Re: FOLLOW THE MONEY - Industry shill Elizabeth Whelan claims mercury fears unfounded

From: Ilena Rose (ilena_at_san.rr.com)
Date: 12/29/04 

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:24:00 -0600

Great post ... she is the Queen of Junk Science and Quackdom ...
funded by the chemical/pharma/med device industries ...

TCS has printed silicone propaganda for years ...

Barrett is one of ACSH's "advisors" ...

He is so deceitful ... when he wrote their garbage piece on MCS ... he
... quack scientist that he is ... failed to disclose who pays ACSH to
pay him to write the nonsense they do.

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 19:38:35 +0000 (UTC), "john"
<nospamoridiotss@vaccine.com> wrote:

>FOLLOW THE MONEY - Industry shill Elizabeth Whelan claims mercury fears
>unfounded
>
>
>FOLLOW THE MONEY
>Another misleading web article in the mercury disinformation
>campaign, from the grand dame of faux public interest front
>groups.
>
>"A Look Back at the Great (Unfounded) Health Scares of 2004"
>
>by Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, 12/29/04
>
>Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan is president of the American Council
>on Science and Health.
>Her email address is acsh@acsh.org.
>
>See "false claim" #6: Mercury in seafood threatens health.
>See "false claim" #1: Childhood vaccines cause autism.
>
>The sponsoring website, Tech Central Station, is owned by a
>conglomerate -- DCI Group, L.L.C.
>On its website TCS states that it is sponsored by Merck and
>PhRMA, among others:
>
>"Tech Central Station is supported by sponsoring
>corporations that share our faith in technology and free
>markets. Smart application of technology - combined with pro
>free market, science-based public policy - has the ability
>to help us solve many of the world's problems, and so we are
>grateful to AT&T, Avue Technologies, The Coca-Cola Company,
>ExxonMobil, General Motors Corporation, Intel, McDonalds,
>Merck, Microsoft, Nasdaq, PhRMA, and Qualcomm for their
>support."
>
>Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan resume, circa 1986 - from tobacco
>litigation
>http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2044702046-2092.html?start_page=19&end_page=19
>
>
>Whelan supporting pharmaceutical companies & attacking
>former NEJM editor Marcia Angell
>http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/whelan200409080850.asp
>
>
>Whelan asking "Who says PCBs cause cancer?"
>http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/PCBs-Cause-Cancer-Whelan-ACSH.htm
>
>
>Whelan defending the use of trans fats in fast food
>http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=12780
>
>Whelan founds first of the "public interest pretender" front
>groups
>http://www.whale.to/m/acsh1.html
>
>________________________
>
>A Look Back at the Great (Unfounded) Health Scares of 2004
>
>By Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan
>Published 12/29/2004
>
>Perhaps we are a society that relishes bad news. Or maybe by
>definition bad news is news. Whatever the explanation, 2004
>was full of headlines about modern living allegedly making
>us sick.
>
>The top 10 health scares of the last 12 months -- described
>below -- have some common characteristics: some of these
>reports overlook the basic toxicological principle that "the
>dose makes the poison" and assume that if a lot of something
>is bad then a little is risky too; some rely on a single,
>often unpublished study that means little out of the context
>of other literature in the field; and many swallow whole the
>baseless mantra "if it causes cancer in a lab animal, it
>must be assumed to pose a human cancer risk."
>
>The top 10 unfounded scares for 2004 are:
>
>1. Childhood vaccines cause autism.
>This claim has been around for a while, but it received
>enormous press exposure this year, with emphasis on the
>claim that thimerosal, a vaccine preservative, is the
>culprit. Coverage ranged from blatant scaremongering and
>dismissal of scientific evidence to fairly unbiased
>assessments of the data. The bottom line: to date, all the
>evidence supports the view that there is no link between
>thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism, or between any
>vaccines and autism. This is the conclusion supported by the
>body of published peer-reviewed scientific studies.
>
>2. Farmed salmon causes cancer.
>Last year, the Environmental Working Group launched this
>scare, releasing a study of seven farmed salmon that they
>said had measurable levels of PCBs -- industrial chemicals.
>This year, an article in Science presented data showing that
>farmed salmon had higher levels of PCBs than wild salmon.
>But the warnings that found their way into the press were
>exaggerated fears based on the assumption that because PCBs
>are animal carcinogens they must pose a human cancer risk
>even at trace levels. Indeed there is no evidence--even at
>high levels -- that PCBs cause human cancer. Many synthetic
>and natural chemicals in food cause cancer in high doses in
>rodents--and those findings have no direct relevance for
>human cancer risk.
>
>3. Cell phones cause brain tumors.
>Another oldie-but-goody made a comeback in 2004 when
>researchers at an institute in Sweden released a study
>supporting a link between cell phone use and acoustic
>neuromas. Even the authors pointed out their study was small
>and had never been replicated. Further, the study involved
>analog cell phones, not the digital phones that are the vast
>majority of those used today. But the story was widely
>covered nonetheless. The mainstream scientific view is that
>the health effects of using cell phones are negligible.
>
>4. Nightlights cause leukemia.
>In September 2004, scientists at a conference in Britain
>suggested that increased light at night (not nightlights
>specifically) may contribute to leukemia in children. Media
>reports understandably caused anxiety in parents of young
>children. But, while the rise in childhood leukemia
>justifies legitimate research, there is currently no reason
>to believe that nightlights pose any danger to children
>(unless, of course, the bulb is really hot or they eat it).
>
>5. Chemicals in cosmetics pose a heath hazard.
>In June of 2004, the Environmental Working Group released
>yet another report accusing a variety of cosmetic
>manufacturers of using ingredients that increase the risk of
>pregnancy problems or cancer. Once again, this scare was
>based on the assumption that things that pose cancer in high
>doses in rodents must pose a risk of human cancer, a claim
>that has no basis whatsoever in scientific reality.
>
>6. Mercury in seafood threatens health.
>Mercury is a toxic metal, and at high levels it can indeed
>pose a serious threat to human health. But again, media
>reports overlooked the "dose makes the poison" rule. The
>government has strict tolerance levels for mercury in fish,
>and at the levels found in fish, mercury does not pose a
>health hazard to humans.
>
>7. Cheeseburgers cause heart disease.
>When former President Bill Clinton announced just before
>Labor Day that he had been diagnosed with severely blocked
>coronary arteries and needed bypass surgery, the media had a
>field day blaming his condition on his diet -- particularly
>his penchant for fast food burgers and fries. Frequent film
>footage showing the former President in front of McDonald's
>and Burger King filled the nightly news. While it is true
>that lifestyle factors such as smoking, inactivity, and
>obesity can raise the risk of a heart attack, so can a
>family history of predisposition toward high "bad"
>cholesterol, low "good" cholesterol, and high blood
>pressure. For preventing heart disease, medications that
>control blood pressure and cholesterol levels are more
>important than avoiding cheeseburgers or any other specific
>food.
>
>8. Antibiotics cause breast cancer.
>A flurry of media coverage followed a February article in
>the Journal of the American Medical Association finding that
>prescriptions for antibiotics had been more common among
>women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer. But as an
>editorial accompanying the article noted, "this study
>provides many (or more) questions than answers" -- and did
>little to further our understanding of the causes of breast
>cancer.
>
>9. Teflon causes health problems.
>This health scare was a spin-off of some wrangling between
>Teflon's manufacturer, DuPont, and the EPA, which wanted
>more data on the presence (in the environment and in blood)
>of chemicals used in producing Teflon. It really had nothing
>to do with scientific evidence of harm to health, as some
>media announced. There is no convincing scientific evidence
>that the chemical harms human health, nor that it is present
>in Teflon itself.
>
>10. Soda causes esophageal cancer.
>Saving the worst for last, this scare came on the scene when
>scientists from India reported a correlation between a rise
>in per capita consumption of soda in the U.S. and the
>occurrence of esophageal cancer--which media interpreted as
>a causal connection. Since this "study" did not have any
>scientific findings about cancer risk--simply showing that
>both soda consumption and esophageal cancer became more
>prevalent over the same time period -- it is remarkable that
>the mainstream media even reported it at all.
>
>With a little luck, this round-up of 2004's worst unfounded
>health scares will encourage you to be more skeptical the
>next time you read about a new, supposedly dire, health
>"threat," and let's hope it will cause editors and
>journalists to more seriously consider whether a story
>really deserves coverage.
>
>*
>
>Elizabeth Whelan, Sc.D., M.P.H., is president of the
>American Council on Science and Health.
>
>###
>
>
>

Relevant Pages