Pesticides Definitively Linked to Bee Colony CollapseIsn’t it time the EPA listened to the science and not the insecticide manufacturer? Since 2006, up to 40% of the bee colonies in the US have suffered Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), in which honeybees die, disoriented, far from their hives. In 2010 we wrote about the disappearing honeybee and how this situation threatened much of our human food supply, including our vegetables and fruits, which must be pollinated by bees. Back then we noted that there have been very few reported bee losses among organic beekeepers, and suggested that the principal difference between them is the use of pesticides. We said at the time that this fact should lead anyone to the most logical conclusion: pesticides are likely responsible for CCD. Now, a study by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has labeled the pesticide clothianidin as being an “unacceptable” danger to bees. At least 143 million of the 442 million acres—that is, nearly one-third—of US cropland is planted with crops treated with one of three neuroactive insecticides related to nicotine (a newer class of pesticide called neonicotinoids), all of which are known to be highly toxic to bees: clothianidin, imidacloprid, and/or thiamethoxam. Clothianidin, which is used to treat up to 90% of US corn, much of canola, and increasingly soy as well, expresses itself through the plants’ pollen and nectar—the honeybee’s favorite sources of food. In addition to finding clothianidin too dangerous to use on plants pollinated by bees, EFSA’s study specifically identifies the shoddy studies provided by pesticide manufacturer Bayer as evidence of clothianidin’s safety as “too flawed to be useful.” It was these studies that EPA used to first approve clothianidin in 2003, even against the objections of EPA’s own scientists. Three years ago we reported about Bayer’s involvement in a material conflict of interest surrounding its pesticide studies. At the time, a study had decided that a fungus tag-teaming with a virus was killing the bees—but the study’s lead author, Montana bee researcher Dr. Jerry Bromenshenk, had originally signed up to be an expert witness on behalf of beekeepers who brought a class-action lawsuit against Bayer in 2003. He suddenly dropped out—and immediately received a significant research grant from Bayer to study bee pollination, which has continued in recent years. It should come as no surprise that Bayer pesticides were never mentioned in the study as a potential cause of CCD. Now Bayer’s clothianidin has been linked to colony collapse in Minnesota and Ohio. And researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health, who studied imidacloprid (which has identical results), believe bees are being exposed either through nectar from plants or the high-fructose corn syrup that beekeepers use to feed bees. The problem is that farmers are not left with much of a choice, as most of the available seeds are already coated with the pesticide: either you buy the seed, or you don’t grow corn. Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency seems to be turning a blind eye to the situation. Even though they acknowledge that pesticides kill bees, they hurry to differentiate this from colony collapse disorder. And when listing possible causes of colony collapse, pesticides are conspicuously absent. Are honeybees merely the canary in the coal mine? If pesticides that coat 90% of our corn are killing off bees, what is the impact of those same pesticides on humans? It is extremely difficult to get accurate information when the biotechnology industry is aligned against you. For example, Beelogics, a company whose primary goal is to control colony collapse disorder, has just been bought by Monsanto. That means any research from Beelogics may now be compromised. Monsanto develops GMO corn and soybeans that develop their own pesticides. If these also contribute to colony collapse, we may never hear of it. Even more frightening, government agencies always seem to side with industry. In Illinois, organic beekeeper Terry Ingram had accumulated fifteen years of research supporting his belief that Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crops cause CCD. But when he asked the Illinois Department of Agriculture to test one of his honeycombs for chemical contamination, since the bees wouldn’t touch it, the agency refused to test for chemicals but instead tested for foulbrood, a disease that affects bee larvae, and subsequently confiscated his bees, beehives, and equipment, and destroyed his fifteen years of research. Ingram calls it a subterfuge to destroy all incriminating evidence against Monsanto. Colony collapse disorder is very dangerous because bees are an integral part of the ecosystem—roughly one-third of crop species in the US are pollinated exclusively by honeybees, including fresh vegetables and fruits. If bees die off, half of the world’s food supply will disappear. Forget about the billions of dollars in agricultural losses: if we lose the bees, we will have worldwide famine of unprecedented proportions. On top of that, bees could hold the key to preventing HIV transmission. According to a study just published in the journal Antiviral Therapy, melittin, a toxin found in bee venom, physically destroys HIV virus without harming human cells. It’s a breakthrough that could potentially lead to drugs that are immune to HIV resistance. It could also be used for a topical anti-HIV gel, thus preventing transmission in the first place The vital importance of the humble honeybee is just one more reason why we should abandon the industrial farming model in favor of organic farming. Dangerous pesticides and genetically engineered foods are not needed, and in the long run they are proving costly both to the economy and to human health. If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.
Dietitians Using Medicare Reform to Monopolize Hospital Nutrition Services
It won’t help hospital food, already notoriously bad, to outlaw advice from the most qualified nutritionists. Action Alert!
Medicare claims to be reforming some of its rules in order to get rid of unnecessary or burdensome regulations. But this has created a window for the dietetics lobby to insert language that will give them a monopoly over hospital diets. This is the very definition of a sneaky maneuver—almost no one would think to look for this change until it had already passed. Happily, we did!
The Federal Register announced the various reforms to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) rules earlier this month. Buried deep inside the new regulations are two sections: Food and Dietetic Services and Privileges for Registered Dietitians (RDs). This would revise the requirement that a therapeutic diet be prescribed only by the practitioners responsible for the care of the patient—a revision we agree with, since few physicians know anything about nutrition. But it would be expanded to include only Registered Dietitians (not Certified Nutrition Specialists, many with Master’s degrees and PhDs, or other highly qualified nutrition professionals) to prescribe a therapeutic diet. This rule specifically deals with special diets for patients; RDs already have a grip of iron on regular hospital food—though not by law!
CMS writes—though it could very easily be the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (formerly the American Dietetic Association) talking—“We believe that RDs are the professionals who are best qualified to assess a patient’s nutritional status and to design and implement a nutritional treatment plan.” It adds that RDs with prescription privileges “would also be able to provide medical nutrition therapy and other nutrition services at lower costs than physicians as well [sic].” Note the co-opting of the terms “medical nutrition therapy” and “nutrition services” for RDs, even though RD’s are only required to have a college degree, and the tortured government logic that creating a new monopoly will reduce costs.
The US Department of Labor places hospital diets under the control of both dietitians and nutritionists. Medicare rules should follow the same guidelines.
Securing a piece of the Medicare pie is part of the dietitians’ strategy at the state level as well. Medical nutrition therapy (MNT) services are covered under Medicare part B for people with diabetes. Federal rules state that RDs or qualified nutrition professionals may provide services so long as they meet certain education and experience requirements and have been certified by a national nutrition organization. However, if an individual state has a licensure policy in place, then only the licensed individual can receive reimbursement. That is why RDs are trying to get the states to pass laws making dietitians the exclusive providers of licensed nutrition services—it creates a separate tier for themselves so they can secure MNT reimbursement through Medicare.
The folks at AND/ADA are speaking out of both sides of their mouth about licensure. On one hand, they say they need a monopoly on scope-of-practice laws so they can be reimbursed by Medicaid and Medicare. But in the document that they submitted to CMS, they argue that “licensure is not a federal requirement” for dietitians to be part of a “medical staff” and therefore receive CMS reimbursement:
Licensure is not a federal requirement; it is only required for practitioners in those states with laws requiring licensure. Federal regulations specific to dietitians similarly have no independent licensure requirement. In section 482.28(a)(2) of the hospital [Conditions of Participation] defining a “qualified dietitian” in the hospital setting, “[q]ualification is determined on the basis of education, experience, specialized training, State licensure or registration when applicable, and maintaining professional standards of practice.”
Sorry, dietitians, you can’t have it both ways!
Here are the monopolistic licensure bills currently in state legislatures:
•Indiana: HB 1272. We recently sent special action alert to Indiana residents about this.
•West Virginia: HB 2533. We will be emailing a special action alert to WV citizens soon.
•New Jersey: AB 2182/ SB 833. The bills are still “alive” but in a holding pattern.
•In Illinois the law is much improved. We were able to get the Illinois legislature to replace the state’s ten-year-old monopolistic dietitian law to include certified nutritionists. The new law is currently in the rule-writing phase. We will keep you updated.
If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.
