Call to 'suspend' diabetes drug

By Nick Triggle Health reporter, BBC News
 

A widely-used diabetes drug should be pulled from the market, European regulators say.

Avandia is used to control blood sugar levels in type 2 diabetes patients.  It was licensed 10 years ago and more than 100,000 patients in the UK use it despite on-going concerns linking it to heart problems.

After reviewing safety data, the European Medicines Agency said the benefits no longer outweighed the risks and it should be suspended.

The drug - generic name rosiglitazone - is also used in combination with other drugs under the names Avandamet and Avaglim.

Contrast A spokeswoman for the regulator said: "Patients who are currently taking these medicines should make an appointment with their doctor to discuss suitable alternative treatments.
"Patients are advised not to stop their treatment without speaking to their doctor."

But the recommendation in Europe contrasts with the US where regulators have decided only to introduce tougher restrictions over its use - a verdict which they confirmed at the same time as the EMA announcement.

Avandia was originally licensed with warnings about the risks for patients with heart failure.
These were later expanded to include other heart problems after further research into its use.
The advice by an expert panel of advisers, who looked at the issue amid mounting concerns, will now be passed to the European Commission.
It may be several months before they make a final ruling, although it is unusual for them to ignore advice from the regulator.
Dr Ellen Strahlman, chief medical officer at GlaxoSmithKline, the manufacturer, said: "Our primary concern continues to be patients with type 2 diabetes and we are making every effort to ensure that physicians in Europe and the US have all the information they need to help them understand how these regulatory decisions affect them and their patients."
GSK said it still believes the drug was an "important treatment" for diabetes patients.
Peter Walsh, head of the patient group Action Against Medical Accidents, said: "Medical experts have been warning for months about the dangers of this drug, which have been well documented.
"It should not take this long to come to a decision when there is evidence that people's lives may be at risk.
"We need a review of how medicines are regulated in the UK and Europe as a whole. We fear that pharmaceutical companies have far more influence than they should have."
Simon O'Neill, of Diabetes UK, agreed action in such cases should be taken more quickly.
But he added: "Patient safety is paramount, so we welcome that a decision has been made about Avandia."

Vaccines = Infertility In Humans

Would you feel comfortable being injected with a vaccine that contains a substance that has been strongly linked to infertility?  Well, if you take the Fluarix swine flu vaccine manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline or any of the other swine flu vaccines that contain Polysorbate 80 that is exactly what you will be doing.  If you are considering getting the swine flu vaccine, or any other vaccine for that matter, perhaps you should educate yourself about EXACTLY what is in these vaccines before you allow them to be injected into your body.

Perhaps you think that linking the swine flu vaccine with infertility is quite a stretch.  Well, let's take this one step at a time.

#1) Polysorbate 80 is in the Fluarix swine flu vaccine manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline according to the CDC.  This is confirmed by the CDC in the document below..... 

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf

#2) A medical study done in Slovakia injected newborn female rats with Tween 80 (Polysorbate 80).  These newborn female rats were injected with Polysorbate 80 at days 4 to 7 after birth.  The researchers found that Polysorbate 80 accelerated the maturation of the female rats, damaged the vagina and womb lining, caused significant hormonal changes, severe ovary deformities and ultimately rendered the young female rats infertile.

In fact, Dee Nicholson, the National Communications Director for Freedom in Canadian Health Care is not shy about saying that Polysorbate 80 is "linked to infertility in mice".

#3) In the package insert for Fluarix, GlaxoSmithKline specifically mentions that they cannot guarantee that their flu vaccine will not damage your fertility: "FLUARIX has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility."  Thanks to foolishly passed laws by the U.S. government, you will not be able to sue anyone if it does leave you infertile.

#4) GlaxoSmithKline is not alone in using Polysorbate 80.  It is being reported that Novartis is using the adjuvant MF59 in its swine flu vaccine. The MF59 adjuvant contains Tween80 (Polysorbate 80) and squalene among other things.

#5) On the World Intellectual Property Organization, a patent application for a "fertility impairing vaccine".  The University of Georgia Research Foundation is listed as the patent applicant.  

