83 percent of brain injury vaccine compensation payouts were for autism caused by vaccines

(NaturalNews) The federal government has been publicly denying any link between autism and vaccines for over two decades, while it has quietly been paying out damages for vaccine injury to children with autism, a study released May 10th shows. The study underscores the need for Congressional hearings and independent scientific research into the connection between autism and vaccines (http://www.news-medical.net/news/20110511/NAA-calls-for-immediate-Congressional-hearings-and-scientific-investigation-into-autism-vaccine-link.aspx). The federal government’s Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was created in 1989 to act as a “no fault” taxpayer-funded alternative for those seeking compensation for proven vaccine injury. The new peer-reviewed study, published May 10th in the Pace Environmental Law Review, looked at cases of vaccine injury that have been monetarily compensated by the VICP. The study looked at 1300 cases of children with brain injury resulting from vaccines where the court’s records referenced autism, symptoms of autism or disorders commonly associated with autism — twenty-one cases outright stated “autism or autism-like symptoms” in the court records. The researchers then identified and contacted 150 of the families that were compensated to find out whether the children had autism. 62 of the families they contacted (greater than 40 percent of their sample) reported children with autism, for a total of 83 cases of autism. (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/83-cases-of-autism-associated-with-childhood-vaccine-injury-compensated-in-federal-vaccine-court-121570673.html). “What we did is we looked at the people who the government said are clearly vaccine injuries and awarded them compensation,” said Lou Conte, the vaccine compensation recipient who helped coordinate the study. “We asked the next question and that question was: Do some of these people also have autism?” said Conte. “We found that in 83 of the cases we were able to locate, the families report that their children have autism and symptoms of autism.” (http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/health/new-study-suggests-link-between-vaccines-and-autism-051011#ixzz1MFSaJ4TY) Government and conventional medicine maintain denial The CDC has since released a statement supporting their previous statements that no link between vaccines and autism exists. (http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/morning/vaccine-autism-link-new-investigation-20110511) Some medical experts agree. While the stories are heartbreaking, said Dr. David Nelson chair of the Department of Pediatrics at Georgetown University Hospital, there is no connection between vaccinations and autism. “There are absolutely no data that show autism is linked to vaccinations,” said Nelson. (http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/health/new-study-suggests-link-between-vaccines-and-autism-051011#ixzz1MFSKu1ve) The Health Resources and Services Administration, the Federal agency responsible for improving access to health care services for people who are uninsured, isolated or medically vulnerable, also put out a statement in response to the new study stating: “The government has not compensated any case based on a determination that autism, in the absence of acute neurological illness, was actually caused by vaccines. Furthermore, there is no reliable scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism even in cases where an acute encephalopathy following vaccination has occurred.”(http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/health/new-study-suggests-link-between-vaccines-and-autism-051011) Critics argue for further investigation The Huffington Post asked Elizabeth Birt Center for Autism Law and Advocacy, whose board members authored the study, why anyone should care about the legal proceedings of some obscure court when so much published science says otherwise. The EBCALA argued that the government officials in Health and human Services or the VICP who decided that the children in this study suffered vaccine injury did so based on science. “We uncovered that these children also have autism. How can the government then continue to assert that there is no link between vaccines and autism?” said EBCALA directors, “If in fact there is no link, why would there be even one case of vaccine-associated autism, let alone 83?” Authors of the study called their preliminary findings “the tip of the iceberg,” during a press conference in Washington May 11th. Hundreds of autism cases have been settled quietly by the government, they say, while thousands more were probably never filed, according to News Medical. There are currently over 5,000 court cases pending that claim autism as a result of vaccine injury. (http://www.news-medical.net/news/20110511/NAA-calls-for-immediate-Congressional-hearings-and-scientific-investigation-into-autism-vaccine-link.aspx). “The [VICP] appears to favor cases without any reference to autism,” said National Autism Association President Wendy Fournier. “The message is clear, if you want to receive financial support for the long-term medical care of your loved one injured by vaccines, submit a claim for brain damage, or residual seizure disorder – but leave autism out of it.” NAA believes the findings of the new study call into serious question the continued assertion from federal health agencies that vaccines do not cause autism. “As this study shows, vaccines can and do cause brain damage and subsequent autism in certain children,” said Fournier. “The government has been settling these cases for over twenty years, yet has failed to conduct research into why these children were susceptible to vaccine injury. This neglect will continue to needlessly and senselessly result in adverse reactions and autism in other children.” Call for congressional hearings “Congress needs to find out whether there was a cover-up,” said lead author and managing director of EBCALA Mary Holland. “It doesn’t look good.” SafeMinds says the government has asserted that it “does not track” autism among the vaccine-injured. SafeMinds is a nonprofit that aims to raise awareness, support research and focus attention on the growing evidence of a link between mercury and neurological disorders such as autism, attention deficit disorder and learning difficulties. Not looking is the easiest way not to find something, said SafeMinds, so the organization is calling for immediate federal research into the mechanisms of injury in these children in an effort to protect other children from harm and Congressional action to reform the VICP. “This study dramatically shifts the debate on autism and vaccines,” said SafeMinds’ Executive Director, Lyn Redwood. “The question is no longer, Can vaccines cause autism? The answer is clear. Now, we have to ask, How many cases of autism have vaccines caused and how do we prevent new injuries from occurring?” (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/83-cases-of-autism-associated-with-childhood-vaccine-injury-compensated-in-federal-vaccine-court-121570673.html) Sources for this article include: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/83-cases-of-autism-associated-with-childhood-vaccine-injury-compensated-in-federal-vaccine-court-121570673.html http://www.news-medical.net/news/20110511/NAA-calls-for-immediate-Congressional-hearings-and-scientific-investigation-into-autism-vaccine-link.aspx http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/morning/vaccine-autism-link-new-investigation-20110511 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/high-rates-of-autism-foun_b_859234.html http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/health/new-study-suggests-link-between-vaccines-and-autism-051011 http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/742471

