Fighting Dow: ABC's Regush May Be Our Guardian Angel
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 10:56:32 -0700


First Of Two
Date: Monday, July 05, 1999 6:30 AM

A taste of what you will see :)

Nicholas Regus for ABC NEWS 

This Journalist Is On OUR SIDE; Finally A Light Of HOPE!!

This is just a portion. 

Junkyard Dogging
This is what I term junk science. It is science that is geared to support points of view. It is highly politicizedscience. And because junk science doesn't prove safety,
then so what?
The IOM panel should have adopted this so what? attitude. Instead, it reviewed the available science as though it truly meant a lot. It doesnít. The panel should have concluded that women with breast implants got a raw deal from the start and are still getting a raw deal because the required standards for evidence of safety havenít been adequately fulfilled. And that until that evidence is in, we should adopt the cautionary principle and continue to view the relationship between serious illness and implants as a plausible hypothesis. This also means that any science showing a link between implants and serious disease has to be taken, at the very least, as hypothesis-generating. The truth wonít be known until good and verifiable evidence becomes available.

Angell Eyes

Naturally, this complex kind of issue gets muddied by junk media. I have the impression that Kolataís dismally incomplete article served as a staging site for much of the reporting that has gone on this week. Junk in, junk out. And then the so-called experts come on board, including The New England Journal of Medicineís Dr. Marcia Angell. This is someone who makes a very big deal of the studies that have been done, including several published in her own journal. Angell is convinced that the available science showing there is no link between serious disease and implants is A-OK. Well, Doc, letís do this: letís you and I debate this issue publicly. The two of us. Face to face. Letís examine the science and the concepts of harm and safety. You put your medical reputation on the line and Iíll put my reporting reputation on the line. Letís find the proper venue and will videocast the debate live for the world to see and hear. Do you have what it takes to fence with a science writer who has covered the breast implant story all the way back to the early 1980s? I think not.

 Dr. Munoz Rises to the Challenge

In this vein, Iím extremely pleased to announce that Dr. Rodrigo Munoz of the American Psychiatric Association has agreed to debate me on the issue of antidepressant drugs and children. This debate will likely take place at APA meetings in New Orleans in October and will be videocast by If the APA takes me seriously enough to agree to a debate, then there shouldnít be any reason for Angell to ignore my challenge. But if Angell should feel a tad inadequate to the task, then Iíll even encourage her to tag team with Gina Kolata of The New York Times. Iím still waiting to hear from the discoverers of the hepatitis C virus about my challenge to debate them on their so-called virus, which they have not come close to proving actually exists. Iím beginning to wonder if they too have deep-rooted doubts about their discovery.

 Nicholas Regush produces medical features for ABCNEWS. In his weekly column, published Wednesdays, he looks at medical trouble spots, heralds innovative achievements and analyzes health trends that may greatly influence our lives. His latest book is The Breaking Point: Understanding Your Potential for Violence. ----------