The Heart Scan Blog...

from "Track Your Plaque" author Dr. William Davis


Dr. William Davis was a cardiologist doing production line coronary by-pass surgery until the shock of his Mother's death from a heart attack with normal cholesterol levels, made him search for other avenues of treating heart disease other than the statin/bypass method. He is always at the forefront of the latest methods, combining standard and nutritional avenues of treatment.

sign up for his worthy newsletter or just peruse his blog HERE

Not sure about what's in your supplements?

Look for this label...

**USP Verified Dietary Supplements**

What the USP Verified Mark Means on a Supplement Label

The distinctive USP Verified Dietary Supplement Mark is awarded to finished dietary supplements that pass USP's comprehensive verification processes. Manufacturers can display the mark on the label of USP Verified products. The mark represents that USP has rigorously tested and verified the supplement to assure the following:

1. What's on the label is in fact in the bottle—all the listed ingredients in the declared amount.
2. The supplement does not contain harmful levels of contaminants.
3. The supplement will break down and release ingredients in the body
4. The supplement has been made under good manufacturing practices.

USP is an independent, not-for-profit organization. No other organization in the U.S. that tests supplements is recognized in federal law as the nation's official standard-setting body for medicines and supplements. USP standards are enforceable by the FDA.
http://www.usp.org/USPVerified/dietarySupplements/index.html?USP_Print

Tip: Be sure that the supplements you buy have the USP mark/seal/logo. If the product has just the word "USP verified" on its label the manufacturer thinks their product would pass inspection, but the supplement has not been actually tested.


Also consider...


_________________________________________________________


Life Extension is a global authority on nutrition, health and wellness
as well as a provider of scientific information on anti-aging supplements and therapies. We supply only the highest quality nutritional supplements, including minerals, vitamins, herbs and hormones.

http://www.lef.org/

29 Years of Anti-Aging Research An impeccable track record of scientific achievements in health and longevity. Read More

Best Vitamins and Supplements

Life Extension provides a guide to the best vitamins, minerals, hormones and drugs.

FYI...After an 11-year reign of terror by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) against The Life Extension Foundation, the FDA "threw in the towel".

In November 1995, Federal Judge Daniel Hurley dismissed all but one of the 56 criminal charges filed against Foundation officers Saul Kent and William Faloon. In February 1996, Judge Hurley dismissed the final charge (see above).

This is the first time in its 88-year history that the FDA has been forced to give up on a criminal prosecution. After spending millions of taxpayer dollars, the FDA has abandoned its crusade to destroy The Foundation and throw its leaders into prison.

The FDA's dismissal of the charges against me (and Bill Faloon) is an unprecedented victory against FDA tyranny that goes far beyond winning in court. The FDA's historic defeat is a victory for everyone who cherishes freedom in healthcare. Before we discuss the implications of this victory, let's take a look at the story behind it.

read more here.

*A N D*

an oldie but a goodie...

Glaxo Chief: Our Drugs Do Not Work on Most Patients

Allen Roses, worldwide vice-president of genetics at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), said fewer than half of the patients prescribed some of the most expensive drugs actually derived any benefit from them.

It is an open secret within the drugs industry that most of its products are ineffective in most patients but this is the first time that such a senior drugs boss has gone public. His comments come days after it emerged that the NHS drugs bill has soared by nearly 50 per cent in three years, rising by £2.3bn a year to an annual cost to the taxpayer of £7.2bn. GSK announced last week that it had 20 or more new drugs under development that could each earn the company up to $1bn (£600m) a year.

Dr Roses, an academic geneticist from Duke University in North Carolina, spoke at a recent scientific meeting in London where he cited figures on how well different classes of drugs work in real patients.

Drugs for Alzheimer's disease work in fewer than one in three patients, whereas those for cancer are only effective in a quarter of patients. Drugs for migraines, for osteoporosis, and arthritis work in about half the patients, Dr Roses said. Most drugs work in fewer than one in two patients mainly because the recipients carry genes that interfere in some way with the medicine, he said.

"The vast majority of drugs - more than 90 per cent - only work in 30 or 50 per cent of the people," Dr Roses said. "I wouldn't say that most drugs don't work. I would say that most drugs work in 30 to 50 per cent of people. Drugs out there on the market work, but they don't work in everybody."

Some industry analysts said Dr Roses's comments were reminiscent of the 1991 gaffe by Gerald Ratner, the jewelry boss, who famously said that his high street shops are successful because they sold "total crap". But others believe Dr Roses deserves credit for being honest about a little-publicized fact known to the drugs industry for many years.

"Roses is a smart guy and what he is saying will surprise the public but not his colleagues," said one industry scientist. "He is a pioneer of a new culture within the drugs business based on using genes to test for who can benefit from a particular drug."

_____________________

Here we Go Again with malpractice "reform"...No protection for the victims

From Susan Madrak at Crooks and Liars:

Wouldn't it be great if all these malpractice "reformers" actually looked at reforming medical practices - instead of trying to limit patients' ability to recover damages from bad medicine? But of course, politicians will always see the solution in light of insurance company interests. Isn't it funny how "reform" always means citizens get less while corporations get more?

Perhaps they need to understand that We, The People just aren't in the mood to hear any more "blame the victim" rhetoric for their financial problems - the result of their bad choices:

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration and key congressional Democrats are taking a hard look at the nation's medical malpractice system as part of a broader health care overhaul.

"It's an essential piece for there to be enduring reform - reform that will stick and will get a significant bipartisan vote in the United States Senate," said Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.), who has a bipartisan health bill that includes incentives to get states to enact malpractice reforms.

Reviving the issue could provoke a fierce fight from trial lawyers, who, along with doctors, have the most at stake in suits for medical malpractice.

Actually, those of us at the mercy of bad doctors have the most at stake. Funny, how the patients get lost in the debate.

Already the trial lawyers' lobby is preparing to distribute a brief on Capitol Hill casting malpractice as a small cost in the overall health system. Also, the brief, citing an Institute of Medicine finding, says as many as 98,000 deaths in the U.S. each year result from medical error.

Trial lawyers and their Democratic Senate allies helped kill attempts under the Bush administration to cap lawsuit payments for punitive damages and pain and suffering in malpractice lawsuits. The Congressional Budget Office says such caps could save the federal government $4.3 billion from 2010-2019.

While capping judgments probably remains a nonstarter in the debate, many top Democrats and administration officials say something must be done to curb medical malpractice costs to help pay for revamping the nation's $2.4 trillion health system.

President Obama told business leaders last week that ideas to save money like "medical liability issues - I think all those things have to be on the table."

Okay, if they want real malpractice reforms, they need to do things like this. Doctor attendance at malpractice-avoidance training seminars will be mandatory, not optional as it is now. Studies dating back decades show the same thing: Patients don't sue because they got a bad outcome. They sue when doctors forced them into a decision they didn't really understand. It's the communication, stupid.

They'll also require use of computerized orders. We all know doctors are famous for bad handwriting, but it's not so cute once you realize sometimes it's on purpose - so a jury can't read their writing. Computerized records will also help avoid the 1.5 million deaths-by-medication errors per year (not to mention the $3.5 billion a year it costs to treat those errors).

Details of all malpractice filings - not just the cases which go to trial - should be public record. Period. There's a compelling public interest. Yes, some of them are frivolous, and just like your credit files, doctors should have the right to attach their own explanation. But interested consumers have a right to know if their doctor (the same one who's always whining about his high malpractice premiums) is paying high premiums because he's a bad doctor.

Right now, it's almost impossible for a "bad" doctor to lose his or her medical license for many, it's as simple as moving to another state. Yet a small percentage of doctors accounts for 95% of malpractice claims. POLICE THE INDUSTRY.

We'll probably see these reforms happen right about the time you look out your window and see those hordes of flying pigs.


___________

Dr. Charles S. Lieber dies, at 78; showed alcohol was liver toxin

Dr. Lieber's findings upset the conventional medical belief that cirrhosis was caused by poor nutrition, not alcohol. (Rubenstein communications)

What A Nut!

Dr. Lieber devoted much of his career to promoting alcohol research as a legitimate science, countering a prevailing perception among doctors and the public that little could be done about alcoholism. He made many of his fundamental findings at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in the Bronx.

