Another Senseless Shooting: Link to Psych Drugs?

The news reports were filled again last week with the tragedy of another young American male who went on a shooting rampage and senselessly took the lives of innocent victims, and ultimately his own. All the facts are not in yet, but we do know that this young man had been treated in the past for depression and ADHD. In the majority of cases, that points towards the use of SSRI anti-depressants and/or Ritalin.

Please read the accompanying article that lays out the known dangers of giving these types of drugs to young males, and the fact that other nations of the world have already banned the use of these medications in children and adolescents. What is the FDA waiting for? This kind of bureaucratic idiocy begs the question: Who is running the store? We need to bring sanity back to our health care system so that it is truly for the benefit and safety of all Americans instead of being driven by the almighty buck.

Omaha Shooter Robert Hawkins Had Been "Treated" For ADHD, Depression
Thursday, December 06, 2007 by: Mike Adams

(NewsTarget) America seems shocked that, yet again, a young male would pick up an assault rifle and murder his fellow citizens, then take his own life. This is what happened last night in Omaha, Nebraska, where the 19-year-old Hawkins killed himself and eight other people with an assault rifle. Those lacking keen observation skills are quick to blame guns for this tragedy, but others who are familiar with the history of such violent acts by young males instantly recognize a more sinister connection: A history of treatment with psychiatric drugs for depression and ADHD.

It all started in Columbine, Colorado, when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold massacred their way into the history books on April 20, 1999 by killing 12 and wounding 23 people. The mainstream media virtually glorified the event, yet utterly failed to report the connection between violence in young men and treatment with psychiatric drugs. (Both Harris and Klebold were taking antidepressant drugs.)

It's a little known fact that antidepressant drugs have never been tested on children nor approved by the FDA for use on children. It is well established in the scientific literature, however, that such drugs cause young men to think violent thoughts and commit violent acts. This is precisely why the U.K. has outright banned the prescribing of such drugs to children. Yet here in the United States -- the capitol of gun violence by kids on depression drugs -- the FDA and drug companies pretend that mind-altering drugs have no link whatsoever to behavior.

Enormous evidence linking mind-altering drugs with violent acts
In 2005, I reported on this site that Eli Lilly had full knowledge of a 1200% increase in suicide risk for takers of their Prozac drug, a popular anti-depressant SSRI medication.

In 2006, we reported the results of a study published in the Archives of General Psychiatry showing that teens taking antidepressant drugs are more likely to commit suicide (and to be "successful" at completing the act).

On September 11, 2006, I reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and violent behavior yet again. In that article, I explained, "If you're going to alter the brain chemistry of these children, you had better be prepared for the results. The result we're seeing now is mass killings. Elsewhere around the world, where children aren't doped up on all these drugs, we don't see this kind of behavior. This is what happens when you change children's brain chemistry; you get these results...

"The very next day, we published a report about the anti-depressant drug Paxil doubling the risk of violent behavior. In that article, I stated, "This finding helps explain why school shootings are almost always conducted by children who are taking antidepressants. We also know that SSRIs cause children to disconnect from reality. When you combine that with a propensity for violence, you create a dangerous recipe for school shootings and other adolescent violence.

In April of this year, I also reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and the Virginia Tech shooting. What I said in that article has urgent application right now, following the Omaha shooting:

A study published in the Public Library of Science Medicine (an open source medical journal) explored these same links in detail. The authors note that "Some regulators, such as the Canadian regulators, have also referred to risks of treatment-induced activation leading to both self-harm and harm to others" and the "United States labels for all antidepressants as of August 2004 note that 'anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, aggressiveness, impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, and mania have been reported in adult and pediatric patients being treated with antidepressants for major depressive disorder as well as for other indications, both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric'".

In other words, the link between antidepressants and violence has been known for years by the very people manufacturing, marketing or prescribing the drugs. As the author of the study mentioned above concluded, "The new issues highlighted by these cases need urgent examination jointly by jurists and psychiatrists in all countries where antidepressants are widely used.

"That was last year, well before this latest shooting. The warning signs were there, and they have been visible for a long time. Medical authorities can hardly say they are "shocked" by this violent behavior. After all, the same pattern of violence among antidepressant takers has been observed, documented and published in numerous previous cases.

Not surprised at what happened in Omaha
The people of Omaha may be surprised at what happened there yesterday, but I'm not. Why? Because the shooter, Robert Hawkins, had a history of being "treated" for both depression and ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). (Source: Associated Press)

And what is the standard American psychiatric "treatment" for these conditions? Mind-altering drugs, of course.

ADHD, for example, is treated with a drug that used to be an illegal street drug called "speed." It's an amphetamine, and recent research published in the August, 2007 issue of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry reveals that Ritalin and other ADHD drugs actually stunt the growth of children, causing their brains and bodies to be physically altered.

Depression, of course, is treated with SSRI drugs, none of which have ever been safety approved by the FDA for use on children or teens. In other words, the use of these drugs on teenagers is a grand, mind-altering medical experiment, and what we just witnessed in Omaha is one result of that experiment.

There will be more. I hate to be accurate about this grisly prediction, because I grieve for the families of those lost to pharmaceutically-induced violence, but the truth is that until we stop drugging our children with psychotropic drugs, the shootings are not going to stop.

