Link not working,Kate

Raw milk?

Man, that's two bad links in one morning. My cut and paste function is determined to ruin me...

Ok Lefties, y'see that? That is what happens when politics gets involved in science. It happens every -single-time. The truth is the truth, politics is everything else but.

This is why we mock you, and hold tea parties.

Tax cut now please. The less money government has to meddle in things like this, the better off we all end up being.

Look, so a few babies might get cancer. Theose scientists meant well. Anyway, I'm sure they're going to apologize.

"I have a simple request of those politicians, career bureaucrats, and other professional public policy meddlers who believe they have a special obligation to their fellow citizens to legislate what we eat, what we drive, what we say, how we play, and when to come in from the midday sun - would you please kindly go f%$# yourselves, now?"

You're way too kind! I'm not even going to say please. I'd like them to use a broken bottle or better yet, a chainsaw.

Black Mamba - you've misunderstood.

YOUR (purported) increased risk of cancer is traded off against less developmental abnormalities in babies.

A good trade.

Good thing you never got to choose.

Choice is bad.

You might make the wrong one.

BlackMamba; it's the ADULT pop. that's supposedly at increased risk of colorectal cancer. The babies are LESS at risk of birth defects.
http://www.cancer.ca/Canada-wide/About%20cancer/Cancer%20statistics/Stats%20at%20a%20glance/Colorectal%20cancer.aspx

Cut back on bread consumption and do yourself a favour...lose excess weight in the process.
(Not you Kate, you're perfect just the way you are! ;) )

I am still waiting for this study:

"Canadian researchers have found that receiving perfectly valid medical surgery from Dr. Henry Morgentaler during pregnancy results in serious problems with the vital signs of offspring."

See I knew there was a reason why I didnt eat bread! It really is evil!
Just remember everyone: Grains and Salad - that's what FOOD eats.

For me all these experts living off the public purse justifying their existence just doesn't add up to an unbiased decision of any kind. Even my wife gives me a bad time for being such a contrarian but I just can't understand how anyone accepts information that effects their daily lives or what they eat without question.
One thing I don't think you can dispute or question however is the sound research that has determined the healthy and nutritional value of rum.

That should have been can't dispute

Question: I'm male, 35 years old. If I consume folic acid while my wife is pregnant, does that mean the kid could be born cross-eyed?? Well duuuuh, like, it does say not to consume folic acid during pregnmancy!

DanninVan: Dutifully typed out your link, which takes me to the Canadaian Cancer Society but tells me "Content not available at this time". From the above article: "...offspring of rats that received the higher dose experienced a much higher degree of changes to genes in the colon and liver shortly after birth." So it's at least a potential rat-baby carcinogen, no?
Yes, I want to choose. If I cut down on bread I want it to be because I feel like it, not 'cause I'm worried that it's been poisoned by the feds. Seriously. High doses of Folic Acid during pregnancy are not required to ward off Spina Bifida.

Question: I'm male, 35 years old. If I consume folic acid while my wife is pregnant, does that mean the kid could be born cross-eyed?? Well duuuuh, like, it does say not to consume folic acid during pregnancy!

Question: I'm male, 35 years old. If I consume folic acid while my wife is pregnant, does that mean the kid could be born cross-eyed?? Well duuuuh, like, it does say not to consume folic acid during pregnancy!

I know I wrote it twice!! I have two wives!!

I think what this points out is the complexity of the natural world, and the fact that science does not and probably can never 'nail' it down in its full identity.

Science can't ever determine with complete accuracy and finality how X chemical affects not only Y processes but how these variables, which are all networked in varying degrees with each other, affect other chemicals and other processes far, far, far down the networking line.

Science does a pretty good job at direct causality, and even, indirect..up to a point. Then, the complexity of the millions of interactions takes over..

So, science thinks it has found the 'definitive' answer to X disease and quite possibly, it has. But then, a few years later, it finds that this definitive answer has effects on other parts of the network...unwelcome effects.

This also shows how we cannot conclude, with such vicious political and economic certainty, issues as complex as the climate - and global warming and cooling.

Multivitamins with folic acid double the risk of prostate cancer. If you are a man, stop taking them. If there was a finding that they doubled the risk of ... say.. breast or ovarian cancer, this news would have been screamed from the rooftops.

