Is There Increased Risk for Preeclampsia in Moms with Autoimmune Disease?
Is preeclampsia a higher risk in pregnancies of women who have autoimmune conditions? Why? Preeclampsia is a medical disorder of pregnancy occurring after the 20th week. Women with preeclampsia have elevated blood pressure, protein in their urine, and usually increased swelling. If preeclampsia is severe, it poses a real health risk to the health of
You won't bee-lieve it! Could manuka honey beat drug-resistant superbugs?
Strong stuff: Manuka honey could fight drug-resistant superbugs
Now, however, honey could hold the key to combating the very modern threat of drug-resistant superbugs.
A study has shown that manuka honey can fight back on two fronts. Not only can it help to kill MRSA and other superbugs, it can also prevent bacteria from becoming resistant to antibiotics.
The danger of the rise of bugs which do not succumb to drugs was outlined this month by the Chief Medical Officer.
Professor Dame Sally Davies described it as a ‘ticking timebomb’ which could leave millions vulnerable to untreatable germs within a generation.
But a study in Australia offers a solution. At the University of Technology Sydney (UTS), tests were carried out on manuka, kanuka and clover honeys to find which was best at treating bacteria commonly found in chronic skin wounds
Researchers looked at key ingredients known to inhibit bacterial growth.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2294229/You-wont-bee-lieve-Could-manuka-honey-beat-drug-resistant-superbugs.html#ixzz2NqXmp7OJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Related articles
- Bacteria and the bees: Antibiotics work better with honey
- Little Walnut and Manuka Honey Tarts with Orange Greek Yoghurt
- New drug being developed using compound found in red wine 'could help humans live until they are 150'
- Grape Seed Extract May Beat Chemo in Late-Stage Cancer
- Foods That Kill Intestinal Parasites
Grape Seed Extract May Beat Chemo in Late-Stage Cancer
Heidi Stevenson
Activist Post
The benefits of grape seed extract in cancer are well documented, but modern medicine won't do anything with it until the mechanism of action has been found, so that it can be isolated, purified, made poisonous and owned by a single company for enormous profits.
The more advanced cancer is, the less effective chemotherapy is. However, a new study has shown that grape seed extract has exactly the opposite quality: The more advanced the cancer, the less extract that's needed to kill it. On top of that, the study also shows that grape seed extract targets the cancer cells that become most resistant to chemotherapy.
In the face of this remarkable new development, it's likely that grape seed extract is more effective in treating late-stage cancer than modern medicine's chemotherapy. Not only does it take less and less of the substance to kill cancer cells, it's able to target the cells that have become drug resistant, thus making chemo useless!
Yet again, the common misperception that modern medicine's treatments are stronger or more potent or better in any way is shown to be mistaken. Sadly, it's a mistake that can kill.
Activist Post
The benefits of grape seed extract in cancer are well documented, but modern medicine won't do anything with it until the mechanism of action has been found, so that it can be isolated, purified, made poisonous and owned by a single company for enormous profits.
The more advanced cancer is, the less effective chemotherapy is. However, a new study has shown that grape seed extract has exactly the opposite quality: The more advanced the cancer, the less extract that's needed to kill it. On top of that, the study also shows that grape seed extract targets the cancer cells that become most resistant to chemotherapy.
In the face of this remarkable new development, it's likely that grape seed extract is more effective in treating late-stage cancer than modern medicine's chemotherapy. Not only does it take less and less of the substance to kill cancer cells, it's able to target the cells that have become drug resistant, thus making chemo useless!
Yet again, the common misperception that modern medicine's treatments are stronger or more potent or better in any way is shown to be mistaken. Sadly, it's a mistake that can kill.
Related articles
- Can Milk Thistle Prevent Skin Cancer?
- Study: Low Vitamin D Raises Beast Cancer Risks
- Study: Prostate Cancer Treatment Nearly Always Leads to Sex Woes
- Vitamin U : This vitamin promotes healing activity in peptic ulcers, particularly in duodenal ulcers.
- 225,000 American patients die in doctors' hands: silence of the lambs
Will New Changes to Autism Diagnosis Leave Your Child in the Cold While Filling Big Pharma’s Pockets?
Christina England
Activist Post
Changes in the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5) for the criteria of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) could mean a high percentage of children currently diagnosed with autism, as per the DSM 4, could lose their diagnosis. Professionals are worried that the change in criteria will put many autistic children at considerable risk.
Age of Autism reported that Dr. Allan Frances, the psychiatrist who headed the development of the current DSM 4, is concerned that the new changes could cause children currently diagnosed with the condition to lose their health insurance, school placement, Medicaid and other services when the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM5) is published by the American Psychiatric Association in May. [1]
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR YOUR CHILD
Due to a rise in the numbers of children currently diagnosed with autism, the cost to the government is considerable. According to Autism Speaks, the world’s leading autism science and advocacy organization, research has shown that the annual cost of autism had tripled to a whopping $126 billion in the USA and £34 billion in the UK last year.
Activist Post
Changes in the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5) for the criteria of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) could mean a high percentage of children currently diagnosed with autism, as per the DSM 4, could lose their diagnosis. Professionals are worried that the change in criteria will put many autistic children at considerable risk.
Age of Autism reported that Dr. Allan Frances, the psychiatrist who headed the development of the current DSM 4, is concerned that the new changes could cause children currently diagnosed with the condition to lose their health insurance, school placement, Medicaid and other services when the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM5) is published by the American Psychiatric Association in May. [1]
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR YOUR CHILD
Due to a rise in the numbers of children currently diagnosed with autism, the cost to the government is considerable. According to Autism Speaks, the world’s leading autism science and advocacy organization, research has shown that the annual cost of autism had tripled to a whopping $126 billion in the USA and £34 billion in the UK last year.
Related articles
Whole Foods: Products will carry GMO labeling
Stop genetically modified organism(s) - GMO. Read comments! (Photo credit: artist in doing nothing) |
By CANDICE CHOI and MATTHEW PERRONE
Associated Press
NEW YORK (AP) - Whole Foods says all products in its North American stores that contain genetically modified ingredients will be labeled as such by 2018.
The company says it's the first national grocery chain to set such a deadline for labeling foods that contain genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. A spokeswoman for the supermarket operator said organic foods will not have to carry the labels since they do not contain genetically modified ingredients by definition.
Read more: http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/21555771/whole-foods-products-will-carry-gmo-labeling#ixzz2NN8Sfhj6
Follow us: @myfoxdc on Twitter | myfoxdc on Facebook
Related articles
New drug being developed using compound found in red wine 'could help humans live until they are 150'
- Drugs are synthetic versions of resveratrol, found in red wine
- Research shows drugs which could prevent cancer and diabetes now viable
- Medication can be taken topically or orally
- No drugs yet developed to target aging skin
Breakthrough: The new anti-aging drugs are synthetic versions of resveratrol which is found in red wine
The new drugs are synthetic versions of resveratrol which is found in red wine and is believed to have an anti-ageing effect as it boosts activity of a protein called SIRT1.
Pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline has been testing the medications on patients suffering with medical conditions including cancer, diabetes and heart disease.
The work proves that a single anti-ageing enzyme in the body can be targeted, with the potential to prevent age-related diseases and extend lifespans.
As each of the 117 drugs tested work on the single enzyme through a common mechanism is means that a whole new class of anti-ageing drugs is now viable, which could ultimately prevent cancer, Alzheimer's disease and type 2 diabetes.
Genetics professor David Sinclair, based at Harvard University, said: 'Ultimately, these drugs would treat one disease, but unlike drugs of today, they would prevent 20 others.
'In effect, they would slow ageing.'
The target enzyme, SIRT1, is switched on naturally by calorie restriction and exercise, but it can also be enhanced through activators.
The most common naturally-occurring activator is resveratrol, which is found in small quantities in red wine, but synthetic activators with much stronger activity are already being developed.
Although research surrounding resveratrol has been going on for a decade, until now the basic science had been contested.
Is There An Alternative to Toxic-Jab Vaccinations?
Catherine J. Frompovich, Contributor
Activist Post
Vaccines and vaccinations need to be examined for various reasons by everyone, I think.
First and foremost, all vaccines contain chemicals and neurotoxins that should not be injected into infants or adults, e.g., formaldehyde—an EPA-declared carcinogen; mercury in the form of Thimerosal (49.6% Hg)—one of the most toxic elements in chemistry; aluminum—a neurotoxin; polysorbate 80—a proven anti-fertility agent in animal studies; foreign DNA from bovine, pig, dog, chicken, monkey, insects, and aborted human fetal cells (diploid cells), plus a roster of toxic industrial chemicals.
If the premise and practice of medicine is first do no harm, then it is quite obvious that the medical profession apparently is not aware of, nor does it read, the informational literature that accompanies vaccines called vaccine package inserts.
IF physicians were to study vaccine package inserts and compare childhood vaccines with the CDC’s VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) reports filed in the hundreds of thousands, doctors would see the harm they are contributing to by blindly accepting that vaccines are safe and do not cause harm or damage. The medical profession’s acceptance of scientific pap that toxic industrial chemicals can improve the immune system in infants, whose immune systems do not mature until around two years of age, simply is nothing short of Frankenscience.
Vaccines and vaccinations need to be examined for various reasons by everyone, I think.
First and foremost, all vaccines contain chemicals and neurotoxins that should not be injected into infants or adults, e.g., formaldehyde—an EPA-declared carcinogen; mercury in the form of Thimerosal (49.6% Hg)—one of the most toxic elements in chemistry; aluminum—a neurotoxin; polysorbate 80—a proven anti-fertility agent in animal studies; foreign DNA from bovine, pig, dog, chicken, monkey, insects, and aborted human fetal cells (diploid cells), plus a roster of toxic industrial chemicals.
If the premise and practice of medicine is first do no harm, then it is quite obvious that the medical profession apparently is not aware of, nor does it read, the informational literature that accompanies vaccines called vaccine package inserts.
IF physicians were to study vaccine package inserts and compare childhood vaccines with the CDC’s VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) reports filed in the hundreds of thousands, doctors would see the harm they are contributing to by blindly accepting that vaccines are safe and do not cause harm or damage. The medical profession’s acceptance of scientific pap that toxic industrial chemicals can improve the immune system in infants, whose immune systems do not mature until around two years of age, simply is nothing short of Frankenscience.
Related articles
- Pretty Damning Statistics: Hospitalizations and Mortality Rates Regarding Vaccines
- 'Preservative-free' Vaccines and Flu Shots Still Contain Deadly Toxins
- Ten deaths linked to having flu jab
- Mercury is not out of vaccines and neither are the conflict of interest or the cover-up
- Study: Infants Receiving The Most Vaccines Are The Most Likely To Be Hospitalized And Die
Mayo: Diabetes Drug Slows Ovarian Cancer
Metformin 500mg tablets (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
A common diabetes drug may slow another malignancy: ovarian cancer.
Ovarian cancer patients who were taking
metformin at the time of their diagnosis survived longer than patients
who weren't on the drug, a new study by Mayo Clinic researchers shows.
Metformin goes by the brand name Glucophage
and is derived from French lilacs. It's typically prescribed to lower
blood sugar levels in people with type 2 diabetes but has shown promise
as a potential anticancer agent in recent prostate, colon, pancreas,
brain, and breast cancer studies, as well as in lab experiments with
ovarian cancer cells.
Read more: Mayo: Diabetes Drug Slows Ovarian Cancer
Important: At Risk For A Heart Attack? Find Out Now.
Related articles
The grass-fed vs. grain-fed beef debate
(Cooking Light)
-- A large herd's worth of beef cattle has passed through the Cooking
Light Test Kitchen over the past 24 years, almost all of it
standard-issue, grain-fed supermarket meat.
But with beef, as with everything in the American diet, change is afoot.
Shoppers are seeing more and more grass-fed beef in regular grocery stores, along with meat from breeds marketed as special (like Angus), and meat from organically raised animals.
The local/sustainable movement has been singing the praises of the grass-fed cow, while the grain-fed industry has been under attack by food activists.
The grass-fed cow, which eats from a pasture and is not "finished" on a diet of grains and supplements for rapid weight gain, is said by its promoters to be better for the planet (less energy goes into growing grass than grain); better for the beef eater (less overall fat, and more omega-3s and other "good" fats); and better for the cow (critics decry feedlot practices as inhumane).
In this article, though, we're looking not at meat politics but at three things that most cooks are acutely interested in: price, taste, and nutrition.
Price may be the first thing you have noticed about grass-fed beef: In supermarkets, small-production, grass-fed meat can be a lot more expensive than your average grain-fed beef, just as artisanal cheese costs more than industrial cheddar.
Cooking Light: Six ways to save on beef
But the cook will notice that the meat often looks different, too -- sometimes a lot darker, often with less of the coveted fat-marbling you see in the highest-grade grain-fed meat.
To dive into the subject, we bought half a cow. Specifically, we bought half of a 648-pound Brangus cow, pasture-raised by Alabama farmer Melissa Boutwell, who is pretty local: She works about 175 miles from our main editorial offices. Boutwell Farms supplies regional restaurants, which have included James Beard Award-winning Chef Frank Stitt's restaurants in Birmingham.
We talked to Boutwell about her husbandry. We saw our meat through the butchering process, took delivery of 243 pounds of meat (plus bones) cut to our specifications, and conducted blind tastings in our Test Kitchen.
We learned that we could dodge supermarket prices by buying in bulk:
Our cost per pound of Boutwell's beef was $5.32, including everything
from ground beef to liver to filet mignon, which made it only marginally
higher than similar quantities of regular grain-fed beef prices in
local supermarkets, and a lot less than we would have paid for premium
grass-fed or grain-fed meat.
As for nutrition, we put fat-content claims to the test by sending some of our finest grass-fed steaks for nutritional analysis, along with supermarket and specialty grain-fed cuts.
And on the matter of taste, we confirmed that grass-fed beef can be delicious and versatile but, if it comes from a lean cow like the one we bought, requires careful cooking lest the extra effort of buying it go to waste on the plate.
(We're still cooking our way through steaks, ground beef, chuck, roasts, and ribs, plus bones and organs, and we will provide beef recipes from our grass-fed project as the year goes on.)
Buying beef directly from farmers not only is a logical next step in the "buy local" movement but also hearkens back to the way many of our parents or grandparents bought meat.
All you need is to do some digging for local suppliers and buy a good-sized freezer (you'll find our primer on sourcing and buying online at CookingLight.com/features).
Some readers are already doing it, as we learned after putting the word out on Facebook, and one benefit of bulk buying is that it obliges the cook to experiment and enjoy less familiar cuts of meat.
"Purchasing a quarter cow was very educational," says Cooking Light reader Julie Lineberger. "I had never even cooked a roast, and now I am comfortable with roasts, brisket, and all sorts of cuts."
Of course, most cooks won't want to buy a whole grass-fed cow or even a half-cow. One option is to "cowpool" with curious friends.
Read the rest of the story and get recipes too!
But with beef, as with everything in the American diet, change is afoot.
Shoppers are seeing more and more grass-fed beef in regular grocery stores, along with meat from breeds marketed as special (like Angus), and meat from organically raised animals.
The local/sustainable movement has been singing the praises of the grass-fed cow, while the grain-fed industry has been under attack by food activists.
The grass-fed cow, which eats from a pasture and is not "finished" on a diet of grains and supplements for rapid weight gain, is said by its promoters to be better for the planet (less energy goes into growing grass than grain); better for the beef eater (less overall fat, and more omega-3s and other "good" fats); and better for the cow (critics decry feedlot practices as inhumane).
In this article, though, we're looking not at meat politics but at three things that most cooks are acutely interested in: price, taste, and nutrition.
Price may be the first thing you have noticed about grass-fed beef: In supermarkets, small-production, grass-fed meat can be a lot more expensive than your average grain-fed beef, just as artisanal cheese costs more than industrial cheddar.
Cooking Light: Six ways to save on beef
But the cook will notice that the meat often looks different, too -- sometimes a lot darker, often with less of the coveted fat-marbling you see in the highest-grade grain-fed meat.
To dive into the subject, we bought half a cow. Specifically, we bought half of a 648-pound Brangus cow, pasture-raised by Alabama farmer Melissa Boutwell, who is pretty local: She works about 175 miles from our main editorial offices. Boutwell Farms supplies regional restaurants, which have included James Beard Award-winning Chef Frank Stitt's restaurants in Birmingham.
We talked to Boutwell about her husbandry. We saw our meat through the butchering process, took delivery of 243 pounds of meat (plus bones) cut to our specifications, and conducted blind tastings in our Test Kitchen.
Cooking Light got 243 pounds of Brangus, cut to order.
As for nutrition, we put fat-content claims to the test by sending some of our finest grass-fed steaks for nutritional analysis, along with supermarket and specialty grain-fed cuts.
And on the matter of taste, we confirmed that grass-fed beef can be delicious and versatile but, if it comes from a lean cow like the one we bought, requires careful cooking lest the extra effort of buying it go to waste on the plate.
(We're still cooking our way through steaks, ground beef, chuck, roasts, and ribs, plus bones and organs, and we will provide beef recipes from our grass-fed project as the year goes on.)
Buying beef directly from farmers not only is a logical next step in the "buy local" movement but also hearkens back to the way many of our parents or grandparents bought meat.
All you need is to do some digging for local suppliers and buy a good-sized freezer (you'll find our primer on sourcing and buying online at CookingLight.com/features).
Some readers are already doing it, as we learned after putting the word out on Facebook, and one benefit of bulk buying is that it obliges the cook to experiment and enjoy less familiar cuts of meat.
"Purchasing a quarter cow was very educational," says Cooking Light reader Julie Lineberger. "I had never even cooked a roast, and now I am comfortable with roasts, brisket, and all sorts of cuts."
Of course, most cooks won't want to buy a whole grass-fed cow or even a half-cow. One option is to "cowpool" with curious friends.
Read the rest of the story and get recipes too!
Related articles
- Modern Paleo Meats Online Store Opens for Business Offering 100% Grass-Fed Meats like Buffalo, Beef and Lamb for the Health Conscious Consumer
- Reader Q&A: What's the Difference Between Grass-Fed and Grain-Fed Beef?
- What's the difference between grass and grain fed beef?
- Defining Standard For Beef Sustainability is Impossible, Experts Say
- Local and grass-fed beef surging in popularity amid E. coli scare
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)