One single company, drug repackager Advantage Dose, accounted for more than 1,000 of those recalls. But even excluding Advantage Dose, recalls jumped 50 percent last year.

CNN reports:

“The fast pace of drug recalls seems to be continuing in 2010 ... High-profile recalls of Tylenol and other products ... have drawn attention to quality concerns in manufacturing ...

The spike in recalls, especially of generic and over-the-counter drugs, is being driven by manufacturing lapses, experts say. Some of the biggest culprits: the quality of raw materials, faulty labeling and packaging and contamination.”

]]> Recalls of prescription and over the counter drugs are surging in the U.S. The FDA reported more than 1,700 recalls last year, compared to less than 430 in 2008.

One single company, drug repackager Advantage Dose, accounted for more than 1,000 of those recalls. But even excluding Advantage Dose, recalls jumped 50 percent last year.

CNN reports:

“The fast pace of drug recalls seems to be continuing in 2010 ... High-profile recalls of Tylenol and other products ... have drawn attention to quality concerns in manufacturing ...

The spike in recalls, especially of generic and over-the-counter drugs, is being driven by manufacturing lapses, experts say. Some of the biggest culprits: the quality of raw materials, faulty labeling and packaging and contamination.”

]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4829 0 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/09/08/china-study.aspx http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/09/08/china-study.aspx#comments Wed, 08 Sep 2010 05:00:00 +0000 Dr. Mercola By Dr. Mercola

I have sought to apply science to improve my health, and that of others, for over forty years. The topic so intrigued me that I went to medical school to increase my understanding of the way the body works.

I have learned many things along this health journey. Clearly one of the major lessons is that there is enormous controversy when it comes to understanding what the human body was designed to thrive on.

Fortunately, as a practicing physician I have had the distinct advantage of having the opportunity to treat over 25,000 patients who were willing to implement suggestions I made to improve their health. Over the years, I certainly have made my share of mistakes, and some people did not improve after implementing what I thought was very solid advice.

Interestingly, most of my initial failures were related to encouraging many thousands of patients to eat too many vegetables in relation to fats and animal protein.

This may sound shocking to some, and staunch vegetarians, or vegans, might wholeheartedly disagree with the notion that you could possibly eat too many vegetables. In fact, many have absorbed Dr. T. Colin Campbell’s writing’s on this topic, particularly his book The China Study, which makes a radical case against the wisdom of eating animal protein at all, by linking protein to all manner of ill health, including cancer.

Is Eating Meat Harmful, Like Popular Pro-Vegan Book Proclaims?

Many who hold strict vegetarian views) still hold up The China Study as the authoritative "proof" that eating meat was harmful.

This work flies in the face of many nutritionally oriented physicians, like myself, who have collectively treated tens of thousands of patients and found that forcing an animal-free protein diet on everyone will invariably cause harm and suffering in many whose biochemically and genetically determined nutritional type requires large amounts of fat and protein.

Since this book is widely trusted and used to defend a no animal protein position I thought it was important to provide my views on why I believe this work has some fundamental flaws.

Another nutritional physician who has taken a hard look at Dr. Campbell’s book, and the studies that form the basis of his conclusions, is Dr. Michael R. Eades, M.D.

Dr. Eades has been in full-time practice of nutritional and metabolic medicine since 1986, and like I, has treated tens of thousands of patients. Interestingly, Campbell, on the other hand, is not a practicing physician and has no real-world experience to support the veracity of his nutritional recommendations for the population at large.

Major Reason Why the China Study is Fatally Flawed

The very title of the book is inaccurate. It is NOT a study but a comprehensive set of observations. While this approach can be valuable, it can never prove his assertion that animal protein should be avoided, as he never TESTED that theory on real live patients... The data from Dr. Campbell’s China study was first published in the tome Diet, Life-Style and Mortality in China. It contains several thousands of statistical correlations, which Campbell insists show that animal protein intake is convincingly associated with prevalence of cancer.

However, it’s important to realize two things:

1. The China study was an observational study. Correlations deduced from an observational study do not – in fact, cannot -- prove causation. As Dr. Eade points out, all you can really do with data from an observational study is to form a hypothesis, which must then be tested in randomized, controlled trials, to ferret out the truth about whether or not x actually causes y.
2. In many cases, the data (presented in arduous detail in the book Diet, Life-Style and Mortality in China) do not show statistically significant correlations between animal protein consumption and disease such as cancer at all. On the contrary. It would seem that sugar and carbohydrates are correlated with cancer – not animal protein. In addition, the data indicate that fat is negatively correlated with cancer mortality, which again contradicts the claim that meat is harmful.

For more information, I highly recommend reading through Dr. Eade’s critique of The China Study.

Two Physicians’ Experiences with Using Vegetarian Diets for Everyone

After finishing my family practice residency in 1985 I read the book Fit for Life. The book made some very compelling arguments encouraging the consumption of raw fruits and vegetables. So I started its recommendations and had fruit for breakfast. After a few weeks I tested my blood work and was shocked to find my fasting triglycerides were nearly 3,000. That is not a typo. Nearly three thousand...This was surprising because they had never been over 100 in the past.

Clearly this diet was killing me and I am convinced I would have died long ago had I remained on it. I now realize that this approach probably helps some, but was a disaster for me personally.

Dr. Eades is another nutritional physician. He and I have never met and do not personally know each other.

However, we both started our medical practices about the same time and were both passionate about helping people with nutritional interventions and helping them with alternatives to drugs and surgery.

We had no predisposition to the outcome and were impartial observers to the results of our nutritional interventions. We were both busy clinicians and never had the luxury to take months out of our lives to publish our observations in the medical literature. Nevertheless the lack of publications does not make the observations any less valid.

Interestingly we both observed the same results, namely that large numbers of sick people failed to improve when they implemented vegetarian or vegan diets.

This shocked us as we were compelled by many of the arguments that Campbell makes and believed that all our patients should have improved on this regimen. Initially I questioned their compliance and believed many of them were “cheating.” But after this started happening to more and more people, it became clear my approach was flawed.

Many of these patients significantly worsened and nearly died. Many even left our practices because they lost faith in our ability to use diet as a tool to help them regain their health. What we both realized after these well-intentioned efforts is that . . .

There is No Perfect Diet that Works for Everyone

Most of the confusion in this debate results from this reality. Vegetarian diets described by Campbell do work for large numbers of people. From my observations, perhaps about one third of the population would benefit from it. These people thrive on these foods and have spectacular health. The problem is that there is an equally large, or even larger, population whose health is devastated by restricting animal protein and fats.

About ten years ago I was exposed to concepts that helped me understand this shocking observation. I realized that there is an enormous level of biochemical and genetic individuality that essentially guarantees that there is no perfect food plan that will work for everyone.

