White Flour Contains Diabetes-Causing Contaminant Alloxan
June 15, 2005
By: Mike Adams
White flour contains diabetes-causing contaminant alloxan You may want to think twice before eating your next sandwich on white bread. Studies show that alloxan, the chemical that makes white flour look "clean" and "beautiful," destroys the beta cells of the pancreas. That's right; you may be devastating your pancreas and putting yourself at risk for diabetes, all for the sake of eating "beautiful" flour. Is it worth it?
Scientists have known of the alloxan-diabetes connection for years; in fact, researchers who are studying diabetes commonly use the chemical to induce the disorder in lab animals. In the research sense, giving alloxan to an animal is similar to injecting that animal with a deadly virus, as both alloxan and the virus are being used specifically to cause illness. Every day, consumers ingest foods made with alloxan-contaminated flour. Would they just as willingly consume foods tainted with a deadly virus? Unless they had a death wish, they probably would not. Unfortunately, most consumers are unaware of alloxan and its potentially fatal link to diabetes because these facts are not well publicized by the food industry.
How does alloxan cause diabetes? According to Dr. Hari Sharma's Freedom from Disease, the uric acid derivative initiates free radical damage to DNA in the beta cells of the pancreas, causing the cells to malfunction and die. When these beta cells fail to operate normally, they no longer produce enough insulin, or in other words, they cause one variety of adult-onset type 2 diabetes. Alloxan's harmful effects on the pancreas are so severe that the Textbook of Natural Medicine calls the chemical "a potent beta-cell toxin." However, even though the toxic effect of alloxan is common scientific knowledge in the research community, the FDA still allows companies to use it when processing foods we ingest.
The FDA and the white flour industry could counter-argue that, if alloxan were to cause diabetes, a higher proportion of Americans would be diabetic. After all, more consumers consume white flour on a regular basis than are actually diabetic. This point is valid, but it does not disprove the alloxan-diabetes connection. While alloxan is one cause of adult-onset type 2 diabetes, it is of course not the only cause. As the Textbook of Natural Medicine states, "current theory suggests an hereditary beta-cell predisposition to injury coupled with some defect in tissue regeneration capacity" may be a key cause. For alloxan to cause injury to an individual's beta cells, the individual must have the genetic susceptibility to injury. This is similar to the connection between high-cholesterol foods and heart disease. Eating high-cholesterol foods causes heart disease, especially in people who have family histories of heart disease. The link between alloxan and diabetes is as clear and solid as the link between cholesterol and heart disease.
If you've been eating white bread for years and you have a family history of diabetes, all hope is not lost for you. Studies show that you can reverse the effects of alloxan by supplementing your diet with vitamin E. According to Dr. Gary Null's Clinicians Handbook of Natural Healing, vitamin E effectively protected lab rats from the harmful effects of administered alloxan. Now, you're not a lab rat, but you're a mammal and vitamin E is definitely worth adding to your daily regimen of nutritional supplements, especially if you have a history of eating foods made with white flour and are at high risk for diabetes.
Even if you are already diabetic, some simple changes to your diet can help treat your diabetes. First of all, stop eating foods made with white flour. Even though you already have diabetes, vitamin E supplements can still help you, as can many common foods. Garlic, for example, does wonders for diabetes. As Dr. Benjamin Lau states in his book Garlic for Health, "When fed garlic, the rabbits' elevated blood sugar dropped almost as much as it did when they were given the antidiabetic drug tolbutamide. Researchers postulated that garlic may improve the insulin effect."
If you can't handle the taste of natural garlic, you can take it in widely available supplements. Aloe vera is a traditional diabetic remedy in the Arabian Peninsula, and its therapeutic characteristics are now gaining worldwide acceptance in the treatment of diabetes. According to both human and animal research studies, aloe vera lowers blood glucose levels by an unknown mechanism. According to the Clinicians Handbook of Natural Healing, this natural hypoglycemic effect extended over a period of 24 hours. Adding onions to your diet (along with the garlic) can also significantly reduce your blood sugar level. Additionally, as Dr. Michael T. Murray writes in The Healing Power of Herbs, studies show that ginseng controls glucose in both diabetic humans and diabetic laboratory animals.
It all comes down to asking if putting yourself at risk for diabetic coma, blindness, limb amputation and death is worth eating white bread. If you're willing to risk your quality of life and your life itself, then go ahead and eat all the foods made with white flour you want. However, if you want to stop poisoning yourself with alloxan, a known toxic chemical, then make a few simple dietary changes. Eat groceries (see related ebook on groceries) made with whole-grain wheat flour, not processed white flour.
The experts speak on alloxan Animal experiments have shown that animals which have their Beta cells destroyed by alloxan are able to regenerate Beta cells after a few months when taking GS, a herb grown in India. The Beta cell is the cell that produces insulin. Diabetics needing insulin treatment (Type 1) have been able to decrease their insulin after GS therapy.
A Physicians Guide To Natural Health Products That Work By James Howenstine MD, page 112 In the mid-1980s, however (when herbal remedies again were popular), pata de vaca's continued use as a natural insulin substitute was reiterated in two Brazilian studies. Both studies reported in vivo hypoglycemic actions in various animal and human models. Chilean research in 1999 reported the actions of pata de vaca in diabetic rats. Their study determined that pata de vaca was found to "elicit remarkable hypoglycemic effects," and brought about a "decrease of glycemia in alloxan diabetic rats by 39%." In 2002, two in vivo studies on the blood sugar-lowering effects of pata de vaca were conducted by two separate research groups in Brazil. The first study reported "a significant blood glucose-lowering effect in normal and diabetic rats."S The Healing Power of Rainforest Herbs by Leslie Taylor, page 382 When beta cells in the pancreas fail to secrete enough insulin, the body loses its ability to metabolize carbohydrates and to reduce glucose levels in the bloodstream. Researchers believe that some people have weak free radical defenses in these beta cells, and that free radical damage to DNA in beta cells, resulting in dysfunction or cell death, helps cause maturity-onset diabetes. It is known, for example, that many chemicals agents beta cells.
Freedom From Disease by Hari Sharma MD, page 94 ...nearly two decades later, researchers at RNT Medical College in India induced diabetes in rabbits with intravenous injections of alloxan. When fed garlic, the rabbits' elevated blood sugar dropped almost as much as it did when they were given the antidiabetic drug tolbutamide. Researchers postulated that garlic may improve the insulin effect by either increasing the pancreatic secretion of insulin or by releasing bound insulin.
Garlic for Health by Benjamin Lau MD PhD, page 22 Commercial yeasted breads, even the whole-grain varieties, often have other problems. They typically contain flour bleach, which forms alloxan, a compound known to cause diabetes in animals by destroying the beta cells of the pancreas (Clinical Nutrition Newsletter, Dec. 1982). S Healing With Whole Foods by Paul Pitchford, page 452 Insulin dependent diabetes mellitus is generally recognized to be due to an insulin deficiency.1 Although the exact cause is unknown, current theory suggests an hereditary beta-cell predisposition to injury coupled with some defect in tissue regeneration capacity. Causes of injury are most likely hydroxyl and other free radicals, viral infection, and autoimmune reactions. alloxan, the uric acid derivative used to induce experimental diabetes in animals, is a potent beta-cell toxin, causing destruction via hydroxyl radical formation.
Textbook of Natural Medicine Volumes 1-2 by Joseph E Pizzorno and Michael T Murray, page 1197 In this study, mice received intraperitoneally melatonin in doses ranging from 100 to 450 mg/kg. Results showed that such treatment proved plasma glucose increase due to alloxan-induced pancreatic toxicity.
The Clinicians Handbook Of Natural Healing by Gary Null PhD, page 88 Bleached white flour. Not only have the bran and germ been stripped away, but bleached flour also contains a substance from the flour bleach (alloxan) which causes diabetes in animals. Unbleached white flour should also be avoided since it is stripped of essential nutrients.
The Enzyme Cure by Lita Lee with Lisa Turner & Burton Goldberg, page 123 When fed garlic, the rabbits' elevated blood sugar dropped almost as much as it did when they were given the antidiabetic drug tolbutamide.
Researchers postulated that garlic may improve the insulin effect by either increasing the pancreatic secretion of insulin or by releasing bound insulin.
Garlic for Health by Benjamin Lau MD PhD, page 22 Aloe vera also exhibits a hypoglycemic effect in both normal and alloxan-induced diabetic mice. A small human study shows benefit in diabetics. Five patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes ingested half a teaspoonful of aloe 4 times daily for 14 weeks. Fasting blood sugar in every patient fell from a mean of 273 to 151 mg/dl with no change in body weight. The authors concluded that aloe lowers blood glucose levels by an unknown mechanismS.
Textbook of Natural Medicine Volumes 1-2 by Joseph E Pizzorno and Michael T
Murray, page 587 Results of this study showed that rats given vitamin E before being administered either streptozotocin or alloxan provided protection against the diabetogenic effects of each. It was also observed that rats with a depleted antioxidant state due to a vitamin E and selenium-deficient diet showed increased diabetogenic susceptibility to normally nondiabetogenic doses of streptozotocin.
The Clinicians Handbook Of Natural Healing by Gary Null PhD, page 312 Noting that the dried sap of the aloe plant to be a traditional diabetic remedy in the Arabian peninusla, this study examined its ability to reduce blood glucose levels in 5 non-insulin-dependent diabetics and in Swiss albino mice made diabetic with alloxan. Results showed that the intake of 1/2 teaspoon of aloes daily for 4-14 weeks signficantly reduced the fasting serum glucose level fell in all patients. Fasting plasma glucose was significantly reduced in diabetic mice by glibenclamide and aloes after 3 days.
The Clinicians Handbook Of Natural Healing by Gary Null PhD, page 369 This study examined the effects of exudate of Aloe barbadensis leaves (oral administration of 500 mg/kg) and its bitter principle (ip administration of 5 mg/kg) on plasma glucose levels of alloxan-diabetic mice. Results showed that the hypoglycemic effect of a single oral dose of aloes on serum glucose level was insignificant in while that of the bitter principle was highly significant and extended over a period of 24 hours.
The Clinicians Handbook Of Natural Healing by Gary Null PhD, page 369 Ginseng exerts numerous pharmacological effects in humans and laboratory animals, including S improved glucose control in humans and diabetic (alloxan-induced) rats; S.
The Healing Power of Herbs by Michael T Murray ND, page 269
White flour contains diabetes-causing contaminant alloxan
Source: http://www.newstarget.com/008191.html
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. Newstarget.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. It is not intended as a substitute for the diagnosis, treatment or advice of a qualified professional. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material.
Sunday, June 19, 2005
Saturday, April 16, 2005
Chloroform Danger With Antimicrobial Soap
It's now been over six or seven years that I have advised people not to use hand soaps with anti-bacterial ingredients. The main reason for my advice has been that these chemicals, such as triclosan, disturb the balance of naturally occuring staph bacteria on the skin's surface (epidermis). Now here is more convincing evidence.
The problem remains that this substance is not just in soaps, but many other items labelled as "anti-bacterial". It has been proven over the years that the process of hand washing, and the friction it causes, aids in the removal of dirt, grime and bacteria. A best bet is to get our natural hand cleaner with pure essential oils, and switch to one of our recommended 'safe'soaps, herbalYODA Says!
By Kellyn Betts, Environmental Science & Technology
4-15-5
Washing dishes by hand with an antibacterial dishwashing liquid can do more than just ensure that the plates, glasses, and silverware are free from grease and germs, according to Peter Vikesland of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. In research published this week on ES&T's Research ASAP website (es048943+), he and his colleagues show that the triclosan antimicrobial agent used in household dishwashing soaps reacts with chlorinated water to produce significant quantities of chloroform. The research also suggests that the reaction of triclosan with chlorine could be producing highly chlorinated dioxins in the presence of sun
light.
Because of its antibacterial, antifungal, and antiviral properties, triclosan is found in toothpastes, acne creams, deodorants, lotions, and hand soaps. It is also incorporated into a wide range of consumer goods, including kitchen tiles, children's toys, cutting boards, toothbrush handles, hot tubs, and athletic clothing. As triclosan flows down drains, it is making its way into surface waters and sewage treatment plants, the bile of fish, and breast milk, according to the Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics, a consumer group. Since 2000, the American Medical Association has been urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to closely monitor and possibly regulate the home use of antimicrobials such as triclosan.
The formation of chloroform from triclosan is of concern because the U.S. EPA classifies the compound as a probable human carcinogen. Moreover, the presence of trihalomethanes such as chloroform in drinking water has been linked with human bladder cancers and miscarriages.
The reaction of phenols such as triclosan with free chlorine is well known, but Vikesland's research is important because "it ties the use of a household product [to] increased exposure to a disinfection byproduct," says David Sedlak, a professor in the civil and environmental engineering department at the University of California, Berkeley. "This research is important for demonstrating that the chlorination of triclosan can occur under environmentally relevant conditions," says Kristopher McNeill of the University of Minnesota's department of chemistry. "The fact that you can chlorinate triclosan [under] pretty mild conditions is troubling," he adds.
Since writing the paper, Vikesland's team has conducted follow-up research under conditions that more closely mimic those found during home dishwashing. The new experiments used EPA's maximum allowable residual disinfectant concentration of 4 milligrams per liter in tap water and were conducted at 40 C, which fits well with the cleaning recommendations of the Soap and Detergent Association. (The association's website says that dishwater temperatures of less than 33 C, even with sufficient detergent, are likely to leave a greasy film, while the hottest water most people's hands can tolerate is about 43 C.)
