Louisa Enright's Blog

Mainely Tipping Points

Archive for July 2014

Turkey Tracks: Budget101.com: Make your own Laundry Detergent

leave a comment »

Turkey Tracks:  July 29, 2014

Make Your Own Laundry Detergent

 

Friend Bonnie Sinatro posted this “recipe” on Facebook the other day.

Hmmmm, I thought.  That’s really interesting.

And note that Bonnie used THE UNCOOKED version of the recipe–which I will also do.

Here’s a picture from the Budget101 web site listed below.

superlaundrysauce1

Budget101.com – – Moms Super Laundry Sauce | Whipped Laundry Soap | Make your own Laundry Detergent.

Basically, this laundry soap uses 3 ingredients and makes 1/2 gallon, for under $2 for each batch, and washes 128 loads with 1 Tablelspoon a load:

superlaundrysauce2

The Fels-Naptha soap gave me some pause, so I did a little research–especially after I bought it.  It does contain petroleum products, and there is one that is toxic.  But that’s the ingredient that helps dissolve grease.  And there are dyes and a really strong fragrance chemical smell.

I’d still say it’s worth a try.  Various users write that this mixture is good about removing stains.  And it’s really cheap.

If you want an environmental laundry option, try soap nuts.  I use them all the time.  they are the dried fruit of the Soapberry tree and are a natural cleaner (Sapindus mukorossi).  I find they work really well.  I use more of the nuts for dirtier clothes.  I do treat stains, especially grease stains, before washing.

100_4054

 

100_4055

Each batch of about six does about six loads of laundry.  And the little baggies come with the packet.  I’ve had this package for about 18 months now.

Here’s another non-toxic laundry product I keep on hand for dirtier loads:

IMG_0357

It does about 100 loads for about $11.

 

Interesting Information: Mercola on “15 Healthiest Foods to Stock in Your Kitchen Year-Round”

leave a comment »

Interesting Information:  July 28, 2014

Mercola on “15 Foods to Stock in Your Kitchen Year-Round”

 

Here’s a nice post from Mercola:

15 Healthiest Foods to Stock in Your Kitchen Year-Round.

 

I do have some comments though:

The organic coconut oil you buy also needs to be UNREFINED and UNHEATED.  I buy mine by the case from Wilderness Family Naturals as it is WAY cheaper than a little jar in the store.  (You can buy less than a case OR sell some of your case to friends.) AND, don’t forget red palm oil, which is another really healthy oil–though it is more delicate than the very sturdy coconut oil.  (See blog post on red palm oil.)

Himalayan Salt is probably a good choice.  Grey-colored moist Celtic Sea Salt is another.  And I use our locally made Maine sea salt, which is also just dried from sea water.

Canned salmon.  Sorry.  Not for me.  There is no way to get around the fact that all big fish are now loaded with mercury.  And canning takes a lot of the “oomph” out of anything as it is heat-processed.

Whey protein.  Mercola does specify that one should use a minimally processed whey, which means it’s a powder.  Nope.  Not for me.  It’s still PROCESSED.  And one should be able to get plenty of protein without eating a processed food.  Plus, you are not eating a whole food, but one you’ve split into parts.  OK, so I drip out some whey protein to use to culture mayonnaise  and, sometimes, my lacto-fermented foods.  But, mostly, I just eat the whey in the whole-milk yogurt I eat pretty much on a daily basis.

Interesting Information: BIG NEWS: Feds Finally Release Burzynski Cancer Cure Treatment

with one comment

Interesting Information:  July 28, 2014

BIG NEWS

Feds Finally Release Burzynski Cancer Cure Treatment

 

I’d be willing to bet that none of you were aware of the news that Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski recently won another legal (and moral and ethical) round in our government’s war against his many-times successful cancer treatment.

I’d be willing to bet that many of you have never heard his name.

Yet, his work is important, exciting, real, should be celebrated, and is, instead, a huge threat to the $$$$ of the established cancer industry–you know, that industry that has failed to “cure” cancer in the past 50 or so years.

Burzynski’s treatments are NON TOXIC (for the most part–sometimes he combines them with some chemotherapy) and have been, as near as I can determine, the most successful with brain tumors–which is a good thing since we’re about to have an epidemic of brain tumors from cell phone usage according to the experts who have been studying this issue for some time now.

 

Here’s Jeffrey Phelps, writing in The Examiner:

 

But once again, another huge victory against the medical establishment for a Houston-based doctor that has been using a breakthrough technology he invented to literally cure cancer on many occasions, who for all-intents-and-purposes should be a household name by now and an easy Nobel Prize winner, is instead nowhere to be found, as if it never even happened.

That’s because Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski and his cancer-curing discovery, “Antineoplastons,” including a remarkable, relatively new gene-targeted therapy, threatens the very way of life to which the Western medical cancer and sick-care industry has become accustom. Raking in billions a year off of the desperate backs of people suffering from debilitating and deadly diseases in which the Western medical industry does not truly want to find a cure.

What’s really terrible, but predictable in our industry/profit-driven society, is the collusion between the greedy and the FDA.  At the same time the federal government and the state of Texas medical folks were trying to not only shut Burzynski down but to send him to jail, they were trying to steal his work.  Here’s Phelps again:

Because even as the skeptics and trolls do everything they can to shoot down the discovery on every single article and video released in support of the technique’s proven successes, for reasons that include the subconscious fears of real answers to questions regarding why this treatment isn’t already widely used, if it truly didn’t work better than what Western-trained doctors are still being forced to do, then why did the agents of deceit in the US government, BigPharma and related individuals collude with one of Burzynski’s own research scientists to file 11 different patents on the very same, non-toxic, Antineoplastons AS2-1 medical technology? #6,037,376, #5,635,532, #5,605,530, #5,852,056, #5,654,333, #5,661,179, #5,635,533, #5,710,178, #5,843,994, #5,877,213, #5,881,124. Only failing to accomplish the patent hijacking after a Grand Jury acquitted Burzynski of any wrongdoing, during the establishment’s 4th and most recent attempt to put him in prison for the very same technology they were trying to patent.

There are TWO documentaries telling this sorry tale:  Burzynski 1 and 2.

Part of the tale is that Burzynski has had to defend himself in the courts at his own expense–while the deep pockets of industry and the government mounted charge after charge against him.  HE HAS WON EVERY SINGLE TIME.

 

Feds finally release Burzynski cancer cure treatment – National Holistic Health | Examiner.com.

Health Freedom Alliance » Feds Finally Release Burzynski Cancer Cure Treatment.

 

Here’s an article from 2011 on one of the more recent attacks on Dr. Burzynski.

Breaking News: Outrageous New Attack on Dr. Burzynski—New Action Alert! | The Alliance for Natural Health USA.

And, here’s an article on how the mainsteam media, in this case, USA TODAY, attempted to smear Dr. Burzynski.  Note that when industry and the status quo control the media, this kind of event is possible.  Dr. Burzyski attempted with great politeness, according to this story, to give USA TODAY some data on his revolutionary treatment, but they refused to print it.

Exclusive: Inside USA Today’s Smear Campaign Against Dr. Burzynski | The Alliance for Natural Health USA.

Written by louisaenright

July 28, 2014 at 3:58 pm

Interesting Information: Warning: Most Sun Screens Do NOT Prevent Skin-Damaging Radiation

leave a comment »

Interesting Information:  July 28, 2014

Warning:  Most Sun Screens Do NOT Prevent Skin-Damaging Radiation

 

I drove up to Belfast this morning in Pea Soup Fog to shop at the Coop.  I retain my fascination with the mystery and softness of a dense Pea Soup Fog.  With this one, I could only see about 100 feet in front of the car.

On the way home, it rained buckets–a real gully washer.  Reynolds insisted on getting into my lap and hiding her head under my left arm.  The parking lot at Hannaford’s, where I stopped to get some cleaning supplies not available at the Belfast COOP (which immediately tells me something about those supplies), was wheel-high gushing water in its low spot.  Mercy!

But, on the way home, the noon Maine NPR station was discussing sunburn and sunblocks.  The guest “expert” was from the Environmental Working Group–which is more or less solid I think.  I do have some problems with the EWG.

Coincidentally, Dr. Joseph Mercola had sent out recently a post on sunblocks and sun protection, and the need for balance in that we get vitamin D from sun shining on our skin.

Here’s the thing I did not know until I read this post:  Sun Screens DO NOT protect your skin from UVA rays, and they are the ones that damage your skin and set into place the potential for skin cancers.

