Ghost Authors Common in Medical Research Papers: Study

Drug companies initiating clinical trials often use ghost authors and medical writers whose contributions are not credited in the research papers, Danish scientists said on Tuesday.
This practice could be reduced by greater transparency and stricter rules that insist everyone who has worked on or contributed to a medical trial is named.
"Ghost authorship is common but it is often kept secret because it is in the interest of both the industry and the academic authors who lend their names to papers they have had very little or, in some cases, nothing to do with," Peter Gotzsche, of the Nordic Cochrane Centre in Copenhagen, Denmark, said in an interview.
The names of authors and researchers are omitted from the published research papers because this may serve the commercial interests of the company sponsoring the trial.
"We have seen again and again that the conclusions in trial reports and other types of articles are given a spin by industry so that the conclusions are too positive compared to the data presented," Gotzsche said.
"It is very important for the industry to get messages out that are useful for their marketing departments," he added.
Lending their name to a study can be beneficial for researchers because it raises their profile and the number of published studies they are linked to. Gotzsche and a team of international researchers believe that unless the role of all the authors is set out in the research paper, people reading the study will not be able accurately to judge or trust its conclusions.
The scientists analysed 44 trials approved by Danish ethics committees in 1994-1995 in the first systematic examination of ghost authorship. One of the studies had been initiated by a local company and 43 by one of 26 multinational drug companies.
The researchers identified 33 trials with ghost authors. In 31 of them the ghost writer was a statistician -- the person who analysed the trial data.
__________________________
Gary Moller comments:
These sorts of appalling practices help to explain why "research" that shows favourable results for commercial products always seem to be far more numerous than those reports that are less than favourable. Coupled with massive publicity machines behind them these reports of questionable repute then receive incredible publicity in the media - propaganda dressed up as news!

Menawhile, the free or cheap, self-help methods for keeping healthy, or regaining health are largely ignored. For example, if a drug was discovered that was shown to reduce cancer risk by as much as 50% it would be a news sensation. The discoverers would not only become incredibly wealthy, they would also be Nobel Prize winners. Or would they?

Well there is a drug that has been discovered that does just that - sunlight. Sadly, because sun is free it receives little in the way of recognition for its cancer preventing qualities. In fact, we are taught by the establishment to fear the sun. Some might think there is some kind of conspiracy going on here. Or is it just a case of willful neglect aided and abetted by powerful commercial interests?

Stroke study misses the point

Stroke rates have been falling over the past 20 years, but findings from an extensive study have
found that Maori and Pacifi c populations in Auckland are not benefi ting from this drop. Research carried out by HRC Pacific Health PhD scholar Kristie Carter, shows that stroke rates for Pacific people have increased since 1981 to almost double that of New Zealand Europeans.

Stroke is the third leading cause of death in New Zealand and a major cause of disability. This number is predicted to double by 2020.

The study has drawn similar conclusions to related research in the United States and the United Kingdom, which showed disparities between African-Americans and Caucasians.
________________________

Gary Moller Comments:
With the other half of my family being Polynesian, I feel I have a reasonably good insight into the healthcare practices of Polynesians, including the standard of health services provided. The standard of health care; especially following an episode of ill health could be much, much better and much more can be done to improve risk factors, principally diet, which trends away from healthy traditional foods to most unhealthy Western junk food.

However; an equally important factor and probably the most important reason why Maori, Pacific Islanders and Africans suffer substantial declines in health status across the board, when moving from their natural homelands to higher latitudes and large cities, is Vitamin D deficiency. While I need just 5 minutes of sunlight a day to keep healthy, my darker skinned relatives require from 10-50 times as much sunlight, depending on their complexion.

In some populations as many as 90% of urbanised dark skinned people are Vitamin D deficient and this greatly increases their susceptibility to all kinds of serious health problems including heart attack, heart failure, diabetes, stroke, internal cancers, depression and osteoporosis.

While studies, like the one referred to here are useful, I remain frustrated that the obvious and extemely well documented role of Vitamin D (Obtained mainly via sunlight) continues to be ignored by health experts who should know much better. Vitamin D levels are seldom, if ever measured, in cases of ill health, including stroke.

If any of your family or friends suffers a bad turn of health, including stroke, insist that his or her doctor orders a test of Vitamin D levels in their blood.

To be exact; what you are asking to be measured is their "25(OH) vitamin D". If those levels are found to be below 40 ng/ml, you must get those levels boosted immediately and the best way to do that is to recommend an extended holiday in a place like tropical Rarotongo or Samoa.

Vitamin D May Cut Breast Cancer Risk by up to 50%!!!

Vitamin D May Cut Breast Cancer Risk by up to 50%!!!
April 5, 2006
WASHINGTON (AP)

Women who get lots of vitamin D are less likely to develop breast cancer, suggests a pair of studies that add to the already strong evidence that the "sunshine vitamin" helps prevent many types of cancer.
High levels of vitamin D translated to a 50 percent lower risk of breast cancer, one study found. Even modestly higher levels resulted in 10 percent less risk, which would translate to 20,000 fewer cases a year if it were true of all American women. A second study, by Canadian researchers, found that women who spent time outdoors or got a lot of vitamin D from their diets or supplements -- especially as teens -- were 25 percent to 45 percent less likely to develop breast cancer than women with less of the nutrient.

"Exposure to vitamin D at the time breasts are developing, particularly around adolescence, might be important," said lead researcher Julia Knight of Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto city
_____________________________________________________

Gary Moller comments:
Why, oh why is it that research like this gets hardly any publicity, to the point of being ignored? Get this right: Here is the way we can REDUCE THE RISK OF BREAST CANCER BY HALF! Furthermore, it’s FREE!

If this was a pharmaceutical drug development, the publicity would be front page headlines, demand would be sensational and each dose would be worth a thousand dollars.

By keeping our girls out of the sun, we are increasing their breast cancer risk later in life by as much as 50%! Surely this is a scandal?

For the last few years, I have been presenting the arguments why we should be encouraging our children to be outdoors doing healthy activity, including getting exposure to Vitamin D producing sunlight. The evidence grows by the day that sunlight is essential for human health. Depression, osteoporosis, cancer, heart failure, multiple sclerosis and more and more and more are associated with Vitamin D deficiency. To understand why influenza and other viruses run rampant during winter and not summer, we need look no further than the Vitamin D connection.

Perhaps the following are reasons why this powerful and free natural therapy is being mostly ignored:

• There’s no money in it for big business: Vitamin D is free via sunlight and in dietary form (e.g. cod liver oil) it is cheap and readily available.
• Health experts and administrators have overdone the hysteria and the consequent rules about skin cancer risk. It is going to take a big effort and the need to swallow much pride to backtrack and accept that people, especially children, need daily sunshine.
• A further issue is the bureaucratic need for “one-size-fits-all rules and the need not to be seen to be discriminating by race. So, because I am fair skinned, I need just 10 minutes sunlight per day; whereas my dark-skinned partner, Alofa, needs about 30 minutes per day to get her Vitamin D.

The photo above, of my son, Alama, and his cousin, Jasmine, demonstrate two very different skin types. They are dressed appropriately for the conditions.

Problem: how do you set non-racist rules in places like childcare centres and schools? Personally, I see no problem at all – just do it!

In the meantime; what do you do?

• Get out in the sunlight for several minutes per day, depending on your skin type and expose at least 1/3 of the body.
• On days you do not get sunlight, such as during winter months, eat eggs and oily fish regularly and consider a few capsules of cod liver oil and natural vitamin D. You can get fresh high quality cod liver oil and a natural vitamin D supplement from my Store www.myotec.co.nz
• If you have children that go to school or are in day care, why not raise this sunlight and health issue at the next suitable meeting with a view to ensuring that the rules and practices are sensible and healthy?

Drugs treatments for osteoporosis may do more harm than good

Fosamax does more harm than good
By Evelyn PringleOnline Journal Contributing WriterApr 18, 2006, 00:50
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_705.shtml

"The osteoporosis drug Fosamax has been on the market for a little over 10 years now. Drug maker Merck promoted it heavily by selling women the fear of a disabling hip fracture and the necessity of regular bone-density tests. Merck's initial TV advertising campaign featured a slim woman in her mid-40s, conveying the notion that testing was appropriate for women in this age group.....

However, although Fosamax may improve bone density, experts say when it comes to fracture prevention, its benefit is modest at best. In fact, some researchers say that when taken for more than 10 years, Fosamax will actually make bones more brittle and thus, more susceptible to fracture. And even if patients stop taking the drug, doctors say it can stay in the body for up to 10 years. "

Gary Moller Comments:

There has been considerable media debate recently about the class of drugs called "bisphosphonates". It is really frustrating to listen to various experts on the subject downplaying the seriousness of these drugs. What is even more frustrating is the almost total absence of reference to the very effective and safe alternatives.

While there may be a case for prescribing these powerful and potentially dangerous drugs in cases of bone cancer, there are much better treatment alternatives for osteoporosis which I will describe later on.

First, a brief overview of what these biphosphonates are and how they work..

These anti osteoporosis drugs are based on the same active ingredients of common phosphate-based laundry detergent and this fact alone puts me off!

Bone, even in old people, is living tissue that is constantly being replaced with new, healthy tissue. As we get older, we tend to lose bone strength to the extent it becomes a health problem (osteoporosis). It was discovered by accident that these laundry products inhibit the bone cells that carry out this process of renewal and, where bone loss was happening, it would slow or stop the loss. So, that's good isn't it, because bone loss slows or is halted altogether, thus preventing osteoporosis? The answer is "NO!" Because bone that is not renewed becomes old and brittle and, if it is damaged, such as during a dental procedure, the old bone is unable to heal. The resulting disease condition is progressive bone death ("osteonecrosis"). This condition is a terrible thing that is almost impossible to cure.

