科学揭秘[过早死=不睡觉+可乐+洗发水+高路洁] 很可怕的绝对不是恐吓，一定要看完

傻雯

过早死=不睡觉+可乐+洗发水+高路洁

很可怕的，一定要看完...........
以后要早睡早起了！
写在后面的内脏器官工作时间蛮值得看看。
一个97级的校友，毕业后进微软的，上月死了，只不过 25岁的黄金年龄。
        早一点睡 ,这件事是真的, 因为我妹妹就在联旭当设计,死掉的人都还是她熟悉的同事。她同事死前每天加班到早上六点才回家,睡到中午又回公司继续上班 ,连续五天最后一天睡一睡就没醒过来了, 死前都很健康无任何心脏方面的疾病。其实这已经是 她们公司第三个过劳死的了 ,希望大家能随时注意自己的身体状况。
        对了,今天听到一个悲伤的消息。广告界的好青年, 又挂了一人了。此人是联旭的, 是业务还是设计我也搞不清楚,来过我们公司几次。前几天在连续加班后的某晚, 回家睡觉后第二天就叫不醒,挂了。奇的是, 约二个月前,也是联旭的一位女生业务,也是这样 ,不过她是离职后第二天, 还是第几天,睡一觉就起不来了。医生说是猝死 ,推测是过劳。
      总之,昨天和前天,晚上九点联旭就全部关灯, 大家都不加班了。大家要好好保 重身体呢。那两名挂掉的都是六十几年次的。年轻力壮无宿疾呢.............发生迹象原本一向身体健康,时常运动 (打篮球) 但在近日连续熬夜数晚,经过数日后,突然第二天起床会觉得很疲劳！一闭眼就想睡觉！ (跟前一日熬夜的感觉不同), 而且会腰酸背痛, 但一到晚上精神又好起来！别以为这是小事！根据中医的看法, 是因过劳而造成体内器官阴阳失调,就是体内器官起内讧,互相打架, 最后造成器官衰竭而死！
医生建议：晚上 10： 00前最好*游戏袋子自动屏蔽语词*休息 ,中午尽可能睡半小时到一小时的午觉(午睡一小时抵过晚上睡三小时 ), 年轻人一天至少要睡足八小时！那些经常半夜不睡觉的人！！收到没！收到没！！收到就早点睡啦！还看！为了大家健康 ,请转寄给你的朋友 ~谢谢！
内脏器官工作时间：
晚上9-11 点为免疫系统（淋巴）排毒时间，此段时间应安静或听音乐
晚间 11-凌晨 1点，肝的排毒，需在熟睡中进行。
凌晨1-3 点，胆的排毒，亦同。
凌晨 3-5点，肺的排毒。此即为何咳嗽的人在这段时间咳得最剧烈，
因排毒动作已走到肺；不应用止咳药，以免抑制 废积物的排除。
凌晨 5-7点，大肠的排毒，应上厕所排便。
凌晨7-9 点，小肠大量吸收营养的时段，应吃早餐。
疗病者最好早吃，在６点半前，养生者在７点半前，
不吃早餐者应改变习惯，即使拖到９、10 点吃都比不吃好。
半夜至凌晨４点为脊椎造血时段，必须熟睡，不宜熬夜。
你不能决定生命的长度，但你可以控制它的宽度；你不能控制他人， 但你可以掌控自己你不能预知明天， 但你可以利用今天；你不能样样胜利， 但你可以事事尽力。

