At times it appears to be a bit hopeless regarding changes in the nutritional habits of Americans, both children and adults. What with the wholesale marketing of junk foods to kids and the presence of a fast-food joint on every corner, it can all seem to be too large of a sociological obstacle to overcome. However, it is always encouraging to hear some good news about ideas that may help lead to some much needed changes.
Today's post focuses on several government agencies that are investigating some of the advertising practices of food and beverage companies, and taking a look at how they are influencing children in an unhealthy way. The amount of money that is involved is staggering. If just a portion of these funds could be used to promote a healthful lifestyle that involves eating whole, nutritional, real foods, along with exercise and other steps towards wellness, could it not make a significant difference in the choices our kids make? The obesity epidemic amongst Americans could begin to be naturally reversed, rather than be used as an excuse to put us on drugs to help us lose weight and deal with the depression that comes from living unhealthily. If the public can get themselves away from the hypnotic influences of the media long enough to experience some of the benefits of living well, perhaps the tide can begin to turn.
FTC: Kids target of $1.6 billion in food ads
By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writer
Tue Jul 29, 5:33 AM ET
Imagine Superman promoting fresh fruits and vegetables instead of a cereal.
Children are confronted with such a barrage of advertising for food and drink -- much of it unhealthy -- that the entertainment industry should take steps to tie popular TV and movie characters to more nutritional products, the Federal Trade Commission says.
The recommendation was part of a report showing that the nation's largest food and beverage companies spent about $1.6 billion in 2006 marketing their products -- especially carbonated drinks -- to children and adolescents.
The report, to be released Tuesday, stems from lawmakers' concern about growing obesity rates in children. It gives researchers new insight into how much companies are spending to attract youth to their products, and what venues the companies are using for their marketing. To come up with its estimate, the FTC used confidential financial data that it required the companies to turn over.
Overall, the spending was less than some previous estimates had indicated. Still, it represents a large pot of money that is being used to entice children to foods that are often unhealthy choices, said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who sought the study.
"This study confirms what I have been saying for years. Industry needs to step up to the plate and use their innovation and creativity to market healthy foods to our kids," Harkin said. "That $1.6 billion could be used to attract our kids to healthy snacks, tasty cereals, fruits and vegetables."
The commission studied spending directed at children ages 2-17. Spending on soda marketing came to $492 million, with the vast majority of that spending directed toward adolescents. Restaurants reported spending close to $294 million, which was divided about evenly between children and adolescents. For cereals, companies spent about $237 million with the vast majority of that amount targeted to children under age 12.
The 44 companies reviewed spread their marketing across all segments of the media, the commission found. Television ads provide a theme that usually carried over to packaging and displays in stores, and to the Internet where entry of a code on a package allowed children to participate in games or contests with prizes.
For example, "Superman Returns" and "Pirates of the Caribbean" were prominently linked to many food products last year. Companies created limited-edition snacks, cereals, waffles and candy based on the movies. They offered prizes on the Internet to buyers of those products that ranged from video games to trips to Disney World to a $1 million reward for the capture of villain Lex Luthor.
"The Internet -- though far less costly than television -- has become a major marketing tool of food companies that target children and adolescents, with more than two-thirds of the 44 companies reporting online, youth-directed activities," the commission report said.
The FTC made several recommendations as part of its report:
_Media and entertainment companies should limit the licensing of characters to healthier foods and drinks.
_Schools should adopt meaningful nutrition standards for the foods that are sold there, and companies should cease all in-school promotion of products that don't meet such standards.
_Companies that market food and drinks to children should expand public-outreach efforts to educate children about the importance of healthy eating and exercise, with particular attention aimed at minority populations that are disproportionately affected by childhood obesity.
The commission noted that its review came during a year in which food and beverage companies had committed to curtailing the marketing of unhealthy products. For example, it noted that 13 companies representing more than two-thirds of advertising spending directed toward children had pledged to not direct their ads to children under 12 -- unless the foods met specific nutritional standards.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080729/ap_on_go_ot/children_marketing_food_9&printer=1;_ylt=AkXuriIdiPZZoxK7845uvGV2wPIE
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
More Good Press for Fruits and Veggies
I ran across the following article that highlights a presentation by a medical doctor who is an advocate for nutritional medicine, and who specializes in the treatment of senior citizens. He had some very good advice to offer regarding the benefits of compounds found in fruits and vegetables that have been shown to significantly reduce the risk for dementia as we age.
We know that eating fresh, organic produce offers a myriad of healthful advantages, and is one of the best ways to prevent disease from forming in the body in the first place. This article specifically discusses the prevention of dementia by consuming ample amounts of fruits and vegetables. The benefits become even greater when a wholesome diet is combined with other lifestyle habits such as regular exercise, both physical and mental, and consistent socialization with others. It is refreshing to hear from an MD who admits that current medical education is slack when it comes to teaching the importance of nutrition, and one who recognizes that there are better ways to treat and prevent illness than dispensing medications, a "solution" that most often only makes matters worse and exposes patients to hazardous side effects.
Mom Was Right: Eat Your Vegetables
To Avoid Dementia, Speaker Says
Friday, July 25, 2008
Eat your vegetables, and plenty of them.
That was part of Dr. Gary H. Oberlender's advice for reducing the risk of dementia during a talk Thursday evening at the Virginia Museum of Natural History.
About 100 people attended "Dementia: What Is It and How We Can Reduce Our Risk," part of the King's Grant lecture series offered at the museum in conjunction with the "Amazing Feats of Aging" exhibit.
Oberlender, a consultant in geriatric medicine, outlined causes and risk factors for cognitive (mental) impairment in seniors, compared the different types of dementia and gave recommendations to "maintain your brain."
Above all, he emphasized, "It ain't always Alzheimer's."
Alzheimer's is a disease of the brain that causes two-thirds of dementia cases, Oberlender said. Patients lose key intellectual abilities such as memory, calculation, language, judgment, orientation and personality. There is a progressive decline in mental function, though most patients are not physically affected until late in the disease.
Most patients see the onset of the disease after age 70 to 75, and it does not appear to be connected with family history, Oberlender said.
The Alzheimer's Association suggests staying physically, socially and mentally active to prevent the disease, because "If you don't use it, you'll lose it," he said.
Alzheimer's is thought to show up more in women and in people with higher IQs, Oberlender said, "so you smart women, start eating lettuce."
He spoke at length about the role nutrition may play in preventing dementia. "As a physician, I believe nutrition hasn't been given enough emphasis in modern medicine," he said.
A 2006 study in the medical journal "Neurology" showed that people who ate four or more servings of fresh vegetables a day had a 38 percent slower mental decline, he said.
Also, a 2005 study in "Alzheimer's and Dementia" found a 66 percent lower incidence of Alzheimer's when people took 400 micrograms of folic acid a day, and a 63 percent lower incidence of the disease with more than 1.3 milligrams of vitamin B-6.
Four hundred micrograms of folic acid is equal to "five or six servings of fresh fruit, or two or three big salads a day," Oberlender said.
Fresh vegetables and fruits have the most benefit, he said, but flash-frozen produce is "almost as good." Canned, overcooked, and processed foods do not have as much nutritional value.
"Go organic when it's possible," Oberlender said, adding that the long-term effects of chronic exposure to toxins in food are not known.
People should also eat more food with omega-3 fatty acids, such as wild-caught coldwater fish, almonds, sunflowers and flax seeds, he said, and drink moderate amounts of red wine.
Even people who eat a balanced diet should take a multivitamin, two to three grams of fish oil and 500 to 1,000 mcg of folic acid per day, he added. People also need 15 to 25 minutes of sun exposure several times a week to ensure they get enough vitamin D.
Dementia is one cause of cognitive impairment, but it is certainly not the only one. There are many factors that can cause problems with memory and brain function later in life, Oberlender said.
Depression is one factor common in seniors, but it can be hard to diagnose because the symptoms are not typical, Oberlender said.
"In seniors, depression can show up as cognitive dysfunction. The person may not even feel depressed," he said. "It's absolutely critical for doctors to evaluate for depression in seniors."
Stroke, hardening of the arteries and thyroid problems can cause mental impairment, as can side effects from prescription drugs. Alternatively, a person who cannot hear well may be misinterpreted as not understanding or remembering conversations.
Oberlender noted that many doctors use the diagnosis "probable Alzheimer's" because of uncertainty and the diseases overlap with other forms of dementia.
After the lecture, many people remained to ask questions of Oberlender. Local attorney Robert Haley was one of them. "A lot of my clients are caretakers for seniors, so I try to get as much information on these issues as possible," Haley said. "It was a great seminar and a great speaker."
Also among the audience were some employees and 24 residents from King's Grant.
"The lecture was certainly relevant to many of our residents and staff, and it was a benefit to the community at large," said Resident Services Director Becky Farrar. "You could see the interest in the audience."
The next lecture in the series will be "Senior Navigator" by Ben Garrett of the Virginia Department for the Aging, held from noon to 1 p.m. July 30 at the Virginia Museum of Natural History.
http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/article.cfm?ID=14828
We know that eating fresh, organic produce offers a myriad of healthful advantages, and is one of the best ways to prevent disease from forming in the body in the first place. This article specifically discusses the prevention of dementia by consuming ample amounts of fruits and vegetables. The benefits become even greater when a wholesome diet is combined with other lifestyle habits such as regular exercise, both physical and mental, and consistent socialization with others. It is refreshing to hear from an MD who admits that current medical education is slack when it comes to teaching the importance of nutrition, and one who recognizes that there are better ways to treat and prevent illness than dispensing medications, a "solution" that most often only makes matters worse and exposes patients to hazardous side effects.
Mom Was Right: Eat Your Vegetables
To Avoid Dementia, Speaker Says
Friday, July 25, 2008
Eat your vegetables, and plenty of them.
That was part of Dr. Gary H. Oberlender's advice for reducing the risk of dementia during a talk Thursday evening at the Virginia Museum of Natural History.
About 100 people attended "Dementia: What Is It and How We Can Reduce Our Risk," part of the King's Grant lecture series offered at the museum in conjunction with the "Amazing Feats of Aging" exhibit.
Oberlender, a consultant in geriatric medicine, outlined causes and risk factors for cognitive (mental) impairment in seniors, compared the different types of dementia and gave recommendations to "maintain your brain."
Above all, he emphasized, "It ain't always Alzheimer's."
Alzheimer's is a disease of the brain that causes two-thirds of dementia cases, Oberlender said. Patients lose key intellectual abilities such as memory, calculation, language, judgment, orientation and personality. There is a progressive decline in mental function, though most patients are not physically affected until late in the disease.
Most patients see the onset of the disease after age 70 to 75, and it does not appear to be connected with family history, Oberlender said.
The Alzheimer's Association suggests staying physically, socially and mentally active to prevent the disease, because "If you don't use it, you'll lose it," he said.
Alzheimer's is thought to show up more in women and in people with higher IQs, Oberlender said, "so you smart women, start eating lettuce."
He spoke at length about the role nutrition may play in preventing dementia. "As a physician, I believe nutrition hasn't been given enough emphasis in modern medicine," he said.
A 2006 study in the medical journal "Neurology" showed that people who ate four or more servings of fresh vegetables a day had a 38 percent slower mental decline, he said.
Also, a 2005 study in "Alzheimer's and Dementia" found a 66 percent lower incidence of Alzheimer's when people took 400 micrograms of folic acid a day, and a 63 percent lower incidence of the disease with more than 1.3 milligrams of vitamin B-6.
Four hundred micrograms of folic acid is equal to "five or six servings of fresh fruit, or two or three big salads a day," Oberlender said.
Fresh vegetables and fruits have the most benefit, he said, but flash-frozen produce is "almost as good." Canned, overcooked, and processed foods do not have as much nutritional value.
"Go organic when it's possible," Oberlender said, adding that the long-term effects of chronic exposure to toxins in food are not known.
People should also eat more food with omega-3 fatty acids, such as wild-caught coldwater fish, almonds, sunflowers and flax seeds, he said, and drink moderate amounts of red wine.
Even people who eat a balanced diet should take a multivitamin, two to three grams of fish oil and 500 to 1,000 mcg of folic acid per day, he added. People also need 15 to 25 minutes of sun exposure several times a week to ensure they get enough vitamin D.
Dementia is one cause of cognitive impairment, but it is certainly not the only one. There are many factors that can cause problems with memory and brain function later in life, Oberlender said.
Depression is one factor common in seniors, but it can be hard to diagnose because the symptoms are not typical, Oberlender said.
"In seniors, depression can show up as cognitive dysfunction. The person may not even feel depressed," he said. "It's absolutely critical for doctors to evaluate for depression in seniors."
Stroke, hardening of the arteries and thyroid problems can cause mental impairment, as can side effects from prescription drugs. Alternatively, a person who cannot hear well may be misinterpreted as not understanding or remembering conversations.
Oberlender noted that many doctors use the diagnosis "probable Alzheimer's" because of uncertainty and the diseases overlap with other forms of dementia.
After the lecture, many people remained to ask questions of Oberlender. Local attorney Robert Haley was one of them. "A lot of my clients are caretakers for seniors, so I try to get as much information on these issues as possible," Haley said. "It was a great seminar and a great speaker."
Also among the audience were some employees and 24 residents from King's Grant.
"The lecture was certainly relevant to many of our residents and staff, and it was a benefit to the community at large," said Resident Services Director Becky Farrar. "You could see the interest in the audience."
The next lecture in the series will be "Senior Navigator" by Ben Garrett of the Virginia Department for the Aging, held from noon to 1 p.m. July 30 at the Virginia Museum of Natural History.
http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/article.cfm?ID=14828
Big Pharma Profiteers from Medicare
A committee in the House of Representatives is looking into allegations that pharmaceutical companies are reaping windfall profits at the expense of US taxpayers. Unlike Medicaid, a program designed to assist impoverished Americans, drugs in Medicare Part D that are sold to the government directly (and consumers indirectly) are not discounted. Medicare serves primarily senior citizens and the disabled.
This conflict is being raised in light of a larger issue, that of the privatization of government programs such as Medicare. Any way you slice it, this is a sweet deal for the drug companies and their bottom lines. I was always under the impression that privatization increases competition, thus reducing costs -- or at least it should. With everyone struggling during these tough economic times (especially those on fixed incomes), it would seem that price controls on drugs would be appropriate on all medications sold to the government regardless of the particular program they are attached to. However, it really should come as no surprise that this deal was cut. The FDA and other government agencies have always had a cozy relationship with Big Pharma. Add to this the fact that pharmaceutical companies spend a small fortune on political contributions, and it is very plain to see why the madness -- companies selling hazardous chemicals to people at exorbitant profits that are supposed to improve their health, but often only make them sicker -- continues year after year.
Medicare Part D a boon for drug companies, House report says
Taxpayers pay up to 30% more for prescriptions under the privately administered program than under Medicaid, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform finds.
By Nicole Gaouette
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
July 25, 2008
WASHINGTON -- U.S. drug manufacturers are reaping a windfall from taxpayers because Medicare's privately administered prescription drug benefit program pays more than other government programs for the same medicines, a House committee charged in a report Thursday.
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found that taxpayers are paying up to 30% more for prescription drugs under Medicare's privatized Part D program for seniors and the disabled than under the government's Medicaid program for the poor.
"Medicare Part D has given the major drug companies a taxpayer-funded windfall worth billions of dollars," said committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills).
Waxman said he would introduce legislation to guarantee that federal taxpayers would not be charged higher prices under Medicare Part D than under Medicaid.
"This is an enormous giveaway. And it has absolutely no justification," he said.
Under Medicaid, drug companies have to sell prescription drugs to the government at discounted prices. When Medicare Part D was enacted in January 2006, drug companies were no longer obliged to cut rates for their products.
In the two years Medicare Part D has been in effect, drug manufacturers have taken in $3.7 billion more than they would have through prices under the Medicaid program, committee investigators found.
"The drug companies are making the same drugs. They are being used by the same beneficiaries. Yet because the drugs are being bought through Medicare Part D instead of Medicaid, the prices paid by the taxpayers have ballooned by billions of dollars," Waxman said.
He said Bristol-Myers made an additional $400 million from higher prices for a single drug, the stroke medication Plavix.
The committee's report and a hearing on Thursday echoed the battle over a Medicare bill last week. That debate centered, in part, on privatization of the Medicare system, which many Republicans support and many Democrats oppose.
The privatization of programs such as Medicare has emerged as an issue in the presidential campaign, with Republican candidate John McCain calling for a change in the way Social Security is funded.
Congress last week overwhelmingly overrode President Bush's veto of the Medicare bill, which will take funds from private insurers that run Medicare Advantage plans to reimburse doctors who see Medicare patients.
On Thursday, the ranking Republican on the oversight committee, Rep. Thomas M. Davis III of Virginia, said that the cost of Medicare Part D had come in nearly 40% lower than original estimates and that seniors using the program were satisfied.
"More economically disadvantaged seniors have access to the drugs their doctors prescribe than ever before in American history," Davis said in a statement. "They've learned to love Part D."
A report by the committee's Republican staff said Democrats were asking the wrong questions about Medicare Part D. Federal price controls for Medicaid result in prices below those available in the free market, but the difference does not amount to a "windfall" for drug companies, Republicans said.
Richard Smith, a vice president with the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the leading drug industry group, warned in a statement to the committee against government interference in Medicare Part D.
"It is primarily the effective operation of the competitive market that has driven down Part D costs for beneficiaries and taxpayers compared to previous estimates," Smith said.
nicole.gaouette@latimes.com
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-medicare25-2008jul25,0,1950084.story
This conflict is being raised in light of a larger issue, that of the privatization of government programs such as Medicare. Any way you slice it, this is a sweet deal for the drug companies and their bottom lines. I was always under the impression that privatization increases competition, thus reducing costs -- or at least it should. With everyone struggling during these tough economic times (especially those on fixed incomes), it would seem that price controls on drugs would be appropriate on all medications sold to the government regardless of the particular program they are attached to. However, it really should come as no surprise that this deal was cut. The FDA and other government agencies have always had a cozy relationship with Big Pharma. Add to this the fact that pharmaceutical companies spend a small fortune on political contributions, and it is very plain to see why the madness -- companies selling hazardous chemicals to people at exorbitant profits that are supposed to improve their health, but often only make them sicker -- continues year after year.
Medicare Part D a boon for drug companies, House report says
Taxpayers pay up to 30% more for prescriptions under the privately administered program than under Medicaid, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform finds.
By Nicole Gaouette
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
July 25, 2008
WASHINGTON -- U.S. drug manufacturers are reaping a windfall from taxpayers because Medicare's privately administered prescription drug benefit program pays more than other government programs for the same medicines, a House committee charged in a report Thursday.
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found that taxpayers are paying up to 30% more for prescription drugs under Medicare's privatized Part D program for seniors and the disabled than under the government's Medicaid program for the poor.
"Medicare Part D has given the major drug companies a taxpayer-funded windfall worth billions of dollars," said committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills).
Waxman said he would introduce legislation to guarantee that federal taxpayers would not be charged higher prices under Medicare Part D than under Medicaid.
"This is an enormous giveaway. And it has absolutely no justification," he said.
Under Medicaid, drug companies have to sell prescription drugs to the government at discounted prices. When Medicare Part D was enacted in January 2006, drug companies were no longer obliged to cut rates for their products.
In the two years Medicare Part D has been in effect, drug manufacturers have taken in $3.7 billion more than they would have through prices under the Medicaid program, committee investigators found.
"The drug companies are making the same drugs. They are being used by the same beneficiaries. Yet because the drugs are being bought through Medicare Part D instead of Medicaid, the prices paid by the taxpayers have ballooned by billions of dollars," Waxman said.
He said Bristol-Myers made an additional $400 million from higher prices for a single drug, the stroke medication Plavix.
The committee's report and a hearing on Thursday echoed the battle over a Medicare bill last week. That debate centered, in part, on privatization of the Medicare system, which many Republicans support and many Democrats oppose.
The privatization of programs such as Medicare has emerged as an issue in the presidential campaign, with Republican candidate John McCain calling for a change in the way Social Security is funded.
Congress last week overwhelmingly overrode President Bush's veto of the Medicare bill, which will take funds from private insurers that run Medicare Advantage plans to reimburse doctors who see Medicare patients.
On Thursday, the ranking Republican on the oversight committee, Rep. Thomas M. Davis III of Virginia, said that the cost of Medicare Part D had come in nearly 40% lower than original estimates and that seniors using the program were satisfied.
"More economically disadvantaged seniors have access to the drugs their doctors prescribe than ever before in American history," Davis said in a statement. "They've learned to love Part D."
A report by the committee's Republican staff said Democrats were asking the wrong questions about Medicare Part D. Federal price controls for Medicaid result in prices below those available in the free market, but the difference does not amount to a "windfall" for drug companies, Republicans said.
Richard Smith, a vice president with the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the leading drug industry group, warned in a statement to the committee against government interference in Medicare Part D.
"It is primarily the effective operation of the competitive market that has driven down Part D costs for beneficiaries and taxpayers compared to previous estimates," Smith said.
nicole.gaouette@latimes.com
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-medicare25-2008jul25,0,1950084.story
Monday, July 28, 2008
Granite Countertops Potentially Hazardous
The use of granite countertops and other granite furnishings has increased substantially over the last few years, but recent research indicates that these items may be releasing harmful levels of radiation and radon gas into the home environment that can put residents at risk.
Those in the industry pooh-pooh the idea of dangers associated with granite, but the fact remains that any exposure to radiation can alter cell DNA, especially if it is consistent and cumulative, and has been linked to an increased risk for certain types of cancer. Despite the attractiveness and durability of granite, you may want to think twice about installing it in your home. Substances that release toxins in a home interior environment are particularly troublesome, as most modern homes are tightly sealed for energy efficiency and allow for minimal ventilation. It is always a good idea to open windows whenever possible in order to keep the air supply in your home fresh and recycled.
Granite Countertops Are Red Hot -- Perhaps Literally
Is the Radiation in Countertops Dangerous?
Granite countertops are red-hot -- and not just because of their soaring popularity and high resale value. It turns out that some granite quarried for furnishings brings with it relatively high levels of uranium, which is not only radioactive but releases radon gas as it decays.
As the New York Times reports, sales of granite countertops have exploded tenfold in the last decade, as has the number of different styles now available. At the same time, a debate has been simmering about how safe the attractive surfaces actually are.
There have been a number of reports of people observing above-background levels of radiation coming from their kitchens, and the EPA has received a growing number of complaints, according to the Times. Officials have noted that some exotic and striated granite varieties from Brazil and Namibia, in particular, have been most suspect.
The Marble Institute of America calls any worries about radiation from granite countertops "ludicrous," saying that any possible levels are insignificant compared with background radiation from space and the Earth's crust, or even X-rays and smoke detectors. Yet one person told the paper her house had radon levels of 100 picocuries per liter of air because of her granite countertops, when the EPA recommends action if radon levels exceed 4 picocuries per liter.
Typically, people receive 360 millirem of radiation from background levels a year, while a "hot" granite countertop might add just a fraction of a millirem per hour, and that's if you are very close to it.
Still, the precautionary principle suggests considering other, and often less pricey, alternatives. What the industry fails to point out is that most public experts agree there is no safe level of radiation -- all radiation has the potential to damage cells, and cumulative, lifetime exposure is often cited as a major cause of many cancers, as well as potentially aging itself. (So even though the fraction contributed by countertops is likely very small, it may be worth thinking about.)
Karl Z. Morgan, often called the founder of the field of health physics, is famous for arguing that exposing DNA to any ionizing radiation is like letting a "madman loose in a library." According to the EPA, living in a home with 4 picocuries per liter of radon in the air carries about the same cancer risk as smoking a half a pack of cigarettes per day. While most granite countertops are not likely to emit that much, it should give all those parents who tell their children not to smoke a little something to think about.
A big point that this recent New York Times article failed to mention is that granite quarrying, processing and shipment also carries a sizable environmental footprint. Not only is the (obviously) nonrenewable resource mined in destructive open pits, which can then leach toxins into surface waters, but what is heavier than rocks to ship around the planet? Granite is surprisingly easy to break, so a lot can get wasted. Even when you get your countertop in place, it may require frequent chemical treatments.
For many reasons, it does make sense to be different and forget granite. Check out our pages of gorgeous and green alternative countertops, from recycled glass, concrete and even paper; to renewable bamboo; and repurposed materials. Not only can you get a great look, but you'll have a nice conversation piece, and something unique, to share with family and guests.
If you do have granite in your home and are thinking about getting it tested for possible radiation, check with the American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists.
http://www.thedailygreen.com/green-homes/eco-friendly/granite-countertops-radiation-460708
Those in the industry pooh-pooh the idea of dangers associated with granite, but the fact remains that any exposure to radiation can alter cell DNA, especially if it is consistent and cumulative, and has been linked to an increased risk for certain types of cancer. Despite the attractiveness and durability of granite, you may want to think twice about installing it in your home. Substances that release toxins in a home interior environment are particularly troublesome, as most modern homes are tightly sealed for energy efficiency and allow for minimal ventilation. It is always a good idea to open windows whenever possible in order to keep the air supply in your home fresh and recycled.
Granite Countertops Are Red Hot -- Perhaps Literally
Is the Radiation in Countertops Dangerous?
Granite countertops are red-hot -- and not just because of their soaring popularity and high resale value. It turns out that some granite quarried for furnishings brings with it relatively high levels of uranium, which is not only radioactive but releases radon gas as it decays.
As the New York Times reports, sales of granite countertops have exploded tenfold in the last decade, as has the number of different styles now available. At the same time, a debate has been simmering about how safe the attractive surfaces actually are.
There have been a number of reports of people observing above-background levels of radiation coming from their kitchens, and the EPA has received a growing number of complaints, according to the Times. Officials have noted that some exotic and striated granite varieties from Brazil and Namibia, in particular, have been most suspect.
The Marble Institute of America calls any worries about radiation from granite countertops "ludicrous," saying that any possible levels are insignificant compared with background radiation from space and the Earth's crust, or even X-rays and smoke detectors. Yet one person told the paper her house had radon levels of 100 picocuries per liter of air because of her granite countertops, when the EPA recommends action if radon levels exceed 4 picocuries per liter.
Typically, people receive 360 millirem of radiation from background levels a year, while a "hot" granite countertop might add just a fraction of a millirem per hour, and that's if you are very close to it.
Still, the precautionary principle suggests considering other, and often less pricey, alternatives. What the industry fails to point out is that most public experts agree there is no safe level of radiation -- all radiation has the potential to damage cells, and cumulative, lifetime exposure is often cited as a major cause of many cancers, as well as potentially aging itself. (So even though the fraction contributed by countertops is likely very small, it may be worth thinking about.)
Karl Z. Morgan, often called the founder of the field of health physics, is famous for arguing that exposing DNA to any ionizing radiation is like letting a "madman loose in a library." According to the EPA, living in a home with 4 picocuries per liter of radon in the air carries about the same cancer risk as smoking a half a pack of cigarettes per day. While most granite countertops are not likely to emit that much, it should give all those parents who tell their children not to smoke a little something to think about.
A big point that this recent New York Times article failed to mention is that granite quarrying, processing and shipment also carries a sizable environmental footprint. Not only is the (obviously) nonrenewable resource mined in destructive open pits, which can then leach toxins into surface waters, but what is heavier than rocks to ship around the planet? Granite is surprisingly easy to break, so a lot can get wasted. Even when you get your countertop in place, it may require frequent chemical treatments.
For many reasons, it does make sense to be different and forget granite. Check out our pages of gorgeous and green alternative countertops, from recycled glass, concrete and even paper; to renewable bamboo; and repurposed materials. Not only can you get a great look, but you'll have a nice conversation piece, and something unique, to share with family and guests.
If you do have granite in your home and are thinking about getting it tested for possible radiation, check with the American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists.
http://www.thedailygreen.com/green-homes/eco-friendly/granite-countertops-radiation-460708
Friday, July 25, 2008
What's Wrong With This Picture?
I chose to post the following scathing review of a recent media release because it is such a potent example of how we as a nation are shamelessly fed propaganda and lies through a team effort that includes key players such as the press, the FDA, pharmaceutical companies, and others.
It really speaks for itself, and I encourage you to read today's post thoughtfully and consider the motives behind many of the recommendations that are typical of those that support conventional "AMA" thinking vs. individuals and organizations that promote natural alternatives and healthcare freedom. The overwhelming conclusion is unavoidable: The self-serving and profit-driven impetus behind mainstream medical philosophy is not in the best interest of the public. Something is seriously wrong when the "healers" of a society consistently put their patients in harms way under the guise of "treatment."
Mainstream Media Promotes Medical Myths by 'Dispelling' Them
by Neil McLaughlin
(NaturalNews) The MSNBC TODAY Show recently teamed up with drug companies to help "dispel" several "medical myths" that were "passed down by your grandparents" and which may have led you to believe you were actually healthy.
In the conveniently anonymous article "7 Medical Myths That Can Kill You (5/21/08)", which offered no means for reader feedback, TODAY reminds us that if we don't treat diseases early and often, we will die. The ghostwriter of the article does not even hint at the idea that a healthy diet can be a factor in disease prevention. After all, the Chief Medical Editor of The TODAY Show (who ranks right up there with the Chief Medical Editor of the National Enquirer) Dr. Nancy Snyderman wants you to remember that only advances in patentable technology can prevent disease (oh and please buy her book).
The article ultimately sends the message that your getting treatment is extremely important for the health of the Medical Industrial Complex. Here are the 7 individual messages that their article sends (see if you notice a pattern):
1) You need an annual checkup (You need annual treatment). Within a year, most every drug commercial has become obsolete, and many of those drugs will have been exposed as highly dangerous. In order to get the latest, untested treatments it is important that you go to a doctor at least once a year, even if you don't feel sick.
2) Vaccines are not just for children (You need adult treatment). Why just poison your kids with mercury when you can poison yourself, your spouse, or other family members? Dr. Snyderman says "Vaccines are the most important medical breakthrough of the past century... and they are not just for children (so) it is important for people over 30 to get booster shots". In case you have recently become informed about the dangers of vaccines that contain mercury, viruses and untested chemical combinations, along with possibly causing Autism (which of course they fail to mention), TODAY is recommending you get vaccinated for many things. They recommend the HPV vaccine despite the fact that there exists no proof that cervical cancer is even caused by HPV, and men don't even have a cervix! TODAY also recommends expensive flu shots that essentially cause the flu, while preventing a few percent from getting last year's flu. They even promote an adult shot for chicken pox! As for understanding the combinations of multiple vaccines at once, just let them know (after taking your shots) if you feel sick.
3) Doctors play favorites (You need the latest treatment). If you are African American, Hispanic and/or elderly, you are likely to have been denied new treatments by your doctor (which may be the reason you are still alive).
4) We're winning the war on cancer (You need conventional treatment). The article goes on to discuss how we have "cured" some types of cancer, where "cure" is defined as someone who manages to survive 5 years of conventional treatment such as radiation, surgery and chemotherapy. In other words, if you are a good enough customer, they will say you are cured! Meanwhile cancer rates are skyrocketing.
5) You're never too young for pharmaceuticals (You need early treatment). Even young people can die of strokes, so why wait until you are old before you start taking dangerous drugs like Lipitor?
6) Natural is not necessarily safe (You need unnatural treatment). Be sure to ask your doctor before taking anything natural. Remember: natural substances may interfere with all of the toxic, unnatural products your doctor will prescribe. More importantly, natural substances may interfere with your doctors ability to make a profit.
7) You can never snap out of mental illness (You need psychiatric treatment). If you have ever experienced a bout of sadness or a fit of anger you are NOT normal, and you will NEVER be normal, EVER! But don't feel bad... treatment is available! Remember: if you feel sad, it's not because you haven't had a date in months, it's not because you are unemployed and homeless, and it's not because you are 29 and diabetic! You are sad because you have a chemical imbalance in your brain. Naturally, doctors say this imbalance can never be rebalanced by anything natural. This chemical imbalance in your brain can only be balanced by a handful of highly toxic chemicals that are strong enough to throw all of your other organs off balance. You must keep taking these drugs for the rest of your life in order to "feel like yourself again". Only somebody making $200,000 per year can really know for sure.
MSNBC reminds us that "If we are to take care of ourselves, we need to know how to access the best health care". In other words, to take care of ourselves, we must rely on others (who just happen to be multinational, profit-seeking, pharmaceutical corporations). They add that one of "the greatest enemies in the battle against... disease (is your) personal belief (system)". I believe that is Socialism.
So there you have it! MSNBC and The TODAY Show say you need treatment, any kind of treatment, maybe even all kinds of treatment (and to be fair, if you believe them, you do). After starting treatment(s), you can be proud to know that you will be distributing these new medicines every time you urinate, and that will help treat and balance all of the fish, frogs and turtles in your local water supply.
References: For more on the dangers of vaccines and to help stop forced vaccinations, check out: http://www.standupbecounted.org/index.htm.
About the author
Neil McLaughlin is a computer scientist and inventor specializing in 3d graphics and simulation. He currently lives in the Orlando, FL area. He can be reached at naturalnews461 (at) yahoo (dot) com.
http://www.naturalnews.com/z023624.html
It really speaks for itself, and I encourage you to read today's post thoughtfully and consider the motives behind many of the recommendations that are typical of those that support conventional "AMA" thinking vs. individuals and organizations that promote natural alternatives and healthcare freedom. The overwhelming conclusion is unavoidable: The self-serving and profit-driven impetus behind mainstream medical philosophy is not in the best interest of the public. Something is seriously wrong when the "healers" of a society consistently put their patients in harms way under the guise of "treatment."
Mainstream Media Promotes Medical Myths by 'Dispelling' Them
by Neil McLaughlin
(NaturalNews) The MSNBC TODAY Show recently teamed up with drug companies to help "dispel" several "medical myths" that were "passed down by your grandparents" and which may have led you to believe you were actually healthy.
In the conveniently anonymous article "7 Medical Myths That Can Kill You (5/21/08)", which offered no means for reader feedback, TODAY reminds us that if we don't treat diseases early and often, we will die. The ghostwriter of the article does not even hint at the idea that a healthy diet can be a factor in disease prevention. After all, the Chief Medical Editor of The TODAY Show (who ranks right up there with the Chief Medical Editor of the National Enquirer) Dr. Nancy Snyderman wants you to remember that only advances in patentable technology can prevent disease (oh and please buy her book).
The article ultimately sends the message that your getting treatment is extremely important for the health of the Medical Industrial Complex. Here are the 7 individual messages that their article sends (see if you notice a pattern):
1) You need an annual checkup (You need annual treatment). Within a year, most every drug commercial has become obsolete, and many of those drugs will have been exposed as highly dangerous. In order to get the latest, untested treatments it is important that you go to a doctor at least once a year, even if you don't feel sick.
