Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Website update
Folks I have not updated the blog regularly these days, but I am revamping my website. To see the update goto: www.rhinochiro.com and bookmark it!!!!
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Obama's view on Chiropractic
Almost every one of my practice members will be voting for Obama very shortly (as will I). For my vote there was no hesitation, but as a Chiropractor, this cements the deal. This letter was drafted to the ACA (American Chiropractic Assoc.) in response to numerous requests to Obama and McCain for their positions on healthcare. McCain= NO RESPONSE. Obama, the following:
Dear Friends,
I am glad to have this opportunity to again share my thoughts on the role doctors of chiropractic play in the American health care system. As I have said before, doctors of chiropractic play an important role in our health care system, and my commitment to you and your patients remains strong.
As I have said, I believe steps should be taken to acknowledge the important care provided by doctors of chiropractic. We need to knock down unreasonable barriers of access and discriminatory insurance coverage so Americans in need of quality chiropractic care can access it without difficulty. We need to expand the range of chiropractic services covered by Medicare, facilitate integration of doctors of chiropractic into the health care systems of the Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense, and allow commission of doctors of chiropractic as officers in the Commissioned Corps of the U.S. Public Health Service. And again, under my health care plan, many, if not all, chiropractic services would be included in the benefit package offered in the public plan.
America faces challenges both at home and abroad. To remain competitive, we must ensure that our health care system is accessible for every American. That is why my plan ensures quality, accessible heath care for all Americans. Doctors of chiropractic will play an important role in achieving this goal. I look forward to a strong relationship with the ACA as we build that future together.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
Dear Friends,
I am glad to have this opportunity to again share my thoughts on the role doctors of chiropractic play in the American health care system. As I have said before, doctors of chiropractic play an important role in our health care system, and my commitment to you and your patients remains strong.
As I have said, I believe steps should be taken to acknowledge the important care provided by doctors of chiropractic. We need to knock down unreasonable barriers of access and discriminatory insurance coverage so Americans in need of quality chiropractic care can access it without difficulty. We need to expand the range of chiropractic services covered by Medicare, facilitate integration of doctors of chiropractic into the health care systems of the Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense, and allow commission of doctors of chiropractic as officers in the Commissioned Corps of the U.S. Public Health Service. And again, under my health care plan, many, if not all, chiropractic services would be included in the benefit package offered in the public plan.
America faces challenges both at home and abroad. To remain competitive, we must ensure that our health care system is accessible for every American. That is why my plan ensures quality, accessible heath care for all Americans. Doctors of chiropractic will play an important role in achieving this goal. I look forward to a strong relationship with the ACA as we build that future together.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Prescription drugs more accessible to teens than beer
From USA Today:
Prescription drugs more accessible to teens than beer
By Janet Kornblum, USA TODAY
What is easier for a typical teen to get his hands on: a six-pack of beer or a bunch of prescription drugs?
More teens now say it's easier for them to acquire prescription drugs — usually powerful painkillers — than it is to buy beer, according to the 13th annual survey on attitudes about drug abuse, out today, from the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia University.
Parents also are ignorant about their teens' use of drugs and alcohol, says the survey of teens 12 to 17 and their parents.
Almost half (46%) of teens surveyed say they leave their homes on school nights to hang out with friends — and sometimes use drugs and alcohol. But only 14% of parents say their teens leave home to hang out with friends.
HEALTH BLOG: Drugs and alcohol making news
Teens still say it's easiest to buy cigarettes and marijuana. But for the first time, they say prescription drugs not prescribed to them are easier to get than beer, the survey says.
Their main source of drugs such as OxyContin, Percocet, Vicodin and Ritalin: "the medicine cabinet," says Elizabeth Planet, director of special projects for CASA. "Another big source of these drugs are their friends."
Says CASA president Joseph Califano,"These parents are passive pushers by not taking care of their drugs."
The survey did not delve into the precise reasons teens take these drugs, but they may think that because the medications are prescribed, they're safer than alcohol or illegal drugs such as marijuana, Califano says.
They're not, says Ralph Lopez, a New York pediatrician who specializes in teens and a clinical associate professor of pediatrics at the Weill Medical College of Cornell University.
Drugs such as Vicodin — a commonly prescribed pain pill that causes a drunk-like feeling — can be detrimental to the still-developing teenage brain and can impair judgment in people who already are prone to mistakes in judgment. The drugs increase "the risk for accidents, sexual activities (and) more drugs," Lopez says.
The survey comes at a time when teen use of illegal drugs is actually down, says Tom Riley, spokesman for the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
"While teen use of illegal drugs has gone down in recent years, the one category that has gone up is teen abuse of prescription drugs," Riley says. "Americans are in denial about how widespread this problem is."
Many recommend locking up drugs. But the best way to prevent drug abuse is good old-fashioned parenting, Planet and others say.
"We know from our research that parental engagement — being involved in your kids' lives, monitoring what they're up to — is a very key component in teen substance risk."
The telephone survey reached 1,002 teens and 312 parents this past spring. The margin of error is 3.1 percentage points.
Prescription drugs more accessible to teens than beer
By Janet Kornblum, USA TODAY
What is easier for a typical teen to get his hands on: a six-pack of beer or a bunch of prescription drugs?
More teens now say it's easier for them to acquire prescription drugs — usually powerful painkillers — than it is to buy beer, according to the 13th annual survey on attitudes about drug abuse, out today, from the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia University.
Parents also are ignorant about their teens' use of drugs and alcohol, says the survey of teens 12 to 17 and their parents.
Almost half (46%) of teens surveyed say they leave their homes on school nights to hang out with friends — and sometimes use drugs and alcohol. But only 14% of parents say their teens leave home to hang out with friends.
HEALTH BLOG: Drugs and alcohol making news
Teens still say it's easiest to buy cigarettes and marijuana. But for the first time, they say prescription drugs not prescribed to them are easier to get than beer, the survey says.
Their main source of drugs such as OxyContin, Percocet, Vicodin and Ritalin: "the medicine cabinet," says Elizabeth Planet, director of special projects for CASA. "Another big source of these drugs are their friends."
Says CASA president Joseph Califano,"These parents are passive pushers by not taking care of their drugs."
The survey did not delve into the precise reasons teens take these drugs, but they may think that because the medications are prescribed, they're safer than alcohol or illegal drugs such as marijuana, Califano says.
They're not, says Ralph Lopez, a New York pediatrician who specializes in teens and a clinical associate professor of pediatrics at the Weill Medical College of Cornell University.
Drugs such as Vicodin — a commonly prescribed pain pill that causes a drunk-like feeling — can be detrimental to the still-developing teenage brain and can impair judgment in people who already are prone to mistakes in judgment. The drugs increase "the risk for accidents, sexual activities (and) more drugs," Lopez says.
The survey comes at a time when teen use of illegal drugs is actually down, says Tom Riley, spokesman for the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
"While teen use of illegal drugs has gone down in recent years, the one category that has gone up is teen abuse of prescription drugs," Riley says. "Americans are in denial about how widespread this problem is."
