100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

June 03, 1972 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1972-06-03

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Edited and managed by students at-the
University o Michigan
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual
opinions of the author. This must be noted in all reprints.
SATURDAY, JUNE 3, 1972 News Phone: 764-0552
Poor old Hubert
POOR OLD Hubert. People leave before he makes
speeches, and he makes speeches before very few
people.
The senator arrived for a luncheon speaking en-
gagement in Santa Barbara 45 minutes late this week but
his businessman audience had already left.
Then he delivered the:
speech he had prepared
for the first appointment
at a Carpenters Union Hall
in Ventura. There he talk-
ed to over 100 people, over
50 of them media person-
nel.
BUT HUMPHREY i s nt
giving up. He is still
attacking Senator McGov-
ern's "schemes" gamely "I
am not going to let the
election be settled on slogans," he declared.
"We were slicked before," he added.
"Slogans settle nothing - dedication, perservering
leadership, experience and, most of all, fellowship, that's
what does the job,' the Minnesota senator explained.
Poorold Hubert.
-ARTHUR LERNER
NIGHT EDITOR: PAUL TRAVIS
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR: ROSE SUE BERSTEIN
ASSISTANT NIGHT EDITOR: JIM O'BRIEN
PHOTO TECHNICIAN: GARY VILLANI

Dange

exa,
By MARK M. GREEN
MOUTH WASH, face soap,
toothpaste, shampoo, after
- shave lotion, fungicidal spray for
fruits and vegetables and vaginal
sprays against odor - some 400
products on the American market
contain the well advertised
sanitizer, hexachlorophene.
The name is familiar. Less well
known is the brain damaging
properties of this commonly used
chemical.
In 1967, five long years ago,
research showed that hexachloro-
phene can enter the body through
the intact skin. In addition, as
early as 1961 and later in 1968
two diseases, chloasma and burn
encephalopathy involving muscle
twitching, coma andhblackening
of the skin, were shown to be
caused by external application of
this "cleaning agent."
It doesn't take a PhD to con-
clude that this chemical can mess
over your chemistry good and
proper if it gets into you. It does.
Scientists at the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) Lab-
oratory in Atlanta, Ga. have
demonstrated that a few parts
per million (ppm) of hexachloro-
phene fed to rats caused gross,
brain damage. (A total of one
ppm of a substance in an aver-
age sized man would be less than
one three hundredth of an ounce.)
This information was made
available in 1969. Other scientists
in the same. laboratory studied
the blood of men and women who
used the over the counter drug
store products in normal ways.
They found ppm levels of hexa-
chlorophene t h a t approached
concentrations causing paralysis
and visible brain damage in rats.
EVEN more horrible, hospitals
across the country have routinely
washed infants with soap solu-
tions containing hexachlorophene
for years. Scientists determined
that when the children left the
hospitals, their blood contained
hexachlorophene at a proportion-
ate level of one tenth to one half
the concentration necessary to
cause brain damage, and paraly-
sis in laboratory rats.
Many of these findings were
written up for publication in jour-
nals to expose to public scrutiny
the entire hexachlorophene ques-
tion. But the FDA refused to al-
low such publication and also re-
fused to act on scientists' recom-
mendations to restrict the sale of
hexachlorophene-containing ma-
terials.
The data finally did get out
when the Atlanta laboratory was
transferred from FDA control. At
that point things began to move,

lurks in hexa,
!exaclorophene
since not only the damaging char- familiar with from the thalido-
acter of hexachlorophene became mide tragedy.
known but evidence came to light Three Dow chemists repeated
that 24 million American women, the work and in a subsequent ar-
spending $53 million per year, had ticle in Food and Cosmetics Toxi-
been using vaginal sprays con- cology showed that the earlier
taining the drug - even though work was correct. They also found
the manufacturers knew that fetal abnormalities including un-
hexachlorophene had no effect on derweight, swelling, retarded bone
odor-causing vaginal bacteria! formation and extra ribs in the
One company, Alberto Culver, lumbar region.
after hearing that some truth was However, the Dow chemists
getting out about their rip-off, immediately redefined the word
demanded a meeting with the teratogenic to mean something
commissioner of the FDA. The which almost kills the fetus and
corporation's president, Leonard blithely proclaimed that 2,4-D is
Lavin, was immediately received, safe for continued sales

and happily left the meeting, 'ac-
cording to the company, "satis-
fied that they (FDA) will await
more scientific evidence before
taking action."
NOW SINCE the facts have fi-
nally struggled to the surface, the
FDA has been compelled to place
certain restrictions on hexachlor-
ophene use. Nevertheless, at the
end of May I could not find a
single store selling drugs and cos-
metics in the campus area that
was not selling hexachlorophone
products.
Meanwhile, Dow Chemical Cor-
poration is waging the battle
against us on another front.
A very heavy selling herbicide
for lawn use causes congenital de-
fects in rats and mice. The herbi-
cide 2,4-D, was studied by two
scientists who found that it caus-
ed fetal abnormalities in mice.
The phenomenon is termed tera-
-togenicity - something we are

LEADING scientists have pro-
tested that the new definition is
"messing about unnecessarily"-
but the sales go on.
It's interesting that in Vietnam
where forty million pounds of
chemically similar herbicides have
been used, the provinces subjected
to intensive spraying have ex-
hibited a large increase in con-
genital birth defects - this time
among human beings.
You can purchase 2,4-D on the
shelf of any well-stocked garden
store in the city.
For further information, including
references, see Science Magazine, Nov.
19, 1971, p. 805, Jan. 14, 1972, p. 148 and
April 21, 1972, p. 262.
Mark. Green, an assistant pro-
fessor of chemistry, will gladly
discuss with anyone interested
where to find out more about
hexachlorophene and 2 4-D.

BOB ANDREWS .. .. .......
RasBERBARKIN .
JAN BENEDETTI ...
ROSE SUE BERSTEIN ..
DANIEL BORUS ... ...
LINDA DREEBEN ....
DENNY GAINER ......
ANDY GOLDING ..a.a . ....
MERYL GORDON ..a...a.. .
HARRY HIRSCH .... .. ....
SHERRY KASTLE .........
KAREN LAAKKO .............
ELLIOT LEGOW ..........
ANTHUR LERNER ........
DIANE LEVICK .... .
DAVID MARGOLICK.-.
SHEILA MARTIN ..........-.
JIM O'BRIEN
CHRIIS PARKS5..........
NANCY ROSENBAUM.
PAUL RUSKIN .. ............
ROLFE TESSEM ,..........-
PAUL TRAVIS...
GARY VILLANI ......
JIM WALLACE .........
DEBORAH WHITING ......,...
CAROL WIECK ................

Summer Staff
................. Associate Sports Editor
.~Night caitor
. NightEditse
............ .. Co-Editor
.Sports Night Editor
.B.os Editor
............ ..Night Editoe
... Photography Editor
. . ............ . .....n. Business Manager
.... ............... Assistant Night Editor
..... .. Display Manager
..... . ............... Circulation Manager
.Classified Manager
. ....................... Sports Editor
.... Co-Ediitor
.A.sistant Night-Edtor
.." .. .... Photographer
.. . . . ..... General Business Assistant
..Sence Edlitae
.... ....... ................. .N ight Editor
.Assistant Night Editor
....................... Assistant Night Editor
................................ Photographer
............................... Night Editor
..................Phtgapher
... ... .. .. Ph apher
....... ............... Circulation Assistant
. ................. General Business Assistant

The Great Debate:

By ERIC SCHOCK
FOR THOSE voters whose only con-
tacts with Hubert Humphrey this
year were primary night television in-
terviews, his television debates with
George McGovern must have come as
quite a shock.
Remember Hubert, after those vic-
tories in Indiana and Ohio and those
defeats in Oregon and Rhode Island?
It was Hubert the Happy we saw, with
that never-ending smile and confident
attitude. He was humble. in victory and
magnanimous in defeat.
But then the California campaign got
tough, and Hubert discovered he was
behind. So he challenged George Mc-
Govern to a series of national television
debates. And with the debates came the
Big Change. No more Mister Nice Guy,
now it was Hubert the Mean.
Humphrey's goal for the debates was
to discredit the McGovern tax, welfare,
and defense budget proposals, and he
seemed to get pretty involved, if not
steamed up, about the whole thing. His
eyebrows hopped up and down over his
narrowed eyes, and his patented smile
was rarely seen. He came across at times
like the last of the angry politicians.
IN CONTRAST, George McGovern
seemed more relaxed, more confident.

He came across like your friendly family
dentist.
Whether or not Humphrey succeeded
in discrediting McGovern and his pro-
gram in the minds of the voters is hard
to tell. The California primary results
may not even answer that question. But
he certainly tried.

HHH jabs George
When the correspondents weren't estimates that must have lost their
probing McGovern's proposals, Hum- meaning for most viewers. 76 billion
phrey was attacking them, usually on dollars, 150 billion dollars, 40 billion
the basis of what they would supposedly dollars, 200 billion dollars-what's that
cost. McGovern was forced to spend again?
most of his time defending his pro- It is questionable whether very many
grams, viewers choose either Humphrey or Mc-
The result was a bewildering barrage Govern as their favorite on the basis of
of conflicting cost, taxation, and budget the debates. Hardly anything new was
:::; :brought up, and one broadcast was
much like another. The episodes must
have been fairly boring to anyone who
knew very much 'about the campaign
and the candidates.
:4 Humphrey hoped to force McGovern
into a serious blunder in front of mil-
lions of viewers, or at least raise doubts
about the McGovern program.
BUT McGOVERN was calm under
y fire. Senator Humphrey may not have
raised many new doubts, and may have
even hurt his own image with his grim
* -NW defensiveness.
a It was a dual composed of repetitious
charges and countercharges and billion-
dollar estimates. How much all of it
may affect the outcome of the Calif or-
nia primary may depend upon the num-
ber of people that got bored and con-
fused and decided that the movie on
another channel was probably more
Daily-Rolle Tessemn interesting anyway.

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan