We are entering cold and flu season, and it's natural to want to do everything possible to keep our families healthy. So it's understandable that many people want their doctors to give them antibiotics. After all, they have an infection and antibiotics treat infections, right?
Cleanliness may be next to godliness, but it might also do us in. A growing body of data suggests that a wide range of ills, from allergies and asthma to metabolic disease and superbugs, may be the consequence of our war on germs.
The interesting (and disturbing) fact is that if you count yourself among those who want no part of pesticides in food, the Stanford study likely confirms your belief that organics are better. But if you just read the headlines and media hype on the paper, you would miss that entirely.
Why was it advantageous for the last common ancestor of all life to sacrifice self-sufficiency -- in other words, why is the world no longer the province of a small number of "jack of all trades" species?
Was Darwin simply mistaken about the gradual nature of hereditary variation? Such ignorance would be unavoidable before we knew about Mendelian genetics and DNA. Or was there a deeper flaw in the theory that he (and Alfred Russell Wallace) propounded?
EPA has a responsibility to keep our waters healthy to ensure that we are too. Instead, the agency glosses over its own science by ignoring the known risks of getting certain illnesses, like diarrhea, from swimming in contaminated waters
Because of the overuse of antibiotics, antibiotic resistance is developing all of the time. With microbial evolution outpacing human invention, a nightmare scenario is possible. And this isn't just science fiction.