Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Childhood Vaccinations – Necessary or Overkill?
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 106 of 327 (365744)
11-24-2006 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Dr Adequate
11-24-2006 7:48 AM


Dietary Supplement Claims
quote:
Yeah, so they cheat.
I don't see where any of your links have a dietary supplement with a claim from the manufacturer. What I see are claims of people, not manufacturers about their product.
Disclaimers are there just like on cigarettes. Ultimately people have to make their own decisions.
quote:
This is because they are liars, swindlers, and crooks.
Yes truth in advertising would be nice, but then that goes for anything someone is selling.
quote:
You might also check out Black Cohosh (also known as Black Snake Root, Bugwort, Bugbane, Squawroot, Rattleweed, Rattle Root, and Cimicifuga). This causes cancer: a look round the Internet shows that herbalists are still selling it.
Black Cohosh May Increase Breast Cancer Spread
Conclusion: These results suggest that black cohosh supplements might not affect your risk of developing breast cancer. But if breast cancer does develop, black cohosh may make it more aggressive and likely to spread to other organs or tissues.
Remember that this is an early small study, done on mice. It's very hard to take information from animal studies and apply it to people. Still, based on these conclusions, researchers may consider it potentially unsafe for women with breast cancer to even try black cohosh.
Which would make sense since Black Cohosh contains phytoestrogens. Breast cancer in the women I've known have been estrogen related. So I can see where it would aggravate, but the study didn't prove it would increase one's risk of cancer.
Personally, I never found that it helped any. Of course there were menstrual pain relievers that worked great for some women, but didn't help me.
Individual's need to be aware of the disease risks of their heredity and environment.
If a supplement is hazardous, it is the job of the FDA to take action.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-24-2006 7:48 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by nator, posted 11-24-2006 4:42 PM purpledawn has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 107 of 327 (365754)
11-24-2006 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by purpledawn
11-24-2006 11:23 AM


Re: Change Resistant
quote:
Is there a supplement that you feel is not follow the guidelines?
No. I don't know much about the situation these days; it's been years since I left Eugene, Oregon, and did my grocery shopping at an organic/whole foods store with shelves and shelves full of "nutritional supplements". I was just expressing my opinion on what I feel would be Good and Just Utopia tm.

Kings were put to death long before 21 January 1793. But regicides of earlier times and their followers were interested in attacking the person, not the principle, of the king. They wanted another king, and that was all. It never occurred to them that the throne could remain empty forever. -- Albert Camus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by purpledawn, posted 11-24-2006 11:23 AM purpledawn has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 108 of 327 (365804)
11-24-2006 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by purpledawn
11-24-2006 9:11 AM


Re: Ephedra
quote:
He's mixing up a remedy for hayfever, not putting it in a dietary supplement. (A dietary supplement is a product taken by mouth that contains a "dietary ingredient" intended to supplement the diet.)
Well, no, that's not what a dietary supplement is, in reality.
Most every herb used as a drug, including ephedra, is labeled a "dietary supplement".
This is because "dietary supplements" do not have to prove that they are safe and effective.
It's the huge loophole that all of the prescribers, sellers, and manufacturers of "dietary supplements" use to get around the requirement that they show their products are safe and effective.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by purpledawn, posted 11-24-2006 9:11 AM purpledawn has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 109 of 327 (365807)
11-24-2006 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by purpledawn
11-24-2006 12:04 PM


Re: Dietary Supplement Claims
quote:
If a supplement is hazardous, it is the job of the FDA to take action.
See, that's backwards.
The responsibility should be on the manufacturers and sellers to demostrate that their products are not harmful and actually do what they say they do. They shouldn't be permitted to sell those products before this.
You know, just like every other drug sold in the country.
As it is now, we taxpayers are currently footing the bill every time the FDA has to do all of the clinical trials and scientific research on these "nutritional supplements" (i.e. botanical drugs) if they start to get reports of poisonings or severe side effects.
It's only after doing all of this taxpayer-funded research (that the company should have had to do in the first place) can the FDA order a recall of dangerous products.
The more I read about this industry the more I think people who take herbal drugs are playing russian roulette with their health and lives, all the while happily forking over billions to the ammunition suppliers.
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by purpledawn, posted 11-24-2006 12:04 PM purpledawn has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 110 of 327 (365840)
11-24-2006 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by purpledawn
11-24-2006 11:23 AM


Re: Change Resistant
These are, indeed, guidelines.
The bottom line is, pd, why do feel so easy about putting hundreds, perhaps thousands of unknown, untested chemical compounds into your body?
That's what I really want to know, if I may be so bold to ask.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by purpledawn, posted 11-24-2006 11:23 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by purpledawn, posted 11-25-2006 6:50 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 111 of 327 (365847)
11-24-2006 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by purpledawn
11-24-2006 6:59 AM


Re: Change Resistant
quote:
But we don't want congress to go the wrong direction. I want the freedom to choose.
Sure, but I want the company producing and selling any drug, botanical or synthetic, to be required to investigate it's theraputic benefits (if they even exist) and side effects and shown that the former outweight the latter before being permitted to sell it.
That way it is possible to make an informed choice.
Right now, it is well-nigh impossible to make an informed choice when purchasing botanical drugs, since very little research of the sort I mentioned has been done.
quote:
Anything used incorrectly can cause harm, whether it's an herb or an over the counter drug.
I agree.
If you don't know anything about a herbal drug, how can you know how to use it "correctly"?
Just because a Naturopath or herbalist says they know about the drug doesn't mean much.
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by purpledawn, posted 11-24-2006 6:59 AM purpledawn has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 112 of 327 (365859)
11-24-2006 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by nator
11-21-2006 7:38 AM


Re: tentative devil's advocate
Schraf writes:
Buz, how many people in the world die from prescription drugs compared to the number of people who die from not having access to them?
That is a very relative question, relative to whether they have availed themselves to alternative safer health treatment, relative to how apprised they are on diet adjustments for optimum health, relative to whether they need to keep on drugs already prescribed, relative to how dangerous the prescription drugs used are and a host of other factors.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by nator, posted 11-21-2006 7:38 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by nator, posted 11-24-2006 8:02 PM Buzsaw has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 113 of 327 (365863)
11-24-2006 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Buzsaw
11-24-2006 7:16 PM


Re: tentative devil's advocate
Buz, how many people in the world die from prescription drugs compared to the number of people who die from not having access to them?
quote:
That is a very relative question, relative to whether they have availed themselves to alternative safer health treatment, relative to how apprised they are on diet adjustments for optimum health, relative to whether they need to keep on drugs already prescribed, relative to how dangerous the prescription drugs used are and a host of other factors.
OK, then let me narrow the question.
Buz, how many people in the world die from prescription antibiotics compared to the number of people who die from not having access to them?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Buzsaw, posted 11-24-2006 7:16 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Buzsaw, posted 11-24-2006 11:16 PM nator has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 114 of 327 (365890)
11-24-2006 11:16 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by nator
11-24-2006 8:02 PM


Re: tentative devil's advocate
Schraf writes:
Buz, how many people in the world die from prescription antibiotics compared to the number of people who die from not having access to them?
That is a very relative question, relative to whether they have availed themselves to alternative safer health treatment, relative to how apprised they are on diet adjustments for optimum health, relative to whether they need to keep on drugs already prescribed, relative to how dangerous the prescription drugs used are and a host of other factors.
Antibiotics are a danger to your immune system. They kill off the good bacteria in your gut along with the bad. They have other side effects like candida, yeast growth, This in turn has a chain reaction to cause other problems. Without the good bacteria and enzymes you digestion is impaired which can cause gurd where things back up and all kinds of problems.
Alternatively, why not use probiotics. Have you heard how these are doing so much for the enhancement of health via the wholistic route? They are good bacteria you take to overwhelm the bad bacteria which cause disease et al. Echinacea, ascorbic acid, garlic (especially aged garlic), Zinc, magnesium, pleurisy root, cayenne, aloe vera, alfalfa and a host of other food suppliments can do safely what harmful antibiotics do to treat and prevent infections and diseases without the harmful side effects. With these the side effects are all good and most of these are foods which you cannot overdose on.
I, my family and a host of other folks apprised on this stuff go year in and year out without the use of any antibiotics or immune shots of any kind. There's a natural remedy for every thinkable disease and ailment, either efficient in prevention or treatment of disease.
Perhaps there may be rare occasions when antibiotics would be helpful for a quick fix, but one would want to get back off of them asap after a crisis event and on to the natural remedies.
There are a growing number of alternative health care practitioners around the nation. I suggest in the event of illness folks unapprised on these things do some research and find a reputable one to go to for professional advice and treatment.
Also there's lots of info on the www. Interested folks can search out these and learn a lot. If you have a given health problem, there's likely a number of sites you can go to for information. Don't just start taking this and that without doing the homework. However with herbs, vitamins and minerals, the chance of serious problems from the nature products is very small.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by nator, posted 11-24-2006 8:02 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by nator, posted 11-25-2006 4:37 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 140 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-27-2006 1:43 PM Buzsaw has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 115 of 327 (365913)
11-25-2006 6:50 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by nator
11-24-2006 5:57 PM


Choices
As long as we have to rely on others for food, drugs, supplements etc., there will always be a risk.
Drugs Marketed in the United States That Do Not Have Required FDA Approval
Supplements have to list ingredients or additives, just like the food I eat. I do my research and make my decisions accordingly.
Assuming that I consume anything advertised is erroneous.
Advertisement has a purpose and we have to discern what is necessary and what isn't; whether it is drugs advertised on TV, dietary supplements, or what foods will help lower cholesterol.
My dentist and MD don't usually give me that option. They use what they deem is best.
Yes understanding basic human physiology is necessary and plays a part in what I decide to ingest. My decisions aren't based on an overnight whim. It is many years of dealing with various doctors on serious illnesses and some not so serious. They are also based on information gleaned from agricultural information associated with raising cattle, chickens, etc. Realizing that what FDA allows under a terminology isn't necessarily what we think it is.
A lot of factors and personal experience go into my decisions. I could be wrong and I could die tomorrow, but that is a risk.
I can trust the doctor and I could also die tomorrow, but that is a risk.
We all choose the risks we are willing to take.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by nator, posted 11-24-2006 5:57 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by nator, posted 11-25-2006 4:43 PM purpledawn has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 116 of 327 (365972)
11-25-2006 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Buzsaw
11-24-2006 11:16 PM


Re: tentative devil's advocate
So, what you are saying is that you don't know and are unwilling to research the question I asked, which was:
Buz, how many people in the world die from prescription antibiotics compared to the number of people who die from not having access to them?
quote:
There's a natural remedy for every thinkable disease and ailment, either efficient in prevention or treatment of disease.
That is demonstrably not true.
quote:
However with herbs, vitamins and minerals, the chance of serious problems from the nature products is very small.
Why do you think that, buz? What makes you think that the side effects for herbs are fewer or even not more numerous than those of synthetics?
Like another mentioned, the reason we use commercial aspirin now is because the willow bark extract that aspirin was originally made from used to make people's stomachs bleed quite frequently.
Commercial aspirin is, by law, consistent in purity and potentcy and it's side effects have been researched to death, while willow bark extract can cause terrible stomach pain and hemmorage.
In fact, the the herbal drugs you have taken are likely to have hundreds or thousands of chemical compounds that might be affecting your body in unknown ways, simply because the company who manufactures them has ever been made to indentify what is in the drugs and make sure there are no dangerous compounds in them.
Haven't you been reading anything I and others have written in this thread?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Buzsaw, posted 11-24-2006 11:16 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Buzsaw, posted 11-25-2006 6:36 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 117 of 327 (365975)
11-25-2006 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by purpledawn
11-25-2006 6:50 AM


Re: Choices
quote:
A lot of factors and personal experience go into my decisions. I could be wrong and I could die tomorrow, but that is a risk.
I can trust the doctor and I could also die tomorrow, but that is a risk.
We all choose the risks we are willing to take.
That's true, but based upon what you have written in this thread, I honestly do not think that you truly understand the magnitude of the lack of information on these herbal drugs.
The information simply doesn't exist to know enough for anyone to make an informed decision about most of them.
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by purpledawn, posted 11-25-2006 6:50 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by purpledawn, posted 11-26-2006 5:56 AM nator has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 118 of 327 (365988)
11-25-2006 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by nator
11-25-2006 4:37 PM


