Tuesday, July 28, 2015

Defying Voters’ Wishes, House Passes the DARK Act

This dangerous, biotech-industry-friendly GMO labeling legislation is on its way to the Senate, but the fight is far from over. Action Alert!

As we reported last week, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) introduced a bill that has been championed by the Monsantos of the world, not to mention the Big Food industry. The deceptively titled “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015” would preempt state efforts to pass mandatory GMO labeling laws with a completely voluntary standard. It would also block communities and states from banning the cultivation of GMO crops.

A voluntary standard? What company that uses GMO ingredients would voluntarily disclose that fact? You may remember the devastating quote from an employee of a Monsanto subsidiary back in ’94: “If you put a label on genetically engineered food, you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it.” In other words, if it’s voluntary, consumers will never see a label containing the information they have overwhelmingly said they want. That’s why pro-labeling advocates have called the bill the “DARK” (“Deny Americans the Right to Know”) Act.

Late last week, by a vote of 275 to 150, the DARK Act passed the House, and is now on it’s way to the Senate. While it still is unclear if the Senate will consider the DARK Act or take up a similar bill that is reportedly being written by Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND), any step forward for this bill is dangerous for the 93% of Americans who want to know what’s in their food.

We will continue to track the DARK Act through the Senate, but if the bill continues to move, it will likely go to the House floor again. We need to dissuade those who supported this measure from doing so again.

Action Alert! “Thank—or spank” your representative, depending on how he or she voted! Say thanks if your representative voted against the DARK Act—or “spank” your representative, voicing your disappointment, if your congressperson voted in favor of it, and urge him or her to reconsider that support when the bill comes back to the House floor. Simply click the “Take Action” button, then fill in your zip code to find out which way your representative voted. Please send your message immediately.

Take-Action

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1HYyKaG via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1I7fEgE

New Proposal Gives Hope to Terminally Ill Patients

A new “Right to Try” law has been introduced in the House of Representatives in addition to Rep. Griffith’s bill. They both need our support! Action Alert!

A few months ago, we reported on the re-introduction of the Compassionate Freedom of Choice Act sponsored by Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA). The purpose of the bill is simple: eliminate bureaucratic hurdles and roadblocks for terminally ill patients who wish to try experimental medication not yet approved by the FDA.

As it stands now, individual patients may apply for access to experimental treatments outside of a drug trial if they have a serious or life-threatening disease or condition; have no other treatment options left; and can persuade a qualified physician to deliver the treatment. Under these circumstances, the FDA may, at the agency’s discretion, grant a “compassionate use” exception to prescribe the new medication. But the program is marred by a prohibitively cumbersome application and documentation process, and the agency has repeatedly refused access—completely arbitrarily. Their logic seems to be that a drug can be riskier than certain death. The agency can even revoke permission after it has been granted!

Rep. Griffith’s bill eliminates the need for the FDA’s approval or even involvement, and streamlines physician and patient access to experimental drugs. It would ensure that dying patients and their families—who don’t have the time or the strength to do so—won’t have to wage fruitless bureaucratic battles over decisions that are, frankly, none of the government’s business.

As of now, Griffith’s bill has only two co-sponsors. Without a strong showing of public support in favor of the legislation, it stands little chance of moving through Congress. Click the button below to send a message to your representatives, urging them to support this important piece of legislation.

There is, however, a second bill that has been introduced by Reps. Matt Salmon (R-AZ), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), and Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), which approaches this issue from a different angle. Almost two dozen states have passed their own versions of so-called “Right to Try” legislation, allowing patients and doctors to bypass FDA regulations under certain conditions. The problem is that many drug companies are unwilling to violate federal regulations that require FDA approval for expanded access to experimental drugs, effectively neutering the state laws.

This new bill, the Right to Try Act of 2015, HR 3012, prevents the federal government—including the FDA and the DEA—from interfering with the twenty-one states that have already passed Right to Try legislation.

It’s important to remember that this is, by definition, a life-and-death issue. Regular readers will recall our continuing coverage of Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s ongoing battle with the FDA over the antineoplaston (ANP) cancer treatment he has pioneered.

Over the years, the FDA has denied expanded access (also known as compassionate use) to Dr. Burzynski’s treatment to a number of dying patients with no other alternatives, arguing that the potential benefits of the treatment do not justify the potential risks. Astonishingly, the FDA representatives who denied one patient’s request did not challenge the fact that the treatment had no significant additional side effects when compared to standard cancer therapies!

In one tragic case, a five-year-old diagnosed with aggressive brain cancer died while waiting for the FDA to approve an application for compassionate use ANP treatment. The FDA eventually did grant the child compassionate use, but by that time he was already brain-dead.

The following is an open letter sent to the FDA from the parents of that five-year-old. It highlights the pain, frustration, and the needless bureaucratic wrangling that characterize the current system:

Open Letter to FDA:

I am still blown away by the cruelty of the system.

Our beloved 5-year-old son, Elisha, was diagnosed in October 2012 with an aggressive malignant brain cancer (Anaplastic Medulla Blastoma}. The worst nightmare of any parent, and it happened to us!

Our son’s medical file was seen across the USA and no one had an adequate answer because there just wasn’t enough research or funding for pediatric brain cancer. We were presented with a few protocols which, naively, we later learned, were ineffective when up against the already disseminated disease.

We had no choice but to follow that protocol which included surgery (causing Elisha to become handicapped}, high dosage radiation (which burnt him} and high dosage systemic chemo which almost killed him with every cycle and required rescue stem cell transplant.

We wanted Elisha to receive Gene-Targeted therapy rather than systemic chemo which destroys the body and the immunity system. An example of the FDA’s barbaric practice is their response to our request to try some clinical trials. We were told we were not allowed until our Elisha had gone through the “standard of care” mainstream protocol. And if he relapsed, ONLY THEN would we be granted permission to try Gene-Targeted trial therapy.

In September 2013 after a grueling year of a harsh protocol that nearly killed our son due to the horrific side effects of treatments forced on Elisha under “standard of care”, our son had a relapse. (We do not think he was ever really disease free.} In any case, this time the disease assaulted him with a vengeance.

We started the frantic search for something to halt the tumors …without much help from his doctors. We researched and found some targeted therapies, but by the time we found out about these clinical trials, he was not eligible for some of them.

That was the ironic FDA catch-22 death sentence. While Elisha’s treatment had to prove their protocol a failure before allowing us to move forward with a new promising procedure, their failure provided the time for the tumor to grow too large for the trial requested.

With the help of a cancer researcher we put our son on several drugs. We gained some time with these drugs but the tumor was very aggressive and our son started experiencing tremendous pain and seizures. Time was of the essence! We needed something and we needed it fast! Our son was dying in front of our eyes.

After investigating, we learned about Antineoplastons (ANP) and the lifelong work of Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski. We spoke with people who had been healed in the past through the ANP, but the FDA had put a partial clinical hold on Dr. Burzynski’s clinic preventing any more patients from being treated!

Here began our unnecessary battle to obtain ANP treatment. Instead of spending as much time as we could with our terminally ill child, we were on the internet launching a campaign to grant us compassionate use for the medicine. Early conversations with the FDA before reaching 100,000 petition signatures were “we will never grant you compassionate use for this drug …we don’t think even a million signatures will make us change our mind”.

We argued, we cried, we begged …If our son was going to die, why NOT let us try? Even if there was a small chance, it would be worth it! Was the FDA really trying to protect our child when in a heartbeat, the FDA granted permission for Elisha to be on a radiation & chemo protocol that is proven not to be effective in anaplastic Medulla Blastoma?

If the FDA cared at all, why didn’t it care to share the true lack of effectiveness of the drugs my son was on? Did the FDA let prejudicial opinion of Dr. Burzynski,or a personal vendetta against him get in the way of helping our son?

It amazes us that the FDA needs at least 100,000 people begging for compassion before it can display any!

THE BIG QUESTION is why did you end up granting us compassionate use after Elisha was already brain dead? Where is the compassion in that? Why couldn’t you grant us compassionate use months before when he had a chance to recover? I suggest you take the word compassionate out of your lexicon.

When people are dying and run out of choices, this is how I view granting compassionate use:

  1. A board should convene and grant use within a matter of day.
  1. Compassionate use of trial drugs should be considered even before relapse in cases of harsh mainstream protocols that are known for failure or do not have a high success rates.

Patients or parents of sick & helpless children should have the right to choose between a failed protocol or trials. Trial treatments may not have had time and research funding to prove their success, but some mainstream protocols have proven to their FAILURE yet are being forces on patients!

If the statistics look low in both cases, aren’t we better off testing newer and targeted approaches? And shouldn’t we consider therapies which provide an enhance quality of life for whatever short time remains for these patients?

I feel cheated by the system that was put in place to protect us, but in reality betrayed us!!!!!

Elisha was put on a failed St Jude protocol (SJMB03). After Elisha’s death I found this quote from Dr. Amar Gajjar, MD, co-chair of Oncology at St. Jude’s hospital. Dr. Amar Gajjar admits that current protocols are not effective in high risk Medulla Blastoma and that there is absolutely a need for new drugs: “We are looking to improve the outlook for high-risk medulla blastoma patients, whose cure rate hovers around 40 percent. Patients with other forms of medulla blastoma are twice as likely to survive. We need new chemotherapy agents, because the current treatment often doesn’t cure.

If current chemo’s are not working let’s take the “Chemotherapy blinders” off and look into safer targeted non-toxic treatments. It should not be one size fits all! Treatment should be tested against genome sequencing and many other factors.

We must do something! We cannot let more children die or suffer through futile and painfully cruel treatments. Their voices cry out to us!

I pray for better days in which better ways to heal our children are forthcoming.

Tragedies such as this demonstrate why it is so critical to pass bills like the Compassionate Freedom of Choice Act and the Right to Try Act. It can be the difference between life and death for a spouse, child, or other family and loved ones.

Action Alert! Write to your representative and urge him or her to support both the Compassionate Freedom of Use Act and the Right to Try Act, which give terminal patients another shot at life. Please send your message immediately.

Take-Action

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1D5INfC via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1LTBpH5

FDA Adds Heart Attack and Stroke Warning to Some Painkillers

Why did it take the FDA so long to warn consumers about these increased dangers? And why, despite these new warnings, does the agency seriously understate the risks?

Earlier this month, the FDA announced it would be strengthening its warnings on non-aspirin nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), updating what is already printed on many NSAID labels about the drugs’ increased risk of heart attack or stroke. The updated labels will include language which warns that these serious side effects can occur as early as the first few weeks of using an NSAID; that the risk may increase with longer use of the NSAID; and that the risk appears greater at higher doses.

NSAIDs are typically used to relieve the pain or fever that results from a variety of conditions. Some of the brands that will have the updated warnings include Celebrex, Advil, Aleve, and Daypro.

This half-hearted, much-too-late admission by the FDA of the dangers of NSAIDs is hardly enough to protect Americans from the well-documented dangers of this class of drugs, as well as other common over-the-counter painkillers such as acetaminophen (i.e., Tylenol). Throughout the years, we’ve documented the scientific evidence showing how deadly these painkillers can be:

  • One study conservatively estimated that 107,000 people are hospitalized each year for NSAID-related gastrointestinal complications and “at least 16,500 NSAID-related deaths occur each year among arthritis patients alone.”
  • Another study showed that patients who take NSAIDs have a 90% greater likelihood of dying from all causes.
  • Daily or long-term use of aspirin doubles the risk of internal bleeding and does not reduce heart attack risk for people with no history of heart problems.
  • By the FDA’s own calculation, acetaminophen—the active ingredient in Tylenol—was the leading cause of liver failure in Americans between 1998 and 2003, and there’s no reason to think that this has changed in the years since. Despite this fact, the New York Times published an article blasting nutritional supplements, specifically green tea extract, for causing liver damage—without even once mentioning the damage done by acetaminophen! In the same way, the FDA has left acetaminophen out of this latest warning. Is this because of industry pressure? It is hard to see any other reason.
  • Every year, 78,000 people go to the emergency room from acetaminophen overdose, whether accidental or intentional. The problem was so bad that the FDA asked doctors to stop prescribing any medication that has more than 325 mg of acetaminophen per dose. Of course, this ignores the fact that if consumers think the prescribed dose isn’t cutting the pain, many will think nothing of taking an extra tablet or two.
  • A study published in JAMA Pediatrics found that Tylenol taken by women during their pregnancy could raise the risk of ADHD and similar disorders in their children by up to 40%. Another study showed that women taking acetaminophen during pregnancy increased the risk of their children having serious behavior problems at age 3 by 70%.

Considering this evidence, it’s outrageous that the FDA has not been more vigilant in making these products safer—or, at the very least, included acetaminophen in its updated warnings— especially given how widely these products are used both for everyday purposes and for the millions of Americans with chronic pain.

The good news is there is research and clinical evidence supporting natural solutions for pain that are non-addictive and cost-effective. You can see our past coverage for a more comprehensive list of what has been studied, but here’s a short review of some of these alternatives to NSAIDs.

(Note: These options are meant to start a conversation between you and your integrative doctor on natural alternatives for chronic pain.)

Dietary supplements

  • Sulfur-containing MSM (methylsulfonylmethane) not only provides pain and anti-inflammatory relief for osteoarthritis, but can also be effective for hay fever and other allergies. As many of us do not get enough usable sulfur in our diet, MSM is offered in powder as well as supplement form, which also facilitates the larger doses that may be necessary for pain and allergy relief.
  • Turmeric, ginger, boswellia, and bromelain exhibit remarkable anti-inflammatory properties (bromelain should be taken at high doses on an empty stomach, as explained at LEF.org).
  • Cayenne cream reduces substance P, a chemical component of nerve cells that transmits pain signals to brain.
  • Cetyl myristoleateacts as a joint lubricant and an anti-inflammatory.
  • The GLA in evening primrose, black currant, and borage oils can help arthritic pain.
  • A member of our staff uses the Swiss Alpine herb butterbur for headaches and migraines (which can often be a side effect of prescription drugs). It also works well for hay fever. Because a toxic element must be removed from the plant, use a reliable preparation such as Petodolex.
  • Samento (a form of cat’s claw, an herb), green tea extract, and zeaxanthin (and other carotenoids) can help manage rheumatoid arthritis. Natural alternatives are particularly important, given the serious—and sometimes fatal—side effects of prescription RA treatments.
  • Even if you already take fish or krill oil, higher-than-normal dosages are anti-inflammatory and may help you manage pain.

Injection therapies that stimulate your body’s natural healing mechanisms (all of the following can only be delivered when appropriate by a knowledgeable and skilled integrative physician)

  • Prolotherapy is the injection of natural substances into chronically injured areas of the body. The injected substances themselves don’t do the healing; instead, they stimulate cell growth in the tissues that stabilize weakened joints, cartilage, ligaments, and tendons.
  • Ozone therapy—a type of oxidative medicine that can also be used to treat viral and fungal infections—is the injection of oxygen gas (ozone) into affected areas. Ozone has been shown to deactivate bacteria, simulate oxygen metabolism, and activate the immune system.
  • Oxygen therapy. Ozone molecules are composed of three oxygen atoms bound together. Oxygen molecules have two such atoms. Other forms of oxygen therapy, such as hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), may help as well by flooding wounded tissue with the pressurized oxygen it needs to repair itself.
  • Prolozone therapy utilizes injections that are a combination of collagen-producing substances and  As a fusion of prolotherapy and ozone therapy, it is sometimes described as a major advance on both treatments.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1D5INft via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1LTBrPd

Action Alert: Support Compassionate Use

Related article: New Proposal Gives Hope to Terminally Ill Patients

.errordiv { padding:10px; margin:10px; border: 1px solid #555555;color: #000000;background-color: #f8f8f8; text-align:center; width:500px; }
var ai_iframe_width_iframe2553 = 0; var ai_iframe_height_iframe2553 = 0;var aiIsIe8=false;var aiReadyCallbacks = ( typeof aiReadyCallbacks != ‘undefined’ && aiReadyCallbacks instanceof Array ) ? aiReadyCallbacks : [];var onloadFirediframe2553 = false; function aiShowIframe() { jQuery(“#iframe2553″).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiShowIframeId(id_iframe) { jQuery(id_iframe).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiResizeIframeHeight(height) { aiResizeIframeHeight(height,iframe2553); } function aiResizeIframeHeightId(height,width,id) {aiResizeIframeHeightById(id,height);} http://ift.tt/1D5Fkxyvar ifrm_iframe2553 = document.getElementById(“iframe2553″);
var hiddenTabsDoneiframe2553 = false;
function resizeCallbackiframe2553() {}

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1I781Xk via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1LTBrP1

Defying Voters’ Wishes, House Passes the DARK Act

This dangerous, biotech-industry-friendly GMO labeling legislation is on its way to the Senate, but the fight is far from over. Action Alert!

As we reported last week, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) introduced a bill that has been championed by the Monsantos of the world, not to mention the Big Food industry. The deceptively titled “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015” would preempt state efforts to pass mandatory GMO labeling laws with a completely voluntary standard. It would also block communities and states from banning the cultivation of GMO crops.

A voluntary standard? What company that uses GMO ingredients would voluntarily disclose that fact? You may remember the devastating quote from an employee of a Monsanto subsidiary back in ’94: “If you put a label on genetically engineered food, you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it.” In other words, if it’s voluntary, consumers will never see a label containing the information they have overwhelmingly said they want. That’s why pro-labeling advocates have called the bill the “DARK” (“Deny Americans the Right to Know”) Act.

Late last week, by a vote of 275 to 150, the DARK Act passed the House, and is now on it’s way to the Senate. While it still is unclear if the Senate will consider the DARK Act or take up a similar bill that is reportedly being written by Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND), any step forward for this bill is dangerous for the 93% of Americans who want to know what’s in their food.

We will continue to track the DARK Act through the Senate, but if the bill continues to move, it will likely go to the House floor again. We need to dissuade those who supported this measure from doing so again.

Action Alert! “Thank—or spank” your representative, depending on how he or she voted! Say thanks if your representative voted against the DARK Act—or “spank” your representative, voicing your disappointment, if your congressperson voted in favor of it, and urge him or her to reconsider that support when the bill comes back to the House floor. Simply click the “Take Action” button, then fill in your zip code to find out which way your representative voted. Please send your message immediately.

Take-Action



from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1HYyKaG via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1LTu2iA

New Proposal Gives Hope to Terminally Ill Patients

A new “Right to Try” law has been introduced in the House of Representatives in addition to Rep. Griffith’s bill. They both need our support! Action Alert!

A few months ago, we reported on the re-introduction of the Compassionate Freedom of Choice Act sponsored by Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA). The purpose of the bill is simple: eliminate bureaucratic hurdles and roadblocks for terminally ill patients who wish to try experimental medication not yet approved by the FDA.

As it stands now, individual patients may apply for access to experimental treatments outside of a drug trial if they have a serious or life-threatening disease or condition; have no other treatment options left; and can persuade a qualified physician to deliver the treatment. Under these circumstances, the FDA may, at the agency’s discretion, grant a “compassionate use” exception to prescribe the new medication. But the program is marred by a prohibitively cumbersome application and documentation process, and the agency has repeatedly refused access—completely arbitrarily. Their logic seems to be that a drug can be riskier than certain death. The agency can even revoke permission after it has been granted!

Rep. Griffith’s bill eliminates the need for the FDA’s approval or even involvement, and streamlines physician and patient access to experimental drugs. It would ensure that dying patients and their families—who don’t have the time or the strength to do so—won’t have to wage fruitless bureaucratic battles over decisions that are, frankly, none of the government’s business.

As of now, Griffith’s bill has only two co-sponsors. Without a strong showing of public support in favor of the legislation, it stands little chance of moving through Congress. Click the button below to send a message to your representatives, urging them to support this important piece of legislation.

There is, however, a second bill that has been introduced by Reps. Matt Salmon (R-AZ), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), and Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), which approaches this issue from a different angle. Almost two dozen states have passed their own versions of so-called “Right to Try” legislation, allowing patients and doctors to bypass FDA regulations under certain conditions. The problem is that many drug companies are unwilling to violate federal regulations that require FDA approval for expanded access to experimental drugs, effectively neutering the state laws.

This new bill, the Right to Try Act of 2015, HR 3012, prevents the federal government—including the FDA and the DEA—from interfering with the twenty-one states that have already passed Right to Try legislation.

It’s important to remember that this is, by definition, a life-and-death issue. Regular readers will recall our continuing coverage of Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s ongoing battle with the FDA over the antineoplaston (ANP) cancer treatment he has pioneered.

Over the years, the FDA has denied expanded access (also known as compassionate use) to Dr. Burzynski’s treatment to a number of dying patients with no other alternatives, arguing that the potential benefits of the treatment do not justify the potential risks. Astonishingly, the FDA representatives who denied one patient’s request did not challenge the fact that the treatment had no significant additional side effects when compared to standard cancer therapies!

In one tragic case, a five-year-old diagnosed with aggressive brain cancer died while waiting for the FDA to approve an application for compassionate use ANP treatment. The FDA eventually did grant the child compassionate use, but by that time he was already brain-dead.

The following is an open letter sent to the FDA from the parents of that five-year-old. It highlights the pain, frustration, and the needless bureaucratic wrangling that characterize the current system:

Open Letter to FDA:

I am still blown away by the cruelty of the system.

Our beloved 5-year-old son, Elisha, was diagnosed in October 2012 with an aggressive malignant brain cancer (Anaplastic Medulla Blastoma}. The worst nightmare of any parent, and it happened to us!

Our son’s medical file was seen across the USA and no one had an adequate answer because there just wasn’t enough research or funding for pediatric brain cancer. We were presented with a few protocols which, naively, we later learned, were ineffective when up against the already disseminated disease.

We had no choice but to follow that protocol which included surgery (causing Elisha to become handicapped}, high dosage radiation (which burnt him} and high dosage systemic chemo which almost killed him with every cycle and required rescue stem cell transplant.

We wanted Elisha to receive Gene-Targeted therapy rather than systemic chemo which destroys the body and the immunity system. An example of the FDA’s barbaric practice is their response to our request to try some clinical trials. We were told we were not allowed until our Elisha had gone through the “standard of care” mainstream protocol. And if he relapsed, ONLY THEN would we be granted permission to try Gene-Targeted trial therapy.

In September 2013 after a grueling year of a harsh protocol that nearly killed our son due to the horrific side effects of treatments forced on Elisha under “standard of care”, our son had a relapse. (We do not think he was ever really disease free.} In any case, this time the disease assaulted him with a vengeance.

We started the frantic search for something to halt the tumors …without much help from his doctors. We researched and found some targeted therapies, but by the time we found out about these clinical trials, he was not eligible for some of them.

That was the ironic FDA catch-22 death sentence. While Elisha’s treatment had to prove their protocol a failure before allowing us to move forward with a new promising procedure, their failure provided the time for the tumor to grow too large for the trial requested.

With the help of a cancer researcher we put our son on several drugs. We gained some time with these drugs but the tumor was very aggressive and our son started experiencing tremendous pain and seizures. Time was of the essence! We needed something and we needed it fast! Our son was dying in front of our eyes.

After investigating, we learned about Antineoplastons (ANP) and the lifelong work of Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski. We spoke with people who had been healed in the past through the ANP, but the FDA had put a partial clinical hold on Dr. Burzynski’s clinic preventing any more patients from being treated!

Here began our unnecessary battle to obtain ANP treatment. Instead of spending as much time as we could with our terminally ill child, we were on the internet launching a campaign to grant us compassionate use for the medicine. Early conversations with the FDA before reaching 100,000 petition signatures were “we will never grant you compassionate use for this drug …we don’t think even a million signatures will make us change our mind”.

We argued, we cried, we begged …If our son was going to die, why NOT let us try? Even if there was a small chance, it would be worth it! Was the FDA really trying to protect our child when in a heartbeat, the FDA granted permission for Elisha to be on a radiation & chemo protocol that is proven not to be effective in anaplastic Medulla Blastoma?

If the FDA cared at all, why didn’t it care to share the true lack of effectiveness of the drugs my son was on? Did the FDA let prejudicial opinion of Dr. Burzynski,or a personal vendetta against him get in the way of helping our son?

It amazes us that the FDA needs at least 100,000 people begging for compassion before it can display any!

THE BIG QUESTION is why did you end up granting us compassionate use after Elisha was already brain dead? Where is the compassion in that? Why couldn’t you grant us compassionate use months before when he had a chance to recover? I suggest you take the word compassionate out of your lexicon.

When people are dying and run out of choices, this is how I view granting compassionate use:

  1. A board should convene and grant use within a matter of day.
  1. Compassionate use of trial drugs should be considered even before relapse in cases of harsh mainstream protocols that are known for failure or do not have a high success rates.

Patients or parents of sick & helpless children should have the right to choose between a failed protocol or trials. Trial treatments may not have had time and research funding to prove their success, but some mainstream protocols have proven to their FAILURE yet are being forces on patients!

If the statistics look low in both cases, aren’t we better off testing newer and targeted approaches? And shouldn’t we consider therapies which provide an enhance quality of life for whatever short time remains for these patients?

I feel cheated by the system that was put in place to protect us, but in reality betrayed us!!!!!

Elisha was put on a failed St Jude protocol (SJMB03). After Elisha’s death I found this quote from Dr. Amar Gajjar, MD, co-chair of Oncology at St. Jude’s hospital. Dr. Amar Gajjar admits that current protocols are not effective in high risk Medulla Blastoma and that there is absolutely a need for new drugs: “We are looking to improve the outlook for high-risk medulla blastoma patients, whose cure rate hovers around 40 percent. Patients with other forms of medulla blastoma are twice as likely to survive. We need new chemotherapy agents, because the current treatment often doesn’t cure.

If current chemo’s are not working let’s take the “Chemotherapy blinders” off and look into safer targeted non-toxic treatments. It should not be one size fits all! Treatment should be tested against genome sequencing and many other factors.

We must do something! We cannot let more children die or suffer through futile and painfully cruel treatments. Their voices cry out to us!

I pray for better days in which better ways to heal our children are forthcoming.

Tragedies such as this demonstrate why it is so critical to pass bills like the Compassionate Freedom of Choice Act and the Right to Try Act. It can be the difference between life and death for a spouse, child, or other family and loved ones.

Action Alert! Write to your representative and urge him or her to support both the Compassionate Freedom of Use Act and the Right to Try Act, which give terminal patients another shot at life. Please send your message immediately.

Take-Action



from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1D5INfC via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1OyRI9R

FDA Adds Heart Attack and Stroke Warning to Some Painkillers

Why did it take the FDA so long to warn consumers about these increased dangers? And why, despite these new warnings, does the agency seriously understate the risks?

Earlier this month, the FDA announced it would be strengthening its warnings on non-aspirin nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), updating what is already printed on many NSAID labels about the drugs’ increased risk of heart attack or stroke. The updated labels will include language which warns that these serious side effects can occur as early as the first few weeks of using an NSAID; that the risk may increase with longer use of the NSAID; and that the risk appears greater at higher doses.

NSAIDs are typically used to relieve the pain or fever that results from a variety of conditions. Some of the brands that will have the updated warnings include Celebrex, Advil, Aleve, and Daypro.

This half-hearted, much-too-late admission by the FDA of the dangers of NSAIDs is hardly enough to protect Americans from the well-documented dangers of this class of drugs, as well as other common over-the-counter painkillers such as acetaminophen (i.e., Tylenol). Throughout the years, we’ve documented the scientific evidence showing how deadly these painkillers can be:

  • One study conservatively estimated that 107,000 people are hospitalized each year for NSAID-related gastrointestinal complications and “at least 16,500 NSAID-related deaths occur each year among arthritis patients alone.”
  • Another study showed that patients who take NSAIDs have a 90% greater likelihood of dying from all causes.
  • Daily or long-term use of aspirin doubles the risk of internal bleeding and does not reduce heart attack risk for people with no history of heart problems.
  • By the FDA’s own calculation, acetaminophen—the active ingredient in Tylenol—was the leading cause of liver failure in Americans between 1998 and 2003, and there’s no reason to think that this has changed in the years since. Despite this fact, the New York Times published an article blasting nutritional supplements, specifically green tea extract, for causing liver damage—without even once mentioning the damage done by acetaminophen! In the same way, the FDA has left acetaminophen out of this latest warning. Is this because of industry pressure? It is hard to see any other reason.
  • Every year, 78,000 people go to the emergency room from acetaminophen overdose, whether accidental or intentional. The problem was so bad that the FDA asked doctors to stop prescribing any medication that has more than 325 mg of acetaminophen per dose. Of course, this ignores the fact that if consumers think the prescribed dose isn’t cutting the pain, many will think nothing of taking an extra tablet or two.
  • A study published in JAMA Pediatrics found that Tylenol taken by women during their pregnancy could raise the risk of ADHD and similar disorders in their children by up to 40%. Another study showed that women taking acetaminophen during pregnancy increased the risk of their children having serious behavior problems at age 3 by 70%.

Considering this evidence, it’s outrageous that the FDA has not been more vigilant in making these products safer—or, at the very least, included acetaminophen in its updated warnings— especially given how widely these products are used both for everyday purposes and for the millions of Americans with chronic pain.

The good news is there is research and clinical evidence supporting natural solutions for pain that are non-addictive and cost-effective. You can see our past coverage for a more comprehensive list of what has been studied, but here’s a short review of some of these alternatives to NSAIDs.

(Note: These options are meant to start a conversation between you and your integrative doctor on natural alternatives for chronic pain.)

Dietary supplements

  • Sulfur-containing MSM (methylsulfonylmethane) not only provides pain and anti-inflammatory relief for osteoarthritis, but can also be effective for hay fever and other allergies. As many of us do not get enough usable sulfur in our diet, MSM is offered in powder as well as supplement form, which also facilitates the larger doses that may be necessary for pain and allergy relief.
  • Turmeric, ginger, boswellia, and bromelain exhibit remarkable anti-inflammatory properties (bromelain should be taken at high doses on an empty stomach, as explained at LEF.org).
  • Cayenne cream reduces substance P, a chemical component of nerve cells that transmits pain signals to brain.
  • Cetyl myristoleateacts as a joint lubricant and an anti-inflammatory.
  • The GLA in evening primrose, black currant, and borage oils can help arthritic pain.
  • A member of our staff uses the Swiss Alpine herb butterbur for headaches and migraines (which can often be a side effect of prescription drugs). It also works well for hay fever. Because a toxic element must be removed from the plant, use a reliable preparation such as Petodolex.
  • Samento (a form of cat’s claw, an herb), green tea extract, and zeaxanthin (and other carotenoids) can help manage rheumatoid arthritis. Natural alternatives are particularly important, given the serious—and sometimes fatal—side effects of prescription RA treatments.
  • Even if you already take fish or krill oil, higher-than-normal dosages are anti-inflammatory and may help you manage pain.

Injection therapies that stimulate your body’s natural healing mechanisms (all of the following can only be delivered when appropriate by a knowledgeable and skilled integrative physician)

  • Prolotherapy is the injection of natural substances into chronically injured areas of the body. The injected substances themselves don’t do the healing; instead, they stimulate cell growth in the tissues that stabilize weakened joints, cartilage, ligaments, and tendons.
  • Ozone therapy—a type of oxidative medicine that can also be used to treat viral and fungal infections—is the injection of oxygen gas (ozone) into affected areas. Ozone has been shown to deactivate bacteria, simulate oxygen metabolism, and activate the immune system.
  • Oxygen therapy. Ozone molecules are composed of three oxygen atoms bound together. Oxygen molecules have two such atoms. Other forms of oxygen therapy, such as hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), may help as well by flooding wounded tissue with the pressurized oxygen it needs to repair itself.
  • Prolozone therapy utilizes injections that are a combination of collagen-producing substances and  As a fusion of prolotherapy and ozone therapy, it is sometimes described as a major advance on both treatments.


from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1D5INft via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1JOC5XY

Action Alert: Support Compassionate Use

Related article: New Proposal Gives Hope to Terminally Ill Patients



from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1I781Xk via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1JOC5HH

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

DARK Act on the Fast Track to Approval—We Need to Act Now!

The industry-sponsored voluntary GMO labeling bill is heading for a floor vote in the House, and could be voted on any day now. URGENT Action Alert!

Last week, the “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015” introduced by Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS)—better known by pro-labeling advocates as the “Deny Americans’ Right to Know (DARK) Act”—was approved by the House Agriculture Committee.

The next stop for the bill was supposed to be the Energy and Commerce Committee. But hours after the Ag Committee approved it, the announcement came that the bill would go right to the House floor just days later, bypassing Energy and Commerce altogether.

Regular readers will remember that the DARK Act would pre-empt state-level, mandatory GMO labeling efforts with a wholly voluntary federal standard. Companies could elect to apply to the USDA for a “GMO-free” label, and then the FDA would review the product—or they could elect not to label their products at all, leaving consumers in the dark about what’s in their food. The bill is being pushed by the biotech industry and the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association.

New additions to the DARK Act also prevent local communities from banning GMO crops!

If the DARK Act passes the House, its next stop would be the Senate. We reported in May that Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) is preparing his own—again, completely voluntary—GMO labeling bill. Whether the Senate will consider the House-approved DARK Act, or Hoeven’s bill when it’s ready, or neither, remains to be seen.

These developments come on the heels of a new study that raises even more concerns about the safety of GMO foods. The study, published in the Agricultural Sciences journal, found evidence that genetic modifications can destroy the equilibrium in cells, in some cases resulting in an accumulation of formaldehyde. The study makes suggestions as to how to improve health and safety testing of GMOs as the White House begins a review of how the government regulates GMOs (see the next article in this week’s Pulse for more details).

As we’ve said before, supporters of the DARK Act seem to care more about doing the bidding of the biotech industry than about standing up for consumers. Poll after poll after poll show that consumers consistently and overwhelmingly support mandatory GMO labeling. That this bill is being put on the fast track by lawmakers kowtowing to powerful special interests with deep pockets is a clear affront to constituents.

Besides the fact that consumers have a right to know what’s in their food, the DARK Act also unfairly puts the onus on traditional farmers and food producers to label their food as “GMO-free” when it should be the other way around. Small producers would likely be unable to afford the costs of whatever process USDA develops for the “GMO-free” label, and USDA is so thoroughly pro-GMO that the process might be unfriendly even for big producers.

Companies are trying to put what amounts to little more than rogue science experiments on our tables: no long-term safety studies have shown that GMOs are safe, yet there is a tremendous amount of evidence that GMOs are extremely dangerous. Such companies should be the ones alerting the public of their food’s contents. Under the DARK Act, Americans would need to play a guessing game about what’s in their food.

Unfortunately—but unsurprisingly—the mainstream media also seem to be compliant with biotech’s goals. When Chipotle announced they were going GMO-free, mainstream media outlets like Time magazine, NPR, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Chicago Tribune skewered the company for its decision. Rather than critically presenting ALL of the evidence of the GMO debate, many news outlets chose to present the issue as if the science were completely settled and GMOs are safe. It is noteworthy that these same media outlets depend on industry advertising for their survival.

Incidentally, we’ve seen similar trends in the coverage of the vaccine issue: non-scientists in the media attempting to convince the public that the science on an issue is settled when the reverse is actually true, and anyone who disagrees is an unhinged conspiracy theorist. (Note: you can visit our GMO Fact Check page to see biotech’s pro-GMO arguments debunked point-by-point.)

Another good example is a recent editorial in the Washington Post titled, “Why We’re So Scared of GMOs, According to Someone Who Has Studied Them Since the Start.” The “someone” presented in the article is an agricultural researcher at a Midwestern land-grant university—institutions that, starved of federal funds, are increasingly becoming extensions of Monsanto and Dow’s research and development departments. Can we rely on researchers at such institutions to be fair and balanced when it comes to presenting the science on GMOs? You decide.

The bottom line is that consumers have spoken loud and clear when it comes to the issue of GMO labeling. We must now work to make that voice heard in the halls of the Capitol.

Action Alert! Write to your legislators in both the House and the Senate and urge them to oppose the DARK Act, which would keep consumers in the dark about what’s in their food. Please send your message immediately.

Take-Action

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1GzT521 via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1Mnapj4

Even More Toxic Chemicals Set to Enter the Food Supply

Surprise—the next generation of GMO crops will be resistant to far higher amounts of pesticides and herbicides, which will then be sprayed on our crops. Poison on the dinner table!

A recent article written by Dr. Jonathan Latham of the Bioscience Resource Project looks at the future of GMOs and argues that GMOs will become more unpopular as the technology takes them in a dramatically more toxic direction.

He points to the recent approval of crops resistant to the herbicides 2,4-D and Dicamba. The reason they need to resist these toxic sprays is because the overuse of Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup is actually breeding Roundup-resistant “superweeds” that require more and more toxic chemicals to kill. Here’s how it works:

  • Monsanto creates the herbicide Roundup. Unfortunately, it sometimes kills the crops along with the weeds.
  • Monsanto creates “Roundup-ready” crops that can withstand the toxic spray, which allows farmers to use even more Roundup to kill all the weeds.
  • Weeds increasingly become resistant to Roundup, becoming “superweeds” that require more toxic chemicals to kill them.
  • The biotech industry creates new crops that are resistant to other herbicides.
  • Inevitably, the weeds will become resistant to these new herbicides as well—a vicious cycle that threatens both our environment and our food supply.

The whole biotech industry is involved, introducing crops that are resistant to multiple herbicides. Monsanto’s Xtend line of products will be resistant to Roundup and Dicamba; Dow’s Enlist products will be resistant to Roundup and 2,4-D. We have discussed 2,4-D in earlier articles and readers will recall that it is an ingredient in what used to be called Agent Orange when used in the Vietnam War.

This, of course, is great news for herbicide manufacturers, but terrible news for just about everyone else whose food will now contain potentially unsafe levels of three different herbicides—at least one of which, regular readers will remember, was deemed probably carcinogenic to humans by the World Health Organization. Dr. Latham argues that the public will not stand for it, which will force food distributors to rethink the use of GMOs in their products along the lines of Chipotle’s decision to remove GMOs from their menu items.

Dr. Latham’s hypothesis is intriguing, but the impending influx of toxic herbicides into our food makes the case for labeling GMOs more urgent than ever—if you haven’t already, you can go to the first article in today’s Pulse to send a message to your representatives to oppose bad voluntary labeling legislation that’s on the move in the House. This legislation is an attempt by industry to avoid mandatory labeling and circumvent state laws requiring this.

But industry-friendly labeling legislation isn’t the only action in Washington, DC, concerning GMOs. Recently, the White House issued an executive memorandum ordering a multi-agency reevaluation and update of the current regulatory regime governing GMOs, which is now decades old.

Details on what exactly this regulatory overhaul will entail are still scarce. There are, however, some concerning themes that recur throughout the document, crystallized in one sentence in the introduction:

The objectives are to ensure public confidence in the regulatory system and to prevent unnecessary barriers to future innovation and competitiveness by improving the transparency, coordination, predictability, and efficiency of the regulation of biotechnology products while continuing to protect health and the environment [emphasis added].

The order of terms here is telling: the government’s first objective is to instill confidence in the public that the GMO regulations in place are adequate—much like the government’s initiative to ensure public confidence in vaccines.

The next objective is to prevent barriers to innovation in the biotech sector. In other places the White House refers to its desire to “[avoid] unjustifiably inhibiting innovation” and “stigmatizing new technologies.” So the government, it appears, wants to revamp its regulations, but not in a way that will upset the Monsantos of the world.

Only at the end is the need to protect consumer health and the environment mentioned.

It’s still too early to jump to any concrete conclusions about the outcome of this initiative. We will certainly be monitoring the process as it unfolds. What’s clear is that a robust system for protecting the health and safety of Americans—and not the profit margins of biotech giants—is sorely needed, especially given the troubling new trends in GMO technology.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1LAZSiA via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1MnaqUe

Three New FDA-Approved Diabetes Drugs May Cause Diabetic Comas

However, there are good natural approaches to managing or even curing some forms of diabetes.

The FDA recently posted a warning that three drugs used to treat type 2 diabetes—canagliflozin (brand name: Invokana), dapagliflozin (Farxiga), and empagliflozin (Jardiance)—may lead to diabetic ketoacidosis, or DKA.

Ketoacidosis is a condition that can lead to diabetic coma and even death. DKA arises when the body does not have enough insulin and creates acids called ketones that build up in the blood and throw off the body’s chemical balance. The signs and symptoms of DKA include difficulty breathing, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, confusion, and unusual fatigue or sleepiness.

Normally, those with type 1 diabetes are at risk for DKA, whereas it is a rare condition for those with type 2 diabetes.

The three drugs the FDA includes in the warning are called sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, which are designed to lower blood sugar in type 2 diabetes patients. From March 2013 to June 2014, the FDA reported twenty cases of DKA. Every case required hospitalization. FDA also found that the median time to onset was two weeks after starting the drugs.

This is another in a long line of examples of the harm Big Pharma’s drugs can cause. When it comes to the development of new ways to treat diseases, the current system drives the creation of more and more exorbitantly priced drugs that, as we’ve seen above and especially in last week’s testimonial, cause more harm than good.

As we’ve noted before, it is possible for many diabetics to keep their blood sugar levels close to a truly normal range with an integrative approach. Here are some natural ways to control or even reverse diabetes—though please remember that any significant changes to your diet, supplement regime, testing, or lifestyle should be made only after consultation with your healthcare professional:

  • Diet. A diet loaded with leafy greens and other low-starch veggies, high-quality fats, and clean sources of protein is helpful in controlling blood sugar. Be sure to look for a nutritional advisor who is independent, however! Organizations like the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and the American Society for Nutrition receive major funding from corporate food interests, including junk food companies. In stark contrast, the Board for Certification of Nutrition Specialists is not similarly compromised.
  • Botanicals. Jonathan Wright, MD, notes that several studies show that berberine, an alkaloid found in the herb goldenseal, can lower blood glucose as effectively as the drug metformin at similar doses (500 mg 3x/day). Indian kino gum resin (Pterocarpus marsupium) has been found to regenerate the beta cells that make insulin in the pancreas. This finding validates its long use in Indian Ayurvedic medicine for diabetes. Other herbs or food ingredients researched for control of blood sugar include cinnamon, bitter melon, and the fruit Garcinia cambogia to enhance insulin sensitivity.
  • Supplement wisely. According to Dr. Julian Whitaker, the water-soluble antioxidants and other nutrients that protect against damage may be lost in the excessive urination that accompanies diabetes. For this or other reasons, people with diabetes are more prone to develop kidney disease. All vitamin, mineral, and amino acid levels should be checked, monitored, and kept in normal range with supplements if necessary, along with checking blood glucose, insulin, and A1c, a longer-term marker for blood sugar. Dr. Whitaker particularly recommends supplementing with magnesium and chromium, and alpha lipoic acid and acetyl-L-carnitine for peripheral neuropathy.
  • Exercise at least thirty minutes every day. This will also control blood pressure.
  • Take care with prescription drugs. Besides the above warnings, the FDA has launched a safety review of the diabetes drug Actos in light of new data suggesting that the drug may increase risk of bladder cancer. And a combination of two common drugs—one an antidepressant, the other a statin used to lower blood cholesterol—may put people at risk for developing diabetes. This finding is especially important because so little is known about how drugs interact with each other, and so many people are prescribed multiple drugs together. The good news is that it is often possible to control diabetes without the use of any drugs.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1LAZSit via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1HHl6IU

Action Alert: Oppose the DARK Act

Related article: 

.errordiv { padding:10px; margin:10px; border: 1px solid #555555;color: #000000;background-color: #f8f8f8; text-align:center; width:500px; }
var ai_iframe_width_iframe2539 = 0; var ai_iframe_height_iframe2539 = 0;var aiIsIe8=false;var aiReadyCallbacks = ( typeof aiReadyCallbacks != ‘undefined’ && aiReadyCallbacks instanceof Array ) ? aiReadyCallbacks : [];var onloadFirediframe2539 = false; function aiShowIframe() { jQuery(“#iframe2539″).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiShowIframeId(id_iframe) { jQuery(id_iframe).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiResizeIframeHeight(height) { aiResizeIframeHeight(height,iframe2539); } function aiResizeIframeHeightId(height,width,id) {aiResizeIframeHeightById(id,height);} http://ift.tt/1VqEUaFvar ifrm_iframe2539 = document.getElementById(“iframe2539″);
var hiddenTabsDoneiframe2539 = false;
function resizeCallbackiframe2539() {}

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1TOvMej via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1OvnNQh

DARK Act on the Fast Track to Approval—We Need to Act Now!

The industry-sponsored voluntary GMO labeling bill is heading for a floor vote in the House, and could be voted on any day now. URGENT Action Alert!

Last week, the “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015” introduced by Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS)—better known by pro-labeling advocates as the “Deny Americans’ Right to Know (DARK) Act”—was approved by the House Agriculture Committee.

The next stop for the bill was supposed to be the Energy and Commerce Committee. But hours after the Ag Committee approved it, the announcement came that the bill would go right to the House floor just days later, bypassing Energy and Commerce altogether.

Regular readers will remember that the DARK Act would pre-empt state-level, mandatory GMO labeling efforts with a wholly voluntary federal standard. Companies could elect to apply to the USDA for a “GMO-free” label, and then the FDA would review the product—or they could elect not to label their products at all, leaving consumers in the dark about what’s in their food. The bill is being pushed by the biotech industry and the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association.

New additions to the DARK Act also prevent local communities from banning GMO crops!

If the DARK Act passes the House, its next stop would be the Senate. We reported in May that Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) is preparing his own—again, completely voluntary—GMO labeling bill. Whether the Senate will consider the House-approved DARK Act, or Hoeven’s bill when it’s ready, or neither, remains to be seen.

These developments come on the heels of a new study that raises even more concerns about the safety of GMO foods. The study, published in the Agricultural Sciences journal, found evidence that genetic modifications can destroy the equilibrium in cells, in some cases resulting in an accumulation of formaldehyde. The study makes suggestions as to how to improve health and safety testing of GMOs as the White House begins a review of how the government regulates GMOs (see the next article in this week’s Pulse for more details).

As we’ve said before, supporters of the DARK Act seem to care more about doing the bidding of the biotech industry than about standing up for consumers. Poll after poll after poll show that consumers consistently and overwhelmingly support mandatory GMO labeling. That this bill is being put on the fast track by lawmakers kowtowing to powerful special interests with deep pockets is a clear affront to constituents.

Besides the fact that consumers have a right to know what’s in their food, the DARK Act also unfairly puts the onus on traditional farmers and food producers to label their food as “GMO-free” when it should be the other way around. Small producers would likely be unable to afford the costs of whatever process USDA develops for the “GMO-free” label, and USDA is so thoroughly pro-GMO that the process might be unfriendly even for big producers.

Companies are trying to put what amounts to little more than rogue science experiments on our tables: no long-term safety studies have shown that GMOs are safe, yet there is a tremendous amount of evidence that GMOs are extremely dangerous. Such companies should be the ones alerting the public of their food’s contents. Under the DARK Act, Americans would need to play a guessing game about what’s in their food.

Unfortunately—but unsurprisingly—the mainstream media also seem to be compliant with biotech’s goals. When Chipotle announced they were going GMO-free, mainstream media outlets like Time magazine, NPR, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Chicago Tribune skewered the company for its decision. Rather than critically presenting ALL of the evidence of the GMO debate, many news outlets chose to present the issue as if the science were completely settled and GMOs are safe. It is noteworthy that these same media outlets depend on industry advertising for their survival.

Incidentally, we’ve seen similar trends in the coverage of the vaccine issue: non-scientists in the media attempting to convince the public that the science on an issue is settled when the reverse is actually true, and anyone who disagrees is an unhinged conspiracy theorist. (Note: you can visit our GMO Fact Check page to see biotech’s pro-GMO arguments debunked point-by-point.)

Another good example is a recent editorial in the Washington Post titled, “Why We’re So Scared of GMOs, According to Someone Who Has Studied Them Since the Start.” The “someone” presented in the article is an agricultural researcher at a Midwestern land-grant university—institutions that, starved of federal funds, are increasingly becoming extensions of Monsanto and Dow’s research and development departments. Can we rely on researchers at such institutions to be fair and balanced when it comes to presenting the science on GMOs? You decide.

The bottom line is that consumers have spoken loud and clear when it comes to the issue of GMO labeling. We must now work to make that voice heard in the halls of the Capitol.

Action Alert! Write to your legislators in both the House and the Senate and urge them to oppose the DARK Act, which would keep consumers in the dark about what’s in their food. Please send your message immediately.

Take-Action



from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1GzT521 via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1GzY8zq

Even More Toxic Chemicals Set to Enter the Food Supply

Surprise—the next generation of GMO crops will be resistant to far higher amounts of pesticides and herbicides, which will then be sprayed on our crops. Poison on the dinner table!

A recent article written by Dr. Jonathan Latham of the Bioscience Resource Project looks at the future of GMOs and argues that GMOs will become more unpopular as the technology takes them in a dramatically more toxic direction.

He points to the recent approval of crops resistant to the herbicides 2,4-D and Dicamba. The reason they need to resist these toxic sprays is because the overuse of Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup is actually breeding Roundup-resistant “superweeds” that require more and more toxic chemicals to kill. Here’s how it works:

  • Monsanto creates the herbicide Roundup. Unfortunately, it sometimes kills the crops along with the weeds.
  • Monsanto creates “Roundup-ready” crops that can withstand the toxic spray, which allows farmers to use even more Roundup to kill all the weeds.
  • Weeds increasingly become resistant to Roundup, becoming “superweeds” that require more toxic chemicals to kill them.
  • The biotech industry creates new crops that are resistant to other herbicides.
  • Inevitably, the weeds will become resistant to these new herbicides as well—a vicious cycle that threatens both our environment and our food supply.

The whole biotech industry is involved, introducing crops that are resistant to multiple herbicides. Monsanto’s Xtend line of products will be resistant to Roundup and Dicamba; Dow’s Enlist products will be resistant to Roundup and 2,4-D. We have discussed 2,4-D in earlier articles and readers will recall that it is an ingredient in what used to be called Agent Orange when used in the Vietnam War.

This, of course, is great news for herbicide manufacturers, but terrible news for just about everyone else whose food will now contain potentially unsafe levels of three different herbicides—at least one of which, regular readers will remember, was deemed probably carcinogenic to humans by the World Health Organization. Dr. Latham argues that the public will not stand for it, which will force food distributors to rethink the use of GMOs in their products along the lines of Chipotle’s decision to remove GMOs from their menu items.

Dr. Latham’s hypothesis is intriguing, but the impending influx of toxic herbicides into our food makes the case for labeling GMOs more urgent than ever—if you haven’t already, you can go to the first article in today’s Pulse to send a message to your representatives to oppose bad voluntary labeling legislation that’s on the move in the House. This legislation is an attempt by industry to avoid mandatory labeling and circumvent state laws requiring this.

But industry-friendly labeling legislation isn’t the only action in Washington, DC, concerning GMOs. Recently, the White House issued an executive memorandum ordering a multi-agency reevaluation and update of the current regulatory regime governing GMOs, which is now decades old.

Details on what exactly this regulatory overhaul will entail are still scarce. There are, however, some concerning themes that recur throughout the document, crystallized in one sentence in the introduction:

The objectives are to ensure public confidence in the regulatory system and to prevent unnecessary barriers to future innovation and competitiveness by improving the transparency, coordination, predictability, and efficiency of the regulation of biotechnology products while continuing to protect health and the environment [emphasis added].

The order of terms here is telling: the government’s first objective is to instill confidence in the public that the GMO regulations in place are adequate—much like the government’s initiative to ensure public confidence in vaccines.

The next objective is to prevent barriers to innovation in the biotech sector. In other places the White House refers to its desire to “[avoid] unjustifiably inhibiting innovation” and “stigmatizing new technologies.” So the government, it appears, wants to revamp its regulations, but not in a way that will upset the Monsantos of the world.

Only at the end is the need to protect consumer health and the environment mentioned.

It’s still too early to jump to any concrete conclusions about the outcome of this initiative. We will certainly be monitoring the process as it unfolds. What’s clear is that a robust system for protecting the health and safety of Americans—and not the profit margins of biotech giants—is sorely needed, especially given the troubling new trends in GMO technology.



from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1LAZSiA via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1GzYara

Three New FDA-Approved Diabetes Drugs May Cause Diabetic Comas

However, there are good natural approaches to managing or even curing some forms of diabetes.

The FDA recently posted a warning that three drugs used to treat type 2 diabetes—canagliflozin (brand name: Invokana), dapagliflozin (Farxiga), and empagliflozin (Jardiance)—may lead to diabetic ketoacidosis, or DKA.

Ketoacidosis is a condition that can lead to diabetic coma and even death. DKA arises when the body does not have enough insulin and creates acids called ketones that build up in the blood and throw off the body’s chemical balance. The signs and symptoms of DKA include difficulty breathing, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, confusion, and unusual fatigue or sleepiness.

Normally, those with type 1 diabetes are at risk for DKA, whereas it is a rare condition for those with type 2 diabetes.

The three drugs the FDA includes in the warning are called sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, which are designed to lower blood sugar in type 2 diabetes patients. From March 2013 to June 2014, the FDA reported twenty cases of DKA. Every case required hospitalization. FDA also found that the median time to onset was two weeks after starting the drugs.

This is another in a long line of examples of the harm Big Pharma’s drugs can cause. When it comes to the development of new ways to treat diseases, the current system drives the creation of more and more exorbitantly priced drugs that, as we’ve seen above and especially in last week’s testimonial, cause more harm than good.

As we’ve noted before, it is possible for many diabetics to keep their blood sugar levels close to a truly normal range with an integrative approach. Here are some natural ways to control or even reverse diabetes—though please remember that any significant changes to your diet, supplement regime, testing, or lifestyle should be made only after consultation with your healthcare professional:

  • Diet. A diet loaded with leafy greens and other low-starch veggies, high-quality fats, and clean sources of protein is helpful in controlling blood sugar. Be sure to look for a nutritional advisor who is independent, however! Organizations like the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and the American Society for Nutrition receive major funding from corporate food interests, including junk food companies. In stark contrast, the Board for Certification of Nutrition Specialists is not similarly compromised.
  • Botanicals. Jonathan Wright, MD, notes that several studies show that berberine, an alkaloid found in the herb goldenseal, can lower blood glucose as effectively as the drug metformin at similar doses (500 mg 3x/day). Indian kino gum resin (Pterocarpus marsupium) has been found to regenerate the beta cells that make insulin in the pancreas. This finding validates its long use in Indian Ayurvedic medicine for diabetes. Other herbs or food ingredients researched for control of blood sugar include cinnamon, bitter melon, and the fruit Garcinia cambogia to enhance insulin sensitivity.
  • Supplement wisely. According to Dr. Julian Whitaker, the water-soluble antioxidants and other nutrients that protect against damage may be lost in the excessive urination that accompanies diabetes. For this or other reasons, people with diabetes are more prone to develop kidney disease. All vitamin, mineral, and amino acid levels should be checked, monitored, and kept in normal range with supplements if necessary, along with checking blood glucose, insulin, and A1c, a longer-term marker for blood sugar. Dr. Whitaker particularly recommends supplementing with magnesium and chromium, and alpha lipoic acid and acetyl-L-carnitine for peripheral neuropathy.
  • Exercise at least thirty minutes every day. This will also control blood pressure.
  • Take care with prescription drugs. Besides the above warnings, the FDA has launched a safety review of the diabetes drug Actos in light of new data suggesting that the drug may increase risk of bladder cancer. And a combination of two common drugs—one an antidepressant, the other a statin used to lower blood cholesterol—may put people at risk for developing diabetes. This finding is especially important because so little is known about how drugs interact with each other, and so many people are prescribed multiple drugs together. The good news is that it is often possible to control diabetes without the use of any drugs.


from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1LAZSit via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1VqYcNg

Action Alert: Oppose the DARK Act

Related article: 



from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1TOvMej via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1HHeHxo

John Oliver Delivers Stunning Rebuke of Pharmaceutical Marketing

Did you know that most Big Pharma companies spend more on marketing than they do on research? Last Week Tonight reveals this and other shocking facts from the world of pharmaceutical marketing. Some language may be inappropriate for all audiences.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1fjwtgn via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1HOyzwy

John Oliver Delivers Stunning Rebuke of Pharmaceutical Marketing

Did you know that most Big Pharma companies spend more on marketing than they do on research? Last Week Tonight reveals this and other shocking facts from the world of pharmaceutical marketing. Some language may be inappropriate for all audiences.



from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1fjwtgn via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1JuMpUS

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

Senator McCaskill Once Again Targets Anti-Aging Supplements

Treating supplements like drugs will do one thing only: eliminate supplements altogether. Action Alert!

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) is a key ally of Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL). Under the auspices of the Special Committee on Aging, where she is the ranking member, Sen. McCaskill sent letters to over a dozen major retailers including Amazon, CVS, Target, the Vitamin Shoppe, GNC, Kroger, Safeway, and Walgreens, asking—in effect, demanding—that the retailers supply information and documents to the committee, with the expectation that it will lead to a Senate hearing. The committee wants to review the retailers’ policies relating to:

  • the sale and marketing of supplements;
  • the removal of products determined to be adulterated, improperly labeled, or fraudulently marketed;
  • the reporting of serious adverse events; and
  • how consumers’ complaints regarding supplements are handled.

The letters also ask that the retailers brief the Special Committee on Aging staff regarding the above procedures.

Some of the letters express specific concerns about supplements that are being used to protect against and/or mitigate the effects of Alzheimer’s and dementia.

This is not the first time the senator has tackled this topic. In 2010, the Special Committee on Aging held a hearing, titled “Dietary Supplements: What Seniors Need to Know.” The overall tenor of the hearing was that regulators needed more authority to clamp down on deceptive marketing practices of some dietary supplement manufacturers. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) responded by clarifying that such deceptive marketing practices were already illegal and that the FDA already had the authority to criminally prosecute offenders, making any further regulation redundant. The hearing showed that many in Congress simply do not understand dietary supplement regulation.

In 2014, Sen. McCaskill headed a Senate Consumer Protection Subcommittee hearing on false or misleading marketing of weight loss supplements, where she famously grilled Dr. Mehmet Oz for using what she considered sensationalist language to push certain products on his popular television program.

It is interesting that Sen. McCaskill is targeting supplements that may protect against Alzheimer’s and dementia. We’ve written before about the positive results from coconut oil in patients with Alzheimer’s after Big Pharma drugs either failed to improve, or actively worsened, the patients’ condition. Other evidence suggests that high doses of B vitamins limit brain shrinkage, a common precursor to Alzheimer’s. A proper diet and proper supplementation may also improve our memory as we grow older.

The Mediterranean Diet has also been shown to be associated with slower cognitive decline. Well-functioning brains contain high levels of DHA, which can be obtained by a diet rich in omega-3 fatty acids found in fatty fish, walnuts, flaxseed, and eggs. Limiting intake of trans-fats common in fried foods and omega-6 fats helps maintain a healthy brain along with getting enough sleep and reducing stress.

There is much more research to be done on these topics, but it is remarkable how much research already has been done, considering that the foods and supplements cannot be patented.

Let’s be clear. Inquiries such as this are often only the first step in a process that culminates in lawmakers calling for supplements to be regulated more like drugs—which, because of what we call the “Catch-22” of drug economics, would likely result in the complete elimination of many important supplements from the market. This is precisely the approach Sen. Durbin has taken in the past—and why it is so very important that we take action now, before it snowballs.

Besides Sens. McCaskill and Durbin, politicians such as Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and former Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) have repeatedly intimated that supplements are unregulated, which is simply untrue. As we’ve written before, supplements are subject to regulation by both the FDA and the FTC, and must adhere to strict current good manufacturing practices to ensure the safety of the supplements consumers buy. Unfortunately, as in most industries, some bad actors will not follow the law, and it is then up to federal regulators to enforce the rules. In one notorious memo from the past, the FDA admitted that it was not doing its job—clearly hoping that some dire result would lead to new legislation against supplements.

It should be remembered that the current system actually works: supplements have a sterling track record of safety. Our friends at ANH-Europe calculated that UK residents were actually more likely to get killed by lightning as to die from taking dietary supplements.

We’ve long suspected that these attacks from certain politicians have less to do with protecting consumers than with doing the bidding of Big Pharma, which would love any competition from supplements to be eliminated. Just compare the price of drugs to supplements. And compare the safety record of supplements to that of FDA-approved drugs which, even when properly prescribed, cause about 1.9 million hospitalizations and kill about 128,000 Americans every year.

Moreover, the drug industry has yet to produce a drug for Alzheimer’s that really works. Personal testing, food, supplements, and lifestyle—the key elements of integrative medicine—are all we have at the moment to protect our aging brains.

Action Alert! Write to the members of the Special Committee on Aging and urge them to halt this bullying of supplement retailers and maintain consumer access to important supplements. Remind them that federal regulators already have the authority to stop deceitful marketing practices. The FDA and FTC should simply do their job and enforce current law. Please send your message immediately.

Take-Action

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1M97cDz via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1I0AnYP

Just How Many Conventional Docs are in the Pocket of Big Pharma? The Evidence Is Disturbing

New government data show drug and medical device makers paid a shocking $6.49 billion to doctors and hospitals in 2014.

It’s no secret that the pharmaceutical industry has an incestuous—and incredibly profitable—relationship with some of the doctors who prescribe their drugs to patients. But a new set of data compiled by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) shows the extent to which some doctors are in the pocket of Big Pharma.

The CMS data was made available through the publicly searchable Open Payments program. The program is meant to increase transparency by requiring drug and device manufacturers to report payments to doctors.

The $6.49 billion in payments included consulting fees and other costs—like travel to exotic locales, lodging in expensive hotels, and big food and beverage tabs. Pharmaceutical companies often offer continuing education courses to doctors in the form of talks and conferences that are little more than promotional opportunities for the latest products Big Pharma is trying to peddle. The CMS report mentions payments to doctors for a training seminar held in the Cayman Islands.

Companies argue that the payments are necessary to conduct research and get input from practicing doctors. Research-related activities accounted for about half of the total payments—but many of the top research payments were related to drugs that have already been on the market for years.

One pediatric geneticist from Illinois collected nearly $447,000 in consulting fees from Pfizer in 2014—the largest single payment to an individual doctor.

Again, the data reveal what regular readers already know: that too many doctors have close ties to Big Pharma, creating a tremendous conflict of interest.

The fact of the matter is that, while Big Pharma often gripes about the cost of researching and developing new drugs, pharmaceutical companies spend about twice as much—$60 billion each year in the US alone—on marketing as they do on R&D. (Read Ben Goldacre’s book Bad Pharma for more details). Much of that is marketing directly to doctors. Why would Big Pharma continue to do this if it wasn’t money well spent?

Fortunately, the pharmaceutical industry’s stranglehold on the practice of conventional medicine is starting to become more widely reported. John Oliver, in his popular HBO show “Last Week Tonight,” devoted a lengthy segment to the issue of pharmaceutical marketing and payments to doctors. The rising cost of drugs is becoming an issue on Capitol Hill as Big Pharma seeks to extend its patent privileges in federal legislation and the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade talks.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1RxbHLO via Aloe for Health




from http://ift.tt/1dZeYkw