Dr. Aly Cohen

speaker
699 appearances 2 recordings 2 series first heard Apr 2025 last heard May 2025

Dr. Aly Cohen’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.

Trend

recordings per month · last 12 months
No recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.

Appearances

newest first · ▶ plays the moment
The Checkup with Doctor Mike · Are Everyday Chemicals ACTUALLY Harming Your Health · 7 May 2025 podcast
As opposed to saying, let's hide from the chemicals, because we don't yet know.
Up until this point, up until this moment, we just got red dye number three out of the market, right? So I'm saying, listen, this is great. We have a movement towards thinking about the food chemicals. We knew that red dye number three was a problem in 1990 when they got rid of it in cosmetics. Now they're finally getting rid of it in food, right?
That's been a little controversial. So I'm curious your take on it.
Look, you could argue everything's controversial. For everything pro, you've got a con. And we know this in medicine too.
But that's a little unfair. I'm just curious. Well, it's not unfair in the sense that my point that I want to make... Because you can't equate every stance that subjectively someone may have about it. But I'm saying in this... In echter wissenschaftlicher Literatur gibt es eine Debatte darüber, ob Red Dye Nr. 3 wirklich menschliche Schäden hat. Ist das eine faire Statement zu sagen?
Es ist fair zu sagen, dass das Animal Studies Precautionary Principle fair genug ist, um zu sagen, dass wenn es schädlich ist in Animal Studies, dann sollten wir darüber nachdenken, in unseren kleinsten, stärksten Menschen, unseren Kindern und sogar unseren eigenen Körpern.
Aber fair zu sagen, dass auch eine sinnvolle Meinung es andersherum nehmen kann. Like, for example, if one of my patients says, don't put your stethoscope on my chest, it's going to give me cancer. Unreasonable thought. Can I disprove it with 100% certainty? I can't. But I can say with reasonable certainty.
So I think in this situation, we can say with reasonable certainty, there's some disagreement surrounding Gredd-Dynamo.
I agree with you. I'm not here to say anything's hard and fast, because these studies can all be in one way or another not big enough. And, you know, participants, or maybe they didn't account for lifestyle before they went into this study, which is my argument for a lot of these studies.
So there's like a hierarchy and a strength level of all these studies.
Mein Ziel ist es, den Leuten zumindest die Fähigkeit zu geben, zu sagen, Hör auf, du hast Agentur über deinem Körper. Du kannst entscheiden, ob du die Bolzen wissen willst oder nicht. Du kannst entscheiden, ob du spielen willst, weißt du, Boxen machen willst. Ich entscheide jedes Mal, wenn ich mein Haar gekleidet habe, was heute Morgen war, ob ich das machen wollte.
These are the choices we make, but to say that we shouldn't know anything about anything, to be protected and shelled off from decision making, especially at different socioeconomic levels or knowledge base, I think is not fair. And that is the idea, is that we should be thinking about... Precautionary principle. And not only that, guess what? They're great swaps. They're great alternatives.
That is the messaging I've always given. Here's a little bit of the problem. Here's a lot of the solution. The idea is that you don't always have to say, oh my gosh, I'm getting rid of this and I don't know what to put in its place. We have so many options now and they actually are affordable. That is the messaging that I'm really trying to share with people.
You mean a lipstick with lead versus something without lead or something without parabens is less... That's an extreme example.
That's wildly hyperbolic. People should have a choice as to what they put on their body.
Please put it on the website. Yeah, no, we'll have it up, yeah.
Well, parabens are still being used in lots of products. But I'm saying in these examples. Jukka, these are apps that are... Those are all fear-mongering misinformation apps. Okay, so they're all bad according to her, but what I want to say is that... Well, they are because they're based on the appeal to nature fallacy and the environment of working group claims.
They're very useful for people who have a lot of reactions to chemicals in general.
Well, I don't understand why we can't be looking at those to make our own decisions on ratings.
Well, can I give a practical situation where I think this actually played out historically in kind of an interesting point for the time being. Sure. When the polio vaccine was first released, we did a huge video on this. We hired a medical researcher to help us get really the best data on it. And what we found was
Showing 341–360 of 699 · page 18 of 35 ← Previous Next →