The European Directive
on Food Supplements

The EU food supplements directive has been approved after its second reading in the EU Parliament on 13 March 2002, with only one proposed amendment, which is the extension of a time limit contained in the directive for submitting dossiers for the approval of vitamin and mineral sources not yet included in the appendix to the directive. There was heated discussion and opposition by MEPs mainly from the UK, Ireland, the Netherlands and Sweden. The result of the vote however, 139 against the directive, 383 for it, and 19 abstentions was in favour of controlling nutritional supplements.

So what does this all mean for us in real terms? Our thanks to Joseph Hasslberger of www.hasslberger.com and www.laleva.cc for the following article which lays out very clearly the implications of the recent vote.

"So there seems to be a noose tightening around the collective necks of the health food industry from European regulatory action. It is a very slowly tightening noose, but it is tightening nevertheless and it appears to be inspired by - this is a suspicion not backed by hard evidence - the pharmaceutical producers who are currently "wiggling their way" into the health food business by way of acquisition of companies and by shifting the emphasis from traditional supplements to 'functional foods' and 'nutraceuticals'." JH

European Food Supplements directive
an industry perspective
Joseph Hasslberger

The EU food supplements directive has been approved in second reading in the EU Parliament on 13 March 2002, with only one proposed amendment, which is the extension of a time limit contained in the directive for submitting dossiers for the approval of vitamin and mineral sources not yet included in the appendix to the directive. There was heated discussion and opposition by MEPs mainly from the UK, Ireland, the Netherlands and Sweden. The result of the vote however, 139 against the directive, 383 for it, and 19 abstentions was in favour of controlling supplements. The text that was discussed and passed can be found at
http://www.laleva.cc/supplements/c5-0640-01_en.pdf

Vitamin and mineral sources found on the market, but not included in the appendix of the directive, comprise about 300 (mainly the more advanced mineral formulations). These are posted at
http://www.laleva.cc/supplements/forgotten_substances.html

Two are the points most likely to influence industry at this point.

Dosages

The directive mandates that maximum dosages shall be set after consultation of the European Scientific Committee for Foods (SCF). The actual decision however is left to administrative action by the European Commission, which is a kind of rudimentary government for the European Union. There is a large margin of discretion in this setting of dosage limits, as article 5 of the directive states that dosages should be set with regard to safety, but after considering intake of vitamins from other sources than supplements (i.e. from food) and after taking due account of the recommended daily intakes (RDI). So there is really no telling yet where the mood will swing on this, the rules can be interpreted in a variety of different ways.

Ingredients

The directive establishes lists of vitamin and mineral sources that may be utilised in the formulation of supplements. The first draft list, which is an annex to the text of the directive, lists - especially for minerals - the most ineffective forms from a viewpoint of bio-availability, forms which have for years been used in pharmaceutical drugs and in dietetic products. To add a vitamin or mineral source to the list, a scientific dossier needs to be submitted to the Scientific Committee for Foods. There are strict requirements, including toxicological assays, for these dossiers, which were laid down by the SCF. The following is a reference to the published requirements which shows that expensive toxicological assays are needed for the approval of any substance:

The guidelines of the SCF "Guidance on Submissions for Safety Evaluations of Sources of Nutrients or of other ingredients proposed for use in the manufacture of foods" (SCF/CS/ADD/NUT/21 Final) can be found detailed in the following report at http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scf/out100_en.pdf

The required tests are for all intents and purposes the same as those required for potentially toxic additives and will require a major investment on the part of the health food industry for every substance to be kept on the market. Exempted are those substances already on the market for decades in Europe, produced by the larger pharmaceutical manufacturers and used in pharmaceutical drugs, as they are on the "original list" already attached to the directive.

Timing

After having been approved by the European Parliament on 13 March, the directive will now require between two or three months before being ready for final issue by the European Council of Ministers. Member states will then have a time limit within which to issue their own laws to put the directive into effect. This is normally a year. Several member states seem eager however to implement the directive and are preparing national laws for this, to issue in the months following official publication of the directive, during the summer of this year.

Member states have the faculty of leaving the national situation as is, putting into effect only the provisions on labelling, until the (EU) administrative decisions on dosages and allowed substances force changes by eliminating certain higher dosages or disallowing the use of substances in case a dossier is given a negative response.

The changeover will occur gradually from the summer of 2002 for up to seven years, always leaving some leeway to national authorities to be tolerant and keep allowing on the market things that have been allowed so far, or to be restrictive and not allow on the market certain substances and dosages.

There will be a time limit of anywhere between 18 and 36 months (to be determined in negotiations between the EU Parliament and the Council of Ministers) for the submission of scientific dossiers for vitamin and mineral sources now on the market, to be added to the list annexed to the directive.

A substance will have to be taken off the market

- in case no scientific dossier has been filed within the time limit (18/36 months)
- if and when the SCF has given an unfavourable opinion against its use

Single market

The directive aims to establish a single market for supplements in Europe and it will gradually force member states to accept products sold in other member states that are in compliance with the directive and the successive administrative decisions, as well as to forbid products that are not in compliance. Seven years is the maximum delay for accepting products that comply and for forbidding products that don't.

Uncertainty

There are major uncertainties on dosages to be permitted in the future as well as on the costs for the preparation of scientific dossiers for the approval of substances. But even in the face of these uncertainties it would seem that industry one way or another can adapt, a stance that has been taken by most of the European producers.

But there is more to be considered . . .

There are at least two other legislative proposals already in the works at the European Union which are likely to negatively influence supplements.

The first one is a proposal for the medicinal registration of herbal products. This has been proposed by the European Commission and it appears to be an attempt to extend to the rest of Europe the restrictive German system, where all herbal products are registered medicines (but not restricted to sale in only pharmacies). European industry seems set to oppose that proposal. The time frame is about two years to approval of a directive, if it does advance as planned.

The second legislative proposal is even more insidious. It is a general revision of the European medicines code. One of the proposed amendments is a change in the definition of what constitutes a medicinal product. If the current definition seems all embracing, the proposed changes would seem to incorporate any substance that can be used for purposes of staying or getting healthy, even if not presented in this way. It would also affirm a new principle, that a product can be considered medicinal if it fits the (very extensive) definition, even if it is already subject to other community legislation. Translation: Any health product that turns out to become serious competition to a pharmaceutical product could be picked out and reclassified a medicine, practically without any possibility of legal recourse.

There is also a European directive already in effect, which requires the scientific evaluation (based on a dossier of scientific tests and data) of any food ingredient or food substance that was not already on the market before 1997. This novel foods directive was first intended to serve for the evaluation of transgenic foods, but is applied to ANY substance new on the market. Stevia, a plant based sweetener that is in competition with pharmaceutically produced artificial sweeteners, is one example of a novel substance that has been kept off the European market by non-approval of a dossier under the novel foods directive.

It would seem that an evaluation of the impact of the food supplements directive should not be done without considering these other pieces of legislation, two in preparation and one already in effect.

Innovation - the noose is tightening

It should be clear that - seen as an organic whole, the recent and ongoing EU legislative changes in the field of supplements, herbs, foods and medicine will hit the supplements industry in its most vulnerable area, reducing the critically important capacity to innovate. If the legislative trend continues on its present course, innovation of natural and nutritional products will be extremely difficult if not impossible for smaller companies. The costs involved will slow innovation down to the pace of the biggest players, which notoriously have been reluctant to allow any changes in the status quo.

In this context it should be noted that the European directive on supplements mandates that within five years from now, a review should be undertaken with a view to subjecting other categories of ingredients (not only the currently contemplated vitamins and minerals) to the same treatment of requiring scientific dossiers and eliminating any substances that do not pass.

So there seems to be a noose tightening around the collective necks of the health food industry from European regulatory action. It is a very slowly tightening noose, but it is tightening nevertheless. The move appears to be inspired by - this is a suspicion not backed by hard evidence - the pharmaceutical producers who are currently "wiggling their way into" the health food business by way of acquisition of companies and by shifting the emphasis from traditional supplements to "functional foods" and "nutraceuticals".

The great unknown - CODEX ALIMENTARIUS

Another ominous development on the horizon is a Codex Alimentarius guideline very similar to the European Union's directive on food supplements. This may, in time, become even more important than the EU directive, which affects commerce only inside the European Union.

Codex guidelines are a reference in international trade disputes, which have worldwide validity. Countries may be forced into compliance with such rules by the mechanism of trade sanctions. The procedure is more or less like this: A country believes its industry is harmed by another country's treatment of its products. It appeals to the WTO (World Trade Organisation) for relief. The WTO hears the case in a Dispute Settlement proceeding, and the losing country is asked to comply with the wishes of the complainant nation. If the losing country still refuses to comply, trade sanctions (punitive tariffs) are normally used to force compliance.

Use of such a mechanism to force a change in a country's vitamin laws seems a remote possibility but cannot be completely discounted.

Trans-Atlantic Harmonisation

The more likely scenario for harmonisation of rules between the US and Europe, however, is industry-driven harmonisation as presently discussed in TABD, the Trans Atlantic Business Dialogue. This industry body has much clout with regulators on both sides of the Atlantic. It comprises the chief executives of multinational companies and some industry associations. TABD has a dietary supplements working group which discusses how to harmonize the laws between the EU and the US, all in the name of transatlantic trade.

Such harmonisation may bring relief to the beleaguered European health product scene, but it may also bring strictures to the US market, if not by legislation, then by voluntary harmonisation of the market.

Is the health food industry already "sold"?

There certainly is a very active movement of consumers, alternative practitioners and small enterprises opposing the "strategy of a thousand cuts" that is decimating not only our health options but our personal freedoms of choice as well. This movement will continue to grow as awareness of the planned restrictions becomes felt at the personal level. The question that now needs to be answered is, whether this movement will have the support of industry or whether our industry has already been sold. The answer will determine how the fight continues.

14 March 2002
Josef Hasslberger
sepp@lastrega.com

CTM Comment: In spite of an unprecedented public storm and reaction to the vote (some 400 million pieces of correspondence were apparently sent into the EU in protest), MEPs have voted for 'harmonisation'. Millions of e-mails and faxes from members of the public around the world, expressing the sender's concerns and outrage over this curtailment of personal freedoms, were all to no avail, deleted by the batchload by opposing MEPs as 'hysterical spam'. Isn't it great to know that democracy is alive and kicking?

Following the outcome of the EU directive vote, CTM continues to work with a number of natural health organisations, pressure groups, and industry executives, currently devising a rebuttal strategy to prevent the implementation of the directive conditions. Spokespeople from this coalition have requested that their plans remain confidential at this time, as their plans are drawn up. Please stay tuned for more news and details on the opposition strategy to help Europe keep free choice and the right to choose in nutritional supplementation.

The Unforgiving Nature of Chemotherapy

Two years ago, Hazel was diagnosed with breast cancer. She described her chemotherapy as the worst experience of her life.

"This highly toxic fluid was being injected into my veins. The nurse administering it was wearing protective gloves because it would burn her skin if just a tiny drip came into contact with it. I couldn't help asking myself, If such precautions are needed to be taken on the outside, then what is it doing to me on the inside?"

Visit www.whatareweswallowing.freeserve.co.uk/chemospill.htm and begin a sobering journey of discovery on conventional cancer treatments. Discover too the great news on natural anti-cancer agents and read the stories of those who declined conventional treatment… with astounding results!

"Mr Ransom, I share your thoughts and I applaud you for your courage. The most dangerous place on planet Earth is the hospital - next is the doctor's office - followed closely by the dentist's office." Frank D Wiewel Former Chairman, Pharmacological and Biological Treatments Committee, Office of Alternative Medicine, US National Institutes of Health

"An excellent, well researched site, congratulations! You have presented the position exceptionally clearly. I will be certainly directing all my cancer patients to your site." Dr Bill Reeder, MD, MB.ChB Member of ACNEM, AIMA, NZIMA, NZNMA. (Nutritional and Natural Medicines Associations of Australia and NZ)

More Than 50% of College Women Have Experienced Eating Disorders

Research has shown that more than half of college women have experienced eating disorder symptoms, although most do not have full-blown anorexia or bulimia.

While the cause of eating disorders is still unknown, new research suggests that depression and difficulty expressing one's feelings may be a risk factor for disordered eating in young women with a history of family problems or abuse.

The researchers found that family conflict, family cohesion, childhood physical and emotional abuse and neglect did indirectly influence whether a college student would develop problem eating behaviours.

However, they found that depression and alexithymia -- difficulty in identifying and describing one's own feelings -- more directly influences whether women from this type of background develop eating problems.

Taken together, results regarding the associations among alexithymia, depression and disordered eating suggest that it is not the mere presence or absence of childhood emotional and physical abuse and neglect that is associated with disordered eating.

Rather, the development of alexithymia and depressive symptoms in response to these childhood experiences seems to be most strongly associated with disordered eating severity.

The results suggest that individuals who engage in disordered eating behaviours, as well as individuals at risk for developing these behaviours, may benefit from interventions that address adaptive ways to cope with depression.
Journal of Counselling Psychology January 2002

How That Daily Dose of Cod Liver Oil Helps 'Cure' Arthritis
By Jenny Hope - Medical Correspondent

Scientists have discovered that cod liver oil can repair arthritic joints as well as lubricating healthy ones. They say Granny really did know best when she insisted on a daily dose, because it halts the inflammation and destruction of joint cartilage caused by arthritis.

And they believe supplements could help thousands of patients waiting in agony for hip and knee replacements by beginning a reversal of the degenerative process.

More than two million people in Britain have been diagnosed with osteoarthritis.

The researchers, at Cardiff University, say there are scientific reasons for the long held belief that cod liver oil is good for joint health. Professor Bruce Caterson, who presented his findings in London yesterday, said it was never too late to start repairing the damage caused by arthritis.

"Cod liver oil can be very helpful and beneficial in arthritic diseases," he said. "We've been able to show that we can slow down or remove the activities of the enzymes that degrade cartilage in arthritis and also keep inflammation down to a lower level."

The latest research shows the importance to joint health of essential fatty acids - called Omega-3 fatty acids - contained in cod liver oil and other fish oils.

These are incorporated by the body into cartilage cells damaged in arthritis sufferers. Cartilage is the protective material that covers bones around the joints to stop them grating.

The scientists tested the effect of Omega-3 fatty acids in the cartilage from the discarded arthritic knees of patients who had had knee replacements.

Some samples were treated with the substance for 24 hours while others were not. A chemical was added to mimic an inflammatory response.

When researchers looked at the untreated cartilage they found enzymes responsible for destroying it. But in the samples treated with Omega-3 fatty acids the enzymes had been 'switched off'.

Fergus Logan, chief executive of the Arthritis Research Campaign, which partly funded the research, said: "These findings are extremely exciting and offer a scientific basis for why cod liver oil helps people with arthritis - and has done for many years."
Daily Mail, Friday 15th February 2002

COPYCAT, FIRST CLONED PET IN THE WORLD

Copycat is a kitten who will go down in history. The two month old tortoiseshell, with inquisitive blue eyes and pink button nose, looks like any other kitten. But Copycat is a pioneer of commercial cloning. Unveiled by US scientists last week, she means that cats of the future could have more than nine lives. The company which produced her - by the same technique as Dolly the Sheep - plans to charge wealthy pet owners thousands of pounds to replicate animals that die. They are already working on a cloned dog. The breakthrough raises yet more concerns, however, about how cloning techniques are being used. The UK's Animal Procedures Committee, which advises the Home Office, says cloning for 'trivial purposes' such as pets should be banned.

Copycat was created in a laboratory at the Texas A&M University. She is a copy of an adult cat from whom DNA was removed, and is quite different to the surrogate mother who gave birth to her.

She was born on December 22nd, but her public debut was delayed until DNA tests confirmed that she was a true clone and the researchers were sure she was developing normally.

Despite having identical genes to the adult animal, Rainbow, Copycat has slightly different markings on her cream and tortoiseshell coats. The Texas team, who will report their breakthrough in the scientific journal Nature next week, say this is because the patterns are the result of factors in a kitten's development as well as genetics.

Copycat's creation was financed by 81 year old John Sperling, who owns a company called Genetic Savings and Clone. He said last night he plans to offer the technology to wealthy people seeking to replace beloved pets. He also wants to replicate 'socially-valuable' animals such as search and rescue dogs.

Cloned cats are likely to cost around £7,000 at first, with the price expected to fall eventually to £700. Cloned dogs will be much more expensive. Once the technique is established a puppy will initially cost more than £70,000. Eventually the price could fall, but only to around £3,000.

The Texas laboratory boasts that it is the only institution in the world to have cloned four different species, cattle, goats, pigs and cats. It's geneticists are now trying to clone Missy, a cross between a husky and a border collie, whose owners have paid a reported £1.5 million to fund the project.

Elizabeth Taylor is said to have told friends she wants to clone her Maltese terrier, Sugar.

The cloning process that produced Copycat, as with Dolly, involved inserting the DNA from one animal into a hollowed-out egg from a donor. By jump starting the egg with a jolt of electricity, scientists created an embryo.

Experts predict that commercial pet cloning will become widely available in just a few years and claim that it will be the first breakthrough in the field to directly benefit the public.

Critics, however, have condemned the work as interfering with nature and a gratuitous waste of scientific resources. They warn that cloned pets, even if they are genetically identical to the animals they are meant to replace, could be quite different in character and behaviours.
Daily Mail, Friday 15th February 2002

SHOCK CUMBRIA DEATH FIGURES
By Elizabeth Kay

Shock new figures have revealed that North Cumbria has the third worst suicide rate in England and Wales. The area is also identified as having one of the highest levels of fatal accidents, including road crashes. Breast cancer survival rates were also highlighted as among the lowest 10 in the country.

In Cumbria, 14 people out of every 100,000 take their own life every year, compared with a national average of 9. Only Camden and Islington in London (15) and Manchester (17) have a higher suicide rate.

The ratio of deaths caused by accidents is also high, with 23 people dying out of every 100,000 every year. Again, Manchester was the only area where this was higher, with 29 deaths per 100,000.

Dr Nigel Calver, a consultant for the North Cumbria Health Authority, said: "We have high rates in both these areas because of the rural nature of Cumbria. We have a lot of road accidents and many people can feel isolated." The health authority, which until April 2001 had overall control over breast cancer services, was highlighted as one of ten worst survival rates for the disease.

NHS performance indicators published yesterday recorded Cumbria's five years survival rate at 70.8 per cent for April 2000 to April 2001. This is a score of 4.7 per cent less than the figures for 1999/2000.

The Depart of Health says that cancer survival rates are a key measure of the effectiveness of treatment for cancer by the NHS.

East Surrey Health Authority came out best in the breast cancer survival table with 80.6 per cent of women surviving for five years.

Dr Calvert said: "It is disappointing but these figures compare just one year to another rather than looking over a wider picture. Breast cancer survival rates have actually been increasing if you look over a ten year rather than two year picture. There seems to have been more women who were diagnosed with breast cancer in 1995 which would affect this figure which has recorded survival rate for five years up to 2001."

Cumbria was not the worst region in the North of England as eight other authorities including Newcastle, Sunderland, Derbyshire and Liverpool, also scored much lower figures of between 60 and 64 per cent.

Cumbria fared better on other survival rates for cancers. Just under four per cent of people diagnosed with lung cancer in 1995 will survive for five years. Although this appears to be a very low figure, lung cancer is one of the most aggressive killers. Even so, the 3.9 per cent survival for five years in 2000/2001, is up from 2.3 per cent the previous year.

Just under half of people diagnosed with colon cancer had survived for five years in 2000/2001, a slight deterioration on the previous year.
News & Star, Thursday 21st February 2002

Phillip Day Comment: For those despairing at articles such as the above, the good news is here! During my tours around the world, I share the simple truth that there is so much you can do to improve your health and avoid the needless heartache and tragedies we see daily reported in the newspapers. Be it cancer, heart disease, diabetes and other debilitating conditions, find out the simple facts you need to know to stay disease-free, or if you have these conditions, the optimum way of striving for health. I invite you to obtain a copy of my book Health Wars from our CTM-recommended store at www.credence.org, and put all the worry and the expense behind you at last!

More on the Dangers of Mammography

Recent confirmation by Danish researchers of longstanding evidence on the ineffectiveness of screening mammography has been greeted by extensive nationwide headlines. Entirely missing from this coverage, however, has been any reference to the well-documented dangers of mammography.

Screening mammography poses significant and cumulative risks of breast cancer for pre-menopausal women. The routine practice of taking four films of each breast annually results in approximately 1 rad (radiation absorbed dose) exposure, about 1,000 times greater than that from a chest x-ray.

The pre-menopausal breast is highly sensitive to radiation, each 1 rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk by about 1 percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased risk for each breast over a decade's screening. These risks are even greater for younger women subject to "baseline screening."

Radiation risks are some four-fold greater for the 1 to 2 percent of women who are silent carriers of the A-T (ataxia-telangiectasia) gene; by some estimates this accounts for up to 20 percent of all breast cancers diagnosed annually.

Since 1928, physicians have been warned to handle "cancerous breasts with care -- for fear of accidentally disseminating cells" and spreading the cancer. Nevertheless, mammography entails tight and often painful breast compression, particularly in pre-menopausal women, which could lead to distant and lethal spread of malignant cells by rupturing small blood vessels in or around small undetected breast cancers.
Missed cancers are common in pre-menopausal women owing to their dense breasts, and also in postmenopausal women on oestrogen replacement therapy.

Mistakenly diagnosed cancers are common. For women with multiple risk factors including a strong family history and early menarche -- just those strongly urged to have annual mammograms -- the cumulative risks of false positives can reach as high as 100 percent over a decade's screening.

The widespread acceptance of screening has lead to over diagnosis of pre-invasive cancer (ductal carcinoma in situ), sometimes treated radically by mastectomy and radiation, and even chemotherapy.

As increasing numbers of pre-menopausal women are responding to aggressively promoted screening, imaging centres are becoming flooded. Resultingly, patients referred for diagnostic mammography are now experiencing potentially dangerous delays, up to several months, before they can be examined.

The dangers and unreliability of screening are compounded by its growing and inflationary costs. Screening all pre-menopausal women would cost $2.5 billion annually, about 14 percent of estimated Medicare spending on prescription drugs.

These costs would be increased some fourfold if the highly profitable industry, enthusiastically supported by radiologists, succeeds in replacing film machines, costing about $100,000 each, with the latest high-tech digital machines recently approved by the FDA, costing about $400,000 each, for which there is no evidence of improved effectiveness.

The ineffectiveness and dangers of mammography pose an agonizing dilemma for the millions of women anxious for reassurance of early detection of breast cancer. However, the dilemma is more apparent than real.

As proven by a September 2000 publication, based on a unique large-scale screening study by University of Toronto epidemiologists, monthly breast self-examination (BSE) following brief training, coupled with annual clinical breast examination (CBE) by a trained health care professional, is at least as effective as mammography in detecting early tumours, and also safe.

National networks of BSE and CBE clinics staffed by trained nurses should be established to replace screening mammography. Apart from their minimal costs, such clinics would empower women and free them from increasing dependence on industrialized medicine and its complicit medical institutions.
Samuel S. Epstein, M.D. Professor Emeritus Environmental and Occupational Medicine Chairman, Cancer Prevention Coalition University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health 312-996-2297 Web site: http://www.preventcancer.com

For further details and supporting documentation, see "Dangers and Unreliability of Mammography: Breast Examination is a Safe, Effective and Practical Alternative," by Samuel S. Epstein, Barbara Seaman and Rosalie Bertell, International Journal of Health Services, volume 31(3):605-615, 2001.

Expert Panel Cites Doubts on Mammogram's Worth

An independent panel of experts said January 24 that there was insufficient evidence to show that mammograms prevented breast cancer deaths. The group, which meets regularly to assess evidence on cancer and provide that information to doctors and to the public, said that while it was possible that mammograms were beneficial, it was also possible that they were not.

The group, called the P.D.Q. screening and prevention editorial board, agreed here today that seven large studies of mammography had serious flaws, weakening or casting doubt on the studies' validity.

The group, which writes information for the National Cancer Institute's online database, said that it would rewrite previous statements to reflect its new view. Previously, the group, which does not make specific recommendations for medical practices, had said that the evidence showed that mammograms prevented breast cancer deaths starting at age 40.

The decision by this group clouds a continuing debate over whether women should have regular mammograms. Since 1997, the National Cancer Institute has also recommended that women have regular mammograms, starting in their 40's.

For now, the cancer institute, whose new director, Dr. Andrew C. von Eschenbach, was sworn in on January 22, has not announced any plans to revisit the issue, raising the question of whether the Institute will end up with conflicting information on its Web site, with one statement saying that the screening is beneficial and another saying that those benefits have not been proved.

The institute's Web site, www.cancer.gov, says that women in their 40's and older should have the test and that it reduces the breast cancer death rate by as much as 30 percent.

Members of the P.D.Q. board said they knew that it was not going to be easy for women and doctors to decide what to do. At the meeting, the members wrestled with the question of how much benefit, if any, mammograms confer. Some, like the board chairman, Donald A. Berry, chairman of the department of biostatistics at M. D. Anderson Cancer Centre in Houston, said they thought it was unlikely that there were benefits that could make the test worthwhile.

But others said that they were uncertain and that they were having a hard time coming to terms with the profound flaws they now saw in studies they had thought put mammograms on solid ground. "What this new material has contributed is a softening, at least in my mind, of what I thought was true," said Dr. Isra Levy of the Canadian Medical Association. "I still think that for women aged 50 to 69 there might be something there. But we've had our confidence shaken."

In the end, the group decided not to deal with age, saying doubts persisted for women of all ages.

The group focused on flaws in the studies that were recently uncovered by two scientists in Denmark. The report, published in October by Dr. Peter C. Gotzsche and Ole Olsen of the Nordic Cochrane Centre in Copenhagen, concluded that the case for the screening was unproven.

The studies were so poorly designed and carried out that they might have found benefits when there were none or exaggerated what benefits there were, the researchers said. None of the studies found that mammography prolonged life, and even when the studies were analysed as a group, women who had the test lived no longer, dying of diseases other than breast cancer.

Some experts have taken issue with Dr. Gotzsche and Mr. Olsen's analysis. But today, the P.D.Q. Board said it believed that the scientists had found serious problems. The board's assessment of mammography is expected to be posted on the cancer institute's Web site in April.

The P.D.Q. Board said it would like to see others take on a detailed and independent analysis of the mammography studies and that some of the data that might settle questions about the quality of the studies could be obtained with difficulty.

The issue of whether women should have mammograms has been controversial for some time. In January 1997, when an independent panel convened by the National Institutes of Health took on the question of mammograms for women in their 40's, Congress got involved.

That panel said then that there was no evidence that the test prevented breast cancer deaths in women under 50 and suggested that those women discuss mammograms with their doctors before deciding to have one.

Before the week was over, the panel's chairman, Dr. Leon Gordis of the Johns Hopkins University, had been summoned by Senator Arlen Specter to testify before Congress. Later, going against the conclusions of the panel convened at its behest, the cancer institute said women in their 40's should have mammograms.

The P.D.Q. Board, which issues its statements independently, has also said over the last several years that mammograms prevent breast cancer deaths for women in their 40's. Today, the P.D.Q. Board emphasized that mammograms have drawbacks, leading at times to excessive treatments for tumours that would not have threatened a woman's life.

The group agreed that doctors should respect a woman's decision, adding that it was rational to decide to have mammograms and that it was rational to decide not to. Whatever they decided, Dr. Berry said in a telephone interview on Tuesday that he was acutely aware of the difficulty in questioning an enormous mammography business.

"Screening programs bring in patients," Dr. Berry said. "It isn't just the mammography, but it's the biopsies, the surgeries and the like. We know that screening is exquisitely fine at finding cancers. Therefore it brings in patients and they demand treatment."

The problem, he said, is if the women who have mammograms fare no better, or do even worse because of excessive treatment, than women who are not screened.
New York Times January 24, 2002

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:
The New York Times is one of the best newspapers in the US. This is their second recent article on this topic. Now, it appears that even the National Cancer Institute is willing to say that mammograms don't work. It seems that the writing is on the wall. Save yourself the expense and danger and replace your mammograms with regular self breast exams.

You really don't have to be a nuclear physicist and physician to understand that mammograms (x-rays) cause cancers, but it helps. Dr. Gofman is a nuclear physicist and a medical doctor and that is his conclusion.

Mammography is a perfect example of modern medicine "putting the cart before the horse." Although there is no evidence that it saves lives, that is exactly what everyone is led to believe.

CTM Comment:

In addition to Dr Mercola's comments, the quoted Dr John Gofman has this to say about mammograms:

"Breast cancer is a largely PREVENTABLE disease, and we reach that good news because of our finding that a large share of recent and current breast cancer in the United States is CERTAINLY due to past medical irradiation of the breasts with x-rays - at all ages, including infancy and childhood. Much of today's radiation dosage is preventable, without any interference with necessary diagnostic radiology, and hence many future breast cancers need not occur."

Professor Samuel Epstein concurs with the risks mammograms and x-rays in general pose for the unknowing patient:

"X-rays are carcinogenic. The more X-rays you submit to and the greater the dose, the greater is your risk of cancer… Whatever you may be told, refuse routine mammograms to detect early breast cancer, especially if you are pre-menopausal. The X-rays may actually increase your chances of getting cancer…. Very few circumstances, if any, should persuade you to have X-rays taken if you are pregnant. The future risks of leukaemia to your unborn child, not to mention birth defects, are just not worth it."
(excerpted from Health Wars by Phillip Day - www.credence.org)

Doctors Not Trained in Nutrition

Dear CTM

I am just in the middle of reading Phillip Day's Health Wars and I totally agree that doctors are not trained in the field of nutrition. At the moment there is a lot of advertising on TV in Australia saying that if you have a weight problem, call now to make an appointment with your doctor so he/she can help you. I actually work for a world-famous weight loss company and a couple of years ago there were so many doctors coming to see us it was a joke. One doctor said to me that "he doesn't eat all day and then has a large meal at night, why aren't I losing weight?" I thought "you're the doctor, you tell me." My sister went to a doctor about weight loss because she was desperate. She was told to keep her mouth shut so she couldn't put anything in there. Absolutely disgusting. What an attitude.

Yours
Suzanne Cox
Australia

Death by Doctoring

Not read 'Death by Doctoring' yet?

Just read some of the comments from those who have!

"Mr Ransom, I share your thoughts and I applaud you for your courage for bringing us 'Death by Doctoring'. The most dangerous place on planet earth is the hospital - next is the doctor's office - followed closely by the dentist's office." Frank D Wiewel, Former Chairman, Pharmacological and Biological Treatments Committee, Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM) US National Institutes of Health (NIH)

"Dear Steve, Thank God you wrote this article! The senseless deaths of our past for the sake of a buck is so sinful I cannot express the grief I feel knowing all of this. No one in my family has this dreadful affliction and I hope they never do. Thank you, thank you, thank you." Eddie Matthews

"This informative and empowering essay shows that the main beneficiaries of cancer treatment are the medical and pharmaceutical interests, while most cancer patients continue to suffer and die of this spreading disease - and not only despite conventional treatment, but often because of it! Death by Doctoring should be required reading for anyone who values his or her health." John J. Moelaert - author of The Cancer Conspiracy http://members.shaw.ca/jmoelaert

"As someone who was diagnosed with enormous cancer 4 years ago -- and who was lucky enough to have had some truth put in front of me BEFORE the axe fell -- I am SO happy to be doing as much as I can to help spread the truth. It is so sad that I know supposedly "educated" people who just close their eyes and will not look at what CAN in fact save their lives - seemingly, they prefer to die. YET -- they DO NOT WANT TO DIE. How brainwashed are we? Keep it up." Jane May, Wagga Wagga, Australia

"Hi Steve! I am a Naturopath in Liverpool, Sydney. I want to encourage you to keep up your great work & mission to get the truth out. I am so glad that my heavenly Father led me out of the nursing profession, where I worked as a trained nurse & midwife for 10 years. I have been practising as a Nature Cure Naturopath for 20 years, specialising in parents' & children's health, & guiding parents to prepare their bodies to have healthy children & then to raise them naturally in vibrant health, not vaccinated or medicated with any drugs. May God bless you abundantly in all that you do. Yours in vibrant health & joy." Marilyn

"Dear Steve, I must blame you for a sleepless night as I had just been sent your site and found your articles to be just brilliant! I have been immersing myself in all of this information for a while now but never have I found it written so well online...so thank you! You certainly gave myself and my family members something to think about. Keep up the brilliant work. Take care, and bless ya heaps!!" Ledonna James

"An excellent, well researched site, congratulations! You have presented the position exceptionally clearly as it is regarding mainstream and 'alternative. It is of growing concern that the rising popularity of alternative medicine, unregulated, is beginning in some areas to go down the same greedy and dishonest path as big pharm. There is too much good to have this happen. The consequences will be government closedown of non-mainstream medicine orchestrated by the dangerous Codex. I practise almost exclusively natural medicine and much of my time is spent in assisting patients through the complex, bewildering maze of which option, which nutrient and which of the thousands of 'cancer cures'. I will be certainly directing all my cancer patients to your site. Our clinic already uses, amongst other immune supportive therapies, IV Vit C and B17 intravenously as well as orally. Keep up the research Steve, we appreciate it." Bill Reeder, Registered Medical Practitioner MB.ChB Member of ACNEM, AIMA, NZIMA, NZNMA. (Nutritional and Natural Medicines Associations of Australia and NZ)

"Hi Steven, I just wanted to THANK YOU for your brilliant "Death By Doctoring" article! It makes for a most insightful and fascinating read. I have passed it on to a lot of people and will keep spreading the word. Keep up the great work!" Ora James

Do not miss out on the most informative cancer story of 2002!

Go now to

www.whatareweswallowing.freeserve.co.uk/deathbydoctoring.htm

With many thanks,
Steven Ransom,
Research Director,
Credence Publications

"We concentrate on consistency without much concern of what it is we are being consistent about, or whether we are consistently right or wrong. As a consequence, we have been learning a great deal about how to follow an incorrect cause with the maximum of precision." W Deutscher

DIABETES THREAT TO COUCH POTATO CHILDREN
By Jenny Hope

British children's sedentary lifestyle is giving them a type of diabetes usually found only in adults, it was revealed yesterday. Doctors who have warned for years that overweight youngsters were storing up health problems in later life were shocked to discover Type 2 diabetes in patients as young as 13.

The findings from the Royal Hospital for Children in Bristol provide one of the starkest warnings yet about the effects of the couch potato lifestyle on the nation's health. They suggest the effects of obesity are being felt in children before they even reach adulthood.

Britain has the third highest rate of increase in obesity levels in the world, rapidly catching up with the epidemic situation in the US. Three out of five adults are overweight or obese - the level at which their health is seriously threatened.

The problem is mirrored among children, with a doubling of the numbers with weight problems. Almost one in ten youngsters under four is obese.

The British doctors showed children are being diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes up to 30 years earlier than they might normally be expected to develop it.

Dr Julian Shields, a senior lecturer in paediatrics said the finding was disturbing.

"This is a major problem," he added yesterday. "There will be a growing pool of people at risk of developing diabetes and suffering complications. The increasing incidence of childhood obesity and the inevitable rise in Type 2 diabetes from an early age is likely to have a major long term impact on health care systems in the UK."

Altogether four teenagers have been diagnosed with the problem - three girls aged 13, 14 and 15, and a boy of 15. Two of the girls have mothers with Type 2 diabetes.

Researchers used an established method of calculating obesity, the Body Mass Index (BMI), which is obtained by dividing weight by height. A BMI of more than 25 in adults is classed as overweight and more than 30 is obese. The children had BMI levels of 35 or more. Diabetes occurs when the level of glucose in the blood is too high. This is triggered by a lack of insulin, or a failure by the hormone to work properly.

When the condition is diagnosed in younger patients, it is normally Type 1, which can be treated with insulin injections.

Medical textbooks say Type 2 is usually found in those aged 40 and older and treated by diet and exercise alone, tablets or sometimes insulin.

The condition damages the arteries and can raise cholesterol levels, while the heart muscle and nerves can also be affected. Complications include heart disease, stroke, kidney failure, blindness and lower limb conditions. Currently 1.4 million Britons are diagnosed with diabetes, including 200,000 youngsters with Type 1.

