The media is helping the GOP in the health care debate

Much of the media, however unwittingly, is helping the Republicans in the health care debate.

No doubt, TV and print journalists claim they’re playing the big story right down the middle:
– The Republicans claim the Democrats want “socialized medicine,” the old conservative pejorative for national health insurance. The Democrats say no way.
– The media simply reports the charges and the denials and calls it “fair and balanced” news coverage.

This old reporter calls it biased coverage, even it it’s not necessarily intentional. Here’s what I mean.

If all, or most, of what we see on TV or read in the newspaper about health care is Republicans saying the Democrats are for “socialized medicine” and the Democrats protesting they’re not, a lot of people are going to conclude that “socialized medicine” really is bad medicine because neither party wants it.

What the Democrats – even liberals – want isn’t anything nearly as comprehensive as national health insurance programs in other countries. Nonetheless, the Republicans call it “socialized medicine.”

The Republicans know “socialism” is a dirty word in America, the most conservative and capitalist industrial democracy. So with a little help from the media, they have been able to frame the health care debate primarily between American “free enterprise” and alien “socialism.”

Don’t get me wrong. It’s a reporter’s job to report, not editorialize. But this old reporter wishes the media would start doing some real reporting on what “socialized medicine” means in other industrial democracies. (We’re the only one without some form of comprehensive national health insurance for everybody.)

But the media seems to prefer playing up “horror stories” of poor souls needlessly suffering, and even dying, in foreign countries with “socialized medicine.” The GOP and its allies in the insurance and private health care industries are feeding most of the stories to reporters.

The Republicans most commonly cite Canada and Great Britain, both of which have comprehensive national health insurance systems, as examples of why America doesn’t need “socialized medicine.”

Many of the “horror stories” are about ill or injured Canadians who say that they had to come to the U.S. to get needed medical care – and that they are grateful to have such a nice neighbor. But I don’t see nearly as much on TV or in the newspaper about other Canadians who say that the “horror stories” are the exception, not the rule, and that many of the stories are not even true.
At the same time, I haven’t seen the media ask the most obvious question about “socialized medicine” in Canada and Britain: If it’s so bad, why don’t the Canadians and British get rid of it?

They can any time they wish. Canada and Britain are every bit as democratic as the U.S.

The Canadians and British vote in and vote out their government leaders, like we do. So why haven’t they elected majorities to their parliaments who would ditch “socialized medicine?”

Even so, the media “horror stories” have doubtlessly convinced a lot of Americans that most Canadians – Britons, too – must hate their public health care systems and would surely prefer a mostly private system like ours.

But if public opinion polls are accurate, most Canadians, and evidently most Britons, like their “socialized medicine” and definitely don’t want what we have. (The U.S. is the only industrial democracy without some form of comprehensive national health insurance.)

A recent Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey hasn’t grabbed many headlines south of the border. But the poll showed that 82 percent of Canadians believe their system is better than ours.

I haven’t been a working reporter for years, so my sources aren’t what they used to be. I looked for a similar poll on health care in Great Britain but couldn’t find one any more current than a 2004 Gallup survey. That one said “only 21% of British citizens would like to see the government-run British system replaced with a system based mostly on private insurance.” My guess is the numbers haven’t changed much in five years.

Here’s another question I’d like to see more reporters asking the Republicans (and Blue Dog Democrats): Can you give us solid proof – not just anecdotal “horror stories” — that “socialized medicine” is making lives shorter and less healthy for Canadians and Britons?
It didn’t take me long to mine some interesting numbers off the Internet. A source I found says life expectancy at birth in Canada is 81.23 years, 79.01 in Great Britain and 78.11 in the U.S.

“Life expectancy at birth is also a measure of overall quality of life in a country,” the source explained.

Republicans and Blue Dogs might dismiss the numbers as cooked, maybe even “socialist propaganda” from Health Canada or the British National Health Service.
The stats — and the explanation – come from the CIA’s World Factbook online.

The Factbook also says the infant mortality rate in the U.S. is 6.26 deaths per 1,000 live births. The rate is 5.04 in Canada and 4.85 in Great Britain. “This rate is often used as an indicator of the level of health in a country,” according to the Factbook.

Meanwhile, James Clancy, national president of Canada’s National Union of Public and General Employees, wants to help set the record straight about health care in his country.

He sent a letter to President Obama, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and every member of the House and Senate, inviting them to contact him about his country’s health care system or to come see it first hand.

“I would be pleased to speak or meet with you at anytime, or if you’re interested we could arrange a ‘study mission’ to Canada, to ensure you have an accurate picture of the benefits and popularity of Canada’s most cherished social program,” Clancy wrote. He said he is concerned “about the scurrilous misrepresentations of Canada and our single-payer health system in the debate over the future of health care in the United States.”

He added, “When it comes to health outcomes, on almost every critical measure, whether it is life expectancy rates, infant mortality rates, or potential years of lost life, Canada rates much better than the U.S. and we’re among the best in the world. Notwithstanding the ‘real life’ stories you’ve heard in TV ads launched by the group Patients United Now [an ultra-conservative U.S. group], a very strong majority of Canadians who use the system are highly satisfied with the quality and standard of care they receive.”

Clancy also wrote that, “In terms of controlling costs, health spending in Canada is on par with most countries in the Western world and it’s substantially lower than in the U.S. And yet we devote a smaller portion of Gross Domestic Product to health care today than we did over a decade ago. It’s totally unthinkable to Canadians to experience bankruptcy due to medical bills, as do over one million Americans every year. Unlike in the U.S., not a single Canadian who is unemployed has lost the ability to access health care during the current economic recession.

“In addition, our single-payer system provides both small and large businesses in Canada with a clear competitive advantage. Employers don’t have to provide basic health care for their workers – our single-payer system does that. Our businesses also enjoy the benefits of a healthier and more productive workforce thanks to our universal system. Unlike in the U.S. where basic health care is a major source of labour relations strife, it’s hardly an issue at the bargaining table in Canada. We also enjoy greater labour mobility because workers who don’t have to worry about losing health benefits are more willing and able to switch jobs and move to where the work is.

“Finally, what you’re being told about government-run health care with patients suffering and dying on wait lists is nothing but lies. No need for emergency or urgent care is ever neglected in Canada. If your doctor says you need the care urgently, you get it, period. Moreover, Statistics Canada reports that the median wait time for elective surgery is four weeks and the median wait time for diagnostic imaging like MRIs is three weeks. And contrary to popular myth, we’re free to choose whatever doctor we want. And all decisions about care and treatment are left to patients and their doctors – there’s no interference by the government or private insurance companies.”

Clancy concluded, “an objective review of the evidence shows that Canada’s single-payer system has consistently delivered affordable, timely, accessible, comprehensive and high-quality care to the overwhelming majority of Canadians on the basis of need, not wealth. It has also contributed to our international competitiveness and the productivity of our workforce.”

Maybe I missed it. But I haven’t seen anything about Clancy’s letter on my TV news or in my local newspaper. But my guess is Clancy would also welcome our Fourth Estate to check out the Canadian health care system. Good reporters are glad to go where the story is.

Anyway, “fair and balanced” journalism goes deeper that just reporting charges and denials — and, for that matter, focusing on health care bill “deadlines,” which party is going to “win” the health care “battle” and nutty charges from far-right-wing crazies that the Democrats’ “socialized medicine” will lead to mass murder of grandmas and grandpas.

If our scribes and TV talking heads were to take Clancy up on his offer, I’ve got a pretty good idea what they would find. My guess is for every Canadian the Republicans or some ultra-conservative group trots out to trash Canada’s single-payer system for the U.S. media, thousands more Canadians would say good things about their system. I’d also bet that most Canadians who would gripe about their system would quickly add it’s better than what we’ve got.

Of course, happy seldom grabs headlines or leads the six o’clock news stateside, no matter what the story is about.

Las Vegas: Physician Family Medicine

Desert Springs Hospital is assisting an established single-specialty group recruit two additional primary care physicians for employed positions.

This is a well established practice, located close to the heart of Las Vegas. The group has 15 providers (14 physicians, 1 PA) and 70 staff members spread over three office locations, with staff members typically "based" at a single location.

Staff physicians average 20- 25 patients per day in office, with a small number in hospital. Hospitalist handle all in-patient care. The practice also offers ancillary services such as X-Ray, lab, echo, ultrasound, and other diagnostic testing.

The group enjoys exceptional physician retention due to the high earning potential. Staff physicians are paid a percentage of individual gross revenue, so each member has complete control over their compensation. Some members earn well above the MGMA’s 90th percentile.

Desert Springs Hospital Medical Center, a 286-bed acute care facility located in southeast Las Vegas, has been providing quality healthcare to the residents of Southern Nevada since 1971. The hospital provides 24-hour emergency services, including a fast-track area in the ER to treat less acute patients. The hospital has long been referred to as the "Heart Hospital" by long-time residents, due to its solid reputation as a leader in cardiac care. The hospital also has three full-service catheterization laboratories, a 107,000 square foot Medical Office Building and an Outpatient Surgery facility. It is also home to the Diabetes Treatment Center.

