Alternative
Health & Healing Newsletter
July, 2002
Dr.
Group’s Quote of the Month: “You
and ONLY you are responsible for your attitude. You
choose each morning, by your thoughts, as to whether
your day will be positive or negative. Determine
to be enthusiastic and happy…smile! This
is healing to the body, mind and spirit.”
CONTENTS:
Don’t
Drink Your Milk!
Smallpox Outbreak
U.S.
To Vaccinate 500,000 Workers Against Smallpox
Conflict
of Interest? Medical Journal Changes Policy of Finding
Independent Doctors to Write
GM Aromatic Plants Threaten
Essential Oil Quality
Factory
may see growth (New Sweetener)
The Recent News About
HRT
Speaking
Schedule
Don't Drink Your Milk!
Dr. Joseph Mercola
Processing Is the Problem
The path that transforms healthy milk products into allergens and carcinogens
begins with modern feeding methods that substitute high-protein, soy-based
feeds for fresh green grass and breeding methods to produce cows with abnormally
large pituitary glands so that they produce three times more milk than the
old fashioned scrub cow. These cows need antibiotics to keep them well.
Their milk is then pasteurized so that all valuable enzymes are destroyed
(lactase for the assimilation of lactose; galactase for the assimilation
of galactose; phosphatase for the assimilation of calcium). Literally dozens
of other precious enzymes are destroyed in the pasteurization process. Without
them, milk is very difficult to digest. The human pancreas is not always
able to produce these enzymes; over-stress of the pancreas can lead to diabetes
and other diseases.
The butterfat of commercial milk is homogenized, subjecting it to rancidity.
Even worse, butterfat may be removed altogether. Skim milk is sold as a health
food, but the truth is that butter-fat is in milk for a reason. Without it
the body cannot absorb and utilize the vitamins and minerals in the water
fraction of the milk. Along with valuable trace minerals and short chain
fatty acids, butterfat is America's best source of preformed vitamin A. Synthetic
vitamin D, known to be toxic to the liver, is added to replace the natural
vitamin D complex in butterfat. Butterfat also contains re-arranged acids
which have strong anti-carcinogenic properties.
Non-fat dried milk is added to 1% and 2% milk. Unlike the cholesterol in
fresh milk, which plays a variety of health promoting roles, the cholesterol
in non-fat dried milk is oxidized and it is this rancid cholesterol that
promotes heart disease. Like all spray-dried products, non-fat dried milk
has a high nitrite content. Non-fat dried milk and sweetened condensed milk
are the principle dairy products in third world countries; use of ultra high
temperature pasteurized milk is widespread in Europe.
Other Factors Regarding Milk
Milk and refined sugar make two of the largest contributions to food induced
ill health in our country. That may seem like an overly harsh statement,
but when one examines the evidence, this is a reasonable conclusion.
The recent approval by the FDA of the use of BGH (Bovine Growth Hormone)
by dairy farmers to increase their milk production only worsens the already
sad picture.
BGH causes an increase in an insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) in the milk
of treated cows. IGF-1 survives milk pasteurization and human intestinal
digestion. It can be directly absorbed into the human bloodstream, particularly
in infants.
It is highly likely that IGF-1 promotes the transformation of human breast
cells to cancerous forms. IGF-1 is also a growth factor for already cancerous
breast and colon cancer cells, promoting their progression and invasiveness.
It is also possible for us to absorb the BGH directly from the milk. This
will cause further IGF-1 production by our own cells.
BGH will also decrease the body fat of cows. Unfortunately, the body fat
of cows is already contaminated with a wide range of carcinogens, pesticides,
dioxin, and antibiotic residues. When the cows have less body fat, these
toxic substances are then transported into the cows' milk.
BGH also causes the cows to have an increase in breast infections for which
they must receive additional antibiotics.
Prior to BGH, 38%of milk sampled nationally was already contaminated by illegal
residues of antibiotics and animal drugs. This will only increase with the
use of BGH. One can only wonder what the long term complications will be
for drinking milk that has a 50% chance it is contaminated with antibiotics.
There is also a problem with a protein enzyme called xanthine oxidase which
is in cow's milk. Normally, proteins are broken down once you digest them.
However, when milk is homogenized, small fat globules surround the xanthine
oxidase and it is absorbed intact into your blood stream. There is some very
compelling research demonstrating clear associations with this absorbed enzyme
and increased risks of heart disease.
Ear specialists frequently insert tubes into the ear drums of infants to
treat recurrent ear infections. It has replaced the previously popular tonsillectomy
to become the number one surgery in the country. Unfortunately, most of these
specialists don't realize that over 50% of these children will improve and
have no further ear infections if they just stop drinking their milk.
This is a real tragedy. Not only is the $3,000 spent on the surgery wasted,
but there are some recent articles supporting the likelihood that most children
who have this procedure will have long term hearing losses.
It is my strong recommendation that you discontinue your milk products. If
you find this difficult, I would start for several weeks only, and reevaluate
how you feel at that time. This would include ALL dairy, including skim milk
and Lact-Aid milk, cheese, yogurt, and ice cream. If you feel better after
several weeks you can attempt to rotate small amounts of one form of milk
every four days.
You probably are wondering what will happen to your bones and teeth if you
stop milk. The majority of the world's population takes in less than half
the calcium we are told we need and yet they have strong bones and healthy
teeth. Cows' milk is rich in phosphorous which can combine with calcium--and
can prevent you from absorbing the calcium in milk. The milk protein also
accelerates calcium excretion from the blood through the kidneys.
This is also true when you eat large amount of meat and poultry products.
Vegetarians will need about 50% less calcium than meat eaters because they
lose much less calcium in their urine.
It is possible to obtain all your calcium from dark green vegetables (where
do you think the cow gets theirs from?). The darker the better. Cooked collard
greens and kale are especially good. If you or your child is unable to take
in large amounts of green vegetables, you might want to supplement with calcium.
If you can swallow pills, we have an excellent, inexpensive source called
Calcium Citrate (NOTE: We recommend Calcium Orotate which is a
better form of calcium and more assimilated by the body), which has a
number of other minerals which your body requires to build up maximally healthy
bone. It is much better than a simple calcium tablet. You can take about
1,000 mg a day. For those who already suffer from osteoporosis, the best
calcium supplement is microcrystalline hydroxyapatite.
It is also important that you take vitamin D in the winter months from November
to March. Normally your skin converts sunshine to vitamin D, but the sunshine
levels in the winter are very low unless you visit Florida or Mexico type
areas. Most people obtain their vitamin D from milk in the winter; so if
you stop it, please make sure you are taking calcium with vitamin D or a
multi vitamin with vitamin D to prevent bone thinning.
Most people are not aware that the milk of most mammals varies considerably
in its composition. For example, the milk of goats, elephants, cows, camels,
wolves, and walruses show marked differences, in their content of fats, protein,
sugar, and minerals. Each was designed to provide optimum nutrition to the
young of the respective species. Each is different from human milk.
In general, most animals are exclusively breast-fed until they have tripled
their birth weight, which in human infants occurs around the age of one year.
In no mammalian species, except for the human (and domestic cat) is milk
consumption continued after the weaning period. Calves thrive on cow milk.
Cow's milk is designed for calves.
Cow's milk is the number one allergic food in this country. It has been well
documented as a cause in diarrhea, cramps, bloating, gas, gastrointestinal
bleeding, iron-deficiency anemia, skin rashes, atherosclerosis, and acne.
It is the primary cause of recurrent ear infections in children. It has also
been linked to insulin dependent diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, infertility,
and leukemia.
Hopefully, you will reconsider your position on using milk as a form of nourishment.
Small amounts of milk or milk products taken infrequently, will likely cause
little or no problems for most people.
However, the American Dairy Board has done a very effective job of marketing
this product. Most people believe they need to consume large, daily quantities
of milk to achieve good health. NOTHING could be further from the truth.
Public health officials and the National Dairy Council have worked together
in this country to make it very difficult to obtain wholesome, fresh, raw
dairy products. Nevertheless, they can be found with a little effort. In
some states, you can buy raw milk directly from farmers.
Whole, pasteurized, non-homogenized milk from cows raised on organic feed
is now available in many gourmet shops and health food stores. It can be
cultured to restore enzyme content, at least partially. Cultured buttermilk
is often more easily digested than regular milk; it is an excellent product
to use in baking.
Many shops now carry whole cream that is merely pasteurized (not ultra pasteurized
like most commercial cream); diluted with water, it is delicious on cereal
and a good substitute for those allergic to milk. Traditionally made crème
fraiche (European style sour cream), it also has a high enzyme content.
Smallpox
Outbreak
By
Sherri Tenpenny, DO
“We
interrupt the current programming to bring you this
important news update…there has been a reported case
of smallpox in Washington, D.C…”
What
will happen next?
Pandemonium.
The
press has done its job over the last few months reinforcing
the belief that an epidemic is about to occur, potentially
causing millions of deaths. Americans thousands of
miles from Washington will demand the smallpox vaccine,
a vaccine with the highest risk of complications of
any vaccine ever manufactured and with a dubious track
record for success.
However,
because you are informed, you will have a different
response. You will not panic. You will turn off the
TV. You won’t listen to your hysterical neighbors.
And more importantly, you won’t rush to be vaccinated.
Here’s why:
On
June 20, 2002, I attended the Center for Disease Control’s
(CDC) meeting of the Advisory Committee for Immunization
Practices (ACIP) and listened to one and a half days
of testimony prior to posting the recommendations
for smallpox vaccination that are currently being
considered by the CDC and the Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS.)
Various
physicians and researchers associated with the CDC
presented by public participants and many testimonies
and comments. Noting that two weeks have past since
the June 20th meeting and the media has still not
reported on this historic event, I decided it was
imperative to report the content and outcome of this
meeting to the general public. After reading this
report you will gain a new perspective on smallpox
and, hopefully, in the event of an outbreak, you will
understand that you have nothing to fear.
Generally
Accepted Facts
Nearly
every article or news headliner regarding smallpox
is designed to instill and continually reinforce fear
in the minds of the general public. Apparently the
goal is to make everyone demand the vaccine as soon
as it is available and/or in the event of an outbreak.
A
very similar media campaign was developed prior to
the release of the Salk polio vaccine in 1955. The
polio vaccine had been in development for more than
a year prior to its release and was an untested “investigational
new drug,” just as the smallpox vaccine will be.
The
difference is that the
potential side effects and complications of the smallpox
vaccine are already known, and they are extensive.
Generally
accepted facts about smallpox include:
1.
Smallpox is highly contagious and could spread rapidly,
killing millions
2. Smallpox can be spread by casual contact with an infected person
3. The death rate from smallpox is thought to be 30%
4. There is no treatment for smallpox
5. The smallpox vaccine will protect a person from getting the disease
As it turns out, these “accepted facts” are not
the “real facts.”
Myth 1: Smallpox Is Highly Contagious
“Smallpox has a slow transmission and is not highly
contagious,” stated Joel Kuritsky, MD, director of
the National Immunization Program and Early Smallpox
Response and Planning at the CDC.
This statement is a direct contradiction to nearly
everything we have ever heard or read about smallpox.
However, keep in mind that this comes “straight from
the horse’s mouth” and should be considered the “real
story” regarding how smallpox is spread.
Even if a person is exposed to a known bioterrorist
attack with smallpox, it doesn’t mean that he will
contract smallpox. The signs and symptoms of the disease
will not occur immediately, and there is time to plan.
The infection has an incubation period of 3
to 17 days, [1] and
the first symptom will be the development of a high
fever (>101º F), accompanied by nausea, vomiting,
headache, severe abdominal cramping and low back
pain. The person will be ill and most likely bed-ridden;
not out mixing with the general public.
Even with a fever, it is critically important to
realize that at this point the person is still not contagious. In fact, the fever may
be caused by something else, such as the flu.
However, if a smallpox infection is developing,
the characteristic rash will begin to develop within
two to four days after the onset of the fever. The
person becomes contagious and has the ability to spread
the infection only after the development of the rash.
“The characteristic rash of variola major is difficult
to misdiagnose,” stated Walter A. Orenstein, M.D.,
Director of the National Immunization Program (NIP)
at the CDC. The classic smallpox rash is a round,
firm pustule that can spread and become confluent.
The lesions are all in the same stage of development
over the entire body and appear to be distributed
more on the palms, soles and face than on the trunk
or extremities.
Action Item:
In
the event of an exposure, it is imperative that you
do everything you can to improve the functioning of
your immune system so that an “exposure” does not
have to result in an “outbreak.”
a.
Stop eating all foods that contain refined white sugar
products, since sugar inhibits the functioning of
your white blood cells, your first line of defense.
[2]
(There
are many other health-conscious dietary considerations
to consider, but that is beyond the scope of this
article.)
b.
Start taking large doses of Vitamin C. Vitamin C has
been proven in hundreds of studies to be effective
in protecting the body from viral infections, [3]
including smallpox. [4] For an extensive scientific
review on the use of this nutrient and a “dosing recipe”,
read “Vitamin C, The Master Nutrient, by Sandra Goodman,
Ph.D. http://www.positivehealth.com /permit/Articles/ Nutrition/vitcpre.htm
c.
If you develop a fever, you still have time to plan.
Purchase enough fresh, organic produce and filtered
water to last three weeks. Move the kids to grandma’s
or the neighbor’s house.
d.
Remember: you may not get the infection
and you are not contagious until you get the rash!
Myth 2: Smallpox Is Easily Spread By Casual Contact
With An Infected Person
Smallpox will not rapidly disseminate throughout
the community. Even after the development of the rash,
the infection is slow to spread. “The infection is
spread by droplet contamination and coughing or sneezing
are not generally part of the infection.
Smallpox will not spread like wildfire,” said Orenstein.
He stated that the spread of smallpox to casual contacts
is the “exception to the rule.” Only 8% of cases in
Africa were contracted by accidental contact.
Transmission of smallpox occurs only after intense
contact, defined as “constant exposure of a person that is within 6-7 feet for a minimum
of 6-7 days.”[5]
Dr. Orenstein reported that in Africa, 92% of all
cases came from close associations and in India, all cases
came from prolonged personal contact.
Dr. Tom Mack from the University of Southern California
stated that in Pakistan, 27% of cases demonstrated
no transmission to close associates. Nearly 37% had
a transmission of only one generation, meaning that
the second person to contract smallpox did not pass
it onto the third person. These statistics directly
contradict models that predict an exponential spread
to millions.
Even without medical care, isolation was the best
way to stop the spread of smallpox in Third World,
population dense areas. With a slow transmission rate
and an informed public, Mack estimated that the total
number of smallpox cases in America would be less
than 10, a far cry from the millions postulated by
the press.
Dr. Kuritsky said at the CDC Public Forum on Smallpox
on June 8 in St. Louis, “Given the slow transmission
rate and that people need to be in close contact for
nearly a week to spread the infection, the scenario
in which a terrorist could infect himself with smallpox
and contaminate an entire city by walking through
the streets touching people is purely fiction.”
Point to ponder:
Mass
vaccination was halted in Third World countries because
it didn’t work. In India, villages with an 88% vaccination
rate still had outbreaks. After the World Health Organization
began a surveillance and containment campaign, actively
seeking cases of smallpox, isolating them in their
homes, and vaccinating family members and close contacts,
outbreaks were virtually eliminated within 2 years.
The
CDC and the WHO organization attribute the eradication
of smallpox to the ring vaccination of close
contacts. However,
since the infection runs its course in 3-6 weeks,
perhaps ISOLATION ALONE would have effectively accomplished
the same thing.
Myth #3: The Death Rate From Smallpox Is 30%
Nearly every newspaper and journal article quotes
this statistic. However, as pointed out in the presentation
by Dr. Tom Mack, it appears that the “30% fatality
rate” has come from skewed data. Dr. Mack has worked
with smallpox extensively and saw more than 120 outbreaks
in Pakistan throughout the early 1970s.
Villages would apparently have “an importation” every
5-10 years, regardless of vaccination status, and
the outbreak could always be predicated by living
conditions and social arrangements. There were many
small outbreaks and individual cases that never came
to the attention of the local authorities.
Mack stated that even with poor medical care, the
case fatality rate in adults was “much lower than
is generally advertised” and thought to be 10-15%. He said that the statistics
were “loaded with children that had a much higher
fatality,” making the average death rate reported
to be much higher. Amazingly, he revealed his opinion
that even without mass vaccination, “smallpox would have died out anyway.
It just would have taken longer.”
Even so, people died. Why? After all, smallpox
is a skin disease and “other organs are seldom involved.”[6]
I posed this question to the committee on two separate
occasions.
Kathi Williams of the National Vaccine Information
Center asked this question at the Institute of Medicine
meeting on June 15th. On June 20, an answer was finally
forthcoming when a member of the ACIP committee said, “That
is a good question. Does anyone know the actual cause
of death from smallpox?”
At that point, Dr. D.A. Henderson, from the John
Hopkins University Department of Epidemiology volunteered
a comment. Dr. Henderson directed the World Health
Organization's global smallpox eradication campaign
(1966-1977) and helped initiate WHO's global program
of immunization in 1974. He approached the microphone
and stated,
“Well, it appears that the cause of death of smallpox
is a ‘mystery.’”
He stated that a medical resident had been asked
to do a complete review of the literature and “not
much information” was found. It is postulated that
the people died from a “generalized toxemia” and that
those with the most severe forms of smallpox -- the
hemorrhagic or confluent malignant types -- died of
complications of skin sloughing, similar to a burn.
However, he concluded by saying, “it’s frustrating,
because we don’t really know.”
Comment: I find this to be extremely
frightening. If we knew why people died when they
contracted smallpox, perhaps current medical technology
could treat the complications, making the death rate
much lower. Considering that the last known case of
smallpox in the U.S. was in Texas in 1949, continuing
to report that smallpox has a 30% death rate is similar
to saying that all heart attacks are fatal. Based
on 1949 technology, that would be accurate reporting.
But in 2002, all heart attacks are NOT fatal. Neither
would smallpox have a mortality rate of 30%.
July 7, 2002
U.S. to
Vaccinate 500,000 Workers Against Smallpox
By
WILLIAM J. BROAD
The federal government will soon vaccinate roughly
a half-million health care and emergency workers against
smallpox as a precaution against a bioterrorist attack,
federal officials said. The government is also laying
the groundwork to carry out mass vaccinations of the
public — a policy abandoned 30 years ago — if there
is a large outbreak.
Until last month, officials had said they would
soon vaccinate a few thousand health workers and would
respond to any smallpox attack with limited vaccinations
of the public. Since 1983, only 11,000 Americans who
work with the virus and its related diseases have
received a vaccination, according to the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.
The plan to increase the number of "first
responders" who receive the vaccination to roughly
500,000 from 15,000 and to prepare for a mass undertaking
of vaccinations in effect acknowledges that the government's
existing program is insufficient to fight a large
outbreak.
The government's new vaccination safeguards come
amid continued talk in Washington of war against Iraq,
which terrorism experts suspect of maintaining clandestine
stocks of the virus, as well as growing criticism
of the government's limited plan. Only Russia and
the United States have declared stocks of the virus.
A highly contagious disease, smallpox was declared
eradicated globally in 1980, eight years after the
United States stopped routine vaccinations.
Until its eradication, smallpox killed roughly
one in three people who were infected but not vaccinated.
Because immunity is believed to diminish with time,
most people alive today are considered vulnerable
to smallpox. But federal officials have long resisted
the resumption of mass smallpox vaccinations, citing
the probable risk of serious side effects, even death.
Last month, a federal advisory panel backed a plan
for "ring vaccinations," in which health
workers would isolate infected patients and vaccinate
people in close contact with them, forming a ring
of immunization around an outbreak and a barrier to
its spread. In theory, such a strategy can work because
the vaccine, if given within four days of exposure
to the virus, protects people from the disease.
Some experts on infectious disease said the plan's
main virtue was that it required little smallpox vaccine.
The government's more aggressive plans are possible
because vaccine supplies are rapidly increasing as
a result of crash manufacturing and stockpiling efforts
begun soon after last fall's terrorist strikes, officials
said. Also, studies have found that existing vaccine
doses can be diluted without loss of effectiveness.
"Now we can act differently because we have
more vaccine," Dr. Donald A. Henderson, senior
science adviser to Tommy G. Thompson, the secretary
of health and human services, said in an interview.
Dr. Henderson, who led the global smallpox eradication
effort, added that in a crisis "we can make vaccine
available on request throughout the community."
Officials said that about 100 million doses of
the smallpox vaccine (160 million if diluted) are
in hand and that by late this year or soon thereafter
enough will be available for every American, more
than 280 million people.
Health and military experts, citing new models
of how the contagion can spread and new disclosures
about how the weaponized virus can sail on the wind,
have recently argued that limited, local vaccinations
could produce thousands if not millions of needless
infections and deaths. Most critics of the ring vaccination
plan advocate mass vaccinations of the United States
population — but often before a smallpox attack, not
after, as the government is now planning.
In addition to vaccinating more "first responders," the
government plans to develop ways to speed vaccine
deliveries around the country and help states plan
how to carry out mass vaccinations after an attack.
Officials said the vaccinations of hospital workers
and smallpox response teams, to begin fairly soon,
would help train health professionals in smallpox
vaccination and educate the public to the attendant
risks.
The White House, Defense Department and other federal
agencies are involved in the vaccination planning. "Everyone
is aware," an administration official said.
Jerome M. Hauer, acting assistant secretary for
emergency preparedness at the Department of Health
and Human Services, said the agency hoped to send
planning documents on how to best conduct mass vaccinations
to cities and states in the next week or two. Mr.
Hauer added that logistics changes to that end were
under way at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
in Atlanta, which oversees the production, safekeeping
and distribution of the nation's stockpile of smallpox
vaccine.
Other details of the plans, such as who would receive
peacetime vaccinations, have yet to be approved by
Mr. Thompson, officials said.
In interviews last week, health officials said
the government had not abandoned its longstanding
plan for ring vaccinations of people near a smallpox
outbreak, the approach health workers used decades
ago to eradicate the highly contagious disease from
human populations. But the added steps, officials
said, will make it possible to move far more aggressively
if a terrorist attack ends up infecting more than
100 people or so.
Critics had said the ring approach, while useful
in battling natural outbreaks, would do little or
nothing against a moderately skilled enemy intent
on mayhem.
"Unless the initial attack is very small and
the infectiousness of the agent is quite mild, ring
vaccination is not going to do much good," said
Edward H. Kaplan, a Yale public health specialist
who questioned the method's value at a federal meeting
in Washington three weeks ago.
In a report, the Cato Institute, a policy group
in Washington, called ring vaccination "woefully
inadequate for countering a direct attack."
Critics argued that a number of factors had diminished
the method's effectiveness since the disease was eradicated
in 1980: populations are now increasingly mobile,
levels of immunity are very low and advanced technologies
have become commonplace, raising the odds that a smallpox
attacker would be at least moderately skilled.
"Today it's a totally different scenario," said
William J. Bicknell, an international health expert
at Boston University who recently faulted federal
smallpox policy at a Cato meeting. The ring plan,
he declared flatly in an interview, "will not
work."
Federal officials said the rising criticism played
no direct role in shaping preparations for mass vaccinations.
"The key to responding to any public health
emergency is flexibility," Mr. Hauer said. "You
listen to critics, but you can't let that drive policy.
You have to do what's best for public health and national
security."
Ring vaccination, he added, was envisioned as simply
a first line of defense that could quickly expand
to much wider immunizations if necessary.
Mr. Hauer added that the ring strategy was inherently
small-scale because it required health professionals
to carefully trace the whereabouts and contacts of
infected people. Such work is so hard and time consuming,
he noted, that ring vaccination is unsuitable as the
only means of fighting a wide epidemic.
He said another complication could arise if the
disease broke out simultaneously in multiple cities,
suggesting a strike of unknown size and danger. In
that case, he said, "the forces pressing you
to mass vaccinate become greater."
Dr. Henderson, the chairman of the Secretary's
Council on Public Health Preparedness at the Department
of Health and Human Services, said critics have falsely
portrayed the government as relying exclusively on
ring vaccination.
"Let me be clear," he said. "If
there is an emergency, and if we have to vaccinate
widely, we need to be ready for it. That's what we're
doing."
Mass vaccinations are not without risk because
the smallpox vaccine uses a live virus, vaccinia,
a cousin of smallpox, that on occasion can cause brain
damage or even kill. In the days of wide vaccination,
roughly one person in a million died.
The risk may be greater for people with weakened
immune systems, like AIDS patients or people undergoing
chemotherapy.
The government is seeking more supplies of vaccinia
immune globulin, a substance now in short supply that
can prevent severe reactions in people with immune
problems as well as the healthy. Officials said 700
doses are in hand and 3,000 will be available by the
year's end.
Despite the vaccine's well-known dangers, federal
critics have increasingly called for various styles
of mass vaccination — including doing it on a voluntary
or mandatory basis, before or after a smallpox attack.
At a June 15 public forum in Washington on federal
smallpox vaccination policy, Dr. Kaplan, of Yale,
presented a study done with colleagues from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology that described how a smallpox
attack could affect a crowded metropolitan region
like New York City. What began as 1,000 infections
at a train station or airport, he said, would spiral
over weeks and months into 97,000 deaths if fought
with ring vaccination alone.
"By contrast," he said, "post-attack
mass vaccination would result in only 525 deaths" from
the smallpox virus, which takes about two weeks to
develop in the body before symptoms become obvious.
Some federal officials call this study unrealistic.
But at the meeting, such ideas gained force as new
evidence came to light on how powdered smallpox can
be used as a biological weapon.
Dr. Alan P. Zelicoff, a smallpox expert at the
Sandia National Laboratories, reported that he and
experts from the Monterey Institute of International
Studies had linked a 1971 outbreak in the Kazakh Republic
to a Soviet field test of weaponized smallpox.
Dr. Zelicoff, a physician, quoted a former Soviet
official as saying the accident occurred when a plume
of smallpox germs sailed about nine miles on the wind.
By the meeting's end, medical experts were questioning
not only the ring plan but also federal assertions
that the smallpox threat is low.
Dr. Kenneth I. Berns, president of the Mount Sinai
Medical Center in New York City, said he judged the
probability that Iraq possessed weaponized smallpox
as "reasonably high" and that Saddam Hussein
would use such germs in a war against the United States
as "quite high."
"That's the confounding issue that we all
face," Dr. Berns told the forum, according to
a transcript.
Frank public discussion of the Iraqi threat, he
added, "is absolutely essential."
In interviews, officials of the Department of Health
and Human Services declined to comment on federal
threat assessments but detailed wide contingency planning
for mass smallpox vaccinations.
On June 20, a federal panel known as the Advisory
Committee on Immunization Practices backed the idea
of immunizing some emergency workers before any attack.
Experts estimated that the immunizations would go
to some 15,000 health care and law enforcement workers
who would be most likely to respond to a biological
attack and come in contact with victims.
But Dr. Henderson, the health department's senior
adviser on bioterrorism, said the tentative new plan
was for many more to be vaccinated. "We could
easily be at a half-million without too much difficulty," he
said.
Wide peacetime vaccinations, he said, would help
educate not only the nation's medical community on
the practical aspects of smallpox immunization but
also the public.
If the peacetime group suffers a couple of deaths, "there
will be a lot of publicity and concern," Dr.
Henderson said. "It's a question of how people
are going to respond."
Conflict of Interest?
Medical Journal
Changes Policy
of Finding Independent Doctors to Write
By John McKenzie June 12
— Is it
a case of, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em?"
The
New England Journal of Medicine will announce Thursday
that it has given up finding truly independent doctors
to write and review articles and editorials for it,
as a result of the financial ties physicians have
with so many drug companies in the United States The
Journal says the drug companies' reach is just too
deep.
In
2000, the drug industry sponsored more than 314,000
events for physicians — everything from luncheons
to getaway weekends — at a cost of almost $2 billion.
On top of that, many doctors accept speaking and consulting
fees that link them to drug companies.
No
publication in this country influences the way your
doctor treats an illness more than the New England
Journal of Medicine. Since 1812, the Journal has scrutinized
and published thousands of clinical studies.
These "review" articles
on drug therapy that can be pivotal. They tell doctors
the strengths and weaknesses of new medications for
everything form high blood pressure to obesity to
cancer.
Now,
the Journal will allow these critical evaluations
to be written by people with financial ties to drug
companies.
"This
change will allow us to recruit the best authors,
the people who have experience with new treatments
to write these editorials and review articles," said
Dr. Jeffrey Drazen, the medical journal's editor-in-chief.
Under
the new policy, doctors writing reviews in the Journal
can accept up to $10,000 a year from each drug company
in speaking fees and consulting fees.
Concerns About Possible Bias
Not
everyone thinks this is such a good idea.
"So
if a doctor is doing that kind of business with four
or five companies, he or she can get as much [as]
$40- to 50,000 a year and not violate the new New
England Journal policy," said Dr. Sidney Wolfe,
the director of the Public Citizen Health Research
Group, one of the country's largest medical consumer
groups.
"The
bias introduced by drug companies paying writers of
review articles a large amount of money can have the
consequence of slanting articles and influencing physicians
in a way that isn't really in the best interests of
their patients," said Wolfe.
The
Journal, in a letter to its readers, says the policy
change is necessary because it simply could not find
enough qualified authors who did not already have
ties to drug companies.
"There
are areas where we simply have not published anything
because we didn't think we could get a person who
was good to write in an area that had absolutely no
interaction with a commercial entity," said Drazen.
But
Jerome Kassirer, who was the Journal's editor between
1991 and 1999, says he had no problem finding independent
authors.
"There's
a lot of depth in academic medicine, sufficient depth,
so that it's almost always possible to find a first-class
person to write an editorial or review article in
which they do not have a conflict of interest," said
Kassirer, now a professor at the Tufts University
School of Medicine.
Some doctors are concerned
that by relaxing conflict-of-interest standards, the
Journal is reducing the prestige and influence that
it has taken 190 years to build. 
GM Aromatic Plants Threaten Essential Oil Quality
By
Jim Lynn
Genetic engineering of plants has become a huge business and now threatens
therapeutic-grade essential oils. The natural order of phyto-chemicals is
under threat of becoming extinct.
Commercial growers of lavender and peppermint are replacing their traditional
non-hybrid seed with genetically modified (GM) seed. Lavender and peppermint
are only the first in a long line of GM aromatic plants to come.
The purpose of this change is to standardize (control) certain chemical constituents,
which here-to-fore was not possible with wild (unaltered) native plants.
Wild pollination is nature's way of assuring viability of the species, and
the potency found in certain therapeutic grade essential oils.
The move to genetically-alter plants was made at the behest of the perfume
industry, which considers natural variations of phyto-chemicals a quality
problem for their products. However, the move to genetically modify aromatic
plants means a loss for people to always obtain high-quality, therapeutic
grade, wild crafted essential oils.
As fields of GM plants are planted next to unaltered fields of the same species,
cross pollination will occur as the wind and insects carry pollen from one
field to the next. The net effect is to contaminate the unaltered plant with
GM pollen, thus changing the plants progeny.
Producers of therapeutic grade essential oil are coming under increasing
pressure to locate untouched, genetically modified lavender. The growers
are under pressure to produce what the market wants. The perfume industry
is much larger than the aromatherapy industry, so growers cater to the perfume
industry at the cost of therapeutic grade essential oil producers.
Large producers of therapeutic essential oils, like Young Living Essential
Oils, cannot continue to meet the demand of their own locally grown lavender
oil, and so must rely on out-sourcing. Traditionally, the best lavender comes
from France where Young Living also contracts with growers. But it is France
where the production of GM lavender has already gained a foothold.
Young Living reportedly tests every batch of oil it receives from France,
both before and after shipment. Gas chromatography allows the company to
dissect the anatomy of any oil. But though this testing method has limitations,
it can detect the chemical variations Young Living looks for.
For the end user of therapeutic grade essential oil, The future of commercially
grown therapeutic oils is uncertain. Savvy consumers are stock-piling supplies
of oils while they can get them. Fortunately, the shelf life of essential
oils is many years given proper storage.
The following links will provide you with information about how peppermint
is being modified to protect the species from insect damage.
http://abstracts.aspb.org/aspb1997/62/0920.shtml
http://www.aspb.org
Factory may see growth
New sweetener could be produced at Augusta facility Web posted Thursday,
July 11, 2002
By
Damon Cline
NutraSweet
Co.'s artificial-sweetener plant in Augusta is a likely
candidate to produce the company's newest product: neotame.
Neotame, which is 7,000 to 13,000
times sweeter than sugar, was formally approved for
use in foods by the Food and Drug Administration this
week.
The
Augusta plant, which already produces the sugar substitute
aspartame, would be one of the "obvious" places
to make the new sweetener, plant Manager Bill DeFer
said.
Neotame is currently manufactured
in small quantities by a third party with assistance
from engineers and technicians from the Augusta plant.
"Our
expectation is that we will self-manufacture neotame someday," Mr.
DeFer said. "It's an important new product for
us, and we're excited about that."
Although
Mr. DeFer said it is premature to assume Augusta would
take on neotame production, there are several
reasons why it could happen:
· NutraSweet's
250-employee facility on Lover's Lane is the world's
largest producer of aspartame.
- Aspartame, which is 200 to 400 times sweeter than sugar,
is one of the raw materials used to make neotame.
- The plant, built in 1984, is NutraSweet's only aspartame
production facility.
- The plant has room for expansion.
How
soon Mount Prospect, Ill.-based NutraSweet gears up
production of the no-calorie sugar substitute depends
on how the product is accepted by food and drink producers.
NutraSweet
President and CEO Nick E. Rosa told The Wall Street
Journal this week that the economic benefit to
soft-drink producers alone would be extraordinary
because they can achieve the same taste with less
sweetener and more water, cutting down production
costs.
However,
Mr. Rosa said he does not believe that neotame,
which is more versatile than aspartame in cooking
applications, will replace its predecessor in the
sweetener market.
"We
don't think there's going to be a 1-to-1 replacement," he
told the Journal.
A
NutraSweet spokesman said Wednesday that aspartame
sales have been level in recent years.
Pepsi-Cola
Co., which uses aspartame and aspartame blends in
its diet soft drinks, said it has not yet decided
whether it will use neotame.
"At
this point, we are certainly reviewing it," Pepsi
spokesman Bart Casabona said.
Coca-Cola's
media relations department did not return a phone
message Wednesday.
Neotame, a water-soluble, white crystalline powder, has
been approved for use in everything but meat and poultry
products. For that, NutraSweet must submit a special
request to the Department of Agriculture.
Aspartame
was discovered in 1965 by a G.D. Searle and Co. researcher
working on amino acids to develop ulcer treatments.
The product was introduced in 1981 as an alternative
to saccharin-based sweeteners.
Monsanto
Co. acquired the sweetener business when it bought
Searle in 1985. Monsanto, then a subsidiary of Pharmacia
Corp., sold the operation to investment firm J.W.
Childs Associates in 2000.
The
Augusta plant sells directly to food producers and
Merisant Co., which makes the tabletop sweetener brands
Equal and Canderel.
In
determining the safety of neotame, the FDA
reviewed data from more than 113 animal and human
studies.
COMMENT: Neotame has similar structure
to aspartame -- except that, from its structure, appears
to be even more toxic than aspartame. This potential
increase in toxicity will make up for the fact that
less will be used in diet drinks. Like aspartame,
some of the concerns include gradual neurotoxic and
immunotoxic damage from the combination of the formaldehyde
metabolite (which is toxic at extremely low doses)
and the excitotoxic amino acid. Given all of the suffering
being caused by Monsanto's aspartame, the prudent
course would be to start out with the assumption that
it may cause toxic damage or cancer from long-term
exposure and conduct many thorough, long-term, and independent human
studies to see the effects.
Even Monsanto's own pre-approval studies of neotame revealed adverse reactions.
Unfortunately, Monsanto only conducted a few one-day studies in humans rather
than encouraging independent researchers to obtain NIH funding to conduct
long-term human studies on the effects of neotame.
The
Recent News About HRT
By: Loretta
Lanphier, C.C.N.
The
secret is out! I don’t know about you but I was not
a bit surprised by last weeks announcement that HRT
is not the “magic bullet” that has been instilled
in women constantly by the medical professionals and
the media. The propaganda for HRT has been hitting
the airwaves non-stop making women feel like if they
are not already taking it then in order to feel “alive
again” they MUST run to their Dr. and request
to be given a prescription…FAST!
· Healthy
women who take HRT after menopause increase their
risk of breast cancer, stroke, blood clots and heart
disease.
· In
the 16,600 women who participated in the study there
was a 41% increase in the number of strokes, 29% increase
in heart attacks and 25% increase in breast cancer.
If
these numbers concern you, you're not alone! Dr. Rossouw
of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute was
quoted as saying, "Women should not start or
continue to use the (HRT) therapy to prevent heart
disease. The findings show it doesn't work. In fact,
the therapy increases the chance of a heart attack
or stroke. Additionally, it increases the risk of
cancer and blood clots."
Let’s
look at just a few of the many “other” dangers caused
by HRT:
1) HRT artificially
continues menstruation, spotting and cyclical bleeding.
HRT can cause incomplete shedding of the uterine lining.
Several new Australian studies reveal that 85 percent
of women taking HRT complain about withdrawal bleeding,
worse than their former periods. If there is persistent
bleeding, then there is increased risk of endometrial
cancer.
2)
HRT increases risk of breast and bone cancer even
when progesterone is added. Endometrial cancer is
still a risk, too, although some studies show decreased
risk when progesterone is added to estrogen. The Center
for Disease Control reported in 1991 that for a women
on HRT for ten years, the risk of cancer of the uterus
or breast goes up 30 percent.
3)
HRT increases appetite, causes fluid retention, aggravates
mood swings and localizes fat deposits on the hips
and thighs. Many women get PMS-like symptoms, including
simultaneous depression and agitation.
4)
Hormone replacement therapy can also destroy Vitamin
E in the body, thus actually increasing the risk of
heart disease.
5)
HRT increases growth of uterine and breast fibroids.
Estrogen-dependent fibroids, and menstrual migraines
stay actively stimulated.
6)
HRT worsens mood swings. Many women report a drop
in sex enjoyment and an increase in nervous tension.
Some women develop depression and hot flashes. A 1988
Swedish study showed that while an estrogen-progesterone
combination was more helpful in controlling hot flashes
and night sweating than estrogen alone, positive mental
outlook decreased.
7) HRT should not be used by women with high blood pressure, breast
or uterine fibroids, high cholesterol, chronic migraines,
or endometriosis. Some hormone driven cancers stem
from poor liver function when the liver does not process
estrogens safely. Avoid HRT if you have a history
of breast, bone or uterine cancer, or thrombosis.
Both gallbladder and liver disease increase with use.
Do not use if you have diabetes, or during pregnancy.
8) HRT may become a lifetime drug with long term unknown consequences. There
are no long term, unbiased, reliable studies. Scientists are counting the
current generation of HRT users as an experiment in progress.
