Excerpted from "The Top Ten Unfounded Health Scares of 2010" list:
Introduction
As the year draws to a close, some of us will be reminded that olde acquaintance should not be forgot. So, before we can officially commence the New Year, the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) would like to reflect upon this year past. We'd especially like to spend an extra moment considering what we hope the world will eventually learn to forget — the most unfounded health scares of 2010.
What were these? Not all of them were so novel. Just as old habits die hard, old scares don’t seem to disappear easily either, and some headlines that received noted media attention in years past have reared their ugly heads once more in this current publication of our annual list of health scares.
But whether old or new, the hoaxes and frauds haven't left us.
After all, with greater tools at their disposal, like Twitter, blogs and Facebook, activist groups have amped up their fear-mongering. In this way, they distract parents from the real threats their children face by hyping non-existent dangers of everyday products like toys, cosmetics, rubber duckies and shower curtains. Phobias about these innocuous products are based on findings that trace amounts of certain supposedly toxic chemicals from which they are made may be found in our blood or urine. Through these claims radical environmentalists take advantage of the new-found ability of investigators to measure chemicals within our bodies in such miniscule quantities as parts per trillion. That this method of analysis lacks any toxicological validity is not a concern to the activists — though it should be to the rest of us.
In addition, we remind our readers that correlation does not prove causation. Just because the presence of a particular substance or chemical is found in the body, it does not mean that it causes a negative health outcome. Also, don’t forget that the results concluded from animal studies cannot be directly extrapolated to humans.
So...please read the following list, and remember that this is meant to reassure Americans that our health and well-being, and that of our children, is not really under attack by insidious exposures to chemicals, toys and vaccines — though it may be from the activist groups that promulgate these fallacies.
E-Cigarettes
The (Unfounded) Scare: E-cigarettes, an odorless and flameless clean nicotine delivery system, contain carcinogens such as diethylene glycol and nitrosamines that pose a health risk to the user. Due to their uncanny appearance to regular cigarettes, certain public health regulators believe they will encourage others to continue smoking.
Origin of the Scare: Earlier this year, the FDA decided to treat e-cigarettes as drug delivery devices, not tobacco products, placing them under more stringent regulation that would require e-cigarette makers to conduct extensive clinical trials in order to allow their product to remain on the market. In July, ACSH joined several other public health and interest groups as an amicus, or friend of the court, to appeal the FDA’s decision. In December, a federal appeals court overruled the FDA’s injunction and determined that, due to its nicotine component, e-cigarettes should be regulated as tobacco products.
Media Coverage: In a statement for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Nancy Brown, the CEO of the American Heart Association (AHA), stated, “No tobacco product is safe to consume. The health hazards associated with tobacco use are well-documented and a recent American Heart Association policy statement indicates smokeless tobacco products increase the risk of fatal heart attack, fatal stroke and certain cancers." Her concerns were based on a study published in the Nov. 5 issue of the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
Fortunately, A-list celebrities such as Katherine Heigl stepped up to the microphone and publicly promoted the use of e-cigarettes as a better alternative to smoking that helped them quit cigarettes for good when nothing else could. While appearing on The Late Show with David Letterman, Ms. Heigl demonstrated how to use an e-cigarette explaining, “You get the habit of this” — bringing her hand to her mouth — “and blow out water vapor so you’re not harming anyone around you and you’re not harming yourself.”
ACSH’s Perspective: After Mariann Piano, Ph.D., a professor in the Department of Biobehavioral Health Science at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said that "smokeless tobacco products are harmful and addictive – that does not translate to a better alternative," in a September AHA policy statement, ACSH’s Dr. Gilbert Ross answered with his own letter. In response to allegations that smokeless tobacco products are dangerous, Dr. Ross wrote: “The evidence is clear, disturbingly so, that you abandoned science in sounding this baseless, destructive alarm: the studies your own authors cite show minimal if any harm from using smokeless tobacco —and even those few studies supporting your thesis are based on a mélange of various types of smokeless tobacco bearing little resemblance to modern snus-type smokeless products.”
Fortunately, readers of The Daily Caller had a chance to peruse Dr. Whelan’s op-ed defending Katherine Heigl’s public display of e-cigarettes, in which she states, “Again, it’s not the nicotine that’s so dangerous about regular cigarettes, but the toxins and carcinogens in the ‘products of combustion’ — the smoke — that’s inhaled deep into the lungs and then into the general circulation. There’s no reason to think e-cigarettes present the same risks, since there’s no combustion.”
In addition, ACSH staffers asked our Dispatch readers to submit commentary regarding their own experiences using e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation device, and we were overwhelmed with the positive feedback we received, such as this response from Kim SanFanandre: “I was a 30 year, 2 pack per day smoker prior to finding e-cigarettes. I completely stopped smoking cigarettes 5 days after first trying the e-cigarette and have not smoked in 6.5 weeks. E-cigarettes should not be banned or demonized. Instead, e-cigarettes as an alternative to smoking should be encouraged.”
The Bottom Line: ACSH has long supported harm reduction as an effective and successful strategy to allow regular cigarette smokers to quit the habit for good. ACSH advocates e-cigarettes as a form of harm reduction for currently addicted smokers who have tried and failed to quit, but we do not condone its use by anyone else. The chemical components found in e-cigarettes pose little danger to human health, and should not be considered toxins or carcinogens. It is irresponsible for public health organizations such as the CDC and the AHA to denounce the use of e-cigarettes as an effective smoking cessation method. In doing so, they only continue to promote the use of regular cigarettes for the majority of smokers who failed to quit using traditional approved cessation methods.
