Farah Fawcett lost her battle with Colon Cancer on July 25th, 2009.  Farah was at  TV superstar from the 1970’s hit show, Charlie’s Angels.   Could her colon cancer had been prevented?  While I do not know the specifics of her case- studies show that up to colon cancer can be reduced by up to 50% when one optimizes their vitamin D levels. Learn more about Vitamin D and cancer risk. Low vitamin D levels are associated with increased risk of breast cancer, prostate cancer, ovarian cancer and more…..

—-BELOW IS AN EXCERPT FROM VITAMIN D PRESCRIPTION BY ERIC MADRID MD, available on Amazon.com—-

Colon Cancer

Colon cancer is one of the top three cancers affecting those in developed countries. According to the American Cancer Society, colon cancer accounts for 8% of all cancer deaths in men and 9% of all cancer deaths in women in the U.S. Colon cancer will affect 1 in 18 men and 1 in 19 women at some point in their lives. Fortunately, the majority of cases can be prevented. Worldwide, the World Health Organization predicts that colon cancer rates will increase 50% by 2020 and will affect up to 20 million people annually.

Risk factors for developing colon cancer include:

• Colon Polyps
• Poor diet, especially high in red meats
• Overweight
• Obesity
• Racial Groups (African Americans &  Ashkenazi Jews)
• Lack of exercise
• Excess alcohol intake
• Family history
• Type 2 diabetes
• Vitamin D deficiency

Those with higher consumption of fruits and vegetables have a benefit in preventing colon cancer from developing in the first place. A 1996 study reported in JAMA suggested that the trace mineral selenium, a potent antioxidant, and part of the glutathione reductase antioxidant complex, could also be protective against precancerous polyps and colon cancer.

There has been renewed interest in the last few years on the ability of sunshine to prevent colon cancer. Specifically, the sunshine vitamin has anti colon cancer properties, observed back in the 1930s, and later confirmed in the 1980s by Cedric Garland, DrPH (Moores Cancer Center University of California, San Diego), and Frank C. Garland, PhD, FACE (Technical Director, Naval Health Research Center (NHRC), San Diego).
Drs. Cedric and Frank Garlands’ landmark study showed that the risk of colon cancer was associated with solar radiation exposure; many other studies have since confirmed this finding. Drs. Garlands’ 1980 study revealed that in the two states with the most solar radiation, New Mexico and Arizona, white males had cancer rates of 6.7 and 10.1, respectively, per 100,000 people. In the three states with the least solar radiation, New York, Vermont, and New Hampshire, white males experienced colon cancer rates of 17.3, 11.3, and 15.3, respectively, per 100,000 population. Data collection occurred from 1959 to 1961. The conclusion was that those with more sunshine exposure had less colon cancer when compared to those with less sunshine exposure.

A review of the CDC web site and the statistics for colon and rectal cancer from 2002–2004 shows similar results. The data today is more inclusive, with men and women from all ethnicities. Arizona and New Mexico have total colon and rectal cancer rates of 49.9 and 51.8, respectively, per 100,000 population. On the contrary, New York, Vermont, and New Hampshire have rates of 63.0, 57.9, and 59.9, respectively, per 100,000 population…..read more about vitamin D and colon cancer when you purchase Vitamin D Prescription by Dr. Eric Madrid

————————————

(NaturalNews) Children delivered by cesarean section (c-section) are significantly more likely to develop asthma and allergies later in life than children delivered through natural, vaginal birth, according to a study conducted by researchers from National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in Bilthoven, the Netherlands.

A c-section is a procedure in which a child is surgically removed through a mother’s abdomen, rather than emerging naturally through the vaginal opening. It is medically recommended only in cases where vaginal delivery would seriously endanger the life of infant or mother, but is becoming more common as many women’s preferred method of childbirth.

Researchers compared the rates of asthma and allergies among 2,917 eight-year-olds, comparing the rates between those who had been delivered vaginally and those who had been delivered by c-section. They found that the risk of asthma was 79 percent higher in those delivered by c-section compared with those delivered vaginally. The correlation between c-section and asthma risk was even higher among children born to one or more parents with allergies.

“Our results emphasize the importance of gene-environment interactions on the development of asthma in children,” the researchers wrote. “The increased rate of cesarean section is partly due to maternal demand without medical reason. In this situation, the mother should be informed of the risk of asthma for her child, especially when the parents have a history of allergy or asthma.”…read more here…

6 Sex Mistakes Men Make

Hey guys, think you know everything there is to know about having sex with women? That erotic encyclopedia you carry around in your head may contain a lot of basic errors and omissions about women’s sexuality — errors that can lead to sex mistakes.

That’s because — after learning the facts of life — most of us are left to figure out sex for ourselves. Guys tend to take a lot of cues from adult movies, and we all know how true-to-life those are. Experience may help, but many women can be shy when talking about what they like.

To help us with some sex tips, WebMD asked two acclaimed sex educators, Tristan Taormino and Lou Paget, to tell us what they think are the most common sex mistakes men make with women.

Taormino is a prolific author, lecturer, and video producer. Her latest project is the Expert Guide educational video series from Vivid Ed.

Paget is author of The Great Lover Playbook and other sex manuals, and she gives seminars nationwide.

Sex Mistake No.1: You Know What She Wants

Men often make assumptions about what a woman wants based upon what they’ve done with other women. But women aren’t all the same.

“You develop a repertoire as you mature sexually, but you should never assume that what worked for the last person is going to work for this person,” Taormino says.

That applies not only to sexual predilections, but also to relationships, she says. “There are women who can have no-strings-attached sex, and women who can get attached very easily, and then everyone in between.”

Sex Mistake No. 2: You Have All She Needs

Some women can’t have an orgasm with less than 3,000 rpm. No human tongue or fingers can generate that kind of vibration. But men typically think something is wrong if a woman needs a vibrator.

“If the only way that a woman can achieve orgasm is with a vibrator, she’s not broken,” Taormino says.

Think of a vibrator as your assistant, not your substitute. Many couples use vibrators together. “While you’re doing one thing, or two things, the vibrator can be doing something else,” Taormino says…..read more here…

5 Alternative Treatments and Practices Worth Trying

As a society full of technological advancements in all areas of our lives, we are sometimes hesitant to try traditional, or alternative, practices when it comes to our health and well-being. However, there has been a large increase in demand for therapies, treatments, and practices that are not aligned with our Western values.

Many people could feel the benefits of some of these practices, but have yet to try them. Here is a brief list of some alternative treatments and practices that are gaining popularity these days.

Therapeutic Massage

While this is the most popular alternative treatment by far, many people are still hesitant to undergo massage therapy for various reasons. Studies show, however, that there are many great benefits of utilizing massage therapy on a regular basis. Decreased anxiety, improved circulation, and increased flexibility and range of motion are just a few of these benefits. Talk to your physician or a licensed massage therapist and see if massage could help you.

Acupressure

Often confused with acupuncture, acupressure is less invasive and uses no needles to manipulate the body. Acupressure points are not generally related the affected areas, but rather associated with traditional Chinese medicine and the influences of yin, yang, and the individual’s chi. While this may not sound like something worth exploring, many who have undergone acupressure have finally felt relief which traditional medicine had been unable to provide.

Acupuncture

Acupuncture utilizes needles to manipulate the same points as in acupressure. Although acupuncture came first, some people are hesitant to undergo this procedure due to its extensive use of fine pointed needles. However, some people have gone so far as to claim acupuncture helped them to sleep better, quit snoring – even quit smoking. If you are adventurous and have explored your other options, you may want to consider acupuncture.

Reiki

Though this particular alternative treatment has no scientific basis, the people who claim to have experienced the healing powers of Reiki are growing on a significant scale. Reiki practitioners believe they’re able to manipulate a universal healing life-force energy, and that they are able to transfer this intelligent energy to their patients through the use of nothing more than their palms. People who undergo Reiki treatment claim to feel not only physical, but mental, emotional, and spiritual benefits from the treatments as well.

Aromatherapy

Aromatherapy involves the use of essential oils to manipulate physical and/or emotional responses to help with an individual’s healing process. This is actually a Western derivation of alternative medicine, as essential oils are used in various ways in other holistic treatment options in varying degrees. Aromatherapy is used, with varying levels of success, in many people who don’t wish to venture too far beyond the realm of traditional medicine.

This post was contributed by Kelly Kilpatrick, who writes on the subject of medical coding online training. She invites your feedback at kellykilpatrick24 at gmail dot com

Posted in Alternative, Fitness, Longevitiy, Wellness, Women's Health Tagged: acupressure, acupuncture, aromatherapy, reiki ]]> http://healthandsurvival.com/2008/12/18/5-alternative-treatments-and-practices-worth-trying/feed/ 2 Eric Madrid http://healthandsurvival.com/2008/09/19/10-worst-breakfast-foods/ http://healthandsurvival.com/2008/09/19/10-worst-breakfast-foods/#comments Fri, 19 Sep 2008 21:34:57 +0000 healthandsurvival http://healthandsurvival.wordpress.com/?p=582 ]]>

Read about the  best breakfast foods for children

—————–

It’s hard to overestimate the importance of eating breakfast. Studies show that people who take time for a morning meal consume fewer calories over the course of the day, have stronger cognitive skills, and are 30 percent less likely to be overweight or obese. Beyond that, people who skip breakfast are more likely to drink alcohol and smoke, and they’re less likely to exercise.

But just because breakfast is the most important meal of the day doesn’t grant you permission to go into a feeding frenzy. But that’s exactly what many of the country’s most popular breakfast joints are setting you up for, by peddling fatty scrambles, misguided muffins, and pancakes that look like manhole covers.

These foods are loaded with unhealthy fats, added sugars, and refined carbohydrates, which catapult your blood sugar, sap your energy levels, and tell your body to store fat.

To help you avoid the morning mishaps, we searched out the good, the bad, and the greasy, and uncovered some of the worst breakfast foods in America. We’ve presented a sampling of the worst offenders below. It’s like a lineup down at the local police station, except in this case, they’re all guilty as charged.

Worst Side Dish
Burger King Hash Browns (large)
620 calories
40 g fat (11 g saturated; 13 g trans)
1,200 mg sodium
60 g carbs

Yes, you’re ingesting more than a meal’s worth of calories from a side dish, but the real cause for concern here is that these little potato cakes pack seven times more trans fats than you’re supposed to eat all day! Until BK learns to cut out the partially hydrogenated oils, avoid encounters with potatoes of any kind at that fatty food joint.

Eat This Instead!
Burger King Egg & Cheese Croissan’wich
300 calories
17 g fat (6 g saturated; 2 g trans)
740 mg sodium
26 g carbs

Read more here

or Read about the  best breakfast foods for children

Drug addiction is a common problem that affects thousands of people worldwide. Legal drug prescription is also a serious problem and no matter  what social economic status one comes from, they are vulnerable. Betty Ford  helped bring awareness to people about alcoholism.  Perhaps Cindy McCain can bring to the forefront  the problems millions have with vicodin and percocet addiction. She could help millions and help save many families from both emotional and  financial destruction that usually comes with narcotic addiction.  

salon.com > News Oct. 18, 1999
URL: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/10/18/drugs

How Cindy McCain was outed for drug addiction

When an attempt to get tough with a whistleblower backfired in 1994, the McCain spin machine went into overdrive, and the candidate’s wife confessed to problems the media was already poised to reveal.

- – - – - – - – - – - -
By Amy Silverman

GOP presidential candidate John McCain’swife Cindy took to the airwaves last week, recounting for Jane Pauley (on “Dateline”) and Diane Sawyer (on “Good Morning America”) the tale of her onetime addiction to Percocet and Vicodin, and the fact that she stole the drugs from her own nonprofit medical relief organization.

It was a brave and obviously painful thing to do.

It was also vintage McCain media manipulation.

I had d�j� vu watching Cindy McCain on television, perky in a purple suit with tinted pearls to match. It was so reminiscent of the summer day in 1994 when suddenly, years after she’d claimed to have kicked her habit, McCain decided to come clean to the world about her addiction to prescription painkillers.

I believe she wore red that day. She granted semi-exclusive interviews to one TV station and three daily newspaper reporters in Arizona, tearfully recalling her addiction, which came about after painful back and knee problems and was exacerbated by the stress of the Keating Five banking scandal that had ensnared her husband. To make matters worse, McCain admitted, she had stolen the drugs from the American Voluntary Medical Team, her own charity, and had been investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The local press cooed over her hard-luck story. One of the four journalists spoon-fed the story — Doug McEachern, then a reporter for Tribune Newspapers, now a columnist with the Arizona Republic (and, it must be added, normally much more acerbic) — wrote this rather typical lead:

“She was blonde and beautiful. A rich man’s daughter who became a politically powerful man’s wife. She had it all, including an insidious addiction to drugs that sapped the beauty from her life like a spider on a butterfly.”

What McEachern and the others didn’t know was that, far from being a simple, honest admission designed to clear her conscience and help other addicts, Cindy McCain’s storytelling had been orchestrated by Jay Smith, then John McCain’s Washington campaign media advisor. And it was intended to divert attention from a different story, a story that was getting quite messy.

I know, because I had been working on that story for months at Phoenix New Times. I had finally tracked down the public records that confirmed Cindy McCain’s addiction and much more, and the McCains knew I was about to get them. Cindy’s tale was released on the day the records were made public.

But the story I was pursuing was not so much about Cindy McCain’s unfortunate addiction. It was much more about her efforts to keep that story from coming to light, and the possible manipulation of the criminal justice system by her husband and his cohorts. The irony is that Cindy’s secret would have stayed secret if John McCain’s heavy-hitting lawyer, John Dowd (of D.C.’s Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld; his most recent claim to fame was serving as co-counsel for fellow partner Vernon Jordan during impeachment) hadn’t heavy-handedly pulled out all the stops to protect the McCain family.

Dowd tried to get back at the man on Cindy McCain’s staff, Tom Gosinski, who had blown the whistle on her drug pilfering to the DEA. But in the course of trying to get local law enforcement officials to investigate Gosinski — Dowd and the McCains considered him an extortionist; others might call him a whistleblower — Dowd set in motion a process that would eventually bring the whole sordid story to light. When that maneuver backfired, the McCain media machine went into overdrive to spin the story.

It’s a story of unintended consequences. It’s also a story of power politics and media manipulation that’s very un-McCain-like — if you believe his national media hagiography.

But both of Cindy McCain’s staged, teary drug-addiction confessions have been vintage John McCain. His MO is this: Get the story out — even if it’s a negative story. Get it out first, with the spin you want, with the details you want and without the details you don’t want.

McCain did it with the Keating Five, and with the story of the failure of his first marriage (Cindy is his second wife).  Read here about why he and his first wife divorced.

So what you recall after the humble, honest interview, is not that McCain did favors for savings and loan failure Charlie Keating, or that he cheated on his wife, but instead what an upfront, righteous guy he is.

Candor is the McCain trademark, but what the journalists who slobber over the senator fail to realize is that the candor is premeditated and polished. John McCain shoots from the hip — but only after carefully rehearsing the battle plan, to be sure he won’t get shot himself.

This is the story of a time that strategy backfired, and yet the McCain machine still managed to contain the damage.

In the early 1990s, Tom Gosinski was the director of government and international affairs for the American Voluntary Medical Team, which did relief and medical volunteer work in third world countries.

Hired by Cindy McCain in 1991, Gosinski enjoyed his job, but he began to notice McCain’s erratic behavior in the summer of 1992. In his journal, he wrote that he and others suspected the boss was addicted to painkillers and might have been stealing them from the organization.

From Gosinski’s journal, July 27, 1992:

I have always wondered why John McCain has done nothing to fix the problem. He must either not see that a problem exists or … not choose to do anything about it. It would seem that it would be in everyone’s best interest to come to terms with the situation. And do whatever is necessary to fix it. There is so much at risk: The welfare of the children; John’s political career; the integrity of Hensley & Company [Cindy's parents' business]; the welfare of Jim and Smitty Hensley [Cindy's parents]; and the health and happiness of Cindy McCain. The aforementioned matters are of great concern to those directly involved but my main concern is the ability of AVMT to survive a major shake-up. If the DEA were to ever conduct an audit of AVMT’s inventory, I am afraid of what the results might be … It is because of [Cindy McCain's] willingness to jeopardize the credibility of those who work for her that I truly worry.

During my short tenure at AVMT I have been surrounded by what on the surface appears to be the ultimate all-American family. In reality, I am working for a very sad, lonely woman whose marriage of convenience to a U.S. Senator has driven her to: distance herself from friends; cover feelings of despair with drugs; and replace lonely moments with self-indulgences.

In his journal-writing over the next few months, Gosinski would alternately complain about Cindy McCain and express concern for her well-being.

In January 1993, McCain fired Gosinski. She told him that AVMT was having financial problems and couldn’t afford him.

Gosinski had already come to suspect that Cindy McCain had gotten volunteer doctors with AVMT to sign prescriptions for her, and had used employees’ names to fill them. Worried his own name had been used (he would eventually learn that it had), Gosinski approached DEA agents in the spring of 1993 to report McCain’s suspicious behavior. The DEA launched an investigation.

Almost a year later, with the statute of limitations about to run out, Gosinski hired a labor attorney and sued Cindy McCain for wrongful termination. He intended to claim that she fired him because she suspected he knew about her addiction, but the lawsuit never got that far. Instead, Gosinski’s attorney wrote to the McCains, asking for a settlement of $250,000.

Rumors about the untold details of the lawsuit hit the cocktail-party circuit that spring, but the story was locked up tight. As a federal criminal investigation, the DEA probe was completely secret; none of it was public record.

The entire story would likely have gone unreported if attorney John Dowd hadn’t entered the picture. He wrote to Maricopa County attorney Richard Romley, a political ally of McCain, and asked him to investigate Gosinski for extortion.

“We believe that Mr. Gosinski is aware that in the past Cindy had an addiction to prescription painkillers … Given Cindy’s public position, exposure of this sensitive matter would harm her reputation, career, the operation of AVMT, and subject her to contempt and ridicule,” Dowd wrote on April 28, 1994.

Thus began the inadvertent outing of Cindy McCain. Although the federal investigative materials were not public, the county investigative materials were. Romley launched an investigation, and one of the first things his people did, naturally, was ask the feds to turn over their investigative materials.

New Times finally got hold of the county investigative materials and we did our own story. So did the Arizona Republic, which was uncharacteristically aggressive, perhaps because the McCain machine had left the paper out of the loop on the story of Cindy’s addiction.

Among the questions asked: Did Cindy McCain get preferential treatment by the feds? True, Cindy was a first-time offender, which partially explains the fact that she did no prison time; instead, she entered a diversion program. But at the time, defense lawyers told New Times that if Cindy McCain had been a poor minority and not married to a U.S. senator, she likely would have been locked up.

Did Gosinski intend to blackmail Cindy McCain? He told New Times he didn’t. Other AVMT employees told county investigators that he did. But the time line makes extortion hard to believe, since Gosinski had already gone to the DEA before he brought his lawsuit against the McCains.

In any case, Tom Gosinski didn’t out Cindy McCain. John Dowd did, and then Jay Smith was called in for the clean-up.

A few postscripts: Tom Gosinski left town shortly after Cindy McCain’s story broke. By that time, his lawsuit had died, ignored. The county did not pursue the extortion investigation against him.

John Max Johnson, the doctor who had written the prescriptions for Cindy McCain, surrendered his medical license.

Cindy McCain still does relief work and raises the McCains’ four children.

John McCain, of course, is running for president.

And only a handful of people remember the details of Cindy McCain’s 1994 “outing” for drug addiction and drug pilfering, and the work of the McCain machine to protect her.
salon.com | Oct. 18, 1999

HOW I SEE IT!

I think defensive medicine is the key here. A doctor does not want to get sued for missing a diagnosis, especially in a child.   The results could be catastrophic.

First,  the average doctor  coming out of residency has almost $200,000 in student loans. No joke!   In order to pay that back, they will have to make payments of $2000-2500/month for 10 years or $1200/month for 30 years.

Since student loans are so high, most new doctors are going into specialites where they will make more money  instead of primary care; like pediatrics, family medicine and internal medicine. 

The result? 

Fewer family doctors and pediatricians.  The brave new  primary care doctors  pay 20%-25% of their monthly take home (After giving 35%  to taxes)  in student loans and another 10% in malpractice insurance. 

In then end, they take home 30 cents on the dollar.  Imagine making $10 per hour and taking home $3? Most new doctors do just that.  

Next month, Medicare is planning on reimbursing doctors from 11-20%   LESS for the work they do. Unfortunately,  many doctors are then pressured to see more patients per hour just to make ends meet. 

The result, they will do more CT scans of the head, abdomen and just about anywhere else since it is quicker and easier  than spending longer periods of time with  patients getting a detailed history. Contrary to belief, most doctors would love to spend 30 minutes or more with each patient if possible. They just would be able to pay their bills if they did.  

Patients are the real victims here. In addition to this, patients are paying more money for health insurance each year for less services. 

Meanwhile, most health insurance company stock prices are up 200-300% over the last 8 years.

The healthcare system is broken and until there is malpractice reform and health insurance reform- patients are actually going to be putting their own lives at risk. Patients and Doctors both  need to speak up!  Health Insurance CEOs make up to $51 million dollars/year while you stuggle to pay your $10 copay.

 ———–

Computed tomography (CT or CAT) scans help doctors detect everything from cancer to kidney stones. But some physicians are raising concerns about the safety of such procedures — most notably, an increase in cancer risk. A CT scan packs a mega-dose of radiation — as much as 500 times that of a conventional X-ray. If your doctor orders a CT scan for you or your child, should you think twice?

Absolutely, say researchers behind two recent studies that sound the alarm about the increased cancer risk associated with multiple CT scans. In the first study of its kind, physicians at hospitals in Florida and Washington, D.C., evaluated the medical-imaging records of 1,243 randomly selected patients to calculate just how much radiation each patient had sustained in the past five years. Although CT scans were the biggest source of radiation, other offenders included X-rays and mammograms. The results of the study, presented in May at the annual conference of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, were disturbing: the average patient had received 45 millisieverts (mSv) of radiation. (The typical chest X-ray dispatches 0.02 mSv of radiation.) And 12% of patients had gotten more than twice that amount — 100 mSv or more. “Our focus is to bring awareness to the fact that people are getting large doses of radiation and it’s not innocuous,” says Timothy Bullard, the study’s lead author and chief medical officer at Orlando Regional Medical Center. “We want people to use the technology appropriately.”

“Appropriate” is the key word — especially since a review study published last November in the New England Journal of Medicine determined that as many as one-third of all CT scans performed in the United States are unnecessary. The authors take issue with the “perhaps 20 million adults and, crucially, more than 1 million children per year in the United States [who] are being irradiated unnecessarily.” Part of the problem, the authors say, is that patients are being prescribed multiple, unneeded CT scans, a predicament that could be avoided with better communication between physicians. “Having the same CT scan twice is ridiculous,” says David Brenner, the review’s lead author and director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University Medical Center. “There is no excuse.” In one of the review’s highlighted studies, among patients undergoing CT scans, 30% were on their third scan, 7% had five or more, and 4% had more than nine. Also to blame: doctors increasingly practicing defensive medicine. “There is an underlying philosophy that you’re at fault if you miss anything,” says Bullard. “The goal is to be perfect every time.” Plus, he notes, CT scans have no immediate negative side effects. “They are quick, painless, and send patients away with the sense of satisfaction that everything’s been done.”

Exactly how much radiation is too much? Because CT scans came into vogue in the 1980s and radiation-induced cancer takes roughly 20 years to develop, long-term studies of CT scans and cancer are still under way. But scientists are already anticipating future health implications. Indeed, researchers found a population of 25,000 Japanese post-atomic-bomb survivors who were exposed to roughly the same amount of radiation as two CT scans. Based in part on those studies, the Food and Drug Administration estimates that an adult’s lifetime risk of developing radiation-induced cancer from a CT scan is roughly 1 in 2,000. Worse, the risk for children is even higher.

Compared with adults, children are more sensitive to radiation because they have longer life expectancies and because their cells divide more rapidly, making their DNA more vulnerable to damage. A child’s risk of developing a fatal cancer from one CT scan is as high as 1 in 500. Although newer machines can be adjusted to deliver up to 50% less radiation for children and small adults, a 2001 study published in the American Journal of Radiation showed that radiologic technologists (RT) rarely make those adjustments. “Changing technical factors is very easy. It just requires a little thought and a few extra seconds,” says Michele Scoglietti, a spokesperson for the American Society of Radiologic Technologists. “But I think there are many RTs who are either not trained to vary the technique, don’t know how, are in a hurry or are just lazy.”

When doctors first ordered a CT scan for Jen Houck’s six-month-old daughter in 2003, the new mom was more worried about the risks of anesthesia (used to keep children from squirming in the machine) than of radiation exposure. In 2006 and 2007, her daughter, now 5, had two additional CT scans, 6 months apart, for what doctors initially thought was a growth abnormality. They’ve since determined the child was perfectly healthy. “All that, just to find out her head is bigger than normal,” says the 27-year-old mother of two in Boone, North Carolina. In hindsight, Houck wishes she had done things a bit differently. “I would have asked more questions about the necessity for a third scan so soon after the second.” She also says no one mentioned the option of a low-dose scan, and she has no idea how much radiation her daughter received. “I wish I’d known to ask the question.”

So what should you ask, if a doctor recommends a CT scan for you or your child? Brenner suggests the following: is a CT scan really necessary? Might a test that doesn’t involve radiation, such as an ultrasound or MRI, do the job? In some cases, a CT scan is absolutely required — for example, for diagnosing severe head trauma or internal injuries, for acute abdominal pain, or to diagnose an existing cancer. If your doctor schedules you for a scan, call ahead to see if you can bring a flash drive. That way you can take an electronic copy of your CT scan to go, and may be able to avoid another scan later, should you move or change doctors. (A hard copy of the scan is bulkier, but may also be an option.) If your child needs a CT scan, ask the technologist to put the machine on pediatric-appropriate settings. For more information on kids and CT scan safety, visit the http://www.pedrad.org/associations/5364/ig/.

• Find this article at:
• http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1818520,00.html

So you want to take Vitamin C, how about if it was illegal to take that vitamin C, what if it was so illegal that you could be thrown in jail for up to 2 years and fined up to $5,000,000! Sounds like fiction doesn’t it?
Well it’s about to become reality unless people become aware of what is going on. The Canadian Government is trying to pass a bill known as Bill C51. This bill has already passed its second reading and it is flying under the radar, it is very close to becoming law and some powers that be DON’T WANT YOU TO KNOW!

This bill would give entire control of supplements over to drug companies by only allowing MDs to “Prescribe” them as they see fit. Of course we know here in this country the government controls the doctors and the pharmaceutical companies tell the government what laws they want inorder to make more profit.

What this means is that if you want to take a multivitamin or some Omega-3, you have to book an appointment with your doctor, go in and try to convince your doctor that you are in need of these supplements. If you doctor doesn’t approve or better yet decides a certain drug would be better off for you then you unfortunately won’t have access to your supplements anymore.

On top of this the entire natural supplement industry will collapse on itself, thousands of jobs will be lost and even more stress will be placed on our already crumbing over-stressed medical system. Imagine waiting over a month to get in to see your MD just to request if you can take some oregano oil for a cold that has now come and past, only to have your request denied anyway.

The irony of all this is that MDs who are NOT trained in the use of herbs and supplements for the most part will have full control over what you can and CANNOT TAKE. To summarize:
….read more here….

FDA Warns Companies to Stop Selling Fake Cancer Cures
Fraudulent products present a safety hazard to the public, agency says

 
By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, June 17 (HealthDay News) — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has sent letters warning more than two dozen companies to stop selling fraudulent products that claim to prevent or cure cancer.

The agency is also cautioning consumers not to buy or use these products, which include tablets, teas, tonics, black salves, and creams, and are sold under various names on the Internet.

“Health fraud has been around for years, and it is a cruel form of greed,” David Elder, director of FDA’s Office of Enforcement in the Office of Regulatory Affairs, said during a morning teleconference Tuesday. “Fraud involving cancer treatments can be especially heartbreaking.”

The warning letters, sent to 23 U.S. companies and one Canadian and one Australian company, cover 125 unapproved products with labeling claims to cure, treat or prevent cancer. “These claims are unproven, unreliable, and they are unkind to the patient who is seeking help,” Elder said.

Elder said the FDA is concerned that some of the products present a safety hazard to consumers. “Others can interfere with medicines that a patient has already taken. And they could be used to forgo medically acceptable treatment plans,” he said.

The bogus cures include ingredients such as bloodroot, shark cartilage, coral calcium, cesium, ellagic acid, Cat’s Claw, an herbal tea called Essiac, and mushrooms such as Agaricus Blazeii, Shitake, Maitake, and Reishi, the FDA said.

“These products pose either a direct health risk to consumers because the products themselves can cause harm, or a serious indirect health risk because the products are marketed for a serious disease, in this case cancer,” Michael Levy, director of FDA’s Division of New Drugs and Labeling Compliance in the Office of Compliance, said during the teleconference.

For example, so-called black salve products, touted to treat skin cancer, can be particularly hazardous, Levy said. “Black salve products essentially burn off layers of the skin and are supposed to also burn away skin cancer,” he said. “But what we have seen is that it actually burns away healthy skin. There is documented evidence of black salve products destroying large parts of people’s skin and the underlying tissue.”

Levy also said the FDA is concerned that consumers will purchase these products instead of products that are proven to be safe and effective.

Elder said: “As a result of these warning letters, FDA expects prompt and complete corrective action. Firms that don’t heed the warnings we have delivered, and other firms marketing similar unapproved products, may face further regulatory action from the agency.”

According to the FDA, the fraudulent claims found on the products include:

• “Treats all forms of cancer.”
• “Causes cancer cells to commit suicide!”
• “80% more effective than the world’s number one cancer drug.”
• “Skin cancers disappear.”
• “Target cancer cells while leaving healthy cells alone.”
• “Shrinks malignant tumors.”
• “Avoid painful surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or other conventional treatments.”

Companies that don’t stop these violations can have their products seized or injunctions placed upon them and also are liable for criminal charges, according to the agency.

More information

For more on fake cancer cures, visit the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

By Anne Harding