The 20 Cancer Symptoms Women Are Most Likely to Ignore

Don't rely on routine tests alone to protect you from cancer. It's just as important to listen to your body and notice anything that's different, odd, or unexplainable. Here are some signs that are commonly overlooked:

1. Wheezing or shortness of breath
One of the first signs many lung cancer patients remember noticing is the inability to catch their breath.

2. Chronic cough or chest pain
Several types of cancer, including leukemia and lung tumors, can cause symptoms that mimic a bad cough or bronchitis. Some lung cancer patients report chest pain that extends up into the shoulder or down the arm.

3. Frequent fevers or infections
These can be signs of leukemia, a cancer of the blood cells that starts in the bone marrow. Leukemia causes the marrow to produce abnormal white blood cells, sapping your body's infection-fighting capabilities.

4. Difficulty swallowing
Trouble swallowing is most commonly associated with esophageal or throat cancer, and is sometimes one of the first signs of lung cancer, too.

5. Swollen lymph nodes or lumps on the neck, underarm, or groin
Enlarged lymph nodes indicate changes in the lymphatic system, which can be a sign of cancer.

6. Excessive bruising or bleeding that doesn't stop
This symptom usually suggests something abnormal happening with the platelets and red blood cells, which can be a sign of leukemia. Over time, leukemia cells crowd out red blood cells and platelets, impairing your blood's ability to carry oxygen and clot.

7. Weakness and fatigue
Generalized fatigue and weakness is a symptom of so many different kinds of cancer that you'll need to look at it in combination with other symptoms. But any time you feel exhausted without explanation and it doesn't respond to getting more sleep, talk to your doctor.

8. Bloating or abdominal weight gain
Women diagnosed with ovarian cancer overwhelmingly report unexplained abdominal bloating that came on fairly suddenly and continued on and off over a long period of time.

9. Feeling full and unable to eat
This is another tip-off to ovarian cancer; women say they have no appetite and can't eat, even when they haven't eaten for some time.

10. Pelvic or abdominal pain
Pain and cramping in the pelvis and abdomen can go hand in hand with the bloating that often signals ovarian cancer. Leukemia can also cause abdominal pain resulting from an enlarged spleen.

11. Rectal bleeding or blood in stool
This is a common result of diagnosing colorectal cancer. Blood in the toilet alone is reason to call your doctor and schedule a colonoscopy.

12. Unexplained weight loss
Weight loss is an early sign of colon and other digestive cancers; it's also a sign of cancer that's spread to the liver, affecting your appetite and the ability of your body to rid itself of wastes.

13. Upset stomach or stomachache
Stomach cramps or frequent upset stomachs may indicate colorectal cancer.

14. A red, sore, or swollen breast
These symptoms can indicate inflammatory breast cancer. Call your doctor about any unexplained changes to your breasts.

15. Nipple changes
One of the most common changes women remember noticing before being diagnosed with breast cancer is a nipple that began to appear flattened, inverted, or turned sideways.

16. Unusually heavy or painful periods or bleeding between periods
Many women report this as the tip-off to endometrial or uterine cancer. Ask for a transvaginal ultrasound if you suspect something more than routine heavy periods.

17. Swelling of facial features
Some patients with lung cancer report noticing puffiness, swelling, or redness in the face. Small cell lung tumors commonly block blood vessels in the chest, preventing blood from flowing freely from your head and face.

18. A sore or skin lump that doesn't heal, becomes crusty, or bleeds easily
Familiarize yourself with the different types of skin cancer -- melanoma, basal cell carcinoma, and squamous cell carcinoma -- and be vigilant about checking skin all over your body for odd-looking growths or spots.

19. Changes in nails
Unexplained changes to the fingernails can be a sign of several types of cancer. A brown or black streak or dot under the nail can indicate skin cancer, while newly discovered "clubbing"-- enlargement of the ends of the fingers with nails that curve down over the tips -- can be a sign of lung cancer. Pale or white nails can sometimes be a sign of liver cancer.

20. Pain in the back or lower right side
Many cancer patients say this was the first sign of liver cancer. Breast cancer is also often diagnosed via back pain, which can occur when a breast tumor presses backward into the chest, or when the cancer spreads to the spine or ribs.

Whether you are a man or a woman, it’s important to watch for any unusual changes in your body and energy levels in order to detect any signs of cancer early on. The sooner you notice there’s a problem, the sooner you can begin to take the steps necessary to promote healing within your body.

Of course, ideally you should follow an anti-cancer lifestyle even before you notice any symptoms, as prevention is the best route when it comes to most chronic diseases. It is not unusual for 10 or more years to pass between exposure to a cancer-causing agent (tobacco, chemicals, radiation, cell phones, poor nutrition, etc.) and detectable cancer.

So during this time you have a chance to alter the progression of the disease.
Cancer is actually a group of diseases characterized by uncontrolled growth and spread of abnormal cells. The “cure” lies in controlling this abnormal growth and stopping the spread.

Your body has a remarkable capacity to do just that -- to heal -- and that ability is fueled largely by your lifestyle. If you eat well, exercise, get enough sleep and sun exposure and address your emotional stress, your body should be able to maintain a healthy balance.

The problem with cancer often lies not only with ignoring these health principles but also with the invasive and highly risky treatments that conventional medicine relies on to treat it -- surgery, chemotherapy and radiation.

This may surprise you to hear, but a recent landmark study found some cancers, even invasive cancers, may go away without treatment, and it may happen more often than anyone thought.

On the contrary, many experts now say cancer patients are more likely to die from cancer treatments like chemotherapy than the cancer itself.

The alarming rates of cancer deaths across the world -- cancer has a mortality rate of 90 percent, according to Italian oncologist Dr. Tullio Simoncini -- speak volumes about the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of these treatments, yet they are still regarded as the gold standard of cancer care.

Source: Dr. Mercola/MSN Health

Posted - True Health Is True Wealth

Suzanne Somer's Sip of Sunshine

Order Here - Try Some Today

Democrats Set to Rush Through Government-Run Healthcare

Senate Democrats announced plans Tuesday to begin committee work next week on health care legislation designed to assure coverage for millions of Americans who now lack it, a key objective of the Obama administration.

IBut Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said the measure that goes before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee would contain gaps rather than include several controversial features included in a draft that circulated only last week. Among them are a proposed government-run insurance plan to compete with private companies -- vociferously opposed by nearly all Republicans -- and a requirement for employers to pay a penalty if they fail to provide coverage for their workforce.

Dodd said he would preside over the sessions in the place of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., the committee chairman, who was diagnosed more than a year ago with brain cancer and has not been in the Capitol in recent days. The committee work will take about three weeks, he said.

Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., the top Republican on the health committee, responded dismissively to Dodd's comments about leaving gaps for GOP lawmakers to debate.

He said Democrats did so "because they know we're not going to like what they've written and they don't want us to have any time to comment," he said in an interview.

Enzi also said Democrats would have behaved differently if Kennedy were present.

"I've never worked a process on any bill with him that went like this where there was absolutely no input taken from the other party," Enzi said. "And I never treated him that way either."

"What the question is, is Senator Dodd in charge or is he just running the meeting, and we don't know yet," Enzi said.

Dodd's announcement signaled a quickening pace of activity on health care legislation, and came as senior House Democrats disclosed they are considering a new tax on employer-provided health benefits to help pay for expanding coverage to the 50 million uninsured. President Barack Obama opposed a tax on benefits during last year's campaign and aired numerous television commercials criticizing the idea when his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, proposed it.

Several officials also said an outline of emerging legislation in the House envisions a requirement for all individuals to purchase affordable coverage, with an unspecified penalty for those who refuse and a waiver for those who cannot cover the cost.

"There's no sense having a mandate unless you have a contribution," Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said Monday. He referred to the suggestion as "play or pay."

Rangel and other senior Democrats arranged to bring members of the party's rank and file up to date at a midday session Tuesday on the effort to draft health care legislation at the top of President Barack Obama's agenda.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they did not want to pre-empt the presentation to rank-and-file Democrats on Tuesday.

Under an outline of the House Democratic plan, individuals and small businesses would be able to purchase coverage from a "health exchange" and the government would require all plans to contain a minimum benefit. No applicant could be rejected for pre-existing conditions, nor could one be charged a higher premium.

The outline shows Democrats want to provide subsidies to families up to about $88,000 a year to help them pay for insurance, and to require new policies to limit out-of-pocket spending as a way to prevent personal bankruptcies.

House Democrats also are considering a wide-ranging change for Medicaid that would provide a uniform benefit across all 50 states and increase payments to providers, according to several officials. Medicaid is a joint state-federal program of health coverage for the poor.

The measure also envisions several changes to Medicare, the government program that provides health care to seniors, although details are lacking.

According to the outline, the gap between primary care physician fees and those of specialists would be narrowed, and beneficiaries would not incur out-of-pocket costs for preventive services. The outline also mentions unspecified improvements in the prescription drug benefit. Democrats vociferously opposed that benefit when Republicans passed it, saying it provided billions in unnecessary subsidies to pharmaceutical companies.

The outline does not include an overall cost for the legislation, which is expected to exceed the $1.2 trillion, 10-year price tag Obama's proposal carried last winter.

Part of the cost would be covered in the form of cuts in the government payments under Medicare plans run by private insurance companies, which receive more per patient than the cost of traditional coverage.

Strikingly, the outline made no mention of the possible tax on health benefits, or of the proposed penalty for those refusing to purchase affordable insurance.

Several officials stressed that no final decisions would be made for several days on the possible tax on health benefits.

The idea has been gaining currency in recent weeks as Congress intensifies its search for more than $1 trillion to help pay for a health care overhaul.

America… Do your homework, contract your Representative and Senator (no matter which side you are on) and do not let them pass this legislation without reading it, without having ‘real’ funds to pay for it and a real plan, and without being satisfied that you will be receiving and will continue to receive the same or better health care treatment than you do today… which means better than the care in any country that now has socialized or nationalized healthcare. If not… do not let the government force you into a plan of worse healthcare that nobody can pay for!!

Source: Associated Press/MoneyNews.com

Related Resources and Posts:

• Understanding the House Democrat's Healthcare Bill
• Healthcare: You Think Michael Moore Will Contribute? Don’t Hold Your Breath
• Here Comes Health Care Rationing
• Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
• British Healthcare – Don’t Treat The Old – And Senator Coburn Warns The Same For USA
• Rights, Responsibilities and Healthcare
• Universal Health and Old People
• Social Medicine is Great*! (as long as you don’t get sick)
• Conservatives for Patient's Rights
• Obama's Attack on Medical Civil Liberties
• Socialized Medicine in cartoon form.
• Voters Steer Europe to the Right – Why… Because Socialism Isn’t Working
• Progressivism – The Progressive Movement Is A Cancer – How We Got Here

Big Pharma and the FDA: Suppress the Science, Ban the Natural Substances, Sell the Drugs!

In 2005, an up-and-coming pharmaceutical company made a big mistake: they invested millions of dollars into developing a drug only to discover that the only active ingredient of the drug, pyridoxamine, was really a common, naturally occurring substance that has been sold for decades at low cost to consumers in the form of a dietary supplement, and has always been available in commonly consumed foods such as chicken and brewer’s yeast.

We’re taught as children that when you make a mistake, you should own up to it and face the consequences. Apparently the pharmaceutical company in question, Biostratum, Inc., has yet to learn that lesson. Instead of owning up to their mistake, Biostratum tried to game the system to their advantage by asking the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to declare supplements containing pyridoxamine “adulterated” and effectively ban anyone but Biostratum from selling pyridoxamine.

Sadly, Biostratum’s desparate ploy to save their investment worked. Earlier this year the FDA agreed to ban companies from selling pyridoxamine as a dietary supplement. They denied the request to declare products containing pyridoxamine “adulterated,” but instead they declared that such products are not dietary supplements at all—claiming they are excluded from the definition of dietary supplements under the “prior market clause” [21 U.S.C. 321(ff)(3)(B)(ii)] and so may not be marketed as such.

Please note that nowhere in the FDA’s response letter is anything said about safety concerns. In fact, the FDA’s letter specifically says that “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.” Fair to the pharmaceutical companies? What about fairness to consumers, some of whom rely on affordable pyridozxamine supplements to provide the levels of vitamin B-6 required for their survival? Is it fair to force those consumers to pay for expensive prescription drugs and doctors’ visits to supply their B-6 needs when they could get the exact same thing for a fraction of the cost in the form of a supplement? Isn’t this why our health care system is so ineffective?

This is hardly the first time the FDA has attacked naturally occuring substances. On October 17, 2005, the FDA banned information about the health benefits of cherries from appearing on websites—scientifically proven benefits, such as tart cherries’ ability to reduce the risk of colon cancer because of the anthocyanins and cyanidin contained in the cherry. Cherries, according to the latest research, help ease the pain of arthritis and gout; reduce risk factors for heart disease and diabetes; help regulate the body’s natural sleep patterns, aid with jet lag, prevent memory loss, and delay the aging process; and helps lower body fat and cholesterol—risk factors associated with heart disease. Moreoever, Scientists at Johns Hopkins have found that tart cherry anthocyanins reduced painful inflammation as well as a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, indomethacin.

When the 2005 ban was instituted, the FDA sent warning letters to twenty-nine companies that market cherry products. In these letters, they ordered the companies to stop publicizing scientific data about cherries. According to the FDA, when cherry companies disseminate this peer-reviewed scientific information, the cherries become “unapproved new drugs” and are subject to seizure. The FDA warned that if those involved in “cherry trafficking” continue to inform consumers about these scientific studies, criminal prosecutions would ensue.

But fresh fruit and vegetables are not the FDA’s only target: As we reported in this newsletter recently, General Mills was recently issued a warning letter by the FDA for illegally marketing Cheerios Toasted Whole Grain Oat Cereal. The problem was the claim on the cereal box that Cheerios can lower cholesterol 4% in six weeks, and the statement on their website that “diets rich in whole grain foods can reduce the risk of heart disease.” The letter, dated May 5, 2009, called the above claims “serious violations” of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and applicable regulations.

FDA stated that based on the claims made, Cheerios is now an unapproved drug, and must go through FDA new drug approval process.Note that the FDA isn't disputing the claim. It's disputing the company's right to make the claim.

As one newspaper columnist humorously put it, “One of these things is not like the others: morphine, penicillin, aspirin, Cheerios. Most drugs, if taken improperly, will kill the consumer or cause substantial bodily harm. An entire bottle of aspirin at one sitting will harm or kill. If Cheerios is a drug, therefore, one should be able to commit suicide by consuming the entire box.”

For years, the FDA barred health claims about the benefits of fish oil 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. This type of enforcement effectively censors scientific information and greatly restricts consumer access to scientific studies that provide valuable information.

In the case of pyridoxamine, the FDA did not act out of concern for public safety. This is about money, and about a profit-seeking corporation taking advantage of what is supposed to be a public health organization in order to save their skins.

Source: American Association for Health Freedom

Related Articles:

• The Drug Story
• Western Medicine - Forbidden Cures
• HPV Vaccine Dangers
• 32 Girls Have Died
• Creating a Generation of Drugged Kids
• Why Does the FDA Maintain a Conspiracy of Silence about the Health Benefits
• The Neglected Nutritional Research of Dr. Weston Price, DDS
• Sanoviv Medical Center
• Big Red Juice
• Conservatives for Patient's Rights In "The Land of the Free", is Natural Medicine One of Your Freedoms?

Posted: True Health Is True Wealth

Understanding the House Democrats’ health care bill

Posted Tuesday, June 9th, 2009, at 10:30 am

Yesterday I posted and described the draft Kennedy-Dodd health care bill. Today I would like to do the same for an outline produced by House Democrats.

Here is a three-page outline of “Key Features of the Tri-Committee Health Reform Draft Proposal in the House of Representatives,” dated yesterday (June 8, 2009).

The three committees are:

• The House Ways & Means Committee, chaired by Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY). The Health Subcommittee is chaired by Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA).
• The House Energy & Commerce Committee, chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA). The Health Subcommittee is chaired by Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ).
• The House Committee on Education & Labor, chaired by Rep. George Miller (D-CA). The Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee is chaired by Rep. Robert Andrews (D-NJ).

The document suggests this is a joint product of the three committees and/or their subcommittees. My sense, however, is that it is Speaker Pelosi who is driving the bus. This is in contrast to the Senate, where the committee chairmen (Kennedy/Dodd and Baucus) appear to have the pen, in less well-coordinated efforts.

Kennedy-Dodd and the House bill outline are remarkably similar. Whether this represents House-Senate coordination or parallel thought processes is unclear.

I think the easiest way for me to present the House bill outline is in comparison with the Kennedy-Dodd bill. So here my description from yesterday of the Kennedy-Dodd bill, with today’s comparison to the House bill outline in red. I hope it’s comprehensible and useful this way. If you read yesterday’s post, you can skim the text in black and focus on the new text in blue.

Here are 15 things to know about the draft Kennedy-Dodd health bill and the House bill outline.

1. The Kennedy-Dodd bill would create an individual mandate requiring you to buy a “qualified” health insurance plan, as defined by the government. If you don’t have “qualified” health insurance for a given month, you will pay a new Federal tax. Incredibly, the amount and structure of this new tax is left to the discretion of the Secretaries of Treasury and Health and Human Services (HHS), whose only guidance is “to establish the minimum practicable amount that can accomplish the goal of enhancing participation in qualifying coverage (as so defined).” The new Medical Advisory Council (see #3D) could exempt classes of people from this new tax. To avoid this tax, you would have to report your health insurance information for each month of the prior year to the Secretary of HHS, along with “any such other information as the Secretary may prescribe.”

   The House bill also contains an individual mandate. The outline is less specific but parallel: “Once market reforms and affordability credits are in effect to ensure access and affordability, individuals are responsible for having health insurance with an exception in cases of hardship.”

2. The Kennedy-Dodd bill would also create an employer mandate. Employers would have to offer insurance to their employees. Employers would have to pay at least a certain percentage (TBD) of the premium, and at least a certain dollar amount (TBD). Any employer that did not would pay a new tax. Again, the amount and structure of the tax is left to the discretion of the Secretaries of Treasury and HHS. Small employers (TBD) would be exempt.

   The House bill outline also contains an employer mandate that appears to parallel that in Kennedy-Dodd: “Employers choose between providing coverage for their workers or contributing funds on behalf of their uncovered workers.”

3. In the Kennedy-Dodd bill, the government would define a qualified plan:
   1. All health insurance would be required to have guaranteed issue and renewal, modified community rating, no exclusions for pre-existing conditions, no lifetime or annual limits on benefits, and family policies would have to cover “children” up to age 26.

      The House bill outline is consistent with but less specific than the Kennedy-Dodd legislative language. The House bill outline would “prohibit insurers from excluding pre-existing conditions or engaging in other discriminatory practices.” I will keep my eye on what “other discriminatory practices” means in the legislative language. Does that mean that a health plan cannot charge higher premiums to smokers?

      Like the Kennedy/Dodd bill, the House bill outline would preclude health plans from imposing lifetime or annual limits on benefits: “Caps total out-of-pocket spending in all new policies to prevent bankruptcies from medical expenses.” This would raise premiums for new policies.

      The House bill outline “introduces administrative simplification and standardization to reduce administrative costs across all plans and providers.” I don’t know what this means, but suggest keeping an eye on it.

   2. A qualified plan would have to meet one of three levels of standardized cost-sharing defined by the government, “gold, silver, and bronze.” Details TBD.

      Same: “… by creating various levels of standardized benefits and cost-sharing arrangements…”. It also contains this addition relative to Kennedy-Dodd: “… with additional benefits available in higher-cost plans.”

      But note the “various levels of standardized benefits.” This appears to be more expansive government control of health plan design than in the Kennedy-Dodd draft.

   3. Plans would be required to cover a list of preventive services approved by the Federal government.

      This is unspecified in the House bill outline. We’ll have to wait to see legislative language. The House bill would require plans to “waive cost-sharing for preventive services in benefit packages.”

   4. A qualified plan would have to cover “essential health benefits,” as defined by a new Medical Advisory Council (MAC), appointed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The MAC would determine what items and services are “essential benefits.” The MAC would have to include items and services in at least the following categories: ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and new born care, medical and surgical, mental health, prescription drugs, rehab and lab services, preventive/wellness services, pediatric services, and anything else the MAC thought appropriate.

      This appears parallel but is less specific for now: “Independent public/private advisory committee recommends benefit packages based on standards set in statute.” I find the “standards set in statute” interesting. It suggests that provider and disease interest groups will have two fora in which to lobby for their benefits to be mandated: Congress, and the advisory committee.

   5. The MAC would also define what “affordable and available coverage” is for different income levels, affecting who has to pay the tax if they don’t buy health insurance. The MAC’s rules would go into effect unless Congress passed a joint resolution (under a fast-track process) to turn them off.

      The House bill outline is silent on this.

4. Health insurance plans could not charge higher premiums for risky behaviors: “Such rate shall not vary by health status-related factors, … or any other factor not described in paragraph (1).” Smokers, drinkers, drug users, and those in terrible physical shape would all have their premiums subsidized by the healthy.

   The House bill outline says it would “prohibit plans [from] rating (charging higher premiums) based on gender, health status, or occupation and strictly limits premium variation based on age.” If the bill were to provide nothing more, this would appear to parallel the Senate bill and preclude plans from charging higher premiums for risky behaviors.

5. Guaranteed issue and renewal combined with modified community rating would dramatically increase premiums for the overwhelming majority of those Americans who now have private health insurance. New Jersey is the best example of health insurance mandates gone wild. In the name of protecting their citizens, premiums are extremely high to cover the cross-subsidization of those who are uninsurable.

   The House bill outline is silent on guaranteed issue and renewal. I’m going to make an educated guess that the bill includes these provisions as part of “other discriminatory practices,” and they have just left them out of the outline. Given the philosophy behind this outline (with which I disagree), it would be a striking omission. But for now, the outline says nothing specific on these topics.

6. The bill would expand Medicaid to cover everyone up to 150% of poverty, with the Federal government paying all incremental costs (no State share). This means adding childless adults with income below 150% of the poverty line.

   The House bill outline “expands Medicaid for the most vulnerable, low-income populations,” so we have no specifics other than that there’s an expansion. I cannot tell if this is expanding eligibility or benefits. The outline also “improves payment rates to enhance access to primary care under Medicaid.” I assume this means the bill would expand the Federal share paid of each dollar spent by a State Medicaid program on primary care, rather than the Federal government actually mandating specific payment rates to be implemented by States. Federal micromanagement of specific Medicaid provider payment rates was eliminated in the mid 1990’s.

7. People from 150% of poverty up to 500% (!!) would get their health insurance subsidized (on a sliding scale). If this were in effect in 2009, a family of four with income of $110,000 would get a small subsidy. The bill does not indicate the source of funds to finance these subsidies.

   The House bill outline has a sliding scale up to 400% of poverty. If this were in effect in 2009, a family of four with income of $88,000 would get small subsidy.

8. People in high cost areas (e.g., New York City, Boston, South Florida, Chicago, Los Angeles) would get much bigger subsidies than those in low cost areas (e.g., much of the rest of the country, especially in rural areas). The subsidies are calculated as a percentage of the “reference premium,” which is determined based on the cost of plans sold in that particular geographic area.

   The House bill outline is not specific on this point. I would not expect it to be – this is something you can tell only from legislative language.

9. There would be a “public plan option” of health insurance offered by the federal government. In this new government health plan, the federal government would pay health care providers Medicare rates + 10%. The +10% is clearly intended to attract short-term legislative support from medical providers. I hope they are not so naive that they think that differential would last.

   The House bill outline “creates a new public health insurance within the Exchange … the public health insurance option competes on ‘level field’ with private insurers in the Exchange.” There are no specifics on how the public plan would work, or on provider payment rates.

10. Group health plans with 250 or fewer members would be prohibited from self-insuring. ERISA would only be for big businesses.

    The House bill outline is silent on this point.

11. States would have to set up “gateways” (health insurance exchanges) to market only qualified health insurance plans. If they don’t, the Feds will set up a gateway for them.

    The House calls it an Exchange rather than a Gateway. While the Senate bill would tell each State, “Create a Gateway or we’ll create one for you,” the House bill outline says to each State, “We’re creating a single new national Exchange. You’re in it unless you develop your own State or Regional Exchange.”

12. Health insurance plans in existence before the law would not have to meet the new insurance standards. This creates a weird bifurcated system and means you would (probably) be subject to a different set of rules when you change jobs.

    The House bill outline appears to parallel the Kennedy-Dodd draft: “Phases-in requirements to benefit and quality standards for employer plans.” This means that new plans will be more expensive than old plans. It also means they’re creating a bifurcated system with all sorts of perverse unintended consequences for employment flexibility.

13. The bill does not specify what spending will be cut or what taxes will be raised to pay for the increased spending. That is presumably for the Finance Committee to determine, since it’s their jurisdiction.

    The House bill outline lists specific topics for changes to Medicare reimbursement:

    • Changing (how?) the Medicare reimbursement for doctors, called the “Sustainable Growth Rate” (SGR).
    • “Increasing reimbursement for primary care providers”
    • “Improving” the Medicare drug program. I won’t be surprised if, when I see the specifics, I disagree that their changes are “improvements.” In the past this has meant having the federal government mandate specific prices for drugs.
    • Cutting payments to Medicare Advantage plans.
    • Expanding low-income subsidies for seniors and eliminating cost-sharing for all preventive services in Medicare.

    The House bill outline also uses positive language to describe things that might generate budgetary savings from Medicare and/or Medicaid. The hospital readmissions point is specific. The first two points could increase or decrease federal spending, depending on the specifics.

    • “Use federal health programs … to reward high quality, efficient care, and reduce disparities.”
    • “Adopt innovative payment approaches and promote[s] better coordinated care in Medicare and the new public option through programs such as accountable care organizations.”
    • “Attack the high rate of cost growth to generate savings for reform and fiscal sustainability, including a program in Medicare to reduce preventable hospital readmissions.”
14. The bill defines an “eligible individual” as “a citizen or national of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence or an alien lawfully present in the United States.”

    The House bill outline is silent on this point.

15. The bill would create a new pot of money for state gateways to pay “navigators” to educate people about the new bill, distribute information about health plans, and help people enroll. Navigators receiving federal funds “may include … unions, …”

    The House bill outline is silent on this point.

This would have severe effects on the more than 100 million Americans who have private health insurance today:

• The government would mandate not only that you must buy health insurance, but what health insurance counts as “qualifying.”
• Health insurance premiums would rise as a result of the law, meaning lower wages.
• A government-appointed board would determine what items and services are “essential benefits” that your qualifying plan must cover.
• You would find a tremendous new disincentive to switch jobs, because your new health insurance may be subject to the new rules and would therefore be significantly more expensive.
• Those who keep themselves healthy would be subsidizing premiums for those with risky or unhealthy behaviors.
• Far more than half of all Americans would be eligible for subsidies, but we have not yet been told who would pay the bill.
• The Secretaries of Treasury and HHS would have unlimited discretion to impose new taxes on individuals and employers who do not comply with the new mandates. (The House bill outline is not specific on this point.)
• The Secretary of HHS could mandate that you provide him or her with “any such other information as [he/she] may prescribe.” (The House bill outline is not specific on this point.)

I strongly oppose the Kennedy-Dodd bill and the House Tri-Committee bill.

If this topic interests you, I highly recommend Jim Capretta’s blog Diagnosis.

Source: Keith Hennessey.com /Daily Thought Pad

Posted: True Health Is True Wealth

Related Resources and Posts:

• Healthcare: You Think Michael Moore Will Contribute? Don’t Hold Your Breath
• Here Comes Health Care Rationing
• Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
• British Healthcare – Don’t Treat The Old – And Senator Coburn Warns The Same For USA
• Rights, Responsibilities and Healthcare
• Universal Health and Old People
• Social Medicine is Great*! (as long as you don’t get sick)
• Conservatives for Patient's Rights
• Obama's Attack on Medical Civil Liberties
• Socialized Medicine in cartoon form.
• Voters Steer Europe to the Right – Why… Because Socialism Isn’t Working
• Progressivism – The Progressive Movement Is A Cancer – How We Got Here

In "The Land of the Free", is Natural Medicine One of Your Freedoms?

As of May 20, police around the country were on the lookout for a Minnesota mother who fled with her cancer-stricken 13 year old son rather than consent to chemotherapy.

Colleen Hauser had told a judge that she wished to treat her son's cancer with natural healing methods advocated by an American Indian religious group known as the Nemenhah Band.

Daniel has Hodgkins lymphoma, a form of cancer. But the teen and his parents rejected chemo after a single treatment, with the boy's mother saying that putting toxic substances in the body violates the family's religious convictions.

The Hauser family had been ordered to appear before a judge for a hearing to consider chemo. But mother and son failed to show, and a warrant was issued for the mother's arrest.

Source - American Association for Health Freedom

As many of you probably heard, a federal arrest warrant was issued for Colleen Hauser after she and her 13-year old son Daniel left Minnesota on May 19, to avoid chemotherapy treatment.

Daniel has Hodgkins lymphoma, a form of cancer typically treated with chemo and radiation.

Their refusal to cooperate with the standard treatment for his condition led to a medical neglect petition, and a Brown County District Court Judge took custody away from his parents.

It’s hard to believe, but this case actually turned into an international manhunt with Interpol being notified, and U.S. Marshals being deployed to Mexico in search of this mother and her child, whose only crime was to say “No thank you” to the conventional medical treatment prescribed by Daniel’s doctor!

Whose Body is it Anyway?

According to the Associated Press, there have been at least five instances in the U.S. in recent years in which parents fled with a sick child to avoid some form of medical treatment.

And, as I reported last year, we’re seeing courts siding with well intentioned but seriously misinformed government “officials” with increasing frequency. Many parents are increasingly cut out of the decision-making process about what’s in their child’s best interest with regards to their health.

Instances like these should be a wakeup call for parents everywhere. There’s something seriously wrong going on here.

Said Gretchen DuBeau, Executive Director of the American Association for Health Freedom:

“I am shocked at the court’s ruling. For the court to take custody, disregard the parents’ right to parent, and dismiss the child’s own wishes is a travesty. Our Constitution affords certain rights, and the court has completely trampled on them. It is still unclear as to what exactly ‘the compelling state interest’ is that the court used to justify this ruling.”

Most states have laws that allow parents to refuse treatment on religious grounds. Minnesota, however, removed this right two decades ago with the help of Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania.

Caplan has stated that “religious exceptions are bad public policy because effective medical treatment for a child shouldn't be sacrificed for a parent's beliefs.”

It’s shocking but true that, increasingly, you .are being told to sacrifice your beliefs as to what’s in the best interest of your child, and simply go along with a program that is designed to uphold the status quo of conventional medicine rather than promote true health.

Chemotherapy is NOT as Effective as Promised by Conventional Medicine

The central challenge in this case is your freedom to choose the health care you want, for whatever problem you have. However, it might be wise to review the specific health challenge here.
Lymphoma is cancer of your white blood cells, and half the people who get it die within 5 years. There are two main kinds of lymphoma: Hodgkin's disease, and the more common non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), which accounts for about 88 percent of all lymphoma.

No one knows exactly what causes this type of cancer, but we know that all cancers are caused by multiple gene mutations and/or damage to the parts of your immune system that normally destroy cancer cells.

According to Colleen Hauser, she opted to treat her son’s cancer with herbal supplements, vitamins, ionized water and other natural alternatives, because she believes chemotherapy to be highly toxic and dangerous. Daniel had suffered severe side effects after his first round of chemo.

This is clearly a rational and objective response to the dangerous and toxic solution that was offered to him.Chemotherapy is by its very nature extremely toxic, and may end up killing you prematurely or cause other cancers down the line as it practically destroys your immune system.

The biggest drawback to chemotherapy is the fact that it destroys healthy cells throughout your body right along with cancer cells. A typical, and potentially deadly, side effect of chemo is the destruction of the rapidly multiplying and dividing cells found in your:

• Bone marrow, which produces blood
• Digestive system
• Reproductive system
• Hair follicles

Conventional Medicine’s Lopsided View of Safety

According to a more recent update on the case, after returning home on May 25, the judge returned custody to Daniel’s parents on the condition that they comply with the recommendations of Daniel’s doctor.

After undergoing the second round of chemo on May 28, a family spokesman stated:

"Danny has had a horrible day, he's felt terrible all day long. He's not happy. The doctor changed the number of chemotherapy drugs in the protocol submitted to the court.
Danny is not tolerating the drugs well and has been vomiting all day.
He is understandably angry and depressed about being forced to go through the ravages of chemotherapy again."

His treating physician, Dr. Richards, has recommended at least five cycles of chemotherapy followed by radiation, adding that “the goal will be to include alternative therapies in which the family is interested, as long as there is not data to suggest that a particular danger exists with any alternative medicine.”

That’s really a rather funny, if not insulting, comment, considering the vast amount of data detailing the severe dangers that exist with chemo and radiation... In fact, a full 75 percent of doctors say they’d refuse chemotherapy if they were struck with cancer due to its ineffectiveness and its devastating side effects!

Granted, Hodgkin’s lymphoma is one of only a handful of cancers where chemotherapy may be of some value. The 5 year survival rate for patients treated with chemotherapy is just under 36 percent, according to a 2004 study published in the journal Clinical Oncology.

Still, being FORCED to undergo an excruciating and potentially deadly treatment because it offers a one third chance of being successful is, to me, morally reprehensible.

The Best Known “Chemotherapy” Agent Ever Found
Every month, there’s new and exciting news emerging about the near-miraculous benefits of having optimized vitamin D levels, and cancer prevention is one area that has already seen a huge number of studies confirming its usefulness.

Calcitriol, the most potent steroid hormone in your body, is produced in large amounts in your tissues when you have sufficient amounts of vitamin D. However, most cancer patients are vitamin D deficient.

Calcitrol -- the activated form of vitamin D -- has been shown to protect against cancer by inducing cell differentiation and controlling cell proliferation.

People with a low vitamin D level are less able to make activated vitamin D in an amount sufficient to exert the controls over cell proliferation that are needed to reduce cancer.
Optimized vitamin D levels will work synergistically with virtually every other cancer treatment. There are over 830 peer reviewed scientific studies showing its effectiveness in the treatment of cancer!
Not only is this approach virtually without any side effects, but the treatment is practically free.

I believe it is nearly criminal malpractice to not optimize vitamin D levels when treating someone with cancer, in which case you’ll want to elevate your levels of vitamin D to about 80-90 ng/ml. To determine your current levels, and to have them monitored throughout your treatment, I strongly recommend you get your blood test done by LabCorp, if you are in the United States.

If the notion that sun exposure actually prevents cancer is new to you, then I highly recommend you watch my one-hour vitamin D lecture to clear up any confusion.

Additionally there are large numbers of highly effective energetic therapies like Meridian Tapping Techniques, or quantum approaches like Matrix Energetics, which can provide powerful options.

Dr. Mercola

Posted: True Health Is True Wealth

Related Resources:

• Fight Cancer with Vitamin D

• Why Does the FDA Maintain a Conspiracy of Silence about the Health Benefits

• The Drug Story

• Western Medicine - Forbidden Cures

• The Neglected Nutritional Research of Dr. Weston Price, DDS

• Sanoviv Medical Center

• Big Red Juice

• Conservatives for Patient's Rights

Healthcare: You Think Michael Moore Will Contribute? Don’t Hold Your Breath

Michael Moore has become the champion of socialized medicine over the last year with his flop movie Sicko. Seems flops don’t seem to bother the Democrats, just look at what happened to Howard Dean.

Anyway, as an example of better living through socialized medicine, Moore took his cameras to England to highlight the joys of their National Health Service and presented a rosy picture of everyone getting everything they need without paying anything out of pocket. Sounds like Utopia, doesn’t it? Too bad it isn’t true.

You see, socialized medicine, or “free health care,” as Moore prefers to call it isn’t free at all, and it isn’t very good for your health. Aside from the oppressive taxes needed to fund it and their stagnating effect on the economy (higher unemployment is but one of the side effects of those taxes), the wait times and straight-up refusal to cover certain things make socialized medicine a great system just as long as you don’t get sick.

We’ve posted examples of the measures to which people stuck in these systems will go to obtain care they need rather than wait their turn, meaning suffer until they can be helped. Remember the woman who made up a batch of fake blood she claimed to vomit so she could skip the long lines where she was forced to wait and wait for a hernia operation, something done regularly and on an out-patient basis in the US? How about the 108 year old woman who was told she would have to wait 18 months for a new hearing aid, should arrive just in time to be buried with her.

Well, we now have another fine example of just what socialized medicine will do for us, or, to put it more accurately, to us.

Anthony Wilson, founder of Factory Records (the label that brought us Joy Division, The Happy Mondays and New Order, just to name a few) and television personality in England is going to die soon from cancer. It’s a shame, but it’s true.

Unfortunately for Wilson, it isn’t really the cancer that’s going to kill him, it’s the National Health Service. See, the NHS won’t pay for the drugs needed to help him fend off the cancer, a drug that has doubled the life expectancy of patients in clinical trials.

Why won’t they pay for it? Did you really think they paid for everything in socialized medicine? Well, they pay for everything they cover. If they don’t cover it, you’re kind of screwed. You either have to pay for it yourself, or go without. When the diagnosis is cancer, going without isn’t the best option.

A dirty little secret the Michael Moores of the world don’t want you to know about is the delay in introducing new drugs into a market with socialized medicine’s price controls. But it’s important to note. Check this out and see if you’re willing to wait an extra 6 months while the government haggles over prices.

In many socialize medicine countries it is illegal to purchase private insurance in order to avoid the long wait times and additional suffering single-payer health systems bring with them. Thankfully, that trend is changing, at least in Canada.

But private health insurance is legal in England, but Wilson has refused to buy it. See, he’s bought completely into the NHS. Now that he needs it he’s beginning to realize how big of a mistake that actually turned out to be.

“I’ve never paid for private healthcare because I’m a socialist. Now I find you can get tummy tucks and cosmetic surgery on the NHS but not the drugs I need to stay alive. It is a scandal.”

No, Mr. Wilson, it is not a scandal, it’s not even new, it’s exactly what you and people like Michael Moore have supported for years. It’s exactly what you’re refused to see while it was too late for others. Now it’s most likely too late for you.

It’s a shame, really. Maybe his friends and the people he’s made rich over the years (maybe even Michael Moore, though we doubt it) will come through with more money than just enough for 5 months worth of the drugs he needs. Maybe the “Big Pharmaceutical” companies will give him free drugs because, well, that’s what they do for people who can’t afford life-saving drugs (no matter how much they are demonized by the Left). Or maybe he die.

We don’t wish ill upon anyone, even a socialist, but this should serve as a lesson to everyone; be careful what you wish for because you just might get it.

By First Friday – First Friday Collective Podcast – Originally Posted Friday August 17, 2007

Posted: True Health Is True Wealth

Related Resources and Articles:

• Here Comes Health Care Rationing
• Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
• British Healthcare – Don’t Treat The Old – And Senator Coburn Warns The Same For USA
• Conservatives for Patient's Rights
• Obama's Attack on Medical Civil Liberties

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Socialized Medicine in cartoon form.
• Becareful what you wish for, Jabba, you just might get it.
• Socialize medicine is GREAT!* *(just as…
• Free Market Pain

HERE COMES HEALTH CARE RATIONING

The photo op was too good to be true. Health care providers trooped out of the White House and trumpeted their goal of saving $1.7 trillion of costs over the next decade in health spending.

Now these drug companies, hospitals, insurance companies, medical device manufacturers, labor unions and doctors have laid out their plans in more detail.

And right there, in plain print, is the beginning of medical care rationing. Now that the cameras have been put away and the media is no longer watching, their secret emerges: They are going to cut medical costs by cutting medical care. Right now, they cite four targets. They plan to:

1. Cut diagnostic imaging tests like MRIs and CAT scans.
2. Reduce the use of antibiotics. (This might not be a bad thing!)
3. Perform fewer Caesarean sections.
4. Cut care for management of chronic back pain

These decisions will not be medical but financial. They will not be based on a doctor's opinion of what his or her patient needs, but a bureaucrat's and an accountant’s opinion of what the new health care system can afford.

And you will not be able to bypass their rulings and pay for this care yourself. The rules laid down must be followed and private payments will not be permitted to override them. What we now call a private fee for service will metastasize into a bribe.

But this is just the very beginning of rationing. The total of health care spending now runs about $2.3 trillion a year in the United States. Over ten years, that's likely to reach $30 trillion. So a cut of $1.7 trillion is a mere drop in the bucket.

More rationing is coming, and coming soon.

In our new book (coming out on June 23rd) Catastrophe, we explain exactly what rationing will mean and what it has done to patient care in Canada.

It's not a pretty picture and Obama will bring it here soon unless we stop him. Forewarned is forearmed!

By: DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!

Source: Daily Thought Pad

Posted: True Health Is True Wealth

Related Resources:

• Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
• Healthcare: You Think Michael Moore Will Contibute? Don't Hold Your Breath!
• British Healthcare – Don’t Treat The Old – And Senator Coburn Warns The Same For USA
• Obama's Attack on Medical Civil Liberties
• Conservatives for Patient's Rights
• Here Comes Health Care Rationing

Gestational Diabetes: What to Do After Delivery

Expectant mothers who develop pregnancy-related or "gestational" diabetes often experience concerns and unnecessary anxiety following a healthy deliveries

Expectant mothers who develop pregnancy-related or "gestational" diabetes often experience concerns and unnecessary anxiety following a healthy delivery. Some of the common questions women with gestational diabetes may have include: "Will my blood sugar return to normal right away?" "How soon after delivery should I undergo glucose monitoring?" "How can I avoid developing type 2 diabetes?"

The answers are rarely straightforward and uniform for all women, but diabetes-care professionals do offer some universal insights. According to studies, 90% of women with gestational diabetes will experience normalized blood sugar almost immediately after their baby is born.

However, an estimated 5% do go on to develop type 2 diabetes. As a result, it has been recommended that women with gestational diabetes get their blood glucose checked approximately 6-8 weeks after delivery and consult their physician about diet and physical activity recommendations for lowering diabetes risk.

Source: LifeScript

Posted: True Health Is True Wealth

Spice of Life Might Help Prevent Alzheimer’s

Turmeric, which is called the spice of life in ancient Indian lore, might help fight Alzheimer’s, according to initial stages of a study.

The spice is an integral ingredient in curry, and tests on laboratory rats have provided evidence that curry helps prevent dementia. A human clinical trial is under way in California.

Murali Doraiswamy, director of the mental fitness laboratory at the Duke University Medical Center's psychiatry department, told a conference that curcumin, an element of turmeric, appears to prevent the accumulation of amyloid plaques. The plaques are toxic proteins found in the brains of Alzheimer’s victims and are a key characteristic of the disease. The plaques are thought to interfere with the electrical signals between brain cells.

In animal trials, high doses of curcumin not only prevented the plaques from forming but also dissolved existing plaques.

“You can modify a mouse so that at about 12 months its brain is riddled with plaques,” Doraiswamy told United Kingdom’s Doncaster Free Press. “If you feed it a curcumin-rich diet it dissolves these plaques. The same diet prevented younger mice from forming new plaques.

“Studies looking at populations show that people who eat a curry meal two or three times a week seem to have a lower risk for dementia,” he said. “These studies seem to show that you need only consume what is part of the normal diet, but the research studies are testing higher doses to see if they can maximize the effect. It would be equivalent of going on a curry spree for a week.”

Turmeric also is being studied for its possible ability to lower the incidence of cancer and arthritis.

Source: NewsMax Health

Posted: True Health Is True Wealth

What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You: Knowledge is Power When It Comes to Your Health

Alberto Peña, MD, has worked with Sanoviv Medical Institute for years as a doctor and consultant. Through his work at Sanoviv, he has treated many patients using the best of Western medicine and the most advanced complementary therapies from around the world. At the core of Dr. Peña’s philosophy is the belief that the body has the power to heal itself when provided with the proper environment and is relieved of its accumulated toxic burden. It’s a remarkable approach that challenges conventional medicine, all the while respecting science and the wisdom of the human body.

The following article is an excerpt from a recent interview regarding “How to Predict and Prevent Disease.”

Interviewer:
I’ve heard people say that they don’t want to do genetic testing because they don’t really want to know when they’re going to die. They say, “I want to live while I’m living and not worry about something that might happen down the road.” What would you tell someone who says something like that?

Dr. Peña:
I would tell them that genetic testing is not really about predicting what you’re going to die from because we also find people who have genetic strengths. The fact that you have a certain gene doesn’t mean that you’re necessarily going to suffer from that. These are just the tendencies, so, on the contrary, we want to know what our tendencies are, so we can prevent a problem from occurring to begin with. Information is power and, in this case, we have the information to keep ourselves healthy. This is not about being condemned, because remember, many of the SNP’s have developed to protect us. In other words, genetic differences have developed over generations in order to protect us from a specific environmental problem. For example certain populations that were in high malaria areas or endemic areas for malaria developed sickle cell anemia because the plasmodium, which is the bug that gives us malaria, cannot reproduce in a person with sickle cell anemia. This is just one classic example of how genetics help us adapt to our environment. So, when we do a genetic test, it’s not really about knowing what we’re going to die from, but instead, knowing how we can avoid dying from a particular cause. What I recommend for all people who want to know their current state of health is to go through Sanoviv’s program, which is what we call the complete health assessment program. The genetic testing will tell me what might happen, but how do I know if what you’re doing right now is really serving the purpose for your health? If we find you have a predisposition for cholesterol LDL production, I really want to know what you’re cholesterol level is right now.

Interviewer:
I know that the Mayo Health Clinic, for example, is well known for having verycomprehensive health assessments, but it’s very expensive - much more expensive than Sanoviv. Sanoviv prides itself in having a very comprehensive health test. How may tests approximately does Sanoviv go through, and how does that compare to the Mayo Clinic’s program?

Dr. Peña:
Well, we could go through every test that we do, but it would just take us too long. We do about 35 different tests to start.

Interviewer:
And how does Sanoviv’s Complete Health Assessment compare to the Mayo Clinic’s program?

Dr. Peña:
Well, we do all the same tests that Mayo does, and some additional ones. For example we test for food allergies. You might be doing everything right for your health, but if your in poor health or you have an inflammation of the intestinal tract and it’s not related to an infection, it could be that you have an undetected food allergy — you’re just not eating the right type of food for your system. So, everybody who comes into our program, for example, we conduct a test which tells us if they have antibodies against a specific food, and I’m not talking about the typical food allergy that we all know where you get hives, and…

Interviewer:
Let’s say, lactose intolerance, or whatever?

Dr. Peña:
Right. Or, let’s say, shrimp or your allergic to peanuts, etc. and you break out or you develop an angioedema and then you can’t breathe. That is what we call an immune globulent E allergy. What I’m talking about is something called IGG or Immune Globulent G Food Sensitivity Test, and what happens when a person eats a specific type of food is they develop a longer-term inflammatory condition in their intestine and their immune system gets challenged. Some people eat a specific food and they don’t notice it, but they feel tired a few hours after, or they sneeze, develop asthma or itching. We have found that many people who have specific diseases have an underlying food allergy. Unlike the Mayo Clinic, we run a series of functional tests to be able to know how the body is doing. For example, we test for Ph levels of the blood.

Interviewer:
And why is that important?

Dr. Peña:
It’s very important because most people today eat a very acidic diet. Acidosis or what we call the presence of acid or too much acid condition in the body is connected to the appearance of many degenerative diseases. Another very important assessment that Sanoviv emphasizes heavily is dental health. Most hospitals do not assess your dental health and yet it is of supreme importance. Modern medicine tends to look at the body as being one thing and the mouth being something separate. But it’s at our own peril that we do so. Dental health and the dental assessment we do is very comprehensive.

Interviewer:
And why is that important?

Dr. Peña:
Well, it’s important because a lot of people have underlying problems in their jaw like an ischemia or not enough oxygenation or blood flow. Certain treatments like root canals will damage their circulation and they produce toxins that could be a source of the problem in their overall health.

Interviewer:
What could happen if this isn’t checked? Is this very unusual that dental tests are done during a medical test like this?

Dr. Peña:
It’s very unusual. Most people, when they have a general health check up never get a dental checkup. Western medicine knows that gum disease can put an individual at risk for a heart attack, yet rarely is this assessed in a general physical. Often all these cardiac tests are done but no one looks in your mouth!

Interviewer:
So, if an individual is having continuous heart problems, Sanoviv might be able to help them find the true source of the issue rather than just putting them on a bunch of medication that will mask the true source of the problem?

Dr. Peña:
Exactly. You want to go to the source of the problem.

Interviewer:
What other kinds of diseases could be detected or checked by examining the mouth?

Dr. Peña:
Well, let’s talk about mercury. We know that mercury is the most toxic, non-radioactive substance in the world. Enough mercury is contained in one amalgam of filling to contaminate a small lake, so we are forbidden from dumping mercury into the environment, into the water, into our soil, but we put it in people’s mouths. Often we find that amalgam fillings are a a major source of toxicity that affects the person’s immune system and their capacity to produce energy from their cells.

Interviewer:
Is this truly detectable? I know that there is certainly a lot of controversy about mercury amalgams and that Dr. Wentz is very committed to getting this information out there through his book A Mouth Full of Poison. Is this something that’s measurable and detectable?

Dr. Peña:
Yes. This is something that is very measurable and detectable. Certain states now prohibit dentists from placing mercury in people’s mouths. Ironically, they didn’t pass that law because of the risks to put it in the person, but instead because of the environmental risks of having mercury disposed of improperly from dental offices. So, you can imagine the irony of that, it is a very toxic substance, and it’s very easy to detect. Most people have it. Every time you brush your teeth, you can detect it with a mercury vapor detector. We’re able to see how the mercury vapor increases in the person’s mouth, and this is something called methyl mercury which is very toxic, it goes to the brain, it does not let brain cells develop, and it affects people’s lives.

Interviewer:
And, what diseases have been connected with mercury poisoning?

Dr. Peña:
Well, everything from Parkinson’s disease to ADHD in children and it has even been implicated in autism or was suggested that the mercury contained in vaccines, which is even minimal compared to the amount in the amalgams, can affect a child’s developing brain. During the health assessment, our patients undergo what we call a psycho-spiritual or psycho-emotional evaluation. Many of the times the causes of a person getting high blood pressure, for example, or getting an allergic reaction is related to their emotions, their toxic emotions, or they cannot handle stress, or they’ve had a past issue that they haven’t been able to completely resolve that is affecting their health. Unlike many or most health assessments, we want to look at the “whole” person to get the complete picture of what could be impacting their health. We teach them how to manage their stress, how to do relaxation exercises, so that they can get out of the cycle of anxiety and live a happy life. As we know, it’s more likely for happy people to be healthy. It sounds sort of Utopic, but you release more adrenaline when you’re angry. This changes your whole circulatory system. It makes your arteries contract. It raises blood pressure. It decreases oxygenation to certain tissues, for example, your intestine, then you can’t digest etc., etc.

Posted:  True Health Is True Wealth

Related Resources:

• The Drug Story
• Western Medicine - Forbidden Cures
• The Neglected Nutritional Research of Dr. Weston Price, DDS
• Big Red Juice
• Sanoviv Medical Center

Lycopene in Tomatoes May Ward Off Heart Disease, Stroke, and Prostate Cancer

Scientists say the naturally occurring antioxidant lycopene, found in abundance in tomatoes, helps block the body from absorbing “bad” LDL cholesterol. This bad cholesterol is primarily responsible for clogging arteries.

In its natural form, lycopene gives tomatoes their red color, but is also poorly absorbed by the human body. Now scientists at the British Cardiovascular Society say a new supplement derived from tomatoes “can reduce the oxidation of harmful fats in the body to almost zero within eight weeks,” according to a report by the BBC. The supplement, Ateronon, provides a modified form of lycopene that is readily used by the body. The modified lycopene compound was originally developed by Swiss food giant Nestle.

Early evidence suggest that the supplement “could be much more effective than statin drugs currently used by doctors to treat high cholesterol,” according to the report.
We are eager to hear the reaction of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). They have created a “Catch-22” situation in which:

• All drugs must be FDA-approved.
• The FDA defines “drugs” as “articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease,” even if those substances are naturally occurring.

• If a substance has not been declared an FDA-approved drug, no health claims may be made about it, regardless of the scientific backing for the claim.

Case in point: In 2005, the FDA banned information about the scientifically proven health benefits of cherries from appearing on websites, calling cherries “unapproved new drugs.” And more recently, they said the maker of Cheerios cannot claim any health benefits of the cereal lest they too be declared a new drug.

Source:  American Association for Health Freedom

Posted:  True Health Is True Wealth

Related Resources:

• The Drug Story
• Western Medicine - Forbidden Cures
• The Neglected Nutritional Research of Dr. Weston Price, DDS
• Big Red Juice
• Sanoviv Medical Center

Creating a Generation of Drugged Children

Last November, the journal Pediatrics published research that found medication use among children across the United States is dramatically increasing as more kids are being treated for diabetes, hypertension, obesity, asthma, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Using a database of prescription claims from children with private health insurance, they were able to find prescriptions for almost 4 million children.

The researchers found that over four years, prescriptions for children aged 5 to 19 increased significantly. Among two drugs to treat type 2 diabetes, the use doubled. In addition, the use of

 drugs to treat asthma rose by 46.5 percent, and the use of drugs to treat ADHD grew by 40.4 percent. The number of prescriptions for cholesterol-lowering drugs rose by 15 percent, the researchers found. They also noted increases in the use of blood pressure drugs and antidepressants (1.8 percent).

Be sure to read AAHF’s position paper on ADHD.
According to one of the co-authors of the study, Emily Cox, as the number of obese children increases, the number of children with chronic diseases is also increasing. "That they are being treated is a good thing," she said. "The concern is, are doctors more likely to use drug therapy over diet and exercise?"

Antidepressants are the second largest group of drugs prescribed for children under 18 years of age, second only to Ritalin and similar ADD/ADHD drugs. An earlier generation was given

 tricyclic antidepressants like Elavil and Toframil. These drugs had some serious, and occasionally fatal, side effects. The newer ones, including those called SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors), are more easily tolerated, but have not been widely tested on children.

SSRIs include Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Celexa, and Luvox. They help regulate levels of serotonin, a chemical in the body that is believed to affect mood. Serotonin levels drop off during early adolescence, and therefore may be related to depression in this age group. Low serotonin levels have also been linked to substance abuse problems in teens.

But why give young people such heavy-handed drugs, with their host of potentially dangerous side effects, when inexpensive, natural, and healthy alternatives are available? Low or imbalanced levels of fatty acids are now linked to autoimmune disorders, mood and behavioral disorders, and heart disease, among other health concerns, prompting even allopathic doctors to recommend fish oil to treat ADHD. Researchers at the University of South Australia tested a combination of omega-3 fish oil and evening primrose oil (an omega-6 oil) on 132 children with

 ADHD, ranging in age from seven to 12. After the 30-week study ended, almost half the parents reported that their children's symptoms were improved.

Many of the other conditions for which children are being overmedicated can be treated naturally as well. For example, vitamin D deficiency has been implicated as a major factor in the pathology of heart disease, stroke, hypertension, autoimmune diseases, diabetes, depression, chronic pain, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, muscle weakness, muscle wasting, birth defects,  periodontal disease, and more.

Children don’t need cholesterol-lowering drugs. They need proper nutrition and exercise, with

 judicious supplementation. But they also need physicians and practitioners who can properly diagnose and treat their conditions with healthy, natural methods. Our website has an excellent database of integrative physicians in your area who can give your family the healthy guidance they need.

Source:  American Association for Health Freedoms

Posted:  True Health Is True Wealth

Related Articles and Resources:

• Vaccine Madness: Private Profits from Health Hysteria
• Fight Swine Flu With Mushrooms
  
• HPV Vaccine Dangers
• 32 Girls Have Died
  
• The Drug Story
• Western Medicine - Forbidden Cures
• The Neglected Nutritional Research of Dr. Weston Price, DDS
• Big Red Juice
• Sanoviv Medical Center