Chiropractic Elk Grove
Chiropractor Elk Grove, South Sacramento, Galt & Laguna (916) 685-1230
8580 Elk Ridge Way, Elk Grove, CA 95624

Chiropractic Elk Grove

Fructose results in more belly fat

September 2nd, 2010 . by admin

by S. L. Baker, features writer

(NaturalNews) High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is hard to avoid if you eat processed foods — it’s used to sweeten soft drinks, candy bars, bread, salad dressings, fruit drinks and thousands of other items. But it’s worth the effort to read labels and avoid the stuff. The reason? Research has mounted over the past couple of years that HFCS may be just plain dangerous to health.

For example, researchers from Loyola University Health System have found women who drink at least two cans of HFCS-sweetened soda pop daily are twice as likely to show signs of kidney disease as those who don’t drink that many sodas (http://www.naturalnews.com/025582_s…). And although HFCS has been linked previously to the widespread rise in obesity, a new study has produced evidence showing exactly why fructose could be making people fatter than ever, starting in childhood.

It turns out that when the sugary stuff is present as children’s fat cells mature, fructose turns more of these cells into belly fat. Defined by a large waistline often dubbed a “spare tire”, abdominal obesity ups the risk of both heart disease and type 2 diabetes. What’s more, cells in both belly fat (visceral fat) and subcutaneous fat located below the skin were found to be less able to respond to insulin if they had been exposed to fructose. That means fructose could up the risk for metabolic syndrome, a precursor of type 2 diabetes, while spurring weight gain.

This research was just presented by lead author Georgina Coade, a PhD student at the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom, at the Endocrine Society’s 92nd Annual Meeting held in San Diego. “Our results suggest that high levels of fructose, which may result from eating a diet high in fructose, throughout childhood may lead to an increase in visceral (abdominal) obesity, which is associated with increased cardiometabolic risk,” Coade said in a statement to the media.

Coade and her research team studied biopsy specimens of both subcutaneous and visceral fat from 32 healthy-weight children who had not gone through puberty yet. Then they took preadipocytes (precursors to fat cells that have the potential to differentiate, or mature, into fat-containing cells called adipocytes) from the specimens and allowed these precursor cells to mature for 14 days in culture media containing normal glucose (the main sugar found in the bloodstream), high glucose or high fructose.

Next the investigators measured the activity of an enzyme dubbed GPDH and the abundance of the adipocyte fatty acid binding protein — both of which are found only in mature fat cells. The results showed that fructose caused fat cells to form more mature, visceral fat cells. In addition, the cells that matured in the fructose solution all showed a decrease in insulin sensitivity (the ability to successfully take up glucose from the bloodstream into fat and muscles) — and decreased insulin sensitivity is a characteristic of type 2 diabetes.

“Fructose alters the behavior of human fat cells if it is present as the fat cells mature,” Coade concluded. “We can maybe compare this (timing) to periods in children when they are making their fat.”

As if you need another reason to avoid fructose, consider this: NaturalNews revealed last year that research published in the journal Environmental Health showed HFCS is contaminated with the toxic heavy metal mercury. (http://www.naturalnews.com/025442_H…).

For more information:
http://www.naturalnews.com/fructose…

Finland suspends H1N1 vaccines after children suffer narcolepsy from vaccinations

August 30th, 2010 . by admin

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Shortly after Australia banned flu vaccines in children due to an alarming increase in vomiting, fevers and seizures caused by the vaccines (http://www.naturalnews.com/029586_A…), Finland has now suspended H1N1 vaccines due to increased reports of narcolepsy in children and teens. Narcolepsy is a nervous system disorder characterized by extreme fatigue and daytime sleepiness. It indicates a serious malfunction of the brain and nervous system.

Finland is now reporting that narcolepsy is appearing in children immediately following vaccination with H1N1 vaccines. So far, six children are confirmed of suffering the neurological side effect and nine more are in the process of being confirmed, reports The Epoch Times (http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/con…).

The Finland National Institute for Health (THL) said in a press release that the cause of the narcolepsy may be the vaccine, and they are investigating further.

Sweden’s Medical Products Agency, meanwhile, launched a similar investigation on August 19 to try to determine the cause of post-vaccination narcolepsy also found in children there. The vaccines appear to be causing a pattern of neurological disorders affecting children and teens across the planet.

