New York, New York -- September 23, 2005. Low-level radiation -- from natural or man-made sources -- is unlikely to pose a threat to human health, according to scientists associated with the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH). In a new publication, The Health Effects of Low-Level Radiation, ACSH explains the various types of exposure to low-level radiation and the ways in which experts assess their effects on health.

The self-appointed nutrition-nanny organization, the Ralph Nader-inspired Center for Science in the Public Interest, this week proclaimed that sodas -- both sugar-sweetened and diet versions -- pose a health hazard, particularly to children. The report "Liquid Candy: How Soft Drinks Are Harming America's Health" charges that soda consumption increases the risks of diseases ranging from heart disease to tooth decay, osteoporosis, cancer, obesity, and poor nutrition.

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).

Anti-nuclear activist Jay M. Gould Died at age ninety, Friday one week ago. I was surprised, in a good way, that the New York Times obituatry gave attention to the criticism his work attracted. Obituaries, the first draft of the history of a person's life, usually offer generous views on the recently deceased. But New York Times science writer Anahad O'Connor appropriately addressed the flaws in Dr. Gould's work.

A September 22, 2005 editorial in the Lincoln Journal Star echoes skepticism voiced on ACSH's HealthFactsAndFears blog about California's anti-fat legislation:

A September 21, 2005 article by Melanie Warner described efforts to get warning labels put on fried foods due to the presence of the chemical acrylamide and noted the response of ACSH's Dr. Elizabeth Whelan:

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.

The U.S. Senate is moving closer this week to passing legislation that will lift restrictions on the importation of cheap drugs from countries like Canada to the United States.

For the past three years -- ever since Swedish scientists found the chemical acrylamide in food (particularly in high-starch foods cooked at elevated temperatures) -- there has been chatter among journalists and environmental advocates about the possible cancer risk of this chemical and the need to alert consumers to the possible dangers associated with eating French fries and chips.

Antioxidant supplements may actually cause more harm than good for cancer patients, according to an article in the current issue of the American Cancer Society's CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians.