jump to navigation

The Connection between Childhood Abuse and Cancer October 17, 2015

Posted by Dreamhealer in Alternative medicine, Cancer, Healthcare, integrative cancer care, Naturopathic Doctor, Naturopathic Medicine, oncology, Research.
Tags: , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

 

best vancouver naturopath dr adam mcleodWritten By: Dr. Adam McLeod, ND, BSc (Hons)

It is not unusual for patients to feel a connection between past emotional traumas and the formation of their cancer. In recent years the mainstream scientific community has started to seriously research this connection. It turns out that these patients are indeed correct and there are large studies to support this connection. Childhood abuse increases the risk of developing cancer in adulthood1,5.

A recent study in journal Cancer demonstrated that adults who reported physical abuse as children were 47% more likely to develop cancer1. There are many well documented physiological changes that occur with this type of abuse2,3. More patients need to recognize that there are clear psychological and physical changes that occur from abuse which make it more likely to develop cancer4. This is not an imaginary connection, it is a very real connection that is supported by large scale studies.

The immune system is constantly patrolling the body looking for any abnormal cells and engages them before it manifests into a clinical disease. During periods of acute stress the immune system is significantly weaker. The immune system will therefore be less likely to recognize these cancerous cells and it will be less effective at preventing the development of cancer.

The stress from childhood abuse continues well after the abuse has stopped. Many patients are permanently scarred emotionally and these emotional stressors will continue weaken the immune system. Many people develop post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following childhood abuse. Abuse victims often remain silent about their experience and as a result have no outlet to deal with the PTSD. Many of these patients feel that it is in their best interest to never bring it up and move on with their lives as if nothing happened. What they do not know is that these past traumas are effecting them in a very physical way. In some patients, one could argue that the true root cause of their cancer was the abuse that they endured as a child.

Some of the most profound healings that I have witnessed resulted from a powerful shift in the patients emotional energy. Sometimes a simple acupuncture treatment or a counselling session can bring these deeply rooted emotions to the surface. To optimize the patients immune system and promote healing it is critical that the emotional root cause of the problem is addressed. At the end of the day we want to look at every possible factor that is impacting the patient. The emotional components of healing cannot be ignored and they can make a big difference when battling something serious such as cancer.

A Naturopathic Doctor can help you to develop a safe and effective treatment plan to battle cancer on the physical and emotional levels. Dr. Adam McLeod is a Naturopathic Doctor (ND), BSc. (Hon) Molecular biology, Motivational Speaker and International Best Selling Author. He currently practices at his clinic in Vancouver, British Columbia where he focuses on integrative cancer care. http://www.yaletownnaturopathic.com

 

References:

1) Fuller‐Thomson, Esme, and Sarah Brennenstuhl. “Making a link between childhood physical abuse and cancer.” Cancer 115.14 (2009): 3341-3350.

2) Heim, C., et al. “Lower CSF oxytocin concentrations in women with a history of childhood abuse.” Molecular psychiatry 14.10 (2009): 954-958.

3) McGowan, Patrick O., et al. “Epigenetic regulation of the glucocorticoid receptor in human brain associates with childhood abuse.” Nature neuroscience 12.3 (2009): 342-348.

4) Kendall-Tackett, Kathleen. “The health effects of childhood abuse: four pathways by which abuse can influence health.” Child abuse & neglect 26.6 (2002): 715-729.

5) Brown, David W., et al. “Adverse childhood experiences are associated with the risk of lung cancer: a prospective cohort study.” BMC Public Health 10.1 (2010): 20.

The Radiation Warnings You Won’t Get from the Mainstream Propaganda Machine December 2, 2013

Posted by Dreamhealer in Cancer, Diet, Government, Healing, Health, Healthcare, Longevity, Pollution, Polutants, Press, social media, Television.
Tags: , , , ,
16 comments

Radiation update provided by Daisy Luther and co-author NinaO. This report was originally published at Inalienably Yours.

japan-radiation-dream healer

The mainstream media and the federal government will soon have the blood of the world on it’s hands.

Radiation from the Fukushima Nuclear Plant disaster in Japan is now actively in the ecosystem all along the North American west coast… even the sea weed is now radiated.  The Vancouver Sun reported one year ago that the seaweed tested from waters off the coast of British Columbia were 4 times the amount considered safe.  No further test results were released after the initial report.

The governments of the United States and Canada are not conducting tests for radioactivity – at least not to the knowledge of the public.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has agreed to continue purchasing seafood from Japan, despite the fact that the food is not being tested for radioactive contamination.  Last November, independent testing in Japan showed 65 per cent of the catches tested positive for cesium (a radioactive material).  Instead of refusing to purchase the poisoned fish, food safety agencies in both the United States and Canada have simply raised the “acceptable level of radiation.”  We can’t go offending the Japanese after promising to buy their tainted goods, now can we?

After the North American governments refused to fund testing, oceanographer Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist at the non-profit Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Woods Hole, Mass, along with Nicholas Fisher, a marine sciences professor at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, and other concerned scientists, managed to secure private funding for a Pacific research voyage.  The results?

Cesium levels in the Pacific had initially gone up an astonishing 45 million times above pre-accident levels. The levels then declined rapidly for a while, but after that, they unexpectedly levelled off.

In July, cesium levels stopped declining and remained stuck at 10,000 times above pre-accident levels.

This means the ocean isn’t diluting the radiation as expected. If it had been, cesium levels would have kept falling.

The finding suggests that radiation is still being released into the ocean long after the accident in March, 2011.

Less than two weeks after the tsunami and subsequent nuclear disaster, Michael Kane, an investigative journalist, reported, “In the wake of the continuing nuclear tragedy in Japan, the United States government is still moving quickly to increase the amounts of radiation the population can “safely” absorb by raising the safe zone for exposure to levels designed to protect the government and nuclear industry more than human life.”

The radiation has absolutely reached the shores of North America.  Water samples from across the continent have tested positive for unsafe levels of radioactivity.  The levels exceeded federal drinking water thresholds, known as maximum contaminant levels, or MCL, by as much as 181 times.”This means that the complete ecosystem of the Pacific Ocean is now poisoned with radiation and we aren’t being warned.

Samples of milk taken across the United States have shown radiation at levels 2000 percent higher than EPA maximums.  The reason that milk is so significant is that it it representative of the entire food supply.  According to an article published on Natural News, “Cows consume grass and are exposed to the same elements as food crops and water supplies. In other words, when cows’ milk starts testing positive for high levels of radioactive elements, this is indicative of radioactive contamination of the entire food supply.”

The Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, instead of refusing to prohibit the sale of tainted foods and mandatory testing of foods produced and harvested from the Pacific Coast, have simply raised the “acceptable levels”  of radioactive material in foods.

Clearly, the “it’s-all-for-your-own-good” government will not protect us, or even inform us of the dangers so we can protect ourselves, because it might dip into the pockets of the global elite, the nuclear energy industry, and the food industries.  There is big money behind this cover-up. Refusing to purchase and consume their tainted goods is the best way to fight back, while keeping our families safe and healthy.

How can we protect ourselves? First, be aware of what items are likely to be highly tainted.

1.)  SEAFOOD:  Question the origin of ALL seafood.  Fish and crustaceans from the Pacific Ocean should all be considered to be poisoned with radiation.

2.)  WATER:  The rainfall and snowfall are all radiated.  Do not drink any water that has not been filtered.   The tap water that flows from your faucet has NOT been treated to rid it of radioactive particles. A recent report from the NY Times stated, “A rooftop water monitoring program managed by UC Berkeley’s Department of Nuclear Engineering detected substantial spikes in rain-borne iodine-131 during torrential downpours …

3.) DAIRY PRODUCTS:  Milk and milk products from the West Coast states currently have the highest levels of radiation in North America.

4.)  PRODUCE:  Leafy Vegetables, Wines, Tomatoes, Strawberries….all produce from California or any other West Coast State are also likely to be tainted.

5.)  MEAT:  If a animal eats any leafy vegetable all along the West Coast, that animal has consumed radiation, and is poisoned.  This is any animal from cows, pigs, goats, sheep to wild deer and other game.

If you eat the above foods from areas with high radiation levels, you are eating radiation and feeding it to your children. Slowly the radiation levels within your body will build up.  This is PERMANENT.

Infant mortality rates across the United States have increased by more than 35% since the nuclear disaster, according to a court statement by Dr. with independent scientist Leuren Moret, MA, PhD.  A study published in The International Journal of Medicine indicates that more than 20,000 deaths right here in North America can be directly attributed to the release of radioactive material from Fukushima.

Radioactive isotopes of the type released from Fukushima have a half life of 30,000 years.  This means that we must permanently change the way we prepare our food.

  • Wash your food with soap and rinse it in filtered water. 
  • Be aware of the origins of your vegetables, fish, game and seafood.
  • Keep abreast of radiation levels to help monitor where your food is acquired.
  • Use only filtered water for drinking, cooking and ice.

Please spread the word and spread this post!

To see a list of Adam’s new 2014 workshops Click here.

Like Adam on facebook

Connect with Adam on LinkedIn

Follow Adam on twitter and pinterest

Adam’s video blogs can be found on his YouTube page. For a directory of video blogs, click here.

Flu Deaths reality check November 21, 2013

Posted by Dreamhealer in Alternative medicine, Dreamhealer, Healing, Healthcare, Research.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Adam Dreamhealer

By: Kelly Crowe, CBC News

Do thousands of Canadians really die every year from the flu? The flu folks keep saying so. I’ve already heard it repeated several times this year and flu season has just started. This is what the Public Health Agency of Canada said in a recent press release: “Every year, between 2,000 and 8,000 Canadians die of the flu and its complications.”

In a CBC interview a few weeks ago an editor of the Canadian Medical Association Journal said: “Four thousand to 8,000  people die every year of influenza.”

It comes directly from the desk of Canada’s chief public health officer. “The flu is serious,” he tells us from his website. “Every year, between 2,000 and 8,000 Canadians die of the flu and its complications.”

Did you ever wonder how they know that? The fact is, they don’t know that. “This is a scientific guess. This is not the truth,” Dr. Michael Gardam, director of the infection prevention and control unit at the University Health Network in Toronto and a longtime flu watcher, told me.

The fact is, no one knows how many people die after being infected with the flu virus. The death estimates are not based on body counts, lab tests or autopsies.

“I think people may have the misconception that every person who dies from the flu is somehow counted somewhere, and they’re not,” Gardam said.

The “2,000 to 8,000” numbers are based on computer models — a statistical guess that comes out of the end of a mathematical formula that makes a range of assumptions about death and flu.

“They’re tossing it into a big computer and they’re churning out estimates,” Gardam said as he scribbled numbers on a white board to show me how the models work.

One model counts all respiratory and circulatory deaths — that’s death from heart and lung failure — as flu deaths.

“As an upper limit, they are looking at everybody who died of a heart and lung problem,” Gardam said. “So you could imagine this could include people who died of a heart attack that had nothing to do with flu, but the feeling is that anybody who died of flu should be captured in there, plus a lot of other people.”

At the lower end of that model they count the number of deaths officially listed as “influenza” on the death certificate, plus all deaths from pneumonia — even though not all pneumonia is caused by flu.

“That is going to include obviously people who died specifically of those, but it might miss people who died of influenza but who didn’t get tested, for example,” Gardam said.

Data can include deaths by poison

Another model assumes that every extra death that happens in the winter is a flu death. At the risk of oversimplifying, this is the basic formula of that model: winter deaths (minus) summer deaths = death by flu virus.

That includes winter deaths from slippery sidewalks, snowy roads, freezing temperatures, plus all the winter heart failure, lung failure and deaths from cancer. In the language of the computer model, all excess mortality in winter is considered “death by flu.”

The model extrapolates that the flu virus will cause more deaths across all causes, including “disorders of the nervous system,” stroke and “disorders of the digestive system.” Which means that according to the model, flu causes 33 more “accidental falls” every year, 18 more “accidental poisonings,” and 68 more deaths from “psychotic conditions.” But what does flu have to do with deaths from accidental poisonings or accidental falls?

‘If they don’t collect that information, how do they know that their policies will work? This is called faith-based medicine.’— Dr. Tom Jefferson

How reliable are the computer model estimates? “I don’t think they’re reliable at all,” Dr. Tom Jefferson told me. He is a Rome-based researcher with the Cochrane Collaboration, and he spends his days reviewing all the research on acute respiratory infections and vaccines. He said hard data on flu deaths “are difficult to get hold of for obvious reasons. So enter modelling, which is nothing more than guesswork, highly sensitive to the assumptions you feed into the model. ‘Give me a model and I will make it say whatever you want,’ a colleague of mine always repeats.”

The models are only as good as the data sets that are fed into them. And death can be complicated. If someone already extremely fragile with heart or lung disease is tipped over the edge with a flu infection, is that a flu death, or a heart death or a lung death? Which database gets to claim it?

“The only mortality estimates which have any credibility are those based on post mortem examinations and tests which were done before death,” Jefferson said.

Flu death statistics not collected

In a perfect world, the flu death statistic would be based on an actual count of confirmed deaths after infection with the flu virus. But that’s difficult to do, because autopsies are almost never done, lab tests for the flu virus are rarely done, and someone could die from the complications of flu even though the virus is no longer detectable in their bodies.

The numbers we do have don’t even come close to the computer estimates. In Statistics Canada’s “deaths and mortality” table, under “cause of death: influenza,” there were only about 300 deaths a year between 2000 and 2008. Public health officials don’t trust that number. They believe it underestimates the true death toll from flu.

But Jefferson believes the models overstate the risk from influenza. “There are no real figures on deaths from influenza. They don’t collect that information,” he said. “So if they don’t collect that information, how do they know it’s a threat? And if they don’t collect that information, how do they know that their policies will work? This is called faith-based medicine, not evidence-based medicine.”

Dr. Michael Gardam, an infectious disease expert at Toronto’s University Health Network, says estimates of the number of flu deaths each year “vary a great deal depending on which research paper you read.” (CBC)

“Could the deaths be being caused by other pathogens? It’s an important question,” Dr. Kumanan Wilson told me. He holds the Canada Research Chair in public health policy at the University of Ottawa. He’s also a hospital clinician who has seen many flu seasons.

“We see lots of people coming in with upper respiratory infections and we don’t know what causes it. Sometimes if they are really sick, we’ll test for influenza. We rarely test for anything else.”

One of the few attempts to check the accuracy of the models in assessing flu deaths was done by one of Wilson’s master’s students, and her thesis is interesting reading.

Using data from three Ottawa hospitals over seven flu seasons, Tiffany Smith did two things. First, she counted the patients who died from flu, according to a doctor’s diagnosis. Then, using one of the official flu modelling methods, she ran a computer model to see how close the actual body count matched the statistical estimates. Her result? The statistical model predicted eight times as many deaths from flu as there were actual clinical cases.

“I have found evidence to suggest that point estimates of influenza burden generated using statistical models may not be reliable,” she concluded, “and that more research is required to understand the limitations of this methodology.”

Remember, that’s an unpublished thesis, not a peer-reviewed study. But Wilson said it was a well done paper that posed some important questions.

Flu models versus counts

Getting back to the question of how deadly influenza really is, fate did offer up a chance to check the model predictions when the flu pandemic hit in 2009, and the world faced a new influenza threat called H1N1.

Back then a flu expert told me that the pandemic would be a rare opportunity to check the true death toll from flu, because, for the first time, there was widespread lab testing, a national reporting system, and all eyes were on potential flu-related deaths. The final count: 428 deaths, which is much closer to the seasonal average of around 300 recorded in the vital statistics tables than to the 2,000 to 8,000 deaths estimated for the average flu season by the computer models.

So how did the models rate after a real life test? “The predictive models of 2009 of influenza have actually been a complete failure,” respiratory-infection expert Jefferson said.

“Ranges like 2,000 to 4,000 or even 8,000 influenza-related deaths a year are thrown around each flu season, and policy decisions and flu shot campaigns are based on these numbers,” Michael Gardam told me. “I think it is important for us to remember that these numbers are estimates and certainly not written in stone. These numbers vary a great deal depending on which research paper you read.”