My favorite example of government meddling in science is when wheat state Senator George McGovern oversaw the creation of the "food pyramid" which recommended that we all stuff ourselves with wheat products. You can date the rise of American obesity to that moment, and you can date the slight reversal in that trend to the moment when we collectively realized that all those carbohydrates that "Big Carbs" through their fascist interconnections with Big Goverment pushed on us was making us obese, causing no end of diabetes and heart disease.

Well, it's either take the results of one study that says you *may* be at increased risk of cancer or rely on the overwhelming body of evidence that shows increased folic acid intake in women (pregnant or otherwise) significantly reduces the occurrence of congenital neural tube defects in children and associated morbidity and mortality.
It's good public health policy.

If one bad study came out saying 'don't vaccinate your kids' (which, unfortunately, has been the case) we wouldn't stop vaccinating our children until there was an overwhelming body of evidence confirming that particular study's findings (which there isn't, incidentally.)

Tim in Vermont:

Actually, you can trace the increase in western obesity to a ridiculous increase in portion sizes over the decades, a dramatic increase in the consumption of unhealthy fast food, and a decrease in the amount of daily physical activity due to increased television and video game usage and an increased usage in labour saving devices (elevators, escalators, washing machines, dishwashers, driving to the store across the street, etc.) among other causes.

If you asked your average Canadian what was in our national food guide they'd look at you with a blank stare, and the same goes for the yanks. It's silly to suggest that 'the government made us fat' (though i'm not sure if you're broaching into satire by that point).

ET Right on. I used to do biochemistry for a living so 95% confidence was the best one could say. Every now and then something does not behave the way it should leading to the very scientific expression, what the he!! happened? It is like the second hand smoke issue. I am not saying it is good but some people have genes that predispose the cancers. In other words they are susceptible to lung cancer even if they never saw a cigarette. All they have to do is live long enough.

Over 20 years ago I was asked to participate in an opinion gathering seminar conducted by epidemiologists from Sask Health concerned with developing policy to increase Folic Acid intake levels in Aboriginal and low income women. We were given the scientific 'facts' [as known at the time] regarding Spina Bifida, Folic Acid etc, [including the likelihood of a "small" increase in odds for men getting prostate cancer with higher Folic acid intake.
The researchers were I think surprised at how strongly the men on the panel objected to the idea that their health should be put at risk on the off chance that some benefit might accrue to a woman who couldn't be bothered to eat a healthy diet during pregnancy. Frankly we were made to feel like selfish Neanderthals. Note that now, 20 years later, prostate cancer rates are through the roof and Spina Bifida rate decreases have been miniscule at best.
Oh, and the 'foods' that it was thought best to lace with Folic Acid? Bread and beer!

Last post, I swear :)
From the New England Journal of Medicine
Reduction in Neural-Tube Defects after Folic Acid Fortification in Canada; De Wals, Tairou, Van Allen et al (2007) 357:135-142
ABSTRACT

Background In 1998, folic acid fortification of a large variety of cereal products became mandatory in Canada, a country where the prevalence of neural-tube defects was historically higher in the eastern provinces than in the western provinces. We assessed changes in the prevalence of neural-tube defects in Canada before and after food fortification with folic acid was implemented.

Methods The study population included live births, stillbirths, and terminations of pregnancies because of fetal anomalies among women residing in seven Canadian provinces from 1993 to 2002. On the basis of published results of testing of red-cell folate levels, the study period was divided into prefortification, partial-fortification, and full-fortification periods. We evaluated the relationship between baseline rates of neural-tube defects in each province and the magnitude of the decrease after fortification was implemented.

Results A total of 2446 subjects with neural-tube defects were recorded among 1.9 million births. The prevalence of neural-tube defects decreased from 1.58 per 1000 births before fortification to 0.86 per 1000 births during the full-fortification period, a 46% reduction (95% confidence interval, 40 to 51). The magnitude of the decrease was proportional to the prefortification baseline rate in each province, and geographical differences almost disappeared after fortification began. The observed reduction in rate was greater for spina bifida (a decrease of 53%) than for anencephaly and encephalocele (decreases of 38% and 31%, respectively).

Conclusions Food fortification with folic acid was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of neural-tube defects in Canada. The decrease was greatest in areas in which the baseline rate was high.