Under these conditions, triclosan reacts with free chlorine to generate more than 50 parts per billion (ppb) of chloroform in the dishwater. When combined with the other trihalomethanes in the water, the additional chloroform could easily ratchet up the concentration of total trihalomethanes to 80 ppb, which is EPA's maximum allowable amount, or higher, Vikesland says.
"Since chloroform and other trihalomethanes and disinfection byproducts are already likely to be present in the tap water, and since chloroform, the other THMs, and many other [disinfection byproducts] are highly volatile, there is a very real likelihood that washing dishes with triclosan-containing liquid could cause additional and troubling significant exposure to these volatiles through inhalation and potentially through dermal absorbtion," says Erik D. Olson, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, a nonprofit environmental group. Olson calls the research "significant."
Water treatment plants are working hard to keep the levels of trihalomethanes in tap water below 80 ppb, Vikesland says, noting that the admissible level has recently decreased from 100 ppb. If there is any bromide in the water, the level of trihalomethanes produced during dishwashing is likely to shoot up even higher, he says.
The research makes clear that it is always wise to wear gloves when dishwashing, says Doris Day, M.D., an assistant professor of dermatology at New York University Medical Center. In light of previous studies showing that the levels of trihalomethanes in people's blood increase when they shower, the research raises questions about exposures to chloroform when antimicrobial soaps are used. At this point, however, no one knows what risk they may pose.
Vikesland's research also shows that triclosan's reaction with free chlorine produces a number of chlorinated triclosan intermediates, including 2,4 dichlorophenol. In the presence of sunlight, these chlorinated intermediates could be producing dioxins, say McNeill and his colleague, William Arnold of the University of Minnesota's department of civil engineering. The two have recently demonstrated that sunlight readily converts triclosan in river water to produce dioxins (Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2005, 24, 517ñ525). But the more highly chlorinated dioxins that could be generated photochemically from chlorinated triclosan intermediates could be far more toxic, says McNeill.
It is unlikely that such dioxins would be generated during dishwashing even near a window on a sunny day because the glass would screen out most of the ultraviolet light necessary to produce the dioxin. But the research suggests that dioxins could be forming near swimming pools in some situations. "There's triclosan in hand soaps and moisturizers. [If] someone who has triclosan-containing moisturizer [on jumps] into the pool Ö they're a potential source for chloroform [and chlorinated dioxin] formation," Vikesland says. The same is true for a child using an antimicrobial soap before getting into the pool, McNeill and Arnold agree. "You could produce a dioxin on the surface of your skin [that] gets absorbed through the skin," Sedlak adds.
McNeill and Arnold say that the research also calls for more detailed studies of whether chlorinated triclosans are being released from wastewater treatment plants. Because triclosan is widely found in the environment, chlorinated triclosan could be a source of toxic dioxins in the environment, says Arnold. Research has already shown that the presence of triclosan can affect algae populations (Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 162Añ164A).
Copyright © 2005 American Chemical Society
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2005/apr/science/kb_chlorine.html
The problem remains that this substance is not just in soaps, but many other items labelled as "anti-bacterial". It has been proven over the years that the process of hand washing, and the friction it causes, aids in the removal of dirt, grime and bacteria. A best bet is to get our natural hand cleaner with pure essential oils, and switch to one of our recommended 'safe'soaps, herbalYODA Says!
By Kellyn Betts, Environmental Science & Technology
4-15-5
Washing dishes by hand with an antibacterial dishwashing liquid can do more than just ensure that the plates, glasses, and silverware are free from grease and germs, according to Peter Vikesland of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. In research published this week on ES&T's Research ASAP website (es048943+), he and his colleagues show that the triclosan antimicrobial agent used in household dishwashing soaps reacts with chlorinated water to produce significant quantities of chloroform. The research also suggests that the reaction of triclosan with chlorine could be producing highly chlorinated dioxins in the presence of sun
light.
Because of its antibacterial, antifungal, and antiviral properties, triclosan is found in toothpastes, acne creams, deodorants, lotions, and hand soaps. It is also incorporated into a wide range of consumer goods, including kitchen tiles, children's toys, cutting boards, toothbrush handles, hot tubs, and athletic clothing. As triclosan flows down drains, it is making its way into surface waters and sewage treatment plants, the bile of fish, and breast milk, according to the Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics, a consumer group. Since 2000, the American Medical Association has been urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to closely monitor and possibly regulate the home use of antimicrobials such as triclosan.
The formation of chloroform from triclosan is of concern because the U.S. EPA classifies the compound as a probable human carcinogen. Moreover, the presence of trihalomethanes such as chloroform in drinking water has been linked with human bladder cancers and miscarriages.
The reaction of phenols such as triclosan with free chlorine is well known, but Vikesland's research is important because "it ties the use of a household product [to] increased exposure to a disinfection byproduct," says David Sedlak, a professor in the civil and environmental engineering department at the University of California, Berkeley. "This research is important for demonstrating that the chlorination of triclosan can occur under environmentally relevant conditions," says Kristopher McNeill of the University of Minnesota's department of chemistry. "The fact that you can chlorinate triclosan [under] pretty mild conditions is troubling," he adds.
Since writing the paper, Vikesland's team has conducted follow-up research under conditions that more closely mimic those found during home dishwashing. The new experiments used EPA's maximum allowable residual disinfectant concentration of 4 milligrams per liter in tap water and were conducted at 40 C, which fits well with the cleaning recommendations of the Soap and Detergent Association. (The association's website says that dishwater temperatures of less than 33 C, even with sufficient detergent, are likely to leave a greasy film, while the hottest water most people's hands can tolerate is about 43 C.)
Under these conditions, triclosan reacts with free chlorine to generate more than 50 parts per billion (ppb) of chloroform in the dishwater. When combined with the other trihalomethanes in the water, the additional chloroform could easily ratchet up the concentration of total trihalomethanes to 80 ppb, which is EPA's maximum allowable amount, or higher, Vikesland says.
"Since chloroform and other trihalomethanes and disinfection byproducts are already likely to be present in the tap water, and since chloroform, the other THMs, and many other [disinfection byproducts] are highly volatile, there is a very real likelihood that washing dishes with triclosan-containing liquid could cause additional and troubling significant exposure to these volatiles through inhalation and potentially through dermal absorbtion," says Erik D. Olson, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, a nonprofit environmental group. Olson calls the research "significant."
Water treatment plants are working hard to keep the levels of trihalomethanes in tap water below 80 ppb, Vikesland says, noting that the admissible level has recently decreased from 100 ppb. If there is any bromide in the water, the level of trihalomethanes produced during dishwashing is likely to shoot up even higher, he says.
The research makes clear that it is always wise to wear gloves when dishwashing, says Doris Day, M.D., an assistant professor of dermatology at New York University Medical Center. In light of previous studies showing that the levels of trihalomethanes in people's blood increase when they shower, the research raises questions about exposures to chloroform when antimicrobial soaps are used. At this point, however, no one knows what risk they may pose.
Vikesland's research also shows that triclosan's reaction with free chlorine produces a number of chlorinated triclosan intermediates, including 2,4 dichlorophenol. In the presence of sunlight, these chlorinated intermediates could be producing dioxins, say McNeill and his colleague, William Arnold of the University of Minnesota's department of civil engineering. The two have recently demonstrated that sunlight readily converts triclosan in river water to produce dioxins (Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2005, 24, 517ñ525). But the more highly chlorinated dioxins that could be generated photochemically from chlorinated triclosan intermediates could be far more toxic, says McNeill.
It is unlikely that such dioxins would be generated during dishwashing even near a window on a sunny day because the glass would screen out most of the ultraviolet light necessary to produce the dioxin. But the research suggests that dioxins could be forming near swimming pools in some situations. "There's triclosan in hand soaps and moisturizers. [If] someone who has triclosan-containing moisturizer [on jumps] into the pool Ö they're a potential source for chloroform [and chlorinated dioxin] formation," Vikesland says. The same is true for a child using an antimicrobial soap before getting into the pool, McNeill and Arnold agree. "You could produce a dioxin on the surface of your skin [that] gets absorbed through the skin," Sedlak adds.
McNeill and Arnold say that the research also calls for more detailed studies of whether chlorinated triclosans are being released from wastewater treatment plants. Because triclosan is widely found in the environment, chlorinated triclosan could be a source of toxic dioxins in the environment, says Arnold. Research has already shown that the presence of triclosan can affect algae populations (Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 162Añ164A).
Copyright © 2005 American Chemical Society
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2005/apr/science/kb_chlorine.html
Another New Wonder Drug
Phosphagenics announces study results from their new drug APA-01. My question is why do we need another drug that may show something in the lab, but little, if anything, is known about how it will respond in humans. Another question is why do we need a drug when we have chelation and vitamin C. Of course lifestyle changes are at the foundation of any health improvement program, but this may be the hardest of all to accomplish.
LONDON 15 April (Dow Jones)--Phosphagenics Limited said Friday that its new patented drug, APA-01, can greatly slow or prevent the development of atherosclerosis, the successful completion of an animal trial shows.
Atherosclerosis is the leading cause of heart disease in the western world, the company said.
See full article
LONDON 15 April (Dow Jones)--Phosphagenics Limited said Friday that its new patented drug, APA-01, can greatly slow or prevent the development of atherosclerosis, the successful completion of an animal trial shows.
Atherosclerosis is the leading cause of heart disease in the western world, the company said.
See full article
Friday, April 15, 2005
More Medical Mania
This researcher might just have overlooked the reduction in the effect of the immune function of the stomach by encouraging "gastro-protective" medicines, and the harm to kidneys, lever, etc. from Motrin (ibuprofen) and Aleve (naproxyn).
Oh well, I just guess there will be a new dis-ease from this combo and of course they'll have to come up with another new combo to fight the side effects and damage.
Strange they do not look into herbs such as yucca that have been known to be anti-inflammorty since the beginning of time.
Two-Drug Combo May Best Replace Bextra, Vioxx
In the post-Bextra, post-Vioxx age, how can arthritis patients get effective pain relief while protecting their hearts and stomachs from dangerous side effects?
The answer may have arrived in a major new study, which used computer models to determine that a combination of two drugs -- a non-cox-2 pain reliever like Aleve, Advil or Motrin and a gastro-protective medicine like Prilosec or Nexium -- may be the best solution for a majority of arthritis patients.
In fact, it may have always been the best solution, some experts say.
"For years I've been advocating a 'back to the future' combination of these two old and safe drugs," said Dr. Mark Fendrick, a long-time expert on these issues and a professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Although not involved in the current study, Fendrick agreed that, for the vast majority of patients, a traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) plus one of the newer generation of acid-reducers, called proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), is the safest, most effective way of easing joint pain while sparing the heart and stomach.
The furor over the cox-2 subclass of NSAID drugs began last September, when Vioxx was pulled from the market after studies linked its long-term use to increased cardiovascular risk. Then, last week, another cox-2, Bextra, was pulled because of similar fears, as well as evidence of increased risks for a rare but potentially fatal skin reaction.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has allowed a third cox-2, Celebrex, to remain on the market, albeit with tough labels warning of possible cardiovascular risk. And in its order April 7, the agency also mandated black-box warnings on all similar prescription drugs and labeling changes for similar over-the-counter drugs.
Bextra's demise brought up the same question, however: What now for cox-2 users?
Reporting in the April 15 issue of Arthritis Care & Research, a team led by Dr. Brennan Spiegel, of the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, may have provided an answer.
The study used complex computer modeling to estimate the one-year costs, both in terms of patient health outcomes and financial expenditure, of three standard treatments for chronic arthritis pain in a hypothetical group of 60-year-old patients. Those treatments included a cox-2 inhibitor drug alone; a traditional NSAID alone; or an NSAID plus a PPI drug, used to prevent the gastrointestinal damage common to all NSAIDs.
Reflecting current medical practice, all of the "patients" in the hypothetical model were also taking a heart-healthy daily aspirin.
"What we found is that, under every circumstance that we could imagine, there was no health-economic benefit to using the cox-2 inhibitors, at all," Spiegel said.
While cox-2s did reduce arthritic pain, the costs linked to their use rose considerably when researchers factored in an increased incidence of heart attacks and strokes. And while Vioxx, Bextra and Celebrex are somewhat safer on the stomach than traditional NSAIDs, they still convey some risk in that area, too.
"The most frequent thing that happens is dyspepsia -- nuisance symptoms like belly aches," Spiegel said. "Belly aches themselves cost money, and that's another reason we see quite a big difference in cost. That really hadn't been looked at before."
Use of pain-relieving traditional NSAIDs alone still left users with these added gastro risks, however, so the best therapy seems to be combining an over-the-counter NSAID like Aleve, Motrin or Advil (the latter two contain ibuprofen) with a stomach-quelling PPI like Nexium, Prevacid or Prilosec.
The study was funded by Tap Pharmaceuticals, the makers of Prevacid, but Spiegel said his team worked hard to fight any potential bias that would favor PPIs.
"We actually went through a lot of steps to try and make it as hard as possible for the PPI strategy to look good," he said. "But, like the phoenix rising from the ashes, it still came out looking good."
Spiegel advocates using any of the PPIs, in fact: "They're all the same, as far as I'm concerned. I say go with the cheapest."
He stressed that, unlike cox-2s, there's a wealth of long-term safety data on these drugs, which work by shutting down acid production in the stomach. "In general they are extremely safe," he said.
Fendrick said the study more or less validates what he's been saying for years. He believes that, for most patients, the combination of naproxen (Aleve) with a PPI may be best. That's because -- as in the Michigan model -- the majority of older patients requiring chronic pain relief are also taking daily aspirin to fight cardiovascular disease.
