Today's Health | Everyday Health
View | Green Cultured
Green Cultured Cannabis College, liscensing in the medical marajuana proffession, APPLY TODAY!
View | VitaminWorld
Vitamin World is a vitamin and supplement company selling both in retail stores as well as online direct to consumers.
Vitamin World believes that nutrition starts at the source and wellness has always been their passion.
Mercola Natural Health Articles
A fishery is an organized means of catching fish, an activity otherwise known as fishing. This is different from fish farms, also known as aquaculture. On fish farms, the fish are commercially raised in enclosures for food, while a fishery is organized fishing for wild fish.
Farmed fish are some of the most toxic foods; this is especially true for farmed salmon, according to one study. Researchers found that farmed salmon tested five times more toxic than other food products. Farmed salmon contain half the omega-3 of wild salmon and are often fed a genetically modified diet. Many are given antibiotics and exposed to pesticides and other toxins to offset the unsanitary conditions in which they live.
Although farmed fish are exposed to purposely applied pesticides, fisheries in Japan have experienced a significant decline in fish and eel populations after neonicotinoids were sprayed in adjacent fields. Also known as neonics, this is a relatively new classification of insecticide that is water soluble and operates systemically.
This means the plants absorb the pesticide. The toxin in neonics operates on the central nervous system of the insects, causing death or impairing the ability to forage in pollinators. The idea was to create a defense mechanism for the plant so insects feeding on them would die before they did significant damage to the crops.
Fish Starved When Their Food Source Affected by Neonics
This widely used type of pesticide has now been associated with a declining harvest from Lake Shinji in Japan. Once a thriving fishery, researchers have found annual catches of smelt have fallen by 90% in the 10 years after the introduction of the pesticide to the surrounding fields.1
The study,2 published in Science, showed there was an immediate decline in the number of insects and plankton in the lake after neonics were used in adjoining rice paddies. This was rapidly followed by a collapse of the smelt and eel populations that rely on the insects and plankton for food.
The populations of smelt and eel had been stable for several decades, and while the analysis shows a strong correlation, the study was not designed to prove a causal link.
Damage to pollinators by neonics has been well-documented. The die-off to freshwater species has been studied more heavily in Europe, where data have linked the toxin to a collapse in the population of dragonflies, snails and mayflies associated with a decline in populations of birds feeding on those insects.
Other groups were recording the salt and pollution content in the lake, but the scientists didn't believe the reduction in the fish population was coinciding with those results. Masumi Yamamuro is a scientist with the Geological Survey of Japan and lead author on the study who investigated the cause of the decimation to the fish population.3
The researchers noticed one fish population had not declined and they determined the species had a more diverse diet and could survive on algae, not affected by insecticides. As the food sources for smelt and eel food were vanishing, the fish were dying as well.
One Chemical Has a Complicated Effect on the Ecosystem
Purdue University ecologist Jason Hoverman, who was not involved in the study, commented on the interrelationship of ecosystems often overlooked by agrochemical companies and big business. He said to NPR reporter Dan Charles:4
"When we think about chemicals, we often just go right to direct toxicity, not thinking about the food web implications; the food of the fish, and the impact of the chemicals on that food."
In 1962, Rachel Carson predicted the decline of the insect population, which she foretold would touch every living ecosystem on the earth. She was a celebrated biologist, ecologist and writer who called for responsible action to steward the Earth's resources.
She warned the federal government was part of the problem that could lead to environmental failure. Events predicted in her book have since come to pass in the last few decades. The Japanese researchers quoted Carson's "Silent Spring":5
"She wrote: 'These sprays, dusts and aerosols are now applied almost universally to farms, gardens, forests and homes — nonselective chemicals that have the power to kill every insect, the 'good' and the 'bad', to still the song of birds and the leaping of fish in the streams.' The ecological and economic impact of neonicotinoids on the inland waters of Japan confirms Carson's prophecy."
