from Portland Tribune, Mar 8, 2012
MY VIEW • Parents, others worry that the next bad drug is being used now •

Peter Latham once said, “Truth in all its kinds is most difficult to win and truth in medicine is the most difficult of all.”
For just a moment, can all those in and out of medicine who consider themselves knowledgeable and informed say to themselves, “so true.”

Problems that plague medicine, medical science and research have created an enter-at-your-own-risk system to health and well being. Dysfunctional peer-review, dangerous and unnecessary interventions, ghost writing, conflicts of interest, the revolving door between industry and regulation, clinical trials designed by marketing departments, medical journals that serve their pharmaceutical industry advertisers and statistical manipulations all contribute to dangerous problems for the consumer.

Yet parents are asked, in spite of all the above, to believe that the mass vaccination program is immune from medicine’s plague. The grab ‘em and stab ‘em, as one physician puts it, the one-size-fits-all approach to vaccinating every child in this country with 49 doses of 14 vaccines before the age of 6 is not pristine or pure as fallen snow.

When a parent questions the methodology of a vaccination study published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, touted in the media as safe and effective, the pejoratives of “anti-vaccine” or “anti-science” darts fly.

Why should anyone accept these studies after they compare adverse reactions for a new vaccine vs. placebo and buried in the study is the fact that the “placebo,” usually a biologically inert substance, is another experimental vaccine?

Were similar characterizations applied to those who questioned the safety of Vioxx, Avandia, PhenPhen or HRT? Are those questioning repeated concussions in football, anti-football? Are those who recognize there are problems for some with yoga, anti-yoga? In spite of the Hippocratic oath, to do no harm, the next Vioxx is likely, already being prescribed by physicians.

One in four parents think vaccines cause autism, and aren’t buying the scientifically irrelevant, methodologically flawed studies. Riddled with conflicts of interest, studies supposedly exonerating the vaccination connection to neurological, behavioral, immune and gastrointestinal disorders don’t match what parents see in real life.

Fifty-four percent of parents are worried about serious adverse effects caused by vaccines. At the same time, an interesting comment was made at a recent international vaccination conference: “By recognizing that the two groups that know the most about immunization are the policy makers on the one hand and the anti-vaccination [there’s that pejorative again] lobby on the other ...” First, there is no lobby. Second, there is only a growing number of educated, scientifically literate parents who know the most about the science and politics of vaccines. They also know the most about their children.

These parents are dedicated to the safety of their children and are entrusted to above all else, “first do no harm.” They aren’t going to allow their children to be “Vioxxed” or “Gardasized” by Merck or by mass vaccination products and policies which pose a reckless disregard for the long-term health of each and every child.

The parents aren’t the problem. The problem is the problem. It’s not the parents.
For example, blaming parents and unvaccinated children for the recurrent cyclical nature of bordetella pertussis (whooping cough) infections is scientifically unsupportable. The more likely explanation can be attributable to 1) the temporary short-term immunity of as little as three years, for the pertussis vaccine, 2) studies suggesting the occurrence of the natural evolution of b. pertussis and 3) the misapplied concept of herd immunity because of the first two reasons.

For evidence that this is happening, look to the story that received national attention. The 2010 Southern California outbreak of whooping cough found, “the bulk of the outbreak was in vaccinated and fully vaccinated up-to-date children.”
Research in the Netherlands suggests that b. pertussis is in a process of evolution, adapting to the pertussis vaccination.

When public health officials or pediatricians pressure parents for their children to join “the herd,” many parents see a herd with increasing numbers of children afflicted with chronic disease, children with a multitude of learning disabilities, severe neurological and behavioral disorders, immune system impairment, and chronic and novel inflammatory gastrointestinal disease in staggering numbers unseen 20 years ago.

School budgets are collapsing under the weight of services for special education. By no stretch of the imagination is “the herd” healthy.

For more than a decade, parents have been asking for genuine independently conducted health outcome studies comparing the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated which, to date, has fallen on deaf ears. There is not one single study demonstrating that the current recommended vaccination schedule is safe for all children.

Until such studies are conducted, free of the multitude of corrupting influences in science, parents will be well advised to do their own thorough research on all vaccines that the U.S. Supreme Court has described as “unavoidably unsafe.”

Michael Framson of Medford does volunteer work in Oregon for the National Vaccine
Information Center.

Copyright 2012 Pamplin Media Group, 6605 S.E. Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222 • 503-226-6397


Vit.D - what do we do?

If you haven't seen it yet, the NIH (National Institute of Health) has just come out with some research questioning whether or not it truly is good or needed to take higher doses of Vit.D. The gov't current recommendations are around 400 IU (international units) per day. It is currently being considered to be increased from 400 to 600. (i think it's funny, cause they still can't agree on what a good amount is to recommend, but they question/criticize others for trying more...)

Basically, the current thought is that if we are only getting 400-600 IU of Vit-D per day, whether through food or sun, then we are already in the category of Vit-D deficient (we are not getting enough). They site studies that show populations of people who have high & low levels of Vit-D, and those with lower levels have a significantly higher risk of heart disease, cancer, flu infections, and a host of other diseases. Obviously, this doesn't prove correlation, since there are many other variables, including the activities of these same people (exercise, diet, etc...)


The newer articles and discussions on the web that just came out, have questioned the claims that high doses of Vit-D will PREVENT said diseases. I would agree that it would be difficult to make that claim and have good evidence from dbl-blinded, clinical-controlled trials (since there's not much done yet, but they are working on some now...), however I feel that it is a very important correlation that needs to be looked at closely. I've read quite a few peer-reviewed research articles on the correlation between Cancer rates & Vit-D deficiency. Basically, we don't have a population of Americans who have cancer, but we have a population of Americans who are Vit-D deficient who have cancer. Just google "Cancer & Vit D" and see for yourself.


They also question the total amount of Vit-D we should be getting. I feel strongly that the gov't recommendations of only 400-600 IU is not enough, but I also recognize that there is a toxic level of Vit-D that we need to be aware of. When someone refers to taking 'Large' doses or 'high' levels of Vit-D, they can be taking up to 50,000 IU/week, for long period of times. This still isn't near the level of toxicity.


Well, this is just a quick glance down some of the articles I've seen on NPR, Mercola, specifically this new article/video, and other mainstream media sites. I am still currently taking 5,000 IU almost daily (i'm human, and I forget some days!), especially during the winter months, when I hardly get any direct sunlight on my skin for more than a minute or two. Please take some time to read some of those articles yourself, and research, research, research. If there are any special circumstances or health concerns, you can easily get tested for Vit-D levels by a simple blood test. If there is any concern for extreme deficiency or toxicity levels, it's always a good idea to know for sure by getting tested. Besides that, know your body, and pay attention to how you feel, eat really well, get enough sleep, and have fun. Here's to your health.

Dr. Nick


Repost: This is why I do what I do

Whether you are a parent or not, this type of thing should open your eyes a little to the choices we make, and the choices that are often 'forced' upon us. We need to think critically and challenge those who don't. Even if they are doctors. They are humans too.

Also, please click on the video and go to YouTube to read the comments to this video. Max isn't the only kid this has happened to.


Few Medical Studies Actually Compare One Treatment to Another

A study released in the March 10, 2010 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) noted that most other studies in medical journals do not compare one type of treatment to another. According to the study, and several news articles written about this study, most medical studies are testing a new drug and not looking to see how it compares to drugs already on the market, or to non-drug care.
It is the lack of "comparative effectiveness" studies that makes it hard for patients and doctors to evaluate which course of treatment or care is best for a patient. A March 10, 2010, article on this study in the Los Angeles Times noted that this is the reason that there is such a large discrepancy between the way medical doctors care for patients with the same ailments.
Coauthors of the study and the LA Times article, Drs. Danny McCormick and Michael Hochman, explained how they conducted their study in the Times article by saying, "In the study, we analyzed 328 medication studies recently published in six top medical journals and found that just 32% were aimed at determining which available treatment is best. The rest were either aimed at bringing a new therapy to market or simply compared a medication with a placebo. Whether the therapy was better or worse than other treatments was simply not addressed."
In an attempt to explain why very few studies are done to check existing treatments against new drugs, the authors explained, "So why, then, did only a third of medication studies focus on helping doctors use existing therapies more effectively? The answer lies in the fact that pharmaceutical companies fund nearly half of all medication research, including the lion's share of large clinical trials. For obvious reasons, commercially funded research is primarily geared toward the development of new and marketable medications and technologies. Once these products have won approval for clinical use, companies no longer have incentives to study exactly how and when they should be used."
Not surprisingly, the research showed that most of the studies done are funded by drug companies trying to get approval for their new drugs. The study also showed that the few studies that actually do "comparative effectiveness" and look at one type of care as compared to another, were mostly funded by the government or received other non-drug company related funding.

:: nW

Do Your Best to Stay Out of Hospitals...

The above is a headline from the February 23rd, 2010 issue of the New York Daily News. The article reports on a study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine on February 22, 2010. The study and resultant articles point out that approximately 48,000 patients die each year from pneumonia or blood poisoning picked up in hospitals.
In this study, hospital discharge records were looked at on 69 million patients who were in hospitals in 40 US states between 1998 and 2006. The records were examined to look for blood infections or pneumonia. Problems of these types that were acquired from outside the hospital were excluded, so that the data only showed problems resulting from a stay at the hospital.
The results of this large study brought forth some alarming data. The study revealed that hospital-acquired illnesses were responsible for 2.3 million extra patient days in hospitals. These extra days in a hospital resulted in a cost of $8.1 billion in the year 2006 alone. Overall, 1.7 million healthcare-associated infections are diagnosed every year.
Ramanan Laxminarayan, spokesperson for Resources for the Future, the group that sponsored the study, reacted to the high rates of infection by saying, "In many cases, these conditions could have been avoided with better infection control in hospitals."
One of the researchers on the study, Anup Malani, from the University of Chicago, added, "That's the tragedy of such cases. In some cases, relatively healthy people check into the hospital for routine surgery. They develop sepsis because of a lapse in infection control and they can die."

:: nW

Low Back Pain Surgeries, Though More Dangerous & Expensive, Are Increasing

We have a problem in America when surgeries for uncomplicated low back pain are rising in frequency, when conservative treatments, such as Chiropractic, have been proven to be more cost-effective and safer.

CHICAGO – A study of Medicare patients shows that costlier, more complex spinal fusion surgeries are on the rise — and sometimes done unnecessarily — for a common lower back condition caused by aging and arthritis.
What's more alarming is that the findings suggest these more challenging operations are riskier, leading to more complications and even deaths. Read More...

:: nW

Study: Breast-feeding would save lives, money

Brief, but short and good article about the benefits of Breast-feeding.

The lives of nearly 900 babies would be saved each year, along with billions of dollars, if 90 percent of U.S. women fed their babies breast milk only for the first six months of life, a cost analysis says.
Those startling results, published online Monday in the journal Pediatrics, are only an estimate. But several experts who reviewed the analysis said the methods and conclusions seem sound.

:: nW