GUT BRAIN HEALING with PROFESSOR SUNDARDAS - NATUROPATH, HOMOEPATH, ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES, SINGAPORE

Is the FDA looking after your Medical Safety?

Dr Sundardas April 8, 2009 3 Comments

Research shows there are 2,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery; 7000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals; 20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals; 80,000 deaths/year from infections in hospitals; 106,000 deaths/year from non-error, adverse effects of medications – these total up to 225,000 deaths per year in the US from iatrogenic causes which ranks these deaths as the # 3 killer. Iatrogenic is a term used when a patient dies as a direct result of treatments by a physician, whether it is from misdiagnosis of the ailment or from adverse drug reactions used to treat the illness. (drug reactions are the most common cause).

Based on the findings of one major study, medical errors kill some 44,000 people in U.S. hospitals each year. Another study puts the number much higher, at 98,000. Even using the lower estimate, more people die from medical mistakes each year than from highway accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS. And deaths from medication errors that take place both in and out of hospitals are aid to be more than 7,000 annually.

A statistical study of hospital deaths in the U.S. conducted at the University of Toronto revealed that pharmaceutical drugs kill more people every year than are killed in traffic accidents.

The study is said to show that more than two million American hospitalized patients suffered a serious adverse drug reaction (ADR) within the 12-month period of the study and, of these, over 100,000 died as a result. The researchers found that over 75 per cent of these ADRs were dose-dependent, which suggests they were due to the inherent toxicity of the drugs rather than to allergic reactions.

The data did not include fatal reactions caused by accidental overdoses or errors in administration of the drugs. If these had been included, it is estimated that another 100,000 deaths would be added to the total every year.

The researchers concluded that ADRs are now the fourth leading cause of death in the United States after heart disease, cancer, and stroke.

According to a USA Today (Dennis Cauchon, Sept 25,200) study, more than half of the experts hired to advise the government on the safety and effectiveness of medicine have financial relationships with the pharmaceutical companies that will be helped or hurt by their decisions. These experts are hired to advise the Food and Drug Administration on which medicines should be approved for sale, what the warning labels should say and how studies of drugs should be designed. The experts are supposed to be independent, but USA TODAY found that 54% of the time, they have a direct financial interest in the drug or topic they are asked to evaluate. These conflicts include helping a pharmaceutical company develop a medicine, then serving on an FDA advisory committee that judges the drug.

The conflicts typically include stock ownership, consulting fees or research grants.

Federal law generally prohibits the FDA from using experts with financial conflicts of interest, but according to the article, the FDA has waived the restriction more than 800 times since 1998. These pharmaceutical experts, about 300 on 18 advisory committees, make decisions that affect the health of millions of Americans and billions of dollars in drugs sales. With few exceptions, the FDA follows the committees’ advice.

The FDA reveals when financial conflicts exist, but it has kept details secret since 1992, so it is not possible to determine the amount of money or the drug company involved.

A USA Today analysis of financial conflicts at 159 FDA advisory committee meetings from Jan. 1, 1998, through last June 30 found:

At 92% of the meetings, at least one member had a financial conflict of interest.
At 55% of meetings, half or more of the FDA advisers had conflicts of interest.
Conflicts were most frequent at the 57 meetings when broader issues were discussed: 92% of members had conflicts.
At the 102 meetings dealing with the fate of a specific drug, 33% of the experts had a financial conflict.

“The best experts for the FDA are often the best experts to consult with industry,” says FDA senior associate commissioner Linda Suydam, who is in charge of waiving conflict-of-interest restrictions. But Larry Sasich of Public Citizen, an advocacy group, says, “The industry has more influence on the process than people realize.”

In an article written by Andrea Knox for Knight Ridder Newspapers appeared on January 7, 2001 in “The Star,” a Ventura County Newspaper.

“In the past four years, 10 prescription drugs and a vaccine have been taken off the market after killing and injuring thousands. According to the article, it is estimated that US drug fatalities runs 100,000 a year. There is no way of confirming the numbers because there is no reliable way to track and investigate problems with drugs. Doctors are not even required to report bad drug interactions.”

It also doesn’t help that the FDA has cut the time for routine drug approvals, making the real-life test for drugs coming after it has actually been approved. Without a proper monitoring system, it takes longer to discover what drugs could be causing problems.

The above is to show that unless as an informed consumer to take responsibility for your own health, nobody else out there in terms of a regulatory body is looking after the safety of drugs. While nutritional and natural medicine products are being stringently regulated in nearly all first world countries, drugs which are infinitely more deadly are not regulated to the same degree.

For example in Singapore, there was a scare about skullcap. Based on adverse drug reports on a handful of individuals in Germany and Switzerland, the drug was banned in Singapore. Compare this with the drug Vioxx. Dr. Graham told the Senate Finance Committee (US) that Vioxx may have caused 55000 deaths alone, more than the 28000 projected by the FDA. Only then did Merck take it off the shelves.

So the next time the next wonder drug comes up, let someone else check it our first. The FDA is too busy doing things other than safeguarding the medical safety of America and the world.

Be well

Dr Sundardas

Why are children becoming more toxic?

Dr Sundardas April 2, 2009 2 Comments

Technological developments have dramatically reduced mortality resulting from many diseases. In many instances, however, disease incidence is increasing, although for some conditions without standardized tracking mechanisms, trends are difficult to determine accurately. The burden from current patterns of disease and disability is enormous and extracts a terrible toll from individuals, families, and communities. Nearly 12 million children in the U.S (17 percent) suffer from one or more developmental disabilities, including deafness, blindness, epilepsy, speech defects, cerebral palsy, delays in growth and development, behavioral problems, or learning disabilities. Learning disabilities alone affect 5 to 10 percent of children in public schools, and these numbers appear to be increasing.

Small exposures to substances like lead, mercury, or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which have no discernible impact on adults, can permanently damage the developing brain of a child, if the exposure occurs during a window of vulnerability. Early exposures to dioxin or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), chemicals from industrial activities that bioaccumulate in dietary fat, damage the developing immune system, making the child more prone to infections. Risks of asthma and high blood pressure are increased by early environmental exposures. Recent research from Sweden concludes not only that environmental factors play a more important role than genetic inheritance in the origin of most cancers, but also that cancer risk is largely established during the first 20 years of life.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder conservatively affects 3 to 6 percent of all school children, and the numbers may be considerably higher. The incidence of autism seems to be increasing, though much of this apparent increase may be due to increased reporting. The age-adjusted incidence of melanoma, lung (female), prostate, liver, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, testis, thyroid, kidney, breast, brain, esophagus, and bladder cancers has steadily increased over the past 25 years. Some birth defects, including disorders of the male reproductive system and some forms of congenital heart disease, are increasingly common. Sperm counts and fertility are in decline in some areas of the U.S. and other parts of the world. Asthma is more common and more severe than ever before.

Genetic factors explain far less than half of the population variance for most of these conditions. Although smoking and sun exposure are well-recognized risk factors for some conditions, improved understanding of development of the brain and the immune, reproductive, respiratory, and cardiovascular systems leads to the conclusion that other environmental factors play a major role in determining current patterns of disease.

Infants of mothers who smoke may receive greater exposure to the products of tobacco smoke through breast milk than through environmental exposure, according to a study led by researchers at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) and Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH). The study showed a 10-Fold Increase Over Environmental Exposure Alone According to the report appearing in the June issue of the American Journal of Public Health, urine levels of cotinine, a substance produced by the breakdown of nicotine in the body, were 10 times higher in breast-fed children of smoking mothers than in bottle-fed children of smoking mothers.

Maria A. Mascola, MD, MPH, first author of the study says, “While we don’t know for sure whether the compounds present in breast milk are related to any of the harmful health effects seen in some children of smoking women—from reduced lung function to greater incidence of asthma and other illnesses—this does stress how important it is to help mothers refrain from smoking both during pregnancy and while they are nursing.” Mascola is director of Perinatal Epidemiology in the Vincent Obstetrics and Gynecology Service at the MGH.

This investigation was part of the Maternal/Infant Lung Study, a long-term project conducted by the Channing Laboratories at BWH in collaboration with the East Boston Neighborhood Health Center. The researchers examined data from 330 mother/infant pairs who received prenatal, obstetric and pediatric care through the East Boston Center, analyzing information about maternal smoking and the presence of other smokers in the home along with results of urine tests taken from the infants in the first year of life. While cotinine, the substance tested for, is not known to have any harmful effects itself, it is generally used as a marker for the presence of nicotine and other tobacco products.

As expected, cotinine levels in bottle-fed infants of smoking mothers were about eight times higher than in bottle-fed infants of non-smoking mothers. But among children of smoking mothers, infants who were breast-fed had cotinine levels ten times higher than those of bottle-fed infants. Type of feeding had no effect on the cotinine levels of infants of non-smoking mothers.The researchers also found significantly higher cotinine levels in infants of non-smoking mothers who were exposed to tobaccco through smoking by another household member, with no difference related to feeding. For infants of smoking mothers, the presence of another smoker in the household caused a small, statistically insignificant increase in cotinine. In addition, children of mothers who smoked in the same room as their infants also had a small, statistically insignificant increase in cotinine over children of mothers who always smoked in rooms away from their infants.

“Our 10-year study has looked at a lot of factors related to the ways kids can be exposed to tobacco smoke on a prenatal and postnatal level,” says John P. Hanrahan, MD, MPH, of the respiratory epidemiology section at Channing Laboratories and BWH, the study’s senior author. “A lot of people have assumed that the inhalation of passive smoke is totally responsible for the adverse health effects seen in children of smoking mothers. This study has widened our view of the ways smoking may be detrimental to the health of children.”

What are we doing to protect our children?

Be well

Dr Sundardas

Why medical norms can kill you.

