What’s in YOUR Kitchen?

Is your kitchen making your Sick … or Fat?

So you try to choose mostly organic, natural, healthful, locally produced foods.

That’s great … but the kitchen you prepare them in could be making you sick or putting on extra pounds.   Really!

With obesity rates continuing to rise at an alarming rate, scientists have started to ask if something aside from diet, exercise, and junk is to blame.  Finally!

As Robert H. Lustig, a professor of clinical pediatrics a t the University
of California, San Francisco said: “Even those at the lower end of the BMI (body mass index) curve are gaining weight.  Whatever is happening is happening to everyone, suggesting an environmental trigger.”

What researchers like Lustig are discovering is that certain chemicals in food, drugs, and industrial products alter metabolic processes in ways that promote weight gain or worse.

These insidious enemies – called obesogens – are endocrine disruptors, meaning that they mimic human hormones and thereby can make you sick, fat, or both.

Let’s Find the Obesogens in Your Home:

About 20 obesogens have been identified … and that list is growing.

These are the best-documented obesogens and their most common sources:

   *       Alkylphenols are surfactants (detergents) used in many industrial, household, and person care products.

   *       Pesticides like DE (dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) are linked to bigger BMIs (body mass indices) in children.

   *       Parabens are used as preservatives in cosmetics due to their bactericide or fungicide properties.

   *       Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) such as PCBs and dioxins work their way up the food chain and accumulate in animal fats.  They’ve been banned for decades but as the name implies, traces are still found in meats, dairy products, and some fish (farmed fish have higher levels than wild fish).

   *       Phthalates are used in plastics and as solvents, and are found in vinyl flooring, adhesives, detergents, lubricating oils, automotive plastics, plastic clothes (raincoats), personal-care products (soaps, shampoos, hair sprays, and nail polishes), plastic packaging film and sheets, garden hoses, inflatable toys, blood-storage containers, medical tubing, some children’s toys.  People are exposed to phthalates by eating and drinking foods that have  been in contact with phthalates.

   *       Organotins are tin-based pesticides also found in PVC (a type of plastic), in some lubricating oils, hydrogen peroxide, and the coatings of some food packages and reusable glass bottles.

What About BPA?

 

Because it’s the best known endocrine-disruptor and potential obesogen, BPA deserves special attention.

BPA is primarily used in polycarbonate plastics, epoxy resins, and most cash register tapes.

This means that BPA is often used in food and drink packaging (e.g., some water and infant bottles), medical devices, food cans, bottle tops, water supply pipes, and some dental sealants and composites.

When BPA concerns first arose in 2007, many legitimate, in particular organic supplier asked all of their suppliers whether any of their food cans or packages contain BPA, and all certified they didn’t.

However, most have since refused to renew their certification, because they don’t control every part of their supply chain and fear liability for an erroneous certification.

By now, BPA is everywhere in the environment, and like virtually every canned food in the world.

This happened even though Consumer Reports agreed that the type of lining used in cans does not contain BPA, and the can makers even certified that BPA was not used.

In February 23, 2010 Washington Post article, “Alternatives to BPA containers not easy for U.S. Food makers to find”.

On of the companies I buy from spends about $10,000 on lab tests trying to pinpoint the source of BPA in their canned tuna, and Consumers Union also found BPA in baked beans made by Eden Foods, which were packed in “BPA-free” cans.

Importantly, legitimate concern over BPA distracts from the fact that – according to recent research – BPA-free plastics contain compounds that also exert endocrine-disruptive effects.

Toxins in the Kitchen:

You also need to keep an eye on toxins that affect the nerve, hormone, and immune systems, whose close interactions and mutual influences have led scientists to consider them one “neuro-endocrine-immunologic” system.

These are the most common offenders:

   *       Ethanol, lead, and hexane.

   *       Pesticides – Any food or beverage not labeled organic may contain pesticides.

   *       Perfluoroctanoic acid (PFOA) – PROAs can be found in non-stick pots and pans.

Look for “PFOA free” on the label.  The biggest danger is in overheating or scratching a non-stick pan that contains PFOAs.
Clearly, we can’t identify and avoid all of the potential obesogens and toxins in our lives.  But we can be smart and mitigate our exposure, starting with our kitchens.

Bruce Blumberg, a biology professor at the University of California, Irvine, who coined the term obesogen in 2006, sums it up pretty well: “Eat organic, filter water, minimize plastic in your life.  If there’s no benefit and some degree of risk, why expose yourself and your family?”

 Get Back to Great-Grandma’s Kitchen:

Think old school.  Chemicals have been omnipresent in home and personal care products since the 1920’s, so referencing grandma’s kitchen probably isn’t going back far enough in time – but you get the point, I hope!

Instead ask, “Would my great-grandmother recognize it?”  I use this same question when teaching folks about food.  Today we all know that the name like tomato can be the same today – but it doesn’t taste anything like when we were growing up – and most of us know why!

Storage

   *       Glass is a clean and cheap way to store nearly anything.

*       Steel boxes and stoneware offer another option – and they look fantastic.

Cooking Utensils

*       Stainless steel is sleek, cleans easily, and can be run through the dishwasher – better yet is surgical steel.

   *       Wood is a great choice.  Bamboo, rosewood, and cherry are good options.

  Pots & Pans

   *       Stainless steel is the first choice of serious chefs, and the lightest of all.

   *       Cast iron is durable, beautiful, a pro at even heat distribution, and it lasts forever.

Enameled cast iron is handsome and works in the oven as well as on the stove top.

*       Copper will cost you and require a learning curve, bit it will also impress your friends.

   *       Glass is the way to go when baking.  The idea that you need risky non-stick coatings to make a cake turn out right is pure baloney.  Just grease the pan with organic butter or oil (I use only organic coconut oil).

*       Stoneware is naturally non-stick, ages beautifully, and comes in a variety of forms from muffin pans to cookie sheets.

 To say these tips remove all hazards from your kitchen would be an exaggeration.  But a bit of awareness could help protect your health, your family’s health … and your waistline!

Remember, I’m all about helping you all –

Plan for Tomorrow’s Good Health – TODAY!

Dr. Rhonda

 

Website:   www.drhenry.com

Email:      Contact@drhenry.com

Office:     702-269-8120

 

INFANTS IN YOUR BED?

Do you think infants should sleep with their parents?

The following letter appeared in the November issue of The Archives of Adolescent and Pediatric Medicine, which is a publication of the American Medical Association.  I have included the entire text, as it contains lots of interesting information and many good references.

“Don’t sleep with your baby or put the baby down to sleep in an adult bed.”  Ann Brown, chair of the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Voiced this statement in the 9/30/99, New York Times through a CPSC press release.

The release previewed data from an October 1999 Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine study entitled “Review of Hazards Associated with Children Placed in Adult Beds.”  The news flew over the associated Press wires, and emotionally charged commentaries were printed in newspapers and magazines nationwide, a clear indication of the public interest on this issue.  Numerous websites espouse the benefits of co-sleeping, also reflecting current interest in the family bed concept.

Historically, co-sleeping in this country was the normal practice.

Today, the practice of co-sleeping is standard for most non-Western cultures and is common in the US, yet  it’s probable that many pediatricians in this country, like the CPSC chairperson, counsel new parents to sleep separately from their infants.  This is one of many areas where physicians may counsel families based on few, or anecdotal data, in contrast to the recent trend toward evidence-based medicine.

What are the potential risks and benefits of co-sleeping?

Are there enough data to support encouraging or discouraging this common practice?  This commentary will review the relevant literature on this subject, enabling pediatricians to more knowledgeably counsel families about co-sleeping.

And because professionals in the field of health often receive information that isn’t shared with the general public, unfortunately, I like to do what I think is best, after all, who cares more for their babies then the parents?

Potential Benefits of Co-sleeping

From a biological perspective, co-sleeping is a natural extension of infant care practice.  Among mammals, human infants are born the most neurologically immature, needing close human contact for basic survival.  Mammals need close physical contact for more than just nutritional needs.  Harlow’s work demonstrated that newborn monkeys separated from their mothers spent significantly more time in contact with a cloth surrogate mother than a wire one, even if th wire surrogate provided all of the infant’s nutrition.

Recent work by Mosko et al has shown that the sleep architecture of infants who co-sleep is qualitatively different.  Healthy mother-infant pairs were studied in the sleep laboratory sleeping either alone or together.  While bed sharing, infants had significantly longer total sleep time, a greater duration and percentage of stage – half sleep, shorter duration and lower percentage of stage – three-quarters sleep (quiet sleep).

The authors postulate that if sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) is caused by an arousal deficiency, then less time spent in quiet sleep through co-sleeping may be protective.

This same group observed patterns of breast-feeding in the sleep laboratory between those who routinely co-slept and those who did not.  For infants who routinely bed shared, the number and duration of breast-feeding episodes were significantly greater on the bed-sharing night.  The authors concluded that bed sharing promotes breast-feeding.

There are many professionals and parents who strongly advocate co-sleeping as the optimal way to raise a child.  Sears, author of Nighttime Parenting, advocates “attachment parenting,” a concept that includes the possibility of various sleeping arrangements, depending on the needs of the family.