看一下，對你或許真的有幫助喲！！！ 看來，生活中真的要非常留意。 以後我再也不喝可樂了。
可乐和洗发水--可怕的可乐
      我认识一位因肾衰竭而过逝的年轻母亲，她曾在伯特米那医院住过一个月，而且每天只能喝一杯水，医生为她进行了药物治疗，但似乎是太迟了。根据她所说，她以前每天午餐都喝「非酒精性的饮料」或 称做「软性饮料」（译注：就是那种有很多种美美的各种颜色，各种口味，甜甜的，多半有气泡的，冰的饮料，像是可口可乐、百事可乐，汽水、沙士，甚至标榜有什麽奥利多活菌，bifidus有益菌等等）。虽然只是每天一杯，但足以摧毁这个维持生命所必须的器官，她终於在去年十月去世，留下一个一岁大的儿子！
请继续往下读！危险的非酒精性饮料！ ！
这篇文章无关*游戏袋子自动屏蔽语词*，但与可口可乐、百事可乐有关，非常耐人寻味。对你们这些爱喝而且自以为很清楚可口可乐／百事可乐的人。
清洁厕所：
倒一罐可口可乐在马桶□，让这种全世界最畅销的饮料待个一小时，然後冲掉。可乐的柠檬酸就会将玻璃质似陶瓷器（译注：指马桶）上的污点消除。
将车子保险杆上的污锈除去：
将皱成一团的铝箔片（译注：即一般厨房□刷洗锅底的铝质刷子）浸在可口可乐後，拿来搓洗保险杆。
清洁汽车电池的电极：
将整罐的可口可乐倒在电极，以可乐的泡沫清除锈蚀。松开锈蚀的螺栓；将一块布浸在可口可乐後，搓洗锈蚀的螺栓，搓个几分钟。除去衣物的油脂；将整罐可乐倒在一堆油腻的衣物，加入清洁剂，再进行清洗工作。可口可乐可以帮忙油垢的分离。它也可以清除挡风玻璃的污雾。而你们竟喝这种东西！
可口可乐 &百事可乐提供参考：
软性饮料的酸碱平均值，像可口可乐、百事可乐，是 3.4。这种酸度酸到可以溶解牙齿和骨头。而人体到了30岁左右（就是咱们这个年纪）就停止制造骨质。之後，骨头透过排尿，每年会有8-18%会溶出体外，而这主要取决于所摄取食物 的酸度。（注意：酸度并不是指食物的味道，而是指钾、钙、镁对比的比例。）所有被溶的钙成份都会在血管的动脉、静脉、皮肤，组织和器官累积。这会影响肾功能（如肾结石）。就维他命和矿物质而言，并且，软性饮料毫无营养价值。
它们只有比较多的糖、酸度，和像是糖精和色素的添加物。有些人喜欢在餐後喝冰冷的软性饮料，想想看会有什麽影响？我们人体维持对消化酵素最佳功能的体温是在37度。而冰冷的软性饮料远低於37度，有时甚至是接近零度。这会降低酵素的功能，而且增加消化系统的负担，而消化较少的食物，事实上，这些食物会发酵。发酵的食物产生难闻的气体，会坏掉，形成毒素，而被我们的肠子所吸收，并且在血管中循环送全身。毒素的传送会导致各种疾病的形成。在喝可口可乐或百事可乐或是其他软性饮料前请想一想。妳可曾在喝瓶含气的饮料的当头想过妳喝的是什麽？妳吞下二氧化碳，而这是全世界没有人会建议妳喝的东西。
二个月前，在达利大学有场比赛：「看谁能喝最多的可口可乐 ?」获胜者喝了八瓶，并当场死亡，因为血管中含了太多的二氧化碳，而没有足够的氧。从那次以後，校长就禁任何的软性饮料在大学的福利社贩卖。有人将掉下来的牙齿放在百事可乐中十天，它溶解了。而牙齿和骨头是人体中唯一死亡後，仍可保存无缺的器官。
想想看这样的饮料，会对妳脆弱的肠壁和胃壁做出什麽样的事来。请仔细阅读！
今天回到家以后，您要做的第一件事就是：检查您的洗发香波（即指任何洗发水）！！请仔细阅读下面的信息，然后回家对照并检查您的洗发水。
现在更换洗发水还为时未晚，请检查洗发水瓶子上的成份说明，看看是否有一种被称为 SodiumLaurethSulfate （钠 Laureth酸盐，或简称 SLS）的物质。这种物质在大多数洗发水中都可以找到，而生产厂商用它是因为它可以产生很多泡沫并且它很便宜。但是，事实上 SLS是用来清洗车库地板的，并且它的清洁能力十分强大！！！而且有证据表明如果长期使用它会导致癌症，这决非玩笑。
有一天我回到家并检查了我的洗发水（维达沙宣）；发现它并不含有该物质；但是其它品牌如 Vo5、 Palmolive、 PaulMitchell以及 BodyShop出品的新型Hemp Shampoo等都含有该物质。克莱柔 Clairo）草本精华（ HerbalEssences）标注的成份中的第一条（这意味着它是唯一的主要成份）就是 SodiumLaurethSulfate
。
因此我打电话给它的一家公司，告诉他们其产品包含有一种会使用户得癌症的物质。他们说：是的，我们知道这件事，但是我们什么也做不了，因为我们需要它来产生泡沫。另外，高露洁（ Colgate）牙膏中也含有该物质，它也被用来产生泡沫。他们还说他们会送给我一些信息。
研究表明，在上世纪80年代，癌症发病概率仅为8000 分之一，而如今每３个人中就有１个可能患这种疾病。哪个更严重呢？因此我希望认真考虑这个问题，并将这封邮件转寄给你的友人，希望这样能防止更多的人患上癌症。

