Ruling is the fourth against autism claims
Vaccines that contain a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal cannot cause autism on their own, a special U.S. court ruled on Friday, dealing one more blow to parents seeking to blame vaccines for their children's illness.
The special U.S. Court of Federal Claims ruled that vaccines could not have caused the autism of an Oregon boy, William Mead, ending his family's quest for reimbursement.
"The Meads believe that thimerosal-containing vaccines caused William's regressive autism. As explained below, the undersigned finds that the Meads have not presented a scientifically sound theory," Special Master George Hastings, a former tax claims expert at the Department of Justice, wrote in his ruling.
Health & Wellness
Stock market slides may hurt more than your savings. New research suggests they might prompt heart attacks.
Duke University researchers found a link between how a key stock index performed and how many heart attacks were treated at their North Carolina hospital shortly after the recession began in December 2007 through July 2009, when signs of recovery emerged.
The trend weakened after they did a second analysis taking into account seasons of the year. Some research suggests heart attacks are more common in winter, meaning the initial finding could have been a statistical fluke.
However, leading scientists unconnected with the work said they found it plausible and worth further research in a nationwide study.
Duke University researchers found a link between how a key stock index performed and how many heart attacks were treated at their North Carolina hospital shortly after the recession began in December 2007 through July 2009, when signs of recovery emerged.
The trend weakened after they did a second analysis taking into account seasons of the year. Some research suggests heart attacks are more common in winter, meaning the initial finding could have been a statistical fluke.
However, leading scientists unconnected with the work said they found it plausible and worth further research in a nationwide study.
The latest study to find a link between smoking and lowered risk of Parkinson's disease says that the protective effect appears to be related to the number of years of smoking, not how many cigarettes a smoker consumes daily, Reuters reported March 10.
Researchers studied more than 305,000 men and women over 10 years and found that the more years the subjects smoked, the lower their risk of developing Parkinson's disease. Those who smoked at least a pack a day for less than 10 years reduced their risk by 4 percent, for example, but those who smoked 10-19 years had a 22-percent lower risk, and risk was reduced 41 percent among those who smoked for 30 years or more.
Researchers studied more than 305,000 men and women over 10 years and found that the more years the subjects smoked, the lower their risk of developing Parkinson's disease. Those who smoked at least a pack a day for less than 10 years reduced their risk by 4 percent, for example, but those who smoked 10-19 years had a 22-percent lower risk, and risk was reduced 41 percent among those who smoked for 30 years or more.
Beginning on January 1, 2010, Russia has officially banned imported poultry products from countries that use chlorine in their processing methods. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin announced that Russia will no longer allow chicken imports from the U.S. because the chlorine baths used to sanitize chickens do not meet Russian food safety standards.
Since it comes from Russia, many may dismiss the ban as being politically charged with no scientific validity. However many nations around the world, including all within the European Union, have banned poultry imports from chlorine-using countries because of the dangers posed by the chemical. These countries use different methods to disinfect meat, including air chilling and electrolyzed water treatments, which do not expose the meat to harmful chemicals.
Putin expressed that Russia is working to become poultry self-sufficient by the year 2015 but, until then, will import only from nations that do not use chlorine in meat processing. Each year, the import quota will be dropped until, eventually, all chicken will be domestically raised in Russia.
Since it comes from Russia, many may dismiss the ban as being politically charged with no scientific validity. However many nations around the world, including all within the European Union, have banned poultry imports from chlorine-using countries because of the dangers posed by the chemical. These countries use different methods to disinfect meat, including air chilling and electrolyzed water treatments, which do not expose the meat to harmful chemicals.
Putin expressed that Russia is working to become poultry self-sufficient by the year 2015 but, until then, will import only from nations that do not use chlorine in meat processing. Each year, the import quota will be dropped until, eventually, all chicken will be domestically raised in Russia.
Many children's snacks marketed as healthy alternatives are actually full of unhealthy ingredients like sugar, salt and fat, according to an analysis conducted by the consumer watchdog organization, "Which?."
"Parents should be able to pick out healthy products for their kids' lunchboxes, but what you see isn't always what you get," said the group's Martyn Hocking.
"Many [products] declare that they don't contain additives, but don't mention they're also full of salt or sugar - giving the impression they're healthier than they are," the report reads.
For example, while Dairylea Lunchables' Ham 'n' Cheese Crackers are advertised as providing half of the recommended daily calcium for a child, nowhere on the label or in promotional materials does the company acknowledge that the product is high in fat, saturated fat and salt -- containing 1.8 grams of the maximum daily recommended 3 grams of the latter.
"Parents should be able to pick out healthy products for their kids' lunchboxes, but what you see isn't always what you get," said the group's Martyn Hocking.
"Many [products] declare that they don't contain additives, but don't mention they're also full of salt or sugar - giving the impression they're healthier than they are," the report reads.
For example, while Dairylea Lunchables' Ham 'n' Cheese Crackers are advertised as providing half of the recommended daily calcium for a child, nowhere on the label or in promotional materials does the company acknowledge that the product is high in fat, saturated fat and salt -- containing 1.8 grams of the maximum daily recommended 3 grams of the latter.
Some moms might pass more than genetics to their newborns. Doctors found three babies born to women with hip implants had high levels of chromium and cobalt in their umbilical cord blood - metals that had worn off the implants.
The results show an association between levels of cobalt and chromium - components of metal implants - in mothers and their babies at the time of delivery.
The finding was only for women with so-called "metal-on-metal" hip implants, in which both the ball of the joint and the surface of the socket are made of metal. The charged form of the cobalt and chromium, called ions, get released as a result of wear and corrosion as the metal parts rub against one another.
The researchers stress that they aren't sure if these metals have detrimental effects for either the mother or her offspring. And the study involved only a few participants, so more research is needed to confirm the findings.
The results show an association between levels of cobalt and chromium - components of metal implants - in mothers and their babies at the time of delivery.
The finding was only for women with so-called "metal-on-metal" hip implants, in which both the ball of the joint and the surface of the socket are made of metal. The charged form of the cobalt and chromium, called ions, get released as a result of wear and corrosion as the metal parts rub against one another.
The researchers stress that they aren't sure if these metals have detrimental effects for either the mother or her offspring. And the study involved only a few participants, so more research is needed to confirm the findings.
Just published is a study into a new drug which makes statins more effective - and it lowers the levels of thyroid hormones in the blood.
But wait a minute. Is it just me, or is there something cockeyed here?
The reason I ask is that, analogues of thyroxine have been used to lower blood cholesterol at least since the mid-1930s when dextrothyroxine was first studied. Right up to the 1970s Dr Broda Barnes and others showed that hypothyroidism - low levels of thyroid hormones - increased cholesterol levels. They suggested that, if a patient came to his doctor with high cholesterol, the first thing that should be checked was his thyroid levels. If thyroid hormone levels were low - and in these cases, they usually were - then treatment with laevothyroxine (T4) or dessicated thyroid (T4 + T3) to raise thyroid hormones into the normal range was usually the most effective way to correct the patient's cholesterol.
Yet here we have a drug which lowers thyroid hormone levels being used to lower cholesterol. Does that stack up?
Why not forget statins and just go back to using thyroxine?
Well, of course, there is a good reason why this isn't contemplated: Statins are expensive (and good profit makers), while thyroxine is probably the cheapest drug on the market. It's even cheaper than aspirin. And who can make money out of that?
Here's a report of the new drug, which is called eprotirome:
But wait a minute. Is it just me, or is there something cockeyed here?
The reason I ask is that, analogues of thyroxine have been used to lower blood cholesterol at least since the mid-1930s when dextrothyroxine was first studied. Right up to the 1970s Dr Broda Barnes and others showed that hypothyroidism - low levels of thyroid hormones - increased cholesterol levels. They suggested that, if a patient came to his doctor with high cholesterol, the first thing that should be checked was his thyroid levels. If thyroid hormone levels were low - and in these cases, they usually were - then treatment with laevothyroxine (T4) or dessicated thyroid (T4 + T3) to raise thyroid hormones into the normal range was usually the most effective way to correct the patient's cholesterol.
Yet here we have a drug which lowers thyroid hormone levels being used to lower cholesterol. Does that stack up?
Why not forget statins and just go back to using thyroxine?
Well, of course, there is a good reason why this isn't contemplated: Statins are expensive (and good profit makers), while thyroxine is probably the cheapest drug on the market. It's even cheaper than aspirin. And who can make money out of that?
Here's a report of the new drug, which is called eprotirome:
A central figure behind the Center for Disease Control's (CDC) claims disputing the link between vaccines and autism and other neurological disorders has disappeared after officials discovered massive fraud involving the theft of millions in taxpayer dollars. Danish police are investigating Dr. Poul Thorsen, who has vanished along with almost $2 million that he had supposedly spent on research.
Thorsen was a leading member of a Danish research group that wrote several key studies supporting CDC's claims that the MMR vaccine and mercury-laden vaccines were safe for children. Thorsen's 2003 Danish study reported a 20-fold increase in autism in Denmark after that country banned mercury based preservatives in its vaccines. His study concluded that mercury could therefore not be the culprit behind the autism epidemic.
Thorsen was a leading member of a Danish research group that wrote several key studies supporting CDC's claims that the MMR vaccine and mercury-laden vaccines were safe for children. Thorsen's 2003 Danish study reported a 20-fold increase in autism in Denmark after that country banned mercury based preservatives in its vaccines. His study concluded that mercury could therefore not be the culprit behind the autism epidemic.
Something doesn't quite add up about genetically modified (GM) foods.
Big biotech claims that genetic engineering is a necessary step towards feeding the world's growing population. And yet debate still rages as to whether GM crops actually increase yields at all. Furthermore, the UN recently stated that 30,000 people a day were starving to death, but not because of underproduction of crops. It's simply through lack of access.
Independent scientific studies raised serious alarm bells over the safety of GM foods over a decade ago. But while this made front-page headlines in European newspapers, the North American mainstream media were conspiratorially silent.
Biotech companies stand to make billions from their seed patents. Governments and supreme courts have sanctioned the patenting of life itself. The planet's food supply is becoming increasingly dominated by fewer and fewer players.
If the biotech industry's stated intention of feeding the world is misguided or even misdirecting, is there another political agenda behind GM food? Have we been mis-sold? Were we even given a choice in the first place?
Big biotech claims that genetic engineering is a necessary step towards feeding the world's growing population. And yet debate still rages as to whether GM crops actually increase yields at all. Furthermore, the UN recently stated that 30,000 people a day were starving to death, but not because of underproduction of crops. It's simply through lack of access.
Independent scientific studies raised serious alarm bells over the safety of GM foods over a decade ago. But while this made front-page headlines in European newspapers, the North American mainstream media were conspiratorially silent.
Biotech companies stand to make billions from their seed patents. Governments and supreme courts have sanctioned the patenting of life itself. The planet's food supply is becoming increasingly dominated by fewer and fewer players.
If the biotech industry's stated intention of feeding the world is misguided or even misdirecting, is there another political agenda behind GM food? Have we been mis-sold? Were we even given a choice in the first place?
© Ann Tornkvist/Getty Images
The UK ranks 26th in the world for mothers' deaths in childbirth, with the US coming in at 41st.
The UK ranks 26th in the world for mothers' deaths in childbirth, with the US coming in at 41st.
The death rate of women giving birth in the US is worse than in 40 other countries, including nearly all the industrialised countries, Amnesty International said today in a report that describes the country's approach to maternity care as "disgraceful and scandalous".
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), the likelihood of a woman dying in childbirth in the US is five times greater than in Greece.
The US has some of the best medical care in the world, but Amnesty says the lives of poor, uninsured, African American and Native American women are put at risk by neglect.
"This country's extraordinary record of medical advancement makes its haphazard approach to maternal care all the more scandalous and disgraceful," said US Amnesty executive director Larry Cox. "Good maternal care should not be considered a luxury available only to those who can access the best hospitals and the best doctors. Women should not die in the richest country on earth from preventable complications and emergencies.
