Hidden Health Science

Archive for the ‘Alternative Medical Treatment’ Category

by Aaron Turpen, FindDiscountInsurance

In brief: A growing trend is happening where uninsured and under-insured people in America turn to daily deals sites to get coupons for health care.

The full story

Groupon, one of the most popular of the daily deals sites, occasionally has coupons from medical clinics and dentists and says that they are often some of the most popular, selling out fast.

The deals usually offer 50% off to consumers who purchase it through the site and present the coupon to the provider.

Another similar site, LivingSocial, has seen trends that are much the same. A recent posting for a dentist in New York there received overwhelming response and sold out within hours.

The sites often feature everything from Botox injections to spa treatements to Lasik eye surgery, dental cleanings and exams, and even health checkups including one ad for a Department of Transportation health check for professional drivers.

It’s a growing trend that is helping some Americans who would otherwise not be able to afford coverage to get basic health care.

from BreastCancer.co

Breast cancer survival rates are higher now than they’ve ever been in the past, but health challenges including high rates of depression are still a problem. Researchers at the University of Missouri have been testing how meditation techniques can help with this.

The researchers in the Sinclair School of Nursing have found that breast cancer survivors’ health improves after they learn Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR), a type of mindfulness training that incorporates meditation, yoga, and physical awareness.

“MBSR is another tool to enhance the lives of breast cancer survivors,” SSN doctoral student Jane Armer says. “Patients often are given a variety of options to reduce stress, but they should choose what works for them according to their lifestyles and belief systems.”

The MBSR program includes eight to ten weeks of group sessions where the participants learn the MBSR skills. The study found that survivors who utilized MBSR had improved moods, more mindfulness, and less depression overall. It can be used for anyone in post-diagnosis, during or after surgery or treatment.

Acupuncture significantly reduces levels of a protein in rats linked to chronic stress, researchers at Georgetown University Medical Center (GUMC) have found. They say their animal study may help explain the sense of wellbeing that many people receive from this ancient Chinese therapy.

Published online in December in Experimental Biology and Medicine, the researchers say that if their findings are replicated in human studies, acupuncture would offer a proven therapy for stress, which is often difficult to treat.

“It has long been thought that acupuncture can reduce stress, but this is the first study to show molecular proof of this benefit,” says the study’s lead author, Ladan Eshkevari, Ph.D., an assistant professor at Georgetown’s School of Nursing & Health Studies, a part of GUMC.

Eshkevari, who is also a nurse anesthetist as well as a certified acupuncturist, says she conducted the study because many of the patients she treats with acupuncture in the pain clinic reported a “better overall sense of wellbeing — and they often remarked that they felt less stress.”

While traditional Chinese acupuncture has been thought to relieve stress —in fact, the World Health Organization states that acupuncture is useful as adjunct therapy in more than 50 disorders, including chronic stress — Eshkevari says that no one has biological proof that it does so.

So she designed a study to test the effect of acupuncture on blood levels of neuropeptide Y (NPY), a peptide that is secreted by the sympathetic nervous system in rodents and humans. This system is involved in the “flight or fight” response to acute stress, resulting in constriction of blood flow to all parts of the body except to the heart, lungs, and brain (the organs most needed to react to danger). Chronic stress, however, can cause elevated blood pressure and cardiac disease.

Eshkevari used rats in this study because these animals are often used to research the biological determinants of stress. They mount a stress response when exposed to winter-like cold temperatures for an hour a day.

Eshkevari allowed the rats to become familiar with her, and encouraged them to rest by crawling into a small sock that exposed their legs. She very gently conditioned them to become comfortable with the kind of stimulation used in electroacupuncture — an acupuncture needle that delivers a painless small electrical charge. This form of acupuncture is a little more intense than manual acupuncture and is often used for pain management, she says, adding “I used electroacupuncture because I could make sure that every rat was getting the same treatment dose.”

