Virginia's vaccine mandate gets new
life
Parents have spoken loud and clear: They don't want dangerous HPV vaccinations forced on their daughters. Even the most ardent pro-vaccine moms and dads have been refusing Merck's Gardasil shot, and I say good for them.
But politicians are too dazzled by Big Pharma money to get the message.
Just look at the state of Virginia, home to eight U.S. presidents along with a notorious mandate that requires all girls between the ages of 11 and 12 get the expensive three-shot Gardasil sequence.
(Sure, there's an opt-out clause. But you know how that works. Parents who exercise their right to opt out are treated like lepers.)
Last month, lawmakers in Virginia managed to kill a proposed repeal of the mandate without actually voting on it -- allowing these chickens to please their Big Pharma masters without having to go on the record as voting for or against a vaccine mandate.
Washington, Jefferson, and Madison would be so proud!
Don't breathe a sigh of relief if you're not in Virginia. Big Pharma is hard at work trying to convince local, state, and federal officials to back HPV shots -- and they're getting big-time results.
Under a recent law in California, for example, docs can give the shot to girls as young as 12 without parental consent or even their knowledge.
On the federal level, the CDC recently extended its Gardasil recommendations to include boys as well as girls -- a move I'm sure is completely unrelated to the fact that the former head of the agency is now the head of vaccines at Merck Pharmaceutical .
Riiiiiiiight.
Here's the reality: This shot offers little to girls and even less for boys. Often wrongly called "the cervical cancer vaccine," it really protects against only some of the strains of HPV that cause the disease.
In boys, it might cut the risk of extremely rare anal cancers -- cancers so rare almost no one gets them anyway.
Now, I'd be the first to admit this shot would be worthwhile if it managed to save even a few lives without ruining any in the process -- but of course that's not the case.
Gardasil has been linked to thousands of adverse events, including paralysis, seizures, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, and even dozens of deaths.
Worth it? I wouldn’t bet my life on it -- and not on the lives of your children and grandchildren.
Parents have spoken loud and clear: They don't want dangerous HPV vaccinations forced on their daughters. Even the most ardent pro-vaccine moms and dads have been refusing Merck's Gardasil shot, and I say good for them.
But politicians are too dazzled by Big Pharma money to get the message.
Just look at the state of Virginia, home to eight U.S. presidents along with a notorious mandate that requires all girls between the ages of 11 and 12 get the expensive three-shot Gardasil sequence.
(Sure, there's an opt-out clause. But you know how that works. Parents who exercise their right to opt out are treated like lepers.)
Last month, lawmakers in Virginia managed to kill a proposed repeal of the mandate without actually voting on it -- allowing these chickens to please their Big Pharma masters without having to go on the record as voting for or against a vaccine mandate.
Washington, Jefferson, and Madison would be so proud!
Don't breathe a sigh of relief if you're not in Virginia. Big Pharma is hard at work trying to convince local, state, and federal officials to back HPV shots -- and they're getting big-time results.
Under a recent law in California, for example, docs can give the shot to girls as young as 12 without parental consent or even their knowledge.
On the federal level, the CDC recently extended its Gardasil recommendations to include boys as well as girls -- a move I'm sure is completely unrelated to the fact that the former head of the agency is now the head of vaccines at Merck Pharmaceutical .
Riiiiiiiight.
Here's the reality: This shot offers little to girls and even less for boys. Often wrongly called "the cervical cancer vaccine," it really protects against only some of the strains of HPV that cause the disease.
In boys, it might cut the risk of extremely rare anal cancers -- cancers so rare almost no one gets them anyway.
Now, I'd be the first to admit this shot would be worthwhile if it managed to save even a few lives without ruining any in the process -- but of course that's not the case.
Gardasil has been linked to thousands of adverse events, including paralysis, seizures, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, and even dozens of deaths.
Worth it? I wouldn’t bet my life on it -- and not on the lives of your children and grandchildren.
The 'A' way to slash your cancer risk
No matter what you've heard, the sun is NOT the cause of deadly skin cancers.
I know that flies in the face of sunscreen industry propaganda, but it's backed by real science -- and it's proven yet again by a new study that places the blame squarely on nutrition, not sun exposure.
To put it simply: People with the lowest intake of vitamin A have the highest risk of melanoma, the deadly form of skin cancer you should worry about most (the other, carcinoma, can be removed in a simple outpatient procedure).
The study of 69,635 men and women over the age of 50 found that people who take supplements with the retinol form of vitamin A have a 60 percent lower risk of melanoma than those who don't get A from supplements.
Those who get the most -- 1,200 mcg a day -- have a 74 percent lower risk of the disease.
The reason supplements offer the most protection isn't because they have some magical power that foods do not. It's because people who get their A from food simply don't get enough to make a difference.
One of the best sources of A, for example, is fresh natural butter -- and how many people do you know actually dare to eat butter anymore?
So eat more butter... and make sure your multi has enough vitamin A in it. But don't let A be your only protection from skin cancer, because there's another letter that's even more important.
It's "D" as in "vitamin D."
People who don't get enough have a higher risk of melanoma -- and not coincidentally, the best source of that D is the very sun you've been told to avoid. A simple way to get enough vitamin D is to take a D3 supplement during the low sun months which is 8 months a year here in the northwest. Most natural doctors recommend 2,000 to 8,000 IU per day and you can find it at Costco.
No matter what you've heard, the sun is NOT the cause of deadly skin cancers.
I know that flies in the face of sunscreen industry propaganda, but it's backed by real science -- and it's proven yet again by a new study that places the blame squarely on nutrition, not sun exposure.
To put it simply: People with the lowest intake of vitamin A have the highest risk of melanoma, the deadly form of skin cancer you should worry about most (the other, carcinoma, can be removed in a simple outpatient procedure).
The study of 69,635 men and women over the age of 50 found that people who take supplements with the retinol form of vitamin A have a 60 percent lower risk of melanoma than those who don't get A from supplements.
Those who get the most -- 1,200 mcg a day -- have a 74 percent lower risk of the disease.
The reason supplements offer the most protection isn't because they have some magical power that foods do not. It's because people who get their A from food simply don't get enough to make a difference.
One of the best sources of A, for example, is fresh natural butter -- and how many people do you know actually dare to eat butter anymore?
So eat more butter... and make sure your multi has enough vitamin A in it. But don't let A be your only protection from skin cancer, because there's another letter that's even more important.
It's "D" as in "vitamin D."
People who don't get enough have a higher risk of melanoma -- and not coincidentally, the best source of that D is the very sun you've been told to avoid. A simple way to get enough vitamin D is to take a D3 supplement during the low sun months which is 8 months a year here in the northwest. Most natural doctors recommend 2,000 to 8,000 IU per day and you can find it at Costco.
IASTM - The new wave in injury resolution without surgery
(NaturalNews article) Chiropractors and physical therapists must stay on
the cutting edge with the latest techniques in rehabilitation and natural
enhancement to achieve the best results for their patients. Instrument
Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization (IASTM) is a procedure that is rapidly
growing in popularity due to its effectiveness and efficiency while remaining
non-invasive. For those who are struggling with a chronic injury or want to bounce
back from a recent injury without having to go the surgical route, IASTM is
worth a closer look.
What is IASTM?
Once the body incurs an injury, the immune response aims to
prevent further damage and repair the wound as quickly as possible by
generating scar tissue. Scar tissue is not the same as skin, muscle, ligament,
or tendon. The arrangement of scar tissue within a wound is in an irregular
pattern and has little functional strength, like a blacktop patch for a
pothole. This is why there may be a limited range of motion and pain in a
muscle or joint that has been injured, or why a scar on the skin surface looks
"tight" and non-uniform. IASTM treatment utilizes a tool, or set of
tools, to break up scar tissue at an injury site to trigger a focal inflammatory
response. This inflammation leads to the absorption of scar tissue and the
production of new collagen to repair the injury site. Combined with proper
movement, stretching, and cold therapy after treatment, the body restores
normal tissue structure and function. Treatments are short, specific, and
effective for a wide variety of ailments.
The effects of IASTM include pain relief, increased flexibility,
increased strength, enhanced recovery, and in most cases complete resolution of
symptoms.
Does it hurt?
Any time inflammation is induced, pain is quite common. Although
the treatment creates inflammation, it's common for the patient to regard the
treatment as a "good hurt". Often there is an immediate improvement
in flexibility and decrease in pain after treatment. Certain injury sites will
be more painful than others and the care provider can adjust accordingly to an
individual's preferences. Fortunately, the treatment takes 5-10 minutes or less
and is very specific as to not disrupt healthy tissues. Common side effects
include local discomfort, redness, and occasional bruising at the treatment
site.
Will it work for me?
A multitude of conditions have been successfully treated through
the administration of IASTM and most within 10 treatments. IASTM can be performed
to almost any part of the body, from plantar fasciitis to TMJ. After surgery,
IASTM can speed up recovery and prevent scar formation that may hinder a full
recovery (spinal surgery). Other successfully treated conditions include:
rotator cuff injuries, knee injuries, ITB syndrome, carpal tunnel syndrome,
elbow tendonitis, strains/sprains, even fibromyalgia!
How do I start?
Start by locating a healthcare provider near you that offers
IASTM, likely a chiropractor or Physical Therapist. Some companies like Graston
require their providers to maintain certification in their technique and will
advertise as such. One can expect to see more IASTM providers appearing within
the next few years since this is a growing alternative treatment for injuries.
Common names for IASTM include Graston, FAKTR, Gua sha, and SASTM.
About the author:
Dr. Daniel Zagst is a chiropractic physician at Advanced Health & Chiropractic in Mooresville, NC. He has a BS in Professional Studies of Adjunctive Therapies, a Doctorate of Chiropractic from NYCC, and an Advanced Certificate in Sport Science and Human Performance.
Dr. Daniel Zagst is a chiropractic physician at Advanced Health & Chiropractic in Mooresville, NC. He has a BS in Professional Studies of Adjunctive Therapies, a Doctorate of Chiropractic from NYCC, and an Advanced Certificate in Sport Science and Human Performance.
Low-fat Milk……Is It Good For You?
If your doctor and your spouse are double-teaming you to cut fat out of your diet, don't fall for it. You need fat, as long as it is the right fat.
And be extra careful for the old milk trick. You probably know it by heart... "Milk: It does a body good." In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.
And if you drink reduced-fat milk every day, your waist will expand while your blood sugar takes a beating.
When you're looking for support from the mainstream, it doesn't get much heftier than Harvard.
Dr. David Ludwig is a Harvard professor with a specialty in childhood obesity. But don't let the "childhood" part fool you. His message is just as important for adults. And it's as simple as basic math...
The sugar content of reduced fat milk is way too high.
How high? Believe it or not, a Reese's Peanut Butter Cup contains less sugar than a cup of 2-percent milk. And yet, the USDA says we should drink three cups per day!
Drinking that much milk -- especially low-fat or skim milk -- is as bad as drinking that much Mountain Dew.
Here's why... The skimming process strips away fat, which helps slow the absorption of sugar. And that process strips away nutrients too. So the nutrition is scant, but the sugar level stays high -- and the sugar courses through your body much faster.
This isn't news. The only news here is that a prominent mainstream specialist is willing to say it in a major journal.
Don't be distracted by the mustaches and grinning celebs. Drinking sugary low fat milk every day promotes obesity and type 2 diabetes.
A better alternative is to drink organic
"whole" milk. But the best choice of all that provides the most nutrition and
health benefit is Raw milk, which is getting easier to find these
days. One place you can find raw milk
along with all kinds of healthy foods and "grass" fed meats is at Bill The
Butcher stores. It's a new chain of healthy shops with 6 locations in the Seattle/Edmonds area and
10 new locations in Portland. You can check out their products and get on their
mailing list at http://www.billthebutcher.com/
E
for Alzheimer’s
Recently, I told you how vitamin E can significantly slow Alzheimer's progression. But that's not the only vitamin that can help beat back Alzheimer's.
Previously, Oxford researchers showed that B vitamins can slow down the shrinkage of your brain volume. They believe the key is homocysteine, the harmful amino acid that B controls.
In a recent trial, the Oxford team gave B vitamins to subjects with mild cognitive impairment and elevated homocysteine.
The results were stunning.
The authors write... "B-vitamin treatment reduces, by as much as seven fold, the cerebral atrophy in those gray matter regions specifically vulnerable to the AD process."
And here's all it took to achieve this remarkable effect...
* Vitamin B6 -- 20 mg per day
* Folic acid -- 800 mcg per day
* Vitamin B12 -- 500 mcg per day
As we age, our homocysteine level tends to rise. So if a good B complex isn't part of your daily regimen, add it today.
Recently, I told you how vitamin E can significantly slow Alzheimer's progression. But that's not the only vitamin that can help beat back Alzheimer's.
Previously, Oxford researchers showed that B vitamins can slow down the shrinkage of your brain volume. They believe the key is homocysteine, the harmful amino acid that B controls.
In a recent trial, the Oxford team gave B vitamins to subjects with mild cognitive impairment and elevated homocysteine.
The results were stunning.
The authors write... "B-vitamin treatment reduces, by as much as seven fold, the cerebral atrophy in those gray matter regions specifically vulnerable to the AD process."
And here's all it took to achieve this remarkable effect...
* Vitamin B6 -- 20 mg per day
* Folic acid -- 800 mcg per day
* Vitamin B12 -- 500 mcg per day
As we age, our homocysteine level tends to rise. So if a good B complex isn't part of your daily regimen, add it today.
Until next time, stay healthy and happy
JD Roma
The information on
this blog is provided for educational purposes only. It is not a substitute for
professional medical care, and medical advice and services are not being
offered. If you have, or suspect you have, a health problem you should consult
your physician (preferably a Naturopath).
No comments:
Post a Comment