Dairy Industry Tries to Hide Artificial Sweeteners in School Lunches Aspartame is already allowed in your kids’ milk. Now they want to erase it from the labels. Action Alert! The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) are petitioning the FDA to let them remove any reference to non-nutritive sweeteners, mainly aspartame, from milk labels in school lunches. They claim—in one of the most spectacular failures of logic we’ve ever seen—that not labeling the milk “promotes honesty and fair-dealing in the interest of consumers.” Huh? Non-nutritive sweeteners are already allowed and included in the flavored milk used in school lunch programs. Many school children already drink flavored milk, so this gives the dairy industry a bigger market share while also falling within the low-calorie guidelines of the USDA School Lunch Program. Of course, the intent of the program guidelines is to provide healthier meals for children, so aspartame already violates the spirit of those guidelines. Aspartame is an extraordinarily dangerous and potentially carcinogenic chemical. Now they’re trying to remove FDA labeling requirements, arguing that labeling requirements makes the milk less attractive to children and might mislead children on the overall nutritive value of the milk—though they provide no data to back up this claim. Labeling is important for children (and parents), who have a right to choose milk without aspartame or other non-nutritive sweeteners—chemicals which have no place in school lunch program in the first place. By removing this labeling requirement, consumers won’t know the difference between artificially flavored milk and regular milk—and we’d be denied the right to choose milk that doesn’t contain artificial sweeteners and flavorings. School lunch is big business. USDA provides $1 billion each year to buy food for the program. Dairy has a vested interest in following the guidelines that qualifies them for the program, though they’ve balked at disclosing just how they are meeting those guidelines. Here’s an example of how powerful the chemical sweetener industry is: a human aspartame study at Harvard spanning a whopping twenty-two years, funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the National Cancer Institute, found a clear association between aspartame consumption and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and leukemia in men. But not a half hour after the study results were revealed, Harvard caved to pressure from industry and issued a press release that minimized the impact of the study, calling the findings “equivocal” and the data “weak,” when in fact the opposite was true. As we reported in 2011, aspartame also decreases the ability of the body to absorb tryptophan and reduces serotonin levels. Ten percent of aspartame is methanol, which is converted to formaldehyde which, in turn, is converted to formic acid—which is used to strip epoxy! The other 90% is composed of phenylalanine and aspartic acid. These amino acids are normally harmless, but in isolation they are neurotoxic. Aspartame has also been implicated in the development of Gulf War syndrome. Huge amounts of diet drinks were shipped to Gulf War troops, who were drinking it in high temperatures. In 1985, Coca-Cola apparently expressed reservations about proposed FDA approval of aspartame for beverages, noting that aspartame is uniquely and inherently unstable and breaks down in the can. When stored or heated above 85 degrees F, aspartame may decompose into formaldehyde (embalming fluid), methanol (wood alcohol), formic acid (ant sting venom), diketopiperazine (an agent in brain tumors), and other toxins. This of course didn’t stop Coke from eventually deciding to use it. Aspartame was approved only because of the revolving door between industry and the FDA. Not only are such artificial sweeteners unhealthy, but so are the artificial colors found in kids’ drinks, which can lead to hyperactivity, allergic reactions, and possibly even cancer. The dairy industry petitioners are using school lunch program guidelines as a foot in the door. They also want to remove labeling requirements for seventeen other dairy products included in the petition, even though they have nothing whatsoever to do with the school lunch program. If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.
FDA-Approved Drug Linked to 542 Deaths and 2,367 Hemorrhages, but FDA Refuses to Pull It
It couldn’t be because it brings in over $1 billion in sales each year, could it?
Pradexa (dabigatran) is an anti-clotting drug used to treat a type of irregular heartbeat called nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and to prevent strokes. It’s used as an alternative to warfarin, an older drug, and needs less monitoring (warfarin requires regular doctor’s visits, blood tests, and dietary restrictions). In clinical trials, Pradexa outperformed warfarin in reducing the risk of stroke, and it initially appeared to be safer, causing less hemorrhaging. But that turned out not to be the case. In 2011, Pradexa caused 542 people to bleed to death.
FDA states that Pradexa’s bleeding rates “do not appear to be higher” than warfarin, even though elsewhere on FDA’s website, we see that the risk of bleeding from Pradexa is six times greater than with warfarin—usually in a pericardial location. Warfarin is also dangerous, and is one of the leading causes of emergency room fatalities. In 2011, warfarin was the subject of 1,106 serious adverse events, including 72 deaths.
Warfarin’s greatest flaw is also its saving grace: its blood-thinning effects can be counteracted with vitamin K, found in the K1 form in abundance in green leafy foods. This means that warfarin stops its beneficial work if you eat too many leafy greens—but if you start hemorrhaging, vitamin K is a swift antidote. No such antidote exists for Pradexa: if you start bleeding, you will bleed to death.
The drug has spurred more reports of injury or death than any of the more than 800 drugs monitored by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices. To date, FDA has refused to recall the drug or address the “no antidote” issue.
This exemplifies one of our great concerns about the drug approval process. How can the FDA approve a drug that causes uncontrollable bleeding with no antidote? It also calls into question the quality of the clinical studies and random-controlled trials. How can the initial trials have indicated that Pradexa causes less hemorrhaging when it actually causes six times more? Clearly, trial results can be skewed to benefit drug manufacturers.
Worse, since warfarin works, there was no urgent requirement for Pradexa approval—or its continued presence on the market, now that it has been shown to be dangerous. The only thing that justifies its sale is the fact that it’s a big money-maker. It brings in over $1 billion a year—about $3,000 per patient, costing sixty times more than warfarin ($48 per patient). That’s a significant income for a drug that’s been on the market for only two years. By August 2012, more than 3.7 million US patients had filled Pradexa prescriptions. The anticoagulant therapy market is estimated to bring in $10 billion a year in the United States alone.
And it’s an expanding market. In Europe, for example, Pradexa is used to treat venous thromboembolism (VTE) after knee or hip replacement surgery. Boehringer Ingelheim, the manufacturer, is currently having clinical trials for this indication, so it’s possible the drug will be approved for even more uses in the US.
One of the problems is that the drug is usually prescribed by cardiologists, while the ones who see the consequences of bleeding are ER doctors. Conventional medicine is by nature a fragmented system.
Though the FDA is refusing to take action, more than 100 lawsuits have already been filed and more than 1,000 are expected, even after screening out obviously fraudulent and questionable cases. Plaintiffs are planning a mass joint claim against Pradexa’s manufacturer. The plan is to use multidistrict litigation instead of a class-action suit to speed up the process.
This is not the first time FDA has approved a dangerous drug for atrial fibrillation. You may recall our report about Multaq, a drug that treated cardiac arrhythmias. Its clinical trial was stopped because more patients who were getting the drug were dying than those who received a placebo—though the study results weren’t published until five years later. Even so, the drug was approved by the FDA in 2009 as a treatment for AF in certain patients.
Of course there is an abundance of natural treatments for AF and to prevent stroke. Dr. Robert J. Rowen points out that not only do drug-thinning drugs increase risk of hemorrhaging, they also stop vitamin K production, and vitamin K is responsible for helping blood to clot and, in the K2 form, is also important for getting calcium into bones: “The truth is most people with atrial fibrillation never develop clots. They have a clotting system that’s operating normally. Those who do develop clots have other non-heart risks for thick blood. These include deficiencies in nutrients that have been proven to help regulate the body’s clotting mechanisms.” He recommends omega-3 fatty acids, vitamin E, bioflavonoids (such as ginkgo), garlic, and nattokinase, a nutrient made from fermented soy, which optimizes your blood’s clotting system. In 2010 we noted that nattokinase also may remove amyloid plaque, so it may be a promising treatment for Alzheimer’s, in addition to other foods and supplements we’ve told you about.
Other good natural methods of stroke prevention include obesity reduction, taking vitamin D to avoid sulfate deficiency (which could be an underlying cause of arterial plaque build up), and managing blood sugar levels.
Dr. Rowen also recommends getting to the root cause of the AF rather than just treating its symptoms. He notes that hypothyroidism could be one root cause predisposing people to AF.
If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.
An estimated 75-85 percent of Americans will experience back pain at some time in their life, and most cases are mechanical in nature, meaning the pain is not due to a serious medical condition such as inflammatory arthritis or fracture. Fifty percent of all working adults say they have back pain, and it’s one of the most common reasons for missed work. According to the American Chiropractic Association,1 Americans spend at least $50 billion annually on back pain treatments, and are often left feeling more confused about their problem. Not surprisingly, back pain has become a major target for Big Pharma disease mongering.2 The latest example of this is the emergence of ads for ankylosing spondylitis, a chronic inflammatory disease of the axial skeleton, which includes the spine. “Do you have back pain? Are you dismissing it as resulting from ‘lifting too much’ at the gym or ‘bad posture’?” one radio ad asks. “You might have ankylosing spondylitis.” The drug advertised is Humira, which has a price tag of about $20,000 a year. It is reprehensible for drug companies to promote this expensive and dangerous drug for an exceedingly rare cause of low back pain, which likely is responsible for less than a tenth of a tenth of one percent of low back pain. Side effects of the drug3 include tuberculosis, serious infections, increased risk of lymphoma and other cancers, hepatitis B infection in carriers of the virus, allergic reactions, nervous system problems, blood problems, heart failure, certain immune reactions including a lupus-like syndrome, liver problems, and new or worsening psoriasis — and that’s the short list! There are many more. Considering the fact that most cases of low back pain are not caused by inflammatory conditions, you probably do not need this drug — although you may have no trouble receiving it should you ask your doctor for it… Besides addictive and dangerous painkillers, pain injections also carry risks. Last year, nearly two dozen people receiving steroid injections for chronic back pain contracted meningitis. The outbreak was traced to a contaminated batch of injectable steroids.4 Since poor posture and/or improper movement is to blame for most cases of back pain, one of the best things you can do to prevent and manage back pain is to exercise regularly and keep your back and abdominal muscles strong. Foundation Training is a simple response to this common back pain problem. The program is inexpensive and can be surprisingly helpful, as these exercises are designed to help you strengthen your entire core and move the way nature intended. What’s Causing the Pain? With the exception of blunt force injuries, low back pain is commonly caused and exacerbated by: Poor posture Poor physical conditioning facilitated by inactivity Internal disease, such as kidney stones, infections, blood clots Obesity Psychological/emotional stress Osteoporosis (bone loss) Back Pain is a Primary Reason Why the US has so Many Prescription Drug Addicts Unfortunately, many simply end up taking pain killers and retiring to bed instead of increasing their activity once the back pain starts. Back pain is actually one of the primary reasons why so many American adults get addicted to pain killers. Addiction is a terrible side effect of these drugs, considering they do not actively change the issue causing the pain in the first place. Pharmaceutical drug overdoses now rank second only to motor vehicle crashes as the leading cause of accidental death in the US. The number of overdose deaths from opioid painkillers alone more than tripled from 1999 to 2006, to 13,800 deaths that year. This despite the fact that the FDA increased the restrictions for consumer drug ads in 2005, especially for COX-2 painkillers like Celebrex and Bextra. In the past, most overdoses were due to illegal narcotics, such as heroin. But prescription painkillers have now surpassed both heroin and cocaine as the leading cause of fatal overdoses. In addition, more than 700,000 people visit US emergency rooms each year as a result of adverse drug reactions to all drugs, not just the opioids. Adverse drug reactions from drugs that are properly prescribed and properly administered also kill about 106,000 people per year, making prescription drugs the fourth-leading cause of death in the US. Pharmaceutical drugs kill more than twice as many Americans as HIV/AIDS or suicide, yet they’re still allowed to be advertised on TV, radio and in magazines. This is particularly ironic when you consider that the death toll from illegal drugs – which is about 10,000 per year – is dwarfed by the death toll (106,000 or more) from properly administered pharmaceuticals! The first step toward meaningful change is realizing that prescription drugs are JUST as addictive and dangerous as illegal street drugs. In many cases, they are identical. The only difference is their legal status. For example, hydrocodone, a prescription opiate, is synthetic heroin – indistinguishable from any other heroine as far as your brain and body are concerned. So, if you’re hooked on hydrocodone, your body is responding as if you’re a heroin addict… Perhaps even more ironic, prescription drug addiction is now also being advertised as a “medical condition” for which there is treatment… Back in the day, this was simply called Drug Rehab, but now they’re trying to remove the stigma associated with drug addiction, since the vast majority are hooked on legal meds. Just because the drugs are legal, does not mean the addiction is any less severe or damaging. Tools to Prevent and Treat Back Pain I strongly recommend considering the least invasive avenues before resorting to pain medication or surgery. For starters, many people fail to realize that many times back pain actually originates from tension and imbalance at a completely different place than where the pain is felt. For example, the very act of sitting for long periods of time ends up shortening the Iliacus, Psoas and Quadratus Lumborum muscles that connect from your lumbar region to the top of your femur and pelvis. When these muscles are chronically short, it can cause severe pain when you stand up as they will effectively pull your lower back (lumbar) forward. The reality is that the imbalance among the anterior and posterior chains of muscles leads to many of the physical pains you may experience daily. By bringing these muscles to a better balance, you will consistently remedy many of these pains and discomforts. Many people end up going through drastic medical procedures to “fix” this type of pain, or end up taking pain killers for extended periods of time. Seeing a qualified chiropractor is certainly a wise consideration if you suffer from back pain. I am an avid believer in the chiropractic philosophy, which places a strong emphasis on your body’s innate healing ability and far less reliance on band-aid responses like drugs and surgery. Foundation Training—an innovative method developed by Dr. Eric Goodman to treat his own chronic low back pain—is an excellent alternative to the Band Aid responses so many are given. Foundation Training exercises work to gradually pull your body out of the movement patterns that are hurting you.. The focus is on strengthening your complete core, which includes anything that directly connects to your pelvis, whether above or below it. Foundation Training teaches all those muscles to work together through integrated chains of movement, which is how your body is structurally designed to move. Every muscle that directly connects to your pelvis should be considered a piece of your core and this includes your glutes, adductors (inner thigh muscles), deep lower back muscles, hip flexors, hamstrings and all of your abdominal muscles. Having strong, balanced core muscles is like having a built-in corset that not only holds your gut in, but also stabilizes your spine, vertebrae, discs, and most importantly your pelvis. Teaching your body to naturally support itself at the deepest level is going to be far more effective than strapping on an external back brace, which over time can lead to even weaker musculature. Foundation Training is like Olympic weight lifting for the deep postural muscles of the human body. Yet another type of exercise called Egoscue can also be helpful in mitigating the damage from excess sitting. And, if you’re in pain, Neuro-structural integration technique (NST) is another non-drug pain relief option. NST is a gentle, non-invasive technique that stimulates your body’s reflexes. Simple movements are done across muscles, nerves and connective tissue, which helps your neuromuscular system to reset all related tension levels, promoting natural healing. It is completely safe and appropriate for everyone from highly trained athletes, to newborns, pregnant women, and the elderly and infirm. To find an NST therapist near you, see our NST Therapists Page. You can also purchase a DVD set to learn more about this technique. Foundation Training Basics I’m a huge fan of Foundation Training, and the primary exercise, called The Founder, is one that everyone would be wise to learn. It’s an integrated movement that pulls together your entire posterior chain of muscles, thereby strengthening your back while lengthening your front. This and all other Foundation Training exercises disperse the force throughout your body and takes friction away from your joints, placing that tension into your muscles instead. I do these exercises daily and it is a great tool to build a stronger and more stable low back that is free from pain. Foundation Training can help counteract the negative effects of excessive sitting, which is not only a cause of chronic back pain, but can also increase your mortality risk from all causes. When you sit, your head and shoulders drop forward, and your hip flexors and abdomen shorten. Every exercise included in Foundation Training lengthens the front of your body, which is over-tightened, and strengthens the back of your body, which will help you stand tall and move with strength and flexibility. As explained by Dr. Goodman: “The place to start is learning how to hinge effectively. Learning how your hamstrings, lower back, and glutes are designed to stretch together. Once that part is in place, you can then advance to all the exercises that build upon that foundation, that build upon The Founder exercise.” Structural Decompression Breathing Also Helps Improve Posture and Reduce Pain Breathing is another important tool that is unfortunately ignored by most people. In his TED Talk below, Dr. Goodman demonstrates structural breathing, which will help improve your posture, especially while seated. Here’s a summary: •Sitting down or standing, place your thumbs at the base of your rib cage, pinkies at pointy bones at the front of your waist. Think of the space between your fingers as a measuring stick. •Pull your chin back so that your chest is lifting upwards and take three slow deep breaths as I instruct you below. •As you breathe in, the distance between your thumbs and pinkies should increase. •As you breathe out, tighten your abdominal muscles to prevent your torso from collapsing back down. This is the important step, do not let your torso drop back down towards the pelvis as you exhale. It should be challenging and you should feel your abdomen engage as you exhale. When done properly, your breath will help lengthen your hip flexors, stabilize your spine, and support your core using your transverse abdominal muscles. This will strengthen your back and keep your chest high and open. Do this exercise for 30 seconds or so, then go back to your normal seated position. With time, those muscles will get stronger, and your seated posture will gradually improve. With Foundation Training you should quickly notice dramatic improvement to your daily posture. The basic Foundation Training program takes about 20 minutes, and is ideally done daily. You can purchase the Foundation Training DVD from my online store. FoundationTraining.com also offers several free videos , and their thought provoking first book called: Foundation: Redefine Your Core, Conquer Back Pain, and Move with Confidence. Even More Tips to Beat Back Pain Preventing back pain is surely easier than treating it. Besides the recommendations already covered above, which included getting chiropractic adjustments, Foundation Training, Egoscue exercises, and NST, below are several more tips for beating back pain. With this many alternatives available, there are few good reasons to turn to pharmaceutical or surgical band-aids that do nothing to treat the underlying causes of your pain, and might cause additional harm in the process: 1.Exercise and physical activity will help strengthen the muscles of your spine. Make your exercise time count by including high-intensity sessions. You probably only need this once or twice a week at the most. You’ll also want to include exercises that really challenge your body intensely along with those that promote muscle strength, balance and flexibility. Remember to build up your entire core to avoid back pain. Always do some stretching and warm-ups before engaging in strenuous physical activity, and make sure you focus on strong, balanced posture. 2.Optimize your vitamin D and K2 levels to prevent the softening of the bones that can often lead to lower back pain. 3.If you spend many hours every day in a chair like I do pay careful attention to consciously sucking in your belly and rotating your pelvis slightly up. At the same time make sure your head is back with your ears over your shoulders and your shoulder blades pinched. This will help keep your spine in proper alignment. You can hold these muscles tight for several minutes and do this every hour you are sitting. 4.Address psychological factors. Few people want to be told that their pain is psychological or emotional in origin, but there’s quite a bit of evidence that backs this up. Underlying emotional issues and unresolved trauma can have a massive influence on your health, particularly as it relates to physical pain. Dr. John Sarno,5 for example, used mind-body techniques to treat patients with severe low back pain and has authored a number of books on this topic. His specialty was those who have already had surgery for low back pain and did not get any relief. This is one tough group of patients, yet he had a greater than 80 percent success rate using techniques like the Emotional Freedom Technique (he has now retired from practice). 5.Get regular massage therapy. Massage releases endorphins, which help induce relaxation and relieve pain. 6.Keep your weight spread evenly on your feet when standing. Don’t slouch when standing or sitting to avoid putting stress on your back muscles. 7.Always support your back, and avoid bending over awkwardly. Protect your back while lifting – this activity, along with carrying, puts the most stress on your back. 8.Sleep in a firm bed. Sleeping on your side to reduce curving of your spine and stretching before getting out of bed is also helpful. 9.Use chairs or car seats that offer good lumbar support. Switch positions often while sitting, walk around a bit and do some light stretching to relieve tension. 10.Wear comfortable shoes. For the ladies, it would be good to not wear heels most of the time. 11.Drink plenty of water to enhance the height of your intervertebral disks. And because your body is composed mostly of water, keeping yourself hydrated will keep you fluid and reduce stiffness. 12.Quit smoking as it reduces blood flow to your lower spine and your spinal disks to degenerate. If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.
