Dr. Gray's Straight Talk

Honest and blunt healthcare discussion and advice.

Posts Tagged ‘research’

Most Powerful Documentary You’ll Ever Watch

Posted by Dr. Gray on Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Many of you may have heard about a recently released documentary called, “Doctored.” I finally got to see this video within the last couple days and I have to say… I was much more impressed than I expected to be. Most often, documentaries are produced with an agenda and/or a message in mind, and this one is no different. However, too often those documentaries fall extremely short in actual data and truth in reporting. I’m happy to announce that this is NOT one of them. Although there is a good deal of anecdotal stories, this documentary had a ton of statistically verifiable evidence in support of the underlying message. Many of you that know me, know that I’m not an “Anti-Med” chiropractor. Yes, I’m natural first, but I recognize that there are times and conditions that warrant concurrent pharmaceutical intervention. That said, this documentary is essential watching to anyone interested in true “health care” as opposed to “sick care.”

I want to thank Dr. Mercola for making this video available for free on his website for a limited time. Watch it now, before it’s taken down. Once it’s taken down… it’s worth the few bucks to order a copy on DVD.  Keep your eyes peeled, because I’m sure it will be available on pay-per-view at some point, too. Here is the link to the free video on Dr. Mercola’s site: Click here to go to Dr. Mercola’s site with the free video.

– Dr. Gray

Posted in General Chiropractic, General Health, Other Pain Conditions, Political, Prescription Medicines | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sports Injuries… Who Cares?

Posted by Dr. Gray on Wednesday, September 7, 2011

2008 Gold Medal winner Kerri Walsh supports her shoulder with kinesio taping.

2008 Gold Medal winner Kerri Walsh supports her shoulder with kinesio taping.

Who cares??? Sounds a little crass, huh? Well, the answer is: YOU CARE!

Just as auto racing often leads to advancements and new technology in our personal cars, health care treatment for athletes often leads to new procedures for everyday complaints. There are a ton of treatments used commonly today that began as experimental methods designed to find anything that could keep an athlete on the field. One of the most striking and recent developments that comes to mind is “Kinesio Taping.” This new form of therapeutic taping uses a specialized elastic tape that allows the athlete to continue with free motion of the joints and muscles, while decreasing pain, healing time and risk of re-injury. It first gained widespread notoriety when Kerri Walsh took to the volleyball court during the summer Olympic Games in Beijing, 2008. Due to pain and prior injuries, who knows if Kerri could have taken gold that year if she hadn’t been able to support it with this new technology. Today, kinesio taping continues to be used with athletes around the world, but is becoming increasingly common in non-athlete musculoskeletal conditions also. A waitress with planter fascitis… a carpenter with tendonitis… a school teacher with lower back pain… You name it, and chances are there’s an application. (… and, yes, we are trained and use this procedure at Gray Chiropractic!)

A recent unique lower extremity study, the first ever to demonstrate preventive effects of chiropractic care, is the Hoskins and Pollard trial, in which adding chiropractic care to standard medical and physical therapy approaches dramatically decreased the number of leg injuries and missed games among Australian professional football players. This has widespread ramifications in the everyday workday world. If regular, even asymptomatic, chiropractic care reduced the number of injuries and games missed for professional athletes, then the same applies for working people. Regular chiropractic care, as a part of your overall health care plan, can reduce your chances for work-related injuries and reduce time missed from work.

Call our office today and schedule your appointment. As noted above, you don’t have to have “symptoms” or pain to benefit from chiropractic care. In fact, most of the time, the best time to take care of a problem is before it gets started!

Dr. Gray

reference: Hoskins W, Pollard H. The effect of a sports chiropractic manual therapy intervention on the prevention of back pain, hamstring and lower limb injuries in semi-elite Australian Rules footballers: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord.2010;11:64.

Posted in General Chiropractic, General Health, Other Pain Conditions | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Pregnancy Causes Sex!!!

Posted by Dr. Gray on Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Yes. Announced recently by Trojan Research are new findings that, in fact, pregnancy causes sex. A sample of 3,000 pregnant women were interviewed and examined recently, and it was found that 97% admitted that, “Yes… by gosh, I have recently had sex!” The researchers have determined that with this new information, they can definitively say that pregnancy does indeed put individuals at more risk of experiencing sexual activity. ….

Sound ridiculous? Well apparently not if you’re a writer for BusinessWeek, the Telegraph (UK), or a commentator for MSNBC:

A new study out of the University of California – San Diego revealed that obese children were far more likely to have been infected with adenovirus 36 (AD36) than fit children. The immediate conclusion was made that the virus must be causing the obesity. BusinessWeek ran with a big headline, “Childhood Obesity Might Be Linked to Strain of Cold Virus.” Next, the Telegraph in the UK jumped in with: “Childhood cold virus could lead to development of obesity.” Not wanting to be left out, MSNBC rolled out this whopper: “Nothing to sneeze at: Common cold virus may make kids fat.”

I think it’s more likely the sex led to the pregnancy, don’t you? Obesity led to the insufficient immune response that allowed the virus to cause the symptoms of a cold. Think about it… With very few exceptions, obesity is almost entirely determined by food and exercise choices. Obese children are more likely to be living on junk food, which adds to the obesity and poor immune function. They are less likely to participate in outside play resulting in less sun exposure which, in turn, leads to Vitamin D deficiency and a weakened immune system. They are less likely to participate in regular, sustained physical activity which would help decrease their weight and increase the efficiency of their immune defenses. Any way you look at it, the lifestyle choices that have led to obesity are the same choices that have weakened the immune system to the point at which these kids are susceptible to the cold virus.

But, “Why?” you ask… “would the jump be made in the opposite direction?” What do we do when we’ve got a question around here, folks? Say it with me!… FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!!

If the virus causes obesity, we must all need a vaccine, right? If we can all be convinced that a virus causes obesity, they can roll out a new Anti-Obesity Vaccine that is so important for the kids. If you’re against it, you don’t care about the children. If you can’t afford it, the taxpayers should be responsible to make sure the children get what they need. However you look at it, Big Pharma is positioning themselves for an all-out blitz to make sure we all know about this crucial “need.” A guaranteed and mandated revenue stream… kinda sounds like the flu shots and the HPV vaccine, huh?

So now, we have a new excuse to play the victim card. It’s not your responsibility. It’s the virus that made you fat. If only you’ll just trust in Big Pharma, we’ll take good care of you. Research leader Dr Jeffrey Schwimmer said, “It is time that we moved away from assigning blame in favor of developing a level of understanding that will better support efforts at both prevention and treatment.” Translated, this statement from the study author essentially says, “Stop blaming people for their own behavior because food choice and exercise has nothing to do with obesity, and instead we need to be vaccinating children against obesity while calling it ‘treatment.'”

So… the next time your teenager comes home pregnant, make sure you rush to the doctor and get your Anti-Sex Vaccine,  because they are now at great risk of being exposed to sexual activity. If you don’t, you don’t care about your kids!

– Dr. Gray

Posted in General Health, Prescription Medicines | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

More Facts About The Cholesterol Myth

Posted by Dr. Gray on Tuesday, August 3, 2010

My last article referenced the myth regarding cholesterol, saturated fats, and heart disease. Well, here are some more facts to chew on:

  • There’s never been a single study that proves saturated fat causes heart disease.
  • As heart-disease rates were skyrocketing in the mid-1900s, consumption of animal fat was going down, not up. Consumption of vegetable oils, however, was going up dramatically.
  • Half of all heart-attack victims have normal or low cholesterol. Autopsies performed on heart-attack victims routinely reveal plaque-filled arteries in people whose cholesterol was low (as low as 115 in one case).
  • Asian Indians – half of whom are vegetarians – have one of the highest rates of heart disease in the entire world. Yup, that fatty meat will kill you, all right.
  • When Morgan Spurlock tells you that a McDonald’s salad supplies almost a day’s allowance of fat, he’s basing that statement on the FDA’s low-fat/high-carbohydrate dietary guidelines, which in turn are based on … absolutely nothing. There’s no science behind those guidelines; they were simply made up by a congressional committee.
  • Kids who were diagnosed as suffering from ADD have been successfully treated by re-introducing natural saturated fats into their diets. Your brain is made largely of fat.
  • Many epileptics have reduced or eliminated seizures by adopting a diet low in sugar and starch and high in saturated animal fats.
  • Despite everything you’ve heard about saturated fat being linked to cancer, that link is statistically weak. However, there is a strong link between sugar and cancer. In Europe, doctors tell patients, “Sugar feeds cancer.”
  • Being fat is not, in and of itself, bad for your health. The behaviors that can make you fat – eating excess sugar and starch, not getting any exercise – can also ruin your health, and that’s why being fat is associated with bad health. But it’s entirely possible to be fat and healthy. It’s also possible to be thin while developing Type II diabetes and heart disease.
  • Saturated fat and cholesterol help produce testosterone. When men limit their saturated fat, their testosterone level drops. So, regardless of what a famous vegan chef believes, saturated fat does not impair sexual performance.

Woo hoo! Three cheers for the mainstream, high-volume, low-quality, cheaply produced food industry! Say it with me folks… “Follow the money!” Refined sugars, vegetable oils, enriched grains, boxed or canned foods, fast food… what do they all have in common?

  1. They cost less to produce
  2. They result in more profits
  3. They last longer on the shelf
  4. They offer “convenience” to the consumer
  5. Most importantly… they offer the minimum amount of nutrition to be considered FOOD.

In our next article, I think I’ll list some words that we hear regularly and see on “food” advertisements… and then give you the true definitions. Until then, take care.

Dr. Gray

Posted in General Health, Nutrition | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

The Cholesterol and Saturated Fat Myth

Posted by Dr. Gray on Thursday, July 15, 2010

Did you know a leading heart surgeon is calling for a ban on butter? Seriously! He explains that obesity and rising rates of heart disease are because children are starting out the day with toast and butter. Okay… are you ready for it? Say it with me folks: FOLLOW THE MONEY! Turns out, this “respected authority” is associated with a major manufacturer of … margarine. Don’t you just love it when they make it this easy? A great question posed by contributing editor Jon Herring of Total Health Breakthroughs was, “Why the butter and not the toast? Two slices of bread contain the equivalent carbohydrates of five teaspoons of sugar. And elevated blood sugar has been directly associated with heart disease.”

If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times… Cholesterol levels and saturated fats DO NOT correlate to the risk for heart disease! In fact, if you’ll recall, I previously wrote about the Framingham Heart Study which showed that after the age of 50 (when 90% of all heart attacks occur), lower cholesterol levels are clearly associated with a shorter life expectancy. I recently came across an article written by Mr. Herring titled The Greatest Scam in Medical History. Since he’s already done the hard work, I’ll credit him and repost a portion of his article here (emphasis and notations are mine). The entire article he’s written is worth the read, so click the link and check it out when you get a chance.

There have been about 30 long-term population studies that have attempted to link saturated fat to heart disease. Of those, only four have shown even the weakest association. And all four had major disqualifications: they were either too small to be significant, they did not isolate the variables properly, or they showed a slight decrease in heart deaths but an increase in death due to cancer.

But population studies are notoriously unreliable anyway. The gold standard among health studies are controlled, randomized trials. And not a single study of this nature has ever shown definitive evidence that saturated-fat consumption leads to heart disease. In fact, many have shown the exact opposite!

Authors of the MR-FIT trial were determined to prove the case. They enrolled 350,000 men, all of whom were considered at high risk of heart disease. In one set of participants, cholesterol consumption was reduced by 42%, saturated fat by 28%, and total calories by 21%.

What happened? Nothing. The authors referred to the results as “disappointing,” stating that “The overall results do not show a beneficial effect on Coronary Heart Disease or total mortality from this multifactor intervention.”

The Women’s Health Initiative was a huge government study, costing almost three quarters of a billion dollars. Among 20,000 women in the study who adhered to a diet low saturated fat diet for eight years, there was no reduction in the rates of heart-disease or stroke.

Then there was the Cochrane Collaboration, in 2000. This group rigorously selected 27 low-fat and cholesterol-lowering trials to review (more than 200 trials were rejected). Their conclusion was that diets low in saturated fat have “no significant effect” on heart attack mortality. Lead researcher Lee Hooper, PhD, said “I was disappointed that we didn’t find something more definitive.”

Or how about something more recent?

This month, the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition published a review of 21 studies. The studies ranged from 5 to 23 years in length and encompassed 347,747 subjects. In the authors’ own words: “Intake of saturated fat was not associated with an increased risk of CHD [coronary heart disease], stroke, or CVD [cerebrovascular disease].”

In 1988, U.S. Surgeon General’s office decided to end the confusion. They set out to finally prove the causal link between saturated fat and heart disease. After 11 years, the project was abandoned. The Surgeon General’s office stated that they, “did not anticipate fully the magnitude of the additional external expertise and staff resources that would be needed.” Sure! After more than a decade of trying, the government just “just didn’t have the resources.”

Scientists and researchers are supposed to have an open mind. They are not supposed to be dogmatic and swayed by politics and peer pressure. But that is exactly what the majority of scientists and doctors have proven of themselves. It is not terribly surprising. Massive industries and shining scientific careers have been built on this faulty theory.

If it were not so tragic, it would be funny to listen to them explain away contradictory findings and make excuses for why their studies don’t match their hoped-for conclusions. The most common excuses are that the “trial didn’t last long enough” or they “didn’t lower the saturated-fat intake enough.” It seems that option number three never crosses their mind… perhaps the entire hypothesis is wrong!

Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD has called the saturated fat theory of heart disease “one of the greatest and most harmful misconceptions in the history of medicine.” Dr. George Mann called it the “public health diversion of the century.”

And the problem is not just the wasted time and billions of dollars dedicated to an unscientific myth. The bigger problem is that undue focus on the saturated fat bugaboo has stolen attention from the REAL causes of heart disease. And perhaps even worse, is that many of the dietary recommendations to reduce heart disease have actually been shown to CAUSE heart disease (not to mention cancer, diabetes and obesity).

If you truly want to protect yourself from the nation’s number one killer, don’t smoke and reduce your stress levels. At least the medical authorities have gotten those two right. And when it comes to your diet, forget about saturated fat and cholesterol. Here is what you should do instead:

• Consume more monounsaturated fats from sources like olive oil, nuts, avocados and avocado oil

• Cut out the sugar and refined carbohydrates

• Consume more omega-3 fatty acids, from wild game, grass-fed beef and bison, sardines and wild (not farm-raised) salmon. And take an omega-3 fish oil supplement.

• And reduce as much as possible omega-6 fatty acids in your diet. These come primarily from conventionally raised meats, processed foods, fried foods and vegetable and seed oils (corn, soybean, sunflower, cottonseed, etc.)

Posted in General Health, Nutrition, Prescription Medicines | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Acupuncture… Does It Work?

Posted by Dr. Gray on Wednesday, June 2, 2010

Found a great article in the Wall Street journal from March 2010. In it, the journalist gives an account of her experience with acupuncture, and details some of the new scientific evidence proving the effective results associated with this form of treatment. For me, this was a great and timely article. I am often asked, “How does acupuncture work?” Well, you all know that I am often honest to a fault, therefore, my answer usually begins with, “We don’t exactly know!” Wow… now if that doesn’t inspire confidence, I don’t know what will! (obvious sarcasm)

A technique that has been around for 5000 years or so has got to have some validity to it, right? So why are there so few scientific studies and such little research done on the subject? The answer to that question is two-fold:

First, I believe that we do not yet fully understand how to evaluate and quantify the effects of the biomagnetic and bioelectric fields that surround and travel through us. Physics can measure, predict, and detail very accurately the electric and magnetic fields created by the interaction of positive and negative charges when we pass electricity through a copper wire. On a very basic, simplified, and cellular level, the interaction between nerves, cells, and other tissues in our body is not that different from passing electrons through a wire. In nearly all functions of the body, there are positive and negative charges being exchanged, transferred, or retained in and between our cells. Individually, this interaction between two cells may be extremely small. However, collectively, these interactions could theoretically develop significantly large biomagnetic and bioelectric fields due to the interaction of positive and negative charges. This model could explain why many seemingly strange techniques work; such as: acupuncture, applied kinesiology, contact reflex analysis, muscle testing, etc. Many of these techniques involve weird and unexplained responses from the manipulation or interference with these fields; such as holding a particular food item causing the strengthening or weakening of a muscle. At this point in time, we just don’t know how to measure or evaluate these responses. Most of these techniques also suffer from interexaminer deficiencies… which means, different practitioners may do an examination on the same patient yet interpret the results differently. Here’s the strange part… even though different results are obtained from examination, and different acupoints may be chosen for treatment, positive outcomes from treatment are still realized… and outperform placebo!

The second reason that research and documentation is scant on acupuncture and energy-based medicine is… say it with me folks… Follow the money!!! That’s right, boys and girls. There’s no money in it for the pharmaceutical, insurance, or medical corporations. Acupuncture, chiropractic, kinesiology, and other energy-based techniques are largely practitioner-based. Face it; if they can’t bottle it and sell it, they’re not going to support it. Who do you think pays for all those research papers in JAMA, NEJM, or any other “peer-reviewed” research journal? And why do they pay for or support these research articles? Because they expect a return on their investment. I don’t have a problem with it… that’s the way the free market works, and I’d rather have it that way than have some moron in Washington deciding what’s good or not (besides… who do you think is paying that guy?). All I’m saying is that the lack of big-money research doesn’t necessarily mean that something doesn’t work. Like I’ve told you before, in anything you read or hear (including this blog!), consider the source and motivation behind what you’re hearing. The pharmaceutical industry is a trillion dollar per year industry… why would they finance, support, and publish any research that encourages a medical treatment option that renders their products unnecessary? Not gonna happen.

That said, there were a couple good videos included with the Wall Street Journal article linked above. Having trouble embedding them here, so follow the link and watch them there. I’ll update this page if I figure out how to embed the video here. If you want to go directly to the videos: here’s the first one… and, here’s the second one.

Dr. James C. Gray

Posted in Acupuncture, General Back Pain, General Health, Low Back Pain, Neck Pain, Other Pain Conditions | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Swine Flu, Flu Shot, Vaccination Follow-Up

Posted by Dr. Gray on Thursday, January 21, 2010

In October and November of last year, when the big swine flu scare was ramping up, I wrote several articles discussing my thoughts on the Swine Flu Pandemic and vaccinations. Here we are several months later and guess what… I was right! The swine flu hoax is coming to light, and now even doctors are beginning to admit it was all crap, and just about money.

Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a leading health authority in Europe, says that drug companies “organized a ‘campaign of panic’ to put pressure on the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare a pandemic. He believes it is ‘one of the greatest medicine scandals of the century,’ and he has called for an inquiry.” Read more about it here.

It turns out… as predicted… that the swine flu was never as dangerous as advertised and has led to less than 10% of the number of deaths annually related to the traditional “seasonal” flu. Dr. Wodarg said, “The great campaign of panic we have seen provided a golden opportunity for representatives from labs who knew they would hit the jackpot in the case of a pandemic being declared.”

What did I tell you? It’s all about the Benjamins, baby! The H1N1 Swine Flu virus was never dangerous, and should never have been escalated to a level-six pandemic. All of the hubbub, fear, and intense concern were mere tactics used to sell vaccines. Why would so many participate? Follow the money…  In the fourth quarter alone, GlaxoSmithKline shipped $1.4 billion worth of their vaccine. That’s BILLION… with a B… $1.4 BILLION in taxpayer dollars just to one company… in just three months… for something that was an artificially inflated risk. Wonder which politicians GSK is supporting in this year’s elections, huh? Wonder which TV stations are selling tons of ad time telling you how badly you need the shot? Wonder which companies all of sudden began supporting the new health care bill… right after the politicians got on board with this hoax? Mike Adams of NaturalNews.com wrote that, “The drug companies raked in billions of dollars in revenues while providing a product that offered absolutely no net reduction in mortality. In fact, as the long-term side effects of the vaccines remain unknown, it could turn out that the vaccines actually result in a net increase in mortality.”

So… all I’m asking is for you to use your head. Be smart. Do your research. And always, always, … follow the money.

Dr. Gray

More information here

Posted in General Health, Prescription Medicines | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Unanswered Questions About Vaccinations and Flu Shots

Posted by Dr. Gray on Thursday, October 22, 2009

As I was preparing and doing some research for this blog post, I found a near identical article to what I was planning.  I’ll add one question that I felt should have been added to the list afterwards, but here ya go:

Vaccine mythology remains rampant in both western medicine and the mainstream media. To hear the vaccination zealots say it, vaccines are backed by “good science,” they’ve been “proven effective” and they’re “perfectly safe.”

Oh really? Where’s all that good science? As it turns out, there’s isn’t any. Flu vaccines (including swine flu vaccines) are based entirely on a vaccine mythology that assumes all vaccines work and no vaccines can be scientifically questioned. Anyone who dares question the safety or effectiveness of vaccines is immediately branded a danger to public health and marginalized in the scientific community.