2) Vaccines are not just for children (You need adult treatment). Why just poison your kids with mercury when you can poison yourself, your spouse, or other family members? Dr. Snyderman says "Vaccines are the most important medical breakthrough of the past century... and they are not just for children (so) it is important for people over 30 to get booster shots". In case you have recently become informed about the dangers of vaccines that contain mercury, viruses and untested chemical combinations, along with possibly causing Autism (which of course they fail to mention), TODAY is recommending you get vaccinated for many things. They recommend the HPV vaccine despite the fact that there exists no proof that cervical cancer is even caused by HPV, and men don't even have a cervix! TODAY also recommends expensive flu shots that essentially cause the flu, while preventing a few percent from getting last year's flu. They even promote an adult shot for chicken pox! As for understanding the combinations of multiple vaccines at once, just let them know (after taking your shots) if you feel sick.
3) Doctors play favorites (You need the latest treatment). If you are African American, Hispanic and/or elderly, you are likely to have been denied new treatments by your doctor (which may be the reason you are still alive).
4) We're winning the war on cancer (You need conventional treatment). The article goes on to discuss how we have "cured" some types of cancer, where "cure" is defined as someone who manages to survive 5 years of conventional treatment such as radiation, surgery and chemotherapy. In other words, if you are a good enough customer, they will say you are cured! Meanwhile cancer rates are skyrocketing.
5) You're never too young for pharmaceuticals (You need early treatment). Even young people can die of strokes, so why wait until you are old before you start taking dangerous drugs like Lipitor?
6) Natural is not necessarily safe (You need unnatural treatment). Be sure to ask your doctor before taking anything natural. Remember: natural substances may interfere with all of the toxic, unnatural products your doctor will prescribe. More importantly, natural substances may interfere with your doctors ability to make a profit.
7) You can never snap out of mental illness (You need psychiatric treatment). If you have ever experienced a bout of sadness or a fit of anger you are NOT normal, and you will NEVER be normal, EVER! But don't feel bad... treatment is available! Remember: if you feel sad, it's not because you haven't had a date in months, it's not because you are unemployed and homeless, and it's not because you are 29 and diabetic! You are sad because you have a chemical imbalance in your brain. Naturally, doctors say this imbalance can never be rebalanced by anything natural. This chemical imbalance in your brain can only be balanced by a handful of highly toxic chemicals that are strong enough to throw all of your other organs off balance. You must keep taking these drugs for the rest of your life in order to "feel like yourself again". Only somebody making $200,000 per year can really know for sure.
MSNBC reminds us that "If we are to take care of ourselves, we need to know how to access the best health care". In other words, to take care of ourselves, we must rely on others (who just happen to be multinational, profit-seeking, pharmaceutical corporations). They add that one of "the greatest enemies in the battle against... disease (is your) personal belief (system)". I believe that is Socialism.
So there you have it! MSNBC and The TODAY Show say you need treatment, any kind of treatment, maybe even all kinds of treatment (and to be fair, if you believe them, you do). After starting treatment(s), you can be proud to know that you will be distributing these new medicines every time you urinate, and that will help treat and balance all of the fish, frogs and turtles in your local water supply.
References: For more on the dangers of vaccines and to help stop forced vaccinations, check out: http://www.standupbecounted.org/index.htm.
About the author
Neil McLaughlin is a computer scientist and inventor specializing in 3d graphics and simulation. He currently lives in the Orlando, FL area. He can be reached at naturalnews461 (at) yahoo (dot) com.
http://www.naturalnews.com/z023624.html
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Red Yeast Rice Better Than Statin Drugs for Cardiac Health
Despite Big Pharma and the FDA's desire to outlaw red yeast rice (see post on this blog from July 18, 2008), evidence continues to mount that it is safer and more effective than synthetic statin drugs and their associated toxic side effects. In the study cited by the following article, a combination of red yeast rice, fish oil, and lifestyle changes out performed Zocor (a leading statin drug) at balancing cholesterol, lowering triglycerides, and helping participants to lose weight.
There's some valuable information in today's article, but keep in mind that it is written from a conventional medicine viewpoint. For example, the author recommends taking these natural supplements "carefully," and tries to create fear by reminding us that we need to consult with our physicians regarding their usage because they are not "risk-free." The irony of the fact that Zocor poses far greater risks is conveniently overlooked. It is much safer to find a reputable source of natural supplements that have been helping to prevent disease for thousands of years
Red yeast rice, fish oil fight high cholesterol
By Anne Harding
Thu Jul 17, 2:46 PM ET
A regimen of supplements and lifestyle coaching is just as effective as statin medication for reducing levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) or "bad" cholesterol, and more effective in helping people lose weight, new research shows.
People with high cholesterol who took red yeast rice and fish oil daily and received counseling on diet, exercise and relaxation techniques showed the same 40 percent drop in LDL cholesterol seen among people taking 40 milligrams of simvastatin daily, Dr. David J. Becker of the University of Pennsylvania Health System's Chestnut Hill Hospital and colleagues found. And they pared off an average of 10 pounds over 12 weeks, compared to less than a pound for patients taking the statin.
Becker has run a lifestyle program for people at risk of heart disease for 13 years. "People had a uniform desire to get off statins, and when they did their cholesterol was only going down maybe 5 percent at most," he told Reuters Health. The cardiologist decided to launch the current study after seeing many patients have success in lowering their cholesterol with red yeast rice and fish oil.
With a grant from the state of Pennsylvania, Becker and his team randomly assigned 74 patients to receive 40 milligrams of simvastatin (Zocor) daily along with printed information on lifestyle changes, or to three capsules of fish oil twice daily and 600 milligrams of red yeast rice daily along with the 12-week lifestyle program.
LDL cholesterol levels fell by 42.4 percent in the red yeast rice group and by 39.6 percent in the simvastatin group, not a statistically significant difference. Triglyceride levels didn't change in the statin group, but fell 29 percent in the red yeast rice group, probably because they were taking fish oil, according to Becker and his team.
People in the red yeast rice group lost an average of 4.7 kilograms (just over 10 pounds), compared to 0.3 kilograms (less than a pound) in the statin group.
Red yeast rice comes from fermenting red yeast with rice. Known as hong ku, the substance has been used as a medicine and food garnish in parts of Asia for centuries, Becker said. It contains a substance called monacolin-K that is nearly identical to the cholesterol-lowering drug lovastatin (Mevacor), as well as several other monacolins that may also have cholesterol-lowering properties.
People in the red yeast rice arm of the study were taking the equivalent of 10 to 15 mg of lovastatin, Becker said. "This lovastatin dosage is quite small, yet the effects we saw with the red yeast rice were akin to those one would generally see with a much higher dose of lovastatin."
"However, it is not risk-free, and it must be used carefully and in conjunction with your physician."
If more studies bear out the current findings, he added, the supplement/lifestyle intervention he and his colleagues tested could offer an alternative to people with high cholesterol who don't want to take statins, or who can't tolerate the drugs. However, he added, people who actually have heart disease should stick with statins, because they have been shown to reduce mortality.
Becker noted that a recent analysis by ConsumerLab found red yeast rice products varied sharply in their potency, and some were contaminated with a toxic byproduct called citrinin. "This paper is a call for better regulation of this supplement as well so that we know consistently what's in it," he said.
SOURCE: Mayo Clinic Proceedings, July 2008
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080717/hl_nm/high_cholesterol_dc_1
There's some valuable information in today's article, but keep in mind that it is written from a conventional medicine viewpoint. For example, the author recommends taking these natural supplements "carefully," and tries to create fear by reminding us that we need to consult with our physicians regarding their usage because they are not "risk-free." The irony of the fact that Zocor poses far greater risks is conveniently overlooked. It is much safer to find a reputable source of natural supplements that have been helping to prevent disease for thousands of years
Red yeast rice, fish oil fight high cholesterol
By Anne Harding
Thu Jul 17, 2:46 PM ET
A regimen of supplements and lifestyle coaching is just as effective as statin medication for reducing levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) or "bad" cholesterol, and more effective in helping people lose weight, new research shows.
People with high cholesterol who took red yeast rice and fish oil daily and received counseling on diet, exercise and relaxation techniques showed the same 40 percent drop in LDL cholesterol seen among people taking 40 milligrams of simvastatin daily, Dr. David J. Becker of the University of Pennsylvania Health System's Chestnut Hill Hospital and colleagues found. And they pared off an average of 10 pounds over 12 weeks, compared to less than a pound for patients taking the statin.
Becker has run a lifestyle program for people at risk of heart disease for 13 years. "People had a uniform desire to get off statins, and when they did their cholesterol was only going down maybe 5 percent at most," he told Reuters Health. The cardiologist decided to launch the current study after seeing many patients have success in lowering their cholesterol with red yeast rice and fish oil.
With a grant from the state of Pennsylvania, Becker and his team randomly assigned 74 patients to receive 40 milligrams of simvastatin (Zocor) daily along with printed information on lifestyle changes, or to three capsules of fish oil twice daily and 600 milligrams of red yeast rice daily along with the 12-week lifestyle program.
LDL cholesterol levels fell by 42.4 percent in the red yeast rice group and by 39.6 percent in the simvastatin group, not a statistically significant difference. Triglyceride levels didn't change in the statin group, but fell 29 percent in the red yeast rice group, probably because they were taking fish oil, according to Becker and his team.
People in the red yeast rice group lost an average of 4.7 kilograms (just over 10 pounds), compared to 0.3 kilograms (less than a pound) in the statin group.
Red yeast rice comes from fermenting red yeast with rice. Known as hong ku, the substance has been used as a medicine and food garnish in parts of Asia for centuries, Becker said. It contains a substance called monacolin-K that is nearly identical to the cholesterol-lowering drug lovastatin (Mevacor), as well as several other monacolins that may also have cholesterol-lowering properties.
People in the red yeast rice arm of the study were taking the equivalent of 10 to 15 mg of lovastatin, Becker said. "This lovastatin dosage is quite small, yet the effects we saw with the red yeast rice were akin to those one would generally see with a much higher dose of lovastatin."
"However, it is not risk-free, and it must be used carefully and in conjunction with your physician."
If more studies bear out the current findings, he added, the supplement/lifestyle intervention he and his colleagues tested could offer an alternative to people with high cholesterol who don't want to take statins, or who can't tolerate the drugs. However, he added, people who actually have heart disease should stick with statins, because they have been shown to reduce mortality.
Becker noted that a recent analysis by ConsumerLab found red yeast rice products varied sharply in their potency, and some were contaminated with a toxic byproduct called citrinin. "This paper is a call for better regulation of this supplement as well so that we know consistently what's in it," he said.
SOURCE: Mayo Clinic Proceedings, July 2008
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080717/hl_nm/high_cholesterol_dc_1
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
New Study Bolsters Evidence for Cell Phone Hazards
Regardless of the propaganda pushed by the cell phone industry that claims there is no solid research that supports a connection between mobile phone usage and cancer, in truth there are many studies that raise red flags concerning this issue. It is clear that frequent users are subject to an increased risk for certain types of cancer. It appears that factors such as frequent rural use can increase these risks even further. The reason for this is thought to be that the electrical signals in isolated areas must by necessity be stronger, as they need to travel farther between towers. However, some studies have also indicated an increased risk in urban areas too, due to the larger amount of signals.
We really need more time for long-term studies to be completed before all the pertinent facts can be established. However, it is recommended that those who do use cell phones take some common-sense precautions such as using a hands-free device whenever possible or alternating sides of the face if the phone is held directly to your ear. It is also not advisable to keep your mobile phone in a pocket, as this may pose additional risks.
Frequent Mobile Phone Use Boosts Tumor Risk by 50 Percent
by David Gutierrez
(NaturalNews) Frequent users of cellular phones develop tumors of the parotid gland 50 percent more often than less frequent users, according to a new study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.
Researchers at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center in Israel examined data that included 402 cases of benign and 58 cases of malignant tumors of the parotid gland, the largest of the salivary glands. They found that people who used mobile phones for more than 22 hours each month had a 50 percent higher risk of developing parotid gland tumors. This risk increased among users who always held the phone to the same ear, who did not use handheld devices and who lived in rural areas.
"Analysis restricted to regular users or to conditions that may yield higher levels of exposure (e.g., heavy use in rural areas) showed consistently elevated risks," the researchers wrote.
Tumors formed more frequently on the side of the head that patients most frequently held their phones to.
The study adds to emerging evidence that long-term cellular phone use increases the risk of cancers and tumors. Because many cancers do not appear for 10 years after initial exposure to a carcinogen, many of the early industry-sponsored studies finding mobile phones to be safe have been criticized for their lack of scope and failure to examine long-term use.
Two studies have found increased risk of a highly dangerous type of brain cancer known as glioma from long-term cell phone use. In an English study, people who used cell phones for more than 10 years were found to have a 20 percent higher risk of glioma, while a similar German study found the risk to be elevated by 100 percent.
A 2004 Swedish study found that frequent users of mobile phones had a higher risk of developing noncancerous brain tumors known as acoustic neuroma.
http://www.naturalnews.com/z023621.html
We really need more time for long-term studies to be completed before all the pertinent facts can be established. However, it is recommended that those who do use cell phones take some common-sense precautions such as using a hands-free device whenever possible or alternating sides of the face if the phone is held directly to your ear. It is also not advisable to keep your mobile phone in a pocket, as this may pose additional risks.
Frequent Mobile Phone Use Boosts Tumor Risk by 50 Percent
by David Gutierrez
(NaturalNews) Frequent users of cellular phones develop tumors of the parotid gland 50 percent more often than less frequent users, according to a new study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.
Researchers at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center in Israel examined data that included 402 cases of benign and 58 cases of malignant tumors of the parotid gland, the largest of the salivary glands. They found that people who used mobile phones for more than 22 hours each month had a 50 percent higher risk of developing parotid gland tumors. This risk increased among users who always held the phone to the same ear, who did not use handheld devices and who lived in rural areas.
"Analysis restricted to regular users or to conditions that may yield higher levels of exposure (e.g., heavy use in rural areas) showed consistently elevated risks," the researchers wrote.
Tumors formed more frequently on the side of the head that patients most frequently held their phones to.
The study adds to emerging evidence that long-term cellular phone use increases the risk of cancers and tumors. Because many cancers do not appear for 10 years after initial exposure to a carcinogen, many of the early industry-sponsored studies finding mobile phones to be safe have been criticized for their lack of scope and failure to examine long-term use.
Two studies have found increased risk of a highly dangerous type of brain cancer known as glioma from long-term cell phone use. In an English study, people who used cell phones for more than 10 years were found to have a 20 percent higher risk of glioma, while a similar German study found the risk to be elevated by 100 percent.
A 2004 Swedish study found that frequent users of mobile phones had a higher risk of developing noncancerous brain tumors known as acoustic neuroma.
http://www.naturalnews.com/z023621.html
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Want to Control Pain Naturally? Write About It
A study published last month in a journal that addresses the management of pain and other symptoms in seriously ill patients, points to the therapeutic value of writing about one's feelings while battling cancer or other debilitating conditions. Sometimes called "narrative medicine," such writing has traditionally focused on increasing communication in the patient-doctor relationship. However, the study detailed in today's post led researchers to conclude that "emotional writing" also has value by helping individuals to get in better touch with what they are feeling during this crisis in their lives. In addition, the results indicated that such writing helped to ease pain as well.
Easing pain is critical in order for healing to take place. When one is in pain, depression often sets in as well as a hopeless mentality. When pain is alleviated, depression usually lifts and one is then able to help and support their body toward healing and health, especially when natural methods are being used.
It is always good news to hear about another natural, drug-free way of dealing with pain. The benefits of sharing innermost feelings while fighting illness strengthens evidence for the mind, body, and spirit connections that surely play a role in both disease and wellness. Developing a habit of being open and truthful instead of suppressing our feelings and emotions can also help to prevent disease from ever occurring in the first place, and we know that prevention is clearly the best form of treatment.
"Emotional" writing may help ease cancer pain
Fri Jul 18, 1:39 PM ET
Some cancer patients may find that putting their emotions down in writing helps improve their pain and general well-being, a study suggests.
Such writing, part of a concept called "narrative" medicine, has been seen as a way to aid communication between seriously ill patients and their doctors.
But the act of writing, itself, may also help patients better understand themselves and their needs, according to the study team, led by Dr. M. Soledad Cepeda of Tufts-New England Medical Center in Boston.
To look at the question, they randomly assigned 234 cancer patients to one of three groups: one that was asked to perform narrative writing; one that filled out a standard questionnaire about pain symptoms; and one that stayed with standard care only.
All of the study patients were suffering from at least moderate levels of pain from their disease. Those in the narrative-writing group were asked to spend 20 minutes per week, for three weeks, writing about the ways in which cancer was affecting their daily lives.
At the study's start and then once a week for eight weeks, patients in all three groups completed a standard questionnaire about their well-being and rated their pain levels.
In general, Cepeda's team found, patients in the writing group who were open about their emotions showed less pain and greater well-being over time than the rest of the study subjects.
Such effects were not seen in patients whose writing was relatively unemotional, the researchers report in the Journal of Pain & Symptom Management.
The findings suggest that the emotional release of writing, specifically, is what helps patients deal with their cancer pain, according to Cepeda's team. However, they add, it's also possible that the most seriously ill patients find it more difficult to write about their feelings.
