AAP Doubles Vitamin D Recommendation

AAP Doubles Vitamin D Recommendation

All children should get at least 400 IU of vitamin D daily, either through dietary intake or supplementation, beginning within days of birth and continuing through adolescence, according to new guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics.

This advice doubles the organization’s previous vitamin D intake recommendation in an effort to prevent the development of rickets in specific pediatric populations, as well as to take advantage of the potential long-term health benefits associated with adequate intake of the fat-soluble nutrient, Dr. Frank Greer reported at the AAP’s annual meeting.

Full article


Immunizations and Alzheimers

The Immunization-Alzheimer´s Controversy

The adjuvants used in vaccines (putting the mercury issue aside) are intentionally highly inflammatory so as to provoke a more active immune response to the weakened pathogen. The fact that American children are the most vaccinated in the world at such an early age, when their brains are setting up shop, runs the high risk that vaccinations will “train” nerves to become more hyper-active to future inflammatory stress of any kind. Such issues would be magnified if a child had a history of stress in the womb, stress as an infant (unstable environment), poor nutrition in the womb or early life, other health problems as an infant, or has family-related gene weaknesses predisposing to Alzheimer´s (or any other nerve-related disease for that matter). These massive numbers of early vaccinations could easily set the stage for early onset Alzheimer´s. At this point there is absolutely no science that refutes this theory, and plenty of science to predict it.


Th1 and Th2 Response

Vaccines – The Great Debate

In addition to their toxic composition, the second problem with vaccinations is that they stimulate the wrong immune system. In my opinion, this is the greatest threat to our immune system that we have ever faced. You see, when a virus, parasites, or cancer cells threaten your body, they will activate an immune response called a Th1 (cell-mediated) response. This is your body’s first line of defense, which will then stimulate a Th2 response (humoral). The Th2 is an emergency response which produces antibodies that resolve inflammation so that healing can continue. The problem is that childhood vaccinations or flu shots stimulate the Th2 resonse, not the Th1, thus violating the natural sequence. This violation has serious consequences. First, when you stimulate a Th1 response, you produce a lifetime immunity; however, when you vaccinate, you need boosters every 3 to 5 years because the Th2 is stimulated first. In other words, you do not have a lifetime immunity.

Another danger in violating the Th2 response sequence is that it teaches your immune system to over-react with the wrong defenses, thus producing a high antibody count which then leads to temporary immunity. When the over reaction (the emergency responses) is repeated again and again, the immune system is now educated to respond in this way. This only confuses the body and drives the diseases internally deeper, thereby causing chronic diseases later in life. Top scientists have said that we are exchanging childhood diseases, which actually strengthen our immune system, for diseases like cancer and autoimmune problems.

Today, 206,000 Americans under the age of 20 have type 1 diabetes, a well-known autoimmune disorder. The CDC reports that 1 out of 400 children and adolescents are now diabetic. In 1945 and 1969, only 1 out of 7,100 faced this disease. J. Barthelow Classen, M.D., a former researcher at the National Institute of Health (NIH) and founder and CEO of Classen Immunotherapies, reported in the May 1996 New Zealand Medical Journal that juvenile diabetes increased 60% following a massive hepatitus B vaccination campaign (1988-1991) for New Zealand babies 6 weeks and older. Along with that, 1 out of 3 Americans has arthritis, and juvenile arthritis is likewise on the rise. Tragically, childhood cancer is also increasing, especially in highly vaccinated communities. We cannot even begin to follow the rise in asthma and allergies because of the great inconsistencies.


Bias, Spin, and Misreporting: Time for Full Access to Trial Protocols and Results

Bias, Spin, and Misreporting: Time for Full Access to Trial Protocols and Results

An-Wen Chan

Although randomized trials provide key guidance for how we practice medicine, trust in their published results has been eroded in recent years due to several high-profile cases of alleged data suppression, misrepresentation, and manipulation [1–5, 39]. While most publicized cases have involved pharmaceutical industry trials, accumulating empiric evidence has shown that selective reporting of results is a systemic problem afflicting all types of trials, including those with no commercial input [6]. These examples highlight the harmful potential impact of biased reporting on patient care, and the violation of ethical responsibilities of researchers and sponsors to disseminate results accurately and comprehensively.

Biased reporting arises when two main decisions are made based on the direction and statistical significance of the data—whether to publish the trial at all, and if so, which analyses and results to report in the publication. Strong evidence for the selective publication of positive trials has been available for decades [7,8]. More recent cohort studies have focused on the misreporting of trials within publications by comparing journal articles either with documents from regulatory agencies [9–12] or with trial protocols from research ethics committees [13–16], funding agencies [17], research groups [18,19], and journals [20]. These cohort studies identified major discrepancies—favorable results were often highlighted while unfavorable data were suppressed; definitions of primary outcomes were changed; and methods of statistical analysis were modified without explanation in the journal article.

…Overall, a substantial amount of primary outcome data submitted to the FDA was found to be missing from the literature. One quarter of trials in their sample were unpublished—predominantly those with unfavorable results. Not only were data suppressed for the unpublished trials, but an additional quarter of primary outcomes were omitted from journal articles of published trials. These findings are consistent with two recent reviews of FDA documents and journal articles [10,21], one of which was published in PLoS Medicine in September 2008 [21].


Gulf War Syndrome

If You Let the Idiots Talk They’ll Tell You What You Want to Know

By Kent Heckenlively, Esq.

I’m still trying to get my mind around the 452 page government report recently released on Gulf War illness and its implications for the vaccine/autism controversy.

For those keeping score, two years ago the National Academy of Sciences released a report asserting there was no such thing as Gulf War illness.  (“VA-Funded Report Unable to Find Evidence of a Complex of Symptoms”, www.msnbc.com, September 13, 2006).

The congressionally mandated report entitled “Gulf War Illness and the Health of Gulf War Veterans” is devastating in its findings.  As reported in the November 17, 2008 of USA Today (“Gulf War Syndrome is a Real Illness, Study Finds”), “The illness resulted from exposure to chemicals and anti-nerve-gas vaccinations received, and no effective treatment has been found.  It affects 25% of the 695,000 U.S. Gulf War vets (author’s note – approximately 173,000 service members) and perhaps 55,000 British veterans.”


Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses. Gulf War Illness and the Health of Gulf War Veterans: Scientific Findings and Recommendations (pdf)

Gulf War Illness and the Health of Gulf War Veterans