Here are ten questions vaccine-pushing doctors and health authorities absolutely refuse to answer:

#1) Where are the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies proving flu vaccines are both safe and effective? Answer: There aren’t any.

#2) Where, then, is the so-called “science” backing the idea that flu vaccines work at all? Answer: Other than “cohort studies,” there isn’t any. And the cohort studies have been thoroughly debunked. Scientifically speaking, there isn’t a scrap of honest evidence showing flu vaccines work at all.

#3) How can methyl mercury (Thimerosal, a preservative used in flu vaccines) be safe for injecting into the human body when mercury is an extremely toxic heavy metal? Answer: It isn’t safe at all. Methyl mercury is a poison. Along with vaccine adjuvants, it explains why so many people suffer autism or other debilitating neurological side effects after being vaccinated.

#4) Why do reports keep surfacing of children and teens suffering debilitating neurological disorders, brain swelling, seizures and even death following flu vaccines or HPV vaccines? Answer: Because vaccines are dangerous. The vaccine industry routinely dismisses all such accounts — no matter how many are reported — as “coincidence.”

#5) Why don’t doctors recommend vitamin D for flu protection, especially when vitamin D activates the immune response far better than a vaccine? Answer: Because vitamin D can’t be patented and sold as “medicine.” You can make it yourself. If you want more vitamin D, you don’t even need a doctor, and doctors tend not to recommend things that put them out of business.

#6) If human beings need flu vaccines to survive, then how did humans survive through all of Earth’s history? Answer: Human genetic code is already wired to automatically defend you against invading microorganisms (as long as you have vitamin D).

#7) If the flu vaccine offers protection against the flu, then why are the people who often catch the flu the very same people who were vaccinated against it? Answer: Because those most vulnerable to influenza infections are the very same people who have a poor adaptive response to the vaccines and don’t build antibodies. In other words flu vaccines only “work” on people who don’t need them. (And even building antibodies doesn’t equate to real-world protection from the flu, by the way.)

#8) If the flu vaccine really works, then why was there no huge increase in flu death rates in 2004, the year when flu vaccines were in short supply and vaccination rates dropped by 40%? Answer: There was no change in the death rate. You could drop vaccination rates to zero percent and you’d still see no change in the number of people dying from the flu. That’s because flu vaccines simply don’t work.

#9) How can flu vaccines reduce mortality by 50% (as is claimed) when only about 10% of winter deaths are related to the flu in the first place? They can’t. The 50% statistic is an example of quack medical marketing. If I have a room full of 100 people, then I take the 50 healthiest people and hand them a candy bar, I can’t then scientifically claim that “candy bars make people healthy.” That’s essentially the same logic behind the “50% reduction in mortality” claim of flu vaccines.

#10) If flu vaccines work so well, then why are drug makers and health authorities so reluctant to subject them to scientific scrutiny with randomized, placebo-controlled studies? Answer: Although they claim such studies would be “unethical,” what’s far more unethical is to keep injecting hundreds of millions of people every year with useless, harmful vaccines that aren’t backed by a shred of honest evidence.

Kudos to Natural News who got this article done, researched, and posted before me. They went even further with their discussion, and have links to a lot of the factual evidence backing up their answers. Don’t take my word for it; check ’em out for yourself.

Now… one other question that keeps hitting me, but never receives an answer: Often, people are made to feel guilty if they refuse the flu shot because “they are putting others at risk.” If I get exposed and fight the flu virus… if the flu shot does what they say, and they’ve had the flu shot, what are they worried about and how am I putting them at risk?

Posted in General Health, Political, Prescription Medicines | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Schoolchildren WILL Eat Healthy Lunches

Posted by Dr. Gray on Monday, August 31, 2009

Great news for parents: Schoolchildren are willing to eat healthy lunches. The days of corn dogs, tater tots, sloppy joes and french fries are slowly being replaced with apple slices, turkey hot dogs and vegetables.

For years people have underestimated children’s willingness to eat healthier foods and schools’ ability to produce appealing, nutritious lunch options. According to a recent University of Minnesota study, school lunch sales don’t decline when healthier meals are served. Children will eat fruits and vegetables if they are presented to them. Moreover, nutritious lunches don’t necessarily cost schools more to produce.

The research, published in the Review of Agricultural Economics, evaluated five years of data involving 330 Minnesota public school districts to determine compliance with federal standards for calories, nutrients and fats. Results suggested that nutritious foods like fruits and vegetables are actually less costly than processed foods, which offsets the higher labor costs involved with producing healthier lunches.

Change is always tough – to make healthy lunches a reality, many school districts will have to adjust by upgrading their kitchens and training their staff to prepare fresh, whole foods in bulk. But if the results achieved in Minnesota can be replicated on a national level, healthy eating at school can finally be a regular part of American life.

To Your Health, January, 2008 (Vol. 02, Issue 01)

Dr. Gray’s comments: You want to show me real “health care reform?” This study was done two years ago and many other similar studies have proven this again and again. For years, we’ve known that providing healthier meals to our schoolchildren actually costs the school district less than providing processed, enriched, frozen, crap. We’ve also known that, although they complain, kids prefer the healthier meals to the other crap. Do you know the number one health affliction in our kids today? … Obesity. Why? Because we are feeding them crap! They’re getting processed, enriched, sugary, artificial junk that their bodies don’t recognize as real food. And we’ve known this for years! But how many of your kids continue to get lunches consisting of chicken nuggets, tater tots, rectangular pizzas, and nachos? Next time someone from the government says they want to “improve health care” in this country, ask them why they won’t improve what they’re already doing before they try to screw the rest of it up!

Posted in General Health, Nutrition, Political | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Chiropractic For Chest Pain?

Posted by Dr. Gray on Tuesday, May 26, 2009

When we think of chiropractic, the first thing most people think of is lower back pain. Unfortunately, that is the only thing many people associate with chiropractic care. The fact is: Chiropractic deals with the entire neuromusculoskeletal system(nerves, muscles, bones). As such, more and more research is proving that chiropractic care can be beneficial for many conditions not regularly associated to it.

For instance: Chest pain, known medically as angina, affects over 6 million Americans every year. These frightening attacks can be brought on by physical overexertion or stress, but are ultimately related to your heart needing more oxygen than it’s receiving. In a recent study performed in Denmark, positive results were shown in patients with stable angina after a four-week session of chiropractic adjustments.

Approximately 75 percent of the participants in the treatment group reported an improvement. 75%! That is a fairly stupendous amount! Do you realize that some medications are approved for use if they show a mere two or three percent improvement? … But 75%!?! That’s almost unheard of! … especially from your government! … On the website for the National Institute of Health (NIH) and the U.S. National Library of Medicine, there is the following statement: “The options for treating angina include medications and surgery.”

Not one mention or reference to safer or alternative treatment options… just drugs and surgery. Period. Their article was supposedly updated in July of 2008, but the study I referenced above was published (in a respected, peer-reviewed journal) in 2005. Three years? Seriously… three years and not one mention? We, in the chiropractic field, have known and witnessed these conditions respond to traditional chiropractic care for decades. The medical establishment, pharmaceutical industry, and government agencies have refused to acknowledge these treatment options in the past due to “lack of scientific evidence.” Okay, so we’ve got published scientific research in respected medical journals… now what’s their excuse? Oh, that’s right… chiropractic hasn’t contributed enough for those re-election campaigns.

Want the worst of it…? This is the same backwards, corrupted, ignorant, years behind, only-approve-the-highest-bidder organization that half of the country thinks they want in charge of their health care. Sorry… off the soapbox now and back on topic:

I’m not saying that chiropractic is going to cure 75% of chest pain cases. This study was done in regards to chest pains known as “stable angina.” However, this is a great example of a condition not normally associated with it responding to chiropractic care much better than expected. With regards to chest pains, it is imperative to start with a proper and accurate diagnosis. Realistically, chiropractic will be one small piece of an overall treatment regimen that involves lifestyle and diet modifications, safe exercise recommendations, nutritional supplementation, and coordination with your medical physician with an overall goal of improving your cardiovascular health.

Regardless of what you have thought about chiropractic in the past, recognize that your chiropractor is a “doctor” and is qualified to answer your questions and assist with the treatment of many conditions other than lower back pain. Remember to think for yourself, and do your own research. There are often tons of information and alternatives that are less invasive than traditional treatment methods.

Posted in General Chiropractic, Other Pain Conditions, Political | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: