|
|
|
Alternative Medicine in the News
July 2010 edition 81
published weekly
|
|
Barefoot Sun Walking Heals the Body and Prevents Disease
"Barefoot sun walking" isn`t a term you`ll find on Wikipedia. But it is
a way to simultaneously tap into two of nature`s most powerful healing
forces. The term relates to the intersection of the sun and the earth
and how they can combine to provide you with a wealth of health
benefits. Quite simply, it is the act of walking barefoot on the earth
while the sun is shining down and touching your skin directly.
Walking
barefoot on the ground on a sunny day allows you to initiate a
multi-directional cascade of healing effects that have the potential to
prevent and reverse disease. This easy activity allows you to get both
vitamin D from the sun and negative ions (electrons) from the earth. In
fact, if Mother Nature had a sign, it might read: no shirt, no shoes,
no disease.
Vitamin D is produced by your skin when it is
exposed to sunlight. Considering the major health challenges facing a
large percentage of the population today, and the fact that 40% of the
U.S. population is deficient in vitamin D, the connection between
vitamin D deficiency and a poor state of health seems pretty clear.
Some of the benefits of maintaining optimal levels of vitamin D include
the potential to alleviate depression and prevent ovarian, prostate,
breast, and colon cancers, as well as osteoporosis. This is only a
small sampling of the incredible benefits of this magical nutrient.
(For more information on the healing potential of vitamin D, read this
comprehensive report here: http://www.naturalnews.com/rr-sunli....)
According
to David Wolfe, who has done a considerable analysis of the research on
the health implications of grounding your body to the earth, it is a
lack of direct connection to the earth that may be the cause of most
advanced chronic inflammation. Being grounded allows the electrical
connection to be made and for the body to synchronize with the
circadian rhythms of the earth. It can lead to improved heart and pulse
rates, a normal pH balance and cortisol levels, and resistance to
oxidation, which helps to slow the aging process.
With the
ubiquitous nature of cell phones, cell phone towers, power lines, and
computers, people today are constantly being bombarded with positive
ions from these dangerous electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs). Being
grounded allows for these EMFs to leave your body and enter the ground,
as the earth is an infinite reservoir of EMF fields. The earth is also
a limitless source of free electrons that pour into the body when it is
grounded. This infusion of negative ions from the earth into your body,
and the discharge of damaging positive ions, is critical for good
health. Excess positive ions in the body are associated with disease
and degenerative conditions. Negative ions are associated with health
and healing. The more time you spend grounded, the less inflammation
you are likely to have, resulting in better overall health and
increased longevity.
Summertime is an excellent opportunity to
kick off your shoes and leverage these two free resources -the sun and
the earth- in order to double your healing potential and positively
impact your health.
Resources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_D
http://www.naturalnews.com/003069.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/rr-sunli...
http://www.longevitynowprogram.com/...
|
|
Yoga & Meditation at Abha Light House
YOGA
Mondays - Wednesdays
5:30 - 6:30
Cost: Ksh 300
4 classes for Ksh 1000
MEDITATION
Tuesdays
6:30 - 7:30
Cost: free!
Welcome!
Call for information: 0710-620323 / 0733-895466
|
|
Quick Links
:: :: ::
We source our articles from the below links. There's a lot of information out there, perhaps you'd like to subscribe directly to these links free e-zines.
Natural News
Emaxhealth.com
Ray Collins Good Life Letter
Hpathy.com
Zeus Info Service
What the Doctors won't Tell You
:: :: ::
Did you miss an earlier edition?
You can visit our archive of previous mini-e-zines. click here
:: :: ::
Why not forward this mini-ezine to a friend or two?
|
|
|
Pharmacists give themselves cancer from dispensing toxic chemotherapy chemicals
One of the side effects of chemotherapy is, ironically, cancer. The
cancer doctors don't say much about it, but it's printed right on the
chemo drug warning labels (in small print, of course). If you go into a
cancer treatment clinic with one type of cancer, and you allow yourself
to be injected with chemotherapy chemicals, you will often develop a
second type of cancer as a result. Your oncologist will often claim to
have successfully treated your first cancer even while you develop a
second or third cancer directly caused by the chemo used to treat the
original cancer.
There's nothing like cancer-causing chemotherapy to boost repeat business, huh?
During
all this, the pharmacists are peddling these toxic chemotherapy
chemicals to their customers as if they were medicine (which they
aren't). While preparing these toxic chemical prescriptions, it turns
out that pharmacists are exposing themselves to cancer-causing chemotherapy agents in the process. And because of that, pharmacists are giving themselves cancer... and they're dying from it.
Why pharmacists are dying of cancer
People
who live in glass houses should never throw stones, they say. And you
might similarly say that pharmacists who deal in poison shouldn't be
surprised to one day discover they are killing themselves with it.
Chemotherapy
drugs are extremely toxic to the human body, and they are readily
absorbed through the skin. The very idea that they are even used in
modern medicine is almost laughable if it weren't so downright
disturbing and sad that hundreds of thousands of people are killed each
year around the world by chemotherapy drugs.
Now you can add
pharmacists to that statistic. For decades, they simply looked the
other way, pretending they were playing a valuable role in our system
of "modern" medicine, not admitting they were actually doling out
chemicals that killed people. Now, the sobering truth has struck them
hard: They are in the business of death, and it is killing them off,
one by one.
The Seattle Times now reports the story of
Sue Crump, a veteran pharmacist of two decades who spent much of her
time dispensing chemotherapy drugs. Sue died last September of
pancreatic cancer, and one of her dying wishes was that the truth would
be told about how her on-the-job exposure to chemotherapy chemicals
contributed to her own cancer.
Secondhand chemo
The
Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA), it turns out, does
not regulate workplace exposure to toxic, cancer-causing chemotherapy
chemicals. At first glance, that seems surprising, since OSHA regulates
workplace exposure to far less harmful chemicals. Why not chemo?
The
answer is because the toxicity of chemotherapy has long been ignored by
virtually everyone in medicine and the federal government. It has
always been assumed harmless or even "safe" just because it's used as a
kind of far-fetched "medicine" to treat cancer. This, despite the fact
that chemotherapy is a derivative of the mustard gas used against enemy
soldiers in World War I. Truthfully, chemotherapy has more in common
with chemicals weapons than any legitimate medicine.
So today, while workers are protected from secondhand smoke
in offices across the country, pharmacists are still being exposed
every single day to toxic, cancer-causing chemicals that OSHA seems to
just ignore. The agency has only issued one citation in the last decade
to a hospital for inadequate safety handling of toxic chemotherapy
drugs.
As the Seattle Times reports, "A just-completed
study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) -- 10 years in
the making and the largest to date -- confirms that chemo continues to
contaminate the work spaces where it's used and in some cases is still
being found in the urine of those who handle it..."
That same article goes on to report more pharmacists, veterinarians and nurses who are dead or dying from chemotherapy exposure:
· Bruce Harrison of St. Louis (cancer in his 50's, now dead)
· Karen Lewis of Baltimore (cancer in her 50's, still living)
· Brett Cordes of Scottsdale, Arizona (cancer at age 35, still living)
· Sally Giles of Vancouver, B.C. (cancer in her 40's, now dead)
The great contradiction in cancer treatments
As the Seattle Times reports:
"Danish
epidemiologists used cancer-registry data from the 1940s through the
late 1980s to first report a significantly increased risk of leukemia
among oncology nurses and, later, physicians. Last year, another Danish
study of more than 92,000 nurses found an elevated risk for breast,
thyroid, nervous-system and brain cancers."
The story goes
on to report how new safety rules are being put in place across the
industry to protect pharmacists, veterinarians, nurses and doctors from
toxic chemotherapy chemicals. But even the Seattle Times, which
deserves credit for running this story, misses the bigger point:
If
these chemicals are so dangerous to the doctors, nurses and pharmacists
dispensing them, how can they be considered "safe enough" to inject
into patients who are already dying from cancer?
It's a serious question. After all, if nurses can become violently ill after merely spilling chemotherapy chemicals on themselves (it's true), then what effect do you suppose these chemicals have when injected into patients?
The cancer industry, though, has never stopped injecting patients long enough to ask the commonsense question: Why are we in the business of dispensing poison in the first place? Poison, after all, isn't medicine. Not when dispensed in its full potency, anyway.
