With the recent tragic earthquake that struck Haiti, is it possible for everyone to go through such a disaster with their lives – and hopefully their health – intact?
By: Ringo Bones
The somewhat mismanaged and uncoordinated disaster relief of the recent earthquake that struck Haiti has been a subject of much politicized discussion, especially for those who had contributed significant portions of their expertise and money to aid the survivors. Surprisingly, many public service “how to” and “what to” dos on what to do before, during, and after an earthquake are already widely available that would minimize unnecessary death and suffering as a result of an earthquake and other natural disasters. Since almost all of us are susceptible to disaster amnesia – i.e. we tend to forget the previous disaster that would have prepared us for the next one, here are some tips that could protect us from the adverse health hazards of an earthquake.
Before an earthquake strikes, it is important that all of us should support local safety building codes with enforcement for schools, hospitals, offices, homes and other public places. Hospitals should not become deathtraps during earthquakes as a result of substandard construction practices since these are the most vital infrastructure that should still be functioning to treat the injured. When it comes to earthquake preparedness, there’s nothing more important than supporting and encouraging earthquake drills and training for schools, work areas and homes.
As a homeowner or tenant, there are a number of ways that you can prevent and minimize possible death and injuries that might occur if an earthquake strikes. Fasten shelves to walls and remove heavy objects from upper shelves unless they are restrained. Place breakable / fragile or valuable items in a safe place. Remove or securely fasten high loose objects, especially those heavy objects situated directly above one’s beds. If you have defective or aging wiring or leaky gas connections, replace them as soon as possible. Bolt down your heaters and other gas operated appliances. Like the Great San Francisco Earthquake of 1906, fires can be as damaging and as deadly as the structural damage introduced by the quake itself. Another way to minimize electrical and fire injuries and to conserve water during the aftermath of an earthquake is by teaching members of one’s family and household how to turn off the electricity, gas and water at the main switches and valves.
Another good earthquake preparedness measure is the maintenance of at least three days of food and bottled water and an up-to-date medical / first-aid kit. One should teach responsible family members basic first-aid instruction like CPR because medical facilities are more often than not could be overwhelmed immediately after a severe earthquake. Also maintaining flashlights and radios with healthy batteries in the house is very important when it comes to earthquake preparedness. Family discussions about what to do in case of an earthquake and related problems should be done in a calm manner. As much as possible, avoid telling frightening stories about disasters. Remember to have the presence of mind to do what’s needed in order to survive when an earthquake struck while you’re at work, in a store, in a public hall or outside. Prior planning will help you act calmly, safely and constructively in an emergency and enable you to aid others.
An overwhelming majority of earthquake victims are usually caught by surprise, but there are ways to keep one’s life and cool when caught in the middle an earthquake. Remain as calm as possible. Think through the consequences of expedient actions you are about to take. Try to calm and reassure others.
When caught indoors, watch out for falling plaster, bricks, lighting fixtures and other objects. Stay away from objects and structures that might shatter in the middle of an earthquake like glass windows, mirrors, chimneys and outer walls. If the building you’re in is in danger of immediate collapse, get under the strongest table you can find or other secure structures you can crawl under like desks, beds, or a strong doorway. School children should be taught to automatically get under desks during an earthquake. Usually, it is not ideal to run outside, unless of course you are in a heavy poorly constructed old building. Most modern high-rise office buildings are constructed with earthquake resistance in mind, so it is better to shelter under the desk or table to protect oneself from falling debris. Do not dash for exits because stairwells may be jammed with people increasing the likelihood of a stampede and power for the elevators may be cut-off.
When caught by an earthquake outside, avoid high buildings, walls, power utility poles and objects that could fall. Never run through the streets. If possible, move away from all hazards. If you are in an automobile, stop in the safest place you can find and stay there. Being made of steel, automobiles are one of the best places to be in case of falling debris. Never be hastily stampeded into leaving an upright building merely because it groans horribly or cracks start to appear and plaster falls. The only good time to leave a building is when collapse is obviously imminent, which is generally indicated by walls falling as a unit.
After an earthquake, check yourself and those near you for injuries. Do not attempt to move seriously injured persons unless they’re in immediate danger of further injury, like by falling debris and imminent building collapse. As you move around, always wear shoes to avoid foot injuries from debris and broken glass. Check for and rule out gas leaks before you operate light switches, light a match or candles. And do not touch downed power lines.
If your home’s water supply is out, emergency water for putting out small fires of non-electrical nature can be obtained from water heaters, from toilet tanks, from ice cubes, canned vegetables and even radiators from cars. Although water from radiators should not be used for drinking as it may contain antifreeze. Check out the sewage lines for damage before permitting the flushing of toilets.
