Lose Them Pounds

In the U.S., 289,000 children aged 15 years and younger receive a tonsillectomy each year, making it one of the most common surgeries.1 The procedure completely removes the tonsils and is sometimes performed along with adenoidectomy, which is surgery to remove the adenoids.
While tonsillectomy itself is associated with serious long-term risks,2 parents need to be aware that the painkillers given to children following the surgery can also be dangerous. This is especially true if children are prescribed opioids, powerful pain-relieving drugs linked to an epidemic of overdose deaths.
In a revealing study from University of Michigan’s C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital researchers, 59.6% of children received a prescription for opioids following tonsillectomy,3 even though safer pain relief options would likely have worked just as well.
Six in 10 children prescribed opioids after tonsillectomy

Data from 15,793 children aged 1 to 18 who underwent tonsillectomy were analyzed for the study, revealing that 6 in 10 had at least one prescription for opioids filled following the procedure. Yet, there was no difference found in risk of return visits for pain or dehydration among children taking opioids or non-opioid drugs.4
Taking opioids was associated with an increased risk of constipation and opioid overdose.5 What’s more, the median prescription duration was eight days, which could mean an equivalent of 48 doses of the drugs — more than is typically needed. Past research found that an average of 52.2 doses of opioids may be prescribed to children following a tonsillectomy, with an average of 43.8 leftover doses.6
Not only does this increase the risk of adverse effects and addiction, but it poses a risk for family and friends who may take the leftover pills.7 According to the study authors:8

“Most children received less than 50% of their prescribed opioid doses because parents quickly tapered opioids, switched to nonopioids, or discontinued analgesics during the first few postprocedure days.

This left a considerable amount of unused prescribed opioids in the homes of children who were prescribed these agents for acute pain. This suggested mismatch between dispensed and used prescription opioids can inadvertently contribute to risky behavior and, therefore, begs for broad intervention.”

As for why opioids are often prescribed following tonsillectomy, the University of Michigan researchers suggested they’re often believed to provide superior pain relief and reduce the risk of return visits to the doctor, but this study suggests this isn’t the case.
They’re also sometimes offered over nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) due to concerns that NSAIDs may increase the risk of bleeding, but research suggests they can be used safely following tonsillectomy.9
“Our findings suggest that it may be possible to reduce opioid exposure among children who undergo this common surgery without increasing the risk of complications,” lead author Dr. Kao-Ping Chua said in a news release, adding:10

“To minimize the risks of opioids to children and their families, clinicians should rely on non-opioids when possible. When opioids are used, they should aim to prescribe only the amount that patients need …

However, our study suggests that many children receive opioid prescriptions after tonsillectomy and that the amount may be excessive. We need to conduct research to identify interventions that safely and effectively reduce opioid exposure for these children.”

Otolaryngologists advise against opioids after tonsillectomy
Prescription opioids are sometimes considered standard care for treating severe pain in adults following surgery or injury or due to illnesses such as cancer, although they’re now increasingly prescribed for many types of pain, including chronic back pain or pain from osteoarthritis.
The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO HNS), however, advises against their use after tonsillectomy, advising instead, “Clinicians should recommend ibuprofen, acetaminophen or both for pain control after tonsillectomy.”11 In their plain language summary for patients, AAO HNS further states:12

“Some medicines like antibiotics and codeine (koh-DEEN) or any medication containing codeine are not good for children younger than 12 years after tonsillectomy. There are better choices than codeine even for children 12 to 18 years old. Codeine [an opioid] can cause very slow breathing and, if too much is given, death. It can also be habit forming (addictive).”

Opioids given to children despite FDA black box warning

In 2012, the FDA announced it was reviewing the safety of codeine use after tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy after serious adverse events and deaths were reported.
They found many of the children affected had obstructive sleep apnea and “had evidence of being ultrarapid metabolizers of codeine, which is an inherited (genetic) ability that causes the liver to convert codeine into life-threatening or fatal amounts of morphine in the body.”13
“Since these children already had underlying breathing problems, they may have been particularly sensitive to the breathing difficulties that can result when codeine is converted in the body to high levels of morphine,” the FDA announced.14
“However, they continued, “this contraindication applies to all children undergoing tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy because it is not easy to determine which children might be ultrarapid metabolizers of codeine.”
The end result was a black-box warning, the FDA’s strongest warning, added to the label of codeine-containing products advising against the use of such drugs in all children following tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy. 
In 2017, Chua and colleagues published a study that found the FDA’s investigation significantly reduced codeine prescribing to children after these procedures — but did not stop it entirely. In a review of 362,992 children who underwent tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy, 5.1% had one or more prescriptions for codeine filled in December 2015.
The researchers explained, “1 in 20 children undergoing these surgeries were still prescribed codeine in December 2015 despite its well-documented safety and efficacy issues.”15
Considering the risks of prescribing codeine to children, the inability to identify which children may be especially vulnerable to its effects and the widespread availability of nonopioid pain relief options, the researchers described prescribing codeine to children after tonsillectomy an “unnecessary gamble, “particularly for children with OSA [obstructive sleep apnea], who are at a higher risk for opioid-related respiratory depression.”16
Parents mistakenly believe opioids are best for pain

Despite widespread media headlines highlighting the risks of opioid abuse and overdose deaths, many parents still believe they’re the most effective option for pain relief. In a survey commissioned by the American Society of Anesthesiologists, nearly two-thirds of parents surveyed believed opioids were better for pain management after surgery or a broken bone than alternatives.17
In reality, research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) suggests that less risky opioid-free options may work just as well.18
The study evaluated the effects of four different combinations of pain relievers — three with different opioids and one opioid-free option composed of ibuprofen (i.e., Advil) and acetaminophen (i.e., Tylenol) — on people with moderate to severe pain in an extremity, due to bone fractures, shoulder dislocation and other injuries.
The patients had an average pain score of 8.7 (on a scale of zero to 10) when they arrived. Two hours later, after receiving one of the pain-relief combinations, their pain levels decreased similarly, regardless of which drug-combo they received. Specifically, pain scores fell by:19

4.3 in the ibuprofen and acetaminophen group
4.4 in the oxycodone and acetaminophen group
3.5 in the hydrocodone and acetaminophen group
3.9 in the codeine and acetaminophen group

“For patients presenting to the ED [emergency department] with acute extremity pain, there were no statistically significant or clinically important differences in pain reduction at two hours among single-dose treatment with ibuprofen and acetaminophen or with 3 different opioid and acetaminophen combination analgesics,” the researchers concluded.20
Opioid-related deaths among children nearly triple

The opioid epidemic kills 130 Americans daily,21 and sadly this sometimes includes children. While adult deaths due to opioid overdose have trended upward in recent years, so too have those among children.
From 1999 to 2016, 8,986 children and adolescents died due to opioid poisonings — an increase in mortality rate of 268.2%.22 Prescription opioids were responsible for 73% of the deaths, with the mortality rate increasing 131.3% during the study period.23
According to the study, “These findings suggest that the opioid epidemic is likely to remain a growing public health problem in the young unless legislators, public health officials, clinicians and parents take a wider view of the opioid crisis and implement protective measures that are pediatric specific and family centered.”24
The findings underscore the high risks involved when bringing opioids into your home and highlight the importance of choosing the least dangerous pain relief option available following surgeries like tonsillectomy.
If your child is scheduled to have this procedure, ask his or her doctor about pain relief options and express your desire for a nonopioid option. However, before choosing to have your child’s tonsils removed, be aware that the surgery itself is risky and may not be the best option for your child.
Risks of tonsillectomy may outweigh benefits

Tonsillectomies are often recommended for treatment of recurring, chronic or severe tonsillitis or complications resulting from enlarged tonsils, such as difficulty breathing at night.25 However, the benefits of the surgery may not outweigh the risks, according to a population-based cohort study of 1,189,061 children.26
In estimating the long-term disease risks associated with tonsillectomy in childhood, the researchers evaluated data from children who had their adenoids or tonsils removed within the first nine years of life, finding their removal to be associated with a significantly increased risk of respiratory, allergic and infectious diseases later in life.
“Increases in long-term absolute disease risks were considerably larger than changes in risk for the disorders these surgeries aim to treat,” the researchers explained.27 Far from being superfluous tissue, your tonsils and adenoids play an important role in the development and function of your immune system, helping to protect against pathogens and stimulate immune response.28
Short-term risks of tonsillectomy, meanwhile, also carry risks, including severe bleeding before or after surgery, swelling that can cause breathing problems, infection and reactions to anesthetics.29
In some cases, a tonsillotomy, or partial removal of the tonsils, may be an alternative surgical option for both children and adults; however, parents should carefully consider whether surgery is the best option to resolve the underlying medical condition.
Finally, if you, your child or someone you love has chronic pain of any kind, know that there are many safe and effective alternatives to prescription and even over-the-counter painkillers that provide excellent pain relief without any of the health hazards that pain medications like opioids often carry.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/08/24/use-of-opioids-after-tonsillectomy.aspx

The exposure of medical fraud is not new. In the past, drugs have been brought to market before clinical trials revealed a deadly list of side effects, including heart attacks and deaths, as in the case of Vioxx.1 ProCon.org published a list in 2014 of 35 drugs pulled from the market after research revealed they caused more damage than benefit to users.2
You need only take a cursory glance at the epidemic that opioid manufacturers have caused in their search for profit, sometimes boasting they could become an “end-to-end” provider by supplying both the addictive drug and the cure for the addiction.3
In 2015 Dr. Anil Potti from Duke University was found guilty of research misconduct,4 and Duke faced lawsuits filed by patients in his clinical trials.5 Potti’s research was first heralded as a groundbreaking game changer, but is now an example of how fraud can occur anywhere.
Had Duke University paid attention to reports from a medical student in 2008, they could have avoided the ensuing public and political challenges. Instead, Potti’s protectors pressured the student to be silent, in a move to protect their own interests.6
Recently, it was revealed that scientists at Novartis hid manipulated data from animal studies while seeking approval from the FDA for a gene therapy drug meant to treat babies with an inherited disease, spinal muscular atrophy.7
Big Pharma corrupts data but keeps profits

AveXis, a subsidiary of Novartis, is aimed at developing and commercializing gene therapy.8 May 24, 2019, the company received approval to release Zolgensma, which was considered a major milestone. However, it is also the most expensive treatment ever offered on the market, at a whopping price of $2.1 million for a single dose.9,10
AveXis knew of the data manipulation in March,11 a full two months before the drug was officially approved by the FDA. Dr. Wilson Bryon, director of the FDA division reviewing the drug, commented to STAT12 that had the agency been told of the data manipulation, approval of the drug would have been delayed.
In what appears to be an opposing statement, Dr. Peters Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research,13 was quoted in a press release saying,14 “The FDA is carefully assessing this situation and remains confident that Zolgensma should remain on the market.” In the same statement Marks also said,15 “The agency will use its full authorities to take action, if appropriate, which may include civil or criminal penalties.”
In a letter to Ned Sharpless, acting head of the FDA, five senators wrote,16 “This scandal smacks of the pharmaceutical industry’s privilege and greed, and Americans are sick of it.” The senators urged the FDA to take action:17

” … to use your full authorities to hold AveXis accountable for its malfeasance. Anything short of a forceful response would signal a green light to future pharmaceutical misbehavior.”

Business Insider18 reports Novartis declined to comment on the content of the letter from the senators. In a Twitter conversation19 between Dr. Peter Bach20 of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and past FDA Commissioner, Dr. Scott Gottlieb,21,22 the problem was clearly acknowledged:

Bach: “I don’t know the rules in detail, but presumably Nvs could have told the FDA to pause its review to ensure the approval was not based on data suspected to be (or known to be) fabricated. This whole thing has the ‘wrongs were committed but there were no wrongdoers’ feel.”

