Obamacare is unpopular in nine swing states, but not when the law is described without that label

Party labels affect what rural voters think about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, according to the latest National Rural Assembly and Center for Rural Strategies poll of rural voters in nine swing states in the presidential election, reports Bill Bishop of the Daily Yonder, which the center publishes.

When asked if they approved or disapproved of the "Affordable Care Act, sometimes called Obamacare," 60 percent of rural voters said they opposed the law, and 34 percent said they favored it. Without reference to "Obamacare," voters were asked if they approved or disapproved of the law, which "would give states the opportunity to extend Medicaid coverage to cover more low income families with health insurance, with the federal government picking up 90 percent of the costs," and 45 percent said they approved, while 42 percent disapproved.

Bishop concludes that partisanship is the culprit for such results. "Partisanship overwhelms issues in today's politics," he writes. "Voters are willing to change their beliefs -- even their religious affiliation ... in order to stay with their political tribe." (Read more)

Party labels affect what rural voters think about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, according to the latest National Rural Assembly and Center for Rural Strategies poll of rural voters in nine swing states in the presidential election, reports Bill Bishop of the Daily Yonder, which the center publishes.

When asked if they approved or disapproved of the "Affordable Care Act, sometimes called Obamacare," 60 percent of rural voters said they opposed the law, and 34 percent said they favored it. Without reference to "Obamacare," voters were asked if they approved or disapproved of the law, which "would give states the opportunity to extend Medicaid coverage to cover more low income families with health insurance, with the federal government picking up 90 percent of the costs," and 45 percent said they approved, while 42 percent disapproved.

Bishop concludes that partisanship is the culprit for such results. "Partisanship overwhelms issues in today's politics," he writes. "Voters are willing to change their beliefs -- even their religious affiliation ... in order to stay with their political tribe." (Read more)

Read More

Study Results Say To Take Your Vitamins And Prevent Cancer

-->

Vitamins Lower Cancer Risk in Men!

October 18, 2012

By: Dr. Walter K. Crooks, DC, DM (P.), CCCN

In a cancer study that spanned 17 years and included 14,641 male participants who were 50 years of age or over, it was found that men that take multivitamins had a decreased cancer rate of 8% and reduced the deaths associated with cancer by a whopping 12%.

130,000 Lives Potentially Saved!

These numbers a statistically significant, especially knowing that more than 1.6 million new cancer cases are diagnosed in the U.S. each year, this translates into about 130,000 cancers being prevented every year!

The study has been published in the Journal of the American Medical Association to coincide with the Annual American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research meeting.

I can remember the time when MD’s stated for fact that vitamin supplementation does nothing to increase the health of a person unless they have a deficiency, as measured by what they determine a deficiency entails.

Even now there are many MD’s that refuse to accept the fact, a fact that holistic health care providers have known all along, that people are not cloned and exact copies of one another, we are all as varied as the snowflake.

To look at the human as a collection of separate parts that have been assembled, and to treat in that manner is no different than being a auto diagnostician, checking each system of a car and repairing them as they are located.

If people would sit back and think for a second how it is to visit their own doctor they will see a pattern that is usually the same for everyone:

You go in they give you a drug that has been shown to ameliorate your symptoms. If that drug doesn’t do the trick then the MD answers with another drug to try out.

It is what I refer to as the “Spit-Balling” method of health care; meaning let’s shoot stuff at you see what sticks…

That’s not science; heck it’s not even as skilled as your local auto mechanic’s analysis of your vehicle!

It is becoming more and more apparent that the medical community has missed the boat whenever it comes to Chronic Health Conditions such as cancer.

Americans make up 5% of the world’s population, however we consume 47% of all the drugs produced worldwide!

You would think, if you follow the medical establishments propaganda, that we would rank 1^st in the world for healthcare!

Well, don’t shoot the messenger but:

The U.S. Ranks 37^thIn The World!

How can this be the case if we are taking our medications?

Americans Are Very Well Medicated, See For Yourself:

• 11% of adults aged 18-65 are on 5 medications!
• 21% of adults aged 18-65 are on 3 medications!
• 25% of children are on at least one medication!
• 37% of seniors are on 5 medications!
• 52% of women in the U.S. are on at least 1 medication!
• 65% of seniors are on 3 medications!            
• 90% of all seniors in America are taking at least one medication!

Study after study proves that the Holistic Health Care Model is the true path to living a healthy life.

The holistic, natural and hands on approach to health has as its base a goal of disease prevention!

On the other hand, allopathic, chemically engineered and un-natural “health care” has as it’s base disease management!  (if you would call it that)

A more fitting term for the American health care model would be “Monopolized Sickness Profit Care-less”, a program of keeping us alive but just sick enough and often enough to rely on their chemicals and death causing drugs.

You see no medication really has a side effect.

All Medication Have EFFECTS, Period.

The effect may rid your body of an infection, or the effect of the drug may be that you die……

Take your vitamins!

 http://LifeChangingCareHouston.com

Life-Changing Care FaceBook Page 

Follow Us On Twitter! 

-->

Vitamins Lower Cancer Risk in Men!

October 18, 2012

By: Dr. Walter K. Crooks, DC, DM (P.), CCCN

In a cancer study that spanned 17 years and included 14,641 male participants who were 50 years of age or over, it was found that men that take multivitamins had a decreased cancer rate of 8% and reduced the deaths associated with cancer by a whopping 12%.

130,000 Lives Potentially Saved!

These numbers a statistically significant, especially knowing that more than 1.6 million new cancer cases are diagnosed in the U.S. each year, this translates into about 130,000 cancers being prevented every year!

The study has been published in the Journal of the American Medical Association to coincide with the Annual American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research meeting.

I can remember the time when MD’s stated for fact that vitamin supplementation does nothing to increase the health of a person unless they have a deficiency, as measured by what they determine a deficiency entails.

Even now there are many MD’s that refuse to accept the fact, a fact that holistic health care providers have known all along, that people are not cloned and exact copies of one another, we are all as varied as the snowflake.

To look at the human as a collection of separate parts that have been assembled, and to treat in that manner is no different than being a auto diagnostician, checking each system of a car and repairing them as they are located.

If people would sit back and think for a second how it is to visit their own doctor they will see a pattern that is usually the same for everyone:

You go in they give you a drug that has been shown to ameliorate your symptoms. If that drug doesn’t do the trick then the MD answers with another drug to try out.

It is what I refer to as the “Spit-Balling” method of health care; meaning let’s shoot stuff at you see what sticks…

That’s not science; heck it’s not even as skilled as your local auto mechanic’s analysis of your vehicle!

It is becoming more and more apparent that the medical community has missed the boat whenever it comes to Chronic Health Conditions such as cancer.

Americans make up 5% of the world’s population, however we consume 47% of all the drugs produced worldwide!

You would think, if you follow the medical establishments propaganda, that we would rank 1^st in the world for healthcare!

Well, don’t shoot the messenger but:

The U.S. Ranks 37^thIn The World!

How can this be the case if we are taking our medications?

Americans Are Very Well Medicated, See For Yourself:

• 11% of adults aged 18-65 are on 5 medications!
• 21% of adults aged 18-65 are on 3 medications!
• 25% of children are on at least one medication!
• 37% of seniors are on 5 medications!
• 52% of women in the U.S. are on at least 1 medication!
• 65% of seniors are on 3 medications!            
• 90% of all seniors in America are taking at least one medication!

Study after study proves that the Holistic Health Care Model is the true path to living a healthy life.

The holistic, natural and hands on approach to health has as its base a goal of disease prevention!

On the other hand, allopathic, chemically engineered and un-natural “health care” has as it’s base disease management!  (if you would call it that)

A more fitting term for the American health care model would be “Monopolized Sickness Profit Care-less”, a program of keeping us alive but just sick enough and often enough to rely on their chemicals and death causing drugs.

You see no medication really has a side effect.

All Medication Have EFFECTS, Period.

The effect may rid your body of an infection, or the effect of the drug may be that you die……

Take your vitamins!

 http://LifeChangingCareHouston.com

Life-Changing Care FaceBook Page 

Follow Us On Twitter! 

