www.facebook.com/velocitywellnesscenter
www.twitter.com/drmikeo
Subscribe to PODCAST in iTunes

www.facebook.com/velocitywellnesscenter
www.twitter.com/drmikeo
Subscribe to PODCAST in iTunes

www.facebook.com/velocitywellnesscenter
www.twitter.com/drmikeo
Subscribe to PODCAST in iTunes

www.facebook.com/velocitywellnesscenter
www.twitter.com/drmikeo
Subscribe to PODCAST in iTunes

Researcher Candace Pert wrote a book called ‘Molecules of Emotion‘ in which she presents her findings that every emotional experience produces specific protein sequences in our body.  These are reproducible and she called them molecules of emotion.  This is important to know in relation to the dis-ease process.  We are naturally emotional beings and we’re supposed to have a physiological reaction to an emotional situation.  The problem arises when we have abnormal physiological reactions to ‘emotional triggers.’  I’ll leave this discussion for another post…

If you’ve seen any yogi walk over hot coals or lie on a bed of glass unharmed, you’re witnessing the power of the mind over the physiological reaction of pain.  Basic neurology shows us that we can consciously send signals to interfere or block the pain response.  This is all fine and dandy, but how can the average person ‘develop’ this untapped skill you may be asking?

During our first pregnancy, my wife and I studied a birthing technique called Hypnobabies in which through various mind focus methods you are able to cut off the pain signal.  It’s essential that both partners be trained in this because dads go through pain as well, not the same pain, but we have our own.  But the basics of what they teach can be used in an everyday situation.

Okay…here’s what I teach patients:

1. You must begin with practice…practicing to quiet your mind.  The best way to do this is to focus on a single object and concentrate on slowing down the brain.  At first it will be difficult.  But you’ll know when you reach that ’state’ because it’s like you’re in between being awake and sleeping.
2. Now focus on what you want…say if you have back pain…focus on your back being totally healed.  This must be an intense focus.  One way you can increase your focus is to use a technique called WORKSHOP.  In this technique you visualize a room that has every thing you need to heal your body.  When I say anything, I mean anything.  You can conjure up various things that you put into a cream that you rub on the affected area or make it into a pill you take.  This is highly effective.
3. Now you have to be conscious of the words you speak in regards to your health.  Phrases like ‘oh I just ache all over’ or ‘I’m tired’ will translate into their physical manifestation.  Rather than expressing your current experience, replace it with what you would like to experience.  Let that become your reality.

Learn to control your mind and experience greater possibilities.  Be Well!

www.facebook.com/velocitywellnesscenter
www.twitter.com/drmikeo
Subscribe to PODCAST in iTunes

Structural:

• Postural relationship – rolled in shoulders, hunched back.  Basically having a closed off chest cavity.
• Spinal subluxations at T2 often times emotionally related.
• Solution is to get adjusted and work on postural re-balancing.

Biochemical:

• Inflammation, Inflammation, Inflammation
• Blood sugar imbalance causes arteries to spasm
• Adrenal & Kidney balance.  Adrenals produce hormones that affect heart rhythm.  Kidneys make hormones that control how much the heart pumps.
• Toxins
• Cardiac Low Back (Total Body Modification Dr. Victor Frank)

Emotional:

• Emotional broken heart syndrome…coping with loss
• Cardiac Low Back

Financial:

• Law of tithing
• Law of flow

Facebook page: www.facebook.com/velocitywellnesscenter

Twitter: www.twitter.com/drmikeo

www.facebook.com/velocitywellnesscenter
www.twitter.com/drmikeo
Subscribe to PODCAST in iTunes

First of all this article does not present two sides to the issue: the benefits vs. the cost.  They tell you how many people die because of an infection and that it could have been prevented through vaccination, but they don’t tell you how many people died regardless of the vaccines (not because of the vaccines, rather they got the vaccine and still died of the infection). 

Secondly they intermingle the terms ‘vaccination’ and ‘immunization’ which leads the average reader to a false understanding.

Vaccination = the artificial process of inoculating your body with a foreign antigen

Immunization = the natural process of your immune system forming immunity to a foreign antigen

Just because one gets a vaccine does not necessarily equate to immunization.

Thirdly, basic microbiology states that an organism is dependent upon the terrain in order to thrive.  Notice how Streptococcus pneumoniae most commonly affects the very young and the very old.  Well these are the cohorts that have lowered immune resistance.  The bodily terrain is perfect for ‘growing’ these pathogenic organisms.  Here’s a statement from wikipedia (and you can find this in any standard microbiology text):

S. pneumoniae is part of the normal upper respiratory tract flora but as with many natural flora, it can become pathogenic under the right conditions (e.g., if the immune system of the host is suppressed). Invasins such as Pneumolysin, an anti-phagocytic capsule, various adhesins and immunogenic cell wall components are all major virulence factors.

Two key points here:

1. it is part of the normal flora of the respiratory tract
2. becomes pathogenic under the ‘right’ conditions

Okay…so what’s the ‘alternative’ you may be asking?

Well in my professional opinion, getting a vaccine for this stuff is the alternative, meaning that it shouldn’t be your first course of action.  Your first course of action is PREVENTION.  Keeping your immune system boosted through proper diet, supplementation, spinal balance, stress levels in check, enough sleep, exercise and water.

Suggestions:

• High Quality Multi-Vit, Multi-Mineral
• Vit D (5000 IU)
• Grape Seed Extract (180 mg daily)
• Find a great Chiropractor (www.123Chiropractors.com)
• Manage stress levels: use techniques like biofeedback (www.heartmath.com) and holosync (www.centerpointe.com)
• Get at least 7 hours of sleep per night with long REM (supplement with high quality Melatonin if needed)
• Exercise at least 30 minutes 5 times per week
• Do a detox program at least once per year
• Drink at least 2 liters of water per day (if you want to take it one step further, use alkaline water)

www.facebook.com/velocitywellnesscenter
www.twitter.com/drmikeo
Subscribe to PODCAST in iTunes

Here’s why I’m making a fuss about this:

• In efforts to live a ‘healthier’ lifestyle people are eating more chicken than beef or fish
• Chicken is marketed as a more healthier choice
• I just recently treated a patient for low-level arsenic poisoning that displayed as peripheral artery disease

Here are some of the symptoms related to arsenic poisoning:

• violent stomach pains in the region of the bowels
• tenderness and pressure
• retching
• excessive saliva production
• vomiting
• sense of dryness and tightness in the throat
• thirst
• hoarseness and difficulty of speech
• the matter vomited, greenish or yellowish, sometimes streaked with blood
• diarrhea
• tenesmus
• sometimes excoriation of the anus
• urinary organs occasionally affected with violent burning pains and suppression
• convulsions and cramps
• clammy sweats
• lividity of the extremities
• countenance collapsed
• eyes red and sparkling
• delirium
• death

Okay take a look at this statement straight from the CDC website:

In June 2001, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) made recommendations for using smallpox (vaccinia) vaccine to protect persons working with orthopoxviruses and to prepare for and respond to a possible terrorist attack involving smallpox (Source)

Two things to notice here:

1. Look at the date of the recommendation.
2. Look at why they’re recommending a smallpox vaccine.

Questions for you to answer:

1. When was the World Trade Center attacked?  (Answer: September 11, 2001)
2. When was there ever a bio-terrorist attack?  (Answer: Never)
3. If President Bush set aside $509 million for smallpox vaccine production, but people never got the vaccine, where did all the money go?  (It’s been estimated that it would actually cost $1 Billion, and who’s paying for that?  Yes…you the taxpayer).

Okay, now that we’ve got that out of the way…without any smallpox or anthrax outbreaks (except the imaginary threats portrayed by the media)…let’s jump into the next money maker “Swine Flu.”

Most people aren’t even aware that Swine Flu is not a “new” thing (I was one of them, until I did the research).  The media portrays this virus as the new superstar alongside what Kanye West is stirring up.  And people bite.  With words such as “Pandemic” and “Outbreak” how can it not get your attention right?  But what the media isn’t coughing up is the 1976 accounts of the swine flu.  Yup, same thing happened back then and we’re going through it all over again, with the exact same reactions.

Let me summarize what played out back then:

• A soldier at Fort Dix was diagnosed with the flu of H1N1 strain.
• NIH told the ACIP (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) and they planned a mass “vaccination” program.
• The government allocated $137 million for the production of a vaccine.
• The vaccine manufacturers made one request: that the federal government indemnify them against claims of adverse reactions as a requirement for release of the vaccines
• August 2, 1976 – a few men at the American Legion in Philadelphia died from “flu-like” symptoms, but was later discovered they had contracted “Legionnaire’s disease.”  But since the swine flu scare was going around, the media quickly portrayed it to be linked.  Mass hysteria continued.
• Vaccinations commenced
• Reports of Guillain-Barre syndrome from the vaccination surfaces, approximately 565 cases noted and 25 who died.  (I know of a patient who’s family member was affected by this).
• Vaccinations halted after 10 weeks

Here’s a quote that was stated in Reuter’s Health section:

Tests show the swine flu vaccine closely matches the H1N1 virus, which suggests it will protect people well. Children also respond to the vaccine just as they do the seasonal flu, meaning those over 10 need one shot while children 9 and under need two.

Did that say “closely” matches?  Let me let you in on a little immunology secret…your immune system doesn’t function on closely matching in order to be effective.  It’s sort of like a lock & key mechanism…the lock doesn’t open if the key “closely” matches.  It just doesn’t.  The article also states:

Swine flu is already widespread in 21 U.S. states. But the virus so far is proving to be milder than expected, with a death rate similar to that of seasonal flu.

If the death rate is similar to the seasonal flu, why is the media in an uproar over this?  Well, all you have to do is look back into history and see that we’re just repeating what’s been done before.  Unknown scare, media pushes out the message, government responds by allocating tax payer money to drug companies to produce vaccines and people bite.  Give it a few months and people will stop talking about it when Brittney Spears or Paris Hilton hits the town again.  Yup, the swine flu is nothing more than makin’ bacon.

They’re specifically talking about emergency situations that arise from natural disasters or other forms of conflict.  But this also shows the importance of breastfeeding for infant health even in everyday situations.  I’m no expert on breastfeeding, but I do know that it’s very important for infant health.  Typically in my practice, the children who come in with allergies and other ailments are those who were formula fed in lieu of being breastfed. 

So what do you think?  What’s your view on breastfeeding? 

Here’s my critique on this whole situation:

The FDA states: “While elemental mercury has been associated with adverse health effects at high exposures, the levels released by dental amalgam fillings are not high enough to cause harm in patients.” This statement is comparing apples to oranges.  What exactly is high exposure?  Well…what they’re getting at here is an acute exposure to high levels of mercury.  The fact of the matter is that anything at an acute high exposure can induce adverse side effects.  Too much water or even air at an acute exposure can cause adverse health effects.  But what we’re dealing with in this statement is the difference between acute high dose exposure and chronic low dose exposure.  So essentially the basis of this statement is correct, when you just take this statement as it is: acute “low” dose exposure will not induce any harm in comparison to an acute high dose exposure.

Susan Runner (acting director for the FDA division that oversees dental devices) states: “The best available scientific evidence supports the conclusion that patients with dental amalgam fillings are not at risk,” she told reporters on a conference call.  Over the past 20 years, the agency has received just 141 reports of problems in patients with the fillings, she added. Here’s the problem with these statistics: it is very difficult to pinpoint heavy metal toxicity as the ultimate causative factor for a health problem!  Our current medical model does not account for the cumulative effects of low dose exposure and the subtle biochemical changes due to that exposure.  Most chronic diseases cannot be linked to one specific causative factor.  These adverse reports are that of POISONING.  Again, comparing apples to oranges.

Now let’s take a look at the economics behind this.  The FDA’s decision could impact makers of metal fillings, which include Dentsply International Inc and Danaher Corp’s unit Kerr, as well as distributors such as Henry Schein Inc and Patterson Cos Inc. Hmm…I wonder how it can impact these companies?  Charlie Brown, a lawyer for Consumers for Dental Choice, said poorer people or those who receive their health care through large institutions such as the U.S. military are more likely to receive the cheaper, silver-colored fillings and are at greater risk for harm. Oh…yeah now I see it?  Since the economy has been in a decline, more and more people are looking for ways to be frugal.  So when presented with a choice, the majority will always choose the cheaper of the two if they are told that there’s essentially no difference between the two.  This will then drive up the profit margins for the dental supply companies.  Is this part of the economic stimulus package?

Initially the FDA issued a warning regarding dental amalgams (See post here).  Then the “final” verdict was released this past tuesday stating that dental amalgams are safe.  When I did a Google search for “FDA Mercury Fillings”

But then when you click on the link here’s what you get:

Not there anymore (obviously).  It always makes me question when Google has the link in a search, but then the page doesn’t exist anymore and does not direct you to the page where the information was moved to.  Just some food for thought.

When I did find the information on the FDA website here’s a key paragraph:

FDA has reviewed the best available scientific evidence to determine whether the low levels of mercury vapor associated with dental amalgam fillings are a cause for concern. Based on this evidence, FDA considers dental amalgam fillings safe for adults and children ages 6 and above. The amount of mercury measured in the bodies of people with dental amalgam fillings is well below levels associated with adverse health effects. Even in adults and children ages 6 and above who have fifteen or more amalgam surfaces, mercury exposure due to dental amalgam fillings has been found to be far below the lowest levels associated with harm. Clinical studies in adults and children ages 6 and above have also found no link between dental amalgam fillings and health problems.

Very straightforward and to the point.  No frills or gimmicks.  The kind of information that will ease the mind of the average person.  But when I went to dig deeper into their website here’s what I found in the appendix:

On July 27, 2009, FDA issued a final rule that: (1) reclassified mercury from a class I (least risk) device to class II (more risk) device; (2) classified dental amalgam as a class II device; and (3) designated a special controls guidance document for dental amalgam. (Source: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DentalProducts/DentalAmalgam/ucm171120.htm)

So from what I understand here is that it was formely classified as a “least risk” device and then upgraded to a “more risk” device and then the news headlines come out and state that it’s “safe.”  I’ll let you make the call here.

Here is a very interesting video that will present you with a visual of what’s going on with dental amalgams.

Solutions: do your homework so that you can make an informed decision.  Don’t just take some “authority’s” statement to be your answer.  Don’t even take what I’m saying to be your answer.  Look past all the hype and propaganda and get down to the facts.

I have a proposal to all the CEO’s of these dental amalgam companies and those in the FDA who state that these amalgams are safe.  Put your money where your mouth is (literally) and use the products which you promote and state are safe.  Fair enough?  Even if you have no “need” for it, I think you should at least try the product out right?  I’m just saying.

One study found that men who were taking statins before undergoing surgical removal of their prostate had a lower risk of having the cancer return. “The use of statins at the time of surgery was associated with a 30 percent reduction in the risk of recurrence of prostate cancer,” said lead researcher Dr. Robert J. Hamilton, a urology resident at the University of Toronto Medical Center in Ontario, Canada.

Hamilton thinks that the anti-inflammatory properties of statins may explain the finding. However, it might also be the ability of these drugs to lower cholesterol that has an effect on cancer cells, he said.

Another study focused on inflammation inside prostate cancer tumors. “We looked at the association between statin use and prostate tumor inflammation,” Banez said.

“We found that men who were using statins prior to surgery had a significantly lower risk for inflammation within their prostate tumor,” Banez said.

In fact, men taking statins had a 72 percent reduction in the risk for inflammation of the prostate tumor. The researchers also found that obesity appears to be associated with increased inflammation and more aggressive prostate cancer.

BINGO!  Statins have a slight anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant characteristic that plays a role here, but you’re also forgetting what else it does like block the production of CoQ10 (See blog post).  Why take a drug that will decrease inflammation but block the production of CoQ10 which will then increase the chances of developing other degenerative diseases?  Why aren’t these studies taking a look at natural sources of anti-inflammatory compounds that do not have deleterious side effects?

Natural anti-inflammatories

• Fish Oil (EPA/DHA) plays a huge role in cooling down inflammation.  I usually recommend 2000 – 6000 mg per day of a high quality fish oil.
• Grape Seed Extract is a potent COX-2 inhibitor
• Enzymes help to remove or digest inflammatory compounds like protein wastes.
• Turmeric is a very potent COX-2 inhibitor herb
• Broad spectrum multi-mineral, multi-vitamin.

Remember the hippocratic oath stresses “Doctor do no harm.”  Take control of your health rather than leaving it up to your medical doctor.  Prevention is the key.  Be pro-active rather than retro-active.

“We need to be doing a lot more to reverse the global trend toward fatness, and recognize it as a key factor in the battle to reduce (carbon) emissions and slow climate change,” the British scientists said.

They estimated that each fat person is responsible for about one tonne of carbon dioxide emissions a year more on average than each thin person, adding up to an extra one billion tonnes of CO2 a year in a population of one billion overweight people.

I’m sorry, but this article totally misses the point of weight issues.  If you just look at it from a ‘carbon-footprint’ perspective, the average overweight person’s carbon footprint may actually equal out the carbon footprint of a person who works out and eats healthily everyday.  Let’s see, a person who works out on a regular basis probably goes to a gym which uses electricity to run the workout machines, then they breathe more and then consume more nutrient dense foods that used many different forms of energy to be produced.

The article should be really talking about “save yourself by losing weight” the planet will take care of itself.

From:

Joan E. Baumann

Database Administrator

www.Nutrisearch.ca

At the bottom of the abstract there was a clinical trials Identifier Number: Trial Registration Number NCT0000611.

The identifying number gave a clearer picture of the criteria.  Here is what the Government Trials website stated as to eligibility:

Eligibility

Ages Eligible for Study:         50 Years to 79 Years

Genders Eligible for Study:    Female

Accepts Healthy Volunteers:  No

Criteria

Postmenopausal women ages 50 to 79.

The Trial Criteria allowed for Postmenopausal Women Ages 50 – 79 BUT excluded healthy volunteers! http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00000611/

The women were asked if they took multivitamins, and a detailed record of their vitamin of choice was kept.  The Data regarding their vitamin use was accepted even if they took their multivitamin as infrequently as once a week!

Some BIG IFS became apparent:  if they took one of the heavier advertised  brands, with their minimal amounts of basic nutrients, if their vitamin contained nutrients that were not optimal in quality, such as synthetic vitamin E instead of the natural form, if it contained very low levels of vitamin C, if it did not include nutrients such as inositol, choline, alpha lipoic acid, quercetin, flavonoids, n-acetyl L-cysteine, coenzymeQ10, beta-carotene instead of vitamin A, optimal levels of Folic Acid ……..then one would expect the outcome the study announced.  Too many IFS! There was no apparent baseline for either levels or quality of nutrients.

Daniel Fabricant, Ph.D., vice president of scientific and regulatory affairs for the Natural Products Association, a non-profit organization, had a few interesting comments on the study.

Fabricant said it is “unprincipled” that the authors arbitrarily lumped supplement types into generalized categories that do not represent nutrient intake accurately. And when coupled with the fact that nutrient intake through the diet was not accounted for, Fabricant explained, the study has no means of establishing a baseline for which to draw any comparisons or eliminate bias.

He further stated: “ Taken as whole, the research on dietary supplements in the prevention of chronic diseases, is strong and consistent.  To suggest that taking vitamins and minerals with a demonstrated health benefit is unnecessary sends the wrong public health message.”

http://www.naturalproductsassoc.org/site/News2?abbr=pc_&page=NewsArticle&id=10409

There are literally thousands of research studies which have shown the benefits of many nutrients, from food and/or supplements.  To ignore such a large body of research and depend solely upon our food supply to provide the level of nutrition that can keep us healthy makes absolutely no sense.

What is HPV?

HPV is estimated to be the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United States. Most sexually active men and women will probably acquire genital HPV infection at some point in their lives.  The American Social Health Association reported estimates that about 75-80% of sexually active Americans will be infected with HPV at some point in their lifetime. By the age of 50 more than 80% of American women will have contracted at least one strain of genital HPV.

It was estimated that in the year 2000, there were approximately 6.2 million new HPV infections among Americans aged 15-44; of these, an estimated 74% occurred to people between ages 15-24. Of the STDs studied, genital HPV was the most commonly acquired.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_papillomavirus

What is Gardasil and is it safe?

Gardasil is a vaccine to prevent HPV infections.  It is manufactured by Merck & Co. which is one of the largest pharmaceutical manufacturers worldwide.  The FDA granted approval in 2006 and till present day they claim that there is no evidence to support the claims that Gardasil caused any of the adverse reactions that were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.  What do you think?

What you have to ask yourself is, do the benefits outweigh the risks and how can you prevent infection from HPV other than a vaccine?

Get knowledge and be informed.