GFIM NEWS

GFIM Eye Clinic

GFIM News — 19 Jun 2008 10:44:16 GMT

Mediccom and The Global Foundation for Integrative Medicines (GFIM) under their Global Integrative Venture Efforts (G.I.V.E) initiative setup a free Eye Clinic in Sri Sambodhi Viharaya, Sri Lanka. At the request of the Chief Incumbent Ven Kusaladamma, Hon. Chief Justice of Sri Lanka and Hon. Sarath N. Silva the clinic was setup and the logistics and the distribution was setup and provided by Dr. Lohitha Samarawickrema, CEO of Mediccom and Prof. Dr. Sir Ravi Ponniah, President of the GFIM and the G.I.V.E team members. Over 2000 pairs of brand new reading spectacles were given out by trained optical staff. Refreshments were organised by Senior DIG Mr. Jayantha Wickramarathna, DIG Colombo Mr. Nimal Mediwaka, SSP Karunarathna and Mr. Sagara and his team from the OIC Cinnamon Gardens.

Integrative with Sutures and All

ALISON ROSE LEVY — 10 May 2008 17:30:49 GMT

As a health journalist, health coach, and facilitator of Family Repatterning, I�ve been reporting on, learning about, and practicing integrative healing modalities for nearly two decades�and I�m constantly amazed at how powerful the most gentle therapies can be.

Through this blog, it�s my goal to bring you the best of what�s out there so that you can make the right health care decisions for yourself and your loved ones.

But one thing I know from years of looking into all the great integrative health care practices I that it�s not just about sifting through information, it�s about learning to discern what works for you. And that is individual. So the choice will always be yours, and it�s my aim to support you and build your confidence in your ability to determine your own health care. I would like to hear from you about what would serve you best. Please write me at: Alison@Health-Journalist.com and let me know what would be most useful to you.

I�m a great believer in Proactive Health Care, rather than Reactive Health care.

Proactive Health Care means laying the foundations for good health on a daily basis. It also means identifying areas of imbalance anywhere in your mind and body and finding ways to address them sooner rather than later. Becoming Proactive means that you maintain your health through listening to what your body sensations, feelings, and thoughts tell you, and finding ways to support healing and balance.

Still, at various times, many of us may find ourselves accessing health care in reaction to a health symptom or wake-up call. We need to prepare for those kinds of situations as well so that we are ready to respond.

Lo and behold I had just that kind of wake-up call this past week.

After dinner with a friend in Soho, I headed across a cobble-stoned street, wearing clogs and lost my footing. It was a pretty bad fall and soon Ms. Integrative Health found herself needing acute care�stitches-- in a hospital emergency room�not my favorite place to be.

Yes, stuff happens, doesn�t it?

Although in 20-20 hindsight, I wished that I could have acted proactively (different shoes, leg strengthening exercises, being less rushed?) here I was having to respond reactively.

But I found that all the Proactive Health understanding I had developed really paid off in this situation because I was already familiar with a wide range of helpful options. I recommend familiarizing yourself with new modalities, and finding practitioners that you trust.

Through my practitioner/friend, Linda Lancaster, an amazing homeopathic physician, I accessed homeopathy to address the shock and bruising and acupuncture to strengthen my body�s immune response. I used a natural silver homeopathic ointment to prevent infection, and health coaching for the feelings of sadness and fear that arose from this scary incident, while Gyrotonics helped rebalance my bones, muscles, and structure. Currently, I�m doing followup with DNA supportive nutraceuticals and energy medicine tools to minimize scarring and help the tissues rebuild rapidly.

All of this taken together has supported my healing quite nicely, but still you better believe that I went out (walking slowly) and got some concealer so that I�m ready for my presentation at an important meeting next week. Integrative/Proactive care means that you access everything that you need. It transcends party lines of us vs. them in medicine. It�s about what works for you.

Finally, one of the most critical things was help from my friends. Building a healing circle of support for the good times and the bad is something we all can do, and the caring counts most of all.

If you have any questions about Proactive Care, please join me and Deepak Chopra, Larry Dossey, and other great practitioners at the Better Health Campaign by signing up at: www.Health-Journalist.com

More hearing aids from GFIM

The Island Newspaper, Sri Lanka — 10 May 2008 17:21:38 GMT

Mediccom and the Global Foundation for Integrative Medicines (GFIM) has setup a hearing aid clinic at the Islamic Centre for the physically handicapped in Sri Lanka. Over US$10,000.00 worth of hearing aids had been fitted thanks to generous donations from Dr. Lohitha Samarawickrema CEO of Mediccom and Prof. Dr. Sir Ravi Ponniah President of the GFIM.

Minister of Housing & Common Amenities Mrs. Ferial Ashraff has supported this initiative while welcoming an additional consignment of hearing aids valued at over US$20,000 to the centre.

Dr. Lohitha Samarawickrema and Prof. Dr. Sir Ravi Ponniah have pledged to donate over US$50,000 in Visual and Braille equipment for the centre.

Click here to link to the Island News

Mercury Fillings Banned in Norway

Dr. George J Georgiou, Ph.D.,DSc — 4 Apr 2008 14:17:30 GMT

The Townsend Letter, a well-known journal for holistic medicine practitioners, announced recently in 2008 that mercury has been banned from all dental fillings in Norway. From the beginning of this year dentists in Norway have to start using safer alternatives. The ban goes further than amalgam fillings, covering many other products; including measuring instruments such as thermometers and sphygomanometers for measuring blood pressure.

Norway has always been a leader in banning mercury, one of the worst neurotoxins known to man. Norway had previously restricted the use of amalgam fillings, especially in children and pregnant and nursing women, but is the first in the world to enforce a complete ban.

Announcing the ban, Norway�s Minister of Environment and Development Erik Solheim said: “Mercury is among the most dangerous environmental toxins. Satisfactory alternatives to mercury in products are available, and it is therefore fitting to introduce a ban.�

Norway is concerned that mercury in our teeth and in the environment is extremely dangerous, and can harm the development of children. Unfortunately for Norway, most of the mercury in its environment comes from other countries that take a more relaxed view to one of the most toxic substances known to man.

It would be wise for many other countries around the world to follow this excellent prerogative taken by the Norwegian government to protect its people. The worrying thing is that there is too much self-interest that may prevent other countries from following suit in the near future.

WHY ARE MANY AUTHORITIES PLAYING THE OSTRICH GAME?

Irrelevant of the overwhelming evidence from scientific research, there are still many authorities that are purporting that amalgams do not cause health conditions or have not been proven. One can only hypothesize why this attitude still prevails!

For example, the American Dental Association continues to maintain, as it did in 1984, that "when mercury is combined with the metals used in dental amalgam, its toxic properties are made harmless." This is the same position adopted by the British Dental Association. However, up until now this position has been based upon reverse logic that amalgam fillings are safe because the evidence that is emerging does not prove irrefutably otherwise.
In 1993, the US Public Health Service issued a report evaluating the safety of dental amalgam. Although the report allowed that small amounts of mercury vapour are released from your fillings and can be absorbed into the body, and that these could cause small responses in that rare group of allergic individuals, it concluded that "there is scant evidence that the health of the vast majority of people with amalgam is compromised, nor that removing amalgam fillings has a beneficial effect on health" (Journal of American Medical Association, 1993, 269: 2491).
The American Food and Drug Administration's position continues to be that there is no valid data to demonstrate clinical harm to patients or that having them removed will prevent adverse health effects or reverse the course of existing diseases (Journal of American Medical Association, 12 June 1991).

WHAT IS THE RESEARCH TO SUPPORT AMALGAM TOXICITY?

Even though Norway and Sweden are putting bans on the use of mercury, and everyone agrees that it is a �dangerous element,� there are still many authorities that are not budging on their stance regarding this poisonous substance. However, there is also much scientific research that suggests that amalgams and mercury can cause a myriad of health problems. Let�s take a look at a few!

Research has shown that dentists have high double the number of brain tumours accompanied by high concentrations of body mercury (British Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1991; 48: 729-34).

Further recent evidence has demonstrated that amalgam in teeth can also causes subtle brain damage as well. Several years ago, dentists in Singapore were compared to other dentists who were less exposed to mercury. The amalgam dentists performed less well on tests of neurological function, even though they did just as well on intelligence tests. The higher the exposure to mercury, the worse the performance on the neurological tests (British Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1992; 49: 782-90, British Medical Journal, November 28, 1992).

American dentists were also tested by Dr Diana Echeverria, a neuro-toxicologist at the University of Washington in America to see whether they showed signs of mercury toxicity. She found evidence of central nervous system disorders - subtle losses of manual dexterity and concentration.

The American Dental Association and the British Dental Association have stated that mercury in amalgam fillings is inert when mixed with the other metals and placed in the mouth. However, other researchers have proved that mercury vapours are continuously released from the fillings every time we chew � in fact, chewing gum doubles the mercury levels in the blood and trebles them in the urine.

The World Health Organization has found that the average individual could absorb as much as 120 micrograms of mercury per day from their amalgam fillings, which is considered a toxic dose.