She then selected a single acupuncture spot to test: Zuslanli (ST 36 on the stomach meridian), which is said to help relieve a variety of conditions including stress. As with the rats, that acupuncture point for humans is on the leg below the knee.

The study utilized four groups of rats for a 14-day experiment: a control group that was not stressed and received no acupuncture; a group that was stressed for an hour a day and did not receive acupuncture; a group that was stressed and received “sham” acupuncture near the tail; and the experimental group that were stressed and received acupuncture to the Zuslanli spot on the leg.

She found NPY levels in the experimental group came down almost to the level of the control group, while the rats that were stressed and not treated with Zuslanli acupuncture had high levels of the protein.

In a second experiment, Eshkevari stopped acupuncture in the experimental group but continued to stress the rats for an additional four days, and found NPY levels remained low. “We were surprised to find what looks to be a protective effect against stress,” she says.

Eshkevari is continuing to study the effect of acupuncture with her rat models by testing another critical stress pathway. Preliminary results look promising, she says.

from NCCAM

Relaxation Training

Scientific Evidence

• One review article noted that relaxation training significantly reduced headache activity compared to other forms of therapy.

Side Effects and Cautions

• Relaxation techniques are generally considered safe for healthy people.
• There have been rare reports that certain relaxation techniques might cause or worsen symptoms in people with epilepsy or certain mental illnesses, or with a history of abuse or trauma. People with heart disease should talk to their doctor before doing progressive muscle relaxation.

Biofeedback

Scientific Evidence

• A review article reported that adding biofeedback to a combination of an antidepressant and high blood pressure medication was more effective in treating tension-type headaches than medication alone.
• Results from one study indicated that biofeedback provided no additional benefit over relaxation therapy in reducing headache frequency and severity.

Side Effects and Cautions

• Biofeedback is generally thought to be safe; however, it may not be appropriate for certain people.

Acupuncture

Scientific Evidence

• In a review of two large trials in people with tension-type headaches, researchers found that adding acupuncture to the use of pain relievers was more effective than using pain relievers alone.
• A review that analyzed results from two large and three small trials comparing true acupuncture with sham acupuncture (in which needles were either inserted at incorrect points or did not penetrate the skin) demonstrated a slightly better effect for true acupuncture in treating tension-type headaches.
• Results of another review article determined that adding acupuncture to acute treatment or routine care may be beneficial in reducing migraine frequency and intensity.

Side Effects and Cautions

• Acupuncture is considered safe when performed by a qualified and competent practitioner using sterile needles.
• Few complications have been reported.
• Serious adverse events related to acupuncture are rare, but include infections and punctured organs.

Tai Chi

Scientific Evidence

• Results from a small clinical trial suggested that a 15-week program of tai chi was effective in reducing the impact of tension-type headaches when compared to a wait-list control group.

Side Effects and Cautions

• Tai chi is a relatively safe practice; however, some health care providers may advise their patients to modify or avoid certain tai chi postures due to acute back pain, knee problems, bone fractures, sprains, and osteoporosis.

Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy

Scientific Evidence

• It has been suggested that cognitive-behavioral therapy may offer additional relief when combined with medication used for preventing migraines.

Massage

Scientific Evidence

• Only a few studies have rigorously examined the role of massage as a headache treatment.
• A 2008 pilot study involving 16 participants suggested that massage may be beneficial in reducing the frequency of tension type headaches as well as the intensity and duration of pain.
• In another small study, researchers observed that a specific type of massage called craniosacral therapy, which involves light touch and manipulation of the skull and spine to release restrictions in tissues, was more effective than no treatment in relieving pain from a tension-type headache but suggested that larger studies are needed to determine the efficacy of massage as a headache treatment.
• Researchers are also investigating whether massage therapy may help prevent migraines. In a 2006 study, researchers randomly assigned 24 people with migraines to receive six 45-minute massages that focused on the muscles of the back, shoulders, head, and neck while 24 people without migraines acted as a control group. Although there was no change in the average intensity of migraines experienced, the researchers observed a significant reduction in migraine frequency among those who received massages.

