Here is a testimonial of some side benefits of HypnoBirthing from a former class member:
So I have been meaning to write to you for weeks! I just wanted to pass along my thoughts about the skills I learned in HypnoBirthing post birth. More than a year after Caroline's birth I still use "HypnoBirthing" daily...although admittedly I have forgotten much of the official lingo. It is so normal for me I barely notice it but I have noticed a true impact.
I have had borderline blood pressure for as long as I can remember in my adult life. In the last year it has been excellent (well within normal limits) and I attribute completely to regular use of relaxation techniques. The other time I use techniques regularly is when I am trying to sleep, especially if I am in a strange place or their are noises disrupting me. For example, recently a neighbor was having a party and instead of allowing the noise to disrupt me I just told myself that every time I heard a noise from the party to relax deeper and deeper. Worked like a charm. I do the same thing for elevator noises and air conditioning in hotel rooms and for my husband's occasional snoring.
Anyway, I just wanted to share these examples with you because I think that hypnobirthing has an impact far beyond labor and delivery-it is truly a valuable life skill!
-Christine
Thanks, Christine, for sharing that! HypnoBirthing is a childbirth education class, but it was developed to be used more as a philosophy than just a class by Marie Mongan 20 years ago.
I know that several former HypnoBirthing clients (moms, dads & partners) have reported that listening to the Rainbow Relaxation CD after the baby arrives helps them get more restful sleep & helps the mom relax while breastfeeding, which also helps with milk letdown.
www.AWellLivedLife.Net
www.AWellLivedLife.blogspot.com
Showing posts with label women's health. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women's health. Show all posts
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Important info about cell phone use
Important Precautionary Advice Regarding Cell Phone Use...here are 2 articles:
University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, 8/12/2008
An international expert panel of pathologists, oncologists and public health specialists recently declared that electromagnetic fields emitted by cell phones should be considered a potential human health risk (see The Case for Precaution in Cell Phone Use, attached). To date, a number of countries including France, Germany and India have issued recommendations that exposure to electromagnetic fields should be limited. In addition, Toronto's Department of Public Health is advising teenagers and young children to limit their use of cell phones, to avoid potential health risks.
More definitive data that cover the health effects from prolonged cell phone use have been compiled by the World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer. However, publication has been delayed for two years. In anticipation of release of the WHO report, the attached prudent and simple precautions, intended to promote precautionary efforts to reduce exposures to cell phone electromagnetic radiation, have been reviewed by UPCI experts in neuro-oncology, epidemiology, neurosurgery and the Center for Environmental Oncology.
Practical Advice to Limit Exposure to Electromagnetic Radiation Emitted from Cell Phones
1. Do not allow children to use a cell phone, except for emergencies. The developing organs of a fetus or child are the most likely to be sensitive to any possible effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields.
2. While communicating using your cell phone, try to keep the cell phone away from the body as much as possible. The amplitude of the electromagnetic field is one fourth the strength at a distance of two inches and fifty times lower at three feet. Whenever possible, use the speaker-phone mode or a wireless Bluetooth headset, which has less than 1/100th of the electromagnetic emission of a normal cell phone. Use of a hands-free ear piece attachment may also reduce exposures.
3. Avoid using your cell phone in places, like a bus, where you can passively expose others to your phone's electromagnetic fields.
4. Avoid carrying your cell phone on your body at all times. Do not keep it near your body at night such as under the pillow or on a bedside table, particularly if pregnant. You can also put it on "flight" or "off-line" mode, which stops electromagnetic emissions.
5. If you must carry your cell phone on you, make sure that the keypad is positioned toward your body and the back is positioned toward the outside so that the transmitted electromagnetic fields move away from your rather than through you.
6. Only use your cell phone to establish contact or for conversations lasting a few minutes, as the biological effects are directly related to the duration of exposure. For longer conversations, use a land line with a corded phone, not a cordless phone, which uses electromagnetic emitting technology similar to that of cell phones.
7. Switch sides regularly while communicating on your cell phone to spread out your exposure. Before putting your cell phone to the ear, wait until your correspondent has picked up. This limits the power of the electromagnetic field emitted near your ear and the duration of your exposure.
8. Avoid using your cell phone when the signal is weak or when moving at high speed, such as in a car or train, as this automatically increases power to a maximum as the phone repeatedly attempts to connect to a new relay antenna.
9. When possible, communicate via text messaging rather than making a call, limiting the duration of exposure and the proximity to the body.
10. Choose a device with the lowest SAR possible (SAR = Specific Absorption Rate, which is a measure of the strength of the magnetic field absorbed by the body). SAR ratings of contemporary phones by different manufacturers are available by searching for "sar ratings cell phones" on the internet.
Scientists revive debate on cellphones and cancer
(Following is an article published in the International Herald Tribune which is the global edition of the New York Times)
Scientists revive the debate on cellphones and cancer
By Tara Parker-Pope
Published: June 3, 2008
What do brain surgeons know about cellphone safety that the rest of us don't?
Last week, three prominent neurosurgeons told the CNN interviewer Larry King that they did not hold cellphones next to their ears. "I think the safe practice," said Dr. Keith Black, a surgeon at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, "is to use an earpiece so you keep the microwave antenna away from your brain."
Dr. Vini Khurana, an associate professor of neurosurgery at the Australian National University who is an outspoken critic of cellphones, said: "I use it on the speaker-phone mode. I do not hold it to my ear."
And CNN's chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, a neurosurgeon at Emory University Hospital, said that like Black he used an earpiece.
Along with Senator Edward Kennedy's recent diagnosis of a glioma, a type of tumor that critics have long associated with cellphone use, the doctors' remarks have helped reignite a long-simmering debate about cellphones and cancer. That supposed link has been largely dismissed by many experts, including the American Cancer Society. The theory that cellphones cause brain tumors "defies credulity," said Dr. Eugene Flamm, chairman of neurosurgery at Montefiore Medical Center.
According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, three large epidemiology studies since 2000 have shown no harmful effects. CTIA (the Wireless Association), the leading industry trade group, said in a statement, "The overwhelming majority of studies that have been published in scientific journals around the globe show that wireless phones do not pose a health risk."The FDA notes, however, that the average period of phone use in the studies it cites was about three years, so the research doesn't answer questions about long-term exposures.
Cellphones emit non-ionizing radiation, waves of energy that are too weak to break chemical bonds or to set off the DNA damage known to cause cancer. There is no known biological mechanism to explain how non-ionizing radiation might lead to cancer. But researchers who have raised concerns say that just because science can't explain the mechanism doesn't mean one does not exist. Concerns have focused on the heat generated by cellphones and the fact that the radio frequencies are absorbed mostly by the head and neck. In recent studies that suggest a risk, the tumors tend to occur on the same side of the head where the patient typically holds the phone. Like most research on the subject, the studies are observational, showing only an association between cellphone use and cancer, not a causal relationship.
The most important of these studies is called Interphone, a vast research effort in 13 countries, including Canada, Israel and several in Europe. Some of the research suggests a link between cellphone use and three types of tumors: glioma; cancer of the parotid, a salivary gland near the ear; and acoustic neuroma, a tumor that essentially occurs where the ear meets the brain. All these cancers are rare.
