Archive for the ‘general’ Category

Toenail fungus sham and disease-creep

magician

How do you make a bunch of money magically appear? I find it impossible, but it seems to be pretty easy if you are a pharmaceutical company. Here are just a few examples of how they do it:

  • Make a really expensive drug to treat a relatively minor problem. The average doctor is unaware of effective natural remedies for toenail fungus and may unwitting write prescriptions for the medication Jublia®. The maker spends hundreds of millions of dollars on television advertising to encourage patients to demand it. Unfortunately, the ads don’t mention that the drug been shown to cure at best fewer than 18% of cases after 48 weeks at a cost of something like $2,000 per toe! Even if the insurance copay was zero, the cost will come back to bite us indirectly. Oh, and there are side effects to medications. Low cost, safe, effective natural remedies for toenail fungus include: ozonated olive oil, oregano oil, tea tree oil, Listerine and even soaking in corn meal water or vinegar. Note: a persistent case of nail fungus might be a clue that there is a systemic problem with yeasts. Quiz. Information.
  • Give kickbacks to encourage prescription of medicines that people don’t need. For example, as reported by ABC news, the makers of Nexium just paid a $7.9 million fine for doing that type of thing. Acid blockers such as Nexium are being misrepresented in a way I can only describe as fraud. First, they don’t address the real cause of the problem. Also, since they are only approved safe for use for a few weeks, implying to doctors and consumers that they should be taken continually is wrong and highly dangerous. In my book on digestion, I detail many horrid potential side effects of long-term use of the drugs such as increased risk of hip fracture, dementia, pneumonia and c-difficile (hard to cure and potentially lethal diarrhea.)
  • Use back channels to create “disease-creep”.  How can pharmaceutical companies possibly amass the power to effect the changes below? Wisely, they started many decades ago to infiltrate and co-opt the entire system from medical schools and scientific journals to state medical boards, FDA, non-profit disease groups and Congress (2+ lobbyists per elected member). That is simply good business for them (for us…not so much). Disease-creep includes:

(a) Change disease risk cutoff points. For example, as pointed out in this shocking Seattle Times article, merely changing the definition of high blood pressure turned 35% more people into potential users of blood pressure medication. Lowering the cholesterol target from 240 to 200 increased the pool of prospects for cholesterol drugs by 86%! (I can’t even begin to calculate the dramatic sales-boosting effect of more recent changes.)

(b)  Give new names to old conditions. For example, PMS had been around forever and was treated mainly with natural remedies. However, changing the name to Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder (PMDD) made it a psychiatric problem and created a ton of new customers for Prozac. Likewise, chronic fatigue syndrome was real to its sufferers and natural medicine practitioners, but routinely trivialized by mainstream medicine. Legitimized now with a stuffy new name, “Systemic Exertion Intolerance Disease” (SEID), it is classified as a disease and drugs will be given. Sadly, the meds most likely will not address the gut imbalances, nutrient deficiencies, food sensitivities and other root causes.

(c)  Promote screening procedures. For example, mammograms and PSA tests result in more treatment of non-lethal cancers and therefore the use of more chemotherapy drugs. The newest push is genetic testing. (There is little notice paid to the power of nutrition and lifestyle to make genes behave better.) Simply informing people of genetic risk factors can panic them into risky treatments. As pointed out in this New America article, addressing the genetic risk might ultimately cause more deaths if the number who die from the treatments are considered.

  • Spread doubt about natural remedies. Using access to media and authorities, drug companies perpetuate the myth that supplements are neither researched nor regulated. I’ll tackle those issues at a later date.

Please be an informed consumer and watch out for the smoke and mirrors.