Side Effects and Cautions

• Massage therapy appears to have few serious risks—if it is performed by a properly trained therapist and if appropriate cautions are followed. The number of serious injuries reported is very small.
• Side effects of massage therapy may include temporary pain or discomfort, bruising, swelling, and a sensitivity or allergy to massage oils.
• Cautions about massage therapy include the following:
  • Vigorous massage should be avoided by people with bleeding disorders or low blood platelet counts, and by people taking blood-thinning medications such as warfarin.
  • Massage should not be done in any area of the body with blood clots, fractures, open or healing wounds, skin infections, or weakened bones (such as from osteoporosis or cancer), or where there has been a recent surgery.
  • Although massage therapy appears to be generally safe for cancer patients, they should consult their oncologist before having a massage that involves deep or intense pressure. Any direct pressure over a tumor usually is discouraged. Cancer patients should discuss any concerns about massage therapy with their oncologist.
  • Pregnant women should consult their health care provider before using massage therapy.

Spinal Manipulation

Scientific Evidence

• Literature reviews suggest that spinal manipulation (a technique often practiced by chiropractors) may offer some benefit for tension-type headaches and that it also may prevent migraines as well as the medication amitriptyline.

Side Effects and Cautions

• Except for high-speed neck manipulation, which is associated with the very rare but serious risk of arterial tearing or stroke, spinal manipulation is not likely to be harmful.
• Side effects from spinal manipulation can include temporary headaches, tiredness, or discomfort in the parts of the body that were treated.

Riboflavin, Coenzyme Q10, and Magnesium

Scientific Evidence

• Some research suggests that the supplements riboflavin and coenzyme Q10 may be helpful headache treatments.
• Studies using magnesium to prevent migraines were inconclusive.

Side Effects and Cautions

• Riboflavin and coenzyme Q10 are generally well tolerated, but magnesium supplements may cause diarrhea.
• Riboflavin supplements are not recommended for pregnant women.

Feverfew and Butterbur

Scientific Evidence

• The herbs feverfew (Tanacetum parthenium) and butterbur (Petasites hybridus) have been used historically for headache relief.
• Study results have indicated that feverfew and butterbur may help reduce migraine frequency.

Side Effects and Cautions

• In clinical trials, use of feverfew was associated with mild side effects such as open sores in the mouth and upset stomach.
• Butterbur is generally well tolerated but may cause mild gastrointestinal upset.
• Some butterbur products contain potentially harmful chemicals called pyrrolizidine alkaloids (PAs). If seeking a butterbur product, look for one labeled or certified as PA-free.
• Feverfew and butterbur are not recommended for pregnant women.

by Marla Manhart

Many women are choosing to self-treat their own breast cancer, according to a survey conducted by TMD Limited, a medical tourism company.  When faced with the possibility of losing a breast or being side-lined by chemotherapy, some women are going the natural route and treating themselves.

The internet offers hundreds of products and websites that tout cures and advice on self-treatment.  Teas, castor oil packs, vitamins, salves that pull tumors out of the body, Brazilian healers and wheat grass enemas are favorites when it comes to self treatment.  And it seems, according to the cancer patients surveyed, that these therapies appear to work in the beginning.  Patients feel more energy, and think their tumors are shrinking.  They could be experiencing a placebo effect, or in some cases may actually see their tumors temporarily reduce in size.  Eventually, these patients end up getting medical treatment, some after years of treating themselves.

According to the American Cancer Society, 230,480 women in the US will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year, and 39,520 women will die from breast cancer in 2011.  With so many women self-diagnosing and choosing their own treatments, one wonders what the real numbers would be if women who are self-treating were included.

Sharon Massey first discovered her breast lump when she was 32.  ”I just knew it was cancer.  But I did not want to lose my breast.  My mom died of breast cancer and I was not going to do the conventional treatments she did,” Massey said.  ”I went to a nutritionist, and took hundreds of supplements.  I changed my diet to all raw foods, exercised and refused to think about cancer.  I became a health nut, and no one knew about my lump.”

Massey self treated for 11 years.  Eventually, the mass grew so large it broke through her skin, bleeding and causing pain.  Finally, she saw an oncologist, and had a radical mastectomy, chemotherapy and radiation.  ”I shouldn’t have waited,” she said.  ”Maybe if I had been treated earlier, I could have saved my breast.  Fear kept me from seeing a doctor all those years.”

Cheryl Watts was 49 when she found a mass in her right breast.  She was newly married to her second husband, and starting a new career as a real estate agent.  ”I had so much going on, I just didn’t have time for cancer,” Watts explained.  ”I ran 25 miles a week, had a busy social life and was so happy in my new marriage.  The thought of a mastectomy, or of losing my hair to chemo just made me feel ill.  So I kept it to myself, and just did everything I could to stay healthy.  When my husband eventually felt the mass, he insisted I get medical help.  I compromised, and went to an alternative clinic in Mexico.  And I have been in remission now for 6 years, and I still have my breast.”

TMD’s study included hundreds of women who sought help from clinics south of the border.  Tumor size when patients finally sought help ranged from walnut to grapefruit size, and many had broken through the skin and were growing around the chest and armpit.  For these women, the average length of time between finding a lump and getting treatment was 5.3 years.  All cited fear of mastectomy and the experience of watching a loved one die after undergoing radiation and chemotherapy as the main reason they avoided conventional treatment.  Lack of insurance was also a big factor.

According to TMD’s survey, more and more women are taking charge of their own health and making their own treatment decisions.  This may be a good thing – but even alternative doctors caution patients to seek some kind of medical treatment early – when the cancer can be treated successfully.

One physician who has seen this shift treats many patients that have not had any conventional treatment.  Dr. Antonio Jimenezof Hope4Cancer Institute used to mainly treat patients who had been through chemo and radiation, and had been told to get their affairs in order.  ”Today we are seeing many breast cancer patients that self-treated for years.  They generally take good care of themselves, watch their diet and are careful not to compromise their immune system.  These patients tend to fare better than those who have undergone extensive surgeries and chemotherapy.  Unfortunately, cancer treatment is not a do-it-yourself project.”

Raised in New Jersey, Jimenez has practiced in Baja, Mexico for over 20 years, first as medical director of a large hospital there, and since 2001 as medical director and chief physician of Hope4Cancer Institute.  He does not use chemotherapy or radiation, and offers non-invasive therapies from around the world.  His breast cancer success rate rivals anything conventional medicine has to offer.

“We see more and more women who have spent thousands of dollars on supplements and ‘wonder cures’ they used at home, Jimenez says.  ”When those treatments fail, they look for a clinic that can help.  Often, they will go to alternative treatment centers in the US, but those clinics can only offer immune support and detox.  In the US, clinics are not legally able to use the ‘big guns’ like medical hyperthermia and SonoPhoto Dynamic Therapy that attack the cancer.  These are not alternative therapies – they are actually mainstream cancer treatments in many countries around the world that have better healthcare systems that the US.  Just because they have not been submitted for approval in the US does not make them alternative therapies.”

“When all else fails, they look outside the US for a clinic that can help.  By then, the tumors are often so large the patient has to undergo debulking surgery before we can treat them.  There are many options out there other than surgery, radiation and chemotherapy.  Being pro-active doesn’t mean you have to go it alone.  It’s just a matter of finding the right doctor and the right clinic.”

Author Marla Manhart is a medical writer and patient advocate.  She can be reached at:  marlamanhart@hotmail.com.

by Carmen Louv

Chiropractic therapy is very good for relieving a variety of heath problems as well as personal injuries as a result of a car accident. This form of alternative medicine can also improve posture, alleviate muscle pain and issues concerning the central nervous system. Consultation and further advice will be available from an Austin chiropractor.

This form of therapy involves subtly adjusting the spine’s vertebrae. The spine is a vertebral column with 24 articulating vertebrae running down the back from the base of the head to the tail bone. In the center of the spine is the spinal cord that carries nerves from the brain to the rest of the body.

The nerve functions can become compromised if any of the vertebrae becomes out of place. This can cause health problems and pain in the rest of the body. The practitioner readjusts the vertebrae with gentle pressure from the hands. This repositions the vertebrae allowing for the proper functionality of nerves.

The patient could be laying down, sitting or standing up during the chiropractic intervention. Sometimes, a chiropractor will use a specially designed table to aid with the readjustments. Sometimes the doctor will put special cushions under the patient’s body in order to allow the weight of the torso to realign the spine.

Chiropractic is considered to be a form of complimentary medicine, it will not replace traditional medicine, but it can prevent health problems and help people recover from personal injuries. Regular intervention will help prevent health issues, and promote better posture and is a good part of a healthy lifestyle. Children may also benefit from regular therapy, as they are growing and will improve posture and may prevent health conditions later.

A new survey commissioned by the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine reveals that almost half of Ontarians treated by naturopathic doctors report naturopathic medicine has helped reduce their use of prescription drugs. Further, approximately 4 in 10 of those individuals report fewer visits to their family doctors and 3 in 10 to hospitals as a result of the care they receive from naturopathic doctors.

Ontarians seeking more natural approaches to health and wellness are increasingly turning to naturopathic medicine. The survey conducted in August 2011 found that 72% of Ontarians familiar with the practice view naturopathic medicine positively, 43% say they are familiar with the practice and an estimated 18% of all adult Ontarians— an estimated two million people—have seen a naturopathic doctor.

According to the survey, women are both more likely to be familiar with naturopathic medicine (49% versus 36%) and more likely to have a positive impression of it (77% versus 66%) as compared to men. Of interest, the Ontario Ministry of Finance reports that females in Ontario enjoy a life expectancy which is over four years longer than their male counterparts.

“These results show more Ontario residents are not only increasingly using complementary therapies, but also indicating that naturopathic medicine is an effective alternative to help relieve the cost pressures on the publicly-funded provincial health system,” says Nick DeGroot, a naturopathic doctor and dean of the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine.

The demand for naturopathic medicine continues to grow with 41% of respondents indicating they are likely to see a naturopathic doctor in the next few years, and over half of these anticipating a visit within the next 12 months.

Moreover, the survey showed that there is a general movement moving towards selecting naturopathic medicine as a treatment option based on a strong desire for more natural approaches to boosting and maintaining health.  In fact, survey respondents currently seeking treatment from naturopathic doctors indicate they are seeking more natural approaches to health and wellness (67%) as opposed to being motivated by a dissatisfaction with traditional health services (4%).

“The naturopathic treatment for my psoriasis has allowed me to make outstanding progress, despite the fact that I’d been treated for the past three years with steroids and other traditional treatments with limited success,” says Andrew Tappin, a patient at the Robert Schad Naturopathic Clinic. “My psoriasis gradually and consistently diminished, and I’ve also experienced a new burst of energy, clarity of thought and tremendously improved sleep patterns. The naturopathic care I’ve received has given me my life back,” adds Tappin.

This study was conducted by Innovative Research Group Inc. through random digit dialling telephone interviews among a sample of 606 English speaking Ontarians, 18 years of age or older.  The interviews were conducted between August 17^th and August 23^rd, 2011. Up to eight call-backs were made in the case of non-response.  Using 2006 Census data from Statistics Canada, the results were weighted according to region, age and gender to ensure a sample representative of the entire Ontario adult population. After weighting a sample of this size, the aggregate results are considered accurate to within ±4.0% (19 times out of 20).  The margin of error will be larger within each sub-grouping of the sample.

by Heidi Stevenson, Gaia-Health

If breastfeeding and improved immunity stand in the way of vaccine profits, then the solution is simple: Delay breastfeeding and undo the immunity.

Children in poor countries do not develop as many antibodies as those in wealthy nations. Rather than ask whether it may be an indication that their bodies are refusing for a good reason, medical researchers assume that it’s bad. Therefore, they’re making a couple of the most inane suggestions imaginable.

Their suggestions include:

• Delay breastfeeding so that it won’t “interfere” with the development of antibodies.
• Medically modify gut biota in healthy children.

When conventional medicine makes inane suggestions, you know that it’s in trouble. That’s exactly what’s happening in the zeal to promote vaccinations in developing nations.

The Problem

Big Pharma sees Big Profits in vaccines, and the number of people in the nonindustrialized nations is enormous, well over half the world’s population. Getting them vaccinated could mean enormous amounts of money—car, train, boat, and plane loads of it.

They have an artificial way of determining whether vaccines are effective—and they’re locked into that system. They measure antibodies to their vaccine, and if they reach a certain arbitrary level, they say that the vaccination is successful. It’s rather clever, because it nicely evades having to demonstrate that people are actually immune from the diseases.

GreenMedInfo describes the issue beautifully:

First, it must be made clear that the term “efficacy” when used in the context of a vaccine’s antibody elevating effects does not equate to effectiveness, i.e. whether a vaccine actually works in real life to protect against the intended infection.

It is this semantic trick (conflating and confusing “efficacy” with “effectiveness”) which convinces most of the “developed” world that vaccine research is “evidence-based” and focused on creating enhanced immunity, when in fact it is simply a highly successful business enterprise founded on defrauding its “customers” of both their money and health. The dangers of common vaccines are so well known by the “experts” and the manufacturers who produce them that their risk (like nuclear power) is underwritten by world governments. The importance of this fact can not be understated.⁽¹⁾

The problem is that children in developing nations are not producing antibodies at the prescribed levels. And if they don’t, then the arbitrary definition of success hasn’t been met. Therefore, something needs to be done. To that end, two possible solutions have been offered—and neither one makes one iota of sense.

Delay Breastfeeding

In Pediatric Infectious Diseases Journal, an article on the ineffectiveness of live oral rotavirus vaccines in poor developing countries found that the culprit is breast feeding.⁽²⁾

The best source of disease immunity in babies is their mothers’ milk. It is well recognized that babies fed on their mothers’ breast milk are healthier. But that, of course, isn’t the real goal. The goal is profits. Therefore, if breast milk interferes with Big Pharma’s profit machine, then something needs to be done about it.

The primary antibody in the intestinal tract is IgA (immunoglobulin A). It’s a significant factor in gut health. The authors of the rotavirus vaccine study surmise that the higher amounts of IgA in mothers’ milk neutralizes or prevents antibodies from forming.

Therefore, the researchers suggest that breast feeding be delayed so that the obvious benefits to the baby cannot interfere with the dubious one of developing rotavirus vaccine antibodies. Are they concerned about a loss of protection during that time? Apparently not. All they care about is that their dog and pony antibody show look good, so they can push the rotavirus vaccine on more and more babies.

Modify Gut Biota

The journal Biology published an article about the difficulty in achieving efficacy of vaccines in undeveloped countries. The author, Myron M. Levine, is concerned that vaccine efficacy—as defined by GreenMedInfo above—is diminished in these places. Here is his explanation:

Giardia infections are highly prevalent among children in developing countries but are increasingly recognized not to be associated with either diarrhea or adverse nutritional consequences. Nevertheless, Giardia may have an impact on mucosal integrity and function that may diminish responses to oral vaccines. Thus, I would advocate a randomized, placebo-controlled trial in which half the participants receive metronidazole to eradicate Giardia before oral vaccination.⁽³⁾

He is saying that giardia, which is a devastating infection in developed nations, is harmless to most children in undeveloped areas because their intestinal mucosa prevents the parasite from harming them. So, Levine hopes to undo this advance in their immunology! He wants to give them the antibiotic metronidazole.