Here’s the explanation from Mercola’s post:

QUOTE:

UVAs versus UVBs

So, how can you get the benefits without raising your risk for skin damage? It’s important to remember that the sun can either be helpful or harmful depending on what type of ultraviolet light you’re getting. The ultraviolet light from the sun comes in two main wavelengths:

  • Ultraviolet A (UVA) Considered the unhealthy wavelength because it penetrates your skin more deeply and cause more free radical damage. Sunblocks containing SPF filter out the beneficial UVB, not these cancer-causing UVAs, unless they also contain a UVA blocking ingredient.
  • As a result, wearing sunscreen may prevent you from burning, as excessive UVBs are the chief cause of sunburn, but you still receive a large amount of skin-damaging radiation. Moreover, UVA rays are constantly available, even on cloudy days.  There are likely some benefits to UVA in moderation that we do not fully understand, as there appears to be with many spectrums emitted from the sun.
  • Ultraviolet B (UVB) – This is the ‘healthy’ wavelength that helps your skin produce vitamin D. While both UVA and UVB can cause tanning and burning, UVB does so far more rapidly.
  • Contrary to UVAs, which are more readily available, UVB rays are low in morning and evening, and high at midday or solar noon, making this the most optimal time for vitamin D production (roughly between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.). Ironically, this is the timeframe most mainstream experts warn you to stay out of the sun.

How to Prevent and Treat Sunburn Naturally.

Mercola goes on to discuss healthy sun-exposure practices–the most important of which is to GET OUT OF THE SUN AFTER 10 OR SO MINUTES OF EXPOSURE IN THE HEAT OF THE DAY!!!

When I was growing up, our days at the beach were so special–it was time we all looked forward to all year.  We went to the beach around 10 a.m. and left just before noon.  We returned around 3:30 or 4:00 until, sometimes, close to dark.  WE NEVER LAY IN THE SUN AND “SUNNED” OURSELVES.  And we got plenty tanned.  We spent our time at the beach swimming, riding waves, and walking the tidal edge looking for shells.  

You know, in other eras, people protected their skin from the sun.  Today we equate a tan with health.

I don’t use sun blocks of any kind any longer–and we never did as children.  There is a strong correlation between today’s heavy use of the chemicals in sun blocks and cancer.  And, science has shown that many of the chemicals in sun blocks are dangerous.  The Environmental Working Group has lists of which sun screens are better than others.  And the speaker today kept emphasizing to RUB IN the chemicals so they are effective, that NO SUNBLOCK protects when washed away with water, and that the spray sunblocks are being investigated by the FDA on a number of accounts.  (Users don’t want to get their fingers “dirty” while rubbing in sunblocks–which is the height of…what???…misguidedness, at the very least.)

Here are the “rules” from my childhood–you know, that time when no one had heard the word “cancer”–leave the beach by noon, don’t go back until late afternoon, wear a hat when out of the water, on really hot days wear an old t-shirt to swim, and protect your skin from the sun in the heat of the day with long-sleeved shirts, yes, but seek out the shade in the heat of the day.  Truthfully, after a morning of riding waves and a hearty lunch, an hour or two reading or playing games was a nice change.  Even the hardier types often fell into naps–which was relaxing and enabled staying up very late at night to enjoy a beach fire or chasing ghost crabs at the edge of the dunes.

Interesting Information: Seventy-Five Percent Of Honey Bought At The Supermarket Isn’t Real Honey

leave a comment »

Interesting Information:  July 27, 2014

Fake Honey

You know that cute little bear filled with honey at the supermarket.  You have a 25 percent chance of that bear’s contents being actual honey.

I’ve written several times about fake or “laundered” honey on this blog.  You can search for “laundered” honey–most of which is coming from China.

Here’s more recent information:

Health Freedom Alliance » Seventy-Five Percent Of Honey Bought At The Supermarket Isn’t Real Honey.

Buy REAL, unprocessed, unheated LOCAL honey from a caring bee keeper.  That kind of honey is one of nature’s most amazing medicines.  I make sure I eat several tablespoons every day, and I can’t think when (knock on wood) I’ve had a cold, or the flu, or allergies…

Written by louisaenright

July 27, 2014 at 5:14 pm

Interesting Information: “The Scary New Evidence on BPA-Free Plastics”

with one comment

Interesting Information:  July 27, 2014

“The Scary New Evidence on BPA-Free Plastics”

I’ve often wondered if the “new” plastics that are BPA-free are any safer.

Ok, so I’m a total cynic where industry “truth” is concerned.