Children’s brains needlessly exposed to cancer-linked radiation

(NaturalNews) Are you a parent? Here’s a simple question to ask yourself: if your youngster receives a bump on the head, would you rather keep an eye on your child for 4 to 6 hours to make sure he or she suffered no serious trauma — or would you prefer that doctors zap your child’s brain with ionizing radiation from costly computed tomography (CT) scans just to make you feel better immediately? Most moms and dads would probably prefer the simple “watchful waiting” approach if they thought there was little chance their offspring had serious head trauma. And it turns out, according to a huge study of more than 40,000 kids with blunt head trauma just published online in the journal Pediatrics , simple observation is the best approach and also the healthiest — because it doesn’t expose children to ionizing radiation. So why do about half of all US children taken to hospital emergency departments (EDs) for a head injury receive a head CT scan? Remarkably, the scientists behind the new research claim it is “often to ease worried parents’ concerns”. Simply put, parents are blamed for the outrageously common practice of exposing children needlessly to radiation for a bump on the head. In a statement to the media, the research team, led by Children’s Hospital Boston and UC Davis, pointed out that true traumatic brain injury is uncommon. Their multi-center study of children with minor blunt head trauma provides compelling evidence that simply allowing a period of observation can reduce the use of head CT by as much as half — without putting the kids in danger and without exposing children to ionizing radiation. This change in medical practice would not only slash healthcare costs, but is better medicine, the researchers concluded. “Only a small percentage of children with blunt head trauma really have something serious going on,” Lise Nigrovic, MD, MPH, of Children’s Hospital Boston (who co-led the study with Nathan Kuppermann, MD, MPH, chair of the Department of Emergency Medicine at UC Davis) said in a media statement. “If you can be watched in the ED for a few hours, you may not need a CT.” Nigrovic, Kuppermann and colleagues found that simply opting for an observation period of kids who had received a blow to the head did not compromise safety. Clinically important traumatic brain injury (defined by an injury resulting in death, neurosurgical intervention, intubation for more than 24 hours or hospital admission for two nights or more) was equally uncommon in the kids who were simply observed for several hours and those who were not observed but sent for CT scans. The scientists pointed out that cranial CT scans present additional risks for children because youngsters’ growing brain tissue is far more sensitive to ionizing radiation than that of adults. And, because of their longer life expectancy, children’s lifetime risk of developing a radiation-induced cancer is greater. However,as NaturalNews has previously reported, there is evidence that CT scans increase the risk of cancer in adults, too(http://www.naturalnews.com/026001_CT_scans_cancer_risk.html). “CT isn’t bad if you really need it, but you don’t want to use it in children who are at low risk for having a significant injury,” Nigrovicn stated. “For parents, this means spending a couple of extra hours in the ED in exchange for not getting a CT. It’s the children in the middle risk groups — those who don’t appear totally normal, but whose injury isn’t obviously severe — for whom observation can really help.” So exactly how long should you keep a watchful eye on a child who has received a blow to the head? Practice guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend a child be carefully observed for 4 to 6 hours after injury. “There is a clear need to develop appropriate and safe guidelines for decreasing the number of inappropriate head CT scans that we do on children,” Kuppermann said in the press statement.” The results of this analysis demonstrate that a period of observation before deciding to use head CT scans on many injured children can spare children from inappropriate radiation when it is not called for, while not increasing the risk of missing important brain injuries.” For more information: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/ http://www.naturalnews.com/029577_CT_scans_radiation.html

Hypocritical pediatricians push for stricter chemical laws at the same time they inject babies with toxic vaccines

(NaturalNews) The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recently issued a policy paper condemning the current Toxic Substances Control Act (TSC Act) for failing to properly regulate the tens of thousands of toxic chemicals used in various consumer products, many of which are especially dangerous to pregnant women and young children. Though correct in its identification of chemical use as a toxic threat to society’s most vulnerable individuals, the AAP hypocritically continues to support the intramuscular poisoning of children through vaccinations, which are loaded with toxic chemicals that are directly injected into children’s bodies. Several different groups have been pushing in recent years to have the TSC Act amended because it has utterly failed to keep tabs on the thousands of new chemicals introduced every single year in the US. Currently, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) only requires safety testing of some 200 chemicals, while thousands of others are specifically exempted. And the EPA does not even properly test chemicals before approving them, anyway — it is basically a system of “safe until proven dangerous,” except the only ones doing the “proving” are the chemical companies themselves (http://www.naturalnews.com/029390_chemicals_EPA.html). “Children are not little adults,” said Dr. Jerome Paulson, a member of the AAP’s Council on Environmental Health, to Reuters Health, noting that children are most affected by chemical exposure. “Their bodies are different and their behaviors are different. That means that their exposures to chemicals in the environment are different, and the way their bodies (break down) those chemicals are different.” Paulson is right, which is what makes AAP’s stance on childhood vaccinations highly concerning. How can a group that openly condemns environmental chemical exposure continue to endorse chemical exposure via childhood vaccinations? AAP is so in favor of vaccinations that it actually holds the yearly “National Infant Immunization Week,” which happens to be going on at the same time as the group’s open condemnation of the TSA Act. Vaccines, as most NaturalNews readers already know, are loaded with toxic chemicals like aluminum hydroxide, artificial dyes, formaldehyde, ethanol, Sorbitol, and Thimerosal (mercury) — all of which are pumped directly into human tissue (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-1.pdf). On the one hand, AAP is right. Environmental chemicals are highly dangerous and need better regulation. But so are the medically sanctioned chemicals used in vaccines, which are linked to innumerable diseases and conditions (http://www.naturalnews.com/vaccines.html). Sources for this story include: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/25/us-pediatricians-chemicals-idUSTRE73O0UB20110425

Breastfeeding prevents seizures, study finds

(NaturalNews) The longer a mother breastfeeds her baby, the less likely the child is to have seizures later in life, according to a recent study published in the Journal of Pediatrics . Danish researchers observed that babies who are breastfed for at least the first nine months are nearly half as likely to experience seizures than babies breastfed for only the first three months. The team from the University of Aarhus School of Public Health looked at the early feeding habits of nearly 70,000 Danish children born between 1996 and 2000, whom they tracked until 2008. They asked mothers how long they breastfed their children, and whether or not those children experienced seizures after they were a year old. Data indicated that the longer babies are breastfed, the less likely they are to experience seizures or develop epilepsy, the neurological condition marked by chronic seizures. According to statistics, about one in 100 U.S. children have two or more seizures during their childhood. Those breastfed at least three months have a one in 135 chance of having seizures, while those breastfed over six months have a one in 150 chance. Those breastfed nine months or longer have a one in 200 chance, and the rate continues to drop the longer the duration of breastfeeding. The unique nutrients and immune factors in a mother’s breast milk are vital for both the mental and physical development of a child. Malnourished babies are known to have a higher risk of seizures, including those that are fed formula rather than real breast milk. There simply is no replacement for the complete, natural baby food that is breast milk. “The brain continues to develop for at least 16 years,” said Dr. Linda Friedman, associate professor of neuroscience at New York College of Osteopathic Medicine, encouraging the breastfeeding of babies for at least the first six months. “The first five years are most important for initial brain development.” Sources for this story include: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/07/us-breastfeeding-seizures-idUSTRE71663T20110207

Dr Andrew Wakefield speaks on the structure of scientific revolutions: Vaccines, viruses and evolution

(NaturalNews) Dr Andrew Wakefield discusses the structure of scientific revolutions with Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, in a video interview available now on NaturalNews.TV: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=0CDBE1A9930CC8A14EEEB139A183D8C9 In this interview, Dr Wakefield speaks at length about the interaction between human beings and infectious disease. This is perhaps the most in-depth discussion by Dr Wakefield that has ever been captured on camera about the long-term threat that vaccines pose to the future of humankind. Here’s some of what Dr Wakefield says about the importance of expanding our view of infectious disease beyond the stilted, dumbed-down conceptual framework of conventional medicine, the CDC, the WHO, etc. I’ve grown to have a huge respect for [infectious bacteria and viruses] over the years. We are here on the Earth now because of infection. Not in spite of it, because of it. Our immune system has been fashioned, shaped, designed over millions of years, since we first emerged from the primordial soup as single-celled organisms to evolve a hugely complex immune system that is a result of its interaction, its education with infectious agents. They are the prime factor in developing our immune responsiveness. By going from a respiratory route of infection of a natural virus to an injected form of infection… from going from a different strain, a different route, a different dose of infection and a different mean population age of exposure to infection, so kids used to get mumps at 7 to 10 years of age, now they get it at 18 months — when you change that subtle ecological balance which has evolved over such a long time, it is no wonder that you are going to have unexpected, unintended consequences. The other thing, of course, is that we’ve now come to learn that so many infections or so many infectious agents are actually beneficial. We require them for education of our gut immune system. The exposure of the gut, the colonization of the gut, the gut flora very early on, is a major determiner of how our immune system [develops.] I’ve become a great respecter of infectious agents and their ability to elude us, to cause problems that we did not expect, and if we believe in our exquisite arrogance that we can exploit them, manipulate them in a test tube, give them back to people and exploit them in a way we call attenuated, then the virus will laugh at us. It will simply laugh, because it has a collective intelligence that will not allow that to happen. You’re fighting mutations that are collectively more intelligent, more adaptable, and ultimately can cause what, we don’t know. But you also create a population that now becomes dependent on vaccination . Not just the first vaccine, but the second, the third, the fourth… it never ends. You create a population that is dependent on immunization. Watch the complete interview at: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=0CDBE1A9930CC8A14EEEB139A183D8C9 The dogmatic intellectual brutality of modern medical science In this interview, Dr Wakefield also speaks about the vaccine attack dogs who use fear tactics to terrorize scientists into conforming to “accepted” views on vaccines: I talk to many scientists, many physicians whose children are affected by autism following vaccines who say I know there is a problem, but we don’t dare step out of line. We look at what happened to you, and we don’t dare step out of line. …And I do meet these people all the time, and to me that’s unacceptable. Because the future of the world depends upon the wellbeing of our children. [Science] has sold out to the pharmaceutical industry, and to the pharma-government complex. Medical schools are dependent upon their funding in large part from the pharmaceutical industry, or pharmaceutical industry influences, and this is dancing with the Devil in respect to the way in which science should be conducted, and the influences placed upon it. This is what happened to me, there were constraints placed upon my valid vaccine safety research, because in the UK, the government had done a deal with the pharmaceutical industry that meant the government had picked up their liability for a knowingly dangerous Measles, Mumps, Rubella vaccine. They licensed a vaccine in July of 1997 which had, in that same month, been withdrawn in Canada for safety reasons. They knew it was not safe . It was cheaper. They put price before the wellbeing of children. Now we’ve seen time and time again the corruption, the abuse of science, and it’s happening largely on one side of this equation. You are told time and time again there are 14, 17, 20, millions of papers which exonerate the vaccine, saying there’s no link between mercury thimerosal preservative and vaccinations. In fact when the data are analyzed, when the studies are looked at comprehensively, 74 percent of those studies’ published data support a link between mercury and autism . And yet the public are being told, through this vast public relations machine, that the science is over, it’s ruled it out. And when you take the science that proposes it is ruled out and reanalyze it correctly, which Dr Desoto did from the University of Northern Iowa, it shows exactly the opposite effect, and the scientists who wrote the original papers had to change their findings and conclusions. They had not analyzed the data properly. So science in the private interest, I’m afraid, is damaging for the people. And that’s what we’re seeing at the moment. The future of human civilization is threatened by modern vaccines In this interview, Dr Wakefield also speaks out how vaccines may one day threaten the long-term survivability of the human race , even while forcing the world population to become dependent on vaccines in the mean time. Here’s what he says: What happens to a population that becomes dependent for its very survival on vaccines? Who are we, and our children, and our grandchildren, then beholden to? And are the people we are beholden to, the pharmaceutical industry, are they actually capable of anticipating what that bacteria or virus is going to do next? No. Because they’ve never thought about it in the first place. So we are creating a marketplace; we are creating a wonderful revenue model; and we are creating a potential time bomb for the population . You cannot sterilize the world, nor should you. This whole notion of the Germ Theory needs to be radically modified in light of what we now know, so that we have scientists who acknowledge that this fundamental and very essential ecological interaction between man and microbe, or plant and microbe, is vital… but you have a commercial imperative which pays no heed to that at all. The dangers of vaccines are quite real Are vaccine ingredients truly dangerous to human health? Dr Wakefield addresses that question in great detail: You’re taking children and you’re giving them ethyl mercury from day one… indeed now in pregnant women in the influenza vaccine, and you are potentially very likely biological, plausibly, poisoning the immune system of those individuals, biasing it towards an immune response that is not protective against viral infections , and then you’re giving live viruses? What is the outcome of that going to be? Aluminum is known to influence the immune system in the same way. Indeed, that’s why it’s there [in the vaccines]. It’s there to promote an antibody response, a response which does not bias the immune system towards protection from intracellular organisms like viruses. You are deliberately doing it. So when you then give a live viral vaccine, what is the compound effect of that? When you’re giving them all at the same time, what is the compound effect? No one knows. Why? Because no one’s looking. Why? Because no one cares enough, that’s why. Do not take these infectious agents, these known toxins for granted. Do not make assumptions about them, particularly when you’re using them in combination because they will produce untoward effects that you don’t even expect, that you are not looking for, [that] you have not got on your list of adverse reactions that are known to be caused by this virus. You won’t find them. Because you have changed the whole interaction between the infectious agent… and the immune system . That’s what you’ve changed, something so fundamental. Dedicated to scientific truth, regardless of the personal and political costs Ultimately, Dr Wakefield is a truly dedicated scientist who persistently pursues the evidence without regard to any particular political agenda or corporate agenda. Unfortunately for Dr Wakefield, this pursuit of scientific truth has put him in the crosshairs of the conventional medical system, the mainstream media and virtually the entire pseudoscientific vaccine-pushing attack dogs; but this has not deterred Dr Wakefield from continuing to pursue scientific answers to important questions. And yet, Dr Wakefield has no illusions that his contributions to these scientific revolutions in the understanding of infectious disease and vaccines may not be recognized in his own lifetime: If you’re going to get involved in this kind of debate, then you as the scientist need to study the history of medicine, the history of science as well, and understand this is the fate of many people who go out on a limb, who make extraordinary claims. That’s what’s going to happen. You mustn’t expect to be exonerated in your lifetime… or ever. But you must stick to the scientific principle and pursue the hypothesis until its natural conclusion, and not abandon it because you’re put under political, financial or other pressures, if you can. Now, there is an additional imperative for a physician to do it, who is looking at these children… As long as I don’t suffer from the vainglorious belief that this is all going to be resolved in my lifetime — I hope it is for the sake of these children — but I’m so far beyond that notion that I need some kind of redemption from the American Academy of Pediatrics, or The Lancet, I don’t. These are instruments of a state that I don’t really want to be associated with. I would like to stick to the principles of medical science, and that’s my job. And I won’t be deterred from that. Watch the full interview at NaturalNews.TV: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=0CDBE1A9930CC8A14EEEB139A183D8C9

TV damages health of toddlers

(NaturalNews) Toddlers who watch television are significantly more likely to have poor health and poor educational performance by age 10, according to a study conducted by researchers from the University of Montreal and published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine . “Although we expected the impact of early TV viewing to disappear after seven-and-a-half years of childhood, the fact that negative outcomes remained is quite daunting,” said lead researcher Linda Pagani. “Our findings make a compelling public health argument against excessive TV viewing in early childhood.” “This is yet another study reinforcing the need for our society to finally accept that quite aside from good or bad parenting, children’s daily screen time is a major independent health issue,” said Aric Sigman of the British Psychological Association, who was not involved in the study. As part of the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development Main Exposure, researchers questioned parents about their children’s television exposure at both 29 and 53 months of age. They found that the average two-year-old watched just under nine hours of TV per week, while the average four-year-old watched just under 15. Fully 11 percent of two-year-olds and 23 percent of four-year olds watched more than two hours per day. At the age of 10, children who had watched more TV as youngsters were significantly more likely to be rated by their teachers as having lower levels of classroom engagement and poorer performance in math. They were also less likely to be active and more likely to drink more soft drinks and have a higher body mass index. “Early childhood is a critical period for brain development and formation of behavior,” Pagani said. “High levels of TV consumption during this period can lead to future unhealthy habits.” “Common sense would suggest that television exposure replaces time that could be spent engaging in other developmentally enriching activities and tasks that foster cognitive, behavioral and motor development.” Sources for this story include: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8654963.stm.

Non-stick cookware chemical PFOA linked to high cholesterol in children

(NaturalNews) Another day, another headline about the dangers of a synthetic chemical in our food… This time it’s PFOA, or perfluoroalkyl acid — the non-stick chemical used on cookware surfaces. According to a study just published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine , high levels of PFOA were strongly correlated with an increase in both total cholesterol and LDL “bad” cholesterol. Typically, high cholesterol is treated with a second chemical intervention — statin drugs. Statins can produce devastating side effects including kidney and liver damage (http://naturalnews.com/statins.html), muscle weakness and eye problems. So now we have a situation where people ingesting PFOA chemicals may be inaccurately diagnosed with cholesterol problems and be prescribed dangerous chemical medications that cause even more health problems. This study looked at 12,000 children who were exposed to PFOA through their local water supply which was contaminated with PFOA. It does not prove a link between non-stick cookware and cholesterol, although it suggests a possible link that should probably be researched further. PFOA is on more than just cooking pans PFOA isn’t merely found on cooking pans, by the way: Nearly all cooking surfaces for electric consumer food prep appliances are made with it: Sandwich toasters, griddles and even popular cooking devices such as George Foreman Grills. You’ll also get PFOA from most restaurants because non-stick cooking surfaces are commonly used to prepare your omelets, pancakes, pasta sauces and many other menu items. Avoiding PFOA is nearly impossible unless you prepare all your own food at home, and even then, you must be extremely careful with what food prep devices you use. Even Swiss Diamond pans which claim that you’re “cooking on diamonds” are actually made with PFOA chemicals (http://www.naturalnews.com/021059.html). I have avoided non-stick cookware for many years and wouldn’t dare prepare any food on such an item made with dangerous chemicals, but most consumers don’t know about the dangers of PFOA, and they continue to cook their food with non-stick pans. It gets really dangerous when people use forks or metal spatulas to stir their food in such pans because this action scrapes off microscopic bits of PFOA chemicals that then become lodged in their food and swallowed. My advice is to avoid all non-stick cookware . Buy stainless steel cookware with copper plating on the bottom, which helps disperse heat and prevent burning. Better yet, eat more raw foods and superfood smoothies which require no cooking whatsoever. The mere act of cooking food in a pan, after all, creates carcinogens in the food. The only “safely” cooked food is steamed or boiled. Anything that subjects foods to very high temperatures — frying, broiling, grilling, etc. — results in the creation of cancer-causing chemicals in the food itself. And that’s true whether you’re using a PFOA pan or not. Sources for this story include: BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11201956

Vitamin E is effective treatment for "silent" liver disease

(NaturalNews) Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is a common, “silent” liver disease. Although it occurs in people who drink little or no alcohol, it causes damage that resembles alcoholic liver disease, including inflammation. According to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), the condition is marked by fat in the liver and is associated with the growing number of overweight Americans. In all, about 2 to 5 percent of people in the US have NASH. And while many feel fine and aren’t aware they have a liver problem, they actually have a disease that can eventually cause cirrhosis, liver cancer, and death. There’s been no effective treatment for NASH — until now. Results from a new multi-center study organized by the Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network of NIDDK show vitamin E is a successful treatment for the disease. The findings of this largest ever placebo-controlled randomized trial of NASH therapies were just published in the April 28 online edition of the New England Journal of Medicine . “There is an increasing prevalence of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) in this country, something that is directly related to the obesity epidemic,” Dr. Joel Lavine, faculty member in the Department of Pediatrics at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and chief of gastroenterology, hepatology and nutrition at New York-Presbyterian/Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital, said in a statement to the press. “The good news is that this study showed that cheap and readily available vitamin E can help many of those with the condition.” Dr. Lavine, who was a leader of the research team, pointed out that the drug pioglitazone was also studied alongside daily doses of 800 IU of vitamin E. Although the medication showed some benefits, they were minimal compared to the dramatic effectiveness of vitamin E. For the Pioglitazone or Vitamin E for NASH Study (PIVENS), the researchers randomly assigned 247 non-diabetic adults with biopsy-confirmed NASH to three groups receiving either vitamin E, pioglitazone (a drug that improves the sensitivity of cells to insulin) or a placebo. After 96 weeks of treatment, liver enzyme tests, which are commonly used to measure liver injury, improved in those who received either pioglitazone or vitamin E. Unlike vitamin E, however, pioglitazone treatment had an unwelcome side effect — it caused an average weight gain of 10 pounds over the duration of this study. What’s more, although pioglitazone improved many features of NASH, it fell short of statistical significance. However, except for the amount of scar tissue in the liver, vitamin E improved all features of NASH and clearly emerged as effective, natural therapy for this potentially fatal liver disease. For more information: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20427778

90 Percent of African American Children Deficient in Vitamin D

(NaturalNews) As many as 90 percent of all black children may be deficient in vitamin D, according to a new analysis conducted by researchers from Harvard Medical School, the University of Colorado-Denver and Massachusetts General Hospital, and published in the journal Pediatrics . The American Academy of Pediatrics defines an adequate vitamin D blood level in children as 50 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L), but many researchers have begun to argue that 75 nmol/L are actually necessary for good health. “There are a lot of studies demonstrating associations between low levels of vitamin D and a laundry list of poor health outcomes,” lead researcher Jonathan Mansbach said. Vitamin D plays a critical role in bone health and development, and guidelines for safe levels were originally set with those effects in mind. Yet new research suggests that higher levels may be necessary for the vitamin to help regulate the immune system and protect against cancer, heart disease, autoimmune disorders and infection. In the current study, researchers used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which measured vitamin D blood levels of approximately 5,000 children between 2001 and 2006. The study participants were designed to comprise a nationally representative sample. The researchers found that if 75 nmol/L is taken as the cutoff point, 92 percent of black children, 80 percent of non-black Hispanic children and more than two-thirds of all children have insufficient levels of the vitamin. Mansbach called the numbers “astounding.” “If 75 nmol/L or higher is eventually demonstrated to be the healthy normal level of vitamin D, then there is much more vitamin D deficiency in the U.S. than people realize,” Mansbach said. Even using the lower level of 50 nmol/L, a full 20 percent of children still had insufficient vitamin D levels. Nationally, this would translate into six million people. Sun exposure is still considered the best source for vitamin D. Sources for this story include: www.sfgate.com; www.eurekalert.org; www.nlm.nih.gov.

