Getting enough quality sleep plays a critical role in many health issues, and the study we are looking at today ties adequate sleep to better memory and cognitive function. It specifically addresses the effects of sleep on older African Americans, but I suspect the findings can apply in many ways to people of all ages and races.
Scientists have been intrigued by the purpose and effects of sleep for many years. Research is ongoing, and we seem to be learning more everyday about the importance of both the quality and quantity of our sleep patterns. Among other things, it is known that sleep is needed for the body to cleanse itself of toxins and for cells and tissues to restore and repair themselves. Sleep also helps to strengthen the immune system. According to today's article, we can also add improvement in long-term memory to the list of benefits derived from sleep. These of are some of the reasons why getting enough good sleep is a foundational part of a lifestyle that leads toward wellness. Looking for a non-invasive, drug-free, natural way to improve your health and prevent disease? Try getting more good sleep! Being in bed by 10:00 PM every night (including weekends) is a great place to begin.
Poor sleep tied to memory trouble in black seniors
1 hr 53 mins ago
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) -- Older African Americans who have difficulty falling asleep seem to be more likely to have memory problems, a new study suggests.
The study, of 174 African Americans ages 65 to 90, found that those who said they often had a hard time falling asleep tended to have poorer scores on standard tests of memory.
Research shows that up to 40 percent of older adults have sleep disturbances, particularly trouble falling asleep. Poor sleep has also been linked to problems with memory and other cognitive functions. However, no studies until now have looked at this relationship specifically in older black adults -- who, some research suggests, tend to be especially vulnerable to sleep problems.
In the current study, reported in the journal Research on Aging, investigators found that participants who'd been having trouble falling asleep over the past year generally had lower scores on tests of short-term and working memory. Working memory refers to the ability to tackle multiple tasks at once.
The link between sleep and memory problems held when the researchers accounted for several other factors, including depression and overall physical health.
The findings raise a number of questions, according to lead researcher Alyssa A. Gamaldo, a Ph.D. candidate at North Carolina State University in Raleigh.
For one, Gamaldo said in a statement, "it is not clear if lack of sleep is the issue. Is it the quantity of sleep, the quality of sleep, or something else altogether?"
More research is needed to confirm that a lack of sleep, or a lack of quality sleep, drain memory in older adults, according to Gamaldo's team. If the current findings are confirmed, they add, then spotting and treating sleep problems in older adults could help them preserve their brain power.
"If we can better understand how sleep quantity, as well as quality, influences general cognitive functioning," Gamaldo said, "perhaps we could better maintain memory throughout life -- including later in life."
SOURCE: Research on Aging, November 2008.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081021/hl_nm/us_poor_sleep/print
Friday, October 31, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Western Diet Huge Factor in Heart Disease
It is no secret that a diet based on high-fat, high-sodium, and nutritionally poor foods can cause heart problems and a myriad of other health concerns. However, this particular study also produced more welcome evidence for the disease-fighting capabilities of a plant-based diet composed mainly of fruits and vegetables. As Western culture spreads around the globe, along with many of its associated health risks, it is important to remember the good news as well as the bad. Namely this: If people can learn to eat well, disease can be both cured and prevented via a lifestyle of wellness that includes a wholesome diet and plenty of physical exercise.
I find it quite ironic that this study was published in the journal of the American Heart Association. One of the most disturbing statements in this article concerns the fact that "Dr. Dean Ornish is one of a few physicians advocating use of healthy diet and lifestyle to treat heart disease." It is disgraceful that the vast majority of conventional medicine practitioners will still not embrace nutritional and lifestyle therapy for the treatment of coronary and other diseases, despite the overwhelming evidence supporting its effectiveness! Perhaps the only thing more hazardous to our health than a Western diet is Western medicine.
Western diet linked to high risk of heart attack
By David Liu, Ph.D.
Oct 21, 2008 - 9:36:38 AM
Tuesday October 21, 2008 (foodconsumer.org) -- A new study suggests that Western diet with fried foods, salty snacks and meat may drastically increase risk of heart attack than those who use other types of diets.
The study published in Circulation, the journal of the American Heart Association showed that those who used Western diet had a 35 percent increased risk of heart attack than those who consumed little fried food and meat.
For the study, Salim Yusuf, D.Phil. at McMaster University in Canada and colleagues examined the association between dietary patterns and risk of heart attack in about 16,000 people in 52 countries.
The researchers were able to classify dietary practices into three groups, namely oriental diet with high intake of tofu, soy and other sauces, prudent diet with high intake of fruits and vegetables and Western diet with high intake of fried foods, salty snacks, eggs and meat.
Among the participants, 5,761 heart attack cases were identified. The researchers found that those who used Western diet were 35 percent more likely to suffer a heart attack than those who did not use much fried food and meat and those who used prudent diet were at a 30 percent reduced risk of heart attack.
They also found that those who used oriental diet were not at increased nor reduced risk of heart attack. Some foods in oriental diet are believed to be protective, but the authors suggested that the effect was neutralized by the high salt sauces.
The findings are consistent with numerous precious studies. Western diet has been linked with a wide range of diseases.
This western diet can affect even young healthy men and women. Of hundreds of soldiers who died in the battles of the Korean War, more than 70 percent were found to have their artery narrowed to some degree, according to Dr. T. Colin Campbell, a nutrition professor at Cornell University.
However, cardiovascular condition can be improved by simply following a healthy diet. According to Dr. Dean Ornish, a professor of the University of California in San Francisco who is one of a few physicians advocating use of healthy diet and lifestyle to treat heart disease, a restricted diet can stop progression of heart disease and even reverse the condition in 99% of patients.
Dr. Dean's diet and lifestyle program has been proved in trials to be effective. His diet is comprised of mostly plant-based foods. But oil is highly restricted. No more than 10 percent of calories should come from oil.
http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/H_eart_amp_B_lood_30/102109362008_Western_diet_linked_to_high_risk_of_heart_attack_printer.shtml
I find it quite ironic that this study was published in the journal of the American Heart Association. One of the most disturbing statements in this article concerns the fact that "Dr. Dean Ornish is one of a few physicians advocating use of healthy diet and lifestyle to treat heart disease." It is disgraceful that the vast majority of conventional medicine practitioners will still not embrace nutritional and lifestyle therapy for the treatment of coronary and other diseases, despite the overwhelming evidence supporting its effectiveness! Perhaps the only thing more hazardous to our health than a Western diet is Western medicine.
Western diet linked to high risk of heart attack
By David Liu, Ph.D.
Oct 21, 2008 - 9:36:38 AM
Tuesday October 21, 2008 (foodconsumer.org) -- A new study suggests that Western diet with fried foods, salty snacks and meat may drastically increase risk of heart attack than those who use other types of diets.
The study published in Circulation, the journal of the American Heart Association showed that those who used Western diet had a 35 percent increased risk of heart attack than those who consumed little fried food and meat.
For the study, Salim Yusuf, D.Phil. at McMaster University in Canada and colleagues examined the association between dietary patterns and risk of heart attack in about 16,000 people in 52 countries.
The researchers were able to classify dietary practices into three groups, namely oriental diet with high intake of tofu, soy and other sauces, prudent diet with high intake of fruits and vegetables and Western diet with high intake of fried foods, salty snacks, eggs and meat.
Among the participants, 5,761 heart attack cases were identified. The researchers found that those who used Western diet were 35 percent more likely to suffer a heart attack than those who did not use much fried food and meat and those who used prudent diet were at a 30 percent reduced risk of heart attack.
They also found that those who used oriental diet were not at increased nor reduced risk of heart attack. Some foods in oriental diet are believed to be protective, but the authors suggested that the effect was neutralized by the high salt sauces.
The findings are consistent with numerous precious studies. Western diet has been linked with a wide range of diseases.
This western diet can affect even young healthy men and women. Of hundreds of soldiers who died in the battles of the Korean War, more than 70 percent were found to have their artery narrowed to some degree, according to Dr. T. Colin Campbell, a nutrition professor at Cornell University.
However, cardiovascular condition can be improved by simply following a healthy diet. According to Dr. Dean Ornish, a professor of the University of California in San Francisco who is one of a few physicians advocating use of healthy diet and lifestyle to treat heart disease, a restricted diet can stop progression of heart disease and even reverse the condition in 99% of patients.
Dr. Dean's diet and lifestyle program has been proved in trials to be effective. His diet is comprised of mostly plant-based foods. But oil is highly restricted. No more than 10 percent of calories should come from oil.
http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/H_eart_amp_B_lood_30/102109362008_Western_diet_linked_to_high_risk_of_heart_attack_printer.shtml
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
New Drugs Pose New Hazards
A very alarming new study has indicated that the risks involved with using many newer drugs may be even greater than feared. Big Pharma and conventional medicine had high hopes for next generation medicines known as biological drugs, which are supposedly composed of living materials rather than chemicals that are foreign to the body. Researchers are discovering that many of these drugs, which are often manufactured using genetic engineering and other artificial processes, have hidden hazards (such as suppressing the immune system, the one thing needed MOST when fighting disease) that are sometimes linked to life-threatening side effects including major infections and cancers. If these are the next generation of pharmaceuticals then I say, NO THANKS! Conventional medicine continues to head in the wrong direction.
The entire drug industry is based on the formation and sale of artificial substances that are designed to "treat" or cover up symptoms, rather than addressing the root causes of illness. True healing can only occur when approaches are used that help to repair and support the body's natural healing mechanisms as contained in many herbs, organic foods and food-grade supplementation.
Today's post also shines some light on the ludicrous way that the FDA tests and approves drugs. They know that there are significant hazards associated with the vast majority of drugs -- these are dangerous chemicals that kill many people every year. Yet, the thinking is that these risks are just a necessary evil that must be tolerated for the greater good of mankind. The enormous amount of money involved in the pharmaceutical industry is a major factor that allows for this madness -- erroneously labeled 'medicine" -- to continue.
Safety a problem for new generation drugs, too
By LINDSEY TANNER, AP Medical Writer
1 hr 8 mins ago
CHICAGO -- Nearly a fourth of widely used new-generation biological drugs for several common diseases produce serious side effects that lead to safety warnings soon after they go on the market, the first major study of its kind found.
Included in the report released Tuesday were the arthritis drugs Humira and Remicade, cancer drugs Rituxan and Erbitux, and the heart failure drug Natrecor. All wound up being flagged for safety.
That might surprise some doctors who may have thought that these new treatments might be safer than traditional chemical-based medicines.
Researchers found that most of the warnings came within five years after these biologicals won government approval in the United States and Europe between 1995 and 2007.
Many traditional medicines wind up with safety warnings too after they go on the market. But experts said there were no similar studies of older medicines that made it possible to compare safety issues between the two groups of drugs.
The new study, by Dutch researchers, is the first comprehensive examination of these newer medicines, a driving part of the biotech revolution.
The drugs are known as biologicals because they're made from living material and they typically affect the body's disease-fighting immune system. Many relieve severe symptoms by suppressing that system.
It's that same mechanism that can result in side effects often not seen with traditional chemical-based medicines, said Dr. Charles Bennett, a Northwestern University drug safety expert. These can include brain and fungal infections and cancer.
Many are genetically engineered and Bennett said that because they typically resemble naturally occurring proteins, many doctors have assumed they were safer than traditional chemical-based medicines. But he said the study shows that's not necessarily true.
"They have an important role," Bennett said. "They're really the next generation of pharmaceuticals."
He said the results simply show that doctors and patients should be aware that the drugs have many potential side effects that may not be listed on the label.
Among the drugs under examination are Genentech Inc.'s psoriasis drug Raptiva, which just last week the Food and Drug Administration warned may contribute to a life-threatening brain illness and infections; and Exubera, an inhaled insulin product, linked with lung cancer risks. Exubera was approved by the FDA in 2006 but Pfizer Inc. stopped selling it last year.
The study appears in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association.
It involved 136 biologics approved in the United States and 105 in the European Union between January 1995 and June 2007. A total of 41, or nearly 24 percent, got safety warnings issued through June 2008.
The results are a concern, and they underscore the need for closer scrutiny of drugs after their approval, said lead author Thijs Giezen of the University of Utrecht.
But he said the study also is reassuring because most problems showed up relatively soon after the drugs became available, which minimized the potential for widespread harm.
"If most issues are discovered within the first few years, then the system is working," Giezen said.
Bennett says it's unreasonable to think that the studied drugs' safety issues should have been discovered before they were marketed. That's because drug approval is based on relatively small studies with patients who generally are healthier than those in the general population. It often takes real-world experience for side effects to appear, he said.
Many biological drugs have advantages over conventional medicine, but the study shows their risks need to also be considered, said Thomas Moore of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices.
For example, non-steroid arthritis medicines including ibuprofen can reduce pain by decreasing inflammation, but they can cause stomach bleeding.
Biologic rheumatoid arthritis medicines Remicade, Enbrel and Humira are designed to ease painful joints by keeping the body's immune system from attacking itself, the underlying problem in the disease. But they are much more expensive and have been linked with higher risks for potentially fatal infections. Also, the FDA is investigating possible cancer risks.
"My message to patients is that these biological products often can treat very difficult to treat diseases but may have very substantial risks and that you need to take extra care to educate yourself as to what those risks might be," Moore said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081021/ap_on_he_me/med_biotech_drug_risks/print
The entire drug industry is based on the formation and sale of artificial substances that are designed to "treat" or cover up symptoms, rather than addressing the root causes of illness. True healing can only occur when approaches are used that help to repair and support the body's natural healing mechanisms as contained in many herbs, organic foods and food-grade supplementation.
Today's post also shines some light on the ludicrous way that the FDA tests and approves drugs. They know that there are significant hazards associated with the vast majority of drugs -- these are dangerous chemicals that kill many people every year. Yet, the thinking is that these risks are just a necessary evil that must be tolerated for the greater good of mankind. The enormous amount of money involved in the pharmaceutical industry is a major factor that allows for this madness -- erroneously labeled 'medicine" -- to continue.
Safety a problem for new generation drugs, too
By LINDSEY TANNER, AP Medical Writer
1 hr 8 mins ago
CHICAGO -- Nearly a fourth of widely used new-generation biological drugs for several common diseases produce serious side effects that lead to safety warnings soon after they go on the market, the first major study of its kind found.
Included in the report released Tuesday were the arthritis drugs Humira and Remicade, cancer drugs Rituxan and Erbitux, and the heart failure drug Natrecor. All wound up being flagged for safety.
That might surprise some doctors who may have thought that these new treatments might be safer than traditional chemical-based medicines.
Researchers found that most of the warnings came within five years after these biologicals won government approval in the United States and Europe between 1995 and 2007.
Many traditional medicines wind up with safety warnings too after they go on the market. But experts said there were no similar studies of older medicines that made it possible to compare safety issues between the two groups of drugs.
The new study, by Dutch researchers, is the first comprehensive examination of these newer medicines, a driving part of the biotech revolution.
The drugs are known as biologicals because they're made from living material and they typically affect the body's disease-fighting immune system. Many relieve severe symptoms by suppressing that system.
It's that same mechanism that can result in side effects often not seen with traditional chemical-based medicines, said Dr. Charles Bennett, a Northwestern University drug safety expert. These can include brain and fungal infections and cancer.
Many are genetically engineered and Bennett said that because they typically resemble naturally occurring proteins, many doctors have assumed they were safer than traditional chemical-based medicines. But he said the study shows that's not necessarily true.
"They have an important role," Bennett said. "They're really the next generation of pharmaceuticals."
He said the results simply show that doctors and patients should be aware that the drugs have many potential side effects that may not be listed on the label.
Among the drugs under examination are Genentech Inc.'s psoriasis drug Raptiva, which just last week the Food and Drug Administration warned may contribute to a life-threatening brain illness and infections; and Exubera, an inhaled insulin product, linked with lung cancer risks. Exubera was approved by the FDA in 2006 but Pfizer Inc. stopped selling it last year.
The study appears in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association.
It involved 136 biologics approved in the United States and 105 in the European Union between January 1995 and June 2007. A total of 41, or nearly 24 percent, got safety warnings issued through June 2008.
The results are a concern, and they underscore the need for closer scrutiny of drugs after their approval, said lead author Thijs Giezen of the University of Utrecht.
But he said the study also is reassuring because most problems showed up relatively soon after the drugs became available, which minimized the potential for widespread harm.
"If most issues are discovered within the first few years, then the system is working," Giezen said.
Bennett says it's unreasonable to think that the studied drugs' safety issues should have been discovered before they were marketed. That's because drug approval is based on relatively small studies with patients who generally are healthier than those in the general population. It often takes real-world experience for side effects to appear, he said.
Many biological drugs have advantages over conventional medicine, but the study shows their risks need to also be considered, said Thomas Moore of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices.
For example, non-steroid arthritis medicines including ibuprofen can reduce pain by decreasing inflammation, but they can cause stomach bleeding.
