Your Last Warning - Consume Folic Acid at your own risk.

[Rashiminos]

so chock full of woo

.. and since woo is a foreign language, I don't understand it (well.. sometimes at least).

 

[Miles Teg]

.. and since woo is a foreign language, I don't understand it (well.. sometimes at least).

No, that's Wú. This is woo.

 

[Rashiminos]

No, that's Wú. This is woo.

I must have forgotten the quote marks in my last post.

 

[Narz]

It doesn't bother you that none of the people selling these infrared sauna can come up with an explanation of how their product works that isn't so chock full of woo that it makes the Shake Weight look legit?

It bothers me a bit but that's advertising for you. If I purchase one it's still like a year away & I don't know what kind I'll get. I figured maybe the thread starter might buy one thru my link which would net be about $70 (I'm an evil capitalist too ).

I'm talking about the legal limits of acceptable chemical concentration in the bodies of the exposed. That particular standard is set well below what anyone's even ever gotten sick from long-term exposure to.

I don't believe that in the least. Remember, most new industrial chemicals aren't even regulated. Bisphenol A wasn't really a big deal until recent times when a bunch of studies revealing it wasn't all that safe but it's still in lots of things in the US. Really stuff should be thoroughly tested pre-release but that would be incredibly time consuming & "slow progress".

"That particular standard" is laregly arbitrary & varies widely between countries (the US being one of the most lax).

The problem with mercury testing in particular is that there's a whole cottage industry devoted to telling people that they have unacceptable levels of certain chemicals in their blood (Here's more if you're interested). As I mentioned earlier, there's a huge gap between "what we can detect" and "what could possibly pose any harm to you".

Taking advantage of people's fears (especially old, rich, sickly people with money) is, I'm sure a huge industry. Charlatans exist in just about every field. I got my blood tests done at the now out of business Atkins center in NYC, they did not do chelation therapy though they did recommend a dentist who could replace my mercury fillings.

By the way Quackwatch is a terrible site, about as fair & balanced as Fox News with as much of an agenda.
http://www.raysahelian.com/quackwatch.html

Yeah, but there's contradictory evidence. The idea that sperm count may be decreasing is highly controversial and speculative, not something you want to use as a settled example of you thesis.

If you read your link it only measures the time between 1975-1980 and 1998. Emissions standards are a lot higher now than in the late-70's/early 80's though many new untested chemicals have been released. So even if sperm counts may be stablizing I don't think there's question they've been falling & infertility has been increasing worldwide.

I prefer to err on the side of caution when it comes to my health.

 

[Miles Teg]

By the way Quackwatch is a terrible site, about as fair & balanced as Fox News with as much of an agenda.
http://www.raysahelian.com/quackwatch.html

I'm starting to think we live in parallel universes. In my universe, Stephen Barrett is an internationally respected doctor, with an "agenda" against sloppy medicine. Quackwatch is marked by a strict adherence to factual data over personal bias or sloppy personal experiences, and has been cited as a reliable source by most major science and medicine publications, in addition to various government agencies.

Ray Sahelian, by contrast, is an obscure crackpot nutritionist who peddles a nasty little steroid that should have been banned years ago, with an incomprehensible article that could be summarized as "my anecdotes are more important than scientific research, and Stephen Barrett is a meanie head."

What's life like in your universe?

I prefer to err on the side of caution when it comes to my health.

Amen. And the first step to that is not sticking ridiculously untested "natural" remedies into your body.

 

[Skwink]

Heck with you guys! I'm gonna go consume all the Folic Acid I want!

 

[Lord Baal]

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/alarm-sounded-over-dr-googles-diagnosis-20110210-1anl7.html

This article is far too interesting to be trapped in such an unworthy thread.

 

[El_Machinae]

FWIW, I could see how 'natural folate' could be much healthier than 'synthetic folate'. We've seen the same with B-carotene, anti-oxidants, the other B-vitamins, etc. Getting your RDI of 'natural folate' requires a quantity of vegetables that people don't normally eat. There's likely a lot of synergies available. And, individual vitamins are notorious for being tough to quantify. They require long studies with a lot of people.

Increased cancer is well worth the reduction of spina bifida, too. We no longer live in a world where sick babies die, and I'd rather not have a decent proportion of the population have that disease for their 70+ years. Cancer is a problem, yes, but it's a disease that can be fought.

Finally, on the "corruption front". I can see why we'd worry about the aspartame lobby given that it used to be owned by Monsanto. They're big and sociopathic enough that we should watch them. I don't know where the big money is, in the 'folate lobby'. AFAIK, the corps are being forced to include folate

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

Being good in some ways is not an argument. Vitamins are also good and important for this and that - yet people who took pills with vitamins are showing reverse effects of what vitamins are supposed to cause. Like some vitamin - I believe it was D - is supposed to decrease the rate of lunge cancer - the vitamin D pills increased it.

That the vitamin hype of the 80s resulted in those findings should be enough to teach people how wrong it is to assume something is safe because it is necessary for something or good in some ways. It is way more complex than that.

There has never been such evidence. All the "studies" that you periodically hear about vitamins are full of flaws and data mining expeditions, reported in the news for excitability. Their claims periodically go in and out of fashion. Recently, for example, Vitamin E was prescribed for its supposed benefits in heart disease. These benefits were later debunked. And I will say that there will never be any evidence that vitamin supplementation can treat anything but vitamin deficiency, and its complications, because vitamins are simply essential nutrients. They are found widespread in food.

The only vitamins that have a risk of overdose are the lipid soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K. All others are water soluble and any consumption beyond the necessary will simply be emptied in urine.

"Popularly esteemed publication."

The reason I mention this is because those publications have a peer review, and will screen every submission for veracity. It doesn't guarantee that biased papers will not be published, but it at least offers some measure of protection against it. Those "journals" cited in the OP are just propaganda rags. They may as well be supermarket tabloids.

 

[Narz]

I'm starting to think we live in parallel universes. In my universe, Stephen Barrett is an internationally respected doctor, with an "agenda" against sloppy medicine. Quackwatch is marked by a strict adherence to factual data over personal bias or sloppy personal experiences, and has been cited as a reliable source by most major science and medicine publications, in addition to various government agencies.

Ray Sahelian, by contrast, is an obscure crackpot nutritionist who peddles a nasty little steroid that should have been banned years ago, with an incomprehensible article that could be summarized as "my anecdotes are more important than scientific research, and Stephen Barrett is a meanie head."

Crackpot, nasty, should have been banned?

You're just being a troll. What steroid are you talking about?

In Barrett's universe anything not patented by a multi-billion dollar pharmacutical corporation is automatically dangerous, any evidence to the contrary is irreverent & any drug or surgical alternative is automatically better.

Barrett is a selective troll. He is a tool for big pharm & thus gets accolades from big pharm profiteers. He cherry picks all anti-anything-mainstream data on anything from vitamin pills to herbs to massages dismissing any positive studies as irrelevant but on Vioxx, Ritalin, etc. the guy is mum.

"Barrett says he does not criticize conventional medicine because that would be 'way outside [his] scope.'"

Yes, his scope is narrow & bias like his little mind.

Amen. And the first step to that is not sticking ridiculously untested "natural" remedies into your body.

I don't take any ridiculously untested remedies into my body.

However, I have taken plenty of "tested" "approved" substances in my life which have caused me a lot of harm. Ritalin for example causes brain damage in rats & increases susceptibility to depression later in life (which is convenient for the drug industry). I've had mania induced by drugs & sexual problems. I've eaten quite a bit of high fructose corn syrup, partially hydrogenated oil, artificial colors & flavors which are approved for consumption & thereby must be healthy, right?

So I'll trust my life experience of trusting the establishment & it's side effects over some a$$hole with an agenda online. That doesn't mean I'm going to trust every charlatan who tries to sell me a "Native American spiritual healing bracelet", that's simply a strawman.

I'm happy to say I've been drug free since 2002 (except when I had a bike accident in '06 & sprained both arms I took a pain drug for one day).

I take DHA (long-chain omega-3), a multi vitamin and Ashwagandha these days. Quacky have any problems with those?

Oh, also, a little while ago I had a urinary tract infection which I successfully treated with D-Mannose which has obvious benefits over antibiotics (cost being a main one).

What's life like in your universe?

It has it's ups & downs but I wouldn't switch places with anyone else & at the end of my life I'll take responsibility for it & not be shocked & depressed that I did "everything right" and am still unhappy/sick/let down/whatever. How about yours? Or do you even have your own universe, or do you just read the mainstream media & think what you're supposed to think @ all times (I imagine this would make it easier in the short-term but in the long-term probably not so much).

Moderator Action: Trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Narz]

Looks like Barrett is a quack himself.

http://www.canlyme.com/quackwatch.html

Dr. Stephen Barrett of Quackwatch Exposed In Court Cases
At trial, under a heated cross-examination by Negrete, Barrett conceded that he was not a Medical Board Certified psychiatrist because he had failed the certification exam.

This was a major revelation since Barrett had provided supposed expert testimony as a psychiatrist and had testified in numerous court cases. Barrett also had said that he was a legal expert even though he had no formal legal training.

The most damning testimony before the jury, under the intense cross-examination by Negrete, was that Barrett had filed similar defamation lawsuits against almost 40 people across the country within the past few years and had not won one single one at trial.

During the course of his examination, Barrett also had to concede his ties to the AMA, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Food & Drug Administration (FDA).

 

[Miles Teg]

Crackpot, nasty, should have been banned?

You're just being a troll. What steroid are you talking about?

Sahelian makes most of his money hocking DHEA, an unregulated steroid hormone he advertises as a natural Viagra (but better), a cure for baldness, anti-carcinogen, memory booster, and so on. It looks like it mostly sells on the Viagra bit. Mind you, the research suggests it doesn't do much beside increasing the risk factor for heart palpitations, but meh.

In Barrett's universe anything not patented by a multi-billion dollar pharmacutical corporation is automatically dangerous, any evidence to the contrary is irreverent & any drug or surgical alternative is automatically better.

It's not that it's automatically dangerous, it's that alternative medicine is by definition unregulated. It's really no better than the patent medicines of the 19th century.

Barrett is a selective troll. He is a tool for big pharm & thus gets accolades from big pharm profiteers. He cherry picks all anti-anything-mainstream data on anything from vitamin pills to herbs to massages dismissing any positive studies as irrelevant but on Vioxx, Ritalin, etc. the guy is mum.

"Barrett says he does not criticize conventional medicine because that would be 'way outside [his] scope.'"

Yes, his scope is narrow & bias like his little mind.

The guy has a specialty, what's wrong with that? There are scores of doctors watchdogging pharmaceutical companies, and ten times as many wannabees doing the same. Most doctors understand that alternative medicine is more or less a scam, but they have other specialties. Barrett seems to have his hands full just keeping up with scams in alternative medicine, and he does well at it.

Ritalin for example causes brain damage in rats & increases susceptibility to depression later in life (which is convenient for the drug industry).

Ritalin is a blunt instrument. It has a lot of problems, but study after study (and soppy personal stories, if you prefer those) show that it really does help people suffering from. Hopefully it can be phased out, but we haven't come across anything better yet.

So I'll trust my life experience of trusting the establishment & it's side effects over some a$$hole with an agenda online.

The thing is, that with man with an agenda seems to be one of a handful of people talking about alternative medicine that aren't trying to sell it to you. Alternative medicine is just a label for medicine that either hasn't been proven to work or has been proven not to work. It's sold using loopholes and blind spots in FDA policies. You know the state of the industry is bad when the honest merchants are the ones who don't put the legally required warnings that nothing they say should be taken seriously in the fine print.

I take DHA (long-chain omega-3), a multi vitamin and Ashwagandha these days. Quacky have any problems with those?

Not much to talk about there. DHA has some limited (often overblown) benefits, while multi-vitamins and Indian ginseng have never been proven to do anything of consequence in people with a decent diet (which I presume you have).

Or do you even have your own universe, or do you just read the mainstream media & think what you're supposed to think @ all times (I imagine this would make it easier in the short-term but in the long-term probably not so much).

Honestly, do you even get points for being edgy and alternative when every other bloke on the street thinks that science is optional in good medicine and that their dentist's brother's medical anecdotes are the real secret?

I don't really care about being "mainstream". I do care about credentials and intellectual rigor. I've never seen that from anyone peddling alternative medicine, or "science is going to kill us all" baloney.

Looks like Barrett is a quack himself.

That article is a kneeslapper all right, just not for the reasons you seem to think.

Addressing the main points of the article:

Barrett practiced psychiatry for 30 years, beginning in the 1960s, when Medical Board certification was optional. Board certification is mandatory for new doctors now, but Barrett was one of thousands of people grandfathered in.

Finallly, no evidence has ever been produced to suggest that Barrett is somehow in the pocket of "Big Pharm", or whatever the cool kids call it these days. If you want to make accusations, back them up.

 

[Narz]

Sahelian makes most of his money hocking DHEA, an unregulated steroid hormone he advertises as a natural Viagra (but better), a cure for baldness, anti-carcinogen, memory booster, and so on. It looks like it mostly sells on the Viagra bit. Mind you, the research suggests it doesn't do much beside increasing the risk factor for heart palpitations, but meh.

Meh, hardly worthy of calling him a quack. According to wiki it has some beneficial effects. No more dangerous than using melatonin probably.

It's not that it's automatically dangerous, it's that alternative medicine is by definition unregulated. It's really no better than the patent medicines of the 19th century.

That really depends completely on what you're talking about. Lumping everything unregulated together in one basket serves no one. Though "unregulated" is a good word to use in fear-mongering.

Ritalin is a blunt instrument.

That statement doesn't really mean anything.

It has a lot of problems, but study after study (and soppy personal stories, if you prefer those) show that it really does help people suffering from.

Study after study, eh?

Hopefully it can be phased out, but we haven't come across anything better yet.

Exercise maybe? Attention from parents? Better teachers? Dietary changes? Nothing at all? Ritalin is some pretty bad stuff.

The thing is, that with man with an agenda seems to be one of a handful of people talking about alternative medicine that aren't trying to sell it to you. Alternative medicine is just a label for medicine that either hasn't been proven to work or has been proven not to work. It's sold using loopholes and blind spots in FDA policies. You know the state of the industry is bad when the honest merchants are the ones who don't put the legally required warnings that nothing they say should be taken seriously in the fine print.

And how much money does it take to get a drug regulated? Not being an official drug doesn't mean something hasn't had research done on it.

Not much to talk about there. DHA has some limited (often overblown) benefits, while multi-vitamins and Indian ginseng have never been proven to do anything of consequence in people with a decent diet (which I presume you have).

Not true. Vitamin-C for one has a lot of benefits.

Honestly, do you even get points for being edgy and alternative when every other bloke on the street thinks that science is optional in good medicine and that their dentist's brother's medical anecdotes are the real secret?

lol, edgy. Don't know how to even respond to that.

I don't really care about being "mainstream". I do care about credentials and intellectual rigor. I've never seen that from anyone peddling alternative medicine, or "science is going to kill us all" baloney.

Again, don't know how to respond to that. "science is going to kill us all"? What?

I
Finallly, no evidence has ever been produced to suggest that Barrett is somehow in the pocket of "Big Pharm", or whatever the cool kids call it these days. If you want to make accusations, back them up.

I didn't say they were paying him. The best tools are the ones you don't have to pay.

 

[Miles Teg]

Hardly worthy of calling him a quack.

Meh. Never trust anyone whose site offers more than five different sexual stimulants on the main page.

Anyways, he also hocks some ridiculous herbs he claims prevent/cure HIV, and acai berry. And he's "neutral" on the issue of whether vaccines cause autism or not, which would be enough to label him crazy on it's own.

And how much money does it take to get a drug regulated? Not being an official drug doesn't mean something hasn't had research done on it.

Did I say something untrue? Is there some objective board that regulates alternative medicine? If not, alternative medicine is by definition "unregulated". That's not an innately scary word. Any negative meanings you attach to it are just the sound of your common sense screaming.

That really depends completely on what you're talking about. Lumping everything unregulated together in one basket serves no one. Though "unregulated" is a good word to use in fear-mongering.

There's research and there's research. Good research is double blind, uses large sample sizes, waits for long periods of time, and is heavily documented. It's an expensive processes, and not one that most people can afford. That's why drug companies do most of the drug research, not some conspiracy to keep the little guy out.

Not true. Vitamin-C for one has a lot of benefits.

That's an incredibly vague phrase. We need to clarify it. If you're saying that Vitamin C is good for you, and a deficiency is harmful, then you're absolutely right. Scurvy is bad, m'kay? If you're claiming that Vitamin C levels in essence of what you get from a balanced diet are beneficial, there's no good evidence for that. That's mostly because Vitamin-C is water-soluable, as Nanocyborgasm was referring to up-thread. Excess Vitamin C literally goes right through you.

I didn't say they were paying him.

You did however quote a really, really bad article claiming that he was. You seemed to like that piece before I pointed out how dishonest it was.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

The only vitamins that have a risk of overdose are the lipid soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K. All others are water soluble and any consumption beyond the necessary will simply be emptied in urine.

What makes you so sure those are the only one? Yes, you said those are the only ones not water soluble - so I take it A, D, E, and K have a common difference in their chemical structure compared to the other vitamins or something of the sort?

 

[emzie]

What makes you so sure those are the only one? Yes, you said those are the only ones not water soluble - so I take it A, D, E, and K have a common difference in their chemical structure compared to the other vitamins or something of the sort?

He's probably so sure because he's a doctor.

It shouldn't be too hard a test. Get a substance, try and dissolve it in water. Does it dissolve? No? Did you raise the water to body tempature? Yes? Then it's not water soluble.

 

[amadeus]

I'm just relieved we won't have to listen to any more warnings after this thread is done.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

On the alternative-medicine-debate:

That alternative medicine is unregulated is its strength and weakness. Weakness because many many many either stupid or greedy or stupid and greedy people waste money, time and trust of their costumers.
Strength because it is open to basically everything. And that enables to explore ways of healing beyond the boundaries of classical medicine. By "beyond the boundaries" I don't mean beyond the laws of nature. I mean beyond what classical medicine is able to amount to in its own system of progression.
For an example just look at acupuncture. Without alternative medicine classical medicine still wouldn't know the first thing about it.

So to be aware how full of bullcrap alternative medicine is, is a most necessary thing - but to oppose the whole of it is not very smart either. Classical medicine should rather be open to promising and different ways of healing which then can be studied in the ways of classical medicine, but which were initiated by alternative medicine.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

It shouldn't be too hard a test. Get a substance, try and dissolve it in water. Does it dissolve? No? Did you raise the water to body tempature? Yes? Then it's not water soluble.

I don't see how one gets from there to "It is all safe".

 

[emzie]

I don't see how one gets from there to "It is all safe".

Well, if it's water soluble (B vitamins for example) then what's not used by your body just ends up being peed out.

I'm not sure if Red Bull and energy drinks like that are popular in Europe, but check the nutrition label. They're all like 6667% of some B vitamins.