stamley

...可乐...只喝可口可乐

V-V

ER.....试试尽力改下个生物钟咯...

Mutia

反正我都觉得我会早死噶啦~~~

Asmin

[这个贴子最后由Asmin在 2008/07/17 04:56pm 第 1 次编辑]

捞猪的口水：
本猪认为早睡早起同少饮碳酸饮料呢两个观点系对人体健康有帮助的，“早睡早起身体好嘛”，而饮可乐时相信大家滴牙都有软既感觉吧...
而对于 SodiumLaurethSulfate （钠 Laureth酸盐，或简称 SLS），因为唔知系咩东东，于是就google左一下，结果却发现好多唔同既声音，响度同大家分享下：

洗发水会致癌吗？
http://www.xici.net/b830411/d66075533.htm
网上一帖子称洗发香波中含有ＳｏｄｉｕｍＬａｕｒｅｔｈＳｕｌｆａｔｅ，此物质是用来清洗车库地板的，如长期使用会导致癌症。
    ＳｏｄｉｕｍＬａｕｒｅｔｈＳｕｌｆａｔｅ属于表面活性剂，是许多化妆品中的常用添加剂，虽具有刺激性，但并不属于已知的致癌因子。
    中国香料香精化妆品工业协会已为国内洗发水全成分标注的实施开始了前期准备工作。
    近日，一则在网上广为流传的帖子引起了记者的关注，其内容是提醒人们检查所使用洗发香波的成分说明，看看其中是否有一种被称为ＳｏｄｉｕｍＬａｕｒｅｔｈＳｕｌｆａｔｅ的物质。并且说“这种物质在大多数洗发水中都可以找到，而生产厂商用它是因为它可以产生很多泡沫并且它很便宜。但是，事实上ＳｏｄｉｕｍＬａｕｒｅｔｈＳｕｌｆａｔｅ是用来清洗车库地板的，并且它的清洁能力十分强大！而且有证据表明如果长期使用它会导致
癌症”。
    记者检查了身边常用的几种洗发香波产品，发现都没有相关的成分说明，而一位刚从国外出差回来的同事带回了几种洗发水则都标明了成分，看到其中果然含有前面帖子中所提到的：ＳｏｄｉｕｍＬａｕｒｅｔｈＳｕｌｆａｔｅ。那么，这种物质是否可能致癌呢？为此，记者采访了清华大学化学系和北京宝洁技术有限公司的相关专家。
    “洗发水致癌”说属于传闻清华大学化学系的麻远博士告诉记者，ＳｏｄｉｕｍＬａｕｒｅｔｈＳｕｌｆａｔｅ（简称ＳＬＥＳ）与ＳｏｄｉｕｍＬａｕｒｙｌＳｕｌｆａｔｅ（简称ＳＬＳ）都属于表面活性剂。早在１９８３年，美国化妆品协会（ＣＩＲ）的专家小组经过研究认为这两种物质是安全的，它们在许多化妆品中是常用添加剂。
    针对于网上所流传的ＳＬＥＳ与ＳＬＳ可能致癌的说法，麻远介绍说，这种说法大约在２０００年时曾在欧美地区流传过一段时间，２０００年７月，美国癌症协会曾专门就这一传闻作出过澄清，指出洗发水或沐浴液中的确含有这两种物质，它们虽然具有一些刺激性，但并不属于已知的致癌因子。另外，２００１年时，在美国的《食品与化学毒物学》杂志中一篇文章也指出，经研究表明，ＳＬＥＳ与ＳＬＳ具有的刺激性可能会诱发人体红斑的发生，但并没有致癌性。
    使用与研究表明：ＳＬＳ和ＳＬＥＳ是安全的。宝洁公司（Ｐ＆Ｇ）是全球最成功的日用消费品公司之一，该公司生产的飘柔、海飞丝、潘婷、沙宣等产品都是被消费者认可和喜爱的洗发水品牌，在网上的有关说法中，就曾提到过“由于‘沙宣’中不含ＳＬＳ，所以比同类产品较贵”。为此，记者联系了北京宝洁技术有限公司，该公司公共事物部的孙雨净女士表示，对于沙宣成分的问题比较复杂，需要询问宝洁的欧洲公司，但ＳＬＳ和ＳＬＥＳ是一种非常安全和有效的清洁成分，包括宝洁公司在内，在全世界都被广泛使用于工业产品中。宝洁公司也非常仔细地研究过相关的信息，结论是它们用于我们的产品是安全的。宝洁公司表示，没有计划停止使用ＳＬＳ和ＳＬＥＳ，对它安全性的顾虑是没有任何科学依据的。经过很多年的使用和科学研究，ＳＬＳ和ＳＬＥＳ已经被广泛认为是安全的。
    国内两年之后将实施洗发水成分标注目前，在国内的洗发香波产品中，还没有采用全成分标注的做法，这也使很多消费者产生了一些疑虑。就此问题，中国香料香精化妆品工业协会常务理事尤先生告诉记者，欧美国家较早开始为洗发水做全成分标注，日本也在去年的４月１日起实行了这一做法。目前，中国香料香精化妆品工业协会为国内洗发水全成分标注的实施开始了前期准备工作，正在修订《消费品使用说明化妆品通用标签标准》，这一标准有望在明年年初通过，大约在两年以后，中国的洗发水也将在上市时做出相关的成分说明。