Thought I should cite my claims. Thanks,
Cheers

Yesterday I purchased an adult multi-vitamin and to my dismay it has a large amount of folic acid -450 mcg.

I really do not know what to believe. It seems the general population is being used as guinea pigs. Vitamin D is supposed to protect against cancer, will the next news item be that it causes some other disease?

I remember being told to place my infants on their backs to prevent SIDS, now parents are told to place infants on their stomaches, or is it the other way around?

I don't understand. Women are told to consume folic acid during pregnancy and now someone is saying don't?
What the hell?
I do wish these scientists would make up their minds.

That's awesome. My wife and I are expecting our first child in the fall... like we don't have enough to worry about as it is.

Griff, missing the point old son. Vaccination, while highly recommended, is voluntary. Fortifying of food products with folate is mandated by government, as in compulsory.

The problem is not folate per se, its the friggin' nanny state mandates. They are actively dangerous because they get imposed based on incomplete or even flatly wrong science.

Denying people choice is the problem.

Beer continues to be the only safe food.

Why don't pregnant women just take a folic acid supplement and leave the rest of us out of it?

The neural tube forms very early in pregnancy, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Folic acid helps it form properly. The plan to fortify foods with folic acid is to help prevent spina bifida, which happens so early the mother hasn't even bothered yet with a pregnancy test.

Bread causes cancer.
Sunshine causes cancer.
According to Suzuki, when I exhale, it's a pollutant.
Avoiding death by heating my home is destroying the world.
Keeping a neat lawn is killing the planet.
And on and on and on.

According to the papers, everything I do as a human, should be stopped.
The only thing I know that's completely safe, is tap water. The 'no plastic bottle' people have assured us of it.
Kates correct, "f@%! off".
I'd rather die of cancer than live in a do-gooder bubble.

speaking of the "Nanny State"

If you have the stomach for it, here's a quick ride around America's new and improved Pelosi-land:

moonbattery.com/archives/2009/04/a_postcard_from.html

Another fine example of the "well intentioned" not appreciating the second and third order effects of their actions.
What types of foods in Canada are currently fortified with Folic Acid?

The problem with folic acid supplementation to prevent spina bifida is that folic acid must be started pre-conception and I often see women who are 2 months pregnant and have no idea that they should be on folic acid.

Folic acid deficiency is associated with increased cancer risk. For years I've been treating cervical dysplasia in women with high dose folic acid and have seen very abnormal paps return to normal with the folic acid. Folic acid deficiency is a cause of depression as well as elevated homocysteine levels. I personally have been taking high dose folic acid for over 30 years along with an extensive cocktail of vitamins.

The problem with folic acid (and B12) is that these two vitamins are essential for DNA replication. If one has a cancer in ones body then it will grow faster when one supplements with these two vitamins. Methotrexate is a folate antagonist and anti-cancer drug. There are experimental B12 antagonists being studied as anti-cancer drugs.

While I personally take folic acid, and will continue to do so as I think the evidence for folate in cancer prevention is still quite strong, I don't believe in fortification of food with folic acid. B12 deficiency is quite common in the population and is exacerbated by taking excess folic acid. I'd be interested in knowing if the B12 levels of the people who developed cancers as a result of folate supplementation were low.

I'll research the folic acid/prostate cancer link but I would suspect that folic acid was probably making a pre-existing cancer grow. There is a very strong link between low vitamin D levels and prostate cancer and vitamin D deficiency is very widespread (one of the consequences of people worried about getting skin cancer).

Adult humans with marginal folic acid status have elevated plasma homocysteine and significantly increased risk of cardiovascular accidents. Folic acid is needed for synthesis of the purine and pyrimidine bases that make up our DNA, which does turn over all the time in rapidly dividing cells. So you don't have to be pregnant to need folic acid. And rat biochemistry is an arcane subject mostly applicable to rats.

Hey Phantom :)

I really do understand where Kate is coming from re: the the nanny-state concerns, but while general concern about an over-reaching nanny state is very much valid and justified, this case is specifically an issue of public health based on established, evidence-based science.