There’s another point to consider here. Using death estimates is the scariest way to talk about the risk from flu, because 8,000 thousand sounds like a lot of deaths. But if you ask, “8,000 deaths out of how many people?” suddenly the risk seems much smaller. In fact, it would be 8,000 deaths among 35 million Canadians. In other words, in a normal flu season, about  0.02 per cent of Canadians are in danger of dying from the flu, using the highest estimate. Another way to look at it is this: 99.98 per cent of Canadians will not die of flu this year.

Undermining flu campaigns

So are the statistical models exaggerating the death toll from flu? “Not enough people have been asking these questions,”  the University of Ottawa’s Wilson said. “These are complicated models. There are multiple ways to calculate the information. Five different analysts with the same data can come up with five different estimates. It depends on how they calculate base line risk, how they define when the season begins, how to run the model. There are lots of potential variables in the model that will influence your answer.”

Influenza prevention has become an industry fuelled by poor science, says Dr. Tom Jefferson. (CBC)

For proof of how models keep changing their estimates, look back at Canada’s flu files. More than a decade ago, flu was estimated to kill about 500 to 1,500 Canadians every year. But in 2003 Health Canada changed models, and the estimates jumped to “700 to 2,500 per annum.” The 2,500 deaths at the upper end of that range quickly became the lower end, when an even newer model was tried in 2007, pushing the upper limit to 8,000 based on the severe flu seasons of 1997 to 1999.

“Influenza prevention has become an industry fuelled by poor science and propelled by conflicted decision makers,” Jefferson said. “This is the significance of the upward creep that you have been witnessing and the chasm that now exists between policy makers and evidence.

“The proof of what I am saying is in the answer to the question: How many die every year? Answer: maybe 300 or maybe 9,000. We are not sure. If you do not know, how can you have such a costly policy and most of all how can you evaluate it?”

When I asked him if there are consequences from over-stating the mortality impact of flu, Jefferson answered: “Yes. Scaring people justifies evidence-free policies. Yes, no one knows exactly what the threat is. The only certainty are the returns for industry.”

Wilson is concerned that overstating deaths could undermine the annual flu campaign. “I think this is a potential risk,” he said. “It’s a good idea to try to capture the number of deaths. People just need to reflect the fact that there is a lot of uncertainty in these numbers and that has not necessarily been conveyed. Even if the estimate is 1,000 or 2,000, it’s a big number. A more conservative approach might be better to convince people it’s a real disease that we have to take seriously.”

One expert I talked to suggests that at least some of the cost of the annual flu campaign should be directed at finding out how much death the virus actually causes every year, by using a system of doctors and hospitals to track laboratory confirmation of flu infections and flu mortality.

The flu virus has lots of ugly company in the winter — less famous viruses such as RSV (respiratory syncytial virus); the ubiquitous cold bugs, including the coronavirus and the adenovirus; as well as Streptococcus pneumonia and all of its bacterial friends. Influenza is certainly one of the nastiest viruses in the group. It also happens to be the only one with a vaccine.

“You’ve got to wonder: The stuff we’re attributing to influenza, how much of that is actually true and how much of that is other viruses? We don’t know because they haven’t been studied,” University Health Network’s Gardam said.

Just 1 death this year

For the record, how many official deaths from flu have been reported so far this year? One.

And finally, as promised, here’s the official response I received  from the Public Health Agency of Canada:

Q1. How are the numbers derived? (i.e., how is it counted? are there any statistical models?) The number of flu related hospitalizations and deaths is not a straightforward estimate, given that influenza is such a non-specific illness and its diagnosis is under-reported. Patients with influenza complications or an exacerbation of their underlying chronic medical condition are often not reported as influenza related.

PHAC has taken data collected by Statistics Canada and hospital discharge records from the Canadian Institute of Health Information and applied statistical techniques to provide an estimate of influenza related deaths.

Q2. Are the numbers an average over the last 10 years? Have the numbers stabilized?

As previously indicated, it is difficult to assess the true burden of influenza in terms of incidence, deaths and hospitalization. However, it is estimated that, on average, the flu and its complications send about 20,000 Canadians to hospital every year, and between 2,000 and 8,000 Canadians die.

Q3. Why is it important to inform Canadians about  these death statistics?

Reporting on these death statistics informs Canadians that infection with influenza can be severe and in some cases result in death. Hence, Canadians should get their seasonal flu shot to prevent infection and to practice infection control measures such as hand washing, cough etiquette and staying home when sick to prevent spread.

Article retrieved from: http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/health/story/1.1127442

To see a list of Adam’s new 2014 workshops Click here.

Like Adam on facebook

Connect with Adam on LinkedIn

Follow Adam on twitter and pinterest

Adam’s video blogs can be found on his YouTube page. For a directory of video blogs, click here.

Naturopathic medicine for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: a randomized clinical trial June 27, 2013

Posted by Dreamhealer in Alternative medicine, Cardiovascular disease, Dreamhealer, exercise, Healing, Health, Healthcare, Heart, Medication, naturopathic.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Here is a recent randomized clinical trial that clearly demonstrated Naturopathic medicine can significantly reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease.

Abstract:

Although cardiovascular disease may be partially preventable through dietary and lifestyle-based interventions, few individuals at risk receive intensive dietary and lifestyle counselling. We performed a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of naturopathic care in reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease.

Results:

Of 246 participants randomly assigned to a study group, 207 completed the study. The characteristics of participants in both groups were similar at baseline. Compared with participants in the control group, at 52 weeks those in the naturopathic group had a reduced adjusted 10-year cardiovascular risk (control: 10.81%; naturopathic group: 7.74%; risk reduction −3.07% [95% confidence interval (CI) −4.35% to −1.78%], p < 0.001) and a lower adjusted frequency of metabolic syndrome (control group: 48.48%; naturopathic care: 31.58%; risk reduction −16.90% [95% CI −29.55% to −4.25%], p = 0.002). Our findings support the hypothesis that the addition of naturopathic care to enhanced usual care may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease among those at high risk.

For those of you who wish to read the entire peer reviewed article, here is a direct link to the study:

Naturopathic medicine for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: a randomized clinical trial

Dreamhealer website: http://dreamhealer.com/

Click here to see a list of Adam’s upcoming workshops.

Watch Adam’s new video blogs on his YouTube page. For a directory of video blogs, click here

Follow Adam on Twitter for live Q&A sessions. Join the discussion.

Statin Benefits Questioned for Heart Disease Prevention June 8, 2013

Posted by Dreamhealer in Alternative medicine, Dreamhealer, exercise, Government, Healing, Health, Healthcare, Heart, Medication.
Tags: , , , ,
2 comments

adam mcleod, dreamhealer

Cholesterol-lowering statins are heavily promoted for heart patients but research is calling into question their use as a preventive medicine.

Statins such as atorvastatin (Lipitor), rosuvastatin (Crestor) and simvastatin (Zocor) are among the widely used prescription drugs.

Since the drugs were first marketed 30 years ago in the U.S. for preventing a second heart attack or stroke in those who’ve already had one, there’s been a shift toward prescribing statins for otherwise healthy people in Canada and the U.S.

“These are patients who really haven’t had an event, a cardiovascular event, but they seem to be at high risk,” said pharmacy Prof. Muhammad Mamdani, who works at St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto.

“You also get populations where people seem to be relatively healthy, their cholesterol levels aren’t that high, but for whatever reason, they are placed on a statin. That’s a patient population that is a lot more debatable and some practices may not be warranted.”

The medical community is debating the pros and cons of using statins for prevention as more independent research comes out on side-effects. This week, a study in JAMA Internal Medicine suggested statins may be associated with an increase in musculoskeletal conditions and pain, especially in physically active individuals.

“If you look at all the studies that have ever been done with statins for primary prevention, so for people who have never had a heart attack or a stroke, if you give a statin to a patient for about five years we can reduce the chance of a person having a heart attack or a stroke by about one per cent,” said James McCormack, a professor of pharmaceutical sciences at the University of British Columbia.

Shifting focus from cholesterol numbers

Other potential side-effects include risk of Type 2 diabetes, reversible muscle damage and short-term kidney damage.

In Canada, as in the U.S., the majority of statin prescriptions go to primary prevention patients, not people with established heart disease, said Dr. Lee Green, a professor and chair of the department of family medicine at the University of Alberta who has surveyed doctors on their prescribing.

“It seems we need to retrain physicians, and the public, to focus on actual risks, not on a convenient number like cholesterol level,” Green said in an email.

In March, epidemiologist Colin Dormuth, an assistant professor in the department of anesthesiology, pharmacology and therapeutics at the University of British Columbia, looked at the use of high potency statins and rates of admission for acute kidney injury.

“There are a lot of patients out there taking the drugs right now who don’t have a history of heart disease who are hoping to prevent heart disease and in all likelihood will derive absolutely no benefit,” Dormuth said.

In medical circles, discussions continue. A review published in January by British researchers who combed through trials sponsored by drug companies concluded that “statins are likely to be cost-effective in primary prevention.”

People like Jim Matheson, 62, of Toronto, are left to decide with their doctor.

“Within five years he told me that I had a 20 per cent chance of either having a stroke or a heart attack,” Matheson recalled. “He offered me the pill but I didn’t want to take it.”

Instead, Matheson opted to eat healthier foods and exercise more. His brother on the other hand decided to go on statins.

“I have sent him, probably for every article he has sent me on how good they are I have sent him 20 that says how bad they are. We’re still having the dialogue,” Matheson said.

“We’ll see who lasts longer,” he quipped.

Article retrieved from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2013/06/05/statins-cholesterol-heart-prevention.html

Click here to see a list of Adam’s upcoming workshops. Register soon for the early bird discount.

Like Adam on facebook

Connect with Adam on LinkedIn

Follow Adam on twitter and pinterest

Adam’s video blogs can be found on his YouTube page. For a directory of video blogs, click here

Heart surgeon speaks out on what really causes heart disease May 22, 2013

Posted by Dreamhealer in Big Pharma, Dreamhealer, Healing, Health, Healthcare, Heart.
Tags: , , , ,
2 comments

dreamhealer adam heart disease

Written by: Dr. Dwight Lundell
Prevent Disease

We physicians with all our training, knowledge and authority often acquire a rather large ego that tends to make it difficult to admit we are wrong. So, here it is. I freely admit to being wrong. As a heart surgeon with 25 years experience, having performed over 5,000 open-heart surgeries, today is my day to right the wrong with medical and scientific fact.

I trained for many years with other prominent physicians labelled “opinion makers.” Bombarded with scientific literature, continually attending education seminars, we opinion makers insisted heart disease resulted from the simple fact of elevated blood cholesterol.

