Welcome to the Net Muslims Forums.
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,954

    Default Today’s “evidence-based medicine” Tomorrow’s Malpractice

    DSM5: Psychiatry guide is medicine gone mad


    HALF the Australian population could be classified as mentally ill under the controversial new diagnostic bible for psychiatry.

    The DSM5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) is being released this weekend...

    ...University of NSW Professor Gordon Parker says the diagnostic criteria in the manual are so loose that it will dramatically expand the number of people who could be classified as having a mental illness.

    "There have been studies showing 50 per cent of the western population would now generate a DSM diagnosis," he told an Australian Science Media briefing....

    ...New research has found that the chance of two doctors agreeing on its diagnosis of major depression is just 60 per cent.

    "That's only moderately better than chance," Professor Hickie said.

    The current version of the manual, produced by the American Psychiatric Association, is used widely in Australia and leading local psychiatrists have already called for the new version to be boycotted.

    Child psychiatrist Professor Jon Jureidini is particularly worried the DSM5 will lead to over diagnosis and over medication.

    US psychiatrist Professor Allen Frances, who developed the existing version, has also warned it will lead to new fad diagnoses that could see normal toddler tantrums and grief treated as illnesses.

    And the head of US peak mental health body the National Institute of Mental Health, Professor Tom Insel, recently declared it would not be using the manual as the basis for any of its research.'

    Professor of neuropsychiatry at the University of NSW, Perminder Sachdev, who worked as a consultant on DSM5, has rejected claims that those involved had links to pharmaceutical companies and had an
    interest in expanding definitions to provide a larger medication market...

    http://www.news.com.au/national-news...-1226645625932

  2. #2
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,954

    Default

    INVENTOR OF ADHD'S DEATHBED CONFESSION: "ADHD IS A FICTITIOUS DISEASE"




    Fortunately, the Swiss National Advisory Commission on Biomedical Ethics (NEK, President: Otfried Höffe) critically commented on the use of the ADHD drug Ritalin in its opinion of 22 November 2011 titled Human enhancement by means of pharmacological agents: The consumption of pharmacological agents altered the child’s behavior without any contribution on his or her part.

    That amounted to interference in the child’s freedom and personal rights, because pharmacological agents induced behavioral changes but failed to educate the child on how to achieve these behavioral changes independently. The child was thus deprived of an essential learning experience to act autonomously and emphatically which “considerably curtails children’s freedom and impairs their personality development”, the NEK criticized.

    The alarmed critics of the Ritalin disaster are now getting support from an entirely different side. The German weekly Der Spiegel quoted in its cover story on 2 February 2012 the US American psychiatrist Leon Eisenberg, born in 1922 as the son of Russian Jewish immigrants, who was the “scientific father of ADHD” and who said at the age of 87, seven months before his death in his last interview: “ADHD is a prime example of a fictitious disease”

    Since 1968, however, some 40 years, Leon Eisenberg’s “disease” haunted the diagnostic and statistical manuals, first as “hyperkinetic reaction of childhood”, now called “ADHD”. The use of ADHD medications in Germany rose in only eighteen years from 34 kg (in 1993) to a record of no less than 1760 kg (in 2011) – which is a 51-fold increase in sales! In the United States every tenth boy among ten year-olds already swallows an ADHD medication on a daily basis. With an increasing tendency.

    When it comes to the proven repertoire of Edward Bernays, the father of propaganda, to sell the First World War to his people with the help of his uncle’s psychoanalysis and to distort science and the faith in science to increase profits of the industry – what about investigating on whose behalf the “scientific father of ADHD” conducted science? His career was remarkably steep, and his “fictitious disease” led to the best sales increases. And after all, he served in the “Committee for DSM V and ICD XII, American Psychiatric Association” from 2006 to 2009. After all, Leon Eisenberg received “the Ruane Prize for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Research. He has been a leader in child psychiatry for more than 40 years through his work in pharmacological trials, research, teaching, and social policy and for his theories of autism and social medicine”.

    And after all, Eisenberg was a member of the “Organizing Committee for Women and Medicine Conference, Bahamas, November 29 – December 3, 2006, Josiah Macy Foundation (2006)”. The Josiah Macy Foundation organized conferences with intelligence agents of the OSS, later CIA, such as Gregory Bateson and Heinz von Foerster during and long after World War II. Have such groups marketed the diagnosis of ADHD in the service of the pharmaceutical market and tailor-made for him with a lot of propaganda and public relations? It is this issue that the American psychologist Lisa Cosgrove and others investigated in their study Financial Ties between DSM-IV Panel Members and the Pharmaceutical Industry7. They found that “Of the 170 DSM panel members 95 (56%) had one or more financial associations with companies in the pharmaceutical industry. One hundred percent of the members of the panels on ‘Mood Disorders’ and ‘Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders’ had financial ties to drug companies. The connections are especially strong in those diagnostic areas where drugs are the first line of treatment for mental disorders.” In the next edition of the manual, the situation is unchanged. “Of the 137 DSM-V panel members who have posted disclosure statements, 56% have reported industry ties – no improvement over the percent of DSM-IV members.” “The very vocabulary of psychiatry is now defined at all levels by the pharmaceutical industry,” said Dr Irwin Savodnik, an assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California at Los Angeles.



    This is well paid. Just one example: The Assistant Director of the Pediatric Psychopharmacology Unit at Massachusetts General Hospital and Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School received “$1 million in earnings from drug companies between 2000 and 2007”. In any case, no one can easily get around the testimony of the father of ADHD: “ADHD is a prime example of a fictitious disease.”

    The task of psychologists, educators and doctors is not to put children on the “chemical lead” because the entire society cannot handle the products of its misguided theories of man and raising children, and instead hands over our children to the free pharmaceutical market. Let us return to the basic matter of personal psychology and education: The child is to acquire personal responsibility and emphatic behavior under expert guidance – and that takes the family and the school: In these fields, the child should be able to lead off mentally. This constitutes the core of the human person.


    www.naturalnews.com/040938_ADHD_fictitious_disease_psychiatry.html

  3. #3
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,954

    Default

    British Psychological Society to launch attack on rival profession, casting doubt on biomedical model of mental illness


    There is no scientific evidence that psychiatric diagnoses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are valid or usefu
    l, according to the leading body representing Britain's clinical psychologists.

    In a groundbreaking move that has already prompted a fierce backlash from psychiatrists, the British Psychological Society's division of clinical psychology (DCP) will on Monday issue a statement declaring that, given the lack of evidence, it is time for a "paradigm shift" in how the issues of mental health are understood. The statement effectively casts doubt on psychiatry's predominantly biomedical model of mental distress – the idea that people are suffering from illnesses that are treatable by doctors using drugs. The DCP said its decision to speak out "reflects fundamental concerns about the development, personal impact and core assumptions of the (diagnosis) systems", used by psychiatry.

    [paradigm shift – a complete change in thought process. Ex: belief in earth as center of our solar system to Sun as center of our solar system]



    Dr Lucy Johnstone, a consultant clinical psychologist who helped draw up the DCP's statement, said it was unhelpful to see mental health issues as illnesses with biological causes.

    "On the contrary, there is now overwhelming evidence that people break down as a result of a complex mix of social and psychological circumstances – bereavement and loss, poverty and discrimination, trauma and abuse," Johnstone said. The provocative statement by the DCP has been timed to come out shortly before the release of DSM-5, the fifth edition of the American Psychiatry Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

    The manual has been attacked for expanding the range of mental health issues that are classified as disorders. For example, the fifth edition of the book, the first for two decades, will classify manifestations of grief, temper tantrums and worrying about physical ill-health as the mental illnesses of major depressive disorder, disruptive mood dysregulation disorder and somatic symptom disorder, respectively. Some of the manual's omissions are just as controversial as the manual's inclusions. The term "Asperger's disorder" will not appear in the new manual, and instead its symptoms will come under the newly added "autism spectrum disorder".

    The DSM is used in a number of countries to varying degrees. Britain uses an alternative manual, the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) published by the World Health Organisation, but the DSM is still hugely influential – and controversial.

    The writer Oliver James, who trained as a clinical psychologist, welcomed the DCP's decision to speak out against psychiatric diagnosis and stressed the need to move away from a biomedical model of mental distress to one that examined societal and personal factors.

    Writing in today's Observer, James declares: "We need fundamental changes in how our society is organised to give parents the best chance of meeting the needs of children and to prevent the amount of adult adversity."

    But Professor Sir Simon Wessely, a member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and chair of psychological medicine at King's College London, said it was wrong to suggest psychiatry was focused only on the biological causes of mental distress. And in an accompanying Observer article he defends the need to create classification systems for mental disorder.