While vaccinations may not be mandatory, seat-belts and fluoridation of public water generally are; an extremely small percentage of people are killed in car crashes due to seatbelt usage (usually due to improper usage, but i digress) and a further small number of individuals experience tooth decay due to overexposure of fluoride. But to suggest that we should immediately repeal mandatory seat-belt laws and stop fluoridation of water would be to ignore the reality that seat-belts save thousands of lives each year, and that thanks to fluoride addition, tooth decay is no longer a major public health concern. These are mandatory public health initiatives, and they work - Well.

You are absolutely right, however, in saying that we need to ensure public health initiatives are based on sound, proven, and irrefutable science, and I public health agencies usually do their best to ensure that this is the case.

As for Kyla who asked why women just don't take supplements during preganancy, and Mike who stated that women 'couldn't be bothered to eat a healthy diet during pregnancy', I refer to HBanan who sums it up well:

"The neural tube forms very early in pregnancy, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Folic acid helps it form properly. The plan to fortify foods with folic acid is to help prevent spina bifida, which happens so early the mother hasn't even bothered yet with a pregnancy test.

Okay, so I lied about my previous post being the last one :)

"This also shows how we cannot conclude, with such vicious political and economic certainty, issues as complex as the climate - and global warming and cooling." - ET

Are you saying you think it's a bad idea to pump pollution into the atmosphere to fight Global Warming?

"I'd rather die of cancer than live in a do-gooder bubble." - doowleb

That's motto material.

If you don't like the results of today's study, wait for the results of tomorrow's study. News at 11.

What I'd really like to know is how there can be a million study and not one shares results with any other. Can they ALL be wrong? That a rhetorical question by-the-way.

There's a very simple way of staying healthy (at least within the limitations of your genetics.) That is to eat real food found in nature, put down the big mac, stay away from the processed dinners, and keep on your feet more than on your couch. I'd put special emphasis on that last one.

Beyond that, your genetics are probably gonna be the cause of your death.

I had been hearing rumblings from the MSM lately that fat and lack of exercise "may" be contributing to obesity.

Oh, my.

Proof read Warwick. PROOF. READ.

That is all...

The article in the Globe and Mail is quite poorly done--something pointed out by many of the commenters. By the time you sort through all the qualifiers and maybe's, there's not much left of the original claim. Perhaps folic acid supplementation should be limited to women of child-bearing age rather than requireing everyone to ingest the substance whether they can benefit from it or not. I recall some discussions over whether hormone replacement for menopausal women is good or bad. At first, the information seemed mostly positive. Then it was negative. Then it turns out that it can help fend off osteoporosis but you might be at greater risk of certain cancers. Seldom do you get a remedy is all good or all bad. What we require is good information, properly and intelligently vetted and reported, and the opportunity to decide what is good for ourselves.

Jack Frosst

"I know I wrote it twice!! I have two wives!!"

You think that's something? I wed three wives.

You youngsters out there won't get the pun.

Newspaper drones writing about "scientific breakthroughs that will revolutionize the way we all will ......................" are always a poor combination for those good folks trying to keep up their level of literacy just in case something worth reading is printed someday.

Anybody interested in the effects of water fluoridation on our health? Crickets...

AssPress has this warning* on behalf of the socialists.

What is socialism?

"Don't let the bastards call it anything else."

"Socialism is really cannibalism
Carol Negro

Apparently in our current political climate "socialism" has become a word that does not convey the horror it actually represents. It has become common and thus meaningless beyond the virtuous idea of "sharing" and "taking care of the poor".

People, especially among the ignorant -- particularly the college educated -- seem proud to call themselves "Socialists" today. And the supremely ignorant -- our politicians -- go a step further, and celebrate the word "Progressive" as though it had a glorious and honorable history.

I refuse to allow "Socialism" and "Progressivism" to be understood as benign, helpful, caring, sharing- as another way of saying "The Brotherhood of Man".

Socialism and Progressivism are cannibalism."
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/04/socialism_is_really_cannibalis.html
...-

*"Overeaters can't resist bad food, contends new book"

""It's the next great public health campaign, of changing how we view food, and the food industry has to be part of it.""
urlm.in/cdoy

"Environazis Whip Up Hatred of the Overweight

Now that the global warming hoax has caused science to be subsumed by hard left politics, anything is possible. The latest revelation from the liberal government/media/academia establishment: being overweight causes climatic catastrophes:

Scientists warned that the increase in big-eaters means more food production — a major cause of CO2 gas emissions warming the planet. Overweight people are also more likely to drive, adding to environmental damage.