An Outsider’s Take on American Medicine

Jonathan Kaplan’s The Dressing Station was published in 2001, but I am only reading it now. Much of the book is about battlefield medicine, but one part concerns his coming from Britain to America in the late 1980s. Born in South Africa, he attended medical school there, then went to Britain rather than be drafted into the military. With research budgets cut under Thatcher, he came to America to be able to pursue his medical career.

After his dreary British experience during a period of budget cutbacks, he greatly enjoyed the cheerful commercialism and general prosperity of American medicine. He promptly found a research project to work on that would enable him to write a Master’s thesis, and the work was fun and went swimmingly.

Nonetheless, Dr. Kaplan was quite disconcerted by some of the differences between British and American medicine. Working on another study, he reviewed hemorrhoid surgery results. He was startled to realize how much more surgery was done for minor piles in the U.S. than in Britain, though results were unimpressive – then “I found the payment invoices in each patient’s folder. These were met by the health insurers, who paid out a lot more for an operation than injections. . . . The logic of a for-profit system appeared to lead to expensive solutions and spiraling costs.”

He was also startled by anecdotal reports of how the stock market crash of 1987 led one surgeon to actually shed tears mid-surgery when he heard the news. As well, the serious, money-oriented medical students surprised him, as he was used to quite a number of more arty, intellectual types among medical students in other countries.

Still, he was thrilled about his promising research results on a heated balloon angioplasty device. Later, he was disillusioned to hear that after the device received FDA approval, the main competitor, a laser manufacturer, bought out the idea and shelved it to keep it off the market.

I thought his observations fit well with Dr. Poses’ concern about insidious corruption in medicine and too many physicians who don’t feel the expected fiduciary responsibility to patient welfare. As well, it makes Maggie Mahar’s term of “money-driven medicine” seem – well – on the money.

Drowning in Alphabet Soup: The Wider Battle for Health Regulation

This is an article about Simon Singh, but more than that about the wider issues at stake. In recent months I've written about the BPS, BACP, GCC, BCA, CNHC, and other unimaginative groups of letters that act as regulators or professional bodies for auxilliary health industries in Britain. Simon Singh's battle against the BCA is one chapter in a broader story that links all these cases together. In this post, I want to take a step back, and explore that wider story.

There are four distinct but related stories that have bubbled along for months now (among many others). The CNHC ('OfQuack') are a hapless alternative medicine "regulator" set up by an alt med charity run by Prince Charles at considerable expense to the taxpayer.

The BCA and GCC are chiropractic regulators now 'dealing' with intense scrutiny of an industry in which the truth is systematically distorted after the BCA's misconceived libel action against Simon Singh.

The BPS may be new to many of you, but made themselves a target of my writing after their point-blank refusal to address concerns about psychologists "diagnosing" people in the media. Blogger Gimpy has touched on a similar story with the BACP and Derek Draper.

And finally we have the Homeopathic Action Trust and Society of Homeopaths, the target of brilliant investigative journalism by Gimpy, who have refused to deal with the reckless actions of Jeremy Sherr in Africa.

These stories all share the same elements: threats and legal shenanigans; obfuscation and deception; ineffective self-regulation; the potential endangerment of public health; and bewildering government actions. I'll deal with these in turn.

The first thing to note is that writing about these organisations is hard, and has in fact been rather risky. The Times ended up vetoing an article I wrote for them about the BCA's "plethora" of evidence on legal grounds. My recent piece for the Guardian about the British Psychological Society was published after considerable scrutiny by the paper's legal team. Bloggers writing about these issues have more freedom from editors, but still risk libel, or contempt of court.

This chilling effect is largely due to the actions of the BCA, but other groups have made threats - notably the CNHC's bizarre open letter to a "Mr. Smith". While these threats have if anything encouraged the blogosphere to write more, they may have helped to dampen criticism of these groups in the mainstream media.

The second element is the failure of these groups to be open and honest. The BPS refused point-blank to answer my questions about psychologists flouting their guidelines; the CNHC have been almost comically inept in their backpedaling over the release of minutes from their meetings and subsequent attempts to rewrite history; the BCA took a year to release a dodgy dossier of evidence that on closer examination suggested they were either ignorant or deliberately misleading people. In each of these cases, investigation was hampered by a culture of secrecy, reluctant cooperation, and distortion of the truth.

The third is that in these cases, health workers are quite simply running amok. The chiropractic industry was thrown into chaos as soon as mass complaints were made; homeopaths are galavanting across Africa claiming to cure AIDS, psychologists are busy diagnosing celebrities in the media, and the CNHC's version of regulation does not include any requirement that the treatments used by its members can actually be shown to work. Worse than that, the professional bodies and regulators themselves provide some of the worst examples of bad behaviour.

The one place where a line could be drawn is in government, but here we find chaos and confusion. The CNHC have sucked in hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money to support their struggling enterprise, with little explanation from the Department of Health to justify this outlay. The legal system is skewed heavily in favour of these groups, dampening criticism of bodies which have a critical role to play in public health. The policies of individual parties on alternative medicine regulation range from decent (LibDems) to mind-boggling insanity (Greens), but the two main parties appear to have no coherent policy on the subject at all.

I believe that the lack of any coherent, consisent policy for the regulation of alternative and complementary medicine is precisely what is allowing the present situation to continue, exacerbated by the horrendously biased legal system that journalists and writers have to contend with.

It makes no sense at all that alternative "medicine" is not subjected to the same rigorous regulation as normal medical practice. Either the treatments have a clinical effect, or they don't. If they do, they should be dealt with like any other drug. If they don't, they are a fraud and should be removed from sale.

Sense About Science are using current events to campaign for a reform of libel law; but while this is a worthwhile thing to do, there's another fight to be had in Westminster. I suspect that the lack of policy in this area is simply due to the fact that MPs haven't been made to think about this issue before. Maybe it's about time we prompted them. And with new initiatives like the Westminster branch of Skeptics in the Pub coming in the near future, perhaps we will.

Probiotics: Can Yoplait Chase the Flu Away?

During the summer when kids would rather chase the ice cream man down the street than eat the GoGurt (portable squeezable yogurt) that they may be used to in their lunch bags, there may be a new reason to keep yogurt on the menu…even during the summer months. It seems that probiotics—the healthy bacteria found in food and dairy products like yogurt—may be able to prevent the flu.

The journal Pediatrics, published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, just released new information regarding probiotics. Professionally known as T-probiotics, these live cultures are a type of “good” bacteria added to foods that are helpful for keeping the digestive system on track as well as boosting your immune system.

Even though the flu vaccine is still the most recommended form of prevention, natural health remedies are becoming more commonplace due to the easy access to supplements and other organic ingredients as well as a lowered cost than the doctor’s visit and the vaccination. If you think flu prevention is something that should only be talked about during the winter, the seasonal flu is a lot more prevalent than most of us know. Coughing, sore throat, fever, and runny nose are symptoms no one wants to deal with during summer especially during the strong heat and height of vacation season.

Danisco, a Danish supplement company, sponsored the probiotics study in which researchers followed a group of young children—almost 250 patients—between the ages of 3 to 5 years old over a period of six months. When given probiotics to two groups of children two times per day (either Lactobacillus acidophilus or a combination of L acidophilus and Bifidobacterium) during the half a year of research, their symptoms were found to be significantly lower than the third placebo group.

The former head of research and development at Danisco in Wisconsin, Gregory Leyer, the author of the study touts the positive influence of his results, “There was definitely a need to show a prophylactic benefit of probiotic consumption, especially in children…. About 60 to 80 percent of our immune cells are associated with gut [cells]. Hitting the immune system through the gut makes sense,” Leyer continues by saying, “I'm assuming that's how this product works. That kid's immune system is in a better state to fight off infections or reduce the symptoms quicker.”

As a non-drug, natural approach, exchanging antibiotics for probiotics seems like it could be a safer option for parents not wanting to give harsh drugs to their young children. The results speak volumes for the complementary—in addition to Western practices instead of alternative medicine being practiced in place of more popular methods—medicine movement. Both groups of young kids given probiotics (singular and combination) showed reduced fevers by 53 and 72 percent, coughing by over 41 and 62 percent, and the sniffles by 28 and 58 percent and also had to stay home due to flu symptoms fewer days than the placebo group. These children also had a quicker recovery time due to the carefully picked probiotics chosen by researchers aimed at preventing the flu virus.

If you would rather go natural, no matter what supplementation you choose to take (or give to your children) should not be a fleeting, quick-fix maneuver. Supplements help in the long-run and are supposed to be taken daily—or the recommended dosage—whichever works best for you, your doctor, and your body; so please be patient.

When you are looking for a sweet treat to keep the flu away and you want to beat the heat, you can also look into one of the many fro-yo chain stores in your neighborhood with the National Yogurt Association’s stamp of approval for probiotic levels. Another plus to the burgeoning trend of healthier frozen yogurt over the Cold Stone and Baskin Robbins ice cream vendors, is that many of the new ones are self-serve offering a easy way to cut cost and your flu risk while keeping your kids happy and healthy throughout the summer.

The Introduction of Meditation Key Points in Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Meditation has been defined as self regulation of attention, in the service of self-inquiry, in the here and now. It is a mental discipline by which one attempts to get beyond the reflexive mind into a deeper state of relaxation or awareness (wikipedia.org). Nowadays meditation have been a mind-body practice in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) since meditation may be practiced to improve psychological balance, cope with illness and enhance overall wellness. This article will provide general introduction with some key points within it.

You will find sections discuss about a group of meditation techniques (mantra meditation, relaxation response, mindfulness meditation, and Zen Buddhist meditation), elements in most type of meditations, the use of meditation for health in the US, common forms of meditation (mindfullness and trancendental), how meditation might work in affecting autonomic nervous system, side effects and risks, and considerations about using meditation practices.

Also, you will be provided with more information regarding publications and searches of Federal scientific and medical literature publications of CAM within the article. Follow complete read of The Introduction of Meditation Key Points in Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the CAM article of pdf filetype here (source: nccam.nih.gov)

Alternative Healthcare versus Traditional Western Medicine

The Western medicine community recently asked the question: Will Alternative Healthcare, a.k.a. Holistic, Metaphysical, Energy or Mind, Body, Spirit healing and Western Medicine (WM) merge? This question implies there is reason to wonder and/or we need to consider the benefits a merger might create. The consideration of merging Holistic, Metaphysical, Energy or Mind, Body, Spirit healing and Western Medicine is analogues to comparing apples to oranges. The only comparison between apples and oranges is that they are both fruit—but the comparison ends there. Holistic, Metaphysical, Energy or Mind, Body, Spirit Healing and Western Medicine is diametrically polar opposites with nothing in common, except the subject (you). I will explain.

If prescription or OTC drugs are so good for people, where are all the healthy medicated customers? The truth is, there aren’t, any. There’s nobody taking twelve prescriptions or OTC drugs with a clean bill of health. In fact, the more prescriptions a person takes, the worse their overall health. And if you approach the healthiest people you can find and ask what prescription drugs or OTC drugs they’re taking in order to be so healthy, they’ll give you a confused look: Healthy people don’t take prescription or OTC drugs!

Western Medicine’s theory and doctrines fail to recognize that diseases are not separate from the person. In fact every disease can be more accurately called an expression of the patient’s lifestyle, beliefs, and energies. Cancer is not a tumor, for example: it is a systemic disorder that can only truly be cured by helping to support the body, not by attacking it with chemical bombs or knives. The tumor is merely one physical expression of the systemic disorder, and simply removing the tumor does nothing to cure the disease. The body is designed to heal itself—given it has the proper care—nutrition, herbal supplements, spiritual and emotional well-being.

Holistic, Metaphysical, Energy or Mind, Body, Spirit healing has existed since the beginning of time amid religious beliefs and practices, along with the mystery, superstition, fear, and misunderstanding. Holistic Healing is now becoming recognized regardless of what anyone chooses to believe or think. Ask almost anyone about their spiritual well-being and they will probably tell you, “Yeah, I am a spiritual person, I go to church frequently.” Therein, the confusion arises out of the association of healing with religion. The majority of people, including religious leaders, do not understand the difference.

Definition: “SPIRIT” 1. The vital principle or animating force within living beings, Incorporeal consciousness. There are about twelve more elaborations mostly to do with various religious implications.

Thus, based on Western Medicine’s common interpretations of how things ‘ARE’, many paradoxes are created. The resultant effect is confusion and un-wellness. The Truth, as Carl Jung and others have carefully worded in their writing, is this: Every Thing in the universe is Energy and Consciousness. How anyone thinks or feels about that Fact cannot change it. The purpose of All religions is the recognition that humans have a part of themselves that is not physical and there is a need to explore and experience this aspect of themselves. Part of the intent is to discover one’s purpose and to live in the best way possible. Another part of that goal also includes the attainment of Truth and Spiritual Wellness. However, the result of religious teachings with regard to our Spiritual health has been an abysmal failure. If the most important aspect of our being is our Spiritual self, and it has been neglected, it is a miracle we have existed this long.

In many cultures it has always been thought and/or known that we are spiritual beings, the biggest exception is in western industrialized cultures that we believe we are people who happen to have a soul. Eastern philosophy believes we are a soul first, housed in this thing called a ‘body.’ The most beautiful and simple interpretation of how everything ‘IS’ can be found in the Native American tradition. “Everything in the universe is Spirit, each thing in it is of the same Spirit and it is all Connected.” This is exactly what we are beginning to understand in science and quantum physics, that everything in the universe is made of the same thing and has a consciousness about it. The two things that frustrate scientists the most is the fact that all these
things operate across time, space and dimensions they do not yet understand, and the ability of things to operate on inter-dimensional and multi-dimensional levels. A high degree of new understanding about the science and physics of what spiritual really means is now mostly coming from independent researchers. High-tech and aerospace research physicists and scientists, all seem to have a more concise and accurate understanding of Spirit and the Spiritual than those from a theological background.

Spiritual Experiences teach us: Everything we think or feel affects oneself and others. We need to realize every feeling—anger, fear, hate, sadness, judgment—are mind generated emotions and need to be modified or eliminated. Left to fester—anger, fear, hate, sadness, judgment, creates physical reactions. For every physical reaction, a.k.a. symptoms—i.e. colds, cancer, MS, and everything from A to Z, there is a direct link to mind generated emotions. When these mind generated emotions are eliminated and the wounds created from long term and dysfunctional expressions are healed, the physical manifestation labeled as illness by Western Medicine is eliminated.

There is little difference in the effects produced by an intentional damaging curse or a prayer prayed improperly, bad advice or simply some random negative thought. Ministers are trained in traditional theosophical dogmatic perceptions specific to the cultural religious views they ascribe to. Most people have little concept about True Spirituality or how the universe really operates. As a consequence they convey misinformation, half-truths, superstitions and fears along with a multitude of associated damaging information into a person’s consciousness. The result of which is Confusion and Paradox—which leads to distress, disease and un-wellness.

Since Holistic/Metaphysical Healthcare focuses on supporting the Mind, Body, Spirit to heal itself as it is designed to do and Western Medicine perceives the human body as a battleground on which wars are waged with chemical bombs and scalpels against invaders, how can these divergent ideologies be merged?

Dorothy M. Neddermeyer, PhD, specializes in: Mind, Body, Spirit healing and Physical/Sexual Abuse Prevention and Recovery. As an inspirational leader, Dr. Neddermeyer empowers people to view life’s challenges as an opportunity for Personal/Professional Growth and Spiritual Awakening. http://www.drdorothy.net

Pork skin food products made by Salinas company recalled

Pork skin food products made by a Salinas company are being recalled because they were prepared without the benefit of federal inspection, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Friday.

Chicharrones, products made by Camacho's Food Processing in Salinas, are being recalled because there is a reasonable probability that they can cause serious health consequences or death, according to the food safety and inspection service of the Department of Agriculture.

About 1,450 pounds of the ready-to-eat fried pork skins are being recalled. They are in 10-pound, plastic-lined bags of "Camacho's Foods PS., URUAPAN, CHICHARRONES, (FRYED PORK SKIN)," according to the Department of Agriculture.

The products were produced between June 16 and July 29 and were repackaged for sale to consumers and distributed to retail stores in California.

The department has not received any reports of illness due to consumption of these products. Anyone concerned about such an illness should contact a physician, according to the department.

Consumers with questions can contact Oscar Camacho, the manager of the company, at (415) 716-4128.

Copyright © 2009 by Bay City News, Inc. "... republication, re-transmission or reuse without the express written consent of Bay City News, Inc. is prohibited.

Health warning: U.S. Marshals seize Clarcon skin products

According to a statement released by the FDA, U.S. Marshals seized all skin sanitizers and skin related products, including ingredients and components, from the Clarcon Biological Chemistry Laboratory in Roy, Utah.

Clarcon Biological Chemical Laboratory products, which include skin protectants and sanitizers, are being recalled by the FDA because they could contain dangerous bacteria. Clarcon manufactured several brands, which include sanitizers and protectants under these names:

Citrushield Lotion
Dermasentials DermaBarrier
Dermassentials by Clarcon Antimicrobial Hand Sanitizer
Iron Fist Barrier Hand Treatment
Skin Shield Restaurant
Skin Shield Industrial
Skin Shield Beauty Salon Lotion
Total Skin Care Beauty

Clarcon voluntarily recalled the affected products in June. That recall came after an FDA review confirmed high levels of potentially disease-causing bacteria.

The FDA advises consumers should throw away any Clarcon products that they own.
The bacteria found in Clarcon products may cause permanent skin damage. Seek medical treatment immediately if you have used the products and have any signs of infection that include redness, swelling or painful skin.

Thus far, there have been no reported infections from using Clarcon products, however they have been produced and distributed in the U.S. since 2007. Clarcon also has an affiliate-marketing program, and the products are widely sold and marketed by bloggers and webmasters.

Swine Flu or Swine Flu Vaccine: Weighing the Dangers

Fox News makes it very clear: "The H1N1 flu virus can damage the developing brains of unborn offspring..." The article on the Fox News website goes on to elaborate: "...children born to women who have suffered flu infections during pregnancy are at increased risk of schizophrenia and possibly autism too."

What that means, of course, is "the new research simply reinforced existing advice...Pregnant women should do their best to avoid all infections, especially flu."

The obvious conclusion? Pregnant women should run, not walk, to their nearest vaccination center.

But wait. It's not that simple.

