Vol. 1 Issue 2 | October 1, 2004           

Welcome to the October issue of Advanced Health & Wellness!


Table Of Contents

Editorial
Merck Pulls Arthritis Drug Off Market
Bill To Limit Mercury In Shots Okd
A New Corporate Villian--Drugmakers?
1918 Killer Flu Virus To Be Tested In UW Lab
Engineered "Escapees" Worry Organic Farmers
Balancing Your Hormones Naturally - What To Do First
Childhood Obesity A National Crisis, Panel Says


Editorial - Traditional Medicine's Answer To The HRT Fiasco                                                                           

It was a Wednesday night in a small town located somewhere in the United States.  A meeting of local area OB/GYN's had been publicized---Bio-Identical Hormone Therapy (BHT): Implementing Strategies For Your Practice. As the doctors strolled into the meeting, small talk was heard about how to continue to offer women hormonal therapy but without all the health problems that traditional estrogen therapy had imposed.  You could hear laughter as several doctors expoused how angry many women are right now.  At 7:30 p.m. the meeting was called to order and the 150 participants were welcomed.  The jest of the presentation was the fact that research now shows the use of bio-identical estrogen improves women's memory and actually lessens the risk of stroke.  The "best" formula would be 80/10/10 which is 80% of E1, 10% of E2 and E3 respectively.  And, it would "probably" be good to remind your patients to supplement with progesterone.  Most doctors nodded in agreement as they scribbled the information into their notes.  Questions were asked and just as they had entered they filed out into the night determined to "try to make this work."  Even thought this is a fictional account the underlying truths are still there. 

In reality, even though most are very hesistant and many more skeptical, the allopathic community is recognizing the importance and usefulness of using natural hormones. Some are even saying that they "knew" this is the way it should have been all along.  So why am I not celebrating this?  First of all no mention was even made about testing to see which hormones may be lacking.  It is assumed that it will always be estrogen even though most women present symptoms that would show estrogen dominance.  Second, even natural estrogen needs to be balanced with progesterone...always.  Third, I have a feeling that this may be more of a  "bandwagon" approach--let's do this for now because it's popular, what women seem to want and we can make some money while we wait for the pharmaceutical companies to come out with something more along the lines of modern medicine.  What we have is the "thinking" of allopathic medicine trying to synergize with the use of natural products. How nice it would be to hear that all of these OB/GYN's would take into consideration a natural diet, water consumption, therapeutic dosages of natural supplements, exercise and stress elimination as these play such a huge factor in balancing the hormones--naturally.  The mentality of "addressing the symptoms" still exists.  So I won't be celebrating until I hear someone actually say "So, what's the actual cause of hormonal imbalance?  Let's address that."

Much has happened in the news so this issue will be a little longer than usual.  Pour yourself a cup of hot, herbal tea and Enjoy!  Please pass Advanced Health & Wellness along to 5 friends who you know will benefit from the information provided in this newsletter.  This is how we grow!

Take Care & Be Well
Oasis Advanced Wellness


Merck Pulls Arthritis Drug Off Market                                                                                                       By:  Randell Pierson

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Merck & Co Inc. on Thursday pulled its arthritis drug Vioxx off the market after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke, a move that sent its shares plunging and erased $25 billion from its market value. The move, which led the company to cut its 2004 earnings forecast, could expose Merck to billions of dollars in legal liabilities at a time when it is already experiencing slower growth. It also calls into question the ability of Chief Executive Raymond Gilmartin to lead the company out of its troubles, analysts said. "This company is on the scientific ropes and it just took a body blow in the market place," said Jim Hall, president of the life-sciences unit at Wood Mackenzie Inc. "There's no easy way for them to deal with this."

Vioxx, which has been used by 84 million people around the world since 1999, accounts for 10 percent of Merck's annual sales. It is part of a class of drugs known as COX-2 inhibitors. Pfizer Inc.'s Celebrex and Novartis AG's (NOVN.VX) experimental drug Prexige are also members of this class. While Celebrex and others have not been shown to cause cardiovascular damage, some observers say the withdrawal of Vioxx casts a cloud over the entire class. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said it would watch other COX-2 inhibitors closely.

