The Dr. Coldwell Report

Sex After Prostate Cancer

2011-09-22T08:26:00.000-07:00

By TARA PARKER-POPE

Treatments for prostate cancer take a significant toll on male potency, leaving a surprisingly high percentage of men unable to have a normal sex life, new research shows.
The findings, based on a study of more than 1,000 men treated for prostate cancer at multiple medical centers, show that whether a man is able to achieve adequate erections after treatment for prostate cancer varies greatly depending on a number of individual variables, including his age, the extent of his cancer and the quality of his sex life before treatment.

Over all, fewer than half of the men who reported good sexual function before cancer had managed to regain it two years after treatment. But the chances of sexual recovery varied widely. After two years, some men had less than a 10 percent chance of achieving adequate erections after treatment, whereas others had a 70 percent or greater chance of a relatively normal sex life.

The results were not encouraging, but for the first time offer men a more personalized model for predicting sexual recovery after cancer treatment.

Cancer experts say the data, published Tuesday in The Journal of the American Medical Association, are sorely needed, in light of marketing efforts that are aimed at wooing men toward particular types of treatment but that often leave patients with unrealistic expectations. Many men report feeling shocked and depressed when their sex lives fail to return to normal after treatment.

“I think being transparent about what the pros and cons are, the reality — that’s important,’’ said Dr. Martin G. Sanda, senior author on the research and co-director of the prostate cancer program at the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center. “For any of the treatments for prostate cancer, it would be misleading to tell someone they have a 100 percent chance of sexual recovery, or even a 95 percent chance. It’s easier for a couple to face that and deal with that if they are expecting it than if they were oversold and told there weren’t going to be any issues.”

The study evaluated sexual function among men at nine academic medical centers who had undergone one of three treatments for prostate cancer: surgical removal of the prostate; radiation therapy; or brachytherapy, which uses radioactive seed implants.

Over all, just 35 percent of men in the surgery group, 37 percent of men in the radiation group and 43 percent of men in the brachytherapy group were able to have sexual intercourse two years after treatment.

Because the men weren’t randomly assigned to a treatment, the data don’t demonstrate whether one treatment is better than another. For instance, men who opt for brachytherapy are typically younger and healthier than men who undergo radiation treatment, so the results can’t be compared.

However, the researchers were able to determine which variables are most important for predicting a man’s erectile function after treatment. In all three treatment groups, the quality of a man’s erections before treatment — determined using a questionnaire about his sex life — helped predict his sexual recovery. Among surgical patients, a man’s age and his P.S.A. score, which measures prostate specific antigen, and whether he had nerve-sparing surgery also helped predict his chances of resuming a normal sex life. For men undergoing radiation treatment, those who had not also undergone hormone therapy were more likely to regain erectile function two years after treatment. Among men who had brachytherapy, a younger age and lower body weight helped predict a better recovery compared with men who were older or obese.

One limit of the study is that it followed the men for only two years. Men who undergo radiation and brachytherapy may experience a decline in erectile function two or more years after treatment, whereas men who undergo surgery may experience improvement.

Dr. Sanda said the data would allow doctors to take a more personalized approach as they talk to patients about the risks of a given treatment and counsel them about the benefits of drugs and other therapies that can improve erectile function.

“By and large, a lot of what we counsel men has been based on generalized average numbers,’’ said Dr. Sanda. “This really creates a more concrete metric as to what patients might expect.”

Ovarian Cancer Screening - Doesn't Save Lives And May Not Need Treatment

2011-09-16T09:28:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

(NaturalNews) There's no denying ovarian cancer is usually a terrible disease. A stealthy malignancy, it's often misdiagnosed as indigestion and by the time ovarian cancer is actually discovered by a doctor, the disease may have spread extensively. According to the National Institutes of Health, ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cancer among women and causes more deaths than any other type of female reproductive cancer.

So it might seem like a potentially life-saving move to have all women 55 and older -- the age group that suffers most often from this form of cancer -- screened regularly for the disease with transvaginal ultrasound and the blood test that measures serum cancer antigen 125 (CA-125).

These are expensive tests but, if they could save the lives of women by pinpointing ovarian malignancies early, they are certainly worth it. After all, the screening tests should save countless lives, right?

Unfortunately, according to new research headed by Saundra S. Buys, M.D., of the University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, that assumption is wrong. What's more, the tests can lead to unneeded surgeries and serious complications in women who actually have no cancer at all.

But the study came to another surprising -- and positive -- conclusion, too. It turns out that not all ovarian cancers may be deadly or even need treatment.

For the study, which was just published in the June 8 issue of JAMA, Dr. Buys and her team investigated studies of almost 80,000 women to compare outcomes between women who received standard health care with no specific testing for ovarian cancer, unless they had overt symptoms, and those who received regular, ovarian cancer screening. The results showed no reduced risk of death from ovarian cancer for those aggressively screened for the disease when compared to women who received usual care.

However, the study did reveal a big difference between the health outcomes of the women in the two groups. Those receiving the cancer screenings had an alarming increase in invasive medical procedures and associated harms as a result of being screened.

In all, there were 3,285 women who turned out to have false-positive results. And of these, over 1,000 were subjected to surgery (32.9 had their ovaries removed as part of the diagnostic workup). Among these 1,080 women, 163 (15 percent) experienced a total of 222 distinct major complications.

Bottom line: the research team concluded there is no evidence from clinical trials to support regular screening for ovarian cancer at this time. The authors of the study also stated that even an optimized program of annual screening may be insufficient to detect cancers early enough to prevent deaths.

"Evidence from modeling suggests that aggressive cancers progress rapidly through the early stages, limiting the ability to detect these cancers with yearly screening," they stated in the paper. "We conclude that annual screening for ovarian cancer...with simultaneous CA-125 and transvaginal ultrasound does not reduce disease-specific mortality in women at average risk for ovarian cancer but does increase invasive medical procedures and associated harms."

And the researchers ended with this startling news. Apparently, not all ovarian cancers detected may be deadly at all or even need treatment: "In contrast, more ovarian cancers were diagnosed in the screened group than in the usual care group (212 vs. 176), suggesting that some of the additional cancers detected by screenings were not clinically important and, if left undetected, may never have caused any symptoms or affected the women during their life-times (i.e., overdiagnosis)."

For more information:
http://jama.ama-assn.org/

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032654_ovarian_cancer_screenings.html#ixzz1Y8KEV5Nf

Effects Of Common Psychiatrics Drugs - Online Database

2011-09-14T21:40:00.000-07:00

(NaturalNews) If you have ever seen a commercial for a pharmaceutical drug, you are probably familiar with the long list of dangerous side effects that are rattled off in the last five seconds of the advertisement, just after viewers are told how Drug "X" is going to save their lives, improve their memories or give them unlimited energy. What was that? Did he just say that pill might cause bleeding out of my eyes?

Drug companies do a great job - and spend a lot of money - to ensure that most consumers aren't aware of the harmful side effects of common drugs prescribed for conditions like depression, heart disease, arthritis, ADHD or high blood pressure. Unfortunately, the result of this has created a society where the average person with a health problem is captivated by the promises delivered in clever advertising. There is a drug for everything? All I have to do is talk to my doctor? How convenient.

But what if there was a way to take back control of our lives and our health? What if, despite talking to your doctor, you still have questions or concerns about the safety of a drug?

The Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHR) has a database that allows you to do just that. It's called the Psychiatric Drug Database, and it allows consumers to research the potential side effects of common psychiatric drugs, such as Ritalin or Wellbutrin.

While the database is limited to psychiatric drugs, this type of public information portal represents a significant step in the right direction to help patients find unbiased information and make informed decisions about their health.

The database allows you to search by drug and will retrieve information about adverse reactions reported by patients who have taken the drug, international warnings and studies that have been done on the drug and what side effects different age groups or genders have experienced. For example, a search of the effects of Ritalin on 18-30 year old women retrieved 89 reported cases of adverse side effects.

These effects including anxiety, fatigue, hypertension, tremors, chest discomfort, nausea, panic attacks, cardiac murmurs, aggression, suicide attempts and completed suicides. The results are broken down by case and list specific symptoms and reactions caused by the drug in each reported case.

Another search of Zoloft and its effects on young children included cases of cerebral disorders, upper respiratory tract infections, sleep disorders, vertigo, hallucinations, psychomotor hyperactivity and suicidal ideation.

The database only includes information on cases that were actually reported to the FDA's Adverse Event Reporting System between 2004 and 2008. Based on the FDA's own estimates, only about 1 to 10 percent of adverse drug side effects are even reported to the FDA. The CCHR's database, therefore, represents only a small margin of the population that has been affected by adverse side effects of pharmaceutical psychiatric drugs.

Visitors to the site will also notice an interesting anecdote that describes how the definition of poison - a substance that causes death or harm when consumed by a living organism - clearly characterizes the drugs listed in the database. Consumers are encouraged to research potential problems of a drug before agreeing with their doctors to start a course of therapy.
To find more information about a particular drug, visit www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers

Sources for this article include

http://www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdan...

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/033581_psychiatric_drugs_side_effects.html#ixzz1XzbapcEe

Alternative Cancer Treatments - Oncologists Don't Know The Power Of Nutrition and Detoxing

2011-08-16T06:29:00.000-07:00

(NaturalNews) Science can be used to obfuscate reality, especially in medicine. Several disclosures from whistle blowers and investigators have uncovered scandalous false medical journal reports. Most oncologists don't want to know the power of nutrition and detoxification. The extremely low rate of recovery from cancer using expensive toxic methods and creating more suffering continues. Why? Authoritative medical science says it's the only way.

A Few Examples of Real Cancer Cures

A retired teacher decides to burn both ends of her life's candle and winds up with cancer. Her oncologist was insisting on surgery. She went to a friend who told her of the Gerson Institute and a retreat in Australia that applies pretty much the same approach as Gerson. She was cured beyond expectation. Hear this incredible woman tell her story with link (1) in the sources below.

A man diagnosed with stage four prostate cancer is told that sudden pH surges destroy cancer. He orders cesium, but it didn't arrive in time for his next medical examination. Instead, he tried pH surging with bicarbonate of soda and molasses. In weeks, he was cancer free. http://www.naturalnews.com/027481_p...

A concerned father sneaks THC hemp oil into his toddler son's feeding tube to reverse his ebbing health during cancer treatments. The little boy's health surged and he became cancer free. The doctors never knew what the father did to reverse the boy's failing health. [Short video link (2) below]

A middle aged New Zealand man with leukemia goes into a coma from flu/pneumonia complications. The hospital staff threatens to pull his life support until family members insist they try mega-dose IV vitamin C. He walks out of the hospital days later. A year later his checkup showed that he was now leukemia free. http://www.naturalnews.com/030599_v...

Real Stats

These highlights are but a few examples of real cases that were cured without chemo or radiation. There are thousands. Curing cancer naturally with patients who have not undergone chemo or radiation has an over 80% cure rate. Those who come to alternative methods half-dead from chemo and radiation average just around a 50% cure rate.

But even this 50% is higher than the three to five percent cure rate proudly offered by mainstream medicine. Mainstream medicine considers five years cancer free as cured.

Authority Lies and Ridicules

Real people, who use alternative treatments to successfully cure their cancer, are disregarded because they can't scientifically prove that the alternative therapy cured their cancer. But it's the science of authoritative obfuscation that the medical mafia uses to confuse others. [Source (3) below]

Medical authorities claim alternative healers can't provide documentation. Charlotte Gerson says otherwise. Case documents were stolen by a medical mafia mole from her father Max Gerons's office before he died. She and her staff have offered documents since then, but mainstream medicine refuses to accept them. http://www.naturalnews.com/027004_c...

Canadian nurse Rene Caisse was allowed to use a Native American herbal remedy that she named Essiac Tea in her clinic as long as her patients were diagnosed by MDs before and after treatments. Her high cure rate was acknowledged by third party examining physicians. When nurse Caisse died, almost all of her documents were seized and burned. http://www.naturalnews.com/026928_c...

Laetrile, derived from legally available apricot seeds' amygdaline, is illegal despite its efficacy and safety. This is all because the Sloane-Kettering Institute said it didn't work even though their research was positive. Sloane-Kettering's spokesman, Dr. Ralph Moss, was so disgusted by the lies that he resigned and leaked the actual research papers to G. Edward Griffin, who then wrote World Without Cancer. http://www.naturalnews.com/027088_c...

Sources for this article include:

(1) http://healthmaven.blogspot.com/201...

(2) http://healthmaven.blogspot.com/201...

(3) When the Blood Boils, article by Jon Rappoport (a must read) http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2...

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/033320_cancer_cures_alternative.html#ixzz1VCJ6Yh2f

Dog Time!

2011-08-01T10:02:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
I appreciate the guest post, Jewel Rodgers

Getting a dog was something I’d always wanted to do but it didn’t really make sense until I moved into my new house. I finally had a yard and tons of room for one to play in and I had already gone to www.texaselectricityproviders.COM and taken care of the insurance and all the other “adult” parts of owning a house. So a few Saturdays ago my best friend and I went to the pound and I found the most adorable long haired golden puppy – it was just meant to be! I named her Chloe and brought her home that afternoon and now I’m a bonafide (no pun intended) dog owner! Chloe loves the backyard where she can run around and play and I love being able to come home to a happy adorable puppy every day after work. She’s changed my life in all the best ways possible and though I hoped I would like having a dog it’s been even better than I could have imagined!

Japan Hit By Nuclear Weapon And Not An Earthquake?

2011-06-13T10:35:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

(NaturalNews) What if the alleged 9.0+ magnitude mega earthquake that was said to have hit off the coast of Japan back on March 11 never actually happened, and the resultant tsunami that destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant was actually a deliberate, false flag attack using nuclear weapons? Freelance journalist Jim Stone offers compelling evidence that the official story we have all been told concerning the disaster is a phony coverup for a concerted attack against Japan, possibly for offering to enrich uranium for Iran.

An actual 9.0+ mega-quake would have leveled the whole country of Japan

Consider first the massive impact of an actual 9.0 magnitude earthquake, which would have been about 100 times more powerful than the 6.8 magnitude Great Hanshin earthquake of 1995 that destroyed much of the city of Kobe, located about 12.5 miles from the epicenter, and that killed more than 6,400 people. If the March 11 earthquake in Japan was actually a 9.0, it would have devastated everything within a 1,000-mile radius of the epicenter -- and yet the city of Sendai, for example, which is only about 48 miles from the epicenter, suffered virtually no structural damage whatsoever.

Truth be told, the only areas that suffered any significant damage at all were areas hit by the tsunami, which included the Fukushima nuclear plant. Besides the immense damage that occurred at the tsunami-hit nuclear plant, there was virtually no seismic damage in any other towns or cities near the epicenter that were not hit by the tsunami, which suggests that the earthquake could not have been anywhere close to a 9.0. According to Stone's review, the size of the earthquake that hit off Japan's coast actually registered at only about a 6.67 magnitude, according to some readings, while the tsunami that ensued was the equivalent of what would have occurred during an actual 9.0.

Cities and towns hit by tsunami appeared strangely unaware that it was even coming

Another factor to consider is that the towns and cities hit by the tsunami appeared to be largely unaware that it was even coming until moments before it arrived. If a 9.0 earthquake had actually hit as claimed, these areas would have not only experienced monumental destruction beforehand, but people living in them would have already been evacuating the area between when the earthquake supposedly hit, and roughly 40 minutes later when the tsunami actually arrived.

Various video clips and photos in towns and cities about to be hit by the approaching tsunami reveal that business was largely taking place a usual just minutes before it hit. People are shown walking around, buildings are intact, and little appears to be out of place, despite the fact that a mega-quake has supposedly just occurred. Take a look for yourself at Stone's information, as well as photos and videos captured, and think to yourself whether or not the official story makes sense in light of what actually took place (http://www.abeldanger.net/2011/05/j...).

The damage at Fukushima, and particularly at non-operational Reactor 4, could not have occurred simply from flooding or an earthquake

According to Stone's analysis, the damage that took place at the Fukushima nuclear facility could not have been the result of just flooding or even a 9.0 earthquake, assuming that one actually occurred. High-resolution aerial images of the damaged plant taken on March 24 show not only a completely missing Reactor 3, despite ongoing reports that it was still there, but also a completely demolished Reactor 4.

Remember the massive explosion that took place at Reactor 3 just a few days after the tsunami hit? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nw2A...) Blamed on hydrogen buildup, this disastrous event could not have occurred as a result of damage caused by the earthquake or tsunami because a special emergency hydrogen stack designed specifically to deal with hydrogen buildup had been installed at Fukushima following the disastrous Three Mile Island accident. This special hydrogen stack does not require electricity to run, so it was fully operational during the time of the explosion and would have mitigated any hydrogen buildup.

And what about the mysterious Reactor 4 explosion, which occurred despite the fact that the reactor had been de-fueled, and was allegedly non-operational? Even in a worst-case scenario where its fuel rods completely melt down, the type of explosion that would follow would not be capable of literally disintegrating Reactor 4's thick, concrete walls, which is what actually occurred. And Reactor 4 was so heavily damaged by this explosion that it was expected to literally collapse.

So what caused these massive explosions in Reactors 3 and 4 to occur? According to Stone, nuclear weaponry was used to forcibly demolish these structures. Magna BSP, a security firm, allegedly installed massive "security cameras" inside the reactors prior to the disaster. These cameras weighed over 1,000 pounds, and look oddly similar to uranium gun-type nuclear bombs (http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/co...).

When you put two and two together, it appears as though nuclear weapons disguised as security cameras may have been used to blow up Fukushima's reactors. Perhaps this explains the reason for the information blackout on Reactor 4 that occurred in the days following the disaster (http://www.naturalnews.com/031758_F...).

Add to the mix a nuclear-induced tsnuami and corresponding earthquake, and you have the perfect scapegoat for deliberately targeting a nuclear facility and blaming it on natural causes.

A critical analysis of the facts actually makes the official story look like a conspiracy theory

Before dismissing this information as just another wacky conspiracy theory, take the time to review Stone's analysis, and think critically about the basic laws of physics in light of the information we have been told by the media. Would a real 9.0 earthquake have left nearby cities that were not hit by the tsunami undamaged? Why did the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) withhold crucial information about Reactor 4 for so long? And why did such massive damage occur from supposed explosions that, in reality, could not have physically caused them?

These and other questions raise doubt about the official story concerning the Japan earthquake and tsunami. Of course, the reasons why anyone would inflict this type of disaster on purpose is a different subject entirely, but that the disaster appears to have been deliberately caused is a possibility that every critical-thinking person would do best to consider.

Sources for this story include:

http://www.abeldanger.net/2011/05/j...

Lithium To Be Added To Our Water Supply?

2011-06-10T07:10:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) Lithium, the psychiatric drug prescribed for depression, mania and bipolar disorder, is now being viewed as the new fluoride by some experts. These experts are calling for the addition of lithium to the water supply as a cure-all for social problems, including suicide, violent crime and drug use.

Lithium is the new fluoride

Dr. Gerald Schrauzer, who published the first paper in 1989 connecting lithium in water supplies to a decrease in certain undesirable social behaviors, became interested in lithium after growing up next to a "miracle spring" in Franzensbad, Czechoslovakia. This lithium-containing spring was alleged to moderate the temperaments of women in particular.

For centuries, people worldwide have been attracted to springs like these for their calming benefits, and scientists have since found the benefits to be credited to unusually high natural lithium levels.

Of course this is how the addition of fluoride to the water supply came about. It was discovered that people with "Colorado Brown Stain" or "Texas Teeth", names that described a mottling and staining of the tooth enamel (http://www.fluoridealert.org/dental...), lived in areas in Colorado and Texas that had higher naturally occurring levels of fluoride (http://www.austinchronicle.com/news...). It was believed that the naturally occurring fluoride in the water made the enamel of the teeth harder and more resistant to cavities, so it was suggested that fluoride be distributed through the water supply to benefit public health (http://www.fluoridealert.org/cdc.htm).

Unfortunately, we now know that "Colorado Brown Stain" and "Texas Teeth" were cases of dental fluorosis, which can cause pitting and decay of teeth in its severe form, and may actually cause them to be structurally weaker (http://www.fluoridealert.org/health...). 41 percent of American adolescents now suffer from this fluoride induced condition (http://www2.fluoridealert.org/Alert...).

The argument for it

Proponents of lithium in the water supply claim that it has compelling benefits.

A 2009 study across 18 communities in Japan showed that those with higher levels of naturally occurring fluoride were significantly less vulnerable to suicide. A study from this year corroborated the findings, showing that 4 to 15 percent of the variation in suicides across 99 counties in Austria was due to lithium content in regional water supplies.

"As a matter of empirical science, this connection between water-based lithium and suicide is absolutely becoming widely accepted," said Jacob Appel, a psychiatrist and bioethicist at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City. "The research, when one of a scientific persuasion reads it, is compelling -- even if it might be jaw-dropping."

If the research continues to show good results, Appel sees America as a possible first candidate for implementation, citing as a precedent how easily genetically modified and fortified foods have been both approved by the U.S. government and accepted by American consumers.

The public is not buying it

It seems that experts who put forward the notion of adding lithium to the water supply often encounter harsh and sometimes violent feedback.

Dr. Allan Young, a psychiatry professor at Imperial College in London who published a 2009 commentary on the subject, received a handful of death threats and was likened to a Nazi. He also received 500 vitriolic emails after publishing an article on The Huffington Post, several of which were so provocative that they caused him to contact the authorities.

But even experts enthusiastic about adding lithium to the water supply caution about unintended consequences. First, it is still not clear how lithium affects the brain and, second, there is also the consideration of possible personality changes within the recipient.

"Lithium certainly dampens impulsivity, which would explain how it dampens suicide rates," Young said. "But at a population level, what if that impulsivity is being directed in a healthy way -- the person jumping onto the subway tracks to save a life?"

Adding lithium to the water supply could also have the unintended consequence of widespread personality homogenization, according to Peter Kramer, a psychiatrist at Brown Medical School.

"When you change these resilience factors in the brain, you see other changes too, People are less timid and shy, for example," Kramer said. "But maybe people want the right not to have these subtle changes taking place, without making the choice for themselves."

Freedom of choice

To begin with, psychology does not always have the best track record with mental health solutions, particularly when it comes to prescription medications, as evidenced by the implication of antidepressants in suicides and school shootings. (http://www.naturalnews.com/025826_A...)

But there is a much more obvious problem. Dr. Paul Connett, director of Fluoride Action Network, has been fighting to get fluoride out of the water in the remaining 2 percent of countries worldwide that still fluoridate, and one of the major arguments against adding fluoride, or any drug -- lithium included, to the water supply is that you cannot control the dose that any one person will get. Connett argues that, to mass medicate in this way, the government would need to ensure that the dose for every individual in the society was at such a level that it would be safe and completely non-toxic -- this means accommodating an adequately safe dose for everyone including infants to large males or different races, ethnicities, ages and sexes (http://austintx.swagit.com/player.p...).

If it were even possible to arrive at such a dosage, Connett argues that such a policy would violate informed consent because those drinking the water are not being made aware of the risks associated with the drug and do not have the right to opt out if they do not wish to assume those risks.

Sources for this article include:
http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/0...
http://austintx.swagit.com/player.p...
http://www.naturalnews.com/025826_A...
http://www.austinchronicle.com/news...
http://www.fluoridealert.org/cdc.htm)
http://www2.fluoridealert.org/Alert...).
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health...
http://www.fluoridealert.org/dental...

