Chemophobia: irrational plague?
An article from Slate, Don’t Take Medical Advice From the New York Times Magazine http://goo.gl/EYaFh is being re-shared and discussed quite a bit on G+. So h/t to Gaythia Weis Jennifer Ouellette Mary Mangan and Google Plus Science Lab
It’s a great article about chemophobia and discusses a story about a mother who would rather give her child some Chinese medicine rather than what the “Western doctor” prescribed. It points out that supplements are not heavily regulated and so the dose and composition of the supplements can vary wildly. So you actually don’t know what you are getting.
When I come across people who display signs of chemophobia or who try to promote only “natural” products, I try my best to politely remind them that snake bites are natural too. Arsenic, cyanide, carbon monoxide can be deadly and are very much natural. You can get any of those three chemicals, naturally from the environment. In fact you probably have traces of arsenic in your blood.
Here’s an old post about rhubarb, natural and delicious.
Rhubarb poisoning not from a rube
I was going to use a belladonna plant for the main picture as belladonna can be poisonous. Atropa belladonna http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belladonna_(plant)
Note that atropine is derived from belladonna and it can be used medicinally (Western medicine) for bradycardia (low heart rate) and ironically to counteract organophosphate poisoning (it’s not an antidote, it blocks the action of acetylcholine). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atropine
Which brings me to another one of my favorite comments when it comes to chemophobia.
Alle Ding’ sind Gift, und nichts ohn’ Gift; allein die Dosis macht, daß ein Ding kein Gift ist.
“All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous.” Paracelsus
The only real difference between medicine and poison is the dose….and intent. Oscar G. Hernandez, MD
Here’s another good article about chemophobia.
The best antidote for this irrational plague of fear is the same as it usually is: good science, clearly understood, and openly available to all. Seymour Garte, Ph.D.
Our Chemophobia Conundrum
The picture is from a NY Times article that was discussed here.
Who can resist?: #Chemophobia in the NYT
Ultimately, this is a problem of psychology. In the age of high-investment parenting, threats to our children can overrun any rational defense a parent might be able to construct… As a chemist, I find chemophobia pretty ridiculous. As a parent, I’m in sympathy — we all fear unknown threats to our kids. I merely ask that parents step back from genuine fear-mongering that we get from Environmental Working Group and the like and try to gain a rational, risk-based perspective on chemicals in the home.
Finally, here is another article that made the rounds on G+.
America’s Real Criminal Element: Lead
#ScienceEveryday when it isn’t #ScienceSunday
I leave you with.
February 9, 2013
This reminds me of the anti-vax people. No real knowledge, just mistrust. I have used natural supplements with great success, but I’m also alive due to Western medicine.
February 9, 2013
Some supplements have merit, e.g. calcium supplements for people with osteoporosis.
February 9, 2013
What about Calcium supplements for men with hypertension? heh heh . . . clunk.
February 9, 2013
What do they call alternative medicine that has been proven to work? They call it medicine.
February 9, 2013
Spencer Renosis that statement is used quite a bit in my circles.
February 9, 2013
Such a great set of articles. I think I’ll be assigning the Slate article my highschool chem students.
February 9, 2013
Coming back for a later read Chad Haney (It seems like we really do have extremes on both ends of the spectrum, No?) I have had a lot of this in my stream (and one straight up medical post) also.
February 9, 2013
Seymour Garte has a a good book, Where We Stand: A Surprising Look at the Real State of Our Planet in which he expresses his balanced approach, as also given in an interview here:
“The purpose of my book is not to try to try to tell people that everything is fine, let’s just not worry about it. In fact, it’s the opposite. I’m an environmental activist and I believe in environmental activism. I think most of the improvements that have occurred have been from a combination of environmental activism, scientific research, and governmental regulation and recently business decisions to try to be more sustainable. The problem I see is that if we keep focusing on the pessimistic side of current events and where we are as a planet, people will get turned off. Instead of having the intended of fact of stimulating activity and stimulating action, it actually, I think, is starting to have a suppressive effect. And we need to focus on where we’ve been successful.”
February 9, 2013
I like this post, but I’m curious about the choice of the image. It seems to suggest that the concern over the lead (Pb) paint on children’s toys is an example of this issue. Is that the intent? I thought the harmful effects of lead paint on children were very well documented.
February 10, 2013
So it’s an element AND a chemical. It’s cute!
February 10, 2013
Bruce Elliott the picture also has PVC and the NY Times article that it is from is about chemophobia.
February 10, 2013
Bruce Elliott The fact that lead toxicity is quite real actually plays very well with Bryn Mawr chemistry professor Michelle Franci’s Chemophobia article in Slate, linked to above. She is quite careful to point out that people are frequently blind to “everyday” substances, some of which are necessary for life, like oxygen and some that can be quite toxic, like carbon monoxide. She points out that some naming choices of the pharmaceutical industry “Aleve” for example, is intended to be as reassuring sounding as “4 marvels powder”. She discusses her own skeptical approach when dealing with doctors:
“I questioned every bit of it. I’m a scientist, which makes me a professionally annoying skeptic. Why? What’s the evidence? How was it obtained? Is it plausible? And above all, what are the risks?—because there are always risks.”
But criticizes the mother who gave the account of her son’s illness in the NYT article and her chemophobia:
“Meadows, on the other hand, suffers from a condition that makes it difficult to be an equal-opportunity skeptic and infinitely harder to make informed decisions about her son’s treatment: chemophobia. An irrational fear of chemicals, which drives her to let a friend of a friend—a social worker and massage therapist—prescribe her son’s drug treatment.”
February 10, 2013
Thanks Gaythia Weis
It also ties in with the Seymour Garte article because of the discussion on the lowering of environmental toxins yet the media hype is increasing.
February 10, 2013
Chad Haney The internet makes the hype different in nature than it was in the earlier phases of environmentalism. And I strongly agree with Seymour Garte that we should celebrate and publicize our accomplishments. Because that is the route for building support for even more accomplishments.
But less hype? At least in the sense that is taken to be a positive, I’m not so sure.
While overall problems were more severe, people were also much less aware of subtle, long term harms.
People who objected to cigarette smokers were seen to be rude.
Nuclear war hazards could be avoided with drills to learn to quickly hide under your desk.
Institutionalization kept many problems out of sight and out of mind.
And a well controlled media did not mean people were well informed.
February 10, 2013
Gaythia Weis I’m referring to the comment about CNN and Anderson Cooper in the Seymour piece.