HealthBeat News

Author: Wellness Club

  • So That’s Where It Comes From!

    This cautionary tale was sent to us by a friend recently, and brought some smiles of remembrance. There are some very good reasons why doctors and nurses are so compulsive about hand-washing and so very careful about never placing their unwashed hands anywhere near their faces! I have spent many, many a shift in nurseries and pediatric wards holding and handling these wonderful creatures who can be so full of little surprises…

    Cheers!
    Nurse Mark

    I Love Mustard.

    (This is said to be a true story. If you have children you will probably relate to this father).

    As ham sandwiches go, it was perfection: a thick slab of ham on a fresh bun with crisp lettuce and plenty of expensive, light brown, Gourmet Mustard.

    The corners of my jaw aching in anticipation, I carried it to the table in our backyard, picked it up with both hands, but was stopped by my wife suddenly at my side.

    "Here, hold Johnny (our six-week-old son) while I get my sandwich," she said.

    I had him balanced between my left elbow and shoulder and was reaching again for the ham sandwich when I noticed a streak of mustard on my fingers.

    I love mustard.

    I had no napkin.

    I licked it off.

    It was not mustard!

    No man ever put a baby down faster.

    It was the first and only time I have sprinted with my tongue protruding out.

    With a washcloth in each hand, I did the sort of routine shoeshine boys do, only I did it on my tongue.

    Later, after she stopped crying from laughing so hard, my wife said, "Now you know why they call that fancy mustard Poupon.”

  • Pregnancy Risks With Flax?

    By Nurse Mark

    There is no natural substance so good that it cannot be overdone!

    And there is no substance, natural or otherwise that cannot have an alarming article written about it based on someone’s reading of a tangentially related research study!

    We get letters… frequently they are from folks who have seen some alarming little tidbit in some article or other and they are now suddenly worried – understandably so, since they are taking the substance that is in question in the cautionary article.

    Here is the note we received:

    Hi there,  My daughter just sent me the link below to an article about flax seed.  I am curious as to your thoughts on what this writer expresses.  Birgitta

    http://www.thenourishinggourmet.com/2009/03/flax-seed-and-oil-phytoestrogens-phytic-acid-and-pregnancy-risks.html

    something to keep in mind, especially with the oil. I’m still going to make the bread and eat it, but I don’t think the
    amount of ground flax in there is high enough to make me nervous.

    And here is Dr. Myatt’s reply:

    Hi Birgitta:

    We’ve talked about flax and phytoestrogens before, but here’s the short course.

    LOTS of foods have mild estrogenic properties, most of which are protective against stronger estrogens in the environment. And lots of foods have some anti-nutrients. Soy is one of the worst.

    At recommended doses these are really "non issues."

    Also, there are a long list of things not to do when pregnant; pregnancy is an entire different metabolic circumstance than non-pregnant. Heck, in natural medicine we often use a tablespoon or two of castor oil to stimulate contractions, but yes, any oils might start labor.

    All in all, there’s nothing new in this article and nothing that contradicts the way in which I advise people to use flax.

    In Health,
    Dr. Myatt

    Like Dr. Myatt, I reviewed the article – a nice article, but one that looks to be written by a layperson. This person has read a single study from Canada (not a country that is especially friendly toward natural solutions over pharmacology) which offers a rather alarming headline – as seen here:

    Pregnant women consuming flaxseed oil have high risk of premature birth

    Université de Montréal study looks at the dangers of some natural products

    A study has found that the risks of a premature birth quadruple if flaxseed oil is consumed in the last two trimesters of pregnancy. The research was conducted by Professor Anick Bérard of the Université de Montréal’s Faculty of Pharmacy and the Sainte-Justine Hospital Research Center and Master’s student Krystel Moussally.

    In Canada, 50 percent of pregnant women take prescription medication. Yet many of them prefer to use natural health products during the pregnancy. "We believe these products to be safe because they are natural. But in reality, they are chemical products and we don’t know many of the risks and benefits of these products contrarily to medication," says Bérard.

    Bérard and Moussally set out to conduct one of the largest studies ever undertaken on by analyzing data from 3354 Quebec women. The first part of the research established that close to 10 percent of women between 1998 and 2003 used natural health products during their pregnancy. Before and after pregnancy they were respectively 15 and 14 percent to use these products. The increase means that about a third of women consuming natural health products stopped during the pregnancy.

    The most consumed natural health products by pregnant women are chamomile (19 percent), green tea (17 percent), peppered mint (12 percent), and flaxseed oil (12 percent). Bérard and Moussally correlated these products to premature births and only one product had a very strong correlation: flaxseed oil.

    "In the general population, the average rate of premature births is 2 to 3 percent. But for women consuming flaxseed oil in their last two trimesters that number jumps up to 12 percent," says Bérard. "It’s an enormous risk."

