Alzheimer’s Latest World Research Conference Recommends LIFESTYLE CHANGES for Prevention

Among these eminent presenters were:

  • National Institutes of Health
  • Columbia University Medical Center
  • Harvard Medical School/Massachusetts General Hospital
  • Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
  • University of California
  • Stanford University
  • University of Texas
  • Weil’ Cornell Medicine
  • Yale School of Medicine

There were five major categories of presentations that stood out from the research presentations.

  1. 1. Lifestyle modification
  2. 2. Neuroimaging
  3. 3. Blood-based biomarkers
  4. 4. Environmental factors (infections, medications)
  5. 5. Microbiota

Lifestyle; keep inflammation stressors down. This mainly applies to foods but immune challenges like molds, bacteria, viruses and fungi contribute to this as well. But let’s talk about sugar first. Sugar tastes great and we need glucose to survive but refined sugar, corn syrup, agave syrup, eating too many fruits will jam up your brain and body over years and inflame your brain causing dementia. We can survive without eating simple carbs. We NEED proteins fats and complex carbs(fiber) to survive and cannot go without them. But sugar, even fruit we can get by without it.

The newest brain research says, “Sugar stimulates systemic(includes your brain) inflammation” Man made fats and too much Omega-6 fatty acids cause inflammation and eventually rot your brain. Fried foods, margarine, canola oil, corn oil. Crisco shortening, sunflower seed oil are all GMO, high heat processed which breaks down the integrity of the fat molecule making it “bad”. Commercial baked goods from cookies and doughnuts to 9 grain breads all full of sugar and chemical preservatives we can do without. Medicines break down the brain too.

Harmless Zyrtec contains aspartate which “melts” your brain. So season after season of using OTC allergy meds like Zyrtec will lead to memory loss and possibly dementia. Make smarter choices, find out what triggers your allergies and avoid it or do a ‘detox’ program here at the office and desensitize your system using our special system based on Chinese Acupuncture points and cold laser stimulation. It’s not a cure but it helps tremendously with “body sensitivity reactions”.

The Illusion Is Gone

by Ben Irwin

Tearing up President Trump’s speech may have been the most honest thing Speaker Pelosi could have done.

Refusing to shake Pelosi’s hand, if it was an intentional snub, may have been the most honest thing Trump could have done.

We are finally able to see ourselves as we are.

For years, the State of the Union and other moments of political pomp and ceremony projected at least the illusion of civility, a carefully choreographed image of a country rising above partisanship for the sake of common cause—or at least common courtesy.

There were occasional cracks in the edifice, like the time a congressman shouted “You lie!” during a speech by then-President Obama. But for the most part, the illusion held. Decorum was maintained, the edifice preserved.

During last night’s State of the Union, there was no such illusion. The customary pretense of civility gave way to what was, if nothing else, a more honest reflection back to us—of who we are, and how deeply divided we are.

We’re not going to offer any hot takes on whether ripping the speech was a bold act of political defiance or a petty display of partisanship. Both perspectives are held by members of our team and our wider community. We are not unlike the divided nation many of us belong to.

What last night’s State of the Union made painfully clear is that we can’t escape or ignore our current situation.

Yes, we really are this divided. Yes, 2020 really is going to be as polarizing as many of us fear.

So what are we going to do about it?

Cholesterol Myth, You Don’t need cholesterol medication

High cholesterol does NOT cause heart attacks. Cholesterol medications have no basis in medical research for preventing death from heart disease. The statin drugs they prescribe actually cause more damage than they prevent, like Lipitor damages the liver and cuts off a vital nutrient called CoQ10 which the heart really depends on. This is why your medical doctor runs blood tests on your liver every few months when you are taking these dangerous medications.

Having cholesterol above 200 is FINE! Many studies from Europe showed that cholesterol levels above 300 were actually good for longevity and overall well being.

So why does my doctor prescribe cholesterol medications if it’s not a problem and the medications are dangerous? They don’t have the time to do the research on their own to find out. I don’t know I guess they just listen to the drug company sales reps that knock on their doors every day and take them out to lunch and pay for exotic trips. Who knows? But you can ask your MD to read a few good books on the subject and see what they do.

Here is a wonderfully researched article by Dr. Mercola, DO.

What? No time read it then use our handy Cholesterol Guide Graphic, click here.

Could it be possible that nearly everything your doctor and the media is telling you about high cholesterol and how it relates to heart disease and strokes is wrong?

Absolutely!

The media and health experts have been giving out massive misinformation about cholesterol. In a thought-provoking two-part series, Dr. Ernest N. Curtis, a doctor of internal medicine and cardiology, puts to rest several decades-old studies that supposedly “proved” the cholesterol-heart disease link.

Debunking the Cholesterol “Science” and Unveiling the Truth

If high cholesterol and high-fat diets are really NOT the cause of heart disease, then how did this massive misinformation campaign start? It actually started more than 100 years ago when the Lipid Hypothesis or the Cholesterol Theory was developed by a German pathologist named Rudolph Virchow. After studying arterial plaques from corpses, he theorized that cholesterol in your blood led to the development of plaques in your arteries.

Meanwhile, in 1913 in St. Petersburg, Russia, Nikolaj Nikolajewitsch Anitschkow fed rabbits cholesterol and determined that it led to atherosclerotic changes (apparently no one questioned the fact that rabbits are herbivores and do not naturally consume cholesterol!). This started the notion that eating cholesterol leads to plaque deposits in your arteries, and at that time it was believed that all cholesterol in your blood was due to dietary sources.

This, of course, is not true, as it’s now known that your liver makes about 75 percent of your body’s cholesterol. That’s right! Even if you didn’t eat any cholesterol, you would still have cholesterol in your body, which is a good thing considering it’s needed by every one of your cells to produce cell membranes.

Your diet is actually an afterthought when it comes to what your cholesterol levels will be, but this simple truth is largely ignored or unrealized even by many physicians.

In the early 1900s, the Cholesterol Theory was already taking root, but it received even more completely flawed support in the 1950s and subsequent years thereafter. The string of research that effectively solidified the cholesterol myth we know all too well today.

The Seven Countries’ Study Incorrectly Links Dietary Fat to Heart Disease

Several decades ago, Dr. Ancel Keys published a seminal paper that serves as the basis for nearly all of the initial scientific support for the Cholesterol Theory. The study is known as the Seven Countries Study, that linked the consumption of dietary fat to coronary heart disease. What you may not know is that when Keys published his analysis that claimed to prove the link between dietary fats and coronary heart disease (CHD), he selectively analyzed information from only seven countries to prove his correlation, rather than comparing all the data available at the time — from 22 countries.

As you might suspect, the studies he excluded were those that did not fit with his hypothesis, namely those that showed a low percentage fat in their diet and a high incidence of death from CHD as well as those with a high-fat diet and low incidence of CHD. If all 22 countries had been analyzed, there would have been no correlation found whatsoever; it should have been called the 22 Countries Study!

The nutrition community of that time completely accepted the hypothesis, and encouraged the public to cut out butter, red meat, animal fats, eggs, dairy and other “artery clogging” fats from their diets — a radical change at that time that is still very much in force today.

Most of the experts I know believe that Dr. Keys’ research was pivotal for perpetuating the low-fat approach to health. This is a major part of the solid science you will need to know if anyone seeks to disagree with you when you share this information; this study is really the foundation that triggered the massive emphasis on low-fat diets and the flawed belief that cholesterol is so pernicious. 

More Flawed “Proof”: The Framingham Study

The next major support for the cholesterol theory came from a study you have likely heard of called the Framingham Heart Study, which is often cited as proof of the lipid hypothesis. This study began in 1948 and involved some 6,000 people from the town of Framingham, Massachusetts who filled out detailed questionnaires about their lifestyle habits and diets. The study is credited with identifying heart disease risk factors, such as smoking, high blood pressure, lack of exercise and, yes, high cholesterol.

The cholesterol link was weak, as researchers noted those who weighed more and had abnormally high blood cholesterol levels were slightly more at risk for future heart disease, but widely publicized. What you don’t hear about is the fact that the more cholesterol and saturated fat people ate, the lower their cholesterol levels.

In a 1992 editorial published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, Dr. William Castelli, a former director of the Framingham Heart study, stated:

“In Framingham, Mass., the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person’s serum cholesterol. The opposite of what… Keys et al would predict…We found that the people who ate the most cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, ate the most calories, weighed the least and were the most physically active.”

The “MrFit” Study: Hypothesis Proven by Omission

The U.S. Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT), sponsored by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, is another study that is highly misleading. It compared mortality rates and eating habits of over 12,000 men, and the finding that was widely publicized was that people who ate a low-saturated fat and low-cholesterol diet had a marginal reduction in coronary heart disease.

What did they leave out?

Their mortality from all causes was higher! As Mary Enig and Sally Fallon stated in The Truth About Saturated Fat:

“The few studies that indicate a correlation between fat reduction and a decrease in coronary heart disease mortality also document a concurrent increase in deaths from cancer, brain hemorrhage, suicide and violent death. After 10 years of lowering fat intake and not smoking, they found no significant difference in death from heart disease or total death compared to the control group of smokers, poor diet etc.”

Statistical Lies: The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial (LRC-CPPT)

Around the same time as the MRFIT study was the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial (LRC-CPPT), which cost $150 million and is often cited to justify a low-fat diet, even though dietary factors were not tested in the study at all. Instead, the study tested the effects of cholestyramine, a cholesterol-lowering drug.

As Enig and Fallon wrote:

” Their statistical analysis of the results implied a 24% reduction in the rate of coronary heart disease in the group taking the drug compared with the placebo group; however, non-heart disease deaths in the drug group increased — deaths from cancer, stroke, violence and suicide. Even the conclusion that lowering cholesterol reduces heart disease is suspect.

Independent researchers who tabulated the results of this study found no significant statistical difference in coronary heart disease death rates between the two groups. However, both the popular press and medical journals touted the LRC-CPPT as the long-sought proof that animal fats are the cause of heart disease …”

What really happened, and how LRC-CPPT came to lend further support to the lipid hypothesis was nothing more than another masterful case of statistical manipulation. As Dr. Curtis stated:

“After 10 years the number dying from coronary heart disease (CHD) plus those suffering a non-fatal myocardial infarction (NFMI) were totaled for both groups. The total incidence in the cholestyramine group was 7.0% and the control group 8.6%.

This small difference of 1.6% was reported as a 19% reduction in death and heart attack by using relative risk reduction (the difference of 1.6% is roughly 19% of 8.6) in place of the less misleading absolute risk reduction (1.6%). Furthermore, this tiny difference was given the designation of “statistically significant” by changing the criteria originally given for determination of significance after the data was in.”

It is often the case that leaders who want to use the cholesterol agenda use statistics to “prove” their point.

Cholesterol Drug Benefits Perpetuated by Statistical Myths

The LRC-CPPT study was only able to show a meaningful benefit because it focused on relative risk reduction rather than absolute risk reduction. What’s the difference? You can find a very simple explanation of relative risk vs. absolute risk at the Annie Appleseed Project web site, but let me sum it up here.

  • Relative risk reduction is calculated by dividing the absolute risk reduction by the control event rate
  • Absolute risk reduction is the decrease in risk of a treatment in relation to a control treatment

In plain English, here’s what that means: let’s say you have a study of 200 women, half of whom take a drug and half take a placebo, to examine the effect on breast cancer risk. After five years, two women in the drug group develop breast cancer, compared to four who took the placebo. This data could lead to either of the following headlines, and both would be correct:

“New Miracle Drug Cuts Breast Cancer Risk by 50%!”

“New Drug Results in 2% Drop in Breast Cancer Risk!”

How can this be?

The Annie Appleseed Project explains:

“The headlines represent two different ways to express the same data. The first headline expresses the relative risk reduction — the two women who took the drug (subjects) and developed breast cancer equal half the number (50%) of the four women who took the placebo (controls) and developed breast cancer.

The second headline expresses the absolute risk reduction — 2% of the subjects (2 out of 100) who took the drug developed breast cancer and 4% of the controls (4 out of 100) who took the placebo developed breast cancer — an absolute difference of 2% (4% minus 2%).”

You can now see why clinical trials, especially those funded by drug companies, will cite relative risk reductions rather than absolute risk reductions, and as a patient you need to be aware that statistics can be easily manipulated.

As STATS at George Mason University explains:

“An important feature of relative risk is that it tells you nothing about the actual risk.”

How Statins Really Work Explains Why They Don’t Really Work

A new look at statin cholesterol-lowering drugs from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology claims that no study has ever proven that statins improve all-cause mortality — in other words, they don’t prolong your life any longer than if you’d not taken them at all. And rather than improving your life, they actually contribute to a deterioration in the quality of your life, destroying muscles and endangering liver, kidney and heart function.

According to Stephanie Seneff, author of this stunning revelation:

“Statin drugs inhibit the action of an enzyme, HMG coenzyme A reductase, that catalyses an early step in the 25-step process that produces cholesterol. This step is also an early step in the synthesis of a number of other powerful biological substances that are involved in cellular regulation processes and antioxidant effects.

One of these is coenzyme Q10, present in the greatest concentration in the heart, which plays an important role in mitochondrial energy production and acts as a potent antioxidant …

Statins also interfere with cell-signaling mechanisms mediated by so-called G-proteins, which orchestrate complex metabolic responses to stressed conditions. Another crucial substance whose synthesis is blocked is dolichol, which plays a crucial role in the endoplasmic reticulum. We can’t begin to imagine what diverse effects all of this disruption, due to interference with HMG coenzyme A reductase, might have on the cell’s ability to function …

There can be no doubt that statins will make your remaining days on earth a lot less pleasant than they would otherwise be … “

It’s widely known that statins lower your CoQ10 levels by blocking the pathway involved in cholesterol production — the same pathway by which Q10 is produced. Statins also reduce the blood cholesterol that transports CoQ10 and other fat-soluble antioxidants.

The loss of CoQ10 leads to loss of cell energy and increased free radicals which, in turn, can further damage your mitochondrial DNA, effectively setting into motion an evil circle of increasing free radicals and mitochondrial damage.

There are no official warnings in the U.S. regarding CoQ10 depletion from taking statin drugs, and many physicians fail to inform you about this problem as well. Labeling in Canada, however, clearly warns of CoQ10 depletion and even notes that this nutrient deficiency “could lead to impaired cardiac function in patients with borderline congestive heart failure.”

As your body gets more and more depleted of CoQ10, you may suffer from fatigue, muscle weakness and soreness, and eventually heart failure, so it is imperative if you take statin drugs that you take CoQ10 or, if you are over the age of 40, the reduced version called ubiquinol.

Statins May Even Cause Diabetes!

Statins carry other side effects as well, including diabetes. A meta-analysis, published in JAMA in June, concluded that those taking higher doses of statins were at increased risk of diabetes compared to those taking moderate doses. What this means is that the higher your dose, the higher your risk of developing diabetes.

The “number needed to harm” for intensive-dose statin therapy was 498 for new-onset diabetes—that’s the number of people who need to take the drug in order for one person to develop diabetes. In even simpler terms, one out of every 498 people who are on a high-dose statin regimen will develop diabetes. (The lower the “number needed to harm,” the greater the risk factor is.)

(As a side note, the “number needed to treat” per year for intensive-dose statins was 155 for cardiovascular events. This means that 155 people have to take the drug in order to prevent one person from having a cardiovascular event.)

Aside from what I’ve already covered above, statin drugs are associated with a rather extensive list of harmful side effects, including:

Weakness, polyneuropathy, sexual dysfunction, cataracts, pancreatic disease, Rhabdomyolysis, a serious degenerative muscle tissue, muscle pain and aches, Suppressed immune function, Increased cancer risk, anemia and acidosis!

Is there Radium in your water?

Does your tap water contain the radioactive element radium? You might be surprised to hear that tap water for more than 170 million Americans contains the compound, and a new interactive map shows the water systems where this potentially hazardous element was found.

The map was made by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a non-profit advocacy organization in Washington D.C. that focuses on environmental issues and public health.

The data for the map comes from an EWG analysis of water quality tests from 2010 to 2015. Of the 50,000 water utilities, 22,000 utilities serving over 170 million people in all 50 states reported detectable levels of radium, EWG said. (The map includes only water systems with detectable levels of radium.)