Many recommend locking up drugs. But the best way to prevent drug abuse is good old-fashioned parenting, Planet and others say.
"We know from our research that parental engagement — being involved in your kids' lives, monitoring what they're up to — is a very key component in teen substance risk."
The telephone survey reached 1,002 teens and 312 parents this past spring. The margin of error is 3.1 percentage points.
Saturday, August 2, 2008
Similarities Of Diets In Our Ancestors
This is from the Weston Price Foundation website: For more information and literally thousands of health related articles goto: http://www.westonaprice.org/
SIMILARITIES OF TRADITIONAL DIETS
Since there is no single essential food, good nutrition requires that one be aware that whole foods nearest their natural state are best able to supply essential nutrients for the highest state of well-being. Dr. Price's primitives demonstrated that there are many dietary patterns which meet the needs of the body. Where optimum health was maintained, however, all dietary practices showed the following similarities:
In general, all the native foods were found to contain two to six times as high a factor of safety in the matter of body building materials as did the displacing foods brought in by civilization.
All groups studied consumed minerals and fat-soluble vitamins from high vitamin butter or from sea foods, cod liver or seal oil, or animal organs with their fat.
Foods were grown on soil which was naturally high in minerals, and no chemical fertilizers or pesticides were used.
All food was eaten liberally in the natural season in which it grew.
Sweets (even good, natural sweets) were used rarely or sparingly, only for occasions of ritual, celebration or special feasting.
In each diet there was some daily source of raw, unaltered protein from sources such as meats, sea foods, nuts, cheeses, eggs, milk, or high quality sprouted seeds. (Foods containing essential amino acids must be included in the food choices for each meal, or it will be impossible to assimilate the total values of the incomplete proteins. It is important to balance the amino acid patterns when vegetable proteins are eaten.) Some sort of sea plant or mineral was a part of most diets. Inland sea deposits were treasured and used thriftily.
Methods of food preservation and storage were used which altered the nutrients very little: Earth storage, drying, freezing in the cold climates, or making nutrients more available by culturing, pickling, fermenting, or sprouting.
Each life style was such that people engaged in vigorous physical exercise on a regular basis, either in work, play, dances, games, sports, or hunting and food-gathering.
All had access to pure air and sunlight. Even in the 1930's, Dr. Price perceived the problems of air pollution and lack of sufficient radiant energy from the sun, due to pollution already present at that time. The situation is far worse today, and that has affected the deterioration of our food quality and our health as well.
Each group observed periods of partial abstinence from food, or regulated periods of under-eating. For some, this came about as a natural result of summer crops being in short supply before the new crops were harvested. For others, certain rituals began or ended with days of fasting. Still others taught the value of periodic under-eating by taboos or other means.
Some diets contained some form of ferments. This would include milk cultures, pickling, and other methods of fermenting. Dr. Pottenger recommended using some of these foods for both children and adults to aid in maintaining good gastric acidity.
They all breast-fed their young. Most of them fed special protective foods to their young of child-bearing age in preparation for conception, pregnancy, and lactation. Most of them had some means of spacing the children at least three years apart, to protect the health of the newborns and their mothers.
All ate whole foods, not fractionalized parts of foods. They did not remove the fiber content of their natural foods by refining them. Most foods were eaten raw or very gently and lightly cooked.
Last but not least, the primitives were able to instruct their young in these important principles, thereby protecting their genetic heritage. They ate the foods of their ancestors.
Since there is no single essential food, good nutrition requires that one be aware that whole foods nearest their natural state are best able to supply essential nutrients for the highest state of well-being. Dr. Price's primitives demonstrated that there are many dietary patterns which meet the needs of the body. Where optimum health was maintained, however, all dietary practices showed the following similarities:
In general, all the native foods were found to contain two to six times as high a factor of safety in the matter of body building materials as did the displacing foods brought in by civilization.
All groups studied consumed minerals and fat-soluble vitamins from high vitamin butter or from sea foods, cod liver or seal oil, or animal organs with their fat.
Foods were grown on soil which was naturally high in minerals, and no chemical fertilizers or pesticides were used.
All food was eaten liberally in the natural season in which it grew.
Sweets (even good, natural sweets) were used rarely or sparingly, only for occasions of ritual, celebration or special feasting.
In each diet there was some daily source of raw, unaltered protein from sources such as meats, sea foods, nuts, cheeses, eggs, milk, or high quality sprouted seeds. (Foods containing essential amino acids must be included in the food choices for each meal, or it will be impossible to assimilate the total values of the incomplete proteins. It is important to balance the amino acid patterns when vegetable proteins are eaten.) Some sort of sea plant or mineral was a part of most diets. Inland sea deposits were treasured and used thriftily.
Methods of food preservation and storage were used which altered the nutrients very little: Earth storage, drying, freezing in the cold climates, or making nutrients more available by culturing, pickling, fermenting, or sprouting.
Each life style was such that people engaged in vigorous physical exercise on a regular basis, either in work, play, dances, games, sports, or hunting and food-gathering.
All had access to pure air and sunlight. Even in the 1930's, Dr. Price perceived the problems of air pollution and lack of sufficient radiant energy from the sun, due to pollution already present at that time. The situation is far worse today, and that has affected the deterioration of our food quality and our health as well.
Each group observed periods of partial abstinence from food, or regulated periods of under-eating. For some, this came about as a natural result of summer crops being in short supply before the new crops were harvested. For others, certain rituals began or ended with days of fasting. Still others taught the value of periodic under-eating by taboos or other means.
Some diets contained some form of ferments. This would include milk cultures, pickling, and other methods of fermenting. Dr. Pottenger recommended using some of these foods for both children and adults to aid in maintaining good gastric acidity.
They all breast-fed their young. Most of them fed special protective foods to their young of child-bearing age in preparation for conception, pregnancy, and lactation. Most of them had some means of spacing the children at least three years apart, to protect the health of the newborns and their mothers.
All ate whole foods, not fractionalized parts of foods. They did not remove the fiber content of their natural foods by refining them. Most foods were eaten raw or very gently and lightly cooked.
Last but not least, the primitives were able to instruct their young in these important principles, thereby protecting their genetic heritage. They ate the foods of their ancestors.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Chiropractor cares New York City's Homeless
Please go to the link below and watch the video. There are great Chiropractors all over the world. Find them, work with them, and enjoy the one side effect of Chiropractic care: HEALTH
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/22/a-chiropractic-touch-for-aching-homeless-backs/index.html
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/22/a-chiropractic-touch-for-aching-homeless-backs/index.html
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Hot Town Summer In The City
Medical researchers are growing increasingly excited about a wonder drug that may significantly reduce your risk of heart disease, cancer, diabetes and many other diseases -- sunshine.A recent study found that men who are deficient in vitamin D, which your body produces in response to sunlight, have more than double the normal risk of suffering a heart attack.In fact, men with vitamin D levels below 15 nanograms per milliliter had 2.5 times the risk of having a heart attack or dying -- even after controlling for all other possible risk factors such as hypertension, obesity and high lipid levels.