Dr Sundardas March 27, 2009 No Comments

In Singapore the medical check-up is ubiquitous. Children have been exposed to the annual medical check-up as young as six years old, yet the actual procedure has become taboo to many adults. Why do we have medical check-ups? Are they necessary? What do medical check-ups really tell us? Or rather, what can’t we not deduce from medical check-ups?

Why have a medical check-up?

Medical tests are done for different reasons. For adults below 30 to 40, medical tests are often only done if a person shows up symptoms. This actually makes sense because to do detailed testing without a reason is a waste of time and money.

Medical testing detects only pathology. Pathology is defined as abnormal organ, tissue and/ or cell function where there is change in tissue, organ and enzyme level. This is a good definition to treat illness, but a poor one to promote wellness.

So, many people can have lowered organ, tissue and or enzyme function with no cellular or tissue change. They will experience symptoms, feel unwell but be told there is nothing wrong with them. This often occurs with ageing. All the medical tests will often prove negative. This is when functional medicine and naturopathic type screening that looks at quality of life rather that pathology can prove useful.

After about 40, routine medical screening is habitually suggested in order to detect early warning markers for potential health problems. A general medical screening will include blood pressure test, full lipid profile, screening for diabetes, full blood examination, kidney function, bone study, gout study, liver function test, screening for veneral disease, urine examination, screening for thyroid function, screening for Hepatitis A and Hepatitis B, screening for rheumatoid arthritis and screening for cancer markers. This also includes bone density scane, mammagrams, and PAP smears.

List of Medical Norms

As you grow older, a higher weight according to your age is acceptable.(Look at height, weight tables for different ages)
When you develop idiopathic hypertension (high blood pressure), it’s a perfectly acceptable consequence of ageing. Simply start medication
Until your fasting blood glucose is 120 mg/dL or more, you are safe.
Its acceptable to age and lose function and quality of life.
Its also acceptable to get aches and pain as you age
When older people get moody and grumpy, that is also a function of ageing. Just live with it.
Treat all your problems with drugs. Modern science is so advanced.

Another look at the above acceptable “medical” norms:

Every 5% weight gain above your optimum weight in your twenties increases your risk of diabetes by 200%.
High blood pressure is often linked to obesity, sub-optimal diets and emotional stress
In fact, you should start watching out when your blood glucose exceeds 80 mg/dl. You are heading towards Syndrome X (precursor to diabetes, heart disease and cancer)
According to studies at Tuft’s University, significant quality of life issues like strength, fitness, endurance and health can be maximized with optimum diet and nutrition
Manual medicine practitioners can help most people minimize aches and pains regardless of age
Mood changes associated with ageing are often forerunners of dis-ease conditions or significant drops in sex hormones
Fourth biggest cause of mortality is surgery and adverse drug treatments

Data interpretation is often a bone of contention between the different schools of thought. The Western medical practitioner is trained to look at the test results and check if they fall into the Normal Curve distribution(Bell Curve). The top and bottom five percent are pathological, either too high or low. The rest are normal. Functional medicine practitioners however will often adopt a different view. Optimal health often revolves around results that are a more in the middle.

“Do not go gentle into that good night,
…..Rage, rage against the dying of the light.”
Dylan Thomas

Be well

Dr Sundardas

Why 3 square meals is not enough

Dr Sundardas March 19, 2009 No Comments

Very often when it comes to the subject of food, there is enormous misinformation. When it comes to the subject of nutrition, there are even more arguments on both sides of the fence. In order to resolve this debate, I would like to outline the profound ways that the world has changed from the time of our grandparents.

Our diets have changed considerably in the last 50 years and not necessarily for the better. In fact this information is so widely accepted that only a few still think this way by clinging to the misguided concept that we can get all the nutrition we need from a well balanced diet.

Despite the wide spread acceptance of the use of dietary supplements to augment the foods we eat, I feel that it is necessary to raise a few points so as to effectively make the issue clear!
There are several major reasons why we eat more lifeless, nutrient deficient foods than any other nation on earth. The first reason is forced production. For example America is the ‘bread basket’ of the world. Not only do they provide food for their 250 million residents but export food and food products to many countries around the world. This places a tremendous demand upon the growers to continually increase the yield per care of crops produced.

The NPK Philosophy

Back in the 1930’s there was a big controversy over soil conditioning (that which was to be put back into our farmlands after each growing season). A group of agricultural scientists were talking about the re-mineralisation of the soil by using full spectrum trace and major minerals. This idea met with considerable opposition by the food industry who only saw this proposal as a greatly added expense that they were not keen to accept. They therefore lobbied the US Department of Agriculture heavily against the re-mineralisation program and subsequently won their point. Because of that in the United States it is what has come to be referred to as the NPK philosophy – the initials which stand for the three major minerals found in all present-day fertilizers, Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium.

They argued that with these three nutrients, in varying ratios, the very highest yield per acre could be achieved thus increasing production and profit for the farmer. Since farmers have always lived with the difficulty of turning a profit, they too were excited by this ‘new NPK philosophy’. This turned out to be bad news!

It is true that yield per acre did increase measurably but after a few years of practising this limited re-fertilization, farmers began to notice that the health of their crops were becoming compromised. Pests would invade the fields at various stages of growth and destroyed far more of the crop than was increased by the new fertilizer program. Science responded by developing even stronger pesticides and other chemicals in an attempt to protect the crops to maturity. Long ago we have exceeded the savings from limited re-fertilization through the expense of adding chemicals to croplands which not only leave residues in the foods, but subsequently sink in to the ground and end up in the water table thus adversely affecting all animal life, including humans.

This de-mineralisation of our soils has created sick plants that cannot survive to maturity on their own. They are so mineral deficient that livestock of various species fed upon them must be supplemented with numerous ‘salt blocks’ containing various combinations of minerals in order to remain healthy.

Mineral Deficiencies and Chronic Disease

Humans are at the top of this vast food chain, and whatever benefits of deficiencies exist are magnified at the top. In the 1930’s Dr William Albrecht predicted that if we followed the concept of restricted fertilization using the NPK concept, we would see a rise in diseases of a chronic, degenerative nature such as we would compare with the infectious plagues of the past. His dire warning appears to have come true. Today the leading causes of death in Europe and the United States are not contagious, infectious diseases, which by the way are also again on the rise, but rather are the very chronic degenerative diseases predicted by Albrecht and other scientists more than 50 years ago. Heart disease, cancer, arthritis, adult onset diabetes and other such debilitating conditions are not contagious, they merely appear and are diagnosed with little or no hope of effective treatment or amelioration. The rest of Asia follows suit.

What else have we done to cause the destruction of our food supply? While there are undoubtedly many points that could be discussed, for the purpose of our illustration here we will address two other major factors. Soil erosion is the next potential problem – one that only gets worse. It is estimated that 85% of America’s topsoil is at the bottom of the ocean. According to the US Department of Agriculture, the problem is so widespread and so severe that it would be prohibitively expensive to correct. This means that they are feeding 250 million people and serve as the ‘bread basket to the world’, on 15% of their topsoil. Is it any wonder that the foods produced and subsequently eaten are mere shadows of those produced 50 or 100 years ago?

The third and perhaps the most devastating factor in the destruction of the American diet has been the food industry itself. Through over-processing of virtually every food we eat, dozen of nutrients are either destroyed or greatly decreased. This adulteration of foods by the industry that controls them not only robs us of the vital minerals but also the vitamins, making most of our food products nothing more than empty calories.

Unless we seriously embark upon a program of diet, nutrition and supplementation, we cannot expect our “three square meals” to be enough to keep us healthy and fit.

Be well,

Dr Sundardas

Electromagnetic toxicity and illness

Dr Sundardas March 10, 2009 1 Comment

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 not to mention handphones. 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.

Dr. Hans-Anne Hanson of the Institute of Newsbiology at the University of Goteborg, Sweden began experimenting a newborn experimental animals. Brief exposure to microwaves, resulted in damage to nerve-cell structures that became visible, as a latent effect, only two to four months following the exposure. The nerve cell damage was visible in the brain, retina, optic nerve and cerebellum. It is interesting to note that clinical studies done by Dr. E. Courchesne of the Neuropsychology Research Laboratory at Children’s Hospital Research Center, San Diego, report finding a specific pathological lesion in the cerebellum in fourteen of the eighteen autistic children be examined.

Years ago, I had the interesting experience of working with mum to be who was a newscaster. She mentioned that all her female colleagues who worked with her had had babies with congenital birth defects. She wanted a diet and nutrition program si that her baby would be normal. She came in about six months before her intended time to get pregnant, so I put her on a tailored program of diet and supplements to support system. Her baby when she delivered was normal.

A brain surgeon in Singapore recently commented that her noticed a higher incidence on brain tumours in young children. Would any body wonder if this was related to radiation hazards perhaps?

be well,

Dr Sundardas

Are allergies/food sensitivitities affecting your child?

Dr Sundardas March 4, 2009 No Comments

Allergies can play havoc with a child’s ability to benefit from teaching. Some forms of ‘hyperactivity,’ short attention spans and mood swings are caused by allergies and intolerances for certain foods and other environmental factors.

There is much controversy in the medical and related fields concerning allergies and their identification, including the types of tests used to identify allergens (the substance that causes the body to show an allergic reaction). In fact, much about allergies is unknown.

What is known? We know that the white blood cells (also known as lymphocytes) are a fundamental component of the immune system that protects our bodies from invaders. When they make a mistake, an allergic response can occur.

In other words, the blood cells of an allergic person are “misinformed’ at the genetic level and cause the production of large quantities of IgE antibodies. The antibody becomes attached on one side to the food/substance molecule and on the other side to a mast cell (mast cells are a type of cell containing histamine and other allergy mediators instrumental in the allergic response). When this happens, histamines and other chemicals are released from the mast cells, causing such immediate responses as runny nose, itchy eyes, skin rashes and indigestion. IgE can cause anaphylaxis, an extreme, sometimes even life-threatening response in which the airways swell, sometimes to the point where the person cannot breathe.
Signs of allergies and intolerances
Take a long, serious look at your child. Obvious changes sometimes occur in the physical appearance of children and adults who have typical allergies, or food or chemical sensitivities.

Perhaps you recognise a characteristic “spacey” or at times almost “demonic” look in a child’s eyes when he or she suddenly becomes “impossible.” These looks are sometimes accompanied by characteristic sounds, such as throat-clearing and clucking. The latter is typical, in particular, of a dairy or milk sensitivity. Some mothers complain that their children make strange noises at home or at school. A few whine and say the same phrase over and over. In addition, children (and adults) can develop a hoarse voice or red ears or cheeks due to food or chemical exposure. Other symptoms include slurred or rapid speech.

The effects of chemical odours, such as perfume or certain cleaning materials, tend to occur within seconds or a very few minutes. Food reactions take fifteen to sixty minutes to become apparent. A reaction to dust or moulds usually occurs within an hour. Parents can often pinpoint the cause merely by thinking back over what happened. For example, if red earlobes, a severe headache, or wiggly legs occur half an hour after lunch, it would be logical to assume the symptoms are possibly related to something that was eaten. If the problem is eczema, watch the arm and leg creases: these areas commonly become red and itchy during meals or immediately after contact with dust, moulds, or certain foods. The actual rash, however, will not develop until the next day. Also suspect food allergies/sensitivities if your child has any form of intestinal complaints after eating. If dark eye circles and muscle aches routinely occur after gym, art, chemistry or biology class, or after a shower, suspect a reaction to a chemical exposure. If these changes occur after play on freshly cut grass, suspect grass pollen. If a child’s nose becomes itchy and drippy, or if asthma and coughing get worse after tumbling on gym mats or playing on an old carpet, the cause could be dust, moulds, or both. If a youngster becomes wild and uncontrollable and has a peculiar spaced-out look after using a bathroom that smells of scented body preparations, deodorants or disinfectants, suspect chemicals.

Parents should learn to watch for dark eye circles (which can be black, blue or pink), red earlobes (sometimes becoming so hot that ice is needed to provide relief), nose-rubbing, skin-scratching, wiggly legs, yawning and various throaty sounds. Small, horizontal wrinkles under the eyes are typical of allergic children, especially those who have eczema. Abnormally red rosy cheeks can occur in anyone, but they are particularly characteristic of allergic children two to four years old and of adult females who have multiple food or chemical allergies.

Facial twitches or tics, along with restless legs, are very common in some children. Other muscles also can go into and out of spasm causing discomfort or pain. Foods, moulds and chemical odours, such as the smell of tar or perfume, are common but unsuspected causes.

Hives, which look like mosquito bites, are often caused by foods, dust, moulds or chemicals. More generalised rashes can be caused by a chronic yeast infection (often following anti-biotic treatment), by contact with formaldehyde in polyester clothing or bedding or by some chemical found in a laundry detergent or fabric softener.

Stomach pains, ‘winds’, nausea, diarrhea, constipation or halitosis are commonly caused by an allergy to food or drink. Recurrent headaches are another very common allergic symptom in all age groups. The pain may occur above or behind the eyes or on the sides, back or top of head. Yeast overgrowths may be caused by repeated courses of antibiotics (in children, frequently used to medicate ear infections or tonsillitis. A white-coated tongue is a common indication of excess yeast.

Sudden unprovoked aggression in both children and adults can be related to allergy. It is often associated with red earlobes, wiggly legs, dark eye circles and a special ‘look’. Behaviour may include hitting, biting, kicking, spitting and punching.

For twenty years I have seen more than a thousand children with allergies and sensitivities in my practice. The number seem to be increasing in the last decade. I wonder why?

Be well

Dr Sundardas

Why are we becoming more infertile?

Dr Sundardas February 24, 2009 No Comments

I have been writing on health for almost 17 years. One of the very first articles I wrote was on Environmental Toxicity. Bear in mind that this was 15 or 16 years ago and the world was not that savvy about toxicity (at least in Singapore). In those days, magazine articles were supposed to be about 2000 words. When I finished my article it was more than double the length at about 5000 words.

On one hand, I was relieved because I had worked really hard on that article. On the other hand I was horrified. The information I had penned down provided a nightmarish picture of what was going on right beneath our eyes. I couldn’t eat or sleep properly for the next two days.

My editor called me up and grumbled about the length of the article. I told her very politely to feel free to edit it to her heart’s content. I knew she could not. I had written the article too tightly. I was also secretly hoping that I would get paid for two articles instead of one because they would have to run this article as part I and part 2.

My wish came true. Not before she called me a few days later in a state of shock. She could not eat, sleep or rest properly after she read that article either. In a way I felt validated. In another, I felt sick and horrified.

I spent the next 10 years studying, researching and doing post graduate work in Clinical Ecology, Environmental Medicine, Allergies, Cancer and Autism. Along the way I discovered that the same principles of reducing toxic loads would also help couples get pregnant more easily.

In those 10 years, I wrote and accumulated hundreds of pages and documentation on environmental toxicity, illness and pollution. I think I was about 35 when I realized that the sheer volume of literature was so sickening, disheartening and frustrating that it would overwhelm anyone to read it in one book unless it became a reference text. Alternatively I would be branded, tarred and feathered (metaphoricallyspeaking) like the author of “Silent Springs” Rachel Carson was for talking about environmental toxicity long before it was fashionable.

By now as I looked at the epidemic of autism, increase in cancers and strange and bizarre neurological illness, the avalanche of conditions like Chronic Fatigues Syndrome,Fibromyalgia, the increase in liver related toxicity cases, everything started fitting together in a bizarre fashion. Symptoms of environmental toxicity can include the following;

Oily Skin
Weight Gain
Cellulite
Fatigue
Lethargy
Sore and tired eyes
Arthritis
Cataract
Infertility
PMS
Mood Swings
Cancer
Fibroids
Tumours
Atherosclerosis
Heart Disease
Fibroids
Birth Defects
Endometrosis

According to present usages, the term “ecologic illness”, refers to chemically induced disease. The term is used to describe some of the subtler devastating health effects of chemical exposure in the workplace, the home and outdoors. These illnesses, according to San Francisco immunologist Alan S. Levin, appear to stem from damage to the immune system, either from acute poisoning by toxic chemicals or from chronic, low-level exposures that ultimately overwhelm the system. As reviewed by Earon S. Davis, the exact symptoms may vary from person to person, but generally involve an increasing intolerance to wide range of chemicals, including substances like formalehyde, pesticide, natural gas fumes, perfumes and scents, solvents, tobacco smoke and auto exhaust, to mention the more common offenders.

Exposures to small amounts of substances like lead, mercury, or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which have no discernible impact on adults early exposures to dioxin or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), chemicals from industrial activities that accumulate in dietary fat, damage the developing immune system, making the child more prone to infections. Risks of asthma and high blood pressure are increased by early environmental exposures. All of these significantly affect the reproductive systems of both men and women. Every year there are 2000 new chemicals being introduced into the environment.

We are being exposed to 100, 000 chemicals that our grandparents were not exposed to. Most of the toxic chemicals that are fat soluble are also xenoestrogenic. These include
The PCBs, DDT, PBB not to mention lead, mercury, chlorine, fluoride, antibiotics and steroids in too large amounts as well as toxic tampons and breast implants .

Be well

Dr Sundardas

Is Your Water Safe?

Dr Sundardas February 24, 2009 No Comments

There is a global crisis of potable water, but most people in the industrialized nations either don’t know about it or simply don’t care about it. This lack of awareness about the severity of the problem is short sighted and puts humans all over the globe at risk.

Water is not an inexhaustible resource; in fact, there is a finite amount of water on the Earth which is rapidly being depleted thanks to worldwide population growth and contamination due to the infrastructure that allows humans to drive cars, fly in airplanes, heat their homes, and more.

How critical is the problem? Look at these statistics and judge for yourself:

1.2 billion people get sick each year due to polluted water

At least 10 million people die from dysentery, diarrhea, and other diseases caused by impure water

25 million children under the age of five die each year due to impure water and its related illnesses

According to the United Nations and leading scientists, half of the wetlands on the planet have been destroyed and the rate of destruction is increasing. Our rivers and our streams are polluted and the increasing demand for potable water is leading to serious water shortages. As you can see, there is a real urgency to finding effective ways to conserve and purify water.

Contaminated Water

Modern technology is rapidly destroying water’s life-giving capacities. Increased population, industrial wastes and agricultural chemicals are contaminating our water sources. Examples can be found in chemical spills, landfills, excessive herbicide and pesticide sprays, chemical dumps and nitrate fertilizer run off that affect our lakes, underground aquifers, and rivers. Time Magazine reports “over 4000 chemicals” have already been found in drinking water. All levels of government have been slow to act. Meanwhile, more and more chemicals are showing up in the water supply of America’s cities and towns.” Each year in the U.S., 18 billion pounds of pollutants and chemicals are released by industry into the atmosphere, soil and groundwater.

Researchers studying water have identified a progression of the disease process in our body. We can call this the “cycle of disease,” because a direct progression of deterioration in the body as it becomes susceptible to disease can be seen. It begins with water that is contaminated with toxins and chemicals that can’t be neutralized and as a result, changes the chemistry of body fluids.

Public water treatment systems rely on chlorine to kill harmful bacteria. Until recently, concerns about drinking water focused on eliminating pathogens. Chlorination of drinking water was a major factor in the reduction in the mortality rates associated with waterborne pathogens. The use of chlorine was believed to be safe until recent years, when halogenated organic compounds, such as chloroform, were identified in chlorinated drinking water supplies. Recent surveys show that these compounds are common in water supplies throughout the North America. These concerns about cancer risks associated with chemical contamination from chlorination by-products have resulted in numerous epidemiological studies. These studies generally support the notion that by-products of chlorination are associated with increased risk of cancer and other health problems. These risks arise from both drinking and bathing in chlorinated water.

