Showing posts with label Alcohol. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alcohol. Show all posts

Friday, October 4, 2013

Breaking: Tylenol can lead to liver failure, death

Breaking: Tylenol can lead to liver failure, death
Oct 4, 2013 | RTAmerica

One of the most popular over-the-counter painkillers, acetaminophen (the active ingredient in Tylenol), could kill you. It is considered to be safe when taken at recommended doses, but taking even two extra pills a day could put your liver and your life at risk, according to a new, in-depth ProPublica report. Acetaminophen overdose now sends over 78,000 people to the emergency room each year, and the drug is now considered the leading cause of acute liver failure in the country. RT's Ameera David has more information on the hidden dangers of what is believed to be a harmless drug.


Comment: See our Herbs category to find natural alternatives.

Friday, February 8, 2013

Being American Is Bad for Your Health

Being American Is Bad for Your Health
Feb 7, 2013 | Alternet | Marti Kaplan

We're not getting sicker by accident.
"Americans are sicker and die younger than people in other wealthy nations."
That stark sentence appears in the January 2013 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, and it comes from the authors of a landmark report -- "Shorter Lives, Poorer Health" -- on differences among high-income countries.

You probably already know that America spends more on health care than any other country. That was one of the few facts to survive the political food fight pretending to be a serious national debate about the Affordable Care Act.

But the airwaves also thrummed with so many sound bites from so many jingoistic know-nothings claiming that America has the best health care system in the world that today, most people don't realize how shockingly damaging it is to your wellness and longevity to be born in the U.S.A.

This is made achingly clear in the study of the "U.S. health disadvantage" recently issued by the National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine, which was conducted over 18 months by experts in medicine and public health, demography, social science, political science, economics, behavioral science and epidemiology.

Compare the health of the American people with our peer nations -- with Britain, Canada and Australia; with Japan; with the Scandinavian countries; with France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands. Side by side with the world's wealthy democracies, America comes in last, and over the past several decades, it's only gotten worse.

With few exceptions -- like death rates from breast cancer -- we suck. Our newborns are less likely to reach their first birthday, or their fifth birthday. Our adolescents die at higher rates from car crashes and homicides, and they have the highest rates of sexually transmitted infections. Americans have the highest incidence of AIDS, the highest obesity rates, the highest diabetes rates among adults 20 and older, the highest rates of chronic lung disease and heart disease and drug-related deaths.

There is one bright spot. Americans who live past their 75th birthday have the longest life expectancy. But for everyone else -- from babies to baby boomers and beyond -- your chances of living a long life are the butt-ugly worst among all the 17 rich nations in our peer group.

In case you're tempted to blow off these bleak statistics about American longevity by deciding that they don't apply to someone like you -- before you attribute them to, how shall we put it, the special burdens that our racially and economically diverse and culturally heterogeneous nation has nobly chosen to bear -- chew on this: "Even non-Hispanic white adults or those with health insurance, a college education, high incomes, or healthy behaviors appear to be in worse health (e.g., higher infant mortality, higher rates of chronic diseases, lower life expectancy) in the United States than in other high-income countries." And by the way, "the nation's large population of recent immigrants is generally in better health than native-born Americans."

Why are we trailing so badly? Some of the causes catalogued by the report:

The U.S. public health and medical care systems: Our employer -- and private insurance-- based health care system has long set us apart from our peer nations, who provide universal access. The right loves to rail against "socialized medicine," but on health outcomes, the other guys win.

Individual behavior: Tobacco, diet, physical inactivity, alcohol and other drug use and sexual practices play a part, but there's not a whole lot of evidence that uniquely nails Americans' behavior. The big exception is injurious behavior. We loves us our firearms, and we don't much like wearing seat belts or motorcycle helmets.

Social factors: Stark income inequality and poverty separate us from other wealthy nations, who also have more generous safety nets and demonstrate greater social mobility than we do. In America, the best predictor of good or bad health is the income level of your zip code.

Physical and social environmental factors: Toxins harm us, but our pollution isn't notably worse than in other rich nations. The culprit may be our "built environment": less public transportation, walking and cycling; more cars and car accidents; less access to fresh produce; more marketing and bigger portions of bad food.

Policies and social values: To me, this is the richest, and riskiest, ground broken by the report, which asks whether there's a common denominator -- upstream, root causes -- that help explain why the United States has been losing ground in so many health domains since the 1970s:
Certain character attributes of the quintessential American (e.g. dynamism, rugged individualism) are often invoked to explain the nation's great achievements and perseverance. Might these same characteristics also be associated with risk-taking and potentially unhealthy behaviors? Are there health implications to Americans' dislike of outside (e.g., government) interference in personal lives and in business and marketing practices?
My answer is yes, but I'd plant the problem in recent history and politics, not in timeless quintessentials. Since the 1980s, in the sunny name of "free enterprise," there's been a ferocious, ideologically driven effort to demonize government, roll back regulations, privatize the safety net, stigmatize public assistance, gut public investment, weaken consumer protection, consolidate corporate power, delegitimize science, condemn anti-poverty efforts as "class warfare" and entrust public health to the tender mercies of the marketplace.

The epidemic of gun violence has been fueled by anti-government paranoia stoked by the gun manufacturers' lobby, the NRA. The spike in consumption of high-fructose corn syrup has been driven by the food industry's business decisions and its political (i.e., financial) clout. In the name of fiscal conservatism, plutocrats push for cuts in discretionary expenditures on maternal health, early childhood education, social services and public transportation. The same tactic that once prolonged tobacco's death grip -- the confection of a phony scientific "controversy" -- now undermines efforts to combat climate change, which is as big a danger to public health as any disease.

More accidents may be shortening our lifespans. But we're not getting sicker by accident.

Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Chris Hedges explains how entire regions within the US are treated like exploited colonies

© Aaron Huey
Pine Ridge Reservation
Chris Hedges explains how entire regions within the US are treated like exploited colonies
Dec 29, 2012 | Alternet | Vince Emanuele

A Q&A with Chris Hedges on his latest book Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt.

Emanuele: In Chapter One of your new book, Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt, you describe the horrendous conditions endured by the Native American population living in Pine Ridge, South Dakota. This population earns, on average, anywhere from $2,600-$3,500 a year, with 49% of the total population living in official poverty status. However in a broad sense, and to inject a historical context, you describe the systematic destruction of Native culture and society; namely, through the practices of physical termination and cultural genocide. Can you talk about why you began this journey in South Dakota and the importance of recognizing previous national injustices?

Hedges: Well, it's important because that's where the project of limitless expansion and exploitation, especially the plundering of natural resources, began. There you had the timber merchants and the railroad magnates, mine speculators, and land speculators seizing territory on the western plains and exterminated the native populations who resisted. Many of which did not even resist. Then, herding the remnants into what were originally prisoner of war camps, which then finally became tribal residencies and eventually reservations - breaking the natives capacity for self-sufficiency, while creating a culture of dependency. Remember, all of this is for profit. This became the template for which the American Empire expanded: the Philippines, Cuba and all throughout Latin America. And today, places like Iraq and Afghanistan. So that's why we wanted to examine where this ideology first took root; where it was first formed; and what happened to these peoples, because in an age of corporate capitalism, where there are no impediments left, what happened to them, is going to happen to us. In the end, we're all going to be herded on some form of a reservation.

This book is about these "sacrifice zones." Whether its in Pine Ridge, or southern West Virginia in the coal mines, or whether that be urban decay such as Camden, New Jersey, which is per capita the poorest city in the country, and on target this year to be the most dangerous, per capita in the country. As we've reconfigured American society, there's no longer any mechanisms to restrain these forces. And I think the other reason Pine Ridge is important, is because the native communities were structured very differently. People who hoarded and kept everything for themselves were disposed; everything was communal; there was an understanding that all forms of life, including the natural world, were sacred. This is unacceptable in a capitalist society where human and natural life are commodities that you exploit for money until exhaustion or collapse. We see the devastation visited on the western plains now being visited in places like the Arctic, where 40% of the summer sea-ice now melts, and the response is that it's a business opportunity, where people go and slam down half a billion dollar drill bits. It's insanity of course, because in the end, these forces will not only kill us off, but they'll kill themselves off as well. That is the awful logic behind it. I think Pine Ridge provides a window into how this ideology took root, and how it works.

Emanuele: Now, you mention that throughout the 20th Century the US government systematically destroyed native cultures and continued to take their lands. Later in Chapter One, you mention the Indiana Reorganization Act of 1934, and the US government's relocation program in the 1950s. Conversely, you highlight the Wounded Knee uprising of 1973, and subsequent crackdown waged by the FBI ,and various other governmental organizations, on Native American activists from the 60s and 70s. You mention that the majority of those who fought in the 1973 uprising at Wounded Knee were products of the US government's relocation and reeducation programs of the 20th Century. Can you talk about the importance of Wounded Knee 1973?

Hedges: The series of laws, treaties and decrees that were passed out of Washington, some four hundred of them, and in every single case were essentially violated, or subverted by further decrees and laws which stripped American Indians of more and more of their land and created mechanisms by which they were utterly disempowered. By the 1970s you had a tribal system in place. You know, these people function the same as a colonial system: They take a native aristocracy and use them to further the interests of the colonial power. This is what happened at Pine Ridge, and as well as other reservations around the country where you had quislings: many of these people weren't full-bloods. In the name of American Indian society, they served the interests, in the case of Pine Ridge, of the ranchers and the FBI. So, Pine Ridge became particularly violent, coming out of the 60s there were there were movements and activists, included the American Indian Movement, and the repression akin to the case of Philadelphia, the police chief Rizzo, who conducted horrific acts of violence and repression on the African American community.

You know, constant beatings and abuse led to a response, which, for the Native American community culminated in a 73 day occupation of Wounded Knee, where they were surrounded by federal marshals, FBI agents and several people were killed. But it was a consequence of the State being utterly tone-deaf. Again, by the way, you saw the same sort of violence erupt in Philadelphia, or Chicago with the Black Panthers. The State was completely tone-deaf to legitimate cries for justice on the part of oppressed communities, and exclusively imposed force. This gave way to a response of violence, or force. And that's what Wounded Knee was about. That's what the Black Panther party was about. Then, we saw a series of trials and persecutions of American Indian activists. Of course Leonard Peltier is still sitting in prison, and anybody who's read through his trial transcripts will tell you there were so many questionable and mendacious tactics used by government prosecutors, that if used in a fair court of law, that trial would be thrown out. Yet he still sits in a prison in Florida, very, very far away from South Dakota. This is important to recognize in a society that has become politically paralyzed. We are seeing the government respond to discontent by criminalized political dissent, and using harsher and harsher forms of control that eventually, as in Wounded Knee, or as in Chicago and Philadelphia, or Oakland, or anywhere else, violence ultimately provokes counter violence.

Emanuele: In Chapter Two, "Days of Siege," your commentary is focused around the city of Camden, New Jersey. However, for many of us, including myself, who grew up in the "Rust Belt," you could have easily switched Camden, New Jersey for Gary, Indiana; Detroit, Michigan; Cleveland, Ohio; Fort Wayne, Indiana; South Bend, Indiana, or so many other post-industrial areas in the United States. So, why Camden, New Jersey? Was there a symbolic and practical purpose for moving from the Native American population to a largely African American population?

