Ideas cannot be killed

As organized medicine has tried to kill chiropractic, the U.S. has tried to kill Fidel Castro and wreck Cuba. Both have failed. Here are some insites from an intellegent and matured leader as opposed to the childish rantings we hear coming out of the U.S. these days.

Ideas cannot be killed

I am not the first person whose death George Bush has anticipated, nor will I be the last.
Fidel Castro

A few days ago, while analysing the expenses involved in the construction of three submarines of the Astute series, I said that with this money "75,000 doctors could be trained to look after 150 million people, assuming that the cost of training a doctor would be one-third of what it costs in the United States." Now, along the lines of the same calculations, I wonder: how many doctors could be graduated with the one hundred billion dollars that Bush gets his hands on in just one year to keep on sowing grief in Iraqi and American homes. Answer: 999,990 doctors who could look after 2 billion people who today do not receive any medical care.

More than 600,000 people have lost their lives in Iraq and more than 2 million have been forced to emigrate since the American invasion began. In the United States, around 50 million people do not have medical insurance. The blind market laws govern how this vital service is provided, and prices make it inaccessible for many, even in the developed countries. Medical services feed into the gross domestic product of the United States, but they do not generate conscience for those providing them nor peace of mind for those who receive them.

The countries with less development and more diseases have the least number of medical doctors: one for every 5,000, 10,000, 15,000, 20,000 or more people. When new sexually transmitted diseases appear such as Aids, which in merely 20 years has killed millions of persons - while tens of millions are afflicted, among them many mothers and children, although palliative measures now exist - the price of medications per patient could add up to 5,000, 10,000 or up to 15,000 dollars each year. These are fantasy figures for the great majority of Third World countries where the few public hospitals are overflowing with the ill who die piled up like animals under the scourge of a sudden epidemic.

To reflect on these realities could help us to better understand the tragedy. It is not a matter of commercial advertising that costs so much money and technology. Add up the starvation afflicting hundreds of millions of human beings; add to that the idea of transforming food into fuels; look for a symbol and the answer will be George Bush.

When he was recently asked by an important personality about his Cuba policy, his answer was this: "I am a hard-line president and I am just waiting for Castro's demise." The wishes of such a powerful gentleman are no privilege. I am not the first nor will I be the last that Bush has ordered to be killed; nor one of those people who he intends to go on killing individually or en masse.

"Ideas cannot be killed," Sarría emphatically said. Sarría was the black lieutenant, a patrol leader in Batista's army who arrested us, after the attempt to seize the Moncada Garrison, while three of us slept in a small mountain hut, exhausted by the effort of breaking through the siege. The soldiers, fuelled by hatred and adrenalin, were aiming their weapons at me even before they had identified who I was. "Ideas cannot be killed," the black lieutenant kept on repeating, practically automatically and in a hushed voice.

I dedicate those excellent words to you, Mr Bush.

Why is too much water dangerous?

Water can cause the brain to swell
A Californian woman has died after taking part in a water-drinking contest, but why is too much water dangerous?

We are regularly advised to drink more water: it clears skin, reduces tiredness and aids concentration.

But the death of a woman in the US after taking part in a water-drinking contest shows you can have too much of a good thing.

Jennifer Strange had taken part in the "Hold Your Wee for a Wii" game, which promised the winner a Nintendo Wii. Afterwards she reportedly said her head was hurting and went home, where she was later found dead. Initial tests have shown her death is consistent with water intoxication.

Drinking too much water can eventually cause your brain to swell, stopping it regulating vital functions such as breathing, and causing death. So what happens?


WHO, WHAT, WHY?

The Danger is in the Dose.

Water enters the body when we drink and is removed primarily in the urine and sweat. The amount of water in the body is regulated to control the levels of certain compounds, such as salt, in the blood.

If you drink too much water, eventually the kidneys will not be able to work fast enough to remove sufficient amounts from the body, so the blood becomes more dilute with low salt concentrations.

"If you drink too much water it lowers the concentration of salt in your blood so that it is lower than the concentration of salt in cells," says Professor Robert Forrest, a consultant in clinical chemistry and forensic toxicology at the Royal Hallamshire Hospital in Sheffield.

Confusion

The water then moves from the dilute blood to the cells and organs where there is less water. Professor Forrest likens this to the effects seen in science-class experiments.

Actor Anthony Andrews was treated for water intoxication in 2003
"If you put salty water on onion skin the cells will shrink, if you put too much plain water on it the cells will swell," he says.

This swelling is a problem in the brain.

"When the brain swells, it is inside a bony box so has nowhere to go," he says. "The pressure increases in the skull and you may get a headache. As the brain is squeezed it compresses vital regions regulating functions such as breathing."

Eventually these functions will be impaired and you are likely to stop breathing and die. Warning signs included confusion and headaches.

Symptoms would normally occur very soon after drinking the water, but if the gut is absorbing the water more slowly then it can take longer.

Drinking several litres over a relatively short period of time could be enough to cause water intoxication. Those most at risk include people taking ecstasy, as the drug increases thirst and facilitates the release of anti-diuretic hormones so more water is taken in but cannot be excreted. Also, elderly people because their kidney function may be impaired.

Treatment for drinking excess water is "relatively straightforward", says Professor Forrest. It includes giving patients diuretics to help decrease their water load, or using drugs to reduce the swelling caused by excessive water.


He says the real problem is diagnosis. Because patients can be very confused they are often mistakenly thought to have taken drugs.


Ursula Arens, of the British Dietetic Association, says water is essential for a variety of bodily functions, for example to excrete waste products such as urea.

We lose water all the time and so need to replace it and in normal circumstances should aim to drink about one and a half litres every day, she says. During hot weather or exercise more should be consumed as dehydration can lead to bad breath, tiredness and a higher risk of bladder infections.

"If you are going to the toilet more than once every two hours or so that might be too much, especially if your urine is clear," she says, but adds that drinking too much water is unusual.

Cancer Information from Johns Hopkins

1. Every person has cancer cells in the body. These cancer cells do not show up in the standard tests until they have multiplied to a few billion. When doctors tell cancer patients that there are no more cancer cells in their bodies after treatment, it just means the tests are unable to detect the cancer cells because they have not reached the detectable size.


2. Cancer cells occur between 6 to more than 10 times in a person's lifetime.


3. When the person's immune system is strong the cancer cells will be destroyed and prevented from multiplying and forming tumors.


4. When a person has cancer it indicates the person has multiple nutritional deficiencies. These could be due to genetic, environmental, food and lifestyle factors.


5. To overcome the multiple nutritional deficiencies, changing diet and including supplements will strengthen the immune system.


6. Chemotherapy involves poisoning the rapidly-growing cancer cells and also destroys rapidly-growing healthy cells in the bone marrow, gastro-intestinal tract etc, and can cause organ damage, like liver, kidneys, heart, lungs etc.


7. Radiation while destroying cancer cells also burns, scars and damages healthy cells, tissues and organs.


8. Initial treatment with chemotherapy and radiation will often reduce tumor size. However prolonged use of chemotherapy and radiation do not result in more tumor destruction.


9. When the body has too much toxic burden from chemotherapy and radiation the immune system is either compromised or destroyed, hence the person can succumb to various kinds of infections and complications.


10. Chemotherapy and radiation can cause cancer cells to mutate and become resistant and difficult to destroy. Surgery can also cause cancer cells to spread to other sites.


11. An effective way to battle cancer is to starve the cancer cells by not feeding it with the foods it needs to multiply.




CANCER CELLS FEED ON:


a. Sugar is a cancer-feeder. By cutting off sugar it cuts off one important food supply to the cancer cells. Sugar substitutes like NutraSweet, Equal,Spoonful, etc is made with Aspartame and it is harmful. A better natural substitute would be Manuka honey or molasses but only in very small amounts. Table salt has a chemical added to make it white in color. Better alternative is Bragg's amino or sea salt.



b. Milk causes the body to produce mucus, especially in the gastro-intestinal tract.Cancer feeds on mucus. By cutting off milk and substituting with unsweetened soya milk cancer cells are being starved.


c. Cancer cells thrive in an acid environment. A meat-based diet is acidic and it is best to eat fish, and a little chicken rather than beef or pork. Meat also contains livestock antibiotics, growth hormones and parasites, which are all harmful, especially to people with cancer.


d. A diet made of 80% fresh vegetables and juice, whole grains, seeds, nuts and a little fruits help put the body into an alkaline environment. About 20% can be from cooked food including beans. Fresh vegetable juices provide within 15 minutes to nourish and enhance growth of healthy cells. To obtain live enzymes for building healthy cells try and drink fresh vegetable juice (most vegetables including bean sprouts) and eat some raw vegetables 2 or 3 times a day. Enzymes are destroyed at temperatures of 104 degrees F (40 degrees C).



e. Avoid coffee, tea, and chocolate, which have high caffeine. Green tea is a better alternative and has cancer-fighting properties. Water-best to drink purified water, or filtered, to avoid known toxins and heavy metals in tap water. Distilled water is acidic, avoid it.


12. Meat protein is difficult to digest and requires a lot of digestive enzymes. Undigested meat remaining in the intestines become putrified and leads to more toxic buildup.



13. Cancer cell walls have a tough protein covering. By refraining from or eating less meat it frees more enzymes to attack the protein walls of cancer cells and allows the body's killer cells to destroy the cancer cells. .



14. Some supplements build up the immune system (IP6, Flor-ssence, Essiac, anti-oxidants, vitamins, minerals, EFAs etc.) to enable the body's own killer cells to destroy cancer cells. Other supplements like vitamin E are known to cause apoptosis, or programmed cell death, the body's normal method of disposing of damaged, unwanted, or unneeded cells.

15. Cancer is a disease of the mind, body, and spirit. A proactive and positive spirit will help the cancer warrior be a survivor. Anger, unforgiveness and bitterness put the body into a stressful and acidic environment. Learn to have a loving and forgiving spirit. Learn to relax and enjoy life.



16. Cancer cells cannot thrive in an oxygenated environment. Exercising daily, and deep breathing help to get more oxygen down to the cellular level. Oxygen therapy is another means employed to destroy cancer cells.


(PLEASE FORWARD IT TO PEOPLE YOU CARE ABOUT)



CANCER UPDATE FROM JOHN HOPKINS HOSPITAL , U S - PLEASE READ

1. No plastic containers in micro.



2. No water bottles in freezer.



3. No plastic wrap in microwave.



Johns Hopkins has recently sent this out in its newsletters. This information is being circulated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center as well. Dioxin chemicals cause cancer,especially breast cancer.