Re: Side Effects.
Schraf writes:
So, what you are saying is that you don't know and are unwilling to research the question I asked, which was:
Buz, how many people in the world die from prescription antibiotics compared to the number of people who die from not having access to them?
My point was that your proposal would not prove anything. Why? Because antibiotics are by far the most popular treatment. They are most used due to the fact that the medical profession is largly money driven. Herbs do not make money for the practitioners nor the pharmaceuticals.
A study of comparisons with 7th Day Adventists who tend to go whoistic healthcare and consume natural foods with non-Adventists shows that those who go alternative live longer and healthier, implicating less deaths on a mortality basis. This studies compares the percentage of non Adventists deaths Adventists have.
Study writes:
OBJECTIVE: Members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church generally adopt a healthy lifestyle, which is reflected by favorable mortality rates. The purpose of this study was to estimate relative mortality rates among persons joining the church in adult life compared with members of the same age who joined in childhood. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A cohort of 29,871 Seventh-day Adventist church members in California was followed for 12 years. A total of 5,109 deaths occurred during follow-up. RESULTS: In men, the relative mortality at the time of entry into the church showed a curvilinear relation with age, with a maximum of about 2 for entry at age 50-60. For most ages at entry, the relative mortality first declined with increasing membership duration but later stabilized. Men joining at age 50 experienced a 15-25% reduction in relative mortality after 10 years of membership. Women joining after age 50 had a somewhat higher mortality than those who joined in childhood, with no subsequent short-term change. CONCLUSION: The pronounced drop in relative mortality among men entering the church may reflect the adoption of a healthy lifestyle.
A cohort study found that earlier and longer Seventh-day Adventist church membership was associated with reduced male mortality - PubMed

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by nator, posted 11-25-2006 4:37 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Chiroptera, posted 11-25-2006 6:47 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 122 by nator, posted 11-26-2006 7:05 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 124 by nator, posted 11-26-2006 9:28 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 125 by nator, posted 11-26-2006 10:33 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 327 (365989)
11-25-2006 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Buzsaw
11-25-2006 6:36 PM


Re: Side Effects.
quote:
They are most used due to the fact that the medical profession is largly money driven.
I'm not sure I completely agree with this statement. Physicians don't make any money off of their prescriptions. They write a prescription which is then filled by a pharmacist who has no connection to the physician. In fact, many times physicians prescribe over the counter medicines that can be bought at any convenience store. I have had doctors prescribe for me things like applying a heating pad or drinking more fruit juice or gargling with salt water and similar things; certainly no money in those things for the physician.
Whatever a physician prescribes, she sees not one dime of whatever money is spent on the prescription.
That's not too say that big money doesn't have something to do with the crummy state of American health care, but it isn't as simple as your post suggests.

Kings were put to death long before 21 January 1793. But regicides of earlier times and their followers were interested in attacking the person, not the principle, of the king. They wanted another king, and that was all. It never occurred to them that the throne could remain empty forever. -- Albert Camus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Buzsaw, posted 11-25-2006 6:36 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Buzsaw, posted 11-25-2006 10:20 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 120 of 327 (366002)
11-25-2006 10:20 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Chiroptera
11-25-2006 6:47 PM


Re: Side Effects.
Chiroptera writes:
Whatever a physician prescribes, she sees not one dime of whatever money is spent on the prescription.
1. She? Does the same apply to he? I hope so.
2. I understand that the pharmaceutical producers are among the highest contributors of the medical schools so the medical schools are beholden to the drug companies by promoting their products so as to receive the funding.
Med link writes:
WASHINGTON, D.C., November 10, 1998 ” The Aetna Foundation, Aetna U.S. Healthcare, Hoechst Marion Roussel, Merck, Schering-Plough Corporation and SmithKline Beecham today announced $6.8 million in funding for 20 outcomes research grants at 13 academic medical institutions participating in the Academic Medicine and Managed Care Forum ("Forum"). Funds were made available through the Quality Care Research Fund, to which Aetna (NYSE: ‘ET) has pledged $15 million in grants over a 5-year period, and through the pharmaceutical companies. This is the second year in which grants have been funded through the Forum, with a total of 36 grants and a funding level of nearly $13 million.
News & insights | CVS Health
3. The med schools being funded by the drug companies program the knife, the needle and the pill heavily into the educational cirricula with very little about diet and nutrition. If it makes money, it's promoted in the schools. What doesn't produce revenue rarely get's introduced into the text books, it appears. Many MDs are incorporating naturopaty into their practice, but for the most part I would assume they learned it on their own. I believe some of it is beginning to get into the schools due to public pressure.
4. Bottom line: MD's indoctrinated by the money driven medical establishment of which the med schools are a major element via funding.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Chiroptera, posted 11-25-2006 6:47 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024