home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!cfe+
- From: Craig_Everhart@transarc.com
- Newsgroups: sci.med
- Subject: Re: Deodorants Harmful?
- Message-ID: <gfEPbZL0BwxI4D9K0c@transarc.com>
- Date: 30 Dec 92 05:01:57 GMT
- Article-I.D.: transarc.gfEPbZL0BwxI4D9K0c
- References: <memo.833374@cix.compulink.co.uk>
- Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
- Lines: 30
- In-Reply-To: <memo.833374@cix.compulink.co.uk>
-
- Excerpts from netnews.sci.med: 30-Dec-92 Re: Deodorants Harmful? Diane
- Bailey@cix.compuli (1436)
-
- > Clearly many substances can cause problems in humans without
- > actual being present in the tissue at the site of the eventual
- > problem. ... I'd seriously hope that some better answers on aluminium
- > might emerge than this, especially given the dreadful prognosis
- > of Alzheimers.
-
- Isn't this a non-sequitur? What other evidence is there to correlate
- aluminum with Alzheimer's? Why not concern oneself over a possible
- connection with, say, rhodium as much as one with aluminum?
-
- The hideosities of Alzheimer's disease are substantial, granted. But
- even if one grants that trace elements can have nasty effects on body
- parts where they don't reside, why pursue a connection between aluminum
- and Alzheimer's if the only study that found a connection was completely
- in error?
-
- At what point does a belief become un-falsifiable? At what point does
- it become un-justifiable? And, to cap, at what point can one make up
- all kinds of other possible beliefs, just as frightening, that have as
- much evidence for them as does a given belief?
-
- Myself, I'll confine my hopes to wishing for some better answers on
- Alzheimer's disease. Pursuing hopes for better answers about aluminum
- seems about as relevant as hoping for better answers to the titanium
- question.
-
- Craig
-