August 22nd, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in True Stories
1 Comment »
Dr. Sid Schwab recently wrote a wonderful blog post about what doctors feel when they treat patients who remind them of their own kids. For example, he describes how it makes the physician want to run home and hug his/her kids out of gratitude that they’re ok. His post reminded me of an experience I had in the pediatric Emergency Department where I came face to face with memories of my own childhood trauma.
I was bitten in the face by a neighbor’s dog when I was about 4 years old. It was unprovoked and completely unexpected. The dog had no history of viciousness and I had no history of tormenting the creature. I was standing in the hallway, eye to eye with the dog (we were the same height) and I reached out to gently pet him when he attacked me. My parents freaked out, blood was pouring out of my face, and apparently it initially looked as if he’d gotten my left eyes since it was covered in blood. I was rushed to the local hospital where a family physician cleaned me up and put stitches in my cheek, eyebrow, and corner of my eye. It was hard to sit still for the numbing medicine and I was crying softly through it all. I don’t remember the details of the event, but I do still have the scars on my face – scars, I am told, that would be less noticeable if a plastic surgeon had closed the wounds.
Flash forward 30 years and I’m working a night shift in the pediatric ED. A father carries in his young daughter, crying and bloody. She had been mauled by a dog – and had sustained injuries to her face only. I escort the little girl to an examining room and begin flushing her wounds with saline to get a sense of how extensive they are. Dad goes to fill out paperwork while mom holds the girl’s hand.
It was eerie – her injuries were very similar to my own. I figured she’d need a total of 15 stitches or so, all on the left side of her face. There was no missing flesh so I knew that the cosmetic result would be good. I explained to her mom that we would be able to stitch her up nicely – and that she’d likely have minimal scarring. The mom asked for a plastic surgeon – and I agreed to call one for her right away.
That night I had a new appreciation for what my parents must have felt when I was bitten. I could see these strangers’ concern – how they hoped that their little girl wouldn’t be permanently disfigured, how they wanted the most experienced doctor to do the suturing, how they held her hand as she cried. It was really tough – but we were all grateful that the injuries weren’t more severe… and I was glad that I didn’t have to do the suturing. I showed the girl my scars and she seemed comforted by how they had turned out. This experience reminded me how personal experience can add a special dimension to caring for others, and that sometimes having been a patient can make you a better doctor.This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
August 21st, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in Uncategorized
3 Comments »
I had an interesting dialog with Dr. Bruce Campbell recently. In his blog he described a patient who lost about 60 pounds after losing his sense of taste. The patient had undergone radiation therapy for throat cancer, and in the process lost his ability to taste food. He soon lost interest in eating, and eventually dropped 60 pounds – not from the cancer, but from the side effect of radiation therapy. In this case there was a happy ending (his sense of taste eventually returned and he regained some of his weight) but it made me think about the relationship of flavor to obesity.
Just as I was musing on this very fact, a new research study was published in the journal Neurology. It suggested that unexplained weight loss was an early warning sign of dementia. They speculate that this could be linked to another early sign of dementia: loss of the sense of smell. Of course taste is largely a function of smell, so we can easily understand how people lose interest in eating when they can’t enjoy the flavor of food.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if we could temporarily alter a person’s sense of taste in order to affect weight loss? I doubt I’m the first to think of this… has anyone else heard of such a strategy? Surely this would be a little bit less invasive and dangerous than bariatric surgery.
This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
August 20th, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
5 Comments »
There has been some recent buzz about the health risks of nail salon workers. Two studies suggest that constant exposure to nail product fumes might impact cognition in both nail salon workers and their unborn babies. Although the workers’ exposure is estimated at 1200 times that of the average American, it does make one wonder if any woman who frequents these places may be at some risk.
The first study involved neuropsychological testing of 33 female salon workers and comparing their results to 35 women matched controls. The researchers found that the salon workers did worse on tests of attention span and mental processing speed and their sense of smell was decreased. This study was too small and non-specific to tease out which chemicals might be the culprits, but the observations were concerning.
The second study involved cognitive testing of children born to 32 mothers who were exposed to organic solvents when they were in utero. Compared to a control group, the children (whose moms had been exposed to chemicals) performed more poorly on IQ tests and various other cognitive tests. Interestingly, the participants in this study were not nail salon workers – they held jobs ranging from funeral home embalming technicians to hair stylists, to dry cleaners.
The Environmental Protection Agency issued some guidelines for nail salons, and based on my experience I’d be surprised if salons adhere to even 1/3 of these guidelines on average. If you scroll to page 12 of the brochure, you’ll see that the EPA recommends wearing a “organic vapor cartridge respirator” which looks like something out of a HAZMAT video. I doubt that any nail salons provide these for their staff… and if they did, what would clients make of it?
And so I think these small studies raise an interesting question: how safe is it to be exposed to organic solvents at all? We need to do more research to tease out the exact risks of each individual chemical, and at which concentrations. As for me, I’d urge pregnant women to minimize their exposure wherever possible, and strongly consider avoiding salons that offer acrylic nail services. Until we know exactly how harmful these chemicals are – the best thing to do is to avoid them wherever possible. The potential for solvent-related cognitive decline is worrisome enough – but allergies and asthma exacerbations are far more common. For a full list of chemicals known to be harmful (and their side effects) please review the EPA brochure, pages 4-5.This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
August 20th, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in Opinion
5 Comments »
I returned from Trader Joe’s with several bags full of
organic produce and frozen goods today.