While I’m not in to trying to predict or worry about the future it’s
probably a very safe bet that the next “band wagon” that
will be promoted will be soy. We will start
to see “reports” and advertisements about the “natural” properties
of soy. Each time they will recite all the wonderful
benefits to women until we actually start to believe
them. I suspect that we will even begin to hear a
few “new” disease names that have been invented for
the problems associated with soy overload. This,
in turn, allows the pharmaceutical companies to develop
new drugs to treat the symptoms. Then whenever they
have made billions of dollars or the American people
start to catch on (which ever comes first) they will “come
clean” and let us know the problems that can manifest
when people are on soy overload. (See June’s Newsletter) Sounds
like it can’t happen? We’ll see…
I have had many questions about what is safe for those experiencing
hormonal problems. Remember that the whole body must
be in balance in order for hormones to be balanced. First
of all you should check the toxicity of your body. Have
you recently cleansed your digestive track, liver/gallbladder
and at the cellular level? If absorption is not taking
place then it will be difficult to experience the
results of good diet and supplementation. Next take
a look at your diet. Are you eating white sugar,
white flour, hydrogenated oil, margarine, dairy, soft
drinks, processed foods, etc.? Are you filling your
body with “live” foods that contain life-giving enzymes? Are
you drinking distilled water with organic Apple-Cider
Vinegar? Drinking the correct amount of water each
day can alleviate many hormonal symptoms. Are you
exercising every day? This is a must! Are you dealing
effectively with emotions, stress and spiritual issues? Are
you happy and enjoying life? These are some things
to work on first.
While working on the above, it is recommended that you get on a good
progesterone cream. This will help with mood swings,
water retention, hot flashes, vaginal dryness, etc. If
you suspect that you have uterine fibroids a word
of caution: Creams made with diocorea, or wild yam,
are used by many women to treat menopausal/pms symptoms. Such
creams have no detrimental effects on uterine fibroids,
and may actually stop bleeding and pain. However,
some “dioscorea” creams contain progesterone that
is not identified on the label, and which stimulates
fibroid growth. Either use dioscorea itself or use
creams that are certified not to contain added progesterone.
I would suspect that many
women are confused and even angry because of the HRT
news. Most may even feel betrayed, and they should! Until
we get real serious with this type of “playing with
people’s health” (I’m suggesting law suits as this
seems to get their attention the quickest), it will
continue to happen over and over again. I am hoping
to see the day when our government recommends something
that actually makes sense…people are beginning
to “wake up.” They are beginning to realize that
there are no “magic bullets”…as well they should.
SPEAKING
SCHEDULE
“The Cause, Prevention & Elimination
of Degenerative Disease”
An Evening
with
Dr. Edward F. Group III, D.C., Ph.D
July 16, 2002 (Tuesday from 7:00 – 10:00 p.m.)
Leisure Learning
Greenway Plaza: Richmond/Kirby
Houston, TX 713-529-4414 (reserve your seat early as
seating is limited)
www.llu.com
“Degenerative Diseases:
Cause, Prevention & Elimination”
An Evening
With
Dr. Edward F. Group III, D.C., Ph.D
July 27, 2002 (Saturday from 2:00 – 5:15 p.m.)
Houston A.R.E. Center
7800 Amelia
Houston, TX 713-522-5084 (call for reservations)
Cancer Facts
Cellular Consciousness
and Cancer: Has Science Been Wrong?
An Evening
With
Dr. Edward F. Group III, D.C., Ph.D
August 14, 2002 (Wednesday from 7:00 – 10:00 p.m.)
Houston A.R.E. Center
7800 Amelia
Houston, TX 713-522-5084 (call for reservations)
For those of you in the Houston area, we personally invite
you to attend these up-coming seminars. Please
come by and introduce yourself, we would love to
meet you!
Academy of Bio-Energetic
and Integrative Medicine (ABEIM)
International Cancer Conference
“Cancer Treatment – No
Magic Bullet”
Seminar/Workshop
With
Dr. Edward F. Group III, D.C., Ph.D
September 12-15, 2002
Will Rogers Memorial Convention Center
3401 West Lancaster Avenue
Fort Worth, TX 76107
“To help educate health practitioners, as well as the general
public, in a thorough and systematic bio-energetic
and integrative medicine approach.”
Other speakers include W. Lee Cowden, M.D., Burton Goldberg,
Joseph Mercola, M.D., Garry Gordon, M.D., John Liscio,
M.D., Douglas C. Leber, AP, Frank Morales, M.D., Pat
Quillin, Ph.D, Christopher Ging, LAC, Jimmy Chan,
N.D. and many more!
For a flyer call 281-383-0038.
If you would like to have Dr. Group speak for
your church or organization or know of an organization
that would benefit from this seminar, please contact
Loretta at 281-383-0038.
DISCLAIMER: It is your constitutional right to
educate yourself in health and medical knowledge,
to seek helpful information and make use of it for
your own benefit, and for that of your family. You
are the one responsible for your health. In
order to make decisions in all health matters, you
must educate yourself. The views and nutritional advice
expressed by Global Healing Center are not intended
to be a substitute for conventional medical service.
If you have a severe medical condition, see your physician
of choice. We do not claim to "cure" disease,
but simply help you make physical and mental changes
in your own body in order to help your body heal itself.
PLEASE PASS THIS NEWSLETTER ON TO OTHER POTENTIAL
SUBSCRIBERS.
Editor: Dr. Edward F. Group, III, D.C., Ph.D
Assistant Editor: Loretta Lanphier, C.C.N.
Published monthly by:
Global Healing Center
P. O. Box 1749
Baytown, TX 77522
281-383-0038
Check us out at: www.ghchealth.com
Questions or Comments? staff@ghchealth.com
“He who does not use
his endeavors to heal himself is a brother to
him who commits suicide.”
Proverbs 18:9 (Amplified)
