We will discuss two short issues today. Diarrhea in cats and how t treat it with home remedies from Mike Mullens, of Natural Pet Remedies and treating termites with FFO. Yes…FFO is very effective to spot treat termite and prevent further encroachment into the wood foundations of your home. I find a turkey baster or syringe for the smaller areas works well. You might try an eyedropper as well, or anything that will get the powder into the nests.
Effective Home Remedies for Cat Diarrhea:
It can certainly be frightening any time your cat is sick, especially when they have diarrhea. If your cat is experiencing problems with diarrhea, you need to be aware of home remedies for cat diarrhea so that you will be prepared to immediately provide a healing treatment for your cat.
There are a few different home remedies for cat diarrhea you can use to restore health to your cat's bowels. First, you might consider giving your cat a bland diet. Good options include any type of baby food that is meat based. White meat chicken or fish is also a good option. In addition, try feeding your cat several small meals per day instead of one or two large meals.
Another good choice would be to provide your cat with some unflavored yogurt. Yogurt is a good choice when fighting diarrhea because it restores good bacteria levels. Make sure you do not give your cat any milk when treating diarrhea.
Remember when using home remedies for cat diarrhea that your cat can easily become dehydrated when experiencing diarrhea. To prevent this, make sure he has access to plenty of fresh water. You might also provide your cat with a bit of unflavored Pedialyte to fight dehydration as well.
Finally, keep in mind that if your cat's diarrhea does not clear up within a couple of days or if your cat's diarrhea appears to have any blood or mucous in it, you should consult your veterinarian. Also, if you have a kitten that is less than twelve weeks of age you should immediately consult a vet anytime your kitty develops diarrhea.
Using effective home remedies for cat diarrhea are great ways to provide relief to your cat and putting your own mind at ease regarding your cat's health.
Flea and Tick season is upon us so stock up on your Flea Free Organically and treat the ant, aphids, and all of the pesky critters that come in the spring and summer.
Organic Jan and Flea Free Organically
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Friday, March 19, 2010
Texas Bulldog Owner Wins Verdict Against Hartz Mountain Pet Products
'Diesel' died less than 40 hours after flea and tick drops were applied
By Lisa Wade McCormick
ConsumerAffairs.com
Read more:http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2010/03/hartz_mountain_court.html#ixzz0hzkS7T9P
A 72-year-old dog owner has won what may be a landmark decision against the country’s leading maker of pet care products and fueled the ongoing debate over the safety of topical flea and tick treatments.
A Texas jury awarded Frank Bowers $4,440.75 in the small claims court action he filed against Hartz Mountain Corporation.In this David-versus-Goliath court battle -- believed to be the first small claims court action of its kind --- Bowers alleged that Hartz Ultra Guard Pro Flea and Tick Drops caused the death of his beloved Olde English Bulldog, Diesel.
The six-member jury deliberated less than 30 minutes before reaching a unanimous decision in favor of Bowers, who was widely considered the underdog in the case.
"When the bailiff walked in the courtroom and said we have a unanimous decision, I nearly passed out," said Bowers, who represented himself in the court action. “The jury said ‘we find Mr. Bowers’ integrity outweighed what was presented by (Hartz) attorney. He lost an animal of value and all costs he’s out are awarded to him.’"
“I just literally went numb,” Bowers added. “I caught up with three jurors in the hallway after the hearing. All I said to them was: ‘thank you, thank you, thank you.’ And they just said: ‘we did our job.’”
Hartz told ConsumerAffairs.com that it believed the case was "without merit," but did not appeal because of the time and cost involved.
Sense of justice
For Bowers, the jury’s decision brings closure and a sense of justice to an emotional issue that started at 8:30pm on August 7, 2008. On that warm summer night in Texas, Bowers applied Hartz Ultra Guard Pro Flea and Tick Drops to the 14-month-old, 68-pound, Diesel.
“I nipped off the top of the tube and put it on his back,” Bowers recalled. “I precisely used it as directed – nothing more, nothing less than directed.” By early the next morning Diesel had become gravelly ill.
“I went to my garage to work and I smelled this odor from excretion,” Bowers said. “Diesel was laying on the floor. He was shaking and having spasms of some kind. And he was passing a horrible odor of diarrhea.” Bowers called his daughter, who told him to immediately take the ailing dog to the vet.
Diesel’s health continued its rapid decline during the ride to his vet’s office, Bowers said.
“He continued to have bowel movements on the way. When we got to the vet’s office, he couldn’t walk. They got one of those stainless steel tables and took him back to an exam room.”
The veterinarian asked Bowers a battery of questions about Diesel, including one that caught him off guard.
“The vet asked me if I’d put any flea treatment on him,” Bowers said. “And I said: ‘yes, last night.’ I told him what it was and went back to the store to get a tube to show him.”
The vet, he said, took one look at the Hartz Ultra Guard Pro Flea and Tick Drops and shook his head. “He said: ‘Oh, my God. He’s going to have kidney failure.’”
By 4 o’clock the next morning, Diesel’s kidneys had shut down.
“He was in total renal failure,” Bowers said. “The vet wanted permission to euthanize him. I said you know what’s best and I don’t want any animal to suffer. “I picked Diesel up around 7am and took him out in the country and buried him on my daughter’s 10 acres.”
This painful chapter in Bowers' life happened in less than 35 hours – from the night he applied the flea and tick drops to the morning of Diesel’s death.
He wanted answers
Bowers wanted answers. He wanted to know why Diesel’s health deteriorated so quickly.
The plain-spoken Texan went straight to the source. He called Hartz.
“But they did not care to discuss this with me,” Bowers said of the company’s customer service representatives. “They insinuated that I did something wrong. “At that point, I said my dog is dead and I need you pay. It’s about $4,000.”
Hartz balked at his suggestion, Bowers said.
“They said we won’t pay that, sir. It’s a risk you take when you use our products. I asked for this person’s supervisor, but she hung up on me.”
Bowers then sent the company a letter about Diesel’s death.
“I got no response,” he said. “This irritated me. They acted like I didn’t exist.
“About two months later, someone (from Hartz) called me and told me it was my fault (that Diesel died) or neglect that caused the death and they were not responsible.”
Bowers contacted a few attorneys to see if they’d take his case. “But none wished to be bothering Hartz as there was not enough money,” he said. The determined pet owner, however, didn’t give up or back down.
He took matters into his own hands and represented himself in court, specifically Small Claims Court, Precinct 3, in Travis County, Texas. Consumers in the Lone Star State can seek damages of up to $10,000 in their small claims court proceedings. Texas also allows jury trials in small claims court actions.
“I filed papers in small claims court,” said Bowers, who lives in Austin, Texas. “But the court called me a while later and said I needed to re-file my case because Hartz did not respond.”
Bowers filed his case again on July 28, 2009. “And this time, Hartz did respond to the court,” he said. “The court sent the company a registered and non-registered letter about my case. An attorney contacted the court and said she represented Hartz.”
The court wanted Bowers and Hartz to resolve the case through mediation. But that process wasn’t too productive, Bowers said.
“I looked at the girl (Hartz’ attorney) square in the eyes and said: ‘do you have a check for this amount -- $4,400?’ She said no. I said ‘then this mediation is over. At this time, there is nothing to negotiate.’”
Bowers and Hartz’ attorney then went back and talked to the judge.
“The judge said we’ll have to reschedule for another appearance,” Bowers said. “But I told the judge that I wanted a trial by jury. She said that’s your privilege. The attorney (for Hartz) didn’t like it. She wanted to settle this between her and I.
“Here I am -- 72-year-olds old. I have a high school education. I don’t have a law degree. But I still wanted a trial by jury. The judge asked me if I thought I could get a jury verdict in my favor and I said I wouldn't be here if I didn’t.”
Day in court
Bowers' day in court finally arrived on January 12, 2010.
Before the trial, each side had a chance to question a pool of potential jurors.
“I chose not to ask them any questions,” Bowers said. “But Hartz’ attorney kicked a few potential jurors off because they had pets. She also asked the jurors if they’d had any problems in the past with pet medications. She didn’t want any pet owners or people who had problems with pet medications on the jury. There were also no vets on the jury.”
In the end, a jury of three men and three women heard the case.
“The trial took less than two hours,” Bowers said. “I wasn’t able to tell the jury everything I wanted to.”
The judge, for example, wouldn’t allow Bowers to enter into evidence any of his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) documents about the adverse reactions dogs and cats have experienced from topical flea and tick products. The vets he wanted to call as witnesses also couldn’t make it to court that day.
“I had no witnesses,” Bowers said. “I was riding the brass rail by myself.” And he was up against Hartz’ savvy attorney, who he learned had taken a special course on flea and tick products to prepare her for the case.
“Hartz had all kinds of statements about flea and tick products and they had everything notarized so it could be entered into evidence,” Bowers said. “I didn’t know I needed to do that (get documents notarized). Hartz had statements from their vets, too.”
During the trial, Hartz also cross-examined Bowers about Diesel’s death. He’s glad they did.
“That’s when I got in the information that they wouldn’t let me enter,” Bowers said. “I entered it by blurting it from the witness box. The attorney asked me a question like ‘how did I know it was Hartz that killed my animal?’ And I said Hartz has killed many other animals.
“The attorney was screaming to get me to shut up and I just kept talking,” Bowers added. “The judge then told me to shut up. At that point, I looked at the judge and said ‘I’m sorry.’ And then I looked at the jury and smiled.”
Used as directed?
Hartz’ attorney also suggested that Bowers didn’t apply the flea and tick drops as directed.
“They screamed that over and over,” Bowers said. “But I precisely used it as directed.”
Hartz and other makers of fleas and tick products often cite the misuse of these treatments for adverse reactions. Pet owners, they say, may put a flea and tick product intended for a dog on a cat. Or they may apply too much flea and tick product on their pets.
Last summer, the ASPCA’s Animal Poison Control Center also studied its data on topical flea and tick products. That study revealed the likelihood of severe adverse reactions was significantly less when dogs and cats were treated according to directions.
“From the data we have collected, the adverse reactions tend to be mild, like skin sensations and stomach upset,” the ASPCA’s Dr. Steven Hansen said after the organization released its study. “We don’t have very many cases of true neurological issues when these products are properly used.”
Bowers, however, repeatedly told ConsumerAffairs.com that he used the Hartz flea and ticks drops as directed when he applied them to Diesel. He also told us the court didn’t give him the chance to cross-examine any of Hartz’ witnesses during the trial. “I wasn’t asked to,” he said. “I asked the judge why I could ask any questions and she said ‘that’s procedure.’”
The jury, however, wasn’t swayed by the witnesses or documents Hartz used in its defense.
After deliberating for less than 30 minutes, the jurors ruled in Bowers favor.
“I didn’t know what to think when I heard that,” he said, adding the $4,440 he won covers the cost of Diesel and the dog’s vet bills. “I was dumbfounded.”
Bowers is convinced the jury sided with him because of one issue that surfaced during the trial: whether the chemical Phenothrin, which is in Hartz Ultra Guard Flea and Tick Drops, is the same or similar to the chemical Permethrin. Bowers said he argued that, according to his “carnal knowledge,” those two are the same chemical compound.
“I kid you not, that is the thing that saved my case,” he said.
Hartz vehemently disputes that contention, saying those are completely different ingredients.
“The trade name for Phenothrin is Sumithrin,” the company’s spokeswoman, Anne Isenhower, told ConsumerAffairs.com. “Permethrin is a completely different ingredient that Hartz does not use in any of our on-animal products in the United States.”
Hartz also downplayed Bowers’ allegations and the jury’s decision. “This case was without merit and the allegations weren’t supported by evidence (presented in the trial),” said Isenhower, senior vice president, with GolinHarris, Hartz’ public relations firm. Hartz, however, did not appeal the jury’s decision because of the time and cost involved to pursue such action, Isenhower said.
Asked if Bowers’ case marked the first time a consumer has successfully sued Hartz over one of its topical flea and tick products, Isenhower said: “Yes, we believe so. We are not aware of any verdict against Hartz flea & tick drops.”
She had an identical comment when asked if Bowers’ case was the first small claims court victory against Hartz. “Yes, we believe so. We are not aware of any verdict against Hartz flea & tick drops.”
Safety defended
In spite of the jury’s decision, Isenhower defended the safety of Hartz flea and tick products.
“We’ve conducted extensive analysis of the adverse event reporting on our products as well as all topic treatments in the market,” she said. “Although Hartz is the leader in flea and tick retail sales, we are less than three percent of all adverse effects reported to the EPA in 2008 for topical dog flea and tick treatments.”
The safety of topical or “spot-on” flea and tick products has come under“intensified” scrutinyby the EPA for the past 11 months.
The agency started that probe last April, saying it had received more than 44,000 reports of adverse reactions associated with spot-on flea and tick products.
“Adverse reactions reported range from mild effects such as skin irritation to more serious effects such as seizures and, in some cases, the death of the pet,” the EPA said.
Data delayed
The agency told ConsumerAffairs.com that it planned to release its findings last fall. The EPA, however, has since delayed that release date.
“Due to the large amount of data and the complex technical issues associated with the review of the data, our report is not ready for public release,” the agency’s spokesman, Dale Kemery, told us in December 2009. "We anticipate publicly releasing the document in early 2010.”
The EPA will post its findings about topical flea and tick products, and any regulatory action it may take, on itsWeb site.
In the meantime, animal experts recommend pet owners consult their veterinarians about which flea and tick product to use on their dogs or cats.
Beware
Back in Texas, Bowers warns pet owners to be “earthly” aware of any topical flea and tick products they put on their animals.
“I think I’ll utilize just plain soap and water,” he said. “I use Head and Shoulders shampoo on my dogs now. I bathe them every time I see them scratching. “We used to get Myrtle Bush when I was a child growing up in Louisiana,” he added. “It was a natural killer of fleas.”
Bowers is also keenly aware that his legal victory could have ripple effects in courtrooms across the country. He suspects his case may serve as a rallying call for other pet owners who’ve seen their dogs or cats suffer burns, blisters, seizures, neurological problems, or even die after using topical flea and tick products.
His case, he said, may open the floodgates for similar lawsuits nationwide.
“I think this case will make pet owners wonder why they have not gone forward with their cases in small claims court,” Bowers said. “And if they do, my advice to them if get a trial by jury; I would never accept a non-jury trial.”
The amount of money consumers can recover in small claims court varies by state. And some states do not allow trials by jury in small claims court. ConsumerAffairs.com has a comprehensivesmall claims court guide.
Read more:http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2010/03/hartz_mountain_court.html#ixzz0hzkJNJnL
'Diesel' died less than 40 hours after flea and tick drops were applied
By Lisa Wade McCormick
ConsumerAffairs.com
Read more:http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2010/03/hartz_mountain_court.html#ixzz0hzkS7T9P
A 72-year-old dog owner has won what may be a landmark decision against the country’s leading maker of pet care products and fueled the ongoing debate over the safety of topical flea and tick treatments.
A Texas jury awarded Frank Bowers $4,440.75 in the small claims court action he filed against Hartz Mountain Corporation.In this David-versus-Goliath court battle -- believed to be the first small claims court action of its kind --- Bowers alleged that Hartz Ultra Guard Pro Flea and Tick Drops caused the death of his beloved Olde English Bulldog, Diesel.
The six-member jury deliberated less than 30 minutes before reaching a unanimous decision in favor of Bowers, who was widely considered the underdog in the case.
"When the bailiff walked in the courtroom and said we have a unanimous decision, I nearly passed out," said Bowers, who represented himself in the court action. “The jury said ‘we find Mr. Bowers’ integrity outweighed what was presented by (Hartz) attorney. He lost an animal of value and all costs he’s out are awarded to him.’"
“I just literally went numb,” Bowers added. “I caught up with three jurors in the hallway after the hearing. All I said to them was: ‘thank you, thank you, thank you.’ And they just said: ‘we did our job.’”
Hartz told ConsumerAffairs.com that it believed the case was "without merit," but did not appeal because of the time and cost involved.
Sense of justice
For Bowers, the jury’s decision brings closure and a sense of justice to an emotional issue that started at 8:30pm on August 7, 2008. On that warm summer night in Texas, Bowers applied Hartz Ultra Guard Pro Flea and Tick Drops to the 14-month-old, 68-pound, Diesel.
“I nipped off the top of the tube and put it on his back,” Bowers recalled. “I precisely used it as directed – nothing more, nothing less than directed.” By early the next morning Diesel had become gravelly ill.
“I went to my garage to work and I smelled this odor from excretion,” Bowers said. “Diesel was laying on the floor. He was shaking and having spasms of some kind. And he was passing a horrible odor of diarrhea.” Bowers called his daughter, who told him to immediately take the ailing dog to the vet.
Diesel’s health continued its rapid decline during the ride to his vet’s office, Bowers said.
“He continued to have bowel movements on the way. When we got to the vet’s office, he couldn’t walk. They got one of those stainless steel tables and took him back to an exam room.”
The veterinarian asked Bowers a battery of questions about Diesel, including one that caught him off guard.
“The vet asked me if I’d put any flea treatment on him,” Bowers said. “And I said: ‘yes, last night.’ I told him what it was and went back to the store to get a tube to show him.”
The vet, he said, took one look at the Hartz Ultra Guard Pro Flea and Tick Drops and shook his head. “He said: ‘Oh, my God. He’s going to have kidney failure.’”
By 4 o’clock the next morning, Diesel’s kidneys had shut down.
“He was in total renal failure,” Bowers said. “The vet wanted permission to euthanize him. I said you know what’s best and I don’t want any animal to suffer. “I picked Diesel up around 7am and took him out in the country and buried him on my daughter’s 10 acres.”
This painful chapter in Bowers' life happened in less than 35 hours – from the night he applied the flea and tick drops to the morning of Diesel’s death.
He wanted answers
Bowers wanted answers. He wanted to know why Diesel’s health deteriorated so quickly.
The plain-spoken Texan went straight to the source. He called Hartz.
“But they did not care to discuss this with me,” Bowers said of the company’s customer service representatives. “They insinuated that I did something wrong. “At that point, I said my dog is dead and I need you pay. It’s about $4,000.”
Hartz balked at his suggestion, Bowers said.
“They said we won’t pay that, sir. It’s a risk you take when you use our products. I asked for this person’s supervisor, but she hung up on me.”
Bowers then sent the company a letter about Diesel’s death.
“I got no response,” he said. “This irritated me. They acted like I didn’t exist.
“About two months later, someone (from Hartz) called me and told me it was my fault (that Diesel died) or neglect that caused the death and they were not responsible.”
Bowers contacted a few attorneys to see if they’d take his case. “But none wished to be bothering Hartz as there was not enough money,” he said. The determined pet owner, however, didn’t give up or back down.
He took matters into his own hands and represented himself in court, specifically Small Claims Court, Precinct 3, in Travis County, Texas. Consumers in the Lone Star State can seek damages of up to $10,000 in their small claims court proceedings. Texas also allows jury trials in small claims court actions.
“I filed papers in small claims court,” said Bowers, who lives in Austin, Texas. “But the court called me a while later and said I needed to re-file my case because Hartz did not respond.”
Bowers filed his case again on July 28, 2009. “And this time, Hartz did respond to the court,” he said. “The court sent the company a registered and non-registered letter about my case. An attorney contacted the court and said she represented Hartz.”
The court wanted Bowers and Hartz to resolve the case through mediation. But that process wasn’t too productive, Bowers said.
“I looked at the girl (Hartz’ attorney) square in the eyes and said: ‘do you have a check for this amount -- $4,400?’ She said no. I said ‘then this mediation is over. At this time, there is nothing to negotiate.’”
Bowers and Hartz’ attorney then went back and talked to the judge.
“The judge said we’ll have to reschedule for another appearance,” Bowers said. “But I told the judge that I wanted a trial by jury. She said that’s your privilege. The attorney (for Hartz) didn’t like it. She wanted to settle this between her and I.
“Here I am -- 72-year-olds old. I have a high school education. I don’t have a law degree. But I still wanted a trial by jury. The judge asked me if I thought I could get a jury verdict in my favor and I said I wouldn't be here if I didn’t.”
Day in court
Bowers' day in court finally arrived on January 12, 2010.
Before the trial, each side had a chance to question a pool of potential jurors.
“I chose not to ask them any questions,” Bowers said. “But Hartz’ attorney kicked a few potential jurors off because they had pets. She also asked the jurors if they’d had any problems in the past with pet medications. She didn’t want any pet owners or people who had problems with pet medications on the jury. There were also no vets on the jury.”
In the end, a jury of three men and three women heard the case.
“The trial took less than two hours,” Bowers said. “I wasn’t able to tell the jury everything I wanted to.”
The judge, for example, wouldn’t allow Bowers to enter into evidence any of his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) documents about the adverse reactions dogs and cats have experienced from topical flea and tick products. The vets he wanted to call as witnesses also couldn’t make it to court that day.
“I had no witnesses,” Bowers said. “I was riding the brass rail by myself.” And he was up against Hartz’ savvy attorney, who he learned had taken a special course on flea and tick products to prepare her for the case.
“Hartz had all kinds of statements about flea and tick products and they had everything notarized so it could be entered into evidence,” Bowers said. “I didn’t know I needed to do that (get documents notarized). Hartz had statements from their vets, too.”
During the trial, Hartz also cross-examined Bowers about Diesel’s death. He’s glad they did.
“That’s when I got in the information that they wouldn’t let me enter,” Bowers said. “I entered it by blurting it from the witness box. The attorney asked me a question like ‘how did I know it was Hartz that killed my animal?’ And I said Hartz has killed many other animals.
“The attorney was screaming to get me to shut up and I just kept talking,” Bowers added. “The judge then told me to shut up. At that point, I looked at the judge and said ‘I’m sorry.’ And then I looked at the jury and smiled.”
Used as directed?
Hartz’ attorney also suggested that Bowers didn’t apply the flea and tick drops as directed.
“They screamed that over and over,” Bowers said. “But I precisely used it as directed.”
Hartz and other makers of fleas and tick products often cite the misuse of these treatments for adverse reactions. Pet owners, they say, may put a flea and tick product intended for a dog on a cat. Or they may apply too much flea and tick product on their pets.
Last summer, the ASPCA’s Animal Poison Control Center also studied its data on topical flea and tick products. That study revealed the likelihood of severe adverse reactions was significantly less when dogs and cats were treated according to directions.
“From the data we have collected, the adverse reactions tend to be mild, like skin sensations and stomach upset,” the ASPCA’s Dr. Steven Hansen said after the organization released its study. “We don’t have very many cases of true neurological issues when these products are properly used.”
Bowers, however, repeatedly told ConsumerAffairs.com that he used the Hartz flea and ticks drops as directed when he applied them to Diesel. He also told us the court didn’t give him the chance to cross-examine any of Hartz’ witnesses during the trial. “I wasn’t asked to,” he said. “I asked the judge why I could ask any questions and she said ‘that’s procedure.’”
The jury, however, wasn’t swayed by the witnesses or documents Hartz used in its defense.
After deliberating for less than 30 minutes, the jurors ruled in Bowers favor.
“I didn’t know what to think when I heard that,” he said, adding the $4,440 he won covers the cost of Diesel and the dog’s vet bills. “I was dumbfounded.”
Bowers is convinced the jury sided with him because of one issue that surfaced during the trial: whether the chemical Phenothrin, which is in Hartz Ultra Guard Flea and Tick Drops, is the same or similar to the chemical Permethrin. Bowers said he argued that, according to his “carnal knowledge,” those two are the same chemical compound.
“I kid you not, that is the thing that saved my case,” he said.
Hartz vehemently disputes that contention, saying those are completely different ingredients.
“The trade name for Phenothrin is Sumithrin,” the company’s spokeswoman, Anne Isenhower, told ConsumerAffairs.com. “Permethrin is a completely different ingredient that Hartz does not use in any of our on-animal products in the United States.”
Hartz also downplayed Bowers’ allegations and the jury’s decision. “This case was without merit and the allegations weren’t supported by evidence (presented in the trial),” said Isenhower, senior vice president, with GolinHarris, Hartz’ public relations firm. Hartz, however, did not appeal the jury’s decision because of the time and cost involved to pursue such action, Isenhower said.
Asked if Bowers’ case marked the first time a consumer has successfully sued Hartz over one of its topical flea and tick products, Isenhower said: “Yes, we believe so. We are not aware of any verdict against Hartz flea & tick drops.”
She had an identical comment when asked if Bowers’ case was the first small claims court victory against Hartz. “Yes, we believe so. We are not aware of any verdict against Hartz flea & tick drops.”
Safety defended
In spite of the jury’s decision, Isenhower defended the safety of Hartz flea and tick products.
“We’ve conducted extensive analysis of the adverse event reporting on our products as well as all topic treatments in the market,” she said. “Although Hartz is the leader in flea and tick retail sales, we are less than three percent of all adverse effects reported to the EPA in 2008 for topical dog flea and tick treatments.”
The safety of topical or “spot-on” flea and tick products has come under“intensified” scrutinyby the EPA for the past 11 months.
The agency started that probe last April, saying it had received more than 44,000 reports of adverse reactions associated with spot-on flea and tick products.
“Adverse reactions reported range from mild effects such as skin irritation to more serious effects such as seizures and, in some cases, the death of the pet,” the EPA said.
Data delayed
The agency told ConsumerAffairs.com that it planned to release its findings last fall. The EPA, however, has since delayed that release date.
“Due to the large amount of data and the complex technical issues associated with the review of the data, our report is not ready for public release,” the agency’s spokesman, Dale Kemery, told us in December 2009. "We anticipate publicly releasing the document in early 2010.”
The EPA will post its findings about topical flea and tick products, and any regulatory action it may take, on itsWeb site.
In the meantime, animal experts recommend pet owners consult their veterinarians about which flea and tick product to use on their dogs or cats.
Beware
Back in Texas, Bowers warns pet owners to be “earthly” aware of any topical flea and tick products they put on their animals.
“I think I’ll utilize just plain soap and water,” he said. “I use Head and Shoulders shampoo on my dogs now. I bathe them every time I see them scratching. “We used to get Myrtle Bush when I was a child growing up in Louisiana,” he added. “It was a natural killer of fleas.”
Bowers is also keenly aware that his legal victory could have ripple effects in courtrooms across the country. He suspects his case may serve as a rallying call for other pet owners who’ve seen their dogs or cats suffer burns, blisters, seizures, neurological problems, or even die after using topical flea and tick products.
His case, he said, may open the floodgates for similar lawsuits nationwide.
“I think this case will make pet owners wonder why they have not gone forward with their cases in small claims court,” Bowers said. “And if they do, my advice to them if get a trial by jury; I would never accept a non-jury trial.”
The amount of money consumers can recover in small claims court varies by state. And some states do not allow trials by jury in small claims court. ConsumerAffairs.com has a comprehensivesmall claims court guide.
Read more:http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2010/03/hartz_mountain_court.html#ixzz0hzkJNJnL
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Idon't usually blog this often but this is important...
Hello Everyone...
If you know of anyone with health challenges...please give them the gift of life and forward these links. I'm not selling anything when I forward this information to you. I do it because most of us don't know that we have a choice. I also do it because I want you to know that your animal cant make a choice...you have to make it for them.
To your health
Organic Jan
.....New research on curing Diabetes. Yes it is curable. Its an mp3 so you can listen to it.
http://www.naturalnews.com/podcasts/Interview-Dr-Gabriel-Cousens.mp3
.....More info on Vitamin D ....also very important.
http://www.naturalnews.com/028353_vitamin_D_sunlight.html
Flea Free Organically | Organic Jan's Newsletter
http://www.fleafreeorganically.com
Subscribe to: Organic Jan's Blog: http://fleafreeorganically.blogspot.com
760-595-8458
• Prevents heartworm and intestinal parasites with regular use
• Removes toxins and heavy metals from the body
• Hairballs reduction
• Better elimination
• Cleaner colon, vein, and arteries
• Reduces Blood Pressure and Cholesterol by reducing Plaque
• Reduces/eliminate joint pain in humans and animals (I know this for a fact because I take a T. Daily
• Improves coat, energy and overall health as opposed to using toxins to just kill fleas and another to kill worms
• Reduces cat box and feces odor
If you know of anyone with health challenges...please give them the gift of life and forward these links. I'm not selling anything when I forward this information to you. I do it because most of us don't know that we have a choice. I also do it because I want you to know that your animal cant make a choice...you have to make it for them.
To your health
Organic Jan
.....New research on curing Diabetes. Yes it is curable. Its an mp3 so you can listen to it.
http://www.naturalnews.com/podcasts/Interview-Dr-Gabriel-Cousens.mp3
.....More info on Vitamin D ....also very important.
http://www.naturalnews.com/028353_vitamin_D_sunlight.html
Flea Free Organically | Organic Jan's Newsletter
http://www.fleafreeorganically.com
Subscribe to: Organic Jan's Blog: http://fleafreeorganically.blogspot.com
760-595-8458
• Prevents heartworm and intestinal parasites with regular use
• Removes toxins and heavy metals from the body
• Hairballs reduction
• Better elimination
• Cleaner colon, vein, and arteries
• Reduces Blood Pressure and Cholesterol by reducing Plaque
• Reduces/eliminate joint pain in humans and animals (I know this for a fact because I take a T. Daily
• Improves coat, energy and overall health as opposed to using toxins to just kill fleas and another to kill worms
• Reduces cat box and feces odor
Friday, March 12, 2010
Incredible New Research on Vitamin D.....
●This may be a bit long for some but consider it an education:
I never tire of hearing the new research on vitamin D. This is amazing. Maybe someday we won’t have to take the toxic medication the medical industry and pharmaceuticals force on us. Watch those commercials carefully. You’d have to be crazy to take those medication. Use the internet…find alternatives. That’s how I found Flea Free Organically.
●●●●There is an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency sweeping the world, and now we know why this is so important: New research reveals that vitamin D "arms" the immune system T cells, allowing them to protect you from invading microorganisms.
It gets even better: Vitamin D prevents cancer, heart disease, diabetes, obesity, osteoporosis and much more. Read the latest on vitamin D in my feature article here:
There is an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency sweeping across our modern world, and it's an epidemic of such depth and seriousness that it makes the H1N1 swine flu epidemic look like a case of the sniffles by comparison.Vitamin D deficiency is not only alarmingly widespread, it's also a root cause of many other serious diseases such as cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis and heart disease.
A new study published in the March, 2010 issue of theJournal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism found that a jaw-dropping 59 percent of the population is vitamin D deficient. In addition, nearly 25 percent of the study subjects were found to have extremely low levels of vitamin D.
Lead author of the study, Dr. Richard Kremer at the McGill University Health Center, said "Abnormal levels of vitamin D are associated with a whole spectrum of diseases, including cancer, osteoporosis, and diabetes, as well as cardiovascular and autoimmune disorders."
This new study also documents a clear link between vitamin D deficiency and stored body fat:Sunshine actually promote body fat loss. Vitamin D may be the hormonal mechanism by which this fat loss phenomenon operates. Im a southern California girl and this happened every summer...(thank god)
The research findings on vitamin D, by the way, get even better...
Activator for the immune system
Recent research carried out at the University of Copenhagen has revealed that vitamin D activates the immune system by "arming" T cells to fight off infections.
This new research, led by Professor Carsten Geisler from the Department of International Health, Immunology and Microbiology at the University of Copenhagen, found that without vitamin D, the immune system's T cells remaindormant, offering little or no protection against invading microorganisms and viruses. But with vitamin D in the bloodstream, T cells become "armed" and begin seeking out invaders that are then destroyed and carried out of the body.
Vitamin D, in other words, acts a bit like the ignition key to your car: The car won't run unless you turn the key and ignite the engine. Likewise, your immune system won't function unless it is biochemically activated with vitamin D. If you're facing the winter flu season in a state of vitamin D deficiency, your immune system is essentially defenseless against seasonal flu. That's why all the people who get sick are the ones who live indoors, work indoors and exist in a chronic state of vitamin D deficiency.
That's also why virtually all the people who died from H1N1 were chronically deficient in vitamin D. They had virtually no immune system protection at all and were thus easy targets for the swine flu.
These findings about vitamin D "arming" the immune system were published in Nature Immunology. Commenting on the findings, the researchers said, "Scientists have known for a long time that vitamin D is important for calcium absorption and the vitamin has also been implicated in diseases such as cancer and multiple sclerosis, but what we didn't realize is how crucial vitamin D is for actually activating the immune system -- which we know now." (UK Telegraph, source below).
It seems the CDC and WHO remain utterly ignorant about this research or they would have been recommending vitamin D to fight the recent H1N1 pandemic rather than vaccine shots. Vitamin D would have been a far more effective (and less costly) defense against the pandemic than vaccine shots, especially given that even vaccines don't work unless there is an immune response, and that immune response requires the presence of vitamin D!
And while vaccine shots have undesirable side effects such as causing severe neurological damage in a small number of vaccine recipients, vitamin D's only significant "side effect" is that it prevents 77% of all cancers, too. (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html)
The common denominator for disease
What's becoming increasingly clear from all the new research is that vitamin D deficiency may be the common denominator behind our most devastating modern degenerative diseases. Kidney failure patients are almost universally deficient in vitamin D and diabetes patients are usually in the same category. People suffering from cancer almost always demonstrate severe vitamin D deficiency, as do people with osteoporosis and multiple sclerosis.
In fact, vitamin D deficiency may be the root cause behind so many degenerative diseases that correcting this deficiency across the population could very well devastate the for-profit "sick care industry" that dominates western medicine today.
Teach the population about vitamin D, in other words, and the cancer industry would suffer devastating losses in profits (vitamin D prevents 4 out of 5 of all cancers).
This is perhaps why so many of the businesses and non-profits that depend on cancer (and other diseases) for their authority and power are actively fighting against vitamin D awareness. The National Cancer Institute, for example, which is one of the wealthiest non-profits in the world, actively runs full-page ads that attempt to scare people away from sunlight, thereby causing them to remain in a state of vitamin D deficiency.
This state of deficiency coincidentally serves the power interests of the NCI by making sure that people remain riddled with cancer even though a free cure (sunshine) is readily available.
The FDA, similarly, doesn't want people to learn the truth about vitamin D because informed consumers would inevitably take more vitamin D supplements and thereby prevent all sorts of diseases that the pharmaceutical industry is counting on for its monopoly profits. Every patient that takes vitamin D is one less patient paying money for cancer drugs, diabetes drugs or heart disease drugs.
Other cancer industry non-profits, likewise, don't want people to learn the truth about vitamin D. They'd rather just keep selling ridiculous pink-ribbon consumer products that claim to raise money for some highly fictitious "search for the cure" -- a search that was obsolete even before it began because sunshine has been curing and preventing cancer for as long as human beings have walked the planet. Our ancestors didn't have to "run for the cure" or "walk for the cure" through some silly fundraising fiction; they merely walked in the sun and they were cured of cancer by the mere act of being exposed to sunlight. Walking outside is, all by itself, the "cure" for cancer that the industry claims to need billions more dollars to try to find through additional research.
They want you to remain ignorant!
The inescapable truth of the matter is that modern medicine wants people to remain ignorant about the healing effects of vitamin D. The financial survival of the medical industry absolutely depends on it, so the most influential medical organizations systematically downplay the importance of this vitamin while outright refusing to recommend it to patients.
The NCI doesn't recommend vitamin D, nor does Komen for the Cure. The AHA, AMA, ADA and FDA all refuse to recommend vitamin D, all while strongly promoting synthetic, patented high-profit medications that cure nothing.
There is, in essence, a conspiracy of silence about vitamin D among the sick-care industries that depend on disease to bring them business. And there always will be, of course, because companies are in business to make money, and if you're in business to make money from disease, you generally don't go telling people how to heal themselves for free. From a purely profit-minded perspective, teaching people about vitamin D makes absolutely no business sense to the sick care industry. It's profits over people (as usual).
You can't keep Vitamin D down
But you can't keep hiding the truth about vitamin D forever: The science is absolutely compelling. It's irrefutable, actually. These nine things about vitamin D are inarguably true:
#1) The vast majority of the western population is deficient in vitamin D.
#2) Vitamin D deficiencies promote cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis, kidney disease, depression, obesity and heart disease, among other health problems.
#3) Vitamin D deficiencies can be corrected with vitamin D supplementation or through sensible sunlight exposure.
#4) Sunscreen products block the production of vitamin D in the skin, causing further vitamin D deficiencies across the population of consumers who use such products.
#5) Correcting widespread vitamin D deficiencies would greatly reduce degenerative disease across the population, thereby saving nations literally trillions of dollars in collective sick-care costs over the next decade.
#6) Vitamin D supplements are extremely affordable. Preventing disease through vitamin D supplementation is a low-cost investment in health that pays off a hundred fold (or more) through health care cost savings.
#7) Vitamin D is extremely safe. There are virtually no negative side effects from deficient people taking vitamin D supplements, even at seemingly high doses such as 4000 - 8000 IU per day (more than ten times the current U.S. RDA).
#8) Vitamin D deficiency is caused, in large part, by modern society's indoor lifestyle. People live, work and play indoors under artificial light. This causes severe deficiencies in exposure to natural light (sunlight) through which vitamin D is usually generated.
#9) Vitamin D dramatically reduces susceptibility to infectious disease such as seasonal flu and H1N1. It "activates" the immune system and allows it to function more aggressively in defending against viral invasions.
Better than a vaccine, safer than a drug...
In effect, Vitamin D is a better vaccine than vaccines. It's a better cancer drug than cancer drugs. It's a better osteoporosis drug than osteoporosis drugs. Vitamin D is a better treatment for diabetes than diabetes drugs.
Again and again, vitamin D turns out to be safer, more effective and far more affordable than expensive monopoly-priced medications. Plus, it's obviously innately compatible with the human body since the human body actually manufactures vitamin D when given the opportunity (and exposure to sunlight).
Furthermore, unlike pharmaceuticals, vitamin D is safe for the environment. Flushing excess vitamin D down the drain doesn't contaminate the fish like pharmaceuticals do (http://www.naturalnews.com/025933_p...).
With all these things being true about vitamin D, it all makes you wonder: Why isn't health care reform even talking about this nutrient? If you really want to reform the health of a nation, you have to start by correcting the epidemic of vitamin D deficiency across the population.
When it comes to keeping people healthy, all the drugs in the world can't accomplish what vitamin D can accomplish... simply, affordably and safely.
You can get it for free. No prescription required. No visit to the doctor. You don't even need to buy supplements to get this. Just walk outside, under the sun, and initiate your own healing.
That very idea -- that patients can cure their own cancers by taking a walk in nature -- is the most fearful thing in the world to the cancer and vaccine industries. Big Pharma is horrified at the idea of people becoming nutritionally literate and realizing that vitamin D, all by itself, eliminates the need for potentially hundreds of different medications and vaccines. It activates healing, it defends the body against disease, and it's the single greatest threat to the profitability of the sick-care industry that dominates medicine today.
If modern medicine could ban Vitamin D, they would do so in an instant. They may yet pull that off, in fact, through Sen. McCain's attempts to destroy nutritional supplements (http://www.naturalnews.com/028257_S...).
Sources for this story include:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/s...
Vitamin D slashes risk of bowel cancer by 40 percent
A recent study published in the British Medical Journal found that high levels of vitamin D help to lower the risk of developing bowel cancer. The study, which was the largest of its kind, evaluated nearly 2,500 people with and without bowel cancer to see how vitamin D plays a role in preventing the disease.
Scientists from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France, and Imperial College London, compared 1,248 bowel cancer patients with 1,248 control group patients. Observers were able to make a clear connection between bowel cancer and low vitamin D levels, indicating that maintaining higher blood serum levels of vitamin D may help to prevent it.
Vitamin D is primarily derived from exposure to natural sunlight where the skin converts UVB rays to the vitamin D. During the winter months or other times when sun exposure is limited, though, it can be difficult to get adequate levels of vitamin D. Few foods are rich in vitamin D but a few of the best sources include fish, cod liver oil, and raw milk.
Despite their findings, study authors do not suggest supplementing with vitamin D. They claim that further studies are needed to verify that vitamin D does not increase the risk of developing other types of cancer or inflicting harm. They did estimate, however, that even a 10 percent increase in vitamin D intake among the U.K. population would reduce bowel cancer cases by 7 percent.
It is unclear precisely why the researchers would not endorse vitamin D supplementation when considering that truly therapeutic doses of vitamin D range in the tens of thousands. Though the U.S. Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) of vitamin D is a mere 400 IU, proper daily dosages range upwards of 10,000 IU for maximum health.
According to the Vitamin D Council, fears over vitamin D toxicity and taking too much of it are unwarranted. To date, there is no solid evidence indicating that any reasonable dose of cholecalciferol, the natural form commonly labeled as D3, is dangerous. Twenty minutes of summer sunlight will produce roughly 20,000 IU of sunlight in the body, so supplementing with that amount will not cause harm.
Research conducted by Dr. Robert Heaney from the American Dietetic Association also shows that vitamin D3 has a therapeutic index of 10, making it twice as safe as water when taken in reasonable doses below 40,000 IU a day.
Sources for this story include:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...
http://dietary-supplements.info.nih...
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/vita...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...
Yet more research shows that vitamin D improves insulin sensitivity,thereby helping prevent type-2 diabetes:
Vitamin D Improves Insulin Sensitivity, Helps Prevent Diabetes
High-dose vitamin D supplements may help increase the body's sensitivity to the blood sugar-regulating hormone insulin, thus reducing the risk of diabetes, researchers have found.
Insulin resistance (or insensitivity) occurs when the body's tissues stop responding as strongly to the presence of insulin. As a consequence, the cells uptake less sugar from the bloodstream, producing the elevated glucose levels characteristic of diabetes.
In the current study, conducted by researchers from Massey University and published in the British Journal of Nutrition, researchers randomly assigned 81 South Asian women between the ages of 23 and 68 to take either a placebo or 4,000 IU of vitamin D once per day. All participants suffered from insulin sensitivity at the start of the study, but none were taking diabetes drugs or vitamin D supplements larger than 1,000 IU per day.
At the start of the study, the average participant had vitamin D blood levels of approximately 50 nanomoles per liter, slightly lower than the average levels in a U.S. adult (60-75 nmol/L). After six months, women in the vitamin D group exhibited significantly more insulin sensitivity and less insulin resistance than women who had received a placebo. The largest effect was seen in women whose vitamin D blood levels had reached 80 to 119 nmol/L.
According to the Vitamin D Council, blood levels should be at least 125 nmol/L for optimal health.
Vitamin D has long been known to play an important role in bone and tooth health, and recommended daily intakes were originally calculated for these functions. Yet a growing body of research suggests that much higher intakes may be required to gain protection against cancer, autoimmune diseases, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and other chronic illnesses.
Health professionals currently debate what daily intakes are ideal, with the U.S. government recommending 200 IU for adults between the ages of 19 and 50, 400 IU for those aged 51 to 70, and 600 IU for those over the age of 70. The British government recommends that those at high risk of deficiency take a daily supplement of 1,000 IU. Yet studies such as the Massey University one keep pointing up the benefits of higher doses.
The study is not the first to connect vitamin D and diabetes. A 2009 meta-analysis published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism found that higher blood levels of vitamin D lowered diabetes risk. Likewise, in a study published in the journal Diabetic Medicine, researchers from the Sitaram Bhartia Institute of Science and Research in New Delhi found that a large dose of vitamin D significantly improved insulin sensitivity after meals in 71 men who were healthy except for central obesity.
Central obesity -- along with high blood pressure and high levels of fasting blood glucose, triglycerides and LDL cholesterol -- is a symptom of the condition known as metabolic syndrome, a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
Diabetes is widespread in the United States, with 24 million people diagnosed and 5.6 million undiagnosed, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The National Institute of Health estimates that a further 70 to 80 million people suffer from metabolic syndrome or other "pre-diabetic" conditions. Some researchers have suggested that the nation's high rate of vitamin D deficiency might be partially to blame for this phenomenon.
Exposure to sunlight is still considered the healthiest way to get vitamin D, as the body can synthesize all it needs in only a fraction of the time it takes to acquire a tan. Health professionals recommend 15 minutes of sun every day on at least the face and hands for light-skinned people, and up to three times as much for people with dark skin. More time in the sun or some form of dietary supplementation may be necessary during the winter for people living far from the equator, especially those with dark skin.
Sources for this story include: www.emaxhealth.com.
Epidemic of Vitamin D deficiency sweeping the world
(NaturalNews) There is an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency sweeping across our modern world, and it's an epidemic of such depth and seriousness that it makes the H1N1 swine flu epidemic look like a case of the sniffles by comparison. Vitamin D deficiency...
Vitamin D slashes risk of bowel cancer by 40 percent
(NaturalNews) A recent study published in the British Medical Journal found that high levels of vitamin D help to lower the risk of developing bowel cancer. The study, which was the largest of its kind, evaluated nearly 2,500 people with and without...
Vitamin D Improves Insulin Sensitivity, Helps Prevent Diabetes
(NaturalNews) High-dose vitamin D supplements may help increase the body's sensitivity to the blood sugar-regulating hormone insulin, thus reducing the risk of diabetes, researchers have found. Insulin resistance (or insensitivity) occurs when the...
Proposed Food and Drug Amendment to the United States Constitution (Opinion)
With all the fight over healthcare reform, it makes sense that no matter who wins or loses the battle, Big Pharma's drug lords and the tyrannical government administration known as the FDA will come out on top. These money grabbing organizations...
Why you've never heard the truth about Vitamin D There is an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency sweeping across our modern world, and it's an epidemic of such depth and seriousness that it makes the H1N1 swine flu epidemic look like a case of the sniffles by comparison. Vitamin D deficiency...
My two cents:
I have a friend who introduced me to Vitamin D. He is a medical doctor and a psychiatrist but studies life extension as well. He suggested I take a minimum of 3000iu a day. I Just developed type 2 Diabetes. Ironically, I just stopped taking Vitamin D……guess I’ll be going to the store today.
Flea Free Organically | Organic Jan's Newsletter
http://www.fleafreeorganically.com
Subscribe to: Organic Jan's Blog: http://fleafreeorganically.blogspot.com
760-595-8458
• Prevents heartworm and intestinal parasites with regular use
• Removes toxins and heavy metals from the body
• Hairballs reduction
• Better elimination
• Cleaner colon, vein, and arteries
• Reduces Blood Pressure and Cholesterol by reducing Plaque
• Reduces/eliminate joint pain in humans and animals (I know this for a fact because I take a T. Daily
• Improves coat, energy and overall health as opposed to using toxins to just kill fleas and another to kill worms
• Reduces cat box and feces odor
I never tire of hearing the new research on vitamin D. This is amazing. Maybe someday we won’t have to take the toxic medication the medical industry and pharmaceuticals force on us. Watch those commercials carefully. You’d have to be crazy to take those medication. Use the internet…find alternatives. That’s how I found Flea Free Organically.
●●●●There is an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency sweeping the world, and now we know why this is so important: New research reveals that vitamin D "arms" the immune system T cells, allowing them to protect you from invading microorganisms.
It gets even better: Vitamin D prevents cancer, heart disease, diabetes, obesity, osteoporosis and much more. Read the latest on vitamin D in my feature article here:
There is an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency sweeping across our modern world, and it's an epidemic of such depth and seriousness that it makes the H1N1 swine flu epidemic look like a case of the sniffles by comparison.Vitamin D deficiency is not only alarmingly widespread, it's also a root cause of many other serious diseases such as cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis and heart disease.
A new study published in the March, 2010 issue of theJournal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism found that a jaw-dropping 59 percent of the population is vitamin D deficient. In addition, nearly 25 percent of the study subjects were found to have extremely low levels of vitamin D.
Lead author of the study, Dr. Richard Kremer at the McGill University Health Center, said "Abnormal levels of vitamin D are associated with a whole spectrum of diseases, including cancer, osteoporosis, and diabetes, as well as cardiovascular and autoimmune disorders."
This new study also documents a clear link between vitamin D deficiency and stored body fat:Sunshine actually promote body fat loss. Vitamin D may be the hormonal mechanism by which this fat loss phenomenon operates. Im a southern California girl and this happened every summer...(thank god)
The research findings on vitamin D, by the way, get even better...
Activator for the immune system
Recent research carried out at the University of Copenhagen has revealed that vitamin D activates the immune system by "arming" T cells to fight off infections.
This new research, led by Professor Carsten Geisler from the Department of International Health, Immunology and Microbiology at the University of Copenhagen, found that without vitamin D, the immune system's T cells remaindormant, offering little or no protection against invading microorganisms and viruses. But with vitamin D in the bloodstream, T cells become "armed" and begin seeking out invaders that are then destroyed and carried out of the body.
Vitamin D, in other words, acts a bit like the ignition key to your car: The car won't run unless you turn the key and ignite the engine. Likewise, your immune system won't function unless it is biochemically activated with vitamin D. If you're facing the winter flu season in a state of vitamin D deficiency, your immune system is essentially defenseless against seasonal flu. That's why all the people who get sick are the ones who live indoors, work indoors and exist in a chronic state of vitamin D deficiency.
That's also why virtually all the people who died from H1N1 were chronically deficient in vitamin D. They had virtually no immune system protection at all and were thus easy targets for the swine flu.
These findings about vitamin D "arming" the immune system were published in Nature Immunology. Commenting on the findings, the researchers said, "Scientists have known for a long time that vitamin D is important for calcium absorption and the vitamin has also been implicated in diseases such as cancer and multiple sclerosis, but what we didn't realize is how crucial vitamin D is for actually activating the immune system -- which we know now." (UK Telegraph, source below).
It seems the CDC and WHO remain utterly ignorant about this research or they would have been recommending vitamin D to fight the recent H1N1 pandemic rather than vaccine shots. Vitamin D would have been a far more effective (and less costly) defense against the pandemic than vaccine shots, especially given that even vaccines don't work unless there is an immune response, and that immune response requires the presence of vitamin D!
And while vaccine shots have undesirable side effects such as causing severe neurological damage in a small number of vaccine recipients, vitamin D's only significant "side effect" is that it prevents 77% of all cancers, too. (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html)
The common denominator for disease
What's becoming increasingly clear from all the new research is that vitamin D deficiency may be the common denominator behind our most devastating modern degenerative diseases. Kidney failure patients are almost universally deficient in vitamin D and diabetes patients are usually in the same category. People suffering from cancer almost always demonstrate severe vitamin D deficiency, as do people with osteoporosis and multiple sclerosis.
In fact, vitamin D deficiency may be the root cause behind so many degenerative diseases that correcting this deficiency across the population could very well devastate the for-profit "sick care industry" that dominates western medicine today.
Teach the population about vitamin D, in other words, and the cancer industry would suffer devastating losses in profits (vitamin D prevents 4 out of 5 of all cancers).
This is perhaps why so many of the businesses and non-profits that depend on cancer (and other diseases) for their authority and power are actively fighting against vitamin D awareness. The National Cancer Institute, for example, which is one of the wealthiest non-profits in the world, actively runs full-page ads that attempt to scare people away from sunlight, thereby causing them to remain in a state of vitamin D deficiency.
This state of deficiency coincidentally serves the power interests of the NCI by making sure that people remain riddled with cancer even though a free cure (sunshine) is readily available.
The FDA, similarly, doesn't want people to learn the truth about vitamin D because informed consumers would inevitably take more vitamin D supplements and thereby prevent all sorts of diseases that the pharmaceutical industry is counting on for its monopoly profits. Every patient that takes vitamin D is one less patient paying money for cancer drugs, diabetes drugs or heart disease drugs.
Other cancer industry non-profits, likewise, don't want people to learn the truth about vitamin D. They'd rather just keep selling ridiculous pink-ribbon consumer products that claim to raise money for some highly fictitious "search for the cure" -- a search that was obsolete even before it began because sunshine has been curing and preventing cancer for as long as human beings have walked the planet. Our ancestors didn't have to "run for the cure" or "walk for the cure" through some silly fundraising fiction; they merely walked in the sun and they were cured of cancer by the mere act of being exposed to sunlight. Walking outside is, all by itself, the "cure" for cancer that the industry claims to need billions more dollars to try to find through additional research.
They want you to remain ignorant!
The inescapable truth of the matter is that modern medicine wants people to remain ignorant about the healing effects of vitamin D. The financial survival of the medical industry absolutely depends on it, so the most influential medical organizations systematically downplay the importance of this vitamin while outright refusing to recommend it to patients.
The NCI doesn't recommend vitamin D, nor does Komen for the Cure. The AHA, AMA, ADA and FDA all refuse to recommend vitamin D, all while strongly promoting synthetic, patented high-profit medications that cure nothing.
There is, in essence, a conspiracy of silence about vitamin D among the sick-care industries that depend on disease to bring them business. And there always will be, of course, because companies are in business to make money, and if you're in business to make money from disease, you generally don't go telling people how to heal themselves for free. From a purely profit-minded perspective, teaching people about vitamin D makes absolutely no business sense to the sick care industry. It's profits over people (as usual).
You can't keep Vitamin D down
But you can't keep hiding the truth about vitamin D forever: The science is absolutely compelling. It's irrefutable, actually. These nine things about vitamin D are inarguably true:
#1) The vast majority of the western population is deficient in vitamin D.
#2) Vitamin D deficiencies promote cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis, kidney disease, depression, obesity and heart disease, among other health problems.
#3) Vitamin D deficiencies can be corrected with vitamin D supplementation or through sensible sunlight exposure.
#4) Sunscreen products block the production of vitamin D in the skin, causing further vitamin D deficiencies across the population of consumers who use such products.
#5) Correcting widespread vitamin D deficiencies would greatly reduce degenerative disease across the population, thereby saving nations literally trillions of dollars in collective sick-care costs over the next decade.
#6) Vitamin D supplements are extremely affordable. Preventing disease through vitamin D supplementation is a low-cost investment in health that pays off a hundred fold (or more) through health care cost savings.
#7) Vitamin D is extremely safe. There are virtually no negative side effects from deficient people taking vitamin D supplements, even at seemingly high doses such as 4000 - 8000 IU per day (more than ten times the current U.S. RDA).
#8) Vitamin D deficiency is caused, in large part, by modern society's indoor lifestyle. People live, work and play indoors under artificial light. This causes severe deficiencies in exposure to natural light (sunlight) through which vitamin D is usually generated.
#9) Vitamin D dramatically reduces susceptibility to infectious disease such as seasonal flu and H1N1. It "activates" the immune system and allows it to function more aggressively in defending against viral invasions.
Better than a vaccine, safer than a drug...
In effect, Vitamin D is a better vaccine than vaccines. It's a better cancer drug than cancer drugs. It's a better osteoporosis drug than osteoporosis drugs. Vitamin D is a better treatment for diabetes than diabetes drugs.
Again and again, vitamin D turns out to be safer, more effective and far more affordable than expensive monopoly-priced medications. Plus, it's obviously innately compatible with the human body since the human body actually manufactures vitamin D when given the opportunity (and exposure to sunlight).
Furthermore, unlike pharmaceuticals, vitamin D is safe for the environment. Flushing excess vitamin D down the drain doesn't contaminate the fish like pharmaceuticals do (http://www.naturalnews.com/025933_p...).
With all these things being true about vitamin D, it all makes you wonder: Why isn't health care reform even talking about this nutrient? If you really want to reform the health of a nation, you have to start by correcting the epidemic of vitamin D deficiency across the population.
When it comes to keeping people healthy, all the drugs in the world can't accomplish what vitamin D can accomplish... simply, affordably and safely.
You can get it for free. No prescription required. No visit to the doctor. You don't even need to buy supplements to get this. Just walk outside, under the sun, and initiate your own healing.
That very idea -- that patients can cure their own cancers by taking a walk in nature -- is the most fearful thing in the world to the cancer and vaccine industries. Big Pharma is horrified at the idea of people becoming nutritionally literate and realizing that vitamin D, all by itself, eliminates the need for potentially hundreds of different medications and vaccines. It activates healing, it defends the body against disease, and it's the single greatest threat to the profitability of the sick-care industry that dominates medicine today.
If modern medicine could ban Vitamin D, they would do so in an instant. They may yet pull that off, in fact, through Sen. McCain's attempts to destroy nutritional supplements (http://www.naturalnews.com/028257_S...).
Sources for this story include:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/s...
Vitamin D slashes risk of bowel cancer by 40 percent
A recent study published in the British Medical Journal found that high levels of vitamin D help to lower the risk of developing bowel cancer. The study, which was the largest of its kind, evaluated nearly 2,500 people with and without bowel cancer to see how vitamin D plays a role in preventing the disease.
Scientists from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France, and Imperial College London, compared 1,248 bowel cancer patients with 1,248 control group patients. Observers were able to make a clear connection between bowel cancer and low vitamin D levels, indicating that maintaining higher blood serum levels of vitamin D may help to prevent it.
Vitamin D is primarily derived from exposure to natural sunlight where the skin converts UVB rays to the vitamin D. During the winter months or other times when sun exposure is limited, though, it can be difficult to get adequate levels of vitamin D. Few foods are rich in vitamin D but a few of the best sources include fish, cod liver oil, and raw milk.
Despite their findings, study authors do not suggest supplementing with vitamin D. They claim that further studies are needed to verify that vitamin D does not increase the risk of developing other types of cancer or inflicting harm. They did estimate, however, that even a 10 percent increase in vitamin D intake among the U.K. population would reduce bowel cancer cases by 7 percent.
It is unclear precisely why the researchers would not endorse vitamin D supplementation when considering that truly therapeutic doses of vitamin D range in the tens of thousands. Though the U.S. Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) of vitamin D is a mere 400 IU, proper daily dosages range upwards of 10,000 IU for maximum health.
According to the Vitamin D Council, fears over vitamin D toxicity and taking too much of it are unwarranted. To date, there is no solid evidence indicating that any reasonable dose of cholecalciferol, the natural form commonly labeled as D3, is dangerous. Twenty minutes of summer sunlight will produce roughly 20,000 IU of sunlight in the body, so supplementing with that amount will not cause harm.
Research conducted by Dr. Robert Heaney from the American Dietetic Association also shows that vitamin D3 has a therapeutic index of 10, making it twice as safe as water when taken in reasonable doses below 40,000 IU a day.
Sources for this story include:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...
http://dietary-supplements.info.nih...
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/vita...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...
Yet more research shows that vitamin D improves insulin sensitivity,thereby helping prevent type-2 diabetes:
Vitamin D Improves Insulin Sensitivity, Helps Prevent Diabetes
High-dose vitamin D supplements may help increase the body's sensitivity to the blood sugar-regulating hormone insulin, thus reducing the risk of diabetes, researchers have found.
Insulin resistance (or insensitivity) occurs when the body's tissues stop responding as strongly to the presence of insulin. As a consequence, the cells uptake less sugar from the bloodstream, producing the elevated glucose levels characteristic of diabetes.
In the current study, conducted by researchers from Massey University and published in the British Journal of Nutrition, researchers randomly assigned 81 South Asian women between the ages of 23 and 68 to take either a placebo or 4,000 IU of vitamin D once per day. All participants suffered from insulin sensitivity at the start of the study, but none were taking diabetes drugs or vitamin D supplements larger than 1,000 IU per day.
At the start of the study, the average participant had vitamin D blood levels of approximately 50 nanomoles per liter, slightly lower than the average levels in a U.S. adult (60-75 nmol/L). After six months, women in the vitamin D group exhibited significantly more insulin sensitivity and less insulin resistance than women who had received a placebo. The largest effect was seen in women whose vitamin D blood levels had reached 80 to 119 nmol/L.
According to the Vitamin D Council, blood levels should be at least 125 nmol/L for optimal health.
Vitamin D has long been known to play an important role in bone and tooth health, and recommended daily intakes were originally calculated for these functions. Yet a growing body of research suggests that much higher intakes may be required to gain protection against cancer, autoimmune diseases, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and other chronic illnesses.
Health professionals currently debate what daily intakes are ideal, with the U.S. government recommending 200 IU for adults between the ages of 19 and 50, 400 IU for those aged 51 to 70, and 600 IU for those over the age of 70. The British government recommends that those at high risk of deficiency take a daily supplement of 1,000 IU. Yet studies such as the Massey University one keep pointing up the benefits of higher doses.
The study is not the first to connect vitamin D and diabetes. A 2009 meta-analysis published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism found that higher blood levels of vitamin D lowered diabetes risk. Likewise, in a study published in the journal Diabetic Medicine, researchers from the Sitaram Bhartia Institute of Science and Research in New Delhi found that a large dose of vitamin D significantly improved insulin sensitivity after meals in 71 men who were healthy except for central obesity.
Central obesity -- along with high blood pressure and high levels of fasting blood glucose, triglycerides and LDL cholesterol -- is a symptom of the condition known as metabolic syndrome, a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
Diabetes is widespread in the United States, with 24 million people diagnosed and 5.6 million undiagnosed, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The National Institute of Health estimates that a further 70 to 80 million people suffer from metabolic syndrome or other "pre-diabetic" conditions. Some researchers have suggested that the nation's high rate of vitamin D deficiency might be partially to blame for this phenomenon.
Exposure to sunlight is still considered the healthiest way to get vitamin D, as the body can synthesize all it needs in only a fraction of the time it takes to acquire a tan. Health professionals recommend 15 minutes of sun every day on at least the face and hands for light-skinned people, and up to three times as much for people with dark skin. More time in the sun or some form of dietary supplementation may be necessary during the winter for people living far from the equator, especially those with dark skin.
Sources for this story include: www.emaxhealth.com.
Epidemic of Vitamin D deficiency sweeping the world
(NaturalNews) There is an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency sweeping across our modern world, and it's an epidemic of such depth and seriousness that it makes the H1N1 swine flu epidemic look like a case of the sniffles by comparison. Vitamin D deficiency...
Vitamin D slashes risk of bowel cancer by 40 percent
(NaturalNews) A recent study published in the British Medical Journal found that high levels of vitamin D help to lower the risk of developing bowel cancer. The study, which was the largest of its kind, evaluated nearly 2,500 people with and without...
Vitamin D Improves Insulin Sensitivity, Helps Prevent Diabetes
(NaturalNews) High-dose vitamin D supplements may help increase the body's sensitivity to the blood sugar-regulating hormone insulin, thus reducing the risk of diabetes, researchers have found. Insulin resistance (or insensitivity) occurs when the...
Proposed Food and Drug Amendment to the United States Constitution (Opinion)
With all the fight over healthcare reform, it makes sense that no matter who wins or loses the battle, Big Pharma's drug lords and the tyrannical government administration known as the FDA will come out on top. These money grabbing organizations...
Why you've never heard the truth about Vitamin D There is an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency sweeping across our modern world, and it's an epidemic of such depth and seriousness that it makes the H1N1 swine flu epidemic look like a case of the sniffles by comparison. Vitamin D deficiency...
My two cents:
I have a friend who introduced me to Vitamin D. He is a medical doctor and a psychiatrist but studies life extension as well. He suggested I take a minimum of 3000iu a day. I Just developed type 2 Diabetes. Ironically, I just stopped taking Vitamin D……guess I’ll be going to the store today.
Flea Free Organically | Organic Jan's Newsletter
http://www.fleafreeorganically.com
Subscribe to: Organic Jan's Blog: http://fleafreeorganically.blogspot.com
760-595-8458
• Prevents heartworm and intestinal parasites with regular use
• Removes toxins and heavy metals from the body
• Hairballs reduction
• Better elimination
• Cleaner colon, vein, and arteries
• Reduces Blood Pressure and Cholesterol by reducing Plaque
• Reduces/eliminate joint pain in humans and animals (I know this for a fact because I take a T. Daily
• Improves coat, energy and overall health as opposed to using toxins to just kill fleas and another to kill worms
• Reduces cat box and feces odor
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
The FDA's conspiracy to promote dangerous chemicals
The FDA, for its part, has been engaged in a conspiracy of silence to avoid admitting that BPA is dangerous for humanhealth. This conspiracy was recently shattered when the FDA's own science advisors blasted the agency for ignoring over 100 published studies showing BPA was dangerous. The FDA, you see, had discarded those 100+ studies and, instead, based its conclusions on just two studies that happened to be funded by the chemical industry.
That's how the FDA operates across the board: Ignore all the science you don't like, and cherry-pick the science you want to believe, even if it's all been funded by the chemical companies. By relying on that gimmick, the FDA was able to maintain its intellectually dishonest position that BPA posed no risk to human health.
There's also evidence of corruption and fraud in the FDA's position on BPA. Did you know, for example, that the chairman of the FDA panel making a key decision on BPA "safety" -- Martin Philbert -- also sits at the top of a company that received a secret $5 million payment (http://www.naturalnews.com/026400_B...).
But the scientific evidence against BPA is now so large than even the FDA can't continue to stonewall the public on this issue. BPA is dangerous to human health, and it should be banned from all items that come into contact with foods (which includes soup can linings, food packaging, water bottles and much more...).
As Kelly Wallace from CBC News discovered, just eating one tuna sandwich caused BPA levels in her blood to soar to over five times the average BPA level found in the blood of American consumers (and that "average" level is dangerous to begin with). (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010...)
Sources for this story include:
Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...
CBS News:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010...
LA Times:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gre...
This has been going on since the 60's that Im aware of. Now they want to control your suppliments and even herbs.
Stay Tuned...
Organic Jan and Flea Free Organically
The FDA, for its part, has been engaged in a conspiracy of silence to avoid admitting that BPA is dangerous for humanhealth. This conspiracy was recently shattered when the FDA's own science advisors blasted the agency for ignoring over 100 published studies showing BPA was dangerous. The FDA, you see, had discarded those 100+ studies and, instead, based its conclusions on just two studies that happened to be funded by the chemical industry.
That's how the FDA operates across the board: Ignore all the science you don't like, and cherry-pick the science you want to believe, even if it's all been funded by the chemical companies. By relying on that gimmick, the FDA was able to maintain its intellectually dishonest position that BPA posed no risk to human health.
There's also evidence of corruption and fraud in the FDA's position on BPA. Did you know, for example, that the chairman of the FDA panel making a key decision on BPA "safety" -- Martin Philbert -- also sits at the top of a company that received a secret $5 million payment (http://www.naturalnews.com/026400_B...).
But the scientific evidence against BPA is now so large than even the FDA can't continue to stonewall the public on this issue. BPA is dangerous to human health, and it should be banned from all items that come into contact with foods (which includes soup can linings, food packaging, water bottles and much more...).
As Kelly Wallace from CBC News discovered, just eating one tuna sandwich caused BPA levels in her blood to soar to over five times the average BPA level found in the blood of American consumers (and that "average" level is dangerous to begin with). (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010...)
Sources for this story include:
Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...
CBS News:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010...
LA Times:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gre...
This has been going on since the 60's that Im aware of. Now they want to control your suppliments and even herbs.
Stay Tuned...
Organic Jan and Flea Free Organically
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