In a classic experiment in 1974, Dr. Lieber and a team of researchers reported that alcohol was toxic to the liver of baboons who had been fed the equivalent of a fifth of liquor every day for up to four years. The findings upset conventional medical belief that cirrhosis was due to the poor nutrition commonly linked to alcoholism, not alcohol.

In other experiments, Dr. Lieber deciphered some of the ways alcohol can affect the liver and showed that it could convert various compounds in the body into highly toxic ones. The findings are still debated, but they help explain why heavy drinkers and even some social drinkers seem more vulnerable to pain relievers like acetaminophen (Tylenol, for example), anesthetics, and industrial solvents.

"He was a giant in his field, probably the most eminent in the world in alcohol and the liver," said Dr. Steven Schenker, another such specialist at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.

"His concepts put him under a lot of pressure, but he defended his positions brilliantly," Schenker said in an interview.

Charles Saul Lieber was born in Antwerp, Belgium.

read more.

__________

Cyberknife Offers New Hope For Cancer Patients in India

Now, CyberKnife technology to treat cancer in India



NEW DELHI: Offering hope in several cases of technically inoperable tumours, the most advanced CyberKnife robotic radio surgery system will be available to cancer patients from next week at the Apollo Specialty Cancer hospital, Chennai.

The Apollo Hospital group has installed the most-advanced version of the system in Asia-Pacific at the cancer specialty centre in Chennai.

"This technology will offer a new treatment option that would revolutionise cancer treatment in India," Prathap C. Reddy, executive chairman, Apollo Hospitals Group, told reporters here Saturday.

The group hopes to start treating patients at the Chennai centre from next week, Reddy added.

Apart from being the only machine of its kind in South Asia, the CyberKnife is unique in its design. It offers large dosages of targeted radiation controlled with image guided technology and computer robotics.

"The advanced technology behind CyberKnife uses real time image guidance technology and computer controlled robotics to deliver an extremely precise dose of radiation to targets, thereby avoiding the surrounding healthy tissue and adjusting for patient and tumour movement during treatment," explained John Rodenbeck Adler, professor of Neurosurgery and oncology at the Stanford University Medical Centre.

"The procedure requires no anaesthesia, as the treatment is painless and non-invasive,"said Adler, who is in India to create awareness about the machine.

The treatment has a higher rate of success with small tumours, and generally lasts between 30 to 90 minutes involving administration of 100-200 radiation beams delivered from different directions each lasting 10 to 15 seconds. The machine's robotic arm works continually with image guided technology and has the ability to move in three dimensions according to the treatment plan.

"So unlike other treatments like the Gammaknife that has a linear plane of working, the patient need not be fitted with a frame. It has a tracking accuracy of less than a millimetre and has minimal side effects," Adler said.

This treatment can also successfully treat lung cancers and other such cancers that are on organs that move involuntarily - like in the respiratory or digestive system.

The treatment that formally began at Stanford in 1994, has had about 60,000 beneficiaries so far, with around 98 percent success rate in dealing with benign tumours and about 95 percent in dealing with malignant tumours. It has a three percent complication risk, Adler informed.

"Largely, the treatments are out-patient procedures, allowing patients to continue their normal activities," Adler said.

There are about 160 such CyberKnife systems across the globe, the one at Chennai is the most advanced, Adler claimed.

The machine is estimated to have cost Apollo Rs.250 million, while the entire set-up cost was Rs.750 million. It will be able to provide treatment to about 1,000 patients annually.

"We hope to keep the cost under Rs.500,000 which is still 1/4th the cost of such treatment anyplace abroad," Reddy said.

"There is need to evolve more accessible and effective treatment to patients," Reddy added.

According to Reddy, In India one million new cases of cancer are diagnosed every year. Currently, India contributes to 8.5 percent of the 10 million cancer cases globally. By 2010, these numbers will grow to 15 million cancer cases globally. India will contribute to 10 percent of these.

Link
_____________________________




Price tag for this "Cyberknife Machine?"


...just under a Billion $$$.






---------------------

Looking for a cheaper cancer therapy?

Run From The Cure



****

Carcinogens Found in Baby Toiletries

Via Wapo:

More than half the baby shampoo, lotion and other infant care products analyzed by a health advocacy group were found to contain trace amounts of two chemicals that are believed to cause cancer, the organization said yesterday.

Some of the biggest names on the market, including Johnson & Johnson Baby Shampoo and Baby Magic lotion, tested positive for 1,4-dioxane or formaldehyde, or both, the nonprofit Campaign for Safe Cosmetics reported.

The chemicals, which the Environmental Protection Agency has characterized as probable carcinogens, are not intentionally added to the products and are not listed among ingredients on labels. Instead, they appear to be byproducts of the manufacturing process. Formaldehyde is created when other chemicals in the product break down over time, while 1,4-dioxane is formed when foaming agents are combined with ethylene oxide or similar petrochemicals.

The organization tested 48 baby bath products such as bubble bath and shampoo. Of those, 32 contained trace amounts of 1,4-dioxane and 23 contained small amounts of formaldehyde. Seventeen tested positive for both chemicals.

"Our intention is not to alarm parents, but to inform parents that products that claim to be gentle and pure are contaminated with carcinogens, which is completely unnecessary," said Stacy Malkan, a spokeswoman for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, which is calling for the government to more strictly regulate personal care products such as shampoo, lotion and makeup.

Companies that manufacture and sell the products tested by the group stressed that they comply with government standards.

"The FDA and other government agencies around the world consider these trace levels safe, and all our products meet or exceed the regulatory requirements in every country where they are sold," Johnson & Johnson said in a statement. "We are disappointed that the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics has inaccurately characterized the safety of our products, misrepresented the overwhelming consensus of scientists and government agencies that review the safety of ingredients, and unnecessarily alarmed parents."

The European Union has banned 1,4-dioxane as an ingredient in personal care products, but the Food and Drug Administration has not established a safe limit for the chemical in shampoo, lotion and other toiletries. It maintains that the trace amounts found in those products are not harmful.

A 1982 study by the FDA showed that 1,4-dioxane can penetrate human skin when used in lotion.

Health advocates argue, however, that federal regulators have not considered the cumulative effect of chemicals in personal care products.

"The levels we've found are relatively low, and the industry often says there's just a little bit of carcinogen in my product," Malkan said. "The problem is, we're finding a little bit of carcinogen in many products. Many of these products are used every day, so we've got repeated and frequent exposure to these low levels of chemicals. They're not the safest and purest products, and parents ought to know that."

In addition, government studies have not examined the effect of chemical exposure on the particular vulnerabilities of infants and children, whose bodies are still developing, the advocates said.

Several Democratic lawmakers said the report is evidence that the nation's chemical regulation system needs to be changed.

"The fact that we are bathing our kids in products contaminated with carcinogens shows how woefully out of date our cosmetics laws are and how urgently they need to be updated," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (Ill.). "The science has moved forward; now the FDA needs to catch up and be given the authority to protect the health of Americans."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) called the findings "horrifying" and said she intends to introduce legislation that would require stronger oversight of the cosmetics industry.

The report can be found at http://www.safecosmetics.org/toxictub.

_________________________________


J&J is dissapointed... that we found out our children are at risk if they use J&J products.

contact J&J here

_________________

Court Rules Drug Companies Not Protected By FDA Warning Labels

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that drug companies can be sued for harm caused by drugs which carry warning labels approved by the FDA.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the drug company Wyeth on Wednesday, stating that the pharmaceutical company can be held liable for the harm caused by FDA-approved drugs.

The vote came down from the U.S. Supreme Court at 6-to-3 in favor of ruling against drug maker Wyeth.

This is being seen as a huge blow to the pharmaceutical industry as it could open the door to many new lawsuits.

The ruling was that warning labels approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration do not pre-empt state laws.

This means they cannot be used to protect companies from liability claims spawning from harm their drugs caused.

The drug in question for this particular lawsuit was Phenergan from Wyeth.

An improper injection caused a Vermont woman, Diana Levine, to lose her arm

She was awarded $7 million in damages by a jury in the state of Vermont.

Link