"It does appear that antioxidant vitamins may be potentially harmful for the heart based on their ability to increase the secretion of very low-density lipoproteins in the liver cells and mice we studied...But until more data is available we can’t make recommendations about whether people should not use these vitamins." --Professor Edward Fisher of New York University School of Medicine, quoted in the London Times (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-1097937,00.html ) about the conclusions of a recent study he led.
So in other words, we apparently are not encouraged to employ the "precautionary principle" here. Despite these preliminary findings, continue doing what you are doing. All right, that sounds sensible. But would people take the same no-need-to-panic approach if the discovery dealt with an apparent health risk from an environmental chemical caused by industrial activity? Would they say, let's keep using the product until more data is available? No -- the precautionary principle is very much in vogue today, at least when it comes to stopping industry. Why the difference?