"If you take ibuprofen and aspirin at the same time, however, ibuprofen blocks aspirin's protective effect on the heart," he pointed out. That's why non-ibuprofen Aleve may be safer for aspirin users, as opposed to other common NSAID pain relievers such as Advil or Motrin, which contain ibuprofen.
Fendrick believes that only a small fraction of pain sufferers -- those with a very high risk for gastrointestinal bleeding -- should turn to Celebrex. "That's probably only about 10 percent of the market," he said.
He also stressed that "there's no one-size-fits-all" solution for patients, and that patients should make their decision in consultation with their doctor, based on their specific risk-benefit profile.
According to Spiegel, since traditional NSAIDs and cox-2 drugs "are equal in effectiveness" in terms of easing pain for the vast majority of arthritis sufferers, it only makes sense to go with the safest, cheapest option.
Of course, all of this begs the question of whether it was necessary for the FDA to approve cox-2s in the first place.
While he believes there may be some small role left for cox-2s, Spiegel said the FDA "was a little shortsighted in the framework that they were using" as they weighed the risks and benefits of these medications.
"That's because they were only really looking at cox-2s versus the traditional NSAID," he said. "They really hadn't thought about this combination, which many people use practically every day now -- a PPI plus an NSAID."
By E.J. Mundell
HealthDay Reporter
Oh well, I just guess there will be a new dis-ease from this combo and of course they'll have to come up with another new combo to fight the side effects and damage.
Strange they do not look into herbs such as yucca that have been known to be anti-inflammorty since the beginning of time.
Two-Drug Combo May Best Replace Bextra, Vioxx
In the post-Bextra, post-Vioxx age, how can arthritis patients get effective pain relief while protecting their hearts and stomachs from dangerous side effects?
The answer may have arrived in a major new study, which used computer models to determine that a combination of two drugs -- a non-cox-2 pain reliever like Aleve, Advil or Motrin and a gastro-protective medicine like Prilosec or Nexium -- may be the best solution for a majority of arthritis patients.
In fact, it may have always been the best solution, some experts say.
"For years I've been advocating a 'back to the future' combination of these two old and safe drugs," said Dr. Mark Fendrick, a long-time expert on these issues and a professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Although not involved in the current study, Fendrick agreed that, for the vast majority of patients, a traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) plus one of the newer generation of acid-reducers, called proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), is the safest, most effective way of easing joint pain while sparing the heart and stomach.
The furor over the cox-2 subclass of NSAID drugs began last September, when Vioxx was pulled from the market after studies linked its long-term use to increased cardiovascular risk. Then, last week, another cox-2, Bextra, was pulled because of similar fears, as well as evidence of increased risks for a rare but potentially fatal skin reaction.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has allowed a third cox-2, Celebrex, to remain on the market, albeit with tough labels warning of possible cardiovascular risk. And in its order April 7, the agency also mandated black-box warnings on all similar prescription drugs and labeling changes for similar over-the-counter drugs.
Bextra's demise brought up the same question, however: What now for cox-2 users?
Reporting in the April 15 issue of Arthritis Care & Research, a team led by Dr. Brennan Spiegel, of the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, may have provided an answer.
The study used complex computer modeling to estimate the one-year costs, both in terms of patient health outcomes and financial expenditure, of three standard treatments for chronic arthritis pain in a hypothetical group of 60-year-old patients. Those treatments included a cox-2 inhibitor drug alone; a traditional NSAID alone; or an NSAID plus a PPI drug, used to prevent the gastrointestinal damage common to all NSAIDs.
Reflecting current medical practice, all of the "patients" in the hypothetical model were also taking a heart-healthy daily aspirin.
"What we found is that, under every circumstance that we could imagine, there was no health-economic benefit to using the cox-2 inhibitors, at all," Spiegel said.
While cox-2s did reduce arthritic pain, the costs linked to their use rose considerably when researchers factored in an increased incidence of heart attacks and strokes. And while Vioxx, Bextra and Celebrex are somewhat safer on the stomach than traditional NSAIDs, they still convey some risk in that area, too.
"The most frequent thing that happens is dyspepsia -- nuisance symptoms like belly aches," Spiegel said. "Belly aches themselves cost money, and that's another reason we see quite a big difference in cost. That really hadn't been looked at before."
Use of pain-relieving traditional NSAIDs alone still left users with these added gastro risks, however, so the best therapy seems to be combining an over-the-counter NSAID like Aleve, Motrin or Advil (the latter two contain ibuprofen) with a stomach-quelling PPI like Nexium, Prevacid or Prilosec.
The study was funded by Tap Pharmaceuticals, the makers of Prevacid, but Spiegel said his team worked hard to fight any potential bias that would favor PPIs.
"We actually went through a lot of steps to try and make it as hard as possible for the PPI strategy to look good," he said. "But, like the phoenix rising from the ashes, it still came out looking good."
Spiegel advocates using any of the PPIs, in fact: "They're all the same, as far as I'm concerned. I say go with the cheapest."
He stressed that, unlike cox-2s, there's a wealth of long-term safety data on these drugs, which work by shutting down acid production in the stomach. "In general they are extremely safe," he said.
Fendrick said the study more or less validates what he's been saying for years. He believes that, for most patients, the combination of naproxen (Aleve) with a PPI may be best. That's because -- as in the Michigan model -- the majority of older patients requiring chronic pain relief are also taking daily aspirin to fight cardiovascular disease.
"If you take ibuprofen and aspirin at the same time, however, ibuprofen blocks aspirin's protective effect on the heart," he pointed out. That's why non-ibuprofen Aleve may be safer for aspirin users, as opposed to other common NSAID pain relievers such as Advil or Motrin, which contain ibuprofen.
Fendrick believes that only a small fraction of pain sufferers -- those with a very high risk for gastrointestinal bleeding -- should turn to Celebrex. "That's probably only about 10 percent of the market," he said.
He also stressed that "there's no one-size-fits-all" solution for patients, and that patients should make their decision in consultation with their doctor, based on their specific risk-benefit profile.
According to Spiegel, since traditional NSAIDs and cox-2 drugs "are equal in effectiveness" in terms of easing pain for the vast majority of arthritis sufferers, it only makes sense to go with the safest, cheapest option.
Of course, all of this begs the question of whether it was necessary for the FDA to approve cox-2s in the first place.
While he believes there may be some small role left for cox-2s, Spiegel said the FDA "was a little shortsighted in the framework that they were using" as they weighed the risks and benefits of these medications.
"That's because they were only really looking at cox-2s versus the traditional NSAID," he said. "They really hadn't thought about this combination, which many people use practically every day now -- a PPI plus an NSAID."
By E.J. Mundell
HealthDay Reporter
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
"WHEN FOOD MAKES MEDICINE KILL, NOT CURE"
Drugs can also interact with foods.
Doctors will be told to check patients' diets before prescribing powerful drugs. Medical drugs "are already toxic by their very nature" and could become more toxic when interacting with other prescribed drugs. Some patients are on as many as 10 drugs.
Warfarin can react with green vegetables. Its efficacy is reduced by ice cream & avocados etc. People prescribed statins should not drink grapefruit juice. Antibiotics' efficacy is reduced by milk & dairy products. People on Lithium should not vary their salt intake.
As many as 200 medical drugs may be affected by food.
Doctors will be told to check patients' diets before prescribing powerful drugs. Medical drugs "are already toxic by their very nature" and could become more toxic when interacting with other prescribed drugs. Some patients are on as many as 10 drugs.
Warfarin can react with green vegetables. Its efficacy is reduced by ice cream & avocados etc. People prescribed statins should not drink grapefruit juice. Antibiotics' efficacy is reduced by milk & dairy products. People on Lithium should not vary their salt intake.
As many as 200 medical drugs may be affected by food.
Wholesale prices for name-brand drugs jump
By ELIZABETH WOLFE, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Wholesale prices for name-brand drugs jumped an average 7.1 percent in 2004 — the largest hike in five years and more than twice the rate of inflation, according to a study released Tuesday by AARP.
AARP's annual Rx Watchdog Report tracked prices drug manufacturers charged wholesalers last year for about 200 prescription drugs popular with older Americans. The price hikes were the largest annual jump since AARP, the nation's largest lobbying group for the elderly, began sponsoring the study five years ago.
"We are disappointed that brand name manufacturers have failed to keep their price increases in line with inflation despite consumer appeals for them to hold the line," AARP chief Bill Novelli said in a statement. "Much more needs to be done to slow down spiraling drug pricing."
The 7.1 percent hike, slightly higher than 2003's 7.0 percent jump, continues a trend of increasing drug prices. Since the end of 1999, prices of more than 150 popular name-brand drugs have risen an average 35.1 percent, nearly three times the 13.5 percent inflation rate over that period, the report said. In 2004, inflation was 2.7 percent in 2004.
Among the 25 best-selling brand-name drugs on the market in 2003 and 2004, the sleep medication Ambien (10 mg. tablets) saw the largest price jump at 11.9 percent. Flomax, used to treat enlarged prostates, 0.4 mg. rose the least — 1.5 percent.
By contrast, the price for 75 popular generic drugs hardly budged in 2004, rising 0.5 percent. In 2003, manufacturers' prices for generic drugs went up an average 13.3 percent.
The report was prepared by the AARP Public Policy Institute and the PRIME Institute of the University of Minnesota.
WASHINGTON - Wholesale prices for name-brand drugs jumped an average 7.1 percent in 2004 — the largest hike in five years and more than twice the rate of inflation, according to a study released Tuesday by AARP.
AARP's annual Rx Watchdog Report tracked prices drug manufacturers charged wholesalers last year for about 200 prescription drugs popular with older Americans. The price hikes were the largest annual jump since AARP, the nation's largest lobbying group for the elderly, began sponsoring the study five years ago.
"We are disappointed that brand name manufacturers have failed to keep their price increases in line with inflation despite consumer appeals for them to hold the line," AARP chief Bill Novelli said in a statement. "Much more needs to be done to slow down spiraling drug pricing."
The 7.1 percent hike, slightly higher than 2003's 7.0 percent jump, continues a trend of increasing drug prices. Since the end of 1999, prices of more than 150 popular name-brand drugs have risen an average 35.1 percent, nearly three times the 13.5 percent inflation rate over that period, the report said. In 2004, inflation was 2.7 percent in 2004.
Among the 25 best-selling brand-name drugs on the market in 2003 and 2004, the sleep medication Ambien (10 mg. tablets) saw the largest price jump at 11.9 percent. Flomax, used to treat enlarged prostates, 0.4 mg. rose the least — 1.5 percent.
By contrast, the price for 75 popular generic drugs hardly budged in 2004, rising 0.5 percent. In 2003, manufacturers' prices for generic drugs went up an average 13.3 percent.
The report was prepared by the AARP Public Policy Institute and the PRIME Institute of the University of Minnesota.
Monday, April 11, 2005
Demand for Natural Healing Therapies
Every year millions of Americans seek providers who offer health care therapies that are neither widely taught in medical schools nor generally available in U.S. hospitals. Researchers from Harvard Medical School studied the health care practices of U.S. adults and estimated that 22 million Americans sought providers of unconventional care in 1990. The study, reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, estimates that in 1990 Americans made more visits to providers who offered unconventional therapies than to all primary care physicians—425 million compared to 388 million visits.
More on What is Out of Control
Seems as if several health research organizations have been monitoring increases in health care costs.
During the period 2000-2003 the following statistics have been reported -
This is part of the reason I encourage people to look at their role in staying healthy, to keep their personal health care costs affordable.
During the period 2000-2003 the following statistics have been reported -
- 6.9 % increase in Medicaid spending per person
- 9.0% increae in spending per privately insured person
- 12.6% increase in health insurance premiums paid in employer-sponsored plans
This is part of the reason I encourage people to look at their role in staying healthy, to keep their personal health care costs affordable.
Little Interest in Ethics Today
According to a study reported by the American Association of Critical Care Nurses (AACN) 84 percent of all doctors have seen their colleagues take shortcuts that could be dangerous to patients.
Worse, less than 10 percent of this group reported what they saw.
My father was a physician and surgeon who fortunately completed medical school when medicine was still an art. He belonged to a group of doctors that agreeably monitored each other so that any harm to a patient or others might be avoided.
This degree of professionalism must be very hard to find today it seems.
Worse, less than 10 percent of this group reported what they saw.
My father was a physician and surgeon who fortunately completed medical school when medicine was still an art. He belonged to a group of doctors that agreeably monitored each other so that any harm to a patient or others might be avoided.
This degree of professionalism must be very hard to find today it seems.
More Drug Dangers
BEXTRA: DESIGNED BY PFIZER TO FAIL.
An Open Letter to Pfizer Inc. on the Underlying Reasons That Bextra Failed, on Why Pfizer Made Bextra Unnecessarily Risky -- and on How Pfizer Might Still Save Celebrex.
Jay S. Cohen, M.D., is a nationally recognized expert on medication side effects and an Associate Professor (voluntary) of Family and Preventive Medicine at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Cohen's scientific papers on drug safety have received worldwide attention, and his book Over Dose: The Case Against The Drug Companies (2001) was highly recommended by reviewers including the Journal of the American Medical Association. Dr. Cohen has long emphasized the need for better, more complete dosing and side-effect information on prescription drugs, and he has been a featured speaker at major medical conferences and at the U.S Food and Drug Association.
An Open Letter to Pfizer Inc. on the Underlying Reasons That Bextra Failed, on Why Pfizer Made Bextra Unnecessarily Risky -- and on How Pfizer Might Still Save Celebrex.
Jay S. Cohen, M.D., is a nationally recognized expert on medication side effects and an Associate Professor (voluntary) of Family and Preventive Medicine at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Cohen's scientific papers on drug safety have received worldwide attention, and his book Over Dose: The Case Against The Drug Companies (2001) was highly recommended by reviewers including the Journal of the American Medical Association. Dr. Cohen has long emphasized the need for better, more complete dosing and side-effect information on prescription drugs, and he has been a featured speaker at major medical conferences and at the U.S Food and Drug Association.
Saturday, April 02, 2005
is it parity or is it camouflage?
Washington state now has parity for mental health coverage with medical/surgical care.
Yet there is no separation between general psychiatrists and specialty psychiatrists such as those for children. The fee is the same in spite of additional training (not the mention all the additional time it takes to work with kids). But that's another hurdle.
Given the ineffectivenes of current drug-based psychiatric treatments - the number of mentally disabled individuals receiving social security beneifts for that disabilty has doubled over the past 15 years - the major effect of mental health parity will be to accelerate the fiscal bankruptcy of medicare, medicaid and the medical care system in general.
Yet there is no separation between general psychiatrists and specialty psychiatrists such as those for children. The fee is the same in spite of additional training (not the mention all the additional time it takes to work with kids). But that's another hurdle.
Given the ineffectivenes of current drug-based psychiatric treatments - the number of mentally disabled individuals receiving social security beneifts for that disabilty has doubled over the past 15 years - the major effect of mental health parity will be to accelerate the fiscal bankruptcy of medicare, medicaid and the medical care system in general.
Sunday, March 27, 2005
Kava Kaper
SPIN by any name is still spin...just another trumped up objection to nautral remedies by Big Pharma used to clamp down on your access to a well respected healing herb. YODA.
A team of University of Hawaii scientists may have solved the mystery of why some Europeans who used products containing kava extract suffered severe liver damage, prompting a number of nations to ban sales of the herbal supplement. The traditional kava drink consumed by Pacific Islanders for the last 2,000 years has not been associated with such problems. It has been a popular herbal remedy for anxiety.
The difference, according to UH-Manoa molecular biosciences professor C.S. Tang, is that only the root of the kava plant is used in the traditional beverage, whereas manufacturers of the capsules sold in Europe purchased (and undoubtedly used) stem peelings and leaves regarded as waste products by traditional kava drinkers.
Supplements containing kava are promoted as remedies for sleeplessness and menopausal symptoms. In Europe, where most of the health problems occurred, kava extract is used in capsule form, and the cases of liver damage apparently involved people who took the capsules, the scientists reported.
Bans in Singapore, Germany, Canada, the United Kingdom and elsewhere wiped out pharmaceutical sales of kava and virtually destroyed it as an export crop in Hawaii. While kava supplements are not banned in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration issued an advisory in March 2002 warning of the potential risk of severe liver injury from dietary supplements containing kava. The health alarms left farmers in Hamakua and elsewhere with crops that were hardly worth harvesting.
Kava stem bark peelings may be to blame for the reported cases of liver failure, hepatitis and cirrhosis. Tang and his team learned from a trader in Fijian kava that European pharmaceutical companies eagerly bought up the peelings when demand for kava extract soared in Europe in 2000 and 2001.
In a research paper accepted for publication in the scientific journal Phytochemistry, researchers Klaus Dragull, W.Y. Yoshida and Tang report they found an alkaloid called pipermethystine in tests of stem peelings and kava leaves. Pipermethystine also was present in lower concentrations in the bark of the stump but was not found in the root itself. Preliminary tests by researcher Pratibha Nerurkar show pipermethystine has a "strong negative effect" on liver cell cultures. If peelings containing the alkaloid were used to make kava capsules, as the scientists suspect, that could explain the liver damage in some of the people who took the capsules.
The UH researchers also learned that the analysis method used by some companies to test plant products could not detect the difference between pipermethystine and kavalactones, "and therefore they mistakenly thought there's no problem, that it's similar stuff," Tang said.
Thursday, March 17, 2005
Misleading Marketing and Chemical Sugar Substitutes
Note: The OCA urges consumers to send a similar letter to the FTC, regarding Splenda's advertising practices. Please feel free to use our letter as a template, print up and mail to the address below:
February 24, 2005
Division of Advertising Practices
Bureau of Consumer Protection
Federal Trade Commission
600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20580
To Whom It May Concern:
On behalf of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), I would like to submit a formal complaint against the deception-filled marketing campaign being conducted by Johnson & Johnson's McNeil Nutritionals for its artificial sweetener Splenda. The marketing campaign, which continually uses the word "sugar," is designed to confuse consumers into believing that Splenda is a low-calorie natural sweetener. The OCA advocates for clear, truthful labeling and advertising, and J&J's marketing campaign thumbs its nose at those ideals.
Splenda is made through a complex chemical process that involves toxic chemicals, including phosgene gas. That's hardly a process anyone would link to a natural product. But, through its marketing campaign, J&J is trying to do just that.
J&J understands that more and more consumers are trying to buy natural, organic products. Consumers are trying to eat healthy, natural foods and are closely watching what they put in their bodies. Unfortunately, J&J is attempting to cash in on this trend by deceiving consumers that its product, Splenda, is natural. But Splenda doesn't grow in a field like sugar cane or sugar beets, it's made in a huge chemical plant. By using deliberately confusing marketing techniques, J&J is hurting family farmers across the country who can't compete with chemicals masquerading as natural products.
The most troubling aspect of J&J's misleading marketing campaign is that it has been successful. The Center for Science in the Public Interest learned in a poll that nearly half of Americans have been taken in by J&J's deceptions and believe that Splenda is a natural ingredient. They don't seem to realize that the final product does not contain any sugar whatsoever.
OCA urges consumers to read labels carefully. Whether it's genetically-engineered food or chemically processed additives, consumers shouldn't be led to believe that the products they are buying are natural and come from the earth. Sadly, J&J's campaign hinders consumers' ability to ferret out the truth about Splenda.
Sincerely,
Ronnie Cummins - National Director
Monday, March 14, 2005
Sick of Being Sick? Try This for Size
Sometimes I just wonder how it is that most folks fail to understand the importance of maintianing an in tact immune system and how much hype goes into helping them destroy it with food and food additives.
YODA
Are Nanobacteria Making Us Ill?
By Amit Asaravala
Wired News
3-14-5
Olavi Kajander didn't mean to discover the mysterious particles that have been called the most primitive organisms on Earth and that could be responsible for a series of painful and sometimes fatal illnesses.
He was simply trying to find out why certain cultures of mammalian cells in his lab would die no matter how carefully he prepared them.
So the Finnish biochemist and his colleagues slipped some of their old cultures under an electron microscope one day in 1988 and took a closer look. That's when they saw the particles. Like bacteria but an astonishing 100 times smaller, they seemed to be thriving inside the dying cells.
Believing them to be a possible new form of life, Kajander named the particles "nanobacteria," published a paper outlining his findings and spurred one of the biggest controversies in modern microbiology.
At the heart of the debate is the question of whether nanobacteria could actually be a new form of life. To this day, critics argue that a particle just 20 to 200 nanometers in diameter can't possibly harbor the components necessary to sustain life. The particles are also incredibly resistant to heat and other methods that would normally kill bacteria, which makes some scientists wonder if they might be an unusual form of crystal rather than organisms.
In 1998, Kajander tried to prove the skeptics wrong by turning up what he believed to be an example of nanobacteria's ribosomal RNA, something that only organisms have. But the claim was squashed two years later by a National Institutes of Health study, which found that the RNA was actually a remnant from a bacteria that often contaminates lab equipment.
The debate would have ended there, except for a steadily increasing number of studies linking nanobacteria to serious health problems, including kidney stones, aneurysms and ovarian cancer. The studies show that nanobacteria can infect humans, a find that has helped push nanobacteria back into the limelight. Now the pressure is on to resolve the controversy and expose how nanobacteria works -- no matter what it is.
"It's all pretty exciting stuff," said David McKay, chief scientist for astrobiology at NASA's Johnson Space Center. "Whether these are bacteria or not -- it doesn't matter at this point. What matters is if we can figure out the association between nanobacteria and kidney stones and develop some kind of countermeasure."
The link between nanobacteria and human diseases was first noticed by Kajander and microbiologist Neva &laqno;iftÁioglu in 1998. The researchers had observed, through an electron microscope, nanobacteria particles building shells of calcium phosphate around themselves. They began to investigate whether such particles played a role in causing kidney stones, which are also made of calcium compounds. Sure enough, at the center of several stones was a nanobacteria particle.
Another breakthrough came in 2003 when a team from the University of Vienna Medical Center discovered nanobacteria in the calcified debris found in tissue samples from ovarian cancer patients. Meanwhile, several other studies revealed nanobacteria in samples of calcified arteries.
Sensing a growing need for tools to detect and study nanobacteria, Kajander and &laqno;iftÁioglu formed a company called NanoBac in 1998. The decision was greatly criticized as a conflict of interest and is still brought up whenever either of the two publishes a new paper.
Fortunately for the researchers, a 2004 study by the esteemed Mayo Clinic supported many of their key findings and helped them regain some of their support. The Mayo study found that nanobacteria does indeed self-replicate, as Kajander had noticed, and endorsed the idea that the particles are life forms.
Kajander and &laqno;iftÁioglu were further vindicated this February when patients with chronic pelvic pain -- thought to be linked to urinary stones and prostate calcification -- reported "significant improvement" after using an experimental treatment manufactured by NanoBac. The study was conducted by a team at Cleveland Clinic Florida.
There's a lot riding on studies like these. Roughly 177,500 patients were discharged from U.S. hospitals with kidney stones and related problems in 2001, according to the NIH. More than 25,000 women in the United States are diagnosed with ovarian cancer each year. In the same period, 14,000 Americans die from complications caused by calcified arteries.
"It brings up a lot of questions," said John Lieske, who led the 2004 Mayo Clinic study. "How many kidney stones are caused by this? Are there other calcification-related diseases that are caused by nanobacteria? Is it infectious?"
Surprisingly, few groups are actually working on answering these questions. One would be hard-pressed to find more than a half-dozen research teams around the globe studying nanobacteria full time.
Lieske suggests it's because the field is still relatively young. But it's clear that there's an additional culprit: the often heated controversy over whether nanobacteria particles are, in fact, alive.
"There's a reluctance to get into controversial areas. It's hard to get proposals funded," said McKay. "Most people are waiting until there's a little more meat on the bones."
Even John Cisar, who led the 2000 NIH study that contradicted Kajander's initial findings, agrees that the issue has become muddled. Though he maintains his stance that nanobacteria are not alive, he said in a phone interview that he is not against further research.
"I'm not saying there's nothing there," said Cisar. "It's just that we were looking at it from a microbiologist's perspective. And when we didn't find any signs of life, we moved on."
Kajander stands by his original assertion that nanobacteria are life forms. However, he blames himself for getting researchers hung up on the life question by using the name "nanobacteria."
"Calcifying self-propagating nanoparticles would have been much better," he wrote in an e-mail to Wired News.
But he added that his regrets about the name don't change the fact that nanobacteria have "miraculous" properties. Those include a growth cycle that closely matches typical biological cycles, the ability to form a shell and the "presence of both mammalian and bacterial components."
It's these properties -- and the potential to save lives -- that keep researchers focused on nanobacteria.
In February, NASA's McKay and Nanobac's &laqno;iftÁioglu announced that they had observed nanobacteria growing at five times its normal rate after they placed it in an incubator that simulates the microgravity conditions of space. The findings mean astronauts may be at an elevated risk for kidney stones on long flights -- something NASA is extremely worried about in light of its new plans to send humans to Mars.
The findings could also add fuel to nanobacteria research by giving scientists a way to grow cultures faster.
"The trouble with studying nanobacteria is that trying to get enough material is very hard," said Lieske. "Trying to culture a lot of it takes time."
Indeed, nanobacteria particles double about once every three days. In comparison, typical bacteria doubles about every 20 minutes.
Lieske's group has continued to experiment with nanobacteria since its 2004 paper. Though he said the team is looking for evidence of DNA and RNA, he is cautious about saying whether he thinks the particles are alive or just an unknown form of crystal.
As a possibility, he offered a third option: The particles could be a form of archaea, a relatively new category of tiny organisms whose DNA is vastly different from that found in typical bacteria. Over the past two decades, archaea has surprised scientists by turning up in places where life was least expected, like in sulfurous lakes and hydrothermal sea vents.
Whatever the case, the Mayo Clinic team may publish a paper outlining new findings in about six months, according to Lieske.
The world may not be waiting, but a handful of faithful microbiologists certainly will.
© Copyright 2005, Lycos, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
YODA
Are Nanobacteria Making Us Ill?
By Amit Asaravala
Wired News
3-14-5
Olavi Kajander didn't mean to discover the mysterious particles that have been called the most primitive organisms on Earth and that could be responsible for a series of painful and sometimes fatal illnesses.
He was simply trying to find out why certain cultures of mammalian cells in his lab would die no matter how carefully he prepared them.
So the Finnish biochemist and his colleagues slipped some of their old cultures under an electron microscope one day in 1988 and took a closer look. That's when they saw the particles. Like bacteria but an astonishing 100 times smaller, they seemed to be thriving inside the dying cells.
Believing them to be a possible new form of life, Kajander named the particles "nanobacteria," published a paper outlining his findings and spurred one of the biggest controversies in modern microbiology.
At the heart of the debate is the question of whether nanobacteria could actually be a new form of life. To this day, critics argue that a particle just 20 to 200 nanometers in diameter can't possibly harbor the components necessary to sustain life. The particles are also incredibly resistant to heat and other methods that would normally kill bacteria, which makes some scientists wonder if they might be an unusual form of crystal rather than organisms.
In 1998, Kajander tried to prove the skeptics wrong by turning up what he believed to be an example of nanobacteria's ribosomal RNA, something that only organisms have. But the claim was squashed two years later by a National Institutes of Health study, which found that the RNA was actually a remnant from a bacteria that often contaminates lab equipment.
The debate would have ended there, except for a steadily increasing number of studies linking nanobacteria to serious health problems, including kidney stones, aneurysms and ovarian cancer. The studies show that nanobacteria can infect humans, a find that has helped push nanobacteria back into the limelight. Now the pressure is on to resolve the controversy and expose how nanobacteria works -- no matter what it is.
"It's all pretty exciting stuff," said David McKay, chief scientist for astrobiology at NASA's Johnson Space Center. "Whether these are bacteria or not -- it doesn't matter at this point. What matters is if we can figure out the association between nanobacteria and kidney stones and develop some kind of countermeasure."
The link between nanobacteria and human diseases was first noticed by Kajander and microbiologist Neva &laqno;iftÁioglu in 1998. The researchers had observed, through an electron microscope, nanobacteria particles building shells of calcium phosphate around themselves. They began to investigate whether such particles played a role in causing kidney stones, which are also made of calcium compounds. Sure enough, at the center of several stones was a nanobacteria particle.
Another breakthrough came in 2003 when a team from the University of Vienna Medical Center discovered nanobacteria in the calcified debris found in tissue samples from ovarian cancer patients. Meanwhile, several other studies revealed nanobacteria in samples of calcified arteries.
Sensing a growing need for tools to detect and study nanobacteria, Kajander and &laqno;iftÁioglu formed a company called NanoBac in 1998. The decision was greatly criticized as a conflict of interest and is still brought up whenever either of the two publishes a new paper.
Fortunately for the researchers, a 2004 study by the esteemed Mayo Clinic supported many of their key findings and helped them regain some of their support. The Mayo study found that nanobacteria does indeed self-replicate, as Kajander had noticed, and endorsed the idea that the particles are life forms.
Kajander and &laqno;iftÁioglu were further vindicated this February when patients with chronic pelvic pain -- thought to be linked to urinary stones and prostate calcification -- reported "significant improvement" after using an experimental treatment manufactured by NanoBac. The study was conducted by a team at Cleveland Clinic Florida.
There's a lot riding on studies like these. Roughly 177,500 patients were discharged from U.S. hospitals with kidney stones and related problems in 2001, according to the NIH. More than 25,000 women in the United States are diagnosed with ovarian cancer each year. In the same period, 14,000 Americans die from complications caused by calcified arteries.
"It brings up a lot of questions," said John Lieske, who led the 2004 Mayo Clinic study. "How many kidney stones are caused by this? Are there other calcification-related diseases that are caused by nanobacteria? Is it infectious?"
Surprisingly, few groups are actually working on answering these questions. One would be hard-pressed to find more than a half-dozen research teams around the globe studying nanobacteria full time.
Lieske suggests it's because the field is still relatively young. But it's clear that there's an additional culprit: the often heated controversy over whether nanobacteria particles are, in fact, alive.
"There's a reluctance to get into controversial areas. It's hard to get proposals funded," said McKay. "Most people are waiting until there's a little more meat on the bones."
Even John Cisar, who led the 2000 NIH study that contradicted Kajander's initial findings, agrees that the issue has become muddled. Though he maintains his stance that nanobacteria are not alive, he said in a phone interview that he is not against further research.
"I'm not saying there's nothing there," said Cisar. "It's just that we were looking at it from a microbiologist's perspective. And when we didn't find any signs of life, we moved on."
Kajander stands by his original assertion that nanobacteria are life forms. However, he blames himself for getting researchers hung up on the life question by using the name "nanobacteria."
"Calcifying self-propagating nanoparticles would have been much better," he wrote in an e-mail to Wired News.
But he added that his regrets about the name don't change the fact that nanobacteria have "miraculous" properties. Those include a growth cycle that closely matches typical biological cycles, the ability to form a shell and the "presence of both mammalian and bacterial components."
It's these properties -- and the potential to save lives -- that keep researchers focused on nanobacteria.
In February, NASA's McKay and Nanobac's &laqno;iftÁioglu announced that they had observed nanobacteria growing at five times its normal rate after they placed it in an incubator that simulates the microgravity conditions of space. The findings mean astronauts may be at an elevated risk for kidney stones on long flights -- something NASA is extremely worried about in light of its new plans to send humans to Mars.
The findings could also add fuel to nanobacteria research by giving scientists a way to grow cultures faster.
"The trouble with studying nanobacteria is that trying to get enough material is very hard," said Lieske. "Trying to culture a lot of it takes time."
Indeed, nanobacteria particles double about once every three days. In comparison, typical bacteria doubles about every 20 minutes.
Lieske's group has continued to experiment with nanobacteria since its 2004 paper. Though he said the team is looking for evidence of DNA and RNA, he is cautious about saying whether he thinks the particles are alive or just an unknown form of crystal.
As a possibility, he offered a third option: The particles could be a form of archaea, a relatively new category of tiny organisms whose DNA is vastly different from that found in typical bacteria. Over the past two decades, archaea has surprised scientists by turning up in places where life was least expected, like in sulfurous lakes and hydrothermal sea vents.
Whatever the case, the Mayo Clinic team may publish a paper outlining new findings in about six months, according to Lieske.
The world may not be waiting, but a handful of faithful microbiologists certainly will.
© Copyright 2005, Lycos, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thursday, March 10, 2005
"Most men die of their drugs not their illness" (old French proverb)
Eczema Drugs To Carry Cancer Warning
By Michael Conlon
3-10-5
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two eczema creams -- Novartis AG's Elidel and Fujisawa Healthcare, Inc.'s Protopic, must carry a strong warning of cancer risk, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Thursday.
Research shows the creams are absorbed into the body and can cause cancer, the FDA said. The creams will carry a "black box" warning -- the strongest warning carried on medicines.
And babies should not be treated with the creams at all, the FDA said.
"The data showed that the risk of cancer increased as the amount of the drug given increased. The data also included a small number of reports of cancers in children and adults treated with Elidel or Protopic," the FDA said in a statement.
In February members of an FDA advisory panel said they were concerned the companies were aggressively advertising the medicines to treat infants and others with skin problems the creams are not approved to treat.
Elidel, known generically as pimecrominum, and Protopic known generically as tacrolimus, should be used only as directed and only after other eczema treatments have failed to work because of the risk, the FDA said.
Since the FDA approved Protopic in 2000 and Elidel in 2001, seven cases of lymphoma and six skin cancer cases have been reported in patients, the FDA said.
Animal tests have suggested the creams could cause cancer, the FDA added.
"The manufacturers of the products have agreed to conduct research to determine whether there is an actual risk of cancer in humans, and, if so, its extent," the FDA said.
"Both products are applied to the skin to control eczema by suppressing the immune system. FDA's Public Health Advisory specifically advises physicians to weigh the risks and benefits of these drugs in adults and children," the agency added.
Doctors who prescribe the drugs should remember they should be used only for the shortest time possible, it said.
"Elidel and Protopic are not approved for use in children younger than 2 years old," the FDA added.
"The long-term effect of Elidel and Protopic on the developing immune system in infants and children is not known. In clinical trials, infants and children younger than 2 years of age treated with Elidel had a higher rate of upper respiratory infections than those treated with placebo cream."
According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), about 15 million Americans, including about 20 percent of children, suffer from eczema, a skin inflammation that can cause itchy thick skin with blisters or scaly patches.
http://www.reuters.com/
the leaf lady has all natural skin care for eczema, psoriasis, athlete's foot, jock itch, nail fungus....
By Michael Conlon
3-10-5
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two eczema creams -- Novartis AG's Elidel and Fujisawa Healthcare, Inc.'s Protopic, must carry a strong warning of cancer risk, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Thursday.
Research shows the creams are absorbed into the body and can cause cancer, the FDA said. The creams will carry a "black box" warning -- the strongest warning carried on medicines.
And babies should not be treated with the creams at all, the FDA said.
"The data showed that the risk of cancer increased as the amount of the drug given increased. The data also included a small number of reports of cancers in children and adults treated with Elidel or Protopic," the FDA said in a statement.
In February members of an FDA advisory panel said they were concerned the companies were aggressively advertising the medicines to treat infants and others with skin problems the creams are not approved to treat.
Elidel, known generically as pimecrominum, and Protopic known generically as tacrolimus, should be used only as directed and only after other eczema treatments have failed to work because of the risk, the FDA said.
Since the FDA approved Protopic in 2000 and Elidel in 2001, seven cases of lymphoma and six skin cancer cases have been reported in patients, the FDA said.
Animal tests have suggested the creams could cause cancer, the FDA added.
"The manufacturers of the products have agreed to conduct research to determine whether there is an actual risk of cancer in humans, and, if so, its extent," the FDA said.
"Both products are applied to the skin to control eczema by suppressing the immune system. FDA's Public Health Advisory specifically advises physicians to weigh the risks and benefits of these drugs in adults and children," the agency added.
Doctors who prescribe the drugs should remember they should be used only for the shortest time possible, it said.
"Elidel and Protopic are not approved for use in children younger than 2 years old," the FDA added.
"The long-term effect of Elidel and Protopic on the developing immune system in infants and children is not known. In clinical trials, infants and children younger than 2 years of age treated with Elidel had a higher rate of upper respiratory infections than those treated with placebo cream."
According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), about 15 million Americans, including about 20 percent of children, suffer from eczema, a skin inflammation that can cause itchy thick skin with blisters or scaly patches.
http://www.reuters.com/
the leaf lady has all natural skin care for eczema, psoriasis, athlete's foot, jock itch, nail fungus....
Monday, March 07, 2005
What Kind of Health Care Do You Want?
"One of the signers of our Declaration of Independence was the physician and psychiatrist Benjamin Rush, MD. He was also involved in writing our Constitution. He warned, "unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship to restrict the art of healing to one class of men and deny equal privileges to others; the Constitution of the Republic should make a special privilege for medical freedom as well as religious freedom." Dr. Rush also believed the Constitution of the United States should explicitly abolish black slavery. Neither of his warnings was heeded, with great harm to our nation. We have gone a long way toward rectifying one of these Constitutional omissions. It is now time to begin addressing Dr. Rush's other concern."
from 'How Medical Boards Nationalized Health Care' by Henry E. Jones, MD
to read the full article click title above
from 'How Medical Boards Nationalized Health Care' by Henry E. Jones, MD
to read the full article click title above
Saturday, March 05, 2005
When Is Enough Enough?
When you take control of your health and well being you can worry less about becoming some form of a guinea pig for intrusive procedures. You might also ponder the ethics of this issue.
This 2001 Siemens article cleanly illustrates something about wellness. While they are making extraordinary advances in technical capabilities, their divorce from nature is breathtaking. I believe this article is worthwhile reading.
The Transparent Patient
At Siemens, researchers are developing technologies that will make patients appear transparent and may one day allow surgeons to operate through micro robots on a cellular level. Just around the corner are genetic testing systems that promise to replace many of today's operations with early detection and wellness programs.
[snip]
Clearly, bioinformatics—the new science of harvesting genetic information to produce medical knowledge—especially when combined with traditional patient medical information, holds the potential of producing a revolution in medical care and public health.
Assuming technologies can be developed that will ensure absolute data privacy and universal data availability, the introduction of genetic testing could move the entire treatment time line forward to the stage of predisposition (see graphic above).
Predispositions would be "treated" with highly targeted medications and possibly even continuously monitored with subcutaneous chips. Drawing from huge public health data bases, neural networks would suggest tailored life-styles and diets designed to maximize each person's healthy life span.
The health care community—and industry leaders such as Siemens—would concentrate less on detecting and repairing advanced illnesses, while focusing more intensely on keeping people healthy.
Hospitals would be transformed into 'wellness centers,' and operating rooms—miles away from today's cut and stitch culture—would become highly specialized control centers in which microscopic robotic instruments guided by surgeons would return the most serious cases to health.
This 2001 Siemens article cleanly illustrates something about wellness. While they are making extraordinary advances in technical capabilities, their divorce from nature is breathtaking. I believe this article is worthwhile reading.
The Transparent Patient
At Siemens, researchers are developing technologies that will make patients appear transparent and may one day allow surgeons to operate through micro robots on a cellular level. Just around the corner are genetic testing systems that promise to replace many of today's operations with early detection and wellness programs.
[snip]
Clearly, bioinformatics—the new science of harvesting genetic information to produce medical knowledge—especially when combined with traditional patient medical information, holds the potential of producing a revolution in medical care and public health.
Assuming technologies can be developed that will ensure absolute data privacy and universal data availability, the introduction of genetic testing could move the entire treatment time line forward to the stage of predisposition (see graphic above).
Predispositions would be "treated" with highly targeted medications and possibly even continuously monitored with subcutaneous chips. Drawing from huge public health data bases, neural networks would suggest tailored life-styles and diets designed to maximize each person's healthy life span.
The health care community—and industry leaders such as Siemens—would concentrate less on detecting and repairing advanced illnesses, while focusing more intensely on keeping people healthy.
Hospitals would be transformed into 'wellness centers,' and operating rooms—miles away from today's cut and stitch culture—would become highly specialized control centers in which microscopic robotic instruments guided by surgeons would return the most serious cases to health.
