Do Americans really know enough about the dangers of smoking to make an "informed" decision to light up? Of course they should. Even Philip Morris, as we now know from a company-funded study in the Czech Republic that caused an international flap last week, was aware of early death rates among smokers. The rates were touted in the study as "indirect positive effects" that netted the country savings on health care, pensions, welfare and housing for the elderly.
Search results
To the Editor:
Re: "California Initiates Blackouts to Save Power" (news story, Jan. 18):
Isn't it ironic that, as the most technologically advanced state in the most technologically advanced nation slouches towards darkness, no one dares speak of the clear solution to our looming energy crisis: nuclear power?
With most of the country covered in snow and gearing up for the holidays, far too little attention was paid this month to the Supreme Court's hearing of the lawn pesticide case. It also looked like a simple, even trivial, off-season issue. Do municipalities have the right to ban the use of pesticides by homeowners whose objective is strictly "cosmetic" a green lawn free of pests and weeds? But this is far from trivial. The pesticide case is actually a deep repository of legal and political trouble.
Dietary fat has been receiving bad press for years. At first it was just saturated fats, because they can raise blood cholesterol. Conversely, polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats were thought to be good because they did not do so.
Then all fat was deemed "bad", and Americans were urged to consume as little as they could. Some have even gone so far as to advocate giving young children (under 2 years of age) non-fat milk. This is advice that no responsible pediatrician would endorse.
To the Editor:
The column "Keeping Breast Cancer in Perspective" conveys a cogent and long overdue message to women: there is no epidemic of breast cancer in this country. Rather, it is the fear of breast cancer not the disease itself, that has reached epidemic proportions.
The positive effort to increase public awareness of breast cancer has had the unfortunate effect of distorting women's perceptions of breast cancer risk.
To the Editor:
The "big one" got away in the recent article on the supersalmon ("Supersalmon to the rescue," Nov. 30).
The article definitely missed the boat on the critical issue that faster-growing salmon can safely help to feed the growing world population. Armed with biotechnology, fish farms would be able to double their production of salmon.
The supersalmon was modified by the introduction of a gene that was found in flounder. When the gene is introduced into the Atlantic salmon, they grow faster by using their natural growth hormone more effectively.
YOUR ARTICLE REVEALS AN IMPORTANT danger of accepting at face value supplement manufacturers' claims that their products are all natural and must be safe because they have been used for years. While the Chinese (or Indians, or South Sea Islanders) may have used an herbal product for a thousand years, they were not simultaneously using immune suppressants, blood thinners, or any of a host of other modern, lifesaving pharmaceuticals.
Complementary Medicine: An Introduction to the Debate
By Elizabeth M. Whelan, Sc.D, M.P.H.
The January l9th New York Times obituary for Dr. William R. Fair, a renowned prostate cancer surgeon associated with Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, raises questions about so-called "alternative" and "complementary" medicine.
Last month, like most months, saw advances and setbacks in biotechnology.
The cloned sheep Dolly appeared to be developing arthritis, but Japanese researchers found cloned mouse embryos in better shape than previously feared. The best news may have been the cloning of so-called "knockout pigs," pigs modified to eliminate a gene that in normal pigs prevents their organs being transplanted into humans. The worst news was the long-anticipated convening of the President's Council on Bioethics.
When a fifteen year-old of Middle Eastern descent who expressed sympathy for Osama bin Laden crashed a small, stolen plane into a Tampa skyscraper last month, killing only himself, few expected acne medication to get the blame. In fact, most people probably thought they had a rough idea what caused the incident: some combination of politics and youthful emotional instability.
Oh, no. As if smoking weren't dangerous enough, now comes tobacoo genetically-modified to entrap and sicken us more effectively.
In the industrialized, modern world we've come to take a certain minimum level of public health so much for granted that it's easy to forget how much the history of the world has been shaped by disease.
Place:
The Regency Hotel Ballroom
540 Park Avenue
New York, New York
Remarks presented by ACSH President Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan at a special conference convened by Secretary Andrew Cuomo.
The following letter from an ACSH Advisor appeared in the March 11, 2002 Wall Street Journal:
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick courted African countries' support for biotechnology-derived crops while on a grand tour of Africa last month. Before the trip, he accused the Europeans of "going around Africa and trying to scare people," and he blasted biotech's adversaries, calling their opposition "equivalent to that period when people were opposed to machines."
Consumers are often seduced by the widespread use of the descriptors "safe" and "natural" by producers and marketers at times with quite deleterious health effects. Thus, in 1995, a woman required a liver transplant after overconsumption of tea made from the chaparral plant. And heart transplant patients learned the hard way that supplements of St. John's Wort could interfere with the immune suppressant they must take to prevent rejection of their transplanted organs.
While years of news reports and Hollywood productions have led the public to believe that industrial pollution in the environment is causing local "cancer clusters," areas where cancer cases are thought to be more prevalent, there is no evidence of a link between so-called "clusters" and exposure to trace environmental chemicals.
Ah, it's that time of year! Taxes, spring, pagan fertility rituals, and not coincidentally Easter (with its eggs, fast-breeding bunnies, and a resurrection), Arbor Day, and Earth Day. With Earth Day only a week away, now is a good time to reflect on whether the environment is improving or worsening, with all the implications for human health that implies.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently warned pharmacies selling "nicotine lollipops" and "nicotine lip balm" to stop, calling them illegal. According to the FDA, these products are being promoted as smoking cessation treatments or therapeutic drugs and therefore must gain FDA approval before public consumption. The lollipops and lip balm also contain a specific form of nicotine, nicotine salicylate, which has not been approved for smoking cessation.
The new sugar substitute Splenda is growing in popularity, reported the May 21 Wall Street Journal, in part because of lingering (albeit unjustified) health concerns about older substitutes such as Sweet'N Low and Nutrasweet, and in part because of enthusiastic customers such as Gloria Cross, a retired medical technician, who swears by Splenda. When her friends use other sweeteners, Cross tells them, "No, no, you don't understand. Those are chemicals and Splenda is not a chemical."
Testimony of Ms. Cassandra Coleman of Chicago, Illinois before the Senate Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, Restructuring, and the District of Columbia, May 14 Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), Chairman.
Chairman Durbin and members of the committee, let me begin by thanking you for holding this hearing and for inviting me to testify today.
My story is also the story of two wonderful children: my thirteen year-old son, Nijell, and my ten year-old daughter, Nzingha, who is with me today.
Imagine working hard your entire life to build a business, establish security for your family, and contribute to the community you live in. Now, imagine that one morning you wake up and it is all in shambles, destroyed because someone doesn't agree with what you do. What you do is perfectly legal, you're honest, customers patronize your business, you pay your taxes, provide jobs in your community, and you raise your family with sound educational and work ethics. But those who don't like what you do destroy it all. Even worse, not many people seem to notice much less care that it happened.
Dr. Neal D. Barnard, head of the animal rights group Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, on the dangers of hot dogs:
"Forget the moderation myth...It applies to healthy foods, not unhealthy ones...moderation does not apply to cigarettes, heroin, or hot dogs. It's easier to make a clean break."
(Boston Globe, March 17, 2002)
A new Harvard School of Public Health study, published in the March 6 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, showed a lower risk of prostate cancer in men whose diets were rich in tomatoes and tomato-based products containing the antioxidant lycopene. Results were taken from the Health Professional Follow-Up Study, in which the dietary and health histories of 47,000 men, aged 40 to 75, were tracked for a period of 12 years. It was found that those who ate two or more meals a week containing tomato products reduced their risk of prostate cancer by 24 to 36 percent.
The Archer Daniels Midland Company one of the leading producers of soy products asks on their website, "Why do the Japanese have 1/8th the incidence of prostate cancer? And few symptoms of menopause? Is it a diet rich in soy?" With 350 factories worldwide, 23,000 employees, and $18 billion in annual net sales, this agricultural powerhouse wishes good health was as simple as eating soy. However, there is very weak scientific support for the idea that the phytoestrogens in soy products can ease the symptoms of menopause, let alone reduce the risk of prostate cancer.
Arguments against constructive change take many forms. One is what I have
called the myth of the "riskless alternative." Every change has its risks,
whether the change is political, scientific, or technological, but a
simple assertion of risk is not in and of itself an argument against
change.
Pagination
ACSH relies on donors like you. If you enjoy our work, please contribute.
Make your tax-deductible gift today!
Popular articles
![](/sites/default/files/styles/taxonomy_midi/public/category/popular.jpg?itok=Nb7H65XL)