Archive for April, 2010

A note from Linda

A note to my readers from Linda…..

I thought you might be interested in this alert from the Organic Consumers Association (November 13, 2009):

A major reason why consumers shop for products that are certified organic is to avoid the hazardous and unlabeled Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), toxic chemicals, and now the most recent, and likely most dangerous hi-tech poison of them all: nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is now a multi-billion dollar Frankenstein monster industry churning out a vast menu of untested and unlabeled products containing tiny nanoparticles including non-organic vitamin supplements, food packaging, processed food, cosmetics and sunscreens.

Over the objections of the OCA and thousands of our members, on November 5, 2009, the National Organic Standards Board decided to table a recommendation to prohibit nanotechnology in organic. The NOSB member who fills the scientist slot, Katrina Heinze of General Mills, delayed the process by insisting that the Board consider a compromise position that wouldn’t exclude nanotechnology from organic altogether, but would classify it as a “synthetic” that could be petitioned for use in specific instances. Please write to the NOSB and tell them to ban untested, unlabeled and hazardous nanotechnology products and ingredients in organic.

Nanotechnology is inherently dangerous. Mounting scientific evidence indicates that nanomaterials produce dangerous “free radicals” which can destroy or mutate DNA and can cause damage to the liver and kidneys. Nanotech particles not only injure and kill lab animals–they can kill you as well.

Please click the link below to tell the USDA that you want the National Organic Standards Board to take a strong stand against the use of nanotechnology in organic.

Click on this URL to take action now
http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/utr/2/?a=13948781&i=1234&c=&u=capwiz.com%2Fgrassrootsnetroots%2Fissues%2Falert%2F%3Falertid%3D13948781


If your email program does not recognize the URL as a link,
copy the entire URL and paste it into your Web browser.

A note from Linda

A note to my readers from Linda…..

I thought you might be interested in this alert from the Organic Consumers Association (November 13, 2009):

A major reason why consumers shop for products that are certified organic is to avoid the hazardous and unlabeled Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), toxic chemicals, and now the most recent, and likely most dangerous hi-tech poison of them all: nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is now a multi-billion dollar Frankenstein monster industry churning out a vast menu of untested and unlabeled products containing tiny nanoparticles including non-organic vitamin supplements, food packaging, processed food, cosmetics and sunscreens.

Over the objections of the OCA and thousands of our members, on November 5, 2009, the National Organic Standards Board decided to table a recommendation to prohibit nanotechnology in organic. The NOSB member who fills the scientist slot, Katrina Heinze of General Mills, delayed the process by insisting that the Board consider a compromise position that wouldn’t exclude nanotechnology from organic altogether, but would classify it as a “synthetic” that could be petitioned for use in specific instances. Please write to the NOSB and tell them to ban untested, unlabeled and hazardous nanotechnology products and ingredients in organic.

Nanotechnology is inherently dangerous. Mounting scientific evidence indicates that nanomaterials produce dangerous “free radicals” which can destroy or mutate DNA and can cause damage to the liver and kidneys. Nanotech particles not only injure and kill lab animals–they can kill you as well.

Please click the link below to tell the USDA that you want the National Organic Standards Board to take a strong stand against the use of nanotechnology in organic.

Click on this URL to take action now
http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/utr/2/?a=13948781&i=1234&c=&u=capwiz.com%2Fgrassrootsnetroots%2Fissues%2Falert%2F%3Falertid%3D13948781

If your email program does not recognize the URL as a link,
copy the entire URL and paste it into your Web browser.

Increased Sensitivity and Specificity of Borrelia burgdorferi 16S Ribosomal DNA

Excerpt:

The DNA of Borrelia burgdorferi spirochetes extracted by ammonium
hydroxide was used as the template for nested polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) amplification of the species-specific 16S
ribosomal DNA (rDNA). The primers were those well known to be
specific for signature sequence amplification of the B
burgdorferi sensu lato 16S ribosomal RNA gene. The positive
293-base-pair nested PCR amplicon was subjected to routine direct
automated Sanger sequencing. A 50-base sequence excised randomly
from the sequencing electrophoretogram between the 2 nested PCR
primer binding sites was sufficient for the Basic Local Alignment
Search Tool
(BLAST) analysis to validate the B burgdorferi sensu lato 16S
rDNA without a reasonable doubt. Nested PCR increased the
sensitivity of DNA detection by 100- to 1,000-fold. DNA sequence
validation based on BLAST algorithms using the GenBank database
practically eliminates any possibility of false-positive results
due to molecular misidentification. This technology may be a
valuable supplement to the current serologic tests for Lyme
disease.

Bartonella spp. Infections, Thailand

Volume 16, Number 4–April 2010

Excerpt:

We conducted a prospective study to determine causes of acute febrile illness in 4 community hospitals, 2 in Chiang Rai (northern Thailand) and 2 in Khon Kaen (northeastern Thailand). We enrolled patients >7 years of age with a temperature >38°C who were brought to study hospitals for treatment from February 4, 2002, through March 28, 2003. Patients were excluded if they had a history of fever for >2 weeks or an infection that could be diagnosed clinically. Acute-phase serum samples were collected at the time of enrollment and convalescent-phase serum samples 3–5 weeks later. We enrolled nonfebrile control patients >14 years of age who had noninfectious conditions; acute-phase serum samples were collected. Clinical information was abstracted from patient charts. Nurses conducted physical examinations and personal interviews to collect information on patients’ demographic characteristics, exposures to animals, and outdoor activities.

Serum samples were tested for immunoglobulin (Ig) G antibodies to Bartonella spp. by immunofluorescent antibody assay at the Bartonella Laboratory of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, CO, USA. Strains used for antigen production were: B. elizabethae (F9251), B. henselae (Houston-1), B. quintana (Fuller), and B. vinsonii subsp. vinsonii (Baker). Homologous hyperimmune serum specimens were produced in BALB/c mice as previously described (8). Bartonella infection was considered confirmed in febrile patients who had a >4-fold rise in IgG antibody titers and a convalescent-phase titer >64. Probable infection was defined as 1) a 4-fold antibody titer rise but convalescent-phase titers of 64, or 2) high and stable titers (>512 in acute-phase and convalescent-phase serum samples), or 3) acute-phase titer >512 with a >4-fold titer fall. Paired serum samples from febrile patients were also tested for serologic evidence of other common causes of febrile illness in Southeast Asia.

Febrile patients with acute-phase and convalescent-phase IgG antibody titers <128 were considered not to have Bartonella infection; we compared demographic and clinical characteristics of these patients to Bartonella-infected patients. To evaluate potential risk factors, we compared Bartonella-infected case-patients >14 years of age without serologic evidence of other infections (n = 20) to nonfebrile controls with IgG to Bartonella <128 (n = 70). Age adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

Proof that they worked with ticks on Plum Island

Linda’s comments:  How can these people sleep at night.  Here are plenty of URLs which prove they worked with ticks on Plum Island!!  (Thanks Randy for sending this)…

Obama’s biotech strategy – letter from Linda

Dear Lyme friend,

On September 21, 2009, President Obama outlined his innovation strategy in
a speech in Troy, N.Y., after touring the technology classrooms of Hudson
Valley Community College.

“From biotechnology to nanotechnology, from the development of new forms
of energy to research into treatments of ancient diseases, there is so
much potential to change our world and improve our lives,” Obama said.

I feel that it is very irresponsible for the President to promote
nanotechnology when there are serious concerns about its safety and there
is virtually no regulation of the industry.

Last December, a report by the National Research Council found serious
gaps in the government’s plan for determining if nanomaterials pose a risk
and called for an effective national plan for identifying and managing
potential risks.

In a March 2009 commentary, a Lloyd’s of London analyst drew parallels
between the global financial meltdown and risks from nanomaterials. The
financial collapse reflected “blithe acceptance of complex products that
many didn’t understand.” With regard to nanomaterials, he commented that
“the importance of getting to grips with and quantifying complex sources
of risk has never been more obvious.”

I understand the EPA is considering taking a more precautionary approach
to nanomaterials. In the mean time, all consumers can do is try to avoid
them, especially the many nanotech foods and cosmetics. The problem is
that they are not labeled.

That is why I am happy to hear that the United States Department of
Agriculture’s National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) is considering an
official ban on nanotechnology in organic.

I am writing to the NOSB in support of the ban on nanotechnology. If they
pass it, I hope that you will ensure that the USDA’s National Organic
Program acts quickly to enforce it.

Sincerely,

Linda Heming

Exposure to electromagnetic fields from cell phones

Linda’s comments:..This is a very important subject for all folks, especially those with chronic illness.  It is very hard to get well when you are being blasted by EMF/EMR.  One of the things I have noticed is the more I detox the more sensitive I am to EMF/EMR.  I’m GRATEFUL for this, as it is a sure sign that I am being blasted more than what I ever imagined.
 
I am being treated by a new technology called Energy Enhancement System and you can read more at www.eesystem.com ……These treatments are helping me to eliminate the EMF/EMR’s from my body.  The exciting thing about these treatments is I take my lifelong daily detox protocol FIGHT before I enter the room for a 2 hour session….the system ENHANCES the protects I am taking for the FIGHT program.
There are many who are buying these systems for their homes….I wish I could afford a system.
 
Please read all the information below regarding EMF/EMR and learn.  When a chronically ill person is getting too much EMF/EMR they can will not reach the wellness level they want to reach.
Linda
Excerpt:
A report that cited more than 2,000 studies found that chronic exposure to even low-level radiation (like that from cell phones) can cause a variety of cancers, impair immunity, and contribute to Alzheimer’s disease and dementia, heart disease, and many other ailments. One likely way: EMFs open the blood-brain barrier, causing blood vessels to leak fluid into the brain and damage neurons.

What’s more, a less–well known kind of EMF, known as “dirty” or transient electricity #, may play an even more damaging role. Transients are largely by-products of modern energy-efficient electronics and appliances—from computers, refrigerators, and plasma TVs to compact fluorescent light bulbs and dimmer switches—which tamp down the electricity they use. This manipulation of current creates a wildly fluctuating and potentially dangerous electromagnetic field that essentially charges up the electrons in every cell of your body. Some research suggests that by overlapping the body’s signaling mechanisms, transients may interfere with the secretion of insulin, drown out the call and response of the immune system, and cause other physical havoc.

Acupuncture transmitted infections

Full article: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/340/mar18_1/c1268

Excerpt:

Acupuncture, which is based on the theory that inserting and manipulating fine needles at specific acupuncture points located in a network of meridians will promote the harmonious flow of “Qi,” is one of the most widely practised modalities of alternative medicine. Because needles are inserted up to several centimetres beneath the skin, acupuncture may pose risks to patients. One of the most important complications is transmission of pathogenic micro-organisms, from environment to patient or from one patient to another.

In the 1970s and 1980s most infections associated with acupuncture were sporadic cases involving pyogenic bacteria.1 So far, more than 50 cases have been described globally. In most cases, pyogenic bacteria were transmitted from the patient’s skin flora or the environment because of inadequate skin disinfection before acupuncture. In localised infections, meridian specific and acupuncture point specific lesions were typical. About 70% of patients had musculoskeletal or skin infections, usually in the form of abscesses or septic arthritis, corresponding to the site of insertion of the acupuncture needles.1 2 A minority had infective endocarditis, meningitis, endophthalmitis, cervical spondylitis, retroperitoneal abscess, intra-abdominal abscess, or thoracic empyema.3 4

Effects of Prolonged Formalin Fixation

Full article: http://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pu
bmed&id=20332424&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks

Excerpt:

Three pathologists graded immunoreactivity according
to a four-tier grading system: negative, weak, moderate, strong.
Canine parvoviral immunoreactivity was markedly decreased
following 2, 7, and 10 weeks of fixation in myocardium, small
intestine, and spleen, respectively. Bovine respiratory syncytial
virus immunoreactivity was markedly decreased following 7 weeks
of fixation. Bartonella henselae had an abrupt loss of
immunoreactivity following 9 weeks of fixation. Despite variation
among time points, immunoreactivity remained moderate to strong
throughout the study period for the other 18 antigens. These
results suggest that prolonged formalin fixation of up to 7 weeks
generally does not limit immunohistochemical detection of
infectious agents. However, the effects of prolonged fixation
depend on the targeted antigen and the selected antibody. The
results of this study further validate the utility and
reliability of immunohistochemistry in diagnostic pathology.

Safety of intravenous antibiotic therapy – neurologic Lyme

Excerpt:

Although intravenous antibiotic therapy is recommended for
neurologic Lyme disease, safety concerns have been raised about
treatment beyond 30 days in patients with persistent neurologic
symptoms. The goal of our study was to evaluate the safety of
extended intravenous antibiotic therapy in patients referred for
treatment of neurologic Lyme disease.

METHODS: We enrolled 200
consecutive patients with significant neurologic symptoms and
positive testing for Borrelia burgdorferi. Patients were treated
with intravenous antibiotics using various intravascular devices
(IVDs). Standard IVD care was administered to all patients, and
monitoring for medication reactions and IVD complications was
performed on a weekly basis.

RESULTS: The mean length of intravenous
antibiotic treatment was 118 days (range, 7-750 days)
representing 23,654 IVD-days. Seven patients (3.5%) experienced
allergic reactions to the antibiotic medication, and two patients
(1.0%) had gallbladder toxicity. IVD complications occurred in 15
patients (7.5%) representing an incidence of 0.63 per 1,000
IVD-days. The IVD problems occurred an average of 81 days after
initiation of treatment (range, 7-240 days). There were six
suspected line infections for an incidence of 0.25 per 1,000
IVD-days. Only one of the IVD infections was confirmed, and no
resistant organisms were cultured from any patient. None of the
IVD complications were fatal.

CONCLUSION: Prolonged intravenous antibiotic therapy is
associated with low morbidity and no IVD-related mortality in
patients referred for treatment of neurologic Lyme disease. With
proper IVD care, the risk of extended antibiotic therapy in these
patients appears to be low.