Thursday April 9, 2009

Less sugar, more fiber, less diabetes risk
United Press International  04-08-09
LOS ANGELES, Apr 7, 2009 (UPI via COMTEX) -- Reducing sugar by one can of soda and increasing fiber by one-half cup of beans per day may protect Latino teens from type 2 diabetes, U.S. researchers say.
Emily Ventura of the Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles and colleagues conducted a 16-week study to examine if reductions in added sugar intake or increases in fiber intake would affect risk factors for developing type 2 diabetes in 54 overweight Latino adolescents -- average age 15.5.
Fifty-five percent of participants decreased their sugar intake equal to the sugar in one can of soda and 59 percent increased their fiber intake by an average of 5 grams per day, or one-half cup of beans across all intervention groups, including controls.
The study, published in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, finds that participants who decreased their sugar intake had an average 33 percent decrease in insulin secretion and those who increased their fiber intake had an average 10 percent reduction in visceral adipose tissue volume.
"A reduction in visceral fat indicates a reduction in risk for type 2 diabetes, considering that to a greater degree than total body fat, visceral fat -- fat surrounding the internal organs -- has been shown to be negatively associated with insulin sensitivity," the authors says in a statement.
http://www.lef.org/news/LefDailyNews.htm?NewsID=8111&Section=Nutrition

Quercetin
Enhanced Antioxidant Protection Against Heart Disease, Cancer, Allergies, and More
By Julius Goepp, MD
Life Extension Magazine April 2009

News of the disease-protective and longevity benefits of red wine has grabbed headlines around the world during the past few years. Red wine contains a number of beneficial polyphenols, such as the much-publicized resveratrol as well as quercetin1—a compound that is now also making news of its own.
Long known for its anti-inflammatory and anti-allergic effects,2,3 recent scientific breakthroughs reveal that quercetin may help promote longevity by mimicking the effects of caloric restriction.4,5 Furthermore, this powerful antioxidant demonstrates multifaceted protective effects against cardio-vascular disease, metabolic syndrome, and even cancer.2,3
While quercetin can be obtained through red wine and other dietary sources such as apples, onions, grapefruit, tea, green vegetables, and beans,6 highly purified supplements make it possible to acquire the bio-logically meaningful doses that have shown promise in tightly controlled studies. In the words of the German nutrition expert Professor Stephan C.
Bischoff, “Quercetin is a most promising compound for disease prevention and therapy.”7 Let’s take a look at some of the compelling evidence that has accumulated over the past few years for quercetin’s role in health management and disease prevention.
ANTI-INFLAMMATORY AND ANTI-ALLERGY EFFECTS
At the core of most of quercetin’s remarkable properties is its ability to modulate inflammation. Since we now understand that inflammation is involved in virtually every chronic human disease and many acute ones—having an inflammatory modulator like quercetin in our armamentarium is likely to prove very useful indeed.

Korean researchers in 2007 showed how quercetin inhibits the production of inflammatory cytokines by blocking the effects of the powerful cellular mediator NF-kappaB, long associated with both cancer and chronic inflammatory conditions.8
Quercetin’s anti-inflammatory effects may arise in part from its inhibitory effects on the inflammation-producing enzymes cyclooxygenase (COX) and lipo-oxygenase (LOX). This in turn leads to a decrease in inflammatory mediators such as prostaglandins and leukotrienes.2,9 Pharmaceutical agents that block the COX enzymes are often used in the management of painful conditions like arthritis, while LOX inhibitors are employed in the management of asthma.
Additionally, quercetin exerts anti-allergy and anti-inflammatory effects by helping prevent the release of histamine from mast cells and basophils, thus acting as a natural antihistamine.2 This is similar to the mechanism of action of the drug cromolyn, which is used to manage allergy-related asthma.
Researchers in both Brazil10 and Korea11 protected animals from fatal allergic reactions to common food allergens by pre-treating them with quercetin in oral or inhaled forms.
Quercetin’s ability to prevent allergic effects has tremendous implications for the treatment and prevention of asthma and bronchitis, conditions for which quercetin-rich foods have had long traditional roles.12 Several studies since 2007 have shown that animals pre-treated with quercetin or related compounds have dramatically reduced reactions to chemicals that trigger asthma attacks.13-15 In a dramatic, eye-opening study in 2008, Korean researcher Hee Moon compared inhaled quercetin head-to-head with prescription asthma drugs in guinea-pigs.16 Remarkably, the nutrient-derived quercetin treatment reduced airway resistance (difficulty breathing) more than the adrenaline-like drug albuterol, and had equivalent effects to the anti-inflammatory cromolyn as well as the potent steroid dexamethasone.
In a form of epidemiological detective work, nutrition scientists from Michigan State University explored the impact of dietary flavonoids such as quercetin in their more general roles as systemic anti-inflammatory agents.17 Basing their work on knowledge that intake of certain foods can lower levels of the inflammatory risk factor C-reactive protein (CRP), they went looking for the most potent food components, studying more than 8,000 adults. They found that higher flavonoid intake was associated with lower CRP levels—and quercetin headed the list of specific flavonoid compounds that had the strongest protective effect. Since elevated CRP levels are associated with numerous disease states such as obesity, heart disease, and lupus, this provides compelling reason to explore quercetin’s potential for preventing death and disability from a host of major killers.
IMMUNE-MODULATING EFFECTS
Quercetin is one of nearly 200 beneficial compounds found in garlic,18 which has been used for millennia in treating and preventing infectious disease such as viral syndromes.19 Indeed, modern science confirms quercetin’s benefits in helping fight off viral invaders.
In laboratory studies, quercetin has been found to reduce the replication and infectivity of numerous viruses, including respiratory syncytial virus (a common cause of children’s upper respiratory infection) and parainfluenza virus type 3.2
Italian researchers just last year showed that they could use a quercetin-rich extract to up-regulate the antiviral immune response in cells infected with herpes viruses.20 Additionally, an animal study last year showed that supplementation with quercetin helped protect mice against influenza infection following exercise-induced stress.21 These findings make quercetin an intriguing candidate for preventing and managing viral infections in susceptible individuals.
OBESITY
The rampant rise of overweight and obesity poses one of the greatest global health threats today. Scientists are now eagerly exploring quercetin’s potential as a means of controlling fat accumulation.
Fat, long considered to be an inert, biologically uninteresting tissue, is now known to be a virtual beehive of metabolic and endocrine activity, producing myriad hormones, inflammatory cytokines, and other molecules that influence health for better or for worse.22 Fat tissue mass is essentially the product of new fat cells, their accumulation of fat triglycerides, and their programmed death by the process of apoptosis.23 Each of these processes can be affected by various natural dietary components, and as University of Georgia nutritionist Srujana Rayalam recently observed, “Therapy employing compounds that target different stages of the adipocyte [fat cell] life cycle might prove beneficial for decreasing adipose tissue volume by inducing apoptosis or by inhibiting adipogenesis [fat accumulation] or both.”23 What is so exciting about quercetin is recent evidence that this flavonoid, alone or in combination with resveratrol and genistein, is capable of exerting just such multiple effects directly on fat tissue!
Quercetin inhibits fat accumulation in maturing human fat cells in culture, for example, while also suppressing the maturation of new fat cells and simultaneously triggering apoptosis (programmed destruction) in existing fat cells.24,25 Quercetin actually blocks the uptake of glucose from the blood, depriving fat cells of the raw material they need to manufacture and accumulate fat molecules.26 In remarkable work published in mid-2008, the University of Georgia group found that while they could block fat cell production and enhance fat cell death dramatically using either quercetin or resveratrol (another powerful flavonoid) alone, when they used the two in combination they decreased lipid accumulation in cultured fat cells by nearly 70%, while increasing fat apoptosis by a whopping 310%!27
Just a few months later, the same research team found that resveratrol and genistein synergize with quercetin to decrease lipid accumulation in human fat cells. While genistein, quercetin, and resveratrol decreased lipid accumulation in fat cells by 17%, 20%, and 17%, respectively, the combination of all three agents decreased lipid accumulation by an impressive 80%.25
Studies in animals lend support to the potential anti-obesity effects of quercetin. In mice fed a high-fat diet, quercetin produced a transient increase in energy expenditure,28 while another study showed that high-dose quercetin supplementation was associated with reduced body weight gain in obese, insulin-resistant mice.3
It’s no surprise then that quercetin—alone or in combination with other nutraceuticals—is drawing the attention of researchers searching for novel strategies for fighting obesity via numerous mechanisms.
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW: QUERCETIN
?  Despite being the most common and best studied of the polyphenols, quercetin has been largely neglected in the public eye until recently, as new research has revealed its astonishing potential as a health-promoting, disease-preventing supplement.
?  Quercetin’s powerful antioxidant effects directly reduce tissue damage and have now been shown to prevent diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular disease.
?  Independent effects of quercetin directly reduce fat tissue growth and development, and even reduce the bulk of body fat stores, promoting health through weight reduction.
?  Quercetin shows promise in fighting the numerous components of the metabolic syndrome, including hypertension, insulin resistance, and adverse lipid profiles.
?  Quercetin’s antioxidant effects lead to anti-inflammatory and anti-allergy effects, augmenting its role in chronic disease prevention and treatment.
?  Quercetin directly extends the life span of laboratory organisms, in part by mimicking the beneficial effects of caloric restriction, and opening the door to a new approach to life extension itself.
?  Health care practitioners recommend quercetin in doses ranging from 50 mg to 500 mg, one to three times daily.2,55
CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE

Increased dietary intake of flavonoids—particularly from quercetin-rich foods—has been linked with decreased heart disease mortality and decreased stroke incidence.2 In 2000, Spanish scientists showed that red wine, laden with quercetin and related antioxidants, prevented activity of inflammation-promoting NF-kappaB in human volunteers, providing a big part of the explanation of how red wine reduces cardiovascular mortality.29
In 2004, British researchers demonstrated that humans who took quercetin supplements had substantially reduced platelet aggregation, suggesting that another of quercetin’s cardiovascular health benefits was related to a reduced risk of clotting.30 These researchers later showed that dietary ingestion of quercetin from onion soup also helped inhibit platelet aggregation.31 And in a study of 30 men who already had coronary heart disease, Greek cardiologists showed that a red grape polyphenol extract rich in quercetin caused an increase in flow-mediated dilation of major arteries, a potent indicator of improved endothelial health.32
The natural next step was to study quercetin supplements alone and their effect on blood pressure, a study undertaken at the University of Utah in 2007.33 They studied 19 patients with pre-hypertension and 22 with stage 1 (early) hypertension, supplementing them with placebo or 730 mg quercetin/day for 28 days. There was no effect on the pre-hypertensive patients, but the hypertensive group enjoyed reductions in both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (average 7 mmHg and 5 mmHg reductions, respectively)—meaningful changes that lower vascular disease risk.
In 2008, a randomized, placebo-controlled crossover trial in 12 healthy men showed biochemical evidence of improved endothelial function (such as augmentation of nitric oxide status) with as little as 200 mg/day of quercetin.34
Together, these effects point to an important role for quercetin in protecting cardiovascular health.
METABOLIC SYNDROME AND DIABETES
Chinese folk medicine has long used a quercetin-rich plant called Euonymus alatus to treat type 2 diabetes.35 Not surprisingly, modern research is finding that quercetin may hold applications in managing metabolic syndrome—a cluster of risk factors that is associated with an elevated risk of diabetes.
Spanish researchers publishing in the journal Obesity showed in 2008 that quercetin given to obese, insulin-resistant rats produced a reduction in systolic blood pressure, plasma lipids, and insulin levels, while improving the over-aggressive inflammatory status these rats develop.3 The higher of two experimental quercetin doses also led to increased expression of endothelial nitric oxide synthase—the enzyme that generates blood vessel-protective nitric oxide. These findings suggest that quercetin may protect against numerous components of the common and deadly metabolic syndrome.
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2009/apr2009_Quercetin_01.htm