Original article located at:
The Top Ten Unfounded Health Scares of 2010 > Publications > ACSH
Introduction
As the year draws to a close, some of us will be reminded that olde acquaintance should not be forgot. So, before we can officially commence the New Year, the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) would like to reflect upon this year past. We'd especially like to spend an extra moment considering what we hope the world will eventually learn to forget — the most unfounded health scares of 2010.
What were these? Not all of them were so novel. Just as old habits die hard, old scares don’t seem to disappear easily either, and some headlines that received noted media attention in years past have reared their ugly heads once more in this current publication of our annual list of health scares.
But whether old or new, the hoaxes and frauds haven't left us.
After all, with greater tools at their disposal, like Twitter, blogs and Facebook, activist groups have amped up their fear-mongering. In this way, they distract parents from the real threats their children face by hyping non-existent dangers of everyday products like toys, cosmetics, rubber duckies and shower curtains. Phobias about these innocuous products are based on findings that trace amounts of certain supposedly toxic chemicals from which they are made may be found in our blood or urine. Through these claims radical environmentalists take advantage of the new-found ability of investigators to measure chemicals within our bodies in such miniscule quantities as parts per trillion. That this method of analysis lacks any toxicological validity is not a concern to the activists — though it should be to the rest of us.
In addition, we remind our readers that correlation does not prove causation. Just because the presence of a particular substance or chemical is found in the body, it does not mean that it causes a negative health outcome. Also, don’t forget that the results concluded from animal studies cannot be directly extrapolated to humans.
So...please read the following list, and remember that this is meant to reassure Americans that our health and well-being, and that of our children, is not really under attack by insidious exposures to chemicals, toys and vaccines — though it may be from the activist groups that promulgate these fallacies.
E-Cigarettes
The (Unfounded) Scare: E-cigarettes, an odorless and flameless clean nicotine delivery system, contain carcinogens such as diethylene glycol and nitrosamines that pose a health risk to the user. Due to their uncanny appearance to regular cigarettes, certain public health regulators believe they will encourage others to continue smoking.
Origin of the Scare: Earlier this year, the FDA decided to treat e-cigarettes as drug delivery devices, not tobacco products, placing them under more stringent regulation that would require e-cigarette makers to conduct extensive clinical trials in order to allow their product to remain on the market. In July, ACSH joined several other public health and interest groups as an amicus, or friend of the court, to appeal the FDA’s decision. In December, a federal appeals court overruled the FDA’s injunction and determined that, due to its nicotine component, e-cigarettes should be regulated as tobacco products.
Media Coverage: In a statement for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Nancy Brown, the CEO of the American Heart Association (AHA), stated, “No tobacco product is safe to consume. The health hazards associated with tobacco use are well-documented and a recent American Heart Association policy statement indicates smokeless tobacco products increase the risk of fatal heart attack, fatal stroke and certain cancers." Her concerns were based on a study published in the Nov. 5 issue of the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
Fortunately, A-list celebrities such as Katherine Heigl stepped up to the microphone and publicly promoted the use of e-cigarettes as a better alternative to smoking that helped them quit cigarettes for good when nothing else could. While appearing on The Late Show with David Letterman, Ms. Heigl demonstrated how to use an e-cigarette explaining, “You get the habit of this” — bringing her hand to her mouth — “and blow out water vapor so you’re not harming anyone around you and you’re not harming yourself.”
ACSH’s Perspective: After Mariann Piano, Ph.D., a professor in the Department of Biobehavioral Health Science at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said that "smokeless tobacco products are harmful and addictive – that does not translate to a better alternative," in a September AHA policy statement, ACSH’s Dr. Gilbert Ross answered with his own letter. In response to allegations that smokeless tobacco products are dangerous, Dr. Ross wrote: “The evidence is clear, disturbingly so, that you abandoned science in sounding this baseless, destructive alarm: the studies your own authors cite show minimal if any harm from using smokeless tobacco —and even those few studies supporting your thesis are based on a mélange of various types of smokeless tobacco bearing little resemblance to modern snus-type smokeless products.”
Fortunately, readers of The Daily Caller had a chance to peruse Dr. Whelan’s op-ed defending Katherine Heigl’s public display of e-cigarettes, in which she states, “Again, it’s not the nicotine that’s so dangerous about regular cigarettes, but the toxins and carcinogens in the ‘products of combustion’ — the smoke — that’s inhaled deep into the lungs and then into the general circulation. There’s no reason to think e-cigarettes present the same risks, since there’s no combustion.”
In addition, ACSH staffers asked our Dispatch readers to submit commentary regarding their own experiences using e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation device, and we were overwhelmed with the positive feedback we received, such as this response from Kim SanFanandre: “I was a 30 year, 2 pack per day smoker prior to finding e-cigarettes. I completely stopped smoking cigarettes 5 days after first trying the e-cigarette and have not smoked in 6.5 weeks. E-cigarettes should not be banned or demonized. Instead, e-cigarettes as an alternative to smoking should be encouraged.”
The Bottom Line: ACSH has long supported harm reduction as an effective and successful strategy to allow regular cigarette smokers to quit the habit for good. ACSH advocates e-cigarettes as a form of harm reduction for currently addicted smokers who have tried and failed to quit, but we do not condone its use by anyone else. The chemical components found in e-cigarettes pose little danger to human health, and should not be considered toxins or carcinogens. It is irresponsible for public health organizations such as the CDC and the AHA to denounce the use of e-cigarettes as an effective smoking cessation method. In doing so, they only continue to promote the use of regular cigarettes for the majority of smokers who failed to quit using traditional approved cessation methods.
Original article located at:
The Top Ten Unfounded Health Scares of 2010 > Publications > ACSH
Last edited:
