By Og Mandino (adapted from original by Red Foley)

Today upon a bus I saw a lovely girl with golden hair. I envied
her – she seemed so gay – and wished I were as fair. But suddenly
she rose to leave. I saw her hobble down the isle, she had only one
leg and wore a crutch, but as she passed, a smile…

Oh, God forgive me when I whine,

I have two legs, the world is mine.

I stopped to buy some candy. The lad who sold them had such charm. I
stopped to talk to him, he seemed so glad – if I was late could do
no harm. As I left he said to me, “I thank-you, you had been so
kind. It’s nice to talk to folks like you, you see,” he said, “I am
blind.”

Oh, God forgive me when I whine,

I have two eyes, the world is mine.

Later while walking down the street, I saw a child with eyes of
blue. He stood and watched the others play, he did not know what to
do. I stopped a moment and said, “Why don’t you join the others,
dear?” He looked ahead without a word and then I knew, he couldn’t
hear.

Oh, God forgive me when I whine,

I have two ears, the world is mine.

With feet to take me where I go, with eyes to see the sun-set glow,
with ears to hear what I would know.

Oh, God forgive me when I whine,

I am blessed indeed, the world is mine!

How were the manufacturers of statin drugs able to convince nearly the entire population that we should all have the same cholesterol levels? Easy. They got the government to make the recommendation for them.

The latest cholesterol-level guidelines issued by the federal government effectively “qualify” 36 million Americans for statin drugs. The government received these guidelines from the influential National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) – an organization with a stated goal to “reduce the number of people with high cholesterol.”

Sounds noble. Any chance that they may have a hidden agenda? Maybe.

Turns out that eight of the nine doctors who make up the NCEP board have made money from the cholesterol-lowering drugs they promote – clearly a conflict of interests. And here’s some additional background on the nine NCEP board members:

- Two of them own stock in statin drugs.
- Two others worked for drug companies after setting the guidelines.
- One of them was a consultant for 10 drug companies.
- Another was serving on the board of a drug company.

(Reference: USA Today, October 2004)

Before you artificially force your blood pressure lower, be very sure that you properly investigate all sides of the approach. Visit http://www.mercola.com as well as understand why cholesterol is a natural protector and a vital component in body health. Look at how, perhaps, other aspects of your diet such as a high intake of sugar may be contributing. And, if you do take the drugs, make sure you look into Coenzyme Q10, which the statin drugs can deplete from the body, causing heart issues.

[The popular press, through its limited interest in presenting complicated facts, often presents studies in a way designed to evoke fear and confusion. Here Dr. Alan Gaby demonstrates that by looking deeper at the facts with an objective eye, we can see that the blanket elimination of higher dose vitamin E supplementation, especially by healthy people, because of a collection of studies that have noteworthy flaws may deprive someone of the therapeutic benefits that have been clearly shown by many other studies over the years. —Rick]

A Healthnotes Newswire Opinion
By Alan R. Gaby, MD

Healthnotes Newswire (November 18, 2004)—Although a large body of evidence suggests that vitamin E may help or prevent many health conditions, a study to be published in the Annals of Internal Medicine (January 2005) has concluded that supplementing with large doses of vitamin E (400 IU per day or more) may increase death rates. However, the claim that vitamin E may be harmful is far from proven, as significant flaws in the study call this conclusion into question. In addition to the researchers’ acknowledgement that their findings may apply only to people with chronic illnesses (as opposed to healthy people), the millions of people who take this antioxidant vitamin to preserve health and prevent heart disease should also consider the limitations outlined below.

In the study, researchers combined the results of 19 previously published vitamin E supplementation trials that included a total of 135,967 participants. The patients in the various studies were randomly assigned to take vitamin E (in amounts ranging from 16.5 to 2,000 IU per day) or a placebo for at least one year. Most of the patients had one or more chronic diseases (such as heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, or kidney failure) or were at high risk of developing heart disease. In the 19 studies combined, the risk of death due to any cause did not differ significantly between people assigned to vitamin E and those assigned to placebo. However, the effect of vitamin E supplementation on mortality differed according to how much vitamin E was used. In the low-dose studies (less than 400 IU per day), vitamin E supplementation was associated with a small and not statistically significant reduction in the death rate. In the 11 high-dose studies (400 IU per day or more), those who took vitamin E had a 4% increase in risk of death, an increase which, though small, was statistically significant. Based on these findings, the authors of the new study recommend that people limit their vitamin E intake to less than 400 IU per day.

For a number of reasons, that recommendation may be unwarranted. In some of the high-dose studies, certain aspects of the study design preclude any meaningful conclusion about vitamin E. For example, in the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS), participants received not only vitamin E, but also 80 mg of zinc and 2 mg of copper per day, as well as other nutrients. Supplementing with large doses of zinc (80 mg per day is a fairly large dose) for long periods of time can lead to copper deficiency, which can increase the risk of heart disease and other chronic illnesses. Although copper was also supplemented, it was given in the form of cupric oxide, an insoluble compound that cannot be absorbed by humans. The increase in mortality found in this study could have been due to zinc-induced copper deficiency, and may have had nothing to do with vitamin E supplementation.

In another high-dose vitamin E study (Cambridge Heart Antioxidant Study), the results were complicated by the fact that the vitamin E and placebo groups were not comparable. Even though assignment to the two groups was done randomly, the vitamin E group had significantly higher serum cholesterol levels and significantly greater percentages of participants with high blood pressure, diabetes, cigarette smoking, and severe coronary artery disease, compared with the placebo group. Thus, the people taking vitamin E were sicker than those taking the placebo, a fact that could account for the slight increase in mortality seen in the vitamin E group.

In a third high-dose study (the MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study), participants received synthetic beta-carotene in addition to vitamin E. Researchers have questioned the safety of synthetic beta-carotene (which is chemically different than food-derived beta-carotene), particularly for people who smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol. Previous studies have shown that supplementing with synthetic beta-carotene increases the risk of lung cancer among smokers and increases alcohol-induced liver damage in laboratory animals. It is possible that the increase in mortality found in the MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study was due to the use of synthetic beta-carotene, and may have had nothing to do with vitamin E.

The three studies mentioned in the previous paragraphs included a total of more than 27,000 participants, fully two-thirds of all of the patients in the 11 high-dose vitamin E studies. Consequently, the conclusion that high-dose vitamin E is dangerous is based primarily on the results of these three apparently flawed studies.

Furthermore, if any adverse effect of high-dose vitamin E does exist, the findings might be explained by the type of vitamin E used in the research studies. Vitamin E (also called tocopherol) occurs naturally in food in four different forms, known as alpha-, beta-, gamma-, and delta-tocopherol. Although approximately 70% of the vitamin E in food is in the form of gamma-tocopherol, most of the nutritional supplements on the market contain only alpha-tocopherol, and all 19 studies included in the new report used alpha-tocopherol by itself.

While alpha-tocopherol has a number of biochemical actions (such as preventing the oxidation of LDL (“bad”) cholesterol and inhibiting platelet aggregation) that would be expected to prevent heart disease, certain functions are performed better by gamma-tocopherol. For example, the formation of nitric-oxide-derived free radicals, which appears to be a factor in heart disease development, is inhibited to a greater extent by gamma-tocopherol than by alpha-tocopherol. In addition, gamma-tocopherol possesses certain anticancer effects that are not shared by alpha-tocopherol. Supplementing with large amounts of alpha-tocopherol alone has been found to deplete gamma-tocopherol. Consequently, whatever positive effects are produced by alpha-tocopherol supplementation might be counterbalanced by a reduction of gamma-tocopherol levels in the body, a reduction that would presumably be more pronounced when using higher doses of pure alpha-tocopherol.

If high-dose alpha-tocopherol does adversely affect some people, one might reasonably expect that “mixed tocopherols,” which contain all four naturally occurring forms of vitamin E, would not have the same negative effects. Although mixed tocopherols are more expensive than alpha-tocopherol, the available evidence suggests that mixed tocopherols are the preferable form of vitamin E, both in terms of safety and effectiveness.

Although all of the 19 studies reviewed in the new report used alpha-tocopherol, not all of them used the same type. Alpha-tocopherol is commercially available in two forms: D-alpha-tocopherol (the form that occurs in food and in the body) and D,L-alpha-tocopherol (an equal mixture of D-alpha-tocopherol and its mirror image, L-alpha-tocopherol). The D,L- mixture is less expensive to manufacture than the D- form, and is frequently used in research studies. L-alpha-tocopherol does not occur naturally in food or in the body and has little or no vitamin E activity; preliminary evidence suggests that it may even interfere with some of the effects of D-alpha-tocopherol. Moreover, not much is known about the long-term safety of L-alpha-tocopherol. Of note, in the only large study that used the naturally occurring D-alpha-tocopherol (the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation), the mortality rates in the vitamin E and placebo groups were identical. Thus, if there is a small negative effect of high-dose vitamin E, it might be attributable in part to the use of the unnatural D,L- mixture.

The issues raised in this commentary cast doubt on the reliability of the new study’s conclusions. Of course, if the only good thing one could say about high-dose vitamin E is that it probably does not kill people, there would be no point to this discussion. Years of research, however, suggests that vitamin E may help prevent heart attacks, slow the progression of Alzheimer’s disease, reduce the deleterious effects of air pollution, and aid in the treatment of intermittent claudication, fibrocystic breast disease, premenstrual syndrome, childhood epilepsy, certain forms of chronic hepatitis, osteoarthritis, and infertility. Nearly all of these studies used 400 IU or more of vitamin E per day. Whether lower doses of mixed tocopherols would be as effective as higher doses of alpha-tocopherol should be a topic of future research.

Alan R. Gaby, MD, an expert in nutritional therapies, testified to the White House Commission on CAM upon request in December 2001. Dr. Gaby served as a member of the Ad-Hoc Advisory Panel of the National Institutes of Health Office of Alternative Medicine. He is the author of Preventing and Reversing Osteoporosis (Prima, 1994), and co-author of The Natural Pharmacy, 2nd Edition (Healthnotes, Three Rivers Press, 1999), the A–Z Guide to Drug-Herb-Vitamin Interactions (Healthnotes, Three Rivers Press, 1999), Clinical Essentials Volume 1 and 2 (Healthnotes, 2000), and The Patient’s Book of Natural Healing (Prima, 1999). A former professor at Bastyr University of Natural Health Sciences, in Kenmore, WA, where he served as the Endowed Professor of Nutrition, Dr. Gaby is the Chief Medical Editor for Healthnotes, Inc.

Copyright © 2004 Healthnotes, Inc. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of the Healthnotes® content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Healthnotes, Inc. Healthnotes Newswire is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. Healthnotes, Inc. shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. HEALTHNOTES and the Healthnotes logo are registered trademarks of Healthnotes, Inc.

From Philip E. Humbert, PhD, http://www.philiphumbert.com

I’ve been studying human achievement for almost 50 years now (professionally for over 30 years), and the longer I do this work, the more I see that the “recipe” for achievement is much easier than most people believe. In fact, Socrates described it over 2000 years ago with the simple phrase, “Know thyself.”

I am working on a new book that expands this simple idea, and I want to share some preliminary observations with you.

First:  Know your strengths

High achievement comes from knowing what you do well, what you love and where your passion lies. Mid-level performance comes from people who can “get by” or are doing something “acceptable” but they are not using their talents to the maximum. When human beings do something they love and have some talent for, they are unstoppable!

Think about a teenager learning to drive, play sports or music or dance. Think about your own determination to be a great parent, good lover or successful investor. When we are doing something that “makes sense,” something that draws and excites us, we find a way to get the job done. Know yourself and go with your strengths, passions and talents!

Second:  Know your weaknesses

We all have blind spots and weaknesses. We have things we don’t enjoy, or don’t want to do, and yet too often we create lives or careers that ask us to do that very thing! How dumb is that?

If you don’t like detail work, hire a bookkeeper! If you are a quiet person, don’t go into sales or politics!

Unfortunately, most of our weaknesses are not so dramatic and over the years, we find ways to hide them or work around them. Then we end up in situations where we “forget” to do the books, return phone calls or calculate the budget. We get “bored” with meetings or annoyed with “those dreamers” in the R&D department. Know yourself and work around your weaknesses!

Third:  Know what you want

We all have dreams and desires. We know, deep inside, what brings us joy, what excites us, what fires us up. Sometimes, we get confused or lose track of our dreams, but they are still “in there.” The trick is to identify and express them!

The winners in life know what they want and they find healthy, productive ways to go after it. They ask, they poke and prod until they “find a way.” Recently, a client he expressed amazement that since he identified a particular skill he wants to develop, he suddenly sees people doing it all the time! My comment was that “when you know what you want, you’re much more likely to get it.”

Fourth:  Know how to express yourself

The final piece is “finding your voice” or finding your unique way to let the world know you exist. Some do this naturally and become entertainers, politicians or whatever. Others struggle to express themselves in the world, but winners always, eventually, find a way. They speak up. They reach out. They “go for it” and “makes waves.” They voice their suggestions, work for their causes, and make a difference in the world.

High achievement starts by knowing who you are and what you want in life. Then, achievement comes from going after it. That’s not always easy or simple, but winners keep trying “until” they find a way. “Know thyself and to thine own self be true.” There is no stopping a human being who knows who they are, what they want, and who is determined to get it.

There is so much worry about eggs as a cause of high cholesterol. But people who I trust have looked at the studies and find that eggs are generally GOOD for the body.

Dr. Sears tells us that eggs are a perfect food. The American Heart Association recommends that you eat seven eggs a week—but he thinks you can safely double that number. Here’s the case he made for doing so in a recent issue of his newsletter, Health Confidential for Men:

* Eggs have only 75 calories, 5 grams of fat, and no trans-fats. They are high in protein and contain 13 essential vitamins and minerals.

* A University of Washington study concluded that people with and without high blood cholesterol levels are better off if they eat two eggs a day. Eggs contain the “good fats” that are heart-healthy.

* Eggs are rich in the nutrient lutein. This nutrient protects against thickening of the arteries. The Los Angeles Atherosclerosis Study found that the more eggs their subjects ate, the better their arteries looked. One egg has more lutein than a large serving of vegetables.

* Aside from being an inexpensive and top-quality source of protein, eggs are filling. You can satiate your appetite and help your brain focus by starting each day with a couple of eggs.

I like mine poached now. If you like the taste of soft-boiled eggs, try poached eggs. Easer, faster, and no shell to peel off!

Contrary to what many may think, smoking is much more expensive than it is advertised. In fact, it’s estimated that actual costs of smoking total nearly $40 a pack.

This estimation includes all the factors associated with smoking, not just merely the cost of one pack of cigarettes. Researchers have broken down these factors by cost:

• $33 a pack for the cost of early deaths, smoking-related disabilities and other factors (which includes $20.28 a pack due to reduced life expectancy)
• $5.44 a pack for the cost of the effect of secondhand smoke on significant others
• $1.44 a pack for the cost of the effect of secondhand smoke on the society as a whole

At approximately $40 for every pack, the total cost over one smoker’s lifetime equals nearly $171,000. In past studies, researchers only calculated medical and secondhand smoke costs. However, in this study researchers tried to take into account the entire range of lifetime costs.

The total was calculated using lifetime costs acquired by men and women who smoke at age 24. Researchers also estimated that many of these people would eventually quit. By smoking one pack of cigarettes:

• A smoker’s life is cut short by two hours
• Men lose a total of 4.4 years of their life
• Women lose a total of 2.4 years of their life

Interesting enough, many smokers are less afraid of dying than they are of acquiring a disabling disease such as emphysema. Though smokers don’t spend much more time with a major disabling condition, they do become disabled sooner, resulting in a sooner death.

Chicago Sun-Times

Flu Deaths Outrageously Exaggerated to Increase Vaccine Sales – Number crunching has showed that the estimated 36,000 flu deaths a year is actually closer to 1,000. Learn the hidden dangers of the flu vaccine and why the CDC is trying so hard to boost demands for it. Also, nothing prevents the flu better than natural alternatives.

The biggest myths of modern medicine were challenged in a new guide for patients that sets out the best treatment for 60 of the commonest medical conditions.

Instead of claiming miracles, the guide admits that often the best treatment is no treatment. Devised by the British Medical Journal (BMJ), it is based on evidence from thousands of research studies and is being made available through the NHS Direct website, the advice service for patients.

Treatments are ranked according to effectiveness and the pros and cons of surgery are explained. In some cases the guide says it can’t recommend any treatment because there is no good evidence that anything works.

Prostate cancer is the commonest male cancer and one of the fastest growing, affecting 27,000 men a year, but surgery to remove it may cause more harm than good, according to the guide. Men who opt for “watchful waiting” live just as long, it says.

On back pain it recommends sufferers should avoid lying in bed and instead continue with their normal activities, taking painkillers if necessary.

It does not recommend tranquillisers as a treatment for anxiety – except for short term use. It also says that there is no evidence that any of the treatments tried for anorexia, which is a serious illness caused by a variety of different factors, work.

Mastectomy for breast cancer does not extend women’s lives any more than the smaller operation of removing the lump and keeping the breast intact.

The removal of impacted wisdom teeth – a routine operation for decades – is needless, unless there is evidence of infection, it says.

It also examines a dozen common operations and diagnostic tests, weighing up the risks and benefits of each.

Luisa Dillner, editor of BMJ Best Treatments, said the guide was designed to give patients the same information as their doctors based on the most up to date information available.

“The big myth about medicine is that people know what works. In fact, they do things for which there is no evidence. There is a tendency for doctors to exaggerate the benefits of what they do because they want to help.

“I think conveying uncertainty is important. We need to say when we just don’t know. “

The BMJ already publishes a guide for doctors, called Clinical Evidence, which assembles the best research to give up to date advice on the treatments that work.

“We thought it made sense to give patients the information that doctors get. We found in our research that patients said they wanted to read what their doctor read, not what their doctor thought they should read,” Dr Dillner said.

The guide has separate sections for patients and doctors, but both can be accessed by anyone – so patients can read the advice for doctors.

The BMJ is paid a licence fee for use of the material but has complete editorial control, avoiding charges that the advice is subject to political interference. Dr Dillner said it was not designed to deter people from seeking treatment but it was about looking squarely at the evidence rather than relying on custom and practice.

“It is about trying to tell the truth,” she said.

Rosie Winterton, health minister, said: “We know that patients would like more information to support them in making decisions about their healthcare.

“This is an important step in providing patients with the resources they need to make informed choices.”

Curing medical myths

CONDITION

Anorexia
Myth: Treatable with a combination of drugs and therapy.
BMJ advice There are no drugs that can cure anorexia and there is no
strong research evidence that any treatments work well.

Anxiety
Myth: Tranquillisers can cure anxiety.
BMJ advice There are no quick fixes. Talking treatments (cognitive
therapy) and certain drugs (some antidepressants) may help but doctors
don’t know which is best.

Back pain
Myth: Best cure is rest.
BMJ advice Staying in bed doesn’t help, it won’t make the pain any
better and could be harmful. Staying active is the best remedy.

Breast cancer
Myth: Mastectomy (removal of the breast) is the safest option to
prevent return of the cancer.
BMJ advice Breast-conserving surgery (only the lump is removed) is
just as effective for locally-advanced disease with the same 10-year
survival rate.

Heart failure
Myth: Exercise can be dangerous where the heart is failing and may
precipitate a heart attack
BMJ advice A moderate amount of exercise is beneficial. Drug
treatments, such as ACE inhibitors and beta blockers, work.

Prostate cancer
Myth: Surgery, radiotherapy and hormone treatment are necessary to
save life.
BMJ advice Where the cancer has not spread, patients who do nothing
but “watchful waiting”, with regular check-ups, are likely to live
just as long.

Wisdom teeth
Myth: When they don’t come through the gum properly (impacted)
dentists often recommend removal.
BMJ advice If they are not causing problems taking them out is likely
to do more harm than good.

OPERATION

Adenoidectomy
Removal of adenoids at the back of the nasal cavity.
Myth: The only way to improve breathing and prevent ear infections in
children.
BMJ advice The problems will usually clear up of their own accord, as
the child grows. The operation works best in children who still have
persistent problems aged five or more.

Grommets
Small tubes inserted in the ear drum to drain fluid from the middle ear.
Myth: Cure for glue ear.
BMJ advice Most children grow out of glue ear. There is no good
evidence demonstrating that fitting grommets is better than doing without.

Tonsillectomy
Removal of tonsils at the back of the throat.
Myth: The cure for repeated sore throats and ear infections.
BMJ advice Taking antibiotics may be just as good. There is no good
evidence to show that the operation reduces throat infections.

Megan McArdle over at http://www.instapundit.com makes a great point that I agree with:

YOU’RE GETTING SLEEEEEEPY: A new study shows that tired interns are making mistakes.

D’uh! I have no patience with the way hospitals work their interns and residents. I’ve never heard a good explanation for why we want our junior medicos, who provide a lot of our front-line care, in a state of perpetual exhaustion; most revolve around the utterly unconvincing idea that they somehow need to learn to work under pressure, as if they were all going to be disaster-relief doctors. After a few weeks, older doctors assure me, they learn how to cope.

Hogwash. I’ve worked those kinds of ours as a technology consultant many times, and while you do get better at coping with exhaustion, there are limits. And I don’t care who you are or how many times you’ve done it before, when you’ve been up for 36 hours: you. are. stupid. Your reaction times slow waaaay down (or speed up disastrously, as you short circuit past critical steps), you’re over-emotional, and you’re prone to cut corners as your body and brain cry out desperately, desperately for sleep.

Sure, I’ve done it. But at the end of the day, I was working on a box of bolts. It would be a VERY BAD THING if one of my clients, say, couldn’t trade on Monday morning — but they’d all still be breathing when they came in on Tuesday. Also, I rarely had to make split-second, irreversible decisions about caring for my boxes; they were unlikely to flatline while I took a few minutes to think things over.

The system endangers patients. I recall when a friend of mine, an intern, had to go to work despite the fact that he was suffering from terrible influenza. Why? He had to make his hours. How ridiculous is it to have a system that puts sick doctors out on the floor where they can infect patients? And what kind of decisions do you think a flu-ridden intern makes?

Even worse than that, the doctors know it endangers patients–they don’t want themselves, or their families, in the care of residents. Some of that is because we all naturally want the most experienced doctor for our families, of course. But some of it is because they know that exhausted doctors make for bad care.

(Why can’t they just let them work shorter hours? Say it with me, folks: the reason is green, and it folds. Fewer hours for residents mean more hours for attending physicians, who, unlike residents, would have to be paid for it.)

By Dr. Ben Lerner on mercola.com: A number of studies have shown that movement is more important than weight loss. In today’s day and age, I know that sounds like complete heresy, but it’s true. With Atkins, Dr. Phil, the South Beach diet and weight loss programs in general becoming a cornerstone of our society and one of our top grossing products, weight loss has become a national past time and foundational health belief.

Be Good to Your Heart—Get Into Shape

Yet, extensive research is now showing that how much you weigh is not nearly as important as what kind of shape you are in. This is why heart disease and cancer wards have thin people too. It has been discovered that losing weight without getting in shape only means you will die lighter.

A recent study of 906 women published in the Journal of American Medicine (JAMA) showed that when it comes to heart health, it’s more important to be fit than to be thin. The research done showed that those who were the most fit were least likely to have clogged arteries, had the fewest heart attacks, and far fewer risk factors for cardiovascular disease. The same correlations did not hold true based on measurements of body fat (BMI or body mass index).

An additional commentary published in the same edition of JAMA said, “While the evidence linking obesity to health problems is indisputable, the role of fitness is equally clear.”

What’s important for all of us to begin realizing is that research is consistently showing that a moderately fit, but obese person is about half as likely to die of heart disease than an unfit person of normal weight. Of course, to be overweight and unfit is also completely deadly.

The majority of people who are successful at losing weight and keeping it off eat breakfast every day. Researchers at the National Weight Control Registry analyzed data on nearly 3,000 people who had lost an average of 70 pounds and kept the weight off for a year or more. 85% of the subjects said they eat breakfast at least six or seven days a week. Only 4% said they never eat breakfast. [via ]http://www.earlytorise.com]