Saga of 12-year-old foster boy reveals state’s psychiatric drug abuse of children

(NaturalNews)A 12-year-old Texas boy testified before Congress that he was drugged for four years with multiple anti-psychotic medications while in the state foster system. The boy, identified only as Ke’onte, recalled that the drugs left him “in a stupor” and physically ill. Governmental…

FDA withdraws approval for breast cancer drug Avastin after declaring it medically useless, but says doctors can still prescribe it

(NaturalNews) Several years after declaring it to be not only medically useless but also dangerous, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has officially withdrawn approval for the $100,000 breast cancer drug Avastin. In a statement, FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said that Avastin has never been proven to be safe or effective, but also in the same breath noted that doctors can still prescribe the drug if they feel like it. “FDA recognizes how hard it is for patients and their families to cope with metastatic breast cancer and how great a need there is for more effective treatments,” Hamburg is quoted as saying by The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review . “But patients must have confidence that the drugs they take are both safe and effective for their intended use.” After being rapidly approved for use by the FDA back in 2007, Avastin quickly generated more than $1.7 billion for its producer Genentech within the first year. When the FDA finally got around to actually reviewing the drug after approving it, though, the agency discovered that Avastin does not lengthen the lives of breast cancer patients, and that it carries with it severe side effects that include death (http://www.naturalnews.com/023524_drug_avastin_cancer.html). In her 69-page report on Avastin, Hamburg wrote that Avastin’s side effects include high blood pressure, bleeding, heart attack or heart failure, and the development of perforations in the nose, stomach and intestines. In at least one case, a patient taking Avastin has died from infection. But the way the FDA is handling the situation shows how blatantly biased it is towards the drug industry. Avastin was proven dangerous and ineffective several years ago, but the FDA allowed it to remain on the market. Now, it has decided to withdraw approval for Avastin, but is still allowing it to remain on the market. If Avastin had been a dietary supplement in the same predicament, the agency would have immediately withdrawn its approval (if it would have approved it in the first place), and demanded that it be removed from the market. The agency likely would have also shut down Avastin’s manufacturer, as it has done a lot worse to supplement companies that produce safe and effective natural treatments. Sources for this article include: http://www.lef.org/news/LefDailyNews.htm?NewsID=11921&Section=Disease

FDA withdraws approval for breast cancer drug Avastin after declaring it medically useless, but says doctors can still prescribe it

(NaturalNews) Several years after declaring it to be not only medically useless but also dangerous, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has officially withdrawn approval for the $100,000 breast cancer drug Avastin. In a statement, FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said that Avastin has never been proven to be safe or effective, but also in the same breath noted that doctors can still prescribe the drug if they feel like it. “FDA recognizes how hard it is for patients and their families to cope with metastatic breast cancer and how great a need there is for more effective treatments,” Hamburg is quoted as saying by The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review . “But patients must have confidence that the drugs they take are both safe and effective for their intended use.” After being rapidly approved for use by the FDA back in 2007, Avastin quickly generated more than $1.7 billion for its producer Genentech within the first year. When the FDA finally got around to actually reviewing the drug after approving it, though, the agency discovered that Avastin does not lengthen the lives of breast cancer patients, and that it carries with it severe side effects that include death (http://www.naturalnews.com/023524_drug_avastin_cancer.html). In her 69-page report on Avastin, Hamburg wrote that Avastin’s side effects include high blood pressure, bleeding, heart attack or heart failure, and the development of perforations in the nose, stomach and intestines. In at least one case, a patient taking Avastin has died from infection. But the way the FDA is handling the situation shows how blatantly biased it is towards the drug industry. Avastin was proven dangerous and ineffective several years ago, but the FDA allowed it to remain on the market. Now, it has decided to withdraw approval for Avastin, but is still allowing it to remain on the market. If Avastin had been a dietary supplement in the same predicament, the agency would have immediately withdrawn its approval (if it would have approved it in the first place), and demanded that it be removed from the market. The agency likely would have also shut down Avastin’s manufacturer, as it has done a lot worse to supplement companies that produce safe and effective natural treatments. Sources for this article include: http://www.lef.org/news/LefDailyNews.htm?NewsID=11921&Section=Disease

ASA sues Obama Administration for interfering with state, local medical marijuana laws

(NaturalNews) The battle continues to rage between the individual states and the federal government over the legalized cultivation and use of medical marijuana. Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the nation’s largest medical marijuana advocacy organization, has now filed a lawsuit against the Obama Administration’s Justice Department for aggressively trying to subvert state and local laws by shutting down legal medical marijuana dispensaries. California, Oregon, New Mexico, Colorado, and a handful of other US states all have laws on the books that permit the growth, possession, and use of medical marijuana in some way, shape, or form. But the federal government still ignorantly classifies the natural plant as a Schedule I narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act, a tenet of the “War on Drugs” that has been a source of much conflict over the past several years. This ongoing clash between state and federal law has led to numerous federal raids of medical marijuana growers and distributors, particularly in the State of California where medical marijuana laws are among the most lenient, and where the plant is most utilized. The federal government also routinely intimidates local officials to try to get them to ban medical marijuana dispensaries. In a most recent raid, for instance, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) stormed Northstone Organics, a fully-licensed marijuana cultivation collective in Mendocino County, Cal. Agents reportedly cut down all 99 of the group’s marijuana plants, and handcuffed the owner and his wife with zip-ties. With a lawsuit, ASA hopes to finally put an end to this type of federal government oppression of medical marijuana both in California, and in the other states that have legalized the plant. “Although the Obama Administration is entitled to enforce federal marijuana laws, the Tenth Amendment forbids it from using coercive tactics to commandeer the law-making functions of the State,” said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who filed the lawsuit in San Francisco’s Federal District Court. “This case is aimed at restoring California’s sovereign and constitutional right to establish its own public health laws based on this country’s federalist principles.” For the first time ever, a recent Gallup poll shows that most Americans now support legalizing marijuana. Fifty percent say that general marijuana use should be legalized, while only 46 percent say it should remain illegal (http://www.gallup.com/poll/150149/Record-High-Americans-Favor-Legalizing-Marijuana.aspx). Sources for this article include: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=6921

Exposed: CDC deliberately manipulated, covered up scientific data showing link between vaccines containing mercury and autism

(NaturalNews) Deniers of the link between mercury-laden vaccines and autism are going to have a hard time denying the latest findings by the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs (CoMeD). The nonprofit group has obtained critical documents via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that exposes the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) role in deliberately lying about and manipulating a key Danish study that showed a clear link between vaccines containing mercury and autism. In 2003, the journal Pediatrics published a study conducted in Denmark that observed a significant decline in autism rates following the country’s elimination of Thimerosal, a mercury-based component, from vaccines. But thanks to the CDC’s corrupting influence, the published version of the study in Pediatrics actually claimed the opposite, and alleged that removal of Thimerosal brought about an increase in autism rates. According to the documents, CDC officials removed large amounts of data from the study that showed a decline in autism rates following the removal of Thimerosal. The agency then twisted the remaining data to imply an increase in autism rates following the removal of Thimerosal, and suggested that there was no link between Thimerosal and autism. Upon submission of the CDC’s tainted version of the study to Pediatrics , the study’s authors contacted CDC officials to let them know that the agency had incorrectly interpreted the data. They tried to tell the CDC that its figures and conclusions were wrong, and that corrections needed to be made. The CDC allegedly responded by saying that it would take a look at the incorrect data, but proceeded to submit the corrupted version of the study to Pediatrics anyway. After encouraging the editors of Pediatrics to perform an expedited review of the corrupted study, the CDC ended up convincing the journal to publish the fraudulent study, which it did in 2003. Now that this critical information has been officially released for the world to see, CoMeD is pressing the CDC to conduct a full criminal investigation into the matter, and make a formal declaration about whether or not scientific fraud was involved. CoMeD is also calling for a full, immediate retraction of the corrupted study from Pediatrics . “This should not be tolerated by those who are entrusted with our children’s health and well-being,” says Lisa Sykes, President of CoMeD. To learn more, visit: http://mercury-freedrugs.org/ Sources for this article include: http://www.anh-usa.org/cdc-mercury-in-vaccines/

Medical societies maintain secret financial ties to drug companies

(Natural News) There are many interlocking financial conflicts of interest between Big Pharma and medical institutions. Many members of major medical groups, universities, and medical journals also have financial ties with pharmaceutical companies. These Big Pharma connections push dangerous drugs into the collective consciousness while keeping safe and inexpensive non-drug health solutions out of public awareness. Medical Journals and Big Pharma Dr. Marcia Angell, author of The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It, issued this statement after her tenure with The New England Journal of Medicine as Editor in Chief: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published.” Pharmaceutical companies even hire ghost writers to concoct favorable product reports. Then those companies pay corrupt doctors or researchers to sign those biased reports that are then published in medical journals. There have been occasions of medical journal reports claiming successful medical drug trials, but no one tried the drugs! These were totally faked trial reports. Yet they were published in medical journals and quoted by medical practitioners who prescribed them. This sort of dishonesty was part of selling Vioxx, the heart medicine that killed more than it cured for a few years before finally being withdrawn from the market. Funding Medical Societies The AMA (American Medical Society) is not the only medical society. It’s the largest and most encompassing one. But there are as many medical societies as medical specialists. Medical equipment and drug manufacturers infiltrate those specific specialty groups to sell their wares. An interesting recent expose on one such group, The Heart Rhythm Society with its 5000 plus mostly cardiologist membership, received half of last year’s $16 million budget from companies that make drugs and devices to treat arrhythmia. Adding to this influence, those same companies had 12 of the 18 Heart Rythm society’s board members on their payroll as consultants and lecturers. Do you see the revolving doors and dual membership conflicts of interest? They are not rare. They are business as usual and common with Big Pharma and government agencies as well. The Cancer and Vaccine Industries According to Reshma Jagsi, M.D., D.Phil., assistant professor of radiation oncology at the University of Michigan Medical School, almost one-third of cancer research reports surveyed in the major medical journals had obvious conflicts of interests . Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/026314_cancer_research_studies.html#ixzz1XWVqDlyc The vaccine industry may be the most corrupt and influential aspect of Big Pharma yet. Health Ranger Mike Adams recently revealed a network involving the vaccine industry, the military, and the IOM (Institute of Medicine), a strange alliance at first glance. But the more one knows of the dark side of vaccinations, the more it makes sense for those demanding covert depopulation efforts under the cover of humanitarian aid. The IOM is as influential as it gets. Whatever they say goes with the mainstream media and authority figures in all levels of government. If the IOM says a vaccine is safe and effective, there is no further discussion. Read more at: http://www.naturalnews.com/033455_Institute_of_Medicine_vaccines.html Money Talks Way Too Much We all need to make a living. But when money pervasively trumps truth and disregards health, there is no protection from the harm it causes. Sincere health practitioners and MDs who step out the Big Pharma box are persecuted and prosecuted for healing without harm. Their lives are often ruined. The liars who falsely promote dangerous drugs make plea bargains or pay affordable fines, if caught, after many are harmed. Sources for more information: Jon Rappoport quotes Dr. Marcia Angell and elaborates http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/faking-medical-reality/ Medical societies maintain secret financial ties to drug companies http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/story/medical-societies-financially-tied-drugmakers/2011-05-09 Big Pharma medical journal ghost writers write and doctors sign http://www.naturalnews.com/029945_HRT_drugs_medical_journals.html http://www.naturalnews.com/033455_Institute_of_Medicine_vaccines.html http://www.naturalnews.com/026314_cancer_research_studies.html#ixzz1XWVqDlyc

Online database lets you research the side effects of common psychiatric drugs

(NaturalNews) If you have ever seen a commercial for a pharmaceutical drug, you are probably familiar with the long list of dangerous side effects that are rattled off in the last five seconds of the advertisement, just after viewers are told how Drug “X” is going to save their lives, improve their memories or give them unlimited energy. What was that? Did he just say that pill might cause bleeding out of my eyes? Drug companies do a great job – and spend a lot of money – to ensure that most consumers aren’t aware of the harmful side effects of common drugs prescribed for conditions like depression, heart disease, arthritis, ADHD or high blood pressure. Unfortunately, the result of this has created a society where the average person with a health problem is captivated by the promises delivered in clever advertising. There is a drug for everything? All I have to do is talk to my doctor? How convenient. But what if there was a way to take back control of our lives and our health? What if, despite talking to your doctor, you still have questions or concerns about the safety of a drug? The Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHR) has a database that allows you to do just that. It’s called the Psychiatric Drug Database, and it allows consumers to research the potential side effects of common psychiatric drugs, such as Ritalin or Wellbutrin. While the database is limited to psychiatric drugs, this type of public information portal represents a significant step in the right direction to help patients find unbiased information and make informed decisions about their health. The database allows you to search by drug and will retrieve information about adverse reactions reported by patients who have taken the drug, international warnings and studies that have been done on the drug and what side effects different age groups or genders have experienced. For example, a search of the effects of Ritalin on 18-30 year old women retrieved 89 reported cases of adverse side effects. These effects including anxiety, fatigue, hypertension, tremors, chest discomfort, nausea, panic attacks, cardiac murmurs, aggression, suicide attempts and completed suicides. The results are broken down by case and list specific symptoms and reactions caused by the drug in each reported case. Another search of Zoloft and its effects on young children included cases of cerebral disorders, upper respiratory tract infections, sleep disorders, vertigo, hallucinations, psychomotor hyperactivity and suicidal ideation. The database only includes information on cases that were actually reported to the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System between 2004 and 2008. Based on the FDA’s own estimates, only about 1 to 10 percent of adverse drug side effects are even reported to the FDA. The CCHR’s database, therefore, represents only a small margin of the population that has been affected by adverse side effects of pharmaceutical psychiatric drugs. Visitors to the site will also notice an interesting anecdote that describes how the definition of poison – a substance that causes death or harm when consumed by a living organism – clearly characterizes the drugs listed in the database. Consumers are encouraged to research potential problems of a drug before agreeing with their doctors to start a course of therapy. To find more information about a particular drug, visit www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers Sources for this article include http://www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers/

Breast cancer drugs may stop cancer, but they also cut life short due to toxicity

(NaturalNews) Here’s another case of a so-called “wonder drug” heavily promoted by Big Pharma having a darker side than anyone knew. It turns out aromatase inhibitors (sold under the names Femara, Aromasin, and Arimidex), widely prescribed to huge numbers of women who’ve been diagnosed with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, could be so toxic in the body they do nothing to prolong life — and might even shorten it. Based on the findings of several studies, most doctors now recommend one of the aromatase inhibitor (AIs) after women with estrogen-positive breast cancer have initial treatment with surgery and often chemotherapy and radiation therapy. An AI medication has been considered a better choice than the other anti-estrogen treatment, tamoxifen, because AIs have been thought to have more benefits and fewer serious side effects. However, research just published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute concludes that the toxic impact of aromatase inhibitors apparently explains why breast cancer patients taking AIs don’t live any longer than women taking tamoxifen. Bottom line: the study suggests that even if AIs slow down or halt the growth of estrogen driven breast cancer, women may lose their lives not to a malignancy — but to the negative impact the drugs have on their bodies. AIs block the enzyme aromatase, which turns the hormone androgen into small amounts of estrogen in the body. So they reduce the amount of estrogen available that can stimulate the growth of estrogen-driven breast cancer cells. This class of drugs doesn’t halt ovaries from making estrogen, so AIs are only used in post-menopausal women. The medications are normally prescribed as an alternative to tamoxifen or after earlier treatment with tamoxifen (which often has intolerable side effects). Overall, AI therapy alone is associated with a reduction in breast cancer recurrence — but doesn’t result in women living any longer. What’s more, the drugs have been found to produce a host of concerning adverse toxic effects on the body. And it’s this toxicity that may explain the lack of overall survival benefit in postmenopausal breast cancer patients, according to researchers Eitan Amir, of the Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology at Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto, Ontario, and colleagues. The research team conducted a systematic review of all randomized trials which compared AIs and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women. Using results from seven trials involving 30,023 breast cancer patients, the scientists performed a meta-analysis of the data. The results showed that, compared to tamoxifen, longer use of AIs was associated with more heart disease and bone fractures. However, tamoxifen users had higher rates of blood clots and cancer of the womb. There were no differences in the risk of stroke or other types of cancer. Overall there was no survival benefit to AIs, even though the drugs seem to have a positive effect on breast cancer recurrence. The researchers concluded that the toxicity of AIs was most likely behind the drugs failure to prolong life. Using tamoxifen first and then switching to AIs for 2 to 3 years was associated with a lower risk of death unrelated to breast cancer compared to the use of either AIs or tamoxifen alone. The scientists speculate that this is because switching between the two drugs lowers the toxicity of AIs in the body. In an accompanying editorial, Nancy E. Davidson, M.D., Shannon Puhalla, M.D., and Rachel C. Jankowitz, M.D., of the UPMC Cancer Center at Magee-Womens Hospital, concluded that doctors should “..choose initial endocrine therapy for the individual patient with careful attention to the risk of breast cancer recurrence, the risk of toxicity, and comorbidities.” As NaturalNews has reported extensively, a host of research is pointing to far safer and even non-toxic natural therapies than mainstream medicine’s current standard breast cancer treatment strategies. For example, there is evidence parsley and other plants may contain phytochemicals that help stop breast cancer (http://www.naturalnews.com/032410_parsley_tumors.html). Vitamin D (http://www.naturalnews.com/032222_breast_cancer_vitamin_D.html) appears to hold great promise in the fight against breast malignancies, too. For more information: http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/ http://www.naturalnews.com/breast_cancer.html

Study pushes dangerous drug as urinary infection cure, but cranberries work better

(NaturalNews) A just published study emphasizes that the super strong Big Pharma antibiotic combo trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (dubbed TMP-SMX, for short, and marketed as Bactrim, Bethaprim, Cotrim and Septra) appears to be more effective for repeated urinary tract infections (UTIs) than the time proven natural remedy of cranberries. This research headed by Marielle A.J. Beerepoot, M.D., from the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam might sound like great news for women who need help to beat UTIs. After all, these infections cause a host of unpleasant symptoms including burning on urination and pelvic pain. But when you take a closer look at what the research actually shows, the phrase “junk science” comes to mind. Cranberry extract fights urinary tract infections and, what’s more, the drug that is being hyped as superior is actually loaded with dangers. Background information in the journal article noted that UTIs are common in women, affecting nearly 50 percent at some point in their lives; up to 30 percent of women develop urinary tract infections that recur over and over. Mainstream medical doctors frequently prescribe antibiotics as a preventive measure for UTIs for countless women who don’t even have an infection. “However, this may lead to drug resistance not only of the causative microorganisms but also of the indigenous flora,” the authors wrote. They pointed out that studies of cranberries and cranberry products can prevent recurrent UTIs. In fact, NaturalNews has reported numerous times about the health benefits of cranberries and how they can specifically treat UTIs.For example, in previous studies, scientists at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) discovered cranberry juice creates what the researchers called an “energy barrier” that has the amazing power to prevent disease-causing microorganisms from starting an infection. This barrier changes the thermodynamic properties of infection-causing germs in the urinary tract. Simply put, the bacteria are then unable to hook onto cells and cause illness (http://www.naturalnews.com/023802_juice_cranberry.htm). The new study, just published in the Archives of Internal Medicine , aimed to directly compare cranberries with TMP-SMX to see which works best for UTIs. The research subjects were 221 premenopausal adult women who had reported at least three symptomatic UTIs in the previous year. Half took either TMP-SMX (480 mg at night, plus one placebo capsule twice daily) or cranberry capsules (500 mg twice daily, plus one placebo tablet at night) for one year. The scientists checked the participants clinical status once a month and for three months after stopping the study medication by taking urine and feces samples. The research subjects also filled out a questionnaire and submitted urine samples when they experienced urinary tract infection symptoms. At 12 months, the average number of clinical recurrences was 1.8 in the TMP-SMX group and 4.0 in the cranberry capsules group. Recurrence occurred, on average, after eight months in the drug group and after four months in the cranberry capsules group. So the conclusion, according to the media statement, was that the antibiotic used in this study appeared to be more effective at preventing UTIs than cranberry capsules. But wait a minute. The cranberry capsules did work against UTIs, even at a fairly low dosage, although they didn’t work as strongly as the drugs. And only capsules of cranberry were used. Isn’t it possible cranberry juice, the whole fruit or a larger dosage would have increased effectiveness? Absolutely. In fact, in an accompanying commentary, Bill J. Gurley, Ph.D., from the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, pointed out that “supplements such as cranberry capsules may not demonstrate optimal efficacy due to issues with poor water solubility and the type of metabolism that occurs.” For example, he explained, cranberry capsules might have a low level of bacteria-fighting chemicals in the dosage used that may have affected the study’s results. There was also a huge downside to taking TMP-SMX. Turns out, antibiotic resistant rates tripled in the disease-causing germs found in the women who took the drug. Dr. Gurley noted that just one month into the study, antibiotic resistance for Escherichia coli was higher than 85 percent in the TMP-SMX group but less than 30 percent in the cranberry capsule group. “Such a marked reduction in antibiotic resistance certainly favors the therapeutic potential of cranberry as a natural UTI preventative,” he wrote in the editorial. Another important point to consider about the new study that supposedly concludes Big Phama’s prescription drug beats the natural alternative: while cranberries are side effect free, not so with the TMP-SMX antibiotic. A few problems you can experience from the drug are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, loss of appetite, or headache muscle weakness, mental/mood changes, new lump/growth in the neck (goiter), low blood sugar, neck stiffness, seizures, liver damage, lung injury, and vaginal yeast infections. For more information: http://jama.ama-assn.org/ http://www.naturalnews.com/cranberries.html

Heartworm drugs for pets; Big Pharma’s cash cow

(NaturalNews) In a seemingly diabolical plot, veterinarians and pharmaceutical companies have teamed up in a marketing campaign to frighten pet guardians into giving year-round heartworm preventatives to their cats, as well as dogs. These so-called experts say they’re doing this to improve protection for individual pets, but the facts say their motives may be less pure. With few exceptions, heartworms (Dirofilaria immitis) are a completely seasonal problem, so there is no reason to give heartworm medicine to ANY pet year-round-except to make money for those who make and sell it! Those financially-motivated folks say the number of cases will rise unless everybody gives the medications. They rationalize this by citing statistics on how most people don’t use the products, and proclaiming that the number of unprotected dogs will surely cause even more disease. However, despite years of many animals being given unnecessary drugs and many more who aren’t, the prevalance of heartworm has not really changed. In fact, a recent headline in a veterinary publication trumpeted, “Heartworm now found in all 50 states”–as if it was a triumph! While that statement may be technically true, the survey did not differentiate between all dogs testing positive for heartworm, and dogs testing positive for heartworm that came from somewhere else! The increase in positive-testing dogs may be attributable to the widespread dispersion of heartworm-infected dogs after Hurricane Katrina, rather than a true increase in the level of disease. Heartworms are transmitted by mosquitoes. Heartworm larvae, called microfilaria, live in the blood and are sucked up by the bug. Once inside the mosquito, they must further develop before they can infect another dog. For that to occur, outside temperatures must remain above 57 degrees F, day and night, for a certain period of time (but at least 8 days). The warmer the temperature, the faster the larvae will mature. If the temperature drops below the critical level, larval development will stop, but the larvae don’t die, development will re-start at the same point when the weather warms back up. Larvae reach their infective stage in 8 to 30 days (the latter being the insect’s entire lifespan-if the larvae haven’t matured by then, they will die along with the mosquito). It should be obvious that during seasons and in areas where there are no mosquitoes, there is no risk of heartworm. Evidently that little fact escaped the attention of the veterinarian who prescribed heartworm protection — in December-for a puppy living high in the Colorado mountains. At that altitude, temperatures are never warm enough for heartworms! On this map, heartworm risk is shown by the month when the use of heartworm preventatives should begin. In most states, protection should be continued through November or December. In the Michigan UP, preventatives are suggested from August through October. Within 150 miles of the Gulf Coast and other areas in pink, prevention is recommended from April through January. In the red areas of southern Texas and Florida, year-round preventatives may be needed. Local conditions may vary from year to year. Global warming, hurricanes/flooding, and other factors may increase the mosquito population and thus influence heartworm risk. (This map is a very loose approximation only, and is not intended to be used exclusively to determine risk.) http://www.naturalnews.com/images/US-Heartworm-Map-1.jpg When an infected mosquito bites a dog or cat, the microfilaria are deposited on the skin, where they then crawl into the bite wound and enter the bloodstream. Inside the body, they grow and progress through other larval forms. In dogs, the heartworm’s natural host, larvae migrate to the heart and eventually develop into adult worms. In cats, full-grown worms can develop (but not reproduce). A cat cannot transmit the disease. Adult heartworms are over a foot long when grown (in 6-8 months), but it takes only 1 or 2 to fill up a cat’s tiny heart and cause serious problems. However, in 80% of infections, the cat’s own immune system kills the larvae at an earlier stage, and clears the infection. However, heartworms don’t have to be full-grown to cause problems. In cats, a respiratory condition can develop. Not-quite-full-grown microfilaria can get stuck small blood vessels in the lungs, where they can cause significant inflammation and damage. This uniquely feline condition is called Heartworm Associated Respiratory Disease, or HARD. Symptoms are similar to asthma; and it’s possible that some “asthmatic” cats are misdiagnosed with an immune-mediated disease instead of a parasite. Even so, about half of infected cats never develop any signs of heartworm disease at all. And while the disease causes serious damage to the lungs, much of the damage may be reversible by the body’s normal healing processes. Chronic and sequential infections have not been studied. Indoor cats are, of course, less likely to be bitten by a mosquito, but anyone who’s ever been around them knows that the little buggers can be quite persistent, so it isn’t impossible. In one study, 25% of heartworm-positive cats were reported to be indoors-only. Outdoor cats are at higher risk not only for heartworm but also for feline leukemia, feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV or feline AIDS), and all the other parasites, injuries, and diseases common to outdoor cats. However, keeping all pets indoors during prime mosquito-feeding time (late afternoon an evening) will greatly reduce the risk of a bite. Heartworm preventative drugs do not kill adult heartworms, but they do kill microfilaria up to a certain stage of development. Currently it is believed that larvae under 6 weeks old are affected. This means that in order to prevent heartworms from reaching adulthood, the preventative can be given up to 6 weeks after the mosquito bite occurs, and still work. The recommendation is to give the drugs every 30 days, purportedly because once-a-month dosing is easier for most people to remember (and, coincidentally, it also sells more drugs!). The most common preventative drugs for heartworm are ivermectin (Heartgard) and selamectin (Revolution). While these drugs are generally considered “safe and effective” at the low doses used for heartworm prevention, there are always exceptions. Signs of toxicity associated with ivermectin include: depression, ataxia (balance problems or unsteady walk), and blindness. Selamectin is also used to treat ear mites and some intestinal worms; adverse reactions include hair loss at the site of application, diarrhea, vomiting, muscle tremors, anorexia, lethargy, salivation, rapid breathing, and contact allergy. Most veterinarians hand out heartworm preventatives like candy; but there is a serious and growing problem of resistance of heartworms to these drugs. This means that we are selecting for “superworms” that will be able to survive and grow even in animals on heartworm preventatives (despite Big Pet Pharma’s denials that this is happening). As with all cases of drug resistance, the correct response is to reduce use of the drug and reserve it only for when it is absolutely necessary. Unfortunately, the veterinary profession and drug industries have decided to go for profits instead, and are continuing to call for all pets to be on medications all year round. This is bad science, and it is bad policy. The Big Pet Pharma folks are very protective of the income from heartworm drugs, and will apparently stop at nothing to increase profits. Merial, maker of the popular heartworm preventative Heartgard, was repeatedly warned by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to stop exaggerating the effectiveness of the product (which has been declining for at least a decade). Moreover, a fired Merial executive filed suit against Merial, claiming that the company deliberately lied for years, not only about the product’s effectiveness, but also the true number and severity of adverse events. Pfizer’s Animal Health division alone, which makes the heartworm preventative Revolution as well as vaccines and other animal drugs, is valued at $10 billion to $16 billion (and may soon be sold to Merial or another competitor!). If you feel you must use heartworm prevention products, get them from your veterinarian. Surveys have found mislabeled, expired, imported, and counterfeit products being sold from other sources. Follow dosage instructions and do not over-treat. NEVER, EVER use a heartworm product made for dogs on a cat. The components are different between dog and cat products, and dog products can kill a cat in a matter of hours. Many cats have suffered and died this way.

Next Page »