Tom Jefferson, an epidemiologist with the distinguished Cochrane Collaboration in the Britain, explains that we don’t really know what protection flu vaccines offer. Fascinating interview.

But, getting to the key question: What should people do to prevent the flu?

If they want to base it on good evidence, they should wash their hands.

Loading mentions Retweet

New research has yielded two metrics that allow doctors to more accurately predict heart attack risk for patients.  Hint: it isn’t cholesterol.  Instead, researchers from the Hanyang University in Seoul analyzed the red blood cells of their subject groups and then measured their levels of omega-3 fatty acids and trans-fatty acids.  The results turned out to be even more accurate than the standard Framingham risk scores most doctors use.

The current research-- published online on June 9, 2009 in the British Journal of Nutrition-- found that the new measures did even better than the Framingham measures in predicting heart attacks. Those who had the lowest levels of omega-3's in their blood had the greatest risk of heart attack as did those who had the highest levels of trans-fats.

Specifically, the omega-3 fatty acid index-- which is the sum of red blood cell EPA and DHA-- was significantly lower in heart attack patients compared with controls, while total trans-fatty acids were significantly higher. Those whose omega-3 fatty acid index was among the top third of participants had an amazing 92 percent lower risk of heart attack than those whose levels were in the lowest third.

Meanwhile, when it came to trans-fats, the exact opposite was true. For those whose total trans-fatty acids were in the top third, the risk of heart attack was a whopping 72.67 percent higher than subjects in the lowest third.

In semi-plain English, this means two things:

1. Avoid man-made trans-fats, period.  If you see anything on your food labels that says hydrogenated or partially-hydrogenated vegetable oil, throw it away.  It’s garbage.
2. Keep your omega-3 levels up.  I take a high-quality fish oil supplement day and night, and I try to eat a lot of toxin-free, wild-caught cold water fish.  You can easily do the same.  (I think fish oil is one of the most important supplements a person can take.)

Loading mentions Retweet

Kurazaybo says about the swine flu:

I live in Mexico in one of the cities where the flu is concentrated. There is a sense of distrust towards everything the governemnt and the media say but many people are scared. Everybody seems to have heard that the cousin of the friend of a neighbor was infected and died, but nobody is able to say exactly. The situation is starting to turn into some kind of urban legend.

Loading mentions Retweet

A quick and simple online test to help determine if you've contracted swine flu, along with succint suggestions of what to do in case you have. Do I have swine flu?

Loading mentions Retweet

Um, seven.

Loading mentions Retweet

Here's a pharmacy in Virginia that won't sell contraceptives based on its own pro-life religious grounds. As a rule, if you walk into a pharmacy adorned with crosses and pictures of saints, you might want to go somewhere else. Just guessing. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQf0-UlkT7Y] (via Chris)

Loading mentions Retweet

I'll begin with the following: I'm not much of a fan of western medicine, especially its focus on symptomatic treatment as opposed to root cause discovery and prevention.  I believe there is indeed a cancer industry, and that 'traditional' approaches to cancer treatment fail and degrade the patient's quality of life.  I'm not suggesting for a single second that alternative approaches are the slam-dunk answer, but what I believe with every atom of my being is suppressing the immune system when you're trying to fight a systemic disease/defect is not a logical conclusion.  I believe there is a non-toxic approach to treatment, one that works with the body's intrinsic systems rather than against them.

But that's just me.  I think for everyone, cancer treatment is an intensely personal choice.  And quite frankly, I would never assign an absolute right or wrong to any given treatment protocol.

Dr. Ralph Moss, author of Questioning Chemotherapy (and seven other books), believes that it's time to re-evaluate our cancer treatment options, especially in light of the horrible efficacy and pharma-political landscape of conventional treatments:

We are obviously losing ground with conventional cancer treatment, because the death rates keep going up. The reason for this is because conventional treatment is based on a faulty standard: That the body must be purged of cancer by aggressive and toxic methods such as surgery chemotherapy and radiation therapy. This, of course, seemed reasonable back in 1894 when William Halsted, M.D. did the first radical mastectomy, but it has proven to be so wrong over the last 50 years that continuing to adhere to it constitutes more fraud than honest mistake. However, this standard still dominates conventional cancer therapy, and until that changes, we will continue to lose ground with cancer.

Dr. Whitaker, a firm believer in Dr. Moss' work, gives his own views of cancer treatments, including what he would do if he were diagnosed with a virulent cancer.  Among the most notable quips:

What is lost in the unemotional statistic of 500,000 cancer deaths per year is how those people died. Dr. Whitaker goes on to say more about the treatment of cancer: In my opinion, conventional cancer therapy is so toxic and dehumanizing that I fear it far more than I fear death from cancer. We know that conventional therapy doesn't work -- if it did, you would not fear cancer any more than you fear pneumonia. It is the utter lack of certainty as to the outcome of conventional treatment that virtually screams for more freedom of choice in the area of cancer therapy. Yet most so-called alternative therapies regardless of potential or proven benefit, are outlawed, which forces patients to submit to the failures that we know don't work, because there's no other choice.

and

I'd turn my back on 50 years of institutionalized expertise, because it follows the wrong paradigm. Everything that is done in medicine or in any other discipline fits some paradigm. The paradigm I use for cancer is that it is a systemic problem in which the normal control mechanisms of your body are altered. Your immune system likely bears the largest burden for this control; thus, all techniques that enhance it are promising. Those that damage it are not.

Also, cancer cells are different from normal cells in many ways, including their metabolic profile. At least one non-toxic therapy, hydrazine sulfate, takes advantage of this difference. It has been shown in double-blind trials published in respectable journals to significantly reduce the severe weight loss (cachexia) of advanced cancer, and markedly improve the patient's emotional state, almost to the point of euphoria. It is also inexpensive. Even though hydrazine sulfate has been shown to be effective and non-toxic, and it makes the patient feel better, it is ignored by every major cancer center. Yet I would take it immediately.

The entire article is very much worth reading, despite it seemingly being authored in the early 1990s.  I'm passionate about this topic, the cynic that I am, and think there's more hope than might meet the eye for many things in life, including cancer.  In fact, I urge everyone reading this to pick up a copy of Dr. Andrew Weil's Spontaneous Healing and read it immediately.  It's one of the most fascinating books I have ever read.

Link

[Via clusterflock]

Loading mentions Retweet

Interesting new class of drugs that target the mitochondria of our cells to help prevent cellular damage and oxidization. The rub is that many age-related diseases are thought to be mitochondrial in nature, so if we can keep the mitochondria healthy, we might dodge a great number of diseases we've heretofore been susceptible to.

The drugs target mitochondria, the cellular power generators that provide our bodies with chemical energy. Over time, mitochondria accumulate damage, causing cells and eventually tissues to malfunction and break down. Some scientists believe that such seemingly disparate diseases as cancer, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes and heart disease -- all of which become more common with age -- share a mitochondrial root. Fix the mitochondria, and you might fix aging itself.

Loading mentions Retweet

Doctors began operating Tuesday on a 2-year-old girl born with four arms and four legs in an extensive surgery that they hope will leave the girl with a normal body, a hospital official said.

The girl named Lakshmi is joined to a "parasitic twin" that stopped developing in the mother's womb. The surviving fetus absorbed the limbs, kidneys and other body parts of the undeveloped fetus.

I can't imagine what this might be like for the little girl or her parents.  It's at once horrifying and tragic, and it's amazing that a surgery will leave her with a normal body.

(Keep the spider jokes to yourself.  And don't pretend you're not thinking them, because you are.)

[Via Jim]

Loading mentions Retweet