Chiropractics, massage rated best for back pain
Last Updated: 2009-04-08 13:43:03 -0400 (Reuters Health)
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Chiropractors are tops for taking care of back pain, according to a survey of more than 14,000 Consumer Reports subscribers.
Physical therapists and acupuncturists came in a close second and third, while specialist physicians and primary care doctors lagged behind, the survey shows.
The Consumer Reports Health Ratings Center asked subscribers who had suffered lower back pain during the past year but hadn't undergone back surgery to rate 23 different treatments, as well as their satisfaction with care provided by different types of practitioners. The survey is summarized in the May 2009 issue of Consumer Reports.
More than half of the study participants said their back pain had limited their activity for more than a week at a time, and 88 percent said their back pain recurred throughout the year. Just over a third said they had never sought professional help for their back pain.
Chiropractic was the treatment that was most helpful for the most people, with 58 percent saying it had helped them "a lot" while 48 percent said massage had helped them a lot and 46 percent said physical therapy was helpful.
In terms of self-help approaches, exercise was the most popular, with 44 percent of survey respondents saying it was helpful and 58 percent saying they wished they had done more back-strengthening exercise in the previous 12 months.
Fifty-nine percent of study participants said they were highly satisfied with the treatment and advice they got from chiropractors, compared to 55 percent for physical therapists, 53 percent for acupuncturists, 44 percent for specialist physicians, and 34 percent for primary care doctors.
In a companion survey, Consumer Reports asked nearly 1,000 subscribers who had undergone back surgery in the past five years to rate their experience. Only 60 percent said they were satisfied with the results, and satisfaction depended on the indication for the surgery. People who had undergone operations for narrowing of the spinal cord channel or slipped disks were more likely to be happy with the results than those who had arthritis of the spine.
Most people in the surgery survey also said that the recovery was longer and more painful than they had thought it would be, and many wished they had received more rehabilitation after surgery.
People who are told they need surgery for back pain should always get a second opinion from another health care provider, according to a press release from Consumer Reports, "preferably one who is not a surgeon."
SOURCE: Consumer Reports, May 2009.
http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2009/04/08/eline/links/20090408elin005.html

Can Government Scientists Save the Planet by Nuking Yellowstone National Park to Halt Global Warming?
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor 

(NaturalNews) Of all the hare-brained ideas about climate change I've heard in the last few years, this one takes the grand prize: John Holdren, the new science advisor to President Obama, is actively considering radical geoengineering ideas in order to halt global warming. One such idea now being discussed with the Obama administration involves -- get this -- launching enormous amounts of pollution particles into Earth's upper atmosphere to block the sun's rays and "chill" the planet.

Let me explain why this is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. And keep in mind this is not about the debate of whether global warming is even real or not, since that's a different article altogether. This is about the short-sighted stupidity of even considering polluting the atmosphere in order to protect us from the CO2 pollution we've already dumped into the atmosphere.

First off, there's the whole idea that intentionally launching pollution into the atmosphere is, by any reckoning, a dangerous ecological experiment that potentially puts the entire Earth ecosystem at risk. Let's face it, folks: Human beings have proven themselves to be remarkably bad at anticipating the ecological effects of their own actions. The ramifications of such misguided efforts to fight global warming simply cannot be foreseen by any scientist (or group of scientists).

On top of that, human scientists have demonstrated themselves to be astonishingly arrogant when it comes to dealing with Mother Nature. The idea that we can save the planet by polluting the atmosphere is reckless at best, and delusional at worst.

Secondly, suppose blocking out one percent (or so) of the sunlight actually does halt global warming... then what? If the scheme somehow works, it will teach human beings that controlling CO2 emissions isn't necessary at all, because no matter how bad the pollution gets, governments can always launch more particles into the atmosphere to dim the sun and make up for it.

This could result in a vicious cycle of atmospheric dimming, followed by yet more CO2 emissions, followed by yet more dimming, and so on until the whole planet is left suffocating in a literal haze of pollution. The root of the problem, meanwhile, will remain completely ignored: CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants, automobiles and other fossil fuel burners.

In fact, this whole idea of dimming the sun instead of reducing CO2 emissions is a classic example of the kind of "treat the symptom" stupidity that characterizes western medicine. Instead of showing a cancer patient how to heal their own cancer, western medical doctors poison the patient with chemotherapy. This is essentially what the "global dimming" idea entails: Poisoning the planet with yet more pollution while calling it a "solution."

It's all quite ridiculous. More pollution will not save the planet any better than more poison saves cancer patients.

What about life on our planet?
But there's a third reason why dimming the sun with atmospheric pollution is a really, really bad idea: Virtually every living creature or system on our planet depends on sunlight for its biological energy. This is true even of humans: We're not solar-powered (unless you're a breatharian), but we do depend on foods that are derived from solar-powered plants at the bottom of the food chain.

This is true on land and in the oceans: Sunlight is the primary energy source for virtually ALL life on our planet. So what happens to life on Earth, exactly, when you start dimming out the sun using some hare-brained global pollution initiative?

Well one obvious thing that might interest anyone who eats food is that changes in sunlight density will alter crop yields. It's not just about the total sunlight reaching the crops, either: It's also about the seasonal sensitivity of crops.

Plants are sun worshippers
Plants are more intelligent than most people think, you see. Plants actually monitor sunlight and they measure the number of hours of sunlight present during the day as well as changes in sunlight density. Based on this data, plants then decide when to flower, when to produce more seeds (grains) or fruits, when to shift caloric energy into growth spurts and when to die off. If you start mucking around with the sunlight, you're going to throw off the timing calculations of virtually all the plants on the entire planet, including food crops. And that could mean planet-wide crop failures.

Given that most of the population on our planet is just a few weeks away from mass starvation, all it takes is one season of crop failures to wipe out as much as 90% of the human population on our planet.

This may be no coincidence, of course. If some evil genius scientist (Dr. Evil?) wanted to destroy 90% of the human population, polluting the atmosphere and dimming the sun for a year or two would be a very effective way to accomplish that.

How do I know it's effective?

Because Mother Nature already demonstrated this nearly two hundred years ago...

1816: The "Year Without A Summer"
1816 is known in the western world as the "year without a summer" because of the eruption of a massive volcano named Tambora located in modern-day Indonesia. The amount of particulate matter ejected into the atmosphere by the volcano dimmed the sun across much of the world and chilled the summer temperatures so drastically that to this day, the year 1816 is called "Eighteen hundred and froze to death." (http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen/...)