Dr Phil Edwards, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said: "Moving about in a heavy body is like driving in a gas guzzler."

Each fat person is said to be responsible for emitting a tonne more of climate-warming carbon dioxide per year than a thin one."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2234593/posts

Don't have time to read all these comments, however vaccinations were discussed.
Don't kid yourself that vaccinations are voluntary!

"I have a simple request of those politicians, career bureaucrats, and other professional public policy meddlers who believe they have a special obligation to their fellow citizens to legislate what we eat, what we drive, what we say, how we play, and when to come in from the midday sun - would you please kindly go f%$# yourselves, now?"

I would add flu vaccine to your list Kate.It's a huge can of worms...too large to open here.

Griff,
I don't know about you, but when I was a child, the "Food Pyramid" was part of our indoctrination in US public schools. To suggest that years of indoctrination had no effect is ludicrous. I have often been shocked at the vehemance of some people claiming that refined carbs like bread and potatoes are required for a healthy diet. I have been steadily shedding pounds for years since I stopped eating the carbs recommended by the govt. Even they have abandoned it. Now they are working on forcing their carbs into our cars to lower our mileage.

Re prostate cancer. The study suggested that it was the high bio availability of the folic acid in multi vitamins that may encourage the growth of cancers, overwhelming the immune system. The suggestion was to get your folates from leafy vegetables, perhaps time release folic acid suppliments may reduce the effect. I don't think there are any of these on the market.

Like I said, if the finding was that the suppliment increased breast cancer, the multi vitamins would have been recalled by now.

Hi Griff, not calling you out or anything, but the public health thing has been used and abused by liberals since the 1950's to jam all manner of restrictions down our throats in the name of safety.

You mentioned seat belts and fluoridation. These things are often mentioned as successes, and I'll even throw in another one, helmet laws.

The question is not "do these regulations sometimes work?" because obviously -sometimes- they do. Its an ill wind that blows no good.

No, the real question is, what is the social COST of government having the power to do that? My contention is that the cost is extremely large already. Like, half your income going to tax kinda large. But that is merely the monetary cost. What is the cost to our social life and our personal, moral life of having Big Brother manage all these details so we can stumble around in a haze?

I don't -want- mandated fluoridation and food supplementation. I'll get my own. I want to live in a country where the government is A) not allowed and B) insufficiently funded to be able to get into these kinds of things. They suck at it and its none of their damn business anyway.

Tell you something else, if women bore the full-up cost of a spina bif baby, they'd be taking their folic acid bigtime.

"I would add flu vaccine to your list Kate.It's a huge can of worms...too large to open here."

It's funny you say that. My employer pays a free flu vaccine yearly, you need just sign up. When I was asked why I don’t get vaccinated I responded "I've never had the flu, so why would I?” I suppose that's not very scientific of me, but I made it another year and I didn't get a needle that made me feel crappy for a day.

Indiana Homez......I get my shot free every year because my better half has chronic asthma.For me,it is a matter of a sore arm for half a day,or my wife in the ICU or worse...BUT.....it is still MY choice,not the gubermint's.I think that was the point Kate was getting across.

Since choice is the crux of this discussion, I'll let you in on how my employer operates:
Apparently we have a 'choice' to receive the flu vaccine, but if we choose to not have the vaccine we cannot go to work.
That' government interference.

I'm reading through some of the comments above and shaking my head at some of you hypocrites. On one day, you'll rail and rant about the failure of society to consider good, broad-based science in relation to climate study, and rightly so. But today, you'll slag incredibly successful public health measures based on good science in favour of some one-off tangent. Then you change gears and say, "I want to make the choice myself." Well that's not how public health measures work. One jackass refuses to vaccinate their kid, and the kid's whole class is at risk because not everyone seroconverts. One loser health care worker refuses flu vaccine, and vectors it into a whole nursing home (5% mortality rate for age 70+). One teenager gets knocked up and keeps the baby, has a spina bifida child, the kid is disabled their whole life. I have seen tremendous advances in my patients' average health over the course of my career, from the tireless work of faceless scientists working on these kind of public health measures. Shame on you selfish people who would ignore good science in favour of some glorified rumour; you serve to deny all of us all the benefits. And you are ABSLOUTELY NO BETTER than the AGW pop science crowd when you do.

The journalist, Carly Weeks, is an early twenties feminist who used to write for the Citizen and some student papers, I've seen her work, she's a lefty. These pig-ignorant television watchers think people in their 30s and 40s and 50s are stupid, and need talking down to, that's why the article is extra stupid. It's actually stupid - talking down to stupid.

Are you people sure you still want women in the work force? Like, fake cancer reports, how much worse does it get before we start asking questions?

turtle...like that shell you are in? Are you waiting for the government to take you out or are you in there by choice?
I for one want the government to back off and stop interfering with my body.
One of my co-workers became gravely ill from the flu vaccine, which is useless.In fact in my department staff that got the vaccine were sicker than staff that didn't.

@ Griff

I always told my undergraduate students, it is never good enought to just read an abstract. One has to consider the whole article and moreover break it down and look for errors and bias.

If you read your reference carefully (and it is one of the most widely referenced ones in this area) you notice that the confidence intervals of rate difference in places like BC actually approach 0.

Which means that statistically the law may actually have done nothing in that province to reduce the rate.

The other interesting thing I would like to point out in general is while we mandate everyone to consume folate for the sake of preventing neural tube defects in pregnancy I can do nothing when I encounter a pregnant patient who intends on carrying to term, stuffs her body with cocaine and methamphetamines causing the inevitable lifetime destruction of a new human being.

We get all high on the hoss about a relatively rare birth defect on one hand the rate of which is lowered by mandatory supplementation and yet my hand's are tied for the sake of a woman's right to choose what to do with her body and a human being she intends on carrying to term on the other hand.

It is a frustrating double standard because essentially leftists lack the balls to tackle issues that require balls...

@ loki,

Yeah I do see the occasional woman who is pregnant and has no idea of folic acid, yet by and large I see quite a number who do know. Still you likely see way more than I do based on the nature of our practices. Btw no evidence exists that I have come across that folate supplementaion increases B12 deficiency in pregancy.

Turtle said: "Shame on you selfish people who would ignore good science in favour of some glorified rumour; you serve to deny all of us all the benefits."

That means "shut up", right turtle? I call into question the cost vs. benefit of allowing government meddling in the realm of public health, and you come in here to shame me into being quiet.

I decline your invitation, sir/madam.

If you are a medical professional, you know that -all- treatments and drugs have side effects. Even sewers and aqueducts, the oldest public health efforts in Western society have side effects. Not all those effects are benign.

I maintain that I am in a better position to make decisions about my health than you are, regardless of your expertise or exalted position. Argue with that if you must, but don't be telling me to shut up.

Tell ya what folks - we'll have a compromise.

All of you who think folate supplementation shouldn't be mandated by public health agencies because you feel it should be *your* choice alone to supplement your diet can have your way.

We'll end the fortification regulations, and take out the folic acid.

But it's YOUR job from here on out to explain to those born with spina bifida and other neural tube defects that they have to live their life with a crippling disability just so you can feel good about your 'choice'.

Oh, and you can explain to crying mothers why their baby was born without the back of its head too, while you're at it.

http://www.gfmer.ch/genetic_diseases_v2/gendis_detail_list.php?cat3=25

@ Dr. Brent,

Yeah and we should also charge pregnant farmers who live on non government approved non processed food with endangering the lives of their future children. Let's have a mature debate shall we?

Kate brings up an important point, that there can be harmful side effects from the best intentions.

As an MD I realize this myself and will do my best to inform patients of the best evidence available and allow them to make their own decisions based upon it. I think that when there are harmful side effects from our interventions patients are more at peace knowing they made their own decision instead of feeling like I forced them into it.

Like I said to Griff using the evidence he provided, the supplementation may easily have done nothing beneficial in places like British Columbia. Which brings up the inevitable question of potential harm.

Personally I am more inclined to encourage women of pregnancy ages to highly supplement (as even with the current food mandate most women (1/4) don't reach the necessary level) rather than use mandatory food supplementation. Still I am split on this issue.

Environmentalism + socialism = cannibalism.
Herewith: the cult of thanatoSS, aka Death.
...-

"Lobby group claims Australia should reduce population to seven million

AUSTRALIA should consider having a one-child policy to protect the planet, an environmental lobby group said. Sustainable Population Australia told The Daily Telegraph that slashing population was the only way to avoid "environmental suicide".