Last year, The American Journal of Epidemiology published data from Israel finding a 58 percent higher risk of parotid gland tumors among heavy cellphone users. Also last year, a Swedish analysis of 16 studies in the journal Occupational and Environmental Medicine showed a doubling of risk for acoustic neuroma and glioma after 10 years of heavy cellphone use. Some doctors say the real concern is not older cellphone users, who began using phones as adults, but children who are beginning to use phones today and face a lifetime of exposure. The fear is that even if the individual risk of using a cellphone is low, with three billion users worldwide, even a minuscule risk would translate into a major public health concern.
http://www.awelllivedlife.net/
http://www.awelllivedlife.blogspot.com/
University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, 8/12/2008
An international expert panel of pathologists, oncologists and public health specialists recently declared that electromagnetic fields emitted by cell phones should be considered a potential human health risk (see The Case for Precaution in Cell Phone Use, attached). To date, a number of countries including France, Germany and India have issued recommendations that exposure to electromagnetic fields should be limited. In addition, Toronto's Department of Public Health is advising teenagers and young children to limit their use of cell phones, to avoid potential health risks.
More definitive data that cover the health effects from prolonged cell phone use have been compiled by the World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer. However, publication has been delayed for two years. In anticipation of release of the WHO report, the attached prudent and simple precautions, intended to promote precautionary efforts to reduce exposures to cell phone electromagnetic radiation, have been reviewed by UPCI experts in neuro-oncology, epidemiology, neurosurgery and the Center for Environmental Oncology.
Practical Advice to Limit Exposure to Electromagnetic Radiation Emitted from Cell Phones
1. Do not allow children to use a cell phone, except for emergencies. The developing organs of a fetus or child are the most likely to be sensitive to any possible effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields.
2. While communicating using your cell phone, try to keep the cell phone away from the body as much as possible. The amplitude of the electromagnetic field is one fourth the strength at a distance of two inches and fifty times lower at three feet. Whenever possible, use the speaker-phone mode or a wireless Bluetooth headset, which has less than 1/100th of the electromagnetic emission of a normal cell phone. Use of a hands-free ear piece attachment may also reduce exposures.
3. Avoid using your cell phone in places, like a bus, where you can passively expose others to your phone's electromagnetic fields.
4. Avoid carrying your cell phone on your body at all times. Do not keep it near your body at night such as under the pillow or on a bedside table, particularly if pregnant. You can also put it on "flight" or "off-line" mode, which stops electromagnetic emissions.
5. If you must carry your cell phone on you, make sure that the keypad is positioned toward your body and the back is positioned toward the outside so that the transmitted electromagnetic fields move away from your rather than through you.
6. Only use your cell phone to establish contact or for conversations lasting a few minutes, as the biological effects are directly related to the duration of exposure. For longer conversations, use a land line with a corded phone, not a cordless phone, which uses electromagnetic emitting technology similar to that of cell phones.
7. Switch sides regularly while communicating on your cell phone to spread out your exposure. Before putting your cell phone to the ear, wait until your correspondent has picked up. This limits the power of the electromagnetic field emitted near your ear and the duration of your exposure.
8. Avoid using your cell phone when the signal is weak or when moving at high speed, such as in a car or train, as this automatically increases power to a maximum as the phone repeatedly attempts to connect to a new relay antenna.
9. When possible, communicate via text messaging rather than making a call, limiting the duration of exposure and the proximity to the body.
10. Choose a device with the lowest SAR possible (SAR = Specific Absorption Rate, which is a measure of the strength of the magnetic field absorbed by the body). SAR ratings of contemporary phones by different manufacturers are available by searching for "sar ratings cell phones" on the internet.
Scientists revive debate on cellphones and cancer
(Following is an article published in the International Herald Tribune which is the global edition of the New York Times)
Scientists revive the debate on cellphones and cancer
By Tara Parker-Pope
Published: June 3, 2008
What do brain surgeons know about cellphone safety that the rest of us don't?
Last week, three prominent neurosurgeons told the CNN interviewer Larry King that they did not hold cellphones next to their ears. "I think the safe practice," said Dr. Keith Black, a surgeon at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, "is to use an earpiece so you keep the microwave antenna away from your brain."
Dr. Vini Khurana, an associate professor of neurosurgery at the Australian National University who is an outspoken critic of cellphones, said: "I use it on the speaker-phone mode. I do not hold it to my ear."
And CNN's chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, a neurosurgeon at Emory University Hospital, said that like Black he used an earpiece.
Along with Senator Edward Kennedy's recent diagnosis of a glioma, a type of tumor that critics have long associated with cellphone use, the doctors' remarks have helped reignite a long-simmering debate about cellphones and cancer. That supposed link has been largely dismissed by many experts, including the American Cancer Society. The theory that cellphones cause brain tumors "defies credulity," said Dr. Eugene Flamm, chairman of neurosurgery at Montefiore Medical Center.
According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, three large epidemiology studies since 2000 have shown no harmful effects. CTIA (the Wireless Association), the leading industry trade group, said in a statement, "The overwhelming majority of studies that have been published in scientific journals around the globe show that wireless phones do not pose a health risk."The FDA notes, however, that the average period of phone use in the studies it cites was about three years, so the research doesn't answer questions about long-term exposures.
Cellphones emit non-ionizing radiation, waves of energy that are too weak to break chemical bonds or to set off the DNA damage known to cause cancer. There is no known biological mechanism to explain how non-ionizing radiation might lead to cancer. But researchers who have raised concerns say that just because science can't explain the mechanism doesn't mean one does not exist. Concerns have focused on the heat generated by cellphones and the fact that the radio frequencies are absorbed mostly by the head and neck. In recent studies that suggest a risk, the tumors tend to occur on the same side of the head where the patient typically holds the phone. Like most research on the subject, the studies are observational, showing only an association between cellphone use and cancer, not a causal relationship.
The most important of these studies is called Interphone, a vast research effort in 13 countries, including Canada, Israel and several in Europe. Some of the research suggests a link between cellphone use and three types of tumors: glioma; cancer of the parotid, a salivary gland near the ear; and acoustic neuroma, a tumor that essentially occurs where the ear meets the brain. All these cancers are rare.
Last year, The American Journal of Epidemiology published data from Israel finding a 58 percent higher risk of parotid gland tumors among heavy cellphone users. Also last year, a Swedish analysis of 16 studies in the journal Occupational and Environmental Medicine showed a doubling of risk for acoustic neuroma and glioma after 10 years of heavy cellphone use. Some doctors say the real concern is not older cellphone users, who began using phones as adults, but children who are beginning to use phones today and face a lifetime of exposure. The fear is that even if the individual risk of using a cellphone is low, with three billion users worldwide, even a minuscule risk would translate into a major public health concern.
http://www.awelllivedlife.net/
http://www.awelllivedlife.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
A message about breast cancer
Breast Cancer is a topic that is close to my heart. My mother & several of my aunts have battled against it. All but one has won. I'm doing what I can to improve my chances of being cancer-free by taking Juice Plus whole food supplements to increase the phytonutrients in my body, eliminating toxins in my bodycare products by using Miessence certified organic products, getting rid of plastic containers in my home & drinking reverse osmosis water. I encourage you to do what you can to make your environment the safest it can be for you & your family...
A politically-charged message from Dr. Fuhrman (www.diseaseproof.com) about breast cancer
Christina Applegate's diagnosis of breast cancer at age 36, brings to our awareness the question, why now, after so many millions spent on cancer research, do so many women still get and die of breast cancer? This diagnosis in such a young celebrity will incite a new media frenzy for more donations for cancer research. Cancer research means more testing for new drugs. I doubt any significant reduction in cancer deaths will result as long as we ignore causation and still expect to discover new poisons to defeat cancer. Deaths from breast cancer have increased throughout the last century and modern medical care has done little to halt this trend.
Imagine if that money was instead spent on educating the public about the environmental and nutritional causes of cancer. We could slash breast cancer rates by 70 to 90 percent if the money that went to cancer research (almost exclusively drug research) instead went to fund a huge publicity campaign to beat cancer at its roots.
How many people know, childhood diets are the main cause of adult cancers? I have studied this subject for years, read thousands of studies and wrote a book about it (Disease-Proof Your Child). However, I learned not many people care about this subject. Knowledge about real cancer prevention is not politically correct and the spread of this message is unlikely to happen as the social, economic and political climate in the modern world revolves around promotion of processed foods and dairy products as the center of childhood nutritional practices.
It is blasphemy to produce scientific studies that expose our present day feeding practices as cancer-causing. This message is not what people want to hear, they want a magic pill. Information about cancer causation does not fly in the media. Flip around the dial, listen to the discussions about cancer in the media and read the articles. Do any of them bring up diet as the cause of cancer? Do the television personalities discuss that over 60 percent of food consumed in America is junk food? That's right, we have crossed over the 60 percent line, white flour, (pasta, bagels, crackers) sweeteners, oils, chips, processed cereals, soft drinks and other junk foods are the vast majority of what we eat. Add cheese and other dairy foods, full of hormones and saturated fat, and you have a simple formula to create the cancer explosion we have seen in the modern world over the last 75 years.
Put low micronutrient, high glycemic carbohydrates together with lots of cheese in your child's mouth and boom, watch the cancer-creating experiment unfold (it usually takes about 40 years). Now, while articles tussle with the argument of whether breast MRI's or mammograms are more appropriate as an early detection tool, those in the know realize that there is no such thing as early detection and all cancers diagnosed with radiographic techniques must be large enough to be visualized with the human eye, so they have been there more than 10 years already.
When Christina Applegate's publicist reports "it was not serious and caught in the early stage" we know that is not factual. Present medical science has no way of determining whether cells have spread outside the breast. A stage zero cancer means that it less than 2 centimeters, and no cancer were found in the lymph nodes. However that still does not tell us that it was caught before cancer cells have spread. Most invasive breast cancers have seeded the body with cells by the time a mammogram or MRI can detect it. Negative lymph nodes on a biopsy does not tell us the cancer is still localized to the breast because a small number of cells are for practical purposes invisible.
There are both aggressive and non-aggressive breast cancers. It was not announced which type Ms. Applegate has, but the more aggressive breast cancers are more common in young women. They spread out from the breast at an earlier stage. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-invasive breast cancer that spreads locally and there is no significant advantage to early detection because these cancers are not generally life threatening and can be detected later when they are larger with a good prognosis. Hopefully Christina has this type. Infiltrating ductal carcinoma is an example of breast cancer that is more aggressive.
Genetics plays a minor role, not the major role. Dietary practices have been identified by scientific studies as the primary cause of breast cancers. The countries with the highest incidence of cancers of the breast are in North America, Western Europe and Australia, while in contrast, the occurrence is lowest in Southeast Asia1. For example, when compared to the United States, Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand have only one-twentieth the amount of breast cancer in the 50-75 age bracket. Breast and Prostate cancer are the most prevalent cancers in America.
Diets lower in animal products (especially cheese) and higher in unrefined plant foods account for these dramatic differences. When people from a low risk country migrate to the United States, their cancer rate increases considerably and the cancer rate in their offspring jumps up to match other Americans. This demonstrates that the lower incidence of these cancers is not due to a lower genetic susceptibility in Asians, but rather due to the exposure to Western dietary practices2.
Plant-derived micronutrients reduce toxic stress and arm the body's defenses against cancer. The growing body, with its dividing cells, is at greater risk when exposed to all types of negative and toxic influences. In adults, our valuable genetic material (DNA) is wound up in a tight ball, like the rubber bands on the inside of a golf ball. When we are young and cells are replicating and growing, the DNA unwinds, exposing more of its surface. This makes it more susceptible to damage from toxic exposure. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, infants and toddlers have a ten times greater cancer risk than adults when exposed to gene-damaging chemicals3.
In a similar manner, an unhealthy diet can do substantially more damage to a young body than an adult one. The fact is, the earlier in life, the greater the potential for damage. The idea that eating an anti-cancer diet in our childhood is more important in determining cancer risk than waiting to eat healthy as an adult, has been tested in animals by Dr. Jerald Silverman of the Comprehensive Cancer Center at Ohio State with a grant from the American Institute for Cancer Research. He chose to study a strain of mice very susceptible to breast cancer. He put one group on a diet low in fat their entire lives and with the other group he switched them from a high fat diet to a healthier low fat one at different times; some before puberty, some at puberty and some after puberty. The study showed the same thing we see in human studies; those mice fed the high fat diet early in life had more cancer and more of the cancer spread to the lung, and the earlier the change to the healthier lower fat diet the better the mice fared.
The things we are exposed to earlier in life are crucial to our later health. If a nuclear power plant exploded nearby, dousing us all in heavy radiation, it would not cause a significant increase in cancer occurrence for at least 30 years. For example, the excess risk for breast, prostate and colon cancer among atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki continues to be observed today, and persists throughout the lifetime of the survivors. The largest grouping of the radiation-related cancer deaths for these common cancers occurred in the period from 1986 to 1990, forty to forty five years after exposure4.
Recent studies have also found fruit eating during childhood had powerful effects to protect against cancer in later life. A 60-year study of 4,999 participants found those who consumed more fruit in their childhood (highest quartile) were 38 percent less likely to develop cancer of all types as adults5.
There is much more here and the science is fascinating. I could go on and on with hundreds of more studies, telling this story, of food and other factors initiating cancer, but the point is--we already know enough about how to beat breast cancer. We can implement good science to win the war on cancer. We can do it now. We must eat right America.
For adults at risk or who already have cancer, nutritional excellence is a critical intervention one can use to reduce risk and significantly increase the chance of survival. Eat a high-nutrient, vegetable-based diet as described in my books, Eat To Live and Eat For Health. Green vegetables are the most powerful anti-breast cancer food. Take note that a vegetarian diet does not show protection against breast cancer as much as a diet rich in green vegetables, berries, and seeds. It is the phytochemical nutrient density and diversity of the diet that offers the most dramatic protection against cancer, not merely the avoidance of meat or fat.
Learn more about the best ways to prevent breast cancer and the debate over mammograms in Dr. Fuhrman's Healthy Times Newsletter #13, May 2004.
Dr. Fuhrman is a board certified family physician and specialist in nutritional medicine. Visit him at DrFuhrman.com
To comment on this article, check out Dr. Fuhrman's blog DiseaseProof.com.
1. Doll R, Muir C, Waterhouse J. International Union Against Cancer (UICC) Cancer Incidence in five continents. Vol VI, Lyon 1997.
2. Ziegler RG, Hoover RN, Pike MC et al. Migration patterns and breast cancer risk in Asian-American women. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85(22):1819-1827.
3. Dourson M, Charnley G, Scheuplein R. Differential sensitivity of children and adults to chemical toxicity. II. Risk and regulation. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2002;35(3):448-467. Miller MD, Marty MA, Arcus A, et al. Differences between children and adults: implications for risk assessment at California EPA. Int J Toxicol 2002;21(5):403-418.
4. McPherson K, Steel CM, Dixon JM. ABC of Breast Diseases, Breast cancer--epidemiology, risk factors, and genetics. BMJ 2000;321:624-628. Pierce DA, Shimizu Y, Preston DL, et al. Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 12, Part I. Cancer: 1950-1990 RERF Report No. 11-95 Radiat Res 1996;146:1-27.
5. Maynard M, Gunnell D, Emmett P, et al. Fruit, vegetable and antioxidants in childhood and risk of adult cancer: the Boyd Orr cohort. J Epidemiol Community Health 2003;57:218-225.
DrFuhrman.com
4 Walter E. Foran Blvd
Suite 408
Flemington, NJ 08822
US
That said, I'd like to share that Juice Plus whole food supplements give you the phytonutrient equivalent of 15 fruits & vegetables per day. If you're interested in learning more, please visit my website at www.AWellLivedLife.Net. You can also qualify for free supplements for your children if they are between the ages of 6-13.
A politically-charged message from Dr. Fuhrman (www.diseaseproof.com) about breast cancer
Christina Applegate's diagnosis of breast cancer at age 36, brings to our awareness the question, why now, after so many millions spent on cancer research, do so many women still get and die of breast cancer? This diagnosis in such a young celebrity will incite a new media frenzy for more donations for cancer research. Cancer research means more testing for new drugs. I doubt any significant reduction in cancer deaths will result as long as we ignore causation and still expect to discover new poisons to defeat cancer. Deaths from breast cancer have increased throughout the last century and modern medical care has done little to halt this trend.
Imagine if that money was instead spent on educating the public about the environmental and nutritional causes of cancer. We could slash breast cancer rates by 70 to 90 percent if the money that went to cancer research (almost exclusively drug research) instead went to fund a huge publicity campaign to beat cancer at its roots.
How many people know, childhood diets are the main cause of adult cancers? I have studied this subject for years, read thousands of studies and wrote a book about it (Disease-Proof Your Child). However, I learned not many people care about this subject. Knowledge about real cancer prevention is not politically correct and the spread of this message is unlikely to happen as the social, economic and political climate in the modern world revolves around promotion of processed foods and dairy products as the center of childhood nutritional practices.
It is blasphemy to produce scientific studies that expose our present day feeding practices as cancer-causing. This message is not what people want to hear, they want a magic pill. Information about cancer causation does not fly in the media. Flip around the dial, listen to the discussions about cancer in the media and read the articles. Do any of them bring up diet as the cause of cancer? Do the television personalities discuss that over 60 percent of food consumed in America is junk food? That's right, we have crossed over the 60 percent line, white flour, (pasta, bagels, crackers) sweeteners, oils, chips, processed cereals, soft drinks and other junk foods are the vast majority of what we eat. Add cheese and other dairy foods, full of hormones and saturated fat, and you have a simple formula to create the cancer explosion we have seen in the modern world over the last 75 years.
Put low micronutrient, high glycemic carbohydrates together with lots of cheese in your child's mouth and boom, watch the cancer-creating experiment unfold (it usually takes about 40 years). Now, while articles tussle with the argument of whether breast MRI's or mammograms are more appropriate as an early detection tool, those in the know realize that there is no such thing as early detection and all cancers diagnosed with radiographic techniques must be large enough to be visualized with the human eye, so they have been there more than 10 years already.
When Christina Applegate's publicist reports "it was not serious and caught in the early stage" we know that is not factual. Present medical science has no way of determining whether cells have spread outside the breast. A stage zero cancer means that it less than 2 centimeters, and no cancer were found in the lymph nodes. However that still does not tell us that it was caught before cancer cells have spread. Most invasive breast cancers have seeded the body with cells by the time a mammogram or MRI can detect it. Negative lymph nodes on a biopsy does not tell us the cancer is still localized to the breast because a small number of cells are for practical purposes invisible.
There are both aggressive and non-aggressive breast cancers. It was not announced which type Ms. Applegate has, but the more aggressive breast cancers are more common in young women. They spread out from the breast at an earlier stage. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-invasive breast cancer that spreads locally and there is no significant advantage to early detection because these cancers are not generally life threatening and can be detected later when they are larger with a good prognosis. Hopefully Christina has this type. Infiltrating ductal carcinoma is an example of breast cancer that is more aggressive.
Genetics plays a minor role, not the major role. Dietary practices have been identified by scientific studies as the primary cause of breast cancers. The countries with the highest incidence of cancers of the breast are in North America, Western Europe and Australia, while in contrast, the occurrence is lowest in Southeast Asia1. For example, when compared to the United States, Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand have only one-twentieth the amount of breast cancer in the 50-75 age bracket. Breast and Prostate cancer are the most prevalent cancers in America.
Diets lower in animal products (especially cheese) and higher in unrefined plant foods account for these dramatic differences. When people from a low risk country migrate to the United States, their cancer rate increases considerably and the cancer rate in their offspring jumps up to match other Americans. This demonstrates that the lower incidence of these cancers is not due to a lower genetic susceptibility in Asians, but rather due to the exposure to Western dietary practices2.
Plant-derived micronutrients reduce toxic stress and arm the body's defenses against cancer. The growing body, with its dividing cells, is at greater risk when exposed to all types of negative and toxic influences. In adults, our valuable genetic material (DNA) is wound up in a tight ball, like the rubber bands on the inside of a golf ball. When we are young and cells are replicating and growing, the DNA unwinds, exposing more of its surface. This makes it more susceptible to damage from toxic exposure. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, infants and toddlers have a ten times greater cancer risk than adults when exposed to gene-damaging chemicals3.
In a similar manner, an unhealthy diet can do substantially more damage to a young body than an adult one. The fact is, the earlier in life, the greater the potential for damage. The idea that eating an anti-cancer diet in our childhood is more important in determining cancer risk than waiting to eat healthy as an adult, has been tested in animals by Dr. Jerald Silverman of the Comprehensive Cancer Center at Ohio State with a grant from the American Institute for Cancer Research. He chose to study a strain of mice very susceptible to breast cancer. He put one group on a diet low in fat their entire lives and with the other group he switched them from a high fat diet to a healthier low fat one at different times; some before puberty, some at puberty and some after puberty. The study showed the same thing we see in human studies; those mice fed the high fat diet early in life had more cancer and more of the cancer spread to the lung, and the earlier the change to the healthier lower fat diet the better the mice fared.
The things we are exposed to earlier in life are crucial to our later health. If a nuclear power plant exploded nearby, dousing us all in heavy radiation, it would not cause a significant increase in cancer occurrence for at least 30 years. For example, the excess risk for breast, prostate and colon cancer among atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki continues to be observed today, and persists throughout the lifetime of the survivors. The largest grouping of the radiation-related cancer deaths for these common cancers occurred in the period from 1986 to 1990, forty to forty five years after exposure4.
Recent studies have also found fruit eating during childhood had powerful effects to protect against cancer in later life. A 60-year study of 4,999 participants found those who consumed more fruit in their childhood (highest quartile) were 38 percent less likely to develop cancer of all types as adults5.
There is much more here and the science is fascinating. I could go on and on with hundreds of more studies, telling this story, of food and other factors initiating cancer, but the point is--we already know enough about how to beat breast cancer. We can implement good science to win the war on cancer. We can do it now. We must eat right America.
For adults at risk or who already have cancer, nutritional excellence is a critical intervention one can use to reduce risk and significantly increase the chance of survival. Eat a high-nutrient, vegetable-based diet as described in my books, Eat To Live and Eat For Health. Green vegetables are the most powerful anti-breast cancer food. Take note that a vegetarian diet does not show protection against breast cancer as much as a diet rich in green vegetables, berries, and seeds. It is the phytochemical nutrient density and diversity of the diet that offers the most dramatic protection against cancer, not merely the avoidance of meat or fat.
Learn more about the best ways to prevent breast cancer and the debate over mammograms in Dr. Fuhrman's Healthy Times Newsletter #13, May 2004.
Dr. Fuhrman is a board certified family physician and specialist in nutritional medicine. Visit him at DrFuhrman.com
To comment on this article, check out Dr. Fuhrman's blog DiseaseProof.com.
1. Doll R, Muir C, Waterhouse J. International Union Against Cancer (UICC) Cancer Incidence in five continents. Vol VI, Lyon 1997.
2. Ziegler RG, Hoover RN, Pike MC et al. Migration patterns and breast cancer risk in Asian-American women. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85(22):1819-1827.
3. Dourson M, Charnley G, Scheuplein R. Differential sensitivity of children and adults to chemical toxicity. II. Risk and regulation. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2002;35(3):448-467. Miller MD, Marty MA, Arcus A, et al. Differences between children and adults: implications for risk assessment at California EPA. Int J Toxicol 2002;21(5):403-418.
4. McPherson K, Steel CM, Dixon JM. ABC of Breast Diseases, Breast cancer--epidemiology, risk factors, and genetics. BMJ 2000;321:624-628. Pierce DA, Shimizu Y, Preston DL, et al. Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 12, Part I. Cancer: 1950-1990 RERF Report No. 11-95 Radiat Res 1996;146:1-27.
5. Maynard M, Gunnell D, Emmett P, et al. Fruit, vegetable and antioxidants in childhood and risk of adult cancer: the Boyd Orr cohort. J Epidemiol Community Health 2003;57:218-225.
DrFuhrman.com
4 Walter E. Foran Blvd
Suite 408
Flemington, NJ 08822
US
That said, I'd like to share that Juice Plus whole food supplements give you the phytonutrient equivalent of 15 fruits & vegetables per day. If you're interested in learning more, please visit my website at www.AWellLivedLife.Net. You can also qualify for free supplements for your children if they are between the ages of 6-13.
Now to something more positive regarding the fight against breast cancer...
I just joined the Love/Avon Army of Women — and you should, too!
The amazing Dr. Susan Love has a call to action for women withOUT breast cancer, whether cured, never had and no risk factors. She has said she is striving for prevention, not just the cure. In order to become one in the Army of Women who would be willing to share their blood, saliva, breast tissue, etc. with scientists, go to ArmyofWomen.org and sign up. Signing up does not necessarily mean you will be chosen, just that you are willing to be. Dr. Love said they are piling the women into regions and will divy them/us out to the scientists in the area. It could be many months before we learn if we have been chosen.
Please, please consider becoming one of the volunteers if you do not have breast cancer! Our sisters (and brothers, because men get breast cancer, too!) need us to help. The Love/Avon Army of Women offers women the opportunity to partner with the scientists who are conducting research that will end this disease--once and for all. Breast cancer has been around for decades, but it does not have to be our future. We can be the generation that stops breast cancer once and for all by figuring out what causes this disease and how to prevent it!
Sign up for your sister, mother, daughter, granddaughter, best friend, and the woman you met last week. This is YOUR chance to be part of the research that will end breast cancer. It takes a just a minute to join. But the impact we will have will last a lifetime.
Please Join Me in Being One in a Million!
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Moisturizers Linked to Skin Cancer?
Moisturizers Linked To Skin Cancer?
Studies: 4 Commonly Used Moisturizing Creams Promote Tumors In UV-Exposed Mice
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/14/health/webmd/main4351459.shtml?source=search_story
(WebMD) Four commonly used moisturizers promoted skin cancers in mouse studies.
Mice are not men. But the unexpected finding suggests that these -- and perhaps other products -- may not be as safe as they're thought to be.
The moisturizers tested in the study were Dermabase, Dermovan (a wholesale only product discontinued in 2006), Eucerin Original Moisturizing Cream, and Vanicream.
In a mouse model of sun-related skin cancer , frequent application of each product resulted in more skin tumors and faster tumor growth, says study leader Allan H. Conney, PhD, director of the Susan Lehman Cullman Laboratory for Cancer Research and professor in the school of pharmacy at Rutgers University in Piscataway, N.J. "This was unexpected. We really did not expect to see the tumor-promoting activity of these creams," Conney tells WebMD.
In fact, Conney and colleagues were getting ready to use one of these moisturizers -- Dermabase -- in human clinical trials of topical caffeine, which prevents skin cancer in animal studies.
"We thought it would be prudent to test Dermabase by itself to see if it had tumor-promoting activity," Conney says. "We did not think it would. But lo and behold, to our surprise we got an increased rate of skin cancer."
This led to new tests of Dermabase and the three other moisturizers, which the Conney team hoped to use in their human study. For these new animal studies, the researchers used hairless mice irradiated with ultraviolet light twice a week for 20 weeks. With no further irradiation, such mice eventually develop skin cancer -- very much like humans overexposed to sunlight early in life.
Five days a week, for 17 weeks, the researchers rubbed moisturizer into the animals' skin. The result:
Dermabase increased the total number of tumors by 69%.
Dermovan increased the total number of tumors by 95%.
Eucerin increased the total number of tumors by 24%.
Vanicream increased the total number of tumors by 58%.
"The multimillion-dollar question is, what about humans?" Conney asks. "The answer is, we don't know. Our study raises a red flag and points out the need for epidemiologists to take a look at people who use moisturizing creams. And the companies that market these products should take a look at animal models and see if their products promote tumors."
Testing Moisturizers for Safety
Dermatologist Keyvan Nouri, MD, director of dermatologic surgery at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and author of the best-selling book Skin Cancer, agrees that companies that make moisturizers should test their products.
"This study could definitely be a warning to alert these companies to consider testing moisturizing creams with some sort of assay," Nouri tells WebMD. "These creams need to be tested first before they come to market."
Moisturizers are classified as cosmetics by the FDA, which does not require that they undergo the same safety and efficacy tests required for drugs.
The moisturizers did not cause cancer in the mice. That came from their early-life radiation exposure. But the creams did make skin cancers grow faster and more readily.
Nouri notes that the radiation damaged the skin of the mice before the moisturizing creams were applied. That, he says, might account for the moisturizers' unusual tumor-promoting effect.
However, he notes that the skin cancers are becoming much more common in humans.
"There are over a million cases a year," he says. "It is by far the most common cancer we deal with. Skin cancers account for more than half of all cancers combined. But most skin cancers are totally curable."
What is it about the moisturizers that might promote cancer?
The Conney team asked Johnson & Johnson to make them a "custom blend" moisturizer without two ingredients previously linked to skin iritation (sodium lauryl sulfate) and tumor promotion (mineral oil). The custom blend (on which Rutgers University and Johnson & Johnson hold a patent) did not promote skin cancer.
But not all of the products tested use these ingredients, so exactly what -- if anything -- might be linked to cancer isn't known. And it's certainly clear that mouse and human skin are very different.
Moisturizers Still Necessary
Nouri warns consumers not to stop using moisturizers.
"As we get older, our skin gets drier," he says. "We need to moisturize, otherwise our skin gets dry and we get eczema , dermatitis , rashes , and so on. It is too soon to say from this study people should stop moisturizing."
Eucerin is made by Beiersdorf Inc.
"We have just learned about this study and are currently reviewing it to understand the findings," Beiersdorf says in a statement to WebMD. "Eucerin Original Creme has been on the market for more than 100 years and is a highly respected, dermatologist-recommended brand. It has been widely used by both individuals with normal skin and those with diseased skin under the care of physicians, and no incidents of this nature have ever been reported."
Vanicream is made by Pharmaceutical Specialties Inc. In a statement to WebMD, PSI President Conrad O. Thompson, RPh, says there is nothing in the Conney study to indicate any need for change in current recommendations for use of Vanicream.
"Treatment with Vanicream Skin Cream clearly did not increase the proportion of animals that developed tumors," Thompson notes.
Dermovan, a wholesale-only product used as a base to which other ingredients are added by compounding pharmacists, was made by Healthpoint Ltd. until the product was discontinued in 2006.
"The product has been around for 50 years, and has no safety issues related to it," Healthpoint spokesman Mark Mitchell tells WebMD.
Dermabase maker Paddock Laboratories Inc. did not respond to WebMD's request for comment.
The Conney study appears in the Aug. 14 advance online issue of the Journal of Investigative Dermatology.
**If you want a moisturizer made from Certified Organic (to food grade levels) ingredients that are cold-pressed & cold-extracted, choose Miessence products. Go to my website at http://www.awelllivedlife.net/ & click on the Miessence tab to learn more.
http://www.awelllivedlife.net/
http://www.awelllivedlife.blogspot.com/
Studies: 4 Commonly Used Moisturizing Creams Promote Tumors In UV-Exposed Mice
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/14/health/webmd/main4351459.shtml?source=search_story
(WebMD) Four commonly used moisturizers promoted skin cancers in mouse studies.
Mice are not men. But the unexpected finding suggests that these -- and perhaps other products -- may not be as safe as they're thought to be.
The moisturizers tested in the study were Dermabase, Dermovan (a wholesale only product discontinued in 2006), Eucerin Original Moisturizing Cream, and Vanicream.
In a mouse model of sun-related skin cancer , frequent application of each product resulted in more skin tumors and faster tumor growth, says study leader Allan H. Conney, PhD, director of the Susan Lehman Cullman Laboratory for Cancer Research and professor in the school of pharmacy at Rutgers University in Piscataway, N.J. "This was unexpected. We really did not expect to see the tumor-promoting activity of these creams," Conney tells WebMD.
In fact, Conney and colleagues were getting ready to use one of these moisturizers -- Dermabase -- in human clinical trials of topical caffeine, which prevents skin cancer in animal studies.
"We thought it would be prudent to test Dermabase by itself to see if it had tumor-promoting activity," Conney says. "We did not think it would. But lo and behold, to our surprise we got an increased rate of skin cancer."
This led to new tests of Dermabase and the three other moisturizers, which the Conney team hoped to use in their human study. For these new animal studies, the researchers used hairless mice irradiated with ultraviolet light twice a week for 20 weeks. With no further irradiation, such mice eventually develop skin cancer -- very much like humans overexposed to sunlight early in life.
Five days a week, for 17 weeks, the researchers rubbed moisturizer into the animals' skin. The result:
Dermabase increased the total number of tumors by 69%.
Dermovan increased the total number of tumors by 95%.
Eucerin increased the total number of tumors by 24%.
Vanicream increased the total number of tumors by 58%.
"The multimillion-dollar question is, what about humans?" Conney asks. "The answer is, we don't know. Our study raises a red flag and points out the need for epidemiologists to take a look at people who use moisturizing creams. And the companies that market these products should take a look at animal models and see if their products promote tumors."
Testing Moisturizers for Safety
Dermatologist Keyvan Nouri, MD, director of dermatologic surgery at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and author of the best-selling book Skin Cancer, agrees that companies that make moisturizers should test their products.
"This study could definitely be a warning to alert these companies to consider testing moisturizing creams with some sort of assay," Nouri tells WebMD. "These creams need to be tested first before they come to market."
Moisturizers are classified as cosmetics by the FDA, which does not require that they undergo the same safety and efficacy tests required for drugs.
The moisturizers did not cause cancer in the mice. That came from their early-life radiation exposure. But the creams did make skin cancers grow faster and more readily.
Nouri notes that the radiation damaged the skin of the mice before the moisturizing creams were applied. That, he says, might account for the moisturizers' unusual tumor-promoting effect.
However, he notes that the skin cancers are becoming much more common in humans.
"There are over a million cases a year," he says. "It is by far the most common cancer we deal with. Skin cancers account for more than half of all cancers combined. But most skin cancers are totally curable."
What is it about the moisturizers that might promote cancer?
The Conney team asked Johnson & Johnson to make them a "custom blend" moisturizer without two ingredients previously linked to skin iritation (sodium lauryl sulfate) and tumor promotion (mineral oil). The custom blend (on which Rutgers University and Johnson & Johnson hold a patent) did not promote skin cancer.
But not all of the products tested use these ingredients, so exactly what -- if anything -- might be linked to cancer isn't known. And it's certainly clear that mouse and human skin are very different.
Moisturizers Still Necessary
Nouri warns consumers not to stop using moisturizers.
"As we get older, our skin gets drier," he says. "We need to moisturize, otherwise our skin gets dry and we get eczema , dermatitis , rashes , and so on. It is too soon to say from this study people should stop moisturizing."
Eucerin is made by Beiersdorf Inc.
"We have just learned about this study and are currently reviewing it to understand the findings," Beiersdorf says in a statement to WebMD. "Eucerin Original Creme has been on the market for more than 100 years and is a highly respected, dermatologist-recommended brand. It has been widely used by both individuals with normal skin and those with diseased skin under the care of physicians, and no incidents of this nature have ever been reported."
Vanicream is made by Pharmaceutical Specialties Inc. In a statement to WebMD, PSI President Conrad O. Thompson, RPh, says there is nothing in the Conney study to indicate any need for change in current recommendations for use of Vanicream.
"Treatment with Vanicream Skin Cream clearly did not increase the proportion of animals that developed tumors," Thompson notes.
Dermovan, a wholesale-only product used as a base to which other ingredients are added by compounding pharmacists, was made by Healthpoint Ltd. until the product was discontinued in 2006.
"The product has been around for 50 years, and has no safety issues related to it," Healthpoint spokesman Mark Mitchell tells WebMD.
Dermabase maker Paddock Laboratories Inc. did not respond to WebMD's request for comment.
The Conney study appears in the Aug. 14 advance online issue of the Journal of Investigative Dermatology.
**If you want a moisturizer made from Certified Organic (to food grade levels) ingredients that are cold-pressed & cold-extracted, choose Miessence products. Go to my website at http://www.awelllivedlife.net/ & click on the Miessence tab to learn more.
http://www.awelllivedlife.net/
http://www.awelllivedlife.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Fight Breast Cancer
Hi everyone-
I just joined the Love/Avon Army of Women — and you should, too!
The amazing Dr. Susan Love has a call to action for women withOUT breast cancer, whether cured, never had and no risk factors. She has said she is striving for prevention, not just the cure.
In order to become one in the Army of Women who would be willing to share their blood, saliva, breast tissue, etc. with scientists, go to ArmyofWomen.org and sign up. Signing up does not necessarily mean you will be chosen, just that you are willing to be. Dr. Love said they are piling the women into regions and will divy them/us out to the scientists in the area. It could be many months before we learn if we have been chosen.
Please, please consider becoming one of the volunteers if you do not have breast cancer! Our sisters (and brothers, because men get breast cancer, too!) need us to help.
The Love/Avon Army of Women offers women the opportunity to partner with the scientists who are conducting research that will end this disease--once and for all. Breast cancer has been around for decades, but it does not have to be our future. We can be the generation that stops breast cancer once and for all by figuring out what causes this disease and how to prevent it!
Sign up for your sister, mother, daughter, granddaughter, best friend, and the woman you met last week. This is YOUR chance to be part of the research that will end breast cancer. It takes a just a minute to join. But the impact we will have will last a lifetime.
Please Join Me in Being One in a Million!
http://www.awelllivedlife.net/
http://www.awelllivedlife.blogspot.com/
I just joined the Love/Avon Army of Women — and you should, too!
The amazing Dr. Susan Love has a call to action for women withOUT breast cancer, whether cured, never had and no risk factors. She has said she is striving for prevention, not just the cure.
In order to become one in the Army of Women who would be willing to share their blood, saliva, breast tissue, etc. with scientists, go to ArmyofWomen.org and sign up. Signing up does not necessarily mean you will be chosen, just that you are willing to be. Dr. Love said they are piling the women into regions and will divy them/us out to the scientists in the area. It could be many months before we learn if we have been chosen.
Please, please consider becoming one of the volunteers if you do not have breast cancer! Our sisters (and brothers, because men get breast cancer, too!) need us to help.
The Love/Avon Army of Women offers women the opportunity to partner with the scientists who are conducting research that will end this disease--once and for all. Breast cancer has been around for decades, but it does not have to be our future. We can be the generation that stops breast cancer once and for all by figuring out what causes this disease and how to prevent it!
Sign up for your sister, mother, daughter, granddaughter, best friend, and the woman you met last week. This is YOUR chance to be part of the research that will end breast cancer. It takes a just a minute to join. But the impact we will have will last a lifetime.
Please Join Me in Being One in a Million!
http://www.awelllivedlife.net/
http://www.awelllivedlife.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Things that make you go hmmmm....
First off, Eve Ensler's article about Sarah Palin in the Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eve-ensler/drill-drill-drill_b_124829.html
Secondly, a little comparison of the candidates that came across my desk:
"I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....
* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic,different."
* Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.
* If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
* Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're wonderful and a genuinemaverick.
* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.
* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.
* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the firstblack President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.
* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.
* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.
* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
* If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you're very responsible with strong family values.
* If your wife is a Harvard graduate laywer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.
* If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.
OK, much clearer now. "
Things that make you go hmmmm....
www.AWellLivedLife.Net
www.AWellLivedLife.blogspot.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eve-ensler/drill-drill-drill_b_124829.html
Secondly, a little comparison of the candidates that came across my desk:
"I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....
* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic,different."
* Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.
* If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
* Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're wonderful and a genuinemaverick.
* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.
* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.
* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the firstblack President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.
* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.
* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.
* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
* If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you're very responsible with strong family values.
* If your wife is a Harvard graduate laywer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.
* If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.
OK, much clearer now. "
Things that make you go hmmmm....
www.AWellLivedLife.Net
www.AWellLivedLife.blogspot.com
Monday, September 8, 2008
A great website
Here's info about a new website...Wellsphere.com. I'm a featured blogger in the HypnoBirthing section. The site is full of helpful information, resources, videos & articles about pretty much any health-related topic. Hope you find it helpful!
Here's the press release:
We’ve made Health Knowledge Personal! Wellsphere launches the next generation health website
Wellsphere, the fastest-growing top 10 health website has just launched its groundbreaking solution for finding expert health knowledge and personal support. The new Wellsphere introduces “WellPages,” comprehensive, personalized webpages that connect people with the best health knowledge from experts, doctors, patients and healthy living professionals – providing immediate answers to their specific health questions.
Every WellPage is powered by Wellsphere’s cutting edge, proprietary Health Knowledge EngineTM. Dr. Geoffrey Rutledge, Wellsphere’s Chief Information Officer, a Stanford Computer Science PhD and former Harvard Medical School faculty member, told reporters today that the new Health Knowledge Engine understands people’s everyday health questions, instantly translates them into medical terminology, finds the most relevant credible knowledge, and presents it all on a single user-friendly WellPage. “Each WellPage provides users with a comprehensive set of articles carefully selected from leading medical experts, research institutions, healthy living professionals and other trusted health writers so users don’t have to visit multiple websites to find answers to their health questions. WellPages also provide a rich user experience by combining health information with relevant informative videos and high quality medical images that helps users understand better what they have and how to cope with it.” said Dr. Rutledge.
Wellsphere has seen tremendous growth in traffic in the last few months to a rate of more than 2 million monthly unique visitors, with more visitors discovering the new website daily. “Listening to users in our supportive online communities, we realized that they are not satisfied with the information about their condition or symptom that generic health websites or encyclopedias provide. What they’re really looking for is a credible, one-stop-shop where they can quickly get a personal perspective on their specific health issues – from medical experts and fellow patients. A 26-year old mother of two recently diagnosed with breast cancer is looking for different kinds of information and support than a 74-year old grandmother facing a seemingly similar diagnosis. We wanted to make sure that each of these individuals could easily find expert medical information that’s relevant to them, as well connect with other patients and health writers with similar experiences” said CEO Ron Gutman.
WellPages offer a comprehensive perspective on millions of health topics by drawing from hundreds of thousands of articles written by Wellsphere’s network of 1,200 rigorously selected health writers and experts who dedicate their writing to helping others improve their lives. Many of the leading medical minds from Stanford, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Yale and other top Medical Institutions are currently sharing their knowledge alongside patients who bravely share their journeys through stories, pictures, videos, and personal discussions. Patients can also connect in any of Wellsphere’s more than 100 new health communities to share advice and support one another.
To experience the new Wellsphere, visit http://www.wellsphere.com/wellpages.
About Wellsphere
Wellsphere, the fastest growing health technology company, is based in San Mateo, CA. Wellsphere develops web and mobile technologies that help millions of people live healthier, happier lives by providing a free consumer health website at www.wellsphere.com, and by building online health platforms for large organizations.
www.AWellLivedLife.Net
www.AWellLivedLife.blogspot.com
Here's the press release:
We’ve made Health Knowledge Personal! Wellsphere launches the next generation health website
Wellsphere, the fastest-growing top 10 health website has just launched its groundbreaking solution for finding expert health knowledge and personal support. The new Wellsphere introduces “WellPages,” comprehensive, personalized webpages that connect people with the best health knowledge from experts, doctors, patients and healthy living professionals – providing immediate answers to their specific health questions.
Every WellPage is powered by Wellsphere’s cutting edge, proprietary Health Knowledge EngineTM. Dr. Geoffrey Rutledge, Wellsphere’s Chief Information Officer, a Stanford Computer Science PhD and former Harvard Medical School faculty member, told reporters today that the new Health Knowledge Engine understands people’s everyday health questions, instantly translates them into medical terminology, finds the most relevant credible knowledge, and presents it all on a single user-friendly WellPage. “Each WellPage provides users with a comprehensive set of articles carefully selected from leading medical experts, research institutions, healthy living professionals and other trusted health writers so users don’t have to visit multiple websites to find answers to their health questions. WellPages also provide a rich user experience by combining health information with relevant informative videos and high quality medical images that helps users understand better what they have and how to cope with it.” said Dr. Rutledge.
Wellsphere has seen tremendous growth in traffic in the last few months to a rate of more than 2 million monthly unique visitors, with more visitors discovering the new website daily. “Listening to users in our supportive online communities, we realized that they are not satisfied with the information about their condition or symptom that generic health websites or encyclopedias provide. What they’re really looking for is a credible, one-stop-shop where they can quickly get a personal perspective on their specific health issues – from medical experts and fellow patients. A 26-year old mother of two recently diagnosed with breast cancer is looking for different kinds of information and support than a 74-year old grandmother facing a seemingly similar diagnosis. We wanted to make sure that each of these individuals could easily find expert medical information that’s relevant to them, as well connect with other patients and health writers with similar experiences” said CEO Ron Gutman.
WellPages offer a comprehensive perspective on millions of health topics by drawing from hundreds of thousands of articles written by Wellsphere’s network of 1,200 rigorously selected health writers and experts who dedicate their writing to helping others improve their lives. Many of the leading medical minds from Stanford, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Yale and other top Medical Institutions are currently sharing their knowledge alongside patients who bravely share their journeys through stories, pictures, videos, and personal discussions. Patients can also connect in any of Wellsphere’s more than 100 new health communities to share advice and support one another.
To experience the new Wellsphere, visit http://www.wellsphere.com/wellpages.
About Wellsphere
Wellsphere, the fastest growing health technology company, is based in San Mateo, CA. Wellsphere develops web and mobile technologies that help millions of people live healthier, happier lives by providing a free consumer health website at www.wellsphere.com, and by building online health platforms for large organizations.
www.AWellLivedLife.Net
www.AWellLivedLife.blogspot.com
Monday, August 25, 2008
Holistic Moms Promote "Birth Rights" on Labor Day
PRESS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
Date: August 25, 2008
Contact: Nancy Massotto, Executive Director
Telephone: (877) HOL-MOMS
HOLISTIC MOMS PROMOTE "BIRTH RIGHTS" ON "LABOR DAY"
Parenting Group Says Womens' Rights to Natural Childbirth Are Rapidly Disappearing
(Caldwell, NJ) -
This Labor Day, as we honor the steadfast efforts of our country's workers, the Holistic Moms Network (HMN) – a national non-profit with 130 Chapters across the U.S. – will be advocating for some of the toughest labor faced by women: childbirth. Through a number of events – organized on or around Labor Day -HMN will focus attention on the critical issue of preserving a woman's right to choose how and where she gives birth - a right that is rapidly disappearing.
This past June, HMN issued a press release to call attention to the American Medical American Association's adoption of Resolution 205, which states that hospitals and hospital birthing centers are "the safest settings" for labor and delivery, despite strong evidence to the contrary. The Resolution is seen by HMN and birth choice advocates as an attempt to outlaw homebirth and eliminate low-intervention childbirth choices for women, thereby robbing them of a powerful birth experience and placing them and their newborns at higher risk of injury and death.
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, vaginal births after Cesarean (VBAC) rates have fallen by 67% since 1996 and U.S. hospitals are increasingly denying women the right to have VBACs, effectively forcing them into unnecessary Cesarean surgery. This runs contrary to the government's own Healthy People 2010 initiative which seeks to increase the VBAC rate to 63% by 2010."Cesarean section is a major surgical procedure that increases the likelihood of many complications for mothers and babies compared to vaginal birth," says Dr. Nancy Massotto, HMN's Executive Director who birthed both of her sons at home. Risks to babies include surgical cuts, breathing problems, and difficulty breastfeeding. Risks to the mother include surgical injury, infection, and death from increased blood loss. Last year, the Associated Press reported that U.S. women are dying from childbirth at the highest rate in decades, with the jump in C-sections partly to blame.
The World Health Organization and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services agree that, for the safety of both mothers and babies, a country's C-section rate should not exceed 15%. Medical institutions are clearly not heeding this advice. New Jersey – home to HMN headquarters - has the highest C-section rate in the country – 38.9% in 2007. This is 7% above the national average of 31%. New Jersey Center for Health Statistics data show that Bayonne Medical Center's C-section rate was an astounding 62% in 2006 - up 15% from the prior year. In 2007, Paterson's Barnert Hospital's C-section rate was 53.9 but its VBAC rate was a mere 1.8%.
To inform women about this crisis and about their birth rights, HMN is organizing and participating in Labor Day events across the country.
For Immediate Release
Date: August 25, 2008
Contact: Nancy Massotto, Executive Director
Telephone: (877) HOL-MOMS
HOLISTIC MOMS PROMOTE "BIRTH RIGHTS" ON "LABOR DAY"
Parenting Group Says Womens' Rights to Natural Childbirth Are Rapidly Disappearing
(Caldwell, NJ) -
This Labor Day, as we honor the steadfast efforts of our country's workers, the Holistic Moms Network (HMN) – a national non-profit with 130 Chapters across the U.S. – will be advocating for some of the toughest labor faced by women: childbirth. Through a number of events – organized on or around Labor Day -HMN will focus attention on the critical issue of preserving a woman's right to choose how and where she gives birth - a right that is rapidly disappearing.
This past June, HMN issued a press release to call attention to the American Medical American Association's adoption of Resolution 205, which states that hospitals and hospital birthing centers are "the safest settings" for labor and delivery, despite strong evidence to the contrary. The Resolution is seen by HMN and birth choice advocates as an attempt to outlaw homebirth and eliminate low-intervention childbirth choices for women, thereby robbing them of a powerful birth experience and placing them and their newborns at higher risk of injury and death.
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, vaginal births after Cesarean (VBAC) rates have fallen by 67% since 1996 and U.S. hospitals are increasingly denying women the right to have VBACs, effectively forcing them into unnecessary Cesarean surgery. This runs contrary to the government's own Healthy People 2010 initiative which seeks to increase the VBAC rate to 63% by 2010."Cesarean section is a major surgical procedure that increases the likelihood of many complications for mothers and babies compared to vaginal birth," says Dr. Nancy Massotto, HMN's Executive Director who birthed both of her sons at home. Risks to babies include surgical cuts, breathing problems, and difficulty breastfeeding. Risks to the mother include surgical injury, infection, and death from increased blood loss. Last year, the Associated Press reported that U.S. women are dying from childbirth at the highest rate in decades, with the jump in C-sections partly to blame.
The World Health Organization and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services agree that, for the safety of both mothers and babies, a country's C-section rate should not exceed 15%. Medical institutions are clearly not heeding this advice. New Jersey – home to HMN headquarters - has the highest C-section rate in the country – 38.9% in 2007. This is 7% above the national average of 31%. New Jersey Center for Health Statistics data show that Bayonne Medical Center's C-section rate was an astounding 62% in 2006 - up 15% from the prior year. In 2007, Paterson's Barnert Hospital's C-section rate was 53.9 but its VBAC rate was a mere 1.8%.
To inform women about this crisis and about their birth rights, HMN is organizing and participating in Labor Day events across the country.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
More about the importance of nutrition during pregnancy
This is a recorded conference call hotline that you can listen to about "The Role that Nutrition Plays in a Successful Pregnancy!"
Call: 1-800-942-1260 Press, 2 # 2 with Dr Odom @ The University of Mississippi
Dr. Odom is the obstetrician that did the research study using Juice Plus with pregnant women. The results are astounding!
www.AWellLivedLife.Net
www.AWellLivedLife.blogspot.com
Call: 1-800-942-1260 Press, 2 # 2 with Dr Odom @ The University of Mississippi
Dr. Odom is the obstetrician that did the research study using Juice Plus with pregnant women. The results are astounding!
www.AWellLivedLife.Net
www.AWellLivedLife.blogspot.com
Friday, June 13, 2008
John McCain & Women's Health
Do you know where John McCain stands on women's health issues? Do your friends?
Planned Parenthood Action Fund just did a really cool thing—they took to the streets in their own version of the Bush-McCain Challenge—to see if folks knew where John McCain stands when it comes to protecting women's health.
Check out the video. It's amazing.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3774&id=12868-1343297-.E3WnRx&t=2
The video is fun to watch, but this is serious stuff and every woman (and man) you know should see it.
After you watch it, please pass it on to your friends and make sure they know about John McCain's record on women's health, too.
www.AWellLivedLife.Net
www.AWellLivedLife.blogspot.com
Planned Parenthood Action Fund just did a really cool thing—they took to the streets in their own version of the Bush-McCain Challenge—to see if folks knew where John McCain stands when it comes to protecting women's health.
Check out the video. It's amazing.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3774&id=12868-1343297-.E3WnRx&t=2
The video is fun to watch, but this is serious stuff and every woman (and man) you know should see it.
After you watch it, please pass it on to your friends and make sure they know about John McCain's record on women's health, too.
www.AWellLivedLife.Net
www.AWellLivedLife.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)