As http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/cosmetics/cosmetics_p... (among many other sources) points out, we do not have good regulation of the cosmetics industry. Which is kind of scary, because the cosmetics industry is deliberately seeking biologically active stuff, and smearing it all over people. Stuff that, in her case, does things like change your natural skin color.
What else does it do? We don't really know. We do know that a lot of these substances can cause cancer. We know that cosmetics mimic biologically active stuff in our body that could do other things. We know it has not been studied.
The last point is important. As http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/a... makes clear, the situation right now is, "The jury is out, we don't have data." But I'd be firmly on the side of, "When you're deliberately trying to get the body to interact with biologically active stuff, it is just a question of time until you succeed..disastrously."
Among that list of "dangerous substances" we have: talc, silica (sand).
Exaggerated alarmism and "think of the children" mentality. I'm sure there's some people that die after consuming Vitamin C supplements, but that doesn't mean it is 'dangerous'.
Do you know what else is carcinogenic? Sunscreen. Of course, standing in the sun without it is more carcinogenic.
Living is the leading cause of cancer. Of course, not smoking, not standing in the sun too much and keeping away from radioactive sources help.
...if sunscreen penetrates into the skin, it promotes indirect DNA damage, which causes the most lethal form of skin cancer, malignant melanoma. This form of skin cancer is rare, but it causes 75% of all skin cancer-related deaths.
So, while the sunburn you get without wearing sunscreen technically causes more cancer, it is of the mild and nonfatal kind. Now I'm left with one more dilemma added to good vs. bad cholesterol, omega-3 vs. omega-6, natural vs. alkali-processed cocoa, etc.
http://www.rumiom.com/index.php/board-of-advoisors.html
This is a nonsense story designed to promote some kind of pseudoscience yoga resort.
I assume you understand this makes you undeserving of that safety.
Of course if you're selling something that we have good evidence is both acceptably safe and makes people look better, then the more power to you. But that's not, by her admission, the position that she is probably in.
Why not?
Because you believe in "progress" as in an inherently good metaphysical entity?
I'd take safety and a better life for the vast majority of mankind over progress anyday.
https://www.google.com/search?q=chanda+zaveri+linus+pauling https://www.google.com/search?q=chanda+zaveri+uc+santa+barba...
I tried looking list of people who have received honorary doctorate degrees from Harvard but couldn't find the entire list. But it is not in the summary list they have. (All this additional info from here: http://www.chandallc.com/index.php?p=1_4_About)
I don't expect her to be on the internet except in the corporate sense. Her formative years were before the internet era.
Ms. Zaveri received a Masters degree in Molecular Biology and Genetics from the University of California at Santa Barbara. Subsequent graduate studies were undertaken at California Polytechnic University (“Cal Tech”)
Since when California Polytechnic University is called Cal Tech? Isn't that abbreviation used for "California Institute of Technology (http://caltech.edu)?
Searching for California Polytechnic University shows "Cal Poly" or "California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA (www.calpoly.edu).
Update: Wikipedia says (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling), Linus Pauling was at Caltech in the 1927–1963 period and does not indicate he was there in the later stage of his life (nineties). Nor does it say that he was ever associated with CalPoly. At least this part of the Ms. Zaveri's story seems suspicious to me.
Wow, that is some luck!
~B
I use the AdBlock Plus, NoScript, and RequestPolicy plugins for Firefox, along with Privoxy, and virtually never see ads.
Incidentally, I can't get those on my iPad.
And i gotta say hailing from Calcutta (now Kolkata) and becoming what she is now, really Really take balls of titanium.
How can a journalist be such a fool to publish something as ridiculous as this? A simple Google search can confirm that she is fake.
With this article behind her back, don't be surprised if she ends up on a '50 under 50' list within a year.
http://www.rumiom.com/index.php/board-of-advoisors.html
The other members are:
A mystery man who's biography is a copy and paste of the next mans bio.
The head of the International Schizophrenia Foundation, the ISF plays a vital role in improving health by 'Orthomolecular medicine'
Jerry Garcia's third wife Deborah Koons Garcia (A Filmmaker)
A Former Soviet Special Forces physical training instructor.
A medical anthropologist and ethnobotanist who has researched shamanism.
A family physician practicing 'Integral Theory'.
I don't know any scientist who would be associated with this much nonsense and be expected to be taken seriously.
Thank you. By writing this comment you just proved the statement I made above.
Did I say I couldn't find details about her on Google? On the contrary, I found enough evidence while doing a simple Google search to come to a reasonable conclusion. If I can't find your story I would reserve my judgement.
> Companies with single shareholders > Cal Poly and Caltech > Shitty websites for companies supplying important formulations to the likes of Estee Lauder and many more..
Please avoid using the word 'Troll' casually without concrete evidence.
Advertorial content?
The quality of comments plummets remarkably, approaching pedestrian at times.
;) I'm just saying there might be other factors: like the industry you work in, your interests, govt subsidization of your industry, saturation/supply/demand, etc. Someone interested in makeup is going to have a different life than someone interested in nuclear physics. There are some poor physics graduates who worked for 10 years in research VS. upper-middle class make-up artists.
You have to screw up pretty hard to be near-homeless as a programmer in this environment.
What?
This woman is from India, and trust me India of 2013 is nothing unlike the India of 1980s or early 1990's. Long gone are those days where one had to leave India and go to somewhere in the west to have a worth while life. You can pretty much be anything you want to be in modern day India.
And by the way if you work hard 'enough', your dreams will come true anywhere!
Why do people keep repeating this? What is the empirical evidence for this statement outside of some anecdotes? I have seen so many counter-examples in my life...
I always thought Land of Opportunity just meant if you work hard enough you'll land a mediocre job that pays well and will be able to provide a decent level of support for your family.(although unfortunately that is not always the case)
The big area where the US is failing people is at the low end. Multi-generational poverty, as well as people who had 1-2 generations of moderate success dropping back to poverty.