Biologic rheumatoid arthritis medicines Remicade, Enbrel and Humira are designed to ease painful joints by keeping the body's immune system from attacking itself, the underlying problem in the disease. But they are much more expensive and have been linked with higher risks for potentially fatal infections. Also, the FDA is investigating possible cancer risks.
"My message to patients is that these biological products often can treat very difficult to treat diseases but may have very substantial risks and that you need to take extra care to educate yourself as to what those risks might be," Moore said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081021/ap_on_he_me/med_biotech_drug_risks/print
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Behavioral Therapy for Autism More Effective Than Drugs
The article highlighted in today's post caught my eye because it discussed issues surrounding a non-invasive, drug-free treatment for autism that, while very expensive, has produced some excellent results in autistic children. Autism advocates are putting pressure on state governments to require insurance companies to pay for this therapy.
It is refreshing to see such a method of therapy gain popularity, rather than the use of stimulants and other drugs that are typically offered to autistic families. I applaud regulations that mandate health insurers to cover this treatment, and would encourage parents of autistic kids to investigate how they may apply some of these same principles in dealing with their own children's illness.
It appears this sort of behavioral therapy provides a much safer, more effective, and better long-term solution than the hazardous medications that simply drug patients up without addressing the root causes behind autistic behavior.
Parents press states for autism insurance laws
By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer
Mon Oct 20, 6:28 am ET
CHICAGO -- In Washington state, Reza and Arzu Forough pay more than $1,000 a week for behavior therapy for their 12-year-old autistic son.
In Indiana, Sean and Michele Trivedi get the same type of therapy for their 11-year-old daughter. But they pay $3,000 a year and their health insurance covers the rest.
Two families. Two states. Big difference in out-of-pocket costs.
If autism advocates get their way, more states will follow Indiana's lead by requiring health insurers to cover intensive and costly behavior therapy for autism.
In the past two years, six states -- Texas, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Florida, South Carolina, Louisiana -- passed laws requiring such coverage, costing in some cases up to $50,000 a year per child.
The powerful advocacy group Autism Speaks has endorsed bills in New Jersey, Virginia and Michigan and is targeting at least 10 more states in 2009, including New York, California and Ohio.
Other states, including Illinois, have similar bills in the works but aren't working directly with Autism Speaks.
"This is the hottest trend in mandates we've seen in a long time," said J.P. Wieske, a lobbyist for an insurance coalition that argues that these state requirements drive up insurance costs for everyone. "It is hard to fight them."
For lawmakers, voting against these measures means voting against parents who are struggling to do the best for their children.
Parents tell moving stories about how behavior therapy works better than anything they've tried. In two states, bills got nicknames like "Steven's Law" and "Ryan's Law," so voting against them was tough.
Arzu Forough of Kirkland, Wash., who is pushing a bill in her state, credits behavior therapy for teaching her son Shayan, at age 3, to make a sound to ask for a drink of water. Now 12, he is learning to converse about his favorite food and music, and to talk about his frustrations rather than throw tantrums.
Trained therapists, using principles of applied behavior analysis (ABA), created a system of rewards to teach Shayan these skills. As a preschooler, he got a piece of cheese when he said "bubba" for water. Now a therapist rewards him with tokens when he responds in conversation. He uses the tokens to "buy" privileges like going for a car ride.
Shayan's improvements are a welcome relief to his mother, who once called for police help with her out-of-control son while she was driving.
"I pulled over to the side of the road," she said. "I had to call the police to drive behind me so I could drive safely home."
The Foroughs have health insurance, but it doesn't cover Shayan's therapy. Although they both work full time, they must live rent-free with her elderly mother to be able to afford his treatment.
Meanwhile, the Trivedi family of the Indianapolis suburb of Carmel, get 25 hours a week of behavior therapy for 11-year-old Ellie. They contribute co-pays and a deductible, totaling about $3,000. Insurance pays the rest, about $47,000 a year.
Michele Trivedi is an autism activist. She fought for years after a vaguely worded 2001 Indiana law required coverage but insurers still refused to pay for ABA. Finally in 2006, she helped convince the state's insurance commissioner to issue a bulletin spelling out what was expected of insurers.
"It's no longer acceptable that blatant discrimination against people with autism occur," Trivedi said.
Autism is a range of disorders that hinder the ability to communicate and interact. Most doctors believe there is no cure. An estimated 1 in 150 American children are diagnosed with it.
Supporters say behavior therapy has decades of research behind it and can save money in the long run by keeping people out of institutions. Researchers agree, but say much remains unknown about which therapy works best for autistic kids, whether long-term gains can be claimed, and whether it works with older children.
Some states require behavior therapy coverage up to age 18 or 21. But the scientific evidence for ABA is strongest for the youngest, ages 2 to 5. Some researchers have reported on individual children with autism who no longer appeared disabled when they reached school age.
The most rigorous studies, though, show mixed results. A study published in 2000 showed that preschoolers who got intensive behavior therapy had greater gains in IQ than children who didn't get the therapy. But there was little difference in the two group's language development or the intensity of behavior problems. And the children most severely affected by autism showed no comparative gain.
Another study in preschoolers, published in 2005, showed little difference between an intensive ABA-based program run by therapists and less-intensive therapy from parents; children in both groups improved.
When it comes to older children, the research is sparse, said Tristram Smith of the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York, who co-authored the 2000 autism study. "You could make a decent case for the little kids up to 6 or 7 that (insurance mandates) would be appropriate," Smith said. "I think it would be hard to make that case for older kids."
Another autism researcher, Laura Schreibman of the University of California at San Diego, said "fly-by-night" behavior therapists could defraud insurers with ineffective therapy.
"I would like to see insurance cover this kind of intervention because it's documented to be effective," she said. "But insurance companies have every right to monitor whether it's working. If it's been two years and there are no gains, an insurance company should be saying, 'What are we paying for here?'"
The Council for Affordable Health Insurance, the industry lobbying arm, estimates autism mandates increase the cost of insurance by less than 1 percent by themselves, but when combined with other requirements make insurance less affordable.
Susan Pisano, a spokeswoman for America's Health Insurance Plans, said the industry has been wary of laws ordering a specific treatment because when new scientific evidence emerges, the mandate remains frozen. And she questions whether behavior therapy is medical or educational.
The American Academy of Pediatrics includes ABA therapy in its clinical report on autism, but describes it as an "educational intervention."
"There has been an effort to transfer the response to autism from school systems to the health care system," Pisano said.
Nevertheless, some big companies and the U.S. military are providing ABA-based autism therapy as a benefit.
The U.S. military's Tricare health insurance program not only covers up to $2,500 a month for the therapy, but also recently expanded the definition of who can provide it to make it more accessible. And some self-insured companies, including Microsoft and Home Depot, pay for autism behavior therapy.
Gaining insurance coverage state by state is the top lobbying priority for Autism Speaks.
"It's the No. 1 thing we hear from parents," said Elizabeth Emken, the group's vice president of government relations. "What's more difficult than knowing there's an effective treatment for your children, but you can't afford to offer it to them because it's not covered by insurance?"
A new federal law requiring insurers to make coverage for mental health conditions equitable with other health coverage was tacked onto the recent financial industry bailout package.
Autism Speaks applauds the law, but says autism is not a psychological condition and that the insurance industry has refused to cover autism treatments in states with mental health parity laws on the books.
"We hope it sets the stage for the Congress and the next president to continue this effort to end discrimination in the health insurance marketplace," Emken said. "Whichever party is elected, autism will be on the table and be a major point of discussion. There may have to be a federal mandate."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081020/ap_on_he_me/med_autism_coverage/print
It is refreshing to see such a method of therapy gain popularity, rather than the use of stimulants and other drugs that are typically offered to autistic families. I applaud regulations that mandate health insurers to cover this treatment, and would encourage parents of autistic kids to investigate how they may apply some of these same principles in dealing with their own children's illness.
It appears this sort of behavioral therapy provides a much safer, more effective, and better long-term solution than the hazardous medications that simply drug patients up without addressing the root causes behind autistic behavior.
Parents press states for autism insurance laws
By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer
Mon Oct 20, 6:28 am ET
CHICAGO -- In Washington state, Reza and Arzu Forough pay more than $1,000 a week for behavior therapy for their 12-year-old autistic son.
In Indiana, Sean and Michele Trivedi get the same type of therapy for their 11-year-old daughter. But they pay $3,000 a year and their health insurance covers the rest.
Two families. Two states. Big difference in out-of-pocket costs.
If autism advocates get their way, more states will follow Indiana's lead by requiring health insurers to cover intensive and costly behavior therapy for autism.
In the past two years, six states -- Texas, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Florida, South Carolina, Louisiana -- passed laws requiring such coverage, costing in some cases up to $50,000 a year per child.
The powerful advocacy group Autism Speaks has endorsed bills in New Jersey, Virginia and Michigan and is targeting at least 10 more states in 2009, including New York, California and Ohio.
Other states, including Illinois, have similar bills in the works but aren't working directly with Autism Speaks.
"This is the hottest trend in mandates we've seen in a long time," said J.P. Wieske, a lobbyist for an insurance coalition that argues that these state requirements drive up insurance costs for everyone. "It is hard to fight them."
For lawmakers, voting against these measures means voting against parents who are struggling to do the best for their children.
Parents tell moving stories about how behavior therapy works better than anything they've tried. In two states, bills got nicknames like "Steven's Law" and "Ryan's Law," so voting against them was tough.
Arzu Forough of Kirkland, Wash., who is pushing a bill in her state, credits behavior therapy for teaching her son Shayan, at age 3, to make a sound to ask for a drink of water. Now 12, he is learning to converse about his favorite food and music, and to talk about his frustrations rather than throw tantrums.
Trained therapists, using principles of applied behavior analysis (ABA), created a system of rewards to teach Shayan these skills. As a preschooler, he got a piece of cheese when he said "bubba" for water. Now a therapist rewards him with tokens when he responds in conversation. He uses the tokens to "buy" privileges like going for a car ride.
Shayan's improvements are a welcome relief to his mother, who once called for police help with her out-of-control son while she was driving.
"I pulled over to the side of the road," she said. "I had to call the police to drive behind me so I could drive safely home."
The Foroughs have health insurance, but it doesn't cover Shayan's therapy. Although they both work full time, they must live rent-free with her elderly mother to be able to afford his treatment.
Meanwhile, the Trivedi family of the Indianapolis suburb of Carmel, get 25 hours a week of behavior therapy for 11-year-old Ellie. They contribute co-pays and a deductible, totaling about $3,000. Insurance pays the rest, about $47,000 a year.
Michele Trivedi is an autism activist. She fought for years after a vaguely worded 2001 Indiana law required coverage but insurers still refused to pay for ABA. Finally in 2006, she helped convince the state's insurance commissioner to issue a bulletin spelling out what was expected of insurers.
"It's no longer acceptable that blatant discrimination against people with autism occur," Trivedi said.
Autism is a range of disorders that hinder the ability to communicate and interact. Most doctors believe there is no cure. An estimated 1 in 150 American children are diagnosed with it.
Supporters say behavior therapy has decades of research behind it and can save money in the long run by keeping people out of institutions. Researchers agree, but say much remains unknown about which therapy works best for autistic kids, whether long-term gains can be claimed, and whether it works with older children.
Some states require behavior therapy coverage up to age 18 or 21. But the scientific evidence for ABA is strongest for the youngest, ages 2 to 5. Some researchers have reported on individual children with autism who no longer appeared disabled when they reached school age.
The most rigorous studies, though, show mixed results. A study published in 2000 showed that preschoolers who got intensive behavior therapy had greater gains in IQ than children who didn't get the therapy. But there was little difference in the two group's language development or the intensity of behavior problems. And the children most severely affected by autism showed no comparative gain.
Another study in preschoolers, published in 2005, showed little difference between an intensive ABA-based program run by therapists and less-intensive therapy from parents; children in both groups improved.
When it comes to older children, the research is sparse, said Tristram Smith of the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York, who co-authored the 2000 autism study. "You could make a decent case for the little kids up to 6 or 7 that (insurance mandates) would be appropriate," Smith said. "I think it would be hard to make that case for older kids."
Another autism researcher, Laura Schreibman of the University of California at San Diego, said "fly-by-night" behavior therapists could defraud insurers with ineffective therapy.
"I would like to see insurance cover this kind of intervention because it's documented to be effective," she said. "But insurance companies have every right to monitor whether it's working. If it's been two years and there are no gains, an insurance company should be saying, 'What are we paying for here?'"
The Council for Affordable Health Insurance, the industry lobbying arm, estimates autism mandates increase the cost of insurance by less than 1 percent by themselves, but when combined with other requirements make insurance less affordable.
Susan Pisano, a spokeswoman for America's Health Insurance Plans, said the industry has been wary of laws ordering a specific treatment because when new scientific evidence emerges, the mandate remains frozen. And she questions whether behavior therapy is medical or educational.
The American Academy of Pediatrics includes ABA therapy in its clinical report on autism, but describes it as an "educational intervention."
"There has been an effort to transfer the response to autism from school systems to the health care system," Pisano said.
Nevertheless, some big companies and the U.S. military are providing ABA-based autism therapy as a benefit.
The U.S. military's Tricare health insurance program not only covers up to $2,500 a month for the therapy, but also recently expanded the definition of who can provide it to make it more accessible. And some self-insured companies, including Microsoft and Home Depot, pay for autism behavior therapy.
Gaining insurance coverage state by state is the top lobbying priority for Autism Speaks.
"It's the No. 1 thing we hear from parents," said Elizabeth Emken, the group's vice president of government relations. "What's more difficult than knowing there's an effective treatment for your children, but you can't afford to offer it to them because it's not covered by insurance?"
A new federal law requiring insurers to make coverage for mental health conditions equitable with other health coverage was tacked onto the recent financial industry bailout package.
Autism Speaks applauds the law, but says autism is not a psychological condition and that the insurance industry has refused to cover autism treatments in states with mental health parity laws on the books.
"We hope it sets the stage for the Congress and the next president to continue this effort to end discrimination in the health insurance marketplace," Emken said. "Whichever party is elected, autism will be on the table and be a major point of discussion. There may have to be a federal mandate."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081020/ap_on_he_me/med_autism_coverage/print
Monday, October 27, 2008
Hidden Latex Allergens
Allergic reactions to latex are becoming more common, and they can range from minor to life-threatening. They are most often associated with medical or dental care, but the article below points out some less obvious situations that may lead to latex exposure. If you are allergic to latex, this post may give you a heads up as to potential sources of latex you should be aware of.
Allergies to latex or any number of common allergens are triggered by a faulty immune system response. A natural health practitioner can often alleviate allergies through dietary and nutritional interventions that bolster your immune system and help bring your body back into balance. Lifestyle changes such as these are much safer, more effective, and offer better long-term solutions than the medications often prescribed for many allergic conditions.
Look Out For Latex In Unexpected Places
Article Date: 06 Oct 2008 - 10:00 PDT
Allergic reactions to latex happen commonly in medical settings, where rubber gloves are in abundant supply. But less-visible elements in other environments can also pose danger, according to the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI).
"Consider that restaurant meals are frequently prepared by cooks wearing latex gloves. In schools, the cafeteria may be a threat, but there is also potential exposure to latex in school supplies," said Donald H. Beezhold, PhD, FAAAAI, chair of the AAAAI Latex Allergy Committee. "This type of inadvertent exposure poses a serious health risk to millions of Americans."
Estimates of latex allergy prevalence vary, but the condition disproportionately affects healthcare workers and others with frequent exposure to latex - including those who have had multiple surgeries. At least 10 percent of healthcare workers and more than half of individuals with spina bifida are believed to have the allergy, versus 1 percent to 6 percent of the general population.
Reactions to latex can result in skin irritation or anaphylaxis - which can be life-threatening.
Avoidance is key to preventing an allergic reaction and the responsibility of education often falls to the patient. The AAAAI offers resources on latex allergy in the Diseases 101 section of its Web site, http://www.aaaai.org. The AAAAI recommends these tips for latex-allergic patients:
- Avoid contact with latex products, including gloves, balloons and condoms.
- Inform your doctors, dentist, family, employer and school personnel of the allergy and request accommodations as needed.
- Remember that the federal Americans with Disabilities Act provides workplace protections for individuals with latex allergy. If protective gloves are required for your job, your employer should consider an alternative synthetic material, which is equally effective in most situations.
- Ask your physician if you should wear a medical bracelet identifying your allergy.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/124377.php
Allergies to latex or any number of common allergens are triggered by a faulty immune system response. A natural health practitioner can often alleviate allergies through dietary and nutritional interventions that bolster your immune system and help bring your body back into balance. Lifestyle changes such as these are much safer, more effective, and offer better long-term solutions than the medications often prescribed for many allergic conditions.
Look Out For Latex In Unexpected Places
Article Date: 06 Oct 2008 - 10:00 PDT
Allergic reactions to latex happen commonly in medical settings, where rubber gloves are in abundant supply. But less-visible elements in other environments can also pose danger, according to the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI).
"Consider that restaurant meals are frequently prepared by cooks wearing latex gloves. In schools, the cafeteria may be a threat, but there is also potential exposure to latex in school supplies," said Donald H. Beezhold, PhD, FAAAAI, chair of the AAAAI Latex Allergy Committee. "This type of inadvertent exposure poses a serious health risk to millions of Americans."
Estimates of latex allergy prevalence vary, but the condition disproportionately affects healthcare workers and others with frequent exposure to latex - including those who have had multiple surgeries. At least 10 percent of healthcare workers and more than half of individuals with spina bifida are believed to have the allergy, versus 1 percent to 6 percent of the general population.
Reactions to latex can result in skin irritation or anaphylaxis - which can be life-threatening.
Avoidance is key to preventing an allergic reaction and the responsibility of education often falls to the patient. The AAAAI offers resources on latex allergy in the Diseases 101 section of its Web site, http://www.aaaai.org. The AAAAI recommends these tips for latex-allergic patients:
- Avoid contact with latex products, including gloves, balloons and condoms.
- Inform your doctors, dentist, family, employer and school personnel of the allergy and request accommodations as needed.
- Remember that the federal Americans with Disabilities Act provides workplace protections for individuals with latex allergy. If protective gloves are required for your job, your employer should consider an alternative synthetic material, which is equally effective in most situations.
- Ask your physician if you should wear a medical bracelet identifying your allergy.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/124377.php
Friday, October 24, 2008
More Vaccines Forced on Our Children
A new frontier has been reached in the blatant violation of healthcare freedoms and parental rights. New Jersey is the first (and hopefully the last) state to pass legislation mandating both flu and pneumococcal vaccines for pre-schoolers and children entering daycare. Despite well-documented dangers, including mercury-laced thimerosol and sometimes deadly reactions, and despite the lack of credible research indicating the necessity or safety of such vaccines for young children, the NJ Health Department is standing their ground. They have even come out in opposition against conscientious objection options for concerned parents.
So now we have mandated vaccines being given to children for the flu, which is not even considered a deadly disease, especially in that age group. What's next? A vaccine for the common cold (oh, they'd love that) or for diaper rash or for stinky feet? As ridiculous as this may sound, authorities have proven that no scenario is too far-fetched for the profit-driven medical-governmental complex. Parents beware!
Speaking of the flu, please read an excellent article about the flu and Vitamin D levels and why you should have your Vitamin D levels checked:
http://www.oasisadvancedwellness.com/learning/epidemic-influenza-vitamin-d.html
NJ flu-shot mandate for preschoolers draws outcry
By DAVID CRARY -- 4 days ago
As flu season approaches, many New Jersey parents are furious over a first-in-the-nation requirement that children get a flu shot in order to attend preschools and day-care centers. The decision should be the parents', not the state's, they contend.
Hundreds of parents and other activists rallied outside the New Jersey Statehouse on Thursday, decrying the policy and voicing support for a bill that would allow parents to opt out of mandatory vaccinations for their children.
"This is not an anti-vaccine rally -- it's a freedom of choice rally," said one of the organizers, Louise Habakus. "This one-size-fits-all approach is really very anti-American."
New Jersey's policy was approved last December by the state's Public Health Council and is taking effect this fall. Children from 6 months to 5 years old who attend a child-care center or preschool have until Dec. 31 to receive the flu vaccine, along with a pneumococcal vaccine.
The Health Council was acting on the recommendations of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which has depicted children under 5 as a group particularly in need of flu shots. But no other state has made the shots mandatory for children of any age.
"Vaccines not only protect the child being vaccinated but also the general community and the most vulnerable individuals within the community," New Jersey's Health Department said in a statement. It has depicted young children as "particularly efficient" in transmitting the flu to others.
Opposition to the policy is vehement. Assemblywoman Charlotte Vandervalk, one of the speakers at the rally, said she now has 34 co-sponsors for a bill that would allow for conscientious objections to mandatory vaccinations.
"The right to informed consent is so basic," she said in an interview. "Parents have a right to decide for their own children what is injected in their bodies."
State policy now allows for medical and religious exemptions to mandatory vaccinations, but Vandervalk said requests for medical exemptions often have been turned down by local health authorities. She said 19 other states allow conscientious exemptions like those envisioned in her bill.
New Jersey's health department has come out strongly against the legislation.
"Broad exemptions to mandatory vaccination weaken the entire compliance and enforcement structure," it said.
The department also contends that New Jersey is particularly vulnerable to vaccine-preventable diseases -- with a high population density, a mobile population and many recently arrived immigrants.
"In light of New Jersey's special traits, the highest number of children possible must receive vaccines to protect them and others," the department said.
Several hundred people attended Thursday's rally, some with signs reading, "Mommy knows best."
Among the speakers was Robin Stavola of Colts Neck, N.J., who said her daughter, Holly, died in 2000 at age 5 less than two weeks after receiving eight different vaccines, including a booster shot.
"I am not against vaccines, but I do believe there are too many," she told the crowd.
State health officials and the CDC insist the flu vaccine is safe and effective, but Vandervalk and the parent groups who support her bill contend there has been inadequate research into the vaccine's impact on small children. Critics note that flu vaccines contain trace amounts of thimerosol, a mercury-based preservative; the CDC says there's no convincing evidence these trace amounts cause harm.
More generally, many of the parents mobilizing against the state policy believe various types of vaccine are being overused, resulting in more cases of autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and other neurological problems in children.
"There's not been a response from the government that is credible in terms of doing the scientific research that will screen out vulnerable children," said Barbara Loe Fisher, a speaker at the rally. She is co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center in Vienna, Va., an advocacy group skeptical of vaccination policies.
"There's an acknowledgment that prescription drugs can cause different reactions in people, but there's a blanket statement by health authorities that we all have to vaccinate, all in the same way," Fisher said.
Fisher is a prominent player in a nationwide movement challenging the scope of vaccination programs. She was harshly critical last year when school officials in Maryland's Prince George's County threatened to impose jail terms and fines on parents whose children didn't get required vaccinations.
Many of the activists in New Jersey accept the need for mandatory vaccinations for certain highly dangerous diseases, such as polio, but argue that the state went too far in requiring flu shots.
"The flu is not a deadly disease," said Barbara Majeski of Princeton, N.J., who does not want her two preschooler sons to get the vaccination.
In fact, flu kills about 36,000 Americans a year and hospitalizes about 200,000. But children make up a small fraction of the victims -- 86 died last year, from babies to teens, according to federal figures. Only two flu deaths of children in New Jersey have been recorded since 2004.
"Mother Nature designed our bodies to be able to fight off infections through natural means -- you need to be exposed and develop immunity," Majeski said. "We've just gotten a little too overprotective with our children."
Associated Press writer Mel C. Evans in Trenton, N.J., contributed to this report.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g0-BzSiuBeFJ9WGOM36G7jN2p3-wD93RQCN80
So now we have mandated vaccines being given to children for the flu, which is not even considered a deadly disease, especially in that age group. What's next? A vaccine for the common cold (oh, they'd love that) or for diaper rash or for stinky feet? As ridiculous as this may sound, authorities have proven that no scenario is too far-fetched for the profit-driven medical-governmental complex. Parents beware!
Speaking of the flu, please read an excellent article about the flu and Vitamin D levels and why you should have your Vitamin D levels checked:
http://www.oasisadvancedwellness.com/learning/epidemic-influenza-vitamin-d.html
NJ flu-shot mandate for preschoolers draws outcry
By DAVID CRARY -- 4 days ago
As flu season approaches, many New Jersey parents are furious over a first-in-the-nation requirement that children get a flu shot in order to attend preschools and day-care centers. The decision should be the parents', not the state's, they contend.
Hundreds of parents and other activists rallied outside the New Jersey Statehouse on Thursday, decrying the policy and voicing support for a bill that would allow parents to opt out of mandatory vaccinations for their children.
"This is not an anti-vaccine rally -- it's a freedom of choice rally," said one of the organizers, Louise Habakus. "This one-size-fits-all approach is really very anti-American."
New Jersey's policy was approved last December by the state's Public Health Council and is taking effect this fall. Children from 6 months to 5 years old who attend a child-care center or preschool have until Dec. 31 to receive the flu vaccine, along with a pneumococcal vaccine.
The Health Council was acting on the recommendations of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which has depicted children under 5 as a group particularly in need of flu shots. But no other state has made the shots mandatory for children of any age.
"Vaccines not only protect the child being vaccinated but also the general community and the most vulnerable individuals within the community," New Jersey's Health Department said in a statement. It has depicted young children as "particularly efficient" in transmitting the flu to others.
Opposition to the policy is vehement. Assemblywoman Charlotte Vandervalk, one of the speakers at the rally, said she now has 34 co-sponsors for a bill that would allow for conscientious objections to mandatory vaccinations.
"The right to informed consent is so basic," she said in an interview. "Parents have a right to decide for their own children what is injected in their bodies."
State policy now allows for medical and religious exemptions to mandatory vaccinations, but Vandervalk said requests for medical exemptions often have been turned down by local health authorities. She said 19 other states allow conscientious exemptions like those envisioned in her bill.
New Jersey's health department has come out strongly against the legislation.
"Broad exemptions to mandatory vaccination weaken the entire compliance and enforcement structure," it said.
The department also contends that New Jersey is particularly vulnerable to vaccine-preventable diseases -- with a high population density, a mobile population and many recently arrived immigrants.
"In light of New Jersey's special traits, the highest number of children possible must receive vaccines to protect them and others," the department said.
Several hundred people attended Thursday's rally, some with signs reading, "Mommy knows best."
Among the speakers was Robin Stavola of Colts Neck, N.J., who said her daughter, Holly, died in 2000 at age 5 less than two weeks after receiving eight different vaccines, including a booster shot.
"I am not against vaccines, but I do believe there are too many," she told the crowd.
State health officials and the CDC insist the flu vaccine is safe and effective, but Vandervalk and the parent groups who support her bill contend there has been inadequate research into the vaccine's impact on small children. Critics note that flu vaccines contain trace amounts of thimerosol, a mercury-based preservative; the CDC says there's no convincing evidence these trace amounts cause harm.
More generally, many of the parents mobilizing against the state policy believe various types of vaccine are being overused, resulting in more cases of autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and other neurological problems in children.
"There's not been a response from the government that is credible in terms of doing the scientific research that will screen out vulnerable children," said Barbara Loe Fisher, a speaker at the rally. She is co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center in Vienna, Va., an advocacy group skeptical of vaccination policies.
"There's an acknowledgment that prescription drugs can cause different reactions in people, but there's a blanket statement by health authorities that we all have to vaccinate, all in the same way," Fisher said.
Fisher is a prominent player in a nationwide movement challenging the scope of vaccination programs. She was harshly critical last year when school officials in Maryland's Prince George's County threatened to impose jail terms and fines on parents whose children didn't get required vaccinations.
Many of the activists in New Jersey accept the need for mandatory vaccinations for certain highly dangerous diseases, such as polio, but argue that the state went too far in requiring flu shots.
"The flu is not a deadly disease," said Barbara Majeski of Princeton, N.J., who does not want her two preschooler sons to get the vaccination.
In fact, flu kills about 36,000 Americans a year and hospitalizes about 200,000. But children make up a small fraction of the victims -- 86 died last year, from babies to teens, according to federal figures. Only two flu deaths of children in New Jersey have been recorded since 2004.
"Mother Nature designed our bodies to be able to fight off infections through natural means -- you need to be exposed and develop immunity," Majeski said. "We've just gotten a little too overprotective with our children."
Associated Press writer Mel C. Evans in Trenton, N.J., contributed to this report.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g0-BzSiuBeFJ9WGOM36G7jN2p3-wD93RQCN80
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Hazards of Bottled Water
In spite of the massive increase in sales of bottled water over the last few decades, there are indicators that it may be just as harmful to your health, if not more so in some cases, than regular tap water. It also appears that many suppliers have deceived consumers into believing that bottled water is purer and safer than tap water.
There are few regulations that force bottled water companies to divulge the source of their product or the presence of known contaminants. The use of plastic bottles, especially if the water is stored in warm or hot temperatures, poses additional chemical risks.
A steady supply of clean water is one of the foundational necessities that lead towards wellness. Your best source for good water is a high-quality home water filtration system that will assure you and your family the pure water you need to stay well and prevent disease.
Bottled Water Is No Purer Than Tap Water, Group Says (Update1)
By Rob Waters
Oct. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Bottled water sold in markets and convenience stores may be no more free of pollutants than the water that pours from the kitchen tap at a fraction of the cost, said an environmental group that tested samples.
Ten top-selling brands of bottled water contained a total of 38 pollutants including fertilizer, industrial chemicals, bacteria and the residue of drugs such as Tylenol, according to a report by the Environmental Working Group based in Washington, D.C. The bottled water showed an average of eight pollutants in each sample.
Americans drank more than twice as much bottled water in 2007 as they did in 1997, guzzling 8.8 billion gallons at a cost of $10.3 billion in 2007, according to the Beverage Marketing Corp., a research and consulting firm based in New York. Although commercials often show pristine mountain springs, the reality is that bottled water often comes from city water supplies, said Renee Sharp, an Environmental Working Group senior scientist.
``If you're going to pay 1,500 times more for bottled water than for tap you'd expect that you'd be getting a cleaner, better product,'' said Sharp. ``And that's not necessarily true.''
Public water utilities are required to inform customers about contaminants that may be present in tap water and, in most states, to tell customers where the water comes from and how it's purified. Companies selling bottled water have few similar rules, Sharp said.
California, which has stricter standards than most states, requires companies to disclose whether bottled water comes from municipal water systems and also to warn consumers about contaminants that may pose health risks.
No Assurances
``But even in California, consumers still can't be assured they're getting a better product'' than they could get from their kitchen sink, Sharp said.
Sharp and her colleagues started their research by buying samples of 10 different brands and sending them to an independent laboratory for testing. They noticed that bottles from Wal-Mart's and Giant Food Inc., a supermarket chain owned by Koninklijke Ahold NV of Amsterdam, seemed to bear the chemical signature of standard municipal water treatment, Sharp said.
In three samples of Sam's Choice purified drinking water sold at Wal-Mart stores near San Francisco, levels of a group of chemicals known as trihalomethanes exceeded state standards, the report said. These are byproducts of chlorine and other chemicals used to kill microbes and can cause cancer at high doses.
Quality is `Top Priority'
Tests conducted by Wal-Mart and its suppliers don't show ``any reportable amounts of chlorine or chlorine by-products,'' Shannon Frederick, a Wal-Mart spokeswoman, said yesterday in an e-mail.
``The suppliers of Sam's Choice water regularly test to verify compliance and quality,'' she said. ``Product quality is a top priority at Wal-Mart, and we stand behind the quality of our bottled water.''
Giant Food spokesman Jamie Miller said in an e-mail today the water marketed by the company is produced with ``numerous safety and quality assurance controls, including a filtration process that assures that the quality of the product meets all regulatory standards for safe drinking water in the areas where we operate.''
While Sharp and her colleagues tested eight bottled water brands in addition to those of Wal-Mart and Giant, the report didn't name the others.
The largest producer of bottled water in the U.S., Nestle Waters North America, a unit of Switzerland-based Nestle SA, said today in an e-mailed statement that the environmental group's report was ``false and misleading'' and seeks to ``undermine the integrity of bottled water.''
Multistep Filtration
Water used in Nestle's brands, which include Poland Spring and San Pellegrino, are tested regularly by independent labs and undergo ``multistep filtration,'' said Heidi Paul, the unit's vice president, in the statement.
``Contrary to the EWG's attempt to equate tap water quality with bottled water, our water is held to a higher standard,'' Paul said.
The Environmental Working Group notified Wal-Mart yesterday that it intended to sue the company for violating the terms of California's Proposition 65, a measure passed by voters in 1986. The regulation requires businesses to notify consumers if products they sell contain significant amounts of chemicals known to cause harm.
Wal-Mart's Frederick said she had no comment on the possible lawsuit.
The increased consumption of water sold in disposable plastic bottles also creates serious environmental problems, Sharp said.
`Enormous Environmental Impacts'
``The environmental impacts of bottled water production are enormous in terms of the amount of energy that goes into producing the bottles and shipping them around the country,'' she said. The bottles also clog landfill sites and increasingly pollute oceans, where they endanger marine animals, she said.
While Giant Food's Acadia brand had similar levels of trihalomethanes, the environmental group doesn't plan to sue the chain under the California statute because it doesn't have stores in the state, Sharp said.
The environmental group wants to see stricter, nationwide standards requiring full disclosure of the contaminants in bottled water and urges consumers to switch from bottled water to tap water. People who are concerned about tap water quality can purchase home filtration systems for a small portion of the cost they pay for bottled water, Sharp said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Rob Waters in San Francisco at rwaters5@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: October 15, 2008 13:36 EDT
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=a4gqSuLAeFYU&refer=home
There are few regulations that force bottled water companies to divulge the source of their product or the presence of known contaminants. The use of plastic bottles, especially if the water is stored in warm or hot temperatures, poses additional chemical risks.