Heart health – 10 interesting snippets

Heart health

Happy Valentine’s Day and American Heart Month. There is a month or at least a day honoring virtually every part of the body and every health condition (May is Hepatitis Awareness Month, June is National Aphasia Awareness Month, etc.)…you’d think we’d be healthier by now!  The red symbols of heart health month are second in visibility to the most well-known disease/month—October/Breast Cancer. That is not logical given that heart disease actually kills 5 times as many women as breast cancer. (Click here for info form the Mayo Clinic on heart disease in women and symptoms to watch for.) Pink has simply been marketed much more aggressively.

If you ask the average person (or average doctor for that matter) what it takes to prevent heart disease, they will likely tell you it is about keeping cholesterol down. Unfortunately, that is just a small (and misleading) part of the real picture. If you have family history of heart disease; another reason to worry; or just don’t want to succumb to the biggest risk factor for an early death*, then you might want to read the articles in our Library on Heart Health and/or on Blood Pressure.

Actually, any of the articles in the library on health basics might be useful because the same needs and mistakes seem to be involved in most diseases. The news during disease months usually focuses on invasive testing, exotic procedures and medications rather than educating us about the fundamentals of building health and avoiding risks. I thought the following sampling of factors related to cardiovascular health might help make my point: 

I could list dozens more, but hopefully it is clear that what we do for the rest of the body helps the heart.

*The largest contributor to premature death is not a disease per se, but the side effects of medications and medical mistakes.

Vaccines revisited. More to the measles story.

Doctor Vaccinating Child Baby Flu Injection Shot I

First let me make it clear what I am NOT saying. I’m NOT telling people to refuse vaccines for themselves or their children. I can sympathize with the goals of each side of the debate. I am NOT going to talk about the question of vaccines and the claimed link to autism. However, I just don’t see how a person can make an informed decision without more facts, especially in the face of all the fear-mongering, bulling and shaming that is going on. Intelligent people who ask reasonable questions are belittled and told that there is no legitimate view other than that of those with the bullhorns. My aim here is simply to provide some viable options and food for thought so that we can discuss this issue like adults. Although the excitement today is about measles, the issues below really apply to all immunizations.

Vaccinations in general:

  • A Huffington post article points to renowned and respected medical experts who have concerns about vaccines, but who are routinely ignored by the mainstream media.

Options:

There are more than just the two answers (vaccinate or don’t) that are getting all the coverage. Many serious concerns can be handled by just changing how we immunize:

  • Wait longer to start immunizations. At least wait until infants have the immune capacity to benefit from the shots and deal with the effects.
  • Eliminate one of the risk factors in the vaccines, mercury. It is used as a preservative and an adjuvant (activator). This metal is toxic to the nervous system and shots without it are available.
  • Don’t give several immunization at one time. The problems with shots for Measles, Mumps and Rubella may stem mostly from them being given together as MMR.
  • Consider the homeopathic approach. It has all of the benefits and none of the risk factors of standard vaccines. Visit this site for some of the successful large scale research done on homeoprophylaxis around the world. Click here for our radio interview on the topic. See additional links below under Resources.
  • It seems quite likely that there are certain categories of children who are more susceptible to vaccine side effects, but scientists mask those differences whenever study results are lumped together as large populations. I think there is enough evidence to make it worth looking at least at those who are low in key nutrients (vitamin D, like B vitamins, and magnesium) and those who lack proper gut bacteria.
  • The media must stop pretending that there is no potential harm to vaccines and implying that anyone who asks questions is an idiot. The stories about children being perfectly fine before immunizations and becoming permanent zombies after them may be relatively rare, but they are real and heartbreaking. There obviously is a reason that the government maintains a substantial Federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund.

Measles:

Resources:

(Note, if you have an app that rates websites, don’t be surprised if virtually any alternative medicine site is flagged with a warning. It seems likely that drug companies and their so-called quack-busters are responsible for the bad reviews.)

Eggs, Label confusion & the cholesterol question

egg question

I seem to have a knee-jerk aversion to white foods (flour, sugar and Crisco®) and so, even though I know the color of the shell is just a reflection of the breed of chicken, I instinctively gravitate to brown eggs (except for Easter eggs). That’s just my silly prejudice. However, I’ve recently become aware of more relevant misleading flim-flam in the marketing of eggs. In fact, I think that egg cartons are one of the most confusing choices in the grocery store.

Let’s start with the assumption that we all probably want the most nutritious eggs and that none of us wants to eat unnecessary drugs and chemicals or to encourage cruelty to animals. So, we are drawn to humble paper cartons labeled with “natural” and “farm fresh”. I know that legally those mean nothing, but what about “cage-free” and some of the other descriptors? I appreciated TIME Magazine for writing an article on the subject in the February 2nd edition (2015). Unfortunately, since the online version is only available to subscribers, I will have to write my own:

  • Cage-free. That sounds good, but the chickens can still be smushed together (think elevator at quitting time on Friday) on the floor of a huge factory building, never seeing the light of day. I suspect that the big agribusiness chicken farmers weren’t being kind when they eliminated cages. It is likely they simply found it to be more profitable and then claimed the change as a sales point. There are no restrictions in this definition regarding feed, antibiotics or hormones.
  • Free-range. Are we getting somewhere now? At least these animals have a door to the outside world if they choose to use it. We can hope that these breeders might be a little more enlightened and inclined to go natural, but there is no requirement regarding feed or drugs. In California there is a special classification (SEFS) which assures that hens can at least turn around and spread their wings.
  • Pasture-raised. Similar to free-range, the definition is not legally binding. But, (if certified by voluntary associations) that can mean that hens may visit a roughly 10′ x 11′ patch of pasture part of the day.
  • Vegetarian. This usually means only that no animal products are put into the feed. Unfortunately, it likely also guarantees that the birds don’t get to go outside and eat what they naturally would…including bugs (which are obviously animal).
  • Omega-3 enriched. I’m all for giving chickens flax seeds or other sources of anti-inflammatory omega-3’s to counteract the inflammatory omega-6 which predominates in grain feed. Chickens scratching around in nature eating their instinctive diet get omega-3 without even trying. However, enhanced eggs can still come from penned up drugged birds eating feed containing pesticides.
  • USDA Certified Organic. Other than buying eggs straight from a farm where you can see how the chickens are raised, this seems to me to be the most reliable choice. Government inspectors assure that hens are not caged; have outdoor access; and are given vegetarian feed free of antibiotics and pesticides. There could be questions about animal welfare as raised by the Humane Society, but this is a good start. I believe organic is the best choice available to most consumers.

Wow. Is it any wonder that so many people are now raising their own chickens…even in the city? They also find that their home grown eggs taste better.

Eggs are a great source of complete protein and, in fact, they contain all the nutrients needed to build a whole animal! Very few people need to worry about the cholesterol in eggs because approximately 75% of the cholesterol in our arteries is made in the liver. When we eat more cholesterol, the liver makes less…that is unless we confuse it with too much sugar.

What is a quack? Blood pressure tips

 Rubber Duck Against The Flow

For many decades whenever a doctor has dared to prescribe vitamins and other natural approaches, he or she risks being called a “quack” by the establishment…never mind that the doctor may have been recommending the very best approach. In fact, that doctor may well have been practicing what I consider the highest quality medicine which is now known as functional medicine. According to the Institute for Functional Medicine (functionalmedicine.org), “Functional Medicine addresses the underlying causes of disease, using a systems-oriented approach and engaging both patient and practitioner in a therapeutic partnership.” 

Although there is training specific to functional medicine, I use the term as a shorthand to cover a broader scope of disciplines. These methods have much in common and contrast with the typical mainstream medical approach of just prescribing drugs to suppress symptoms. Integrative medicine, naturopathic medicine, nutrition-based preventive medicine, clinical nutrition and chiropractic are all alternatives that share the goal of finding and fixing the root cause of problems…or better yet, preventing them in the first place. These systems have gained valuable insight from ancient gentle arts such as Traditional Chinese Medicine, Ayurveda (from India) and Native American Shaman healing. Practices that have worked for thousands of years shouldn’t be discounted simply because they didn’t come out of a white coat Western laboratory. The functional approach is gaining traction in mainstream medicine as evidenced by the fact that the prestigious Cleveland Clinic has opened a Center for Functional Medicine.

Here is an example of the difference I’m talking about: High blood pressure is obviously a risk factor for stroke and kidney disease. The conventional approach is to simply prescribe a drug such as Lisinopril. That may well bring down the blood pressure, but in the process, the patient might well suffer any one of a number of drug side effects which might generate more prescriptions. A functional medicine practitioner might first try any one or all of the following natural approaches to lowering blood pressure: exercise, smoking cessation, weight loss, salt intake reduction, increase in vegetable intake and supplementation with magnesium (this is a new study), vitamin D, probiotics, fish oil, Kyolic Aged Garlic complex #109 and others. All of the above will likely lower blood pressure and each will provide extra benefits in other parts of the body. Because they all work in different ways, they can be combined and thereby provide a natural synergy. (Read my article on 6 ways to lower blood pressure.)

Symptoms send people to the doctor where they most likely will receive a prescription for a medication–and not just because the doctor suggests it. We patients might demand it because we’ve been well trained to have a knee-jerk reaction: if we have symptom, we need drug! However, besides the fact that drugs don’t usually fix the root cause of the problem, drug side effects are often soft peddled by drug company reps and therefore by doctors. Television drug advertising purposely distracts our attention from the long list of side effects (some lethal) by showing us how much better life is when we are medicated.

It makes sense to me that when a symptom appears, instead of asking which drug we should take for it, we should ask which drug might be the cause. That brings me back to the question of what should define a doctor a quack. Click here to read my short article on the subject.  

Fluoride dangers

Hand drawing the symbol for the chemical element fluorine

Our website page on Toxins is now up. Yay! (Each of these is a labor of love.) It has some information and links regarding mercury, pesticides, BPA, smoking, water, radiation and fluoride–the one I must discuss today.

If fluoridation of drinking water was a brand new idea seeking FDA approval, I contend that for the following reasons the agency would never allow it :

  • They already require a warning on fluoride toothpaste instructing users to call the poison control center if swallowed.
  • Too little is known about health effects of the constant exposure to fluoride over decades. For example, more study is needed on indications that fluoridation may accelerate certain cancers as shown in this study. 
  • The evidence in this study that fluoride in water interferes with brain function would have to be investigated. 
  • Fluoride blocks the mineral iodine that our thyroid glands need. Therefore, the agency would be concerned that fluoridation might cause trouble with thyroid function. (Here is one study. Others are needed.) 
  • FDA demands precise dosing of medicines. That is not possible in this case because quantities of fluoride that naturally occur in water before treatment varies so widely. Also, obviously, people don’t all consume the same amount of water. 
  • Excess fluoride causes pitting and staining of teeth.

In light of the seriousness of these issues and the fact that fluoride acts mainly topically anyway, the agency would be right to suggest tooth decay be addressed directly with topical application. That would target those individuals who are actually at risk rather than force medication on an entire population including toothless infants, denture-wearing adults, vulnerable elderly persons, cancer patients, dogs, cats and pet turtles.

Notes and Resources:

  • Most home water filters do not remove fluoride and often bottled water is made from local tap water only lightly filtered for flavor. 

​Newspapers don’t help

Back in May I objected to a Dallas Morning News columnist labeling citizens as “cranks” because they expressed their concerns to the city council over fluoride being added to public drinking water. Then another columnist in the same paper called a hero and friend of mine a “clod” for daring to speak out about the issue. Howard Garrett, the Dirt Doctor, is all about saving us from a toxic planet. (It was an opinion piece, but still, I really don’t like the idea of my newspaper calling intelligent well-intentioned citizens ugly names just because they disagree with them.)

The newspaper (like many others) has obviously decided to side with the establishment. Hmm…didn’t the establishment tell us in the 1950’s and 60’s that it was a good idea to put radioactive radium up noses for chronic sinus infections? (Not surprisingly cancer, thyroid trouble, brittle teeth and other problems appeared years later.) And, they said that Vioxx was a fine drug for arthritis. (It was later withdrawn because it killed more people than it was expected to.) I could go on. While we still have some freedom of the press in this country, I want to remind our readers that there is another side to this fluoride story.

FluorideAlert.org is a useful website that lists facts that we should be aware of in order to make an informed decision. That site notes: “…comprehensive data from the World Health Organization reveals that there is no discernible difference in tooth decay between the minority of western nations that fluoridate water, and the majority that do not. In fact, the tooth decay rates in many non-fluoridated countries are now lower than the tooth decay rates in fluoridated ones.”

So, apparently we don’t have a better record on tooth decay, but we do have more people suffering with degenerative disease than other countries. Could there be a connection? One of our radio guests, renowned nutritionist, pharmacist and clinician, Jim LaValle, seemed to be choking back outright laughter when I asked him if there was a nutritional need for fluoride that I had overlooked. His answer was an emphatic “No”. He explained that fluoride competes in the body with iodine which we desperately need to make thyroid hormone. Click here for more on that topic.

Excess fluoride can kill. Studies of toxicity for virtually all chemicals are done by testing what happens when an animal gets too much all at once. But, in murder mysteries the villains escape detection by poisoning their victims slowly, a little bit at a time. We have to remember that we also get fluoride naturally in some foods, tea and wine. Worse yet, we are also getting loads of other toxins from multiple sources and those have an additive effect. Again, I suggest visiting our website page on Toxins.

Added Sugar – More than empty calories!

lots of various brown sugar - food and drink

Yes, it is unkind of me to write about this topic just after the annual Oct-Jan sugarfest, but in light of news, I must. Added sugar is apparently much more than non-nourishing calories…and not in a good way. Researchers at the University of California in San Francisco reviewed 8,000 scientific papers regarding the link between added sugar and chronic disease. These scientists are on pretty solid ground when they declare that this pervasive food ingredient is a major contributor to the escalating trends in fatty liver disease, type 2 diabetes, “syndrome X”, heart disease and of course, obesity. (There is a growing belief that cancer and Alzheimer’s disease should be included on that list.)

Understand that we are just talking here about added sugars, not those that occur naturally for example in an apple. The obvious sources of added sugar are the likes of candy, cookies, cake, pies, toaster pastries and donuts. But, the worst offenders are sweet drinks such as sodas, sports and energy beverages. Although they aren’t usually mentioned, we shouldn’t overlook coffee drinks–a Starbucks® Venti Caramel Macchiato is loaded with 10 teaspoons of sugar! Does it matter if the sweetener is cane sugar, beet sugar, brown sugar, raw sugar, etc.? No, not really…and get this: added sugars go by another 57 names!

In a Chicago Tribune article, Barbara Sadick said that the lead researcher in that massive scientific review, Laura A. Schmidt, PhD, explained that sugars are added to almost 75% of all packaged food products.

Here are some other shocking tidbits from the article:

•    “[Dr. Dean Schillinger] pointed out that during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, 1,500 American soldiers lost a limb in combat. In that same period, 1.5 million people in the U.S. lost limbs to amputations from Type 2 diabetes, a preventable disease.”

•    “[Pediatric endocrinologist Robert Lustig, author of Fat Chance: Beating the Odds Against Sugar, Processed Food, Obesity, and Disease] said that more than half of the U.S. population is sick with metabolic syndrome, a group of risk factors for chronic diseases such as heart disease, diabetes and liver disease that are directly related to the excessive consumption of added sugars in the Western diet.”

