Fair Promotes Health and Fitness

One determinant of a healthy and progressive nation is healthy individuals. These individuals, in turn, make up the community which turns into a nation in terms of economic and social interactions. One good way to promote health and wellness is through health fairs that provide the basic health services. This is done to ensure that the basic health needs of individuals are met and community programs are implemented.

In connection to this, the Fitness Fiesta Health Fair Saturday at the Westside Community Center provided basic health services to the residents of New Braunfels, Texas. Several booths were set up to discuss diseases and other health programs like speech disabilities in children and health advice in early childhood. Parenting classes were also held during the day’s affair. The booth for the American Cancer Society, sponsored by Bob Peterson, handed out pamphlets about the early warning signs for cancer.

The health fair also provided free medical health screenings like blood tests. Free transportation to hospitals in New Braunfels, San Antonio and Seguin were also provided by Peterson and other volunteers for diagnostic tests and treatment. These were part of the American Cancer Society’s program on cancer patients.

The event proved to be a success as almost 700 people attended it. This is according to Rosie Sherrow of the Institute for Public Health and Education Research (TIPHER) where she is the fitness and health coordinator. The event is on its 5th year running and has been helping the people all the while. One who attended and benefitted from the said event was Awilda Ramos. She shares that she learned so many things like the importance of exercise as well as learned about the other services that the community offers. She also said that fairs like this serve as the venue for information dissemination as she got here free parenting classes.

One good way to living a healthy life is by equipping yourself with health information. Information on healthy foods and proper exercise are vital in keeping yourself healthy and fit. Another important factor to be considered in staying healthy is monitoring your health. On the average, a person will have to pay about $300 on annual tests every year. To some, spending this amount is quite hard on the budget. This now comes the benefit of health fairs. In addition, weight loss information is also being tackled during such events. Take advantage of these services and start living a healthy life.

Health and Fitness Level: What Is Your True Level of Health?

Article 4 of 7

This article is about the completion of a key element of the proposed medical information system–the national research center.

To realize the most from this article you need to read the 3 previous articles. However, I will try and summarize some of the key points of those articles here.

The most effective means of evaluating a person’s health would of course be through some direct means of looking into the human organism to see what is truly taking place. Fortunately, as strange as it may seem, the human body does provide such a window in the form of its biochemical makeup. Furthermore, even more encouraging, there is a science already fully developed that is taking full advantage of that body phenomenon called clinical laboratory science. These are major factors in the success any advanced health care system.

I highly recommend that you take a minute here to read what the experts have to say on that matter by clicking on the link (called page 18) at the end of this article. These experts are from text books located in the University of Michigan’s Medical Library.

As described in the link reference on page 18, the advantages of the biochemical makeup of the body is very impressive indeed. Clinical laboratory science is a highly computerized and a very rapidly moving industry. Hundreds of critical tests are now available for use. That industry is an important part of the current health care system. The blood or tissue tests that your doctor orders for you when he or she is suspicious of a given medical condition that needs verification usually involves clinical laboratory science.

The key difference between the proposed national medical information system and the current health care system lies in the difference in the use of these data. The current health care system primarily uses it to evaluate a disease condition whereas the proposed system would apply it on a broader scale basis to include disease prevention and wellness–taking advantage of far more of what clinical science has to offer.

To get a good feel of some of the amazing success in clinical laboratory science click on link (45-47) at the end of this article.

The proposed medical information system would use a completely new and far different type of application of clinical laboratory data. Far larger test profiles (100 blood constituents taken from one blood test) would be used in conjunction with a very sophisticated national research system for massive correlation to human health–including disease prevention and wellness.

Following is a remaining key element of the proposed system.
Article 3 was discussed with the use of handout A. A link to handout A is provided at the end of this article and should be referred to again here. This article will discuss the underlying technical strengths of that system by showing briefly how and why the health data fed into the national research center is so effective in its correlation to human health and wellness.

Referring back to the 100 test profile pattern discussed in article 3, it was shown that the 100 individual bits of test information along with patient environmental and patient data would be fed to the national research computer center (marked case #1). The research computers would record the profile pattern results and correlate that particular combination of test results to a particular health related condition. With the size of this 100 test profile pattern, as discussed earlier, there would be literally trillions of possible combinations involved. Of those trillions of possibilities, there would conservatively end up being at least millions of what we would call significant combinations that would represent significant health related information. The National Research Center would then relate that data to the individual’s current health condition, history, family history, the individual’s environment, and also to the same data of tens of millions of other patients. This is an enormous amount of health information for the supercomputers to pull together and relate to human health conditions!

In addition, there would no doubt also be smaller sets of tests of interest within that overall 100 test profile, such as separate groups of hormones, enzymes, antibodies and other special tests that could also be read and analyzed as separate group combinations as well. Many of us realize how very important these various groups are to our well being.

Let me stop here and review this for a moment. We talk about millions of significant health data combinations. So why is it necessary for such a breadth of examination capacity? Basically, because of the extreme complexities involving our environment, our health and of course their complex inter-relationship. For example, if we (as individuals) try to determine what it is in our environment that is having an effect on our health, either positive or negative, we know it’s usually very difficult to do. We know there are literally dozens of elements (variables) in our personal environment that could affect our health. So how do we go about narrowing it down to determine what it is in a person’s environment that is likely affecting his or her health?

The system described here does it in two ways, it uses the extreme reading breadth of the profile pattern (as discussed in article 3), to read an individuals test results along with the input of the environmental and doctor’s medical examination report. It was shown that this data was then fed into the national research center system and compared to millions of other patient’s health conditions, environments and test results.

This comparison, to the millions of other patients, would soon be very effective in narrowing the unknown element, or elements, down to the common denominator (or denominators) of what it is in the environment that normally affects people’s health in certain ways. Very few patients would have the exact same environment and health conditions. Comparing millions of patient’s health to their environmental exposures would provide a very effective screening process. The results of this research would then be fed back into the state diagnostic computers to diagnose specific individuals based on their individual profile pattern results and their individual environmental and physical examination reports.

This article discusses the key to success for any highly advanced health care system, and also the sophisticated features of the proposed medical system’s research center.

The Morality of Animal Research (Vivisection) – Reflections From A Medical Researcher

When people argue over the use of animals in research, also called vivisection, there are those who defend the animals and those who defend the research.

The animal defenders point out the obvious suffering that researchers often inflict on animals, and contend that this cruelty is morally unjustifiable. They further argue that you cannot necessarily predict human responses on the basis of animal studies, which makes the best animal model no more than an unreliable analogy to human function. Finally, they encourage the replacement of animal testing with non-animal research techniques. In short, this group would say animal research is inaccurate, unnecessary, and cruel.

On the other side are the researchers who use animals and contend that such research is essential for science to progress and help cure disease. They assure the public that they are doing all that they can to reduce animal suffering, so long as it is avoidable. And they firmly assert that, while they recognize the limitations of animal models, there is no better alternative. They insist that when it comes to fighting disease, it is better to first test drugs and treatments on an animal, such as a dog, than on a human, such as your child. In short, this group would say animal research is minimally cruel, essential for progress in medicine and may save human lives.

Which position is correct? The answer depends on your state of mind.

I was trained in biochemistry and human medicine. In both these fields animal research is the standard, and the results of animal studies constitute the bulk of medical knowledge. I would have at one time defended animal research, since I had been told over and over by my professors, who were themselves animal researchers, how animal experiments saves human lives. If the ends justify the means, they explained, then killing dogs to save children is acceptable and necessary, even if it is distasteful. After all, we’re dealing with human life and death. Animal sacrifice was a necessary evil.

But throughout my training and research, my soul silently wept each time an animal was “sacrificed” on the alter of medicine. How could a healing profession, presumably dedicated to ending human suffering, promote a methodology that causes animal suffering? Can we trust a health care system to treat us with compassion when it shows none for helpless, innocent creatures?

Ultimately, I realized the essence of the animal research problem. Medicine is a different field from any other because it deals with life and death. When people are suffering there are extreme feelings of urgency and anxiety which may lead to extreme conclusions of what’s right and wrong. However, the ethics one uses for life and death decisions are not normal, everyday moral judgments. They are lifeboat ethics. And the conclusions you come up with on a lifeboat are not normal conclusions.

The classic example of lifeboat ethics is that you are on a boat with other people, presumably the survivors of an ocean mishap, and there is the need for some people to be sacrificed to save the others. For example, let’s say the boat can only hold 3 people without sinking, and there are 4 people on board. Lifeboat ethics asks how to decide on who should be thrown overboard to save the others. As another example, we have all heard of airplane crash survivors having to resort to cannibalism to avoid starving to death. For someone contemplating this lifeboat situation, the issue is not whether someone should to be eaten, but who should be eaten. In general terms, lifeboat ethics addresses decisions of who should be helped and who should be harmed. The belief in impending disaster unless someone is sacrificed to save the others is a basic assumption of lifeboat ethics.

Of course, if people can resort to cannibalism when faced with a life and death situation, then they will have no problem killing animals if it means saving themselves from some dreadful disease. Once they believe their lives are on the line, that they are in a lifeboat situation, then they are mentally prepared to make sacrifices in the name of survival. Animal researchers, who are the captains of this disease lifeboat, offer animal sacrifices as a substitute for human ones.

But is this really a lifeboat situation? We all face the possibility of disease and death each day as part of the normal risks of life. Is it right to call life itself a lifeboat situation?

The answer to this depends on who is answering. Fearful, negative, pessimistic people see life as a lifeboat struggle against disease and death. Cheerful, positive, optimistic people sees life as just…life.

Those in the medical research and treatment business profit most when people are fearful, anxious, and desperate. Animal researchers arguing that it’s a dog or your child are selling with fear. The medical/ pharmaceutical industry uses fear to keep people addicted to doctors and medication, willing to obey medical authority and accept its practices, including the use of animals in research. Fearful, desperate people agree to whatever the cost, financially and morally. When you are sold on the belief that you are in a lifeboat, you want salvation at any price. Meanwhile, people are kept ignorant about how their bodies work and how to prevent disease, since ignorance keeps people fearful, mystified, and sick.

Fortunately, not everyone sees life in such emergency terms. And that’s a good thing, since lifeboat ethics are a suspension of normal, decent, moral behavior. Desperate people are dangerous. They are willing to kill if it means you or them. We don’t want a society with everyone running around feeling that way. If you are not fearful to the point of being able to justify killing, then animal research will clearly seem morally wrong. Anyone with any sensitivity who has ever befriended a dog, cat, bird, mouse, or even a rat will realize that animals have feelings and can experience suffering. To any mentally healthy person, it is wrong to cause others to suffer. It shouldn’t matter what species they are. Of course, this assumes that you are not in a fearful panic, willing to do anything, even kill, if it meant saving yourself.

If we can all be decent human beings with some compassion for other creatures, then of course we should be using non-animal research methods. Animal research is only considered a standard since it has been historically used as one. It is imperfect at best. And one of its greatest shortcomings is that it blinds us to the real cause of disease, which has nothing to do with animals and everything to do with being human.

For years the World Health Organization has been saying that the greatest cause of disease and death in modern times is our lifestyle. This means our lifestyle and the culture that defines it are making us sick. Of course, you cannot model human culture in animals. It is a human phenomenon. Clearly, we can learn more about our problems by studying ourselves. By addressing our exposure to stress, chemical pollution, a toxic diet, legal and illegal drugs, alcohol, tobacco, tight clothing, electromagnetic radiation, and innumerable other cultural factors that make us sick, we can better control our health and stay off the disease lifeboat. We could prevent disease by taking responsibility for living healthfully, instead of feeling desperate and doing anything, even making a deal with the devil, to find a cure.

I left medicine to dedicate my life to the search for human lifestyle solutions to human health problems. I look at the way we treat ourselves, the environment, and the creatures with whom we share the planet. And it is clear that we live in a sick culture. We are our own worst enemy. And the only sacrifice we need to make is to be willing to give up our damaging lifestyles. We can then lead healthy and happy lives as Nature intended, even as we approach old age and, ultimately, death. For those who are cheerful, positive, and optimistic, it’s all good.

Life does not need to feel like a lifeboat. But if it does to some fearful people, then that’s their problem. It gives them no moral right to sacrifice others, human or animal, as they act out their personal lifeboat nightmares.

Sydney Ross Singer is a medical anthropologist and director of the Institute for the Study of Culturogenic Disease, located in Hawaii. His unique form of applied medical anthropology searches for the cultural/lifestyle causes of disease. His working assumption is that our bodies were made to be healthy, but our culture and the attitudes and behaviors it instills in us can get in the way of health. By eliminating these causes, the body is allowed to heal. Since most diseases of our time are caused by our culture/lifestyle, this approach has resulted in many original discoveries into the cause, and cure, of many common diseases. It also makes prevention possible by eliminating adverse lifestyle practices. Sydney works with his co-researcher and wife, Soma Grismaijer, and is the author of several groundbreaking health books.

Pet Meds Technology and Medical Treatments

You will find many thoughts about pet medications, cures and medical treatments today. This article discusses medical issues of pets and the author offers some insight on the subject and current state of pet meds.

Pet owners will say that the amount of medical problems and medical treatments for pets are just about equal to that of pet owners. Attending to physical, medical and dietary needs for our animals calls for a huge quantity of pet meds.

Examples of medical issues and diseases for dogs are, but not limited to; tapeworms, hookworms, liver or kidney disease, ulcers, hernia, parasites or cancer.

Examples of medical issues and diseases for cats are, but not limited to; feline leukemia, tape-worm, cancer, diabetes or poisoning.

Growing up, I never imagine the range of medical needs for pets. As a pet owner today, I have experienced a few extreme medical issues for pets. Many people spend a lot of money on medical and health problems for their pets.

That is in part due to the advancing medical technology for pets. Currently, there are a lot more options available for medical issues to animals than ever before.

In recent times, pet medicine and medical treatments have advanced dramatically- Hollywood pet psychiatrists excluded. You can find so much information and data very easily by browsing the internet on the topics of animal dental care to cancer treatment for our pets.

Furthermore, there are many fantastic and advanced medical treatments for pet diseases and pet ailments. Kansas State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine offers interesting information concerning different medical issues about pets. K-State is just one in an long line of higher education institutions engaging in research to advance the medical care and cures of our pets. You will frequently find general data on topics from health issues to the treatment of feline leukemia at the researchers web sites.

Remember, the lists presented below of medical issues for dogs and cats are abbreviated. Their information is presented as a small range of possible medical conditions of pets today.

Without a doubt, with the many advancements in medical technology for pets, there are medical safety issues as well. Even though animals have tough digestive systems, they remain vulnerable to a range of health issues.

In February 2007, an article by Reuters reported that one brand of cat food was found by the FDA to contain salmonella in some of the batches.

Note: Reuters is said to be the world’s largest international multimedia news agency.

Both, pets and pet owners alike, are thankful that the research for advancement of pet meds continues today.

We all should offer thanks to the many scientists and researchers continuously working to improve medical treatment, cures and meds for our pets.