Read More

UK study definitively shows that meth labs proliferate in state's counties where pseudoephedrine sales are high

A University of Kentucky research study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association this week shows a direct correlation between pseudoephedrine sales and methamphetamine production in Kentucky counties. Pdeudoephedrine, the main ingredient in Sudafed and similar decongestants, is the key feedstock for meth labs. The General Assembly further limited its sale this year.

“We find that counties where more pseudoephedrine is sold, more methamphetamine lab seizures are reported. Even though Kentucky requires pseudoephedrine sales to be tracked electronically, in real-time, the per-capita sales in some counties appear to be aberrant. Our results indicate a 565-fold variation in pseudoephedrine sales between counties. It is highly improbable that demand for pseudoephedrine in these counties is solely due to cough/cold/allergy,” explained Jeffrey Talbert, director of the College of  Pharmacy's Institute for Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy.

The other authors of the study are College of Pharmacy faculty members Karen Blumenschein and Trish Freeman, staff member Amy Burke, and Arnold Stromberg of UK’s Department of Statistics. For a copy of their report, click here.

A University of Kentucky research study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association this week shows a direct correlation between pseudoephedrine sales and methamphetamine production in Kentucky counties. Pdeudoephedrine, the main ingredient in Sudafed and similar decongestants, is the key feedstock for meth labs. The General Assembly further limited its sale this year.

“We find that counties where more pseudoephedrine is sold, more methamphetamine lab seizures are reported. Even though Kentucky requires pseudoephedrine sales to be tracked electronically, in real-time, the per-capita sales in some counties appear to be aberrant. Our results indicate a 565-fold variation in pseudoephedrine sales between counties. It is highly improbable that demand for pseudoephedrine in these counties is solely due to cough/cold/allergy,” explained Jeffrey Talbert, director of the College of  Pharmacy's Institute for Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy.

The other authors of the study are College of Pharmacy faculty members Karen Blumenschein and Trish Freeman, staff member Amy Burke, and Arnold Stromberg of UK’s Department of Statistics. For a copy of their report, click here.

Read More

13-year-old with national following succumbs to rare cancer

A 13-year-old McLean County boy whose fight with a rare cancer gained national attention died last night. The death of Lane Goodwin was announced to 342,000 followers on his "Prayers for Lane" Facebook page, report Rich Suwanski and Megan Harris of the Messenger-Inquirer in Owensboro.

"In 2010, Lane was diagnosed with alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma Stage IV, a rare and aggressive childhood cancer that is only diagnosed in one out of 1 million children," the reporters write. "In 2010, he underwent 54 weeks of chemotherapy and radiation treatment. In 2011, 13 tumors were found in his bones. . . . The family regularly updated followers on Facebook with his condition. Almost half a million people worldwide 'liked,' posted words of encouragement or started fundraisers to help the family with medical expenses. Followers included celebrities, college and professional athletes and social media friends who were inspired by his fight against the deadly disease."

His mother, Angela Goodwin, told the newspaper last month, “We never expected this. We knew there was some good support and prayers for Lane the last couple of years, but this has been unbelievable.” (Read more)

A 13-year-old McLean County boy whose fight with a rare cancer gained national attention died last night. The death of Lane Goodwin was announced to 342,000 followers on his "Prayers for Lane" Facebook page, report Rich Suwanski and Megan Harris of the Messenger-Inquirer in Owensboro.

"In 2010, Lane was diagnosed with alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma Stage IV, a rare and aggressive childhood cancer that is only diagnosed in one out of 1 million children," the reporters write. "In 2010, he underwent 54 weeks of chemotherapy and radiation treatment. In 2011, 13 tumors were found in his bones. . . . The family regularly updated followers on Facebook with his condition. Almost half a million people worldwide 'liked,' posted words of encouragement or started fundraisers to help the family with medical expenses. Followers included celebrities, college and professional athletes and social media friends who were inspired by his fight against the deadly disease."

His mother, Angela Goodwin, told the newspaper last month, “We never expected this. We knew there was some good support and prayers for Lane the last couple of years, but this has been unbelievable.” (Read more)

Read More

Doctor's rejection of the willfully obese makes exercise expert ask: Who's responsible for your health? Who should pay for it?

Bryant Stamford, professor and chairman of the Department of Kinesiology and Integrative Physiology at Hanover College in Indiana, wrote in his weekly exercise-and-health column Thursday's edition of The Courier-Journal:

"I caught an interesting news story on TV about a physician who refuses to treat obese patients. That was the headline. In truth, when she was interviewed she made it clear that she had a number of obese patients and she was treating them," if they were willing to lose weight. She referred the other obese patients to physicians who specialized in care of the overweight.

Stamford asked: "Is this approach the rationing of health care? It’s rationing it to those who take responsibility for themselves by managing their weight. . . . I don’t support withholding health care to anyone, and that includes the obese and smokers. But it does raise the issue of who is responsible for your health. We spend far more on health care than other industrialized countries, and we are bankrupting our health-care systems, including Medicare and Medicaid. Why? We follow a health-destroying lifestyle, then we expect to jump into the health-care system and have it perform miracles. And, more often than not, it does, but it costs a fortune for each patient. Does this make any sense?"

He points to ways in which some countries have decided in what order people get heart surgeries -- those who smoke are not first in line. What it could mean in the future for us?  "I believe the writing is on the wall. ... If you engage in health-destroying behaviors, you will be required to pay a lot more for health insurance. It’s the model for life insurance, and there already are rumblings around the country supporting a move in this direction. Stay tuned." Read the column here.

Bryant Stamford, professor and chairman of the Department of Kinesiology and Integrative Physiology at Hanover College in Indiana, wrote in his weekly exercise-and-health column Thursday's edition of The Courier-Journal:

"I caught an interesting news story on TV about a physician who refuses to treat obese patients. That was the headline. In truth, when she was interviewed she made it clear that she had a number of obese patients and she was treating them," if they were willing to lose weight. She referred the other obese patients to physicians who specialized in care of the overweight.

Stamford asked: "Is this approach the rationing of health care? It’s rationing it to those who take responsibility for themselves by managing their weight. . . . I don’t support withholding health care to anyone, and that includes the obese and smokers. But it does raise the issue of who is responsible for your health. We spend far more on health care than other industrialized countries, and we are bankrupting our health-care systems, including Medicare and Medicaid. Why? We follow a health-destroying lifestyle, then we expect to jump into the health-care system and have it perform miracles. And, more often than not, it does, but it costs a fortune for each patient. Does this make any sense?"

He points to ways in which some countries have decided in what order people get heart surgeries -- those who smoke are not first in line. What it could mean in the future for us?  "I believe the writing is on the wall. ... If you engage in health-destroying behaviors, you will be required to pay a lot more for health insurance. It’s the model for life insurance, and there already are rumblings around the country supporting a move in this direction. Stay tuned." Read the column here.

Read More

Board of Medical Licensure to amend pill-mill regulations to address concerns of doctors and some patients

The Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure wants to change some of the more controversial requirements for urine screenings and digital monitoring in the state’s new prescription-drug regulations under the law aimed at fighting doctor shopping and "pill mills" that dispense painkillers indiscriminately.

Mike Wynn of The Courier-Journal reports that Dr. Preston Nunnelley, the board’s president, told state lawmakers Wednesday that the board plans to submit amendments to the regulations by Nov. 1 to address the concerns of doctors that the new law is proving too burdensome, and because patients are being charged for urine tests that insurance companies are refusing to cover. Nunnelley said the amendments would provide more flexibility on when patients must receive those screenings. He said "chronic pain patients would not face regular screenings unless they are considered high risk for abuse or diversion," Wynn reports. "The amendments are also likely to exempt certain patients, such as children, from checks through the Kentucky All Schedule Prescription Electronic Reporting system, or KASPER, he said."

Nunnelley called the changes “tune-ups." “This is a new experience for the board of licensure,” he testified. “This is the first time we’ve done anything on this scale and obviously we didn’t do it perfect.” Or perfectly. (Read more)

The Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure wants to change some of the more controversial requirements for urine screenings and digital monitoring in the state’s new prescription-drug regulations under the law aimed at fighting doctor shopping and "pill mills" that dispense painkillers indiscriminately.

