Madely Health Headlines Commentary for June 1 , 2011
Source:
- Home
- Articles
- Adolescent Medicine and Issues
- Alternative Medicine
- General Topics
- Geriatrics
- H1N1 Information
- Maternal And Newborn Care
- Medical Post
- Medicine
- Men's Health
- Mental Health
- Nutrition Science
- Pediatrics
- Pharmacology
- Prevention and Screening
- Science and Media Reporting
- Stem Cell Research
- Surgery
- Technology
- Travel medicine
- Women's Health
- Blog Posts
- Book Reviews
- Health Headlines
- Alternative Medicine
- Clinical Research
- Emergency Medicine
- Food
- General information
- Genetics
- Geriatrics
- Health Policy
- Health Statistics
- Junk Science
- Medicine
- Mental Health
- Ophthalmology
- Pediatrics
- Pharmacology
- Prevention and Screening
- Pseudoscience
- Radiology
- Science and Media Reporting
- Sports Medicine
- Surgery
- Technology
- Travel Medicine
- Women’s Health
- Radio Interviews
- Alternative Medicine
- Clinical Research
- Emergency Medicine
- Food
- Genetics
- Geriatrics
- Health Policy
- Health Statistics
- History of Medicine
- Junk Science
- Medicine
- Mental Health
- Ophthalmology
- Parasitology
- Pediatrics
- Pharmacology
- Prevention and Screening
- Pseudoscience
- Radiology
- Science and Media Reporting
- Sports Medicine
- Surgery
- Technology
- Travel Medicine
- Women's Health
- Sunday House Call Shows
- Wednesday House Call
Archive
Category: Junk ScienceMadely Health Headlines Commentary for May 30, 2011
Source:
More chemophobia reports about heavy metals in lipstick, Mumps booster recommended for young adults
May 17Madely Health Headlines Commentary for May 17, 2011
More chemophobia reports about heavy metals in lipstick, Mumps booster recommended for young adults Play Now | Play in Popup | DownloadSource:
How safe is your makeup?
Teens and young adults may need mumps booster
Reference:
An assessment of mumps vaccine effectiveness by dose during an outbreak in Canada
Madely Health Headlines Commentary for February 3, 2010
Comment:
This is a story that we have covered extensively over the years on Sunday House Call. An excellent synopsis can be heard in our interview with Guardian columnist Dr. Ben Goldacre here.
I hold the some of the media just as responsible as Dr. Wakefield for this fiasco by sensationalizing news, promoting fear, and misrepresenting risk to peddle their stories. They are thus complicit in this MMR hoax. To see them react with such gusto against Wakefield and his research now that this paper has been completely retracted from publication epitomizes hypocrisy. They have learned nothing from their shameless behaviour and poor science reporting.
Source:
Lancet retracts study linking vaccine to autism
Reference:
The Lancet, Early Online Publication, 2 February 2010
Retraction—Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children
Following the judgment of the UK General Medical Council’s Fitness to Practise Panel on Jan 28, 2010, it has become clear that several elements of the 1998 paper by Wakefield et al1 are incorrect, contrary to the findings of an earlier investigation.2 In particular, the claims in the original paper that children were “consecutively referred” and that investigations were “approved” by the local ethics committee have been proven to be false. Therefore we fully retract this paper from the published record.
References
a The Lancet, London NW1 7BY, UK
Madely Health Headlines Commentary for January 8, 2010
Source:
Air Canada ordered to create nut-free buffer zones
Comment:
This is a classic illustration of poor risk evaluation. There is no information available in this article to help me answer the basic questions when examining a health claim.
How many people suffer anaphylactic reactions on airplanes that require emergency treatment? How many have died? What is the incidence of these occurrences?
Has there been any evidence to show what the risk reduction would be with setting this policy? Will there be any subsequent evaluation to look at outcomes? And if the outcome demonstrates little to no reduction of risk or incidence, will there be a push to rescind this edict?
Have proactive measures by people who have nut allergies prior to boarding the plane been sufficient to prevent anaphylaxis?
This is a classic illustration of the precautionary principle eloquently discussed by this man.
An exerpt from the website Junkfood Science illustrates this point.
Food allergy deaths have only been tracked by the CDC since 1998, using death certificates coded using ICD-10 classifications (the 10th edition of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases). ICD-10 hasn’t yet been universally adopted, which makes the accuracy of its figure unreliable. It reports that of 2.5 million deaths among all ages in the U.S. in 2005, 11 people died from a food allergy in 2005, with the number from peanuts unknown.
Perhaps the most accurate population data on peanut-related deaths among children comes from the UK. Its national death statistics and pediatric surveillance system has recorded death statistics for nearly all children and it reported that only one child, a 15-year old, died from a peanut allergy between 1990 and 2000.
Madely Health Headlines Commentary for November 4, 2009
Source:
