151 Myths of Everyday Science

151 Myths
of Everyday Science

Arthur Furst

Copyright 2002 by Arthur Furst All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America Privately published, 2002

Faith may be dened briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable. H.L. Mencken

Contents
Preface: Science and Myth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 I. Toxicity and Chemicals 1. Natural Is Good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 2. All Chemicals Are Toxic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 3. Hormesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 4. Organic Acids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 5. Arsenic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 6. Household Pesticides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 7. Vindication of Apparent Toxin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 8. Pesticides, I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 . 9. Pesticides, II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 10. Fluoride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 11. Insoluble Metals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 . 12. Single Asbestos Fibers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 . 13. Polluted Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 14. Lead in Calcium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 . 15. Bottled Water vs. Tap Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 16. Chlorine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 . 17. Mercury Amalgam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 18. Ozone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 . 19. Inorganic Toxic Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 20. Removal of Pesticides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 21. Radioactive Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 . 22. Government Exposure Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 23. Benzoates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 . 24. Phthalates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 25. DDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

II. Cancer and Carcinogens 26. Epidemic of Breast Cancer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 . 27. Diet and Breast Cancer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 28. The Cause of Cancer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 29. Mesothelioma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 . 30. Food Carcinogens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 31. Painted Mice and Rats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 . 32. Mixtures of Carcinogens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 33. Carcinogens and Birth Defects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 34. Nickel as a Carcinogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57 . 35. Synonymous Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 . 36. Chloroform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 37. Rodent and Human Carcinogens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

38. Animal Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 39. PCBs and Cancer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 III. Pharmaceuticals 40. Drug Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 41. Drugs with Food, I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 . 42. Drugs with Food, II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 43. DrugDrug Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 44. Placebos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 .. 45. Multiple Drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72 . 46. Chelated Minerals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 . 47. Oral Chelation, I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74 48. Oral Chelation, II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 . 49. OTC Drug Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 50. Fragrance-Free Cosmetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77 .

IV. Foods, Additives, and Supplements 51. All Natural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 52. Aspartame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 53. Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 54. Light Olive Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 55. Acesulfame K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 56. Eggs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 57. Grapefruit Juice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 58. Organic Foods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 59. Colloidal Minerals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 60. Indium: A New Inorganic Supplement . . . . . . . . . . 90 61. Vitamin E from Foods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 62. Glucosamine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 63. D-Phenylalanine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 64. Genetically Modied Foods, I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 65. Genetically Modied Foods, II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 66. Genetically Modied Foods, III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 67. Copper in Supplements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 68. Beta-Carotene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 69. Flavonoids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 70. Irradiation of Foods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 71. Fats and Oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 72. Canola Oil Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 73. Fresh Foods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 74. Natural Vitamin E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 75. Combination of Supplements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 76. Noni Juice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 77. U.S. Food and Drug Administration . . . . . . . . . . . 107

V. Herbs 78. Ginseng . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 79. Herbs as Drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 . 80. HerbDrug Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 81. Chinese Herbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 82. Herbs and Surgery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .115 83. Origin of Herbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 84. Herbal Purity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 VI. The Business of Doing Science 85. M.D.s and N.D.s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 86. Creativity and Youth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122 87. Boards of Directors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .123 88. Publishing Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 89. Research Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 . 90. Science and the News Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 . 91. The Integrity of Journals, I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 92. The Integrity of Journals, II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 93. Selected Manuscripts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 . 94. Journal Mergers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 95. Right-To-Know Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 96. Expert Witnesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 . 97. Determining Cause . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133 98. Experimental Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 99. Shared Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .135 100. Big-name Scientists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 .

VII. Mathematics Related 101. Mathematical Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 . 102. Epidemiology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 . 103. Extrapolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 . 104. StructureActivity Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . .142 105. Timing of Doses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 . 106. Multiple Risk Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .144 107. Animal Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 . VIII. Physiological Effects 108. Homocysteine and Heart Disease . . . . . . . . . . . . .149 109. Cholesterol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 . 110. Aging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 . 111. Hearing Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .152 112. Polygraph Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 . 113. Malformed Frogs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .154 114. The Shrinking Brain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

115. Neuron Die-Off . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 . 116. Nightmares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 .. 117. Aluminum and Alzheimers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 . 118. Detoxication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 .. 119. Cosmetic Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 120. Breast Implants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .161 .. 121. Endocrine Disrupters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .162 . IX. Miscellaneous Biological 122. In Vitro Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 123. Bed Rest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .166 . 124. Skin Absorption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 125. Colon Cleansing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 . 126. Cumulator Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 . 127. Acid Deposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .170 128. Water Weight Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 129. Hair Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .172 130. Mice Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 . 131. Nursing Homes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .174 132. Coral Bleaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 133. Secret Cures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .176 . 134. Cross-Sensitivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .177 135. Children and Detoxication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178 136. Water Is Safe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 . 137. Primate Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 138. Cell Phones and Brain Tumors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 139. Magnets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 . 140. Side Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .183 . 141. Parasites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .184 .

X. General Topics 142. Single Amino Acids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .187 143. Accuracy of Labels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 . 144. Breakthrough Supplements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 . 145. Private Colleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 . 146. New and Improved! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 . 147. Colloidal Silver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 . 148. Vitamin O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 . 149. Negative Hydrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .194 150. Astrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 151. Toxicology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

Epilogue: Junk Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

Preface: Science and Myth

Everyone knows that all human cancers are the result of exposure to toxic chemicals. Often we know the specic chemical involved, even if its manufacturer doesnt want to admit it. Similarly, we all know that anyone who develops lung cancer of any type is or was a cigarette smoker, though the tobacco companies continue to maintain otherwise. There is no question that damage to the human body can only be caused by synthetic chemicals. In fact, the decrease in lifespan in civilized countries is due to the introduction of so many synthetic chemicals. What is wrong with our government regulatory agencies? Why do they allow all these toxic, cancer-causing agents to be added to our food supply? Worse, perhaps, is that big companies are now altering our foods with modern genetic engineering techniques. Soon Frankenstein foods will be foisted upon us. Lucky for us, though, natural products are safe and harmless. Its a good thing that we can buy organically grown foods, which are grown without fertilizers or pesticides and have no toxic components.

All of the above are mythsor are they? Do modern-day myths have a basis in reality? To answer this, we must rst ask what a myth is. Websters Illustrated Encyclopedia Dictionary denes myth as: 1.a. A traditional story originating in a preliterate society, dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serve as primordial types in a primitive view of the world; b. A body of such stories told among a given people; a mythology: as in Norse myth; c. All such stories collectively. 2. Any real or ctional story, recurring theme, or character type that appeals to the consciousness of a people by embodying its cultural ideals or by expressing commonly felt emotions: the

11

I. Toxicity and Chemicals

1. Natural Is Good
Background Many people among the general public believe that the contamination of our environment is a result of the introduction of synthetic chemicals. A portion of the general population believe that most illnesses are the result of exposure to synthetic chemicals. On the other hand, the same people consider natural products to be safe and best to use. Myth Synthetic chemicals are bad, whereas natural compounds are safe and good. Reality Many compounds made in laboratories and factories are absolutely identical with those found in nature. There is no difference in chemistry or biological action, and in many cases there is no difference in nutritional value. In reality, there are very few synthetic products that are as toxic as certain natural substances. Exposure to some natural chemicals can be fatal. Cyanide, a natural substance, is fatal at a dose of 10,000 micrograms (mcg). Botulism is natural, and it is lethal in doses as small as 0.03 mcg; one thimbleful could wipe out half of a citys inhabitants. Tetanus toxin is lethal at 0.7 mcg. For cobra poison the value is 0.3 mcg. Poison oak and poison ivy are also natural. Scientically speaking, general statements of good or bad, toxic or safe, are not adequate to describe any substance or agent. Synthetic chemicals are ubiquitous in the modern world. The vast majority of prescription drugs are synthetic. Much of the fabric used in clothing is synthetic. Plastic bottles are everywhere. It is impossible to avoid synthetics in our daily lives. And yet the average life expectancy has actually gone up in recent decades.

21

2. All Chemicals Are Toxic

Background At some (mostly very high) dosage, every chemical becomes toxic. Myth All chemicals are bad, because all chemicals are toxic. Since chemicals are chemicals, their origin makes no difference. In fact, we should coin a new single word, as a contraction: toxichemical. Reality In the early 1500s (the date has been variously reported) the concept of quantication of poisons was presented by Philippus Aureolus Theophrastus Bombasus von Hohenheimwho, following the tradition of his day, changed his name to Paracelsus upon receiving his doctoral degree, so as to resemble a Greek philosopher. His dictum is as useful today as it was in his time. In paraphrase, what he said was, What is there that is not a poison? All things are poisons, and nothing is without poison. The right dose differentiates a poison from a remedy. Following Paracelsus cue, the modern toxicologist takes as his slogan The dose makes the poison. When the term chemical is used, a certain segment of the population equates it with synthetic chemicals. The next thought is toxic. Everything in the universe is made up of chemicals, including human beings. Without chemicals there would be no universe. In a sense, every substance is potentially toxic if the dose is large enough. This includes oxygen, which is necessary to sustain life. The opposite is also true: at a low enough dose, no agent manifests toxicity; if a low enough dose is used, the chemical becomes innocuous. For every chemical, there is a threshold below which no toxicity is noticed. There is one exception to this. By law (but not by science), there is no permissible sub-threshold dosage for chemicals that have been declared carcinogenic.

22

3. Hormesis
Background In classical toxicology, a dose-response curve is commonly used to describe the effects of toxins. As the dose is increased, the response becomes more pronounced. As mentioned before, the opposite is also apparently true: as the dose is decreased, toxicity becomes less pronounced. Eventually, at a low enough dose, there will be no toxic response. This means a threshold has been crossed. Myth When a biological system is exposed to a toxic agent, there will always be some adverse effect on some organ. As noted, the greater the dose, the more injury will result. However, if the dose is lowered, there will be less harm, but there will still be harm. Only if there is no dose will there be no harm. There may be a dip in the curve at some threshold point, but this has no meaning. Reality It is true that as the dose is lowered, toxic response decreases. (For the record, this response is not linear). In many cases a different and little-known phenomenon takes place, which may be the reason for the dip in the dose-response curve known as a U-dip or hockey stick dip. A pharmacological inversion may take place. At some low dose, a known toxic compound may become biologically benecial! This phenomenon is known as hormesis. Hormesis can be dened as a stimulatory effect that occurs when a substance which, at high doses, results in negative effects (growth inhibition or toxic manifestations), produces positive effects at much lower doses (growth stimulation; enzyme activation). Examples are legion. Mice exposed to very low doses of x-rays live longer than unexposed mice used as control subjects; at higher doses, the mice develop cancer. Arsenic is a growth stimulant at very low doses; at high doses it is toxic. Cadmium, one of the most toxic metals, will stimulate the growth of cells at low doses. reference: Calabrese, E.J. and Baldwin, L.A., eds. (2001). Special Issue: Scientic Foundations of Hormesis. Critical Reviews in Toxicology. Vol. 31, nos 45.

23

4. Organic Acids
Background Acids are corrosive to the skin. When they come into contact with skin, they can burn holes in it. People have become disgured when they were accidentally exposed to strong acids. Myth I just read the label on my soft drink. It contains citric acid. Acids are acids. How dare the company put an acid in a drink? I will not drink any more of this brand! Reality There are hundreds of different acids. Some are corrosive, like hydrochloric, nitric, and sulfuric acids. However, there are many organic acids (i.e, those that contain carbon) that are very weak. Vinegar is an example. Two factors inuence corrosiveness: the nature of the acid, and its concentration. Citric acid is non-toxic and is a natural constituent of lemons, for example. At the concentration at which citric acid is used in soft drinks, it is safe and presents no problem. People who drink excessive amounts of soft drinks may have some physiological or medical problems, but these are not citric acid problems per se.

24

5. Arsenic
Background Arsenic has been declared a human carcinogen, mainly because of results from epidemiological studies of environmental and occupational exposure. Myth Arsenic is carcinogenic because small amounts of it are retained in the body. Given enough time, a critical concentration will be reached, and cancer will result. Reality Arsenic is not accumulated in the body. When a person is exposed to arsenic, he or she starts to excrete it in the urine almost at once. Rates of excretion are easily followed. About 50% to 60% of ingested arsenic is excreted within a week. Only exposure to high concentrations on a daily basis can lead to cancer. In occupational settings, such as at metal foundries, workers are constantly inhaling residues of arsenic and other heavy metals. There is doubt as to whether the presently permitted concentration of 50 per liter can be carcinogenic. reference: Vahter, M. and Marafante, E. (1988) In vivo methylation and detoxication of arsenic. In Craig, P.J. & Glockling, F., eds., The Biological Alkylation of Heavy Elements. Royal Soc. Chem., London, pp. 105199 Yager, J.W., Hicks, J.B., and Fabianova, E. (1997) Airborne Arsenic and Urinary Excretion Of Arsenic Metabolites During Boiler Cleaning in a Slovak Coal-Fired Power Plant. Environ. Health Per. 105:836842.

25

About the Author

Arthur Furst, Ph.D., Sc.D., is the Distinguished University Professor Emeritus at the University of San Francisco. In 1940, he started research in cancer and toxicology. He is the author of more than 300 research publications, reviews, and abstracts. Dr. Furst has received a number of honors, among them the UCLA Medal for Excellence in Professional Achievement. More recently, in 2001, he became the rst and only recipient of the Lifetime Contribution Award presented by the American College of Toxicology. He is a fellow of ve scientic societies. Now retired, Dr. Furst lives in Cupertino, California.