Mike Wynn of The Courier-Journal reports that Dr. Preston Nunnelley, the board’s president, told state lawmakers Wednesday that the board plans to submit amendments to the regulations by Nov. 1 to address the concerns of doctors that the new law is proving too burdensome, and because patients are being charged for urine tests that insurance companies are refusing to cover. Nunnelley said the amendments would provide more flexibility on when patients must receive those screenings. He said "chronic pain patients would not face regular screenings unless they are considered high risk for abuse or diversion," Wynn reports. "The amendments are also likely to exempt certain patients, such as children, from checks through the Kentucky All Schedule Prescription Electronic Reporting system, or KASPER, he said."

Nunnelley called the changes “tune-ups." “This is a new experience for the board of licensure,” he testified. “This is the first time we’ve done anything on this scale and obviously we didn’t do it perfect.” Or perfectly. (Read more)

Read More

Georgia doctor prescribes pills to help in school -- whether or not the ADHD shoe fits -- to level the playing field for the poor

Amanda Rocafort and her son, Quintn,
who takes Adderall for his ADHD.
(NYT photo by Bryan Meltz)

In light of last week's news that the number of poor children on Medicaid in Kentucky are being prescribed anti-psychotic drugs at alarming rates for such diagnoses as attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder and depression, the New York Times reports that some doctors are making "no excuses" for prescribing psychostimulants in other locales for children of the poor.  Dr. Michael Anderson, a pediatrician in a poor county north of Atlanta, Ga., said he thinks ADHD is "made up" and "an excuse" to prescribe pills to treat what he "considers the children’s true ill -- poor academic performance in inadequate schools." Still, "I don’t have a whole lot of choice,' said Anderson. “We’ve decided as a society that it’s too expensive to modify the kid’s environment. So we have to modify the kid.'"

Dr. Anderson is one of the more outspoken proponents of an idea that is gaining some ground: Prescribe drugs to struggling students in schools not to treat ADHD, necessarily, but to boost their focus and impulse control.  Alan Schwarz reports that Anderson figures that he is arming them with the only tool he has because these children can't afford family therapy or tutoring or behavior-based counseling or any of those other tools that other children might have at their disposal to help them learn.

Of course, Anderson is not without his critics. Many doctors, writes Schwarz, warn of the dangers of exposing children to the unwarranted physical and psychological risks of powerful drugs on everything from mood to blood pressure to the suppression of growth. (Read more)

Amanda Rocafort and her son, Quintn,
who takes Adderall for his ADHD.
(NYT photo by Bryan Meltz)

In light of last week's news that the number of poor children on Medicaid in Kentucky are being prescribed anti-psychotic drugs at alarming rates for such diagnoses as attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder and depression, the New York Times reports that some doctors are making "no excuses" for prescribing psychostimulants in other locales for children of the poor.  Dr. Michael Anderson, a pediatrician in a poor county north of Atlanta, Ga., said he thinks ADHD is "made up" and "an excuse" to prescribe pills to treat what he "considers the children’s true ill -- poor academic performance in inadequate schools." Still, "I don’t have a whole lot of choice,' said Anderson. “We’ve decided as a society that it’s too expensive to modify the kid’s environment. So we have to modify the kid.'"

Dr. Anderson is one of the more outspoken proponents of an idea that is gaining some ground: Prescribe drugs to struggling students in schools not to treat ADHD, necessarily, but to boost their focus and impulse control.  Alan Schwarz reports that Anderson figures that he is arming them with the only tool he has because these children can't afford family therapy or tutoring or behavior-based counseling or any of those other tools that other children might have at their disposal to help them learn.

Of course, Anderson is not without his critics. Many doctors, writes Schwarz, warn of the dangers of exposing children to the unwarranted physical and psychological risks of powerful drugs on everything from mood to blood pressure to the suppression of growth. (Read more)

Read More

Governor lauds HB 1 for closing 10 of the state's worst pain clinics, reducing the number of controlled-substance prescriptions

Gov. Steve Beshear gave credit this week to House Bill 1 for reducing the number of prescriptions written for frequently abused controlled substances and for closing the doors on 10 of the state's worst pain-management clinics. He also said the bill had promoted investigations into what he called "suspicious prescribing practices." Beshear, in a prepared statement, said: "We knew that this bill would have an immediate impact on thwarting the abuse and diversion of prescription drugs in our state, and the statistics over the last few months are already showing progress."

The governor also noted that Kentucky All Schedule Prescription Electronic Reporting (KASPER) accounts have increased from 7,911 in April to 21,542 in October. Account users are physicians, dentists, optometrists, advances practice nurses and podiatrists who then use those accounts to check on the drug records of patients daily. Beshear, responding to frequent criticism that the reporting of KASPER results is time-consuming, remarked that "the vast majority of those requests are processed in less than 15 seconds."
 
John Cheves of the Lexington Herald-Leader also reported that state regulators said this week that "they're working with private insurance companies and Medicaid managers to make sure health insurance plans help cover the cost of urine tests required under HB 1." Cheves had written earlier about consumer complaints that the costs of those tests, now required by the bill, were being borne by the patient. The
Kentucky Department of Insurance is communicating with insurers to guarantee that urine tests under HB 1 are classified as a medically necessary expense, Insurance Commissioner Sharon Clark told Cheves. The Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services is doing the same for Medicaid clients.
(Read more)

Gov. Steve Beshear gave credit this week to House Bill 1 for reducing the number of prescriptions written for frequently abused controlled substances and for closing the doors on 10 of the state's worst pain-management clinics. He also said the bill had promoted investigations into what he called "suspicious prescribing practices." Beshear, in a prepared statement, said: "We knew that this bill would have an immediate impact on thwarting the abuse and diversion of prescription drugs in our state, and the statistics over the last few months are already showing progress."

The governor also noted that Kentucky All Schedule Prescription Electronic Reporting (KASPER) accounts have increased from 7,911 in April to 21,542 in October. Account users are physicians, dentists, optometrists, advances practice nurses and podiatrists who then use those accounts to check on the drug records of patients daily. Beshear, responding to frequent criticism that the reporting of KASPER results is time-consuming, remarked that "the vast majority of those requests are processed in less than 15 seconds."
 
John Cheves of the Lexington Herald-Leader also reported that state regulators said this week that "they're working with private insurance companies and Medicaid managers to make sure health insurance plans help cover the cost of urine tests required under HB 1." Cheves had written earlier about consumer complaints that the costs of those tests, now required by the bill, were being borne by the patient. The
Kentucky Department of Insurance is communicating with insurers to guarantee that urine tests under HB 1 are classified as a medically necessary expense, Insurance Commissioner Sharon Clark told Cheves. The Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services is doing the same for Medicaid clients.
(Read more)

Read More

Kentucky Spirit to terminate Medicaid contract with state early; Cabinet assures recipients no interruption in service

Kentucky Spirit, a Medicaid managed-care provider, will terminate its contract with the state's Cabinet for Health and Family Services a year earlier than scheduled, effective July 5, 2013. The company serves approximately 140,000 Medicaid recipients in 104 Kentucky counties. According to the CFHS, Kentuckians enrolled in Kentucky Spirit coverage "will continue to receive health care with no interruptions, and the Cabinet will ensure a smooth transition for those patients to another managed care organization in the coming months."

Kentucky Spirit said in a statement Wednesday that it is committed to helping its clients it serves transfer to one of Kentucky's three other Medicaid contractors. In addition, the move will cut some 200 jobs in Lexington, representing $12 million a year in wages and benefits.

The Courier-Journal's Tom Loftus writes that Kentucky Spirit has been in months of discussions with the Cabinet for Health and Family Services about its contract. The company also said it has filed a formal dispute with the cabinet for damages it has incurred throughout the process. Gov. Steve Beshear issued his own statement informing the company that the state "will hold this company accountable to its contractual commitments through whatever means necessary on behalf of both the members and the taxpayers.”

Overall, Kentucky’s transition to Medicaid managed care has not been smooth, explains the Lexington Herald-Leader's Beth Musgrave. Many doctors, hospitals and other providers have complained about late payments and cumbersome reimbursement processes; some of which have had to be resolved in court.

To see the Kentucky Spirit statement, go here.

Kentucky Spirit, a Medicaid managed-care provider, will terminate its contract with the state's Cabinet for Health and Family Services a year earlier than scheduled, effective July 5, 2013. The company serves approximately 140,000 Medicaid recipients in 104 Kentucky counties. According to the CFHS, Kentuckians enrolled in Kentucky Spirit coverage "will continue to receive health care with no interruptions, and the Cabinet will ensure a smooth transition for those patients to another managed care organization in the coming months."

Kentucky Spirit said in a statement Wednesday that it is committed to helping its clients it serves transfer to one of Kentucky's three other Medicaid contractors. In addition, the move will cut some 200 jobs in Lexington, representing $12 million a year in wages and benefits.

The Courier-Journal's Tom Loftus writes that Kentucky Spirit has been in months of discussions with the Cabinet for Health and Family Services about its contract. The company also said it has filed a formal dispute with the cabinet for damages it has incurred throughout the process. Gov. Steve Beshear issued his own statement informing the company that the state "will hold this company accountable to its contractual commitments through whatever means necessary on behalf of both the members and the taxpayers.”

Overall, Kentucky’s transition to Medicaid managed care has not been smooth, explains the Lexington Herald-Leader's Beth Musgrave. Many doctors, hospitals and other providers have complained about late payments and cumbersome reimbursement processes; some of which have had to be resolved in court.

To see the Kentucky Spirit statement, go here.

Read More

New antiviral treatments for cats

Robert-Tissot C, Ruegger VL, Cattori V, et al. Stimulation with a class A CpG oligonucleotide enhances resistance to infection with feline viruses from five different families. Vet Res. 2012; 43: 60. [free, full text article] 
 
Viral pathogens commonly infect domestic cats, in particular in multi-cat environments such as shelters and catteries, often leading to increased morbidity and mortality. A promising addition to our armamentarium against viral infection along with vaccinations is the manipulation of innate immunity. Oligonucleotides (ODN) containing unmethylated cytosine-phosphate-guanosine motifs of class A (CpG-A) are recognized as pathogen-associated molecular patterns due to high abundance in viral genome (as well as bacterial genome) and, thus, are highly potent synthetic inducers of innate antiviral mechanisms.

This study tested in vitro CpG-A ODN ability to enhance innate immune responses and prevent viral replication. CpG-A ODN was shown to stimulate feline peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), enhancing their proliferation, and shifting their gene expression in an antiviral orientation. In vivo, CpG-A ODN also induced a systemic antiviral state with astonishing effects of potent induction of IFNα and IFNω, with mRNA expression of these genes increased by up to 12 000 and 35 000-fold respectively in PBMCs of cats. 

 With regard to this, a recombinant feline type I IFN marketed in both Japan (Intercat®) and Europe (Virbagen Omega®) has made its way into therapeutic protocols for FCV, FHV, FeLV and canine parvovirus infections and has demonstrated preventive capacities in a cattery developing an outbreak of FPV. However, when compared to direct initiation of antiviral mechanisms by a recombinant IFNα protein, administration of CpG-A ODN holds the advantage of inducing the production of all type I IFN and their subtypes, which have been shown to possess differential antiviral properties and kinetics. On the other hand, CpG-A ODN stimulated PBMCs in kittens tended to develop an immunologic environment with a Th2 orientation (antibody response) corroborating the immature IFN system and impaired activation of mononuclear cells in neonates. This particular observation opens new perspectives on possible explanations for the qualitative discrepancy between innate immune responses in newborns and adults. 

Overall, treatment with CpG-A ODN enhanced resistance against feline viruses from five distinct viral families, namely Coronavirdae, Herpesviridae, Caliciviridae, Parvoviridae, and Retrovridae. The data highlights the prophylactic potential of CpG-A ODN in domestic cats as a stand-alone agent and against a large range of viral pathogens simultaneously. Cats may highly benefit from such a molecule when placed in environments with strong infectious pressure such as catteries, shelters or pet shows. [GO]

See also: Medzhitov R. Recognition of microorganisms and activation of the immune response. Nature. 2007; 449: 819-26.

More on cat health:
Winn Feline Foundation Library
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Join us on Google+

Robert-Tissot C, Ruegger VL, Cattori V, et al. Stimulation with a class A CpG oligonucleotide enhances resistance to infection with feline viruses from five different families. Vet Res. 2012; 43: 60. [free, full text article] 
 
Viral pathogens commonly infect domestic cats, in particular in multi-cat environments such as shelters and catteries, often leading to increased morbidity and mortality. A promising addition to our armamentarium against viral infection along with vaccinations is the manipulation of innate immunity. Oligonucleotides (ODN) containing unmethylated cytosine-phosphate-guanosine motifs of class A (CpG-A) are recognized as pathogen-associated molecular patterns due to high abundance in viral genome (as well as bacterial genome) and, thus, are highly potent synthetic inducers of innate antiviral mechanisms.

This study tested in vitro CpG-A ODN ability to enhance innate immune responses and prevent viral replication. CpG-A ODN was shown to stimulate feline peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), enhancing their proliferation, and shifting their gene expression in an antiviral orientation. In vivo, CpG-A ODN also induced a systemic antiviral state with astonishing effects of potent induction of IFNα and IFNω, with mRNA expression of these genes increased by up to 12 000 and 35 000-fold respectively in PBMCs of cats. 

 With regard to this, a recombinant feline type I IFN marketed in both Japan (Intercat®) and Europe (Virbagen Omega®) has made its way into therapeutic protocols for FCV, FHV, FeLV and canine parvovirus infections and has demonstrated preventive capacities in a cattery developing an outbreak of FPV. However, when compared to direct initiation of antiviral mechanisms by a recombinant IFNα protein, administration of CpG-A ODN holds the advantage of inducing the production of all type I IFN and their subtypes, which have been shown to possess differential antiviral properties and kinetics. On the other hand, CpG-A ODN stimulated PBMCs in kittens tended to develop an immunologic environment with a Th2 orientation (antibody response) corroborating the immature IFN system and impaired activation of mononuclear cells in neonates. This particular observation opens new perspectives on possible explanations for the qualitative discrepancy between innate immune responses in newborns and adults. 

Overall, treatment with CpG-A ODN enhanced resistance against feline viruses from five distinct viral families, namely Coronavirdae, Herpesviridae, Caliciviridae, Parvoviridae, and Retrovridae. The data highlights the prophylactic potential of CpG-A ODN in domestic cats as a stand-alone agent and against a large range of viral pathogens simultaneously. Cats may highly benefit from such a molecule when placed in environments with strong infectious pressure such as catteries, shelters or pet shows. [GO]

See also: Medzhitov R. Recognition of microorganisms and activation of the immune response. Nature. 2007; 449: 819-26.

More on cat health:
Winn Feline Foundation Library
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Join us on Google+

Read More

GMOs in pregnant women can cause cancer, even in the fetus!

 

 

 

Food habits in recent days have become more and more dictated by technological advancements rather than instincts. With striking technological and scientific improvements in every sphere of life, people are becoming more and more inclined towards genetically modified food, seeds, and organisms. Genetic modification, on one hand, has undoubtedly increased the productivity of crops and on the other, it has ushered an era of new sorts of diseases that were previously unheard of. Such is the influence of the GMOs on human beings that they are even capable of causing cancer in the fetus.

 

A study conducted by the researchers from University of Sherbrook Hospital Centrein Quebec, Canadashows that all the pregnant women involved in the study as subjects were found with blood samples containing GMO toxins. But the most dreadful part is that their unborn babies were also found affected with such toxins. From this study, it is evident that these toxic ingredients fail to break down and are not eliminated during digestion and continue to linger in the blood of the host. These elements not only avoid the digestive system of the pregnant women but they also take refuge in their blood for an indefinite span of time and even enter the blood streams of the unborn children in their womb. These toxins are responsible for an unknown number and types of diseases but it is certain that they play a vital role in harvesting seeds of cancer in the fetus.

 

With this shocking revelation, it has become more important for women to become cautious about what they eat because the GMO toxins find their way inside the body only through food. Though the government should actually do something about it, we already know that they won’t and so, we are left with just one option – be careful about what we eat and drink so that we don’t infect our off-spring with these harmful toxins.

