Good News on Lab Testing

The FDA’s attack on independent lab testing appears to have been beaten back. Action Alert!

In a recent announcement, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said that it will back off of its plans to put new rules in place for laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), rules that represented an attempted regulatory takeover of the industry.

Lab-developed tests have historically been regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). In 2014, the FDA issued a draft guidance saying it would regulate LDTs as medical devices. Congress pushed back, with some legislators arguing that the FDA’s approach to LDTs was “redundant, [would]raise costs and stifle innovation, and [would]require additional taxpayer funding to the FDA.”

At the time, we pointed out that LDTs are not medical devices. They are services which are provided only to the ordering healthcare provider, and which are offered only by labs that validate and develop them. FDA does not regulate professional medical services. LDTs are not “devices” at all, nor are they commercially distributed among states, both of which are requirements for FDA jurisdiction under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C).

To us, it seemed clear that the FDA wanted to take over LDTs in order to maintain the monopoly enjoyed by hospitals together with two companies: LabCorp and Quest Diagnostics. The agency, if it had gotten authority, would likely have approved only those tests that big companies have a legal right to perform and are inclined to offer, and which insurance companies and Medicare will pay for. It would have taken an already existing testing monopoly and made it much worse.

This matters enormously for all of us. Medical testing is the future of medicine. New tests already exist to spot cancers long before they manifest themselves otherwise. But these tests are very expensive, and neither Medicare nor insurance companies will pay for them. If they become more widely available, the price will fall. Testing can also help prevent diabetes, heart and blood vessel illness, prostate cancer, and other diseases.

LDTs are not only important for general medicine; they’re the future of individualized medicine. Integrative doctors use these tests to gather information that aids them in identifying the root causes of their patients’ illnesses—information that cannot be gathered and analyzed otherwise. If the FDA moved forward with its proposal, these developments would have been halted and medicine would be set back years.

Thanks to ANH-USA members who took action on this issue!

Action Alert! Please send a message to Congress and thank them for their support on LDTs. Your message will include a request for your legislators to address the fake food issue we discuss in a related article in this issue. Please send your message immediately!

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Fake Olive Oil in Your Kitchen?

The FDA Bans Triclosan

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gS6fHf via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2gCiIOD

Fake Olive Oil in Your Kitchen?

Will the FDA finally do something about it? Action Alert!

The FDA has reportedly known about mislabeled and fraudulent olive oil and other foods for decades, but has done nothing to address the issue. Now Congress has stepped in. In April of this year, lawmakers directed the FDA through an appropriations bill to test a sampling of imported olive oil and report back on what the agency will do to ensure that consumers are not being deceived.

It’s about time. Many investigations into the olive oil industry have uncovered fraud and deception on a grand scale. A food fraud study spanning thirty years showed that olive oil is the most commonly adulterated food. A 2011 test from the Olive Center found that the five top-selling imported extra-virgin olive oil brands failed to meet trade standards 73% of the time. Other studies have suggested that as much as 69% of imported extra-virgin olive oil may be fraudulent.

Some of their findings:

• Real extra-virgin olive oil is often adulterated with less expensive oils such as sunflower oil or soybean oil;
• Extra-virgin olive oil is often adulterated with low quality, non-virgin olive oil;
• Less expensive extra-virgin olive oil is often adulterated with older, often rancid, stocks of oil held over from previous seasons.

Another common trick: oils from places like Syria, Turkey, Morocco, and Tunisia are bottled and sold as authentic Italian extra-virgin olive oil. An undercover operation by the Italian police found a massive scam involving the Mafia in which Spanish and Greek oils were passed off as Italian.

Larry Olmstead, author of Real Food, Fake Food: Why You Don’t Know What You’re Eating and What You Can Do About It, offers the following advice on how to avoid getting scammed:

• Don’t trust the labels. Terms like “pure,” “natural,” “virgin olive oil,” “premium,” “light,” “made in Italy,” and even “olive oil,” are often meaningless and may suggest low, not high, quality. “First cold press” also doesn’t really mean much, since most olive oil is made by using centrifuges rather than presses.

• Look for the stamp of approval of certain groups, like the California Olive Oil Council, the Extra Virgin Alliance, and UNAPROL, the Italian olive grower’s association.

• In terms of country of origin, if you’re buying the oil blindly, it’s best to go with Chile or Australia, the two countries that received the highest marks from the US International Trade Commission. You can also purchase olive oil directly from California growers.

• Time and season matter. According to Olmstead, the end of the year is the worst time to buy olive oil from the northern hemisphere since it will likely be leftovers from last year’s harvest. An olive oil’s quality degrades in light, so avoid buying olive oil packaged in a clear bottle.

Being able to buy authentic extra virgin olive oil is all the more important because it is a superfood. Among other good things, it contains a miracle ingredient known as oleuropein, which has anticancer, pro-mitochondrial, antibiotic, and anti-Alzheimer’s properties. It also contains polyphenols and antioxidants with anti-inflammatory benefits. It is a mainstay of the ketogenic diet.

Even the FDA acknowledges the health benefits of olive oil: it is among a small group of foods with a pre-approved health claim from the agency: two tablespoons of olive oil per day may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease.

Action Alert! Please send a message to Congress and ask them to address the fake olive oil problem right away. Your message will include a thank you message to your legislators for supporting LDTs, as we discuss in a related article in this issue. Please send your message immediately!

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Good News on Lab Testing

The FDA Bans Triclosan

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gS9Sgn via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2fI7CTT

Good News on Lab Testing

The FDA’s attack on independent lab testing appears to have been beaten back. Action Alert!

In a recent announcement, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said that it will back off of its plans to put new rules in place for laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), rules that represented an attempted regulatory takeover of the industry.

Lab-developed tests have historically been regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). In 2014, the FDA issued a draft guidance saying it would regulate LDTs as medical devices. Congress pushed back, with some legislators arguing that the FDA’s approach to LDTs was “redundant, [would]raise costs and stifle innovation, and [would]require additional taxpayer funding to the FDA.”

At the time, we pointed out that LDTs are not medical devices. They are services which are provided only to the ordering healthcare provider, and which are offered only by labs that validate and develop them. FDA does not regulate professional medical services. LDTs are not “devices” at all, nor are they commercially distributed among states, both of which are requirements for FDA jurisdiction under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C).

To us, it seemed clear that the FDA wanted to take over LDTs in order to maintain the monopoly enjoyed by hospitals together with two companies: LabCorp and Quest Diagnostics. The agency, if it had gotten authority, would likely have approved only those tests that big companies have a legal right to perform and are inclined to offer, and which insurance companies and Medicare will pay for. It would have taken an already existing testing monopoly and made it much worse.

This matters enormously for all of us. Medical testing is the future of medicine. New tests already exist to spot cancers long before they manifest themselves otherwise. But these tests are very expensive, and neither Medicare nor insurance companies will pay for them. If they become more widely available, the price will fall. Testing can also help prevent diabetes, heart and blood vessel illness, prostate cancer, and other diseases.

LDTs are not only important for general medicine; they’re the future of individualized medicine. Integrative doctors use these tests to gather information that aids them in identifying the root causes of their patients’ illnesses—information that cannot be gathered and analyzed otherwise. If the FDA moved forward with its proposal, these developments would have been halted and medicine would be set back years.

Thanks to ANH-USA members who took action on this issue!

Action Alert! Please send a message to Congress and thank them for their support on LDTs. Your message will include a request for your legislators to address the fake food issue we discuss in a related article in this issue. Please send your message immediately!

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Fake Olive Oil in Your Kitchen?

The FDA Bans Triclosan

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gS6fHf via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2fI7m7b

Fake Olive Oil in Your Kitchen?

Will the FDA finally do something about it? Action Alert!

The FDA has reportedly known about mislabeled and fraudulent olive oil and other foods for decades, but has done nothing to address the issue. Now Congress has stepped in. In April of this year, lawmakers directed the FDA through an appropriations bill to test a sampling of imported olive oil and report back on what the agency will do to ensure that consumers are not being deceived.

It’s about time. Many investigations into the olive oil industry have uncovered fraud and deception on a grand scale. A food fraud study spanning thirty years showed that olive oil is the most commonly adulterated food. A 2011 test from the Olive Center found that the five top-selling imported extra-virgin olive oil brands failed to meet trade standards 73% of the time. Other studies have suggested that as much as 69% of imported extra-virgin olive oil may be fraudulent.

Some of their findings:

• Real extra-virgin olive oil is often adulterated with less expensive oils such as sunflower oil or soybean oil;
• Extra-virgin olive oil is often adulterated with low quality, non-virgin olive oil;
• Less expensive extra-virgin olive oil is often adulterated with older, often rancid, stocks of oil held over from previous seasons.

Another common trick: oils from places like Syria, Turkey, Morocco, and Tunisia are bottled and sold as authentic Italian extra-virgin olive oil. An undercover operation by the Italian police found a massive scam involving the Mafia in which Spanish and Greek oils were passed off as Italian.

Larry Olmstead, author of Real Food, Fake Food: Why You Don’t Know What You’re Eating and What You Can Do About It, offers the following advice on how to avoid getting scammed:

• Don’t trust the labels. Terms like “pure,” “natural,” “virgin olive oil,” “premium,” “light,” “made in Italy,” and even “olive oil,” are often meaningless and may suggest low, not high, quality. “First cold press” also doesn’t really mean much, since most olive oil is made by using centrifuges rather than presses.

• Look for the stamp of approval of certain groups, like the California Olive Oil Council, the Extra Virgin Alliance, and UNAPROL, the Italian olive grower’s association.

• In terms of country of origin, if you’re buying the oil blindly, it’s best to go with Chile or Australia, the two countries that received the highest marks from the US International Trade Commission. You can also purchase olive oil directly from California growers.

• Time and season matter. According to Olmstead, the end of the year is the worst time to buy olive oil from the northern hemisphere since it will likely be leftovers from last year’s harvest. An olive oil’s quality degrades in light, so avoid buying olive oil packaged in a clear bottle.

Being able to buy authentic extra virgin olive oil is all the more important because it is a superfood. Among other good things, it contains a miracle ingredient known as oleuropein, which has anticancer, pro-mitochondrial, antibiotic, and anti-Alzheimer’s properties. It also contains polyphenols and antioxidants with anti-inflammatory benefits. It is a mainstay of the ketogenic diet.

Even the FDA acknowledges the health benefits of olive oil: it is among a small group of foods with a pre-approved health claim from the agency: two tablespoons of olive oil per day may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease.

Action Alert! Please send a message to Congress and ask them to address the fake olive oil problem right away. Your message will include a thank you message to your legislators for supporting LDTs, as we discuss in a related article in this issue. Please send your message immediately!

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Good News on Lab Testing

The FDA Bans Triclosan

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gS9Sgn via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2fIeaS5

The FDA Bans Triclosan

The FDA recently issued a rule banning triclosan and more than a dozen other chemicals commonly used in antibacterial soaps.

This will affect a large number of products. “If the product makes antibacterial claims, chances are pretty good that it contains one of these ingredients,” according to an FDA spokeswoman. Companies have a year to comply with the new rule.

Triclosan is the trade name for 5-Chloro-2-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)phenol. It’s manufactured from the same raw material as 2,4-D, a component of the infamous Vietnam-era defoliant, Agent Orange.

According to the FDA, antibacterial soaps are no better at preventing infection or illness than washing with soap and water. Advocates of natural health have been saying this for years. Many so-called “germs” are essential to the body’s optimal bacteria balance. They act as probiotics for the gut and skin; are naturally anti-inflammatory; and boost the immune system.

This ban has been a long time coming. In 1978, the FDA proposed to regulate antibacterial soaps and allow on the market only those it determined were safe and effective. However, it created a loophole: if there wasn’t enough data to know whether a chemical was safe and effective, it stayed on the market until a final determination was made.

Until now, the FDA had not made a final determination on triclosan, probably because of industry pressure. Meanwhile, its use in consumer products has mushroomed—until an estimated 75% of antibacterial liquid soaps and body washes sold in the US now contain it. The chemical is also found in mouthwash, toothpaste, and toys.

Here are some of the dangers associated with triclosan and triclocarban (a related chemical agent):

• Animal studies have shown that both of these chemicals can interfere with hormones critical for normal development and functioning of the brain and reproductive system.
• Triclosan has been associated with lower levels of thyroid hormone and testosterone, which could result in altered behavior, learning disabilities, or fertility problems.
• Triclocarban has been shown to amplify or unbalance artificially the effects of sex hormones such as estrogen and testosterone, and may be carcinogenic. It can also cause muscle damage.
• Furthermore, laboratory studies suggest that triclosan and triclocarban may be contributing to antibiotic resistance in bacteria known to cause human infections. Infections caused by bacteria with resistance to at least one antibiotic have been estimated to kill more than 60,000 hospitalized patients each year.

Why is the FDA taking this action now after so many years? We think it might be because banning triclosan in personal care products will keep prices of the raw material for 2,4-D low for Bayer, Monsanto, and DuPont. As current pesticides lose effectiveness, companies and farmers are increasingly relying on this component of Agent Orange from the 1940s to kill weeds.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Good News on Lab Testing

Fake Olive Oil in Your Kitchen?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2fMPtr6 via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2fIcDvD

The FDA Bans Triclosan

The FDA recently issued a rule banning triclosan and more than a dozen other chemicals commonly used in antibacterial soaps.

This will affect a large number of products. “If the product makes antibacterial claims, chances are pretty good that it contains one of these ingredients,” according to an FDA spokeswoman. Companies have a year to comply with the new rule.

Triclosan is the trade name for 5-Chloro-2-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)phenol. It’s manufactured from the same raw material as 2,4-D, a component of the infamous Vietnam-era defoliant, Agent Orange.

According to the FDA, antibacterial soaps are no better at preventing infection or illness than washing with soap and water. Advocates of natural health have been saying this for years. Many so-called “germs” are essential to the body’s optimal bacteria balance. They act as probiotics for the gut and skin; are naturally anti-inflammatory; and boost the immune system.

This ban has been a long time coming. In 1978, the FDA proposed to regulate antibacterial soaps and allow on the market only those it determined were safe and effective. However, it created a loophole: if there wasn’t enough data to know whether a chemical was safe and effective, it stayed on the market until a final determination was made.

Until now, the FDA had not made a final determination on triclosan, probably because of industry pressure. Meanwhile, its use in consumer products has mushroomed—until an estimated 75% of antibacterial liquid soaps and body washes sold in the US now contain it. The chemical is also found in mouthwash, toothpaste, and toys.

Here are some of the dangers associated with triclosan and triclocarban (a related chemical agent):

• Animal studies have shown that both of these chemicals can interfere with hormones critical for normal development and functioning of the brain and reproductive system.
• Triclosan has been associated with lower levels of thyroid hormone and testosterone, which could result in altered behavior, learning disabilities, or fertility problems.
• Triclocarban has been shown to amplify or unbalance artificially the effects of sex hormones such as estrogen and testosterone, and may be carcinogenic. It can also cause muscle damage.
• Furthermore, laboratory studies suggest that triclosan and triclocarban may be contributing to antibiotic resistance in bacteria known to cause human infections. Infections caused by bacteria with resistance to at least one antibiotic have been estimated to kill more than 60,000 hospitalized patients each year.

Why is the FDA taking this action now after so many years? We think it might be because banning triclosan in personal care products will keep prices of the raw material for 2,4-D low for Bayer, Monsanto, and DuPont. As current pesticides lose effectiveness, companies and farmers are increasingly relying on this component of Agent Orange from the 1940s to kill weeds.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Good News on Lab Testing

Fake Olive Oil in Your Kitchen?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2fMPtr6 via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2gESCqo

Action Alert: Thank Congress for Work on LDTs

Related articles:

Good News on Lab Testing

Fake Olive Oil in Your Kitchen?

Trouble Taking Action? Click here.

.errordiv { padding:10px; margin:10px; border: 1px solid #555555;color: #000000;background-color: #f8f8f8; text-align:center; width:500px; }
var ai_iframe_width_iframe3075 = 0; var ai_iframe_height_iframe3075 = 0;var aiIsIe8=false;var aiReadyCallbacks = ( typeof aiReadyCallbacks != ‘undefined’ && aiReadyCallbacks instanceof Array ) ? aiReadyCallbacks : [];var onloadFirediframe3075 = false; function aiShowIframe() { jQuery(“#iframe3075”).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiShowIframeId(id_iframe) { jQuery(id_iframe).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiResizeIframeHeight(height) { aiResizeIframeHeight(height,iframe3075); } function aiResizeIframeHeightId(height,width,id) {aiResizeIframeHeightById(id,height);} http://ift.tt/2gsWv2Kvar ifrm_iframe3075 = document.getElementById(“iframe3075”);
var hiddenTabsDoneiframe3075 = false;
function resizeCallbackiframe3075() {}

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gfGvTN via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2fIbgwF

Action Alert: Thank Congress for Work on LDTs

Related articles:

Good News on Lab Testing

Fake Olive Oil in Your Kitchen?

Trouble Taking Action? Click here.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gfGvTN via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2gCfISp

Big Pharma Reaches into the Womb

If vaccinating pregnant mothers weren’t bad enough, now the vaccine companies would like a twofer by also going after the child in utero. Action Alert!

For many months now, we’ve been monitoring the progress of the 21st Century Cures bill. This legislation is intended to bring medicine into the 21st century, but as we’ve noted before, it does the opposite. Rather than looking forward, this bill simply doubles down on conventional approaches that have been in place for decades.

21st Century Cures passed the House last year. The Senate has broken up the bill into over a dozen separate pieces, which could be considered any day now.

One extremely worrisome provision seems to put structures in place for amending the current vaccine schedule and including more vaccinations for pregnant mothers. Senate bill S. 2742 (the “Promoting Biomedical Research and Public Health for Patients Act”) contains the following language:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of this subtitle, both a woman who received a covered vaccine while pregnant and any child who was in utero at the time such woman received the vaccine shall be considered persons to whom the covered vaccine was administered and persons who received the covered vaccine.

This may have been written for liability reasons. Perhaps Big Pharma is concerned that the child would be eligible to sue for damages, unlike anyone vaccinated after birth. Perhaps the thinking is that doctors tend to have more control over mothers before birth, so why not force vaccines on them then, rather than after birth?

Then again, this provision may be intended simply to increase vaccinations given to pregnant mothers. If a developing child is considered a “person” eligible to receive vaccinations, the vaccine industry could begin to develop more vaccines intended specifically for children in utero.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) already recommend that pregnant mothers get whooping cough, flu, and hepatitis B vaccines. Good questions remain about whether this is necessary or useful. Some scientific studies have shown virtually no benefit to the maternal flu vaccine, and of course flu vaccines contain mercury. Injecting a mother with mercury, much less a baby in utero, seems totally reckless to us.

In addition, if the language quoted above becomes law, the whole CDC vaccine schedule could be shifted or expanded to create more vaccine industry profit-making opportunities. Maybe the first DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis) shot will be given to the mother and the fetus, rather than to the child at one month. Perhaps the schedule will be expanded.

The risks in doing this are frightening. The adjuvant load alone that would be delivered to the mother and shared with a child in utero (a child without a functioning immune system) could cause serious damage. As we’ve noted elsewhere, adequate safety testing of aluminum adjuvants for young children—much less for unborn children—has been completely absent!

We know of no studies that have looked at the long-term consequences of multiple vaccinations during pregnancy, nor any analysis comparing the risks to the benefits (if any). Further, the safety and effectiveness of giving certain vaccines to pregnant women was not determined before the vaccines were licensed in the US.

Provisions included in the bill only heighten these concerns. They instruct various federal agencies to develop a report “on ways to promote innovation in the development of vaccines that minimize the burden of infectious disease.” The agencies are to consider whether any obstacles exist which inhibit the development of vaccines, and make recommendations on how to remove these obstacles in order to “promote and incentivize vaccine innovation and development.”

Could one such “obstacle” be the apprehension of pregnant mothers about receiving a host of vaccinations for their children still in the womb?

Other parts of the legislation provide for lower standards for drug and device approval and safety. They also encourage the development of new antibiotics for “limited populations” that do not need to meet standard criteria for safety and effectiveness. On top of it all, they give more funding to the National Institutes of Health for the development of experimental drugs and other products, probably to hand over to Big Pharma. After all, one of the principle architects of the bill, Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), was the top recipient of pharmaceutical industry money in 2013-14.

These are complex subjects—far too complex for Congress to be legislating about. For example, we generally think the Kefauver Act, which demanded FDA approval of drug effectiveness as well as safety, was a mistake. Once a drug has been deemed safe, effectiveness should be worked out by the medical profession, not by unqualified government employees whose salaries are covered by Big Pharma.

Clearly this is a bill with much potential for harm and no evident potential for good. We need to defeat it.

Action Alert! Write to your senators and tell them to oppose 21st Century Cures legislation, especially S. 2742, which could be used to develop more vaccines for pregnant women AND their children in the womb. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

FTC Decides to Destroy Homeopathy

Ohio Moves to Rein in Nutritional Monopolists

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2fnUshC via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2gHgIWt

FTC Decides to Destroy Homeopathy

The FDA is no doubt pulling the strings on this.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently issued a policy statement explaining that the agency will hold efficacy and safety claims for over-the-counter (OTC) homeopathic drugs to the same standard as claims for other OTC drugs. This means homeopathic OTC products will need to back up claims with “competent and reliable scientific evidence” for health-related claims, or else use certain FDA-approved disclaimers.

Here are some examples of acceptable disclaimers, as noted in the FTC’s policy statement: “There is no scientific evidence that the product works,” or “The product’s claims are based only on theories of homeopathy from the 1700s that are not accepted by most modern medical experts.”

We’ve been expecting this attack on homeopathy for some time. Last year, the FTC held a workshop to discuss the advertising of OTC homeopathic formulations. The FDA also held a public hearing to evaluate enforcement policies for homeopathic drugs.

The pretense for such actions, of course, is consumer protection and safety, but there’s little reason to believe this is genuine. No one has any concern for properly produced homeopathic products, which have been used for centuries without harm. These medicines are often so diluted that the original ingredient is virtually undetectable. Homeopathic products must also go through an approval process with a monograph from the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States, which ensures homeopathic products are both safe and effective.

The most likely motivation of the FTC is that the homeopathic industry is rapidly expanding, which presents a clear threat to pharmaceutical drug company profits, which is enough for the FDA to put homeopathy in its scopes. The FDA often works in conjunction with the FTC, as we’ve seen in similar attacks on advertising claims of natural products (e.g., the case of POM Wonderful).

This is all contrary to the expressed choices of consumers. In a survey of 20,000 consumers who had purchased at least one OTC homeopathic product in the past two years, more than 96% said they were very or extremely satisfied with the results of the homeopathic medicines they had used.

As of yet, no official rule or guidance on this issue has been proposed, so we have no opportunity for engagement. We will be monitoring the situation closely. When the time comes, we must let the FTC and FDA know what we think of their crony capitalist move.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Big Pharma Reaches into the Womb

Ohio Moves to Rein in Nutritional Monopolists

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gh3CvA via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2gHbQAV

Ohio Moves to Rein in Nutritional Monopolists

We’re making progress in the effort to make sure health coaches and nutritionists can practice. State-based Action Alert!

Last year, we sent letters to the sixteen states that had the worst monopolistic scope-of-practice laws for the nutrition profession. This action was a follow-up to court victories that sent a clear signal to monopolistic boards to shape up or else face the consequences.

ANH-USA also began working with allies to change the laws in these states. We began with Ohio, and we’re proud to report that legislation is currently being considered that would substantially improve the regulatory landscape in Ohio. One bill—SB 329, introduced by Sen. Keith Faber (R-OH12)—would establish a procedure for the legislature to review and evaluate the performance of state boards to determine if they are serving the public or special interests. Another bill (SB 366/HB 617), introduced by Sen. Bill Seitz (R-OH08), would abolish the Ohio Board of Dietetics and transfer its duties to Ohio’s medical board, and provide for state oversight of regulatory actions that exclude competition.

The main culprit behind the establishment of monopolistic state nutrition and dietetics boards is, of course, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND). They’ve been at this for quite a while. As we’ve argued before, the AND—the trade association for registered dieticians (RDs)—has made it a priority to pass, in as many states as possible, scope-of-practice laws under which only RDs can provide nutrition services. This explicitly excludes other nutrition professionals who are often better educated, more experienced, and better qualified than RDs. For example, a PhD in nutrition may be told he or she may not legally offer nutrition advice, while a college-educated member of the AND can.

To be clear, it’s perfectly legitimate for RDs to want to protect the term “registered dietician” as a means of informing consumers of their particular professional training. But this does not mean there should not be a competitive and open market for nutrition professionals. Consumers and payers (including hospitals and Medicare) should be able to decide what credentials, education, and experience they want in a nutrition provider. We advise state dietetic boards to voluntarily restrict enforcement to title protection alone—essentially limiting the use of certain specific titles like “licensed dietician” or “registered dietician.”

A free and open market for nutrition professionals is especially important given the well-documented ties between the AND and Big Food companies. When so-called nutrition “experts” like the AND take money from the likes of Coca-Cola, Kraft Foods, and other junk food giants, it’s even more important for consumers to have access to other nutrition professionals.

If the Ohio bills become law, it will send a clear message to the other states that consumers are no longer willing to tolerate nutrition monopolies.

State-based Action Alert! Ohio residents: write to your state legislators and urge them to support SB 329 and SB 366/HB 617. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Big Pharma Reaches into the Womb

FTC Decides to Destroy Homeopathy

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2fC8xpE via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2gd4Y93

Big Pharma Reaches into the Womb

If vaccinating pregnant mothers weren’t bad enough, now the vaccine companies would like a twofer by also going after the child in utero. Action Alert!

For many months now, we’ve been monitoring the progress of the 21st Century Cures bill. This legislation is intended to bring medicine into the 21st century, but as we’ve noted before, it does the opposite. Rather than looking forward, this bill simply doubles down on conventional approaches that have been in place for decades.

21st Century Cures passed the House last year. The Senate has broken up the bill into over a dozen separate pieces, which could be considered any day now.

One extremely worrisome provision seems to put structures in place for amending the current vaccine schedule and including more vaccinations for pregnant mothers. Senate bill S. 2742 (the “Promoting Biomedical Research and Public Health for Patients Act”) contains the following language:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of this subtitle, both a woman who received a covered vaccine while pregnant and any child who was in utero at the time such woman received the vaccine shall be considered persons to whom the covered vaccine was administered and persons who received the covered vaccine.

This may have been written for liability reasons. Perhaps Big Pharma is concerned that the child would be eligible to sue for damages, unlike anyone vaccinated after birth. Perhaps the thinking is that doctors tend to have more control over mothers before birth, so why not force vaccines on them then, rather than after birth?

Then again, this provision may be intended simply to increase vaccinations given to pregnant mothers. If a developing child is considered a “person” eligible to receive vaccinations, the vaccine industry could begin to develop more vaccines intended specifically for children in utero.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) already recommend that pregnant mothers get whooping cough, flu, and hepatitis B vaccines. Good questions remain about whether this is necessary or useful. Some scientific studies have shown virtually no benefit to the maternal flu vaccine, and of course flu vaccines contain mercury. Injecting a mother with mercury, much less a baby in utero, seems totally reckless to us.

In addition, if the language quoted above becomes law, the whole CDC vaccine schedule could be shifted or expanded to create more vaccine industry profit-making opportunities. Maybe the first DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis) shot will be given to the mother and the fetus, rather than to the child at one month. Perhaps the schedule will be expanded.

The risks in doing this are frightening. The adjuvant load alone that would be delivered to the mother and shared with a child in utero (a child without a functioning immune system) could cause serious damage. As we’ve noted elsewhere, adequate safety testing of aluminum adjuvants for young children—much less for unborn children—has been completely absent!

We know of no studies that have looked at the long-term consequences of multiple vaccinations during pregnancy, nor any analysis comparing the risks to the benefits (if any). Further, the safety and effectiveness of giving certain vaccines to pregnant women was not determined before the vaccines were licensed in the US.

Provisions included in the bill only heighten these concerns. They instruct various federal agencies to develop a report “on ways to promote innovation in the development of vaccines that minimize the burden of infectious disease.” The agencies are to consider whether any obstacles exist which inhibit the development of vaccines, and make recommendations on how to remove these obstacles in order to “promote and incentivize vaccine innovation and development.”

Could one such “obstacle” be the apprehension of pregnant mothers about receiving a host of vaccinations for their children still in the womb?

Other parts of the legislation provide for lower standards for drug and device approval and safety. They also encourage the development of new antibiotics for “limited populations” that do not need to meet standard criteria for safety and effectiveness. On top of it all, they give more funding to the National Institutes of Health for the development of experimental drugs and other products, probably to hand over to Big Pharma. After all, one of the principle architects of the bill, Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), was the top recipient of pharmaceutical industry money in 2013-14.

These are complex subjects—far too complex for Congress to be legislating about. For example, we generally think the Kefauver Act, which demanded FDA approval of drug effectiveness as well as safety, was a mistake. Once a drug has been deemed safe, effectiveness should be worked out by the medical profession, not by unqualified government employees whose salaries are covered by Big Pharma.

Clearly this is a bill with much potential for harm and no evident potential for good. We need to defeat it.

Action Alert! Write to your senators and tell them to oppose 21st Century Cures legislation, especially S. 2742, which could be used to develop more vaccines for pregnant women AND their children in the womb. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

FTC Decides to Destroy Homeopathy

Ohio Moves to Rein in Nutritional Monopolists

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2fnUshC via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2fC9XjT

FTC Decides to Destroy Homeopathy

The FDA is no doubt pulling the strings on this.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently issued a policy statement explaining that the agency will hold efficacy and safety claims for over-the-counter (OTC) homeopathic drugs to the same standard as claims for other OTC drugs. This means homeopathic OTC products will need to back up claims with “competent and reliable scientific evidence” for health-related claims, or else use certain FDA-approved disclaimers.

Here are some examples of acceptable disclaimers, as noted in the FTC’s policy statement: “There is no scientific evidence that the product works,” or “The product’s claims are based only on theories of homeopathy from the 1700s that are not accepted by most modern medical experts.”

We’ve been expecting this attack on homeopathy for some time. Last year, the FTC held a workshop to discuss the advertising of OTC homeopathic formulations. The FDA also held a public hearing to evaluate enforcement policies for homeopathic drugs.

The pretense for such actions, of course, is consumer protection and safety, but there’s little reason to believe this is genuine. No one has any concern for properly produced homeopathic products, which have been used for centuries without harm. These medicines are often so diluted that the original ingredient is virtually undetectable. Homeopathic products must also go through an approval process with a monograph from the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States, which ensures homeopathic products are both safe and effective.

The most likely motivation of the FTC is that the homeopathic industry is rapidly expanding, which presents a clear threat to pharmaceutical drug company profits, which is enough for the FDA to put homeopathy in its scopes. The FDA often works in conjunction with the FTC, as we’ve seen in similar attacks on advertising claims of natural products (e.g., the case of POM Wonderful).

This is all contrary to the expressed choices of consumers. In a survey of 20,000 consumers who had purchased at least one OTC homeopathic product in the past two years, more than 96% said they were very or extremely satisfied with the results of the homeopathic medicines they had used.

As of yet, no official rule or guidance on this issue has been proposed, so we have no opportunity for engagement. We will be monitoring the situation closely. When the time comes, we must let the FTC and FDA know what we think of their crony capitalist move.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Big Pharma Reaches into the Womb

Ohio Moves to Rein in Nutritional Monopolists

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gh3CvA via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2gehoRE

Ohio Moves to Rein in Nutritional Monopolists

We’re making progress in the effort to make sure health coaches and nutritionists can practice. State-based Action Alert!

Last year, we sent letters to the sixteen states that had the worst monopolistic scope-of-practice laws for the nutrition profession. This action was a follow-up to court victories that sent a clear signal to monopolistic boards to shape up or else face the consequences.

ANH-USA also began working with allies to change the laws in these states. We began with Ohio, and we’re proud to report that legislation is currently being considered that would substantially improve the regulatory landscape in Ohio. One bill—SB 329, introduced by Sen. Keith Faber (R-OH12)—would establish a procedure for the legislature to review and evaluate the performance of state boards to determine if they are serving the public or special interests. Another bill (SB 366/HB 617), introduced by Sen. Bill Seitz (R-OH08), would abolish the Ohio Board of Dietetics and transfer its duties to Ohio’s medical board, and provide for state oversight of regulatory actions that exclude competition.

The main culprit behind the establishment of monopolistic state nutrition and dietetics boards is, of course, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND). They’ve been at this for quite a while. As we’ve argued before, the AND—the trade association for registered dieticians (RDs)—has made it a priority to pass, in as many states as possible, scope-of-practice laws under which only RDs can provide nutrition services. This explicitly excludes other nutrition professionals who are often better educated, more experienced, and better qualified than RDs. For example, a PhD in nutrition may be told he or she may not legally offer nutrition advice, while a college-educated member of the AND can.

To be clear, it’s perfectly legitimate for RDs to want to protect the term “registered dietician” as a means of informing consumers of their particular professional training. But this does not mean there should not be a competitive and open market for nutrition professionals. Consumers and payers (including hospitals and Medicare) should be able to decide what credentials, education, and experience they want in a nutrition provider. We advise state dietetic boards to voluntarily restrict enforcement to title protection alone—essentially limiting the use of certain specific titles like “licensed dietician” or “registered dietician.”

A free and open market for nutrition professionals is especially important given the well-documented ties between the AND and Big Food companies. When so-called nutrition “experts” like the AND take money from the likes of Coca-Cola, Kraft Foods, and other junk food giants, it’s even more important for consumers to have access to other nutrition professionals.

If the Ohio bills become law, it will send a clear message to the other states that consumers are no longer willing to tolerate nutrition monopolies.

State-based Action Alert! Ohio residents: write to your state legislators and urge them to support SB 329 and SB 366/HB 617. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Big Pharma Reaches into the Womb

FTC Decides to Destroy Homeopathy

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2fC8xpE via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2fZPNAI

Action Alert: Oppose 21st Century Cures

Related article: Big Pharma Reaches into the Womb

Trouble Taking Action? Click here.

.errordiv { padding:10px; margin:10px; border: 1px solid #555555;color: #000000;background-color: #f8f8f8; text-align:center; width:500px; }
var ai_iframe_width_iframe3069 = 0; var ai_iframe_height_iframe3069 = 0;var aiIsIe8=false;var aiReadyCallbacks = ( typeof aiReadyCallbacks != ‘undefined’ && aiReadyCallbacks instanceof Array ) ? aiReadyCallbacks : [];var onloadFirediframe3069 = false; function aiShowIframe() { jQuery(“#iframe3069”).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiShowIframeId(id_iframe) { jQuery(id_iframe).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiResizeIframeHeight(height) { aiResizeIframeHeight(height,iframe3069); } function aiResizeIframeHeightId(height,width,id) {aiResizeIframeHeightById(id,height);} http://ift.tt/2gcSRZPvar ifrm_iframe3069 = document.getElementById(“iframe3069”);
var hiddenTabsDoneiframe3069 = false;
function resizeCallbackiframe3069() {}

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gyDoaI via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2fnX0fQ

Action Alert: Oppose 21st Century Cures

Related article: Big Pharma Reaches into the Womb

Trouble Taking Action? Click here.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2gyDoaI via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2fm3s3O

Legal Drugs: Time to “Just Say No”

They’re dangerous, even deadly, but hugely profitable. Big Pharma has bought politicians and doctors. Only the American public can stop it by refusing the product. Action Alert!

Most people are understandably afraid to say no. They don’t know enough about medicine. We understand. We aren’t doctors and never offer medical advice. But the Internet has put most medical research at your doorstep, including information about drug side effects and risks. And there are integrative doctors who can offer sound advice on the subject.

Are we as a society addicted to legal drugs? Are we also wasting huge amounts of money on substances that all too often offer more harm than benefit? Let’s consider these numbers:

• 60% of Americans take one or more prescription drugs.
• 15% of Americans take five or more prescription drugs. Some, many more. There are no studies on the interaction of all these drugs.
• 10% of Americans take an antidepressant medication; for women in their 40s and 50s, it’s 25%.
• 25% of Americans over the age of 45 take a statin drug, despite much evidence of harm, including promoting diabetes.
• Doctors write about 6 million prescriptions for proton-pump inhibitors (a class of acid blocking drugs) each year, making these drugs the third highest selling class of drugs on the market. This is happening although logic and evidence suggest that most people, especially older people, suffer from too little stomach acid, not too much.

Statins and acid blockers only begin to describe the problems.

A recent study found that elderly patients were able to reduce their risk of death by 38%. How? By “de-prescribing”—reducing the number of prescription drugs they were taking.

Properly prescribed prescription drugs are the fourth leading cause of death in the country; they cause an estimated 1.9 million hospitalizations a year and 128,000 deaths. Another 840,000 hospitalized patients are given drugs that cause serious adverse reactions. These are just hospital numbers. And even in hospitals, there is reason to believe that most of the injury from drugs is hard to isolate and therefore not reported.

Even if a drug does not kill or hospitalize us, there can still be serious side effects. One study found that adverse drug effects reported to the FDA more than doubled in the last decade—and these figures are based on voluntary reports. Some researchers estimate that fewer than 10% of adverse events are actually reported.

Another risk to taking prescription drugs: they often deplete the body of nutrients. This is a serious issue. Last week, we reported that the US Department of Agriculture estimates that 90% of the American public is deficient in at least one nutrient; it is common to be severely deficient in many. Magnesium is an essential co-factor with more than 300 different enzymes regulating different processes throughout the body. If magnesium is scarce, it may be routed to the heart, where it is especially needed, and other parts of the body suffer over time. Or it may even be inadequate in the heart.

Another example is vitamin D. A number of drugs can interfere with the body’s absorption of vitamin D, including antacids, anticonvulsants, antiretrovirals (AIDS drugs), and some antibiotics. A meta-analysis found that those with what conventional medicine considers low vitamin D in the blood and integrative doctors consider very low (lower than 30 ng/ml) were twice as likely to die prematurely from all causes. As much as two-thirds of the US population may be below that level (David Williams, Alternatives Newsletter, September 2014).

The list goes on. COX-2 inhibitor drugs, which include some non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) drugs (ibuprofen, aspirin), reduce vitamin B6 levels in the body. This is in addition to the risk they present for internal bleeding and other medical complications. For further information, Dr. Julian Whitaker has a helpful reference chart explaining which drugs deplete the body of which nutrients.

The irony is that many doctors prescribing multiple drugs to their patients will advise them NOT to take a vitamin or mineral supplement while on the drug, when in fact the need for supplements is increased.

There are more reasons to wonder about these drugs. Unlike natural treatments, which give your body the nutrients it needs to heal itself, they directly interfere and force biological outcomes. This is bound to produce unintended consequences.

In addition, virtually all drugs are chlorine-based, but little or no research has explored whether this in itself is a risk. While a tiny amount of chlorine is natural to the body, higher amounts are toxic.  The effects of ingesting, breathing and absorbing this chemical on a daily basis, as Americans do, are largely unknown.

Keep in mind also that 80% of the prescription drugs consumed in the US come from China or India. While drugs made overseas must theoretically meet US standards, in reality, widespread quality issues abound.

Think of the irony here. The prescription pill that costs a few pennies to make but sells for hundreds of dollars is made in China to save another penny. Does this make sense?

Because the FDA was so deficient in inspecting foreign drug manufacturers, a law was passed in 2012 that requires the agency to inspect foreign pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities as frequently as domestic facilities. But the numbers don’t add up. India and China each have about 500 drug manufacturing plants registered with the FDA. The FDA has nineteen staff members in India, and is working on increasing the number of inspectors in China from eight to twenty-seven.

A report by the Health and Human Services’ Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found that the agency was not able to meet the legal requirements. Before the 2012 law was passed, the Government Accountability Office found that the FDA inspected 11% of foreign drug facilities in FY 2009, noting that at such a rate, it would take the agency more than nine years to inspect these facilities just once. And who are the inspectors? How do we know that they have not been bought off?

Meanwhile the same FDA that is utterly failing to meet the inspection requirements demanded by law has issued proposed rules on new supplements which cannot possibly be implemented without huge additions to staff, and which will also cripple and even destroy the supplement industry. Why is it doing this? The only reason we can think of is that the FDA is so beholden to the drug industry it is supposed to regulate, but which is actually providing much of its funding.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Not Diabetic? Take a Diabetes Drug Anyway!

Pink Drill Bits “For the Cure”?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2f1quje via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2f1v1Cl

Not Diabetic? Take a Diabetes Drug Anyway!

That’s what the medical establishment is scandalously recommending. There are billions of dollars to be made, even if the drugs are harmful even for actual diabetics.

“Prediabetes” refers to a condition of abnormal but not pathological blood sugar levels. People with “prediabetes” are considered to be at risk to develop type 2 diabetes. One in three Americans are said to be prediabetic. That is a lot of people, and it has Big Pharma salivating: $322 billion is already spent annually caring for people with diabetes and prediabetes.

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) has obliged by recommending diabetes drugs for “prediabetes.” It should come as no surprise that the list of the AACE’s corporate sponsors includes the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world: Novo Nordisk, Merck, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and many others.

Some of the worst diabetes drugs have by now been taken off the market. But current diabetes drugs are still both ineffective and involve enormous risks, especially for the heart.

The government-funded Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of diabetes drugs in reducing heart attacks, strokes, and other negative outcomes. Part of the study tested whether aggressively lowering blood sugar through these drugs would provide greater protection against heart disease.

This part of the study was shut down when it was found that the opposite was true—patients on a regimen aimed at aggressively lowering blood sugar with these drugs had a much higher cardiovascular death rate. If the study had looked at natural ways to reduce blood sugar, the opposite might have been found.

The evidence suggests that drugs are not needed to reverse diabetes or prediabetes. Dr. Mercola writes extensively about the potential for diet and exercise to prevent and reverse type 2 diabetes. Type 2 diabetes often arises from faulty leptin signaling and insulin resistance, which can be overcome by recovering the body’s insulin and leptin sensitivities. Some actions you can take to accomplish this are:

• eliminating sugar and grains from the diet
• exercising regularly
• optimizing vitamin D
• avoiding trans fats
• optimizing gut flora
• eating at the right time of day (hint: the closer to bedtime you eat, the higher your blood sugar may be the next morning.)

Of course, it is essential to consult with an integrative doctor to develop the best course of treatment.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Legal Drugs: Time to “Just Say No”

Pink Drill Bits “For the Cure”?

 

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2f1cZjU via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2f1v2Gp

Pink Drill Bits “For the Cure”?

The largest breast cancer organization has a strange new bedfellow.

Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the largest breast cancer fundraising organization in the US and known for painting everything pink, has partnered with Baker Hughes, one of the world’s largest oilfield service companies. To mark the partnership, thousands of Baker Hughes drill bits used in hydraulic fracturing—or fracking have been colored pink.

We have all heard about “greenwashing,” in which a polluting company donates to an environmental organization to improve its image. So here we seem to have “pinkwashing.”

A Komen spokeswoman said that the partnership “grew from Baker Hughes’ involvement in our Houston Race for the Cure” and that “the issue is personal to them and their employees,” adding that “the evidence to this point does not establish a connection between fracking and breast cancer.”

How convenient for Baker Hughes to have Komen provide this protection. But it doesn’t surprise us in the least. We have never considered Komen an organization devoted to ending breast cancer. We have always viewed it as a money-raising scheme that is closely allied with Big Pharma. Both Komen and Big Pharma make money from breast cancer. Does either really want to cure it?

As for whether fracking might contribute to cancer, consider that a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study found dangerous levels of benzene, a proven human carcinogen, in the urine of fracking workers. Health experts say that this may put workers in fracking operations at a high risk for leukemia.

Other evidence suggests that benzene is linked with breast cancer in particular. An Italian study of women exposed to the chemical in a shoe factory found benzene to be a risk factor for breast cancer. Other studies have linked benzene to breast cancer in males.

And that’s just benzene, one of an estimated 190 different chemical constituents of the fluid used in fracking operations—many of which aren’t even known to the public, since the companies claim their “recipe” as a trade secret. Of all the chemicals used in fracking, we lack publicly available safety information on about a third of them.

Fracking also contaminates water and air. One study showed that air near fracking sites contained potentially dangerous levels of petroleum hydrocarbons like benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene that could contribute to acute and chronic health problems for those living in the vicinity. Those living near fracking sites have reported drinking water turning brown.

Maybe Komen ought to partner with cigarette companies next. They have a lot of money and could use some pinkwashing.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Legal Drugs: Time to “Just Say No”

Not Diabetic? Take a Diabetes Drug Anyway!

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2f1cB4A via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2f1y25I

Legal Drugs: Time to “Just Say No”

They’re dangerous, even deadly, but hugely profitable. Big Pharma has bought politicians and doctors. Only the American public can stop it by refusing the product. Action Alert!

Most people are understandably afraid to say no. They don’t know enough about medicine. We understand. We aren’t doctors and never offer medical advice. But the Internet has put most medical research at your doorstep, including information about drug side effects and risks. And there are integrative doctors who can offer sound advice on the subject.

Are we as a society addicted to legal drugs? Are we also wasting huge amounts of money on substances that all too often offer more harm than benefit? Let’s consider these numbers:

• 60% of Americans take one or more prescription drugs.
• 15% of Americans take five or more prescription drugs. Some, many more. There are no studies on the interaction of all these drugs.
• 10% of Americans take an antidepressant medication; for women in their 40s and 50s, it’s 25%.
• 25% of Americans over the age of 45 take a statin drug, despite much evidence of harm, including promoting diabetes.
• Doctors write about 6 million prescriptions for proton-pump inhibitors (a class of acid blocking drugs) each year, making these drugs the third highest selling class of drugs on the market. This is happening although logic and evidence suggest that most people, especially older people, suffer from too little stomach acid, not too much.

Statins and acid blockers only begin to describe the problems.

A recent study found that elderly patients were able to reduce their risk of death by 38%. How? By “de-prescribing”—reducing the number of prescription drugs they were taking.

Properly prescribed prescription drugs are the fourth leading cause of death in the country; they cause an estimated 1.9 million hospitalizations a year and 128,000 deaths. Another 840,000 hospitalized patients are given drugs that cause serious adverse reactions. These are just hospital numbers. And even in hospitals, there is reason to believe that most of the injury from drugs is hard to isolate and therefore not reported.

Even if a drug does not kill or hospitalize us, there can still be serious side effects. One study found that adverse drug effects reported to the FDA more than doubled in the last decade—and these figures are based on voluntary reports. Some researchers estimate that fewer than 10% of adverse events are actually reported.

Another risk to taking prescription drugs: they often deplete the body of nutrients. This is a serious issue. Last week, we reported that the US Department of Agriculture estimates that 90% of the American public is deficient in at least one nutrient; it is common to be severely deficient in many. Magnesium is an essential co-factor with more than 300 different enzymes regulating different processes throughout the body. If magnesium is scarce, it may be routed to the heart, where it is especially needed, and other parts of the body suffer over time. Or it may even be inadequate in the heart.

Another example is vitamin D. A number of drugs can interfere with the body’s absorption of vitamin D, including antacids, anticonvulsants, antiretrovirals (AIDS drugs), and some antibiotics. A meta-analysis found that those with what conventional medicine considers low vitamin D in the blood and integrative doctors consider very low (lower than 30 ng/ml) were twice as likely to die prematurely from all causes. As much as two-thirds of the US population may be below that level (David Williams, Alternatives Newsletter, September 2014).

The list goes on. COX-2 inhibitor drugs, which include some non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) drugs (ibuprofen, aspirin), reduce vitamin B6 levels in the body. This is in addition to the risk they present for internal bleeding and other medical complications. For further information, Dr. Julian Whitaker has a helpful reference chart explaining which drugs deplete the body of which nutrients.

The irony is that many doctors prescribing multiple drugs to their patients will advise them NOT to take a vitamin or mineral supplement while on the drug, when in fact the need for supplements is increased.

There are more reasons to wonder about these drugs. Unlike natural treatments, which give your body the nutrients it needs to heal itself, they directly interfere and force biological outcomes. This is bound to produce unintended consequences.

In addition, virtually all drugs are chlorine-based, but little or no research has explored whether this in itself is a risk. While a tiny amount of chlorine is natural to the body, higher amounts are toxic.  The effects of ingesting, breathing and absorbing this chemical on a daily basis, as Americans do, are largely unknown.

Keep in mind also that 80% of the prescription drugs consumed in the US come from China or India. While drugs made overseas must theoretically meet US standards, in reality, widespread quality issues abound.

Think of the irony here. The prescription pill that costs a few pennies to make but sells for hundreds of dollars is made in China to save another penny. Does this make sense?

Because the FDA was so deficient in inspecting foreign drug manufacturers, a law was passed in 2012 that requires the agency to inspect foreign pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities as frequently as domestic facilities. But the numbers don’t add up. India and China each have about 500 drug manufacturing plants registered with the FDA. The FDA has nineteen staff members in India, and is working on increasing the number of inspectors in China from eight to twenty-seven.

A report by the Health and Human Services’ Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found that the agency was not able to meet the legal requirements. Before the 2012 law was passed, the Government Accountability Office found that the FDA inspected 11% of foreign drug facilities in FY 2009, noting that at such a rate, it would take the agency more than nine years to inspect these facilities just once. And who are the inspectors? How do we know that they have not been bought off?

Meanwhile the same FDA that is utterly failing to meet the inspection requirements demanded by law has issued proposed rules on new supplements which cannot possibly be implemented without huge additions to staff, and which will also cripple and even destroy the supplement industry. Why is it doing this? The only reason we can think of is that the FDA is so beholden to the drug industry it is supposed to regulate, but which is actually providing much of its funding.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Not Diabetic? Take a Diabetes Drug Anyway!

Pink Drill Bits “For the Cure”?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2f1quje via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2fdC8oS

Not Diabetic? Take a Diabetes Drug Anyway!

That’s what the medical establishment is scandalously recommending. There are billions of dollars to be made, even if the drugs are harmful even for actual diabetics.

“Prediabetes” refers to a condition of abnormal but not pathological blood sugar levels. People with “prediabetes” are considered to be at risk to develop type 2 diabetes. One in three Americans are said to be prediabetic. That is a lot of people, and it has Big Pharma salivating: $322 billion is already spent annually caring for people with diabetes and prediabetes.

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) has obliged by recommending diabetes drugs for “prediabetes.” It should come as no surprise that the list of the AACE’s corporate sponsors includes the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world: Novo Nordisk, Merck, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and many others.

Some of the worst diabetes drugs have by now been taken off the market. But current diabetes drugs are still both ineffective and involve enormous risks, especially for the heart.

The government-funded Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of diabetes drugs in reducing heart attacks, strokes, and other negative outcomes. Part of the study tested whether aggressively lowering blood sugar through these drugs would provide greater protection against heart disease.

This part of the study was shut down when it was found that the opposite was true—patients on a regimen aimed at aggressively lowering blood sugar with these drugs had a much higher cardiovascular death rate. If the study had looked at natural ways to reduce blood sugar, the opposite might have been found.

The evidence suggests that drugs are not needed to reverse diabetes or prediabetes. Dr. Mercola writes extensively about the potential for diet and exercise to prevent and reverse type 2 diabetes. Type 2 diabetes often arises from faulty leptin signaling and insulin resistance, which can be overcome by recovering the body’s insulin and leptin sensitivities. Some actions you can take to accomplish this are:

• eliminating sugar and grains from the diet
• exercising regularly
• optimizing vitamin D
• avoiding trans fats
• optimizing gut flora
• eating at the right time of day (hint: the closer to bedtime you eat, the higher your blood sugar may be the next morning.)

Of course, it is essential to consult with an integrative doctor to develop the best course of treatment.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Legal Drugs: Time to “Just Say No”

Pink Drill Bits “For the Cure”?

 

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2f1cZjU via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2eX9fMT

Pink Drill Bits “For the Cure”?

The largest breast cancer organization has a strange new bedfellow.

Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the largest breast cancer fundraising organization in the US and known for painting everything pink, has partnered with Baker Hughes, one of the world’s largest oilfield service companies. To mark the partnership, thousands of Baker Hughes drill bits used in hydraulic fracturing—or fracking have been colored pink.

We have all heard about “greenwashing,” in which a polluting company donates to an environmental organization to improve its image. So here we seem to have “pinkwashing.”

A Komen spokeswoman said that the partnership “grew from Baker Hughes’ involvement in our Houston Race for the Cure” and that “the issue is personal to them and their employees,” adding that “the evidence to this point does not establish a connection between fracking and breast cancer.”

How convenient for Baker Hughes to have Komen provide this protection. But it doesn’t surprise us in the least. We have never considered Komen an organization devoted to ending breast cancer. We have always viewed it as a money-raising scheme that is closely allied with Big Pharma. Both Komen and Big Pharma make money from breast cancer. Does either really want to cure it?

As for whether fracking might contribute to cancer, consider that a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study found dangerous levels of benzene, a proven human carcinogen, in the urine of fracking workers. Health experts say that this may put workers in fracking operations at a high risk for leukemia.

Other evidence suggests that benzene is linked with breast cancer in particular. An Italian study of women exposed to the chemical in a shoe factory found benzene to be a risk factor for breast cancer. Other studies have linked benzene to breast cancer in males.

And that’s just benzene, one of an estimated 190 different chemical constituents of the fluid used in fracking operations—many of which aren’t even known to the public, since the companies claim their “recipe” as a trade secret. Of all the chemicals used in fracking, we lack publicly available safety information on about a third of them.

Fracking also contaminates water and air. One study showed that air near fracking sites contained potentially dangerous levels of petroleum hydrocarbons like benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene that could contribute to acute and chronic health problems for those living in the vicinity. Those living near fracking sites have reported drinking water turning brown.

Maybe Komen ought to partner with cigarette companies next. They have a lot of money and could use some pinkwashing.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Legal Drugs: Time to “Just Say No”

Not Diabetic? Take a Diabetes Drug Anyway!

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2f1cB4A via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2gdWUsK

Action Alert: Stop the NDI Guidance

Related article: Legal Drugs: Time to “Just Say No”

Trouble Taking Action? Click here.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2fRonxr via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2eWUDxc

Action Alert: Stop the NDI Guidance

Related article: Legal Drugs: Time to “Just Say No”

Trouble Taking Action? Click here.

.errordiv { padding:10px; margin:10px; border: 1px solid #555555;color: #000000;background-color: #f8f8f8; text-align:center; width:500px; }
var ai_iframe_width_iframe3065 = 0; var ai_iframe_height_iframe3065 = 0;var aiIsIe8=false;var aiReadyCallbacks = ( typeof aiReadyCallbacks != ‘undefined’ && aiReadyCallbacks instanceof Array ) ? aiReadyCallbacks : [];var onloadFirediframe3065 = false; function aiShowIframe() { jQuery(“#iframe3065”).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiShowIframeId(id_iframe) { jQuery(id_iframe).css(“visibility”, “visible”);} function aiResizeIframeHeight(height) { aiResizeIframeHeight(height,iframe3065); } function aiResizeIframeHeightId(height,width,id) {aiResizeIframeHeightById(id,height);} http://ift.tt/2gcxH2Vvar ifrm_iframe3065 = document.getElementById(“iframe3065”);
var hiddenTabsDoneiframe3065 = false;
function resizeCallbackiframe3065() {}

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2fRonxr via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2eCh6V3

Are You Nutrient Deficient?

Fully 90% of Americans are deficient in one or more key nutrients.

Unfortunately, many Americans are not even meeting the government’s (flawed) recommended daily allowances of key nutrients:

(Chart from Precision Nutrition, based on USDA data)

One nutrient in particular to note is magnesium. Life Extension Foundation (LEF) points out in its most recent issue (December 2016) that magnesium could be the next vitamin D. It is a low-cost supplement that confers broad health benefits. Magnesium is associated with reduced risks of sudden cardiac death, stroke, type II diabetes, asthma, heart disease, hypertension, colon and pancreatic cancer, and more.

Depending on the type taken, it also helps the brain (magnesium-l-threonate is the most helpful) and bowel regularity. Ironically, magnesium oxide, the type most commonly sold, works best for regularity precisely because it is very poorly absorbed by the body and thus does not confer most of the other health benefits of this mineral! It is also important to have functioning stomach acid to absorb and utilize any mineral. Those on acid blockers are unlikely to be able to do so.

LEF also points out that food sources for magnesium can be unreliable. This is because plants take magnesium from the soil, and there can either be not enough magnesium or too much of something else, like potassium, that crowds out a plant’s absorption of magnesium. Studies show that the magnesium content of food has declined precipitously from pre-1950s levels.

The bottom line: to get enough of this vital nutrient, we probably need to supplement with it.

It’s ironic that the above chart data comes from the US Department of Agriculture. Meanwhile, the FDA continues its war against supplements, presumably intended to protect the drug companies that fund the agency.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Fascist Medicine from California

More Lawlessness from Washington

Can’t Get (or Afford) a Zika Virus Test?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2faJa0C via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2ftyurV

Fascist Medicine from California

A doctor in California faces criminal charges for giving a vaccine medical exemption. Action Alert!

Dr. Bob Sears is facing charges of gross negligence for daring to write a letter recommending that a two-year-old be excused from vaccinations based on his mother’s description of serious adverse reactions to previous immunizations.

ANH-USA is following this case closely, because it is clearly intended to intimidate other doctors in the state and thereby shut down any medical vaccine exemptions, the only exemptions left under law. This case will also set a legal precedent for when a medical exemption is acceptable, at a time when states are increasingly threatening to eliminate all other exemptions.

The attack on Dr. Sears is also another example of how vaccine supporters in California will stop at nothing to push their agenda on everyone else. The sponsor of the bill revoking all exemptions other than medical, Dr. Richard Pan (D-CA06), promised that medical exemptions would be left alone. So much for that promise!

Due to the importance of this case, ANH-USA is encouraging members to donate to Dr. Sears’ legal defense. The case is likely to be protracted and expensive. We need to support Dr. Sears.

Action Alert! Take action at donation page to support Dr. Sears’ legal efforts. He’s fighting for the right of doctors to provide their patients with medical exemptions to vaccination. Please visit our donation page and take action now!

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Are You Nutrient Deficient?

More Lawlessness from Washington

Can’t Get (or Afford) a Zika Virus Test?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/2fx1ob0 via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/2ftviNc