Search results

Overview: Questions and Answers on AIDS in New York City
By Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan
President, ACSH
Question 1

WHAT IS PERC?

Hair analysis is an ostensibly diagnostic procedure that is a major part of alternative medicine. Among promoters of alt-med, those likelier to proffer hair analysis are chiropractors, naturopaths, physicians who routinely use chelation therapy, practitioners of orthomolecular medicine, persons who style themselves "nutrition consultants," and companies that provide laboratory services directly to the public.
For What Might Hair Analysis Be Useful?

Health news can be confusing especially when it comes to nutrition. It often seems as though what's touted as good to eat on Tuesday is out of favor by Friday. And it seems to be happening again with the most favored food groups fruits and vegetables. Although numerous epidemiological studies support the concept that consumption of ample amounts of these foods can help protect against various types of cancer, a study in the February 14 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) finds no such benefit, at least with respect to breast cancer.

Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the United States. Understandably, Americans are very concerned and fearful about cancer and would welcome sound information on how to reduce the risk of the various forms of this disease. In an attempt to fill that need, some 20 years ago Congress passed a law requiring the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to publish a biennial report telling American consumers what is known or suspected to cause human cancer. The DHHS delegated that responsibility to the National Toxicology Program (NTP).

For the past few decades, Americans have been manifesting a chronic condition best described as "chemicalphobia."
All around us, ads brag that products are "100% natural" or "organic" or chemical free." Many consumers think that "chemical" is the opposite of "natural" and the opposite of "good." Viewed in this context, the 100-percent natural Holiday Dinner Menu that the American Council on Science and Health publishes each year comes as quite an eye-opener.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the self-appointed "food police," is distressed that Congress has voted to repeal the warning label that has appeared on saccharin since 1977. Why is the scary little warning label soon to be a thing of the past? Because saccharin was voted off the federal "carcinogen list" because it does not cause cancer in people.

Opponents of foods altered by bioengineering (often misnamed genetically modified or GM foods) cite a number of concerns ranging from human safety to environmental degradation to support their disapproval of the technology. A new twist has surfaced recently: opponents have stated that the new golden rice, enhanced by the addition of genes that allow it to make beta-carotene, will not be effective at treating the vitamin A deficiency that is a major cause of childhood blindness in the developing world.

To the Editor:
Sen. Breaux makes some cogent points concerning America's looming energy crisis (Op-ed, Jan. 18). It is unfortunate, however, that he neglects to mention one energy source which would fulfill his criteria of environmental preservation, high efficiency, and domestic sources to reduce our dependence on foreign cartels: nuclear power.

WASHINGTON, March 20 /PRNewswire/ The American Council on Science and Health, Center for Global Food Issues, Citizens for the Integrity of Science, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Consumer Alert, and National Center for Public Policy Research sent the following letter to Mr. Orin Smith, President and CEO of Starbucks Corporation today, signed by Steven J. Milloy, Citizens for the Integrity of Science; Elizabeth M.

With most of the country covered in snow and gearing up for the holidays, far too little attention was paid this month to the Supreme Court's hearing of the lawn pesticide case. It also looked like a simple, even trivial, off-season issue. Do municipalities have the right to ban the use of pesticides by homeowners whose objective is strictly "cosmetic" a green lawn free of pests and weeds? But this is far from trivial. The pesticide case is actually a deep repository of legal and political trouble.

Science is under attack in affluent nations, where antibiotech activists claim consumers are being poisoned by inorganic fertilizers and synthetic pesticides. They also claim that newer genetic engineering technologies decrease biodiversity and degrade the environment. Neither claim is true, but fear-mongering could be disastrous for less-developed nations.

Scientists and physicians associated with the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) report that California's Proposition 65 (Prop65), a law whose purported intent was to improve the public's health, is misdirected and highly unlikely to effect such improvement. Other states and the U.S. Congress should consider these findings as they deliberate similar prospective "right to know" legislation.

This letter was written in response to an article Time published on October 30, 2000 that discussed early puberty in girls and linked it to a variety of possible causes.

Philip Morris's opposition to the use of genetically modified tobacco in cigarettes ("Tobacco Fracas in Argentina," page B1, March 7) raises an interesting issue. It appears that Philip Morris's primary concern is that consumers' irrational fear of genetically modified products will supersede most smokers' irrational tolerance of the proven health risks of smoking.

To the Editor:
Re: "California Initiates Blackouts to Save Power" (news story, Jan. 18):
Isn't it ironic that, as the most technologically advanced state in the most technologically advanced nation slouches towards darkness, no one dares speak of the clear solution to our looming energy crisis: nuclear power?

To the Editor:
Contrary to Bennett S. LeBow's statement regarding his new Vector cigarette, there is no reason to imagine that using a zero-nicotine cigarette will help smokers quit (Economics, Jan. 16). Would inhaling fine sugar promote abstinence in someone addicted to cocaine? The "double-whammy", to use his own term, will more likely double smokers' travails than reduce them.

To the Editor:
The Personal Health column on Dec.5 correctly notes the potential of genetically-improved food to help feed the world while reducing the need for pesticides ("Gene-Altered Foods: A Case Against Panic"). Genetic engineering is thoroughly regulated by at least three separate federal agencies. Scientific data reveal no cases of any human illness from GM foods, despite over four years of common use.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A study published in a respected scientific journal initiated a flurry of anti-soda rhetoric. The main message was that adolescent girls' consumption of sodas, especially colas, increases their risk of bone fractures.

Many Americans engage in bicycling principally to improve their health and/or physical fitness for example, to control body weight, blood pressure, and/or plasma cholesterol concentrations, and/or to increase agility. Bicycling is useful not only toward these ends but also as a mode of physical therapy (e.g., to promote recovery from knee surgery) and as a means of stress reduction.
On the other hand, bicycling entails many health risks, even for experienced bicyclists. National statistics suggest that in the United States:

"Flip Little Article"?
Dear Dr. [sic] Raso,