What I gradually came to appreciate is that we are all uniquely designed and require customized plans.

I eventually adopted a program called Nutritional Typing, which is a central part of my health plan and is available for free on my site.

This plan categorizes people into three different groups:

• Protein: High amounts of healthy fats and protein and lower amounts of vegetables
• Carb: High amounts of vegetables and lower amounts of protein and fat
• Mixed: Somewhere between the above options

The population is divided equally between the groups, with about one third of the population of the US in each group.

If you go to certain countries however, you will find high percentages in one group, but the US is a wide mixture and has a widespread heterogeneity.

Nutritional Typing Produced Dramatic Improvement

Once I began implementing Nutritional Typing in my practice I noticed a remarkable decrease in those that did not respond favorably to dietary changes. Nearly everyone seemed to notice improvement, and for many it was quite dramatic.

One of the underlying principles of the program is to "Listen to Your Body" and adjust your foods based on how you feel mentally and physically after consuming them. Many who claim to have tried nutritional typing and report feeling worse, have clearly missed this most essential point.

If, after a meal, you feel sluggish, tired, nauseous, or depressed, your meal was not ideal. If you are indeed following the nutritional typing program, this will be a giant clue that you need to modify your diet.

You make a great mistake if you simply take the test once and strictly follow the food choices recommended for that type – you must continuously check in with yourself and keep modifying your food choices until you find the right balance of fats, healthy carbs and protein for you.

Nutritional typing is a way to determine what YOUR customized diet is, and it is not even a one-size-fits-all within each nutritional grouping. If you take nutritional typing seriously, its guidelines will help you modify your food intake until you find the right balance.

That said, some of the most dramatic improvements I saw were from individuals who were protein types but were eating mostly carbs, in the way of vegetables. It was very common for these people to have strong ethical positions about refusing to eat animal products.

I would never ask someone to eat animal foods if they had spiritual convictions against doing so. However, many in this category were just confused about this issue – thinking this is what was healthiest for their body. They couldn't understand why they felt so sick and had so many health problems. Once we were able to clear up that confusion, and experiment with the program, the result was typically quite impressive.

Don’t Listen to Me or ANYONE Else About What You Should Eat

It is sad to see that many staunch vegans and vegetarians fail to even acknowledge that anyone is designed to have animal protein. Unfortunately they are able to convince many with seemingly compelling information like Campbell’s China Study and as a result, many people continue to suffer from not including vital nutrients in their diet -- nutrients they were designed to eat.

Ultimately, if you are sincerely honest and seek to understand what diet is best for you, it is my recommendation to abandon any previously held convictions you might have about diet and listen to your body.

Let your body tell you what foods you were designed to eat. Don’t listen to me or Dr. Eades or a researcher like Campbell who has never treated patients. Just listen to your own body.

You can experiment for yourself and observe your reactions, but if you would like a systemized way to approach this and record your results so you can reach your own independent conclusions about what you were designed to eat, then I would encourage you to take the FREE Nutritional Typing Test.

Should Meat Be Avoided Because of the Cholesterol Issue?

Many, if not most, conventional physicians still maintain the position that cholesterol is harmful and should be avoided. However, this misconception has been carefully debunked in more recent years. Alas, the conventional system is not known for its speed to embrace corrective action even when a fallacy has been clearly revealed.

I won't repeat all the arguments here but if you are interested in getting a more in-depth review, please read my most recent cholesterol report.

The truth is, many of the health problems attributed to fat and cholesterol are in fact caused by SUGAR, not fat! If you do not understand this vital concept, you will likely continue to sabotage your health – avoiding health promoting foods, and substituting them with some of the most health-harming…

Is Vegetarianism Right for You?

I have long advocated consuming plenty of fresh, organic, locally grown raw vegetables, but it's important to understand that different ratios are appropriate for depending on your nutritional type.

This means that some people will thrive on very large amounts of vegetables and very little animal protein. For others, this ratio would spell disaster for their health. Again, it's highly individual. The people who fare the worst on a vegetarian diet are those who are naturally protein types, as they're depriving their bodies of essential fuel, determined by their genetic and biochemical makeup.

Some of my views on eating animal protein were directly influenced by the work of Dr. Weston Price but although his contribution was great, since then countless peer-reviewed studies have been published that support these views.

It's also worth mentioning that I have no competing commercial interests that might sway me from providing the most accurate, health-promoting information I possibly can share on this or any other health related subject. As you may know already, my business model does not allow outside advertisers.

The only commercial items sold on my site are ones that I firmly believe in and most of which I personally use – and that includes grass-fed, organically-and humanely (non-factory farmed) raised meats and wild fish providers whose food products I have tested for purity by an independent lab prior to endorsing them.

But to recap: a largely vegetarian diet may be appropriate for some, but to promote it as the only, or even the best, way to improve health is foolhardy at best, because some two-thirds of people simply cannot and will not thrive on a meatless diet.

What About the Other Animal Protein: Milk… Is it Good or Bad?

Another important distinction that must be taken into account when discussing animal protein sources is the difference between raw and pasteurized dairy. When you heat a protein to the temperature required to achieve pasteurization you denature the tertiary and quaternary structure of the protein making it essentially a new molecule.

Additionally, any time you see studies where casein is given to animals and adverse health effects ensue, there's really little cause for surprise.

Why?

Because any time you process foods you damage them, and you can therefore experience a variety of adverse health effects when you consume them. This should not be misconstrued as being a reflection of the same food in its raw and/or unadulterated state!

My recommendation to everyone is to try cheeses made from raw milk and compare them to cheeses made from pasteurized milk. I'm willing to bet that most of you would agree the taste of raw cheese is far superior. This is so well known, no self-respecting cheesemaker would ever choose pasteurized milk over raw when making cheese, because the properties are entirely different – it's basically damaged goods.

For those who claim there's no significant health benefits of raw over pasteurized, the inherent differences in flavor and consistency between raw and processed cheeses alone will clue you in on the fact that there ARE significant differences between the two types of milk – otherwise the cheeses would also be identical, wouldn't they?

Another common misconception many people have is that you should avoid milk because no other animal in nature consumes it after they're weaned. While this may be logistically true, observation will show you that most animals will eagerly and readily consume raw milk when given the opportunity.

Few would argue with the fact that human breast milk is probably the ideal and most perfect food designed for human infants -- a truly custom-made whole food for a baby -- yet virtually no adult is able to consume this as a source of nutrition for logistical unavailability.

However, throughout history, ancient people across the world have continued drinking similar raw milk from cows, sheep and goats, well past being weaned from their mother's breast.

Final Recommendation

This is obviously a very sensitive issue for many. It has been my experience that many make choices to eat certain foods based on philosophical or intellectual reasons. While I believe that should always be an important part of the process, I believe it is equally important to listen to the important feedback that your body provides you when you consume a certain diet.

If your current diet allows you to function at the highest level of energy and fitness and you rarely feel hungry or crave sweets that is a fairly good sign that you are eating food appropriate for your nutritional type.

However if you are struggling with health challenges and have rigidly adhered to a diet that severely limits or avoids animal protein, because you believe you should or you are choosing it for ethical reasons then I would encourage you to consider changing your diet to include some animal proteins.

Just be honest with yourself and objectively evaluate your body's response. Your body is the most awesome instrument to make this assessment. Ultimately it is the best resource and far superior to anything you read on the Internet or in any published study.

Please feel free to use our free Nutritional Typing Test as tool to help you explore what foods you were designed to eat.

So my final words are to trust the body God gave you to tell you the truth.

]]> By Dr. Mercola

I have sought to apply science to improve my health, and that of others, for over forty years. The topic so intrigued me that I went to medical school to increase my understanding of the way the body works.

I have learned many things along this health journey. Clearly one of the major lessons is that there is enormous controversy when it comes to understanding what the human body was designed to thrive on.

Fortunately, as a practicing physician I have had the distinct advantage of having the opportunity to treat over 25,000 patients who were willing to implement suggestions I made to improve their health. Over the years, I certainly have made my share of mistakes, and some people did not improve after implementing what I thought was very solid advice.

Interestingly, most of my initial failures were related to encouraging many thousands of patients to eat too many vegetables in relation to fats and animal protein.

This may sound shocking to some, and staunch vegetarians, or vegans, might wholeheartedly disagree with the notion that you could possibly eat too many vegetables. In fact, many have absorbed Dr. T. Colin Campbell’s writing’s on this topic, particularly his book The China Study, which makes a radical case against the wisdom of eating animal protein at all, by linking protein to all manner of ill health, including cancer.

Is Eating Meat Harmful, Like Popular Pro-Vegan Book Proclaims?

Many who hold strict vegetarian views) still hold up The China Study as the authoritative "proof" that eating meat was harmful.

This work flies in the face of many nutritionally oriented physicians, like myself, who have collectively treated tens of thousands of patients and found that forcing an animal-free protein diet on everyone will invariably cause harm and suffering in many whose biochemically and genetically determined nutritional type requires large amounts of fat and protein.

Since this book is widely trusted and used to defend a no animal protein position I thought it was important to provide my views on why I believe this work has some fundamental flaws.

Another nutritional physician who has taken a hard look at Dr. Campbell’s book, and the studies that form the basis of his conclusions, is Dr. Michael R. Eades, M.D.

Dr. Eades has been in full-time practice of nutritional and metabolic medicine since 1986, and like I, has treated tens of thousands of patients. Interestingly, Campbell, on the other hand, is not a practicing physician and has no real-world experience to support the veracity of his nutritional recommendations for the population at large.

Major Reason Why the China Study is Fatally Flawed

The very title of the book is inaccurate. It is NOT a study but a comprehensive set of observations. While this approach can be valuable, it can never prove his assertion that animal protein should be avoided, as he never TESTED that theory on real live patients... The data from Dr. Campbell’s China study was first published in the tome Diet, Life-Style and Mortality in China. It contains several thousands of statistical correlations, which Campbell insists show that animal protein intake is convincingly associated with prevalence of cancer.

However, it’s important to realize two things:

1. The China study was an observational study. Correlations deduced from an observational study do not – in fact, cannot -- prove causation. As Dr. Eade points out, all you can really do with data from an observational study is to form a hypothesis, which must then be tested in randomized, controlled trials, to ferret out the truth about whether or not x actually causes y.
2. In many cases, the data (presented in arduous detail in the book Diet, Life-Style and Mortality in China) do not show statistically significant correlations between animal protein consumption and disease such as cancer at all. On the contrary. It would seem that sugar and carbohydrates are correlated with cancer – not animal protein. In addition, the data indicate that fat is negatively correlated with cancer mortality, which again contradicts the claim that meat is harmful.

For more information, I highly recommend reading through Dr. Eade’s critique of The China Study.

Two Physicians’ Experiences with Using Vegetarian Diets for Everyone

After finishing my family practice residency in 1985 I read the book Fit for Life. The book made some very compelling arguments encouraging the consumption of raw fruits and vegetables. So I started its recommendations and had fruit for breakfast. After a few weeks I tested my blood work and was shocked to find my fasting triglycerides were nearly 3,000. That is not a typo. Nearly three thousand...This was surprising because they had never been over 100 in the past.

Clearly this diet was killing me and I am convinced I would have died long ago had I remained on it. I now realize that this approach probably helps some, but was a disaster for me personally.

Dr. Eades is another nutritional physician. He and I have never met and do not personally know each other.

However, we both started our medical practices about the same time and were both passionate about helping people with nutritional interventions and helping them with alternatives to drugs and surgery.

We had no predisposition to the outcome and were impartial observers to the results of our nutritional interventions. We were both busy clinicians and never had the luxury to take months out of our lives to publish our observations in the medical literature. Nevertheless the lack of publications does not make the observations any less valid.

Interestingly we both observed the same results, namely that large numbers of sick people failed to improve when they implemented vegetarian or vegan diets.

This shocked us as we were compelled by many of the arguments that Campbell makes and believed that all our patients should have improved on this regimen. Initially I questioned their compliance and believed many of them were “cheating.” But after this started happening to more and more people, it became clear my approach was flawed.

Many of these patients significantly worsened and nearly died. Many even left our practices because they lost faith in our ability to use diet as a tool to help them regain their health. What we both realized after these well-intentioned efforts is that . . .

There is No Perfect Diet that Works for Everyone

Most of the confusion in this debate results from this reality. Vegetarian diets described by Campbell do work for large numbers of people. From my observations, perhaps about one third of the population would benefit from it. These people thrive on these foods and have spectacular health. The problem is that there is an equally large, or even larger, population whose health is devastated by restricting animal protein and fats.

About ten years ago I was exposed to concepts that helped me understand this shocking observation. I realized that there is an enormous level of biochemical and genetic individuality that essentially guarantees that there is no perfect food plan that will work for everyone.

What I gradually came to appreciate is that we are all uniquely designed and require customized plans.

I eventually adopted a program called Nutritional Typing, which is a central part of my health plan and is available for free on my site.

This plan categorizes people into three different groups:

• Protein: High amounts of healthy fats and protein and lower amounts of vegetables
• Carb: High amounts of vegetables and lower amounts of protein and fat
• Mixed: Somewhere between the above options

The population is divided equally between the groups, with about one third of the population of the US in each group.

If you go to certain countries however, you will find high percentages in one group, but the US is a wide mixture and has a widespread heterogeneity.

Nutritional Typing Produced Dramatic Improvement

Once I began implementing Nutritional Typing in my practice I noticed a remarkable decrease in those that did not respond favorably to dietary changes. Nearly everyone seemed to notice improvement, and for many it was quite dramatic.

One of the underlying principles of the program is to "Listen to Your Body" and adjust your foods based on how you feel mentally and physically after consuming them. Many who claim to have tried nutritional typing and report feeling worse, have clearly missed this most essential point.

If, after a meal, you feel sluggish, tired, nauseous, or depressed, your meal was not ideal. If you are indeed following the nutritional typing program, this will be a giant clue that you need to modify your diet.

You make a great mistake if you simply take the test once and strictly follow the food choices recommended for that type – you must continuously check in with yourself and keep modifying your food choices until you find the right balance of fats, healthy carbs and protein for you.

Nutritional typing is a way to determine what YOUR customized diet is, and it is not even a one-size-fits-all within each nutritional grouping. If you take nutritional typing seriously, its guidelines will help you modify your food intake until you find the right balance.

That said, some of the most dramatic improvements I saw were from individuals who were protein types but were eating mostly carbs, in the way of vegetables. It was very common for these people to have strong ethical positions about refusing to eat animal products.

I would never ask someone to eat animal foods if they had spiritual convictions against doing so. However, many in this category were just confused about this issue – thinking this is what was healthiest for their body. They couldn't understand why they felt so sick and had so many health problems. Once we were able to clear up that confusion, and experiment with the program, the result was typically quite impressive.

Don’t Listen to Me or ANYONE Else About What You Should Eat

It is sad to see that many staunch vegans and vegetarians fail to even acknowledge that anyone is designed to have animal protein. Unfortunately they are able to convince many with seemingly compelling information like Campbell’s China Study and as a result, many people continue to suffer from not including vital nutrients in their diet -- nutrients they were designed to eat.

Ultimately, if you are sincerely honest and seek to understand what diet is best for you, it is my recommendation to abandon any previously held convictions you might have about diet and listen to your body.

Let your body tell you what foods you were designed to eat. Don’t listen to me or Dr. Eades or a researcher like Campbell who has never treated patients. Just listen to your own body.

You can experiment for yourself and observe your reactions, but if you would like a systemized way to approach this and record your results so you can reach your own independent conclusions about what you were designed to eat, then I would encourage you to take the FREE Nutritional Typing Test.

Should Meat Be Avoided Because of the Cholesterol Issue?

Many, if not most, conventional physicians still maintain the position that cholesterol is harmful and should be avoided. However, this misconception has been carefully debunked in more recent years. Alas, the conventional system is not known for its speed to embrace corrective action even when a fallacy has been clearly revealed.

I won't repeat all the arguments here but if you are interested in getting a more in-depth review, please read my most recent cholesterol report.

The truth is, many of the health problems attributed to fat and cholesterol are in fact caused by SUGAR, not fat! If you do not understand this vital concept, you will likely continue to sabotage your health – avoiding health promoting foods, and substituting them with some of the most health-harming…

Is Vegetarianism Right for You?

I have long advocated consuming plenty of fresh, organic, locally grown raw vegetables, but it's important to understand that different ratios are appropriate for depending on your nutritional type.

This means that some people will thrive on very large amounts of vegetables and very little animal protein. For others, this ratio would spell disaster for their health. Again, it's highly individual. The people who fare the worst on a vegetarian diet are those who are naturally protein types, as they're depriving their bodies of essential fuel, determined by their genetic and biochemical makeup.

Some of my views on eating animal protein were directly influenced by the work of Dr. Weston Price but although his contribution was great, since then countless peer-reviewed studies have been published that support these views.

It's also worth mentioning that I have no competing commercial interests that might sway me from providing the most accurate, health-promoting information I possibly can share on this or any other health related subject. As you may know already, my business model does not allow outside advertisers.

The only commercial items sold on my site are ones that I firmly believe in and most of which I personally use – and that includes grass-fed, organically-and humanely (non-factory farmed) raised meats and wild fish providers whose food products I have tested for purity by an independent lab prior to endorsing them.

But to recap: a largely vegetarian diet may be appropriate for some, but to promote it as the only, or even the best, way to improve health is foolhardy at best, because some two-thirds of people simply cannot and will not thrive on a meatless diet.

What About the Other Animal Protein: Milk… Is it Good or Bad?

Another important distinction that must be taken into account when discussing animal protein sources is the difference between raw and pasteurized dairy. When you heat a protein to the temperature required to achieve pasteurization you denature the tertiary and quaternary structure of the protein making it essentially a new molecule.

Additionally, any time you see studies where casein is given to animals and adverse health effects ensue, there's really little cause for surprise.

Why?

Because any time you process foods you damage them, and you can therefore experience a variety of adverse health effects when you consume them. This should not be misconstrued as being a reflection of the same food in its raw and/or unadulterated state!

My recommendation to everyone is to try cheeses made from raw milk and compare them to cheeses made from pasteurized milk. I'm willing to bet that most of you would agree the taste of raw cheese is far superior. This is so well known, no self-respecting cheesemaker would ever choose pasteurized milk over raw when making cheese, because the properties are entirely different – it's basically damaged goods.

For those who claim there's no significant health benefits of raw over pasteurized, the inherent differences in flavor and consistency between raw and processed cheeses alone will clue you in on the fact that there ARE significant differences between the two types of milk – otherwise the cheeses would also be identical, wouldn't they?

Another common misconception many people have is that you should avoid milk because no other animal in nature consumes it after they're weaned. While this may be logistically true, observation will show you that most animals will eagerly and readily consume raw milk when given the opportunity.

Few would argue with the fact that human breast milk is probably the ideal and most perfect food designed for human infants -- a truly custom-made whole food for a baby -- yet virtually no adult is able to consume this as a source of nutrition for logistical unavailability.

However, throughout history, ancient people across the world have continued drinking similar raw milk from cows, sheep and goats, well past being weaned from their mother's breast.

Final Recommendation

This is obviously a very sensitive issue for many. It has been my experience that many make choices to eat certain foods based on philosophical or intellectual reasons. While I believe that should always be an important part of the process, I believe it is equally important to listen to the important feedback that your body provides you when you consume a certain diet.

If your current diet allows you to function at the highest level of energy and fitness and you rarely feel hungry or crave sweets that is a fairly good sign that you are eating food appropriate for your nutritional type.

