Forming Lines
The real Pinocchio
Breeding a happier chicken
Shhh!
How good is the evidence implicating climate change as a cause of heart attacks? Not very. Let's take a critical look at some of this research.
Cannabis is a complex mixture of hundreds of chemicals. Here’s a look at one of them.
Falls while hospitalized are costly to your health and wallet. Can a wearable, a pair of Smart Socks, reduce your risk?
Who would have thought that in today’s litigious America, someone could negligently harm another– and the law doesn’t recognize a claim? One generally unrecognized claim is called wrongful life. It arises when a doctor botches an abortion or fails to timely diagnose a pregnant mother’s German measles or when an IVF facility in some way negligently causes a baby to be born with severe injuries. Judges, lawyers, and ethicists are in conflict on what the law should be.
Here is the narrative: if we reduce manmade greenhouse gases and their companion aerosols, like PM2.5, we will reduce global warming and improve our health. Unfortunately, the climate is a bit more complex. Our best plans come with unintended consequences. A new study shows that reducing those manmade aerosols also increases the “climate forcing” bringing about global warming.
The New Lede — the Environmental Working Group's "investigative reporting" outlet — continues to mislead readers about pesticides. This time it’s spreading nonsense about a recent lawsuit challenging the EPA's assessment of the weedkiller glyphosate. Let's have a look.
The EPA’s model for assessing the rise of carcinogenesis from chemicals and their dose-response models remains controversial. Is the EPA “following the science” or making assumptions?
Hermann J Muller revolutionized radiation genetics, received the Nobel Prize for producing gene mutations, and helped to create the linear non-threshold (LNT), the EPA’s default model for cancer risk assessment. Could mistakes he made haunt today’s most dominant global regulatory strategy?
World War II ended with the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those bombings and the late effects of radiation on the development of cancers in those “survivors” spurred scientific inquiry into the mechanisms underlying human carcinogenesis – the development of cancer. Today’s regulatory science of chemical carcinogens is based upon assumptions and beliefs that are now 75 years old. Our understanding of carcinogenesis has evolved; should our regulatory models shift?
