A. The Harmful Side of Something
Good
Narrator: This is Science Today.
It's a good idea to take antioxidants to prevent
cancer, right? Not necessarily, says Dr. Courtney
Broaddus of the University of California, San
Francisco. In the lab, she found that giving high
doses of antioxidants to lung cells helps the
cells survive -- but they develop strange mutations
and may get cancer later on.
Broaddus: What everyone would
have thought made perfect sense turned out to
reveal an unexpected and harmful side of something
that seemed so good for us.
Narrator: Her work supports the
findings of other researchers, who say that the
thing to do is not take lots of high-dose antioxidant
pills...
Broaddus: ...but rely on the
tried and true source of antioxidants, which are
vegetables and fruits. Because they contain either
the right combination of antioxidants or the right
concentrations of fiber together with antioxidants,
whatever combination they have, they are the beneficial
entity -- and not something that we purify from
them and think that we've got the answer.
Narrator: For Science Today,
I'm Steve Tokar.
B.
The Best Kept Secret
Delbanco: Emergency contraception
is referred to as the best kept secret.
Narrator: This is Science Today.
There's a birth control method that's effective
and safe that many people don't know about, according
to public health expert Suzanne Delbanco of the
University of California, Berkeley. It's called
"emergency contraception."
Delbanco: Most of the time today
when you hear that term, people are referring
to the use of high-dose oral contraceptives used
after unprotected intercourse to prevent pregnancy.
Narrator: Another name for it
is the "morning after pill." Surprisingly,
obstetricians and gynecologists know about it
but don't talk about it.
Delbanco: Although they're all
incredibly familiar with this as a method, and
they wholly endorse it as far as its safety and
effectiveness goes, they rarely tell their patients.
Narrator: Delbanco says that
women who know about it tend to be graduates of
four-year universities, where the idea is promoted
to students.
Delbanco: And women who are older
tend to know about it, I think mostly because
they've been around longer and have had a greater
chance to hear about this as a contraceptive alternative.
So what we see is the need for the public to be
informed about it so they can demand this as a
service when they need it.
Narrator: For Science Today,
I'm Steve Tokar.
C. Helping AIDS Patients End
Their Lives
Narrator: This is Science Today.
As the national debate over physician-assisted
suicide continues, a study of doctors who treat
AIDS patients found that over half the doctors
admitted to helping some patients end their lives.
Dr. Donald Abrams of the University of California,
San Francisco says the usual method was to prescribe
lethal doses of painkillers or barbiturates.
Abrams: That is, written prescriptions
so that patients have access to these medications
when they decide that they would like to leave
this world.
Narrator: But Abrams notes the
survey was conducted before the powerful AIDS
drugs known as protease inhibitors became available.
Abrams: And certainly, currently
we're in a new era of enthusiasm and hope for
treatment, for possibly eradicating the virus
from individuals, some people even mention the
word cure. I think it would be interesting to
again repeat this questionnaire in another five
years if we're still dealing with AIDS as we know
it today, and see what the situation is.
Narrator: For Science Today,
I'm Steve Tokar.
D. A Doctor's Guide to Protease
Inhibitors
Narrator: This is Science Today.
Protease inhibitors, powerful new AIDS drugs,
are raising new hopes that the virus might be
defeated, or at least contained. But the drugs
are so new, doctors often aren't sure when or
how to prescribe them. Dr. James Kahn of the University
of California, San Francisco hopes to change that
with a new study -- a sort of doctor's guide to
protease inhibitors.
Kahn: Effective treatments are
on the market even before studies that led to
their approval have been peer-reviewed. So we
thought that the regular providers who see patients
were going to be left to the kinds of information
that the pharmaceutical companies would like them
to receive. And that's certainly not a fair or
unbiased approach.
Narrator: It's unusual for drugs
to be released before they're studied. But AIDS
isn't your usual epidemic, says Kahn.
Kahn: You don't know if you're
doing it the best way. You certainly know you're
doing it an effective way. So I think a lot of
the refinements will occur after the drugs have
been marketed, but at least that way, patients
have access to them.
Narrator: For Science Today,
I'm Steve Tokar.
E. Smoke-Free By the Year 2000?
Narrator: This is Science Today.
The author of The Cigarette Papers, a nationwide
expose of the tobacco industry, says current anti-smoking
campaigns aren't working. Dr. Stanton Glantz of
the University of California, San Francisco says
the main reason is the focus on getting kids to
stop smoking.
Glantz: What we've seen once
we got into this let's kids from smoking rhetoric
is more kids are smoking. And so I'm very worried
that by shifting away from a general message of
a smoke-free society to let's keep kids from smoking,
that's another very damaging thing.
Narrator: Instead, Glantz says
regulatory agencies should pursue a just-don't-smoke
campaign.
Glantz: I think that this complete
preoccupation with kids is doomed to fail, and
if the health groups figure out that that's a
mistake and get back to the general message of
a smoke-free society, they can recover from it.
Narrator: If that happens, Glantz
says the idea of a smoke-free country by the year
2000 is not so far-fetched. For Science Today,
I'm Steve Tokar.
