(NaturalNews) The serious issue of overmedicating kids could be about to take on a whole new dimension with the emergence of a new medication known as Adzenys. While kids are generally averse to taking medications, few will turn their noses up at a piece of candy. That is exactly what Adzenys is banking on with its underhanded and potentially dangerous new fruit-flavored amphetamine.
The drug recently hit the market, and psychiatrists are voicing concerns that it could serve as another gateway to ADHD drug abuse. Perhaps not surprisingly, the extended-release amphetamine gained FDA approval in January for patients as young as six years old.
Manufacturer Neos Therapeutics is launching on a shameless marketing campaign to get "ahead of back-to-school season", with CEO Vipin Garg bragging that they are launching at "full speed." Neos's 125 sales reps throughout the country claim doctors have been very receptive to the product.
ADHD meds widely abused
Around three fourths of children who have been diagnosed take some form of ADHD medication. However, the drugs are also being abused. Their stimulant properties make them popular choices for partying and enhancing performance. Some older students believe it helps them boost focus and snag better grades, despite studies that show the exact opposite.
Abuse of ADHD drugs is rampant in schools, with many students feeling increased pressure to get into top colleges and bring home the best grades. DEA figures reported in 2012 showed that 29 percent of teens reported having close friends who abuse ADHD drugs. Adderall and Ritalin are Class 2 controlled substances, placing them in the same category as morphine and cocaine. They stimulate the central nervous system and alter the brain chemicals that govern impulse control.
Placing the drug in such an appealing format is an invitation for abuse, with some psychiatrists believing that people will request it and then sell it on the black market.
Rising numbers of ADHD diagnoses and sales of meds
The ADHD pharmaceutical market is booming, with ADHD medication sales nearly tripling from 2006's $4.7 billion to last year's $12.7 billion. IBISWorld reports that this figure is expected to continue full steam ahead, reaching $17.5 billion by 2020. This is due in no small part to efforts by manufacturers to turn normal behavioral variances into diseases that must be treated with medication. One way they go about this is by offering self-assessment questionnaires that can make normal behaviors, like difficulty concentrating, seem like signs of a medical problem.
While Adderall and Ritalin might have been the top choices until now, this extended-release ADHD drug, which dissolves in the user's mouth, clearly hopes to give them a run for their money, particularly among parents who are desperate to find a way to get their kids to take their medicine. It is being sold in a blister pack, making it highly convenient and portable. Of course, [...]
(NaturalNews) A government agency that is supposed to be driven to act based on sound scientific evidence rather than political agenda? Does such an agency exist? If so, it isn't the Environmental Protection Agency.
For the paltry amount of $190 million (of taxpayer money) the EPA has been busy purchasing its so-called unbiased experts. Okay, so the agency hasn't simply placed wads of cash in brown paper sacks and given it to "independent" advisors. The process is much more subtle and official-looking: The money has come in the form of "grants" to these advisors, in order to ensure that the agency's desired political – er, scientific - goals are met through various "studies."
In what would be considered fraud, embezzlement and other forms of illegal activity and corruption if the private sector were doing the same thing, the EPA, in this sense, is behaving no differently than a criminal enterprise: Buying loyalty.
As noted by The Daily Caller:
A free market legal group is suing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for allegedly stacking a scientific advisory panel on air pollution with researchers who had received more than $190 million in grants from the agency.
'Plainly disregards the law'
The Energy and Environmental Legal Institute (EELI) is suing the agency on behalf of the Western States Trucking Association and Dr. James Enstrom, a former University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) disease transmission expert who was boycotted for testing EPA claims about particulate matter.
"The EPA has stacked the board, which is required by law to be autonomous and fair, with analysts who have gotten over $190 million in optional gifts from the EPA," said Steve Milloy, a lawyer with EELI, in an announcement.
"This plainly disregards the law and makes a joke of the thought of "autonomous" exploratory survey," he said.
The agency depends on a board of scientific advisors called the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, to accept science claims regarding key clean air rules pushed by the EPA. In its case, the EELI is requesting that the court inhibit the EPA from assembling a panel tasked with looking into the science behind agency rules on fine particulate matter, or PM2.5.
EELI says that the EPA has stacked the board with scientists which essentially serves as a rubber stamp for all agency actions pertaining to PM2.5. The agency likewise is dependent upon assertions contained in PM2.5 for the greater part of health benefits in some of its biggest regulations regarding power plants.
The DC points out that 24 of the 26 members of the agency's PM2.5 panel have received or are currently receiving EPA grants. In sum, the board's members have received in excess of $190 million from the agency, according to figures provided by EELI.
'Considerable financial support'
Milloy said that is a violation of federal law, which requires that such scientific bodies be "independent."
EELI is not by itself in sh [...]
(NaturalNews) It's been a tough few weeks for Big Pharma, as three major studies have now completely disproved the effectiveness of its most profitable drugs. Last week, a huge study published in The Lancet admitted that the risks of antidepressants in children and teens far outweigh... [...]
(NaturalNews) An explosive new federal complaint finally sheds some light on the great mystery of why exactly the EPA, which is tasked with protecting the environment, inexplicably sits back and allows the fracking industry to destroy the earth.According to the environmental watchdog... [...]
Are Gender-Bending Chemicals Causing Gender-Bending Confusion?
Holy Hormones Journal: This is a tough post to write… and at the same time it is probably one of the most important posts I have ever written. I have had articles saved for weeks on 08.12.15 gender-confusion-and-moral-rebellionthis… but could not seem to muster the writing needed to make you all aware that we are living in dangerous times. And then I had an email from my friend and colleague Christina England alerting me to the fact that estradiol (a bioidentical hormone extracted from yam or soy) has been discovered in polio vaccines being given to children in Kenya. Christina asked me to provide links to articles regarding the dangers of estradiol – and asked my thoughts on the matter – especially in regards to males receiving these vaccines and the risk to their fertility. And that my friends prompted me to write what has to be written.
I have been aware of the dangers of xenoestrogens in our environment for quite some time. Many of us have been sounding the alarm on this – and we have begun to see the ravaging effects of what has been called “gender-bending chemicals.” Bear with me gentle reader as I take you down the road to gender confusion.
The web site, Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families reports:
In the U.S. today, there is increasing concern that environmental contaminants may be harming the reproductive health and fertility of women and men. Reproductive and fertility problems appear to be on the rise.
At least 12% of women reported difficulty in conceiving and maintaining pregnancy in 2002, an increase of 40% from 1982. From 1982 to 1995, the prevalence of infertility almost doubled in younger women, ages 18–25. A recent update concludes that the trend may have leveled off, although there is disagreement on this.
Fibroids and other fertility-related diseases, like endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome, are diagnosed more frequently now, which may be the result of a true increase, better detection, or both.
According to a large study of men from the Boston area, testosterone levels in adult men are declining. This decline is not explained by an increase in age or other health or lifestyle factors such as obesity or smoking.
Testicular cancer increased by 60% between 1973 and 2003 in the U.S.
Sperm counts have declined in men in some areas of the U.S., Europe, and Australia.
In U.S. girls, puberty is beginning earlier than in the past. A weight-of-the-evidence evaluation of human and animal studies suggests that endocrine-disrupting chemicals, particularly estrogen mimics and anti-androgens, as well as increased body fat and certain social circumstances, can advance the onset of puberty.
Reproductive tract abnormalities are increasing in certain populations. In one analysis of two U.S. surveillance systems, cryptorchidism (undescended testicle(s)) increased 200% between 1970 and 1993. In some [...]
(NaturalNews) It is no secret that fruit is one of the healthiest and most nutritious foods any person can eat, but a new study indicates just how crucial it is for pregnant women to eat plenty of fruit.The study, which was published in EBioMedicine, involved an analysis of data... [...]
By Dr. Mercola
The recent federal lawsuit filed against former Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg again highlights industry influence at the highest government levels.
Hamburg, her husband, Peter Brown, and Johnson & Johnson are charged with conspiracy, racketeering and colluding to conceal the dangers of the antibiotic Levaquin, made by Johnson & Johnson.1
The suit was filed by Larry Klayman, a former federal prosecutor, who claims the parties concealed the drug's dangers for financial gain. Peter Brown is an executive in the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies, which held hundreds of millions of dollars of Johnson & Johnson stock. The suit charges that:2
"While Defendant Hamburg was FDA Commissioner, her husband, Defendant Brown's annual income, not coincidentally, increased from a reported $10 million in 2008 to an estimated $125 million in 2011 and an estimated $90 million in 2012, due in whole or in part to Defendants' racketeering conspiracy to withhold information about the devastating, life threatening, and deadly effects of Levaquin."
Did Hamburg Conceal Drug Dangers for Financial Gain?
Many safety questions arose after Levaquin's 1996 approval, including the drug's role in tendon ruptures (like its fluoroquinoline cousin Cipro), possible cell damage, links to neurodegenerative diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and Huntington's, and permanent peripheral nerve damage.3
Only after Hamburg left the FDA did the agency put clearer warnings on Levaquin's label says the complaint.
This is not the first time there have been questions about the relationship between the FDA's drug decisions and Hamburg's financial interests. In 2013, Hamburg verbally supported approval of the extreme opioid Zohydro despite its rejection by an FDA advisory board.
It is very rare that the FDA does not accept and follow an advisory board's decision. Subsequently, 28 state attorneys general, reeling under their states' opioid epidemics, urged the FDA to reverse the Zohydro decision.
Hamburg defended the Zohydro approval by saying that "100 million Americans" suffer from severe chronic pain, a fact that most public health experts not linked to drug companies dispute.
Yet Renaissance Technologies, the hedge fund, also held significant stock in Alkermes, the maker of Zohydro, at the time, giving the appearance of a financial conflict of interest.4
Hamburg Has a Long History of Conflicts of Interest
Questions about financial conflicts of interest clouded Hamburg's entire tenure. To be appointed, she had to agree to sell her stock and stock options in Henry Schein Inc., the largest seller of dental amalgam (mercury fillings) and a flu vaccine seller, and to recuse herself from regulatory matters affecting Schein.
While Hamburg sold her stock, she retained her stock options, which in a few weeks gained from being "under water" (no value) to having market value.
Under Hamburg's lea [...]
You gotta meet Margaret*. I changed her name to protect her privacy. She recently emailed me to vent against Western Medicine’s push to get everyone hooked on drugs and stab kids with risky, ineffective vaccines! Interestingly enough, she has seen medicine from an angle that most people aren’t privy too.
Margaret is a pharmacist. With a Pharmacy (PharmD) degree, and over two decades working in the field of pharmacy, she’s seen firsthand how “guideline-driven” medicine has artificially forced every patient into the same clinical box, thereby hooking them on drugs. The result is that “Doctors don’t THINK anymore — they just do what they’re told, which is to put people on meds. So many people in medicine (doctors, nurses, pharmacists) don’t really question anything,” says Margaret. “They’re so busy that they just do what the ‘guidelines’ say to do, rather than look at individuals and what makes sense.”
A former employee of a major pharmaceutical company, Margaret left her job so she could spend more time with her family. At the time, she questioned her former employer’s “huge marketing budget” and now believes the marketing of drugs to the general public — along with guidelines-driven medicine — needs to stop.
“We never get the flu shot,” she adds, referring to herself and her family. “I’ve read the entire package insert and can take on anyone who tries to tell me that it is useful with just that information alone. My years in pharma taught me just how clinical trials are designed to show the planned outcome — they aren’t real studies at all.”
In a world where most parents don’t even bother READING the flu vaccine insert, Margaret is a refreshing example of a mother who takes charge.
She initially contacted me to ask: “Shane, what has been the response been to what you write about vaccines? For those of us with licenses to protect, we don’t feel very safe voicing concerns about vaccines.”
I understood completely.
Big Pharma fires anyone who speaks out. They work hard to cover up the truth.
I told Margaret what I tell everyone: The science can’t be disputed. And since my job doesnt depend on parroting the status quo, I’ve had no problems whatsoever. My four kids are all unvaccinated and are strong, healthy, and vibrant. Attending school has never been an issue, and who cares anyway, health comes first.
Curious to learn more about Margaret’s experience as a pharmacist, I asked for an interview.
She generously agreed to share more of her perspective as a pharmacist. What follows is a candid interview in which Margaret encourages parents to stop, THINK, and get a reality check when it comes to vaccinating their kids. Commenting on how vaccines are pushed — and sometimes even forced — on everyone, she says, “They’ve done a very good job of psychological indoctrination.”
She also shares her thoughts on what needs to change in mainstream medicin [...]
Big Pharma research fraud
(NaturalNews) Even though the big revelations about Big Pharma’s science paper research fraud came out years ago, most people are still not aware of this. Here’s the scoop: Drug companies routinely pay P.R. firms to ghostwrite clinical science papers which are published in medical journals and forwarded to the FDA to “prove” the drugs are safe and effective. But it’s all a farce: The papers are pure fiction, dreamed up by what are essentially marketing firms for the sole purpose of getting drugs approved even when they don’t work.
“In 2009, around fourteen thousand women who developed breast cancer while taking Prempro, a hormone replacement therapy (HRT), sued the drug’s manufacturer, Wyeth,” wrote Rupert Sheldrake in an extraordinary book called Science Set Free.
In court, it turned out that many of the medical research papers supporting HRT had been ghostwritten by a commercial medical communications company called DesignWrite, whose website boasted that over twelve years they had “planned, created and/or managed hundreds of advisory boards, a thousand abstracts and posters, 500 clinical papers, over 10,000 speakers’ bureau programmes, over 200 satellite symposia, 60 international programmes, dozens of websites, and a broad array of ancillary printed and electronic materials.” It emerged that DesignWrite organized a “planned publication programme” for Prempro, consisting of review articles, case reports, editorials and commentaries, using the medical literature as a marketing tool.
As Ben Goldacre reported in the Guardian: DesignWrite wrote the first drafts and sent them to Wyeth, who advised on the creation of a second draft. Only then was the paper sent to the academic who would appear as the “author” … Design Write sold Wyeth more than 50 peer-reviewed journal articles for HRT, and a similar number of conference posters, slide kits, symposia, and journal supplements. Adrienne Fugh-Berman (an associate professor of physiology at Georgetown University) found that these publications variously promoted unproven and unlicensed benefits of Wyeth’s HRT drug, undermined its competitors, and downplayed its harms … [A]cademic journal publications are not regarded as promotional activity, so all this was legal. Worst of all was the complicity of the academics… “Research shows high clinician reliance on journal articles for credible product information,” said Design Write. They’re right: when you read an academic paper, you trust it was written by the person whose name is on it.
Wyeth was only caught after its toxic HRT drugs started causing a wave of cancer among women
This nefarious activity was uncovered by PLoS Medicine, an open source medical journal that has a history of being far more transparent than the usual pharma-corrupted journals like BMJ and The Lancet. As PLoS reported:
…the documents illustrate how Wyeth Pharmaceuticals contracted with Design [...]
By Dr. Mercola
If you were to believe the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Pop-Tarts and Frosted Flakes are healthier than nuts and avocados. This incomprehensible stance stems from the agency's definition of the word "healthy."
According to FDA rules, food can only be marketed as healthy if it meets certain nutritional criteria for fat, sodium, cholesterol and beneficial nutrients like vitamins, minerals, and fiber.
Snack foods cannot contain more than 3 grams of total fat per serving in order to qualify as healthy, and only 1 gram of that can be saturated fat. This position is reprehensibly negligent in light of all the new evidence supporting the benefits of saturated fat.
As a result of this outdated — not to mention wrong — criteria, high-sugar, low-fat snacks like Pop-Tarts end up on the "healthy" snack list, while high-fat, low-sugar ones like KIND fruit and nut bars fail to qualify.
FDA to Reassess Definition of Healthy
Last year, KIND LLC received an FDA warning letter ordering the company to cease using the term "healthy" on its snack packaging because their nut bars contain too much saturated fat. As noted by the Organic Consumers Association:
"When the term 'healthy' was first officially defined in 1994, low fat content was the main focus of health professionals. Sugar wasn't on the FDA's, or most nutritionists', radar.
Kellogg Co. doesn't generally market its Frosted Flakes or low-fat Pop-Tarts as 'healthy,' but under the current guidelines, it could. While the foods are high in sugar, they meet all the criteria, from low-fat to fortified with vitamins.
And fat-free pudding cups can be marketed as healthy, but avocados couldn't because they have too much fat, according to today's rules."
Striking Discrepancies Between FDA Rules and Dietary Guidelines
To prevent ill health, both the American Heart Association and the World Health Organization (WHO) recommend limiting daily added sugar intake to 9 teaspoons (38 grams) for men, and 6 teaspoons (25 grams) for women. The limits for children range from 3 to 6 teaspoons (12 to 25 grams) per day, depending on age.
The problem is, low-fat foods are typically chockfull of sugars, and the FDA's criteria for "healthy" doesn't even take sugar content into account at all.
As noted by The Wall Street Journal, there are even striking discrepancies between the latest U.S. dietary guidelines, issued earlier this year, and the FDA's criteria for healthy foods.
Not only do the guidelines recommend limiting sugar intake to 10 percent of total daily calories, they also recommend increasing consumption of salmon and nuts, "yet neither food meets the FDA's criteria for 'healthy.'"
Following a petition by KIND LLC, and at the urging of both food manufacturers and lawmakers, the FDA has announced it will reevaluate the definition of the word healthy. It will also seek to define the word "natural," and reevaluate regulations for nutrient content claims in general.3,4,5,6,
"We very much [...]
The 50-Year Cover-Up Killing Millions
By Dr. Mercola
Antibiotic-resistant infections affect 2 million Americans annually, leading to the death of at least 23,000. Even more die from complications related to the infections, and the numbers are steadily growing.
According to the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), just one organism — methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus, better known as MRSA — kills more Americans each year than the combined total of emphysema, HIV/AIDS, Parkinson's disease, and homicide.
A 2015 report3, commissioned by U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron estimates that by 2050, the annual global death toll from antibiotic-resistant disease will reach 10 million, and the global cost for treatment will be around $100 trillion.
Experts have been warning about the implications of antibiotic resistance for years, but as their warnings have largely been ignored, the number of strains developing resistance to even our strongest antibiotics has been allowed to grow unabated.
While overuse of antibiotics in medicine and widespread use of antibacterial household products (items containing triclosan) are part of the problem, the inappropriate use of antibiotics in farming bears the heaviest responsibility for creating the antibiotic-resistant superbug crisis of today.
An estimated 80 percent of total antibiotic sales in the U.S. end up in livestock. For example, commercial chicken producers have a history of treating each egg with gentamicin, an antibiotic listed as "essential" to human medicine. One chicken producer has seen the light though, and has abandoned this risky practice.
Perdue Proves Meat Production Can Prosper Without Drugs
Perdue Farms no longer uses gentamicin. In fact, according to a recent report by Mother Jones, the only antibiotic remaining in use at Perdue is narasin, an antibiotic not used in human medicine, and only about one-third of its chickens ever get it. (It's used to treat a parasitic intestinal condition called coccidiosis.)
Any other antibiotics are administered to sick birds only (about 4 percent of all birds). According to Mother Jones:
"Perdue ... the country's fourth-largest poultry producer, has set out to show that the meat can be profitably mass-produced without drugs.
In 2014, the company eliminated gentamicin from all its hatcheries, the latest stage of a quiet effort started back in 2002 to cut the routine use of antibiotics from nearly its entire production process."
Interestingly, Perdue fared the best in a 2010 Consumer Reports test checking for the presence of the foodborne pathogens salmonella and campylobacter in commercial chicken meat. Fifty-six percent of Perdue's chickens were free of both pathogens.
Its main competitors, Tyson and Foster Farms, both had 80 percent of their chickens tested positive for one or both bacteria. Organic store brand chickens had no salmonella at all, but 57 percent still harbored campylobacter.
According to Consumer Reports, "This [...]