Sunscreen or no? Flip a Coin!

28 06 2010

Have you bought sunscreen lately? From what the advertising claims, we wouldn’t get sunburned even if Scotty accidently beamed us a kajillion miles closer to the sun.

Sunscreens have never been on our list of things to watch.  They basically do one thing, and the higher the SPF rating, the more protected we are. Right?

Well, before we squirt goo from that bottle or mist ourselves, here’s something to think about. The Environmental Working Group studied 500 sunscreens and ended up recommending only 8 percent of those studied.

The problems they found were:

The Personal Care Products Council, an association representing sunscreen manufacturers and others, basically says it isn’t so.  They claim to do all the necessary testing and follow FDA guidelines.

Who should we believe? Wish we had an answer. More studies need to be done by various groups before we can be certain.

Share





Patients’ Rights

10 08 2007

Although no parent can bear to think of their child being terminally ill, we know it does happen. When it happens, each of us wants the right to use any drug available to save our child.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decided that a terminally ill patient does not have a constitutional right to experimental drugs, even if those drugs could potentially save that patient.

In a dissent written by Judge Judith W. Rogers, she said that courts have established the right “to marry, to fornicate, to have children, to control the education and upbringing of children, to perform varied sexual acts in private, and to control one’s own body even if it results in one’s own death or the death of a fetus…but the right to try to save one’s life is left out in the cold despite its textual anchor in the right to life.”

Parents of terminally ill children should have access to experimental drugs that have undergone preliminary safety testing but are not yet FDA-approved. Period.