Big Pharma is to blame for this one, not the manufacturer of the gun. That gun has a trigger, you see, and the trigger was pulled by a finger. The finger was connected via a series of nerves to a brain, and that brain was altered by psychotropic drugs. The brain wasn't functioning like a normal, healthy, well-nourished brain; it was functioning like a zoned out "zombie" brain permanently distorted by psychiatric drugs.

Sending a teenager out into the public doped up on mind-altering drugs that we KNOW are linked to violence -- and jacked up on junk foods (he worked at McDonald's) -- is a certain recipe for disaster. Big Pharma executives, drug reps and the irresponsible psychiatrists who dish these pills out to teenagers might as well have just walked right into the mall and set off a bomb themselves. These are the people ultimately responsible for the tragedy in Omaha. Hawkins may have pulled the trigger, but modern psychiatry drugged him with violence-inducing chemicals. The fact that such drugs promote violence isn't even disputed. It is printed right on the warning labels of those drugs!

And as sad as this tragedy is for all those affected by this medication-induced violence, the truly sad part is that America still hasn't learned this lesson. If you drug the children with chemicals that cause violence, you're going to see more shootings. It is as simple as that. And if you take away the guns, you will see bombs, knives or machetes used in these attacks. When disturbed young boys are doped up on psychotropic drugs that promote violence, and they're drugged by the hundreds of thousands, it's like playing a national game of Russian roulette (with apologies to Russia). Sooner or later, another kid whose mind has been altered by Ritalin, Prozac or some other drug is going to walk into yet another school or mall and start killing people. This kind of behavior is a direct product of chemical-based psychiatric "treatment."

The criminals running modern psychiatry
In fact, I predict we'll see another such shooting in the next 30 days, if not sooner. And yet, even with the increasing frequency of these events, the unholy alliance between Big Pharma and the immensely evil psychiatric industry will continue. Yet more children will be put on mind-altering drugs that stunt their growth, alter their brain chemistry, and turn them into mind-numbed massacre drones who acquire dangerous weapons and open fire in public places.

The psychiatric industry, though, thinks that yet MORE children need "treatment" with drugs for ADHD and depression. In fact, an industry press release recently claimed that only one-third of those children "suffering" from ADHD are receiving appropriate "treatment" for the condition. Of course, those are just code words for "drugging the children with high-profit pharmaceuticals." When the psychiatric authorities say "treatment," what they mean is "more drugging."

What could have healed Robert Hawkins and saved lives
So what is the solution to all this? Robert Hawkins could have been healed with a radical change in diet that supports healthy brain chemistry. His parents or caretakers should have stopped the junk food, ended the medication and put him on raw, living foods and daily superfood smoothies, fresh vegetable juices, raw nuts and seeds and other wholesome, non-processed foods. Nutrition is the single most powerful factor determining healthy moods and behavior, and virtually all young men who commit violent acts (including the vast majority of those imprisoned in the U.S. today) suffer from wild nutritional deficiencies.

Robert Hawkins could have been a healthy, stable and normal kid with the help of some real food, real nutrition and real love from a supporting family. Instead, he lived on junk food, worked at McDonalds and took medication pills as directed by his psychiatric doctor. The results speak for themselves: This recipe of processed food and mind-altering drugs created a monster, and yesterday in Omaha, that monster exploded in a rage of violence.

If we do nott learn from all this and stop drugging the children of our nation, then those innocents in Omaha will have died in vain. And I ask the question: How many more innocent Americans must pay the price for medication-induced violence?

Ask yourself one question: Why does the FDA continue to allow these dangerous drugs to be prescribed to children and teens when 1) They have never been tested on children or teens, and 2) Other countries have already banned the prescribing of these drugs to children and teens?

Story Notes: The Associated Press originally reported Hawkins age as 20 years old, but corrected it to 19 years old following a correction by local police. Hawkins was not reported to have been taking medications at the precise time of the shooting, but his caretaker, Debora Maruca-Kovac, said that "he had been treated in the past for depression and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder." We do not know exactly which drugs Hawkins had been treated with in the past, and we hope the names of those drugs will surface in future reports on this tragedy.

NewsTarget deeply regrets the loss of life witnessed in this event, and
we commit to doing our part to end these medication-induced crimes that continue to be perpetrated by Big Pharma and modern psychiatry.

http://www.newstarget.com/022330.html

Ixempra - Newest Drug for Advanced Breast Cancer

Once again chemotherapy is being proven as very ineffective in the treatment of cancer. Suggesting that a 1.6 month response rate is something huge is hardly what most cancer patients would get very excited especially if they were told the truth about the conventional medicine meaning of response rate.

Notice the side effects of Ixempra and how many of them have to do with the digestive tract. Once the digestive tract, which is where 70-80% of the immune system is located, is compromised it becomes very difficult to bring it back into uncompromised health. Not impossible, but very difficult. And even then there will almost always be future digestive tract issues that are a result of chemotherapy.

Almost all chemotherapy is experimental medicine, meaning that the patient is being used as a guinea pig in the name of cancer research. Through these experiments patients are used to determine the type of drugs that seemingly get a response when mixed (chemo cocktails), dosage amounts (some trials have been stopped because patients died from what was discovered to be over-dosage), severity of side effects along with survival rates using different ratios of the above.