That year, a record-keeping meteorologist named Edward Holyoke recorded this entry on June 7 (which should be summer): "...exceeding[ly] cold. Ground frozen hard, and squalls of snow through the day. Icicles 12 inches long in the shade at noon day."

A poem from that year reads,

The trees were all leafless, the mountains were brown
The face of the country was scathed with a frown
And bleak were the hills, and the foliage sere
As had never been seen at that time of the year.

You can read more about the Summer of 1816 at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_W...

Without question, the eruption of Tambora dimmed the sun and chilled the planet. Modern-day scientists concerned about global warming might call this a "success" (if they only look at the symptoms and not the whole patient). But at what cost? How many people, animals and plants died in 1816 as a result of this particulate matter being ejected into the atmosphere? And why on Earth (literally) would modern-day scientists wish to recreate such a catastrophe on purpose?

How to create the next global dimming event
The fact that volcanic eruptions eject huge amounts of particulate matter into the atmosphere and dim the sun may, in fact, make volcanoes a target for exploitation by mad scientists looking to dim the sun. It's a pretty simple scheme, actually: Find a volcano that's about to blow, drop a nuke into it, then set it off and hope for the best.

Anyone looking to set off a volcano would be immediately drawn to just one sleeping giant of a volcano... the largest volcano in the world, and one that's already 20,000 years or so behind schedule for a major eruption.

Which volcano am I referring to? Yellowstone National Park, of course.

Huh? I can hear people saying right now: "There's no volcano in Yellowstone National Park!"

Okay, you're right: There's no volcano there. In technical terms, it's a SUPER volcano!

The largest volcano in the world is ready to blow
Yellowstone National Park sits on top of a unique caldera containing a combination of pressures and gasses that make it the single most dangerous active volcano in the world. So why is there no mountain on top of the volcano? The answer may surprise you: Because it blows itself away with each eruption!

Learn more about the Yellowstone SUPER volcano here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...

or watch this shocking YouTube video here: (really shocking, trust me) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh9z...

or read this book called SUPER Volcano: The Ticking Time Bomb Beneath Yellowstone National Park: http://www.nationalparkstraveler.co...

Now why is all this important?

Pay attention, Earthlings. Here comes the scary part...

Nuking Yellowstone to save the planet

The Yellowstone super volcano is a special kind of volcano. It's not the usual kind where deep pressure force molten lava to the surface. Instead, the Yellowstone super volcano is a special kind of highly-pressurized gas chamber with a lid on top (the lid being the ground). If the lid comes off, the pressure drops and the gasses start to rapidly expand in a runaway explosion that dwarfs typical volcanoes.

As explained on Wikipedia: "The volcanic eruptions, as well as the continuing geothermal activity, are a result of a large chamber of magma located below the caldera's surface. The magma in this chamber contains gases that are kept dissolved only by the immense pressure that the magma is under. If the pressure is released to a sufficient degree by some geological shift, then some of the gases bubble out and cause the magma to expand. This can cause a runaway reaction. If the expansion results in further relief of pressure, for example, by blowing crust material off the top of the chamber, the result is a very large gas explosion." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow...)

In fact, the term "very large" is an understatement. We're talking about a Biblical event here -- something that would cover most of the United States in ash and alter the world climate for years to come.

Here's the scary part: Arrogant scientists could conceivably nuke Yellowstone National Park to blow the lid off the super volcano there, causing a massive eruption that would accomplish their goal of "global dimming" by ejecting many megatons of particular matter into the atmosphere. And God knows far too many modern-day scientists are stupid and arrogant enough to try something like this. One nuke is all it would take, and it's a whole lot cheaper (and faster) than launching matter into the atmosphere the old-fashioned way (with rockets). Why not let Mother Nature do the job for you?

One carefully-placed nuke could set off the Yellowstone super volcano chain reaction of rapid gas expansion, making the entire caldera go ballistic in a gigantic volcanic explosion that the planet hasn't seen for 600,000 years (or so).

The best part of this evil plan, of course, is that the whole thing can be done covertly. Simply bury a nuke in Yellowstone National Park and set it off without any warning whatsoever. If anyone asks, just blame it on Acts of God. With the sun dimmed for an entire growing season, not only will global warming be halted, but a global population reduction of billions of people will also likely be achieved, killing two birds with one stone (from the twisted point of view of mad geoengineering scientists and population reduction schemers).

I mean, come on: It's no longer even a secret that world governments are trying to reduce the world population. It's only a matter of HOW it's going to be done. One Yellowstone eruption takes care of the whole population problem in one growing season. If such an event does occur, by the way, the safest place the live will be near the equator and far from Yellowstone. South America looks really good at the moment...

By the way, I don't have any hard evidence that the U.S. government is looking to nuke Yellowstone in order to accomplish this "global dimming" objective (combined with a population reduction agenda), but the government is talking about radical geoengineering ideas that fit into the same category. Nuking Yellowstone National Park is a cheap, effective way to depopulate the planet and halt global warming while blaming the whole thing on Mother Nature. It's the perfect ecological crime.

If you notice people in radiation suits drilling in Yellowstone this summer, you might want to evacuate the area just in case...

By the way, aren't governments already engaged in geoengineering and population reduction? Read this excellent article on PrisonPlanet.com to learn more about chemtrails, vaccinations and other population reduction efforts under way right now: http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-gov...

http://www.NaturalNews.com/z026021.html

Natural Strategies Could Slash Colorectal Cancer Rate
by Sherry Baker, NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) A British research team headed by Professor Donald Maxwell Parkin of Cancer Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Mathematics, and Statistics in London reports natural approaches involving a healthy lifestyle could slash the rate of colorectal cancer in Great Britain over the next 24 years. And there's no reason to think the strategies wouldn't prevent the same cancers in other countries, too.

The new research suggests that changes in diet, exercise, alcohol use, and body weight could cause the rate of colorectal cancer in the U.K. to plummet by over one-fourth. This is a ten percent higher reduction in the number of cancers than would most likely be prevented by a proposed national medical screening program. What's more, Professor Parkin and his colleagues concluded "the preventive interventions described in this study would save more deaths from other causes (cancer of the breast and upper GI tract, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes) than from colorectal cancer."

The study, just published in the May issue of The European Journal of Cancer Prevention, presents data-backed projections that estimate how "reasonable" lifestyle changes would affect future rates of colorectal cancer. In all, the scientists found lifestyle modifications would lead to a "substantial" reduction in colorectal malignancies, causing cases of colorectal cancer in the U.K. population to decrease by 26 percent -- this would include 31.5 percent fewer cases of colorectal cancer in men and 18.4 percent fewer cases in women.

The five all natural lifestyle factors studied by the researchers include:
* Little or no consumption of red and processed meat (no more than 80 or 90 grams per day).
* Eating more fruits, vegetables, and fiber (least five servings per day).
* Exercising at least 30 minutes on 5 or more days per week.
* Limiting the drinking of alcohol to no more than 21 units per week for men, 15 units for women.
* Conquering the problems of being overweight and obesity by aiming to reduce average weights to those normally seen 20 years ago.

Most of the cases of colorectal cancer prevented by these strategies would be in people 50 or older. However, in a statement to the media, the researchers noted the proportional reduction in risk would be even greater at younger ages.

Colorectal cancer is the number two cause of cancer deaths in the U.K. It is also a major health problem in the U.S. According to the National Cancer Institute, about 50,000 Americans died from colon and rectal malignancies last year.

http://www.NaturalNews.com/z026020.html

HPV Vaccine Batch Makes Girls Sick; Emergency Recall Results
by David Gutierrez, NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) The Health Ministry of Spain has ordered an emergency recall of a batch of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine Gardasil, manufactured by Merck and jointly marketed by Merck and Sanofi-Aventis.

Gardasil is marketed as preventive against cervical cancer and genital warts. It is designed to immunize the body against HPV stains 16 and 18, which are believed to be responsible for 70 percent of cervical cancer cases, and 6 and 11, believed to cause 90 percent of cases of genital warts. GlaxoSmithKline produces a similar vaccine, Cervarix, that produces against strains 16 and 18 but not against 6 or 11.

The recall order came after two adolescent girls became seriously ill and went into convulsions immediately after being vaccinated with the same batch, NH52670. Both girls were taken to intensive care, and were eventually pronounced stable. Merck and Sanofi-Aventis announced plans to investigate the reactions.

Authorities initially believed, after the first girl became sick in Valencia, that her reaction was unrelated to the vaccine. After a second girl had the same reaction immediately after receiving an injection from the same batch, however, the Health Ministry ordered a halt to all use of batch NH52670. Almost 80,000 doses of the batch had already been distributed and were in use all over Spain. Eventually, the government issued an outright recall.

The two girls had been vaccinated as part of a government program aimed at teenagers, similar to those being proposed in many parts of the United States. 

Widescale HPV vaccination programs for children have been criticized both on grounds of potential risk and suspect benefit. Neither HPV vaccine has been tested on children, or has been clinically shown to reduce the risk of cervical cancer or genital warts.

Other health advocates have questioned the vaccines' usefulness in saving lives or even lowering medical costs, since regular Pap smears have already greatly improved the prognosis for cervical cancer. Since the HPV vaccine is not failsafe, women who are vaccinated must still continue to get regular Pap smears.

http://www.naturalnews.com/026019.html

New PhRMA chief says healthcare system is ‘broken’
By Phil Taylor, 09-Apr-2009  In-Pharma-Technologist.com
The new chairman of US trade body the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) – AstraZeneca CEO David Brennan – has laid out his vision for reforming the “broken” healthcare system.

In his address Brennan painted a bleak picture of the current healthcare environment in the US, saying that the “deepening global economic recession” had already cost 4.4 million people their jobs “and in many instances ... their health insurance.”
“It's not hyperbole to say that before this recession is over millions more will join the 47 million other Americans who do not have health insurance,” said Brennan, and he predicted the loss of routine access to physician and preventative care will lead to a “rising tide” of chronic diseases.
As chronic diseases account for about 75 per cent of healthcare costs in the US this will put added strain on Medicare and Medicaid programs, which have grown from a 1970 level of $365 per US resident - 7.2 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) - to a forecast $12,000 in 2016.

"That’s an unbelievable and unsustainable 19.6 per cent of GDP," said Brennan. 
Brennan backed President Barack Obama’s view that the US needs reform “that's built on American traditions to meet the diverse medical needs of our people, while ... reducing cost and strengthening the economy."

Brennan emphasised the need for “quality care with an emphasis on outcomes,” but cautioned against any reform that would break the strengths of the current system, such as the strong relationship between physician and patient.
Pharma and other stakeholders should explore opportunities to increase racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trials, as part of measures to reduce healthcare disparities.
He also stressed the importance of pharmaceuticals in healthcare, citing studies which suggest that “for each additional dollar spent on newer pharmaceuticals, over $6 is saved in total healthcare spending.”
Access to medicines for the uninsured and underinsured remains a big problem, and in future coverage needs to include a comprehensive prescription drug benefit. At the same time, the insured are forced to pay considerably more in co-pays on medicines than for other healthcare services, despite the fact that medicines “have remained at about the same percentage of the healthcare dollar for 40 years.”
To illustrate the co-pay problem Brennan gave the example of an office equipment firm which reduced co-payments for its employees' health plan when they paid for diabetes and asthma drugs.
"The Wall Street Journal reported that the company realised $1m net savings in the first year by reducing complications common to those diseases," he said.
Meanwhile, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) urgently needs more resources, commented Brennan. More than 50 fast-track review deadlines were not met in 2008 by the agency, at a cost for both patients and drugmakers, which has been blamed on a lack of staff and funds, he pointed out.
“An understaffed and under-funded FDA is an agency in crisis,” said Brennan, adding that PhRMA is “working hard for increased appropriations to the FDA so that it is recognised as a watchdog with a full set of teeth.”

Finally, Brennan warned against complacency, noting that Europe and China are introducing “pro-medical innovation policies” to challenge the US’s leading position in drug development.

