April 2010 Health in the News Archive

[ Monthly Index of New Briefs ]

Susan G. Komen organization teams up with Kentucky Fried Chicken

April 22, 2010

Participating KFC franchise locations are selling specially designed pink buckets of grilled and Original Recipe chicken. KFC has pledged 50 cents to Komen for every pink bucket ordered by its restaurant operators during the promotion period, April 5 through May 9. To date, according to KFC, it has raised nearly $1.8-million.

The KFC pink buckets bear the names of breast-cancer survivors and other women who died from the disease.

Criticism has been fast and furious. "It's like ... Smith & Wesson funding a rifle range at Columbine High School," wrote Joe Waters, director of cause marketing at Boston Medical Center in his blog, Selfish Giving. "With 2,400 calories and 160 grams of fat, a bucket of extra-crispy KFC should include the wig you'll need for cancer treatments after eating this crap for years."

Andrea Raider, Komen's director of marketing and communications, admits that the charity has received some e-mail messages criticizing the KFC promotion. "But for the most part, reaction in the general public has been positive," she says. One of Komen's motivations for doing the promotion is that it allows the charity to get its message to women in neighborhoods it normally doesn't reach, Raider said, and 900 hundred of KFC's 5000 fast-food restaurants are in cities or towns where the charity does not have an affiliate.

Dr. Grout's Comment:

Does SBK have any standards for corporate relationships? The idea here is that a difference is made somehow when women who may have never heard that breast cancer is a problem, buy a bucket of greasy chicken, and read the names of those who've had breast cancer. Is that what Komen calls an educational campaign? Let me guess the bucket does not say, "If you eat this you'll be at greater risk of breast cancer, according to dietary research from the American Cancer Society." No, KFC would not benefit from that. And of course, both Komen and KFC realize the women who buying these pink buckets will get the impression that the cancer organization gives its okay to eating all that fried food.

Many have criticized Komen for this, yet others are amazingly supportive. One blogger writes on Philanthropy.com: "What is appalling to me is the lack of awareness on how this is a GREAT way to get the message about breast cancer awareness out to women who are not otherwise exposed to the message … I lost a dear friend to the disease in November and her last words were ‘Do whatever you can and whatever it takes to fight this disease and find a cure.'"

We have the cure for breast cancer. Let me say that again. We know what causes breast cancer in large part, and we know how to prevent possibly 90 percent of it. We know that it is an environmental illness, a break-down of the immune system after years of punishment from environmental pollution and lack of good nutrition. In fact, we need look no further than a 2007 Komen report done in partnership with the Silent Spring Institute that examined all the studies to date and said breast cancer is an environmental disease. "While it is disturbing to learn that there are so many chemicals that may be linked to breast cancer, there is also a great opportunity to save thousands of lives by identifying those links, limiting exposure and finding safer alternatives. It is critical that we integrate this information into policies that govern chemical exposures," said Julia G. Brody, PhD, executive director of the Silent Spring Institute. By the way, good luck finding that report on the Komen website; it is not featured. The Breast Cancer Fund is much more on top of this. Their mission: "To expose and eliminate the environmental causes of cancer. We can stop this disease before it starts." Yes we can.

Susan G. Komen for the Cure® calls itself "the global leader of the breast cancer movement, having invested nearly $1.5 billion since inception in 1982." What cure does it have to show us after 28 long years? "We have become the largest source of nonprofit funds dedicated to the fight against breast cancer in the world." Fight? We don't need to fight breast cancer. We need to stop it, and we can if we educate about the carcinogenic chemicals in makeup, in household furnishings and cleaners, in our cars, in the pesticides we use around every building, in the PAHs created in fried foods, etc. We didn't "fight" lung cancer. We worked to stop it by educating people about the harm of smoking so they would stop.

When foods are overheated, as is the case with fried chicken, carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are formed. Some grilled chicken products may also contain a dangerous carcinogenic compound called PhIP. In 2009, a report by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine found "PhIP, a chemical classified as a carcinogen" and related to "heterocyclic amines (HCAs), has been linked to several forms of cancer, including breast cancer, in dozens of scientific studies. No safe level of ingestion has been identified. Every sample [of KFC's Grilled Chicken] also tested positive for at least one additional type of HCA." It makes no sense to campaign against breast cancer with a food that promotes breast cancer.

One in 2 men and 1 in 3 women are expected to get cancer in their lifetimes; the Big Two are breast and prostate cancer. How much worse does it have to get until Komen starts using its clout for stopping cancer?

---

High fructose corn syrup under fire

April 21, 2010

Consumer resistance to high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has led to a wave of announcements that companies are removing it from their products.

PepsiCo is taking HFCS out of Gatorade, Con Agra is taking HFCS out of its Hunt's ketchup, Kraft is banishing it from Wheat Thins, and you will no longer find it in Snapple drinks.

In February, outraged San Francisco parents forced high fructose corn syrup out of chocolate milk in the school system.

The Corn Refiners Association, a trade group consisting of companies like Cargill and ADM, has postulated in their advertising campaign that HFCS is a natural product, and no worse than regular refined sugar.

A new Princeton study tosses a scientific bombshell in the middle of the debate. The university reports that rats which ate HFCS gained significantly more weight than those that ate table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same.

In addition to causing significant weight gain in lab animals, long-term consumption of high-fructose corn syrup also led to abnormal increases in body fat, especially in the abdomen, and a rise in circulating blood fats called triglycerides. Researchers say the work sheds light on the factors contributing to obesity trends in the United States.

"Some people have claimed that high-fructose corn syrup is no different than other sweeteners when it comes to weight gain and obesity, but our results make it clear that this just isn't true, at least under the conditions of our tests," said psychology professor Bart Hoebel, who specializes in the neuroscience of appetite, weight and sugar addiction. "When rats are drinking high-fructose corn syrup at levels well below those in soda pop, they're becoming obese – every single one, across the board. Even when rats are fed a high-fat diet, you don't see this; they don't all gain extra weight."

The study's results were published online March 18 by the journal Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior.

Dr. Grout's Comment:

In 1970, around 15 percent of the U.S. population met the definition for obesity; today, roughly one-third of the American adults are considered obese, according to the CDC. In the 40 years since the introduction of HFCS in the American diet, rates of obesity in the U.S. have skyrocketed. Although the Corn Refiners Association suggests HFCS is fine in moderation, given how much processed food people eat, there is no such thing as moderation. On average, Americans consume 60 pounds of the sweetener per person every year.

Glucose is the form of sugar our bodies are designed to run on. Fructose is not the same. We get some fructose naturally from vegetables and fruits. A century ago, people consumed about 15 grams per of fructose day – the kind that naturally comes mixed with fiber, vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and beneficial phytonutrients which moderate the negative metabolic effects. It isn't that fructose itself is bad, it is the supersized amounts of it people consume today that makes it dangerous. A teenager might consume 73 grams per day from sweetened drinks and diet sodas.

This Princeton study on HFCS showed that when you consume this product, you start to collect abdominal fat, that hard-to-get-rid-of belly fat. This is the fat associated with a greater risk of heart disease. That is why at the Arizona Center for Advanced Medicine, we use the homeopathic version of the HCG diet to reduce this hormonally-active belly fat.

---

"Unseasonably" cold winter creates severe allergy season

April 13, 2010

Allergy specialists are saying this spring is the worse allergy season they have seen in years.

This winter's unseasonably cold weather may have helped delay some of the plants from blooming as early as they may have wanted to. In addition, high winds in some areas help "spread the misery. Oak tree pollen is especially heavy in some parts of the country.

Dr. Grout's Comment:

I had two patients tell me this week that they have heard from their friends how bad the allergy season is, but they themselves, on immunotherapy from our office, are feeling just fine, not experiencing allergy symptoms at all. Treatment for allergies, when the right things are tested and used in the treatment vials, is remarkably effective, not only for reducing symptoms, but also for restoring the body's normal reactivity – so that you can go out and smell the roses without being plugged up for the next 2 months.

Another patient who has undergone about 40 chelation sessions after a heart attack told me he usually has very bad spring allergies – post nasal drip, propping himself up on pillows to sleep, and going through three or four hankies a day. He told me his allergies are a whole lot better this year, almost as if it were not springtime in the desert. The chelation has greatly lowered the overall chronic inflammation in his body, and so his immune system is much better able to stay in control of his allergies.

---

Federal employee health plans talk of prevention

April 9, 2010

Joe Davidson writes in the Washington Post that the Obama administration wants federal employees to embrace healthful living practices. Thus the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) contacted health insurance companies that cover workers in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

OPM advises companies on what it wants to see in the offerings made to employees during the fall open season, when they can shop among a broad variety of plans. This year, the OPM said, "We expect you to provide benefits for preventive care, immunizations, and screenings with no enrollee cost sharing. We expect you to offer comprehensive smoking cessation benefits that include coverage for counseling, medications, multiple quit attempts, no annual or lifetime limitations and no enrollee cost sharing."

The emphasis on preventive-care services is not new, but according to OPM, too few employees are taking advantage of them.

Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said she was happy about the preventive services and the extended coverage of dependents, but "disappointed that OPM has not placed more emphasis on reining in the rising costs of prescription drugs."

Dr. Grout's comment:

Whether this is helpful depends at least in part on what is called "prevention." If by prevention we mean annual mammograms, that's not really helpful. Last November, the U.S. Preventive Services Taskforce made headlines when it recommended less mammography because there were too many false positives, too much overtreatment, and too much radiation exposure. Thermography is the better screening technology, but so many radiologists are invested in mammography equipment, thermography does not get much press. For example, General Electric, the largest maker of mammography machines, is on the board of the Susan G. Komen Foundation. It skews the message.

On the other hand, if by prevention we mean metabolic analysis, nutritional counseling and help with both diet and exercise to empower people to make healthy lifestyle choices, that's real prevention. Again we come up against different models of care: disease management vs health empowerment. It's a tight line, but one which I think needs to be walked, if we are ever to increase our state of health as a population.

---

Drunk driving also means prescription drug impairment

April 8, 2009

The Arizona Republic reports that more and more drivers are being pulled over for impaired driving – not from alcohol, but from legally prescribed drugs.

The number of drug-related DUI cases handled by the Arizona Department of Public Safety rose from about 4,400 in 1999 to more than 14,700 last year, an increase of more than 230 percent. The state's population in that period rose about 38 percent.

Arizona law requires an officer to have probable cause that a driver is impaired, such as swerving, before stopping a car and having the driver take a field sobriety test. If the driver fails that test, the officer can make an arrest on suspicion of DUI. A blood sample is taken from the driver and delivered to a lab, where analysts determine whether there is alcohol or a level of drugs in the driver's system that is consistent with impairment, said Todd Griffith, superintendent of the Phoenix DPS lab.

Many drivers arriving for an assessment do not consider themselves criminals or drug users. They don't correlate their prescription-drug use with the offense.

"It's socially acceptable; the stigma isn't there," said Linda Scholten, clinical director of Dynamic Living Counseling which provides group therapy for drug-related DUI drivers. "It's prescribed, so you get people using it who would never dream of smoking marijuana and may not know how addictive the drugs are."

The Arizona Department of Health Services and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration report that more than half of new admissions for addiction treatment in Arizona are for pharmaceuticals.

Dr. Grout's Comment:

Although prescription drugs must label side effects, this is one side effect not listed on the label. The fact that so many people are encouraged to take drugs means there are more people on the road with a cocktail of multiple drugs in their system – whether for legitimate reasons or because they abuse them. Doctors in conventional settings – those who take insurance, have 10 minute appointments, see about 50 people a day – have no time to warn patients about drug interactions.

Some of the more troubling interactions involve anti-depressants and anti-anxiety drugs. After a while, they really don't work too well for most people. A more effective way to address those brain disorders is with drug-free system for making the human brain work better called BrainAdvantage. The brain is able to change and repair itself, even into old age. It has done wonders for people with depression and anxiety, head injury, mild memory loss, ADD, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and "brain fog."

---

Pesticide used at home killed two toddlers

April 7, 2010

Federal regulators clamped strong new controls on pesticides that produce deadly phosphine gas after the deaths of 4-year-old Rebecca Toone and her 15-month-old sister Rachel of Layton, Utah.

The Toone sisters died in February the week after the Bugman extermination company applied Fumitoxin near the family's front door and garage to control rodents. The Utah Medical Examiner's Office determined that Rachel, 4, and Rebecca, 15 months, had elevated levels of phosphorous and lung damage "consistent with inhaling a harmful substance."

The EPA's actions:
• Ban aluminum and magnesium phosphide pesticides in residential areas, including homes, nursing homes, day care facilities, hospitals and schools, except on school athletic fields where the pesticide may still be used.
• Allow its use for burrowing pests outdoors only in agricultural settings, such as golf courses, cemeteries and other non-residential and industrial uses.
• Create a buffer zone of 100 feet for using it in burrows around homes. The old buffer zone was 15 feet. • Post warning signs in the areas where the fumigant is used that include a 24-hour emergency number and that remain in place for 2 days.

Phosphide pesticides create deadly phosphine gas, which has been used for decades to kill insects and burrowing rodents. Federal law limits the fumigant to use by trained and certified applicators, who were not to use it in burrows within 15 feet of a residence. Still, the pesticide's use around homes has been linked to the deaths of at least four children.

In 2002, a 5-year-old South Dakota girl died after the pesticide was used outside her home and, a 4-year-old Texas girl died in 2007 after it was used in the home in violation of the label restrictions.

Gina Solomon, a medical doctor who works for the Natural Resources Defense Council, wrote about the tobacco industry's successful efforts to stymie phosphine restrictions when EPA first proposed tougher standards in 1998. "It's sad that it takes a tragedy like a death to light a fire" underneath those responsible for these regulations, she said.

Years ago, companies like R.J Reynolds fought to use phosphine to control cigarette beetles, and other agricultural uses came to include the American Farm Bureau Federation and even the U.S. Agriculture Department.

Eventually, the EPA's proposal for expanded buffer zones was scrapped and the pesticide was cleared for use beyond 15 feet from homes. The EPA's plan to require warnings for neighbors up to 750 feet away also was abandoned after the coalition said people would be safe as long as the pesticides were properly applied.

Dr. Grout's Comment:

This is a crystal clear lesson that politics invades agencies charged with protecting the public. Most pesticides are poisons developed during WWI and WWII to kill human beings. After the war, these products were introduced in smaller doses with the idea these poisons would just kill rodents and insects. By law, no pesticide can be called "safe." You can limit your exposure to pesticides by learning how to use more natural substances.

Arsenic is another poison that is allowed. It is used in chicken feed to kill rodents. Tests have shown that brand name chicken sold in American supermarkets and fast food restaurants is widely contaminated with arsenic – what the chickens eat, we eat. Arsenic causes cancer even at the low levels currently found in our environment. Evidence suggests arsenic also contributes to other diseases, including heart disease, diabetes, and declines in intellectual function.

---

Seasonal flu vaccine increased risk of catching swine flu?

April 6, 2010

In the current issue of PLoS Medicine, Canadian researchers report the unexpected results of a series of Canadian epidemiological studies suggesting a counterproductive effect of the seasonal flu vaccine.

Researchers found that people who got a seasonal flu shot in the previous season (autumn 2008) appeared to increase the risk of coming down with H1N1 blue by 1.03- to 2.74-fold, even after adjustment for comorbidities, age, and geography. In other words, those who were vaccinated with the previous seasonal flu were 103% to 274% more likely to be infected with H1N1 than those who skipped the vaccine.

Researchers did not find that having the seasonal flu shot made any difference in the severity of the subsequent bout of swine flu.

