People often ask me if I have ever killed a patient...
I'm never quite sure how to answer that.
My reaction is that every physician has killed a patient.
Of course not intentionally, probably not even negligently, but it eventually happens.
One that stands out for me is Mrs. M.
Mrs M was an older woman, probably 63 or so. I inherited her care from the venerable senior small town doc whom I replaced. She was short, wide and with multiple medical problems. My first impression of her is overhearing her lament the loss of her retiring physician, a man who was loved by all, and her stating she didn't want some young kid taking care of her.
She went on to tell my nurse she was only there because she liked my staff.
I immediately liked her!
She was often somewhat dishevelled, always cantankerous and difficult to care for.
We grew quite close though neither of us would admit it as her grumpy, slightly pessimistic front was never to be drawn down for a moment.
One afternoon she presented with 24 hours of shortness of breath.
Her physical exam was basically normal , but her pulse oximetry in the office hovered in the low 80% .
This meant she was not getting enough oxygen in her lungs, and as she had no signs of heart failure, two things occurred to me.
First, how happy I was that I had spent $800 that I really didn't have when I first opened my doors on this cool hand held oximeter.
The second was that my patient had a pulmonary embolism, was lucky to be alive, and needed a hospital and immediate blood thinners.
As I delivered to her my fears, she never blinked. She trusted me. I loved this woman!
I called an ambulance (a clear conflict of interest since I owned the ambulance company! but that is another story).
I called the ER and sold her to the admitting service there.
As it turned out, I was correct, her lung scan showed the dreaded ventilation perfusion mismatch.
In other words plenty of air in the lungs (ventilation) but no blood to pick up that oxygen and take it to the body (perfusion). She did well and was discharged on long term anti coagulation. Blood thinners, that dual edged sword that is the treatment for blood clots.
Our blood is an amazing thing, flowing through the body as a liquid but becoming a sticky solid when exposed to the outside world. Neat trick huh?
Well not so fast, cause every heart attack, most strokes, and blood clots are an example of that blood turning into a solid when it isn't supposed to... in the heart, the brain or a leg.
Managing blood thinners is an interesting dance with the devil. Like arming insurgents to help you fight a battle only to have those arms turned into an IED that kills or mames your troops later in the long war on disease.
The goal is to thin the blood, but not too much... lest you turn your patient into an oozing puddle of goo.
The problem is every patients body responds to the blood thinner differently and the dose is quite variable for each patient and can vary with other factors particularly diet. Vitamin K counteracts blood thinners, so if your patient goes grazing the greens at a salad bar they may end up a little thick, overshoot on the thinners and they end up too thin.
All this is followed by repeating the blood test frequently and our chubby grumpy Gussie was not an easy stick!
So she was in my office so often that she had her own coffee cup. She became quite close to the staff and I. The blood draws started early in my office. Hech, at that time the nearest medical lab was 25 miles away. Many a morning her grumpy mug met me as the nurses searched desperately for a source of the much needed blood to follow her bleeding times so we could adjust her dose of anti coagulant.
As it turns out she was the most sensitive patient to coumadin I had ever heard of or encountered in my medical career.
Most patients take about 5 mg a day or so of coumadin (yes rat poison! How do you think it kills the rats?) the hospital sent her home on 5 mg a day with follow up in my office.
After an incredibly painful and elongated series of blood tests in which she was so thin I damn near could have sopped her up with a sponge she settled out on a half a milligram every other day! Unbelievable!
There she stayed until her 6 month course of therapy was done.
Four months later she called my office with shortness of breath. To survive another blood clot in the lung...well its damn lucky. Off the the hospital, new pulmonary embolism, another round of anti coagulation possibly for life this time.
I immediately called the attending on call and discussed the patient. I told him about her unusual coumadin dosages and how I was amazed and had never seen a patient this sensitive to the drug.
We pondered a hematology workup for clotting disorders, filter placement and other issues.
5 days later she was discharged on 5 mg of coumadin a day!
I didn't receive this paperwork til days later, she was scheduled for a blood test in my office soon to check her bleeding time.
I called her in immediately to have it done, ordered the test stat.
She came back DANGEROUSLY thin.
I was upset. How could this information be lost, why did the patient take so much knowing what we went through? Why wouldn't she call me on discharge?
She would have to go back to the hospital and be placed on heparin while her coumadin effects were reversed.
I called the attending. He was busy, he was annoyed with my call. He obviously didn't share the same feeling for this grumpy patient that I did.
He talked me into a conservative approach of watching her, stopping the oral drug, and letting it fall naturally. I balked but acquiesced.
That cost the patient her life.
She was found by her family the next morning, unconscious and rushed to the hospital, a massive intracranial bleed!
Damn! The roadside bomb I had given to the insurgents, the one I was so trying to avoid, went off in my patients brain!
I was devastated and heartbroken.
I had failed her, she needed an advocate and I had caved! I knew what was right and I should have just sent her to the ER and to hell with the attending!
I was also scared, whose ass was on the line here? Mine! I made the call. The fact that the family might sue the attending from the hospital too was little consolation.
She lived several painful harrowing months, but never regained consciousness, a vegetable.
A terrible experience for all involved in her care, especially her family.
They refused my calls to enquire about her care. I heard later from one of her nurses at the nursing home that the only reason they did not sue was that the family knew the patient loved me, and would never have wanted that.
That offered me some solace, but not much.
I killed that patient.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Special Holiday Facts 12 days of christmas
Well the big day is here, so before I partake in all the goodies and open my new socks, I wanted to share a few things i discovered en route to looking up other things:
So. Do you know the meaning inherent in the well-known carol "The Twelve Days of Christmas"?
What in the world do leaping lords, French hens, swimming swans, and especially the partridge who won't come out of the pear tree have to do with Christmas?
Today, you'll find out.
From 1558 until 1829, Roman Catholics in England were not permitted to practice their faith openly. Someone during that era wrote this carol as a catechism song for young Catholics. It has two levels of meaning: the surface meaning, plus a hidden meaning known only to members of their church. Each element in the carol has a code word for a religious reality that the children could remember.
The partridge in a pear tree was Jesus Christ
Two turtle doves were the Old and New Testaments
Three French hens stood for faith, hope and love
The four calling birds were the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John
The five golden rings recalled the Torah or Law, the first five books of the Old Testament
The six geese a-laying stood for the six days of creation
Seven swans a-swimming represented the sevenfold gifts of the Holy Spirit
Prophesy
Serving
Teaching
Exhortation
Contribution
Leadership
Mercy
The eight maids a-milking were the eight beatitudes
Nine ladies dancing were the nine fruits of the Holy Spirit
Love
Joy
Peace
Patience
Kindness
Goodness
Faithfulness
Gentleness
Self Control
The ten lords a-leaping were the ten commandments
The eleven pipers piping stood for the eleven faithful disciples
The twelve drummers drumming symbolized the twelve points of belief in the Apostles'
Creed
Merry Christmas
So. Do you know the meaning inherent in the well-known carol "The Twelve Days of Christmas"?
What in the world do leaping lords, French hens, swimming swans, and especially the partridge who won't come out of the pear tree have to do with Christmas?
Today, you'll find out.
From 1558 until 1829, Roman Catholics in England were not permitted to practice their faith openly. Someone during that era wrote this carol as a catechism song for young Catholics. It has two levels of meaning: the surface meaning, plus a hidden meaning known only to members of their church. Each element in the carol has a code word for a religious reality that the children could remember.
The partridge in a pear tree was Jesus Christ
Two turtle doves were the Old and New Testaments
Three French hens stood for faith, hope and love
The four calling birds were the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John
The five golden rings recalled the Torah or Law, the first five books of the Old Testament
The six geese a-laying stood for the six days of creation
Seven swans a-swimming represented the sevenfold gifts of the Holy Spirit
Prophesy
Serving
Teaching
Exhortation
Contribution
Leadership
Mercy
The eight maids a-milking were the eight beatitudes
Nine ladies dancing were the nine fruits of the Holy Spirit
Love
Joy
Peace
Patience
Kindness
Goodness
Faithfulness
Gentleness
Self Control
The ten lords a-leaping were the ten commandments
The eleven pipers piping stood for the eleven faithful disciples
The twelve drummers drumming symbolized the twelve points of belief in the Apostles'
Creed
Merry Christmas
Friday, December 5, 2008
The DEA, Civil Rights, and Inneffective On Site Drug Tests
Organic Consumers and Companies Harassed by Drug Agents and Police
When Canadian citizens Nadine Artemis and Ron Obadia took a family vacation, it ended with them being led through Toronto's airport in handcuffs, locked up and separated from their baby.
Police told them they could be facing years in prison for exporting narcotics.
Two and a half pounds of material found in their carry-on bag had tested positive for hashish. But they didn't have drugs. They had chocolate. So far, the couple's legal bills have topped $20,000.
The couple was caught up in what civil libertarians say is a growing problem -- the use of unreliable field drug-test kits as the basis to arrest innocent people on illegal drug charges.
The kits, which are used by most every police department in the U.S., and by federal agents in Customs at the nation’s borders, use powerful acids that react with the substance in a plastic pouch. If the liquid turns a certain color, it is a considered a positive result.
A positive result generally leads to an arrest.
But a number of legal products and plants test positive:
chocolate for hashish
rosemary for marijuana
natural soaps for the "date-rape drug" GHB
With the growth of organic and natural foods and products, experts say arrests are likely to increase.
Sources:
Organic Consumers Association November 1, 2008
>
As a certified DOT workplace drug test evaluator, I have long known that hand held, on site drug screens are grossly inaccurate. I never used them or recommend any institution use them,
let alone police and other law enforcement agencies that often employ those in our society with the lowest IQs, the most corrupt, and ironicly have total power and the ability to cause the most damage to our civil liberties than any other organizations in our country.
As Coroner and physician for our local jail, I have never worked with a more uneducated, ignorant, misguided group of individuals in my life.
Particularly probation officers who rank as the most untrustworthy, corrupt and ignorant individuals on the planet.
To put these inaccurate tools in the hands of these people is a travesty of justice that must be addressed. This is a system with nearly no counterbalances of power.
I personally have seen local adult parole authorities with a 4 hour course on drug testing use these tests to put people in jail on a regular basis, then have them tell me that they are 100% accurate! It smacks of third world justice and is happening all over this country.
As organic products become more popular, the potential for civil rights violations using these inaccurate test kits at borders, and in police patrol cars, is enormous.
This is not the first time innocent people have been jailed and burdened with large legal fees over organic fare like chocolate, herbs, all natural soaps, and even deodorants.
Cornelius Salonis of Shakopee, Minn., spent two nerve racking months in jail after police stopped him for drunk driving. He admitted to the drunk-driving charge, but was “scared witless” over the drug charge that was slapped on top of it when a deodorant in his car tested positive for cocaine. Lab tests ultimately showed it did not contain the drug.
Punk rocker Don Bolles also spent three days in jail in Newport Beach, Calif., in April last year, after his Dr. Bronner"s soap tested positive for GHB during a police traffic stop. Again, further lab tests found no drugs in the soap and the charges were dropped.
According to government officials, there are no records on how many people have been wrongly arrested because of this field test, but it’s probably safe to assume it certainly can, and does happen with some frequency, as people tend to travel with their favorite products. These days, many have switched to organics.
As for Nadine Artemis and Ron Obadia, just two weeks shy of being cleared of their drug charges, the couple, who are founders of Living Libations, a company that makes organic and natural food and beauty products in Haliburton, Ontario, were charged with drug possession again. This time while crossing the border in Lewiston, N.Y., on their way to a natural health festival -- despite the fact that they were traveling with a lawyer, just in case!
Officers ran the drug test on the food and toiletries in their possession, and the chocolate again tested positive for drugs. Ditto for a bottle of tea tree oil (a natural antiseptic and antifungal). Mr. Obadia was subsequently arrested again, and is currently awaiting the lab results that will likely exonerate him a second time.
But is it really reasonable to subject our constitutional rights to a test that is so clearly limited, and will lead to an untold number of arrests simply for carrying an organic treat, or an organic personal care product?
According to Allen Miller of Forensic Source, maker of the NarcoPouch® 928 test kits, the tests are designed to find “families of chemical compounds,” and are not meant to be definitive. “Any arrest should be the result of good investigative police work,” he says.
But following up with a real, valid test, after receiving a fake positive in the field usually means spending time in jail, posting bail, and hiring an attorney – potentially in a foreign country, depending on whether you’re coming or leaving, and where you get “caught” with your organic stash.
According to retired FBI agent and forensics expert Dr. Frederick Whitehurst:
“There is no effort by the National Academies of Science to validate forensic science protocols, and there are no national standards for presumptive field drug tests.
I believe our freedoms are being infringed upon because of fake science.”
NarcoPouch is a Great Natural Soap Test
As it turns out, any true natural soap product -- such as soaps by Dr. Bronner, Tom’s and Pangea -- will test positive with the NarcoPouch test, as demonstrated in this video on Dr. Bronner’s website. As will many all natural deodorants. Says David Bronner,
“Our testing shows that real soaps, which are made using the ecological time-honored process of saponification of vegetable oil, will always test positive for GHB, while complicated synthetic detergent-based so-called ‘liquid soaps’ will test negative.”
My Advice
Does it really take a rocket scientist to figure out, that at the very least, DON'T FILE ANY CHARGES UNTIL RELIABLE CONFIRMATION TESTS ARE RETURNED! DUH!???
Until these narcotic field tests have been re-formulated to give accurate results, and field agents can tell the difference between an organic personal care product and an illegal narcotic, (which given the stupidity and sheep like mentality of government agencies is highly doubtful) I strongly recommend you avoid traveling across the U.S. border with any kind of all natural soap, deodorant, or any other item that may get flagged, such as tea tree oil, or organic chocolate. You may also want to reconsider keeping these items in your car, in case you’re ever stopped and searched for a traffic violation.
It seems unreasonable, yes. But unless you’re willing to deal with that kind of hassle, think twice about what you pack when you travel.
This is the United States of America, where we are about to lose all of our civil liberties and our auto industry.
When Canadian citizens Nadine Artemis and Ron Obadia took a family vacation, it ended with them being led through Toronto's airport in handcuffs, locked up and separated from their baby.
Police told them they could be facing years in prison for exporting narcotics.
Two and a half pounds of material found in their carry-on bag had tested positive for hashish. But they didn't have drugs. They had chocolate. So far, the couple's legal bills have topped $20,000.
The couple was caught up in what civil libertarians say is a growing problem -- the use of unreliable field drug-test kits as the basis to arrest innocent people on illegal drug charges.
The kits, which are used by most every police department in the U.S., and by federal agents in Customs at the nation’s borders, use powerful acids that react with the substance in a plastic pouch. If the liquid turns a certain color, it is a considered a positive result.
A positive result generally leads to an arrest.
But a number of legal products and plants test positive:
chocolate for hashish
rosemary for marijuana
natural soaps for the "date-rape drug" GHB
With the growth of organic and natural foods and products, experts say arrests are likely to increase.
Sources:
Organic Consumers Association November 1, 2008
>
As a certified DOT workplace drug test evaluator, I have long known that hand held, on site drug screens are grossly inaccurate. I never used them or recommend any institution use them,
let alone police and other law enforcement agencies that often employ those in our society with the lowest IQs, the most corrupt, and ironicly have total power and the ability to cause the most damage to our civil liberties than any other organizations in our country.
As Coroner and physician for our local jail, I have never worked with a more uneducated, ignorant, misguided group of individuals in my life.
Particularly probation officers who rank as the most untrustworthy, corrupt and ignorant individuals on the planet.
To put these inaccurate tools in the hands of these people is a travesty of justice that must be addressed. This is a system with nearly no counterbalances of power.
I personally have seen local adult parole authorities with a 4 hour course on drug testing use these tests to put people in jail on a regular basis, then have them tell me that they are 100% accurate! It smacks of third world justice and is happening all over this country.
As organic products become more popular, the potential for civil rights violations using these inaccurate test kits at borders, and in police patrol cars, is enormous.
This is not the first time innocent people have been jailed and burdened with large legal fees over organic fare like chocolate, herbs, all natural soaps, and even deodorants.
Cornelius Salonis of Shakopee, Minn., spent two nerve racking months in jail after police stopped him for drunk driving. He admitted to the drunk-driving charge, but was “scared witless” over the drug charge that was slapped on top of it when a deodorant in his car tested positive for cocaine. Lab tests ultimately showed it did not contain the drug.
Punk rocker Don Bolles also spent three days in jail in Newport Beach, Calif., in April last year, after his Dr. Bronner"s soap tested positive for GHB during a police traffic stop. Again, further lab tests found no drugs in the soap and the charges were dropped.
According to government officials, there are no records on how many people have been wrongly arrested because of this field test, but it’s probably safe to assume it certainly can, and does happen with some frequency, as people tend to travel with their favorite products. These days, many have switched to organics.
As for Nadine Artemis and Ron Obadia, just two weeks shy of being cleared of their drug charges, the couple, who are founders of Living Libations, a company that makes organic and natural food and beauty products in Haliburton, Ontario, were charged with drug possession again. This time while crossing the border in Lewiston, N.Y., on their way to a natural health festival -- despite the fact that they were traveling with a lawyer, just in case!
Officers ran the drug test on the food and toiletries in their possession, and the chocolate again tested positive for drugs. Ditto for a bottle of tea tree oil (a natural antiseptic and antifungal). Mr. Obadia was subsequently arrested again, and is currently awaiting the lab results that will likely exonerate him a second time.
But is it really reasonable to subject our constitutional rights to a test that is so clearly limited, and will lead to an untold number of arrests simply for carrying an organic treat, or an organic personal care product?
According to Allen Miller of Forensic Source, maker of the NarcoPouch® 928 test kits, the tests are designed to find “families of chemical compounds,” and are not meant to be definitive. “Any arrest should be the result of good investigative police work,” he says.
But following up with a real, valid test, after receiving a fake positive in the field usually means spending time in jail, posting bail, and hiring an attorney – potentially in a foreign country, depending on whether you’re coming or leaving, and where you get “caught” with your organic stash.
According to retired FBI agent and forensics expert Dr. Frederick Whitehurst:
“There is no effort by the National Academies of Science to validate forensic science protocols, and there are no national standards for presumptive field drug tests.
I believe our freedoms are being infringed upon because of fake science.”
NarcoPouch is a Great Natural Soap Test
As it turns out, any true natural soap product -- such as soaps by Dr. Bronner, Tom’s and Pangea -- will test positive with the NarcoPouch test, as demonstrated in this video on Dr. Bronner’s website. As will many all natural deodorants. Says David Bronner,
“Our testing shows that real soaps, which are made using the ecological time-honored process of saponification of vegetable oil, will always test positive for GHB, while complicated synthetic detergent-based so-called ‘liquid soaps’ will test negative.”
My Advice
Does it really take a rocket scientist to figure out, that at the very least, DON'T FILE ANY CHARGES UNTIL RELIABLE CONFIRMATION TESTS ARE RETURNED! DUH!???
Until these narcotic field tests have been re-formulated to give accurate results, and field agents can tell the difference between an organic personal care product and an illegal narcotic, (which given the stupidity and sheep like mentality of government agencies is highly doubtful) I strongly recommend you avoid traveling across the U.S. border with any kind of all natural soap, deodorant, or any other item that may get flagged, such as tea tree oil, or organic chocolate. You may also want to reconsider keeping these items in your car, in case you’re ever stopped and searched for a traffic violation.
It seems unreasonable, yes. But unless you’re willing to deal with that kind of hassle, think twice about what you pack when you travel.
This is the United States of America, where we are about to lose all of our civil liberties and our auto industry.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Wal Mart Stampede Death
It is very early in the process of discovering what truly happened, but one of those outrageous events that is hard to comprehend has occurred. a Wal Mart worker was trampled to death while trying to manage a crowd of early morning bargain seekers at a New Jersey Wal Mart
Apparently the doors were actually pushed in off the hinges and a throng of about 200 workers pushed through over and around this unfortunate 34 yr old temp worker.
I at first thought it was a hoax because of a quote about a pregnant lady losing her baby on site, which would never happen, she would be emergently taken to the hospital.
My initital gut is that no one individual caused this. I m sure the crowd pushed forward and the people in the front were merely at the tip of the spear.
However there must be surveillance tapes and its entirely possible that individuals may be charged in this persons death.
Reports were in the media and seem to be reliable that shoppers refused to stop shopping when told of the tragedy and that many were angry when told that the store was going to close to handle the tragedy.
These folks have to live with the reality of what they participated in, and ask themselves if this bargain merchandise they were trying to buy was worth acting like animals to get. Would they feel joy giving those gifts this Christmas?
I suppose the huge resulting lawsuit in this episode will result in changes in how these sales are handled including increased security and the handing out of entry numbers, and coupons that one must have in order to purchase the most desirable items, in the hours before the store opens in attempts to decrease the crowd size.
Each store only had probably 100 of the flat screens for sale anyways. So hand out those 100 coupons in line 2 hours before the store opens so folks can come anytime that morning to buy them and help stop the stampede mentality.
My how the almighty dollar affects otherwise basically rational people.
Was it worth standing in line all night in the cold to try and save $400 on a flat screen TV?
An outrageous death nonetheless.
Apparently the doors were actually pushed in off the hinges and a throng of about 200 workers pushed through over and around this unfortunate 34 yr old temp worker.
I at first thought it was a hoax because of a quote about a pregnant lady losing her baby on site, which would never happen, she would be emergently taken to the hospital.
My initital gut is that no one individual caused this. I m sure the crowd pushed forward and the people in the front were merely at the tip of the spear.
However there must be surveillance tapes and its entirely possible that individuals may be charged in this persons death.
Reports were in the media and seem to be reliable that shoppers refused to stop shopping when told of the tragedy and that many were angry when told that the store was going to close to handle the tragedy.
These folks have to live with the reality of what they participated in, and ask themselves if this bargain merchandise they were trying to buy was worth acting like animals to get. Would they feel joy giving those gifts this Christmas?
I suppose the huge resulting lawsuit in this episode will result in changes in how these sales are handled including increased security and the handing out of entry numbers, and coupons that one must have in order to purchase the most desirable items, in the hours before the store opens in attempts to decrease the crowd size.
Each store only had probably 100 of the flat screens for sale anyways. So hand out those 100 coupons in line 2 hours before the store opens so folks can come anytime that morning to buy them and help stop the stampede mentality.
My how the almighty dollar affects otherwise basically rational people.
Was it worth standing in line all night in the cold to try and save $400 on a flat screen TV?
An outrageous death nonetheless.
Monday, November 3, 2008
McCain Or Obama
This is not a political blog.
But i think it needs to be said that McCain has been taking a hard knock for his bold plan to tax health benefits like any other benefit you get from your employer like a company car, bonuses or other allowances.
Heck yes that is painful. It is not a new concept and has been talked about for years. It is SURELY a burden from the haves to the have nots, (isnt this a DEMOCRATIC TENDENCY?)
IF IT IS USED TO EXPAND COVERAGE.
The other point is that the Bush administration STUBBORNLY REFUSED TO ALLOW MEDICARE TO NEGOTIATE LOWER DRUG PRICES WITH THE MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES LIKE EVERY OTHER INSURANCE COMPANY IN THE COUNTRY
We absolutely need to allow medicare to negotiate and save up to 40% on drug acquisistion costs and stop the PROFIT WINDFALL for the drug companies.
We also need to consider a true one party payer. Its time. It works in other countries. Its not a swear word. Neither candidate is considering this at all.
But i think it needs to be said that McCain has been taking a hard knock for his bold plan to tax health benefits like any other benefit you get from your employer like a company car, bonuses or other allowances.
Heck yes that is painful. It is not a new concept and has been talked about for years. It is SURELY a burden from the haves to the have nots, (isnt this a DEMOCRATIC TENDENCY?)
IF IT IS USED TO EXPAND COVERAGE.
The other point is that the Bush administration STUBBORNLY REFUSED TO ALLOW MEDICARE TO NEGOTIATE LOWER DRUG PRICES WITH THE MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES LIKE EVERY OTHER INSURANCE COMPANY IN THE COUNTRY
We absolutely need to allow medicare to negotiate and save up to 40% on drug acquisistion costs and stop the PROFIT WINDFALL for the drug companies.
We also need to consider a true one party payer. Its time. It works in other countries. Its not a swear word. Neither candidate is considering this at all.
Vitamin D more than just bones
Vitamin D is a Key Player in Your Overall Health
Vitamin D, once linked to only bone diseases such as rickets and osteoporosis, is now recognized as a major player in overall human health.In a paper published in the August issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Anthony Norman, an international expert on vitamin D, identifies vitamin D's potential for contributions to good health in the adaptive and innate immune systems, the secretion and regulation of insulin by the pancreas, the heart and blood pressure regulation, muscle strength and brain activity. Access to adequate amounts of vitamin D is also believed to be beneficial towards reducing the risk of cancer.Norman also lists 36 organ tissues in the body whose cells respond biologically to vitamin D, including bone marrow, breast, colon, intestine, kidney, lung, prostate, retina, skin, stomach and uterine tissues.According to Norman, deficiency of vitamin D can impact all 36 organs. Already, vitamin D deficiency is associated with muscle strength decrease, high risk for falls, and increased risk for colorectal, prostate and breast and other major cancers.An unrelated study also suggests that low vitamin D is associated with Parkinson’s disease. The majority (55 percent) of Parkinson's disease patients in the study had insufficient levels of vitamin D. Meanwhile, the American Academy of Pediatrics has doubled its recommendation for a daily dose of vitamin D in children, in the hopes of preventing rickets and promoting other health benefits.The new guidelines now call for children to receive 400 international units (IU) of vitamin D per day, beginning in the first few days of life.“ … Evidence has shown this could have life-long health benefits," said Dr. Frank Greer of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Sources:
Eurekalert October 9, 2008
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition August 2008, Vol. 88, No. 2, 491S-499S
Archives of Neurology October 2008, Vol. 65, No. 10
Reuters October 13, 2008
It’s somewhat unfortunate that dermatologists and sunscreen manufacturers have done such a thorough job of scaring some people out of the sun. Their widely dispersed message to avoid the sun as much as possible, combined with an overall cultural trend of spending more time indoors during work and leisure time, has greatly contributed to the widespread vitamin D deficiency that’s seen today.
There are only 30,000 genes in your body and vitamin D has been shown to influence over 2,000 of them.
That is one of the primary reasons it influences so many diseases (as seen in the table below).
Cancer
Hypertension
Heart disease
Autism
Obesity
Rheumatoid arthritis
Diabetes 1 and 2
Multiple Sclerosis
Crohn's disease
Flu
Colds
Tuberculosis
Septicemia
Aging
Psoriasis
Eczema
Insomnia
Hearing loss
Muscle pain
Cavities
Periodontal disease
Athletic performance
Macular degeneration
Myopia
Pre eclampsia
Seizures
Fertility
Asthma
Cystic fibrosis
Migraines
Depression
Alzheimer's disease
Schizophrenia
Vitamin D really isn’t a vitamin at all but a potent neuroregulatory steroidal hormone. It has become very clear that vitamin D deficiency is a growing epidemic across the world and is contributing to many chronic debilitating diseases. In the United States, the late winter average vitamin D is only about 15-18 ng/ml, which is considered a very serious deficiency state. Meanwhile, it’s thought that over 95 percent of U.S. senior citizens may be deficient, along with 85 percent of the American public.
Further:
• Vitamin D deficiency is epidemic in adults of all ages who have increased skin pigmentation, such as those whose ancestors are from Africa, the Middle East, or India, who always wear sun protection, or who limit their outdoor activities.
• African Americans and other dark-skinned people and those living in northern latitudes make significantly less vitamin D than other groups.
• 60 percent of people with type 2 diabetes have vitamin D deficiency.
• Studies showed very low levels of vitamin D among children, the elderly, and women.
• One U.S. study of women revealed that almost half of African American women of childbearing age might be vitamin-D deficient.Vitamin D and CancerGiven that cancer, heart disease and diabetes are three of the top causes of death in the United States, ensuring that you are getting enough of this crucial vitamin should be a top priority.A study by Dr. William Grant, Ph.D., internationally recognized research scientist and vitamin D expert, found that about 30 percent of cancer deaths -- which amounts to 2 million worldwide and 200,000 in the United States -- could be prevented each year with higher levels of vitamin D.Vitamin D has a protective effect against cancer in several ways, including:
• Increasing the self-destruction of mutated cells (which, if allowed to replicate, could lead to cancer)• Reducing the spread and reproduction of cancer cells
• Causing cells to become differentiated (cancer cells often lack differentiation)
• Reducing the growth of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones, which is a step in the transition of dormant tumors turning cancerousBeyond cancer, the researchers pointed out that increasing levels of vitamin D3 could prevent diseases that claim nearly 1 million lives throughout the world each year! And other studies showed that you can decrease your risk of cancer by MORE THAN HALF simply by optimizing your vitamin D levels with sun exposure.Worried About Getting the Flu? Optimize Your Vitamin DAs we enter into flu season in the United States, you should know that your vitamin D levels play a direct role in your risk of getting the flu. Vitamin D levels in your blood fall to their lowest point during flu seasons. If you have low vitamin D, you will not be protected by your body’s own antibiotics (antimicrobial peptides), which are released by vitamin D. This means that a person with a low vitamin D level is more vulnerable to contracting colds, influenza, and other respiratory infections.
.What can you do instead to safely prevent, and even treat, the flu? getting enough vitamin D will nearly eliminate your risk of getting the flu.
BUT THIS IS IMPORTANT!!!!!!!
But don’t listen to the RDAs spouted by the public health agencies. They are not nearly enough to keep you healthy. In order to prevent the flu, children need 2,000 IU a day of vitamin D, while adults need 5,000 IU to 10,000 IU.So even though the American Academy of Pediatrics just announced that they’re doubling the RDA of vitamin D for children to 400 IU, their new guidance still falls absurdly short of what’s needed to keep kids healthy.
If you do come down with a case of the flu this year, vitamin D can also help to eliminate the illness. The dose of vitamin D is 2,000 IU per kilogram of body weight, taken as one dose, every day for three days. If you start this program early on in the illness, it should be able to completely wipe out the flu.
The Best Source of Vitamin D, and What Level You Need to Stay HealthyExposing your skin to sunlight is the best way to get vitamin D. Sun exposure (without sunscreen) of about 10 to 15 minutes a day, with at least 40 percent of your skin exposed, is a general guide of how much you need, although people with dark skin will need to stay out significantly longer.
If you’re able to get out in the sun for an adequate time period each day, your vitamin D levels should be naturally optimized. However most of us struggle with seasonal vitamin D winters in which we may not be able to get enough sun exposure during certain parts of the year. In that case, I also advise using a safe tanning bed (one that has the harmful emissions shielded) to have your own body produce vitamin D naturally. A third option is taking a high-quality vitamin D supplement. The most important thing to keep in mind if you opt for oral supplementation is that you only want to supplement with natural vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol), which is human vitamin D. Do NOT use the synthetic and highly inferior vitamin D2 How do you know if you’re getting the right amount of vitamin D?You need to have your blood levels tested, but not just any test -- or any lab -- will do. Most doctors will not tet for this vitamin and consider it not an important medical test.
I personally use Ultra-Vitality by symmetry. it is high quality totally complete daily supplement with more than just vitamins and minerals.
It has a blend of herbals that actually increase the uptake of nutrients on the border of the small intestine. It has a blend of herbals, antioxidants and energy blends that is among the best on the market
go to www.symmetrydirect.com/sservices and click on products to view this supplement
Vitamin D, once linked to only bone diseases such as rickets and osteoporosis, is now recognized as a major player in overall human health.In a paper published in the August issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Anthony Norman, an international expert on vitamin D, identifies vitamin D's potential for contributions to good health in the adaptive and innate immune systems, the secretion and regulation of insulin by the pancreas, the heart and blood pressure regulation, muscle strength and brain activity. Access to adequate amounts of vitamin D is also believed to be beneficial towards reducing the risk of cancer.Norman also lists 36 organ tissues in the body whose cells respond biologically to vitamin D, including bone marrow, breast, colon, intestine, kidney, lung, prostate, retina, skin, stomach and uterine tissues.According to Norman, deficiency of vitamin D can impact all 36 organs. Already, vitamin D deficiency is associated with muscle strength decrease, high risk for falls, and increased risk for colorectal, prostate and breast and other major cancers.An unrelated study also suggests that low vitamin D is associated with Parkinson’s disease. The majority (55 percent) of Parkinson's disease patients in the study had insufficient levels of vitamin D. Meanwhile, the American Academy of Pediatrics has doubled its recommendation for a daily dose of vitamin D in children, in the hopes of preventing rickets and promoting other health benefits.The new guidelines now call for children to receive 400 international units (IU) of vitamin D per day, beginning in the first few days of life.“ … Evidence has shown this could have life-long health benefits," said Dr. Frank Greer of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Sources:
Eurekalert October 9, 2008
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition August 2008, Vol. 88, No. 2, 491S-499S
Archives of Neurology October 2008, Vol. 65, No. 10
Reuters October 13, 2008
It’s somewhat unfortunate that dermatologists and sunscreen manufacturers have done such a thorough job of scaring some people out of the sun. Their widely dispersed message to avoid the sun as much as possible, combined with an overall cultural trend of spending more time indoors during work and leisure time, has greatly contributed to the widespread vitamin D deficiency that’s seen today.
There are only 30,000 genes in your body and vitamin D has been shown to influence over 2,000 of them.
That is one of the primary reasons it influences so many diseases (as seen in the table below).
Cancer
Hypertension
Heart disease
Autism
Obesity
Rheumatoid arthritis
Diabetes 1 and 2
Multiple Sclerosis
Crohn's disease
Flu
Colds
Tuberculosis
Septicemia
Aging
Psoriasis
Eczema
Insomnia
Hearing loss
Muscle pain
Cavities
Periodontal disease
Athletic performance
Macular degeneration
Myopia
Pre eclampsia
Seizures
Fertility
Asthma
Cystic fibrosis
Migraines
Depression
Alzheimer's disease
Schizophrenia
Vitamin D really isn’t a vitamin at all but a potent neuroregulatory steroidal hormone. It has become very clear that vitamin D deficiency is a growing epidemic across the world and is contributing to many chronic debilitating diseases. In the United States, the late winter average vitamin D is only about 15-18 ng/ml, which is considered a very serious deficiency state. Meanwhile, it’s thought that over 95 percent of U.S. senior citizens may be deficient, along with 85 percent of the American public.
Further:
• Vitamin D deficiency is epidemic in adults of all ages who have increased skin pigmentation, such as those whose ancestors are from Africa, the Middle East, or India, who always wear sun protection, or who limit their outdoor activities.
• African Americans and other dark-skinned people and those living in northern latitudes make significantly less vitamin D than other groups.
• 60 percent of people with type 2 diabetes have vitamin D deficiency.
• Studies showed very low levels of vitamin D among children, the elderly, and women.
• One U.S. study of women revealed that almost half of African American women of childbearing age might be vitamin-D deficient.Vitamin D and CancerGiven that cancer, heart disease and diabetes are three of the top causes of death in the United States, ensuring that you are getting enough of this crucial vitamin should be a top priority.A study by Dr. William Grant, Ph.D., internationally recognized research scientist and vitamin D expert, found that about 30 percent of cancer deaths -- which amounts to 2 million worldwide and 200,000 in the United States -- could be prevented each year with higher levels of vitamin D.Vitamin D has a protective effect against cancer in several ways, including:
• Increasing the self-destruction of mutated cells (which, if allowed to replicate, could lead to cancer)• Reducing the spread and reproduction of cancer cells
• Causing cells to become differentiated (cancer cells often lack differentiation)
• Reducing the growth of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones, which is a step in the transition of dormant tumors turning cancerousBeyond cancer, the researchers pointed out that increasing levels of vitamin D3 could prevent diseases that claim nearly 1 million lives throughout the world each year! And other studies showed that you can decrease your risk of cancer by MORE THAN HALF simply by optimizing your vitamin D levels with sun exposure.Worried About Getting the Flu? Optimize Your Vitamin DAs we enter into flu season in the United States, you should know that your vitamin D levels play a direct role in your risk of getting the flu. Vitamin D levels in your blood fall to their lowest point during flu seasons. If you have low vitamin D, you will not be protected by your body’s own antibiotics (antimicrobial peptides), which are released by vitamin D. This means that a person with a low vitamin D level is more vulnerable to contracting colds, influenza, and other respiratory infections.
.What can you do instead to safely prevent, and even treat, the flu? getting enough vitamin D will nearly eliminate your risk of getting the flu.
BUT THIS IS IMPORTANT!!!!!!!
But don’t listen to the RDAs spouted by the public health agencies. They are not nearly enough to keep you healthy. In order to prevent the flu, children need 2,000 IU a day of vitamin D, while adults need 5,000 IU to 10,000 IU.So even though the American Academy of Pediatrics just announced that they’re doubling the RDA of vitamin D for children to 400 IU, their new guidance still falls absurdly short of what’s needed to keep kids healthy.
If you do come down with a case of the flu this year, vitamin D can also help to eliminate the illness. The dose of vitamin D is 2,000 IU per kilogram of body weight, taken as one dose, every day for three days. If you start this program early on in the illness, it should be able to completely wipe out the flu.
The Best Source of Vitamin D, and What Level You Need to Stay HealthyExposing your skin to sunlight is the best way to get vitamin D. Sun exposure (without sunscreen) of about 10 to 15 minutes a day, with at least 40 percent of your skin exposed, is a general guide of how much you need, although people with dark skin will need to stay out significantly longer.
If you’re able to get out in the sun for an adequate time period each day, your vitamin D levels should be naturally optimized. However most of us struggle with seasonal vitamin D winters in which we may not be able to get enough sun exposure during certain parts of the year. In that case, I also advise using a safe tanning bed (one that has the harmful emissions shielded) to have your own body produce vitamin D naturally. A third option is taking a high-quality vitamin D supplement. The most important thing to keep in mind if you opt for oral supplementation is that you only want to supplement with natural vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol), which is human vitamin D. Do NOT use the synthetic and highly inferior vitamin D2 How do you know if you’re getting the right amount of vitamin D?You need to have your blood levels tested, but not just any test -- or any lab -- will do. Most doctors will not tet for this vitamin and consider it not an important medical test.
I personally use Ultra-Vitality by symmetry. it is high quality totally complete daily supplement with more than just vitamins and minerals.
It has a blend of herbals that actually increase the uptake of nutrients on the border of the small intestine. It has a blend of herbals, antioxidants and energy blends that is among the best on the market
go to www.symmetrydirect.com/sservices and click on products to view this supplement
Friday, September 5, 2008
Climate, Natural Disasters and Health Care
HERE we have a great article about the terrible natural disasters we have been having in the last several years Straight from TIME magazine. See the link at the end.
Why is it here?
Well it is my position that the concept of climate change is given way too much precedence and focus of our national resources.
While we spend billions on carbon reduction, which is at best a dubious answer to global warming, other long term solutions are negelected.
We need alternative energy sources that are cleaner than what we have now. We need to pour money into developing systems that are sustainable.
We need to consider population growth as a huge factor in that sustainability.
What we do not need is to pour billions into answers to the wrong problem.
I am still not convinced CO2 levels are causing climate change.
We have had ice ages and global warming cycles throughout history that correlate better with sunspot activity! Shouldn't we have a broader view of energy production than limiting CO2 output?
I mean, I know it is not an easy question to ask, but why do so many people live in a place below sea level like New Orleans? What are the long term questions surrounding continuing to live there?
And with politicians running around like chicken Little about carbon output, what are we doing about health care and the solid answers that need to be developed to provide and yes RATION care and a myriad of other issues that need immediate attention.
Enjoy this article, and remember not everything related to climate has a CO2 output level attatched to it.
(time articel follows see end for citation details)
If it seems like disasters are getting more common, it's because they are. But some disasters do seem to be affecting us worse - and not for the reasons you may think. Floods and storms have led to most of the excess damage. The number of flood and storm disasters has gone up by 7.4% every year in recent decades, according to the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. (Between 2000 and 2007, the growth was even faster - with an average annual rate of increase of 8.4%.) Of the total 197 million people affected by disasters in 2007, 164 million were affected by floods.
It is tempting to look at the line-up of storms in the Atlantic (Hanna, Ike, Josephine) and, in the name of everything green, blame climate change for this state of affairs. But there is another inconvenient truth out there: We are getting more vulnerable to weather mostly because of where we live, not just how we live.
In recent decades, people around the world have moved en masse to big cities near water. The population of Miami-Dade County in Florida was about 150,000 in the 1930s, a decade fraught with severe hurricanes. Since then, the population of Miami-Dade County has rocketed 1,600% to 2,400,000.
So the same intensity hurricane today wreaks all sorts of havoc that wouldn't have occurred had human beings not migrated. (To see how your own coastal county has changed in population, check out this cool graphing tool from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.)
If climate change is having an effect on the intensities of storms, it's not obvious in the historical weather data. And whatever effect it is having is much, much smaller than the effect of development along the coastlines. In fact, if you look at all storms from 1900 to 2005 and imagine we had today's populations on the coasts, as Roger Pielke, Jr., and his colleagues did in a 2008 Natural Hazards Review paper, you would see that the worst hurricane would have actually happened in 1926.
If it happened today, the Great Miami storm would have caused $140 to $157 billion in damages. (Hurricane Katrina, the costliest storm in U.S. history, caused $100 billion in losses.) "There has been no trend in the number or intensity of storms at landfall since 1900,"says Pielke, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado. "The storms themselves haven't changed."
What's changed is what we've put in the storm's way. Crowding together in coastal cities puts us at risk on a few levels. First, it is harder for us to evacuate before a storm because of gridlock. And in much of the developing world, people don't get the kinds of early warnings that Americans get. So large migrant populations - usually living in flimsy housing - get flooded out year after year. That helps explain why Asia has repeatedly been the hardest hit by disasters in recent years.
Secondly, even if we get all the humans to safety, we still have more stuff in harm's way. So each big hurricane costs more than the big one before it, even controlling for inflation.
But the most insidious effect of building condos and industry along the water is that we are systematically stripping the coasts of the protection that used to cushion the blow of extreme weather. Three years after Katrina, southern Louisiana is still losing a football field worth of wetlands every 38 minutes.
Human beings have been clearing away our best protections all over the world, says Kathleen Tierney, director of the Natural Hazards Center at the University of Colorado, Boulder. "The natural protections are diminishing - whether you're talking about mangrove forests in areas affected by the Indian ocean tsunami, wetlands in the Gulf Coast or forests, which offer protection against landslides and mudslides."
Before we become hopelessly lost in despair, however, there is good news: we can do something about this problem. We can enact meaningful building codes and stop keeping insurance premiums artificially low in flood zones.
But first we need to understand that disasters aren't just caused by FEMA and greenhouse gases. Says Tierney: "I don't think that people have an understanding of questions they should be asking - about where they live, about design and construction, about building inspection, fire protection. These just aren't things that are on people's minds."
Increasingly, climate change is on people's minds, and that is all for the better. Even if climate change has not been the primary driver of disaster losses, it is likely to cause far deadlier disasters in the future if left unchecked.
But even if greenhouse gas emissions plummeted miraculously next year, we would not expect to see a big change in disaster losses. So it's important to stay focused on the real cause of the problem, says Pielke. "Talking about land-use policies in coastal Mississippi may not be the sexiest topic, but that's what's going to make the most difference on this issue." View this article on Time.com
Why is it here?
Well it is my position that the concept of climate change is given way too much precedence and focus of our national resources.
While we spend billions on carbon reduction, which is at best a dubious answer to global warming, other long term solutions are negelected.
We need alternative energy sources that are cleaner than what we have now. We need to pour money into developing systems that are sustainable.
We need to consider population growth as a huge factor in that sustainability.
What we do not need is to pour billions into answers to the wrong problem.
I am still not convinced CO2 levels are causing climate change.
We have had ice ages and global warming cycles throughout history that correlate better with sunspot activity! Shouldn't we have a broader view of energy production than limiting CO2 output?
I mean, I know it is not an easy question to ask, but why do so many people live in a place below sea level like New Orleans? What are the long term questions surrounding continuing to live there?
And with politicians running around like chicken Little about carbon output, what are we doing about health care and the solid answers that need to be developed to provide and yes RATION care and a myriad of other issues that need immediate attention.
Enjoy this article, and remember not everything related to climate has a CO2 output level attatched to it.
(time articel follows see end for citation details)
If it seems like disasters are getting more common, it's because they are. But some disasters do seem to be affecting us worse - and not for the reasons you may think. Floods and storms have led to most of the excess damage. The number of flood and storm disasters has gone up by 7.4% every year in recent decades, according to the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. (Between 2000 and 2007, the growth was even faster - with an average annual rate of increase of 8.4%.) Of the total 197 million people affected by disasters in 2007, 164 million were affected by floods.
It is tempting to look at the line-up of storms in the Atlantic (Hanna, Ike, Josephine) and, in the name of everything green, blame climate change for this state of affairs. But there is another inconvenient truth out there: We are getting more vulnerable to weather mostly because of where we live, not just how we live.
In recent decades, people around the world have moved en masse to big cities near water. The population of Miami-Dade County in Florida was about 150,000 in the 1930s, a decade fraught with severe hurricanes. Since then, the population of Miami-Dade County has rocketed 1,600% to 2,400,000.
So the same intensity hurricane today wreaks all sorts of havoc that wouldn't have occurred had human beings not migrated. (To see how your own coastal county has changed in population, check out this cool graphing tool from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.)
If climate change is having an effect on the intensities of storms, it's not obvious in the historical weather data. And whatever effect it is having is much, much smaller than the effect of development along the coastlines. In fact, if you look at all storms from 1900 to 2005 and imagine we had today's populations on the coasts, as Roger Pielke, Jr., and his colleagues did in a 2008 Natural Hazards Review paper, you would see that the worst hurricane would have actually happened in 1926.
If it happened today, the Great Miami storm would have caused $140 to $157 billion in damages. (Hurricane Katrina, the costliest storm in U.S. history, caused $100 billion in losses.) "There has been no trend in the number or intensity of storms at landfall since 1900,"says Pielke, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado. "The storms themselves haven't changed."
What's changed is what we've put in the storm's way. Crowding together in coastal cities puts us at risk on a few levels. First, it is harder for us to evacuate before a storm because of gridlock. And in much of the developing world, people don't get the kinds of early warnings that Americans get. So large migrant populations - usually living in flimsy housing - get flooded out year after year. That helps explain why Asia has repeatedly been the hardest hit by disasters in recent years.
Secondly, even if we get all the humans to safety, we still have more stuff in harm's way. So each big hurricane costs more than the big one before it, even controlling for inflation.
But the most insidious effect of building condos and industry along the water is that we are systematically stripping the coasts of the protection that used to cushion the blow of extreme weather. Three years after Katrina, southern Louisiana is still losing a football field worth of wetlands every 38 minutes.
Human beings have been clearing away our best protections all over the world, says Kathleen Tierney, director of the Natural Hazards Center at the University of Colorado, Boulder. "The natural protections are diminishing - whether you're talking about mangrove forests in areas affected by the Indian ocean tsunami, wetlands in the Gulf Coast or forests, which offer protection against landslides and mudslides."
Before we become hopelessly lost in despair, however, there is good news: we can do something about this problem. We can enact meaningful building codes and stop keeping insurance premiums artificially low in flood zones.
But first we need to understand that disasters aren't just caused by FEMA and greenhouse gases. Says Tierney: "I don't think that people have an understanding of questions they should be asking - about where they live, about design and construction, about building inspection, fire protection. These just aren't things that are on people's minds."
Increasingly, climate change is on people's minds, and that is all for the better. Even if climate change has not been the primary driver of disaster losses, it is likely to cause far deadlier disasters in the future if left unchecked.
But even if greenhouse gas emissions plummeted miraculously next year, we would not expect to see a big change in disaster losses. So it's important to stay focused on the real cause of the problem, says Pielke. "Talking about land-use policies in coastal Mississippi may not be the sexiest topic, but that's what's going to make the most difference on this issue." View this article on Time.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)