Good To Know
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Truth in Advertising?
Yesterday's Washington Post "The Magazine Reader" column had a short synopsis of a Scientific American article on how drug and chemical corporations use "product defense" to whitewash the dangers of their products. The full article is only available via the hardcopy of the magazine since the SciAm site calls for a paid subscription and InfoTrac OneFile only provides an abstract. The Post article is copied as follows:
Manufacturing Doubt By Peter Carlson Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, May 24, 2005; Page C04 _____
Back in 1969, an executive at the tobacco company Brown & Williamson wrote a line that summed up Big Tobacco's attempt to confuse the public about the health effects of smoking: "Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the 'body of fact' that exists in the mind of the general public."
"In recent years, many other industries have eagerly adopted this strategy," David Michaels writes in an important article in the June Scientific American. The article is called "Doubt Is Their Product," and it exposes how drug and chemical corporations hire "product-defense" companies to create "scientific" studies that whitewash the dangers of their merchandise.
Michaels, a professor of environmental and occupational health at George Washington University, knows his subject. He watched these companies in action in the 1990s, when he was assistant secretary for environmental safety and health at the Energy Department and was trying to regulate the highly toxic element beryllium.
"If a pharmaceutical firm faces questions about the safety of one of its drugs," he writes, "its executives trumpet company-sponsored trials that show no significant health risks while ignoring or hiding other studies that are much less reassuring. The vilification of threatening research as 'junk science' and the corresponding sanctification of industry-commissioned research as 'sound science' has become nothing less than standard operating procedure."
To illustrate his point, Michaels recounts the tales of how drug companies used dubious studies to defend the pain-reliever Vioxx, which was shown to cause heart attacks, and the appetite suppressant PPA, which caused hemorrhagic strokes in young women. Both drugs have now been withdrawn from the market.
The Bush administration and its allies in Congress have aided these corporations, Michaels says, by passing a bill in 2001 that made it easier for companies to challenge government-funded research.
"I believe it is fair to say that never in our history have corporate interests been as successful as they are today in shaping science policies to their desires," Michaels writes. "We need a better balance between health and money." ¶ 5/25/2005 0 comments
Manufacturing Doubt By Peter Carlson Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, May 24, 2005; Page C04 _____
Back in 1969, an executive at the tobacco company Brown & Williamson wrote a line that summed up Big Tobacco's attempt to confuse the public about the health effects of smoking: "Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the 'body of fact' that exists in the mind of the general public."
"In recent years, many other industries have eagerly adopted this strategy," David Michaels writes in an important article in the June Scientific American. The article is called "Doubt Is Their Product," and it exposes how drug and chemical corporations hire "product-defense" companies to create "scientific" studies that whitewash the dangers of their merchandise.
Michaels, a professor of environmental and occupational health at George Washington University, knows his subject. He watched these companies in action in the 1990s, when he was assistant secretary for environmental safety and health at the Energy Department and was trying to regulate the highly toxic element beryllium.
"If a pharmaceutical firm faces questions about the safety of one of its drugs," he writes, "its executives trumpet company-sponsored trials that show no significant health risks while ignoring or hiding other studies that are much less reassuring. The vilification of threatening research as 'junk science' and the corresponding sanctification of industry-commissioned research as 'sound science' has become nothing less than standard operating procedure."
To illustrate his point, Michaels recounts the tales of how drug companies used dubious studies to defend the pain-reliever Vioxx, which was shown to cause heart attacks, and the appetite suppressant PPA, which caused hemorrhagic strokes in young women. Both drugs have now been withdrawn from the market.
The Bush administration and its allies in Congress have aided these corporations, Michaels says, by passing a bill in 2001 that made it easier for companies to challenge government-funded research.
"I believe it is fair to say that never in our history have corporate interests been as successful as they are today in shaping science policies to their desires," Michaels writes. "We need a better balance between health and money." ¶ 5/25/2005 0 comments
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
Search Engines -- Taking over the world???
The Seattle Times: Business & Technology: How "search" is redefining the Web — and our lives This intriguing articletalks not just about cool things seach engines are adding to attract us, but how this ramps up concerns over privancy and security ..." In developing its own search engine, Microsoft found that people search an average of 11 minutes before they find what they are looking for. See how long it takes to find the top five university marine-biology programs, or the store with the cheapest tires in Seattle. You searched for java, but did you mean coffee, the island or the programming language?
If we increasingly live in an "always on" world, and if our every task starts with a question, then every task could start with search, said Mark Anderson, a Friday Harbor technology forecaster. Search moves to the front of how we think and work, he said, and its impact becomes staggering.
"Huge," he said. "That's where the big money is. The number of eyeballs goes up hugely, and all the money comes from eyeballs."
So where does search go from here? Some experts say the technology will jump digital boundaries from the browser to other platforms. Its next stop is the cellphone [and mobile devices] in the future, television."
¶ 5/10/2005 0 comments
Sunday, May 08, 2005
Based on the Book - MCPL
Ceated by a library system in Missouri, this handy list can be sorted by Movie or Book title, Year or Author name. Nothing fancy, but exactly what I needed to remember the name of the movie based on The Orchid Thief.
¶ 5/08/2005 0 comments
Thursday, May 05, 2005
Going Under Cover with Book Search Tools
The Text Is Out There..er, I mean IN there. You can actually search within the source now --if you follow these tips and tricks from Gary Price. You can zoom in on fulltext from the Google Library Print program, as well as Amazon's 'Search Inside the Book" feature.
¶ 5/05/2005 0 comments
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
To IM or not to IM
Virtual reference or reference chat is receiving a lot of attention. Library Journal, in their April 1 issue, had an article of interest. Be sure to check out their "Best Practices" sidebar at the end of the article.
IM Me
¶ 5/04/2005 0 comments
Library blogs - they're everywhere!
Blogs address almost everything and this is true in the world of Libraries. Check out this listing of over 300 blogs that touch on librarianism is some manner or another.
300+ library blogs
¶ 5/04/2005 0 comments