Do not use your telephone except for genuine emergency calls. This rule applies to mobile phones and satellite phones, and even to Internet traffic as well. Tune to the radio instead for information. Do not spread rumors or be quick to believe them. Rumors can cause great harm and panic following a major disaster. Do not immediately go sightseeing. Keep the streets clear for emergency vehicles. Be prepared for additional aftershocks. Although usually smaller, these may be large enough to cause further damage to weakened structures like masonry structures. Watch out for and stay clear of areas of potential tidal waves or landslides.
Help police, fire fighters, civil defense or relief units only if requested to do so. Otherwise, stay out of damaged areas. Make thorough check of your home for cracks or leaks in chimneys, utility connections or other weakened parts of your house that could cause further fires, asphyxiation or further damage.
Lastly, no set of rules can eliminate all earthquake dangers, but the following rules previously mentioned can greatly reduce injuries and damage to property. You can count yourself fortunate if your only concern after an earthquake is whether your insurance policy payout is adequate to fix your home like before.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Friday, December 4, 2009
Bisphenol-A: Too Profitable To Be Banned?
With a host of health risk recently uncovered in studies relating to its use in the food industry, is the use of Bisphenol-A or BPA in the global food industry just too profitable to be banned?
By: Ringo Bones
As one of the ingredients in polycarbonate-based plastics used to line tin cans and as a food-grade plastic container, its ubiquity in the global food industry is hard to deny. But in recent studies, funded by U.S. President Barack Obama’s 30 million dollar stimulus research grant to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration– Bisphenol-A or BPA like its pthalate-based chemical cousins – has been proven to cause adverse health risks. With its relatively low cost, ease of manufacture and lack of a viable safer – from a health standpoint – replacement, will Bisphenol-A prove to be too profitable to be banned despite of being a carcinogen?
Bisphenol-A, like its pthalate-based chemical cousins which are often mixed together to make food grade containers and tin can linings for the global food industry had been recently found to pose a health threat. Bisphenol-A or BPA has a chemical structure that acts as a hormone mimic when it enters the human metabolic process. By mimicking the biological function of the hormone estrogen, BPA in high enough concentrations has been found to arrest the male sex organ development in laboratory animals under test. Sex hormone imbalances due to hormone metabolism problems in humans can trigger some of the most common forms of cancer. As one of the chemical hormone mimics that constitute almost all plastics in our daily use, Bisphenol-A is an out-and-out carcinogen and teratogen – i.e. has a potential to harm developing embryos and fetuses.
Bisphenol-A seeps away from the plastic used to hold drinking water and other foodstuffs especially at elevated temperatures. Recent testing of a number volunteers who are long-term inhabitants of the industrialized West have shown elevated levels of BPA. People with higher BPA concentrations in their bloodstream tend to show increased liver enzymes that could increase susceptibility to diabetes, heart disease and liver damage. And could even trigger cancers. In higher concentrations, BPA have caused sterility, brain damage, and cancers in later life of the higher primates under test.
Recent studies have shown that 50 micrograms per day per kilogram of body weight is the daily safety dose limit of BPA. This means for someone weighing 50 kilograms, they should only be ingesting 2,500 micrograms of Bisphenol-A in order for their bodies to safely metabolize the stuff without undue health problems. Sadly, despite of its negative effects to our health, BPA use has been increasing on an annual basis of 8%. Not only that, dentistry epoxy resins contain BPA too – which make it as a health concern together with the metallic mercury content of tooth fillings.
Even if Bisphenol-A used in food containers are banned immediately most of us have been using BPA-containing polycarbonate-based plastics continuously in our daily lives for the past thirty years or so. From CDs, i-Pod housings, to bullet-resistant glass, and even those plastic cups that we used for drinking for almost forever. And these BPA-containing plastics emit 55 times more BPA when heated risking bloodstream absorption just by casual contact or inhalation. To minimize ones BPA intake, it could be as easy as using those good old drinking glasses and ceramic cups – if you are willing to overcome the minor inconvenience that these drinking vessels break when you drop them on the floor.
By: Ringo Bones
As one of the ingredients in polycarbonate-based plastics used to line tin cans and as a food-grade plastic container, its ubiquity in the global food industry is hard to deny. But in recent studies, funded by U.S. President Barack Obama’s 30 million dollar stimulus research grant to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration– Bisphenol-A or BPA like its pthalate-based chemical cousins – has been proven to cause adverse health risks. With its relatively low cost, ease of manufacture and lack of a viable safer – from a health standpoint – replacement, will Bisphenol-A prove to be too profitable to be banned despite of being a carcinogen?
Bisphenol-A, like its pthalate-based chemical cousins which are often mixed together to make food grade containers and tin can linings for the global food industry had been recently found to pose a health threat. Bisphenol-A or BPA has a chemical structure that acts as a hormone mimic when it enters the human metabolic process. By mimicking the biological function of the hormone estrogen, BPA in high enough concentrations has been found to arrest the male sex organ development in laboratory animals under test. Sex hormone imbalances due to hormone metabolism problems in humans can trigger some of the most common forms of cancer. As one of the chemical hormone mimics that constitute almost all plastics in our daily use, Bisphenol-A is an out-and-out carcinogen and teratogen – i.e. has a potential to harm developing embryos and fetuses.