Dioxins are highly poisonous to the cells of our bodies. Don't freeze your plastic bottles with water in them as this releases dioxins from the plastic.


Recently, Dr. Edward Fujimoto, Wellness Program Manager at Castle Hospital , was on a TV Program to explain this health hazard. He talked about dioxins and how bad they are for us

He said that we should not be heating our food in the microwave using plastic containers .


This especially applies to foods that contain fat.


He said that the combination of fat, high heat, and plastics releases dioxin into the food and ultimately into the cells of the body.


Instead, he recommends using glass, such as Corning Ware, Pyrex or ceramic containers for heating food. You get the same results, only without the dioxin. So such same results, only without the dioxin. So such things as TV dinners, instant ramen and soups, etc, should be removed from the container and heated in something else.


Paper isn't bad but you don't know what is in the paper. It's just safer to use tempered glass, Corning Ware, etc.

He reminded us that a while ago some of the fast food restaurants moved away from the foam restaurants moved away from the foam containers to paper. The dioxin problem is one of the reasons.

Also, he pointed out that plastic wrap, such as Saran, is just as dangerous when placed over foods to be cooked in the microwave. As the food is nuked, the high heat causes poisonous toxins to actually melt out of the plastic wrap and drip into the food. Cover food with a paper towel instead.

Veggies good for mental health

New research suggests that eating vegetables helps
slow mental decline as we age.
In a six-year study, people 65 years of age or older
who ate more than two servings of vegetables a day
had about 40 percent less mental decline than
people who ate few or no vegetables. Spinach, kale,
and collards were among the most beneficial
vegetables. Researchers suspect that is because
they contain vitamin E, a powerful antioxidant.

Morris MC, Evans DA, Tangney CC, Bienias JL,
Wilson RS. Associations of vegetable and
fruit consumption with age-related cognitive change.
Neurology. 2006;67:1370-1376.

Lower gout risk for coffee lovers

Coffee's action appeared to be unrelated to caffeine
Drinking four or more cups of coffee a day may cut the risk of having a painful attack of gout, say Canadian scientists.
A University of British Columbia team found blood uric acid levels - which are linked to the condition - were lower in people who drank more coffee.

But tea had no measurable effect, suggesting that the active ingredient was not caffeine.

The work is published in the journal Arthritis Care and Research.

Condition of the joints

Gout affects about 600,000 people in the UK, with numbers thought to be increasing in recent years.

Its symptoms, which are often joint pains in the lower limbs, happen when uric acid crystallises out of the blood into the joints.

Drinking too much beer, or eating too much red meat are thought to be to blame for many cases.

The main way to tackle the condition is to take anti-inflammatory pills, change diet and drink more water, or in more severe cases, to take more powerful drugs to reduce uric acid levels in the blood.

The latest research looked at the eating habits of 14,000 men and women between 1988 and 1994.

This information was compared with the results from blood tests for uric acid.

No caffeine link

The researchers found that those who drank four or more coffees a day were more likely to have a much lower uric acid level in the blood, compared with those who drank one or fewer cups.

Tea had no measurable effect but decaffeinated coffee did, suggesting that the active ingredient was not caffeine.

The team claim that coffee drinking can lead to lower insulin levels in the blood, and that there is an established link between higher insulin levels and higher uric acid levels.

The results back the findings of an earlier, much smaller, Japanese study.

Dr Andrew Bamji, a consultant rheumatologist and President of the British Society of Rheumatology, said: "There is no reason why coffee consumption shouldn't have an effect on blood uric acid levels - although this is the first study I've seen which comes to this conclusion."

However, he said that there was no certainty that high blood uric acid levels - the only test carried out by the researchers - would cause gout.

"Some people have elevated uric acid levels throughout life without ever having an attack of gout," he said.

Wheeled Shoes Raise Safety Concerns, Say Chiropractors

Wheeled Shoes Raise Safety Concerns, Say Chiropractors

With the popularity of wheeled shoes on the rise, doctors of chiropractic are expressing concerns about safety, both for the children who use them and others who must dodge children skating in crowded shopping centers and parks.

The shoes, most recognized by the dominant brand name, Heelys®, resemble normal sneakers but have removable wheels in the heels. Although parents have purchased more than 4 million pairs of the popular shoes, some malls and schools have banned Heelys® due to safety concerns.

“Parents should be concerned about Heelys® and other wheeled sneakers because of the potential for head, wrist, elbow and ankle injuries due to falls, as well as the possibility of injuries due to altered gait patterns,” says Dr. Steven Conway, a member of the American Chiropractic Association from Athens, Wis. “When wearing the shoes on a surface that isn’t skatable, children must walk on their toes. This altered gait forces their posture into unnatural positions, and if worn regularly for walking, this could potentially cause strain on growing bodies, especially in the foot, ankle and lower back.”

Conversely, when skating in the shoes, children are forced to put their weight on their heels. By doing so, they can easily lose their balance, putting them at a higher risk for falls and resulting injuries to the back of the head, elbows and wrists. Because many children consider Heelys® to be shoes rather than athletic gear, they fail to wear the proper safety equipment - which can be especially dangerous when children fall on slick tile or cement surfaces.

The American Chiropractic Association offers the following safety tips when wearing Heelys® and other brands of wheeled shoes:

Always wear the proper safety equipment including helmets, wrist guards and protective pads.
Use the shoes for recreation only - not for regular wear - and always remove the wheels when walking in the sneakers.
Do not allow children to wear the shoes in crowded malls, near busy streets or other areas where collisions with other pedestrians - or worse yet, automobiles - could occur. Urge children to be aware of their surroundings and mindful of fellow pedestrians.
Remind children to be aware of how their bodies feel. Pain is the first sign of a problem.
If an injury does occur, remember RICE - rest, ice, compression, and elevation. Ice the injured for 10 to 15 minutes, then remove the ice for about an hour and reapply. Using ice will help reduce the pain and inflammation.
If your child continues to feel soreness, pain or muscle strain after following these tips, it may be time to visit a doctor of chiropractic. Chiropractors are trained to treat the entire neuromusculoskeletal system and can provide advice on sports training, nutrition and injury prevention to young athletes.

Exercise 'reverses' muscle ageing

The secret of turning back the clock?
A twice-weekly trip to the gym may not just give you stronger muscles - it may give you younger muscles as well.
Research on over-65s has shown that regular resistance training appears to reverse signs of ageing in the muscles.

Analysis of muscle tissue showed the molecular machinery powering muscle cells became as active as that in 20-year olds after exercise.

Its authors say the Canadian study, published in the journal PLoS One, shows the benefits of remaining active.

Around 25 healthy adults over the age of 65 were given twice-weekly hour-long training sessions for six months. The results were compared with participants aged 20-35 years.

Before the sessions, which used standard gym equipment and a programme of 30 contractions of each muscle group, the older adults were 59% weaker than the younger adults.


This shows that it's never too late to start exercising and that you don't have to spend your life pumping iron in a gym to reap benefits
Dr Mark Tarnopolsky

But after the training the older adults were only 38% weaker.

The researchers also took tissue samples to look at changes in the mitochondria, the rod-like "power plants" that sit within every cell and generate energy.

Previous studies have suggested that mitochondrial dysfunction is involved in the loss of muscle mass and function commonly seen in older people but the team wanted to look specifically at the gene activity in the mitochondria.

The results showed the gene expression - the generation of functional proteins by a gene - declined with age.

But exercise resulted in a reversal of the gene expression back to levels similar to those seen in the younger adults.

Reversed

Dr Simon Melov, who co-led the research at McMaster University Medical Centre in Hamilton, Ontario, said: "We were very surprised by the results of the study.

"We expected to see gene expressions that stayed fairly steady in the older adults.

"The fact that their 'genetic fingerprints' so dramatically reversed course gives credence to the value of exercise, not only as a means of improving health, but of reversing the ageing process itself, which is an additional incentive to exercise as you get older."

Co-author Dr Mark Tarnopolsky added that a further four months of follow-up found most of the older adults were no longer doing formal exercise in a gym, but were doing resistance exercises at home, lifting soup cans or using elastic bands.

"They were still as strong, they still had the same muscle mass."

"This shows that it's never too late to start exercising and that you don't have to spend your life pumping iron in a gym to reap benefits."

Professor Marion McMurdo, head of ageing and health at the University of Dundee, said: "There is an age-related loss of muscle from about 35 onwards.

"It used to be thought this was completely irreversible but what we have begun to understand is that there's a sedentary loss as well."

"We know that people in their 90s can regain lost muscle tissue and lost muscle strength with quite a modest amount of exercise."

"The encouraging thing is it doesn't have to be vigorous and only a little exercise is necessary."

Why Are Millions Taking Avandia, A Dangerous Anti-Diabetic Drug?

By: Herb Denenberg, The Bulletin
05/24/2007

Why are a million Americans and many more millions outside of the U.S. taking Avandia (from GlaxoSmithKline), a drug that might increase the risk of cardiac disease and death? The explanation is simple: doctors read and rely on drug company advertising instead of disinterested drug studies; doctors listen to drug company pitchmen instead of disinterested drug researchers; drug companies spend billions to brainwash doctors and patients so they clamor for and prescribe drugs that may be unsafe, ineffective and overpriced for conditions for which there may be drugs that are safer, more effective and lower in price.

All the usual suspects acted surprised when an important new study in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine found that Avandia, prescribed for type 2 diabetes, increased the chances of heart disease and death. Rep. John Dingell (R-Mich.) and Rep. Henry Waxman (R-Calif.) went into their standard tirade about the FDA and drug companies and called for hearings. These are the same phonies who have been doing their act for many years, while failing to bring about fundamental reform at the FDA. They have enough energy for the initial flurry of publicity but not for the long haul of fundamental reform of the FDA. The New York Times, whose reporting on most matters has become a journalistic joke, reported that the new findings took doctors and Wall Street by surprise. If they were taken by surprise, they've been in a Rip van Winkle slumber for years. The drug company involved went into its usual state of denial, criticizing the study and reaffirming the safety of its product. Many health organizations and the FDA took the standard cop-out: See your doctor. They didn't have good advice for doctors or patients.

Now put the case that the doctors were actually reading the medical literature instead of only paying heed to drug company propaganda and snake oil salesmen, bearing free samples and gifts.
Avandia came on the market in 1999, and The Medical Letter (August 13, 1999) reported, "The long-term benefits and safety of [Avandia, the brand-name] rosiglitzaone [the generic name] for patients with type 2 diabetes remain to be established." Medical Letter also reported that clinical trials of Avandia have only been published in abstract form. Can you believe that? The FDA lets a drug come on the market, and scientists still don't have access to the full clinical studies supposedly demonstrating the drug is safe and effective. That's one of a thousand links proving the FDA and drug companies aren't protecting the public and the patients.

Doctors, unfortunately for patients, don't pay attention to the old maxim of prescribing, "Don't be the first to use a new drug, or the last to use an old one." This maxim has become a prescribing rule for wise doctors, who know to avoid new drugs (unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise, because they have simply not been tested on a large enough sample to assure their safety and effectiveness). The Health Research Group, author of the best-selling book Worst Pills, Best Pills, recommends a seven-year rule: Avoid new drugs until they have been tested on the market for seven years, unless there is some compelling reason to do otherwise.

One critic of the FDA and the drug industry, Dr. Ray D. Strand, in his book Death by Prescription, says those who take new drugs are participating in "the great clinical trial - you!" In other words, when you take a new drug, you are becoming an unknowing guinea pig. He documents disasters from new drugs such as Lotronex, on the market for less than a year, and pulled off because it was causing serious illness and death.

As soon as Avandia hit the market, the respected monthly, The Medical Letter (August 13, 1999) warned "the long-term benefits and safety" of Avandia for treating type 2 diabetes "remain to be established."
There were other signals of problems with Avandia long before this latest flurry of publicity. On March 21, 2000, Rezulin was withdrawn from the market because of rare but severe liver toxicity. The Medical Letter (April 17, 2000) reported full-page ads urged patients to switch from Rezulin to Avandia. How's that from going from the pharmaceutical frying pan into the fire? At the time, Medical Letter again warned (April 17, 2000) that the long-term safety of Avandia "remains to be established."
But little and big warnings like that don't stop doctors from prescribing and patients from asking for drugs of unproven safety and efficacy. There was another implied warning in the recall of Rezulin. It is a member of the same family as Avandia, which should have raised a red flag or two. When one drug in a family is recalled, that often means others in the same family may be on the way out. That's what happened in the case of Vioxx.

If you need more advance warning, Avandia is one of 181 top-selling drugs that Worst Pills, Best Pills places on its "Do Not Use" list. Even before the Avandia publicity, the Health Research Group (author of the just cited book) had petitioned the FDA to require the package insert to indicate the therapeutic inferiority of the drug compared to other oral diabetics, and to better explain the safety problem with Avandia. To support this, the petition indicated that nine out of 10 studies showed that Avandia and other drugs in its family, so-called glitzazones, came out as inferiors to other anti-diabetic drugs. The petition also pointed out Avandia causes fluid retention, which can lead to difficult breathing and heart failure.
Even before the latest flap, the Avandia package insert indicated that the drug could cause or worsen heart failure says Worst Pills, Best Pills. Despite that and other warnings, a study found that 7.1 percent of patients leaving hospitals who had been there with heart failure got a prescription for Avandia or its brother drug, Actos, although both cause fluid accumulation and carry the same warning. This suggests, as does many other studies, that even warnings are often ignored perhaps due to the heavy selling pressure exerted by the drug companies. In another later study of hospitalized heart failure patients, the use of Avandia and its brother drug had increased to 16.1 percent. That latter study suggest that despite warnings, the situation is only getting worse.

Dr. Ray Strand, whose book is cited above, makes an interesting point in the history of Rezulin, brother drug of Avandia. He said the FDA has a voluntary reporting system, so no one knows for sure what is going on with adverse reactions to drugs. Experts agree only a small fraction of all adverse reactions get reported. So when one does occur, FDA often just changes the labeling. That happened, says Dr. Strand, four times with Rezulin. Finally, in March of 2000, the FDA had to admit a killer drug was on its hands and it recalled Rezulin. Dr. Strand says if you put blind faith in the broken drug system, it may cost you or a loved one their health and life. Incidentally, my guess is the FDA will make some label changes and not recall Avandia.

So warnings were flying from 1999 when Avandia came to market. If that's not enough, consider a few more advance warnings:

At least as early as 2005, the drug company had warned the FDA of a safety problem with Avandia.
Then, it is reported, that the company posted a study on its obscure Web site, indicting Avandia raised patients' heart disease risk by 30 percent. That was only nine months ago.
So did the FDA or the drug company issue a warning to the public? Of course not. Further study is always necessary, until the drugs' dangers are obvious beyond any contradiction. The FDA has a long history of studying such problems to death, yes, the death of the patients.

If that isn't enough to give you the message about this drug, the drug company that makes it, and the FDA, here's one final flick. The FDA doesn't have a recommendation to stop using the drug and getting a substitute or other treatment plan. It says merely don't stop using the drug and consult with your doctor. If the doctors had been paying attention, they wouldn't have been prescribing the drug in the first place. The FDA offers no help for patients or doctors.

Other doctors weren't as chicken-hearted as the FDA. In fact, as indicated, the Health Research Group recommends against the drug (and its brother Actos) and says there are better alternatives. Other doctors have expressed the same view in published reports since the Avandia story broke. An editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine questions why doctors would continue to prescribe Avandia. The editorial stated, "In view of the potential cardiovascular risks and in the absence of evidence of other related advantages, except for laboratory measures of glycemic [blood sugar] control, the rationale for prescribing [Avandia] at this time is unclear." Dr. Steven A. Nissen of the Cleveland Clinic, lead author of the study in the New England Journal of Medicine, denied some who claimed the heart risk was small: "It's a huge risk," he said, noting that an estimated "tens of thousands of people" might have had heart attacks as a result of the drug. Dr. Nissen admits his study has some imperfections, but he stands by it. And remember, he was the one who blew the whistle on Vioxx, getting it recalled, and on another anti-diabetes drug, Pargluva, keeping it off the market altogether.

To further put this matter into perspective, there was a report that GlaxoSmithKline recently settled a lawsuit filed by the attorney general of New York for $2.5 million. The lawsuit accused GlaxoSmithKline of fraudulently withholding some of the results of safety studies on the prescribing of the antidepressant Paxil to children. The company denied the accusations while settling.

The bottom line for those taking Avandia or its brother, Actos:
You don't want to stop taking the drug without getting medical advice first. See your doctor as soon as possible.
You have to decide who you are going to believe. If you believe the critics, you may want to see if your doctor can switch you to another drug that will work for you. That's what Worst Pills, Best Pills suggests.
It is not clear if there is a problem with Actos based on this study. But Actos is a "Do Not Use" drug on the list of Worst Pills, Best Pills.

You may also want to let your elective representatives know that it is about time they fix the FDA.
This might be a good time to reconsider your whole approach to your treatment plan. I'd recommend the section on diabetes in Worst Pills, Best Pills. Make sure that your lifestyle treatment - diet, exercise, sleep and control of stress - is working along with any medication your taking. It makes sense to push lifestyle treatment in an attempt to eliminate the need for medications altogether.

Feeling Boo-Hoo-y? Get Electro-cuitie!

Brain 'Pacemaker' Tickles Your Happy Nerve
Marty Graham 05.23.07 | 2:00 AM


The vagus nerve stimulator power pack is implanted near the collarbone, and wired to the left side nerve -- always the left, since the right side goes directly to the heart.
Illustration: Cyberonics Inc.

SAN DIEGO -- A novel medical technique that smuggles an electrical charge into the brain through the vagus nerve is proving at least as effective as medication in controlling severe depression, psychiatrists say.

In vagus nerve stimulation, or VNS, a two-inch diameter, .25 inch thick disk is surgically tucked under the skin near the left collarbone, then wired upward to the vagus nerve in the neck. The battery-operated disk delivers intermittent, rhythmic pulses to the nerve -- whose name means "wandering" in Latin -- that reaches a half dozen areas of the brain critical to treating depression, according to Dr. Darin Dougherty of Massachusetts General Hospital.

"Instead of prescribing milligrams I'm prescribing milliamps," Dougherty says. The implanted disc is programmed and reprogrammed with a wand held over the skin. Data on each patient about the intensity and frequency of the pulse and device settings is stored in individual memory cards slotted into in a handheld computer linked to the wand.
VNS has been used for 10 years to treat epilepsy, where it can cut the number of seizures for some patients by about 40 percent. Doctors began to suspect it held potential for treating severe depression when patients clung to the device, even when it wasn't helping their epilepsy.

"We asked (epilepsy) patients who weren't being helped if we could remove the device and by and large, the patients said, 'No, no, don't take this away,'" says Dr. Mitchel Kling of the National Institutes for Health. "In some cases where there wasn't good seizure control, patients' mood problems stabilized."

The technique won FDA approval as a depression treatment in July 2005. Since then, about 3,000 depression patients have been wired, according to Cyberonics, the Houston-based manufacturer of the device. Doctors gathered at the American Psychiatric Association conference here say they've seen measurable results.

In an October 2005 study, about a third of the severely depressed patients responded well, and almost half went into remission. Ninety-one percent maintained their recovery nine months later, and some patients who didn't report immediate benefits showed improvement and even remission later on.

Researchers know the treatment stimulates norepinephrine and serotonin centers, now treated with pharma at a tepid success rate, and increases blood flow and neuron activity. But they candidly say they don't fully understand why VNS works.
Once healed from surgery, patients report their voices get gravelly during the pulse cycle, usually five of every 30 seconds. If that becomes a problem -- during public speaking, for example -- the device is designed with an off-switch: The patient can suspend the unit by placing a magnet over it, Dougherty says.

Batteries last eight to 12 years, Dougherty says, and drawbacks include a requirement that the patient avoid physical therapy ultrasounds that can heat up the wiring and damage the nerve -- though diagnostic ultrasound works fine -- and problems getting a full body MRI.

The implant neatly sidesteps one of the biggest problem of treating depression: the documented tendency for patients to abandon treatment over side effects or because they feel better.

Tea 'healthier' drink than water

The researchers recommend people consume three to four cups a day
Drinking three or more cups of tea a day is as good for you as drinking plenty of water and may even have extra health benefits, say researchers.
The work in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition dispels the common belief that tea dehydrates.

Tea not only rehydrates as well as water does, but it can also protect against heart disease and some cancers, UK nutritionists found.

Experts believe flavonoids are the key ingredient in tea that promote health.

Healthy cuppa

These polyphenol antioxidants are found in many foods and plants, including tea leaves, and have been shown to help prevent cell damage.


Tea replaces fluids and contains antioxidants so its got two things going for it
Lead author Dr Ruxton

Public health nutritionist Dr Carrie Ruxton, and colleagues at Kings College London, looked at published studies on the health effects of tea consumption.

They found clear evidence that drinking three to four cups of tea a day can cut the chances of having a heart attack.

Some studies suggested tea consumption protected against cancer, although this effect was less clear-cut.

Other health benefits seen included protection against tooth plaque and potentially tooth decay, plus bone strengthening.

Dr Ruxton said: "Drinking tea is actually better for you than drinking water. Water is essentially replacing fluid. Tea replaces fluids and contains antioxidants so it's got two things going for it."

Rehydrating

She said it was an urban myth that tea is dehydrating.

"Studies on caffeine have found very high doses dehydrate and everyone assumes that caffeine-containing beverages dehydrate. But even if you had a really, really strong cup of tea or coffee, which is quite hard to make, you would still have a net gain of fluid.

"Also, a cup of tea contains fluoride, which is good for the teeth," she added.

There was no evidence that tea consumption was harmful to health. However, research suggests that tea can impair the body's ability to absorb iron from food, meaning people at risk of anaemia should avoid drinking tea around mealtimes.


Tea is not dehydrating. It is a healthy drink
Claire Williamson of the British Nutrition Foundation

Dr Ruxton's team found average tea consumption was just under three cups per day.

She said the increasing popularity of soft drinks meant many people were not drinking as much tea as before.

"Tea drinking is most common in older people, the 40 plus age range. In older people, tea sometimes made up about 70% of fluid intake so it is a really important contributor," she said.

Claire Williamson of the British Nutrition Foundation said: "Studies in the laboratory have shown potential health benefits.

"The evidence in humans is not as strong and more studies need to be done. But there are definite potential health benefits from the polyphenols in terms of reducing the risk of diseases such as heart disease and cancers.

"In terms of fluid intake, we recommend 1.5-2 litres per day and that can include tea. Tea is not dehydrating. It is a healthy drink."

The Tea Council provided funding for the work. Dr Ruxton stressed that the work was independent.

Pre-birth apples benefit babies

Pre-birth apples 'benefit babies'

Part of a healthy diet
Children of mothers who eat plenty of apples during pregnancy are less likely to develop asthma, research suggests.
The University of Aberdeen project quizzed 2,000 mums-to-be on their eating habits, then looked at their child's health over five years.

They found that those who ate four or more apples a week were half as likely to have an asthmatic child compared with those who ate one or fewer.

The study was presented at the American Thoracic Society conference.


This study suggests a simple modification that can be made to a pregnant mother's diet which may help protect her child from developing asthma
Dr Victoria King, Asthma UK

The researchers also found a link between eating more fish in pregnancy, and a lower chance of their child developing the allergic skin condition eczema.

Women who ate one or more portions of any type of fish during pregnancy again had almost half the chance of having a child diagnosed with eczema within the first five years.

There are no firm clues as to why apples and fish might be able to produce this benefit - no other foodstuffs were linked to decreases in asthma or eczema.

However, apples are already linked to better lung health when taken by adults, perhaps due to their antioxidant properties, and oily fish in particular contain Omega-3 oils, which, it has been suggested, offer health benefits.

It is, however, notoriously difficult to uncover links between maternal diet and child health, given the numerous other factors which may be involved in the development of diseases such as asthma and eczema.

The Aberdeen team has a group of 2,000 women, who, more than five years ago, monitored their food intake during pregnancy, and then allowed researchers to see what happened to their children.

Proof needed

The project, funded by the charity Asthma UK, has previously revealed links between vitamin consumption in pregnancy and lower levels of asthma.

This time, they feel that while the apparently strong link between apples and asthma does not prove that eating the fruit is the cause of lower asthma rates in children, it does offer a strong argument for a balanced diet during pregnancy.

Dr Graham Devereux, one of the lead researchers, said: "There may well be another factor in the lifestyles of women who eat lots of apples that is influencing this result.

"But it is certainly a clear association, and it is certainly less controversial to encourage women to eat more fruit during pregnancy rather than to take extra vitamins."

Dr Victoria King, Research Development Manager at Asthma UK says: 'This study suggests a simple modification that can be made to a pregnant mother's diet which may help protect her child from developing asthma before the age of five.

"The study supports our advice to pregnant mothers to eat a healthy, balanced diet.

"One in ten children in the UK has asthma so it is vital to continue funding research that could reduce the incidence of childhood asthma.'

Atkins Diet: Safe, Healthy, Best.

On March 7, 2007, the Journal of the American Medical Association published one of the biggest stories in the world of health with results of a study which compared four popular diet programs, executed by researchers at Stanford University, and underwritten by the National Institutes of Health. The year-long weight loss and health study tested among 311 pre-menopausal overweight women was titled “The A to Z Weight Loss Study: A Randomized Trail.” It compared the Atkins Nutritional Approach, the Zone diet, the Ornish diet and a basic conventional eating plan based on food-pyramid recommendations (the LEARN program).

The Atkins Diet declared “The Winner” and "Back on Top".

The study’s results were clear:

The women who followed the Atkins weight loss program lost on average 40 percent more weight than the women on the next best plan;
The Atkins weight loss program proved significantly more effective than the other leading weight loss programs tested, and lowered risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease;
The best news was that women following the Atkins program also experienced the most favorable results in their “good” cholesterol levels (HDL), blood triglycerides and blood pressure.

The Stanford researchers were interested primarily in weight loss. Lead author of the research, Dr. Christopher Gardner said, “In the weight loss department there was an advantage for the Atkins group.”

An interesting fact to note: Women on all four diets were far from meticulous about following the dietary regime they were assigned by the end of the 12- month period. No matter what diet they followed, those who consumed the least amount of carbohydrates had the best clinical results in weight loss and risk factors for cardiovascular disease. “We purposely didn’t just hand them the diet book and tell them to come back in a year,” said Dr. Gardner. “We made sure they understood it. Each group had eight weeks of classes with a dietitian who went over the principles of the books, section by section, so everyone knew exactly what to do. Furthermore, these were educated women in the Stanford University area; they were highly motivated and had a lot of support for the first two months. In addition, for the last 10 months of the 12-month study, the women were left to follow the diets on their own. It was a very “real-world” scenario,” said Dr. Gardner. “It’s what happens when even motivated people follow diet books. We think that’s extremely relevant.”


While the women may not have followed the diets to the letter, they did make changes in some important areas; many of them following principles of the Atkins Advantage —- fewer refined carbohydrates, more fiber, more protein, no trans-fats, much less sugar. For example, before starting the program, the Atkins women were consuming about 215 grams of carbohydrates a day (about 45 percent of their diet). By the end of the 12 months, they were down to about 34 percent. This is a very significant change.


They may not have achieved perfection, but they did achieve results, and those results shouldn’t be overlooked simply because the women didn’t follow the diets perfectly.

Even more importantly, the women in the Atkins group also had noticeable improvements in a number of health measures.

Their HDL (“good”) cholesterol at 12 months was significantly higher for Atkins than Ornish, and triglycerides for the Atkins group went down by a whopping 29 percent, more than twice the percentage of any other group.
The decrease in average blood pressure for the Atkins group was significantly greater than any other. LDL-(“bad”) cholesterol, the type that many health professionals warned would worsen on the Atkins diet, was not different among any of the diet groups after 12 months.
These are important findings especially in light of past unsubstantiated claims that the Atkins program may raise lipids. In this study, as well as other studies in the recent past, the Atkins program reduced lipids.

The JAMA article is just the latest watershed study in four years of independent research trials confirming that adherence to the Atkins principles for weight control and nutrition is effective, healthy, and safe. Other major studies were those funded by the American Heart Association and the Veterans Affairs Healthcare Network.. In addition, studies were conducted at the Duke University Division of General Internal Medicine and Temple University.

So what’s the lesson learned? Eat adequate protein from a variety of sources; eat fiber rich foods; get your carbohydrates from nutrient dense high-fiber sources; stay away from trans-fats and keep sugar and carbohydrates low --- all basic nutrition principles of the Atkins diet.

Dr. Gardner summed it up best:

“I think one advantage that the Atkins diet had was the simplicity of the message. A lot of people say that the main Atkins message is to eat all the steak and brie that you want but that’s not it. Their main message is this. You can’t have refined sugar. No soda, no white bread, no high-fructose corn syrup. It’s simple and direct and easy to understand, and I think it may turn out to be one of the most important messages of all.”

Read more research on low carb at: http://www.atkins.com/research-library

Breastfeeding advice 'is ignored' from the BBC

Breastfeeding is becoming more common
Fewer than one in a hundred women follow government advice to breastfeed exclusively for the first six months, figures show.
The Infant Feeding Survey shows in 2005 76% of UK mothers started out breastfeeding - up 7% from 2000.

However, most resort to formula within weeks, and fewer than half still breastfeed by the time their child is six weeks old.

By six months, just one in four are still breastfeeding.


Women need to be able to feel confident and comfortable to breastfeed wherever they need to
Alison Baum
Breastfeeding Manifesto Coalition

The survey, which has been carried out every five years since 1975, also found that well educated, professional women aged over 30 who were first time mothers were the most likely group to breastfeed.

Professor Denise Lievesley, of the Information Centre, which produced the study, said the overall message was positive as more women were breastfeeding for longer.

She said the survey would help health workers to target resources at those on which they would have the most impact.

"Overall, it is encouraging to see that more mothers than ever before are starting out breastfeeding their babies and, while there is a sharp drop-off, more are continuing to breastfeed for longer."

Manifesto

The figures were released on the first day of National Breastfeeding Week, which will see the launch of a breasteeding manifesto in Westminster on Wednesday.


BREASTFEEDING BENEFITS
Breastfed babies five times less likely to end up in hospital than formula-fed babies with gastroenteritis
Breastfed babies half as likely to end up in hospital with respiratory disease in their first seven years of life
Breast milk protects against diabetes and obesity

The manifesto, supported by 183 MPs and various celebrities, aims to promote breastfeeding and create an environment in which women feel more comfortable about doing so.

Alison Baum, from the Breastfeeding Manifesto Coalition, said: "Women need to be able to feel confident and comfortable to breastfeed wherever they need to.

"Babies need to feed at all sorts of times, and you can never know when a baby is going to need to feed

"It's the most natural thing in the world, and the evidence for the health benefits are huge, so we should be doing all we can to support women."

She said most women who breastfed in public did so discreetly, with people not realising.

But she said: "There are the odd cases where women are thrown out of restaurants and cafes."

It is illegal in Scotland to ask someone to stop breatsfeeding in an establishment that normally serves food.