And that cynicism is driven by the fact that with regard to agricultural chemicals, industry lets a chemical ride until it has hurt enough people, then withdraws it, then replaces it with something else that does not yet have a reputation.  The tobacco industry wrote this playbook, and it staved off recognition of health dangers for…what?…50 or 60 years.

Our government either is powerless to stop this kind of practice and/or turns a blind eye.

Mariah Blake’s article beings this way:

EACH NIGHT AT DINNERTIME, a familiar ritual played out in Michael Green’s home: He’d slide a stainless steel sippy cup across the table to his two-year-old daughter, Juliette, and she’d howl for the pink plastic one. Often, Green gave in. But he had a nagging feeling. As an environmental-health advocate, he had fought to rid sippy cups and baby bottles of the common plastic additive bisphenol A (BPA), which mimics the hormone estrogen and has been linked to a long list of serious health problems. Juliette’s sippy cup was made from a new generation of BPA-free plastics, but Green, who runs the Oakland, California-based Center for Environmental Health, had come across research suggesting some of these contained synthetic estrogens, too.

And, contains this kind of information:

Even as the industry crafted defensive talking points, some companies began offering BPA-free alternatives. But they often didn’t bother testing them for other potentially toxic compounds or synthetic hormones. Nor did they have to: Under US law, chemicals are presumed safe until proven otherwise, and companies are rarely required to collect or disclose chemical-safety data. Michael Green, the Center for Environmental Health director who worried about his daughter’s sippy cup, says this results in a “toxic shell game”: Corporations that come under pressure to root out toxins often replace them with untested chemicals, which sometimes turn out to be just as hazardous. “It’s an unplanned science experiment we’re doing on our families,” Green told me when I visited him at his Bay Area home, where Juliette, now 5, was padding around in a pink princess costume.

We are talking about reproductive health and cancer for our children.  Nothing less…

So, do read the article…

The Scary New Evidence on BPA-Free Plastics | Mother Jones.

Written by louisaenright

July 27, 2014 at 5:05 pm

Interesting Information: AARP Bulletin – May 2014 – “Cancer RX: `The $100,000 Myth’ “

leave a comment »

Interesting Information:  July 27, 2014

“Cancer RX:  The $100,000 Myth”

The cancer industry is driven not by finding a “cure,” but by finding patients who are desperate to live, who have good insurance, and who agree to undergo cancer drug treatments–which by the way have been a scandalous and dismal failure.

This little piece in the AARP Bulletin exposes the gouging practices for the drugs.

AARP Bulletin – May 2014 – Page 22-23.

The authors are Donald W. Light and Hagop Kantarjian.

 

Here’s a quote:

Eleven of the 12 new cancer drugs approved in 2012 were priced above $100,000 annually, and a 20 to 30 percent copayment can make them unaffordable even for well-insured patients.

The article goes on to ask WHY? and proceeds to utterly demolish Big Pharma’s rationale for this kind of gouging.

Big Pharma has inflated and twisted its actual development costs.

Taxpayers “subsidize about half of company research costs through credits and deductions granted to drug companies.”

Big Pharma distorts its “average” costs by only using the most expensive drugs to compute the average.

Big Pharma spends only about one-sixth of its research funds in developing new drugs.  For cancer drugs, this figure is even lower.

Big Pharma continually raises prices across its whole market yearly, or it has a “market spiral pricing strategy.”

And on and on…

It’s a rigged system–rigged for profit, not for human health.

And that’s what industry does when capitalism is not fettered to morals and ethics that are good for people.

 

 

 

Written by louisaenright

July 27, 2014 at 4:52 pm

Interesting information: Dr. Sylvia Onusic on Taking Daily Baby Aspirin

leave a comment »

Interesting Information:  July 2014

 Dr. Sylvia Onusic on Taking Daily Baby Aspirin

 

Are you taking a daily baby aspirin to prevent heart disease?

If so, you may want to take a look at this posting.

And, note that aspirin is actually a very serious drug, not just something we can pop like we might a vitamin pill…

 

Sylvia Onusic is a board certified and licensed nutritionist with a PhD in Public Health Education.  

 

By Dr. Sylvia Onusic

Another medical sacred cow bites the dust. Time to chuck that baby aspirin bottle in the trash if you haven’t already.

My Mother, who is 88 years old, has never had a heart attack, stroke or angina, religiously takes a coated low dose aspirin “every other day” on the advice of her physician.

A couple of years ago, she was complaining of heart burn and her doctor thought it was heart pain. After placing a stent, the pain continued and it was found that she had had several ulcers which were caused by the bacteria heliobacter pylori: h.pylori for short.

She was given high dose antibiotics to combat the bacterial infection. After an emergency visit to the hospital because of a reaction to the medication, her doctor paid her no further attention except to prescribe daily aspirin and proton pump inhibitors like Prilosac.

In some time she was informed that she needed a medical procedure to look at her stomach lining which involved IV anesthetics in a hospital setting. After the procedure the gastroenterologist showed us photos of her stomach lining which was inflamed. There were angry red specks everywhere. He informed us that the aspirin had caused the inflammation but she needed to keep taking it because it protected her heart!

The truth is that there is no evidence that aspirin prevents cardiovascular disease in men and women 80 years or older. 1 But despite this, elderly are regularly recommended aspirin when the potential benefit due to a reduction in myocardial infarctions outweighs the potential harm due to an increase in gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

The risk of bleeding from aspirin usage is especially higher in the elderly. 2-3 More worrisome, recent studies have linked regular use of aspirin with the development of macular degeneration, an eye condition which leads to blindness. 4 -5

A recent article in the Journal of the American Board for Family Medicine reports that:

“ Even with new evidence against the use of aspirin for primary prevention, it is difficult to change beliefs about the effectiveness and safety of aspirin, as reflected in the behavior of physicians and patients.” 6

But other groups may not benefit as well. In 2002 the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPTF) started recommending the use of aspirin as primary prevention for patients at high risk of developing cardiovascular disease.

They still recommend aspirin use but differently in men versus women:

–for men age 45-79 to reduce risk of myocardial infarction (MI) when a net benefit is present.

–for women age 55-79 to reduce risk of ischemic stroke when a net benefit is present.

And how to determine “net benefit? It is totally up to the physician.

The USPSTF provides an online instrument to calculate the ten year coronary heart disease risk as a means of deciding if aspirin ingestion would yield a “net benefit.” The USPSTF is an independent panel of 16 so-called experts in prevention and evidence-based medicine and is composed of physicians and psychologists. 1

On two occasions the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has denied to approve aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events and stroke in any population because of a lack of evidence supporting its efficacy. 6 The most recent denial was a citizen’s petition from Bayer to add primary prevention of heart attacks and strokes to aspirin labeling. 

In fact NO studies have shown that the benefits of aspirin outweigh the risks of side-effects for those without a history of cardiac events. Despite current prescription policies, there is no specific population, not even diabetics, where the benefits of aspirin for primary prevention outweigh the risks. 3,6 Several long term clinical trials showed conflicting results. A recent meta-analysis of l9 randomized controlled trials of aspirin for primary prevention of cardio-vascular disease (CVD), with data on over 100,000 people, concluded that “routine use of aspirin for primary prevention is not warranted.” 7

A new and emerging use of aspirin for the prevention of deaths from colon cancer was also evaluated in the same meta-analysis and no overall beneficial effect of aspirin use on cancer deaths was found. 7

The American Heart Association recommends regular aspirin usage for secondary prevention of acute cardiovascular events since 1997. Secondary prevention means that the person has already had a heart attack, stroke or angina. 8 For these patients the benefits of taking aspirin may be outweighed by the increase in internal bleeding. Aspirin interferes with platelets, which help blood to clot. A 2010 study showed that patients taking aspirin showed a higher risk for recurrent heart attack and heart problems.3

The most common side effect from regular aspirin usage is upper abdominal pain from gastric irritation. Enteric coasted aspirin is recommended to deal with this. 8 The coating supposedly prevents inflammation of the stomach lining but contains aluminum, around 50 mg. per pill 9 Aluminum has been strongly linked with the development of Alzheimers Disease.10 To reduce the risk of bleeding medical professionals recommend a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) like the “little purple pill” Nexium or Prilosec and similar medications in combination with the aspirin. PPI’s reduce the level of stomach acid and thus dramatically impact digestive efficiency. They are closely linked to development of osteoporosis, B 12 deficiency, anemia, severe iron deficiency, and many nutrient deficiency diseases which can be life threatening. 11