Bisphenol-A seeps away from the plastic used to hold drinking water and other foodstuffs especially at elevated temperatures. Recent testing of a number volunteers who are long-term inhabitants of the industrialized West have shown elevated levels of BPA. People with higher BPA concentrations in their bloodstream tend to show increased liver enzymes that could increase susceptibility to diabetes, heart disease and liver damage. And could even trigger cancers. In higher concentrations, BPA have caused sterility, brain damage, and cancers in later life of the higher primates under test.
Recent studies have shown that 50 micrograms per day per kilogram of body weight is the daily safety dose limit of BPA. This means for someone weighing 50 kilograms, they should only be ingesting 2,500 micrograms of Bisphenol-A in order for their bodies to safely metabolize the stuff without undue health problems. Sadly, despite of its negative effects to our health, BPA use has been increasing on an annual basis of 8%. Not only that, dentistry epoxy resins contain BPA too – which make it as a health concern together with the metallic mercury content of tooth fillings.
Even if Bisphenol-A used in food containers are banned immediately most of us have been using BPA-containing polycarbonate-based plastics continuously in our daily lives for the past thirty years or so. From CDs, i-Pod housings, to bullet-resistant glass, and even those plastic cups that we used for drinking for almost forever. And these BPA-containing plastics emit 55 times more BPA when heated risking bloodstream absorption just by casual contact or inhalation. To minimize ones BPA intake, it could be as easy as using those good old drinking glasses and ceramic cups – if you are willing to overcome the minor inconvenience that these drinking vessels break when you drop them on the floor.
Friday, November 6, 2009
The Hidden Dangers of Coumarin-Containing Products
As the inherently toxic white crystalline lactone that gives cinnamon its distinctive aroma, does coumarin-containing products pose a health risk to consumers?
By: Ringo Bones
Thankfully, its chemically distant cousin – vanillin – which is the crystalline phenolic aldehyde that is the chief fragrant component of vanilla used in flavoring and perfumery is yet to be proven as a health hazard. But coumarin, the toxic white crystalline lactone, which in higher purity smells like newly-mown hay, found in cinnamon and mostly manufactured synthetically for use in cosmetics and perfumes. Has been deemed hazardous by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment since 2005. In lower concentrations, coumarin is the active component that gives cinnamon and related flavorings their distinctive aroma. Because recent studies have shown that some products – especially cosmetic creams that contain high concentrations of coumarin – results in unfavorably elevated liver enzyme values. And in some cases resulted to jaundice and liver damage. Coumarin is also toxic to the human kidney in sufficient amounts thus making it a definite no-no to those taking cholesterol lowering medication.
Erring on the side of caution, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment had urged cosmetic and foodstuff manufacturers to indicate whether their products contain coumarin or not since 2005. Making them probably the first in the world to do so. The established dose limit of coumarin has been set at 0.1 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. So a person weighing 75 kilograms should keep their daily intake of coumarin at below 7.5 milligrams. Although studies are still ongoing whether taking coumarin via the gastro-intestinal tract can result in increased risk for liver damage as opposed to via skin absorption through cosmetic creams.
When it comes to cosmetics and toiletries, coumarin-containing creams pose the most risk because they are not readily rinsed off giving higher concentrations of coumarin ample time to be absorbed by the skin. Unlike soaps which are rinsed right away, while perfumes are only applied to the skin’s surface at lower concentrations. Baby products containing coumarin are a definite no-no because a baby’s skin easily absorbs oil-based chemicals and their liver can’t readily process elevated amounts of toxins. So it’s better to err in the side of caution when it comes to coumarin because even in its natural concentration it hardly qualifies as a poison. But due to larger quantities made possible to industrial scale synthesizing of the chemical, products containing coumarin should carry warning labels.
By: Ringo Bones
Thankfully, its chemically distant cousin – vanillin – which is the crystalline phenolic aldehyde that is the chief fragrant component of vanilla used in flavoring and perfumery is yet to be proven as a health hazard. But coumarin, the toxic white crystalline lactone, which in higher purity smells like newly-mown hay, found in cinnamon and mostly manufactured synthetically for use in cosmetics and perfumes. Has been deemed hazardous by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment since 2005. In lower concentrations, coumarin is the active component that gives cinnamon and related flavorings their distinctive aroma. Because recent studies have shown that some products – especially cosmetic creams that contain high concentrations of coumarin – results in unfavorably elevated liver enzyme values. And in some cases resulted to jaundice and liver damage. Coumarin is also toxic to the human kidney in sufficient amounts thus making it a definite no-no to those taking cholesterol lowering medication.
Erring on the side of caution, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment had urged cosmetic and foodstuff manufacturers to indicate whether their products contain coumarin or not since 2005. Making them probably the first in the world to do so. The established dose limit of coumarin has been set at 0.1 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. So a person weighing 75 kilograms should keep their daily intake of coumarin at below 7.5 milligrams. Although studies are still ongoing whether taking coumarin via the gastro-intestinal tract can result in increased risk for liver damage as opposed to via skin absorption through cosmetic creams.
When it comes to cosmetics and toiletries, coumarin-containing creams pose the most risk because they are not readily rinsed off giving higher concentrations of coumarin ample time to be absorbed by the skin. Unlike soaps which are rinsed right away, while perfumes are only applied to the skin’s surface at lower concentrations. Baby products containing coumarin are a definite no-no because a baby’s skin easily absorbs oil-based chemicals and their liver can’t readily process elevated amounts of toxins. So it’s better to err in the side of caution when it comes to coumarin because even in its natural concentration it hardly qualifies as a poison. But due to larger quantities made possible to industrial scale synthesizing of the chemical, products containing coumarin should carry warning labels.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Of Adjuvant and Swine Flu Vaccines
Given the recent row in Germany over the reservation of adjuvant-free H1N1 vaccine doses for Germany’s “more useful” citizens, are adjuvant-added H1N1 vaccines really dangerous?
By: Ringo Bones
From the Aryan Nation-leaning paranoid fear-mongering of American right-wing conservative media darlings Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck to the German government reserving the “supposedly safer” adjuvant-free swine flu vaccines for their soldiers, politicians and other “more useful” citizens. It seems that the public at large are starting to demand that the H1N1 / swine flu vaccine doses intended for them must be adjuvant-free. Will this be exploited by unscrupulous health insurance providers if and when swine flu becomes a flue pandemic, thus making true the excesses that former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’ Connor and the late, great Senator Ted Kennedy spent their entire careers fighting against? Lets just hope it won’t come to that. But what is an adjuvant anyway and what role does it play in H1N1 / swine flu vaccine doses?
According to Webster’s dictionary, an adjuvant is something that enhances the effectiveness of a medical treatment and is often found in vaccine doses and chemotherapy cocktails. An adjuvant is usually agents or substances added to a typical vaccine preparation or dose to allow the recipient’s immune system to respond with higher levels of effectiveness. A typical adjuvant can include various forms of aluminum and are typically used with other vaccines in the United States, including vaccinations for hepatitis-A and B, diptheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine preparations and Heamophilus influenzae type b or Hib. In flu vaccine doses, the adjuvant would be a proprietary water-oil mixture. By using them in various vaccines, doctors hope to reduce the amount of the vaccine itself that is needed.
According to Dr. David Fedson, formerly a professor of medicine at the University of Virginia and former medical director for the pharmaceutical company Aventis Pasteur, an adjuvant reduces the amount of antigen needed in a typical vaccine to initiate an immune response to its intended recipient. For example, a typical bird flu vaccine contains 90 micrograms of antigen – i.e. a flu virus’s “signature” that allows for an immune response. Adding an adjuvant reduces this to 3.75 micrograms, effectively enabling 24 times more doses. By adding an adjuvant, you gain what is known as an antigen sparing effect, according to Dr. Fedson. While flu vaccine doses typically use 15 micrograms of antigens, adding an adjuvant could decrease the amount of antigen required significantly. Which Dr. Fedson readily points out that being able to produce 4 times as many vaccine doses is a huge advantage in terms of public health management.
Ironically, no flu vaccine that is FDA-approved for use in the United States has ever contained an adjuvant because the country had never experienced a widespread flu pandemic in modern times. Thus the need to manufacture adjuvant-treated flu vaccines in America never arose. Although there are still some folks who say that the extent of side effects a typical adjuvant can manifest has never been thoroughly studied. But fortunately for some, all 2009 flu season H1N1 / swine flu vaccine batches being dispensed in the US to protect her citizenry against the H1N1 virus are all adjuvant-free. So far, the latest WHO and CDC studies conducted on adjuvant-added H1N1 / swine flu vaccine doses show no side effects.
But what does this all mean? Given that the majority of people – especially those who gravitate more towards demagoguery than science – tends to have the loudest voices when it comes to griping about this subject. Remember the fears over the mercury-based preservative thimerosal being used in vaccine preparations intended for infants? I’ll bet the loudest voices that griped over that issue are more concerned over obtaining effective “cheat codes” for their game consoles than making informed choices and decisions over the long-term health and well-being of their loved ones. Who knows that the adjuvant in swine flu vaccine issue might gain similar overly sensational media coverage and hype that surrounded the Gulf War Syndrome incidences – thus making scientifically valid investigations very difficult - back in the 1990s.
By: Ringo Bones
From the Aryan Nation-leaning paranoid fear-mongering of American right-wing conservative media darlings Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck to the German government reserving the “supposedly safer” adjuvant-free swine flu vaccines for their soldiers, politicians and other “more useful” citizens. It seems that the public at large are starting to demand that the H1N1 / swine flu vaccine doses intended for them must be adjuvant-free. Will this be exploited by unscrupulous health insurance providers if and when swine flu becomes a flue pandemic, thus making true the excesses that former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’ Connor and the late, great Senator Ted Kennedy spent their entire careers fighting against? Lets just hope it won’t come to that. But what is an adjuvant anyway and what role does it play in H1N1 / swine flu vaccine doses?
According to Webster’s dictionary, an adjuvant is something that enhances the effectiveness of a medical treatment and is often found in vaccine doses and chemotherapy cocktails. An adjuvant is usually agents or substances added to a typical vaccine preparation or dose to allow the recipient’s immune system to respond with higher levels of effectiveness. A typical adjuvant can include various forms of aluminum and are typically used with other vaccines in the United States, including vaccinations for hepatitis-A and B, diptheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine preparations and Heamophilus influenzae type b or Hib. In flu vaccine doses, the adjuvant would be a proprietary water-oil mixture. By using them in various vaccines, doctors hope to reduce the amount of the vaccine itself that is needed.
According to Dr. David Fedson, formerly a professor of medicine at the University of Virginia and former medical director for the pharmaceutical company Aventis Pasteur, an adjuvant reduces the amount of antigen needed in a typical vaccine to initiate an immune response to its intended recipient. For example, a typical bird flu vaccine contains 90 micrograms of antigen – i.e. a flu virus’s “signature” that allows for an immune response. Adding an adjuvant reduces this to 3.75 micrograms, effectively enabling 24 times more doses. By adding an adjuvant, you gain what is known as an antigen sparing effect, according to Dr. Fedson. While flu vaccine doses typically use 15 micrograms of antigens, adding an adjuvant could decrease the amount of antigen required significantly. Which Dr. Fedson readily points out that being able to produce 4 times as many vaccine doses is a huge advantage in terms of public health management.
Ironically, no flu vaccine that is FDA-approved for use in the United States has ever contained an adjuvant because the country had never experienced a widespread flu pandemic in modern times. Thus the need to manufacture adjuvant-treated flu vaccines in America never arose. Although there are still some folks who say that the extent of side effects a typical adjuvant can manifest has never been thoroughly studied. But fortunately for some, all 2009 flu season H1N1 / swine flu vaccine batches being dispensed in the US to protect her citizenry against the H1N1 virus are all adjuvant-free. So far, the latest WHO and CDC studies conducted on adjuvant-added H1N1 / swine flu vaccine doses show no side effects.
But what does this all mean? Given that the majority of people – especially those who gravitate more towards demagoguery than science – tends to have the loudest voices when it comes to griping about this subject. Remember the fears over the mercury-based preservative thimerosal being used in vaccine preparations intended for infants? I’ll bet the loudest voices that griped over that issue are more concerned over obtaining effective “cheat codes” for their game consoles than making informed choices and decisions over the long-term health and well-being of their loved ones. Who knows that the adjuvant in swine flu vaccine issue might gain similar overly sensational media coverage and hype that surrounded the Gulf War Syndrome incidences – thus making scientifically valid investigations very difficult - back in the 1990s.
Monday, September 14, 2009
The US Healthcare System: Desperately Seeking Reform?
Given the overwhelming resistance from the entrenched – and moneyed – “corporate right”, will US President Barack Obama’s proposed healthcare reform ever see the light of day?
By: Ringo Bones
The recent anti-healthcare reform outbursts at various town hall meetings across America reminiscent of 1989 neo-NAZI Oi! Scene punk rock parties whenever the King of Pop’s name is mentioned, I for one also wonder if the proposed American healthcare system reform is fast becoming a political – rather than a health – issue. Is the corporate side of America’s healthcare system being run by white supremacists groups given that those vehemently disrupting the town hall meetings to clarify President Obama’s healthcare reform proposals bear an uncanny resemblance of neo-NAZI youths from 1989? If this is true, then maybe South Carolina Republican Congressman Joe Wilson should find a better excuse for his recent outrage at the president’s recent congressional address other than “Aryan Nation former head honcho Richard Butler made me do it”.
After seeing Dr. Andrew Weil’s recent interview on Larry King Live, I think Dr. Weil did properly point out some aspects of President Obama’s proposed healthcare reform still didn’t tackle the root causes of those continually spiraling costs – especially systemic problems that dates back to the Reagan Administration. Especially the lack of education and information campaigns tackling the root causes of lifestyle-related health problems like diabetes, obesity, and heart disease. Which can easily be avoided by preventative changes of unhealthy lifestyle choices.
Another bone of contention is that an overwhelming majority of healthcare providers – especially those in the pharmaceutical industry – has too many vested interests when it comes to the profit making side of the American healthcare system. By being too reliant on technological-based – therefore expensive – treatment regimens, it is no wonder why America’s healthcare system has been continually spiraling in cost since Ronald Reagan ruled the “free world”. Though this is to be expected since Dr. Weil is no friend to the pharmaceutical industry.
In short, blame could be mostly directed to the profit-driven healthcare providers – especially the major pharmaceutical industry with their consumer-directed medical ads that had been slowly ruining America’s healthcare system. Pfizer paying 2.3 billion-dollar payout to the US Department of Justice over the pharmaceutical company’s BEXTRA fiasco is probably just a tip of the iceberg. Not to mention the prevailing culture of the current form of the American healthcare system that denies coverage to anyone with a preexisting condition. Something the late, great Senator Ted Kennedy was campaigning passionately against.
The promise of an American universal healthcare has been a political campaign cause célèbre as far back as then US President Woodrow Wilson’s presidential campaign days. But during the Reagan Administration, an extremely radicalized greed-based interpretation of the Protestant Work Ethic had deemed universal healthcare as a Socialist ideal that is just “too Marxist” for Americans. Thus relegating America’s existing healthcare system to be in par with that of Serbia.
By: Ringo Bones
The recent anti-healthcare reform outbursts at various town hall meetings across America reminiscent of 1989 neo-NAZI Oi! Scene punk rock parties whenever the King of Pop’s name is mentioned, I for one also wonder if the proposed American healthcare system reform is fast becoming a political – rather than a health – issue. Is the corporate side of America’s healthcare system being run by white supremacists groups given that those vehemently disrupting the town hall meetings to clarify President Obama’s healthcare reform proposals bear an uncanny resemblance of neo-NAZI youths from 1989? If this is true, then maybe South Carolina Republican Congressman Joe Wilson should find a better excuse for his recent outrage at the president’s recent congressional address other than “Aryan Nation former head honcho Richard Butler made me do it”.
After seeing Dr. Andrew Weil’s recent interview on Larry King Live, I think Dr. Weil did properly point out some aspects of President Obama’s proposed healthcare reform still didn’t tackle the root causes of those continually spiraling costs – especially systemic problems that dates back to the Reagan Administration. Especially the lack of education and information campaigns tackling the root causes of lifestyle-related health problems like diabetes, obesity, and heart disease. Which can easily be avoided by preventative changes of unhealthy lifestyle choices.
Another bone of contention is that an overwhelming majority of healthcare providers – especially those in the pharmaceutical industry – has too many vested interests when it comes to the profit making side of the American healthcare system. By being too reliant on technological-based – therefore expensive – treatment regimens, it is no wonder why America’s healthcare system has been continually spiraling in cost since Ronald Reagan ruled the “free world”. Though this is to be expected since Dr. Weil is no friend to the pharmaceutical industry.
In short, blame could be mostly directed to the profit-driven healthcare providers – especially the major pharmaceutical industry with their consumer-directed medical ads that had been slowly ruining America’s healthcare system. Pfizer paying 2.3 billion-dollar payout to the US Department of Justice over the pharmaceutical company’s BEXTRA fiasco is probably just a tip of the iceberg. Not to mention the prevailing culture of the current form of the American healthcare system that denies coverage to anyone with a preexisting condition. Something the late, great Senator Ted Kennedy was campaigning passionately against.
The promise of an American universal healthcare has been a political campaign cause célèbre as far back as then US President Woodrow Wilson’s presidential campaign days. But during the Reagan Administration, an extremely radicalized greed-based interpretation of the Protestant Work Ethic had deemed universal healthcare as a Socialist ideal that is just “too Marxist” for Americans. Thus relegating America’s existing healthcare system to be in par with that of Serbia.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Michael Jackson’s Health Issues: The Price of Fame?
After “fighting tooth and nail” to be crowned as the undisputed King of Pop, did Michael Jackson’s meteoric rise to fame and fortune eventually took a toll on his health and well being?
By: Ringo Bones
Even though I’m but a casual fan in comparison to the more dedicated Michael Jackson fan that I’ve met over the years, I can’t help myself but to think that most of us will never probably get over the untimely passing of the eternally reigning King of Pop. Though most of us have seen Michael Jackson’s private struggles from the prism of supermarket tabloids, it was probably his tell-all interview with Oprah that everyone of us eventually found out that Jackson’s “unhappy” childhood is probably what we perceive is the root cause of his “eccentricities”. Nonetheless, Michael Jackson will probably go down in history as a case study for celebrity health in America.
Growing up with a less-than-ideal childhood in the supposedly child-friendly society of post-World War II America is probably the consensus explanation on why Michael Jackson eventually spent countless millions of dollars to recapture his lost childhood via the Neverland Ranch. While the primary suspected reason of his untimely passing last June 25, 2009 is blamed on Jackson’s chronic prescription painkiller abuse that started after that fateful accident while shooting a Pepsi commercial back in 1984.
Michael Jackson’s personal doctor, which he hired just recently back around May 2009, is now the prime suspect of his death and could face charges of negligent homicide. Dr. Conrad Murray, more a close personal friend than a physician, is now seen by investigators as an “enabler” – i.e. allowing Michael Jackson access to prescription painkillers to which he became chronically addicted over the years. And authorities investigating the untimely death of Michael Jackson became even more concerned when Dr. Murray enabled Jackson to receive doses of the anaesthetic propofol / diprivan – which is reserved only for operating room use during surgery.
The diprivan use in a domestic setting is probably the last straw that eventually made Dr. Conrad Murray the prime suspect in the untimely and suspicious death of Michael Jackson, given that the doctor should have been exercising his Hippocratic Oath in the first place – i.e. first do no harm. Diprivan was probably administered to Michael Jackson - according to the investigators – to enable him to sleep by subjecting him to a narcotic coma that supposedly reduces the stress of jet lag as the singer does his upcoming concert tour through different time zones.
Being addicted to strictly controlled pharmaceuticals is not the only malady suffered by Michael Jackson during his relentless pursuit of fame and fortune. His “unhappy” childhood is probably the primary cause of his “eternal dissatisfaction” with his own physical appearance. The scores of cosmetic surgery, which the King of Pop endured through the years - is a case in point. Michael Jackson is indeed an artist who suffers for his work. Despite of his relatively short and tortured life, Michael Jackson’s legacy lives on through his underwriting of philanthropic causes to help sick and needy children; Not to mention his musical legacy, which the long-time fan and the newly-initiated never seems to get enough of.
By: Ringo Bones
Even though I’m but a casual fan in comparison to the more dedicated Michael Jackson fan that I’ve met over the years, I can’t help myself but to think that most of us will never probably get over the untimely passing of the eternally reigning King of Pop. Though most of us have seen Michael Jackson’s private struggles from the prism of supermarket tabloids, it was probably his tell-all interview with Oprah that everyone of us eventually found out that Jackson’s “unhappy” childhood is probably what we perceive is the root cause of his “eccentricities”. Nonetheless, Michael Jackson will probably go down in history as a case study for celebrity health in America.
Growing up with a less-than-ideal childhood in the supposedly child-friendly society of post-World War II America is probably the consensus explanation on why Michael Jackson eventually spent countless millions of dollars to recapture his lost childhood via the Neverland Ranch. While the primary suspected reason of his untimely passing last June 25, 2009 is blamed on Jackson’s chronic prescription painkiller abuse that started after that fateful accident while shooting a Pepsi commercial back in 1984.
Michael Jackson’s personal doctor, which he hired just recently back around May 2009, is now the prime suspect of his death and could face charges of negligent homicide. Dr. Conrad Murray, more a close personal friend than a physician, is now seen by investigators as an “enabler” – i.e. allowing Michael Jackson access to prescription painkillers to which he became chronically addicted over the years. And authorities investigating the untimely death of Michael Jackson became even more concerned when Dr. Murray enabled Jackson to receive doses of the anaesthetic propofol / diprivan – which is reserved only for operating room use during surgery.
The diprivan use in a domestic setting is probably the last straw that eventually made Dr. Conrad Murray the prime suspect in the untimely and suspicious death of Michael Jackson, given that the doctor should have been exercising his Hippocratic Oath in the first place – i.e. first do no harm. Diprivan was probably administered to Michael Jackson - according to the investigators – to enable him to sleep by subjecting him to a narcotic coma that supposedly reduces the stress of jet lag as the singer does his upcoming concert tour through different time zones.
Being addicted to strictly controlled pharmaceuticals is not the only malady suffered by Michael Jackson during his relentless pursuit of fame and fortune. His “unhappy” childhood is probably the primary cause of his “eternal dissatisfaction” with his own physical appearance. The scores of cosmetic surgery, which the King of Pop endured through the years - is a case in point. Michael Jackson is indeed an artist who suffers for his work. Despite of his relatively short and tortured life, Michael Jackson’s legacy lives on through his underwriting of philanthropic causes to help sick and needy children; Not to mention his musical legacy, which the long-time fan and the newly-initiated never seems to get enough of.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Who’s Afraid of Swine Flu?
Even though it did create a somewhat irrational-leaning panic since the mainstream press reported it, but does the rest of the world be concerned over the swift spread of swine flu?