Following are quotes from a variety of sources:

U.S. COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: “Cancer rates for people on chlorinated water systems is 93% higher than for those on non-chlorinated water systems…”

U.S. NEWS &WORLD REPORT – July 29 1991 Is Your Water Safe–The Dangerous State of Your Water “A long hot shower can be dangerous. The toxic chemicals are inhaled in high concentrations.”

High levels of THMs (trihalomethanes) may also have an effect on pregnancy. A California study found that pregnant women who drank large amounts of tap water with high THMs had an increased risk of miscarriage. These studies do not prove that there is a link between THMs and cancer or miscarriage. However, they do show the need for further research in this area to confirm potential health effects.”

Make sure your water is safe and life giving.

Be well

Dr Sundardas

Why soya is not good for you.

Dr Sundardas February 24, 2009 4 Comments

For the last twenty years, tofu has been all the rage. As people became increasingly educated about the dangers of dairy and dairy products, tofu became the viable substitute. However in a bizarre reversal of sorts, we have begun to discover that if a little of something is good, more of it is not necessarily better. “Tofu Shrinks Brain!” Not a science fiction scenario, this sobering soybean revelation is for real. But how did the “poster bean” of the ’90s go wrong? Apparently, in many ways – none of which bode well for the brain.

In a major ongoing study involving 3,734 elderly Japanese-American men, those who ate the most tofu during midlife had up to 2.4 times the risk of later developing Alzheimer’s disease. As part of the three-decade long Honolulu-Asia Aging Study, 27 foods and drinks were correlated with participants’ health. Men who consumed tofu at least twice weekly had more cognitive impairment, compared with those who rarely or never ate the soybean curd.

“The test results were about equivalent to what they would have been if they were five years older,” said lead researcher Dr. Lon R. White from the Hawaii Center for Health Research. For the guys who ate no tofu, however, they tested as though they were five years younger.

What’s more, higher midlife tofu consumption was also associated with low brain weight. Brain atrophy was assessed in 574 men using MRI results and in 290 men using autopsy information. Shrinkage occurs naturally with age, but for the men who had consumed more tofu, White said “their brains seemed to be showing an exaggeration of the usual patterns we see in aging.”

Phytoestrogens – Soy Self Defense

Tofu and other soybean foods contain isoflavones, three-ringed molecules
bearing a structural resemblance to mammalian steroidal hormones. White and his fellow researchers speculate that soy’s estrogen-like compounds (phytoestrogens) might compete with the body’s natural estrogens for estrogen receptors in brain cells.

Plants have evolved many different strategies to protect themselves from predators. Some have thorns or spines, while others smell bad, taste bad, or
poison animals that eat them. Some plants took a different route, using birth
control as a way to counter the critters who were wont to munch.

Plants such as soy are making oral contraceptives to defend themselves, says
Claude Hughes, Ph.D., a neuroendocrinologist at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center.They evolved compounds that mimic natural estrogen. These phytoestrogens caninterfere with the mammalian hormones involved in reproduction and growth – a strategy to reduce the number and size of predators.

Toxicologists Concerned About Soy’s Health Risks

The soy industry says that White’s study only shows an association between tofu consumption and brain aging, but does not prove cause and effect. On the other hand, soy experts at the National Center for Toxicological Research, Daniel Sheehan, Ph.D., and Daniel Doerge, Ph.D., consider this tofu study very important. “It is one of the more robust, well-designed prospective epidemiological studies generally available. . . We rarely have such power in human studies, as well as a potential mechanism.”

In a 1999 letter to the FDA (and on the ABC News program 20/20), the two
toxicologists expressed their opposition to the agency’s health claims for soy, saying the Honolulu study “provides evidence that soy (tofu) phytoestrogens cause vascular dementia. Given that estrogens are important for maintenance of brain function in women; that the male brain contains aromatase, the enzyme that converts testosterone to estradiol; and that isoflavones inhibit this enzymatic activity, there is a mechanistic basis for the human findings.”

Although estrogen’s role in the central nervous system is not well understood, White notes that “a growing body of information suggests that estrogens may be needed for optimal repair and replacement of neural structures eroded with aging.”

One link to the puzzle may involve calcium-binding proteins, which are
associated with protection against neurodegenerative diseases. In recent
animal studies at Brigham Young University’s Neuroscience Center, researchers found that consumption of phytoestrogens via a soy diet for a relatively short interval can significantly elevate phytoestrogens levels in the brain
and decrease brain calcium-binding proteins.

Concerns About Giving Soy to Infants

The most serious problem with soy may be its use in infant formulas. “The
amount of phytoestrogens that are in a day’s worth of soy infant formula equals 5 birth control pills,” says Mary G. Enig, Ph.D., president of the Maryland Nutritionists Association. She and other nutrition experts believe that infant exposure to high amounts of phytoestrogens is associated with early puberty in girls and retarded physical maturation in boys.

A study reported in the British medical journal Lancet found that the “daily
exposure of infants to isoflavones in soy infant-formulas is 6-11 fold higher on a bodyweight basis than the dose that has hormonal effects in adults consuming soy foods.” (A dose, equivalent to two glasses of soy milk per day, that was enough to change menstrual patterns in women. ) In the blood of infants tested, concentrations of isoflavones were 13000-22000 times higher than natural estrogen concentrations in early life.

Soy Interferes with Enzymes

While soybeans are relatively high in protein compared to other legumes, Enig says they are a poor source of protein because other proteins found in soybeans act as potent enzyme inhibitors. These “anti-nutrients” block the action of trypsin and other enzymes needed for protein digestion. Trypsin inhibitors are large, tightly folded proteins that are not completely deactivated during ordinary cooking and can reduce protein digestion. Therefore, soy consumption may lead to chronic deficiencies in amino acid
uptake.

Soy’s ability to interfere with enzymes and amino acids may have direct consequence for the brain. As White and his colleagues suggest, “isoflavones in tofu and other soyfoods might exert their influence through interference with tyrosine kinase-dependent mechanisms required for optimal hippocampal function, structure and plasticity.”

High amounts of protein tyrosine kinases are found in the hippocampus, a
brain region involved with learning and memory. One of soy’s primary
isoflavones, genistein, has been shown to inhibit tyrosine kinase in the
hippocampus, where it blocked “long-term potentiation,” a mechanism of memory formation.

Be well

Dr Sundardas

The Epidemic of Autism

Dr Sundardas February 24, 2009 23 Comments

When I first started practice 19 years ago, I had barely heard and registered that were conditions like ADHD, ADD and Autism. I think I was practicing for almost 3 years before I saw my first real case of learning disability. It was either ADD or ADHD. Since than the numbers have mushroomed. Now I may see 6 to 10 children a month. At least a third will have some kind of learning disability on top of allergy like symptoms. At least one child will be in the Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).

Nearly 12 million children in the United States of America (or up to 17 percent) suffer from one or more developmental disabilities, including deafness, blindness, epilepsy, speech defects, cerebral palsy, delays in growth and development, behavioral problems, or learning disabilities.

Learning disabilities alone affect 5 to 10 percent of children in public schools, and these numbers appear to be increasing. Prior to 1960’s the reported figure was 0.2 percent. According to the US Census Bureau in 1997, there was a 2.7 percent of children under five who exhibited some form of developmental delay.

Why is there an increase?

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) conservatively affects 3 to 6 percent of all school children, and the numbers may be considerably higher. The incidence of autism seems to be increasing, though much of this apparent increase may be due to increased reporting.

Are we poisoning our kids?

Exposures to small amounts of substances like lead, mercury, or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which have no discernible impact on adults, can permanently damage the developing brain of a child, if the exposure occurs when a child is most vulnerable (during development in utero up till the first six months of life) .

Early exposures to dioxin or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), chemicals from industrial activities that accumulate in dietary fat, damage the developing immune system, making the child more prone to infections. Risks of asthma and high blood pressure are increased by early environmental exposures.

The gut-brain connection starts in the womb

When there is significant damage to the lining of the small intestine (intestinal villi,) multiple systems failure (ie the immune system, the digestive system, the nervous system, the endocrine system) tends to manifest. Perhaps of even greater importance is the effect on intestinal permeability. The intestines are lined with a slimy layer of mucoproteins.

This layer provides lubrication and protection for the intestinal wall as food passes down the alimentary canal. These mucoproteins must be sulphated if they are to be continuous, protective and effective. If they are not sulphated, the proteins clump together and leave exposed intestinal material which makes it more susceptible to toxic food particles. When these get into the tissues, the body’s immune system over-reacts, generating auto-immune conditions.

We believe that these peptides are the agents (bullets) which are directly responsible for the symptoms but there may be other agents, which can have a serious impact upon the total picture. In some cases, wheat (gluten) and dairy (casein) appear to be the sole elements but in other cases it is clear that other factors are involved. The involvement of peptides from gluten and casein is very large and will obscure other factors. It is only after the main sources of the bullets, gluten and casein, are removed from the diet that the smoke will clear sufficiently to allow us to detect other causative elements which are largely of dietary origin.

What can you as a parent do? You can clean up your lifestyle. Eat clean food, clean water and reduce your personal exposure to toxins. I am sorry to say this ladies, you need to stop drinking alcohol and smoking for at least one year before conception. You may also want to clean out all your mercury fillings and reduce the metal and toxic load on your body. Very often I have parents and mothers come in to see me after they have one autistic child to figure out what to do for the next.

For those who are interested in learning how to clean themselves up, the resources are outlined in the books below. Alternatively they can also access the website of my Naturopathic Practice www.NaturalTherapies.com . For those who have children with learning disabilities, they can also access the above website and look at the information on Autism and Learning Disabilities.

Be well

Dr Sundardas