Matt Shardlow6 is a conservationist, author and CEO of Buglife, the only organization in Europe dedicated to saving invertebrates. The organization works to save bug habitats from destruction and to improve freshwater ecosystems. He commented to the Guardian on the results of this study:7
"Japan has had a tragic experience with nerve-agent insecticides. In the paddy fields, where the air once thrummed with the clatter of billions of dragonfly wings, these insecticides have imposed near silence. The annihilation of humble flies and the knock on effects on fish serve as further testament to the dreadful folly of neonicotinoids.
It is also extremely worrying that the levels of neonicotinoids in rivers in eastern England, as recently reported by Buglife, are very similar to the levels reported in this research. Unfortunately, while it is clear that harm must have been done to UK river health, the exact impact of neonicotinoids has yet to be quantified."
Vanishing Insect Population Affects Human Food Supply
In speaking with NPR Hoverman raised more specific questions about the cause of the problems:8
"These chemicals can definitely end up in water. We apply them on land, but they don't stay on land. The question becomes, are they at levels that are high enough to cause a problem?"
Other scientists studying the effects have acknowledged how these killer chemicals have damaged the environment, both immediately after application and years later. Yamamuro writes in the study,9 "This disruption likely also occurs elsewhere, as neonicotinoids are currently the most widely used class of insecticides globally."
If you remember going on a road trip as a child, you likely have a memory of bugs being smashed on your windshield. If you think about it for a minute, you may realize it's been awhile since your windshield was covered with insects. This has been called the "windshield phenomenon" by entomologists and is an ominous warning of the decline in insect species.
In one study evaluating the total flying insect biomass over 27 years in 63 protected areas in Germany, researchers discovered there had been a 76% decline. These reductions happened regardless of the type of habitat and were not explained solely by changes in weather, land use or habitat characteristics.
The researchers cautioned the loss of diversity and abundance could provoke a cascading effect on food ecosystems and the ramifications should not be taken lightly. Experts estimate 80% of wild plants depend on insects for pollination, 60% of birds depend on them for food and ecosystem services in the U.S. estimate their worth at $57 billion annually.
A study by researchers from the University of Nevada followed 67 butterfly species over 20 years in four locations. They discovered a significant reduction in the butterfly population was closely linked to the increased use of neonicotinoids.
Neonics Have High Risk and Little Reward
One study found agricultural lands in the U.S. are now 48 times more toxic than they were a short 25 years ago. The researchers found synthetic insecticide use shifted from organophosphorus pesticide to a mix of neonicotinoids and pyrethroids. The number of crops treated with neonicotinoids has risen precipitously and seed suppliers have doubled the amount of insecticide applied to each seed.
In the 1990s, only 35% of U.S. corn and 5% of soybean acres were treated with neonicotinoids. At that level of application, the pest population was not damaging enough to crops to cause economic harm, suggesting that treating hundreds of millions of acres is not necessary.
Despite years of evidence that neonics have a damaging effect on the environment with long-term damage on humanity, the use of this class of insecticide has continued. To compound the problem, farmers are not experiencing great benefits from the practice.
The investigators of one study compared results of farmers using regenerative practices to those who were using current monoculture methods. They discovered regenerative fields had a 29% lower production, but a 78% higher profit. In their review of pest management, they found corn fields treated with insecticides had 10 times more pests than those of regenerative farms.
Reduce Pesticide Use and Support Regenerative Farms
One key to reducing damage to the environment, wildlife and ultimately human health is to reduce the use of pesticides. Although the application is so commonplace it may seem necessary, researchers have demonstrated that pesticides can be cut without harming yields.
The results from some studies suggest reducing pesticide use may reduce crop losses since neonic coated seeds injure useful insects that help kill other pests naturally. Ecologically-based farming practices to help kill soybean aphids could save farmers in four states from hundreds of millions in losses each year.
Despite these findings, farmers are inundated with neonic-treated seeds and have limited ability to avoid them. Regenerative farming improves the biodiversity of the soil. It does not harm the environment and it ultimately increases the farmers' net profits, allowing them to continue providing food for the world and supporting their families.
Regenerative practices rebuild the topsoil, protect water sources, protect the insect population and offer you optimal nutrition. If you're not able to grow your own food, choose fresh, organic produce from local growers and seek out farmers who provide organic, grass fed beef, poultry and dairy products.
Certifications indicating farmers are using regenerative principles include Demeter biodynamic certification and American Grassfed Association (AGA) certification.
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an imaging study that allows your physician to see detailed pictures of your organs and tissues. The MRI machine uses a large magnet, radio waves and a computer to take detailed cross-sectional pictures of your internal organs and tissues.1
The scanner looks like a tube with a table that enables you to slide into the tunnel of the machine to gather data. Unlike CT scans or X-rays that use ionizing radiation known to damage DNA, the MRI uses magnetic fields.
Images from an MRI give physicians better information about abnormalities, tumors, cysts and specific organ problems with your heart, liver, uterus, kidneys and other organs.
In some instances, your physician may want an enhanced MRI, one using a contrast agent or dye to improve the clarity of the images produced. According to a recent international poll,2 a majority of radiologists avoid informing patients when deposits of toxic contrast agents are discovered.
FDA Guidance on Gadolinium
Gadolinium is the contrast agent of choice in about one-third of cases.3 It's injected into your body, allowing for greater detail to show up in the MRI images. There's a price for this, however, as gadolinium is a highly toxic heavy metal.
To reduce its toxicity, the gadolinium is administered with a chelating agent.4 However, research suggests as much as 25% of the gadolinium injected in certain patients is not excreted,5,6 and deposits are still found in some patients long afterward.
In 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began investigating the potential health effects from brain deposits of gadolinium, and released guidelines7 on the use of gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) to lower any potential risk.
Two years later, the agency issued an update8 saying "Gadolinium retention has not been directly linked to adverse health effects in patients with normal kidney function," and that the benefits of GBCAs outweigh potential risks. Still, the agency required a new class warning and certain safety measures to be implemented. In its December 19, 2017, safety announcement, the FDA stated:9
"… after additional review and consultation with the Medical Imaging Drugs Advisory Committee, we are requiring several actions to alert health care professionals and patients about gadolinium retention after an MRI using a GBCA, and actions that can help minimize problems.
These include requiring a new patient Medication Guide, providing educational information that every patient will be asked to read before receiving a GBCA. We are also requiring manufacturers of GBCAs to conduct human and animal studies to further assess the safety of these contrast agents …
Health care professionals should consider the retention characteristics of each agent when choosing a GBCA for patients who may be at higher risk for gadolinium retention …
These patients include those requiring multiple lifetime doses, pregnant women, children, and patients with inflammatory conditions. Minimize repeated GBCA imaging studies when possible, particularly closely spaced MRI studies."
Patients Responsible for Requesting Medication Guide
However, while MRI centers are required to provide the gadolinium medication guide to all first-time patients scheduled for an enhanced MRI, hospital inpatients are not required to receive the guide unless the patient specifically requests it. A rather disconcerting detail mentioned in the FDA's May 16, 2018, update is that:10
"A health care professional who determines that it is not in a patient's best interest to receive a Medication Guide because of significant concerns about its effects may direct that it not be provided to that patient."
In other words, if they think you might say no to the procedure because you're worried about heavy metal toxicity, the health professional is allowed to simply withhold the safety information. Only if you specifically ask for it must that guide be provided to you.