Radium is found naturally in soil and rock, and can get into groundwater supplies. Exposure to the element in high doses — much higher than the levels seen in drinking water — are known to cause cancer. There is no amount of exposure to radium that’s considered “risk free,” but the risk of cancer decreases at lower doses, EWG says.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set a legal limit for the combined level of two forms of radium, known as radium-226 and radium-228, that are allowed in drinking water: 5 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). A picocurie is a measure of radioactive decay. At this level, researchers would expect to see about 7 cancer cases per 100,000 people exposed to radium in drinking water over their lifetimes, EWG said.

Only a small percentage of water systems have radium at levels that exceed this limit. From 2010 to 2015, 158 public water systems serving 276,000 Americans in 27 states reported radium at levels that exceeded the federal limit, EWG said.

However, EWG says that the federal limit is based on data from more than 40 years ago, and needs to be updated. (Most of the water systems shown in the group’s interactive map have radium levels below the legal limit.)

In 2006, the California Office of Environmental Hazard Assessment, a department of the California state government, set new public health goals for radium in drinking water. The limits set in these goals were about 60 to 70 times lower than the federal limits, EWG said. (The California public health goal for radium-226 is 0.05 picocuries per liter, and the goal for radium-228 is 0.019 picocuries per liter.) At this level, a person risk of cancer from exposure radium in to drinking water over their lifetime would be about 1 in a million, EWG said.

People who want to know if there are radioactive elements in their drinking water can check EWG’s Tap Water Database and enter their zip code. If their water provider isn’t listed, they can contact their water utility for records of testing, EWG said.

If radium is found in your water, you can consider buying a water filter that is certified to remove radium, such as certain reverse osmosis filters, EWG said.

Original article on Live Science.

West Nile Virus- Not to Worry

West Nile Virus Infection Symptoms and Risk Factors

West Nile Virus is spread to humans from birds via mosquitos

What is West Nile virus?

West Nile virus was first observed in the U.S. during the summer of 1999 and is believed to be permanently established (endemic) in the U.S. at this time. A member of the flavivirus family, West Nile virus is related to the St. Louis encephalitis virus that is also found in the U.S. West Nile virus is commonly found in Africa, the Middle East, and in the western parts of Asia. It infects mosquitoes, birds, horses, humans, and some other mammals. In 2012, West Nile virus infections reached epidemic levels in Texas, and were reported in many other states.

How do you get West Nile?

Humans normally acquire the viral infection through a mosquito bite. The early fall, from late August to early September, is the most common time for infection to occur in the U.S. West Nile virus has the potential to cause a very serious illness, although 60%-80% of people infected will not develop any symptoms at all. The others most commonly develop a mild illness, sometimes termed West Nile fever, which is characterized by:

  • fever,
  • tiredness,
  • headaches,
  • body aches,
  • swollen lymph nodes, and
  • sometimes a rash.

West Nile fever develops two to 15 days following the bite of an infected mosquito and persists for a few days to a few weeks.

How dangerous is West Nile virus?

In less than 1% of cases, West Nile virus infection leads to severe illness that is referred to as “neuroinvasive” disease since it affects the nervous system. This severe form of West Nile virus infection results in an inflammation of the brain (encephalitis) or the meninges, tissues that cover the brain and central nervous system (meningitis). A combination of the two (meningoencephalitis) can also occur, and the disease can be fatal. People over 50 years of age, pregnant women, infants, and those with weakened immune systems due to medications, HIV, or cancer are at greatest risk for severe illness related to West Nile virus infection. Neuroinvasive West Nile virus infection is characterized by:

  • high fever,
  • neck stiffness,
  • stupor,
  • disorientation,
  • coma,
  • seizures,
  • muscle weakness, and
  • potentially permanent neurological disturbances.

West Nile virus infection cannot be spread by casual contact such as touching or kissing an infected person. In addition to transmission via mosquito bites, less common modes of transmission of the virus include organ transplantation, blood donation, and from mothers to their fetuses in the womb or to infants via breast milk.

How can I prevent West Nile virus?

The best way to avoid West Nile virus infection is to prevent mosquito bites. There is no human vaccine available, although a vaccine against West Nile virus has been licensed for use in horses. No specific treatment is available for the illness. West Nile fever generally resolves on its own, and those with severe infections must be hospitalized to receive supportive care.

Medically reviewed by Robert Cox, MD; American Board of Internal Medicine with subspecialty in Infectious Disease

REFERENCE:

United States. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “West Nile Virus.”

Now for Dr. D’s Information based on the Virginia Dept. of Health

According to the Virginia Department of Health Department here are their tips on how to keep your odds low of contracting West Nile Virus.

Wear insect repellent (use natural non-toxic brands do not spray on infants or small children as it can be toxic to them.

Wear light colored long and short sleeve clothing when ever possible to keep “biteable” areas covered.

Repair holes in window screens and door screens.

Keep gutters clean and clear so standing water cannot gather to breed mosquitos.

Get rid of old tires, plant pots and any container that can hold rain water. Even an ounce of standing water can breed mosquitos!

Fill low places in the yard with sand or level them with top soil.

Keep ditches clear of grass, leaves, trash and any debris so rain water doesn’t sit and accumulate in them.

Cover trash can to keep out rain water or drill a small hole in the bottom so water cannot fill the bottom of trash cans.

Add sand to outdoor plant pot trays so that not standing water accumulates there but yet your plants can stay watered.

Fill tree root holes in the yard.

Fill tree stump holes and tree branch holes in large trees with sand to stop free standing water from accumulating there.

Keep the lawn mowed and short. Keep shrubs trimmed and the bottom area around the bushes clean and neat.

For stagnant ponds or other areas where free standing water cannot be drained use environmentally safe larvicides that are safe for pets and people. Follow package instructions. This will kill mosquito larvae and not harm your pets or people if they should drink or get the water on them.

For more information visit the Virginia Dept. of Health website at, www.vdh.virginia.gov or contact your local health department.

Kids with Horns, “Text Neck”

By Isaac Stanley-Becker

Mobile technology has transformed the way we live — how we read, work, communicate, shop and date.

But we already know this.

What we have not yet grasped is the way the tiny machines in front of us are remolding our skeletons, possibly altering not just the behaviors we exhibit but the bodies we inhabit.

New research in biomechanics suggests that young people are developing hornlike spikes at the back of their skulls — bone spurs caused by the forward tilt of the head, which shifts weight from the spine to the muscles at the back of the head, causing bone growth in the connecting tendons and ligaments. The weight transfer that causes the buildup can be compared to the way the skin thickens into a callus as a response to pressure or abrasion.

The result is a hook or hornlike feature jutting out from the skull, just above the neck.

In academic papers, a pair of researchers at the University of the Sunshine Coast in Queensland, Australia, argues that the prevalence of the bone growth in younger adults points to shifting body posture brought about by the use of modern technology. They say smartphones and other handheld devices are contorting the human form, requiring users to bend their heads forward to make sense of what’s happening on the miniature screens.

The researchers said their discovery marks the first documentation of a physiological or skeletal adaptation to the penetration of advanced technology into everyday life.

Health experts warn of “text neck,” and doctors have begun treating “texting thumb,” which is not a clearly defined condition but bears resemblance to carpal tunnel syndrome. But prior research has not linked phone use to bone-deep changes in the body.

“An important question is what the future holds for the young adult populations in our study, when development of a degenerative process is evident in such an early stage of their lives?” ask the authors in one paper, published in Nature Research’s peer-reviewed, open-access Scientific Reports. The study came out last year but has received fresh attention following the publication last week of a BBC story that considers, “How modern life is transforming the human skeleton.”

Since then, the unusual formations have captured the attention of Australian media, and have variously been dubbed “head horns” or “phone bones” or “spikes” or “weird bumps.”

Each is a fitting description, said David Shahar, the paper’s first author, a chiropractor who recently completed a PhD in biomechanics at Sunshine Coast.

“That is up to anyone’s imagination,” he told The Washington Post. “You may say it looks like a bird’s beak, a horn, a hook.”

However it is designated, Shahar said, the formation is a sign of a serious deformity in posture that can cause chronic headaches and pain in the upper back and neck.

Part of what was striking about the findings, he said, was the size of the bone spurs, which are thought to be large if they measure 3 or 5 millimeters in length. An outgrowth was only factored into their research if it measured 10 millimeters, or about two-fifths of an inch.

The danger is not the head horn itself, said Mark Sayers, an associate professor of biomechanics at Sunshine Coast who served as Shahar’s supervisor and co-author. Rather, the formation is a “portent of something nasty going on elsewhere, a sign that the head and neck are not in the proper configuration,” he told The Post.

Their work began about three years ago with a pile of neck X-rays taken in Queensland. The images captured part of the skull, including the area where the bony projections, called enthesophytes, form at the back of the head.

Contrary to conventional understanding of the hornlike structures, which have been thought to crop up rarely and mainly among older people suffering from prolonged strain, Shahar noticed that they appeared prominently on X-rays of younger subjects, including those who were showing no obvious symptoms.

The pair’s first paper, published in the Journal of Anatomy in 2016, enlisted a sample of 218 X-rays, of subjects ages 18 to 30, to suggest that the bone growth could be observed in 41 percent of young adults, much more than previously thought. The feature was more prevalent among men than among women.

The effect — known as enlarged external occipital protuberance — used to be so uncommon, Sayers said, that one of its early observers, toward the end of the 19th century, objected to its title, arguing that there was no real protrusion.

That’s no longer the case.

Another paper, published in Clinical Biomechanics in the spring of 2018, used a case study involving four teenagers to argue that the head horns were not caused by genetic factors or inflammation, pointing instead to the mechanical load on muscles in the skull and neck.

And the Scientific Reports paper, published the month before, zoomed out to consider a sample of 1,200 X-rays of subjects in Queensland, ages 18 to 86. The researchers found that the size of the bone growth, present in 33 percent of the population, actually decreased with age. That discovery was in stark contrast to existing scientific understanding, which had long held that the slow, degenerative process occurred with aging.

They found instead that the bone spurs were larger and more common among young people. To understand what was driving the effect, they looked to recent developments — circumstances over the past 10 or 20 years altering how young people hold their bodies.

“These formations take a long time to develop, so that means that those individuals who suffer from them probably have been stressing that area since early childhood,” Shahar explained.

The sort of strain required for bone to infiltrate the tendon pointed him to handheld devices that bring the head forward and down, requiring the use of muscles at the back of the skull to prevent the head from falling to the chest. “What happens with technology?” he said. “People are more sedentary; they put their head forward, to look at their devices. That requires an adaptive process to spread the load.”

That the bone growth develops over a long period of time suggests that sustained improvement in posture can stop it short and even ward off its associated effects.

The answer is not necessarily swearing off technology, Sayers said. At least, there are less drastic interventions.

“What we need are coping mechanisms that reflect how important technology has become in our lives,” he said.

Shahar is pressing people to become as regimented about posture as they became about dental hygiene in the 1970s, when personal care came to involve brushing and flossing every day. Schools should teach simple posture strategies, he said. Everyone who uses technology during the day should get used to recalibrating their posture at night.