关于“过早死=不睡觉+可乐+洗发水+高路洁”的讨论
http://topic.csdn.net/t/20020919/09/1035683.html
18楼
喝茶？据报道大部分茶叶农药过量  
牛奶？据报道不少牛奶含激素  
   
可乐的碳酸饮料伤害牙齿，仅仅因为它是弱酸性的，也就是说，即使你吃条糖醋鱼，也比它损伤大。而且弱酸的作用仅限于含钙比较多的骨骼....各位，我不是来搅场的，只是说，即使喝生理盐水，长期也会有害，这只是个量的问题。没人含着可乐整个月让自己的牙溶掉。即使洗澡，连续几天也会休克呢。  
   
至于   SodiumLaurethSulfate   ，学名是12烷基硫酸钠，是一种发炮剂，就它的化学结构来看，是一种相当稳定的物质，我不敢随便说，它就一定没有问题，但也很希望知道，“有证据表明如果长期使用它会导致癌症”的证据出自何处？  

21楼
第一点：楼主极力渲染柠檬酸和SodiumLaurethSulfate的清洁能力，似乎有清洁能力的东西都有害。那么请将自己的小便用来洗拖布，你会发现小便洗拖布甚至衣服都非常好用，只要及时用清水把尿液冲干净，可以代替肥皂和洗衣粉，因为小便里含氨。中世纪欧洲用小便当洗涤剂，每天都在排泄这种东西，看来是不是要把肾和膀胱都切掉呢？  
   
第二点：喝了8瓶可乐致死人的事件。我不清楚这个“瓶”有多大。如果是通常包装的小瓶可乐，我绝对喝过8瓶以上（30分钟内）。如果是2.5升的，那么我想问问：一次喝下20升水的人是被二氧化碳毒死的？还是被水涨死的？  
   
第三点：牙齿泡到可乐里会溶解就说明可乐有害。那么把牙齿泡进胃酸里（主要成分是盐酸），恐怕溶解得更快。看来要把胃也切除掉。  
   
可乐对人体的害处无非是这样几个方面：一、含糖，导致糖引起的不良反映（比如龋齿）。二、碳酸刺激胃。三、喝冷的东西对胃不好。四、含咖啡因，有副作用。五、含防腐剂。不过这些危害并不严重。  
洗发水和牙膏都不是食品，换句话说这些东西不能饮用或者吞服。牙膏根本不用吃多，只要你吃下一小条牙膏，保证会出现一种类似感冒的症状，当然这不是疾病，一天内就可以消失。  
如果说对人体危害最大的食品添加剂，要属亚硝酸盐。这个东西本身有毒，而且还会生成亚硝胺（强烈致癌物质）。酸菜、火腿肠、熟肉、腊肉制品里都有这些物质存在。因为亚硝酸盐（主要是亚硝酸钠）能凝结蛋白，使肉更好吃。酸菜白肉之所以好吃是因为酸菜里含有这种物质。  
和可口可乐的有害程度比起来，这些东西对身体的摧残要强许多倍。

以下系西文辟谣（本猪是看不懂的，不过都分享下啦。。。嘻嘻）
What Is Sodium Laureth Sulfate...
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/weekly/aa090998.htm
And why are people saying those awful things about it?
Dateline: 09/09/98
(Latest update: 04/08/01)
By David Emery
A dire health warning circulating by email since 1998 claims that sodium laureth sulfate, a synthetic chemical found in brand-name shampoos and other personal care products, causes cancer.
As is typical of such warnings, the message is unsigned and cites no references to support its claims.
As also commonly happens with chain letters, this one has picked up false "signatures" after the fact. Such is usually the result of someone with an authoritative-sounding title forwarding the message with their .sig file attached, which is left intact by later forwarders and eventually becomes a permanent part of the text.
As near as I can determine, the name "Michelle Hailey" first began appearing on a version of this message in September 1998, approximately two months after the original (unsigned) version was first sighted. The "signed" version quickly surpassed the original in popularity, but Hailey denied authoring the email in an Oct. 20, 1998 article in the Daily Tennessean.
"This is not a chain letter," the message declares, but in fact it is one. As you shall see, its purpose is not to inform, but to frighten:
Subject: FW: SHAMPOO ALERT!!! MUST READ!!!
Importance: High
Check the ingredients listed on your shampoo bottle, and see if they have this substance by the name of Sodium Laureth Sulfate or simply SLS.
This substance is found in most shampoo, the manufactures use it because it produces a lot of foam and it is cheap. BUT the fact is that SLS is used to scrub garage floors, and it is very strong.
It is also proven that it can cause cancer in the long run, and this is no joke. Well, I went home and check my shampoo (Vidal Sasoon), it hasn';t got it, but others such as Vo5, Palmolive etc..they';ve got this substance, so I';ve called up to one of the company (u must think I had nothing better to do, no, I am just concerned about our health) well, I told them their product contains a substance that will cause people to have cancer, and u know what they said, they said "Yeah.we knew about it but there is nothing we can do about it coz we need that substance to produce foam, oh, by the way the Colgate toothpaste also contains the same substance to produce the bubbles". Oh my God, I';ve been using the Colgate since when I was born, what the world is that, are we going to die very soon. They said they are going to send me some info.
Research have shown that in the 1980s, the chance of getting cancer is 1 out of 8000 and now in the 1990s, the chances of getting cancer is 1 out of 3 which is very serious. So I hope that you will take this seriousness and pass on this to all the people you know, and hopefully, we can stop "giving" ourselves the cancer virus.
This is serious, after you have read this, pass it on to as many people as possible, this is not a chain letter, but it concerns our health.

Part 2: Questions and Answers
Here I will debunk some of the more dubious claims in the forwarded email. Please note that this is not a general article about the pros and cons of shampoo ingredients, or even of this particular ingredient. I will address specific allegations in the email text, the main one being that sodium laureth sulfate is carcinogenic. Sources and links for further reading are at the bottom of this page and in the sidebar to the right.
    * Q: Is sodium laureth sulfate commonly found in shampoos and toothpastes?
      A: Shampoos, frequently; toothpastes, occasionally. (It';s much more common to find the harsher surfactant sodium lauryl sulfate in toothpastes.)
    * Q: Is sodium laureth sulfate known to cause cancer?
      A: No. The chemical does not appear on any official list of known or suspected carcinogens.
    * Q: Is sodium laureth sulfate properly abbreviated as "SLS?"
      A: No. The correct abbreviation is "SLES." The chain letter confuses this compound with another: sodium lauryl sulfate, which is abbreviated "SLS." The two substances are related, but not the same.
    * Q: Is sodium laureth sulfate used to scrub garage floors?
      A: No.
    * Q: What about the other one – sodium lauryl sulfate – is it used to scrub garage floors?
      A: No doubt! SLS is a powerful surfactant (wetting agent) and detergent. It is used in both industrial cleaning products and, in lesser concentrations, personal care products.
    * Q: Is sodium lauryl sulfate commonly found in shampoos and toothpastes?
      A: Yes, both. It';s also found in shaving creams and other lathering products.
    * Q: Ah. Well, then, is SLS a known carcinogen?
      A: No, it is not on any official list of known or suspected carcinogens. But it is a harsher chemical than SLES, which is why SLES is typically used in baby shampoos instead. Sodium lauryl sulfate is well known to be a skin and eye irritant and can cause dermatitis with prolonged contact in high concentrations. Results of some tests on animal tissues indicate that it';s mutagenic — i.e., it may be related to abnormal cell mutations — though the evidence is inconclusive. Even so, scientists familiar with the substance insist it is not dangerous in the concentrations found in personal care products.
    * Q: Would a manufacturer freely admit to consumers, as claimed in the message, that it knowingly uses a carcinogen in its products "because we need that substance to produce foam?"
      A: Of course not.
    * Q: Is it true that my chances of getting cancer are "1 out of 3" in the ';90s?
      A: Yes, with a few qualifications. The problem with stating probabilities in this case is that there';s no way to generalize accurately. The reasons are: 1) cancer risks for individuals vary according to a host of factors, including gender, race, habits, and family history; and 2) the likelihood of any individual contracting cancer is also a function of their age. For example, if you';re 20 years old, the odds are much greater that you';ll contract cancer in your lifetime than they are if you';re 50, simply because there';s a longer time span involved.
      That said, the longer answer is: For an "average person" (that is, someone of no particular age or gender who lives nowhere in particular and inherited no genes from his or her parents), the chances of getting cancer over a lifetime work out to somewhere between 1 in 3 and 1 in 2, at present.
    * Q: Were the chances of getting cancer in the 1980s "1 out of 8,000?"
      A: No, that';s absurd. Cancer rates were approximately the same two decades ago as they are now; if anything, they were a bit higher.
    * Q: Really? Aren';t cancer rates rising?
      A: No, in the United States they have been falling, though at a fractional rate and there';s no telling if that trend will continue.
    * Q: Is cancer a "virus," as alleged in the email?
      A: No.
    * Q: Is the chain letter a hoax?
      A: Most likely. At the very least, it contains egregiously inaccurate information. But we can only guess at the motives of whoever launched it.
    * Q: Where did the misinformation come from?
      A: Well, if you';re asking who started the chain letter, there';s no way of knowing. As to the misinformation itself, it turns out that there are a good many Web pages containing very similar — and in some cases identical — statements. It';s a good bet that it all came from the same source at some point in time.
      Interestingly, all these Websites are maintained by "independent distributors" for multi-level marketing companies hawking "natural" personal care products, etc. As a matter of fact, the majority of URLs returned in a standard Web search on the keywords "sodium laureth sulfate" point to versions of the same propaganda. Assuming all this information did come from the same source, the author of our chain letter and some of these Web entrepreneurs are sloppy copyists at the very least, and/or intent on slanting the "facts" to suit their purposes.
      In the chain letter, for example, the cancer rate in the 1980s is alleged to be "1 out of 8,000"; the Web pages tend to say that was the cancer rate in 1901. That sounds more reasonable, but it';s no cause to assume the Websites are entirely accurate. On some of them, the ratio cited for 1901 is not "1 out of 8,000," but "1 out of 80." Again, some of these authors are either making it up as they go along, or copying the information very carelessly.
      Misinformation has a way of multiplying.
      Many of the pages I looked at were littered with inaccuracies, deceptive statements and outright lies. One even alleges that "In 1993 it was documented that sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and sodium laureth sulfate (SLES) were the leading cause of blindness in children" — as if claiming they';re carcinogens weren';t inaccurate enough. Another page links prominently to a site vending quack cancer cures. In some cases, the texts cite legitimate medical studies, but in a misleading way, making it appear as if the studies prove much more than they actually did.
      Small wonder that by the time this information made its way into chain letter form, virtually every statement in it was outrageously false.
      What';s worse, as the chain letter circulates, the information continues to degrade. One of the more recent variants of the email gives the abbreviation of sodium laureth sulfate as "SLY," which is doubly wrong.
    * Q: Do you think the chain letter may have been deliberately started to frighten people into using other products?
      A: I suspect it, but there';s no way to know for sure, and I can';t prove it. For all we know, someone came across this stuff by accident, innocently believed it to be true, and decided to share it with others.
    * Q: Do you really think that was the case?
      A: I doubt it.
    * Postscript: The old adage, "Where there';s smoke, there';s fire," may apply here. While the "facts" stated in the sodium laureth sulfate warning are almost entirely false, there may be other potentially hazardous substances in name-brand personal care products. For more information, see the following:
          o Personal Care and Cosmetic Products May Be Carcinogenic
            Synopsized as one of the "Top 25 under-reported news stories of 1997"
          o Report on carcinogens
            From the National Toxicological Program
          o FDA guidelines for inspection of cosmetic products
            "Non-binding" reference material for investigators