Co-sleeping and SIDS

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (Atlanta, Ga) surveillance data between 1980 and 1994, SIDS was the leading cause of death among infants aged 28 to 364 days, accounting for 33% of all post-neonatal deaths.  The annual rate of decline of SIDS deaths in the U.S. was more than 3 times faster from 1990 to 1994 than from 1083 to 1989; the latter dates coincide with national efforts placed on educating families about the risks of prone sleeping.

Does co-sleeping increase the risk of SIDS?  Several studies have attempted to answer this question.  Results from the 3 most recent and comprehensive investigations.  These studies drew similar conclusions; there is no detectable increase risk of SIDS from co-sleeping unless the mother smokes.  Recall bias and residual confounding many have disforested results from these studies.  However, point estimates for the relative risk of SIDS while co-sleeping (and smoke free) were remarkably similar and close to unity in all 3 studies.

Co-sleeping and Suffocation

Another major concern involving the practice of co-sleeping is the risk of
suffocation, a fear dating back to biblical times.  (In 1 Kings, chapter 3, one woman accused another of having “overlaid” her newborn.)

Drago and Dannenberg reviewed 2178 case summaries from the CPSC Death Certificate Files from 1980 to 1997, for infants younger than 13 months, whose deaths were attributed to mechanical suffocation.

The leading pattern (40% of cases) of suffocation was wedging (infant is trapped between 2 products or parts of a product).  More than half of the wedgings involved a bed; 22% occurred in a crib.  Further investigation revealed that many of these cribs didn’t meet current federal crib standards.  The second leading cause (24% of cases) of suffocation death was due to nasal obstruction from bedding, pillows, and plastic bags.  The third cause (8% of cases) was from infants being overlain by another person.

Another article, published in Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, reviewed the CPSC’s databases from 1990 to 1997 for deaths of children aged younger than 2 years who were placed in adult beds, day beds, and waterbeds.  There were 515 deaths in children younger than 2 years who were placed to sleep in an adult bed, with 394 of these deaths attributed to entrapment in the bed.

A total of 121 deaths were attributed to overlying by a parent, sibling, or other adult.  During the same period, there were 17 deaths of children older than 2 years sleeping in adult beds, 8 of which occurred in severely disabled children.  Although the authors did not investigate deaths of children placed in cribs, they did cite another CPSC study from 1989 t0 1991, which found an average of 50 accidental deaths per year in cribs, compared with an average of 64 deaths per day in adult beds.

The authors maintain that mothers should be encouraged to breast-feed, but recommend they be “alerted to the hazard of overlying” if the mother and infant fall asleep together after feeding, which is likely to be a common occurrence.

Unfortunately, the CPSC data only represent a case series and aren’t denominator-based, making it impossible to ascertain the relative risk of death for infants who co-sleep.  There is also no possibility of ascertaining the accuracy of the information derived from the databases.  Last, how many infants were sleeping with parents impaired by alcohol or other drugs?  How many were sleeping with a sibling vs a parent (another potential risk factor)?

To put the risk of suffocation into perspective, the post-neonatal injury death rate per 100,000 live births of white infants in 1994 was 22, of which nearly a third were due to suffocation.  This is less than one tenth of the mortality rate from SIDS for the same cohort.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has issued a statement on this topic.  Although co-sleeping is not encouraged, it’s not discouraged either, assuming that the sleep environment is otherwise safe, the infant is supine, and co-sleepers do not smoke or use other drugs that impair arousal.

Recommendations

To my knowledge, to date, the literature offers insufficient data to recommend or discourage babies and parents from co-sleeping.  Meanwhile, many parents and healthcare professionals believe that co-sleeping is the best way to raise a baby physiologically, psychologically, and emotionally.

Therefore, are pediatricians justified in condemning the family bed, making parents feel guilty about harming their baby?  Clearly, pediatricians must counsel families about the dangerous of smoking, drinking alcohol, or taking drugs that impair arousal, and the potential for infant suffocation in beds, cribs, and bedding.  However, until there is more compelling evidence, the decision to co-sleep, like many other child rearing practices, should be left to the family.

Catherine Kelley, MD, University Hospital, Department of Pediatrics. I couldn’t agree more with Dr. Kelley that physicians should keep their noses out of the business of parents’ person child rearing practices, particularly when there is insufficient evidence to back up their claims.  The co-sleeping arrangement may not be suitable for all families, but parents should not be scared away from it unnecessarily.

What doctor’s should do however, is discuss the issue or provide information to parents concerning how to keep such a sleeping arrangement as safe as possible.  Some of these recommendations would be as follows: 

   *       The safest arrangement, according to William Sears, MD, is for the infant to sleep between the breast-feeding mother and the edge of the bed, with an adequate barrier to prevent the baby from falling off.  This removes any risk of suffocation from the father.  Many experts have noted that there is a connection or awareness of the baby between mother and child that does not exist with the father.  I would stress that this in no way means the father loves the baby any less.  The mother’s special bond is simply a protective biological mechanism.

*       If the baby is to sleep between mother and father in the middle of the bed, extra care and precautions should be taken, particularly concerning the father.

*       Co-sleeping mothers particularly should try to breast-feed their babies, as that special biological bond discussed previously will be much more acute and in tune with the baby.

*       Do not sleep with the baby if you have had any alcoholic beverages.

*      Do not sleep with the baby if you’re very overtired or fatigued enough to impair your ability to awaken during the night.

If the father has gone out and had a few alcoholic drinks or is overtired for whatever reason, it would be much safer for him to sleep on the couch, than to sleep next to a newborn baby.

Most of the risks associated with co-sleeping tend to decline rapidly as the baby grows, but care should still be exercised with children of all ages.

Hope this is information that some of you can use today, or may have family and friends that should read this article.  Remember, that knowing is the first step in making wise decisions for you and those you love.  OK?

Dr. Rhonda – helping you to –

Plan for Tomorrow’s Good Health – TODAY

 

Website:                www.drhenry.com

Email:                   contact@drhenry.com

Office:                   702-269-8120

Infant DIE…t

May Raise Adult Obesity Risk!

New mothers with newborn babies, and sometimes even women who are not first-time mothers, often find themselves at a loss when a baby is still fussy despite being fed and dry-bottomed.  Unfortunately, the first inclination is to feed more, which is often not the answer at all.  In fact, what we feed our babies is very important, and the early introduction of cereals and juices and giving babies high carbohydrate infant formulas may cause an increased risk for obesity in later years.

Feeding our babies in this manner is called “metabolic programming,” and the risks associated with it may carry over into future generations, according to the findings of a recent study.
The study, the results revealed that rats fed with high-carbohydrate diets as infants or early in life exhibited over-production of insulin and permanent changes in their pancreatic cells.  The insulin abnormality is a contributor to human adult obesity.  The children of the high-carbohydrate female rats became obese with high insulin levels as they matured.

————————–

“Overfeeding of formula and

early introduction of

supplemental weaning foods …

May be the culprits.”

We are always looking at what happens later in life.  Maybe we should be looking at the role of early metabolic programming.  Metabolic signals in the body reset in response to high carbohydrate diets, this induces the permanent changes in the rats.

Overfeeding of formula and early introduction of supplemental weaning foods such as cereals, fruits, and juices that are high in carbohydrates may be the culprits.

So what does this mean to us?  Obviously, it means that mothers have to fight the urge to feed fussy infants cereal to get them to sleep.
Instead, try giving them more formula, or changing formulas.  Ask your natural-oriented doctor for solutions before deciding it’s time to add foods and juices to your baby’s diet – if you don’t, you just might be making a fat adult.

 

It’s every mother or caretakers responsibility to feed your child properly – when you start them off with junk – their bodies become a garbage full of chemicals, toxins, pesticides, etc.  They deserve better – don’t you agree?

Besides, you don’t want to make your child a food addict – let your mistakes be their blessing.

Dr. Rhonda

 

If you need assistance, here’s my contact information:

Website:          www.drhenry.com

Email inquiries:                 contact@drhenry.com

Las Vegas Office:              702-269–8120

 

Health is Wealth so start

Planning for Tomorrow’s Good Health – TODAY!™

For YOU and YOURS!

TOXIC HOT SEAT:

The link below could help us save many lives by educating everyone we know regarding toxins in our homes.  Please make this a MUST see for anyone you love.  Until now there have been only a few documentaries on the dangers from chemicals in our lives.

Check this out NOW: http://www.toxichotseatmovie.com/

I think this will open of many to now understanding why were seeing so much illness.  It doesn’t mention that the Bromine and Chlorine in these flame retardants act just like Fluorine, as all of these halogens will compete with Iodine.  They all act to increase our relative deficiency of iodine and thus all lead to more thyroid problems and obesity but in addition PBDE’s also contribute to low energy levels, low fertility, cancer, auto immune disease, etc.

Know that this is just the tip of the iceberg but it’s very heavily documented or HBO would be sued. Chemical flame retardants are everywhere.  Our furniture.  Our homes.  Our bodies.  But do they work as promised?  And are they making us sick?

The 3 chemical companies producing flame retardants would prefer that we not ask these questions, and they’ve spent millions of dollars on lobbyists, publicists and influencers to ensure that we don’t.  It might remind you of the Big Tobacco cover-up.  Which makes sense, since Bit Tobacco has had a hand in this, too.

Set against the backdrop of the awards-winning 2012 Chicago Tribune investigative series “Playing with Fire,” TOXIC HOT SEAT threads together an intricate story of manipulation that details how Big Tobacco skillfully convinced fire safety officials to back a standard that, in effect, requires all furniture to be filled with toxic flame retardants.  The film continues to untangle how the chemical companies obscure the risks to public health and misrepresent chemical safety data by paying “experts” to alarm legislators and the public about the deadly risk of removing chemical flame retardants from our homes.

Through the personal stories of a cancer-surviving firefighter, a renowned chemist whose work helped remove fire retardants from kid’s pajamas in the 1970s, and a brave and determined young Maine legislator and mom, TOXIC HOT SEAT reveals the courage of brave citizens willing to fight for the truth against a shadowy nexus of money and politics.

Make sure you share this with everyone you know – we each have to take responsibility by saving our own lives and those we know and love.  Let’s stop the secretes.

Dr. Rhonda

Website:                              www.drhenry.com

Email inquiries:                 contact@drhenry.com

Las Vegas Office:              702-269-8120

PLASTIC BAG BAN!

To date, their dream hasn’t been realized, but it’s certainly not from lack of trying.  In fact, one of the most recent attempts to ban the plastic bags was via Assembly Bill (AB) 298, which was a bill to ban single-use plastic bags statewide at supermarkets, retail pharmacies and convenience stores in California starting in 2014.  AB 298 would have also required retailers to provide reusable bags for sale and to charge a fee for recycled paper bags – all to give incentives to people to remember to use their reusable bags. Unfortunately, AB 298 failed to pass the California State Senate.

But that won’t stop Californians from their bag-ban mission.  In fact, in a little over the past two years, over 50 California cities or counties have voted to ban single-use plastic bags.  When all of those ordinances go into effect, then nearly one-third, or approximately 38 million, of Californians will reside in plastic bag-free communities.  That in itself is a win, but Californians won’t stop until they accomplish the dream.

Banning the plastic bags is not just a trendy bandwagon to jump on, either.  Plastic bags have serious consequences for beaches and other waters, marine life and other wildlife, and even for the land-based taxpayers.  Truth be told, single-use plastic bags are one of the most common forms of waste found on beaches that make their way into the ocean, becoming a part of what’s called the “Great Floating Garbage Patch” or the “Pacific Gyre.”  (By the way, there’s also one in the Atlantic Ocean – a similar story, but a different location.)

In fact, over the last 25 years, 7,825,319 plastic bags were collected from beaches around the world.  Plastic bags can also clog drains and create mosquito breeding grounds during warmer months, resulting in other health consequences.

Adding to the plastic-bag nemesis is that plastic bags nearly indefinitely – since they’re not biodegradable – to continually work their damage.  What’s more is that of the 115 billion plastic bags used nationally each year, only a dismal 5% are recycled.  (California alone uses a whopping 12 billion plastic bags a year.)

Likewise, pollution from those plastic bags directly affects 267 animal species annually, including whales, fish, birds and turtles.  Speaking of turtles … the Pacific Leatherback sea turtle, which consumed jellyfish, can mistake plastic bags for jellyfish.  Unfortunately, one-third of adult turtles have consumed the plastic, which undoubtedly adds to the reason why the Leatherback sea turtle population has declined by 95% in the last 20 years.  Additionally, plastic bags make their way into wilderness areas where they can choke and kill animals.

Marine life and wildlife are not the only ones who pay the cost of plastic bags, however.  California taxpayers spend approximately $25 million each year to landfill used plastic bags – money which could certainly be used for better purposed.  L.A. County alone spends $24 million on litter prevention, cleanup efforts and enforcement, with plastic bags weighing in significantly on those costs.

Getting rid of those plastic bags could also result in Green jobs in California, as there are currently 15 reusable bag companies based in California.  One of those companies, Green Vets, could see more jobs created for disabled veterans if there could be a statewide plastic-bag ban law.  The bottom line is that there is so much good that can come from getting rid of those plastic bags.

Unfortunately, Californians haven’t seen the plastic bag ban realized – yet!  They will keep trying, however, while the rest of the nation watch expectantly.

So I have a suggestion that would really help our environment and that is that each month we buy at least one reusable shopping bag, in this way, we are all responsible Americans.  Second, recycle all plastic so that you’re not part of the problem, but part of the solution.

We can’t continue to complain and not do anything.  It’s up to each one to start doing what is right – don’t worry about others – you and your household is all you have to concern yourself with – the others, one way or another, they will catch on.

Do realize that every time we do something like this we’re saving the world for our kids and their kids.  Understand, every small effort becomes really big down the road – so let’s all get started being good citizens.

Dr. Rhonda

Temporary website:          www.drhenry.com

Email inquiries:                 contact@drhenry.com

Las Vegas Office:              702-269-8120

7-Hidden Household Toxins

 Do you really know what’s making you sick?

    1.      Respiratory Toxins:

Our air is filled with both indoor and outdoor pollutants that wreak havoc on our basic effort to breath.  Corrosives in air conditioning units can cause asthma and bronchitis.  Dangerous ozone, carbon monoxide, pesticides, sulfur oxides and more have been linked to asthma and lung disease along with headaches and fatigue.

   2.      Weight Gain Toxins:

To stay thin and fit, your cells need to be cleaned regularly.  But when your cells are dragged down by toxins that lurk in fattening, processed foods, they have a harder time turning up your body.  What results is a slower metabolism and “toxic weight gain” that’s often blamed on aging.

   3.      Fatigue Toxins:

Shocking amounts of heavy metals found in our water sources have been linked to fatigue, as well as to other health problems – all of which make us feel even more run-down and tired!  Even your favorite cologne can cause fatigue due to a main ingredient called tuluene, which can trigger headaches, asthma, seizures, birth defects and even cancer?

   4.      High Cholesterol, Blood Pressure & Circulation Toxins:

Pollutants from radiation, fried foods and processed foods can unleash an army of free radicals on your system and trigger dangerous LDL cholesterol levels.

*   Lead in drinking water has been linked to 680,000 cases of high blood pressure.

*   Paints and solvents used in new construction of homes and offices are loaded with       chemicals and gases that can damage your heart, liver, and even your central nervous       system without you knowing it until it’s too late.

   5.      Digestive Toxins:

The FDA lists more than 2,800 food additives, many of which come from sources that are unnatural to our bodies.  These can create a sluggish bowel with nasty symptoms such as abdominal pain, intense gas, constipation, cramps and diarrhea.

The nutrient-stripped convenient foods we’re now used to eating contained hormones, antibiotics, preservatives, dyes, pesticides, sulfur or tar-based additives, and more.

These toxins float into the bloodstream and head straight to your weakest organism – so not only is your digestive system in peril, but your tissues, glands and blood supply suffer from toxic poisoning, too.

   6.      Joint, Muscle & Headache Toxins:

If you suffer from any type of discomfort, yo should be aware that chemical irritations may be the root cause of your pain.

Nerves are irritated by a host of environmental toxins, such as cigarette smoke, prescription drug use and even microscopic allergens in the air and water – all of these cause a chain reaction that often leads to inflammation and migraines.

   7.      Immune System Toxins:

Something as innocent as the “silver” dental fillings you received as a child quietly release mercury, tin, copper and zinc into your body and drag down your immune system.

Breast cancer has been attributed to pesticides in foods.

Even worse, more than 10,000 bladder and rectal cancer cases each year can be attributed to trihalomethanes found in tainted water supplies.

Doctors across the country agree that the best way to get healthy is to

GET RID OF THE TOXINS!

It’s best to discuss your issues with a doctor who specializes in NATURAL HealthCare.  Although, there are many different products available in local stores, using the right, natural, bioidentical, pharmaceutical grade product will give you the end results you no doubt  desire.  Don’t experiment with your health – INVEST IN YOU – YOUR WORTH IT!

 

Dr. Rhonda – always wanting you to remember how important it is to –

Plan for Tomorrow’s Good Health – TODAY!”™

Temporary website:          www.drhenry.com

Email inquiries:                 contact@drhenry.com

Las Vegas Office:              702-269-8120

PET PERKS:

 

Whether it be Smokie your canine companion, or Mollie, Maygen, and Maxie Boy, my feline kids – or even if you have both – you’re most likely reaping health benefits by having then as your pet. Why?

Studies indicate that having a pet can help:

*      lower stress levels

*      decrease blood pressure

*      support healthy cholesterol levels

*       improve our moods

*       boost our immunity, and more

For example, many studies, including some via the National Institute of Health, say that dogs can offer great social support and stress relief – sometimes even better than family or friends can.  Additionally, some studies even say that having a dog can control blood pressure better than prescription d rugs are able to.  Then there’s the exercise aspect.  Those who own dogs exercise more consistently than those who don’t own dogs.

Some other health benefits from having a dog are:

• increased longevity after having a heart attack
• lowered cholesterol and triglycerides
• improved blood pressure
• reduction of irregular heartbeats, or arrythmias
• improved blood vessel function
• increased physical activity as well as physical functioning
• reduction of minor health difficulties
• improved mood
• boost in self esteem
• improved alertness and attention in elderly people who own pets

Having a cat as a pet has its perks, too.

A study by the Minnesota Stroke Institute, which followed more than 4,000 cat owners over a 10-year time period, found that owning a cat can greatly reduce a person’s chance of dying from heart disease.  In fact, the study found that those who don’t have cats were between 30 to 40 percent more likely to die of cardiovascular disease than cat owners were.  But were the same benefits found with owning dogs?  Not so, according to the study.

Other benefits of having a feline friend – some of which mirror the benefits of having a dog as a pet – include:

• a reduction in heart attack and stroke risk
• improved immune function
• decreased chance of children developing allergies
• helping to prevent asthma in children
• reduced stress and anxiety
• reduced blood pressure
• low triglyceride and cholesterol levels
• help with autism (in some instances) and depression

Likewise, pet ownership – in general – can reduce stress hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol, can boost your immune system and can aid the management of pain.  Having a furry friend has also been found to reduce aggression, to build empathy and to improve learning, while  fostering a great sense of trust in others.  Additionally, owning a pet can speed recovery following surgery.

I can tell you that I recently had knee surgery and my cats took turns being with me, I was never alone, not for a moment – that’s true love and companionship.  So, if you haven’t thanked your pet lately for being such a wonderful companion, then give him or her an extra dose of appreciation and treats for being a great addition to your overall health.

On a sad note.  I have tried for years to at least have cats in Senior Living Homes because of what I’ve just shared.  I even offered to buy the electric litter box and food.  People need something with a heart beat to hold and talk to.  So often children put their parents in homes and think that’s enough.  NO IT’S NOT!   Often when they’re left in these homes they start having more aches and pains, depression, etc., and what does that bring on – another toxic  prescription.  They don’t have a drug deficiency, they have a broken heart, no family, no visitors, etc., what they are is

human attention deficient.

We could start volunteering and visit a couple of times a month.  I promise, you will get more out of it than you ever expected.   Thinking about others, often takes our minds of ourselves, and that could be a very health move!

Dr. Rhonda

Always wanting to help you to –

Plan for Tomorrow’s Good Health – TODAY!™

 

Temporary website:          www.drhenry.com

Email inquiries:                 contact@drhenry.com

Las Vegas Office:              702-269-8120

WHY MDs ABUSE DRUGS

 

Doctors who report they abuse prescription drugs cite self-medication to help manage physical pain and emotional problems as the number one reason for this habit, new research shows.

 

In the study, substance-impaired doctors participated anonymously in guided group discussions as part of a monitored state physician health program (PHP).  In addition to helping manage physical and emotional pain, physicians also cited stress, recreational use, and withdrawal prevention as the main reasons for using prescription medications.

 

Opiates and sedatives were the prescription drugs most commonly misused by the study participants.

 

“Substance-related impairment of physicians is a small but serious problem, with significant consequences for patient safety and public health,” write the investigators, led by Lisa J. Merlo, PhD, from the McKnight Brain Institute and the University of Florida in Gainesville.

 

“Prevention efforts targeting prescription drug misuse among physicians should be initiated during medical training, with continuing education requirements through the physicians’ career,” they added.

 

The study was published in the October Issue of the Journal of Addiction Medicine.

 

High Rate of Misuse:

 

According to the research, 10% to 15% of physicians will experience a substance use disorder during their lifetime.  Although this rate is similar to that in the general population, more physicians appear to misuse prescription drugs.

 

“Understanding the reasons … would help educators, administrators, colleagues, and providers more successfully identify, treat, and monitor addicted physicians,” the investigators write.

 

The study included 55 substance-dependent physicians (94.5% men; 53 years, 72% white, 21% Latino, 7% other) who were participants in a Florida PHP.

 

A total of 21,8% of the participants listed their speciality as family/general medicine, 16.4% listed internal medicine, 14.5% listed anesthesiology, 14% listed surgery, and 10.9% listed psychiatry.  Pediatrics, obstetrics/gynecology, and “others” made up the remaining specialities.

 

All participants in guided group discussions between December 2008 and March 2009.  Beforehand, they filled out a questionnaire, which also asked about substance use patterns and work history.

