If lawmakers knew that stopping by a smoky bar for a beer was no more dangerous for citizen's heart than eating a Happy Meal, they would not have voted for a smoking ban.
Reading this blog is like watching to children fight on the playground. Neither side ever really says anything new and both sides fail to understand that they are both right when the stick to the rigid defintions that they self-righteously believe the other side should adopt.
A brilliant mind, rich resources and loads of education can't make up for those who fail to check their ego at the door.
So you feel that since you were insulted by Tobacco Scam that you need to post on your blog that you want a copy of "Vascular Biology for Dummies?"
I think what you need my friend, is a vacation, a long vacation.
Dr. Siegel is trying to blow the whistle on a huge fraud. Sounds like a pretty adult project to me.
"Dr. Siegel is trying to blow the whistle on fraud." How noble of him to do so. Thank God he's here to do that by arguing about who knows more about vascular biology. What an exceptional strategy.
Not sure I can tell what's really going on here. THere is supposed to be a "consensus" about all this SHS stuff.
When anyone here disagrees with the doctor--or if anyone agrees to work in a smoky environment--he accuses those people of not being fully informed. Of not really understanding the science. He says the fact that 44 percent of people appear to disagree with him about the dangers of SHS serves as proof that they don't fully understand the science. Otherwise, they would agree with the California EPA and Stanton Glantz and all the rest. You know. The smart people. The consensus.
So now what's happening? The doctor is disagreeing with "consensus" position held by Stanton Glantz and the California EPA and all the rest regarding the acute effects of SHS.
And how are they responding? Exactly the same way he does: Accusing the nay-sayer of not being fully aware of all the facts, or not being smart enough to understand them.
That's what it feels like when someone says that anyone who disagrees is obviously wrong, incompetent or dishonest. Sucks, don't it?
Consensus can really suck. Especially when someone just says there is one and insists that "the debate is over." Even though really smart people who are really qualified disagree.
Someone call Drs. Gori and Whelan. I think they might want to see this.
Perhaps the 15 nonsmokers who participated in the Otsuka study were afraid of secondhand smoke and the 15 active smokers were not? Could that be an alternative explanation of the Otsuka findings?
Bill--
Otsuko found nothing of any importance. And nothing he wouldn't have found if he'd done the same experiment with veggie burgers and fruit. Or even, for all we know, after a losing hand of poker or a screening of :"Saw 2"
Sam--
Good shot. As usual.
:
I am waiting for the big research project to be completed and sent down the media pipeline.
When we discover whether endothelial dysfunction remains, after the customary burp. This could be entirely useful to determine the long term effects of Bromo Seltzer and its curative abilities in preventing vascular disease.
People keep telling me a long loud burp is not necessary.
Keep at em Michael we seek the truth. Modern medicine so much like a day time soap opera, you just never know where the writers will take you next.
Dr. Siegel, are you really surprised by the response you received from TobaccoScam? TobaccoScam is Dr. Stanton Glantz and the response you received is the same that I received when I challenged his claims using your blog. He basically said “Siegel has never done any work on cardiovascular disease, in particular work on the vascular endothelium and his statements clearly reflect a lack of understanding of the effects of smoking on the endothelium or the role that even seemingly minor damage to the endothelium plays in both the immediate risk of a heart attack and also the long term cumulative risk.” The truth of the matter is that his Helena study and the claims made about the health effects of only a brief exposure to SHS are the strongest ammo that TC has for bans. If people released that health effects of brief exposures to SHS were no different then eating one meal at McDonald’s then most would conclude that SHS is not that big a deal (as I have been saying all along). No need for bans.