A steady supply of clean water is one of the foundational necessities that lead towards wellness. Your best source for good water is a high-quality home water filtration system that will assure you and your family the pure water you need to stay well and prevent disease.
Bottled Water Is No Purer Than Tap Water, Group Says (Update1)
By Rob Waters
Oct. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Bottled water sold in markets and convenience stores may be no more free of pollutants than the water that pours from the kitchen tap at a fraction of the cost, said an environmental group that tested samples.
Ten top-selling brands of bottled water contained a total of 38 pollutants including fertilizer, industrial chemicals, bacteria and the residue of drugs such as Tylenol, according to a report by the Environmental Working Group based in Washington, D.C. The bottled water showed an average of eight pollutants in each sample.
Americans drank more than twice as much bottled water in 2007 as they did in 1997, guzzling 8.8 billion gallons at a cost of $10.3 billion in 2007, according to the Beverage Marketing Corp., a research and consulting firm based in New York. Although commercials often show pristine mountain springs, the reality is that bottled water often comes from city water supplies, said Renee Sharp, an Environmental Working Group senior scientist.
``If you're going to pay 1,500 times more for bottled water than for tap you'd expect that you'd be getting a cleaner, better product,'' said Sharp. ``And that's not necessarily true.''
Public water utilities are required to inform customers about contaminants that may be present in tap water and, in most states, to tell customers where the water comes from and how it's purified. Companies selling bottled water have few similar rules, Sharp said.
California, which has stricter standards than most states, requires companies to disclose whether bottled water comes from municipal water systems and also to warn consumers about contaminants that may pose health risks.
No Assurances
``But even in California, consumers still can't be assured they're getting a better product'' than they could get from their kitchen sink, Sharp said.
Sharp and her colleagues started their research by buying samples of 10 different brands and sending them to an independent laboratory for testing. They noticed that bottles from Wal-Mart's and Giant Food Inc., a supermarket chain owned by Koninklijke Ahold NV of Amsterdam, seemed to bear the chemical signature of standard municipal water treatment, Sharp said.
In three samples of Sam's Choice purified drinking water sold at Wal-Mart stores near San Francisco, levels of a group of chemicals known as trihalomethanes exceeded state standards, the report said. These are byproducts of chlorine and other chemicals used to kill microbes and can cause cancer at high doses.
Quality is `Top Priority'
Tests conducted by Wal-Mart and its suppliers don't show ``any reportable amounts of chlorine or chlorine by-products,'' Shannon Frederick, a Wal-Mart spokeswoman, said yesterday in an e-mail.
``The suppliers of Sam's Choice water regularly test to verify compliance and quality,'' she said. ``Product quality is a top priority at Wal-Mart, and we stand behind the quality of our bottled water.''
Giant Food spokesman Jamie Miller said in an e-mail today the water marketed by the company is produced with ``numerous safety and quality assurance controls, including a filtration process that assures that the quality of the product meets all regulatory standards for safe drinking water in the areas where we operate.''
While Sharp and her colleagues tested eight bottled water brands in addition to those of Wal-Mart and Giant, the report didn't name the others.
The largest producer of bottled water in the U.S., Nestle Waters North America, a unit of Switzerland-based Nestle SA, said today in an e-mailed statement that the environmental group's report was ``false and misleading'' and seeks to ``undermine the integrity of bottled water.''
Multistep Filtration
Water used in Nestle's brands, which include Poland Spring and San Pellegrino, are tested regularly by independent labs and undergo ``multistep filtration,'' said Heidi Paul, the unit's vice president, in the statement.
``Contrary to the EWG's attempt to equate tap water quality with bottled water, our water is held to a higher standard,'' Paul said.
The Environmental Working Group notified Wal-Mart yesterday that it intended to sue the company for violating the terms of California's Proposition 65, a measure passed by voters in 1986. The regulation requires businesses to notify consumers if products they sell contain significant amounts of chemicals known to cause harm.
Wal-Mart's Frederick said she had no comment on the possible lawsuit.
The increased consumption of water sold in disposable plastic bottles also creates serious environmental problems, Sharp said.
`Enormous Environmental Impacts'
``The environmental impacts of bottled water production are enormous in terms of the amount of energy that goes into producing the bottles and shipping them around the country,'' she said. The bottles also clog landfill sites and increasingly pollute oceans, where they endanger marine animals, she said.
While Giant Food's Acadia brand had similar levels of trihalomethanes, the environmental group doesn't plan to sue the chain under the California statute because it doesn't have stores in the state, Sharp said.
The environmental group wants to see stricter, nationwide standards requiring full disclosure of the contaminants in bottled water and urges consumers to switch from bottled water to tap water. People who are concerned about tap water quality can purchase home filtration systems for a small portion of the cost they pay for bottled water, Sharp said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Rob Waters in San Francisco at rwaters5@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: October 15, 2008 13:36 EDT
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=a4gqSuLAeFYU&refer=home
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
The Real Drug Problem in America
Today's post presents a scathing indictment of the American medical system and its cohorts Big Pharma and the FDA. The over-medication of American children amounts to child abuse in one of its most damaging forms -- at the hands of trusted professionals (physicians) whose purpose is to allegedly help and heal, not to shamelessly push dangerous drugs on patients, young and old, who don't need them.
With ADD and ADHD at epidemic proportions and the mainstream offer of a "quick fix" solution of prescription drugs, certainly we must wonder "why" this is so much more prevalent now than ever before. It is prudent to take into account the junk-food diet of most children, the injection of toxic chemicals through vaccinations, toxic water and air, the adulteration of our food with hormones and chemicals, and the lack of nutrient dense fruits and vegetables (many are genetically modified) in our children's diets. The above combinations wreck havoc on the digestive tract (constipation is accepted as no big deal in conventional medicine) resulting in a very compromised immune system. Celiac disease is also rampant amount children and adults and often goes undiagnosed.
The article contrasts European practices with the atrocities done here in the US. Factors to blame for the excessive drugging of American kids include consumer advertising, cultural beliefs that encourage drug use, and a larger number of child psychiatrists who freely dispense medications to children, often more than one at a time.
We as parents need to be aware of these alarming trends and protect our children from this insanity. In many cases, the health care freedoms of families have been violated by forced medication of their children.
American Kids are the Most Medicated in the World
American children are about three times more likely to be prescribed psychotropic medication than children in Europe. The differences may be a result of differing regulatory practices, along with cultural beliefs about the role of medication in emotional and behavioral problems.
A team of researchers from the U.S., Germany and the Netherlands investigated prescription levels in the three countries. Antidepressant and stimulant use was three or more times greater in the U.S. than in the Netherlands and Germany, while antipsychotic prevalence was 1.5 to 2.2 times greater.
The researchers pointed to different diagnostic classification systems, government cost restrictions in Europe, the larger number of child psychiatrists per capita in the U.S. and the use of two or more different psychotropic drugs in a single year in U.S. children as possible explanations. Direct-to-consumer drug advertising, which is common in the U.S., was also considered to be a likely reason for the difference.
Every year more than 200 million prescriptions are written for children and teenagers in the United States, according to California's Board of Pharmacy. That works out to more than three prescriptions per child, every year!
Meanwhile, in any two-week period in the United States, 13 million children take a prescription medication. Of them, over 6 million are taking them for chronic diseases, and the top five of these diseases that children take medications for are asthma, epilepsy, attention deficit disorders, arthritis and diabetes.
The amount of drugs being given to U.S. children is outrageous, and the extent of the problem becomes clear when you compare the statistics with other countries. U.S. children are getting three times more prescriptions for antidepressants and stimulants, and up to double the amount of antipsychotic drugs than kids from Germany and the Netherlands.
Isn't it ironic that children are urged not to take recreational drugs, then are readily supplied with a steady stream of FDA-approved prescription medications, some of them mind-altering? It is presumed that these prescribed drugs are somehow safer than the illegal variety, when in reality recreational drugs are less likely to kill you than prescribed drugs!
Of course I'm not promoting recreational drug use, only trying to point out the insanity. America's "war on drugs" is directed at the wrong enemy -- kids are taking prescription drugs at alarming rates, and for the sake of their very future, this needs to stop.
U.S. Culture Encourages Drugged-Up Children
From a very young age, sometimes even before they leave the hospital at birth, kids are given medicine. Antibiotics for colds and ear infections (even though they don't work for this purpose), pills for indigestion, fever, headaches, the flu, and in some cases even for simply acting out.
Kids are taught that in order to "feel better" they need to go to the doctor and get a prescription. Or they need to go to the corner drugstore and get some type of liquid gel-cap to "cure" them. To make matters worse, kids are exposed to TV commercials, some with animated characters and talking animals, pedaling drugs to their parents and sometimes directly to teens.
So widely accepted is the practice of drugging our children that state-mandated, forced medication has become a growing trend.
In one case, without the presence of a single doctor, a court decided to put a 6-year-old child with mild autism on five powerful anti-psychotic drugs, even though none of the drugs had been approved by the FDA for use in children, and despite the mother's adamant wishes not to do so.
Believe it or not, your child can actually be "diagnosed" with mental health "maladies" such as mathematics disorder, caffeine disorder, malingering, telephone scatialogia, and disorder of written expression. And if they can be diagnosed, you can bet that they can also be given a drug to "fix" the problem.
You Name an Ailment, There's a Drug to "Cure" It
Among the most disheartening of all of this are the vast numbers of psychotropic (mind-altering) drugs being given to children. The number of prescriptions for psychotropic drugs for children has more than doubled between 1995 and 2000. And psychotropic drugs like Prozac, Paxil, Ritalin, Zyprexa and Depakote, by definition, alter your mind, your emotions and your behavior.
These drugs, many of which are not even approved for kids, act on your central nervous system, reduce your mobility and lead to a dizzying array of side effects ranging from depression and anger to sleep disturbances and behavior problems.
These powerful drugs are even being prescribed for toddlers as young as 2, whose brains and bodies are not fully developed. Combine these drugs into hefty doses of two, three or more different meds, and the side effects are anybody's guess.
There may even be a chance that as these kids get older, the mind-altering drugs could lead to violent "hostility events" like those that occurred at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School.
Aside from mind-altering medications, young kids are also being prescribed a laundry list of other almost-always-unnecessary and typically dangerous drugs like:
-- Sleeping pills
-- Heartburn drugs
-- Statins to lower cholesterol
The saddest part is, none of these drugs ever address the cause of the problem. Most all of these ailments are easily overcome by leading a healthy lifestyle. It's too bad that doctors won't tell you that before pulling out their prescription pads, because a lot of unnecessary suffering could be prevented.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/10/16/american-kids-are-the-most-medicated-in-the-world.aspx
With ADD and ADHD at epidemic proportions and the mainstream offer of a "quick fix" solution of prescription drugs, certainly we must wonder "why" this is so much more prevalent now than ever before. It is prudent to take into account the junk-food diet of most children, the injection of toxic chemicals through vaccinations, toxic water and air, the adulteration of our food with hormones and chemicals, and the lack of nutrient dense fruits and vegetables (many are genetically modified) in our children's diets. The above combinations wreck havoc on the digestive tract (constipation is accepted as no big deal in conventional medicine) resulting in a very compromised immune system. Celiac disease is also rampant amount children and adults and often goes undiagnosed.
The article contrasts European practices with the atrocities done here in the US. Factors to blame for the excessive drugging of American kids include consumer advertising, cultural beliefs that encourage drug use, and a larger number of child psychiatrists who freely dispense medications to children, often more than one at a time.
We as parents need to be aware of these alarming trends and protect our children from this insanity. In many cases, the health care freedoms of families have been violated by forced medication of their children.
American Kids are the Most Medicated in the World
American children are about three times more likely to be prescribed psychotropic medication than children in Europe. The differences may be a result of differing regulatory practices, along with cultural beliefs about the role of medication in emotional and behavioral problems.
A team of researchers from the U.S., Germany and the Netherlands investigated prescription levels in the three countries. Antidepressant and stimulant use was three or more times greater in the U.S. than in the Netherlands and Germany, while antipsychotic prevalence was 1.5 to 2.2 times greater.
The researchers pointed to different diagnostic classification systems, government cost restrictions in Europe, the larger number of child psychiatrists per capita in the U.S. and the use of two or more different psychotropic drugs in a single year in U.S. children as possible explanations. Direct-to-consumer drug advertising, which is common in the U.S., was also considered to be a likely reason for the difference.
Every year more than 200 million prescriptions are written for children and teenagers in the United States, according to California's Board of Pharmacy. That works out to more than three prescriptions per child, every year!
Meanwhile, in any two-week period in the United States, 13 million children take a prescription medication. Of them, over 6 million are taking them for chronic diseases, and the top five of these diseases that children take medications for are asthma, epilepsy, attention deficit disorders, arthritis and diabetes.
The amount of drugs being given to U.S. children is outrageous, and the extent of the problem becomes clear when you compare the statistics with other countries. U.S. children are getting three times more prescriptions for antidepressants and stimulants, and up to double the amount of antipsychotic drugs than kids from Germany and the Netherlands.
Isn't it ironic that children are urged not to take recreational drugs, then are readily supplied with a steady stream of FDA-approved prescription medications, some of them mind-altering? It is presumed that these prescribed drugs are somehow safer than the illegal variety, when in reality recreational drugs are less likely to kill you than prescribed drugs!
Of course I'm not promoting recreational drug use, only trying to point out the insanity. America's "war on drugs" is directed at the wrong enemy -- kids are taking prescription drugs at alarming rates, and for the sake of their very future, this needs to stop.
U.S. Culture Encourages Drugged-Up Children
From a very young age, sometimes even before they leave the hospital at birth, kids are given medicine. Antibiotics for colds and ear infections (even though they don't work for this purpose), pills for indigestion, fever, headaches, the flu, and in some cases even for simply acting out.
Kids are taught that in order to "feel better" they need to go to the doctor and get a prescription. Or they need to go to the corner drugstore and get some type of liquid gel-cap to "cure" them. To make matters worse, kids are exposed to TV commercials, some with animated characters and talking animals, pedaling drugs to their parents and sometimes directly to teens.
So widely accepted is the practice of drugging our children that state-mandated, forced medication has become a growing trend.
In one case, without the presence of a single doctor, a court decided to put a 6-year-old child with mild autism on five powerful anti-psychotic drugs, even though none of the drugs had been approved by the FDA for use in children, and despite the mother's adamant wishes not to do so.
Believe it or not, your child can actually be "diagnosed" with mental health "maladies" such as mathematics disorder, caffeine disorder, malingering, telephone scatialogia, and disorder of written expression. And if they can be diagnosed, you can bet that they can also be given a drug to "fix" the problem.
You Name an Ailment, There's a Drug to "Cure" It
Among the most disheartening of all of this are the vast numbers of psychotropic (mind-altering) drugs being given to children. The number of prescriptions for psychotropic drugs for children has more than doubled between 1995 and 2000. And psychotropic drugs like Prozac, Paxil, Ritalin, Zyprexa and Depakote, by definition, alter your mind, your emotions and your behavior.
These drugs, many of which are not even approved for kids, act on your central nervous system, reduce your mobility and lead to a dizzying array of side effects ranging from depression and anger to sleep disturbances and behavior problems.
These powerful drugs are even being prescribed for toddlers as young as 2, whose brains and bodies are not fully developed. Combine these drugs into hefty doses of two, three or more different meds, and the side effects are anybody's guess.
There may even be a chance that as these kids get older, the mind-altering drugs could lead to violent "hostility events" like those that occurred at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School.
Aside from mind-altering medications, young kids are also being prescribed a laundry list of other almost-always-unnecessary and typically dangerous drugs like:
-- Sleeping pills
-- Heartburn drugs
-- Statins to lower cholesterol
The saddest part is, none of these drugs ever address the cause of the problem. Most all of these ailments are easily overcome by leading a healthy lifestyle. It's too bad that doctors won't tell you that before pulling out their prescription pads, because a lot of unnecessary suffering could be prevented.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/10/16/american-kids-are-the-most-medicated-in-the-world.aspx
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Managing Time Effectively = Less Stress
High levels of stress is one of the down sides of modern life for many people. In our 24-hour go-go society, we can easily fall into the trap of running ourselves ragged trying to keep up with all of our many responsibilities. Along with eating well, exercising, and other wellness strategies and stress reduction techniques, learning to manage our time is one way we can deal more effectively with stress.
Today's article gives some valuable tips about how we can make better use of our time, and while it is written specifically to women, these ideas can apply to all of us. It is critical that we take whatever steps necessary to reduce stress in our lives to avoid its many potential hazards, both physical and emotional. Managing time well allows us to both avoid poor behaviors and have the resources to pursue positive lifestyle choices as well.
