Glyphosate is not linked to cancer — examining the systematic reviews
What does the science say about the potential links between glyphosate (Roundup) and cancer? There’s a lot of research that says no link.
Home »
meta-analysis
Does exercise have any effect on dementia or Alzheimer’s disease?
New study shows that exercise may not have an effect on cognitive decline, dementia, or Alzheimer’s disease.
Does cranberry juice really treat a UTI? Let’s check the science
There is a belief that cranberry juice can prevent or treat a UTI (urinary tract infection). Now, I love cranberry sauce — yes, I love the stuff that comes out of the can, and I will die on that hill,… Read More »Does cranberry juice really treat a UTI? Let’s check the science
COVID-19 prognosis between pregnant and non-pregnant women – get the vaccine
I keep pushing that pregnant women should get the COVID-19 vaccine because of the disease’s poor prognosis. A recent meta-review clarifies that pregnant women have worse outcomes and prognoses from the disease than non-pregnant women.
This morning, I read a heartbreaking story of a 30-year-old woman who died from COVID-19 within a week after giving birth to her baby girl, Summer Reign McMullen. The mother, Kristen, was only able to hold her newborn for two minutes before she had to be moved to the intensive care unit.
So, I’m going to write about the difference in COVID prognosis between pregnant and non-pregnant women. Maybe what I’ll write here will cause one pregnant woman to get the vaccine – saving her life and allowing her baby to grow up with a mother. I hope someone will listen. I hope someone will take what I write and show it to a friend, sibling, daughter, or mother who has avoided the vaccine. Hope isn’t scientific, but that’s all I’ve got right now.
Read More »COVID-19 prognosis between pregnant and non-pregnant women – get the vaccine
GMO corn – safe and more productive according to new meta-review
As I wrote recently, the science is settled on “controversial” topics like vaccines and anthropogenic climate change. The science is also settled on genetically modified organisms (GMO) – real science, not anecdotes, beliefs, misinformation, and lies, tells us that genetically modified agricultural products are safe for the environment, for animals, and for humans. Now, we have a new, powerful study that shows us that GMO corn is not only safe but also increases production of corn.
GMOs are one of those modern technologies that many people avoid, mainly for irrational and unscientific reasons. Of course, many people push fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) about GMOs using little or no scientific evidence to support their claims.
But I’m here to provide real, published, peer-reviewed scientific evidence that contradicts that fear about GMOs – well, at least about GMO corn.Read More »GMO corn – safe and more productive according to new meta-review
John Oliver promotes real science – a comedian gets it right
On Sunday evening (8 May 2016), John Oliver, the English comedian and political satirist, talked about science and how we should embrace it during his HBO show, Last Week Tonight. The upshot is that John Oliver promotes real science – and critical thinking about bad science. And states that vaccines don’t cause autism.
Oliver is one of the best satirists on TV. His attacks on stupidity in politics and culture are classics. He’s been doing his shtick for many years on American TV, being one of featured correspondents for the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. I always looked forward to his reports, though always funny, they were generally pointed and quite intelligent.
His recent segment on science on his HBO show was a classic. And let’s take a look at how John Oliver promotes real science – and why it’s kind of sad that a comedian has to hit it out of the park.
Read More »John Oliver promotes real science – a comedian gets it right
Stop eating, all foods cause cancer
Tripe.
But of course, that’s probably not true.
A new article published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, by JD Schoenfeld and JP Ioannidis, examined the conclusions, statistical significance, and experimental reproducibility of published articles that claim an association between specific foods and the risk of cancer. The found 50 common food ingredients, taken from random recipes found in a typical cookbook. They then searched PubMed for studies that examined the relationship of each ingredient with a risk of cancer. (If they found a more than 10 articles for a particular search, the only evaluated the most recent 10 articles.) This study didn’t just examine increased risks but potential reduced risks of cancer.
According to Shoenfeld and Ioannidis, 40 out of the 50 ingredients had articles describing a relationship with cancer, which were published in 264 single-study assessments. Among the 40 foods that had been linked to cancer risks were flour, coffee, butter, olives, sugar, bread and salt, as well as peas, duck, tomatoes, lemon, onion, celery, carrot, parsley and lamb, together with more unusual ingredients, including lobster, tripe, veal, mace, cinnamon and mustard.
Tripe? No thanks.Read More »Stop eating, all foods cause cancer