This article appeared in the June 12, 2005 Washington Times.
Reports of new vaccines have those of us in public health excited, but these vaccines may never get into the marketplace. Why? A combination of political, economic, and regulatory factors make vaccine development, production and marketing increasingly difficult for drug manufacturers.
Here are a few of the amazing vaccines in various stages of production:
Search results
When a woman goes to a hospital right after being sexually assaulted, she shouldn't have to worry that she will receive subpar health care. Currently, however, depending on where she turns for help, she might not have access to or even find out about emergency contraception, which is the standard, effective, and safe way to help prevent pregnancy after unprotected intercourse.
With headlines stating "Compound in Teflon A 'Likely Carcinogen'" (June 29) and "Teflon likely to cause cancer" (June 30), it is crucial to clarify a few issues surrounding the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientific advisory board's recent draft report identifying PFOA (also referred to as C-8) as a "likely carcinogen":
Diet sodas, which have no or very few calories, should be a boon to the overweight in their attempts to lose excess pounds. What, then, can we make of a recent report about a study purportedly showing that people who drink diet sodas gain rather than lose weight? The answer might lie in the report, rather than in biology, and is a great example of the drawbacks of presenting preliminary reports (those which have not been peer-reviewed) to the public.
Once again, proponents of the precautionary principle have tried to convince us that we are always better safe than sorry." Dr. Bruce Barrett recently published an article in favor of using this poorly defined doctrine to govern public health issues, making it in effect an institutionalized "fear factor."
A July 27, 2005 article on India's FinancialExpress.com noted the ACSH position on pesticides:
The pesticide industry has challenged the findings of the Delhi-based Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) relating to health hazards of pesticide use in Punjab.
An August 2, 2005 article by Michael Hill quotes ACSH's Dr. Ruth Kava among experts wondering what craze will succeed the low-carb mania started by the now-bankrupt Atkins company:
Ruth Kava, director of nutrition for the American Council on Science and Health, figures it might be something like a high-protein diet.
An August 14, 2005 article by Mimi Spencer describes endless food scares and quotes ACSH's Dr. Elizabeth Whelan:
Last week Senator Bill Frist made headlines with his apparent turnabout in favor of federal funding for research using embryonic stem cells (ESC) -- a break with the policy of President Bush. Almost all proponents of ESC (potentially far more flexible and thus conducive someday to far more treatments than adult stem cells) saw this as terrific news, while opponents -- including a full spectrum of religious groups and social conservatives -- characterized Frist as a traitor. But Frist may not have changed enough to keep him from stifling ESC after all.
It might be nice if all scientific debates were conducted quietly, with no media attention to them at all. Instead, we get varying levels of media attention, each bringing a different degree of distortion to the underlying facts (as a random grab-bag of odd science and health stories from 2005 remind us) but occasionally offering enlightenment:
A new study by E.G. Knox of the University of Birmingham (UK) claims children who were born near "emissions hotspots" (bus stations, train stations, and other transportation hubs) are at greater risk for childhood cancers than those who were born farther away.
A July 7, 2005 article by Gary White on the website of the Florida newspaper The Ledger noted some customers' fear-driven purchases of organic milk but also quoted ACSH Advisor Thomas G. Baumgartner's reassurances about conventional milk:
September 21, 2005--New York, New York. The public, press, and regulators alike are not well-equipped to weigh pharmaceutical benefits against pharmaceutical risks, leading to an unnecessary climate of fear. So says a new report from the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), a non-profit health education group.
A new ad by US orange juice promoters tries to scare consumers away from "chemical-packed" rivals
By Elizabeth M. Whelan, Sc.D., M.P.H.
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2005
When can a supplement do more harm than good? When it's taken by smokers, in some cases. At least, that's what the latest data suggest about beta-carotene. Beta-carotene is a compound found in a wide variety of fruits and vegetables. In the early 1990s, some animal studies and small, observational human studies suggested that beta-carotene, as an antioxidant, might have cancer-preventive properties. Then, in 1994, a large study of heavy smokers suggested that beta-carotene slightly increased their risk of lung cancer (1).
This article originally appeared on Spiked-Online.com.
Last week's news that a jury found the pharmaceutical company Merck negligent in its marketing of the painkiller Vioxx, awarding $229 million in punitive damages, is bad news for all consumers who hope that pharmaceutical companies will continue to develop new drugs -- to address not only their aches and pains but life-threatening conditions like cancer, heart disease, and diabetes.
As an economic development expert, I have written about and been an advisor on disaster relief. Now that there is a major disaster close to home and very much in the news, it might be a good idea to outline some basic principles of disaster intervention. Ironically, since the effects of Hurricane Katrina are so close at hand for us in Houston, many of the established rules of intervention -- which hinge on recognizing the distinction between local knowledge and the desire by distant donors to grant assisitance -- can be violated, but it is still important to know the general rules.
Last night I attended a book party for a colleague here in New York. In the course of mixing with other guests, I met the host's best friend from college -- let's call the friend Joe. Joe told me he was a film producer, a graduate of an Ivy League school, and a long-term resident of New York City.
After Friday's suit by California Attorney General Bill Lockyer demanding that snack food companies put warning labels on foods such as potato chips and French fries because of the chemical acrylamide found in them, it's worth taking a look back at the calmer comment sent by ACSH Nutrition Director Dr. Ruth Kava to California's Office of Health Hazard Assessment about acrylamide:
We told you so. We told you some recent health scares were groundless or exaggerated, and a couple recent headlines are reminders we were correct:
1) "No allergy problems from GM corn or soy: study"http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050831/hl_nm/gm_study_dc
We told you so, here:
Biotechnology and Food (September, 2000)http://www.acsh.org/publications/pubID.289/pub_detail.asp
In the words of Carl Sagan: "We've arranged a global civilization in which most critical elements depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster."
An article by John Luik on TechCentralStation November 2, 2005 noted the opposition of ACSH's Dr. Elizabeth Whelan to California Attorney General Bill Lockyer's crusade against foods containing acrylamide:
Ah, the contrast! Last night, I was lucky enough to attend Popular Mechanics magazine's 2005 Breakthrough Awards, a reminder that wonderful things that benefit human health are still being invented all the time.
Results of a two-year study involving over 12,000 women indicate that an experimental vaccine has proven highly effective at preventing cervical cancer and precancerous cervical lesions.
Imagine that you fear you may have a life-threatening disease. Imagine now that this disease is almost always contracted through sexual activity or illicit drug use. Imagine that the stigma attached to this disease is so great that you fear running into someone you know at the doctor's office or wherever you can go to get the test. Would you be more likely to present yourself at a crowded public health clinic to take a diagnostic test, or would you be happier to just take the test in the privacy of your own home?
Pagination
ACSH relies on donors like you. If you enjoy our work, please contribute.
Make your tax-deductible gift today!