Time Management -- Tips to Reduce Stress
Article Date: 09 Oct 2008 - 0:00 PDT
Many women know the overwhelmed feeling caused by too much to do and too little time. Better time management can help you do more. And it has health benefits, such as less stress and a better quality of life.
The October issue of Mayo Clinic Women's HealthSource offers tips to improve time management. The recommendation is to try one strategy for two to four weeks to see if it helps. If it does, add another. If not, try a different one. Here's a few to consider:
Plan each day. A schedule minimizes conflicts and last-minute rushes. Write a to-do list with the most important tasks at the top. Even if you don't get through the list, you'll know time was spent constructively.
Say no to nonessential tasks. Let priorities determine your schedule rather than letting guilt have the final say.
Delegate. Consider what you can eliminate or delegate from your to-do list. Be willing to let others do tasks differently from how you do them.
Take time to do a quality job. Doing something right the first time may take more time up front, but errors caused by rushing may require longer to correct.
Practice the 10-minute rule. Work on dreaded tasks for 10 minutes each day. Once a task is started, you may be able to finish it.Evaluate how you are spending your time. Keep a diary for three days to track tasks. Look for time that could be used more wisely, freeing up time to spend exercising or with family and friends.
Get plenty of exercise and sleep. Improved focus and concentration help increase efficiency, so you can complete tasks in less time.
Take a time management course. Employers, community colleges and community education programs often offer these classes.
Take a break when needed. Too much stress can derail attempts at getting organized. When you need a break, take one. Take a walk. Do some quick stretches. Take time for a day of relaxation when you need it.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/124809.php
Today's article gives some valuable tips about how we can make better use of our time, and while it is written specifically to women, these ideas can apply to all of us. It is critical that we take whatever steps necessary to reduce stress in our lives to avoid its many potential hazards, both physical and emotional. Managing time well allows us to both avoid poor behaviors and have the resources to pursue positive lifestyle choices as well.
Time Management -- Tips to Reduce Stress
Article Date: 09 Oct 2008 - 0:00 PDT
Many women know the overwhelmed feeling caused by too much to do and too little time. Better time management can help you do more. And it has health benefits, such as less stress and a better quality of life.
The October issue of Mayo Clinic Women's HealthSource offers tips to improve time management. The recommendation is to try one strategy for two to four weeks to see if it helps. If it does, add another. If not, try a different one. Here's a few to consider:
Plan each day. A schedule minimizes conflicts and last-minute rushes. Write a to-do list with the most important tasks at the top. Even if you don't get through the list, you'll know time was spent constructively.
Say no to nonessential tasks. Let priorities determine your schedule rather than letting guilt have the final say.
Delegate. Consider what you can eliminate or delegate from your to-do list. Be willing to let others do tasks differently from how you do them.
Take time to do a quality job. Doing something right the first time may take more time up front, but errors caused by rushing may require longer to correct.
Practice the 10-minute rule. Work on dreaded tasks for 10 minutes each day. Once a task is started, you may be able to finish it.Evaluate how you are spending your time. Keep a diary for three days to track tasks. Look for time that could be used more wisely, freeing up time to spend exercising or with family and friends.
Get plenty of exercise and sleep. Improved focus and concentration help increase efficiency, so you can complete tasks in less time.
Take a time management course. Employers, community colleges and community education programs often offer these classes.
Take a break when needed. Too much stress can derail attempts at getting organized. When you need a break, take one. Take a walk. Do some quick stretches. Take time for a day of relaxation when you need it.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/124809.php
Monday, October 20, 2008
Genetic Link to Obesity Overcome by Diet
It seems like "obesity" is the latest buzz word in the media. The obesity of Americans has been used as a wake up call by some, and as potential justification for the use of drugs and surgery to combat it by others. The article below discusses research that may point to a genetic predisposition towards obesity for some individuals, but goes on to make the refreshing and accurate conclusion that regardless of genetic factors, the only true way to stay lean and fit is through healthy lifestyle choices such as a whole foods based diet and exercise.
Despite the numerous "solutions" that Big Pharma and the weight-loss industry offer, many of which are associated with serious side effects, nobody can lose weight and keep it off healthily without changing what they eat and increasing their activity levels. Such lifestyle choices will not only moderate weight, but more importantly will lead one towards wellness and away from illness and disease of all types.
Got obesity gene? Eat a whole foods, plant-based diet!
By Jimmy Downs
Oct 18, 2008 - 9:03:58 AM
Saturday October 18, 2008 (foodconsumer.org) -- A new study published in the Oct 17, 2008 issue of the journal Science suggests that a gene variant has something to do with the obesity epidemic. But a health observer quickly warned that the genetic effect on the risk of obesity if there is any should be small and people can adjust their lifestyle including their diet to get their weight under control.
The study led by Eric Stice, PhD, of the Oregon Research Institute and colleagues from Yale University and the University of Texas at Austin found some evidence to support the theory that "individuals may overeat to compensate for a hypofunctioning dorsal striatum, particularly those with genetic polymorphisms thought to attenuate dopamine signaling in this region."
The researchers found females with decreased striatal activation in response to the milkshake in the study were at increased risk of weight gain after one year. But the risk was even greater in those who had both decreased striatal activation and the A1 allele.
The study involved two sub-studies. One enrolled 43 female college students ages 18 to 22 with a mean body mass index of 28.6 while the other involved ages 14 to 18 with a mean BMI of 24.3.
For the study, Stice and colleagues let subjects eat fat and sugar loaded milkshake and measured the striatal activation in response to food intake in the brain using a technique called functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI). Subjects were also tested for Taq1A1 allele.
Early studies found people with this gene variant tend to have a low number of dopamine D2 receptors, meaning they are less likely to get satisfied with the amount of food they eat which would otherwise satisfy those who do not have the gene variant.
Stice and colleagues found females who carry a genetic variation and a weakened "reward circuitry" in their brains or decreased striatal activation in response to food intake were significantly more likely to gain weight after one year.
The researchers said the finding demonstrated that people who have the gene variant and a blunted response to the pleasure from eating food would have to eat energy-dense food (fat and sugar with much fiber) to get satisfied, leading to an increase in the risk of becoming obese.
In an interview with the journal Science, Dr. Stice said his group just completed a new study to see dietary intervention would counteract the effect of the gene variant. The data did not come out, but he said "you could use either behavioral or pharmacological interventions to try to correct this blunted striatal response to food received."
Another study published in the Sep 30, 2008 issue of Nutrition also suggests that just because you have the Taq1A gene variant you do not necessarily have to become obese.
The study led by Barnard ND and colleagues from George Washington University School of Medicine showed at least white people who were positive for Taq1A actually reduced fat intake after 74 weeks on a vegan diet. But for blacks, the vegan diet did not make much of a difference.
The study did not say whether this vegan diet helped subjects' weight loss among those who reduced fat intake. But at least, the results suggested that the white Taq1A carriers do not have to turn to a high fat diet for the eating pleasure.
Although the Stice's study suggests that the gene variant carriers are more likely to over-eat energy dense foods, which could be a cause for obesity, the caloric intake alone does not determine the weight status.
Colin T. Campbell, Ph.D., a distinguished nutrition professor at Cornell University said Chinese people in rural areas eat 400 more calories than their American counterparts, but few of them are obese. He noticed two things are different; the Chinese in such areas eat mostly a whole foods, plant-based diet. In their diet, fat and meat are low while the bulk is grain products and vegetables. They are also more physically active.
Dr. Campbell said a whole foods, plant-based diet plus moderate amounts of physical activity are the only solution to maintaining healthy weight although people who have some genetic variant need to work hard to keep their weight under control. He said this whole foods plant-based diet is more satisfying and the eaters can eat whatever amounts they want to, but are unlikely to gain weight as showed in many early studies.
http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/B_ody_W_eight_32/101809032008_Got_obesity_gene_Eat_a_whole_foods_plant-based_diet_printer.shtml
Despite the numerous "solutions" that Big Pharma and the weight-loss industry offer, many of which are associated with serious side effects, nobody can lose weight and keep it off healthily without changing what they eat and increasing their activity levels. Such lifestyle choices will not only moderate weight, but more importantly will lead one towards wellness and away from illness and disease of all types.
Got obesity gene? Eat a whole foods, plant-based diet!
By Jimmy Downs
Oct 18, 2008 - 9:03:58 AM
Saturday October 18, 2008 (foodconsumer.org) -- A new study published in the Oct 17, 2008 issue of the journal Science suggests that a gene variant has something to do with the obesity epidemic. But a health observer quickly warned that the genetic effect on the risk of obesity if there is any should be small and people can adjust their lifestyle including their diet to get their weight under control.
The study led by Eric Stice, PhD, of the Oregon Research Institute and colleagues from Yale University and the University of Texas at Austin found some evidence to support the theory that "individuals may overeat to compensate for a hypofunctioning dorsal striatum, particularly those with genetic polymorphisms thought to attenuate dopamine signaling in this region."
The researchers found females with decreased striatal activation in response to the milkshake in the study were at increased risk of weight gain after one year. But the risk was even greater in those who had both decreased striatal activation and the A1 allele.
The study involved two sub-studies. One enrolled 43 female college students ages 18 to 22 with a mean body mass index of 28.6 while the other involved ages 14 to 18 with a mean BMI of 24.3.
For the study, Stice and colleagues let subjects eat fat and sugar loaded milkshake and measured the striatal activation in response to food intake in the brain using a technique called functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI). Subjects were also tested for Taq1A1 allele.
Early studies found people with this gene variant tend to have a low number of dopamine D2 receptors, meaning they are less likely to get satisfied with the amount of food they eat which would otherwise satisfy those who do not have the gene variant.
Stice and colleagues found females who carry a genetic variation and a weakened "reward circuitry" in their brains or decreased striatal activation in response to food intake were significantly more likely to gain weight after one year.
The researchers said the finding demonstrated that people who have the gene variant and a blunted response to the pleasure from eating food would have to eat energy-dense food (fat and sugar with much fiber) to get satisfied, leading to an increase in the risk of becoming obese.
In an interview with the journal Science, Dr. Stice said his group just completed a new study to see dietary intervention would counteract the effect of the gene variant. The data did not come out, but he said "you could use either behavioral or pharmacological interventions to try to correct this blunted striatal response to food received."
Another study published in the Sep 30, 2008 issue of Nutrition also suggests that just because you have the Taq1A gene variant you do not necessarily have to become obese.
The study led by Barnard ND and colleagues from George Washington University School of Medicine showed at least white people who were positive for Taq1A actually reduced fat intake after 74 weeks on a vegan diet. But for blacks, the vegan diet did not make much of a difference.
The study did not say whether this vegan diet helped subjects' weight loss among those who reduced fat intake. But at least, the results suggested that the white Taq1A carriers do not have to turn to a high fat diet for the eating pleasure.
Although the Stice's study suggests that the gene variant carriers are more likely to over-eat energy dense foods, which could be a cause for obesity, the caloric intake alone does not determine the weight status.
Colin T. Campbell, Ph.D., a distinguished nutrition professor at Cornell University said Chinese people in rural areas eat 400 more calories than their American counterparts, but few of them are obese. He noticed two things are different; the Chinese in such areas eat mostly a whole foods, plant-based diet. In their diet, fat and meat are low while the bulk is grain products and vegetables. They are also more physically active.
Dr. Campbell said a whole foods, plant-based diet plus moderate amounts of physical activity are the only solution to maintaining healthy weight although people who have some genetic variant need to work hard to keep their weight under control. He said this whole foods plant-based diet is more satisfying and the eaters can eat whatever amounts they want to, but are unlikely to gain weight as showed in many early studies.
http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/B_ody_W_eight_32/101809032008_Got_obesity_gene_Eat_a_whole_foods_plant-based_diet_printer.shtml
Friday, October 17, 2008
Brazil Nuts: A Great Source of Selenium
If you can find a source of organic, naturally-grown Brazil nuts, munching on a mere two of them a day may provide all the selenium your body needs. The study outlined in today's post indicates that Brazil nuts are an excellent alternative to supplemental selenium by providing this necessary trace mineral in very bioavailable form.
Similar to ginkgo biloba, as discussed in yesterday's post, selenium plays a key role in the stimulation of certain enzymes that act as strong anti-oxidants by destroying damaging free- radicals. Selenium is absorbed by foods such as Brazil nuts from the soils they are grown in, so it is crucial that your source of Brazil nuts is grown in mineral-rich soil. Other foods high in selenium include certain meats, seafood, and grains. Keep in mind that most selenium is destroyed when foods are highly processed, so this is just another reason to eat whole-grain, organic, raw and natural foods!
Eating Just Two Brazil Nuts a Day Ensures Adequate Selenium Levels
by Barbara L. Minton
(NaturalNews) Brazil nuts are the best way to add selenium to your diet. A recent study at the University of Otago in New Zealand found that eating just two Brazil nuts a day is as effective in increasing selenium status and enhancing glutathione peroxidase activity as a recommended dosage of selenomethionine. Inclusion of this high-selenium food in the diet could avoid the need for fortification or supplements to improve selenium levels.
Researchers operating with the knowledge that Brazil nuts provide a rich natural source of selenium sought to investigate the bioavailability of this selenium in humans. They investigated the efficacy of Brazil nuts in increasing selenium compared to that of selenomethionine, believed to be the preferred supplement because of its high bioavailability. A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 59 New Zealand adults. Participants consumed 2 Brazil nuts, selenomethionine, or a placebo. Plasma selenium and plasma and whole blood glutathione peroxidase activities were measured at baseline and at intervals following treatment.
Changes in plasma selenium and glutathione peroxidase activity in the Brazil nut and selenomethionine groups differed significantly from the placebo group but not from each other. The change in whole blood glutathione peroxidase activity was greater in the Brazil nut group than in the placebo and selenomethionine groups.
Selenium is a trace mineral that is essential to good health but required only in small amounts. It is used in creating important antioxidant enzymes that help prevent cellular damage from free radicals. Free radicals are natural by-products of oxygen metabolism that are seen to contribute to the development of chronic diseases like cancer and heart disease. Selenium is also critical for proper thyroid functioning and plays a role in the immune system.
The content of selenium in food depends on the selenium content of the soil in which plants are grown or animals raised. Much of the overall mineral content of the soils used in modern agriculture is depleted, so people have been turning more and more to supplements to get the needed amount of selenium.
People with gastrointestinal disorders may have decreased absorption of selenium, and people with iodine deficiency are particularly likely to benefit from selenium supplementation. Findings from research recently completed indicate that adequate selenium levels are correlated with reduced levels of breast and prostate cancer. Research is currently underway on the protective effects of selenium in humans against aging, other cancers, heart disease, cataracts, arthritis, Alzheimer's disease, and HIV infection.
Glutathione peroxidase is the general name of an enzyme family with peroxidase activity whose main role is the protection of organisms from oxidative damage. Its biochemical function is to reduce lipid hydroperoxides to their corresponding alcohols and to reduce free hydrogen peroxide to water. Glutathione peroxidase is a selenium containing glycoprotein. The integrity of the cellular and subcellular membranes is heavily dependent on glutathione peroxidase, while the antioxidative protective system of glutathione peroxidase itself is dependent on the presence of selenium.
http://www.naturalnews.com/z024456.html
Similar to ginkgo biloba, as discussed in yesterday's post, selenium plays a key role in the stimulation of certain enzymes that act as strong anti-oxidants by destroying damaging free- radicals. Selenium is absorbed by foods such as Brazil nuts from the soils they are grown in, so it is crucial that your source of Brazil nuts is grown in mineral-rich soil. Other foods high in selenium include certain meats, seafood, and grains. Keep in mind that most selenium is destroyed when foods are highly processed, so this is just another reason to eat whole-grain, organic, raw and natural foods!
Eating Just Two Brazil Nuts a Day Ensures Adequate Selenium Levels
by Barbara L. Minton
(NaturalNews) Brazil nuts are the best way to add selenium to your diet. A recent study at the University of Otago in New Zealand found that eating just two Brazil nuts a day is as effective in increasing selenium status and enhancing glutathione peroxidase activity as a recommended dosage of selenomethionine. Inclusion of this high-selenium food in the diet could avoid the need for fortification or supplements to improve selenium levels.
Researchers operating with the knowledge that Brazil nuts provide a rich natural source of selenium sought to investigate the bioavailability of this selenium in humans. They investigated the efficacy of Brazil nuts in increasing selenium compared to that of selenomethionine, believed to be the preferred supplement because of its high bioavailability. A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 59 New Zealand adults. Participants consumed 2 Brazil nuts, selenomethionine, or a placebo. Plasma selenium and plasma and whole blood glutathione peroxidase activities were measured at baseline and at intervals following treatment.
Changes in plasma selenium and glutathione peroxidase activity in the Brazil nut and selenomethionine groups differed significantly from the placebo group but not from each other. The change in whole blood glutathione peroxidase activity was greater in the Brazil nut group than in the placebo and selenomethionine groups.