It is time that America insist that the cancer-game that we have been playing, in the name of cancer research, for the last 30 plus years be stopped. We need to take our focus off of toxic drugs that harm the entire body and instead focus on giving the body (immune system) what it needs to get well. As long as we believe the mass media marketing by the NCI and cancer treatment hospitals that poisoning the body with chemicals and then hoping for wellness is actually obtainable, this barbaric treatment will continue. It hasn't worked in the past and it will not work in the future. Remember, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Right now, cancer treatment in the U.S. is in the realm of insanity.


IXEMPRA - A NEW DRUG FOR ADVANCED BREAST CANCER

In October 2007, the FDA approved Ixempra (ixabepilone) for the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Specifically, the drug was approved for the treatment of patients whose metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer has become resistant to standard drugs such as anthracyclines, taxanes, and capecitabine (Xeloda). Ixempra is classified as a "microtubule inhibitor." It is thus similar to the taxanes but is said by the manufacturer, Bristol-Myers, to be somewhat less toxic.

"Previously, patients with aggressive metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer no longer responding to currently available chemotherapies had limited treatment options," said Linda Vahdat, M.D., of New York Presbyterian Hospital Weill Cornell Medical Center, in a statement released by the company. "The approval of Ixempra means that we now have an important new option for patients with metastatic breast cancer who have rapidly progressed through currently approved chemotherapies."

Let us therefore examine just how "important" this new option is likely to be to patients with metastatic breast cancer.

First of Two Trials

The FDA approval of Ixempra was based on two clinical trials that included a total of 878 patients. The first of these studies was a phase II (non-randomized) trial of Ixempra as a stand-alone treatment. That study enrolled 126 patients with either metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer that had proven resistant to three prior therapies. There was an "objective partial response" in 12.4 percent of 113 evaluable patients. In other words, fewer than one out of eight patients who got the drug saw their tumors shrink. (And, by the way, whatever happened to the other 13 "unevaluable" patients in the study? Under the commonly observed intent-to-treat rule of medical statistics, they should have been included in this analysis.)

A partial response is generally defined as an incomplete shrinkage of the tumor by more than 50 percent for one month or more. As long-time readers of this newsletter will know, a partial response generally does not correlate with increased survival.

Side effects of Ixempra in this trial included the following:

• Peripheral sensory neuropathy in 62 percent of patients, with serious to severe effects (Grades 3 and 4) in 14 percent;


• Fatigue, asthenia 56 percent (Grade 3/4: 13 percent);


• Myalgia, arthralgia 49 percent (Grade 3/4: 8 percent);


• Alopecia 48 percent (Grade 3/4: 0 percent);


• Nausea 42 percent (Grade 3/4: 2 percent);


• Stomatitis,mucositis 29 percent (Grade 3/4: 6 percent);


• Vomiting 29 percent (Grade 3/4: 1 percent);


• Diarrhea 22 percent (Grade 3/4: 1 percent);


• Musculoskeletal pain 20 percent (Grade 3/4: 3 percent).

Major hematologic [blood-related] adverse events included neutropenia [Grade 3-4 in 54 percent] and leukopenia [Grade 3-4 in 49 percent].

Combination Trial

FDA also took into consideration a larger phase III randomized trial which evaluated the efficacy and safety of Ixempra combined with Xeloda (capecitabine) in comparison to Xeloda used as a stand alone treatment. This trial included 752 patients who were previously treated with anthracyclines (such as Adriamycin) and taxanes (such as Taxol), and whose tumors had already shown resistance to these therapies. In this trial, Ixempra in combination with Xeloda resulted in a slight improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) compared to Xeloda given alone.

The median survival with the combination of Ixempra and Xeloda was 5.7 months vs. 4.1 months for Xeloda alone - a gain of 1.6 months. But the side effects included peripheral sensory neuropathy in 65 percent, hand-foot syndrome in 64 percent, nausea in 53 percent, diarrhea in 44 percent, etc.

Again, readers will note that the above statistics do not yield any information on overall survival, i.e., how long on average Ixempra patients can be expected to live compared to those who got either Xeloda alone or no further treatment. The increase of 1.6 months (which you can be sure will be widely bandied about as indicative of the "value" of Ixempra) refers solely to an improvement in progression-free survival. But progression-free survival is not at all the same thing as improved overall survival. Progression-free survival is the time during which the disease appears stable before once again beginning to advance. It is entirely possible that two groups of patients could have a significant difference in this parameter, but the disease could still claim their lives at roughly the same time.

A Bristol-Myers spokesperson has been quoted as saying that the cost of a full course of Ixempra would be between $18,440 to $23,050.

There was a time when FDA required proof of increased survival before it would approve a new drug. Now Bristol-Myers has gotten Ixempra onto the market, having only shown a slight increase in a surrogate marker of doubtful benefit.

--Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D.
http://www.cancerdecisions.com/

References:

Ixempra company web site: http://www.ixempra.com/

Cost of Ixempra: http://www.topnews.in/bristol-myers-breast-cancer-drug-won-us-fda-approval-23921

What You Don't Know About Anti-Bacterial Products May Harm You

One of the known hazards regarding the overuse of antibiotics and anti-bacterial products is that infectious bacterial agents can, and do, develop immunity, making them harder to control. However, it appears that we have another reason to be concerned about anti-bacterial consumer products, because many of them contain a potentially carcinogenic substance called triclosan.