Further research has shown a positive correlation between the level of mercury in mother�s breast milk and the number of dental amalgams in the mouth. The mean levels of mercury in milk of amalgam-free mothers was less than 0.2mcg/litre, while milk from mothers with 1-4 amalgam fillings contained 0.50 mcg/litre, with 5-7 fillings 0.57mcg/litre and with more than 7 fillings 2.11 mcg/litre (Trace Elem Med Biol., 1998, Mar; 12(1): 23-7).

Dr Murray J Vimy, clinical associate professor of the Department of Medicine, plus numerous other medical researchers from the Departments of Radiology, Medicine and Medical Physiology at the University of Calgary in Canada have spent more than a decade examining the effects of amalgam fillings on sheep, monkeys and, more recently, humans. Their published evidence conclusively proves that mercury from amalgam fillings migrates to tissue in the body the oral cavity, the lungs and the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, causing a type of "timed released poisoning", as Vimy has called it.
Vimy's animal studies, which were met by ridicule within the dental community, have been vindicated by the work of Professor H Vasken Aposhian, head of the Molecular and Cellular Biology Department of the University of Arizona in Tucson. Aposhian and his team graded the amalgam filling content of human volunteers, from which they were given an amalgam score.

The study participants were then given a salt of 2, 3-dimercaptopropane 1-sulfonic acid (DMPS), a chelating agent which binds to mercury and removes it from the body through urine. An analysis of the results showed a positive correlation between the amount of amalgam in the teeth and the amount of amalgam in the body. Aposhian's team was also able to show that two thirds of the mercury excreted in the urine of those study participants with dental amalgam came from their fillings (FASEB Journal, 1992; 6: 2472-6; Clinical Toxicology, 1992; 30 (4): 505-28).
New evidence on humans shows that mercury fillings in pregnant women may also affect the growing foetus. In 1989 the University of Calgary Medical School published evidence that within three days of placing amalgam fillings in pregnant sheep, mercury showed up in the blood, pituitary glands, liver, kidney and placenta of their babies. By 33 days (around the time of birth), most foetal tissue had higher levels of mercury than that of the mothers. During nursing, the mother sheep were found to have eight times more mercury in their milk as in their blood (American J Physiology, 1990; 258: R939-945).

More recently, Professor Gustav Drasch, a forensic toxicologist and his colleagues at the Institut fur Rechtsmedicine in Munich, examined the brains, liver and kidneys of dead human babies and foetuses aborted for medical reasons. They found these levels correlated significantly with the number of amalgam fillings in their mothers. Furthermore, children accumulated mercury in their kidneys apparently from the mother's amalgams to a similar extent as adults do from their own fillings. As most of the children weren't breastfed or fed for only a short period, the researchers concluded that the mercury must have crossed the placenta (European Journal of Pediatrics, 1994; 153: 607-10).

Current research suggests that mercury vapour from fillings may be one of the predominant underlying causes of a broad spectrum of conditions, ranging from gum disease, migraine, headaches, poor memory, depression, anxiety, mental lethargy, chronic fatigue, growth, allergies such as eczema and asthma, and sensitivity reactions to food and inhalants, to rheumatism, arthritis, backache, kidney disease, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis and other neurological disorders.

Watch this fascinating video made by the University of Calgary, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Physiology and Biophysics, entitled How Mercury Causes Brain Neuron Degeneration as well as the Smoking Tooth video of mercury vapour escaping from an extracted amalgam tooth under various conditions.

Another interesting video showing the effects of amalgams with good references and scientific experiments. Another video worth watching is entitled "Quecksilber: The Strange Story of Mercury Amalgam."

Dr. George J Georgiou, Ph.D.,DSc (AM).,N.D.,MSc.,BSc
Inventor and Worldwide Patent Holder of HMD

The Family Field: A Valentine to Enduring Connection

ALISON ROSE LEVY — 2 Apr 2008 13:58:20 GMT

When I first read The Field, I practically gulped it down like it was a mystery novel that I couldn�t wait to finish. As Lynne McTaggart writes in her beautiful sharing on this blog, the new science the book covers "suggests that at our essence, we exist as a unity, a relationship � utterly interdependent, the parts affecting the whole at every moment."

Yet current psychological wisdom with its marked individualistic view hasn�t caught up with this reality. What would collective psychology based upon field theory look like?

First of all, it would look at the greater family system, not just the individual. Second, it would access the knowing field of the family system, not just the thoughts and beliefs of the individual. Third, it would see beyond the personality level dramas to the field interconnection between family members. Fourth, it would not confine itself to the nuclear family but to ancestors and all those who belong to the family field. Fifth, it would recognize that limiting patterns arise from separation, suffering and trauma, while authentic resolution entails acknowledgement, inclusion, acceptance, and restoring dharma and compassion for all in the system.

Better yet, this is not just a theory. It�s something I�ve been blessed to practice over the last eight years in the process called Family Repatterning (www.familyrepatterning.com) and Family Constellations (FC). Rupert Sheldrake once told me that this was the first therapeutic based on his work. This process of working with the family knowing field was first developed in Europe and South Africa over twenty-five years ago by an 82 year old former priest named Bert Hellinger. Now it�s practiced in every continent of the world, typically in day-long (or weekend) workshop sessions, where participants join to form a virtual tribe.

In our uprooted society, this collective holding is necessary to safely re-open past traumas still lingering in the field, and to bear witness and resolve them. A person manifesting issues acts as the symptom bearer for their family system. In every case I�ve seen, their issue originates with unhealed past hurt, harm, losses, and disconnection, that continue to resonate within the family field where they impact descendents who experience ongoing, life-limiting patterns that recapitulate the original suffering.

With only one person per family in attendance, we work with each person�s family via other workshop participants, who enter the “family field� and “represent� key family members. Through the process, we can locate the hidden ancestral suffering, bring it to light, and enact a resolution beneficial to all family members.

By accessing the family field, amazingly representatives reveal information unknown to the seeker, or carry the feelings or physical sensations of family members not present. In one constellation, for a woman who claimed that men were “not there� for her, the family field revealed that the representative for her grandfather stared away from his family to an unknown woman, perhaps a bygone love of which his prominent family was unaware. His granddaughter denied that woman had ever existed. Then, as we watched, the woman representative reported feeling weak, dropped to a kneeling position, and joined her hands in prayer.

At that, Grandfather�s representative felt impelled to back away crying: “No, no!�

That was the ah-ha moment: the granddaughter suddenly recalled an old family story about a beautiful young maidservant who had for unknown reasons entered a nunnery. Marrying a servant was strictly forbidden in that epoch, but the granddaughter was able to later confirm the unacknowledged love, that had lived on in Grandfather�s heart. It was right there in the family field. Even though neither Grandfather nor his love were still among the living, their painful separation still resonated. Acknowledging their love restored connection to the family field so that in the months following the session, the young woman began to recognize men who were “there for her.�

For me, serving and bearing witness to the family field provides an ever evolving and embodied experience of the scientific and spiritual truths The Field reveals. Plus, when workshop participants sit there in amazement at the genius of the field, I can turn them on to The Field. Thank you, Lynne McTaggart.

Alison Rose Levy, MA, health journalist, bestselling writer, and facilitator of Family Repatterning publishes a monthly ezine on collective healing.

Just How Smart is Your Body?

ALISON ROSE LEVY — 2 Apr 2008 13:26:52 GMT

We all know that ah-ha! moment when a new insight or experience changes everything. But ah-ha's are the province of the mind, aren't they? Like a backward beast, the body merely drags around our higher mental functions and our opposable thumbs. Despite its amazing capacity to self-heal, it's regarded as a mere mechanical marvel, like the Tin Man in the Wizard of Oz--to be oiled, excised, and/or flooded with exogenous chemicals, an ingenious contraption incapable of learning, progressing, or manifesting.

But what if the body is smarter than we think? Or understands things we don't? Perhaps it's time for a dialogue.

For two centuries, homeopaths have engaged in an intimate conversation with the body-- regarding it as not just alive, but also capable of learning, acting upon subtle information, and taking hints from nature about how to expel infections, self-regulate, and restore balance.

Homeopathic remedies begin with a given natural substance, progressively diluted (and shaken in a process known as "succussion") until no measurable amount of the material remains. The chosen remedy induces the entire range of symptoms the person suffers and paradoxically prompts the body's capacity to heal them. According to Dana Ullman, a homeopathic educator and author of The Homeopathic Revolution, homeopaths see symptoms as expressions of the body's innate healing response. A homeopathic remedy, like aikido, "goes with" the symptoms, subtly amplifying the healing message so that the body "gets it." Once the body goes "ah-ha," the symptoms express, lessen, and then pass.

Obviously, this method and view sharply contrast with approaches that suppress symptoms, or "fight" disease, the typical "us against them" stance of mainstream western medicine.