Selenium is a trace mineral that is essential to good health but required only in small amounts. It is used in creating important antioxidant enzymes that help prevent cellular damage from free radicals. Free radicals are natural by-products of oxygen metabolism that are seen to contribute to the development of chronic diseases like cancer and heart disease. Selenium is also critical for proper thyroid functioning and plays a role in the immune system.
The content of selenium in food depends on the selenium content of the soil in which plants are grown or animals raised. Much of the overall mineral content of the soils used in modern agriculture is depleted, so people have been turning more and more to supplements to get the needed amount of selenium.
People with gastrointestinal disorders may have decreased absorption of selenium, and people with iodine deficiency are particularly likely to benefit from selenium supplementation. Findings from research recently completed indicate that adequate selenium levels are correlated with reduced levels of breast and prostate cancer. Research is currently underway on the protective effects of selenium in humans against aging, other cancers, heart disease, cataracts, arthritis, Alzheimer's disease, and HIV infection.
Glutathione peroxidase is the general name of an enzyme family with peroxidase activity whose main role is the protection of organisms from oxidative damage. Its biochemical function is to reduce lipid hydroperoxides to their corresponding alcohols and to reduce free hydrogen peroxide to water. Glutathione peroxidase is a selenium containing glycoprotein. The integrity of the cellular and subcellular membranes is heavily dependent on glutathione peroxidase, while the antioxidative protective system of glutathione peroxidase itself is dependent on the presence of selenium.
http://www.naturalnews.com/z024456.html
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Ginkgo Biloba Prevents Brain Damage
Long known and used for its many benefits to the circulatory system, Ginkgo Biloba is a terrific natural remedy that has now been proven to prevent or lessen brain damage in stroke victims. It seems this herb works by stimulating a particular enzyme that acts as a powerful antioxidant and protects cells against free-radicals.
Other studies have shown that Ginkgo is actually safer and more effective than one of the most common drugs given stroke patients called tPA. This drug can be harmful to some patients, increasing blood clots in the brain. Not so with Ginkgo, which can help with healing after a stroke and help prevent one from happening in the first place by keeping the circulatory system strong and healthy.
Study: Ginkgo can prevent stroke damage
Published: Oct. 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM
HAGERSTOWN, Md., Oct. 10 (UPI) -- Daily doses of ginkgo tree-leaf extract can prevent or reduce brain damage caused by a stroke, U.S. researchers said in a medical journal Friday.
The Johns Hopkins University researchers said in the journal Stroke that their work supported other evidence that ginkgo biloba triggers a cascade of events that neutralizes free radicals known to cause cell death.
"Our results suggest that some element or elements in ginkgo actually protect brain cells during stroke," lead researcher and Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine associate professor, Sylvain Dore, said.
Mice given daily doses of ginkgo biloba extract before having a stroke induced in a laboratory suffered about half the neurological damage as animals not given it, the researchers said.
Mice denied ginkgo before a stroke but given it five minutes afterward sustained nearly 60 percent less damage the day after the stroke than those not given ginkgo at all, the researchers said.
Mice given ginkgo 4 1/2 hours after a stroke had about a third less damage than those not given ginkgo, the researchers said.
"If further work confirms what we've seen, we could theoretically recommend a daily regimen of ginkgo to people at high risk of stroke as a preventive measure against brain damage," Dore said.
A stroke is the rapidly developing loss of brain function due to a disturbance in the blood vessels supplying blood to the brain.
Roughly 700,000 people experience a stroke in the United States annually.
http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2008/10/10/Study_Ginkgo_can_prevent_stroke_damage/UPI-61171223678488/
Other studies have shown that Ginkgo is actually safer and more effective than one of the most common drugs given stroke patients called tPA. This drug can be harmful to some patients, increasing blood clots in the brain. Not so with Ginkgo, which can help with healing after a stroke and help prevent one from happening in the first place by keeping the circulatory system strong and healthy.
Study: Ginkgo can prevent stroke damage
Published: Oct. 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM
HAGERSTOWN, Md., Oct. 10 (UPI) -- Daily doses of ginkgo tree-leaf extract can prevent or reduce brain damage caused by a stroke, U.S. researchers said in a medical journal Friday.
The Johns Hopkins University researchers said in the journal Stroke that their work supported other evidence that ginkgo biloba triggers a cascade of events that neutralizes free radicals known to cause cell death.
"Our results suggest that some element or elements in ginkgo actually protect brain cells during stroke," lead researcher and Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine associate professor, Sylvain Dore, said.
Mice given daily doses of ginkgo biloba extract before having a stroke induced in a laboratory suffered about half the neurological damage as animals not given it, the researchers said.
Mice denied ginkgo before a stroke but given it five minutes afterward sustained nearly 60 percent less damage the day after the stroke than those not given ginkgo at all, the researchers said.
Mice given ginkgo 4 1/2 hours after a stroke had about a third less damage than those not given ginkgo, the researchers said.
"If further work confirms what we've seen, we could theoretically recommend a daily regimen of ginkgo to people at high risk of stroke as a preventive measure against brain damage," Dore said.
A stroke is the rapidly developing loss of brain function due to a disturbance in the blood vessels supplying blood to the brain.
Roughly 700,000 people experience a stroke in the United States annually.
http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2008/10/10/Study_Ginkgo_can_prevent_stroke_damage/UPI-61171223678488/
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
The Many Benefits of Vitamin D-3
Increasingly more research is pointing towards the need for more natural vitamin D-3 in our diets. Not only does the D-3 help build strong bones and teeth, but this critical nutrient also plays a vital role in the prevention of some of the major diseases afflicting our modern world, including Diabetes, Coronary disease, and Cancer.
The best way to get plenty of vitamin vitamin D-3 is to get out in the sunshine every day, all-year round, for at least 30 minutes daily. However, not everyone's body processes Vitamin D-3 properly, and even some who live in tropical climates (lots of sunshine) have vitamin D-3 deficiency. One can test for vitamin D-3 in the privacy of their own home by using a Vitamin D-3 Dried Blood-Spot Test. D-3 is also available in certain foods including organic dairy, organic eggs, fatty fish, and cod liver oil. However, for most people the use of a high-quality liquid vitamin D-3 supplement that is bioavailable and easily absorbed by the body is recommended. As research continues, I'm sure even more benefits from this master vitamin will be discovered.
October 13, 2008
Doubling of Vitamin D for Children Is Urged
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
CHICAGO (AP) -- The country's leading group of pediatricians is recommending that children receive double the usually suggested amount of vitamin D because of evidence that it might help prevent serious diseases.
To meet the new recommendation of 400 units daily, millions of children will need to take vitamin D supplements each day, the American Academy of Pediatrics said. That includes breast-fed infants -- even those who get some formula -- and many teenagers who drink little or no milk.
Baby formula contains vitamin D, so infants fed only formula generally do not need supplements. However, the academy recommends breast-feeding for at least the first year of life, and breast milk is sometimes deficient.
Most commercially available milk is fortified with vitamin D, but most children do not drink enough of it -- four cups daily would be needed -- to meet the new requirement, said Dr. Frank Greer, who helped write the report.
The new advice is based on mounting research about potential benefits from vitamin D besides keeping bones strong, including suggestions that it might reduce the risk for cancer, diabetes and heart disease. But the evidence is not conclusive, and there is no consensus on how much of the vitamin would be needed for disease prevention.
The advice replaces a 2003 academy recommendation for 200 units daily. That is the amount the government recommends for people up to age 50; 400 units is recommended for adults ages 51 to 70, and 600 units for those 71 and older. Vitamin D is sold in capsules and tablets, as well as in drops for young children.
The Institute of Medicine, a government advisory group that sets dietary standards, is discussing with federal agencies whether the recommendations should be changed based on the new research, said a spokeswoman, Christine Stencel.
The recommendations were to be released Monday at an academy conference in Boston. They will be published in the November issue of the academy's journal, Pediatrics.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/health/policy/13vitamind.html?_r=1&ref=health&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
The best way to get plenty of vitamin vitamin D-3 is to get out in the sunshine every day, all-year round, for at least 30 minutes daily. However, not everyone's body processes Vitamin D-3 properly, and even some who live in tropical climates (lots of sunshine) have vitamin D-3 deficiency. One can test for vitamin D-3 in the privacy of their own home by using a Vitamin D-3 Dried Blood-Spot Test. D-3 is also available in certain foods including organic dairy, organic eggs, fatty fish, and cod liver oil. However, for most people the use of a high-quality liquid vitamin D-3 supplement that is bioavailable and easily absorbed by the body is recommended. As research continues, I'm sure even more benefits from this master vitamin will be discovered.
October 13, 2008
Doubling of Vitamin D for Children Is Urged
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
CHICAGO (AP) -- The country's leading group of pediatricians is recommending that children receive double the usually suggested amount of vitamin D because of evidence that it might help prevent serious diseases.
To meet the new recommendation of 400 units daily, millions of children will need to take vitamin D supplements each day, the American Academy of Pediatrics said. That includes breast-fed infants -- even those who get some formula -- and many teenagers who drink little or no milk.
Baby formula contains vitamin D, so infants fed only formula generally do not need supplements. However, the academy recommends breast-feeding for at least the first year of life, and breast milk is sometimes deficient.
Most commercially available milk is fortified with vitamin D, but most children do not drink enough of it -- four cups daily would be needed -- to meet the new requirement, said Dr. Frank Greer, who helped write the report.
The new advice is based on mounting research about potential benefits from vitamin D besides keeping bones strong, including suggestions that it might reduce the risk for cancer, diabetes and heart disease. But the evidence is not conclusive, and there is no consensus on how much of the vitamin would be needed for disease prevention.
The advice replaces a 2003 academy recommendation for 200 units daily. That is the amount the government recommends for people up to age 50; 400 units is recommended for adults ages 51 to 70, and 600 units for those 71 and older. Vitamin D is sold in capsules and tablets, as well as in drops for young children.
The Institute of Medicine, a government advisory group that sets dietary standards, is discussing with federal agencies whether the recommendations should be changed based on the new research, said a spokeswoman, Christine Stencel.
The recommendations were to be released Monday at an academy conference in Boston. They will be published in the November issue of the academy's journal, Pediatrics.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/health/policy/13vitamind.html?_r=1&ref=health&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Doubts Continue to Rise About Merck's Gardasil
I'm not sure if Merck is bragging or complaining, but they are announcing en masse this week via the press that they have gotten 25% of certain teen girls to get the highly controversial HPV vaccine. Of course, their goal is 100% of all age groups and genders, as some are even now recommending vaccination for younger girls and boys as well. Last week, I watched a very well known doctor on a TV program suggest that this vaccine should be included in all the "required" vaccinations beginning with 5th graders so that all (girls & boys) could just "get it over and done with" -- in other words, convenience and no time to consider the consequences. Many in the medical community are beginning to speak out about this debacle that is based on bad science and the marketing of greed (Merck prefers to call it "education.")
The risks to our children are undeniable, and the way this is being pushed through so irresponsibly raises red flags galore. (Does it remind you of a certain financial "bail-out" plan that has been in the news lately)? The hazards outlined in the article below are not new, as many have raised these concerns. However, it is encouraging to see such stories appear in the media from other than natural and alternative medicine sources. Maybe the American people are beginning to wake up to the true and present danger of these snake-oil salesman and their tactics designed to line their pockets and trample on healthcare freedoms at the expense of the health and welfare of our children.
Another thing. Vaccines are being looked at by conventional medicine as the "end-all" for many diseases, especially cancer. I was told in 2000 by a Houston oncologist that the future of cancer treatment would migrate toward vaccines. This is exactly what is happening, as one prominent hospital in Houston is now advertising a possible vaccine for prostate cancer. It is prudent to suggest to my readers that the ingredients in vaccinations very well may play an important role in "why" we see so much disease today. It's the long-term effects that we must be concerned about and it is this factor that is most ignored. It is the wise person who is careful about what they allow to be injected into their body. Always research and do not blindly trust anyone with a needle!
Is it worth it to get HPV vaccine?
By Sue MuellerOct 10, 2008 - 1:55:39 PM
Merck has successfully gotten 25 percent of girls ages 13 to 17 vaccinated with its HPV vaccine Gardasil, data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed.
The HPV vaccine intended to prevent cervical cancer has gotten recommendation by the CDC for girls ages 11 and 12. Many states have responded to the recommendation influenced by Merck or not to require that school girls get Gardasil before the age of 11 years.
Merck has been extremely aggressive in lobbying state governments to mandate the sexually transmitted viral infection in girls age younger than 12, leading to concerns in many medical rights advocates who said states should never mandate any vaccination against the sexually transmitted disease.
A health observer suggested that many of those whose daughters got vaccinated might not have known much about the vaccine in terms of its safety and efficacy. And in fact, there is some doubt in the scientific community about the efficacy and safety of this HPV vaccine.
First of all, females enrolled in the vaccine trials were mostly aged more than 13. Only a very small fraction of the participants were younger than that age, meaning the efficacy and safety for the girls ages younger than 13 remains largely unknown.
Only short-term trials have been conducted and the overall efficacy and safety of this Gardasil remains unknown. The immunity against HPV requires a girl to get three shots at a cost of $375 per person. But it is unknown whether or not a booster shot is needed even if the vaccine is effective in a short-term. Deaths resulting from cervical cancer occur often after the age of 40. How could the vaccine maintain the immunity for next 30 years if an individual gets it at age 11 remains unknown.
Some people questioned the necessity to get the vaccine in the first place. About 4,000 women die from cervical cancer each year, a risk that is too low to justify the expensive vaccination. In the U.S. the risk of dying from cervical cancer is far much less than the risk of dying from traffic accidents. Some experts from a leading medical school have questioned this in a major medical journal suggesting that it is not worth it to get the protection because it is too expensive.
Most people can clear the HPV or human papillomavirus in two years. The virus can persist in only a very small percentage of people raising their risk of cervical cancer.
Merck's HPV vaccine is not omnipotent. It protects against a couple of strains that cause about 70 percent of cervical cancer. Doctors and the U.S. government have said that those who have received the vaccine are not immune to other HPV strains meaning they are still facing the risk and they should keep receiving Pap Smear screening just like those who have not received the vaccine.
While the efficacy and safety of Gardasil is not fully understood, many severe adverse reactions including many cases of deaths have been reported associated with the vaccine shots.
http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/D_rug_N_ews_50/101001552008_Is_it_worth_it_to_get_HPV_vaccine_printer.shtml
The risks to our children are undeniable, and the way this is being pushed through so irresponsibly raises red flags galore. (Does it remind you of a certain financial "bail-out" plan that has been in the news lately)? The hazards outlined in the article below are not new, as many have raised these concerns. However, it is encouraging to see such stories appear in the media from other than natural and alternative medicine sources. Maybe the American people are beginning to wake up to the true and present danger of these snake-oil salesman and their tactics designed to line their pockets and trample on healthcare freedoms at the expense of the health and welfare of our children.
Another thing. Vaccines are being looked at by conventional medicine as the "end-all" for many diseases, especially cancer. I was told in 2000 by a Houston oncologist that the future of cancer treatment would migrate toward vaccines. This is exactly what is happening, as one prominent hospital in Houston is now advertising a possible vaccine for prostate cancer. It is prudent to suggest to my readers that the ingredients in vaccinations very well may play an important role in "why" we see so much disease today. It's the long-term effects that we must be concerned about and it is this factor that is most ignored. It is the wise person who is careful about what they allow to be injected into their body. Always research and do not blindly trust anyone with a needle!
Is it worth it to get HPV vaccine?
By Sue MuellerOct 10, 2008 - 1:55:39 PM
Merck has successfully gotten 25 percent of girls ages 13 to 17 vaccinated with its HPV vaccine Gardasil, data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed.
The HPV vaccine intended to prevent cervical cancer has gotten recommendation by the CDC for girls ages 11 and 12. Many states have responded to the recommendation influenced by Merck or not to require that school girls get Gardasil before the age of 11 years.
Merck has been extremely aggressive in lobbying state governments to mandate the sexually transmitted viral infection in girls age younger than 12, leading to concerns in many medical rights advocates who said states should never mandate any vaccination against the sexually transmitted disease.
A health observer suggested that many of those whose daughters got vaccinated might not have known much about the vaccine in terms of its safety and efficacy. And in fact, there is some doubt in the scientific community about the efficacy and safety of this HPV vaccine.
First of all, females enrolled in the vaccine trials were mostly aged more than 13. Only a very small fraction of the participants were younger than that age, meaning the efficacy and safety for the girls ages younger than 13 remains largely unknown.
Only short-term trials have been conducted and the overall efficacy and safety of this Gardasil remains unknown. The immunity against HPV requires a girl to get three shots at a cost of $375 per person. But it is unknown whether or not a booster shot is needed even if the vaccine is effective in a short-term. Deaths resulting from cervical cancer occur often after the age of 40. How could the vaccine maintain the immunity for next 30 years if an individual gets it at age 11 remains unknown.