 

http://www.naturalnews.com/037493_GMO_toxins_pregnant_women.html#ixzz290vwhzbA

 http://www.naturalnews.com/037493_GMO_toxins_pregnant_women.html#ixzz290xFSInO

http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Books.html )

 

 

 

Food habits in recent days have become more and more dictated by technological advancements rather than instincts. With striking technological and scientific improvements in every sphere of life, people are becoming more and more inclined towards genetically modified food, seeds, and organisms. Genetic modification, on one hand, has undoubtedly increased the productivity of crops and on the other, it has ushered an era of new sorts of diseases that were previously unheard of. Such is the influence of the GMOs on human beings that they are even capable of causing cancer in the fetus.

 

A study conducted by the researchers from University of Sherbrook Hospital Centrein Quebec, Canadashows that all the pregnant women involved in the study as subjects were found with blood samples containing GMO toxins. But the most dreadful part is that their unborn babies were also found affected with such toxins. From this study, it is evident that these toxic ingredients fail to break down and are not eliminated during digestion and continue to linger in the blood of the host. These elements not only avoid the digestive system of the pregnant women but they also take refuge in their blood for an indefinite span of time and even enter the blood streams of the unborn children in their womb. These toxins are responsible for an unknown number and types of diseases but it is certain that they play a vital role in harvesting seeds of cancer in the fetus.

 

With this shocking revelation, it has become more important for women to become cautious about what they eat because the GMO toxins find their way inside the body only through food. Though the government should actually do something about it, we already know that they won’t and so, we are left with just one option – be careful about what we eat and drink so that we don’t infect our off-spring with these harmful toxins.

 

http://www.naturalnews.com/037493_GMO_toxins_pregnant_women.html#ixzz290vwhzbA

 http://www.naturalnews.com/037493_GMO_toxins_pregnant_women.html#ixzz290xFSInO

http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Books.html )

Read More

Cigarette companies balking at Justice Dept's request for "confessional" advertising that they say goes too far

Calling them "forced public confessions," America's largest tobacco companies are asking a federal judge to reject the government's proposed corrective statements for cigarette advertising. Fred Frommer reports for the Associated Press that the Justice Department has responded by saying that such statements need to be strong enough to protect people from future false declarations made by cigarette makers. The statements that the tobacco industry views as "going too far" include admissions that the companies lied about the dangers of smoking, the addictiveness of nicotine, the lack of health benefits for "low-tar" and "light" cigarettes and the negative effect of second-hand smoke. U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler, who is hearing the case, has already said "she wants the industry to pay for corrective statements in various types of ads," writes Frommer. (Associated Press photo)

Judge Kessler ruled in 2006 that America's largest cigarette makers had systematically concealed the dangers of smoking for decades and that, as assurance that the crime was not repeated, such statements as a requirement in tobacco advertising would be appropriate. An example of an advertising statement under consideration, as suggested by the Justice Dept.: "For decades, we denied that we controlled the level of nicotine delivered in cigarettes. Here's the truth: Cigarettes are a finely tuned nicotine delivery device designed to addict people." At Monday’s hearing, Kessler said she doesn’t have to take the government’s proposed statements word-for-word, and will come up with “modifications.” (Read more)

Calling them "forced public confessions," America's largest tobacco companies are asking a federal judge to reject the government's proposed corrective statements for cigarette advertising. Fred Frommer reports for the Associated Press that the Justice Department has responded by saying that such statements need to be strong enough to protect people from future false declarations made by cigarette makers. The statements that the tobacco industry views as "going too far" include admissions that the companies lied about the dangers of smoking, the addictiveness of nicotine, the lack of health benefits for "low-tar" and "light" cigarettes and the negative effect of second-hand smoke. U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler, who is hearing the case, has already said "she wants the industry to pay for corrective statements in various types of ads," writes Frommer. (Associated Press photo)

Judge Kessler ruled in 2006 that America's largest cigarette makers had systematically concealed the dangers of smoking for decades and that, as assurance that the crime was not repeated, such statements as a requirement in tobacco advertising would be appropriate. An example of an advertising statement under consideration, as suggested by the Justice Dept.: "For decades, we denied that we controlled the level of nicotine delivered in cigarettes. Here's the truth: Cigarettes are a finely tuned nicotine delivery device designed to addict people." At Monday’s hearing, Kessler said she doesn’t have to take the government’s proposed statements word-for-word, and will come up with “modifications.” (Read more)

Read More

Open enrollment period for 2012 Medicare Part D continues now through Dec. 7

The open enrollment period for 2012 Medicare Part D began this week and will continue through Dec. 7. The open period is a time for seniors and persons with disabilities to take advantage of prescription drug benefits or, if they've been previously enrolled in the program, to modify their existing plans. The Part D program, now in its sixth year, was set up to assure those 65 and older, or those with disabilities, easy access to their medications.

According to the Medicare Rx Access Network of Kentucky, nearly 11 million Americans over 65 gained comprehensive prescription drug coverage as a result of Medicare Part D's implementation including 63 percent of Kentucky’s seniors. Currently, more than 40 million people with Medicare -- 90 percent of all beneficiaries and 89 percent of Kentucky seniors – now have comprehensive prescription drug coverage.

For additional information on the Medicare Part D program, or to view and compare Medicare plans, go here.

The open enrollment period for 2012 Medicare Part D began this week and will continue through Dec. 7. The open period is a time for seniors and persons with disabilities to take advantage of prescription drug benefits or, if they've been previously enrolled in the program, to modify their existing plans. The Part D program, now in its sixth year, was set up to assure those 65 and older, or those with disabilities, easy access to their medications.

According to the Medicare Rx Access Network of Kentucky, nearly 11 million Americans over 65 gained comprehensive prescription drug coverage as a result of Medicare Part D's implementation including 63 percent of Kentucky’s seniors. Currently, more than 40 million people with Medicare -- 90 percent of all beneficiaries and 89 percent of Kentucky seniors – now have comprehensive prescription drug coverage.

For additional information on the Medicare Part D program, or to view and compare Medicare plans, go here.

Read More

Calorie counts on your Coke and Pepsi machines coming in 2013

Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and the Dr Pepper Snapple Group, for starters, will start displaying calorie counts on vending machines in an effort to encourage consumers to make lower-calorie choices, starting in 2013. The plan, explains Time magazine, falls in line with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s requirement that vending machines and restaurant chains with more than 20 locations display calorie information. The labels will be marked "Check Then Choose" or "Try A Low-Calorie Beverage." The industry initiative, called the Calories Count Vending program, will begin its launch in city buildings in Chicago and San Antonio, where government employees are participating in a “wellness challenge.” The nationwide rollout will begin next year.

Time reporter Olivia B. Waxman asked whether this move will make a difference in calorie consumption. Early research didn't hold much hold, but later studies were more promising, she reports: "Studies have found that calorie information, when presented clearly — and at the point of sale — does tend to sway people’s eating and drinking behaviors. In a December study published in the American Journal of Public Health, for example, researchers at Johns Hopkins went to corner stores in predominantly black neighborhoods and posted signs with calorie information about sugary drinks (sodas, fruit drinks, energy drinks and the like) on refrigerated beverage cases. Overall, the study found, black teens — a population that is more likely to consume sugary drinks and is at higher risk of obesity than other groups — were 40 percent less likely to buy soft drinks when they saw the calorie signs. They were even less likely to buy them when the calorie labels put information in context: for instance, by noting that it would take 50 minutes of running to burn off the calories in one sugary drink. Those signs reduced soda consumption by 50 percent." (Read more)

Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and the Dr Pepper Snapple Group, for starters, will start displaying calorie counts on vending machines in an effort to encourage consumers to make lower-calorie choices, starting in 2013. The plan, explains Time magazine, falls in line with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s requirement that vending machines and restaurant chains with more than 20 locations display calorie information. The labels will be marked "Check Then Choose" or "Try A Low-Calorie Beverage." The industry initiative, called the Calories Count Vending program, will begin its launch in city buildings in Chicago and San Antonio, where government employees are participating in a “wellness challenge.” The nationwide rollout will begin next year.

Time reporter Olivia B. Waxman asked whether this move will make a difference in calorie consumption. Early research didn't hold much hold, but later studies were more promising, she reports: "Studies have found that calorie information, when presented clearly — and at the point of sale — does tend to sway people’s eating and drinking behaviors. In a December study published in the American Journal of Public Health, for example, researchers at Johns Hopkins went to corner stores in predominantly black neighborhoods and posted signs with calorie information about sugary drinks (sodas, fruit drinks, energy drinks and the like) on refrigerated beverage cases. Overall, the study found, black teens — a population that is more likely to consume sugary drinks and is at higher risk of obesity than other groups — were 40 percent less likely to buy soft drinks when they saw the calorie signs. They were even less likely to buy them when the calorie labels put information in context: for instance, by noting that it would take 50 minutes of running to burn off the calories in one sugary drink. Those signs reduced soda consumption by 50 percent." (Read more)

Read More

Kaiser study estimates how changing Medicare to a premium-support plan like Ryan's would cost differently by state and region

A Kaiser Family Foundation study has looked into what Medicare beneficiaries might pay under a "premium support" system that relies on competitive bidding, like the one proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman and Republican vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan. Presidential nominee Mitt Romney has also supported a premium-support system, which allows beneficiaries to choose among competing plans.

Under such plans, if subscribers choose to enroll in a more costly plan, for whatever reason, they would pay the additional premiums. This differs from the current Medicare system, explains Kaiser, "in which beneficiaries generally pay the same Medicare premium regardless of where they live, whether they choose traditional Medicare or a private plan, or whether they live in a high-cost or low-cost area." Assuming full implementation of such a premium support system, and assuming current plan preferences among beneficiaries, the Kaiser study "estimates that:

• Nearly six in 10 Medicare beneficiaries nationally could face higher premiums, assuming current plan preferences, including more than half of the beneficiaries enrolled in traditional Medicare and almost nine in 10 Medicare Advantage. Even if as many as a fourth of all beneficiaries moved into a low-cost plan offered in their area, more than a third of all beneficiaries would still face higher premiums.
• Premiums for traditional Medicare would vary widely based on geography, with no increase for beneficiaries living in Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Wyoming, or Washington, D.C., but an average increase of at least $100 per month in California, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey and New York. Such variations would exist even within a state, with traditional Medicare premiums remaining unchanged in California's San Francisco and Sacramento counties and rising by more than $200 per month in Los Angeles and Orange counties.
• At least nine in 10 Medicare beneficiaries in Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts and New Jersey would face higher premiums to keep their current benefits.

"This analysis does not attempt to model all aspects of any specific premium-support proposal, which would require more details than are currently available and assumptions about shifts in demographics, spending, and enrollment," Kaiser says. "The analysis also differs from Chairman Ryan's most recent proposal by assuming full implementation in 2010 (rather than a phased-in implementation starting in 2023) and by not exempting everyone who is at least 55 years old now." (Read more) To read the full report, go here.

A Kaiser Family Foundation study has looked into what Medicare beneficiaries might pay under a "premium support" system that relies on competitive bidding, like the one proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman and Republican vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan. Presidential nominee Mitt Romney has also supported a premium-support system, which allows beneficiaries to choose among competing plans.

Under such plans, if subscribers choose to enroll in a more costly plan, for whatever reason, they would pay the additional premiums. This differs from the current Medicare system, explains Kaiser, "in which beneficiaries generally pay the same Medicare premium regardless of where they live, whether they choose traditional Medicare or a private plan, or whether they live in a high-cost or low-cost area." Assuming full implementation of such a premium support system, and assuming current plan preferences among beneficiaries, the Kaiser study "estimates that:

• Nearly six in 10 Medicare beneficiaries nationally could face higher premiums, assuming current plan preferences, including more than half of the beneficiaries enrolled in traditional Medicare and almost nine in 10 Medicare Advantage. Even if as many as a fourth of all beneficiaries moved into a low-cost plan offered in their area, more than a third of all beneficiaries would still face higher premiums.
• Premiums for traditional Medicare would vary widely based on geography, with no increase for beneficiaries living in Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Wyoming, or Washington, D.C., but an average increase of at least $100 per month in California, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey and New York. Such variations would exist even within a state, with traditional Medicare premiums remaining unchanged in California's San Francisco and Sacramento counties and rising by more than $200 per month in Los Angeles and Orange counties.
• At least nine in 10 Medicare beneficiaries in Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts and New Jersey would face higher premiums to keep their current benefits.

"This analysis does not attempt to model all aspects of any specific premium-support proposal, which would require more details than are currently available and assumptions about shifts in demographics, spending, and enrollment," Kaiser says. "The analysis also differs from Chairman Ryan's most recent proposal by assuming full implementation in 2010 (rather than a phased-in implementation starting in 2023) and by not exempting everyone who is at least 55 years old now." (Read more) To read the full report, go here.

Read More

Health reform expected to hurt recruitment of rural doctors

Recruiting doctors to rural hospitals will get harder in the next few years as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act reaches full implementation and the demand for healthcare services increases, a new report suggests. An Association of Staff Physician Recruiters report, "In-House Physician Recruitment Benchmarking," says interview-to-hire ratios in rural areas are much higher than in urban, and rural recruiting officers are often responsible for several things, not just hiring new doctors, making them overworked. Both factors make it harder for rural hospitals to recruit, the authors concluded.

ASPR Benchmarking Committee Chair Shelly Tudor told John Commins of HealthLeaders Media that the cost of recruitment is rising, making it hard for rural hospitals to compete with their urban counterparts. "In lots of respects, the process favors urban providers. Physicians are coming to urban areas and they are looking for jobs, whereas rural providers have to go out and target physicians that are likely to come to their area," Tudor said. Rural recruiters have to "filter through a lot of people to find the right one who is willing to come in and even look at the opportunity," she said. (Read more)

Recruiting doctors to rural hospitals will get harder in the next few years as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act reaches full implementation and the demand for healthcare services increases, a new report suggests. An Association of Staff Physician Recruiters report, "In-House Physician Recruitment Benchmarking," says interview-to-hire ratios in rural areas are much higher than in urban, and rural recruiting officers are often responsible for several things, not just hiring new doctors, making them overworked. Both factors make it harder for rural hospitals to recruit, the authors concluded.

ASPR Benchmarking Committee Chair Shelly Tudor told John Commins of HealthLeaders Media that the cost of recruitment is rising, making it hard for rural hospitals to compete with their urban counterparts. "In lots of respects, the process favors urban providers. Physicians are coming to urban areas and they are looking for jobs, whereas rural providers have to go out and target physicians that are likely to come to their area," Tudor said. Rural recruiters have to "filter through a lot of people to find the right one who is willing to come in and even look at the opportunity," she said. (Read more)

Read More

Studies show that preteen girls who get the HPV vaccination are not more inclined toward promiscuity than those who don't

An electron micrograph of the
human papilloma virus.
(National Cancer Institute photo)

 

The most recent study of preteen girls who received the vaccine for the human papilloma virus (HPV) found that they were no more likely than unvaccinated girls to get pregnant, develop sexually transmitted infections or seek birth-control counseling. The findings in Monday's issue of Pediatrics are in line with recent studies on British teens, which also dismissed concerns that getting the vaccination might encourage promiscuity.  USA Today reporter Michael Healy writes that while the latest results were based on parental or self-reporting, the reports were corroborated by medical tests, clinical markers of sexual activity and other behavior markers.

Robert Bednarczyk, a clinical investigator with the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research-Southeast and an epidemiologist at Emory University in Atlanta., queried 1,398 girls, aged 11 and 12, and analyzed their medical records. He and colleagues divided the girls into two groups and followed them for three years. "One group of 493 girls received at least one dose of the HPV vaccine Gardasil, along with other recommended vaccines for tetanus and meningitis. A comparison group of 905 girls received the tetanus and meningitis vaccines, but not HPV," Healy writes. "There was a very similar rate of testing, diagnosis and counseling between both groups," with no increase in pregnancies, STIs or birth-control counseling, Bednarczyk reported. Fewer than 1 percent of all girls tested positively for a sexually transmitted infection, and fewer than 1 percent had a positive pregnancy test.  (Read more)

An electron micrograph of the
human papilloma virus.
(National Cancer Institute photo)

 

The most recent study of preteen girls who received the vaccine for the human papilloma virus (HPV) found that they were no more likely than unvaccinated girls to get pregnant, develop sexually transmitted infections or seek birth-control counseling. The findings in Monday's issue of Pediatrics are in line with recent studies on British teens, which also dismissed concerns that getting the vaccination might encourage promiscuity.  USA Today reporter Michael Healy writes that while the latest results were based on parental or self-reporting, the reports were corroborated by medical tests, clinical markers of sexual activity and other behavior markers.

Robert Bednarczyk, a clinical investigator with the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research-Southeast and an epidemiologist at Emory University in Atlanta., queried 1,398 girls, aged 11 and 12, and analyzed their medical records. He and colleagues divided the girls into two groups and followed them for three years. "One group of 493 girls received at least one dose of the HPV vaccine Gardasil, along with other recommended vaccines for tetanus and meningitis. A comparison group of 905 girls received the tetanus and meningitis vaccines, but not HPV," Healy writes. "There was a very similar rate of testing, diagnosis and counseling between both groups," with no increase in pregnancies, STIs or birth-control counseling, Bednarczyk reported. Fewer than 1 percent of all girls tested positively for a sexually transmitted infection, and fewer than 1 percent had a positive pregnancy test.  (Read more)

Read More

Home-health agency for Madison, Estill and Powell counties says it has to cut staff because of issues with Medicaid and Medicare

Declining reimbursements from Medicaid and Medicare are behind the Madison County Health Department's layoff of seven home-health employees last week. Director Nancy Crew said the cuts should not mean a reduction in care but that cuts were being made because "we've done all we can do without involuntary layoffs," Bill Robinson of the Richmond Register reports. The department's MEPCO subsidiary, which has offered home-health services in Madison, Estill and Powell counties since 1974, has been under financial pressure for two years despite cutting costs and not filling eight now-vacant positions. It had a deficit last year of $610,000.

Only about 15 percent of MEPCO's revenue comes from private insurance, said David Reed, the health department's financial director. That leaves MEPCO with a disproportionate number of Medicaid patients at a time when those re-reimbursements often are denied by managed-care companies, Reed said. Challenging those denials is a complicated process, sometimes requiring going to court to recover costs. The problem is not all with Medicaid. MEPCO’s Medicare reimbursements began a steep decline from nearly $3.24 million in 2008 to $2.55 million in 2012.  (Read more)

Declining reimbursements from Medicaid and Medicare are behind the Madison County Health Department's layoff of seven home-health employees last week. Director Nancy Crew said the cuts should not mean a reduction in care but that cuts were being made because "we've done all we can do without involuntary layoffs," Bill Robinson of the Richmond Register reports. The department's MEPCO subsidiary, which has offered home-health services in Madison, Estill and Powell counties since 1974, has been under financial pressure for two years despite cutting costs and not filling eight now-vacant positions. It had a deficit last year of $610,000.

Only about 15 percent of MEPCO's revenue comes from private insurance, said David Reed, the health department's financial director. That leaves MEPCO with a disproportionate number of Medicaid patients at a time when those re-reimbursements often are denied by managed-care companies, Reed said. Challenging those denials is a complicated process, sometimes requiring going to court to recover costs. The problem is not all with Medicaid. MEPCO’s Medicare reimbursements began a steep decline from nearly $3.24 million in 2008 to $2.55 million in 2012.  (Read more)

Read More

FIV and kidney disease

Baxter KJ, Levy JK, Edinboro CH, Vaden SL and Tompkins MB. Renal disease in cats infected with feline immunodeficiency virus. J Vet Intern Med. 2012; 26: 238-43.
 
In people infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), renal disease is the fourth most common cause of death. Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) causes similar clinical syndromes to HIV in humans (e.g., immune dysregulation, opportunistic infections, inflammatory diseases, and neoplasia). The seroprevalence of FIV in cats in North America is estimated to be 3.6-4.3%, with the highest prevalence found in adult male, sick, and free-roaming cats. The authors used a mixed retrospective/prospective cross-sectional study of client-owned cats (153 FIV-infected, 306 FIV-uninfected) and specific-pathogen-free (SPF) research colony cats (95 FIV-infected, 98 FIV-uninfected). The researchers hypothesized that cats infected with FIV are at increased risk of proteinuria, and that proteinuria is associated with advanced FIV infection and comorbidity factors contribute to the prevalence of renal disease. 

Comparisons were made by evaluating blood urea nitrogen, serum creatinine, urine specific gravity, and urine protein-creatinine (UPC) ratio between infected and uninfected cats. Also CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes were measured and the ratio was calculated. Renal azotemia was defined as a serum creatinine > 1.9 mg/dL with urine specific gravity < 1.035. Proteinuria was defined as a UPC ratio > 0.4 with an inactive urine sediment. The results indicated that the prevalence of proteinuria was higher in client-owned FIV-infected cats than in FIV-uninfected cats. Yet, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of azotemia. The authors believe that using their classification system, being considered “diseased” was not a risk factor for proteinuria in FIV-infected cats. The primary conclusion from the study was that client-owned cats with naturally acquired FIV infection were at increased risk of proteinuria, but not renal azotemia. The cause and pathogenesis of this proteinuria is uncertain. [VT]

See also: Poli A, Abramo F, Matteucci D, et al. Renal involvement in feline immunodeficiency virus infection: p24 antigen detection, virus isolation and PCR analysis. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 1995; 46: 13-20.

More on cat health:
Winn Feline Foundation Library
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Join us on Google+

Baxter KJ, Levy JK, Edinboro CH, Vaden SL and Tompkins MB. Renal disease in cats infected with feline immunodeficiency virus. J Vet Intern Med. 2012; 26: 238-43.
 
In people infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), renal disease is the fourth most common cause of death. Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) causes similar clinical syndromes to HIV in humans (e.g., immune dysregulation, opportunistic infections, inflammatory diseases, and neoplasia). The seroprevalence of FIV in cats in North America is estimated to be 3.6-4.3%, with the highest prevalence found in adult male, sick, and free-roaming cats. The authors used a mixed retrospective/prospective cross-sectional study of client-owned cats (153 FIV-infected, 306 FIV-uninfected) and specific-pathogen-free (SPF) research colony cats (95 FIV-infected, 98 FIV-uninfected). The researchers hypothesized that cats infected with FIV are at increased risk of proteinuria, and that proteinuria is associated with advanced FIV infection and comorbidity factors contribute to the prevalence of renal disease. 

Comparisons were made by evaluating blood urea nitrogen, serum creatinine, urine specific gravity, and urine protein-creatinine (UPC) ratio between infected and uninfected cats. Also CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes were measured and the ratio was calculated. Renal azotemia was defined as a serum creatinine > 1.9 mg/dL with urine specific gravity < 1.035. Proteinuria was defined as a UPC ratio > 0.4 with an inactive urine sediment. The results indicated that the prevalence of proteinuria was higher in client-owned FIV-infected cats than in FIV-uninfected cats. Yet, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of azotemia. The authors believe that using their classification system, being considered “diseased” was not a risk factor for proteinuria in FIV-infected cats. The primary conclusion from the study was that client-owned cats with naturally acquired FIV infection were at increased risk of proteinuria, but not renal azotemia. The cause and pathogenesis of this proteinuria is uncertain. [VT]

See also: Poli A, Abramo F, Matteucci D, et al. Renal involvement in feline immunodeficiency virus infection: p24 antigen detection, virus isolation and PCR analysis. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 1995; 46: 13-20.

More on cat health:
Winn Feline Foundation Library
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Join us on Google+

Read More

"Why in the World are They Spraying?" Could Monsanto Gain Financially?

I must admit, whenever I would read a post about someone suggesting that people start to set up seed storage  units in their homes and also water storage systems, I thought they were "Nutbags"!

However, over the past few months, as I have read and watched different things on this subject of global control of our environment/agriculture/life, from these scientist, government officials, and documentary producers, it is apparent, to me, that something is amiss.

The evidence that has been accumulated is overwhelmingly supportive of the facts in this and other films and papers, that someone is spraying something out of airplanes on a daily basis, in vast quantities.