The harm caused by flu vaccines
H1N1 swine flu vaccines and seasonal flu vaccines have been linked to seizures and other neurological disorders, and they have resulted in some children and teens being paralyzed or even killed. At the same time, there is no scientific evidence whatsoever that seasonal flu vaccines are even safe or effective — they’ve never been subjected to double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, which are considered the “gold standard” of scientific investigation.

There’s no real evidence that seasonal flu vaccines work at all, in fact. Most of the people who get sick every winter, it turns out, are the very people who got vaccinated. That’s because vaccines actually weaken the immune system and cause increased risk of future infections. A study published in the journal PLoS revealed that seasonal flu vaccination actually increases the risk of H1N1 swine flu infections (”Does Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Increase the Risk of Illness with the 2009 A/H1N1 Pandemic Virus?” Viboud C, Simonsen L (2010) PLoS Med 7(4): e1000259).

Also see: http://www.naturalnews.com/028538_s…

Rather than protecting the public, seasonal flu vaccines and H1N1 swine flu vaccines actually leave them more vulnerable to future infections. That simple fact, combined with the increasing reports of neurological side effects being linked to vaccines, should raise serious questions about the reasoning behind any mass-vaccination program.

When it comes to vaccines, children seem to suffer more than adults. It is the children who are winding up in hospitals, convulsing with seizures or suffering narcolepsy. The saddest part of this is that these children could be very effectively protected from seasonal flu with vitamin D, but the medical industry isn’t recommending vitamin D for children.

Vaccines remain the prescription for everyone; even as children around the world are suffering the consequences.

Additional sources for this story include:
The Epoch Times:
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/con…

PrisonPlanet.com:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/finland…

Food Dyes Linked to Cancer

August 19th, 2010 . by admin

Did you know that in the United States alone we consume an estimated 15 million pounds of food dyes per year? That’s a whole lot of dye going into our foods, our bodies, and our children’s bodies. Not only do these food dyes cause behavior problems like hyperactivity in children, they have now been linked to childhood cancers, according to Michael F. Jacobson, Executive Director of CSPI (Center for Science in Public Interest) and co-author of the latest report on this serious health danger, “Food Dyes: A Rainbow of Risks.”
In a recent study by CSPI, food dyes were linked to serious health problems in children. That’s right, the food dyes that are currently being poured into our daily foods are known carcinogens and clearly linked to childhood cancers. These are the foods children innocently consume for breakfast, lunch, snacks, and dinner. Day after day, year after year. These perilous dyes are poisoning our bodies, particularly our children’s vulnerable, still-growing bodies.

Poisoning Our Children with Food Dyes

One of the most frightening things going on here is that so many of the foods children consume on a daily basis are loaded with these deadly dyes. These are the foods that are being heavily promoted on the children’s television stations, in their magazines, in the stores, and everywhere you can think of. The highly persuasive and misleading ads cause our children to beg for these foods. From chips and fruit snacks to breakfast cereals and lunch meats, these dyes are found everywhere and our children are consuming them more and more everyday.

In fact the same report by CSPI reveals that our consumption of food dyes has increased five times over the last fifteen years alone.

It takes a minute to let this soak in for most people. The realization that these common food dyes are directly linked to cancers, and more alarmingly–childhood cancers. It’s hard to believe. In fact we really don’t want to believe it.

But if you (and I know you do), want to protect your children (and yourself) from the deadly diseases that result from these hazardous toxins, take heed!

Getting the Real Facts on Food Dyes
According to the CSPI report, “Food Dyes: A Rainbow of Risk,” the most frequently used dyes that are found to be carcinogenic are the following:

■Red 40
■Yellow 5
■Yellow 6
Sadly these three dyes are also the food dyes most used and found in all varieties of foods. From candy M & Ms to salad dressings, these three carcinogenic dyes abound in our foods.

Take a look in your own cabinets. Read the labels. What do you see? Chances are if you’re like most common households in the West there are a few things in your pantry with at least one of the food dyes listed above.

Who Will Protect Our Children?

As I first read this report I was shocked to find out just how dangerous food dyes are. I was alarmed actually. My thoughts immediately went to the government’s own FDA (Food and Drug Administration) thinking that once they know, they’ll ban these food dyes and protect us. But as I read on, I realized I was wrong.

According to CSPI in 1985 the then acting commissioner of the FDA urged the American government to ban the use of Red dye 3 that was clearly shown to cause cancer.

This urgency was pushed aside as John Block, then the current Secretary of Agriculture, fought to keep Red 3 in foods. It stayed and despite its direct link to cancer, the United States uses 200,000 pounds of dangerous Red 3 in our food annually.

The United States government simply isn’t taking action, but you can.

Shopping by Senses: Colors Sell
So why is our government keeping dangerous dyes in our foods? There is no benefit of these dyes except for increasing the appeal of these nutrient devoid foods. The colors fool the consumer into thinking they may just be a healthy food choice. The consumer couldn’t be more wrong.

Think about it. When you are browsing the shelves at the local grocery store what appeals to you? Whether you are aware of it or not, colors draw on the emotions of the consumer. Would you buy a box of fruit chews or a bottle of salad dressing that was a sickly, brownish green color? Probably not. But with the dyes added that same product suddenly becomes a deep red or bright yellow and we are fooled into thinking it’s healthy, or at least it appeals to us.

We all shop with our senses. Advertisers bank on it and are winning big. Smell, sight, touch, and more tell us what to buy. We listen, and so do the food manufacturers. They keep pouring more dyes into our foods and we keep buying them with no idea about what we are really putting into our bodies.

Is the Government Protecting Your Health or Selling You Out?

If you’re like me you may be a bit baffled as to why our own government isn’t telling us about these health dangers in our own foods. You may wonder why these dangerous dyes haven’t been yanked off the market immediately.

We could theorize on the reasons why the United States has allowed these dangerous dyes to stay in our foods or we can look at the facts and take action on our own.

It’s refreshing to realize that not all governments are sitting by idly. In fact, the Australian government is currently considering banning food dyes from a number of their foods, particularly breakfast cereals and confectionary items. Both of these foods are heavily consumed by many children.

Europe is reacting to this too.

The European Union has passed into law that any food product containing food dyes must come with a visible warning label. This label must be on all foods by this past July 2010 according to the CSPI. And in Britain, the government asked food manufacturers to phase out food dyes by December 2010.

The food manufacturers have responded in countries where the government reacted. But here in America, most consumers continue on, oblivious to the dangers of food dyes, eating more and more each day.

In Britain you’ll find a strawberry sundae at McDonald’s that looks delicious and is colored with good ole’ strawberries. That same sundae in the United States is colored with Red dye 40.

Another example is with the British version of Fanta soda. The British version is bright orange with extracts from pumpkin and carrots. In America? That same soda is colored orange with Red dye 40 and Yellow dye 6. A colored cocktail of sickness.

The changes that need to be made are simple but until that happens it’s up to you and me to take action in our daily lives.

Empower Yourself Today
You may be outraged that you didn’t know about all this before, or that the government hasn’t banned these dangerous dyes. And while we are all justified to feel this way there are better ways to direct your energy.

It’s up to each individual to make the decisions for him or herself and their families about what they will put into their bodies. We can’t rely on the government nor can we blame them once we know the facts about foods dyes.

Now that you know, you’ve become empowered and it’s time to make a change. It’s not complicated. It’s actually quite basic. Eating foods that are real foods, not fake foods, are the best way to avoid eating dangerous dyes.

If you choose fresh, whole foods that come from nature and go through no or very little processing then you won’t have to worry about dyes in your foods.

All of the foods that contain these carcinogenic food dyes are fake foods. They’re the foods you’ll find in boxes, bags, jars, and bottles lining the grocery store shelves. They’re the fruit chews that tell the consumer they’ll be getting a serving of fruit in each bag; the highly processed and refined chips that would probably be an ugly green color if it weren’t for the Yellow 6 dye they added.

When you shop for produce locally, you’ll eat what’s in season as God intended you to eat it. You won’t be fooled by ‘fake’ colors on your fruits and veggies. If it’s old and unhealthy, its natural colors and smell will reveal that to you, and you won’t buy it.

When a piece of fruit or a vegetable is too old and not completely healthy for us it begins to rot, stink, feels mushy, and turns brown. Our senses tell us not to eat it. These same senses that the food manufacturers count on tricking by adding dye to very unhealthy foods – and coincidently make them even unhealthier.

Now that you understand more about what’s going on with the foods that line the grocery store shelves, take action to protect you and your loved ones from succumbing to lifestyle diseases from what we’re eating.

Sources
Medical News Today (2010)

Center for Science in the Public Interest (2010)

Study: Medical errors cost at least $19.5 billion annually in U.S.

August 13th, 2010 . by admin

By MassDevice staff
Created 08/12/2010 - 08:11
A Society of Actuaries study finds that medical errors cost the country at least $19.5 billion annually.

Medical errors cost the U.S. economy an estimated $19.5 billion in 2008, according to a study commissioned by the Society of Actuaries.

Seattle-based consulting firm Milliman Inc. compiled medical claims data to provide a measurement of costs for avoidable medical injuries.

The study [1]’s researchers found that of the approximately $80 billion in costs from medical injuries, around 25 percent resulted from avoidable errors.

The study only looked at the “measurable costs” of medical errors, including “increased medical costs, costs related to increased mortality rates and costs related to lost productivity of an error.”

“We used a conservative methodology and still found 1.5 million measurable medical errors occurred in 2008,” said Milliman [2] consultant Jonathan Shreve, who co-wrote the report, said in a prepared statement.

The study found that lost productivity due to related short-term disability claims contributed to $1.1 billion of the total, which translates to more than 10 million excess days missed from work due to short-term disability. Measurable medical errors also resulted in more than 2,500 avoidable deaths; $1.4 billion was lost from increased death rates among the victims of those mistakes.

The study found that there were 6.3 million measurable medical injuries in the U.S. in 2008. SOA and Milliman estimates associate 1.5 million of those injuries with errors. The average total cost per error was about $13,000.

Shreve said that the total economic impact of medical errors is likely greater than the numbers indicate, because the report only includes errors that Milliman could identify through claims data.

The study found that approximately 55 percent of the total error costs were the result of five common errors:

•Pressure ulcers
•Postoperative infections
•Mechanical complications from devices, implants, or grafts
•Postlaminectomy syndrome
•Hemorrhages complicating a procedure
Medical errors, and the malpractice lawsuits that often follow, are among the hotly debated issues related to healthcare reform. Newly tapped, and somewhat controversial, CMS head Donald Berwick [3] founded the not-for-profit Institute for Healthcare Improvement [4] in part to help reduce medical errors.

Unnecessary Mastectomy Gets Woman $198,000

August 11th, 2010 . by admin

LOS ANGELES — A woman who underwent a double mastectomy and later discovered she didn’t have breast cancer was set to receive $198,000 under a settlement approved Tuesday by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

Ana Jimenez-Salgado had her breasts surgically removed at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center after two outside pathologists determined the cells obtained from an August 2007 biopsy were cancerous.

She later underwent reconstructive surgery. The hospital’s pathologists examined tissue obtained during that procedure and concluded she did not have breast cancer.

Instead, she was suffering from “a benign condition with features that are very similar to cancerous cells,” according to county documents.

Jimenez-Salgado filed a medical malpractice lawsuit, alleging the hospital was negligent in relying on the interpretation of the outside pathologists. She also claimed the breast reconstruction surgery was negligently performed.

The county acknowledged it failed to review the biopsy specimens, resulting in the unnecessary mastectomy.

The hospital has revised its policies to ensure that in-house pathologists review biopsy specimens obtained from outside facilities. It has also stopped sending patients to outside facilities for MRI directed biopsies.

In approving the settlement, the county supervisors also agreed to pay $24,756 of Jimenez-Salgado’s medical bills not covered by Medi-Cal, the state’s version of the federal Medicaid program.

An after-hours call seeking comment from Jimenez-Salgado’s attorney wasn’t immediately returned.

Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Vitaminwater revealed as non-healthy beverage by Coca-Cola’s own lawyers (opinion)

August 10th, 2010 . by admin

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Do you ever wonder things like “Who is actually gullible enough to think that Vitaminwater is healthy?” Although that question may seem demeaning or even arrogant, it turns out that the Coca-Cola company (which owns the Vitaminwater brand) is essentially asking that exact question.

How so? In response to a recent lawsuit against Coca-Cola filed by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), Coke’s attorneys replied in court briefings that, “…no consumer could reasonably be misled into thinking vitaminwater was a healthy beverage.”

Except, of course, millions of consumers were misled into believing precisely that. This illusion was helped in no small part by Coca-Cola’s advertising of Vitaminwater, which blatantly positions it as a health-enhancing beverage. Even the name itself implies that the product is made solely out of vitamins and water.

But of course it isn’t.

“Sugarwater” might be a better name

If Vitaminwater were accurately named, it would actually be called Sugarwater. Its first two ingredients are, not surprisingly, sugar and water (the sugar coming in the form of crystalline fructose, a processed sweetener that has been linked to health problems) (http://www.naturalnews.com/029371_f…).

In addition to the sugar and water, Vitaminwater contains a smattering of synthetic vitamin chemicals that any informed health consumer probably wouldn’t want to ingest. So in reality, Vitaminwater is really sugar water with the addition of synthetic chemicals that happen to be called “vitamins” (but which are not the natural, plant-based nutrients your body would greatly prefer).

So what we have now with Vitaminwater is a beverage that’s positioned and marketed as a health-enhancing beverage, yet its own corporate lawyers dismiss any notion that the beverage is “healthy.” How, then, can Coca-Cola get away with advertising Vitaminwater as a healthy beverage?

Simple: Because corporations use advertisements to lie to consumers. And virtually no one in the history of corporate advertising has mastered the art of deception better than Coca-Cola — a company whose products have contributed to untold numbers of diabetes victims while being positioned as cool, hip drinks that make you feel energized or inspired.

Coca-Cola isn’t really in the business of selling beverages, you see. It’s in the business of selling the illusion of happiness in a bottle or a can. Buy their products, say the advertisements, and you too can feel happiness (or freedom, or sexiness or whatever). But what Coca-Cola delivers isn’t really happiness at all: Many of Coke’s products deliver the liquid sugars, artificial chemical sweeteners and bone-dissolving acids (like phosphoric acid) that promote disease and suffering. And no reasonable person would equate degenerative disease with happiness.

Misleading name, misleading labels

Speaking of disease, how much sugar is actually in Vitaminwater? A lot more than you might think: While the label claims only 13 grams of sugar per serving, one bottle of vitamin water is actually 2.5 servings, meaning that you’re chugging down 32 grams of liquid sugars with every bottle.

That’s just one of the many “deceptive and unsubstantiated claims” pointed out by CSPI in its lawsuit against Coca-Cola. It is this lawsuit that resulted in Coke’s lawyers making the incredible statement that no reasonable person could possibly conclude Vitaminwater was a healthy beverage.

Lawyers, by the way, can argue absolutely anything — even if it makes no sense. And they can do it with a straight face, too. If you’re looking for a professional liar, hire a lawyer. Coca-Cola seems to already have its share working at their headquarters in Atlanta.

Using its lawyers, Coca-Cola tried to argue its way out of this CSPI lawsuit, but that effort was rejected by the courts. “A federal judge has denied Coca-Cola’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit over what the CSPI says are deceptive and unsubstantiated claims on the company’s “vitaminwater” line of soft drinks,” touts an article on the CSPI website (http://www.cspinet.org/new/20100723…)

That same announcement goes on to quote Judge John Gleeson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, who says “The names of the drinks, along with other statements on the label have the potential to reinforce a consumer’s mistaken belief that the product is comprised of only vitamins and water.”

CSPI’s litigation director Steve Gardner adds, “For too long, Coca-Cola has been exploiting Americans’ desire to eat and drink more healthfully by deceiving them into thinking that vitaminwater can actually prevent disease. In fact, vitaminwater is no more than non-carbonated soda, providing unnecessary added sugar and contributing to weight gain, obesity, diabetes, and other diseases. We look forward to representing all Americans whom Coke has deceived.”

Who really drinks Vitaminwater?

Reading all this, you might wonder who drinks Vitaminwater in the first place. I’ve never even tried the beverage myself because I read ingredients labels and I don’t drink liquid sugars.

But most consumers don’t read labels. Even if they attempted to, most consumers are simply unable to decode what food labels really mean. People simply believe whatever is most prominently displayed on the front of the package, which in this case are the two words “vitamin” and “water.”