National president Sandra Kanck wants Australia's population of almost 22 million reduced to seven million to tackle climate change."
urlm.in/cdrt

(to correct what I said) Even with the current food folate supplementation mandate MOST women 3/4 do not reach the required serum folate level. In other words only 1/4 do reach it. Which means voluntary supplementation provides a likely potential reduction in neural tube defects.

Simply women planning on pregnancy still need to supplement with folic acid anyway regardless of big brother's best intentions.

This is why we mock you, and hold tea parties.
Tax cut now please.

Tell it to your Dear Leader, Nanny Steve, Phantom. The yahoos are in charge, or didn't you get the memo?

I do, pillboy. All the time. The CPC is pretty good at writing back too, unlike the Lieberals.

Stevie is not my dream Prime Minister, he's the least-bad alternative out of what's on offer. We've got light pink CPC, red Liberal and fire engine red NDP, with the Blocheads vacillating between fascism and communism weekly. Making Harper the lesser of four weevils, if you will.

That said, Stevie is not the guy who set all this up, and he is at least not moving in the wrong direction just at the moment. I'll take what I can get.

Tax cut now, pillboy.

Dr. Brent, I'll tell all the mummies who have spina biff babies what happened if you'll tell all the mummies who lose kids to robbers why you supported gun control.

Or you could get down off the horse and have a discussion, instead of defaulting to the SHUT UP!!! position.

I have examined the article I referenced (and others similar to it) at some length (posted the abstract and citation for quick reference for other readers) and while you are correct that rate differences in pre and post-fortification (/1000 births) drop close to zero at the bottom range of the CI for British Columbia, they are substantially higher in eastern provinces, particularly for my province of Newfoundland and Labrador. (difference of 3.80/1000 births, 2.89-4.71). PEI and Nova Scotia experienced similar significant drops, with pre and post-fortification rate differences decreasing the further west you go (concordant with lower pre-fortification incidences in the first place). Essentially, there isn't much difference in rates out west because rates were lower in the first place (which *may* suggest possible increased folate intakes prior to fortification)

While it is wonderful to see that western provinces have a reduced incidence in neural tube defects, the higher rates occurring further east and the significant decrease in the rate of defects subsequent to the introduction of folate fortification suggest that this initiative, as a public health measure, is quite worthwhile.
However your point re: BC and the western provinces is very much valid, as we especially need to consider the potential risks involved if the benefits appear to be negligible. Hopefully public health agencies will be responsive to these concerns in the future should substantial evidence build.

lastly : You are absolutely right about inadequate folate levels in pregnant mothers, I wish it were higher!

Our Enemy, The State.
Socialism is a cannibal.
...-

"Kids, it's cool to sign that donor card
Globe and Mail - ‎18 hours ago‎
Young people in Ontario are the targets of a blunt new campaign designed to drive up the number of organ and tissue donors in the province.
Youth asked to give the gift of life Toronto Sun"

griff, still dodging the issue of mandated fortification vs. any other method?

"...as we especially need to consider the potential risks involved if the benefits appear to be negligible."

Top-down central planning is a very blunt instrument, one best left unused except in the gravest extreme. Hence my point above.

Tax cut now, pillboy.

No argument from me on that score. Although you'll probably get one from your fellow travelers.

On the contrary, I'm not dodging it, I just think we have to be practical about it. The rates of coronary heart disease would sink like a stone 'if only' people just exercised more and ate a healthier diet; try getting them to do that, though! There is an argument to be made there for social darwinism and personal choice, i know, but unlike people who can't be bothered with diet and exercise, the case of folate supplementation involves tiny babies who don't have a choice and I'm very partial to take their side, given the supporting evidence.

'Evidence' establishing a link with cancer is so far quite tenuous, while the evidence for a decrease in congenital defects with supplementation is very much apparent. In short, it hasn't been proven to do any harm, but it has darn well done a lot of good.

That's why, while I agree that you are speaking from an extremely commendable and principled position, I have to disagree with you; saving babies' lives and preventing extremely serious congenital defects through phenomenal public health policy trumps a comparatively trivial concern over the government making you eat your vitamins.

Cheers, and thanks for the great discussion everyone. :)

My first h/t (I think)!!! *blush*

The benefits of folic acid and folates in reducing spina bifida and neural tube defects have been touted for a while, while the report on their supposed links to prostate and other cancers are apparently new. But, as at least one commenter noted, the chemical mix in the human body is so complex that many substances can be harmful either in excess or in deprivation. The question is where the boundaries are.

Another example already noted here is sunshine and Vitamin D. Not enough D causes certain problems, but too much sunshine can cause melanoma. Are we going to have "public health"-mandated required levels of exposure to sunshine? With penalties for getting a bad suntan? They too have been linked to skin cancer, and (like, say, smoking) would therefore correlate to increased expenses for socialized medicine.

Science often finds new evidence and in effect "changes its mind". Recall the famous Australian experiment on stomach ulcers and helicobacter pylori in 1984. Recently, some were questioning the long-held belief that exercise in school can reduce overweightness among children.

The point is that it is the right of the individual to follow the science (or not) and to make up his own mind. "Public health", if that is a concept that has any use whatsoever, which is doubtful, does not come into it.

It's funny how many good things go bad when "public" is put in front of them: education, health, property, interest, etc.

"the turtle" said this: "'I want to make the choice myself.' Well that's not how public health measures work."

So apparently "public health" means government coercion into certain measures "for your own good", for which the science may change next year and they turn out to be bad. No thanks. If individual choice is "not how public health measures work", then forget the public health measures. Like many bureaucratic programs, they have all the hallmarks of nanny-state make-work, whether of value or not. And you can bet that, when one of these initiatives turns out to be bad and people suffer, the government and its minions will not take any responsibility for it.

Phantom should have the last word, because he summed it up nicely: "The problem is not folate per se, its the friggin' nanny state mandates. They are actively dangerous because they get imposed based on incomplete or even flatly wrong science."

Griff
Yes I realize that folic acid is needed in the very early days of pregnancy. That's why Sask Health wanted to put it into the at-risk females' everyday diets. As I said, bread and beer were considered to be their staples.

From the folks who sanctioned Thelidomide for mornig sik mothers, flouride for kids teeth and hydrogenated fats rather than omegas.

The deadly string of social engineering experiments is long.

The only thing one can conclude from Nanny's constant deadly advice is that the old girl is trying to trim our numbers back because abortion, euthenasian and neo-eugenics are not working fast enough for her liking.

"Food is a weapon." - Max Litvinov - Soviet Commissar of Foreign Affairs

The three maxims of deception:

1) The check is in the mail

2) Here's my e-mail address, I'll call you next week.

3) I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

Why don't pregnant women just take a folic acid supplement and leave the rest of us out of it?
Posted by: Kyla
I'll tell you why. They are too damn lazy,stupid and indifferent.
Folic acid isn't the only hassle with bread - which I've quit eating for over 10 years now, since the government forced the addition of folic acid in 1998 and about the same time encouraged the millers to add calcium. In the same period peoples paranoia over sodium intake seems to have led to replacing sodium proprionate as a mould inhibitor with calcium proprionate, all of which makes the bread taste like plaster. I have not been able to find one decent tasting loaf of bread since 1998 - all plaster trash.
And when I write our baloney Federal Health Ministry I get a dumb response from a Mr. King (6 months later) who suggests I try whole grain product. I had already been eating that for 40 years before the damned Anti-Christ government (they swear oaths in defiance of Christ's instruction) destroyed natural bread with this legislated poisoning.
This has seriously affected my ability to eat well and I have lost weight because of it. At age 77 I am damn tired of dogdung government.

Yes, there is a liberal conspiracy out to get you everywhere. You can make up your own mind about folic acid, or vitamins, or chiropractic, smoking (!)or even the hazard of riding a motorcycle (see:the ride2die website based on NHSTA data).

And the modern neo-con is no different from the hyper-sensitive liberal. The modern "nanny" state is sustained as much by neo-conservative stupidity than it is of any liberal looking for a hand-out. We get the government that we are: divisive, bickering, stagnant. If you/we don't like a centralized gov. in a large country the Constitution allows for your own nation.

Our conservative parents, gandparents and on didn't: blame, whine,point fingers. Their lives were much more careful and they had to be become, through circumstance, adults. Real adults (myself included). We need more adults.

Iwon't be back to this site again: it's neither conservative nor informative.