Ok, back to the kids.   There are [...]]]> We have three children.  Aside from the occasional sniffle (and one moderately scary thing we had to take care of), all three are as healthy as horses.  My grandfather used that simile often, so I am taking it on faith that horses are some of the healthiest creatures around.

Ok, back to the kids.   There are several reasons why we believe they are healthy:

1. We insist their primary diet be predominantly from the ground (fruits, veggies, nuts, whole grains – organic when feasible or dictated by the dirty dozen list) or from something that had a mother (typically chicken, turkey or fish, occasionally pork, once in a while beef).  They also have their Isagenix organic whey protein shake in the morning with a little shot of the Isagenix cleanse drink (organic aloe vera-based).  That’s for the additional nutrition and minerals that they’re missing with the other “regular” food.
2. They take a dose of liquid colostrum every morning (Isagenix Isamune) – three spritzes in the mouth.  If they feel like they’re beginning to come down with a sniffle, we add a nightly dose as well until they’re back to normal.  Usually takes less than a couple days.
3. They’re up-to-date on all their vaccines.

Huh?  Wait a minute!  I thought you were going to go all Jenny McCarthy on us and rail against vaccines!

Hold your horses (the healthy ones, remember?).  I’ve read Jenny’s book.  She presents a large body of evidence, and her stories are compelling.  More on that in a minute.

This article is about risk.  Humans are not very good at assessing most risks.  We just aren’t.  Too many emotional things come into play when we try to decide how risky a particular behavior is.  Bruce Schneier, love him or hate him, is an industry expert on security.  He’s written about how humans process risk here, here, here, here and here.  And that’s just a representative sample from the past 6 months.

So…back to vaccinations.  What does risk have to do with vaccinations?  Everything.

Ok, class, quick quiz.  What was the leading cause of death in the United States in 1900?  Pneumonia and Influenza.  What was 10th on the list in 1900?  Diptheria.  (Here’s the reference from the CDC.  Last page of the PDF, and work your way up for more recent years)

Fast forward to 1950 (page 50 of the same PDF, for you slackers).  Pneumonia and Influenza have dropped to number 6.  Diptheria is no longer on the list.  However we have a new cause at number 5:  Diseases of Early Infancy.  But…why wasn’t that on the 1900 list?  Wasn’t infant mortality higher in 1900 than 1950? Yes it was.  Ask any genealogy expert, and they’ll tell you.  But in 1900, the vast majority of births happened in the home and mortality data was not formally kept.  In 1950, the vast majority of births happened in hospitals where there was much more rigor in record keeping.

Hey, what about smallpox?  Hasn’t it killed millions of people in the US?  Why isn’t it on the list? Yes it has, but it was largely eradicated in the US in the late 1890’s.  And 1900 is as far back as the CDC’s data goes.  Stop interrupting.

Back to the CDC data.  Fast forward to 1990 (p. 10, Spiccoli).  Pneumonia and the flu are steady at #6.  Infant mortality is hanging out (renamed) at number 15.  Why haven’t they dropped further?  That’s a great question.  Maybe we should look at more than just the ranking of the top 10 or 15.  Let’s look at the rate at which these deaths occurred.

In the PDF, take a look at the far right column of numbers.  That’s the death rate per 100,000 people of population in the US at the time the data was taken.  So that’ll be our comparison point.  Let’s look at Pneumonia and Flu:

• 1900: 202.2
• 1950: 31.3
• 1990: 32.0

So in 1900 there were 6 times as many people dying per capita from pneumonia and influenza than in “modern” times.  Just as another comparison point so that you have some context, what was the rate in 1918?  That was the year of the massive Spanish Flu pandemic.

• 1918: 588.5 (and back on the top of the list for the next three years)

Another quick quiz.  When was flu vaccine first widely available in the US?  In the 1940’s.  Here’s a decent Time magazine article on some history.

Sure, death rate from the flu has gotten a lot lower, but why hasn’t the flu been completely eradicated? Another great question for which there isn’t an easy answer.  Read what Dr. Michael T. Osterholm said about the next flu pandemic in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2005.

Back to the risk conversation.  What do you think it was like to have a loved one die of the flu in 1900?  It was just as bad as it is today, only it was 6 times more likely to happen then than it is now.  In 1918, it was a staggering 18 times more likely.  How about death by diphtheria?  Or smallpox?  Or maybe even worse than death, how about severe physical or mental disability brought on by rubella or polio or hib meningitis?

Smallpox and polio have been completely eradicated in the United States of America due entirely to vaccinations.  Most of us are too young to remember when those two illnesses were prevalent in our country.  Remember what Schneier said about how immediacy impacts our ability to assess risk?  Most of us don’t consider polio a risk because most of us haven’t experienced it in our lifetimes.  It doesn’t make it any less of a real risk.  Just because they’ve been eradicated in this country doesn’t mean they’ve been removed from the earth altogether.

