Sunday, October 31, 2010

In Your Cosmetics...What You Don't Know...Still Won't Kill You Pt. 1

I was asked a great question about David Suzuki and his cosmetic chemical comments, and what should you be concerned about in your cosmetics. This is a great question. I am going to break this up into two separate entries because I need to get on my little soap box here for a minute. This question highlights the huge disconnect that exists between science and the general public. This is a shame, because science is awesome, and makes huge impacts on our everyday lives. 

Part 1 of this entry is concerned with dealing with scienc-y info you come across from the mass media, facebook cult, politicians, and lobbyists. It is very frustrating as a scientist to see one little misused claim cause out right panic over a chemical. So I am going to break down a few things you can do to better understand what the real science issues are and what is the junk. 

1) Consider the source and be skeptical. Who is presenting the data? What research was done and by whom? What is the sources agenda? What are the other sides of the research? Was it peer reviewed?-  These questions will help you sort out how much you should be buying into the claims. If the source is a politician hoping to get through a law for stricter regulations on a chemical, they are going to present any research on the chemical that is negative and leave out the positives. Remember too that news media is a business, therefore they want their stories to sell and what better way to sell then to embellish (just a little) the concerns about the chemical. All credible science will have peer reviewed research to back up any claims they make.

2) Beware of Radicals. I hate radicals, they cause all sorts of problems in chemical reactions, the cause all sorts of problems in the environment, and the cause all sorts of problems in society. Anyone who is so far to one side of an issue as those people who fall into the "radical" category are not known well for presenting all the facts and for having the very best logic-no matter what side of the issue they are on! David Suzuki IS a radical, and he feels that he no longer has to support his claims. Reading his article on cosmetics, I must say I am appalled. He speaks very generally, skirting around what any potential issues are. His link to the "dirty dozen" is extremely misleading. Some points are also incorrect. (I will deal with these in part 2) but it is very important to be aware of that. Where is the research links? Who was it done by? He gives none of this, which going back to point 1 has me skeptical over what he is trying to get across.

3) Correlation does NOT mean CAUSE. This is so important! Many studies are done by correlating two particular data sets eg. Ben & Jerry Sales vs the # of murders, to determine if there may be a relation between the two. Positive correlations mean that, continuing with my example, the number of murders increased as the number of Ben & Jerry Sales increased. A negative correlation means the opposite, the number of murders decreased as the number of Ben & Jerry Sales increased. However, this does not mean that it CAUSED anything. The above example is a true study, often used to illustrate this point. It was found that there is a positive correlation between the number of murders and the sales of Ben & Jerry. Does this mean that eating ice cream will cause you to be a murderer? I think we can all agree that would a pretty ridiculous claim, but you see my point. When a news article says MAY CAUSE (or variations of) that means that a positive correlation was observed, but whether an actual cause exits remains to be seen and is probably under further investigation. It is worth knowing that there is a correlation, but don't jump too quickly to the panic side of things. 
Please check out this link for a laugh and an illustration of my point: The Science News Cycle

A chemical we should all be concerned about is: dihydrogen monoxide. This chemical is a colourless, odourless liquid. In large amounts it is known to cause suffocation. It contains the a hydroxide group, which has been known to form radicals that can cause cancer, and DNA damage. It has been responsible for the destruction of settlements in extremely large amounts. It has been shown to easily erode land, and is often used to dissolve a variety of different chemicals. In its solid form it has been linked to the deaths of thousands. And we are all exposed to large amounts of this chemical EVERYDAY! What is it? Dihydrogen-means two hydrogen atoms. Monoxide-means one oxygen atom. H2O-oh it is WATER! 

No comments:

Post a Comment