Study finds connection between prenatal exposure to BPA and aggression during toddler years

(NaturalNews) Researchers from the Harvard University School of Public Health have made a disturbing new discovery about the plastics chemical bisphenol-A (BPA). It turns out that prenatal BPA exposure can spur aggressive and undesirable behaviors in girls after they are born and reach their toddler years. Published in the journal Pediatrics , the study analyzed a group of 244 mothers and their three-year-old daughters living in the Cincinnati, Oh., area. The study team gathered and studied gestational and childhood BPA exposures using urine samples from the mothers, and compared various exposure levels among the children to their respective behavioral profiles. The team discovered that for each ten-fold increase in gestational BPA exposure levels, young girls exhibited significantly more indicators of anxiety and depression than their less- or non-exposed counterparts. Young girls exposed to high BPA levels were also more emotionally disturbed than the others and had a more difficult time controlling their inhibitions. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) jointly funded the study as part of an investigation into the safety of BPA. “Parents should be concerned about these findings,” says study author Joe Braun. “As the mothers concentration of BPA rose, the girls born to those mothers had higher scores on these behavior problem indices. If pregnant women or parents are concerned about exposure to BPA, they can try to reduce it by limiting their exposure to canned foods and packaged foods.” Although these particular findings were limited strictly to females, previous studies have found a similar connection between prenatal BPA exposure and poor behavior in both sexes. Back in 2009, a study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives found that BPA’s endocrine-disrupting effects can harm both girls and boys. Besides impairing proper neurological development, which is likely the reason for behavior problems later in life, prenatal BPA exposure was found to “masculinize” unborn females, and “feminize” unborn males. It appears, based on that study, that BPA actually blocks the proper growth and development of human sex hormones (http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/48065/title/Science_%2B_the_Public__BPA_in_the_womb_shows_link_to_kids%E2%80%99_behavior). Both the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the American Chemistry Council (ACC), however, continue to insist that BPA is safe, despite the plethora of scientific data showing that the chemical is harmful. Sources for this article include: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/study-links-bpa-exposure-in-womb-to-behavior-problems-in-toddler-girls/2011/10/24/gIQA6ihRDM_story.html http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/48065/title/Science_%2B_the_Public__BPA_in_the_womb_shows_link_to_kids%E2%80%99_behavior

Flaxseeds can reduce cholesterol and blood lipid levels

(NaturalNews) Folk stories had it that flaxseeds were blessed – that they could bring good fortune, restore health, and protect from the evil witchery. Nowadays, it’s really no different. Bringing flaxseeds into your diet will definitely bring you good fortune, restore health, and protect you from the evils that your own body can produce. There is a little gender-related controversy regarding the lowering of cholesterol levels via flaxseed consumption. In a study conducted by ISU professor Suzanne Hendrich of Iowa State University’s Nutrition and Wellness Research Center (NWRC), it was found that men’s cholesterol levels can fall much faster than that of a woman’s, upon the consumption of about 150 milligrams of flaxseeds (about three tablespoons) a day. The study, which included 90 people of both genders, took place over a span of three months and looked at patients that all had high levels of cholesterol but no other underlying health-related conditions. According to Professor Hendrich, it is the flaxseed ‘lignans’ – a plant-based chemical compound group known for its protective health properties – that is responsible for helping lower cholesterol levels. “There are certainly some people who would prefer not to use a drug,” Hendrich says, “but rather use foods to maintain their health. This potentially would be something to consider.” Hendrich believes that where men in particular are concerned, the properties in flaxseeds make it a wonderful natural, long-term alternative for those who would rather opt for nature than drugs. This doesn’t mean that women should despair however. In another significant study conducted, women who added as little as 50 grams of ground flaxseed to their daily diets for four weeks were shown to have lowered LDL (bad) cholesterol levels by 18%, without touching the HDL (good) cholesterol levels. Gene Bruno, Dean of Academics at Huntington College of Health Sciences, wrote in his 2008 article that flaxseed research has also shown major serum lipid level reduction by about 8% – an effect traditionally achieved through the consumption of fish oils. In another study involving only female volunteers and the consumption of 50 grams of flaxseed for a month, serum lipid levels went down by about 9%. Bruno also states that the lignans in flaxseeds have been found to possess anti-platelet activating properties – essential in preventing platelets in the bloodstream from clumping, rupturing, and creating harmful clots that can lead to heart-attacks and strokes, making flaxseed a premium health option. Adding flaxseeds to your daily diet is not only highly beneficial for your health, but also very easy. Sprinkling a spoon or two of either whole or ground flaxseeds daily on your food will give you not only a good dose of omega-3 fats, but also both soluble and insoluble fiber – as well as will regulate your cholesterol levels. Sources for this article include: http://www.naturalhealthresearch.org/nhri/?p=1748 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100326101121.htm http://101foodsthatcouldsaveyourlife.answerstv.com/AnswersTV/Channel.aspx?ChannelID=3c3bc78b-913f-4c2c-b250-4b4f8885411d About the author Raw Michelle is a natural health blogger and researcher, sharing her passions with others, using the Internet as her medium. She discusses topics in a straight forward way in hopes to help people from all walks of life achieve optimal health and well-being. She has authored and published hundreds of articles on topics such as the raw food diet and green living in general. In 2010, Michelle created RawFoodHealthWatch.com , to share with people her approach to the raw food diet and detoxification.

Disposable coffee cups, carryout containers filled with cancer-causing agents

(NaturalNews) Millions of people eat and drink from plastic and styrofoam cups and containers every single day, and the US government now admits that many of these consumer products contain known cancer-causing agents. The formaldehyde preservatives found in many disposable coffee cups and foam take-out containers, as well as styrene, another chemical additive used in such products, have both been added to the federal government’s list of known or suspected carcinogens. The addition of these two chemicals, as well as six others, to the carcinogen list this year was reportedly a reluctant decision made by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which has been pressured by the chemical industry for years to delay coming forward with this information. Nevertheless, both formaldehyde and a chemical known as aristolochic acid have now been categorized as “known human carcinogens,” while captafol, cobalt-tungsten carbide, certain glass wool fibers, o-nitrotoluene, riddelliine, and styrene have been dubbed “reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens.” “Reducing exposure to cancer-causing agents is something we all want, and the Report on Carcinogens provides important information on substances that pose a cancer risk,” said Dr. Linda Birnbaum, director of both the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the National Toxicology Program (NTP). “The NTP is pleased to be able to compile this report.” You can read the full report, entitled 12th Report on Carcinogens , here: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc12 The chemical industry was quick to denounce the findings, of course, claiming that there is no significant danger from exposure to these chemicals. And some federal officials seem to be kowtowing to this pressure by telling the public that the main concern is the industrial use of these chemicals, rather than consumer use. Even the American Cancer Society (ACS) has urged the public not to worry about continuing to use plastic cups or foam containers, despite the fact that many are loaded with some of the chemicals in question. Sources for this story include: http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/health/2011/06/12/2011-06-12_two_main_components_of_coffee_cups_and_carry_out_containers_identified_as_cancer.html?r=lifestyle/health http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robyn-griggs-lawrence/formaldehyde-carcinogen_b_876115.html

Beet juice provides incredible cardiovascular benefits that improve active function

(NaturalNews) Beetroots, also known as beets, are packed with blood pressure-reducing, heart disease-preventing nutrients that help maintain healthy active function and boost overall endurance levels in those that consume them. And a new study out of the University of Exeter (UofE) has found that not only do beets benefit athletes by boosting their performance, but they also help the elderly and people with heart or lung diseases to live more active, physically-functional lives. Published in the Journal of Applied Physiology , the study builds upon a previous one conducted by the university that found that beet juice increases exercise capacity by 16 percent in athletes that drink it. Except this time, these same benefits were found to apply to non-athletes as well, including those that have trouble performing everyday physical activities. “As you get older, or if you have conditions which affect your cardiovascular system, the amount of oxygen you can take in to use during exercise drops considerably,” explained Katie Lansley, a Ph.D. student from the Sport and Health Sciences department at UofE, and author of the study. “What we’ve seen in this study is that beetroot juice can actually reduce the amount of oxygen you need to perform even low-intensity exercise.” Beet juice not only dilates blood vessels to improve blood flow and lower blood pressure, but it also reduces the amount of oxygen muscles need during physical activity. This muscle effect makes it significantly easier for people of all ages, no matter what their health condition, to perform both low- and high-intensity physical activities. In fact, researchers noted that those who drank beet juice required 12 percent less effort to walk than those who did not drink it. Based on a comparison between whole beet juice and beet juice that had its nitrates filtered out, the team was able to conclude that the natural nitrates are the primary active ingredient in beet juice that bring about improved overall performance and heart function. Sources for this story include: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-12/uoe-bjc121710.php

Diabetes drug researcher admits drug trials are unethical and dangerous

(NaturalNews) A drug researcher who presided over the trial that first raised concerns over the diabetes blockbuster Avandia has warned that further tests of the drug’s safety would be unethical. In 2009, David Juurlink of Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center in Toronto was the lead author of a study that compared rates of heart failure and death among older diabetics taking Avandia (known generically as rosiglitazone) and those taking Actos (pioglitazone), another drug in the same family. That study found that patients taking Avandia were 30 percent more likely to suffer heart failure or death. Now Juurlink has joined with Sidney Wolfe, director of health research for Public Citizen, to call for the cancellation of another planned Avandia-Actos comparison study, known as the Thiazolidinedione Intervention in Vitamin D Evaluation (TIDE) trial. The TIDE trial is to be performed by Avandia manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline at the behest of the FDA, which in 2007 ordered the company to conduct further safety studies of the drug. The FDA’s order came after it required the company to put a “black box” warning on the drug’s packaging about the risk of heart attack and heart failure. The strong results of the 2009 study make any further comparison unethical, Juurlink and Wolfe have warned. The TIDE trial would expose “thousands of high-risk patients with diabetes to a drug with an unfavorable safety profile and clinical advantage over its comparator,” they wrote in an open letter to the FDA. The TIDE study is due to be carried out in 14 different countries, including Third World countries such as Chile, India, Latvia, Mexico and Pakistan. “[The] price of definitive proof” that Avandia is unsafe, “will almost certainly be measured in the lives of study subjects who have been incompletely informed about the risks and benefits of participation,” Wolfe and Juurlink wrote. All drugs in the thiazolidinedione class, including Actos and Avandia, have also been linked to increased risk of anemia, edema, macular edema, bony fractures and acute liver injury. Sources for this story include: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/booster_shots/2010/05/diabetes-drug-trial-unethical-and-dangerous-researcher-charges.html.

GlaxoSmithKline pushing dangerous Avandia drug on thousands in new global clinical trial

(NaturalNews) Back in February, I wrote an article about how a Senate Finance Committee report revealed that GlaxoSmithKline, the maker of the diabetes drug Avandia, knew that its drug was dangerous and caused heart attacks; yet GSK went out of its way to hide this important information from the public and kept on selling Avandia . Now, GSK has now decided to launch a global clinical trial of this dangerous drug that could potentially harm thousands of people. Both FDA and GSK scientists have found that Avandia is dangerous and significantly increases the risk of heart attacks, but the drug remains on the market to this day. FDA officials have rejected sound scientific evidence demonstrating the dangers of the drug, including evidence from the FDA’s own scientists. (Read all about the Avandia scandal in my previous article on the subject .) Meanwhile, GSK is moving forward with a global clinical trial that it says will compare the safety of Avandia with other diabetes drugs in its class. In other words, according to press reports, GSK knows Avandia is dangerous, but it’s choosing to go ahead with a trial anyway… a trial that could put the lives of thousands of people at risk. Real scientists say Avandia drug trial is unethical and dangerous Dr. David Juurlink, chief of clinical pharmacology and toxicology at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center in Toronto, and Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of health research for the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, have petitioned the FDA to stop the GSK drug trial . Citing concerns that the trial is “unethical” and “dangerous”, the two are doing what the FDA itself should be doing – assessing the evidence and coming to a rational conclusion about risk versus benefit. After all, it was Dr. Juurlink’s 2009 study which already found that Avandia increases the risk of heart failure and death by 30 percent more than another diabetes drug in the same class. Not only has Avandia been proven to be dangerous, it’s been proven to be even more dangerous than the competition. And numerous studies years before found that Avandia increases the risk of heart problems and death, prompting the FDA to issue two black-box warnings for the drug back in 2007. But at this point, it doesn’t seem to matter how many people suffer and die from Avandia because the FDA somehow doesn’t believe there is “conclusive evidence” that Avandia is dangerous, so pharmacies everywhere continue to sell it. And even though GSK knows that Avandia is statistically responsible for an increase in deaths, it continues to push this drug on the masses. GSK guilty of negligent deaths? If you really think about it, what GSK is doing amounts to negligent homicide. The company is knowingly and willfully selling a dangerous drug that’s killing people, and now it wants to subject even more people to unnecessary risk of death through a medically unnecessary clinical trial that’s global in scope. I say “medically unnecessary” because there have already been a number of studies verifying that Avandia is dangerous. Why create another trial with 16,000 participants to reveal what we already know? How many more people need to suffer or die before the FDA pulls the drug from the market? The sheer lunacy of what’s taking place here in the name of “medicine” and “science” is shocking — even to those of us who follow the crimes and corruption of Big Pharma on a regular basis. Real scientists and doctors know this behavior by GSK is appalling, and apparently so does much of the public who, according to new reports , are refusing to even participate in the trial. GSK can’t even get Americans to participate in the trial, so it’s moving to third-world countries/h1> Typically when drug companies conduct clinical trials, they pay people a sum of money to act as guinea pigs for a new drug. (Sadly, many people are willing to ingest experimental substances for a couple hundred bucks). However according to a recent Wall Street Journal article, GSK can’t even get Americans to sign up! You see, the average joe has more common sense than the FDA, and a lot of people know that Avandia is dangerous. The Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center in North Carolina, for example, which is one of GSK’s study sites, has “not succeed[ed] in recruiting anybody” in over a year. And this is during a time when a lot of Americans are out of jobs and desperately need the cash. So what does GSK do in response? It opens dozens of new sites in third-world countries where it can prey on innocent poor people who are less informed about the dangers of Avandia. In fact, this is part of the reason why Dr. Juurlink and Dr. Wolfe are urging the FDA to stop the trial. They recognize how evil it is for GSK to exploit ill-informed people from other countries when things aren’t going so well for Avandia back at home. In targeting low-income third-world study subjects, GSK is demonstrating itself to be a ruthless, money-hungry organization that has no qualms about exploiting human lives to achieve its profit goals. The inhumanity of the medical-industrial complex The whole Avandia fiasco is truly indicative of the way the medical-industrial complex operates. You would think that after all the studies and trials proving its dangers, the countless lawsuits and the official government report, that GSK would at least back down from this drug. Not only has GSK continued to deny the obvious truth about Avandia’s risks, but now it is shamelessly pressing forward to expand the market for Avandia around the world. (Remind you of anything? How about Big Tobacco?) It seems obvious that Avandia should be pulled from the market and GSK investigated for its role in pushing a knowingly harmful drug. At the very least, there should be a moratorium on the sale of the drug until GSK can prove the safety of Avandia. But in the real world, this dangerous drug is being treated as safe and its producer is allowed to continue using it on human guinea pigs around the world. If GSK was a person, that person might be classified as a serial killer (and the FDA would be considered its accomplice). Both GSK and the FDA, if they were people, would be pursued for their crimes against society. But because they are two of the key organizational players in the global medical-industrial complex, they continue to perpetrate their crimes without consequence. This may be changing, though, as people wake up to the truth. The fact that GSK can’t get U.S. participants to sign up for its Avandia clinical trials says to me that people are really starting to recognize “the emperor has no clothes.” Big Pharma’s lies can only continue for so long before the truth is exposed.

Antidepressant drug linked to increase in breast cancer deaths

(NaturalNews) Women who take the antidepressant Paxil (paroxetine) while undergoing some breast cancer treatments are significantly more likely to die than women who do not take the antidepressant, according to a study conducted by researchers from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center in Toronto, and published in the British Medical Journal . “These results highlight a drug interaction that is extremely common, widely underappreciated and potentially life-threatening, yet uniformly avoidable,” researcher David Juurlink said. The researchers analyzed the medical records of 2,430 women over the age of 65 who had been treated for breast cancer with the drug tamoxifen between 1993 and 2005. Approximately 30 percent of these women took at least one antidepressant during the course of their cancer treatment. The risk of death from breast cancer was significantly higher among women who took Paxil at the same time as tamoxifen. The risk increased by 25 percent in women with a 25 percent overlap in Paxil and tamoxifen treatment, and by 91 percent in women with a 75 percent overlap in treatment. “In contrast, no such risk was seen with other antidepressants,” the researchers wrote. Although the researchers could not say exactly why Paxil caused this effect, they believe that the antidepressant interferes directly with the action of tamoxifen. For the breast cancer drug to function, the body must first process it with an enzyme known as CYP2D6. Yet selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) such as Paxil can inhibit the action of CYP2D6. “Paxil is a fairly potent inhibitor of that enzyme,” Juurlink said. Although Prozac (fluoxetine) also significantly inhibits CYP2D6, few women in the study were taking that drug. The researchers emphasized that even women undergoing cancer treatment should not stop antidepressant treatment without the supervision of a doctor, because the withdrawal symptoms of such drugs can be dangerous. Sources for this story include: www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61800520100209.

New evidence shows selenium and omega-3s prevent colon cancer

(NaturalNews) When scientists gathered in Houston recently for the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research Conference, they heard groundbreaking evidence about how colon cancer can be prevented. The new data wasn’t about drugs or surgery, either. Instead, two separate research groups concluded natural substances appear to protect from often deadly colon malignancies. Colon cancer, which the American Cancer Society estimates is diagnosed in over 108,000 Americans each year, is intricately linked to adenomas, also called polyps. These lesions grow in the large bowel and start off as benign. However, they can turn into cancerous tumors and 70 to 80% of all cancers of the colon (the longest part of the large intestine) and rectum result from adenomas-turned-malignant. So, in hopes of preventing future cancerous growths, polyps found during colonoscopies are snipped off and biopsied. Unfortunately though, pre-cancerous polyps often return. But scientists at the National Institute for Cancer Research in Genoa, Italy, conducted a long term study that shows the risk of pre-cancerous polyps (dubbed colorectal metachronous adenomas) coming back after they’ve been removed can be greatly reduced. The key? Taking specific antioxidants , including a selenium-based compound. “Our study is the first intervention trial specifically designed to evaluate the efficacy of the selenium-based antioxidant compound on the risk of developing metachronous adenomas,” said Luigina Bonelli, M.D., head of the unit of secondary prevention and screening at the National Institute for Cancer Research, in a statement to the media. 40% reduced risk The research team studied volunteers between the ages of 25 and 75 who had already had one or more colorectal adenomas removed. None of the participants were diagnosed with any additional colorectal disease, cancer or other life-threatening illness and none were taking vitamins or mineral supplements when the study began. The scientists randomly divided the 411 participants into two groups: those in one group received an inactive placebo and those in the second group took a daily antioxidant supplement containing a selenium compound (selenomethionnine 200 ug), zinc 30 mg, vitamin A 6,000 IU, vitamin C 180 mg and vitamin E 30 mg. “Our results indicated that individuals who consumed antioxidants had a 40% reduction in the incidence of metachronous adenomas of the large bowel,” Bonelli said. “It is noteworthy that the benefit observed after the conclusion of the trial persisted through 13 years of follow up.” Omega-3s help prevent colorectal cancer Another study just released at the Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research Conference — this one from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina — found that omega-3 fatty acids , which are primarily found in cold water fish such as salmon, may be able to prevent colorectal cancer. The scientists recruited 1,509 Caucasian participants (716 cancer cases and 787 controls) and 369 African-American participants (213 cancer cases and 156 controls). A validated food questionnaire was used to collect information on the frequency and amount of foods typically consumed by the research subjects in the past 12 months. Those who ate more long-chain omega-3 fatty acids had a significantly reduced risk of large bowel cancer. In fact, the highest intake was linked to an almost 40% decreased cancer risk. Unfortunately, the greatly reduced risk was only seen in white research subjects and the scientists are trying to figure out what might account for the racial disparity. “Experimental data have shown benefits of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids in colorectal carcinogenesis, ranging from reduced tumor growth, suppression of angiogenesis and inhibition of metastasis,” research leader Sangmi Kim, Ph.D., said in a statement to the press. “Our finding of inverse association between dietary intakes of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids and distal large bowel cancer in white participants adds additional support to the hypothesis.” These new studies linking natural substances to colon cancer prevention are part of a growing body of evidence indicating dietary measures can fight this kind of cancer successfully. For example, as NaturalNews has previously reported, the disease is primarily linked to the typical Western diet (http://www.naturalnews.com/025974_cancer_health_colon_cancer.html), so avoiding processed food and trans fats (http://www.naturalnews.com/025880_trans_fat_fats_trans_fats.html) can go far to prevent it. What’s more, blueberries have been shown to slash the risk of colon cancer by 57% (http://www.naturalnews.com/021951_blueberries_cancer_colon_cancer.html) and apples contain natural phytochemicals that have a protective effect against colon cancer (http://www.naturalnews.com/023136_cancer_apples_health.html), too. For more information: http://www.aacr.org/home/public–media/aacr-press-releases.aspx?d=1681 http://www.aacr.org/home/public–media/aacr-press-releases.aspx?d=1683 http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/colon-and-rectal