Up to one million adults have undiagnosed Type 2 diabetes and the total is due to double by 2010. The expert say the increase reflects the growing numbers of the overweight.

"Most people who develop diabetes have a genetic predisposition," added Dr Shields. "These children may have been more likely to develop it anyway but we would have expected it to happen at a much older age. It is worrying because children with Type 2 will have it for a long time which puts them at higher risk of complications."

The threat of obesity related health problems has grown as youngsters increase their intake of so called junk foods and cut the amount they exercise. One in four children watches four hours of TV a day and only a third of schools offer two hour a week of physical activity.

Most recent figures indicate that secondary schools in England and Wales allocate less time to PE than anywhere else in Europe.

British Heart Foundation medical director Professor Sir Charles George said the charity was very concerned about the diabetes time bomb because it raises the risk of heart problems.

He said: "There is a high association between the number of hours spent watching TV and family car ownership, and children becoming seriously overweight and the risk of diabetes. To minimise the danger we have to promote healthy lifestyles and get children on the move."

A spokesman for the charity Diabetes UK said: "These cases confirm a very worrying trend."
Daily Mail, Thursday 21st February 2002

CTM Comment: The Campaign's recommended flagship book Health Wars, by UK health researcher Phillip Day, discusses type 2 diabetes recovery in conjunction with low grain diets and regular exercise. Type 2 is not a lack of insulin, actually, often too much of it, where the body has become resistant to the hormone. Dr Joseph Mercola at www.mercola.com also has great information on this condition. Health Wars (available from www.credence.org) and Dr Mercola's site are highly recommended by CTM for everyone who needs solid information on the problem of diabetes.

Hard to Swallow

Public health officials are fighting two anti-fluoridation bills in the Utah Legislature with a familiar two-pronged argument: Weird Utahns have been bucking a trend with their dogged opposition to water fluoridation, and scientists are unanimously behind it. It is the same misinformation that helped proponents win referendums in Davis and Salt Lake counties in November 2000.

The truth is voters around the country have been rejecting fluoridation regularly for the past decade. Ten U.S. towns -- including Flagstaff, Arizona, and Modesto, California -- defeated fluoridation measures handily last year while only Yuma, Arizona, and Utah's Centerville passed them. Even the City Council of progressive Colorado Springs, Colorado, recently spurned fluoridation, while the national Sierra Club is urging communities to seek "safer alternatives." Utahns didn't start bucking a trend until they voted for fluoridation.

An even greater falsehood is that scientists are united behind fluoridation. That notion has always been proponents' most intimidating weapon, and a federal health official predictably unsheathed it again last week while speaking with the Utah media. William Maas, the government's director of oral health, said he couldn't understand "why people don't trust the recommendations from esteemed scientific [sources]." What he and other fluoridation proponents know well but never acknowledge is that the many scientists who question fluoridation are every bit as "esteemed" as the ones who don't.

Dr. Maas, meet Dr. Arvid Carlsson of Sweden. Carlsson won the Nobel Prize in medicine in 2000, then joined a list of a dozen other past Nobel-winning scientists by advising the world not to fluoridate. In an interview last year with the Kamloops (British Columbia) Daily News -- verified by The Tribune via e-mail -- he said fluoridation isn't worth the risks. "Side-effects cannot be excluded and, thus, some people might only have negative effects without any benefit," Carlsson explained. "In Sweden, water fluoridation, to my knowledge, is no longer advocated by anybody."

It has few advocates in the rest of Europe, either. Dutch officials responded to a Tribune inquiry last year by forwarding a Ministry of Health study, which noted that "a number of questions concerning human health and the environment in connection with fluoride have not and can hardly be clarified." The Netherlands today doesn't even recommend fluoride tablets for consumption, and about 98 percent of Europe has rejected fluoridation.

How can this be when the U.S. Public Health Service is such a relentless proponent? It's possible that America knows something that Europe doesn't -- a premise not supported by comparisons of cavity rates -- or it could just be simple politics. European health organizations didn't stick their necks out by aggressively promoting fluoridation early on, so they risked no loss of credibility by backing away when questions arose about its safety and effectiveness.

In any event, the "esteemed" scientific community that pushes fluoridation is far smaller than it would have Utahns believe. From a global standpoint, it appears as odd as it has always accused Utahns of looking.
Salt Lake Tribune, Tuesday, March 5, 2002

Gall Bladder Flushes and Cleanses
How Your Gall Bladder Works

The gall bladder is a hollow inactive organ supplying bile to the digestive tract that is mainly used to emulsify fats and oils. According to some natural health experts who believe in gall bladder flushes, the gall bladder can be damaged by
· Excessive amounts of fat and oil;
· Large amounts of spice;
· Very cold liquids;
· Cold dairy products
· Drafts
· Planning and thinking ahead all the time
· Stress.
These same writers say the gall bladder can be protected by:
· Pickles
· Good quality vinegar.
According to these writers, gall bladder problems (thus suggesting the need for a gall bladder flush) are often found in people who are
· Constantly planning
· Hypersensitive to drafts
· Hypersensitive to noises
· Hypersensitive to strong smells.
When the liver is constantly stagnant, sediment often settles out of the bile and forms accumulations that resemble stones, sand or mud in the gall bladder.

Symptoms of sediment in the gall bladder:
· Indigestion
· Flatulence
· Periodic pain below the right side of the rib cage
· Tension in the back of the shoulder near the neck
· Bitter taste in the mouth
· Chest pain.
How To Do the Gall Bladder Flush
This is a one-day purge to flush the gall bladder of sediment and stones. Beginning in the morning, eat only organic apples, at least five throughout the day. Green apples help soften the stones more than red. Drink pure water and herbal teas. At bedtime, warm up 2/3 cup of olive oil to body temperature and mix in 1/3 cup of fresh lemon juice. Slowly sip the entire mixture, and then immediately go to bed. Lie on your right side with your right leg drawn up. In the morning, all gallstones should pass in the stool.

This flush should be done only with the guidance of an experienced health practitioner.

5-Day Gall Bladder Flush
This is a milder, slightly less effective variation of the one-day flush. Consume apples and radishes for five days. For five consecutive days, take two tablespoons of olive oil and two tablespoons of lemon juice on an empty stomach one time a day.

Gradual Gall Bladder Cleanse
This cleanse takes 21 days and is slower and gentler on the body. This is the one often recommended for those unsure of how much sediment or stones they may have. Cleansing two or three times a year ensures a healthy gall bladder.

During the cleanse, avoid all foods high in fat, meats, dairy, eggs. Eat unrefined grains, vegetables, fruits and legumes to help clear the gallbladder.

These foods hasten gallstone removal:
· Pears
· Parsnips
· Seaweed
· Lemons
· Limes
· Turmeric
Radish also remove stones, so, for the entire 21 days eat 1-2 radishes a day between meals and drink three cups of cleavers tea or five cups of chamomile tea a day.

For every 160 pounds of body weight use five teaspoons of cold-pressed flax seed oil. Pour the flax oil over your food during one meal of the day or divide into half and use on two meals. Take the flax oil six days a week for two months.

When the liver has been stagnant for a long time, sediments form in the gall bladder, according to some natural health writers, and that's the time to do a home gall bladder flush.
Chet Day January 29, 2002

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:
I addressed this issue in a previous posting several years ago, but thought it was worth reposting as so many people have unnecessary surgery to have their gallbladder removed. In my experience, more than half the time the gallbladder is taken out, the patient's pain that prompted the surgery still remains.

This is because the surgeon never fixed the problem. They only treated the symptom. This makes about as much sense as putting a piece of tape over the idiot light that would come on in your dashboard if your engine oil pressure is low. This would clearly solve the problem, the light would not bother you anymore, but you would be looking at expensive engine repairs if you failed to treat the cause of the light being on.

If you have abdominal pain that is immediately below your last rib on your right side and lined up with your right nipple, especially if your press down in that spot, there is a good chance that you have a gallbladder problem.

The first step is to immediately follow the eating plan. Regular exercise has been consistently associated with a decrease in gallbladder problems.

If the pain persists the article above provides a far simpler less expensive option prior to surgery.

I believe it is nearly criminal what traditional medicine is doing to the public when it comes to managing this problem. It is RARELY ever necessary to remove someone's gallbladder. If one ignores warning symptoms and does not address the reasons why their gallbladder is not functioning properly, than the disease can progress to the point where the pancreas is inflamed or the gallbladder is seriously infected and may have to be removed to save a person's life.

However, it is important to have a proper perspective here. Nearly ONE MILLION gallbladders are removed every year in this country and it is my estimate that only several thousand need to come out.

So, not only are surgeons removing these organs unnecessarily, but also in their nutritional ignorance they are telling patients that their gallbladders do not serve any purpose and they can live perfectly well without them.

This is a lie.

The gallbladder serves an important digestive function. It is required to emulsify fats. What is emulsification? One can easily understand this concept when washing greasy dishes. It is nearly impossible to properly clean greasy dishes without soap as the soap emulsifies the fat so it can be removed.

Similarly, the gallbladder stores bile and bile acids, which emulsify the fat one eats so it can be properly transported through the intestine into the blood stream.

Anyone who has had their gallbladder removed will need to take some form of bile salts with every meal for the rest of their life (I use and recommend Beta Plus from Biotics Research), if they wish to prevent a good percentage of the good fats they eat from being flushed down the toilet.

If one does not have enough fats in the diet, their entire physiology will be disrupted, especially the ability to make hormones and prostaglandins.

Hawaii And The Fluoridation War

Dear all at CTM,

Two more fluoridation items from Hawaii.

First, a letter which I received via the US Mail this morning from State Representative William Stonebraker. Although he addresses the letter to me personally, I think it equally applies to all FAN members who have sent in letters urging Hawaiin legislators to oppose fluoridation. He tells us of his new bill to outlaw fluoridation and urges our continued support. You might wish to e-mail him and thank him for his efforts. His email address is <repstonebraker@capital.hawaii.gov>.

Also from Hawaii is an email from Diane Kaneshiro <cyberseek1@juno.com> who has responded to IFIN 470 ( Victory in Hawaii). I find it extremely interesting that the outrageously ill-informed Dr. Mark Greer (Dental Director for the Hawaii Dept of Health) has Michael Easley ( fluoridation's most unabashed propagandist) as his side-kick. No wonder Greer spouts the nonsense that he does!

Both items are printed below.

Paul Connett.

House of Representatives,
State of Hawaii,
State Capitol,
Honolulu, HAWAII 96813,
February 4, 2002.

Dear Professor Connett,

I am writing to express my continued appreciation for your support for keeping Hawaii's drinking water clean and pure. Your testimony in last year's legislative session played an instrumental role in the law-making process.

The valiant efforts of you and others have helped to protect the health and well being of our Hawaii's residents and has kept our State's water the cleanest in the Nation. It is important that we keep Hawaii's water clean and pure. As many other experts have testified fluoridating drinking water is often unhealthy and not a very effective way to prevent tooth decay.

People should be able to make their own decisions as to what they would like to put in their bodies, provided they are not harmful. It is not our place to legislate these kinds of decisions.

I am once again introducing a Pure Hawaiian Drinking Water bill, H.B. 2177. I am optimistic that we can once again count on your support for this important piece of legislation. Lawmakers need to hear the opinions and concerns of people like you in this legislative process.

If I, or my staff can be of any assistance please feel free to contact us at (808) 586-6420. Thank you once again for your valiant efforts. I look forward to seeing you again this year.

Aloha,

Budd,

William "Bud" Stonebraker,
Representative, District 15,
House of Representatives
State of Hawaii.

E-mail : repstonebraker@capital.hawaii.gov

Hi, Dr. Connett:

Thanks for posting the Advertiser article on HB 2761 (water fluoridation) on your website, and in the IFIN e-newsletter. This is a great victory, yes, but it is only one battle in the war against water fluoridation. The people here in Hawaii who are fighting water fluoridation still have to be watchful that no one reintroduces some form of water fluoridation into a bill during this legislative session. The session runs until March 2; plenty of time for the pro fluoride gang to sabotage all of our hard work.

By the way, I'd like to mention that the notorious Michael Easley was there, but he didn't testify. I noticed that as soon as it was announced that the water fluoridation portion of the bill was going to be deleted, he and Mark Greer suddenly got up and left the hearing. This only proves to me that these so-called public servants really do not have the public's best interests in mind; otherwise, they would have stayed to hear what private citizens had to say about this matter. Thank you again for all of your hard work on our behalf. Your website is a tremendous research tool; I depended on it heavily while drafting my testimony before the health committee.

Diane Kaneshiro
Honolulu, HI

Hormone Treatment in Older Women Questioned
By Susan Okie

In older women, taking the sex hormones oestrogen and progestin does not improve emotional well-being except among those suffering from hot flushes, a new study suggests. In women without hot flushes, the hormones may actually worsen physical functioning.

The researchers called the results surprising and said they cast doubt on the popular belief, encouraged by drug advertisements, that taking hormones after menopause can make most women feel more youthful, active and vibrant.

"These findings are challenging that perception," said Joann E. Manson, chief of preventive medicine at Harvard's Brigham and Women Hospital. "This study would suggest that perhaps we should remove quality-of-life benefits from the risk/benefit equation" when women are considering whether to take hormones after menopause.

Thirty-eight percent of U.S. women between the ages of 50 and 74 take hormones after menopause, according to a national survey published in 1999. However, the new findings are the latest in an array of studies that have raised questions about whether such treatment confers a net health benefit.

For example, oestrogen increases the risk of blood clots, gall bladder disease, uterine cancer and breast cancer.

Manson and other experts emphasized that the new study confirmed that women suffering from frequent hot flushes do obtain relief from hormone treatment. Hot flushes - sudden episodes of skin flushing, sweating and a sensation of uncomfortable warmth - occur in 70 percent of women during menopause and are sometimes severe enough to cause insomnia, fatigue and irritability.

In some women they abate after a year or two, while in others they continue for a decade or more. Among study participants with hot flushes, hormone treatment improved symptoms of depression and did not reduce physical well-being.

The new study, led by cardiologist Mark A. Hlatky of Stanford University, examined physical functioning, energy levels, mental health and depressive symptoms among 2,763 women who participated in the HERS trial, a research project originally designed to find out whether women with heart disease would benefit from treatment with oestrogen and progestin.

Women in the study were randomly allocated to receive either hormone treatment or a placebo. Researchers then followed their health for three years.

In the group as a whole, physical functioning, energy and mental health declined during the study, perhaps reflecting their underlying heart disease. However, at the start of the study, 16 percent of the women said they were bothered by hot flushes, and their baseline indicators of physical and mental health were worse than for the other participants.

Among this group, hormone treatment improved depression and mental health without significantly affecting energy levels or physical functioning.

In contrast, women without hot flushes who received hormone treatment showed a faster decline in physical functioning than women given a placebo, but no significant difference in mental health or symptoms of depression.
Washington Post February 5, 2002
JAMA February 6, 2002:287:591-97

CTM Comment: Excess estrogen in the female body, unopposed by progesterone, may bring on menopausal symptoms, cysts, fibroids and breast cancer. There is a tremendous controversy raging over the necessity of hysterectomies, ovary removal, HRT treatments and the dangers associated with these procedures. For a fuller explanation, the reader should read "Barking up the Wrong Tree", a chapter devoted to these issues in Health Wars (www.credence.org).

More People on Antidepressants

The number of prescriptions written by British doctors for antidepressants more than doubled over the last three decades. Rates of antidepressant prescribing increased markedly in all age and sex groups with as much as a threefold increase in the older age groups, the investigators found. In 1998, they noted, UK doctors wrote 23.4 million prescriptions for antidepressant drugs.

The introduction of the antidepressant Prozac, in 1987 was a major factor behind these trends, the authors pointed out. Prozac and other drugs known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have fewer side effects than the previous class of antidepressant drugs, known as tricyclics. The newer medications have a less complicated dosing regimen, and are also much less dangerous when taken in overdose.

With the exception of 12-19-year-olds, these increases have been more marked in males, although absolute levels of prescribing are still at least two times higher in females.

It is uncertain whether or not these trends reflect a change in the population's mental health or changes in the presentation, recognition and management of depression.

In the US, experts estimate that during any given year, between 5% and 10% of the population experiences major depression.
Journal of Public Health Medicine 2001;23:262-267

Council Votes to End Fluoridation

New Zealand's Ashburton's town water supply will no longer be fluoridated from April on the casting vote of Mayor Murray Anderson. With his council tied six votes all at its meeting yesterday, Mr Anderson said he could not be sure that fluoridation benefited all residents, and cast his vote to end the practice.

The council debate had swirled around the competing arguments of freedom of choice and the medical establishment's support for fluoridation.

Most urban ward councillors backed a motion by Cr Robin Kilworth to continue fluoridation, but in the end the votes of rural councillors John Leadley, Bev Tasker, Ken Lowe, and Darryl Nelson combined with the Mayor's vote to decide the issue.

Of the urban councillors, only Kelvin Holmes and Neville Truman voted to stop adding fluoride to the town supply.

The council has been swamped with information about fluoridation since a petition of 827 signatures was presented last year calling for it to be stopped.

Anti-fluoride campaigner Don Church said yesterday that the fact that fluoridation made no difference to dental health had won out. During the months-long debate, campaigners have raised the spectre of cancer and bone disease resulting from fluoridation.

Dentists and the Ministry of Health advised the council to continue the practice.

Mr Anderson said he believed fluoridation was safe, but the debate came down to individual rights.

It appeared possible that fluoridation benefited some people but not others, he said. "That's where I have not got the real knowledge of being able to dictate to a community and say "there is no doubt". Cr Kilworth said it was an issue where they were damned either way, but just 827 people had signed the petition to stop fluoridating out of 11,000 electors.

"Do we have the right to take it out because 827 people asked us to when by far the majority of people who use this water every day have not asked to?" she said.

Cr Bede O'Malley said the campaign to end the practice had been too shrill in labelling it mass medication, while Cr Derek Glass said fluoride had nothing but beneficial effects.

Mr Anderson suggested ending fluoridation from July 1, but the council voted to end it on March 31.
The Press - Christchurch 2002-03-01

Oestrogen Linked to Insulin Resistance

Postmenopausal women taking oral oestrogen, with or without progesterone, show increased insulin resistance, even when allowing for being overweight.

Researchers used a three-hour hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic in the study, which is the most sensitive way to assess a person's insulin level. They found women taking oestrogen had a 31 percent lower utilization rate of insulin compared to postmenopausal women not on oestrogen replacement therapy.

The authors concluded that postmenopausal women taking oral oestrogen, with or without progesterone, show a greater degree of insulin resistance than those not taking hormone replacement therapy, even allowing for total and abdominal adiposity.
Diabetes Care January 2002;25:127-133

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:
Unless you had your head buried under the sand for the last few years, you should be aware that excess oestrogen is one of the main causes of breast cancer.

The key here is excess. Women do need oestrogen. The problem is that most western women have excessive amounts. Many women also have total hysterectomies in which their ovaries are removed. This is one of the few times where oestrogen replacement therapy is appropriate.

Unfortunately the above study was quite small and did not seem to differentiate between these two groups. However, in addition to oestrogen increasing the risk of breast cancer, the study shows it increases insulin levels.

This is important as increased insulin levels are associated with not only increased risk of cancer, but high blood pressure, diabetes, high cholesterol and obesity.

Oestrogen has also been promoted for many years to decrease the risk of heart disease. Well folks, this is simply not true.

Although oestrogen does appear to lower cholesterol levels, heart disease prevention is clearly far more complex than cholesterol levels alone. It seems quite clear that oestrogen supplementation in postmenopausal women who still have their ovaries does not lower the risk of heart disease.

Additionally oestrogen is not the cure for bone loss that it is commonly promoted to be and oestrogen does not decrease a women's risk of Alzheimer's disease. www.mercola.com

Optimism Can Ward Off Stress

Optimists tend to develop better coping skills and a more supportive social network than those with a darker outlook, which may shelter them from stress and depression. The role that our personality plays in generating responses from others can go a long ways towards our own mental well-being.

Previous research has shown that those who have a sunny outlook about the future tend to have better mental health than those who are pessimistic. One possible reason, the researchers theorize, is that optimists are more likely to develop strong ties with others, which has been shown to be one factor in being better able to handle stress.

Because optimistic people may be more skilled interpersonally and are better to be around, they may develop these social networks more easily.

The study found two potential reasons for the optimists' lower levels of stress: strong friendships and superior coping skills. For example, optimists were more likely to report feeling that they had someone who would help them move or loan them a car. Optimists were developing more supportive networks than people who were more pessimistic.

Optimists were no more likely than pessimists to develop an even larger group of friends over time, but their friendships seemed to be of a deeper quality. There was no greater increase in the number of friendships, but you could argue they were potentially stronger.

Optimists also seem to function better than pessimists because they are more likely to rely on an effective coping skill called positive reinterpretation and growth, rather than ineffective coping methods such as denial or disengagement.

Positive reinterpretation is looking at a bad situation and looking for the silver lining, or interpreting the setback as a challenge. Optimists cope differently than pessimists.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology January 2002;82:102-111

A Peppery Don Beats the Big C
By Harriet Sergeant

Twenty five years ago, five young men and I lay nervously on a double bed. We were all students and this was our first night at Oxford University. The bed belonged to Michael Gearing-Tosh, our new tutor, described by one former pupil as resembling a vulture with in-growing toenails.

Oxford dons were notoriously cranky and indifferent to their students. We did not know what to expect. Certainly not an elaborate dinner cooked by Michael on a camping stove, offers of wine and the arrival of John Bayley and Irish Murdoch as fellow guests.

After dinner, Michael acted out the play he was writing with such gusto that he pulled down his curtains. As we left, he handed me a 2ft high red pepper pot. "Hit any young man you think needs it," was my tutor's advice.

So when Michael got cancer at the aged of 54, and was given only months to live, I was not surprised that he attacked it with the same eccentric, delightful and generous spirit that he had shown us that evening.

Eight years later, his book Living Proof is an account of his fight against myeloma, a cancer of the bone marrow, and of his survival.

It is a most unusual book. It does not preach or tell you what to do. It rejects medicine but honours doctors. It is about friendship, but these are the sort of friends who are bossy, funny and often at odds with one another. Most of all it is about making a decision in a state of terror. It is an attempt to get at the truth and to live with truth's uncertainty.

Cancer doctors, Michael quickly discovered, do not go in for truth, but the principle of 'gradual disclosure'. Or, as one remarked: "Keep the patients calm. Do not tell them much. Try love and a tranquilliser."

They guard the essential truth that they 'know so little how the body works', as one specialist put it - let along the effects of chemotherapy on the body. "Touch it," another warned Michael through a friend, "and he's a goner."

Michael rejected urgings to start chemotherapy immediately. He took advice then ignored it.

He dithered for months before finally settling on a sever regime of four coffee enemas a day (through which he read War and Peace), a strict diet, vegetable juices, vitamin and mineral supplements and breathing exercises. He never comes off his diet. At the college dinner, while the rest of us sipped champagne, Michael wandered about with a bowl of lentil soup.

As much as about truth, this book is about fear. Cancer is the illness on which we project our fears of death.

A book is the nearest many of us get to examining those fears. As Michael puts it: "If you are diagnosed with cancer, you need time to think." Fear makes us like 'dependent children' eager to entrust ourselves to doctors and conventional medicine. Living Proof points out a different if no less difficult route.

The joy of this book is the vivid writing and Michael's sense of fun, which never deserts him. His arguments with Rachel Trickett, the former principal of St Hug's College and the woman with whom he lived for 25 year, are delicious.

"The Slav soul," she announces on hearing of the arrival of Michael's new friend, a Russian captain, "is always a disaster."

His breathing exercises where he visualises killing off cancer cells are as exciting as a James Bond movie.

His arguments are presented in dramatic fashion. In his head, he forces cancer specialists to take the stand and present their case. "All are male and in white coats, except the GP, who wears a suit, with a too youthful tie. Nobody is to leave until I finish my post mortem."

The men in white coats are almost as much the enemy as the cancer cells. As a tutor, Michael always wanted us to get at the truth. He would not put up with evasion or flim-flam.

Living Proof is what one astute man makes of the medical establishment. He does not make much. He scrutinises their writings with the same terrifying vigour that he applied to my weekly essays.

If I was lucky, tiny ticks of Michael's approval leapt like fleas about the page. Did that medical journal, The Lancet, expect its editorials to be analysed with the same care as Michael applied to Paradise Lost or Hamlet?

Queen Elizabeth I, Donne, Chekhov and Primo Levi are treated like old friends and pulled into the witness box along with Michael's cast of unusual admirers, a fabulous American heiress, a Russian captain, a Malaysian tycoon, impoverished students and strong willed women.

In the end, the title speaks for itself. Michael is still alive.

What this proves, I am not sure. That coffee enemas and carrot juice work? Or that a man of large spirit and unusual intelligence who refused to be dehumanised by a disease or its specialists, has found his way to live?

What chance, after all, has death, or the rude doctor, got against a weapon like that red pepper pot? You must judge for yourself.
Critics Choice - Daily Mail, Friday 15th February 2002

CTM Comment: Michael Gearing-Tosh is to be applauded for his stentorian stance against chemotherapy, and his common-sense embracing of treatments he knew by instinct were going to do him good. His story is a fabulous endorsement of the desire to live, even when faced with insurmountable odds. For further information on natural, nutritional, non-toxic treatments for cancer, obtain a copy of Phillip Day's excellent book Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know the Truth, available at www.credence.org.

PILL THAT MAKES YOU SLIM WITHOUT EXERCISE

It sounds like wishful thinking, but drinkers may soon be able to get rid of their beer bellies by taking a pill.

Scientists have developed a drug which enables users to lose weight without cutting calories or taking more exercise.

Further trials of the drug will be carried out throughout the year and a pill could be on the market in four years' time. The drug has been developed by researchers at Monash University in Australia, led by Professor Frank Ng.

He was investigating the causes of diabetes when he made a break through leading to the production of the drug called Advanced Obesity Drug 9604, which speeds up the body's metabolism.

Obese men who took part in a trial lost an average of 1.1lb in a month after being injected with a single dose of the drug. As well as the benefits for drinkers, the researchers hope their discovery will have a serious impact on the treatment of obesity.

It is associated with heart disease, strokes, hypertension, angina and types of cancer. Fat people are likely to die nine years younger than slim people.

Dr Ng said: "We are hoping to give the drug to really obese people and reduce, to a certain extent, their fat so that they can become sufficiently mobile to begin the path towards improved health. Obesity used to be a condition associated with the trend toward old age but now we are seeing more and more children suffering obesity. This group has become our greatest concern but hopefully, using drugs like this one, we will be able to prevent them from becoming obese adults."

Obesity costs the British economy more than £2.5 billion a year. Levels have trebled since 1980 and one in five adults is dangerously overweight. The condition also affects nearly one in ten children under 11 according to a report from the National Audit Office.

Britons are now fatter than most of Europeans, with obesity accounting for 30,000 premature deaths a year. By 2010 Britain will have caught up with the United States, where one in four adults is obese.
Daily Mail, Wednesday 6th February 2002

CTM Comment: Once again we see the 'Pill for Every Ill' concept being applied by medicine for the benefit of those who are unwilling to bring the body into optimum condition naturally through diet and activity. There are of course those who cannot exercise because of disability. However the vast majority who will see the above article as 'good news' will be those who are looking to cut corners either because of indolence, or because they do not have the time. Such time-saving measures, especially when applied to health, invariably end in tears.

STATISTICS OF THE WEEK

Two hundred and sixty four Falklands veterans have committed suicide - nine more than were killed in the 1982 war.
The Mail on Sunday

In terms of employee numbers, the NHS is the world's second largest organisation after the Indian State Railways.
The Mail on Sunday

TAX TO RISE
Labour Promises a world-class NHS but,
guess what, it's Middle England who'll pick up the bill
By Paul Eastham

Cabinet Ministers launched a major campaign yesterday for big tax rises. Without them, they claimed, the NHS cannot be revived.

Twelve hours after Tony Blair warned of a huge tax increase in the April 17 budget, senior colleagues rushed to reinforce the message.

Health Secretary Alan Milburn insisted: "If we want sustained investment in the NHS, we will need to pay for it. I believe the best way of doing it - the fairest and most efficient way - is through general taxation."

The Tories, in a surprise break with previous policy, signalled that they agreed. Shadow Health Secretary Dr Liam Fox suggested taxes "may still have to rise", although he said later the party is still reviewing how to fund the NHS.

Experts said a Labour tax rise would be targeted solidly on middle-income earners. A rise in the upper limit of National Insurance is the most likely option - ministers repeatedly refused to rule out such a move during the general election campaign.

A drastic curb in the value of personal income tax allowances may also be high on the Budget agenda. That could force another million people into the higher 40 per cent tax band.

But there were warnings that, for all the stress on the NHS, the Government needs money from somewhere to continue its promised spending on other public services like education and transport. And health experts said simply throwing money at NHS problems would be enough without careful consideration of where and how to spend.
Daily Mail, Friday 22nd February 2002

CTM Comment: Is the answer to the National Health Service's woes even more money to benefit the medical and drug industries, or is it not reducing the number of NHS customers through proper diet and education? Who expects a politician to tell us what the medical industry has failed to do? Food, water and education, organic of course (including the education), and watch those hospital beds empty out. It won't happen, of course, until significant numbers of the public make their voices heard in unison. This is what the Campaign for Truth in Medicine is designed to co-ordinate.

TIME MARCHES ON
(A look at aging attitudes)

1970: Long Hair
2000: Longing for hair

1970: The perfect high
2000: The perfect high yield mutual fund

1970: KEG
2000: EKG and ECT

1970: Acid rock
2000: Acid reflux

1970: Moving to Calif. because it's cool
2000: Moving to Calif. because it's warm

1970: Growing pot
2000: Growing pot belly

1970: Trying to look like Marlon Brando or Liz Taylor
2000: Trying NOT to look like Marlon Brando or Liz Taylor

1970: Seeds and stems
2000: Roughage

1970: Popping pills, smoking joints
2000: Popping joints

1970: Killer weed
2000: Weed killer

1970: The Grateful Dead
2000: Dr. Kevorkian

1970: Going to a new, hip joint
2000: Receiving a new hip joint

1970: Rolling Stones
2000: Kidney stones

1970: Being called into the principal's office
2000: Calling the principal's office

1970: Screw the system
2000: Upgrade the system

1970: Disco
2000: Costco

1970: Peace sign
2000: Mercedes logo

1970: Parents begging you to get your hair cut
2000: Children begging you to get their heads shaved

1970: Taking acid
2000: Taking antacid

1970: Passing the drivers test
2000: Passing the vision test

1970: Whatever
2000: Depends

"THE UK's 100 - PLUS TOUR 2002"
with PHILLIP DAY
Cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, Alzheimer's arthritis, osteoporosis, hormonal concerns and more. IF YOU COULD REMOVE THE THREAT OF THESE CONDITIONS FROM YOUR LIFE FOREVER, WOULD YOU?

Find out why our technology is killing us.

Phillip Day, international health researcher and author of "Health Wars" & "Cancer: 'Why We're Still Dying To Know The Truth" is expanding his 100 - PLUS Tour for 2002 into a NINE-HOUR, THREE-SESSION extravaganza of incredible, uplifting and empowering health and wellness information. Use his famous unique, hilarious, poignant, intelligent and insightful style to learn and master the tools you can use IMMEDIATELY to make incredible and positive changes in your life. (If you miss Lap One of the series, a brief synopsis of the previous talk will be given at the start of the meetings on Laps 2 and 3.)

On the heels of his enthusiastically received Australian and New Zealand tours, Phillip Day is now bringing this vital information to the UK in an all-new expanded format. Don't miss this chance to hear the talk that has been educating and enthralling audiences everywhere. This information can literally change your life!

Here's a small peek at some of the topics Phillip will be covering in the coming three laps:

1. Find out the six astoundingly simple reasons why the Karakorum, Abkhasians and Hunza people are routinely living to a healthy and mobile 100+ in the absence of Western healthcare and how you can too!

2. Why are 1 in 2 over 70 years of age suffering from Alzheimer's disease and other mental impairment problems? What can you do to prevent this? How does the liver play a vital role?

3. How can the number one killer, heart disease, be so easily and cheaply prevented? Why is this life-saving information, researched to the highest levels of biochemistry, NOT being circulated?

4. What can you do naturally to prevent and treat cancer, according to leading experts? Why is the public deliberately denied this life-saving protocol?

5. Discover the harmful toxins we innocently allow into our bedrooms and bathrooms that are contributing to our misery, physical handicap and early death.

6. Why are women today suffering an astonishing increase in hormonal problems, breast cancer, cysts, fibroids and gynaecological problems? What can be done simply to remove this misery from so many lives?

7. How is psychiatry behind the damaging of our societies today? Why can this branch of 'medicine' justifiably be labelled a crime against humanity?

8. Who are the 'Dark Gods' of psychiatry, who spawned two world wars, have revolutionised the educational system to prevent children learning correctly, introduced political correctness, legally replaced parents as the arbiters of the family, maimed and brain-damaged hundreds of thousands of trusting patients with drugs, psychosurgery and electrocution, and today preside over the destruction of our religious institutions, the non-effectiveness of our political and legal systems and the subverting of our laws? What can be done to expose them and get society back on track?

9. What's really behind 'mental illnesses', such as ADD/ADHD, Aspbergers, autism, schizophrenia, over-eating, epilepsy, addictions, depression, insomnia, anxiety, anorexia, bulimia, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, ALS (motor neuron) and others? Are there simple and straight-forward measures you can use for yourself to help or reverse these conditions?

10. What about AIDS, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, osteoporosis, asthma, heartburn, diabetes, Crohn's, vaccination mania, stroke, foot and mouth disease, mad cow and other ailments afflicting our societies today? What is the great news we can bring to bear to eradicate these from our own bodies, our families and our nations?

AND LASTLY: Why do people do what they do? Why are some motivated and successful and some aren't? Why are some popular and some aren't? Why do people get addicted to moods and destructive behaviour in relationships and business? What can be done to coach ourselves to avoid these painful blights on our lives and set ourselves on the road to peace, laughter and progress? What can we do TODAY to turn the corner, climb out of the rut and enjoy a healthier, wealthier, happier, fulfilling and LONGER life?

Phillip Day: "My job for the past 16 years has been to understand human behaviour and assist people to HELP THEMSELVES, regardless of the condition in which I found them. My message to you for 2002 is simple: Whether you are sick, unhealthy, depressed, demotivated, disliking your job, fed up with a relationship, broke, fearful, beset by feelings of doom or just plain, flat-out BORED WITH YOUR EXISTENCE, if you do only ONE POSITIVE THING for 2002, start the revolution in your life with a visit to any one of my meetings on Lap One for a complete mental and physical 60,000-MILE SERVICE! Get ready for some 2002 power-action and let's have some fun!"

Tour Organiser: Edward Day edward@credence.freeserve.co.uk Please use e-mail if at all possible.

The tour schedule is available at www.credence.org under 'Meeting Schedule' and is being constantly updated. Please check regularly. See you there!

UK Tour - Lap Two Update
by Phillip Day of Credence Publications

The first lap of my UK tour is now complete! On the 2nd April, we are touring the country again with the second instalment of information, commencing at Kent University in Canterbury. During lap one, we had the chance to visit areas we had never been to before in the UK and Ireland, and it was a pleasure to be able to sow some seeds and encourage those who attended to spread the word on health, longevity and standing up for our personal freedoms in important matters of health.

The lap two talk will of course be a different presentation from lap one, and will consist of the following: Cancer/heart disease round-up from lap one, vaccinations, diet, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, HRT and the Pill, ADD/ADHD, sugar, water fluoridation, anorexia/bulimia, infectious diseases, AIDS, foot and mouth/BSE, food bio-engineering and additives, and more!

Lap two will build on the tools and information shared in lap one, so don't miss it! More importantly, if you attended a lap one talk, bring at least five people with you to the next one!

See you soon.

Phillip Day
Credence Research
Tour schedule, maps and downloadable Lap Two flyers at:
www.credence.org and select 'Meeting Schedule'