However if you are struggling with health challenges and have rigidly adhered to a diet that severely limits or avoids animal protein, because you believe you should or you are choosing it for ethical reasons then I would encourage you to consider changing your diet to include some animal proteins.

Just be honest with yourself and objectively evaluate your body's response. Your body is the most awesome instrument to make this assessment. Ultimately it is the best resource and far superior to anything you read on the Internet or in any published study.

Please feel free to use our free Nutritional Typing Test as tool to help you explore what foods you were designed to eat.

So my final words are to trust the body God gave you to tell you the truth.

]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4828 0 http://www.NaturalNews.com/029676_PFOA_non-stick_cookware.html http://www.NaturalNews.com/029676_PFOA_non-stick_cookware.html#comments Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:00:00 +0000 NaturalNews.com perfluoroalkyl acid -- the non-stick chemical used on cookware surfaces. According to a study just published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, high levels of PFOA were strongly correlated with an increase in both total cholesterol and LDL "bad" cholesterol.

Typically, high cholesterol is treated with a second chemical intervention -- statin drugs. Statins can produce devastating side effects including kidney and liver damage (http://naturalnews.com/statins.html), muscle weakness and eye problems. So now we have a situation where people ingesting PFOA chemicals may be inaccurately diagnosed with cholesterol problems and be prescribed dangerous chemical medications that cause even more health problems.

This study looked at 12,000 children who were exposed to PFOA through their local water supply which was contaminated with PFOA. It does not prove a link between non-stick cookware and cholesterol, although it suggests a possible link that should probably be researched further.

PFOA is on more than just cooking pans
PFOA isn't merely found on cooking pans, by the way: Nearly all cooking surfaces for electric consumer food prep appliances are made with it: Sandwich toasters, griddles and even popular cooking devices such as George Foreman Grills.

You'll also get PFOA from most restaurants because non-stick cooking surfaces are commonly used to prepare your omelets, pancakes, pasta sauces and many other menu items. Avoiding PFOA is nearly impossible unless you prepare all your own food at home, and even then, you must be extremely careful with what food prep devices you use.

Even Swiss Diamond pans which claim that you're "cooking on diamonds" are actually made with PFOA chemicals (http://www.naturalnews.com/021059.html).

I have avoided non-stick cookware for many years and wouldn't dare prepare any food on such an item made with dangerous chemicals, but most consumers don't know about the dangers of PFOA, and they continue to cook their food with non-stick pans. It gets really dangerous when people use forks or metal spatulas to stir their food in such pans because this action scrapes off microscopic bits of PFOA chemicals that then become lodged in their food and swallowed.

My advice is to avoid all non-stick cookware. Buy stainless steel cookware with copper plating on the bottom, which helps disperse heat and prevent burning. Better yet, eat more raw foods and superfood smoothies which require no cooking whatsoever.

The mere act of cooking food in a pan, after all, creates carcinogens in the food. The only "safely" cooked food is steamed or boiled. Anything that subjects foods to very high temperatures -- frying, broiling, grilling, etc. -- results in the creation of cancer-causing chemicals in the food itself. And that's true whether you're using a PFOA pan or not.

Sources for this story include: BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11201956]]> perfluoroalkyl acid -- the non-stick chemical used on cookware surfaces. According to a study just published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, high levels of PFOA were strongly correlated with an increase in both total cholesterol and LDL "bad" cholesterol.

Typically, high cholesterol is treated with a second chemical intervention -- statin drugs. Statins can produce devastating side effects including kidney and liver damage (http://naturalnews.com/statins.html), muscle weakness and eye problems. So now we have a situation where people ingesting PFOA chemicals may be inaccurately diagnosed with cholesterol problems and be prescribed dangerous chemical medications that cause even more health problems.

This study looked at 12,000 children who were exposed to PFOA through their local water supply which was contaminated with PFOA. It does not prove a link between non-stick cookware and cholesterol, although it suggests a possible link that should probably be researched further.

PFOA is on more than just cooking pans
PFOA isn't merely found on cooking pans, by the way: Nearly all cooking surfaces for electric consumer food prep appliances are made with it: Sandwich toasters, griddles and even popular cooking devices such as George Foreman Grills.

You'll also get PFOA from most restaurants because non-stick cooking surfaces are commonly used to prepare your omelets, pancakes, pasta sauces and many other menu items. Avoiding PFOA is nearly impossible unless you prepare all your own food at home, and even then, you must be extremely careful with what food prep devices you use.

Even Swiss Diamond pans which claim that you're "cooking on diamonds" are actually made with PFOA chemicals (http://www.naturalnews.com/021059.html).

I have avoided non-stick cookware for many years and wouldn't dare prepare any food on such an item made with dangerous chemicals, but most consumers don't know about the dangers of PFOA, and they continue to cook their food with non-stick pans. It gets really dangerous when people use forks or metal spatulas to stir their food in such pans because this action scrapes off microscopic bits of PFOA chemicals that then become lodged in their food and swallowed.

My advice is to avoid all non-stick cookware. Buy stainless steel cookware with copper plating on the bottom, which helps disperse heat and prevent burning. Better yet, eat more raw foods and superfood smoothies which require no cooking whatsoever.

The mere act of cooking food in a pan, after all, creates carcinogens in the food. The only "safely" cooked food is steamed or boiled. Anything that subjects foods to very high temperatures -- frying, broiling, grilling, etc. -- results in the creation of cancer-causing chemicals in the food itself. And that's true whether you're using a PFOA pan or not.

Sources for this story include: BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11201956]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4798 0 http://www.NaturalNews.com/029673_vaccines_drug_companies.html http://www.NaturalNews.com/029673_vaccines_drug_companies.html#comments Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:00:00 +0000 NaturalNews.com
The hysteria over last year's supposed swine flu pandemic led to the development of millions of vaccines that were never used. By the time drug companies finished producing the vaccines, flu season was virtually over, leaving millions of leftover doses to rot in warehouses.

So this year, officials are doing everything they can to speed up the production process so the vaccines will be ready when the scare campaigns begin this fall. Except this time, officials are planning to target virtually everyone over the age of six months, including healthy, young adults.

This year's shot contains strains of last year's H1N1 virus, as well as strains of H3N2 and influenza B. Officials are aiming to have manufacturers produce up to 165 million doses of this combo vaccine, which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says will be more than have ever been produced for a single flu season.

According to reports, the CDC is soon planing to launch a full ad campaign to promote the new shot, and is even encouraging people who already got the H1N1 vaccine last year to get it again this year.

Seasonal flu vaccines, however, typically do not even contain the strains that ends up infecting the population at large that year. These same vaccines also contain harmful adjuvants, preservatives, and other toxic chemicals that are implicated in causing autoimmune disorders, reproductive problems and even cancer.

The best ways to prevent yourself from getting the flu includes getting plenty of vitamin D, drinking lots of clean water, getting plenty of rest and loading up on powerful superfoods every day.

Sources for this story include:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704125604575449951130700056.html]]>
The hysteria over last year's supposed swine flu pandemic led to the development of millions of vaccines that were never used. By the time drug companies finished producing the vaccines, flu season was virtually over, leaving millions of leftover doses to rot in warehouses.

So this year, officials are doing everything they can to speed up the production process so the vaccines will be ready when the scare campaigns begin this fall. Except this time, officials are planning to target virtually everyone over the age of six months, including healthy, young adults.

This year's shot contains strains of last year's H1N1 virus, as well as strains of H3N2 and influenza B. Officials are aiming to have manufacturers produce up to 165 million doses of this combo vaccine, which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says will be more than have ever been produced for a single flu season.

According to reports, the CDC is soon planing to launch a full ad campaign to promote the new shot, and is even encouraging people who already got the H1N1 vaccine last year to get it again this year.

Seasonal flu vaccines, however, typically do not even contain the strains that ends up infecting the population at large that year. These same vaccines also contain harmful adjuvants, preservatives, and other toxic chemicals that are implicated in causing autoimmune disorders, reproductive problems and even cancer.

The best ways to prevent yourself from getting the flu includes getting plenty of vitamin D, drinking lots of clean water, getting plenty of rest and loading up on powerful superfoods every day.

Sources for this story include:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704125604575449951130700056.html]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4768 0 http://www.NaturalNews.com/029674_fuel_cells_urine.html http://www.NaturalNews.com/029674_fuel_cells_urine.html#comments Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:00:00 +0000 NaturalNews.com
According to a Yahoo! India news report, the team's fuel cells utilize a compound in urine called urea, which is an organic chemical waste product that results when the body metabolizes protein. And unlike current hydrogen gas and methanol fuel cell technologies, both of which can be problematic to the environment, urea is non-toxic, rich in useful nitrogen and readily available for use.

Also known as carbamide, urea does not require expensive catalysts like platinum to operate, either. The team was able to develop a simple and relatively inexpensive method with which to convert urea into water, nitrogen, carbon dioxide and electricity -- all at the same time.

The "Carbamide Power System" prototype, as it is being called, has the potential to reduce waste water treatment costs as well because many municipal water systems already spend big bucks removing urea from waste water. So by integrating the technology into existing water systems for the purpose of extracting urea, the fuel cells are a win-win prospect because they have the potential to generate large amounts of electricity cheaply as well as reduce overall costs for utilities.

The project was made possible by a $203,000 grant from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, with the goal of one day utilizing urine fuel cells on remote islands and in deserts and submarines where energy can be difficult to generate. But the potential uses are limitless, if and when such technology is publicly unveiled.

Sources for this story include:

http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20100827/981/tsc-urine-powered-fuel-cells-to-offer-pe_1.html]]>
According to a Yahoo! India news report, the team's fuel cells utilize a compound in urine called urea, which is an organic chemical waste product that results when the body metabolizes protein. And unlike current hydrogen gas and methanol fuel cell technologies, both of which can be problematic to the environment, urea is non-toxic, rich in useful nitrogen and readily available for use.

Also known as carbamide, urea does not require expensive catalysts like platinum to operate, either. The team was able to develop a simple and relatively inexpensive method with which to convert urea into water, nitrogen, carbon dioxide and electricity -- all at the same time.

The "Carbamide Power System" prototype, as it is being called, has the potential to reduce waste water treatment costs as well because many municipal water systems already spend big bucks removing urea from waste water. So by integrating the technology into existing water systems for the purpose of extracting urea, the fuel cells are a win-win prospect because they have the potential to generate large amounts of electricity cheaply as well as reduce overall costs for utilities.

The project was made possible by a $203,000 grant from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, with the goal of one day utilizing urine fuel cells on remote islands and in deserts and submarines where energy can be difficult to generate. But the potential uses are limitless, if and when such technology is publicly unveiled.

Sources for this story include:

http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20100827/981/tsc-urine-powered-fuel-cells-to-offer-pe_1.html]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4767 0 http://www.NaturalNews.com/029675_atrazine_water_supply.html http://www.NaturalNews.com/029675_atrazine_water_supply.html#comments Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:00:00 +0000 NaturalNews.com
Atrazine is an herbicide widely sprayed on corn fields in the Midwest, and one of the most widely detected groundwater contaminants in the country. According to an analysis of state and federal records by the Chicago Tribune, atrazine has been detected in the drinking water of a million people in 60 Illinois communities over the past four years. Yet the EPA requires testing for the chemical only four times a year, meaning that short-term spikes of the toxin go undetected -- and unregulated.

Special agreements between the EPA and Syngenta, the top manufacturer of the atrazine used in the U.S., have led to limited weekly or biweekly testing for the chemical by 130 water utilities in 10 different states. In 2008, nearly half of these communities in the Midwest alone experienced atrazine levels in their water above the federally imposed limit of 3 ppb (parts per billion) at least once. In Flora, Illinois, levels spiked as high as 30 ppb at one point.

In nine Midwestern communities, atrazine levels averaged higher than 3 ppb for the full year. Yet unless levels higher than 3 ppb are detected during one of the EPA's four official yearly tests, the agency is helpless to take action. Likewise, contamination detected at other times need not, under the Safe Water Drinking Act, be reported to the public. This has led to a situation where citizens are not only unaware that their water is contaminated, they are never told that an inexpensive home filter could remove the toxin from their water.

Even the EPA's "safe" level of 3 ppb, however, may be far too high; studies suggest that atrazine is biologically active in levels as low as 0.1 ppb, mimicking the action of hormones in the body. A recent meta-analysis of 125 studies by researchers from the University of South Florida found that the chemical causes developmental and reproductive defects in amphibians and fish. Another study, conducted by University of California-Berkeley researchers and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that small amounts of atrazine lowered testosterone levels and fertility in male frogs. Many of the frogs were chemically castrated or even turned into females.

Prenatal exposure to low levels of atrazine has also been shown to predispose rats to cancer as adults. And according to a 2009 study by researchers from Indiana University, human children conceived between the months of April and July, when atrazine levels in water are highest, were more likely to suffer from nine different kinds of birth defects than children conceived in other months.

"Atrazine ... appears to have effects during critical stages of fetal development," said Suzanne Fenton of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, a former EPA researcher.

Atrazine has been banned in Europe for its contaminating effects on groundwater, and a handful of U.S. states prohibit spraying in certain contamination-prone areas. Yet the EPA's most recent ruling on the chemical, issued in 2006, endorses its use. The Bush-era ruling was based on a 2003 review heavily funded by Syngenta. Bush administration officials are known to have met with officials from the company at least 50 times before issuing their ruling, including at two industry-dominated panels.

The EPA's position has drawn the ire of states that have been stuck with regulating the atrazine problem on their own. In 2009, 44 water utilities in the states of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi and Ohio sued the federal government to reimburse them for the costs of atrazine cleanup.

Since the 2003 EPA review, a further 100 studies have been published showing health risks from atrazine exposure. The Obama administration is now conducting a review of the EPA's stance on the chemical.

Sources for this story include: http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-atrazine-water-20100417,0,2193737.story.]]>
Atrazine is an herbicide widely sprayed on corn fields in the Midwest, and one of the most widely detected groundwater contaminants in the country. According to an analysis of state and federal records by the Chicago Tribune, atrazine has been detected in the drinking water of a million people in 60 Illinois communities over the past four years. Yet the EPA requires testing for the chemical only four times a year, meaning that short-term spikes of the toxin go undetected -- and unregulated.

Special agreements between the EPA and Syngenta, the top manufacturer of the atrazine used in the U.S., have led to limited weekly or biweekly testing for the chemical by 130 water utilities in 10 different states. In 2008, nearly half of these communities in the Midwest alone experienced atrazine levels in their water above the federally imposed limit of 3 ppb (parts per billion) at least once. In Flora, Illinois, levels spiked as high as 30 ppb at one point.

In nine Midwestern communities, atrazine levels averaged higher than 3 ppb for the full year. Yet unless levels higher than 3 ppb are detected during one of the EPA's four official yearly tests, the agency is helpless to take action. Likewise, contamination detected at other times need not, under the Safe Water Drinking Act, be reported to the public. This has led to a situation where citizens are not only unaware that their water is contaminated, they are never told that an inexpensive home filter could remove the toxin from their water.

Even the EPA's "safe" level of 3 ppb, however, may be far too high; studies suggest that atrazine is biologically active in levels as low as 0.1 ppb, mimicking the action of hormones in the body. A recent meta-analysis of 125 studies by researchers from the University of South Florida found that the chemical causes developmental and reproductive defects in amphibians and fish. Another study, conducted by University of California-Berkeley researchers and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that small amounts of atrazine lowered testosterone levels and fertility in male frogs. Many of the frogs were chemically castrated or even turned into females.

Prenatal exposure to low levels of atrazine has also been shown to predispose rats to cancer as adults. And according to a 2009 study by researchers from Indiana University, human children conceived between the months of April and July, when atrazine levels in water are highest, were more likely to suffer from nine different kinds of birth defects than children conceived in other months.

"Atrazine ... appears to have effects during critical stages of fetal development," said Suzanne Fenton of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, a former EPA researcher.

Atrazine has been banned in Europe for its contaminating effects on groundwater, and a handful of U.S. states prohibit spraying in certain contamination-prone areas. Yet the EPA's most recent ruling on the chemical, issued in 2006, endorses its use. The Bush-era ruling was based on a 2003 review heavily funded by Syngenta. Bush administration officials are known to have met with officials from the company at least 50 times before issuing their ruling, including at two industry-dominated panels.

The EPA's position has drawn the ire of states that have been stuck with regulating the atrazine problem on their own. In 2009, 44 water utilities in the states of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi and Ohio sued the federal government to reimburse them for the costs of atrazine cleanup.

Since the 2003 EPA review, a further 100 studies have been published showing health risks from atrazine exposure. The Obama administration is now conducting a review of the EPA's stance on the chemical.

Sources for this story include: http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-atrazine-water-20100417,0,2193737.story.]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4766 0 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/09/07/does-insulin-resistance-cause-alzheimers-plaques.aspx http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/09/07/does-insulin-resistance-cause-alzheimers-plaques.aspx#comments Tue, 07 Sep 2010 05:00:00 +0000 Dr. Mercola Insulin resistant people with type 2 diabetes are more likely to develop plaques in their brains which are associated with Alzheimer's disease.

A study looked at 135 elderly participants who were monitored for signs of Alzheimer's disease for 10 to 15 years. 

After they died, researchers conducted autopsies on their brains and that those who had high blood sugar levels while they were alive also tended to have the plaques.

According to Reuters:

“Twenty-one participants, or 16 percent, developed Alzheimer's disease before they died and plaques were found in all of their brains. But the autopsies also found plaques in other participants who had abnormally high blood sugar levels.

Plaques were found in 72 percent of people with insulin resistance and 62 percent of those with no indication of insulin resistance, the researchers wrote.

"The point is that insulin resistance may possibly accelerate plaque pathology (development)," Sasaki wrote.”

]]> Insulin resistant people with type 2 diabetes are more likely to develop plaques in their brains which are associated with Alzheimer's disease.

A study looked at 135 elderly participants who were monitored for signs of Alzheimer's disease for 10 to 15 years. 

After they died, researchers conducted autopsies on their brains and that those who had high blood sugar levels while they were alive also tended to have the plaques.

According to Reuters:

“Twenty-one participants, or 16 percent, developed Alzheimer's disease before they died and plaques were found in all of their brains. But the autopsies also found plaques in other participants who had abnormally high blood sugar levels.

Plaques were found in 72 percent of people with insulin resistance and 62 percent of those with no indication of insulin resistance, the researchers wrote.

"The point is that insulin resistance may possibly accelerate plaque pathology (development)," Sasaki wrote.”

]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4770 0 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/09/07/indian-children-die-after-being-vaccinated.aspx http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/09/07/indian-children-die-after-being-vaccinated.aspx#comments Tue, 07 Sep 2010 05:00:00 +0000 Dr. Mercola Four children died in Indian villages during a routine immunization drive. So far, a five-member inspection team has failed to ascertain the cause behind the death of the otherwise healthy children.

The team went to the vaccine cold-chain room of the community health center, and even opened the refrigerators, probably to check to see whether or not they were working.

According to The Times of India:

“The team quizzed the cold-chain in charge C. P. Yadav and auxiliary nursing midwife (ANM) Usha Verma for about two hours ... There were reports that the team cancelled its scheduled departure to Delhi on Sunday night and instead decided to stay back for further investigation.”

]]> Four children died in Indian villages during a routine immunization drive. So far, a five-member inspection team has failed to ascertain the cause behind the death of the otherwise healthy children.

The team went to the vaccine cold-chain room of the community health center, and even opened the refrigerators, probably to check to see whether or not they were working.

According to The Times of India:

“The team quizzed the cold-chain in charge C. P. Yadav and auxiliary nursing midwife (ANM) Usha Verma for about two hours ... There were reports that the team cancelled its scheduled departure to Delhi on Sunday night and instead decided to stay back for further investigation.”

]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4769 0 http://www.NaturalNews.com/029670_L-arginine_infections.html http://www.NaturalNews.com/029670_L-arginine_infections.html#comments Mon, 06 Sep 2010 07:00:00 +0000 NaturalNews.com
Published in the journal Science Signalling, the discovery has massive implications in understanding the role of proper nutrition -- particularly essential and non-essential amino acids -- in maintaining good health and preventing disease.

A healthy body is full of macrophage white blood cells that seek out infections and destroy them. Prior research has established that L-arginine plays an important role in the function of macrophages, but the new study has expanded upon that to reveal that L-arginine also acts as a watchdog for invaders, signaling to the rest of the body to "rally up the troops", so to speak.

The team also discovered that, even in the absence of proper nutrition, L-arginine still helps the body to fight infections. So in third-world countries where malnutrition is widespread, L-arginine could have a significantly positive effect on overall health.

"This is a major work," explained Lamb in a press release about the report. "[I]t shows that one aspect of nutrition that is critical is the level of amino acids (people consume)."

L-arginine, in conjunction with many other amino acids, serves other important functions as well.

"Special amino acids of specific interest in regard to growth and development, metabolism, and protection from environmental chemicals as well as a variety of diseases...include arginine. Arginine plays an important role in wound healing, detoxification reactions, immune functions, and promoting the secretion of several hormones, including insulin and growth hormone," explain Michael Murray, N.D., and Joseph Pizzorno, N.D., in their book The Encyclopedia of Healing Foods.

Sources for this story include:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-08/uoaf-uoa083010.php]]>
Published in the journal Science Signalling, the discovery has massive implications in understanding the role of proper nutrition -- particularly essential and non-essential amino acids -- in maintaining good health and preventing disease.

A healthy body is full of macrophage white blood cells that seek out infections and destroy them. Prior research has established that L-arginine plays an important role in the function of macrophages, but the new study has expanded upon that to reveal that L-arginine also acts as a watchdog for invaders, signaling to the rest of the body to "rally up the troops", so to speak.

The team also discovered that, even in the absence of proper nutrition, L-arginine still helps the body to fight infections. So in third-world countries where malnutrition is widespread, L-arginine could have a significantly positive effect on overall health.

"This is a major work," explained Lamb in a press release about the report. "[I]t shows that one aspect of nutrition that is critical is the level of amino acids (people consume)."

L-arginine, in conjunction with many other amino acids, serves other important functions as well.

"Special amino acids of specific interest in regard to growth and development, metabolism, and protection from environmental chemicals as well as a variety of diseases...include arginine. Arginine plays an important role in wound healing, detoxification reactions, immune functions, and promoting the secretion of several hormones, including insulin and growth hormone," explain Michael Murray, N.D., and Joseph Pizzorno, N.D., in their book The Encyclopedia of Healing Foods.

Sources for this story include:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-08/uoaf-uoa083010.php]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4713 0 http://www.NaturalNews.com/029671_hip_replacement_tumors.html http://www.NaturalNews.com/029671_hip_replacement_tumors.html#comments Mon, 06 Sep 2010 07:00:00 +0000 NaturalNews.com
The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) recently announced that it would test all 40,000 patients who had received metal hip implants for high levels of metal in their blood. This would indicate that the implants are wearing down and releasing debris into the body, with potentially dangerous consequences.

"Any patients who are affected by these recommendations will be contacted by their surgeon," the MHRA said, and will have their implants replaced.

The procedures in question are full metal-on-metal hip implants and hip resurfacing, which involves lining the hip socket and the top of the thigh bone with metal. In both procedures, friction can cause bits of metal to grind loose. This debris can cause soft tissue necrosis (death), which can develop into a small, non-cancerous tumor known as a pseudotumor.

Because they last longer than other kinds of implants, metal hip replacements are popular among younger patients.

The government warning came after a study conducted by researchers from the Nuffield Orthopedic Center in Oxford found that 4 percent of patients who had received a hip resurfacing operation needed a new operation due to pseudotumors. Women under the age of 40 were particularly at risk, with 13 percent requiring a new operation.

Concerns over metal implants had emerged before, with a 2008 MHRA report noting that there "was evidence of genetic damage in patients with certain metal hip implants." In addition, implant manufacturer DePuy recently issued a warning that its products had a "higher than expected" rate of failure and should not be used "in females of childbearing age."

DePuy has since announced that it will cease manufacturing the products in question, but insists it has no concerns over its products' safety.

"Data about safety were not the basis for this decision," it said.

Sources for this story include: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7603360/Metal-hip-replacements-could-cause-tumours-doctors-warn.html; http://www.onmedica.com/NewsArticle.aspx?id=73dbc176-a7c4-475a-acfe-2e5b8e543077; http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article7100905.ece.]]>
The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) recently announced that it would test all 40,000 patients who had received metal hip implants for high levels of metal in their blood. This would indicate that the implants are wearing down and releasing debris into the body, with potentially dangerous consequences.

"Any patients who are affected by these recommendations will be contacted by their surgeon," the MHRA said, and will have their implants replaced.

The procedures in question are full metal-on-metal hip implants and hip resurfacing, which involves lining the hip socket and the top of the thigh bone with metal. In both procedures, friction can cause bits of metal to grind loose. This debris can cause soft tissue necrosis (death), which can develop into a small, non-cancerous tumor known as a pseudotumor.

Because they last longer than other kinds of implants, metal hip replacements are popular among younger patients.

The government warning came after a study conducted by researchers from the Nuffield Orthopedic Center in Oxford found that 4 percent of patients who had received a hip resurfacing operation needed a new operation due to pseudotumors. Women under the age of 40 were particularly at risk, with 13 percent requiring a new operation.

Concerns over metal implants had emerged before, with a 2008 MHRA report noting that there "was evidence of genetic damage in patients with certain metal hip implants." In addition, implant manufacturer DePuy recently issued a warning that its products had a "higher than expected" rate of failure and should not be used "in females of childbearing age."

DePuy has since announced that it will cease manufacturing the products in question, but insists it has no concerns over its products' safety.

"Data about safety were not the basis for this decision," it said.

Sources for this story include: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7603360/Metal-hip-replacements-could-cause-tumours-doctors-warn.html; http://www.onmedica.com/NewsArticle.aspx?id=73dbc176-a7c4-475a-acfe-2e5b8e543077; http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article7100905.ece.]]> http://youle.info/wellness-blog/?feed=rss2&p=4712 0