 

Results showed that 69% of the physicians had misused prescription drugs sometime in the past.  The other reported only using illicit drugs and/or alcohol.  Interestingly, all of those who      reported misusing prescription drugs also had a history of using illicit drugs or alcohol.

 

Those who cited managing physical pain as the main reason for prescription drugs misuse commonly reported having severe chronic pain due to trauma or surgery.

 

To all those I care about: if you or a loved one is having surgery, I would suggest that you request (your right) a day of the surgery drug test (urine), and you make sure you get a copy.  To many unnecessary errors in medications and deaths after surgery should be in question.

Don’t ever lose responsibility for your own body.

 

Health Provider Mistrust:

 

Several of the physicians who said that they misused drugs to manage emotional pain and/or psychiatric symptoms reported that it was because they had trouble trusting the recommendations from their treating provider.  Strange, yet they expect us to trust them!   Not I, for the most part!

 

Many of those who listed stressful situations as reasons explained that included work and person problems, including malpractice suits, financial problems, and juggling work-child responsibilities.

 

The researchers note that recreational use was also an important factor for many of these doctors, with most reporting using prescription drugs to enhance the effect of another substance.  Great!

 

Finally, other participants reported using prescription drugs as a way to prevent or alleviate withdrawal symptoms.

 

“Indeed, the issue of withdrawal seemed to become more salient to the physicians as their addiction progressed,” write the investigators.

 

They note that although the study population was small and was composed mainly of men and so may not be representative of all clinicians who abuse prescription drugs, “there is inherent value in obtaining such in-depth data from physicians.”

 

As reported at the time by Medscape Medical News, Dr. Merlo presented part of this research at the 2011 annual meeting of the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry.

 

“We know that (PHPs) work, and we know that monitoring is associated with really good outcomes.  It’s just getting people into the system that’s been the challenge,” she told meeting attendees at the time.

 

“And the most important reason for research into this area is that it’s showing that these professionals can be helped and shouldn’t just lose their license,” she added.

 

Disease of Denials:

“This was really interesting,” David O.

 

Warner, MD, professor of anesthesiology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, told Medscape.

 

Dr. Warner was not involved with this research but recently published a study is JAMA examining the incidence of substance use disorder (SUD) among 44,612 anesthesiology residents between 1975 and 2009.  Results showed that 0.86% of these residents had a confirmed SUD during training.

 

“We don’t really know among the anesthesiology folks why they do this.  Anecdotally, many of the stories revolved around, “Well, I’m around these drugs every day and just wanted to see what it was like.”  Whether that’s actually accurate or not, no one knows,” he said.

 

“Addiction is a disease and is characterized by denial and evasion.  So I think what the real reasons might be is a very interesting question.  Certainly self-medicating for pain or for stress is quite plausible.”

 

The study was funded by a grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and by the Professionals Resources Network, “an integral arm of the Florida Medical Association.”  The study authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

 

Most reading this don’t get the news on health that I do, but I felt obligated to sound the alarm on this one.

Dr. Rhonda

Temporary website:          www.drhenry.com

Email inquiries:                 contact@drhenry.com

Las Vegas Office:              702-269-8120

Label GMOs!

We’re at a tipping point in the fight to label GMOs and prevent the overuse of their toxic herbicides. We need you to join us in the march to victory! View and share our new video Demon Weeds! It’s the story of glyphosate-resistant weeds, a GMO herbicide, and the negative effects on the environment and human health. It’s more important than ever for you to take action! Increased use of GMO crops is causing the herbicide glyphosate (an ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup) to be used in massive amounts. ANH-USA’s newest report shows that increased use of glyphosate can damage our environment, our economy, the livelihood of American farmers, and especially our health.   You deserve to know what’s in your food, and what kind of farming practices your purchases support. Take action now! View and share our new video Demon Weeds! Visit www.ANH-USA.org/gmo to take action and view our reports. They will give you the real information about GMOs you deserve. Please take action today—there’s no time to lose.  Our health depends on it.

Tell your elected officals remove this GMO herbicide! Sign up for important updates!

 

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

 

 

MEN & INFERTILITY

Oligoasthenoteratozoospermia is a condition that includes oligozoospermia (low number of sperm), asthenozoospermia (poor sperm movement), and teratozoospermia (abnormal sperm shape), and is the leading cause of infertility in men. 

In another study investigating fertility, this time performed on infertile men suffering with this condition, supplementation with CoQ10 showed a dramatic improvement in sperm morphology and sperm count as well as antioxidative parameters in men suffering with this condition.

May I suggest that you don’t just use the usual CoQ10 – but use Ubiquinol CoQ10 for the incredible strength and advantages it can offer.