- We strive to provide complete care for our patients. Learn more about all the services we provide.
You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.
~~Providing probiotics, or "good bacteria," to healthy infants shortly after they're born may reduce the development of gastrointestinal disorders and prolonged crying episodes later in life, a new study from Italy suggests.
In the study, newborns that received a daily dose of the probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri had fewer episodes of inconsolable crying (colic), constipation and regurgitation (reflux) at age three months compared to newborns given a placebo.
Use of probiotics also had benefits in terms of reducing health care expenses, such as money spent on emergency department visits, or money lost when parents took time off work. On average, families with infants that took probiotics saved about $119 per child, the researchers said. [5 Ways Gut Bacteria Affect Your Health]
However, more research is needed to confirm the findings before it can be recommended for newborns, experts say. Currently, doctors do not recommend that probiotics be used routinely in infants, said Dr. William Muinos, co-director of the gastroenterology department at Miami Children's Hospital, who was not involved with the study.
And although the treatment was not related to any harmful events in the current study, use of probiotics could potentially pose risks to newborns, Muinos said. For example, the lining of a newborn's intestinal tract is less mature, and more porous, than that of an older child, which could cause some bacteria to seep into the blood stream, Muinos said. This risk will need to be evaluated in future studies, Muinos said.
Probiotics and gut health
Infant colic, gastroesophageal reflux and constipation the most common gastrointestinal disorders that require infants to visit the doctor in the first months of life, the researchers said.
In the new study, Dr. Flavia Indrio, of the University of Bari Aldo Moro in Italy, and colleagues randomly assigned 554 infants born at full term to receive either daily drops of Lactobacillus reuteri mixed with oil, or just an oil mixture (the placebo). Neither the parents nor the doctors knew which treatment children received.
Parents were asked to keep diaries recording vomiting episodes, bowel movements and episodes of inconsolable crying, as well as the number of pediatrician visits they made.
After three months, the average duration of inconsolable crying per day was 38 minutes for those infants who received probiotics versus 71 minutes for those who received the placebo; the average number of regurgitations per day was 2.9 for those who received probiotics versus 4.6 for those who received the placebo; and the average number of bowel movements for those that received probiotics was 4.2 versus 3.6 for those that received the placebo.
The exact reason for the beneficial effect of probiotics in infants is not known, but gut microbes are known to play a role in food absorption, movement of the gut and many other functions, Muinos said.
Because conditions such as colic, constipation and gastroesophageal reflux can be defined in many different ways, future studies of probiotics in infants should clearly specify the criteria that need to be met in order to be diagnosed with these diseases, Muinos said.
And because not all colic is related to gastrointestinal symptoms, probiotics may not always help with the condition, Muinos said
In an editorial accompanying the study, Dr. Bruno Chumpitazi and Dr. Robert Shulman, both of the Baylor College of Medicine, called the results "encouraging." However, future studies need to follow children for several years to examine whether there are any long-term consequences from using probiotics in infancy, they said.
The study and editorial are published in the Jan. 13 issue of the journal JAMA Pediatrics. It was funded by the Swedish company BioGaia AB, which makes probiotics. The company had no role in the design, analysis or interpretation of the study.
~~Used by millions of Britons every day, they can increase blood pressure by killing off “good” bacteria that help blood vessels relax.
Professor Amrita Ahluwalia, of Queen Mary, University of London, said: “Killing off all these bugs each day is a disaster when small rises in blood pressure have significant impact on morbidity and mortality from heart disease and stroke.
“We are not telling people to stop using antiseptic mouthwashes if they have a gum or tooth infection but we would ask why anyone else would want to.”
The shocking findings come as sales of mouthwash are booming. A third of adults use it, according to the British Dental Health Foundation, creating a market worth more than £150million a year.
The study, published in the journal Free Radical Biology And Medicine, tracked the blood pressure of 19 healthy people who started using Corsodyl twice a day.
Their blood pressure shot up by between 2 and 3.5 units. For each two-point rise in blood pressure, the risk of dying from heart disease rises by seven per cent and the risk of dying from stroke by 10 per cent.
~~WASHINGTON - Could cold and flu drugs help spread the flu? Some researchers think so.
Over-the-counter cold and flu drugs contain ibuprofen, acetaminophen or other drugs that can reduce fever. When patients' fever is down, they tend to feel better.
But researchers at Canada's McMaster University concluded that when some patients reduce their symptoms with cold and flu medications, they feel better and return to work or school while still infected. While patients feel fine, they are still able to infect others, according to the study, which is published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
NBC News reports that it's a controversial study, but it suggests as many as 1,000 more people a year may die from flu because of people taking over-the-counter medicines that make them feel good enough to get out of their sick beds and back into the swing of things, infecting others.