An article in Associated Content makes the arguable statement:

As it has been abundantly proven, mercury and its derivatives are responsible for autism in children and many other neurological diseases, such as the Gulf War Syndrome. Mercury in its most common form - thimerosal- is put in almost all vaccines made available to the public, usually as a preservative. As it was recently unveiled by the Washington Post, many doses of the new H1N1 vaccine will be stored in multi dose vials which will contain thimerosal.

CBS News echoes these fears:

A backlash against vaccines has picked up steam in recent years. A vocal minority fears vaccines can cause autism, despite consensus among experts that they don't. Now warnings are cropping up on the Web that the new H1N1 vaccine could be rushed to market without enough proof that it's safe.

Autism-related blogs are digging deeply into the H1N1 vaccine development process, and finding a whole range of issues to worry about. Ginger Taylor, creator of the Adventures in Autism blog, puts it this way:

Vaccines are pharmaceutical products that carry a risk of injury or death and those risks are greater for some than others. 1 in 6 children in America is learning disabled18. 1 in 9 has asthma 1 in 150 develops autism. 1 in 450 has diabetes and millions more suffer with allergies and autoimmune disorders. Will the swine flu vaccine be safe for them?

Although it is a good idea for health officials to prepare for a worst case scenario and stockpile vaccines, it is a bad idea to turn schools into medical clinics and basically test experimental swine flu vaccines on children first. Especially when nobody has any liability. That has the potential to hurt children instead of keeping them well.

Taylor, among others, makes the point that, so far, swine flu in the US has been surprisingly mild. In fact, it's milder than many other strains of flu. She, and others, wonder whether the risk of the flu outweighs the risk of the vaccines.

Where are you on the issue of swine flu vaccine? Will you request it when it's available in early September? Will your children be among the first in line for protection against a potential epidemic?

U.K. Probes Structured-Finance Products

LONDON -- The U.K.'s Serious Fraud Office is investigating sales of structured products such as credit-default swaps and collateralized debt obligations, amid concern some bankers may have knowingly sold complex assets based on flawed valuations before the global financial crisis struck two years ago.

"Some of them are incredibly complicated and they are sold by very, very clever people," Richard Alderman, the director of the Serious Fraud Office, said. "The question is not just were they mis-sold, because that gives rise to a number of regulatory issues, but was there actually fraud. Or in other words, did those selling them actually know they weren't worth what the institution said they were?"

Credit-default swaps are insurance-like contracts designed to protect investors against losses on bonds or loans, though in recent years they have been used more often to speculate on the health of companies or countries. CDOs are packages of different slices of debt that are given a single credit rating, enabling them to be traded.

The U.K. probe is the latest sign that policymakers and regulators on both sides of the Atlantic are scrutinizing structured products, which many believe were at the heart of the financial crisis, after years of taking a mostly hands-off regulatory approach.

In recent weeks, the U.S. Justice Department has examined the credit-default-swaps market, including the dominant role of data provider Markit Group Holdings Ltd. and its bank owners. In a statement, Markit said it has "been informed of an investigation by the Department of Justice into the credit derivatives and related markets."

Meanwhile, a key Senate panel, the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has issued subpoenas to such banks as Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Deutsche Bank AG looking for evidence of fraud in the selling of mortgage-related securities. Those banks didn't comment. Like the U.K. SFO, the Senate panel is focused on whether bankers had doubts that the mortgage-securities they were selling were as sound as marketed.

The Obama administration in recent months has moved to regulate credit-default swaps and make them safer for the financial system, and proposed changes that would make it less lucrative for banks to package consumer loans into asset-backed securities. Last month, European regulators unveiled similar proposals for the credit-derivatives industry.

In the U.K., the SFO investigates complex, international fraud cases and it can press criminal charges on its own. The Financial Services Authority, the U.K.'s top financial regulator, also will look at whether structured products were mis-sold, the SFO's Mr. Alderman said.

The SFO plans further inquiries of asset-backed securities, he said. One case that has already been made public involves structured products sold by AIG Financial Products, the unit of American International Group Inc. that is largely responsible for the parent company's struggles. It sold billions of dollars of guarantees on complicated securities tied to mortgages, and those guarantees pushed the company into the rescuing arms of the U.S. government. The unit had offices in London and Wilton, Conn. AIG said it was unwinding certain businesses and portfolios of the unit.

"Valuation cases are fraught with difficulty, but the weight that certain financial products were made to bear was untenable," said Glyn Powell, joint interim head of the SFO unit responsible for London's financial district.

As part of the SFO's work on structured products, it has put together a red-flag system to unearth risks, as it has done in other areas such as hedge funds.

In a broader move, the watchdog is responding more quickly to evidence of fraud, rather than waiting for a report to go to police or company liquidators and then taking months to decide whether to pursue it, Mr. Alderman said. In the past, it "would mean seven to nine years before it would get to court," he said.

The office also is doing more to support whistle-blowers when they come forward and taking a closer look at accounting matters, he said.

In the past year, the office has worked on cases including Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme and the collapse of U.K. hedge fund Weavering Capital. In June, it obtained an order to freeze about $100 million of Allen Stanford's assets held at "certain London financial institutions."

Fraud cases that went to court in the U.K. rose last year, according to analysis by KPMG. The worst-hit sector was financial services, which suffered £388 million ($648.2 million) of fraud in 63 cases, a tenfold increase on the £37 million via 36 cases recorded in 2007. However, these figures were partly skewed by one case: an alleged £220 million attempt to hack into Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp.'s computer systems, which went to court in the first half of the year. Fraud cases to date this year in the U.K. financial sector total £111 million, KPMG said.

—Neil Shah contributed to this article.

US Marshals Seize Skin Sanitizers

At the request of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), US Marshals have seized several skin products made by Clarcon Biological Chemical Products of Utah at the company facility in Roy. Seized were all skin sanitizers and protectatants as well as the ingredients used to make them. The seizure came after the company refused to destroy the products and their ingredients in a timely fashion following several FDA requests.

The action in Roy on Saturday was a follow-up to the voluntary recall of a handful of products by the company in June after FDA tests revealed contamination. The recalled and now seized products have been shown to contain harmful bacteria that might sicken humans. Contamination of the particular products recalled are thought to be particularly problematic because they are marketed to treat open wounds, damaged skin, and to protect against serious diseases.

Over 800,000 recalled Clarcon products have been distributed throughout the country since 2007. Examples of products that should be discarded are: Citrushield Lotion, Dermasentials DermaBarrier, Dermassentials by Clarcon Antimicrobial Hand Sanitizer, Iron Fist Barrier Hand Treatment, Skin Shield Restaurant, Skin Shield Industrial, Skin Shield Beauty Salon Lotion, Total Skin Care Beauty, and Total Skin Care Work.

According to the FDA no serious cases of human illness have been reported thus far. The FDA is asking that health care professionals and consumers report serious adverse events or product quality problems related to the use of these products to the FDA's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program either online, or by regular mail, fax, or phone (MedWatch, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20852-9787; Fax: 800-FDA-0178; Phone: 800-FDA-1088).

Uncle Sam must stop subsidizing obesity

It is often cheaper to prevent than to treat a problem. Nowhere is this more true than with diet and childhood obesity.

I see children in my office daily whose parents, in their struggle to make ends meet, have their kids eat school lunches. These meals are heavily subsidized by the federal government, which also decides what foods end up on the trays. Unfortunately, most of the choices are processed meat and dairy products loaded with fat, salt and cholesterol. This leaves kids nutritionally deprived and obese.

As a pediatrician, it is my duty to educate my patients and their parents about obesity. But my families have no fighting chance when their kids eat school lunches. All the good choices they might make are wiped out. This leaves the taxpayer alone to pay for the health consequences of our children's obesity.

That's why it's so crucial that new legislation help schools in California and across the country serve meals that support children's well-being and lower the long-term health care costs of obesity.

The U.S. taxpayer pays on average $175 per year to finance obesity, according to Eric A. Finkelstein, author of "The Fattening of America." We need to tell Congress that we want our tax dollars spent on providing children with healthy meals and teaching healthy eating habits, not treating their obesity-related health conditions down the road. This year, the United States spent $100 billion on obesity-related health care expenditures.

Health care and lost productivity due to obesity cost California $41.2 billion in 2006. California Controller John Chiang estimates "the economic cost to California of adults who are obese, overweight and physically inactive is equivalent to more than a third of the state's total budget."

The financial and personal burdens of obesity, with its increased risk of diabetes, heart disease and other obesity-related conditions, will only increase as these children reach adulthood .

In my practice, I have obese children with high cholesterol and high blood pressure. Many of them have skin changes called acanthosis nigricans, an early sign of type 2 diabetes. These are things we used to see only in middle-aged adults. No more, and because of it, I order more lab tests, have to see these patients more often and refer them more often to nutritionists, gastroenterologists, cardiologists or endocrinologists than their non-overweight peers.

Bottom line: We can't afford obesity. But now we have an opportunity to fight the economic and social harms of obesity.

This year, Congress will vote on the reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act, which determines what foods are served to children in school and other nutrition programs. Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, is chair of the Committee on Education and Labor. He is in the unique position to change the physical as well as financial health of California - and of the entire nation.

In order to stop the upward trend of obesity, we must focus on prevention. We must educate families and communities to buy fresh foods, prepare home-cooked meals, avoid fast food and engage in physical activity.

Yet, that alone will not be enough. Kids need fresh, wholesome food for school lunch - and a menu that complies with the USDA's food pyramid. It is time for Congress to align food policy with nutritional guidelines.

Contact Miller to get school lunches a better grade for your child's health - and our fiscal future.

Dr. Rina Shah is a pediatrician in Vallejo.

Drug, Energy Firms Buck Lobbying Decline

WASHINGTON -- Drug makers and oil-and-gas companies boosted their lobbying in Washington during the three months ended June 30 amid a flurry of congressional action on health care and climate legislation.

But overall, Washington's lobbying business continued to slump as the economy pinched budgets at some big companies and trade associations.

Companies, nonprofits, unions and other organizations spent $814.6 million to influence Congress and the Obama administration in the second quarter, down 1% from $825.3 million during the same three-month period in 2008, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of lobbying data. The data were supplied by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

The decline continues a rare recession in Washington's lobbying business. But groups at the center of big legislative pushes still invested heavily to sway lawmakers.

The campaign by President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats to overhaul the nation's health-care system provided a big boost to lobbyists for health-industry interests. Drug manufacturers increased lobbying spending 13% to $68 million in the second quarter from a year earlier, according to the data.

Pfizer Inc. spent $5.6 million on lobbying in the quarter, up 82% from the quarter last year. Amgen Inc. reported a 19% increase in expenditures to $3.4 million. GlaxoSmithKline increased spending by 27% to $2.3 million in the period, according to the data.

A representative for Pfizer didn't respond to requests for comment.

Kelley Davenport, a spokeswoman for Amgen, said that as a regulated company, Amgen lobbies Washington "in an effort to effectively shape health-care policy and ensure patient safety and access to products."

Kevin Colgan, a spokesman for Glaxo, attributed the company's rise in lobbying spending to "the timing of certain annual expenditures and by some organizational changes."

Overall, the health-care sector reported a 5% increase in lobbying expenditures to $133 million, making it the single largest spender on lobbying of the 10 major industry sectors tracked by the Center for Responsive Politics. Health-insurance companies increased lobbying activity by 11% to $7.8 million, according to the data.

Labor unions increased spending by 4% in the second quarter from a year earlier, to $10.6 million, according to data from the center.

The AFL-CIO spent $1 million in the April-to-June period, an increase of 23% from a year earlier. The federation is lobbying on issues including the health overhaul and a bill that would make it easier for employees to join labor unions.

The Blue Green Alliance, a coalition of labor and environmental groups, registered to lobby for the first time in the second quarter. It reported spending $720,000 in the period, making it the second largest labor group by expenditures.

Debate over a broad-ranging climate and energy bill prompted more spending by energy interests. Chevron Corp., ConocoPhillips, BP PLC and other oil-and-gas companies increased spending on lobbying by 30% to $37.7 million in April, May and June of this year, compared with the same quarter in 2008. That coincided with the House debate over a sweeping climate-change and energy bill.

ConocoPhillips doubled its lobbying spending to $3.3 million during the second quarter; Chevron increased spending 88% to $6 million; and BP posted a 54% rise in lobbying spending to $4 million, according to the data.

Exxon Mobil Corp. cut quarterly lobbying expenses by 16% from the same period in 2008 to $4.3 million.

Representatives for Chevron, ConocoPhillips and BP said that part of their increase in spending is the result of an increase in dues paid for lobbying to industry trade association the American Petroleum Institute. A spokesman for Exxon didn't respond to requests for comment.

Wall Street, once a rich and fast-growing source of lobbying money, is showing the lingering effects of last year's financial crisis. Wall Street firms spent $109.4 million on lobbying in the second quarter, down 4% from the same period in 2008, according to the data.

Drug, Energy Firms Buck Lobbying Decline

WASHINGTON -- Drug makers and oil-and-gas companies boosted their lobbying in Washington during the three months ended June 30 amid a flurry of congressional action on health care and climate legislation.

But overall, Washington's lobbying business continued to slump as the economy pinched budgets at some big companies and trade associations.

Companies, nonprofits, unions and other organizations spent $814.6 million to influence Congress and the Obama administration in the second quarter, down 1% from $825.3 million during the same three-month period in 2008, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of lobbying data. The data were supplied by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

The decline continues a rare recession in Washington's lobbying business. But groups at the center of big legislative pushes still invested heavily to sway lawmakers.

The campaign by President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats to overhaul the nation's health-care system provided a big boost to lobbyists for health-industry interests. Drug manufacturers increased lobbying spending 13% to $68 million in the second quarter from a year earlier, according to the data.

Pfizer Inc. spent $5.6 million on lobbying in the quarter, up 82% from the quarter last year. Amgen Inc. reported a 19% increase in expenditures to $3.4 million. GlaxoSmithKline increased spending by 27% to $2.3 million in the period, according to the data.

A representative for Pfizer didn't respond to requests for comment.

Kelley Davenport, a spokeswoman for Amgen, said that as a regulated company, Amgen lobbies Washington "in an effort to effectively shape health-care policy and ensure patient safety and access to products."

Kevin Colgan, a spokesman for Glaxo, attributed the company's rise in lobbying spending to "the timing of certain annual expenditures and by some organizational changes."

Overall, the health-care sector reported a 5% increase in lobbying expenditures to $133 million, making it the single largest spender on lobbying of the 10 major industry sectors tracked by the Center for Responsive Politics. Health-insurance companies increased lobbying activity by 11% to $7.8 million, according to the data.

Labor unions increased spending by 4% in the second quarter from a year earlier, to $10.6 million, according to data from the center.

The AFL-CIO spent $1 million in the April-to-June period, an increase of 23% from a year earlier. The federation is lobbying on issues including the health overhaul and a bill that would make it easier for employees to join labor unions.

The Blue Green Alliance, a coalition of labor and environmental groups, registered to lobby for the first time in the second quarter. It reported spending $720,000 in the period, making it the second largest labor group by expenditures.

Debate over a broad-ranging climate and energy bill prompted more spending by energy interests. Chevron Corp., ConocoPhillips, BP PLC and other oil-and-gas companies increased spending on lobbying by 30% to $37.7 million in April, May and June of this year, compared with the same quarter in 2008. That coincided with the House debate over a sweeping climate-change and energy bill.

ConocoPhillips doubled its lobbying spending to $3.3 million during the second quarter; Chevron increased spending 88% to $6 million; and BP posted a 54% rise in lobbying spending to $4 million, according to the data.

Exxon Mobil Corp. cut quarterly lobbying expenses by 16% from the same period in 2008 to $4.3 million.

Representatives for Chevron, ConocoPhillips and BP said that part of their increase in spending is the result of an increase in dues paid for lobbying to industry trade association the American Petroleum Institute. A spokesman for Exxon didn't respond to requests for comment.

Wall Street, once a rich and fast-growing source of lobbying money, is showing the lingering effects of last year's financial crisis. Wall Street firms spent $109.4 million on lobbying in the second quarter, down 4% from the same period in 2008, according to the data.

Sifting through the mounting problem of e-waste

(CNN) -- Clouds of black smoke from burning plastic hang over the sites of Nigeria's vast dumps, as tiny figures pick their way through slicks of oily water, past cracked PC monitors and television screens.

But it isn't just a cut from broken glass these mainly young scavengers are risking. Much of the discarded electronic kit contains tiny -- but valuable -- quantities of aluminum, copper, cadmium and other minerals, all of which can be sold on, if they can be recovered.

However they also contain highly toxic materials, which have been linked to reproductive problems and cancers.

"People living and working on and around the dump sites, many of whom are children, are exposed to a cocktail of dangerous chemicals that can cause severe damage to health, including cancer, damage to the nervous system and to brain development in children," Kim Schoppink, Toxics Campaigner at Greenpeace, told CNN.

"The open burning creates even more hazardous chemicals among which are cancerous dioxins."

No studies have been done on the extent of the chemical pollution of such sites in Nigeria, but in 2008 a Greenpeace report on similar dumps in nearby Ghana confirmed that high levels of lead, phthalates and dioxins were present in soils and the water of a nearby lagoon.

A Chinese academic report published in "Environmental Health Perspectives" in 2007 confirmed that children living in the same area had higher levels of toxic metals in their blood than other children living nearby.

There is increasing evidence that this new health and environment problem is arriving in shipping containers from Western countries. Nigeria is one of the principal global destinations for "e-waste" -- the catch-all term for discarded consumer electronics.

Some of this may have been legitimately handed in to be recycled in an EU or U.S. city, but lax enforcement, vague legislation and a lack of political will has meant that it instead passes through a network of traders keen to profit from developing countries' hunger for hi-tech and a burgeoning second hand market.

According to the United Nations Environment Program around 20 to 50 million tons of e-waste are generated worldwide each year.

In 2008 a Greenpeace study, "Not in My Backyard", found that in Europe only 25 percent of the e-waste was recycled safely. In the U.S. it is only 20 percent and in developing countries it is less than one percent.

Extrapolating out from these figures the report concluded that a massive 80 percent of e-waste generated worldwide is not properly recycled. Some is burnt in Western incinerators or buried in landfill sites.

But much is exported to developing countries including India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria and Ghana. When it arrives, a further percentage may be repaired and sold on to populations desperate for affordable technology. But anything beyond the skills of local traders will end up dumped.

It's a profitable business, and is already attracting the attention of organized crime. A report issued by the United Nations in July said that the criminal gangs behind much of the drug trade in West Africa were becoming involved with e-waste trading.

The volume of material on the move is staggering. In 2005, more than 500 containers full of e-waste entered Nigerian ports every month, according to the Basel Action Network, a U.S. NGO campaigning on issues surrounding toxic waste.

Each one contains 10 to 15 tons of e-waste, totaling 60,000 to 90,000 tons per year. These figures are likely to have increased in recent years.

There seems little doubt that much of this waste is finding its way to Africa from Western countries. The Basel Action Network and Dutch NGO Danwatch have traced equipment from Europe to Nigerian dumps and earlier this year Greenpeace placed a radio tracking device in a broken TV handed in for safe recycling in the UK, but followed it to a Nigerian market.

"Greenpeace is disappointed especially by U.S. and EU authorities," said Schoppink.

"It is toxic waste from the U.S. and EU countries that is causing serious environmental and health problems in Nigeria, a country without the means to deal with this problem.

"The U.S. and EU must play the biggest role in stopping the spread of e-waste; they are most responsible for the problem and have the resources to tackle it. The export of e-waste from the EU is illegal under the Basel Convention and the Waste Shipment Directive, but the laws are not being sufficiently implemented. In the U.S., there is no such law banning this practice.

"In Nigeria the government is talking about stopping imports, but there has been no progress on this to date."

Signs of progress

There are calls from environmental groups likes Greenpeace for electronics producers to do more to phase out their use of hazardous substances, and there are some signs of progress.

Several electronics companies already make products using fewer hazardous substances, and others, including Nokia, Philips and Samsung are setting up voluntary collection and recycling systems in countries where they are not legally obliged to. Apple claims its products are now almost entirely free of the worst toxic chemicals.

"If producers continue to use hazardous chemicals in their electronics and to fail to take responsibility for the safe disposal of their products, e-waste will continue to be dumped in developing countries," said Schoppink.

"The pollution and related health problems in countries where e-waste is dumped will increase massively as the amount of electronics used worldwide is growing exponentially and the number of countries used as dump sites will grow."

But while the developing world needs the U.S. and EU to take responsibility for their waste, it also needs their discarded computers to train and build a 21st century workforce.

"Nobody is arguing that Africa should be denied access to computers," said Tony Roberts, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Computer Aid International, a charity licensed by the UK Environment Agency, which provides recycled computers to developing countries to improve education and healthcare.

"Technical colleges and universities are always short of resources. It is, of course, essential to developing economies escaping poverty to have access to affordable modern technology."

Computer Aid works to close the digital divide between the north and southern hemispheres and offers corporations, including Coca Cola, as well as individuals, a positive way of disposing of electronics. They also believe learning about responsibility for that technology is a crucial part of the exchange.

"Computer Aid argues that, in addition to the PCs, it is essential to also build the skills, knowledge and operating capacity in every country to manage responsible re-use programs and environmentally sound end-of-life recycling."

In the end, this is about everyone involved -- particularly the developed nations -- taking responsibility for their waste.

"It is clear that companies have a moral obligation to treat Africa in exactly the same way that they do, say, Germany," said Roberts. Until then, toxic black smoke will continue to cast a shadow over lives across the developing world

KFC slow to comply with countywide polystyrene ban

It has been two years since Capitola became the first city in the county to tell restaurants to stop using polystyrene food packaging products. Since then, every jurisdiction in the county has enacted similar bans.

While most eateries -- both mom-and-pop, as well as national chains -- have complied with the new rules, Kentucky Fried Chicken is still waiting for its supplier to ship paper packaging.

"They're working on it," said Chris Moran, waste reduction manager for the Santa Cruz public works department. "They are supposed to be getting in environmentally safe food products within three weeks. It's good news."

The city's ban went into effect last year. Relying on the public to report violators, the city notified the Mission Street KFC of the ordinance and encouraged the company to rectify it as soon as possible. A second letter about the violation was sent in June, she said.

No fine has been issued because the city would rather work with the company for the greater environmental good, than impose penalties, Moran said.

"Our aspiration is for them to change corporate-wide," she said. "The city has had success in doing that with Cold Stone Creamery. They switched out almost 2,000 businesses. Jamba Juice also is changing."

Polystyrene foam has been banned because it isn't easily biodegradable and poses a health hazard to animals that mistake it for food. What's more, a 1986 study by the Environmental Protection Agency detected the foam in the fat tissue of every man, woman and child tested, according to documents related to the county's ban on foam instituted last year.

The anti-polystyrene laws focus on commercial sources, such as restaurants, caterers, motels and movie theaters, as well as the organizers of special events, such as parades, foot races and concerts. Such products can still be purchased in stores for private use.

Polystyrene regulations exist primarily in California, said Annika Stensson, spokeswoman for the National Restaurant Association. More than 30 California cities and counties have prohibitions on polystyrene products, reported the Nation's Restaurant News trade publication. In June, state lawmakers shelved a statewide ban on the product, citing concerns with job losses in the state's polystyrene manufacturing industry, the magazine reported. The restaurant lobby wanted lawmakers to rethink the ban because of increased costs to businesses.

Locally, enforcement relies on reports from consumers. Generally, violators get a warning then face a $100 fine for the first offense in each jurisdiction. The fine increases an extra $100 each additional offense and max out at $500.

The cities of Scotts Valley and Capitola have sent letters to their respective KFC restaurants seeking compliance.

"We'd rather make sure they're doing the right thing, rather than issue a violation and fine," said Scott Hamby, the city's wastewater and environmental programs director.

The Mount Hermon Road establishment expects its supply of non-polystyrene food packaging products to "arrive no later than next Saturday," said manager Brandon Rus.

In Watsonville, where the ban went into effect May 14, businesses are still operating under a grace-period, during which the city is focusing on education, said Nancy Lockwood, of the public works and utilities department.

This fall, her office plans to conduct "eco-visits" at city businesses and restaurants to talk about water conservation and ways to improve company image in going green, as well as the polystyrene ban, she said.

"If they have other issues they want to talk about, we can talk about those, too," she said.

As for the county, they will check on reports that the Aptos KFC is still using polystyrene food packaging.

Self-help alternatives rise

Self-help alternatives rise. Interest in alternative therapies like energy healing and relaxation has declined, while practices that have more scientific validity and that depend on practitioners who are licensed and regulated, such as acupuncture, are more popular, according to a new survey. Consumers' use of alternative and complementary self-care therapies has increased, while visits to complementary health-care professionals has decreased. The National Institutes of Health survey is the first in 10 years to assess Americans' interest in herbal and homeopathic treatments, energy healing, acupuncture, tai chi and other healing practices. Researchers surveyed more than 75,000 adults in 2007. About 38 percent said they had used some form of complementary medicine for preventive health purposes or to treat a disease or condition.

Complementary medicine makes up just 1.5 percent of U.S. health care expenditures, but it accounts for 11.2 percent of total out-of-pocket spending. Of the $33.9 billion spent out of pocket on complementary medicine, most was for self-care products, such as classes, products and materials. Los Angeles Times

Doctor sees insurance remedy in health reform

Dr. Scott Nelson has found a growing problem among his patients in rural Mississippi, and it's not related to a disease.

More and more patients, he says, have extremely high deductibles in their health insurance plans. As high as $5,000. So they must pay that amount out-of-pocket in a year before insurance kicks in.

Nelson, a family physician in Cleveland, Miss., treats many people with chronic medical conditions such as diabetes and hypertension. They require ongoing care for those conditions, but it's out-of-pocket costs – amid a recession -- that lead an average of two patients a day to walk out of his clinic without getting needed tests, he says. "A lot of sick people need a lot of monitoring,'' he says.

Such insurance problems have helped convince Nelson to support the movement to overhaul the nation's health care system. Not only would reform help patients receive proper care, he says, but it also could boost his practice financially.

Doctors are far from united on health reform. Some major organizations, though, have moved to support the proposals coalescing in Congress, a shot of adrenaline for President Obama and advocates of an overhaul.
The American Medical Association earlier this month endorsed legislation moving through the House. The American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians have also backed reform efforts.

Nelson, 45, looks upon reform from his rural Mississippi perspective. He has been a doctor in solo practice for the past four years in Cleveland, his hometown. Office overhead, though, is higher than he anticipated -- rent, salaries, malpractice coverage, equipment, insurance hassles. His business is marginally profitable.
"Cash flow is pretty sporadic,'' he says.

Health reform as it now stands is a confusing, elusive target. Nelson welcomes the talk of bonus pay for primary-care physicians like himself, but he's not sure what final legislation will actually produce. "I don't think I've met a physician who really has a good grasp of it,'' he says.

He wants any legislation to preserve patients' ability to choose their doctor, and physicians' autonomy to order medications and tests.

Extending coverage to people without insurance -- about 5% of Nelson's practice -- ''would help tremendously,'' he says. People with chronic disease need care early before medical conditions worsen -- when treatment becomes more expensive.

And he would embrace a prohibition on health insurance companies from rejecting people with pre-existing medical conditions. ''An ongoing nightmare for patients,'' he says.

But the under-insured situation needs fixing, too, Nelson says. These people have coverage, but their deductibles and out-of-pocket costs make affording medical care difficult, if not impossible.

"Deductibles have skyrocketed,'' he says. Employers and individuals have not been able to maintain the same coverage, he says.

With a $5,000 deductible, few patients are going to reach that point where their medical spending triggers their insurance coverage, Nelson says. About half of his patients with private insurance have high deductibles.
His patient volume is decreasing by 10%, which he largely attributes to insurance problems. Better coverage for more people could help his practice revenue, he says.

Currently, Nelson says, "I have no choice but to ask to be paid at the time of service. My profit margin is slim. That puts a patient in a difficult position.''

Such concerns about patients' access to care have driven many physicians to consider the positives of health reform, Nelson says. He adds: "Virtually everyone realizes that something's got to be done. ''

Senate Republicans: No deal on health care

posted at 12:15 pm on July 30, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

With most of the focus on the House in the health-care battle, the Senate has tried to independently reach a bipartisan deal on health-care reform — by actually engaging Republicans. At least for now, Democrats in the Senate have has as much luck with the GOP as they have with their own Blue Dogs. The three Republicans on the panel have announced that no deal will come before tomorrow’s recess — and it doesn’t look like they’re getting closer regardless:

Two of the three Senate Republicans negotiating a bipartisan deal on health care reform said they consider an agreement out of reach before the Senate goes on its August recess.

That likely dashes the hopes of Democratic leaders and President Barack Obama for a deal among the so-called Gang of Six negotiators that could deliver critical momentum for the stalled health care overhaul.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyoming, dropped the bombshell news to CNN and two other reporters in Capitol hallways Wednesday night. They have spent weeks behind closed doors, trying to hammer out an agreement with their Democratic counterparts on the Senate Finance Committee but said too many issues remain unresolved, making it virtually impossible for them to sign on to a deal before the break.

Harry Reid postponed consideration of health-care reform until after the break, but he had hoped to get some broad framework of agreement before everyone left Washington. In this case, Reid at least tried to play it smarter than Nancy Pelosi, who has put herself in the worst-case scenario of having a firm bill with only Democrats supporting it (and not even all of those), hanging in public like a pinata for the GOP to hit for the next several weeks. Reid wanted to get Republicans on board before the recess to alleviate the pressure on his caucus from constituents during the recess.

Even if Reid failed, the strategy made a lot more sense than what Democrats are doing in the House:

A leading Blue Dog said today that Democrats aren’t working with any Republicans to pass healthcare reform.

Rep. Barron Hill (D-Ind.) admitted that healthcare efforts so far have focused entirely on rounding up the Democratic caucus.

“We’ve not had any discussions or negotiations with Republicans,” Hill said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. “We invite Republicans to be a part of the solution to our healthcare problems that we have, but we’ve not had any negotiations with them.”

Why Health Care Isn't Going Away

(Photo: Joseph Rodriguez / Gallery Stock)

Watching the Dixiecrats supposedly impose fiscal responsibility on the "unrealistic liberals," who, in theory, would go off and provide health care to all Americans if someone didn't put a stop to them, you have to wonder if this isn't all for show.

Speaking of shows, the mainstream media is in full-onslaught mode on health care reform now. They're going after Obama and his health care, trouble-making with everything and the kitchen sink. One more poll published today illustrating how "the public" is turning against Obama on health care reform will make an even hundred. How informative, so impressive.

In fact there is some real news out there that mattered: A quick read of the independent press might reveal, as David Swanson reports, "Nine More Go to Jail for Single Payer". [1] These were not hooligans or persons of low moral character; they were doctors and Catholic workers, an 11-year-old child and ordinary citizens who cared enough that all Americans would be entitled to health care that they voluntarily forfeited their liberty.

Or, as Nayla Kazzi reports, "More Americans Losing Health Insurance Every Day". [2] To wit: 46 million Americans are currently uninsured, but that the number is rising at an alarming and accelerating pace. Further, Kazzi reports that many of the uninsured are currently working.

The US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports, "Percentage of Americans With Private Health Insurance Hits 50-Year Low". [3] So, that's a drop in the percentage of insured Americans from an estimated "nearly 80% in the 1970s and early 1980s", to a 2008 estimated level, according to the CDC, of 67 percent of non-elderly Americans. That's down 2 percent in the past year alone apparently, according to the report.

Health Care as a Wedge Issue

If the corporate news machine isn't good for anything else, they're good at shaping public opinion in favor of corporate profits, even at the expense of the public's best interest. To be sure, Alabama Rep. Mike Ross and his Dixiecratic associates are well aware of the facts laid out above, well aware of the toll of human suffering generated by them and just as well aware of the losses meaningful reform of the health care industry would mean to industry bottom lines.

But how do you convince an ordinary American that health care reform that clearly stands to benefit them, at least to some extent, is something they should oppose, and oppose its advocates as well? First, you need a powerful medium. Broadcast television is a good start, commercial print media helps as well and talk radio really saturates the market fully. But you still need a wedge, an issue that divides.

What if you could convince the majority of Americans that health care reform would actually cost them money? Well. that would sure do it; yes, it would. The reality is a bit different: The American health care industry enjoys not only the staunch protection of US lawmakers, but the enormous financial benefits that follow. The numbers are staggering. [4] These are Fortune 500 people, and they absolutely, positively intend to keep it that way. Take away the enormous profit and health care would serve no other purpose than to ease human suffering.

So, sure, Barack Obama's popularity can be tarnished by a media onslaught and, sure, public opinion can in the same manner be panic driven to a profitably convenient conclusion. People, however, are dying and being left to die in staggering numbers as the Fortune 500 priorities are writ large by the nation's lawmakers.

Let there be no mistake, health care isn't going away.

The Heavenly Host of Health Care Authors

The health care bill is 1,000+ pages. As long as the Old and New Testaments, with a few centuries of The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire tacked on. That in itself raises justifiable suspicions as to what is in it. All conceivable explanations for such unseemly length suggest that these doubts are well founded.

The legion of authors is one reason. Most all congressmen, their armada of staffers, armies of lobbyists, and even the occasional White House operative have had a hand in writing this opus. Unhappily, the all too common motivations of ego satisfaction and promotion of self-interest are a lethal combination as far as the public interest is concerned. That's one. Then there are the myriad of qualifiers, addenda and exemptions incorporated at the behest of some special pleading party or other. That's two.

Complexity and rephrased repetitions similarly serve to open opportunities for dispute as to what exactly has and has not been stipulated. Multiple interpretations can be a form of compromise between drafters and/or a way for legislators to put their own spin on the bill when defending it before constituents. That's three. Confusion as to specific aims and purposes also can be the more or less innocent outcome of a turgid, wearisome process. To quote the prophet Isaiah, "Take counsel together and it shall come to nought." Protracted deliberations on this scale pretty much ensure that we have gone beyond 'nought' and passed into negative territory. Amazingly, Isaiah had this blazing insight without ever serving on a Congressional committee or having attended a faculty meeting. That is four.

A persuasive explanation can be compounded of all four hypotheses. That is not reassuring, especially for those who doubtless will encounter the hardships of trying to obtain affordable medical care -- the point of the exercise, supposedly.

Those of a more positive frame of mind will be free to celebrate the modest signs of bipartisanship that marked the bill's tortuous odyssey. No small thing; after all, even the Good Book is bipartisan. Consider the fair and balanced admonitions of Matthew (7:7): "Seek and you shall find," he counsels Republicans while comforting Democrats with the words, "ask and you shall be given." Perhaps reflections on Scripture will give Barack Obama peace of mind on his holidays.

Defending Canada's Health Care: Truths and Lies

Last week a new study showed that 92% of Canadians would recommend their doctor to friends and family. Two-thirds have had their doctor for over five years and 85% of Canadians have a regular doctor.

Does that sound like the health care system depicted in the right-wing Republican-backed smear campaign against Canada?

No care for life-threatening conditions, no choice, exorbitant costs, bureaucrat control, poor outcomes -- these are the bogeymen of the right-wing smear campaign. And like all bogeymen, once you look under the bed they don't exist.

Our system does have flaws. We need better prescription drug coverage, better remote access to care and better practices in hospitals and clinics. No honest advocate for our health care system would dismiss these things. But Canadian health care works -- and works well.

If you face a medical emergency -- you get the help you need. An admitting nurse doesn't check your credit card -- she checks your pulse. Across Canada innovative best practices in hospitals and clinics are cutting wait times for emergency treatment and elective surgery alike.

Costs are under control in Canada. We spend similar amounts on public care - around 7% of GDP. For that price, Canada covers everyone, the U.S. just one third of the population. In case you're worried Canada wastes money on bureaucracy, know that just 2.4% of our total costs go to administration compared to 7% of what your government spends. In end, Canadian care costs $2,500 less per capita - and covers everyone.

Our outcomes are excellent too: infant mortality is lower, people live longer and we are less at risk of cardiovascular disease than Americans.

Does all this mean that the United States should adopt Canada's health care system?

No. America can no more adopt our health care system than we can swap hockey for baseball as our national pastime. A good health care system reflects a country's values, and each country's values are different.