While the FDA decided not to restrict the use of any GBCAs, the European Medicines Agency's Pharmacovigilance and Risk Assessment Committee has recommended suspending the use of four linear gadolinium contrast agents shown to be less stable (and therefore more likely to accumulate in the brain and cause issues in those with kidney problems) than macrocyclic GBCAs.11
Most Radiologists Hide Findings of Gadolinium Deposits
An equally disturbing finding12 is that 58% of radiologists hide findings of gadolinium deposits from patients when they're found on scans. As reported by Health Imaging,13 the most commonly cited justification for omitting any mention of gadolinium deposits in their radiology report was to avoid provoking "unnecessary patient anxiety."
However, this also prevents patients from taking action to protect their health, which could be really important if they're experiencing effects of gadolinium toxicity and haven't put 2 and 2 together yet.
To date, the greatest danger of GBCA has been thought to be relegated to those with severe kidney disease, in whom GBCA exposure has been linked to nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF),14 a debilitating disease involving progressive tissue fibrosis involving skin and subcutaneous tissues.15 To avoid this, those with kidney disease need to receive more stable forms of chelate with the gadolinium.16
However, the fact that gadolinium can accumulate in the brain (and throughout your body) even if you do not have kidney problems could have significant, hitherto unrecognized, dangers. For example, use of GBCAs has been linked to hypersensitivity in two brain regions (the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus),17 the consequences of which are still unknown.
Hyperintensity in the dentate nucleus has previously been linked to multiple sclerosis, and according to more recent research, this hyperintensity may actually be the result of the large number of enhanced MRI scans MS patients tend to receive.18 Hyperintensity of the globus pallidus, meanwhile, has been linked to liver dysfunction.
Researchers Propose New Gadolinium Disease Category
In the 2016 paper,19 "Gadolinium in Humans: A Family of Disorders," the researchers actually propose that GBCA deposits in the body should be viewed as a new disease category. They write:
"In early 2014, an investigation by Kanda et.al. described the development of high signal intensity in brain tissue on T-2 weighted images of patients with normal renal function after repeated administrations of GBCA …
This caught many radiologists by surprise, as many had thought that deposition of gadolinium could not occur in patients with normal renal function. This deposition results in signal-intensity increase on unenhanced T1-weighted images in different regions of the brain, primarily in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus …
To our knowledge, neither the bone deposition first reported by Gibby et. al. nor the brain deposition first reported by Kanda et. al. have been associated with recognized disease. We propose to name these storage entities 'gadolinium storage condition.'
Along a separate avenue of inquiry, patient advocacy groups have formed, with an online presence in which individual members report that they have experienced severe disease following the administration of GBCAs.
Some of these patients have reported persistent presence of gadolinium in their systems, as shown by continued elevated gadolinium in their urine. All experience a variety of symptoms including pain in both the torso and the extremities; the latter location is associated with skin thickening and discoloration.
These physical features are similar, but lesser in severity, to those reported for NSF. Our preliminary investigation has convinced us that this phenomenon is a true disease process, which we propose naming 'gadolinium deposition disease.'"
The researchers go on to note other common signs and symptoms of "gadolinium deposition disease," such as persistent headache, bone, joint, tendon and ligament pain (often described as sharp pins and needles, cutting or burning), tightness in the hands and feet, brain fog and soft-tissue thickening that "clinically appears somewhat spongy or rubbery without the hardness and redness observed in NSF."
Lawsuit Highlights Gadolinium Dangers
"Gadolinium deposition disease" is what Chuck Norris' wife Gena claims to have developed after undergoing three contrast-enhanced MRIs in a single week to evaluate her rheumatoid arthritis.
The study cited above is part of the evidence included in the Norris' lawsuit20,21 (filed in November 2017) against several manufacturers and distributors of GBCAs. According to the lawsuit, the risks of gadolinium were known, yet patients are not warned.
Gena's symptoms began with a burning sensation in her skin. In a 2017 Full Measure interview, she described it as if there was acid burning her skin, slowly covering her body.22 Mental confusion, muscle spasms, kidney damage and muscle wasting followed.
