Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Rat Paradise - Where Drug Addiction Is No Longer An Issue For Rats Or Humans Who Are Not In Cages

Rat Park - It's not the drug, it's the box [cage] ...
http://suboxforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=1444
 
In the late 1970's, Bruce Alexander conducted the Rat Park experiments in an attempt to better understand the effects of environment on addiction. Instead of keeping his junky (adicted) rats alone in a wire cage with nothing but heroin to do, he built them a rat paradise.

The rats in Rat Park showed some curious behavior: when presented with an unlimited supply of morphine, they chose plain fresh water instead. He even added sugar to the morphine water to make it more appealing, and still the rats just said No.
Quote:
A Skinner box is a cage equipped to condition an animal’s behaviour through reward or punishment. In a typical drug test, a surgically implanted catheter is hooked up to a drug supply that the animal self-administers by pressing a lever. Hundreds of trials showed that lab animals readily became slaves to such drugs as heroin, cocaine, and amphetamines. “They were said to prove that these kinds of dope are irresistible, and that’s it, that’s the end of the addiction story right there,” Alexander says. After one particularly fruitless seminar in 1976, he decided to run his own tests.

The problem with the Skinner box experiments, Alexander and his co-researchers suspected, was the box itself. To test that hypothesis, Alexander built an Eden for rats. Rat Park was a plywood enclosure the size of 200 standard cages. There were cedar shavings, boxes, tin cans for hiding and nesting, poles for climbing, and plenty of food. Most important, because rats live in colonies, Rat Park housed sixteen to twenty animals of both sexes.

Rats in Rat Park and control animals in standard laboratory cages had access to two water bottles, one filled with plain water and the other with morphine-laced water. The denizens of Rat Park overwhelmingly preferred plain water to morphine (the test produced statistical confidence levels of over 99.9 percent). Even when Alexander tried to seduce his rats by sweetening the morphine, the ones in Rat Park drank far less than the ones in cages. Only when he added naloxone, which eliminates morphine’s narcotic effects, did the rats in Rat Park start drinking from the water-sugar-morphine bottle. They wanted the sweet water, but not if it made them high.
The addicted rats in Rat Park even kicked their habits voluntarily when given the option to do so:
Quote:
In a variation he calls “Kicking the Habit,” Alexander gave rats in both environments nothing but morphine-laced water for fifty-seven days, until they were physically dependent on the drug. But as soon as they had a choice between plain water and morphine, the animals in Rat Park switched to plain water more often than the caged rats did, voluntarily putting themselves through the discomfort of withdrawal to do so.

Maybe this offers an explanation as to why some people can use addictive drugs without becoming addictive. It might also offer some ideas as to why addiction treatment so often fails. Maybe we're focused on the wrong things. Maybe we need to fix the issues that seem to so often foster addiction [Both physical and mental cages.]: poverty, loneliness, lack of community, lack of spirituality.

Well worth reading: A more in depth chapter from the book - Opening Skinner's Box by Lauren Slater is here.

More articles on Rat Paradise here:
http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/02/08/the-rat-park/
http://the-mouse-trap.blogspot.com/2008/02/rat-park-addiction-and-environmental.html
http://homelessnation.org/en/node/6949


You can read more about the Rat Park experiments here.

Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World


Sprouted Buckwheat is Simple and Delicious

Sprouted Buckwheat is Simple and Delicious

Tuesday, June 30, 2009 by: Sheryl Walters, citizen journalist
See all articles by this author
Email this author
http://www.naturalnews.com/026521_buckwheat_food_water.html

Key concepts: Buckwheat, Food and Water

(NaturalNews) Sprouting takes a nut or seed that is dormant and brings it to life. You can watch as a food that has been sitting in a bag on a shelf for months begins to grow a little sprout and transforms. One of the easiest foods to sprout is buckwheat. Buckwheat becomes packed with live enzymes and vital nutrients when sprouted.

Sprouted buckwheat is an amazing food because it tastes like a grain but is actually gluten and wheat free and not a grain at all. It is one of the most complete sources of protein on the planet, containing all eight essential amino acids. This makes it perfect for diabetics and those who want to cut down on their sugary carbohydrates and to balance their blood sugar levels. It is also known to lower high blood pressure. Sprouted buckwheat also cleanses the colon and alkalizes the body.

Buckwheat is a wonderful super food for people who have varicose veins or hardening of the arteries. One of the reasons is that it is full of rutin, which is a compound that is known as a powerful capillary wall strengthener. When veins become weak, blood and fluids accumulate and leak into nearby tissues, which may cause varicose veins or hemorrhoids.

This healing food is also rich in lecithin, making it a wonderful cholesterol balancer because lecithin soaks up "bad" cholesterol and prevents it from being absorbed. Lecithin neutralizes toxins and purifies the lymphatic system, taking some of the load off of the liver.

Sprouted buckwheat is also a brain boosting super food. 28% of the brain is actually made up of lecithin. Research suggests that regularly consuming foods rich in lecithin may actually prevent anxiety, depression, brain fog, mental fatigue and generally make the brain sharper and clearer.

Buckwheat is high in iron so it is a good blood builder. It also prevents osteoporosis because of its high boron and calcium levels.

Sprouted buckwheat is high in bioflavonoids, flavonols and co-enzyme Q10. It contains all of the B vitamins, magnesium, manganese, and selenium, as well as many other health giving compounds.

How to Sprout Buckwheat

Place 2/3 Cup of buckwheat groats into a bowl and cover it with 2- 3 5times as much room temperature water. Mix the seeds up so that none are floating on the top. Allow the seeds to soak for about an hour. You need to give them plenty of time to soak, but also remember that buckwheat groats can take in too much water which will keep them from sprouting.

Drain the water in a colander and let them stand, rinsing 3 times per day with cool water for 2 days. You will notice a goopy substance on the buckwheat, which is starch. Make sure that you wash this off thoroughly.

At first you will notice a brown spot, and will then see a little sprout coming out.

Sprouted Buckwheat Chocolate Banana Sundae
1 Banana
1 cup Sprouted Buckwheat
1 Teaspoon Raw Chocolate Powder
1 Teaspoon Lucuma
1 Teaspoon Agave Nectar
Splash of Warm Water

Smash up the banana and add all of the other ingredients. You can add more buckwheat if you want it thicker. This makes an amazing breakfast cereal or desert.

http://www.sproutpeople.com/seed/bw...
http://www.herbsarespecial.com.au
www.vegancoach.com/sprouted-buckwhe...

Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World

Sunday, June 28, 2009

An Inspiration For The World - Peru Reverses Policy And Decides To Better Protect The Amazon Instead Of Further Destruction

An Inspiration For The World - Peru Reverses Policy And Decides To Better Protect The Amazon Instead Of Further Destruction

defend a part of the ecosystem none of us can live without
.

people who live in the Amazon.
people have seen what has happened elsewhere in the Amazon when the oil companies arrive.

"My people are sick and dying because of Oxy. The water in our streams is not fit to drink and we can no longer eat the fish in our rivers or the animals in our forests."
toxic waste allegedly dumped after Chevron-Texaco's drilling has been blamed by an independent scientific investigation for 1,401 deaths, mostly of children from cancer.

do not want to see their forests felled and their lands poisoned.
preserve ... habitat

Some of Garcia's associates have been caught on tape talking about how to sell off the Amazon to their cronies.
"The government has been giving away our natural resources to the lowest bidders. This has not benefited Peru, but the administration's friends."

blockaded the rivers and roads to stop the oil companies getting anything in or out.
captured two valves of Peru's sole pipeline between the country's gas field and the coast, which could have led to fuel-rationing.
ake care of the forest, to save the life of the equator and the entire world."

"The earth has no price. It cannot be bought, or sold or exchanged. It is very important that white people, black people and indigenous peoples fight together to save the life of the forest and the earth.

something extraordinary happened.
The Peruvian Congress repealed the laws that allowed oil company drilling, by a margin of 82 votes to 12.
Garcia was forced to apologise for his "serious errors and exaggerations".

Human beings need to make far more decisions like this: to leave fossil fuels in the ground, and to leave rainforests standing.

Ecuador
leave ... country's largest oil reserve under the soil,
+++


Johann Hari: A fight for the Amazon that should inspire the world

The uprising In the Amazon is more urgent than Iran's - it will determine the future of the planet

Wednesday, 24 June 2009

While the world nervously watches the uprising in Iran, an even more important uprising has been passing unnoticed – yet its outcome will shape your fate, and mine.

In the depths of the Amazon rainforest, the poorest people in the world have taken on the richest people in the world to defend a part of the ecosystem none of us can live without. They had nothing but wooden spears and moral force to defeat the oil companies – and, for today, they have won.

Here's the story of how it happened – and how we all need to pick up this fight. Earlier this year, Peru's right-wing President, Alan Garcia, sold the rights to explore, log and drill 70 per cent of his country's swathe of the Amazon to a slew of international oil companies. Garcia seems to see rainforest as a waste of good resources, saying of the Amazon's trees: "There are millions of hectares of timber there lying idle."

There was only one pesky flaw in Garcia's plan: the indigenous people who live in the Amazon. They are the first people of the Americas, subject to wave after wave of genocide since the arrival of the Conquistadors. They are weak. They have no guns. They barely have electricity. The government didn't bother to consult them: what are a bunch of Indians going to do anyway?

But the indigenous people have seen what has happened elsewhere in the Amazon when the oil companies arrive. Occidental Petroleum are facing charges in US courts of dumping an estimated nine billion barrels of toxic waste in the regions of the Amazon where they operated from 1972 to 2000. Andres Sandi Mucushua, the spiritual leader of the area known to the oil companies as Block (12A)B, said in 2007: "My people are sick and dying because of Oxy. The water in our streams is not fit to drink and we can no longer eat the fish in our rivers or the animals in our forests." The company denies liability, saying they are "aware of no credible data of negative community health impacts".

In the Ecuadorian Amazon, according to an independent report, toxic waste allegedly dumped after Chevron-Texaco's drilling has been blamed by an independent scientific investigation for 1,401 deaths, mostly of children from cancer. When the BBC investigator Greg Palast put these charges to Chevron's lawyer, he replied: "And it's the only case of cancer in the world? How many cases of children with cancer do you have in the States?... They have to prove it's our crude, [which] is absolutely impossible."

The people of the Amazon do not want to see their forests felled and their lands poisoned. And here, the need of the indigenous peoples to preserve their habitat has collided with your need to preserve your habitat. The rainforests inhale massive amounts of warming gases and keep them stored away from the atmosphere. Already, we are chopping them down so fast that it is causing 25 per cent of man-made carbon emissions every year – more than planes, trains and automobiles combined. But it is doubly destructive to cut them down to get to fossil fuels, which then cook the planet yet more. Garcia's plan was to turn the Amazon from the planet's air conditioner into its fireplace.

Why is he doing this? He was responding to intense pressure from the US, whose new Free Trade Pact requires this "opening up", and from the International Monetary Fund, paid for by our taxes. In Peru, it has also been alleged that the ruling party, APRA, is motivated by oil bribes. Some of Garcia's associates have been caught on tape talking about how to sell off the Amazon to their cronies. The head of the parliamentary committee investigating the affair, Rep. Daniel Abugattas, says: "The government has been giving away our natural resources to the lowest bidders. This has not benefited Peru, but the administration's friends."

So the indigenous peoples acted in their own self-defence, and ours. Using their own bodies and weapons made from wood, they blockaded the rivers and roads to stop the oil companies getting anything in or out. They captured two valves of Peru's sole pipeline between the country's gas field and the coast, which could have led to fuel-rationing. Their leaders issued a statement explaining: "We will fight together with our parents and children to take care of the forest, to save the life of the equator and the entire world."

Garcia responded by sending in the military. He declared a "state of emergency" in the Amazon, suspending almost all constitutional rights. Army helicopters opened fire on the protesters with live ammunition and stun-grenades. More than a dozen were killed. But the indigenous peoples did not run away. Even though they were risking their lives, they stood their ground. One of their leaders, Davi Yanomami, said simply: "The earth has no price. It cannot be bought, or sold or exchanged. It is very important that white people, black people and indigenous peoples fight together to save the life of the forest and the earth. If we don't fight together, what will our future be?"

And then something extraordinary happened. The indigenous peoples won. The Peruvian Congress repealed the laws that allowed oil company drilling, by a margin of 82 votes to 12. Garcia was forced to apologise for his "serious errors and exaggerations". The protesters have celebrated and returned to their homes deep in the Amazon.

Of course, the oil companies will regroup and return – but this is an inspirational victory for the forces of sanity that will be hard to reverse.

Human beings need to make far more decisions like this: to leave fossil fuels in the ground, and to leave rainforests standing. In microcosm, this rumble in the jungle is the fight we all face now. Will we allow a small number of rich people to make a short-term profit from seizing and burning resources, at the expense of our collective ability to survive?

If this sounds like hyperbole, listen to Professor Jim Hansen, the world's leading climatologist, whose predictions have consistently turned out to be correct. He says: "Clearly, if we burn all fossil fuels, we will destroy the planet we know. We would set the planet on a course to the ice-free state, with a sea level 75 metres higher. Coastal disasters would occur continually. The only uncertainty is the time it would take for complete ice sheet disintegration."

Of course, fossil fools will argue that the only alternative to burning up our remaining oil and gas supplies is for us all to live like the indigenous peoples in the Amazon. But next door to Peru, you can see a very different, environmentally sane model to lift up the poor emerging – if only we will grasp it.

Ecuador is a poor country with large oil resources underneath its rainforests – but its president, Rafael Correa, is offering us the opposite of Garcia's plan. He has announced that he is willing to leave his country's largest oil reserve under the soil, if the rest of the world will match the $9.2bn in revenues it would provide.

If we don't start reaching for these alternatives, we will render this month's victory in the Amazon meaningless. The Hadley Centre in Exeter, one of the most sophisticated scientific centres for studying the impacts of global warming, has warned that if we carry on belching out greenhouse gases at the current rate, the humid Amazon will dry up and burn down – and soon.

Their study earlier this year explained" Their study earlier this year explained: "The Amazonian rainforest is likely to suffer catastrophic damage even with the lowest temperature rises forecast under climate change. Up to 40 per cent of the rainforest will be lost if temperature rises are restricted to C, which most climatologists regard as the least that can be expected by 2050. A 3C rise is likely to result in 75 per cent of the forest disappearing while a 4C rise, regarded as the most likely increase this century unless greenhouse gas emissions are slashed, will kill off 85 per cent of the forest." That would send gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere – making the world even more inhabitable.

There is something thrilling about the fight in the Amazon, yet also something shaming. These people had nothing, but they stood up to the oil companies. We have everything, yet too many of us sit limp and passive, filling up our tanks with stolen oil without a thought for tomorrow. The people of the Amazon have shown they are up for the fight to save our ecosystem. Are we?

Johann Hari is a writer for the Independent. To read more of his articles, click here.

j.hari@independent.co.uk



Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World


Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Obama Running Scared - Scared To Make Single Payer Health Care For Everyone

Nearly all Republicans and some moderate Democrats oppose any public plan option.
These are the same lawmakers who receive many government-provided perks including health insurance.

Obama should tear a page out of LBJ's vote-getting manual and shame the heartless opponents.

The health of all Americans is our business.
+++

Obama Running Scared

by Helen Thomas

A universal health care system based on the single-payer model appears to be a bridge too far for President Barack Obama.

A single-payer system, such as Medicare for everyone, would provide health care for all.

President Lyndon Johnson had the courage to weigh in with all his clout to win passage of Medicare and Medicaid.

President Roosevelt put all his chips on the table to win passage of the Social Security Act that makes the elderly more secure.

All around the world, governments have long made medical care available for their citizens. Why not us?

Obama clearly has no stomach for the political battle that any single-payer plan would ignite. So he's endorsed a step that would allow the government to provide health insurance coverage -- not health care -- to eligible people. Such government-sponsored health insurance is being considered in Congress as it writes health care reform legislation.

While the public plan option gets full consideration in Congress, the single-payer model has been unwelcome at the White House or on Capitol Hill.

Obama said part of the fierce opposition to health care reform has been fueled "by some interest groups and lobbyists -- opposition that has used fear tactics to paint any effort to achieve reform as an attempt to, yes, socialize medicine."

He made it clear that his idea of health care reform would allow patients to choose their own doctors and keep their own health plans.

Somehow government bailouts have been more palatable for Wall Street plutocrats who happen to be needy.

Obama stressed in a speech to the AMA in Chicago last week that he does not favor socialized medicine.

Some 47 million Americans are uninsured -- many because some employers have dropped coverage in the economic downturn. Others lack insurance because pre-existing illnesses deny them access to private insurance. There also are millions with no way to pay for soaring health insurance payments because they have lost their jobs.

Nearly all Republicans and some moderate Democrats oppose any public plan option. These are the same lawmakers who receive many government-provided perks including health insurance.

In his remarks to the AMA, Obama warned against "scare tactics" and "fear mongering" by opponents of the public plan option, which the President said should be available to those who have no health insurance.

Obama rejected the "illegitimate concern that's being put forward by those who are claiming that a public option is somehow a Trojan horse for a single-payer system."

Obama should tear a page out of LBJ's vote-getting manual and shame the heartless opponents.

The health of all Americans is our business.



Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Children Taking Ritalin & Other ADHD Meds Has 5 Times Risk Of Sudden Cardiac Death

stimulants used to treat children for so-called ADHD can cause sudden cardiac arrest and death in kids.

drugs includes amphetamines like Adderall and Dexedrine and methylphenidate products such as Ritalin, Concerta, and Focalin.

Children and youth age 7 to 19 taking prescribed Ritalin for ADHD were four to five times more likely to die of sudden unexplained cardiac arrest than other children who were not taking Ritalin.

the study was skewed to hide just how many children die of sudden death when taking Ritalin.

Unconscionable, the study researchers were trying not to prove that stimulants cause sudden death in children.

There is also evidence from studies of stimulant addicts and case reports that stimulant drugs can cause heart disease, including inflammation and scarring. When drugs like Ritalin and Adderall are prescribed in routine pediatric doses, they commonly cause hypertension, which can lead to an enlarged heart. Yet children with even slightly enlarged hearts were excluded from the study. So the researchers ended up excluding any children with enlarged hearts caused by the stimulant treatment itself.

The same is true in regard to anorexia. Stimulants commonly cause anorexia. The researchers therefore excluded cases of stimulant-induced death in anorexic patients when the anorexia itself could have been caused by the stimulant.


the answer to this problem is simple.
Don't give stimulants to children.

There are far better non-drug ways to deal with so-called ADHD.

Very often these children improve dramatically when parents develop a more consistent, rational and loving plan for discipline.

Sometimes the problem completely disappears when the child is assigned a better teacher.

the child may be especially full of life and need more opportunity to run, to play, and to be creative.

these children ... don't need toxic drugs that can lead to drug addiction, cause psychosis and depression, stunt growth, impair brain function, and even cause sudden cardiac arrest. 

Our children  ... need us to protect them from misguided health professionals while we make every effort to meet their real needs in our families and schools.
+++


Children taking ADHD medication may be at risk of sudden cardiac death, study finds

Thursday, June 18th 2009, 4:00 AM

A study that links ADHD drugs to an increased risk of sudden cardiac death in children may be driving parents crazy.

If your child has ADHD, a new federally funded study that links ADHD drugs like Ritalin to an increased risk of sudden cardiac death may be making you crazy.

But mental health experts say the research is not conclusive enough for parents to necessarily take their children and teenagers off their medication.

The FDA is saying that the study has its limitations and should not necessarily change the way the stimulant drugs are used, according to WebMD.

The study, funded by the National Institute of Mental Health and the FDA, identified 564 children and teenagers who had died suddenly for unexplained reasons, and who had no structural heart defects.

Researchers also looked at 564 young people who had died as passengers in car accidents, many of whose deaths were later attributed to undiagnosed cardiac problems.

The researchers concluded that the odds of using a stimulant like Ritalin were six to seven times higher among the children who had died suddenly of unexplained causes than among those who died in auto accidents.

The study, which will appear in The American Journal of Psychiatry, does not prove that ADHD drugs cause cardiac deaths but they highlight the importance of screening kids and teens for heart problems before putting them on a stimulant medication, says Charlotte Armstrong, a NIMH spokesperson.

"One of the concerns is that there need to be improvements in screening for cardiac abnormalities in young people before putting them on medications like Ritalin," she says.

She also stressed the need for more studies.

"The bigger the numbers they can look at, the better," Armstrong says.

Dr. Ramon Solhkhah, director of the Child and Family Institute of St. Luke’s Roosevelt Hospital, says that while medication is the "gold standard of treatment for moderate to severe ADHD," some kids may benefit from non-drug therapies.

"There are definitely some behavioral and lifestyle changes that could be beneficial," he says. "These include cognitive behavioral therapy, certain organizational skills, more individual attention in the classroom and life coaches who can get kids organized."

Chiropractor Gerard Clum notes that many young people with ADHD can benefit from chiropractic techniques.

"A number of case reports have been published with chiropractic care and there has been a positive resolution in the severity of symptoms," he says.

And Dr. Robert Melillo, author of "Disconnected Kids," recommends not just behavioral modification, but careful attention to diet and nutrition.

"ADHD medications can help with symptoms," he says. "But there are a lot of alternatives out there that address the underlying problem."
===



Dr. Peter Breggin

Stimulants for ADHD Shown to Cause Sudden Death in Children
Dr. Peter Breggin

Posted: June 17, 2009 03:04 PM

A new study, published Monday in the American Journal of Psychiatry, confirms what I've been warning about for years in my scientific books and articles. The stimulants used to treat children for so-called ADHD can cause sudden cardiac arrest and death in kids. The study was published by the journal online in advance of regular publication in the near future. On Monday, I had the opportunity to comment on the study on Good Morning America. Here is more detail.

The stimulant group of drugs includes amphetamines like Adderall and Dexedrine and methylphenidate products such as Ritalin, Concerta, and Focalin. The study focused on Ritalin because at the time it was more commonly used than the amphetamines, although amphetamines are probably even more toxic to the heart.

The results of the study were as dramatic as they are tragic. Children and youth age 7 to 19 taking prescribed Ritalin for ADHD were four to five times more likely to die of sudden unexplained cardiac arrest than other children who were not taking Ritalin.

Despite these ominous results, the study was skewed to hide just how many children die of sudden death when taking Ritalin. The study relied heavily on identifying cases through toxicology reports at autopsy. But autopsy studies for the detection of these controlled substances are geared to detect more massive doses from addiction and overdose. They are not sensitive enough to detect many cases of routine prescription use. As a result, many stimulant-caused deaths were probably missed.

Also, the study excluded a large number of sudden deaths if the children had even the slightest evidence of pre-existing heart disease. They excluded these children even when the coroner thought that heart disease played no role in the death. For example, if a child was taking stimulants and had minimal heart disease, such as a slightly enlarged heart, the researchers didn't include the case as a possible death due to the stimulant. They also did not count children who were severely obese, anorexic, or asthmatic. But all of these children, especially ones with undetected heart disease, are much more highly at risk for of stimulant-induced sudden death. They even excluded children whose parents had some forms of heart disease.

It's as if they did not want to confirm the obvious--that an examination of children with heart disease and related disorders would swell the numbers of those killed by Ritalin. In fact, the current FDA approved label specifically mentions the risk of cardiac sudden death when Ritalin is given to children with heart conditions.

Unconscionable, the study researchers were trying not to prove that stimulants cause sudden death in children. They made the findings despite their own attempts to avoid it. I was not surprised to find that some of the researchers for this study are among the biggest advocates of psychiatric medications for children.

Sudden cardiac death in children is rare, probably occurring--as the study notes--in a slightly little less than 1 in 100,000 children. But we need to take a few other facts into account. First, the rate is going to be much higher in children taking stimulant drugs. Not just the four or five times higher found in this study, but many more times higher when vulnerable children are included such as those with undetected heart disease, severe obesity, asthma, or anorexia. Second, stimulant drugs are one of the few causes of cardiac death in otherwise normal children, making it impossible to detect the risk before it happens.

There is also evidence from studies of stimulant addicts and case reports that stimulant drugs can cause heart disease, including inflammation and scarring. When drugs like Ritalin and Adderall are prescribed in routine pediatric doses, they commonly cause hypertension, which can lead to an enlarged heart. Yet children with even slightly enlarged hearts were excluded from the study. So the researchers ended up excluding any children with enlarged hearts caused by the stimulant treatment itself.

The same is true in regard to anorexia. Stimulants commonly cause anorexia. The researchers therefore excluded cases of stimulant-induced death in anorexic patients when the anorexia itself could have been caused by the stimulant.

Meanwhile the psychiatric establishment--represented by American Psychiatric Association, NIMH and drug companies--has been quick to dismiss the importance of the study. Instead, they should be emphasizing that the study detected the risk even though the highest risk patients were excluded, including some who were displaying toxic stimulant effects such as heart disease and anorexia.

Meanwhile, it's hard to imagine a greater tragedy for the surviving family than the unexpected death of a child from taking a medication prescribed by a doctor. I've been involved as a medical expert or consultant for families in several tragic cases of stimulant-induced cardiac death. I've also been an expert in cases of suicide in children caused by stimulants. These tragic deaths are always heartbreaking. Years afterward, the emotional wounds remain as raw as ever for their parents and brothers and sisters. The family's trust for doctors and the healthcare system can be forever shattered.

Yet the answer to this problem is simple. Don't give stimulants to children. There are far better non-drug ways to deal with so-called ADHD. ADHD is defined as involving hyperactivity, inattention, and impulsivity. These are not diseases--they are disciplinary and educational problems. Very often these children improve dramatically when parents develop a more consistent, rational and loving plan for discipline. Sometimes the problem completely disappears when the child is assigned a better teacher.

At times the child diagnosed with ADHD is simply a little delayed in learning self-discipline or finding the motivation to study. Often something is distressing the youngster, such as peer ridicule and abuse. Or the child may be especially full of life and need more opportunity to run, to play, and to be creative.

Whatever these children need, they don't need toxic drugs that can lead to drug addiction, cause psychosis and depression, stunt growth, impair brain function, and even cause sudden cardiac arrest. I describe and document all of these adverse stimulant effects, and many more, in my medical book, Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry: Drugs, Electroshock, and the Psychopharmaceutical Complex, Second Edition (2008).

Our children don't need drugs--they need us to protect them from misguided health professionals while we make every effort to meet their real needs in our families and schools. It's time for all of us to retake responsibility for our children.

Dr. Breggin's latest book is Medication Madness: The Role of Psychiatric Drugs in Cases of Violence, Suicide and Crime (St. Martin's, 2008). It is now in paperback.

Dr. Breggin's website is www.breggin.com.



Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World


Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Eating Meat Is Not Natural - Our Bodies Have Never Adapted To It - It Is A Recent Phenomenom In Human Evolution

Eating Meat Is Not Natural
a relatively
recent phenomenon in human evolution.
our bodies have never adapted to it.

our basic biochemical functionality
depends on the nutrient composition of plant-based foods.

largely plant-based diet, drawing on foods we can pick with our hands.
meat-eaters have a higher incidence of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other problems.”  

humans are herbivores.
like the intestines of other herbivores, ours are very long
(carnivores have short intestines so they can quickly get rid of all that rotting flesh they eat)

we don’t need [meat]
human beings are not natural carnivores.

when we choose to eat meat, that causes problems,
from decreased energy and a need for more sleep
up to increased risk for obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer.
 

top nutritional and anthropological scientists from the most reputable institutions imaginable
say categorically that humans are natural herbivores

we will be healthier today if we stick with our herbivorous roots.

+++


Eating Meat Is Not Natural

By Kathy Freston, AlterNet. Posted June 15, 2009.

Eating meat is a relatively recent phenomenon in human evolution. And our bodies have never adapted to it.


Going through the reader feedback on some of my recent articles, I noticed the frequently stated notion that eating meat was an essential step in human evolution. While this notion may comfort the meat industry, it’s simply not true, scientifically. 

Dr. T. Colin Campbell, professor emeritus at Cornell University and author of The China Study (please check out the link), explains that in fact, we only recently (historically speaking) began eating meat, and that the inclusion of meat in our diet came well after we became who we are today. He explains that “the birth of agriculture only started about 10,000 years ago at a time when it became considerably more convenient to herd animals. This is not nearly as long as the time [that] fashioned our basic biochemical functionality (at least tens of millions of years) and which functionality depends on the nutrient composition of plant-based foods.” 

That jibes with what Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine President Dr. Neal Barnard says in his book, The Power of Your Plate, in which he explains that “early humans had diets very much like other great apes, which is to say a largely plant-based diet, drawing on foods we can pick with our hands. Research suggests that meat-eating probably began by scavenging -- eating the leftovers that carnivores had left behind. However, our bodies have never adapted to it. To this day, meat-eaters have a higher incidence of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other problems.”  

There is no more authoritative source on anthropological issues than paleontologist Dr. Richard Leakey, who explains what anyone who has taken an introductory physiology course might have discerned intuitively -- that humans are herbivores. Leakey notes that “[y]ou can’t tear flesh by hand, you can’t tear hide by hand ... We wouldn’t have been able to deal with food source that required those large canines” (although we have teeth that are called “canines,” they bear little resemblance to the canines of carnivores).  

In fact, our hands are perfect for grabbing and picking fruits and vegetables. Similarly, like the intestines of other herbivores, ours are very long (carnivores have short intestines so they can quickly get rid of all that rotting flesh they eat).  We don’t have sharp claws to seize and hold down prey.  And most of us (hopefully) lack the instinct that would drive us to chase and then kill animals and devour their raw carcasses. Dr. Milton Mills builds on these points and offers dozens more in his essay, “A Comparative Anatomy of Eating.”  

The point is this: Thousands of years ago when we were hunter-gatherers, we may have needed a bit of meat in our diets in times of scarcity, but we don’t need it now.  Says Dr. William C. Roberts, editor of the American Journal of Cardiology, “Although we think we are, and we act as if we are, human beings are not natural carnivores.  When we kill animals to eat them, they end up killing us, because their flesh, which contains cholesterol and saturated fat, was never intended for human beings, who are natural herbivores.”   

Sure, most of us are “behavioral omnivores” -- that is, we eat meat, so that defines us as omnivorous. But our evolution and physiology are herbivorous, and ample science proves that when we choose to eat meat, that causes problems, from decreased energy and a need for more sleep up to increased risk for obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer.  

Old habits die hard, and it’s convenient for people who like to eat meat to think that there is evidence to support their belief that eating meat is “natural” or the cause of our evolution. For many years, I too, clung to the idea that meat and dairy were good for me; I realize now that I was probably comforted to have justification for my continued attachment to the traditions I grew up with.   

But in fact top nutritional and anthropological scientists from the most reputable institutions imaginable say categorically that humans are natural herbivores, and that we will be healthier today if we stick with our herbivorous roots. It may be inconvenient, but it alas, it is the truth.  

Click here for great-tasting recipes and meal plans, and here for tips on eating more vegetarian foods.





Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World


A PETITION TO CONGRESS - Supporting Single-Payer Health Care

A PETITION TO CONGRESS
Supporting Single-Payer Health Care

Our current private health insurance system is the most costly, wasteful, complicated and bureaucratic in the world. Today, 46 million people have no health insurance. Even more are underinsured with high deductibles and co-payments. Close to 20,000 Americans die each year because they don’t have regular access to a doctor. 

The time is now for our nation to address the most profound moral and economic issue we face. 

The time is now for our country to join the rest of the industrialized world and provide cost-effective, comprehensive quality health care to every man, woman and child in our country. 

The time is now to take on the powerful special interests in the insurance and pharmaceutical industries and pass a single-payer national health care program.

Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World


Monday, June 15, 2009

Daily Healthy Steps - Consumption Of Fresh Fruits And Vegetables - Each Day

Obesity

Life Extension Update
http://www.lef.org/newsletter/2009/0616_D-is-for-Dieting.htm?source=eNewsLetter2009WkWk26-1&key=Archive

For weight loss, these easy steps can be taken every day:

  1. Before each meal, take one of the following:
    • 8–9 g of Enhanced Fiber Food Powder or
    • 8–9 g of High Lignan Flax seed powder or
    • 3–6 capsules of PGX soluble fiber blend
  2. Take 200–700 mcg of chromium daily.
  3. Take 160–320 mg of magnesium citrate daily before bedtime.
  4. Take 3000–4000 mg of CLA (with or without 1000 mg guarana) daily.
  5. Take 2400 mg of EPA/DHA with sesame lignans daily.
  6. Take 200 mg of 7-keto DHEA daily in the morning.
  7. Take 725–1450 mg of green tea extract (minimum 93 percent; caffeinated or decaffeinated) daily.


  8. Minimize consumption of foods cooked at high temperatures.
  9. Consume most calories early in the day (avoid late-night snacking).
  10. Reduce intake of high glycemic foods (breads, pasta, potatoes, fruit juices, sugary snacks).
  11. Reduce intake of saturated fats such as those found in beef and butter, and
    increase consumption of foods rich in omega-3 fats, such as fish.
  12. Increase consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables.
Note: Supplements should be taken in conjunction with a healthy diet and regular exercise program. Results may vary.


Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

World Ban On Plastic Bags - China & San Francisco Have Banned Them

Top UN Official Calls for Global Ban on Plastic Bags

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/6/9/headlines#15

In environmental news, a top UN official is urging a global ban on plastic bags, in part because plastic is the most pervasive form of ocean litter. Achim Steiner, executive director of the UN Environment Program, said, "Single-use plastic bags, which choke marine life, should be banned or phased out rapidly everywhere.

There is simply zero justification for manufacturing them anymore, anywhere.” The campaign to ban plastic bags is gaining steam internationally.

China banned free plastic bags last year, saving the country an estimated 40 billion plastic bags. Here in this country, San Francisco is the only large city to have banned plastic bags.

===

Portland may ban plastic bags or charge for them

by Mark Larabee, The Oregonian

The next thing you might hear at the cash register is: "Paper or plastic? That'll be extra."

On the heels of San Francisco, Seattle and Los Angeles, Portland may impose a fee on grocery bags by next year to reduce waste and encourage people to shop with reusable sacks.

"It's a simple behavioral change that we have to ingrain in ourselves," said City Commissioner Sam Adams.

He first brought up the idea more than a year ago and now is pushing for a City Council vote, but hasn't decided how much to charge: He's discussing anywhere from 5 cents to 20 cents per bag.

The switch would represent a big lifestyle change for consumers, Adams acknowledged. They'll have to remember to bring their own bags or risk the fee, but he said many people already carry cloth bags in keeping with Portland's "green values."

"This is a totally avoidable fee," he said.

Part of the money raised from the fee would help provide free cloth bags to low-income people. Some would go toward city recycling programs and some would go to stores for administration and programs to educate consumers about the fee.

Adams hopes the fee will be in place by the time he takes over as Portland's mayor in January.

Even though both paper and plastic bags are recyclable, both present environmental problems.

Only 52 percent of the paper and 5 percent of plastic grocery bags given out in the United States are recycled, said Stephanie Barger, executive director of the Earth Resources Foundation in Costa Mesa, Calif.

Plastic bags are made from oil. They don't biodegrade and are considered a serious litter problem because they're lightweight and blow around. They also kill marine mammals who mistake them for food.

Grocery stores collect the bags and send them to be made into plastic "lumber" or flower pots -- Portland doesn't allow them in the city's new blue recycling carts because they gum up the machinery used to sort recycling.

Paper bags easily decompose, but it takes trees to make them. They're also heavier than plastic, so for every truckload of plastic bags shipped to a grocery store, it takes three trucks to ship the same number of paper bags, said Joe Gilliam, president of the Northwest Grocery Association, a lobbying group working on the issue.

"It's consumption without thinking of the resources we're taking and the impact we're having on our planet and our future," Barger said. "If you have a reusable bag, you've eliminated that waste of energy in transporting that bag all over the place."

Gilliam, who represents most major and some smaller grocery chains, said they'll support some kind of bag fee program as long as they can help shape it because they'll have to enforce it.

It's important that the city notifies shoppers about the fee before they're asked to pay, Gilliam said, so clerks can offer the cloth bags instead. Most of the stores in the region have been selling cloth bags for more than two years, he noted.

"Making our customers angry does not motivate them to work with you," Gilliam said. "Our clerks don't need to be the referees of tax policy."

Other U.S. cities are ahead of Portland. In March 2007, San Francisco became the first city to ban the use of plastic shopping bags, allowing grocery stores to give out paper bags or biodegradable film bags that look like plastic but are made of corn. Those bags caused their own trouble.

Gilliam said the compostable bags are too thin, so stores were triple bagging. That promoted the use of paper bags, he said. And he said the corn bags look and feel like plastic, so they were getting mixed in with plastic recycling. But the corn ruins the plastic during recycling, so contaminated loads of recycled plastic ended up going to the landfill.

Los Angeles voted Tuesday to ban plastic shopping bags from stores beginning in July 2010. Shoppers can either bring their own bags or pay 25 cents for a paper or biodegradable bag.

On Monday, the Seattle City Council will vote on a proposal to ban the use of foam containers by restaurants and implement a 20-cent fee at grocery stores on plastic bags. Portland has already banned foam containers.

With the high price of oil, grocers are bracing for a three-fold increase in the cost of plastic bags next year, Gilliam said. "Grocers are already thinking about the bagless store," he said.

Still, it's not as if Adams' proposal will sail through without opposition. Bag manufacturers are gearing up to make sure their interests are protected. Both paper and plastic bag makers stress that their products are recyclable and that the most appropriate government policy would push more recycling.

Paul Cosgrove of the American Forest and Paper Association, a national trade association for forest product companies, said the group is ready to discuss the fee idea. He's concerned about local job losses tied to a possible declining demand for paper bags.

"Our position is that paper bags are highly recyclable and made with recycled content as well," he said. "There are paper bag plants as well as recycling facilities in Oregon. We would like to have them not adversely affected by what the city is thinking."

Tim Shestek, state affairs director for the American Chemistry Council in Sacramento, said his industry is urging cities to increase plastic bag recycling rather than "unnecessarily taxing or prohibiting the use of carryout bags."

"The city's idea is to push reusable bags," he said. "We don't oppose the idea. I don't know if that's an option for everybody."
===



UN calls for global ban on plastic bags to save oceans
Jeremy Hance mongabay.com  June 09, 2009

http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0609-hance_plasticban.html

The UN’s top environmental official called for a global ban on plastic bags yesterday. "Single use plastic bags which choke marine life, should be banned or phased out rapidly everywhere. There is simply zero justification for manufacturing them anymore, anywhere," said Achim Steiner, executive director of the U.N. Environment Program.

Steiner’s call comes after the U.N. Environment Program released a comprehensive report on litter in the world’s ocean, which identified plastic as the most common form of ocean litter. When plastic enters the marine food -chain it can devastate marine life and even affect humans when they consume seafood that have eaten plastic debris.

The plastic problem is so bad that a floating island of plastic debris has been discovered in the northern Pacific which is double the size of the United States.

China and Bangladesh have both banned plastic bags, while Ireland has reduced plastic bag consumption by 90 percent by levying a fee on each bag. Such measures have only just reached the United States: San Francisco is the only city to ban plastic bags, although Los Angeles will have a ban in place next year. New York City rejected such a fee on bags last year, but Washington D.C. is considering a 5-cent-fee this week.
===

News -  May 23, 2008

China Sacks Plastic Bags

Ban could save 37 million barrels of oil and alleviate "white pollution"

By David Biello

SHANGHAI—Thin plastic bags are used for everything in China and the Chinese use up to three billion of them a day--an environmentally costly habit picked up by shopkeepers and consumers in the late 1980s for convenience over traditional cloth bags. Fruit mongers weigh produce in them, tailors stuff shirts into them, even street food vendors plunk their piping hot wares directly into see-through plastic bags that do nothing to protect one's hands from being burned or coated in hot grease. They even have a special name for the plastic bags found blowing, hanging and floating everywhere from trees to rivers: bai se wu ran, or "white pollution," for the bags' most common color.

Yet, the Chinese government is set to ban the manufacture and force shopkeepers to charge for the distribution of bags thinner than 0.025 millimeters thick as of June 1—and no one seems prepared. "I don't know what we'll do," Zhang Gui Lin, a tailor at Shanghai's famous fabric market, tells me through a translator. "I guess our shopping complex will figure it out and tell us what to buy to use as bags."

His wife adds: "Maybe it will be like this," tugging a thicker mesh orange plastic bag she is using to carry some shoes. Such thicker bags may prove one replacement for the ubiquitous thinner versions.

The clothes makers are not alone. "I don't know actually," says a vendor of Chinese tamales, known as zong zi, who declined to give her name. "I'm sure the government will come up with a solution. Maybe people will just eat it [the zong zi directly.]"

The Chinese government is banning production and distribution of the thinnest plastic bags in a bid to curb the white pollution that is taking over the countryside. The bags are also banned from all forms of public transportation and "scenic locations." The move may save as much as 37 million barrels of oil currently used to produce the plastic totes, according to China Trade News. Already, the nation's largest producer of such thin plastic bags, Huaqiang, has shut down its operations.

The effort comes amid growing environmental awareness among the Chinese people and mimics similar efforts in countries like Bangladesh and Ireland as well as the city of San Francisco, though efforts to replicate that ban in other U.S. municipalities have foundered in the face of opposition from plastic manufacturers.

More than one million reusable cloth bags have already been sold on various Chinese merchandising Web sites, according to Taobao.com, and local environmental groups, such as Shanghai Roots & Shoots, are promoting and giving away cloth bags in schools.

"Too many plastic bags is a great waste of natural resources," retired Communist Party cadre Liu Zhidong says through a translator. "When burnt, they produce poisoning smoke, and if buried underneath the ground they need more than 300 years to be degraded."

But it remains to be seen how strong enforcement will be. Specific penalties have not been set but will include fines. Other environmental efforts—such as a similar ban on disposable wooden chopsticks (a waster of trees) and so-called "green GDP," or gross domestic product, an effort to account for environmental costs when calculating overall economic development— fell by the wayside because they proved too difficult to implement and created significant opposition at the local level. It also remains to be seen whether some of the possible replacements—thicker or biodegradable plastic bags—will be any better.

"This is a very good measure to protect the environment. However, whether it can last long is still very doubting," chemistry graduate student Oliver says. "And another problem is [that] the so-called biodegradable plastic bags, it seems, cannot be totally degraded. Whether or not they are really good for environment protection in the long run remains unknown."

Yet, the ban enjoys enthusiastic support from many residents here, particularly students, who may not even recall the more traditional practice of cloth bags or baskets. "I will just carry the things by my hands," one young man told me on the campus of Shanghai International Studies University. "I will never use the plastic bags supplied in supermarkets and I'll ask my friends not to use them, too."







Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World