Anti-bacterial products seem to be popping up everywhere, and the shelves of the grocery store are lined with them. I even saw an ad for anti-bacterial underwear the other day, believe it or not. As is often the case, these products are sold to the unsuspecting public as a new and improved way to protect themselves, in this case from germs. They are not told the whole story about the significant risks these products pose for them and their families. The chemical manufacturers and government regulatory agencies cover over any concerns with their double talk, and the profits roll on, at the expense of the consumer, you and me.

If you are concerned about germs, bacteria, and viruses, a prudent solution is the use of essential oils. We recommend a product called Germ Fighter Spray which is convenient and safe for adults and children.

The timely article below will educate you about the dangers of triclosan, and will also open your eyes to the widespread and indiscriminate use of this hazardous substance.


Toxic Chemical Triclosan Commonly Found in Anti-Bacterial Soaps, Toothpaste Products
by Mike Adams

A chemical called triclosan poses a health risk, as it is a toxic compound which can promote cancer. The most shocking thing is that triclosan is commonly found in everyday consumer goods such as antibacterial soaps, deodorants, body washes, creams, lotions, cosmetics, cleaning supplies, detergents, dishwashing liquids, and yes, mouthwash and toothpaste.

Toothpaste is supposed to help clean your teeth, but what it actually does just might horrify you. When tap water meets toothpaste, the triclosan reacts freely with the chlorine in the tap water to become chloroform (a chlorinated aromatic) and is similar to the dioxins found in the compound Agent Orange. It's a chemical reaction occurring right in your mouth while you brush your teeth. And don't think you are safe once you rinse it all out of your mouth: research shows that it can remain in your mouth after brushing for up to 12 hours, and can be easily absorbed into the tongue and through mucus into the body. (Children are at the greatest risk, as they tend to swallow their toothpaste more while brushing their teeth.)

According to the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides (NCAMP), "Manufacturers of a number of triclosan-containing toothpaste and soap products claim that the active ingredient continues to work for as long as 12 hours after use. Thus, consumers are exposed to triclosan for much longer than the 20 seconds it takes to wash their hands or brush their teeth."

"These products produce low levels of chloroform, but that adds up over time. The amount of gas formed is very low but I think the key thing is that we just don't know what the effects are. However, manufacturers do have to list triclosan on their ingredients, so if consumers are worried the best advice is to avoid products with the chemical," said Giles Watson, a toxicology expert.

Triclosan is officially a probable human carcinogen

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Union currently regulate triclosan, and the Environmental Protection Agency classifies this substance as a probable human carcinogen.

Toothpaste manufacturers claim that triclosan is used because it helps to reduce plaque and kill bacteria, but it actually aids in gum damage and can cause mouth ulcers, say some health experts. These companies like the chemical because it allows them to state the product is a "99.9% bacteria killer" and make claims about the product being a "medicated formula."

According to the chemical creator's website, Ciba Specialty Chemicals "invented triclosan more than 35 years ago and in this long time of application without any adverse effects it has proven itself as the 'aspirin' of the antibacterial actives -- helpful without side effects.

"The popularity of triclosan is a reflection of its unique combination of efficacy against almost all types of bacteria and safety to man and nature which with the currently known substances used cannot be surmounted."

The toothpaste manufacturers haven't done any substantial studies that reach a decision on whether to take triclosan out of their products. They continue to say that it is safe and only harmful if ingested. Even then, they say it only affects the nervous system (as if that's something very minor to have harmed).

No good science supporting safety of triclosan

According to the American Medical Association: "Despite their recent proliferation in consumer products, the use of antimicrobial agents such as triclosan in consumer products has not been studied extensively. No data exist to support their efficacy when used in such products or any need for them…it may be prudent to avoid the use of antimicrobial agents in consumer products."

The chemical company states: "Ciba supports the use of triclosan only if there is a benefit to human beings."

So, what if it is shown to offer no benefit to humans? Will they pull it off the shelves now that evidence points to its danger from exposure? (Some toothpaste manufacturers, like Tom's of Maine, specifically state that they do not contain triclosan.)

Also found in toys, bedding, clothing and more

Triclosan is also used in plastics and fabrics, where it goes under the trade names Microban and Biofresh respectively. It is infused into or used as an additive in a number of consumer products like toys, bedding, trash bags, socks, kitchen utensils, textiles and plastics.

"Over 95% of the uses of triclosan are in consumer products that are disposed of in residential drains. In a U.S. Geological Survey study of 95 different organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, triclosan was one of the most frequently detected compounds, and in some of the highest concentrations," according to the NCAMP.

According to Worldwatch Institute: "In the United States, 75% of liquid soaps and nearly 30% of bar soaps now contain triclosan and other germ-fighting compounds whose prevalence can foster the growth of bacterial resistance."

The widespread use of triclosan is now known to create the risk of breeding new, resistant superbugs that may be far more dangerous to human health than the original germs killed by triclosan in the first place. My advice to consumers is to avoid all products containing triclosan.

Action items

Avoid all products that make "antibacterial" claims (unless they are using herbs to accomplish it).

Be aware of the harmful environmental impact of consuming products containing triclosan. The ingredient is not only unhealthy for humans, it's also unhealthy for the environment.

Read the ingredients labels of all consumer products in order to make sure they do not contain triclosan.