Some people questioned the necessity to get the vaccine in the first place. About 4,000 women die from cervical cancer each year, a risk that is too low to justify the expensive vaccination. In the U.S. the risk of dying from cervical cancer is far much less than the risk of dying from traffic accidents. Some experts from a leading medical school have questioned this in a major medical journal suggesting that it is not worth it to get the protection because it is too expensive.
Most people can clear the HPV or human papillomavirus in two years. The virus can persist in only a very small percentage of people raising their risk of cervical cancer.
Merck's HPV vaccine is not omnipotent. It protects against a couple of strains that cause about 70 percent of cervical cancer. Doctors and the U.S. government have said that those who have received the vaccine are not immune to other HPV strains meaning they are still facing the risk and they should keep receiving Pap Smear screening just like those who have not received the vaccine.
While the efficacy and safety of Gardasil is not fully understood, many severe adverse reactions including many cases of deaths have been reported associated with the vaccine shots.
http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/D_rug_N_ews_50/101001552008_Is_it_worth_it_to_get_HPV_vaccine_printer.shtml
Monday, October 13, 2008
Could We Be Too Clean for Our Health?
The following article poses some interesting questions regarding the increase of immune system related illnesses in our modern times. It is a known fact that the presence of helpful bacteria in the intestinal tract and throughout the body is there by design for a number of reasons. When this bacteria is killed off through the overuse of antibiotic drugs, soaps, and other products that are supposed to make us healthier, the result is actually harmful to the immune system and the body.
This article goes on to explain how compromising our immune systems is likely responsible for the onslaught of many common diseases these days, including diabetes, eczema, asthma, and other allergies. This is one reason why it is vital to our wellness that we use a quality probiotic product on a regular basis to restore and maintain healthful bacteria and other flora in our systems. Not only will this help bolster the immune system, but it will also greatly increase the effectiveness of digestion and elimination, allowing our bodies to absorb more nutrients from food and to more efficiently eliminate waste products from the body.
Friendly Bacteria Protect Against Type 1 Diabetes
In a dramatic illustration of the potential for microbes to prevent disease, researchers have shown that mice exposed to common stomach bacteria are protected against the development of type 1 diabetes.
The findings support the "hygiene hypothesis" -- the theory that a lack of exposure to parasites, bacteria and viruses in the developed world may lead to increased risk of diseases like allergies, asthma, and other disorders of the immune system.
The results also suggest that exposure to some forms of bacteria might actually help prevent onset of type 1 diabetes, which is an autoimmune disease. In Type I diabetes, the patient's immune system launches an attack on cells in the pancreas that produce insulin.
Many people don't realize that type 1 diabetes is actually an autoimmune disease that occurs because your immune system mistakenly attacks the cells in your pancreas that produce insulin. Like other autoimmune diseases such as lupus, multiple sclerosis and inflammatory bowel disease, type 1 diabetes occurs because of a malfunctioning in your body's defense system, or your immune system.
Meanwhile, other immune system disorders -- such as asthma, hay fever, eczema, and food allergies -- are caused by your immune system responding to substances that are ordinarily harmless, such as pollen or peanuts.
While you wouldn't normally think that allergies or asthma have anything in common with type 1 diabetes or MS, they are all in fact related to problems with your immune system.
Experts estimate that many allergies and immune-system diseases have doubled, tripled or even quadrupled in the last few decades. Many researchers suspect something about modern living is to blame because the increases show up largely in highly developed countries in Europe and North America. The illnesses have only started to rise in other countries as they have become more developed.
What About Modern Society Could be Harming Your Immune System?
Your immune system fights off invaders using a two-pronged defense:
--Th1 lymphocytes, white blood cells that direct an assault on infected cells
--Th2 lymphocytes, white blood cells that produce antibodies that try to block dangerous microbes from invading your cells (Th2 lymphocytes are also the cells that drive allergic responses to foreign organisms)
At birth, an infant's immune system relies primarily on the Th2 system to keep healthy. But the "hygiene hypothesis" suggests that the Th1 system can grow stronger only if it gets some practice, either through fighting infections or through encounters with certain harmless microbes. Without such stimulation, the Th2 system flourishes and the immune system tends to react with allergic responses more easily.
So, if a child is raised in an environment doused in antibacterial soaps and cleansers, given antibiotics that kill off all of the good and bad bacteria in their gut, and kept away from the natural dirt, germs, viruses and other grime of childhood, they are not able to build up resistance to disease, and they are vulnerable to illnesses later in life.
Similarly, the mice in the Nature study were protected against type 1 diabetes under normal living conditions. But when they were raised in a germ-free environment, and lacked beneficial gut bacteria, they developed severe diabetes. It was only when the mice were exposed to bacteria normally found in the human intestine that they became less likely to develop diabetes.
Another CRUCIAL Factor for Diabetes Prevention
Many people do not realize that, just like MS, there is a strong association between how far away from the equator you are and the likelihood of acquiring type 1 diabetes. In other words the more sun you get the higher your levels of vitamin D and the lower your risk of insulin-dependent diabetes. This is so well documented that many Nordic countries now regularly supplement with high levels of vitamin D to prevent diabetes.
Typical adult doses of vitamin D are about 4,000 units per day. One can save the cost of supplements, risk of overdosing and cost of testing by exposing large amounts of your skin to sunlight in the spring, summer and fall. You can achieve levels of about 10,000 units per day.
Interestingly, vitamin D levels also help prevent and treat type 2 diabetes.
The Healthiest Environments are Those With a Bit of Dirt
There's a misconception that a healthy home is one that's been scrubbed from floor to ceiling with disinfectants. A healthy home is actually one that allows a bit of normal dirt to exist. Otherwise, when you leave the sterile environment of your antibacterial home and go out in public, say to the grocery store, your immune system will either go into overdrive or not even know what hit it.
This is the precise reason why kids who grow up on farms have a lower risk of allergies and asthma, while kids who are overly hygienic get asthma and eczema more frequently.
So if you want to lower your (and your children's) risk of all sorts of immune system disorders from type 1 diabetes to allergies, you need to learn how to live in harmony with a little bit of dirt. You can do this easily by:
--Letting your child be a child. Allow your kids to play outside and get dirty (and join them yourself once in a while).
--Not using antibacterial soaps. Simple soap and water is all you need.
--Serving locally grown or organic meats that do not contain antibiotics.
--Avoiding antibiotics unless they are absolutely necessary.
--Introducing more friendly bacteria to your gut by eating naturally fermented foods or taking a high-quality probiotic.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/10/11/friendly-bacteria-protect-against-type-1-diabetes.aspx?source=nl
This article goes on to explain how compromising our immune systems is likely responsible for the onslaught of many common diseases these days, including diabetes, eczema, asthma, and other allergies. This is one reason why it is vital to our wellness that we use a quality probiotic product on a regular basis to restore and maintain healthful bacteria and other flora in our systems. Not only will this help bolster the immune system, but it will also greatly increase the effectiveness of digestion and elimination, allowing our bodies to absorb more nutrients from food and to more efficiently eliminate waste products from the body.
Friendly Bacteria Protect Against Type 1 Diabetes
In a dramatic illustration of the potential for microbes to prevent disease, researchers have shown that mice exposed to common stomach bacteria are protected against the development of type 1 diabetes.
The findings support the "hygiene hypothesis" -- the theory that a lack of exposure to parasites, bacteria and viruses in the developed world may lead to increased risk of diseases like allergies, asthma, and other disorders of the immune system.
The results also suggest that exposure to some forms of bacteria might actually help prevent onset of type 1 diabetes, which is an autoimmune disease. In Type I diabetes, the patient's immune system launches an attack on cells in the pancreas that produce insulin.
Many people don't realize that type 1 diabetes is actually an autoimmune disease that occurs because your immune system mistakenly attacks the cells in your pancreas that produce insulin. Like other autoimmune diseases such as lupus, multiple sclerosis and inflammatory bowel disease, type 1 diabetes occurs because of a malfunctioning in your body's defense system, or your immune system.
Meanwhile, other immune system disorders -- such as asthma, hay fever, eczema, and food allergies -- are caused by your immune system responding to substances that are ordinarily harmless, such as pollen or peanuts.
While you wouldn't normally think that allergies or asthma have anything in common with type 1 diabetes or MS, they are all in fact related to problems with your immune system.
Experts estimate that many allergies and immune-system diseases have doubled, tripled or even quadrupled in the last few decades. Many researchers suspect something about modern living is to blame because the increases show up largely in highly developed countries in Europe and North America. The illnesses have only started to rise in other countries as they have become more developed.
What About Modern Society Could be Harming Your Immune System?
Your immune system fights off invaders using a two-pronged defense:
--Th1 lymphocytes, white blood cells that direct an assault on infected cells
--Th2 lymphocytes, white blood cells that produce antibodies that try to block dangerous microbes from invading your cells (Th2 lymphocytes are also the cells that drive allergic responses to foreign organisms)
At birth, an infant's immune system relies primarily on the Th2 system to keep healthy. But the "hygiene hypothesis" suggests that the Th1 system can grow stronger only if it gets some practice, either through fighting infections or through encounters with certain harmless microbes. Without such stimulation, the Th2 system flourishes and the immune system tends to react with allergic responses more easily.
So, if a child is raised in an environment doused in antibacterial soaps and cleansers, given antibiotics that kill off all of the good and bad bacteria in their gut, and kept away from the natural dirt, germs, viruses and other grime of childhood, they are not able to build up resistance to disease, and they are vulnerable to illnesses later in life.
Similarly, the mice in the Nature study were protected against type 1 diabetes under normal living conditions. But when they were raised in a germ-free environment, and lacked beneficial gut bacteria, they developed severe diabetes. It was only when the mice were exposed to bacteria normally found in the human intestine that they became less likely to develop diabetes.
Another CRUCIAL Factor for Diabetes Prevention
Many people do not realize that, just like MS, there is a strong association between how far away from the equator you are and the likelihood of acquiring type 1 diabetes. In other words the more sun you get the higher your levels of vitamin D and the lower your risk of insulin-dependent diabetes. This is so well documented that many Nordic countries now regularly supplement with high levels of vitamin D to prevent diabetes.
Typical adult doses of vitamin D are about 4,000 units per day. One can save the cost of supplements, risk of overdosing and cost of testing by exposing large amounts of your skin to sunlight in the spring, summer and fall. You can achieve levels of about 10,000 units per day.
Interestingly, vitamin D levels also help prevent and treat type 2 diabetes.
The Healthiest Environments are Those With a Bit of Dirt
There's a misconception that a healthy home is one that's been scrubbed from floor to ceiling with disinfectants. A healthy home is actually one that allows a bit of normal dirt to exist. Otherwise, when you leave the sterile environment of your antibacterial home and go out in public, say to the grocery store, your immune system will either go into overdrive or not even know what hit it.
This is the precise reason why kids who grow up on farms have a lower risk of allergies and asthma, while kids who are overly hygienic get asthma and eczema more frequently.
So if you want to lower your (and your children's) risk of all sorts of immune system disorders from type 1 diabetes to allergies, you need to learn how to live in harmony with a little bit of dirt. You can do this easily by:
--Letting your child be a child. Allow your kids to play outside and get dirty (and join them yourself once in a while).
--Not using antibacterial soaps. Simple soap and water is all you need.
--Serving locally grown or organic meats that do not contain antibiotics.
--Avoiding antibiotics unless they are absolutely necessary.
--Introducing more friendly bacteria to your gut by eating naturally fermented foods or taking a high-quality probiotic.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/10/11/friendly-bacteria-protect-against-type-1-diabetes.aspx?source=nl
Friday, October 10, 2008
The Great Soy Deception
The article posted below gives a great overview of the confusion and misrepresentations put out by the soy industry in this country. Their propaganda has been so successful that even many in the natural health field have been duped into thinking soy is the holy grail of health foods.
It is critical to understand that the soy used in the vast majority of food products here in the US is not the same as fermented soy used in Asian countries, and that the way soy is consumed is completely different than the way it is used here. Cheap, unfermented forms of soy are one of the favorite ingredients and fillers used by food manufacturers and processors in the West, and despite their attempts to convince us this is beneficial for our health, the main reason they do it is because this type of soy is almost always genetically modified, thus cheap and plentiful. Rather than being a healthful choice, soy consumption has led to an onslaught of concerns, and is a factor in a multitude of disease conditions. The mass consumption of soy has led to an epidemic of unhealthy situations that is the direct result of the hormonal imbalances triggered by an excess of soy in our diets.
Six Surprising Facts About Soy
by Ella Andersen
(NaturalNews) When people think of living healthfully, usually what comes to mind is eating tofu or drinking soymilk. Why wouldn't they? After all, the popular magazines point to soy consumption as the ultimate form of health. This article will show some surprising facts that many do not know about soy, and facts that are actually contrary to what the magazines print and the health "officials" promote.
Soy is not the cornerstone of Asian diets
This is probably by far the most common misconception about soy products. Many of the fitness magazines, and even some dietitians, overplay the role of soy in the Asian diet.
In China and Japan, people only eat about 10 grams (2 teaspoons) a day. What's more, soy is viewed and consumed as a condiment, not as a replacement for animal products or as an entire meal. Basically, soy in those regions would be like ketchup or mustard, rather than the main dish.
Additionally, the type of soy that is consumed in the Asiatic region is quite different from the way it is eaten in the West. The soy that is prepared in Asian countries is fermented. More will be revealed below about fermented soy.
The soy that westerners eat is unhealthy
Yes, that's right. The popular soy-mantra that "soy prevents osteoporosis, heart disease, cancer," is what the soy industry would like you to think, but in reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Above, fermented soy was mentioned. The reason it was mentioned is because raw, unfermented soy contains anti-nutrients that pose great risks for those who consume soy on a regular basis.
The main anti-nutrients that are in soy are phytates, trypsin inhibitors and phytoestrogens. Soy processing results in some undesirable components as well: toxic lysinoalanine, carcinogenic nitrosamines, monosodium glutamate or MSG (a potent neurotoxin), and aluminum (a toxin to the nervous system and kidneys).
The phytates in soy reduces the assimilation of the minerals copper, iron, calcium, zinc and magnesium, creating deficiencies. Methods such as soaking and sprouting are ineffective at reducing the phytate amounts in soy.
The trypsin inhibitors make digesting proteins problematic and can lead to pancreatic disorders.
Phytoestrogens are potent anti-thyroid agents that interfere with the endocrine system, along with causing menstruation problems in women. Furthermore, women who consumed soy during pregnancy had a higher chance of giving birth to babies born with hypospadias, which is where the urethral opening of the penis is misplaced (near the base of the penis instead of at the tip). Also, phytoestrogens, along with PCBs and DDE, contribute to premature development of girls.
In Asia, soy is fermented, so many of the above problems, with the exception of the phytoestrogens, are eliminated.
Soy does not contribute to bone health
Despite popular belief, soy does not contribute to bone health. Soy increases the body's need for calcium and vitamin D, actually taking away from bone health! Also, Westerners are deficient in vitamin D as it is, eating soy foods will just make the problem worse!
Soy contributes to infertility
This fact is what many men and women need to know because if you are consuming large amounts of unfermented soy products, you will likely experience this effect. Since the phytoestrogens interfere with the delicate hormonal systems of healthy individuals, such problems are not uncommon. In fact for women, painful and irregular periods are common and for men, a decreased sperm count can be found among heavy soy consumers.
Additionally in Japan, when housewives want to decrease the virility of their husbands, typically they give them soy products.
Soy is not good for postmenopausal women
Since soy contains high amounts of phytoestrogens, a potent anti-thyroid agent and endocrine disruptor, the problems of low thyroid function during postmenopausal years is heightened. Also, tumors that require large amounts of estrogen can feed off of the phytoestrogens in the soy.
Soy formula is not a good substitute for breast milk or even milk formulas
All infants should be fed breast milk for at the very least, the first year of life. The best substitute after breast milk is raw goat's milk. Soy formula should not be considered. This is because soy-based formulas are high in phytoestrogens and the other anti-nutrients. Bottom line, feeding an infant soy formula is comparable to giving the baby five birth control pills. For girls, this can cause premature development such as breast buds, pubic hair and even menstruation before age eight. In boys, this can retard sexual development and even cause learning disabilities.
At the risk of being redundant, the point must be made again: soy formula is not a good replacement for the highest form of infant nutrition, breast milk. It is also poor when nutritionally compared to wholesome raw goat's milk.
Summary
Soy has been upheld for many years as the pinnacle of health and wellness. It has been over-glorified by being placed on a pedestal above foods that truly should represent health. Through all of its promotions, through all of the publicity, it has failed many people, leaving them with problems that are difficult to treat. Not every health fad is what it is cracked up to be. A little research into these effects goes a long way.
http://www.naturalnews.com/z024407.html
It is critical to understand that the soy used in the vast majority of food products here in the US is not the same as fermented soy used in Asian countries, and that the way soy is consumed is completely different than the way it is used here. Cheap, unfermented forms of soy are one of the favorite ingredients and fillers used by food manufacturers and processors in the West, and despite their attempts to convince us this is beneficial for our health, the main reason they do it is because this type of soy is almost always genetically modified, thus cheap and plentiful. Rather than being a healthful choice, soy consumption has led to an onslaught of concerns, and is a factor in a multitude of disease conditions. The mass consumption of soy has led to an epidemic of unhealthy situations that is the direct result of the hormonal imbalances triggered by an excess of soy in our diets.