The only accepted therapy was prescribing medications to lower cholesterol and a diet that severely restricted fat intake. The latter of course we insisted would lower cholesterol and heart disease. Deviations from these recommendations were considered heresy and could quite possibly result in malpractice.

It Is Not Working! 

These recommendations are no longer scientifically or morally defensible. The discovery a few years ago that inflammation in the artery wall is the real cause of heart disease is slowly leading to a paradigm shift in how heart disease and other chronic ailments will be treated.

The long-established dietary recommendations have created epidemics of obesity and diabetes, the consequences of which dwarf any historical plague in terms of mortality, human suffering and dire economic consequences.

Despite the fact that 25% of the population takes expensive statin medications and despite the fact we have reduced the fat content of our diets, more Americans will die this year of heart disease than ever before.

Statistics from the American Heart Association show that 75 million Americans currently suffer from heart disease, 20 million have diabetes and 57 million have pre-diabetes. These disorders are affecting younger and younger people in greater numbers every year.

Simply stated, without inflammation being present in the body, there is no way that cholesterol would accumulate in the wall of the blood vessel and cause heart disease and strokes. Without inflammation, cholesterol would move freely throughout the body as nature intended. It is inflammation that causes cholesterol to become trapped.

Inflammation is not complicated — it is quite simply your body’s natural defence to a foreign invader such as a bacteria, toxin or virus. The cycle of inflammation is perfect in how it protects your body from these bacterial and viral invaders. However, if we chronically expose the body to injury by toxins or foods the human body was never designed to process,a condition occurs called chronic inflammation. Chronic inflammation is just as harmful as acute inflammation is beneficial.

What thoughtful person would willfully expose himself repeatedly to foods or other substances that are known to cause injury to the body? Well, smokers perhaps, but at least they made that choice willfully.

The rest of us have simply followed the recommended mainstream diet that is low in fat and high in polyunsaturated fats and carbohydrates, not knowing we were causing repeated injury to our blood vessels. This repeated injury creates chronic inflammation leading to heart disease, stroke, diabetes and obesity.

Let me repeat that: The injury and inflammation in our blood vessels is caused by the low fat diet recommended for years by mainstream medicine.

What are the biggest culprits of chronic inflammation? Quite simply, they are the overload of simple, highly processed carbohydrates (sugar, flour and all the products made from them) and the excess consumption of omega-6 vegetable oils like soybean, corn and sunflower that are found in many processed foods.

Take a moment to visualize rubbing a stiff brush repeatedly over soft skin until it becomes quite red and nearly bleeding. you kept this up several times a day, every day for five years. If you could tolerate this painful brushing, you would have a bleeding, swollen infected area that became worse with each repeated injury. This is a good way to visualize the inflammatory process that could be going on in your body right now.

Regardless of where the inflammatory process occurs, externally or internally, it is the same. I have peered inside thousands upon thousands of arteries. A diseased artery looks as if someone took a brush and scrubbed repeatedly against its wall. Several times a day, every day, the foods we eat create small injuries compounding into more injuries, causing the body to respond continuously and appropriately with inflammation.

While we savor the tantalizing taste of a sweet roll, our bodies respond alarmingly as if a foreign invader arrived declaring war. Foods loaded with sugars and simple carbohydrates, or processed with omega-6 oils for long shelf life have been the mainstay of the American diet for six decades. These foods have been slowly poisoning everyone.

How does eating a simple sweet roll create a cascade of inflammation to make you sick?

Imagine spilling syrup on your keyboard and you have a visual of what occurs inside the cell. When we consume simple carbohydrates such as sugar, blood sugar rises rapidly. In response, your pancreas secretes insulin whose primary purpose is to drive sugar into each cell where it is stored for energy. If the cell is full and does not need glucose, it is rejected to avoid extra sugar gumming up the works.

When your full cells reject the extra glucose, blood sugar rises producing more insulin and the glucose converts to stored fat.

What does all this have to do with inflammation? Blood sugar is controlled in a very narrow range. Extra sugar molecules attach to a variety of proteins that in turn injure the blood vessel wall. This repeated injury to the blood vessel wall sets off inflammation. When you spike your blood sugar level several times a day, every day, it is exactly like taking sandpaper to the inside of your delicate blood vessels.

While you may not be able to see it, rest assured it is there. I saw it in over 5,000 surgical patients spanning 25 years who all shared one common denominator — inflammation in their arteries.

Let’s get back to the sweet roll. That innocent looking goody not only contains sugars, it is baked in one of many omega-6 oils such as soybean. Chips and fries are soaked in soybean oil; processed foods are manufactured with omega-6 oils for longer shelf life. While omega-6’s are essential -they are part of every cell membrane controlling what goes in and out of the cell — they must be in the correct balance with omega-3’s.

If the balance shifts by consuming excessive omega-6, the cell membrane produces chemicals called cytokines that directly cause inflammation.

Today’s mainstream American diet has produced an extreme imbalance of these two fats. The ratio of imbalance ranges from 15:1 to as high as 30:1 in favor of omega-6. That’s a tremendous amount of cytokines causing inflammation. In today’s food environment, a 3:1 ratio would be optimal and healthy.

To make matters worse, the excess weight you are carrying from eating these foods creates overloaded fat cells that pour out large quantities of pro-inflammatory chemicals that add to the injury caused by having high blood sugar. The process that began with a sweet roll turns into a vicious cycle over time that creates heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes and finally, Alzheimer’s disease, as the inflammatory process continues unabated.

There is no escaping the fact that the more we consume prepared and processed foods, the more we trip the inflammation switch little by little each day. The human body cannot process, nor was it designed to consume, foods packed with sugars and soaked in omega-6 oils.

There is but one answer to quieting inflammation, and that is returning to foods closer to their natural state. To build muscle, eat more protein. Choose carbohydrates that are very complex such as colorful fruits and vegetables. Cut down on or eliminate inflammation- causing omega-6 fats like corn and soybean oil and the processed foods that are made from them.

One tablespoon of corn oil contains 7,280 mg of omega-6; soybean contains 6,940 mg. Instead, use olive oil or butter from grass-fed beef.

Animal fats contain less than 20% omega-6 and are much less likely to cause inflammation than the supposedly healthy oils labelled polyunsaturated. Forget the “science” that has been drummed into your head for decades. The science that saturated fat alone causes heart disease is non-existent. The science that saturated fat raises blood cholesterol is also very weak. Since we now know that cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease, the concern about saturated fat is even more absurd today.

The cholesterol theory led to the no-fat, low-fat recommendations that in turn created the very foods now causing an epidemic of inflammation. Mainstream medicine made a terrible mistake when it advised people to avoid saturated fat in favor of foods high in omega-6 fats. We now have an epidemic of arterial inflammation leading to heart disease and other silent killers.

What you can do is choose whole foods your grandmother served and not those your mom turned to as grocery store aisles filled with manufactured foods. By eliminating inflammatory foods and adding essential nutrients from fresh unprocessed food, you will reverse years of damage in your arteries and throughout your body from consuming the typical American diet.

Article retrieved from: http://www.sott.net/article/242516-Heart-Surgeon-Speaks-Out-On-What-Really-Causes-Heart-Disease

Adam’s 2013 workshop schedule has been announced. Click here to see a list of upcoming workshops. Register soon for the early bird discount.

Like Adam on facebook

Connect with Adam on LinkedIn

Follow Adam on twitter and pinterest

Adam’s video blogs can be found on his YouTube page. For a directory of video blogs, click here.

Self-Prescribing Natural Supplements February 17, 2013

Posted by Dreamhealer in Alternative medicine, Healing, Health, Healthcare, Integrative Medicine, Medication, Misdiagnose, vitamins.
Tags: , , ,
10 comments

adam dreamhealer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Article written by: Adam McLeod

Our society has rapidly changed over the last decade due to the internet by allowing everyone to easily access information. This freedom of information has led to many positive changes around the world. The internet has changed the doctor patient relationship significantly because the patient often comes to the appointment informed about their health. This is a very positive change that has empowered people to take responsibility for their own health. It encourages patients to do the research and take the initiative to understand what is happening in their body. It is very important that everyone becomes actively engaged in their own healing by making positive changes with lifestyle and with focused intentions. Your intentions are a powerful tool that can complement any healing modality. The bottom line is that a patient who is focused and engaged with their own healing is much more likely to heal.

Although this is a positive step in the right direction, patients doing their own research brings up new challenges which can sometimes be harmful. It is now a common occurrence to have a patient come in very distressed because they read on a blog that a random symptom they are experiencing means that they have a serious health condition. The doctor must then spend time reassuring the patient that the information which they came across is simply not relevant to their case.

More commonly and, in my opinion, more concerning is when patients start taking supplements based on their own research, especially when they are taking these supplements to fight a serious illness. Patients often come into the clinic with a big bag of supplements that they are taking and very often they don’t even know why they are taking each supplement. They will cite a news story or a website that says zinc is good for you so the patient buys zinc thinking it is helping. Before you know it the patient is taking a mish mash of low quality supplements that are simply not helpful. In some cases zinc might be helpful but in reality it is not specific to that health concern.

The media often simplifies a study and writes a story with a headline that gives the reader the wrong impression. People will read that article and think that the supplement is proven to help every health condition and that everyone should take it. The reality is that the study is not saying that at all! The story gets so distorted in the brief summary that it makes it very difficult to sift through all the health information presented in the media.

This is where Naturopathic doctors can be of great assistance to patients. They are extremely knowledgeable about supplements and they know how to design a treatment plan that is specific to your health condition. Medical doctors simply do not get the training with these different supplements whereas Naturopathic doctors receive extensive training in this area. A Naturopathic physician can also make sure that you are getting quality supplements that will help to optimize your healing. The quality of a supplement makes a huge difference and only a trained professional will be able to help you pick quality supplements that are specific to your healing. Take the initiative and get engaged with your own healing but do so with the proper guidance. A Naturopathic doctor can give you guidance on your healing and provide you with all the tools necessary to promote the healing process.

For information on my workshops visit my website. My 2013 workshop schedule has now been posted.

http://dreamhealer.com/

Like me on facebook

Follow me on twitter for news and announcement

www.twitter.com/dreamhealer

We Need to Work to keep this Province Smoke Free January 25, 2013

Posted by Dreamhealer in Cancer, Dreamhealer, Government, Healing, Health, Health Insurance, Healthcare, Longevity, Lung Cancer, Pollution, Research.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

adam dreamhealer

As National Non-Smoking Week winds up, the Canadian Cancer Society, BC and Yukon, is continuing to encourage the BC government – and all political parties – to support smoke-free public outdoor spaces including the patios of hospitality establishments, and where children play, such as parks, playgrounds and beaches.

Although many municipalities, including Nanaimo and Duncan here on Vancouver Island, have banned smoking in outdoor public places, many British Columbians remain unprotected. Since we started talking about smoke-free public places, we’ve heard from people on both sides of the fence. Some feel it is their personal right to smoke where they want and that provincial regulations would be going too far.

But the vast majority view smoking restrictions as an important public health measure to protect us all from involuntary exposure. This is a valuable debate and one that we are proud to have sparked.

Debates aside, the facts reveal that tobacco use in our society is taking a staggering toll. Tobacco use remains the largest single preventable cause of death and disease in B.C., killing more than 6,000 British Columbians each year. Second-hand smoke is linked to the death of up to 140 B.C. residents each year.

Currently the provincial government is deferring to municipalities to decide whether or not to ban smoking in outdoor public places. However, at the 2012 Union of BC Municipalities Convention in September, municipalities spoke loud and clear by asking the province to introduce province-wide restrictions.

Please continue to encourage your MLA, and the B.C. Health Minister, to follow the lead of 30 B.C. municipalities and four other provinces, and keep B.C. beautiful and smoke-free.

Erin Hemmens Health Promotion Co-ordinator Vancouver Island Region

Article retrieved from http://www.canada.com/need+work+keep+this+province+smoke+free/7873437/story.html

http://dreamhealer.com/

Like me on facebook

Follow me on twitter

Connect with me on Pinterest

All my video blogs can be found on my YouTube page. For a directory of video blogs, click here.

Legumes May Aid Glycemic Control, Cut Lipids October 23, 2012

Posted by Dreamhealer in Alternative medicine, Alternatives, Diabetes, Diet, Dreamhealer, Energy Healing, exercise, Healing, Health, Healthcare, Integrative Medicine, Longevity, naturopathic, Research, Skeptics, vitamins.
add a comment

By Kristina Fiore, Staff Writer, MedPage Today

Published: October 22, 2012

Reviewed by Robert Jasmer, MD; Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco and Dorothy Caputo, MA, BSN, RN, Nurse Planner

Eating more legumes such as beans and chickpeas helped improve  glycemic control and lowered total cholesterol and triglycerieds in patients with type 2 diabetes, researchers found.

In a randomized controlled trial, patients who ate at least an additional cup of legumes per day had a greater reduction in HbA1c than patients who increased their insoluble fiber consumption for 3 months (-0.5% versus -0.3%, P<0.001), David Jenkins, MD, PhD, of the University of Toronto, and colleagues reported online in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

Foods with a low glycemic index (GI) have been shown to improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes, and legumes — such as beans, chickpeas, and lentils — were among the first foods recognized to have low GI values.

They’ve been recommended in many nutrition therapy guidelines for diabetes, but their effects on glycemic control and other parameters still remain controversial, researchers say.

So Jenkins and colleagues randomized 121 patients with type 2 diabetes to one of two diets for 3 months: a low-GI legume diet that required them to eat at least a cup of legumes per day, or to a diet that increased their intake of insoluble fiber via consumption of whole wheat products.

The primary outcome was change in HbA1c, with a secondary endpoint of calculated coronary heart disease risk.

The difference they found in HbA1c reduction remained significant after adjustment for body weight change, they reported (P=0.005).

In terms of cardiac parameters, they found that the legume diet significantly lowered mean total cholesterol (-8 mg/dL, P<0.001) and triglycerides (-22 mg/dL, P<0.001), without any changes in HDL cholesterol levels.

The insoluble fiber diet increased average HDL cholesterol levels (2 mg/dL, P=0.004), although the reasons for this are unclear, given that such an association hasn’t been seen before in the literature, the researchers noted.

And the legume diet reduced blood pressure and heart rate relative to the high insoluble fiber diet, they added.

Thus, the legume diet overall reduced heart risk significantly more than the insoluble fiber diet (-0.8%, P=0.003), and the researchers concluded that incorporating legumes into a low-GI diet can help improve glycemic control and reduce heart risk.

In an accompanying editorial, Marion Franz, MS, RD, questioned whether the modest benefits come from the dietary components or from a reduced energy intake overall.

She warned that low-GI diet has been controversial, with some smaller studies showing a benefit in terms of improved glycemic control but larger studies showing no such benefit.

Franz conceded that legumes are part of a healthy diet for diabetics and the general population, but “whether people with diabetes can eat the amount necessary to improve glycemic control is debatable, and, if legumes do improve glycemia, is it because of their low GI or high soluble fiber content?”

She concluded that nutrition therapy for diabetes is effective but “just as there is no one medication or insulin regimen appropriate for all persons with diabetes, there is no one nutrition therapy intervention.”

Action Points

  • Eating more legumes such as beans and chickpeas may help improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes, a study has found.
  • Note that the legume diet significantly lowered mean total cholesterol and triglycerides, without any changes in HDL cholesterol levels.

Article retrieved from: http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/DietNutrition/35491

Dreamhealer: http://dreamhealer.com/

Follow me on twitter

Like me on facebook

Connect with me:

Flickr

Google+

YouTube

LinkedIn (Email: questions@dreamhealer.com)

Health Experiences from Around the World July 22, 2009

Posted by Dreamhealer in Healthcare.
add a comment

Landmark health care legislation that would provide health insurance for all Americans is under intense scrutiny — in particular, the “public option,” which creates a government health insurance program that would compete with private insurers. Critics lambast the public option as “socialized medicine,” warning that bureaucracy and government-mandated rationing would lead to interminable waits and dangerously substandard care. Read More…

%d bloggers like this: