Preventing Health Defects in Children

      No Comments on Preventing Health Defects in Children

A vitamin supplement composed of several different forms of folate may help prevent or even treat the brain defect hydrocephalus in children, according to a study conducted by researchers from the universities of Lancaster and Manchester, England, and published in the Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology.

“Hydrocephalus can cause severe disability and learning difficulties, so the possibility of prevention through a specific vitamin supplement is exciting,” said Andrew Russell, head of the Association for Spina Bifida and Hydrocephalus.

In hydrocephalus, cerebrospinal fluid abnormally gathers in the brain’s cavities, placing pressure on the tissues and leading to neurological dysfunction. Symptoms include an unusually large head, irritability, sleepiness, vomiting, drooping eyes, verbal aggression, hyperactivity and other abnormal behavior, and even seizures.

There is currently no cure for the condition, which is normally treated by installing shunt to divert the fluid from the brain to the heart or abdomen. These shunts must be cleaned with several surgeries throughout a lifetime, however, to prevent blockage and infection.

In the current study, researchers found that a folate mixture led to significant reductions in the rates of fluid buildup in the brains of hydrocephalic rats. They also found that the symptom’s conditions might come less from pressure caused by cerebrospinal fluid, and more from its chemical composition.

“Cerebrospinal fluid is not a liquid which simply cushions the brain and carries chemicals around it,” lead researcher Jaleel Miyan said. “It is actively produced and transported and plays an essential biological role in developing the brain.”

The researchers are now seeking to partner with a pharmaceutical company that can make the supplement into a pill, which can then be used in human clinical trials.

Folic acid, the naturally occurring form of folate, is known to prevent against neural tube defects such as spina bifida but has not proven effective in preventing hydrocephalus.

“There are so few things we can currently do to decrease the incidence of birth defects so these findings are really to be welcomed,” said Imogen Montague of the United Kingdom’s Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
It’s official: Vitamin D deficiency is so widespread in U.S. children that it poses a huge threat to the future health of an entire generation. A new study published in the journal Pediatrics paints a disturbing picture of vitamin D deficiency across the population of children aged 1 through 21. Three-fourths of young African American children, for example, are deficient in vitamin D. Much the same pattern holds true for Mexican American children. Even white kids, with their fairer skin and greater vitamin D production, hit the charts with 50% – 60% deficiency, depending on the age group.

Of course, in classic medical doublespeak style, health researchers don’t actually call it “deficiency.” (Because that would trigger a whole new urgency to correct the problem.) Instead, they call it “vitamin D insufficiency,” while reserving the term “deficiency” for children who have virtually no vitamin D in their blood whatsoever.

Of course, “insufficient” means “deficient” in the real world, since kids who are now labeled as “insufficient” in vitamin D are, of course, actually quite deficient in the nutrient. And keep in mind that these frighteningly common vitamin D deficiencies exist even when the accepted standards of vitamin D levels in the blood are artificially low to begin with. If you use real numbers of the vitamin D levels required for peak human performance, the truth is that as many as 90 percent of U.S. children are chronically deficient in vitamin D.

“It’s astounding,” said Michal L. Melamed of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, in a Washington Post report (source below). “At first, we couldn’t believe the numbers. I think it’s very worrisome.” But why are American kids so deficient in vitamin D in the first place?
The answer, of course, is because kids are sunlight deficient. And that’s due to a few reasons: First, too many kids today spend most of their hours in front of computers, televisions or gaming consoles. The live almost like vampires, staying awake all night, sleeping during the day, living off the flesh of other creatures (beef jerky and hamburgers…).

Many of their parents, too, are part of the problem. Today’s moms seem terrified that their kids might actually experience “the outdoors” for more than a few moments. They wait with air-conditioned cars at the school bus stops, then hustle their kids into pre-cooled cars to drive the quarter mile back to their artificially air-conditioned homes. Sunlight almost never touches these kids (they might turn to dust).

The sunscreen industry also shares some blame in all this, as it thrives on the silly idea that sunlight is bad for children and that all kids need to be smothered in sunscreen lotions before venturing outdoors. (Of course, they never admit their own sunscreen products are filled with cancer-causing chemicals in the first place…) Above all, the medical establishment is to blame for vitamin D deficiency. Rather than teaching parents and children about the importance of vitamin D, they seem to have declared a blackout on most useful information about the nutrient, preferring instead to prescribe toxic pharmaceutical drugs to treat the symptoms of vitamin D deficiency. Osteoporosis drugs, in particular, are made virtually obsolete by vitamin D alone. That’s why you don’t see any drug companies talking about vitamin D — it would destroy osteoporosis drug sales!
The entire “sick care” industry (including Big Pharma) actually depends on widespread nutritional deficiencies in order to create repeat business. Vitamin D deficiency, of course, figures prominently in this equation: It promotes cancer, bone loss, obesity, depression and heart disease. It’s no coincidence that these are some of the biggest profit earners for drug companies.
I wonder what the statistics are for Asian children? It might be a good idea for parents to get healthy before they have children.

be well

Dr Sundardas

www.naturaltherapies.com/cell rejuvenation program.htm

Protecting the Male Reproductive System

      1 Comment on Protecting the Male Reproductive System

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning a few years ago that pregnant women taking the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant paroxetine risk giving birth to infants with major birth defects, including heart abnormalities Now comes word that the same drug (sold as Paxil, Paxil CR, Seroxat, Pexeva, and generic paroxetine hydrochloride) carries another danger that could keep babies from being born in the first place. A new study just published in the online edition of the journal Fertility and Sterility concludes as many as fifty percent of all men taking the antidepressant could have damaged sperm and compromised fertility.

New York Presbyterian Hospital and Weill Cornell Medical Center researchers followed 35 healthy male volunteers who took paroxetine for five weeks. Then sperm samples from the men were studied using an assay called terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) to evaluate whether there were missing pieces of genetic code in the sperm DNA. This condition, know as DNA fragmentation, is associated with reproductive problems.

The results? The percentage of men with abnormal DNA fragmentation soared from less than 10 percent to 50 percent while taking the antidepressant. This is a crucial finding because DNA fragmentation has long been known to correlate with an increased risk of birth defects, poor fertility and unsuccessful pregnancy outcomes — even when high tech, extraordinarily expensive fertility enhancing techniques such as in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection are used.

The study, one of the first scientific investigations into the effect of SSRIs on sperm quality, also confirmed that paroxetine impairs sexual function. More than a third of the research subjects reported significant changes in erectile function and about half had difficulty ejaculating.

“It’s fairly well known that SSRI antidepressants negatively impact erectile function and ejaculation. This study goes one step further, demonstrating that they can cause a major increase in genetic damage to sperm,” Dr. Peter Schlegel, the study’s senior author and chairman of the Department of Urology and professor of reproductive medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College, explained in a statement to the media. “Although this study doesn’t look directly at fertility, we can infer that as many as half of men taking SSRIs have a reduced ability to conceive. These men should talk with their physician about their treatment options, including non-SSRI depression medications.”

The scientists could not identify the exact way the SSRI caused the DNA fragmentation, but the evidence strongly suggests the drug slows sperm as it moves through the male reproductive tract from the testis to the ejaculatory ducts. When this happens, the sluggish sperm grows old and its DNA becomes damaged. “This is a new concept for how drugs can affect fertility and sperm. In most cases, it was previously assumed that a drug damaged sperm production, so the concept that sperm transport could be affected is novel,” Dr. Schlegel stated.

The study contains some good news for men currently on Paxil and related drugs who may be concerned about their fertility. All the changes the researchers found appeared to be totally reversible. Specifically, normal levels of sexual function and DNA fragmentation both returned to normal one month after discontinuation of the drug.

A higher dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids may protect men from prostate cancer even if they have a genetic predisposition to the disease, researchers have found.

“We detected strong protective associations between increasing intake of long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and more advanced prostate cancer,” said lead researcher John S. Witte. “These fatty acids are primarily from dark fish such as salmon.”

“And the decrease in risk may be even more pronounced if one has a high-risk genetic variant,” he said.

In a study published in the journal Clinical Cancer Research, Witte and colleagues compared the diets and genetic profiles of 466 men suffering from aggressive prostate cancer with those of 478 healthy men of similar age and ethnic distribution. Average participant age was 65, and cancer patients were recruited an average of 4.7 months after diagnosis. Healthy controls were recruited from among men undergoing standard annual health checkups.

The researchers focused only on aggressive tumors because these represent the most dangerous form of the disease. Many men with non-aggressive, slow-growing tumors die of other causes before ever experiencing any cancer symptoms.

Researchers had all participants fill out food frequency questionnaires, classifying their intake of various kinds of fish as “never,” “one to three times per month,” or “one or more times per week.” All men were screened for nine different mutations of the cox-2 gene. These variables were then analyzed for their relationship with prostate cancer, adjusting for other known risk factors such as smoking, obesity, family cancer history and prior prostate screening results.

The study was conducted by researchers from the Institute for Human Genetics, University of California and University of Southern California, and funded by the National Institute of Health and a dean’s grant from Laval University McLaughlin.

The researchers found that men with cancer had a significantly higher intake of calories, fat and linoleic acid (an omega-6) than healthy men. They had a significantly lower intake of omega-3s, shellfish and dark fish.

Men who ate dark fish one to three times a month had a 36 percent lower chance of developing an aggressive prostate cancer than those who ate it rarely or never, while those who ate such fish once a week or more had a 63 percent lower risk.

“The strongest effect was seen from eating dark fish such as salmon one or more times per week,” Witte said.

The researchers found that men with a particular cox-2 gene variant, rs4647310, had 5.5-times the risk of aggressive prostate cancer as men without that variant. This elevated risk was not seen, however, among men with a high omega-3 intake.

“Men with low intake of dark fish and the high-risk variant had a substantially increased risk of more advanced prostate cancer,” Witte said.

Omega-3s are believed to decrease the risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and autoimmune disorders, and to improve cognitive health. The mechanisms for these benefits are not well understood, but are believed, in some cases, to be linked to reduced inflammation.

The cox-2 gene is known to play a role in prostate inflammation, a risk factor for prostate cancer.

For many years, we have been doing a Natural Fertility Program for couples who are delighted with the results.

Be well

Dr Sundardas

http://www.naturaltherapies.com/nfp.htm

Toxic Vaccines

      No Comments on Toxic Vaccines

To most people, vaccines sound medically harmless. “They’re good for you!” say the doctors and drug companies, but they never really talk about what’s in those vaccines. There’s a good reason for that: If people knew what was really in those vaccines, they would never allow themselves to be injected with them.

Vaccine production is a disgusting procedure. To begin, one must first acquire the disease germ — a toxic bacterium or a live virus. To make a “live” vaccine, the live virus must be attenuated, or weakened for human use. This is accomplished by serial passage — passing the virus through animal tissue several times to reduce its potency. For example, measles virus is passed through chick embryos, polio virus through monkey kidneys, and the rubella virus through human diploid cells — the dissected organs of an aborted fetus! “Killed” vaccines are “inactivated” through heat, radiation, or chemicals.

The weakened germ must then be strengthened with adjuvants (antibody boosters) and stabilizers. This is done by adding drugs, antibiotics, and toxic disinfectants to the concoction: neomycin, streptomycin, sodium chloride, sodium hydroxide, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum hydrochloride, sorbitol, hydrolyzed gelatin, formaldehyde, and thimerosal (a mercury derivative).

Aluminum, formaldehyde, and mercury are extremely toxic substances with a long history of documented hazardous effects. Studies confirm again and again that microscopic doses of these substances can lead to cancer, neurological damage, and death. Yet, each of them may be found in childhood vaccines.

In addition to the deliberately planned additives, unanticipated matter may contaminate the shots. For example, during serial passage of the virus through animal cells, animal RNA and DNA – foreign genetic material — is transferred from one host to another. Because this biological matter is injected directly into the body, researchers say it can change our genetic makeup.

Undetected animal viruses may jump the species barrier as well. This is exactly what happened during the 1950s and 1960s when millions of people were infected with polio vaccines that were contaminated with the SV-40 virus undetected in the monkey organs used to prepare the vaccines. SV-40 (Simian Virus #40 — the 40th such virus detected since researchers began looking), is considered a powerful immunosuppressor and trigger for HIV, the name given to the AIDS virus. It is said to cause a clinical condition similar to AIDS, and has been found in brain tumors, leukemia, and other human cancers as well. Researchers consider it to be a cancer-causing virus.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Modernization Act of 1997 called for the FDA to review and assess the risk of mercury containing food and drugs. In line with this review, U.S. vaccine manufacturers responded to a December 1998 and April 1999 FDA request to provide more detailed information about the thimerosal content of their preparations which include this compound as a preservative. Thimerosal has been used as an additive to biologics and vaccines since the 1930’s.Some but not all of the vaccines recommended routinely for children in the United States contain thimerosal. As a result.some children could be exposed to a cumulative level of mercury over the first six months of life that and there is the riskof neuro-developmental effects

The Public Health Service, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and vaccine manufacturers agree that thimerosal-containing vaccines should be removed as soon as possible. Similar conclusions were reached in 1998 in a meeting attended by European regulatory agencies, the European vaccine manufacturers, and the US FDA which examined the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines produced or sold in European countries.

A 1994 study found that children diagnosed with asthma (a respiratory ailment not unlike SIDS) were five times more likely than not to have received pertussis vaccine. Another study found that babies die at a rate eight times greater than normal within three days after getting a DPT shot. The three primary doses of DPT are given at two months, four months, and six months. About 85% of SIDS cases occur at one through six months, with the peak incidence at age two to four months.

In a recent scientific study of SIDS, episodes of apnea (cessation of breathing) and hypopnea (abnormally shallow breathing) were measured before and after DPT vaccinations. “Cotwatch” (a precise breathing monitor) was used, and the computer printouts it generated (in integrals of the weighted apnea-hypopnea density — WAHD) were analyzed. The data clearly shows that vaccination caused an extraordinary increase in episodes where breathing either nearly ceased or stopped completely. These episodes continued for months following vaccinations. Dr. Viera Scheibner, the author of the study, concluded that “vaccination is the single most prevalent and most preventable cause of infant deaths.”

In another study of 103 children who died of SIDS, Dr. William Torch, of the University of Nevada School of Medicine at Reno, found that more than two-thirds had been vaccinated with DPT prior to death. Of these, 6.5 percent died within 12 hours of vaccination; 13 percent within 24 hours; 26 percent within three days; and 37, 61, and 70 percent within one, two, and three weeks, respectively He also found that SIDS frequencies have a bimodal-peak occurrence at two and four months — the same ages when initial doses of DPT are administered to infants.
Aside from the dangerous ingredients many people already know about (like squalene or thimerosal), one of the key ingredients used in flu vaccines (including the vaccines being prepared for the swine flu pandemic) is the diseased flesh of African Green Monkeys. This is revealed in U.S. patent No. 5911998 – Method of producing a virus vaccine from an African green monkey kidney cell line. (http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5…)

As this patent readily explains, ingredients used in the vaccine are derived from the kidneys of African Green Monkeys who are first infected with the virus, then allowed to fester the disease, and then are killed so that their diseased organs can be used make vaccine ingredients. This is done in a cruel, inhumane “flesh factory” environment where the monkeys are subjected to a process that includes “incubating said inoculated cell line to permit proliferation of said virus.” Then: “harvesting the virus resulting from step (c); and… (ii) preparing a vaccine from the harvested virus.”
Vaccines anyone?

be well
Dr Sundardas

Nutrition that reduces Cancer.

      3 Comments on Nutrition that reduces Cancer.

What if a substance was found that normalizes out-of-control cell growth? The result could be a way to treat and prevent cancer. And a new study offers hope that discovery may have already been made. Scientists from the University of Chicago have just published groundbreaking research in the journal Cell which concludes a powerful compound exists that can restore a healthy balance to cell processes. It’s not a new chemotherapy agent or drug but one derived from nature — retinoic acid, a derivative of vitamin A.

According to the American Cancer Society, estrogen fuels the growth of two out of three breast cancers. The female hormone can spur on cancer by altering the expression of certain genes, resulting in breast cells that become malignant and proliferate. The University of Chicago study found that retinoic acid can also alter these same estrogen-sensitive genes. But instead of causing cells to grow without restraint, a hallmark of cancer, retinoic acid restored normal balance to the cells and inhibited their growth.

“This work reveals important insights on the interplay between vitamin A and estrogen action,” said Myles Brown, MD, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and the Dana Farber Cancer Institute, in a statement to the media. “These insights will hopefully lead to new approaches for the prevention and treatment of the most common form of breast cancer.”

Retinoic acid has already demonstrated cancer fighting effects in previous studies and it is currently used to treat a rare form of leukemia. In addition, earlier research has associated retinoic acid with the halting of breast cancer cell proliferation.

For the new study, Kevin White, PhD, professor of human genetics and director of the Institute for Genomics and System Biology at the University of Chicago, and colleagues focused on documenting cell receptors for the vitamin A derivative. They used a process dubbed ChIP-chip analysis that combines chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP), which locates where the retinoic acid receptors are bound to the genome, with micro-array gene-chip analysis, which measures the expression levels of specific genes.

This merging of techniques allowed the scientists to map out the complete genetic effects of retinoic acid and its receptors in a cell line provided by patients who had estrogen-fueled breast cancers. The results showed that 39 percent of the genomic regions bound by the estrogen receptor known as alpha overlapped with the estrogen receptors bound by retinoic acid.What’s more, they discovered that estrogen and retinoic acids receptors often competed to activate or repress many of the same genes. For example, estrogen increased expression of the same 139 genes that retinoic repressed and retinoic acid activated 185 genes that estrogen repressed. For approximately140 genes, estrogen and retinoic acid had the same effect.

So what does all this mean? As the scientists explained in their press statement, they now have evidence that estrogen and retinoic acid carry on a kind of “cross talk”. So, although they can have opposite effects, certain estrogen and retinoic acid receptors on cells activate each other and normalize each other. That provides what the researchers call “an additional level of control for achieving a balanced regulation of expression.”

One of the most effective naturally occurring weapons against cancer is, like most healthy things, something many of us are not getting enough of. The mineral selenium has been shown in multiple studies to be an effective tool in warding off various types of cancer, including breast, esophageal, stomach, prostate, liver and bladder cancers. Not many people get the recommended dose of 200 micrograms a day. Most Americans only get between 60 and 100 micrograms of selenium daily from dietary sources, according to the Life Extension Foundation’s Disease Prevention and Treatment. That means daily supplements might be worth considering.

Today, research shows selenium, especially when used in conjunction with vitamin C, vitamin E and beta-carotene, works to block chemical reactions that create free radicals in the body (which can damage DNA and cause degenerative change in cells, leading to cancer). Selenium also helps stop damaged DNA molecules from reproducing. In other words, selenium acts to prevent tumors from developing. “It contributes towards the death of cancerous and pre-cancer cells. Their death appears to occur before they replicate, thus helping stop cancer before it gets started,” says Dr. James Howenstine in A Physician’s Guide to Natural Health Products That Work

Breast cancer rates are four to five times lower in China than in most Western countries, a fact widely attributed to a different lifestyle. Some foods commonly eaten as part of the traditional Chinese diet can reduce a woman’s risk of breast cancer by as much as 90 percent, according to a study conducted by researchers from the University of Western Australia in Perth, and published in the International Journal of Cancer. Researchers compared consumption of mushrooms and green tea between two groups of Chinese women, one with breast cancer and one without. They found that women who ate at least 10 grams (0.35 ounces) of fresh mushrooms per day had a 64 percent lower risk of developing breast cancer than those who did not eat as much. Those who also regularly drank green tea reduced their risk by a total of 90 percent. Dried mushrooms also reduced breast cancer risk, although they were not as effective as fresh ones.

Previous research has supported the cancer-fighting properties of both mushrooms and green tea. Mushrooms are believed to suppress tumor growth and boost the immune system, and may also block production of the hormone estrogen. Green tea contains polyphenols, which have been shown to remove free radicals from the blood and hamper breast tumor development. The protective benefit of mushrooms and green tea remained significant even after researchers adjusted for other breast cancer risk factors, including weight, exercise, smoking and education level.

be well

Dr Sundardas

http://www.naturaltherapies.com/cancer.htm

Being Seduced by Shape.

      No Comments on Being Seduced by Shape.

There are an increasing number of teenagers suffering from eating disorder, especially females. I continue to be increasingly concerned by this obsession with body shape and weight. Quite often I get these slim young women who come in and tell me, “Doctor, I need to lose weight”. More often than not I have stopped being polite and I tell these women to have a life.

However we could wonder about the factors that influence individuals to refuse to maintain a minimally normal body weight, harbor an intense fear of gaining weight, exhibit significant distortion in the perception of the ideal shape or size of their bodies, as well as feel dissatisfaction with their body shape and size

A brief look at the history of attractive/desirable body types reveals that these trends were always influenced by public perception. The lower classes always looked towards the higher classes for their model of the desirable body types.

Various strategies are sometimes employed to temporarily or permanently alter the shape of a body. The most common included dieting and exercise. At times artificial devices were used or surgery was employed. Breast size could be artificially increased or decreased. Falsies, breast prostheses or padded bras may have been used to increase the apparent size of a woman’s breasts, while minimiser bras may have been used to reduce the apparent size. Breasts could be surgically enlarged using breast implants or reduced by the systematic removal of parts of the breasts.

Historically, the greatest efforts have been made to reduce a woman’s waistline. Boned corsets were used for several centuries, but during the twentieth century these were mostly replaced with more flexible foundation garments. Where corsets are used for waist reduction, it may been for temporary reduction by occasional use or permanent reduction by people who were often referred to as tightlacers. Liposuction is the common current surgical method of reducing the waist size.

Each society develops a general perception of what an ideal female body shape would be like. These ideals are generally reflected in the art produced by or for a society. The ideal or preferred female body size and shape has varied over time and continues to vary between cultures; but a preference for a small waist has remained fairly constant throughout history. A low waist-hip ratio has often been seen as a sign of good health and reproductive potential.

A low waist-hip ratio has also often been regarded as an indicator of attractiveness of a woman, but recent research suggests that attractiveness is more correlated to body mass index than waist-hip ratio, contrary to previous belief. Historically, according to Devendra Singh, there was a trend for slightly larger women in the 17th and 18th centuries, as typified by the paintings of Rubens, but that in general there has been a preference for a slimmer waist in Western culture. She notes that “The finding that the writers describe a small waist as beautiful suggests instead that this body part – a known marker of health and fertility – is a core feature of feminine beauty that transcends ethnic differences and cultures.”

New research suggests that apple shape women have the highest risk of developing heart disease while hourglass shape women have the lowest. The waist-hip ratio (WHR) is a person’s waist measurement divided by the hip measurement. Notwithstanding wide cultural differences in preferences for female build, scientists have discovered that the waist-hip ratio of any build is very strongly correlated to attractiveness across all cultures. Women with a 0.7 WHR (waist circumference that is 70% of the hip circumference) are usually rated as more attractive by men from European cultures. Such diverse beauty icons as Marilyn Monroe, Sophia Loren, and the Venus de Milo all have ratios around 0.7.

In other cultures, preferences vary, ranging from 0.6 in China, to 0.8 or 0.9 in parts of South America and Africa, and divergent preferences based on ethnicity, rather than nationality, have also been noted. WHR has been found to be a more efficient predictor of mortality in older people than waist circumference or body mass index (BMI). In the early days (18th Century) it was both class consciousness and the works of great artists like Botticelli and Michelangelo influenced public perception.

With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, the growth of the printed media ( ie newspapers, television and the media), the popular perception of what looked good became what was fashionable. So the media has always influenced public perception. However what is happening now is that the divisions that existed between the different cultures and societies is dissolving (ie East and West, Indian and Chinese etc). We are witnessing the melding of different models of desired shapes.

Advertising in teen magazines and on television typically glamorizes skinny models who do not resemble the average woman. In fact, today’s models generally weight 23% less then the average woman. Considering the average person in the United States sees approximately 3,000 ads in magazines, billboards, and television every day, your teenager is getting the wrong message about body image much too often. Media targeting teenage girls are emphasizing the ideal of thinness as beauty. When you stop and think about the fact that the average height and weight for a model is 5’10” and 110 lbs, and the height and weight for the average woman is 5’4″ and 145 lbs, it’s easy to see why this creates a tremendous health risk for young girls.

This leads to starving young skinny women who have difficulty getting pregnant because their BMI is too low for healthy hormonal balance. If they do become pregnant, they often give birth to children who have subtle deficiencies that impact their physical and emotional health. These young women eventually develop osteoporosis in their later years because of their early dieting (See Blog on “Osteoporosis). “Oh what a tangled web we weave”. The media has a lot to answer for.

Be well
Dr Sundardas

Protecting Yourself against HINI

      No Comments on Protecting Yourself against HINI

In an effort to censor any online text that might inform consumers of the ability of natural products to protect consumers from H1N1 influenza A, the FDA has been sending out a round of warning letters, threatening to “take enforcement action… such as seizure or injunction for violations of the FFDC Act without further notice.”

“Firms that fail to take correction action,” the FDA warns, “may also be referred to the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations for possible criminal prosecution for violations of the FFDC Act and other federal laws.”

The message is crystal clear: No product may be described as protecting against or preventing H1N1 infections unless it is approved by the FDA. And which products has the FDA approved? Tamiflu (the anti-viral drug that most people will never have access to), and soon the new H1N1 vaccine that’s being manufactured at a cost of one billion dollars (paid to Big Pharma by the taxpayers). This vaccine, of course, will be utterly useless because H1N1 will undoubtedly mutate between now and the time the vaccine is ready, rendering the vaccine useless.

In other words, according to the tyrants at the FDA, the only products that may be marketed alongside the term “H1N1” are those products that either don’t work or aren’t available to most people. Anything that really works to prevent influenza infections — such as natural anti-virals, medicinal herbs, etc. — is banned from even mentioning H1N1 without the threat of being criminally prosecuted.

! As the defender of Big Pharma, the FDA is also the destroyer of knowledge that seeks to remove educational statements from the internet. Truth has nothing to do with it — it is verifiably true that anti-viral herbs, probiotics and other natural products help protect consumers from influenza — but the FDA cannot allow such statements to remain online for the simple fact that people might become informed. And that, it seems, would be a dangerous precedent.

If people were informed about the healing and protective powers of herbs, they would no longer remain enslaved by the medical establishment. Profits would be lost. Power would evaporate. This is why people can never be allowed to attain any real knowledge about herbs, superfoods or nutritional supplements. And the FDA will threaten people with imprisonment just to make sure they don’t dare publish knowledge that the FDA does not want the people to see. The fact that nearly two-thirds of U.S. adults are clinically obese is worrisome for a whole new reason: Evidence emerging from a hospital in Michigan (and published by the CDC) appears to indicate that obese patients may be very easily killed by swine flu.

In the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s report on death and disease, researchers documented the case of ten swine flu patients at a Michigan hospital who became so ill they were put on ventilators. Three of the patients ultimately died from the infection. The kicker? Nine of the ten were obese, and two of the three who died were severely obese.

As reported by Reuters, CDC virologist Dr. Tim Uyeki said, “What this suggests is that there can be severe complications associated with this virus infection, especially in severely obese patients.”

Notably, five of the patients showed evidence of blood clots in their lungs, indicating severe cellular trauma in the lungs. Nine of the patients suffered from multiple organ failure, and six experienced kidney failure.
These findings are especially worrisome because nearly two-thirds of U.S. adults are now clinically obese. Combined with widespread vitamin D deficiency, nutritional deficiencies and pharmaceutically-induced immune suppression, the U.S. population is more vulnerable to a pandemic right now than any other population in the history of the world.

The people of the first world countries who have adopted a lifestyle similar to the Americans, in other words, are primed for a pandemic. Most of the deaths in Singapore from H1N1 are from people who have a history of health conditions that create free radicals and cytokines from inflammatory conditions ie diabetes, epilepsy, allergies or infections. Shockingly, most Asians may still be thinking that excess body fat is normal and that obese babies are just “chubby.” Should the circulating swine flu combine with seasonal flu this fall, it could devastate the immunologically vulnerable Asian population, potentially killing millions.
The number of patients reviewed in this study is quite small (only ten), but even so, this could be a warning sign of more deaths to come from infected, obese patients. Of course, there’s really no mystery why obesity may cause extreme vulnerability to swine flu infections: The virus kills through an inflammatory process, and obesity is, itself, a highly-inflammatory condition that only exacerbates the deadliness of the H1N1 virus.

Patients who have made themselves obese — for whatever reason — have also unleashed a storm of inflammatory cytokines in their blood, and these cytokines are precisely what get over-excited during the body’s response to a swine flu infection, leading to organ damage and death. This is precisely why people wishing to survive the coming pandemic must make a special effort to attain a high level of physical and nutritional health before such a pandemic arrives.

Being obese compromises your body’s immune system, liver, heart, lungs and kidneys. This puts a serious additional burden on your body, leaving few spare resources for fighting off infections. That’s probably why nine out of ten swine flu victims documented in the Michigan hospital were obese.

The bottom line in this study is quite clear: Don’t be obese during the next pandemic. If you are obese now, let this bit of knowledge provide whatever extra motivation you need to drop some excess body fat and reduce the inflammatory burden on your body’s organs. Obesity is, after all, readily reversed through simple changes in diet and exercise habits.

Be well

Dr Sundardas

Listed below are nutrients that will improve your immune system against viral infections.
Protecting Yourself against the Swine Flu. on June 15, 2009

Managing Diabetes

      1 Comment on Managing Diabetes

Diabetes management is something that many must deal with on a day to day basis. About 16 million Americans suffer from diabetes mellitus, a chronic disease in which the pancreas produces too little or no insulin, impairing the body’s ability to turn sugar into usable energy.

In recent years, the Food and Drug Administration has approved a fast-acting form of human insulin and several new oral diabetes drugs, including the most recent, Rezulin (troglitazone), the first of a new class of drugs called insulin sensitizers. This drug is designed to help Type II diabetics make better use of the insulin produced by their bodies and could help as many as 1 million Type II diabetics reduce or eliminate their need for insulin injections.

While it is treatable, diabetes is still a killer. Thus, diabetes management is extremely important. The fourth leading cause of death in America, diabetes claims an estimated 178,000 lives each year. So the treatment is aimed at holding the disease in check, reversing it where possible, and preventing complications.

Philip Cryer, M.D., a professor at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and president of the American Diabetes Association, believes that most people simply don’t understand the magnitude of the diabetes problem. “Diabetes is an increasingly common, potentially devastating, treatable yet incurable, lifelong disease. It’s the leading cause of blindness in working-age adults, the most common cause of kidney failure leading to dialysis or transplants, and is a leading cause of amputation,” he says. “The most recent estimate we have of diabetes’ cost [in terms of] direct medical care is $90 billion dollars annually–more than heart disease, cancer, or AIDS.”

At the heart of diabetes control are dietary management and drug treatment. The increasing emphasis on the importance of a healthy diet, the availability of glucose monitoring devices that can help diabetics keep a close watch over blood sugar levels, and the wide range of drug treatments enable most diabetics to live a near-normal life.
Managing the diet is easier now because of food labeling regulations that went into effect in 1994 (see “The New Food Label: Coping with Diabetes” in the November 1994 FDA Consumer).According to the Corn Refiners Association, high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is no worse for you than any other dietary carbohydrate. Many health experts, however, disagree, warning consumers that HFCS is strongly correlated with diabetes and obesity.

According to NaturalNews, these quotes tell you how bad the problems is:

Roughly $40 billion in federal subsidies are going to pay corn growers, so that corn syrup is able to replace cane sugar. corn syrup has been singled out by many health experts as one of the chief culprits of rising obesity, because corn syrup does not turn off appetite. Since the advent of corn syrup, consumption of all sweeteners has soared, as have people’s weights. According to a 2004 study reported in the American journal of Clinical Nutrition, the rise of Type-2 diabetes since 1980 has closely paralleled the increased use of sweeteners, particularly corn syrup.
There is a Cure for Diabetes: The Tree of Life 21-Day+ Program by Gabriel Cousens

Since the fructose in corn syrup does neither stimulate insulin secretion nor reduce the hunger hormone ghrelin, you will continue to feel hungry while the body converts the fructose into fat. The resulting obesity increases the risk of diabetes and other diseases. Since you obviously cannot expect to receive much help from those who only know how to treat the effects of illness and not its causes, you may need to take your health into you own hands.
Timeless Secrets of Health & Rejuvenation: Unleash The Natural Healing Power That Lies Dormant Within You by Andreas Moritz

More than half of the carbohydrates being consumed are in the form of sugars (sucrose, corn syrup, etc.) being added to foods as sweetening agents. High consumption of refined sugars is linked to many chronic diseases, including obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. Generally, the term “dietary fiber” refers to the components of plant cell wall and non-nutritive residues. Originally, the definition was restricted to substances that are not digestible by the endogenous secretions of the human digestive tract.
Textbook of Natural Medicine 2nd Edition Volume 1 by Michael T. Murray, ND

The following are tips to prevent or manage diabetes (Type 2);

1) If you have a history of diabetes in your family, recognize you will have a higher tendency to do so. Very often diabetes is a disease of denial.

2) Watch your weight. DO not let it exceed more than 5% of your optimum body weight when you wer at your healthiest. Studies have shown that every 5% increase to correlate to a 200% risk of mature onset diabetes. (Weight gain and the Risk of Developong Insulin Resistance Syndrome . Everson SA, et al. Diabetes Care 1998;21(10):1637-43)

3) Exercise regularly and lifelong. Studies have shown, it helps to protect against diabetes.(The Protective Effect of Good Physical Fitness when young on the Risk of Impaired Glucose Tolerance when Old)Takemura Y, et al. Prev Med 1999;28(1):14-9 )

4) Watch your carbohydrates really carefully if you are at high risk. Use complex carbohydrates.
(Heterogeneity in associations between macronutrient intake and lipoprotein profile in individuals with type 2 diabetes) Mayer-Davis EJ;Levin S;Marshall JA, Diabetes care Oct 1999 22(10) p1632-9)

5) Follow the blood type diet. The lectins in food which are antagonistic to your blood cells can lead to pancreatic damage.

Be well
Dr Sundardas

What you can do about Cancer Screening.

      No Comments on What you can do about Cancer Screening.

Much of the treatment for prostrate cancer is completely unwarranted. Remember, the majority of prostate cancer is pseudodisease. Most men die with it, not of it.

What Tests Should You Get?
So which tests should you get and when should you get them? It depends on who you listen to. Unfortunately, there’s no clear consensus among expert panels and advocacy groups, so confusion reigns.

I hesitate to make blanket recommendations. However, before you have a test, I strongly encourage you to understand both the pros-the slim but potentially lifesaving possibility that early-stage, clinically significant cancer will be found and treated-and the cons-the high risk of false positives, additional testing, anxiety, and unnecessary treatment. That way, you’ll be better prepared to deal with the outcome, whatever it may be.

Think Twice
I understand that this is an emotionally charged issue. Cancer is scary and the treatments for it are as frightening as the disease itself. If you have symptoms of cancer, by all means see a doctor and discuss appropriate testing. Otherwise, think twice. If your physician orders a cancer screening test, question its necessity. Doctors sometimes suggest these tests for all the wrong reasons: fears of malpractice, financial incentives, and even patient demand. Find out what course would be recommended if your results were positive. Then review the information in this article, and make your own educated decision. Next time you hear that someone who died of cancer would have been saved if only he’d had regular testing, realize that’s nothing more than unsubstantiated opinion. And, whatever you do, don’t let anyone make you feel irresponsible if you elect not to undergo cancer screening.

Two major Issues Associated with Ageing and Cancer are :
A) Anabolic/Catabolic Balance – Anabolism refers to cellular buildup. Catabolism refers to cellular breakdown. These two processes are involved in ageing. As you age poorly, catabolism increases much faster than it should.