So what are the alternatives?

Exercise , vitamin D and a nutritious diet enhance this process of renewal - and strengthening. Lack of exercise, sunlight and a poor diet will, on the other hand, accelerate bone loss.

The alternative therapy is :

• Daily sunlight for vitamin D, plus food sources of this essential vitamin
• A daily vitamin and mineral supplement
• Extra protein such as a whey supplement
• Fresh fruit and vegetables
• Daily exercise

This therapy is highly effective.

Why aren't these therapies prescribed with the same enthusiasm as those terrible phosphate drugs?

Is it because exercise and sunlight are free and mineral supplements and good food are not prescription drugs?

Official recommendations for vitamin D are hopelessly outdated

"During the summer months most people should be able to achieve adequate vitamin D (blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D) levels through incidental outdoor UV exposure outside peak UV times. As an example, someone who burns easily in the sun.... may only need 5 minutes of daily summer sun exposure before 11am and after 4pm (to the face, hands and forearms) to achieve adequate vitamin D levels whereas someone who tans more easily or has darker skin... will need more time e.g., up to 20 minutes."
Source: Sunsmart recommendations.

"Evaluation of most relations of health and disease that involve vitamin D leads to the conclusion that a desirable 25(OH)D concentration is 75 nmol/L (30 ng/mL) (3-5). If a concentration of 75 nmol/L is the goal to be achieved by consumption of vitamin D, then why is it so rare for members of the population to accomplish this?

One reason is that almost every time the public media report that vitamin D nutrition status is too low, or that higher vitamin D intakes may improve measures of health, the advice that accompanies the report is outdated and thus misleading.

Media reports to the public are typically accompanied by a paragraph that approximates the following: "Current recommendations from the Institute of Medicine call for 200 IU/d from birth through age 50 y, 400 IU for those aged 51–70 y, and 600 IU for those aged >70 y. Some experts say that optimal amounts are closer to 1000 IU daily. Until more is known, it is wise not to overdo it."

The only conclusion that the public can draw from this is to do nothing different from what they have done in the past. "
Source: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition The urgent need to recommend an intake of vitamin D that is effective
_____________________________
Gary Moller comments:
As the 2nd quotation indicates, the official recommendations are totally outdated and are thus seeling the public perilously short.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that one can get adequate vitamin D from incidental exposure of hands etc especially if exposure is outside of the midday period. Vitamin D deficiency may now be the most widespread public health issue and one must ask just what it is going to take to get effective action.


The revised safe upper limit for vitamin D dietary intake is 10,000iu per day. So, taking 2,000 per day is safe. In fact, if a blood test shows less than optimum levels, then you could take 6-8,000 per day until blood tests demonstrate healthy levels of this health-giving vitamin. For example, if you want to halve your daugter's lifetime risk of developing breast cancer, get her out in the sun during her adolescence and ensure her diet is rich with vitamin D.

Vitamin D supplementation guidelines during winter

Winter is on us in New Zealand and vitamin D levels plummet. As it plummets, so does our resistance to disease, including flu and colds. We become depressed - SAD (Seasonal Affective Disorder), we gain weight and our heart and circulation begins to faulter.

Wow! the list of health consequences of low vitamin D grows by the day.

In this video I explain how to supplement with vitamin D during winter months to maintain health



To purchase a quality vitamin D supplement go to here.

What are the health risks of low vitamin D and how much should I take as a supplement?

The high rate of natural production of vitamin D in the skin is the single most important fact every person should know about vitamin D because it has such profound implications for health and vitality. In the last year that I have been getting people to have their vitamin D levels tested, not one has returned with an optimum result, including myself. this is an appalling result that has serious implications for the health of New Zealanders.

Photo: A ridiculous requirement: Polynesian kids hiding from the sun on a sunless Autumn day in Wellington City!

What is vitamin D?
Vitamin D is a steroid hormone precursor that has recently been found to play a role in a wide variety of diseases. Vitamin D deficiency plays a role in causing:

• Seventeen varieties of cancer
• Heart disease
• Stroke
• Hypertension
• Autoimmune diseases like multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis
  
• Diabetes
• Depression
• Chronic pain
• Osteoarthritis
• Osteoporosis
• Muscle weakness
• Muscle wasting
• Birth defects
• Periodontal disease

The list seems to be growing by the day.

This does not mean that vitamin D is the only cause of these diseases, or that you will not get them if you take vitamin D. What it does mean is that the possiblility of vitamin D deficiency should always be considered when dealing with these and related ailments; especially in those cases where there has been a failure to recover. It also means that health professionals and public health officials must review and revise their policies about being "Sun Smart" because these may be contributing to causing far more disease than they might be preventing. This is especially the case for dark-skinned people, like my partner and our children, who may require 20-50 times as much sunlight to be healthy as compared to white-skinned people like myself.

It bothers me constantly that vitamin D deficiency is seldom investigated as a potential factor in ill health. It bothers me even more when a blood test is ordered and the results are not properly interpreted.

Where does vitamin D come from?
Vitamin D comes pricipally from exposure of the skin to sunlight. The UVB rays convert cholesterol into vitamin D. Most of us make about 20,000 units of vitamin D after about 20 minutes of summer sun. This is about 100 times more vitamin D than the health experts say you need every day. If you are not getting vitamin D from sunlight then you need up to 4,000 units per day through diet (about 40 glasses of milk per day). Good dietary sources are:

• Cod liver oil
• Oily Fish
• Eggs
  
• Animal liver and other organs
  
• Dairy products

This assumes that the animals, including the chickens and cows have been raised in open fields where they have been able to get plenty of sunshine themselves.

During days of no sunlight and during winter you may supplement with up to 2,000 units of vitamin D which you can get from Red Seal cod liver oil capsules (200 units per capsule) or Thompson's Vitamin D (2 capsules provide 2,000 units) available from www.myotec.co.nz .

Nutritents that are critical for health, including vitamind D, E and A are fat soluble. If you are on a fat free or cholesterol-lowering diet, your ability to uptake these nutrients through your digestive system and to put them to good use in your body may be severely compromised. You must take in fat with these vitamins. This is one reason why fat-free cholesterol lowering diets and medications are often associated with declining health.

If you have not already done so, go and ask your doctor for a blood test for vitamin D - even if you are presently healthy, then keep the results and compare successive results as the years go by. Write to me if you need assistance with interpreting the results.

New Product to help prevent vitamin D deficiency

I have been running a campaign for years warning people about the dangers of the lack of sunlight and the huge consequences of vitamin D deficiency which is implicated in numerous health problems ranging from osteoporosis, muscle weakness, heart disease and cancer. So far everybody I have had tested for vitamin D has been less than optimum, including myself.

While the sun is by far the best source; the problem always has been how to supplement already low stores of vitamin D on sunless days, when working all day indoors and during winter? I now have the answer with a brand new product from Thompsons Nutrition of New Zealand and Australia. Hot off the production line, this quality product has a mix of vitamin D and Omega 3.

For more details, go to http://www.myotec.co.nz

Am I exposing myself to cancer risk?

"Dear Gary
I live in Mississippi, age is 56 and I am very active. If I am forced to be out doors between 1000-1400 for any length of time, I use sunscreen.
Outside these hours, I will not use sunscreen. However, before and after these hours, I like to go out twice a week for 30 minutes, to expose as much skin to the sunlight as I can. I usually only do this when the weather is warmer.
During the cooler months, just my face and hands get the sunlight, whenever I just happen to be outside.
Considering the above, any problems with overexposure, cancer risks?"
__________________________________________
Gary Moller comments:The purpose of getting daily sunlight is twofold:

1. To ensure vitamin D levels are at optimum for health and fitness
2. To set the body clock which is again essential for health

You first need to establish your current status:

1. Determine vitamin D by a simple blood test through your Dr and then compare your results with recommendations for optimum health by going here.
2. Complete this simple assessment to determine how well your circadian cyle is synchronised and abide by the guidelines for exposure to full spectrum light.

How much sun you require for optimum vitamin D is determined by:

1. How deficient you are, if at all
2. Your skin type
3. Where you live

I have seen no evidence that incidental exposure of the face and hands or even the arms is sufficent to maintain healthy D levels. Read this. To boost vitamin D levels you need to expose large expanses of skin to the sun. If skin has been damaged by repeated sunburn over the years then it is less efficient at producing vitamin D.
If you are deficient, as determined by a blood test, then you need to expose your skin to sunlight 2-4 times a week and only for suffient to get the slightest pinking of the skin. No burning! Sunscreen prevents production of vitamin D and should only be applied to damaged or sensitive parts of the skin, or better still, covered over.
If you are highly prone to freckling or very fair then you must take great care and may only require 5 minutes of full body exposure to the midday sun. If you are olive skinned then you may require 10-15 minutes. If you have very dark skin, your needs may be 40 or 50 minutes - get the idea?
If you over-expose and get a dark tan then the time you need to spend in the sun becomes longer, so excessive tanning is counter-productive and potentially damaging to the skin, so stick to the minimalist approach according to your skin type.
A big factor is where you live, time of day and the season of course! If you live in New Zealand, then your exposure needs are less due to the Ozone Hole over our country allowing in more UV radiation which is the light that produces vitamin D but also causes skin cancer. If you live in a place with high air pollution levels, your exposure time will have to be longer since the pollution filters out the UV. The best time for exposure is midday because that is the time of highest UV. Set an egg timer for 5 minutes and then roll over for the other side and then cover up. Take note of how your skin is several hours later and increase or decrease the exposure accordingly.
I have discussed the matter of skin cancer with a skin specialist and can pass on the following. First of all, if you are olive or dark-skinned like a Polynesian or African, then your statistical odds of developing sun-caused skin cancer are very low, to the point of being negligible. If you are fair, red-headed, and/or freckly then you are at high risk and must take great care not to suffer sunburn.
The best time to measure D levels by a blood test is during Spring and then with the onset of Autumn. These will give your seasonal highs and lows and will show how effective you have been over summer at building your stores of D. I measured my levels in Spring and had a dissapointing 68nmol. I am due to have the test repeated now it is almost Autumn and I expect it be be much higher. Got the idea? Over winter, you work on a D rich diet to maintain the body's vitamin D stores as best you can then repeat the test next Spring.
If you develop a cancer like melanoma then you must take measures to reduce the possibility of developing secondary cancers within the body. One of your best protections against secondary cancer is high vitamin D. So you know what I will be doing if I develop a melanoma - Yes! I will be getting a blood test to assess my current D status.

How to reduce your risk of cancer by 50%

Please also read these articles that are here.

Can incidental exposure to sunlight produce optimum levels of vitamin D?

"During the summer months most people should be able to achieve adequate vitamin D (blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D) levels through incidental outdoor UV exposure outside peak UV times (2). As an example, someone who burns easily in the sun (skin type 1 or 2 - see Appendix 2) may only need 5 minutes of daily summer sun exposure before 11am and after 4pm (to the face, hands and forearms) to achieve adequate vitamin D levels whereas someone who tans more easily or has darker skin (skin type 5 or 6) will need more time e.g., up to 20 minutes."

Quoted from Cancer Society Position Statement: The Risks and Benefits of Sun Exposure in New ZealandSeptember 2005

Photo: Alama and Jamine Moller: sun exposure according to skin type

_______________________________________
Gary Moller Comments:These guidelines are misleading and have no relationship with reality. They are instrumental in creating an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency-related ailments that are beginning to swamp our health system.

I have been running a campaign since 2001 to highlight the importance of Vitamin D for optimum health and a long and productive life span. I can tell readers that I have not yet had a single person who has consulted me about health or injury problems who has optimum vitamin D levels. Every single person has been either deficient or not far off it. Clinical deficiency begins at 50, optimum is 120-150nmol/l. The lowest level by a client has been 8. Needless to say, she was not feeling well.

Can you obtain optimum levels of vitamin D by "incidental exposure" as advised by the Cancer Society? My answer is a definite "NO!" Take compeititive cyclists for example: They spend long hours out in the sun, but only expose their arms and legs at the most (Usually when sipping lattes outside a cafe!). This exposure can be over several hours and often during peak UV periods of the day. So far, the highest summer time vitamin D levels I have seen produced by a cyclist is just 75.

Sunlight is our only practical source of vitamin D, unless we consume large amount of seal blubber and various animal organs. Normal dietary sources such as eggs and liver and varous supplements like cod liver oil are not sufficient to significantly increase vitamin D levels. They serve only to slow the attrition that normally occurs over winter months. Cod liver oil, for example, can safely deliver only 200-800 iu of vitamin D, per day whereas full body exposure to sunlight can deliver from 10-20,000 iu in a single day.

It is time that the cancer authorities reviewed the latest evidence and altered their sun exposure guidelines accordingly.

Sunlight makes athletes stronger, faster and more precise

"If you are vitamin D deficient, the medical literature indicates that the right amount of vitamin D will make you faster, stronger, improve your balance and timing, etc. How much it will improve your athletic ability depends on how deficient you are to begin with. How good an athlete you will be depends on your innate ability, training, and dedication. However, peak athletic performance also depends upon the neuromuscular cells in your body and brain having unfettered access to the steroid hormone, activated vitamin D. In addition, how much activated vitamin D is available to your brain, muscle, and nerves depends on having ideal levels of vitamin D in your blood - about 50 ng/ml, to be precise". Quote from Dr John Cannell.

_____________________________________________
Gary Moller comments:
To relate Dr Cannell's recommended levels to the usual NZ blood tests, here is the information you need.We have known for years that vitamin D deficiency in the elderly leads to muscle and bone weakness and poor cognitive performance that results in poor balance and stumbling, dementia and so on. It is therefore little surprise that boosting an athlete's vitamin D levels to optimum will bring about an imtprovement in strength, speed, agility, concentration and stamina. It also stands to reason that such athletes are more resistant to injury by having stronger bones and muscles.

To date, not a single sports person (Or anybody else for that matter) who has consulted me about a chronic health or injury problem has returned a blood test for vitamin D that is anywhere near optimum.

If you are in serious training and if you want to produce your best and most consistent performances then it makes such good sense to boost your vitamin D levels to optimum and then to keep it there year round. Here is one of the most important nutritional supplements and it is completely free!

Treat the whole person and not the disease

"Gary
My Vit D was 63 - which is the lower end of the scale.??
Mum's was 41.
Dr said he has no idea what is wrong with my calf, never struck it before. Have had little pain for over a week now, then Wednesday I felt my calf ' clinch' again and it has ached ever since. I was aware of it as soon as I woke up this morning too. No walk. Tried to get appt with Dr today so he could see what it is like when sore, no go. Tried to get appt with physio, no go. She must have realised that I was close to tears as she rung back and said if there was a cancellation she would fit me in. Told me not to walk meanwhile. Seeing her on Monday. Really really depressed and fed up now!"
Anon
_________________________________________
Gary Moller comments:
The modern health system is failing many people because it is based on an inapproriate medical-financial model that treats all diseases as it would an infection or a broken bone.

This woman has been struggling for years with all kinds of health problems, aches and pains, depression and very gradually getting worse. It took several months for us to get the vitamin D test completed and the results are revealing. Cause for concern while also being very good news. Bear in mind that these vitamin D results are her seasonal peak, having been taken towards the end of summer. They will now begin to plummet with winter setting in. Bad news unless corrective action is taken.
Optimum for vtamin D is 120+ especially if one is struggling with illness. Low vitamin D is a factor in depression and muscle and joint pain.

Ongoing physiotherapy, anti-depressants, pain killers and anti-inflammatories are largely a waste of time for her because none of these deal with the root causes of her pain which are to do with lifestyle factors that have been in place and have been doing their damage for decades.

She should also be referred for counselling because she could do with this as support and the Dr can not provide this service during appointments that are just 15 minutes duration. The problem is that a referral to counselling is costly to the patient and this may be a further source of stress. With 99% of the national health $$ tied up in pharmaceutical and surgical based healthcare, there is little funding or investment in these ancillary services.

This lovely person needs to make significant longterm changes to diet and lifestyle, including the way she exercises and she needs to get out in the sun more (without burning of course!). Sadly, the medical system, as it is, is very limited in what it can do to help.

Is avoidance of the sun causing serious ill-health?

"Gary
I assume that my vitamin D levels are low, they can't not be. I spent 8 years inside in the shop eating my lunch on the run at the back of the shop. I didn't get outside much at all and by the time we got home at 5-30, 6.00 I certainly didn't stop and take in the sun.
I would never have gone out in the mid-day sun for a sunbathe if you had not told me about the vitamin D. I am finding it therapeutic just to lie in the heat, I come back inside rejuvenated." (excerpt from correspondence with a woman who has been experiencing chronic health problems and has been experimenting with several minutes sunbathing per day when she can)
_______________________________________
Gary Moller comments
The Sunsmart and Cancer Society dictums that that we avoid the sun for fear of developing cancer is at the root cause of a national epidemic of vitamin D deficiency in children and adults.

Low vitamin D is implicated in a whole raft of serious chronic illnesses ranging from tuberculosis to depression to mulitple sclerosis and cancer. From trends that I am seeing in my own practice as a natural health consultant we are facing a national disaster.

An added benefit of full spectrum sunlight on the face is the stimulation of the pineal galnd deep in the brain to break down the hormone melatonin. Melatonin makes us tired, lethargic and very grumpy. This explains why bright sunlight is an effective antidepressant.

We are creatures of the light - not of the night.

Sunlight does not cause skin cancer - sunburn does. Let's get that right!

Vitamin D deficiency among patients attending a central New Zealand rheumatology outpatient clinic

Abstract
Aims To measure the Vitamin D status in patients attending a rheumatology outpatient clinic because of the known musculoskeletal and immunosuppressive effects of Vitamin D deficiency.
Methods 66 consecutive patients at a private rheumatology clinic in central New Zealand were recruited at the beginning of winter.
Results Of 66 patients, 55 patients were included in the analysis. 43 (78%) had 25OH cholecalciferol levels that were below the reference range (50–150 nmol/L), and of these 12 (22%) had levels classified as moderate to severe deficiency (<25>
Disease/condition
Number of patients
Rheumatoid arthritis
Inflammatory arthritis
Psoriatic arthritis
Polymyalgia rheumatica
Backpain and muscle pain
Arthralgia
Osteoarthritis
CREST syndrome
Enthesopathy
Exercise induced urticaria
Juvenile RA
Oligoarthritis
Post viral fatigue
Reactive arthritis
Sarcoidosis
SLE
Spondyloarthropathy
Tendinitis
Undifferentiated CTD
_______________________________
Gary Moller comments:
This study, published in the NZ Medical Journal by Dr Chiu of Wellington reflects very much my own findings when dealing with people with chronic health conditions. One of the most difficult things to get done in these cases is to get a blood test for vitamin D. Doctors rarely test for it despite the wealth of research evidence about the link between vitamin D and health.

For those of you who are athletically inclined, consider this: low vitamin D is associated with joint and muscle pain and muscle weakness. And it is no concidence that more babies are conceived over summer months than any other time of year!

As Dr Chiu points out in the Discussion Section of his paper, the optimum level for vitamin D is around 120 nmol/l. The fact that his results are at the end of summer is of great concern because it can be expected that D levels will plummet over the winter months.

Building up vitamin D levels is not an easy task, as I have found out personally. Despite a change of occupation that took me out from under flourescent lighting all day and into natural lighting surroundings and plenty of sunlight, my levels have been low. Last winter we holidayed a couple of weeks in sunny North Queensland. Despite this, my own vitamin D levels coming into spring were a low 68 nmol/l. This really shocked me and confirmed the need to really work on building levels over summer by a mix of vitamin D rich foods and careful sunbathing.

Roll on the 120-160nmol goal!

Some Australian childcare centres now requiring wearing of sunglasses

"Australian eye experts say childcare centres and schools should be keeping children in the shade in the middle of the day and teaching them to wear sunglasses as well as hats and sunscreen. "

"My children go to childcare. They have to wear hats outside and sunscreen and I think sunglasses should be part of that," said the father of Georgia, almost three, and Thomas, one."There's no reason they shouldn't be wearing them. There's no harm that will come to them from wearing them. It's all good for their long-term sight."

For more, click the hyperlinked title and the following: http://www.babybanz.co.nz/news.php

_________________________________

Gary Moller comments:

We are seeing an explosion of ailments that are associated with lack of sunshine. These include spontaneous childhood fractures (Gilchrist fractures), depresssion, a resurgence of tuberculosis, ulcerative digestive tract diseases, neurological diseases like multiple sclerosis and all manner of terrifying cancers, including breast, prostate and cervical cancer.

A single-minded attempt to terrorise entire populations, regardless of skin type, about the dangers of sunlight in order to prevent a single disease (melanoma) is contributing to this explosion of diseases - if not being the principal cause.

We know, for instance, that exposure of skin to sunlight during the adolescent years can reduce a girl's lifetime risk of developing breast cancer by up to 50%. Do you hear about that from the cancer prevention agencies? No!

Bright sunlight on the face during the morning hours suppresses the hormone melatonin which causes sleepiness and depression. Wearing dark glasses during the day upsets the body's natural day-night biorythms, including suppression of melatonin during waking hours. Should we be doing this to our children from their earliest years?

As an aside, large floppy hats and sunglasses on children prevent the proper development of peripheral vision which is essential for safety and sporting activities. If not developed during early childhood this ability is lost forever.

The Australian, New Zealand or US Cancer Society and the rest that are spear-heading this erroneous and scandalous campaign of terror and consequent illness have no credibility as neutral advisors on the matter. This is because of the fact that much of their revenue is reliant on the sale of commercial products including protective clothing, sunscreen, hats and sunglasses. They have no credibility, so my advice is to take their advice with a grain of salt.

Pfizer ends development of "blockbuster" cholesterol drug after excessive patient deaths

"I'm convinced that it works," said Dr. Norman Lasser, director of preventive cardiology at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey in Newark.

Study: Drug Lifts Good Cholesterol Level
April 8, 2004

Oops! I think he spoke too soon:

Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer announced that it has ended a clinical trial for the highly anticipated cholesterol drug torcetrapib -- which raises levels of "healthy" HDL cholesterol -- after a high number of patients participating in the trial died or experienced cardiovascular problems.
Pfizer, the world's largest drug firm, was informed over the weekend that an independent board monitoring a study of torcetrapib found that 82 patients out of 7,500 who were taking the drug had died. Fifty-one patients out of 7,500 in the same study who were taking Lipitor -- Pfizer's best-selling cholesterol drug -- also died, though the company said it was not concerned over Lipitor's safety.

___________________________________

Gary Moller comments:

Chemically tinkering with the way the body does its job and expecting a favourable health outcome is a long shot. Its just another attempt to suck more money out of you via your body.

If you are on Lipitor, or similar cholesterol lowering drugs, talk to your Dr about natural alternatives. If you suffer any joint or muscle pain or feel weak, then go talk to your Dr right away.

Doing it naturally (before the Therapeutic Goods Authority gets in the way)

If you want to improve your good cholesterol naturally, try taking a quality natural vitamin B complex that contains niacin, boost your vitamin D by exposing your skin to sunlight, take cod liver oil during winter or if not going out in the sun often; take flax seed oil and fish oil daily, and use olive oil in your cooking. Reduce your intake of dairy, refined grains and sugars. Exercise briskly each day and go for a long walk along bush trails for up to 3 hours in the weekends, preferably without eating anything. Drink fresh water.

Book Review: The Myth of Osteoporosis

"Hip fractures, among all fragility fractures, result in the greatest suffering to the individual. The evidence is indisputable that hip fractures are severe. The injury has a profound impact on a person's quality of life, as evidenced by findings that 80 percent of women more than 75 years old preferred death to a hip fracture resultin in nursing home placement". P69

New Zealand author and health researcher, Gillian Sanson, is now a recognised international expert on osteoporosis. Gillian began her journey of discovery when routine bone density tests revealed a disturbing rate of low bone mineral density in her family, yet no unusual fractures. How could this be?

Her book, "The Myth of Osteoporosis", is written for the ordinary person. In it she asks the hard questions such as: "Where are all those elderly people with fractured hips that we hear so much about?" Are we being conned? And,"Are bone mineral density tests accurate; or are they causing anxiety where there is no cause for concern?" "Do osteoporosis drugs do more harm than good?"

With regards to the last question: I believe that the drugging of millions of women with biphosphenate drugs may become one of the worst medical scandals in history. I am convinced that Gillian is onto something. And why terrorise and drug millions of women when there are much more effective interventions like exercise, sunlight and nutrition???

This book is compelling reading and I recommend it as compulsory reading for all women who are the primary target of what is a money making machine of immense proportions and persuasion.
For more information about osteoporosis and related health issues and to order the book go here.

What is Resveratrol?

hi,Gary,

first time i have responded to a blogg site- Have you heard or do you know about this new vitamin- "resveratrol"sounds good but what do you know about it?

regards Mike

_________________________

Gary Moller comments:

Mike, you are not the first to have asked: This compound is found in the skin of red grapes and as a constituent of red wine and various other nuts fruits and veges, including blue berries; but apparently not in sufficient amounts to explain the “French paradox” that the incidence of coronary heart disease is relatively low in southern France despite high dietary intake of saturated fats.

The more likely explanation of the French paradox is a combination of factors including red wine intake. The most powerful factor may be vitamin D levels: the further South one lives in France, the higher the vitamin D levels. Strangely, research findings of this association between regional variations of heart desease, cancer and vitamin D levels in France is largely ignored. Perhaps it is because sunlight cannot be patented and packaged and it certainly is not PC to recommend sunbathing as a healthy activity!

I think resveratrol is expensive in pill form. here's my general advice: Eat lots of coloured fruit and veges and take a multi vitamin, a mineral supplement and some omega 3 oil and you will be quite well covered. Have a smoothie now and then with blueberries in it. Get your vitamin D levels tested and, if you have some spare dosh after all that, buy some resveratrol.

Vitamin D deficiency linked to tuberculosis, flu and other respiratory diseases

"..the researchers point to studies showing that in winter, colds, flu, and other respiratory diseases are more common and more likely to be deadly than they are in summer. During winter, ultraviolet-light exposure tends to be low because people spend more time indoors and the atmosphere filters out more of the sun's rays, especially at mid and high latitudes.
Cannell's group cites a 1997 study showing that the rate of pneumonia in Ethiopian children with rickets, and therefore a likely vitamin D deficiency, was 13 times as high as in children without that disease. The researchers also point to five studies since the 1930s that have linked reduced risks of infectious disease to dietary supplementation with cod liver oil, a rich source of vitamin D."
__________________________________________

Gary Moller Comments:

It has always fascinated me why, in summer, there is less flu, why we are happier and why more babies are conceived.
A boys' school in Palmerson North. NZ, has suffered a terrifying outbreak of tuberculosis that has spread like wild fire through the pupils. Cases are now turning up in a nearby girls' school. Doctors in sunny Waikato have recently reported an upsurge in cases of rickets while doctors here in Wellington recently reported disturbingly low levels of vitamin D in immigrant populations. Is there a link? How could third world diseases like these be turning up in a country like New Zealand?
"Cold-weather wear and the sun's angle in the winter sky limit how much ultraviolet light reaches the skin. This can add up to a deficiency in production of vitamin D, which might explain why respiratory infections are common and severe in winter." (Quoted from the same report above).
I believe these Drs are dead right: Keeping our children swaddled head to toe in clothes and not allowing them to go outside to play in the sun is at the heart of the problem. Whether it be the flu, TB, meningococcal disease, rickets, osteoporosis or depression, our first defence is ensuring that we have adequate vitamin D levels.
Back in the old days, the sickly (including those with TB) were sent up to the fresh air of the mountainside sanitorium. Was the real health benefits from the exposure to unfiltered UVB?
To date, every person who has consulted me about a chronic ailment and subsequently had a blood test of vitamin D levels, has come up as deficient, or dangerously close to being so.
Note: If you have a blood test and your Dr prescribes a vitmain D supplements, ensure that your blood levels are closely monitored because it is easy to overdose. Getting D from the sun is safe because the production mechanism turns off once levels get high - the body is very smart!

technorati tags: vitamin+d, tuberculosis, influenza, sunlight, meningococcal, sanitorium