Ethical Issues Related to Testing Anthrax Vaccine on Children
The US government has proposed a children’s trial of anthrax vaccine arguing that it is a necessary step in protecting them from the effects of a potential future bioterrorism attack using weaponized anthrax.
The Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP) is in strong opposition to this idea, and rightly so. Experimenting on the most vulnerable members of our society with a dangerous vaccine, without the promise of any benefit, is both heartless and unnecessary — not to mention highly unethical.
The fact that anthrax is a dangerous bacterium deserving our concern if it is weaponized is not the issue. Unlike most other bacteria, anthrax forms very potent spores that can remain alive under harsh conditions for 100 years or longer.
The rugged survivability of the anthrax spore is what could make it a powerful biological weapon. For example, it can easily survive being dropped from an airplane or exploded in a bomb.
The issue is that your risk for anthrax exposure has been vastly blown out of proportion. History tells us that exposure to anthrax is extremely rare, and bioterrorism experts say the likelihood of it ever being used as an agent of attack on a mass scale is negligible.
Fortunately, the idea of trying out the anthrax vaccine on children has met with fierce opposition. In fact, even Paul Offit, a pediatric vaccine developer and long-time vaccine advocate, advised against such a trial.1
On February 18, 2013, AHRP sent a detailed exposé to Amy Gutman, PhD, Chair of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, which is the committee assigned the task (by DHHS Secretary Sebelius) of evaluating the ethical problems with the proposed vaccine trial.
The Commission met four times over the past year regarding this issue, having completed their deliberations in January 2013. You can read the complete transcript of their final discussion here.2
This powerful exposé, authored by Vera Sharav and Dr. Meryl Nass of AHRP, is a convincing argument that exposes the many flaws in logic, misleading propaganda, and ethics violations of this proposed vaccine trial. What follows is a synopsis of the concerns covered in their exposé.
Anthrax as a Bioterrorism Agent is Extremely Unlikely
In modern times, no foreign enemy has used biological weapons against Americans, neither military nor civilian.
The only possible exception was the anthrax-laced mail attack in October 2001. The federal government has maintained that a scientist in charge of anthrax vaccine testing at a US military lab, who is now dead, was to blame for the anthrax letter attacks although others have suggested the mystery is not solved and the investigation should continue.3 Since 2001, there have been no credible reports about an anthrax bioterrorism threat to the U.S. civilian population.
How can they declare an emergency when there is no evidence for one?
In the anthrax-laced mail attack of 2001, thousands of people were exposed to anthrax spores. Antibiotics were successful in preventing illness in 100 percent of those treated after exposure. Five people died, but their cases were recognized very late. There was no additional benefit from using anthrax vaccine over antibiotics alone and the vaccine was accepted by less than two percent of those who received antibiotics.
This is a Flash-based video and may not be viewable on mobile devices.
Why Do We Need the Anthrax Vaccine when Antibiotics have Proven 100 Percent Effective?
The anthrax vaccine, BioThrax,4 manufactured by Emergent BioSolutions, has never been proven effective in humans against inhaled anthrax and is not licensed for post-exposure use, even in adults. Two papers published in 2012 by top anthrax scientists (Ingram and Baillie, and Bellanti, et al) confirm this point. Because there is no animal model for anthrax vaccine response that translates to humans, there is no human efficacy data for adults or children; therefore, it’s impossible to derive effectiveness data for children from any anthrax trial that DHHS may propose.
That said, why would a vaccine be needed when there is already a treatment proven to be 100 percent effective? As stated above, prompt treatment with antibiotics after anthrax exposure was 100 percent effective for all 30,000 people exposed in 2001. When the appropriate treatment is antibiotics, why the urgency to test an outmoded, inferior and potentially dangerous treatment on children, especially when the vaccine itself frequently causes severe adverse reactions?
Giving a Risky Vaccine to Children Violates Federal Regulations
The statistics for adverse reactions from anthrax vaccine are very concerning:
•According to the 2002 anthrax vaccine label, between five and 35 percent of vaccine recipients develop systemic adverse reactions.
•Of those, approximately six percent are serious and life threatening, including birth defects, hospitalization, permanent disability and death.
•According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), one to two percent of vaccinated individuals may experience severe adverse reactions harmful enough to result in death or disability.
There is no acceptable justification for exposing healthy children to these dangers. In fact, doing so is a violation of a US statute requiring children to be exposed to no greater than a “minor increase over minimal risk.” The child subjects of the proposed vaccine trial are not receiving treatment for any condition or other problem affecting their health or welfare (“nontherapeutic research”), so do not stand to benefit in any way, which is against Federal regulations.
In fact, the Presidential Commission was never informed of a pivotal trial involving the safety issues with anthrax vaccine. The complete findings of this trial were submitted to the FDA in 2009 but have never been published or disclosed to the public. The trial found that 186 people suffered 229 serious adverse events during the trial, with seven deaths. That is, 12 percent of the subjects suffered serious adverse events! Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Secretary Sebelius has the authority to demand the release of this safety data at any time, but she has not done so.
If the proposed trial were going to provide meaningful answers to any questions about the vaccine’s safety for children, thousands of children would have to be experimented upon. The proposed trial, which involves a much smaller number of children, would have no scientific or clinical value at all and would therefore be unethical and illegal under US statute.
Whose children will be the sacrificial lambs in a corporate-government collusion scheme to expand the BioThrax stockpile and create a potential civilian market for the vaccine’s sole US manufacturer, Emergent BioSolutions? And what happens when something goes wrong? Who is liable?
Government Shields Vaccine Makers from All Liability
If you’re in the military, you can’t sue the government for damages for injuries that occurs during your military service (Fere’s Doctrine). Instead, you have to use the VA health system. The situation is just as dire for civilians when it comes to pandemic vaccines, such as the now infamous H1N1 swine flu vaccine, as well as anthrax, thanks to the PREP Act passed by Congress and signed into law in 2006.
The PREP Act, or Public Readiness Emergency Preparedness Act, said that if a public health emergency is declared by the federal government, the manufacturer of a product made to address the emergency would be given a near blanket waiver of liability. This waiver of liability would apply to the vaccine manufacturer, the doctors administering the vaccine, the distributors, and anybody in the government who had been part of the planning for a vaccine or drug program. The waiver was supposed to be for “emergencies” only.
In spite of the lack of any credible anthrax threat, DHHS Secretary at that time, Michael Leavitt, invoked the extraordinary “emergency” powers given to him by Congress and declared anthrax a public health emergency in 2008, effective through 2015. So, when the government declares anthrax a “public health emergency,” you are prevented from seeking damages if you (or your child) are injured by the anthrax vaccine. And your risk of being injured by this vaccine, based on its history, is quite likely.
Problem-Reaction-Solution… Will You Take the Bait?
There is a strategy that some refer to as “Problem-Reaction-Solution,” which looks like this:
1.You create or manufacture a problem
2.There is a public reaction
3.You solve the problem in a way that completes your own agenda
The threat of bioweapons can easily be manipulated for financial gain using the Problem-Reaction-Solution process. With respect to the anthrax vaccine, the problem created after 9-11 was the fear of bioterrorism attacks on the U.S. civilian population. People reacted to the implied threat of further attacks with widespread panic, and the government and pharmaceutical industry came to the rescue with plans to expand production and civilian stockpiling of anthrax vaccine already being given to U.S. military personnel.
The bizarre anthrax letters incident 10 years ago boosted the biodefense budget by $60 billion dollars, and Emergent BioSolutions, the sole producer of BioThrax vaccine for the US military, received a $1.4 billion contract to produce anthrax vaccine for public use. This contract was recently renewed to the tune of $1.25 billion.
The PREP Act in combination with the Problem-Reaction-Solution process creates a massive opportunity for vaccine makers by allowing them to “sneak in” new ingredients and adjuvants (immune-boosting additives with potentially unknown or risky profiles) under the guise of needing to prepare for a bioterrorism “emergency.” Then, since the new vaccine ingredient has been used already, they can use these ingredients in other vaccines without having to go through a rigorous approval process.
By declaring a public health emergency, Secretary Leavitt did not protect the public health but instead sacrificed the public’s civil and human rights, while protecting biodefense stakeholders. The Presidential Commission’s review process itself was extremely flawed, and there were multiple conflicts of interest. AHRP identified the following issues:
•No expert witnesses knew anything about anthrax or anthrax vaccine and there was no scientific testimony about the vaccine’s safety or efficacy in adults. They never even looked at the vaccine label!
•No details about the proposed vaccine trial were provided, and the issue of anthrax risk was never discussed.
•The trial on children is ostensibly to test the vaccine for post-exposure use in an emergency, but in fact the trial would involve pre-exposure, which might lay the groundwork for the vaccine’s routine use in children
•The Commission was never briefed on the existing legal cases relevant to pediatric research that provides them no benefit
The Real Motivation: Increasing Vaccine Profits by Any Means Possible
The entire history of the anthrax vaccine enterprise has been rife with evidence of profiteering at taxpayer expense. To gain insight about the motives behind DHHS’ anthrax policies, you need to examine the hidden web of financial conflicts of interest and revolving doors.. The government was able to capitalize on the public’s post-9/11 fear of another terrorist attack by getting away with pretty much anything. The country was manipulated into believing it “needed” a 2 billion dollar stockpile of anthrax vaccine, which DHHS continues to maintain in spite of safety concerns about the vaccine and lack of efficacy data. Indeed, the anthrax vaccine has been exceedingly profitable to BioThrax manufacturer Emergent BioSolutions:
•On October 3, 2011, the government awarded Emergent BioSolutions a five year contract worth up to $1.25 billion to provide millions of doses of anthrax vaccine for government stockpiles
•Emergent BioSolutions has sold more than 55 million vaccine doses to the US government and plans to supply another 44.75 million doses over the next few years5
•Emergent BioSolutions has made more than one billion dollars in profit6
Realizing that experimenting with children is fraught with difficulty in terms of informed consent and ethical restrictions, they cleverly devised a method for conducting the trial that would sidestep these problems by starting with 18 to 20 year olds, who CAN give informed consent, then working their way down through the age groups. This “method” has an underlying assumption: that data do not exist on this vaccine’s safety, and must therefore be obtained for 18 to 20 year olds. Of course, that is hardly the case. According to AHRP, such a trial could begin to overturn existing federal protections for child subjects.
Once you consider the issue in its broader context, you can only conclude that the real goal of this child trial is expanding civilian vaccinations and marketing the vaccine to parents, rather than obtaining safety and efficacy data. Naturally, the financial incentives are enormous for increasing vaccine stockpiles and widening its use.
In Summary
The government’s proposed anthrax vaccine trial for children is being vehemently opposed by AHRP, citing conflicts of interest, corrupt political motives and financial incentives, and a blatant disregard for federal regulations that protect children from unnecessary harm. The entire premise that we are at high risk for a bioterrorist attack is erroneous, and the idea that a vaccine is needed is ridiculous, as antibiotics have proven to be 100 percent effective for anthrax exposure. This is yet another example of greed and political corruption trumping public health.
If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.
It’s official. Even the conservative US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states the latest stats show one in 50 US kids now has autism.
This is a startling increase from their 2007 data, which showed one in 88 children with the condition. Boys are also four times as likely to be diagnosed with autism as girls, according to the new data. The CDC attributed the steep increase on improved diagnoses, particularly in older kids, noting:
“Children who were first diagnosed in or after 2008 accounted for much of the observed prevalence increase among school-aged children (those aged 6–17).”
Even if this is true (and this is the same rationale they used to explain the last noted increase), the deeper implications behind this rising trend are being downplayed by the media, or worse, entirely ignored. The latest statistics mean that between 3-4 percent of US boys now have autism, and the rate is growing …
Consider that about 15 years ago, 1 in 10,000 kids had autism. Ten years ago it was 1 in 1,000, then 1 in 150, 1 in 88 and now 1 in 50.1 This means there’s one child with autism on just about every school bus (one school bus holds about 50 kids). This is beyond tragic and a shocking testimony to the accumulated insults that our modern health care system and lifestyle have on the developing fetus.
Are Genes Really to Blame for Autism?
It’s long been known that boys have a greater risk for developing autism than girls, a trend that’s often blamed on mutations in genes on the X chromosome, which only affect boys.
Some have even gone so far as to say that genetics account for 90 percent of a child’s risk for autism. However, research from Stanford University using identical twins suggested otherwise.2
Since identical twins share nearly the same DNA, if there were an important genetic component to autism, then if one identical twin has autism, so should their identical sibling in the vast majority of cases.
But, when researchers completed diagnostic assessments on 192 twin pairs, they found fraternal twins were more likely to share an autism diagnosis than identical twins. Fraternal twins share only 50 percent of their DNA, which means something else is probably responsible for the double diagnosis — and researchers suspect environmental factors are likely to blame.
The majority of autism cases do appear to result from the activation, or “expression,” of a number of different genes, along with multiple epigenetic and environmental factors that interact to produce the traits of autism.
What Environmental Factors are Linked to Autism?
Science is increasingly showing us just how malleable our genes are — they continuously respond to their environment, meaning, your body and everything you put into and onto it. The possible environmental factors for autism are incredibly diverse. The following is just a short list of examples:
•Vitamin D Deficiency: This is a simple and inexpensive factor to eliminate. It is simply inexcusable to be vitamin D deficient when you are pregnant. There is also a link between rampant vitamin D deficiency in pregnant women and the proportionate jump in autism, which has been highlighted by Dr. John Cannell.3 The vitamin D receptor appears in a wide variety of brain tissue early in the fetal development, and activated vitamin D receptors increase nerve growth in your brain. You can only imagine what happens to the fragile, developing nervous system of an infant or young child if insufficient vitamin D is present to support neurodevelopment.
•Electromagnetic fields: Work by Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt suggests there are distinct correlations between a woman’s exposure to electromagnetic fields during pregnancy and her child’s neurological functioning. He found that if you sleep in strong electromagnetic fields during pregnancy, your child will likely begin to exhibit neurological abnormalities within the first two years of life, such as neurological dysfunction, hyperactivity, and learning disorders.
In 2007, this theory received additional support from a study published in the Journal of the Australasian College of Nutritional & Environmental Medicine.4 It presented the theory that electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi devices and other similar wireless technologies may work in conjunction with genetic and environmental factors, becoming an accelerating factor in autism.
After more than five years of research on children with autism they found that EMR negatively affects cell membranes, encouraging heavy metal toxins, which are associated with autism, to build up.
•Mercury toxicity: It is already an established fact that exposure to mercury can cause immune, sensory, neurological, motor, and behavioral dysfunctions — all similar to traits defining, or associated with autism. Mercury pollution is widespread from the burning of fossil fuels, but the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines (still used in annual flu shots) and dental amalgams — both of which contain mercury — also cannot be overlooked as major sources of individual exposure to this neurotoxin.
•Vaccines: A 2011 review of the peer-reviewed published studies on autism (going all the way back to 1943) revealed numerous documented cases of autism caused by encephalitis following vaccination.5 There are many potential vaccine-related culprits, including the use of toxic adjuvants, the presence of human DNA in vaccines, and the increasing number of vaccines given in a short period of time, any one of which could induce autoantibodies to be formed that may attack self-structures such as the myelin that coats the nerves, disrupting neurological development and function.
•Phthalates: Research from 2009 discovered that infants who lived in homes with vinyl floors were twice as likely to have autism five years later, compared to those with wood or linoleum flooring. Vinyl floors can emit chemicals called phthalates, which are widely used plastic softeners found in much more than just vinyl flooring. Hairsprays, perfumes, cosmetics, toys, shower curtains, wood finishers, lubricants, certain medical devices and more all contain phthalates. Researchers have suggested the chemicals may contribute to autism by disrupting hormones not only in small children but also in the womb.
The Autism-Gut Connection You May Not Have Heard About
Neurologist Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride recently shared a common thread that may be linking these and other environmental factors together, namely brain toxicity stemming from gut toxicity, otherwise known as Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS). She cured her own son of autism using an all-natural treatment involving dietary changes and detoxification, and her hypothesis is in my view one of the most relevant.
In her research, Dr. Campbell-McBride discovered that nearly all of the mothers of autistic children have abnormal gut flora, which is significant because newborns inherit their gut flora from their mothers at the time of birth. Establishing normal gut flora in the first 20 days or so of life plays a crucial role in the maturation of your baby’s immune system. Babies who develop abnormal gut flora are left with compromised immune systems, putting them at higher risk for suffering vaccine reactions.
If your baby has suboptimal gut flora, vaccines can become the proverbial “last straw” — the trigger that “primes” his/her immune system to develop chronic heath problems.
How to Prevent GAPS
In short, there is a close connection between abnormal gut flora and abnormal brain development — a condition Dr. Campbell-McBride calls Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS). The best way to prevent GAPS is for the mother to avoid all antibiotics and birth control pills prior to conception and then by breastfeeding and avoiding the use of antibiotics during (intrapartum) and after delivering. This is because they destroy the balance of gut flora and promote the growth of pathogenic bacteria.
Fortunately, it’s possible to rather inexpensively identify GAPS within the first weeks of your baby’s life, which can help you make better-informed decisions about vaccinations, and about how to proceed to set your child on the path to a healthy life.
The entire process for identifying children who would be at risk for developing autism from a vaccine is described in her book Gut and Psychology Syndrome, but to sum it up, in her practice she starts out by collecting a complete health history of the parents, and their gut health is assessed. Then, within the first few days of life, the stool of the child can be analyzed to determine the state of her gut flora, followed by a urine test to check for metabolites, which can give you a picture of the state of your child’s immune system.
These tests are available in most laboratories around the world and cost a very reasonable amount, about $80 to $100 per test — peanuts compared to the incredible expense of treating an autistic child once the damage is done.
In my view it is absolutely VITAL to perform this analysis BEFORE you consider vaccinating your child. If the test results are normal the likelihood of autism after vaccines is dramatically reduced. As Dr. Campbell-McBride states, she has yet to find an autistic child with normal bowel flora. If you find that your baby has abnormal gut microflora, or begins to develop symptoms of autism a year or two later, the GAPS program should be started immediately, as the younger the child is when you start the treatment, the better the results. The child should not be given any vaccines until their microflora tests normal; that is, assuming you choose to vaccinate at all.
If you want to know what is “normal” behavior for a developing child, and what may indicate signs of autism or another delay, the CDC has a milestone chart online for ages two months to five years.6
Reducing Your Child’s Toxic Burden is Crucial to Preventing Chronic Diseases Like Autism
Autism is a complex condition with many contributing factors and it takes a multi-faceted approach to treat it. We’re now also beginning to understand it requires a multi-faceted approach to prevent it. This includes avoiding as many dangerous chemicals as possible, which makes listing the do’s and don’ts virtually impossible. As a general rule, eating whole organic foods will go a long way, as that automatically cuts out processed foods and related chemicals, genetically engineered foods and artificial sweeteners.
Also be careful with the personal care products you use, as well as your household cleaning products and home building materials and furnishings … Opting for “green” and/or organic alternatives will help reduce many of the toxins most people encounter on a daily basis. Do whatever you can to establish a toxin-free environment for your whole family, and then establish a detoxification program. Please remember hidden toxins like mold and fluoride. The book Our Toxic World: A Wake Up Call, by Dr. Doris Rapp, is an excellent resource if you’re unsure of how or where to start. Other helpful tips for tackling autism include:
•Lower the EMF burden in your home, especially in your bedrooms.
•Carefully review the vaccination issue, including the conventional vaccination schedule, and know that in most US states you still have the right to opt out of vaccines.
•Avoid pasteurized milk; it’s an absolute imperative to the treatment of autism. Those managing this illness without restricting milk are deceiving themselves. This includes all milk products, such as ice cream, yogurt and whey. Even natural flavorings in food must be avoided unless the processor can guarantee that caseinate is not included.
•Completely eliminating sugar/fructose, juice, soda, French fries and wheat (pasta, bagels, cereal, pretzels, etc.) is also highly recommended.
•Get proper sun exposure. It is my personal belief that vitamin D deficiency in conjunction with damaged gut flora may be two of the most significant contributing factors to autism. Optimizing your vitamin D levels and your gut flora during pregnancy may be the most important prevention strategies discovered to date.
Tell the White House It’s Time to Take Action Against Autism
Today the autism rates are one in 50. What are we waiting for to start looking for real answers about this devastating condition? For rates to rise to one in 30 or one in 15?
We must tackle this problem from all angles, and the Autism Action Network has launched a campaign urging the US government to finally take action against autism. You can join in via this Take Action Link to send an email to the President, your two United States Senators and your member of the House, letting them know that it’s time to acknowledge there’s a problem and start taking the autism epidemic seriously.
If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.
The brain chemical hypocretin, a neurotransmitter that helps keep you awake, is most widely known for its role in the sleeping disorder known as narcolepsy. Narcoleptics, who uncontrollably fall asleep during the day and have much higher rates of depression than the general population, are unable to produce hypocretin. This not only interferes with their sleep-wake cycle, but also may also disrupt their emotional state – a new finding that has implications for everyone. Hypocretin May Regulate Your Levels of Happiness A new study, which used epilepsy patients who had special electrodes implanted in their brains that could monitor hypocretin levels, found that levels of the neurotransmitter soared during positive emotions, anger, social interactions and upon awakening.1 Hypocretin has been previously associated with reward-seeking behaviors, and the researchers suggested it may have a very specific role in human arousal and happiness as well. The study’s lead author, Dr. Jerome Siegel, told the New York Times:2 “This [study] shows that hypocretin is related to a particular kind of arousal … There is an arousal system in the brain whose function is keeping you awake for pleasure, to get rewards. It is related to positive effects, and in its absence you have a deficit in pleasure seeking.” This explains why people with narcolepsy, who are lacking hypocretin, also commonly suffer from depression. Interestingly, it also suggests there may be other arousal systems in your brain, driven by different brain chemicals, that may be in charge of regulating other specific emotions. A Warning About Hypocretin-Blocking Sleeping Pills If an important new biological pathway is discovered you can bet your bottom dollar that the drug companies will not be far behind to manipulate that pathway in some way that will not correct the problem, but merely relieve the symptoms and make them a boatload of money. And that is precisely what has happened. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has accepted a new drug application for Suvorexant, a new insomnia medication made by Merck.3 This is the same company that brought you Vioxx,, which killed 60,000 before being pulled from the market. The new drug works by targeting hypocretin, temporarily blocking it to help you fall asleep, or, as the New York Times put it, “essentially causing narcolepsy for a night.”4 The concern is that if reduced hypocretin may be responsible for causing depression in narcoleptics, could it also cause depression, or interfere with mood, in healthy people using the hypocretin-blocking drug Suvorexant? So far Merck claims no connection has been found, but there is likely reason for caution:5 “The initial reports are rosy,” Dr. Siegel told the New York Times, “But they come from a drug company with an enormous investment. And there is a long list of drugs acting on the brain whose severe problems were only identified after millions of people were taking them.” More Proof Lack of Sleep Leads to Weight Gain Research has only scratched the surface of the far-reaching implications of a disrupted sleep-wake cycle. But in addition to impacting your emotions, it’s known that a lack of sleep causes changes in the hunger and satiety hormones ghrelin and leptin – changes that impact your food intake and ultimately your weight. The latest research showed the effects of sleeping just five hours a night for five days. The study participants actually burned more energy than those who slept longer, but they had less restraint when it came to mealtime. The sleep-deprived subjects ended up eating more, so that despite their increased energy burning they gained nearly two pounds, on average, during the five-day study.6 Researchers noted: “Our findings suggest that increased food intake during insufficient sleep is a physiological adaptation to provide energy needed to sustain additional wakefulness; yet when food is easily accessible, intake surpasses that needed … These findings provide evidence that sleep plays a key role in energy metabolism. Importantly, they demonstrate physiological and behavioral mechanisms by which insufficient sleep may contribute to overweight and obesity.” The good news is that the opposite also held true: when participants started getting more sleep, they subsequently started to eat less and lose weight. Too Little Sleep Wreaks Havoc on Your Insulin Levels, Leads to Food Cravings Sleep deprivation tends to lead to food cravings, particularly for sweet and starchy foods. Researchers have suggested that these sugar cravings stem from the fact that your brain is fueled by glucose (blood sugar); therefore, when lack of sleep occurs, and your brain is unable to properly respond to insulin (which drives glucose into brain cells) your brain becomes desperate for carbohydrates to keep going. If you’re chronically sleep deprived, consistently giving in to these sugar cravings will virtually guarantee that you’ll gain weight. Getting too little sleep also dramatically decreases the sensitivity of your insulin receptors, which will raise your insulin levels. This too is a surefire way to gain weight, as the elevated insulin will seriously impair your body’s ability to burn and digest fat. According to research published in the Annals of Internal Medicine,7 after four nights of sleep deprivation (sleep time was only 4.5 hours per night), study participants’ insulin sensitivity was 16 percent lower, while their fat cells’ insulin sensitivity was 30 percent lower, and rivaled levels seen in those with diabetes or obesity. Sleep Deprivation Linked to Psychiatric Disorders Getting back to the link between sleep, or lack of it, and mood, sleep deprivation is linked to psychiatric disorders such as anxiety and bipolar depression, while getting the right amount of sleep has been linked to positive personality characteristics such as optimism and greater self-esteem, as well as a greater ability to solve difficult problems.8 So there’s no doubt about it: too little sleep can seriously impact your mood and your ability to be happy. If you feel well-rested in the morning, that’s a good sign that your sleep habits are just fine. But if not, you might want to investigate your sleep patterns more closely. 10 Reasons Why You Might Have Trouble Sleeping There are many factors that can influence your sleep. For my complete recommendations and guidelines that can help you improve your sleep, please see my article 33 Secrets to a Good Night’s Sleep. Following are 10 often-overlooked factors to address if you’re having trouble with your sleep: 1.Too Much Light in Your Room Even the tiniest bit of light in the room, including those emitted by electronic devices, can disrupt your pineal gland’s production of melatonin and serotonin, thereby disrupting your sleep cycle. So close your bedroom door, install black-out drapes, use a sleep mask, get rid of night-lights, and refrain from turning on any light during the night, even when getting up to go to the bathroom. If you have to use a light you can use a red flashlight, as that wavelength of light has a minimal impact on melatonin production. 2.Exercising Too Close to Bedtime Exercising for at least 30 minutes per day can improve your sleep. However, don’t exercise too close to bedtime (generally not within the three hours before) or it may keep you awake. 3.Drinking Alcohol Before Bed Although alcohol will make you drowsy, the effect is short lived and you will often wake up several hours later, unable to fall back asleep. Alcohol can also keep you from entering the deeper stages of sleep, where your body does most of its healing. 4.Your Bedroom is Too Warm Many people keep their homes and particularly their upstairs bedrooms too warm. Studies show that the optimal room temperature for sleep is quite cool, between 60 to 68 degrees F. Keeping your room cooler or hotter can lead to restless sleep. When you sleep, your body’s internal temperature drops to its lowest level, generally about four hours after you fall asleep. Scientists believe a cooler bedroom may therefore be most conducive to sleep, since it mimics your body’s natural temperature drop. 5.Caffeine is Keeping You Awake Caffeine has a half-life of five hours, which means some will still be in your system even 10 hours later, and 12.5% 20 hours later (see the problem?). Plus, in some people caffeine is not metabolized efficiently, leaving you feeling its effects even longer after consumption. So, an afternoon cup of coffee or tea will keep some people from falling asleep at night. Be aware that some over the counter medications contain caffeine as well (for example, diet pills). 6.You’re Watching the Clock The more you watch the clock when you wake up in the middle of the night, the more stressed and anxious you will become, and the more you may actually “train” yourself to start awakening at the same time each night. The solution is simple: Remove the clock from your view so you actually have to sit up or change positions to see the clock. 7.Watching TV to Help You Fall Asleep The artificial glow from your TV can serve as a stimulus for keeping you awake and, possibly, eating, when you should really be asleep. Further, computer and TV screens (and most light bulbs) emit blue light, to which your eyes are particularly sensitive simply because it’s the type of light most common outdoors during daytime hours. As a result, it can disrupt your melatonin production and further interfere with your sleep. 8.Worrying in the Middle of the Night If stress keeps you up at night, try keeping a “worry journal” next to your bedside so you can jot down your thoughts there and clear them from your head. The Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) can also help balance your body’s bioenergy system and resolve some of the emotional stresses that are contributing to your insomnia at a very deep level. The results are typically long lasting and improvement is remarkably rapid. 9.Eating Too Close to Bedtime Although you might struggle with this initially, it is ideal to avoid eating any foods three hours before bed, as this will optimize your blood sugar, insulin and leptin levels and contribute to overall good health. 10.Smoking The nicotine in cigarettes is a stimulant, which can keep you awake much as though you just drank a cup of coffee. If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.
Do you ever find that eating breakfast makes you hungry soon thereafter? If so, you’re likely eating the wrong kind of breakfast. According to the featured article, many are confused about what makes for a healthy morning meal.
The featured article1 is a great example of what most of the media and conventional health “experts” recommend. It lists five of the most commonly believed breakfast “mistakes,” including:
•Not enough protein
•Too little fiber
•No fat
•Not enough food, and
•Eating too late in the morning
While most of these have their merit, these points fail to address what may be the biggest mistake of all, which is eating breakfast in the first place.
Omitting breakfast, as part of an intermittent fasting schedule, can actually have a number of phenomenal health benefits, from improving insulin sensitivity to shifting your body into burning more fat instead of sugar for fuel.
But before we get into that, let’s take a quick look at the five breakfast mistakes listed in the featured article. If you DO, for whatever reason, choose to eat breakfast and are not yet convinced to change, you might notice you tend to feel hungry shortly afterward. If so these recommendations might offer some relief.
Common Breakfast Mistakes
The most common mistake people make with their breakfast is to eat typical breakfast foods, most of which are highly processed and loaded with sugars. This includes waffles, cereal, toast, muffins, bagels and other breakfast sandwiches. These are some of the absolute worst foods you can eat. They satiate your current hunger but set you up for metabolic disasters and fuel excess body fat and obesity-related diseases.
There are many thousands of well done peer reviewed studies that support the harmful effects of sugar on human health and many are listed on this site. For a quick review, read the “76 Dangers of Sugar to Your Health.”
Unfortunately, many recommend the need for more protein, and fail to address the excess carb issue. They also fail to address the health problems related to pasteurized dairy, including milk and yoghurt. They are also clueless about the fact that most commercially available yoghurts are absolutely chockfull of sugar! Whether it’s full fat or low-fat (which is even worse), these commercial pasteurized yoghurts are simply not a good source of either protein or fat.
Yoghurt made from raw organic milk on the other hand, can be a helpful health food for many, and is something you can easily make at home. This kind of yoghurt contains both beneficial protein and healthful fat, but most importantly loads of beneficial bacteria, making it an ideal breakfast food if you are going to have breakfast.
One of the other challenges with many breakfasts, and for that matter, most other meal recommendations, is that too much protein is recommended. There is an emerging consensus that excess carbs are deleterious but many simply substitute protein for the carbs and ignore the fat. For most, this is a serious mistake. So rather than replacing carbs with protein, consider substituting it for some of the healthy fats listed below. It will go a long way towards helping you transition to fat burning mode discussed below.
Olives and Olive oil
Coconuts and coconut oil
Butter made from raw grass-fed organic milk
Raw nuts, especially macadamia
Organic pastured egg yolks
Avocados
Grass-fed meats
Palm oil
Unheated organic nut oils
What Can You Have for a Healthy Breakfast?
Again, I am not convinced that most people benefit from eating breakfast, but if you are in transition to phasing this meal out of your schedule, or for whatever reason choose to eat breakfast, then organic pastured eggs are an excellent breakfast option. The less you cook them the better, as many of the nutrients in the yolk are susceptible to heat damage. So soft boiled or poached are your best options. One other option is to prepare a lunch or dinner option for breakfast, or even use leftovers from your last evening’s meal.
The Strong Case for Skipping Breakfast
The interesting aspect about eating first thing in the morning is that it coincides with your circadian cortisol peak, that is, the time of day when your cortisol (a stress hormone) levels rise and reach their peak. The circadian cortisol peak impacts your insulin secretion, such that when you eat during this time it leads to a rapid and large insulin release and a corresponding rapid drop in blood sugar levels, more so than when you eat at other times of the day.
If you’re healthy, your blood sugar levels won’t drop to a dangerously low level (such as can occur with hypoglycemia) but they can drop low enough to make you feel hungry. So, although skipping breakfast goes against the conventional idea that you should not skip meals, omitting breakfast could actually make it easier for you to control food cravings and hunger throughout the day. That said, there are also many other reasons to consider skipping breakfast.
However, it is important to remember that skipping breakfast is a process, not an action. You don’t simply stop eating breakfast one day and you are golden and reap all the benefits. It is a major commitment that may come with some discomfort, and it typically takes several weeks to successfully transition from being a primary carb burner to using fat as your primary fuel.
How to Implement Intermittent Fasting
Intermittent fasting, also known as “scheduled eating,” does not necessarily mean abstaining from all food for extended periods of time. Rather it refers to a dramatic reduction of calorie intake, or limiting your eating to a narrow window of time each day. Some recommend cutting your daily calories at least in half, but you can go as low as 500-800 calories. Another alternative is to simply eat all meals or snacks during a limited window of time.
Ideally, you’ll want to limit your eating to a window of about 6-8 hours each day, which means you’re fasting daily for 16-18 hours. This is enough to get your body to shift into fat-burning mode, and applies whether you’re restricting the number of calories you consume during this time or not. Say from noon to 6 pm.
As mentioned previously, this is a gradual process. Typically you start by not eating anything for three hours prior to going to sleep. This will give you a head start to the fasting process so if you sleep for 8 hours you’ve already fasted for 11 hours when you awake. The next step is to wait as long as you can before you start your first meal or “break” your fast. You can gradually extend the time that you have your first meal by 15 to 30 minutes a day. So after several weeks you will be having your first meal at lunch. Typically the more your body uses carbs as its primary fuel rather than fat, the longer this will take. Once you shift to fat burning mode, modern research has confirmed some of the benefits to be:
•Normalizing your insulin sensitivity, which is key for optimal health as insulin resistance is a primary contributing factor to nearly all chronic disease, from diabetes to heart disease and even cancer
•Normalizing ghrelin levels, also known as “the hunger hormone”
•Promoting human growth hormone (HGH) production, which plays an important part in health, fitness and slowing the aging process
•Lowering triglyceride levels
•Reducing inflammation and lessening free radical damage
Fasting also inhibits your mTOR pathway, which emerging science and many experts believe plays an important part in driving the aging process. Furthermore, while it’s long been known that restricting calories in certain animals can increase their lifespan by as much as 50 percent, more recent research suggests that sudden and intermittent calorie restriction can provide similar benefits as constant calorie restriction, which is very difficult, if not impossible for most to implement as it violates a primary powerful hunger drive that, for most, is virtually impossible to override for the long term.
Omitting Breakfast Helped Me Lose Fat and Gain Muscle
Many may know that about nine months ago I revised my personal eating schedule to eliminate breakfast and restrict the time I eat to a period of about six to seven hours—typically from noon to 6 or 7 pm. I typically exercise in the morning, and most of the time I am fasting, as exercising while in a fasted state has been shown to produce many beneficial changes. I find that it works particularly well to exercise first thing in the morning and delay your first meal until later in the day. To learn more about this strategy, please see this previous article by fitness expert Ori Hofmekler.
However, the two to three days a week that I do strength training I will make certain I have some food about 30-60 minutes after I work out. Pure Protein powder can be a convenient source of protein for many, but I would restrict the dose to one scoop, or about 20 grams.
Remember, your ancestors rarely had access to food 24/7 like you do today, and it makes sense that your genes are optimized for this type of intermittent fasting. It takes about six to eight hours for your body to metabolize your glycogen stores and after that you actually start to shift to burning fat. However if you are replenishing your glycogen by eating every eight hours, you make it far more difficult for your body to actually use your fat stores as fuel.
Interestingly, in the first few months of adopting this approach, I lost two inches from my waist size and gained three pounds, which means I lost body fat and gained muscle mass. A growing body of intriguing research is, in fact, showing that intermittent fasting may be a key weight loss tool, and that was certainly my experience.
But, clearly, the most amazing benefit that intermittent fasting produced is that it shifted me to fat burning mode, which was one of the most amazing and radical health transformations I have ever experienced. Once you are truly shifted to primarily fat burning mode your hunger dramatically decreases and your desire for unhealthy processed junk foods virtually disappears. You then don’t have to have much discipline or will power to follow a healthy eating plan as your hunger for these carbs is just not there. In my experience it is nothing short of a miracle.
Is Intermittent Fasting Right for You?
If you’re already off to a good start on a healthy diet and fitness plan, then intermittent fasting might be just the thing to bring you to the next level, like it did for me. However, you need to pay very careful attention and listen to your body, and your energy levels. This is especially true if you’re overweight, diabetic, hypoglycemic, or pregnant.
Please keep in mind that proper nutrition becomes even MORE important when fasting, so focusing on your diet really should be your first step. Common sense will tell you that fasting combined with a denatured, highly processed, toxin-rich diet is likely to do more harm than good, as you’re not giving your body proper fuel to thrive when you DO eat.
If you’re hypoglycemic, diabetic, or pregnant (and/or breastfeeding), you may be better off avoiding any type of fasting or timed meal schedule until you’ve normalized your blood glucose and insulin levels, or weaned the baby. Others categories of people that would be best served to avoid fasting include those living with chronic stress, and those with cortisol dysregulation or “adrenal fatigue.”
As for pregnant and/or lactating women, I don’t think fasting would be a wise choice. Your baby needs plenty of nutrients, during and after birth, and there’s no research supporting fasting during this important time. On the contrary, some studies2 suggest it might be contraindicated, as it can alter fetal breathing patterns, heartbeat, and increase gestational diabetes.
It may even induce premature labor. Personally, I don’t think it’s worth the risk. Instead, my recommendation would be to really focus on improving your nutrition during this crucial time. A diet with plenty of raw organic, biodynamic foods, and foods high in healthful fats, coupled with high quality proteins will give your baby a head start on good health. You’ll also want to be sure to include plenty of cultured and fermented foods to optimize your—and consequently your baby’s—gut flora. For more information, please see this previous article that includes specific dietary recommendations for a healthy pregnancy, as well as my interview with Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride.
Finding a Lifestyle Plan that Works
If you have already put much focus and energy on your diet, cutting out grains and processed foods and replacing them with healthful fats like the one in the table above, then intermittent fasting could further boost weight loss and provide additional health benefits. Also, while not discussed here, if you’re engaged in a regular fitness program and feel like you’ve hit a plateau, then working out in a fasted state might help rev things up. For more information about exercise while fasting, please see this previous article.
If you decide to give intermittent fasting a try, remember to not eat any food for three hours before going to sleep and then start slow and work your way up to 16-18 hour fasts; narrowing that window during which you eat all your calories. Remember to listen to your body. Also be sure to address any hypoglycemic tendencies, as it can get increasingly dangerous the longer you go without eating to level out your blood sugar.
In conclusion, it is my experience that breakfast is not the most important meal of the day, and no matter how you tweak it, it might be causing you more harm than good. Skipping breakfast might be the easiest way to shift your body into using fat as its primary fuel. Once you make this shift to fat burning mode your hunger for unhealthy foods will dramatically and almost magically disappear, and you will not have to exert enormous amounts of self-discipline or will power to resist unhealthy foods that you know will increase your risk of disease.
If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.
Flu vaccine causes 1,400 percent increased risk of narcolepsy Speculation that an emergency vaccine widely administered for H1N1 (swine flu) may have caused a sharp uptick in cases of narcolepsy has been confirmed following the release of a new study out of the U.K. As reported in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), individuals given the Pandemrix vaccine for influenza during the 2009/2010 swine flu “pandemic” had a 1,400 percent increased risk of developing the neurological disorder compared to those not vaccinated. Drawing from data collected in the aftermath of the vaccine’s release, researchers found that the use of Pandemrix, particularly among young people between the ages of four and 18, increased the risk of narcolepsy by a factor of about 14 compared to those who did not get the jab. And the ingredient believed to be primarily responsible for this increase is an adjuvant known as AS03, a squalene-based component used in a number of vaccines produced by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). “This study shows a significantly increased risk of narcolepsy in children who received the AS03 adjuvanted pandemic strain vaccine in England,” explains the study. “Our case coverage method gave an odds ration of 14.4 (4.3 to 48.5) for the primary analysis and is consistent with the relative risk of 13 reported from Finland in a retrospective study.” Many health authorities knew about the dangers associated with squalene-based adjuvants like AS03, which are used to significantly boost immunogenicity, or the overall immune response prompted by a vaccine, but they have done little or nothing to stop their use. Such dangers include conditions like severe autoimmune disease, neurological damage, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus, as well as many others. “(Squalene) contributed to the cascade of reactions called Gulf War syndrome,” says Dr. Viera Scheibner, a micropaleontologist who has long studied the adverse effects associated with vaccines and vaccine adjuvants. “(GIs developed) arthritis, fibromyalgia, lymphadenopathy, rashes, photosensitive rashes, malar rashes, chronic fatigue, chronic headaches, abnormal body hair loss, non-healing skin lesions, aphthous ulcers, dizziness, weakness, memory loss, seizures, mood changes, neuropsychiatric problems, anti-thyroid effects, anemia, elevated ESR (erythrocyte sedimentation rate), systemic lupus erythematosus, multiple sclerosis, ALS, Raynaud’s phenomenon, Sjorgren’s syndrome, chronic diarrhea, night sweats and low-grade fever.” Squalene-based adjuvants like AS03 definitively linked to causing neurological damage This is quite the laundry list of health conditions associated with squalene-based adjuvants, and yet these chemical toxins were indiscriminately injected into millions of children across the globe, many of whom are now permanently injured. And according to the study, the results speak for themselves — the AS03 squalene-based adjuvant used by GSK in Pandemrix is causally-associated with an increased risk of narcolepsy. “It is now abundantly clear that throughout the world, Pandemrix has caused thousands of children to develop narcolepsy during only a couple of years,” explains Gaia-Health.com. “There is now no evading the reality of the devastation caused by this vaccine that was pushed through a campaign of fear mongering about a mild disease.” Beyond this, the AS03 adjuvant itself has been fully indicted as a dangerous toxin. It and many other squalene-based adjuvants like it simply have no legitimate place in vaccines administered to humans. And the many dangers associated with squalene-based adjuvants have been known for decades, which means there is no excuse as to why health authorities allowed it to be used in a rushed-to-market pandemic flu vaccine that was targeted towards young, developing children. “These children with narcolepsy are condemned to lives constrained by the effects of both narcolepsy and the drugs they may take,” adds Gaia-Health.com. “When you consider that the disease they were supposedly being protected from, swine flu, proved to be a rather mild type of influenza, the tragedy of what has happened is inexcusable.” Sources for this article include: http://www.france24.com http://gaia-health.com http://www.globalresearch.ca If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.