Watch this important video (1:32 minutes) about fluoride and its dangers.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
VIDEO: The Great Culling: Our Water - Dangers of Fluoride
Friday, March 22, 2013
ARTICLE: In Vaccines We Trust? Paul Offit threatens religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions. A response by Suzanne Humphries, MD
In Vaccines We Trust? Paul Offit threatens religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions. A response by Suzanne Humphries, MD
– August 26, 2012
Millionaire vaccine inventor and mandatory vaccine advocate Paul Offit recently released a short VIDEO for doctors on medscape. Here is a transcript of the speech. Please read it before moving along. It is only one page long. This statement that outlines Offit's personal belief system could be a prelude to the legal removal of all philosophical and religious vaccine exemptions in the United States of America. This is something that Offit has been working toward for years, and the likely end-purpose of his series of books.
Paul Offit believes that exempting your child from vaccination is morally reprehensible. He considers himself an authority on autism, all infectious diseases, morality, history, every religious system, and infant immunology. You may also recognize Dr Offit as the one who says that all vaccines are perfectly safe and infants can tolerate theoretically 10,000 of them at once:
"A more practical way to determine the diversity of the immune response would be to estimate the number of vaccines to which a child could respond at one time…. each infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10, 000 vaccines at any one time." [1]
The status accorded to him by the pharmaceutical and medical fields permits him to influence the opinions and practice of lower rung physicians regarding vaccine exemptions. Unfortunately, even doctors will simply believe the "expert"[2] without bothering to go and check their own medical literature, to see if the self-proclaimed expertise has a solid scientific foundation. Research shows that when people listen to the expert, the part of their brains that is capable of independent thought goes to sleep.[3]
In Offit's video, he said that religious exemptions do not "make sense" and went on to inform doctors on the chronological age of three religious scriptures, and how they could not possibly have anything to do with vaccination because vaccines are so much newer than those tattered and outmoded scribbles of hundreds or thousands of years ago. Those "outmoded" books, including the Old Testament and the Koran, include specific passages containing principles which obliquely address many health issues. To many people, these scriptures place vaccines amongst may things which are not consistent with scriptural hygiene. Here are specific references from the HOLY BIBLE and the KORAN. Dr Katme's explanation of the Islamic problems with vaccination can be read HERE. Hindu faith also has restrictions on what is permitted in their bodies, the treatment of cows and monkeys etc. Vaccination is an affront to many Hindus who know the contents of vaccines. The Dalai Lama hopefully does not understand the full impact of his alliances.
God gave Moses core principles on Mt. Sinai that are held in high esteem by both Christians and Jews the world over. Offit misses out on the timelessness of God's words. God's principles don't wear out. Neither do they need continuous repeating and revising.
God could have instructed Moses on how to inoculate the Israelites in the desert when the diseases came upon them. If you take note of the Old Testament books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, you'll see that there were very specific guidelines handed down on everything from worship of God to disease management, with warnings as to what would happen if those guidelines were ignored. The Israelites had highly skilled metal smiths and very sophisticated craftsmen and oil production. They had access to all the tools that Edward Jenner used to invent the smallpox vaccine, which included cowpox (not smallpox) pus scraped directly from infected cow bellies, a crude filter, glycerine, and a sharp prong. Paul Offit may not realize how crude the highly praised first vaccine really was. Still, medical vaccination or inoculation of any sort, was never part of God's instruction.
Hospital-based doctors who consider any disease that is supposedly treatable by pharmaceutical medicine to have a spiritual component, are considered to be quacks. Lip service, however, is given through the tolerance of chaplains and religious representatives, so long as they don't interfere with the use of drugs, vaccines or "medical science."
In the New Testament, did Jesus, the greatest human healer of all time, ever turn to Luke, the physician-apostle, to do any of the healing work of people brought to him? No. Did any of the apostles and disciples ever call on Luke to do God's healing for them? No. Did Jesus instruct Luke to carry on with his old medical practices later? No. Jesus left the Holy Spirit here on earth for any and all to ask for, receive and gain wisdom from.
In medical school, doctors are taught to view the human body as a random mistake-ridden vessel, which is to be forced into submission with antibiotics, antihypertensives, antihistamines, anti-inflammatories, surgery, drugs etc. The natural extension of this paradigm over the past 100 years has been for the medical profession to condition human beings to not trust anyone but certified medical doctors to fix this defective mistake-ridden aberration of creation. Veterinary science has similarly conditioned humans to consider animals as defective, mistake-ridden creation prototypes. The number one successful strategy in creating this industry has been to always implant fear into people's heads. That increases cortisol, undermines the immune system, and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Vaccines are the template for the fear-based belief system that those who don't know their history will easily fall for. The trajectory of fear removes God from the picture. A fear-ridden populace couldn't possibly credit God with any usefulness once the medical/pharmaceutical industry sets itself up in God's place.
Through the resultant lack of faith in the human creation and the God who does actually have the power to heal all through both the design of the body and miracles, seeps the arrogance (and ignorance) of doctors and scientists who think they can outwit God's nature. While sometimes it might look like it's possible to outwit nature, for example by using antibiotics, the law of "What you sow you will reap" often comes back with a vengeance. Drug-resistant bacteria like MRSA, VRE, and overgrowth of the colitis-causing Clostridium difficile, are prime examples.
Doctors like Paul Offit believe that the slowly maturing immune system of an infant is defective[4] and that vaccinations[5][6], designed to put it into hyper-drive, will fix the defects. On the other hand, Dr Offit doesn't have much faith in his own laboratory creations, since he believes that the anti-vaccination movement "threatens us all," including presumably …the vaccinated.
Paul Offit makes reference to the two states that have ruled that parents do not have a religious privilege to decide how their children's bodies are treated, citing US Constitutional amendment 14. The 14th amendment was designed to protect newly freed slaves. It is being used for a different purpose in Mississippi and West Virginia. Many people are unaware that the 14th amendment is the most controversial amendment ever proposed, and that according to some legal experts, it was NEVER LEGALLY RATIFIED. See also this PDF.
If corporate medicine is going to be permitted to over-ride parental philosophical and religious objections, and invade the bodies of our children with dozens of vaccine antigens, chemicals, animal DNA, aborted fetal tissue, and CANCER CELLS, the source of these laws must come under scrutiny.
The impingement on Article I of the FIRST AMENDMENT of the Constitution should also be taken into consideration.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
It would appear that the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation has made PLANS that would steamroll right over the protection of our free speech.
"An anti-vaccine surveillance and alert system Seth Kalichman of the http://www.uconn.edu in the USA will establish an Internet-based global monitoring and rapid alert system for finding, analysing, and counteracting communication campaigns containing misinformation regarding vaccines to support global immunization efforts."
Only time will tell what is going to be considered "misinformation" and "counteraction." If parents were convinced that vaccines are safe and effective, there would be no anti-vaccination movement. It shouldn't take military action or Internet surveillance to maintain the health of communities or global immunization efforts. This type of action is not new. It is reminiscent of policies found in National Socialist empires, Stalinist countries, or Communist China.
Those who push removal of philosophical and religious exemption should at least be free of financial CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, and they are NOT. More importantly, in order to bolster the 30-billion-dollar-per-year-income vaccine industry they consider to be evidence-based science, they should not be proclaiming worldwide expertise in what it takes to have a personal relationship with Jesus, something they appear to have no experience in.
Dr Offit considers "evidence based medicine" to be separate from religion, or spirituality – yet the Christian scriptures, both old testament and new, make it perfectly clear that good health is solely predicated on a living relationship with God.
When it comes to vaccines, these flag bearers of evidence-based medicine use research protocols which involve tight selection and exclusion criteria for vaccine study entrants. They then recommend those same vaccines, assuring safety to concerned parents, to even the children who would have been refused entry to that vaccine safety study.
Instead of placebos, evidence based medicines uses vaccines, and calls them placebos, yet vaccines do not fit their own definition of placebo;
pla·ce·bo/pləˈsēbō/Noun:
1. A harmless pill, medicine, or procedure prescribed more for the psychological benefit to the patient than for any physiological effect.
2. A substance that has no therapeutic effect, used as a control in testing new drugs.
Here are some examples of vaccine trial "placebos":
The hepatitis A vaccine was the placebo for the influenza vaccine in a well publicized STUDY. The study's designer is quoted as SAYING that he didn't want to withhold a potentially beneficial treatment from the control subjects. "Hepatitis was not studied, but to keep the investigators from knowing which colonies received flu vaccine, they had to offer placebo shots, and hepatitis shots do some good while sterile water injections do not." So, if the placebo is supposed to have no therapeutic effect as the definition that was taken from an ardently pro-vaccine website that criticizes our criticism of their use of placebos, and the study used hepA placebo because "water does no good" … where on earth is the match up with even their definition of science?
You can go HERE and see for yourself how many dangerous false placebo trials are done. THIS is an interesting one where the placebo for evaluating the safety of albumin-containing vaccines in egg-allergic children is …an egg-containing vaccine.
Multi antigen vaccines used in trials, as placebos for other multi antigen vaccines happens all of the time. These studies would be the ones Offit refers to, regarding the safety of giving numerous vaccines on the same day.
Not using real placebos, like saline, is a trade sleight of hand, because harmful placebos will give results which show that the study vaccine appears to have the same safety profile as the placebo- and is therefore seemingly OK.
The truth is, that corporate medicine makes the rules up to suit its own needs. When children die and parents successfully sue the vaccine companies responsible for the deaths, first congressmen (who accept massive corporate medicine campaign funding) then the Supreme Court, jump in to protect vaccine interests. It is politics and money, which rule on vaccine recommendations. I've only cited a couple examples of the hypocrisy of the vaccine faithful. There are hundreds if not thousands more examples of both scientific hypocrisy and CORRUPTION.
Paul Offit challenges the issue of philosophical exemption using the word origins. He says: "Philo means love, sophos means wisdom. Exactly where is the wisdom in saying that it is better not to get vaccines than to get them?"
For many educated parents, scientists and parents of vaccine-injured children who have given birth to subsequently unvaccinated children, who have the kind of health that God intended (and pediatricians appear to not understand), there is plenty of wisdom and indeed love, in not vaccinating.
Many of us who once bowed at the altar of "eminence-based" medicine, have learned the hard way, and had to re-boot our belief system. We have learned through experience and researching the latest core scientific understanding of the immune system, that the human body can and does do the job God intended. By going back to the scriptures and understanding the principles from the "manufacturer's manual," we have a new found awe and respect for God's design. We are learning that we can trust God's design to maintain its health, providing we follow God's principles to support and maintain what he manufactured, which is what it means to have a relationship with God, and to believe in God's word.
And I ask you Paul Offit, where is the wisdom in injecting newborn infants with neurotoxins, carcinogens, foreign animal and viral DNA, and metals that are known to alter the natural course of God's exquisitely designed immunity? To many who believe in God, vaccines are anything but divine. Fear of disease and faith in vaccination, along with the alteration of the human organism with new bacteria, new vaccine viruses and chronic illness- are not part of God's curriculum.
In the developed world today, we see risk-averse parenting, and cocooned children, both of whom have become disconnected from the earth, largely as a result of corporate medicine. Yet when this same medical system fails with its drugs, etc, they turn back to such things as MAGGOT THERAPY, and in desperation, try FECAL TRANSPLANTATION. See THIS ARTICLE TOO. Both of these treatments are, in an ironic sort of way, God's contributions. Isn't that interesting? These are things that any nation in existence in the Old Testament times, could have done…
The problem with man trying to assume the role of God is that every new discovery shows scientists more of what they DON'T know. Occasionally the medical system discovers a mistake they have made and then they have to change course and discontinue some long-held practice because it caused cancer, heart disease, fetal malformations, or loss of life. But rarely is the public told about that. Where possible, such knowledge is kept "in house."
We have to ask ourselves why the most heavily funded research is towards chemically or biologically altering an immune system about which the MEDICAL SYSTEM KNOWS LITTLE.
Where are the studies that show the short and long term safety in vaccinating a woman who bears a new life in her womb? The vaccine product description states that they have not been tested for mutagenicity or teratogenicity. Certainly they will never be tested for long-term consequences on the developing child. Do the lessons of DIETHYLSTILBESTROL (DES) not apply to vaccines? The eminence based medical system will no doubt perform vaccine studies only asking carefully crafted pre-determined questions with an eye to what they want to see. The data generated by the statisticians of pharmaceutically funded studies, with cunningly chosen placebos, will no doubt find no toxicity in vaccinating pregnant women, whatsoever.
Where are the long term studies on vaccinated vs. unvaccinated and the status of their health? "It can't be done," say Offit, et al. Most importantly, where is the interest in successful treatment of the infectious diseases? After all, one of the most potent marketing phrases behind so many of these vaccines is "because there is no cure." Perhaps the word "cure" is banned on the potential research list.
As medical students, we learned the biochemical process of oxidative metabolism and the function of the amazing mitochondria. How many practicing doctors really appreciate the design of those biochemical and electrical pathways that are essential to properly functioning and robust health? How many doctors know how to put that knowledge into practice? Why doesn't medical education support nutritional programs that are geared toward this primary process of oxygen utilization into energy and inflammation reduction? There is nothing more important to the sustenance and vibrance of health. Just try holding your breath for three minutes and you will see how true that is. There is nothing more important than the body's use of oxygen, which extends far beyond the lungs and ultimately involves the mitochondria. Where are the studies looking into how vaccines alter the process of oxidative metabolism, the ratio of NAD/NADH? I shudder to think what the results would show. Where are the studies looking at whether vaccines have an adverse epigenetic effect on the development and function of the immune system? To me these intricate and elaborate processes are sacred and designed by a power far greater than Paul Offit or any scientist. Yet most of them act is if it would be possible for them to develop a far better human with a much better immune system than the ones they are studying.
Those of us who do not vaccinate our children have learned from each other how to support our children through the usual childhood illnesses, because we can't rely on conventional medicine's approach. It is just too limited in principles, vision and solutions.
In the timeline of humanity, vaccines are a modern invention but they have absolutely NO claim to the betterment of humanity. There are distinct and known factors that had a far bigger impact on diseases and mortality than vaccines, and they were implemented long before the vaccines were in full use. See AIELLO, NELSON, and MCKINLEY. See also "THE AMAZING DECLINE." Until the proper study is conducted to compare the health of vaccinated vs unvaccinated children, nobody has the authority to uphold vaccination as superior to holistic management.
Paul Offit claims to be an unbiased scientist with no personal interest in vaccination. To me, this does not make sense. In 2008 while sitting on the ACIP as a voting member, Children's Hospital Of Pennsylvania sold its royalty stake in Offit's vaccine RotaTeq for $182 million, and Offit received an unspecified percentage: his share of the intellectual property, said to be "in the millions." Why doesn't he just call himself what he really is? A "multimillionaire vaccine patent owner who, by INFLUENCING IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES while sitting on the Advisory Committee For Immunization Practices, had a huge personal interest in policymaking, and wants to remove your personal rights as to what goes into your infant and your body by way of injection, and touts his own personal feelings on religion and wisdom to naïve doctors over the internet."
According to a 2009 Philadelphia Magazine interview with Offit, a reporter asked him once if he was the Antichrist, and he replied, "I'm just one of the Devil's many humble servants."
Addendum:In the initial publication of this document I misspoke. I said "Public Law 97-280 96 STAT.1211 is a law that Declares the Bible to Be The Word of God. This represents Congress' stance that the Bible has its rightful place above the Constitution because our forefathers were inspired by the Bible in the writing of the Constitution." Public Law 97-280 96 STAT.1211 is not actually a "law," as my critics have so generously pointed out. Even though it is labeled a "Law," technically it was a "resolution." However, I'd like to have Dr Offit prove his statement about a child safely taking 10,000 vaccines (note he does not say vaccine antigens, but vaccines) at once. Here's my suggestion: Let's not give 10,000 vaccines to a child, but to a monkey who is about the same size and weight of a two month old child. That should be able to prove if Offit is right.
REFERENCES:
[1] Offit, Paul et al. 2002. Addressing Parents' Concerns: Do Multiple Vaccines Overwhelm or Weaken the Infant's Immune System? Pediatrics. 2002 Jan;109(1):124-9. PMID:11773551
[2] http://www.ted.com/talks/noreena_hertz_how_to_use_experts_and_when_not_to.html
[3] Engelmann et al. "Expert Financial Advice Neurobiologically "Offloads" Financial Decision-Making under Risk"PLoS ONE. 2009; 4(3): e4957. PMC2655712 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2655712/
[4] Chelvarajan RL et al. "Defective macrophage function in neonates and its impact on unresponsiveness of neonates to polysaccharide antigens." J Leukoc Biol. 2004 Jun;75(6):982-94. Epub 2004 Feb 24. PMID:14982942
[5] Siegrist CA." Neonatal and early life vaccinology."Vaccine. 2001 May 14;19(25-26):3331-46. PMID:11348697
[6] Marshall-Clark et al. "Neonatal immunity: how well has it grown up?" Immunol Today. 2000 Jan;21(1):35-41. PMID:10637557
Dr Humphries is a board certified nephrologist. She is also a licensed internist and a homeopath.
DrSuzanne.net
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
STUDY: GMO toxins found in nearly all pregnant women, unborn babies
Study: GMO toxins found in nearly all pregnant women, unborn babies
http://www.naturalnews.com/037493_gmo_toxins_pregnant_women.html
by Jonathan Benson, staff writer
October 10, 2012
(NaturalNews) A recent study published in the journal Reproductive Toxicology debunks yet another lie of the biotechnology industry concerning genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). According to an analysis conducted by researchers from the University of Sherbrooke Hospital Centre in Quebec, Canada, 100 percent of pregnant women and their unborn babies tested positive for GMO toxins in their blood, proving that transgenic materials are not effectively broken down and eliminated during digestion as we have all been told.
The study, which is featured in the new Jeffrey Smith documentary Genetic Roulette (http://www.naturalnews.com/037272_Genetic_Roulette_movie_GMO.html), examined the blood of 30 pregnant women and 39 non-pregnant women. The research team, led by Aziz Aris and Samuel Leblanc, looked for glyphosate (Roundup); gluphosinate, an active ingredient in various broad-spectrum herbicides; Cry1Ab, the Bt toxin of gluphosinate; and several metabolites of both glyphosate and gluphosinate.
Upon observation, they noticed that the non-pregnant women all had high levels of both glyphosate and gluphosinate in their blood, while none of the pregnant women had either of the two chemicals in their blood, illustrating that some type of metabolic change takes place when women become pregnant. As far as the other chemicals were concerned; however, 100 percent of the pregnant women and their unborn babies tested positive for 3-methylphosphinico propionic acid (3-MMPA), a metabolite of gluphosinate, while 93 percent of maternal blood and 80 percent of fetal cord blood tested positive for the Bt toxin Cry1Ab.
This is highly concerning, as it shows not only that these two untested chemicals are effectively bypassing the digestive systems of pregnant women, but that they are also persisting in their bloodstreams for an untold amount of time, where they proceed to infect the bloodstreams of unborn children. The long-term health effects of such exposure are largely unknown, as few formative safety studies have ever been conducted on either Bt toxin or the pesticide and herbicide chemicals used on GMO crops.
Gluphosinate, Cry1Ab both linked to causing major health problems
Existing studies do suggest; however, that gluphosinate, the precursor to 3-MMPA, can cause cancer, DNA damage, and reproductive toxicity. The European Union (EU) actually banned the use of gluphosinate in member states after determining that the herbicide is a significant threat to environmental and human health. (http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2785.html)
"This paper shows that this GM protein (Cry1Ab) can survive extensive food processing to enter the diet," says the U.K. group GM-Free Cymru. "It can then survive human digestion to enter the blood of the person eating it and then cross the placenta to enter the fetus." (http://www.gmfreecymru.org.uk/pivotal_papers/crucial24.htm)
Another recent study found that rats fed a lifetime of GM corn, many varieties of which contain the Cry1Ab toxin, developed horrific tumors all over their bodies. Compared to a control group not fed GM corn, GM corn-fed male mice died prematurely at a 66 percent higher rate, and GM corn-fed females died prematurely at a 250 percent higher rate. (http://www.naturalnews.com)
Be sure to check out the informative new film Genetic Roulette, which takes a comprehensive, in-depth, and scientific look at the non-safety of GMOs, and how these untested poisons are destroying the health of the world: http://geneticroulettemovie.com/
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/037493_gmo_toxins_pregnant_women.html#ixzz2O8sMdR5j
Monday, March 18, 2013
Oral Sensitivity in Children with Aspergers and High-Functioning Autism
Oral Sensitivity in Children with Aspergers and High-Functioning Autism
http://www.myaspergerschild.com/2012/03/oral-sensitivity-in-children-with.html
In contrast to motor-based swallowing problems, difficulties with eating can also stem from dysfunction with the sensory system. The act of swallowing does require both motor and sensory functions to complete the act.
All of us have a range of sensory tolerance, some of us more sensitive than others. If you have a low sensory threshold, you may have an affinity for stronger tasting foods or perhaps crunchy foods. Conversely, if you are on the other end of the sensory spectrum, you may prefer milder foods or soft foods. Kids also have taste and texture preferences and tend to prefer milder, simple foods.
Hypersensitive oral reactions are exaggerated responses to touch in the mouth or around the face. Younger Aspergers and HFA kids with hypersensitive oral reactions may not let you into their mouths for feeding, tooth brushing, or play. They may have problems moving from one food texture to the next, spitting out or gagging on any food but puree. They may gag when a spoon touches the tip of their tongues. A tiny lump of food may be gagged on instead of swallowed.
The following are red flags for sensory-based eating difficulties:
- Able to bite and chew solid foods, but not swallow them
- Gag on foods that require chewing
- Hypersensitive gag only with solids and not with liquids
- May try to swallow foods whole to avoid contact for chewing
- No problems with taking liquids
- Will separate textures from smooth food and pocket or expel them
Some kids become so sensitive and emotional, that their reactions go one step beyond hypersensitive and become “aversion reactions” (these are stronger, more emotional, and less logical reactions). These kids may cry, fuss, pull away, push food away, or refuse even to let you near their mouths. Gagging may turn into vomiting in an aversive reaction.
Fears can develop around eating or any touch around the mouth. Aspergers and HFA kids may try to control all aspects of a meal in an effort to protect themselves from uncomfortable situations. They may want only certain food textures, certain spoons, certain plates, and certain cups. Moms and dads become frustrated because their youngster will eat only a few foods prepared in very specific ways. Face washing and tooth brushing can seem impossible.
For most Aspergers kids, mouth hypersensitivity is one part of an overall body sensitivity to touch or changes in touch. These kids have a hard time handling touch on other parts of their bodies as well. Therefore, treatment for the face and mouth needs to be part of a treatment plan of relaxing or desensitizing touch reactions throughout the body
Because most hypersensitive kids have body as well as mouth over-sensitivities, they may allow touch or cuddling only if it is their idea. If you try to approach them, they may push you away, or rub or scratch the spot. The touch may be quite agitating.
Helping your youngster handle deep pressure or firm touch is usually a good starting place. Light ticklish touch can be too over-stimulating. Massage can be an excellent activity for these kids. Deep pressure touch, given in an organized, predictable way can be very helpful with touch sensitivities. When your youngster can anticipate the touch, it makes it easier to handle. A variety of other firm touch activities may be described by your youngster's therapist.
Let your Aspergers youngster know that you are going to touch. Approach the youngster within his/her vision so that the touch is not a surprise. Often, touch is handled well if the youngster sees it coming. Kids seem to be able to "prepare" themselves for the touch and sometimes can react more appropriately. Also, your youngster needs to learn that touch around the face and in the mouth can be fun.
Remember that the mouth is the most sensitive part of the face. Start by touching places away from the mouth and work toward the mouth. Consider starting on the trunk or back of the arms, and make a game of moving toward the face. In this playful way, the game becomes a distraction, so your youngster isn't just worrying about the touch. You also are moving in a predictable fashion that is less scary.
Tips for helping your child accept touch:
- Kiss your youngster's face with the stuffed toy, and then let him/her kiss the toy or your face.
- Play face-touch games with stuffed toys and dolls.
- Playfully taking turns with touching can help your youngster handle play around the mouth.
- Tooth brushing with regular or electric toothbrushes can help
- Wipe the face regularly (slowly and softly) with warm cloths, using deep pressure. This can be calming to an over-reactive youngster.
- Singing is nice to combine with touch activities. The predictability of the tune helps your youngster prepare for the touch.
Eating involves many different types of touches that the parent needs to understand. The spoon, fork, and cup touch the lips as they bring food to the mouth. The food temperature is a touch. Food texture (e.g., lumpy, wet, thick, etc.) is an important touch of eating. Some kids remove food from the spoon with their teeth very rapidly, so that the spoon doesn't touch their lips. Try gradually keeping the spoon or cup at the lips longer. Use the youngster's most favorite foods for this activity.
Food temperature often can cause over-reactions. Remember that room-temperature foods tend to be easier to handle. Notice the temperatures your youngster handles easily. Make temperature changes very slowly and with foods the youngster likes.
When Aspergers kids over-react by gagging when you try to switch to thicker, more textured or lumpy foods, you probably need to make the transition more slowly. Aspies usually will do better moving from strained foods to thickened strained foods, to blended foods, to thickened blended foods, to thickened blended foods with tiny, very soft lumps. Remember, it is easier to hide lumps in thickened foods. They are much too obvious when presented with strained foods. Good food thickeners include cereal, dehydrated foods, instant potatoes, instant puddings, and ground cracker crumbs.
When you present new body or mouth touches or new food textures, always start with familiar touches or textures. Making games of the touching helps kids think that the touch or the eating or the new texture o" their idea. Move at your youngster's pace, but be persistent.
Provide crunchy foods, and separate textures during meals. Keep crunchy foods on hand for your sensory-sensitive youngster, as these foods facilitate an important "sixth sense" called proprioception, in which sensory feedback makes the child aware of movement and body position. Crunchy foods may help your youngster to develop better proprioception. Also, avoid mixing foods together that have conflicting textures, such as mashed potatoes and gravy.
A speech-language pathologist or occupational therapist (OT) that is trained in oral sensitivities can implement an oral-sensory treatment program to help desensitize the child and reduce the sensitive gag response to textures. Also, the therapist can assist the mother or father with activities to transition the child to age-appropriate textures and tastes of food. If the sensory problem is more pronounced or pervasive, an OT with a background in sensory integration can provide more involved sensory intervention. These therapies may need to be preceded by resolution of medical problems first, especially reflux, before treatment activities can have an effect.
Advice to parents with Aspergers kids who have sensory-based eating problems may include to avoid forcing the child to eat certain foods, maintain a routine mealtime, have at least one preferred food available each meal, and to have the youngster join the family at mealtime versus eating alone.
Aspergers and High-Functioning Autistic kids with hypersensitive reactions to touch in the mouth and around the face need extra help learning to handle the touches of everyday life, especially for eating. You do not have to struggle with this one alone. Your youngster's pediatrician, dietitian, or therapy team can work with you and your youngster to figure out the best way to help.
The Aspergers Comprehensive Handbook
Thursday, February 7, 2013
Tetanus Vaccine Causes New Disease: New Vaccines Worse?
Tetanus Vaccine Causes New Disease: New Vaccines Worse?
http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2013/02/06/tetanus-vaccine-causes-new-disease-new-vaccines-worse/
The tetanus vaccine causes a new disease known both as Hughes syndrome and antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). It's an autoimmune condition that can attack any part of the body, though is best noted for heart attacks and killing fetuses. It's likely that APS will become more common with the new generation of vaccine adjuvants now being produced.
The sufferers of (APS) are mostly women, and its diagnosis is often made as a result of multiple pregnancy losses. As is typical of new diseases, research is focused on finding a genetic cause, in spite of the fact that the connection with vaccines is well known and documented.
As the name implies, APS is a condition in which phospholipids, natural and necessary substances required by every part of the body, is seen as an infectious agent by the immune system. So, this substance that exists in every cell becomes subject to attack. Symptoms include:
- Blindness
- Cardiovascular:
- Deep vein thrombosis (clots in veins)
- Phlebitis
- Thrombocytopenia (deficiency of blood platelets, causing bleeding & bruising)
- Atherosclerosis
- Pulmonary embolus (clots in the lungs)
- Heart valve abnormatilies
- Stroke
- Headaches & migraines
- Miscarriages
- Neurological disorders:
- Epilepsy
- Chorea (sudden uncontrollable jittery movements)
- Transverse myelitis (inflammation of the spinal cord)
- Multiple sclerosis
- Cognitive dysfunction
- Skin disorders, including mottling, ulcers, and necrosis
APS can also be diagnosed—more accurately, misdiagnosed—as lupus erythematosus, which is another vaccine-induced condition.
APS and Vaccines
One study calls Hughes syndrome the "classical antiphospholipid syndrome"[1]. That study refers to similarities between plasma protein beta-2-glycoprotein-I (β2GPI), which is attacked in APS, and the tetanus vaccine. That is, the tetanus antigen has parts that are virtually identical to β2GPI, which is found virtually everywhere in the body.
Another study documents how APS can be induced in laboratory animals with tetanus vaccination[2]. Many large number of other studies document and investigate the connection between vaccines and antiphospholipid syndrome[3,4,5,6,7,8].
These studies leave little doubt that APS is caused by vaccines. That should come as little surprise, since it was first identified as a disease during the 1980s. If this disease existed prior to vaccines, it was so rare that it was unknown. Now, it can take its place among a growing list of vaccine-induced conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis, macrophagic myofasciitis, multiple sclerosis, autism, and siliconosis. The list keeps growing and many believe that all these conditions should be included under a single name, autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants, or ASIA.
Article Addendum
In a rather humorous exchange, the head of the APS Foundation of America objected to the use of their website as a reference—though it was, as it was heavily referenced for the effects of APS, though not for its focus on anything but vaccines as the cause. I removed the reference, as demanded, but a new one to the site is now going up. It's number 9 in Sources. She offered it as proof that APS goes back to 1906, so therefore could not be caused by vaccines. So what does the article state?
In discussing the history of APS, the article states that in 1906 Wasserman and coworkers "developed serological reactions for the diagnosis of syphilis utilizing phospholipid-rich tissues as antigens[9]". In other words, they developed symptoms as a result of the injection of phospholipids in 1906. It now stands as the earliest proof of the likely causal link between vaccines and APS.
A tip of the hat to the head of the APS Foundation of America, unintentional though the offer of documentation is!
Why New Generation Vaccines Are Especially Worrisome
Phospholipids are a primary part of your body, forming part of the membrane of every cell, among other functions. They're under attack in APS. As can be seen with regard to tetanus vaccine, APS can be induced by the antigen when the epitope—the part of the antigen forming the pattern that autobodies are designed to attack—is similar to a particular part of the body.
What's frightening is that phospholipids are becoming a primary ingredient of vaccines in the form of a new generation of adjuvants made via recombinant DNA by diddling with a part of pathogenic bacteria called outer membrane vesicles (OMVs). You can read more about them in New Generation of Vaccine Adjuvants: Worst Ever?
OMVs allow for designer vaccine antigens and adjuvants. OMV adjuvants are, of course, being promoted as the safest ever developed. That safety claim is based on the fact that they're so much like the body already. This is the same claim that's been used to promote squalene, which, as we've recently seen with the tragic cases of narcolepsy in children after the squalene-laced flu vaccine, Pandemrix, was unleashed in Europe, can devastate lives. Gaia Health explained the issue in How the Flu Vaccine Causes Narcolepsy.
Squalene is a lipid. That's what makes it so dangerous. OMVs are even more precisely analogous to human tissue, because they are not only lipids, they are phospholipids—which are precisely what the body attacks in APS. Therefore, we can anticipate that there will be ever-more cases of APS as we see the approval of ever-more OMV-based vaccines, which are in the pipeline now.
Have no doubt: these vaccines will be approved. The first one, Cervarix, is already out there—and it's been deemed safe, in spite of evidence to the contrary.
People with APS are suffering from phospholipid antibodies that are erroneously destroying parts of the eye, cardiovascular system, brain, nerves, skin, reproductive system—in short, any part of the body. This self-destruction is induced by vaccine technologies. These technologies are presumed safe without adequate, if any, testing. Just how many people must suffer before this travesty is ended? When will the clearly mad purveyors of these technologies step back and question what they're doing?
The fact is that there are not just one, but several generations of people who don't even know what good health is. Worse, each successive generation is growing sicker than the previous one. And worst of all, the vaccine junta is not only unconcerned, it's massively gearing up this vaccine arms race against the human race.
Sources:
- When APS (Hughes syndrome) met the autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA)", Lupus, M Blank, E Israeli, Y Shoenfeld, doi: 10.1177/0961203312438115.
- Vaccine model of antiphospholipid syndrome induced by tetanus vaccine, Lupus, L Dimitrijević, I Živković, M Stojanović, V Petrušić, S Živančević-Simonović, doi: 10.1177/0961203311429816.
- β2 glycoprotein 1 (β2GPI), the major target in anti phospholipid syndrome (APS), is a special human complement regulator, Blood, Katharina Gropp, Nadia Weber, Michael Reuter, Sven Micklisch, Isabell Kopka, Teresia Hallström and Christine Skerka, doi:10.1182/blood-2011-02-339564.
- Anti-β2 glycoprotein I (β2GPI) autoantibodies recognize an epitope on the first domain of β2GPI, PNAS, G. Michael Iverson, Edward J. Victoria, and David M. Marquis.
- Anti-phospholipid antibodies following vaccination with recombinant hepatitis B vaccine, Clinical and Experimental Immunology, J Martinuč Porobič, T Avčin, B Božič, M Kuhar, S Čučnik, M Zupančič, K Prosenc, T Kveder, and B Rozman, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2249.2005.02923.x
- Immunomodulatory and physical effects of phospholipid composition in vaccine adjuvant emulsions.
- 'ASIA' – autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants.
- Infections and vaccines in the etiology of antiphospholipid syndrome.
- The Antiphospholipid Story, from the APS Foundation of America website
- Hughes Syndrome Foundation
- Antiphospholipid syndrome
- Learning About Antiphospholipid Syndrome (APS)
- The antiphospholipid syndrome (Hughes' syndrome)
Vaccines cause autoimmune disorders!
Friday, January 18, 2013
The Miracle of Vitamin D
The Miracle of Vitamin D
by Krispin Sillivan, CN
12/31/2000
In April of 2000 a clinical observation published in Archives of Internal Medicine caught my attention. Dr. Anu Prabhala and his colleagues reported on the treatment of five patients confined to wheelchairs with severe weakness and fatigue. Blood tests revealed that all suffered from severe vitamin D deficiency. The patients received 50,000 IU vitamin D per week and all became mobile within six weeks.1
Dr. Prabhala's research sparked my interest and led to a search for current information on vitamin D, how it works, how much we really need and how we get it. The following is a small part of the important information that I found.Any discussion of vitamin D must begin with the discoveries of the Canadian-born dentist Weston A. Price. In his masterpiece Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, Dr. Price noted that the diet of isolated, so-called "primitive" peoples contained "at least ten times" the amount of "fat-soluble vitamins" as the standard American diet of his day.2 Dr. Price determined that it was the presence of plentiful amounts of fat-soluble vitamins A and D in the diet, along with calcium, phosphorus and other minerals, that conferred such high immunity to tooth decay and resistance to disease in nonindustrialized population groups. Today another Canadian researcher, Dr. Reinhold Vieth, argues convincingly that current vitamin D recommendations are woefully inadequate. The recommended dose of 200-400 international units (IU) will prevent rickets in children but does not come close to the optimum amount necessary for vibrant health.3 According to Dr. Vieth, the minimal daily requirement of vitamin D should be in the range of 4,000 IU from all sources, rather than the 200-400 currently suggested, or ten times the Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA). Dr. Vieth's research perfectly matches Dr. Price's observations of sixty years ago!
Vitamin D From Sunlight
Pick up any popular book on vitamins and you will read that ten minutes of daily exposure of the arms and legs to sunlight will supply us with all the vitamin D that we need. Humans do indeed manufacture vitamin D from cholesterol by the action of sunlight on the skin but it is actually very difficult to obtain even a minimal amount of vitamin D with a brief foray into the sunlight.4,5Ultraviolet (UV) light is divided into 3 bands or wavelength ranges, which are referred to as UV-C, UV-B and UV-A.6 UV-C is the most energetic and shortest of the UV bands. It will burn human skin rapidly in extremely small doses. Fortunately, it is completely absorbed by the ozone layer. However, UV-C is present in some lights. For this reason, fluorescent and halogen and other specialty lights may contribute to skin cancer. UV-A, known as the "tanning ray," is primarily responsible for darkening the pigment in our skin. Most tanning bulbs have a high UV-A output, with a small percentage of UV-B. UV-A is less energetic than UV-B, so exposure to UV-A will not result in a burn, unless the skin is photosensitive or excessive doses are used. UV-A penetrates more deeply into the skin than UV-B, due to its longer wavelength. Until recently, UV-A was not blocked by sunscreens. It is now considered to be a major contributor to the high incidence of non-melanoma skin cancers.7 Seventy-eight percent of UV-A penetrates glass so windows do not offer protection. The ultraviolet wavelength that stimulates our bodies to produce vitamin D is UV-B. It is sometimes called the "burning ray" because it is the primary cause of sunburn (erythema). However, UV-B initiates beneficial responses, stimulating the production of vitamin D that the body uses in many important processes. Although UV-B causes sunburn, it also causes special skin cells called melanocytes to produce melanin, which is protective. UV-B also stimulates the production of Melanocyte Stimulating Hormone (MSH), an important hormone in weight loss and energy production.8 The reason it is difficult to get adequate vitamin D from sunlight is that while UV-A is present throughout the day, the amount of UV-B present has to do with the angle of the sun's rays. Thus, UV-B is present only during midday hours at higher latitudes, and only with significant intensity in temperate or tropical latitudes. Only 5 percent of the UV-B light range goes through glass and it does not penetrate clouds, smog or fog. Sun exposure at higher latitudes before 10 am or after 2 pm will cause burning from UV-A before it will supply adequate vitamin D from UV-B. This finding may surprise you, as it did the researchers. It means that sunning must occur between the hours we have been told to avoid. Only sunning between 10 am and 2 pm during summer months (or winter months in southern latitudes) for 20-120 minutes, depending on skin type and color, will form adequate vitamin D before burning occurs.9 It takes about 24 hours for UV-B-stimulated vitamin D to show up as maximum levels of vitamin D in the blood. Cholesterol-containing body oils are critical to this absorption process.10 Because the body needs 30-60 minutes to absorb these vitamin-D-containing oils, it is best to delay showering or bathing for one hour after exposure. The skin oils in which vitamin D is produced can also be removed by chlorine in swimming pools. The current suggested exposure of hands, face and arms for 10-20 minutes, three times a week, provides only 200-400 IU of vitamin D each time or an average of 100-200 IU per day during the summer months. In order to achieve optimal levels of vitamin D, 85 percent of body surface needs exposure to prime midday sun. (About 100-200 IU of vitamin D is produced for each 5 percent of body surface exposed, we want 4,000 iu.) Light skinned people need 10-20 minutes of exposure while dark skinned people need 90-120 minutes.11 Latitude and altitude determine the intensity of UV light. UV-B is stronger at higher altitudes. Latitudes higher than 30° (both north and south) have insufficient UV-B sunlight two to six months of the year, even at midday.12 Latitudes higher than 40° have insufficient sunlight to achieve optimum levels of D during six to eight months of the year. In much of the US, which is between 30° and 45° latitude, six months or more during each year have insufficient UV-B sunlight to produce optimal D levels. In far northern or southern locations, latitudes 45° and higher, even summer sun is too weak to provide optimum levels of vitamin D.13-15 A simple meter is available to determine UV-B levels where you live.
Vitamin D From Food
What the research on vitamin D tells us is that unless you are a fisherman, farmer, or otherwise outdoors and exposed regularly to sunlight, living in your ancestral latitude (more on this later), you are unlikely to obtain adequate amounts of vitamin D from the sun. Historically the balance of one's daily need was provided by food. Primitive peoples instinctively chose vitamin-D-rich foods including the intestines, organ meats, skin and fat from certain land animals, as well as shellfish, oily fish and insects. Many of these foods are unacceptable to the modern palate.For food sources to provide us with D the source must be sunlight exposed. With exposure to UV-B sunlight, vitamin D is produced from fat in the fur, feathers, and skin of animals, birds and reptiles. Carnivores get additional D from the tissues and organs of their prey. Lichen contains vitamin D and may provide a source of vitamin D in the UV-B sunlight-poor northern latitudes.16 Vitamin D content will vary in the organs and tissues of animals, pigs, cows, and sheep, depending on the amount of time spent in UV-B containing sunlight and/or how much D is given as a supplement. Poultry and eggs contain varying amounts of vitamin D obtained from insects, fishmeal, and sunlight containing UV-B or supplements. Fish, unlike mammals, birds and reptiles, do not respond to sunlight and rely on vitamin D found in phytoplankton and other fish. Salmon must feed on phytoplankton and fish in order to obtain and store significant vitamin D in their fat, flesh, skin, and organs. Thus, modern farm-raised salmon, unless artificially supplemented, may be a poor source of this essential nutrient. Modern diets usually do not provide adequate amounts of vitamin D;17 partly because of the trend to low fat foods and partly because we no longer eat vitamin-D-rich foods like naturally reared poultry and fatty fish such as kippers, and herring. Often we are advised to consume the egg white while the D is in the yolk or we eat the flesh of the fish avoiding the D containing skin, organs and fat. Sun avoidance combined with reduction in food sources contribute to escalating D deficiencies. Vegetarian and vegan diets are exceptionally poor or completely lacking in vitamin D predisposing to an absolute need for UV-B sunlight. Using food as one's primary source of D is difficult to impossible.
Vitamin D Miracles
Sunlight and vitamin D are critical to all life forms. Standard textbooks state that the principal function of vitamin D is to promote calcium absorption in the gut and calcium transfer across cell membranes, thus contributing to strong bones and a calm, contented nervous system. It is also well recognized that vitamin D aids in the absorption of magnesium, iron and zinc, as well as calcium.Actually, vitamin D does not in itself promote healthy bone. Vitamin D controls the levels of calcium in the blood. If there is not enough calcium in the diet, then it will be drawn from the bone. High levels of vitamin D (from the diet or from sunlight) will actually demineralize bone if sufficient calcium is not present. Vitamin D will also enhance the uptake of toxic metals like lead, cadmium, aluminum and strontium if calcium, magnesium and phosphorus are not present in adequate amounts.18 Vitamin D supplementation should never be suggested unless calcium intake is sufficient or supplemented at the same time. Receptors for vitamin D are found in most of the cells in the body and research during the 1980s suggested that vitamin D contributed to a healthy immune system, promoted muscle strength, regulated the maturation process and contributed to hormone production. During the last ten years, researchers have made a number of exciting discoveries about vitamin D. They have ascertained, for example, that vitamin D is an antioxidant that is a more effective antioxidant than vitamin E in reducing lipid peroxidation and increasing enzymes that protect against oxidation.19;20 Vitamin D deficiency decreases biosynthesis and release of insulin.21 Glucose intolerance has been inversely associated with the concentration of vitamin D in the blood. Thus, vitamin D may protect against both Type I and Type II diabetes.22 The risk of senile cataract is reduced in persons with optimal levels of D and carotenoids.23 PCOS (Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome) has been corrected by supplementation of D and calcium.24 Vitamin D plays a role in regulation of both the "infectious" immune system and the "inflammatory" immune system.25 Low vitamin D is associated with several autoimmune diseases including multiple sclerosis, Sjogren's Syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, thyroiditis and Crohn's disease.26;27 Osteoporosis is strongly associated with low vitamin D. Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis respond favorably (and rapidly) to higher levels of D plus calcium and magnesium.28 D deficiency has been mistaken for fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue or peripheral neuropathy.1;28-30 Infertility is associated with low vitamin D.31 Vitamin D supports production of estrogen in men and women.32 PMS has been completely reversed by addition of calcium, magnesium and vitamin D.33 Menstrual migraine is associated with low levels of vitamin D and calcium.81 Breast, prostate, skin and colon cancer have a strong association with low levels of D and lack of sunlight.34-38 Activated vitamin D in the adrenal gland regulates tyrosine hydroxylase, the rate limiting enzyme necessary for the production of dopamine, epinephrine and norepinephrine. Low D may contribute to chronic fatigue and depression.39 Seasonal Affective Disorder has been treated successfully with vitamin D. In a recent study covering 30 days of treatment comparing vitamin D supplementation with two-hour daily use of light boxes, depression completely resolved in the D group but not in the light box group.40 High stress may increase the need for vitamin D or UV-B sunlight and calcium.41 People with Parkinsons and Alzheimers have been found to have lower levels of vitamin D.42;43 Low levels of D, and perhaps calcium, in a pregnant mother and later in the child may be the contributing cause of "crooked teeth" and myopia. When these conditions are found in succeeding generations it means the genetics require higher levels of one or both nutrients to optimize health.44-47 Behavior and learning disorders respond well to D and/or calcium combined with an adequate diet and trace minerals.48;49
Vitamin D and Heart Disease
Research suggests that low levels of vitamin D may contribute to or be a cause of syndrome X with associated hypertension, obesity, diabetes and heart disease.50 Vitamin D regulates vitamin-D-binding proteins and some calcium-binding proteins, which are responsible for carrying calcium to the "right location" and protecting cells from damage by free calcium.51 Thus, high dietary levels of calcium, when D is insufficient, may contribute to calcification of the arteries, joints, kidney and perhaps even the brain.52-54Many researchers have postulated that vitamin D deficiency leads to the deposition of calcium in the arteries and hence atherosclerosis, noting that northern countries have higher levels of cardiovascular disease and that more heart attacks occur in winter months.55-56 Scottish researchers found that calcium levels in the hair inversely correlated with arterial calcium—the more calcium or plaque in the arteries, the less calcium in the hair. Ninety percent of men experiencing myocardial infarction had low hair calcium. When vitamin D was administered, the amount of calcium in the beard went up and this rise continued as long as vitamin D was consumed. Almost immediately after stopping supplementation, however, beard calcium fell to pre-supplement levels.27 Administration of dietary vitamin D or UV-B treatment has been shown to lower blood pressure, restore insulin sensitivity and lower cholesterol.58-60
The Battle of the Bulge
Did you ever wonder why some people can eat all they want and not get fat, while others are constantly battling extra pounds? The answer may have to do with vitamin D and calcium status. Sunlight, UV-B, and vitamin D normalize food intake and normalize blood sugar. Weight normalization is associated with higher levels of vitamin D and adequate calcium.61 Obesity is associated with vitamin-D deficiency.62-64 In fact, obese persons have impaired production of UV-B-stimulated D and impaired absorption of food source and supplemental D.65When the diet lacks calcium, whether from D or calcium deficiency, there is an increase in fatty acid synthase, an enzyme that converts calories into fat. Higher levels of calcium with adequate vitamin D inhibit fatty acid synthase while diets low in calcium increase fatty acid synthase by as much as five-fold. In one study, genetically obese rats lost 60 percent of their body fat in six weeks on a diet that had moderate calorie reduction but was high in calcium. All rats supplemented with calcium showed increased body temperature indicating a shift from calorie storage to calorie burning (thermogenesis).61
The Right Fats
The assimilation and utilization of vitamin D is influenced by the kinds of fats we consume. Increasing levels of both polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids in the diet decrease the binding of vitamin D to D-binding proteins. Saturated fats, the kind found in butter, tallow and coconut oil, do not have this effect. Nor do the omega-3 fats.66 D-binding proteins are key to local and peripheral actions of vitamin D. This is an important consideration as Americans have dramatically increased their intake of polyunsaturated oils (from commercial vegetable oils) and monounsaturated oils (from olive oil and canola oil) and decreased their intake of saturated fats over the past 100 years.In traditional diets, saturated fats supplied varying amounts of vitamin D. Thus, both reduction of saturated fats and increase of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats contribute to the current widespread D deficiency. Trans fatty acids, found in margarine and shortenings used in most commercial baked goods, should always be avoided. There is evidence that these fats can interfere with the enzyme systems the body uses to convert vitamin D in the liver.80
Vitamin D Therapy
In my clinical practice, I test for vitamin-D status first. If D is needed, I try to combine sunlight exposure with vitamin D and mineral supplements.Single, infrequent, intense, skin exposure to UV-B light not only causes sunburn but also suppresses the immune system. On the other hand, frequent low-level exposure normalizes immune function, enhancing NK-cell and T-cell production, reducing abnormal inflammatory responses typical of autoimmune disorders, and reducing occurrences of infectious disease.26;67;68-71 Thus it is important to sunbathe frequently for short periods of time, when UV-B is present, rather than spend long hours in the sun at infrequent intervals. Adequate UV-B exposure and vitamin-D production can be achieved in less time than it takes to cause any redness in the skin. It is never necessary to burn or tan to obtain sufficient vitamin D. If sunlight is not available in your area because of latitude or season, sunlamps made by Sperti can be used to provide a natural balance of UV-B and UV-A. Used according to instructions, these lamps provide a safe equivalent of sunlight and will not cause burning or even heavy tanning. Tanning beds, on the other hand, are not acceptable as a means of getting your daily dose of vitamin D because they provide high levels of UV-A and very little UV-B. If you have symptoms of vitamin-D insufficiency or are unable to spend time in the sun, due to season or lifestyle or prior skin cancer, consider adding a supplement of 1,000 IU daily. Higher levels may be needed but should be recommended and monitored by your health care practitioner after testing serum 25(OH)D. 1,000 iu can be obtained from a concentrated supplement or from 2 teaspoons of high quality cod liver oil. Both Carlson Labs and Solgar make a 1,000 IU vitamin-D supplement naturally derived from fish oil. (Do not attempt to obtain large amounts of vitamin D from cod liver oil alone, as this would supply vitamin A in excessive and possibly toxic amounts.) Supplementation is safe as long as sarcoidosis, liver or kidney disease is not present and the diet contains adequate calcium, magnesium and other minerals. Adequate calcium and magnesium, as well as other minerals, are critical parts of vitamin D therapy. Without calcium and magnesium in sufficient quantities, vitamin-D supplementation will withdraw calcium from the bone and will allow the uptake of toxic minerals. Do not supplement vitamin D and do not sunbathe unless you are sure you have sufficient calcium and magnesium to meet your daily needs. Weston Price suggested a minimum of 1,200-2,400 mg of calcium daily. Research suggests that 1,200-1,500 mg is adequate as a supplement for most adults, both men and women. (Magnesium intake should be half that of calcium.) Two excellent sources of calcium in the human diet are dairy products and bone broths.2 If the diet does not contain sufficient amounts, you will need to add supplements. Bone meal, dolomite powder or calcium and magnesium tablets (Solgar or Kal), or calcium carbonate or lactate (Solgar, Kal, Now or Twinlab) are good calcium sources, inexpensive and safe.74 All of these brands have been tested and found to be free of lead and other heavy metals. In my experience, the forms of calcium given in supplements should be equivalent to those found in food—bone meal as in the broth, calcium lactate as in milk products and dolomite as in lime used to process cornmeal products. These forms work most efficiently and with the least cost for bone repletion and general repletion of serum calcium status.75 If your diet is high in protein, calcium lactate or carbonate is probably a better source of calcium. Read the label carefully to see how much elemental calcium is contained in each dose or tablet and make sure to take the right amount. If the label says a serving size is three tablets and contains 1,000 mg of calcium, you must take the full serving size to get that amount. Higher amounts of calcium are important for anyone diagnosed with bone loss. Total daily calcium as a supplement may range from 1,500 mg to 2,000 mg depending on current bone status and your body size. Make the effort to split up your daily dose. Do not take all your calcium and magnesium once a day. A higher percentage of the calcium dose is absorbed if delivered in smaller, more frequent amounts.82 Expensive "chelated" calciums are not necessary if vitamin-D status is adequate. Taking calcium without sufficient D may cause other problems. Vitamin D controls the production of some calcium binding proteins, which are critical to normal calcium utilization. Patients on vitamin-D therapy report a wide range of beneficial results including increased energy and strength, resolution of hormonal problems, weight loss, an end to sugar cravings, blood sugar normalization and improvement of nervous system disorders. A paradoxical transient and non-complicating hypercalciuria (more calcium in the urine) may occur when the program is first initiated. This resolves quickly when adequate calcium and other minerals are consumed. Two other temporary side effects may occur during the first several months of treatment. One is daytime sleepiness after calcium is taken. This usually resolves itself after about one week. The other condition is the reappearance of pain and discomfort at the site of old injuries, a sign of injury remodeling or proper healing, which may take some time to clear up.
Toxicity Issues
Vitamin programs usually omit vitamin D because of concerns about toxicity. These concerns are valid because vitamin D in all forms can be toxic in pharmacological (drug-like) doses. The dangers of toxicity have not been exaggerated, but the doses needed to result in toxicity have been ill defined with the unfortunate result that many people currently suffer from vitamin-D deficiency or insufficiency.Abnormally high levels of vitamin D are indicated by blood levels exceeding 65 ng/ml or 162 nmol/l for extended periods of time and may be associated with chronic toxicity. Levels of 200-300 nmol/l or higher have been seen in several studies using supplementation and quickly resolve when supplementation is stopped. In such cases no long-term problems have been found. Long-term supplementation, without monitoring, may have serious consequences. Before 1993, there was no affordable and available blood test for vitamin D. Now there is. To avoid problems, anyone engaging in levels of vitamin-D supplementation above 1,000 iu daily should have periodic blood tests. Don't forget to calculate your total vitamin-D intake from all sources—sunlight, food (including vitamin D in milk) and supplements, including cod liver oil. Dr. Vieth suggests that critical toxicity may occur at doses of 20,000 IU daily and that the Upper Limit (UL) of safety be set at 10,000 IU, rather than the current 2,000 IU. While this may or may not be the definitive marker for safety in healthy persons with no active liver or kidney disease, there is no clinical evidence that long-term supplementation needs to be greater than 4,000 IU for optimal daily maintenance. This level would be somewhat lower when combined with exposure to UV-B.3;76 Doses used in clinical studies range from as little as 400 IU daily to 10,000-500,000 IU, given either as a single onetime dose or daily, weekly or monthly. Such large doses are given either as a prophylactic or because compliance is considered a problem. There seems to be some evidence that vitamin D works better, without toxicity, when given in lower, more physiologic doses of 2,000-4,000 IU daily rather than as 100,000 IU once a month. However, a single monthly dose of 100,000 IU did replete low levels of vitamin D in adolescents during winter.77 In my experience and that of other researchers, high, infrequent dosing can lead to problems. In one recent study, blood levels rose from low to extremely high, (more than 300 nmol/l) 2 to 4 hours after a 50,000 IU oral dose,65 and then slowly returned to pretreatment suboptimal levels. Clearly this must disrupt normal feedback mechanisms in D and calcium regulation. Vitamin A can be administered in large, infrequent doses from consumption of animal or fish liver (or injections, used in third world countries to prevent blindness) because we have storage capacity for vitamin A in our livers. Vitamin D is different. It has only a small storage pool in the liver and peripheral fat. Our ancestors most definitely did not get vitamin D in large, infrequent doses. While vitamin D is stored in body fat, storage is not sufficient to maintain optimum blood levels during winter months.78 A single exposure to UV-B light will raise levels of vitamin D over the next 24 hours and then return to baseline or slightly higher within 7 days. Historically our requirements for D were satisfied by daily exposure to sunlight and/or daily intake from food. Lowfat diets and lack of seafood in the diet further contribute to the current worldwide insufficiency of vitamin D.
Sunlight on the Inside
If any nutrient incorporates the properties of sunlight, it is vitamin D. The healthy "primitive" peoples that Dr. Price observed not only had broad, round, "sunny" faces, they also had sunny dispositions and optimistic attitudes towards life in spite of many hardships. Typical food intakes for peoples who have not been "civilized" range from 3,000 IU-6,000 IU. Modern intakes are paltry in comparison. The standard American diet provides vitamin D only in very low quantities.The first step towards redressing some of the ills of civilized life—from depression to road rage, from cavities to osteoporosis—would be to get more light, inside or outside. Vitamin D adds sunlight to life from childhood through the golden years. In nonagenarians and centagenarians high levels of vitamin D in the blood and normal thyroid function were the strongest markers of health and longevity.79 Whether in the form of sunlight or dietary vitamin D from food and fish oils, optimal levels of the sunshine vitamin allow your body and mind to thrive, even during periods of stress.
Food Sources of Vitamin D
USDA databases compiled in the 1980s list the following foods as rich in vitamin D. The amounts given are for 100 grams or about 3 1/2 ounces. These figures demonstrate the difficulty in obtaining 4,000 IU vitamin D per day from ordinary foods in the American diet. Three servings of herring, oysters, catfish, mackerel or sardines plus generous amounts of butter, egg yolk, lard or bacon fat and 2 teaspoons cod liver oil (500 iu per teaspoon) yield about 4,000 IU vitamin D—a very rich diet indeed!
The Many Forms of Vitamin D
There are two types of vitamin D found in nature. Vitamin D2 is formed by the action of UV-B on the plant precursor ergosterol. It is found in plants and in was formerly added to irradiated cows milk. Most milk today contains D3. Vitamin D3 or cholecalciferol is found in animal foods. Both forms of vitamin D have been used successfully to treat rickets and other diseases related to vitamin D insufficiency.Many consider D3 the preferred vitamin, having more biologic activity. Vitamin D3 as found in food or in human skin always comes with various metabolites or isomers that may have biological benefit. Dr. Price believed that there were as many as 12 metabolites or isomers in the vitamin D found in animal foods. When vitamin D is taken in the form of fish oil, or eaten in foods such as eggs or fish, these metabolites will be present. Both D2 and D3 can be toxic when taken inappropriately in large amounts. When humans take in vitamin D from food or sunlight, it is converted first in the liver to the form 25(OH)D and then in the kidney to 1,25(OH)D. These active forms of vitamin D are available by prescription and are given to patients with liver or kidney failure or those with an hereditary metabolic defect in vitamin-D conversion.
Assessing Vitamin D Status
Blood Testing: Currently there are two tests available for physicians to assess vitamin-D status. One is for the somewhat biologically active precursor 25(OH)D and another for 1,25(OH)D, the most active form, which is converted in the kidney and other organs. The latter is often normal in the blood even when the precursor 25(OH)D is low or deficient. The precursor is a better marker of vitamin-D status (or reserves) than the most active 1,25(OH)D form. It is the optimum level of 25(OH)D that is most strongly associated with general good health. (The test values given in this article are for 25(OH)D.) For many years the acceptable level of 25(OH)D has been at least 9 ng/ml (23 nmol/l). Some researchers believe that 20 ng/ml (50 nmol/l) should be the lower acceptable limit72 but Dr. Vieth presents a large amount of data to support his claim that this is far from optimal.3 Optimal levels are certainly at least 32 ng/ml (80 nmol/l) and preferably closer to 40 ng/ml (100 nmol/l).Salivary pH Testing for calcium sufficiency: A method of assessing ionized calcium levels has been used by Weston Price, DDS and Carl Reich, MD and has confirmation in current research.73 After determining your serum-D status (testing) and undertaking a program of supplementation with vitamin D, calcium and magnesium, morning salivary pH should read 6.8-7.2. Lower values may indicate insufficient vitamin D (retest), or low levels of calcium in the diet. Look for pH paper with a range of 5.5-8.0 and increments of 0.2. PH papers with 0.5-degree increments are not sensitive enough to monitor progress. (Note: Do not take more than 1,000 IU of vitamin D without testing and supervision by a knowledgeable healthcare practitioner. Calcium can be adjusted within the ranges suggested. Several months of supplementation may be required to show positive results if the deficiency is severe and prolonged.)
Sources
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