More studies are needed, the researchers conclude, to see whether encouraging seriously ill patients to reveal their emotions in writing benefits their well-being. In addition, they say, studies should look at whether verbally telling one's "story" has positive effects.
SOURCE: Journal of Pain & Symptom Management, June 2008.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080718/hl_nm/cancer_pain_dc&printer=1;_ylt=Ap0M0B31JBEo1qScbIqP6zcR.3QA
Easing pain is critical in order for healing to take place. When one is in pain, depression often sets in as well as a hopeless mentality. When pain is alleviated, depression usually lifts and one is then able to help and support their body toward healing and health, especially when natural methods are being used.
It is always good news to hear about another natural, drug-free way of dealing with pain. The benefits of sharing innermost feelings while fighting illness strengthens evidence for the mind, body, and spirit connections that surely play a role in both disease and wellness. Developing a habit of being open and truthful instead of suppressing our feelings and emotions can also help to prevent disease from ever occurring in the first place, and we know that prevention is clearly the best form of treatment.
"Emotional" writing may help ease cancer pain
Fri Jul 18, 1:39 PM ET
Some cancer patients may find that putting their emotions down in writing helps improve their pain and general well-being, a study suggests.
Such writing, part of a concept called "narrative" medicine, has been seen as a way to aid communication between seriously ill patients and their doctors.
But the act of writing, itself, may also help patients better understand themselves and their needs, according to the study team, led by Dr. M. Soledad Cepeda of Tufts-New England Medical Center in Boston.
To look at the question, they randomly assigned 234 cancer patients to one of three groups: one that was asked to perform narrative writing; one that filled out a standard questionnaire about pain symptoms; and one that stayed with standard care only.
All of the study patients were suffering from at least moderate levels of pain from their disease. Those in the narrative-writing group were asked to spend 20 minutes per week, for three weeks, writing about the ways in which cancer was affecting their daily lives.
At the study's start and then once a week for eight weeks, patients in all three groups completed a standard questionnaire about their well-being and rated their pain levels.
In general, Cepeda's team found, patients in the writing group who were open about their emotions showed less pain and greater well-being over time than the rest of the study subjects.
Such effects were not seen in patients whose writing was relatively unemotional, the researchers report in the Journal of Pain & Symptom Management.
The findings suggest that the emotional release of writing, specifically, is what helps patients deal with their cancer pain, according to Cepeda's team. However, they add, it's also possible that the most seriously ill patients find it more difficult to write about their feelings.
More studies are needed, the researchers conclude, to see whether encouraging seriously ill patients to reveal their emotions in writing benefits their well-being. In addition, they say, studies should look at whether verbally telling one's "story" has positive effects.
SOURCE: Journal of Pain & Symptom Management, June 2008.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080718/hl_nm/cancer_pain_dc&printer=1;_ylt=Ap0M0B31JBEo1qScbIqP6zcR.3QA
Monday, July 21, 2008
Mainstream Medicine Takes a Closer Look at Prevention
The following article is encouraging because it highlights several programs instituted by conventional medicine organizations that are focusing on the value of disease prevention. One of the silver linings in the cloud of currently tough economic times is that everyone -- including public health providers, insurance companies, and the government -- are looking for ways to save money on health care. If that's what it takes for them to consider prevention seriously, so be it.
There's been a lot of talk in this election year about health care reform. Here's an idea: What about allowing people to use a medical-type savings account for disease preventative measures such as exercise programs, nutritional supplements, and classes that educate them how to eat right, maintain proper weight, and pursue a lifestyle of wellness. It would be even better if health insurance companies would be forced or enticed into covering such measures. If preventative medicine could be undertaken on a large scale such as this, the reduction in disease would be much greater than the paltry 5% predicted in these particular studies, and people would begin to actually live better and longer, without the use of toxic drugs. Hmm, I wonder how Big Pharma would feel about this?
Disease Prevention Programs Worth the Investment
Within five years, $16 billion a year could be saved, report claims
Posted July 17, 2008
By Ed EdelsonHealthDay Reporter
THURSDAY, July 17 (HealthDay News) -- Community-based health programs aimed at diet, exercise, smoking prevention and other known risk factors for chronic diseases could cut health-care costs in the United States by $16 billion a year, a new report says.
"We worked with economists at the Urban Institute who looked at health-care costs associated with these chronic diseases," said Jeffrey Levi, executive director of the Washington-based Trust for America's Health, which issued the report. "They estimated a 5 percent reduction in these chronic diseases to derive these savings."
The estimate was based on a model developed at the Urban Institute and a review of studies on the cost and effectiveness of prevention programs by experts at the New York Academy of Medicine.
Spending $10 a year per person would save the United States more than $16 billion annually within five years, the economists said, for a return of $5.60 on every $1 invested. Their survey showed that effective prevention programs costing less than $10 per person could reduce rates of type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure by 5 percent within two years, reduce heart disease, kidney disease and stroke by 5 percent within five years, and reduce some forms of cancer, arthritis and lung disease by 2.5 percent in 10 to 20 years.
Who would pay for the prevention programs? Primarily the same agencies that promote prevention programs now, such as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and other agencies, along with state and local health departments, according to Levi.
"But since private insurance companies and Medicare and Medicaid would benefit, the question is whether some of these resources should be tapped," Levi said.
Medicare would save more than $5 billion a year, Medicaid would save more than $1.9 billion and private health insurers would save more than $9 billion, the economists estimated.
Levi said the report is "a call to action for people to recognize the importance of investing in these kinds of prevention measures."
"The programs recommended by the Trust for America's Health is an absolutely complementary approach" to preventive measures recently proposed in a collaboration by the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society and the American Diabetes Association, said Dr. Rose Marie Robertson, chief science officer of the heart association.
"In the paper we just published, we looked at the concept that if people in the United States have some risk factor for cardiovascular disease, cancer or diabetes, they should see a health provider and get guidance to reduce or eliminate the risk factor," Robertson said.
Both approaches concentrate on the same risk factors, such as high blood pressure, smoking and lack of physical activity, but one proposes community programs, and the other suggests individual activity guided by physicians, she said.
The endpoints measured in the two programs were different. "What we looked at primarily was the life years saved," Robertson said. "People would not only live longer but have good quality years. They would add millions of quality-adjusted life years."
People worried about known risk factors should see a physician, she said. "There is a cost to doing that, but it doesn't cost as much as many of the things we think are reasonable. And you get great bang for the buck."
More information
The full report on preventive programs and the money they would save is available from the Trust for America's Health.
http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2008/07/17/disease-prevention-programs-worth-the-investment.html
There's been a lot of talk in this election year about health care reform. Here's an idea: What about allowing people to use a medical-type savings account for disease preventative measures such as exercise programs, nutritional supplements, and classes that educate them how to eat right, maintain proper weight, and pursue a lifestyle of wellness. It would be even better if health insurance companies would be forced or enticed into covering such measures. If preventative medicine could be undertaken on a large scale such as this, the reduction in disease would be much greater than the paltry 5% predicted in these particular studies, and people would begin to actually live better and longer, without the use of toxic drugs. Hmm, I wonder how Big Pharma would feel about this?
Disease Prevention Programs Worth the Investment
Within five years, $16 billion a year could be saved, report claims
Posted July 17, 2008
By Ed EdelsonHealthDay Reporter
THURSDAY, July 17 (HealthDay News) -- Community-based health programs aimed at diet, exercise, smoking prevention and other known risk factors for chronic diseases could cut health-care costs in the United States by $16 billion a year, a new report says.
"We worked with economists at the Urban Institute who looked at health-care costs associated with these chronic diseases," said Jeffrey Levi, executive director of the Washington-based Trust for America's Health, which issued the report. "They estimated a 5 percent reduction in these chronic diseases to derive these savings."
The estimate was based on a model developed at the Urban Institute and a review of studies on the cost and effectiveness of prevention programs by experts at the New York Academy of Medicine.
Spending $10 a year per person would save the United States more than $16 billion annually within five years, the economists said, for a return of $5.60 on every $1 invested. Their survey showed that effective prevention programs costing less than $10 per person could reduce rates of type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure by 5 percent within two years, reduce heart disease, kidney disease and stroke by 5 percent within five years, and reduce some forms of cancer, arthritis and lung disease by 2.5 percent in 10 to 20 years.
Who would pay for the prevention programs? Primarily the same agencies that promote prevention programs now, such as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and other agencies, along with state and local health departments, according to Levi.
"But since private insurance companies and Medicare and Medicaid would benefit, the question is whether some of these resources should be tapped," Levi said.
Medicare would save more than $5 billion a year, Medicaid would save more than $1.9 billion and private health insurers would save more than $9 billion, the economists estimated.
Levi said the report is "a call to action for people to recognize the importance of investing in these kinds of prevention measures."
"The programs recommended by the Trust for America's Health is an absolutely complementary approach" to preventive measures recently proposed in a collaboration by the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society and the American Diabetes Association, said Dr. Rose Marie Robertson, chief science officer of the heart association.
"In the paper we just published, we looked at the concept that if people in the United States have some risk factor for cardiovascular disease, cancer or diabetes, they should see a health provider and get guidance to reduce or eliminate the risk factor," Robertson said.
Both approaches concentrate on the same risk factors, such as high blood pressure, smoking and lack of physical activity, but one proposes community programs, and the other suggests individual activity guided by physicians, she said.
The endpoints measured in the two programs were different. "What we looked at primarily was the life years saved," Robertson said. "People would not only live longer but have good quality years. They would add millions of quality-adjusted life years."
People worried about known risk factors should see a physician, she said. "There is a cost to doing that, but it doesn't cost as much as many of the things we think are reasonable. And you get great bang for the buck."
More information
The full report on preventive programs and the money they would save is available from the Trust for America's Health.
http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2008/07/17/disease-prevention-programs-worth-the-investment.html
Friday, July 18, 2008
Big Pharma and FDA Seek to Eliminate Vitamin B6 Sales
In another frightening example of pretzel logic that is the unfortunate trade mark of the FDA and Big Pharma conglomerate, a plan is in the works to make it illegal to manufacture or distribute one of nature's many powerful and beneficial substances known as vitamin B6. This would be bad enough if it were an isolated incident, but it is just one of many cases that have surfaced in recent decades that demonstrate the hostile attitude of the powers that be towards those who seek to treat and prevent disease naturally rather than through the use of hazardous chemicals produced by the pharmaceutical industry.
As we discussed earlier this week here on the blog, freedoms of all types, including the freedom to choose how we manage the health or our families, are in serious peril in this land. Perhaps it will get to the point where we will be forced to go "off the grid," so to speak, and remove ourselves from any activity or association with conventional medicine or any type of health insurance. The only way to beat the forces that seek to squeeze us into their mold may be to quit using their services altogether and take care of our own doctoring the way it was done in centuries past. The only other route would be a revolution in this country that restores the rights of us all to practice health care as we best see fit without being persecuted and harassed by ridiculous policies instituted by authorities who are driven and influenced by profits instead of the welfare of the public.
Health Freedom Warning: Drug Company Seeks to Outlaw Vitamin B6 to Protect Pharma Profits
by Mike Adams
(NaturalNews) Big Pharma is constantly finding new ways to destroy the natural supplements market, in much the same way that the American Medical Association once sought to destroy the chiropractic industry (for which it was later found guilty of conspiracy in U.S. courts, by the way). The latest attack against vitamins comes from an FDA petition filed by Medicure Pharma, Inc., which has astonishingly asked the FDA to ban the sale of Vitamin B6!
Vitamin B6, of course, is a naturally-occurring nutrient found in numerous vegetables, nuts and whole grains. Its natural form is called pyridoxal 5'-phosphate or P5P for short. It's an essential nutrient for expectant mothers, growing children and anyone who wishes to be healthy. It's absolutely crucial for healthy blood cell function, and it's used in over 100 enzymatic reactions involving protein metabolism.
So why would a pharmaceutical company petition the FDA to outlaw the sale of this essential nutrient? It's simple: Because Big Pharma wants to market its own form of Vitamin B6 and call it a "drug."
Medicure Pharma, Inc., has been studying the clinical effects of Vitamin B6 (which they call "MC-1") on humans. This is part of a process for receiving FDA approval on MC-1 as a "drug," and then marketing this drug through the conventional medical system (and selling it at markups that can reach 500,000% over the cost of the actual ingredients).
This issue was reported by the Alliance for Natural Health, an outstanding health freedom organization that deserves your support. You can read about this Vitamin B6 issue (along with links to the petition) at: http://www.anhcampaign.org/news/hand-ph...
Obviously, it is in the financial interest of Medicure Pharma, Inc. to not only receive FDA approval for their "MC-1" version of Vitamin B6; it's also crucial to eliminate the competition. After all, if people knew MC-1 was just Vitamin B6, they could go out and buy it on their own, for a fraction of the price of a prescription drug. This is most likely why Medicure Pharma petitioned the FDA to outlaw Vitamin B6 supplements: It's the simplest and easiest way to eliminate the competition and guarantee profits!
Screwy logic, biopiracy and Big Pharma scams
So what's the logic behind banning Vitamin B6? It's simple: Medicare Pharma wants the FDA to declare Vitamin B6 to be "adulterated" because it contains a drug. Which drug does it contain? Well, MC-1, of course!
Do you see the circular reasoning here? Vitamin B6 is a naturally-occurring vitamin, but if a drug company gets FDA approval on Vitamin B6 (with a different name), then that very same drug company can petition the FDA to ban Vitamin B6, claiming it contains their drug!
I know this sounds incredibly stupid. And it is. But it isn't unprecedented. In fact, the very same thing happened with red yeast rice.
A few years ago, drug companies discovered that red yeast rice (a natural supplement) contained powerful, natural compounds that balance cholesterol levels. These compounds are called lovastatins (sound familiar?)
Drug companies ripped off the lovastatin molecules from red yeast rice, then patented them. Once they achieved FDA approval for their "statin drugs," it was easy to file a petition requesting the outlawing of red yeast rice, claiming the supplement was "adulterated" with drugs! Which drugs? Statin drugs, of course -- the very same drugs that were isolated from red yeast rice in the first place!
This is why the FDA has been on a terror campaign to outlaw red yeast rice supplements. They've sent warning letters to online retailers and threatened numerous companies with legal action. The point of all this is to eliminate red yeast rice from the marketplace because it competes with statin drugs. And it's the exact same strategy now being following by Medicure Pharma in its attempt to get the FDA to ban Vitamin B6.
Was it a move out of financial desperation?
Medicure Pharma, by the way, is losing its shirt. It recently received notice from the American Stock Exchange that it would be "delisted" because it no longer meets the minimum requirement for shareholder equity vs. ongoing fiscal losses. In other words, the company is losing too much money and has too little shareholder equity to even stay listed in the American Stock Exchange.
This might explain its decision to petition the FDA to outlaw the sale of Vitamin B6 (P5P). If consumers were unable to buy the vitamins, many would have no choice but to seek out the company's own patented, high-profit MC-1 version of the vitamin, and that would generate a windfall of profits!
Making money in the pharmaceutical industry, you see, is not about helping people in any real way; it's about limiting their options, controlling the marketplace, and forcing people to buy products from you at monopoly prices.
This is, in fact, the underlying business model of the entire pharmaceutical industry: Selling drugs at monopoly prices while outlawing competing products. Any approval by the FDA is, in effect, a license to engage in monopolistic market practices. And remarkably, the FDA even enforces this monopoly by threatening, intimidating and raiding the warehouses of competing product companies, especially if they're in the "natural" products industry.
Even more remarkably, the FTC, which claims to protect fair market practices in the United States, has utterly ignored the monopoly practices of Big Pharma. Yes, the same government office that went after Microsoft for creating a "monopoly" user interface in Windows seems to have no interest whatsoever in going after drug companies engaged in widespread, fraudulent monopoly marketing practices that are bankrupting the entire nation! (How's that for selective enforcement of trade practices?)
We must either stop the FDA, or lose all access to herbs and supplements
Do you see where all this is ultimately headed? If the FDA is allowed to keep banning nutritional supplements while promoting the very same drugs synthesized from those natural sources, it could allow Big Pharma to commit widespread biopiracy, stealing all the good medicine from nature, claiming patent protection on the useful molecules, and getting the FDA to outlaw virtually all the natural substances from which those medicines were first derived.
It's not a particularly brilliant strategy, but it is exceedingly effective at defrauding the public out of trillions of dollars in dishonest profits. And the fact that this is going on today gives additional support to something I've proposed for quite some time: Ending all patent protection on medicines, genes and seeds.
I say, there should never be a financial incentive for corporations to deny the People access to information and products that could halt disease, end suffering, and enhance their health. And yet today's conventional medical system is set up precisely to profit from the ongoing disease of the People.
It is a system that offers no cures, no education and no honest information to the public about real health solutions. It only offers a lifetime of ever-more-expensive patented pharmaceuticals that lead to a downward spiral of bad health and bad debt until more and more American families are left diseased and penniless, victims of a profiteering system of medicine that trades lives for profits as the foundation of its business model.
It is time for radical -- revolutionary, in fact! -- changes to our system of medicine, and I believe that begins by ending all patent protection for medicines, genes and seeds. These things belong to ALL the People, not just the rich, white fat cats who take home $300 million annual salaries by fraudulently selling dangerous prescription medications to people who are only harmed by them.