Aspirin is also associated with development of ulcers and diverticular disease, and there is an increased risk of breast cancer in women taking aspirin, increased risk of kidney failure and development of cataracts, hearing loss and tinnitus. But that is not all. With frequent aspirin use, there is an increase in sudden death. Aspirin may act as a masking agent, and conceal a “cardiac event in progress.” Aspirin does not perform any better for women. 3

Some may remember the government campaign in the 70’s and 80’s cautioning parents not to not give aspirin to infants, from birth to 18 years of age especially after a viral illness. The warnings were prompted by the many cases of children taking aspirin who developed Reyes Syndrome. Researchers today believe that the Reyes Syndrome was caused, at least in part of the cases, by metabolic failure of the mitochondria from virus, pesticides, medicine, or stress. 12 The warning still appears on aspirin packaging. 9

Did Overly Liberal Use of Aspirin Contribute to Flu Deaths in 1918?

Autopsies of young adult victims who died early on during the 1918-1919 flu pandemic which accounted for a high number of cases showed wet and hemorrhaging lungs and pulmonary edema. Physicians of the day were giving huge amounts of aspirin, up to 31 grams per day. Today we know those amounts produce toxicity as well as pulmonary edema.

Recent results with aspirin overdoses show similar lung problems and a significant proportion of the deaths in persons who had pulmonary edema could be explained by aspirin overdose. Aspirin overdose has serious consequences including hallucinations, confusion, seizure, cerebral edema and coma. The most common cause of death following overdose is cardiopulmonary arrest.13

A government panel recently recommended daily low-dose aspirin use after 12 weeks of gestation for pregnant women in order to reduce the risk of pre-eclampsia and premature birth. Fans of Downtown Abbey may remember the death of the daughter, Sybil, who developed eclampsia at a home birth. Eclampsia. It is characterized by high blood pressure, protein in the urine, liver disease and blood-clotting abnormalities.14

Most people switched from aspirin to acetaminophen (Tylenol) and other pain relievers at the end of the 20th century. In 2013 the FDA issued a warning that acetaminophen can cause rare but fatal skin reactions with actual skin death. Overdose accounts for the most cases of acute liver failure in this country. Contrary to popular belief, acetaminophen does not reduce inflammation. Its history is fraught with reports of harm… its deadly to cats, dogs and snakes. But what about people? Dr. William Shaw, PhD, Director of Great Plains Laboratories, who has done extensive work with autistic children, points to acetaminophen as a possible cause of rising rates of autism, asthma and Attention Deficit Disorder (ADHD). 15

In addition, acetaminophen has been linked with shockingly high rates of asthma in children even when taken as infrequently as once per year.

Bottom line? Just because we can buy aspirin and acetaminophen over-the-counter doesn’t mean that it they have no health risks, especially for the most vulnerable of us, such as the unborn child, infants, young children and the elderly.

About the Author

Sylvia Onusic is a board certified and licensed nutritionist with a PhD in Public Health Education.  She discovered her gluten sensitivity as an adult after experiencing serious weight gain, disabling arthritis and skin infections. She herself experienced many enamel defects and untold hours of expensive dental work.

One of her main nutritional interests is helping individuals and  families recognize the physical and mental conditions and illnesses related to early gluten sensitivity, celiac disease and other food-related disorders, and how to deal with them to protect the family’s health. You can read more of her work at her website drsylviaonusic.com or connect with her via Facebook.

References

1 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Aspirin for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease. Recommendation Statement. March 2009. http://bit.ly/1iQ9K5w

2 Pilottto A et al. The risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in elderly users of aspirin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: the role of gastroprotective drugs. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2003 Dec;15(6):494-9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14959953

3 Mercola J. Aspirin’s Mostly Unrecognized Connection to Serious Medical Problems. Mercola.com. Take Control of Your Health. http://bit.ly/Q1nnYB

4 Liew G et al. The association of aspirin use with age-related macular degeneration. JAMA Intern Med . 2013 February 25;173(4):258-64.

5 de Jong PT, Chakravarthy U, Rahu M et al. Associations between aspirin use and aging macula disorder: the European Eye Study. Ophthalmology 2012 January;119(1):112

6 Hissett J et al. Effects of Changing Guidelines on Prescribing Aspirin for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events. Am Board Fam Med. 2014;27(1):78-86. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/818884, accessed 5-3-14.

7 Seshasai SRK, Wijesuriya S, Sivakumaran R, et al. Effect of aspirin on vascular and nonvascular outcomes: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 2012;172:209 –16.