Camden, N.J
Hedges: Well, I think we wanted to show this was something happening in both rural and urban areas, and that it was the same system: i.e. the reconfiguration of American society into a Corporate State. We didn't consciously set out to profile different ethnic groups in the chapters, but it just came out that way. Camden of course being largely African American; Native communities in Pine Ridge; poor white communities in southern West Virginia; and Latino communities in the produce fields in Florida. These are all manifestations of the same process. And it's a process by which the American citizen is politically and economically disempowered as the Corporate State creates an Oligarchy, where a tiny percent amass vast fortunes and workers around the globe, in sort of a neo-feudalism, are told that in a global marketplace they must essentially compete with sweatshop workers in Bangladesh who make 22 cents an hour, or prison labor in China. That's the world we've created. We have allowed our manufacturing base to be dismantled because it's more profitable for these corporations to employ sweatshop workers in southern China, who work 70 hours a week, without any sort of protection, or rights. Remember, that's 700,000 workers for Apple, none of them are in the United States. They live in Dickinsonian, 19th Century conditions. That's the world that has been cemented into place by these forces, and the consequences are that whole cities, such as Camden, are virtually abandoned.

At one point, Camden was an industrial center: Campbell Soup was made there; RCA Victor was there; the ship yards there, by the middle of the century, employed over 36,000 people--it's all gone. There's nothing. Whole city blocks are abandoned. And of course people are trapped within these internal colonies, by both the very visible, and not so visible walls of the Prison-Industrial-Complex. So people fall into a kind of despair: the abuse of narcotics and alcohol, in all of these places, was absolutely rampant. In southern West Virginia people would retreat into Oxycontin, or what they call "Hillbilly Heroin." In Camden, on the streets they use a drug called "Wet," which is a mixture of marijuana and PCP; Pine Ridge has an 80% rate of alcoholism. So all of this physical devastation brings with it a kind of human devastation. If they rest of us don't wake up, and begin to resist, the forces that carried out these assaults within these internal colonies, or these sacrifice zones, since they have now been unleashed on the rest of us, we will of course replicate what happened in Biblical terms to our "neighbor." There has been a failure on the part of the Left in this country to stand up to the assault carried out by both the Democrats, and Republicans. Of course, Clinton was one of the worst: he destroyed the welfare system, which under the original welfare system, 70% of the recipients were children; NAFTA, of course, 1994, the greatest betrayal of working class people in this country since the Taft-Hartley Act of 1948, which makes it difficult to organize. You know, the Left, or the Liberal-Class, sort of busied itself with the boutique activism of multiculturalism and gender politics--all of which I support--but forgot about the primacy of justice. And because of that, what's happened to our "under-classes," is now happening to the middle-class.

Emanuele: Now, you write in that same chapter, "The Civil Rights Movement was a legal victory, not an economic one. And the economic barriers remain rigid and impenetrable for the bottom 2/3 of African Americans, whose lives are worse today, than when King marched in Selma." You go on the mention that 1/3 of African American males, at some point in their lives, will go to prison within the United States. While the school system in Chicago is now more segregated than during the Civil Rights Era. Can you talk about the difference between "legal" and "economic" victories? In addition, further along in the chapter you mention the work of theologian James Cone, and his work The Cross and the Lynching Tree, and further along, the work of Father Doyle and the Sacred Heart School. Can you talk about the importance of religion and theology in the African American community? 

Hedges: Well, what a lot of white Christians don't grasp, and this is the importance of the theologian such as James Cone, is that the black Christian tradition is radically different from the white Christian tradition. I, as a former seminarian, would argue that the Gospel was written by the oppressed, for the oppressed, as was the Hebrew Bible. These were communities that endured horrific repression, and were deeply sensitive to what it meant to be oppressed. So, Cone writes in The Cross and the Lynching Tree, about the long nightmare of terror, through lynching, that was unleashed on the African American community, and how that embodied, for African Americans, the crucifixion. And yet white churches and white theologians were utterly unable to see the connection between an innocent body on a tree, in their midst, and the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The whole story of Moses leading forty-years into the wilderness--that carried a whole different import if you were a slave, or suffering in the South, being disposed by Jim Crow laws. I think Cone is right: I think while it uses the same language, iconography and even symbols, it means something very different to African Americans.

I think Cone is also right that this interpretation is a far more genuine rendering of the Christian narrative than the sterilized narrative adopted by the white-elites, that identify with systems of power, and ultimately systems of oppression. People in all of these communities tended to fall on two sides of the divide: One, there was the use of alcohol, narcotics and drugs to cope with horrific human suffering and pain, and the other was faith--not necessarily Christian faith. For example, in Pine Ridge, those people who managed to pull it together recovered their identities as Lakota--through their language, sweat-lodges, sun-dances and various other rituals. I went to one over the summer. It was deeply moving, with four days of fasting, and dancing, and sort of flesh offerings. They take pegs with ropes attached to them and at the end of the four days will pull them out, leaving small scars on their chests. Many of these men were just out of prison. So, when you fall that low, when life is desperate, you can hang on by building a structure of belief, or you often disintegrate. That was very common. There were very few people in the middle.

Emanuele: Can you talk more specifically about the difference between "legal" and "economic" victories?

Hedges: Sure, well, King recognized this towards the end of the Civil Rights Movement. Of course he was killed while supporting a garbage workers strike in Memphis. Remember, King kept saying that there would be no racial justice if there is not economic justice. And that is where the white liberals walked out on him. They were willing to support legal mechanisms by which African Americans were theoretically granted equality before the law. But economic justice was something totally different. So they managed to get that legal victory, however it's been subverted: I was just in Alabama, and 34% of African American males in Alabama are disqualified and subsequently disenfranchised from the voting rolls because of prior convictions. It's essentially a resurrection of Jim Crow. So, once people got the right to vote, they created mechanisms to take away that right. And I think the Occupy Movement is important in this regard, because it recognizes the issue of inequality as one that has effectively been used to keep the majority of the poor, and especially African Americans, trapped in what King and Malcolm X called "Internal Colonies." Again, places like Camden, New Jersey, where the upper 1/3, or elite within the African American community, were integrated into white culture and society, the way Michelle and Barrack Obama have been. But for the bottom 2/3 of African American society life is worse than when King marched in Selma, Alabama.