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
Protecting the Bottom Line at Your Expense
Today's news tells us that health care costs are rising at twice the rate of inflation. It is questionable that quality of care rises in the same equation. Somehow the missing factor of the insurance industry never gets mentioned.
More co-opting of your health continues at the FDA through the latest reversal on the approval of these high risk drugs -
Two New York Times writers have blown the whistle on a government committee that voted to keep three controversial painkillers on the market. Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra will all be stocked on pharmacists’ shelves thanks to the vote of 32 advisers on the FDA advisory panel. Ten of those advisers have ties to the drug industry. According to the Times reporters, if those “10 advisers had not cast their votes, the committee would have voted 12 to 8 that Bextra should be withdrawn and 14 to 8 that Vioxx should not return to the market. The 10 advisers with company ties voted 9 to 1 to keep Bextra on the market and 9 to 1 for Vioxx’s return.”
Only one committee member voted to withdraw Celebrex despite a recent study that connected the drug to life-threatening heart trouble. That study found that those who took 400-800 mg. of Celebrex a day were 2.5 times more likely to develop a major heart problem than those who took placebo. Vioxx was previously removed from the market after its association with heart attacks and strokes was finally revealed.
Data from clinical trials by Merck, the drug’s manufacturer showed that between 88,000 and 139,000 Americans probably have had heart attacks or strokes as a result of taking Vioxx, and that 30 to 40 percent probably died, according to David Graham, a highly placed FDA official. David J. Graham, associate director of the Office of Drug Safety, testified about the toxicity of Vioxx and several other drugs before a Senate panel. He suggested that Bextra, Crestor (the cholesterol-lowering drug), Accutane (acne), and Serevent (asthma) should all be restricted because they have dangerous side effects. Graham called the FDA’s handling of Merck & Co.’s Vioxx a profound regulatory failure. Graham also said that “the FDA as currently configured is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx.” His statements in November 2004 proved to be prophetic. Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra have all been given a seal of approval from the FDA advisory panel.
Gardiner Harris and Alex Berenson, 10 voters on panel backing pain pills had industry ties, New York Times, Feb. 25, 2005.
Continuing to either raise the ante on fear or unveil the end times of pharacological creativity we have this -
Drugs To Combat Superbugs 'Will Soon Be Useless'
By Roger Highfield
Science Editor, The Telegraph - UK
3-2-5
The world may run out of effective antibiotics by the end of this decade and faces a gap of at least five years before new drugs can be developed to combat superbugs, according to one of the world's most influential scientists.
The warning that the age of infectious disease control is almost over has come from Prof George Poste, Director of the Biodesign Institute at Arizona State University and an advisor to the US president.
"Frankly, most governments are asleep at the switch," said Prof Poste. He predicts that from 2010 to 2015 will be a "window of vulnerability" when the toll of the superbug will reach its peak as a result of antibiotic resistance.
"We are facing a relentless increase in antibiotic resistance across all classes of drug," said Prof Poste, who began his 40-year career in Britain. The superbugs of most concern are strains of MRSA, methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus.
Last week, it emerged that deaths caused by MRSA in British hospitals have doubled in four years to almost 1,000 a year. "If we think we have problems today, the problems at the end of thedecade will be that much more dramatic," he told The Telegraph. "We are facing serious challenges."
The bacterium is resistant to many more antibiotics than methicillin alone. Some strains are now resistant to all common antibiotics - penicillin, cephalosporin, methicillin and its cousin flucloxacillin - as a result of overprescribing of antibiotics, their use in animal feeds, and poor infection control in hospitals compared with measures used in the days before penicillin.
In the mid 1960s, the US Surgeon General said the battle against infectious disease had been won. Even a few years ago, biologists could still turn to the ìantibiotic of last resortî, vancomycin.
Now some degree of resistance to vancomycin exists in all MRSA. ìOnce you have an increasing prevalence of vancomycin resistant Staph, youhave limited therapeutic options for those patients,î said Prof Poste.
Meanwhile, he said, half a dozen leading manufacturers of antibiotics have given up developing new types. One reason is that they are unable to profit much from the development of variants on the theme of a given class of antibiotic.
Aside from doing more to reinstate old fashioned infection control, more has to be done to encourage drug companies to create novel classes of antibiotics, he said.
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2005.
(a reason why you want to know more about nutrition, herbs, supplements, and essential oils)
To me there seems only one answer. This should be a mass movement away from mainstream industrialized medicine to a place where you are activley involved in your own health care. You do this through prevention. Prevention starts at the core to develop good health through sound nutritional practice, and good health education.
The Leaflady is again offering highly acclaimed home study and on-site programs for medical professionals and anyone interested in improving health while reducing the reliance on allopathic care. Contact us for more information: leaflady@leaflady.org
More co-opting of your health continues at the FDA through the latest reversal on the approval of these high risk drugs -
Two New York Times writers have blown the whistle on a government committee that voted to keep three controversial painkillers on the market. Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra will all be stocked on pharmacists’ shelves thanks to the vote of 32 advisers on the FDA advisory panel. Ten of those advisers have ties to the drug industry. According to the Times reporters, if those “10 advisers had not cast their votes, the committee would have voted 12 to 8 that Bextra should be withdrawn and 14 to 8 that Vioxx should not return to the market. The 10 advisers with company ties voted 9 to 1 to keep Bextra on the market and 9 to 1 for Vioxx’s return.”
Only one committee member voted to withdraw Celebrex despite a recent study that connected the drug to life-threatening heart trouble. That study found that those who took 400-800 mg. of Celebrex a day were 2.5 times more likely to develop a major heart problem than those who took placebo. Vioxx was previously removed from the market after its association with heart attacks and strokes was finally revealed.
Data from clinical trials by Merck, the drug’s manufacturer showed that between 88,000 and 139,000 Americans probably have had heart attacks or strokes as a result of taking Vioxx, and that 30 to 40 percent probably died, according to David Graham, a highly placed FDA official. David J. Graham, associate director of the Office of Drug Safety, testified about the toxicity of Vioxx and several other drugs before a Senate panel. He suggested that Bextra, Crestor (the cholesterol-lowering drug), Accutane (acne), and Serevent (asthma) should all be restricted because they have dangerous side effects. Graham called the FDA’s handling of Merck & Co.’s Vioxx a profound regulatory failure. Graham also said that “the FDA as currently configured is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx.” His statements in November 2004 proved to be prophetic. Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra have all been given a seal of approval from the FDA advisory panel.
Gardiner Harris and Alex Berenson, 10 voters on panel backing pain pills had industry ties, New York Times, Feb. 25, 2005.
Continuing to either raise the ante on fear or unveil the end times of pharacological creativity we have this -
Drugs To Combat Superbugs 'Will Soon Be Useless'
By Roger Highfield
Science Editor, The Telegraph - UK
3-2-5
The world may run out of effective antibiotics by the end of this decade and faces a gap of at least five years before new drugs can be developed to combat superbugs, according to one of the world's most influential scientists.
The warning that the age of infectious disease control is almost over has come from Prof George Poste, Director of the Biodesign Institute at Arizona State University and an advisor to the US president.
"Frankly, most governments are asleep at the switch," said Prof Poste. He predicts that from 2010 to 2015 will be a "window of vulnerability" when the toll of the superbug will reach its peak as a result of antibiotic resistance.
"We are facing a relentless increase in antibiotic resistance across all classes of drug," said Prof Poste, who began his 40-year career in Britain. The superbugs of most concern are strains of MRSA, methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus.
Last week, it emerged that deaths caused by MRSA in British hospitals have doubled in four years to almost 1,000 a year. "If we think we have problems today, the problems at the end of thedecade will be that much more dramatic," he told The Telegraph. "We are facing serious challenges."
The bacterium is resistant to many more antibiotics than methicillin alone. Some strains are now resistant to all common antibiotics - penicillin, cephalosporin, methicillin and its cousin flucloxacillin - as a result of overprescribing of antibiotics, their use in animal feeds, and poor infection control in hospitals compared with measures used in the days before penicillin.
In the mid 1960s, the US Surgeon General said the battle against infectious disease had been won. Even a few years ago, biologists could still turn to the ìantibiotic of last resortî, vancomycin.
Now some degree of resistance to vancomycin exists in all MRSA. ìOnce you have an increasing prevalence of vancomycin resistant Staph, youhave limited therapeutic options for those patients,î said Prof Poste.
Meanwhile, he said, half a dozen leading manufacturers of antibiotics have given up developing new types. One reason is that they are unable to profit much from the development of variants on the theme of a given class of antibiotic.
Aside from doing more to reinstate old fashioned infection control, more has to be done to encourage drug companies to create novel classes of antibiotics, he said.
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2005.
(a reason why you want to know more about nutrition, herbs, supplements, and essential oils)
To me there seems only one answer. This should be a mass movement away from mainstream industrialized medicine to a place where you are activley involved in your own health care. You do this through prevention. Prevention starts at the core to develop good health through sound nutritional practice, and good health education.
The Leaflady is again offering highly acclaimed home study and on-site programs for medical professionals and anyone interested in improving health while reducing the reliance on allopathic care. Contact us for more information: leaflady@leaflady.org
Friday, February 25, 2005
The Diesel Opportunity
This week it has been warm and dry in the Inland NW, and air quality is poor. Add this to the lowered environmnetal standards fostered by the current White House agenda, and there's trouble. Pollen starts blooming now and mold will certainly increase in the water logged California counties beseiged by heavy rain.
There is a reason to be able to breathe clean air.
From: RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS
The deadly effects of breathing diesel fumes came into sharp focus this week when the Clean Air Task Force (CATF) released a report[1]estimating that diesel fumes kill about 21,000 U.S. citizens each year.
Furthermore, diesel fumes cause 27,000 nonfatal heart attacks and 410,000 asthma attacks in U.S. adults each year, plus roughly 12,000 cases of chronic bronchitis, 15,000 hospital admissions, 2.4 million lost-work days, and 14 million restricted activity days.
And that is almost certainly not the worst of it. The Clean Air Task Force report cites numerous studies revealing that diesel soot
** degrades the immune system (the system that protects us all from bacteria, viruses and cancers)
** interferes with our hormones, reducing sperm production, masculinizing female rats, altering the development of baby rats(changing their bones, thymus, and nervous systems), modifying their adrenal and reproductive hormones
** causes serious, permanent impairment of the nervous system in diesel-exposed railroad workers
** induces allergic reactions, not limited to asthma, causing children to miss thousands upon thousands of school-days -- a primary cause of school dropout, consequent low self-esteem, and subsequent life-failure.
The new report is based on the most recent available data from the federal EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) combined with EPA risk models, with calculations carried out by Abt Associates, a consulting firm that frequently performs contract studies for the EPA.[2]
The key findings of the report should come as no surprise. The dangers of breathing diesel fumes have been known for at least two decades. More than 20 years ago, numerous researchers confirmed and reconfirmed that they could cause lung cancer in laboratory animals breathing air laced with diesel fumes.
To anyone taking a precautionary approach, this confirmed knowledge of diesel's ill effects on animals would have jump-started a search for alternative ways to power on-road and off-road machines, to phase out diesel in an orderly step-wise fashion.
But the National Academy of Sciences did not take a precautionary approach. The New York Times reported Dec. 23, 1981, that the Academy acknowledged that diesel soot is known to contain suspected cancer-causing substances. But the Academy said, "no convincing epidemiological evidence exists" that there is "a connection between diesel fumes and human cancer." In other words, let's not act on the animal evidence -- let's hunker down and wait until we can line up the dead humans. This is the risk-based approach to public health. It is the opposite of a precautionary approach.
Twenty years ago, in the spring of 1985, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) issued a scientific report about the dangers of diesel fumes in New York. The New York Times reported May 18, 1985: "Diesel emissions are probably the single most important air-quality threat in New York City today," said Eric A. Goldstein, a lawyer for the environmental group and an author of the report. "But city, state and Federal agencies have not yet mounted a broad-based counterattack." The Times reported then that a spokesperson for the New York State Environmental Conservation Department acknowledged that diesel fumes cause lung cancer in humans but, he said, the state was "not yet sure" how big the problem was. The state had no plan for dealing with diesel because "we have not identified the extent of the problem," he said.
This is a classic example of the risk-based approach. Ignore the evidence so long as it is not 100% airtight. Use uncertainty as an excuse to delay. Wait for the dead bodies to pile up, then slowly acknowledge the need for action.
By 1985, there was no doubt that dead bodies were piling up. But the exact number of corpses remained uncertain, so the risk-based approach allowed "business as usual" to continue.
From a precautionary perspective, knowing that a technology causes lung cancer, and knowing that hundreds of millions of people are exposed to it, just naturally kicks off a search for less-harmful alternatives. But no one in 1985 was taking a precautionary approach.
In 1988 the federal government's Robert A. Taft Laboratory inCincinnati published NIOSH report 88-116, officially confirming that exposure to diesel fumes causes lung cancer in humans.
Read more by clicking on the link above
See an earlier post on this BLOG abount ionising particulate matter adhering to lung tissue from cellular EMF/ELF
There is a reason to be able to breathe clean air.
From: RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS
The deadly effects of breathing diesel fumes came into sharp focus this week when the Clean Air Task Force (CATF) released a report[1]estimating that diesel fumes kill about 21,000 U.S. citizens each year.
Furthermore, diesel fumes cause 27,000 nonfatal heart attacks and 410,000 asthma attacks in U.S. adults each year, plus roughly 12,000 cases of chronic bronchitis, 15,000 hospital admissions, 2.4 million lost-work days, and 14 million restricted activity days.
