Blood Type O Friends - Here is the info on Diet 4 You!

BLOOD TYPE O - This book is great guys.   It's so detailed.  There's a lot more info for "O"s but it's too much info to post. So for each food group it categories each type within the group as Beneficial, Neutral, Avoid.  I've added the 4 basic groups including some extra stuff at the end.

There's the following groups that i've included in the order that they appear.  Meats, Seafood, Dairy, Grains/Pasta, Veggies, Fruits, Others .  Hope you will find this information helpful to you.  :) 

__________________________________________

(Other stuff)  Very Beneficials

Oils & Fats - FLAXSEED OIL, OLIVE OIL

Nuts & Seeds - FLAXSEED, PUMPKIN SEEDS, WALNUTS

Beans & Legumes - ADZUKI BEAN, BLACK-EYED PEAS

Cereals - No beneficials  The Neutrals - AMARANTH, BUCKWHEAT/KASHA, CREAM OF RICE, KAMUT, MILLET, OAT BRAN, OATMEAL, RICE BRAN, RICE, SPELT, TAPIOCA, TEFF

Spices, Sugars, Seasonings - Carob, Curry, Dulse, Horseradish, Kelp, Parsley, Pepper, Cayenne, Turmeric

Condiments - no beneficials  The Neutrals - APPLE BUTTER, JAM/JELLY, MUSTARD, SALAD DRESSING, SOY SAUCE, APPLE CIDER VINEGAR

Misc Beverages - CLUB SODA, SELTZER, TEA-GREEN, (RED WINE IS A NEUTRAL)

Possible New Crohn's Treatment - Pig Whipworms - Research is in Progress

Who would consider this option? Come on come on... Be honest.  You know it's  kind of... different, but probably the majority of people would agree to this treatment if it was found to be highly effective with no strange side-effects.  
As for myself, I would have to know it was effective and know for sure that the parasite wouldn't eat me from the inside out... If I was reassured of those 2 concerns, I'd give it a try.   To get it down though.... That would be a challenge.  I'd have to get over the idea that I was swallowing a bunch of  worm larva. Not sure how I would do that .. 

Pig Whipworms Studied To Help People With Crohn's Disease

TOPEKA, Kan. (WIBW) - A potential new treatment for Crohn's disease might sound a bit squeamish. Researchers are testing whether microscopic eggs of the pig whipworm parasite can help the half million Americans living with Crohn's.

Dr. Curtis Baum of the Cotton-O'Neil Digestive Health Center in Topeka says, in Crohn's, there is an inflammation that can involve the small intestine or colon. Tesearchers are studying whether a microscopic parasite can make a big difference in the abdominal pain, diarrhea and other symptoms that result from Crohn's.

The reasoning behind why it might work stems from what's called the "hygiene hypothesis." Some immune disorders like Crohn's are unheard of in developing countries. As hygiene has improved, the theory goes, people's immune systems have become naive to infections that protect us from those diseases.

Researchers looked for a parasite that would not harm humans, but help those diseases. They found the pig whipworm.

Dr. Bause says the parasite, which he stresses does not cause disease in humans, elicits an immune response that then results in a reduction or possibly elimination of the immune response that leads to Crohn's.

While the thought of purposely ingesting a parasite might make some squeamish, the process isn't as obvious as sitting down to a bowl full of worms. Dr. Baum says the worms are in a microscopic larval stage and suspended in a small amount of salt water with about 7500 of them in a small dose. Study participants take a dose every two weeks for twelve weeks.

Dr. Baum says the larvae cannot be seen, tasted or felt. He says they hatch and elicit the immune response and will not be visible as they pass through the gastrointestinal tract.

The bonus, he says, is that there don't appear to be any side effects. Compared to steroids and other drugs, Dr. Baum says, this would be a way of treating people with very little downside.

The Cotton-O'Neil Digestive Health Center is among 15 study sites. The goal is to collectively enroll 220 participants. The total length of the study is 13 months.

People interested in learning further details or to see if they qualify should contact the Cotton-O'Neil Digestive Health Center at 785-270-4896 and ask for Kris in research.

Related Links

• Trust-1 Research Study
• 
  

Pig Whipworms Studied To Help People With Crohn's Disease:

'via Blog this'

African American & Caucasian Individuals w/ IBD - Research Studies Compare Symptoms & Therapy

Good research study to look into.  Racial differences in people who have IBD.  How 2 varying races may respond in a different manner in regards to treatment.  Different races with the same disease may manifest a different symptom profile as well. This knowledge will help doctors to tailor treatment specific to the individual.

Good read :).      It's almost Friday people! YAY!  

Studies explore racial disparities in IBD symptoms and therapy 

October 22, 2012 in Diseases, Conditions, Syndromes 

Three separate studies presented today at the American College of Gastroenterology's (ACG) 77th Annual Scientific meeting in Las Vegas help to advance understanding of the differences between African American and Caucasian patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) and provide clinicians with new insight on how racial disparities involving disease characteristics, infliximab use, and fistulizing Crohn's disease may impact their patients—and their decisions on how best to manage the disease. 

The incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in non-Caucasian minority groups, including African-Americans (AA), appears to be increasing but there is limited understanding of phenotypic differences and outcomes by race, according to researchers from the University of Chicago who describe disease characteristics of both groups in a retrospective review, "Comparing Disease Characteristics between African-American and Caucasian Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients." 

"This study analyzed our large IBD registry and looked at the type of diseases seen in the African Americans (self-described) compared to Caucasians," said co-investigator David T. Rubin, M.D., FACG. "It is one of the largest studies of African Americans with IBD, and we identified a few important differences in this population. First, they were more likely to have extra-intestinal manifestations of their IBD, including joint pain and skin inflammation. Secondly, in the Crohn's patients, they were less likely to have small intestinal involvement." 