    The correlation existed only with flaxseed oil, yet women consuming the actual seed were unaffected. Even if more studies must be undertaken to verify these results, Bérard recommends caution when it comes to consuming flaxseed oil.

    If we read this article carefully we see that the researcher (who is not a doctor but rather a "professor") looks to have a bit of a bias against natural products to begin with. We then see that amounts of flax oil consumed by the subjects of this study are not given and that the risks are increased for those taking this unknown amount during the last few weeks of pregnancy. Finally, there is the somewhat grudging admission that this effect was seen in women consuming this unknown amount of flax oil – and not those using flax seed.

    So, I am left to wonder if this effect is the same effect that might be seen with the consumption of any amount of any oil during the late stages of pregnancy. As Dr. Myatt mentioned in her note to Birgitta a couple of tablespoons of castor oil is a time-honored natural way of stimulating the contractions of labor – and  a dose of oil taken too early could possibly stimulate the premature labor of the researchers headline…

    The bottom line?

    There are two: All things in moderation. And, pregnancy changes the rules – proceed with caution and with the assistance of a good holistic / naturopathic physician to ensure a happy and healthy outcome for all!

  • A Reader Thanks Us For The GERD Article

    It is always a pleasure to know that our HealthBeat News articles are making a positive difference in people’s lives. We often get small notes of thanks, but this one was extra special – for it came in the form of an email conversation between a long-standing patient of Dr. Myatt’s and her sister which that sister included in her note of thanks to Dr. Myatt.

    First Kathy forwarded our HealthBeat News article "What’s Burning You?" to Chris.

    Chris then answered Kathy as follows:

    From: Chris
    To: Kathy
    Subject: RE: GERD is NOT Caused By Excess Stomach Acid
    Kathy – thanks for forwarding the article on GERD.  I have ordered the test and look forward to taking it.  I have always had real doubts about the benefits vs. unknown side effects of taking my nightly Pepcid AC and other ad hoc antacids. Dana’s article is eye opening.   I was aware of the impact on Calcium absorption and have wondered what else was being blocked that negatively impacts my natural ability to fight off “bad stuff.”   It’s true – my PCP at that time ran no test, they just listened to the symptoms and called it GERD.
    Chris

    Chris then emailed Dr. Myatt with this brief but welcome note:

    Hi Dr. Dana
    Great article on GERD.  I look forward to taking the test that I have ordered and learning the results!  Thank you for explaining this so clearly.
    Chris

    Well, Chris should have her Gastric Acid Function Self-Test by now, and I’m betting that she is just as surprised and pleased as most people are when they discover the cause for their years of digestive discomfort and discover just how simple, effective, and natural the solution – dare we say "cure" – is!

    Chris, from both Dr. Myatt and Nurse Mark, you are as welcome as flowers in the spring!

  • Wyeth Drugs Takes A Hit – And So Will You!

    Will Big Pharma Be Forced To Offer Less Toxic Drugs?

    Opinion by Nurse Mark

    Here is an interesting piece of news that is just out this morning, found in Reuters Business News: (why is this kind of thing Business News and not Medical News or general interest news?)

    U.S. top court rules against Wyeth in liability case: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090304/bs_nm/us_drugs_wyeth_court

    It seems that The Drug Companies will no longer be able to hide behind the skirts of the mighty FDA by claiming immunity from responsibility for the ill effects of their patented poisons because they have complied with the rules and printed the FDA mandated "Black Box" warnings on their toxic offerings. Up to now these "fine-print" warnings about the potential harm of a drug have kept the drug companies safe: "We informed consumers, with the FDA-Approved warning, of the danger – so we’re not responsible!" has been their defense.

    Well, according to the Supreme Court, this cop-out won’t cut it any longer – Big Pharma is now to be held responsible for the ill effects of it’s offerings, no matter what "warnings" are printed on the package.

    So, this is  a good thing, right?

    I don’t know… I foresee some unintended consequences here folks…

    This will certainly be a good thing for those individuals who are harmed by these toxins – the person involved in this case, a guitarist, lost her arm and presumably her income and musical career to the toxic effect of a drug, and was awarded a multi-million dollar settlement – that is nevertheless just a tiny drop in the billion-dollar profit bucket of Big Pharma.

    But I predict it will not be a good thing for anyone who must buy the offerings of Big Pharma, because they will not take this lightly – there are profits and bonuses and stockholders to consider. No, this will simply be factored into the obscenely inflated prices already demanded for these patented poisons, and you, the consumer, will pay for this settlement and all others like it in the end. You really didn’t think that the Wyeth executives would pay for this out of their annual bonus and profit-sharing did you?

    On the other hand, maybe, just maybe Big Pharma will begin looking for some less-toxic, safer formulas to patent and profit from, since they know that killing and maiming people can now cost them regardless of "FDA Approval" and "Black Box Warnings".

    Dare we hope?

    Nah…

  • Ionizing Radiation – For Fun And Profit!

    Why Are Americans Being Exposed To So Much Radiation?

    Opinion by Nurse Mark

    There are a couple of things that have happened to conventional medicine over the past few decades that are not so very good at all.

    One of those things, the dependence upon patented pharmaceutical prescription drugs for virtually every ill by most conventional doctors is somewhat related to the other which is a total dependence upon lab tests and radiology rather than "clinical skills" to lead to the formulation of a diagnosis and treatment plan.

    You see, the average office visit of 8 to 12 minutes (and I’m being generous here) that’s allowed by the busy physician’s schedule simply does not permit much hands-on clinical diagnosis – nosiree – in that brief visit the poor harried clinic doc has about enough time to listen to the complaint, nod knowingly, and say something sage like "Hmmm… I think we’d better get some tests…" and then "While we’re doing that, let’s get you started on some of this…" at which point he (or she) will whip out the trusty prescription pad, scribble out the name of the "Drug-du-Jour" and order up what is known in medical circles as ATKTM (All Tests Known To Man).

    ATKTM is ordered in the hope that one of the reports will come back with something that will justify the drug that was just ordered, or maybe even suggest a diagnosis.

    Radiology reports are particularly good for this, and can save the busy doc a lot of time and trouble – here is the trick: Requision a radiologic survey or procedure, list some vague symptoms or complaints on the req. (short for requisition) and then let the radiology department figure out what is really needed and makes sense – they will call the doc with an alternate suggestion if they think he is on the wrong track – and then let the radiologist who reads the x-rays or scans provide the doc with a nice dictated report which will strongly suggest a diagnosis of some sort (or a "rule-out" of some condition) that the doc can then use during the inevitable 8 to 12 minute follow-up visit: "Well Mrs. Smith, the lab tests and x-rays show that your symptoms definitely do / do not relate to your gallbladder/heart/lungs/you-name-it."

    If the answer was "do relate" then the doc can say "keep taking that medicine I gave you" and be done with the visit for now.

    If the answer was "do not relate" then the doc can say "Keep taking that medicine I gave you and let’s do some more scans and tests" or "I’m going to refer you on to a specialist – I’ll have my friend Dr. Jones’ office contact you…" This is known in medical terms as the "Buff and Turf" – the doc has done some tests to "Buff" the patient’s chart and make it look good, and can now "Turf" the patient along to someone else, thus ending his responsibility. Neat, huh?

    No wonder so many clinics and doctor groups have installed expensive medical imaging machines in their clinics – they make a huge profit and provide a great cover for a doc that is too busy to do a real, hands-on workup. And if there is not a C.T. Scanner right there in the clinic, there is probably one just down the road – maybe even in the local mall – that the patient can be sent to… (Dare I suggest that there might be a finders fee or small commission for the doctor? Nah… that couldn’t happen…)

    I’m guessing that there is probably now a required class in medical school, and it is called something like "Ionizing Radiation – For Fun And Profit 101"

    In The News:

    Here is a report just issued by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) at its annual meeting in Bethesda, Maryland – I will reprint their press release in full here, since I’m guessing that a report this critical of conventional medicine might be hard to find in the near future.

    For immediate release:

    March 3, 2009 (12:00 PM)

    Medical Radiation Exposure of the U.S. Population Greatly Increased Since the Early 1980s

    In 2006, Americans were exposed to more than seven times as much ionizing radiation from medical procedures as was the case in the early 1980s, according to a new report on population exposure released March 3rd by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) at its annual meeting in Bethesda, Maryland.

    In 2006, medical exposure constituted nearly half of the total radiation exposure of the U.S. population from all sources.

    The increase was primarily a result of the growth in the use of medical imaging procedures, explained Dr. Kenneth R. Kase, senior vice president of NCRP and chairman of the scientific committee that produced the report. “The increase was due mostly to the higher utilization of computed tomography (CT) and nuclear medicine. These two imaging modalities alone contributed 36 percent of the total radiation exposure and 75 percent of the medical radiation exposure of the U.S. population.”

    The number of CT scans and nuclear medicine procedures performed in the United States during 2006 was estimated to be 67 million and 18 million, respectively.

    The NCRP Report No. 160, Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, provides a complete review of all radiation exposures for 2006.

    Background radiation, which in 2006 contributed fully half of the total exposure, comes from natural radiation in soil and rocks, radon gas which seeps into homes and other buildings, plus radiation from space and radiation sources that are found naturally within the human body.

    Other small contributors of exposure to the U.S. population included consumer products and activities, industrial and research uses and occupational tasks.

    NCRP is working with some of its partners like the American College of Radiology (ACR), World Health Organization and others to address radiation exposure resulting from the significant growth in medical imaging and to ensure that referrals for procedures like CT and nuclear medicine are based on objective, medically relevant criteria (e.g., ACR appropriateness criteria).

    This year marks the 80th anniversary of NCRP’s founding and the 45th anniversary of its charter from the U.S. Congress under Public Law 88-376.