Watch NaturalNews tomorrow, for I'll be publishing a grassroots action article that dares to call for revolutionary action designed to rebuild a new health care system following the coming collapse of the American Empire.
You sense it coming, don't you? A year ago, you were skeptical, but now you know it's true: Skyrocketing fuel prices, hiking food prices, collapsing real estate bubbles, the demise of the U.S. dollar in international markets, failed wars and massive inflation caused by the Fed's bailout of rich white bankers... these are all signs of a modern Roman Empire that's about to collapse under the weight of its debt, disease and disastrous war mongering.
The end of American as we know it is coming. And it will be replaced by a new nation, built upon the ideas of people like you and me (those of us who can still think clearly because we're not all drugged out on Ambien...)
So read NaturalNews tomorrow to learn about what we need to do after the coming collapse of the U.S. government to rebuild a nation based in individual liberties, Free Speech, true health and respect for nature.
In the mean time if you want to send your comments to the FDA on this Vitamin B6 petition, the web page for you to file a comment on this Vitamin B6 issue is located here: http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/c...
To file a comment, you have to click the little text balloon beside the phrase "Add Comments." It's difficult to find on the page, which just goes to show you that the FDA isn't really interested in people adding comments in the first place.
Be sure to also visit the Alliance for Natural Health at www.ANHcampaign.org
http://www.naturalnews.com/023514.html
As we discussed earlier this week here on the blog, freedoms of all types, including the freedom to choose how we manage the health or our families, are in serious peril in this land. Perhaps it will get to the point where we will be forced to go "off the grid," so to speak, and remove ourselves from any activity or association with conventional medicine or any type of health insurance. The only way to beat the forces that seek to squeeze us into their mold may be to quit using their services altogether and take care of our own doctoring the way it was done in centuries past. The only other route would be a revolution in this country that restores the rights of us all to practice health care as we best see fit without being persecuted and harassed by ridiculous policies instituted by authorities who are driven and influenced by profits instead of the welfare of the public.
Health Freedom Warning: Drug Company Seeks to Outlaw Vitamin B6 to Protect Pharma Profits
by Mike Adams
(NaturalNews) Big Pharma is constantly finding new ways to destroy the natural supplements market, in much the same way that the American Medical Association once sought to destroy the chiropractic industry (for which it was later found guilty of conspiracy in U.S. courts, by the way). The latest attack against vitamins comes from an FDA petition filed by Medicure Pharma, Inc., which has astonishingly asked the FDA to ban the sale of Vitamin B6!
Vitamin B6, of course, is a naturally-occurring nutrient found in numerous vegetables, nuts and whole grains. Its natural form is called pyridoxal 5'-phosphate or P5P for short. It's an essential nutrient for expectant mothers, growing children and anyone who wishes to be healthy. It's absolutely crucial for healthy blood cell function, and it's used in over 100 enzymatic reactions involving protein metabolism.
So why would a pharmaceutical company petition the FDA to outlaw the sale of this essential nutrient? It's simple: Because Big Pharma wants to market its own form of Vitamin B6 and call it a "drug."
Medicure Pharma, Inc., has been studying the clinical effects of Vitamin B6 (which they call "MC-1") on humans. This is part of a process for receiving FDA approval on MC-1 as a "drug," and then marketing this drug through the conventional medical system (and selling it at markups that can reach 500,000% over the cost of the actual ingredients).
This issue was reported by the Alliance for Natural Health, an outstanding health freedom organization that deserves your support. You can read about this Vitamin B6 issue (along with links to the petition) at: http://www.anhcampaign.org/news/hand-ph...
Obviously, it is in the financial interest of Medicure Pharma, Inc. to not only receive FDA approval for their "MC-1" version of Vitamin B6; it's also crucial to eliminate the competition. After all, if people knew MC-1 was just Vitamin B6, they could go out and buy it on their own, for a fraction of the price of a prescription drug. This is most likely why Medicure Pharma petitioned the FDA to outlaw Vitamin B6 supplements: It's the simplest and easiest way to eliminate the competition and guarantee profits!
Screwy logic, biopiracy and Big Pharma scams
So what's the logic behind banning Vitamin B6? It's simple: Medicare Pharma wants the FDA to declare Vitamin B6 to be "adulterated" because it contains a drug. Which drug does it contain? Well, MC-1, of course!
Do you see the circular reasoning here? Vitamin B6 is a naturally-occurring vitamin, but if a drug company gets FDA approval on Vitamin B6 (with a different name), then that very same drug company can petition the FDA to ban Vitamin B6, claiming it contains their drug!
I know this sounds incredibly stupid. And it is. But it isn't unprecedented. In fact, the very same thing happened with red yeast rice.
A few years ago, drug companies discovered that red yeast rice (a natural supplement) contained powerful, natural compounds that balance cholesterol levels. These compounds are called lovastatins (sound familiar?)
Drug companies ripped off the lovastatin molecules from red yeast rice, then patented them. Once they achieved FDA approval for their "statin drugs," it was easy to file a petition requesting the outlawing of red yeast rice, claiming the supplement was "adulterated" with drugs! Which drugs? Statin drugs, of course -- the very same drugs that were isolated from red yeast rice in the first place!
This is why the FDA has been on a terror campaign to outlaw red yeast rice supplements. They've sent warning letters to online retailers and threatened numerous companies with legal action. The point of all this is to eliminate red yeast rice from the marketplace because it competes with statin drugs. And it's the exact same strategy now being following by Medicure Pharma in its attempt to get the FDA to ban Vitamin B6.
Was it a move out of financial desperation?
Medicure Pharma, by the way, is losing its shirt. It recently received notice from the American Stock Exchange that it would be "delisted" because it no longer meets the minimum requirement for shareholder equity vs. ongoing fiscal losses. In other words, the company is losing too much money and has too little shareholder equity to even stay listed in the American Stock Exchange.
This might explain its decision to petition the FDA to outlaw the sale of Vitamin B6 (P5P). If consumers were unable to buy the vitamins, many would have no choice but to seek out the company's own patented, high-profit MC-1 version of the vitamin, and that would generate a windfall of profits!
Making money in the pharmaceutical industry, you see, is not about helping people in any real way; it's about limiting their options, controlling the marketplace, and forcing people to buy products from you at monopoly prices.
This is, in fact, the underlying business model of the entire pharmaceutical industry: Selling drugs at monopoly prices while outlawing competing products. Any approval by the FDA is, in effect, a license to engage in monopolistic market practices. And remarkably, the FDA even enforces this monopoly by threatening, intimidating and raiding the warehouses of competing product companies, especially if they're in the "natural" products industry.
Even more remarkably, the FTC, which claims to protect fair market practices in the United States, has utterly ignored the monopoly practices of Big Pharma. Yes, the same government office that went after Microsoft for creating a "monopoly" user interface in Windows seems to have no interest whatsoever in going after drug companies engaged in widespread, fraudulent monopoly marketing practices that are bankrupting the entire nation! (How's that for selective enforcement of trade practices?)
We must either stop the FDA, or lose all access to herbs and supplements
Do you see where all this is ultimately headed? If the FDA is allowed to keep banning nutritional supplements while promoting the very same drugs synthesized from those natural sources, it could allow Big Pharma to commit widespread biopiracy, stealing all the good medicine from nature, claiming patent protection on the useful molecules, and getting the FDA to outlaw virtually all the natural substances from which those medicines were first derived.
It's not a particularly brilliant strategy, but it is exceedingly effective at defrauding the public out of trillions of dollars in dishonest profits. And the fact that this is going on today gives additional support to something I've proposed for quite some time: Ending all patent protection on medicines, genes and seeds.
I say, there should never be a financial incentive for corporations to deny the People access to information and products that could halt disease, end suffering, and enhance their health. And yet today's conventional medical system is set up precisely to profit from the ongoing disease of the People.
It is a system that offers no cures, no education and no honest information to the public about real health solutions. It only offers a lifetime of ever-more-expensive patented pharmaceuticals that lead to a downward spiral of bad health and bad debt until more and more American families are left diseased and penniless, victims of a profiteering system of medicine that trades lives for profits as the foundation of its business model.
It is time for radical -- revolutionary, in fact! -- changes to our system of medicine, and I believe that begins by ending all patent protection for medicines, genes and seeds. These things belong to ALL the People, not just the rich, white fat cats who take home $300 million annual salaries by fraudulently selling dangerous prescription medications to people who are only harmed by them.
Watch NaturalNews tomorrow, for I'll be publishing a grassroots action article that dares to call for revolutionary action designed to rebuild a new health care system following the coming collapse of the American Empire.
You sense it coming, don't you? A year ago, you were skeptical, but now you know it's true: Skyrocketing fuel prices, hiking food prices, collapsing real estate bubbles, the demise of the U.S. dollar in international markets, failed wars and massive inflation caused by the Fed's bailout of rich white bankers... these are all signs of a modern Roman Empire that's about to collapse under the weight of its debt, disease and disastrous war mongering.
The end of American as we know it is coming. And it will be replaced by a new nation, built upon the ideas of people like you and me (those of us who can still think clearly because we're not all drugged out on Ambien...)
So read NaturalNews tomorrow to learn about what we need to do after the coming collapse of the U.S. government to rebuild a nation based in individual liberties, Free Speech, true health and respect for nature.
In the mean time if you want to send your comments to the FDA on this Vitamin B6 petition, the web page for you to file a comment on this Vitamin B6 issue is located here: http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/c...
To file a comment, you have to click the little text balloon beside the phrase "Add Comments." It's difficult to find on the page, which just goes to show you that the FDA isn't really interested in people adding comments in the first place.
Be sure to also visit the Alliance for Natural Health at www.ANHcampaign.org
http://www.naturalnews.com/023514.html
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Scandalous Corruption Within the FDA
The following article holds no punches when it comes to exposing the shameful network between the FDA, pharmaceutical companies, and the justice system, and how these relationships have sacrificed the lives of countless Americans on the altar of the almighty buck. Fortunes are being made off of dangerous chemicals that are being passed off as beneficial medicines or food additives, and regulatory agencies are turning a blind eye to it all, or even worse, participating directly in the deception.
The United States is on the verge of becoming a police state that is run by out of control government agencies whose employees are not elected and are therefore not held accountable to the public or the laws of this land. In order for sanity to return and the American people to recover their lost rights, deep and significant change must occur that can only be accomplished through a revolution within the leadership of this country. However, the political system being what it is, the odds are stacked against anyone that seeks to defy the establishment and usher in a return to common sense and true freedom for the masses.
Ron Paul, a recent candidate for President, is a classic example of this David and Goliath type of situation. Mr. Paul has a ton of wonderful ideas about government that truly serves the people instead of lining their own pockets, but he was not able to overcome and get his name on the ballot this November. However, all hope is not lost! After pulling out of the Presidential race, Paul is encouraging his supporters to get involved in grassroot politics at the local and regional level. He believes this is the most powerful way to bring about substantial change in Washington, and I tend to agree; however, I would love to see a March on Washington for Health Freedom. If enough of us stand up and become proactively involved, perhaps we will see a return to the America that our forefathers fought and died for. Don't hesitate to make sure that your representatives know where you stand concerning health issues and health freedoms. Hold them accountable and find out where they stand. If we neglect to make sure our voice is heard and our vote is counted, we may wake up one morning to news that natural vitamins, supplements and natural health modalities now require a prescription from your MD who hasn't a clue about natural health and healing. It's happened this quickly in other countries, let's not allow it to happen here.
HOW MANY MORE WILL DIE BEFORE FDA GHOULS ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE?
By: DevvyJuly 14, 2008
Copyright 2008 - NewsWithViews.com
The American people have grown up with so many federal alphabet soup agencies, they've become immune to the dastardly deeds done by these unelected officials - except when it hits their home. When I refer to the FDA, I don't mean the Federal Drug Administration, I mean the Federal Death Administration. This agency derives its jurisdiction from treaties and has been getting away with destroying people's health for decades, and in too many cases, the result is death. The FDA is nothing more than another out of control agency answerable to no one. It needs to be abolished. While I was still writing news items for NWVs back in 2004, I wrote a piece on Donald Rumsfeld and aspartame. The mail came flooding in with accusations that aspartame was perfectly safe because the ghouls at the FDA said so! I followed up the deluge with a column under my own by-line; Aspartame Concerns - Junk Science, Quack Doctors?
Dr. Betty Martini has been a pioneer in exposing the devastating effects of ingesting that deadly chemical. Naturally, she's been attacked on a regular basis as have doctors and scientists who have studied the effects of aspartame on the human body - particularly the brain. Anyone who dares expose the truth which cuts into the profits of the big pharma houses is persecuted by the ghouls at the Federal Death Administration. Many are political prisoners for doing nothing more than trying to naturally treat their patients.
This is especially true for the multi-billion dollar a year cancer industry; see The Cancer Research Money Machines. Since I wrote that column almost two years ago, more "safe" drugs and treatments, given the stamp of approval by the Federal Death Administration, have proven fatal. Let's start with Gardasil, a new, deadly vaccine that I've covered in previous columns:
July 3, 2008. From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton: Judicial Watch Uncovers Shocking New FDA Documents Related to Gardasil
"Those of you who regularly read this column know that Judicial Watch has taken the lead in exposing the ugly truth about the dangerous side effects associated with Gardasil, the vaccination for human papillomavirus (HPV) currently being administered to young girls.
"Well this week, we released a special report based on new "adverse event reports" and other information obtained from the FDA under the Freedom of Information Act. These reports document 10 reported deaths since September, 2007. (The total number of death reports is at least 18 and as many as 20.) The FDA also produced 140 "serious" reports (27 of which were categorized as "life threatening"), 10 spontaneous abortions and six cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome - all since January 2008. Here are a few excerpts from the documents we uncovered. The rest can be read in our report. (Warning: These descriptions get very graphic.)"
July 7, 2008. Should parents worry about HPV vaccine? "7,802 "adverse event" reports to CDC since Gardasil was approved. Reports claim drug caused nausea and paralysis -- even death."
Only after enough Americans die or thousands have their health destroyed, does the FDA pull some of these dangerous drugs:
October 8, 2007, FDA pulls Drug for Stomach Ills Is Pulled From the Market: rug for Stomach Ills Is Pulled From the Market: Zelnorm...Arthritis Drug Bextra Pulled: "The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today requested Pfizer recall arthritis drug Bextra (valdexocib) and change the warning label on Celebrex (celecoxib)...Parkinson's disease drug pulled from market: "The FDA pulled a Parkinson's drug from the market after reports of heart valve damage in more than a dozen patients. Pergolide is sold under the name Permax and is believed to raise the risk of heart valve damage by 20 percent." "FDA Okays Stomach Drugs Prilosec And Nexium, For Now. Diabetes drug should be pulled over heart risks, FDA scientist says; Avandia."
How about the widely popular, HRT (hormone replacement therapy) drug, Prempro, found in the government's own study to increase a healthy woman's risk of breast cancer by 24%, stroke by 41% and heart attack by 29%?
April 24, 2007. 70 women 'die each year from cancer after taking HRT. "But the UK-sponsored Million Women Study now suggests HRT resulted in 1,300 extra cases of ovarian cancer between 1991 and 2005. Of these women, 1,000 died of the disease."
2008: Wyeth, Pfizer ordered to pay $27 million in punitive damages. "A Little Rock, Ark., federal jury found Wyeth Pharmaceuticals and Upjohn (a Pfizer unit) liable for $27 million in punitive damages to Donna Scroggin, who sued the drug manufacturers in 2004 after developing breast cancer after taking hormone replacement therapy. The award includes $19.3 million from Wyeth and $7.7 from Upjohn.
"Wyeth manufactures Premarin, an estrogen replacement, and Prempro, which is a combination of estrogen and progestin. These, along with Upjohn's Provera, which contains progestin, are commonly prescribed to treat the unpleasant effects of menopause....About 25 million American women use hormone replacement therapy (HRT) to ease the discomfort of menopause. There are about 5,300 similar cases pending across the country for Premarin and Prempro."
Here's a news flash: These dangerous cocktails are still on the market and being prescribed! I've never taken any form of HRT and am truly thankful I listened to my friend, Dr. Lorraine Day, 14 years ago. The 25 million women who use HRT's in this country just might be 'concerned' they will end up dead from breast and/or cervical cancer. I don't understand why anyone would take these drugs once you read the side effects: "Long-term treatment with Prempro may increase your risk of breast cancer, heart attack, or stroke." To help with hot flashes? Perhaps women should try natural supplements (Evening Primrose Oil, Dong Quai, Black Cohash) and a good 100% Mexican Yam progersterone cream for hot flashes. Okay, I have to give the disclaimer: I'm not a doctor nor am I making a medical referral here. I wouldn't want the Nazi's from the Department of Fatherland Security to charge me with some federal crime, i.e., prescribing natural supplements without the approval of the ghouls at the FDA.
People ask me all the time why can't Americans see what's happening in this country? Why the apathy? Well, a number of reasons: ignorance of the facts, blind loyalty to their political party; they take our freedoms for granted while distracted by meaningless past times likes sports and the mall, as well as being poorly educated on the history of this constitutional republic. I also believe it's because we have a nation of sick and dying people by the millions who are incapable of analyzing the big picture. Americans have been ingesting deadly chemicals into their bodies for decades, courtesy of the FDA. Aspartame is dangerous to your brain; please read this important warning. Aspartame is in most commercial yogurts, diet soft drinks and thousands of food products.
What about fluoride?
