First U. S. Clinical Trial To Treat Prostate Cancer With Diet Begins

Greetings,

Its great to see that someone is finally looking at something natural to treat disease.  When universities are starting investigating how a healthy diet can heal naturally, I can hardly believe it.  How did this one get past the FDA and big pharma?

All the best,

Lou & Debbie

First U. S. Clinical Trial To Treat Prostate Cancer With Diet Begins

Some of the very healthy foods -- such as cauliflower, brussels sprouts and broccoli -- that many boys desperately sought to shun from their diets in childhood just may be the key to staving off prostate cancer in adulthood. That hypothesis is the impetus of a new clinical trial underway at University of California (UC) San Diego Moores Cancer Center.

The study will evaluate the effect that comes from a change in diet, supported with telephone counseling and exercise, in stopping or delaying the start or progression of prostate cancer. It is the first clinical trial in the U.S. that is a non-supplement study on prostate cancer/diet.

"Ours is the first study to focus on changing the entire lifestyle rather than just giving the participants a supplement pill," said J. Kellogg Parsons, MD, MHS, urologic oncologist at UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center. "We focus on more vegetables, less meat, and comprehensive counseling which encourages a more active lifestyle."

Participants in the Men's Eating and Living (MEAL) Study will be eating at least seven servings of colorful, robust-flavored produce per day, particularly cruciferous vegetables and tomato products, fruit, as well as whole grains, beans or other legumes.

"Evidence in previous studies suggests that a diet high in vegetable intake and low in meat and fat intake may decrease the risk of prostate cancer progressing or even beginning," said Parsons.

Although approximately 100,000 men are diagnosed annually with early stage, low-risk prostate cancer in the United States, low-risk prostate cancer is a slow-growing disease and many of those afflicted may not require immediate treatment. Unnecessary aggressive surgical or radiation treatment diminishes quality of life for thousands of men each year, but the UC San Diego study researchers see an opportunity to hone, and even re-define, treatment options and patient susceptibility within this particular patient demographic.

"Diet provides the participant/patient with a way to take control and fight what can be a distressing diagnosis," explained Parsons. "If diet is related to the risk of prostate cancer, it may well exert an impact on the earliest phases of the disease. One of the implicit messages that participants will take from this study is that low-risk prostate cancer can often be a condition to monitor: it is not a death sentence, nor is it a condition that necessarily requires radical, immediate, life-changing intervention."

Eligible participants are males up to 80 years of age who have been diagnosed with non-aggressive   within the last two years, are in the early stages, and have not yet received treatment of any kind.

Would you go thru a naked body scanner?

Greetings,
Are you planning on flying in the near future?  
I had to go to Dallas not long ago but did not have to deal with this issue.
I know that I don't even like getting x-ray's, so why would I submit myself to something like this?
Whenever something like this makes the news, it makes me wonder -why do we allow them do this to us?
Do you feel any safer now that they are installing these? 
I know I don't!


Let us know you thoughts.


All the best


Lou & Debbie 

TSA Admits Bungling of Airport Body-Scanner Radiation Tests

• By David Kravets 
• March 15, 2011

The Transportation Security Administration is re-analyzing the radiation levels of X-ray body scanners installed in airports nationwide, after testing produced dramatically higher-than-expected results.

The TSA, which has deployed at least 500 body scanners to at least 78 airports, said Tuesday the machines meet all safety standards and would remain in operation despite a “calculation error” in safety studies. The flawed results showed radiation levels 10 times higher than expected.

At least one flier group, the Association for Airline Passenger Rights, is urging the government to stop using the $180,000 machines that produce a virtual-nude image of the body until new tests are concluded in May.

“Airline passengers have enough concerns about flying — including numerous ones about how TSA conducts its haphazard security screenings — so it is TSA’s responsibility to ensure passengers are not being exposed to unhealthy amounts of radiation,” Brandon Macsata, executive director of the group, said in a statement.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center has been a loud voice opposing the machines. Last week, it urged a federal appeals court to stop using them until further health studies were conducted. Marc Rotenberg, EPIC’s executive director, is expected to tell the same thing to a congressional panel Wednesday.

“The agency should have conducted a public rule-making so that these risks could have been more carefully assessed,” (.pdf) according to a transcript of his expected testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Still, the government said the results proved the safety of the devices.

“It would appear that the emissions are 10 times higher. We understand it as a calculation error,” TSA spokesman Sarah Horowitz said in a telephone interview.

The snafu involves tests conducted on the roughly 250 backscatter X-ray machines produced by Rapiscan of Los Angeles, which has a contract to deliver another 250 machines at a cost of about $180,000 each. About 250 millimeter-wave technology machines produced by L-3 Communications of New York were not part of the bungled results.

Rapiscan technicians in the field are required to test radiation levels 10 times in a row, and divide by 10 to produce an average radiation measurement. Often, the testers failed to divide results by 10, Horowitz said.

“Certainly, the errors are not acceptable. It’s not every report. We believe the technology is safe,” she said.  ”We’ve done extensive, independent testing. It doesn’t raise alarms in terms of safety.”

Rapiscan, in a letter to the TSA, admitted the mistake and is “redesigning the form” used by its “field service engineers” when surveying the Rapiscan Secure 1000 that is deployed to 38 airports.

“Oftentimes, the FSE will bypass the step of dividing by 10. While the resulting entry, at a pragmatic level, is understandable on its face and usable for monitoring purposes, the value, if read literally by persons unfamiliar with our system and the survey process, would imply energy outputs that are unachievable by the Secure 1000 Single Pose,” (.pdf) Rapiscan wrote.

A recent Wired.com three-part series examined the constitutionality,effectiveness and health concerns of the scanners, which the TSA mandated as the preferred airport screening method in February 2009. Among other things, the Wired.com series concluded that there was discord among the scientific community about the scanners’ health risks to humans, and that they were not tested with mice or other biological samples before being deployed.

The government, however, maintains a thousand screenings equal the amount of radiation of one standard medical chest X-ray.

A federal appeals court hearing EPIC’s lawsuit suggested last week it wasnot likely to halt the scanners’ use.

Things You Didn’t Know about Water

Greetings,

Sometimes we don't do the things we know we should, like just drink good water...

All the best,

Lou & Debbie

Things You Didn’t Know about Water

Seventy-five percent of Americans are chronically dehydrated

In 37% of Americans, the thirst mechanism is so weak that it is often mistaken for hunger.

Even MILD dehydration will slow down one’s metabolism as much as 3%.

One glass of water will shut down midnight hunger pangs for almost 100% of the dieters studied in a University of Washington study.

Lack of water is the number 1 trigger of daytime fatigue.

Preliminary research indicates that 8-10 glasses of water a day could significantly ease back and joint pain for up to 80% of sufferers.

A mere 2% drop in body water can trigger fuzzy short-term memory, trouble with basic math, and difficulty focusing on the computer screen or on a printed page.

Drinking 5 glasses of water daily decreases the risk of colon cancer by 45%, plus it can slash the risk of breast cancer by 79%, and one is 50%less likely to develop bladder cancer.

Now - go get a good water system and drink some water...

Restrictions apt to cut Avandia sales

Never ceases to amaze me that drugs that are so dangerous are allowed to even get on the market... All the best Lou & Debbie The diabetes drug is now meant only for those who have no other alternative.

Associated Press / February 8, 2011

WASHINGTON — GlaxoSmithKline PLC has updated labels for its diabetes pill Avandia to include safety restrictions because of the drug’s links to heart attacks.

The Food and Drug Administration ordered the changes in September, the last in a series of actions against the former blockbuster drug. Avandia has triggered thousands of lawsuits and a Department of Justice investigation. The European Union has banned the drug.

The new US label indicates Avandia is intended only for patients who cannot control their blood sugar with any of other medications. Patients who are currently on the drug can continue taking it after consulting with a doctor.

The FDA approved Avandia in 1999 and it became the top-selling diabetes pill in the world, with more than $3 billion in sales by 2006. But its use has plummeted since a 2007 analysis linked the drug to heart attacks.

More than 900,000 US patients filled prescriptions for Avandia in the first half of 2010, according to the health data firm IMS Health. That number is expected to shrink as the new FDA restrictions kick in.

London-based Glaxo reported last year that the Justice Department and several state attorneys general are investigating Avandia. A Senate investigation released last year concluded Glaxo knew about the drug’s risks years before they were made public and withheld data from the FDA.

The company has reportedly settled thousands of personal injury lawsuits.

Japan Stops Use of Pfizer, Sanofi Vaccines on Four Deaths

Greetings,

I just read that the Vaccines makers just won another round of court battles that keeps them from being sued for damage from their drugs?  Now we read this.  When will the FDA investigate this themselves?

All the best

Lou & Debbie

Feel free to share this with your friends...

Japan Stops Use of Pfizer, Sanofi Vaccines on Four Deaths

By Jason Clenfield and Junko Hayashi - Mar 6, 2011 9:49 PM ET

Japan’s health ministry suspended the use of pediatric vaccines made by Pfizer Inc. (PFE) and Sanofi- Aventis SA after reports of four deaths following immunizations.

The use of Pfizer’s Prevenar, to protect children against meningitis and pneumonia, and Sanofi’s ActHIB, to fightHaemophilus influenzae type b, will be suspended until at least tomorrow, when a safety panel will meet to discuss the cause of the deaths, the ministry said in a March 4 website posting.

The temporary suspension is a precautionary measure following the deaths of four children who had previously been immunized simultaneously with several pediatric vaccines, said Victor Carey, the Sydney-based Asia Pacific medical director for Sanofi’s vaccines unit. About 1.5 million Japanese children have received ActHIB since it was approved in Japan in 2007, 15 years after it was first licensed in Europe, he said.

“No causal relationship has been established between immunization and these fatalities, but an investigation is under way, which we’re fully cooperating with,” Carey said in a telephone interview.

Haemophilus influenzae type b, or Hib, caused 2 million to 3 million cases of serious disease, notably pneumonia and meningitis, and 386,000 deaths in young children in 2000, according to the Geneva-basedWorld Health Organization.

More than 200 million doses of ActHIB have been given to children in more than 120 countries, according to Paris-based Sanofi.

Multiple Vaccines

The deaths of the children in Japan occurred from March 2 to March 4, the ministry said. ActHIB was given to three of the four children, who were simultaneously vaccinated with at least one other vaccine from a different manufacturer, Carey said.

Pfizer’s Prevenar is a so-called pneumococcal conjugate vaccine that aims to prevent invasive disease caused by serotypes of the Streptococcus pneumoniae bacterium. The vaccine that protects against 13 serotypes generated $2.42 billion last year and a shot that fights seven serotypes had $1.25 billion in 2010 sales, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Surveillance in North America and Europe, where Prevenar has been used for at least a decade, hasn’t identified any major safety concerns, the WHO said in a 2007 report. Evidence suggests pneumococcal conjugate vaccines will have a “considerable impact on pneumococcal disease and overall infant mortality,” the United Nations health agency said.

Victoria Davis, a Pfizer spokeswoman, declined to comment specifically on the deaths in Japan.

“Pfizer thoroughly reviews and continually monitors all of its medicines and vaccines as safety is our top priority,” the New York-based drugmaker said in an e-mailed statement. “The company thoroughly evaluates all reported cases and works closely with health authorities to determine if there is any association with use of our medicines and vaccines.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Jason Clenfield in Tokyo at jclenfield@bloomberg.net; Junko Hayashi inTokyo at juhayashi@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jason Gale in Singapore at j.gale@bloomberg.net.

Lemon is a miraculous product to kill cancer cells

Why does this not surprise me.
Let us know what you think about this .
All the Best.
Lou  & Debbie 
======================
Institute of Health Sciences
819 N. L.L.C. Charles Street
Baltimore, MD 1201.

This is the latest in medicine, effective for cancer!
Lemon (Citrus) is a miraculous product to kill cancer cells. It is 10,000 times stronger than chemotherapy. Why do we not know about that? Because there are laboratories interested in making a synthetic version that will bring them huge profits. You can now help a friend in need by letting him know that lemon juice is beneficial in preventing the disease. Its taste is pleasant and it does not produce the horrific effects of chemotherapy. If you can, plant a lemon tree in your garden or patio. How many people die while this is a closely guarded secret so as not to jeopardize the beneficial multimillionaires large corporations? As you know, the lemon tree is down, does not occupy much space and is known for its varieties of lemons and limes. You can eat the fruit in different ways: you can eat the pulp, juice press, prepare drinks, sorbets, pastries, ... It is credited with many virtues, but the most interesting is the effect it produces on cysts and tumors. This plant is a proven remedy against cancers of all types. Some say it is very useful in all variants of cancer. It is considered also as an anti microbial spectrum against bacterial infections and fungi, effective against internal parasites and worms, it regulates blood pressure which is too high and an antidepressant, combats stress and nervous disorders.
The source of this information is fascinating: it comes from one of the largest drug manufacturers in the world, says that after more than 20 laboratory tests since 1970, the extracts revealed that: It destroys the malignant cells in 12 cancers, including colon, breast, prostate, lung and pancreas ... The compounds of this tree showed 10,000 times better than the product Adriamycin, a drug normally used chemotherapeutic in the world, slowing the growth of cancer cells. And what is even more astonishing: this type of therapy with lemon extract not only destroys malignant cancer cells and does not affect healthy cells.


Institute of Health Sciences
819 N. L.L.C. Cause Street
Baltimore, MD1201

Study Reveals Some Pharma Clinical Trial Results Remain Off-Grid

Is this a little scary or what?

Study Reveals Some Pharma Clinical Trial Results Remain Off-Grid

Results go unpublished in certain classes.

Investors and patients seeking data and information on experimental drugs regularly hunt for relative news that provides details on clinical trials, in order to determine safety and efficacy for such new therapies. However, it appears they may not always be getting the full story, according to a recent article published in Newsweek magazine citing a study that says clinical trial results for some particular classes of pharmaceutical drugs are often buried beyond accessibility.

Newsweek cites an analysis published in the Annals of Internal Medicine that states that results from at least one-third of the clinical trials of five classes of drugs are never released. These unpublished results thwart the efforts of investors and patients by making the outcome of many trials either difficult, or impossible, to uncover.

The classes of drugs identified in the study are antidepressants, antipsychotics, anticholesteremics, proton-pump inhibitors (for gastric acid reduction), and vasodilators (blood-vessel wall relaxers for hypertension).

This type of publication bias was meant to be dealt with by the legal requirement that all clinical trials be registered at clinicaltrials.gov, with the results posted upon submission. However, that still falls short of mandating publication.

A major hitch in getting those wayward results fully published is that clinicaltrials.gov doesn't appear on PubMed, the National Institutes of Health online database that serves as an industry-standard source of information on medical studies and publications. As a result, many searches for information will still only yield results for the trials that the submitting authors opted to publish. The article also indicates that specific patterns in the failure-to-publish problem are pointing to disconcerting trends. The study, led by Florence Bourgeois of Children's Hospital Boston and Kenneth Mandl of its Children's Hospital Informatics Program, reveals that of 546 drug trials conducted between 2000 and 2006, only 32 percent of those primarily funded by industry were published within 24 months of completion. That is in contrast to 56 percent published in the same timeframe for the trials funded by nonprofit or non-government organizations with no industry investment.

It could be construed that industry is handpicking the trials with the most favorable safety and efficacy results to publish, opting to leave out the trials that have more negative results that could render damaging consequences for investment opportunities, reputation, etc.

Good news was more likely to be reported in industry-funded trials than in those financed by non-industry entities. Industry-funded trials reported positive results in 85 percent of publications, compared to 50 percent positive outcomes for privately endowed or government-funded trials. Such publication bias that releases the positive, while suppressing the negative could distort the true merit of a drug by exclusively publishing its positive benefits and by neglecting to disclose its entire negative aspects.

This is not the first study to find that publication bias is still an issue, but it is the most complete one, according to the Newsweek article. A 2009 analysis in PLoS Medicine, a peer reviewed, open-access journal, examined a random 10 percent of registered clinical trials, and found that after at least two years from the study's completion, less than half (311 of 677, or 46 percent) had been published. Again, trials primarily sponsored by industry were less likely to be published than those funded by nonindustry/nongovernment sources (40 percent vs. 56 percent).

The stakes of cherry-picking clinical trial results for publication have been elevated to a new reality in an age of accessible high technology that allows masses of people to personally scour the Internet for health information. Harris Interactive reported that 175 million Americans searched online for health information in 2010 through September of that year. That figure represents 88 percent of all the adults online, and was substantial enough to inspire the term "cyber-chondriacs." The inherent dilemma is that not many of them have the applicable knowledge of medical terminology or the patience to sort through the raw data at clinicaltrials.gov. Instead, they conduct searches that link to published papers or to sites that report on those published papers. Consequently, the result is that searchers are unaware that they may be prone to be misinformedabout a drug's efficacy because they may be getting the complete dossier on that drug.