By: Ringo Bones
News of the relatively rapid spread of the H1N1 virus – also known as swine flu – did somewhat ruin the festivities slated for President Obama’s 100 days in office. Or maybe it was that April 28, 2009 breaking news live coverage of CNN when the World Health Organization spokesperson Gregory Hartl announced the raising of the Threat Level of the H1N1 / swine flu “pandemic” from Threat Level Three to Threat Level Four, there are six global pandemic threat levels by the way as established by the WHO. Which the WHO had taken into effect, especially when the suspected death toll throughout Mexico reached 152. Although this was later proven to be an exaggeration because three weeks later it was verified that the death toll in Mexico due to the H1N1 virus or swine flu now stands at 101. Given that seasonal flu death toll of the previous years are magnitudes greater in comparison to current swine flu deaths, why is everyone “deathly” afraid of swine flu?
Compared to the H5N1 virus a few years back, the H1N1 virus that causes swine flu is 800 times less – I and every molecular biologist on the planet can attest, repeat 800 times less – virulent in comparison to the bird flu virus. The problem is that the swine flu virus managed to spread very quickly in a very short amount of time. As cases of the H1N1 virus were reported on every major metropolitan city within the airline route of Mexico City. Thus everyone unfamiliar with the mechanisms of how viruses reproduce and spread to new hosts tend to err on the side of caution – namely switch on to a mode of irrational panic.
Given that the H1N1 virus’s 800 times more virulent cousin has yet to kill over a billion people, the most sensible way to err on the side of caution is to follow the WHO guidelines of avoiding catching the virus - namely covering your nose and mouth as you sneeze to avoid unintentionally spreading the virus. Plus avoiding unnecessary travel to the H1N1 virus’s point of origin, which can be a bummer if you are on a global personal crusade to kick-start the ailing global economy via tourism.
When the Great Influenza Pandemic of 1918 happened, humanity still hasn’t known a single iota about flu viruses – let alone had seen one. Electron microscopes were still a few years away. This was still before a UN-based WHO was established. It was still known as the Health Organization, an agency of the League of Nations formed during the Treaty of Versailles of 1919-1920. Even though the influenza pandemic eventually died out, it managed to kill over 20 million people around the world back then.
So far, it looks like the specter of a global pandemic rivaling that of the Influenza Pandemic of 1918 won’t be repeated this time by the lowly H1N1 virus, which just so happens to have crossed the species barrier to manage to infect a few hundred souls while killing just over a hundred. Maybe it is by luck or if fate is on our side, let’s just hope that what we currently know about flu viruses can protect us from another global pandemic like that of 1918.
By: Ringo Bones
News of the relatively rapid spread of the H1N1 virus – also known as swine flu – did somewhat ruin the festivities slated for President Obama’s 100 days in office. Or maybe it was that April 28, 2009 breaking news live coverage of CNN when the World Health Organization spokesperson Gregory Hartl announced the raising of the Threat Level of the H1N1 / swine flu “pandemic” from Threat Level Three to Threat Level Four, there are six global pandemic threat levels by the way as established by the WHO. Which the WHO had taken into effect, especially when the suspected death toll throughout Mexico reached 152. Although this was later proven to be an exaggeration because three weeks later it was verified that the death toll in Mexico due to the H1N1 virus or swine flu now stands at 101. Given that seasonal flu death toll of the previous years are magnitudes greater in comparison to current swine flu deaths, why is everyone “deathly” afraid of swine flu?
Compared to the H5N1 virus a few years back, the H1N1 virus that causes swine flu is 800 times less – I and every molecular biologist on the planet can attest, repeat 800 times less – virulent in comparison to the bird flu virus. The problem is that the swine flu virus managed to spread very quickly in a very short amount of time. As cases of the H1N1 virus were reported on every major metropolitan city within the airline route of Mexico City. Thus everyone unfamiliar with the mechanisms of how viruses reproduce and spread to new hosts tend to err on the side of caution – namely switch on to a mode of irrational panic.
Given that the H1N1 virus’s 800 times more virulent cousin has yet to kill over a billion people, the most sensible way to err on the side of caution is to follow the WHO guidelines of avoiding catching the virus - namely covering your nose and mouth as you sneeze to avoid unintentionally spreading the virus. Plus avoiding unnecessary travel to the H1N1 virus’s point of origin, which can be a bummer if you are on a global personal crusade to kick-start the ailing global economy via tourism.
When the Great Influenza Pandemic of 1918 happened, humanity still hasn’t known a single iota about flu viruses – let alone had seen one. Electron microscopes were still a few years away. This was still before a UN-based WHO was established. It was still known as the Health Organization, an agency of the League of Nations formed during the Treaty of Versailles of 1919-1920. Even though the influenza pandemic eventually died out, it managed to kill over 20 million people around the world back then.
So far, it looks like the specter of a global pandemic rivaling that of the Influenza Pandemic of 1918 won’t be repeated this time by the lowly H1N1 virus, which just so happens to have crossed the species barrier to manage to infect a few hundred souls while killing just over a hundred. Maybe it is by luck or if fate is on our side, let’s just hope that what we currently know about flu viruses can protect us from another global pandemic like that of 1918.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