She visited the emergency room several nights in a row, where doctors ran tests for ALS, MS, cancer and Parkinson's disease. The couple's attorney, Todd Walburg, told CBS News,23 "We have clients who have been misdiagnosed with Lyme disease, ALS, and then they've eventually ruled all those things out and the culprit remaining is the gadolinium."
In fact, it was Gena who made the connection between her symptoms and the MRIs she had undergone. She told Full Measure:24
"When we got to the hospital in Houston this last time, and I'm so bad and I said, listen, I am sober enough in my thinking right now, because I had such brain issues going on, I said I'm only going to be able to tell you this one time and I need you to listen to me very closely. I have been poisoned with gadolinium or by gadolinium and we don't have much time to figure out how to get this out of my body or I am going to die."
The Norrises claim they've spent nearly $2 million on efforts to restore Gena's health, with little progress. Even chelation therapy has had limited success.25
Heavy Metal Toxicity Is a Common Modern Hazard
Heavy metals are widely distributed throughout the environment from industrial, agricultural, medical and technical pollution. Heavy metal toxicity has documented potential for serious health consequences, including kidney, neurological, cardiovascular, skeletal and endocrine damage.
Heavy metals most commonly associated with poisoning are arsenic, lead, mercury and cadmium, which are also the heavy metals most commonly found in environmental pollution. Symptoms of heavy metal poisoning vary based on the organ systems affected.
Scientists have found that heavy metals also increase oxidative stress secondary to free radical formation.26 Testing for heavy metal toxicity includes blood, urine and hair and nail analysis for cumulative exposure.
Detoxification can be difficult, and needs to be done with proper care. I've written several articles about this. More information can be found in "The Three Pillars of Heavy Metal Detoxification" and "The Walsh Detoxification Program."
Carefully Consider Your Need for Contrast MRI
The key take-home message here is to avoid using MRI scans with contrast unless absolutely necessary. Many times, physicians will order these tests just to be complete and cover themselves from a legal perspective.
If that is your case, then simply refuse to have the test done with contrast. If necessary, consult with other physicians that can provide you with a different perspective.
This is particularly important if you have a condition such as MS in which multiple MRIs are done. Also remember that multiple MRIs with contrast will be particularly dangerous the closer they're done together.
If You Need an MRI, It Pays to Shop Around
While I always recommend being judicious in your use of medical diagnostic procedures, there are times when it is appropriate and useful for you to have a certain test.
What many don't realize is that the fees for these procedures can vary tremendously, depending on where they are performed. Hospitals tend to be the most expensive option for diagnostics and outpatient procedures, sometimes by an enormous margin.
Freestanding diagnostic centers are alternative places to obtain services such as lab studies, X-rays and MRIs, often at a fraction of the cost charged by hospitals. Private imaging centers are not affiliated with any particular hospital and are typically open for Monday through Friday business hours, as opposed to hospital radiology centers that require round-the-clock staffing.
Hospitals often charge higher fees for their services to offset the costs of their 24/7 operations. Hospitals also may charge exorbitant fees for high-tech diagnostics, like MRIs, to subsidize other poorly reimbursed services. And, hospitals are allowed to charge Medicare and other third-party insurers a "facility fee," leading to even more price inflation.
So, if you do find that you need an MRI, don't be afraid to shop around. With a few phone calls to diagnostic centers in your area, you could save up to 85% over what a hospital would charge for the same service.
MyRecipes: Editor's Picks
Save the seeds when you carve a fresh pumpkin, toast them, and use them for snacking or as a crunchy salad topping.
This homemade pork bolognese sauce should be served over cooked fettuccine and takes less than 15 minutes to prepare.
Set out a fiendish spread of appetizers and beverages when you host the annual Halloween costume party.
With a few low-fat baking tricks, our healthy pumpkin bread recipe shaved 33 percent of the calories and more than half the fat from the original recipe.
Marge Perry compares the amount of caffeine found in chocolate to a cup of coffee in this episode of Ask the Expert.