tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.comments2023-04-04T07:07:18.483-06:00His Science Is Too Tight!Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04881353695735499600noreply@blogger.comBlogger43125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-44737894660752997772019-03-25T07:29:45.694-06:002019-03-25T07:29:45.694-06:00Aldehyde dehydrogenase from yeast catalyzes the fo...Aldehyde dehydrogenase from yeast catalyzes the following reaction: RCHO + NAD/NADP+ + H2O → RCOOH + NADH/NADPH+ + H+. The yeast enzyme requires potassium ions and thiols (glutathione, 2-mercaptoethanol, cysteine) for its activity. <a href="https://www.creative-enzymes.com/similar/ALDH_46.html" rel="nofollow">aldh</a><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-37325023481364855112016-03-23T23:03:15.165-06:002016-03-23T23:03:15.165-06:00You know more about whether soy protects brains fr...You know more about whether soy protects brains from lead poisoning like estrogen? I can't find anything.bedsidetrashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05052021893824132771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-9460791834196097952016-03-23T22:58:12.493-06:002016-03-23T22:58:12.493-06:00leaded gasoline theory doesn't claim to explai...leaded gasoline theory doesn't claim to explain all variations in crime. <br /><br />Moreover, the fact that Japan had the strictest laws on lead and probably the least lead in their blood seems to support the lead exposure causes crime theory, not hurt it. <br /><br />Also, there have been other studies showing lead doesn't destroy the frontal lobe in women, presumably because of estrogen.http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/713475. The researchers speculated estrogen had some protective effect. So, yeah perhaps diets rich in phystoestrogens do protect brains from lead exposure.<br /><br />bedsidetrashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05052021893824132771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-73978612933518199222015-01-28T06:07:10.260-06:002015-01-28T06:07:10.260-06:00The thing that amazes me the most is that everybod...The thing that amazes me the most is that everybody acts like this is brand new stuff. Roger Masters was publishing papers in the 90s. See Masters, Roger D., Hone, Brian T., and Doshi, Anil. 1998. "Environmental Pollution, Neurotoxicity, and Criminal Violence," in J. Rose., ed., Environmental Toxicology: Current Developments (London: Taylor and Francis), pp. 13-48. (ISBN 9789056991401)<br /><br />On Google Books:<br /><br />https://books.google.com/books?id=5lMP9ivOoxcC&lpg=PP1&dq=editions%3AymxeVQLZzoQC&pg=PA11#v=onepage&q&f=false<br />Acceptablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18270545515593424963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-63045058319771951252015-01-28T05:54:37.844-06:002015-01-28T05:54:37.844-06:00Lead damages the prefrontal cortex which impairs e...Lead damages the prefrontal cortex which impairs executive function leading to crime. IQ is tangential to this.Acceptablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18270545515593424963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-74503049108504281702015-01-28T05:53:03.555-06:002015-01-28T05:53:03.555-06:00Please spend some time reading the research papers...Please spend some time reading the research papers before writing nonsense. Lead damages the prefrontal cortex which impairs executive function leading to crime. IQ is tangential to this. You also wrote "would only affect criminality" but teenage pregnancy has also been correlated.<br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_functions<br /><br />Acceptablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18270545515593424963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-61599366703090969442015-01-28T04:21:44.171-06:002015-01-28T04:21:44.171-06:00Recent research suggests that estrogens protect ag...Recent research suggests that estrogens protect against damage caused by lead. By extension a diet rich in phytoestrogens (soy) might also offer neuroprotection. This could explain Japan not having a lead-induced crime wave.<br /><br />------------<br />Boys, Not Girls, Are Negatively Affected on Cognitive Tasks by Lead Exposure: A Pilot Study<br />Maya M Khanna, PhD, Department of Psychology, Creighton University<br />Journal of Environmental Health, Jan 2015<br /><br />Abstract<br /><br />The study described in this article provides behavioral evidence that boys experience the deleterious cognitive effects of lead more than girls do. In fact, girls with elevated blood lead levels (BLLs >= 10μg/dL) performed as well as girls without elevated BLLs on behavioral measures of cognition. This was shown by testing executive function and reading readiness skills of 40 young children (aged three to six years; 23 with elevated blood lead levels, 17 without) residing within a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-designed lead Superfund site. The results also indicate that elevated BLLs are related to a more pronounced negative impact on executive function than on reading readiness. These finding support recent research on adults indicating that lead exposure is related to atrophy within the prefrontal cortex and other work suggesting that estrogen and estradiol may act as neuroprotectants against the negative impact of neurotoxins.<br />Acceptablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18270545515593424963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-14653884090389962722014-09-22T02:56:10.123-06:002014-09-22T02:56:10.123-06:00So interesting post.I read some activities related...So interesting post.I read some activities related antibodies - that can treat some illness and I really great news. A <a href="http://www.creative-biolabs.com/" rel="nofollow">single chain antibody</a> engineered to become more powerful antibody to fight foreign molecules. Sandra Parkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12915204322249439911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-33357114483661804832014-06-23T11:58:31.246-06:002014-06-23T11:58:31.246-06:00Thanks! Yep, that Dr. Ames quote has been around f...Thanks! Yep, that Dr. Ames quote has been around for years, and the idea that the vast majority of pesticides we ingest occur naturally is quite well established. I really have no expertise to be giving advice on what pregnant women should and should not avoid, but there's a few things to consider at least, and I guess the best I can do is lay out my thought process on it and let people be their own judge.<br /><br />Personally, I wouldn't particularly worry about decaf coffee too much, and if my partner asked about it, I'd say I can't really see where it'd be necessary to avoid as a rule. I suspect Dr. Ames's comments are a bit of a rhetorical exercise to combat the appeal to nature fallacy more than raising a red flag on the uncertainty we face every day from coffee.<br /><br />If caffeine doesn't present a clear and unacceptable risk in pregnancy after years of research on it, especially when limited to 1-2 cups a day, I'd imagine decaf would be even less of a risk, just going by it being the most present alkaloid in regular beans. But if I were talking to a pregnant woman avoiding all coffee while she was pregnant, I wouldn't really consider that a totally unreasonable thing, and certainly not a choice worth me trying to persuade differently. There's not really a downside to avoiding it, and probably not much of a downside to drinking it. It's a personal choice that wouldn't register on my "things I can't bite my lip on" radar.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04881353695735499600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-87911530537779061732014-06-19T20:48:31.406-06:002014-06-19T20:48:31.406-06:00I really appreciate your expertise and insight. Th...I really appreciate your expertise and insight. Thanks for this informative post. I have a question regarding your commentary about conventional produce pesticide residue. I am sure you're familiar with Dr. Bruce Ames. I am speaking specifically to his commentary regarding naturally occuring rodent carcinogens present in a cup of coffee that would exceed the amount of pesticide residue fron conventional produce eaten over a year and whether that statement is accurate and as a result would you recommend that pregnant women avoid even decaffeinated coffee.<br />Thanks in advance for your response.<br />Finite Beinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08751942624602224213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-69562066609574168572014-06-03T15:23:36.919-06:002014-06-03T15:23:36.919-06:00Thanks! I actually hadn't seen anything about ...Thanks! I actually hadn't seen anything about glyphosate and CCD. I've sorta been following the link between neonicotinoids and CCD, and there was a paper that came out a couple of weeks ago purporting to show that it's the primary cause that made a pretty big splash. <br /><br />With neonics, there's obvious direct biological plausibility that they could be the primary cause, but I don't think it's been demonstrated that it's more than one of several possible contributors as of yet. With glyphosate, the link would be more indirect because it's an herbicide rather than an insecticide. It's certainly plausible that glyphosate would disrupt bees' foraging, but the evidence appears to be pretty much non-existent. Glyphosate has also been used for way, way longer than CCD started to appear, so that would have to be convincingly explained somehow. <br /><br />Ultimately, I don't like to dismiss many things completely out of hand unless they violate fundamental laws. Even something without a known mechanism, like that retracted Seralini study on Roundup Ready corn causing cancer could be worthwhile if the methods and analysis were legit. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04881353695735499600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-78997474754963074272014-06-03T10:19:46.988-06:002014-06-03T10:19:46.988-06:00Great article. Question--what about the info that ...Great article. Question--what about the info that came out a couple of weeks ago about glyphosate being a contributing factor to colony collapse disorder in bees? Do you think those "studies" are valid and worth listening to?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-56391531235643778192013-07-24T08:31:35.626-06:002013-07-24T08:31:35.626-06:00Thanks Andres. Glad to hear it was helpful!Thanks Andres. Glad to hear it was helpful!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04881353695735499600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-30351858726871954472013-07-23T12:14:46.578-06:002013-07-23T12:14:46.578-06:00Hi Scott,
I have just been searching for info abou...Hi Scott,<br />I have just been searching for info about this topic for a while and yours is the best I have found out so far. <br /><br />Andres<br /><a href="http://www.stomachsupport.com/celiac/" rel="nofollow">digestion help</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09279071100353910731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-41365048475609900952013-07-12T05:08:31.520-06:002013-07-12T05:08:31.520-06:00really you help me to understand the medical.thank...really you help me to understand the medical.thanks<a href="http://www.biobrea.com/" rel="nofollow">Antibody<br /></a> Aaliyahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04154344554808527545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-28181110091008566912013-06-10T16:52:53.436-06:002013-06-10T16:52:53.436-06:00Nope, you got it. That's exactly what I did wr...Nope, you got it. That's exactly what I did wrong. I guess if I'm going to be off by an order of magnitude because of a careless mistake, I'd rather understate my case than overstate it? Thanks for the comment!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04881353695735499600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-35664994624449544012013-06-10T15:40:10.998-06:002013-06-10T15:40:10.998-06:00I thought Number Needed to Treat = 1/(Absolute Ris...I thought Number Needed to Treat = 1/(Absolute Risk Reduction)? In this case 1/ARR = 1/(0.5%) = 1/(0.005) = 200 (rather than 20). Looks like a error resulting from mixing decimals of percents, unless I'm incorrect in understanding NNT.<br /><br />I like your blog, and appreciate your summaries of clinical statistics.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11336014204698654513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-40765720138489453762013-04-23T08:55:03.574-06:002013-04-23T08:55:03.574-06:00Thanks for your comment, Carl. I still haven't...Thanks for your comment, Carl. I still haven't bothered to look too much into the neuroscience aspect. I have, however, had a couple of months to marinate on the overall argument I made. One larger theme of this blog is showing how the study designs we use to assess environmental risks don't really have the capacity to give the public the answers they need in isolation. This is especially the case here when we're talking about teasing out a potential effect of 30%-50%. <br /><br />This is very different than how researchers used the same tools to determine causation in smoking and lung cancer, for instance. The effect there was ~1000x greater, and even then, they still had to reproduce the findings. That's just how it works.<br /><br />We've firmly established some extremely harmful effects of lead, and that there's no safe level of exposure. My concern is that throwing in non-established effects as if they are known or "blindly obvious" could undermine the argument to remediate lead pollution. If you want to mention the link to violent crime, it would go a long way to be up front about the uncertainties, at least. Perhaps a shift to more Bayesian analysis can help get to these answers quicker, but that brings with it its own set of problems.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04881353695735499600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-27663642053667531652013-04-23T05:35:39.519-06:002013-04-23T05:35:39.519-06:00Thanks for this blog I will be certainly following...Thanks for this blog I will be certainly following you in the future as I do accept your proposal that informatics is becoming essential for anyone seriously following media coverage, particularly as it relates to health issues.<br />As an aside concerning your questions surrounding violence and lead poisoning in children growing worse with age, you will want to particularly research neurological recovery in children and adults. While we have overall been surprised by the resilience of the human brain in studies over the past 20 years the resilience of children in adaptation and the brain's self repair should be of particular interest to this study. carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13961049487071070354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-42040360016878327182013-03-21T14:08:08.162-06:002013-03-21T14:08:08.162-06:00Yeah, thank you for pointing that out. I've he...Yeah, thank you for pointing that out. I've heard that was the argument. Unfortunately, there's little to no basis that the genetic alteration of wheat in and of itself is meaningful at all. It's more of an ideological red herring, based upon very low levels of evidence that has limited value.<br /><br />Let me put it this way: If I could go into PubMed, search "William Davis wheat" and find a systematic review of dozens of epidemiological studies in a peer-reviewed publication, I'd respect his approach in taking his findings into a book for popular consumption. Seeing as he went straight to the book with no pretense of systematically looking at anything, and got it published by Rodale, it's pretty easy to be skeptical.<br /><br />One thing is for sure, a lot of processed junk food is made with endosperm and not whole grains, and has sugar added. If people reduce these in their diet, it's not surprising that they'd lose some weight. It's great if you want to advocate people do this, and to inspire them to live healthier lives. It's great if you want to question the old conventional wisdom of a low-fat diet, but in order to really do it you can't cherry pick your way to that conclusion, much less say all wheat, organic, whole, durum, whatever, is essentially a chronic poison. Or to say that whole grains are analogous to filtered cigarettes. That's quackery, plain and simple.<br /><br />You're right that there is considerably more autoimmunity in Finns to gluten, according to that one study. The strains/amount of wheat consumed nor genetics appear to make any difference. That's the difference between writing a term-paper and a systematic review. You have to accept that these types of results are out there, and they don't fit in the narrative.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04881353695735499600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-68944064419858603112013-03-21T03:16:40.508-06:002013-03-21T03:16:40.508-06:00note that pasta usually is a different strain of w...note that pasta usually is a different strain of wheat. <br /><br />According to Wheat belly, pasta should be way less problematic (its less genetically duplicated.<br /><br />btw, is not the finnish vs. Russian celiac reflecting generally higher autoimmuinty by finns?Jazi Zilberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05905089558096276638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-14254613849726345512013-03-15T13:54:57.582-06:002013-03-15T13:54:57.582-06:00Thanks for the comment Adam. I have not heard the ...Thanks for the comment Adam. I have not heard the audio, but I understand your concerns about it. Obviously there is some skin exposure from thermal receipts, and perhaps far more as you have found in your analysis. <br /><br />As I'm sure you well understand, when you want to see if some sort of environmental toxin or potential risk factor is harmful to humans, obviously you can't run a randomized control trial, so it's a long process to try to establish potential causation. You start with ecological or cross-sectional data to generate the testable hypothesis and build from there. Hopefully the researchers who build on the earlier work address the limitations that previous work had and minimize the new ones they create, but that's not really always the case.<br /><br />One big issue, contributing to how slow these things move, is whether the way we even analyze the data is really appropriate. I sort of hint at this in the post, but the dominant evidence-based approach is frequentist, which has its own pros and cons. The major downside is that our prior knowledge going in really doesn't factor in the analysis. So you have to test over and over, building up the evidence p-value by p-value using designs that have inherent limitations, where you try the best you can to control for other factors that might be leading to the outcomes you see. <br /><br />It would be one thing if these p-values were showing a 10 or 20 or 30x higher risk of obesity, or cancer, or whatever, but they're much, much less than that. There are people out there who are skeptical that an increased risk ratio of say 30% from non-randomized studies is even meaningful at all.<br /><br />Incomplete information does indeed justify inaction, which is sort the major takeaway I wanted to leave the post with. People who want to advocate for action need to know how this game works. The US is not as risk-averse as the EU obviously, so you might as well just not even bother mentioning associations found in cross-sectional studies unless you clearly understand and openly acknowledge what that means. Ultimately, I think it would just be so much more worthwhile to focus effort on really fixing the potential problem with a ready-made solution, rather than playing that game.<br /><br />I'm not sure I'm cynical enough to believe that environmental groups actually PREFER the slow game and the setbacks, but..well..there's a point to it.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04881353695735499600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-85261161845952845982013-03-15T13:07:53.165-06:002013-03-15T13:07:53.165-06:00Hi Scott,
Great analysis - Have you heard the aud...Hi Scott,<br />Great analysis - Have you heard the audio recording from the symposium Justin organized? All the speakers seemed to use the "oral is the only means of exposure" as the crux of their "It's not dangerous to humans" argument.<br /><br />Specifically, that because it travels through the digestive system, it is detoxified by the liver before it ever hits the bloodstream. They repeatedly used the figure "99.9%" rendered biologically inactive by the liver, and used that as a basis to take any research findings from urinary or blood samples and view the "harmful" portion as only .1% of the amount actually detected. <br /><br />But that's not the only means of exposure if you look at the research. You mention in your analysis that exposure from the skin misses some of the metabolic processes that quickly turn BPA into an inactive form called BPA-monoglucuronide. That's exactly right, and it's exactly why dermal exposure is so much more dangerous than oral exposure.<br /><br />This leads to the next problem: Paper recycling has created a BPA-Trap that collects and concentrates BPA contamination with each passing generation. The recycling process does not destroy BPA, and since a majority of the pulp used in US foodservice products (not to mention other packaging) it's getting worse all the time. <br /><br />My family and I became concerned because we all used to sell environmentally friendly foodservice packaging to institutional clients and foodservice management companies before being bought out in 2011. As we learned about BPA, it became apparent that the people most trying to do the right thing are in fact the ones exposing themselves the most. We privately tested items from several prominent restaurant and grocery chains and found BPA contamination in many single item at more than 10x the level the FDA has (arbitrarily) determined safe - 50parts per billion.<br /><br /> From where I sit it seems like the science is kept controversial because incomplete information justifies inaction, and listening the the two and a half hours of "The data says it's dangerous... but we just don't know" at Justin's symposium is just wierd. This has been heavily researched for over 30 years, so why is it still controversial?<br /><br />You can email me at adam@mindtomatter.org, I'd love to talkA/Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00584959684762317183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-37311793580746671062013-02-26T15:57:08.895-06:002013-02-26T15:57:08.895-06:00Without looking it up, just spitballing some probl...Without looking it up, just spitballing some problems with using the SAT scores - I'm thinking SAT scores are not a good measure for this, because there's going to a be a huge overlap between children at highest risk for lead exposure (not just from gas, but from other sources) and those children who never take the SAT in the first place. Using SAT, you're losing a great number of kids who may have high levels of exposure but who either drop out of high school or graduate high school but have no prospects for college or $ for tests and applications, so never take the test. Relatedly, I grew up in a low income area of Appalachia not known for environmental protections, but the ACT was the usual test there for kids with any college prospects - everybody else took the ASVAB. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329571067764673239.post-8005225968680312942013-01-18T04:33:06.418-06:002013-01-18T04:33:06.418-06:00I'd just like to pass this Department of Justi...I'd just like to pass this Department of Justice data on:<br /><br />http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm<br />http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/tables/vracetab.cfm<br /><br />When you view violent crime data by race, you really get the sense that Nevin has done a bit of fudging to make his point. From the DOJ data, crime is seen on a general and slow decline since 1976, with 2 peaks in the African American data -- one of which begins with the introduction of crack cocaine in 1985.<br /><br />If Nevin was willing to conveniently ignore one very obvious stressor in the African American community, I wonder what other stressors he's ignored in favor of lead. And how does the fact that violent crime has been on decline in white communities (thanks to the fact that we have never had to deal with the terrible crap that black communities have had to), despite the rise and fall of airborne environmental lead levels, that should have completely ignored all social boundaries?<br /><br />Also, to address question of IQ and lead levels, why not look at SAT data? When you do, you can see pretty clearly that scores tend to ignore peaks in leaded gasoline use.<br /><br />Anywho, I'm all for removing any and all environmental toxins. But I'm completely against saddling an entire generation with the stigma of childhood lead poisoning, just to make a point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com