Category Archives: Wellness

By Liz Szabo, USA TODAY Nearly 40% of parents of toddlers have delayed or refused a child’s vaccination — a practice that endangers not only their children but others around them, a study reported Monday. Refusing vaccines is becoming more common, according to a study presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies meeting in Vancouver, Canada. The percentage of parents who delay or refuse a shot rose from 22% in 2003 to 39% in 2008, according to the study, based on records and interviews of parents of 8,904 children ages 1½ to 3 and conducted through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention‘s National Immunization Survey. MISSED VACCINES: Weaken ‘herd immunity’ in kids AUTISM: Though unproven, 1 in 4 parents believe vaccines cause disorder CELEBS: Are they crossing the line on medical advice? The change in public opinion may not be quite as dramatic as it seems, says the CDC’s Lance Rodewald. Parents in 2008 had more opportunities to delay shots than they had five years earlier, because experts recommended three new vaccines for children those ages between 2003 and 2008 — including vaccines against hepatitis A, rotavirus and influenza. Interviews with parents suggest that many are influenced by medical myths, such as the notions that kids can’t be vaccinated when they have a cold or that shots cause autism, Rodewald says. Although vaccines were once almost universally accepted, some parents who are too young to remember diseases such as measles now question their importance, says pediatrician Paul Offit of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Yet some of these intentionally undervaccinated children have helped to spark recent measles outbreaks. In 2008, for example, an intentionally unvaccinated 7-year-old boy brought measles into the country after returning from Switzerland, according to an April report in Pediatrics. The child exposed 839 people in the San Diego area to the disease, which killed 500 Americans a year before a vaccine was introduced in 1963. Few of those exposed in 2008 became ill, a sign that their childhood vaccines protected them, Rodewald says. But 11 unvaccinated children got sick. One of those was a newborn who was too young to get a measles shot — which is typically given at age 1 — who had to be hospitalized, according to the Pediatrics report. A total of about 140 people across the USA got measles that year, all related to infections brought in from other countries, Offit says. “A parent’s decision not to vaccinate their child puts their own child at risk, but it also puts other children at risk,” Rodewald says, noting that unvaccinated newborns, children getting chemotherapy and those with immune deficiences are especially vulnerable.

Demented Seniors At Risk From Household Poisons NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – One of the most important steps in childproofing a home is keeping dangerous household chemicals, such as cleaning agents, out of the reach of children. A report published recently in the journal Chest points out that these chemicals are also dangerous to elderly people with dementia, who may drink them by mistake.The report, from Drs. James A. Walker and Gary P. Zaloga of Washington Hospital Center in Washington, DC, includes details of a case of an 88-year-old woman with Alzheimer’s disease who drank 10 ounces of a pine oil-based cleaning solution.Over 10,000 such cases, in which people drank pine oil-based cleaning products, are reported each year in the US, making these products second only to gasoline as the most common type of substance involved in accidental toxic poisoning, the authors note. The researchers also point out that since many incidents go unreported, the actual number of such cases is probably much higher.“We’ve done a great job on preventing unintentional childhood poisoning… we think it’s one of the great success stories of public health. But the issue of older people unintentionally swallowing substances is much more complicated,” said US Product Safety Commission spokesman Ken Giles, when asked to comment about the problem.The Alzheimer’s patient in the report was being cared for at home by her grandson. Mentally disoriented but physically functional, she had been left alone in her bathroom for approximately 5 minutes — during which time she swallowed the cleaning solution. She was quickly brought to an emergency department, put on a mechanical ventilator and treated for poisoning, but subsequently died of pneumonia and multiple organ failure.In an interview with Reuters Health, Giles said that such accidents in the general population –and particularly in children under the age of 5 — have greatly diminished in the US since the passage of the Poison Prevention Packaging Act in 1970. However, he emphasized that in the 28 years since the first child-resistant packaging was designed for aspirin in 1972, the focus has been on the protection of children, not the elderly, which involves a different set of concerns and strategies.“Children under 5 put things in their mouth because that’s their approach to learning about their world,” he said. “But with older people you begin to have a lot of other factors… not reading the label, not turning the light on at night, mixing substances together, so that you get a bad synergistic effect — lots of issues that are not there with children.”However, the investigators point out that both the demented elderly and children have in common the ability to move about their environment while doing so with limited cognitive faculties, leaving both groups vulnerable to the dangers of toxic ingestion.Walker and Zaloga also note that less than 0.1% of reported cases of toxin ingestion have fatal outcomes. Elderly patients account for about 17% of these fatal cases, and the risk of dying from ingesting a toxin rises with age. Because of physical changes associated with aging, the elderly are likely to be exposed to toxins for longer periods after ingestion than children.The researchers advise medical practitioners to become familiar with the treatment of pine oil intoxication. Quick response to signs of ingestion — which include the aroma of pine on the breath of the patient, blurred vision, headache, sore throat, vomiting, and abdominal pain and respiratory failure — is important to prevent serious and potentially fatal complications. SOURCE: Chest 1999;116:1822-1826.

A dramatic case study about a woman who had previously had ovarian cancer and was seeking help for infertility was published in the January 23, 2012, issue of the Journal of Pediatric, Maternal & Family Health. The study authors begin by noting that infertility is defined as one year of attempted conception without success. They also report that in 2002 there were approximately 7.3 million women who were considered infertile. In this case, a 28-year-old woman went to the chiropractor seeking improvement in her overall health, and to increase her chances of becoming pregnant. When she first came to the chiropractor, the woman had a history of infertility for two years, and was suffering from lower back pain for the previous 3 months. Her history also included ovarian cancer nine years earlier requiring surgical removal of one ovary, leaving the other with only three-quarters function. Patient had also undergone standard medical treatment for infertility without any help. After an examination and x-rays, it was determined that the woman had multiple areas of vertebral dysfunction, more commonly known as subluxation. To correct what the authors called vertebral imbalances, a series of adjustments were initiated. The results of the case study reported that after 14 chiropractic visits, the woman had announced that she had conceived. She subsequently carried a baby to full term and had a normal delivery. In the discussion, the authors noted that infertility is becoming a growing issue in the United States. They also note that many couples are turning to non-medical forms of care due to the expense and unreliability of medical care. To offer an explanation of how chiropractic can help in cases of infertility, the authors stated, “Chiropractic care can improve the autonomic nervous system function of the body including the reproductive organs by reducing subluxations.”

A study published in the January 19, 2012, issue of the scientific journal the Archives of Vertebral Subluxation Research shows that specific chiropractic adjustment techniques cause positive changes in neck curvatures. The authors of the study begin by noting, “There has been an increasing amount of attention in the literature on the role of spinal structure and the affects on neurology, health, and physiology.” Researchers note that either a reduction, loss, or reversal of the normal cervical curvature, as seen on a side  x-ray of the neck, is associated with problems, including ADHD, otitis media, respiratory problems, headaches, neck pains, sinus infections, scoliosis, and spinal degeneration. Additionally, researchers point out that the strength of a spine is dependent on having normal curvatures. In this study, 51 chiropractic patients were included in a retrospective analysis. All participants had to have been under chiropractic care long enough to have a follow-up side neck x-ray taken.  The average number of visits for patients in this study before follow-up post-x-rays were taken was 12, with the average time frame being just over ten weeks. The results showed that the average correction of cervical curve for all patients in this study was 56.76%. Seven of the patients in the study reached a maximum improvement by the end of the analysis, while five cases showed a maximum improvement after only one specific chiropractic adjustment. The study authors noted that the results of this study were attained without any use of traction, exercises, therapy, or rehabilitation, thus ruling out other cofactors having an influence on the results. They also reported that, ”One hundred percent (of patients) had some degree of positive change towards lordosis (normal forward neck curve) or a decrease in kyphosis (harmful reversal of neck curve).”

Red Sox center fielder and lead off hitter, Johnny Damon, like many professional athletes, is a regular chiropractic patient. Following his 2003 collision with teamate Damien Jackson, Damon suffered a Grade 2 concussion and neck injuries which left him with periodic migraine headache symptoms. He finds relief from this pain with regular chiropractic adjustments. Damon was quoted in the October 6, 2004 Boston Globe as saying, “Physically I’m all right, I just have that headache thing working again. I can tell when it’s coming on because it comes up through my neck. I had migraines every day the first months of last off season. I felt them coming so I went and got adjusted, and I was good for a good month, but then they started coming back. Over the course of the season I have to get my neck adjusted every now and then. ” Later that Friday evening, during the third game of the playoffs, it was announced on international television that Johnny Damon had seen his chiropractor and his migraines were gone. Over 11 million Americans suffer headaches. Research shows that spinal manipulation – the primary form of care provided by doctors of chiropractic – may be an effective treatment option for tension headaches and headaches that originate in the neck. A report released in 2001 by researchers at the Duke University Evidence-Based Practice Center in Durham, NC, found that spinal manipulation resulted in almost immediate improvement for those headaches that originate in the neck, and had significantly fewer side effects and longer-lasting relief of tension-type headache than a commonly prescribed medication. Also, a 1995 study in the Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics found that spinal manipulative therapy is an effective treatment for tension headaches and that those who ceased chiropractic treatment after four weeks experienced a sustained therapeutic benefit in contrast with those patients who received a commonly prescribed medication.

With the growing concern of childhood obesity – rates have tripled in the last 30 years, and approximately 30 percent of all children are obese – it’s past the time to educate parents on their child’s snacking habits. Typically, children are reaching for high-calorie sodas, sports drinks, potato chips and microwave snacks when they need something light between meals. What they might be missing is something as simple as the health benefits of nuts and seeds. Parents need to be educated that research continues to reveal that nuts and seeds do not deserve their bad reputation. Absolutely, they are high in fat; but it’s the good fat, not the bad, and when eaten in moderation, their health benefits far outweigh the dangers of their fat content. The fact is, the more we learn about nuts and seeds, the more we realize that they’re one of the best snack-food options for children. Isn’t Fat Bad? We know that nuts and seeds are high in fat. An ounce of almonds and sunflower seeds each have a total fat count of 14 grams; cashews have 13 grams and pecans have 20 grams apiece per ounce. It’s when we consider what kind of fat they contain that we see the difference between these and other foods with a high total fat count. Saturated fats raise our “bad” cholesterol levels (LDL) and increase our risk of heart disease and stroke. These are the fats that are high in most snack items and put our health at risk. By comparison, an ounce of almonds contains 1 gram of saturated fat, while cashews and pecans have 3 and 2 grams per ounce, respectively. Where nuts and seeds are high in fat is in the mono- and polyunsaturated fats; however, these are good for us because they raise our “good” cholesterol levels (HDL) and typically contain essential vitamins like A, D, E and K. An ounce of almonds contains a combined 12 grams of mono- and polyunsaturated fats, cashews contain 10 combined grams and pecans have 18 combined grams. Nuts and Health: The Facts In 1996, the Iowa Women’s Health Study found that women who ate nuts four or more times a week were 40 percent less likely to die of heart disease. Since then, similar studies performed by the Harvard School of Public Health and Loma Linda University in California have found the same. And the Physicians’ Health Study (2002) determined that men who consumed nuts two or more times per week had a noticeably reduced risk of sudden cardiac death. A study at the University of Toronto found that nuts, almonds in particular, reduced risk factors that are typically associated with heart disease, specifically LDL count. Richard Mattes, PhD, professor of foods and nutrition at Purdue University in Indiana, found that when people added 1-2 ounces of nuts a day to their diets, they did not gain weight, contrary to popular belief. Studies performed at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and the Harvard School of Public Health revealed that three times as many people who were trying to lose weight were able to stick to a diet that included moderate fat content in the form of nuts and seeds. Researchers suggested that the fat, protein and fiber in nuts helped the dieter feel full longer, so many felt less deprived and ate less during the day. Another study of women by the Harvard School of Public Health reported that there was a 30 percent reduced risk of type 2 diabetes in those women who ate five or more 1-ounce servings of nuts per week as compared with women who rarely or never ate nuts. Finally, studies published in the Journal of Nutrition and elsewhere have found that seeds, flax seeds in particular, are high in omega-3 fatty acids, which have proven benefits in the fight against heart disease, stroke and other circulatory diseases. The Good and the Bad When it comes to food in general, too much of a good thing can still end up being a bad thing; that’s why moderation is key. But the options for eating good nuts and seeds are limitless, and the vitamins and minerals provided are equally various. A typical serving of nuts (1 ounce) generally will contain between 160 to 200 calories and 13 to 20 grams of fat, but it’s monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats that make up the majority. When compared to potato chips, pastries and other typical “snack food” items with equal fat content, the difference lies in … Continue reading →

In the family wellness practice, you cannot help but see the rise in allergies in the childhood population. In North America, more than 2 million children and an estimated 12 million adults are sensitive to one food item or another. You might wonder why there has been such an overall increase; many in the nutritional arena believe it’s a reflection of our Western diet. Many parents who are frustrated with giving their children over-the-counter or prescription drugs are looking for a less invasive approach to managing allergy symptoms. Why would the family chiropractor become involved? Many chiropractors acknowledge there are three stressors to the nervous system that may cause vertebral subluxation: physical, emotional and biochemical. The biochemical stressors may be attributed to several sources: air quality, toxic cleaning and building materials, and foods. This article focuses on food sources of stress on a child’s immune system. This article does not attempt to present an in-depth nutritional explanation, but rather is meant to introduce some very simple concepts that may assist child patients. Explaining food allergies to parents can be simple. When a child is exposed to a food source, the body responds by activating the immune system, creating immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies to the food. When these antibodies react with the food, histamine and other chemicals cause hives, asthma or other symptoms of an allergic reaction. An allergic histamine response may cause the following symptoms: tingling sensation in the mouth, swelling of the tongue and throat, difficulty breathing, hives, vomiting, abdominal cramps, diarrhea, lowered blood pressure and even death. Less noticeable symptoms are irritability, fatigue, headache, nasal congestion and skin discoloration. Some health care professionals also link learning and behavioral issues (including ADD/ADHD) with poor food selection. Although a child can develop an allergy to anything, six foods account for 90 percent of all food-induced allergic reactions. The six culprits are milk, egg, peanuts, seafood (particularly shellfish), soy and wheat. Breast milk matters. The American Academy of Pediatrics has finally caught on and is now advocating that infants be breastfed exclusively for the first 12 months of life. Although the benefits of breast milk are endless, most young mothers do not exclusively feed their infant in this manner. By the third month of life many pediatricians and/or family members are advocating supplementing the infant’s diet with cereal so “the baby can sleep through the night.” Starting so early with wheat products can set the stage for developing this immune response allergy. The grain family, vegetables and fruits ideally should not be introduced to the infant until the sixth month, when the digestive system has matured. It should be noted that taste buds do not develop until the eighth month and parents need to begin the practice of choosing healthy foods early. We need to train our children when they are young that “we eat to live, not live to eat.” Whole grains such as brown rice, millet, barley and oats can be introduced when children begin to secrete salivary amylase (coinciding with the arrival of teeth), which is helpful for digesting carbohydrates. A good rule of thumb regarding grains is waiting until the sixth month (or later) to play it safe, especially if there is a family history of allergies, eczema or other skin disorders. Also around the sixth month, introduce vegetables such as steamed squash, sweet potatoes, peas, zucchini, carrots and green beans to the infant, followed by the fruit family (apples, pears, peaches, etc.). Always avoid citrus fruits until later to prevent an acidic response. Moving from breast milk to water should be standard practice. Western culture is one of the few to endorse the practice of moving from breast milk or formula to milk or juices. Juices should be looked at as a “concentrated sugar,” even though it is in a more natural state of fructose. Even if a mother states, “I watered down the apple juice,” I recommend responding back, “Could your baby eat an entire apple?” Introducing juices begins to develop the lifestyle of insulin imbalance. We start our young by creating hypoglycemia – and then later in life, in combination with obesity, lack of exercise and, for some, inherited genetics, we risk the onset of type 2 diabetes. When it comes to milk (particularly cow’s milk), there is a growing acknowledgement within the medical field that milk doesn’t “do a body good.” Dr. Robert Kradjian, chief of breast surgery at California’s Seton Medical Center, reviewed archives of medical and scientific journals and found that … Continue reading →

ADHD used to be known as attention-deficit disorder, but was renamed ADHD in 1994 and broken down into three subtypes, each distinctive with their own pattern of behaviors: an inattentive type, a hyperactive-impulsive type and a combined type. While every child diagnosed with ADHD will not act the same, there seems to be a pattern of behavior that is being seen more frequently. In the 1990s there were about 900,000 children being treated for ADHD with Ritalin. Today that number is more than 5 million. It’s time to find out what is causing such a dramatic rise in the number of diagnosed cases of ADHD. Contributing Factors While no one has, of yet, been able to determine the exact cause of ADHD, there has been much speculation as to the contributing factors. These factors include: genetic and environmental links, smoking during pregnancy, premature delivery, low birth weight, birth injuries, excessive television watching, diet, nutrition and allergies. Much of this has to be considered as pure speculation, but recent studies are proving that one particular area is adding up to be more than just conjecture. Diet, Nutrition and the Busy Family Unfortunately, in today’s busy families, it’s not unusual to see that healthy meals prepared at home are the exception and not the rule. In some nutritional circles, the “fast” or “box” food has led to a “toxic food environment.” Fresh fruits, vegetables, poultry, fish and whole-grain products are no longer a part of the standard diet. With this processed-food approach, parents might not realize the excessive amounts of preservatives, artificial flavors and colors their children are consuming. The Trouble With Food Coloring In a recent article published in The Lancet medical journal, researchers at Southampton University in England reportedly have found a link between food dyes and hyperactive behavior in children. Professor Jim Stevenson and his colleagues published their results based upon the examined effects of additives on 153 children age 3, and 144 children ages 8 and 9. The children were divided into three groups, two of which were given one of two drinks that contained a different combination of food colorings and sodium benzoate. The third group was given a placebo that contained no food coloring or preservatives. This double-blind, placebo-controlled study determined that those artificial colors and the preservative sodium benzoate (or both) in a child’s diet result in increased hyperactivity. In response, Susan Jebb, nutrition scientist at Britain’s Medical Research Council added, “Such additives are most likely to be found in foods that we would like to see children eating less of (i.e., soft drinks, confectionery, and so on) and so it reiterates the general healthy eating messages of encouraging healthier food choices.” A Natural Approach A study done at Harvard Medical School, in their neuropsychology post-graduate program, tested 20 children who had been diagnosed with ADHD. Ten were treated with Ritalin, the most commonly prescribed drug. The other 10 were treated with dietary supplements. The results were compared using the most popular neurological tests, including IVA/CPT and the WINKS analysis. The tests revealed that the subjects in both groups showed significant and essentially identical improvements. These studies suggest that the majority of neurological symptoms ascribed to ADHD can be attributed to food and additive allergies, heavy-metal toxicity and other environmental toxins, low-protein/high-carb diets, thyroid disorders, mineral imbalances, essential fatty-acid deficiencies, amino acid deficiencies and B-vitamin deficiencies. The dietary supplements used were a mix of vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients, amino acids, essential fatty acids, phospholipids and probiotics that attempted to address the ADHD biochemical risk factors. These findings support the effectiveness of food-supplement treatment in improving attention and self-control in children with ADHD, and suggest that food-supplement treatment of ADHD may be equally effective to Ritalin treatment. Dietary Recommendations Chiropractors and other health care professionals agree that diet plays a vital role in a child’s health and well-being. In your family wellness practice, consider providing the following recommendations: Do not allow children to drink soft drinks. These chemical concoctions contain artificial food coloring, additives and preservatives. Eliminate baked products. These items contain high quantities of bleached flour and sugar, both of which wear down a child’s immune system and overtax their digestive system. Limit fast food. The only healthy option is to avoid it all together, but if this isn’t possible, then limit it to once a month. Encourage eating at least four servings of vegetables and one serving of fruit every day. Fruit is an important part of your child’s diet, but fresh vegetables contain more … Continue reading →

Parents tend to make decisions based on what they’re told by their health care providers. So, what should parents do when science starts proving that what they’ve been told for more than 50 years could be wrong? What Is Fluoride? Fluoride is defined as a salt of hydrofluoric acid consisting of two elements. The first element is fluorine, which, in its elemental form, is part of the Earth’s crust. This doesn’t mean much to a parent unless they understand that Dr. Robert Carton, a former EPA toxicologist, considers fluoride “somewhat less toxic than arsenic and more toxic than lead.” Now that they understand! What doesn’t make sense about this is that fluoridated water contains an average of 1 mg/liter of fluoride, but the EPA considers any water containing more than .015 mg/liter of either lead or arsenic to be in excess of what is considered “its maximum contaminant level.” In other words, fluoridated water would be considered poisonous if it weren’t for all the hype around “fluoride.” Dr. Carton believes, “Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century, if not of all time.” Fluoride Sources Many city and county governments have added fluoride to their water because it’s supposed to be good for us; but this isn’t the only source. Several items you purchase for your home contain fluoride including toothpaste, grape juice (pesticides), chicken (bone dust released during the separation process), bottled spring water, tea and wine (natural byproducts from the earth). The Problem With Fluoride We’ve all heard that the American Dental Association says fluoride is good for our teeth; the problem is this is a fallacy. Fluoride is not good for our teeth. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. In order for fluoride to bond to teeth, it must remove calcium. That process is called fluorosis. Fluorosis is defined as an abnormal condition caused by excessive intake of fluorides, characterized in children by discoloration and pitting of the teeth, and in adults by pathological bone changes. Not only is fluoride not good for our teeth, but some authorities also believe it’s possible many adults suffering from “arthritis” are, in reality, battling fluorosis. Fluoride Research In 1988, the National Institute of Dental Research and the United States Public Health Service completed a massive $3.6 million nationwide survey to determine the efficacy of fluoridation. The data, which was released only after a Freedom of Information Act filing, revealed there was no difference in the amount of tooth decay between fluoridated and nonfluoridated communities. Public health officials in New Zealand and Canada have made similar findings. In 1999, the New York State Department of Health completed an unprecedented 45-year study comparing children in Newburgh, N.Y., which had fluoridated water for 45 years, with Kingston, N.Y., which never had fluoridated water. It was determined there were no significant differences in the amount of cavities between the two cities. Unfortunately, there was more dental fluorosis in Newburgh. In 2000, a systematic review of more than 200 water-fluoridation safety and efficacy studies found they were lacking in any real scientific data. One researcher was quoted as saying, “The most serious defect of the studies of possible beneficial effects of water fluoridation was the lack of appropriate design and analysis.” A similar study taken on by the University of California, Davis Department of Mathematics said, “The announced opinions and published papers favoring mechanical fluoridation of public drinking water are especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain muddle-headedness and hebetude.” In other words, they basically were making it up as they went along. Finally, according to a 1998 U.S. patent by the pharmaceutical company Sepracor, fluoride activates the very oral “G proteins” that have been determined to lead to chronic gingivitis, periodontal disease and, ultimately, tooth loss. Fluoride Dangers The first obvious danger is that fluoride is a poison, but it also is a proven carcinogen. Studies performed by the National Cancer Institute’s former Chief Chemist Emeritus, Dr. Dean Burke, show fluoride is responsible for about 10,000 deaths annually. “In point of fact, fluoride causes more human cancer deaths, and causes it faster, than any other chemical.” Similar studies from St. Louis University, Japan’s Nippon Dental College and the University of Texas showed fluoride actually increases tumor growth rate, and the New Jersey Department of Health found the risk of osteosarcoma among males under 20 was up to seven times higher in fluoridated areas. Equally surprising is the fact fluoride has … Continue reading →