But a system with 47 million uninsured, coverage denied due to pre-existing conditions and people thrown off plans when they become ill? That doesn't reflect American values.

Fixing the health care system won't be easy -- from Truman to Nixon to Clinton presidents have tried and failed. But it wasn't easy in Canada either.

Sixty years ago Canadians families shouldered their own medical bills. Those with the money got the care they needed, but those without struggled -- they sold their farms, mortgaged their homes, or went without care, suffered, and even died.

Tommy Douglas, one of my predecessors as leader of the New Democrats, believed everyone should get the health care they needed, regardless of income. So in 1947 Tommy and his supporters launched a decades-long battle for Canadian Medicare.

The forces of the status quo -- like those in America today -- fought back. Small and big business, patients and doctors groups -- at different times they all fought reform. Doctors even went on strike, leaving sick women, men and children without care. But by 1984 the Canada Health Act had secured a national public health care system that has become part of our identity. It's not a perfect system, but it works.

With health care reform in the U.S. closer to success than at any time in my life, our hopes are with you. Don't let right-wing lies about Canada help derail health care reform in America.

FIU professor and humanitarian Dr. Pedro José “Joe” Greer to receive Presidential Medal of Freedom

MIAMI (July 30, 2009) – Dr. Pedro José “Joe” Greer, chair of the Department of Humanities, Health & Society at Florida International University’s Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, has been chosen by President Barack Obama to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest recognition given to civilians by the United States.

“I am deeply humbled by this incredible honor,” said Greer, who will accept the award at a White House ceremony on August 12. “I love medicine and what it can do for our community, particularly those in need. This is our country, this is our community and it’s our responsibility as physicians to make sure we take care of those who need it most.”

The Presidential Medal of Freedom is designed to recognize individuals who have made “an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural or other significant public or private endeavors.”

Greer has pioneered medical delivery and education in areas of homelessness, poverty and its relationship to policy and ethics in medicine. At the FIU Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, he is the chair of the Department of Humanities, Health & Society, which incorporates ethics, medicine and society and family medicine in concert with the College of Medicine’s unique curriculum.

That curriculum, called NeighborhoodHELP™ (Health Education Learning Program) and operated under the Green Family Medicine & Society Program, will place each medical student in a team that will include students from nursing, social work, public health, and others. Each medical student will spend three years working with a household in North Miami-Dade County. The interdisciplinary cooperation is similar to the model that is taking shape in modern medicine, as doctors collaborate with counterparts, such as social workers, to address a patient’s needs.

“Our students will have the privilege of learning about the social aspects of medicine from a recognized leader in this field,” said Wertheim College of Medicine Dean John Rock. “The energy and the vision of professors like Dr. Greer will inspire our students and propel this young college of medicine into a leadership position on the national stage.”

The Wertheim College of Medicine welcomes its first class of 43 students on Monday, Aug. 3.

President Obama on Thursday praised Greer and his fellow honorees for “their relentless devotion to breaking down barriers and lifting up their fellow citizens.”

“These outstanding men and women represent an incredible diversity of backgrounds. Their tremendous accomplishments span fields from science to sports, from fine arts to foreign affairs,” said President Obama in a statement. “Yet they share one overarching trait: Each has been an agent of change. Each saw an imperfect world and set about improving it, often overcoming great obstacles along the way.”

Added FIU President Modesto A. Maidique, “Dr. Greer represents the best that our community has to offer. This great honor is testament to the caliber of doctors that FIU’s Wertheim College of Medicine has attracted. We are honored to call Dr. Greer one of our own.”

Greer has been awarded the prestigious MacArthur “Genius” Fellowship, the Doctor of the Year for Teaching by the Magazine Hippocrates, and has received the Presidential Service Award from Presidents Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Jimmy Carter. Dr. Greer also was named the Health Care Hero of the Americas by Pan American Health Organization in Washington DC in 2005. He has advised both the Bush Sr. and Clinton Administration in issues of healthcare and poverty. He has published articles ranging from digestive and liver disorders to policy and poverty in America, as well as the book, Waking Up in America.

He did his undergraduate studies at the University of Florida and earned his medical degree from the Pontifica Universidad Madre y Maestra in Santiago, Dominican Republic. Greer did his internship, residency and was Chief Medical resident at JMH/ VA in Miami as well as two fellowships in Gastroenterology and Hepatology there. He is a Fellow of the American College of Physicians and the American College of Gastroenterology.

Custom Search Control Web Medical interns supporting doctors strike in Gujarat resume duty

As many as 550 final year MBBS interns in various Gujarat hospitals who were supporting the resident doctors on indefinite strike since July 23 resumed duty Thursday.

However, at least 1,200 resident doctors who are postgraduate students serving with various government hospitals in the state are continuing with their strike to demand a higher stipend.

The interns were warned by the state government that their support to the resident doctors and their absence from hospitals would be taken seriously and expulsions ordered for absentee interns from Thursday onwards.

"There had been some respite for the government hospitals with the 550 interns deciding to resume duty today (Thursday). As of now, there are 633 resident doctors out of 1,200 whose services are likely to be terminated from today (Thursday) evening," a senior health department official said.

He said that the resident doctors have been warned against going on a hunger strike across the state.

The state government had already told the resident doctors that the government would not bow down to their demand.

A statement issued by the Gujarat Association of Resident Doctors (GARD) said that none of the resident doctors will resume duty till their demands are met.

Health care reform, part III

Physician-related problems

• Medical education: It is long and very costly. In the U.S., we do not follow a vocational model as many other countries do. Here you must complete a four-year university degree, a four-year medical degree, and a residency program (at minimum). This is payed for by the students themselves, so that it is not unusual for a student to enter residency with 200K in debt. Residency, which is a minimum of three years, usually pays about 40K, so not much debt is being repaid (but interest is accruing on some loans). This means that an average doctor in the US needs to be paid A LOT just to maintain loan payments. Starting up a practice often isn't an option, as there is no money left. This leads to additional problems/solutions.


• Reimbursement: Doctors' fees make up a small percentage of health care costs but it is often seen as low-hanging fruit. Remember though, that doctors are repaying enormous personal debt in addition to the usual work of raising a family and creating a career. Remember also that once a doctor is committed to a house, a debt payment, the costs of a practice, then drastic changes in payments will collapse the system. Doctors will lose their homes (yes, really), default on debts, and be unable to sustain their practices.

• Financing education: unless the country decides to significantly subsidize medical education, including retroactive debt forgiveness, there is no way to significantly lower physician reimbursement. Most countries do this, and many, in return, demand a year or two of public service. Public financing of medical education, with a built-in expectation of military or public service, would mitigate the problem of underserved areas and the massive debt-burden of doctors.
• Bureaucracy: If medical bureaucracy is overly burdensome, as is seen with many insurance companies, doctors will find new careers or refuse to accept insurance and demand payment out-of-pocket. My private practice does not accept HMO patients because we would have to hire more people just to do the paperwork involved with referrals and prior authorizations. It's just not worth it.

There are no easy solutions to our health care problems, and we do have problems. Any person who is covered by decent insurance is going to be hesitant to risk a change, but we have to decide, as a nation, what we value. If we value our economic and physical health, we need a system that gives everyone access to preventative care, that encourages practices based on evidence, and that encourages our best people to practice medicine. Right now, we pay a huge amount for health care, so arguments that any change will cost more are ridiculous---it doesn't have to cost more, and shouldn't. It should cost different. If businesses are relieved of the burden of paying insurance (like overseas businesses), if less money is spent on administration, we will all benefit.

Whether a system is a patchwork of private insurers with citizens given tax-incentives or vouchers, or whether it is a single payer system, or whether it is the same system we have now with minor tweaks (which seems likely), we need to get comfortable with change, and do it soon. Any real change, change that actually accomplishes something, is going to hurt. It's not going to be easy. Before you reject certain options out of hand remember this: our largest insurer in Medicare. Medicare is unassailable as a program beloved by people enrolled, and they are pretty easy to work with as a provider. Medicare for all is not such a bad idea. It would require giving up some things to gain others. There is no system that won't require some sort of sacrifice. It's time to step up.

Eastern Medicine in Western Culture

About a quarter of all Americans are obese. This week the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) announced that obesity-related diseases account for an estimated 147 billion dollars in medical costs annually in the United States. That's 9.1 percent of all medical spending, up from 6.5 percent in 1998.

If you do the math, the report suggests we could pay the entire ten-year trillion-dollar bill for health care reform by lowering our obesity rate from 25 percent to 8 percent and thereby saving 100 billion dollars annually. And after ten years we'd have 100 billion dollars a year left over.

Obviously, we're failing miserably to curb the obesity epidemic. But is there a country with a low obesity rate that we can look to as an example? China comes immediately to mind. In recent years the obesity rate in China has soared as urbanization and Westernization have introduced an unhealthier diet and more sedentary lifestyle. But traditional Chinese culture still serves as a model we can study, leading to an obesity rate of only 2.6 percent in 2002. Just as experts are looking to countries around the world for ideas on how to fix our broken health care system, we should be exploring the traditions of other cultures -- now and in the past -- for ideas on how to follow healthier lifestyles.

During this week's CBS Doc Dot Com, I visit two Chinese physicians practicing in New York City who are trying to integrate the best of Eastern and Western medicine.