    "A classification system is like a map," Wessely explains. "And just as any map is only provisional, ready to be changed as the landscape changes, so does classification."


    http://www.guardian.co.uk

  4. #4
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,954

    Default

    Documentary: Making a Killing - The Untold Story of Psychotropic Drugging




    This video provides the facts about psychotropic drugs and the huge profits they create for the pharmaceutical industry. These drugs are not safe and have not been on the market long enough to provide sufficient long term studies regarding their effects. These drugs do cause addiction, however most "doctors" would call this dependence because you do not have to take an increasing dose over time. They are completely fine with you being addicted to the same amount of any given drug on a daily basis. Over half of the people that commit suicide in the United States are prescribed to psychotropic drugs. (Ex: Paxil (Paroxetine), Zoloft (Sertraline), Prozac, Wellbutrin (Bupropion), Effexor, Seroquil, Ultram (Tramadol), etc.)

    Video:


  5. #5
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,954

    Default Biggest Moneymaker of all Time: Cancer

    The Biggest Moneymaker of all Time: Cancer, and Why the Profiteers Don’t Want a Cure

    By Dr. Dennis Antoine

    People wail, cry, and question why him /her, how could this happen to a child? Immeasurable grief.

    Yet the answers are quite clear: humans are unknowingly exposed to far too many chemicals on their food, in their water, their clothes – even when buying a new car. That new car smell? Major cancer causing chemicals that have been used to treat the new leather and the rugs in that new car. And people get in and snort it like they smelled a bouquet of flowers.

    Food sprayed with chemicals to make them last? Preservatives. At one time, you could not patent food. Yet we now have a patented soybean. Just so Monsanto can profit. This fooling around and injecting chemicals in food has got to stop!

    This is why you must demand that food be labeled GMO ! Go California!

    Even new clothing has been treated with chemicals that can seep into the body and wreak havoc especially in young children. Not to mention the pesticides that are used on your food. What is very interesting is how many people from Monsanto wind up working for the FDA. The FDA is supposed to protect US citizens from poisons, right? Do enough of your own research and the more you learn the more outraged you will become. This is what is meant by the wolf guarding the henhouse. They eat healthy, sure. And you can bet the ranch they don’t eat the food they sell.

    Dr Max Gerson, who in 1938 made a startling discovery that his safe natural treatment for cancer patients held enormous promise. He was getting people well by using something that could not be patented – vegetables. At this time in history, a bill was appropriated for 100 million dollars to anyone who could show promise and results in treating cancer. Dr Gerson in 1946 presented 5 terminal cases and 5 additional patients’ records showing his effective treatment and cure of all of these cases. Well, guess what? The Pepper-Neely bill was defeated by four senators who were medical doctors.

    Also of note, radio announcer Raymond Gram Swing who was in the room, was as astonished as any of the others and made a broadcast that night detailing these events and Gerson’s effective treatment. Two 2 weeks later, Swing was fired from his job.

    The following video is life changing. The angel Charlotte Gerson is still alive and living in San Diego.

    Gerson died in 1959, eulogized by long-time friend, Albert Schweitzer M.D.

    I see in him one of the most eminent geniuses in the history of medicine. Many of his basic ideas have been adopted without having his name connected with them. Yet, he has achieved more than seemed possible under adverse conditions. He leaves a legacy which commands attention and which will assure him his due place. Those whom he has cured will now attest to the truth of his ideas.

    Dozens of treatments have come and gone and have just as quickly been termed “not effective”. When an individual encounters a pathogen (virus, bacteria, fungus) their immunomodulators in their brain kick in to use and many different self-preservation events occur. One of the first is a fever. Almost all pathogens function best at 98.6, or normal body temperature.

    The aspirin companies have convinced the public that a fever is bad. “We’ve got to break the fever” “if it gets too high we could cause brain damage”. And so this is drilled into caring parents’ minds and they immediately freak and start giving aspirin.

    The body knows what it is doing and we interfere. Because we have a degree from a prestigious school and a stethoscope around our neck-we know better. But the fever is designed to make a poor quality environment for the germ, and eventually kill it off.

    Instead, the aspirin, or Tylenol, does lower the temperature in some cases and the pathogen can now flourish.

    The following was written by a medical doctor and comes from The Cancer Prevention Coalition: The verdict is unassailable. The American Cancer Society bears a major responsibility for losing the winnable war against cancer. Reforming the ACS is, in principle, relatively easy and directly achievable. Boycott the ACS. Instead, give your charitable contributions to public interest and environmental groups involved in cancer prevention. Such a boycott is well overdue and will send the only message this “charity” can no longer ignore. The Cancer Prevention Coalition (chaired by the author) in April 1999 formally announced a nationwide campaign for an economic boycott of the ACS .

    Mammography

    The American Cancer Society has close connections to the mammography industry. Five radiologists have served as ACS presidents, and in its every move, the ACS reflects the interests of the major manufacturers of mammogram machines and films, including Siemens, DuPont, General Electric, Eastman Kodak, and Piker. In fact, if every woman were to follow ACS and NCI mammography guidelines, the annual revenue to health care facilities would be a staggering $5 billion, including at least $2.5 billion for premenopausal women. Promotions of the ACS continue to lure women of all ages into mammography centers, leading them to believe that mammography is their best hope against breast cancer. A leading Massachusetts newspaper featured a photograph of two women in their twenties in an ACS advertisement that promised early detection results in a cure “nearly 100 percent of the time.” An ACS communications director, questioned by journalist Kate Dempsey, responded in an article published by the Massachusetts Women’s Community’s journal Cancer:

    The ad isn’t based on a study. When you make an advertisement, you just say what you can to get women in the door. You exaggerate a point. . . . Mammography today is a lucrative [and] highly competitive business.

    The way women are treated when they have a mammography is deplorable. The tender, sensitive breast is jostled around, roughly handled and placed in the device to obtain the x-ray. The already angry area (angry with cancer cells) is now irritated further, enhancing the probability and possibility of cells spreading to other parts of the body.

    Not only that, the tumor has a capsule around it. All the rough movement of the breast only helps to disrupt this capsule and enhance spreading or metastasis. Want a little more irritation? Let’s biopsy the area. A needle is stuck into the balloon and cells removed. Don’t you know there will be some leakage of the cells contained in that capsule?

    Lung cancer and esophageal cancers too, are extraordinarily lucrative. It is one of the more difficult cancers to treat. There are miraculous stories about using Hydrogen Peroxide in the proper form to treat the body with oxygen.

    Madison Cavanaugh has written a book called The One Minute Cure detailing the effectiveness of Hydrogen Peroxide on various health problems. Get the book.

    To be clear, Hydrogen Peroxide must be Food Grade, meaning NOT WHAT YOU BUY IN THE SUPERMARKET. You must find food grade at 35% and then dilute it to 3%. What they sell in the brown bottle has preservatives in it and is not meant for internal use.

    Cancer despises oxygen. It also loves 98.6. And it loves fatty tissue. It’s nirvana for the cancer cells. Cancer also has a unique capability to do what is called angiogenesis - it makes it’s own blood vessels to bring more blood and more food to feed it’s crazy appetite. It has this appetite because it is making cells at such a rapid pace.

    Sugar is perfect fuel for cancer. High fructose corn syrup is a form of sugar that is ideal, as the high mitotic rate (cell division and tumor growth) calls for energy.

    So here we have the “perfect storm”- you take a body, make it overweight – eat low quality food with all kinds of chemicals in the food and expose that person to fluoride in water, or vaccinations (additional cancer causing chemicals), air pollution, barbecued food (additional carcinogens) nitrates and nitrites, second hand smoke, etc and voila! You have a good potential to develop cancer.

    Not everyone takes the cheese of standard treatment however, because there are alternatives to treating even difficult esophageal cancer as evidenced by this next video: http://youtu.be/LdlA7kjK-4o

    Tumors – Let’s pretend you were away and when you came home your home was extremely hot. You go to the thermostat an turn on the air conditioner. Nothing happens.

    Would you then rip the thermostat out of the wall, thinking, “Well that should fix it”?

    Of course not. This is what we do when we cut out a tumor. The tumors purpose just may be a “thermostat” a way to measure the presence of sickness. What if the tumor was only an indicator and not a sign of imminent death?

    In so many cases, when treated successfully, there are reports of tumors shrinking and disappearing.

    So what we do in America, we cut the tumor out. And the wonderful surgeon tells the family “I think we got it all”. Since cells are so vastly small, how could anyone, even with a microscope know for sure that they “got it all?” There is not a physician on the planet that could know for 100% sure they were able to “get it all”.

    As a matter of fact, what if the tumors actually served a purpose and acted as indicators to tell us whether improvement is taking place? After all, unless the tumor is pressing on an airway or blood vessel, why take a chance and cut a person open who is already in a challenged state? And leave them susceptible to infection. Many people die from secondary infections due to the immunosuppresion of their bodies brought on by the side effects of chemotherapy. The radiation kills healthy cells. Cancer does not make hair fall out; radiation does that. And poor appetite causing poor nourishment? Caused by the drugs. So how can a body stay healthy if they are not getting proper nourishment?

    This does not have to be. This is exactly where Dr Gerson was going. Take away the irritants (bad food, poor quality fluoridated water, fats, and sugars) and introduce ingredients the body can use to fight with-clean water-a healthy liver-vegetables-nutrients, and proper health can be restored.

    This is a small sampling of incredible alternatives to fight cancer. The reason hemp is outlawed? Henry Ford many years ago said we should be using hemp for almost anything you can imagine – more and better use than cutting down all the trees and insulting the earth with mining. Greed is why hemp is outlawed. It is a very powerful solution to a number of health problems.

    Rick Simpson in his video Run From the Cure discusses his very effective treatment for cancer-hemp oil.


    Source:
    wakeup-world.com

  6. #6
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,954

    Default Today’s “evidence-based medicine” Tomorrow’s Malpractice

    Today’s “evidence-based medicine” may be tomorrow’s malpractice


    2.14.16

    We hold these truths to be self-evident:


    A hospital administrator with a clipboard is in search of a physician who isn’t following “evidence-based guidelines”.
    There are fads in medicine just as there are in fashion—today’s “evidence-based medicine” may be tomorrow’s malpractice.



    Did your hospital, like so many, abruptly switch from povidone-iodine antiseptic solution to ChloraPrep® for cleaning a patient’s skin before surgery? If so, I’m sure the staff was told that ChloraPrep would be more effective and cheaper. No doubt, they were also warned of the extra precautions that must be taken with ChloraPrep to prevent operating room fires, since ChloraPrep contains highly flammable 70% isopropyl alcohol in addition to chlorhexidine. Even the fire risk apparently wasn’t enough to make hospitals think twice before switching antiseptics.


    You (and your hospital’s staff) may not have heard this news. The US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced last month that CareFusion Corp. would pay the government a $40.1 million settlement to resolve allegations that the company violated the False Claims Act by paying kickbacks to boost sales of ChloraPrep and promoting it for uses that aren’t FDA-approved.


    Who received kickbacks? According to the DOJ’s press release, the complaint alleged that “CareFusion paid $11.6 million in kickbacks to Dr. Charles Denham while Denham served as the co-chair of the Safe Practices Committee at the National Quality Forum, a non-profit organization that reviews, endorses, and recommends standardized health care performance measures and practices.” Another physician with close ties to CareFusion, Dr. Rabih Darouiche, was the lead investigator on a 2010 NEJM article which concluded (not surprisingly) that Chloraprep was “significantly more protective” than povidone-iodine against surgical site infections.


    The Leapfrog Group, launched by the Business Roundtable in 2000, claims that its hospital survey is “the gold standard for comparing hospitals’ performance on the national standards of safety, quality, and efficiency.” On January 30, Leapfrog announced that it accepted the resignation of Dr. Denham, who had served as chair of Leapfrog’s Safe Practices Committee since 2006, amid concerns that Dr. Denham had failed to reveal his “potentially compromising relationship with CareFusion.” At the same time, Leapfrog said it would undertake “a thorough scientific review of its full slate of endorsed safe practices.”


    Are you still feeling good about evidenced-based medicine?

    More @ http://apennedpoint.com/todays-evide...s-malpractice/

  7. #7
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,954

    Default How a Mideast medical tradition became an Olympics trend

    How a Mideast medical tradition became an Olympics trend

    Aug 9, 2016


    A new medical treatment that has its origins in Islamic and Middle Eastern traditions is trending at the Rio Olympics used by star-athletes like Michael Phelps.

    Cupping, or known as ‘hijama’ in Arabic, involves applying glass or plastic cups to an area of discomfort on the body and either applying heat or suction to create a vacuum. The suction pulls the skin away from the muscle and draws oxygenated blood to the area. The suction also is what causes the bruising, like giant hickey without the fun that comes with it.

    Phelps, who won his 19th career gold medal so far, was seen with a huge bruising on his right shoulder on the morning of his meet, prompting many to ask whether he was applying the ancient Middle Eastern medical treatment.

    Researchers have traced cupping’s origins back to China and Greece somewhere around 1500 B.C., and Team USA gymnast Alex Naddour was among other Olympians who have been seen with the purple marks in Rio.

    It roots in Islam is reported several times in quotes by the Prophet Mohammed who said: “Indeed the best of remedies you have is hijama (cupping)…”

    And it’s not just for star athletes. Health spas often offer the service for a few hundred dollars and the cups can be purchased online for as little as $15 and applied at home.

    Some in the medical community believe it’s nothing but hocus pocus, the latest form of snake oil that tricks patients into paying for it again and again. Others insist that it aids recovery, relaxes muscles and helps an athlete maximize performance.

    Phelps certainly believes in it. In the end, that may be all that matters. “I’ve done it before meets at pretty much every meet I go to,” he said.

    http://saudigazette.com.sa/life/mide...lympics-trend/

  8. #8
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,954

    Default Pig Kidney Transplant to Humans Coming Soon

    Forget blood type. Soon we'll be able to transplant organs from different species

    12/14/2016

    "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which." - George Orwell, Animal Farm, 1946

    If you need a kidney transplant tomorrow, chances are you will wait around three years. Even before you get transplanted, assuming you live, you will most likely spend years on dialysis. Right now there are more than 100,000 people in the US waiting for kidney transplants. Every year nearly 5,000 people will die just waiting for one. On the horizon though, is a potential source of donors that may revolutionize kidney transplantation as we know it. Best of all, it may be that we only have to go to a local farm to get one.

    In 1984 at Loma Linda University Medical Center an infant girl known as "Baby Fae" received the first xenotransplant, also known as non-human to human transplant. In this case, Baby Fae received a baboon heart in a last ditch effort to save her life. Sadly, Baby Fae died 21 days later.

    The roadblock to success with this kind of therapy in transplantation has always been how best to keep you from rejecting your new organ. This is the cornerstone of the science whose goal is to best match your gift and to protect it for the remainder of what we hope will be your long life. This is essentially the same science that determines blood types and why we need to match blood donors with blood recipients.

    You see, your body is able to recognize an unmatched transplanted organ such as a heart, kidney or liver, as not being your own. This recognition of the unmatched organs is triggered when certain proteins on their cells cause a cascade of biological processes in which your body mounts an attack on your newly transplanted organ. This leads to organ rejection and possibly even your death.

    The ability to successfully transplant an organ is a product of two fundamental therapies. First we have find an organ from a donor whose proteins most closely look like yours, and second we have to protect that organ with medications meant to keep your immune system from attacking your new transplant. Even then the organ is often rejected, an incredible loss not only for you but for the family of the deceased or living donor who graciously tried to save your life.

    The trouble with the Baby Fae case is that the heart of the baboon, while similar in size and structure to her own heart, simply did not look like her human heart on the cellular level. Fae’s own immune system attacked the baboon heart and she died.

    Over the years since the early 80’s there has been a resurgence in research the focus of which is to alter the cells of non-human species and ultimately make those cells resemble those of a human being.

    Scientists have started to make huge inroads through cloning. The model that seems the most promising is not a primate such as a monkey, or chimp. Instead the animal that holds the most promise of all potential animal donors is of all things…the pig. Incredibly scientists have succeeded in removing those proteins from pig cells that are most responsible for rejection. In the simplest of explanations, these pig kidneys, on the cellular level are coming close to being indistinguishable from humans. They are so close in fact that they may not even need to be matched. You can essentially put the same kidney into…well anybody.

    Transplant surgeon Dr. Joseph Tector, and his laboratory at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, is on the forefront of this scientific advancement. They are very close. So close in fact that I predict, for the coming year, that Dr. Tector will put the first pig kidney into a human being, possibly as early as the end of 2017, or the very beginning of 2018. I also predict this will work and change the way we think of organ transplantation forever.

    Down the line I envision huge cloning farms, producing the same pig over and over. Essentially a continuous and unlimited source of kidneys, so many in fact that we will probably need hospitals solely meant for kidney transplantation. In time I predict this process will eventually translate to livers, hearts, even intestines but for now the focus is on kidneys. I am excited to see what will happen in the near future and where we are headed. We just may be on the verge of one of the most significant advancements in medicine in the last fifty years. One that few even knew was within our grasp.

    Perhaps George Orwell was right, at least when it comes to the kidney, in the very near future we may not be able to tell which is which.

    Dr. Louis M. Profeta is an emergency physician practicing in Indianapolis. He is the author of the critically acclaimed book, The Patient in Room Nine Says He's God.

    https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/forge...00L0EffW_Q5DA1

    Comments:

    That's one procedure Muslims and Jews won't be getting involved in or approving.

  9. #9
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,954

    Default

    Chemotherapy Warning As Hundreds Die From Cancer Fighting Drugs

    By Sarah Knapton - 30 August 2016

    Patients should be warned about the dangers of chemotherapy after research showed that cancer drugs are killing up to 50 per cent of patients in some hospitals.

    For the first time researchers looked at the numbers of cancer patients who died within 30 days of starting chemotherapy, which indicates that the medication is the cause of death, rather than the cancer.

    The study by Public Health England and Cancer Research UK found that across England around 8.4 per cent of patients with lung cancer, and 2.4 per cent of breast cancer patients died within a month.

    But in some hospitals the figure was far higher. In Milton Keynes the death rate for lung cancer treatment was 50.9 per cent, although it was based on a very small number of patients.

    At Lancashire Teaching Hospitals the 30 day mortality rate was 28 per cent for palliative chemotherapy for lung cancer, which is given when a cure is not expected and treatment given to alleviate symptoms.

    Deaths of lung cancer patients from chemotherapy were also far higher than the national average in Blackpool, Coventry, Derby, South Tyneside and Surrey and Sussex, according to the research.

    Similarly, around one in five people who underwent palliative care for breast cancer at Cambridge University Hospitals died from their treatment.

    Public Health England (PHE), said it had contacted the hospitals concerned to ask them to review practices.

    Dr Jem Rashbass, Cancer Lead for PHE, said: "Chemotherapy is a vital part of cancer treatment and is a large reason behind the improved survival rates over last four decades.

    "However, it is powerful medication with significant side effects and often getting the balance right on which patients to treat aggressively can be hard.

    "Those hospitals whose death rates are outside the expected range have had the findings shared with them and we have asked them to review their practice and data."

    The study looked at more than 23,000 women with breast cancer and nearly 10,000 men with 9634 non-small cell lung cancer who underwent chemotherapy in 2014. Of those treated 1,383 died within 30 days.

    Chemotherapy is toxic for the body because it does not discriminate between healthy and cancerous cells.

    The researchers also found that there were significant differences in survival for older people and those in poorer health. They advised doctors to be more careful in selecting patients for treatment where it could do more harm than good.

    "The statistics don't suggest bad practice overall but there are some outliers," said Professor David Dodwell, Institute of Oncology, St James Hospital, Leeds, UK.

    "It could be data problems, and figures skewed because of just a few deaths, but nevertheless it could also be down to problems with clinical practice. I think it's important to make patients aware that there are potentially life threatening downsides to chemotherapy. And doctors should be more careful about who they treat with chemotherapy."

    Professor David Cameron, Edinburgh Cancer Centre, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland, added: "The concern is that some of the patients dying within 30 days of being given chemo probably shouldn't have been given the chemo. But, how many? There is no easy way to answer that, but perhaps looking at those places/hospitals where the death rate was higher might help. Furthermore, if we give less chemo then some patients will die because they didn't get chemo. It's a fine balance and the more data we have the better we can be at making sure we get the balance right."

    Professor Peter Johnson, Cancer Research UK's chief clinician, said: "Chemotherapy is an important part of treatment for many people with cancer. Having information about how well it is being delivered is vitally important to patients and to the health service."

    All the hospitals named said they had since reviewed the cases and were satisfied that chemotherapy prescribing was safe.

    The research was published in The Lancet Oncology.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/08/30/chemotherapy-warning-as-hundreds-die-from-cancer-fighting-drugs/



    Chemotherapy (radiation) is not the cure to cancer. So many people have been cured by other means. The modern medical profession is designed to keep customers (patients) returning.


 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •