To Your Health

Protect Consumers: Rename Laptops

habwwe — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 07:58:13 +0000

Why Laptops Should Be Renamed To Protect Consumers

Februray 23, 2012

Recent research published in the journal Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health concluded that the “Laptop is paradoxically an improper site for the use of a LTC [laptop computer], which consequently should be renamed to not induce customers towards an improper use.” [emphasis added]

What lead these reseachers to reach such a seemingly drastic conclusion?

In the study referenced above and titled “Exposure to electromagnetic fields from laptop use of “laptop” computers,” researchers found that electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produced by laptop computers likely induce currents within the adult body, and the bodies of developing fetuses exposed by proxy, to unsafe levels. They found that in the laptop computers analyzed EMF values were “considerably higher than the values recommended by 2 recent guidelines for computer monitors magnetic field emissions…”

Furthermore:

When close to the body, the laptop induces currents that are within 34.2% to 49.8% ICNIRP recommendations, but not negligible, to the adult’s body and to the fetus (in pregnant women). On the contrary, the power supply induces strong intracorporal electric current densities in the fetus and in the adult subject, which are respectively 182-263% and 71-483% higher than ICNIRP 98 basic restriction recommended to prevent adverse health effects.

—Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health, 2012 Jan; 67(1): 31-6

The fact that laptop computers may have adverse health effects was confirmed late last year (Nov. 2011) in the journal Fertility and Sterility, which we reported on in this article. In summary, researchers discovered that laptops connected to the internet through Wi-Fi decrease human sperm motility and increase sperm DNA fragmentation. This was the first human clinical study of its kind to establish that laptop-associated radiation can cause substantial harm to male fertility.

Laptop computers are far more convenient than desktops and difficult to avoid, especially if your livelihood is in any way connected to computer work and the internet. An effort should be made to use them cautiously and to avoid putting them directly on your lap. When circumstances make such exposures unavoidable it is possible that natural substances like turmeric, and propolis, along with other radioprotective substances, can reduce the adverse effects associated with exposure to harmful electromagnetic fields.

Link:

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/why-laptops-should-be-renamed-protect-consumers?utm_source=www.GreenMedInfo.com&utm_campaign=9b05003caa-Greenmedinfo&utm_medium=email

Heart Attacks in Women Under 55 Harder to Detect, Deadlier

habwwe — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 22:02:53 +0000

Heart Attacks in Women Under 55 Harder to Detect, Deadlier [Video]

Although chest pain is still the number one sign of a heart attack, doctors are finding that women, and especially younger women, experience a number of other symptoms during a heart attack. Those symptoms include fatigue, nausea, shortness of breath and pain or numbness in the jaw, arms or back.

A new study of more than 1 million heart attack patients showed that women under 55 are less likely to seek medical attention for those atypical symptoms and more likely to die in a hospital from a heart attack than men of the same age.

LINK: http://yourblackworld.net/2012/02/black-news/heart-attacks-women-55-harder-detect-deadlier-video/

NY Court Affirms Towns’ Powers to Ban Fracking

habwwe — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:25:18 +0000

New York Court Affirms Towns’ Powers to Ban Fracking

Februray 23, 2012 – by Lena Groeger

ProPublica, Feb. 22, 2012, 5:51 p.m.

Opponents and supporters of fracking walk into the last of four public hearings on proposed gas drilling regulations in New York state on Nov. 30, 2011. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

In a decision that could set a national precedent for how local governments can regulate gas drilling, a New York state court yesterday ruled for the first time that towns have the right to ban drilling despite a state regulation asserting they cannot.

At issue was a zoning law in Dryden, a township adjacent to Ithaca and the Cornell University campus, where drilling companies have leased some 22,000 acres for drilling. In August, Dryden’s town board passed a zoning law that prohibits gas drilling within town limits. The next month, Denver-based Anschutz Exploration Corp. sued the town, saying the ban was illegal because state law trumped the municipal rules.

As Anschutz noted, New York law promotes the development of oil and gas resources in the state. State Supreme Court Justice Phillip Rumsey addressed this point in his decision, writing: “Nowhere in legislative history provided to the court is there any suggestion that the Legislature intended — as argued by Anschutz — to encourage the maximum ultimate recovery of oil and gas regardless of other considerations, or to preempt local zoning authority.”

The Dryden case is merely the latest in a string of similar conflicts arising from Colorado to Pennsylvania that pit local communities against state oil and gas laws. It is common for local governments to zone industrial or commercial land, or to institute ordinances for noise or traffic. When it comes to the development of natural resources like oil and gas, the industry contends that local government shouldn’t make those decisions.

In New York, the controversy over state regulation of fracking has been brewing for years. In 2008, New York effectively put drilling on hold while it launched an environmental analysis of fracking, a process that uses a mix of highly pressurized water, sand and other chemicals to crack the earth deep underground. This is the first ruling on an industry effort to use the mineral extraction law to get around local bans.

In addition to the environmental and health concerns over fracking, which we’ve covered in depth, a fundamental issue has been the rights of localities against state or federal laws. According to Eric Goldstein, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council in New York, the right of local governments to determine their own land use has been guaranteed by the Constitution for over a century.

“The argument is simple,” said Goldstein. “New York state laws shouldn’t override the authority of local governments to protect their constituents.”

In New York, two very similarly worded laws govern the regulation of mining and oil and gas drilling. The oil and gas provision gives the state the power to “regulate the development, production and utilization of natural resources of oil and gas.” The town of Dryden argued that it was not trying to regulate fracking but merely trying to protect its citizens and property. It pointed out that courts have allowed towns to ban mining, and said Dryden should be allowed to do the same for fracking. The justice seemed to agree, concluding that the state’s oil and gas laws don’t prohibit localities from barring drilling.

Anschutz’s lawyer, Thomas West, said he was not sure whether the company would appeal the decision. Even if it does so, said Joseph Heath, an environmental attorney in New York, Tuesday’s win could help set a precedent for other communities. Despite the threat of similar lawsuits from a major corporation, local fracking bans and moratoriums have continued to grow in the last few years.

“People are now concentrating on local governments because that’s the best form of protection against fracking,” said Heath.

Such protection is unlikely to come from the states, as New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation has already deferred to the courts. When ProPublica interviewed the commissioner last year, we asked him specifically about the potential for conflict between local municipalities and states. He said it was likely “that the courts will need to decide these issues in a lawsuit between the town and the drilling company, not the state.” Now, it looks as if at least one court has decided.

“[The Dryden case] is an important indicator of how those battles are likely to play out,” said the NRDC’s Goldstein, “although it’s not the final word.”

Article Link:

http://www.propublica.org/article/new-york-court-affirms-towns-powers-to-ban-fracking

Pushing Back Against Dangerous Genetically Engineered Foods?

habwwe — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 07:00:49 +0000

Alliance for Natural Health – USA – http://www.anh-usa.org -

Can We Succeed in Pushing Back Against Dangerous Genetically Engineered Foods?

Posted By ANH-USA On February 14, 2012 @ 2:00 pm In International

^[1]Yes! There are more and more anti-GMO campaigns across the country—with your help this effort can succeed.

Genetically engineered food is the biggest uncontrolled experiment ever conducted on humans. Nearly all of our processed food contains genetically engineered ingredients. A handful of biotechnology companies dominate the US market and claim there is no safety risk to consumers, animals, or the environment. The evidence suggests quite the opposite. Remember the animal studies that showed sterility by the third generation ^[2]?

We’ve partnered with numerous campaigns and combined efforts to stop the GE food take over of our food supply. All of us need to keep taking action to support these campaigns. The federal government, no matter which party is in power, is unwilling or unable to stand up to the GE industry, so citizens must do it instead. The only reason major food manufacturers stopped contaminating the European food supply with GE food sources was because European citizens voiced their objection to GMO in massive numbers. (Learn more)

Chronic Diseases in Developing Countries

habwwe — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 06:36:44 +0000

The Economist — Growing Pains

Poor countries are developing the diseases of the rich, with lethal consequences

Sep 24th 2011 | KAMPALA AND NEW YORK | from the print edition

THE Uganda Cancer Institute is on a hilltop with a fine view of the verdant capital, Kampala. But most of its patients are too ill to stand. They have spent their life’s savings for a chance of a cure, but most die within weeks of being admitted. “They come too late,” says Jackson Orem, the clinic’s director.

Of Ugandans who die of cancer, 96% never see a medical practitioner. The country’s health-care system was designed to treat infectious diseases: the institute’s neighbour is a big tuberculosis unit. Non-communicable diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and heart and respiratory ailments have not been priorities. Dr Orem’s institute has the only cancer unit for the country’s 34m people. Kidney failure (a result of diabetes) is a death warrant. Uganda has only seven dialysis machines. The cheapest transplant (in India) costs $40,000.

Time was when people in poor countries were too hungry and hardworking to be obese, could not afford cigarettes and mostly died before the ailments of ripe middle age kicked in. Non-communicable diseases were a rich-world problem. Not any more. Affluence and urbanisation mean new kinds of unhealthy lifestyles. Developing countries already bear more than 80% of the burden of chronic illnesses. Their share will grow—at a time when older diseases are still ravaging the poor. In India over two-fifths of children under five are malnourished, yet obesity is mushrooming. The leader of the main opposition party, Nitin Gadkari, is the latest public figure to be fitted with a gastric band.

Old and new diseases compound each other. Diabetics are three times as likely to contract tuberculosis. Burkitt’s lymphoma, a cancer common in equatorial Africa, is linked to malaria. HIV patients on antiretroviral treatment are at a higher risk of developing diabetes and cancer. Two-thirds of Mr Orem’s cancer patients in Uganda also have HIV. “None of the HIV resources went to cancer—a very big mistake,” he says. Julio Frenk, dean of the Harvard School of Public Health, highlights the contradiction between spending thousands of dollars on each patient with AIDS but not offering “pennies” for those with diabetes. (Read Full Article)

Mercury in our air?? No thank you!!

habwwe — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 19:55:21 +0000

MomsRising.org | Mercury in our air?? No thank you!!.

Mercury in our air?? No thank you!!

This might be a face kids put on to make their friends laugh, but it’s never a face a parent wants to see. Yet, there is an asthma epidemic in this country, and the more than seven million children suffering from this disease indeed find it hard to breath.

Tell your Senators that our kids need clean air – it’s time to stop power plants from spewing mercury and other toxic emissions!

TAKE ACTION: http://action.momsrising.org/letter/Mercury_Rollback_2-22-20L/?akid=3132.1921252.8kkzol&rd=1&t=3

CSPI: Tell Congress: Pass the “Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act”

habwwe — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 04:23:42 +0000

Center for Science in the Public Interest:

Tell Congress: Keep antibiotics working by passing the “Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act”

The rise of “superbugs,” germs that are immune to the drugs we rely on to fight off infections, is a huge public health concern. Yet, almost 80 percent of all antibiotics sold in the U.S. end up in animal agriculture, where most are fed to healthy animals to promote faster growth and keep the animals healthy in overcrowded feedlots. Many of the antibiotics used in animal agriculture are also important in human medicine and decades of research has shown that daily dosing of healthy food animals with antibiotics is a major reason for the rise in drug-resistant bacteria.

We need your help to pass legislation that could put a stop to overuse of drugs that are important to human health! Please send a message to your Representative and Senators asking them to support the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act.

Recipients

Your Senators
Your Representative

Toxic Chemical Being Sold as a Health-Conscious Sweetener

habwwe — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:36:07 +0000

Toxic Chemical Being Sold as a Health-Conscious Sweetener

Posted By ANH-USA On February 21, 2012 @ 5:00 pm In Healthcare Reform,

^[1]Splenda Essentials pretend to be health-supporting, when in fact they seem to have more in common with pesticides than with sugar.

Sucralose, sold under the brand name Splenda, is simply chlorinated sugar; in chemical terms, it is a chlorocarbon. The idea behind this is that the body would no longer recognize it as sugar. But, as Johns Hopkins-trained physician and biochemist James Bowen, MD ^[2], points out, chlorine is “nature’s Doberman attack dog—a highly excitable, ferocious atomic element employed as a biocide in bleach, disinfectants, insecticide, WWI poison gas and hydrochloric acid.” Common chlorocarbons include chlordane and DDT, a product so harmful that it is now banned for agricultural use the world over.

Now Splenda is selling a product called Splenda Essentials ^[3]. Different formulations contain B vitamins, antioxidants (vitamins C and E), or fiber. The marketing and advertising appear to be targeting health-conscious people who are interested in vitamins and nutrition—despite the fact that Splenda is highly toxic and has no place in a healthy diet.

Splenda’s advertising says the addition of B1, B5, and B6 “help support a healthy metabolism.” The antioxidant product “contains vitamin C and E, like those found in fruits and vegetables,” while the fiber product is touted as containing “one gram of healthy fiber.” It is worth noting that the regular Splenda product already contains fiber—the powdery dextrose and/or maltodextrin that forms the carrier for the sweetener—but only between 0.5 and 1.0 grams of it. For the fiber product, they bumped it up an even 1.0 grams. Whoopee.

For the vitamins, Splenda has added 20% of the recommended daily allowance; for the fiber, they’ve added 0.03% of the RDA. But let’s compare those amounts with the recommendations from the late scientist, researcher, and physician Dr. Emanuel Cheraskin of the International Academy of Science: (READ FULL ARTICLE)

habwwe — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 01:19:37 +0000

TODAY Health – Gluten-free diet may be a waste of money for some, new research suggests

Februray 21, 2012

Gluten-free products can be considerably more expensive than their gluten counterparts — and they’re not lower in calories.

By Rita Rubin

Gluten-free products are everywhere, but many people who buy them are probably wasting their money, according to Italian research released Monday.

The worldwide market for gluten-free products is nearly $2.5 billion, spurred in part by the Internet, alternative medicine and questionable scientists with ties to manufacturers, coauthor Dr. Roberto Corazza of the University of Pavia told msnbc.com in an email.

Gluten is a component of the protein mixture in wheat, rye and barley flour. For people with the autoimmune condition celiac disease, foods that contain gluten trigger the immune system to attack the lining of the small intestine. The only treatment is a lifelong, gluten-free diet. Untreated, celiac disease raises the risk of life-threatening conditions such as digestive tract cancers. About 1 in 133 Americans has celiac disease, according to the Celiac Disease Foundation.

Far more people think they have what has come to be called “nonceliac gluten sensitivity,” Corazza says. Sufferers, in whom celiac disease has been ruled out, complain of a variety of symptoms after consuming gluten, including bloating, abdominal discomfort, flatulence and headache. The problem, Corazza and Dr. Antonio Di Sabatino write in an opinion piece in the Annals of Internal Medicine, is that no one is quite sure what gluten sensitivity is.

“Considerable debate about nonceliac gluten sensitivity has recently surfaced on the Internet, with a sharp increase in forums, patients or patient groups, manufacturers, and physicians advocating a gluten-free diet,” the two write. “Claims seem to increase daily, with no adequate scientific support to back them up.”

Gluten-free diets have become “trendy, fashionable,” says Dr. Alessio Fasano, director of the University of Maryland’s Center for Celiac Research in Baltimore, who coauthored an article about gluten-related disorders Feb. 14 in BioMed Central. “I would say the occasional consumers are the ones who have no reason to be on a gluten-free diet.”

Gluten-free products can be several times more expensive than their gluten-containing counterparts. Part of the gluten-free fad comes from the misperception that the foods are healthier or more diet-friendly. The main health concern is that people cut out all gluten as a way to self-diagnose a sensitivity or celiac disease. But, Corazza notes, it’s impossible to diagnose celiac disease in someone who’s gone gluten-free before being evaluated.

When he sees patients who complain of symptoms after eating bread or pasta, Fasano says, he’ll order a blood test to check for biomarkers of celiac disease and a skin test for the far less common wheat allergy. If necessary, he’ll then perform an endoscopy to look for damage in their digestive tract characteristic of celiac disease.

He was skeptical when he first started hearing about nonceliac gluten sensitivity a few years ago, Fasano says, but he since has come to realize that some sufferers are “severely impaired.” But because doctors aren’t exactly sure what the condition is, it’s difficult to diagnose.

The best-known diagnostic method, Fasano and Corazza say, is a double-blind oral “challenge.” Patients are given drinks with and without gluten and then asked how they feel. Neither the patient nor the doctor knows which is which at the time of the testing. Such tests are expensive and time-consuming, though, Corazza says.

“The bottom line for gluten sensitivity,” Fasano says, “is there are very little facts and a lot of fantasy.”

TODAY contributor and nutritionist Joy Bauer clears up common confusion regarding gluten-free diets, defining Celiac disease and warning against self-diagnosing. She suggests keeping gluten in your diet unless you have a health aversion.

Article Link: http://todayhealth.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/21/10437409-gluten-free-diet-may-be-a-waste-of-money-for-some-new-research-suggests

Honey For Wound Care?

habwwe — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 05:30:54 +0000

The Sweet Golden Treat That Can Help Wipe Out Deadly MRSA

Posted By Dr. Mercola | February 20 2012

Story at-a-glance

Certain types of honey, such as Manuka, have been shown to be more effective than antibiotics in the treatment of serious, hard-to-heal skin infections
The only types of honey you should ever attempt to use for wound care are Manuka honey or raw (unprocessed) honey. Conventional “Grade A” type honey found in most grocery stores may actually worsen infection and should never be applied to wounds
Clinical trials have found Manuka honey can effectively eradicate more than 250 clinical strains of bacteria, including resistant varieties such as MRSA

By Dr. Mercola

Honey was a conventional therapy in fighting infection up until the early 20th century, at which time its use slowly vanished with the advent of penicillin.

Now the use of honey in wound care is regaining popularity again, as researchers are determining exactly how honey can help fight serious skin infections.

According to their findings, certain types of honey might be more effective than antibiotics!

After any skin injury, bacteria that live on your skin can infect and penetrate the wound site.

One particularly common type of strep (Streptococcus pyogenes) can result in wounds that refuse to heal.

But honey, especially the kind made by bees foraging on manuka flowers, was found to destroy these bacteria. (Read Full Article)