And that is almost certainly not the worst of it. The Clean Air Task Force report cites numerous studies revealing that diesel soot
** degrades the immune system (the system that protects us all from bacteria, viruses and cancers)
** interferes with our hormones, reducing sperm production, masculinizing female rats, altering the development of baby rats(changing their bones, thymus, and nervous systems), modifying their adrenal and reproductive hormones
** causes serious, permanent impairment of the nervous system in diesel-exposed railroad workers
** induces allergic reactions, not limited to asthma, causing children to miss thousands upon thousands of school-days -- a primary cause of school dropout, consequent low self-esteem, and subsequent life-failure.
The new report is based on the most recent available data from the federal EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) combined with EPA risk models, with calculations carried out by Abt Associates, a consulting firm that frequently performs contract studies for the EPA.[2]
The key findings of the report should come as no surprise. The dangers of breathing diesel fumes have been known for at least two decades. More than 20 years ago, numerous researchers confirmed and reconfirmed that they could cause lung cancer in laboratory animals breathing air laced with diesel fumes.
To anyone taking a precautionary approach, this confirmed knowledge of diesel's ill effects on animals would have jump-started a search for alternative ways to power on-road and off-road machines, to phase out diesel in an orderly step-wise fashion.
But the National Academy of Sciences did not take a precautionary approach. The New York Times reported Dec. 23, 1981, that the Academy acknowledged that diesel soot is known to contain suspected cancer-causing substances. But the Academy said, "no convincing epidemiological evidence exists" that there is "a connection between diesel fumes and human cancer." In other words, let's not act on the animal evidence -- let's hunker down and wait until we can line up the dead humans. This is the risk-based approach to public health. It is the opposite of a precautionary approach.
Twenty years ago, in the spring of 1985, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) issued a scientific report about the dangers of diesel fumes in New York. The New York Times reported May 18, 1985: "Diesel emissions are probably the single most important air-quality threat in New York City today," said Eric A. Goldstein, a lawyer for the environmental group and an author of the report. "But city, state and Federal agencies have not yet mounted a broad-based counterattack." The Times reported then that a spokesperson for the New York State Environmental Conservation Department acknowledged that diesel fumes cause lung cancer in humans but, he said, the state was "not yet sure" how big the problem was. The state had no plan for dealing with diesel because "we have not identified the extent of the problem," he said.
This is a classic example of the risk-based approach. Ignore the evidence so long as it is not 100% airtight. Use uncertainty as an excuse to delay. Wait for the dead bodies to pile up, then slowly acknowledge the need for action.
By 1985, there was no doubt that dead bodies were piling up. But the exact number of corpses remained uncertain, so the risk-based approach allowed "business as usual" to continue.
From a precautionary perspective, knowing that a technology causes lung cancer, and knowing that hundreds of millions of people are exposed to it, just naturally kicks off a search for less-harmful alternatives. But no one in 1985 was taking a precautionary approach.
In 1988 the federal government's Robert A. Taft Laboratory inCincinnati published NIOSH report 88-116, officially confirming that exposure to diesel fumes causes lung cancer in humans.
Read more by clicking on the link above
See an earlier post on this BLOG abount ionising particulate matter adhering to lung tissue from cellular EMF/ELF
Government forced to disclose locations of test sites of biopharmaceutical crops
February 8, 2005
HONOLULU -- In a first step toward public disclosure of test sites of biopharmaceutical crops, the U.S. Department of Agriculture was forced by court order on February 4 to reveal the locations of these sites in Hawai`i.
Following the ruling, representatives of the USDA handed over to Earthjustice attorneys information on the precise locations of open-air field tests of biopharmaceutical crops genetically engineered to produce industrial chemicals and drugs. This marks the first time the federal government has been forced to disclose the location of field tests of genetically engineered crops since it began systematically hiding these locations from the public.
Earthjustice, representing citizen groups Center for Food Safety (CFS), Friends of the Earth, Pesticide Action Network North America, and KAHEA: The Hawaiian-Environmental Alliance, filed a lawsuit in November 2003 in federal district court, seeking to compel USDA to review the environmental and public health impacts of such activities. In August 2004, District Court Judge David A. Ezra ordered the disclosure, rejecting the government's and the Biotechnology Industry Organization's claims of potential "espionage," "vandalism," and "civil unrest." The government and industry resisted disclosure since that ruling through a series of delay requests. At a hearing Friday, Judge Ezra denied their latest motion for a stay of disclosure, and the government handed the information to plaintiffs' counsel.
"This ruling is an important first step toward the day when citizens can find out if biopharmaceutical crops are growing near their food crops or their back yards," said Paul Achitoff, an Earthjustice attorney. "No one wants to accidentally get contraceptives in their corn flakes. Given the potentially disastrous effects these experiments could have on human health and the environment, we hope this ruling will result in lifting the veil of secrecy."
The plaintiffs sought information on the locations of these field tests in response to the government's arguments that plaintiffs lacked standing to sue because they had not specified the precise locations of the field tests. Magistrate Judge Barry M. Kurren originally ordered discovery of the locations in April 2004, ruling that the mere locations of the field tests were not confidential business information.
JudgeEzra affirmed the ruling in August, but preliminarily limited disclosure to plaintiffs only, and allowed the government and industry 90 days to come up with better support for denying public access to the information. The industry submitted supplemental arguments, to which plaintiffs responded, but the court has not yet ruled on the public disclosure issue. Until then, plaintiffs cannot reveal the informationto the public at large.
"Allowing food crops to be engineered to produce chemicals or drugs is bad enough," said Peter Jenkins of CFS, "but hiding the location of the test fields from an at-risk public is indefensible. Yet we find our own government fighting on the side of the biotech industry to keep the public in the dark about drug-laced food crops."
Plaintiffs' attorneys are still reviewing the information to see whether it complies with the court's order. This latest development should allow plaintiffs' November 2003 lawsuit calling for long-overdue environmental reviews to move forward.
"With this order," added Jenkins, "we may at last be able to find out how close these experiments are to conventional food crops, ecologically sensitive areas, and our homes and schools. The next step will be to compel our government to investigate the impacts from these biotech crops."
HONOLULU -- In a first step toward public disclosure of test sites of biopharmaceutical crops, the U.S. Department of Agriculture was forced by court order on February 4 to reveal the locations of these sites in Hawai`i.
Following the ruling, representatives of the USDA handed over to Earthjustice attorneys information on the precise locations of open-air field tests of biopharmaceutical crops genetically engineered to produce industrial chemicals and drugs. This marks the first time the federal government has been forced to disclose the location of field tests of genetically engineered crops since it began systematically hiding these locations from the public.
Earthjustice, representing citizen groups Center for Food Safety (CFS), Friends of the Earth, Pesticide Action Network North America, and KAHEA: The Hawaiian-Environmental Alliance, filed a lawsuit in November 2003 in federal district court, seeking to compel USDA to review the environmental and public health impacts of such activities. In August 2004, District Court Judge David A. Ezra ordered the disclosure, rejecting the government's and the Biotechnology Industry Organization's claims of potential "espionage," "vandalism," and "civil unrest." The government and industry resisted disclosure since that ruling through a series of delay requests. At a hearing Friday, Judge Ezra denied their latest motion for a stay of disclosure, and the government handed the information to plaintiffs' counsel.
"This ruling is an important first step toward the day when citizens can find out if biopharmaceutical crops are growing near their food crops or their back yards," said Paul Achitoff, an Earthjustice attorney. "No one wants to accidentally get contraceptives in their corn flakes. Given the potentially disastrous effects these experiments could have on human health and the environment, we hope this ruling will result in lifting the veil of secrecy."
The plaintiffs sought information on the locations of these field tests in response to the government's arguments that plaintiffs lacked standing to sue because they had not specified the precise locations of the field tests. Magistrate Judge Barry M. Kurren originally ordered discovery of the locations in April 2004, ruling that the mere locations of the field tests were not confidential business information.
JudgeEzra affirmed the ruling in August, but preliminarily limited disclosure to plaintiffs only, and allowed the government and industry 90 days to come up with better support for denying public access to the information. The industry submitted supplemental arguments, to which plaintiffs responded, but the court has not yet ruled on the public disclosure issue. Until then, plaintiffs cannot reveal the informationto the public at large.
"Allowing food crops to be engineered to produce chemicals or drugs is bad enough," said Peter Jenkins of CFS, "but hiding the location of the test fields from an at-risk public is indefensible. Yet we find our own government fighting on the side of the biotech industry to keep the public in the dark about drug-laced food crops."
Plaintiffs' attorneys are still reviewing the information to see whether it complies with the court's order. This latest development should allow plaintiffs' November 2003 lawsuit calling for long-overdue environmental reviews to move forward.
"With this order," added Jenkins, "we may at last be able to find out how close these experiments are to conventional food crops, ecologically sensitive areas, and our homes and schools. The next step will be to compel our government to investigate the impacts from these biotech crops."
Thursday, February 24, 2005
You Don't Deserve Brain Cancer -
You Deserve The Facts
By Amy Worthington
2-23-5
Some people appear to have an almost pathological emotional attachment to their cell phones and there is a fascinating suggestion that cell radiation pulses might actually be addictive to the human brain.. We can't save those who would rather die than switch. But ethics compelled us to ensure that all reasonable people have access to the basic scientific facts.
Your cell phone is a microwave transmitter and it should bear a cancer warning! Microwave energy oscillates at millions to billions of cycles per second. The Journal of Cellular Biochemistry reports that these frequencies cause cancer and other diseases by interfering with cellular DNA and its repairmechanisms. Microwave promotes rapid cell aging. Italian scientists have recently demonstrated that cell phone radiation makes cancerous cells grow aggressively. Cordless phones marked 900 megahertz or 2.4 gigahertz emit the same dangerous microwave radiation as cell phones.
READ THE COMPLETE ARTICLE ON OUR ELECTROSMOG PAGE AT www.leaflady.org
By Amy Worthington
2-23-5
Some people appear to have an almost pathological emotional attachment to their cell phones and there is a fascinating suggestion that cell radiation pulses might actually be addictive to the human brain.. We can't save those who would rather die than switch. But ethics compelled us to ensure that all reasonable people have access to the basic scientific facts.
Your cell phone is a microwave transmitter and it should bear a cancer warning! Microwave energy oscillates at millions to billions of cycles per second. The Journal of Cellular Biochemistry reports that these frequencies cause cancer and other diseases by interfering with cellular DNA and its repairmechanisms. Microwave promotes rapid cell aging. Italian scientists have recently demonstrated that cell phone radiation makes cancerous cells grow aggressively. Cordless phones marked 900 megahertz or 2.4 gigahertz emit the same dangerous microwave radiation as cell phones.
READ THE COMPLETE ARTICLE ON OUR ELECTROSMOG PAGE AT www.leaflady.org
Wednesday, February 23, 2005
ASPARTAME DISEASE RAGES
INTERACTIONS WITH ALL DRUGS, VACCINES AND TOXINS
When aspartame was news, Dr. H. J. Roberts in a press conference foretold that in 5 or 10 years we would have a global plague. And it was Dr. Roberts who declared Aspartame Disease to be a global plague and published the medical text in 2001, Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, www.sunsentpress.com or 1 800 827 7991.
His chapter on drug interaction goes into Coumadin, Dilantin, antidepressants and other psychotropic agents, Inderal, Aldomet, hormones and insulin. He says aspartame interacts with all cardiac medication and even discusses drug reactions after the cessation of aspartame.
In his general considerations he discusses that aspartame may either reduce or potentiate drug action by various mechanisms. He lists a few of the possibilities.* Alteration of the blood proteins to which drugs attach.* Alteration of drug receptors on cell membranes.* Changes in the sites at which impulses are transmitted along nerves and to muscle.* Metabolic abnormalities in the elderly that are known to enhance their vulnerability to drug reactions (Weber l986). This problem increases in the case of persons taking multiple drugs ("polypharmacy") prescribed by several physicians.* Interference with drug action by amino acids and protein. An example is the erratic therapeutic effects when patients with parkinsonism who were controlled on levodopa began to use aspartame products. The antagonism of levodopa by dietary protein presumably reflects impaired transport from serum across the blood brain barrier by neutral amino acids (Pincus l986).Dr. Roberts also discusses Lidocaine (Xylocaine) which he says is an important drug used for local anesthesia and the treatment of ventricular arrhythmias in intensive care units. Alterations of its pharmacology by aspartame require study. He says: "Kim et al (l987) reported that the intraperitoneal administration of aspartame significantly reduced the 50% convulsion dose of lidocaine. They indicated that PKU patients and asymptomatic PKU heterozygotes may be more sensitive to the toxic effects of this and related local anesthetics."
Today Dr. Roberts explained: "An interaction should be suspect with virtually every drug if the patient is using aspartame."This goes along with Dr. James Bowen who says because aspartame damages the mitocondria of the cell it will interact with all drugs, and as a chemical hypersensitization agent will interact with vaccines, unsafe sweeteners like Splenda (sucralose, a chlorinated hydrocarbon) and toxins.
excerpt from Dr. Betty Martini
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
FLU SHOT UPDATE
Flu Shots Do Not Save Lives
It will come as no surprise to vaccine critics that flu vaccination does not result in a decreased incidence of deaths in the elderly. In my book The Vaccine Guide (North Atlantic Books, 2002) I stated that, "The primary targeted population for flu vaccine is the elderly, yet the vaccine is notoriously ineffective in preventing disease in that population." Now a report published in the Archives of Internal Medicine confirms that the flu vaccine has no ability to prevent deaths in people over 65.
The authors of that study examined vaccination rates and death rates that could be attributed to the flu between the years 1968 and 2001. The campaign for flu vaccination in the elderly resulted in a significant increase in people vaccinated. Flu vaccine coverage among people 65 or older increased from between 15% and 20% before 1980 to 65% in 2001. Despite the increased number of vaccinated people in this age group the mortality rates in flu seasons remained the same during these two decades. The authors conclude, "We could not correlate increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates in any age group." These findings contradicted all assumptions and predictions about the protective effect of flu vaccines. Estimates from clinical trials suggest that increased flu vaccine coverage should substantially reduce deaths from the flu.
"If vaccination reduces influenza-related mortality by 70% to 80%, then the 50-percentage-point increase in vaccination coverage among the elderly after 1980 should have reduced... mortality by about 35% to 40%. We found no evidence to indicate that such a reduction had occurred... in any elderly age group."
These findings should result in a change in the prevention strategies we adopt for the flu season. Strengthening the immune system and maintaining a high level of health through the use of natural forms of treatment that stimulate healing should have a much greater impact on flu related deaths than vaccination campaigns.
For suggestions about better ways to prevent and treat the flu see my book FLU: Alternative Treatments and Prevention (North Atlantic Books, 2005).
Simonsen L, et al. Impact of influenza vaccination on seasonal mortality in the US elderly population. Archives of Internal Medicine 2005; 165:265-272.
Bird Flu Update
Concerns about the ability of flu viruses to jump the gap between domestic animals and humans have alarmed the public health world for many years. It is well recognized that severe flu epidemics and worldwide pandemics occur when birds or pigs pass flu viruses to humans. If such an animal virus develops the ability to spread between humans, then a deadly flu season can occur. Health authorities predict millions of deaths with such a scenario. This year Vietnam has experienced 29 confirmed deaths from an outbreak of bird flu. Possibly many more unreported cases have occurred. Several confirmed cases have also documented the spread of bird flu between humans. This has led to the announcement that Vietnam's largest cities will slaughter all of their poultry in an attempt to halt the spread of bird flu.
Thank you to Randall Neustaedter OMD for his work on the vaccination hoax.
It will come as no surprise to vaccine critics that flu vaccination does not result in a decreased incidence of deaths in the elderly. In my book The Vaccine Guide (North Atlantic Books, 2002) I stated that, "The primary targeted population for flu vaccine is the elderly, yet the vaccine is notoriously ineffective in preventing disease in that population." Now a report published in the Archives of Internal Medicine confirms that the flu vaccine has no ability to prevent deaths in people over 65.
The authors of that study examined vaccination rates and death rates that could be attributed to the flu between the years 1968 and 2001. The campaign for flu vaccination in the elderly resulted in a significant increase in people vaccinated. Flu vaccine coverage among people 65 or older increased from between 15% and 20% before 1980 to 65% in 2001. Despite the increased number of vaccinated people in this age group the mortality rates in flu seasons remained the same during these two decades. The authors conclude, "We could not correlate increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates in any age group." These findings contradicted all assumptions and predictions about the protective effect of flu vaccines. Estimates from clinical trials suggest that increased flu vaccine coverage should substantially reduce deaths from the flu.
"If vaccination reduces influenza-related mortality by 70% to 80%, then the 50-percentage-point increase in vaccination coverage among the elderly after 1980 should have reduced... mortality by about 35% to 40%. We found no evidence to indicate that such a reduction had occurred... in any elderly age group."
These findings should result in a change in the prevention strategies we adopt for the flu season. Strengthening the immune system and maintaining a high level of health through the use of natural forms of treatment that stimulate healing should have a much greater impact on flu related deaths than vaccination campaigns.
For suggestions about better ways to prevent and treat the flu see my book FLU: Alternative Treatments and Prevention (North Atlantic Books, 2005).
Simonsen L, et al. Impact of influenza vaccination on seasonal mortality in the US elderly population. Archives of Internal Medicine 2005; 165:265-272.
Bird Flu Update
Concerns about the ability of flu viruses to jump the gap between domestic animals and humans have alarmed the public health world for many years. It is well recognized that severe flu epidemics and worldwide pandemics occur when birds or pigs pass flu viruses to humans. If such an animal virus develops the ability to spread between humans, then a deadly flu season can occur. Health authorities predict millions of deaths with such a scenario. This year Vietnam has experienced 29 confirmed deaths from an outbreak of bird flu. Possibly many more unreported cases have occurred. Several confirmed cases have also documented the spread of bird flu between humans. This has led to the announcement that Vietnam's largest cities will slaughter all of their poultry in an attempt to halt the spread of bird flu.
Thank you to Randall Neustaedter OMD for his work on the vaccination hoax.
Cancer causing red dye in food, welcome to globalisation
D. Mail 21.2.05 "WATCHDOG WITH NO BARK & NO BITE" by Geoffrey Lean.
Sudan 1 has been known to be dangerous for nearly 100 years. It appears it has been used in foods for months without detection. It's known in the industry as 'Red devil' because of its side-effects.
Sudan 1 in food came to light in June 03 - when a French lab. spotted some suspiciously red chili powder & did a full chemical screening on it.
"DANGER DYE RUNS THROUGH FOOD CHAIN" from The Guardian (UK)
Few who eat processed food will have avoided cancer-causing red dye Sudan 1, which was used to adulterate poor quality chilli powder. This was added to Worcester sauce used to flavour over 350 ready-meals, sauces & other foods sold by main supermarkets, food manufacturers & restaurants. It is in many foods from vegetable soup, lasagne, shepherds pie, sausages, prawn cocktail, tuna mayonnaise, pickles etc.
There was an alert about Sudan 1 in 2003 but there has been a 2 year gap between the authorities first discovering the adulteration & the re-call attempt yesterday. They failed to discover it was in so many foods.
Sudan 1 dye is meant to be used in boot & floor polish, industrial solvents & petrol etc.
This chemical family was banned in foods in 1995.
The Food Commission said controls of food ingredients are not good enough & that this is one of the problems of a globalised food system.
Times 19.2.05 "NO SAFE LEVEL FOR DANGER CHEMICAL IN FOOD"
It is a genotoxin which damages DNA & causes cell mutations such as cancer.
Sudan 1 has been known to be dangerous for nearly 100 years. It appears it has been used in foods for months without detection. It's known in the industry as 'Red devil' because of its side-effects.
Sudan 1 in food came to light in June 03 - when a French lab. spotted some suspiciously red chili powder & did a full chemical screening on it.
"DANGER DYE RUNS THROUGH FOOD CHAIN" from The Guardian (UK)
Few who eat processed food will have avoided cancer-causing red dye Sudan 1, which was used to adulterate poor quality chilli powder. This was added to Worcester sauce used to flavour over 350 ready-meals, sauces & other foods sold by main supermarkets, food manufacturers & restaurants. It is in many foods from vegetable soup, lasagne, shepherds pie, sausages, prawn cocktail, tuna mayonnaise, pickles etc.
There was an alert about Sudan 1 in 2003 but there has been a 2 year gap between the authorities first discovering the adulteration & the re-call attempt yesterday. They failed to discover it was in so many foods.
Sudan 1 dye is meant to be used in boot & floor polish, industrial solvents & petrol etc.
This chemical family was banned in foods in 1995.
The Food Commission said controls of food ingredients are not good enough & that this is one of the problems of a globalised food system.
Times 19.2.05 "NO SAFE LEVEL FOR DANGER CHEMICAL IN FOOD"
It is a genotoxin which damages DNA & causes cell mutations such as cancer.
Saturday, February 19, 2005
CHELATION VICTORY in Connecticut...
Chelation therapy is now completely legal in Connecticut.
The Connecticut Medical Board, on Tuesday February 15th, 2005, was presented with a negotiated settlement in the Connecticut Health Department versus Robban Sica MD case.
The parties recommending this settlement were the Connecticut Department of Health (DOPH), the Connecticut Attorney General, Robban Sica MD and her attorneys, the International College of Integrative Medicine (ICIM), and the American College for the Advancement of Medicine (ACAM). The board accepted the recommendation.
Read more about the history of chelation at www.leaflady.org
The Connecticut Medical Board, on Tuesday February 15th, 2005, was presented with a negotiated settlement in the Connecticut Health Department versus Robban Sica MD case.
The parties recommending this settlement were the Connecticut Department of Health (DOPH), the Connecticut Attorney General, Robban Sica MD and her attorneys, the International College of Integrative Medicine (ICIM), and the American College for the Advancement of Medicine (ACAM). The board accepted the recommendation.
Read more about the history of chelation at www.leaflady.org
Proof of mobile health risk
By Mark Prigg Science Correspondent, Evening Standard
Doctors today claim to have found the first proof of health problems caused by mobile phones.
They say up to five per cent of the population could be suffering headaches, mood swings and hearing problems caused by radiation from handsets.
Experts are advising people - especially children - to limit their use of phones if they experience headaches or other symptoms.
The research, by the Irish Doctors Environmental Association (IDEA), was carried out on 16 people who had complained of symptoms from using mobile phones and were particularly sensitive to electromagnetic radiation.
The 16 were studied over several months. They were examined by doctors, filled in detailed questionnaires charting their use of mobile phones, and underwent medical tests including blood and liver analysis.
It was found 13 suffered symptoms including nausea, headaches and dizziness which researchers believe are a clear indication of radiation. IDEA chairman Dr Philip Michael said: "This is causing disabilities in a large section of the population.
"We are working on funding for a far larger study which will use blind testing to prove beyond doubt that mobile phones are responsible, but we believe the evidence is now overwhelming.
"These problems can get very difficult to deal with - we had one person in our study who was basically confined to their house because of the symptoms."
He advised anyone suffering from the symptoms the study describes to limit the time they spend on their mobile, and to try to stay away from mobile phone masts.
The research was this week presentedto a select committee of Irish MPs, who, it is hoped, will back plans for further research.
Other experts in the field said they were not surprised by the results of the study. Dr Michael Maier of Imperial College said more research was needed, adding: "There is so much anecdotal evidence I think more findings along these lines are inevitable.
"The biggest problem is that it is hard to measure any effects as people use their phones so differently.
"But the brain is an electrical instrument, and the frequency of radiation produced is very close to that used in the brain, so it's no big surprise to find a phone is interfering with that frequency, causing headaches, nausea and the other problems."
Last month experts advising the Government warned that children under eight should not be given mobile phones because of the potential health risks.
Sir William Stewart, chairman of the Health Protection Agency, said: "I don't think we can put our hands on our hearts and say mobile phones are safe. If there are risks, and we think there may be risks, then the people who are going to be most affected are children."
That study, by the National Radiological Protection Board, found no firm conclusion could be reached on the impact of mobile phones.
IDEA is made up of 30 leading Irish doctors, and is affiliated with the World Health Organisation. It is part of a group awarded the Nobel prize for physics in 1985. Members include Dr Patrick Hillery, the ex-President of Ireland and an EU commissioner.
Find this story at http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/16470166?version=1
©2005 Associated New Media
Doctors today claim to have found the first proof of health problems caused by mobile phones.
They say up to five per cent of the population could be suffering headaches, mood swings and hearing problems caused by radiation from handsets.
Experts are advising people - especially children - to limit their use of phones if they experience headaches or other symptoms.
The research, by the Irish Doctors Environmental Association (IDEA), was carried out on 16 people who had complained of symptoms from using mobile phones and were particularly sensitive to electromagnetic radiation.
The 16 were studied over several months. They were examined by doctors, filled in detailed questionnaires charting their use of mobile phones, and underwent medical tests including blood and liver analysis.
It was found 13 suffered symptoms including nausea, headaches and dizziness which researchers believe are a clear indication of radiation. IDEA chairman Dr Philip Michael said: "This is causing disabilities in a large section of the population.
"We are working on funding for a far larger study which will use blind testing to prove beyond doubt that mobile phones are responsible, but we believe the evidence is now overwhelming.
"These problems can get very difficult to deal with - we had one person in our study who was basically confined to their house because of the symptoms."
He advised anyone suffering from the symptoms the study describes to limit the time they spend on their mobile, and to try to stay away from mobile phone masts.
The research was this week presentedto a select committee of Irish MPs, who, it is hoped, will back plans for further research.
Other experts in the field said they were not surprised by the results of the study. Dr Michael Maier of Imperial College said more research was needed, adding: "There is so much anecdotal evidence I think more findings along these lines are inevitable.
"The biggest problem is that it is hard to measure any effects as people use their phones so differently.
"But the brain is an electrical instrument, and the frequency of radiation produced is very close to that used in the brain, so it's no big surprise to find a phone is interfering with that frequency, causing headaches, nausea and the other problems."
Last month experts advising the Government warned that children under eight should not be given mobile phones because of the potential health risks.
Sir William Stewart, chairman of the Health Protection Agency, said: "I don't think we can put our hands on our hearts and say mobile phones are safe. If there are risks, and we think there may be risks, then the people who are going to be most affected are children."
That study, by the National Radiological Protection Board, found no firm conclusion could be reached on the impact of mobile phones.
IDEA is made up of 30 leading Irish doctors, and is affiliated with the World Health Organisation. It is part of a group awarded the Nobel prize for physics in 1985. Members include Dr Patrick Hillery, the ex-President of Ireland and an EU commissioner.
Find this story at http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/16470166?version=1
©2005 Associated New Media
Sunday, February 06, 2005
Your Money or Your Life
Read this enlightening article by Dan Frosch, and you will see how health care is failing the every day person, while embellishing corporate welfare.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)