Buy Propecia Online – An Effective Solution for Male Hair Loss

All of us are normally born with hair on top of our heads, but as males become older, genetics start to kick in, and if they possess the baldness gene, then they are in for an experience that will definitely affect the way they lead their lives.  If you are a man who has never worried about your hair or you have never thought that being bald may be one of the things set in your future, then you will definitely feel really stressed if you experience some hair thinning, hair loss, or evident balding at some point in your life.  There are many products out there in the market these days that address this kind of problem, and you will surely encounter people with the same predicament as yours who buy Propecia online in order to help them solve their hair-related issue.

Before you buy Propecia online, it is recommended that you get yourself to the doctor to help you determine if you really possess the gene associated with male pattern baldness or androgenetic alopecia.  When you get yourself properly diagnosed, then that is the time that you really do have the right to this medicine, and you can opt to buy Propecia online once you have tried out some from the local pharmacy and it worked well for you. Of course, it is also good to have your doctor’s approval (a prescription) initially to prove that you really need to buy Propecia online for your male pattern baldness.

While it is actually very easy to buy Propecia online, you should be careful which online pharmacy to buy them from.  Start by researching them and pick out top 3 or 5 and test them by buying Propecia from them. Most online pharmacies are helpful enough to give you the information you need about their products, and all you have to do is ask. Of course, most customers go for websites that provide them good service and online customer support, so whenever you feel happy and satisfied on your Read more…

A little bit of poison?

Expert witnesses fail to acquit BPA in the court of public opinion

Last month, Canada became the first – and still the only – country to formally declare bisphenol A (BPA) a toxin, listing the organic compound as hazardous both to human health and to the environment.

BPA is an endocrine disruptor that can mimic the effects of estrogen. In vivo studies have linked even very low concentrations with permanent changes to the brains and reproductive systems of laboratory animals.

Two years ago, Canada announced its intention to ban BPA from baby bottles, as did several US states. In the event, they were largely pre-empted by the industry, as the shower of negative publicity surrounding BPA made it commercially nonviable.

But BPA hardly went away. In fact, it’s ubiquitous. It may be found in cellphone casings, cash register receipts, and all sorts of packaging, including and especially canned food. It’s an extremely common ingredient in the epoxy linings that cover the metal on the can’s inside.

This, most experts agree, is the number one source of human exposure. In Canada, the age group with the highest detected levels of BPA is teenagers, followed by younger kids. These are also the age groups most likely to eat canned foods.

This month, a panel of international experts sat down in Ottawa to get to the bottom of the issue of BPA in food. The meeting was sponsored by the World Health Organization, with support from the FDA, Health Canada and the European Food Safety Authority.

Their conclusion? That canned food is indeed the main avenue by which we absorb BPA … and it’s not a problem. Their modeling shows that BPA coming in through food consumption matches the quantity going out through urine. BPA does not significantly accumulate in the body, says WHO, and therefore action to remove it from food packaging would be “premature”.

Why premature? Because, as WHO acknowledges, there are still several studies suggesting adverse health effects even at very low levels, and finding worse overall health in people who work around BPA, for instance in canneries. Some of the best quality studies have still to report their findings, so the WHO wants to keep its options open.

But WHO also didn’t want to hurt industry by causing a public health scare before it knew the facts, so it held the meeting behind closed doors and made participants sign confidentiality agreements.

This approach may have backfired. Several manufacturers, apparently unable to stand the strain of not knowing, pre-empted the conference’s findings by announcing plans to remove BPA from their products while the experts were still deliberating. Among these was the world’s largest, Nestlé.

But Nestlé only said it would remove BPA from its US products – though many such products will undoubtedly find their way onto Canadian shelves. Different solutions might apply in different parts of the world, said the company, depending partly on local “cultural sensitivities” and consumer preferences. In other words, where the public shows no sign of caring about potential toxicity, manufacturers are unlikely to worry about it either.