Japan May Become Uninhabitable Due To Nuclear Meltdown

2011-06-09T09:25:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) Recent reports confirming that Reactors 1, 2, and 3 of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear facility completely melted just hours after the devastating earthquake and tsunami hit the area on March 11 (http://www.naturalnews.com/032537_F...) have been trumped by even worse news that those same reactors have all likely "melted through," a situation that according to Japan's Daily Yomiuri DY is "the worst possibility in a nuclear accident."

And senior political official Ichiro Ozawa suggested in an interview with The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) that the Fukushima situation could make the entire country of Japan "unlivable."

A nuclear core meltdown involves nuclear fuel exceeding its melting point to the point where it damages the core, leaks out, and threatens to potentially release high levels of radiation into the environment. However, a nuclear melt-through is an even worse scenario, as nuclear fuel literally melts through the bottom of damaged reactor pressure vessels into out containment vessels -- and possibly even melts through those outer vessels directly into ground, air, and water.

The report suggesting that melt-throughs have already occurred, which is set to be submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is the "first official recognition" of this dire situation, according to DY. It also confirms early suspicions that such a scenario had been underway all along, as later reports confirmed that the epic disaster at the reactors had produced holes in come of the plant's core containment vessels, and that radioactive water, and possibly even fuel, were leaking into the lower vessels.

IAEA has already stated that the Fukushima disaster is at least as bad as the Chernobyl disaster (http://www.theatlanticwire.com/glob...), but this new information now suggests that it is probably even worse. At this time, it is unknown whether the fuel that has accumulated in the outer containment vessels has seeped outside, where it has the potential to contaminate groundwater supplies and wreak widespread environmental damage.

In an interview conducted prior to the release of the new report, Ichiro Ozawa told the WSJ that areas around Fukushima were already becoming completely "uninhabitable." He also suggested that as it currently stands, much of the rest of the country, including Tokyo, could suffer the same fate if nothing is done to properly and effectively contain the situation.

Sources for this story include:

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/nationa...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...

http://hawaiinewsdaily.com/2011/03/...

Environmental Toxins And Autism Link

2011-06-08T09:25:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

(CNN) Autism and environmental health experts called for greater scrutiny of chemicals found in the environment, which could potentially lead to autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders, in a conference call Tuesday.

"We live, breathe and start our families in the presence of toxic chemical mixtures and constant low-level toxic exposures, in stark contrast to the way chemicals are tested for safety," said Donna Ferullo, Director of Program Research at The Autism Society.

"Lead, mercury, and other neurotoxic chemicals have a profound effect on the developing brain at levels that were once thought to be safe," she said.

Autism spectrum disorders are being diagnosed at unprecedented rates, partly because of improved diagnostic tools and criteria, but also a host of other factors including what mothers-to-be are exposed and consequently their unborn children too, said Irva Hertz-Piccotto, Chief of the Division of Environmental Health at the University of California, Davis, and a faculty member at the Mind Institute.

About 1 in 110 children in the United States has autism, a group of developmental disorders that lead to impairments in behavior, communication and socialization. The cost of autism is staggering: $3.2 million for the care of a person with autism throughout his or her life; behavioral therapy can be hard to come by and be very limited, and most medications don't help much.
Studies have strongly suggested a genetic component in the cause of autism, but it's becoming clear that genetics alone isn't the whole story; there could be interactions between susceptibility genes and environmental chemicals.

Recent research from her group, appearing in the journal Epidemiology, showed that prenatal vitamins taken prior to conception seem to interact with certain metabolizing genes that are inherited. Those women who did not take the vitamins, and had the high-risk genotypes, were more likely to have a child with autism. Still, this was a small study limited in scope, and more research should be done to confirm these findings.

The central nervous system of the fetus is sensitive to a wide range of chemicals, Hertz-Piccotto said. Hormones, such as estrogens and androgens, are essential for proper brain development. Endocrine-disrupting compounds need more research, she said. Flame-retardant chemicals called PBDEs interfere with the body's hormones. Even though many of them are no longer used in manufacturing, they can hang around in the environment and the human body for a long time. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is aware of concerns about these chemicals and is working on accessing substitutions (see the action plan).

Bisphenol A, present in plastic food packaging and water bottles, among other products, is another big concern, she said, because it could interfere with the body's natural estrogen system; antimicrobials added to soaps, toothpaste and other products can artificially enhance androgenic activity.

"That means that they could potentially play a role in autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders," Hertz-Piccotto said.

Moreover, many children with autism spectrum disorders have abnormal immune responses. The chemical messengers in the immune system interact with the receptors in the brain, so chemicals that affect immunity could also be implicated in autism.

Thyroid dysfunction is common in children with autism that psychiatrist Dr. Suruchi Chandra sees, even though that's not part of the classical symptoms of the condition. She believes the abnormalities are due to the thyroid hormone disruptors such as BPA and flame retardants.
"Thyroid hormone is critical for brain development in early life, and even small alterations in hormone levels can have serious consequences; long-lasting and perhaps irreversible consequences in terms of brain function," she said.

Air pollution from traffic and certain pesticides have also been shown to have associations with autism, studies have shown. Maternal conditions could partially result from chemicals in the environment.

Andy Igrejas, National Campaign Director of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, called for an update of the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) has proposed a stricter version that would require all industrial chemicals to be tested for safety.

All-Natural ArginMax Produces Incredible Results In Female Cancer Survivors

2011-06-07T07:36:00.000-07:00

Image by PaRAnOid AnDRoiD ARG via Flickr
(NaturalNews) Big Pharma's drugs have failed miserably in helping female cancer survivors deal with quality of life problems that can linger for years after chemo and radiation treatments are finished. But now there's help on the horizon -- and it's all natural and appears to be free of side effects. Study results just presented at the 2011 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting in Chicago revealed a natural combination of nutrients and phytochemicals were healthy for female cancer survivors across the board with a wide variety of problems.

Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center scientists were looking for a way to help women cancer survivors who often suffer from sexual problems following their chemo and other mainstream medical therapies. So the researchers tested a natural nutritional supplement (which has been marketed for the last decade to boost all around well-being and balance hormones); the supplement had already been shown in a small study conducted at Stanford University to improve sexual function.

The Wake Forest research team conducted a double-blind, placebo controlled study and found the all-natural supplement didn't measurably improve sexual function in the cancer patients. But imagine the scientists' surprise when the results of the study were analyzed. They found the herbal/vitamin blend produced incredible results in other areas of the women's lives -- reducing pain, relieving insomnia, stopping nausea and boosting energy.

The Wake Forest research, funded by the National Cancer Institute, used a supplement sold as ArginMax for Women which is made from a proprietary blend of L-arginine, ginseng, ginkgo, and 14 vitamins and minerals. Many of these natural ingredients have long been used in traditional medicine to boost energy and circulation and optimize hormonal balance.

For the study, scientists at the Comprehensive Cancer Center at Wake Forest Baptist, the Derrick L. Davis Forsyth Regional Cancer Center, and multiple other cancer centers across the country recruited 186 female cancer survivors who were at least six months past their last treatment for any type of malignancy. The trial was strictly controlled so that neither the research subjects nor the investigators knew who was receiving the supplement and who was being given a placebo pill.

At the start of the study and again at four weeks, eight weeks and 12 weeks after taking the supplement or placebo, all the women completed two standardized questionnaires that measured sexual function and quality of life. Dubbed the FACT-G questionnaire, it measures overall quality of life and has been used in research of all cancer types to evaluate physical, emotional, social and functional well-being.

Amazingly, every single cancer survivor who took the herbal/vitamin supplement was found to have a dramatic boost in measures of overall quality of life.

"The group taking the supplements experienced significant improvement in overall quality of life, particularly physical well-being," Kathryn M. Greven, M.D., a radiation oncologist at Wake Forest Baptist and the lead investigator on the study, said in a statement to the media.

"Bothersome symptoms such as lack of energy, pain, nausea, and sleeplessness were all improved, as were measures of functional well-being, for example the ability to perform normal activities at home or work. Simply, they reported a greater enjoyment of life, without any additional side effects from the supplement."

Edward G. Shaw, M.D., M.A., an oncologist as well as counselor and principal investigator for Wake Forest Baptist's Community Clinical Oncology Program Research Base, was a co-researcher on the study. In the press statement, he noted that cancer survivors can suffer from persistent inflammation (also called chronic oxidative stress) for years after chemo, radiation and other mainstream medical cancer treatments. The result can be lingering fatigue that greatly reduces the quality of life. Dr. Shaw hypothesized that the herbal and vitamin ingredients in the supplement used for the study counteract this process.

"Beyond managing individual symptoms as they appear, the medical community has not been able to offer cancer patients more global symptom relief. This research is empowering for the community of cancer survivors," he noted. "It is very exciting that we've found something that has the potential to affect and improve quality of life for female cancer survivors."

For more information:

http://www.wakehealth.edu/News-Rele...

E.coli Superbug Bioengineered To Purposely Kill People?

2011-06-06T08:01:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

(NaturalNews) Even as the veggie blame game is now under way across the EU, where a super resistant strain of e.coli is sickening patients and filling hospitals in Germany, virtually no one is talking about how e.coli could have magically become resistant to eight different classes of antibiotic drugs and then suddenly appeared in the food supply.

This particular e.coli variation is a member of the O104 strain, and O104 strains are almost never (normally) resistant to antibiotics. In order for them to acquire this resistance, they must be repeatedly exposed to antibiotics in order to provide the "mutation pressure" that nudges them toward complete drug immunity.

So if you're curious about the origins of such a strain, you can essentially reverse engineer the genetic code of the e.coli and determine fairly accurately which antibiotics it was exposed to during its development. This step has now been done (see below), and when you look at the genetic decoding of this O104 strain now threatening food consumers across the EU, a fascinating picture emerges of how it must have come into existence.

The genetic code reveals the history

When scientists at Germany's Robert Koch Institute decoded the genetic makeup of the O104 strain, they found it to be resistant to all the following classes and combinations of antibiotics:

• penicillins
• tetracycline
• nalidixic acid
• trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazol
• cephalosporins
• amoxicillin / clavulanic acid
• piperacillin-sulbactam
• piperacillin-tazobactam

In addition, this O104 strain posses an ability to produce special enzymes that give it what might be called "bacteria superpowers" known technically as ESBLs:

"Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamases (ESBLs) are enzymes that can be produced by bacteria making them resistant to cephalosporins e.g. cefuroxime, cefotaxime and ceftazidime - which are the most widely used antibiotics in many hospitals," explains the Health Protection Agency in the UK (http://www.hpa.org.uk/Topics/Infect...).

On top of that, this O104 strain possesses two genes -- TEM-1 and CTX-M-15 -- that "have been making doctors shudder since the 1990s," reports The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...). And why do they make doctors shudder? Because they're so deadly that many people infected with such bacteria experience critical organ failure and simply die.

Bioengineering a deadly superbug

So how, exactly, does a bacterial strain come into existence that's resistant to over a dozen antibiotics in eight different drug classes and features two deadly gene mutations plus ESBL enzyme capabilities?

There's really only one way this happens (and only one way) -- you have to expose this strain of e.coli to all eight classes of antibiotics drugs. Usually this isn't done at the same time, of course: You first expose it to penicillin and find the surviving colonies which are resistant to penicillin. You then take those surviving colonies and expose them to tetracycline. The surviving colonies are now resistant to both penicillin and tetracycline. You then expose them to a sulfa drug and collect the surviving colonies from that, and so on. It is a process of genetic selection done in a laboratory with a desired outcome. This is essentially how some bioweapons are engineered by the U.S. Army in its laboratory facility in Ft. Detrick, Maryland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation...).

Although the actual process is more complicated than this, the upshot is that creating a strain of e.coli that's resistant to eight classes of antibiotics requires repeated, sustained expose to those antibiotics. It is virtually impossible to imagine how this could happen all by itself in the natural world. For example, if this bacteria originated in the food (as we've been told), then where did it acquire all this antibiotic resistance given the fact that antibiotics are not used in vegetables?

When considering the genetic evidence that now confronts us, it is difficult to imagine how this could happen "in the wild." While resistance to a single antibiotic is common, the creation of a strain of e.coli that's resistant to eight different classes of antibiotics -- in combination -- simply defies the laws of genetic permutation and combination in the wild. Simply put, this superbug e.coli strain could not have been created in the wild. And that leaves only one explanation for where it really came from: the lab.

Engineered and then released into the wild

The evidence now points to this deadly strain of e.coli being engineered and then either being released into the food supply or somehow escaping from a lab and entering the food supply inadvertently. If you disagree with that conclusion -- and you're certainly welcome to -- then you are forced to conclude that this octobiotic superbug (immune to eight classes of antibiotics) developed randomly on its own... and that conclusion is far scarier than the "bioengineered" explanation because it means octobiotic superbugs can simply appear anywhere at any time without cause. That would be quite an exotic theory indeed.

My conclusion actually makes more sense: This strain of e.coli was almost certainly engineered and then released into the food supply for a specific purpose. What would that purpose be? It's obvious, I hope.

It's all problem, reaction, solution at work here. First cause a PROBLEM (a deadly strain of e.coli in the food supply). Then wait for the public REACTION (huge outcry as the population is terrorized by e.coli). In response to that, enact your desired SOLUTION (total control over the global food supply and the outlawing of raw sprouts, raw milk and raw vegetables).

That's what this is all about, of course. The FDA relied on the same phenomenon in the USA when pushing for its recent "Food Safety Modernization Act" which essentially outlaws small family organic farms unless they lick the boots of FDA regulators. The FDA was able to crush farm freedom in America by piggybacking on the widespread fear that followed e.coli outbreaks in the U.S. food supply. When people are afraid, remember, it's not difficult to get them to agree to almost any level of regulatory tyranny. And making people afraid of their food is a simple matter... a few government press releases emailed to the mainstream media news affiliates is all it takes.

First ban the natural medicine, then attack the food supply

Now, remember: All this is happening on the heels of the EU ban on medicinal herbs and nutritional supplements -- a ban that blatantly outlaws nutritional therapies that help keep people healthy and free from disease. Now that all these herbs and supplements are outlawed, the next step is to make people afraid of fresh food, too. That's because fresh vegetables are medicinal, and as long as the public has the right to buy fresh vegetables, they can always prevent disease.

But if you can make people AFRAID of fresh vegetables -- or even outlaw them altogether -- then you can force the entire population onto a diet of dead foods and processed foods that promote degenerative disease and bolster the profits of the powerful drug companies.

It's all part of the same agenda, you see: Keep people sick, deny them access to healing herbs and supplements, then profit from their suffering at the hands of the global drug cartels.

GMOs play a similar role in all this, of course: They're designed to contaminate the food supply with genetic code that causes widespread infertility among human beings. And those who are somehow able to reproduce after exposure to GMOs still suffer from degenerative disease that enriches the drug companies from "treatment."

Do you recall which country was targeted in this recent e.coli scare? Spain. Why Spain? You may recall that leaked cables from Wikileaks revealed that Spain resisted the introduction of GMOs into its agricultural system, even as the U.S. government covertly threatened political retaliation for its resistance. This false blaming of Spain for the e.coli deaths is probably retaliation for Spain's unwillingness to jump on the GMO bandwagon. (http://www.naturalnews.com/030828_G...)

That's the real story behind the economic devastation of Spain's vegetable farmers. It's one of the subplots being pursued alongside this e.coli superbug scheme.

Food as weapons of war - created by Big Pharma?

By the way, the most likely explanation of where this strain of e.coli was bioengineered is that the drug giants came up with it in their own labs. Who else has access to all the antibiotics and equipment needed to manage the targeted mutations of potentially thousands of e.coli colonies? The drug companies are uniquely positioned to both carry out this plot and profit from it. In other words, they have the means and the motive to engage in precisely such actions.

Aside from the drug companies, perhaps only the infectious disease regulators themselves have this kind of laboratory capacity. The CDC, for example, could probably pull this off if they really wanted to.

The proof that somebody bioengineered this e.coli strain is written right in the DNA of the bacteria. That's forensic evidence, and what it reveals cannot be denied. This strain underwent repeated and prolonged exposure to eight different classes of antibiotics, and then it somehow managed to appear in the food supply. How do you get to that if not through a well-planned scheme carried out by rogue scientists? There is no such thing as "spontaneous mutation" into a strain that is resistant to the top eight classes of brand-name antibiotic drugs being sold by Big Pharma today. Such mutations have to be deliberate.

Once again, if you disagree with this assessment, then what you're saying is that NO, it wasn't done deliberately... it happened accidentally! And again, I'm saying that's even scarier! Because that means the antibiotic contamination of our world is now at such an extreme level of overkill that a strain of e.coli in the wild can be saturated with eight different classes of antibiotics to the point where it naturally develops into its own deadly superbug. If that's what people believe, then that's almost a scarier theory than the bioengineering explanation!

A new era has begun: Bioweapons in your food

But in either case -- no matter what you believe -- the simple truth is that the world is now facing a new era of global superbug strains of bacteria that can't be treated with any known pharmaceutical. They can all, of course, be readily killed with colloidal silver, which is exactly why the FDA and world health regulators have viciously attacked colloidal silver companies all these years: They can't have the public getting its hands on natural antibiotics that really work, you see. That would defeat the whole purpose of making everybody sick in the first place.

In fact, these strains of e.coli superbugs can be quite readily treated with a combination of natural full-spectrum antibiotics from plants such as garlic, ginger, onions and medicinal herbs. On top of that, probiotics can help balance the flora of the digestive tract and "crowd out" the deadly e.coli that might happen by. A healthy immune system and well-functioning digestive tract can fight off an e.coli superbug infection, but that's yet another fact the medical community doesn't want you to know. They much prefer you to remain a helpless victim lying in the hospital, waiting to die, with no options available to you. That's "modern medicine" for ya. They cause the problems that they claim to treat, and then they won't even treat you with anything that works in the first place.

Nearly all the deaths now attributable to this e.coli outbreak are easily and readily avoidable. These are deaths of ignorance. But even more, they may also be deaths from a new era of food-based bioweapons unleashed by either a group of mad scientists or an agenda-driven institution that has declared war on the human population.

Tracking Chips In Your Food?

2011-06-04T13:03:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) It will monitor your calorie intake, show from where your food was sourced, and even let you know when the food in your fridge is about to go bad -- these are some of the enticing claims made by the developers of a new system that embeds edible radio frequency identification (RFID) chips directly into food. Its creators insist the technology will revolutionize the way humans eat for the better, but critical-thinking onlookers will recognize the ploy as just another way to track and control human behavior.

Developed by Hannes Harms from the Royal College of Art in London, the "NutriSmart" system is based on the idea that RFID wafers injected directly into food can help better track the food supply chain, further automate the supermarket shopping experience, and simplify the eating experience by programming data into food so that humans essentially do not have to think about what they are
doing.

The technology makes both eating and dealing with food in general mindless, as a person simply needs to plop an RFID-embedded food item onto a special RFID-laced plate, which then tells the person all about the item and how much of it to eat. RFID ovens and microwaves also eliminate having to think about how long to cook an RFID food item -- simply put it in the RFID microwave, oven, or toaster, and the machine will know exactly how long to cook the item.

As interesting and novel as this might sound, such technology is actually quite frightening when taken to its logical ends. NaturalNews previously warned that mad scientists have already developed edible RFID tags for use in pharmaceutical drugs (http://www.naturalnews.com/028663_h...). These tags, of course, can and will likely be used to monitor patients' compliance with doctors orders, and alert authorities if a patient refuses to take certain pills as prescribed.

And if such technology also ends up in food, it is safe to assume that evil powers will seek to control the food supply with it, as well as monitor the types of food people eat. In other words, if authorities one day decide that vitamin and mineral supplements are off limits, which is what is currently happening in Europe (http://www.naturalnews.com/032389_h...), it is plausible that RFID technology can assess illegal intake of such nutrients, and immediately send this data to the appropriate enforcement agencies.

This 1984-esque scenario appears to be more than just science fiction -- it is unfolding before our eyes just a little bit more every single day. And the NutriSmart system is just another piece of evidence that those in power wish to micromanage every single aspect of our lives, from the drugs we take to the foods we eat.

Sources for this story include:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-05...

A Drug That Reduces Bad Memories - Is It A Good Thing?

2011-06-02T09:20:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

(Reuters Health) - Blocking a hormone involved in the body's stress response may change the way people remember negative memories, according to a new study.
But it's still unclear exactly how the drug involved works, and if the finding has implications for the treatment of people with conditions like post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

The drug, metyrapone, blocks the stress hormone cortisol and has been used to treat people with diseases related to cortisol production.

But cortisol is also involved in storing and retrieving memories, leading researchers to wonder if tinkering with its levels in the body could change how people recall past events.

"We know that (cortisol) is important for memory," Marie-France Marin, the study's lead author from the University of Montreal, told Reuters Health. "Very high levels are bad for your memory, and very low levels are bad for your memory," she explained.

In their research, Marin and her colleagues went for the very low levels, using metyrapone to stop healthy volunteers from producing cortisol.

Those volunteers, 33 young men, were first shown a narrated slide show that had both "neutral" and "emotionally negative" slides.

The slides told the story of a young girl who goes to her grandparents' house. There, she and her grandparents try to build a birdhouse, and the girl gets badly injured, with scenes showing lots of blood and a trip to the operating room. In the end, viewers know that the girl will be okay.

Three days after watching the video, researchers gave the men either a single 750-milligram dose of metyrapone, a double dose, or a drug-free placebo pill. Then they asked them to recall as much information as possible from the story.

Another four days after that, they brought the participants in once more, and without giving them any drugs asked them to recall the story again.

There was no difference in how men who had taken a single dose of metyrapone and those given a placebo remembered the story either time.

But on both occasions, those given a double dose remembered significantly less of the negative emotional components of the story.

For example, men in the placebo group scored between 40 and 50 percent on their second memory test for negative emotional information in the story, compared to about 30 percent in the group given a double metyrapone dose.

"The fact that the effects of metyrapone were still evident for four days after -- that's pretty remarkable," Tony Buchanan, who studies stress and memory at Saint Louis University and was not involved in the study, told Reuters Health.

Both metyrapone groups still recalled the "neutral" information as well as the placebo group.
The investigators who determined how much participants remembered didn't know whether they had taken metyrapone or the placebo, the authors note in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism.

Marin and her colleagues believe that once participants were asked to retrieve the memory of the story, those taking the high dose of metyrapone re-stored that memory in a different, less-emotional way -- probably because cortisol levels were lower at that time.

Though they predicted that people would remember the story differently while under the effects of the drug, they didn't know the memory would still be changed once hormone levels returned to normal.

"What was really surprising is that once the memory was sorted in the brain we were able to modify it in a long-lasting manner," Marin said.

Researchers still aren't sure why metyrapone might affect how negative memories, but not neutral ones, are recalled and re-stored, Marin said.

The ultimate goal from this and other studies that have tried to use drugs to alter negative memories is to treat people who are overwhelmed by these memories, such as war veterans suffering from PTSD -- an idea that still makes some uncomfortable.

According to the National Institute of Mental Health, about 3.5 percent of U.S. adults suffer from PTSD -- but that rate climbs to up to 20 percent in estimates of veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

PTSD is generally treated with psychotherapy, including cognitive behavioral therapy, and some people are also prescribed anti-depressants. Marin said a drug like metyrapone could one day prove helpful for people who don't get better with therapy alone.

But it's not clear yet that a drug that helps people without PTSD remember fewer ugly details in a story will also work for those who experienced the trauma first-hand and have been profoundly affected by that trauma.

"We need to see if autobiographical memories are sensitive (to metyrapone) in the same way or not," Marin said.

What's more, "only a small fraction of people exposed to traumatic events experience PTSD," Buchanan said. It's hard to tell if any of those 33 volunteers might have had certain characteristics that would predispose them to PTSD or not, he said.

In people with that predisposition, he said, "you'd imagine there's something different about their brains before the trial," which could affect how they recall negative memories.

Researchers also can't be sure that women would have the same reaction to the drug as men, since only men were used in the study.

Metyrapone, sold under the name Metopirone in the U.S., is currently not on the market, the authors note, so it's important also to study other drugs that may have the same effect.

More research is needed before metyrapone, or similar drugs that block cortisol, can be tested in PTSD patients. But according to Buchanan, the new study "is a great step in that direction."

SOURCE: bit.ly/jQim60 Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, online May 18, 2011.

Weight Lifting Class Getting My Form Perfect

2011-06-01T12:25:00.000-07:00

Image by teamstickergiant via Flickr
Thanks for the article from Robin Woodard

Weight lifting is a passion for me, so it was a natural progression to take a group exercise class at my local gym. Even though I did weight lifting before the class I learn a lot by taking it. One of the biggest things I learned in a group setting was the mistakes that I was making. Form is very important when you talk about weight lifting and learning to do it properly is very important. I learned this from taking the class, and I would always set my home security alarm from www.TotalAlarmSystems.com/ before going to group exercise class.

Another big advantage of the group exercise class was I could learn and interact with others. Many times you cannot find someone that has the same kind of passion that you have. In this class setting you can feel at ease talking about what you love to do. Learning from your classmates was another big plus I loved. They gave a lot of great advice to me as well. The instructor was a guy who knew his craft making the class go way to fast if you ask me. I gained a lot of knowledge from the weight lifting class and would recommend it to anyone.

Chinese Organics Are Safety Hazards For U.S. Consumers

2011-05-31T10:51:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) Three years ago, Chinese baby formula tainted with Melamine caused the death of six infants and over 300,000 serious injuries. After initially suppressing the information, the Chinese government made a grand gesture of eradicating the problem. The company was shut down. Some executives were even put to death. The epidemic, however, was not.

The scandal reared its head earlier this year, when the product line was placed back into circulation in China. Innumerable parents stood helplessly by as their toddlers developed kidney stones caused by the same Melamine-laced formula that they had hoped to consider a notorious and dark part of their country's history.

Many citizens in China are only too aware of the food safety issues that are still rampant in their country. Verna Yu, a writer in Hong Kong, reported to the New York Times a brief history of the health issues that have plagued Chinese food safety, placing the scandal in a nightmarish context: "...there had been plenty of food scares floating around: The fake baby formula killed 12 babies in 2004, the carcinogenic food-coloring that found its way into many food products in 2005, not to mention fake eggs, fake vaccines and flour tainted with powdered lime."

Many consumers in the US, however, do not understand how these food safety problems might affect their own families, and organic produce is one of the most significant potential hazards. Currently, the US imports 80% of its organic produce, the vast majority of which hails from Mexico, Brazil, and China. So people who try to avoid artificial fertilizers and insecticides by making organic purchases are likely to eat food from China. Ironically, the people who think they are safest from harm are actually closest to it.

A number of incidents this year have alerted the organics-consuming public to possibility of food contamination. Among them was a discovery on February 11, when the USDA uncovered a Chinese company exporting inferior products under the pristine guise of the organic label. Among the goods, which had been produced using non-organic means, was a shipment of ginger that had been heavily dusted with a dangerous pesticide, called aldicarb.

Even in small portions, aldicarb can leave consumers with nausea and blurred vision. But in high doses, it can be deadly - the respiratory system seizes up entirely, leaving the victim unable to breathe. This batch would not have even qualified for the non-organic market, due to the excessive amounts of the noxious chemical. Fortunately this time, the USDA was lucky to have caught the problem before it entered the US food markets.

Miraculous would be the word to use, as the Chinese company was caught - not because the ginger failed to pass any sort of inspection, but due to its counterfeit documents. Rather than being sent to one of the certification entities in China to receive its documentation, its papers had been forged, citing Ecocert as its certifying entity. Ecocert, a USDA accredited certification company, had notified the USDA of the lie.

This shipment was not caught because it was aldicarb-dusted and potentially lethal. It was caught because it was fraudulent in the wrong way. Currently, there are no tests for organic produce being imported to the US, yet Americans still trust the organic label. Mischa Popoff, author of Is it Organic? states "because of the US government lack of objective standards, consumers of organic food have a big sign on their foreheads that says, 'I'll buy anything if it says organic.'"

Organic suppliers are required to describe their activities on a daily basis. When an organic certifying agency, such as Ecocert, looks at the list of tasks performed to bring the crop to market, it looks for non-organic methods, such as fertilizer, etc. So, the ginger-supplier could have simply written down an organic pesticide, and any certifying agency would have blindly given them the stamp of approval. There would have been no way to stop the shipment from being placed neatly under the sign "Organic ginger."

Mr. Popoff points out the terrifying possibility that few have the courage to voice: "It's about knowing human nature. If they caught aldicarb, there is every reason to believe this was just the tip of the iceberg." If Chinese companies will feed Melamine to their own country, what is stopping them here?

Sources:
Renewable energy news (http://www.renewable-energy-news.in...)
Mischa Popoff (http://www.isitorganic.ca/cornucopi...)
Cornucopia (http://www.cornucopia.org/2011/02/u...)
New York Times (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refer...)

Sunshine Can Help Fight Cancer - Doctors Finally Admit It

2011-05-27T08:34:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) Since the 1980s, physicians and cancer groups have regularly warned the public against the potential health dangers of direct sunlight on skin. As a result, many people have stayed out of the sunlight completely, covered their limbs even in warm weather or slathered themselves with UV protection products, all in the interest of lowering their risk of melanomas.

However, more recent findings indicate that this kind of nearly vampiric avoidance of the sun may not benefit your cancer odds after all.

A 2009 study by a group of Leeds University researchers found that higher levels of Vitamin D were linked to improved skin cancer survival odds. Other studies have found that Vitamin D has a connection to a strong immune response in the body. In fact, Vitamin D may hasten the death of tumor cells.

Unfortunately, most people have low levels of Vitamin D, leaving them at higher risk for a host of diseases including breast cancer, prostate cancer, bowel cancer, cervical cancer, rickets and osteoporosis. (For more in-depth information on this, see this report: http://www.naturalnews.com/rr-sunli...)

"It's common for the general public to have low levels of vitamin D in many countries," said Professor Julia Newton Bishop of the Leeds Institute of Molecular Medicine and author of the Leeds study. "Melanoma patients tend to avoid the sun as sunburn is known to increase the risk of melanoma. We use sunshine to make vitamin D in the skin, so melanoma patients' levels of vitamin D may be especially low."

Bishop also noted that people can get more Vitamin D through dietary sources such as fatty fish. She points out that balance is key, as extremely high levels of Vitamin D can have a negative effect on health.

The mainstream media continues to run stories every summer warning people against the sun even two years after the Leeds study. While hours of sunbathing may be risky behavior for your long-term health, receiving a moderate amount of sunlight while out gardening or walking is actually as good for you as eating a low-fat diet and engaging in regular exercise. In fact, laying off the sunscreen may help you not only absorb sunshine into your skin to help fight tumors, but also helps you avoid the chemicals in most commercial sun blocking products. Some studies have indicated that these chemicals can actually generate harmful free radicals in the body.

So this summer, relax, and enjoy the sunshine.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/article...
http://www.skinbiology.com/toxicsun...

Walking And Tylenol Can Cut Prostate Cancer Risk

2011-05-26T07:18:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
In the first study, published Monday in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, scientists found that men who took a daily dose of acetaminophen (Tylenol) for five years had a 38% lower risk of developing prostate cancer, compared with other men. Additionally, daily acetaminophen was associated with a 51% reduced risk of developing an aggressive form of the disease. Men who took acetaminophen for less than five years saw no protective benefit.

Previous research has shown that taking aspirin or other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) every day may help reduce prostate cancer risk. The authors theorize that the same may be true of acetaminophen; while not an NSAID, it does have anti-inflammatory properties.

For the study, the researchers looked at data from 78,485 men who participated in the longitudinal Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort, answering questions about diet and drug use every two years starting in 1992. During the follow-up, there were 8,092 cases of prostate cancer — significantly fewer in the group who took acetaminophen daily for five years.

The second study, published online Tuesday by Cancer Research, involved 1,455 men who had already been diagnosed with early-stage prostate cancer. Researchers from the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), and Harvard School of Public Health followed the men from 2004 to 2009 and found that those who engaged in regular brisk walking after diagnosis were significantly less likely to see their disease progress.

Men who walked briskly — at a pace of about 3 miles per hour or faster — at least three hours per week were 57% less likely to experience disease progression (including elevated PSA levels, secondary treatment, bone metastasis or prostate cancer-related death), compared with men who walked less and more slowly.

"The important point was the intensity of the activity," Erin Richman, a postdoctoral fellow at UCSF, said in a statement. "The walking had to be brisk for men to experience a benefit."
The researchers said the effect of brisk walking persisted independent of age, diagnosis, type of treatment and characteristics of disease. The patients' average age at diagnosis was 65. The findings are in line with previous research suggesting that physical activity may help reduce the risk of disease-related death in certain cases of prostate cancer.

Why the association? MedPage Today reports:

Richman and colleagues noted that the brisk walks may reduce insulin resistance, which decreases bioavailable insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF1) and increases adiponectin levels, which are all associated with decreased risk of advanced or fatal prostate cancer in vitro and in vivo.

Another potential source of the associated reduction was reduced inflammation due to a lower circulation of interleukin-6, high levels of which "predicted a 73% increased risk of dying from prostate cancer among normal-weight men," the researchers wrote.

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men. According to the National Cancer Institute, about 32,050 men died from prostate cancer in 2010 and 217,000 new cases were diagnosed. More than 2.2 million men in the U.S. are living with prostate cancer.

Medical Doctors Are Bad For Your Health And Could Kill You!

2011-05-25T07:26:00.000-07:00

Image by edenpictures via Flickr
(NaturalNews) Today's doctors-in-training are learning how to think critically and clearly about the need for -- and potential dangers of -- any drugs they prescribe. And surgeons only operate if they are physically and mentally able to make sure they will not be putting their patient in any danger, right? Unfortunately, two new papers show that those assumptions are wrong. In fact, they reveal critical reasons why mainstream medicine can be a danger to your health and even threaten your life.

Bottom line: med students are being taught through a hidden curriculum devised and carried out by Big Pharma (and allowed by medical schools) to push the prescribing of their drugs. Meanwhile, countless surgeons are operating and sometimes harming patients because they are impaired by fatigue and lack of sleep.

Here are the facts. Medical students in the United States are being bombarded with the pro-drug propaganda of pharmaceutical companies -- and the students are exposed to this throughout their education, even in the years before they have clinical experience treating patients. According to research led by Kirsten Austad and Aaron S. Kesselheim from Harvard Medical School just published in PLoS Medicine, it turns out the drug giants have created what the Harvard researchers have dubbed a highly influential hidden curriculum
that pushes doctors-in-training into accepting and promoting Big Pharma's prescription drugs and other therapies.

The enormous and ongoing contact with drug companies is associated with medical professionals developing positive attitudes about the marketing of prescription medications. Moreover, the med students are not developing any healthy skepticism about potential negative implications of the drug pushing techniques -- or the drugs themselves.

The Harvard research team studied all published studies on this topic and collected the results from a total of 9,850 medical students studying at 76 different medical schools. The results showed that most medical students were interacting with the pharmaceutical industry and that contact increased in the clinical years.

In fact, up to 90 percent of all students working with patients in clinics were receiving some form of educational materials from none other than Big Pharma. And most of the medical students thought it was fine and dandy to accept gifts from drug manufacturers. They justified taking these freebies by claiming they were entitled to gifts from drug manufacturers because they had financial hardships; some med students said it must be ethical because most other students accepted gifts, too.

Almost two-thirds of students claimed that despite the fact they were receiving promotions, gifts and having other interactions with Big Pharma sales representatives, they were somehow miraculously immune from any bias from all this attention and all the "extras" from drug companies. Student opinions were split on whether physician-industry interactions should be regulated either by medical schools or the government.

The authors of the new study recommend better education for medical students on the subject of physician and drug industry relationships and they are also pushing for medical institutions to support reforms such as rules limiting the contact students have with Big Pharma marketing. However, in a statement to the media, the researchers noted it could be difficult to change the influence of the drug giants who seem to have a stronghold on medical schools and students.

"Given the potential for educational and institutional messages to be counteracted by the hidden curriculum, changes should be directed at faculty and residents who serve as role models for medical students," the scientists concluded. "These changes can help move medical education a step closer to two important goals: the cultivation of strong professional values, as well as the promotion of a respect for scientific principles and critical review of evidence that will later inform clinical decision-making and prescribing practices."

Another article just published in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal) shows that doctors -- both residents still in training and experienced physicians -- may be putting patients at risk due to sleep deprivation.

"The problem may only be getting worse," CMAJ editors Drs. Noni MacDonald, Paul Hebert, Ken Flegel and Matthew Stanbrook wrote in an editorial. "Medical care today is more complex than in decades past....Increasing complexity of care at the bedside or in the operating theatre places unprecedented cognitive and physical demands on doctors who oversee and deliver care in these environments."

They noted that a recent study indicated that lack of sleep is causing higher rates of surgical complications, especially if a surgeon had less than six hours of sleep the preceding night.

For more information:
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article...
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/doi/10.1503/...

US Kids To Be Guinea Pigs For Anthrax Vaccine

2011-05-24T07:57:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) The highly controversial and potentially lethal anthrax vaccine may be tested on US children if the federal government gets its way. Although adverse event reports related to the vaccine among adult test subjects have included hospitalization, disability and even death, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is exploring the possibility of testing the vaccine on children.

Nicole Lurie, the assistant secretary for preparedness and response at the DHHS, recently requested that the National Biodefense Science Board submit an evaluation of safety issues related to testing the anthrax vaccine on children. The DHHS frames the possible testing as an issue of biodefense preparedness. However, the possibility of pediatric testing of the vaccine both ignores the vaccine's dangers, and raises the specter of class- and/or race-based selection of medical test subjects which has haunted US health agencies for over a century.

Even in the months in 2001 when letters containing anthrax were mailed to several congressional leaders, heightening national fears during the post-9/11 period, Bill First, a physician and then-Senate Majority Leader, urged caution in use of the anthrax vaccine. He told CNN: "There are very real and potentially serious side effects from the vaccine and anyone who elects to receive the vaccine needs to be made aware of that. I do not recommend widespread inoculation. There are too many side effects and if there is limited chance of exposure- the side effects would far outweigh any potential advantage."

A 2007 report by the CDC, along with the Vaccine Healthcare Centers of the Department of Defense and the watchdog group Government Accountability estimated that "between 1 and 2 percent" of vaccinated military personnel, experienced "severe adverse events, which could result in disability or death."

If a vaccine with this kind of reputation is to be tested on children, one has to wonder which children. It is fairly certain those young test subjects won't be the offspring of high-ranking government officials or corporate vice presidents and CEOs.

The history of medical testing carries a taint of racism, classism and opportunism, as health officials select those with less education and fewer choices to be unwitting guinea pigs in medical experiments supposedly in the name of scientific advancement.

You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist or history professor to have heard of the notorious 40-year long Tuskegee experiments in which the US Public Health Service withheld syphilis treatment from infected black men to measure the effects of the disease.

In October of 2010, President Obama apologized to Guatemala for tests during the 1940s when the US Public Health Service used prostitutes deliberately infect 700 prisoners, soldiers and patients with emotional and mental problems with syphilis both through visits with prostitutes and pouring bacteria for the disease onto skin abrasions on the subjects' bodies.

Vaccine testing has its own special place in the annals of this kind of integrity-free medical research. In the early 1960s, mentally disabled children at a residential state school in New York were deliberately infected with viral hepatitis so that they could be test subjects for the disease.

A 1978 CDC test for a hepatitis B vaccine which sought "promiscuous homosexual male" volunteers has some interesting connections to both HIV and the previously rare opportunistic diseases associated with the AIDS virus. As recently as 1990, the CDC and Kaiser Pharmaceuticals gave 1,500 black and Hispanic 6-month old infants an unlicensed measles vaccine without the approval and consent of their parents. (For more detail of these stories and other true-life medical experimentation horror stories, see http://www.naturalnews.com/022383.html).

Sources for this article include:
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/vie...
http://bioprepwatch.com/news/243663...
http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/...
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalp...
http://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timelin...

Treat COPD Naturally With Vitamin D

2011-05-23T08:06:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) At the national meeting of the American Thoracic Society (ATS), currently underway in Denver, much of the research presented has dealt so far with COPD, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

COPD is a serious and progressive disease that makes it difficult to breathe. The miserable symptoms it causes include coughing that produces large amounts of mucus, wheezing, shortness of breath and chest tightness.

Caused by smoking and long-term exposure to irritants and pollution, COPD is a major cause of disability and the 4th leading cause of death in the U.S. The disease can prevent sufferers from even doing basic tasks like walking and cooking. And according to the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, there is "no cure and doctors don't know how to reverse the damage to the airways and lungs."

But here comes good and unexpected news from the ATS meeting.

In two separate studies, scientists have announced breakthroughs that can profoundly help people suffering with COPD. And the treatments are not from Big Pharma but involve a vitamin and an ancient natural treatment.

Traditional Chinese medicine has used a paste known as Xiao Chuan, or XCP, for over a thousand years to help with breathing difficulties, including COPD and asthma. The primary ingredients of XCP are plants native to China -- including Ephedra vulgaris, Asarum heterothropoides and Acorus gramineus Soland.

Now mainstream medicine is finding out that this herbal paste actually works. COPD tends to get much worse in cold weather with symptoms triggered by breathing cold air. But Beijing scientists have found XCP can reduce these potentially dangerous winter exacerbations of COPD.

"We had performed observational studies of XCP which had shown the paste decreased the frequency of COPD exacerbations, but this study is the first randomized controlled trial showing the effectiveness and safety of XCP in the prevention of COPD exacerbation," study author Yongjun Bian, MD, clinical researcher in the respiratory department of Gunag'anmen Hospital in Beijing, said in a media statement. "These data confirmed the beneficial effect of XCP on the prevention of winter COPD exacerbations."

To treat winter worsening of COPD and other breathing problems, the paste was applied in the summer on specific acupuncture points on the back. "The herbs contained in XCP and natural remedies may have some immune regulation properties, which in turn may aid in their ability to prevent COPD exacerbations," Dr. Bian explained.

The researchers worked with 142 research subjects who were randomized into two groups. One group received either XCP, the other received a placebo paste. Both pastes were applied to the same acupuncture points four times during the eight-week period of July and August.

"Treatment with XCP significantly reduced the frequency of winter exacerbation compared with patients treated with placebo," Dr. Bian concluded in the media statement. "XCP patients experienced statistically significant reductions in steroid use and episodes of shortness of breath, and XCP patients also reported an improved quality of life compared to those treated with placebo."

"Although this treatment has been used in China for thousands of years, no scientific studies had been performed on this conventional Chinese natural therapy," he added. "This study results helped us standardize the treatment protocol and avoid adverse events in future clinical practice."

In a separate study, researchers from Belgium revealed data showing that vitamin D deficiency is common among patients with COPD and supplements of the vitamin may significantly help patients with the breath-robbing disease.

"Our study shows that high doses of vitamin D supplementation on top of a standard rehabilitation program improve the outcome in terms of exercise capacity and respiratory muscle strength," Miek Hornikx, physiotherapist and doctoral studentin the department of pneumology at the Katholieke University in Leuven, Belgium, said in a press statement.

"Low levels of vitamin D in the blood have been related with muscle weakness, a major target for respiratory rehabilitation and increased risk of falls," she added. "Since vitamin D is often depleted in patients with COPD, we wanted to see if vitamin D supplementation would have a beneficial effect on rehabilitation among these patients, perhaps by increasing muscle strength."

The research team studied 50 COPD patients with a history of exacerbations who had been referred for rehabilitation and randomly assigned them to receive either a monthly dose of vitamin D or placebo. Patients receiving vitamin D were given 100,000 IUs (international units) in a monthly dose (far above U.S. recommended daily allowance of 600 daily IUS of vitamin D).

All the research subjects participated in a pulmonary rehabilitation program for three months. Both at the beginning of the rehabilitation and when it concluded, the scientists measured peripheral and respiratory muscle strength, exercise capacity and vitamin D levels.

The results? The patients treated with vitamin D had significant improvement in exercise capacity and respiratory muscle strength compared to those in the placebo group.

"These results support the idea that correcting vitamin D deficiency by adding vitamin D supplements to training programs allows COPD patients to achieve better results from rehabilitation, including improvements in muscle strength and exercise capacity," Ms. Hornikx said.

For more information:
http://www.thoracic.org/media/press...
http://www.thoracic.org/media/press...

Cell Phones And Brain Tumors

2011-05-20T09:13:00.000-07:00

Image by Ollie Crafoord via Flickr
By Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Chief Medical Correspondent

Just about every time I use a cell phone, I plug in my wired earpiece first. Having discussed the use of earpieces on several news shows, people expect to see me using one. If I am walking around the CNN studios, my colleagues often comment on it. In airports, people will stop me in the rare cases I forget to use the earpiece, and remind me about it. Perhaps, they are intrigued because I am a neurosurgeon who openly shows some concern about cell phones.

Truth is, it is a pretty easy thing to do – using an earpiece. Furthermore, my neck doesn’t hurt after being on the phone for a long conference call, and given that many of those calls take place in a car, an earpiece becomes a requirement. Still, though, I don’t want to dodge the obvious question: Do cell phones cause brain cancer?

It may be too early to say for sure. The latency period or time between exposure and recognition of a tumor is around 20 years, sometimes longer. And, cell phone use in the U.S. has been popular for only around 15 years. Back in 1996, there were 34 million cell phone users. Today there are 9-10 times as many. Keeping that in mind, it is worth taking a more detailed look at the results of Interphone, a multinational study designed to try to answer this question.

The headline from this study was there was little or no evidence to show an association between cell phones and cancer. Though, if you went to the appendix of the study, which interestingly was available only online, you found something unsettling. The data showed people who used a cell phone 10 years or more doubled the risk of developing a glioma, a type of brain tumor. And, across the board – most of the studies that have shown an increased risk are from Scandinavia, a place where cell phones have been popular since the early 1990s. For these reasons, the whole issue of latency could become increasingly important.

Cell phones use non-ionizing radiation, which is very different from the ionizing radiation of X-rays, which everyone agrees are harmful. Non-ionizing radiation won’t strip electrons or bust up DNA. It's more like very low power microwaves. Short term, these microwaves are likely harmless, but long term could be a different story. Anyway, who likes the idea of a microwave, even a low-powered one, next to their head all day?

And, what about kids? I have three of them, aged 5, 4 and 2. Fact is, they are more likely to lead to my early demise than cell phones. But, as hard as it is to believe sometimes, they actually have thinner skulls than adults, and will probably be using cell phones longer than I ever will.

The first person to encourage me to regularly wear an ear piece was Dr. Keith Black. He also is a neurosurgeon, and makes a living removing – you guessed it – brain tumors. Keith has long believed there is a link, and for some time, his was a lonely voice in this discussion. Nowadays, he has loud and prominent voices accompanying him. Ronald Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, sent a memo warning staffers to limit their cell phone use. One of the possible consequences, he says, is an increased risk of brain cancer.

The city of San Francisco is trying to pass an ordinance requiring radiation warning labels on all cell phones. The European Environmental Agency has said cell phones could be as big a public health risk as smoking, asbestos and leaded gasoline. Even the makers of cell phones suggest you don’t place a device against your head, but rather advocate holding it 5/8 to a full inch away.
Many will roll their eyes at this, scoffing at the precautionary principle on display here. Fair enough. Still, I like my wired earpiece, and I don’t have to turn my life upside down to use it. I also text and email a lot more, because my kids rarely allow me to have a phone conversation.

Speaking of kids, you will probably see mine using earpieces too, when my wife and I decide they are old enough to use one, which isn’t in the foreseeable future.

Common Prescription Drugs Are Complete Scams

2011-05-19T09:27:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) Surprise! Statin, commonly referred to as the wonder drug, has come under scrutiny again for not living up to its claims. This drug has been shown to be ineffective at best and is tied to numerous serious side effects. Statins are frequently prescribed to treat a plethora of illnesses including heart attacks, prevention of heart disease, strokes, broken bones, and some have even been suggested that they are effective at preventing Alzheimer's (http://www.naturalnews.com/022726.html). Over the past three or four years, new evidence has come to light and medical researchers alike have begun to refute the buzz the benefits of statins. Yet, these findings have not deterred doctors from writing manifold prescriptions.

One of the problems is that the very same drug companies that tout the benefits of statins are often in control of the research trials. Apart from this obvious conflict of interest is the fact that results are somewhat skewed - trial participants don't necessarily represent the sex, age, and health demographics of individuals that are often prescribed the drug (http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view...). What this means is that a large number of individuals taking statins possibly derive no true medical benefit.

Newer claims that statins are effective in treating Alzheimer's and dementia have been refuted. A variety of studies discredit those claims, including one conducted by the American Academy of Neurology, which found that there was no connection between the ingestions of statins and the prevention or treatment of these diseases (http://www.naturalnews.com/022726.html).

What's even worse than spending money on a drug that you don't need and doesn't work? When the same drug actually causes you harm. Statins have been tied to a wide range of dangerous side effects including heart failure, reduction in sex hormones, depression, and interference with normal liver functioning, to name a few (http://www.naturalnews.com/001254.html). Even more disturbing is the recent discovery that ingestion of statins can impair proper brain functioning (http://www.naturalnews.com/022726.html). Apparently the same ability to reduce bad cholesterol, which makes these drugs so popular a choice among doctors, also reduces the good cholesterol that your brain needs for proper functioning. The lack of cholesterol in the brain, affects the release of neurotransmitters which in turn deal with your brain's ability to think and retain memory.

Sadly in this day and age, we are often tossed prescriptions without the proper education and awareness of the drug we are taking. As with a number of wonder drugs touted by the medical and pharmaceutical industries, there are effective natural alternatives to this not so "wonderful" drug.

Drinking Coffee Can Reduce Prostate Cancer Risk

2011-05-18T08:46:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) Imagine this scenario: drug company researchers make an amazing discovery. It's a remarkable therapy that's easy to take, has few serious side effects and reduces the risk of a man developing any kind of prostate cancer. Most importantly, it dramatically lowers the odds a man will ever have the most serious, deadly form of the disease.

Can you fathom the enormous money-making possibilities of such a discovery for Big Pharma? Can anyone even predict how many millions of prescriptions would quickly be written for men who would be willing to pay any price to prevent prostate cancer?

In breaking research news, it turns out that scientists actually have found a substance that appears to prevent prostate cancer, especially the most lethal variety, by a whopping 60 percent. But fortunately for men -- and unfortunately for Big Pharma -- the cancer preventative isn't a drug. It's a natural plant-based drink: plain old coffee.

That's right. The results of a large, new study show that men who regularly drank coffee had a lower risk of developing any prostate cancer, especially the kind most likely to kill. The new research, conducted by Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) scientists, was just published in the online edition of the Journal of of the National Cancer Institute.

Of course, if you drink too much caffeinated coffee, you can feel anxious, jittery, have difficulty falling asleep at night and even have heart palpitations. And should you abuse java by gulping down cup after cup of the stuff to keep working or playing when your body needs a rest, you might end up exhausting your adrenal glands, too.

But in moderation, coffee is not only safe for most people but may be beneficial. For example, scientists have found there is something in this ancient and natural drink that may protect against a host of ills, including Parkinson's disease, type 2 diabetes, gallstones, liver cancer and cirrhosis. As NaturalNews recently reported, research shows drinking coffee may also help protect women from breast cancer.

The Harvard scientists decided to study coffee because it contains natural compounds that are known to act as antioxidants, reduce inflammation, and regulate insulin --- and all of these health benefits are believed to play a role in reducing the risk of prostate cancer.

Earlier research has already provided evidence coffee could play a role in prostate cancer prevention. However, only a few studies have specifically looked at the association between coffee intake and the risk of lethal prostate cancer, the form of the disease that is the most critical to prevent because it spreads to the bones and causes death.

"Our study is the largest to date to examine whether coffee could lower the risk of lethal prostate cancer," said senior author Lorelei Mucci, associate professor of epidemiology at HSPH, in a statement to the media.

The research team investigated the association between regularly drinking coffee and the risk of prostate cancer, especially the risk for aggressive, lethal prostate cancer, in 47,911 U.S. men who participated in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. The research volunteers reported their coffee consumption every four years from 1986 to 2008. During that time, 5,035 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, including 642 fatal or metastatic cases.

The HSPH study concluded that the men who drank the most java (six or more cups each day) had a 20 percent lower risk of developing any form of prostate cancer when compared to non-coffee drinkers. What's more, it didn't appear to matter if the coffee was decaffeinated or regular.

Just drinking one to three cups of coffee daily lowered the risk of the deadly form of disease by 30 percent. And men who drank the most coffee saw their risk of lethal prostate cancer plummet by 60 percent.

The Harvard researchers are currently planning additional studies to understand more about the health benefits of coffee. They want to zero in on the specific mechanisms by which coffee provides such a huge reduction in the risk of the deadliest form of metastatic prostate cancer.

For more information:
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cont...
http://www.naturalnews.com/025737_c...

More Proof That Vaccines Are Connected To Autism

2011-05-17T10:42:00.000-07:00

Image by Sanofi Pasteur via Flickr
(NaturalNews) The federal government has been publicly denying any link between autism and vaccines for over two decades, while it has quietly been paying out damages for vaccine injury to children with autism, a study released May 10th shows. The study underscores the need for Congressional hearings and independent scientific research into the connection between autism and vaccines (http://www.news-medical.net/news/20...).

The federal government's Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was created in 1989 to act as a "no fault" taxpayer-funded alternative for those seeking compensation for proven vaccine injury. The new peer-reviewed study, published May 10th in the Pace Environmental Law Review, looked at cases of vaccine injury that have been monetarily compensated by the VICP. The study looked at 1300 cases of children with brain injury resulting from vaccines where the court's records referenced autism, symptoms of autism or disorders commonly associated with autism -- twenty-one cases outright stated "autism or autism-like symptoms" in the court records. The researchers then identified and contacted 150 of the families that were compensated to find out whether the children had autism. 62 of the families they contacted (greater than 40 percent of their sample) reported children with autism, for a total of 83 cases of autism. (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...).

"What we did is we looked at the people who the government said are clearly vaccine injuries and awarded them compensation," said Lou Conte, the vaccine compensation recipient who helped coordinate the study.

"We asked the next question and that question was: Do some of these people also have autism?" said Conte. "We found that in 83 of the cases we were able to locate, the families report that their children have autism and symptoms of autism." (http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/health/n...)

Government and conventional medicine maintain denial

The CDC has since released a statement supporting their previous statements that no link between vaccines and autism exists. (http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/morn...)

Some medical experts agree. While the stories are heartbreaking, said Dr. David Nelson chair of the Department of Pediatrics at Georgetown University Hospital, there is no connection between vaccinations and autism.

"There are absolutely no data that show autism is linked to vaccinations," said Nelson. (http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/health/n...)

The Health Resources and Services Administration, the Federal agency responsible for improving access to health care services for people who are uninsured, isolated or medically vulnerable, also put out a statement in response to the new study stating:

"The government has not compensated any case based on a determination that autism, in the absence of acute neurological illness, was actually caused by vaccines. Furthermore, there is no reliable scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism even in cases where an acute encephalopathy following vaccination has occurred."(http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/health/n...)

Critics argue for further investigation

The Huffington Post asked Elizabeth Birt Center for Autism Law and Advocacy, whose board members authored the study, why anyone should care about the legal proceedings of some obscure court when so much published science says otherwise.

The EBCALA argued that the government officials in Health and human Services or the VICP who decided that the children in this study suffered vaccine injury did so based on science.

"We uncovered that these children also have autism. How can the government then continue to assert that there is no link between vaccines and autism?" said EBCALA directors, "If in fact there is no link, why would there be even one case of vaccine-associated autism, let alone 83?"

Authors of the study called their preliminary findings "the tip of the iceberg," during a press conference in Washington May 11th.

Hundreds of autism cases have been settled quietly by the government, they say, while thousands more were probably never filed, according to News Medical. There are currently over 5,000 court cases pending that claim autism as a result of vaccine injury. (http://www.news-medical.net/news/20...).

"The [VICP] appears to favor cases without any reference to autism," said National Autism Association President Wendy Fournier. "The message is clear, if you want to receive financial support for the long-term medical care of your loved one injured by vaccines, submit a claim for brain damage, or residual seizure disorder - but leave autism out of it."

NAA believes the findings of the new study call into serious question the continued assertion from federal health agencies that vaccines do not cause autism.

"As this study shows, vaccines can and do cause brain damage and subsequent autism in certain children," said Fournier. "The government has been settling these cases for over twenty years, yet has failed to conduct research into why these children were susceptible to vaccine injury. This neglect will continue to needlessly and senselessly result in adverse reactions and autism in other children."

Call for congressional hearings

"Congress needs to find out whether there was a cover-up," said lead author and managing director of EBCALA Mary Holland. "It doesn't look good."

SafeMinds says the government has asserted that it "does not track" autism among the vaccine-injured. SafeMinds is a nonprofit that aims to raise awareness, support research and focus attention on the growing evidence of a link between mercury and neurological disorders such as autism, attention deficit disorder and learning difficulties.

Not looking is the easiest way not to find something, said SafeMinds, so the organization is calling for immediate federal research into the mechanisms of injury in these children in an effort to protect other children from harm and Congressional action to reform the VICP.

"This study dramatically shifts the debate on autism and vaccines," said SafeMinds' Executive Director, Lyn Redwood. "The question is no longer, Can vaccines cause autism? The answer is clear. Now, we have to ask, How many cases of autism have vaccines caused and how do we prevent new injuries from occurring?" (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...)

Sources for this article include:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20...
http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/morn...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david...
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/health/n...
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle...

Cell Phone Towers Wiping Out Bee Population

2011-05-16T14:54:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) It's one of the signs of the approaching food collapse our world will soon be facing: Honeybees are disappearing at a truly alarming rate all around the world. Up to 30 percent of the honeybee population is collapsing in North America every year, and there's no end in sight to "the silence of the bees."

Honeybees, of course, pollinate about a third of all the food consumed by first-world nations. Without them, the global food supply crashes and food prices skyrocket. The human population, not surprisingly, would plummet. Honeybees are absolutely crucial to the chain of life on planet Earth, and they are dying in record numbers.

Efforts to understand the cause of the honeybee population collapse (sometimes called "Colony Collapse Disorder") have so far pointed to pesticides, air pollution and even GMOs. All of those are no doubt important factors, but new research carried out at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology may have unveiled the real key: Cell phone signals.

How cell towers cause honeybee hives to collapse

Researcher Daniel Favre and his colleagues performed 83 experiment recording the reaction of honeybees to cell phones in their off state, standby state or active talking state. It turns out that when cell phones are in their "active" state (sending or receiving signals), honeybees are strongly disoriented and suffer from widespread miscommunication that causes them to stop seeking out food and begin swarming.

Specifically, their "worker piping" activity increases by 1000 percent (ten times). This was determined with a detailed scientific approach that's outlined in his paper: http://www.kokopelli.asso.fr/docume...

As Favre explains in his paper, entitled "Mobile phone-induced honeybee worker piping:"

Worker piping in a bee colony is not frequent, and when it occurs in a colony, that is not in a swarming process, no more than two bees are simultaneously active. The induction of honeybee worker piping by the electromagnetic fields of mobile phones might have dramatic consequences in terms of colony losses due to unexpected swarming.

Favre went on to tell Fast Company: (http://www.fastcompany.com/1752894/...)

"Among other factors such as the varroa mite and pesticides, signals from mobile phones and masts could be contributing to the decline of honeybees around the world. I am calling the international scientific community for more research in this field."

Of course, by the time additional studies are done, it may simply be too late. If the honeybee population collapse continues for just a few more years, pollination of the global food supply may become nearly impossible. That will lead to the great die-off of human beings.

Funny how that works, isn't it? Imagine the narrative of future historians: Humans multiplied and expanded their cell phone towers to the point where the pollinators all died. Then human civilization collapsed and the cell towers went silent. Within a decade, the honeybees were once again prolific and healthy...

Honeybees don't need humans, you see. But we need them.

The arrogance of science and technology

In Rome, the scientists manufactured the municipal water delivery canals and pipes out of lead, thereby causing the widespread lead poisoning of the population without even knowing it. Science and technology has always come with a heavy dose of arrogance and willful ignorance. Today, the pesticide chemical companies keep producing toxics that poison our planet, and they keep doing it in the name of "scientific agriculture."

See my related documentary - The God Within - to understand just how dark and deep this abandonment of life by the scientific community reality goes: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=E3B38...

Whether it's pesticides, cell towers, GMOs or some other technology, scientists always insist their technologies are harmless to the natural world, even while the sixth great extinction is now under way on planet Earth. But no one can deny that the collapse of the honeybees is indeed taking place, and the beauty of Mother Nature is that when so-called "scientific advancements" get completely out of balance with the natural world and actually become a threat to life on Earth, the world has a way of keeping the expansion of the human race in check. It's called population collapse. And it's coming soon.

If we could turn off the cell towers, halt the GMOs, stop the spraying of pesticides and end the mass pharmaceutical contamination of our planet, then our honeybees (and other important animal species) might have a chance. But human beings are too shortsighted to understand their role in causing almost anything that impacts the delicate web of life on Earth. So humans will deny any responsibility for their actions, cover up the truth about what's really going on, and even accelerate their own global population collapse.

Science cannot turn a seed into a living food plant

It will all be led by "science" and "technology," of course. And yet all the science in the world can't create one scrap of real food that will keep you alive. Only Mother Nature can grow a plant from a seed, pollinate it, produce a flower and then a vegetable or fruit. Only Mother Nature can keep us alive, not science and not technology. And in the end, when the history of our modern world is fully written, it will show how the scientists nearly wiped out the human race through their arrogance, their mass poisoning of the world, and their complete disregard for the value of life.

All these things have been carried out under the name of science: Genetically Modified crops, terminator seeds that self destruct, chemical pesticides, cell towers, water fluoridation, mercury fillings, psychiatric drugs and much more. Each one of these, in its own way, threatens the sustainability of life on our planet. And that's why "science" as practiced today has become the pathway to our own self destruction.

The disappearing honeybees are merely a symptom of what's wrong. The real cancer in our civilization is the arrogance and widespread destruction of the scientists who play God with our world while having absolutely no clue about the consequences of their actions.

Watch my documentary to learn more about the soulless, mindless and utterly insane philosophy that underpins modern-day science: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=E3B38...

Sources for this story include:
http://www.kokopelli.asso.fr/docume...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011...

Europe Bans Herbal Remedies

2011-05-13T09:44:00.000-07:00

Image by nègFoto via Flickr
(NaturalNews) Live in Europe? Get your herbs while they last. New rules put forth by the European Union (EU) will ban the sale of certain herbal remedies that have been used for centuries.

Traditional herbs such a St. John's Wort or Echinacea must now meet strict licensing guidelines in order to be sold, while other lesser-known herbs that haven't been "traditionally" used in the last 30 years won't even make the cut to reach consumer shelves. Only those products that have been "assessed" by the Medicine and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) will be available for purchase. The real kicker? Even approved products will only be recommended for minor ailments such as the common cold, which means that product labeling may no longer be allowed to convey the potent health benefits of widely-used herbal remedies.

According the the EU, the laws were put in place to protect consumers from the "damaging" effects of traditional herbal remedies. The subtext of that statement, of course, is that herbal remedies can sometimes have dangerous interactions when taken with prescription drugs. Used alone, however, herbal supplements rarely pose a problem. With so many people taking prescription drugs, it's clear that the EU's move to ban herbal products is a monopolistic attack on the alternative health movement. While they can't admit the dangerous and deadly side effects of manufactured drugs, they can shift the blame to herbs.

Richard Woodfield, MHRA head of herbal medicine policy, claims that the new regulations empower the consumer: "The current signs are that the [herbal remedy] market will be lively and competitive. The key difference for consumers is that in the future they will be in the driving seat and able to make an informed choice when they wish to use these medicines."

Banning widely-used natural substances that may help cure or prevent illness promotes "informed" choices?

Paul Gimson, director of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society in Wales, also claims that herbal remedies may not be safe because they have not been put through clinical trials in the same way drugs are tested. Isn't this a tad obvious, however, since drug companies would never even consider testing or promoting a natural herb as a medicinal cure? Clearly, herbal remedies are not widely used because doctors or health care professionals recommend them. They are used because people know they work.

The most disturbing part? These regulations point to a movement toward complete restriction of herbal products and the idea that pharmaceutical companies may someday have patents on herbal remedies. Consider a possible scenario: A woman who has been taking Chasteberry supplements to regulate a gynecological condition may now need a prescription for it. She goes to her doctor and, instead of giving her the herb, he recommends a drug. She can no longer buy Chasteberry supplements unless she scours the Internet in search of a reputable company that sells safe herbal products. As we all know, these companies can be hard to find.

Not only do these laws threaten the livelihood of nutritionists, herbalists and holistic healthcare providers across Europe, but they put consumers in a lose-lose situation: go without herbal remedies or run the risk of purchasing them online.

Vicky Perks, clinical nutritionist at The Health Diva and health food store, Beanfreaks, notes that the regulations are "poorly thought out" and are driven by money: "Licensing is just a way of generating extra money for the government. It costs €50,000 to license one product."

Herbal products still on shelves will be for sale until their expiration dates. Stock up while you can.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13...
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...

FEMA To Take Food From Local Farmers During Emergencies

2011-05-11T07:51:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) - Since our nation's founding the federal government has, in times of emergency, claimed extra-constitutional powers and authority. Under the guise of acting in the public's best interests, Washington has taken away privacy rights, free speech, and habeas corpus, among others. There's no reason to think it wouldn't happen again.

With that in mind, would it surprise you to find out that if disaster strikes in your part of the country, the federal government is prepared to take over local food supplies, in part by confiscating farms?

It shouldn't, says "Farmer Brad," a Texas-based farmer who said in an interview about food security with Mike Adams for Natural News TV that during Hurricane Katrina, an inventory of local farms and what they produced was conducted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

"FEMA was doing an inventory of all the farms around ... metroplexes," he said, which included nearby Houston and other large cities. "They started calling up farms and wanted to know where farms were, and they were being prepared to maybe take food if they need to, from farms, you know, for a crisis like that."

Brad, of HomeSweetFarm.com, said that while the agency didn't come right out and say they would confiscate crops and cattle, "they were making food assessments, you know, what is in the local food shed in a metroplex."

He said the agency's assessment took into account a number of potential emergencies and disasters, including spikes in fuel prices or even sudden disruptions - anything that might hinder or prevent the delivery of food to stores. Such scenarios would also lead to dramatic increases in food prices as well, Brad said.

"The distribution system for food is so fragile, you know, and there's only enough food in these grocery stores to last, literally, for just a couple of days," he said, noting that store shelves during Katrina were stripped bare "within hours."

Worse, Brad said, because of mass evacuations from the big cities, traffic choked local roads, making even short-distance travel impossible. He said he and his family couldn't even get into town to go to the store.

"We heard all kinds of stories from our local residents about what it was like - people camping out in the Walmart parking lot; grocery stores were empty; food wasn't coming in," he said. "We had people from 90 miles away from Houston and some other metroplexes coming into our town because we were one of the few that still had gas."

Brad said that FEMA didn't send agents to farms but made phone calls instead asking, "what are you producing, how much land do you have, wanting to get the details of the local food sheds in the area." He said he and local farms were voluntarily providing the information but that the food security aspect of the questions made them all "a little suspicious."

As people flee the large cities, Brad says most of them will be unprepared and that his farm - through theft or through confiscation - will likely be "wiped out."

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com

"Food Safety Legislation A Fraud" Says GRAIN Report

2011-05-10T08:53:00.000-07:00

Image by peter pearson via Flickr
(NaturalNews) The typical response to food contamination outbreaks in the industrialized world, and particularly in the US, is to impose stricter regulations and more so-called "food safety" requirements. But a new report compiled by GRAIN, an international non-profit group devoted to supporting small farmers, explains that most food safety legislation does nothing to make food safer, and instead harms those that are actually producing clean, safe food.

The melamine-tainted food scare of 2008 (http://www.naturalnews.com/024947_m...), the salmonella tomato and pepper recall of the same year (http://www.naturalnews.com/023614.html), and the massive egg recall of 2010 (http://www.naturalnews.com/029539_s...) are just a few examples of the systemic problems inherent in the conventional food supply system. And in one of these cases, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and others have pushed for more new food safety laws that they insist will help curb the problem, but that actually make it worse.

Each contamination and recall is an example of inherent problems of factory food, not the type of food grown and raised by small farmers using traditional, bio-diverse agricultural methods. And yet food safety laws like the Food Safety Modernization Act, or S. 510, which were presented as solutions to the problem, worsen it by targeting small farmers who produce safe food. And at the same time, these supposed food safety laws ignore the root problems characteristic of the food system as we currently know it (http://www.naturalnews.com/030863_f...).

The only thing bills like S. 510 do is increase FDA power over food, and pave the way for measures like food irradiation and pasteurization, both of which attempt to treat the symptoms of the problem rather than the actual problem. The GRAIN report, however, goes into great detail about the real problems associated with industrialized agriculture, and why this system is directly responsible for the many food safety problems that the world currently faces.

To read the entire 37-page GRAIN report for yourself, visit:
http://www.grain.org/briefings_file...

School Giving Away iPod In Vaccine Contest

2011-05-09T07:36:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(NaturalNews) The Chapel Hill - Carrboro City School (CHCCS) district in North Carolina has launched a shocking new vaccination contest that offers prize incentives to students who get vaccinated. According to the CHCCS district website, for each vaccine a student receives, he or she will also receive an entry into a drawing to win an Apple iPod or a laptop computer -- and students that get the entire recommended vaccine schedule, which includes the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine for both boys and girls, will be allowed extra entries into the contest and more chances to win than other students.

According to the CHCCS website, the three vaccines being promoted are the Meningococcal vaccine, the Tdap (tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis) combination vaccine, and the HPV vaccine. Between April 1, 2011, and May 31, 2011, students are encouraged to get one or all of these vaccines, and present proof to their school nurse before June 1. Those that do will receive individual entries for each vaccine, and four entries total if they get all three.

The stunt is taking place under the leadership of superintendent Neil Pedersen, and is being promoted by both school nurses and the Orange County Health Department. The CHCCS information page explains that the contest was made possible by a donation from a family whose daughter allegedly died from meningococcal disease, but it does not explain why the Tdap and HPV vaccines are also included in the vaccine drive.

The Tdap vaccine, of course, is a highly dangerous vaccine that has been implicated in causing permanent brain damage and other serious injuries. Just a few months ago, a Texas man explained to My FOX Houston that the Tdap vaccine caused his otherwise healthy and bright young daughter to basically turn into a vegetable, suffering hundreds of seizures daily as a result (http://www.naturalnews.com/031469_v...).

And the HPV vaccine is widely known to cause neurological damage, seizures, heart problems, autoimmune diseases, vision and hearing loss, chronic fatigue, paralysis, and death (http://truthaboutgardasil.org/). NaturalNews has an extensive archive of reports about the HPV vaccine that you can explore here:
http://www.naturalnews.com/HPV.html

That the CHCCS school district has chosen to push a series of high-risk vaccines on young students using alluring prize incentives is both irresponsible and unethical. In fact, it is borderline child abuse, as the HPV vaccine in particular has absolutely no proven benefits, and only an extremely high risk of serious injury and death.

To help speak out against this vaccine drive, please check out this informative Action Alert which provides details on who to contact, as well as some helpful talking points:
http://movingstronglyforward.typepa...

Sources for this story include:

http://www2.chccs.k12.nc.us/educati...

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032330_vaccines_iPod.html#ixzz1LrjxZidy

Are Sex, Coffee And Exercise Bad For You?

2011-05-06T10:06:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(Health.com) -- Having sex, drinking coffee, working out -- these and other everyday activities that cause blood pressure to spike may briefly raise the risk of a burst aneurysm in the brains of certain vulnerable people, a new study suggests.

Roughly 2% of the population is believed to have an aneurysm, a balloon-like swelling in a brain artery that results from a weak spot in the artery wall.

Aneurysms are usually too small to cause symptoms or problems, but if they grow large they can burst and cause a stroke, leading to permanent brain damage or death.

The overall risk of rupture is small. However, even brief activities that raise blood pressure can temporarily boost the risk, according to the study, which appears in the journal Stroke.
For instance, the risk appears to nearly double in the hour after drinking a cup of coffee, the researchers found.

"We investigated those factors that were known to cause a short-lasting sudden increase in blood pressure," says the lead author of the study, Monique Vlak, M.D., a neurologist at the University Medical Center, in Utrecht, the Netherlands. "Other researchers have already described that sexual activity or physical exercise are often reported by patients to precede rupture, but these potential risk factors were never quantified."

To do just that, Vlak and her colleagues asked 250 patients who had survived a rupture if they had been exposed to any of 30 potential triggers in the past year, how frequently, and whether any such exposures had occurred immediately before their rupture.

Coffee and vigorous exercise were the most commonly noted triggers, followed by nose blowing, sex, straining to defecate, drinking cola, being startled, and anger.

Coffee was linked to nearly 1% of the ruptures in the study participants and vigorous exercise to roughly 8%. The remaining risk factors each accounted for approximately 5% or less of the ruptures.

This doesn't mean that people with aneurysms need to quit drinking coffee, says Stanley Barnwell, M.D., a neurosurgeon and stroke specialist at Oregon Health and Science University, in Portland.

"I'm not worried about coffee or cola," says Barnwell, who was not involved in the research. "There's not enough evidence here to get people upset about drinking coffee. There was a relatively small number of patients involved to make a strong conclusion."

Aneurysms are most common after age 40. High blood pressure, genes, smoking, and drug abuse are among the many factors that are believed to contribute to their development. They can also be caused by head injuries and infections.

Most people who have small aneurysms don't know it because they don't have symptoms. These cases are usually discovered by accident -- when a brain scan is performed following a head injury, for example -- and regular check-ups to monitor the aneurysm's growth are generally all that's needed.

People with larger aneurysms tend to undergo surgery or another treatment within one to three weeks of their diagnosis, so there's no real need for them to give up coffee or make other lifestyle changes, says Neil Martin, M.D., the co-director of the UCLA Stroke Center, who was not involved in the study.

But some people aren't healthy enough for surgery and must live with the risk of rupture. These patients should quit smoking and lower their blood pressure, Martin says, and it might also be advisable for them to quit drinking coffee and take a stool softener if needed, as the study authors suggest.

"We don't tell patients to stop having sex or having bowel movements or exercising," he says.

What We Can Learn From Zombies

2011-05-05T08:44:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
By Elizabeth Landau, CNN

(CNN) -- An airborne virus is rapidly turning people into zombies. Two-thirds of humanity has been wiped out. Scientists desperately look for a cure, even as their own brains deteriorate and the disease robs them of what we consider life.

Relax, it's only fiction -- at least, for now. This apocalyptic scenario frames the new novel "The Zombie Autopsies" by Dr. Steven Schlozman, a child psychiatrist who holds positions at Harvard Medical School and the Massachusetts General Hospital/McLean Program in Child Psychiatry.

You might not expect someone with those credentials to take zombies seriously, but it turns out the undead are a great way to explore real-world health issues: why certain nasty diseases can destroy the brain, how global pandemics create chaos and fear, and what should be done about people infected with a highly contagious and incurable lethal illness.

"One of the things zombie novels do is they bring up all these existential concerns that happen in medicine all the time: How do you define what's alive?" says Schlozman, who has been known to bounce between zombie fan conventions and academic meetings.

"When is it appropriate to say someone's 'as-good-as-dead,' which is an awful, difficult decision?"

What a zombie virus would do to the brain

So maybe you've seen "Night of the Living Dead," read "World War Z," or can't wait for the return of the AMC show "The Walking Dead," but you probably don't know what differentiates the brains of humans and zombies.

First things first: How does the zombie disease infect its victims? Many stories in the genre talk about biting, but Schlozman's novel imagines a deliberately engineered virus whose particles can travel in the air and remain potent enough to jump from one person to another in a single sneeze.

Now, then, to the brain-eating. The zombie virus as Schlozman describes it basically gnaws the brain down to the amygdala, an almond-shaped structure responsible for the "fight or flight" response. The zombies always respond by fighting because another critical part of the brain, the ventromedial hypothalamus, which tells you when you've eaten enough, is broken.

The brain's frontal lobes, responsible for problem-solving, are devoured by the virus, so zombies can't make complex decisions. Impairment in the cerebellum means they can't walk well, either. Also, these humanoids have an unexplained predilection for eating human flesh.

"The zombies in this book are stumbling, shambling, hungry as hell," Schlozman said. "Basically they're like drunk crocodiles; they're not smart, they don't know who you are or what you are."

How a zombie virus would be made

So the bloodthirsty undead wander (or crawl) around spreading a lethal illness ominously called ataxic neurodegenerative satiety deficiency syndrome, or ANSD, for short.

"When something really terrifying comes along, especially in medicine or that has a medical feel to it, we always give it initials. That's the way we distance ourselves from it," Schlozman said.

The virus has several brain-destroying components, one of which is a "prion," meaning a protein like the one that causes mad cow disease. In real life, prions twist when they are in an acidic environment and become dangerous, Schlozman said. How our own environment has changed to make prions infectious -- getting from the soil to the cows in mad cow disease, for instance -- is still a mystery.

Now here's something to send chills up your spine: In Schlozman's world, airborne prions can be infectious, meaning mad cow disease and similar nervous-system destroyers could theoretically spread just like the flu. Swiss and German researchers recently found that mice that had only one minute of exposure to aerosols containing prions died of mad cow disease, as reported in the journal PLoS Pathogens. A follow-up described in Journal of the American Medical Association showed the same for a related disease that's only found in animals called scrapie.

Of course, these are mice in artificially controlled conditions in a laboratory, and humans do not exhale prions, but it could have implications for safety practices nonetheless.

Like mad cow disease, the zombie disease Schlozman describes also progresses in acidic environments. In the book, a major corporation doles out implantable meters that infuse the body with chemicals to artificially lower acidity when it gets too high. But, sadly, when acidity is too low, that also induces symptoms that mimic the zombie virus, so it's not a longterm solution. Everyone who gets exposed eventually succumbs, Schlozman said.

As for the unknown component of the zombie disease that would help slowly zombifying researchers in their quest for a cure, that's up for the reader to figure out -- and the clues are all in the book, Schlozman said.

How we'd fight back

You can't ethically round up fellow survivors to kick some zombie butt unless the undead have technically died. And in Schlozman's book, a group of religious leaders get together and decide that when people reach stage four of the disease, they are basically dead. That, of course, permits zombie "deanimation," or killing.

And how do you kill a zombie? Much of zombie fiction knocks out zombies through shots to the head. That, Schlozman said, is because the brain stem governs the most basic functioning: breathing and heartbeat.

A zombie-apocalypse disease like the one he describes probably wouldn't evolve on its own in the real world, he said.

But, as we've seen, individual symptoms of zombies do correspond to real ailments. And if they all came together, the disease would be creepily efficient at claiming bodies, Schlozman said.
Bad news, folks: Even if people contracted a zombie virus through bites, the odds of our survival aren't great.

A mathematician at the University of Ottawa named Robert Smith? (who uses the question mark to distinguish himself from other Robert Smiths, of course), has calculated that if one zombie were introduced to a city of 500,000 people, after about seven days, every human would either be dead or a zombie.

"We're in big, big trouble if this ever happens," Smith? said. "We can kill the zombies a bit, but we're not very good at killing zombies fundamentally. What tends to happen is: The zombies just win, and the more they win, the more they keep winning" because the disease spreads so rapidly.

The best solution is a strategic attack, rather than an "every man for himself" defense scenario, he said. It would take knowledge and intelligence, neither of which zombies have, to prevail.

Why study zombies?

In his day job, Smith? models how real infectious diseases spread. But he's already reaped benefits from his work on zombies. For instance, while many mathematical models only deal with one complicated aspect of a situation at a time, he tackled two -- zombie infection and zombie-killing -- when it came to speculating about outbreaks.

When it came time for modeling of real-world human papillomavirus (HPV), then, Smith? felt equipped to handle many facets of it at the same time, such as heterosexual and homosexual transmission of HPV.

"Knowing what we knew from zombies allowed us to actually take on these more complicated models without fear," he said.

Studying zombies is also a great way to get young people excited about science. Smith?, who was on a zombie-science panel with Schlozman through the National Academy of Sciences' Science and Entertainment Exchange in 2009, has also seen math-phobic people get interested in mathematics by reading about his work with zombies.

"There are insights that we gain from the movies, and from fiction, from fun popular culture stuff, that actually can really help us think about the way that science works, and also the way science is communicated," he said.

And as to why people like reading about zombies and watching zombies so much, Schlozman points to the impersonal nature of things in our society, from waiting in line in the DMV to being placed on hold on a call with a health insurance company.

Think about all the situations in daily life where you sense a general lack of respect for humanity, and zombies make a little more sense.

"The zombies themselves represent a kind of commentary on modernity," Schlozman says. "We're increasingly disconnected. That might be the current appeal."

Pancreatic Cancer - Silent And Deadly

2011-05-03T10:08:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
Note: Although there are more than 300 natural cures for cancer, it's still a good idea to know what the symptoms are if you develop them.

******
Cancer of the pancreas is an especially serious form of cancer, in part because pancreatic cancer symptoms are hard to notice. Overall, fewer than 4 percent of people with the most common type of pancreatic cancer survive.

Your pancreas is a 6-inch-long organ that lies deep within your abdomen, between your stomach and spine. Your doctor cannot feel small tumors growing in it while examining you. Early in its development, the cancer doesn't cause symptoms. When pancreatic cancer symptoms do show up, you may think some other ailment is causing them.

The only way to control pancreatic cancer is to remove it via surgery before it spreads to other organs. However, most people don't have symptoms before this point. Also, the precise cause of pancreatic cancer remains unknown, although there are some risk factors associated with the illness. Detection, then, becomes key.

Being able to detect pancreatic cancer symptoms plays a big role in your chance of survival. In people with small cancers found only in the pancreas, a successful surgery provides about an 18 to 24 percent chance of surviving five years.

Pancreatic Cancer Symptoms

According to Elizabeth Poplin, MD, a cancer specialist at the Cancer Institute of New Jersey in New Brunswick, pancreatic cancer is usually "silent," but it can cause noticeable symptoms.

These include:

Back pain. Since the pancreas is so close to the spine, a tumor growing on the pancreas can press on nerve roots next to the spine, causing pain in the middle back, Dr. Poplin says. Pain may be steady or on-and-off, according to the American Cancer Society. The pain may show up first in the upper abdomen, radiate straight back, and be made worse by eating. However, most people's back pain is caused by some other problem.

Jaundice. Sometimes people with pancreatic cancer will first go to the doctor when they develop jaundice, which causes the eyes and skin to turn yellow. That's because the liver creates a brownish substance, called bilirubin, that goes to the small intestine through a tube called the common bile duct. The wider end, or the "head," of the pancreas is next to this duc

If a tumor grows in the head of the pancreas, it may press on the bile duct, preventing the bilirubin from reaching the intestines and causing bilirubin levels to increase in the body. The excess bilirubin leads to the yellowing of the skin as well as itching.

Sometimes jaundice may occur as the result of a small tumor in the pancreas head, thus providing an early warning. However, if the cancer develops elsewhere in the pancreas, it won't cause this symptom as quickly.

Weight loss. Pancreatic cancer symptoms can include a decreased appetite, a feeling of early fullness, and weight loss when you weren't trying to lose weight.

Fatigue. You may also have less energy if you have pancreatic cancer.

Stool changes. The blockages of the common bile duct can cause your feces to look different. According to the ACS, the stool may be pale and greasy, and it may float on the surface of the water in the toilet.

If you and your doctor think you may have pancreatic cancer symptoms, your doctor will check your skin and eyes for jaundice and feel your abdomen for warning signs around your pancreas and nearby organs. You may also have blood and urine tests to measure bilirubin. If your common bile duct is blocked, you'll probably have more bilirubin in your blood and urine.

Remember, as is the case with most cancers, pancreatic cancer has the best prognosis when found in its earliest stages. Talk to your doctor if you notice any new or unusual symptoms. Taking action early could mean the difference between life and death.

By Eric Metcalf, MPH

Can Too Much Exercise Cause Anxiety?

2011-05-02T08:57:00.000-07:00

Image by kharied via Flickr
By GRETCHEN REYNOLDS

There exists a large and soothing body of scientific literature suggesting that regular exercise can improve someone’s mood and fight anxiety. And then there is this experiment from Germany, in which researchers placed running wheels in the cages of a group of laboratory mice and let them exercise at will.

Mice generally love to run, and these rodents spent almost every waking hour on their wheels, skittering through more miles than most animals are allowed to complete during exercise studies, averaging about seven miles per mouse per day. The scientists, from the Central Institute of Mental Health Mannheim, then placed these avid runners in unfamiliar situations. What they found was surprising, in part because it contradicted earlier experiments by other researchers. The mice froze or quickly fled to dark corners, behaviors considered by some researchers to signify anxiety. It was as if the marathon runners in this experiment had become more anxious and neurotic than the nonrunners, presumably because of the volume of their running.

The apparent implication of that finding — that too much running makes an animal a nervous wreck — might seem disconcerting. But as this study, published in the journal Hippocampus, and additional new research makes clear, a great deal still needs to be understood about just how exercise affects mood.

To date, most research into the interplay of exercise and anxiety has focused on the actions of various neurotransmitters or chemical messengers within the brain, like serotonin and dopamine. But the German researchers weren’t looking at neurotransmitters. Their interest was in a different brain mechanism. They were trying to determine whether the formation of new brain cells, a process called neurogenesis, was making their lab animals nervous.

Exercise spurs neurogenesis, a finding confirmed by seminal research completed a few years ago. This neurogenesis would seem to be completely laudable, since it occurs mostly in the hippocampus, a portion of the brain associated with memory and thinking. Rodents that have exercised and that have brains fizzing with new neurons tend to score well on tests of memory and cognition.

But the effects of neurogenesis on mood are murkier. A number of neurological case studies have reported that people and animals with lesions in the hippocampus — meaning fewer brain cells in that region — are less prone to anxiety than other people.

So could high volumes of running and the commensurately large amounts of neurogenesis in the hippocampus produce anxiety? The German work seemed to say yes, particularly a follow-up experiment by the same scientists published in September in the online journal PLoS One. In that study, the researchers radiated the brains of mice to prevent neurogenesis, and then let them run. The treated mice eagerly took to their wheels, but grew almost no new neurons.

Afterward, placed in stressful situations, they remained calm, reacting much like sedentary mice.
It seemed that neurogenesis had been the culprit behind the earlier runners’ excessive anxiety.
But the scientists are quick to point out that these findings do not mean that human marathon and ultramarathon runners are necessarily at risk of developing mood problems. The “exercise schedule of mice is not comparable to human fitness training,” wrote Dr. Johannes Fuss and Dr. Peter Gass, the primary authors of the two studies, in a shared e-mail response to questions. With very rare exceptions, humans will not spend their entire waking hours running.

More important, it’s not clear whether the behavior of the nervous mice was necessarily anxiety as we might experience it. The exercised mice did frequently freeze and hide, but they are prey animals, a situation that does not reward insouciance. To be less anxious, if you are a mouse, Dr. Fuss and Dr. Gass wrote, “might not always be the best survival strategy.”

The German scientists, in focusing narrowly on neurogenesis, may also have underestimated the intricate and broad ways in which exercise affects the brain’s mood centers. A fascinating series of experiments conducted at Princeton University and presented at the 2010 annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience in November showed that neurons born from running actually behave differently from other neurons. They are not as physiologically excitable, even in stressful situations.

The Princeton scientists showed that after a rodent stress test, the hippocampi of running mice contained fewer proteins associated with neuron activity than the brains of sedentary mice, even though the runners had more neurons over all. The runners’ brain cells had remained, it seemed, more calm in the face of stress. Similarly, the scientists found, areas of the brain that would normally shoot stimulating messages to the hippocampus during and after stress were quieter in exercised mice.

“Thus,” the Princeton researchers concluded, “running may reduce anxiety-like behavior” despite increasing the number of new brain cells. Exercise had recalibrated the animals’ brains so that they were more serene.

What this emerging science means for those of us who regularly exercise is, admittedly, still being teased out by researchers. But other recent studies are encouraging. A review article published last year in The Archives of Internal Medicine, for instance, concluded that compared with sloth, “exercise training significantly reduced anxiety symptoms” in a group of people at risk for mood problems. And in a beguiling experiment also presented at the 2010 Society for
Neuroscience meeting, scientists from Oklahoma State University found that female rats allowed to run at a moderate pace for 10 to 60 minutes several times a week — my exercise regimen, in fact — behaved with robust mental health in stress tests. So whether you run on two legs or four, the message may be: relax.

Corrections: An earlier version of this post misidentified the affiliation of Dr. Fuss and Dr. Gass; they are with the Central institute of Mental Health Mannheim and the University of Heidelberg. The earlier version also misidentified the affiliation of the scientists whose experiment was presented at the 2010 Society for Neuroscience meeting; it is Oklahoma State University.

Armadillos Spread Leprosy

2011-04-29T07:05:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

Leprosy is something we don't think about much in modern days, yet this disease may be on the rise.

By GARDINER HARRIS

Published: April 27, 2011

Armadillos have never been among the cuddly creatures routinely included in petting zoos, but on Wednesday federal researchers offered a compelling reason to avoid contact with the armored animals altogether: They are a source of leprosy infections in humans.

Using genetic sequencing machines, researchers were able to confirm that about a third of the leprosy cases that arise each year in the United States almost certainly result from contact with infected armadillos. The cases are concentrated in Louisiana and Texas, where some people hunt, skin and eat armadillos.

Leprosy, also known as Hansen’s disease, is an ancient scourge that has largely disappeared, but each year about 150 to 250 people in the United States and 250,000 in the world contract the illness. As long as the disease is identified relatively quickly, treatment with antibiotics — a one- to two-year regimen with three different drugs — offers an effective cure. But every year dozens of people in the United States do not recognize their skin lesions for what they are early enough and suffer lifelong nerve damage as a result.

Part of the problem is that doctors sometimes fail to consider leprosy in patients who have not traveled to parts of the world where the disease is endemic, like India, Brazil, Africa, the Philippines and other islands in the Western Pacific. Two-thirds of leprosy patients in the United States are people who have either lived or worked in such places before coming down with the illness.

But in a given year, about 50 to 80 people who have symptoms consistent with leprosy tell their doctors that they have not traveled to such areas or had any contact with someone with a leprosy infection. And in these patients, doctors may mistakenly dismiss consideration of a leprosy infection.

“These patients have always been a puzzle,” said Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Now researchers are hoping that their study leads doctors to ask one more question of patients who have skin lesions that are numb in the center: Any armadillos in your life?

Leprosy now joins a host of other infectious diseases — including flu, H.I.V./AIDS and SARS — that are known to have jumped from animals to humans. Flu is thought to have first crossed to humans from migratory waterfowl several hundred years ago. H.I.V./AIDS first crossed from a chimpanzee about 90 years ago.

Dr. Fauci said that about 70 percent of new emerging infectious diseases were known to have animal origins.

But one of the interesting aspects of leprosy is that transmission seems to have gone in both directions. Leprosy was not present in the New World before Christopher Columbus, and armadillos are indigenous only to the New World.

“So armadillos had to have acquired it from humans sometime in the last 400 to 500 years,” said Dr. Richard W. Truman, a researcher at the National Hansen’s Disease Program in Baton Rouge, La., and an author of the armadillo study, which was published Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Some studies have shown that as many as 20 percent of armadillos in some areas are infected with leprosy.

Armadillos now range from Colorado to North Carolina and have a similar habitat to opossums. Few armadillos live long enough in the wild to be seriously affected by the infection, Dr. Truman said, but those in laboratories suffer many of the same problems as humans and eventually die of liver and kidney failure.

The microbe that causes leprosy, Mycobacterium leprae, is a fragile one. It does not grow in laboratory petri dishes, and survives only a week or two in moist soil. Indeed, the only animals in which it is known to flourish are humans and armadillos, and researchers have long used armadillos to grow the disease, although its presence in armadillos predates such research.

Because of this, researchers have speculated that some share of human leprosy cases reported in the United States and other parts of the Americas resulted from contact with armadillos, but there has not been definitive proof until this study.

The fragility of the leprosy bacterium suggests that infections result from something more than casual contact with an armadillo, Dr. Truman said.

“The important thing is that people should be discouraged from consuming armadillo flesh or handling it,” Dr. Truman said.

A version of this article appeared in print on April 28, 2011, on page A17 of the New York edition with the headline: Armadillos Can Transmit Leprosy to Humans, Federal Researchers Confirm.

When Are You Most Likely To Overeat?

2011-04-28T10:34:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(CNN) -- If you're trying to lose weight, close your eyes for a minute and imagine the moments that make you fat.

Think through your day, and you'll see them, as big and obvious as a hot fudge sundae sitting right in front of you. You've been good all day, and wham, your friends suggest you go to a buffet for dinner; or you've diligently worked out and wham, you end up at a cocktail party with an array of the most killer desserts ever.

Don't rely on your willpower to get you through these tough times, advises James Hill, executive director of the Anschutz Health and Wellness Center at the University of Colorado.

"Willpower is not inexhaustible," he says. "You only have a certain amount of it, and it's gone."
The key is to accept the fact that your willpower will run out at some point, and plan strategies to get you through fattening situations. Here are the top five moments that make you fat, and what you can do to outwit them.

On vacation

The problem: You're on vacation and you want to kick back, relax, and enjoy the local cuisine -- but you don't want to come home with pounds to shed.

The solution: "Go for it," advises Frances Largeman-Roth, a registered dietitian and senior food and nutrition editor at Health magazine. But share with others. If you're in Paris, for example, don't skip a visit to the bakery -- that would be tres triste -- but share the goodies with friends.

After a break-up

The problem: You want to bury your sorrows in a pint of ice cream.

The solution: "Instead of meeting your friend for a drink to dish about your ex, meet up for a power walk or run," Largeman-Roth advises. Also, sign up for a team that is training for a 5K or some other race to distract your self and meet new people.

A party with fabulous food

The problem: You're at a party and everything looks delicious. It's free, it's in front of you, and no one's stopping you.

The solution: Don't arrive famished, says Dr. Melina Jampolis, CNNHealth's diet and fitness expert. Eat a small protein snack before the party, such as a few slices of turkey, a half a cup of low-fat cottage cheese, or half a protein bar.

Also, limit your alcohol, and not just because it's caloric, but because if it's hard to control yourself while you're sober, imagine how much harder it is while tipsy.

Watching TV

The problem: You want to plop in front of the television with a high-fat snack.

The solution: Use a small bowl, Largeman-Roth says, or snack on frozen grapes or veggies with a yogurt-based dip.

At a buffet, or a restaurant with enormous portions

The problem: Buffets offer limitless amounts of food, and much of it has tons of calories. Restaurants with big portions of delicious foods make it hard to push the plate away.

The solution: Simply don't go to buffet restaurants, Hill advises. But if you really have to, sit at a table where you can face away from the buffet -- Jampolis says studies show people who face away tend to eat less -- and load up initially on fruits, vegetables, and lean proteins so (at least hopefully) you won't have enough room for the bad stuff. At the end of the meal, she suggests having everyone at the table get just one dessert and share, so you get a little taste of lots of things.

As for big portion restaurants, the trick is to get the doggy bag at the front end, not the back end. Hill suggests when you order your meal, ask for half of your dinner to be brought to you on a plate, and the other half in a to-go box.

Natural Remedies That Work

2011-04-26T08:32:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

By Liz Welch, Health.com

April 26, 2011 8:18 a.m. EDT

The online claim: Black cohosh eases hot flashes

Is it true? Yes

Commonly known as bugwort or rattle root, this herb is derived from a plant called Actaea racemosa. While it may sound like something from Harry Potter's wizarding world, this remedy is not all hocus-pocus: Some studies suggest that black cohosh may indeed reduce hot flashes, according to guidelines re-released last year by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

"It appears to have an anti-inflammatory effect," says Philip Hagen, M.D., co-editor of the "Mayo Clinic Book of Home Remedies." In fact, the herb is often prescribed in Europe; it's a key ingredient in Remifemin, a popular drug there, which is also available in the United States.

While U.S. studies haven't conclusively proven that black cohosh works, Curtis says it can't hurt to try the herb -- just consult with your doctor about the dosage first, and stick with it for 12 weeks, she says. (Make sure you're getting black cohosh, not blue cohosh, which could potentially be harmful, she adds.)

The online claim: Pop calcium pills to quell PMS cramps

Is it true? Yes

Since there's scientific evidence that PMS sufferers have lower levels of calcium in their blood, it's not a stretch to think that loading up on it would ease the cramps, headaches, and bloating that come at that time of the month. Indeed, research has shown that taking 600 milligrams of calcium twice a day can reduce PMS symptoms.

And getting the nutrient in your food (such as calcium-packed dairy) may keep them at bay altogether: In a recent study conducted at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, women who consumed four servings a day of skim or low-fat milk reduced their risk of developing PMS by 46%.

Note: Some women's cramps are so severe that only prescription medication can curb them, Curtis says. So if calcium doesn't make a difference with yours, see your doctor.

The online claim: Tea tree oil can zap your zits

Is it true? Maybe

One brand of tea tree oil sold online is dubbed "Pure Liquid Gold," and it just may be, at least in the case of acne. A study published in the British Journal of Dermatology found that applying the extract to pimples reduced inflammation.

"Tea tree oil is antifungal and antibacterial," says Debra Jaliman, M.D., a New York City-based dermatologist. "It's so effective that many of my patients prefer it to benzoyl peroxide."

Other experts are not so keen. "The oil can cause rashes and even blistering," warns Jerome Z. Litt, M.D., assistant clinical professor of dermatology at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in Cleveland and the author of "Your Skin from A to Z." If you're nervous about using tea tree oil, Jaliman says, instead try a face wash for oily skin that contains salicylic or glycolic acid.

The online claim: Steam clears up sinus headaches

Is it true? Yes

This old-school treatment -- touted in more than 400,000 Google results! -- really works. "Inhaling steam flushes out your nasal passages, relieving sinus pressure," explains Neil Kao, M.D., head of research at the Allergic Disease and Asthma Center in Greenville, South Carolina.

Add a few drops of peppermint or eucalyptus oil to make it more potent. "The minty smell causes a tingling sensation in the nasal membrane, and this has a decongestant effect," says Kao, who also suggests dabbing Vicks VapoRub at the lower rim of your nostrils.

Another natural alternative: Using a neti pot to irrigate the nostrils with saline solution, which can also ease sinus symptoms, according to one study.

The online claim: Black tea bags help cold sores disappear

Is it true? No

If left alone, cold sores usually clear up in a few weeks -- but who wants to wait?

Online remedies for the blisters range from the absurd (like earwax) to the less silly, like placing a damp black tea bag on the sore. "Black tea leaves have tannins, compounds that may inhibit the growth of viruses and bacteria, but no studies have verified this," Hagen says.

Tea bags may also have an anti-inflammatory effect, he says. But your best bet to shorten healing time is an OTC treatment like Abreva or a prescription med like Valtrex. To prevent sores from popping up, stay out of the sun, and use a high-SPF sunscreen around your lips: "Sun-light can trigger cold sores if you're prone to them," Hagen says.

The online claim: Drinking cranberry juice prevents UTIs

Is it true? Yes

This popular home cure isn't just an old wives' tale: Major medical institutions, including the National Institutes of Health, agree that drinking cranberry juice can be effective for treating urinary tract infections (UTIs). "The berries contain proanthocyanidins, which keep E. coli from attaching to the bladder wall and causing an infection," Hagen says.

If you're prone to UTIs, drink one to two glasses of cranberry juice daily to help prevent them. Doing so also works when you have symptoms -- like a constant need to pee, or a burning sensation when you do -- to speed recovery. (There's also evidence that peeing immediately after sex can help prevent UTIs by flushing out bacteria.)

Stick to juice that's at least 20% pure cranberry -- or try supplements, taking up to six 400-milligram pills twice a day an hour before or two hours after a meal. If your symptoms don't end within 24 to 48 hours, see your physician -- especially if you have a fever or chills. "That points to something serious," Hagen says, "and means you should not be messing with a home remedy."

Read the full story here

Depression And Seasonal Allergies Linked

2011-04-22T08:35:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(CNN) -- You know spring has sprung when hundreds of people daily turn to Twitter to vent about their itchy eyes, dripping nose and uncontrollable sneezing and coughing. And if it's not obvious that allergies can ruin a person's day, watch how many tweets go by that use "allergies" and the f-word in the same sentence.

Seasonal allergies, which affect about 36 million Americans, aren't just an annoyance; many doctors agree there is a real connection between allergies and mood.

"'Cranky' is really the best word for it," says Katie Ingram, 30, of Alexandria, Virginia, a triathlete who suffers seasonal allergies. "I take a lot of medication for it and that makes me sleepy. And I can't do a lot of the things that I like to do outside, so that makes me cranky. ... The wheezing part of it makes me feel tired."

In some people, such annoyances are more serious. Research has shown there is about a doubling of risk for depression in a person suffering allergies and, if you've been seen by an allergist, that about triples the likelihood of having depression, said Dr. Paul Marshall, neuropsychologist at Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Those are correlations found in scientific studies, but they don't show that allergies cause clinical depression. In practice, allergy-connected mood changes usually boil down to mild depressive symptoms, like feeling sad, lethargic and fatigued, Marshall said. Some people say they're more likely to cry during the allergy season. Allergies could make symptoms even worse in a person with clinical depression, experts say.

"It's important for people to understand that experiencing allergies can affect their mood," Marshall said.

That's not to say that all people with allergies have depression or that all people with depression have allergies. But experiencing allergic reactions does seem to be a risk factor for developing depression -- not necessarily the emotional side of the condition, but more physiological symptoms such as low energy.

But is all of this in spite of the use of antihistamines or because of it? And is it the actual allergic reaction that causes these symptoms, or just the sleep disturbances and general discomfort?

The biological response

An allergic reaction is an immune response that releases cytokines, protein molecules used in communication between cells. When they signal the brain, they induce the feelings of sickness, or being "mentally drained," that often accompany the flu. This cytokine release isn't as powerful in allergies, but it's still present, Marshall said.

A 2002 study Marshall led, published in the journal Psychosomatic Medicine, found that allergic reactions to ragweed pollen cause "significant fatigue and mood changes" in at least some patients. Previous research Marshall collaborated on in 2000 found that such reactions could cause slowed speed of cognitive processing.

More recently, Dr. Teodor Postolache at the University of Maryland led a review published in 2008 of the association between suicidal indicators and allergies. Postolache's group noted a peak in suicide rates from April to June, and the dramatic environmental change of pollen that occurs during that time. The researchers found correlations between depression measurements and allergy symptoms in relation to the seasonal severity of tree pollen. In women the association is stronger between allergy, depression and suicide than in men, perhaps because allergy and depression are more common in women anyway.

Postolache's group has also explored cytokines that may be involved in triggering fatigue, hypothesizing that the allergic reaction is the direct biological cause of low mood.
This parallels what happens when stress gets you down, too, Marshall says.

A side effect?

Alternatively, low moods during allergy season could be situational -- the result of all the sneezing or side effects from medication.

Studies show that people don't perform as well at school because of allergic reactions, and adults' performance at work also suffers, says allergist Dr. Robert Overholt of Knoxville, Tennessee. These problems could exacerbate depressive symptoms, he said. That, combined with sleep disturbance, could make people feel unwell. Overholt doesn't believe the allergic response inherently triggers depression, but could circumstantially make existing depression worse.

"It would jump onto depression but wouldn't be the cause," he said.

Antihistamines themselves can also contribute to sleep disturbances and grogginess, he said.
Side effects of allergy medications can contribute to irregular sleeping patterns that increase irritability. The major antihistamines in pill form are now sold over the counter -- Allegra, Claritin and Zyrtec -- but they help only with sneezing, unless specified as the "decongestant" form. The added decongestant benefits come with a price, though. The same chemicals that ease your throat could also lead to insomnia, put more stress on the heart and lead to prostate problems in some men, Overholt said.

Erik Fisher, clinical psychologist in Atlanta, Georgia, sees more people fatigued this time of year, but isn't flooded with patients with allergy-fueled depression. He does see that allergies wear patients down, though.

"Once you realize what's causing your moods, it helps people feel less stressed out," Fisher said.

Children in particular are more susceptible to vast swings in moods and behaviors related to allergies because their bodies are more sensitive, Fisher said. In some kids, when allergies overwhelm the system, they have more temper tantrums and a harder time getting to sleep.
The bottom line, though, is that people shouldn't blame their allergies for deeper emotional issues, says Dr. Michael Silverman, assistant professor of psychiatry at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York. Even if some people have a direct mood response from allergies, that's not always the best explanation for feeling down.

"There's so much stigma associated with mood disturbance and anxiety that patients try to grab on to anything they can to explain what's going on," he said. "Allergies could be aggravating a problem in their lives they don't want to deal with."

What to do?

Intranasal steroids and topical antihistamines for the nose, which must be prescribed by a doctor, work pretty well, often in combination, and don't seem to cause drowsiness, Overholt said.

Others swear by the neti pot and other over-the-counter nasal rinses for sinus problems.
But the only way to get more complete, prolonged relief from allergies is to undergo desensitization, or what people commonly call "allergy shots," Overholt said. After an initial test to see what specific plants affect the patient, a doctor would administer small doses of the offending pollen or other substance to the patient under the skin over the course of three to five years.

At the end of that time, protection from allergies lasts another three to five years on average, with some people coming out allergy-free for life and others only getting relief for a year or two.
Allergy shots are the only longterm option for nixing the symptoms of allergies, and the fatigue and malaise that may accompany them, he said. Desensitization also prevents the formation of other allergies and reduces the risk of allergy-associated asthma.

Other forms of immunotherapy, such as oral (drops of allergens under the tongue) and intranasal (in the nose), have shown promise in trials, but are currently not available in the United States.
Ingram, whose allergies have been particularly bad in the last few years, is considering allergy shots. In the meantime, she vacuums every day, takes more showers, washes the sheets more and keeps the windows closed. Her husband, who doesn't have allergies, brushes the dogs more in the spring.

"My allergies are so bad right now, I would happily claw my eyeballs out with toothpicks to make that feeling go away," Ingram wrote on her blog.

Pesticide Exposure Can Lower Your Child's IQ

2011-04-21T13:10:00.000-07:00

Image by Ianiv & Arieanna via Flickr
By TARA PARKER-POPE

Babies exposed to high levels of common pesticides in the womb have lower I.Q. scores than their peers by the time they reach school age, according to three new studies.

The research, based on data collected in New York and California from about 1,000 pregnant women and their babies, is certain to set off a new debate about the benefits of organic produce and the risks of chemicals found in the food supply and consumer products. The pesticides, called organophosphates, are commonly sprayed on food crops and are often used to control cockroaches and other pests in city apartments.

The latest findings are based on three separate but similar studies financed by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the federal Environmental Protection Agency. Two were conducted by researchers at Mount Sinai School of Medicine and Columbia University and studied urban families in New York; the third was done by researchers at the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley, and focused on children in Salinas, Calif., an agricultural area. All three were published online on Thursday in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

Each study began about a decade ago, when researchers recruited pregnant women who gave blood and urine samples that were used to measure pesticide exposure. In some instances, umbilical cord blood was tested. After the babies were born, the researchers continued to monitor the health of the children and also obtained regular urine samples to determine exposure to pesticides.

Over all, the studies found that women who had higher exposures to pesticides during pregnancy gave birth to children who eventually had lower I.Q. scores once they reached school age. In the Berkeley study, for instance, children with the highest levels of prenatal pesticide exposure scored 7 points lower on intelligence tests compared with children with the lowest levels of exposure. In that study, every 10-fold increase in organophosphate exposure detected during pregnancy corresponded to a 5.5 point drop in overall I.Q. scores.

“I think these are shocking findings,” said Dr. Philip Landrigan, a professor of pediatrics and director of the Children’s Environmental Health Center at Mount Sinai. “Babies exposed to the highest levels had the most severe effects. It means these children are going to have problems as they go through life.”

Dr. Landrigan compared the findings with research in the 1980s that linked childhood lead exposure to lower intelligence, dyslexia, higher risk for dropping out of school and a range of behavioral and developmental problems. As a result of that research, lead was removed from gasoline to prevent exposure from car exhaust, and it was also removed from paints and other consumer products.

The drop in I.Q. scores shown in the pesticide studies is similar to the drops shown in the earlier lead research, Dr. Landrigan said.

“When we took lead out of gasoline, we reduced lead poisoning by 90 percent, and we raised the I.Q. of a whole generation of children by four or five points,’’ said Dr. Landrigan. “I think these findings about pesticides should generate similar controversy, but I’m cautiously optimistic that they will have the effect of having the E.P.A. sharply reduce the use of organophosphate pesticides.”

Individuals can also do more to limit their own exposure. In homes with pest problems, sealing up cracks and crevices in baseboards and cleaning up food residue has been shown to be more effective at controlling cockroaches than using pesticides.

Steps can also be taken to minimize exposure to pesticides in foods, particularly among pregnant women. Buying organic foods can help because certified organic fruits and vegetables aren’t grown with organophosphate pesticides. Better washing and peeling of conventionally grown produce can also reduce exposure.

The Environmental Working Group offers a shopper’s guide showing which foods have the highest and lowest rates of pesticide exposure. Strawberries, peaches, celery, apples and spinach typically have the highest levels of pesticide residue among commercially grown fruits and vegetables. Onions, avocado, frozen corn and pineapple had the lowest levels of pesticide residue.

Easy Remedy To Stop Snoring

2011-04-20T09:47:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
Chronic snoring can be more than a noisy nuisance. Up to three-quarters of nightly snorers also have sleep apnea, which causes breathing interruptions throughout the night. Sleep apnea raises the risk of heart disease, stroke and high blood pressure.

Snorers looking for a cure are often told to sleep on their sides, not on their backs, so that the base of the tongue will not collapse into the back of the throat, narrowing the airway and obstructing breathing. But for some snorers, changing sleep position may not make much of a difference.

Scientists say there are two types of snorers: those who snore only when they sleep on their backs, and those who do it regardless of their position. After sleep researchers in Israel examined more than 2,000 sleep apnea patients, for example, they found that 54 percent were “positional,” meaning they snored only when asleep on their backs. The rest were “nonpositional.”

Other studies have shown that weight plays a major role. In one large study, published in 1997, patients who snored or had breathing abnormalities only while sleeping on their backs were typically thinner, while their nonpositional counterparts usually were heavier. The latter group, wrote the authors, consequently suffered worse sleep and more daytime fatigue.

But that study also found that patients who were overweight saw reductions in the severity of their apnea when they lost weight. According to the National Sleep Foundation, in people who are overweight, slimming down is generally the best way to cure sleep apnea and end snoring for good.

THE BOTTOM LINE

Sleeping on your side can help reduce snoring, though in people who are overweight, it may not make much difference without weight loss.

ANAHAD O’CONNOR
scitimes@nytimes.com

How Not To Die While Waiting In The Emergency Room

2011-04-18T09:33:00.000-07:00

Image by VCU Libraries via Flickr
(CNN) -- When 2-year-old Malyia Jeffers developed a fever one Sunday afternoon in November, her parents gave her a children's Motrin and kept a cautious eye on her throughout the night.
By the following morning, Malyia's fever had jumped to 101 degrees, and other concerning symptoms also started to appear.

"I noticed bruising on her right cheek. She was really weak and could hardly walk," says her father, Ryan. He and his wife, Leah, drove Malyia to the emergency room at Methodist Hospital, five miles from their Sacramento, California, home.

According to Jeffers, a triage nurse briefly examined his daughter and said Malyia most likely had a virus and a rash, and told the family to wait.
They waited -- and Malyia got worse.

After two hours in the ER waiting room, Malyia couldn't walk or even stand up. "I tried to stand her on her feet, but her knees buckled," her father says.

Malyia's fever went from 101 to 103 degrees. Then, Jeffers says, the bruising on his daughter's cheek, once the size of a marble, covered most of her face and ears.
Jeffers says he returned to the emergency room nurse, who repeated that Malyia had just a virus and a rash.

"I told him, 'This isn't normal. Look at her ears,' " Jeffers recalls saying to the nurse. "'A rash isn't black and blue!' The nurse kept telling me, 'You'll be next, you'll be next.' But we saw other people going back before us."

Jeffers says he carried Malyia around with him while constantly complaining to the staff while his daughter continued to grow weaker in his arms. The couple discussed switching to another hospital but thought they would be seen soon and they didn't want to lose time.

They continued to wait.

The Jeffers finally see the doctor

After what her father says was nearly five hours of waiting in the emergency department, Malyia's body went limp. For Jeffers, the wait was over. This time he bypassed the desk where the emergency room nurses sat and pushed through the doors behind them.

"I asked to see someone different," Jeffers says. "I showed another nurse the bruising and said, 'Does this seem like a rash to you?' The nurse said, 'No' and put us in a room right away."
Jeffers says blood tests showed Malyia's liver was failing. She was sent by ambulance to a nearby hospital with a pediatric intensive care unit, which diagnosed a strep A infection. Also called the "flesh eating bacteria," strep A had sent Malyia into toxic shock.

Malyia was transferred once again, this time to Lucile Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford University. By this time, the prognosis was more grim.

"It was hour to hour, sometimes minute to minute. We had a roller-coaster ride trying to keep her alive," says Jeffers, who for two weeks thought his daughter might not pull through.

"She deteriorated quickly in front of us," says Dr. Deborah Franzon, the pediatrician who treated Malyia when she arrived at Stanford. "She needed life support and blood pressure medications to help her heart functioning."

While the doctors managed to save Malyia, not enough oxygen was getting to her limbs. Because of that, Franzon said, three weeks after she arrived at Stanford, surgeons had to amputate her left hand and some of the fingers on right hand. They also had to remove her legs below the knees.

Methodist Hospital said it could not legally comment on the Jeffers' case.

"At Methodist Hospital, patient care and safety is always our top priority" said communications manager Bryan Gardner. "Patient privacy laws do not allow us to discuss specifics of this case. We were sorry to hear about the eventual outcome for this little girl and our thoughts and prayers are with her and her family."

Emergency room wait times a national problem

According to a 2009 report from the Government Accountability Office, emergency department wait times continue to increase. The report says the average wait time to see a physician is more than double the recommended time in some cases.

Research from Press Ganey Associates, a group that works with health care organizations to improve clinical outcomes, finds that in 2009, patients admitted to hospitals waited on average six hours in emergency rooms. Nearly 400,000 patients waited 24 hours or more.

"It's not unheard of to wait that long in the best hospitals, and even in the best emergency departments," says Dr. Assaad Sayah, chief of emergency medicine for the Cambridge Health Alliance in Massachusetts. "Overcrowding is not just an emergency department problem, but a hospital inpatient problem."

Dr. Sandra Schneider, president of American College of Emergency Physicians, says the backups occur as emergency departments struggle to find beds for admitted patients.

"Think of the emergency room like a restaurant where people come in and go out," she says. "Now imagine a restaurant where the customers come in, but never leave. They come in for breakfast, they stay for lunch and they're there for dinner."

When a patient is admitted to the hospital and needs to remain for additional procedures, they take up available inpatient beds leading to a domino effect, Schneider says.

"I wish I could have kicked in the doors"

Her parents believe Malyia's condition was the result of a recent ear piercing that got infected.
"It makes me angry to think about it," says Jeffers. He says he made many attempts to get his daughter the care she needed, and regrets he could not do more.

"I wish I had kicked in the doors to the emergency room and made someone see her sooner," he says.

Emergency department physicians offer these tips to help you both before and after your arrival at the emergency room.

BEFORE YOU ARRIVE

Find out if your hospital posts emergency room wait times

Even before an emergency happens, it's a good idea to figure out which nearby hospitals post their emergency room wait times on the internet, Sayah recommends.

Many hospitals, including members of the Cambridge Health Alliance where Sayah works, have started posting up-to-date estimates on their homepages to help inform visitors of their potential wait.

Avoid high-traffic days if you can

Patients who have the option might want to consider when they choose to go to the ER.

"In most emergency rooms, the busiest day is Monday," says Sayah. "Patients who get sick on the weekend wait until Monday to go to the hospital because they don't want to spend their weekend in the ER," he explains. Studies have shown that patients who arrive in the ER on Monday rank lowest in terms of patient satisfaction.

Experts say parental instinct can tip off a parent to a developing problem, but say there are also some cut-and-dry situations when a parent really should take a child to the ER. [More tips on how to tell if it is an emergency in our column: When to take a child to the ER.]

Call your doctor on the way to the emergency room

"It's a good idea to let your doctor call ahead and tell the ER physicians what they may be thinking," said Schneider. Your physician may be able to explain your symptoms more clearly, and when ER doctors hear from a fellow physician, it might help put you on the radar.

AFTER YOU'VE ARRIVED

Don't leave once you're already waiting

"People often get angry or leave, but that's a bad idea," says Schneider. "If you were sick enough to be there in the first place, then you need to wait."

She says to note that triage nurses are sorting through dozens of patients and says don't be rude, but do be persistent.

Tell someone if you notice changes

"As you are waiting, if you notice changes in the patient, let the nurses know there is a new symptom as soon as possible," says Schneider. According to the Emergency Severity Index, triage physicians have specific requirements for assessing pediatric patients.

There are protocols in place to reassess patients in the waiting room and alerting the staff to changes in symptoms, especially to changes in temperature and fever, can help your child avoid an excessively long wait in the emergency room.

Ask for the charge nurse

If you have been waiting for a while, and feel like the situation is getting worse, ask for the charge nurse or shift supervisor. Experts in emergency medicine often define urgency using certain terms. They say to advise the person in charge that you think the patient has an "emergency medical condition that should be evaluated right away."

CNN's Elizabeth Cohen contributed to this report.

Harmful Bacteria Found In Nearly Half The U.S. Meat

2011-04-15T06:50:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(Health.com) -- Almost half of the meat and poultry sold at U.S. supermarkets and grocery stores contains a type of bacteria that is potentially harmful to humans, a new study estimates.
Researchers tested 136 packages of chicken, turkey, pork, and ground beef purchased at 26 grocery stores in five cities around the country, and found that 47 percent contained Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), a common cause of infection in people.

What's more, roughly half of the contaminated samples contained strains of the bacteria that were resistant to at least three antibiotics, such as penicillin and tetracycline. Some strains were resistant to a half dozen or more.

Although the high contamination rates may sound alarming, the threat these bacteria pose to humans is still unclear.

"We know that nearly half of our food supply's meat and poultry are contaminated with S. aureus, and more than half of those are multidrug resistant," says Lance B. Price, Ph.D., the senior author of the study, which was published Friday in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases. "What we don't know [is] how often these transfer to people. We need more studies to quantify the public health impact."

S. aureus, and drug-resistant strains in particular, can cause serious infections and even death in humans. However, simple precautions including cooking meat thoroughly, washing hands after handling meat, and keeping raw meat separate from other foods to prevent cross-contamination are believed to neutralize the risk of infection, according to experts not involved in the research.

"Numerous studies of this type done in other countries...have generally come up with the same findings, that multidrug-resistant S. aureus are present in a variety of animal meats," says Pascal James Imperato, M.D., the dean of the School of Public Health at SUNY--Downstate Medical Center, in Brooklyn. "But, so far, no one has been able to draw a connection between the presence of those bacteria in meats and human illness."

Multidrug-resistant bacteria strains are "always a concern for humans," says M. Gabriela Bowden, Ph.D., a bacteria expert and assistant professor at the Texas A&M Health Science Center, in Houston. "But if you follow the hygiene rules that you would follow for Salmonella or E. coli, there shouldn't be a problem."

The meat, which was sold under 80 different brands, was purchased in Los Angeles; Chicago; Washington, D.C.; Fort Lauderdale; and Flagstaff, Ariz. The variety and number of S. aureus strains found on the samples suggest that the livestock themselves -- rather than contamination during processing and packaging -- are the source of the bacteria, the study notes.

Each year farmers and ranchers give millions of pounds of antibiotics to farm animals, most of them healthy, to make them grow faster and to prevent -- rather than treat -- diseases, says Price, the director of the Center for Food Microbiology and Environmental Health at the Translational Genomics Research Institute, a nonprofit organization in Flagstaff.

The combination of bacteria, antibiotics, and livestock living in close quarters creates the perfect environment for bacteria to thrive and mutate, which may explain the high levels of drug-resistant S. aureus seen in the study, he adds.

Virtually all (96 percent) of the S. aureus strains Price and his colleagues isolated had developed resistance to at least one antibiotic. Strains resistant to three or more antibiotics were found in 79 percent of turkey, 64 percent of pork, 35 percent of beef, and 26 percent of chicken samples.

"It's four different meats from four different animals in different geographical areas," Bowden says. "[S. aureus] may be more prevalent than we think."

Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), which has been a particular menace to humans in hospitals and communities alike, was found in one package each of beef, turkey, and pork, though not chicken. This sample size wasn't large enough to arrive at an accurate estimate of its prevalence in meat nationwide, according to the study.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture currently monitor the country's meat supply for evidence of four major types of antibiotic-resistant bacteria (including Salmonella and E. coli). The study findings suggest that S. aureus should be screened for regularly as well, the researchers say.

Manuka Honey May Reverse Antibiotic Resistance

2011-04-14T09:17:00.000-07:00

Image by bob in swamp via Flickr
(NaturalNews) In less than a week, three different research studies have been released about antibiotic-resistant super bugs. Two were issued as nothing less than dire warnings. For example, as NaturalNews covered earlier, UK scientists are calling for the "urgent need for global action" due to the discovery of a spreading phenomenon -- a gene that is turning bacteria into not just super bugs but SUPER superbugs.

On the heels of that report, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has just sounded the alarm that an impending "health care disaster" is looming unless Big Pharma can find new drugs to combat deadly antibiotic-resistant super bugs.

Tired of all this bad news? Keep reading. Because amid all this gloom-and-doom about the threat of deadly super bugs comes yet another study from a third group of scientists that reaches a new and hopeful conclusion.

It turns out these researchers have found a way to battle life-threatening super bugs naturally with manuka honey. In fact, manuka honey could be an efficient way to clear chronically infected wounds and could even reverse super bug bacterial resistance to antibiotics.

Those are the results of a report just presented at the Society for General Microbiology's Spring Conference in Harrogate in the UK. Professor Rose Cooper from the University of Wales Institute Cardiff is investigating how manuka honey interacts with three types of bacteria that commonly infest wounds: Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Group A Streptococci and Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). She and her research team have discovered that honey can interfere with the growth of these bacteria in a multitude of ways. And that makes honey a strong option for the treatment of drug-resistant wound infections.

The idea that honey has antimicrobial properties is nothing new. In fact, traditional therapies containing honey were used in the topical treatment of wounds by numerous ancient civilizations. Professor Cooper is particularly interested in the super bug-fighting potential of manuka honey, which comes from nectar collected by honey bees foraging on the manuka tree in New Zealand.

Although manuka honey is found in modern wound-care products sold around the world, the anti-infection properties of the honey have not been used much by mainstream medicine. According to a press statement, Professor Cooper's group believes this is because the mechanisms of the honey's germ zapping action haven't been known. So they are working to document just how manuka honey halts wound-infecting bacteria, including super bugs, on a molecular level.

"Our findings with streptococci and pseudomonads suggest that manuka honey can hamper the attachment of bacteria to tissues which is an essential step in the initiation of acute infections. Inhibiting attachment also blocks the formation of biofilms, which can protect bacteria from antibiotics and allow them to cause persistent infections," explained Professor Cooper in a media statement.

"Other work in our lab has shown that honey can make MRSA more sensitive to antibiotics such as oxacillin -- effectively reversing antibiotic resistance. This indicates that existing antibiotics may be more effective against drug-resistant infections if used in combination with manuka honey."

The researchers believe their findings may increase the clinical use of manuka honey as doctors are faced with the threat of diminishingly effective systemic antibiotics now used to try and control wound infections. "We need innovative and effective ways of controlling wound infections that are unlikely to contribute to increased antimicrobial resistance," said Professor Cooper. "The use of a topical agent (manuka honey) to eradicate bacteria from wounds is potentially cheaper and may well improve antibiotic therapy in the future. This will help reduce the transmission of antibiotic-resistant bacteria from colonized wounds to susceptible patients."

For more information:
http://www.sgm.ac.uk/news/
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_relea...
http://www.naturalnews.com/032004_s...

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032079_manuka_honey_superbugs.html#ixzz1JVylySqv

Unshielded Infants Exposed To X-Rays

2011-04-13T08:04:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

By WALT BOGDANICH and KRISTINA REBELO

Published: February 27, 2011

It was well after midnight when Dr. Salvatore J. A. Sclafani finally hit the “send” button.

Soon, colleagues would awake to his e-mail, expressing his anguish and shame over the discovery that the tiniest, most vulnerable of all patients — premature babies — had been over-radiated in the department he ran at State University of New York Downstate Medical Center in Brooklyn.

A day earlier, Dr. Sclafani noticed that a newborn had been irradiated from head to toe — with no gonadal shielding — even though only a simple chest X-ray had been ordered.

“I was mortified,” he wrote on July 27, 2007. Worse, technologists had given the same baby about 10 of these whole-body X-rays. “Full, unabashed, total irradiation of a neonate,” Dr. Sclafani said, adding, “This poor, defenseless baby.”

And the problems did not end there. Dr. John Amodio, the hospital’s new pediatric radiologist, found that full-body X-rays of premature babies had occurred often, that radiation levels on powerful CT scanners had been set too high for infants, and that babies had been poorly positioned, making it hard for doctors to interpret the images.

The hospital had done the full-body X-rays, known as “babygrams,” even though they had been largely discredited because of concerns about the potential harm of radiation on the young. Dr. Sclafani and Dr. Amodio quickly stopped the babygrams and instituted tight controls on how and when radiation was used on babies, according to doctors who work there. But the hospital never reported the problems in the unit to state health officials as required.

A little over a week ago, after The New York Times asked about the situation at Downstate, the state health commissioner, Dr. Nirav R. Shah, ordered two offices of the department to investigate.

“Our investigators will pull films, they will examine the medical records and they will interview relevant staff,” said Claudia Hutton, the department’s director of public affairs. “Our authority to investigate goes basically as far as we need it to go.”

The errors at Downstate raise broader questions about the competence, training and oversight of technologists who operate radiological equipment that is becoming increasingly complex and powerful. If technologists could not properly take a simple chest X-ray, how can they be expected to safely operate CT scanners or linear accelerators?

With technologists in many states lightly regulated, or not at all, their own professional group is calling for greater oversight and standards. For 12 years, the American Society of Radiologic Technologists has lobbied Congress to pass a bill that would establish minimum educational and certification requirements, not only for technologists, but also for medical physicists and people in 10 other occupations in medical imaging and radiation therapy.

Yet even with broad bipartisan support, the association said, and the backing of 26 organizations representing more than 500,000 health professionals, Congress has yet to pass what has become known as the CARE bill because, supporters say, it lacks a powerful legislator to champion its cause.

In December 2006, the Senate passed the bill, but Congress adjourned before the House could vote. At the time, the House bill had 135 co-sponsors.

“I would think the public would be outraged that Congress was sitting on what could reduce their radiation exposure,” said Dr. Fred Mettler, a radiologist who has investigated and written extensively about radiation accidents.

Individual states decide what standards, if any, radiological workers must meet. Radiation therapists are unregulated in 15 states, imaging technologists in 11 states and medical physicists in 18 states, according to the technologists association. “There are individuals,” said Dr. Jerry Reid, executive director of a group that certifies technologists, “who are performing medical imaging and radiation therapy who are not qualified. It is happening right now.”

Two months ago, in Michigan — which sets no minimum standards for technologists — the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reported that a large hospital had irradiated the healthy tissue of four cancer patients, three of whom suffered burns, because a technologist repeatedly used the wrong radiological device. “It’s amazing to us, knowing the complexity of medical imaging, that there are states that require massage therapists and hairdressers to be licensed, but they have no standards in place for exposing patients to ionizing radiation,” said Christine Lung, the technologist association’s vice president of government relations.

Read the rest on NY Times

Will A Gluten-Free Diet Help?

2011-04-12T06:48:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
(Health.com) -- Sarah Cooper was a new mom in her mid-20s, busily juggling her family and a career as an electrical engineer, when everything came to a halt.

She lost all her energy. She developed acne. And she began experiencing gastrointestinal problems: bloating, diarrhea, cramping, constipation. Her doctors, thinking something must be missing from her diet, put her on various vitamins, none of which helped.

"It was all I could do to go to work," she says.

After years of failed treatments, Cooper's luck changed. She saw a doctor who suspected she might have celiac disease, an autoimmune disorder that can appear at any age and is caused by an intolerance to gluten.

A protein found in wheat, barley, and rye (and countless food products -- like bread and pasta -- that contain those grains), gluten gradually damages the intestines of people with celiac disease, preventing the absorption of vitamins and minerals and setting off a slew of related health problems, which can include fatigue and bad skin.

Cooper tested negative for celiac disease, but the doctor advised her to try a gluten-free diet anyway.

"Within a week of eliminating [gluten], I started to feel markedly better," says Cooper, now 36, from Melbourne, Australia. "It wasn't a gradual feeling better; it was almost a crossing-the-street kind of thing."

That was 10 years ago. The general practitioner who treated Cooper was ahead of his time, as most doctors are only now starting to realize that some people who don't have celiac disease may benefit from diets free of (or low in) gluten.

In fact, experts now believe that celiac disease represents just one extreme of a broad spectrum of gluten intolerance that includes millions of people like Cooper with less severe -- but nevertheless problematic -- reactions to the protein.

While celiac disease affects about 1 percent of the U.S. population, experts estimate that as many as 10 percent have a related and poorly understood condition known as non-celiac gluten intolerance (NCGI), or gluten sensitivity.

"This is something that we're just beginning to get our heads around," says Daniel Leffler, M.D., an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a gastroenterologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, in Boston. "There is a tight definition of celiac disease, but gluten intolerance has been a moving target."

Growing awareness of gluten sensitivity has led some people who struggle with gut problems but have tested negative for celiac disease to take matters into their own hands and try a gluten-free diet, even though it's an extremely difficult diet to follow.

Sales of gluten-free products increased 16 percent in 2010, according to the Nielsen Company.
"Gluten is fairly indigestable in all people," Leffler says. "There's probably some kind of gluten intolerance in all of us."

The spectrum of gluten intolerance

Experts now think of gluten intolerance as a spectrum of conditions, with celiac disease on one end and, on the other, what's been called a "no man's land" of gluten-related gastrointestinal problems that may or may not overlap.

Leffler estimates, for instance, that half of the approximately 60 million people in the U.S. who suffer from irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are probably sensitive to gluten. (Gluten allergies, which are similar to other food allergies, also fall on the spectrum but affect only about 0.1 percent of the population.)

Gluten intolerance of any kind -- including celiac disease -- is often underdiagnosed (or misdiagnosed) because it manifests itself in many and murky ways that can baffle doctors.
People with celiac disease and gluten sensitivity usually have stomachaches, gas, and diarrhea -- as do people with IBS.

Celiac patients can also develop headaches, tingling, fatigue, muscle pain, skin rashes, joint pain, and other symptoms, because the autoimmune attack at the root of the disease gradually erodes the wall of the intestine, leading to poor absorption of iron, folate, and other nutrients that affect everything from energy to brain function.

People with gluten sensitivity sometimes experience these far-reaching symptoms as well, though it's less clear why.

Gluten intolerance "starts in the intestines as a process, but doesn't necessarily stay in the intestines. It may affect other organs," says Alessio Fasano, M.D., medical director of the University of Maryland Center for Celiac Research, in Baltimore.

Celiac disease can be definitively diagnosed using a two-step process: Doctors test the patient's blood for the presence of intestine-attacking antibodies activated by gluten, and, if those tests come back positive, they order a biopsy (or series of biopsies) to look for intestinal damage, any evidence of which confirms the diagnosis.

Gluten sensitivity, on the other hand, is a gray area that "lacks any defining medical tests," Leffler says. People who fall into this group exhibit the classic symptoms of celiac disease yet have no detectable intestinal damage, and test negative for certain key antibodies (though in some cases they may have elevated levels of others).

Gluten sensitivity is a kind of "non-diagnosis," in other words -- a diagnosis by default for those who don't have celiac disease but feel better on a gluten-free diet.

A recent study by Fasano and his colleagues offers some clues about what gluten sensitivity is, and how it differs from celiac disease. Although they show no signs of erosion or other damage, the study found, the intestines of gluten-sensitive patients contain proteins that contribute to a harmful immune response, one that resembles -- but is distinct from -- the process underlying celiac disease.

Blood tests that can diagnose gluten sensitivity by measuring these and other proteins are in the works, but they are still a ways off.

"The reason we don't have tests yet is mainly because we don't have a clear definition of [gluten sensitivity]," Fasano explains.

How much gluten is OK?

People with celiac disease must commit to an absolutely gluten-free diet, as eating the protein can, over time, increase a person's risk of osteoporosis, infertility, and certain cancers, in addition to worsening short-term symptoms.

"You're going to be on this diet for life, and it has to be extremely strict. Even crumbs can turn on the autoimmune process typical of celiac disease," Fasano says. "If you make a mistake with celiac disease, you pay the price on the spot, but there can be a cumulative price, too."

Recommendations for people with gluten sensitivity aren't as clear-cut. Unlike celiac disease, gluten sensitivity hasn't been linked to intestine damage and long-term health problems, so some experts say that people on the less severe end of the spectrum should feel comfortable eating as much gluten as they can handle without feeling sick.

"Some people can be exquisitely sensitive and have to be as strict as people with celiac disease, while others can eat a pizza," Fasano says.

The impact that gluten can have on those without celiac disease was illustrated by a recent study in Australia.

When gluten-sensitive people were asked to eat bread and muffins every day that, unbeknownst to them, had been laced with gluten, 68 percent saw all their old symptoms come back rapidly, compared with 40 percent in a similar group that ate only gluten-free products.

"People complained that they felt like they were pregnant, had gut pain...and tiredness increased," says the lead researcher, Jessica Biesiekierski, a Ph.D. candidate at Monash University Department of Medicine and Gastroenterology.

Sarah Cooper participated in the study and felt like she had been "hit by a bus" after the first day of gluten snacks. Her symptoms got so bad that she had to drop out halfway through the six-week study.

People with gluten sensitivity who don't respond this way aren't necessarily in the clear, however. Experts like Marlisa Brown, a registered dietitian in private practice in Long Island, N.Y., and the author of "Gluten-Free, Hassle-Free," worry that gluten could have long-term negative consequences that just haven't been identified yet.

Even if you feel better, "definitely don't try to add it back in," she urges. Brown counts herself among the gluten sensitive.

After enduring sinus infections, hair loss, sensitive skin, and fatigue since she was a little girl, and despite a negative celiac-disease test in her 20s (which she thinks may not have been thorough enough), Brown finally cut out gluten in her late 40s.

"I felt better in a week," she says.

Gluten-free doesn't equal healthy

If you suspect your body can't tolerate gluten, the first thing you should do is get tested for celiac disease. If the test comes back negative, try a gluten-free diet for a week to see if you feel better, Leffler says.

Cutting out gluten is the most reliable way to determine if you are, in fact, sensitive to the protein -- and if you are sensitive, it's the only treatment.

However, Leffler stresses that you should get help from a dietitian to make sure that you avoid hidden sources of gluten (like soy sauce and salad dressing), and that you don't miss out on the vitamins that wheat products provide.

Even though celebrities like Oprah Winfrey and Gwyneth Paltrow have reportedly cut out gluten to "detox," there's nothing inherently healthier about a gluten-free diet.

"It can be very healthy, or it can be junk food," says Dee Sandquist, a registered dietitian and spokesperson for the American Dietetic Association.

Some of the many gluten-free products on the market can be unhealthy, Fasano says, because manufacturers add extra sugar and fat to simulate the texture and satisfying fluffiness that gluten imparts.

Another potential pitfall is that gluten-free products are less routinely fortified with iron and vitamins B and D than regular bread products, Sandquist says.

"Vitamins B and D are the ones particularly at risk of being deficient in [gluten-sensitive] people."

If you plan to go gluten free, select more fruits, vegetables, and lean meat, and more naturally gluten-free grains like brown rice, quinoa, and buckwheat, rather than just buying prepackaged products labeled "gluten free," Sandquist says.

She adds, however, that gluten-free products are "evolving" and may become healthier overall as manufacturers develop ways to fortify them.

Medical Mistakes Are More Common Than You Think

2011-04-11T09:00:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

(Health.com) -- Unthinkable errors by doctors and surgeons -- such as amputating the wrong leg or removing organs from the wrong patient -- occur more frequently than previously believed, a new study suggests.

Over a period of 6.5 years, doctors in Colorado alone operated on the wrong patient at least 25 times and on the wrong part of the body in another 107 patients, according to the study, which appears in the Archives of Surgery.

So-called wrong-patient and wrong-site procedures accounted for about 0.5 percent of all medical mistakes analyzed in the study. Although these serious errors are rare overall, the numbers seen in the study are "considerably higher" than previous estimates, researchers say.

In fact, the surgical blunders reported in the study are probably "the tip of the iceberg," says the lead researcher, Dr. Philip Stahel, M.D., a surgeon at Denver Health Medical Center. The actual number of patient and site mix-ups is likely much higher, says Stahel, describing those mistakes as "a catastrophe."

Catastrophic surgical errors are "a lot more common than the public thinks," says Dr. Martin Makary, M.D., a professor of surgery and public health at Johns Hopkins University, in Baltimore.

"Each hospital, whether they publicly admit it or not, and whether or not it's discoverable in a lawsuit, has an episode of wrong-site or wrong-patient surgery either every year or once every few years," says Makary, who wrote an editorial accompanying the study. "Almost every surgeon has seen one."

Stahel and his colleagues analyzed 27,370 records from a database of medical errors maintained by a company that provides malpractice insurance to about 6,000 physicians in Colorado. (The physicians themselves reported the incidents.)

The errors in the database -- some of which originated with other doctors or support staff, rather than surgeons -- were caused by a range of slipups, including mixing up patient medical records, X-rays, and biopsy samples. All of the mistakes could be traced back to some form of miscommunication.

In one wrong-patient procedure, hospital staff confused two patients with the same first and last name who were in a doctor's office at the same time; in another, staff members brought the wrong child into the operating room. Examples of wrong-site errors included removing the wrong ovary or irradiating the wrong organ.

"One of the worst cases I saw in this study was two patients who had had prostate biopsies," Stahel says. "One had cancer and one did not. Clinicians mixed up the samples and the patient without cancer had a radical prostatectomy -- which is a huge surgery, removal of an organ for nothing -- while the patient with cancer [was] still walking out in the community, not knowing his true diagnosis."

Overall, one-third of the mistakes led to long-term negative consequences for the patient. One patient even died of lung complications after an internist inserted a chest tube in the wrong side of his body.

Only about 22 percent of the mistakes led to malpractice claims or lawsuits. The database is unusual in that it contains information on all incidents (not just those that resulted in a claim), and for that reason the rate of surgical mix-ups reported in the study is likely more accurate than those in previous studies, Stahel says.

The main culprit in cases such as these is human error, Makary says. "We rely on the nurse to tell us the side of a hernia repair, and the nurse can make mistakes. We rely on the surgeon's memory, which is fallible." Even the best surgeons can be expected to make mental errors occasionally, he says.

Health organizations have tried to put an end to surgical mix-ups. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons has launched an initiative called "Sign Your Site" that encourages surgeons to initial the actual surgical site before operating. And the Joint Commission, a nonprofit group that accredits hospitals and other health-care facilities, has developed a protocol for surgeries that includes having a presurgery "time out" -- a pause during which the surgical team double-checks that the patient and site are correct.

But these protocols "are not sufficient," Stahel says. They only apply to the operating room, he says, and nearly one-third of the botched procedures in the study took place in doctor's offices. Moreover, the study showed that many operating-room mistakes start out in biopsy labs or during the imaging and diagnosis process.

"A lot of wrong-side, wrong-patient errors occur outside of the operating room," Stahel says. "We should have time-outs for labeling for samples. If the lab mixes up the sample, the consequences may be worse than erroneously cutting off the wrong leg. I think we should extrapolate time-outs to internal medicine [and] laboratories."

About Charcot-Marie-Tooth An Inherited Nerve-related Disorder

2011-04-08T08:38:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

By KAREN BARROW

Published: April 4, 2011

It is classified as a rare disease, but the chronic condition called Charcot-Marie-Tooth is one of the most common inherited nerve-related disorders, with an estimated 150,000 patients in the United States. It can be devastating to patients and their families, with crippling effects on balance and the ability to walk and grasp objects. Nor does it help that few people have heard of it, unless they are directly affected.

“It’s like the hidden secret,” said Allison Moore, chief executive of the Hereditary Neuropathy Foundation, who has the disease. “And when you mention, ‘I have C.M.T.,’ people look at you like you have three heads.”

The disease — named for Jean-Martin Charcot, Pierre Marie and Howard Henry Tooth, the researchers who first described it in 1886 — is actually a group of neurodegenerative conditions that gradually degrade the nerves in the feet, legs, arms and hands, usually starting in childhood. There is no medical treatment, though orthopedic braces and corrective surgery can help.

On nytimes.com/health, six patients describe life with C.M.T. Here are three.

Bernadette Scarduzio, 31
Drexel Hill, Pa.
To have a disease that’s not well known is scary, and you feel like you’re not a part of the world.
I’ve told people that I have multiple sclerosis before, because I know it’s like M.S., and I felt stupid saying I have this disease that no knows of. I felt weird.
I want to be the face for this disease, and I want everyone to know that’s what I have. The people that are hiding, I need them to come out and say, ‘Yes, I have this disease.’ I know the name is silly, and it’s a family disease, and it sucks, but that’s the only way were going to get a cure for C.M.T.

Joseph Torello, 29
Queens
As an actor with C.M.T., the most nerve-racking part of the audition is walking to the center of the room. It’s not the singing; it’s not the dance callback; it’s not the reading; it’s that walk.

Everything is based on looks, and that’s why it’s so nerve-racking and so easy to get into your head when you have something like this. It’s hard enough to get a job, but to have one more hurdle in your way of that job is tough.

Nicholas Zappola, 18
Sag Harbor, N.Y.
At first I was nervous and scared because you’re diagnosed with a disease that you have no idea about, but I knew I wasn’t alone, and I knew that I could talk to my family members that have it.
I walk with a limp. I am in pain constantly, but I don’t let it get to me. You do suffer, but if you strengthen yourself, you can overcome just about anything.
I feel like a stronger-hearted person than most of my friends because I have the capability of going through all this — keeping a strong mind and helping other people out — and it makes me feel good.

A version of this article appeared in print on April 5, 2011, on page D6 of the New York edition.

Diabetics At Risk For Cancer Death

2011-04-07T09:23:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

By TARA PARKER-POPE

Diabetes has long been associated with a host of serious health problems, including increased risk of vision loss, kidney problems, heart attack and stroke. Now a growing body of research shows that diabetes also increases risk for deadly cancers.

Researchers from the National Cancer Institute collected diet, lifestyle and health data from 500,000 people ages 50 to 71 and followed the patients for 11 years. They found that having diabetes was associated with an 11 percent increased risk of dying from cancer among women and a 17 percent increased risk of cancer death among men.

Having diabetes not only increased risk for dying from cancer, but people with diabetes were, over all, more likely to be given a cancer diagnosis as well.

“It’s well known that there are a lot of benefits from avoiding diabetes,’’ said Dr. Neal D. Freedman, investigator in the division of cancer epidemiology and genetics at the National Cancer Institute. “Our study, along with others, suggests that there may be additional benefit in terms of reduced morbidity and mortality from cancer.”

The researchers found diabetes was associated with a higher overall risk for colon, rectal and liver cancers among both men and women. In women, diabetes was most strongly associated with a higher risk of stomach, anal and endometrial cancers. In men, diabetes was most likely to raise risk for pancreatic and bladder cancers, according to the report, presented at the American Association for Cancer Research meeting in Orlando, Fla.

Over all, women with diabetes were 8 percent more likely to develop cancer. The findings were more complicated for men. Men with diabetes were 4 percent less likely to get a cancer diagnosis, but that number was skewed by the finding that diabetes lessened the risk of prostate cancer.

Research has suggested men with diabetes are less likely to develop prostate cancer as a result of having lower testosterone levels. However, most prostate cancers aren’t fatal, so the negatives of having diabetes far outweigh any protective effect the disease might have on prostate cancer. When prostate cancer was excluded from the data, the research showed that for men, having diabetes was associated with a 9 percent increased risk of a cancer diagnosis.

Although earlier research has also suggested that diabetes increases cancer risk, the new study is important because of its large size and years of follow-up. The study did not distinguish between Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, so it’s not clear if the heightened cancer risk is the same for the different forms of diabetes.

Fasting Is Good For Your Heart

2011-04-06T10:33:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

By TARA PARKER-POPE

Regular fasting may be good for your heart.

That’s the finding of a new study from doctors in Utah who looked at the relationship between periodic fasting and cardiovascular disease. The researchers interviewed 200 patients who were undergoing a diagnostic test called angiography, an X-ray exam of the blood vessels and heart chambers that can determine if a person has coronary heart disease.

The patients were asked if they engaged in regular fasting, and the researchers compared the answers to whether they eventually received a diagnosis of heart disease. Because about 90 percent of the patients were Mormons, a faith that encourages its members to fast for one day a month, the doctors expected to find a relatively high rate of regular fasting among the study participants.

The researchers found that people who fasted regularly had a 58 percent lower risk of coronary disease compared with those who said they didn’t fast, according to the report presented at the American College of Cardiology conference in New Orleans this week.

The study showed only an association between fasting and better heart health, which means it’s possible that fasting may not have a direct effect but might just be more common among people who are healthier to begin with. Devout Mormons, for instance, abstain from alcohol, smoking and caffeine, which are all factors that could affect heart health.

But the researchers say the findings are important because they affirm the results of an earlier, larger study, published in 2008 in The American Journal of Cardiology, that found a similar association between fasting and heart disease among 448 patients.

“The first study we did was not a chance finding,’’ said Dr. Benjamin D. Horne, director of cardiovascular and genetic epidemiology for Intermountain Healthcare, a health services and managed care firm in Salt Lake City. “We were able to replicate the findings and show that people who fast routinely have a lower prevalence of coronary disease.’’

The downside of the study is that it didn’t ask for specific details on the type and duration of fasting among the patients. However, preliminary interviews suggest that the most common form of fasting involved a monthly ritual of abstaining from all food and drinking only water for 24 hours.

A second, smaller study conducted by the same research team suggests that the effects of fasting aren’t just about having an overall healthy lifestyle, but that abstaining from food on a regular basis leads to metabolic changes that are good for the heart.

For that research, also presented at the New Orleans conference, 30 patients were asked to fast for 24 hours with water only. The scientists used blood tests before and after the fasting period to look at a number of different metabolic markers. Among other changes, they found that levels of human growth hormone, or HGH, surged after fasting — increasing 20 times in men and 13 times in women. The hormone is released by the body in times of starvation to protect lean muscle mass and trigger the body to start burning fat stores.

“There is a lot more to be done to fill in the research on the biological mechanism,’’ Dr. Horne said. “But what it does suggest is that fasting is not a marker for other healthy lifestyle behaviors. It appears to be that fasting is causing some major stress, and the body responds to that by some protective mechanisms that potentially have a beneficial long-term effect on risk of chronic disease.”

Dr. Horne noted that patients shouldn’t take up fasting without discussing it first with their doctor. Any fast should include water because dehydration can raise risk for stroke. He said the group was planning additional research into the potential health effects of regular fasting.

Vegetables And Fruits Not The Cancer Fighters We Thought?

2011-04-05T10:08:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
Although I don't agree with the ACS, WHO, and other big companies like this, it's still an interesting article since the bottom line is to live a healthier lifestyle - Eating fruits and vegetables alone won't prevent cancer!

(CNN) -- The benefits of fruits and vegetables in staving off cancer exist, but they're not as strong as previously believed, a new study reports.

Eating an additional 200 grams a day of fruits and vegetables (about two servings) resulted in only a 3 percent reduction of cancer risk, which was described as "very weak," according to the study published online in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

"This doesn't mean fruits and vegetables aren't important," said lead author Dr. Paolo Boffetta, the deputy director at the Tisch Cancer Institute at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine. "They aren't the only factor. There is no one factor."

The World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Cancer Society all encourage people to maintain a healthy lifestyle and eat five servings of produce a day for cancer protecting benefits.

The U.S. government's food pyramid recommends 1.5 to 2 cups of fruits a day and 2.5 to 3 cups of vegetables for adults. See guidelines here.

Scientists think fruits and vegetables have anti-cancer compounds, affecting enzymes, immune system and hormone levels.

From 1992 to 2000, Boffetta and the 51 co-authors obtained self-reported dietary and lifestyle habits of 478,478 people from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. The participants answered questions about their medical histories, physical activities, tobacco and alcohol use, and habitual diet.

They lived in 10 Western European countries and ate varying diets. About eight years later, a follow-up revealed that more than 30,000 participants had cancer -- the incidence rate was about 7 per 1,000.

Researchers raised the prospect that people who ate more fruits and vegetables could have lower cancer risks because they had generally healthier lifestyles, "such as lower intake of alcohol, never smoking, short duration of tobacco, and higher level of physical activity." These could've been factors rather than just fruit and vegetable intake.

Previous studies have touted the benefits of produce, with findings of 20 to 30 percent reduced cancer rates. The latest finding from the European study was low in comparison.

"Diet is a complex pattern and lifestyle," Boffetta said. "Cancer is complex disease. It's unlikely that one thing will explain the other."

The study does not contradict existing American Cancer Society guidelines about eating five servings a day to reduce cancer risk, said Dr. Michael Thun, the organization's vice president emeritus of epidemiology. It reaffirmed existing notions that higher intake lowered cancer risk, he said.

"In my view, there is a good body of evidence that fruit and vegetables do matter for cancer -- it certainly matters for heart disease," Thun said. "It's not as strong as initial studies suggested."
Decades of research have shown that eating processed red meat increases risk of cancers in the digestive tract and that obesity is associated with colorectal and breast cancer. But "the story on vegetables and fruits has been harder to nail down," Thun said.

Dr. Christine Gerbstadt, a spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association, warned against slacking off on daily fruit and vegetable intake because of this study.

She pointed out eating fruits and vegetables has benefits beyond the cancer realm.
"It does help with lowering weight and blood pressure, lowering diabetes risk or lowering blood sugar. Those are all health benefits that increase lifespan significantly."

They also provide soluble and insoluble fiber, minerals, high nutrients and low calories, she added.

Is Alzheimer's In Your Genes?

2011-04-04T10:15:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
The two largest studies of Alzheimer’s disease have led to the discovery of no fewer than five genes that provide intriguing new clues to why the disease strikes and how it progresses.

Researchers say the studies, which analyzed the genes of more than 50,000 people in the United States and Europe, leave little doubt that the five genes make the disease more likely in the elderly and have something important to reveal about the disease’s process. They may also lead to ways to delay its onset or slow its progress.

“The level of evidence is very, very strong,” said Dr. Michael Boehnke, a professor of biostatistics at the University of Michigan and an outside adviser on the research. The two studies are being published Monday in the journal Nature Genetics.

For years, there have been unproven but persistent hints that cholesterol and inflammation are part of the disease process. People with high cholesterol are more likely to get the disease. Strokes and head injuries, which make Alzheimer’s more likely, also cause brain inflammation. Now, some of the newly discovered genes appear to bolster this line of thought, because some are involved with cholesterol and others are linked to inflammation or the transport of molecules inside cells.

The discoveries double the number of genes known to be involved in Alzheimer’s, to 10 from 5, giving scientists many new avenues to explore. One of the papers’ 155 authors, Dr. Richard Mayeux, chairman of neurology at Columbia University Medical Center, said the findings would “open up the field.”

And an expert who was not part of the studies, Dr. Nelson B. Freimer, who directs the Center for Neurobehavioral Genetics at the University of California, Los Angeles, said there were now enough unequivocal genes for Alzheimer’s disease that researchers could make real progress in figuring out its biology. “This is a big, solid step,” he said.

An estimated 5.4 million Americans have Alzheimer’s disease, most of whom are elderly. According to the Alzheimer’s Association, one in eight people over age 65 have the disease. Its annual cost to the nation is $183 billion.

By themselves, the genes are not nearly as important a factor as APOE, a gene discovered in 1995 that greatly increases risk for the disease: by 400 percent if a person inherits a copy from one parent, by 1,000 percent if from both parents.

In contrast, each of the new genes increases risk by no more than 10 to 15 percent; for that reason, they will not be used to decide if a person is likely to develop Alzheimer’s. APOE, which is involved in metabolizing cholesterol, “is in a class of its own,” said Dr. Rudolph Tanzi, a neurology professor at Harvard Medical School and an author of one of the papers.

But researchers say that even a slight increase in risk helps them in understanding the disease and developing new therapies. And like APOE, some of the newly discovered genes appear to be involved with cholesterol.

Of the 10 genes now known to be associated with Alzheimer’s in old age, four were found in the past few years and are confirmed by the new studies. APOE may have other roles in the disease, perhaps involved in clearing the brain of amyloids that pile up in plaques, the barnacle-like particles that dot the brain of Alzheimer’s patients and are the one unique pathological feature of the disease.

It is known that one of the first signs of Alzheimer’s disease is an accumulation of beta amyloid, or a-beta, a protein that forms plaques. And it is known that later in the disease, twisted and tangled proteins — tau — appear in dead and dying nerve cells.

But what is not known is why a-beta starts to accrue, why the brains of people with Alzheimer’s cannot get rid of its excess, or what is the link between amyloid and tau.

One of the new papers, by American investigators, analyzed the genes of 54,000 people, some with Alzheimer’s and others the same age but without the disease. They found four new genes.

The other paper is by researchers in Britain, France and other European countries with contributions from the United States. They confirmed the genes found by the American researchers and added one more gene.

The American study got started about three years ago when Gerard D. Schellenberg, a pathology professor at the University of Pennsylvania, went to the National Institutes of Health with a complaint and a proposal. Individual research groups had been doing their own genome studies but not having much success, because no one center had enough subjects.

In an interview, Dr. Schellenberg said that he had told Dr. Richard J. Hodes, director of the National Institute on Aging, the small genomic studies had to stop, and that Dr. Hodes had agreed.

These days, Dr. Hodes said, “the old model in which researchers jealously guarded their data is no longer applicable.”

Read The Rest On The NY Times Site

Midlife Eating Disorders On The Rise

2011-04-01T08:23:00.000-07:00

Image by ! *S4N7Y* ! via Flickr

By RANDI HUTTER EPSTEIN

Margie Hodgin, a nurse in Kernersville, N.C., had struggled to lose weight since she was a teenager. But it wasn’t until she turned 40 that she finally took off the extra pounds, and then some.

“It was a real sense of empowerment, that I can do this all on my own and no one is helping me, and I’m achieving what I want and fitting into my clothes better,” she said of her initial delight in shedding the excess weight.

But what started as discipline transformed into disorder. Ms. Hodgin would not eat more than 200 calories a meal, and if she did, she made herself vomit. She surfed pro-ANA, or pro-anorexia, Web sites for advice. She knew that what she was doing was wrong — more like adolescent, she said — but she figured she was only hurting herself.

Meanwhile, her chronic state of starvation was triggering wild mood swings. It was only after she and her husband had several therapy sessions that she came to realize that her eating disorder was wreaking havoc on him, as well as their three boys.

“At a certain point,” she said, “you cross that line and you can’t help what you are doing, and the eating disorder owns you. I lost my bearings on reality and maturity.”

No one has precise statistics on who is affected by eating disorders like anorexia nervosa and bulimia, often marked by severe weight loss, or binge eating, which can lead to obesity. But experts say that in the past 10 years they are treating an increasing number of women over 30 who are starving themselves, abusing laxatives, exercising to dangerous extremes and engaging in all of the self-destructive activities that had, for so long, been considered teenage behaviors.

The recent surge in older women at eating disorder clinics is not a reflection of failed treatment, experts say, but rather a signal that these disorders may crop up at any age. But while some diagnoses, like Ms. Hodgin’s, are not made until these women are in their 40s, they may have battled food issues for years.

The Renfrew Center, one of the largest eating disorder clinics, with centers throughout the United States, started a treatment track geared to the 30-and-older set in 2005. The Laureate Psychiatric Hospital in Tulsa, Okla., is about to start a program, too.

Cynthia M. Bulik, director of the Eating Disorders Program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said her clinic used to have about one older patient at a time. Now, she said, about half the inpatients are midlife women. And the executive director of the Remuda Ranch Treatment Programs in Wickenburg, Ariz., Edward J. Cumella, said that clinic had had a 400 percent increase in admissions of patients 40 and older since the late 1990s.

“I think the degree of despair we are seeing among adult women about their bodies is unrivaled,” said Margo Maine, co-author of “The Body Myth: Adult Women and the Pressure to Be Perfect” (Wiley, 2005). “Eating disorders creep up during periods of developmental transitions, so the peak had been 13 to 15 and 17 to 19 — moving into adolescence and moving into college. Now, we are seeing them again during or after pregnancy and as women hit other life phases, such as empty nesting.”

No one knows what triggers eating disorders. Emerging studies point to altered brain signals, but it is tricky to decipher whether the defective biochemistry is a cause or a result of poor eating. The reigning theory is the same as it is for so many syndromes with no known cause: some people are born with genes that make them highly vulnerable to environmental stimuli. “Genetics loads the gun, and environment pulls the trigger,” is what the experts always say at the eating disorder conferences, said Caitlin Scafati, a recovered anorexic. And yet no one has identified the genes.

Gail Schoenbach, a 48-year-old mother of three from Warren, N.J., said she had been bulimic since she was 18 but did not get treatment until her 40s, when her friends alerted her husband and he started calling treatment centers. “I was very embarrassed and scared and humiliated and ashamed that I had lied about it,” she said.

Sharon Pikus, a 64-year-old grandmother from Manhasset, N.Y., had struggled since childhood with bulimia. But it wasn’t until her 40s, when her children were grown, that she finally got help. Of being bulimic, she said, “I just couldn’t be it anymore — I don’t know how else to put it.” She was better for a time, then had a setback 10 years later and was treated again. She considers herself recovered today, but says it is a constant battle.

Extreme dieting fads like weeklong fasts are supported by our thin-obsessed culture, said Lynn Grefe, the chief executive of the National Eating Disorders Association. She added that women who fall into the diet trap of overexercising and avoiding family meals are setting dangerous examples for their children.

“A problem is that friends, and even doctors, get used to seeing someone in their overly skinny state and may not recognize their habits and physique as dangerously unhealthy,” said Dr. David Herzog, the director of the Harris Center for Education and Advocacy in Eating Disorders at Massachusetts General Hospital. He is also the endowed professor in the field of eating disorders at Harvard Medical School.

Unlike teenagers, who often must be coerced into treatment, many older women come on their own accord. One of the greatest motivators is having a teenage daughter, because many parents start to worry that their child may mimic their behavior, said Craig Johnson, director of the Eating Disorders Program at Laureate Psychiatric Hospital in Tulsa.

Another reason that older women may be more likely to enter treatment is that after years of anorexia or bulimia, they finally realize that their coping strategies backfired. What they thought would bring happiness never did.

Yet making that first difficult step to admit to the problem does not make recuperation easy. In fact, for some older patients, the path can be even more difficult than it is for teenagers. Therapy involves unraveling years of entrenched habits and jettisoning an eating-disorder identity that had been with them for decades. And the first step in getting better — healthy eating — often seems an insurmountable task to those who are terrified of food and gaining weight.

“This is asking these patients a great deal,” said G. Terence Wilson, professor of psychology at Rutgers University in New Jersey. “Being intelligent and successful doesn’t immunize against eating disorders.”

Ms. Hodgin, who is now 45, credits her recovery in part to a trial at the University of North Carolina, where researchers are studying whether family therapy works as well for adults as it does for teenagers with the disorder. Bringing her husband to therapy sessions, she said, “made me realize how much I was breaking him down, and the resentment I had of people trying to make me better.”

Every day remains a battle, Ms. Hodgin said, and she still feels strong urges to weigh less.
“But I’ve been able to see the damage I left in the wake of it, and I can’t bear to see what I’ve put my kids through,” she said. “You can’t have an eating disorder and think it doesn’t affect your family.”

Story on NY Times

Radiation Found In West Coast Milk

2011-03-31T08:20:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

By MATTHEW L. WALD

Published: March 30, 2011

Tests of milk samples taken last week in Spokane, Wash., indicate the presence of radioactive iodine from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan, but at levels far below those at which action would have to be taken, the Environmental Protection Agency said on Wednesday.

Radioactive materials in liquids are measured in pico-curies per liter, and the sample, taken March 25, showed a reading of 0.8 pico-curies, the agency said. Those numbers, it said, would have to be 5,000 times higher to reach the “intervention level” set by the Food and Drug Administration.

“These types of findings are to be expected in the coming days and are far below levels of public health concern, including for infants and children,” the environmental agency said.
Levels of iodine 131 entering the air can be very diluted, but if the iodine is deposited on grass eaten by cows, the cows will reconcentrate it in their milk by a factor of 1,000. This is mainly a concern with fresh milk, not for dairy products that are stored before consumption.

Iodine 131 has a half-life of eight days, meaning that every eight days it loses half its strength. Since production of iodine 131 stopped when the Fukushima reactors shut down on March 11, it has already been through two half-lives and could easily be halved once or twice more again before the milk is consumed as cheese or yogurt.

Iodine 131 emits beta particles, which resemble electrons. They are not considered a major hazard outside the human body, although in large doses, they can damage the cornea of the eye.

The problem arises when materials that emit beta particles are ingested or inhaled. Iodine 131 is chemically identical to normal, nonradioactive iodine and thus is absorbed into the body just as normal iodine is, mainly in the thyroid gland, where it delivers a concentrated dose to that small organ and can cause cancer.

In the Chernobyl nuclear accident of 1986, the biggest health effect was cases of thyroid cancer, especially in children living near the nuclear plant in Ukraine.

The New York Times

TENS Unit and Muscle Stimulators from LGMedSupply

2011-03-30T08:54:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia
Whether you're suffering with knee pain, back pain, or any other type of muscle pain LGMedSupply offers Ultrasonic Units, TENS Units, and Muscle Stimulators. If you choose the LG-TEC Dual Combo TENS Unit and Muscle Stimulator you'll find that it gives you all the benefits of both units all in one.

The machines can help with old injuries or new injuries, helping to decrease painful muscles while increasing the tone of the muscles as well. Rather than taking muscles relaxers, pain killers, and OTC drugs such as ibuprofen or aspirin, you can do something much more natural for your body.

TENS Pain Relief and the Muscle Stimulators are used by people all over the world for dependable pain relief. Stop by and visit LGMedSupply Online now and learn how you can lessen the pain of your muscle injuries without the harmful side-effects of drugs. They have all items in stock, and if you find that you need more information you can simply visit their online customer blog.