Chris Hedges spent nearly two decades as a foreign correspondent in Central America, the Middle East, Africa, and the Balkans. He has reported from over 50 countries around the world. Hedges is currently a senior fellow at the Nation Institute in New York City and has taught at New York University, Columbia University and Princeton University. He currently teaches inmates at a correctional facility in New Jersey. He has written twelve books, his latest, written with illustrator Joe Sacco, is entitled Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt. This transcribed interview covers the first two chapters in Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt.

Vince Emanuele is the host of the Veterans Unplugged Radio program, which airs every Sunday, from 5-7pm(Central) in Michigan City, Indiana via 1420AM "WIMS Radio: The Talk of the South Shore," or streaming live online @ (www.veteransunplugged.com). Also, Vince is a member of Veterans for Peace, and currently serves on the board of directors for Iraq Veterans Against the War.

Sunday, January 6, 2013

How the Media Ignores Alcohol's Contributions to Personal Disaster

© Alternet
How the Media Ignores Alcohol's Contributions to Personal Disaster
Jan 3, 2013 | The Fix | Susan Cheever

Booze is implicated in many more major news stories than the press ever acknowledges, from party politics to bloody mayhem.

‘Tis the season to be jolly, to go a-wassailing, to stay late at Christmas parties, to dress up like Santa Claus and to drink too much eggnog. Yet when it comes to public acknowledgement of the results of all this drinking, our national carol seems to be “Silent Night.” Almost every day, the media brings us another troubling or tragic story in which drinking or drugging plays a role—not necessarily the primary role, but one that typically goes unmentioned. When drinking isreported, it is often in celebrity scandal stories that make getting drunk seem like the privilege and the curse of being a star.

In politics, one example is the apparent intransigence of Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner and his inability to get along with President Obama. Boehner is known to be a heavy-drinking, hard-partying pol who likes bars so much that Joe Scarborough, the host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe, has called him a bar fly. “Every Republican I talk to says John Boehner, by 5 or 6 p.m., you can see him at bars. He is not a hard worker,”  said Scarborough, a fellow Republican who served with Boehner in the House. His drinking is such an open secret on Capitol Hill that it has inspired an online  Boehner Booze watch. Boehner reportedly turned down President Obama’s offer of a  Slurpee Summit because alcohol would not be served.

In New York a few weeks ago, the news was dominated by the death of Ti-Suck Han, a victim shown clinging to a station platform in the lights of an oncoming subway train. Han, unable to save himself, quickly became a media symbol of the “bystander effect”: the more people who witness a tragedy, the less likely it is that someone will react to stop it. Rarely reported in the dozens of stories about the incident was that Han was extremely drunk and possibly obstreperous. According to  his wife, he had been drinking heavily, they had had a fight before he left home, and he was carrying a vodka bottle at the time of his death.

More recently, the senseless midtown shooting of a visitor from California had everyone baffled…until the victim turned out to be an alleged drug courier.

Drinking is hardly responsible for all of the evil in the news. The dreadful events at the Sandy Hook elementary school last week did not seem related to alcohol. But when drinking is responsible, the press should acknowledge it. Why is it kept under wraps? Perhaps recognizing the role of drinking in the bad things that happen to us—from healthcare expenses to domestic violence—might suggest that we should change our own drinking habits. Perhaps people who are uneducated on the subject of alcoholism—and this is extremely common—just don’t understand its effects.

Even when our drinking habits play a role in good news, it often doesn’t rate a mention. This week, the trend of silence continued in  a new report from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation showing that life expectancy has risen around the world. From 1990 to 2010, there has been a sharp decline in early mortality. According to the New York Times report, the improvement in life expectancy is due to better sanitation, medical services, access to food and public health initiatives.

Not revealed in these stories is the likelihood that we are living longer in part because we are drinking far less than we did 20 years ago. The French are drinking less wine; their 2010 consumption was about  a third of what it was in 1960. The British are drinking less ale, according to the  British Office for National Statistics. The Irish are drinking less whiskey, and the Australians are drinking less of everything. In the US we are also drinking less— a Gallup poll, for instance, shows that the percentage of people who say they drink too much has fallen to 22% in 2011 from 35% in 1990. The thousands of subjects in the Framingham heart study report less drinking, and alcohol-related traffic fatalities have fallen 26% since 1991, according to the Century Council.

As drinking slows down and health improves, as recovery becomes a mainstream phenomenon and understanding of addiction grows, it would make sense for alcohol’s effects to be more frequently reported in the news. That’s not happening. Alcoholism is still the unmentioned force behind many major stories. Alcoholism is also often a well-kept family secret; we seem to want to keep it a national secret.

Susan Cheever is a columnist for The Fix, and the author of many books, including the memoirs Home Before Dark and Note Found in a Bottle, and the biography My Name Is Bill, about AA's founder.

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Simple Steps to Kick the Sugar Habit – Fast!

© Natural Society
Simple Steps to Kick the Sugar Habit – Fast!
Nov 13, 2012 | Julie Fletcher

Refined sugar has been at the root of many dietary problems for years. Food addictions are often cited as ‘comfort measures’ by the people suffering from addiction, while a spiral of binge eating, depression, and more binge eating has led to more expanded waistlines and health disorders. Until recently, sugar addiction was considered a willpower issue, but we know that it goes deeper than that.

Thanks to a study release in 2010 by the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, we now know that sugar causes the brain to release the same type of endorphins in a pattern reminiscent of some habit-forming drugs. In the study, researchers noted that the addiction to sugar follows the same path as drug addiction. The addict will crave sugar, gain a high tolerance level, and after cutting sugar from the diet – experience withdrawal. The addiction system is very similar to that of street drugs.

Researchers at California State University also noticed that children of drug and alcohol addicts were more likely to become addicted to sugar during childhood. The children were also more likely to become alcoholics later in life. Children of people with addictions presented genetic markers that drew a connection between sugar addiction and disorders like alcoholism, bulimia, and obesity.

With carcinogenic sugars rampant among the food supply, it is easy to see how sugar so easily takes over. Kids alone are cumulatively taking in nearly 7 trillion calories of sugar from beverages each year, while Americans overall are consuming 35 pounds of sugar in the form of high-fructose corn syrup on average each year.

The good news for anyone suffering from an addiction to sugar is that the withdrawal symptoms fade fast. By changing diet to eliminate refined sugar and include natural, raw sugars, the body can easily recover. Whole grain bread with raw honey can replace processed ‘goodies’ such as doughnuts or other sugary treats. Raw honey is a natural, healthful sugar that is processed by the digestive system easily. Honey can cause a blood glucose spike, but not as dramatic as refined sugar, nor does the brain react as it does to ‘table sugar’. (Here are some awesome health benefits of honey you won’t want to miss). It will take about one week to kill the cravings – during this time, always use natural, raw natural sugar sources in place of refined sugar like honey or stevia.

People often claim they ingest sugary foods as a ‘pick me up’. Sugar will give a burst of energy, but the energy high does not last. At the end of the high there is a dramatic energy crash. Cutting sugar and replacing energy snacks with true energy boosters such as homemade trail mix will eliminate the sugar crash and save your body from sugar-induced health damage. Here are another 10 foods to consider when eating for energy. Whole fruits, nuts, grains, and fresh foods will counter the sugar cravings until they are a thing of the past.

Additional Sources:

NaturalNews
Pubmed/20648910

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Even Slightly Elevated Blood Sugar Decreases Brain Size

© naturalsociety.com
Even Slightly Elevated Blood Sugar Decreases Brain Size
Sept 16, 2012 | Elizabeth Renter

New research published in this month’s issues of Neurology, the medical journal of the American Academy of Neurology, finds that people with elevated blood sugar levels that fall even on the higher end of the normal range are at a greater risk for brain shrinkage related to diseases like dementia.

According to Medical News Today, this is the first evidence that the same shrinkage and dementia associated with type 2 diabetes can be found in people with only slightly elevated blood sugar, or even high-end normal blood sugar levels.

Scientists evaluated 249 people between the ages of 60 and 64. All participants had normal blood sugars at the beginning of the study. Brain scans were taken then, and four years later.

The subjects with higher fasting blood glucose levels, but levels that still fell within the normal range (typically between 70 and 100 mg/dL), were more likely to have a loss of brain volume in the hippocampus and amygdala. This is significant because these areas are commonly associated with memory and cognitive skills. These slightly elevated higher blood sugar levels were not high enough to be considered diabetic (180 mg/dL) or even prediabetic (110 mg/dL), but were just at the high end of normal.

After analyzing the data and adjusting for other risk factors including smoking, high blood pressure, alcohol use, and other factors, the high-end-of-normal blood sugar levels accounted for six to ten percent of the brain shrinkage.

What Does Elevated Blood Sugar Mean for You? 

What does this mean for you? It means that even slight elevations in blood glucose levels can increase your risk of age-related dementia. Slightly elevated blood sugar could, in the long run, shrink your brain causing problems with memory and cognitive function.The research gives yet another reason to shift to a diet and lifestyle that will promote healthy blood sugar levels.
“These findings suggest that even for people who do not have diabetes, blood sugar levels could have an impact on brain health,” said one of the study’s lead authors. “More research is needed, but these findings may lead us to re-evaluate the concept of normal blood sugar levels and the definition of diabetes.”
So, how can you ensure your blood sugar levels are at the low or mid-range of normal? Take care of your health! Some home remedies for high blood pressure may also be excellent for reducing blood sugar levels, while cinnamon for diabetes and blood sugar has also been used as a simple and most valuable solution. Exercise regularly, eat whole, natural foods, and avoid over-consumption of sugar – try to stick to around 25g/day (although anything less than your current intake is probably improvement).

Foods that may help control blood sugar includes things like: beans and legumes, whole grains, vitamin K and magnesium-rich foods, turmeric, and fresh produce.

Monday, September 3, 2012

Why don't they enforce law in White Clay Nebraska?

Why don't they enforce law in White Clay Nebraska?
Sept 2, 2012 |



The Sheriff talks about his blind eye to up holding Nebraska law. Aug 26, 2012

Whiteclay has four off-sale beer stores licensed by the State of Nebraska which sell the equivalent of 4.5 million 12-ounce cans of beer annually (12,500 cans per day), mostly to the Oglala Lakota living on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. These retailers routinely violate Nebraska liquor law by selling beer to minors and intoxicated persons, knowingly selling to bootleggers who resell the beer on the reservation, permitting on-premise consumption of beer in violation of restrictions placed on off-sale-only licenses, and exchanging beer for sexual favors. Let the Sheridan County Commissioners know what you think. Attn: Chairperson, James Krotz 520th Road, Rushville, Nebraska 69360 (308) 327-2161 or Sheriff Terry Robbins (308) 327-2161-Video provided by Native Impact.

Monday, August 27, 2012

Breaking News: Support DGR Blockaders Arrested in White Clay

© deepgreenresistance.org
Support DGR Blockaders Arrested in White Clay
Aug 26, 2012 | Deep Green Resistance

Breaking News:

“For over 100 years the women of the Oglala Lakota nation have been dealing with an attack on the mind body and spirit of their relatives. We have been silenced through chemical warfare waged by the corporations who are out to exploit and make a profit off of the suffering and misery of our people. The time has come to end this suffering by any means necessary.” –Olowan Martinez, Oglala Lakota

WHITE CLAY, NE—Five activists with Deep Green Resistance  were arrested on Sunday, August 26th, at 7:40pm for blockading the town of White Clay, Nebraska. Taken to jail in a horse trailer while still connected to each other by lock-boxes, the arrestees were later released on their own recognizance when they agreed to unlock themselves.

The blockade shut down the town and four infamous liquor stores that define the 14-person municipality, for more than six hours, and preventing an estimated $5,250 in liquor sales. They were being held at Sheridan County Jail in Rushville, NE. A solidarity legal fund has been set up to raise money for bail, legal, and court fees and supporters are asked to donate here.

We need to raise as much money as we possibly can to support those brave individuals—Alexander Knox, Rachel Collins, Alex Budd, Val Wesp, T.R. McKenzie—who put their bodies on the line against the chemical warfare being waged against the Oglala Lakota. We need to work to make sure that those arrested are supported for the sacrifices they made. Their collective fines are estimated to be, at maximum, $10,000. Anything you can give will go a long way towards levitating the immense costs facing the five full-time activists.

Donated funds will also go towards supporting a juvenile Lakota boy who was pepper-sprayed and arrested by police, after defending himself in a physical altercation with four adult males (some of whom are associated with White Clay liquor stores).

White Clay has a population of 14, yet 4 liquor stores in the town sell 12,500 cans of beer each day. The stores have been documented repeatedly selling to bootleggers, intoxicated people, minors, and trading beer for sexual favors. 150 years ago, it was the U.S. Calvary and smallpox-infested blankets; today, White Clay is the face of genocide for the Oglala Lakota.


HOW YOU CAN HELP:
  • Spread the word to your friends, families, and networks. We’ll be putting out updates on the situation as things change.
  • Stay tuned to join the battle against White Clay. This fight is just beginning.
CONTACT:

Ben Barker of Deep Green Resistance / (262) 208-5347, ben_dgr@riseup.net

Deep Green Resistance is committed to the battle against the exploitative White Clay. Read more about the first action that DGR members were part of in June 2012: http://deepgreenresistance.org/whiteclay-blockade/

Related video:

Sunday, July 22, 2012

Alcohol - not marijuana - is the gateway drug, study shows

© unknown
Alcohol - not marijuana - is the gateway drug, study shows
July 21, 2012 | J.D. Heyes

(NaturalNews) For years Americans have been told that marijuana should remain illegal because it is the ultimate "gateway" drug - that is, the drug that most often leads to the abuse of other, more potent drugs.

Not so, according to a new study which says alcohol - not marijuana - is the true gateway drug.

Of three drugs or drug-containing substances - alcohol, tobacco and marijuana - the study found that the former, not the latter, led to more drug use.

In examining a nationally representative sample obtained from the University of Michigan's Monitoring the Future survey, the study concluded: "Results from the Guttman scale indicated that alcohol represented the 'gateway' drug, leading to the use of tobacco, marijuana, and other illicit substances. Moreover, students who used alcohol exhibited a significantly greater likelihood of using both licit and illicit drugs."

That said, the study concluded "that alcohol should receive primary attention in school-based substance abuse prevention programming, as the use of other substances could be impacted by delaying or preventing alcohol use.

"Therefore, it seems prudent for school and public health officials to focus prevention efforts, policies, and monies, on addressing adolescent alcohol use," said the study.

Earlier studies point to similar results.

Longstanding tie between alcohol consumption and drug abuse

As early as 1985, for example, a study published in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence concluded "that students do not use illicit drugs unless they also use alcohol."

"Since alcohol serves as the gateway to all other drug use, prevention approaches that control and limit alcohol use among adolescents may be warranted," authors John W. Welte and Grace M. Barnes, both of New York State University at Buffalo, wrote.

A Missouri Western State University study conducted in 2009 found that a majority of subjects examined - 67 percent - went on to smoke marijuana after they had already begun consuming alcohol, not the other way around.

"We found that for our study, the more alcohol someone drinks the more likely they will be to want to smoke marijuana," wrote the study's authors.

"Marijuana is called the gateway drug. It is considered the worst drug available because is supposedly causes its users to move on to harder drugs. What people don't realize is that marijuana use comes after someone is already using alcohol and tobacco," they wrote.

In 2010 British Prof. David Nutt, the one-time chief drugs adviser to the government, co-authored a report that said alcohol use and abuse in England was more harmful than crack or heroin, when the overall damage they all cause to society are measured.

"Overall, alcohol was the most harmful drug (overall harm score 72), with heroin (55) and crack cocaine (54) in second and third places," the report, which was published in the journal Lancet, concluded.

Denying the obvious

"Our findings lend support to previous work in the UK and the Netherlands, confirming that the present drug classification systems have little relation to the evidence of harm," said the report. "They also accord with the conclusions of previous expert reports that aggressively targeting alcohol harms is a valid and necessary public health strategy."

When released, the authors' findings ran afoul of the government's long-standing drug classification system, which have claimed for years that other drugs are more potent.

"Overall, alcohol is the most harmful drug because it's so widely used," Nutt told the BBC following publication of his findings.

"Crack cocaine is more addictive than alcohol but because alcohol is so widely used there are hundreds of thousands of people who crave alcohol every day, and those people will go to extraordinary lengths to get it," he said.

Predictably, like its American counterpart likely would, the British government balked at Nutt's report.

"Our priorities are clear - we want to reduce drug use, crack down on drug-related crime and disorder and help addicts come off drugs for good," a spokesman from the Home Office sniffed.

The alcohol lobby obviously has deeper pockets.

