Take a look at these articles. https://www.naturalnews.com/052943_Zika_virus_hoax_larvacide_chemical_GM_mosquitoes.html https://thetruthaboutcancer.com/truth-zika-virus-part-1/ I'm horrified but not surprised. Many years ago, a drug called Thalidomide was touted as a miracle drug. Yes, it made women fertile, but the children were born with birth defects similar to Zyka.
Hmm.. Would you consider a 12,000 / <10 chance when being pregnant and being in a Zika risk area as 'scary'? Quoted from your second link.... There is no vaccination nor a prophylaxis or remedy for Zika yet. The only indirect prophylaxis is mosquito repellent. I think that any reasonable mother-to-be would stay away from traveling to Zika risk countries and check the current situations. To healthy adults Zika is usually rather harmless. There can be no symptoms at all or just symptoms like of a weak flu... Thalidomide was used as sedative which had no teratogenic effect at animal testing..... To me questionable is the use/need of a sedativum in pregnancy generally. I mean pregnancy is no illness to be treated. Unfortunately it inhibited VEGF a human growth factor that plays an essential role for embryonic growth at a very specific embryonic state. Thalidomide then caused deformities at the extremities.... When we strictly consider this (contraindicated in pregnancy) Thalidomid today is a very save and useful drug (certain kind of cancer / leprosy) Prenatal microcephaly is different. Characteristic is a small infantile head circumference and intellectual disability.
Both these websites appear to be not reputable. They play to paranoia, and fear. I don't trust either of them.
@Yen: IMHO, this situation needs to be studied further: https://www.scimex.org/newsfeed/expert-reaction-is-a-pesticide-not-zika-virus-causing-microcephaly Notably, this: http://www.reduas.com.ar/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2016/02/Informe-Zika-de-Reduas_TRAD.pdf My family knows about thalidomide first-hand. My uncle is a Thalidomide baby. It only affected his arms. http://broughttolife.sciencemuseum.org.uk/broughttolife/themes/controversies/thalidomide https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-15536544 and https://allthatsinteresting.com/thalidomide-babies
@boyonthebus: That's -exactly- what was said about DDT and Saccharin. Until studies were done and it was proven that DDT has caused an environmental disaster and saccharin was proven to be carcinogenic. We understand so little about the human body, especially the reproductive cycle. What I found interesting about those articles I posted is that they are not advocating panic. They seem to be advocating independent research. Take a look at Bisphenol A. This article is from WebMD, a site that I would not associate with fear mongering. https://www.webmd.com/children/bpa#1 I am not easily panicked. I grew up in a toxic superfund site called Williamsburg, New York. This will give you an idea. https://www.metro.us/local/toxic-city-the-5-most-toxic-places-in-new-york/tmWman---5aZDXe48ICWfQ I'm not trying to cause panic. I am simply sharing what I know from first-hand experience.
from wikipedia. In the 1970s, studies performed on laboratory rats found an association between consumption of high doses of saccharin and the development of bladder cancer.[11] However, further study determined that this effect was due to a mechanism that is not relevant to humans.[11] Epidemiological studies have shown no evidence that saccharin is associated with bladder cancer in humans.[11][12] The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) originally classified saccharin in Group 2B ("possibly carcinogenic to humans") based on the rat studies, but downgraded it to Group 3 ("not classifiable as to the carcinogenicity to humans") upon review of the subsequent research.[13] Saccharin has no food energy and no nutritional value.[14] It is safe to consume for individuals with diabetes. But, you changed the subject entirely. Weren't you talking about Zyka? and Thalidomide? I grew up with thalidamide and my mother took it once. It ever so slightly affected my sister. Zyka comes from mosquitoes. One thing I do know though, is that I can only state what I know. IF you accept it fine, if you don't it is not my problem.
The topic has now exceeded the original headline. Zika: I consult for such matters (also because I am traveling myself) the tropical institute Germany. There is a correlation of appearance of Zika virus and prenatal microcephaly. The institute's view today is that there is a correlation of the virus itself and the microcephaly since there are studies which suggest that. Also placental insufficiency and intrauterine growth restriction IUGR yes even death of fetus due to can be linked to Zika so the institute informs. I know that it's hard to get clear evidence even because you cannot test directly at pregnant women if it causes microcephaly. The same applied to Thalidomide disaster and applies to pesticides as well. But from a rational point of view (own risk) it does not matter. Why? There is a significant higher rate of it that's a fact. Whether the correlation has to be at the virus itself or the used Pyriproxyfen to fight the larvas / mosquitoes for instance is secondary from the perspective of risk-evaluation. From the perspective of science and how to fight microcephaly it is of course not. I have to agree with that. Due to my job I have to do a lot of serious literature research. It's the way how they address emotions with adjectives. For instance it's clear to any expert that Zika is firstly discovered in the year 1947 in Uganda. "This is not something new" cannot be any serious argument. Thalidomide: Same here, too. A good friend of my mum. Also left hand affected. The deformities when they appeared firstly have been associated to potential nuclear radiation, especially nuclear weapon tests! Yes own responsibility of Grünenthal was far too late and until today controversial. I do not defend Grünetal, but Thalidomide and science that time. (Especially the 'enantiomers issue') And there was another sad fact. On the Thalidomide box there was a label which showed a pregnant woman which was struck through. It was made for illiterates. How would you understand that? 1- Do not take when pregnant 2- If you take that you do not get pregnant (is contraceptive) This happened especially in Brazil 2- caused a new disaster. Cancer suspect agents. This is a complex matter. Cancer itself, too. Only some remarks since it's not main topic. There is no absolute carcinogenic substance as there is no absolute poison. Absolute means: If you take it you get it / you die. (This is of course not meant to be a pro argument for those substances, it's just a fact) So we have categorizations which are not even conform from country to country. These categorizations do change. And not only that. It also depends what you read / from where you get info. Anyway there has to be a reasonable dealing with those substances and people need proper information and how to protect. Cancer is one of number one diseases today. And there are regions in which cancer is more significant than in other regions. There are several reasons why. Life-style and nutrition play also a role. A very underestimated factor is psychological stress. But there is also new scientific knowledge about certain classes of substances which has to change our way how to deal with them. Recklessness / profit of industry. But also false experiments to damage a competitor. As mentioned....this fills pages...
is pretty bad in brazil but they did that to themselfs by not cleaning up their garbage and contaminating everything.