Germans and Russians Used Fluoride to Make Prisoners Stupid and Docile
"While a member of the Communist Party, I attended Communist underground training schools outside the City of New York.. Here, under the tutoring of Eugene Dennis, M. Sparks, Morris Chyilds, Jack Kling and others, we were schooled in the art of revolutionary overthrow of the established Government. We discussed quite thoroughly the fluoridation of water supplies and how we were using it in Russia as a tranquilizer in the prison camps. The leaders of our school felt that if it could be induced into the American water supply, it would bring about a spirit of lethargy in the nation; where it would keep the general public docile during a steady encroachment of Communism...We discussed in these schools, the complete art of revolution: the seizure of the main utilities, such as light, power, gas and water, but it was felt by the leadership that if a program of fluoridating the water could be carried out in the nation, it would go a long way toward the advancement of the revolution." Oliver Kenneth Goff, 1957
Americans have been drinking this deadly poison for almost as long as I've been alive. I stopped drinking any tap water 41 years ago; I don't even give it to my dogs or cook with it. A couple hundred million Americans brush their teeth with it everyday, it's in most commercial mouth washes and dentists use it on their patients. So, you have mass ingestion of aspartame, cooking people's brain and destroying their bodies while enriching the big pharmaceutical companies for more drugs to treat the results of aspartame poisoning! Douse the masses with fluoride to make them apathetic, lethargic and unable to resist. In other words, little better than cattle, controlled using the herding technique. I hate to put it that way, but I also hate what's been done to my fellow Americans. Yes, without question, certain drugs and vaccines are safe and they have benefited mankind in remarkable ways. But, that does not excuse the shoddy science being used by manufacturers who cover up the results and then get bad drugs approved by their coconspirators at the FDA.
One emailer, Captain Bobby, kept sending me requests to expose what he calls a lyme disease epidemic. He asked me with deep frustration in his emails why I wouldn't expose this and how people like him are suffering 24/7? If I wrote ten columns a day, eight days a week, I couldn't cover the thousand cuts killing this nation and our people. However, in the mini-master file discussed below, I have included credible information on lyme disease -- including denials that it's even a problem!
Then, there is the real danger from the chemical cocktails being dropped on this country called chemtrails. I've done many columns on this human and environmental disaster; new material is included in the mini-master file discussed below.
There isn't room in this column to list all the articles and studies I have been saving, so what I've done is put them in this mini-master file for you to read over the weekend or when ever you can. Nothing is more important than good health. For you and your family. Also, I strongly recommend you listen to Dr. Sherry Tenpenny during a recent interview on KAJO Radio during the Carl Wilson show. Sherry is an expert regarding vaccines and your right to say no. Every parent in America needs to read her columns and listen to this interview. I have four brothers and sisters. Like our parents, the only vaccines we had were smallpox, diphtheria and polio. I also made sure my daughter received only those three. Thank, God.
How many more Americans will die, have strokes or suffer life long medical problems from deadly chemicals and treatments approved by the FDA? These poltroons in Congress who also own stock in pharmaceutical companies, continue to pass legislation to protect their big $$ donors and dividend checks, while parents try to cope with sick or dying children they love so much. Do you not cry for them? Congress has given these drug peddlers immunity more times than you can imagine to protect them from lawsuits. Look at the hundreds of billions of dollars in settlements, enriching lawyers like former presidential candidate, John Edwards, after these drugs given the "safe" label by the FDA, turned out to be a killer or laid low thousands of Americans by stokes and heart attacks?
Is the head of the FDA (past and present) ever held accountable? NO. They just resign and move on to another lucrative job if there's some heat. How about their lackeys? NO. You can sue the federal government, but it's a nightmare. Why should we the people continue paying taxes for settlements when the people who caused the problem (FDA) are never held accountable?
The honchos at the FDA who do the approving of these deadly cocktails walk around with impunity because they know from past history that these cowards in Congress will not hold them accountable. I believe at the very least, the head of the FDA and his underlings should be indicted by a grand jury for conspiracy to commit murder, reckless disregard for human life and any other charges a grand jury in any of the 50 states can find that applies -- if you could get jurisdiction using the same legal basis as Bugliosi did in his book, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder. It's a slam dunk the corrupt Federal Department of Justice under Attorney General Michael Mukasey, won't lift a finger for justice for the victims.
The FDA pulls these deadly drugs off the market - AFTER people like my brother have a major stroke that almost kills him (VIOXX). Then, the head of the FDA goes back to business as usual and power lunches in DC with his big pharma house buddies and is NEVER held accountable. I say it's long past time these people are held accountable in the criminal justice system. Giving these unelected officials immunity after wreaking such death and destruction on the American people cannot and must not be allowed to continue. This will NOT happen if the American people vote back in the same incumbents who have done nothing to stop the FDA's madness other than more meaningless hearings. Change cannot happen with the same players. In the meantime, dangerous drugs are still on the market and unsuspecting Americans will die or their health destroyed, requiring them to spend even more money for the pharmaceutical companies (pills) to "treat them." Don't you think it's time to hold Congress and the FDA officials accountable?
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd376.htm
The United States is on the verge of becoming a police state that is run by out of control government agencies whose employees are not elected and are therefore not held accountable to the public or the laws of this land. In order for sanity to return and the American people to recover their lost rights, deep and significant change must occur that can only be accomplished through a revolution within the leadership of this country. However, the political system being what it is, the odds are stacked against anyone that seeks to defy the establishment and usher in a return to common sense and true freedom for the masses.
Ron Paul, a recent candidate for President, is a classic example of this David and Goliath type of situation. Mr. Paul has a ton of wonderful ideas about government that truly serves the people instead of lining their own pockets, but he was not able to overcome and get his name on the ballot this November. However, all hope is not lost! After pulling out of the Presidential race, Paul is encouraging his supporters to get involved in grassroot politics at the local and regional level. He believes this is the most powerful way to bring about substantial change in Washington, and I tend to agree; however, I would love to see a March on Washington for Health Freedom. If enough of us stand up and become proactively involved, perhaps we will see a return to the America that our forefathers fought and died for. Don't hesitate to make sure that your representatives know where you stand concerning health issues and health freedoms. Hold them accountable and find out where they stand. If we neglect to make sure our voice is heard and our vote is counted, we may wake up one morning to news that natural vitamins, supplements and natural health modalities now require a prescription from your MD who hasn't a clue about natural health and healing. It's happened this quickly in other countries, let's not allow it to happen here.
HOW MANY MORE WILL DIE BEFORE FDA GHOULS ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE?
By: DevvyJuly 14, 2008
Copyright 2008 - NewsWithViews.com
The American people have grown up with so many federal alphabet soup agencies, they've become immune to the dastardly deeds done by these unelected officials - except when it hits their home. When I refer to the FDA, I don't mean the Federal Drug Administration, I mean the Federal Death Administration. This agency derives its jurisdiction from treaties and has been getting away with destroying people's health for decades, and in too many cases, the result is death. The FDA is nothing more than another out of control agency answerable to no one. It needs to be abolished. While I was still writing news items for NWVs back in 2004, I wrote a piece on Donald Rumsfeld and aspartame. The mail came flooding in with accusations that aspartame was perfectly safe because the ghouls at the FDA said so! I followed up the deluge with a column under my own by-line; Aspartame Concerns - Junk Science, Quack Doctors?
Dr. Betty Martini has been a pioneer in exposing the devastating effects of ingesting that deadly chemical. Naturally, she's been attacked on a regular basis as have doctors and scientists who have studied the effects of aspartame on the human body - particularly the brain. Anyone who dares expose the truth which cuts into the profits of the big pharma houses is persecuted by the ghouls at the Federal Death Administration. Many are political prisoners for doing nothing more than trying to naturally treat their patients.
This is especially true for the multi-billion dollar a year cancer industry; see The Cancer Research Money Machines. Since I wrote that column almost two years ago, more "safe" drugs and treatments, given the stamp of approval by the Federal Death Administration, have proven fatal. Let's start with Gardasil, a new, deadly vaccine that I've covered in previous columns:
July 3, 2008. From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton: Judicial Watch Uncovers Shocking New FDA Documents Related to Gardasil
"Those of you who regularly read this column know that Judicial Watch has taken the lead in exposing the ugly truth about the dangerous side effects associated with Gardasil, the vaccination for human papillomavirus (HPV) currently being administered to young girls.
"Well this week, we released a special report based on new "adverse event reports" and other information obtained from the FDA under the Freedom of Information Act. These reports document 10 reported deaths since September, 2007. (The total number of death reports is at least 18 and as many as 20.) The FDA also produced 140 "serious" reports (27 of which were categorized as "life threatening"), 10 spontaneous abortions and six cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome - all since January 2008. Here are a few excerpts from the documents we uncovered. The rest can be read in our report. (Warning: These descriptions get very graphic.)"
July 7, 2008. Should parents worry about HPV vaccine? "7,802 "adverse event" reports to CDC since Gardasil was approved. Reports claim drug caused nausea and paralysis -- even death."
Only after enough Americans die or thousands have their health destroyed, does the FDA pull some of these dangerous drugs:
October 8, 2007, FDA pulls Drug for Stomach Ills Is Pulled From the Market: rug for Stomach Ills Is Pulled From the Market: Zelnorm...Arthritis Drug Bextra Pulled: "The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today requested Pfizer recall arthritis drug Bextra (valdexocib) and change the warning label on Celebrex (celecoxib)...Parkinson's disease drug pulled from market: "The FDA pulled a Parkinson's drug from the market after reports of heart valve damage in more than a dozen patients. Pergolide is sold under the name Permax and is believed to raise the risk of heart valve damage by 20 percent." "FDA Okays Stomach Drugs Prilosec And Nexium, For Now. Diabetes drug should be pulled over heart risks, FDA scientist says; Avandia."
How about the widely popular, HRT (hormone replacement therapy) drug, Prempro, found in the government's own study to increase a healthy woman's risk of breast cancer by 24%, stroke by 41% and heart attack by 29%?
April 24, 2007. 70 women 'die each year from cancer after taking HRT. "But the UK-sponsored Million Women Study now suggests HRT resulted in 1,300 extra cases of ovarian cancer between 1991 and 2005. Of these women, 1,000 died of the disease."
2008: Wyeth, Pfizer ordered to pay $27 million in punitive damages. "A Little Rock, Ark., federal jury found Wyeth Pharmaceuticals and Upjohn (a Pfizer unit) liable for $27 million in punitive damages to Donna Scroggin, who sued the drug manufacturers in 2004 after developing breast cancer after taking hormone replacement therapy. The award includes $19.3 million from Wyeth and $7.7 from Upjohn.
"Wyeth manufactures Premarin, an estrogen replacement, and Prempro, which is a combination of estrogen and progestin. These, along with Upjohn's Provera, which contains progestin, are commonly prescribed to treat the unpleasant effects of menopause....About 25 million American women use hormone replacement therapy (HRT) to ease the discomfort of menopause. There are about 5,300 similar cases pending across the country for Premarin and Prempro."
Here's a news flash: These dangerous cocktails are still on the market and being prescribed! I've never taken any form of HRT and am truly thankful I listened to my friend, Dr. Lorraine Day, 14 years ago. The 25 million women who use HRT's in this country just might be 'concerned' they will end up dead from breast and/or cervical cancer. I don't understand why anyone would take these drugs once you read the side effects: "Long-term treatment with Prempro may increase your risk of breast cancer, heart attack, or stroke." To help with hot flashes? Perhaps women should try natural supplements (Evening Primrose Oil, Dong Quai, Black Cohash) and a good 100% Mexican Yam progersterone cream for hot flashes. Okay, I have to give the disclaimer: I'm not a doctor nor am I making a medical referral here. I wouldn't want the Nazi's from the Department of Fatherland Security to charge me with some federal crime, i.e., prescribing natural supplements without the approval of the ghouls at the FDA.
People ask me all the time why can't Americans see what's happening in this country? Why the apathy? Well, a number of reasons: ignorance of the facts, blind loyalty to their political party; they take our freedoms for granted while distracted by meaningless past times likes sports and the mall, as well as being poorly educated on the history of this constitutional republic. I also believe it's because we have a nation of sick and dying people by the millions who are incapable of analyzing the big picture. Americans have been ingesting deadly chemicals into their bodies for decades, courtesy of the FDA. Aspartame is dangerous to your brain; please read this important warning. Aspartame is in most commercial yogurts, diet soft drinks and thousands of food products.
What about fluoride?
Germans and Russians Used Fluoride to Make Prisoners Stupid and Docile
"While a member of the Communist Party, I attended Communist underground training schools outside the City of New York.. Here, under the tutoring of Eugene Dennis, M. Sparks, Morris Chyilds, Jack Kling and others, we were schooled in the art of revolutionary overthrow of the established Government. We discussed quite thoroughly the fluoridation of water supplies and how we were using it in Russia as a tranquilizer in the prison camps. The leaders of our school felt that if it could be induced into the American water supply, it would bring about a spirit of lethargy in the nation; where it would keep the general public docile during a steady encroachment of Communism...We discussed in these schools, the complete art of revolution: the seizure of the main utilities, such as light, power, gas and water, but it was felt by the leadership that if a program of fluoridating the water could be carried out in the nation, it would go a long way toward the advancement of the revolution." Oliver Kenneth Goff, 1957
Americans have been drinking this deadly poison for almost as long as I've been alive. I stopped drinking any tap water 41 years ago; I don't even give it to my dogs or cook with it. A couple hundred million Americans brush their teeth with it everyday, it's in most commercial mouth washes and dentists use it on their patients. So, you have mass ingestion of aspartame, cooking people's brain and destroying their bodies while enriching the big pharmaceutical companies for more drugs to treat the results of aspartame poisoning! Douse the masses with fluoride to make them apathetic, lethargic and unable to resist. In other words, little better than cattle, controlled using the herding technique. I hate to put it that way, but I also hate what's been done to my fellow Americans. Yes, without question, certain drugs and vaccines are safe and they have benefited mankind in remarkable ways. But, that does not excuse the shoddy science being used by manufacturers who cover up the results and then get bad drugs approved by their coconspirators at the FDA.
One emailer, Captain Bobby, kept sending me requests to expose what he calls a lyme disease epidemic. He asked me with deep frustration in his emails why I wouldn't expose this and how people like him are suffering 24/7? If I wrote ten columns a day, eight days a week, I couldn't cover the thousand cuts killing this nation and our people. However, in the mini-master file discussed below, I have included credible information on lyme disease -- including denials that it's even a problem!
Then, there is the real danger from the chemical cocktails being dropped on this country called chemtrails. I've done many columns on this human and environmental disaster; new material is included in the mini-master file discussed below.
There isn't room in this column to list all the articles and studies I have been saving, so what I've done is put them in this mini-master file for you to read over the weekend or when ever you can. Nothing is more important than good health. For you and your family. Also, I strongly recommend you listen to Dr. Sherry Tenpenny during a recent interview on KAJO Radio during the Carl Wilson show. Sherry is an expert regarding vaccines and your right to say no. Every parent in America needs to read her columns and listen to this interview. I have four brothers and sisters. Like our parents, the only vaccines we had were smallpox, diphtheria and polio. I also made sure my daughter received only those three. Thank, God.
How many more Americans will die, have strokes or suffer life long medical problems from deadly chemicals and treatments approved by the FDA? These poltroons in Congress who also own stock in pharmaceutical companies, continue to pass legislation to protect their big $$ donors and dividend checks, while parents try to cope with sick or dying children they love so much. Do you not cry for them? Congress has given these drug peddlers immunity more times than you can imagine to protect them from lawsuits. Look at the hundreds of billions of dollars in settlements, enriching lawyers like former presidential candidate, John Edwards, after these drugs given the "safe" label by the FDA, turned out to be a killer or laid low thousands of Americans by stokes and heart attacks?
Is the head of the FDA (past and present) ever held accountable? NO. They just resign and move on to another lucrative job if there's some heat. How about their lackeys? NO. You can sue the federal government, but it's a nightmare. Why should we the people continue paying taxes for settlements when the people who caused the problem (FDA) are never held accountable?
The honchos at the FDA who do the approving of these deadly cocktails walk around with impunity because they know from past history that these cowards in Congress will not hold them accountable. I believe at the very least, the head of the FDA and his underlings should be indicted by a grand jury for conspiracy to commit murder, reckless disregard for human life and any other charges a grand jury in any of the 50 states can find that applies -- if you could get jurisdiction using the same legal basis as Bugliosi did in his book, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder. It's a slam dunk the corrupt Federal Department of Justice under Attorney General Michael Mukasey, won't lift a finger for justice for the victims.
The FDA pulls these deadly drugs off the market - AFTER people like my brother have a major stroke that almost kills him (VIOXX). Then, the head of the FDA goes back to business as usual and power lunches in DC with his big pharma house buddies and is NEVER held accountable. I say it's long past time these people are held accountable in the criminal justice system. Giving these unelected officials immunity after wreaking such death and destruction on the American people cannot and must not be allowed to continue. This will NOT happen if the American people vote back in the same incumbents who have done nothing to stop the FDA's madness other than more meaningless hearings. Change cannot happen with the same players. In the meantime, dangerous drugs are still on the market and unsuspecting Americans will die or their health destroyed, requiring them to spend even more money for the pharmaceutical companies (pills) to "treat them." Don't you think it's time to hold Congress and the FDA officials accountable?