It cost me substantially more than it would have at a regular grocery
store, but I figured it was worth it since the food was probably of higher
quality. It also seemed that I might be
helping small farmers by purchasing goods there, which pleased me. And yet I had this nagging feeling that maybe
this was a marketing ploy… that the “experience” of Trader Joe’s was what I was
really buying.
Dr. Clark
directed me towards this interesting, if not controversial blog about organic foods. In it, the author explains the “real story”
behind Trader Joe’s:
Trader Joe’s is a
supermarket chain specializing in organic, vegetarian, and alternative foods
with hundreds of locations throughout the United
States, centered in organic-happy Southern
California. Shoppers appreciate its image of healthful food in a
small-business family atmosphere. Really? In 2005 alone, Trader Joe’s racked up
sales estimated at $4.5 billion. The company is owned by a family trust set up
by German billionaire Theo Albrecht, ranked the 22nd richest man in the world
by Forbes in 2004. He’s the co-founder and CEO of German multi-national ALDI,
with global revenue in grocery sales at $37 billion. According to Business
Week, the decade of the 1990’s saw Trader Joe’s increase its profits by 1000%.… Trader Joe’s customers are willing to pay
their premium prices to get that healthful image. But they should not kid
themselves that they’re striking a blow at big business and supporting the
little guy.
Ok, so maybe I’m not
helping the little guy. But isn’t it
healthier to eat organic food?
From Canada’s
Department of Agriculture (hat tip to Moof for finding this reference):
· Some studies have shown traces of pesticide
residues in both food sources, regardless of production method.
· Nutritional value of plants depends on
genetics, availability of water, amount of sunlight, maturity when picked, how
long it took to come to market and whether it was properly handled and
refrigerated. Numerous laboratory tests have not found any substantial
nutritional differences in organically and conventionally grown produce.
· In blind taste tests, consumers generally
cannot differentiate between organically and conventionally grown food.
· Organic produce is marketed as pure and
healthy. Conventionally produced goods are equally safe and nutritious due to
strict regulations and guidelines.
In a recent
article in the Chicago Tribune, raw foods were not found to be as healthy
as initially suspected. The natural
sprouted plant enzymes that are supposed to be really good for you are actually
destroyed by stomach acid and never absorbed in the body. A raw food diet lacks Vitamin B12, which can
cause dangerous deficiencies.
A study by the Center for Global Food Issues found that
although organic foods make up about 1 percent of America’s diet, they also account
for about 8 percent of confirmed E. coli cases.
For a long list of organic food contaminations, check out the Canada Free Press.
What about hormones
given to animals to increase milk production or bulk them up?
In theory, this is the most concerning and potentially
convincing reason to preferentially select organic meats. I could imagine that eating animals pumped
with hormones could have a negative impact on humans – though the research I
found from the WHO and Cornell
University did not support my initial fears. They write:
Studies indicate that
if correct treatment and slaughter procedures are followed, the levels of these
hormones may be slightly higher in the treated animal’s meat or milk, but are
still within the normal range of natural variation known to occur in untreated
animals.
FDA scientists have
concluded that eating foods with slightly higher levels of rbGH would not
affect human health. This is because the amount of rbGH that is in milk or milk
products as a result of treatment of the animals is insignificant compared to
the amount of growth hormone that is naturally produced by our bodies. Also,
rbGH is a protein hormone and is digested into smaller fragments (peptides and
amino acids) when eaten. The rbGH hormone used on dairy cattle is effective in
promoting growth in cows, but does not work in humans. Scientists know that
rbGH is not recognized as a hormone by human cells.
Well, isn’t organic
farming better for the environment?
The Canadian Department of Agriculture states that organic
farming methods lead to increased soil erosion, lower crop yields (which
require more acres to produce the same amount of food), and require more
pesticides. Although regular farming
methods use different pesticides than the organic variety, neither types of
pesticides are particularly safe for humans.
Organic pesticides such as
rotenone may be a risk factor for developing Parkinson’s Disease – though
more research is needed to fully elucidate this risk.
So should you go
organic?
If you enjoy the flavor or the food quality of certain
produce (and don’t care about price) then purchase it gladly. Make sure you wash it well (organic or not)
and peel the skin if you have any doubts about remaining pesticides. Buy food directly from local farmers when you
can, support free range farming (it’s so much kinder to the animals), and don’t
believe the hype about organic foods automatically being healthier or more
nutritious for you.
Conclusions: organic food is not necessarily more
nutritious, it still may contain harmful pesticides, it is more likely to
contain harmful bacteria, there’s no convincing evidence to suggest that
hormones or antibiotics given to cattle have a negative impact on meat eaters,
and one thing’s for certain: organic food costs at least 20% more than
non-organic.This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
August 19th, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
1 Comment »
Thanks to MedGadget for bringing this to my attention. Did you know that as many as 1 million fake diabetes test strips (manufactured in China but imported via Canada) made it onto the US market? About 10 million Americans use the One Touch Ultra system for measuring their glucose and titrating their insulin doses. Bloomberg news had this to say:
“Growth in counterfeit medicines and devices is probably
the biggest health threat besides infectious disease,” says
Peter Pitts, director of the Center for Medicines in the Public
Interest in New York and formerly an FDA official investigating
knockoff drugs.
The court filings disclose, for the first time, that China
is the source of about one million phony test strips that have
turned up in at least 35 states and in Canada, Greece, India,
Pakistan, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey.”
The test strips don’t measure glucose levels reliably and could result in patients dosing their insulin incorrectly. So be careful out there, folks… make sure that the test strips you use are not counterfeit. Check the lot number on your package to make sure it’s not one of these fake numbers.This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