Finally I have some random thoughts I would like to share. Why did these researchers target McDs? While I do not dispute their findings, the first thing that came to mind is that these researchers have an agenda. What is it and who funded this study? Is this the ammo needed to sue fast food for causing childhood obesity? Why did they not have a control that included a “consensus” example of a completely healthy meal, one even the Surgeon General or WHO would be proud of? My first thought was that perhaps what is being measured is a normal physiological body response to eating any meal. By not including a good control meal, they have not ruled that out. If this is the case then why call it “endothelial dysfunction” making it sound like a dysfunction. That is like calling taking a dump an excretory dysfunction? I am not convinced that any meal may cause the same response and testing for this should be on some scientists’ plate and if found to be so then all claims regarding health effects of brief exposures to SHS would be mute. Finally we all here already know that the brief exposure claims on healthy individuals is false, including ACS, TobaccoScam, etc. However TC realizes these claims are the strongest case for smoking bans and will not easily give them up. Sending an Email to those colleagues, who do not take you seriously anyways, will have no effect. If you want to change things, you will need to go to the press with your claims, if they will listen. My guess is they will not since the corporations that own them probably agree will the TC agenda. Why would they give the enemy ammo?
"I think what you need my friend, is a vacation, a long vacation."
Could you kindly elaborate on the implications of that remark?
SAM, what do you take to alleviate the pain caused by banging your head against a brick wall ? I totally agree with your comments but my medication just doesn't cut it any more.
Michael;
Is it not true the level of endothelial dysfunction [Countered by nitrous Oxide signaling the media layer to relax]is reliant on nitrous Oxide [NO] levels available [[[at the time of testing]]]. The production of which; varies by the person, is not predictable or associated with outside factors. Is it not also true calcium binding levels also play a vital role in cell signaling which determines the relaxation of the media [factors which also vary widely by the person].
"The innermost layer of an artery, in direct contact with the flowing blood, is the tunica intima, commonly called the intima. Adjacent to this layer is the tunica media, known as the media and composed of smooth muscle cells and elastic tissue. The outermost layer is the tunica adventitia or tunica externa. This layer is composed of tougher connective tissue."
Increased Blood pressure tests check for the condition at the time of testing and are no indication of hazardous factors which would express the norm or permanence.
The overproduction of NO levels produces another big problem
"Macrophages, certain cells of the immune system, produce nitric oxide in order to kill invading bacteria. Under certain conditions, this can backfire: Fulminant infection (sepsis) causes excess production of nitric oxide by macrophages, leading to vasodilatation (widening of blood vessels), probably one of the main causes of hypotension (low blood pressure) in sepsis. The inducible isoform of nitric oxide synthase is expressed and produces cytotoxic levels of nitric oxide."
In other words the narrowing and widening of the media is dependent on individual production of NO and personal interactions which "may or may not" be varied by smoking or exposures to other agents, however the momentary testing by stimulating NO levels triggering dilation is in no way indicative of a long term problem or is there any proof endothelial dysfunction is not simply the normal functioning of the body in reaction to NO levels involved interacting in an extensive array of other factors present at that time.
To leave others believing because of the name, "dysfunction" the condition is an urgent hazard is entirely callous and disrespectful and I would suggest entirely indicative of the unprofessional nature of the source.
Michael you are keeping the lie alive by not elaborating a lot more information, as to the total effect and significance of the observations discussed. Arguing the duration of the condition is a start, but as you well know is a long way from disclosing the complete truth in this situation. The complexity of the interactions and the many factors at play here is being used deliberately to promote fear in an obviously premature evaluation of the situation.
This leaves the impression heart specialists know a lot more than they actually do know and allows politicians to state with confidence smoking and ETS are causing permanent damage as indicated "within 30 seconds", which is absolutely beyond our ability to know. Certainly well beyond credibility based in what we do know.
There is no known test to apply medical significance of the condition which predates by many years any actual heart disease.
The sticky platelets and hardening of arteries can not be determined to be caused directly or indirectly by ETS, or even smoking for that matter, the truth is no one knows for sure. If you knew you could do a lot more than prescribe NO producing drugs you could regulate the system and end all chance of any threat.
Of course we wont find those cures in theoretic discussions we will find them in physical science or what remains of it when TC is done.
From the article Below:....a veggie burger with fries and soda; and a veggie burger with salad, fruit, yogurt, and orange juice.
