Karen Erickson, DC
American Chiropractic Association
Well-designed studies have shown that chiropractic care (often just called “chiropractic”) is at least as effective — and sometimes more effective — than traditional medicine for treating certain types of physical complaints.
Emerging research indicates that chiropractic affects more than just the spine and surrounding muscles. It has been used to successfully treat a variety of conditions, including digestive complaints and ear infections.
Ways chiropractic can help…
DIGESTIVE DISORDERS
A survey of 1,494 patients found that 22% reported digestive relief following chiropractic treatments, even though the majority had never mentioned digestive issues to their chiropractors.
Many of the spinal nerves that are affected by chiropractic manipulation control digestive functions. Patients who undergo routine manipulations may experience changes in their levels of digestive fluids, the speed at which food moves through the intestinal tract or the strength and/or frequency of intestinal contractions.
We’re often told by patients that manipulations for, say, neck or low-back pain not only helped their musculoskeletal complaints but also resulted in improvement in constipation, irritable bowel syndrome and other digestive issues.
Digestive problems need to be medically diagnosed first, but the most effective treatments involve an integrative approach, which can include chiropractic. I often get referrals from medical doctors of patients with constipation, colitis or irritable bowel syndrome.
Help for colic: A study published in Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics found that colicky babies treated with chiropractic cried about three hours less daily than they did before, compared to a one-hour reduction in those given the drug dimethicone, a standard treatment. The manipulations given to children are very gentle. Many have a reduction in colic after just one or two treatments. Look for a chiropractor who specializes in children’s problems.
TENSION HEADACHE
The headaches that we all get from time to time often are related to the cervical spine in the neck. Known as cervicogenic headaches, these occur when vertebral misalignments cause muscle tightness or spasms. The tension begins in the neck but can radiate through the occipital nerves that rise upward from the base of the skull.
A study that compared patients receiving chiropractic care for tension headaches with those who were treated with the antidepressant amitriptyline showed reduction in both the frequency and pain intensity of these types of headaches. Most important, the chiropractic patients sustained these improvements after the treatment period, unlike patients who were treated with medication.
In a typical treatment, the chiropractor attempts to realign the cervical joints by manipulating the neck and head. The main goals of the treatment, apart from adjusting the vertebrae, are to increase the range of motion, relax the surrounding muscles and decrease pain and inflammation.
People who have only recently started getting headaches often will improve after one or two sessions with a chiropractor. Those who have suffered from headaches for years probably will require multiple treatments before they start to notice a significant improvement.
Also important: The chiropractor will take a detailed history to learn why there is misalignment in the neck. This usually is due to lifestyle issues. For example, many of us look down at our computer monitors, which puts excessive tension on the neck. Raising the monitor to eye level can correct this. Women may be advised to carry a handbag rather than a heavy shoulder bag. Cradling your phone between your neck and shoulder also can cause problems. If you often find yourself doing this, get a headset.
It’s not clear if chiropractic is as effective for migraines, but preliminary research suggests that chiropractic manipulations may affect nerves that control vascular expansion and contraction, a key component of migraines.
EAR INFECTIONS
Some adults and virtually all children accumulate fluids in the eustachian tube, the passage between the throat and middle ear. The fluid is a perfect medium for viruses and bacteria, which can cause otitis media, an infection or inflammation of the middle ear.
Many studies have shown that chiropractic can relieve and prevent ear infections without antibiotics. The treatments, which include chiropractic adjustment and massage of the lymph nodes along the neck and around the ear, help drain excess fluid. The adjustment helps regulate the nervous system, which in turn drains the eustachian tube and promotes long-term drainage.
SINUSITIS
People with chronic sinusitis (inflammation of the mucous membranes in the sinuses) rarely get long-term relief from antibiotics or other types of conventional medicine, such as antihistamines and decongestants. Chiropractic can sometimes relieve all or most of the typical symptoms, such as facial pain and nasal congestion.
People with chronic sinusitis often have a misalignment in the cervical vertebrae. Chiropractic adjustments may help sinuses drain more efficiently. The treatment for sinusitis also includes applying pressure to the sinuses near the eyebrows and on either side of the nose.
REPETITIVE STRESS DISORDERS
Most repetitive stress injuries, including tennis elbow, are caused by tendonitis, an inflammation of the fibrous tissue that connects muscles to bones. Carpal tunnel syndrome, another type of repetitive stress injury, is caused by nerve inflammation in the wrist.
Doctors usually treat these conditions with anti-inflammatory drugs, including steroid injections in severe cases. For carpal tunnel syndrome, surgery to “release” pressure on the nerve is sometimes recommended.