In his book, Ullman (recently on radio on Oprah and friends) recounts homeopathy's long history of successful use by a host of monarchs, (the British royal family), world leaders, (including Gandhi, and eleven U.S. Presidents ranging from Lincoln to Clinton), artists (Beethoven, Renoir, and Pollock), and celebrities, (Marlene Dietrich, Tina Turner, and David Beckham). Countless powerful and smart people --with ample health care options--have found homeopathy valuable. Ullman's site: http://www.homeopathic.com/

One was Charles Darwin, whose persistent health problems (untreatable by the medicine of his day) debilitated him, making work impossible, Ullman learned. Skeptically, Darwin went to a homeopath, received treatment, and recovered, going on to do his most important research and writing (while living for three more decades.) He never publicly mentioning his homeopathic treatment for fear of his scientific colleagues' derision.

Conventional biological scientists (then and now) resist healing mechanisms outside their paradigm. Like the man who lost his contact lens down a dark alley, but searched for it under a bright street lamp because that's where he could see, they deny even the possibility that homeopathy could convey healing information via mechanisms they can't measure. Since only material substances (rather than information) have agency, surely homeopathy must be either a fraud or a placebo.

Late last year, in a debate on homeopathy at the University of Connecticut, naturopath Andre Saine revealed his investigated outcomes for homeopathic treatments of typhus, meningitis, tetanus, anthrax, septicemia, malaria, and other infectious diseases--including a dozen cases of fully developed rabies with recoveries solely via homeopathic treatment.

"Despite well-documented and official reports," Saine argued, "the results obtained by homeopathy have been almost completely ignored... as if they had occurred in a void of time and space."

"When scientists ignore or reject healing successes outside of their paradigm, the spirit of scientific inquiry is undermined," claims a leader in the Connecticut debate, Professor Rustum Roy, who among his credentials is Professor of the Solid State Emeritus at the Pennsylvania State University as well as Visiting Professor of Medicine at the University of Arizona.

Professor Roy's current research could lead to a sea change. While homeopaths assert that a plant "signature," imprinted in water, carries information to the body, conventional scientists consider that impossible since homeopathic dilutions are biochemically identical to "pure water."

Roy, however, points out that due to water's unique properties, even weak forces can cause powerful structural changes. His lab is currently investigating a recent discovery that common radio waves can cause water to burst into flame and burn, which has immense implications for energy production. In Roy's view, it's not water's biochemical content but its structure that's ripe for exploration. Water's structure can readily be changed by the very actions commonly used in homeopathic preparations, he says. In their research, Roy and his colleagues have found that even when remedies are biochemically indistinguishable from pure water, changes in structure differentiate them. This altered structure persists over time. Since the human body is composed of over 60% water, Roy's research supports the working hypothesis that the water structure in homeopathic remedies can potentially carry healing information to the body. As more scientists follow the thread initiated by Roy, perhaps we'll discover the secrets of the healing power of information.

For more information on Dr. Roy�s research, check out this article.

Alison Rose Levy, MA, health journalist, bestselling writer, and Communications Director of the Better Health Campaign blogs on Huffington Post, Intentblog and other sites. To join leading health experts in a consumer movement for full options in Proactive Health care, please sign up for the Health Journalist�s ezine on at: www.health-journalist.com

Estrogen Therapy: Hot News or More of the Same?

ALISON ROSE LEVY — 2 Apr 2008 13:04:53 GMT

In response to news headlines announcing "doctors change in course on estrogen replacement therapy," Dr. Christiane Northrup, MD, the OB-GYN and bestselling author comments, "This is nothing new."

The media claims that it's time to return to synthetic estrogen come in response to a WHI (Women's Health Initiative) study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine. Like it's predecessor, a prior WHI study on the health impact of synthetic estrogen replacement, this study was also funded by the NIH (National Institutes of Health) with major funding by Wyeth, the maker of Premarin, the hormone replacement drug being studied.

The earlier study had to be discontinued in 2002 because of the higher incidence of cancer, heart disease, and stroke among those taking the synthetic estrogen. This scared millions of women away from this form of hormone replacement.

But in this new round, study authors narrowed their focus and found what they claim is good news: for women who have had their female organs removed through surgery, taking synthetic estrogen replacement may help reduce one possible risk factor for heart attacks.

I asked Dr. Erika Schwartz, MD, a specialist on hormonal health, with a private practice in New York, who is affiliated with Downstate Medical College for a closer look into the study results.

ARL: "Are study results based on women who have had hysterectomies applicable to all women?"

Dr. Erika: "No, not in my opinion. For one thing, the women could have had a disease condition, requiring surgery that has not been taken into account. Healthy women with in tact ovaries might well experience entirely different results. As a woman, and a doctor who sees thousands of women patients, I would not equate them."

ARL: "The study showed that taking the synthetic estrogen would prevent heart disease. Any comment?"

Dr. Erika: "Well, since there was no data taken before the women began treatment, it's really not possible to say whether or not the plaque levels were due to the synthetic estrogen. They could have been low to begin with."

ARL: "Are their other known ways to lower plaque levels?"

Dr. Erika: "Many. Diet is the most well-known."

ARL: "What about the synthetic estrogen increasing risk for cancer?"

Dr. Erika: "That remains a real concern, that hasn't changed."

ARL: "So to summarize, in your view, synthetic estrogen relieves menopausal symptoms, may reduce one possible risk factor for heart disease, and still may increase risk for cancer -- what should women do if they experience menopausal symptoms?"

Dr. Erika: "Many, many studies show that bio-identical hormones are safer than these synthetic products, which are derived from horses. That's what I recommend, along with a healthy diet and lifestyle changes."

Still trying to understand what was "new" I asked Dr. Northrup, "Why was this called "new?" Was anything "new" in the current study that in your opinion would dictate a change of course in treatment recommendations?"

"Wyeth (who produces the synthetic estrogen) came up with a new P.R. campaign," she said.

For more information on options in treating menopausal symptoms, consult Dr. Northrup's book, The Wisdom of Menopause (Warner, 2004) and Dr. Schwartz' book, The 30 Day Natural Hormone Plan (Bantam 2006). I plan to go into this topic more fully in future blogs, and would love to hear your questions about this topic either here or at my website, www.health-journalist.com

The Imperfection of the Aspirin Quick Fix

ALISON ROSE LEVY — 2 Apr 2008 11:48:42 GMT

In a recent post, Dr. Rick Positano calls aspirin "perfect" - a "wonder drug" in preventing heart attacks, strokes, even colon cancer. As an integrative health journalist, I wanted to offer a different view.

As Dr. Positano writes, people can "use aspirin if the benefit ... outweighs gastrointestinal risks." Since aspirin is well documented to sometimes lead to internal abdominal bleeding, Dr. Positano advises that "your doctor...must green light ...and monitor your body's acceptance of this wonder drug."

Uh oh, aspirin's must be monitored by regular doctor visits. And just how will the doctor monitor?

Well, after discovering signs of internal bleeding, the doctors attending one of my elderly relatives ordered an endoscopy and a colonoscopy, in the end determining (after the fact) that the bleeding resulted from years of aspirin use.

Wisely, the doctors took my relative off aspirin, while an integrative physician recommended a natural product that both thins the blood and heals the gut without causing internal bleeding. Why isn't this natural product more widely known and available? Because despite decades of successful use and thousands of anecdotal cases, this product would not be deemed "evidence-based standard care" by conventional MDs. Unlike aspirin (produced by an internationally traded company that can pour millions into testing and marketing all of its uses) that natural product has to yet to undergo the particular form of testing devised for toxic synthetic products made by drug companies. Although there are many other forms of testing efficacy (such as outcomes based research) the "gold standard" of what's been dubbed "evidence based medicine" is reserved for the pharmaceutical model of research.

Applying unnecessary testing criteria to natural substances and soft touch treatments with less risk of harm than more invasive medical products and procedures diminishes the use and availability of such treatments by creating fear and doubt in peoples' minds. The rising, potentially bankrupting medical costs we face begin with over-rating the high cost synthetic over the natural and human.

Are lower risk treatments really "unscientific," as often claimed by industry spokespeople? Can those acting from vested interest be considered "scientifically objective?"

The bottom line is that any product or treatment that lessens the need for a pharma industry OTC or prescription product, (like aspirin), or that reduces or eliminates the need for a costly surgery lowers income gained by medical institutions, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies.

Opposition to natural treatments, under the guise of "science," (or by stirring up needless alarm about one questionable herb while many synthetic drugs are known to produce scores of startling "side effects") is in many instances economic. Can we assume that doctor always "knows best" or can even be "objective" when his or her health care recommendations are influenced by economic and industry pressures and incentives? 88% of Americans agree that "there are some good ways of treating sickness that medical science does not recognize. (This according to a 2001 survey by the National Science Foundation.)

This is not just about aspirin.

Failure to address potential future health concerns at the wellness stage inevitably leads to their treatment at the acute or terminal stage, when invasive and conventional treatments often serve as the final option. The costs, both human and economic, of health and insurance systems geared to drive us towards final stage acute treatment, are painfully high.

Due to prescription drug advertising, and political lobbying, the public policies and corporate agendas that sustain our current system are not well covered on television or addressed by most politicians. But with health care costs for seniors tripling in the next decade and with visits to integrative practitioners (often paid out of pocket) accessed by two thirds of all Americans, according to a 2001 survey, it's clear that the majority of people are voting with their feet. They need to be better represented in the discussions about health care reform. Perhaps one of the Presidential candidates will reach out to this sizeable constituency.

The oft-repeated chestnut that the American health care system is "the best in the world" is contradicted by many international surveys in which we typically rank below other developed nations. While critiquing the system is subtly depicted as "unpatriotic," many Americans, at all economic and social levels, are paying a steep price for the denial about the shortfalls in our system. Events of the last decade have awakened a well-founded skepticism about the beneficence of those entrusted with political leadership. It's been a painful awakening. With the mounting health care crisis, there may be a parallel reconsideration about the beneficence of conventional approaches and quick fix solutions.

Offering aspirin as a "perfect" panacea for preventing heart disease, stroke or colon cancer may get a patient out of one's office in ten minutes. But what about looking into the wider causes of the dramatic rise in the ailments Positano cites. Why over the last thirty years have heart disease and colon cancer become more frequent in our population? Does it have anything to do with the quality of our foods, with the exposure to a brew of novel chemicals, or even to medical treatments themselves?

Part of self-care is looking beyond physicians for a quick fix, and seeking the answers to these questions ourselves. The real remedy is demanding that our leaders make changes in health care, food safety, and public policy. If instead, we accept the quick fix, we'll deserve the health care we get. So before you take that perfect aspirin and expect to feel better in the morning, think about the long-term side-effects of abdicating your health care.

Don't Get Depressed Because Your Antidepressant is a Placebo

ALISON ROSE LEVY — 28 Mar 2008 13:24:41 GMT

Stand back and watch the P.R. spin as a new study in a peer-reviewed journal finds that antidepressants make "virtually no difference at moderate levels of initial depression to a relatively small difference for patients with very severe depression."

In an article published in PLoS Medicine, researchers doing a meta-analysis looked at 47 published and unpublished clinical trials, and found that depressants attained clinically significant levels of efficacy "only for patients at the upper end of the very severely depressed category."

In other words, if you have anything short of the upper end of severe depression, a placebo might do as well as or better than an antidepressant.

Now, to be clear, I would never suggest that anyone out there read this or any blog, and then suddenly go off their medication. Nor am I a fan of Tom Cruise so let's take that right off the table.

In fact, I hope I don't disappoint your need for advice if I mention that I'm not your doctor and I'm not making any clinical recommendations -- though it's widely known that because of the effect on brain chemistry any alteration in medication dosage should be done gradually and under the care of a practitioner.

However I will point out that gentle and uplifting supports which some find helpful in low-grade depression relief, such as exercise, certain herbs, counseling, guided imagery, relaxation, prayer, (or hey, even that unscientifically verified behavior of talking with a friend) don't have the side-effects of medication.

These side-effects have been known to include changes in brain chemistry, and potential for suicidal ideation, violent urges, loss of libido, and other goodies -- as well as the risk of harmful interactions with other drugs, as occurred in the death of Heath Ledger. So choose your placebos wisely.

The irony here is that conventional medicine routinely dismisses soft touch approaches as "mere placebos." Therefore, what a surprise to find prescribed drugs inside the Placebo Club, that feel-good purgatory reserved only for natural substances developed by the earth.

Now that the Placebo Club is getting crowded, perhaps it's time to consider whether some of those easily accessible approaches might warrant additional study. Indeed many have been studied, even though Nature doesn't get the same grants, let's face it.

Still, there's one underlying question. Clearly, it's the medical aim of prescription antidepressants to act upon the neurotransmitters and thereby to correct chemical imbalances in the brain that contribute to depression.

So do these drugs actually balance brain chemistry? Or do they merely intervene in brain chemistry in a way that could potentially perpetuate or worsen any imbalance?

Neurologist Fred Baughman, Jr. M.D. cites Dr John D. Griffith, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, who as far back as 1970 testified at a Congressional Hearing that, "Every drug, however innocuous, has some degree of toxicity. A drug, therefore, is a type of poison and its poisonous qualities must be carefully weighed against its therapeutic usefulness."

The risk of toxicity to the brain, the locus for mood and mental function, is something to ponder, especially since there are health approaches that balance brain chemistry in a gentler manner.

Over the last seven years, clinicians and researchers have developed diagnostics and protocols to measure and support key neurotransmitters, like serotonin and dopamine. (FYI: The former are what antidepressant SSRIs act upon.) First, they measure neurotransmitter levels and then customize targeted amino acid supplements, which nourish the brain with the building blocks of protein. On the biochemical level, these are options to consider. (For more info, you can go to: http://www.health-journalist.com/)

Beyond the biochemical, if you or someone you know is suffering from depression, the further question is: "What in our world of suffering is causing you pain?"

Whatever it is, you need to acknowledge it and then access all the best "placebos" you can find. Whatever brings real joy, makes you feel a tad better about yourself, moves you to care, or to reach out and act, go for that placebo.

Don�t Drink the Water: Overcoming Complacency in Health Reporting

ALISON ROSE LEVY — 28 Mar 2008 13:18:04 GMT

The media�s selling the Iraq war prompts outrage, yet the typical reporter�s eager acceptance of health reports and spins by the government and vested medical interests passes for objective science. Health investigative journalism is an endangered species. So here�s kudos to the trio of Associated Press reporters, who recently undertook an independent investigation into the contamination of the water supplies by pharmaceutical drugs.

Delving past the official denials and half truths to review water tests or test independently, the AP team found that 41 million Americans drink water contaminated by antidepressants, hormones, heart medications and other prescription and over the counter meds. The substances excreted by those taking them end up in the water supply. Standard water treatment methods don�t remove them. Millions of people, (down to young children prescribed psychiatric medications) take meds, but those who don�t also imbibe a weird chemical brew.

Scientists don�t know how small quantities of a wide variety of agents never intended to be taken together interact in our bodies, or among themselves, where unintended toxic synergies can result. Do those chemicals really find their way into us? In Bill Moyers� 2001 PBS special Trade Secrets, testing revealed that Moyers had a eighty-four different chemicals in his bodily tissues. But until mass use drives down testing costs, few can afford similar tests.

What we don�t know could be hurting us but don�t count on reading all about it. Unlike Moyers and the AP team, health coverage rarely probes the interconnection between personal and environmental health. Instead the media purveys the latest research finding as “objective proof,� overlooking the vested interests that typically pay for the research, and quickly bury studies that don�t support the sponsor�s intended product claims. Scrutiny is called for.

In a number of federal regulatory agencies with oversight on food and health, so-called public servants regularly traipse to and fro the industries they supposedly regulate. For example, aspartame, a known neurotoxin, gained FDA approval when Donald Rumsfeld (then Chairman of Searle, the aspartame patent holder) reportedly played a role in the appointment of Reagan�s FDA commissioner. Soon after breaking a tie at the panel that approved aspartame, this commissioner left the FDA, going on to serve as the PR czar for the companies producing aspartame.

Few journalists face up to a compromised policy context. Nevertheless, it shapes what's regulated, what's studied, how it's studied, what's regarded as "proof" in a study, what's stamped as "safe," and what's targeted as "dangerous," and what makes it on to a label and into our bodies, food supply, water supply, and the earth. Instead of navigating this complex context, the health media either proffers health tips or offers information uncritically as if it descended from a scientific ivory tower, untainted by economic interest. All of these factors will meet in addressing the widespread contamination of the water supply. As researchers attempt to get their hands around the problem, standard health science research may prove inadequate.

Our current research model developed to target substances patentable as drugs, not to explore the complexity of the human organism and the multiple influences (biochemical, psychological, and spiritual) upon it. Targeting only a single agent (as either cause or treatment) overlooks three factors: A. Biochemical individuality, which causes people to react differently to various agents. B. Multi-factorial impacts, in which multiple agents act together synergistically, or in unpredictable ways, beyond the limits of single agent testing to identify. C.

Environmental impacts If many factors act in synergy to produce harm, testing only one, as we commonly do “proves� nothing. Although each individual drug in our water supply is considered “safe� for use by some people, researching and isolating a single agent tells us nothing about the real health dangers of environmental contamination by multiple agents.

We need to reassess the assumption that the earth and its creatures, including us, have infinite capacity to dilute whatever we dump. “The chemical stress that�s put on any organism is the result of minute stresses of a multitude of chemicals,� says Christopher Daughton, the EPA�s chief of environmental chemistry in a recent article in Chemical and Engineering News on the impact of drugs in water on wildlife, which has resulted in the feminization of certain species of fish, whose males now bear eggs. It�s the job of health reporting to connect the dots on some of these sad realities, and their attendant risk to human, animal, and global health. But if instead you next read headlines about a study that refutes any potential health problem from drug contaminated water, don�t forget: Deniability has a bottom line: the hefty price tags for the clean-up and health harm.

Unless well-informed people call for a collective accounting for health risks and impacts, individuals will be forced to dig into their own pockets to cover the damages. Those interested in collective health journalism and action can sign up at: www.health-journalist.com Copyright, 2008, Alison Rose Levy. All rights reserved.