URL: http://www.newstarget.com/022178.html

Environmental Toxins in the Workplace

A recent outbreak of a rare neurological disease at a Minnesota pork processing plant brings to light several major health concerns: safety in the workplace, the increase in autoimmune diseases, and the dangers of vaccines. The article below discusses how the State of Minnesota Health Department is concerned that exposure to raw pork may be linked to the development of an autoimmune disease called CIPD in an unusually high number of workers at the facility. A form of CIPD has also been identified as a proven risk associated with the swine flu vaccine administered to about 43 million Americans in 1976.

Autoimmune diseases occur when the immune system fails to operate properly and it attacks healthy tissue instead of infectious agents, as it is designed to. More and more research is pointing to environmental issues as one of the primary causes of autoimmune diseases. This story bears watching to see what unfolds as the investigation continues. Future discoveries may continue to prove that there are many factors in the places we live and work that are potentially toxic to our bodies. This reinforces the fact that the best thing any of us can do to ensure our wellness is to make healthy lifestyle choices that strengthen and bolster our immune system so that it can successfully defend us against disease. For more about the immune system see the OAW Immune System Calculator at: http://www.glyconutrients-center.org/immune-calculator.php

The Question at Austin Pork Plant: Why?
By Jon Tevlin, Josephine Marcotty and Matthew McKinney / StarTribune startribune.com

The wages and overtime Susan Kruse made working for 15 years for Quality Pork Processors helped her support her son, Travis, a ninth-grader. She can hear the evening shift-change whistle from inside the small house she's renovating a block away from the plant.

But last December, Kruse, 36, started having cramps in her legs, followed by muscle stiffness, soreness and pain that's left her unable to work and forces her to use a walker to get around.

Kruse was among the first of the 11 employees at the Austin plant to be diagnosed with a rare disease called chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), which typically strikes only two out of every 100,000 people.

"It started with a charley horse in my calf that wouldn't go away," Kruse said in an interview at her home Tuesday night. "Then my hands and feet got sore and cold and numb. I had perfect health before."She can't do a lot of the things she used to," Travis Kruse said. "Before, she could lift heavy boxes and stuff, but now she gets tired after she walks a little."

Plant owner Kelly Wadding said Tuesday that investigators told him they probably won't know "for some time" what caused the illnesses.

Officials from the Minnesota Department of Health, which disclosed the illnesses Monday, are conducting the investigation. Health Department staffers arrived in Austin on Tuesday. Another team is researching the disease.

"We're trying to get a sense of whether the incidence has changed in recent years," said Ruth Lynfield, the state's epidemiologist, adding that there could be clusters of cases elsewhere in the country that have not been recognized.

The investigation is expected to take months.

Connecting the dots

The Austin cases were connected because of a fortunate confluence of events, Lynfield said. Occupational health nurses at the plant were the first to recognize that they were seeing an unusual number of people with odd neurological symptoms. They began calling doctors in the area, asking if they knew what might be causing them.

They very quickly connected with doctors at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester who happen to be among the nation's experts in CIDP, she said.

Kruse spent Tuesday at Mayo completing another battery of tests. Every other week, she spends five hours receiving an intravenous drug that doctors hope will curtail her symptoms, which include muscle weakness, pain and tingling sensations.

Though she's taking online accounting classes, doctors have told Kruse she may never work again. Her disability insurance payments recently ended, and she's living on Social Security.

Kruse had been puzzled about the illness until last week, when someone from the Health Department called her and asked questions. Then she ran into a co-worker at Mayo who had the same illness.

But it wasn't until Monday's Health Department news conference acknowledging that 11 workers were ill that she realized the link to her job.

The air compressor angle

Kruse worked in the "day kill area," where her job was to carve meat out of the back of butchered pigs' heads with a small knife. Her work area was next to the place where compressed-air hoses were used to remove brain material.

The cause of CIDP is unknown and could include any number of factors, including infectious microbes, toxins or something from the pigs that triggers the body's immune system to attack healthy tissue, according to experts.

CIDP is the chronic form of another disease, Guillain-Barré syndrome, which develops much more rapidly and has a number of known triggers. It first received public attention in 1976 when linked to the swine flu vaccine.

It does not appear to be spread by person-to-person contact, Lynfield said.

Health officials were concerned enough about exposure to raw pig meat to recommend that the plant shut down the air compressor system used to extract brain tissue from the skulls.

Symptoms first emerged around the same time the plant began using the high-powered air system. Some health experts think exposure to blood and pulverized tissue might have caused the autoimmune response.

But the compressed-air system almost certainly is not the problem, said mechanical engineer Frank Moskowitz, a compressed-air expert based in Phoenix. "Compressed air itself absolutely cannot introduce anything bad," he said. He said pressurization kills any living organism in the air.

Air systems have made workers ill in the past because they unintentionally drew in carbon monoxide from a truck idling near the intake ports for the compressed air, Moskowitz said. But that wouldn't cause the serious illnesses seen at the food plant.

Using compressed air is fairly common in the food industry, said Frank Busta, the director emeritus of the National Center for Food Protection and Defense at the University of Minnesota. The technology is used to inflate milk cartons, move food powders through a plant and make bread.

'Vital to our economy'

In Austin, a city of 23,500 where bronze hogs grace the entrance of the Spam Museum and hog farms and smokestacks of processing plants dominate the landscape, many expressed sympathy for those who are ill but remained confident that the industry that powers the town will not be affected.

At the Austin Chamber of Commerce, Sandy Forstner, executive director, underscored the importance of the hog industry in Austin, where Hormel and Quality Pork Processors employ about 3,600 people.