8 Paikin JS, Eikelboom, JWCardiology Patient Page. Cardiology patient page: Aspirin. Circulation. 2012; 125: e439-e442 . doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.046243

Free text here: http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/125/10/e439.full.pdf

9 Toxic Effects everyday exposures. Aluminum. http://www.everydayexposures.com/toxins/toxic-metals/aluminum;

Daily Med. Safety coated enteric aspirin. http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/lookup.cfm?setid=5e1484d3-5be1-40da-a3bf-fb19f7d27d45

10 Bhattacharjee S et al. Aluminum and its potential contribution to Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Front Aging Neurosci. 2014 Apr 8;6:62. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00062. eCollection 2014. Open access free text.

11 Saint Louis C. Acid-Suppressing Drugs Linked to Vitamin B12 Deficiency. New York Times, 12-10-14. http://nyti.ms/1eGBcBo

12 Aspirin Foundation – Suitability – Backgrounder on New Advice on Aspirin. Aspirin and Reyes syndrome. http://www.aspirin-foundation.com/suitability/backgrounder.html

13 Starko KM. Salicylates and Pandemic Influenza Mortality, 1918–1919. Pharmacology, Pathology, and Historic Evidence. Clin Inf Diseases. 2009; 49:1405-10

14 Saint Louis, C. Panel Urges Low Dose Aspirin to Reduce Preeclampsia Risk. New York Times. 4-7-2013. http://nyti.ms/1fG4R4C

15 Shaw, W. Evidence that Increased Acetaminophen use in Genetically Vulnerable Children Appears to be a Major Cause of the Epidemics of Autism, Attention Deficit with Hyperactivity, and Asthma. Great Plains Laboratory; Ellis S. New research claims use of acetaminophen / paracetamol correlates with Autism and ADHD diagnosis rise. AND Austism Daily Newscast. October 29, 2013 ; Krans B. Healthline. Study: Acetominopen during pregnancy raises risk for ADHD. Healthline News. 2-2-14. http://bit.ly/1luWHMk.

– See more at: http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/aspirin-no-benefit-prevention-heart-attack-and-stroke/#sthash.2AbgcP1E.dpuf

 

Written by louisaenright

July 27, 2014 at 4:34 pm

Interesting (AND SAD) Information: CDC Estimates 1 in 68 Children Has Been Identified With Autism Spectrum Disorder

leave a comment »

Interesting Information:  July 23, 2014

 

CDC Estimates 1 in 68 Children Has Been Identified With Autism Spectrum Disorder

1 in 48 boys and 1 in 189 girls…

30% higher than 2012 data…

Autism rates are worse in some areas than others…

When I was growing up, people were just not sick like they are now…

Where’s the tipping point where we demand change, where we demand what is good for human health BEFORE what’s seemingly good for industry?

Here’s a quote from the press release:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 1 in 68 children (or 14.7 per 1,000 eight-year-olds) in multiple communities in the United States has been identified with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).  This new estimate is roughly 30 percent higher than previous estimates reported in 2012 of 1 in 88 children (11.3 per 1,000 eight year olds) being identified with an autism spectrum disorder.    The number of children identified with ASD ranged from 1 in 175 children in Alabama to 1 in 45 children in New Jersey.

The surveillance summary report, “Prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorder among Children Aged 8 Years – Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2010,” was published today in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.  Researchers reviewed records from community sources that educate, diagnose, treat and/or provide services to children with developmental disabilities. The criteria used to diagnose ASDs and the methods used to collect data have not changed.

The data continue to show that ASD is almost five times more common among boys than girls:  1 in 42 boys versus 1 in 189 girls. White children are more likely to be identified as having ASD than are black or Hispanic children.

CDC estimates 1 in 68 children has been identified with autism spectrum disorder Latest snapshot shows proportion of children with autism and higher IQ on the rise | Press Release | CDC Online Newsroom | CDC.

Written by louisaenright

July 23, 2014 at 2:47 pm

Interesting Information: Tara Derr Web makes FOOD AND WINE MAGAZINE

with one comment

Interesting Information:  July 23, 2014

Tara Derr Web makes FOOD AND WINE MAGAZINE

 

Oh yes, we are all very proud.

It’s a beautiful spread.

Take a look?

press – thefarmbar.

Written by louisaenright

July 23, 2014 at 2:36 pm