“Food That Doesn’t Contain Any Chemicals” – Guardian Science
Nov24

“Food That Doesn’t Contain Any Chemicals” – Guardian Science

[See addendum at end of post] The Guardian? Say it ain’t so! Ever wonder why the public has an irrational fear of anything labeled, “chemical”? Well. . . The book section of Guardian Science has been running a contest since 19th November to win six books shortlisted for the Royal Society Winton Prize for Science Books 2012. The Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker The Information by James Gleick My Beautiful Genome by Lone Frank Moonwalking with Einstein by Joshua Foer The Hidden Reality by Brian Greene The Viral Storm by Nathan Wolfe Lofty books, though I must admit to not having gotten to any yet (I’m currently stuck on Sid Mukherjee’s Pulitzer prize-winning tome, The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer). To enter the contest, one need only answer four “science” questions (and, sadly, be a UK resident.). Let’s take a lookie-see at one of those questions: A mega-tip-of-the-hat the London nanochemist Suze @FunSizeSuze and Oxford’s Nessa Carson @SuperScienceGrl for alerting me to this travesty via Twitter. As Suze tweeted: Most surprising to me is that this contest has been up since Monday and will run through 29th November. That’s another five days to attract ridicule. On one hand, I jest. But this is one serious example of why the public has chemophobia. We know several superb science journalists at The Guardian so I’m certain that the book editor(s) didn’t run this quiz past them. But to let such a question go live online? To win six science books shortlisted for a major award? I hope that The Guardian will quickly remove this question and/or print a correction.   Addendum: After seeing a recent tweet from @guardianscience about their “(slightly tricksy) competition,” I suspect that the question is meant to be one in which no answer is the correct answer. If so, they’ve done a lovely job in getting the social mediasphere to talk about the contest. I still object to using this as a trick since it feeds chemophobia among some, but I can also see that value in using it for a science book...

Read More
Legislation to protect men from PDE5 inhibitors
Mar04

Legislation to protect men from PDE5 inhibitors

I’ve been rather quiet here as of late, Dear Reader. Between my new day job and trying to finish my book chapter on natural toxins while fighting an overall bout of writer’s block, these pages have been devoid of pixels. But I couldn’t resist posting this news that came across my screen from various sources: State Senator Nina Turner (D-Cleveland) announced legislation today that would protect men in Ohio from the risks of PDE-5 inhibitors, drugs commonly used to treat symptoms of impotence.  Turner’s legislation would include provisions to document that the symptoms are not psychological in nature, and would guide men to make the right decision for their bodies. Physicians would be required to obtain a second opinion from a psychological professional to verify that a patient has a true medical malady before the medication could be prescribed. “The men in our lives, including members of the General Assembly, generously devote time to fundamental female reproductive issues—the least we can do is return the favor,” Senator Turner said. “It is crucial that we take the appropriate steps to shelter vulnerable men from the potential side effects of these drugs.” No, this is not from The Onion. This is a press release from State Senator Turner’s website. And the closer: “We must advocate for the traditional family, protect the sanctity of procreation, and ensure that all men using PDE-5 inhibitors are healthy, stable, and educated about their options—including celibacy as a viable life choice. This legislation will do just that.”   The State Senator is my new hero....

Read More