Learn more in my article on sugars and at SugarScience.org.

Don’t count on the FDA to offer real guidance on food labels any time soon. Although the total grams of sugar are listed in the Nutrition Facts Panel, we are not informed about which are naturally-occurring or added sugars. Most importantly, we aren’t told what constitutes a safe daily intake of sugar. Given that even a relatively small amount can be harmful, the lobbyists for Nabisco, Kellogg’s, Generals Mills, Nestle, etc. will likely stall any effort to put warnings on labels for decades.

While we are waiting for food policies, economics and market factors to become more health-supportive, we had better take matters into our own hands. Perhaps instead of worrying about whether to eat a diet that is strictly defined as low carb, low fat, paleo, etc., we should just work at eliminating added sugar—added sugar is not a significant part of any type of diet that has been touted as healthful. It may be most practical to aim for zero added sugar because we will probably still get a lot accidentally. Read more in my article on how sugar spikes our blood sugar and ways to avoid those problems. 

Hangover prevention and remedies

Man Nursing A Hangover Holding An Ice Pack

It is party time. Fun, fun, fun. But, why waste the precious next day with the headache, upset stomach and fatigue of a hangover? Click here for my article about the good and bad effects of alcohol. But back to preventing/treating a hangover the natural way:

1.  The most sure fire protection is of course to stay sober. Having a New Year’s party? For toasting make festive Martinelli’s Sparkling Cider available at least for abstainers and pregnant women.

2.  Tricks to pace yourself. Alcohol is absorbed almost instantly and because it is a good solvent, it very quickly affects all parts of the body, especially the brain. Since it takes the liver 1-2 hours to properly process one drink, slowing the alcohol absorption down with food in your stomach is quite helpful. Alternating alcoholic beverages with other beverages gives the liver a fighting chance to keep up. (A martini glass of water looks just like a martini and helps avoid the dehydration that is a big cause of hangovers!) Alternating drinks seems easier than just trying to drink slowly, especially if the snacks are salty. Don’t let someone else keep your glass full because it is too easy to lose track.

3.  Sidestep side effects. Sugary drinks seem to make matters worse, so consider sticking with non-sweet choices.

4.  Take a remedy before you go to bed. In the morning you will be amazed at how much better you feel. (The glass of water that goes with each of these remedies is extra help.)

  • RU-21. I know about this product because friends of mine in California own the company. The formula was created by the Russian Academy of Sciences to help spies keep their heads straight while drinking. In addition to nutrients that replace those lost due to the alcohol and antioxidants to help with the free radical damage, it also contains succinic acid. That is a fascinating substance (also found in the menopause/weight loss product Amberen) that improves cellular communication.
  • Oxylent vitamin/mineral effervescent powder is a great daily multiple vitamin/mineral that you may well have in the house already.
  • Emergen-C is not nearly as good for regular use as Oxylent, but is more widely available.

5.  “Hair off the dog that bit you” theory. Drinking in the morning (e.g. Mimosas or Bloody Marys) simply delays the evitable by making you slightly drunk again so you don’t know how bad you feel.

6. Drinking and driving. Is there a worse idea? Cab fare, even if outrageously high might be the best investment you ever make.

Holiday wishes

merry christmas

Wishing you and your loved ones wonderfully safe

and meaningful holidays. Pray for peace.

Thank you for your support of Healthy by Nature’s mission.

Smelling your way to Health

Scientists in England believe that something in the odor of rotten eggs and noxious human toots may protect the important little powerhouses of our cells (mitochondria) from damage. That in turn would protect us from a variety of degenerative diseases such as high blood pressure to name just one. Time article and the Study. The beneficial smell is liberated from sulfur-containing foods like eggs, broccoli and garlic by our good bacteria. So, protect mitochondria by eating health foods and taking probiotics.


Healthy By Nature Show