"There are lot of people on their payrolls," Forstner said. "That facility is vital to our economy. Everybody has to be cautious, but we also have to find out what it is without overreacting."

Kruse said she liked her job and is sorry she can no longer do it.

"It's depressing," she said of her increased weakness and decreased mobility -- and of her uncertain future. "I hope that my arms aren't so weak that I can't at least get a desk job."

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22105971/

Doctors on Doctors: Be Careful Who You Trust

Is it safe to put your health and wellness into the hands of American doctors and hospitals? The following article summarizes the results of a study sponsored by Harvard Medical School that was just released several days ago. The numbers speak for themselves, and the findings are alarming. Mind you, this does not represent all physicians, as there are many fine men and women in the medical profession. But it certainly is damning information for the conventional medical field as a whole.

If you ever needed any more evidence to indicate that there is a health care crisis in this country, its all here: incompetence, deception, and a dire lack of personal and professional integrity. I wish I were referring to used car salesmen, but unfortunately these are the confessions of medical doctors. Pursuing wellness has its own rewards, and it appears we can add a new one to the list: avoiding having to consult with a physician or spend time in a hospital.



Half of doctors mum about medical mistakes
Survey: Physicians believe errors should be reported, but don't always do so

WASHINGTON - Nearly half of all U.S. doctors fail to report incompetent or unethical colleagues, even though they agree that such mistakes should be reported, researchers said on Monday.

They found that 46 percent of physicians surveyed admitted they knew of a serious medical error that had been made but did not tell authorities about it.

"There is a measurable disconnect between what physicians say they think is the right thing to do and what they actually do," said Eric Campbell of Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, who led the survey.

Doctors are also surprisingly willing to order unnecessary - and often expensive - tests such as magnetic resonance imaging or MRI scans. Just 25 percent said they were looking out to ensure they did not unintentionally treat someone differently because of their sex or race, the survey found.

In 2000, the U.S. Institute of Medicine reported that up to 98,000 people die every year because of medical errors in hospitals alone.

Campbell and colleagues surveyed more than 1,600 physicians in 2003 and 2004 for their report, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Up to 96 percent of those surveyed said they should report all instances of significant incompetence or medical errors to the hospital clinic or to authorities. The exception was among cardiologists and surgeons, with just about 45 percent agreeing.

And 85 percent of most doctors said they should tell patients or relatives about significant errors.

But this did not translate into practice.

Forty percent of the doctors said they knew of a serious medical error in their hospital group or practice but 31 percent admitted they had done nothing about it at least once.

Doctors also did not always practice what they preached ethically. While 93 percent of doctors said they should provide care regardless of a patient's ability to pay, only 69 percent actually accepted uninsured patients who cannot pay.

Letting skills slide
While most of the doctors agreed they needed to keep up with changes in the profession and have their competence reviewed, only 31 percent had undergone a competency review in the past three years.

Dr. James Thompson, chief executive officer of the Federation of State Medical Boards, said one problem may be that doctors know there is not much that can be done to help doctors who are struggling to be competent.

"There are very few places where they can send them for remediation," Thompson told a news conference.

And medical boards may not have the resources to punish errant doctors.

"There are restrictions on state medical boards that inhibit their ability to go after physicians aggressively," Thompson said.

"There are state medical boards that don't even have their own teams of investigators," he added. "There are state medical boards that are, quite frankly, underfunded and understaffed."

But he said medical boards cannot act unless someone reports a problem doctor.

"State medical boards only react to complaints - they are not a policing agency," Thompson said.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22083982/

(c) Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.

A Safer Option to Mammography

Despite what the conventional medical community will tell you, regular mammograms are not in your best interest. In fact yearly mammograms have proven not to be a factor in overall breast cancer prevention. As the following article will show, not only are they not necessary, but they can be extremely harmful due to radiation exposure and other risks.

Finding cancer at the very earliest stage is not necessarily the end-all that conventional medicine promotes. The body develops cancer cells every day and it is supposed that everyone develops very small tumors. In a healthy body (healthy immune system) the body will recognize these cells and small tumors and dispose of them in a natural way. The key is to keep the immune system functioning at healthy levels. However, if we automatically begin drugging and radiating the smallest of these growths, in the long run, we may be doing ourselves more harm than good when, if left alone, the body would take care of the concern on its own.

This piece also presents a diagnostic tool for breast cancer that can serve as an alternative to mammography. It is not usually offered by most practitioners, but as a savvy consumer, you should be aware of it and request it in lieu of exposing yourself to the hazards of mammography. As women become more knowledgeable and proactive regarding health care issues, safer, more effective, and less invasive procedures such as this will become more widely available.

Thermography: A Safer Option for Breast Cancer Detection
by Mary Laredo http://www.NewsTarget.com/022227.html

(NewsTarget) The occurrence of breast cancer has dramatically increased in the past 50 years and the medical establishment encourages the use of annual mammogram screenings as a womans best option for early detection. In fact, for more than 30 years it has been the unquestioned, standard screening device used by the medical community. While mammography may be useful in certain situations, it has many disturbing drawbacks.

With toxic radiation, mammogram testing compresses sensitive breast tissue causing pain and possible tissue damage. To make matters worse, the false negative and false positive rates of mammography are a troubling 30% and 89% respectively.(1) Another concern is that many breast cancers occur below the armpits; however, mammography completely misses this auxiliary region, viewing only the breast tissue compressed between two plates of glass. Considering these drawbacks, breast thermography should be given closer consideration.

Thermography (also called thermology) is a little-known technique for breast cancer detection that has been available since the 1960s. It is non-invasive and non-toxic, using an infrared camera to measure thermal emissions from the entire chest and auxiliary regions. Cancerous tissue develops a blood supply to feed a growing tumor, and the abnormal blood vessel formations generate significantly more heat than the surrounding healthy tissue. The infrared camera detects the differences in heat emitted from abnormal tissue (including malignancies, benign tumors and fibrocystic disease), as compared to normal tissue. There is no physical contact with the patient, who stands several feet away from the camera while a technician takes a series of images.

A second set of images is taken following a cold challenge. The patient places her hands in ice cold water for one minute causing healthy tissue to constrict while the abnormal tumor tissue remains hot. The infrared scanner easily distinguishes the difference, and these images are compared with the first set for confirmation.

Thermography can detect abnormalities before the onset of a malignancy, and as early as ten years before being recognized by other procedures such as manual breast exam, mammography, ultrasound or MRI.(2) This makes it potentially life-saving for women who are unknowingly developing abnormalities, as it can take several years for a cancerous tumor to develop and be detected by mammogram. Its accuracy is also impressive, with false negative and false positive rates at 9% for each.(3) Thermography is also an effective way to establish a baseline for comparison with future scans; therefore, women should begin screening by the age of 25.

Although widely embraced by alternative health care practitioners, thermographys obscurity in the mainstream means that too many women rely on mammograms as their only option. There are several reasons for thermographys lack of support by the conventional medical community. Early thermal scanners were not very sensitive, nor were they well-tested before being used in clinical practice. This resulted in many misdiagnosed cases and its utter dismissal by the medical community. Since then the technology has advanced dramatically and thermography now uses highly sensitive state-of-the-art infrared cameras and sophisticated computers. A wealth of clinical research attests to its high degree of sensitivity and accuracy. In 1982, the FDA approved thermography for breast cancer screening, yet most of the medical establishment is either unaware of it or still associates it with its early false start. Since most women are also uninformed of the technology there is no pressure on the medical community to support it.

This author - who knows from first-hand experience the physical and emotional trauma of mammography as well as the passive and comforting accuracy of thermal scanning - would have been spared from years of radiation exposure with an earlier knowledge of thermography. The importance of education and awareness of this technology cannot be overstated.

When a thermographic report is negative, annual monitoring is essential to note any changes as early as possible. A positive report should be discussed with a health care practitioner as it may be necessary to follow up with another detection method such as mammography or ultrasound to identify the exact location of the abnormality and to determine whether tissue biopsy is needed. If mammography is used to complement the thermal scan, it is important to offset the affects of radiation prior to and following the procedure. Wheat grass juice, green super foods, or brown seaweed such as Modifilan are powerful detoxifiers.

Breast abnormalities and tumors are merely symptoms of imbalances within the bodys internal terrain that need to be identified and corrected. A thoughtful and careful look at diet, exposure to toxins, and lifestyle should be the first line of defense against any disease. This, and regular thermal screenings provide an effective arsenal against breast cancer. An internet search of thermography will locate qualified technicians in your area.

1. Saputo, MD. Len. Overview: Beyond Mammography. From his account of the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: Five Year summary Report CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, Vol 32, 194-225, Copyright 1982 by American Cancer Society.

2. International Academy of Clinical Thermology, www.iact-org.org

3. http://healthybreasts.info/ Summary from Value and Interest of Dynamic Telethermography in Detection of Breast Cancer, ACTA Thermographica, Vol. 1, Num. 2, 89-96, 1976.

Avoiding Common Food Allergens During The Holidays

Its the time of year again when many of us will be entertaining and serving our favorite dishes and goodies. If cooking for folks with food allergies, the stakes can be quite high as far as determining what we are and are not putting on the table. Some people can have dangerous allergic reactions to common foods such as eggs, peanuts, or shellfish. The last thing you want to do at your holiday gala is unknowingly expose a guest to a hidden allergen.

The tips in the following article are very helpful at identifying likely sources, both obvious and hidden, of some of the most common allergens. In addition, some excellent suggestions are given for ways to change recipes by using substitutions that do not include allergens. Use this overview as an aide to preparing healthy, delicious meals that will keep your friends and family coming back for more.

Note: I highly suggest not using or substituting with soy milk or unfermented soy when putting together your favorite recipe. Not only is it high on the list of common allergens for many people, but soy can also mimic hormones in the body. When using pre-packaged foods be sure to read the ingredient list thoroughly, as some form of soy is found in just about everything. Fermented soy used as a condiment is the exception, and actually recommended since many who are allergic to soy can consume fermented soy without concern.


Guide to Food Allergies and Special Eating Needs
By EatingWell, EatingWell.com

Following the guide below can help you prepare a meal for someone with food allergies or other special eating needs. Hidden sources are not as elusive as they were before it became mandatory to list, in plain language, ingredients derived from the "Big Eight" allergens. But you still need to read labels. We have simplified that job by identifying some foods in which these risky ingredients are common.

We also offer ways to modify favorite dishes so all can enjoy them. Note: The information in this chart is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Since allergies and intolerances are quite variable, its best to ask your guests about their specific restrictions before you start planning a dinner menu.

The Big Eight	Foods to Avoid	Common Hidden Sources	Delicious Swaps and Recipes
Milk Also relevant to: * people with lactose intolerance (though many can tolerate yogurt and aged cheeses) * vegans	Cows milk and all food products including butter, buttermilk, cheese, cream cheese, cream, half and half, ice cream, cottage cheese, yogurt, pudding, sour cream (made from it.) Plus, many (but not all) people who are allergic to cows milk are sensitive to proteins in goats milk and sheeps milk too.	Deli meats and hot dogs, veggie burgers, sorbet, canned tuna, chocolate, nondairy creamers, commercial breads and rolls, salad dressings and mayonnaise.	* Substitute an equal amount of rice milk, soymilk or almond milk in recipes. * Blend soy yogurt into smoothies. * Make a cheeseless pesto. * Bake cookies with nonhydrogenated margarine, soy/rice milk, dairy-free chocolate chips. * Chile Pesto recipe
Egg Also relevant to: * vegans	Eggs. Note: Some people are so sensitive to egg proteins that cooking fumes can stoke an allergic reaction.	Ice creams, egg substitutes, pastas, candies, hot dogs, meatballs, breads, rolls and other baked goods, mayonnaise, meringues, marshmallows, nougat and marzipan.	* Sub mashed avocado, hummus or tapenade for mayo on sandwiches. * Scramble tofu with salsa, black beans and a little cheese. * Make your own frozen yogurt instead of eating commercial ice cream. (Berry Frozen Yogurt recipe)
Peanut	Peanut butter, mixed nuts, beer nuts, peanut oil. Note: Experts often caution those with peanut allergies to avoid tree nuts, due to cross-contamination risks. Plus, about one-third of those with an allergy to peanuts (which are legumes like beans) have or will develop an allergy to one or more true nuts, which grow on trees.	Sauces used in ethnic(Asian, African and Mexican) meals (e.g., mole), candy, chocolate, sunflower seeds and nut butters (which often are processed on shared equipment, so read labels to find ones that keep peanuts separate), some natural and artificial flavors and many other foods (i.e., read labels of all processed foods).	* Dip apples in a little honey instead of peanut butter. * Pop some popcorn when craving a crunchy, salty snack. (Cheesy Popcorn recipe) * Think outside the peanut butter-sandwich box: try turkey-cranberry, Cheddar-chutney or goat cheese roasted red pepper.
Tree Nuts	Walnuts, almonds, cashews, pistachios, pecans, Brazil nuts, hazelnuts, chestnuts, macadamia nuts, pine nuts, and more. Note: Experts often caution those with tree nut allergies to avoid peanuts too. (See explanation above.)	Cereals, chocolate, candies, marzipan, nougat, mortadella, pesto and some natural and artificial flavors (i.e., read labels of all processed foods).	* Mix your own nut-free trail mix with a variety of favorite cereals, raisins and banana chips. * Try whole-grain croutons in salads to mimic the crunchy texture of nuts. (Whole-Wheat Skillet Croutons recipe)
Fish Also relevant to: * vegans	Fish including tuna, salmon, catfish, and more. Note: Experts often caution those allergic to fish to be aware of cross-contamination risks of eating shellfish and other seafood.	Caesar salad dressings (many contain anchovy paste), Worcestershire sauce, fish sauce, caponata, imitation crab meat (a.k.a., surimi).	* Blend olives and sun-dried tomatoes into cream cheese as a substitute for smoked salmon on a bagel. * Prepare canned chicken as you would canned tuna. (Sweet & Sour Chicken recipe)
Shellfish Also relevant to: * vegans	Shrimp, crab, lobster, crawfish, and more. Note: Experts often caution those allergic to fish to be aware of cross-contamination risks of eating fish and other seafood.	Fish stocks, flavorings (anything labeled "natural and/or artificial flavorings" may contain fish by-products).	* Try risotto cakes instead of crab cakes. (Rice and Corn Cakes with Spicy Black Beans recipe) * Stir up a festive paella using a variety of meats and veggies instead of shellfish.
Soy	Soymilk, tofu, tempeh, edamame, soybeans, soy protein isolate, soy sauce, soy nuts, TVP or textured vegetable protein (defatted soy flour), tamari, miso.	Tuna, deli meats, hot dogs, vegetable broth, vegetable starch, textured vegetable protein, cereals, infant formulas, sauces, soups, many vegetarian products.	* Make a stir-fry with seitan (wheat gluten) or chicken, plus veggies, ginger and garlic (skip the soy sauce!). * Try paneer (pressed Indian cheese) in your curry. * Enjoy fortified rice milk on cereal. * Dairy-Free Banana Rice Pudding recipe
Wheat Also relevant to: * people with celiac disease	Wheat-based pastas, cereals, breads, bran; wheat germ, wheat berries, semolina (a type of wheat used to make pasta), kamut (used in cereals, crackers and pasta), bulgur, seitan.	Ice creams, bouillon cubes, potato chips, deli meats, French fries, soy sauce, many processed snacks (too many to list), breadcrumbs, couscous, spelt, hot dogs.	* Experiment with different pastas, including those made from corn, brown rice and quinoa. (Quinoa with Latin Flavors recipe) * Switch from flour to corn tortillas. * Use rice noodles for Asian-inspired dishes.

From http://www.eatingwell.com/ with permission. copyright 2007 Eating Well Inc.