In the description section of the patent application, Tween 80 (Polysorbate 80) is listed as a preferred ingredient:

"In a preferred embodiment the vaccine comprises oil, preferably a biodegradable oil such as squalene oil, in an amount of about 2.5% to about 15%, preferably about 8% to about 12%. In preparing the vaccine it is advantageous to combine a concentrated oily adjuvant composition with an aqueous solution of the antigen, pZP glycoprotein. Typically, the vaccine is prepared using an adjuvant concentrate which contains lecithin (about 5% to about 15 % wt/vol, preferably about 12% wt/vol) and STDCM (preferably about 25 mg/mL to about 50 mg/mL) in squalene oil. The term % wt/vol means grams per 100 mL of liquid. The aqueous solution containing the isolated pZP glycoprotein is typically a phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution, and additionally preferably contains Tween 80 (about 0.2% vol/vol to about 0.8% vol/vol, preferably about 0.4% vol/vol)."

#6) The United Nations is actively seeking ways to limit and control population growth around the globe.  An incredibly shocking U.N. population division policy brief from March 2009 asked this very disturbing question: 

What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?

You can read this almost unbelievable document here:

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/UNPD_policybriefs/UNPD_policy_brief1.pdf

The reality is that for the super wealthy global elite and the majority of the social engineers at the United Nations, population control is a major obsession.  If you doubt this fact, just read this article:

http://signsofthelastdays.com/archives/the-radical-population-control-and-eugenics-agenda-of-the-global-elite

The truth is that the more people learn about what is in these vaccines, the less likely they are to take them.  It is important to do your own research before letting anyone inject anything into your body.  Those who blindly trust the government or world health authorities are likely the ones to end up being extremely disappointed in the end.

Aspirin Gives Strokes

NSAID Use Associated With Future Stroke in Healthy Population

 

September 8, 2010 (Stockholm, Sweden) — Short-term use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) was associated with an increased risk of stroke in a Danish population study including only healthy individuals.
Presenting the study at last week's European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2010 Congress, Dr Gunnar Gislason (Gentofte University Hospital, Hellerup, Denmark) said the results could have "massive public-health implications."

"First we found an increased risk of MI with NSAIDs. Now we are finding the same thing for stroke. This is very serious, as these drugs are very widely used, with many available over the counter," Gislason told heartwire . "We need to get the message out to healthcare authorities that these drugs need to be regulated more carefully."

Cochair of the session at which the study was presented, Dr Robert Califf (Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC), agreed that the results raised a major public-health issue, especially in the US, where many NSAIDs were available without a prescription.

For the current study, Gislason and colleagues examined the risk of stroke and NSAID use in healthy individuals living in Denmark. He explained to heartwire that information on each individual in the Danish population is kept in various national registries. His team started with the whole population of Denmark aged over 10 years. To select just the healthy individuals, they excluded anyone admitted to the hospital within the past five years or those prescribed chronic medications for more than two years. This left a population of around half a million, who were included in the study. By linking to prescribing registries, the researchers found that 45% of these healthy individuals had received at least one prescription for an NSAID between 1997 and 2005. They then used stroke data from further hospitalization and death registries and estimated the risk of fatal and nonfatal stroke associated with the use of NSAIDs by Cox proportional-hazard models and case-crossover analyses.

Results showed that NSAID use was associated with an increased risk of stroke. This increased risk ranged from about 30% with ibuprofen and naproxen to 86% with diclofenac.

Risk of Stroke With Various Nsaids

NSAID	HR (95% CI) for risk of stroke
Ibuprofen	1.28 (1.14–1.44)
Diclofenac	1.86 (1.58–2.19)
Rofecoxib	1.61 (1.14–2.29)
Celecoxib	1.69 (1.11–2.26)
Naproxen	1.35 (1.01–1.79)

Gislason noted that there was also a dose-relationship found, with the increased risk of stroke reaching 90% (HR 1.90) with doses of ibuprofen over 200 mg and 100% (HR 2.0) with diclofenac doses over 100 mg. He pointed out that the results were particularly striking, given that this study was conducted in healthy individuals.
He conceded that his results could have some confounding but noted that the data were controlled for age, gender, and socioeconomic status and the patient population did not include those with chronic diseases. "We also have to think about the degree of confounding needed to nullify risk. It would have to increase risk four- to fivefold, which is very unlikely," he commented.

He said he did not find the results that surprising in view of the accumulating evidence of increased MI risk with these drugs, adding that the mechanism was probably the same. There have been several hypotheses about the mechanism linking NSAIDs with cardiovascular events, including increased thrombotic effect on platelets, the endothelium, and/or atherosclerotic plaques; increasing blood pressure; and effect on the kidneys and salt retention.