"This has implications for all members of this class," said Dr. Garret FitzGerald, chairman of the Department of Pharmacology at the University of Pennsylvania. Investors are concerned the risk may also extend to Merck's newer drug, Arcoxia, a COX-2 inhibitor that is already sold in 47 countries but is still awaiting approval in the United States. An FDA decision on the drug is expected by Oct. 30. "We are going to be more interested in looking at long-term data on new products that come down the pike," said Steven Galson, acting director of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

several years after earlier studies showed higher risk of heart attack and stroke, but Merck has always maintained that the drug, which last year had sales of $2.55 billion, was safe. The decision to withdraw Vioxx came after a three-year trial showed patients taking the drug faced twice the risk of a heart attack or stroke after three years as patients taking a placebo. The risk did not appear until after 18 months, the company said. The trial was designed to see if Vioxx could prevent recurrence of colon polyps, which can become cancerous.

Merck is already facing lawsuits over Vioxx and those are likely to increase, analysts said, potentially opening the company to billions of dollars in liabilities. "It's got to be bigger than fen-phen," said Hall, referring to Wyeth's recalled diet drug combination, which has already cost Wyeth $16 billion in charges to cover damages to people who claimed to have suffered heart damage. "Vioxx is a much bigger drug, so the exposure will be that much more." Merck said it will defend itself vigorously against lawsuits. "We have substantial defenses in these cases," said Kenneth Frazier, Merck's general counsel.

Despite the blow, members of Merck's board of directors said they stood behind the company's chief executive, and Gilmartin said he has no intention of resigning. Board member Larry Bossidy said the company is looking both inside and outside the company for a potential successor to Gilmartin, who plans to retire in 2006. "We think shareholders deserve to know we looked around for the best person we could find," Bossidy said. The Vioxx recall comes as Merck is girding for the slated 2006 expiration of its U.S. patent on the cholesterol fighter Zocor, the company's top-selling product.

Merck said it expects costs associated with the Vioxx recall to reduce earnings by 50 cents to 60 cents per share in the second half of the year. It said it will give more financial details on Oct. 21. Merck shares fell $12.27, or 27 percent, to $32.80 on the New York Stock Exchange.  (Additional reporting by Toni Clarke, Bill Berkrot and Edward Tobin in New York, Debra Sherman in Chicago, and Lisa Richwine in Washington

Dr. Lanphier's Comment: 

Vioxx now joins the ever-growing list of drugs that have been recalled during the last three years after the FDA approved them as safe and effective.  We are being shown over and over that the FDA is too cozy with big drug companies.  Red flags emerged from 2001–2004 about the side-effects of Vioxx.  But the FDA’s communication skills are lacking at best when it comes to informing doctors.  It is interesting to note that in the end it was Merck, not the FDA, that pulled the plug, probably out of fear of lawsuits. The FDA is good about foot-dragging as this has become characterisic of their actions.  If this had been a "natural" supplement one wonders how quickly, after the first "red-flag" it would have been pulled from the market.  Think about it.


Bill To Limit Mercury In Shots Okd                                                                                        By: Myron Levin & Nancy Vogel 

Gov. Schwarzenegger signs a measure to curb the poison for children under 3 and pregnant women.    Times Staff Writers September 29, 2004

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Tuesday signed a bill to sharply restrict the mercury content in vaccines for pregnant women and babies, handing a victory to parent activists across the country who have blamed mercury for a surge in autism and other neurological disorders in children.

The bill by Assemblywoman Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills) will prevent expectant mothers and children younger than 3 from getting immunizations with more than trace levels of thimerosal — a preservative used in some vaccines that is about half ethyl mercury — a compound known to damage the nervous system. The restriction will take effect in July 2006.

Vaccine makers and many public health officials say that there is no cause for alarm and that there is no credible evidence of harm to children from the small amounts of mercury in vaccines.

Still, manufacturers in the last few years have voluntarily eliminated thimerosal or reduced it to trace levels with one exception: the flu vaccine made by Aventis Pasteur Inc. The sole supplier of flu inoculations for children under 2 years old, it was the only vaccine manufacturer to openly oppose Pavley's bill.

Aventis released a statement saying that it was disappointed that the bill has become law and concerned that it could undermine public confidence and deter people from getting flu shots for their children.

In a signing message, Schwarzenegger noted that although the best available evidence finds no link between thimerosal and autism, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the American Academy of Pediatrics in 1999 recommended the removal of thimerosal from childhood vaccines.

"I believe that an abundance of caution merits the acceleration of the process already underway to remove thimerosal from the last few vaccines that contain it, as intended by AB 2943," Schwarzenegger wrote.

Pavley said: "Any time we can reduce public exposure to mercury or any other neurotoxin and there is an alternative readily available, we should be promoting the alternative."

Rick Rollens, a board member of the Autism Society of America and the father of an autistic child who lives in the Sacramento suburb of Granite Bay, said the new law "has sent a strong message that vaccines that contain mercury have no place in the veins of California's pregnant women and young children."

Dr. Lanphier's Comment:

While this is definitely a step in the right direction we still have a long way to go in getting toxic substances out of vaccines.  Again this is something that our government is dragging it's feet on.  The AAP recommended removal of thimerosal in 1999 and now in 2004 it is still there in "some" vaccines.  You can bet that anytime an organization issues a "caution" there are definitely problems.  Their "caution" should mean "definite health problems" to the public.


A New Corporate Villain - Drugmakers?                                                                                               By: Gregory M. Lamb

A number of charges against the pharmaceutical industry damages its credibility and further erodes public support.  

Big Pharma is in danger of joining Big Oil and Big Tobacco as one of the bad boys of American industry. A slew of revelations have stung drugmakers in recent months - from charges of hiding unflattering clinical trials to studies showing a link between the use of antidepressants in children and suicidal thoughts. The companies' stance against allowing Americans to buy cheaper drugs in Canada has further eroded public support.

Now, a steady stream of critical books - with titles such as "On The Take" and "The $800 Million Pill" - lambastes the way the companies do business.

"It's obviously frustrating," says Jeff Trewhitt, a spokesman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the industry trade group. "We think it's the result of a barrage of distorted allegations, and we are trying to fight back." The charges have "obscured the fact that the US pharmaceutical and biotechnology research industry is the most innovative ... in the world," he says, supplying 60 to 70 percent of the world's new medicines.

Nevertheless, the charges keep coming. In June, New York's attorney general sued GlaxoSmithKline for, among other things, suppressing clinical findings that its antidepressant drug was ineffective in children and teens and possibly could cause suicidal behavior. The drug industry has since announced it will establish a voluntary database of clinical studies. But some in Congress, as well as the American Medical Association and medical journal editors, are calling for a mandatory registry that would make public all clinical trials, even the ones where the drugs failed to work.

Then last week, advisory panels to the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) urged the strongest possible warnings on the use of antidepressants in children.

What's more, the current publicity about antidepressants "almost certainly" will lead to more lawsuits against drug manufacturers, says Richard Daynard, an expert in product liability and consumer protection who teaches at Northeastern University in Boston. People will say "these guys did know [about the problems]. They should have told me," Professor Daynard says.

The drumbeat of revelations has damaged the industry's credibility. A majority of Americans (55 percent) now think drug companies should be more closely regulated and two-thirds of Americans say drug prices are unreasonably high, according to Harris polls this year. Most significantly, only 44 percent say pharmaceutical companies serve their customers well. That's down 35 percentage points since 1997, the biggest drop in approval among any of the 15 industries the poll tracks. Only four industries - health insurance (36 percent), oil (32 percent), managed care or HMOs (30 percent), and tobacco (30 percent) - now rank lower.

Big Pharma is not the first industry to enter the doghouse of American public opinion. The 1970s gasoline shortages and the infamous 1989 spill from the oil tanker Exxon Valdez off the Alaskan coast have made Big Oil a longtime member of the bad boys club.

Big Tobacco has an even longer history, although many Americans assume it got its comeuppance in 1998 when US state attorneys general won a gigantic $206 billion settlement against cigarettemakers.

Drugmakers do have a stronger case to make than the tobacco industry, says Daynard, who has led efforts to make that industry legally responsible for tobacco-induced deaths, diseases, and disabilities. "What the drug industry can always do is say, 'Well, that was a bad product. We're sorry about that one. And we should have put a somewhat different label on this other one. But all our other stuff is fabulous and, you know, you need it."

"It's big industry, and people are prejudiced against large industries like the oil industry," says Mel Harkrader Pine, a veteran public-relations expert in Purcell-ville, Va., who has represented both Mobil and the treated-wood industry when they were under attack.

Part of the problem is that drug companies are a victim of their own success, he says. "We went through this in the '70s and early '80s [in the oil industry] until business went down the tubes," Mr. Pine says. "People liked us better when we weren't making as much money."

But critics say it's practices not profits that has gotten Big Pharma into trouble. "[C]ontrary to its public relations, this is not a very innovative industry," writes Marcia Angell, a former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and author of "The Truth About the Drug Companies," in an e-mail. "[T]he notion that the pharmaceutical companies discover lifesaving drugs is largely myth. Of the 487 drugs they brought to market in the past six years, 78 percent were classified by the FDA as not likely to represent improvements over drugs already on the market, and 68 percent didn't even contain new chemical compounds (just old drugs in new combinations or formulations)."

The current patch of criticism that has come upon PhRMA is "deserved," adds Dr. Jerome Kassirer, another former editor in chief of NEJM and author of "On The Take: How Medicine's Complicity with Big Business Can Endanger Your Health." "[T]hey exaggerate the amount of money that's used to produce new products. They are producing too many drugs that don't have any special added value, a bunch of 'me too' drugs."

"Obviously, it's hard for someone to understand what's wrong with going across the border into Canada and getting a needed drug for a lower price," says PR guru Pine. He says Big Pharma would benefit from the same advice he gives all his clients: "Be authentic and sympathetic."

Critical books about the drug industry

• "The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It," by Dr. Marcia Angell.
• "On The Take: How Medicine's Complicity with Big Business Can Endanger Your Health," by Dr. Jerome Kassirer.
• "Powerful Medicines: The Benefits, Risks, and Costs of Prescription Drugs," by Dr. Jerry Avorn.
• "Overdo$ed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine," by Dr. John Abramson.
• "Critical Condition: How Health Care in America Became Big Business - and Bad Medicine," by investigative reporters Donald Barlett and James Steele.
• "The $800 Million Pill: The Truth Behind the Cost of New Drugs," by Merrill Goozner.


"Money will buy you a bed, but not a good night's sleep, a house but not a home,  

a companion but not a friend." --Zig Ziglar


“Studies have shown that five minutes of anger will depress your immune system for up to six hours. If you destroy your immune system with anger, no matter how well you take care of yourself by eating properly and exercising, you're putting yourself at risk for disease. Remember, about 40 percent of all cancers are related to lifestyle choices such as smoking, alcohol, obesity, high-fat diets and inactive lifestyles. If you control lifestyle factors such as these, you will dramatically reduce your risk of cancer.”---Francisco Contreras, MD


1918 Killer Flu Virus To Be Tested In UW Lab                                                                                                               

University of Washington scientists plan to infect monkeys with a killer flu virus grown from tissue exhumed from victims of the 1918 epidemic. They hope the insight they gain will unravel the mystery of why tens of millions of people worldwide died from the virulent flu strain and lead to development of better vaccines and drugs that may save lives in the future.

"This was the most deadly infectious disease in the history of mankind, killing at least 40 million people," said Dr. Michael Katze, a UW microbiologist and principal investigator for the local arm of the project. "To this day, nobody understands why the virus was so deadly." ...

A skeptic of resurrecting and enlivening the 1918 flu virus, however, said it is critical to first make sure we are adequately protected against creating a "man-made" pandemic.

"This project could create a new bug that infects someone in the lab who then walks out at the end of the day and, literally, kills tens of millions of people," said EdHammond, director of a biotechnology and bio-weapons watchdog organization called the Sunshine Project at http://www.sunshine-project.org based in Austin, Texas.

Although Hammond said he could accept the noble intentions of the UW scientists, he noted that there are no national laboratory standards for dealing with this particular virus.

Read all the disturbing story at http://snipurl.com/981f


Engineered "Escapees" Worry Organic Farmers                                                                                    By: Paul Elias 

The Associated Press Sep 27, 2004

SAN FRANCISCO - California rice farmers are worried Japanese customers will boycott their products if genetically engineered rice is allowed into the state. In Hawaii, organic papaya farmers are outraged because traces of genetically engineered papaya are showing up in their harvest. Biologists call it "gene flow." It's how plants have swapped genetic material through cross pollination since life first appeared. But for people who choose to grow crops without genetically altering them, this natural biological exchange is a threat when bioengineered organisms are involved.

Oregon study

Last week, already heightened tensions between the biotech industry and its foes peaked when the U.S. government published a study showing that genetically engineered grass found its way into conventionally grown grass some 12 miles away in Oregon's Willamette Valley. The study led to renewed calls for tighter gene-flow regulations, especially from farmers who promise customers that their products are free of genetically modified material.

More farmers are reporting finding trace amounts of genetically modified organisms cross-pollinated or otherwise mingled with their organically grown crops. Those are potentially devastating discoveries because organic consumers generally demand that the higher-priced food they buy be free of biotechnological adulteration. The problem, like the weather, respects no boundaries.

Around the world

A North American Free Trade Agreement watchdog group said in March it had found genetically engineered corn in Mexico despite that country's 6-year-old biotechnology ban. Meanwhile, consumers in Japan, Europe and elsewhere demand all their crops are grown conventionally. Farmers who can't make those biotech guarantees risk losing those markets.

U.S. labeling rules allow for trace amounts of genetically engineered material in organic products. Still, organic growers and other growers fear market perception will turn against them if customers perceive that gene flow isn't being controlled. That's why many rice farmers in California opposed a biotechnology company's plan this summer to increase the acreage it devotes to rice spliced with human genes to produce medicines. The state government refused to let the company expand. It's also why organic growers in Hawaii earlier this month symbolically dumped 20 genetically engineered papayas into a trash bin labeled with a "biohazard" sign. Papayas genetically engineered to resist a virus were first grown commercially in 1998 and widely credited with turning around a moribund industry devastated by disease.

But the bioengineered variety is not the only papaya grown in Hawaii. "We are finding widespread contamination, and farmers are concerned," said Noli Hoye of the Hawaii anti-biotech group that organized the protest. "Once these genetically engineered crops are released commercially, they can't be contained."  An increasing number of scientific studies show evidence that genetically engineered crops are creeping into conventionally grown fields, including the grass study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency. The Union of Concerned Scientists in February found trace amounts of genetically engineered seeds of corn, soy and canola mixed in with seeds that were supposed to be conventionally bred. "We are concerned about gene flow," said U.S. Agriculture Department spokeswoman Meghan Thomas. But she said the USDA's regulatory reach extends only to experimental crops. Once biotech crops are approved for market, as papayas were in 1997, the government's oversight essentially ends.

Fears exaggerated?

The levels of cross-pollination in other studies were found to be minuscule, and industry leaders say gene flow concern is overblown. "Organic acreage has really boomed at the same time biotech acreage has boomed," said Chris Horner, a spokesman for Monsanto. "With good agricultural practices, there is no reason these two technologies can't coexist." Horner and others point out that no known lawsuits have been filed against any biotechnology company alleging that gene flow has caused anyone economic harm.

Call for coexistence

"It has not been a significant problem, and proving gene flow caused you economic harm will be difficult," said Drew Kershner, a University of Oklahoma law professor who has written extensively on the subject. "If you are neighborly and trying to get along, biotechnology and organic farming can coexist very easily."

Still, some organic farmers say the cross-pollination issue already is cutting into their profits because they've undertaken more costly planting processes or lost sales over fears their crops were corrupted by genetically modified organisms. The Organic Farming Research Foundation said about 11 percent of the farmers responding to a survey last year said they have been DNA-testing crops for the presence of genetically modified organisms.


Balancing Your Hormones Naturally - What To Do First                                      By: Loretta Lanphier, ND, CN, HHP

One of the questions that I frequently get asked is "What steps do I need to take to begin getting my hormones in balance?"  The following is what I suggest:

1)  Test your hormone levels.  This should include saliva testing and blood testing.  For more information on how you can do this yourself call Oasis Advanced Wellness about how to obtain kits to use in the privacy of your own home.  You will need to test for estrogen, progesterone, testosterone, DHEA and cortisol.

2)  Educate yourself on the topic of bio-identical hormone replacement therapy and balancing your hormones naturally.  A good place to start is my e-book--Balancing Your Hormones Without Drugs...You Can Feel Good Again. This will not only address your hormones but also help you to bring your whole body into balance...from the comfort of your own home.  You can purchase this at www.oasisserene.com

2)  Take your results to a healthcare professional that you trust and one that works with bio-identical hormones.  If you cannot find a healthcare professional in your area we offer telephone consults and will be glad to assist you in reaching your health goals.

3)  If you are currently on HRT go to www.oasisserene.com for instructions on how to get off HRT.  You will need to wean yourself off gradually. 

4)  As good as bio-identical hormones replacement therapy is, it is not an end-all.  Your goal should be to bring your body into total health.

5)  You must be willing to address detoxification, diet, water in-take, supplementation, exercise, physical / emotional stress and environment.  This is a MUST. 

6)  Once you start on a program you should monitor your hormone levels every three months for one year.  This eliminates all the guess work as to whether or not what you are doing is actually working.

It would be easy for me to include, in the above suggestions, vitamin/supplement recommendations like B-Complex, Vitamin E, etc.  The reason that I do not is because many will go to a local drugstore or grocery store to purchase these supplements.  All supplements/vitamins are not created equal.  Sometimes the fillers and excipients can negate any benefit that you might get from the vitamin.  I believe this is one reason why natural medicine is not taken seriously by many people.  They tried a $6.95 supplement and it did not work, so the thought is that using a natural approach does not work.  It can be over whelming and time consuming to decide which supplements are best and which ones will work.  This is why I believe it is important for most people to have a healthcare professional on their team who is trained in knowing what supplements will be be absorbed, transported and utilized.

At Oasis Advanced Wellness, we not only specialize in getting the hormones in balance for women and men, but in the process we will help you to get your whole body in balance.  For many it is the first time in a long, long time that they begin to experience true health.  We can help you, too and count it a privilege to be "your partner in health."


Childhood Obesity a National Crisis, Panel Says                                                                               By:  Maggie Fox

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - America's children are getting fatter and need help from parents, schools, the government, advertisers and the food industry to get back in shape, a panel of experts said Thursday.

The report on childhood obesity from the Institute of Medicine paints a picture of children awash in a society that makes it difficult to exercise and eat right, from suburbs with no sidewalks to schools that sell sugary snacks in vending machines. "At present, approximately nine million children over 6 years of age are considered obese," the report reads.

It does not call for sweeping legislation but proposes moves such as clearer labeling requirements for junk foods and getting schools involved in monitoring students' weight and health.

The institute, an independent group that advises the federal government on health matters such as vitamin requirements and medical insurance, appointed a committee of pediatricians, educators, industry experts and lawyers to look at childhood obesity. The report says nutritional standards should be set for all foods and beverages served on school grounds, including those from vending machines. The committee of 19 experts also recommended that schools add programs to get children to exercise at least half an hour a day.

VOLUNTARY RESTRICTIONS

The food, beverage, and entertainment industries should self-regulate how they sell food and drink to children, modeled perhaps on voluntary guidelines for promoting alcohol, the panel said. Restaurants should do more to provide healthy alternatives and should list calorie content and nutrition information.

"Frankly, how many more of these reports do we need before the government actually starts adopting some of these policies?" asked Margo Wootan of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which has been pressing for strong legislation and regulations to limit junk-food marketing to children. "Congress should help parents by requiring calories and other nutrition information on chain-restaurant menus, getting junk foods out of schools, and by directing the Federal Trade Commission to restrict the advertising of junk foods to kids." U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson said his department was working to encourage exercise and healthier eating. "The FDA is examining how to revise food labels to ensure that parents clearly understand how many calories they and their children are consuming," Thompson said in a statement.

Parents should encourage healthier eating and should help their children get more exercise, partly by limiting time in front of the television or computer to two hours or less a day, the panel said. Surveys by the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation have found that nearly one out of every four children aged 8 and older spend more than five hours a day watching TV, and that children 6 and under spend an average of two hours a day watching television or playing computer and video games. The foundation estimated the typical child saw about 40,000 commercials a year on TV, most for candy, cereal, soda and fast food. The food and beverage industries spend $10 billion or more a year marketing directly to children and youth, the committee found. "By the time they are 14 years old, 52 percent of boys and 32 percent of girls are drinking three or more eight-ounce (225-gram) servings of soda a day," the institute noted.

Dr. Lanphier's Comment: 

We do not need government help or control in this area.  We do need for parents to take control--at home and in the schools. Some good suggestions are given in the article but I believe that we need to go farther.  The following 10 Suggestions will help to get your children healthy: 

1)  Provide only purified water for drinking--school and home.

2) Provide children with at least 3 recesses each day at school.  One should be an organized exercise time and varied in approach--pilates, yoga, power walking, etc.

3) Parents need to be willing to take control of the computer and the TV.  No TV during the week would be a good policy.  Lead by example.

4) Replace school vending machines with healthy snacks.

5) Eliminate Fast Food Bars in schools. Either eat in the cafeteria (parents should require the school to provide healthy food) or bring a healthy lunch from home.

6) Children should spend at least one hour of play time, outside if weather permits, after school.

7) At home snacks should be fresh fruits and vegetables, nuts/seeds, protein smoothies.  Get your children involved with the growing, shopping and cooking of vegetables.  Farmers' Markets can be a fun shopping trip.  Teach them what vegetables will do to their body and how important they are. Try to eat organic as much as possible.  Lunch and dinner should be healthy and include a salad.  Lead by example.  Limit going out to eat to 1x/week.

8) Every child should eat a healthy breakfast.  Processed cereal is not healthy.  Provide an organic multi-vitmain/mineral supplement for your child every day. 

9) Replace refined sugar with stevia or Xylitol.  Eliminate grocery store milk (substitute with almond milk).  By implementing just these two sugggestions you will be amazed at the results you see in your children! 

10) Limit extracurricular activities to no more than two each week.  Children can get stressed on go on "overload" very quickly.  This encourages families to spend time at home which will make healthy eating more condusive. 


 

Editor:  Dr. Loretta Lanphier, ND, CN, HHP

Published monthly by:
Oasis Advanced Wellness
www.oasisadvancedwellness.com  
www.oasisserene.com

Questions or Comments? staff@oasisadvancedwellness.com

Check out our websites for more advice and information on improving your health at www.oasisadvancedwellness.com; www.menopause-pms-progesterone.org; www.oasisserene.com

Required disclaimer: Any statements in this newsletter have not been evaluated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Our products are not intended to diagnose, cure, treat, or prevent any disease. If you have a health concern see your physician of choice.

"Be sensitive to other people's challenges in life, even when their speech to you may seem offensive.  Often what someone jokes or brags about most in public is the very thing that makes them cry in private."

--Loretta Lanphier, ND, CN, HHP

(as told by a friend) 

 


To Sign Up For 

Advanced Health & Wellness

visit us online at: www.oasisadvancedwellness.com

 


 

 

Oasis Serene

Bio-Identical Progesterone Cream

 

 "You've Used Natural Hormones All Your Life...

Why Switch Now?" 

 

2-ounce jar - $34.95

www.oasisserene.com

 

Formulated by a team of doctors and scientists based on Dr. John Lee’s research of progesterone cream.
 

Carefully formulated with safety, function and aesthetics in mind.
 

 Made with 750 mg/ounce of high quality USP progesterone, not wild yam extract.
 

Independent laboratory certified for the quality of USP progesterone content.
 

Compounded by a pharmacist with 31 years of experience.
 
 

 
Designed as an all-natural, luxurious, anti-aging moisturizer with natural progesterone. 
 

 Smooth and silky cosmetic cream that woman love to use.
 

Made in small batches to ensure freshness and quality control.
 

Completely organic. 
 

Free of toxic chemicals and artificial preservatives.
 

Free of Methyl Paraben, Propyl Paraben, Butyl Paraben. 

Free of ethoxylated wetting agents,
 

Free of mineral oil.

 
 
Free of Stearal Konium Chloride.

 

Also available in 1500 mg/ounce for those experiencing severe symptoms of pms, menopause, peri-menopause, ovarian cysts, osteoporosis, endometriosis and fibroids.

 


Mammograms - You Decide

Let me outline a few dangers of mammograms for you. Based on the NIH's data from 1986, anywhere from 150 to 1,000 women can expect to get radiation-induced breast cancer for every million women who are screened with a mammogram. This was published in the article, "Radiogenic Breast Cancer," in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1986. In 1989, the International Journal of Health Services published an article called, "The Cancer Establishment," that stated that mammography, especially in younger women, may result in radiation-induced cancer. Three hundred thousand women screened annually between age forty and fifty received x-ray doses high enough to increase their breast cancer risk by 20-30 percent. As I mentioned above, for every 100 mammograms that show positive tumor activity, only 2.5 percent actually have cancer in women between the ages of forty and forty-nine. Expert radiologists incorrectly interpret mammograms over 40 percent of the time. In 1996, the Journal of the American Medical Association published the following information: · Mammography is leading to excessive treatment of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) and Lobular Carcinoma In Situ (LCIS). As a result, thousands of women (approximately 25,000 per year) undergo mastectomy unnecessarily. · Only 30 percent of DCIS and LCIS cases ever progress to become invasive cancer. Every time a woman has a mammogram, her risk of developing cancer increases by 2 percent because x-rays are carcinogenic. If you start taking mammograms every year, in 10 years you will increase your probability of developing cancer by 20 percent. 

---Francisco Contreras, MD  Oais Of Hope


Diet Linked to Endometriosis

Endometriosis, a condition that affects life quality for far too many women, has been shown to be firmly related to diet, with higher risk associated with higher estrogen levels, meats, and intake of processed vegetable fats (as in polyunsaturated oils), and lower risk achieved with high green vegetable and fresh fruit intake.

There is a significant reduction in risk in women with higher consumption of green vegetables and fresh fruit, and an 80 to 100 percent increase in risk with high intake of beef and ham.

Endometriosis, an estrogen-dependent disorder, is one of the most prominent public health problems in the United States.

The authors of this study suggest that a diet high in fats increases the circulation of estrogens, which may then predispose to endometriosis. Fats may also influence the concentration of substances that negatively affect ovarian function.

Women with endometriosis often have pelvic pain, infertility, and menstrual difficulties.

Source: Human Reproduction 2004;19:1755-1759; Obstetrics & Gynecology Clinics of North America, March 2003; Fertility & Sterility 2004;81(5):1441-6.


Now You Can Get The Same Recommendations That We Give To Our Oasis Advanced Welness Clients. Read our ebook...

Balancing Your Hormones Without Drugs…
You Can Feel Good Again!

Learn how YOU can achieve hormonal balancing PLUS TOTAL health and well-being.

  

Oasis Advanced Wellness          9842 Pinehurst Drive, Baytown, Texas 77521          Phone: (281) 303-0707