This piece appeared on April 28, 2006 on the site MedicalProgressToday.com.

This piece appeared on NationalReview.com and on CBSNews.com.
Earlier this year in New York City, a public health regulation went into effect that set a new and very troublesome precedent, one that insinuates government agencies into personal medical matters.

Foods and beverages containing sugar substitutes are widely used in the United States and other countries; they offer attractive dietary options for people who are trying to limit calorie intake and/or reduce the risk of tooth decay.

New York, NY -- May 1, 2006. Five low-calorie sugar substitutes currently available in the United States -- acesulfame-K, aspartame, neotame, saccharin, and sucralose -- are safe for consumer use. That is the conclusion -- described in a new publication, Sugar Substitutes and Your Health -- of a panel of scientists affiliated with the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH).

This piece appeared April 12, 2006 on TCSDaily.com.

An April 11, 2006 article by Melissa Rayworth about parents seeking quicker, easier meals for kids notes the organic trend and an ACSH dissent:
"We certainly have seen an increase in the number of convenience products that appeal to families," says Amy Schaefer, a Texas-based spokeswoman for Whole Foods. New parents, Schaefer says, often choose organic processed foods.

An April 6, 2006 article by John Johnston on bird flu quotes ACSH and Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, shortly after the release of our report on the subject:
"The potential for an avian flu pandemic is something we're constantly asked about," says American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) President Elizabeth Whelan.

An article by John Carney in the April 6-12, 2006 TimeOut New York explains that sellers of Vava and some other bottled waters claim the products have healing powers:

This article appeared in the New York Sun.

Three April 1, 2006 pieces on the Heartland Institute site mention ACSH, one on pesticides...
The proposal [to mandate that farmers warn surrounding towns when using pesticides] and its demise raised the issue of "junk science." Gilbert Ross, medical director of the American Council on Science and Health, criticized the Washington proposal prior to the decision as having "absolutely no basis in scientific fact."