Gottlieb: “Based on the tone and substance of the FDA statement today, Peter, I suspect there will be wrongdoers here. And consequences.”

Drugmakers not required to report suspected data corruption

In their letter to Sharpless, the five senators described how taxpayers had funded benefits to Novartis in order to speed the regulatory and approval processes for their new drug. They wrote:23

“What makes this unscrupulous action even more appalling is the fact that AveXis was the beneficiary of numerous federal taxpayer-funded benefits and incentives, including obtaining Fast Track, Breakthrough Therapy, and Priority Review designations — ensuring that Zolgensma would be sped through the regulatory approval process. All the while, AveXis breaks records, and budgets, with its staggering $2.1 million price.”

In the same letter, the senators requested that the FDA answer questions about how it plans to deal with cases of data manipulation from drug companies. Additionally, they wanted an explanation about why the FDA had decided to drop a regulation requiring pharmaceutical companies to report any suspected data manipulation.24
Dr. Vasant Narasimhan became the chief executive officer of Novartis on February 1, 2018.25 Narasimhan defended the company’s decision to delay release of the information about manipulated data and said the company “thoroughly, aggressively”26 investigated the issue.
The New York Times27 reports that when Narasimhan assumed this role, his mission was to restore the reputation of Novartis following several allegations of price-fixing, past data manipulation and the decision to hire Michael Cohen, President Trump’s ex-lawyer who pleaded guilty to making false statements to Congress.28
Narasimhan said they waited before releasing information about data manipulation in order to perform their own internal investigation and not in an effort to hasten the approval process.29 Novartis continues to assert the falsified data were limited to the early phases of research involving animals; this was discontinued in the summer of 2018.
Insurance companies picking up $2.1 million bill

While Zolgensma is the second gene therapy drug to be approved by the FDA, the government agency expects to be approving between 10 and 20 cell and gene therapy products each year by 2025.30 Zolgensma is a $2.1 million one-time drug for the treatment of spinal muscular atrophy in children under 2.
Spinal muscular atrophy is a muscle wasting disease, affecting about 400 children each year. In the most severe form, children die before age 2. At one point, UnitedHealthcare refused payment for several cases. Later, they reversed their decision after pressure from families and intense media coverage.31
The FDA released an inspection report from the mice used in the early phases of the research and found how long the mice lived was different from the actual value in some cases. While the FDA reported the data were manipulated, they would not say if they believed the information was deliberately falsified.32
Novartis concerned regulations may impact business

The high cost of prescriptions has become a political issue, with most calling for change. Bausch Health, possibly best known for their eye care products, is led by CEO Joseph Papa. In an interview with CNBC, Papa said pharmaceuticals are the most cost-effective way to treat and improve health care.33
Also under the Bausch Health umbrella is a dermatology business, Ortho Dermatologics, which received approval in early 2019 for a lotion to treat psoriasis. In two clinical trials, the drugmaker posted a success rate of 36% in the first study and 45% in the second.
Despite pledges from Congress to help regulate prescription prices, Papa remains unconcerned.34 However, Novartis is not quite as unruffled by movements in Congress toward greater regulation.
The company is standing behind their newest gene therapy drug, and defends the massive price tag that nearly all families would find impossible to pay without full coverage insurance. At the same time, Novartis’ annual report cites concern for transparency in the way their company may be forced to do business:35

“For example, we are faced with increasing pressures, including new laws and regulations from around the world, to be more transparent with respect to how we do business, including with respect to our interactions with healthcare professionals and organizations.

These laws and regulations include requirements that we disclose payments or other transfers of value made to healthcare professionals and organizations, as well as information relating to the prices for our products. Such measures, including any additional such measures that may be put in place, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.”

Novartis dumped vaccine program and more

Novartis’s headquarters are in Switzerland and the company has offices in multiple countries.36 If their name sounds familiar it might be from years of manufacturing and supplying vaccines, including flu vaccines and those for meningitis B. Their vaccine division was formed in 2006 but began posting losses in 2013.37
In 2015, Novartis sold the flu vaccine business for $275 million to Australia’s CSL. This placed CSL as the world’s second largest flu vaccine supplier.38 The acquisition also included the cell-based manufacturing facility in North Carolina.
This was a win for CSL as it was the first of its kind in the U.S. The cost of $487 million was in part paid by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. This was a part of the organization’s pandemic preparedness efforts.39 In other words, U.S. taxpayers funded the facility, which was later sold to Australia.
GlaxoSmithKline acquired the remaining vaccine business from Novartis in 2015 for $7.1 billion, which included nearly 20 vaccines the company had in development.40 In addition, GSK divested its oncology portfolio to Novartis for cash consideration of $16 billion.41
Novartis began their companywide restructure with the divestment of their vaccine portfolio, over-the-counter drugs and animal health sections.42 In another deal closed December 2015, Novartis sold Kayersberg Pharmaceuticals from their Alcon unit in a bid to improve financial margins and focus their attention in a different direction.43
By June 2018, Novartis had announced the sale of the entire Alcon eye-care unit44 as Narasimhan continued to focus the attention of the company on prescription drugs. In 2018, Novartis bought AveXis for $8.7 billion to acquire the then experimental Zolgensma.45
As the pharmaceutical industry jockeys for position in an ever-changing political environment, it is the consumer who ultimately loses the battle. Although Papa believes pharmaceutical treatments are the answer to health and wellness, it has been my assertion for decades your life choices have a significant effect on your health, including nutrition, sleep, hydration and exercise.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/08/21/big-pharma-corrupts-data-but-keeps-approval.aspx

The question of where and how to give birth is a relatively new one for women. Up until the early 20th century, fewer than 5% of women gave birth in a hospital. In the 1950s the birth of a baby, an event that had once been a family affair and attended by a midwife, became more medicalized.1
Pregnancy and birth were seen more as a sickness than a natural part of life. One mom described the birth of her first child in the 1960s as occurring without pain medication, with minimal interaction from medical staff and a forced two-week hospital stay.2
Dads began attending births in the 1970s and by the 1990s childbirth was swinging back toward being a natural part of life. More women are now offered choices that are respectful of their wishes, without repeating the horror stories of past generations. This is an important factor in the future health of mother, child and family as recognized by the World Health Organization.3
The outcome not only affects the mother but may also be important in the development of the mother’s and child’s relationship and mom’s future childbearing experiences. Researchers have found that a woman’s positive and negative perceptions of birth are related more to her ability to control the situation and have a choice in her options, than specific details.
Low-Risk Home Birth as Safe as Hospital Birth

Evidence doesn’t back the long-held belief that low-risk deliveries are better served in the hospital where medical intervention may be used to speed delivery.
The safety debate surrounding home births is not a new one. Nearly 11 years ago data showed when a home birth was planned by a woman with a low-risk pregnancy and attended by a midwife, there were:4

” … very low and comparable rates of perinatal death and reduced rates of obstetric interventions and other adverse perinatal outcomes compared with planned hospital birth attended by a midwife or physician.”

In 2008 the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) published a statement in opposition to home births, writing that “Choosing to deliver a baby at home, however, is to place the process of giving birth over the goal of having a healthy baby.”5
Despite evidence to the contrary, their statement published nearly 10 years later did not change: In 2017 they recommended women be informed of the risks, specifically that there are a lower number of risks to the woman but a higher rate of perinatal deaths.6
In another study of 530,000 births in the Netherlands,7 researchers found no differences in the rate of death in mother or baby between those born at home or in a hospital. The study was sparked by the suggestion that the high rate of infant mortality may be due to the high number of home births. The review of medical records did not bear out the hypothesis. Professor Simone Buitendijk commented to the BBC:8

“We found that for low-risk mothers at the start of their labour it is just as safe to deliver at home with a midwife as it is in hospital with a midwife. These results should strengthen policies that encourage low-risk women at the onset of labour to choose their own place of birth.”

Safety Data Positive With Well-Educated Midwives

It should be noted data were published long before the 2017 policy statement from ACOG mentioned above. In 2014, a review of 16,924 home births recorded between 2004 and 2009 were examined. Researchers noted the rise of home births by 41% from 2004 to 2010, writing there is a9 “need for accurate assessment of the safety of planned home birth.”
The scientists found that of the participants who planned a home birth, 89.1% did in fact do so. Most of the transfers to the hospital during labor were for failure to progress. However, 93.6% went on to have a spontaneous vaginal delivery, and 86% of infants were breastfeeding exclusively by 6 weeks of age. The overwhelming majority — 87% — of 1,054 who attempted a vaginal delivery after cesarean section at home were successful.
Researchers recently conducted an international meta-analysis to evaluate the safety of home and hospital births with the primary outcome measurement of any perinatal or neonatal death. They chose 14 studies including approximately 500,000 intended home births attended by a midwife.10
The information was pulled from outcomes from eight Western countries, including the U.S., in studies published since 1990.11 What they found fit many of the previous studies:12 “The risk of perinatal or neonatal mortality was not different when birth was intended at home or in hospital.” Eileen Hutton from McMaster University, one of the researchers, commented:13

“More women in well-resourced countries are choosing birth at home, but concerns have persisted about their safety. This research clearly demonstrates the risk is no different when the birth is intended to be at home or in hospital.”

Conditions Best Addressed at the Hospital

Of course, there are high risk pregnancies better served inside a hospital environment. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, factors that potentially create a high-risk pregnancy include existing health conditions and lifestyle choices. While this list is not all-inclusive, these are factors your midwife or doctor will consider as you discuss your birth plan. Some include:14

High blood pressure — If this is the only risk factor and blood pressure is only slightly elevated, it may not be enough to stop a home delivery plan. However, uncontrolled blood pressure is dangerous to mother and baby.

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) — PCOS can increase the risk of gestational diabetes, cesarean section, preeclampsia and pregnancy loss before 20 weeks.

Diabetes — Moms who have diabetes are more likely to have babies that are larger than most; their babies may also have low blood sugar after being born.

Kidney disease — Depending upon the extent of the disease, it may impact fertility and the ability to carry a pregnancy to term. Nearly 20% of women with preeclampsia during pregnancy go on to be diagnosed with kidney disease.

Autoimmune disease — Medications used to treat autoimmune diseases may be harmful to the baby; such conditions also increase risks of pregnancy and delivery.

Thyroid disease — Uncontrolled disease may increase stress on the baby and cause poor weight gain, heart failure or problems with brain development.

Obesity — Obesity before becoming pregnant is associated with high risk and poor outcomes, including large for gestational age babies, difficult birth and a risk for heart defects.

Age — Teens and first-time moms over 35 fall into high-risk categories.

Lifestyle factors — Alcohol, tobacco and drug use increase the risks to mom and baby during the pregnancy and delivery.

Pregnancy conditions — Women carrying multiples, who have had a previous premature birth or who have gestational diabetes, preeclampsia or eclampsia are at high risk.

Comparing the Risks of Home and Hospital Births
The decision to give birth at home or in a hospital is a personal one. While ACOG claims the hospital is the safest place, research evidence shows low-risk pregnancies delivered at home or in a hospital with a qualified midwife have the same risks and outcome potential. Just as important are the risks for low-risk women who give birth inside a hospital setting.
For instance, while a home birth rarely if ever includes the use of drugs or interventions to speed delivery, many women who are hospitalized may receive Pitocin, a synthetic form of oxytocin. The drug is used to induce labor or start contractions and it may be used to intensify labor contractions to speed the process.
However, the use of the medication must be balanced against outcomes, such as a higher rate of analgesia and cesarean section,15 both of which affect mother and baby. In any pregnancy, oxytocin may also increase the risk of fever in the woman, low pH values in the umbilical cord and a shorter first stage of labor.16
Data from the CDC show the rate of cesarean sections in 2018 were 31.9% of all births.17 However, this includes a number of cesarean sections considered medically unnecessary. The rate for Nulliparous, Term, Singleton, Vertex (NTSV) Cesarean Birth Rate is 25.9%.18
This means that of all the women who had a cesarean section, 25.9% were having their first baby, beyond 39 weeks gestation and carrying one child who presented normally, in the vertex position with the head down.19
Having had a first cesarean section nearly guarantees the following births will also be a cesarean section as the repeat rate is 86.7%.20 As explained by the American Pregnancy Association, cesarean section introduces multiple risks for mother and baby. For the mother, these include infection, hemorrhaging, injuries, lengthy stays in the hospital and emotional reactions as well as those related to medicine.
Moms can also have adhesions, or scar tissue that causes a blockage in the stomach area. Babies can have a low birth weight, a low APGAR score, breathing difficulties and even injuries.21
Type of Birth Influences Future Health

As you likely know, the gut microbiome is an intricate living foundation for your immune system that plays a role in your risk of chronic disease, weight management and how well your body absorbs nutrition. As you may imagine, during a vaginal birth a baby’s microbiome is first “seeded” and developed.
During the process a baby is passed the mother’s microbiome, which is why it’s so important for the woman to have a healthy gut before, during and after pregnancy. The makeup of the mother’s gut will influence how the baby’s microbiome grows.
A cesarean section bypasses this important step, which may be compounded by bottle feeding, a lifetime of processed foods and an overuse of antibiotics. These factors all have led to a steep loss of biodiversity in the human gut making many vulnerable to disease. Skin-to-skin contact after birth and breastfeeding are two ways to pass along a healthy microbiome if you’ve had a cesarean section.
For more information about how to more effectively help seed your baby’s gut microbiome see “How the Method of Birth Can Influence Lifelong Health.”
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/03/25/home-births.aspx

Prolonged stress can have life-threatening consequences not only for adults but also for children. Research shows adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) can predispose them to any number of health problems later in life.

In the early days of mankind’s evolution, the stress response saved our lives by enabling us to run from predators or take down prey. Today, however, such dire circumstances are few and far between, yet we still turn on the same “life-saving” reaction to cope with countless everyday situations.

Constantly being in a stress response may have you marinating in corrosive hormones around the clock, which can raise your blood pressure, add fat to your belly, shrink your brain and even unravel your chromosomes.1

Stress disrupts your neuroendocrine and immune systems and appears to trigger a degenerative process in your brain that can result in Alzheimer’s disease. Stress can also accelerate aging by shortening your telomeres, the protective genetic structures that regulate how your cells age. In the words of Dr. Lissa Rankin, author of “Mind Over Medicine”:2

“Our bodies know how to fix broken proteins, kill cancer cells, retard aging, and fight infection. They even know how to heal ulcers, make skin lesions disappear and knit together broken bones! But here’s the kicker — those natural self-repair mechanisms don’t work if you’re stressed!”

Childhood Stress and Mental Health
In a March 2020 Newsweek article,3 Adam Piore discusses the work of Dr. Nadine Burke Harris, founder of a children’s medical clinical in one of San Francisco’s poorest neighborhoods.

A surprisingly large portion of her young patients struggled with symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), the hallmarks of which include an inability to focus, impulsivity and abnormal restlessness. Many also had severe health problems and depression. Piore writes:

“Burke Harris noticed something else unusual about these children. Whenever she asked their parents or caregivers to tell her about conditions at home, she almost invariably uncovered a major life disruption or trauma.
One child had been sexually abused by a tenant, she recalls. Another had witnessed an attempted murder. Many children came from homes struggling with the incarceration or death of a parent, or reported acrimonious divorces. Some caregivers denied there were any problems at all, but had arrived at the appointment high on drugs.”

Alarmed by the obvious trend she was witnessing in her clinic, Harris began searching for answers in the medical literature. Was childhood trauma responsible for the poor state of health of so many of her young patients?

“Childhood stress can be as toxic and detrimental to the development of the brain and body as eating lead paint chips off the wall or drinking it in the water — and should be screened for and dealt with in similar ways, in Burke Harris’ view. As California’s first Surgeon General … she is focusing on getting lawmakers and the public to act,” Piore writes.4

Adverse Childhood Experiences Screening
In 2020, California is allocating $105 million to promote screening for ACEs, which have been shown to trigger toxic stress responses and epigenetic changes linked to a variety of health problems. As reported by Piore, the biological switches flipped during ACEs increase a child’s risk for:5

Nicotine, alcohol and drug abuse
Heart disease

Suicide
Cancer

Mental illness
Dementia

Impaired immune function

What’s more, these stress-induced epigenetic changes can be passed on to future generations. Indeed, you will often find that childhood trauma “runs in families,” with each subsequent generation playing out the same interpersonal dramas as their parents. According to Harris, “The social determinants of health are to the 21st century, what infectious disease was to the 20th century.”6
The ACE Study

Much of what we now know about ACEs are the result of the 1998 ACE Study,7 which examined the relationship between childhood trauma and subsequent risky behaviors and diseases in adulthood. Categories of ACEs examined included:8,9

Psychological abuse
Physical abuse

Sexual abuse
Violence against the mother

Living with household members who were substance abusers
Living with mentally ill or suicidal household members

Living in a household in which a member has been or is imprisoned
Early death of a parent

Neglect
Separation or divorce

Of the 13,494 adults who received the questionnaire and had completed a standard medical evaluation, 70.5% responded. Of those, more than half reported experiencing at least one ACE; one-fourth reported two or more.

Not only did they find a direct “dose-dependent” relationship between the number of ACEs and future health problems and risky behaviors, childhood trauma appeared to be an independent risk factor for leading causes of death. According to the authors:10

“We found a graded relationship between the number of categories of childhood exposure and each of the adult health risk behaviors and diseases that were studied.
Persons who had experienced four or more categories of childhood exposure, compared to those who had experienced none, had 4- to 12-fold increased health risks for alcoholism, drug abuse, depression, and suicide attempt; a 2- to 4-fold increase in smoking, poor self-rated health, > or = 50 sexual intercourse partners, and sexually transmitted disease; and 1.4- to 1.6-fold increase in physical inactivity and severe obesity.
The number of categories of adverse childhood exposures showed a graded relationship to the presence of adult diseases including ischemic heart disease, cancer, chronic lung disease, skeletal fractures, and liver disease.
The seven categories of adverse childhood experiences were strongly interrelated and persons with multiple categories of childhood exposure were likely to have multiple health risk factors later in life.”

Origins of ACEs
In the June 2019 issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, (full text is behind a paywall)11 Dr. Vincent J. Felitti commented on his 1998 ACE Study:

“The ACE Study was a direct outgrowth of significant counterintuitive findings derived from … the treatment of obesity in Kaiser Permanente’s Department of Preventive Medicine in San Diego, California. Unexpectedly, we discovered that such major weight loss was actually threatening to many patients.
Pursuing this, we came to realize that obesity, a major public health problem from a societal standpoint, was from the involved patient’s standpoint often an unconsciously chosen solution to unrecognized traumatic life experiences that were lost in time and further protected by shame, secrecy, and social taboos against exploring certain realms of human experience.”

Upon investigation, 55% of 286 patients enrolled in the Kaiser Permanente weight loss study acknowledged sexual abuse — an absolutely staggering statistic Felitti could hardly believe at first. Many of these patients also spoke about other childhood traumas.

Since these patients unconsciously used obesity as a defense mechanism, their weight loss efforts were often unsustainable, and they’d gain all the weight back. Since the publication of the 1998 ACE Study, Felitti and co-principal investigator Dr. Robert Anda have published more than 75 articles on its findings and other follow-up investigations.
The Importance of Sharing and Acceptance
Unfortunately, while interest in ACEs has grown, there’s been a strong resistance to using the information in clinical medical practice. For example, there were fears that questions about ACEs might enrage patients or trigger suicide.

However, when Felitti conducted an investigation, he found that when the ACE questions were included in an adult medical history intake, outpatient visits were actually reduced by 35% and emergency room visits declined by 11% in the subsequent year, compared to the year before the ACE questions were added.

They also found there was no rise in referrals to psychotherapy, so the reduction was not due to more people seeking psychiatric help. What they eventually discovered was that the mere ability to talk about their ACEs had a tremendously beneficial effect. Felitti writes:12

“We learned from patients that our apparent acceptance of them after hearing their dark secret was of profound importance. After lengthy consideration, we came to see that ‘Asking’ … followed up by face-to-face ‘Listening’ and ‘Accepting’ was a powerful form of ‘Doing.’
In other words, we had come upon a mechanism for reducing traumatic shame, which shame had the secondary effect of causing stress-related symptoms and hence doctor visits. Given our sample size, the economic implications of a reduction of this magnitude in medical utilization are in the multibillion-dollar range for any large organization.
Numerous legislatures, state and federal, have become involved because of the multibillion-dollar implications of the ACE Study findings for population health as well as medical care budgets.
The WHO has been collecting data annually with an International Version of the ACE Questionnaire in more than two dozen European and Asian nations, and the CDC has added since 2009 an ACE module to its annual Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Study, with almost all states currently participating.
Thus, in spite of the slow progress over the past 20 years, the international breadth and strength of interest in understanding the implications and extent of the ACE findings strongly suggest that our keynote AJPM article will ultimately have a major role in advancing well-being and medical care.”

Mind-Body Connection
In the two decades since the ACE Study came out, researchers have investigated the connection between childhood trauma and adult disease states from a variety of angles, looking for biological mechanisms to explain it.
One proposed mechanism involves the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, which controls stress reactions and regulates immune function, energy storage and expenditure, moods and emotions by way of hormones. A key hormone involved is cortisol, which plays a role in energy regulation. As explained by Piore:13

“When all is calm, the body builds muscle or bone and socks away excess calories for future consumption as fat, performs cellular regeneration and keeps its immune system strong to fight infection. In the case of a child, the body fuels normal mental and physical development.
In an emergency, however, all these processes get put on hold. The HPA axis floods the bloodstream with adrenaline and cortisol, which signals the body to kick into overdrive immediately. Blood sugar levels spike and the heart pumps harder to provide a fast boost in fuel …
When the emergency goes on for a long time — perhaps over an entire childhood of abuse — the resulting high levels of cortisol take a big and lasting toll.”

ACEs and Cortisol Dysregulation
Interestingly, researchers have discovered that different ACEs impact cortisol regulation in different ways. Children who experience severe emotional, physical or sexual abuse tend to have abnormally high cortisol levels first thing in the morning, while children experiencing severe neglect tend to have abnormally low morning levels.
Low morning cortisol has been linked to delinquency and alcohol use, while high morning cortisol levels are associated with anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.
Excessive amounts of cortisol also lower immune function, thus raising the risk of infection, and raises the risk of high blood pressure, insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes, obesity and heart disease.
On the other hand, too little cortisol increases the risk of an inflammatory immune response and exaggerated inflammatory response to stress. “Sickness behavior” — lack of appetite, fatigue, social withdrawal, depressed mood, irritability and poor cognitive functioning — has also been shown to be related to insufficient cortisol, Piore reports.
Genetics Also Play a Role

Researchers have also discovered that the presence of ACEs is in and of itself not enough to trigger toxic stress. Genetics also appear to play a role, as does interpersonal intervention. If someone is around to offer soothing reassurance, a sense of safety can be restored, allowing cortisol levels to normalize.
The problem is that chronic abuse is typically because no one is intervening on the child’s behalf. “Adversity and stress without adequate buffering can turn on genes that flood the system with enzymes that prime the body to respond to further stress by making it easier to produce adrenaline and reactivate the fight-or-flight response quickly, which can make it harder for children with toxic stress to control their emotions,” Piore notes.14
Childhood Trauma Is a Significant Health Risk

In 2019, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention analyzed data from 144,017 individuals in 25 states, finding:15,16

Nearly 1 in 6 adults (15.6%) has experienced four or more types of ACEs
ACEs raise the risk of at least five of the top 10 leading causes of death
Preventing ACEs could reduce adult depression rates by as much as 44%, asthma rates by 24% and stroke by 15%
Preventing ACEs could also prevent up to 1.9 million cases of heart disease and up to 2.5 million cases of overweight or obesity

Interventions to Combat the Stress Response
The good news is that as the role of ACEs and toxic stress is becoming more widely recognized, doctors can begin to address these issues, which is what Harris is pushing for in California. Caregivers of stressed or traumatized children also need to be educated on the importance of emotional and physical buffering. Piore writes:17

“Buffering includes nurturing caregiving, but it can include simple steps like focusing on maintaining proper sleep, exercise and nutrition.
Mindfulness training, mental health services and an emphasis on developing healthy relationships are other interventions that Burke Harris says can help combat the stress response.
The specifics will vary on a case-by-case basis, and will rely on the judgment and creativity of the doctor to help adult caregivers design a plan to protect the child — and to help both those caregivers and high-risk adults receive social support services and interventions when necessary … ‘Most of our interventions are essentially reducing stress hormones, and ultimately changing our environment,’ says Burke Harris. ”

A 2017 paper18 in Health & Justice delineates further “action steps using ACEs and trauma-informed care” to improve patient resiliency without retraumatizing them.
Resilience is the ability of your body to rapidly return to normal, physically and emotionally, after a stressful situation. One way to improve resilience is through breath work, as described in “Simple Techniques to Reduce Stress and Develop Greater Resiliency.”
The Health & Justice paper19 also highlights the importance of incorporating neuroscience concepts to trauma-informed care programs and therapies, and stresses the use of a resilience-oriented approach in order to move “from trauma information to neuroscience-based action with practical skills to build greater capacity for self-regulation and self-care in both service providers and clients.”
Problems and Challenges: ACE Score May Be Misleading

California’s Department of Health Care Services ACEs Aware Initiative kicked off January 1, 2020.20 Health care providers in the state are encouraged to screen patients for ACEs that might influence their health, and connecting patients in need with the appropriate interventions and resources.
Some, however, including Anda, who helped develop the ACE score with Felitti, worry that the ACE score might not work well when applied to individual patients, as it does not take into account caregiver buffering and other factors that tend to be protective. Piore writes:21

“The problem with applying it to individual patients, he says, is that it doesn’t take into account the severity of the stressor. Who’s to say, for instance, that someone with an ACE score of one who was beaten by a caregiver every day of their life is less prone to disease than someone with an ACE score of four who experienced these stressors only intermittently?
On a population level, surveying thousands, the outliers would cancel each other out. But on the individual level they could be misleading.”

While screening tools can indeed be misused and lead to inappropriate labeling, recognizing the influence of ACEs in public health is an important step forward. In coming years, we’re likely to see more advances in screening methods as well.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/03/19/adverse-childhood-experiences.aspx

A class-action lawsuit has been filed against Seattle Children’s Hospital after six children died and many others were sickened from Aspergillus mold.1 The lawsuit claims the hospital knew about “systemic problems” with its air-handling system and the related risks as far back as 2000, but “engaged in a cover-up” that left vulnerable patients exposed to potentially dangerous Aspergillus mold.
Since 2001, Seattle Children’s has identified 14 patients who contracted Aspergillus infections during or after hospital stays; six of those patients died as a result.2 Attorneys suggest, however, that many more children were likely affected and the numbers could be as high as “dozens if not hundreds.”3
As of December 4, 2019, all 14 operating rooms at the hospital’s main campus remained closed as a new air handling unit was moved into place. “We are incredibly sorry for the hurt experienced by these families and regret that recent developments have caused additional grief,” Seattle Children’s said in a statement. “Out of respect for privacy, we do not intend to share details about our patients or comment on specific cases or legal action.”4
Hospital’s Air Handling System Led to Deadly Mold Infections

Patients affected by the toxic mold at Seattle Children’s Hospital range in age from 2 months to 17 years.5 The infections occurred from 2001 to 2019 as a result of the hospital’s negligence at maintaining and testing its facilities, leading to the transmission of Aspergillus mold spores to hospitalized children, according to the suit.6
In 2019, the hospital admitted that it was contaminated with Aspergillus mold since 2001, sickening patients as a result. Air tests conducted in November 2019 also revealed the presence of Aspergillus in several operating rooms.7
However, this wasn’t a new revelation, as the suit alleges that the hospital knew by at least 2005 its air-handling system could be transmitting Aspergillus, when a family sued them over the issue. “During the course of that lawsuit troubling information surfaced regarding the Defendant’s failure to maintain and staff its air-handling systems,” the complaint reads.
The lawsuit was settled in 2008 under confidential terms, but the hospital continued to keep “a deadly secret” in assuring patients and the public that it was safe, when in fact the mold persisted.8
Further, as early as 2002, an engineering consultant as well as the hospital’s lead engineer warned the hospital about “filthy conditions” of its air-handling units, including water leaks, birds in fan shafts, units “rotting out” and failure to test equipment.9
The hospital also published an internal investigation in 2007 looking into three Aspergillus infections, but concluded they were isolated incidents. Seattle Children’s CEO Dr. Jeff Sperring said in a statement:10

“As we have previously shared, Seattle Children’s has had seven Aspergillus surgical site infections since the summer of 2018. We are deeply saddened that one of those patients died. As we have looked more closely at our history of Aspergillus infections, we believe there are connections between recent and past infections. Between 2001 and 2014, seven patients developed Aspergillus surgical site infections. Tragically, five of those patients died. At the time, we believed most of these were isolated infections. However, we now believe that these infections were likely caused by the air handling systems that serve our operating rooms. Looking back, we should have recognized these connections sooner.”

Dangers of Aspergillus Infection
Aspergillus is a common type of mold found both indoors and outdoors, in decaying leaves and on plants, trees and compost.11 While most people come in contact with Aspergillus daily without any ill effects, certain strains can be dangerous for people with weakened immune systems or lung diseases.
Disease caused by Aspergillus is known as aspergillosis, which can lead to allergic reactions and infections in the lungs or other organs.12 The CDC lists seven types of aspergillosis, which range in severity from mild to life threatening:13

Allergic broncopulmonary aspergillosis, which occurs when the mold causes allergy symptoms and lung inflammation.Allergic Aspergillus sinusitis, which occurs when the mold causes sinus inflammation and symptoms of a sinus infection.

Azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus, caused by A. fumigatus, a type of Aspergillus that’s resistant to certain medications used to treat it.Aspergilloma, or “fungus ball,” which refers to a ball of Aspergillus that grows in the lungs or sinuses.

Chronic pulmonary aspergillosis, which is Aspergillus infection that causes cavities and sometimes fungal balls in the lungs.Invasive aspergillosis, a serious infection that typically affects people with weakened immune systems; it commonly affects the lungs but may spread to other areas.

Cutaneous (skin) aspergillosis, which occurs when the mold enters a wound or other skin break and leads to infection.

Aspergillosis isn’t a reportable disease in the U.S., which means numbers on its incidence are scarce, but the CDC estimates that nearly 15,000 aspergillosis-associated hospitalizations occurred in the U.S. in 2014, with costs of $1.2 billion.14 Further, they noted, “In a broad U.S. health care network of intensive care unit autopsy studies, aspergillosis was one of the top four most common diagnoses that likely lead to death.”15
Aspergillosis Outbreaks in Hospitals

While clusters of cases of dangerous invasive aspergillosis are rare in the general population, outbreaks have occurred previously in hospital settings, particularly among immunocompromised patients.
Recently, lung infections caused by Aspergillus have been reported in people hospitalized with severe influenza and, in one study, invasive pulmonary aspergillosis occurred even in people without a compromised immune system.16 The CDC also reported:17
“Although most cases of aspergillosis are sporadic (not part of an outbreak), outbreaks of invasive aspergillosis occasionally occur in hospitalized patients. Invasive aspergillosis outbreaks are often found to be associated with hospital construction or renovation, which can increase the amount of airborne Aspergillus, resulting in respiratory infections or surgical site infections in high-risk patients. Outbreaks of primary cutaneous aspergillosis and central nervous system aspergillosis in association with the use of contaminated medical devices have also been described. The incubation period for aspergillosis is unclear and likely varies depending on the dose of Aspergillus and the host immune response.”

While it’s virtually impossible to avoid exposure to aspergillus in the environment, hospitals have a responsibility to ensure they aren’t exposing patients to this potentially dangerous fungus via an ill-maintained air handling system. As for Seattle Children’s, they’re installing new air handlers in an attempt to resolve the mold issues:18
“Seattle Children’s will install a new rooftop air handler as well as custom-built, in-room high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters in every operating room and adjacent supply area. HEPA is an extremely effective filtration system that removes 99.97 percent of particles from the air that passes through the filter. This is the highest level of filtration found in operating rooms today. These operating rooms will remain closed until the enhancements are fully in place.”

Is There Mold in Your Home?
Common health problems that can be attributed to poor and potentially toxic indoor air quality courtesy of mold growth include but are not limited to the following. If you have any of these issues, it may be worthwhile to consider your indoor air quality, and the possibility that your health problems may be related to mold.

Frequent headaches
Depression
Chronic fatigue

Allergies

Neurological problems; poor concentration and forgetfulness
Skin rashes

Stomach and digestive problems, such as dysbiosis, leaky gut and frequent diarrhea
Chronic sinusitis

Joint aches and pains

Muscle wasting
Frequent fevers
Asthma or trouble breathing

To determine if mold is lurking in your home, first look for signs of visible mold or musty odors. However, not all mold is easily detectable, so if you can’t see any visible traces of mold, take an air sample and use a moisture meter to determine the moisture level in the area.
Wood flooring should have a maximum moisture content of 10% to 12%, for instance, as anything above that is a breeding ground for mold. Exterior walls should not have a moisture content above 15%. In addition to air sampling, proper lab testing of bulk samples of the mold growth is recommended.
This will require cutting out a piece of the affected area. The U.S. EPA has a test called Environmental Relative Moldiness Index (ERMI), which tests for 31 different species of mold. If all you have is a small area of surface mold, you probably don’t have to call in an expert. However, only attempt to clean it if it’s limited to the surface of a small area. Any deep-rooted mold will require professional assistance to remediate.
Mold Is Serious, Here’s What You Can Do

Download Interview Transcript

Aspergillosis is an example of what Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker calls biotoxic illness. Most biotoxic illnesses are difficult to diagnose and treat as all of them, including mold, affect multiple systems in your body and produce a wide array of symptoms.
Shoemaker, a pioneer in the field of biotoxin-related illness, explains that the underlying commonality, whether the disease is caused by dinoflagellates, mold or spirochetes, for example, is chronic inflammation. The inflammation induced by exposure to the toxins and metabolic products produced by these microorganisms is what wreaks havoc on your health. “In order to treat them, we need to both remove them from exposure and remove toxin from their body,” Shoemaker said. Many of his patients have had success using cholestyramine (CSM), a rarely used cholesterol drug that binds to not just cholesterol, but just about everything of a particular molecular shape and size. “Binding CSM to the toxin prevents its reabsorption. There’s another cholesterol-lowering resin called Welchol that also has these net positive charges … Even though people have used clays — and Bentonite is one — with some success, cholestyramine is so much better that people would put up with the common side effects of constipation and some reflux,” he said. This is only the first step in his protocol, which includes 10 additional steps intended to stop the inflammatory process initiated by the mold (or other toxin) exposure. For more information, SurvivingMold.com is a great resource for medical practitioners and patients alike.19
I also discuss helpful tests and diagnostic tools for mold-related illness in “Mold: The Common Toxin That Can Be Far More Damaging Than Heavy Metals.” Overall, your best approach is to find a well-informed physician with expertise in environmental medicine. Together you can devise an appropriate treatment plan. For a list of physicians with experience in treating mold-associated disease, see DrThrasher.org.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/12/17/seattle-childrens-hospital-mold.aspx

Plant-based milk has become increasingly popular. Once regarded as a fringe product geared toward “health nuts,” it’s now gone mainstream and is available at many supermarkets and coffee shops. The health benefits, if any, of alternative milks are debatable, and new health guidelines released by a group of health organizations suggest most young children should not consume it.
Childhood nutrition sets the stage for optimal development and lifelong health. What your child drinks is part of this equation, as is what your child does not drink. It’s widely known that sugar-sweetened beverages and even fruit juice should be limited or avoided, but milk is largely considered to be a go-to beverage option for children. However, not all milk is created equal.
Most Young Children Should Avoid Plant-Based Milk

A panel of experts with the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Heart Association prepared the healthy beverage consensus statement, “Healthy Beverage Consumption in Early Childhood.”1
For infants aged zero to 12 months, the panel stated plant milks are not recommended. For those aged 1 to 5 years, plant milks were also not recommended for exclusive consumption in place of dairy milk. This includes plant milks and nondairy beverages such as rice, nut and seed milk, or milk made from coconut, oats, peas or blends of these ingredients. The rationale, according to the statement:2

“Plant-based milks are growing in popularity, but it is important to note that they are not nutritionally equivalent to cow’s milk. They have varying nutritional pro les based on their plant source and many often contain added sugars.”

Two studies were cited that compared the nutritional value of cow’s milk with nondairy beverages. One found that cow’s milk has higher protein content and quality compared to most nondairy milk beverages.3
The other concluded, “[I]f the goal is to provide a beverage nutritionally similar to cow’s milk for growing children, then, with the exception of soy, NDMAs [nondairy milk alternatives] are not nutritionally similar to cow’s milk and are not a good substitute.”4 The expert panel noted:5

“Although plant milks may be fortified to attain similar nutrient levels as cow’s milk, it is not known whether the bioavailability of these added nutrients is comparable to that of their naturally-occurring counterparts in cow’s milk.

These studies concluded that cow’s milk should not be removed from the diets of young children unless there is a medical indication or specific dietary preference, and that non-dairy milk beverages should not be considered adequate nutritional substitutes for cow’s milk until nutrient quality and bioavailability are established.”

Almond and Soy Milk Are Not Healthy Options
Almond milk is loaded with oxalates and should be avoided. Not only can oxalates increase your risk of kidney stones but there is increasing evidence that high oxalate consumption can cause a wide variety of disorders and there is pretty clear evidence that oxalates can cause excess oxidative stress and increase mitochondrial dysfunction.The panel made an exception for soy milk; however, this beverage is not a healthy choice for children or adults. Most soybeans in the U.S. are genetically engineered to be herbicide tolerant. They are doused with toxic glyphosate, a chemical linked to cancer and other health risks. Soy is also high in antinutrients called lectins, including soybean agglutinin (SBA), which may alter intestinal health and gut flora.6
Other antinutrients in soy include saponins, soyatoxin, phytates (which prevent the absorption of certain minerals), oxalates, protease inhibitors, estrogens (which can block the hormone estrogen and disrupt endocrine function) and goitrogens (interfering with your thyroid function) as well as a blood clot-inhibiting substance called hemagglutinin.
The expert panel noted that children with allergies may choose to consume plant milks, but even in these instances, soy milk is not a healthy choice. It’s also not a safe choice for infant formula either, in part because it exposes infants to hormone-mimicking substances. As noted in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives:7

“Early-life exposure to estrogenic compounds affects the development of the reproductive system in rodent models and humans. Soy products, which contain phytoestrogens such as genistein, are one source of exposure in infants fed soy formula, and they result in high serum concentrations.”

Are Plant Milks Ever Healthy?
One major problem with plant milks, particularly if you’re giving it to a child as a significant portion of their diet, is that they don’t offer much nutrition. Almond milk, for instance, may contain only 2% almonds.8 The rest of the beverage may be made largely of water, sugar and other additives, like carrageenan, a highly inflammatory additive that may cause inflammation in your gastrointestinal system and related problems.9
Rice milk is also problematic due to potential arsenic contamination, which may surpass the maximum levels allowed in drinking water.10 That being said, if you choose unsweetened, organic options, most plant milks aren’t necessarily harmful, but they’re not going to provide children with the nutrition their growing bodies need.
What they will do is fill up the child, making them less likely to eat the foods they need, like healthy fats and vegetables. The panel stated:11

“For 0 to 12-month-olds, plant milks/non-dairy beverages should not be used as a substitute for breast milk or infant formula. Use of alternative beverages as a major component of the diet during this period has been associated with malnutrition.”

Certain plant milks, particularly coconut milk, can provide some nutrition, but you’re almost always better off choosing the whole food instead, especially for children. So instead of serving a child almond milk, choose a handful of organic almonds.
Is Cow’s Milk a Healthy Choice?

The assumption that all children need milk to grow up strong is outdated. The calcium and protein found in milk can be consumed via a variety of dairy sources, vegetables and other foods. It’s not necessary to give children milk, provided they’re consuming a healthy, whole-food diet otherwise.
If your child feels ill after drinking dairy milk, a lactose intolerance, casein allergy or another type of dairy sensitivity may be present, and regular cows’ milk may be better off avoided. If you’re still looking for a dairy beverage, keep in mind that some people who have problems drinking regular dairy do fine when drinking raw, organic grass fed milk, which is far easier on your digestive system. Raw, grass fed A2-only milk may be even more ideal.
Due to the unique needs of their developing bodies, it is important to ensure children are getting the full spectrum of vitamins and minerals, as well as sufficient amounts of high-quality fat and protein, on a daily basis. However, this can come from a number of healthy sources, not necessarily milk.
Have You Heard of Cockroach Milk?

Speaking of milk alternatives, one of the most outrageous to surface is cockroach milk — but when you learn about the potential benefits, it doesn’t sound so outrageous after all. The female Pacific beetle cockroach is the only known cockroach species to be viviparous, meaning they give birth to live young and nurse their offspring.
As cockroach embryos drink their mother’s milk, it concentrates inside their guts and forms tiny crystals, which are considered a complete food with proteins, fats and sugars. Because cockroach milk has quadruple the nutrition value in comparison to cow’s milk, it may in the future be tapped to feed the world.12
What Are the Healthiest Beverage Choices for Children?

Healthy beverage choices are an important component of an overall healthy diet, particularly in childhood. As the panel explained:13

“Establishing healthy dietary patterns in early childhood (0 to 5 years) is important to help prevent future diet-related chronic diseases, as well as to support optimal physical and cognitive growth and development and overall health.

Healthy beverage intake is critical in early childhood as beverages can make a significant contribution to dietary intake during this period, and thus may serve as important sources of essential nutrients.”

If cockroach milk is too “out there,” and plant milks aren’t really healthy, what should you give your children to drink? From zero to 6 months, infants need only breastmilk. At 6 to 12 months, breastmilk along with a small amount of pure water (one-fourth to 1 cup a day) can be given.
For those older than 12 months, the panel recommended a combination of pure water and milk, along with a small amount of fruit juice (no more than 0.5 to 0.75 cups daily)14 — an addition I don’t recommend due to the high sugar content. And, while the panel recommended the water you give your children be fluoridated, I don’t recommend that either, as research confirms that fluoride lowers children’s IQ levels.
Perhaps most notable are the beverages the panel does not recommend for children aged zero to 5, which include:

Plant milks and other nondairy beverages, unless medically indicated
Flavored milk, such as chocolate or strawberry milk

Toddler milk, which often contains added sugars
Sugar-sweetened beverages

Beverages with low-calorie, or artificial, sweeteners
Caffeinated beverages

Unfortunately, many children are consuming far too many unhealthy beverages and not enough pure water, putting them at risk of diet-related chronic diseases such as obesity, Type 2 diabetes and dental caries. The panel stated:15

Many infants consume milk and 100% juice prior to their first birthday, which increases the risk of nutrient deficiencies and anemia
Among 2- to 5-year-olds, 44% consume a sugar-sweetened beverage daily
The prevalence of sugar-sweetened beverage consumption increases throughout childhood

To replace sugar-sweetened beverages, many children enjoy homemade smoothies made from kefir (fermented milk) and berries. If you’re having a hard time getting your child to drink water, try adding in some healthy flavor, such as fresh lemon or lime juice, cucumber slices or crushed mint leaves.
Sparkling mineral water can add some variety, but the fact remains that, once you’re past 6 to 12 months and no longer breastfeeding, your body needs pure water, and plenty of it. Swapping out sweetened beverages, plant milks and artificially sweetened drinks for pure water will go a long way toward protecting your child’s health, both now and in the years to come.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/10/05/plant-based-milk.aspx

Children are spending an alarming amount of time watching media on various screens and devices, but among them, Google-owned YouTube is emerging as one of the biggest threats to their well-being.
In fact, Google must pay a record $170 million to settle allegations by the Federal Trade Commission and the New York attorney general, which claim YouTube collected children’s personal information without parents’ consent. Broken down, Google will pay $136 million to the FTC and $34 million to New York.
The allegations include that YouTube violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) by using persistent identifiers, also known as cookies, which track users, on child-directed YouTube channels without parents’ consent.1 According to the FTC, YouTube earned millions of dollars via the cookies by selling targeted ads.
FTC Chairman Joe Simons said in a news release, “YouTube touted its popularity with children to prospective corporate clients. Yet when it came to complying with COPPA, the company refused to acknowledge that portions of its platform were clearly directed to kids. There’s no excuse for YouTube’s violations of the law.”2 The penalty is the largest ever obtained by the FTC in a COPPA case.
A study by Ofcom, the U.K.’s communications regulator, also revealed that YouTube was the most popular platform among children. It was the go-to spot for children to find and watch content, “and the place they did so most frequently — many of them every day.”3
In one of the most ironic findings, children enjoyed watching people pursue hobbies on YouTube that they themselves did not do, or had recently given up.4 They also enjoyed the ability to find whatever content they wanted, whenever they wanted it.
“As YouTube responds to demand, it can offer a seemingly limitless choice of content. YouTube offers everything they could possibly want, and then allows them to easily access more of what they like the most,” the researchers explained5—and herein lies part of the problem.
While collecting information, YouTube is able to tailor content directly to your child, presenting an irresistible stream of digital content that children have a hard time turning off. Like the way food manufacturers engineered potato chips to offer an addictive mix of salt, crunch and unhealthy fats, YouTube has been set up to make your kids crave it.
Autoplay and Other Tactics Keep Kids Glued to the Screen

Apps like YouTube collect data, such as the number of “likes,” and use it to select content your children may be interested in. The content is then played automatically, one video after another, making it difficult for children to look away.
Baroness Beeban Kidron, who is leading a campaign for children’s online rights, told the New York Times, “The idea that it’s O.K. to nudge kids into endless behaviors, just because you are pushing their evolutionary buttons — it’s not a fair fight … It’s little Timmy in his bedroom versus Mark Zuckerberg in his Valley.”6
The personalization aspect is emerging as one of the keys drawing children in. The Ofcom study revealed, in fact, that children were most attracted to content that they could view on their own device, exercise maximum choice over and that directly fed them content of interest, i.e., YouTube.7 They explained how YouTube presents the perfect storm of personalization to capture kids:8

“The way content is presented on YouTube also makes for a very different platform experience. For example, videos on YouTube are recommended to individual users with one of the most personalised experiences on the internet. The content available on YouTube is also refreshed second by second by millions of users worldwide, dynamically responding to what is popular.

Organisations and individuals alike create and upload content with the sole aim of maximising views, and therefore advertising revenues, making use of YouTube analytics to see exactly what is appealing to users and generating more content of that type.

As a result, the videos available on YouTube adapt rapidly in response to what users watch, making it easier and easier for people to find and discover content that appeals to them. In this research, we found that children could easily access exactly what they wanted to watch and were being served with an endless stream of recommendations tailored exactly to their taste.”

Baroness Fights for Children’s Online Rights
Kidron began the 5Rights foundation, which aims to protect children’s digital rights. Just as children are afforded certain protections in the real world, Kidron believes they should be extended to the digital world.
At issue is those pop-up boxes that ask users to click “accept” in order to access content, and in so doing surrender much personal privacy, along with so-called “nudge” techniques that encourage users to stay engaged. 5Rights notes that the very design of these technologies is costing children their childhood, one notification and “Like” at a time:9

“Persuasive design strategies are the hooks and tricks that keep users online; auto-play, auto-suggestion, Likes, re-tweets, notifications, buzzes, pings, typing bubbles, Streaks…

Each on their own offer a small symbol of personal worth or fuzzy reward, together they provide a constant, damaging ecosystem of distraction, competition and invasion that and with it an epidemic of anxiety, sleeplessness and negative impacts on health education family and social life.”

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), in its draft Age Appropriate Design Code, is considering 16 standards that would help to protect children’s online privacy. The Code, which was proposed by Kidron, calls on online services to automatically provide the following protections for children under 18:10

Automatically set high privacy settings
Collect and retain only the minimum amount of personal data
Not share children’s data
Geolocation services should be switched off by default
Nudge techniques that encourage children to provide personal data, lessen privacy settings or keep using the app longer should not be used

Tech giants aren’t happy with the Code, including defining a “child” as under 18 instead of 13 or 16. Further, the protections are slated to affect all sites in Britain, not just those geared to children — another aspect the tech industry is fighting against.
According to The New York Times, “A children’s online privacy law in the United States, by contrast, applies only to nursery rhyme apps and other services directed at children under 13.”11
This, however, is part of the problem, as while YouTube and many social media platforms state they’re designed for users over 13, many children under this age tune into such sites daily. One Ofcom report found 46% of 11-year-olds and 51% of 12-year-olds have social media profiles, while 90% of 12- to 15-year-olds use YouTube.12
However, as part of the FTC settlement, Google and YouTube must make changes to help protect children under 13 years of age who are using their online services. According to the news release:13

“In addition to the monetary penalty, the proposed settlement requires Google and YouTube to develop, implement, and maintain a system that permits channel owners to identify their child-directed content on the YouTube platform so that YouTube can ensure it is complying with COPPA.

In addition, the companies must notify channel owners that their child-directed content may be subject to the COPPA Rule’s obligations and provide annual training about complying with COPPA for employees who deal with YouTube channel owners.”

Spying on Your Kids in Schools

Google and its parent company, Alphabet, in addition to owning YouTube and Android, one of the most popular operating systems worldwide, are also infiltrating U.S. classrooms via Chromebooks and Google apps.
In 2012, less than 1% of the tablets and laptops used in the U.S. school system were Google Chromebooks. By 2015, 51% of the devices sold to K-12 schools were Chromebooks,14 which come complete with a host of Google apps.
While Google has pledged to protect student privacy, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) found that the company is tracking students’ online habits and even using it to create profiles and targeted advertisements.15 What data is Google collecting about students? According to EFF:16

“When students log in to Google, whether through Chromebooks or through GAFE, Google collects a huge variety of personal data by default: search history and which results students click on, videos they search for and watch on YouTube, usage data and preferences, Gmail messages, G+ profiles and photos, docs, and other Google-hosted content and content that flows through Google’s systems.

Additionally, if students use Chrome (the only browser available on Chromebooks), Google also collects the following information by default: browsing history, bookmarked URLs, passwords, website form entries, and which extensions are installed—and Google stores this information in the cloud (rather than locally on the Chromebook itself).”
Google Is Listening at Home Too
If you use smart speakers in your home, like Google Home smart speakers or the Google Assistant smartphone app, there’s a chance people are listening to your requests, and even may be listening when you wouldn’t expect. When you say “OK Google,” the command to “wake up” the speakers or virtual assistant, the recording starts, according to an investigation by VRT NWS.17
“Not everyone is aware of the fact that everything you say to your Google smart speakers and your Google Assistant is being recorded and stored. But that is clearly stated in Google’s terms and conditions,” VRT NWS reported, after a Google contractor gave them access to 1,000 voice recordings.18 Further, it employs people to listen to the recordings and transcribe them, in order to improve their algorithms.
Personal information, like addresses, names and companies, are often included, raising serious privacy concerns. As VRT NWS noted:19

“Knowing that people who work for Google indirectly are listening to such recordings raises questions about privacy. In order to avoid excerpts being automatically linked to a user, they are disconnected from the user’s information.

They delete the user name and replace it with an anonymous serial number. But … it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to recover someone’s identity; you simply have to listen carefully to what is being said.

What’s more, if they don’t know how it is written, these employees have to look up every word, address, personal name or company name on Google or on Facebook. In that way, they often soon discover the identity of the person speaking.”

It’s not only Google’s smart speakers that are recording queries, which are then reviewed by human workers. Apple’s Siri does too, and was accused of being activated by similar sounding phrases to “hey Siri” and recording private moments including discussions between doctors and patients, arguments, business deals, criminal deals, sexual encounters and more.20
Out of the 1,000 Google recordings reviewed VRT NWS, 153 of them reportedly occurred when they shouldn’t have been and “the ‘OK Google’ command was not clearly given.”21
Google ‘Pausing’ Spy Technique While Under Investigation

In response to the investigation, Google announced that it had “paused” its human reviews of queries to Google smart speakers, telling Ars Technica, “Shortly after we learned about the leaking of confidential Dutch audio data, we paused language reviews of the Assistant to investigate. This paused reviews globally.”22
Google stated they would not be transcribing voice recordings starting August 1, 2019 and continuing for at least three months. They also stated that users can turn off audio data storage or choose to have it auto-deleted every three or 18 months.
This represents only a sliver of the assault to your privacy that occurs when you regularly use Google products online, or allow your children to do so, however. To be part of the solution, and help protect your privacy, I encourage you to take the following actions:

• Boycott Google by avoiding any and all Google products:

? Stop using Google search engines. Alternatives include DuckDuckGo23 and Startpage24
? Uninstall Google Chrome and use Brave or Opera browser instead, available for all computers and mobile devices.25 From a security perspective, Opera is far superior to Chrome and offers a free VPN (virtual private network) service to further preserve your privacy
? If you have a Gmail account, try a non-Google email service such as ProtonMail,26 an encrypted email service based in Switzerland
? Stop using Google docs. Digital Trends has published an article suggesting a number of alternatives27
? If you’re a high school student, do not convert the Google accounts you created as a student into personal accounts

• Sign the “Don’t be evil” petition created by Citizens Against Monopoly

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/09/10/children-are-spending-more-time-online.aspx

Quitting smoking is likely one of the best things you can do for your health as traditional cigarettes cause damage to nearly every organ in your body. Vaping, or using e-cigarettes, is sometimes marketed as a way for adults to quit smoking, but there’s not enough evidence to demonstrate it helps.1
If you’re trying to quit smoking, the American Heart Association2 endorses using established methods. They suggest you don’t try vaping because you think it’s “cool” or “safe.” There is a perceived assurance e-cigs are safe and harmless. The vapor is often the odorless, making it difficult to detect once the device has been put away.
In a 2016 report,3 “E-Cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults,” the U.S. Surgeon General called the products unsafe and documented an alarming increase in use by young adults. The report also showed e-cigarettes are associated with the use of other tobacco products as well as challenges with brain development affecting the health and mental health of young adults.
In July 2018 the Verge reported4 on the difference between Juul salts using freebase nicotine and other e-cigarettes. The combination of freebase nicotine with benzoic acid creates a chemical reaction designed to be as easy to inhale as cigarettes. A company spokesperson, Victoria Davis, called fighting underage vaping a “top priority.” She said:5

“Juul is intended for adult smokers only who want to switch from combustible cigarettes. We cannot be more emphatic on this point: No young person or non-nicotine user should ever try Juul.”

Juul spends thousands in schools and camps

Davis’ commentary in 2018 does not line up with information presented to the House Oversight Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy, which viewed documents as part of an investigation into the role the company played in the vaping epidemic.6
Documents show “Juul spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund” programs, which an employee characterized as7 “our new understanding of how much our efforts seem to duplicate those of big tobacco.” In the same email thread, another employee expressed concerns about pulling out of the health fair as they would certainly lose the school as part of the pilot program.8
In a memo from the Subcommittee,9 an examination of the role Juul has played in teenage nicotine addiction was outlined. The memo stated Juul had deployed “a sophisticated program to enter schools” and direct its message at teenage children; it also targeted teenagers in summer camps and public out of school programs.
Internally,10 Juul maintained a division aimed at recruiting schools to present a program to students. In testimony about one presentation, a representative from Parents Against Vaping E-cigarettes said no parents or teachers were allowed in the room and the message from the company was the product was safe. During the presentation, the presenter did a demonstration of how to use the product.
The program paid the school system $10,000 to access the students in class, in summer school or at a Saturday school program.11 Additionally, they targeted teenagers by purchasing access to teens in a public out of school program,12 in one instance paying the Richmond, California, Police Activities League $89,000 to offer the Juul program.
At another time, the company paid $134,000 for access to children attending a five-week summer camp, recruiting those in grades 3 through 12 and providing them with a “holistic health education program.”13

Juul also engaged social media influencers

Over the past decade, there has been a shift from celebrities to social media influencers behind the drive to purchase new beauty products, cars and clothing and to get involved in nonprofit organizations. Whereas before spokespeople have been recognizable celebrities, marketing companies now understand the power that social media influencers wield on personal brand recognition.14
Audiences appear to be more receptive to social media influencers who often are the first to try products and services.15 In one survey 70% of brand marketing agencies said they either “agreed” or “strongly agreed” their 2018 budgets aimed at social media influencers would increase; 89% thought this form of marketing could impact how people felt about their product.16
Juul was no exception. They put into place a sophisticated program used to promote their product online to young people.17 Documents obtained by the subcommittee show Juul hired the Grit Creative Group to find 280 influencers in the Los Angeles and New York area18 “to seed Juul product to over the course of three months.”
In a second contract with the same company, Juul sought to secure social media influencers who held a following of at least 30,000 to attend launch events and engage their efforts to establish a network to leverage their influence for the company. Just four months later, the company’s marketing update stated:19

“The Container Tour will get JUUL into the hands of over 12,500 influencers, subsequently introducing JUUL to over 1.5 million people.”

The subcommittee was given further evidence of the program designed by Juul with planning documentation, in an email showing an employee held the title “Influencer Manager” and another email indicating there may be an entire department devoted to addressing social media influencers within Juul.20

Company pushes addictive nicotine but tells teens it’s safe

The subcommittee met in late July 2019,21 hearing testimony from research experts, parents and Juul Labs. In addition, the subcommittee heard testimony from two teenagers who told Congress a Juul representative had repeatedly told their ninth-grade classroom the e-cigarette was totally safe and then went on to show the students the device. All the students were underage.22
One of the teens, 17-year-old Caleb Mintz, told Congress the representative was there as part of a mental health seminar during which teachers were not present. At just 17, Mintz cut to the chase on Juul’s marketing tactics when he said:23

“I believe the presenter was sending mixed messages by saying Juul was ‘totally safe’ and following up every totally safe statement with ‘but we don’t want you as customers.’ I believe that the presenter was playing on the rebellious side of teens, where when teens are told not to do something, they are more likely to do it.”

Following Mintz’s testimony, his 16-year-old friend Philip Fuhrman testified. CNN reported Fuhrman told Congress the Juul representative told him the24

“FDA was about to come out and say that Juul was 99% safer than cigarettes, and he said that that would happen very soon, and that it was in FDA approval while the talk was going on.”

In June 2018, Juul Labs was valued at $15 billion.25 While selling tobacco and nicotine to those addicted has been a good business model, Juul innovated the e-cigarette to a product delivering more nicotine than a cigarette and with a sensation similar to smoking. This is all thanks to nicotine salts, a chemical base used to deliver nicotine.26
Each puff from a Juul delivers more nicotine than other e-cigarettes while reducing throat discomfort at higher concentrations. And, because nicotine salts work well in smaller devices, there’s no need to opt for a larger, bulkier e-cigarette product. Using new technology, Juul salts in one cartridge delivers roughly the amount of nicotine as found in a pack of cigarettes.27
The vaping community acknowledges nicotine salts are potentially more addictive since they lead to higher blood levels of nicotine over a short amount of time.28 Juul sponsored a study demonstrating their29 “tobacco-flavored nicotine salt-based ENDS were well tolerated and provided similar nicotine exposure and perceptual satisfaction compared to tobacco-flavored combusted cigarettes.”

Reactions in vape juice form airway irritating compounds

The long-term effects of heating e-cigarette juice have not been determined, but researchers have now found these liquids are reacting on the shelf and forming chemicals called acetyls. In a study published in Nicotine and Tobacco Research,30 data show the liquids may form new chemicals as they are sitting on the shelf with unexpected toxicological effects.
The researchers recommended a rigorous process to monitor the changes in chemical composition and continue to analyze the situation in order to identify the potential health hazards to users. In other words, chemical reactions that occur once the liquid is placed in the delivery device and before heating, may increase the potential risk for those using e-cigarettes.31
The chemicals in question are from flavorings for vanilla, cherry, citrus and cinnamon. Sven-Eric Jordt, Ph.D., from Duke University, and senior author of the study commented on the results, saying:32

“These individual ingredients are combining to form more complex chemicals that are not disclosed to the user. When inhaled, these compounds will persist in the body for some time, activating irritant pathways. Over time, this mild irritation could cause an inflammatory response.”

Clusters of seizures and pulmonary infections

Doctors and hospitals have found vaping is associated with a cluster of neurological conditions.33 The FDA has received reports of 127 people who have experienced seizures or other neurological symptoms potentially related to the use of e-cigarettes. Although experts have not yet established a link, they are investigating if the nicotine in e-cigarettes are causing neurological disturbances.
NPR reports34 there have been 15 cases of severe respiratory injury in Wisconsin and 15 more are suspected. Six other cases were reported in Illinois and four in Minnesota, prompting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to work with health departments to determine the cause.
The problem was first found by Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin after eight healthy teenagers were hospitalized with rapid onsets of coughing, weight loss and breathing difficulties. Some were admitted to the Intensive Care Unit for treatment. At this point, Dr. Thomas Haupt from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services says the only common denominator has been vaping.35

Vaping companies sue over regulations to protect kids

In 2009, the law gave the FDA power over combustible cigarettes but not e-cigarettes. In 2016 the agency expanded those regulations but have repeatedly delayed the timeline to review the products that have come to market. Recently, an e-cigarette industry group sued to delay the review arguing the deadline of May 2020 could wipe out many smaller companies.36
Unfortunately, while manufacturers and regulators argue over legalities, children and teens are being caught in the middle. Exposure at a young age to nicotine affects the reward center in the brain and increases their risk of engaging in addictive behavior as they grow into adulthood.
Additionally, addiction at a young age leaves these teens with no good treatment options for the addiction to a product designed specifically to increase the users risk of becoming addicted. In other words, children as young as 11 are becoming addicted to a product for which medical science has yet to come up with a treatment option safe at their age.
If you are addicted to cigarettes or e-cigarettes and would like to take control of your health and quit the habit, I suggest my previous article, “Quitting Smoking Starts in the Brain,” to learn a free technique that may make the process easier. Take the profit out of the tobacco industry’s pocket and put it back in yours.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/08/28/juul-funded-program-to-hook-kids-on-vaping.aspx

In the U.S., an estimated 3.2 million adolescents between the ages of 12 and 17 suffer from depression, defined as having at least one major depressive episode in a year. This accounts for 13.3% of adolescents, who experience a period of at least two weeks with a depressed mood, loss of interest in daily activities and other symptoms, such as problems with sleep, appetite, energy, concentration or feelings of self-worth.1
Depression among adolescents is on the rise, increasing by 30% in the last 10 years.2 Many factors may be to blame, but one that continues to fly under the radar is diet, particularly an unhealthy one based on processed foods and fast foods.
Junk Food Diet Linked to Depression in Teens

Researchers at the University of Alabama at Birmingham looked into the role two dietary factors play in symptoms of depression among adolescents, in this case African-American teens who may be at an increased risk of both unhealthy diet and depression.
They analyzed the excretion of sodium and potassium in the urine of 84 urban, low?income adolescents. Higher levels of sodium in the urine can be an indication of a diet high in sodium, such as processed foods and salty snacks. A low level of potassium, meanwhile, is indicative of a diet lacking in fruits, vegetables and other healthy potassium-rich foods.
As might be expected, higher sodium and lower potassium excretion rates were associated with more frequent symptoms of depression at follow up 1.5 years later. “This study was the first to demonstrate relationships between objective indicators of unhealthy diet and subsequent changes in depressive symptoms in youth,” the study noted.3
It’s possible that eating foods high in sodium and low in potassium may lead to depression by negatively influencing neurotransmitters and neural function during a time that is particularly vulnerable.
“Given the substantial brain development that occurs during adolescence, individuals in this developmental period may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of diet on the neural mechanisms underlying emotion regulation and depression,” the researchers wrote. In addition, poor diet could influence depression by disturbing the gut microbiome, which could further influence brain function.4
Past studies have also confirmed the diet-depression link among children and teens. When researchers systematically reviewed 12 studies involving children and adolescents, an association was revealed between unhealthy diet and poorer mental health, as well as between a good-quality diet and better mental health.5
The consumption of junk food has also been associated with psychiatric distress and violent behaviors in children and adolescents, which includes worry, depression, confusion, insomnia, anxiety, aggression and worthless feelings, as well as physical fighting, being a victim and bullying.6
Unhealthy Diet Linked to Depression in Adults, Too

While teens may be especially vulnerable to the negative effects of a poor diet, adults, too, may suffer mentally from a diet based on unhealthy foods. An inflammatory diet, which can include one high in processed foods, was associated with recurrence of depressive symptoms in women, for starters.7
Likewise, in 2018, a systematic review and meta-analysis with a total of 101,950 participants also found an association between a pro-inflammatory diet and risk of depression.8 People who ate a pro-inflammatory diet were 1.4 times more likely to suffer from depression.9 “Thus, adopting an anti-inflammatory diet may be an effective intervention or preventative means of reducing depression risk and symptoms,” according to the study.10
Sugar intake, a known inflammatory food, is also specifically linked to common mental disorder and depression. Research published in 2002 also found a “highly significant correlation between sugar consumption and the annual rate of depression.”11
Men consuming more than 67 grams of sugar per day were 23% more likely to develop depression over the course of five years than those whose sugar consumption was less than 39.5 grams per day.12 Several potential mechanisms were discussed for why a high-sugar diet may influence depression risk, including:13

Sugar may decrease levels of brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), leading to hippocampal atrophy in depression
Consuming sugar may increase circulating inflammatory markers, which could lead to depressed mood
A high-sugar diet may cause an exaggerated insulin response, influencing hormone levels and mood
Sugar has addiction-like effects, which could influence dopamine and mood
A high-sugar diet may lead to obesity, which could contribute to depression via inflammatory pathways as well as psychosocial factors

Eating Real Food Is Key for Good Mental Health
You can improve your mood and your mental health by tweaking your diet for the better. Researchers even compiled a list of five key dietary recommendations for the prevention of depression, based on current published evidence. The basic premise is to eat real food. The five strategies include:14

Follow “traditional” dietary patterns
Increase consumption of fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds
Eat lots of foods rich in omega-3 fats
Replace unhealthy foods with wholesome nutritious foods
Limit your intake of processed foods, fast foods, commercial bakery goods and sweets

That last one is truly essential, in part because of the additives in processed foods, such as emulsifiers. Previous research has shown that adding the food emulsifiers CMC and P80 to the diet leads to low-grade inflammation, obesity and metabolic abnormalities in mice, while disturbing gut microbiota.15
Because your gut and brain communicate via your gut-brain axis, altering microbes in your gut can influence anxiety and behavior, leading researchers to speculate that consuming emulsifiers may also influence mental health and behavior.
Likewise, in 2015, it was previously found that low concentrations of emulsifiers (CMC and P80) induced low-grade inflammation, obesity and metabolic syndrome in mice.16 “Depression and inflammation fuel one another,” researchers wrote in the American Journal of Psychiatry, adding that in the case of inflammation, “depression fans the flames and feasts on the heat.”17
Making sure you’re getting enough anti-inflammatory omega-3s in your diet, either from wild Alaskan salmon, sardines, herring, mackerel and anchovies or a high-quality animal-based omega-3 supplement, is also crucial for optimal mental health. B vitamins are also important, and low levels of B vitamins are common in patients with depression, while vitamin B supplements have been shown to improve symptoms.18
Further, in a study of 9,700 vegetarian (including a small number of vegan) men, vegetarians were more likely to suffer from depression than meat eaters, even after adjusting for variables like job status, family history and number of children.19 Vegetarians tend to have lower intakes of omega-3 fats, vitamin B12 and folate, which could affect depression risk.
In the case of folate, it helps your body produce mood-regulating neurotransmitters, including serotonin and dopamine. One 2012 study found people who consumed the most folate had a lower risk of depression than those who ate the least.20 Addressing nutrient deficiencies, as well as optimizing your diet, are keys to mental health and should be first-line strategies to treating depression.
How to Get Teens to Eat Better

It’s clear that your mental health depends, at least in part, on what you eat. Less clear is how to get teenagers — a population keen on junk food — to eat better. One simple tip? Let teenagers know they’re being manipulated by food marketers.21 Students who read an exposé that revealed the manipulative practices used by marketing companies chose to eat less junk food and drank more water instead of soda.
Students who read about the junk food industry’s manipulation also chose healthier foods for the remainder of the school year — a period of about three months. Tapping into teens’ natural desire to rebel against authority proved to be an effective way to prompt significant changes in dietary choices.
Teaching children to eat right from a young age can alter their health significantly, even beyond mood and depression. In one study, eating fast food three or more times per week was associated with an increased risk of severe asthma, rhinitis and eczema.22
Children who eat more fast food also progress slower academically, with test score gains about 20 percent lower in children who ate the most fast food compared to those who ate none.23 One British study also revealed that kids who ate a predominantly processed food diet at age 3 had lower IQ scores at age 8.5.24
Junk Food Marketing Targets Youth

Yet, children are exposed to junk food marketing 27.3 times a day, at home, in public spaces and even at school. Marketing for sugary drinks, fast food, candy and snack foods were the types most commonly encountered by the children in one study.25
With the continual barrage of marketing and junk food’s highly addictive nature, it’s easy for teens to fall into a trap of unhealthy eating. As a result, even the World Health Organization is calling for more protections for children from the harmful effects of junk food and junk food marketing:26

“Food advertising and other forms of marketing have been shown to influence children’s food preferences, purchasing behaviour and overall dietary behaviour. Marketing has also been associated with an increased risk of overweight and obesity in children.

The habits children develop early in life may encourage them to adopt unhealthy dietary practices which persist into adulthood, increasing the likelihood of overweight, obesity and associated health problems such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases.”

Depression, unfortunately, can also be added to those health problems, so in addition to modeling healthy eating behaviors for your teen by eating right yourself, have a serious conversation about the profit-driven motives behind junk food ads. It just may prompt your teen to rebel in a good way and choose healthier, real foods instead of processed junk.
Finally, if you think your teenager is suffering from depression, keep a close watch for signs they may be contemplating suicide. If there are any doubts, please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, a toll-free number: 1-800-273-TALK (8255), or call 911 or take your teen to your nearest hospital emergency department for help.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/09/12/link-between-fast-food-and-depression.aspx

According to the most recent data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,1 39.8% of all U.S. adults are obese. The same data show the obesity prevalence in children ages 2 to 19 years is 18.5%, and is expected to rise to 20.6% in adolescents from 12 to 19 years.2
According to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases,3 an individual who weighs more than what’s considered normal for their height is described as overweight or obese. According to the CDC, the percentage of youth who are overweight or obese has more than tripled since the 1970s.4
There are several factors contributing to these rising percentages, including shorter sleep duration, metabolic inefficiency, poor eating and low levels of physical activity.5 Children who are obese are also more likely to develop health conditions such as metabolic syndrome, musculoskeletal disorders, cardiovascular disease and disability.6
The growing number of those who are overweight and obese directly feeds the weight loss industry, which market researchers anticipated would grow in 2018 to a value of $70.3 billion.7
While the final reports are not yet out on whether those numbers were actually reached, a summary of Marketdata’s research8 showed the greatest gains were expected in the commercial chains and meal replacement programs, with a trend toward ketogenic diets as well as diets high in protein. One market that was identified as untapped and underserved included overweight adolescents.
WW losing consumer base opens up to teens

However, even as researchers anticipated strong growth in the weight loss industry, one iconic company has been posting losses. WW, the company formerly known as Weight Watchers, rebranded their company in September 2018 in an effort to become the world’s partner in wellness. According to Mindy Grossman, president and chief executive officer:9

“No matter what your goal is — to lose weight, eat healthier, move more, develop a positive mind-set, or all of the above — we will deliver science-based solutions that fit into people’s lives. This is just the beginning of our journey to become the world’s partner in wellness, and I am inspired by the potential for our impact.”

The company posted a poor fourth quarter 2018 performance with declining memberships for 2019. One marketing analyst believes this might be in part due to their rebranding, as well as the declining popularity of “dieting.”10 Early in 2018, the company offered free membership to teens between ages 13 to 17.
While the company said they were aiming at helping children develop good habits at a critical age, CNN11 reported Weight Watchers expected the tactic to engage young customers who could become loyal for years. The company’s goal was to impact 10 million lives with 5 million people in the program by the end of 2020 and another 5 million using other company content.12
The announcement angered many parents who felt counting calories and engaging in a weight loss program may give rise to unhealthy eating behaviors. However, Time magazine reports WW CEO Mindy Grossman responded by saying,13 “It actually strengthened our resolve and made us offensive.”
The answer didn’t go down well with Lori Ciotti, regional assistant vice president of the Renfrew Center, an organization that bills itself as having treated more than 75,000 adolescents for eating disorders.14 Ciotti spoke to Today, saying:15

“Dieting is a slippery slope into an eating disorder. It sends a message that one should not listen to their body’s hunger or fullness cues, so it’s really concerning from that perspective.

I think what (Weight Watchers) is doing here is offering a sanctioned method of counting calories or points or whatever they want to call it. It’s not teaching teens anything about self-care or self-worth. Instead it teaches them that their worth is about a number on a scale or the back of their jeans.”

Appearing to aim at childhood obesity, WW lowers the bar

As the company appears to take aim at childhood obesity in their well-publicized “wellness” campaigns, they have now announced the release of a smartphone app for children as young as 8.16 In their notice, Gary Foster, Ph.D., chief scientific officer at WW said:17

“At WW, we have decades of expertise in scaling science-backed behavior change programs, uniquely positioning us to be a part of the solution to address the prevalent public health problem of childhood obesity.

Alongside a distinguished group of leaders in pediatric health and nutrition, we’ve carefully developed this platform to be holistic, rewarding and inspirational so kids, teens and families get the tools and guidance they need to manage their environment and build and sustain healthy habits.”

The “distinguished group” to which Foster is likely referring are the scientists at Stanford Pediatric Weight Control Program.18 The Stanford program was licensed by the app’s founder, Joanna Strober, who helped develop the original app, Kurbo.19
That app was designed to help children learn healthier eating patterns without parental involvement. This app did not produce metrics like calories, carbs and sugar, but rewarded children for their food choices with a red, yellow or green light. After WW purchased the product, they made a few changes.20
With the WW version, parents have greater involvement, and for an optional monthly subscription, children may work with coaches. Parents also have the option of joining the sessions. WW also added options children can track, such as weight loss, body measurements and Snapchat-style tracking streaks.21 Children enter their height, weight, age and goals, and then log what they eat.22
In an earlier free progra, WW targeted teens aged 13 to 17. But in an effort to take advantage of smartphone applications, children’s affinity for using smartphones and the childhood obesity epidemic, WW aimed the Kurbo app at children as young as 8. In their press release, the company says the program:23

“ … builds on Kurbo’s evidence-based mobile platform to help children and teenagers, with support from their families, make lifestyle changes while receiving guidance around sustainable healthy eating, physical activity and mindfulness habits. Kurbo by WW is currently available in the U.S., and the free Kurbo app can be accessed through iOS Apple Store and Google Play.”

Dieting may have the opposite effect

Despite the company’s assertion that this is a program that teaches healthy eating choices, critics counter that it’s nothing more than a weight loss program for children, which they believe will contribute to children’s eating disorders. The backlash has gained a substantial following of people filing a Change.org petition calling for WW to remove the app.24
In explaining why she thinks WW’s app is counterintuitive to WW’s stated goals for it, Tomi Akanbi, clinical nutrition coordinator at Mount Sinai Adolescent Health Center, warns that encouraging children and teenagers to count calories like many adults do is dangerous.25 She routinely counsels patients who have adopted weight loss programs used by their parents without realizing that the nutritional needs of teens are different from those in other age groups.
By focusing on calories, many teenagers tend to skip meals or replace foods with empty calories from junk foods. Akanbi goes on to say focusing on weight can also lead to eating disorders, especially in teenage girls who feel pushed by media images to conform to a specific image. Following the announcement of the free summer program for teens, she said to CNBC

“Weight Watchers really is dieting and focusing on just weight, and research has shown when the focus is on weight and dieting in teens, that is not an effective way to promote and sustain weight loss. It’s not even helpful to promote overall wellness because we’re also talking about body image and how these kids are experiencing themselves and food and their bodies, and dieting does not help with that.”

In support of this line of thinking, some experts have suggested weight loss efforts in childhood may result in body image dissatisfaction and unhealthy weight control behaviors, including disordered eating, if the behavior is not severe enough to warrant diagnosis of an eating disorder.26
A small study using a survey and two workshops delved into it deeper, with researchers gathering data about how young people interact with fitness mobile apps. The aim was to identify risks and negative experiences about how current fitness apps may or may not exacerbate risky eating behaviors.27
The researchers concluded there was a need for consideration around the design of these apps when used for teenagers who are vulnerable to poor body image and maladaptive eating behaviors.28 Additionally, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has advised doctors and families to avoid the use of “weight” in their talks with teens and instead focus on healthy lifestyles.29
Calorie counting is not the answer

The AAP stresses families focus on eating a healthy diet and get plenty of physical activity rather than focusing on weight loss, if they want to reduce the risk of their teens developing an eating disorder:30

“Family involvement in treatment of teen obesity and EDs [eating disorders] has been determined to be more effective than an adolescent-only focus. An integrated approach to the prevention of obesity and EDs focuses less on weight and more on healthy family-based lifestyle modifications that can be sustained …

… AAP recommendations include discouraging dieting, skipping of meals or the use of diet pills; promoting a positive body image; encouraging more frequent family meals; and suggesting that families avoid talking about weight.”

The AAP also stressed that making healthy foods such as fruits and vegetables more accessible while limiting sugars and refined carbohydrates is one way to positively address weight without directly talking about it. The pediatricians also suggest working on helping children make lifestyle changes, such as limiting TV and screen time and promoting physical activity — and I agree.
In addition to the possibility that counting calories or counting points may promote an unhealthy relationship with food31 and increase a teen’s risk of developing an eating disorder, the act of counting calories is not the answer to maintaining a healthy weight or overall health.
The fatal flaw in counting calories is you don’t pay attention to the nutrition you’re eating. The calorie-counting theory is that whatever calories you take in, as long as you burn them off, you will either maintain your weight or lose weight. But that way of thinking is simply wrong: All calories are not alike — while you may like to believe 100 calories in an apple and 100 calories in a cookie are identical, they are not.
The real science says that calories you get from whole, unprocessed foods feed your cells and reduce your risk of disease, including obesity. Foods from processed meals include high amounts of sugar or fructose as well as chemicals that may trigger weight gain.32
Cyclical ketosis supports balanced weight and health

Like the AAP states, more important than counting calories is focusing on bringing home healthy foods and watching where your teens are spending their lunch money. While Grossman has attributed part of the problem with WW’s poor earnings in late 2018 to the keto diet,33 she’s failed to realize that one reason the keto “diet” — which is aimed at adults — is working is because you don’t count calories. Instead, you focus on eating healthy, which is just what the AAP prescribes.
The good news is that keto also aligns with the AAP’s guidance in that you don’t eat processed foods or refined sugars when you “go keto.” The truth is children need protection from the junk food industry and you can help your children eat healthy and learn to make healthy food choices by simply refusing to buy processed foods, and concentrating on stocking your pantry with organic, fresh fruits and vegetables.
Go the extra step and skip fast food restaurants and cook and eat at home, and you’ll be well on your way to teaching them healthy eating.
You can also help by getting your kids moving. Overweight and obese children need at least 30 minutes of exercise each day, and may benefit from closer to 60 minutes. But, even if your child is not overweight, you should encourage him or her to take part in physically engaging activities after school and on the weekends.
For older teens and young adults who are motivated to try the keto way to health on their own, it’s crucial to understand which fats are good for you and which are not. Most Americans consume harmful fats like processed vegetable oils, which will invariably worsen your health.
So when we’re talking about boosting consumption of dietary fats, we’re referring to natural, unprocessed fat, found in real foods such as seeds, nuts, butter, olives, avocado and coconut oil. A more extensive list of examples can be found in “Basic Introduction to Metabolic Mitochondrial Therapy.”
If they want to go the next step and consider ketofasting, it’s even more important to remember that this isn’t about skipping meals, but of understanding that cyclical ketosis lies in the metabolic flexibility your body achieves as it is able to burn glucose and ketones for fuel.
Unfortunately, eating over a 12-hour period or more during the day radically increases your risk for obesity as your body is only adapted to burning glucose and it’s not flexible enough to burn ketones or fat for fuel.
In addition to metabolic flexibility and the reduction in the risk for metabolic syndrome, cyclical ketosis accelerates autophagy34 during which your body eliminates damaged organelles and intracellular pathogens.35
This essential cleaning process encourages the growth of healthy cells and is a foundation for longevity. Intermittent fasting may be one of the most profound interventions you can do to radically improve your health, increase your body’s ability to preferentially burn visceral fat36 and help you shed excess weight37 all while extending your lifespan.
Instead of picking up the newest smartphone app, consider going on a journey of discovery with your teenagers, seeking out some of your locally grown produce, eliminating the processed foods and incorporating intermittent fasting. Each of these nutritional strategies helps support your overall health and weight control.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/08/28/new-app-for-kids-to-address-childhood-obesity.aspx