Another study found that low levels of vitamin D increased the risk of diabetes, and yet another linked vitamin D deficiencies to an increased risk of dying from breast cancer.These findings all join a growing body of evidence indicating that an adequate level of the vitamin, which many people can get from 20 minutes in the sun each day, is crucial to maintaining good health.
Sources:
Los Angeles Times June 10, 2008
Archives of Internal Medicine June 9, 2008; 168(11):1174-1180
Another study found that low levels of vitamin D increased the risk of diabetes, and yet another linked vitamin D deficiencies to an increased risk of dying from breast cancer.These findings all join a growing body of evidence indicating that an adequate level of the vitamin, which many people can get from 20 minutes in the sun each day, is crucial to maintaining good health.
Sources:
Los Angeles Times June 10, 2008
Archives of Internal Medicine June 9, 2008; 168(11):1174-1180
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
A little motivation from #23
Listen to the greatest ever give us all a little perspective on hard work. Take a moment to think of your mentor/hero/person you admire, and imagine how hard they must have worked to achieve their successes.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
ICPA - Holistic Pediatric Healthcare
Dr. Larry Palevsky is phenomenal Homeopathic Medical Doctor practicing in New York. He is a strong proponent of Chiropractic care for children. If you are a parent take a few minutes to listen to his explaination of some common childhood ailments.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
New Study: Chiropractic care lowers blood pressure. Can this be true??
In the study patients under Chiropractic care (through adjustments of their upper cervical spine), saw marked decreases in blood pressure. The average drop in BP was an amazing 17 points (the same affectivness as taking 2 medications).
What does this all mean? Is Chiropractic a cure for high blood pressure? Can I stop taking these drugs?
As my patients already know, Chiropractic doesn't cure anything!!!! Not low back, pain, headaches, neck tension, asthma, cancer, etc.
However, the miracle of Chiropractic is it removes interference in the nervous system, thereby it improves the funtion of your nervous system, and your body works better. Chiropractors have been screaming this in the Unbited States for over a century, and occasionally a study like this comes out and MD's everywhere look skeptically and scratch their head.
Here is the link http://i.abcnews.com/GMA/OnCall/story?id=4520614&page=1
What baffles me is that for each of these great Chiropractic stories that comes out, at the end they always quote some supposedly all knowing Medical Doctor, to interpret the results. To go to your medical doctor and ask questions about how Chiropractic works is as ridiculous as asking your favorite carpenter a plumbing question. They simply are not trained to answer the question intelligently. If you would like to prove this ask your MD how much Chiropractic training they received in medical school (theory, technique, the whole shabang). It is the same amount of surgical training I received in Chiropractic school. ZERO!!
If you want your body (or that of your family and friend) to work better have them checked by a Chiropractor to see if they can help. It is a drug free way to better health.
What does this all mean? Is Chiropractic a cure for high blood pressure? Can I stop taking these drugs?
As my patients already know, Chiropractic doesn't cure anything!!!! Not low back, pain, headaches, neck tension, asthma, cancer, etc.
However, the miracle of Chiropractic is it removes interference in the nervous system, thereby it improves the funtion of your nervous system, and your body works better. Chiropractors have been screaming this in the Unbited States for over a century, and occasionally a study like this comes out and MD's everywhere look skeptically and scratch their head.
Here is the link http://i.abcnews.com/GMA/OnCall/story?id=4520614&page=1
What baffles me is that for each of these great Chiropractic stories that comes out, at the end they always quote some supposedly all knowing Medical Doctor, to interpret the results. To go to your medical doctor and ask questions about how Chiropractic works is as ridiculous as asking your favorite carpenter a plumbing question. They simply are not trained to answer the question intelligently. If you would like to prove this ask your MD how much Chiropractic training they received in medical school (theory, technique, the whole shabang). It is the same amount of surgical training I received in Chiropractic school. ZERO!!
If you want your body (or that of your family and friend) to work better have them checked by a Chiropractor to see if they can help. It is a drug free way to better health.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Chiropractic Kid in California
Is Chiropractic for kids? Yes, but don't take my word for it. I don't know this kid or her dad, but it is always great to see a child describe their experiences. This girls sentiments ring true with me. I have gone to the Chiropractor my whole life and I still get adjusted once a week to this day. Like the girl in the video says, "It feels good and makes you healthier". I couldn't have said it any better myself.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Holistic Approach to Ear Infections (Free Lecture)
Where: Whole Foods Market
1575 Fairway Rd. Jenkintown, PA 19046
When: Wednesday March 12th 2008 @ 11:30am
Details:
No more Tubes, no more antibiotics: Holistic treatments for childhood ear infections.
During this lecture participants will learn about some of the medical myths concerning this very common childhood ailment. We will explore the most common causes of ear infections, as well as learning about the most effective treatment options and prevention measures. This is a "must attend" workshop for any parent of young children.
This lecture is part of the OneFit Mama lunch and learn series at Whole foods (every second Wednesday a new topic by a differnt speaker). For more info visit http://www.onefitmama.com/ or call (215) 886-2869.
This lecture is part of the OneFit Mama lunch and learn series at Whole foods (every second Wednesday a new topic by a differnt speaker). For more info visit http://www.onefitmama.com/ or call (215) 886-2869.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Amazing Chiropractic results for TV host Montel Williams
Montel Williams suffers from Multiple Sclerosis (an autoimmune disease where an individual's body attacks the protective layer around the nerves). Like many autoimmune diseases, the severity varies with each individual. Often patients are prescribed heavy amounts of powerful drugs to suppress their immune system, in hopes to slow the progress of the disease. As Montel Williams discovered maybe there are other less volatile ways to get the body to work better........
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Recreational drugs less likely to kill than Prescription drugs
Readers,
I am choosing to reprint this article in an attempt to cause you to think of things in a different way. Like this blog, the article is written so that certain habits that have become very common place in our society, such as prescription drug use, may be looked at through more educated eyes and addressed with renewed vigor.
The following article is written by Christopher Kent a Chiropractor and Lawyer. His remarks may cause you to feel an emotional response. GOOD! Citations for Dr. Kent's statistics can be found at the bottom of the article: Enjoy....
Recreational Drugs FAR Less Likely to Kill You than Prescribed Drugs!
By Christopher Kent, D.C., J.D.
Recreational drugs, including cocaine and heroin, are responsible for an estimated 10,000-20,000 American deaths per year [1,2]. While this represents a serious public health problem, it is a "smokescreen" for America's real drug problem. America's "war on drugs" is directed at the wrong enemy. It is obvious that interdiction, stiff mandatory sentences, and more vigorous enforcement of drug laws have failed.
Recreational drugs, including cocaine and heroin, are responsible for an estimated 10,000-20,000 American deaths per year [1,2]. While this represents a serious public health problem, it is a "smokescreen" for America's real drug problem. America's "war on drugs" is directed at the wrong enemy. It is obvious that interdiction, stiff mandatory sentences, and more vigorous enforcement of drug laws have failed.
The reason is simple. Cause and effect have been reversed.
The desire to solve problems by taking drugs is a product of our culture. When a child is taught by loving parents that the appropriate response to pain or discomfort is taking a pill, it is obvious that such a child, when faced with the challenges of adolescence, will seek comfort by taking drugs.
Drugs are Dangerous Whether Pushed or Prescribed
While approximately 10,000 per year die from the effects of illegal drugs, an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reported that an estimated 106,000 hospitalized patients die each year from drugs which, by medical standards, are properly prescribed and properly administered. More than two million suffer serious side effects. [3]
An article in Newsweek [4] put this into perspective. Adverse drug reactions, from "properly" prescribed drugs, are the fourth leading cause of death in the United States. According to this article, only heart disease, cancer, and stroke kill more Americans than drugs prescribed by medical doctors. Reactions to prescription drugs kill more than twice as many Americans as HIV/AIDS or suicide. Fewer die from accidents or diabetes than adverse drug reactions. It is important to point out the limitations of this study. It did not include outpatients, cases of malpractice, or instances where the drugs were not taken as directed.
According to another AMA publication, drug related "problems" kill as many as 198,815 people, put 8.8 million in hospitals, and account for up to 28% of hospital admissions. [5] If these figures are accurate, only cancer and heart disease kill more patients than drugs. Has the situation improved since the publication of this information? Hardly. Null [6] et al have published the most comprehensive and well-documented study I have seen of deaths associated with medical practice. In this report, their research revealed some shocking facts. The findings are summarized in the abstract:
"A definitive review and close reading of medical peer-review journals, and government health statistics shows that American medicine frequently causes more harm than good. The number of people having in-hospital, adverse drug reactions (ADR) to prescribed medicine is 2.2 million. Dr. Richard Besser, of the CDC, in 1995, said the number of unnecessary antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections was 20 million. Dr. Besser, in 2003, now refers to tens of millions of unnecessary antibiotics.
The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million. The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million. The total number of iatrogenic deaths shown in the following table is 783,936. It is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the United States. The 2001 heart disease annual death rate is 699,697; the annual cancer death rate, 553,251."
Drugs Number One Killer
The authors conclude: "When the number one killer in a society is the healthcare system, then, that system has no excuse except to address its own urgent shortcomings. It's a failed system in need of immediate attention. What we have outlined in this paper are insupportable aspects of our contemporary medical system that need to be changed -- beginning at its very foundations."
A recent article in Archives of Internal Medicine [7] stated that in the seven year period from 1998 through 2005, reported serious adverse drug events increased 2.6-fold, and fatal adverse drug events increased 2.7-fold. The authors noted that reported serious events increased 4 times faster than the total number of outpatient prescriptions during the period. Another study concluded that the majority(86%) of the adverse drug reactions for which patients were admitted to a medical intensive care unit were preventable. [8]
One proposed solution to the illegal drug problem was encouraging potential users to ignore peer pressure and "just say no." Interestingly, this strategy is not being recommended for prescription drugs. Bruce Pomeranz, MD , one of the authors of the JAMA paper, said he is not warning people to stay away from drugs. "That would be a terrible message," he said. Lucian Leape, MD, of the Harvard School of Public Health said, "When you realize how many drugs we use, maybe those numbers aren't so bad after all." [4]
Does that mean that the number of deaths due to illegal drugs, suicide, HIV/AIDS, diabetes, accidents, and drunk driving "aren't so bad" either? Does it mean that we shouldn't discourage drunk driving or unsafe sex?
The folly of such double standards should be obvious to all. It is time to address the real drug problem -- the cultural notion that the first solution to seek for relief of life's problems is a drug. That's the drug culture we need to address.
References:
1. "Drug deaths." Globe & Mail (Canada). February 27, 1998.
2. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. CDC. 2007;56(05):93-96.
3. Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN: "Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients." JAMA 1998;279:1200.
4. Kalb C: "When drugs do harm." Newsweek. April 27, 1998. Page 61.
5. "Reaction." American Medical News. January 15, 1996. Page 11.
6. 1. Null G, Dean C, Feldman, M, Rasio, D, Smith D: "Death by Medicine." Life Extension. March, 2004. www.lef.org/magazine/mag2004/mar2004_awsi_death_01.htm
7. Moore TJ, Cohen MR, Furberg CD: Serious adverse drug events reported to the Food and Drug Administration, 1998-2005. Archives of Internal Medicine 2007;167:1752-1759.
8. Rivkin A: Admissions to a medical intensive care unit related to adverse drug reactions. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy 2007;64(17):1840-1843.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Delicious snack tip of the week (****SARCASM ALERT Must read*****)
The McDonald's Chicken McNugget came out around 1983. Some estimated facts from the company are: they estimate 20% of Americans eat McNuggets during the year, to the tune of about 4.8 billion PER YEAR. McNuggets are clearly one of the top sellers, and are one of the most commonly consumed foods by children. Lets take a gander at the ingredients of a McNugget (from the McDonalds website):
Chicken McNuggets®: White boneless chicken, water, food starch-modified, salt, chicken flavor (autolyzed yeast extract, salt, wheat starch, natural flavoring (botanical source), safflower oil, dextrose, citric acid, rosemary), sodium phosphates, seasoning (canola oil, mono- and diglycerides, natural extractives of rosemary). Battered and breaded with: water, enriched flour (bleached wheat flour, niacin, reduced iron, thiamin mononitrate, riboflavin, folic acid), yellow corn flour, food starch-modified, salt, leavening (baking soda, sodium acid pyrophosphate, sodium aluminum phosphate, monocalcium phosphate, calcium lactate), spices, wheat starch, whey, corn starch. Prepared in vegetable oil ((may contain one of the following: Canola oil, corn oil, soybean oil, hydrogenated soybean oil, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, partially hydrogenated corn oil with TBHQ and citric acid added to preserve freshness), dimethylpolysiloxane added as an antifoaming agent).
Question: What the heck is dimethylpolysiloxane & for that matter TBHQ?????
Answer: (From Beth Greer)
Then there’s citric acid and Dimethylpolysiloxane (added as an anti-foaming agent). According to the Handbook of Food Additives this “is a suspected carcinogen and an established mutagen, tumorigen and reproductive effector: it’s also flammable.”
If that’s not enough, here’s the kicker: TBHQ is added to help preserve freshness. Pollan says in his book, “Perhaps the most alarming ingredient in a Chicken McNugget is tertiary butylhydroquinone, or TBHQ, an antioxidant derived from petroleum that is either sprayed directly on the nugget or the inside of the box it comes in to ‘help preserve freshness.’ According to A Consumer’s Dictionary of Food Additives, TBHQ is a form of butane (i.e. lighter fluid) the FDA allows processors to use sparingly in our food.”
Wikepedia says:
Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) is the most widely used silicon-based organic polymer, and is particularly known for its unusual rheological (or flow) properties. Its applications range from contact lenses and medical devices to elastomers, caulking, lubricating oils and heat resistant tiles.
PDMS is optically clear, and is generally considered to be inert, non-toxic and non-flammable. It has been assigned CAS number 63148-62-9, and is occasionally called dimethicone. It is one of several types of silicone oil (polymerized siloxane).
PDMS is optically clear, and is generally considered to be inert, non-toxic and non-flammable. It has been assigned CAS number 63148-62-9, and is occasionally called dimethicone. It is one of several types of silicone oil (polymerized siloxane).
Watch what you put into your mouth folks!
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Pregnant women do not tip over, and the reason has a lot to do with an evolutionary curve, researchers say
By JOHN SCHWARTZ (Seen in the New York Times)
Published: December 13, 2007
Published: December 13, 2007
Anthropologists studying the human spine have found that women’s lower vertebrae evolved in ways that reduce back pressure during pregnancy, when the mass of the abdomen grows by nearly a third and the center of mass shifts forward considerably.
Even without the benefit of advanced study in biomechanics, women tend to deal with the shift — and avoid tumbling over like a bowling pin — by leaning back. But the solution to one problem creates another, since leaning puts even more pressure on the spine and muscles.
And that, report researchers from Harvard and the University of Texas in the current issue of the journal Nature, is where evolution enters the story.
Anthropologists have long known that the lower spine in humans developed a unique forward curve to help compensate for the strains that arose when the primate ancestors began walking upright. Researchers looked for a mechanism that compensated for pregnancy’s additional burden as well.
What they found, said Katherine K. Whitcome, a post-doctoral fellow at Harvard and the lead author of the paper, was evidence that evolution had produced a stronger and more flexible lower spine for women.
After studying 19 pregnant subjects, Dr. Whitcome found that the lumbar, or lower back, curve in women extends across three vertebrae, as opposed to just two in men. And the connecting points between vertebrae are relatively larger in women and shaped differently in ways that make the stack more stable and less prone to shifting or breaking.
Since the engine of evolution runs on the passage of genes from one generation to the next, pregnancy is a critical moment. Without that adaptation, Dr. Whitcome said, females would have been in considerably greater pain during pregnancy and might not have been able to forage effectively or escape predators, ending the pregnancy and the genetic line as well.
Working at the University of Texas with Dr. Liza Shapiro, an associate professor of anthropology, Dr. Whitcome found that the differences between male and female spines do not show up in chimpanzees. That suggested that the changes occurred in response to the pressures of walking upright.
When she moved on to Harvard and started working with Daniel Lieberman, an anthropologist with expertise in primate fossils, she was able to examine two sets of fossilized vertebrae. Of the two samples, she found the three-vertebra arrangement in one sample and not in the other. Separate evidence suggested that the extra-curvy spine belonged to a female and the other to a male. “It was very exciting” to have the fossilized puzzle fall into place, Dr. Whitcome said.
As solutions go, the extra flexibility is only partly successful, Professor Shapiro said, since women still commonly complain of back trouble during pregnancy. And that is the difference between the way that evolution works and the way that actual designers do their job, Dr. Whitcome said: nature tinkers. For natural selection to favor one feature over another, “It doesn’t have to be an ideal solution,” she said. “It just has to be better.”
Karen R. Rosenberg, an associate professor and chairwoman of the anthropology department at the University of Delaware, characterized Dr. Whitcome’s work as “way cool.” Dr. Rosenberg, who studies the evolution of childbirth, said the paper was the first published research that asked whether pregnancy caused evolutionary changes in the skeleton. “In hindsight,” she said, “Duh, of course it does.”
Even without the benefit of advanced study in biomechanics, women tend to deal with the shift — and avoid tumbling over like a bowling pin — by leaning back. But the solution to one problem creates another, since leaning puts even more pressure on the spine and muscles.
And that, report researchers from Harvard and the University of Texas in the current issue of the journal Nature, is where evolution enters the story.
Anthropologists have long known that the lower spine in humans developed a unique forward curve to help compensate for the strains that arose when the primate ancestors began walking upright. Researchers looked for a mechanism that compensated for pregnancy’s additional burden as well.
What they found, said Katherine K. Whitcome, a post-doctoral fellow at Harvard and the lead author of the paper, was evidence that evolution had produced a stronger and more flexible lower spine for women.
After studying 19 pregnant subjects, Dr. Whitcome found that the lumbar, or lower back, curve in women extends across three vertebrae, as opposed to just two in men. And the connecting points between vertebrae are relatively larger in women and shaped differently in ways that make the stack more stable and less prone to shifting or breaking.
Since the engine of evolution runs on the passage of genes from one generation to the next, pregnancy is a critical moment. Without that adaptation, Dr. Whitcome said, females would have been in considerably greater pain during pregnancy and might not have been able to forage effectively or escape predators, ending the pregnancy and the genetic line as well.
Working at the University of Texas with Dr. Liza Shapiro, an associate professor of anthropology, Dr. Whitcome found that the differences between male and female spines do not show up in chimpanzees. That suggested that the changes occurred in response to the pressures of walking upright.
When she moved on to Harvard and started working with Daniel Lieberman, an anthropologist with expertise in primate fossils, she was able to examine two sets of fossilized vertebrae. Of the two samples, she found the three-vertebra arrangement in one sample and not in the other. Separate evidence suggested that the extra-curvy spine belonged to a female and the other to a male. “It was very exciting” to have the fossilized puzzle fall into place, Dr. Whitcome said.
As solutions go, the extra flexibility is only partly successful, Professor Shapiro said, since women still commonly complain of back trouble during pregnancy. And that is the difference between the way that evolution works and the way that actual designers do their job, Dr. Whitcome said: nature tinkers. For natural selection to favor one feature over another, “It doesn’t have to be an ideal solution,” she said. “It just has to be better.”
Karen R. Rosenberg, an associate professor and chairwoman of the anthropology department at the University of Delaware, characterized Dr. Whitcome’s work as “way cool.” Dr. Rosenberg, who studies the evolution of childbirth, said the paper was the first published research that asked whether pregnancy caused evolutionary changes in the skeleton. “In hindsight,” she said, “Duh, of course it does.”
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
NEW STUDY: Honey is better than cough medicine for kids' coughs....
Honey works best to calm kids' coughs, study finds
Source: Reuters
By Michael Conlon
CHICAGO, Dec 3 (Reuters) - A spoonful of buckwheat honey quells a child's nighttime chest cold coughing better than the most common cough suppressant in nonprescription medicines, researchers said on Monday.
"Honey may be a preferable treatment for the cough and sleep difficulty associated with childhood upper respiratory tract infection," a team of investigators from Pennsylvania State University said.
Their study, paid for by the National Honey Board, an industry-funded U.S. Agriculture Department agency, compared honey to dextromethorphan -- or DM -- the most common cough suppressant in over-the-counter remedies.
Honey is not recommended for children under the age of one. Buckwheat honey is a dark variety that tends to have more compounds associated with honey's antioxidant properties, the researchers said. In addition, they said honey can sooth the throat and thus help control coughing.
The report said that neither the American Academy of Pediatrics nor the American College of Chest Physician backs the use of DM for childhood cough.
In addition the substance has been implicated in drug abuse among teenagers who use cough medicine to get high.
The study, published in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, comes just weeks after a government advisory panel recommended that many nonprescription cough and cold medicines in use for decades should not be given to children under 6 until their efficacy can be proven.
That move came after a group of pediatricians and public health officials petitioned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to restrict sales for children younger than 6 because of reports of deaths, seizures, hallucinations and other problems.
Makers have said the products are safe and effective, when given as directed, to children aged 2 and older.
The new study involved 105 youngsters age 2 to 18 who had been battling upper respiratory tract infections for seven days or less. Some were given 10 milliliters -- about one tablespoon -- of buckwheat honey 30 minutes before bedtime, others got DM and others nothing at all.
Honey was found to make the best improvements in cough control and sleep followed by DM, while doing nothing showed the least improvement.
"Parents rated honey most favorably for symptomatic relief of their children's nocturnal cough and sleep difficulty," the study concluded.
"While our findings and the absence of contemporary studies supporting the use of DM continue to question its effectiveness for the treatment of cough associated with upper respiratory tract infections, we have now provided evidence supporting honey, which is generally regarded as safe for children older than 1 year, as an alternative," the authors said. (Editing by Andrew Stern and Eric Walsh)
CHICAGO, Dec 3 (Reuters) - A spoonful of buckwheat honey quells a child's nighttime chest cold coughing better than the most common cough suppressant in nonprescription medicines, researchers said on Monday.
"Honey may be a preferable treatment for the cough and sleep difficulty associated with childhood upper respiratory tract infection," a team of investigators from Pennsylvania State University said.
Their study, paid for by the National Honey Board, an industry-funded U.S. Agriculture Department agency, compared honey to dextromethorphan -- or DM -- the most common cough suppressant in over-the-counter remedies.
Honey is not recommended for children under the age of one. Buckwheat honey is a dark variety that tends to have more compounds associated with honey's antioxidant properties, the researchers said. In addition, they said honey can sooth the throat and thus help control coughing.
The report said that neither the American Academy of Pediatrics nor the American College of Chest Physician backs the use of DM for childhood cough.
In addition the substance has been implicated in drug abuse among teenagers who use cough medicine to get high.
The study, published in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, comes just weeks after a government advisory panel recommended that many nonprescription cough and cold medicines in use for decades should not be given to children under 6 until their efficacy can be proven.
That move came after a group of pediatricians and public health officials petitioned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to restrict sales for children younger than 6 because of reports of deaths, seizures, hallucinations and other problems.
Makers have said the products are safe and effective, when given as directed, to children aged 2 and older.
The new study involved 105 youngsters age 2 to 18 who had been battling upper respiratory tract infections for seven days or less. Some were given 10 milliliters -- about one tablespoon -- of buckwheat honey 30 minutes before bedtime, others got DM and others nothing at all.
Honey was found to make the best improvements in cough control and sleep followed by DM, while doing nothing showed the least improvement.
"Parents rated honey most favorably for symptomatic relief of their children's nocturnal cough and sleep difficulty," the study concluded.
"While our findings and the absence of contemporary studies supporting the use of DM continue to question its effectiveness for the treatment of cough associated with upper respiratory tract infections, we have now provided evidence supporting honey, which is generally regarded as safe for children older than 1 year, as an alternative," the authors said. (Editing by Andrew Stern and Eric Walsh)
Thursday, November 29, 2007
New thoughts on BRAIN FOOD....
This is an article from the Mercola.com newsletter......
Newest Thoughts on Brain Food
Fish have long been regarded as “brain food” because of their high content of omega-3 fatty acids.Historically, omega-3 fats have been said to improve brain development and maintenance. Now, two new studies in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition provide further evidence for the beneficial effects of omega-3 fats, including better performance or preservation of your brain function as you age.While numerous studies exist showing diets high in omega-3 fats lower your risk of dementia, these newer studies looked at the benefits of omega-3 fats among healthy people, with the hope that they would prevent progression to dementia. More than 5 million Americans have some form of Alzheimer’s disease, and just as many suffer from vascular dementia, so preventing and slowing the progression of neurodegenerative disorders is a public health imperative.The studies found:
A diet high in fish and fish products is associated with better cognitive performance
Higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids were associated with less decline in the speed-related cognitive domainsIt often takes decades for dementia to develop and brain volume to shrink. These studies of the benefits of omega-3 fats on brain function offer an opportunity for early intervention to maintain your brain function and slow progression to dementia.
Sources:
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 86(5), 1259-1260, November 2007
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition November 2007, 86: 1470-1478
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition November 2007, 86: 1479-1485
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Flouride in the drinking water. Is it safe?????
This is a great article from Canada.
Critics raise red flag over fluoride in tap water
MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT
From Friday's Globe and Mail
November 23, 2007 at 9:27 AM EST
Nearly a half-century after water fluoridation became widespread, a small but growing number of medical officials and environmentalists are again raising concerns over the practice.
Recent research is suggesting that fluoride may be connected to a number of serious conditions, including the development in teenage boys of osteosarcoma, the rare bone cancer that killed Canadian icon Terry Fox, reduced intelligence levels in children, and impaired thyroid function.
In Waterdown, Ont., a suburb of Hamilton, Cindy Mayor has approached her city council and asked that it stop fluoridation for the area's 500,000 residents. "Here we are, mass-medicating with a drug," she says. The activist frets that fluoridation could be one reason for the growing number of people being treated for lowered thyroid hormone levels.
She isn't alone in worrying about fluoride, placed in many municipal water supplies to make teeth more resistant to decay.
Enlarge Image
While those complaining about fluoride were often portrayed as a kooky fringe - typified by the 1964 movie classic Dr. Strangelove, in which a demented U.S. general feared fluoridation was a communist plot - fluoride criticism has recently gone mainstream.
Although the research linking the chemical with serious conditions is disputed, critics of fluoridation say that at the least it indicates a review of the practice needs to be conducted.
A review is even more pressing, in the view of critics, because scientists now believe that the main protective action from fluoride does not come from ingesting the chemical, with the teeth absorbing it from inside the body, but from direct absorption through topical application to teeth.
This means swallowing water is a far less effective way to fight cavities than brushing with fluoridated toothpaste. That may explain the steep decline in cavity rates observed in industrialized countries since the 1970s, irrespective of whether they fluoridate water. Almost all of Europe does not, and yet has seen a sharp reduction in dental caries.
"I think there is a much broader understanding that there might be some legitimate concerns with fluoride," said Richard Wiles, executive director of the Washington-based Environmental Working Group, a public-interest group that has been lobbying the U.S. National Institutes of Health to provide a second opinion on fluoridation.
About 13.5 million Canadians, or about 43 per cent of the population, live in communities with fluoridated tap water, but almost no fluoridation is done in British Columbia or Quebec, according to Health Canada.
The EWG worries that the public is being overexposed to fluoride, and says water is the easiest source to eliminate.
Fluoridation is based on research from the 1940s, and Mr. Wiles contends that it wouldn't be able to pass a modern risk assessment used for drugs or pesticides.
"We took a look at the science and it was really apparent to us that the current levels of fluoride exposure were unsafe," he said.
The view on fluoride's potential downside is rejected out of hand by Health Canada, as well as the Canadian Dental Association.
"The fluoridation of drinking water supplies is a well-accepted measure to protect public health that is strongly supported by scientific evidence," Health Canada said in an e-mailed statement.
Nonetheless, the department said it is currently studying the recent scientific findings and may adjust the amount it recommends for water.
The Canadian Dental Association also endorses fluoridation. "It's among the greatest public-health measures that has ever been put in place, right up there with vaccination," said Darryl Smith, president of the association.
Dr. Smith worries that if fluoridation critics have their way, it will lead to a loss in the hard-won gains against tooth decay. Currently, about half of the children in Canada younger than 11 don't have cavities.
Although health authorities are confident fluoridation is a good idea, they haven't been very good at picking the optimum dose.
Many jurisdictions have, with little fanfare, recently cut the amount they add, to minimize chances that children will get dental fluorosis, or mottled teeth.
The cuts have been substantial enough to suggest that previous levels to which the public was exposed for more than three decades were too high. Toronto's drinking water, after several reductions, now contains half the fluoride it did before 1999, while the province of Quebec cut the recommended amount by 42 per cent in 2004.
Fluorosis, if severe, causes unsightly staining of teeth, but in mild cases the result is white streaking that many dentists consider cosmetic. During the 1990s, anywhere from 20 per cent to 75 per cent of children were afflicted in fluoridated areas.
Both Toronto and Quebec fluoridate below the level Health Canada believes is optimum: 0.8 to 1 part per million fluoride to water. Toronto is at 0.6 ppm.
Among the recent studies, the most worrisome is the possible association with childhood osteosarcoma.
The disease, the cause of which is unknown, is fatal in about one-third of cases and almost always leads to amputations.
The research indicates that fluoride exposure among boys, but not consistently among girls, during a critical period of bone growth from age 5 to 10 makes them more susceptible to the bone cancer during their teenage years.
Scientists are on the lookout for effects on bones, because they absorb half the fluoride people ingest.
A paper outlining the finding was published in 2006 in the journal Cancer Causes & Control and produced by Harvard University researchers.
Researchers found that boys aged 6 to 8 who were exposed to more fluoridated water were about four times more likely to develop the cancer than those exposed to lower levels. The researchers called their results "remarkably robust."
Although similar findings in young male rodents have been seen in laboratory experiments, other studies that investigated lifetime human exposure to the chemical did not detect any association with osteosarcoma.
The EWG's Mr. Wiles said these findings are the kinds of research clues that should cause governments to consider listing the chemical as a probable carcinogen.
In its statement, Health Canada says it wants to see whether further research confirms the cancer finding before taking action. "The findings of the study are in contradiction with the majority of current science," it said, although it said health authorities around the world "have taken seriously the suggestion that fluoridation might increase bone cancer rates."
Also worrisome are four studies in China, published in scientific literature from 1996 to 2007, that found a strong association between water with high fluoride levels and sharply reduced IQs in children.
Some parts of China have water naturally rich in fluoride and the chemical was not deliberately added, as it is in Canada.
Although the concentrations that led to the reduced intellectual functioning were far higher than found in Canada, the studies weren't designed to discover whether neurological effects occurred at the lower levels typical of the West.
Fluoride has also been found to disrupt normal thyroid hormone functions. There are concerns that fluoride exposure may be associated with hypothyroidism, a condition of lowered thyroid hormone levels. Those with the illness often experience depression, fatigue and weight gain.
Hardy Limeback, head of protective dentistry at the University of Toronto and a former advocate of fluoridation, is alarmed by these studies.
"We don't know what the health implications are of a lifetime exposure to fluoride in drinking water," he says.
If fluoridation is ended, it may lead to a modest increase in tooth decay, which Dr. Limeback estimates at one extra filling in every fifth child. Given the emerging data on its possible risks, he says, this would be a small price to pay.
Ms. Mayor in Waterdown isn't waiting for Health Canada to complete its study of the new research. She doesn't drink or cook with tap water, and instead buys distilled water that has had fluoride removed.
Fluoride primer
Researchers hit upon adding traces of fluoride to water after observing that people living in areas with drinking water naturally rich in the element had lower cavity rates.
Fluoridation is primarily done in Canada, the United States and Australia, but almost nowhere else in the world. Western Europe and Japan have almost no fluoridated water supplies.
Small amounts of fluoride make teeth stronger so they resist decay better. Too much fluoride causes teeth to be mottled.
A typical big city that fluoridates will spend about $1 per resident each year to add the chem- ical to drinking water supplies.
Although fluoridation has been practised for nearly half a century, it has always been controversial. Critics contend that if fluoride had to pass a modern assessment for a new drug, it would flunk.
But health authorities insist that fluoridation is a good thing and that the benefits of better oral health outweigh potential risks.
Once fluoride is added to water, it isn't easy to get out. It can't be captured through simple filtering devices. It can be removed through reverse-osmosis filters or through distilling.
Many bottled waters don't contain a lot of fluoride, but some are rich in it. Those worried about fluoride should check the labels.
Martin Mittelstaedt
*****
Fluoride facts
Fluoridation practices vary widely around the world and in Canada. Most of Europe doesn't fluoridate, and practices vary across the country. There are no national figures to show whether cavity rates differ substantially as a result of fluoridation.
SOURCE: HEALTH CANADA, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
Critics raise red flag over fluoride in tap water
MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT
From Friday's Globe and Mail
November 23, 2007 at 9:27 AM EST
Nearly a half-century after water fluoridation became widespread, a small but growing number of medical officials and environmentalists are again raising concerns over the practice.
Recent research is suggesting that fluoride may be connected to a number of serious conditions, including the development in teenage boys of osteosarcoma, the rare bone cancer that killed Canadian icon Terry Fox, reduced intelligence levels in children, and impaired thyroid function.
In Waterdown, Ont., a suburb of Hamilton, Cindy Mayor has approached her city council and asked that it stop fluoridation for the area's 500,000 residents. "Here we are, mass-medicating with a drug," she says. The activist frets that fluoridation could be one reason for the growing number of people being treated for lowered thyroid hormone levels.
She isn't alone in worrying about fluoride, placed in many municipal water supplies to make teeth more resistant to decay.
Enlarge Image
While those complaining about fluoride were often portrayed as a kooky fringe - typified by the 1964 movie classic Dr. Strangelove, in which a demented U.S. general feared fluoridation was a communist plot - fluoride criticism has recently gone mainstream.
Although the research linking the chemical with serious conditions is disputed, critics of fluoridation say that at the least it indicates a review of the practice needs to be conducted.
A review is even more pressing, in the view of critics, because scientists now believe that the main protective action from fluoride does not come from ingesting the chemical, with the teeth absorbing it from inside the body, but from direct absorption through topical application to teeth.
This means swallowing water is a far less effective way to fight cavities than brushing with fluoridated toothpaste. That may explain the steep decline in cavity rates observed in industrialized countries since the 1970s, irrespective of whether they fluoridate water. Almost all of Europe does not, and yet has seen a sharp reduction in dental caries.
"I think there is a much broader understanding that there might be some legitimate concerns with fluoride," said Richard Wiles, executive director of the Washington-based Environmental Working Group, a public-interest group that has been lobbying the U.S. National Institutes of Health to provide a second opinion on fluoridation.
About 13.5 million Canadians, or about 43 per cent of the population, live in communities with fluoridated tap water, but almost no fluoridation is done in British Columbia or Quebec, according to Health Canada.
The EWG worries that the public is being overexposed to fluoride, and says water is the easiest source to eliminate.
Fluoridation is based on research from the 1940s, and Mr. Wiles contends that it wouldn't be able to pass a modern risk assessment used for drugs or pesticides.
"We took a look at the science and it was really apparent to us that the current levels of fluoride exposure were unsafe," he said.
The view on fluoride's potential downside is rejected out of hand by Health Canada, as well as the Canadian Dental Association.
"The fluoridation of drinking water supplies is a well-accepted measure to protect public health that is strongly supported by scientific evidence," Health Canada said in an e-mailed statement.
Nonetheless, the department said it is currently studying the recent scientific findings and may adjust the amount it recommends for water.
The Canadian Dental Association also endorses fluoridation. "It's among the greatest public-health measures that has ever been put in place, right up there with vaccination," said Darryl Smith, president of the association.
Dr. Smith worries that if fluoridation critics have their way, it will lead to a loss in the hard-won gains against tooth decay. Currently, about half of the children in Canada younger than 11 don't have cavities.
Although health authorities are confident fluoridation is a good idea, they haven't been very good at picking the optimum dose.
Many jurisdictions have, with little fanfare, recently cut the amount they add, to minimize chances that children will get dental fluorosis, or mottled teeth.
The cuts have been substantial enough to suggest that previous levels to which the public was exposed for more than three decades were too high. Toronto's drinking water, after several reductions, now contains half the fluoride it did before 1999, while the province of Quebec cut the recommended amount by 42 per cent in 2004.
Fluorosis, if severe, causes unsightly staining of teeth, but in mild cases the result is white streaking that many dentists consider cosmetic. During the 1990s, anywhere from 20 per cent to 75 per cent of children were afflicted in fluoridated areas.
Both Toronto and Quebec fluoridate below the level Health Canada believes is optimum: 0.8 to 1 part per million fluoride to water. Toronto is at 0.6 ppm.
Among the recent studies, the most worrisome is the possible association with childhood osteosarcoma.
The disease, the cause of which is unknown, is fatal in about one-third of cases and almost always leads to amputations.
The research indicates that fluoride exposure among boys, but not consistently among girls, during a critical period of bone growth from age 5 to 10 makes them more susceptible to the bone cancer during their teenage years.
Scientists are on the lookout for effects on bones, because they absorb half the fluoride people ingest.
A paper outlining the finding was published in 2006 in the journal Cancer Causes & Control and produced by Harvard University researchers.
Researchers found that boys aged 6 to 8 who were exposed to more fluoridated water were about four times more likely to develop the cancer than those exposed to lower levels. The researchers called their results "remarkably robust."
Although similar findings in young male rodents have been seen in laboratory experiments, other studies that investigated lifetime human exposure to the chemical did not detect any association with osteosarcoma.
The EWG's Mr. Wiles said these findings are the kinds of research clues that should cause governments to consider listing the chemical as a probable carcinogen.
In its statement, Health Canada says it wants to see whether further research confirms the cancer finding before taking action. "The findings of the study are in contradiction with the majority of current science," it said, although it said health authorities around the world "have taken seriously the suggestion that fluoridation might increase bone cancer rates."
Also worrisome are four studies in China, published in scientific literature from 1996 to 2007, that found a strong association between water with high fluoride levels and sharply reduced IQs in children.
Some parts of China have water naturally rich in fluoride and the chemical was not deliberately added, as it is in Canada.
Although the concentrations that led to the reduced intellectual functioning were far higher than found in Canada, the studies weren't designed to discover whether neurological effects occurred at the lower levels typical of the West.
Fluoride has also been found to disrupt normal thyroid hormone functions. There are concerns that fluoride exposure may be associated with hypothyroidism, a condition of lowered thyroid hormone levels. Those with the illness often experience depression, fatigue and weight gain.
Hardy Limeback, head of protective dentistry at the University of Toronto and a former advocate of fluoridation, is alarmed by these studies.
"We don't know what the health implications are of a lifetime exposure to fluoride in drinking water," he says.
If fluoridation is ended, it may lead to a modest increase in tooth decay, which Dr. Limeback estimates at one extra filling in every fifth child. Given the emerging data on its possible risks, he says, this would be a small price to pay.
Ms. Mayor in Waterdown isn't waiting for Health Canada to complete its study of the new research. She doesn't drink or cook with tap water, and instead buys distilled water that has had fluoride removed.
Fluoride primer
Researchers hit upon adding traces of fluoride to water after observing that people living in areas with drinking water naturally rich in the element had lower cavity rates.
Fluoridation is primarily done in Canada, the United States and Australia, but almost nowhere else in the world. Western Europe and Japan have almost no fluoridated water supplies.
Small amounts of fluoride make teeth stronger so they resist decay better. Too much fluoride causes teeth to be mottled.
A typical big city that fluoridates will spend about $1 per resident each year to add the chem- ical to drinking water supplies.
Although fluoridation has been practised for nearly half a century, it has always been controversial. Critics contend that if fluoride had to pass a modern assessment for a new drug, it would flunk.
But health authorities insist that fluoridation is a good thing and that the benefits of better oral health outweigh potential risks.
Once fluoride is added to water, it isn't easy to get out. It can't be captured through simple filtering devices. It can be removed through reverse-osmosis filters or through distilling.
Many bottled waters don't contain a lot of fluoride, but some are rich in it. Those worried about fluoride should check the labels.
Martin Mittelstaedt
*****
Fluoride facts
Fluoridation practices vary widely around the world and in Canada. Most of Europe doesn't fluoridate, and practices vary across the country. There are no national figures to show whether cavity rates differ substantially as a result of fluoridation.
SOURCE: HEALTH CANADA, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