On top of that, mainstream consumers are disturbingly gullible. If a product is positioned as being healthy, that’s what people believe it’s for, even if it makes no sense whatsoever. After all, why do so many people believe Slim-Fast will make them lose weight even though it’s made mostly from processed refined sugar?

Slim-Fast, by the way, never technically claims it’s a weight loss product. It dances around that claim with all sorts of other gray-area language that implies it is a weight loss product without making any direct claims. If pushed in the courts, its manufacturer would no doubt pull the same thing Coca-Cola just did and proclaim that no reasonable person could conclude that Slim-Fast is a weight loss product.

You see, big food companies are masters at making implied claims about their products that, upon closer inspection, are blatantly false. There are all sorts of false claims found on the labels of popular food products: A chocolate milk product made with sugar claims it “builds strong bones!” A liquid meal substitute sold in cans and made mostly with sugars and milk proteins claims to provide “balanced nutrition!” A product for diabetics claims to be “sugar free” but neglects to mention it’s sweetened with a chemical that may actually promote diabetes.

The list of examples like these is endless. And thanks to these food corporation deceptions, consumers are faced with a food product minefield when attempting to intelligently shop for foods.

That’s why several years ago I developed the Honest Food Guide (http://honestfoodguide.org), a free downloadable guide that explains which foods are truly good for your health (and which are not).

Download it now and check it out for yourself.

In the mean time, don’t buy Vitaminwater. Unless, of course, you think you could use 32 grams of liquid sugars and some synthetic vitamin chemicals in your diet. And if you somehow think that Vitaminwater is healthy, the Coca-Cola corporation thinks you are a fool.

Sources for this story include:
http://recipes.howstuffworks.com/vi…

http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/order_on…

http://www.cspinet.org/new/20100723…{SubscribeHealthRangerBlock}

Use of Household Cleaners Linked to Increased Risk of Breast Cancer

August 6th, 2010 . by admin

 

Use of Household Cleaners Linked to Increased Risk of Breast Cancer

(Beyond Pesticides, July 23, 2010) A new study published in BioMed’s online journal, Environmental Health, links endocrine disrupting pesticides and other chemicals in household cleaning products to an elevated risk of breast cancer. Researchers at the Silent Spring Institute in Newton, MA and Boston University found that women who use household cleaners more often have double the risk of breast cancer, compared to women who use household cleaners less frequently. The study includes over 1,500 women selected from Cape Cod, MA and found a correlation between cases of breast cancer and the number of women who reported using household cleaners, particularly solid, slow-release air fresheners when used more than seven times a year, and mold removers when used more than once a week.The antimicrobials, phthalates and alkylphenolic surfactants often found in mold and mildew products are associated with various health and environmental issues. The antimicrobial triclosan for example, can cause skin irritation, allergy susceptibility, bacterial and compounded antibiotic resistance, and dioxin that jeopardizes fragile aquatic ecosystems. The study highlights methylene chloride (in some fabric cleaners), nitrobenzene (soaps, polishes), perfluorinated compounds (stainresistant, waterproof coatings), phthalates (surfactants), alkylphenols (solvents), parabens (preservatives), triclosan, and polycyclic musks (fragrance) as ingredients of concern.

Past studies from the Silent Spring Institute have shown that many of the chemicals used in household cleaning products are endocrine disrupting compounds that produce mammary gland tumors in rats.

This study focuses on 787 women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1988 and 1995 and 721 controls from the Cape Cod, MA area. Through telephone interviews, researchers collected information about the participants’ family history of breast cancer, menstrual and reproductive history, height, weight, alcohol and tobacco use, physical activity, pharmaceutical hormone use, and education. They were also asked about five categories of cleaning products, including solid and spray air fresheners, surface cleaners, oven cleaners, and mold/mildew products, as well as 10 categories of pesticides in and around their homes, including insecticides, lawn care, herbicides, lice control, insect repellents, and pest control on pets.

Using predefined categories, the women reported on the frequency of their use of the different products and were then asked about their beliefs about factors that may contribute to breast cancer. These factors include heredity, diet, chemicals and pollutant in the air and water, and a woman’s reproductive or breastfeeding history. Details on the interview questions are posted on Silent Spring Institute’s website.

The researchers acknowledged and corrected for potential recall bias (for instance, a woman who believed chemicals contribute to breast cancer might falsely believe she used those products more frequently) by comparing the odds ratio of product use and beliefs about whether chemicals and pollutant contribute to breast cancer to the odds ratio for family history and beliefs about heredity.

However, researchers point out that self-reported product use has the potential to represent long-term exposure to a wide range of compounds and stated in their report, “Although exposure levels may be low and EDCs (endocrine-disrupting chemicals) are typically less potent than endogenous hormones, limited knowledge of product formulations, exposure levels, and the biological activity and toxicity of chemical constituents alone and in combination make it difficult to assess risks associated with product use.”

Confounders such as mammography use, medical radiations, lactation, hormone replacement therapy, oral contraceptive use, diethylstilbestrol exposure, body mass index, smoking, alcohol consumption, teen and adult physical activity, race, marital status, and religion were evaluated, but none changed the core adjusted odds ratio estimates by over 10%, so they were not included in the final analysis. Study participants are predominantly white (98%), 60-80 years of age (60%), and completed high school or higher education (94%).

Sandra Steingraber, Ph.D., a New York ecologist, cancer survivor and author of the books Living Downstream and Having Faith, told the Columbus Dispatch that she advises everyone to stop using chemical cleaners, and stick to least-toxic alternatives, such as baking soda and vinegar. Dr. Steingraber, who is a scholar in residence at Ithaca College stated, “I just see this as such an easy problem compared to a lot of things” but points to the new research as evidence that “the conversation is shifting now. We can’t just sort of look at the murky evidence on cancer and the environment and sort of set it aside because it’s too inscrutable.”

Linking the use of particular chemicals in our environment to cancer cases is indeed difficult to research, and the epidemiologists involved in this study recommend that “in order to avoid possible recall bias, the researchers recommend further study of cleaning products and breast cancer using prospective self-reports and measurements in environmental and biological media.”

Additionally, past studies covered by Beyond Pesticides suggest that overuse of disinfectants can be harmful, rather than beneficial to our health and the environment. Disinfectants tend to kill a wide variety of bacteria, reducing both “bad” bacteria associated with illness, as well as the “good” bacteria that perform useful functions in our environment and in our bodies. The overuse of antimicrobial chemicals has also been linked to the creation of drug-resistant bacteria, or “superbugs,” which are bacteria and viruses that have become resistant to the antimicrobial compounds and antibiotic drugs developed to control them.

You can reduce your risk by avoiding toxic pesticides and switching to more natural cleaning products as recommended by Beyond Pesticides in our 2007 issue of our School Pesticide Monitor. You can also find products free of the harmful antibacterial triclosan from our list of companies that have signed the pledge to be triclsoan-free. For more information, please see Beyond Pesticides’ antibacterial and antimicrobial page.

 

Share/Save/Bookmark

Cherry Strawberry Ice Cream

August 5th, 2010 . by admin


http://www.elanaspantry.com/cherry-strawberry-ice-cream/

strawberry cherry ice cream vegan gluten free

Given how hot it’s been around here lately, the boys have been jonesing for ice cream, and I’m more than happy to indulge them with my homemade, frozen treats.  They’ve been asking for a chocolate cherry ice cream, which may be coming here soon.  For now, enjoy this gluten free, dairy free Cherry Strawberry Ice Cream.
Read the rest of this entry »

The Truth About Antibiotics and Why They May KEEP You Sick

August 4th, 2010 . by admin
 by Kevin Donka, D.C.

Share

This is a time of year when many people find themselves challenged with upper respiratory infections. The symptoms associated with the clearing of these infections can last several weeks and can be very challenging. Many people eventually end up going to see their family medical doctor and most end up taking antibiotics even though the doctor never performs a culture to verify if the infection is viral or bacterial.

You may not know it, but the “Physician’s Desk Reference” clearly states that antibiotics should not be prescribed unless a culture reveals the presence of a bacterial infection. Just this past week, three different practice members came in and told me they were taking antibiotics without a culture being done.

One of these three people told me that her doctor must have guessed right because she was definitely feeling better since she had started taking the antibiotic. Her fever had diminished, her coughing had decreased and her energy had begun to return within 2 days of starting the medicine. Many people make this mistake of believing that because symptoms begin to disappear when taking a medicine that the medicine is the reason they are feeling better and that they are on their way to a “cure.”

You must understand that when you begin to see symptoms, it is really your body beginning to CLEAR the infection - the infection had already taken hold. Once symptoms appear, it means that your body’s Innate Wisdom has identified a problem and is taking steps to eliminate a problem. Now, let’s say your body is in full swing eliminating a virus. You have all the signs and symptoms – fever, headache, chills, lethargy, runny nose, cough, etc. Then you introduce an antibiotic – a powerful drug whose name literally means “against-life” – into your body. But you do NOT have a bacterial infection for this antibiotic to work on – only a viral infection, upon which antibiotics have no affect whatsoever.

Ask yourself which of these two – a virus or a chemical poison – is a more immediate threat to your well-being. The answer of course is that the antibiotic is a more urgent problem. As such, your body immediately takes steps to eliminate the poison (antibiotic). One of the things that the body’s Innate Intelligence does in order to accomplish this is to temporarily stop trying so hard to eliminate the virus. As a result, your symptoms begin to go away! Unfortunately, many misinterpret this as a sign that the antibiotic is making you “well.”

Don’t get me wrong – I am not saying you should never take an antibiotic. I am simply saying that all of the proper protocols must be followed in order to avoid doing more harm than good to your body, and our society. Numerous articles are being written on the “superbugs” we have created and are continuing to create due to the improper use of antibiotics.

Finally, realize that flies don’t cause garbage! You wouldn’t look at a pile of garbage and complain that the flies caused it! Flies can only live and thrive in an environment that is favorable for them to do so. Your body is normally strong and resistant to most outside stresses including viruses and bacteria. If an infection has occurred in your body it means that some process has been gradually changing your normally healthy and resistant environment into something more favorable for some critter to come calling and set up house.

Make sure to begin living a health-creating lifestyle right away including creating a peaceful environment, laughing as much as possible, deep breathing, lots of clean water, a high energy diet and a balance of movement and rest – including enough sleep and exercise. Last, but certainly not least, make sure you get your nerve system checked regularly by your chiropractor to ensure that your Life Force is flowing from above down and inside out as completely as possible.

For more, please visit www.kevindonka.com

What You Don’t know WILL Hurt You

August 3rd, 2010 . by admin

Join us for our FREE Nutrition Webinar
Tuesday, August 17
, 2010, 7PM EST

The market for diet drinks is larger than ever before.  Many diet programs rely heavily on artificial sweeteners to appease the North American sweet tooth. 

Historically, artificial sweeteners have been part of a public health experiment as very few long term studies have been done before their release into the food supply.  The newest and most popular sweeteners continue to follow this deadly trend.

If you or someone you know drink diet drinks – you cannot miss this webinar!

You will learn:

  • Why diet sodas are more hazardous to your health than “regular” sodas.
  • How artificial sweeteners are toxic to the body.
  • Which artificial sweeteners are highly chlorinated, and break down into dangerous chemicals in your body.
  • Why research is now showing that artificial sweeteners actually create hunger and give you even more cravings!
  • Artificial sweeteners have been linked to headaches, migraines, agitation, dizziness, diarrhea, fibromyalgia, muscle aches, intestinal cramping, lupus, MS and MS type symptoms, and much more.

If you or anyone you know has been using artificial sweeteners, such as Aspartame, Splenda, or Equal, be sure to attend this webinar and learn the nautral alternatives.

Hosted by : 
Dr. B.J. Hardick and Kimberly Roberto
Co-authors of Maximized Living Nutrition Plans

 

« Previous Entries


  • What other doctors have to say about Dr. Steve Hansen

    Dr. Steve Hansen is one of the few doctors who I would trust if I was in crisis.  He is one of the most knowledgable chiropractors I know.

    Dr. Suzanne Frye,D.C.

    Lancaster, CA

    Dr. Hansen is the Most proficient and experienced Bio-Cranial chiropractor that I know.  His compassion for his patients is unparralled.
    Santa Clarita California 

    Dr. Hansen takes the time to advance his education in natural healing methods.  As a result ihs patients always recieve cutting edge care.
    Denver, Colorado