It isn't often that anyone, even a doctor, gets emotional over a research paper, but a very recent study published in the highly-prestigious & internationally recognized scientific journal Spine at the beginning of this month may very well stir the souls of those who understand the importance of what these incredible scientists & doctors have done.
The study, entitled, "Natural History of Progressive Adult Scoliosis," aims to establish a clear prognosis for individuals living with scoliosis. Research on this topic up to this point has been discordant, even contradictory, leaving people living with scoliosis without a clear answer to the question, "Will my scoliosis get worse?" This new study examined 51 patients over a span of 27 years, and introduced the ground-breaking new concept of different "types" of scoliosis. The first type, Type A, developed an abnormal rotatory subluxation (misalignment) of the spine during the onset of scoliosis. In the words of the authors, "Type A corresponds to adolescent scoliosis which continues to progress after skeletal maturity at a rate specific to each curve." In the second type, Type B, the rotatory subluxation was found to develop prior to the onset of scoliosis, and the rate of progression was much higher in this incidence. Type B was described by the authors as, "a degenerative scoliosis, which progresses late in adulthood: either a pre-existing stable adult scoliosis that progresses late or a de novo late-onset scoliosis." (De novo is Latin, meaning "new.") There was also a subgroup of Type B that was found to progress at menopause. In all cases, however, the rate of progression was found to be linear - that is, it could be predicted on a graph in a straight line.
What is the relevance of this new information? First, even if your scoliosis stabilized after adolescence, that is no guarantee that it will not begin to progress again in adulthood. Second, the aforementioned rotatory subluxation appears to cause this late-progression in previously stable scoliosis cases, although menopause may also be a contributing factor in some regard. Third, and perhaps most importantly, it is possible to establish an individual prognosis for each scoliosis case, and predict its progression, with much greater accuracy than was previously believed.
The graphs demonstrating the linear progression of scoliosis, as well as the complete text of this article, are available at:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/558628_print
2 August 2007
Backpacks & Scoliosis
Backpacks & Scoliosis
Although this may seem like a rather mundane topic, one might be surprised at the amount of research that has been conducted on the effect of heavy loads carried in a backpack by people with scoliosis. While standard recommendations state that the amount of weight carried in a backpack should not exceed 10% of the person's body weight, the research concludes that this may not apply to students living with scoliosis. Loads as small as 5% of the person's weight, less than half of the typical load limit, were found to have a significant, negative effect upon the compression of the spine, and also on the functions of the heart & lungs. This occured even in patients with mild scoliosis (Cobb angles of 10-25 degrees).
This information should be particularly relevant to parents of students with scoliosis. Schoolgoing patients treated by CLEAR-certified doctors are provided with a doctor's note that they provide to their school authorities, specifically stating that the patient must have two sets of books - one for use at studying at home, and one to be stored in their locker at school (the only other option, using a rolling suitcase, seems to be much more popular at airports than at educational institutions).
Although this may seem like a rather mundane topic, one might be surprised at the amount of research that has been conducted on the effect of heavy loads carried in a backpack by people with scoliosis. While standard recommendations state that the amount of weight carried in a backpack should not exceed 10% of the person's body weight, the research concludes that this may not apply to students living with scoliosis. Loads as small as 5% of the person's weight, less than half of the typical load limit, were found to have a significant, negative effect upon the compression of the spine, and also on the functions of the heart & lungs. This occured even in patients with mild scoliosis (Cobb angles of 10-25 degrees).
This information should be particularly relevant to parents of students with scoliosis. Schoolgoing patients treated by CLEAR-certified doctors are provided with a doctor's note that they provide to their school authorities, specifically stating that the patient must have two sets of books - one for use at studying at home, and one to be stored in their locker at school (the only other option, using a rolling suitcase, seems to be much more popular at airports than at educational institutions).
20 July 2007
New England Journal of Medicine review concludes vitamin D deficiency is common yet preventable
The July 19, 2007 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine published a review authored by renowned vitamin D expert Michael Holick, MD, PhD, which concluded that vitamin D deficiency is widespread although easily prevented. An estimated 1 billion people have levels of the vitamin that are either insufficient or deficient.
Dr Holick, who is a professor of medicine, physiology, and biophysics, and director of the General Clinical Research Center at Boston University School of Medicine and Director of the Bone Healthcare Clinic at Boston Medical Center, introduces his subject by stating that “rickets can be considered the tip of the vitamin D deficiency iceberg.” While reduced levels of the vitamin in utero and childhood can cause growth retardation, skeletal deformities and increased hip fracture risk later in life, a deficiency in adults can result in osteopenia, osteoporosis, muscle weakness, fractures, autoimmune diseases, infectious diseases, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers.
Having insufficient vitamin D means that only 10 to 15 percent of calcium and 60 percent of the phosphorus we consumed are absorbed. Diminished absorption of these minerals is reflected in low bone mineral density, which is associated with fractures, decreased muscle strength, and falls. Individuals living at higher latitudes whose skin is unable to produce adequate amounts of vitamin D have been found to be at greater risk of Hodgkin’s lymphoma, colon, pancreatic, prostate, ovarian, breast, and other cancers.
Fortification of dairy products with vitamin D has helped lower the incidence of rickets, yet Dr Holick believes the current recommended Adequate Intakes for vitamin D need to be increased to at least 800 IU vitamin D3 per day. Greater amounts are needed to treat deficiency states or specific conditions.
“Providing children and adults with approximately at least 800 IU of vitamin D3 per day or its equivalent should guarantee vitamin D sufficiency unless there are mitigating circumstances, he writes. “Unless a person eats oily fish frequently, it is very difficult to obtain that much vitamin D3 on a daily basis from dietary sources. Excessive exposure to sunlight, especially sunlight that causes sunburn, will increase the risk of skin cancer. Thus, sensible sun exposure (or ultraviolet B irradiation) and the use of supplements are needed to fulfill the body’s vitamin D requirement,” he concludes.
Dr Holick, who is a professor of medicine, physiology, and biophysics, and director of the General Clinical Research Center at Boston University School of Medicine and Director of the Bone Healthcare Clinic at Boston Medical Center, introduces his subject by stating that “rickets can be considered the tip of the vitamin D deficiency iceberg.” While reduced levels of the vitamin in utero and childhood can cause growth retardation, skeletal deformities and increased hip fracture risk later in life, a deficiency in adults can result in osteopenia, osteoporosis, muscle weakness, fractures, autoimmune diseases, infectious diseases, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers.
Having insufficient vitamin D means that only 10 to 15 percent of calcium and 60 percent of the phosphorus we consumed are absorbed. Diminished absorption of these minerals is reflected in low bone mineral density, which is associated with fractures, decreased muscle strength, and falls. Individuals living at higher latitudes whose skin is unable to produce adequate amounts of vitamin D have been found to be at greater risk of Hodgkin’s lymphoma, colon, pancreatic, prostate, ovarian, breast, and other cancers.
Fortification of dairy products with vitamin D has helped lower the incidence of rickets, yet Dr Holick believes the current recommended Adequate Intakes for vitamin D need to be increased to at least 800 IU vitamin D3 per day. Greater amounts are needed to treat deficiency states or specific conditions.
“Providing children and adults with approximately at least 800 IU of vitamin D3 per day or its equivalent should guarantee vitamin D sufficiency unless there are mitigating circumstances, he writes. “Unless a person eats oily fish frequently, it is very difficult to obtain that much vitamin D3 on a daily basis from dietary sources. Excessive exposure to sunlight, especially sunlight that causes sunburn, will increase the risk of skin cancer. Thus, sensible sun exposure (or ultraviolet B irradiation) and the use of supplements are needed to fulfill the body’s vitamin D requirement,” he concludes.
3 July 2007
Osteoporosis Drug Causes Jawbone Rot
People who take bisphosphonate drugs for osteoporosis or cancer are at risk of osteonecrosis of the jaws, which is permanent damage in which the jawbone rots away.
There are two varieties of the drugs, one taken intravenously by cancer patients, the other taken in lower-dose pill form by those with osteoporosis (Fosamax, Actonel and Boniva). The risk of jaw rot is said to be highest among those taking the drug intravaneously, though adverse affects can take three years to appear in oral users.
The drugs are problematic because they stay in the bone indefinitely and may upset the cell balance in how the jaws regenerate and remove unhealthy bone.
The problem is so severe that experts are now advising dentists to ask patients whether they are taking the drugs and to screen for this condition. Osteonecrosis is becoming so common that dentists are even referring to it as fossy jaw (after the drug Fosamax).
What can you do to prevent osteoporosis -- without exposing yourself to a potentially dangerous drug that can kill your jawbone? You guessed it: exercise regularly and eat a healthy diet.
Science Daily June 26, 2007
There are two varieties of the drugs, one taken intravenously by cancer patients, the other taken in lower-dose pill form by those with osteoporosis (Fosamax, Actonel and Boniva). The risk of jaw rot is said to be highest among those taking the drug intravaneously, though adverse affects can take three years to appear in oral users.
The drugs are problematic because they stay in the bone indefinitely and may upset the cell balance in how the jaws regenerate and remove unhealthy bone.
The problem is so severe that experts are now advising dentists to ask patients whether they are taking the drugs and to screen for this condition. Osteonecrosis is becoming so common that dentists are even referring to it as fossy jaw (after the drug Fosamax).
What can you do to prevent osteoporosis -- without exposing yourself to a potentially dangerous drug that can kill your jawbone? You guessed it: exercise regularly and eat a healthy diet.
Science Daily June 26, 2007
Number of Children With Chronic Diseases Quadrupled, Study Says
Kids in the United States are sicker than ever and are facing chronic illnesses at epidemic levels, a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found.
The number of U.S. children with chronic illnesses has quadrupled in the last 30 years, setting the scene for a new generation of adults facing disability and higher health costs. Among the massive increases noted in the study were:
* A fourfold increase in childhood obesity in the past three decades
* Twice the asthma rates since the 1980s
* ADHD, which was not even recognized as a medical condition in 1968, is now diagnosed in about 6 percent of kids
While in 1960 just 1.8 percent of youngsters had a chronic health condition that limited their activities, in 2004 that number jumped to 7 percent. Meanwhile, with the childhood obesity epidemic growing, the number of young adults facing weight-related conditions like diabetes and heart disease is expected to increase as well.
Most Childhood Chronic Illness is Preventable
Most kids are fortunate enough to start off with a relatively clean slate when it comes to their health. Sadly, as even the JAMA researchers pointed out, it is overwhelmingly environmental and social changes that are driving this worsening of kids’ health.
Things like increasing fast-food diets, more time spent in front of the TV and not outside playing, and parents who are not serving as good role models when it comes to health are having devastating effects on the nation’s children (not to mention their parents).
If this epidemic of chronic illness is not reversed we will, for the first time in history, see a generation of kids living shorter lives than their parents. But you can stop the epidemic in its tracks by making healthy lifestyle changes like:
* Cooking healthy meals at home
* Getting regular exercise as a family
* Trading soda for water
* Keeping a positive state of mind, and teaching your kids to do so as well
Journal of the American Medical Association June 27, 2007, 297:2755-2759
Bloomberg June 26, 2007
The number of U.S. children with chronic illnesses has quadrupled in the last 30 years, setting the scene for a new generation of adults facing disability and higher health costs. Among the massive increases noted in the study were:
* A fourfold increase in childhood obesity in the past three decades
* Twice the asthma rates since the 1980s
* ADHD, which was not even recognized as a medical condition in 1968, is now diagnosed in about 6 percent of kids
While in 1960 just 1.8 percent of youngsters had a chronic health condition that limited their activities, in 2004 that number jumped to 7 percent. Meanwhile, with the childhood obesity epidemic growing, the number of young adults facing weight-related conditions like diabetes and heart disease is expected to increase as well.
Most Childhood Chronic Illness is Preventable
Most kids are fortunate enough to start off with a relatively clean slate when it comes to their health. Sadly, as even the JAMA researchers pointed out, it is overwhelmingly environmental and social changes that are driving this worsening of kids’ health.
Things like increasing fast-food diets, more time spent in front of the TV and not outside playing, and parents who are not serving as good role models when it comes to health are having devastating effects on the nation’s children (not to mention their parents).
If this epidemic of chronic illness is not reversed we will, for the first time in history, see a generation of kids living shorter lives than their parents. But you can stop the epidemic in its tracks by making healthy lifestyle changes like:
* Cooking healthy meals at home
* Getting regular exercise as a family
* Trading soda for water
* Keeping a positive state of mind, and teaching your kids to do so as well
Journal of the American Medical Association June 27, 2007, 297:2755-2759
Bloomberg June 26, 2007
26 June 2007
Body Absorbs 5 Lbs of Make-Up Chemicals Per Year
Researcher Richard Bence, a biochemist who has studied conventional products for three years, estimates women's bodies absorb almost 5 pounds of toxic chemicals per year from the use of toiletries and beauty products.
Putting chemicals on the skin is actually far worse than ingesting them, he explains, because when you eat something the enzymes in your saliva and stomach help break it down and flush it out.
When you put it on your skin, however, it is absorbed straight into your blood stream without filtering of any kind, so there's no protection against the toxin.
Nine out of 10 women also use products that are past their use-by date--lipstick and mascara being the two most commonly products being used past their prime--which can turn them into hothouses for aggressive bacterial growth.
Many of the synthetic compounds found in cosmetics and toiletries have been linked to side effects like skin irritation, premature aging and cancer.
Parabens--used as preservatives in soaps, shampoos, deodorants and lotions--have been found in breast tumour samples, for example.
The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health has previously reported that of all the chemicals used in cosmetics, nearly 900 of them are toxic. Women are becoming more aware of this issue, and there are more more natural cosmetics available today than in years past. But remember that labels do not tell the whole story. For more on how to select natural products, see Not All Natural Beauty Products are Natural.
Telegraph.co.uk June 22, 2007
22 June 2007
The Sunscreen Myth: How Sunscreen Products Actually Promote Cancer
The myth that the sun is detrimental to your health, and that sunscreen is a necessity to guard against cancer is one of the most pervasive hoaxes in our society today.
As this article in News Target points out, this myth can be traced back to the two industries that benefit the most: the cancer industry and the sunscreen manufacturers.
Mike Adams draws a neat little picture about these two giant profit-makers, and how their tag-team efforts keep the unsuspecting public in a trance.
Sunscreens perpetuate the rise in cancers by delivering a potentially deadly double-whammy:
* They contain cancer-causing chemicals, and
* They promote vitamin D deficiency, as they block sun rays.
Recent studies have shown that vitamin D prevents up to 77 percent of all cancers. For more information about the vital importance of vitamin D from sunlight, please review my article Reduce Your Risk of Cancer With Sunlight Exposure, if you haven't already seen it.
Sunburn should always be avoided, but there are many all-natural ways to protect yourself from sunburn than resorting to the toxic infusions of commercial sunscreens. Slathering on some aloe vera gel, and boosting your skin's "internal sunscreen" from within with chlorella, spirulina, goji berries (not the juice), raspberries, blackberries, blueberries and carrots, are far healthier options.
If you're still hooked on the idea of a cream, look for natural sunscreen products that contain no petrochemicals, such as Aubrey's Active and Green Tea sunblocks. Just remember, although these products are non-toxic, they still prevent you from metabolizing vitamin D, so use them with caution. I recommend testing your vitamin D levels to make sure you're not deficient before resorting to sunscreen of any kind.
NewsTarget.com June 15, 2007
21 June 2007
GETTING TO THE GUTS OF TRUTH ABOUT AUTISM, ALLERGY AND MMR
If you are not sure, then please read on to find out what we know about autism, the gut, vaccinations and what food has to do with it. The strongest direct evidence of foods linked to autism involves wheat and dairy, and the specific proteins they contain - namely gluten and casein. These are difficult to digest and, especially if introduced too early in life, may result in an allergy. Fragments of these proteins, called peptides, can mimic chemicals in the brain called endorphins, so they're often referred to as 'exorphins'. These exporphin peptides have damaging opioid-like effects in the brain, leading to the many symptoms we describe as autism. Researchers at the Autism Research Unit at Sunderland University have found increased levels of these peptides in the blood and urine of children with autism [1].
What's Going on in the Gut
To understand how these common foods can be so harmful to sensitive individuals, we need to look at how they get into the body via the gut. Opioid peptides are derived from the incomplete digestion of proteins, particularly food containing gluten and casein. One such peptide, IAG, derived from gluten in wheat, is detected in 80 per cent of autistic patients [2], while another, gliadorphin-7, has been found in very large amounts in 54 per cent of autistic children, but only in very small amounts in just 32 per cent of non-autistic children [3]. So the first problem is the poor digestion of proteins. Zinc and vitamin B6 can help autistic children, and here it is worth noting that these two nutrients are essential for proper stomach acid production and therefore protein digestion. But even then, these partially digested protein fragments shouldn't enter the bloodstream. So how do they? Vitamin A deficiency is certainly one culprit, but there may be more.
A large proportion of parents with autistic children report that their child received repeated or prolonged courses of antibiotic drugs for ear or other respiratory infections during the first year of life, prior to the diagnosis of autism. Broad spectrum antibiotics kill good as well as bad bacteria in the gut, weakening the intestinal membranes. This can lead to what is known as leaky gut syndrome, in which large molecules that shouldn't be absorbed through the gut membrane do get through [4]. Dr Andrew Wakefield, in a now controversial study, published in the Lancet in February 1998, of 60 autistic children with gastrointestinal symptoms, found much greater incidences of intestinal lesions than in non-autistic children with similar digestive problems. Over 90 per cent of autistic children showed clinical evidence of chronic inflammation of the small and large intestine as a result of infection, at levels greater than six times that found in non-autistic children with inflammatory bowel disease [5].
Despite a concerted effort to discredit Wakefield's research, recent studies are confirming the link between autism, digestive problems, immune system abnormalities and the MMR vaccine. Wakefield's own research has shown that, in a group of 15 autistic children versus healthy children, there is clear evidence of immune dysfunction [6]. Three studies have shown measles antibodies in the central nervous system, with the potential to damage both brain and gut. [7;8;9]
So restoring a healthy gut in autistic children is very important. Supplementing digestive enzymes and probiotics is known to produce positive clinical results in autistic children, as these nutrients help heal the digestive tract and restore normal absorption [10]. Improving the healthy balance of bacteria in the digestive tract, which can be helped by taking probiotic supplements, may also help by digesting exorphins in the gut before they can be inappropriately absorbed [11]. The amino acid L-glutamine is especially important in restoring the integrity of the digestive tract. Drinking 5g dissolved in water just before bedtime can help heal the gut.
Cutting Out Wheat and Dairy
Clearly though, removing suspect foods from the diet is key, and there are many anecdotal reports of dramatic improvements from parents who remove casein and gluten from their autistic children's diet [12]. It can take some time for the harmful peptides to be removed from the blood and brain, so results can be slow to emerge. Dr Robert Cade, professor of medicine and physiology at the University of Florida, has observed that as the levels of peptides in the blood decrease, the symptoms of autism decrease. 'If they can be reduced to normal range,' he says, 'most patients either improve dramatically or become completely normal.' But you need to rigidly adhere to a gluten/casein-free diet to accomplish this [13].
The Autism Research Unit at Sunderland University recommend a gradual withdrawal of foods, waiting three weeks after the removal of casein (dairy) before removing gluten (wheat, oats, barley, rye) from the diet. Keep a food diary and note behaviours and symptoms alongside. This can help to identify other problematic foods, which commonly include citrus fruits, chocolate, artificial food colourings, salicylates, eggs, tomatoes, avocados, aubergine, red peppers, soya and corn [14]. Because you need to ensure that these foods are replaced rather than just removed, as well as being fully aware of all those foods that contain gluten and/or casein, this is best done under the guidance of a nutritional therapist.
The MMR Vaccine Debate
The official line is that there's no good evidence of a danger of the MMR vaccine causing autism in children. There's some truth to this, in that Dr Andrew Wakefield's research at the Royal Free Hospital [15], while important, was the first hint of a problem and it may be too early to jump to conclusions. Of course, the last thing the medical profession want is a whole lot of children not being vaccinated, since that increases the risk of epidemics. Here's what Wakefield actually said: 'Although MMR cannot by any means be described as a cause of autism, a child genetically predisposed to asthma, eczema , food allergy or intolerance, perhaps with possible disruption of the gut flora or with a fungal overgrowth, deficient in vitamins, minerals and essential fatty acids, may be at risk from MMR. For them MMR could be described as the straw that broke the camel's back, tipping the balance of normal childhood development into a retrogressive state. [16]' However, despite many attempts to discredit Wakefield, a recent review of all the available evidence on autism and vaccination concludes 'there has not been a single credible study that can robustly refute the claims of the parents that their children's acquired autism has been caused by MMR or related measles-containing vaccines, or thimerosal-containing vaccines.' [17] A recent study found that in 55 out of 824 children with autism, the parents reported clear signs of regression associated with the MMR vaccine. If correct, this means that 6.7 per cent of autistic children, or 1 in 15, are attributed to the MMR vaccine, according to parents. [18]
For most children, the MMR vaccine is unlikely to be a problem, but having said this, no one really knows the full consequences of giving a child three immune attacks - mumps, measles and rubella - all at the same time. Getting all three illnesses at once simply doesn't occur in nature, so there's a logical argument for single vaccines if a parent so chooses, especially for children with weakened immune systems. Perhaps for these children, with nutrient deficiencies, lacking essential fatty acids, susceptible to food allergies, infections and/or gut problems, these triple vaccines are the last straw.
So just what is the evidence against MMR? First, studies have shown a high incidence of autism in children whose mothers had received live virus vaccines (particularly the MMR or rubella vaccine) immediately prior to conception during pregnancy, or immediately following birth [19]. Secondly, there are two classifications of autism: the first where autistic traits are noted from birth and the second where symptoms are noted at 18 months plus. Autism onset at 18 months was uncommon until the mid-1980s, when the MMR vaccine came into wide use. After that the incidence shot up [20]. Thirdly, there is now evidence that measles antibodies can lie in the central nervous system, potentially damaging brain and gut. In fact, many autistic children are found to have measles antibodies in the gut. It's a bit like having a chronic infection. It seems that this triple vaccine makes measles persist. The antidote for measles is vitamin A. This is one of the most important infection fighters for this virus.
The late Dr Bernard Rimland said that the problem may not be the vaccine itself, but a preservative used in multi-dose vials of many childhood vaccines till very recently. Thimerosal, a preservative containing high levels of mercury, was used in many vaccines up until 2001. Before this, each vaccine injection exposed the child to levels of toxic mercury in excess of the US federal government's own safety guidelines, and a child receiving all their jabs could have received a total of 187.5mcg of mercury - enough to give them heavy metal poisoning [21]. Mercury is known to inhibit the enzyme that digests gluten and casein, possibly increasing a child's susceptibility to wheat and milk allergy.
Although it is too early to conclude, it is entirely possible that late-onset autism may be triggered by multiple vaccinations, allergies, toxic overload or nutritional deficiencies and especially combinations of any of these that send a child's gut and brain into distress.
19 June 2007
Hidden Danger of Swimming Pools
A new study published in the journal Pediatrics, found that children who spend a lot of time at indoor swimming pools during their early years are more prone to developing asthma and other breathing problems as they grow older, compared to others who do not frequent indoor pools.
They believe that harmful gases trapped indoors from the chlorinated pools are to blame for the airway damage. The main culprit: trichloramine, or nitrogen trichloride, is created when chlorine reacts with ammonia, which can be found in the sweat and urine from swimmers.
Swimming is both a great form of exercise and a vital life-saving skill for little ones. However, I don't recommend swimming in swimming pools, whether indoors or out, since your body absorbs more chlorine by swimming in a chlorinated pool than you would by drinking tap water for one week.
If you don't have access to a lake, ocean or other natural body of water, using peroxide (not bromine) is also an alternative for chlorine in your private pool. A product called Baquacil is available at most pool stores that can do the job safely. If all else fails--try to stick with outdoor pools, as at least the fumes are whisked away by the open air.
Pediatrics 2007 Jun;119(6):1095-103
They believe that harmful gases trapped indoors from the chlorinated pools are to blame for the airway damage. The main culprit: trichloramine, or nitrogen trichloride, is created when chlorine reacts with ammonia, which can be found in the sweat and urine from swimmers.
Swimming is both a great form of exercise and a vital life-saving skill for little ones. However, I don't recommend swimming in swimming pools, whether indoors or out, since your body absorbs more chlorine by swimming in a chlorinated pool than you would by drinking tap water for one week.
If you don't have access to a lake, ocean or other natural body of water, using peroxide (not bromine) is also an alternative for chlorine in your private pool. A product called Baquacil is available at most pool stores that can do the job safely. If all else fails--try to stick with outdoor pools, as at least the fumes are whisked away by the open air.
Pediatrics 2007 Jun;119(6):1095-103
5 June 2007
When Doctors Strike, Fewer People Die
In 1973 doctors in Israel staged a month-long strike and during that month, mortality fell by 50 percent. A couple of years later, a two-month work stoppage by doctors in the Columbian capital of Bogotá led to a 35-percent decline in deaths. And during a “work slowdown” by doctors in Los Angeles protesting against the sharp increase in premiums for liability insurance, the number of deaths fell by 18 percent.
Once doctors were back at work full time, mortality immediately jumped back to the previous level. Every year, 1.2 million Britons are hospitalized as a result of improper medical care. In the United States – where 40,000 people are shot to death each year – the chance of getting “killed” by a doctor is three times greater than being killed by a gun. And every year significantly more people die from an infection sustained while in the hospital than as a result of traffic accidents.
Over 20 years ago the American culture critic Ivan Illich wrote that health care has become a threat to our health. But this is still not the prevailing image. Modern healthcare is considered one of the triumphs of the twentieth century. Most people are convinced that a close family member or friend without a pill or a doctor’s input wouldn’t be alive today. But as lauded as today’s doctors are, they are no more effective – when it comes to medicine – than the priests of yesteryear.
More recently Gary Null performed a comprehensive literature review and found that the conventional medical system is responsible for killing nearly 800,000 people every year in the US alone.
Today we live twice as long, an average, compared to a century ago, but this progress is not due to modern medicine. Cholera, typhoid, tuberculosis and dysentery were already on the decline when antibiotics and vaccines were introduced.
The reason?
Hygiene and Better Nutrition.
And while doctors first discovered and proclaimed the importance of these two factors, it doesn’t mean that soap and boiled water are medical remedies. It is typical that the man who conducted the first heart transplant in the world, the South African physician Christiaan Barnard, points to Thomas Crapper as one of humanity’s greatest benefactors.
Crapper was a British plumber who invented the flush toilet. The greatest advance in modern medicine in the twentieth century was the advent of “emergency care”. If you develop an acute, life-threatening infection, suffer a heart attack, a serious care accident or an operable tumor, the best place you can be is in a western hospital. The same applies to a new hip or a cataract operation. But such “crisis moments” are the exception.
The vast majority of most conditions concern chronic illnesses, cancer and cardiovascular disease. And western health care has sadly little to offer in this regard. Old plagues have been supplanted by new ones. The post-war belief that illness would be eradicated has come to naught. Eighty percent of the most common treatments and medicines have not even been thoroughly tested (New Scientist, 17 September 1994), don’t contribute to our health or even threaten it. For example, excessive use of antibiotics not only leads to resistance, but can also damage your body’s natural, friendly bacterial balance.
Recent research also shows that mammograms more often lead to cancer than detect it. And that it is often safer not to operate on prostate cancer. And that low-cholesterol diets increase the chance of dying. And so forth.
The problem lies with our vision of modern healthcare: health is the normal state of being for humans and illness is something that comes from the outside, an enemy to be fought. Often, healthcare resembles a military operation. Even the terminology is similar: the war on cancer… Doctors see the body as a machine whose dysfunctional parts are replaceable. This machine can be controlled externally by medicine and medial technology.
The use of chemotherapy against cancer is a striking illustration of this way of thinking. The body is poisoned to beat the cancer. The worst part is that the results are dreadful: in over 90 percent of cases, chemotherapy has nothing to offer. When 118 oncologists at a major cancer institute in the United States were asked whether they would opt for chemotherapy if they were cancer patients, three-quarters said they would turn down the treatment.
Why?
Cancer Treatment is “Ineffective and Unacceptably Poisonous.”
And yet, a great many people subject themselves to this poisonous therapy. This is due to another concerning aspect of modern health care: the conflict of interest between doctors and the pharmaceutical industry.
Patients can only think that they are buying what they think they need. Patients have become objects in a system in which technology is the master and the doctor is God. They lie in hospital beds while doctors consider their “status”. They are so closely identified with a sick body part that they lose themselves completely. They have become an illness instead of human beings.
The defenseless patient is the inevitable result of the fact that health care has degenerated into an industrial system in which – and this is inherent to such a system – procedures are more important than people. In this system, taking responsibility and independence have gotten lost. “The pre-eminence of technology leads to inner debilitation,” genetic expert Hans Galjaard once told Ode. And this lays the foundation for illness.
There May Be Another Way
Or, better yet: there is another way. Healing appears to be a complex process in which–contrary to the accepted western view–not only medicine and tangible cells play a role, but also intangible aspects such as hope, belief, trust and will. Take prayer, for example.
Doctors know from experience that patients who ask “why” when blood work is ordered and doesn’t simply undress for the doctor, usually fare well. And how can it be that a mother produces antibodies in her breast milk when her baby is suffering from an infection? All doctors take the Hippocratic oath, but do these doctors–who continually intervene in the body’s natural processes–realize that this ancient Greek master once said that “the healing power of nature” is the most important of all?
This is why Chinese, Indian, Native American and other “primitive” medicine practices are geared towards supporting the body’s self-healing processes. These traditions assume that nature is perfect and that the body wants to be healthy.
We continually hear stories about people who inexplicably heal from incurable illnesses. People, for example, who doctors give up on because their tumors are no longer treatable. They walk out of the hospital – and the health care system – choose their own path and “miraculously” heal. Years later, scans pick up no trace of the tumor.
Modern medicine passes such cases off as “anecdotal” because there is no concrete explanation. But perhaps these anecdotes prove the self-healing power of the human body. Perhaps treatments and medicines mainly serve to stimulate the body’s spontaneous healing process. A phenomenon that is just as ancient as health care itself, points in this direction.
It is known that people get better when they take pills that have no demonstrable physical effect: the placebo, which comes from the Latin for “I shall please”. It’s easy to accept that the medicinal effect of the brews and potions of the doctors of the past can be explained by the placebo effect. Those potions had no provable medicinal effect. But the same is true for the majority of modern medicines: only 20 percent have been proven to have a scientific effect. This means that doctors prescribe pills and treatments that are essentially inert. But that doesn’t mean they don’t work: their healing power comes from the placebo effect.
For many disorders – from pain and high blood pressure to asthma and arthritis – placebos appear to offer substantial relief to 70 percent of patients. Placebos are even effective in cases of psychiatric disturbances, e.g. depression. Or in any case no less effective than “real” medicines.
Your Mind Can Heal Your Body
A dramatic example of this is the multi-center double blinded placebo controlled randomized trial of knee arthroscopy surgery that showed patients that received the sham non surgical intervention performed as well as those that had the real surgery. This was published in the most prestigious medical journal in the world.
The simple fact that a doctor prescribes a pill is apparently sufficient to boost healing. Expectations and trust play a crucial role here. And trust grows with the attention given by the doctor. Various placebo studies have shown that doctors themselves are the best medicine. A doctor who listens, mobilizes patients’ ability to heal themselves. Moreover, the placebo effect indicates that all types of “health care” are effective once the patient believes.
This also explains the increasing success of alternative therapies. Aside from the fact that the treatment methods – such as homeopathy and acupuncture – have numerous proven healing effects, alternative therapies generally show more respect for patients. They take an integral approach instead of merely addressing the symptoms. And the natural medical doctor generally spends more time and attention on his patients. He listens to their whole story, including their feelings of sadness and despair. This attention restores “patients’ faith in their own healing.”
Attention and care are therefore crucial. But these are qualities seldom found in the modern health care system. Doctors who want to give their patients attention are hounded by hospital administrators and insurance companies clamoring for “efficiency”. It is telling that The Economist recently argued that health care could learn a whole lot from McDonald’s in the area of efficiency…
New technology, medicines or procedures will not lead to a better and cheaper healthcare system. What will, is the willingness and ability of individuals to take care of themselves. Only when patients take that step, will modern medicine fall from its pedestal.
Take Control of Your Health
Taking responsibility is more than sticking to a low-cholesterol diet. It means asking questions. What can I do myself? How can I live my life differently? What lifestyle would suit me better? It means no longer seeing the doctor as an all-knowing master but as a partner who can help find the best method of healing based on the conviction that everyone can find his or her own answer to an illness. It means: seeking the best therapies both in the conventional and alternative circuits.
Dr. Andrew Weil targets seven characteristics of successful patients. They won’t take “no” for an answer; they actively seek alternative treatment methods; they seek advice from people who have recovered from the same illness; they constructively cooperate with doctors and other healers; they are not afraid of a radical change in their lives; they see their illness as an opportunity for growth; and they accept themselves as they are.
That last characteristic is essential because dying is not failing. Dying is a natural process that no one can avoid. Modern medicine digs its heels in against death, but in so doing robs people of the meaning of life.
Ultimately, healing is not always physical recovery. It is possible to find meaning and acceptance in death. In that respect, an illness—even one that is terminal—offers an opportunity to “heal”. Ultimately, a dignified death counts. There is a story about this, in which an old man in the hospital witnesses how doctors try, in vain, to bring a fellow patient back to life using tubes and machines. After this experience, the man begs his doctor to spare him a similar end.
“Listen doctor,” he says, “I don’t want to die with my body stuffed with tubes. I don’t want my children to remember their father like that. I have always tried to live with my head held high. I am not complaining that I’m dying. But I want to die like a human being, not like a plant that someone comes to water every day—I don’t want to die like him.”
But the man’s wish goes unheeded. The hospital system is simply programmed to extend people’s lives as much as possible. Ultimately, the man is able to free himself from the tubes and machines. He leaves a note for his doctor: “Death is not the enemy, doctor; inhumanity is the enemy.”
Ode Issue 999
Once doctors were back at work full time, mortality immediately jumped back to the previous level. Every year, 1.2 million Britons are hospitalized as a result of improper medical care. In the United States – where 40,000 people are shot to death each year – the chance of getting “killed” by a doctor is three times greater than being killed by a gun. And every year significantly more people die from an infection sustained while in the hospital than as a result of traffic accidents.
Over 20 years ago the American culture critic Ivan Illich wrote that health care has become a threat to our health. But this is still not the prevailing image. Modern healthcare is considered one of the triumphs of the twentieth century. Most people are convinced that a close family member or friend without a pill or a doctor’s input wouldn’t be alive today. But as lauded as today’s doctors are, they are no more effective – when it comes to medicine – than the priests of yesteryear.
More recently Gary Null performed a comprehensive literature review and found that the conventional medical system is responsible for killing nearly 800,000 people every year in the US alone.
Today we live twice as long, an average, compared to a century ago, but this progress is not due to modern medicine. Cholera, typhoid, tuberculosis and dysentery were already on the decline when antibiotics and vaccines were introduced.
The reason?
Hygiene and Better Nutrition.
And while doctors first discovered and proclaimed the importance of these two factors, it doesn’t mean that soap and boiled water are medical remedies. It is typical that the man who conducted the first heart transplant in the world, the South African physician Christiaan Barnard, points to Thomas Crapper as one of humanity’s greatest benefactors.
Crapper was a British plumber who invented the flush toilet. The greatest advance in modern medicine in the twentieth century was the advent of “emergency care”. If you develop an acute, life-threatening infection, suffer a heart attack, a serious care accident or an operable tumor, the best place you can be is in a western hospital. The same applies to a new hip or a cataract operation. But such “crisis moments” are the exception.
The vast majority of most conditions concern chronic illnesses, cancer and cardiovascular disease. And western health care has sadly little to offer in this regard. Old plagues have been supplanted by new ones. The post-war belief that illness would be eradicated has come to naught. Eighty percent of the most common treatments and medicines have not even been thoroughly tested (New Scientist, 17 September 1994), don’t contribute to our health or even threaten it. For example, excessive use of antibiotics not only leads to resistance, but can also damage your body’s natural, friendly bacterial balance.
Recent research also shows that mammograms more often lead to cancer than detect it. And that it is often safer not to operate on prostate cancer. And that low-cholesterol diets increase the chance of dying. And so forth.
The problem lies with our vision of modern healthcare: health is the normal state of being for humans and illness is something that comes from the outside, an enemy to be fought. Often, healthcare resembles a military operation. Even the terminology is similar: the war on cancer… Doctors see the body as a machine whose dysfunctional parts are replaceable. This machine can be controlled externally by medicine and medial technology.
The use of chemotherapy against cancer is a striking illustration of this way of thinking. The body is poisoned to beat the cancer. The worst part is that the results are dreadful: in over 90 percent of cases, chemotherapy has nothing to offer. When 118 oncologists at a major cancer institute in the United States were asked whether they would opt for chemotherapy if they were cancer patients, three-quarters said they would turn down the treatment.
Why?
Cancer Treatment is “Ineffective and Unacceptably Poisonous.”
And yet, a great many people subject themselves to this poisonous therapy. This is due to another concerning aspect of modern health care: the conflict of interest between doctors and the pharmaceutical industry.
Patients can only think that they are buying what they think they need. Patients have become objects in a system in which technology is the master and the doctor is God. They lie in hospital beds while doctors consider their “status”. They are so closely identified with a sick body part that they lose themselves completely. They have become an illness instead of human beings.
The defenseless patient is the inevitable result of the fact that health care has degenerated into an industrial system in which – and this is inherent to such a system – procedures are more important than people. In this system, taking responsibility and independence have gotten lost. “The pre-eminence of technology leads to inner debilitation,” genetic expert Hans Galjaard once told Ode. And this lays the foundation for illness.
There May Be Another Way
Or, better yet: there is another way. Healing appears to be a complex process in which–contrary to the accepted western view–not only medicine and tangible cells play a role, but also intangible aspects such as hope, belief, trust and will. Take prayer, for example.
Doctors know from experience that patients who ask “why” when blood work is ordered and doesn’t simply undress for the doctor, usually fare well. And how can it be that a mother produces antibodies in her breast milk when her baby is suffering from an infection? All doctors take the Hippocratic oath, but do these doctors–who continually intervene in the body’s natural processes–realize that this ancient Greek master once said that “the healing power of nature” is the most important of all?
This is why Chinese, Indian, Native American and other “primitive” medicine practices are geared towards supporting the body’s self-healing processes. These traditions assume that nature is perfect and that the body wants to be healthy.
We continually hear stories about people who inexplicably heal from incurable illnesses. People, for example, who doctors give up on because their tumors are no longer treatable. They walk out of the hospital – and the health care system – choose their own path and “miraculously” heal. Years later, scans pick up no trace of the tumor.
Modern medicine passes such cases off as “anecdotal” because there is no concrete explanation. But perhaps these anecdotes prove the self-healing power of the human body. Perhaps treatments and medicines mainly serve to stimulate the body’s spontaneous healing process. A phenomenon that is just as ancient as health care itself, points in this direction.
It is known that people get better when they take pills that have no demonstrable physical effect: the placebo, which comes from the Latin for “I shall please”. It’s easy to accept that the medicinal effect of the brews and potions of the doctors of the past can be explained by the placebo effect. Those potions had no provable medicinal effect. But the same is true for the majority of modern medicines: only 20 percent have been proven to have a scientific effect. This means that doctors prescribe pills and treatments that are essentially inert. But that doesn’t mean they don’t work: their healing power comes from the placebo effect.
For many disorders – from pain and high blood pressure to asthma and arthritis – placebos appear to offer substantial relief to 70 percent of patients. Placebos are even effective in cases of psychiatric disturbances, e.g. depression. Or in any case no less effective than “real” medicines.
Your Mind Can Heal Your Body
A dramatic example of this is the multi-center double blinded placebo controlled randomized trial of knee arthroscopy surgery that showed patients that received the sham non surgical intervention performed as well as those that had the real surgery. This was published in the most prestigious medical journal in the world.
The simple fact that a doctor prescribes a pill is apparently sufficient to boost healing. Expectations and trust play a crucial role here. And trust grows with the attention given by the doctor. Various placebo studies have shown that doctors themselves are the best medicine. A doctor who listens, mobilizes patients’ ability to heal themselves. Moreover, the placebo effect indicates that all types of “health care” are effective once the patient believes.
This also explains the increasing success of alternative therapies. Aside from the fact that the treatment methods – such as homeopathy and acupuncture – have numerous proven healing effects, alternative therapies generally show more respect for patients. They take an integral approach instead of merely addressing the symptoms. And the natural medical doctor generally spends more time and attention on his patients. He listens to their whole story, including their feelings of sadness and despair. This attention restores “patients’ faith in their own healing.”
Attention and care are therefore crucial. But these are qualities seldom found in the modern health care system. Doctors who want to give their patients attention are hounded by hospital administrators and insurance companies clamoring for “efficiency”. It is telling that The Economist recently argued that health care could learn a whole lot from McDonald’s in the area of efficiency…
New technology, medicines or procedures will not lead to a better and cheaper healthcare system. What will, is the willingness and ability of individuals to take care of themselves. Only when patients take that step, will modern medicine fall from its pedestal.
Take Control of Your Health
Taking responsibility is more than sticking to a low-cholesterol diet. It means asking questions. What can I do myself? How can I live my life differently? What lifestyle would suit me better? It means no longer seeing the doctor as an all-knowing master but as a partner who can help find the best method of healing based on the conviction that everyone can find his or her own answer to an illness. It means: seeking the best therapies both in the conventional and alternative circuits.
Dr. Andrew Weil targets seven characteristics of successful patients. They won’t take “no” for an answer; they actively seek alternative treatment methods; they seek advice from people who have recovered from the same illness; they constructively cooperate with doctors and other healers; they are not afraid of a radical change in their lives; they see their illness as an opportunity for growth; and they accept themselves as they are.
That last characteristic is essential because dying is not failing. Dying is a natural process that no one can avoid. Modern medicine digs its heels in against death, but in so doing robs people of the meaning of life.
Ultimately, healing is not always physical recovery. It is possible to find meaning and acceptance in death. In that respect, an illness—even one that is terminal—offers an opportunity to “heal”. Ultimately, a dignified death counts. There is a story about this, in which an old man in the hospital witnesses how doctors try, in vain, to bring a fellow patient back to life using tubes and machines. After this experience, the man begs his doctor to spare him a similar end.
“Listen doctor,” he says, “I don’t want to die with my body stuffed with tubes. I don’t want my children to remember their father like that. I have always tried to live with my head held high. I am not complaining that I’m dying. But I want to die like a human being, not like a plant that someone comes to water every day—I don’t want to die like him.”
But the man’s wish goes unheeded. The hospital system is simply programmed to extend people’s lives as much as possible. Ultimately, the man is able to free himself from the tubes and machines. He leaves a note for his doctor: “Death is not the enemy, doctor; inhumanity is the enemy.”
Ode Issue 999
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)