My readers know well that I do not support Big Pharma. Yes, I can see you smiling now, thinking that’s the biggest understatement since Noah said ‘it looks like rain’! The truth is I am strongly against the drug companies and I support the use of very few pharmaceuticals.
I advocate investing some time and effort in becoming better informed about health and then taking action to follow a healthy lifestyle once you really do know what that is. Most drugs are destructive of health and a healthy person has no need for them, so my position is consistent with experience.
Even when it comes to a serious infection like the one caused by HIV and even if it develops into AIDS, I believe the best strategy will always be based on a thoroughly cleansed system, significant immune system support with nutraceuticals and a truely healthy lifestyle, including a positive mental attitude, strenuous exercise, sufficient quality sleep, balanced and effective nutrition, plenty of pure water, controlled direct sunlight exposure, meaningful social and interpersonal support, a sense of purpose in life, and the practice of sensible safety.
The sad fact is that too many people, either willfully or in ignorance, fail to follow the above healthy living practices. When it comes to HIV/AIDS the need to adopt a healthy lifestyle is urgent and paramount, yet many do not. The result is very high risk of serious deterioration, sooner and swifter.
It doesn’t matter how a person becomes infected with HIV. Whether it is due to engaging in high-risk activities such as unprotected sex with infected partners, being born to an infected mother or through accidental contamination by health professionals in clinical settings, the need to take appropriate action is the same.
For those who follow the orthodox treatment methods there tends to be a significant and increasing reliance on potent drugs. As anti-drugs as I am, HIV infection and AIDS are conditions where I acknowledge that drugs will probably be necessary. Those following the orthodox route will tend to need them earlier and in greater number and strength.
I followed the activities of Dr Mathias Rath in Africa where he promoted the use of natural therapies over anti-viral drugs with interest. In an earlier article I said that "in the case of dealing with seriously life threatening viral illnesses such as AIDS, the cost-benefit analysis currently favors use of the drugs." By the time AIDS has developed it appears that few people can follow a sufficiently healthy lifestyle, having not done so for years, and the drugs are indeed required.
So am I ready to capitulate? Have I given in to the exploitation by Big Pharma after all? Absolutely not.
If and when a person must use drugs, or indeed if they follow an orthodox approach and are prescibed anti-virals early, then it is important that they have ample access to them. It is unsatisfactory to scrimp and under-dose because of the exhorbitant cost of the drugs.
Happily there is a good solution for those who need these HIV/AIDS drugs. A web-based, Canadian business has sourced highest quality generics from licensed and approved overseas manufacturing plants and can supply them at substantial savings. They are called Aids-Drugs-Online.com.
This is very good news for those who need these drugs. It means that people who might otherwise not have been able to afford treatment can do so. It means that those who might not have been able to pay for enough medicine to achieve maximally effective treatment can do so. And more importantly than many might realize, it allows an increased sense of control in the hands of the person needing the treatment and this has real benefits.
If you do happen to need medication to assist with treatment of HIV/AIDS then I recommend you visit Aids Drugs Online today.
I recently read something in a newsletter that seemed to capture my own thoughts exactly. It is about the potential negative impact of genetically modified (GM) foods on health. It was written by Jenny Thompsom of the Health Sciences Institute. Here it is:
Proponents of genetically modified (GM) foods often characterize fears about these crops as "unfounded" and "unscientific."
Welcome to "founded" and "scientific."
Australian government researchers developed a plan that looked good on paper. The common bean contains a protein that inhibits an enzyme that pea weevils need to digest starch. So (the thinking went) just genetically modify pea plants with the bean protein and you’ve got a weevil-resistant pea plant. Early trials showed that the genetic change was effective in controlling the pea weevil.
But there was one small problem. When scientists for CSIRO (Australia’s national research organization) tested the GM peas on mice, the peas triggered allergic lung damage. The same results occurred with both cooked and uncooked peas. Further investigation showed that the structure of the bean protein was slightly different when it was expressed in the pea. The CSIRO team speculates that this minor difference may be the factor that caused the lung damage.
The result: The ten-year program to develop a GM weevil-resistant pea plant has been discontinued. No tests on humans are planned.
In an article in the journal New Scientist, Jeremy Tager (a Greenpeace advocate of GM monitoring) noted that if a private company had been developing the new GM pea plant, the results of the mouse study would probably never have been reported.
Source: "GM Pea Causes Allergic Damage in Mice" Emma Young, New Scientist, 11/21/05, Newscientist.com
I would like to highlight the observation that it was only a very minute change, one that advanced scientists could not predict would have any negative effects, that had devestating consequences for the laboratory mice. GM foods are all potentially equally dangerous to humans. The nature of the impact may be much slower to be noticed than the effect on the mice, but there is absolutely no way at all that any scientists can be sure that ill effects won’t occur.
We already live in a dangerous chemical world, full of industrial chemicals and drugs. These do have a negative impact on human health. You would be hard pressed to find a single individual living in Western society that doesn’t have chemicals in their blood stream that should not be there. Do we really need to compound the situation with exposure to GM foods? I firmly believe the answer is no. Our bodies are burdened enough already.
This update is provided by the dedicated health campaigner Stephen Fox. He is certainly in a position to let everyone know what’s happening because Stephen is the petitioner in this matter. Even if you are already conversant with what is happening, please read the important message at the foot of this article. Now it’s over to Stephen.
DISCUSSION DRAFT and COMMENTARY ON BILL FOR BANNING ASPARTAME IN NEW MEXICO
STATUTORY AUTHORITY, CONTEXT, AND LOCATION FOR ADDED LANGUAGE:
NMSA 25-2-10 is clear on this matter: "a food shall be deemed to be adulterated if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health," and the responsibility of the Attorney General or the District Attorneys, to institute prosecution is made clear also, in NM 25-2-7.
This is made further clear in NMSA 25-2-13: "Any poisonous or deleterious substance added to any food, except where such substance is required in the production thereof….shall be deemed to be unsafe."
ADDED LANGUAGE: It is the sense of the Legislature that it is imperative for human health in New Mexico to declare forthwith that the artificial sweetener, aspartame and all of its trade names, because of the proven effects of its neurotoxic and carcinogenic metabolites, is a poisonous and deleterious food additive and adulterant, and as such will be prohibited from sale in New Mexico.
The Legislature also finds that federal authorities have not intended to or expressed an intention to occupy and preempt the areas of concern herein, regarding prohibiting toxic, neurotoxic, carcinogenic, poisonous, and deleterious food additives, and that therefore, the legislature may take such an action regarding a prohibition of the sale of aspartame-containing products, and all of their trade names, in order to protect and ensure public health and safety for all New Mexicans.
News on the Legislature: Governor could ban Aspartame/Formaldehyde in 2006; Bill by Senator Ortiz y Pino
The artificial sweetener, Aspartame, is a carcinogenic neurotoxin since one of its metabolites is formaldehyde. The recent Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology’s study proves it to cause 6 kinds of cancer: this report was posted on the National Institute of Health website in November 2005. Physicians and plaintiff’s lawyers have been excoriating aspartame’s carcinogenicity since the 70’s. The FDA refuses to rescind its approval, so aspartame is found in coffee sweeteners, "diet" beverages, "low-fat" yogurt, "sugarless" gum — a total of 6000 products consumed by 70% of Americans and 40% of our children.
On January 3, the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board postponed the 5 day hearing, originally scheduled for July 06, till January 07, because they were still waiting for the Attorney General’s Opinion they had requested November 7, as is also the NM Pharmacy Board, which requested it November 14 [Aspartame is in over 500 children’s medications; I have asked the Pharmacy Board for a ban in order to protect New Mexico’s children].
Other Attorneys General, particularly Bill Lockyer of California, Eliot Spitzer of New York, and Mike Hatch of Minnesota, comprehend the level of consumer protection necessary to protect health. Lockyer is suing 9 mega fast food corporations to require labeling every bag of French fries stating: "This product contains a chemical which is known to the state of California to cause cancer." Heating potato starch to 400 degrees turns it to carcinogenic acrylamide.
I told New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer on June 1 about our aspartame/FDA efforts; he immediately replied: "the FDA is a joke!"
In March 2005, Minnesota AG Mike Hatch entered an amicus curie brief in the case against Pfizer by a widow of a man who committed suicide because the Zoloft was making him suicidal, in support of the widow. The brief stated that no company can hide behind the FDA approval of their product when the product does harm under Minnesota’s tort and product liability laws. Judge Rosenbaum later agreed, rejecting Pfizer’s request for a Summary Dismissal on the basis of its FDA approval for Zoloft.
Richardson stated in December that he is in favor of states taking back some of the power given to the FDA, because "the FDA doesn’t do anything," and applied the same strong consumer protection principles by putting a bill to ban Thimerosal/Mercury from vaccines on the Agenda for this coming session. Seven other states have done this already. No New Mexican of any age should be injected with these large amounts of mercury: it is one of the most deadly neurotoxins of all and many flu shots have it.
I have asked the Governor to also place a bill on his 2006 Agenda banning aspartame from sale in New Mexico. This is long overdue; it would be a precedent for New Mexico to pass such a bill in 2006 and not have to wait for the 2007 long session. When it comes to toxicology and the need to remove this deadly neurotoxin from foods and medicines, six months or nine months or 18 months is an eternity.
After EIB temporarily caved in to the demands of the world’s largest Aspartame and MSG manufacturer, the Ajinomoto Corporation of Japan. I called US Senator Bingaman, asking him to read out sections of the Italian study on the floor of the Senate, asking the FDA Commissioner to immediately rescind the approval for aspartame. This happened in 1969 when President Nixon asked the FDA commissioner to rescind cyclamates approval, after it became clear that it was causing cancer. Aspartame violates and cyclamates violated the 1958 Delaney Amendment, which prohibits any chemical causing cancer to be knowingly added to food products. The Italian study proves the cancer causality beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt.
UK Parliament member from Wales, Roger Williams, has asked for a total United Kingdom ban on aspartame. When Governor Richardson puts this bill on the agenda, the FDA will immediately move toward rescinding aspartame’s approval. Industries should switch to Stevia or Xylitol, both non-toxic natural sweeteners, and they wouldn’t have to lose a dime of their sacred profits!
President Bush won’t do anything about aspartame; the FDA ignores letters and citizen’s petitions; the state EIB has basically failed in a regulatory sense by postponing hearings till 2007, so the Legislature and the Governor’s agenda are truly the last hope for protecting New Mexican’s health, and such a bill could go into effect in July 2007. We have a NM Senate sponsor: the Honorable Gerald Ortiz y Pino. Please write to Governor Richardson and encourage him to put a bill to ban aspartame on his Agenda for 2006.
Governor Richardson’s fax # is 505 476-2226. Thank you!
Respectfully,
Stephen Fox
217 W. Water, Santa Fe, NM 87501 505 983-2002
stephen @ santafefineart.com
Right NOW we need LOTS of letters to be emailed to Govenor Bill Richardson of New Mexico. Express thanks for his efforts to date in ridding New Mexico of Aspartame and strongly urge him to move forward on this matter as soon as possible. Remember, a victory against the use of aspartame in New Mexico will certainly spread to other jurisdictions. The banning of aspartame will benefit the health and wellbeing of millions of people, including you and your loved ones.
Emails can be sent directly using the form here: http://www.governor.state.nm.us/emailchoice.php?mm=6
Several diseases are routinely treated by orthodox physicians with corticosteroids, or just steroids as many people know them. I am always in favor of challenging the prescription of steroids because they are associated with unavoidable unwanted adverse effects. If they can be avoided in any treatment plan, they should be.
With this attitude you’ll understand that I was pleased to see research findings that support use of an alternative treatment for lupus, a disease that commonly requires steroid therapy.
Lupus is a disease that misguides the immune system, prompting attacks on healthy tissues and organs. The disease is progressive, moving from organ system to organ system, at rates that can vary markedly between sufferers.
This chronic condition is conventionally treated with immune system suppressants, malaria medications and corticosteroids. In some cases these treatments decrease inflammation and address specific symptoms of lupus, but the side effects of the drugs can sometimes do more to complicate the condition than relieve it. Over time they become a real problem in themselves.
Interestingly, omega-3 fish oils and supplements of copper have been shown to successfully address lupus symptoms in animal studies. Previous human studies have shown that lupus patients tend to have lower omega-3 levels compared to healthy people.
In a trial reported last year, researchers with the Northern Ireland Center for Food and Health (NICHE) at the University of Ulster recruited 52 lupus patients who were randomly divided into four treatment groups:
- Three grams of fish oil and three grams of copper daily
- Three grams of fish oil and a placebo copper
- A placebo fish oil and three grams of copper
- Placebo fish oil and placebo copper
Blood samples were taken and disease activity was measured at the outset of the study, and then at six, 12 and 24 weeks. Researchers found a significant decline in the disease measurements for those taking fish oil compared to placebo. Copper had no significant beneficial effect. Fish oil had no apparent effect on inflammation, but skin rashes and neurological problems improved considerably.
In contrast to steroids and other drug therapies used to treat lupus, none of the subjects in the NICHE study reported any adverse side effects. There are numerous instances where steroids are the treatment of choice by orthodox practitioners. In many cases a naturopathic practitioner can offer a far safer alternative, frequently with equal or greater effectiveness.
An excellent source of Omega3/DHA fish oil, which has several nutritional benefits, is available via our health products site.
It’s no secret that I am a very selective supporter of modern medicine. Indeed I am very comfortable being a critical consumer and I encourage others to become critical consumers, if only to improve personal safety. Make no mistake — modern medicine is very dangerous.
I remain genuinely impressed with the skills found in many major trauma centers. Several surgical procedures, such as those used for reconstructive surgery for birth defects or following accidents are praiseworthy. Some proven medical interventions for those whose health has already seriously deteriorated, such as insulin therapy for diabetics for example, are also welcome where needed. All up there is probably about 10 percent of orthodox medical practice that I consider worthwhile, when it is really necessary.
As for the rest, it is best avoided. Vast numbers of unnecessary tests, procedures and surgeries are performed every year and the numbers keep increasing. Unbelievable amounts of toxic drugs are prescribed and mis-prescribed, doing untold harm, almost all of it unnecessarily. Hospitals have returned to being the places of high risk that they were centuries ago.
In this article I simply want to highlight another all-too-common problem. It is becoming increasingly the case that medical tests are performed using mass-produced, standardized test kits, supplied to hospital and pathology laboratories and even doctor’s offices. So what is the problem? These tests frequently give false results.
Sometimes the results are wrong due to operator error. A busy doctor or their equally busy staff cannot be expected to always have the skill levels required to employ all the tests accurately in every case. Sometimes, being human, they make mistakes. In special laboratories this operator error is reduced but cannot be totally eliminated.
Next there is the problem of test malfunction. This happens more than most people would like to admit. Sometimes however it is so apparent and poses such a high level of risk that warnings and recalls must be issued. For example, the FDA and Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics recently issued the following.
Ortho VITROS Immunodiagnostic HBsAg Confirmatory Kit
Audience: Clinical laboratory personnel
[Posted 01/09/2006] Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics and FDA notified healthcare professionals and clincal laboratory staff of a class 1 recall of the HBsAg Confirmatory Kit due to an unknown component in the diluting solution used to test blood and serum samples that may produce ‘Not Confirmed’ results for samples found to be positive with the initial test. This can cause some results to be classified as false negatives. False negative results may prevent some patients infected with or carrying the hepatitis B virus from receiving necessary treatment. This is especially true for pregnant women whose tests show false negative results. The company recommends that previously reported results be reviewed.
As this warning indicates, test result errors can have very signficant consequences. False positives and false negatives all mean that treatment decisions, even the better ones, will be wrong. The harm caused by unnecessary treatment for a problem that doesn’t exist can be just as bad as giving no treatment for a condition that does exist.
Never agree to a medical test that cannot be thoroughly justified by the person recommending it. Make sure you ask why it is necessary and if alternatives are available. Ask if the results will actually change the treatment proposed — you may be surprised by the answer! I am still amazed by the number of times doctors order tests after they have initiated therapy that the test should be used to justify.
If you do have any medical tests performed I recommend that you have them verified in some way. Either have it repeated by a different laboratory or at least enquire whether and how your doctor verified its accuracy. Most won’t be able to answer other than to say something lame about using accredited labs which use approved and tested methods. Read the FDA warning above again. Recognize that the tests may well be wrong, even if your doctor choses to live in denial.
You may complain that this will add to your expense. You’re right, it will. That, my dear reader, is the price you pay for not maintaining good health and falling into the clutches of orthodox medicine. It is a very small price to pay compared to living with an error.