Alongside all the bad news about health dangers that we need to be aware of, it is refreshing to end the year by taking a look at a positive story. The State of Illinois is starting the New Year off by giving the tobacco industry another much deserved blow. Following on the heels of a strict Chicago law that severely restricted indoor smoking beginning in 2005, Illinois officials are instituting this legislation that now distinguishes it as one of the toughest states on smokers.
I find this to be an encouraging trend that hopefully will become more common in the near future. I am sure that the tobacco industry, restauranteurs, and other interest groups put up a significant amount of money to block this legislation, and it is very satisfying to see them go down in defeat. We have a long way to go in this country as far as changing the unhealthy lifestyles that are too often associated with Americans, but continuing to crack down on smoking, especially among our young people, is definitely a step in the right direction. Even more so when we take into account all the herbicides and pesticides used in growing tobacco that get transferred to the lungs of consumers. In addition, second hand smoke has proved to be just as dangerous as if you were puffing on the cigarette yourself! Perhaps we are one step closer to the reality of a smoke-free environment that relegates tobacco use to a memory of the distant past. Hopefully we will continue to educate ourselves and decide to make these choices without the government doing it for us.
Get ready to clear the air
SMOKING BAN New Year's timing hit, but health benefits cited
December 28, 2007
BY JIM RITTER Health Reporter/jritter@suntimes.com
Happy New Year. Now, put out that cigarette.
At the stroke of midnight on New Year's Eve, Illinois will ban virtually all indoor smoking in public spaces, including bars and restaurants.
Bad timing, said Sheila O'Grady of the Illinois Restaurant Association.
"To become effective in the middle of New Year's Eve celebrations is not ideal," O'Grady said.
However, O'Grady predicted that restaurants will comply. And if past experience is any guide, she's probably right.
Chicago restricted indoor smoking in 2005, and so far this year, the city has received only 119 smoking-related complaints, the public health department said.
Under the Smoke-Free Illinois Act, just about the only places left where you can smoke indoors will be private cars and homes.
Smoking will be banned in offices, factory floors, stores, private clubs, prisons, bowling alleys, dormitories, stadiums, casinos, elevators and restrooms.
Smoking also will be banned within 15 feet of entrances, exits and windows.
Ask, tell, call 311
Smoking will still be allowed in private rooms in nursing homes, in up to 25 percent of hotel rooms and in tobacco shops and hookah bars that don't serve food or alcohol.
Smokers could be fined as much as $250. Businesses could be fined at least $250 for the first violation and at least $2,500 for a third violation within a year.
The city offers this advice if you see a violation: Ask the smoker to put the cigarette out, then inform the management. And if that doesn't work, call 311. After three complaints, the city will send an inspector to investigate.
Outside Chicago, call the Cook County Public Health Department, (708) 492-2000, or the Illinois Public Health Department, (866) 973-4646.
Health advocates say the law will protect workers. In addition to cancer, secondhand smoke can cause stroke, heart disease, respiratory ailments and sudden infant death syndrome. Studies have found secondhand smoke kills 65,000 Americans each year, including eight people in Illinois every day.
A 2005 survey found that 72 percent of Illinois adults said smoking should be banned from work and 73 percent said it should be banned from restaurants.
But the Illinois Licensed Beverage Association says bars, restaurants and nightclubs could lose business to neighboring states. And a casino trade group has warned that casinos could lose as much as 20 percent of their business, costing the state as much as $144 million in lost tax revenue.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/716561,CST-NWS-smoke28.article#
Monday, December 31, 2007
Friday, December 28, 2007
The Dangers of Acid-Reflux Drugs
The use of medications to fight acid-reflux or Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease(GERD) is huge all throughout the year, but some people might be tempted to use them even more around the holidays when overeating and rich foods may bring on such disorders more often. In most cases, all patients have to do is mention they have heartburn or indigestion and their doctors will be more than willing to dash off a prescription for the PPI drugs that are so commonly given for such maladies.
As with most prescription medications, PPIs have potentially serious side effects. Besides increased risk for hip fractures, as discussed in the article below, research has also shown that these drugs are addictive in the sense that if a person stops using them, episodes of acid-reflux will increase. There are also concerns that long-term use of PPIs can alter the lining in the esophagus and increase risk for certain types of cancer.
The good news is you do not have to resort to these dangerous drugs to fight heartburn and acid-reflux. Natural remedies include: A tablespoon of organic apple cider vinegar in a glass of water before meals; consuming digestive enzymes before each meal; the use of a quality probiotic; drinking plenty of clean pure water throughout the day; and eating 2-cloves of raw, organic garlic daily to eliminate H. pylori, a bacteria responsible for many cases of acid-reflux.
These Hips Don't Lie
They say there are only six degrees of separation between you and any other person on earth. If so, there must be only a couple degrees separation at most between you and all the people who use proton-pump inhibitor drugs to address gastrointestinal reflux disease (GERD).
According to WebMD Medical News, in 2005 more than 95 million U.S. prescriptions were written for Nexium, Prilosec, Prevacid, and other proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs).
So forward this e-mail along your friends who use these drugs and let them know they may be putting themselves at greater risk of hip fractures. Fortunately, you can also let them know there's a safe alternative treatment for GERD that's far less expensive than PPI drugs.
An absorbing issue
The WebMD article notes that PPIs turn off the "pump" mechanism that the stomach cells need to make acid. And the article adds that PPIs are "very effective for treating GERD." Why the free promotional comment? Wyeth, AstraZeneca, and TAP Pharmaceutical Products are PPI manufacturers that just happen to also be WebMD sponsors. I suppose WebMD editors figured they'd throw their benefactors a bone before delivering the bad news.
Here's the root of the problem: PPIs may interfere with calcium absorption, and may also reduce bone resorption (part of the natural process that constantly renews the structure of bones). To investigate just how pronounced this problem might be, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania compared PPI use with incidence of hip fracture.
STUDY ABSTRACT Researchers examined 15 years of data contained in the UK's General Practice Research Database
Data included more than 13,500 hip fracture cases and more than 135,000 patients without hip fracture - all subjects were at least 50 years of age
Results showed that low dose PPI therapy produced a slight risk of hip fracture
Subjects who used PPIs for more than one year increased risk of hip fracture by 44 percent compared to subjects who didn't use PPIs
Subjects who used high doses of PPIs for long periods were significantly more likely to fracture a hip
Researchers noted that the detrimental effect of PPI use is probably most pronounced among patients at high risk of osteoporosis.
Fighting acid with acid
You might feel caught between the devil and the deep blue sea if you have both osteoporosis and GERD. But don't despair. HSI Panelist Allan Spreen, M.D., has a solution that can address GERD, improve overall digestion, and won't compromise bone health.
In the e-Alert "Fire Down Below" (12/23/02), Dr. Spreen outlined a simple two-step plan that starts with acidophilus supplements; available at most health food stores and through many Internet sources. Dr. Spreen recommends refrigerated varieties in capsules or powdered form. And he adds: "They should be measured in billions (with a 'B') of cfu (colony-forming units)."
In step two, believe it or not, acid is added, along with digestive enzymes. Dr. Spreen explains: "It isn't acid that's the problem (you need it desperately for digestion); it's acid reaching the esophagus. Proper digestion allows for higher concentration of acid while tightening the GE junction and protecting the esophagus. I do that using Super Enzymes by TwinLab, two capsules at mid-meal. I hate to push just one company, but it's one of the few enzymes that includes betaine hydrochloride, a plant-based form of acid."
You'll find much more information about Dr. Spreen's GERD protocol in "Fire Down Below" at this link: http://www.hsibaltimore.com/ealerts/ea200212/ea20021223.html
URL: http://www.hsibaltimore.com/ealerts/ea200701/ea20070116a.html
As with most prescription medications, PPIs have potentially serious side effects. Besides increased risk for hip fractures, as discussed in the article below, research has also shown that these drugs are addictive in the sense that if a person stops using them, episodes of acid-reflux will increase. There are also concerns that long-term use of PPIs can alter the lining in the esophagus and increase risk for certain types of cancer.
The good news is you do not have to resort to these dangerous drugs to fight heartburn and acid-reflux. Natural remedies include: A tablespoon of organic apple cider vinegar in a glass of water before meals; consuming digestive enzymes before each meal; the use of a quality probiotic; drinking plenty of clean pure water throughout the day; and eating 2-cloves of raw, organic garlic daily to eliminate H. pylori, a bacteria responsible for many cases of acid-reflux.
These Hips Don't Lie
They say there are only six degrees of separation between you and any other person on earth. If so, there must be only a couple degrees separation at most between you and all the people who use proton-pump inhibitor drugs to address gastrointestinal reflux disease (GERD).
According to WebMD Medical News, in 2005 more than 95 million U.S. prescriptions were written for Nexium, Prilosec, Prevacid, and other proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs).
So forward this e-mail along your friends who use these drugs and let them know they may be putting themselves at greater risk of hip fractures. Fortunately, you can also let them know there's a safe alternative treatment for GERD that's far less expensive than PPI drugs.
An absorbing issue
The WebMD article notes that PPIs turn off the "pump" mechanism that the stomach cells need to make acid. And the article adds that PPIs are "very effective for treating GERD." Why the free promotional comment? Wyeth, AstraZeneca, and TAP Pharmaceutical Products are PPI manufacturers that just happen to also be WebMD sponsors. I suppose WebMD editors figured they'd throw their benefactors a bone before delivering the bad news.
Here's the root of the problem: PPIs may interfere with calcium absorption, and may also reduce bone resorption (part of the natural process that constantly renews the structure of bones). To investigate just how pronounced this problem might be, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania compared PPI use with incidence of hip fracture.
STUDY ABSTRACT Researchers examined 15 years of data contained in the UK's General Practice Research Database
Data included more than 13,500 hip fracture cases and more than 135,000 patients without hip fracture - all subjects were at least 50 years of age
Results showed that low dose PPI therapy produced a slight risk of hip fracture
Subjects who used PPIs for more than one year increased risk of hip fracture by 44 percent compared to subjects who didn't use PPIs
Subjects who used high doses of PPIs for long periods were significantly more likely to fracture a hip
Researchers noted that the detrimental effect of PPI use is probably most pronounced among patients at high risk of osteoporosis.
Fighting acid with acid
You might feel caught between the devil and the deep blue sea if you have both osteoporosis and GERD. But don't despair. HSI Panelist Allan Spreen, M.D., has a solution that can address GERD, improve overall digestion, and won't compromise bone health.
In the e-Alert "Fire Down Below" (12/23/02), Dr. Spreen outlined a simple two-step plan that starts with acidophilus supplements; available at most health food stores and through many Internet sources. Dr. Spreen recommends refrigerated varieties in capsules or powdered form. And he adds: "They should be measured in billions (with a 'B') of cfu (colony-forming units)."
In step two, believe it or not, acid is added, along with digestive enzymes. Dr. Spreen explains: "It isn't acid that's the problem (you need it desperately for digestion); it's acid reaching the esophagus. Proper digestion allows for higher concentration of acid while tightening the GE junction and protecting the esophagus. I do that using Super Enzymes by TwinLab, two capsules at mid-meal. I hate to push just one company, but it's one of the few enzymes that includes betaine hydrochloride, a plant-based form of acid."
You'll find much more information about Dr. Spreen's GERD protocol in "Fire Down Below" at this link: http://www.hsibaltimore.com/ealerts/ea200212/ea20021223.html
URL: http://www.hsibaltimore.com/ealerts/ea200701/ea20070116a.html
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Parasitic Infections On the Rise in US
Illnesses that are caused by parasites were once thought to be mainly a problem affecting poor and underdeveloped nations, especially in tropical locations. However, research indicates that the number of infections in this country caused by tapeworms, roundworms, and other parasites has increased significantly.
In addition to causing intestinal discomfort and destroying the permeability of the colon, parasites can lead to even more serious complications such as malnutrition, fatigue, high blood pressure, neurological disorders, respiratory conditions such as asthma, and in severe cases even death. Parasites choose to take up residence in many different areas of the body. Some favor the area of the digestive tract, while specific flukes flourish in the tissues of the lungs. Other parasites, such as the pig tapeworm (taenia solium), gravitate to the brain to live and reproduce. Human parasites can enter the body in four different ways: Consuming infected food or water; sexual contact with an infected person; contact with contaminated water through drinking, bathing or swimming; or from the bite of an infected agent (such as a mosquito). Once inside the body, parasites multiply, migrate, and proceed through their life cycles, potentially causing damage to different bodily systems. Parasites may actually be present in the body without being detected for months or years, triggering damage that can result in mild conditions such as digestive disturbances, allergies, colds, and flu.
In the US, however, the main way these parasites are introduced into the body is through eating undercooked and improperly handled pork, beef, or fish. If you do choose to eat meat or fish, be certain that these foods are adequately prepared.
It is also a good idea to make use of a quality parasitic cleanse to make sure that your system is free of any potential contaminants. Performing a parasite cleanse at least two times per year is highly recommended. Between parasite cleanses, the following preventative measures can be taken: Frequent and thorough hand washing with warm water and soap; cooking foods thoroughly and at correct temperatures; becoming familiar with your source of water for drinking and bathing (make sure it is clean and pure); wearing shoes when outside; and thoroughly washing all produce and meat before eating or cooking.
Worms infect more U.S. poor than thought
Many carry same parasitic infections that affect developing nations
Reuters
WASHINGTON - Roundworms may infect close to a quarter of inner city black children, tapeworms are the leading cause of seizures among U.S. Hispanics and other parasitic diseases associated with poor countries are also affecting Americans, a U.S. expert said on Tuesday.
Recent studies show many of the poorest Americans living in the United States carry some of the same parasitic infections that affect the poor in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, said Dr. Peter Hotez, a tropical disease expert at George Washington University and editor-in-chief of the Public Library of Science journal PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases.
Writing in the journal, Hotez said these parasitic infections had been ignored by most health experts in the United States.
'I feel strongly that this is such an important health issue and yet because it only affects the poor it has been ignored,' Hotez said via e-mail.
He said the United States spent hundreds of millions of dollars to defend against bio-terrorism threats like anthrax or smallpox or avian flu, which were more a theoretical concern than a real threat at present.
'And yet we have a devastating parasitic disease burden among the American poor, right under our nose,' Hotez said.
Roundworms link to asthma
He noted a recent study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, presented in November, found that almost 14 percent of the U.S. population is infected with Toxocara roundworms, which dogs and cats can pass to people.
'Urban playgrounds in the United States have recently been shown to be a particularly rich source of Toxocara eggs and inner-city children are at high risk of acquiring the infection,' Hotez wrote, adding that this might be partly behind the rise in asthma cases in the country. Up to 23 percent of urban black children may be infected, he said.
'Because of its possible links to asthma, it would be important to determine whether covert toxocariasis is a basis for the rise of asthma among inner-city children in the northeastern United States,' he added.
'Cysticercosis is another very serious parasitic worm infection ... caused by the tapeworm Taenia solium, that results in seizures and other neurological manifestations,' Hotez wrote.
He said up to 2,000 new cases of neurological disease caused by tapeworms are diagnosed every year in the United States. More than 2 percent of adult Latinos may be infected, and with 35 million Hispanics in the United States, this could add up to tens of thousands of cases, Hotez said.
'In the hospitals of Los Angeles, California, neurocysticercosis currently accounts for 10 percent of all seizures presenting to some emergency departments,' he wrote.
'We need to begin erasing these horrific health disparities,' Hotez wrote in the paper.
Copyright 2007 Reuters.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22398067/
In addition to causing intestinal discomfort and destroying the permeability of the colon, parasites can lead to even more serious complications such as malnutrition, fatigue, high blood pressure, neurological disorders, respiratory conditions such as asthma, and in severe cases even death. Parasites choose to take up residence in many different areas of the body. Some favor the area of the digestive tract, while specific flukes flourish in the tissues of the lungs. Other parasites, such as the pig tapeworm (taenia solium), gravitate to the brain to live and reproduce. Human parasites can enter the body in four different ways: Consuming infected food or water; sexual contact with an infected person; contact with contaminated water through drinking, bathing or swimming; or from the bite of an infected agent (such as a mosquito). Once inside the body, parasites multiply, migrate, and proceed through their life cycles, potentially causing damage to different bodily systems. Parasites may actually be present in the body without being detected for months or years, triggering damage that can result in mild conditions such as digestive disturbances, allergies, colds, and flu.
In the US, however, the main way these parasites are introduced into the body is through eating undercooked and improperly handled pork, beef, or fish. If you do choose to eat meat or fish, be certain that these foods are adequately prepared.
It is also a good idea to make use of a quality parasitic cleanse to make sure that your system is free of any potential contaminants. Performing a parasite cleanse at least two times per year is highly recommended. Between parasite cleanses, the following preventative measures can be taken: Frequent and thorough hand washing with warm water and soap; cooking foods thoroughly and at correct temperatures; becoming familiar with your source of water for drinking and bathing (make sure it is clean and pure); wearing shoes when outside; and thoroughly washing all produce and meat before eating or cooking.
Worms infect more U.S. poor than thought
Many carry same parasitic infections that affect developing nations
Reuters
WASHINGTON - Roundworms may infect close to a quarter of inner city black children, tapeworms are the leading cause of seizures among U.S. Hispanics and other parasitic diseases associated with poor countries are also affecting Americans, a U.S. expert said on Tuesday.
Recent studies show many of the poorest Americans living in the United States carry some of the same parasitic infections that affect the poor in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, said Dr. Peter Hotez, a tropical disease expert at George Washington University and editor-in-chief of the Public Library of Science journal PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases.
Writing in the journal, Hotez said these parasitic infections had been ignored by most health experts in the United States.
'I feel strongly that this is such an important health issue and yet because it only affects the poor it has been ignored,' Hotez said via e-mail.
He said the United States spent hundreds of millions of dollars to defend against bio-terrorism threats like anthrax or smallpox or avian flu, which were more a theoretical concern than a real threat at present.
'And yet we have a devastating parasitic disease burden among the American poor, right under our nose,' Hotez said.
Roundworms link to asthma
He noted a recent study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, presented in November, found that almost 14 percent of the U.S. population is infected with Toxocara roundworms, which dogs and cats can pass to people.
'Urban playgrounds in the United States have recently been shown to be a particularly rich source of Toxocara eggs and inner-city children are at high risk of acquiring the infection,' Hotez wrote, adding that this might be partly behind the rise in asthma cases in the country. Up to 23 percent of urban black children may be infected, he said.
'Because of its possible links to asthma, it would be important to determine whether covert toxocariasis is a basis for the rise of asthma among inner-city children in the northeastern United States,' he added.
'Cysticercosis is another very serious parasitic worm infection ... caused by the tapeworm Taenia solium, that results in seizures and other neurological manifestations,' Hotez wrote.
He said up to 2,000 new cases of neurological disease caused by tapeworms are diagnosed every year in the United States. More than 2 percent of adult Latinos may be infected, and with 35 million Hispanics in the United States, this could add up to tens of thousands of cases, Hotez said.
'In the hospitals of Los Angeles, California, neurocysticercosis currently accounts for 10 percent of all seizures presenting to some emergency departments,' he wrote.
'We need to begin erasing these horrific health disparities,' Hotez wrote in the paper.
Copyright 2007 Reuters.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22398067/
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Health Care Choices: Confusion by Design?
As we close in on the end of the year, the deadline approaches for Medicare recipients to choose a drug plan or change their existing one. The confusion surrounding this issue is a classic example of the needless complexity and shameless pandering to profit that defines the current state of health care here in the United States. Many seniors are too overwhelmed to effectively analyze their choices and make decisions that best meet their needs and budget. The irony of the whole situation is that insurance companies, supposed non-profit organizations like AARP, and the pharmaceutical industry are making obscene profits off of drugs that are steering people away from much safer and effective natural alternatives and causing them to suffer financially as well.
What you learn in the following article may cause you to reevaluate the integrity of AARP, an organization that is supposedly an advocate for the rights of people over the age of 50. But even more importantly I hope it causes you to question a system that allows such conflicts of interest. Health care is one of the critical issues in the upcoming presidential election, and the only candidate that is speaking out against the current system is Ron Paul (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/). Unless we wake up and realize the imminent danger to our health care freedoms, the American people may lose those freedoms forever and the corruption of the system will triumph. The time to speak out against this travesty of justice is now.
AARP is drug plan advocate, marketer
By KARL STARK
The Philadelphia Inquirer
PHILADELPHIA --
When Kim Andrews advises seniors in suburban Delaware County, Pa., on choosing a Medicare drug plan, she finds that the AARP-branded options are not typically the cheapest.
The AARP plans often cost hundreds of dollars more a year than the lowest-priced competitors, according to estimates by the government's Medicare Web site, which Andrews uses.
"They're usually not in my top 10 on a comparison basis. They may be in the top 20," Andrews said. But seniors often "go with the (AARP) name even though it can be much higher."
That kind of loyalty has pushed the AARP-branded plans to the top of the Medicare heap. The group gives its name to the top-selling standalone Medicare drug plan in the country - the AARP MedicareRX Preferred - and to two of the top five. As the Dec. 31 deadline approaches for Medicare members to change plans or sign up, many seniors are choosing AARP to cut through the clutter of a confounding marketplace.
But AARP's role is not without controversy. The group makes millions from lending its name to Medicare plans. And experts who advise the elderly say that its drug offerings are not usually the bargains that many people expect. "They're not the most expensive, but they are not the cheapest either," said Tiffany Lombardi, who coordinates counseling for CARIE, an Philadelphia advocacy group for the elderly.
AARP spokesman Anthony Deluise said the group encouraged people to select the best plan for their needs, whether it is AARP-branded or not.
"I'd say we're comparable with other plans," he said, referring to cost. AARP's plans help "set the standard for quality in the industry."
Trust plays a big role in picking a Medicare plan. The array of choices overwhelms even many experts.
AARP, which lends its name to three plans run by UnitedHealthcare Services Inc., has risen to the top because of its reputation as a champion of people age 50 and over. "There clearly is a level of trust attached to the brand," said James Dougherty, health insurance practice leader for the survey firm J.D. Power & Associates.
Blue Cross plans have had similar success because of their longevity, while competitors such as Humana Inc., which runs the country's second- and third-largest Medicare drug plans, have enticed members by offering low-cost products. Humana, though, has raised premiums for 2008, betting that seniors will pay up and stay put.
Premiums among the nation's top 10 plans are rising about 21 percent in 2008, and insurers are placing more restrictions on what drugs they will pay for, according to Avalere Health, a consulting firm that tracks the Medicare business.
So it's key to shop around. The same plan that worked this year could cost a lot more in 2008.
While its cachet comes from advocacy, AARP is also an entrepreneurial juggernaut that profits from the Medicare drug benefit it helped pass. The Washington-based nonprofit crossed the $1 billion mark in revenue last year.
AARP gained the most - nearly $430 million - by lending its name to products, including Medicare prescription drug and Medicare Supplement plans. By contrast, the group's dues-paying members brought in $240 million in 2006, records show.
AARP now believes it has the largest collection of branded health-care products for people 50 and older. About 7.8 million people have flocked to AARP-branded Medicare plans, and the group projects that number will nearly double by 2014.
The group expects to collect $4.4 billion over the next seven years from deals announced this year with Aetna Inc. and UnitedHealthcare.
Also gaining is AARP's chief executive officer, William Novelli, a former public relations executive, who was paid more than $2 million in 2006, tax records show. His compensation included a onetime $1.2 million payment for completing five years of service.
With 39 million members, AARP is a potent political force that helped pass the Medicare drug benefit, which began in 2006.
But its dual role as advocate and commercial enterprise worries Judith A. Stein, executive director of the Center for Medicare Advocacy.
Stein has worked with AARP on lawsuits, and shares its outlook on many issues. But she called the Medicare law "a shameful boondoggle" for its generous support of insurers, and said she thought AARP might find it hard to change those subsidies when it was gaining so much from them.
"The privatization of Medicare in general is a very bad thing and a good thing for the companies that are making a huge profit," Stein said. "When one of those companies is benefited by the AARP brand, I think it's a conflict."
Deluise, the AARP spokesman, said the royalty income did not affect the group's advocacy. For example, he noted that some want to deal with rising Medicare doctor fees by cutting them or raising Medicare premiums. But AARP wants the money to come from insurers, he said.
Strong finances, he continued, enable AARP to better serve its members. The group is committing $500 million over the next decade to run a call center called Health Aid to answer anyone's health questions for free. A pilot is to start next year.
AARP is not shy about marketing. It spent $90 million last year to attract members, sell products, and run advocacy ads, annual records show.
Medicare used to be a quiet market where few needed to advertise. Now it can be an endurance test to decide whether to pick Medigap insurance with an added drug benefit, or a Medicare Advantage plan, which typically comes with drug coverage included.
Even many advisers say they cannot choose without help. They often work by running a client's drugs through a public program at www. medicare.gov to identify the cheapest plans. The site estimates total drug costs, including co-pays, and indicates whether key drugs are on a plan's approved list, or formulary.
But the service is not foolproof. The federal Web site can be wrong or slow to update, advisers say. So seniors need to call the plan they prefer.
Customer service is another factor. Medicare gave all three AARP-branded plans four out of five stars for service, although many observers call the government's analysis a work in progress. Many advisers praise AARP's customer service.
The Medicare business has not always gone smoothly for AARP's partner, UnitedHeathcare, which runs the group's Medicare plans and pays AARP for using its name.
In June, the company was one of seven insurers that agreed to stop marketing certain Medicare Advantage plans amid concerns that its sales force was misrepresenting those products to consumers. Those plans had no connection with AARP. Medicare allowed UnitedHealthcare to resume marketing in September after the company reeducated its sales force.
The federal government also fined UnitedHealthcare $200,000 last year for failing to give timely notice of plan changes to members, including some in AARP plans.
Deluise noted that this year UnitedHealthcare's members got their notice of changes on time.
Despite its status as the one of the nation's largest health insurers, UnitedHealthcare is no match for AARP among the Medicare crowd.
The three AARP-branded Medicare drug plans run by UnitedHealthcare cover 4.1 million people, while the two plans sold strictly under UnitedHealthcare's name have just 600,000, company spokeswoman Kathleen Harrington said.
Richard G. Stefanacci, who directs the Center for Medicare Medication Management at the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, has seen the allure of AARP firsthand.
Stefanacci, a physician who specializes in geriatrics and Medicare policy, showed his parents, who live in New Jersey, how they could save money by picking a regional drug plan. But they chose an AARP product that cost more, because they already were customers.
"It's peace of mind," Stefanacci said. "That's why AARP/United is able to get a premium."
Gene Bishop, a Philadelphia doctor who consults for the Pennsylvania Health Law Project, came to similar conclusions.
Modeling the needs of a typical patient - a diabetic with asthma and high blood pressure - Bishop ran seven common drugs through the Medicare Web site to estimate drug costs. The cheapest AARP plan was 33d, she found.
AARP "never has come up as the best financial option for consumers," said Juanita Way, Apprise coordinator at the Albert Einstein Medical Center, who has counseled more than 150 Medicare members this year. "It comes up on the list but never in the top three in terms of costs."
Way said she had never received any service complaints about AARP plans. And many people choose it anyway, because "AARP has a reputation," she said.
"But the cost can be $500 to $700 more a year. That's an important factor especially for someone who is low-income."
AARP All Over
The advocacy group not only puts its name on two of the five most popular Medicare drug plans, but also on a host of other insurance and health plans. The AARP Privileges program also gives discounts on travel-related and consumer products.
Here are some of the products that carry the AARP name:
AARP Dental Insurance.
AARP Vision Discounts.
AARP Long-Term-Care Insurance.
AARP Pharmacy Services.
AARP Credit Card Services.
AARP Motorcycle Insurance.
AARP Life Insurance Program.
SOURCE: AARP
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/health/story/228599.html
What you learn in the following article may cause you to reevaluate the integrity of AARP, an organization that is supposedly an advocate for the rights of people over the age of 50. But even more importantly I hope it causes you to question a system that allows such conflicts of interest. Health care is one of the critical issues in the upcoming presidential election, and the only candidate that is speaking out against the current system is Ron Paul (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/). Unless we wake up and realize the imminent danger to our health care freedoms, the American people may lose those freedoms forever and the corruption of the system will triumph. The time to speak out against this travesty of justice is now.
AARP is drug plan advocate, marketer
By KARL STARK
The Philadelphia Inquirer
PHILADELPHIA --
When Kim Andrews advises seniors in suburban Delaware County, Pa., on choosing a Medicare drug plan, she finds that the AARP-branded options are not typically the cheapest.
The AARP plans often cost hundreds of dollars more a year than the lowest-priced competitors, according to estimates by the government's Medicare Web site, which Andrews uses.
"They're usually not in my top 10 on a comparison basis. They may be in the top 20," Andrews said. But seniors often "go with the (AARP) name even though it can be much higher."
That kind of loyalty has pushed the AARP-branded plans to the top of the Medicare heap. The group gives its name to the top-selling standalone Medicare drug plan in the country - the AARP MedicareRX Preferred - and to two of the top five. As the Dec. 31 deadline approaches for Medicare members to change plans or sign up, many seniors are choosing AARP to cut through the clutter of a confounding marketplace.
But AARP's role is not without controversy. The group makes millions from lending its name to Medicare plans. And experts who advise the elderly say that its drug offerings are not usually the bargains that many people expect. "They're not the most expensive, but they are not the cheapest either," said Tiffany Lombardi, who coordinates counseling for CARIE, an Philadelphia advocacy group for the elderly.
AARP spokesman Anthony Deluise said the group encouraged people to select the best plan for their needs, whether it is AARP-branded or not.
"I'd say we're comparable with other plans," he said, referring to cost. AARP's plans help "set the standard for quality in the industry."
Trust plays a big role in picking a Medicare plan. The array of choices overwhelms even many experts.
AARP, which lends its name to three plans run by UnitedHealthcare Services Inc., has risen to the top because of its reputation as a champion of people age 50 and over. "There clearly is a level of trust attached to the brand," said James Dougherty, health insurance practice leader for the survey firm J.D. Power & Associates.
Blue Cross plans have had similar success because of their longevity, while competitors such as Humana Inc., which runs the country's second- and third-largest Medicare drug plans, have enticed members by offering low-cost products. Humana, though, has raised premiums for 2008, betting that seniors will pay up and stay put.
Premiums among the nation's top 10 plans are rising about 21 percent in 2008, and insurers are placing more restrictions on what drugs they will pay for, according to Avalere Health, a consulting firm that tracks the Medicare business.
So it's key to shop around. The same plan that worked this year could cost a lot more in 2008.
While its cachet comes from advocacy, AARP is also an entrepreneurial juggernaut that profits from the Medicare drug benefit it helped pass. The Washington-based nonprofit crossed the $1 billion mark in revenue last year.
AARP gained the most - nearly $430 million - by lending its name to products, including Medicare prescription drug and Medicare Supplement plans. By contrast, the group's dues-paying members brought in $240 million in 2006, records show.
AARP now believes it has the largest collection of branded health-care products for people 50 and older. About 7.8 million people have flocked to AARP-branded Medicare plans, and the group projects that number will nearly double by 2014.
The group expects to collect $4.4 billion over the next seven years from deals announced this year with Aetna Inc. and UnitedHealthcare.
Also gaining is AARP's chief executive officer, William Novelli, a former public relations executive, who was paid more than $2 million in 2006, tax records show. His compensation included a onetime $1.2 million payment for completing five years of service.
With 39 million members, AARP is a potent political force that helped pass the Medicare drug benefit, which began in 2006.
But its dual role as advocate and commercial enterprise worries Judith A. Stein, executive director of the Center for Medicare Advocacy.
Stein has worked with AARP on lawsuits, and shares its outlook on many issues. But she called the Medicare law "a shameful boondoggle" for its generous support of insurers, and said she thought AARP might find it hard to change those subsidies when it was gaining so much from them.
"The privatization of Medicare in general is a very bad thing and a good thing for the companies that are making a huge profit," Stein said. "When one of those companies is benefited by the AARP brand, I think it's a conflict."
Deluise, the AARP spokesman, said the royalty income did not affect the group's advocacy. For example, he noted that some want to deal with rising Medicare doctor fees by cutting them or raising Medicare premiums. But AARP wants the money to come from insurers, he said.
Strong finances, he continued, enable AARP to better serve its members. The group is committing $500 million over the next decade to run a call center called Health Aid to answer anyone's health questions for free. A pilot is to start next year.
AARP is not shy about marketing. It spent $90 million last year to attract members, sell products, and run advocacy ads, annual records show.
Medicare used to be a quiet market where few needed to advertise. Now it can be an endurance test to decide whether to pick Medigap insurance with an added drug benefit, or a Medicare Advantage plan, which typically comes with drug coverage included.
Even many advisers say they cannot choose without help. They often work by running a client's drugs through a public program at www. medicare.gov to identify the cheapest plans. The site estimates total drug costs, including co-pays, and indicates whether key drugs are on a plan's approved list, or formulary.
But the service is not foolproof. The federal Web site can be wrong or slow to update, advisers say. So seniors need to call the plan they prefer.
Customer service is another factor. Medicare gave all three AARP-branded plans four out of five stars for service, although many observers call the government's analysis a work in progress. Many advisers praise AARP's customer service.
The Medicare business has not always gone smoothly for AARP's partner, UnitedHeathcare, which runs the group's Medicare plans and pays AARP for using its name.
In June, the company was one of seven insurers that agreed to stop marketing certain Medicare Advantage plans amid concerns that its sales force was misrepresenting those products to consumers. Those plans had no connection with AARP. Medicare allowed UnitedHealthcare to resume marketing in September after the company reeducated its sales force.
The federal government also fined UnitedHealthcare $200,000 last year for failing to give timely notice of plan changes to members, including some in AARP plans.
Deluise noted that this year UnitedHealthcare's members got their notice of changes on time.
Despite its status as the one of the nation's largest health insurers, UnitedHealthcare is no match for AARP among the Medicare crowd.
The three AARP-branded Medicare drug plans run by UnitedHealthcare cover 4.1 million people, while the two plans sold strictly under UnitedHealthcare's name have just 600,000, company spokeswoman Kathleen Harrington said.
Richard G. Stefanacci, who directs the Center for Medicare Medication Management at the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, has seen the allure of AARP firsthand.
Stefanacci, a physician who specializes in geriatrics and Medicare policy, showed his parents, who live in New Jersey, how they could save money by picking a regional drug plan. But they chose an AARP product that cost more, because they already were customers.
"It's peace of mind," Stefanacci said. "That's why AARP/United is able to get a premium."
Gene Bishop, a Philadelphia doctor who consults for the Pennsylvania Health Law Project, came to similar conclusions.
Modeling the needs of a typical patient - a diabetic with asthma and high blood pressure - Bishop ran seven common drugs through the Medicare Web site to estimate drug costs. The cheapest AARP plan was 33d, she found.
AARP "never has come up as the best financial option for consumers," said Juanita Way, Apprise coordinator at the Albert Einstein Medical Center, who has counseled more than 150 Medicare members this year. "It comes up on the list but never in the top three in terms of costs."
Way said she had never received any service complaints about AARP plans. And many people choose it anyway, because "AARP has a reputation," she said.
"But the cost can be $500 to $700 more a year. That's an important factor especially for someone who is low-income."
AARP All Over
The advocacy group not only puts its name on two of the five most popular Medicare drug plans, but also on a host of other insurance and health plans. The AARP Privileges program also gives discounts on travel-related and consumer products.
Here are some of the products that carry the AARP name:
AARP Dental Insurance.
AARP Vision Discounts.
AARP Long-Term-Care Insurance.
AARP Pharmacy Services.
AARP Credit Card Services.
AARP Motorcycle Insurance.
AARP Life Insurance Program.
SOURCE: AARP
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/health/story/228599.html
Monday, December 24, 2007
Bouncing Back From Holiday Slips
We are now at the peak of holiday parties and celebrations, and for many people that means an onslaught of temptation to partake of the sweets, large meals, and alcoholic drinks that often result in eating and drinking things that we should not and normally would not. Statistics tell us that the average American gains about 7 pounds between Thanksgiving and Christmas. I ran across this article that discusses some tips for surviving the excesses of the holidays, especially if we have given in and over-indulged.
These suggestions are specifically geared to getting on track with weight control, but they can also be applied to those of us who have allowed junk to invade our diets that we normally would not put into our bodies. We all get our good intentions derailed from time to time, but the important thing to remember is to get right back up, regain our perspective, and carry on. Remember, the pursuit of wellness is a marathon and not a sprint.
Overcoming weight-loss setbacks
Don't let the occasional slip-up blow your weight-loss plan. Use these tips to get back on track.
It's not unusual to occasionally lose track of your weight-loss program and slip back into old patterns of unhealthy eating and minimal exercise. In fact, you can expect it to happen and have a plan in place to recover when it does. It takes time and regular reinforcement for your new healthy behaviors to become habits.
Use these tips to help you deal with occasional weight-loss setbacks:
Take charge: Accept responsibility for your own behavior. Remember that ultimately only you can help yourself lose weight.
Avoid risky situations: If all-you-can-eat buffets are just too much temptation, avoid them, at least until you feel more in control of your new eating behavior.
Buy time: If you're tempted to indulge in an old favorite food, first ask yourself if you're really hungry. Chances are, it's a craving and you may talk yourself out of it. If not, wait a few minutes and see if the desire passes. Or try distracting yourself from your urge to eat - call a friend or take the dog for a walk. If the craving still doesn't pass, have a glass of water or a piece of fruit instead.
Be gentle with yourself: Practice self-forgiveness. Don't let negative self-talk - "I've blown it now!" - get in your way of getting back on track with your eating and exercise goals. Try not to think of your slip-up as a catastrophe. Remember that mistakes happen and that each day is a chance to start anew.
Ask for and accept help: Accepting help from others isn't a sign of weakness, nor does it mean that you're failing. Asking for help is a sign of good judgment, not weakness. You need support from others to keep you on track when you have difficult days.
Work out your guilt and frustration with exercise: Take a walk or go for a swim. But keep your exercise and activity upbeat. Never use it as punishment for a lapse.
Plan your strategy: Clearly identify the problem, and then create a list of possible solutions. Try a solution. If it works, you've got a strategy for preventing another lapse. If it doesn't, try the next solution and keep trying until you find one that works.
Recommit to your goals: Review your weight-loss goals and make certain they're still realistic. Remember, healthy weight loss comes slowly - 1 or 2 pounds a week.
What if you do experience a weight-loss setback? Although relapses are disappointing, they can help you learn to keep your goals realistic, what high-risk situations to avoid, or that certain strategies don't work for you.
Above all, realize that you're not a failure. Reverting to old behaviors doesn't mean that all hope is lost. It just means that you need to recharge your motivation, recommit to your program and return to healthy behaviors.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/weight-loss/WT00021
These suggestions are specifically geared to getting on track with weight control, but they can also be applied to those of us who have allowed junk to invade our diets that we normally would not put into our bodies. We all get our good intentions derailed from time to time, but the important thing to remember is to get right back up, regain our perspective, and carry on. Remember, the pursuit of wellness is a marathon and not a sprint.
Overcoming weight-loss setbacks
Don't let the occasional slip-up blow your weight-loss plan. Use these tips to get back on track.
It's not unusual to occasionally lose track of your weight-loss program and slip back into old patterns of unhealthy eating and minimal exercise. In fact, you can expect it to happen and have a plan in place to recover when it does. It takes time and regular reinforcement for your new healthy behaviors to become habits.
Use these tips to help you deal with occasional weight-loss setbacks:
Take charge: Accept responsibility for your own behavior. Remember that ultimately only you can help yourself lose weight.
Avoid risky situations: If all-you-can-eat buffets are just too much temptation, avoid them, at least until you feel more in control of your new eating behavior.
Buy time: If you're tempted to indulge in an old favorite food, first ask yourself if you're really hungry. Chances are, it's a craving and you may talk yourself out of it. If not, wait a few minutes and see if the desire passes. Or try distracting yourself from your urge to eat - call a friend or take the dog for a walk. If the craving still doesn't pass, have a glass of water or a piece of fruit instead.
Be gentle with yourself: Practice self-forgiveness. Don't let negative self-talk - "I've blown it now!" - get in your way of getting back on track with your eating and exercise goals. Try not to think of your slip-up as a catastrophe. Remember that mistakes happen and that each day is a chance to start anew.
Ask for and accept help: Accepting help from others isn't a sign of weakness, nor does it mean that you're failing. Asking for help is a sign of good judgment, not weakness. You need support from others to keep you on track when you have difficult days.
Work out your guilt and frustration with exercise: Take a walk or go for a swim. But keep your exercise and activity upbeat. Never use it as punishment for a lapse.
Plan your strategy: Clearly identify the problem, and then create a list of possible solutions. Try a solution. If it works, you've got a strategy for preventing another lapse. If it doesn't, try the next solution and keep trying until you find one that works.
Recommit to your goals: Review your weight-loss goals and make certain they're still realistic. Remember, healthy weight loss comes slowly - 1 or 2 pounds a week.
What if you do experience a weight-loss setback? Although relapses are disappointing, they can help you learn to keep your goals realistic, what high-risk situations to avoid, or that certain strategies don't work for you.
Above all, realize that you're not a failure. Reverting to old behaviors doesn't mean that all hope is lost. It just means that you need to recharge your motivation, recommit to your program and return to healthy behaviors.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/weight-loss/WT00021
Friday, December 21, 2007
Toxic Plastic: Bisphenol A
Despite the denial of the FDA and plastics manufacturers, evidence is mounting as to the dangers of certain types of plastics that contain a chemical called bisphenol A. It is found in many products including beverage and food containers, and has been the subject of much debate as of late. Bisphenol A mimics hormones that occur naturally in the body, and studies have linked it to reproductive dysfunction in both male and female laboratory animals, including miscarriage, cancers, and infertility.
This no small problem. Recent research indicates that 93% of people tested in the US had this chemical present in their urine. The food / beverage and plastics industries are, as you might expect, opposed to any regulation of bisphenol A, due to the huge financial implications of rocking the boat regarding the use of the chemical.
Of particular concern is the manufacture of baby bottles and formula cans using this substance. Some kids are exposed to bisphenol A in their formula and in the bottle it is served in. Perhaps the actions discussed in the following article, taken by a major Canadian retailer, will help to raise more awareness about this important health issue.
Canadian retail chain pulls plastic water bottles
Plastic containers taken off shelves over chemical's health concerns
updated 9:38 a.m. CT, Mon., Dec. 10, 2007
TORONTO - Canada's largest outdoor-goods chain has pulled water bottles and food containers made of polycarbonate plastic from its shelves over worries about the chemical bisphenol A, which has been linked to cancer and reproductive problems in animals.
Vancouver-based Mountain Equipment Co-op became the first major Canadian retailer to stop selling products that contain bisphenol A over fears the chemical can leach from plastic food and water containers.
"Inconclusive science and regulatory uncertainty presently surrounds bisphenol-A (BPA)," the company said in a statement
"For these reasons, MEC has stopped selling polycarbonate water bottles and food containers until guidance is provided by the Government of Canada on the health risks posed by BPA."
The Canadian co-operative joins U.S.-based Patagonia in dropping the products because of health concerns.
The chemical, which can mimic the effects of the hormone estrogen in cells, has been surrounded by controversy. Some North American researchers and environmentalists have shown it can cause several types of cancer as well as developmental, neural, behavioral and reproductive harm in animals.
Industry says the products are not dangerous, citing studies from government agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that food and beverage containers manufactured from polycarbonate do not pose a health risk to humans.
"Rarely has a chemical been the subject of such intense scientific testing and scrutiny, and still, important agencies across the globe agree that there is no danger posed to humans from polycarbonate bottles," said Tom Cummins, spokesman for Nalgene and Nunc Brand Products, which manufacturers the popular Nalgene polycarbonate water bottles.
Besides hard-plastic water bottles, bisphenol A is also used in some baby bottles and the linings of some food cans, including most major brands of infant formula, according to a study co-released this week by Environmental Defence Canada and the Washington-based Environmental Working Group.
"We have study after study showing that this chemical is toxic,... and there are safe and available alternatives that are affordable," said Aaron Freeman, policy director of Environmental Defence Canada.
Canada's health department declined to comment before it releases preliminary results of a review of the chemical's effects next spring.
"We are looking at as much research as we can to make a very science-based assessment," said Joey Rathwell, a spokeswoman for Health Canada.
Norway and the European Union are also reviewing the product. Japanese manufacturers decided voluntarily to stop making products using polycarbonate plastic five to six years ago.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22183034/
(c) Reuters 2007.
This no small problem. Recent research indicates that 93% of people tested in the US had this chemical present in their urine. The food / beverage and plastics industries are, as you might expect, opposed to any regulation of bisphenol A, due to the huge financial implications of rocking the boat regarding the use of the chemical.
Of particular concern is the manufacture of baby bottles and formula cans using this substance. Some kids are exposed to bisphenol A in their formula and in the bottle it is served in. Perhaps the actions discussed in the following article, taken by a major Canadian retailer, will help to raise more awareness about this important health issue.
Canadian retail chain pulls plastic water bottles
Plastic containers taken off shelves over chemical's health concerns
updated 9:38 a.m. CT, Mon., Dec. 10, 2007
TORONTO - Canada's largest outdoor-goods chain has pulled water bottles and food containers made of polycarbonate plastic from its shelves over worries about the chemical bisphenol A, which has been linked to cancer and reproductive problems in animals.
Vancouver-based Mountain Equipment Co-op became the first major Canadian retailer to stop selling products that contain bisphenol A over fears the chemical can leach from plastic food and water containers.
"Inconclusive science and regulatory uncertainty presently surrounds bisphenol-A (BPA)," the company said in a statement
"For these reasons, MEC has stopped selling polycarbonate water bottles and food containers until guidance is provided by the Government of Canada on the health risks posed by BPA."
The Canadian co-operative joins U.S.-based Patagonia in dropping the products because of health concerns.
The chemical, which can mimic the effects of the hormone estrogen in cells, has been surrounded by controversy. Some North American researchers and environmentalists have shown it can cause several types of cancer as well as developmental, neural, behavioral and reproductive harm in animals.
Industry says the products are not dangerous, citing studies from government agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that food and beverage containers manufactured from polycarbonate do not pose a health risk to humans.
"Rarely has a chemical been the subject of such intense scientific testing and scrutiny, and still, important agencies across the globe agree that there is no danger posed to humans from polycarbonate bottles," said Tom Cummins, spokesman for Nalgene and Nunc Brand Products, which manufacturers the popular Nalgene polycarbonate water bottles.
Besides hard-plastic water bottles, bisphenol A is also used in some baby bottles and the linings of some food cans, including most major brands of infant formula, according to a study co-released this week by Environmental Defence Canada and the Washington-based Environmental Working Group.
"We have study after study showing that this chemical is toxic,... and there are safe and available alternatives that are affordable," said Aaron Freeman, policy director of Environmental Defence Canada.
Canada's health department declined to comment before it releases preliminary results of a review of the chemical's effects next spring.
"We are looking at as much research as we can to make a very science-based assessment," said Joey Rathwell, a spokeswoman for Health Canada.
Norway and the European Union are also reviewing the product. Japanese manufacturers decided voluntarily to stop making products using polycarbonate plastic five to six years ago.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22183034/
(c) Reuters 2007.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Walking for Life
When it comes to getting active and changing sedentary habits, many folks overlook the simple joys and benefits of walking. If you are considering a New Years resolution to pursue wellness by getting more exercise, walking may be just the ticket for you to get started. Almost anyone can do it. It does not take a lot of expensive equipment (just a good quality pair of shoes). You can start slowly and consistently add to your workout. If you stick with it you will lose weight and lower your risk for all types of disease.
Walking will also help bolster your confidence that you can successfully take proactive steps to change the way you live, and it will help spur you on to making additional lifestyle changes. Walk outdoors if you can, as the fresh air and sunshine will bring added benefits. However, if you live in an area with harsh winters or prefer indoor walking, many communities have walking tracks available at local high schools or colleges. The important thing is that you get up and get moving!
Walking Packs Huge Health Punch, Study Confirms
Brisk Walk Every Day May Ward Off Metabolic Syndrome, Diabetes
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - A brisk 30-minute walk 6 days a week is enough to trim waistlines and cut the risk of metabolic syndrome -- an increasingly common condition that is linked to obesity and a sedentary lifestyle, a new study indicates.
"Our study shows that you'll benefit even if you don't make any dietary changes," study leader Johanna L. Johnson, a clinical researcher at Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, said in a statement.
It's estimated that about one quarter of all U.S. adults have metabolic syndrome -- a cluster of risk factors that raise the odds of developing heart disease, diabetes and stroke. To be diagnosed with metabolic syndrome, a person must have at least three of these five risk factors -- a large waistline, high blood pressure, high levels of harmful triglycerides, low levels of "good" HDL cholesterol, and high blood sugar -- and according to many studies, a growing number of people have these problems.
The new findings stem from the STRRIDE study -- an acronym for Studies of a Targeted Risk Reduction Intervention through Defined Exercise -- in which investigators examined the effects of varying amounts and intensity of exercise on 171 middle-aged, overweight men and women.
Before exercising regularly, 41 percent of the study subjects met the criteria for metabolic syndrome. At the end of the 8-month exercise program, only 27 percent did.
"That's a significant decline in prevalence," said Johnson. "It's also encouraging news for sedentary, middle-aged adults who want to improve their health. It means they don't have to go out running 4 or 5 days a week; they can get significant health benefits by simply walking around the neighborhood after dinner every night."
The results of the STRRIDE study, which was funded by the National Institutes of Health, appear in the American Journal of Cardiology this month.
People in the study who exercised the least - walking 30 minutes 6 days a week or the equivalent of about 11 miles per week -- gained significant benefit, while those who exercised the most, jogging about 17 miles per week, gained slightly more benefit in terms of lowered metabolic syndrome scores.
People who did a short period of very vigorous exercise didn't improve their metabolic syndrome scores as much as those who performed less intense exercise for a longer period, the researchers found.
This suggests, they say, that there's more value in doing moderate intensity exercise every day rather than more intense activity just a few days a week.
All of the exercisers lost inches around their waistline over the 8-month study period, whereas the inactive control group gained an average of about one pound and a half-inch around the waist. "That may not sound like much, but that's just 6 months. Over a decade, that's an additional 20 pounds and 10 inches at the belt line," noted Duke cardiologist Dr. William E. Kraus, the study's principal investigator.
"The results of our study," he added, "underscore what we have known for a long time. Some exercise is better than none, more exercise is generally better than less, and no exercise can be disastrous."
SOURCE: American Journal of Cardiology, December 15, 2007.
Copyright 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4016628
Walking will also help bolster your confidence that you can successfully take proactive steps to change the way you live, and it will help spur you on to making additional lifestyle changes. Walk outdoors if you can, as the fresh air and sunshine will bring added benefits. However, if you live in an area with harsh winters or prefer indoor walking, many communities have walking tracks available at local high schools or colleges. The important thing is that you get up and get moving!
Walking Packs Huge Health Punch, Study Confirms
Brisk Walk Every Day May Ward Off Metabolic Syndrome, Diabetes
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - A brisk 30-minute walk 6 days a week is enough to trim waistlines and cut the risk of metabolic syndrome -- an increasingly common condition that is linked to obesity and a sedentary lifestyle, a new study indicates.
"Our study shows that you'll benefit even if you don't make any dietary changes," study leader Johanna L. Johnson, a clinical researcher at Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, said in a statement.
It's estimated that about one quarter of all U.S. adults have metabolic syndrome -- a cluster of risk factors that raise the odds of developing heart disease, diabetes and stroke. To be diagnosed with metabolic syndrome, a person must have at least three of these five risk factors -- a large waistline, high blood pressure, high levels of harmful triglycerides, low levels of "good" HDL cholesterol, and high blood sugar -- and according to many studies, a growing number of people have these problems.
The new findings stem from the STRRIDE study -- an acronym for Studies of a Targeted Risk Reduction Intervention through Defined Exercise -- in which investigators examined the effects of varying amounts and intensity of exercise on 171 middle-aged, overweight men and women.
Before exercising regularly, 41 percent of the study subjects met the criteria for metabolic syndrome. At the end of the 8-month exercise program, only 27 percent did.
"That's a significant decline in prevalence," said Johnson. "It's also encouraging news for sedentary, middle-aged adults who want to improve their health. It means they don't have to go out running 4 or 5 days a week; they can get significant health benefits by simply walking around the neighborhood after dinner every night."
The results of the STRRIDE study, which was funded by the National Institutes of Health, appear in the American Journal of Cardiology this month.
People in the study who exercised the least - walking 30 minutes 6 days a week or the equivalent of about 11 miles per week -- gained significant benefit, while those who exercised the most, jogging about 17 miles per week, gained slightly more benefit in terms of lowered metabolic syndrome scores.
People who did a short period of very vigorous exercise didn't improve their metabolic syndrome scores as much as those who performed less intense exercise for a longer period, the researchers found.
This suggests, they say, that there's more value in doing moderate intensity exercise every day rather than more intense activity just a few days a week.
All of the exercisers lost inches around their waistline over the 8-month study period, whereas the inactive control group gained an average of about one pound and a half-inch around the waist. "That may not sound like much, but that's just 6 months. Over a decade, that's an additional 20 pounds and 10 inches at the belt line," noted Duke cardiologist Dr. William E. Kraus, the study's principal investigator.
"The results of our study," he added, "underscore what we have known for a long time. Some exercise is better than none, more exercise is generally better than less, and no exercise can be disastrous."
SOURCE: American Journal of Cardiology, December 15, 2007.
Copyright 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4016628
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Ron Paul Update: Health Care Freedom at Stake
Presidential candidate Ron Paul is hanging tough in his battle against the established political system. He is the only one in the field that has the vision and gumption to take on issues involving our fleeting health care freedoms. As much as the press, Republicans, and Democrats would like him to just go away, he is continuing to gather support, both philosophically and financially.
The tyrannical behaviors of the FDA and other government agencies towards our freedom to choose natural health care over the dangers of conventional medicine has reached a climactic point. Health care freedom is one of the most critical issues of this election, as major policy changes such as Codex, which would severely limit natural health care options, are looming on the horizon. If not vetoed by our government, the US will be locked into Codex starting January 1, 2009. Without the action of politicians like Ron Paul and other like-minded Americans, many wellness options that we now have will be declared illegal, and our right to exercise them may be lost forever.
NewsTarget.com printable article
Originally published December 17 2007
Health Freedom Candidate Ron Paul Raises $6 Million in Record-Setting Online Boston Tea Party
by Mike Adams
(NewsTarget) Rep. Ron Paul, the only 2008 presidential candidate who supports honest health freedom reforms and the ending of Big Pharma's monopoly over medical free speech, raised more than $6 million in yesterday's record-breaking online "Boston Tea Party" event. Nearly 25,000 of the donors were new donors, indicating that Ron Paul's support base continues to rapidly expand, reaching new people who resonate with the message of genuine freedom for the American people.
Registered as a Republican, Ron Paul is actually a Libertarian who strongly disagrees with the current Republican administration. Paul is against the war in Iraq, against the Federal Reserve running the nation's money supply, and against the United States surrendering its sovereignty to outside authorities such as the World Trade Organization. Most importantly for NewsTarget readers, Paul is the primary Congressional sponsor of the "Health Freedom Protection Act" that seeks to end the FDA's censorship of nutritional supplements, granting the American public full access to scientifically accurate information about the benefits of herbs, superfoods and nutritional supplements.
Why the FDA censors the truth about healing foods and supplements
Current FDA regulations do not allow nutritional supplement manufacturers to make any true statements about the health benefits of their products. Companies that sell vitamin C, for example, cannot claim vitamin C cures scurvy without being threatened, raided at gunpoint and having their inventory confiscated by the Food and Drug Administration. Also notable: Cherry growers and cherry product manufacturers have been threatened and intimidated by the FDA over simply linking to scientific articles published in peer-reviewed medical journals which describe the health benefits of natural phytochemicals found in cherries.
The FDA's campaign of censorship and intimidation against nutritional supplement companies has been called "a campaign of terrorism" against U.S. companies, and even while over 100,000 Americans are killed each year by pharmaceuticals -- the very people who could likely be saved by safe, natural and effective remedies that work even better than prescription drugs -- the FDA continues to protect the financial interest of Big Pharma by censoring all free speech from food or supplement companies. The FDA, it turns out, simply wants to keep the American people enslaved to Big Pharma and ignorant of their natural health options.
If elected, Ron Paul would introduce desperately-needed reforms that would help restore genuine health freedoms to the American people. This could dramatically improve the health of Americans, providing them with safer, more natural and far more affordable options for preventing cancer, lowering cholesterol, restoring healthy blood sugar levels, beating heart disease and enhancing their health and productivity through the use of honestly-labeled natural health products.
No other candidate in the running supports health freedom. Even both Democratic candidates (Clinton and Obama) essentially support the status quo in health care today. And the Republicans? They seem closely allied with Big Pharma and have no apparent reason to offer reforms that would disturb Big Pharma's monopoly over medicine in America.
Challenging the status quo
This is precisely what makes Ron Paul the exception: He's willing to shake up the establishment and end the FDA's campaign of tyranny and oppression against the American people. At the same time, he's looking to dismantle the IRS, restore honesty to the U.S. money supply (requiring that the currency be backed by gold) and end our illegal war on Iraq and Afghanistan. While Paul may have other positions that aren't much liked by progressive thinkers (he's not yet well informed on global warming, for example), he's probably the only truly honest, freedom-supporting candidate running for President today.
This is the guy that the mainstream media (MSM) is trying to shut out. They don't want Paul in the debates because he makes all the other candidates look like liars (which, of course, they are). Paul is willing to tell the truth, and he's willing to shake up the establishment. In an honest voting system that wasn't engineered to favor the two-party system, Paul would no doubt be the victor. Such voting systems include Instant Runoff Voting where voters choose their first, second and third choice, allowing them to vote for who they really want to support without fearing they might "waste" their vote on a candidate who doesn't have a real shot at winning.
Both the Democratic and Republican parties hate the idea of an Instant Runoff Vote because it would allow independent-minded candidates to threaten their stranglehold over U.S. elections. Click here to learn more about Instant-Runoff Voting at Wikipedia. You can also learn more at http://www.instantrunoff.com/
Ron Paul needs your continued help. I donated another $100 last night as part of the Boston Tea Party event. You can donate today at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
And you want to know the most interesting part of all this? Ron Paul is a doctor! He was actually trained as a physician, and yet unlike most other physicians, he believes in genuine freedom for patients. Paul believes that patients should have open access to scientifically accurate information about the usefulness of natural remedies and nutritional supplements. This just goes to prove that not all doctors are idiots!
In fact, as I've stated in every article I've written that's critical of doctors, many of the strongest advocates for health freedom are, in fact, doctors. While probably 98% of doctors remains nutritionally illiterate and hopelessly brainwashed by Big Pharma into believing that drugs are the only answer to disease, there are a few outstanding, brilliant doctors who are interested in promoting what really works: Superfoods, disease prevention, high-grade nutritional supplements and natural healing modalities.
If you believe in freedom and you want to support a candidate that will actually work to restore it, Ron Paul is the only sensible choice for the next U.S. President. Everybody else will only defend the current system with minor tweaks or reforms.
http://www.newstarget.com/022399.html
The tyrannical behaviors of the FDA and other government agencies towards our freedom to choose natural health care over the dangers of conventional medicine has reached a climactic point. Health care freedom is one of the most critical issues of this election, as major policy changes such as Codex, which would severely limit natural health care options, are looming on the horizon. If not vetoed by our government, the US will be locked into Codex starting January 1, 2009. Without the action of politicians like Ron Paul and other like-minded Americans, many wellness options that we now have will be declared illegal, and our right to exercise them may be lost forever.
NewsTarget.com printable article
Originally published December 17 2007
Health Freedom Candidate Ron Paul Raises $6 Million in Record-Setting Online Boston Tea Party
by Mike Adams
(NewsTarget) Rep. Ron Paul, the only 2008 presidential candidate who supports honest health freedom reforms and the ending of Big Pharma's monopoly over medical free speech, raised more than $6 million in yesterday's record-breaking online "Boston Tea Party" event. Nearly 25,000 of the donors were new donors, indicating that Ron Paul's support base continues to rapidly expand, reaching new people who resonate with the message of genuine freedom for the American people.
Registered as a Republican, Ron Paul is actually a Libertarian who strongly disagrees with the current Republican administration. Paul is against the war in Iraq, against the Federal Reserve running the nation's money supply, and against the United States surrendering its sovereignty to outside authorities such as the World Trade Organization. Most importantly for NewsTarget readers, Paul is the primary Congressional sponsor of the "Health Freedom Protection Act" that seeks to end the FDA's censorship of nutritional supplements, granting the American public full access to scientifically accurate information about the benefits of herbs, superfoods and nutritional supplements.
Why the FDA censors the truth about healing foods and supplements
Current FDA regulations do not allow nutritional supplement manufacturers to make any true statements about the health benefits of their products. Companies that sell vitamin C, for example, cannot claim vitamin C cures scurvy without being threatened, raided at gunpoint and having their inventory confiscated by the Food and Drug Administration. Also notable: Cherry growers and cherry product manufacturers have been threatened and intimidated by the FDA over simply linking to scientific articles published in peer-reviewed medical journals which describe the health benefits of natural phytochemicals found in cherries.
The FDA's campaign of censorship and intimidation against nutritional supplement companies has been called "a campaign of terrorism" against U.S. companies, and even while over 100,000 Americans are killed each year by pharmaceuticals -- the very people who could likely be saved by safe, natural and effective remedies that work even better than prescription drugs -- the FDA continues to protect the financial interest of Big Pharma by censoring all free speech from food or supplement companies. The FDA, it turns out, simply wants to keep the American people enslaved to Big Pharma and ignorant of their natural health options.
If elected, Ron Paul would introduce desperately-needed reforms that would help restore genuine health freedoms to the American people. This could dramatically improve the health of Americans, providing them with safer, more natural and far more affordable options for preventing cancer, lowering cholesterol, restoring healthy blood sugar levels, beating heart disease and enhancing their health and productivity through the use of honestly-labeled natural health products.
No other candidate in the running supports health freedom. Even both Democratic candidates (Clinton and Obama) essentially support the status quo in health care today. And the Republicans? They seem closely allied with Big Pharma and have no apparent reason to offer reforms that would disturb Big Pharma's monopoly over medicine in America.
Challenging the status quo
This is precisely what makes Ron Paul the exception: He's willing to shake up the establishment and end the FDA's campaign of tyranny and oppression against the American people. At the same time, he's looking to dismantle the IRS, restore honesty to the U.S. money supply (requiring that the currency be backed by gold) and end our illegal war on Iraq and Afghanistan. While Paul may have other positions that aren't much liked by progressive thinkers (he's not yet well informed on global warming, for example), he's probably the only truly honest, freedom-supporting candidate running for President today.
This is the guy that the mainstream media (MSM) is trying to shut out. They don't want Paul in the debates because he makes all the other candidates look like liars (which, of course, they are). Paul is willing to tell the truth, and he's willing to shake up the establishment. In an honest voting system that wasn't engineered to favor the two-party system, Paul would no doubt be the victor. Such voting systems include Instant Runoff Voting where voters choose their first, second and third choice, allowing them to vote for who they really want to support without fearing they might "waste" their vote on a candidate who doesn't have a real shot at winning.
Both the Democratic and Republican parties hate the idea of an Instant Runoff Vote because it would allow independent-minded candidates to threaten their stranglehold over U.S. elections. Click here to learn more about Instant-Runoff Voting at Wikipedia. You can also learn more at http://www.instantrunoff.com/
Ron Paul needs your continued help. I donated another $100 last night as part of the Boston Tea Party event. You can donate today at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
And you want to know the most interesting part of all this? Ron Paul is a doctor! He was actually trained as a physician, and yet unlike most other physicians, he believes in genuine freedom for patients. Paul believes that patients should have open access to scientifically accurate information about the usefulness of natural remedies and nutritional supplements. This just goes to prove that not all doctors are idiots!
In fact, as I've stated in every article I've written that's critical of doctors, many of the strongest advocates for health freedom are, in fact, doctors. While probably 98% of doctors remains nutritionally illiterate and hopelessly brainwashed by Big Pharma into believing that drugs are the only answer to disease, there are a few outstanding, brilliant doctors who are interested in promoting what really works: Superfoods, disease prevention, high-grade nutritional supplements and natural healing modalities.
If you believe in freedom and you want to support a candidate that will actually work to restore it, Ron Paul is the only sensible choice for the next U.S. President. Everybody else will only defend the current system with minor tweaks or reforms.
http://www.newstarget.com/022399.html
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Toxic Cosmetics: Minnesota Cracks Down on Mercury
Personal care products are very poorly regulated in the United States, and manufacturers are not required to give a thorough or accurate account of the ingredients in their products. Carcinogens and other dangerous substances, including mercury, are found in many make up and skin care products, and the FDA consistently turns a blind eye towards the situation.
Minnesotas new regulations, which become law the first of the year, are stricter than any limitations put on mercury by the feds. Hats off to the lawmakers that sponsored this legislation. However, there is still much work to be done in order to make such products safer. The number of chemicals that one can be exposed to in most commercial cosmetics seems endless, and most people use from 7 to 13 personal care products every day. The thought of women (and men) applying these to their skin on a daily basis is a frightening prospect and one that is likely causing many health concerns.
Mercury in Mascara? Minn. Law Bans It
By MARTIGA LOHN Associated Press
ST. PAUL, Minn. - The quest for thicker lashes and defined eyes should get safer in Minnesota on Jan. 1, when a state law banning mercury from mascara, eye liners and skin-lightening creams takes effect.
Minnesota apparently is the first state in the nation to ban intentionally added mercury in cosmetics, giving it a tougher standard than the federal government.
Retailers who knowingly sell mercury-containing cosmetics in Minnesota could face fines of as much as $700. Penalties could reach $10,000 for manufacturers who fail to disclose mercury on product labels, according to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
"Mercury does cause neurological damage to people even in tiny quantities," said Sen. John Marty, the Democrat from Roseville who sponsored the ban. "Every source of mercury adds to it. We wanted to make sure it wasn't here."
Most makeup manufacturers have phased out the use of mercury, but it's still added legally to some eye products as a preservative and germ-killer, said John Bailey, chief scientist with the Personal Care Products Council in Washington. That group doesn't track mercury in beauty products and favors a national approach to regulating cosmetics, instead of laws that vary from state to state.
Federal law allows eye products to contain up to 65 parts per million of mercury. The exposure a person would get from a product used in small quantities around the eyes would not cause a problem, Bailey said.
"It's added at very low levels, and for good reason," he said.
No other state has specifically gone after mercury in cosmetics, said Stacy Malkan with the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics in Berkeley, Calif. Connecticut, Rhode Island and Louisiana ban products containing more than low levels of mercury, with some exceptions. New York and Illinois prohibit consumer products with mercury, such as figurines, toys and jewelry.
"Personal care products contain many problematic chemicals," Malkan said. "Many ingredients aren't listed on the labels."
Minnesota's cosmetics provision is part of a larger ban targeting better-known sources of mercury, such as thermostats, barometers, industrial switches and medical devices. The law also covers toiletries, fragrances and over-the-counter drugs such as eye drops, nasal sprays, hemorrhoid treatments and antiseptics.
State pollution regulators said they don't know how many beauty products containing mercury are sold in Minnesota.
The new law is intended as a warning to cosmetics manufacturers not to use mercury, said John Gilkeson, with the state Pollution Control Agency's toxics reduction program. Enforcement will happen mainly when consumers complain.
Using eye makeup with mercury is unlikely to cause immediate health problems, but mercury accumulates in the body, so consumers should avoid exposure whenever possible, said Carl Herbrandson, a toxicologist with the state Health Department.
"Mercury is bad, basically in all forms that get into the body," Herbrandson said.
Mercury can retard brain development in children and fetuses, who are most vulnerable to the metal's toxic effects. But it can also cause neurological symptoms in adults.
Mercury fumes can collect inside a jar of skin cream or a tube of mascara, and a person could inhale them when the container is opened, Herbrandson said.
Imported skin-lightening creams and soaps with high levels of mercury have been found in other states; they are illegal under federal law. Herbrandson said skin products with mercury are more dangerous than mercury-containing eye makeup because people apply larger quantities to their bodies.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/12/14/ap4443709.html
Minnesotas new regulations, which become law the first of the year, are stricter than any limitations put on mercury by the feds. Hats off to the lawmakers that sponsored this legislation. However, there is still much work to be done in order to make such products safer. The number of chemicals that one can be exposed to in most commercial cosmetics seems endless, and most people use from 7 to 13 personal care products every day. The thought of women (and men) applying these to their skin on a daily basis is a frightening prospect and one that is likely causing many health concerns.
Mercury in Mascara? Minn. Law Bans It
By MARTIGA LOHN Associated Press
ST. PAUL, Minn. - The quest for thicker lashes and defined eyes should get safer in Minnesota on Jan. 1, when a state law banning mercury from mascara, eye liners and skin-lightening creams takes effect.
Minnesota apparently is the first state in the nation to ban intentionally added mercury in cosmetics, giving it a tougher standard than the federal government.
Retailers who knowingly sell mercury-containing cosmetics in Minnesota could face fines of as much as $700. Penalties could reach $10,000 for manufacturers who fail to disclose mercury on product labels, according to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
"Mercury does cause neurological damage to people even in tiny quantities," said Sen. John Marty, the Democrat from Roseville who sponsored the ban. "Every source of mercury adds to it. We wanted to make sure it wasn't here."
Most makeup manufacturers have phased out the use of mercury, but it's still added legally to some eye products as a preservative and germ-killer, said John Bailey, chief scientist with the Personal Care Products Council in Washington. That group doesn't track mercury in beauty products and favors a national approach to regulating cosmetics, instead of laws that vary from state to state.
Federal law allows eye products to contain up to 65 parts per million of mercury. The exposure a person would get from a product used in small quantities around the eyes would not cause a problem, Bailey said.
"It's added at very low levels, and for good reason," he said.
No other state has specifically gone after mercury in cosmetics, said Stacy Malkan with the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics in Berkeley, Calif. Connecticut, Rhode Island and Louisiana ban products containing more than low levels of mercury, with some exceptions. New York and Illinois prohibit consumer products with mercury, such as figurines, toys and jewelry.
"Personal care products contain many problematic chemicals," Malkan said. "Many ingredients aren't listed on the labels."
Minnesota's cosmetics provision is part of a larger ban targeting better-known sources of mercury, such as thermostats, barometers, industrial switches and medical devices. The law also covers toiletries, fragrances and over-the-counter drugs such as eye drops, nasal sprays, hemorrhoid treatments and antiseptics.
State pollution regulators said they don't know how many beauty products containing mercury are sold in Minnesota.
The new law is intended as a warning to cosmetics manufacturers not to use mercury, said John Gilkeson, with the state Pollution Control Agency's toxics reduction program. Enforcement will happen mainly when consumers complain.
Using eye makeup with mercury is unlikely to cause immediate health problems, but mercury accumulates in the body, so consumers should avoid exposure whenever possible, said Carl Herbrandson, a toxicologist with the state Health Department.
"Mercury is bad, basically in all forms that get into the body," Herbrandson said.
Mercury can retard brain development in children and fetuses, who are most vulnerable to the metal's toxic effects. But it can also cause neurological symptoms in adults.
Mercury fumes can collect inside a jar of skin cream or a tube of mascara, and a person could inhale them when the container is opened, Herbrandson said.
Imported skin-lightening creams and soaps with high levels of mercury have been found in other states; they are illegal under federal law. Herbrandson said skin products with mercury are more dangerous than mercury-containing eye makeup because people apply larger quantities to their bodies.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/12/14/ap4443709.html
Monday, December 17, 2007
More On Our Crumbling Health Care Freedoms
As a follow up to our discussion of several weeks ago about the outrageous vaccinations forced upon children in Maryland, I would like to point you towards this press release that was published by a leading national physicians association. Apparently, even some in conventional medicine are appalled by the irresponsible actions of the powers-that-be in Prince George County.
Not only was this incident an illegal violation of parental rights, but it was also very medically dangerous. The icing on the cake is the fact that one of the officials involved in this debacle chose to opt out of hepatitis B vaccines for his own children.
I applaud the willingness of AAPS to offer their help to parents involved in this situation. I hope this is a wake up call to all of us that we should never take our health care freedoms for granted. Indeed, even this week, New Jersey announced they are mandating flu shots for all children attending preschool or day care. We must continue to fight for the rights to choose what is best for the health and welfare of our own families.
AAPS
1601 N. Tucson Blvd. Suite 9Tucson, AZ 85716-3450
Phone: (800) 635-1196
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc.
A Voice for Private Physicians Since 1943
Omnia pro aegroto
CONTACT: Kathryn Serkes (202) 333 3855, kaserkes@att.net
November 16, 2007
For Immediate Release:
DOCTORS OPPOSE MARYLAND VACCINE ROUNDUP:
Expect dangerous reactions when children are treated like cattle
Washington, D.C. -- The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons today condemned the vaccine roundup executed in Prince George county Maryland this week, and promised to do everything it can to support parents who refuse to immunize their children.
This power play obliterates informed consent and parental rights, said Kathryn Serkes, director of policy for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), one of the few national physician groups that refuse corporate funding from pharmaceutical companies.
In a scenario reminiscent of cattle round-ups, the states attorney has issued summons to more than 1600 parents of children who have not provided certificates of immunization for their children. But instead of toting a cattle prod, this states attorney chooses to wield a syringe to keep the herd in line.
Parents have been told to appear in Court on Saturday, and to subject their children to on-the-spot state-mandated vaccines of up 17 vaccine doses, or face imprisonment. Parents who ignore the courts demands could face a $50 fine for every day their child is out of compliance or up to 10 days in jail.
This campaign of intimidation to brutally enforce blanket vaccine mandates by government agencies and the school district gives no consideration for the rights of the parents or the individual medical condition of the child, said Serkes.
Children should be carefully screened, medical records taken and decisions made carefully - not in an ad hoc assembly-line clinic in a county courtroom and under the brutal watch of law enforcement. This is a man-made disaster ready to waiting to detonate. Children could receive a dangerous cocktail of several vaccines without proper examinations. The procedure is reckless and subjects children to the risk of severe reactions. Physicians would not be allowed to treat children in this way, without individual histories and physical exams - or informed consent, said Jane M. Orient, M.D., AAPS Executive Director.
Money and politics may be at the center of the round of threats. The school district will lose a substantial amount of state funding if students do not comply with the vaccine mandate. Apparently the district wants that money, even if it gets it off the backs of children, said Serkes.
Mr. Ivey apparently has no problem invoking his own right to informed consent and parental control. In a radio interview on Thursday, he admitted that he has chosen to refuse the hepatitis B vaccines for his own children. It is interesting that parents have to ask the states permission by filing a form if they want to make the same decision for their children that he made for his own, said Dr. Orient.
But his galling hypocrisy clearly demonstrates that not every vaccine is right for every child.
In their efforts to help the targeted parents, AAPS is contacting as many of them as possible to educate them about their rights under Maryland law and questions to ask before deciding whether vaccination is appropriate for their child (see below). We will do our best to help the parents make an informed decision, said Serkes. Representatives will also be on hand at the courthouse on Saturday, and AAPS is working to set up a legal team to help parents who refuse the vaccinations.
AAPS will also work with the National Vaccine Information Center to make sure parents are informed on how to report any adverse reactions to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Such reporting is actually required, but even medical professionals are lax about filing the reports. Do not expect the police to do it. The States Attorney General, the manufacturers, and the people giving the shots are immune from liability if the shots hurt somebody, however.
AAPS is also acting as coordinator for the Hands Off Our Kids coalition of parents across the country who were instrumental in overturning Texas Governor Perrys executive order requiring the HPV vaccine for school girls last spring. The coalition is appealing to Gov. OMalley to intervene in the case and work with the legislature to pass a philosophical exemption provision. (The letter to the governor is posted at www.AAPSonline.org.)
All eyes are on PG County, said Serkes. It is not just a local now, and parents across the country are ready to fight.
http://www.aapsonline.org/press/nr-11-16-07.php
Not only was this incident an illegal violation of parental rights, but it was also very medically dangerous. The icing on the cake is the fact that one of the officials involved in this debacle chose to opt out of hepatitis B vaccines for his own children.
I applaud the willingness of AAPS to offer their help to parents involved in this situation. I hope this is a wake up call to all of us that we should never take our health care freedoms for granted. Indeed, even this week, New Jersey announced they are mandating flu shots for all children attending preschool or day care. We must continue to fight for the rights to choose what is best for the health and welfare of our own families.
AAPS
1601 N. Tucson Blvd. Suite 9Tucson, AZ 85716-3450
Phone: (800) 635-1196
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc.
A Voice for Private Physicians Since 1943
Omnia pro aegroto
CONTACT: Kathryn Serkes (202) 333 3855, kaserkes@att.net
November 16, 2007
For Immediate Release:
DOCTORS OPPOSE MARYLAND VACCINE ROUNDUP:
Expect dangerous reactions when children are treated like cattle
Washington, D.C. -- The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons today condemned the vaccine roundup executed in Prince George county Maryland this week, and promised to do everything it can to support parents who refuse to immunize their children.
This power play obliterates informed consent and parental rights, said Kathryn Serkes, director of policy for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), one of the few national physician groups that refuse corporate funding from pharmaceutical companies.
In a scenario reminiscent of cattle round-ups, the states attorney has issued summons to more than 1600 parents of children who have not provided certificates of immunization for their children. But instead of toting a cattle prod, this states attorney chooses to wield a syringe to keep the herd in line.
Parents have been told to appear in Court on Saturday, and to subject their children to on-the-spot state-mandated vaccines of up 17 vaccine doses, or face imprisonment. Parents who ignore the courts demands could face a $50 fine for every day their child is out of compliance or up to 10 days in jail.
This campaign of intimidation to brutally enforce blanket vaccine mandates by government agencies and the school district gives no consideration for the rights of the parents or the individual medical condition of the child, said Serkes.
Children should be carefully screened, medical records taken and decisions made carefully - not in an ad hoc assembly-line clinic in a county courtroom and under the brutal watch of law enforcement. This is a man-made disaster ready to waiting to detonate. Children could receive a dangerous cocktail of several vaccines without proper examinations. The procedure is reckless and subjects children to the risk of severe reactions. Physicians would not be allowed to treat children in this way, without individual histories and physical exams - or informed consent, said Jane M. Orient, M.D., AAPS Executive Director.
Money and politics may be at the center of the round of threats. The school district will lose a substantial amount of state funding if students do not comply with the vaccine mandate. Apparently the district wants that money, even if it gets it off the backs of children, said Serkes.
Mr. Ivey apparently has no problem invoking his own right to informed consent and parental control. In a radio interview on Thursday, he admitted that he has chosen to refuse the hepatitis B vaccines for his own children. It is interesting that parents have to ask the states permission by filing a form if they want to make the same decision for their children that he made for his own, said Dr. Orient.
But his galling hypocrisy clearly demonstrates that not every vaccine is right for every child.
In their efforts to help the targeted parents, AAPS is contacting as many of them as possible to educate them about their rights under Maryland law and questions to ask before deciding whether vaccination is appropriate for their child (see below). We will do our best to help the parents make an informed decision, said Serkes. Representatives will also be on hand at the courthouse on Saturday, and AAPS is working to set up a legal team to help parents who refuse the vaccinations.
AAPS will also work with the National Vaccine Information Center to make sure parents are informed on how to report any adverse reactions to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Such reporting is actually required, but even medical professionals are lax about filing the reports. Do not expect the police to do it. The States Attorney General, the manufacturers, and the people giving the shots are immune from liability if the shots hurt somebody, however.
AAPS is also acting as coordinator for the Hands Off Our Kids coalition of parents across the country who were instrumental in overturning Texas Governor Perrys executive order requiring the HPV vaccine for school girls last spring. The coalition is appealing to Gov. OMalley to intervene in the case and work with the legislature to pass a philosophical exemption provision. (The letter to the governor is posted at www.AAPSonline.org.)
All eyes are on PG County, said Serkes. It is not just a local now, and parents across the country are ready to fight.
http://www.aapsonline.org/press/nr-11-16-07.php
Friday, December 14, 2007
Fat Kids Become Sickly Adults
We really have no need of a scientist to prove it, but a study was released recently that indicates a clear statistical connection between obesity in kids and future heart problems. Our children are now experiencing symptoms that only a few years ago were associated with middle age, such as hypertension and high cholesterol. And childhood obesity rates are soaring, having tripled in the last 30 years. Perhaps savvy fast-food investors will spot a trend and switch some of their assets into the health care industry.
Speaking of fast food, their marketing techniques geared towards children and adolescents is one of the major factors that has fueled this health crisis involving our kids, but it is likely they will ever admit it. As of 2006, close to 25% of American high schools and almost 20% of middle schools have brand name fast food available on campus.
Another concern that adds to the childhood obesity issue is the fact that recess has all but been eliminated from most elementary and middle school curriculums. At one time, all elementary school children had at least two recesses per day. Children need this time to run and play, not to mention the added sunshine. In fact, one very good solution for depression and anxiety is---guess what? Exercise!
Parents who have broken free from the fast food culture must instill the values of wholeness and the pursuit of wellness into the next generation if we ever hope to break this tragic cycle. It is up to us to fight this battle, because the government or the medical establishment is certainly not going to be on our side. Abstinence and Just say No can apply to these culinary killers just as much as to street drugs, and kids who are raised to develop a lifestyle that leads to life and away from sickness and disease will thrive and pass those values on when they become parents. The most effective way to beat the pull of the mainstream culture in our society is to expose kids to a strong, positive example of wise choices modeled at home which includes wholesome and healthy food choices and an encouragement to go outside and just run!!
Overweight Kids At Risk as Adults
Study Finds Problems Even Among Those Who Eventually Slim Down
By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Being overweight as a child significantly increases the risk for heart disease in adulthood as early as age 25, according to a large new study that provides the most powerful evidence yet that the obesity epidemic is spawning a generation prone to serious health problems later in life.
The study, of more than 276,000 Danish children, found that those who were overweight when they were 7 to 13 years old were much more likely to develop heart disease between the ages of 25 and 71 -- even those who were just a little chubby as kids, and possibly regardless of whether they lost the weight when they grew up.
"This is incredibly important," said Jennifer L. Baker of the Institute of Preventive Medicine in Copenhagen, who led the research, being published today in the New England Journal of Medicine. "This is the first study to convincingly show that excess childhood weight is associated with heart disease in adulthood, or with any significant health problem in adulthood."
The study was published with an analysis of U.S. health statistics that projects teenage obesity will raise the nation's rate of heart disease by at least 16 percent by the year 2035, causing more than 100,000 additional cases.
"This offers a frightening glimpse of what we have in store," said David S. Ludwig of Harvard Medical School, who wrote an editorial accompanying the studies. "The epidemic of childhood obesity is not a cosmetic problem. It can have profound long-term consequences for adult illness and death."
The proportion of U.S. children who are overweight has tripled since 1976 and now totals more than 9 million. The sharp rise has already caused a jump in children developing Type 2 diabetes, which used to be known as adult-onset diabetes because it occurred almost exclusively among adults. Children are also increasingly being diagnosed with high blood pressure and cholesterol, which raised fears they will be more likely to develop heart disease -- the nation's leading cause of death.
Previous studies had produced mixed results. "Although studies have hinted there may be an association, none has been able to confirm it," Baker said. "They didn't have the power to show the association."
Baker and her colleagues analyzed information collected about the height and weight of 276,835 Danish schoolchildren between 1955 and 1960 and scoured hospital records from between 1977 and 2001 to see which of them went on to be hospitalized for heart problems as adults.
The risk increased with any amount of excess weight in childhood, the researchers found.
"Even a few extra pounds increases the risk," Baker said. "That's the very frightening message from our results."
For example, a 4-foot-1-inch boy who weighed about 61 pounds at age 7 faced a 12 percent increased risk of developing heart disease between the ages of 25 and 71, compared with a similar boy who was at the normal weight of about 52 pounds.
The greatest increased risk, however, was for the heaviest older children, the researchers found.
For example, a 5-foot-1-inch boy who weighed 121 pounds at age 13 had a 34 percent greater risk compared with a boy of the same height and age who had a normal weight of 96 1/2 pounds. The risk was 51 percent higher if the boy weighed 132 1/2 pounds.
The risk was significantly lower for those who were overweight at age 7 but not at age 13, indicating that a child who can lose excess weight while still young, and remain at a normal weight, can reduce the extra risk substantially.
"This gives us hope," Baker said. "This really suggests that if an intervention occurs during this short period of time to help a child attain and maintain a normal weight, the risk of heart disease could be reduced."
Because the researchers did not have data on the subjects' adult weight, they could not definitively determine whether the increased risk was due to the effects of being overweight when young or because overweight children are more likely to become overweight adults.
"We speculate that it's the early exposure," Baker said. "It's plausible that because these heavy children have these risk factors and are exposed to them early in life and continue to be exposed to them, that leads an increased risk in heart disease."
In the second study, Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo of the University of California at San Francisco and colleagues used federal statistics from the year 2000 and other data to project that by the time today's adolescents turn 35 in 2020, up to 37 percent of men and 44 percent of women will be obese, resulting in an additional 100,000 cases of heart disease by 2035. Bibbins-Domingo said the projections would have been even higher if the analysis had included the Danish data.
"We took a very conservative approach," she said.
Melinda Sothern, an expert on childhood obesity at Louisiana State University in New Orleans, said the findings are disturbing because they suggest not only that overweight children experience more disease and disability in childhood but also that many are also destined to be more sickly young adults.
"Overweight children are already losing their childhood. They can't do the same types of activities as healthy-weight children," she said. "Now they will lose their early adulthood as well."
Ludwig likened the childhood obesity epidemic to the threat from global warming, saying that even though hard evidence is just now emerging about the consequences of the threat, society should act more aggressively to counter the trend.
"We don't have all the data yet. But by the time all the data comes in it's going to be too late," Ludwig said. "You don't want to see the water rising on the Potomac before deciding that global warming is a problem. We need national policies to address childhood obesity, too."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/05/AR2007120502072.html
Speaking of fast food, their marketing techniques geared towards children and adolescents is one of the major factors that has fueled this health crisis involving our kids, but it is likely they will ever admit it. As of 2006, close to 25% of American high schools and almost 20% of middle schools have brand name fast food available on campus.
Another concern that adds to the childhood obesity issue is the fact that recess has all but been eliminated from most elementary and middle school curriculums. At one time, all elementary school children had at least two recesses per day. Children need this time to run and play, not to mention the added sunshine. In fact, one very good solution for depression and anxiety is---guess what? Exercise!
Parents who have broken free from the fast food culture must instill the values of wholeness and the pursuit of wellness into the next generation if we ever hope to break this tragic cycle. It is up to us to fight this battle, because the government or the medical establishment is certainly not going to be on our side. Abstinence and Just say No can apply to these culinary killers just as much as to street drugs, and kids who are raised to develop a lifestyle that leads to life and away from sickness and disease will thrive and pass those values on when they become parents. The most effective way to beat the pull of the mainstream culture in our society is to expose kids to a strong, positive example of wise choices modeled at home which includes wholesome and healthy food choices and an encouragement to go outside and just run!!
Overweight Kids At Risk as Adults
Study Finds Problems Even Among Those Who Eventually Slim Down
By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Being overweight as a child significantly increases the risk for heart disease in adulthood as early as age 25, according to a large new study that provides the most powerful evidence yet that the obesity epidemic is spawning a generation prone to serious health problems later in life.
The study, of more than 276,000 Danish children, found that those who were overweight when they were 7 to 13 years old were much more likely to develop heart disease between the ages of 25 and 71 -- even those who were just a little chubby as kids, and possibly regardless of whether they lost the weight when they grew up.
"This is incredibly important," said Jennifer L. Baker of the Institute of Preventive Medicine in Copenhagen, who led the research, being published today in the New England Journal of Medicine. "This is the first study to convincingly show that excess childhood weight is associated with heart disease in adulthood, or with any significant health problem in adulthood."
The study was published with an analysis of U.S. health statistics that projects teenage obesity will raise the nation's rate of heart disease by at least 16 percent by the year 2035, causing more than 100,000 additional cases.
"This offers a frightening glimpse of what we have in store," said David S. Ludwig of Harvard Medical School, who wrote an editorial accompanying the studies. "The epidemic of childhood obesity is not a cosmetic problem. It can have profound long-term consequences for adult illness and death."
The proportion of U.S. children who are overweight has tripled since 1976 and now totals more than 9 million. The sharp rise has already caused a jump in children developing Type 2 diabetes, which used to be known as adult-onset diabetes because it occurred almost exclusively among adults. Children are also increasingly being diagnosed with high blood pressure and cholesterol, which raised fears they will be more likely to develop heart disease -- the nation's leading cause of death.
Previous studies had produced mixed results. "Although studies have hinted there may be an association, none has been able to confirm it," Baker said. "They didn't have the power to show the association."
Baker and her colleagues analyzed information collected about the height and weight of 276,835 Danish schoolchildren between 1955 and 1960 and scoured hospital records from between 1977 and 2001 to see which of them went on to be hospitalized for heart problems as adults.
The risk increased with any amount of excess weight in childhood, the researchers found.
"Even a few extra pounds increases the risk," Baker said. "That's the very frightening message from our results."
For example, a 4-foot-1-inch boy who weighed about 61 pounds at age 7 faced a 12 percent increased risk of developing heart disease between the ages of 25 and 71, compared with a similar boy who was at the normal weight of about 52 pounds.
The greatest increased risk, however, was for the heaviest older children, the researchers found.
For example, a 5-foot-1-inch boy who weighed 121 pounds at age 13 had a 34 percent greater risk compared with a boy of the same height and age who had a normal weight of 96 1/2 pounds. The risk was 51 percent higher if the boy weighed 132 1/2 pounds.
The risk was significantly lower for those who were overweight at age 7 but not at age 13, indicating that a child who can lose excess weight while still young, and remain at a normal weight, can reduce the extra risk substantially.
"This gives us hope," Baker said. "This really suggests that if an intervention occurs during this short period of time to help a child attain and maintain a normal weight, the risk of heart disease could be reduced."
Because the researchers did not have data on the subjects' adult weight, they could not definitively determine whether the increased risk was due to the effects of being overweight when young or because overweight children are more likely to become overweight adults.
"We speculate that it's the early exposure," Baker said. "It's plausible that because these heavy children have these risk factors and are exposed to them early in life and continue to be exposed to them, that leads an increased risk in heart disease."
In the second study, Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo of the University of California at San Francisco and colleagues used federal statistics from the year 2000 and other data to project that by the time today's adolescents turn 35 in 2020, up to 37 percent of men and 44 percent of women will be obese, resulting in an additional 100,000 cases of heart disease by 2035. Bibbins-Domingo said the projections would have been even higher if the analysis had included the Danish data.
"We took a very conservative approach," she said.
Melinda Sothern, an expert on childhood obesity at Louisiana State University in New Orleans, said the findings are disturbing because they suggest not only that overweight children experience more disease and disability in childhood but also that many are also destined to be more sickly young adults.
"Overweight children are already losing their childhood. They can't do the same types of activities as healthy-weight children," she said. "Now they will lose their early adulthood as well."
Ludwig likened the childhood obesity epidemic to the threat from global warming, saying that even though hard evidence is just now emerging about the consequences of the threat, society should act more aggressively to counter the trend.
"We don't have all the data yet. But by the time all the data comes in it's going to be too late," Ludwig said. "You don't want to see the water rising on the Potomac before deciding that global warming is a problem. We need national policies to address childhood obesity, too."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/05/AR2007120502072.html
Thursday, December 13, 2007
McMarketing to Kids: Building Future Customers
There has been a lot in the news lately about the controversy over some of the marketing tactics used by McDonalds. This company has a reputation for aggressively going after the childrens market, while at the same time denying it and calling what is as if it were not. They are masters at making themselves appear as good citizens who are concerned about the health of kids, and the situation outlined below is just another flagrant example of their doublespeak.
The braintrust behind McDonalds knows that if they can get kids hooked on their products at a young age, they will have a customer for life. About 40% of the megabucks they spend on advertising every year is targeted specifically at kids. It reminds me a bit of the liquor industry, who freely admit that the reason so much advertising is directed at the college crowd is because brand loyalty to beer is typically set before the age of 21.
This story about advertising for McDonalds on report cards (although they do not consider it advertising) raised a few eyebrows even amongst people familiar with their corporate policies regarding marketing. Their public relations staff tries to make them look good by publicizing the fact that they have signed a pledge to limit advertising to kids, yet McDonalds denies that posting Ronald McDonalds smiling mug on the envelope of report cards is in violation of that pledge. Meanwhile, the obesity rates of children and adolescents continue to skyrocket…
Seminole students get McDonald's bonus on report cards
Dave Weber
Sentinel Staff Writer /OrlandoSentinel.com
December 6, 2007
SANFORD
Report cards in Seminole County elementary schools are doubling as a pitch for McDonald's restaurants, encouraging kids to get free fast food as a reward for good grades.
Officials say they are reconsidering the promotions on school report-card envelopes, which go home every few weeks with about 27,000 Seminole elementary-school children. But the re-evaluation comes only after a parent and a child-advocacy group complained that Seminole County is encouraging poor eating habits at the same time childhood obesity is a growing national concern.
"This takes in-school marketing to a new low," said Susan Linn, director of Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, a Boston-based advocacy group. "We are going to ask that McDonald's stop advertising on children's report cards."
Linn questioned why school officials would approve the promotion and whether McDonald's was sidestepping its own pledge not to advertise in elementary schools. McDonald's was one of 13 large food and beverage companies that signed a Council of Better Business Bureaus pledge that restricts advertising to kids.
The pledge does not take effect until Jan. 1, but the report-card envelopes are intended to remain in use throughout the school year, which ends in June.
Not advertisements?
A McDonald's spokesman says the company is not violating the pledge and views the report-card envelopes as support for schools, not advertisements.
"McDonald's does not advertise in the schools," William Whitman, spokesman for the Illinois-based company said in a prepared statement. "This is a local program in Seminole County, Florida, that promotes academic excellence and rewards academic achievement."
The company said it is interested in good nutrition and encourages children to make good eating choices.
McDonald's officials said Seminole's report-card promotion is unique in Florida and that the company was approached by district officials to take the spot after Pizza Hut dropped out. Seminole administrators said McDonald's covered the $1,700 cost of envelopes and printing, which they say was the district's only compensation.
Seminole schools Superintendent Bill Vogel said he did not understand all the fuss, considering Pizza Hut had a similar promotion on report-card jackets for about 10 years. Still, the district may have second thoughts before deciding in the spring whether to repeat the promotion, he said.
"Based on what has come up, we will definitely look at the whole program when it comes up for next school year," Vogel said.
McDonald's offers free Happy Meals as a reward for good grades to elementary-school students in nine Central Florida counties. While the region's "Made the Grade" program is the only such promotion in Florida, company officials could not say whether it is done in other states. They don't keep a tally of how many meals are handed out locally.
But only Seminole promotes it on the manila envelope that contains students' report cards. In other counties, students learn of the offer from announcements in school, posters at restaurants or word of mouth.
'I was appalled'
No one ever complained about the report cards, Vogel said, until a Winter Springs woman raised the issue this week.
"I was appalled when I received this," said Susan Pagan, whose daughter, fourth-grader Catherine Griffith, brought the report card home from Red Bug Elementary.
The promotion offers a free Happy Meal to any student who has all A's and B's, no bad marks in behavior, or no more than two absences. A child qualifies for free food by achieving any of those three goals.
But Pagan said it was an inappropriate reward for good grades, and she resented "being the bad guy" who had to deny her daughter the meal. Pagan said she rarely takes her daughter to fast-food restaurants and doesn't appreciate the school system encouraging it.
She said she had not noticed earlier Pizza Hut plugs on report-card sleeves.
Orange, Osceola, Lake and Volusia schools say they don't pitch fast-food restaurants on their report cards, although a couple of Lake schools have banks as sponsors for the envelopes -- a tradition that officials there said is decades old.
But some Orange schools do slip reward coupons inside report cards for kids who get good grades, district spokeswoman Kathy Marsh said. At Brookshire Elementary, for example, report cards from time to time might include a coupon for Steak 'n Shake, Aloma Bowling Centers or Ale House, she said. A coupon for free Publix ice cream as a reward for straight A's recently went home with Waterford Elementary report cards.
Promotional materials for businesses and coupon rewards go home with students at other times, too, she said.
Seminole officials say they consider the report-card promotions a "business partnership" rather than an advertisement, which might violate School Board policies that restrict advertising in county schools.
On heels of other controversy
The advertising restrictions came up again recently when Seminole approved testing the controversial new Bus Radio programming on some of its school buses. Officials say they intend to revise the policy to clarify that radio advertising on buses is OK.
Officials boast that they have more than 900 companies on board as supporters of Seminole schools. They often do promotions, such as Mullinax Ford's annual car giveaway to students for good grades and attendance.
But some School Board members said they were unaware -- and somewhat surprised -- at McDonald's report-card promotion.
"Do we receive funding for this program or why are we doing this?" School Board member Barry Gainer asked Vogel in an e-mail after Pagans complaint. "It would be easier to defend this if they had some healthy offerings."
Seminole schools have boasted about health-conscious menus in school lunchrooms. The district eliminated trans fats from most foods -- including french fries -- a year ago and is teaching health consciousness in classrooms.
McDonald's says it has improved its menu and that the free meal its stores are offering as a report-card reward is nutritious -- if kids make the right choices. Chicken nuggets, apple slices with caramel dipping sauce and low-fat milk come in at a dieter's delight -- 375 calories and 13 grams of fat.
But kids who aren't partial to apple slices also can choose the less-healthy burger, fries and soft-drink meal, another option under the deal. Calories, fat and sugar content jump considerably with those selections.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/health/orl-mcgrades0607dec06,0,7457494.story
Copyright 2007, Orlando Sentinel
The braintrust behind McDonalds knows that if they can get kids hooked on their products at a young age, they will have a customer for life. About 40% of the megabucks they spend on advertising every year is targeted specifically at kids. It reminds me a bit of the liquor industry, who freely admit that the reason so much advertising is directed at the college crowd is because brand loyalty to beer is typically set before the age of 21.
This story about advertising for McDonalds on report cards (although they do not consider it advertising) raised a few eyebrows even amongst people familiar with their corporate policies regarding marketing. Their public relations staff tries to make them look good by publicizing the fact that they have signed a pledge to limit advertising to kids, yet McDonalds denies that posting Ronald McDonalds smiling mug on the envelope of report cards is in violation of that pledge. Meanwhile, the obesity rates of children and adolescents continue to skyrocket…
Seminole students get McDonald's bonus on report cards
Dave Weber
Sentinel Staff Writer /OrlandoSentinel.com
December 6, 2007
SANFORD
Report cards in Seminole County elementary schools are doubling as a pitch for McDonald's restaurants, encouraging kids to get free fast food as a reward for good grades.
Officials say they are reconsidering the promotions on school report-card envelopes, which go home every few weeks with about 27,000 Seminole elementary-school children. But the re-evaluation comes only after a parent and a child-advocacy group complained that Seminole County is encouraging poor eating habits at the same time childhood obesity is a growing national concern.
"This takes in-school marketing to a new low," said Susan Linn, director of Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, a Boston-based advocacy group. "We are going to ask that McDonald's stop advertising on children's report cards."
Linn questioned why school officials would approve the promotion and whether McDonald's was sidestepping its own pledge not to advertise in elementary schools. McDonald's was one of 13 large food and beverage companies that signed a Council of Better Business Bureaus pledge that restricts advertising to kids.
The pledge does not take effect until Jan. 1, but the report-card envelopes are intended to remain in use throughout the school year, which ends in June.
Not advertisements?
A McDonald's spokesman says the company is not violating the pledge and views the report-card envelopes as support for schools, not advertisements.
"McDonald's does not advertise in the schools," William Whitman, spokesman for the Illinois-based company said in a prepared statement. "This is a local program in Seminole County, Florida, that promotes academic excellence and rewards academic achievement."
The company said it is interested in good nutrition and encourages children to make good eating choices.
McDonald's officials said Seminole's report-card promotion is unique in Florida and that the company was approached by district officials to take the spot after Pizza Hut dropped out. Seminole administrators said McDonald's covered the $1,700 cost of envelopes and printing, which they say was the district's only compensation.
Seminole schools Superintendent Bill Vogel said he did not understand all the fuss, considering Pizza Hut had a similar promotion on report-card jackets for about 10 years. Still, the district may have second thoughts before deciding in the spring whether to repeat the promotion, he said.
"Based on what has come up, we will definitely look at the whole program when it comes up for next school year," Vogel said.
McDonald's offers free Happy Meals as a reward for good grades to elementary-school students in nine Central Florida counties. While the region's "Made the Grade" program is the only such promotion in Florida, company officials could not say whether it is done in other states. They don't keep a tally of how many meals are handed out locally.
But only Seminole promotes it on the manila envelope that contains students' report cards. In other counties, students learn of the offer from announcements in school, posters at restaurants or word of mouth.
'I was appalled'
No one ever complained about the report cards, Vogel said, until a Winter Springs woman raised the issue this week.
"I was appalled when I received this," said Susan Pagan, whose daughter, fourth-grader Catherine Griffith, brought the report card home from Red Bug Elementary.
The promotion offers a free Happy Meal to any student who has all A's and B's, no bad marks in behavior, or no more than two absences. A child qualifies for free food by achieving any of those three goals.
But Pagan said it was an inappropriate reward for good grades, and she resented "being the bad guy" who had to deny her daughter the meal. Pagan said she rarely takes her daughter to fast-food restaurants and doesn't appreciate the school system encouraging it.
She said she had not noticed earlier Pizza Hut plugs on report-card sleeves.
Orange, Osceola, Lake and Volusia schools say they don't pitch fast-food restaurants on their report cards, although a couple of Lake schools have banks as sponsors for the envelopes -- a tradition that officials there said is decades old.
But some Orange schools do slip reward coupons inside report cards for kids who get good grades, district spokeswoman Kathy Marsh said. At Brookshire Elementary, for example, report cards from time to time might include a coupon for Steak 'n Shake, Aloma Bowling Centers or Ale House, she said. A coupon for free Publix ice cream as a reward for straight A's recently went home with Waterford Elementary report cards.
Promotional materials for businesses and coupon rewards go home with students at other times, too, she said.
Seminole officials say they consider the report-card promotions a "business partnership" rather than an advertisement, which might violate School Board policies that restrict advertising in county schools.
On heels of other controversy
The advertising restrictions came up again recently when Seminole approved testing the controversial new Bus Radio programming on some of its school buses. Officials say they intend to revise the policy to clarify that radio advertising on buses is OK.
Officials boast that they have more than 900 companies on board as supporters of Seminole schools. They often do promotions, such as Mullinax Ford's annual car giveaway to students for good grades and attendance.
But some School Board members said they were unaware -- and somewhat surprised -- at McDonald's report-card promotion.
"Do we receive funding for this program or why are we doing this?" School Board member Barry Gainer asked Vogel in an e-mail after Pagans complaint. "It would be easier to defend this if they had some healthy offerings."
Seminole schools have boasted about health-conscious menus in school lunchrooms. The district eliminated trans fats from most foods -- including french fries -- a year ago and is teaching health consciousness in classrooms.
McDonald's says it has improved its menu and that the free meal its stores are offering as a report-card reward is nutritious -- if kids make the right choices. Chicken nuggets, apple slices with caramel dipping sauce and low-fat milk come in at a dieter's delight -- 375 calories and 13 grams of fat.
But kids who aren't partial to apple slices also can choose the less-healthy burger, fries and soft-drink meal, another option under the deal. Calories, fat and sugar content jump considerably with those selections.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/health/orl-mcgrades0607dec06,0,7457494.story
Copyright 2007, Orlando Sentinel
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Ron Paul: Restoring Sanity to Health Care
If you have been following the presidential race, you have probably noticed that Health Care is turning out to be one of the pivotal issues in this contest. Folks who are consumers of conventional medicine are concerned about such issues as the cost and availability of health care, and for good reason. Anytime the government gets involved with a service, you can be sure that there will be waste and poor management galore. Health Care in America is a profit-driven enterprise, with the medical establishment, Big Pharma, and regulatory agencies such as the FDA playing a cozy game of scratch my back and I will scratch yours. As the old saying goes: Politics makes strange bedfellows.
Those of us who take a more natural, alternative stand on this issue need to be additionally alarmed about the propensity the government has to feed the golden goose of mainstream medicine and the pharmaceutical industry by seeking to eliminate options such as naturopathy, herbal and nutritional supplements, and other safe and effective methods of pursuing wellness. The American people are being railroaded by the multi-billion dollar health care industry, and the loss of freedoms in this arena is increasing at a frighteningly rapid pace.
Ron Paul has come out clearly in favor of health care reforms, and a return to a time when we were freely able to care for our medical needs, and for those of our children, as we best saw fit. Dr. Paul believes in our right to choose, and not to have dangerous policies such as forced immunizations and mandatory chemotherapy forced upon us. The US government is risking the health of its citizens by pandering to the profits of Big Medicine, and Ron is the one candidate with a clear vision that can turn back the tide in the direction of health care policies that are sane, and constitutional to boot.
Below are a couple of links that I think you will find very helpful. The first is an excellent resource for assessing the health care views of all the major presidential candidates. This interactive site allows you to do a side-by-side comparison between two or more candidates of your choice. Secondly, I have included a page on the Ron Paul website that clarifies his stance on health care in his own words. I trust this information will help you to carefully evaluate the various views on this vital issue.
http://www.health08.org/sidebyside.cfm
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/health-care/
Those of us who take a more natural, alternative stand on this issue need to be additionally alarmed about the propensity the government has to feed the golden goose of mainstream medicine and the pharmaceutical industry by seeking to eliminate options such as naturopathy, herbal and nutritional supplements, and other safe and effective methods of pursuing wellness. The American people are being railroaded by the multi-billion dollar health care industry, and the loss of freedoms in this arena is increasing at a frighteningly rapid pace.
Ron Paul has come out clearly in favor of health care reforms, and a return to a time when we were freely able to care for our medical needs, and for those of our children, as we best saw fit. Dr. Paul believes in our right to choose, and not to have dangerous policies such as forced immunizations and mandatory chemotherapy forced upon us. The US government is risking the health of its citizens by pandering to the profits of Big Medicine, and Ron is the one candidate with a clear vision that can turn back the tide in the direction of health care policies that are sane, and constitutional to boot.
Below are a couple of links that I think you will find very helpful. The first is an excellent resource for assessing the health care views of all the major presidential candidates. This interactive site allows you to do a side-by-side comparison between two or more candidates of your choice. Secondly, I have included a page on the Ron Paul website that clarifies his stance on health care in his own words. I trust this information will help you to carefully evaluate the various views on this vital issue.
http://www.health08.org/sidebyside.cfm
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/health-care/
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
The American Love Affair With Deep-Fried Foods
The Standard American Diet (SAD) has many faults, and one of them is the dangerous amounts of high fat foods on the menu. Deep-fried foods are especially popular, whether its Chicken McNuggets, french fries, or an assortment of dessert items that are high in sugar as well.
In 2006, the State Fair in Texas introduced a phenomenon called fried coke that caught the attention of the fast-food industry, and has spawned a whole new litany of deep-fried foods. (In addition to the article below, check out this link that lists some new fried foods that are the darlings of the carnival industry this year: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20466401/ ).
Just when you thought you had seen it all, they have found a way to take a product like a soft drink, unhealthy in its own right due to sugar, artificial sweeteners, and other toxic chemicals, and compound the problem by deep frying it and adding additional sugar as well! It would not be so bad if folks only indulged in a food such as this once a year at fair time, but unfortunately it is just another form of the types of foods that many Americans subsist on day in and day out. No wonder obesity is at epidemic proportions.
Put down that corndog, fried Coke is it
Fatty state fair fare
COMMENTARY
By Brian Tracey
Business Editor
MSNBC
One ritual millions of Americans love is attending their state or county fair with all of its sensory seductions: The carousel calliope music, the twinkling lights and, of course, the smells and tastes of fatty fried foods.
Well, attention funnel-cake fans and french-fry aficionados, coming to a carnival near you: Deep-fried Coke.
The gelatinous cola-infused snack won the "most creative" title at the Texas State Fair in Dallas last month. Since then, the deep-fried phenomenon has spread to North Carolina and Arizona.
"We have been getting calls from everywhere since we introduced it," said Elizabeth Martin, a spokeswoman for the North Carolina state fair, in a recent report in the Dallas Morning News. "Everyone wants to know where they can get it."
The Texas fair has long prided itself in offering foods that would make a cardiologist faint. Beginning with now ubiquitous corndog in 1942, the Lone Star State extravaganza has seen Twinkies, cookies and even pickles stuck on a stick, dipped in batter and then deep fried.
The Dallas newspaper said Fried Coke's inventor, concessionaire Abel Gonzales Jr., is a fanatical fryer. Last year he sold 20,000 fried peanut butter, jelly and banana sandwiches. Fried Coke appears to be an even bigger hit: He sold 16,000 cups in the first two weeks of the fair, which runs through next week.
And unlike Coca-Cola, Gonzales has also had more success modifying his formula. He reworked the recipe to make the dough more absorbent so it would soak up more of the cola syrup.
"They were good before, but they are even better now," Gonzales said.
Maybe he could offer discounts on angioplasties with each serving.
http://ori.msnbc.msn.com/id/15334588/
In 2006, the State Fair in Texas introduced a phenomenon called fried coke that caught the attention of the fast-food industry, and has spawned a whole new litany of deep-fried foods. (In addition to the article below, check out this link that lists some new fried foods that are the darlings of the carnival industry this year: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20466401/ ).
Just when you thought you had seen it all, they have found a way to take a product like a soft drink, unhealthy in its own right due to sugar, artificial sweeteners, and other toxic chemicals, and compound the problem by deep frying it and adding additional sugar as well! It would not be so bad if folks only indulged in a food such as this once a year at fair time, but unfortunately it is just another form of the types of foods that many Americans subsist on day in and day out. No wonder obesity is at epidemic proportions.
Put down that corndog, fried Coke is it
Fatty state fair fare
COMMENTARY
By Brian Tracey
Business Editor
MSNBC
One ritual millions of Americans love is attending their state or county fair with all of its sensory seductions: The carousel calliope music, the twinkling lights and, of course, the smells and tastes of fatty fried foods.
Well, attention funnel-cake fans and french-fry aficionados, coming to a carnival near you: Deep-fried Coke.
The gelatinous cola-infused snack won the "most creative" title at the Texas State Fair in Dallas last month. Since then, the deep-fried phenomenon has spread to North Carolina and Arizona.
"We have been getting calls from everywhere since we introduced it," said Elizabeth Martin, a spokeswoman for the North Carolina state fair, in a recent report in the Dallas Morning News. "Everyone wants to know where they can get it."
The Texas fair has long prided itself in offering foods that would make a cardiologist faint. Beginning with now ubiquitous corndog in 1942, the Lone Star State extravaganza has seen Twinkies, cookies and even pickles stuck on a stick, dipped in batter and then deep fried.
The Dallas newspaper said Fried Coke's inventor, concessionaire Abel Gonzales Jr., is a fanatical fryer. Last year he sold 20,000 fried peanut butter, jelly and banana sandwiches. Fried Coke appears to be an even bigger hit: He sold 16,000 cups in the first two weeks of the fair, which runs through next week.
And unlike Coca-Cola, Gonzales has also had more success modifying his formula. He reworked the recipe to make the dough more absorbent so it would soak up more of the cola syrup.
"They were good before, but they are even better now," Gonzales said.
Maybe he could offer discounts on angioplasties with each serving.
http://ori.msnbc.msn.com/id/15334588/
Monday, December 10, 2007
Another Senseless Shooting: Link to Psych Drugs?
The news reports were filled again last week with the tragedy of another young American male who went on a shooting rampage and senselessly took the lives of innocent victims, and ultimately his own. All the facts are not in yet, but we do know that this young man had been treated in the past for depression and ADHD. In the majority of cases, that points towards the use of SSRI anti-depressants and/or Ritalin.
Please read the accompanying article that lays out the known dangers of giving these types of drugs to young males, and the fact that other nations of the world have already banned the use of these medications in children and adolescents. What is the FDA waiting for? This kind of bureaucratic idiocy begs the question: Who is running the store? We need to bring sanity back to our health care system so that it is truly for the benefit and safety of all Americans instead of being driven by the almighty buck.
Omaha Shooter Robert Hawkins Had Been "Treated" For ADHD, Depression
Thursday, December 06, 2007 by: Mike Adams
(NewsTarget) America seems shocked that, yet again, a young male would pick up an assault rifle and murder his fellow citizens, then take his own life. This is what happened last night in Omaha, Nebraska, where the 19-year-old Hawkins killed himself and eight other people with an assault rifle. Those lacking keen observation skills are quick to blame guns for this tragedy, but others who are familiar with the history of such violent acts by young males instantly recognize a more sinister connection: A history of treatment with psychiatric drugs for depression and ADHD.
It all started in Columbine, Colorado, when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold massacred their way into the history books on April 20, 1999 by killing 12 and wounding 23 people. The mainstream media virtually glorified the event, yet utterly failed to report the connection between violence in young men and treatment with psychiatric drugs. (Both Harris and Klebold were taking antidepressant drugs.)
It's a little known fact that antidepressant drugs have never been tested on children nor approved by the FDA for use on children. It is well established in the scientific literature, however, that such drugs cause young men to think violent thoughts and commit violent acts. This is precisely why the U.K. has outright banned the prescribing of such drugs to children. Yet here in the United States -- the capitol of gun violence by kids on depression drugs -- the FDA and drug companies pretend that mind-altering drugs have no link whatsoever to behavior.
Enormous evidence linking mind-altering drugs with violent acts
In 2005, I reported on this site that Eli Lilly had full knowledge of a 1200% increase in suicide risk for takers of their Prozac drug, a popular anti-depressant SSRI medication.
In 2006, we reported the results of a study published in the Archives of General Psychiatry showing that teens taking antidepressant drugs are more likely to commit suicide (and to be "successful" at completing the act).
On September 11, 2006, I reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and violent behavior yet again. In that article, I explained, "If you're going to alter the brain chemistry of these children, you had better be prepared for the results. The result we're seeing now is mass killings. Elsewhere around the world, where children aren't doped up on all these drugs, we don't see this kind of behavior. This is what happens when you change children's brain chemistry; you get these results...
"The very next day, we published a report about the anti-depressant drug Paxil doubling the risk of violent behavior. In that article, I stated, "This finding helps explain why school shootings are almost always conducted by children who are taking antidepressants. We also know that SSRIs cause children to disconnect from reality. When you combine that with a propensity for violence, you create a dangerous recipe for school shootings and other adolescent violence.
In April of this year, I also reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and the Virginia Tech shooting. What I said in that article has urgent application right now, following the Omaha shooting:
A study published in the Public Library of Science Medicine (an open source medical journal) explored these same links in detail. The authors note that "Some regulators, such as the Canadian regulators, have also referred to risks of treatment-induced activation leading to both self-harm and harm to others" and the "United States labels for all antidepressants as of August 2004 note that 'anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, aggressiveness, impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, and mania have been reported in adult and pediatric patients being treated with antidepressants for major depressive disorder as well as for other indications, both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric'".
In other words, the link between antidepressants and violence has been known for years by the very people manufacturing, marketing or prescribing the drugs. As the author of the study mentioned above concluded, "The new issues highlighted by these cases need urgent examination jointly by jurists and psychiatrists in all countries where antidepressants are widely used.
"That was last year, well before this latest shooting. The warning signs were there, and they have been visible for a long time. Medical authorities can hardly say they are "shocked" by this violent behavior. After all, the same pattern of violence among antidepressant takers has been observed, documented and published in numerous previous cases.
Not surprised at what happened in Omaha
The people of Omaha may be surprised at what happened there yesterday, but I'm not. Why? Because the shooter, Robert Hawkins, had a history of being "treated" for both depression and ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). (Source: Associated Press)
And what is the standard American psychiatric "treatment" for these conditions? Mind-altering drugs, of course.
ADHD, for example, is treated with a drug that used to be an illegal street drug called "speed." It's an amphetamine, and recent research published in the August, 2007 issue of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry reveals that Ritalin and other ADHD drugs actually stunt the growth of children, causing their brains and bodies to be physically altered.
Depression, of course, is treated with SSRI drugs, none of which have ever been safety approved by the FDA for use on children or teens. In other words, the use of these drugs on teenagers is a grand, mind-altering medical experiment, and what we just witnessed in Omaha is one result of that experiment.
There will be more. I hate to be accurate about this grisly prediction, because I grieve for the families of those lost to pharmaceutically-induced violence, but the truth is that until we stop drugging our children with psychotropic drugs, the shootings are not going to stop.
Big Pharma is to blame for this one, not the manufacturer of the gun. That gun has a trigger, you see, and the trigger was pulled by a finger. The finger was connected via a series of nerves to a brain, and that brain was altered by psychotropic drugs. The brain wasn't functioning like a normal, healthy, well-nourished brain; it was functioning like a zoned out "zombie" brain permanently distorted by psychiatric drugs.
Sending a teenager out into the public doped up on mind-altering drugs that we KNOW are linked to violence -- and jacked up on junk foods (he worked at McDonald's) -- is a certain recipe for disaster. Big Pharma executives, drug reps and the irresponsible psychiatrists who dish these pills out to teenagers might as well have just walked right into the mall and set off a bomb themselves. These are the people ultimately responsible for the tragedy in Omaha. Hawkins may have pulled the trigger, but modern psychiatry drugged him with violence-inducing chemicals. The fact that such drugs promote violence isn't even disputed. It is printed right on the warning labels of those drugs!
And as sad as this tragedy is for all those affected by this medication-induced violence, the truly sad part is that America still hasn't learned this lesson. If you drug the children with chemicals that cause violence, you're going to see more shootings. It is as simple as that. And if you take away the guns, you will see bombs, knives or machetes used in these attacks. When disturbed young boys are doped up on psychotropic drugs that promote violence, and they're drugged by the hundreds of thousands, it's like playing a national game of Russian roulette (with apologies to Russia). Sooner or later, another kid whose mind has been altered by Ritalin, Prozac or some other drug is going to walk into yet another school or mall and start killing people. This kind of behavior is a direct product of chemical-based psychiatric "treatment."
The criminals running modern psychiatry
In fact, I predict we'll see another such shooting in the next 30 days, if not sooner. And yet, even with the increasing frequency of these events, the unholy alliance between Big Pharma and the immensely evil psychiatric industry will continue. Yet more children will be put on mind-altering drugs that stunt their growth, alter their brain chemistry, and turn them into mind-numbed massacre drones who acquire dangerous weapons and open fire in public places.
The psychiatric industry, though, thinks that yet MORE children need "treatment" with drugs for ADHD and depression. In fact, an industry press release recently claimed that only one-third of those children "suffering" from ADHD are receiving appropriate "treatment" for the condition. Of course, those are just code words for "drugging the children with high-profit pharmaceuticals." When the psychiatric authorities say "treatment," what they mean is "more drugging."
What could have healed Robert Hawkins and saved lives
So what is the solution to all this? Robert Hawkins could have been healed with a radical change in diet that supports healthy brain chemistry. His parents or caretakers should have stopped the junk food, ended the medication and put him on raw, living foods and daily superfood smoothies, fresh vegetable juices, raw nuts and seeds and other wholesome, non-processed foods. Nutrition is the single most powerful factor determining healthy moods and behavior, and virtually all young men who commit violent acts (including the vast majority of those imprisoned in the U.S. today) suffer from wild nutritional deficiencies.
Robert Hawkins could have been a healthy, stable and normal kid with the help of some real food, real nutrition and real love from a supporting family. Instead, he lived on junk food, worked at McDonalds and took medication pills as directed by his psychiatric doctor. The results speak for themselves: This recipe of processed food and mind-altering drugs created a monster, and yesterday in Omaha, that monster exploded in a rage of violence.
If we do nott learn from all this and stop drugging the children of our nation, then those innocents in Omaha will have died in vain. And I ask the question: How many more innocent Americans must pay the price for medication-induced violence?
Ask yourself one question: Why does the FDA continue to allow these dangerous drugs to be prescribed to children and teens when 1) They have never been tested on children or teens, and 2) Other countries have already banned the prescribing of these drugs to children and teens?
Story Notes: The Associated Press originally reported Hawkins age as 20 years old, but corrected it to 19 years old following a correction by local police. Hawkins was not reported to have been taking medications at the precise time of the shooting, but his caretaker, Debora Maruca-Kovac, said that "he had been treated in the past for depression and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder." We do not know exactly which drugs Hawkins had been treated with in the past, and we hope the names of those drugs will surface in future reports on this tragedy.
NewsTarget deeply regrets the loss of life witnessed in this event, and
we commit to doing our part to end these medication-induced crimes that continue to be perpetrated by Big Pharma and modern psychiatry.
http://www.newstarget.com/022330.html
Please read the accompanying article that lays out the known dangers of giving these types of drugs to young males, and the fact that other nations of the world have already banned the use of these medications in children and adolescents. What is the FDA waiting for? This kind of bureaucratic idiocy begs the question: Who is running the store? We need to bring sanity back to our health care system so that it is truly for the benefit and safety of all Americans instead of being driven by the almighty buck.
Omaha Shooter Robert Hawkins Had Been "Treated" For ADHD, Depression
Thursday, December 06, 2007 by: Mike Adams
(NewsTarget) America seems shocked that, yet again, a young male would pick up an assault rifle and murder his fellow citizens, then take his own life. This is what happened last night in Omaha, Nebraska, where the 19-year-old Hawkins killed himself and eight other people with an assault rifle. Those lacking keen observation skills are quick to blame guns for this tragedy, but others who are familiar with the history of such violent acts by young males instantly recognize a more sinister connection: A history of treatment with psychiatric drugs for depression and ADHD.
It all started in Columbine, Colorado, when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold massacred their way into the history books on April 20, 1999 by killing 12 and wounding 23 people. The mainstream media virtually glorified the event, yet utterly failed to report the connection between violence in young men and treatment with psychiatric drugs. (Both Harris and Klebold were taking antidepressant drugs.)
It's a little known fact that antidepressant drugs have never been tested on children nor approved by the FDA for use on children. It is well established in the scientific literature, however, that such drugs cause young men to think violent thoughts and commit violent acts. This is precisely why the U.K. has outright banned the prescribing of such drugs to children. Yet here in the United States -- the capitol of gun violence by kids on depression drugs -- the FDA and drug companies pretend that mind-altering drugs have no link whatsoever to behavior.
Enormous evidence linking mind-altering drugs with violent acts
In 2005, I reported on this site that Eli Lilly had full knowledge of a 1200% increase in suicide risk for takers of their Prozac drug, a popular anti-depressant SSRI medication.
In 2006, we reported the results of a study published in the Archives of General Psychiatry showing that teens taking antidepressant drugs are more likely to commit suicide (and to be "successful" at completing the act).
On September 11, 2006, I reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and violent behavior yet again. In that article, I explained, "If you're going to alter the brain chemistry of these children, you had better be prepared for the results. The result we're seeing now is mass killings. Elsewhere around the world, where children aren't doped up on all these drugs, we don't see this kind of behavior. This is what happens when you change children's brain chemistry; you get these results...
"The very next day, we published a report about the anti-depressant drug Paxil doubling the risk of violent behavior. In that article, I stated, "This finding helps explain why school shootings are almost always conducted by children who are taking antidepressants. We also know that SSRIs cause children to disconnect from reality. When you combine that with a propensity for violence, you create a dangerous recipe for school shootings and other adolescent violence.
In April of this year, I also reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and the Virginia Tech shooting. What I said in that article has urgent application right now, following the Omaha shooting:
A study published in the Public Library of Science Medicine (an open source medical journal) explored these same links in detail. The authors note that "Some regulators, such as the Canadian regulators, have also referred to risks of treatment-induced activation leading to both self-harm and harm to others" and the "United States labels for all antidepressants as of August 2004 note that 'anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, aggressiveness, impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, and mania have been reported in adult and pediatric patients being treated with antidepressants for major depressive disorder as well as for other indications, both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric'".
In other words, the link between antidepressants and violence has been known for years by the very people manufacturing, marketing or prescribing the drugs. As the author of the study mentioned above concluded, "The new issues highlighted by these cases need urgent examination jointly by jurists and psychiatrists in all countries where antidepressants are widely used.
"That was last year, well before this latest shooting. The warning signs were there, and they have been visible for a long time. Medical authorities can hardly say they are "shocked" by this violent behavior. After all, the same pattern of violence among antidepressant takers has been observed, documented and published in numerous previous cases.
Not surprised at what happened in Omaha
The people of Omaha may be surprised at what happened there yesterday, but I'm not. Why? Because the shooter, Robert Hawkins, had a history of being "treated" for both depression and ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). (Source: Associated Press)
And what is the standard American psychiatric "treatment" for these conditions? Mind-altering drugs, of course.
ADHD, for example, is treated with a drug that used to be an illegal street drug called "speed." It's an amphetamine, and recent research published in the August, 2007 issue of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry reveals that Ritalin and other ADHD drugs actually stunt the growth of children, causing their brains and bodies to be physically altered.
Depression, of course, is treated with SSRI drugs, none of which have ever been safety approved by the FDA for use on children or teens. In other words, the use of these drugs on teenagers is a grand, mind-altering medical experiment, and what we just witnessed in Omaha is one result of that experiment.
There will be more. I hate to be accurate about this grisly prediction, because I grieve for the families of those lost to pharmaceutically-induced violence, but the truth is that until we stop drugging our children with psychotropic drugs, the shootings are not going to stop.
Big Pharma is to blame for this one, not the manufacturer of the gun. That gun has a trigger, you see, and the trigger was pulled by a finger. The finger was connected via a series of nerves to a brain, and that brain was altered by psychotropic drugs. The brain wasn't functioning like a normal, healthy, well-nourished brain; it was functioning like a zoned out "zombie" brain permanently distorted by psychiatric drugs.
Sending a teenager out into the public doped up on mind-altering drugs that we KNOW are linked to violence -- and jacked up on junk foods (he worked at McDonald's) -- is a certain recipe for disaster. Big Pharma executives, drug reps and the irresponsible psychiatrists who dish these pills out to teenagers might as well have just walked right into the mall and set off a bomb themselves. These are the people ultimately responsible for the tragedy in Omaha. Hawkins may have pulled the trigger, but modern psychiatry drugged him with violence-inducing chemicals. The fact that such drugs promote violence isn't even disputed. It is printed right on the warning labels of those drugs!
And as sad as this tragedy is for all those affected by this medication-induced violence, the truly sad part is that America still hasn't learned this lesson. If you drug the children with chemicals that cause violence, you're going to see more shootings. It is as simple as that. And if you take away the guns, you will see bombs, knives or machetes used in these attacks. When disturbed young boys are doped up on psychotropic drugs that promote violence, and they're drugged by the hundreds of thousands, it's like playing a national game of Russian roulette (with apologies to Russia). Sooner or later, another kid whose mind has been altered by Ritalin, Prozac or some other drug is going to walk into yet another school or mall and start killing people. This kind of behavior is a direct product of chemical-based psychiatric "treatment."
The criminals running modern psychiatry
In fact, I predict we'll see another such shooting in the next 30 days, if not sooner. And yet, even with the increasing frequency of these events, the unholy alliance between Big Pharma and the immensely evil psychiatric industry will continue. Yet more children will be put on mind-altering drugs that stunt their growth, alter their brain chemistry, and turn them into mind-numbed massacre drones who acquire dangerous weapons and open fire in public places.
The psychiatric industry, though, thinks that yet MORE children need "treatment" with drugs for ADHD and depression. In fact, an industry press release recently claimed that only one-third of those children "suffering" from ADHD are receiving appropriate "treatment" for the condition. Of course, those are just code words for "drugging the children with high-profit pharmaceuticals." When the psychiatric authorities say "treatment," what they mean is "more drugging."
What could have healed Robert Hawkins and saved lives
So what is the solution to all this? Robert Hawkins could have been healed with a radical change in diet that supports healthy brain chemistry. His parents or caretakers should have stopped the junk food, ended the medication and put him on raw, living foods and daily superfood smoothies, fresh vegetable juices, raw nuts and seeds and other wholesome, non-processed foods. Nutrition is the single most powerful factor determining healthy moods and behavior, and virtually all young men who commit violent acts (including the vast majority of those imprisoned in the U.S. today) suffer from wild nutritional deficiencies.
Robert Hawkins could have been a healthy, stable and normal kid with the help of some real food, real nutrition and real love from a supporting family. Instead, he lived on junk food, worked at McDonalds and took medication pills as directed by his psychiatric doctor. The results speak for themselves: This recipe of processed food and mind-altering drugs created a monster, and yesterday in Omaha, that monster exploded in a rage of violence.
If we do nott learn from all this and stop drugging the children of our nation, then those innocents in Omaha will have died in vain. And I ask the question: How many more innocent Americans must pay the price for medication-induced violence?
Ask yourself one question: Why does the FDA continue to allow these dangerous drugs to be prescribed to children and teens when 1) They have never been tested on children or teens, and 2) Other countries have already banned the prescribing of these drugs to children and teens?
Story Notes: The Associated Press originally reported Hawkins age as 20 years old, but corrected it to 19 years old following a correction by local police. Hawkins was not reported to have been taking medications at the precise time of the shooting, but his caretaker, Debora Maruca-Kovac, said that "he had been treated in the past for depression and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder." We do not know exactly which drugs Hawkins had been treated with in the past, and we hope the names of those drugs will surface in future reports on this tragedy.
NewsTarget deeply regrets the loss of life witnessed in this event, and
we commit to doing our part to end these medication-induced crimes that continue to be perpetrated by Big Pharma and modern psychiatry.
http://www.newstarget.com/022330.html
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Ixempra - Newest Drug for Advanced Breast Cancer
Once again chemotherapy is being proven as very ineffective in the treatment of cancer. Suggesting that a 1.6 month response rate is something huge is hardly what most cancer patients would get very excited especially if they were told the truth about the conventional medicine meaning of response rate.
Notice the side effects of Ixempra and how many of them have to do with the digestive tract. Once the digestive tract, which is where 70-80% of the immune system is located, is compromised it becomes very difficult to bring it back into uncompromised health. Not impossible, but very difficult. And even then there will almost always be future digestive tract issues that are a result of chemotherapy.
Almost all chemotherapy is experimental medicine, meaning that the patient is being used as a guinea pig in the name of cancer research. Through these experiments patients are used to determine the type of drugs that seemingly get a response when mixed (chemo cocktails), dosage amounts (some trials have been stopped because patients died from what was discovered to be over-dosage), severity of side effects along with survival rates using different ratios of the above.
It is time that America insist that the cancer-game that we have been playing, in the name of cancer research, for the last 30 plus years be stopped. We need to take our focus off of toxic drugs that harm the entire body and instead focus on giving the body (immune system) what it needs to get well. As long as we believe the mass media marketing by the NCI and cancer treatment hospitals that poisoning the body with chemicals and then hoping for wellness is actually obtainable, this barbaric treatment will continue. It hasn't worked in the past and it will not work in the future. Remember, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Right now, cancer treatment in the U.S. is in the realm of insanity.
IXEMPRA - A NEW DRUG FOR ADVANCED BREAST CANCER
A partial response is generally defined as an incomplete shrinkage of the tumor by more than 50 percent for one month or more. As long-time readers of this newsletter will know, a partial response generally does not correlate with increased survival.
Side effects of Ixempra in this trial included the following:
Notice the side effects of Ixempra and how many of them have to do with the digestive tract. Once the digestive tract, which is where 70-80% of the immune system is located, is compromised it becomes very difficult to bring it back into uncompromised health. Not impossible, but very difficult. And even then there will almost always be future digestive tract issues that are a result of chemotherapy.
Almost all chemotherapy is experimental medicine, meaning that the patient is being used as a guinea pig in the name of cancer research. Through these experiments patients are used to determine the type of drugs that seemingly get a response when mixed (chemo cocktails), dosage amounts (some trials have been stopped because patients died from what was discovered to be over-dosage), severity of side effects along with survival rates using different ratios of the above.
It is time that America insist that the cancer-game that we have been playing, in the name of cancer research, for the last 30 plus years be stopped. We need to take our focus off of toxic drugs that harm the entire body and instead focus on giving the body (immune system) what it needs to get well. As long as we believe the mass media marketing by the NCI and cancer treatment hospitals that poisoning the body with chemicals and then hoping for wellness is actually obtainable, this barbaric treatment will continue. It hasn't worked in the past and it will not work in the future. Remember, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Right now, cancer treatment in the U.S. is in the realm of insanity.
IXEMPRA - A NEW DRUG FOR ADVANCED BREAST CANCER
In October 2007, the FDA approved Ixempra (ixabepilone) for the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Specifically, the drug was approved for the treatment of patients whose metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer has become resistant to standard drugs such as anthracyclines, taxanes, and capecitabine (Xeloda). Ixempra is classified as a "microtubule inhibitor." It is thus similar to the taxanes but is said by the manufacturer, Bristol-Myers, to be somewhat less toxic.
"Previously, patients with aggressive metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer no longer responding to currently available chemotherapies had limited treatment options," said Linda Vahdat, M.D., of New York Presbyterian Hospital Weill Cornell Medical Center, in a statement released by the company. "The approval of Ixempra means that we now have an important new option for patients with metastatic breast cancer who have rapidly progressed through currently approved chemotherapies."
Let us therefore examine just how "important" this new option is likely to be to patients with metastatic breast cancer.
First of Two Trials
The FDA approval of Ixempra was based on two clinical trials that included a total of 878 patients. The first of these studies was a phase II (non-randomized) trial of Ixempra as a stand-alone treatment. That study enrolled 126 patients with either metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer that had proven resistant to three prior therapies. There was an "objective partial response" in 12.4 percent of 113 evaluable patients. In other words, fewer than one out of eight patients who got the drug saw their tumors shrink. (And, by the way, whatever happened to the other 13 "unevaluable" patients in the study? Under the commonly observed intent-to-treat rule of medical statistics, they should have been included in this analysis.)A partial response is generally defined as an incomplete shrinkage of the tumor by more than 50 percent for one month or more. As long-time readers of this newsletter will know, a partial response generally does not correlate with increased survival.
Side effects of Ixempra in this trial included the following:
- Peripheral sensory neuropathy in 62 percent of patients, with serious to severe effects (Grades 3 and 4) in 14 percent;
- Fatigue, asthenia 56 percent (Grade 3/4: 13 percent);
- Myalgia, arthralgia 49 percent (Grade 3/4: 8 percent);
- Alopecia 48 percent (Grade 3/4: 0 percent);
- Nausea 42 percent (Grade 3/4: 2 percent);
- Stomatitis,mucositis 29 percent (Grade 3/4: 6 percent);
- Vomiting 29 percent (Grade 3/4: 1 percent);
- Diarrhea 22 percent (Grade 3/4: 1 percent);
- Musculoskeletal pain 20 percent (Grade 3/4: 3 percent).
Major hematologic [blood-related] adverse events included neutropenia [Grade 3-4 in 54 percent] and leukopenia [Grade 3-4 in 49 percent].
Combination Trial
FDA also took into consideration a larger phase III randomized trial which evaluated the efficacy and safety of Ixempra combined with Xeloda (capecitabine) in comparison to Xeloda used as a stand alone treatment. This trial included 752 patients who were previously treated with anthracyclines (such as Adriamycin) and taxanes (such as Taxol), and whose tumors had already shown resistance to these therapies. In this trial, Ixempra in combination with Xeloda resulted in a slight improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) compared to Xeloda given alone.
The median survival with the combination of Ixempra and Xeloda was 5.7 months vs. 4.1 months for Xeloda alone - a gain of 1.6 months. But the side effects included peripheral sensory neuropathy in 65 percent, hand-foot syndrome in 64 percent, nausea in 53 percent, diarrhea in 44 percent, etc.
Again, readers will note that the above statistics do not yield any information on overall survival, i.e., how long on average Ixempra patients can be expected to live compared to those who got either Xeloda alone or no further treatment. The increase of 1.6 months (which you can be sure will be widely bandied about as indicative of the "value" of Ixempra) refers solely to an improvement in progression-free survival. But progression-free survival is not at all the same thing as improved overall survival. Progression-free survival is the time during which the disease appears stable before once again beginning to advance. It is entirely possible that two groups of patients could have a significant difference in this parameter, but the disease could still claim their lives at roughly the same time.
A Bristol-Myers spokesperson has been quoted as saying that the cost of a full course of Ixempra would be between $18,440 to $23,050.
There was a time when FDA required proof of increased survival before it would approve a new drug. Now Bristol-Myers has gotten Ixempra onto the market, having only shown a slight increase in a surrogate marker of doubtful benefit.
--Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D.
http://www.cancerdecisions.com/
References:
Ixempra company web site: http://www.ixempra.com/
Cost of Ixempra: http://www.topnews.in/bristol-myers-breast-cancer-drug-won-us-fda-approval-23921
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