Chiropractic, a more conservative approach, is effective for virtually all types of repetitive stress disorders. Manipulations to realign joints and improve range of motion can reduce pressure on tendons and nerves. The movements also improve lymphatic drainage, which reduces inflammation, improves circulation and accelerates healing.
Scientists have discovered that the spleen, long consigned to the B-list of abdominal organs and known as much for its metaphoric as its physiological value, plays a more important role in the body’s defense system than anyone suspected.
Reporting in the current issue of the journal Science, researchers from Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School describe studies showing that the spleen is a reservoir for huge numbers of immune cells called monocytes, and that in the event of a serious trauma to the body like a heart attack, gashing wound or microbial invasion, the spleen will disgorge those monocyte multitudes into the bloodstream to tackle the crisis.
“The parallel in military terms is a standing army,” said Matthias Nahrendorf, an author of the report. “You don’t want to have to recruit an entire fighting force from the ground up every time you need it.”
That researchers are only now discovering a major feature of a rather large organ they have been studying for at least 2,000 years demonstrates yet again that there is nothing so foreign as the place we call home.
“Often, if you come across something in the body that seems like a big deal, you think, ‘Why didn’t anybody check this before?’ ” Dr. Nahrendorf said. “But the more you learn, the more you realize that we’re just scratching on the surface of life. We don’t know the whole story about anything.”
Dr. Nahrendorf, with Filip K. Swirski, Mikael J. Pittet and a dozen other colleagues, performed the initial studies using mice, but the scientists suspect the results will apply to humans as well.
Ulrich H. von Andrian, an immunologist at Harvard Medical School who was not involved with the research, agreed that the findings were a surprise. “If one had to guess the source of these cells, one would have thought it likely that they were mobilized from the bone marrow rather than from the spleen,” he said. “The discovery adds another layer of complexity not previously associated with that organ.”
The latest work also sounds a cautionary note against underestimating a body part or dismissing it as vestigial, expendable or past its prime. In an accompanying essay, Ting Jia and Eric G. Pamer of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center admit that “the spleen lacks the gravitas of neighboring organs” like the liver or the stomach “because we can survive without it.”
Spleens can rupture during contact sports, say, or in a motorcycle accident, at which point surgeons have no choice.
“It’s such a vascularized organ, and the risk of big-time hemorrhaging is so great, that if the spleen ruptures, it’s a surgical emergency,” said James N. George, a hematologist with the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center. “You have to remove it.”
The new findings in no way counter the necessity of excising a ruptured spleen, the researchers said, but they do suggest that the loss of the organ is more than a mere “inconvenience,” as it has often been depicted, and could help explain previous reports showing an enhanced risk of early death among people who have undergone splenectomies.
In one study that appeared in The Lancet in 1977, for example, researchers compared a group of 740 American veterans of World War II who had had their spleens removed as a result of battle injuries with a similar size sample of veterans who had suffered other war injuries but had kept their spleens. The splenectomized men, the researchers found, were twice as likely to die of cardiovascular disease as were the veterans in the control group. All of which means that despleening should be diligently guarded against, particularly among our little sports warriors, perhaps through the wearing of appropriate protective gear.
Researchers cite other cases in which organs were presumed to be so dispensable that they could be removed “prophylactically” — often with unfortunate outcomes. In recent years, for example, many older women undergoing hysterectomies have been advised to have their healthy ovaries removed at the same time, the rationale being: if you are past your childbearing years, why hang on to reproductive organs that might turn cancerous and kill you? Yet follow-up surveys have shown that women who underwent elective ovariectomy had a heightened risk of dying during a given study period, were more susceptible to heart disease and lung cancer and were twice as likely to develop Parkinson’s disease compared with women who had kept their ovaries. “Evolution has an edge on us,” Dr. Nahrendorf said. “I would be very careful about saying, ‘You don’t need this organ, get rid of it.’ ”
Another reason to esteem the spleen — a purplish, fist-size, five-ounce organ in the upper left quadrant of the abdominal cavity, just behind the stomach and under the diaphragm — is its illustrious medical and poetic history. Galen considered the spleen to be a source of one of the four bodily humors, specifically the black bile associated with irritable, melancholic cranks. In his poem, “Spleen,” Charles Baudelaire describes a young narrator so weary and despondent, unresponsive even to beautiful women and jesting men, that it is as if the “green waters of Lethe” fills his veins.
More recently, researchers determined that the spleen is like an elaborate wetlands, a Mississippi bayou for filtering and freshening the blood. In other organs, blood flows through an interconnected mesh of increasingly narrow arteries, veins and capillaries. The spleen, by contrast, has a so-called noncapillary circulatory system: as the blood flows in, it is dumped into puddle-like sinusoids, and to get back out it must squeeze between cells. That dumping and squeezing help filter out blood-borne parasites, aging blood cells too brittle for compression and the little oxidized pellets, the BB’s, with which red blood cells are often pocked. The spleen has often been called a graveyard for red blood cells, but it is more of a recycling center, for the iron and other components are plucked out of the cells and used to stock new hemoglobin cages.
Filtration, cannibalization, and now — serious monocyte cultivation. In the new study, the researchers began by looking at monocytes, the largest of the body’s white blood cells. “It was recognized that these cells are the major repair workers after a heart attack,” Dr. Nahrendorf said. “They remove dead muscle cells, they start rebuilding stable scar tissue, they stimulate the generation of new blood vessels.”
The cells make haste to cut and paste. “Within 24 hours after a myocardial infarction,” Dr. Nahrendorf said, “there are millions of monocytes” congregating around the broken heart. All of which would seem sensible, desirable, an excellent display of emergency preparedness, except that Dr. Nahrendorf and his principal colleagues were puzzled by one big unknown: Where did the rapid response team come from? The numbers circulating in the blood were simply too low. The researchers searched one organ after another, until they checked the spleen and found the monocytic mother lode. “The numbers there were huge, 10 times higher than what was in the bloodstream,” Dr. Nahrendorf said.
By the researchers’ reckoning, monocytes, like all blood cells, are born in the bone marrow and at some point migrate to the spleen, lured by cues yet to be identified. They sit and wait, a sessile bunch, but when aroused by such chemical signatures of damage as angiotensin, the cells surge forth without hesitation, a reaction the researchers hope someday to understand well enough to recapitulate at will. Hail to the chief, hail to the queen and hail to the monocytes residing in my spleen.
Progressive Resistance Strength Training May Help Improve Physical Function in Older Adults
July 28, 2009 — Progressive resistance strength training (PRT) may
improve physical function in older adults, according to the results of a
systematic review reported online in the July 8 issue of Cochrane
Database of Systematic Reviews.
“Muscle weakness in old age is associated with physical function
decline,” write Dr. Chiung-ju Liu, from Indiana University at
Indianapolis, and Dr. Nancy K. Latham, from the School of Public Health,
Boston University in Boston, Massachusetts. “…PRT exercises are
designed to increase strength.”
The goals of this review were to evaluate the effects of PRT on older
people and to identify adverse events. The reviewers searched the
Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialized Register to
March 2007; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The
Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 2); MEDLINE from 1966 to May 1, 2008;
EMBASE from 1980 to February 6, 2007; CINAHL from 1982 to July 1, 2007;
and 2 other electronic databases. In addition, the reviewers searched
bibliographies of identified articles, reviewed abstracts from
conference proceedings, and contacted investigators of the original studies.
Criteria for inclusion of studies in the review were randomized
controlled trials of PRT in older participants that evaluated and
reported on physical outcomes. Both review authors independently
identified trials meeting selection criteria, evaluated the methodologic
quality of the trials, and extracted data to be pooled when appropriate.
The reviewers identified 121 trials that met selection criteria. These
enrolled a total of 6700 participants, and in most trials, PRT was given
at high intensity 2 to 3 times per week. PRT was associated with a
small, significant improvement in physical ability (33 trials, 2172
participants; standardized mean differences [SMD], 0.14; 95% confidence
interval [CI], 0.05 – 0.22).
There were also improvements in measures of functional limitation. For
example, gait speed improved modestly (24 trials, 1179 participants; MD,
0.08 meters per second; 95% CI, 0.04 – 0.12), and ability to get out of
a chair showed moderate to large improvements (11 trials, 384
participants; SMD, -0.94; 95% CI, -1.49 to -0.38). Furthermore, there
was a large positive effect of PRT on muscle strength (73 trials, 3059
participants; SMD, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.67 – 1.00).
Decreased pain after PRT was reported in 6 trials enrolling a total of
503 participants with osteoarthritis (SMD, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.48 to
-0.13). However, 10 other trials enrolling a total of 587 participants
provided no evidence that PRT had any effect on bodily pain.
In most trials, adverse events were poorly recorded. However, many of
the studies that prospectively defined and monitored adverse events
showed that most of these were musculoskeletal complaints including
joint pain and muscle soreness. Serious adverse events were rare
overall, and none were directly attributed to the exercise program.
“This review provides evidence that PRT is an effective intervention for
improving physical functioning in older people, including improving
strength and the performance of some simple and complex activities,” the
review authors write. “However, some caution is needed with transferring
these exercises for use with clinical populations because adverse events
are not adequately reported.”
Limitations of the review include high dropout rates in some of the
included trials, generally poor methodologic quality, heterogeneity in
the data, and low frequency of reporting any monitoring for adverse events.
“Doing PRT two to three times a week can improve physical function in
older adults, including reducing physical disability, some functional
limitations (i.e. balance, gait speed, timed walk, timed ‘up-and-go’,
chair rise; and climbing stairs) and muscle weakness in older people,”
the review authors conclude. “Therefore, it would appear to be an
appropriate intervention for many older people to improve performance of
some simple physical tasks. The training also shows a reduction in pain
in people with osteoarthritis. “
The National Institute of Disability and Rehabilitation Research
provided a postdoctoral fellowship to the first review author through
Boston University and Switzer research. The second review author
received support from the National Institute of Aging and through a
Pepper Center Trainee award from Boston Pepper Center funded by the
National Institute of Aging.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Published online July 8, 2009.
This is an excerpt from an email I received from a friend I have not talked to in a long time. Here is my response as well.
so what made you become a chiropractor? i’ve always been afraid of them. since youre an expert, is it true, once you go to be adjusted, its a lifetime commitment?
I first wanted to be a Chiropractor during my time in undergrad as a personal trainer. What it stood for made sense in we believe the power that made the body can heal the body and by removing blockages in the body we can help it heal naturally without drugs or surgery. It is how the body is intended to heal.
Good health is a lifetime commitment. Most people do not realize there are certain dis-ease processes going on without our knowledge until they show up in the body as symptoms. In fact, certain diseases do not present sometimes until they are either terminal (cancer) or the person dies (heart attack). Our bodies break down due to excessive stress to our systems. We are built to handle stress and even thrive off of certain types of stress to make our bodies stronger. However in this age, we no longer have healthy diets, we eat processed and refined foods that make our digestive systems work overtime, we work too much, we don’t exercise enough, and we don’t sleep enough. Sometimes we even throw in a little bit of physical trauma. We constantly run our bodies in overdrive 24/7. After some time, our bodies begin to break down and we get sick, put undue strain on our relationships in our lives, and simply put, no longer function normally.
Getting adjusted is only the tip of the iceberg when you go to a GOOD Chiropractor. I emphasize good because I feel there are a lot out there that only want to adjust you and send you on your way. To be a true holistic Doctor, they must actually take into consideration all these other factors.
The reason that the perception of once you go, you have to keep going sticks is that the reasons are not explained why. What I mentioned before states that we are over stressed all the time. When you overload the system constantly without change, you have to be treated more often. If you start eating healthier, exercising, reducing your stress, you don’t need to be treated as often.
This is a sad day for our children.
In Health,
Dr Andy
by Sandy Maple Jun 30th 2009 3:00PM
Categories: Health & safety, Weird but true
Sam’s Club targets children with ill-advised pharmacy promotion. Image: Pam Roth/sxc.huCompetition in the pharmacy business must be pretty tough these days. In order to get your business, pharmacies have begun promoting themselves like never before. These efforts to lure customers are not always met with approval. Like when some pharmacy chains started giving away free antibiotics and insinuating that the drug could be used to help fight cold and flu viruses. Experts worried that this type of promotion might send consumers the wrong message about the proper use of antibiotics.
If experts are worried about pharmacies handing out prescription drugs like candy, I wonder how they would feel about a pharmacy that hands out candy like prescription drugs. That is exactly what a Sam’s Club pharmacy in Salisbury, Maryland was doing last week.
Sams’ Club is a membership store and has a checkpoint at the entry where shoppers must show their identification before entering. But at this particular store, employees weren’t just checking member cards, they were also promoting the in-store pharmacy by giving children prescription medicine bottles filled with candy.
That’s right, they stuffed Tootsie Rolls and Dots into real prescription bottles with real prescription labels and handed them out to children. I think this takes the prize for sending the wrong message about prescription medication.
After complaints about the promotion, Sam’s Club dropped it and issued an apology. Deeming it an “isolated incident,” Sam’s Club Corporate Communications Manager Susan Koehler promised it would never happen again.
It would seem that this was a case of a rogue pharmacy department trying to be clever without corporate approval. But does it really take a degree in marketing communications to recognize the sheer stupidity of this idea?
Moms are continuously challenged to treat themselves with the same care and concern they selflessly dedicate to their children, their spouse and countless others. Finding the time is one of the biggest challenges, but it’s an absolute necessity for your sake and the sake of your loved ones. Here are four ways to stay healthy – physically and emotionally – in the midst of the chaos:
Make the world your gym. This might sound strange, but it’s great advice, especially when you’re running around with your head cut off and can’t possibly see yourself making it the gym for an hour a day, three or four days a week. At home, you can increase your metabolism (which promotes weight loss) and tone your muscles with simple body-resistance exercises (push-ups, pull-ups, lunges, squats, etc.) in as little as 10-15 minutes a day. If you’re with the kids at a park, bring a few cones and set up a sprint course for you (and them) to run. Even riding the swings can be a heart-pumping, muscle-toning activity.
Plan ahead – way ahead. This is a great suggestion in general, but with respect to ensuring proper nutrition for you and your family, it’s essential. Why wait until the last minute and end up rushing to prepare breakfast, get lunches ready or whip up dinner after work? To combat this all-too-common trend, plan weekly meals. On the weekends, shop for the week, paying particular attention to purchasing a variety of healthy, easy-to-prepare foods you can turn into quick meals. Anything that can be prepared beforehand and/or in large quantities is perfect – leftovers are a great way to ensure good meals during the hectic week.
Give yourself a break. Sometimes finding time to do nothing is just as important as finding time to exercise, eat right or do something. Just because you’ve finally found an “extra” 20 minutes in your day doesn’t necessarily mean you’ve got to fill it with an activity. Taking a few moments to unwind, de-stress and get away from it all can do wonders. If the kids are asleep or otherwise occupied, kick off your shoes and relax in your favorite chair with soft music and aromatherapy (or complete silence, if that’s possible); if the house is still bustling, a casual walk around the block can be just as freeing.
Put yourself on your list of priorities. One of the very qualities that makes moms so special – selflessness – can also be their downfall. To avoid this, make sure you’re on your priority list (and not at the bottom); this doesn’t mean being selfish or putting yourself ahead of your children or your other responsibilities; it’s really about identifying when you need your time – and then taking it without feeling guilty. If you’re convinced that sacrificing your own health and wellness to ensure the same for your children is acceptable, think of it this way: By giving to yourself, you’ll be giving to them, too.
Here are a few fun facts that a fellow chiropractor of mine had researched and I find very interesting. I thought you would too.
Dr Andy
WATER
1) 75% of Americans are chronically dehydrated. (Likely applies to half world pop.)
2) Even MILD dehydration will slow down one’s metabolism as much as 3%.
3) One glass of water shut down midnight hunger pangs for almost 100% of the dieters studied in
a University of Washington study.
4) Lack of water, the #1 trigger of daytime fatigue.
5) Preliminary research indicates that 8-10 glasses of water a day could significantly ease back and
joint pain for up to 80% of suffers.
6) A mere 2% drop in body water can trigger fuzzy short-term memory, trouble with basic math, and
difficulty focusing on the computer screen or on a printed page.
7) Drinking 5 glasses of water daily decreases the risk of colon cancer by 45%, the risk of breast
cancer by 79%, and one is 50% less likely to develop bladder cancer.
Are you drinking the amount of water you should everyday?
COKE
1) In many states the highway patrol carries two gallons of Coke in the trunk of their vehicles to
remove blood from the highway after a car accident.
2) You can put a T-bone steak in a bowl of Coke and it will be gone in two days.
3) To clean a toilet: Pour a can of Coca-Cola into the toilet bowl and let the “real thing” sit for one
hour, then flush clean. The citric acid in Coke removes stains from vitreous china.
4) To remove rust spots from chrome car bumpers: Rub the bumper with a crumpled up piece of
Reynolds wrap aluminum foil dipped in Coca-Cola.
5) To clean corrosion from car battery terminals: Pour a can of Coca-Cola over the terminals to
bubble away the corrosion.
6) The active ingredient in Coke is phosphoric acid. Its ph is 2.8. It will dissolve a nail in about 4 days.
7) To carry Coca-Cola syrup (the concentrate) the commercial truck must use the hazardous material
place cards reserved for highly corrosive materials.
Still Want to Drink Up?
In 2005, the pharmaceutical company Biostratum, Inc. made a mistake — they invested millions of dollars into developing a drug, only to discover that the active ingredient, pyridoxamine, was a common, naturally occurring substance that has been sold for decades at low cost.
Biostratum responded by asking the U.S. FDA to declare supplements containing pyridoxamine “adulterated,” and effectively ban anyone but Biostratum from selling pyridoxamine. Earlier this year the FDA agreed to ban companies from selling pyridoxamine as a dietary supplement.
The FDA’s comment on the decision specifically says, “To allow such an article to be marketed as a dietary supplement would not be fair to the pharmaceutical company that brought, or intends to bring, the drug to market.”
Apparently, they were not as concerned about fairness to consumers.
This is hardly the first time the FDA has attacked naturally occurring substances. The FDA has banned information about scientifically proven health benefits of cherries from appearing on Web sites. And for years, the FDA barred health claims about the benefits of omega-3 fats for heart, cancer, depression, body pain, and various other conditions until a drug company paid a great deal of money to go through the approval process.
In the case of pyridoxamine, the FDA did not act out of concern for public safety. This is about a profit-seeking corporation taking advantage of corruption in what is supposed to be a public health organization.
Sources:
 |
Dr. Mercola’s Comments: |
Pyridoxamine is one form of the vitamin B6. It is an important nutrient for helping your body process carbohydrates, support your nervous system activity and prevent homocysteine, which has been linked to increased risk of heart disease, from building up in your blood.
This substance has long been sold over-the-counter as a dietary supplement, but the FDA abruptly put a stop to that in January 2009. Their reasoning has nothing to do with safety, but rather is firmly based on protecting a drug company’s investment.
As stated above, the FDA actually said:
“To allow such an article to be marketed as a dietary supplement would not be fair to the pharmaceutical company that brought, or intends to bring, the drug to market.”
What is happening here is a blatant example of the FDA protecting the hand that feeds it. It is now essentially banning vitamin B6 in the form of pyridoxamine, and reserving it to be exclusively distributed by the drugmaker Biostratum, Inc.
If the FDA really wants to speak about being fair, why are they not worried about being fair to the supplement makers who already distribute this product … or the people who will have their inexpensive supply of this vitamin taken away?
Why?
Because the FDA and U.S. government are loaded with people trying to eliminate all competition for the drug companies, who financially support the FDA in the form of user fees for drug approval.
This Type of Injustice Has Happened Many Times Before
To get a feeling of who the FDA is really looking out for, you need look no further than the recent estriol debacle.
Estriol is a bioidentical hormone that is sometimes used in hormone replacement therapy drugs, available through compounding pharmacies. However, estriol is not an FDA-approved drug, and according to the FDA estriol “has not been shown to be safe and effective for the uses for which it is being prescribed.”
Therefore, the FDA has proposed to allow estriol-containing prescriptions to be filled only if accompanied by an Investigational New Drug (IND) application, stating that the use of INDs is “routine,” and therefore shouldn’t cause any major inconvenience or limitation on estriol’s use, if and when a physician believes it’s in his patient’s best interest.
However, the IND places a significant financial burden on physicians, most notably by requiring them to submit applications to an Institutional Review Board (IRB). Submitting necessary documentation and contracting for a private IRB can easily cost between $10,000 and $25,000 and can take months.
So the process will effectively ban most physicians from prescribing estriol, which is a much safer, natural alternative to synthetic hormones.
This news is frustrating in and of itself, and certainly highlights the need for less government involvement in health care. But what happened next is nothing short of infuriating.
Pipex Therapeutics is now seeking approval for Trimesta, a knock-off of natural estriol, and the FDA is in the process of considering the approval!
Clearly, the FDA was never concerned with estriol being used in an unsafe manner — they were concerned that their drug-company buddies were not getting their fair share of the profits.
Is The FDA Your Protector – or a Threat to Your Health Freedom?
Examples like this one and the latest pyridoxamine scandal are red flags that the U.S. FDA is not there to protect you, or your health freedom.
You may not be aware, but in June 2007 the FDA announced new standards for dietary supplements that were intended to improve consumer safety.
In reality, the 800-page rule surrounds the dietary supplement industry with regulations and requirements in excess of those imposed on the drug industry, and up to 50 percent of small companies will simply not be able to afford to comply.
Even before this ruling, supplement makers were (and still are) limited from making health claims (this is reserved only for drugs).
Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it?
But consider that it’s still illegal even in cases where the claims have been clearly proven — so cherry growers cannot legally say that tart cherries may do more good than aspirin or other anti-inflammatory drugs when it comes to pain relief, even though studies back them up.
This is why the American Association for Health Freedom (AAHF) states that the FDA “ignores first amendment protections and censors the communication of valid scientific information.” They continue:
“The agency seems to have lost sight of its mandate to protect the public and has instead come to see itself as the guardian of corporate interests.”
The FDA is clearly censoring your right to know about, and purchase, foods and supplements that can help you stay healthy and prevent disease. At the same time, they are allowing dangerous drugs and consumer products to remain on the market and be sold and aggressively advertised as safe.
Even the FDA has admitted to its shortcomings and in a report said:
• “The FDA cannot fulfill its mission because its scientific base… is weak….”
• “The FDA cannot fulfill its mission because its scientific workforce does not have sufficient capacity and capability.”
• “FDA does not have the capacity to ensure the safety of food for the nation.”
• “The development of medical products based on ‘new science’ cannot adequately be regulated by the FDA.”
You Can Sign a Petition to Help
The AAHF is leading a campaign to reform the FDA, and your help is urgently needed, as a large number of signatures are required to compel Congressional Action.
So if you believe reforming the FDA is a worthy cause, please sign the petition now, and encourage your friends and family to do so also.
Congress already knows the FDA represents a serious problem. This petition will help move them to take the urgent action required to invoke much-needed positive change.
In January of this year, Oprah Winfrey invited Suzanne Somers on her show to talk about health tips. The 62-year-old actress uses bio-identical estrogen cream and progesterone on her other arm two weeks a month.
According to Somers, the bio-identical hormones are identical to the ones created by the human body, unlike conventional hormones, which are made from mare’s urine.
The result has been a media firestorm condemning both Somers and Oprah, including the hit piece in Newsweek linked below. The authors of the piece, Weston Kosova and Pat Wingert, argue that bio-identical hormones are just as synthetic as conventional hormones — although they don’t much discuss the fact that conventional hormones are actually different from the 17-beta-estradiol made by your body, while the bio-identical hormones are 17-beta-estradiol itself.
The real reason for the attacks on bio-identical hormones?
As Somers points out, many doctors, scientists and media figures make a good deal of money off of the pharmaceutical industry.
And one thing you won’t see mentioned in the Newsweek article is the fact that Pat Wingert is the co-author of a pharmaceutically biased book on hormones and menopause, and that Newsweek is heavily funded by pharmaceutical companies.
This resembles an incident a few years ago when the cattle industry actually sued Oprah Winfrey just for talking about Mad Cow Disease.
Sources:
|
Dr. Mercola’s Comments: |
The authors of this Newsweek article clearly had a bone to pick with alternative medicine of all kinds. Newsweek does not just ridicule Suzanne Somers for her endorsement of bioidentical hormones, they blast Jenny McCarthy’s stance on vaccine adjuvants being a culprit in causing autism, and even criticize Dr. Christiane Northrup for warning Oprah’s audience of the HPV vaccine and recommending dietary and lifestyle changes to enhance their natural immunity instead. In their article they counter this advice with the statement,
“It is true that of the millions of women who have received the vaccine, 32 have died in the days or weeks afterward. But in each case, the Centers for Disease Control and the Food and Drug Administration investigated the deaths and found that they were coincidental and were not related to the shot.”
This is the kind of blanket dismissal one could only expect from those who have not bothered to do any serious investigations of their own on a topic.
And as for the idea that your thoughts and beliefs may have the slightest to do with your physical health? Ridiculous, according to these two authors.
Apparently they’ve never heard of epigenetics.
Dr. Bruce Lipton, a forerunner in the field of epigenetics and The New Biology, has carefully documented how emotions are one of the most important factors in your health. According to his research, the controlling factor in deciding what your genes express — in deciding how your future health will play out — is not your genes, your family history or even the strength of your immune system. It is YOUR MIND.
These are the kind of myopic viewpoints you have to contend with when dealing with conventional medicine, big pharma, and their mouthpieces. But that doesn’t mean they’re any more right, or any less ridiculous, than the people and alternative strategies they try to dismiss with little more than parroted catch-phrases.
Is an Organized Smear Campaign Underway?
Now, Oprah has been targeted by big industries before, such as when she dared talk about Mad Cow disease on her show – a topic that brought her a lawsuit by the meat industry.
But Oprah is not the only one in the crosshairs of what can only be described as an organized smear campaign against alternative medicine.
There’s a disturbing trend taking shape, with a recent onslaught of media articles seeking to put a bad spin on various complementary, alternative medicine and natural medicine options. The misinformation campaign is shifting into higher gear. Is it a very deliberate and concerted media strategy?
Could there be any coincidence that this is all occurring just as the government is preparing health care reform? What would happen If much of alternative medicine was determined illegal?
Robert Zieve, MD, who gave me many of these links, believes that it smells like a witch hunt.
Recent headlines include:
- Contaminants lurk in many ‘natural’ products. Tests find some herbal supplements may be doing more harm than good.
- Cancer patients turning to alternative remedies. 60 percent seek natural ‘cures’ despite warnings from doctors.
- Doctors eager to try ‘mystical mumbo jumbo’. Alternative remedies gain acceptance despite lack of evidence.
- Many ‘natural’ products make dubious claims. A product with “natural” ingredients may be no better for you than one with artificial ingredients, but a lot of us still trust advertisements that suggest as much.
- Reality check on supplements, remedies. Americans increasingly turn to alternative medicine. But does it really help?
- $2.5 Billion spent, no alternative cures found. Big government-funded studies show most work no better than placebos.
- Alternative heart disease treatment probed. Government investigating whether patients were told enough about risks.
Dr. Deepak Chopra responded to the Oprah bashing with this Alternet article, where he states,
“The criticism the medical establishment is directing at Oprah through this article only exposes their own frustration in having squandered their credibility with the public. They hope that if they can successfully attack Oprah’s immense credibility, then they can magically get some of that credibility back for themselves. However, if people still trusted the health care industry to act in their best interest the way they did decades ago, then it would be unnecessary to brand Oprah for “crazy talk” simply because she occasionally provides a forum for ideas outside of mainstream medicine.
The medical profession is burdened with a host of problems that Oprah addresses with more candor and force than the AMA. She promotes wellness and prevention, two areas that drastically need improvement. She brings up creative solutions to problems that medical science is baffled by, such as the healing response itself and the role of subjectivity in patient response. These are issues that few M.D.s are willing to explore, yet she has done so for decades.
… What this tells me is that medicine needs Oprah and other patient advocates who are demanding that official medicine heal itself. To accuse them of lacking medical credibility is a red herring. Patients aren’t supposed to know more than their physicians. The fact that they often do, at least insofar as alternative treatment goes, is both a sign of hope and cause for distress.”
AP – Zicam Cold Remedy nasal gel is shown in Boston Tuesday, June 16, 2009. The Food and Drug Administration … ` WASHINGTON – Consumers should stop using Zicam Cold Remedy nasal gel and related products because they can permanently damage the sense of smell, federal health regulators said.
The over-the-counter products contain zinc, an ingredient scientists say may damage nerves in the nose needed for smell. The other products affected by the Food and Drug Administration’s announcement Tuesday are adult and kid-size Zicam Cold Remedy Nasal Swabs.
The FDA says about 130 consumers have reported a loss of smell after using Matrixx Initiatives‘ Zicam products since 1999. Shares of the Scottsdale, Ariz.-based company plunged to a 52-week low after the FDA announcement, losing more than half their value.
“Loss of the sense of smell is potentially life threatening and may be permanent,” said Dr. Charles Lee, of FDA’s compliance division. “People without the sense of smell may not be able to detect dangerous life situations, such as gas leaks or something burning in the house.”
Matrixx defended the safety of its products, but said late Tuesday it will withdraw Zicam Cold Remedy Swabs and Zicam Cold Remedy Gel from the market.
The FDA said Zicam Cold Remedy was never formally approved because it is part of a small group of remedies that are not required to undergo federal review before launching. Known as homeopathic products, the formulations often contain herbs, minerals and flowers.
A warning letter issued to Matrixx on Tuesday asked the company to stop marketing its zinc-based products, but the agency did not issue a formal recall. Instead, regulators said Matrixx would have to submit safety and effectiveness data on the drug.
“The next step, if they wish to continue marketing Zicam intranasal zinc products, is for them to come in and seek FDA approval,” said Deborah Autor, director of FDA’s drug compliance division.
The agency is requiring formal approval now because of the product’s safety issues, she added.
“It won’t bring my smell back, but at least I feel like there’s some justice that’s starting to take place,” said David Richardson, of Greensboro, N.C., who lost his sense of smell after taking Zicam for a cold in 2005. He said he hopes the product will be formally banned.
Medical records appear to support Richardson’s claim that his lost sense of smell was linked to using Zicam.
The global market for homeopathic drugs is about $200 million per year, according to the American Association of Homeopathic Pharmacists. The group’s members include companies like Nutraceutical International Corp. and Natural Health Supply.
Matrixx has settled hundreds of lawsuits connected with Zicam in recent years, but says on its Web site: “No plaintiff has ever won a court case, because there is no known causal link between the use of Zicam Cold Remedy nasal gel and impairment of smell.”
The company said in a statement Tuesday that the safety of Zicam Cold Remedy is “supported by the cumulative science and has been confirmed by a multidisciplinary panel of scientists.” Matrixx said it will comply with the FDA’s requirements, but will seek a meeting with the agency to “vigorously defend its scientific data.”
But government scientists say they are unaware of any data supporting Zicam’s labeling, which claims the drug reduces cold symptoms, including “sore throat, stuffy nose, sneezing, coughing and congestion.”
The products accounted for about 40 percent of Matrixx’s $111.6 million in sales last year.
Health officials said they have asked Matrixx executives to turn over more than 800 consumer complaints concerning lost smell that the company has on file. A 2007 law began requiring manufacturers to report such problems, but FDA regulators declined to say Tuesday whether the company broke the law.
The 130 reports received by the FDA came entirely from physicians and patients, not the manufacturer.
Regulators said the relatively small number of complaints accounted for the agency’s lengthy investigation.
“FDA doesn’t take action against drug products without evaluating all of the circumstances surrounding the issues with the product,” Lee said.
Shares of Matrixx Initiatives Inc. plummeted $13.46, or 70 percent, to $5.78 Tuesday. The company said based on the FDA’s recommendation, consumers should discard any unused product or contact Zicam at 1-877-942-2626 or http://www.zicam.com to request a refund.