So, what are the childhood vaccination recommendation standards in this country?  MMR for measles, mumps and rubella.  DPT for diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus.  Add to that the polio vaccine.  Most states and municipalities are also recommending flu and swine flu shots especially for certain particularly vulnerable demographics (folks with COPD, the elderly, children, etc.).  Should you have your children vaccinated?

Let’s take a look at a different facet of the story.  What about the negative consequences of vaccinations?  Back to risk again.  What is the risk of developing a significant (or even fatal) condition directly because of the vaccination?  Is the “cure” worse than the “disease”? (Yes, I know, vaccinations aren’t cures – you know what I mean).  Is the risk of vaccination larger/worse than the risk of not vaccinating?

Back to Jenny McCarthy for a moment.  She really is a lovely person (in all meanings of the word), and she’s as staunch an advocate for her family as you’ll ever find.  It’s not the vaccine, per se, that she’s against.  It’s the ancillary toxins that come along with the vaccine that she’s adamant to eradicate.  Thimerosal, a mercury-based chemical, is an antiseptic and anti-fungal preservative used in certain vaccines.  It just so happens that, in addition to fighting fungus and bacteria, mercury is also toxic to humans…even in trace doses.  Jenny and her folks have built a body of evidence supporting the assertion that toxins (like Thimerosal) in vaccines can cause autism (and other bad stuff).  Other scientists and drug companies have tried to build bodies of evidence to support the opposite.

How about for us?  For our family, it’s a case-by-case determination.  We’ve chosen to vaccinate our kids on all the standard childhood stuff, and we’ve chosen to have our kids be vaccinated with Thimerosal-free vaccines (even if it means getting multiple shots instead of just one – mean parents, I know).

And we’ve also chosen not to give our kids flu shots.  Here’s why, in case you’re interested.  You know we’ve done tons of research on the effects of colostrum.  Get Andrew Keech’s book.  It explains how and why colostrum works.  The data tells us that colostrum is equally or more effective than flu vaccines in preventing occurrence and diminishing effects of the flu.  And since we know there are no toxins in Isamune, we determined it was the better choice.  So far, it’s going well.  The first 4 weeks of school this year, a lot of kids were out sick.  Our kids got on the verge (mildly) a couple brief moments, but they luckily have not been affected by illness at all this school year.

Let me emphasize that this was a well-researched family decision that we determined was right for us.  You need to do your own research and make your own decision for yourselves and your families.

And I’m saving the most incendiary for last.  If you really want to dig into the debate, go read Amy Wallace’s article in this month’s Wired magazine in which she interviews Dr. Paul Offit and lays bare some of the awful impacts of  ”pseudo-science”.

What is your answer to the question?

UPDATE 10/23/2009:

Here’s a synchronicity for you.  Last night on the news, it was reported that the NYC Department of Health has confirmed an outbreak of the mumps in Brooklyn.  57 cases have been confirmed.  The most detailed story is from the NY Daily News.  It seems a boy went to the UK (where vaccination levels are much lower, apparently) and contracted the disease.  He came back and went to summer camp, where he infected a bunch of kids, many of which had received the MMR vaccine (some had not).  This topic is only going to get hotter as the stakes get higher.

Update 2/2/2010:

The Lancet, which is the UK’s premier medical journal, just announced that it’s retracting its 1998 paper linking vaccine to autism.  This retraction is based on an ethics judgement last week by Britain’s General Medical Council against Andrew Wakefield, the lead researcher in the study.  Here’s a link to an article about it on Yahoo.

Here’s the article at Yahoo:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20091007/hl_hsn/plasticschemicaltiedtoaggressioninyounggirls

Also remember that just because two [...]]]> There is yet another study (Environmental Health Perspectives, Oct 6th, 2009) on the negative effect of Bisphenol-A (BPA), which is a hormone disrupting chemical found in plastics.  It’s also in the interior can liner of practically every canned food you can buy in the grocery store.

Here’s the article at Yahoo:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20091007/hl_hsn/plasticschemicaltiedtoaggressioninyounggirls

Also remember that just because two things are proved to be related (correlation) doesn’t by itself prove that one thing causes another to happen (causality).  That’s what the Yahoo article is describing when it says “not everyone agreed with the study’s conclusions”.  It’s a limitation of the design of this particular study (and many other studies, actually).  Proving causality is a more difficult proposition.

Of course, there continues to be a mounting body of factual and scientific evidence linking BPA with negative impacts on humans.   One little puff of smoke doesn’t necessarily mean there’s a fire, but big, billowing towers of the stuff usually implies some form of combustion.  Some folks believe the BPA evidence is a puff of smoke.  Others believe it’s a mushroom cloud of sky-darkening proportions.  What do you believe?

Here’s [...]]]> How many times have our parents and our grandparents told us, “you are what you eat?” Of course none of us is *actually* a green bean, an apple or a potato. But we certainly become nourished (or not) by the foods and drinks we consume.  And apparently that can impact one’s adult behavior.

Here’s an article published at Yahoo titled Eating Candy in Childhood Linked to Adult Crime.  It references a study done by Simon Moore from Cardiff University in the UK (and a couple other studies).  I’ll try to get direct links to them if I can.  While correlation definitely does not imply causality, “Moore acknowledges that there is also some intriguing data suggesting that diet itself may have a profound effect on behavior.”

Score another one for our parents and grandparents.

He explains it well that you can’t mess up with Isagenix even if you don’t follow the schedule perfectly or even if you go on vacation without your  products for a week or even if you [...]]]> This guy won the 2009 IsaBody Challenge. His story is great and typical for folks that consume the Isagenix products consistently.  http://www.isagenixpodcast.com/2009/08/isagenix-real-people-real-results-august-182009/

He explains it well that you can’t mess up with Isagenix even if you don’t follow the schedule perfectly or even if you go on vacation without your  products for a week or even if you skip a day or two here and there for celebrations.  As long as you get back on the products when the event is over, your body will adjust quickly and get you back on track.  It’s really hard to mess up if you hold tight to this one simple rule:  Put Isagenix into your mouth!

The IsaBody Challenge for the 2010 Celebration in San Diego, CA is open for participants.  This time, participants have been given the flexibility to choose their 24-week period.  Here are the details:

http://isabodychallenge.isagenix.com/

Isagenix will change your life if you’re ready to take the leap and the IsaBody Challenge provides a good incentive to keep you on track. 

For me, it all came down to Matthew 7:7.   I was seeking and I found because I took the leap of faith and walked through the door.

Lexan (#7 plastic) bottles, including Nalgene water bottles, show that food and fluids stored can contain trace [...]]]> This is my review of an E (The Environmental Magazine) article in the January – February 2008 issue.  Per the article, “most plastic bottles are safe to reuse a few times IF properly wasked with hot soapy water.  However…

Lexan (#7 plastic) bottles, including Nalgene water bottles, show that food and fluids stored can contain trace amounts of Bisphenol A (BPA), a synthetic chemical that interferes with the body’s hormonal messaging system.  The same studies found repeated re-use of #7 bottles increases the chance that chemicals will leak out of the tiny cracks and crevices that develop over time.  Per the Environment California Research and Policy Center (which reviewed 130 studies), BPA is linked to breast and uterine cancer, increased risk of miscarriage, and decreased testerone levels.  BPA can wreak havoc on children’s developing systems.  Beware that most baby bottles and sippy cups are made of plastics containing BPA (and I understand them to leach more chemicals when heated).  Most experts agree that the amount of BPA that could leach through normal handling is probably small but are concerned about cumulative effects.

Health advocates also recommend NOT using bottles made from plastics #1 (polyethylene terephthalate, a.k.a. PET or PETE), including most disposable bottles.  Studies indicate they may leach DEHP (another probable human carcinogen-after repeated use).  Another bad choice for water bottles is plastic #3 (polyvinyl chloride or PVC), which can leach hormone-disrupting chemicals.  Plastic #6 (polystyrene or PS) has been shown to leach styrene, a possible human carcinogen, into food and fluids as well. 

Safer choices include bottles made from HDPE (plastic #2), low-density polyethylene (LDPE or plastic #4), or polypropylene (PP or plastic #5).  Aluminum bottles, like those by SIGG, and stainless steel water bottles are also safe.

The article recommends these contacts:  www.TheGreenGuide.com and www.EnvironmentCalifornia.org.”

I, personally, believe that a stainless steel bottle is the best choice.  With #7 bottles being considered the safest choice several years ago and then to be suspected of increasing the risk for liver damage years later, I can’t help but wonder if #2, #4, #5 plastics will still be considered safe in 10 years.

http://www.isagenixhealth.net/?p=297

“We don’t go out on a limb and put our reputations on the line for nothing,” said Technical Advisory Board [...]]]>

In the Technical Advisory Board session at the annual Isagenix Celebration in 2006, members of the board and guest doctors discussed the quality of the Isagenix products and how the products drew each to the company.

“We don’t go out on a limb and put our reputations on the line for nothing,” said Technical Advisory Board Director Dennis Harper, D.O.  He explained that after spending a quarter of a million dollars to get an education in the medical field, each doctor’s decision to join Isagenix was a major resolution backed by careful research and results the products created for their clients. “Isagenix has done more for my patients than any other thing I have ever seen in the last 20 years of my practice; when you see a product like that, you’re obligated to get behind it.”
 
Dr. Harper said the new IsaCalcium product is superior to other calcium supplements because of the rate of absorption. He explained that most calcium products have less than 10 percent absorption rates-specifically calcium carbonate, which must undergo 12 steps to be beneficial for the body. “IsaCal cium only takes one step,” said Dr. Harper. He added that IsaCal is extremely beneficial for women who are pregnant or nursing to replace calcium depleted from the mother’s bones by the fetus.

Cynthia M. Watson, M.D., who specializes on women’s health, focused on Isagenix’s Cleansing and Fat Burning System as an important way to obtain nutrition and lose weight, explaining that obesity was a common risk factor for disease. “Isagenix is a concept of overall health and wellbeing,” she said. “It’s important for women to maintain their weight, especially after menopause. Why not start cleansing now?”

Thomas McNeilis, D.O., OBGYN, spoke on the epidemic of childhood obesity and how Isagenix could help fight against it. “It’s a very frightening problem. Statistics show that more than 18 million children are now obese. That’s not counting those that are simply overweight.” He explained that soon obesity will be the No. 1 killer in the U.S., far surpassing those that die from smoking. “With Isagenix we can make a difference,” he said.

Andrew Keech, Ph.D., who developed Isagenix’s Isamune colostrum, highlighted its particular benefits. “It’s very important for adults as well as babies to receive colostrum,” he said. “Colostrum is the first food we get when we are born. It’s the most perfect food designed by nature.”

Vitamin C researchers Michael J. Gonzalez, Ph.D., and Jorge R. Miranda-Massari, Pharm. D., stressed the importance of supplementing with Isagenix’s C-Lyte. “I can summarize C-Lyte in one sentence,” said Dr. Gonzalez. “It’s the most complete formulation of vitamin C on the market.” Dr. Miranda-Massari added that health depends more on nutrients and lifestyles than on synthetic drugs, and that C-Lyte should be taken daily to aid nutritional supplementation.

Doctor Bios:

–Dennis Harper, D.O.
Dr. Harper has been in general medical practice for 20 years, with 16 years being devoted to the practice of complementary medicine. He was one of three people that spoke to Senator Hatch and got the DSHEA (Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act) started. This act saved the health food industry from overregulation by the FDA. Dr. Harper is the author of Cleansing for Life: Nature’s Best Kept Health Secret.

–Cynthia M. Watson, M.D.
Dr. Watson is board certified in family medicine and is known for incorporating herbs, homeopathy, and nutrition with conventional medicine. Her principal interests are preventative medicine, anti-aging, and natural hormone replacement. She is a staff member of St. John’s Hospital and Santa Monica-UCLA Medical Center. She is currently a clinical faculty instructor at UCLA Department of Family Medicine and has previously been a preceptor at USC Medical School. Dr. Watson lectures to the public and physicians on various topics in integrative medicine including programs sponsored by UCLA, Kaiser Permanente and St. John’s Hospital. She was recently appointed Physician Representative to the California Naturopathic Advisory Council. Dr. Watson is the author of The New Science of Adaptogens in Herbal Tonics: The Key to Living a Longer, Healthier Life and Love Potions: A Guide to Aphrodisiacs and Sexual Pleasures.

–Thomas McNeilis, D.O., OBGYN
Dr. McNeilis is Board Certified in Obstetrics and Gynecology and a fellow of the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology. He’s currently a professor of biology at Dixie State College in St. George, Utah, where he teaches nutrition, anatomy, physiology, histology, head and neck anatomy, pathophysiology, and microbiology. . He previously worked as a Medical Laboratory Technician in the U.S. Army. Dr. McNeilis has a bachelor’s degree from Brigham Young University, a Master of Science and Ph.D. degree in Anatomy Physiology from the University of North Dakota, and a Doctor of Osteopathy degree from Midwestern University.

–Andrew M. Keech, Ph.D.
Dr. Keech received a Bachelor of Science with a double major in Mathmatics and Chemistry in 1990 and a Bachelors degree with honors in Chemical and Processing Engineering in 1992.  He then earned a studentship to study at Oxford in England and received a Doctor of Philosophy degree in Chemical Process Engineering in 1995 from the University of Canterbury. He was also awarded a Diploma in Process Control Systems in 1996 and became a Certified Plant Engineer (CPE) in 2002. He is a member of the Institute of Professional Engineers of New Zealand and the Institute of Chemical Engineers in London, England.  He is a member of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology.  Dr. Keech has been working in the area of Protein Biochemistry since 1997.  He promotes the power of PRPs through clinical studies around the world as part of his personal mission to save lives.

Meet the current Isagenix Advisory Board members: http://karrilucas.isagenix.com/us/en/scientadvboard.dhtml

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. These products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.  Always consult your doctor before starting an Isagenix program or any nutritional supplement program. Individual results may vary. ]]> http://cleansenutrition.com/2009/08/doctors-say-quality-of-isagenix-products-obligated-them-to-become-associates/feed/ 0