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd376.htm
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Contaminated Foods Rise with Surge in Imports
As authorities in the United States seek to deal with the rising number of food imports and insufficient agency budgets to adequately monitor the safety of these products, consumers are exposed to an ever-growing risk for food-borne illnesses. As today's article points out, the inspection of the foods coming into this country falls dangerously short, and outbreaks of salmonella and other conditions with sometimes fatal consequences have become all too common.
This situation brings a couple of issues to light. First, it reinforces the benefits of growing our own organic fruits, vegetables, and herbs whenever possible, as this is the best way to guarantee the safety and nutritional quality of such foods. Even people who live in urban areas can practice container gardening. Secondly, as the problem of tainted food continues to grow, this opens up the door for the FDA and other government agencies to step in and seize greater control of the food supply, limiting sources only to ones they approve. Of course, this would likely mean a huge increase in genetically modified and irradiated foods, under the guise of protecting the food supply from contamination, and would also make it difficult, if not downright illegal, for individuals to grow their own food or raise their own farm animals and other agricultural products. We are already seeing this happen through the control of seed by such companies as Monsanto, with the full support and cooperation of the government.
When you do purchase produce, be sure to wash it thoroughly before consuming. I recommend washing your produce in a sink filled with filtered or distilled water along with a capful of hydrogen peroxide or a capful of our Oxy-SC. Be sure to allow leafy vegetables to soak for 10-15 minutes. It is also advisable to carefully choose your restaurants, as food can also be contaminated from unsanitary preparation or poor hygiene habits on the part of food handlers. Be particularly cautious if you or a family member suffers from a condition that compromises your immune system.
Surging food imports outpace inspection
Safety concerns rise as FDA looks at Mexico as a source of salmonella- tainted tomatoes.
By Laurence Iliff and Alfredo Corchado
DALLAS MORNING NEWS
LAREDO, Texas - Day after day, Mexican trucks line up as far as the eye can see for entry to the United States at the World Trade Bridge, carrying everything from raw tomatoes, broccoli and fresh basil to frozen seafood. They also bring in small amounts of salmonella, listeria, restricted pesticides, and other food poisons.
Customs and Border Protection officers take less than a minute per truck to determine which products enter the country and find their way into grocery stores and restaurants across North Texas.
Most trucks are waved through. The avalanche of imported goods, especially food from Mexico, is too much for the limited number of inspectors at the nation's 300 ports of entry to effectively screen, critics say. And the sheer volume makes it impossible for them to carry out their mission: protecting the U.S. food supply and American consumers.
Concerns about the nation's food inspection system are gaining urgency - especially as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration looks at Mexico as a likely source of salmonella-tainted tomatoes that have sickened more than 800 people in the last two months. The FDA last month sent inspectors to three Mexican states - Jalisco, Sinaloa and Coahuila - to check farms and packing plants.
The great majority of the food that crosses the southern U.S. border is safe, U.S. officials say. But a surge in imports in recent years means that the system of border inspections is badly strained and in urgent need of repair, the officials acknowledge.
"We have this huge growth in imports, this huge growth in trade; at the same time we have severely cut back on our regulatory agencies and their ability to do their job, especially the food portion of the Food and Drug Administration," said Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives for Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports magazine.
"If they are only checking 1 percent of the stuff and finding lots of problems, then ... there are a lot of problems that are never caught," she said.
Overall, about 15 percent of the U.S. food supply and 60 percent of fresh fruits and vegetables consumed are imported, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service.
Mexico is the second-largest foreign source (Canada is No. 1) of agricultural products and seafood for the United States - moving to No. 1 during the winter months and filling about 60 percent of the supermarket produce aisle. And it's the worst offender when it comes to food shipments turned away at the border by U.S. inspectors, a review of food rejections shows.
The problem, officials and analysts say, is the result of sometimes substandard agricultural practices south of the border, and a U.S. food inspection system that has become so overwhelmed that President Bush endorsed a 50-step plan that would put more emphasis on inspections in the countries of origin.
The in-country system would put U.S. inspectors in foreign countries or use third parties to check products before they are shipped to the United States. It also would give the FDA mandatory recall powers over food products. Currently, the agency negotiates "voluntary" recalls.
Both consumer groups and an internal FDA study group said the proposed Bush plan to fix the current system "within available resources" was far too modest.
"We can state unequivocally that the system cannot be fixed 'within available resources,' " the agency's subcommittee on science and technology said in a report late last year. The subcommittee called the inspection rate "appallingly low."
In fairness to Mexico, U.S. food producers were the subject of far more expansive recalls last year than foreign producers, including recalls of California spinach that tested positive for E. coli and was blamed for three deaths, and of 22 million pounds of frozen beef hamburger patties, also because of a dangerous strain of that common bacteria.
"I must emphasize that by and large, the food traded is very safe," said Suzanne Heinen, the USDA's counselor for agricultural affairs at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City. "We have very few problems, especially when you consider the volume of trade that crosses the border every day."
Still, food imports remain on Washington's radar - particularly in light of the latest salmonella outbreak.
U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt announced plans recently to open a food safety monitoring office in Latin America, similar to three being planned for China. He did not say which country might house the office.
Another recent recall targeting Mexican agriculture is an example of what consumer groups say is wrong with the system.
In December, officials took a sample for testing from a 5,500-pound load of Mexican basil moving through the Otay Mesa border crossing in San Diego. The basil continued on its way and was sold to restaurants and other customers in California, Texas and Illinois the next day.
When the test results came back two weeks later, they suggested salmonella contamination, sparking a late recall.
Mexico has been the subject of other recent recalls as well:
In February 2007, the FDA recalled 672 cartons of Mexican cantaloupes after a sample analysis found salmonella, which can cause fever, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain and arterial infections.
In September, the FDA recalled a hard, dry cheese from Mexico that it suspected was contaminated with salmonella.
And in early December, the Texas Department of State Health Services announced the voluntary recall of several Mexican candies after tests showed high lead levels. Lead can harm mental and physical development in children and unborn babies. California had banned the candies in August.
A top Mexican health official acknowledged that some Mexican food producers cut corners to boost their profits or have simply not adopted modern safety measures, although they have made great strides in recent years.
For example, chile peppers are often spread out to dry on the ground, where they can pick up lead or pesticides only approved for other crops.
"In Mexico, we have a lot of work to do," said Maria Esther Diaz Carrillo, a chemist and food technician at Mexico's Federal Commission to Prevent Sanitary Risks, part of the Health Ministry. "We also have producers who are very conscientious ... of the risks associated with their products and truly dedicated to public health. In some cases, it's ignorance."
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/health_science/20080714_Surging_food_imports_outpace_inspection.html
This situation brings a couple of issues to light. First, it reinforces the benefits of growing our own organic fruits, vegetables, and herbs whenever possible, as this is the best way to guarantee the safety and nutritional quality of such foods. Even people who live in urban areas can practice container gardening. Secondly, as the problem of tainted food continues to grow, this opens up the door for the FDA and other government agencies to step in and seize greater control of the food supply, limiting sources only to ones they approve. Of course, this would likely mean a huge increase in genetically modified and irradiated foods, under the guise of protecting the food supply from contamination, and would also make it difficult, if not downright illegal, for individuals to grow their own food or raise their own farm animals and other agricultural products. We are already seeing this happen through the control of seed by such companies as Monsanto, with the full support and cooperation of the government.
When you do purchase produce, be sure to wash it thoroughly before consuming. I recommend washing your produce in a sink filled with filtered or distilled water along with a capful of hydrogen peroxide or a capful of our Oxy-SC. Be sure to allow leafy vegetables to soak for 10-15 minutes. It is also advisable to carefully choose your restaurants, as food can also be contaminated from unsanitary preparation or poor hygiene habits on the part of food handlers. Be particularly cautious if you or a family member suffers from a condition that compromises your immune system.
Surging food imports outpace inspection
Safety concerns rise as FDA looks at Mexico as a source of salmonella- tainted tomatoes.
By Laurence Iliff and Alfredo Corchado
DALLAS MORNING NEWS
LAREDO, Texas - Day after day, Mexican trucks line up as far as the eye can see for entry to the United States at the World Trade Bridge, carrying everything from raw tomatoes, broccoli and fresh basil to frozen seafood. They also bring in small amounts of salmonella, listeria, restricted pesticides, and other food poisons.
Customs and Border Protection officers take less than a minute per truck to determine which products enter the country and find their way into grocery stores and restaurants across North Texas.
Most trucks are waved through. The avalanche of imported goods, especially food from Mexico, is too much for the limited number of inspectors at the nation's 300 ports of entry to effectively screen, critics say. And the sheer volume makes it impossible for them to carry out their mission: protecting the U.S. food supply and American consumers.
Concerns about the nation's food inspection system are gaining urgency - especially as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration looks at Mexico as a likely source of salmonella-tainted tomatoes that have sickened more than 800 people in the last two months. The FDA last month sent inspectors to three Mexican states - Jalisco, Sinaloa and Coahuila - to check farms and packing plants.
The great majority of the food that crosses the southern U.S. border is safe, U.S. officials say. But a surge in imports in recent years means that the system of border inspections is badly strained and in urgent need of repair, the officials acknowledge.
"We have this huge growth in imports, this huge growth in trade; at the same time we have severely cut back on our regulatory agencies and their ability to do their job, especially the food portion of the Food and Drug Administration," said Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives for Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports magazine.
"If they are only checking 1 percent of the stuff and finding lots of problems, then ... there are a lot of problems that are never caught," she said.
Overall, about 15 percent of the U.S. food supply and 60 percent of fresh fruits and vegetables consumed are imported, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service.
Mexico is the second-largest foreign source (Canada is No. 1) of agricultural products and seafood for the United States - moving to No. 1 during the winter months and filling about 60 percent of the supermarket produce aisle. And it's the worst offender when it comes to food shipments turned away at the border by U.S. inspectors, a review of food rejections shows.
The problem, officials and analysts say, is the result of sometimes substandard agricultural practices south of the border, and a U.S. food inspection system that has become so overwhelmed that President Bush endorsed a 50-step plan that would put more emphasis on inspections in the countries of origin.
The in-country system would put U.S. inspectors in foreign countries or use third parties to check products before they are shipped to the United States. It also would give the FDA mandatory recall powers over food products. Currently, the agency negotiates "voluntary" recalls.
Both consumer groups and an internal FDA study group said the proposed Bush plan to fix the current system "within available resources" was far too modest.
"We can state unequivocally that the system cannot be fixed 'within available resources,' " the agency's subcommittee on science and technology said in a report late last year. The subcommittee called the inspection rate "appallingly low."
In fairness to Mexico, U.S. food producers were the subject of far more expansive recalls last year than foreign producers, including recalls of California spinach that tested positive for E. coli and was blamed for three deaths, and of 22 million pounds of frozen beef hamburger patties, also because of a dangerous strain of that common bacteria.
"I must emphasize that by and large, the food traded is very safe," said Suzanne Heinen, the USDA's counselor for agricultural affairs at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City. "We have very few problems, especially when you consider the volume of trade that crosses the border every day."
Still, food imports remain on Washington's radar - particularly in light of the latest salmonella outbreak.
U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt announced plans recently to open a food safety monitoring office in Latin America, similar to three being planned for China. He did not say which country might house the office.
Another recent recall targeting Mexican agriculture is an example of what consumer groups say is wrong with the system.
In December, officials took a sample for testing from a 5,500-pound load of Mexican basil moving through the Otay Mesa border crossing in San Diego. The basil continued on its way and was sold to restaurants and other customers in California, Texas and Illinois the next day.
When the test results came back two weeks later, they suggested salmonella contamination, sparking a late recall.
Mexico has been the subject of other recent recalls as well:
In February 2007, the FDA recalled 672 cartons of Mexican cantaloupes after a sample analysis found salmonella, which can cause fever, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain and arterial infections.
In September, the FDA recalled a hard, dry cheese from Mexico that it suspected was contaminated with salmonella.
And in early December, the Texas Department of State Health Services announced the voluntary recall of several Mexican candies after tests showed high lead levels. Lead can harm mental and physical development in children and unborn babies. California had banned the candies in August.
A top Mexican health official acknowledged that some Mexican food producers cut corners to boost their profits or have simply not adopted modern safety measures, although they have made great strides in recent years.
For example, chile peppers are often spread out to dry on the ground, where they can pick up lead or pesticides only approved for other crops.
"In Mexico, we have a lot of work to do," said Maria Esther Diaz Carrillo, a chemist and food technician at Mexico's Federal Commission to Prevent Sanitary Risks, part of the Health Ministry. "We also have producers who are very conscientious ... of the risks associated with their products and truly dedicated to public health. In some cases, it's ignorance."
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/health_science/20080714_Surging_food_imports_outpace_inspection.html
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Why It's Crucial to Eat Wild Fish
Most Americans are likely aware that eating fish a couple of times per week is a nutritious and healthy habit that can be particularly good for one's heart. But it is also important that the right type of fish is eaten. Unfortunately, all fish are not created equally, and the issue becomes even more complex when farm-raised fish are put into the equation.
The fish that are highest in heart-friendly omega-3 fatty acids include such species as salmon, herring, and mackerel. However, fish that is raised on a farm does not provide the same benefits as wild fish, and can in fact do more harm than good, as the article below discusses. Farm-raised fish are typically given the cheapest feed available, which often pollutes them with pesticides, genetically modified ingredients, and can change the body chemistry of the fish so that it little resembles the same species found in the wild. Tilapia is an excellent example of a fish that is easily available and relatively inexpensive, but which can mislead consumers into thinking they are making a healthy choice.
Eating wild-caught fish in moderation is a great addition to your diet, but beware that the same species that are highest in omega-3 also tend to contain greater amounts of mercury and other heavy metals. Supplementation by consuming other sources of omega-3 such as organic flax seed, flax seed oil, hemp seed oil, or hemp-seed milk is also recommended as an alternative way to pursue wellness.
Popular Tilapia Might Not Help Heart
Study finds farm-raised fish has high levels of unhealthy omega-6 fatty acids
Posted July 11, 2008
By Amanda GardnerHealthDay Reporter
FRIDAY, July 11 (HealthDay News) -- The wildly popular farm-raised fish known as tilapia may actually harm your heart, thanks to low levels of healthy omega-3 fatty acids and high levels of unhealthy omega-6 fatty acids.
New research suggests the combination could be particularly bad for patients with heart disease, arthritis, asthma and other diseases involving overactive inflammatory responses.
"If you're in a vulnerable population such as a heart disease patient, you need to be very careful with what you're eating, and that includes everything," said senior study author Dr. Floyd H. Chilton, director of Wake Forest Center for Botanical Lipids, in Winston-Salem, N.C. "But when it comes to fish, there's not a more important thing you can do for heart disease than eat the right type of fish or take dietary fish oil. There is evidence that you may harm yourself by eating the wrong kind of fish, and [farmed] tilapia and catfish are the two that fall into that category."
"I don't think that this is an issue for everyone, any more than eating a hamburger is an issue for everyone," Chilton added.
The study was published in the July issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association.
As for suppliers, "the industry needs to improve ways of farming fish," said Katherine Tallmadge, a national spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association. "The whole idea of farming is a great one, but they're feeding the fish food that's inexpensive, so they can keep the price down, and it's having an adverse effect on the nutritional quality of the fish."
Several health groups, including the American Heart Association, recommend eating two servings of fish a week, preferably fatty fish such as salmon. The reason: primarily to increase omega-3 fatty acids.
But no one has really looked at the nutritional effect of an explosion in farmed fish (increasing at an annual rate of 9.2 percent, compared with 1.4 percent for wild fish). In particular, inexpensive tilapia is exploding in popularity.
This study used gas chromatography to analyze the fatty acid composition of 30 widely consumed farmed and wild fish.
Farmed trout and Atlantic salmon had relatively good concentrations of "good" omega-3 fatty acids compared with "bad" omega-6 fatty acids.
Farm-raised tilapia and catfish, on the other hand, had troubling ratios.
Tallmadge recommends looking for wild fish. Wild salmon, even canned wild salmon, has high levels of omega-3s and is an excellent source of protein. "It can be fairly economical," she said. "I buy frozen salmon at Trader Joe's for about $7 a pound, that's $2 a serving."
Concentrate on cold-water fish such as salmon, rainbow trout, sardines, tuna and anchovies, all of which have healthy fats, added Marianne Grant, a health educator with Texas A&M Health Science Centers Coastal Bend Health Education Center, in Corpus Christi.
"In the 1970s, we lost the ability to feed the planet with fish we catch," Chilton said. "Farm-raised fish has to be part of our future, but we must do it correctly. We must feed animals the correct foods. Animals become what we feed them, and we become what we eat as well. The food chain is fairly consistent."
http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2008/07/11/popular-tilapia-might-not-help-heart_print.htm
The fish that are highest in heart-friendly omega-3 fatty acids include such species as salmon, herring, and mackerel. However, fish that is raised on a farm does not provide the same benefits as wild fish, and can in fact do more harm than good, as the article below discusses. Farm-raised fish are typically given the cheapest feed available, which often pollutes them with pesticides, genetically modified ingredients, and can change the body chemistry of the fish so that it little resembles the same species found in the wild. Tilapia is an excellent example of a fish that is easily available and relatively inexpensive, but which can mislead consumers into thinking they are making a healthy choice.
Eating wild-caught fish in moderation is a great addition to your diet, but beware that the same species that are highest in omega-3 also tend to contain greater amounts of mercury and other heavy metals. Supplementation by consuming other sources of omega-3 such as organic flax seed, flax seed oil, hemp seed oil, or hemp-seed milk is also recommended as an alternative way to pursue wellness.
Popular Tilapia Might Not Help Heart
Study finds farm-raised fish has high levels of unhealthy omega-6 fatty acids
Posted July 11, 2008
By Amanda GardnerHealthDay Reporter
FRIDAY, July 11 (HealthDay News) -- The wildly popular farm-raised fish known as tilapia may actually harm your heart, thanks to low levels of healthy omega-3 fatty acids and high levels of unhealthy omega-6 fatty acids.
New research suggests the combination could be particularly bad for patients with heart disease, arthritis, asthma and other diseases involving overactive inflammatory responses.
"If you're in a vulnerable population such as a heart disease patient, you need to be very careful with what you're eating, and that includes everything," said senior study author Dr. Floyd H. Chilton, director of Wake Forest Center for Botanical Lipids, in Winston-Salem, N.C. "But when it comes to fish, there's not a more important thing you can do for heart disease than eat the right type of fish or take dietary fish oil. There is evidence that you may harm yourself by eating the wrong kind of fish, and [farmed] tilapia and catfish are the two that fall into that category."
"I don't think that this is an issue for everyone, any more than eating a hamburger is an issue for everyone," Chilton added.
The study was published in the July issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association.
As for suppliers, "the industry needs to improve ways of farming fish," said Katherine Tallmadge, a national spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association. "The whole idea of farming is a great one, but they're feeding the fish food that's inexpensive, so they can keep the price down, and it's having an adverse effect on the nutritional quality of the fish."
Several health groups, including the American Heart Association, recommend eating two servings of fish a week, preferably fatty fish such as salmon. The reason: primarily to increase omega-3 fatty acids.
But no one has really looked at the nutritional effect of an explosion in farmed fish (increasing at an annual rate of 9.2 percent, compared with 1.4 percent for wild fish). In particular, inexpensive tilapia is exploding in popularity.
This study used gas chromatography to analyze the fatty acid composition of 30 widely consumed farmed and wild fish.
Farmed trout and Atlantic salmon had relatively good concentrations of "good" omega-3 fatty acids compared with "bad" omega-6 fatty acids.
Farm-raised tilapia and catfish, on the other hand, had troubling ratios.
Tallmadge recommends looking for wild fish. Wild salmon, even canned wild salmon, has high levels of omega-3s and is an excellent source of protein. "It can be fairly economical," she said. "I buy frozen salmon at Trader Joe's for about $7 a pound, that's $2 a serving."
Concentrate on cold-water fish such as salmon, rainbow trout, sardines, tuna and anchovies, all of which have healthy fats, added Marianne Grant, a health educator with Texas A&M Health Science Centers Coastal Bend Health Education Center, in Corpus Christi.
"In the 1970s, we lost the ability to feed the planet with fish we catch," Chilton said. "Farm-raised fish has to be part of our future, but we must do it correctly. We must feed animals the correct foods. Animals become what we feed them, and we become what we eat as well. The food chain is fairly consistent."
http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2008/07/11/popular-tilapia-might-not-help-heart_print.htm
Monday, July 14, 2008
Hospital Stays Can Be Very Hazardous to Your Health
The number of serious errors involving medications and other procedures in American hospitals is outrageously high, and common-sense safety / check and balance regimens that can help prevent such disasters are long overdue. Why hospitals and pharmacies have not instituted such changes already is a great mystery. The sheer volume of patients and the wide variety of drugs that are employed is a recipe for tragedy, but unfortunately it apparently takes some high profile cases such as those highlighted in the following article before anything is done.
Surgeons are now talking about check lists that would become a routine part of the surgical procedure, a system that has been used in parts of Europe and certain other countries of the world for some time with great success. I recently heard one American surgeon state that he did not think a check list was necessary, but that since he agreed to try it, there has not been a day in the last six months that he did not catch something he likely would have missed without this precautionary measure.
If you or your children are hospitalized or prescribed any medication, please be sure to double check that you have the right drug and the right strength, as there are literally tens of thousands of errors every year. It is a good idea to do your own research as to possible side effects as well. You may run into a doctor or other health care provider that is arrogantly offended by your queries, but most will understand and agree that this is a wise and necessary step in order to protect your family and prevent a potential crisis.
Hospital error blamed for more infant overdoses
By CHRISTOPHER SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
Fri Jul 11, 8:56 PM ET
The case of 14 babies who received accidental overdoses while in intensive care has raised new questions about how a common blood-thinning medication could be given to infants repeatedly in the wrong dosage.
Unlike a previous case involving twins of actor Dennis Quaid, the Texas newborns got the overdose because of an error at the hospital pharmacy, not a labeling problem.
Quaid sued one of heparin's manufacturers last year after his children's overdose was traced to a hospital pharmacy worker who grabbed vials of the wrong dosage because the labels looked almost identical if turned a certain way.
In Corpus Christi, pharmacy workers at Christus Spohn Hospital South made what the hospital called a "mixing error." The two workers went on voluntary leave.
The heparin, which was 100 times stronger than recommended, was given to 14 infants in the hospital's neonatal intensive care unit on July 4.
Two of the babies involved -- twins who were born one month premature -- have died, although the hospital said its physicians have found no direct links to the overdose. Autopsies are being performed.
In addition to the 14 infants, three other babies who were discharged shortly after the overdoses may also have received too much heparin, but they showed no ill effects.
Nurses discovered the error Sunday and immediately gave the hospitalized infants a drug to counteract the effects.
At a news conference Friday, the grandmother of the children who died said the family was devastated as it prepared to hold funerals for the babies on Saturday, the same day relatives had planned a baby shower for their mother.
"We want answers," Maggie Chapa said. "We want to know what happened."
A patient safety expert said hospitals are often slow to change.
"It is frustrating to people that we have had other heparin issues," said Diane Pinakiewicz, president of the National Patient Safety Foundation.
"When you have complex systems interfacing with humans, we're never going to have perfection," she added. But "our job is to get as close to perfection at all times."
Hospitals around the nation have made changes to the way they handle heparin, which is one of the most common additives to intravenous solutions.
For example, at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, vials of heparin are no longer available in the neonatal intensive care unit. Nurses must get it directly from the pharmacy. That would not have helped in the Corpus Christi case, where the error was made in the pharmacy, but it may have avoided a situation like the one that threatened Quaid's twins in Los Angeles.
"You always have to go on the premise that somebody is going to make a mistake," said Dr. Eric Eichenwald, medical director of the unit. "So you have to make it really, really hard to make a mistake."
In 2006, Methodist Hospital in Indianapolis gave six babies doses 1,000 times stronger than recommended. Vials of the wrong dosage of the drug had been placed in a medicine cabinet in the neonatal intensive care unit, and nurses didn't catch the mistake before the babies were given the medication. Three of those infants died.
Pharmacy technicians normally placed premeasured vials of a less concentrated form of heparin in a computerized drug cabinet. Nurses then had to enter their personal code and the specific patient's code to open the cabinet. When the drawer opened to display an assortment of drugs, the nurse would select the correct one and then enter the amount withdrawn.
But the pharmacy technician mistakenly placed in the cabinet a more concentrated form of heparin.
The following year, at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, two pharmacy technicians failed to verify the correct concentration of the heparin they placed in the pediatrics ward. Quaid's twins, as well as another infant, received doses similar in strength to those given in Indianapolis.
The nurses who administered the drug also failed to check the dosage. All three children recovered.
Quaid sued Baxter Healthcare Corp. for negligence, arguing that the two concentrations of the drug looked almost identical. The company had already changed its packaging to add a red caution label that had to be torn off before opening.
Cedars-Sinai instituted additional training and required that four pharmacy technicians verify such "high-alert" medications before putting them in any hospital units.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration also investigated hundreds of cases of adverse reactions to injections of heparin made by Baxter International. The reactions were blamed on a tainted supply originating in China.
The tainted heparin was not involved in the Texas case, Baxter said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080712/ap_on_re_us/blood_thinner_deaths&printer=1;_ylt=Ah1xSnOssmI3OQPKSdpI1GRH2ocA
Surgeons are now talking about check lists that would become a routine part of the surgical procedure, a system that has been used in parts of Europe and certain other countries of the world for some time with great success. I recently heard one American surgeon state that he did not think a check list was necessary, but that since he agreed to try it, there has not been a day in the last six months that he did not catch something he likely would have missed without this precautionary measure.
If you or your children are hospitalized or prescribed any medication, please be sure to double check that you have the right drug and the right strength, as there are literally tens of thousands of errors every year. It is a good idea to do your own research as to possible side effects as well. You may run into a doctor or other health care provider that is arrogantly offended by your queries, but most will understand and agree that this is a wise and necessary step in order to protect your family and prevent a potential crisis.
Hospital error blamed for more infant overdoses
By CHRISTOPHER SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
Fri Jul 11, 8:56 PM ET
The case of 14 babies who received accidental overdoses while in intensive care has raised new questions about how a common blood-thinning medication could be given to infants repeatedly in the wrong dosage.
Unlike a previous case involving twins of actor Dennis Quaid, the Texas newborns got the overdose because of an error at the hospital pharmacy, not a labeling problem.
Quaid sued one of heparin's manufacturers last year after his children's overdose was traced to a hospital pharmacy worker who grabbed vials of the wrong dosage because the labels looked almost identical if turned a certain way.
In Corpus Christi, pharmacy workers at Christus Spohn Hospital South made what the hospital called a "mixing error." The two workers went on voluntary leave.
The heparin, which was 100 times stronger than recommended, was given to 14 infants in the hospital's neonatal intensive care unit on July 4.
Two of the babies involved -- twins who were born one month premature -- have died, although the hospital said its physicians have found no direct links to the overdose. Autopsies are being performed.
In addition to the 14 infants, three other babies who were discharged shortly after the overdoses may also have received too much heparin, but they showed no ill effects.
Nurses discovered the error Sunday and immediately gave the hospitalized infants a drug to counteract the effects.
At a news conference Friday, the grandmother of the children who died said the family was devastated as it prepared to hold funerals for the babies on Saturday, the same day relatives had planned a baby shower for their mother.
"We want answers," Maggie Chapa said. "We want to know what happened."
A patient safety expert said hospitals are often slow to change.
"It is frustrating to people that we have had other heparin issues," said Diane Pinakiewicz, president of the National Patient Safety Foundation.
"When you have complex systems interfacing with humans, we're never going to have perfection," she added. But "our job is to get as close to perfection at all times."
Hospitals around the nation have made changes to the way they handle heparin, which is one of the most common additives to intravenous solutions.
For example, at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, vials of heparin are no longer available in the neonatal intensive care unit. Nurses must get it directly from the pharmacy. That would not have helped in the Corpus Christi case, where the error was made in the pharmacy, but it may have avoided a situation like the one that threatened Quaid's twins in Los Angeles.
"You always have to go on the premise that somebody is going to make a mistake," said Dr. Eric Eichenwald, medical director of the unit. "So you have to make it really, really hard to make a mistake."
In 2006, Methodist Hospital in Indianapolis gave six babies doses 1,000 times stronger than recommended. Vials of the wrong dosage of the drug had been placed in a medicine cabinet in the neonatal intensive care unit, and nurses didn't catch the mistake before the babies were given the medication. Three of those infants died.
Pharmacy technicians normally placed premeasured vials of a less concentrated form of heparin in a computerized drug cabinet. Nurses then had to enter their personal code and the specific patient's code to open the cabinet. When the drawer opened to display an assortment of drugs, the nurse would select the correct one and then enter the amount withdrawn.
But the pharmacy technician mistakenly placed in the cabinet a more concentrated form of heparin.
The following year, at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, two pharmacy technicians failed to verify the correct concentration of the heparin they placed in the pediatrics ward. Quaid's twins, as well as another infant, received doses similar in strength to those given in Indianapolis.
The nurses who administered the drug also failed to check the dosage. All three children recovered.
Quaid sued Baxter Healthcare Corp. for negligence, arguing that the two concentrations of the drug looked almost identical. The company had already changed its packaging to add a red caution label that had to be torn off before opening.
Cedars-Sinai instituted additional training and required that four pharmacy technicians verify such "high-alert" medications before putting them in any hospital units.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration also investigated hundreds of cases of adverse reactions to injections of heparin made by Baxter International. The reactions were blamed on a tainted supply originating in China.
The tainted heparin was not involved in the Texas case, Baxter said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080712/ap_on_re_us/blood_thinner_deaths&printer=1;_ylt=Ah1xSnOssmI3OQPKSdpI1GRH2ocA
Friday, July 11, 2008
Western Decadence Takes Its Toll on China
For thousands of years, the Chinese have generally been some of the healthiest people on earth, suffering far less from the epidemic of modern debilitating diseases that have become so common in much of the rest of the world. Now, however, their culture, which included a quality, whole foods diet and large of amounts of physical exercise due to their primarily agricultural economy, is being decimated by the poor lifestyle habits that have flooded in from the West.
This is a tragic turn of events that is a seemingly inevitable result of the globalization of world economies. Free enterprise and affluence has benefited many people in developing nations, but they do, unfortunately, have a dark side as well. Hopefully wisdom will prevail, and the Chinese can be educated as to both the dangers of a poor diet and the benefits of pursuing a lifestyle of wellness. Let's hope that Big Pharma will not be able to unleash their propaganda in China, with their sights set on millions of new customers for their statin drugs and other toxic ways of supposedly dealing with obesity and connected health problems.
Quarter of Chinese adults are overweight, obese: US study
Tue Jul 8, 1:32 PM ET
Declining physical activity and a shift towards a Western diet are driving up obesity rates in China, with more than 25 percent of adults now considered overweight or obese, a study warned Tuesday.
Researchers writing in the July/August issue of the journal Health Affairs predicted these rates would double by 2028 unless the Chinese government took action -- with the rest of the developing world likely to follow suit.
"What's happening in China should be seen as a marker for what is going to hit the rest of the developing world if we fail to act," said study author Barry Popkin, a professor of nutrition at the Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina.
"We need to find the right investments and regulations to encourage people to adopt a healthy lifestyle, or we risk facing higher rates of death, disease and disability, and the related costs."
Deaths from diseases linked to poor diet, including coronary heart disease and cancer, have increased from 48 percent in 1985 to 61.8 percent today in urban areas, and from 34.5 percent to almost 46 percent in rural areas.
The researchers blame changes in the Chinese diet, to include more eggs and meat and fewer vegetables and carbohydrates, and a shift away from physically demanding jobs such as farming to more sedentary, service-sector work.
The study also notes the increase in television and car ownership, signaling a more sedentary lifestyle -- the odds of being obese are 80 percent higher for adults in households that own a car than those that do not.
Using data from the China Health and Nutrition Survey, Popkin said 1.2 percent of Chinese adult males became obese or overweight each year in the past decade.
This is a greater increase than in all developing countries except Mexico and than in developed nations such as Australia, Britain and the United States.
Whereas governments in developed countries have taken action to address the problem, Popkin said Beijing needs to do more to encourage its citizens to eat more healthy foods and create environments to stimulate more physical activity.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080708/hl_afp/chinaushealthobesityresearch&printer=1;_ylt=Ah5Z78rVYZEiscLIC5fcifmKOrgF
This is a tragic turn of events that is a seemingly inevitable result of the globalization of world economies. Free enterprise and affluence has benefited many people in developing nations, but they do, unfortunately, have a dark side as well. Hopefully wisdom will prevail, and the Chinese can be educated as to both the dangers of a poor diet and the benefits of pursuing a lifestyle of wellness. Let's hope that Big Pharma will not be able to unleash their propaganda in China, with their sights set on millions of new customers for their statin drugs and other toxic ways of supposedly dealing with obesity and connected health problems.
Quarter of Chinese adults are overweight, obese: US study
Tue Jul 8, 1:32 PM ET
Declining physical activity and a shift towards a Western diet are driving up obesity rates in China, with more than 25 percent of adults now considered overweight or obese, a study warned Tuesday.
Researchers writing in the July/August issue of the journal Health Affairs predicted these rates would double by 2028 unless the Chinese government took action -- with the rest of the developing world likely to follow suit.
"What's happening in China should be seen as a marker for what is going to hit the rest of the developing world if we fail to act," said study author Barry Popkin, a professor of nutrition at the Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina.
"We need to find the right investments and regulations to encourage people to adopt a healthy lifestyle, or we risk facing higher rates of death, disease and disability, and the related costs."
Deaths from diseases linked to poor diet, including coronary heart disease and cancer, have increased from 48 percent in 1985 to 61.8 percent today in urban areas, and from 34.5 percent to almost 46 percent in rural areas.
The researchers blame changes in the Chinese diet, to include more eggs and meat and fewer vegetables and carbohydrates, and a shift away from physically demanding jobs such as farming to more sedentary, service-sector work.
The study also notes the increase in television and car ownership, signaling a more sedentary lifestyle -- the odds of being obese are 80 percent higher for adults in households that own a car than those that do not.
Using data from the China Health and Nutrition Survey, Popkin said 1.2 percent of Chinese adult males became obese or overweight each year in the past decade.
This is a greater increase than in all developing countries except Mexico and than in developed nations such as Australia, Britain and the United States.
Whereas governments in developed countries have taken action to address the problem, Popkin said Beijing needs to do more to encourage its citizens to eat more healthy foods and create environments to stimulate more physical activity.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080708/hl_afp/chinaushealthobesityresearch&printer=1;_ylt=Ah5Z78rVYZEiscLIC5fcifmKOrgF
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