Six Surprising Facts About Soy
by Ella Andersen
(NaturalNews) When people think of living healthfully, usually what comes to mind is eating tofu or drinking soymilk. Why wouldn't they? After all, the popular magazines point to soy consumption as the ultimate form of health. This article will show some surprising facts that many do not know about soy, and facts that are actually contrary to what the magazines print and the health "officials" promote.
Soy is not the cornerstone of Asian diets
This is probably by far the most common misconception about soy products. Many of the fitness magazines, and even some dietitians, overplay the role of soy in the Asian diet.
In China and Japan, people only eat about 10 grams (2 teaspoons) a day. What's more, soy is viewed and consumed as a condiment, not as a replacement for animal products or as an entire meal. Basically, soy in those regions would be like ketchup or mustard, rather than the main dish.
Additionally, the type of soy that is consumed in the Asiatic region is quite different from the way it is eaten in the West. The soy that is prepared in Asian countries is fermented. More will be revealed below about fermented soy.
The soy that westerners eat is unhealthy
Yes, that's right. The popular soy-mantra that "soy prevents osteoporosis, heart disease, cancer," is what the soy industry would like you to think, but in reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Above, fermented soy was mentioned. The reason it was mentioned is because raw, unfermented soy contains anti-nutrients that pose great risks for those who consume soy on a regular basis.
The main anti-nutrients that are in soy are phytates, trypsin inhibitors and phytoestrogens. Soy processing results in some undesirable components as well: toxic lysinoalanine, carcinogenic nitrosamines, monosodium glutamate or MSG (a potent neurotoxin), and aluminum (a toxin to the nervous system and kidneys).
The phytates in soy reduces the assimilation of the minerals copper, iron, calcium, zinc and magnesium, creating deficiencies. Methods such as soaking and sprouting are ineffective at reducing the phytate amounts in soy.
The trypsin inhibitors make digesting proteins problematic and can lead to pancreatic disorders.
Phytoestrogens are potent anti-thyroid agents that interfere with the endocrine system, along with causing menstruation problems in women. Furthermore, women who consumed soy during pregnancy had a higher chance of giving birth to babies born with hypospadias, which is where the urethral opening of the penis is misplaced (near the base of the penis instead of at the tip). Also, phytoestrogens, along with PCBs and DDE, contribute to premature development of girls.
In Asia, soy is fermented, so many of the above problems, with the exception of the phytoestrogens, are eliminated.
Soy does not contribute to bone health
Despite popular belief, soy does not contribute to bone health. Soy increases the body's need for calcium and vitamin D, actually taking away from bone health! Also, Westerners are deficient in vitamin D as it is, eating soy foods will just make the problem worse!
Soy contributes to infertility
This fact is what many men and women need to know because if you are consuming large amounts of unfermented soy products, you will likely experience this effect. Since the phytoestrogens interfere with the delicate hormonal systems of healthy individuals, such problems are not uncommon. In fact for women, painful and irregular periods are common and for men, a decreased sperm count can be found among heavy soy consumers.
Additionally in Japan, when housewives want to decrease the virility of their husbands, typically they give them soy products.
Soy is not good for postmenopausal women
Since soy contains high amounts of phytoestrogens, a potent anti-thyroid agent and endocrine disruptor, the problems of low thyroid function during postmenopausal years is heightened. Also, tumors that require large amounts of estrogen can feed off of the phytoestrogens in the soy.
Soy formula is not a good substitute for breast milk or even milk formulas
All infants should be fed breast milk for at the very least, the first year of life. The best substitute after breast milk is raw goat's milk. Soy formula should not be considered. This is because soy-based formulas are high in phytoestrogens and the other anti-nutrients. Bottom line, feeding an infant soy formula is comparable to giving the baby five birth control pills. For girls, this can cause premature development such as breast buds, pubic hair and even menstruation before age eight. In boys, this can retard sexual development and even cause learning disabilities.
At the risk of being redundant, the point must be made again: soy formula is not a good replacement for the highest form of infant nutrition, breast milk. It is also poor when nutritionally compared to wholesome raw goat's milk.
Summary
Soy has been upheld for many years as the pinnacle of health and wellness. It has been over-glorified by being placed on a pedestal above foods that truly should represent health. Through all of its promotions, through all of the publicity, it has failed many people, leaving them with problems that are difficult to treat. Not every health fad is what it is cracked up to be. A little research into these effects goes a long way.
http://www.naturalnews.com/z024407.html
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Caution Needed With Exotic Pets
Pets can bring much joy into our lives, and relationships with animals can also be very therapeutic for people of all ages, both kids and adults. However, in order to prevent potential disease conditions, certain precautions should be taken. This is especially true in the case of young children, whose immune systems are still forming, and others that may have compromised immune systems.
Today's article gives some practical tips for reducing risks from pets, including recommendations that some animals should probably not be brought into the house at least until your children are older. Having pets of any kind in the home is a great opportunity to teach kids responsibility and the proper care of both the animal and their own personal hygiene after handling them. I don't think it is necessary to eliminate pets, at least most varieties, but it behooves us as parents to take the proper steps in order to ensure the health and safety of both our children and the creatures we invite into our world.
Not All Pets and Children Are Compatible
By: Allie Montgomery Published: Tuesday, 7 October 2008
When we were young we enjoyed our furry companions, but in today's society exposing your children to the joys of owning their own pet, in some cases, may also mean exposing them to injuries and infections. Parents need to be very aware of the danger -- which include salmonella infection and even monkey pox -- of owning a nontraditional pet such as rodents, reptiles, monkeys, and more.
The most recent report on this subject was published in October by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in the most recent issue of Pediatrics. The study's co-author Dr. Robert Frenck, a pediatrics professor at Cincinnati Children's Hospital and a member of the AAP committee of infectious diseases, said that this report is the first comprehensive statement on this particular topic. "Nontraditional pets are becoming more traditional, and nontraditional pets can expose kids to disease they otherwise might not be exposed to. If parents are thinking about having these nontraditional pets, they may want to talk to a veterinarian and/or pediatrician first to see if there is any real concern."
The number of exotic animals that are in the United States has nearly doubled since 2002. For example, approximately 40,000 households in America now harbor hedgehogs, while 4.4 million homes have reptiles, according to the new report. A professor of the pediatric infectious diseases at the University Of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Dr. Charles Miller, added that from the standpoint of public education and from the standpoint of both family practitioners and pediatricians, this subject of owning exotic pets is very important.
The risks of having these pets are real. In 2003, there was an outbreak of human monkey pox that was traced back to imported African Gambian rats that had infected many prairie dogs and were sold as pets. Small turtles that were kept as house pets were responsible for approximately 103 cases of salmonella during the second half of last year, mostly in young children. In just last week, an Iraqi dog was shipped to the United States as part of an international rescue effort for animals and was found to have rabies. Twenty-four other animals were in this shipment and had already been distributed to 16 states. According to the October 3rd issue of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that these other animals were also potentially exposed to the rabies.
The new review by AAP details a number of the diseases that could be potentially transmitted by these more unusual house pets. The reptiles have a very high rate of carrying different strains of salmonella, as do turtles, baby poultry (including chicks), and our friendly hamsters. Plague is a disease which is carried by wild rodents and is transmitted to human that are handling infected animals. This group also includes the common house cat that has been bitten by fleas. The herpes B virus has been said to be carried by the macaque monkey. These animals don't have to be in a household to pose a risk. More than 55 outbreaks of the diseases in humans, including the infection with E. coli bacteria, have involved animals that were in public settings between 1991 and 2005.
The report is recommending that we wash our hand frequently to help minimize these risks. Children that are under the age of 5 are at particular risk, in part because their immune systems are still developing. Adults that have weakened immune systems, including women who are pregnant and the elderly, are also at a greater risk.
Dr. Jonathan Field, emeritus director of the pediatric allergy and asthma clinic at the New York University/Bellvue Medical Center, stated that our normal allergies are typically associated with dogs and cats than with nontraditional pets. The real problem seem to lie with the people who have weakened immune systems and are exposed to a virus form or a bacteria from one of these pets.
http://www.healthnews.com/family-health/child-health/not-all-pets-children-are-compatible-1913.html
Today's article gives some practical tips for reducing risks from pets, including recommendations that some animals should probably not be brought into the house at least until your children are older. Having pets of any kind in the home is a great opportunity to teach kids responsibility and the proper care of both the animal and their own personal hygiene after handling them. I don't think it is necessary to eliminate pets, at least most varieties, but it behooves us as parents to take the proper steps in order to ensure the health and safety of both our children and the creatures we invite into our world.
Not All Pets and Children Are Compatible
By: Allie Montgomery Published: Tuesday, 7 October 2008
When we were young we enjoyed our furry companions, but in today's society exposing your children to the joys of owning their own pet, in some cases, may also mean exposing them to injuries and infections. Parents need to be very aware of the danger -- which include salmonella infection and even monkey pox -- of owning a nontraditional pet such as rodents, reptiles, monkeys, and more.
The most recent report on this subject was published in October by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in the most recent issue of Pediatrics. The study's co-author Dr. Robert Frenck, a pediatrics professor at Cincinnati Children's Hospital and a member of the AAP committee of infectious diseases, said that this report is the first comprehensive statement on this particular topic. "Nontraditional pets are becoming more traditional, and nontraditional pets can expose kids to disease they otherwise might not be exposed to. If parents are thinking about having these nontraditional pets, they may want to talk to a veterinarian and/or pediatrician first to see if there is any real concern."
The number of exotic animals that are in the United States has nearly doubled since 2002. For example, approximately 40,000 households in America now harbor hedgehogs, while 4.4 million homes have reptiles, according to the new report. A professor of the pediatric infectious diseases at the University Of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Dr. Charles Miller, added that from the standpoint of public education and from the standpoint of both family practitioners and pediatricians, this subject of owning exotic pets is very important.
The risks of having these pets are real. In 2003, there was an outbreak of human monkey pox that was traced back to imported African Gambian rats that had infected many prairie dogs and were sold as pets. Small turtles that were kept as house pets were responsible for approximately 103 cases of salmonella during the second half of last year, mostly in young children. In just last week, an Iraqi dog was shipped to the United States as part of an international rescue effort for animals and was found to have rabies. Twenty-four other animals were in this shipment and had already been distributed to 16 states. According to the October 3rd issue of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that these other animals were also potentially exposed to the rabies.
The new review by AAP details a number of the diseases that could be potentially transmitted by these more unusual house pets. The reptiles have a very high rate of carrying different strains of salmonella, as do turtles, baby poultry (including chicks), and our friendly hamsters. Plague is a disease which is carried by wild rodents and is transmitted to human that are handling infected animals. This group also includes the common house cat that has been bitten by fleas. The herpes B virus has been said to be carried by the macaque monkey. These animals don't have to be in a household to pose a risk. More than 55 outbreaks of the diseases in humans, including the infection with E. coli bacteria, have involved animals that were in public settings between 1991 and 2005.
The report is recommending that we wash our hand frequently to help minimize these risks. Children that are under the age of 5 are at particular risk, in part because their immune systems are still developing. Adults that have weakened immune systems, including women who are pregnant and the elderly, are also at a greater risk.
Dr. Jonathan Field, emeritus director of the pediatric allergy and asthma clinic at the New York University/Bellvue Medical Center, stated that our normal allergies are typically associated with dogs and cats than with nontraditional pets. The real problem seem to lie with the people who have weakened immune systems and are exposed to a virus form or a bacteria from one of these pets.
http://www.healthnews.com/family-health/child-health/not-all-pets-children-are-compatible-1913.html
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
The Many Benefits of Oatmeal
As we turn the seasonal corner and head into Fall and Winter, many people begin to think again of hot cereal as a great breakfast to keep off the chill, and indeed oatmeal is one of the most popular choices. Organic, unprocessed, whole-grain oatmeal (this immediately eliminates the "quick-cooking" varieties) is an excellent addition to your breakfast menu, and can in fact be used in meals and snacks throughout the day. The best sources are probably found at local health food stores and co-ops. Oatmeal is easy to prepare, and many different healthy fruits, nuts, and other ingredients can be added to stave off nutritional boredom.
Oats can be eaten in many different ways, whether cooked as cereal or served raw in yogurt or as a healthy filler in many recipes. Some even like their oats sprinkled on a fresh, raw vegetable salad. Just be careful not to counteract the benefits of oats by overdoing ingredients such as milk or sugar. Raw honey, agave nectar, or stevia for sweeteners are much better choices, as are organic raw milk, organic goat's milk, or hemp seed milk in lieu of grocery store cow's milk. Oats can provide a consistent source of fiber and other useful nutrients. In fact, oatmeal is one of the few nutritional foods that has received the blessing of the FDA in the form of permission for labels lauding oatmeal's benefits. At least they got it right, this time!
The Best Breakfast: Eating oatmeal reduces cholesterol, and much more
Eating a bowl of oatmeal for breakfast every morning could be about the healthiest start to the day you can have, a new study has discovered. The whole-grain cereal can reduce cholesterol levels, and lower the risk of raised blood pressure, weight gain and type II diabetes.
The health benefits of oatmeal have been recognised by America's drug regulator, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which has allowed manufacturer to put health claims on packaging since 1997.
But in the 10 years since then, every study has confirmed the benefits, and now researchers believe oatmeal's abilities as a cholesterol-lowering agent are even stronger than earlier research suggested.
Leading the latest review is Dr James W Anderson, professor of medicine and clinical nutrition at Kentucky University's College of Medicine. He says: "Whole-grain products like oatmeal are among some of the best foods one can eat to improve cholesterol levels, in addition to other lifestyle choices."
Each study he reviewed concluded that total cholesterol levels are lowered by eating oats, and that LDL (low-density lipoprotein, or 'bad' cholesterol) is reduced without reducing levels of HDL (high-density, lipoprotein, or 'good' cholesterol).
Separate reviews have also discovered that eating oatmeal can reduce your chances of getting high blood pressure, type II diabetes and gaining weight. Oatmeal also contains simple unique compounds that may protect against premature hardening of the arteries, or atherosclerosis.
Dr Anderson says: "Lifestyle choices such as diet should be the first-line therapy for most patients with moderate cholesterol risk, given the expense, safety concerns and intolerance related to cholesterol-lowering drugs."
(Source: American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 2008; 2: 51-7).
Oats can be eaten in many different ways, whether cooked as cereal or served raw in yogurt or as a healthy filler in many recipes. Some even like their oats sprinkled on a fresh, raw vegetable salad. Just be careful not to counteract the benefits of oats by overdoing ingredients such as milk or sugar. Raw honey, agave nectar, or stevia for sweeteners are much better choices, as are organic raw milk, organic goat's milk, or hemp seed milk in lieu of grocery store cow's milk. Oats can provide a consistent source of fiber and other useful nutrients. In fact, oatmeal is one of the few nutritional foods that has received the blessing of the FDA in the form of permission for labels lauding oatmeal's benefits. At least they got it right, this time!
The Best Breakfast: Eating oatmeal reduces cholesterol, and much more
Eating a bowl of oatmeal for breakfast every morning could be about the healthiest start to the day you can have, a new study has discovered. The whole-grain cereal can reduce cholesterol levels, and lower the risk of raised blood pressure, weight gain and type II diabetes.
The health benefits of oatmeal have been recognised by America's drug regulator, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which has allowed manufacturer to put health claims on packaging since 1997.
But in the 10 years since then, every study has confirmed the benefits, and now researchers believe oatmeal's abilities as a cholesterol-lowering agent are even stronger than earlier research suggested.
Leading the latest review is Dr James W Anderson, professor of medicine and clinical nutrition at Kentucky University's College of Medicine. He says: "Whole-grain products like oatmeal are among some of the best foods one can eat to improve cholesterol levels, in addition to other lifestyle choices."
Each study he reviewed concluded that total cholesterol levels are lowered by eating oats, and that LDL (low-density lipoprotein, or 'bad' cholesterol) is reduced without reducing levels of HDL (high-density, lipoprotein, or 'good' cholesterol).
Separate reviews have also discovered that eating oatmeal can reduce your chances of getting high blood pressure, type II diabetes and gaining weight. Oatmeal also contains simple unique compounds that may protect against premature hardening of the arteries, or atherosclerosis.
Dr Anderson says: "Lifestyle choices such as diet should be the first-line therapy for most patients with moderate cholesterol risk, given the expense, safety concerns and intolerance related to cholesterol-lowering drugs."
(Source: American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 2008; 2: 51-7).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