For Crohn's disease (CD) patients, 797 Caucasians and 86 African Americans were identified. For ulcerative colitis (UC) patients, 345 Caucasians and 19 African Americans were identified. Among CD patients, African Americans had significantly higher rates of joint symptoms (31.2 percent vs. 20.1 percent) and pyoderma gangrenosum (3.5 percent vs. 1.1 percent) compared to Caucasian patients. African American Crohn's disease patients also had a significantly lower rate of ileal involvement (45.4 percent vs. 60.4 percent) compared to Caucasian patients, but no difference in rates of upper gastrointestinal, jejunal, colonic, or perianal disease. 

Among UC patients, African Americans had significantly higher rates of extra-intestinal manifestations (EIMs) overall (42.1 percent vs. 20.8 percent), joint symptoms (26.3 percent vs. 12.1 percent), and pyoderma gangrenosum a necrotizing condition that causes skin ulcers (5.3 percent vs. 0.6 percent). There was no significant difference in disease extent. 

Researchers also reported no significant differences in medication usage, clinical trial enrollment, prevalence of dysplasia or cancer, surgical, family, or smoking histories between African American and Caucasian patients for either disease. 

"We are moving towards personalizing our care of the IBD patient in a variety of important ways related to the severity and prognosis of the disease itself, specific inter-patient differences in response to therapies and potential side effects from the therapies, and importantly, understanding other differences in disease phenotypes – how the disease looks – that may be attributable to a variety of other factors, like race, geographic location in the world and even exposures that occur in the uterus before birth," Dr. Rubin said. "These findings are important since they can lead to focused genetic assessments in this population and help to define better treatment strategies for these individuals." 

Racial Differences in Fistulizing Crohn's Disease 

Researchers from Mount Sinai School of Medicine explored racial differences in the prevalence of severe fistulizing perianal Crohn's disease in cross-sectional study of all adult patients with Crohn's disease treated with infliximab at The Mount Sinai Hospital between May 1 and December 31, 2011. In the study cohort, African Americans with Crohn's disease are significantly more likely than others, and Caucasians significantly less likely, to have severe fistulizing perianal disease. 

Perianal disease is noted in up to one-third of patients with Crohn's disease (CD), according to co-investigator Pruthvi Patel, M.D. "In 2005, the Montreal Classification recognized that fistulizing perianal disease (FPD) represents a distinct phenotype from enteric fistulization," she said. "A growing body of literature suggests that there might be racial variations in the phenotypic manifestations of Crohn's disease but different studies have reached conflicting conclusions and few if any have specifically focused on perianal disease in adults with pre-specified criteria of severity." 

Among all 333 CD on infliximab, 245 were Caucasian and 38 were African American, 48 were Hispanic and 6 were Asian. Of the 333 patients, 88 had FPD. 48 of these were Caucasians while 18 were African Americans. This demonstrates that African Americans are 1.87 times more likely than others to have FPD. On the other hand, Caucasians were significantly less likely than others to have FPD. 

"These findings provide a platform to discuss the differences in Crohn's disease phenotype that may exist among various races, said Dr. Patel. "Knowledge about the burden of disease among racial groups may help early triage and management choices that will hopefuly improve the outcome on an individual basis."

 In a third study, "Lower infliximab Use in African American Compared to Caucasian IBD Patients: Analysis of a Large U.S. Comparative Hospital Database," researchers from the University of Maryland School of Medicine suggest that African-American IBD patients were less likely to use infliximab therapy than Caucasian IBD patients after reviewing data from the Premier Perspective Comparative Database (PCD). 

"During the last few decades, studies in numerous areas of medicine have revealed racial disparities in diagnosis and treatment, with African American patients often receiving inferior care to their Caucasian counterparts," said co-investigator Mark H. Flasar, M.D., MS. "Unfortunately, some more recent analyses in the realm of inflammatory bowel diseases have suggested likewise disparities in use of medical resources, medication use, nutritional support therapies, and both the timing and type of surgery."

The study group included a total of 129,478 IBD patients treated at a hospital or hospital-based infusion center within the Premier Perspective database between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2008. Of the 100,318 Caucasian patients, 55,033 (54.8 percent) had Crohn's disease and 37,719 (37.6 percent) had ulcerative colitis, while of the 10,279 African American patients, 6,032 (58.7 percent) had CD and 3,417 (33.2 percent) had UC. 

Overall, a similar overall percentage of African American and Caucasian IBD patients got infliximab treatment (6.0 percent vs. 5.8 percent). Further, those who were treated seemed to get a similar and also appeared to get a similar average number of infusions (8.6 vs. 8.5). However, after adjusting for whether they had Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis, as well as other factors such as gender and age, African Americans had a lower chance (about 12 percent lower) of getting infliximab treatment compared to Caucasian patients with IBD. Analyses limited to the 73,109 patients with moderate-to-severe disease revealed similar findings—about a 15 percent lower chance of getting infliximab treatment in African American compared to Caucasian IBD patients. 

"It is important to note that these results represent the preliminary step in a larger and more detailed analysis, and should be interpreted with caution," said Dr. Flasar. "For instance, important factors which could influence the results such as severity of disease and important disease complications were not fully controlled for. On the other hand, at least preliminarily, these results lend some support to existing literature throughout medicine and within the realm of IBD with regards to issues of treatment disparities by race in the United States. It will be very interesting to see whether the results of our subsequent planned analyses remain consistent with the current findings," added Dr. Flasar. 

Provided by American College of Gastroenterology

Read more at: http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-10-explore-racial-disparities-ibd-symptoms.html#jCp

Studies explore racial disparities in IBD symptoms and therapy:

'via Blog this'

Soligenix- SGX203 was FDA "Fast Track" Designation to Treat Pediatric Crohn's Disease

Announcement of the FDA approval of SGX203 for children with mild to moderate Crohn's Disease. Soligenix SGX203 programme to treat paediatric Crohn’s disease receives US FDA fast track designation

Princeton, New Jersey Monday, November 12, 2012, 17:30 Hrs  [IST]

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted “Fast Track” designation to Soligenix programme for development of SGX203 (oral beclomethasone 17,21-dipropionate or oral BDP) for the induction treatment of mild-to-moderate paediatric Crohn’s disease. Soligenix has also previously received Orphan Drug Designation from the FDA for oral BDP as a treatment for paediatric Crohn’s Disease. Fast track is a designation that the FDA reserves for a drug intended to treat a serious or life- threatening condition and one that demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need for the condition. Fast track designation is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of new drugs. For instance, should events warrant, Soligenix will be eligible to submit a new drug application (NDA) for SGX203 on a rolling basis, permitting the FDA to review sections of the NDA prior to receiving the complete submission.  Additionally, NDAs for fast track development programs ordinarily will be eligible for priority review, which implies an abbreviated review time of six months. “There are no FDA approved corticosteroid therapies for the induction treatment of Crohn’s disease in the paediatric population,” stated Christopher J Schaber, president & chief executive officer of Soligenix. “The FDA's action in granting fast track designation is an indication of SGX203's potential to address this debilitating, unmet medical need.  We look forward to working closely with the FDA to potentially expedite the development and NDA review process.” Crohn's disease is an ongoing disorder that causes inflammation of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Crohn's disease can affect any area of the GI tract, from the mouth to the anus, but it most commonly affects the lower part of the small intestine, called the ileum. The swelling caused by the disease extends deep into the lining of the affected organ. The swelling can induce pain and can make the intestines empty frequently, resulting in diarrhea. Because the symptoms of Crohn's disease are similar to other intestinal disorders, such as irritable bowel syndrome and ulcerative colitis, it can be difficult to diagnose. People of Ashkenazy Jewish heritage have an increased risk of developing Crohn's disease. Crohn's disease can appear at any age, but it is most often diagnosed in adults in their 20s and 30s. However, approximately 30% of people with Crohn's disease develop symptoms before 20 years of age. Paediatric Crohn's disease is a subpopulation of approximately 80,000 patients 0-19 years of age in the United States.  Crohn’s disease tends to be both severe and extensive in the pediatric population and a relatively high proportion (25-40%) of pediatric Crohn’s patients have involvement of their upper gastrointestinal tract. SGX203 contains BDP, a highly potent, topically active corticosteroid that has a local effect on inflamed tissue. BDP has been marketed in the United States and worldwide since the early 1970s as the active pharmaceutical ingredient in inhalation products for the treatment of patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma. SGX203 is a two tablet delivery system (i.e., immediate and delayed release) of BDP specifically designed for oral use that allows for delivery of BDP throughout the small bowel and the colon. The FDA has previously awarded SGX203 Orphan Drug Designation for the treatment of pediatric Crohn's disease. Soligenix is a development stage biopharmaceutical company developing products to treat serious gastrointestinal diseases where there remains an unmet medical need, as well a developing several biodefense vaccines and therapeutics.

How it works - SGX203 is specifically formulated for oral administration as a single product consisting of two tablets. One tablet releases BDP in the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract and the other tablet releases BDP in the lower GI tract. 

We will initiate a SGX203 development program for pediatric Crohn’s disease program in 2012. The objective of developing SGX203 for pediatric Crohn’s is to make available a corticosteroid option with less toxicity than the current standard therapy prednisone. 

Soligenix SGX203 programme to treat paediatric Crohn’s disease receives US FDA fast track designation:

'via Blog this'

A MUST READ! Article Focused on False Information Discrediting Natural Health Supplements

Here is a MUST READ that I received in my e-mail. This was originally published several years ago however, is extremely relevant today! It just goes to show us that the distorted reports against natural supplements/vitamins has persisted year after year, right up to 2012.   
Really, this information is exactly inline with the things that I believe and have mentioned to people at one time or another, especially regarding the absolute fact that the pharmaceutical industry and the current healthcare system is CORRUPT! The reason I use the word "corrupt" is because the focus on making drugs by most pharm companies (most...not all drug companies. There's some companies that are not consumed with greed and have a goal of getting people healthier.. They are few, but exist) is not to cure you, but to manage symptoms.  Do you realize how much money would be lost if they cured illnesses?   Exactly...BILLIONS!

It's vital to know what's going on within these industries....  
1) if you take any prescribed medication. (It's your responsibility to do your part before committing to treatment) 
2) if a friend or family member is prescribed medication. 
3) if you care at all about your life & are caught up in a vicious cycle of getting better then ill (neither one of them last very long).  Basically, if you are not getting better & you always feel "off" and not quite yourself. You're in a standstill.  
4) if you know there's something not right within the medical industry, but you can't really pinpoint exactly what it is. You are aware that there are major flaws and want to learn more and educate yourself.
5)If you want to blow the whistle on this sad situation and want to be a voice to spread truth.
6) If you are driven and feel a strong conviction to EXPOSE what's going on in our healthcare system today and want to see a positive change.
7) If you want to have the knowledge about what's happening in our nation and around the world regarding an area that WILL one day impact your life (everyone will be effected by the condition of these industries at one point in your lifetime. 

Health fails us... it's inevitable that as we age things in our body breakdown, need special attention & care, require repair. 
   
Newsletter from Jini Patel Thompson. Her website info is at the end of this article.  Visit her site for more articles.