Gislason told heartwire that there is reluctance among the medical profession to limit the prescribing of these drugs. "The problem is that we don't have randomized trials, and it is very hard to change the habits of doctors. They have been using these drugs for decades without thinking about cardiovascular side effects."
He also stressed that the public needs to be protected by not allowing NSAIDs to be bought without a prescription. He has had some success in this regard in Denmark at least, where diclofenac became available over the counter recently, but after some of the MI data came out, Gislason's group campaigned the health authorities, and it has now become a prescription-only drug again. But he noted that many more NSAIDs are available over the counter in the US.

He believes the harmful effects of these agents are relevant to huge numbers of people. "If half the population takes these drugs, even on an occasional basis, then this could be responsible for a 50% to 100% increase in stroke risk. It is an enormous effect."

These results have been partly published in Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes earlier this year [1]. Gislason told heart wire that the novelty of the results presented at the ESC meeting was that "we had further analyzed our data regarding specific stroke and looked at the risk of ischemic stroke, and we confirmed that the risk of ischemic stroke was substantially elevated." He added: "We are in the process of analyzing these data related to time to risk and the effect of duration of treatment on stroke risk."

 

Vitamin D Deficiency May Contribute to Musculoskeletal Pain

Musculoskeletal pain, or pain that affects the bones and muscles in the body, is a common complaint among all segments of the population. Still, despite the high incidence and potential consequences of such pain, precise diagnosis and effective treatment are not always easily attained.

What's more, extremely low levels of vitamin D (known as hypovitaminosis D) may be partly responsible for causing some musculoskeletal pain that goes undetected, which can often lead to more severe consequences, including softening of the bones.

In order to determine the prevalence of hypovitaminosis D in patients suffering from musculoskeletal pain, researchers examined 150 patients (ages 10-65) with musculoskeletal pain who had no known health conditions that would decrease the production or absorption of vitamin D, or otherwise account for their pain.

The study found that 55 percent of individuals younger than age 55 had exceptionally high rates of vitamin D deficiency, while 28 percent of patients had severely deficient vitamin D levels. The deficiencies were similar for both men and women.

The moral of the story? Don't underestimate the role that vitamins and nutrition play in maintaining health and well being.

For more information on the benefits of vitamins, visit www.chiroweb.com/find/archives/nutrition/vitamins.

Reference:
Plotnikoff GA, Quigley JM. Prevalence of severe hypovitaminosis D in patients with persistent, nonspecific musculoskeletal pain. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2003;78, pp1463-70.

Scottish warning over vitamin D levels

Sunlight on the skin helps generate vitamin D

 

New leaflets are to be handed out urging people to make sure they get enough vitamin D.

Doctors are concerned people in Scotland are not getting enough of the vitamin from sunlight and are not topping up their levels with a healthy diet.

There is increasing evidence that a lack of vitamin D could be linked to cancer and multiple sclerosis.
Doctors are also concerned about a rise in the bone disease rickets.
Rickets is a rare condition which causes the softening and weakening of bones in children.

Pregnant and breastfeeding women are particularly at risk of vitamin D deficiency, along with children under five, the elderly, the housebound and people with darker skin.
About 10 to 15 minutes a day of sunshine is considered safe.

But in Scotland the sun is only strong enough to provide vitamin D between April and September.

If the body's reserves of vitamin D run out during the winter, they need to be topped up from oily fish, eggs, meat or a supplement.


Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon said: "We know that in Scotland the winter sun is not strong enough to provide the minimum vitamin D needed for health - especially for those with darker skin.

"A significant proportion of the UK population has low vitamin D levels. This leaflet aims to ensure that those at risk are aware of the implications of vitamin D deficiency and know what they can do to prevent it."
She added: "Vitamin D is key to maintaining healthy bones. Young children have a high risk of deficiency and we are seeing an increase in reported cases of rickets in Scotland.
"These conditions are easily prevented by improving diet and taking a supplement if you are at risk.
"Recent research suggests that vitamin D deficiency may also contribute to a range of other medical conditions. The Scottish government are keen to continue to monitor this evidence."

The health secretary is due to speak at the Shine on Scotland conference on Tuesday, which will bring together academics from across the world to consider the possible links between vitamin D deficiency and various health problems.
The event is taking place after schoolboy Ryan McLaughlin took a petition to the Scottish Parliament which called on ministers to produce new guidelines on vitamin D supplements for children and pregnant women, along with an awareness campaign about the issue.

Ryan took up the cause after watching his mother Kirsten suffering from MS.

He said: "It's amazing that I only launched Shine on Scotland early last year and so much has happened since.
"The petition lodged at the Scottish Parliament got great support and I'm really grateful to the Scottish government for being prepared to look at this issue.
"I hope the summit is a great success and that something positive can be done for people with MS and to prevent future generations from developing it."

Dr. Green says:  For people eating plenty of good, healthy red meat, this isn't a problem.  Saturated Fats and Protein are what fed our ancestors for thousands of years and it's just as good for us today.  It's only nonsense of the food pyramid and vegetarianism that causes this and many other problems.  Meat is full of vitamins and nutrients.  It is what we were designed to eat. 

Drinking beer could help prevent weak bones

Drinking certain types of beer can help prevent osteoporosis, claims a new study. Photograph: David Sillitoe

Beer is a rich source of a nutrient that can help prevent weak bones – but it depends what type you drink, claim researchers at University of California, Davis, today.

As one of the nation's favourite tipples, beer is a rich source of dietary silicon, which can help cut the chance of developing diseases like osteoporosis, they conclude.
However, not all beers are the same, with those containing malted barley and hops having higher silicon content than beers made from wheat.

Some light lagers made from grains like corn have the lowest levels of silicon while beers made from hops seem to come out on top, according to the study. The research, published in the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, examined 100 commercial beers and their production methods.
The experts said beer was a major source of dietary silicon – roughly half of the silicon in beer can be readily absorbed by the body.

Charles Bamforth, lead author of the study, said: "Beers containing high levels of malted barley and hops are richest in silicon.
"Wheat contains less silicon than barley because it is the husk of the barley that is rich in this element.
"While most of the silicon remains in the husk during brewing, significant quantities of silicon nonetheless are extracted into wort and much of this survives into beer."

Dr Claire Bowring, from the National Osteoporosis Society, said: "These findings mirror results from previous studies which concluded that moderate alcohol consumption could be beneficial to bones.
"However, while the National Osteoporosis Society welcomes measures to improve bone health we do not recommend anyone increases their alcohol consumption on the basis of these studies.
"While low quantities of alcohol may appear to have bone density benefits, higher intakes have been show to decrease bone strength, with an alcohol intake of more than two units per day actually increasing the risk of breaking a bone.

"There are also many other health concerns linked with alcohol which cannot be ignored."
Catherine Collins, a dietician at St George's Healthcare NHS Trust in London, said there was no recommended daily amount of silicon people should be consuming.
She said it was hard to prove deficiency in silicon because so little was needed.
"Sources of silicon do include beer – either alcohol-containing or alcohol-free – and it's also added as an anti-caking agent to powders such as baking powder.
"It is found in different amounts in water, so contributes to beer's total silica content.
"Silica may well contribute to bone health but in a minor way.
"It is not really significant compared with nutrients that we know are essential for bone health and are potentially deficient in the UK diet – such as calcium and vitamin D.

High-Risk Moments for Your Low Back

How to Avoid Injury and Pain

By Marc Heller, DC

What are the high-risk times and events for your lower back? Why can you get into more trouble doing something as simple as picking up a loaf of bread from the trunk of the car, rather than doing something more challenging? What simple steps can you take to avoid injury and pain? Let's get the answers to these questions and more.

Two Critical Moments
When it comes to your lower back and injury risk, there are two critical times when you need to be especially careful. One is first thing in the morning. Your back is actually swollen at that time. You are substantially taller, and the discs have extra fluid in them. A careless forward bend or twist first thing in the morning can do substantial damage to your discs or other back structures. It doesn't seem fair that such a simple thing, bending and twisting, something you have done thousands of times before, can suddenly cause big problems.

The other critical time is after you have been sitting. Long car drives or airplane trips are especially challenging. In this case, the culprit is something called "creep." This means that your ligaments and tendons lengthen into the position that you have been in. Think of sitting as a bent-forward position, as your legs are forward. The ligaments and tendons do not provide protection properly when they have been lengthened by creep. When you first get up from sitting, you are at risk. The longer you have been sitting, the higher the risk. If you sit more upright, with good lumbar support, you will have somewhat less risk.
 
Here are some common events that can contribute to lower back pain. Keep in mind that in all of these scenarios, your back was already vulnerable.

Scenario #1: You didn't sleep well last night, perhaps from sleeping in an unfamiliar bed after travel, after sitting too long. You get up, feel stiff, but ignore it. You sit down in a soft chair to enjoy your morning hot drink. You get up and get a sudden sharp stab in the back.

Scenario #2: You get up from sleeping, and sit at your laptop, and get entranced by a video or article. You end up sitting far longer than you planned. You get up, and can't completely straighten up.

Scenario #3: You get up from sleeping, drink your morning coffee, which wakes up your gut, and you go to bathroom to empty your bowel. You are a bit constipated, and have to strain. When you get up from the toilet, your back spasms.

Overnight sleeping, even a good sleep on your favorite bed, leaves your back somewhat swollen. Swollen may be an exaggeration, but the reality is that there is extra fluid in all of your joints.

If you have a good back, none of this matters. If you have a vulnerable back, it all matters. Ideally, when you get up, you should do some kind of activity that warms up and "wrings out" the excessive fluids. A short walk, some simple movements, can make a real difference. Sitting down at the computer, sitting on the toilet, etc., can get you in trouble.

So, who has a good back versus a bad back? Unfortunately, most of us have bad backs, at least in the sense that they can be subject to injury and pain at any time. In fact, studies suggest that as many as eight in 10 people experience low back pain during their lifetime. That's a lot of back pain already happening or waiting to happen. And as you can tell from the above discussion, some of the scenarios whereby people experience back pain are all too common.

How to Avoid Injury and Pain
Don't bend over immediately after sitting. Sitting, even in good posture, puts you at risk. The longer you sit and the worse the seat, the more at risk you are. Airlines are very risky; it's hard to get up and move around because of the tight quarters, and the minute the plane stops, you bend over and get stuff from under the seat, or reach up, and twist and lift to get your bag from the overhead compartment. After a long sit, give yourself at least a few seconds of backward bending and/or moving around to reset your spine. Then you can carefully, using your hips rather than your back, bend over to pick up something.

When you sit, don't slump. Slumping reinforces the risks, makes it more likely for something bad to happen to your discs or joints or muscles. So, sit up straight, and keep your back in neutral. Neutral means that you keep a bit of a lordosis in your lower back, keep the lumbar spine from slumping forward, stay more upright. This simple action can make a huge difference. Like any habit, this will require you to "Just Do It" for a few weeks.

Talk to your doctor about these and other high-risk moments for your lower back and what you can do to relieve low back pain or avoid the pain altogether. And make sure to review "Self-Care for Back Pain", which provides information on exercises your doctor may prescribe if you are experiencing back pain.

---

Marc Heller, DC, maintains a chiropractic practice in Ashland, Ore. He is a nationally recognized expert in treating tailbone, sacroiliac and lower back pain.

Supplements for osteoarthritis 'do not work'

Two popular supplements taken to combat joint pain do not work, a study says.

The review of 10 previous trials by Bern University in Switzerland found glucosamine and chondroitin did not have any beneficial effect on osteoarthritis of the hip or knee.

But the researchers said they did no harm so if people wanted to continue taking them they could.
This is because of the so-called placebo effect, where symptoms improve because a patients feels better psychologically for taking a substance.

Researchers analyzed the results of tests on 3,800 patients, assessing changes in levels of pain after patients took glucosamine, chondroitin or both together.  They then compared the effects with patients who took a placebo, the British Medical Journal reported.

Lead researcher Professor Peter Juni said: "Compared with placebo, glucosamine, chondroitin and their combination do not reduce joint pain or have an impact on narrowing of joint space.
"Health authorities and health insurers should be discouraged from funding glucosamine and chondroitin treatment."

But the researchers argued that given these supplements were not dangerous there was no reason for patients not to keep taking them if "they perceive a benefit and cover the cost of treatment themselves".
Global sales of glucosamine supplements reached nearly £1.3bn in 2008, although very few are funded by the NHS as they are not recommended by NICE, the official advisory body for the health service.

New cartilage Glucosamine and chondroitin are natural body chemicals which go to make up cartilage, the natural shock absorber in our joints which prevents bones rubbing together.  Some glucosamine and chondroitin is made by the body, but taking them as supplements is thought to boost the production of new cartilage.


However, Dr James Kennedy, of the Royal College of GPs, said he had never prescribed them to a patient.
"If a patient is eating a balanced diet then do they really need supplements?" he asks.
Jane Tadman, from Arthritis Research UK, said they were two of the most popular health supplements for osteoarthritis - and two of the most commonly investigated.
"NICE makes it clear in their guidelines on osteoarthritis that while they don't feel there's enough evidence to warrant the NHS paying for the supplements, some people may want to consider an over-the-counter trial as part of a wider self-management plan which includes exercise and keeping to an ideal weight, and we would support that view," she said.

The researchers' conclusion also supports the view taken by the Scottish Medicines Consortium