Search results

Politically-driven vaccine resistance renders persuasion efforts all but futile in that segment of the population. A different, but still potent, obstacle is posed when trying to persuade those susceptible to conspiracy theories. What happens when the two tactics are deliberately and calculatedly used in tandem – facilitated by junk science? Might perpetuating this kind of compound disinformation count as treason if done by a public servant?

In 2017 I did an extensive search of Cochrane Reviews that addressed the efficacy (lack, really) of Tylenol (acetaminophen) in controlling pain. With few exceptions, it did little or nothing. In the six ensuing years, there have been more published data on the efficacy of the drug. And the message is the same.

As of January 25, 2022, some 40% of Americans [1] have not been fully vaccinated. [2] This, notwithstanding valiant efforts for over a year at persuading vaccine uptake.  The impacts are now apparent. The US death toll [3] is averaging 2500 cases a day – and rising, at least for now.  Because of widespread vaccine resistance, the President has attempted to mandate vaccines. In addition to those refusing vaccines, we now have a separate group of individuals who oppose vaccine mandates.  

Decades ago, I became a fan of the ACSH long before becoming an occasional contributor. I was motivated by one clear point of reasoning. I found it next to impossible to locate a reliable source of health-related issues I had an interest in, as well as being able to recommend that source to students enrolled in my college course for continuing education purposes.

I've written numerous times that when it comes to supplements, you can throw both common sense and science out the window. Up is up and so is down. Somehow, I’ve been laboring under the notion that I don't really have much else to write about this topic. That was until a leisurely stroll up and down the aisles of a CVS store. And an existential thought experiment at no extra cost.

Even innovative-sounding equipment cannot stop concussions in contact sports. Unfortunately, we may not know if long-term brain damage can actually be limited by new technologies until it is too late.

Dr. Singh, ACSH friend and former Chief Medical Officer for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for HHS, published a paper on the adulterants found in street drugs. What was in there? A lot of junk.

With brutal temperatures now plaguing millions of Americans, especially in the midwest and northeast, it's as good a time as any to debunk myths connected to cold-related injuries.

With the cancellation of "The Dr. Oz Show", his alternative medicine audience should not think of it as a time to mourn. but instead should take a moment to celebrate the man who created all their worst fears; they should rejoice a guy who wore medical scrubs during a show in which he suggested apple juice was as dangerous for children as plutonium, who taught concerned viewers to fear chicken and to love juice cleanses.

A new, 50-page study manages to say in 17,701 words something that has been obvious for years: The replacement of OxyContin with abuse-resistant OxyContin was the driving force behind the surge in heroin deaths. Oh, really.  

I received a letter from the CEO of the exercise group CrossFit, Inc., but since no contact information was listed I'm responding here. As ACSH's president, I addressed his high points and clarified other statements he made, in the hope of clearing up some important issues for those with a sincere interest in evidence-based information.

A new study states that kids who live near farms which use sulfur – a chemical and a pesticide – have more asthma. And it doesn't matter if the sulfur is used in a conventional or organic farm setting. Can this be true?

With Memorial Day weekend and the subsequent peak "drowning season" upon us, there's no better time to review the precautions that should be taken when any body of water is in close proximity.

With the overload of information — bad, good and worse — from all media mediums, at all times, public confidence in it on the whole is plummeting. That's according to a new report identifying that only 37 percent of the public trusts evidence from medical research. Compare that to 65 percent who prefer experiences of friends and family to guide them.

Concluding our two-part series on important melanoma topics, we focus on immunotherapy and the new frontier in the areas of research and treatment by engaging three experts from the Wistar Institute Melanoma Research Center.
 

Consumer Reports (CR) promotes itself as an unbiased source of a wide variety of product ratings. It also publishes Should I Eat This? Simple ways to know what to eat and what to avoid. I recently received the updated 4th edition. Let's see how much of the content we should swallow.

YouTube announced last week that it's banning a number of high-profile anti-vaccine activists from its platform. The policy shift is meant to stem the spread of misinformation, but it raises some troubling questions. Most important among them: is more censorship worth the cost it imposes on society?

1. Nature magazine covered our ranking of the good and bad science journalism sites last week, highlighting our concern that "Not only is it susceptible to the same sorts of biases that afflict regular journalism, but it is uniquely vulnerable to outrageous sensationalism”.

It's no secret that air pollution is bad news (but no longer in the U.S.). It's also no secret that people write sensationalized junk that poses as science to drive home a point or support an agenda. Today we're having a two-for-one special. You get both. And no – small particulate matter does not affect IQ. This is beyond ridiculous.

Earlier this year, the EPA issued its “preliminary assessment” of imidacloprid, the first commercially available, widely-used neonicotinoid pesticide. But its assessment wasn’t so favorable (or accurate) for cotton and citrus crops. But as guest writer Henry Miller explains, in reaching its conclusions the EPA ignored persuasive scientific evidence.

Ever wonder why the American public is so ill-informed about issues involving science such as evolution, genetic modification of food crops, stem cell research, and homeopathy or "alternative medicine"? Some scientific issues seem settled in the public's mind. There is no serious question as to whether the earth revolves around the sun, even though not too many centuries ago one could be burned at the stake for promoting proscribed ideas on this issue.

Some thoughts on the "debate" between Drs. Jeff Singer and Ardianne Fugh-Berman. Such as it was. The video is now available. Have a strong stomach.

President Eisenhower's concern about the growing "military-industrial complex," referenced in his 1961 farewell address, became part of the cultural lexicon. But less well known is Ike's second warning, about manipulation of academia by political interests, which would change the nature of the “free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery.”

Last week an article in City Journal wrote about a “scoping review” of the physical harms of masks. It is time for a bit of debunking. A note to the tl:dr – the too long, didn't read among us, it takes more words to correct a mistruth than to propagate one.

Even as we find ourselves in a new wave of COVID-19, the politicizers and minimizers of the pandemic won't let up. They continue to spread disinformation about both the effectiveness and safety of masks.