HOW PHARMACEUTICALS USE "EXPERTS" TO DISCREDIT NATURAL MEDICINE 

You may have noticed this already: Whenever a natural supplement or herbal medicine becomes well-known and widely used, with lots of evidence piling up for its efficacy - there will then be a slew of media releases in newspapers, magazines, and tv news reports, discrediting that natural medicine. Or, the FDA will ban the substance based on trumped-up charges of user damage. This is exactly what happened with one of the best wound healers I've ever found called Comfrey. The FDA found one person who they claimed died of Comfrey use (the person had long-term, extensive medical problems, was very sick already and then began drinking ridiculous amounts of Comfrey tea) and based on that one incidence, they banned Comfrey use. Of course, no mention or comparison to the 7000 people who die EVERY YEAR in the US from Aspirin use! Then they set upon other bestsellers like Ma Huang (ephedra), St. John's Wort, and Vitamin E, the list goes on and on.

Well recently I received this article from the Alliance for Natural Health (a European organization) that does an excellent job of detailing exactly HOW pharmaceutical-backed interests use " scientific " experts" to compile evidence against natural remedies.

You need to know this information to help you understand how the medical and pharmaceutical industries are very clearly focused on keeping you on your drugs. It's all about money. They don't want anyone getting better, because then they lose massive amounts of money. Read on so you can educate yourself and become savvy about this insidious battle for your healthcare dollars...

________________________________________________________________

ANH Press Release-19 April 2006

META-ANALYSIS: a new tool to discredit natural health supplements?
By Dr Robert Verkerk, Executive & Scientific Director, Alliance for Natural Health

On 24 March 2006, The British Medical Journal' published a meta-analysis (a study of other studies) on omega-3 fatty acids [1] that prompted headlines around the world to the effect that "fish oils don't work". This is not the first time a meta-analysis has triggered headlines that discredit natural health supplements.


THE VITAMIN E META-ANALYSIS OF 2004
________________________________________________________________

In November 2004, Dr Edgar Miller and colleagues published electronically in the Annals of Internal Medicine a meta-analysis [2] that provided headlines as bizarre as "High dose vitamin E death warning" (this headline was run by none other than the BBC on 11 November 2004). The meta-analysis appeared to be pitched to tarnish the reputation of vitamin E, a nutrient in which many are known to be deficient. Among many of its problems, the study failed to show how healthy people would respond to supplemental intakes of vitamin E and it only included studies on synthetic vitamin E (dl-alpha-tocopherol). It therefore omitted any consideration of the effects of the seven other related compounds that make-up full spectrum, natural vitamin E, as found in vegetable oils. Interestingly, the body's absorption of the most important dietary form (gamma-tocopherol) is hindered by high doses of synthetic vitamin E, and this could have explained the negative results found by Miller et al.

The overall conclusion that high-dose vitamin E causes increased mortality could also have been a statistical artefact, with no biological relevance. Since the study assessed all-cause mortality, and not just cardiovascular mortality, other factors could easily have contributed to the greater death rate in the higher dose vitamin E group found when trials were pooled. It should be noted that the increased death rate was marginal; just 63 additional deaths per 10,000 persons, compared with the control group. Given that the confidence interval ranged from 6 to 119, this increased death rate cannot be said to be statistically significant.

Prior to this meta-analysis on vitamin E, market research data from Frost & Sullivan showed that vitamin E was the second most consumed single vitamin supplement, after vitamin C, in Europe. High-dose Vitamin E could have easily been perceived by Big Pharma as a threat to its huge cardiovascular drug market, comprised of statins, beta-blockers and ACE-inhibitors. In fact, Big Pharma had demonstrated such a strong interest in vitamins that it established an illegal cartel to control the markets and prices of a range of key vitamins, including vitamin E. Fortunately for the consumer, the conspiracy was eventually exposed and pharma companies like BASF and Hoffman-La Roche, as well as some of their top executives, got busted. Fines imposed by the US Justice Department in the US (May 1999) and, separately, by the European Commission (November 2001), which amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars in the US and similar amounts in Europe, are still among the largest ever imposed following an anti-trust investigation. Undeterred by this prosecution, Big Pharma continued its campaign against supplements, with the meta-analysis on vitamin E appearing in the peer-reviewed journal Annals of Internal Medicine just three years later.


THE ANTIOXIDANT VITAMIN META-ANALYSIS OF 2003
________________________________________________________________

A year earlier, in June 2003, another meta-analysis appeared. This one was published in the prestigious medical journal, the Lancet, by Dr Marc Penn and colleagues from the Cleveland Clinic [3]. These authors asserted that beta-carotene, vitamin A and other antioxidant vitamins such as vitamin E, were harmful. These authors re-iterated yet again negative results from a very small clutch of studies on synthetic vitamins like synthetic beta-carotene and vitamin E, which were once more administered to diseased or high risk subjects, and often for inadequate periods of time.

Following the publication of the meta-analysis, the lead author was quoted in the media saying that people should stop taking supplements containing vitamins A, beta-carotene and E. These conclusions, some of which were carried over into the vitamin E meta-analysis the following year, are profound misinterpretations of the existing evidence base, and most certainly cannot be applied to the role of these vitamins in reducing risks of chronic diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular disease in healthy people. Nor can these conclusions be applied to supplements containing natural forms of these vitamins.

Back to the omega-3 meta-analysis of 2006

Last month's attack on fish oils prompted by the meta-analysis by Dr Lee Hooper and his colleagues, as published in the BMJ, must surely be seen in the same light as the two meta-analyses discussed above. Put bluntly, the meta-analysis appears to be, once more, a vehicle to generate negative headlines. In fairness, even the authors have now conceded that they were "misquoted in much of the press." [4]

The scientific evidence for long chain omega-3 benefits on lowering triglycerides and other risk factors in heart disease, as well as clear, beneficial immune system modulation and behavioural effects, have been regarded by scientists, doctors and health authorities around the world as conclusive. This evidence has formed the basis of recommendations to consume oily fish or fish oil supplements by many governments. Where governments have stipulated a limit on the maximum amount to be consumed, such as no more than three portions of oily fish weekly, this has served mainly as a means to limit intake of heavy metals like mercury, or other contaminants such as dioxins or PCBs common in most wild fish [5]. Peculiarly, governments have appeared shy of recommending high-quality fish oil supplements which are often guaranteed as being free of any significant levels of these contaminants. This is particularly relevant given that specific batches of several low cost, mass market fish oil product lines have recently had to be withdrawn from the UK market owing to dioxin contamination (e.g. several Seven Seas [owned by pharma giant Merck] fish oil product batches were withdrawn on 14th March 2006, and on 11th March 2006 high street pharmacy chain Boots withdrew two batches of its own brand fish oil product).

In closely scrutinising Hooper et al''s paper, one thing becomes apparent: the findings are not nearly as damning as those suggested by the negative headlines on omega-3 fats that rebounded around the world for over a week. In fact, to the contrary; when it comes to the studies with fish oils only, the news appears just as rosy as we had all thought.

Ten out of 12 randomised control trials considered in the meta-analysis that assessed these oils in relation to total mortality point to positive findings. The same can be said for all three cohort studies considered by the meta-analysis authors. That's thirteen out of fifteen studies showing favourable results for higher intakes of omega-3 fats. The remaining two studies have been presented as showing very slightly negative findings, but in both cases the studies deal with existing disease states, either angina or coronary artery bypass grafts. The negative effects, in both cases, are so small that they could be regarded as having little or no biological relevance (in one study there was half a percent greater mortality in the treatment compared with control, while in the other there was a little over a 2% difference). The meta-analysis authors themselves considered both studies as being of medium to high risk of bias, which might in itself explain or at least contribute to such variations.

So, while the world was assaulted with headlines such as "The benefits of fish and linseed oils as elixir of life are another health myth" (this example being courtesy of The Times newspaper), we could have just as easily, and much more correctly, read headlines along the lines of: "New meta-analysis reinforces the health benefits of fish oils." But perhaps fewer newspapers would have sold on 24 and 25 March 2006.

Smearing the data with margarine

Even when Hooper and co-workers included studies with plant-derived, short chain omega-3 fats, such as those found in certain vegetable oils (e.g. flax) including margarines, the overall trend still pointed to reduced mortality for those consuming higher intake levels of all forms of omega-3.

The study that was presented as having the most pronounced apparent negative effect was one published in 2002 by Groningen University's Dr Wanda Bemelmans and colleagues [6]. The study, known as the MARGARIN trial, investigated the effect on heart disease risk of a Unilever margarine enriched with alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), an important short-chain omega-3 found to be rich in Mediterranean diets, well known for their health promoting properties. The study also aimed to assess the effect of group education on the benefits associated with consuming a typical Mediterranean diet. Importantly, the subjects in the study all had multiple cardiovascular risk factors; nearly half were smokers and took anti-hypertensive drugs, while over 40% had family histories of cardiovascular risk.

Bemelmans and colleagues' own findings, in contrast to their interpretation of these findings in the Hooper et al meta-analysis, are overwhelmingly positive. They demonstrate clearly the beneficial effects of ALA-enriched margarine on reducing heart disease risk. The study also shows that group education led to healthier diets, with increased consumption of fish, and consequently lower heart disease risk factors. These findings are actually fully in line with another major study, the Lyons Diet Heart Study, published in 1994 in the Lancet, which actually provided the inspiration for Bemelmans and colleagues' MARGARIN trial.

So, how was this study distorted to give the impression that omega-3 fats might be bad for you? This is down to the very small number of deaths recorded, which could just as easily be a function of chance rather than any treatment effect. The study included only four deaths out of 266 subjects in total. The omega-3 meta-analysis authors managed to blacken this study because 3 out of 4 of these deaths (again from all-causes, not just cardiovascular disease) occurred in the high ALA, treatment group, while only one was in the low ALA, control group. This small number of deaths could easily have been a function of random, 'statistical clustering', particularly given that risk factors appeared lower in the high ALA treatment group.

Dr Bemelmans has actually gone on public record since the release of Hooper et al''s meta-analysis questioning the way in which her study has been used, and how her and her co-authors' positive findings have been used to demonstrate negative findings in the meta-analysis.

Just as importantly, since the omega-3 sources are vegetable oils in margarine, it is not surprising that the benefits are perhaps less pronounced given the inefficient and limited conversion by the human body of plant-derived omega-3s to key long chain fatty acids like eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) that are abundant in fish oils. Additionally, harmful trans fats in margarine could have been an additional confounding factor.

Cutting to the chase

Looking at all of the data in the omega-3 meta-analysis, the only area where it is possible to interpret a tendency towards very slightly negative effects, is in the case of randomised control trials (but not cohort studies) looking at the effects of omega-3 fats on cancer and stroke. However, these results could just as easily be the result of bias or confounding factors, inadequate periods of supplementation, or even the effects of contaminants in fish or fish oil capsules.

For the BMJ''s own view on the subject, it is worth referring to the Editorial published on 24 March which focuses on Hooper et al's meta-analysis. Contrary to the thrust of the meta-analysis itself, and the related media, the Editorial takes a rather positive line on omega-3s, and demonstrates concern over dwindling supplies of marine-derived omega-3s.

Citing directly from the Editorial:
"For the general public some omega 3 fat is good for health..... Adequate intake of omega 3 fats is particularly important for women of childbearing age...... We are faced with a paradox. Health recommendations advise increased consumption of oily fish and fish oils, within limits, on the grounds that intake is generally low. However, industrial fishing has depleted the world's fish stocks by some 90% since 1950, and rising fish prices reduce affordability particularly for people with low incomes. Global production trends suggest that, although fish farming is expanding rapidly, we probably do not have a sustainable supply of long chain omega 3 fats."

Additionally, there are now many Rapid Responses published in the BMJ which reinforce problems with the authors' conclusions. These can be found at: ? http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/332/7544/752.

Let you be the judge. I don't believe many people who read the full Hooper et al meta-analysis, as well as the BMJ editorial and Rapid Responses, would stop taking fish oil supplements. The problem is that only a tiny proportion of the population will do this. Many more will succumb to the negative headlines triggered by the meta-analysis and, contrary to the vast weight of evidence, they now run the risk of going against government advice to increase consumption of oily fish or fish oil supplements at recommended doses.

Those very few who interrogate the evidence considered by Hooper and colleagues might actually decide to alter their sources of omega-3 fats, shifting in the direction of high quality fish oil supplements and away from vegetarian sources of omega-3 and even oily fish, which runs the risk of contamination. This way, they can be guaranteed specific amounts of long-chain EPA and DHA, as well as being confident they are consuming products that are certified as free from contaminants.

So, despite the headlines, there is no new evidence clouding the efficacy of fish oils or long chain essential fatty acids. In fact, if the meta-analysis had included other health benefits such as immune system function, cognitive and behavioural function and joint health, the case for marine-derived omega-3s would have looked even stronger. So strong, in fact, one wonders if the media couldn't be sued by fish oil supplement manufacturers for damages. But things are rarely this simple.

We are left wondering about those negative headlines. Could there have been a motive for the negative spin?

Pharma fish oils

Just as we've seen Big Pharma control vitamin and mineral markets globally, both legally and illegally, is it not possible that this most recent skewed meta-analysis is part of a plan to discredit fish oils consumed increasingly by the masses?

When you peruse the competing interests declared in the BMJ paper, the only possible link given is that speaker fees have been paid to one of the authors by a company, Solvay, that markets a product called Omacor. Solvay is not a small marketing outfit. It is part of an international chemical and pharmaceutical group, headquartered in Brussels, which employs some 33,000 people across 50 countries. Omacor also happens to be the first prescription-only fish oil. As a licensed medicine, unlike the much more common fish oil food or dietary supplements, it can brandish extensive health and medicinal claims. Omacor, manufactured by Pronova Biocare in Norway (a private, limited company owned by Ferd Private Equity Fund), is prescribed primarily for reducing triglycerides (a major heart disease risk factor) and is positioned firmly as a stable mate with cholesterol-reducing statin drugs. In other words, the evidence for taking high quality fish oils is so convincing, drugs companies perhaps now want a slice of the action.

And the timing for the release of the meta-analysis does appear most fortuitous. In November 2004, Omacor was approved as a drug by the US Food & Drug Administration. In September 2005, Solvay Pharmaceuticals and Pronova Biocare signed a licensing agreement for exclusive distribution rights for distribution into India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Vietnam, Singapore, Malaysia, China, Hong Kong and New Zealand.

Furthermore, on 1 December 2005, EPAX Sales and Production de-merged from Pronova Biocare to enable Pronova to focus exclusively on the production of prescription-only Omacor. EPAX, also based in Norway, will continue to produce concentrated omega-3 oils for the 'poor-cousin', dietary supplement industry.

Is the way actually being paved to encourage patients to elect for the prescription-only fish oil version, resplendent with all the health claims allowed under a drugs regime and banned in the food or dietary supplement sector? Even if these processes are only coincidental, and we currently have no direct evidence to suggest otherwise, the effect is the same.
The crying shame from a public health and disease prevention perspective, is that some of the most robust evidence for taking fish oils relates to their early, protective effects against heart disease. And that's why the free availability of high quality fish oil supplements is so important; people only take drugs when they become sick.

So now, those people - and there may be many - who have been unfairly frightened away from fish oil supplements might believe that they need to wait until they're sick in later life before their trusted doctors can prescribe the fish oil supplements they should have been consuming all along.

It is indeed a topsy-turvy world of lies, damn lies - and statistics.

REFERENCES
1. Hooper L, Thompson RL, Harrison RA, Summerbell CD, Ness AR, Moore HJ, Worthington HV, Durrington PN, Higgins JP, Capps NE, Riemersma RA, Ebrahim SB, Davey Smith G. Risks and benefits of omega 3 fats for mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: systematic review. British Medical Journal, 2006; 332 (7544): 752-60.
2. Miller ER 3rd, Pastor-Barriuso R, Dalal D, Riemersma RA, Appel LJ, Guallar E. Meta-analysis: high-dosage vitamin E supplementation may increase all-cause mortality. Annals of Internal Medicine, 2005; 142(1): 37-46.
3. Vivekananthan DP, Penn MS, Sapp SK, Hsu A, Topol EJ. Use of antioxidant vitamins for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet, 2003; 361(9374): 2017-23.
4. Hooper L, Thompson RL, Harrison RA, Summerbell CD, Ness AR, Moore HJ, Worthington HV, Durrington PN, Higgins JP, Capps NE, Riemersma RA, Ebrahim SB, Davey Smith G. Rapid Response in British Medical Journal: Authors reply - omega 3s and health. http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/332/7544/752#131349 [last accessed 19 April 2006].
5. Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition / Committee on Toxicity (UK). Advice on fish consumption: benefits and risks. Food Standards Agency / Department of Health. 2004. 204 pp.
6. Bemelmans WJ, Broer J, Feskens EJ, Smit AJ, Muskiet FA, Lefrandt JD, Bom VJ, May JF, Meyboom-de Jong B. Effect of an increased intake of alpha-linolenic acid and group nutritional education on cardiovascular risk factors: the Mediterranean Alpha-linolenic Enriched Groningen Dietary Intervention (MARGARIN) study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2002; 75(2): 221-7.

For further information, please contact:
Alliance for Natural Health?The Atrium, Dorking,?Surrey RH4 1XA, United Kingdom?Tel: +44 (0)1252 371 275? Email: info@anhcampaign.org
This article may be copied, downloaded, printed and distributed freely as long as it is not modified in any way.
Web: www.anhcampaign.org

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

JINI HAS MORE VERY VALUABLE INFORMATION ON HER SITE.  
                                  READ MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE ARTICLESThere are many more excellent articles available at my blog: 
http://www.listen2yourgut.com/blog

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

JINI'S POLICY FOR SHARING/REPUBLISHING HER ARTICLES

You are welcome to publish this newsletter, or send it on to whomever you wish,
so long as you include this copyright notice:
Copyright 2011 Jini Patel Thompson
Jini is the author of numerous books on natural healing
methods for IBS, Crohn's, diverticulitis and colitis.
http://www.listen2yourgut.com

*ViDEO*Semi-Vegetarian Diet & Effects On Reaching Remission in Crohn's Disease -

"Meat (including fish),  cheese, and animal protein intake in general have been associated with an increased risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In the meantime, plant-based diets may not only help prevent such conditions, but treat them as well, resulting in the longest recorded remission rates for Crohn’s disease."

Dietary Treatment of Crohn's Disease | NutritionFacts.org:

'via Blog this'

Canada Researchers from Hotchkiss Brain Institute & Snyder Institute for Chronic Illness Discover New Findings for the Developing Treatments for IBD

This is a few moths old, but thought it was a good read and pretty interesting. 


Monday March 19, 2012

Research provides new hope for those suffering from Crohn’s Disease
Calgary, Alberta- Researchers from the Hotchkiss Brain Institute (HBI) and the Snyder
Institute for Chronic Diseases at the University of Calgary’s Faculty of Medicine have
discovered a pathway that may contribute to the symptoms related to Crohn’s disease and
ulcerative colitis, collectively known as Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD).  This
research is a major milestone in developing future drug therapies for those living with
these debilitating disorders.
The digestive process is complex.  To coordinate the many functions involved in
digestion, the gut has its own set of nerve cells (neurons), often called the “second brain”.
Crohn’s disease is characterized by inflammation in the gut, leading to damage or death
of millions of these neurons lining the gastrointestinal tract.  As a consequence, patients
are left with a host of debilitating symptoms including abdominal pain and numerous
disruptive digestive conditions.  Using translatable animal models, these new research
findings have identified “pannexins” as molecules that mediate gut neuron death and, as
such, may allow for the development of new treatments to prevent it.
“Our work identifies a critical mechanism of neuron death in intestinal inflammation that
appears relevant to IBD,” says Brian Gulbransen, PhD, the study’s lead author and a
postdoctoral fellow at the University of Calgary’s HBI.  “We used animal models of
intestinal inflammation to show that blocking the “pannexins” was able to prevent gut
neuron death.  Interestingly, we found the “pannexins” involved in the death of mouse
gut neurons are also present in human gut neurons.”
Canada has one of the highest incidences of IBD in the world and it affects over 200,000
Canadians.  Previously, researchers could not identify the cause of gut neuron death, and
therefore no therapeutic strategies exist to prevent it.  Current IBD treatment options are
limited to controlling inflammation, which frequently leaves patients to still suffer with
chronic gut dysfunction.  “Although our research will not cure IBD, these findings could
lead to developing therapeutics for the debilitating symptoms in those who suffer from
Crohn’s disease,” says Keith Sharkey PhD, the senior author of the paper, the Crohn’s &
Colitis Foundation of Canada Chair in IBD Research, and member of the Snyder Institute
and Deputy Director of the HBI, at the University of Calgary.
This study is published in the April print edition of the prestigious journal Nature
Medicine (available online March 19)

'via Blog this'

C-Diff - More Common & More Severe According to Researchers - What's going on here?

The numbers are so high. I don't understand why there is this "drastic shift" when really if you read toward the end of this article, it discusses ways to prevent the spread of the bacteria.  It's basic, common sense actions like washing your hands frequently, use bleach when cleaning, ect.  Shouldn't the hospital staff do this no matter what for harm reduction purposes?  
Just like the fungal meningitis outbreak that could have been completely prevented if they followed protocol.  It all comes down to people being CARELESS.  CARELESSNESS KILLS.  Those 23 people should be alive today, but because of ad decisions made by people in the position to call the shots, these people didn't make it and many got very sick.  
I'm really getting sick of reading stories like this.  I'm getting sick of our medical system and how the billion dollar drug companies use unlawful ways to profit more $ (kickbacks people...its gotten corrupt because everyones motivation is wrong).  
Just everything ...I'm sick of the crazy prices of medictions these days.  Im extremely pissed off that doctors don't even discuss or look at family history/genetics before they jump on suggesting possibly deadly medications.   Biologic drugs ARE NOT for everyone.....(like me.... cancer runs on both sides of my family..& guess what kind of cancer? The exact type of cancer that the manufacturer reports that people have gotten from treatment with Biologics.  When a doctor just casually mentions that I should be on one of these drugs, it makes me want to punch them in the face.  
I ask them exactly what I want to know when I'm there.  This is our lives people.  Don't ever be intimidated by the man wearing the white coat with a medical degree.  Most of them shouldn't even have the degree.  Anyone can be a doctor these days.  There are brilliant doctors out there.... but finding them is either difficult because of persons' location and require some $ because the doctor is  extremely far.  Most people won't want to have that burden and will just settle with the stupid man that thinks he's smart.  LOL  I'm done venting now.  Carry on with the article.  You'll probably be just as  disgusted as me.  

Researchers See Dramatic Shifts in C. Diff Infections - Yahoo! News

Minnesota scientists studying the records of discharged hospital patients found some dramatic shifts in the infection Clostridium difficile. This germ is commonly referred to as C. diff.

The Mayo Clinic says its researchers examined five years of data from the National Hospital Discharge Study. They found that incidents of C. diff infections among two groups -- children and the elderly -- are becoming more frequent and are increasing in severity.

Of an estimated 13.7 million hospitalized children, 46,176 had C. diff infections. When compared to those without the illness, they had longer hospital stays, more surgeries for removal of part or all of the colon, more stays at long- or short-term healthcare facilities, and a greater risk of dying.

The scientists also followed 1.3 million adults who were in the hospital with C. diff. Those older than 65 experienced longer stays, were sent to nursing homes more frequently, and had a higher risk of dying than others. The researchers concluded that being older than 65 is an independent risk factor for negative outcomes linked to the infection.

C. diff is a bacterium that causes diarrhea and can result in serious intestinal conditions, according to MedlinePlus. Its most common symptoms are fever, watery diarrhea, nausea, loss of appetite, and/or abdominal pain or tenderness. The disease typically spreads in hospitals, nursing homes, or in other institutions.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that C. diff causes 14,000 U.S. deaths a year. The annual tab for treating it is at least $1 billion. The risk of recurrence after one infection is 20 percent. After multiple episodes, it rises to 60 percent.

Individuals who have taken antibiotics are particularly at risk. These drugs destroy beneficial flora in the intestine. Ironically, the main treatment for C. diff is antibiotics, typically oral metronidazole or vancomycin.

The Mayo Clinic states that despite the dramatic shift in these infections, several preventive measures are effective. They include washing hands frequently with soap and water, separating hospitalized patients with C. diff from others without the infection, cleaning surfaces with chlorine bleach, and equipping hospital staff and visitors with disposable gloves and gowns when around infected patients. When antibiotics are necessary, probiotics can help rebalance the intestines.

I have had at least three episodes of C. diff. Years ago, a gastroenterologist advised that patients with Crohn's disease -- particularly those like me on immunosuppressants -- are at elevated risk of contracting it.

I recently developed an infection in my foot that wouldn't go away. After 10 days of an antibiotic, I had several symptoms of C. diff. Since I take metronidazole periodically for Crohn's, I wondered if the bacteria might finally be resistant to it. I bypassed the drug. Each day for two weeks, I took a probiotic and ate yogurt. Fortunately, I avoided yet another C. diff infection.

Vonda J. Sines has published thousands of print and online health and medical articles. She specializes in diseases and other conditions that affect the quality of life.

 C-DIFF.... IS UGLY!
Researchers See Dramatic Shifts in C. Diff Infections - Yahoo! News:

      '   

Amy Brenneman-The Private Practice Actress ->Open about Having #IBD & Is A Proud Spokeswoman For The CCFA

Actress AMY BRENNEMAN has opened up about the secret surgery she underwent in January (10), revealing she had an operation to cure her from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

The Private Practice star previously refused to go into detail about what ailed her after she spent several days in hospital to correct a "longstanding and chronic problem".

But now she's gone public with her health battle - she was suffering from painful symptoms of IBD, a disease which can inflict sufferers with ulcers or open sores on their large intestine or colon.

She says, "I had a big old operation. I'd been suffering from ulcerative colitis for about five years and I had to have an operation to correct that... I'm great now."

Actress Amy Brenneman has stepped up as the spokeswoman for the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of America after suffering from inflammatory bowel disease for years.
 http://www.contactmusic.com/news/brenneman-underwent-surgery-for-intestinal-disease_1166943

The Private Practice star underwent surgery in 2010 to have her colon removed and she has been in good health ever since.

Brenneman was recently approached by organisers behind the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation to help raise awareness about the disease and she agreed to film a public service announcement to encourage others not to suffer in silence.

During an appearance on U.S. talk show The View on Monday (01Oct12), she said, "A lot of people suffer from it, it is not a glamorous disease. They (Foundation officials) wanted it to get some traction because there is something really private and embarrassing and strange about (inflammatory bowel disease)."

http://www.contactmusic.com/news/amy-brenneman-films-psa-for-bowel-disease-foundation_3307972#.UGssTLN2toQ.blogger

Actress AMY BRENNEMAN has opened up about the surgery she underwent in January (10) to correct a "longstanding and chronic problem".

The Heat star admits she was squirming in pain as her surgery approached and spent several days in hospital as her body "fell apart".

Brenneman refuses to go into details about what ailed her, but the 45 year old is relieved she's in recovery.

She tells website MomLogic.com, "It was as if my body knew that relief was in sight; that it didn't need to be a good camper anymore and hang on. Around January 15, it fell apart altogether and I found myself limping into the ER (emergency room).

"Everything went well. Of course it did - how could it not? I was with the top surgeon in the country for this sort of thing, at a major medical institution that did this kind of surgery all the time. I had sanitary surroundings, top-notch nursing and kind people constantly asking me if I was in pain - and if I was, doing something to rectify it.

"That said, the journey was not without drama. Because my body was failing, there were emergency situations, and I was in the emergency room three times in two weeks."

Brenneman admits she did a lot of thinking during her time in hospital: "When you're in physical distress, higher thoughts go out the window. Here I am - me, who loves thinking about God and art and politics and social justice; me, who is always looking for signs and portents and the Meaning Of Life - here are the kinds of thoughts I've had during the last month: 'I'm in pain. When am I not going to be in pain? I need to sleep. I need to eat. I'm cold. How can I get to the restroom with an IV and a catheter? And how the hell do the ties on a hospital gown work?'

"My world became very, very small. It reminded me of when my kids were newborns. Moment to moment - can't think beyond that. Eating, sleeping, pooping, crying. Elemental and animal. I was reduced to this.

"Perhaps by letting go of the search for the Meaning of Life, I stumbled into a piece of it, right there in hospital room 804."

http://www.contactmusic.com/news/brenneman-relieved-surgery-pain-is-over_1133834