"Given the uncertainty associated with observational studies, we believe it would be premature to conclude that TIV increased the risk of 2009 pandemic illness," the authors wrote. "The putative association between seasonal vaccination and 2009 pH1N1 illness remains an open question, given the conflicting evidence from available research."

Dr. Grout's Comment:

As is so often the case with vaccines, the studies and conclusions are controversial. The take-away from the swine flu "pandemic" of the 2009-2010 season is that a strong immune system is the very best defense. To strengthen ourselves, we eat good food – good fats from grass-fed meats and dairy and cut out the sugar and junk food – get lots of vitamin D, and check thyroid levels. Vitamin D upregulates some 300 genes and is strongly protective against cancer and infections. In November 2008, the American Academy of Pediatrics doubled the recommended daily intake of vitamin D for infants and children, from 200 IU/day (2003 recommendation) to 400 IU/day. The majority of us are deficient in vitamin D, and deficient in thyroid hormone as well. One of thyroid's many good effects is that it enables us to fight off infections. At the Arizona Center for Advanced Medicine, we use natural, desiccated thyroid.

Unfortunately, the FDA, the WHO, and the CDC promote only vaccines, not natural preventive measures.

---

Recent Plavix boxed warning divides physicians

April 2, 2010

The Wall Street Journal reports that every month, approximately three million prescriptions for the anti-clotting drug Plavix (clopidogrel) are written, but some patients carry genetic abnormalities that render the drug ineffective. The medical community has known about such risks for more than a year; however, the FDA's recent decision to place a black-box warning on the clot-preventing drug has caused a divide among cardiologists who are either unsure about the usefulness of genetic testing, the soundness of doubling doses, or the benefits of switching patients to a rival drug, Effient (prasugrel).

"'There are so many questions about what to do that it puts us in a tough spot on a day-to-day basis,' says Christopher Cannon," a Brigham and Women's Hospital cardiologist. He added, "There are lots of issues, none of which have any answers."

Last month, the FDA put a new "black box" warning on Plavix, the second best-selling drug in the world. The new label warns that normal doses of Plavix have a potentially deadly lack of effect in 2% to 14% of patients. Such patients are so-called "poor metabolizers" who carry a variant CYP2C19 gene affecting the enzyme that converts Plavix into its active form.

The frequency of the variant gene is about 2% of Caucasians, 4% of blacks, and 14% of Chinese, according to Mary Ross Southworth, deputy director for safety in the FDA's division of cardiovascular and renal products. There is also a variation of the gene that makes a person a "hyper-responder" to Plavix.

The FDA wants doctors to discuss Plavix options with patients. Right now, those options include using Effient, another anti-clotting drug that is not affected by the CYP2C19 gene. Another option is to use a double dose of Plavix.

The test costs about $500, according to Courtney Harper, PhD, director of the FDA's division of chemistry and toxicology devices. But cost isn't the only issue. "The time to get a test result varies. It may be a few hours to a day or two, or other labs may take a few weeks," Harper said at a news conference held to discuss the FDA action.

For many patients at risk of a second heart attack or stroke, time is of the essence, noted Robert Temple, MD, director of the FDA's office of medical policy. "Unfortunately, waiting to see if Plavix will work isn't easy. This drug is to keep you from having a heart attack or stroke or dying, so waiting is not a good idea," he said at the news conference.

Dr. Grout's comment:

A simple genetic test can tell whether a person is a poor metabolizer. If your cardiologist believes you are really at risk for a heart attack or stroke, and he prescribes Plavix, the responsible thing to do is to order the genetic test required to determine whether the prescription for Plavix is going to be effective. The real quandary here is why some cardiologists don't get the value of genetic testing.

If you get right down to it, why use Plavix at all? The drug approach to heart disease is riddled with dangerous side effects. Why not prevent heart disease by teaching patients to modify their diets and reduce their clot risk by decreasing the production of fibrinogen, increasing their intake of omega-3 fatty acids, and reducing their intake of starches, sugars, trans fats, and chemicals like mercury and chlorine?