All three meals resulted in signficant endothelial dysfunction, as documented by a significant reduction in flow-mediated endothelium-dependent dilatation.
I looked up the fat content of the healthy meal on McDonald's website:
Veggie Burger - 12g total fat
Salad - 0 g total fat
Dressing - Range 1.5g - 18g total fat
Fruit & Yougurt - 2 g total fat
Orange Juice - 0g total fat
Total= 15.5 g -to- 32g [dressing choice]
.....So, what is Everyone talking about? Looks like a healthy meal to me. Or is it like Light Cigarettes; eating anything is harmful for your health?
Oh, and here are the Cliff notes:
http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/
...OfContents.html
Dan;
" TobaccoScam is Dr. Stanton Glantz and the response you received is the same that I received when I challenged his claims using your blog. He basically said “Siegel has never done any work on cardiovascular disease, in particular work on the vascular endothelium"
Perhaps the question you should ask of Glanz would be in his assessment; the role the 5000 " Deadly" ingredients in Tobacco smoke play, [individually or collectively] in the process known as calcium-binding and the resulting regulation of protein targets.
What specifically is the total effect [positive or negative or even a ratio of positive vs negative] on the human body And what would be the source of his oversight.
Hot off the press!!! And how convenient that they discovered this just as the "war on obesity" picks up speed. Gee, what a surprise, eh?
Common virus may contribute to obesity
Updated Mon. Aug. 20 2007 4:49 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
A common virus that causes cold and eye infections may also lead to obesity, according to research presented at the national meeting of the American Chemical Society.
Infection with human adenovirus-36 (Ad-36) seems to direct adult stem cells from fat tissue to turn into fat cells, researchers have found in lab experiments. Stem cells not exposed to the virus, in contrast, were unchanged.
"This study provides evidence that it's much more complicated than that," he told CTV News.
If the findings are proven true, it raises the possibility that a vaccine or antiviral medication could one day help fight some forms of obesity.
Study presenter Dr. Magdalena Pasarica, of the Pennington Biomedical Research Center at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, notes that researchers don't believe that everyone who has been infected with Ad-36, which is widespread in nature, will develop obesity.
[url]http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/
CTVNews/20070820/obesity_virus_070820/20070820?
hub=CTVNewsAt11[/url]
Here's the link properly done:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/Articl...icleNews/story/
CTVNews/20070820/obesity_virus_070820/20070820? hub=CTVNewsAt11
I give up, it just doesn't want to work right. Just copy and paste the url into your browser........grrrrrr 
Lynda, I wondered where Big Pharm was going with the obesity thing, I get it now, a whole new series of drugs to "treat" the virus (And its associated "complications". I get it now, where they were going to profit from the war on obesity.
Or you may try this link (Obesity virus)
http://www.physorg.com/
news10683...s106832187.html
And more here on asthma:
http://www.physorg.com/
news10689...s106894843.html
Gee what a surprise.
.
“Allow people to make assumptions and they will come away absolutely convinced that assumption was correct and that it represents fact.” - “It’s not necessarily so.”
New York Times, August 21, 2007
Sleights of Mind - Science of Magic
By GEORGE JOHNSON
Lead in:
The reason he had picked me from the audience, Apollo Robbins insisted, was that I’d seemed so engaged, nodding my head and making eye contact as he and the other magicians explained the tricks of the trade. I believed him when he told me afterward, over dinner at the Venetian, that he hadn’t noticed the name tag identifying me as a science writer. But then everyone believes Apollo — as he expertly removes your wallet and car keys and unbuckles your watch.
It was Sunday night on the Las Vegas Strip, where earlier this summer the Association for the Scientific Study of Consciousness was holding its annual meeting at the Imperial Palace Hotel. The organization’s last gathering had been in the staid environs of Oxford, but Las Vegas — the city of illusions, where the Statue of Liberty stares past Camelot at the Sphinx — turned out to be the perfect locale. After two days of presentations by scientists and philosophers speculating on how the mind construes, and misconstrues, reality, we were hearing from the pros: James (The Amazing) Randi, Johnny Thompson (The Great Tomsoni), Mac King and Teller — magicians who had intuitively mastered some of the lessons being learned in the laboratory about the limits of cognition and attention.
Excerpt:
Sounding more like a professor than a comedian and magician, Teller described how a good conjuror exploits the human compulsion to find patterns, and to impose them when they aren’t really there.
“In real life if you see something done again and again, you study it and you gradually pick up a pattern,” he said as he walked onstage holding a brass bucket in his left hand. “If you do that with a magician, it’s sometimes a big mistake.”
Pulling one coin after another from the air, he dropped them, thunk, thunk, thunk, into the bucket. Just as the audience was beginning to catch on — somehow he was concealing the coins between his fingers — he flashed his empty palm and, thunk, dropped another coin, and then grabbed another from a gentlemen’s white hair. For the climax of the act, Teller deftly removed a spectator’s glasses, tipped them over the bucket and, thunk, thunk, two more coins fell.
As he ran through the trick a second time, annotating each step, we saw how we had been led to mismatch cause and effect, to form one false hypothesis after another. Sometimes the coins were coming from his right hand, and sometimes from his left, hidden beneath the fingers holding the bucket.
He left us with his definition of magic: “The theatrical linking of a cause with an effect that has no basis in physical reality, but that — in our hearts — ought to.”
Excerpt:
“Allow people to make assumptions and they will come away absolutely convinced that assumption was correct and that it represents fact,” Mr. Randi said. “It’s not necessarily so.” [Rod note: To push an agenda, one should encourage false assumptions.]
URL: http://tinyurl.com/yp3qm9
Another piece on assumptions (need to be patient with this one):
Discovering Assumptions: URL: http://tinyurl.com/2rkvbr
con·sen·sus
An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole
sup·po·si·tion
something that is supposed; assumption; hypothesis.
ev·i·dence
that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.
con·clu·sive
Serving to put an end to doubt, question, or uncertainty; decisive.
fact
something that actually exists; reality; truth
So, the short version is this?
TC consensus is based on supposition that lacks the conclusive evidence to support the known facts.
But at least they agree.
This of course results in:
de·lib·er·ate
Done with or marked by full consciousness of the nature and effects; intentional
fraud
A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
Junkfood Science
August 19, 2007
Yes, they actually make this stuff up!
Lead in:
Tragically, parents were given another bogus scare today, as news warned that fat babies could die from SIDS. Before new parents panic, they’ll want to learn the source for this story. It wasn’t based on any research, but the most illogical contortions of the evidence, speculations and scaremongering.
The Australian Daily Telegraph reported:
SIDS risk for fat babies
FAT babies may be at higher risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) because their extra body weight suffocates them and restricts their ability to move, according to a top Australian pathologist. The warning, which comes as the weight of new mothers and babies rockets to record levels, is surprising, because until now it was believed that low-weight babies were most at risk.
Professor Roger Byard, a chief pathologist who specialises in SIDS at the University of Adelaide, reveals fears about the potentially-fatal effects of maternal obesity in the latest edition of the Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health.
Professor Byard’s name may be familiar to readers as he was quoted by Reuters earlier this month, saying that fat dead people in Australia were creating a safety hazard at mortuaries and...
Excerpt:
The source of today’s news stories turned out not to be a study, but a Letter to the Editor in the September issue of the Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health:
In many communities there have been recent increases in cases of maternal obesity with studies showing corresponding increases in numbers of obese infants....While an increase in obstructive sleep apnea has been shown to be associated with obesity in childhood, the situation in infants has not been fully explored.... Is it possible that markedly obese infants may be less able to move from the prone position, may have upper airway narrowing, and may have abnormal pulmonary function, particularly when prone?
Although previous studies have not shown a relationship between obesity and SIDS, with infants dying of SIDS often having low birth weights, perhaps it is opportune to examine the possibility that larger body masses could be an effect modifier or even a risk factor for sudden infant death by compromising movement and respiratory function.
Besides a lot of may bes and could bes, is there any evidence to support any of these scary speculations? Is there an epidemic of fat babies dying of SIDS? Are rates of SIDS even rising? No, no, and no.
URL: http://tinyurl.com/2wqbey
Are you really offended that a mechanical engineer told you you don't know enough about biology? I know 3 engineers, all nice people, I wouldn't let them operate on me.
As a side note, I'd like to point out that 2 of them don't even work as engineers, apparently they make more money waiting tables--now we know what Glantz's problem is. The other one got a VERY well paying job.....in France.
Which brings me to my next point, any doctor that went to school at UCSF is NOT my "doctor". I want a REAL doctor for that job, not someone trained by a mechanical engineer.
Lynda F;
Try adding a carriage return or two after pasting in a link it may help.
Some times the blog software assumes the end of a link after a combination of characters, Similar to the smiley's which appear for no apparent reason in posts, as a result of key combinations.
LightningBoy - This of course results in:
de·lib·er·ate
Done with or marked by full consciousness of the nature and effects; intentional
fraud
A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
.......
LightningBoy,
All part of BLM (Big Lie Movement):
NGO - Non-Governmental Organization: An unelected, self-appointed group that de facto is a governing body.
Non-profit and not-for-profit entitiies: Main business plan is to generate tens of thousands of well-paying jobs based on propagating Big Lies.
Back to Sam M's point about the "Consensus"
Clearly, there isn't one.
If there is no consensus, how could anything coming out of TC be even remotely considered as "conclusive"
Yet,...."In the interest of Public health", and "leveling the playing field", and of course, "for the children", nearly every statewide ban in effect today uses the term "conclusive evidence" in the, Petition language, Ballot language, or actual language incorporated into the law.
The only thing that's conclusive here is *Deliberate Fraud perpetrated by TC*
At least that's the consensus among smokers.
The effects of reduced dilation occur for many reasons beyond what you eat or smoke, The cooling of the blood and withholding of heat in the body seems to be the most useful effect.
Heart rate is changed through coincidental NO signaling which restricts the arteries and slows the heart rate when at rest. NO serves as a regulator when more or less blood is required. Pot actually aids dilation.
What remains from the public in a complete understanding is the amount of time NO has been identified as an agent and considering the amount of time science has been considering the effects we have to assume a lot more research is needed to develop even consistent theories concerning Vascular disease predictions.
"The discovery of the biological functions of nitric oxide in the 1980s came as a complete surprise and caused quite a stir. Nitric oxide was named "Molecule of the Year" in 1992 by the journal Science, a Nitric Oxide Society was founded, and a scientific journal devoted entirely to nitric oxide was established. The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1998 was awarded to Ferid Murad, Robert F. Furchgott, and Louis Ignarro for the discovery of the signalling properties of nitric oxide. Another notable contributor to NO research is Salvador Moncada who also identified EDRF as NO molecule but did not share the Nobel Prize. It is estimated that yearly about 3,000 scientific articles are published on the biological roles of nitric oxide."
"The endothelium (inner lining) of blood vessels use nitric oxide to signal the surrounding smooth muscle to relax, thus dilating the artery and increasing blood flow; bodybuilders use this to achieve a more "ripped", vascular look. This underlies the action of nitroglycerin, amyl nitrate and other nitrate derivatives in the treatment of heart disease: The compounds are converted to nitric oxide (by a process that is not completely understood), which in turn dilates the coronary artery (blood vessels around the heart), thereby increasing its blood supply. Nitric oxide also acts on cardiac muscle to decrease contractility and heart rate. The vasodilatory actions of nitric oxide plays a key role in renal control of extracellular fluid homeostasis. Nitric oxide also plays a role in erection of the penis. The effects of the recreational drugs known as poppers are also thought to be due to nitric oxide. Nitric oxide is also a second messenger in the nervous system and has been associated with neuronal activity and various functions like avoidance learning."
Cardiovascular health
High noise levels can contribute to cardiovascular effects and exposure to moderately high (e.g. above 70 dBA) levels during a single eight hour period causes a statistical rise in blood pressure of five to ten mmHg; a clear and measurable increase in stress [10]; and vasoconstriction leading to the increased blood pressure noted above as well as to increased incidence of coronary artery disease.
In short;
In a bar with loud music there is every reason to believe, endothelial dysfunction would occur in much larger degree; associated with the noise from the music, which could of course offset significantly the damage believed to be associated with bartenders exposure to ETS.
Now what do you predict would be the result if someone failed to realize the effect, and did not confound the effect properly in their research?
ETS and a large percentage of smoking related cardiovascular diseases could simply be a scapegoat for what is not known today, and certainly wasn't known in 1960 about the cause and effects of endothelial dysfunction.
Perhaps the question Michael could ask of the experts at The Tobacco Scam is;
What are the Employment risks of a symphony orchestra? If the effects of endothelial dysfunction are causative of sticky platelets and hardening of arteries, leading to heart attacks and strokes; what would be contribution to heart disease associated with the Boston POP and what is [for direct comparison] the RR of attending a live production of the Nutcracker suite?
In a way the lobbying of artificial fears could be a good thing. The Boom Boom which irritates us while sitting at a stop light, could be banned and the kids stereos confiscated, if the 30 second rule were applied to Rap music in cars.
Kevin,
if half of this is true Canada (Montreal) is in a bad way. How long before the citizens are revolting?
http://www.canadafreepress.com/
2...jsman082007.htm
GreatScot
Fortunately, not everyone is buying into this "cold virus causing obesity" nonsense:
From CNN's poll:
Quick Vote
Do you think a virus may play a role in obesity?
Yes 19% 6711
No 81% 28013
Total Votes: 34724
read related article »
This is not a scientific poll
Nice to see there is still some common sense out there to be salvaged.
I wonder how many of those NO voters (81%) believe SHS is harmful.
Can we get a "consensus" here?
Probably all of them...........
The cold virus--> obesity theory was first noted (or floated) in the mid 90s with the postulate that it was contagious in the same way non-obesity-causing colds are contagious. IE, through the AIR (as well as by hand).
I recall a few "don't put beans in your ears" articles cautioning people NOT to fear sitting next to fat people with sniffles in public transportation. And others, provoking even more general misanthropy, suggesting that the already-fat weren't the problem so much as the sneezing thin who didn't yet know they were actively infected with the fat-making virus. Even worse, when people aren't even yet sneezing, they're shedding the most viruses.
The answer, then, is clearly to stay away from everyone, but especially the fat since sneezing or not, they just might be shedding viri.
More recently, they've been playing with the theory of a stomach virus as the "cause" ( a google ought to find it) but it's not as alarming as a cold virus is, and isn't likely to provoke as much general shunning of the obese.
Lynda--
Sometimes you can keep a link hot all the way to the end by enclosing the whole thing between this kind of bracket: < >. :
Thanks Walt. I screwed it up the first time, but the second time I was careful about coding it right, so I don't know what happened there. Just having a blonde day here I guess (no offense to the blondes, I dye my hair blonde so I can say that...hehehe 
Co-Ed ROOMS becoming popular at colleges and we're worried about SHS.
AMAZING!
Cleveland Clinic importing nurses from the Phillipines and will not hire ones that smoke and are citizens as of Sept.1.
DOUBLE AMAZING!!
The LEECHING AND TORTURE THAT OCCUR AT END OF LIFE IN THE NAME OF MEDICINE and the CC is focusing on "savings" by taking choice away from their employees.
TRIPLE AMAZING!!!
Helping to blow the whistle>>>>>>
Lynda, or you could simply go to tinyurl.com and use their link shortening and post that here.
"Mike's comments are further evidence that he just does not understand modern vascular biology."
Or maybe he does understand it, but it doesn't further the agenda he's here to promote.
Jerry, geeeze, something else I have to learn now..............this is the first time I messed up a url, be kind....hehehehehe
Cathy, you really need to get a grip, girl.............and remember, it's against the law to hit and run (going to check the other thread now to see if you answered my question and the Doc's question).
One has to wonder about agendas Stantons claims of expertise and Michael's lack of education seemed to fall apart when Stanton revealed the following
"From: Glantz, Stanton A
Date: Sun Aug 19 2007 - 21:00:22 PDT
The finding of similar changes in endothelial function with a high cholesterol load is not new. It just shows that the high oxidant load has effects similar to SHS (which is probably also acting, at least in part through the oxidant load in the smoke). We pubished the first paper on this over ten years ago, when I was an associate editor of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology. (The "intervention there was an eg McMuffin.)
In addition to the acute effects, the associated insult to the vascular endothelium is important for the long-run development of atheroschlerosis.
What is puzzling, the obvious errors were not pointed out to Mr. Glanz in a much more definitive response pointing to the self serving language which in no way represents the effects.
The test to determine dysfunction involves stimulation of NO and measuring for increased blood pressure if I read the description properly.
This would indicate the artery [if improvement was seen] is functioning as it should and remains elastic.
How on earth would Stanton assume damage had occurred without physical examination? Further his description of "oxidant loads" infers he knows how to decrease NO levels with those "loads" and he can verify ETS was responsible somehow for the decrease in NO levels, How does he know?
Further Dysfunction is only believed to be a cause of coronary damage the span between first detection and any damage is decades in most cases. The elastic effect of the process is normal in moderating blood flow and in moderating temperature in the body the arteries are supposed to expand and contract otherwise you would have bigger problems.
To pass his personal judgment and call it a universal effect;
demonstrates Stanton's comments are further evidence that he just does not understand modern vascular biology
I really would like an answer; what is the RR of the Nutcracker suite in comparison to the RR of a big mac meal or 3 hours exposure to ETS.
I assume the answer will be "we just don't know" although the blood flow increases measured so precisely in noise effects, seems to indicate the ingestion of food and inhalation of smoke are relatively small by comparison, otherwise The Tobacco Scam Brotherhood would have the blood flow decreases advertised all over the front pages of your local paper by now. You can be sure they would never pass up the chance to make the news.
I don't consider Stan Glantz' reply to Mike Siegal as the "attack" that Mike called it in the title of this blog posting.
While some smokefree advocates have exaggerated the health risks of short term exposure to tobacco smoke pollution, Mike hasn't helped his campaign for accurate information about the health risks of smoking by exaggerating the actions of those he criticizes.
OH, my, my, my.........look at the pot calling the kettle black.
Bill;
" While some smokefree advocates have exaggerated the health risks of short term exposure to tobacco smoke pollution, Mike hasn't helped his campaign for accurate information about the health risks of smoking by exaggerating the actions of those he criticizes."
Bill if you consider what is being iterated considering endothelial reactions. It would be much less notable however much more accurate to call the effect "interruption" as opposed to "dysfunction" however the later simply provokes a stronger reaction and the reaction is the sole intent of the use of the language.
If you did not have the observed reaction to ETS, that would be a surprise and likely indicate an immune deficiency.
When you take into consideration the many duties of the endothelial organ which coats basically all surfaces in the body where blood would flow and the use of NO in those duties, lack of NO indicates normal bodily function as the body completes its basic functions. Would you not expect to find a similar reaction to wood smoke or auto exhaust?
Where this will demonstrate irresponsibility is when a diabetes patient refuses to take insulin because of the well known effect in reaction to insulin is endothelial dysfunction, or otherwise those who fear the effect, make wrong decisions based in really bad advice in exaggerating a relatively minor short term effect.
If I need to install a billboard and the permit required a calculation of how much concrete to put into the ground to offset the wind load at the other end of the pole, Stanton Glanz is your man. As for medical advice? I would prefer my advice came from someone with proper medical training, including the training in ethical conduct real doctors receive along with their other studies.
Cathy >>
Or maybe he does understand it, but it doesn't further the agenda he's here to promote.
Would that be is indoor workplace smoking ban agenda?
Just curious :P
Commenting by HaloScan