Dr. Lawrence Palevsky joins NaturalNews Talk Hour: Holistic healthcare for children

(NaturalNews) This week’s NaturalNews Talk Hour presents Dr. Lawrence Palevsky. board certified pediatrician specializing in children’s health and illness. This show will be discussing “Holistic Healthcare for Children , The ABC’s of Safe and Sound Medicine”. This will be special evening focused on dissolving unnecessary fears in the hearts and minds of parents all over the world. Our show starts this Thursday evening at 6pm Pacific / 9pm Eastern, and registration is FREE. Simply enter your email address in the registration form on the right column of this page and you’ll receive call-in details for the broadcast. The NaturalNews Talk Hour is a “behind the scenes”, up close and personal look at the most important issues of our time. Discover what the mainstream media hasn’t told you about the secrets of optimal health, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. Jonathan Landsman, host of NaturalNews Talk Hour, says “Dr. Palevesky represents a rare breed of physicians with a brave, new message of hope and understanding for parents everywhere. This is an excellent opportunity to learn how to take GREAT care of our children and rid ourselves of unwarranted fears and confusion about our own health.” With participation by the Health Ranger, the NaturalNews Talk Hour features top-notch guests like Drs. Julian Whitaker, Bernie Siegel, T. Colin Campbell plus many other notable experts on healthy living. Reader feedback about the talk hour has been extremely positive. One listener sent us this testimonial about the show: I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for “The NaturalNews Talk Hour.” As soon as I receive my show information it’s passed on to all my clients and classmates from the Institute for Integrative Nutrition. The next show will be posted on my FB page. Jonathan, you are making a difference in people’s lives – keep up the good work!!!!” – Regina E. The NaturalNews Talk Hour is sponsored by the NaturalNews MOXXOR Team. MOXXOR is a NEW class of omegas and antioxidants blended together into a powerful supplement. Improve your mobility, brain function and emotional well-being. To order MOXXOR , email: naturalnewsteam@optonline.net Each show will continue to feature many of the top natural health experts in the world. To receive each week’s unique call-in number, simply register by entering your email address in the form on the right. This week’s guest: Lawrence Palevsky, M.D., F.A.A.P. Lawrence Palevsky, M.D., F.A.A.P. , Holistic Healthcare for Children – Thu. Feb. 18th Dr. Palevsky is a board certified pediatrician who utilizes a holistic approach to children’s wellness and illness. Dr. Palevsky received his medical degree from the NYU School of Medicine in 1987, completed a three-year pediatric residency at The Mount Sinai Hospital in NYC in 1990, and served as a pediatric fellow in the ambulatory care out-patient department at Bellevue Hospital, NYC, from 1990-1991. Since 1991, his clinical experience includes working in pediatric emergency and intensive care medicine, in-patient and out-patient pediatric medicine, neonatal intensive care medicine, newborn and delivery room medicine, and conventional, holistic and integrative pediatric private practice at the Center for Health and Healing- an integrative and complementary care medical facility affiliated with the Beth Israel Medical Center in NYC. Dr. Palevsky is a Fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics, co-founder and President of the Holistic Pediatric Association (www.hpakids.org) and Past,President of the American Holistic Medical Association (www.holisticmedicine.org). In his current practice in Northport, Long Island and Manhattan, NYC, Dr. Palevsky offers consultations and educational programs to families and practitioners in the areas of preventive and holistic health; childhood development; lifestyle changes; nutrition for adults, infants and children; safe, alternative treatments for common and difficult to treat acute and chronic pediatric and adult conditions; vaccination controversies; mindful parenting; and rethinking the medical paradigm. Additionally, he teaches holistic integrative pediatric and adolescent medicine to parents, and medical and allied health professionals, both nationally and internationally, and is available for speaking engagements worldwide. Attention ALL Parents! As a parent, myself, I know you’re going to LOVE the questions I ask him. Don’t forget to share the news about this show with your friends and family. Send an email, use facebook or just call and tell a friend! Register now using the email form in the right column, and you will be emailed show details. Don’t miss out — space is limited — Register Now!