“BIOMARKERS”- By William Evans, PhD and Irwin H. Rosenberg MD,Tufts University, Huyman Nutrition Research Centre on Ageing, Publisher – Fireside, Simon and Schuster – A very good book to read about this process.

B) Oxidative Stress –Environmental Damage and Hidden Infections. Oxidative Stress is a significant marker in disease and ageing. As we age faster, oxidative stress increases faster

A surprising number of studies report that excess serum insulin (hyperinsulinemia) is a major health problem. It appears that excess insulin promotes hypertension by impairing sodium balance. Too much insulin harms the kidneys. The vascular system is severely damaged by prolonged exposure to excess insulin. By acting as a catalyst in promoting cell growth, excess insulin increases the risk and progression of certain cancers. Excess insulin is a contributory factor to benign prostate enlargement because it promotes overgrowth of prostate cells. One of the first class markers for Syndrome X is the Hip to Waist ratio.

For people trying to reduce body fat, excess insulin suppresses the release of growth hormone and prevents fat from being released from fat cells. High serum insulin is associated with the development of abdominal obesity and a number of health problems, including atherosclerosis and impotence. Obesity is associated with excess insulin and reduced insulin sensitivity, both risk factors for Type II diabetes.

Perhaps the simplest method of evaluating the toxic effects of excess insulin is to look at its effects on human mortality. One early study showed that over a 10-year period, the risk of dying was almost twice as great for those with the highest levels of insulin compared to those with the lowest. The scientists stated that hyperinsulinemia is associated with increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, independent of other risk factors (NIH 1985). Aging people experience a wide range of degenerative diseases that are directly attributable to elevated insulin.

Most of us want to grow old and age gracefully. We know that the most common enemies to growing old gracefully are heart disease (50% of men, 33% of women), cancer (33%), diabetes (12%) and hypertension (12%).

It takes 8 years for a tumour/growth to become significant enough to be detected on a X-ray or scan. It takes another 8 to 15 years for the tumour/growth to first start . So it takes anything from 16 to 23 years for you to develop a growth/tumour.

So before a tumour/growth develops or you become ill:
• Your cells start ageing faster (Biological Age)
• Your metabolic rate slows down and you becomes fatter (BMI)
• Specific systems in your body slow down or dysfunction
• Your hip waist ratio changes for the worse (Syndrome X)
• Your cells becomes more dehydrated and you lose muscle mass (Fluid Levels)
• Your saliva and urine become more and more acidic (< Ph6.8)

I have developed a system to measure these changes called the
Optimal Health Assessment.

Be well

Dr Sundardas

www.naturaltherapies.com/cell rejuvenation program.htm

The Myth of Cancer Screening

      4 Comments on The Myth of Cancer Screening

For more than 15 years, I’ve been warning patients about the downside of mammograms, PSA testing, and the overall concept of cancer screening. It hasn’t been a popular position. Today, however, there’s a small but growing band of researchers, clinicians, and expert panels who are speaking out against the unbridled use of these tests. One of them, H. Gilbert Welch, MD, a professor at Dartmouth Medical School, has laid out very persuasive arguments in an aptly titled book, Should I Be Tested for Cancer? Maybe Not and Here’s Why. In this straightforward and well-referenced book, Dr. Welch raises several concerns about cancer screening.

1. Few People Benefit From Screening
For starters, the majority of folks who are screened receive no benefit. That’s because, despite scary statistics, most people will not get cancer. Let’s look at breast cancer as an example.

According to government statistics, the absolute risk of a 60-year-old woman dying from breast cancer in the next 10 years is 9 in 1,000. If regular mammograms reduce this risk by one-third-a widely cited but by no means universally accepted claim-her odds fall to 6 in 1,000. Therefore, for every 1,000 women screened, three of them avoid death from breast cancer, six die regardless, and the rest? They can’t possibly benefit because they weren’t going to die from the disease in the first place.

If mammograms worked as touted, death from breast cancer would be rare, since three-quarters of American women 40 and older get regular screenings (a total of 33.5 million per year). The modest decline in the death rate from the mid-1970s, when mammography was introduced, through the present can be attributed to factors other than screening, such as changes in treatment and the dramatic decrease in the use of Premarin and other cancer-promoting hormone replacement drugs. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that mammograms do not substantially reduce risk of death from breast cancer.

2. The Most Deadly Cancers Are Missed
The flip side is that some people who are screened get cancer and die anyway. Test results aren’t always accurate. Sometimes cancer is there, but it’s missed (false negatives). In the case of mammograms, it could be a question of a poor-quality test or a radiologist who overlooked something. Even experienced radiologists don’t always interpret test results the same, and sometimes they just plain get it wrong.

The most likely reason that cancer is overlooked, however, is due to the nature of cancer itself. The deadliest cancers grow very rapidly. Screening can detect slow-growing cancers in their early stages, but you can see how aggressive cancers could be missed if you’re only looking for them once a year. Depending on the cancer’s growth cycle, it could crop up just months after screening and be far advanced by the time the next test rolls around.

3. The Pitfalls of False Positives
Far more common than false negatives are false positives-those cancer scares that occur when you’re told that your test is suspicious but, after further evaluation, turns out to be nothing. False positives lead to confirmatory testing such as ultrasound of the breast and prostate, CT scan of the lung, colonoscopy, and colposcopy of the cervix. These tests are at best inconvenient and at worst extremely unpleasant, as anyone who’s had a colonoscopy knows. They also often lead to biopsies, which are far more invasive and could possibly promote the spread of cancer.

Unfortunately, false positive rates are incredibly high. For mammography, it’s close to 10 percent. For every 100 women screened, 10 will require further workup. If you repeat this screening test every year for 10 years, your cumulative risk of having at least one false positive rises to 65 percent. This means that more than half of all women will get the terrifying news that their mammogram is abnormal-the first step on the slippery slope of intervention.

False positive rates are high for PSA as well, especially among older men. Some estimate that three-quarters of men who have a prostate biopsy based on an elevated PSA level do not have cancer. And lifetime false-positive risk for Pap smears is 75 percent.
Another consideration is the psychological trauma of cancer screening. Being told you might have cancer is a harrowing experience, and the lag time between retesting and getting a clean bill of health can be months.

4. Unnecessary Treatment
Even worse than the sound and fury created by false positives is unnecessary treatment. Yes, some lives are saved due to early detection and treatment. But not all cancers are the same. Some are deadly, treated or not; others are not fatal regardless of treatment. Dr. Welch calls the latter pseudodisease-small, slow-growing or nonprogressive cancers that you’d never know existed were it not for screening tests. Yet all too often, these innocuous tumors are attacked with a vengeance, often to the detriment of patients.

A prime example is prostate cancer. Since 1975, its incidence has more than doubled. But rather than having an epidemic of prostate cancer, what we have is an epidemic of detection. Although many more men are being diagnosed and treated, the death rate from prostate cancer has held steady at 3 percent.

It’s human nature, when given a diagnosis of cancer, to want to get rid of it. But prostate cancer treatment is not benign. Surgical complications include difficulty urinating (17 percent), urinary incontinence (28 percent), and inability to have an erection (more than 50 percent). Radiation damages the rectum and can cause diarrhea and bowel urgency. Side effects of androgen suppression range from sexual dysfunction to risk of diabetes and heart disease.

Be well
Dr Sundardas

http://www.naturaltherapies.com/cancer.htm

Is your Computer safe for you?

      No Comments on Is your Computer safe for you?

As the computer visual display (VDU) unit became more common in the workplace, the issue of radiation hazards associated with the prolonged use of VDU’s were tested by reputable laboratories and found to emit no detectable levels of X- rays. A similar study by Canadian Radiation Protection Bureau researchers arrived at the same conclusion. World Health Organisation (WHO) experts endorsed similar findings. Given such reassurances, the temptation has been to conclude that VDU’s are harmless. However, deeper more haunting statistics suggest that health problems from VDU’s could arise from electromagnetic radiation.

The early research did not consider all the relevant data. Since 1979 small clusters of miscarriage and birth defects among VDU users in a dozen or more office locations have been reported. Due to the low level of X-ray radiation around VDU’s, authorities often dismissed the increased incidence of these abnormalities as chance occurrences, while others argued alternately that the reported defects could be hereditary.

In 1982 Delagado and others reported powerful inhibitory effects on chicken embryos produced by weak 100 H2 {28} electromagnetic fields. The following year Ubeda and others also observed ‘teratogenic” changes or monstrous mutations to chicken embryos exposed to low intensity pulsed electromagnetic fields of 100Hz. The most deterious effects were observed with a weak magnetic field strengths of about 1 micro Tesla, with stronger and weaker fields less effective.

Since the original work of Delgado and co-workers, several more recent studies have confirmed that weak electromagnetic fields are capable of interacting with biological systems of specific frequencies and intensities. Since magnetic field strength pulses of up to 400,000 microtesla have been reported with VDU’s it follows that weak magnetic pulses will exist even at a considerable distance from the units.

With approximately half the workforce using VDU’s being women of childbearing age, the health implications are enormous. McDonald and co-workers who studied births in the Montreal area in 1984, reported, that the rate of spontaneous abortion in 2609 current pregnancies with no VDU use was 5.7% compared to 8.3% for 588 with weekly exposure of less than 15 hours and 9.4% for 710 pregnancies with VDU use greater than 15 hours per week.

In 1988 Goldhaber and co-workers found in a case control study of pregnancy outcome that there exists: “Significantly elevated risk of miscarriage for working women who using VDU’s for more than 20 hours per week during the first trimester of pregnancy compared to other working who reported not using VDUs”. The increased risk could not be explained by age, education, occupation, smoking, alcohol consumption on other maternal characteristics.

Reported cases of foetal damage from VDU’s.:

1. In 1979, four out of seven pregnant VDU operates who had worked on the classified advertising department of the Toronto Star gave birth to infants with defects. One had a club foot, another a deft palate, a third an underdeveloped eye and the fourth had multiple heart abnormalities. None of the mothers had smoked or taken drugs during the pregnancies.During that period, three other employees at the Star who didn’t work on VDU’s gave birth to normal babies.

2. Due to excessive fetal retardation and birth defects among the off-spring of women and animals exposed to radioactive fields in Eastern Europe, pregnant women in Czechoslovakia have been specifically prohibited from working in areas where the “safe” level of micro-waves was exceeded. The Czech standard is one-thousandth the recommended American guideline.

The following items also possess a significant electromagnetic field; television, electric razors, electric blankets, electric-power transmission and distribution networks, fluorescent lights, electric clocks, hair dryers and electric heaters, microwave ovens, personal radio transmitters. Research done by Dr. Robert O. Becker M.D. appears to indicate that all of the above appliances at times have radiation levels that sometimes exceed current safety levels of radiation.

The rise of phenomena such as electromagnetic – hypersensitivity syndrome has been verified by several scientists, like Robert Becker M.D. and Dr. William Rae. It refers to the phenomena whereby an individual develops an allergy due to electro-magnetic fields. Chronic-fatigue syndrome has also been linked to electro-magnetic fields.

While Dr. Becker says that it is too premature to conclude that brain lesions of the autistic children match those of the experimental animals, he points out that the apparent onset of autism as a clinical condition in the 1940’s coincided with the marked increase in the use of electro- magnetic energy.

A simple way of measuring if you are outside the direct influence of the electric field of an appliance is outlined below; To check the level of radiation from your TV set, simply turn on your small battery-operated AM radio. Tune it to a spot on the dial where you cannot hear a station and turn the volume up to maximum. Hold the radio about a foot away from the front of the TV and switch the TV on. If you then move the radio away from the TV you will reach a distance at which the noise disappears. This method can be used for devices that give off radio-frequency fields such as computers and stereos. It will not work for devices that give off 60-H3 only such as electric stoves and hair dryers. The distance at which the “white” noise disppears is the safe distance. To be absolutely safe, pregnant mothers should minimize exposure to VDU’s computers and micro-wave ovens.

be well
Dr Sundardas
http://www.naturaltherapies.com/ELECTRODERMAL%20SCREENING.htm