"We aren't saying don't take medication. That's not the message," David Earn, who specializes in mathematics and disease, said to NBC News. "Be aware that if you take this medication, there is this effective increase in transmission."
Just because you have a mild case of flu doesn't mean the person you infect will get a mild case, too. Influenza kills anywhere between 3,000 and 49,000 people a year, NBC reports.
Earn says a flu that may make a child feel bad, could be more serious for the elderly.
"Maybe you'll give your young child medication to make them feel better and because they feel better they might go jump in granny's lap and give her a hug and a kiss," Earn said to NBC.
For more information on this season's flu, go to the CDC website.
~~These days, you’ve likely seen coconut oil popping up in health food stores everywhere. Perhaps you even have a couple of jars already. Not only is coconut oil (virgin in particular) a healthy choice when cooking meals, but it’s a more natural alternative to store bought products which are often laden with harmful chemicals. Sure, coconut oil is a great cooking ingredient that’s also been shown to boost energy levels and play a role in weight loss, but did you know it can also make your furniture shine and keep your acne at bay?
Read on to discover some lesser known uses for coconut oil.
Top 5 Helpful Uses for Coconut Oil
Many toothpaste ingredients contain a host of preservatives, sweeteners and other chemicals. Rather than put this in your mouth, clean your teeth with coconut oil. Just mix even amounts of the oil with some baking soda and a few drops of peppermint oil. Your teeth will be clean, minus exposure to harmful additives and other artificial ingredients.
Skip that store-bought moisturizer and head to the health food store. Not only are many of them extraordinarily expensive for a small amount, but most commercial skin care products in the US today are made from polyunsaturated oils and carcinogens that result in free radical damage which affects the skin. Instead of providing a remedy, some face creams actually make the situation worse! For skin in need of moisturizing, coconut oil works wonders by softening and hydrating. Many people prefer to gently rub a dab of coconut oil on their face before bedtime in lieu of a store bough face moisturizer. Others make a face scrub by mixing coconut oil with a natural exfoliator of their choice like sugar or baking soda. The oil also works well to soothe sunburns.
Combats Acne and Other Skin Conditions
Coconut oil surpasses pharmaceutical drugs when it comes to treating skin conditions like acne. Antibiotics and drugs such as Benzemyacin and clindamycin only keep the problem away for a while, only to return once people stop taking the prescribed or over-the-counter medication. The reason is that many skin conditions aren’t fixed with a topical application, but rather from the inside out. That phrase about “you are what you eat” is true in the case of coconut oil, a gut and flora regulating oil that fights bacteria that cause acne and other skin issues. While applying it topically helps smooth and hydrate, ingesting it helps with more serious skin conditions such as acne, eczema, psoriasis and dermatitis.
Coconut oils gleam is great as a protective polish on wood furniture. Test a small area first to make sure you like the results and be sure to adopt the “less is more” approach because too much oil can yield very slick appearance. It works just as well as what you’d purchase in the supermarket and is a lot better for the environment!
Shiny Hair While Controlling Dandruff
Want shiny hair? Have issues with the itching and embarrassment associated with dandruff? Both? Many people tout the benefits of coconut oil for reducing scalp itch and flaking as well as for diminishing frizz and strengthening hair. It’s suggested to use coconut oil as a leave-in conditioner about twice weekly, rinsing after about 10 minutes.
So what are you waiting for? Coconut oil adds a great flavor when cooking, is good for us (years of being told by food and ad agencies that low-fat is food is ideal has actually harmed our bodies, but more on that in another article) and has benefits that can even keep our furniture looking good!
~~U.S. geneticists say a second code hiding within DNA changes how scientists read its instructions and interpret mutations to make sense of health and disease.
Since the genetic code was deciphered in the 1960s, scientists have assumed it was used exclusively to write information about proteins, but University of Washington scientists say they've discovered genomes use the genetic code to write two separate "languages."
One, long understood, describes how proteins are made, while the other instructs the cell on how genes are controlled. One language is written on top of the other, which is why the second language remained hidden for so long, a university release said Thursday.
"For over 40 years we have assumed that DNA changes affecting the genetic code solely impact how proteins are made," UW genome sciences Professor John Stamatoyannopoulos said. "Now we know that this basic assumption about reading the human genome missed half of the picture. These new findings highlight that DNA is an incredibly powerful information storage device, which nature has fully exploited in unexpected ways."
Parts of the genetic code have two meanings, one related to protein sequence, and one related to gene control, the researchers said, and both apparently evolved in concert with each other.
The gene control instructions appear to help stabilize certain beneficial features of proteins and how they are made, they said.
The discovery has major implications for how scientists and physicians interpret a patient's genome and could open new doors to the diagnosis and treatment of disease, Stamatoyannopoulos said.
"The fact that the genetic code can simultaneously write two kinds of information means that many DNA changes that appear to alter protein sequences may actually cause disease by disrupting gene control programs or even both mechanisms simultaneously," he said.
Exercise could be as effective as some of the best drugs which protect against major diseases, research has found.
A study of more than 300 trials has found that physical activity was better than medication in helping patients recovering from strokes - and just as good as drugs in protecting against diabetes and in stopping heart disease worsening.
The research, published in the British Medical Journal, analysed data about studies on 340,000 patients diagnosed with one of four diseases: heart disease, chronic heart failure, stroke or diabetes.
Researchers said the findings suggested that regular exercise could be "quite potent" in improving survival chances, but said that until more studies are done, patients should not stop taking their tablets without taking medical advice.
The landmark research compared the mortality rates of those prescribed medication for common serious health conditions, with those who were instead enrolled on exercise programmes.
~~NaturalNews) Of all the toxic heavy metals, mercury is the most devastating to the brain. No legitimate scientist would ever argue that mercury is safe to inject into a child at any dose, and the CDC has never established any "safe" level of mercury in human blood for the simple reason that there's isn't any safe level.
Yet the New York City Board of Health has now decided that all children in New York City need to be injected with a devastating dose of toxic mercury as part of their twisted "public health" measure. Flu shots, of course, still contain the neurotoxin heavy metal known as mercury, yet virtually the entire medical establishment blatantly lies to the public and claims -- with a straight face -- that "all the mercury has been removed from vaccines."
That is an insidious lie. It's still in flu shots.
CDC admits: Nearly all flu shots still contain toxic mercury
The CDC even reluctantly admits that on its own thimerosal page where it states that the 2013-2014 flu shot "contains thimerosal to safeguard against possible contamination of the vial once it is opened."
The CDC then goes on to wildly discredit itself by claiming, "There is a large body of scientific evidence on the safety of thimerosal." What the CDC doesn't tell you, of course, is that this "large body of scientific evidence" was conjured up by the vaccine industry itself -- the same industry for which the CDC primarily serves as cheerleader, marketing department and pimp. Surely we are more skeptical of industry today than we were in the days when Big Tobacco hired a bunch of doctors and scientists to claim that "cigarettes are good for you" and "nicotine is not addictive" -- all while the pages of the Journal of the American Medical Association touted full-page ads for Camel's Cigarettes which claimed, "More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette!"
Yep, Big Tobacco says cigarettes are safe. (And for a long time so did the AMA.) The fracking industry says fracking is good for the environment. The Corn Refiners Association says high-fructose corn syrup is healthy for children. Casino lobbyists say casinos are good for society. Monsanto says GMOs are perfectly safe to eat. Dentists insists that mercury fillings are totally safe to chew on. And not surprisingly, vaccine manufacturers swear up and down that mercury is actually GOOD for you because it "makes vaccines work better." (Yes, this is actually one of their ridiculous claims.)
There is no anti-logic too twisted for the vaccine industry, you see. The entire industry is based on a fabrication so sweeping and insidious that it can easily be disproven with the momentary invocation of simple logic. That fabrication is the false assumption that all vaccines are absolutely safe.
Why there is no such thing as a safe vaccine
This is the premise of the entire vaccine industry: no vaccine can ever, under any circumstances, cause harm. All vaccines are beneficial and have no serious side effects. All children should be required by the state to take vaccines because all vaccines are absolutely safe, and so on and so forth. Vaccine safety is assumed to be absolute!
The people who make these statements are pathetic excuses for scientists, doctors and public health "officials." They lack intelligence. They are incapable of clear thinking. Their brains are damaged, perhaps from vaccines. Why do I say that? Because the term "safe" is an absolute term. There is no such thing as a "safe" vaccine because there is no such thing as a vaccine without risk. Anyone who claims "vaccines are safe" and actually believes it is either woefully uninformed or deeply mentally impaired.
Certainly, you can talk about certain vaccines being "safer" than other vaccines in terms of relative risk, but there is no such thing as a vaccine that offers absolute safety. Yet this is the way vaccines are routinely described by doctors and public health officials... and anyone who dares to raise the legitimate question of levels of risk or harm that can be reasonably attributed to the injection of mercury into the body of a child is instantly labeled a lunatic by the medical mafia (actually a cult of reductionism).
You see, it is an undeniable, scientific fact that every vaccine comes with a risk of serious injury or death, and as tens of thousands of parents are discovering each year in the USA alone, vaccines can also pull the trigger on a cascading collapse of neurological function that we now call "autism spectrum disorder." To describe vaccines as functioning without risk is to label yourself an idiot, a quack, or a shill for the vaccine industry. Perhaps all three.
Vaccines are so dangerous, the entire vaccine industry had to be granted blanket legal immunity just to stay in business
The desperate attempts of the CDC and vaccine manufacturers to hide this clear link between injected mercury (thimerosal) and autism is one of the saddest and most insidious medical conspiracies in human history. Those who deny that mercury is toxic to children are morally repugnant and scientifically inept. They are the "Flat Earthers" of medicine and they will do almost anything to make sure your child gets injected with a substance so dangerous than the entire industry had to be granted legal immunity by Congress because its products would otherwise result in so much legal liability that the industry would go bankrupt.
If cars were sold in the same way as vaccines, every 1 in 88 families who bought a car would find their child permanently maimed by the child seat sold with the car, to the point where that child could no longer function in society. And then, when they tried to sue the manufacturer for selling them a faulty, dangerous product, they would be told, "Sorry. The car industry has been granted blanket immunity from all lawsuits. You have no due process." That's how the vaccine industry works.
Today, 1 in 88 children now have autism. Vaccines aren't the only cause of autism, but they seem to be the trigger in many cases. Yet vaccine companies and vaccine-pushing public health officials continue to carry on the big lie, claiming that vaccines have ZERO link to autism -- yet another false piece of medical propaganda designed to keep the medical mafia rolling in cash while your children suffer lifelong brain damage from their faulty products.
Words of wisdom:
Beware of any product so dangerous than the government says "you can't sue the manufacturer even if it kills you" but then that same government turns around and says, "Oh, by the way, you MUST inject your child with this substance, too."
That's New York City in 2014. You must line up your children and inject them with this highly toxic heavy metal. And guess what? If your child suddenly goes autistic, it's YOUR problem, not the state's problem. Don't expect any free medical care for your newly-autistic child.
In this way, the state actually causes serious medical economic damage and then shifts the burden to pay for that damage to the very moms and dads who are also devastated by the harm caused by vaccines.
New York City to become the capitol of autism in America
For the city of New York to now state that all parents much subject their children to these risks of harm and death -- without telling those parents the truth about such risks -- is a wildly dangerous misappropriation of government power. It is, in essence, "gunpoint medicine" where the state criminalizes non-compliance with a twisted quack science public health mandate that will inevitably increase the rate of autism, paralysis, hospitalization and even death of New York City children.
With this vote, the NYC Board of Health has just declared NYC will be the capitol of autism in America.
It is also, not coincidentally, the capitol of mentally-impaired medical experts who have once again demonstrated to the whole world just how incapable they are of intelligent decision-making. It takes no intelligence whatsoever to prostitute yourself out to the vaccine industry and vote for whatever new mandate happens to support their financial interests. What really takes intelligence is being a vaccine skeptic and considering the incredible mountain of evidence that mercury in vaccines causes brain damage or that thimerosal is linked to neurotoxicity.
Because here's the simple moral, ethical and righteous truth of the matter, encompassing the breadth of medical ethics, human rights, parental rights and fundamental human dignity: When there is any risk of harm in a medical decision, parents' rights trump the state. Children do not belong to the state; they belong to their parents. When parents are forced to subject their own children to medical procedures which carry a significant risk of serious harm or even death, it is nothing less than the tyranny of a medical police state to mandate such potentially harmful interventions.
Any city, state or nation which claims this power to force parents to potentially lobotomize their own children with a questionable medical intervention (that's easy to beat with things like zinc and vitamin D, by the way) has forfeit any moral or legal authority it might have once held. It is an open admission that the city, state or nation in question has abandoned fundamental human rights and has transitioned into a medical police state society, where whatever toxic interventions happen to generate profits for the drug companies will be forced onto children at gunpoint.
That is where we have arrived today in New York City. Real science has been abandoned. Medical ethics are thrown out the window. Logic and sanity are nowhere to be found. Parental rights? Trampled into oblivion. Full disclosure? Never gonna happen. PRO-CHOICE? Not with vaccines, you moms! You get no choice. Sure, if you want an abortion, it's your choice because the state says you have that right. But what if you want to SAVE a child that's already been born by not subjecting it to mercury? NYC now says you don't have that right.
Folks, we are well into the age of insanity. Reason has been long abandoned. "Science" has been twisted into whatever warped bastardization the for-profit industry wants it to be. Medical ethics are nowhere to be found. The vaccine mandate push is perhaps the best example yet of how modern medicine -- with all its faulty reductionist paradigms -- is a failure on all levels: biochemically, morally, financially, sociologically, ethically and even culturally.
Forced vaccine mandates are the single most worrisome sign we've seen yet that the state has joined forces with the pharma establishment to push reductionist, interventionist pharmacological medicine at the end of a gun. When medicine is so dangerous, so unwanted and so unpopular that it must be forced upon parents under the threat of criminal penalty, something is very, very wrong with that medical system, and it must be torn down, reformed and rebuilt from the ground up with a restoration of the very first rule of medicine: FIRST, DO NO HARM.
~~NaturalNews) It's not difficult to understand the appeal of Wi-Fi. This revolutionary technology, which has been commercially available since 1999, eliminates cabling and wiring for computers, reduces cellular usage charges and allows us to connect to the Internet from anywhere with a signal. Despite these benefits, however, studies continue to show that the radiation generated by wireless routers is negatively affecting our health. In fact, the British activist website Stop Smart Meters recently published a list of 34 scientific studies demonstrating the adverse biological effects of Wi-Fi exposure, including studies linking it to headaches, reduced sperm count and oxidative stress.
The latest research into the dangers of Wi-Fi, though, comes from a surprisingly humble source: Five ninth grade female students from Denmark, whose science experiment revealed that wireless radiation is equally as devastating to plants.
The experiment began when the five students realized that they had difficulty concentrating in school if they slept near their mobile phones the previous night. Intrigued by this phenomenon, the students endeavored to study the effects of cellphone radiation on humans. Unfortunately, their school prevented them from pursuing this experiment due to a lack of resources, so the students decided to test the effects of Wi-Fi radiation (comparable in strength to cellphone radiation) on a plant instead.
The girls placed six trays of Lepidium sativum seeds (a garden cress grown commercially throughout Europe) in a room without radiation, and an equal amount in a room next to two Wi-Fi routers. Over a 12-day period, they observed, measured, weighed and photographed the results. Even before the 12th day arrived, however, the end results were obvious: The cress seeds placed near the routers either hadn't grown or were completely dead, while the seeds placed in the radiation-free room had blossomed into healthy plants.
The experiment earned the five students top honors in a regional science competition. Moreover, according to a teacher at their school, Kim Horsevad, a professor of neuroscience at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden was so impressed with the experiment that he is interested in repeating it in a controlled scientific environment.
You can help reduce your exposure to Wi-Fi radiation by following the advice in this article.
Sources for this article include:
About the author:
Michael Ravensthorpe is an independent writer whose research interests include nutrition, alternative medicine, and bushcraft. He is the creator of the website Spiritfoods, through which he promotes the world's healthiest foods.
~~Nutrition professionals have an excellent track record of demonizing healthy foods.
Red meat, cheese, coconut oil… to name a few.
But the #1 worst example is their decades of propaganda against eggs, which are among the healthiest foods on the planet.
Eggs do NOT Cause Heart Disease
Historically, eggs have been considered unhealthy because they contain cholesterol.
A large egg contains 212mg of cholesterol, which is a lot compared to most other foods.
However, it has been proven, time and time again, that eggs and dietary cholesterol do NOT adversely affect cholesterol levels in the blood.
In fact, eggs raise HDL (the good) cholesterol. They also change LDL cholesterol from small, dense LDL (which is bad) to large LDL, which is benign (1, 2, 3).
A new meta-analysis published in 2013 looked at 17 prospective studies on egg consumption and health. They discovered that eggs had no association with either heart disease or stroke in otherwise healthy people (4).
This isn’t new data. Multiple older studies have led to the same conclusion (5).
Bottom Line: Despite the fear mongering of the past few decades, eating eggs and cholesterol has no association whatsoever with heart disease.
Eggs Are Rich in Unique Antioxidants
Eye on White Background
Eggs are particularly rich in the two antioxidants Lutein and Zeaxanthine.
These antioxidants gather in the retina of the eye and protect against the eye diseases Macular Degeneration and Cataracts (6, 7, 8).
In one study, supplementing with an average of 1.3 egg yolks per day for 4.5 weeks increased blood levels of Lutein by 28-50% and Zeaxanthine by 114-142% (9).
Bottom Line: Eggs contain large amounts of the antioxidants Lutein and Zeaxanthine, which dramatically lower your risk of age-related eye disorders.
Eggs Are Among The Most Nutritious Foods on The Planet
Just think about it… one egg contains all the nutrients and building blocks required to grow an entire baby chicken.
Eggs are loaded with high-quality proteins, vitamins, minerals, good fats and various trace nutrients.
A large egg contains (10):
Only 77 calories, with 5 grams of fat and 6 grams of protein with all 9 essential amino acids.
Rich in iron, phosphorous, selenium and vitamins A, B12, B2 and B5 (among others).
One egg contains 113 mg of Choline – a very important nutrient for the brain, among other things. A study revealed that 90% of Americans may not get enough choline in their diet (11).
If you decide to include eggs in your diet (you should) then make sure to eat Omega-3 enriched or pastured eggs. They are much more nutritious than eggs from factory-raised chickens.
Eat the yolks, they contain pretty much all the nutrients!
Bottom Line: Eggs contain all 9 essential amino acids, are highly concentrated with vitamins and minerals and are among the best sources of choline you can get. Omega-3 enriched or pastured eggs are best.
Eggs Are Satiating and Help You Lose Weight
Woman smiling and holding an egg
Eggs score high on a scale called the Satiety Index, which means that eggs are particularly capable of making you feel full and eat less overall calories (12).
Eggs only contain trace amounts of carbohydrate, which means that they will not raise blood glucose levels.
In a study of 30 overweight or obese women that ate either a bagel or eggs for breakfast, the egg group ended up eating less during lunch, the rest of the day and for the next 36 hours (13).
In another study, overweight men and women were calorie-restricted and given either a breakfast of 2 eggs (340 kcal) or an isocaloric breakfast of bagels. After 8 weeks, the egg eating group had a (14):
61% greater reduction in BMI.
65% more weight loss.
34% greater reduction in waist circumference.
16% greater reduction in body fat.
~~Why Are Eggs Good For You? An Egg-ceptional Superfood
~~(NaturalNews) The ramifications of a recent German study on piglets may lead to healthier livestock with less pharmaceutical antibiotic use if other farmers get involved and see the results.
The study determined that pathogenic E. coli strains and their disease-causing genes were greatly lessened with probiotic E. faecium. The recent study also determined that there are E. coli strains that are beneficial, and those strains were not disturbed by E. faecium, even as it destroyed pathogenic E. coli.
It's estimated that the 70 to 80 percent of existing pharmaceutical antibiotics go into farm animal feed, often to fatten up livestock and increase their meat market value in addition to protecting against infectious diseases from overcrowded factory farmfeeding conditions.
This is a major factor in the development of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria, such as the deadly MRSA bacteria. It would be interesting if pharmaceutical antibiotics faded into the medical background. They can and often do more harm, especially with their current frequent and indiscriminate use.
Pharmaceutical antibiotics destroy probiotic bacteria, leading to the debilitation of the entire immune system permanently if the intestinal flora is not replenished by intense probiotic dosing with supplements or fermented foods and beverages.
Because of their chemical nature, pharmaceutical antibiotics often create mild to serious neurological problems, as several fluoroquinolone antibiotic users will painfully attest (http://www.naturalnews.com).
In short, pharmaceutical antibiotics are the chemo of bacteria, the napalm or agent orange of infectious disease that leave so much collateral damage that one wonders how they have been called one of modern medicine's miracles, along with vaccines, another Big Pharma solution that creates many more problems.
Before pharmaceutical antibiotics, there were natural, less harmful antibiotics that were effective, ranging from colloidal silver to garlic and several herbal essential oils (http://www.naturalnews.com).
Is this the beginning of a new trend toward healthier farming?
So what does this have to do with farm animals? Well, those who eat meats from animals that aren't organic, free range or grass-fed are taking in some of the antibiotics fed to those animals. It's somewhat like carcinogenic second-hand (cigarette) smoke, but it's second-hand antibiotics. And as antibiotic-resistant strains increase, the animals have to be given more.
This actually encourages factory farming with terrible disease-fostering, crowded conditions and unnatural feed. In other words, sick livestock to create inferior food while endangering workers and nearby areas with infectious diseases.
Remember the swine flu? It was supposedly from an American-owned factory pig farm in Central Mexico which had spread so much filth and disease that the locals had begun protesting. Yes, swine flu reports were greatly exaggerated to promote vaccines. But it's on record that the American factory pig farm was a pathogenic-producing mess that endangered locals and workers.
The good news is that the EU has banned antibiotics for fattening up livestock since 2006. So European farmers were forced into other options such as prebiotics, probiotics and even zinc to absorb livestock gut pathogenic bacteria.
Feed companies quickly adapted, producing natural antibiotic feed products that tested better against their pharmaceutical counterparts without side effects.
Dutch animal feeds with diluted oregano oil were among the products tested. Oregano oil is a strong natural antimicrobial, antifungal and antiparasitic. A pair of Pennsylvanian farmers heard about it and decided to try it. One was a chicken farmer and the other a pig farmer.
Both farmers reported that the feed effectively minimized pathogenic bacterial infections, and their livestock animals seemed healthier and more energetic with the oregano oil feed than they did with pharmaceutical antibiotics.
They were also not dehydrated, as they had tended to be from pharmaceutical antibiotics. Hopefully, this will catch on in America and eliminate some of the unhealthy cycle of antibiotic overuse.
Sources for this article include:
Probiotics protect pigs from E. coli infections
~~Should I Stay Married For My Children?
ChildWritten by Joe Beam, Chairman MarriageHelper.com
“I know it would be wrong to stay married for the sake of my children.”
“Really? Who told you that?”
“Several of my friends.”
“I don’t mean to sound offensive, but what makes them experts on the matter?”
She stared at me for a few moments. I think she was trying to decide if I were a jerk, or if I had a point worth considering. Finally she spoke. Her advice from “several friends” mostly came from one.
“Linda tells me the best thing she ever did was divorce Tom. Says I should divorce Bill so I can be happy.”
“Do you think Linda’s kids feel the same way about her divorcing their Dad?”
“I don’t know.”
“I assume the kids live with her. Do you think either Tom or their children hurt because he now plays a more limited role in their lives?”
She shifted uncomfortably. “I don’t know, but that really doesn’t matter, does it? If Linda is happy, then it was the best choice for her.”
“And now she wants you to make the same choice for yourself. Think there’s any possibility that her encouraging you to divorce Bill could somehow validate in her own conscience her decision to divorce Tom?”
“Why would you ask a mean question like that?”
“I witness many people encouraging others to end their marriages so that they might find some kind of belated justification to their own divorces.
“You say she’s happy. Maybe. Does she ever talk about how tough it is to raise kids alone? She ever complain about trying to have a social life while attempting to be both Mom and Dad?
“And did you really mean it when you said it doesn’t matter how it affects Tom or the kids as long as Linda is happy? Do you really think it does not matter if her kids ache because their Mom and Dad aren’t together? Think they may pray at night that God will make their parents fall in love again and remarry? Think it might matter to them?
“Rather than listening to Linda, I suggest you seek wisdom from qualified people before deciding that staying together for the children is wrong. Wouldn’t it make more sense to talk to someone who absolutely has no personal agenda? Someone objective?”
I based the story above on many discussions. Our culture seems to think that one should not consider his or her children’s emotions or desires when contemplating divorce. Instead, one should consider his or her own emotions and desires. Some believe that the children will be better off if the parent is happy, even if they suffer for a while because of their parents’ divorce.
Could Divorce Benefit Children?
When children are in danger sexually, physically, emotionally, or otherwise, divorce removes them from the presence and primary influence of the person hurting them. The same applies if the harm is directed at the other spouse rather than the children. Separation or divorce in situations such as those should occur, in my opinion.
However, reasons such as those vary drastically from, “I want to be happy, and so the kids will just have to adjust to the divorce.”
Please do not think that I want people to be miserable. When a marriage is difficult, I urge people to seek help to repair that relationship and make it good. People should demand respect, civility, affection, and all the other attributes a marriage should have. If a marriage is bad, a person should stand up to the situation and demand that they deal with their problems.
However, much more often it occurs as Linda in our story recommends. “If you are not happy, divorce your spouse and move on to whatever might be next. Do not let your children deter your decision. They may hurt for a while, but they will adapt eventually; therefore, do what makes you happy now and let things work out for the kids later.”
Though Linda says it is wrong to stay in a marriage for the sake of the kids, from my experience working with thousands of couples, I state unequivocally that it is wrong to divorce without first considering your children.
Consider the Children’s Present
Children sometimes desire things that are bad for them. We understand the confused emotions of a child who begs to stay with a sexually abusive parent. The child abhors the abuse but loves the parent and fears being without him. As much as it breaks our hearts to witness the child’s pain, we know that we must remove the parent’s opportunities to hurt the child. We think of the child’s welfare. We do not allow their emotions to deter us from protecting them.
However, that is much different from diminishing the importance of a child’s emotions because they conflict with what we desire.
If those considering divorce allowed themselves to empathize with the pain in the hearts of their children, and their agony poured out in supplication to God as night after night they beg Him to make their parents love each other again, how could they not seek ways to repair rather than end their marriages?
Children did not ask their parents to bring them into the world. Therefore, it is not the children who owe the parents. Parents brought their children into this world. That means the parents have responsibilities and obligations to their children.
Every day our organization works with people whose marriages are in crisis. We hear the stories – infidelity, control, selfishness, and much more. When we hear of abuse or fear, we encourage people to get themselves and their children to safety. However, most stories involve behaviors that are not dangerous, though destructive to relationships. Behaviors that can change if either or both is willing to stop the things they should not do and start the things they should to make love take root again. Sometimes one spouse hurt the other deeply and must find the path to forgiveness. The hurt partner decides whether to forgive, and, if they are willing to do so, to learn how to reconcile their relationship. We witness the pain, frustration, and anger. Yet, since 1999 we have witnessed thousands of seemingly unsalvageable marriages develop deep love again.
For many of them, their deep love for their children motivated the effort to repair their marriage. Because they knew their children craved and needed two loving parents, they pushed aside their anger and hurt long enough to find the help they needed.
Recently, a woman we helped posted this on Facebook, “This morning as [my young daughter] and I were saying our prayers on the way to school, she said, ‘Jesus, thank you that Mommy & Daddy love each other and go on dates’. If ever I doubted choices in forgiveness, in that moment all doubt was gone. Lots of thanks, first to God and also to [our organization].”
The greatest thing any parent can do for a child is to love his or her spouse.
The most selfish thing a parent can do is to end their children’s current family because they decided they love someone else. Thousands end their marriages and put their children through pain because they feel that the new person they love is more important to them than salvaging the family they have. Sadly, they have plenty of Linda’s who cheer them on, telling them that their children will get over it. They emphasize happiness over responsibility. They forget that happiness always roots itself in what is happening and, therefore, constantly changes with time. They sacrifice the essential for the superficial, the life-long for the here and now.
Consider the Children’s Future
It happened over 50 years ago, but he lives it again when he tells it. You see it in his eyes and hear it in his voice. At five, he was the youngest of a large farm family. One day his parents gathered the children in the front yard and announced their divorce. The father moved several feet away from the mother and then told the children that each should walk to the parent they wished to live with. At five, my friend had just moments to make a decision he would live with for the rest of his life.
I think so. So does my friend. Over a half-century later, he mourns that day.
A parent contemplating divorce today might shrug off the story, convinced he or she will be much more considerate. However, even if the process follows a kinder route, it still results in a child living with one divorced parent (or neither) and having less access to the other. That experience – just like every other major experience in life – affects the child forever.
As difficult as it is after divorce to balance weekends, summer vacations, and holidays when children are young, it gets tougher when they marry and have their own children.
Even their weddings can be emotional earthquakes. I officiated many weddings where bride and groom struggled with which parent and his or her new spouse would enter when, sit where, and a hundred other “little things” that matter. Even when the parents and their new spouses act civilly, stress abounds. When one or more acts out because he or she feels treated with less honor than their former mate, calamity erupts. Too often, I have consoled a weeping bride on what should have been the happiest day of her life.
In our workshops that help troubled couples salvage their marriages, we hear regularly, “I have so much pain from my parent’s divorce. I’m determined I won’t do that to my children. We will figure how to solve our problems and make our marriage good. I owe that to them.”
Truly Make the Effort Before Divorcing
If your marriage is in trouble, would you for the sake of your children make an effort to save your family? Not just save it, but to make it a good, healthy, loving marriage?
You can find wise and caring people who will help you work on your problems. If you decide to search for one, be sure to ask how strong their values are in helping you save your marriage. Unfortunately, not every counselor or helper believes in saving marriages: Some take the easier route and advise divorce if your situation seems too difficult. Avoid those people. Find people who care and who do not give up if your problems take effort to overcome.
Welcome New Patients!
|Monday||10:00 - 12:00||2:30 - 6:30|
|Tuesday||2:30 - 6:30|
|Wednesday||10:00 - 12:00||2:30 - 6:30|
|Thursday||2:30 - 6:30|
|Friday||10:00 - 12:00||2:30 - 6:30|
|10:00 - 12:00||10:00 - 12:00||10:00 - 12:00||Closed||Closed|
|2:30 - 6:30||2:30 - 6:30||2:30 - 6:30||2:30 - 6:30||2:30 - 6:30||Closed||Closed|