Search results

We asked three straightforward questions about the integrity of the organic certification process. Program officials refused to answer them. It seems clear that this agency is less of a regulatory body and more of a taxpayer-funded cheerleading squad. It should be eliminated.

Food labels serve one purpose, and one purpose only: To provide nutritional information to consumers. The process by which a food is produced is not relevant to its nutritional content or safety profile. Therefore, products made using animal cell culture techniques absolutely should not require special labeling.

When it comes to medical fundraising on social media, you may be gambling with the highest of stakes.

We haven't had a flu pandemic in a hundred years. And vaccines are why.

With hospital accreditation in itself a big business, it might be time for some oversight of such oversight.

The EPA is evaluating 10 chemicals under the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act. To guide its decision-making, we've created explanations for each, with recommendations when the science is clear. Here is the science story on perchloroethylene.

The EPA is evaluating 10 chemicals under the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act. To guide their decision-making, we have created explanations for each, with recommendations when the science is clear. Here is the science story on Pigment Violet 29.

Some studies are so incredibly stupid, one wonders how they get published in any scientific journal, let alone a prestigious one. And yet, it's happened once again. A new study in JAMA Internal Medicine claims that eating organic food will reduce a person's risk of developing cancer. You got it right: Magic prevents cancer.

Though e-cigarettes gained a fast following, the number of people using them isn't increasing. So why has the U.S. government started spending taxpayer money to undermine them as a tool for smoking cessation and harm reduction? And why does the U.K. endorse them? A look through conflicting studies seeks to find out.

Would GlaxoSmithKline hire Robert De Niro to host an award ceremony for vaccine research? Or would Unilever hire Gwyneth Paltrow for awards on food science? Those would be equivalent to what the Breakthrough Prize is doing by paying Pierce Brosnan.

A Superior Court judge seems ready to throw out not only a $250 million punitive judgment against Monsanto, which makes a weedkiller using glyphosate, but even to reduce the $39 million in compensation to $9 million. Most likely she will order a new trial.

Now, Disney Princesses and films are under attack. We are straying further and further from what most impacts child development, as a source of adult challenges.

Loss of bone density can be a significant issue for adults later in life. A new study found that those who regularly played sports as children and teens had stronger bones as an adult, as compared to those who gave up sports or never played them to begin with.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer has been caught manipulating reports, and even images inside reports. At what point should the United Nations step in and fix this?

In discussions about pollution and lives saved, it's hard to get straight answers. But one thing is clear: exempting the biggest polluters as "developing nations" is a mistake. And focusing on PM2.5 instead of real smog is worse.

Here's another observational study of organic food, but it's from the French, who brought us "fine dining." The paper's claims are greater than their proofs. It's just another paper from a "high impact" journal shedding shade.

Though recent and alarming headlines are touting a global superbug, it can be hard to discern fact from fiction. Should we be worried? Let's take a look and find out.

Brand names are meant to communicate trust that products are of a certain high quality. But healthcare is not a product in that way, and once again hospital's branded with a flagship's name often produce results that are not as good as the flagship itself. Let the patient beware.

California is a trendsetter. It’s home to world-class wine, championship basketball teams, beautiful weather and legendary cities like San Francisco. But sadly, it's also a trendsetter when it comes to wrongheaded public health policy. There’s no better example of this than Proposition 65, a law that as of 2016 has cost California businesses close to $300 million.

Although the name is derived from the Greek “calos” meaning “good" and “melas” for “black,” "calomel" -- the name given to mercurous chloride, the most common medicine of the era -- is neither good nor black. So what's the story?

The New York Times recently swallowed whole a study which concluded that those who eat meat die 23% more quickly than those who don't. But the meat study sounded fishy. And it was. ACSH advisor and expert biostatistician Dr. Stan Young turns the meat study into hamburger.

Whether occupationally, recreationally, or induced by a run-of-the-mill activity, ocular issues involving objects is not rare. And the summer is a prime time for things, propelled by the wind, to land in the eye.

While there's no formula to determine the "correct answer" for public health policy, there are guidelines that can at least point policymakers in the right direction. Ultimately, what separates good public health policy from bad public health policy is a satisfactory response to three essential questions.

The current troubles plaguing the giant airline manufacturer reveal that a greater societal problem. We are increasingly the servant -- rather than the master -- of our technologies.

Despite substantial research, there remains no cure for herpes, only methods to minimize outbreaks and transmission. But, there is an interesting development - a gel containing a known HIV drug was tested for its ability to prevent the spread of genital herpes. Does it work? Maybe. The answer is not clear.