Showing posts with label books. Show all posts
Showing posts with label books. Show all posts

Monday, August 2, 2010

A Matter of Health

I just finished Why Our Health Matters by Andrew Weil, MD, another treatise on the failure of the American health care system and what we, as a nation, can do about it.

Unlike the authors of What If Medicine Disappeared, Weil is in fact a trained physician. In contrast to so many of his colleagues, Weil explains at length, he rejected the normal medical school curriculum which emphasized treating the symptoms of disease with drugs and went looking for a way to treat the cause of disease instead, something his medical school instructors frowned upon.

Much of what Weil says echoes all the other books I’ve read about what’s wrong with our profit driven system. The pharmaceutical companies rule the roost, providing poorly constructed studies as proof their drugs work miracles. They spend more money on advertising to both doctors and patients than they do on research and development. The idea of the industry is to make people sick, keep them sick and continue to profit from them.

Preaching to the choir here. Overall I agree with Weil’s assessment that change has to come from the people and we have to take a more active role in managing our own health, at the same time the government makes sweeping changes into how health care is managed and provided.

My only disagreement with Weil is his occasional lapse in heavy handed measures such as ‘forcing’ citizens to pay more attention to their health by imposing ‘sin’ taxes or penalties for non-compliance. This is where he veers off his otherwise straight and narrow track and dips into ludicrous by forgetting that as Americans we fought for our freedom not to have our every move regulated by the government. He also fails to realize that by imposing penalties for not being healthy, he will in fact be punishing the most law abiding of us. Those who truly abuse the health care system and those who cost the most money will still do as they please regardless of what penalties are imposed on them, while those who, like today, struggle to play by the rules, will be the ones facing the full impact of the penalties. Tsk tsk, Dr. Weil. He seems to be a margin too full of his own shiny dream of perfect health care to see the forest for the trees.

Once again, all this information is interesting and oftentimes shocking, but my question is, has anyone sent a copy of this book to the President? The people who really need to understand how to effect change are the ones who are least likely to do it, because they remain the ones with the most profit to lose if we become a nation of truly healthy people.

Sunday, July 25, 2010

The Case Against Medicine

I know, I’ve been gone a while. Life’s been busy and as far as medical and other WTFery, I sometimes get weary of writing about all the ludicrousness I come across.

Having spent a good portion of the last six months not in cyberspace, I can’t say I miss it, but I do miss talking about topics that interest me.

I just finished reading What if Medicine Disappeared by Gerald E. Markle and Frances B. McCrea. Markle and McCrea are professors of sociology, not medical doctors, which I haven’t yet decided if that helps or hurts their credibility in the field of discussing how the disappearance of the medical profession [generally doctors, surgeons, specialists, pharmaceuticals and hospitals] would effect the morbidity and mortality of the world’s population. They conduct ‘thought’ experiments based on this hypothesis, which is to say they ‘think’ about how things would be, though their discussions of the subject are backed up with interesting facts and figures taken directly from articles published in all the premier medical journals such as JAMA and the Lancet to name a few.

I find it interesting that they use medical studies to prove their points that various aspects of our medical profession are overrated, overpriced and under-efficient. That’s not really news, is it?

Overall I found the book, a rather quick read, to be interesting and thought provoking, especially that one of their main conclusions was that if tobacco products disappeared, the effect on life and health in our nation [and very likely the world] would be far more profound that if doctors disappeared. Meaning far more lives could be saved by the removal of a toxic substance that permeates our society, than would be lost by the removal of those dedicated to healing.

My only complaint about the book is the style is a bit too conversational. Theories are presented interspersed with narrative about the authors eating dinner, raking leaves and watching the flora and fauna around their home as if they were attempting to novelize their story. Without those useless asides, I think the book would have been an even quicker and more informative read.

Overall, despite the mistrust with which I hold the medical profession these days, I can’t say I’d like to see the outcome of a society without doctors, trauma surgeons and emergency rooms. A far more interesting thought experiment would be to imagine the impact on our world if pharmaceutical company stockholders, medical insurance companies and politicians disappeared. I’m sure we’d all lead much happier and healthier lives then.

Monday, March 8, 2010

To fish or cut bait?

Since I’ve started researching nutrition, I’ve come across tons of information about the benefits of fish oil. Book after book and website after website tout the role of fish oil in heart health as well as its efficacy in helping to treat high cholesterol, depression, anxiety, AHDH, low immunity, cancer, diabetes, inflammation, arthritis, IBD, AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease, eye disorders, macular degeneration and ulcers.

It sounds like a wonder drug – well, not actually a drug. Let’s call it a wonder-substance since it can be had over the counter without a prescription.

The supermarket vitamin aisle is overflowing with fish oil – in fact this past week my local store had an entire endcap devoted to large, colorful jars of the enormous amber capsules. They were on sale so the price was right – the only thing stopping me, aside from the sheer size of the pills [I could probably find a whole fish smaller than some of the capsules] was of course that I recently read information discounting everything that’s out there about the benefit of fish oil.

Insert a big sigh here.

I'd just picked up the book Eat to Live by Joel Fuhrman, MD which for the most part enforces a lot of what I’ve been learning about the subterfuge practiced on us by the food industry. Dr. Fuhrman advocates a diet rich in fruits and vegetables which makes sense, but on pg. 127 he opines that fish oil can actually ‘decrease the activity of the immune system’ and may have a role in liver dysfunction, citing that much of the oil in those jewel-like amber capsules may in fact be rancid.

He also believes eating fish in general [another health tip promoted heavily everywhere else] isn’t as good for us as we’ve been lead to believe thanks to elevated mercury content.

Once again, information overload wins the day. I’m not saying I believe Dr. Fuhrman over everyone else, but it’s interesting and disheartening to find yet more contradictory health information. If everything we eat is bad for us – then why not just eat anything we want?

I suppose that’s exactly what the food industry is hoping we will do.

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Bored by chocolate

Yes, you read that right. I’m official bored with chocolate and I’ll tell you why.

I read too much about it.

A couple weeks ago I ordered The Healing Powers of Chocolate by Cal Orey. I thought it would be fun and informative and give me lots of good excuses to eat my favorite food. I had visions of curing all my common ailments with a Hershey Bar or pound or two of good ‘ol Jersey Shore fudge.

As it turns out, according to the author, who also penned The Healing Powers of Vinegar and The Healing Powers of Olive Oil, chocolate can cure a host of complaints from acne to weight gain. You could probably convince me that chocolate is not responsible for pimples [who doesn’t want to believe that?] and that chocolate in moderation will not make you fat, but the extensive list of ills found in the chapter titled ‘Home Remedies’ also includes much less believable items such as Economic Stress and Universal Emergency. When an author has to reach for stuff like this to fill up a list, her credibility hits the skids as far as I’m concerned.

Overall the book is a lighthearted look at how awesome chocolate is. I can’t argue with that, and yes, I certainly agree it’s not the root of all evil as so many diets would have us believe. But after slogging through the first 200 pages, I’m pretty much done with my journey through chocolate’s healing powers. I should have given up on page 71 in the middle of the list of herbs that can be added to chocolate. The author includes Marshmallow [the plant Althaea officianalis] for its ability to sooth a sore throat or an upset stomach. That’s cool. But she lists dark chocolate topped with marshmallows as a way to get this healing effect. Um...marshmallow may be a plant with curative powers, but marshmallows are made of SUGAR. They might make you feel better because they’re yummy, but they’re not herbal.

My take home message from the book is something I already knew: Chocolate is not bad for you. My life without chocolate would be much less happy and much less healthy, so I’m not ever giving it up...but I can do without the book, thanks.

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Going Organic

I’ve been reading Natural Cures “They” Don’t Want You to Know About by Kevin Trudeau and it’s doing a lot to erode my confidence in the food and drug industries. One thing I’ve taken away from the book so far is the benefits of organic food.

Up until now I have to admit I looked at ‘organic’ food as something that was just more expensive than regular food. Living on a budget in one of the most expensive counties in the USA, it’s tough to fill up a shopping cart with enough food for 84 meals [3 meals x 7 days x 4 people] and not go broke. Like most hunter-gatherers I know, I’ve been trained to shop for bargains and get the most bang for my buck, so if a dozen regular eggs cost $1.88 and the organic eggs cost $2.49 – guess which ones I’m going to buy? When regular lettuce is on sale for $0.99 and organic lettuce is 2 for $5.00 the regular has to win. I never wanted to pay more for something – especially something that might not taste as good.

Then I read the book, which describes how the food industry loads everything with chemicals [even produce] in order to make it look better, taste better, grow bigger, and make people hungrier. Yeah. That last one gave me pause too. It sort of makes sense. I’ve often felt addicted to certain foods – the potato chips that promise ‘you can’t eat just one’ – maybe there’s more to that slogan than meets the eye. Candy that calls to me, cookies that disappear in a few days...I often feel like I can’t stop eating something even though I really don’t feel hungry. I used to think it was my own dismal lack of will power, but now I’m starting to wonder if it’s not an industry-engineered reaction to the food itself.

In response to this alarming information, I decided to start small and replace a couple of items in my cart with their organic counterparts. This week I bought organically grown romaine lettuce and I made a killer Greek salad from it. I also splurged on organic eggs [not the specially formulated omega-3 eggs that I sometimes buy, but regular certified organic eggs]. In each case these items were slightly more expensive than what I normally buy, but I feel if I’m reducing even by a little bit, the amount of unnecessary chemicals my family and I consume, it may be worth the price.

Do you buy organic food? Would you if it were the same price as regular food? If you do eat organic some or all of the time, do you think the changeover improved your health?

I’ll let you know if I feel any different after eating some organic food – even if it’s only peace of mind in knowing I’m cutting down on my chemical intake it may be worth the extra cost.

Saturday, January 23, 2010

The Dos and Don'ts of Food Cures

I’m currently reading Food: Your Miracle Medicine by Jean Carper. It’s a thick paperback packed with interesting tidbits about how foods have effect in both healing and preventing disease.

It’s interesting stuff but not as easy to understand as one might think. The main message of course seems to be that eating healthy food will help make you healthy. No problem there. Eating certain foods in larger quantities can ease symptoms of certain diseases and even stop them completely. Avoiding certain foods can also help prevent and cure certain common disorders.

The problem I’m finding with the book, though, lies in the need to cross reference each food…if you take more of something to prevent or cure a certain condition, you may be causing yourself another problem.

Tea is a perfect example – it seems to have lots of healing properties and has effect in numerous medical conditions. The take home message in a lot of health related literature I’ve read lately is drink more tea. But tea is also listed as a culprit in the formation of kidney stones [been there, done that, don’t want to go back.] So, do I continue to drink large amounts of tea because of the anti-oxidants and other healing properties or do I give it up in order to prevent a recurrence of my kidney stones?

Sweet potatoes are another suspect on the kidney stone list – and they’re likewise a superfood reported to have numerous health benefits. Another dilemma. By changing my diet to include more sweet potatoes and more tea for their healthful effects, I seem to be putting myself at greater risk for a recurrence of kidney stones.

{Insert big sigh here}. I won’t even mention all the bad things chocolate is supposed to cause because I haven’t started reading this book yet. Of course, I would never give up chocolate, even if it caused sudden, irreversible, flatulent death. Maybe my love of chocolate means I’ll never be fully healthy – or maybe it means I’ll never die. I don’t know, and I don’t care…but I do want to know how I can cure with food and not cause some other ailment in the process.

Any suggestions?

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Who's afraid of the FDA?

I am now. I wasn’t before I read this book:

FDA: Failure, Deception, Abuse
Compiled from articles in Life Extension Magazine* and largely written by William Faloon.

Forget Salem’s Lot or A Haunting in Connecticut. This stuff is much more terrifying. The book discusses various cases in which the Food and Drug Administration is [and sometimes by its own admission] failing in its mission to protect the health and welfare of the American people.

The articles highlight instances where the FDA guidelines have allowed bad drugs to come to market despite numerous deaths, terrible side effects and poorly constructed clinical trials while oftentimes useful drugs or supplements are stonewalled or denied to needy patients.

I spend a lot of time reading the labels in the health food/vitamin aisle at the supermarket and I’ve always been concerned about those little taglines you see that say in effect: These statements have not been verified by the FDA. It’s sort of a backhanded warning for consumers. It’s not saying the bottle of supplements or the diet drink you’re thinking of buying is bad for you, it’s just saying the government agency established to safeguard your health by testing and controlling the manufacture of anything you want to put in your body hasn’t bothered to find out if this particular product does what it claims to do.

Not a glowing testimonial. Cleverly designed to make you wonder, is this stuff okay? If it’s not, why do they sell it at the supermarket? If it is, why did my doctor tell me it was all hogwash to take supplements? Am I wasting my money or endangering my health?

The book tends to lean toward the explanation that the FDA is under the control of Big Pharma. Drugs produced by companies that have the time and money to wade through all the FDA regulations to get official approval are better, safer, more effective. Supplements that may help you avoid the need for costly pharmaceuticals are not regulated, they don’t undergo the vigorous testing prescription drugs do and therefore should be avoided.

Let’s spin this another way: If it’s cheap and effective, maybe the FDA would prefer you didn’t trust it.

Consider this, “The FDA does not make drugs or directly test drugs to determine if they are safe and effective. The FDA’s role is to oversee the research conducted by pharmaceutical companies…” The results of the trials are obtained by the pharmaceutical company and given to the FDA.

Does this mean the prescriptions in your medicine cabinet don’t work? No…but it does mean they work only as well as the people who make them say they do.

Do you trust the FDA stamp of approval? I used to. Now I’m not so sure.

* Just a note on the other side of the argument. The Life Extension Foundation, authors of Life Extension Magazine, sells vitamins and supplements. Could their reports about the FDA be biased?