if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained?"
-- Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 1803
Can the Consensus be Wrong?
by Lee
I used to live in Marin County, just north of San Francisco. It’s one of the most affluent areas in the state. And, for some reason, it has some of the highest rates of breast cancer in the country. Nobody’s been able to figure out why. But this seems as likely a culprit as any other theory I’ve heard so far.
For decades, researchers have puzzled over why rich northern countries have cancer rates many times higher than those in developing countries — and many have laid the blame on dangerous pollutants spewed out by industry.
But research into vitamin D is suggesting both a plausible answer to this medical puzzle and a heretical notion: that cancers and other disorders in rich countries aren’t caused mainly by pollutants but by a vitamin deficiency known to be less acute or even non-existent in poor nations.
Those trying to brand contaminants as the key factor behind cancer in the West are “looking for a bogeyman that doesn’t exist,” argues Reinhold Vieth, professor at the Department of Nutritional Sciences at the University of Toronto and one of the world’s top vitamin D experts. Instead, he says, the critical factor “is more likely a lack of vitamin D.”
What’s more, researchers are linking low vitamin D status to a host of other serious ailments, including multiple sclerosis, juvenile diabetes, influenza, osteoporosis and bone fractures among the elderly.
Now, for years it has been common for doctors to tell you to stay out of the sun. You could say that “an overwhelming consensus” of doctors would tell you to stay out of the sun, and when you do go outside to wear heavy sunscreen cream. You could say that there was “a mountain of data” suggesting that the responsible course of action was to protect yourselves from the sun’s harmful rays. You could even say that anyone who decided to go against this overwhelming scientific consensus, backed up by a mountain of data, was being irresponsible.
Now… not so much.
So, the next time some liberal lunatic tells you that there is “an overwhelming consensus” among climate scientists about the “dangers” of global warming, and that anyone who dares hold a contrary view is some kind of “irresponsible” madman, tell them to shit the fuck up, go out in the sun, and have a nice, steaming cup of Vitamin D.
Comments
shit the fuck up
I nominate for phrase of the week.
Seems likely for permanent status.
How about “Up fuck the shit?”
And now we have real scientists saying that it’s the Sun, ocean currents, pointing to what’s happening on Mars...the more a Big Lie grows, the more holes it gets in it.
Breast cancer seems to also affect women of northern European descent disproportionally. Marin County is full of white chicks.
My mom stayed out of the sun for years. Scottish ancestry makes for light skin I guess. She had breast cancer. HAD breast cancer, fortunately.
These are the same people that tell you all sorts of dietary advice that has been proven wrong repeatedly in numerous studies.
Here’s a hint - that short digestive tract you have wasn’t designed for eating grains. It was designed for cooked meat - same with your teeth.
I thought we got vitamin E from exposure to the sun. I thought vitamin D was mainly in dairy products. Clarification please.
I also like the phrase “shit the fuck up” (even though I try to not use that language on a frequent or regular basis) and would like to second its nomination for phrase of the week.
I thought we got vitamin E from exposure to the sun. I thought vitamin D was mainly in dairy products.
That is incorrect. Dairy products provide vitamin D. The sun also provides a lot of vitamin D to light skinned people. Vitamin D production is linked to skin tone. Vitamin D.
This sounds very suspicious to me. There are always nutjobs running around telling us we should chug vitamins. And the fact that he links a variety of completely different ailments—diabetes, which is actually more prevalant among blacks; MS, flu, all kinds of shit is a blaring screaming red flag. People have get used to the idea that there is no magic bullet to give you good health. If you weren’t getting enough Vitamin D, your bones would let you know.
Personally, I will take the possible inceased risk of cancer from avoiding the sun over the CERTAIN risk of skin cancer from being in the sun.
So, the next time some liberal lunatic tells you that there is “an overwhelming consensus” among climate scientists about the “dangers” of global warming, and that anyone who dares hold a contrary view is some kind of “irresponsible” madman, tell them to shit the fuck up, go out in the sun, and have a nice, steaming cup of Vitamin D.
Nobody ever tries to say that the “consensus” of scientists believe 9.8 m/s^2 is the gravitational pull of the Earth. No one refers to a consensus that E=mc^2.
Birth control pills cause breast cancer. Hormones, and all that.
The thing to take away from the global warming debate is don’t waste your time with genuine research. Guessing is okay and more efficient. You’ve gotta love how the Vitamin D world famous expert chimes in with his area of expertise being the solution to the problem. It’s like how Al Gore makes millions touring the Earth selling His solution to this problem he’s describing. Oh, and the problem is really really bad, worse than WWII, Asian Flu, Chicken Pox, Bird Flu, Monkey Pox, Dog Flu and bats with rabies biting you in the neck… COMBINED.
"decreased vitamin D is suggesting both a plausible answer to this medical puzzle of some regional increases in breast Cancer”???
I think this sounds like non-sense. There is a some evidence that cancer is a metabolic as well as a genetic disease but for something like vitamins i think the data pretty weak. Tumors are primarlily genetic and epigenic processes.
And well the Vit. D crowd are always suggest some cause and effect.
david
Here’s a hint - that short digestive tract you have wasn’t designed for eating grains. It was designed for cooked meat - same with your teeth.
Hah! Seattle Outcast is a closet IDist! I knew it! ;)
(Running and ducking...)
"Here’s a hint - that short digestive tract you have wasn’t designed for eating grains. It was designed for cooked meat - same with your teeth.”
I’m looking around and finding a lot of contradictory evidence on this subject. I found this page that insists that humans of a short intestinal tract of about 20 feet which is about 10 times the average body length. And then a veg site uses the same data but calls it long (saying that your average plant eater is in the same boat, but with a meat eater having a tract only 3 to 6 times as long as its body). Both sites had the same data, but I think the pro meat site cheated and compared the human intestinal length to full human height, not just body length. Reading more.
Next entry: Gun-Free Free Zones
Previous entry: Big Brother is Reading You
I nominate for phrase of the week.