"They are creating strategies to develop the infrastructure and biochemistry knowledge of their people that will make them more competitive over the next 20 to 40 years, " he said.
The consequence of losing that leadership role would have dramatic consequences on the US economy, he said, given that pharma added $88bn to GDP in 2006 and - directly or indirectly – employs 3.2m people.
"We have an important economic impact on the nation,” said Brennan.
http://www.in-pharmatechnologist.com/Industry-Drivers/
New-PhRMA-chief-says-healthcare-system-is-broken

Dentists Still Using Plastic Sealants, Despite BPA Toxicity
by David Gutierrez, NaturalNews.com 

(NaturalNews) In spite of rising concern over the endocrine-disrupting effects of bisphenol-A (BPA), the chemical is still used in dental sealants that are strongly recommended by the American Dental Association.

BPA is used in a wide variety of industrial applications, including in the making of compact discs, polycarbonate plastic water and baby bottles, and the resins that line cans of food. The chemical is known to mimic the effects of the hormone estrogen, however, and has been linked to developmental, neurological and reproductive defects and increased risk of cancer. Although the FDA and EPA have yet to regulate it as a toxic substance, the National Toxicology Program concluded in a recent research review that there is indeed cause for concern over BPA's effects, particularly in children.

The issue with dental sealants -- syrupy substances applied to the cracks in teeth, hardened and then buffed smooth as a barrier to the bacteria that cause tooth decay.
-- is the same as with plastic water bottles or the linings of cans: Under certain conditions, especially high temperatures, BPA is known to leach out of plastics and resins. Scientists believe that exposure to BPA from such sources is the reason that the Centers for Disease Control Prevention (CDC) has detected the chemical in the urine of 93 percent of all people tested.

Responding to concerns over BPA in dental sealants, American Dental Association consumer adviser Leslie Seldin dismissed "the BPA issue" as "minuscule in impact."

Not all dental sealants contain BPA or expose patients to equal amounts of chemical. In a 2006 study, researchers found that men who received Dentsply Ash's Delton Light Cure sealant were exposed to 20 times the BPA dose of men whose teeth had been sealed with Ivoclar Vivadent Helioseal F.

The study was conducted by researchers from the U.S. Public Health Service and the CDC, and published in the the American Dental Association.

http://www.naturalnews.com/026016.html

LSD Proves to be Miracle Cure for Cluster Headaches
by David Gutierrez, NaturalNews.com 

(NaturalNews) A review published in the respected journal Neurology has confirmed widespread evidence that LSD can be used to successfully treat an otherwise devastating and crippling health condition known as "cluster headaches."

Often confused with migraines, cluster headaches come in attacks so debilitating that they have been known to drive sufferers to kill themselves, earning them the nickname "suicide headaches." Because 90 percent of sufferers experience a form known as episodic cluster headaches, in which attacks come regularly at the same time of day for a few months before vanishing for up to a year, they are also known as "alarm clock headaches."

Researchers do not know what causes the headaches, and there is no accepted treatment. One business owner who goes by the pseudonym "Flash" on Internet message boards related to the condition relates his experience with various treatments: "My doctor did the worst thing you can do to a person with cluster headache: he put me on normal analgesics. Aspirin, paracetamol, codeine -- doubling up on the codeine -- taking whatever you're allowed to each day," Flash says. "It took the lining off my stomach, and it aggravated the attacks until they got out of control."

Other popular treatments such as beta-blockers, blood pressure medications and antidepressants led to other dangerous side effects, such as a slowing of the heart rate and psychotic symptoms.

Eventually, Flash decided to experiment with LSD, and found that after one dose, his attacks immediately stopped for the next two years. When he felt the next attack looming, he experimented with psilocybin mushrooms ("magic mushrooms"), which were just as effective. The mushrooms were even effective at stopping an attack that he had deliberately exacerbated with alcohol, as a test.

Anecdotal accounts like Flash's have attracted the attention of some researchers, who note that many hallucinogenic compounds are chemically similar to certain neurotransmitters and migraine medications. 

Harvard Medical School researcher John Halpern, author of the Neurology article, has even applied to the university for permission to conduct a clinical trial.

"It is a life-or-death situation for some of these patients," Halpern said.

http://www.naturalnews.com/026015.html

GARY:  HOW THE HELL CAN ANY CAESARIAN BE “NATURAL”???
From The Times  April 4, 2009

The new "natural" Caesarean
With more babies being born by Caesarean section, a new movement is campaigning to make the event a more "natural" experience
Charlotte Edwardes

The lights of the operating theatre are dimmed and there is a mood of calm among the hospital staff. A midwife softly narrates a continuing procedure to a patient who is squeezing her husband's hand. The surgeon gives the nod: it's time. The drape across the patient's abdomen is lowered and her head is raised. Her eyes widen as she and her husband watch their baby, tiny and pink with a mop of black hair, being gently delivered from her. There is a moment of collective awe before the newborn's cry fills the air. “It's a boy!” his mother gasps, before enveloping him in a warm hug.
This mother has just had a “natural Caesarean”, a revolutionary technique that attempts to turn one of the world's most common operations into an experience closer to vaginal birth. The idea was conceived by Professor Nicholas Fisk, formerly a consultant obstetrician at Queen Charlotte's Hospital in London, in response to the rising numbers of Caesareans in the UK. Caesarean deliveries account for 24 per cent of all births. More than half are emergency C-sections rather than planned, and maternal age is a factor; according to the National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit, mothers under the age of 20 have a C-section rate of just 13 per cent, compared with 33 per cent for mothers aged between 40 and 50.
There's no doubt that a Caesarean is major surgery. It is also the joyous moment of arrival for parents and this is what Professor Fisk, and two colleagues - Dr Felicity Plaat, consultant anaesthetist, and Jenny Smith, a senior midwife and author (see panel) - set out to emphasise.
“It struck me that all the effort was going into changing normal childbirth but that Caesarean section was still steeped in old surgical rituals,” says Fisk. “In some cases I was horrified; the baby would be dragged out like a tumour and passed to several medical staff before the mother. It was ripe for reform.”
His team concentrated on three areas. First, parental involvement: this meant dropping the drape that “divorced” the mother from her abdomen, to allow her to see her baby's head emerge; the baby itself blocks the mother's view of the operation.
The second point was physiological: Fisk showed that when a Caesarean is performed slowly the baby is able to “autoresuscitate” - start breathing unaided - while still attached to the placenta, as in normal birth. The baby is “half-delivered” and a combination of the naturally contracting uterus and the baby's vigorous wriggles allow the lungs to expel fluid in a similar way to a vaginal birth. This reduces the risk of the baby needing help to breathe; a common occurrence after a Caesarean.
Finally, Fisk wanted to see newborns handed immediately to their mother for skin-to-skin bonding. “There are now official standards for skin-to-skin bonding in childbirth, but these are almost never met with Caesareans,” he says. One obstruction is that the monitoring equipment needed for patients in surgery is routinely attached to the mother's chest. “In a natural Caesarean we attach the ECG wires to the back of the chest so that the baby can be placed on the mother after birth,” Plaat says. The anaesthetic dose is lowered so that there is no “heaviness in the arms” to prevent holding the baby, and a clip that measures oxygen in the blood is attached to the toe.
Plaat knows from experience how important it is for a mother to be given her child as quickly as possible: “My son was passed around, measured, weighed, dressed and even had his hair washed before being given to me. A crucial player, therefore, is the midwife . She has to be enthusiastic and involved. It's not just ‘dumping baby on mum' and writing up notes; it's making sure that the baby is safe, is not going to slip off, and is warm. We put towels over the baby and even bubble-wrap - the kind you buy in big rolls in Ryman.”
Smith, whose book Your Baby, Your Body, Your Birth advocates a softer general approach to birth, adds: “And while keeping both mother and baby safe, we focus on the fact that this is a birth. We bring in the elements of normal birth: the mother can see her baby's sex at the same time as the operating team. The father can perform a second ‘cutting of the cord' and the midwife can show him where to clamp it. It is entirely different from the experience parents have had before.”
While plans to audit the effects of the natural Caesarean on mother and baby are in the pipeline, women who have heard of the technique want it now. The procedure is unsuitable for babies who are in the breech position, or when the baby or mother, or both, are in danger, or for premature babies whose lungs are not mature. But Ruwan Wimalasundera, consultant obstetrician at Queen Charlotte's, says that 90 per cent of his patients ask for the natural Caesarean and more than 100 have been performed in the past 18 months. “Parents love it,” he says. “The benefits are obvious: mothers bond with their baby earlier.”
Those who have had a natural Caesarean could not be more effusive. Camilla Fisher had one last summer, after an emergency Caesarean two years before. “It was the most relaxing environment: calm and reassuring,” she recalls. “The staff and my husband were all in green surgical gowns, but it didn't feel like an operation. When you've had a natural Caesarean you wonder why it was ever different. I've never felt that I was deprived of a 'natural birth'.”
Discuss your views on birth styles at timesonline.co.uk/alphamummy
How to have a 'natural' C-section
Jenny Smith, a leading midwife and author of Your Body, Your Baby, Your Birth (Rodale UK, £14.99), gives these tips:
Ask if the surgical team will play music and if your partner can take photographs.
Ask for an epidural dose that won't make your arms “heavy”.
Ask for the screen to be dropped so that you can see your baby being delivered.
You can ask to call the sex of your baby yourself.
Ask the midwife to pass your baby directly to you so that you can enjoy skin-to- skin bonding immediately.
Ask that the father may perform the second “cutting of the cord” while the baby is in your arms.

Too Much Protein, Eaten Along With Fat, May Lead To Insulin Resistance
ScienceDaily (Apr. 9, 2009) — A clue about the blood chemistry of obese people who develop insulin resistance, a precursor to diabetes, has been confirmed in animal studies at the Duke University Medical Center.

Obese people have been found to harbor proteins called branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) at far higher levels than non-obese people. The suspicion has been that these amino acids, in combination with a high-fat diet, contribute to insulin resistance.
The team found that the BCAA signature in obese humans consisted of the branched-chain amino acids themselves, plus a cluster of several products related to the body's breakdown processes for BCAA.
"In the case of the amino acids, we also are finding increased levels of their metabolic breakdown products, which suggests the whole system for handling the amino acid metabolic process has been overloaded," said senior author Christopher Newgard, Ph.D., director of the Sarah W. Stedman Nutrition and Metabolism Center and W. David and Sarah W. Stedman Distinguished Professor at Duke. "Our rat studies show that this overload causes changes at the cellular level that can lead to insulin resistance."
To determine whether the BCAA signature in obese humans might signal that their intake is harmful, the scientists performed a feeding study in rats that showed an independent contribution of BCAAs to insulin resistance.
"These findings, however, would need to be confirmed in studies with people before any dietary recommendations could be issued," said Laura Svetkey, M.D., director of the Duke Hypertension Center, director of clinical research at the Sarah W. Stedman Nutrition and Metabolism Center, and co-senior author of the study, published in Cell Metabolism.
"Insulin resistance occurred in animals with a diet high in the branched-chain amino acids, but only if they were ingested along with a high level of fat in the diet," Newgard said. Because obese humans tend to ingest high-fat diets, the combination of high-BCAA and high-fat intake might contribute to insulin resistance in obese humans, but additional studies are needed. BCAAs comprise as much as 25 percent of amino acids in dietary protein, and are particularly enriched in diets high in animal (meat) proteins.
"I want to be clear that our animal data suggest that there is nothing wrong with obtaining protein from sources that are high in branched-chain amino acids, as long as you are not eating beyond what your energy needs are," said Newgard, who is a professor of pharmacology and cancer biology and professor of medicine at Duke. "If you add a lot of unneeded protein to a fatty diet, perhaps that's where you get into problems. The ancient Greeks were right: everything in moderation."
Insulin resistance happens when insulin, released by the beta cells in the pancreas, doesn't work normally to stimulate glucose uptake into tissues.
Rats on a high-fat diet gained substantially more weight than rats that ate BCAAs with high-fat chow or those that ate standard chow. However, the rats eating the high-fat diet with BCAA became as insulin resistant as rats fed a high-fat only diet, even though they weren't eating as much.
To make sure that the BCAAs and not high fat contributed to insulin resistance, the researchers let animals feed freely on the standard chow, high-fat, or high fat with BCAA diets, and added a fourth group of rats fed a high-fat chow diet in an amount that matched the lower rate of food intake in the high-fat BCAA group. Studies showed clear insulin resistance in the high-fat and high-fat with BCAA groups, but not in the rats eating less of the high fat chow or those eating standard chow. This proved that moderate fat intake was not a cause of insulin resistance.
The researchers also showed that BCAAs contributed to insulin resistance by chronically activating mTOR, a signaling protein that regulates cell growth and survival and that functions as a sensor of cellular nutrient and energy levels. When the rats had the drug rapamycin, which blocks mTOR, their insulin resistance was reversed.
Next the team will study what happens when obese people who have insulin resistance lose weight and "whether there is a parallel improvement in the BCAA metabolic signature in the blood," Newgard said.
Svetkey added, "We also need to study the relationship between dietary intake of BCAA and insulin resistance in humans, and whether changing dietary patterns, beyond weight control, can improve matters."
The study was supported by a sponsored research agreement from Glaxo SmithKline and NIH grants. Authors Jie An, James Bain, Michael Muehlbauer, Robert D. Stevens, Lillian Lien, Andrea Haqq, Michelle Arlotto, Olga Ilkayeva, Brett Wenner, David Millington and Mark D. Butler are with the Sarah W. Stedman Nutrition and Metabolism Center. Lillian Lien, Svati Shah, Cris Slentz, William Yancy Jr. and Gerald Musante are with the Duke Department of Medicine. Jie An is with the Duke Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology. Andrea Haqq and David Millington are with the Duke Department of Pediatrics. James Rochon and Dianne Gallup are with the Duke Department of Biostatistics and Informatics. Howard Eisenson is with Duke Community and Family Medicine, and Richard Surwit is the Duke Department of Psychiatry.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090407130905.htm

Aerosols May Drive A Significant Portion Of Arctic Warming
ScienceDaily (Apr. 9, 2009) — Though greenhouse gases are invariably at the center of discussions about global climate change, new NASA research suggests that much of the atmospheric warming observed in the Arctic since 1976 may be due to changes in tiny airborne particles called aerosols.
Emitted by natural and human sources, aerosols can directly influence climate by reflecting or absorbing the sun's radiation. The small particles also affect climate indirectly by seeding clouds and changing cloud properties, such as reflectivity.
A new study, led by climate scientist Drew Shindell of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, used a coupled ocean-atmosphere model to investigate how sensitive different regional climates are to changes in levels of carbon dioxide, ozone, and aerosols.
The researchers found that the mid and high latitudes are especially responsive to changes in the level of aerosols. Indeed, the model suggests aerosols likely account for 45 percent or more of the warming that has occurred in the Arctic during the last three decades. The results were published in the April issue of Nature Geoscience.
Though there are several varieties of aerosols, previous research has shown that two types -- sulfates and black carbon -- play an especially critical role in regulating climate change. Both are products of human activity.
Sulfates, which come primarily from the burning of coal and oil, scatter incoming solar radiation and have a net cooling effect on climate. Over the past three decades, the United States and European countries have passed a series of laws that have reduced sulfate emissions by 50 percent. While improving air quality and aiding public health, the result has been less atmospheric cooling from sulfates.
At the same time, black carbon emissions have steadily risen, largely because of increasing emissions from Asia. Black carbon -- small, soot-like particles produced by industrial processes and the combustion of diesel and biofuels -- absorb incoming solar radiation and have a strong warming influence on the atmosphere.
In the modeling experiment, Shindell and colleagues compiled detailed, quantitative information about the relative roles of various components of the climate system, such as solar variations, volcanic events, and changes in greenhouse gas levels. They then ran through various scenarios of how temperatures would change as the levels of ozone and aerosols -- including sulfates and black carbon -- varied in different regions of the world. Finally, they teased out the amount of warming that could be attributed to different climate variables. Aerosols loomed large.
The regions of Earth that showed the strongest responses to aerosols in the model are the same regions that have witnessed the greatest real-world temperature increases since 1976. The Arctic region has seen its surface air temperatures increase by 1.5 C (2.7 F) since the mid-1970s. In the Antarctic, where aerosols play less of a role, the surface air temperature has increased about 0.35 C (0.6 F).
That makes sense, Shindell explained, because of the Arctic's proximity to North America and Europe. The two highly industrialized regions have produced most of the world's aerosol emissions over the last century, and some of those aerosols drift northward and collect in the Arctic. Precipitation, which normally flushes aerosols out of the atmosphere, is minimal there, so the particles remain in the air longer and have a stronger impact than in other parts of the world.
Since decreasing amounts of sulfates and increasing amounts of black carbon both encourage warming, temperature increases can be especially rapid. The build-up of aerosols also triggers positive feedback cycles that further accelerate warming as snow and ice cover retreat.
In the Antarctic, in contrast, the impact of sulfates and black carbon is minimized because of the continent's isolation from major population centers and the emissions they produce.
"There's a tendency to think of aerosols as small players, but they're not," said Shindell. "Right now, in the mid-latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere and in the Arctic, the impact of aerosols is just as strong as that of the greenhouse gases."
The growing recognition that aerosols may play a larger climate role can have implications for policymakers.
"We will have very little leverage over climate in the next couple of decades if we're just looking at carbon dioxide," Shindell said. "If we want to try to stop the Arctic summer sea ice from melting completely over the next few decades, we're much better off looking at aerosols and ozone."
Aerosols tend to be quite-short lived, residing in the atmosphere for just a few days or weeks. Greenhouses gases, by contrast, can persist for hundreds of years. Atmospheric chemists theorize that the climate system may be more responsive to changes in aerosol levels over the next few decades than to changes in greenhouse gas levels, which will have the more powerful effect in coming centuries.
"This is an important model study, raising lots of great questions that will need to be investigated with field research," said Loretta Mickley, an atmospheric chemist from Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. who was not directly involved in the research. Understanding how aerosols behave in the atmosphere is still very much a work-in-progress, she noted, and every model needs to be compared rigorously to real life observations. But the science behind Shindell's results should be taken seriously.
"It appears that aerosols have quite a powerful effect on climate, but there's still a lot more that we need to sort out," said Shindell.
NASA's upcoming Glory satellite is designed to enhance our current aerosol measurement capabilities to help scientists reduce uncertainties about aerosols by measuring the distribution and microphysical properties of the particles.
Drew Shindell, Greg Faluvegi. Climate response to regional radiative forcing during the twentieth century. Nature Geoscience, 2009; 2 (4): 294 DOI: 10.1038/ngeo473