Search results

Today brought another reminder that people writing for the op-ed pages of the Wall Street Journal and the reporters responsible for the rest of the paper aren't necessarily on the same wavelength:

When my friend Ted, who is very skeptical about democracy, sees a crazy person or an idiot, he likes to say, "Remember: that person gets one vote, and you get one vote." The past few weeks have been full of events that make you wonder about the wisdom of the masses but the elites don't come off looking so clever, either:

Much as famine relief organizations are getting tired of ignorant anti-biotech protesters, the grown-ups at the World Health Organization are getting tired of the reckless kids at Ralph Nader's group Public Citizen. The WHO angrily denies Public Citizen's report claiming that irradiating food to kill bacteria is dangerous (see ACSH's booklet on the topic as well):

I. Bits and Pieces
Where was I...? Can't remember, but I try. Relatives making such a hew and cry, I feel like I'm the sane one amidst neurotic plagues.
No, I shouldn't be fazed, And that's not how the thing's phrased: It's neuritic plaques that have left me dazed, These brain-addling indicators of Alzheimer's disease.
II. Land of the Lost

Our recent report on the role of beef in the American diet noted some beef benefits, but that didn't please everyone. Below is a prime example of how some of beef's detractors react to such news but we will not be cowed.
Responses:
February 11, 2003

If the Environmental Protection Agency bans something, it must be dangerous, right? Well...

In a newly updated report, Traces of Environmental Chemicals in the Human Body: Are They a Risk to Health?, the physicians and scientists of the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) conclude that the mere ability to measure small amounts of environmental chemicals in human blood and other tissue is not an indication of the presence of a health hazard.

One of the most hotly contested issues in the popular nutrition press of late has been cutting carbs: that is, whether or not the much-touted low-carbohydrate, high protein, high fat diet espoused by such diet gurus as Dr. Atkins is better at helping people lose weight than a balanced, moderately high carbohydrate diet. Most mainstream nutrition experts have been leery of the rather extreme Atkins diet, partly out of concern that its high complement of total and saturated fats might cause or exacerbate heart-damaging blood lipid levels.

The refiling of the lawsuit for two obese teen-agers against McDonald's Pelman v. McDonald's brings to mind an old Bill Cosby joke.
Cosby is awakened one morning by his tired wife, who tells him to go down and feed the children breakfast. He eventually does, grumpily, and spies a chocolate cake. His mind goes to the recipe for chocolate cake. There are eggs in chocolate cake. And flour. And milk. There's nutrition in chocolate cake!

Two recent articles in my hometown newspaper show how hard a time the media have understanding and explaining science.
The "Organic Foods" Story

There are a growing number of reasons to drink alcohol.
No, no, I don't mean because my girlfriend left me or because it's so terribly cold in the big city (the Kyoto Accord against global warming must be working perfectly). I mean that drinking appears to be associated with health benefits:

The specter of contagious disease often engenders a primal reaction based on fear, with resultant irrational behavior. SARS is no exception. Only a few weeks ago, New York's bustling Chinatown became a ghost town as a result.

Over 50 years of scientific research have established that the irradiation of foods to minimize food-borne illness and decrease waste is both safe and effective. Physicians and scientists associated with the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) endorse the use of irradiation to enhance safety and supplement other food protection methods.

Relatively little is known about perfluorinated acids where they are coming from, how they travel, how they get in the human body, or their long-term health effects. "We don't have the data to do more at this point than than to worry," said Dr. Gina Solomon, a physician with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
An apt summary of the default NRDC position on chemicals, in the New York Times, April 15, 2003, in an article with a title that could run in every issue: "EPA Orders Companies to Examine Effects of Chemicals"

As one might have expected, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is taking a wrong-headed approach to solving the problem of the increasing obesity of American youth. According to their latest press release, CSPI thinks that "Replacing soda and junk foods with healthful drinks and snacks...can help combat the skyrocketing rates of obesity in children and teens." Would that it were true.

Editor's note: We just received this letter, a reminder that weighing long-term risks and benefits is often hardest for the young, which is what makes them such an important market for cigarette manufacturers. To help kids get a better handle on the risks, we'll soon publish a teen version of our book Cigarettes: What the Warning Label Doesn't Tell You, and for smokers of all ages interested in knowing some of the quit-assist options, there's our book Kicking Butts in the Twenty-First Century.

[Editor's note: We admire Sandy Szwarc for pointing out some of the excesses in America's war on obesity, such as lawsuits now brewing against fast food chains. But our nutrition director, Dr. Ruth Kava, objects to Szwarc's promotion of an odd, revisionist theory about obesity: that we are neither consuming more nor exercising less but are getting fat precisely because dieting causes metabolic changes that induce obesity. TS]

During scenes from the movie The Secret Lives of Dentists, Dana and David Hurst are seen undergoing an unholy combination of adultery and viral gastroenteritis. While Dana (Hope Davis) and their three kids are all feverish and vomiting, David (Campbell Scott) responds to the illness and betrayal in his family by . . . pulling out a pack of smokes.

Orange-juice makers claim they can reduce high blood pressure and help prevent stroke. Saw Palmetto herbs boast they can "support prostate health." Dried plums (nee prunes) are touted for cardiovascular benefits. These claims are not backed up by solid scientific evidence, but under federal law they are legal.

Chefs at some of New York's finest restaurants including Blue Water Grill, Atlantic Grill and Blue Fin are practicing the latest form of culinary political correctness: banning farmed salmons from their menus, to supposedly protect their patrons' health.
The cause? A flurry of media reports that an environmental advocacy organization, the Environmental Working Group (EWG), found unusually high levels of PCBs the long-banned industrial chemicals that news reports claimed "caused cancer" in farmed salmon.

In light of the ongoing controversy over fast food lawsuits, the media has called upon ACSH to deliver scientific information regarding obesity and fast food. John Banzhaf, a law professor at George Washington University is the proponent of the fast food lawsuits, which seek to shift the blame for obesity from individuals to restaurants.

It is difficult for a group like ACSH to present "hard data" on the impact ACSH's publications have on improving public knowledge on topics related to chemicals, nutrition, the environment, lifestyle and public health. But one possible measure for evaluation is the extent of coverage ACSH receives in major Internet search engines such as Google, the top-ranked Internet search engine, which accounts for over a third of all Internet searches performed.

Jury selection began last week in California in a case where employees will argue that IBM knowingly exposed them to chemicals used in the manufacturing of chips and disc drives that caused a variety of cancers, birth defects and other ailments. If found liable, IBM faces hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.

Last month, a company called Freedom Tobacco International, Inc. offered celebrities lifetime supplies of their cigarettes and paid women to smoke the brand in hip Manhattan bars and nightclubs in an effort to draw attention to the brand.

Executive Summary