A New Epilepsy Drug – Vimpat®
By Mark Schauss | July 22, 2009
Finally, after 6 months of waiting, we were able to see a new neurologist and she suggested that we try Tasya on a new drug called Vimpat®. We were desperately trying to get our daughter off of Topamax® as it was hurting her cognitively and she was beginning to have breakthrough seizures again.
So one day on it shouldn’t make much of a difference but something happened that hasn’t occurred ever before. Tasya was about to have a seizure upon waking (her most common type) but it didn’t happen. I rushed to the room hearing the cry that she has right before a seizure and there she was, clear eyed and talkative. She told both my wife and I how different she felt and that she felt clearer and sharper than before.
Vimpat’s® mode of action supposedly is to stop a seizure by changing the sodium channel slowly as opposed to older drugs which did it very quickly. Side-effects seem to be less than other drugs which try to dampen the entire brain like Topamax®.
While we are in the early stages of trying this med out on Tasya and the fact that it is only approved for people over the age of 17, we remain hopeful but not fully convinced of Vimpat’s® efficacy. Still, the fact that Tasya showed such a quick positive reaction makes us feel that maybe, just maybe, we have the answer to help stop her seizure activity completely.
Topics: Drugs, Epilepsy, Health, pharmaceuticals, Research | 1 Comment »
Additives to Remove From Your Diet
By Mark Schauss | July 9, 2009
Here’s a handy list of items that need removing from your diet. Read labels carefully and enjoy the good health you’ll achieve.
1. Sodium nitrite
2. BHA & BHT
3. Propyl gallate
4. Monosodium glutamate
5. Trans fats
6. Aspartame
7. Acesulfame-K
8. Food colorings (Blue & , Red , Green , Yellow )
9. Olestra
10. Potassium bromate
11. White sugar
12. Sodium chloride – This last one needs to be lowered not eliminated. We all need good old sodium, just not as much.
Topics: Food, Health, Opinion, Toxicity | No Comments »
Sunscreens – Which are non-toxic and safe?
By Mark Schauss | July 2, 2009
Well, if you want an answer about safe products to use, look no further than our friends at the Environmental Working Group. This month, with the Fourth of July about to hit us, we are in the dog days of summer where sunscreen is being lathered on ourselves and our children. Go to this site to find out which ones are best.
Topics: Health, Life, Toxicity, Websites | No Comments »
Ten Lies About Global Warming – From Your Elected Officials
By Mark Schauss | July 1, 2009
People out there are ramping up the lies about human caused global warming. The industries that would be most affected by the recent legislation proposed by the Obama administration are trying to scare and deceive the American public and are actively funding anti-global warming nonsense. One of the leaders in the science-based truth bearers is the Environmental Defense Fund. Here is a list of the ten lies being told by Congress this past week.
10 Outrageous Claims
As the House debate heated up, so did the hyperbole.
We already knew that climate action opponents were, shall we say, special.
They’ve spent years denying the reality of global warming and doing everything possible to delay action. But, last week’s floor debate put their tortured reasoning in the Congressional Record.
We’ve compiled 10 of the most outrageous comments from the floor last week.
Yes, they’re bizarre. But, it’s important to keep in mind that we are very likely to see much more of this as the bill moves to the Senate.
10 Outrageous Claims
10) “Wake up, America. There hasn’t been any global warming, which is what we heard over and over and over again – there hasn’t been any global warming for 10 years.” – Rep. Dana Rohrabacker (R-CA)
No warming for 10 years? Well, not exactly true. 1998 was the 2nd hottest year on record while 2008 was only the 8th hottest. So, if you only look at those two years, you might assume there hasn’t been any warming. But, 2005 was the hottest year on record and the warmest decade on record is 1998 through 2008. The trends are clear. The planet is warming. Period.
9) “You want to talk about a massive new welfare program for energy? It’s in here too… It’s a whole new welfare program for energy.” – Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR)
If you want to talk welfare, what about the hundreds of billions the oil, gas and coal industries have received in subsidies and tax breaks over the years?
8) “God has put us on this Earth as responsible stewards of these resources, and we ought to use them responsibly. This bill does not do it. In fact, it does nothing good. The only meaningful thing that it might do is provide a relatively meaningless photo op for our President in December in Copenhagen as he stands to brag about what America has done while the leaders of India and China laugh at us behind his back.” – Rep. Mike Conaway (R-TX)
We look forward to working with Rep. Conaway to strengthen this bill and to fight for the strongest possible international global warming treaty later this year.
7) “Energy producing states like Oklahoma will be economically punished and devastated.” – Rep Tom Cole (R-OK)
Rep. Cole should have a look at climate models showing that Oklahoma could spend nearly the entire summer with 100+ temperatures by the end of the century. Talk about devastating.
6) “We should not be the first lemming to jump off the cliff.” – Rep. Doc Hasting (R-WA)
That’s an interesting point given that the U.S. is the only industrial country in the world that never ratified the Kyoto global warming treaty and that much of Europe is operating under a carbon cap right now.
5) “[For some, this bill is an] economic death sentence.” – Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA)
As opposed to the current economy in which we are held hostage by our reliance on foreign oil and in which only last summer we saw gas prices exceed $4/gallon.
4) “The whole point of cap-and-trade is to make fossil fuels, or 85 percent of the energy we consume, more expensive.” – Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-PA)
No, the point of this bill is to cap global warming pollution, put Americans back to work building out our clean energy future, and free us from our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.
3) “Do you want to throw away the economic prosperity for nothing, because that’s what this bill does. And for what, to satisfy the twisted desires of radical environmentalists.” – Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA)
With millions of Americans out of work and the economy in recession, it might not be the best time to talk about “throwing away our economic prosperity” or to support the status quo.
2) “[This will bring us back to] hunting and gathering.” – Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI)
Yeah, when we look at solar panels, hybrids and windmills, that’s exactly what comes to mind – hunting and gathering societies.
1) “The idea of human induced global climate change is one of the greatest hoaxes perpetrated out of the scientific community. It is a hoax… We need to be good stewards of our environment, but this is not it, it’s a hoax!” – Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA)
A global conspiracy involving thousands of scientists taking tens of thousands of measurements on everything ranging from ice core samples to the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere to sea level rise, hundreds of governments around the world working to address global warming pollution, dozens of science academies that have endorsed the reality of global warming and urged action, as well as hundreds of millions of people around the world who have joined the movement to promote global warming action.
And, we’re all coordinating our activities to push this hoax because…?
Please support this organization so the truth can come out.
Topics: Environment, Global Warming, Opinion, Our World, Politics, Toxicity, Websites | 1 Comment »
General News From the World of Science
By Mark Schauss | May 20, 2009
Today’s blog is just a gathering of things I’ve learned recently while perusing the numerous journals I subscribe to.
- A recent issue of The Lancet published a study that says that if your BMI (body mass index) is 30-35 which is the definition of moderate obesity, you can expect to have 2-4 years cut off of your life expectancy. Additionally, it is likely that those years will be filled with more ill health as well.
- Milk may fuel cancer in men and women because of the number of different estrogen’s found in different types of milk. Researchers at the National Cancer Institute at Fredrick, Maryland found high levels of estrogen’s in all types of milk. Particularly disturbing was the finding of 2-hydroxyestrone in skim milk as this hormone is the most reactive. Other disturbing hormones found include 5alpha-pregnanedione which increases the number of estrogen receptors which can turn tumor growth on. Use the precautionary principle here and cut out milk consumption.
- The pharmaceutical industry spends an average of 28.8 billion dollars per year on research. Conversely, they spend 73.9 billion a year on marketing and administration. Must be working for them as their annual sales of brand-name drugs was $228.5 billion in 2008.
- If you have prostate cancer or concerned about developing it, test for the amino acid sarcosine as it may help distinguish between slow-growing prostate cancer versus the type that is more likely to spread. According to researchers sarcosine is likely to be more of a fuel for the cancer than a bystander.
- Is there a better cause than is being developed by the Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education? Its mission is To undertake a rigorous scientific study of the neural, mental and social bases of compassion and altruistic behavior that draws from a wide spectrum of disciplines including psychology, neuroscience, economics and contemplative traditions.
To explore ways in which compassion and altruism can be cultivated within an individual as well as within the society on the basis of testable cognitive and affective training exercises. Albert Schweitzer once said “Until he extends his circle of compassion to include all living things, man will not himself find peace.” In today’s uncertain times, isn’t it time to change from a consumption minded society to a compasionate one? Then, and only then, can we all be happier and more at peace with world.
Topics: Drugs, Health, Life, Opinion, Our World, pharmaceuticals, Research, Uncategorized | No Comments »
Correlation & Causation – Genetics versus Epigenetics/Metabolomics
By Mark Schauss | May 3, 2009
People ask me why I am not all that excited about genetic testing. I think the following explanation from Dr. H. Frederik Nijhout, Department of Biology, Duke University puts it my thoughts together perfectly. He talks about genes and what they really do and how our behavior and environment are as important, if not more so than the existence of a specific gene.
“Think about using a key to open, then turn on a car. The key doesn’t actually control the car but it can be thought to be correlative to the control. The key must be turned and used to turn on the car. It is a stimulus from the outside influences – a human – that makes it work, the true controller and causation of the car turning on and moving. the gene is just a key that needs outside stimulus (environment) to turn on.”
He further goes on to say – “When a gene product is needed, a signal from its environment, not an emergent property of the gene itself, activates expression of that gene.”
This is why I feel that just because we know what the gene is, doesn’t mean it will express itself unless the outside environment triggers it and causes it to move. This is why I think it is far more important to fight environmental damage which turns on some of the “bad” genes causing cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and other debilitating diseases. It’s not just about global warming, it’s about our species existence. The planet will survive, it’s us that may not the way we’re going.
Topics: Global Warming, Health, Opinion, Our World, Toxicity | 1 Comment »
The Tide Is Turning – Hotel Chains Going Green
By Mark Schauss | April 15, 2009
The green revolution was always in my opinion, a movement that was going to gain momentum not just because it was the right thing to do but because it was also the smart economic way to go. This article is another example of how businesses are realizing that greening themselves is economically beneficial. In today’s tough economic times, businesses are being forced to reduce waste and energy expenditures so they are being forced to make changes.
While these changes are not perfect and more can be done, I really feel that the direction we are going in is correct. Change doesn’t always have to be sudden, sometimes it needs to be gradual so we can judge the full implications of our changes. An example is the removal of trans-fats from many foods on the market. No million man march necessary. People wanted the change and economically, food manufacturers were faced with the reality that unless they removed the trans-fats, they were going to lose business to the products that were removing them.
All of us need to do something, big or small to improve our world by consuming less, demanding better and more efficient products, by spending our money at places who are trying to green their business. Don’t forget to tell then that is why you chose to use their services or buy their products. If enough people do that, we may yet save this world we live in.
Topics: Environment, Life, Opinion, Our World | 2 Comments »
Icecap.us, Just Who Are These Global Warming Denialists
By Mark Schauss | April 13, 2009
I just love it when people tell me that global warming is a sham and point to groups of so-called scientists to back up their claims such as the bunch from icecap.us. Being the eternal skeptic myself, I decided to find out who the people are at icecap so I looked over the list of adviser’s and I headed to Sourcewatch.com to find out where these people get their funding. Guess what? Yup, they are people who make their living from those who would most suffer from controls on global warming emissions.
Let’s look at who some of these people are:
Robert C. Balling Jr –Balling has acknowledged receiving $408,000 in research funding from the fossil fuel industry over the last decade (of which his University takes 50% for overhead). Contributors include ExxonMobil, the British Coal Corporation, Cyprus Minerals and get this OPEC!!!
Sallie Baliunas – Between December 1998 and September 2001 she was listed as a “Scientific Adviser” to the Greening Earth Society, a group that was funded and controlled by the Western Fuels Association (WFA), an association of coal-burning utility companies.
Robert M. Carter– Sits on the advisory board os the Institute of Public Affairs which is funded by the mining and tobacco industry along with Monsanto.
Reid A. Bryson– While certainly a climatologist and skeptic, Dr. Bryson passed away last year yet is still listed on icecap as being a consultant. Maybe they discovered how to channel the deceased?
To me, I’d rather follow 30,000 scientists who believe that global warming is real than a handful of industry backed people. My biggest concern is that if the skeptics are wrong and we do nothing, billions of people will suffer. Paying a little bit more for energy is well worth the expense to protect our world.
Topics: Environment, Global Warming, Opinion, Our World, Websites | 9 Comments »
DNA Testing – Good, the Bad and the Ugly
By Mark Schauss | April 9, 2009
DNA testing is the latest fad to hit the health market. Companies like Navigenics are selling test kits that will supposedly tell you if you have increased risks for developing a number of diseases like Alzheimer’s, breast cancer, cardiovascular disease, macular degeneration and many more. From there, you can make the appropriate lifestyle changes that will bring your risk back down. Sounds great doesn’t it? Well not so fast, there are real problems with this type of testing.
First off, say you have a 20% greater risk for developing Multiple Sclerosis that the average person. That would make you concerned right? Well, according to this article from MSNBC.com, that only would lift your risk from .3% to .5% (3 out of every 1,000 versus 5 out of every 1,000, respectively). This is inconsequential yet the lab highlighted it which would cause unwanted concern for most lay people who are not geneticists or statisticians.
Secondly, do we really understand what all the genetic variants mean? Does one abnormality really increase the risk for developing a disease or is it really a combination of interactions that is most important? It is my belief, which is backed by a lot of research and the opinions of a lot of people in the field, that we are truly in the infancy of genetic testing and that claiming that a genes configuration means that you are more likely to develop a disease. We don’t fully fathom all the subtle nuances that make up our genes.
Next problem lies in those supposed markers that might indicate you have a lowered risk of developing a disease. Do you then not concern yourself with the possibility of getting sick? Lifestyle and environmental causes of disease are far, far more likely to cause a disease than a supposedly abnormal gene would.
Another problem I have is when you use the myopic line of thinking that if you have a gene that increases your risk of developing a disease and turning it off is definitely a good thing. Do we know that by turning off the gene we aren’t increasing the risk of developing another more deadly disease? We don’t.
Here is an extreme example of this problem. People with sickle cell anemia, a life-shortening disease actually protects the person with the genetic disorder from malaria. Think of living in equatorial Africa with the high levels of malaria. Many children would have died without the sickle cell protective gene. There are literally thousands of other examples, many we are not sure of.
In the case of breast cancer, having the bad gene is one thing, but prophylacticaly removing ones breast is an extreme case of acting on the bad gene news. Environmental and lifestyle choices such as depressed vitamin D, exposure to toxins, smoking, and alcohol intake vastly increases your risk of developing the disease, more so than the gene. If you choose to do these things, do you remove your breasts to reduce the risk of developing the disease? Of course not. Having the gene increases your risk but working to increase your vitamin D3 level, avoiding toxic exposure and detoxing regularly, not smoking and reducing or eliminating your alcohol intake would be more beneficial and would actually lower the risk to those women with the gene.
In a nutshell, lifestyle choices have a greater impact on overall health than genetics. This is the concept of metabolomics, but that is a whole other blog.
Topics: Environment, Health, Healthcare, Laboratory Tests, Opinion, Research, Toxicity | 2 Comments »
Eat Local, Eat Better
By Mark Schauss | April 3, 2009
Eating locally is known to be better for our environment as well as our health and the local economy. The problem is finding those local co-ops, farmers markets and other resources. Well, look no further than the website Local Harvest. Here, you just type your city or zipcode into the search box and out comes the list of local organic farmers and other sustainable food sources.
Enjoy the bountiful harvest while making the world a better place to live in.
Topics: Environment, Food, Health, Life, Our World, Websites | 1 Comment »