The
whole idea of "safety" in the cancer industry is to find new ways to
protect the health care workers from the extremely dangerous chemicals
they're still injecting into the bodies of patients. Something is
clearly wrong with this picture... if health care workers need to be
protected from this stuff, why not protect the patients from it, too?
Nobody ever died from handling herbs
In
contrast to all this, consider the truthful observation that no
naturopath ever died from handling medicinal herb, homeopathy remedies
or nutritional supplements. These natural therapies are good for
patients, and as a bonus, you don't have to wear a chemical suit to
handle them.
Furthermore, medicinal herbs, supplements and natural remedies don't cause cancer.
They support and protect the immune system rather than destroying it.
So they make patients healthier and more resilient rather than weaker
and fragile.
But herbs, supplements and natural remedies don't
earn much money for the cancer industry. Only the highly-toxic patented
chemotherapy drugs bring in the big bucks. So that's what they deal in
-- poison for the patients. And when you deal in poison, some of it always splashes back onto you.
Chemotherapy doesn't work
Beyond
this whole issue of pharmacists and health care workers dying from
exposure to secondhand chemotherapy, there's the issue of whether
chemotherapy actually works in the first place. Scientifically
speaking, if you take a good, hard look at what the published studies
actually say, chemotherapy is only effective at treating less than two
percent of the cancers that exist. And that two percent does not
include breast cancer or prostate cancer.
Yet chemotherapy is
routinely used to "treat" breast cancer even though it offers no
benefit to breast cancer patients. In effect, the cancer industry is
engaged in a criminal treatment hoax that promises to make you
healthier but actually gives you even more cancer -- which is great for
repeat business, but terrible for the cancer patients who suffer under
it.
The level of quackery at work right now in the cancer
industry is simply astonishing. You would think that if doctors and
pharmacists were dishing out these chemicals to patients, they would
make sure there was some sort of legitimate science to back them up.
But they haven't. The science doesn't exist. Chemotherapy doesn't work
at anything other than causing cancer -- and it accomplishes
that indiscriminately, damaging any person it comes into contact with.
Merely touching chemotherapy chemicals is dangerous for your health.
So
if you're considering chemotherapy for yourself, think about this long
and hard: If chemotherapy is so dangerous that it's giving the
pharmacists cancer just from touching it, why on earth would you want
to inject it into your body?
This is not an idle question. It is
perhaps the most important question of all for someone considering
conventional cancer treatment using chemotherapy. The question is
essentially this: If chemotherapy causes cancer, how can it treat cancer?
Treating
cancer with chemotherapy is like treating alcoholism with vodka. It's
like treating heart disease with cheese, or like treating diabetes with
high-fructose corn syrup. Cancer cannot be cured by the very thing that
causes it.
And to those who deal in poison, watch out for the
cause-and-effect laws of biology. If you deal in chemotherapy
chemicals, don't be surprised if you get cancer one day. If you deal in
chemical pesticides, don't be surprised if you get Alzheimer's. If
you're a dentist installing mercury fillings in the mouths of clients,
don't be surprised if one day you just go stark raving mad (because
mercury causes insanity, and dentists breathe in mercury vapor thrown
into the air from their drills).
If you work around chemicals,
they will eventually impact your health, and never in a good way.
There's a karmic element in all this, too: If you spend your life
dishing out chemotherapy drugs as a pharmacist, you have a lot to
answer for. You have been an enabler of a very real chemical holocaust
against the people. Don't be surprised if that holocaust turns against
you one day. Karma tends to work that way. Cause and effect is a
universal law that cannot be escaped.
And if you're a cancer patient, I urge you to think twice
about the toxicity of anything you might allow in your body. If you are
trying to HEAL your body, why would you allow yourself to be poisoned
with a chemical that causes cancer?
Don't let some cancer doctor
talk you into chemotherapy using his fear tactics. They're good at
that. So next time he insists that you take some chemotherapy, ask him to drink some first.
If your oncologist isn't willing to drink chemotherapy in front of you
to prove it's safe, why on earth would you agree to have it injected in
your body?
Sources for this story include:
Investigate West
http://invw.org/chemo-main
Seattle Times
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ht...ety/2...
|
Gestational Diabetes can be Prevented by Dietary Changes During Early Pregnancy
A new study has found that it is possible to prevent the onset of
Gestational Diabetes in an expectant mother by making simple changes in
the mother's diet. The study, done by researchers at UCSF(University of
California - San Francisco), found that a chemical called serotonin
influences the onset of Gestational Diabetes in an expectant mother.
Since serotonin is made from the amino acid tryptophan which is found
abundantly in high-protein foods, eating foods rich in protein during
early pregnancy may prevent gestational diabetes in pregnant women.
Gestational
Diabetes is a condition in which insulin resistance(caused by hormonal
changes) leads to high glucose levels or hyperglycemia in some women.
It can have serious consequences for the mother and child, if left
untreated. According to the researchers, the study "offers new insights
into possible ways to reverse non-gestational diabetes in its early
stages".
How Does Serotonin Prevent Gestational Diabetes?
Pregnancy
can cause several changes in the mother's metabolism. The energy
requirements of the fetus are met by increased levels of insulin
resistance in the mother's body. Since insulin is the hormone which
carries glucose molecules in the blood to the molecular cells, insulin
resistance causes the nutrients to be channeled in to the growing fetus
instead of going to the mother's body. The mother's body
counterbalances the insulin resistance and prevents hyperglycemia by
the increased production of insulin-producing beta cells.
Serotonin,
a chemical produced by the body and a known neurotransmitter, is the
underlying agent that signals the stimulation of beta cell
proliferation during the early pregnancy. Since serotonin is made from
tryptophan - an amino acid that comes from high-protein foods such as
milk, eggs, meat and fish - the study shows that increased intake of
high-protein foods during the early pregnancy can cause higher
production of serotonin and subsequently higher levels of insulin.
According
to UCSF Professor Michael German, MD, who is also the senior author of
the paper, tryptophan hydroxylase (Tph1), the enzyme that produces
serotonin from tryptophan increased by as much 1000-fold during the
early pregnancy. The researchers found that inhibition of serotonin
synthesis by restricting the intake of tryptophan in pregnant mice
blocked beta cell proliferation and resulted in the development of
glucose intolerance and gestational diabetes in the mice.
The
research indicates that anything that affects the production of
serotonin, such as drugs, diet or genetic inheritance may affect the
risk of developing gestational diabetes and possibly the long-term risk
of developing type 2 diabetes.
Serotonin has been widely studied
as a neurotransmitter in the brain for its effects on appetite and
mood, especially depression. Since it also influences the insulin
production, this could explain why some patients with gestational
diabetes experience depression. This would also explain the effect of
some classes of psychiatric medications on diabetes.
The study will be published in the upcoming issue of "Nature Medicine" and was published online on June 27, 2010.
Resources:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_relea...
http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/va...
http://www.physorg.com/news19685577...
|
Victory against Frankenfoods: India blocks harvesting of GM crops
Critics of genetically modified (GM) crops
have secured a victory in India, where the environment minister has
indefinitely blocked the approval of any further GM varieties.
GM
cotton was approved for cultivation in India in 2002, and now covers 80
percent of the country's cotton farmlands. In October 2009, the
country's Genetic Engineering Approval Committee gave approval for the
planting of a GM eggplant produced by Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co., in
partnership with Monsanto. The brinjal-variety eggplant had been
engineered with genes from the bacteria Bacillus thuringniensis (Bt) to
produce pesticide in its tissues.
The approval of the country's
first GM food crop sparked an uproar among farmers, environmentalists,
health advocates and other GM critics across India. Critics objected to
the unknown health effects of consuming or working near GM foods, as
well as the risks that the plants could produce "genetic pollution" by
crossing with non-GM varieties.
"Stringent monitoring measures
should be immediately put in place to ensure that no releases of GM
crops happens," said Rajesh Krishnan of Greenpeace India.
Farmers
also object to the fact that GM seeds not only cost roughly three times
as much as unmodified seeds, but must also be purchased each year from
the company rather than saved from prior harvests, as farmers have
traditionally done.
Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh responded
by holding a series of public consultations across the country. After
hearing critics' concerns, he placed a moratorium on any cultivation of
Bt brinjal until "independent scientific studies" can prove "the safety
of the product from the point of view of its long-term impact on human
health and environment."
"Public sentiment is negative. It is my duty to adopt a cautious, precautionary, principle-based approach," Ramesh said.
"The decision is responsible to science and responsive to society."
GM advocates claim that engineered foods are needed to address global food shortages, an assertion that critics reject.
"You
can't simply abandon all other solutions, including organic farming, to
focus just on biotechnology when the testing, labeling and enforcement
standards are so inadequate," said Kushal Yada of the Center for
Science and Environment.
Sources for this story include: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8506047.stm; www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61F0....
|
Widespread male infertility sweeping the globe
Nearly 20 years ago, Danish scientists first broke the news to the
world that men from Western countries seem to be slowly becoming
infertile. Recent research seems to back this up as well, with average
sperm counts having dropped to half of what they were 50 years ago.
According
to reports, nearly 20 percent of men between the ages of 18 and 25 have
sperm counts that are abnormally low. To put this in perspective,
consider the fact that in the 1940s, men had an average of about 100
million sperm cells per millimeter of semen (m/ml). Today, the average
is around 60m/ml. Those among the 20 percent with abnormal levels have
less than 20m/ml.
So what is the cause behind decreasing sperm
counts? Realistically, there is probably more than just one cause.
Environmental toxins, synthetic food and water additives, and
estrogenic substances in food are all likely culprits.
"It's
most likely a reflection of the fact that many environmental and
lifestyle changes over the past 50 years are inherently detrimental to
sperm production," explained Professor Richard Sharpe, a fertility
research expert at the Medical Research Council, in a U.K. report.
But
what scientists believe may be the biggest cause of poor semen quality
in men has more to do with what their mothers were exposed to during
pregnancy, than what the men themselves are exposed to throughout their
lifetimes.
A case in point is the disastrous chemical accident
that occurred in 1976 in Seveso, Italy. The incident caused the highest
known human exposure to toxic chemical dioxins. It was later revealed
that pregnant women who were exposed to the chemical during that time
bore male children who ended up having poor sperm counts.
Other
studies also seem to lend credence to the idea that lifelong sperm
counts are determined during the early stages of male fetal
development. Interference with the Sertoli cells, which are responsible
for proper sperm development during fetal development, can lead to
lifelong sperm production problems in males.
"Maternal-lifestyle
factors in pregnancy can have quite substantial effects on sperm counts
in sons in adulthood, and the most logical mechanism by which this
could occur is via reducing the number of Sertoli cells," explained
Professor Sharpe.
In other words, prenatal exposure to toxic
chemicals is a serious threat to male health, which ultimately
threatens the existence of mankind.
Sources for this story include:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seveso...
|
A diet loaded with antioxidant rich foods improves insulin resistance
According to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases (NIDDKD), insulin resistance is a condition in which
the pancreas eventually can't keep up with the body's demand for
insulin (a hormone that helps the body use glucose for energy).
Eventually, an excess of glucose builds up in the bloodstream -- and
that sets the stage for type 2 diabetes.
New research just
presented at the Endocrine Society's 92nd Annual Meeting, held in San
Diego, shows that natural antioxidants in the diet can be a powerful
way to improve insulin resistance -- even in people who are obese and
suffering from metabolic syndrome. A precursor of diabetes
associated with insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome is a cluster of
conditions (including high blood pressure, elevated insulin levels,
excess body fat around the waist and abnormal cholesterol levels) that
raise the risk of heart disease and stroke, as well as diabetes.
"The
beneficial effects of antioxidants are known, but we have revealed for
the first time one of their biological bases of action -- improving
hormonal action in obese subjects with the metabolic syndrome," lead
researcher Antonio Mancini, MD, an endocrinology researcher at Catholic
University of the Sacred Heart in Rome, Italy, said in a statement to
the media.
Dr. Mancini and his fellow researchers investigated
the effects of dietary antioxidants on insulin resistance in 16 men and
13 women between 18 and 66 years of age. All the research subjects were
obese and insulin-resistant but had not yet developed full-blown
diabetes. The study participants were randomly assigned to one of four
treatment groups. Then all groups were place on low-calorie,
Mediterranean-type diets averaging 1,500 calories daily and containing
only 25 percent of these calories from protein foods with the rest made
up of low-glycemic-index carbohydrates (carbs such as whole grains that
don't cause a quick rise in blood sugar).
However, while one
group ate only this diet, the second group consumed the same foods but
also took the an oral medication that lowers blood glucose called
metformin (sold under the brand names Glucophage, Glucophage XR,
Glumetza, Fortamet, and Riomet). Groups three and four ate a
Mediterranean style diet, too, but theirs was enriched with extra
helpings of fruits and vegetables that are known to be loaded with
antioxidants; group four was also given metformin.
Even though
all the research subjects in each group lost about the same amount of
weight, only the two groups consuming the high antioxidant diet (groups
3 and 4) had a significant decrease in insulin resistance. The latter
group had the best improvement based on an oral glucose tolerance test,
according to the scientists' report.
Although the researchers
did not discuss the possibility, the ability of the high antioxidant
diet to greatly improve insulin resistance without any medication is a
hopeful indication that diets rich in natural antioxidants alone may
help many people faced with this pre-diabetic problem who can not take
-- or don't want to take -- the drug metformin. The medication's most
common side effects (which occur in one out of every three patients)
are nausea, vomiting, gas, bloating, diarrhea and loss of appetite.
Dr.
Mancini pointed out that there's evidence oxidative stress, which can
result in damage to blood particles and cells, plays a role in the
metabolic syndrome. And previous research has shown that antioxidants
can prevent oxidative damage to cells and sometimes even repair damage.
Antioxidants, which are found naturally in many foods including fruits,
vegetables, legumes and nuts, include vitamins E and C, selenium and
carotenoids, such as beta-carotene.
For more information:
http://www.endo-society.org/endo201...
http://www.naturalnews.com/antioxid...
http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pu...
|
Nobel scientist discovers scientific basis of homeopathy
07 July 2010
In the week that doctors have described homeopathy as 'nonsense on
stilts', a Nobel prize-winning scientist has made a discovery about the
nature of water that suggests the therapy does have a scientific basis.
Professor Luc Montagnier, a French virologist who won the Nobel prize
for discovering a link between HIV and AIDS, has shocked fellow Nobel
prize-winners by telling them that water has a memory that continues
even after many dilutions. The idea is one of the foundations of
homeopathy, which maintains that the potency of a substance is
increased with its dilution.
Montagnier has discovered that solutions containing the DNA of viruses
and bacteria "could emit low frequency radio waves". These waves
influence molecules around them, and turn them into organised
structures. These molecules in turn can emit waves. He has discovered
that the waves remain in the water, even after it has been diluted many
times.
Montagnier's statement couldn't happen at a worse time for doctors.
Last week, the UK's British Medical Association (BMA) - the trade union
of doctors - passed a resolution to stop homeopathy being made
available on the National Health Service. It also wants all homeopathic
remedies to be placed in a special area marked 'Placebos' in health
shops and pharmacies. The NHS currently spends around £4m a year on
homeopathy, mainly by funding four homeopathic hospitals in the UK.
(Sources: Sunday Times, July 4, 2010; British Medical Association).
|
Spicy peppers may cause your body to burn more calories
Losing weight is just a few spicy peppers away, according to a recent
report out of the UCLA Center for Human Nutrition. Researchers there
say that the capsaicin compounds found in peppers that give them their
spicy taste, actually help to burn calories as well.
Scientists
believe that the reason why capsaicin burns calories is because the
compound uses energy to raise a person's body temperature, which
provides a similar effect as the one obtained by engaging in
traditional exercise routines.
Because capsaicin is usually
pretty spicy, it might be a turn-off to many people who simply would
not be able to tolerate the sensation. Fortunately, some chili peppers
produce a form of capsaicin called dihydrocapsiate, or DCT, that is
milder and more palatable.
For the study, the research team
evaluated 34 different people trying to lose weight. They gave some of
the volunteers DCT pills with their meals and others placebo pills.
Upon observation, those that took the DCT pills exerted a lot more
energy than those who took the dummy pills, indicating that more
calories are being burned due to the compound's effects.
In fact, those who took the DCT burned almost twice as much energy as those who took the placebo.
The
research team is suggesting that people who are trying to lose weight
stick to just eating peppers at this point rather than going out and
trying to buy isolated DCT. Simply integrating more peppers into your
meals will help to shed some extra pounds and keep that weight off.
Another
interesting fact about chili peppers is that they warm the body in the
winter and cool it off during the summer. It may seem strange for
something that produces heat to cool during the summer, but the peppers
actually help to increase perspiration which ultimately decreases body
temperature.
Another benefit of capsaicin, and chili peppers in
general, is its efficacy as an anticoagulant in helping to prevent
heart attacks and strokes. Chili peppers are naturally
anti-inflammatory and they help to keep blood pressure at normal levels
as well. They are also rich in bioflavanoids, which help to maintain
strong blood vessel walls.
So no matter what, you cannot go
wrong with eating chili peppers. They provide numerous health benefits
that make them a worthwhile food to integrate into your regular meals.
Just be sure you can handle the heat.
Sources for this story include:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/boo...
|
Nasal Swabs to Diagnose Flu are Unscientific and Meaningless
During outbreaks of influenza, including the past H1N1 epidemic, it is the Standard of Care
for doctors to perform a nasal swab to diagnose the flu. A swab,
similar to an everyday cotton swab, is inserted into the nasal cavity
for a sample and sent to a laboratory. If the swab comes back positive,
then the illness is determined to be influenza and an antiviral
medication is often prescribed. The problem with this procedure is that
it is absolutely meaningless and has no scientific basis whatsoever in
determining if the illness in question really is due to the flu. This
is due to several different factors.
Questionable Accuracy
Nasal
flu swabs require a degree of skill from the sample collector and quite
a bit of cooperation from the ill person to allow a swab to be inserted
high into the nasal cavity. This is an uncomfortable procedure at best
and even those given thorough instructions will reflexively pull away
and reduce the chance of obtaining a proper sample, making the accuracy
of the test very suspect. Even the CDC admits that nasal swabs are not
highly worthwhile for diagnosing H1N1 infections. Most doctors know
this and will often prescribe antiviral medications even when the swab
is negative because a patient's symptoms match the flu to a degree that
there is still a high level of suspicion. However, if a doctor is going
to give a medication regardless of the outcome of the swab, there is
just no justification for collecting and spending money on an
uncomfortable test with poor accuracy.
Exposure vs Illness
Even if a swab is positive, it can only determine exposure to the flu; it can in no way determine if the current illness is caused
by the flu. Because the nasal passages are not sterile and are exposed
to billions of microorganisms every day, the simple presence of a
disease-causing organism in the nasal passages in no way implies that
the current illness is due to a microorganism present, or even that the
person has ever even had that disease in the past. It simply means that
the person has been exposed to the organism. A telling example of this
is that nasal swabs for the 'superbug' Methicillin Resistant Staph
Aureus (MRSA) are done on a routine basis for a large percentage of
hospitalized patients, yet this swab is NEVER used to determine if the
patient's illness is from MRSA; further testing is always required to
determine the cause of illness regardless of the findings from the
nasal swab. In this context it is used only to find out if they are colonized with MRSA in order to prevent potential exposure to hospital patients with immune dysfunction.
Lack of Studies
When
medical tests are developed, volunteers are used to determine what is
'normal' in healthy people, but testing groups of healthy people has
never been done to determine if healthy people carry the flu virus in
their nasal passages from casual exposures or past illnesses. Because
no studies with a 'control' group have ever been done, doctors using
this test are simply 'presuming' that the presence of the virus
indicates that their illness is due to that virus. But it is absolutely
possible that harboring the flu virus in the nasal passages is
completely normal in a large percentage of the population. These facts
together make using nasal swabs for the flu an absolutely worthless and
unscientific diagnostic test that the medical community spends millions
of health care dollars on every year.
Resources
http://www.pipp.pitt.edu/pdf/Uyeki-...
http://www.travelmedicinejournal.co...
http://www.easy-immune-health.com/M...
http://www.oregonhealthykids.gov/DH...
|
|
|
|
Medical Disclaimer:
The information contained within does not take the place of medical diagnosis or
prescription. See your health care provider in case of sickness.
Editorial Disclaimer: Publication of these articles are to promote food for thought. The opinions expressed in these articles may not be the opinion of editors.
|
|
|