Sources:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com

http://clearinghouse.missouriwestern.edu/manuscripts/481.php

http://www.springerlink.com/content/fgn1j1w6158xt202/

www.thelancet.com


Comment: This article has much truth to it. I can remember as a juvenile I attempted to become an alcoholic and failed miseralbly. For some reason unknown to me, alcohol just didn't take, and I lost all interest in it. I guess it didn't mix well with Pink Floyd. But that didn't stop me from trying it, and sleeping in some guys car trunk all night listening to Ummagumma. I don't remember the very first experience with this dumbing liquid, but I do remember the very first experience with cannabis and exactly that moment in time, even the song that was playing. What it did was the opposite of the liquid which makes you stupid, it made me aware of everything around me. This may be why the government would like you to remain stupid, as this benefits them, not you. The other main difference is addiction, again complete opposite. There is no use to them to let you smoke cannibis as you can't become addicted. And last, the word marijuana was created by those who needed a word that sounded stupid to cloak reality, and I wish people would go back and study history and finally learn this and quit using this dumb word.

Monday, July 16, 2012

Depression Chemical Imbalance Doesn’t Exist, Experts Say

© naturalsociety.com
Depression Chemical Imbalance Doesn’t Exist, Experts Say
July 15, 2012 | Elizabeth Renter

What if you went to a crime ridden street corner, suffering from depression, and were told that a certain drug could change how you felt about things? What if you went to your doctor and were told the same thing? While the corner drug dealer and your physician might have different drugs in mind, they are essentially offering a similar solution—putting you in a “drug-induced” state to minimize your negative symptoms. Doctors, the media, and society say there chemical imbalance which causes depression, but a depression chemical imbalance doesn’t exist.

Depression Chemical Imbalance Doesn’t Exist

Dr. Joanna Moncrieff, a mental health expert from the department of mental health services at University College in London is taking a quite non-politically-correct approach in characterizing anti-depressants and other mental health drugs as just another dependency.

She says that although doctors, the media, and society in general has latched on to the idea that depression and anxiety, for example, are just evidence of a “chemical imbalance” in the brain, there is no hard evidence to support this.
“Scientific research has not detected any reliable abnormalities of the serotonin system in people who are depressed.”
While many people are convinced this is indeed their problem and therefore are okay with being offered a drug to solve the “problem”, she says the problem is that we are minimizing the seriousness of taking drugs to solve a “mental disorder.”

It is frequently overlooked that drugs used in psychiatry are psychoactive drugs, like alcohol and cannabis. Psychoactive drugs make people feel different; they put people into an altered mental and physical state. They affect everyone, regardless of whether they have a mental disorder or not. Therefore, an alternative way of understanding how psychiatric drugs affect people is to look at the psychoactive effects they produce

She says that these drugs, like anti-depressants, often produce symptoms of other, illegal drugs. The difference—these are prescribed by medical professionals and marketed to the masses in a more acceptable way.

In decades past, there was a stigma associated with mental health drugs. While it’s debatable whether this stigma was justified, there’s little doubt that it did make people think twice about taking medication for depression.

Now, however, we are convinced that these drugs are correcting a defect in the brain. The drugs are correcting an “imbalance.” But the problem is, that imbalance has never been proven.

Sure, you can argue that your medication makes you feel better, but wouldn’t other psychoactive drugs make you feel better too?

Dr. Moncrieff isn’t suggesting that people take cheaper illegal drugs, since they may have similar effects, but instead wants people to really get real about their anti-depression or anti-anxiety medications– what are they really doing to themselves when they rise each morning and pop the same pill, occasionally having to up their dosage because their body has developed a tolerance.

And with the number of Americans on antidepressant medication estimated to be 1 in 10, perhaps a critical look at this drug trade is warranted.

Posted from: NaturalSociety.com

Friday, July 13, 2012

Why Does The Government Approve of Gruesome Images on Cigarette Packs and Not Cosmetics, Alcohol or Junk Food?

Why Does The Government Approve of Gruesome Images on Cigarette Packs and Not Cosmetics, Alcohol or Junk Food?
July 12, 2012 | PreventDisease.com | Marco Torres

There is a shameful double standard that exists at the expense of smokers. We all know smoking is bad for our health and that modern-day cigarettes are the equivalent of cancer on a stick. Smokers know it too. But why do government officials allow graphic images of disease on cigarette packages without extending the same courtesy to the labels on cosmetics, alcohol and junk food, some of which cause more disease and deaths annually than tobacco.

© preventdisease.com

First let me be clear that I'm not a smoker and not defending smoking. However, I find it very convenient that governments take such drastic measures to inform the public about the health risks associated with smoking and glance over more serious, although masked as casual threats to our health. Could the corporate profit machines that run the gears of politicians have anything to do with it?

Heart disease causes half of all deaths in the United States and far more deaths than lung cancer. Statistics from the American Heart Association show that 75 million Americans currently suffer from heart disease, 20 million have diabetes and 57 million have pre-diabetes. These disorders are affecting younger and younger people in greater numbers every year. Toxic foods are the number one cause of chronic inflammation. This repeated injury leads to heart disease, stroke, diabetes and obesity.

What are the biggest culprits of chronic inflammation? Quite simply, they are the overload of simple, highly processed carbohydrates (sugar, flour and all the products made from them) and the excess consumption of omega-6 vegetable oils like soybean, corn and sunflower that are found in many processed foods. More than 95% of all processed foods including fast food contain the above ingredients.

So essentially, processed foods are at least equal to if not a much greater risk to our health than smoking. So why do we not allow graphic images of heart disease, diabetes and obesity on these foods? Obviously, the answer is that they may not sell as well which would upset the food industry and corporations that run the big agriculture.

What about alcohol? Twenty-five to forty percent of all patients in U.S. general hospital beds (not in maternity or intensive care) are being treated for complications of alcohol-related problems. Annual health care expenditures for alcohol-related problems amount to $22.5 billion. The total cost of alcohol problems is $175.9 billion a year (compared to $137 billion for smoking). Untreated alcohol problems waste an estimated $184.6 billion dollars per year in health care, business and criminal justice costs, and cause more than 100,000 deaths. Health care costs related to alcohol abuse are not limited to the user. Children of alcoholics who are admitted to the hospital average 62 percent more hospital days and 29 percent longer stays.

So why are there not graphic images of cirrhosis of the liver or alcohol-related diseases on beer, wine and liquor bottles? Perhaps it is because the government does not want to alienate people with imagery or language that doesn't necessarily chime with their experience of drinking. After all, drinking wine is seen as something classy and prestigious in many settings and heaven forbid we attach a negative stigma to all wine drinkers.

Cosmetics are another topic for debate. Every year, cosmetics companies kill millions of animals to test their products. These companies claim they test on animals to establish the safety of their products and ingredients for consumers. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require animal testing for cosmetics, and alternative testing methods are widely available and lead to more reliable results. Here is a list of companies and associated brands that still test on animals. Why not plaster images of abused primates, mice, rabbits and other animals (many who are grotesquely disfigured) on cosmetic labels? Why not show the skin conditions and diseases that some of the chemicals in these cosmetics cause to segments of the population?

Why Are Cigarettes Always The Object of Attack?


Cigarettes are easily targeted because smoking is an easy public display of enforcement. Governments like to make an example out of smokers. They make the public think that the government cares about health policy and disease prevention when all they do is use this one toxic element as a repetitive nag on the population. 

Public health officials know people will continue to smoke regardless.  It’s all about politics, enforcement and of course corporate greed.  If there were enough graphic images placed on cosmetics, junk food packaging and alcohol, it would eventually create a public firestorm which would cause parents and consumers to eventually question the government and force them to create the same stigma attached to these foods and products as there is with smoking. But that would cut into profits and educate the population to a higher level, and they don’t want that. Then people would become more aware about the entire health, food and safety industry being one big scam. And where would they stop? That would mean they would need to incorporate graphic images on 95% of processed foods and cosmetics which are filled with chemicals and toxic additives. All fast foods would also need to be targeted, not just McDonalds.

Few people are aware of this fact, but it’s not even the tobacco inside cigarettes that are the direct cause of lung cancer. It’s all the fillers, chemicals and glues that are the real source of disease inside each cigarette. But they don’t tell the public these facts either.

People know smoking is toxic and they do it at their own risk and will continue to do it regardless of public health advertising that promotes the opposite. Perhaps the same can be said about junk food, cosmetics and alcohol, but governments don’t want to take the chance in further educating the masses about all of these. We have much bigger problems than smoking when it comes to our population’s health. The entire food and medical industry is a much bigger threat, but our governments prefer to keep that on the down low and continue to make show out of the "evil" cigarette to make us all think they really care about our health.

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.

Sources:
prlog.org
thevegetariansite.com
telegraph.co.uk
cdc.gov


Comment: I've added the analecta Sacred Fire. If you're a follower of my posts, you'll know exactly what that means. My name is at the bottom of each post which reveals the Intel blog Network web sites.

Monday, April 30, 2012

Amazing Photos Show What the World Really Eats

Amazing Photos Show What the World Really Eats by Anthony Gucciardi

 What do you and your family eat each week? You may be shocked to see the significant variation even between relatively ‘similar’ nations when it comes to diet. While many families within the United States and Mexico include fast food and soda into the core of their nutritional program, families from nations like Bhutan survive off of traditional base food items like vegetables and grains. It is easy to see why disease rates are skyrocketing in many developed countries, where nutrition is not held to a very high regard.

Amazingly, the United States also spends more on healthcare than any nation in the world. Despite spending $7,960 per capita, the United States has been ranked dead last when it comes to the quality of care. The fact of the matter is that when food intake is ignored — along with the subsequent toxic ingredients that go along with the processed food addiction — disease will arise. In the telling pictures below, taken from the book ‘Hungry Planet: What the World Eats’, you can see what the average family from each nation eats over the period of one week.

North Carolina, United States
 

This family from North Carolina eats a diet almost entirely of processed and pre-prepared foods with heavy amounts of junk and fast food. Consuming mostly sugar-laden ‘fruit’ drinks and mega-sized sodas from Burger King and McDonald’s, this average American diet will ultimately lead to chronic disease and rampant sickness. Some favorite foods include pizza and fast food.

Mexico

Families in Mexico also tend to consume sugary sodas and processed foods, though their fruit and vegetable intake is higher than the United States families observed. The family lists their favorite food items as pizza, pasta, and chicken.

Canada


Enjoying some of the same processed items as families from Mexico and the United States, Canadian families do consume processed chips and meats, though you will notice a more prominent display of vegetables and fresh fish on the table. An increased amount of yogurt and cheese is also featured.

Italy


Italian families enjoy their bread, pasta, and assorted fruits. With grains a major part of the diet, along with other carbohydrate-rich foods, Italian families tend to forfeit some meal options high in protein for ‘traditional’ Italian dishes like pasta with ragu. While many of these items are fresh or even baked at home, Italian families still consume large amounts of sodas like Pepsi. You can see that this family drinks about 6 larger-sized bottles per week.

China


This Chinese family prefers fried shredded pork with sweet and sour sauce, listed as their favorite dishes. Eating processed food items mixed with packaged meats and fish, this Chinese family eats more fruits than vegetables, and their produce selection is one of the smallest besides the United States.


Chad


This family resides in the developing nation of Chad and spends only the equivalent of $1.23 per week on food to feed the entire family. Their favorite food is soup with fresh sheep meat.

Japan


It may surprise you, but this Japanese family consumes a diet high in processed junk and sugary treats. They list their favorite food items as cake, potato chips, and sashimi.

Germany


This German family has adopted an American-styled nutritional regiment, stating that their favorite foods are pizza, vanilla pudding, fried potatoes, and fried noodles. You may also notice the largely increased amount of beer and other alcoholic drinks over the other nations.

Great Britain


Spending over $250 per week on food, the average family in Great Britain is eating mostly processed meals and candy. This family’s preferred foods include chocolate fudge cake, mayonnaise sandwiches, and prawn cocktail.