Metronidazole’s adverse effects include encephalopathy, neuropathy (including the optic nerve), pancreatitis, seizures, skin necrolysis, leukopenia, and other unpleasant effects, including, of course, candidiasis, the ever-common fungal result of antibiotics, and the now recognized life-long increased risk of cancer.

To sum it up, Levine wants to give healthy children a dose of metronidazole, a highly dangerous antibiotic, to all the children of undeveloped nations because their immune systems are able to prevent harm from at least one disease. He wants to strip their improved health away, and at the same time, permanently harm and even kill many of them.

Nonetheless, Big Pharma’s imperative, to increase profits, must be satisfied. Therefore, these children’s advantage must be taken from them by giving them a drug that will certainly kill some of them, maim others, and increase their chances of developing cancer. Then, they can be given vaccines that will likely further harm their immune systems.

Back to the Bottom Line

Of course, the most important problem is resolved. Big Pharma’s profits are protected. Does it matter that it comes at the cost of lives around the world? That it costs the health of children? That it causes suffering? That it undoes improvements in immune systems? No, it doesn’t. There is only one ethic in Big Pharma. It’s spelled:

P R O F I T

by S.L. Baker, NaturalNews

If you think being concerned over natural health issues means you automatically dismiss everything that mainstream medicine has to say – think again. Not only are many mainstream researchers coming up with evidence that nutrition and other natural therapies really are effective but now comes a report published in none other thanArchives of Internal Medicine, a Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), that blows the lid off an unethical Big Pharma practice.

Specifically, thearticleshows how drug pushing – notscience- appears to have been the motivation behind a study that supposedly was testing thedrugNeurontin (gabapentin), currently widely used to treat nerve pain. The test was allegedly designed to document how various doses could treatepilepsy.But it turns out the trial was set up to “seed” theresultsin order to sell the drug, much like a card shark might stack a deck of cards in order to cheat at a game of poker.

According to the just published article, when researchers are involved in so-called seedingresearch, they are conductingclinical trialsprimarily as marketing tools so the drug can be promoted and sales pushed by doctors. Bottom line: these are promotional trials used for sellingdrugsand research subjects and physicians may not be told the true purpose of thestudies.

Surely, promoting a study as true scientific research when it is really a ploy used to market drugs must be illegal, right? According to the new report,Big Pharmais allowed to get away with seeding studies under the current law. However, the authors (Samuel D. Krumholz, B.A., David S. Egilman, M.D., M.P.H., and Joseph S. Ross, M.D., M.H.S., who are consultants at the request of plaintiffs currently suing Pfizer Inc. over the gabapentin seeding study in the U.S.), report the practice is clearly unethical.

To prepare their report, entitled “Study of Neurontin: Titrate to Effect, Profile of Safety (STEPS)”, the researchers investigated whether the study was a seeding trial by looking into documents related to themarketing, sales practices, and product liability litigation of Neurontin (gabapentin), prescribed for epilepsy. Because the authors were consultants to the plaintiffs in a lawsuit involving the drug, they had access to depositions and the document database.And that meant they were able to get their hands on damning correspondence, clinical research reports and market research analyses for a look inside the workings of Big Pharma’s pushing of the drug.

What did they discover? Although the trial’s supposed purpose was to study dose-titration of gabapentin among 2,759 patients enrolled by 772 investigators, the study was uncontrolled and unblended. In other words, it didn’t meet the basic criteria for a sound drug study.

However, articles based on the results of this anything-but-gold-standard-science study managed to be published in two journals – even though the sloppy study design was questioned by two outside sources and that “data quality during the study was often compromised.”

But here’s even more compellingevidencesomething was not on the up and up: the authors cite documents that strongly suggest drug company marketing personnel were involved in collecting the trial data. What’s more, the Big Pharma marketing heads viewed the trial (and not only its results) as a way to push sales of gabapentin.

This involvement of the marketing team and the failure to disclose the study’s real purpose from both research subjects and collaborators are the “smoking guns” that mark the STEPS study as a seeding trial, according to the authors. They are calling for institutional review boards (IRBs) to finally take a strong stance in discouraging these types of marketing-over-science trials. “Reform of the current IRB system,” they wrote, “as well as promoting better clinical trial practice in the human subjects research community, are necessary to prevent continued conduct of seeding trials by the pharmaceutical industry.”

In an accompanying commentary to the study, G. Caleb Alexander, M.D., of the University of Chicago, noted that seeding trials negatively affect scientific knowledge and clinical care. “The biomedical enterprise depends ongood sciencefor its foundation, and good science requires transparency of methods and integrity of purpose,” he wrote.

He pointed out the evidence presented by Krumholz and colleagues “strongly supports the conclusion that STEPS meets key criteria of seeding trials.” Dr. Alexander also stated that these unethical seeding trials can detract from the legitimate value of well-designed and well-conducted phase 4 studies of pharmaceutical drugs.

“Although the road is long and the hill steep, these and other changes offer the promise of incrementally improving and safeguarding the integrity of the biomedical enterprise. One can only hope that the report by Krumholz et al will contribute to this evolution,” he concluded.

Let’s be blunt here: the new report in theArchives of Internal Medicineshows that Big Pharma’s research results cannot always be trusted and may place more importance of skewing data to promote and push drugs on the public than in coming up with true scientifically sound data.

For more information:
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/curren…

Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/032828_Neurontin_clinical_trials.html#ixzz1QmtloHEV

The latest issue of the Health Freedom Network Newsletter (#377) has the following article as part 1 of a 2 part series. This excerpt includes some valuable information on detoxification and the methods for doing so.

Your body is building up toxins as you read this. Everyone’s does, it’s a normal part of life. Before our modern era of plenty and a lack of general exercise, our bodies would detoxify themselves on their own. Before modern conveniences, we worked harder (physically), ate a less varied diet (for better or worse), and often had to go without for relatively long periods of time (fasting). Added to this was the work our bodies did ridding us of germs and parasites that were everywhere.

Obviously, things weren’t necessarily better in those days, but our bodies are built to be living in those times, so we have to adapt to our current (mostly better) times to match. To do this, we should regularly detox ourselves and clean out those nasties that build up over time. So be thankful for our times of relative plenty, but understand that this comes with a price and to pay that price, we must conscientiously keep ourselves clean.

Luckily, it’s not that difficult. Cleansing the body comes in three steps and each must be taken before the next for proper detoxification to take place. Cleaning out your liver, for instance, before the colon that it sends its refuse to is clean will mean a backing up of toxins and that leads to sickness. This is why many detox programs make you nauseous, sickly, or downright ill.

Start With the Finish Line

A proper detoxification begins in the colon, the finish line for most of our intake. This is the body’s primary route for ridding itself of things that are harmful to it. Both the liver and gall bladder dump directly into the colon when getting rid of the things they’ve filtered out of our bodies. So a clean and well-functioning colon is our first priority.

There are literally hundreds of colon cleansers on the market. Some work better than others, but most are barely getting started when it comes to cleaning out what’s likely backed up in the average person’s large intestine. Probably the most often cited and recommended colon cleanse is the one created by Dr. Richard Shulze, a well-known herbalist. While it can be purchased commercially, Dr. Schulze actually recommends that people purchase the ingredients and make it themselves to take as either a home-made capsule (gel caps can be purchased at most health food stores) or directly as a powder (1 capsule equals about 1/2 a teaspoon of powder).

Read the rest in the latest issue of the Health Freedom Network Newsletter!