Sources and further reading:
    * 8th Annual Report on Carcinogens (1998). National Toxicology Program. URL: http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/Main_pages/NTP_8RoC_pg.html
      (1 Sep. 1998).
    * "Study: U.S. Cancer Rates Declining." CNN News, 13 Mar. 1998. URL: http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9803/13/less.cancer/
      (7 Sep. 1998).
    * Clayton, R.M., et al. (1985). "The Penetration of Detergents into Adult and Infant Eyes." Food and Chemical Toxicology 23.2 (Feb. 1985): 239-246.
    * Friedlander, Ed. "Sodium Lauryl Sulfate - Not a Cancer Risk." The Pathology Guy. URL: http://www.pathguy.com/sls.htm (8 April 2001).
    * Hope, J. "Absence of Chromosome Damage in the bone marrow of rats fed detergent actives for 90 days." Mutation Research 56.1 (Sep. 1977): 47-50.
    * Material Safety Data Sheet for Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (Sodium Lauryl Sulfate). URL: http://www.vwrsp.com/ (1 Sep. 1998).
    * "New Report on Declining Cancer Incidence and Death Rates..." National Cancer Institute Press Release, 12 Mar. 1998. URL: http://rex.nci.nih.gov/massmedia/pressreleases/deathrate.html
      (7 Sep. 1998).
    * "Sodium Lauryl Sulfate." American Cancer Society. URL: http://www2.cancer.org/zine/index.cfm?fn=004_09231998_0 (8 April 2001).
    * UMCP Partial List of Teratogens (1995). University of Maryland. URL: http://www.inform.umd.edu/DES/ch/terat.html (4 Sep. 1998).
    * Winter, Ruth. A Consumer';s Dictionary of Household, Yard and Office Chemicals. New York: Crown, 1992.

谁是谁非，明眼的各位自己分析好了...嘻嘻~~不过，而家好多商家都因为想稳多滴而沦为黑商，为此提醒各位同学要多注意了...今日警讯到此为此...
另，看左下本帖系7月1日发的，浏览量有200几，虽然广青网唔系咩大网，不过感觉许多同学应该会比较相信在这看到的信息的，而这个帖子上因为关于SLS的内容是不确认的，为免误导别人，请楼主或管理帮忙将这个帖的主题改下...多谢！

傻雯

ls很强.....~但我看不明..~

eliahoho

哇，又是好长

霖仔

下面引用由傻雯在 2008/07/24 03:03pm 发表的内容：
ls很强.....~但我看不明..~

仲唔明？驳斥你篇伪科学嘅！！！
我就是学化工嘅！但从来未听过哩种谬论！！！

水晶狐狸

那喝思乐冰好了．．．．．．