I am no "Tree Hugger" and I think, for the most part, that people like Congressman Dennis Kucinich are socially liberal fools, but even these "fools"  do bring valid concerns to the people.

There should be no question as to my feelings on GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms)  food and that it should not be grown, much less consumed by any living, breathing animal.

I have now, after doing my own research of the research, combined with what I have seen and heard from those that are in the "In The Know" positions of society, that there is a collaborative effort to cause our soil to become more and more acidic.

Your first question may be "how?" Well by spraying chemicals and metals such as aluminum, barium and strontium into the atmosphere, under the pretense of cooling the earth, but in fact, these metals, when oxidized as they inevitably do in the soil, cause the pH to change.

Now what would that have to do with GMO crops you may ask. Well, if a soil is naturally at a certain pH  and this is the state that crops must have to grow and thrive,  the pH then becomes altered in a matter of days/weeks/months/years, well those plants that once thrived in a certain type of pH environment will no longer do so.

At that point companies such as Monsanto step in and exclaim "Hey, we just so happen to have some of that plants' seed that just so happens to have been modified to be able to resist aluminum/barium/strontium and other metals and also, by coincidence, thrive in soil with an acidic pH." 

At that point what choice would you have? Company M owns the only seed that lives in the unnatural but predominant soil of the earth and you need to feed your children and let us not forget that you also depend upon the money that is earned by selling your crop, well you are in a position of no choice, you must buy what Company M is selling at a price that Company M has set, a price that the patent owners set without competitive free market control! (Now all together....say it with me....Monopoly!)

You may think I have fallen off the crazy truck, but let me assure you that if you will spend a few hours and peruse the internet for the patents that have been applied for within the US Patent system for seeds that just so happen to grow in this type of soil, a soil that, until the last few decades or so ago, did not exist in the overwhelming majority of the earths surface yet now is becoming more and more the soil of the land, well, in my opinion, you can come to no other conclusion than the following: This is a GREED for NEED of higher PROFIT that is driving the destructive adulteration of the environment with the full support, backing, and in COLLUSION with our own government along with our NATO counterparts. 

Why else would a huge company devise a seed that, at the time in which that seed was developed, would not have been marketable at all,  but lo and behold, 15 or more years later, by some chance evolutionary gaffe, the soil has morphed into the type of soil in which  that particular seed would grow undeterred and the natural crop begins to die off because of the soil's pH!

It is as if companies such as Monsanto had a crystal ball decades ago and could see that the earth would suddenly begin to change her soil's pH, in the process destroying the crops that depended upon that soil, a crop whose seed was once abundantly cheap and without patented ownership!

Due to the exceptional and other-worldly foresight with which these companies were able to predict this unnatural and chaotic shift of soil pH,  Monsanto and others like them,  will be in the position to step in and save the world from famine by offering their patented, profit driven Frankenseed, whose price doesn't depend upon market variants or supply-demand models of free enterprise because the different corporations that own the seed have a monopoly on the raw product, the various crop seed,  that is at the core of the agricultural global market economy. A monopoly fully insured by out government's willing participation.

The Monsanto's of the world will make out like bandits at a expense of our children and their children's children's health.

Please do not allow the greed and power-hungry of the world ruin what God has given to us for our sustenance and livelihood. 

Are we not as the three servants in the Book Of Matthew that were called by their master to take care of His belongings while he was away? Two of the servants did as instructed and nurtured and cared for the gold by investing it for their Master for a profit, whom, upon His return, showed them appreciation for their obediance by offering them a share in His riches.

When the third servant explained that he did not watch after the Masters gold, but instead buried it rendering it unproductive, the Master ordered the servant to be thrown out to the place where the people wail and gnash their teeth.

Please watch this film and pass this blog post on to everyone in your contact list!

"LIKE" Us on FaceBook 
Life-Changing Care of Texas  
Follow Us On Twitter 

I must admit, whenever I would read a post about someone suggesting that people start to set up seed storage  units in their homes and also water storage systems, I thought they were "Nutbags"!

However, over the past few months, as I have read and watched different things on this subject of global control of our environment/agriculture/life, from these scientist, government officials, and documentary producers, it is apparent, to me, that something is amiss.

The evidence that has been accumulated is overwhelmingly supportive of the facts in this and other films and papers, that someone is spraying something out of airplanes on a daily basis, in vast quantities.

I am no "Tree Hugger" and I think, for the most part, that people like Congressman Dennis Kucinich are socially liberal fools, but even these "fools"  do bring valid concerns to the people.

There should be no question as to my feelings on GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms)  food and that it should not be grown, much less consumed by any living, breathing animal.

I have now, after doing my own research of the research, combined with what I have seen and heard from those that are in the "In The Know" positions of society, that there is a collaborative effort to cause our soil to become more and more acidic.

Your first question may be "how?" Well by spraying chemicals and metals such as aluminum, barium and strontium into the atmosphere, under the pretense of cooling the earth, but in fact, these metals, when oxidized as they inevitably do in the soil, cause the pH to change.

Now what would that have to do with GMO crops you may ask. Well, if a soil is naturally at a certain pH  and this is the state that crops must have to grow and thrive,  the pH then becomes altered in a matter of days/weeks/months/years, well those plants that once thrived in a certain type of pH environment will no longer do so.

At that point companies such as Monsanto step in and exclaim "Hey, we just so happen to have some of that plants' seed that just so happens to have been modified to be able to resist aluminum/barium/strontium and other metals and also, by coincidence, thrive in soil with an acidic pH." 

At that point what choice would you have? Company M owns the only seed that lives in the unnatural but predominant soil of the earth and you need to feed your children and let us not forget that you also depend upon the money that is earned by selling your crop, well you are in a position of no choice, you must buy what Company M is selling at a price that Company M has set, a price that the patent owners set without competitive free market control! (Now all together....say it with me....Monopoly!)

You may think I have fallen off the crazy truck, but let me assure you that if you will spend a few hours and peruse the internet for the patents that have been applied for within the US Patent system for seeds that just so happen to grow in this type of soil, a soil that, until the last few decades or so ago, did not exist in the overwhelming majority of the earths surface yet now is becoming more and more the soil of the land, well, in my opinion, you can come to no other conclusion than the following: This is a GREED for NEED of higher PROFIT that is driving the destructive adulteration of the environment with the full support, backing, and in COLLUSION with our own government along with our NATO counterparts. 

Why else would a huge company devise a seed that, at the time in which that seed was developed, would not have been marketable at all,  but lo and behold, 15 or more years later, by some chance evolutionary gaffe, the soil has morphed into the type of soil in which  that particular seed would grow undeterred and the natural crop begins to die off because of the soil's pH!

It is as if companies such as Monsanto had a crystal ball decades ago and could see that the earth would suddenly begin to change her soil's pH, in the process destroying the crops that depended upon that soil, a crop whose seed was once abundantly cheap and without patented ownership!

Due to the exceptional and other-worldly foresight with which these companies were able to predict this unnatural and chaotic shift of soil pH,  Monsanto and others like them,  will be in the position to step in and save the world from famine by offering their patented, profit driven Frankenseed, whose price doesn't depend upon market variants or supply-demand models of free enterprise because the different corporations that own the seed have a monopoly on the raw product, the various crop seed,  that is at the core of the agricultural global market economy. A monopoly fully insured by out government's willing participation.

The Monsanto's of the world will make out like bandits at a expense of our children and their children's children's health.

Please do not allow the greed and power-hungry of the world ruin what God has given to us for our sustenance and livelihood. 

Are we not as the three servants in the Book Of Matthew that were called by their master to take care of His belongings while he was away? Two of the servants did as instructed and nurtured and cared for the gold by investing it for their Master for a profit, whom, upon His return, showed them appreciation for their obediance by offering them a share in His riches.

When the third servant explained that he did not watch after the Masters gold, but instead buried it rendering it unproductive, the Master ordered the servant to be thrown out to the place where the people wail and gnash their teeth.

Please watch this film and pass this blog post on to everyone in your contact list!

"LIKE" Us on FaceBook 
Life-Changing Care of Texas  
Follow Us On Twitter 

Read More