What's New Robert L. Park May 14, 2010

WHAT=92S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, May 14, 2010   Washington, DC

1. HOLY OIL:  THOU ANOINTEST MY HEAD WITH THIS DAMNED STUFF.
Both President Bush and the Vice President Cheney were drawn from the oil=
=20
industry. Not surprisingly, they saw increased domestic production of oil=
=20
to be in the national interest, which it undoubtedly would be. The major=20
obstacle is the threat to the environment.  Rather than deal with this=20
problem directly, the Minerals Management Service of the Interior=20
Department, which oversees the awarding of permits for offshore drilling,=
=20
has routinely suppressed science, and has even allowed offshore drilling=20
without a permit.  Even as I put these words down, however, Pres. Obama i=
s=20
speaking live on CNN calling for urgent reform to remove a conflict by=20
separating the Minerals Management Service, which is responsible for=20
preserving our resources, from the Interior Department which is responsib=
le=20
for developing our resources.

2. HOLY WATER:  SHOULD A PRIEST ALSO BLESS THE CONTAMINENTS?
After all, the Presidents Cancer Panel finds BPA, which is said to have=20
estrogenic effects, to be present in numerous consumer products.  It=92s=20
detectable at biologically active levels in the urine of an estimated 93%=
=20
of Americans.  BPA is used to harden plastics including water and baby=20
bottles. Canada banned its use in baby bottles and infant formula cans in=
=20
2008, and a number of U.S. municipalities are set to follow suit.  Has=20
anyone identified a reduction in Canadian cancers as a result of the ban?=
=20
The panel expressed concern that the public is largely unaware of such=20
common cancer agents as formaldehyde, benzene and radon.  The Presidents=20
Cancer Panel was created as part of the National Cancer Act of 1971, whic=
h=20
is generally taken as a start of Nixon's War on Cancer. The panel report=20
does not stop with suspected chemical carcinogens; it also includes a=20
warning against frequent medical x-ray use and even cell phones. As WN ha=
s=20
pointed out repeatedly there is no credible evidence linking cell phone=20
radiation and brain cancer. In fact, the inclusion of cell phone radiatio=
n=20
suggests the report is little more than public mythology. It is time to=20
pare the list of cancer agents down to those for which there is at least =
a=20
plausible mechanism.  Don=92t we have enough to worry about?

3. FOOD ALLERGIES: MAYBE YOU JUST DON=92T LIKE BROCCOLI.=20
On Tuesday in the New York Times Gina Kolata, who is a good writer, write=
s=20
about food allergies that aren=92t. In a recent report done for the=20
government, Marc Riedl, an allergist at UCLA, finds that the field is rif=
e=20
with poorly done studies, misdiagnoses and misleading tests. For their=20
report Dr. Reidl and his colleagues reviewed more than 12,000 articles on=
=20
food allergies in the last 10 years. Only 72 could be confirmed as real=20
allergic reactions. Some of which, such as the allergy to peanuts, can be=
=20
life-threatening.  But others, such as lactose intolerance, just lack an=20
enzyme.

4. ISS:  ANOTHER STUDY IN HOW NOT TO DO SCIENCE.
This peculiar issue of WN wouldn't be complete without mentioning the=20
International Space Station. They are rushing to launch the shuttle to th=
e=20
ISS today, before the Russians take over that part of the job.  One of=20
these days Earth will have to worry about getting it down safely. =20
Meanwhile, it was an expensive lesson in how not to do science

THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND.
Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the
University of Maryland, but they should be.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.bobpark.org
What's New is moving to a different listserver and our
subscription process has changed. To change your subscription
status please visit this link:
http://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbobparks-whatsnew&A=3D1