As motivation, he suggested reaching a hand around to the lower rear of the skull. Those who have the hornlike feature can probably feel it.

Red Meat Allergy From Tick Bites (Alpha-gal)

Wood Tick

Excerpts from Prevention Magazine Article by Alisa Hrustic May 21, 2019


While not technically classified as a disease, a bite from a lone star tick can cause an allergic reaction to red meat. How? These critters transfer a sugar called alpha-gal into your system, which is found in red meat—like beef, pork, and lamb—but not in humans. Because the sugar travels through your blood, your immune system goes haywire and releases antibodies. Once you try to eat red meat again, your body pumps out histamine in reaction to the sugar, spurring an allergic reaction.

Symptoms: If you have the alpha-gal allergy, you will experience symptoms similar to other severe food allergies, like itching, swelling of the throat, lips, and tongue, weakness, nausea, vomiting, headaches, skin rash, and even passing out due to anaphylaxis (difficulty breathing). Unlike typical allergic reactions to food, which tend to be immediate, symptoms may take hours to appear, according to the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI).

How common it is: It’s hard to tell, since meat allergies themselves aren’t very common. However, one preliminary study presented at the 2018 AAAAI and World Allergy Organization Joint Congress found that 40 percent of 222 anaphylaxis cases had a definitive trigger—and the most common was alpha-gal.

Conclusion on what to do for tick born symptoms is by Dr. Demetrios Kydonieus, Chiropractic Nutritionist.

Nutritional therapy for tick bite diseases and the red meat allergy are based on supporting a normal healthy response of the immune system. This type of treatment is not a cure or a direct assault on the condition like medicine but works very well. In the current scientific research literature there are many studies that show a stronger response to “natural therapies” than conventional medical or drug based ones. Alpha-gal is an allergy most likely related to a weak immune system from leaky gut issues that has been going on way before the tick bite. This is compounded by generations of people eating processed, high sugar, low fiber, high inflammatory fatty (Omega-6) foods. As people eat more of these inflammatory and autoimmune triggering foods their genetics become “weakened” and they pass this onto successive generations (their children). Now weak children eat the same poor diets and they pass on even more weakened genes to their kids and this continues until the poor diet is stopped. So this is one theory as to why we are seeing more diseases and reactions to the environment (allergies) that we have not seen before in such high numbers. These “weak” people are more reactive to environmental stresses like tick bites and pollutants than their grandparents.

The good news is that this can be overcome with targeted nutritional support and knowledge of what you are sensitive to in the environment. Nutrition Response Testing is just one nutritional technique that can accurately help the body become stronger and more healthy, many times overcoming autoimmune and allergy challenges. My definition of Health is, “A normal functioning body(and all systems) with no lasting reactions from environmental challenges expressing itself in a vibrant and active manor for a lifetime.”

So if you are suffering from any tick born disease, like Lyme’s, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, Alpha-gal, etc. Nutrition Response Testing may be able to help you feel better by making you stronger enabling your body to use your innate immune responses to overcome your condition. We do not cure or treat any specific disease or condition but work to strengthen and normalize biochemical reactions within your body by restoring normal nerve function and physiology. We teach you how to become “healthier”.

Arizona May Add Chiropractic to Curb Opioid Crises

Medicaid recipients in Arizona may soon be able to see the chiropractor when care is ordered by a primary medical care doctor.

Introduced by Senator Heather Carter (R-Cave Creek), the new bill would allow patients on the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System to get a prescription from their primary care physician(PCP) for 20 chiropractic visits per year, and more as needed if the PCP authorizes it with the chiropractor.

The concern so far is that people with chronic pain that are opiod recipents will need a lot of chiropractic adjusting to get them off the pain-killers and stable. Most new chiropractic patients start care out at two to three visits per week for a month or two and that would use up the initial 20 visits. Acute care can last a couple of months, tapering off steadily before a person can get into “wellness” or “maintenance” care at 1-2 x per month. This means many Medicaid recipients will need more than 20 annual visits to really get off the opioids and well, biomechanically speaking.

The bill is currently being reviewed by the House, and Representative Randy Friese (D-Tucson) told Arizona Central that the limitations are meant to safeguard the state’s first attempt at covering a new practice. If recipients are consistently meeting the imposed caps, they will consider removing the limits. Legislatures are considering both budget implications and how to best address the opioid crisis.  

Many states currently offer chiropractic care, with about 30 states offering some form of coverage through their state Medicaid program, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. This bill adds options for both physicians and patients who experience chronic pain and want to improve their quality of life and not take addictive pain medication for life.

Nothing here in Virginia as far as getting Medicaid to pay for chiropractic yet. So let your state legislatures know call and email them, tell them what Arizona is doing and maybe we can get some movement here in the east with chiropractic for Medicaid recipients.

Dr. Demetrios Kydonieus, DC

Information from an article written by
Katherine Rushlau, CPT, is the editor of IntegrativePractitioner.com.

Vaccine Hearings Need Your Input

Congressional Hearings on Measles Outbreaks (2/27/2019) and State Vaccine Laws (3/5/2019)ACTION NEEDED: Calls and Emails to Support Vaccine Exemptions and Share Vaccine Injuries Dear NVIC Advocacy Team Members,We wanted to make you aware of two upcoming federal committee hearings scheduled in the U.S. House of Representatives on February 27, 2019 and in the U.S. Senate on March 5, 2019 to discuss measles outbreaks and state vaccine laws. Communication with members of these two committees along with your U.S. Representative and 2 U.S. Senators to protect vaccine exemptions is absolutely critical.On February 14, 2019, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Scott Gottlieb made an inappropriate public statement warning state legislators that if they do not tighten vaccine exemptions in “lax laws,” then the federal government will take action.  Vaccine mandate and exemption laws are state laws. Federal officials threatening government intervention if state legislators do not restrict or eliminate vaccine exemptions is federal interference in state rights.The truth is vaccine injuries happen.  No amount of industry sponsored attacks on state vaccine exemption laws or censorship of vaccine reaction, harassment or discrimination experiences over the internet or in the media will change that fact.NVIC issued a national press release Feb. 25, 2019 urging Americans to attend these Congressional hearings and to communicate concerns directly with elected officials because official testimony is by invitation only.  NVIC was not invited. Attacks on vaccine exemptions and attempts to limit free speech about vaccine reactions are resulting in bills working their way through state legislatures around the country on both sides of the debate.  As of Feb. 25th, NVIC is tracking 140 vaccine related bills across 31 states on the NVIC Advocacy Portal, and NVIC supports 61, opposes 74, and we are watching 5 to see what happens. There are currently bills filed in 8 states to add or expand vaccine exemptions and 11 states to restrict or remove exemptions. The lack of informed consent in the vaccination process has resulted in bills being filed in 12 states to improve vaccine informed consent.The U.S. Vaccine Market alone was $36.45 Billion in 2018, and expected to reach $50.42 billion by 2023. This is a very powerful industry with lots of resources to lobby and influence policy to remove parental rights to be able to delay or decline a vaccine. The industry benefits from forced use.Thousands of parents have attended state legislative public hearings across the country on bills to restrict or expand vaccine exemptions and informed consent rights. Many have included powerful testimony by parents describing how their children suffered vaccine reactions that permanently injured them or caused their death. The public conversation about vaccine exemptions, parental rights and civil liberties is happening right now in the halls of state legislatures and in Congress. You can be part of that conversation by using the NVIC Advocacy Portal to contact your state and federal legislators and make sure they understand you want them to protect vaccine exemptions and informed consent rights in America.ACTION ITEMS1) Plan on attending the hearings on February 27th and March 5th and calling and emailing members of the committees to express your support for vaccine exemptions and informed consent rights in light of the upcoming hearings. Share your vaccine reaction, harassment and discrimination stories and ask that they are relayed with the Representative or Senator because you don’t know if experiences like yours will be represented in the hearings. Feb. 27, 2019 U.S. House of Representatives public hearing on “Confronting a Growing Public Health Threat: Measles Outbreaks in the U.S.”  (contains link to live stream)Time: 10:00amLocation: 2123 Rayburn House Office BuildingU.S. House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce (use links on committee site to fill out web contact form for email)Chair: Diana DeGette (CO): (202) 225-4431Chair: Joseph P. Kennedy (MA): (202) 225-5931Janice D. Schakowsky (IL): (202) 225-2111Raul Ruiz (CA): (202) 225-5330Ann M. Kuster (NH): (202) 225-5206Kathy Castor (FL): (202) 225-3376 John P. Sarbanes (MD): (202) 225-4016Paul Tonko (NY): (202) 225-5076Yvette D. Clarke (NY): (202) 225-6231Scott H. Peters (CA): (202)-225-0508Ex-Officio: Frank Pallone (NJ): (202) 225-4671Ranking: Brett Guthrie (KY): (202) 225-3501 Michael C. Burgess (TX): (202) 225-7772 David B. McKinley (WVA): (202) 225-4172H Morgan Griffith (VA): (202) 225-3861 Susan W. Brooks (IN): (202)-225-2276Markwayne Mullin (OK): (202) 225-2701Jeff Duncan (SC): (202) 225-5301Ex-Officio: Greg Walden (OR): (202) 225-6730 Mar. 5, 2019 U.S. Senate public hearing on “Vaccines Save Lives: What Is Driving Preventable Disease Outbreaks?” (contains link to live stream)Time:  10:00 AMLocation: 430 Dirksen Senate Office BuildingU.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (use links on committee site to fill out web contact form for email)Chair: Lamar Alexander (TN): (202) 224-4944 Richard Burr (NC): (202) 224-3154Rand Paul (KY): (202)-224-4343Bill Cassidy, MD (LA): (202) 224-5824Lisa Murkowski (AK): (202)-224-6665Mitt Romney (UT): (202) 224-5251Michael B. Enzi (WY): (202) 224-3424Johnny Isakson (GA): (202) 224-3643Susan Collins (ME): (202)224-2523Pat Roberts (KS): (202)-224-4774Tim Scott (SC): (202) 224-6121Mike Braun (IN): (202) 224-4814Ranking Member: Patty Murray (WA): (202) 224-2621Robert P. Casey, Jr (PA): (202) 224-6324Christopher A. Murphy (CT): (202) 224-4041Tim Kaine (VA): (202) 224-4024Tina Smith (MN): (202) 224-5641Jacky Rosen (NV): (202)-224-6244Bernie Sanders (VT): (202) 224-5141Tammy Baldwin (WI): (202) 224-5653Elizabeth Warren (MA): (202) 224-4543Maggie Hassan (NH): (202) 224-3324Doug Jones (AL): (202) 224-4124 2) Call and Email your own U.S. Congressional Representative and 2 U.S. Senators. Let them know about these hearings and that you wanted to express your support for vaccine exemptions and informed consent rights. Share your vaccine reaction, harassment and discrimination stories because you don’t know if experiences like yours will be represented in the hearings. If you do not know who your U.S. House Representative or 2 U.S. Senators are or their contact information, you can login to the NVIC Advocacy Portal, http://NVICAdvocacy.org, click on the “NATIONAL” tab, and your elected Congressional Legislators are automatically posted on the right hand side of the page.  Click on their name to display links to all of their contact information.  If a district office is close to your home, you may also consider visiting and meeting with local staff in person.3) Login to the NVIC Advocacy Portal, http://NVICAdvocacy.org, OFTEN to check for state and U.S. updates and action items.  We review bills and make updates daily. Bills can change many times over the legislative process and your timely visits, calls, and emails directed at the correct legislators are critical to this process. 4) Please forward this email to family and friends and ask them to register for the NVIC Advocacy Portal at http://NVICAdvocacy.org and share their concerns with their legislators as well.   TALKING POINTS in the NVIC press release:Protecting vaccine exemptions is a parental rights and civil liberty issue. NVIC Co-founder and President Barbara Loe Fisher said, “The state and federal public hearings being held this year are an opportunity for Americans to communicate with their legislators about this important parental rights and civil liberty issue.”·       Vaccine laws are state laws. The federal government licenses vaccines, makes vaccine use recommendations and enacts vaccination requirements for persons crossing U.S. borders, while state governments enact mandatory vaccination laws for residents of states, including for children attending school. In 1905, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the constitutional authority of state governments to mandate vaccines but warned that vaccine laws must be “limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression, or an absurd consequence” and become “cruel and inhuman to the last degree.”·       In 2019 so far, 140 vaccine-related bills have been introduced in 31 states. Most propose to expand, restrict or eliminate vaccine exemptions and informed consent rights. NVIC is supporting 61 of the bills, including bills to add or protect personal belief vaccine exemptions. There are currently bills filed in 8 states to add or expand vaccine exemptions and 11 states to restrict or remove exemptions. The lack of informed consent in the vaccination process has resulted in bills being filed in 12 states to improve vaccine informed consent.·       Few people qualify for medical vaccine exemptions. There are few federally approved contraindications to vaccination and most adverse health conditions and vaccine reactions do not qualify for a medical exemption to vaccination under federal guidelines.Federal officials threatening government intervention if state legislators do not restrict or eliminate vaccine exemptions is federal interference in state rights. NVIC advocates for public participation in vaccine policy and law making. In response to a public statementmade by FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb on Feb. 14, 2019 warning state legislators that if they do not tighten vaccine exemptions in “lax laws,” then the federal government will take action, NVIC’s President responded, “The constitutional authority to mandate vaccinations belongs to the states. The FDA Commissioner heading a federal agency legally responsible for regulating the safety and effectiveness of vaccine products sold by drug companies should not be threatening state legislators with federal intervention if they don’t restrict or remove exemptions in vaccine laws.”·       In 2011 the U.S. Supreme Court effectively removed all liability for FDA licensed, CDC recommended and state mandated vaccines. NVIC co-founders worked with Congress to secure vaccine safety informing, recording, reporting and research provisions in the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The Act gave the pharmaceutical industry a partial liability shield for harm caused by government licensed, recommended and mandated vaccines and created a federal vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) alternative to a vaccine injury lawsuit. In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that FDA licensed vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” and effectively granted vaccine manufacturers a full liability shield, even when there was evidence a company could have made a vaccine safer. More than $4 billionhas been awarded to children and adults harmed by federally recommended vaccines since 1988 but two out of three petitioners filing injury claims in the VICP are denied compensation.Congress should hold oversight hearings on the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which has been seriously compromised by weakening amendments and federal agency rule making. For the past two decades, NVIC has been critical of federal agency implementation of the 1986 Act’s vaccine safety, research and vaccine injury compensation provisions. In 1999 and 2002, congressional oversight hearings were held on operation of the VICP, and the General Accountability Office (GAO) issued an investigative report in 2014 pointing out continuing problems with the VICP. NVIC Co-founder and Vice President said, “The integrity of the original law has been seriously compromised and no substantive action has been taken by Congress to repair damage done to the 1986 Act by eroding amendments and federal agency rule making. Part of the current focus by Congress on disease control and vaccine laws should include hearings to hold the Department of Health and Department of Justice accountable for betraying the trust of parents obeying laws to vaccinate their children.”Incentivizing grants are given to states by the CDC to achieve high vaccination rates.The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) gives incentivizing grants to states to achieve high vaccination rates among children with federally recommended vaccines. States with higher vaccination rates receive “bonus” funding awards and states with lower rates may receive lower grant amounts. The CDC’s recommended childhood vaccine schedule currently is 69 doses of 16 vaccines given between the day of birth and age 18 with 50 doses given before age six·       There are many new vaccines coming that will be federally recommended and state mandated. There are 27 FDA licensed vaccines and 16 of them are mandated by different states for children to attend school. There are new vaccines in development, many of which will be federally recommended and considered by state legislatures for mandates in the future. Sincerely,NVIC Advocacy Team
National Vaccine Information Center
http://NVIC.org and http://NVICAdvocacy.org
https://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Members/ContactUs.aspxThe National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) works diligently to prepare and disseminate our legislative advocacy action alerts and supporting materials.  We request that organizations and members of the public forward our alerts in their original form to assure consistent and accurate messaging and effective action. Please acknowledge NVIC as originators of this work when forwarding to members of the public and like-minded organizations. To receive alerts immediately, register  at http://NVICAdvocacy.org, a website dedicated to this sole purpose and provided as a free public service by NVIC.