🚀 go-pugleaf

CORRECTED... OTHER ONE GOT CUT OFF.

http://BreastImplantAwareness.org/blogspot.com



Bravo to Pamela for this excellent compilation!

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Pamela.htm

News for the Week of November 4, 2007

LEBANON (Nov 2)�Men and women from oil-rich Arab Gulf states have been
coming in droves to fix their noses, lift buttocks and enlarge their
breasts in Lebanon. On Beirut's trendy shopping streets, women stroll
along the sidewalks with band-aids covering their nose jobs and
sleeveless shirts showing bandages covering recent breast implants.

USA (Oct 28)�Do plastic surgery reality shows influence patients'
decisions about whether to undergo cosmetic procedures?

USA (Oct 30)�When Congress passed a bill last month requiring makers
of drugs and medical devices to disclose the results of clinical
trials for all approved products, advocates of greater study
disclosure applauded the move. But a provision that would have
mandated disclosures for another group of products never made it into
the final version of the bill. It would have covered products tested
on patients, but dropped before marketing.

AUSTRALIA (Oct 31)�QUEENSLAND could become the first state in
Australia to regulate breast implants, nose jobs, tummy tucks and
botox for under-18s.

CANADA (Oct 30)�Women are smarter, savvier and arguably more
self-confident than we've ever been. Opportunity abounds. Look at
Hillary Clinton, who is poised to shatter the highest glass ceiling in
America. For a growing number of women, however, the path to
self-worth still includes a side trip to a plastic surgeon.

USA (OCT 29)�Could an infrared camera be a better tool than
mammography for detecting possible signs of breast cancer?
Thermography uses high-resolution infrared photography and computer
software to look at how cells are functioning � whether they are
producing higher temperatures or inflammation. In a mammogram, a
woman's breasts are squeezed between two plates while an X-ray picture
is taken. Many women say the procedure hurts, and if a woman has had
breast implants, the squeezing might even rupture the implants.
Thermography is painless.

UNITED KINGDOM (Nov 2)�A veterans' group says the British government
may be forced to pay thousands of former soldiers for ailments related
to their service in the first Gulf War after a key ruling handed down
this week. Daniel Martin, 35, a former British Army reservist, won his
case in front of Britain's Pensions Appeals Tribunal after proving he
suffers from "Gulf War Syndrome."

USA (Oct 30)�There can be no doubt that the United States has one of
the most legally polluted food supplies in the Western world.
Antibiotics and hormones have long been allowed in chicken and cattle
feed, a practice forbidden in Europe. We have more additives of all
kinds: preservatives, dyes, color enhancers, taste enhancers, texture
enhancers, sugar substitutes, emulsifiers, thickeners, all labeled
�GRAS�, generally regarded as safe, by the porous safety net charged
with protecting our food supply: the Food and Drug Administration.



Wanted in Lebanon: Angelina's lips and Haifa's breasts

BEIRUT (AFP) � Wanted: Angelina Jolie's luscious lips or Lebanese sex
bomb Haifa Wehbe's nose or breasts. Clutching pictures of their idols,
Arab women are flocking to Lebanon which has become a hub for plastic
surgery in the Middle East.

"The boom in plastic surgery started in 2000 in Lebanon, which then
became THE destination for 'plastic surgery tourism' in the Middle
East," plastic surgeon Tony Nassar, who owns the Brazilian Esthetic
Clinics in Beirut, told AFP.

Men and women from oil-rich Arab Gulf states have been coming in
droves to fix their noses, lift buttocks and enlarge their breasts in
Lebanon, attracted by the reputation of the country's surgeons, its
low prices, good weather and buzzing night-life.

"Sixty percent of our clients are Lebanese and 40 percent from the
Gulf," said Elias Shammas, owner of the Hazmieh International Medical
Centre, which employs an army of no less than 50 plastic surgeons.

There are no official statistics, but industry experts say as many as
1.5 million plastic surgeries are performed annually in Lebanon in
addition to 10 million non-surgical operations such as Botox and
collagene fillings.

Lebanon's ambition to become the region's plastic surgery hub has
however been dampened by a prolonged political crisis and a series of
assassinations targeting figures from the ruling majority.

"After the (2005) assassination of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri,
our revenues went down by 70 percent," Shammas said. "But we have been
rebuilding our client base, and this last August we reached a record
of 240 operations in one month."

The most sought after surgeries are nose jobs, liposuctions,
face-lifts and breast implants.

"A nose job costs about 2,000 dollars in Lebanon, against 4,000
dollars in London and between 5,000 and 10,000 dollars in the United
States," Shammas said.

Clients, ranging from 14 to 75, often ask for operations to make them
look like their favourite stars.

"It is rare for a client not to show up with the picture of a star,
asking for Angelina Jolie's lips or Haifa's nose and chest," Nassar
said.

"For Lebanese woman, being beautiful is a national duty, not a luxury.
Women compete with each others, and plastic surgery has ceased to be a
taboo subject and become something to brag about," he said.

On Beirut's trendy shopping streets, women stroll along the sidewalks
with band-aids covering their nose jobs and sleeveless shirts showing
bandages covering recent breast implants.

"If at the age of 65, I can look 50 why deprive myself?" insisted
Nadia, an elegantly-dressed Kuwaiti woman who did not wish to reveal
her family name.

"A few weeks with a swollen face, and goodbye to wrinkles, bags and
double-chins," added Nadia as she examined a computer-generated
simulation of her future face.

Shammas said even mothers drag their daughters in to guarantee them a
good catch.

"After I performed several operations on a young woman, she got
engaged," he said.

"Without the surgeries, she would have probably had to wait 30 years
before finding a man."

He said winter is a busy time for nose jobs and face-lifts while
summer is the hot season for breast enlargements, liposuctions and
tummy-tucks.

Shammas said even men are entering the race and now represent three
out of 10 clients.

"They mostly ask for hair implants, eye-lid liftings, removal of
double-chins and liposuctions, in that order," he said.

In a country suffering an economic crisis, the plastic surgery craze
has even prompted Lebanon's First National Bank to offer three-year
loans, with a six percent interest rate, for such operations.

"Demand for these loans has increased by about 35 percent since they
were launched in May 2007," said Georges Nasser, head of the bank's
marketing department.

"The only requirements are for applicants to be over 17 years old, and
with a minimum monthly salary of 600 dollars," Nasser said.
He brushed aside critics who say that the search for eternal youth
ends up producing clones with similar lips and noses.

"All the women don't become identical," Shammas insisted. "These are
allegations made by people who are against plastic surgery."
For 25-year-old Myrna, the choice is simple.

"I would rather we all look like Haifa, than be ugly," she said.



Plastic surgery patients inspired by TV shows

By Sandra G. Boodman

The Washington Post

October 28, 2007

Do plastic surgery reality shows influence patients' decisions about
whether to undergo cosmetic procedures? A small study by researchers
at Yale, the first to examine the effect of these shows on
decision-making by patients, suggests that the answer is yes.

To determine whether shows such as "Extreme Makeover" and "Dr. 90210"
affect patient behavior, researchers polled 42 first-time patients who
sought a consultation at Yale's plastic surgery clinic about how often
they watched such shows, which have proliferated in recent years.

Plastic surgeon John Persing and his colleagues found that 57 percent
of patients, whose average age was 36, regularly watched one or more
reality shows; only 12 percent said they had never seen one.

These frequent viewers cited the TV shows as a significant factor in
their decision to consult a surgeon, and were more knowledgeable about
procedures than those who said they rarely or never watched the
programs. The only area in which there was little difference in
patient knowledge was cost, which is rarely addressed on many shows.

Ethnic and racial differences emerged as well, Persing and his
colleagues found. About 75 percent of Hispanics, who accounted for
roughly a third of those surveyed, said they were frequent viewers, as
were 70 percent of African-Americans, who accounted for a quarter of
those polled. By comparison, only 36 percent of whites, who made up 33
percent of the group, said they often watched the shows. Nearly all
were female.

The study did not establish causality -- whether viewing the reality
shows frequently made one more likely to undergo surgery. The study
appeared in the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.
Copyright � 2007, Chicago Tribune



Participants Left Uninformed in Some Halted Medical Trials

By BARRY MEIER

October 30, 2007

When Congress passed a bill last month requiring makers of drugs and
medical devices to disclose the results of clinical trials for all
approved products, advocates of greater study disclosure applauded the
move.
But a provision that would have mandated disclosures for another group
of products never made it into the final version of the bill. It would
have covered products tested on patients, but dropped before
marketing.

�Trial sponsors can still choose to keep information about some trials
confidential, creating serious ethical concerns,� said Dr. Deborah A.
Zarin, the director of ClinicalTrials.gov, a Web site run by the
National Library of Medicine.

Many experts said the recent Congressional debate underscored a
troubling fact: some patients in clinical studies never learn about
test results. The problem may be particularly relevant to those
implanted with medical devices that stay with them long after a trial
is over.

For manufacturers and researchers alike, �there is a tremendous
incentive to go on, to forget about the old and move on to the new,�
said Drummond Rennie, a deputy editor at The Journal of the American
Medical Association, who has written critically about clinical trials.

There are no data available for the number of patients who participate
in studies of drugs and medical devices that never make it to the
marketplace, though it is likely that the number runs into the
thousands. A product may not reach the market for a variety of reasons
� it may not perform well in trials, for example, or it may be
rejected by regulators.

Although researchers conducting clinical studies are not required to
disclose test results to study participants, they must alert patients
taking part in a test to emerging product dangers.

Companies also have to keep promises made to regulators at the time a
trial began, like agreements to follow the health of study patients.
Such promises are often required to get approval to begin trials in
the first place.

But researchers and manufacturers do not always fulfill even those
minimal requirements. And such failing may be particularly acute in
trials of implanted devices, since those products remain inside
patients.

In August, for example, the Food and Drug Administration sent a
warning to Boston Scientific after investigators discovered the
company�s diligence in following up with patients faltered around the
time it dropped a product under development.

The product being tested was an experimental stent intended to prevent
the rupturing of an aneurysm in the major abdominal artery.

Among other things, agency investigators found that Boston Scientific,
which halted development of the stent last year after a study showed
it frequently fractured, had neglected to tell patients in that trial
about the problem�s scope.

Researchers involved said such a fracture, while not dangerous in
itself, could cause a stent device to shift position, thus rendering
it useless in treating an aneurysm, a weakening of a blood vessel that
can burst with fatal consequences.

Paul Donovan, a spokesman for Boston Scientific, said that the company
was moving to address the F.D.A.�s concerns. While six patients
involved in the study have died, Mr. Donovan said that the company did
not believe that those deaths were related to either the stent or
burst aneurysms.

�There were instances of reporting that was not done in a complete and
timely manner, and we are addressing these shortcomings,� Mr. Donovan
said.

Because of loopholes in the recently passed Congressional bill, device
makers like Boston Scientific will still have discretion whether to
publicly reveal the results of studies like that of the failed stent.

Under the law, device producers will have to report such
�premarketing� studies and their results to the F.D.A. But that data
will remain in a confidential �black box� until a product is approved;
if a device is rejected or dropped, a company will not have to
disclose those results or even publicly acknowledge that the trials
occurred.

Device makers lobbied against mandating disclosure for failed
products, arguing that releasing such data would be confusing to
patients and would give away valuable information to a company�s
competitors about devices under development that might succeed in
subsequent trials.

�Such disclosures could have the unintended consequence of eliminating
many small device makers from the marketplace,� Stephen J. Ubl, chief
executive of the Advanced Medical Technology Association trade group,
testified before Congress in June.

The new bill does allow for a mechanism under which the secretary of
the Health and Human Services Department could release trial data
about unapproved products if a public health issue exists, but such
moves would be argued case by case.

�This was a disappointment,� said Dr. Steven E. Nissen, the chairman
of the cardiology department at the Cleveland Clinic, who helped draft
the House version of the bill. �The problem is that if you don�t tell
people about failed trials, you can make the same mistake again and
again.�

As a result, patients who were in failed trials may find out about the
consequences only by chance.

That apparently is what happened last year when two women struck up a
conversation at a hospital in Tampa, Fla., and found out that they
were both there for the same reason: severe pain, related to their
breast implants.

As they talked, the women, Christina Rafsky and Barbara Padgett,
learned they had more in common. Both had seen the same doctor in
Tampa, who had persuaded them to participate in a clinical trial he
was overseeing of a new type of silicone-filled implant made by Inamed
Aesthetics, now a unit of Allergan.

Next, a curious Ms. Rafsky called Allergan and learned for the first
time that Inamed had halted that trial in 2005 because the implant
model she had received was rupturing.

�I was angry and frustrated,� said Ms. Rafsky, who lives in Tampa.

A spokeswoman for Allergan, Caroline Van Hove, said that Inamed
alerted physicians involved in the study in 2005 including the women�s
physician, Dr. Gerard Mosiello of Tampa, and suggested that they
contact patients about the rupture issue.

But when Ms. Rafsky contacted Dr. Mosiello, he claimed not to have
received the letter.

�He said he did not know anything about the product being recalled,�
she said.

Ms. Rafsky then filed a complaint with a panel at the University of
South Florida that oversaw the implant trial, which took place at the
H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute in Tampa. Such
panels, which are known as institutional review boards, or I.R.B.�s,
help ensure, among other things, that trials are properly conducted.

After a lengthy investigation, the panel found that Dr. Mosiello had
failed, among other things, to follow up on the health of study
participants like Ms. Rafsky and Ms. Padgett.

�It was the consensus of the I.R.B. that there was sufficient evidence
to support that there were lapses in participant care and follow-up,�
the group wrote in a July letter that Ms. Rafsky made available to The
New York Times. Dr. Mosiello declined to be interviewed for this
article.

Recently, Ms. Rafsky and Ms. Padgett retained Alan Milstein, a lawyer
who specializes in representing patients involved in clinical trials.

As to whether Dr. Mosiello received the Inamed letter in 2005, the
University of South Florida panel, which interviewed both Dr. Mosiello
and an Allergan official, found that �there was no documentation or
recordkeeping regarding who had been contacted and when,� its letter
states.

Ms. Van Hove, the Allergan spokeswoman, said that Inamed had followed
up to make sure researchers like Dr. Mosiello had received the
company�s letter. But she acknowledged that it had not checked back to
see what physicians like Dr. Mosiello had told patients, if anything.

�The actual communication between a health care provider and his or
her patient is left to the physician exercising his or her medical
judgment,� Ms. Van Hove said in a statement.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company



Teenage cosmetic surgery queried

Cosima Marriner

October 31, 2007

QUEENSLAND could become the first state in Australia to regulate
breast implants, nose jobs, tummy tucks and botox for under-18s.

Concerned that teenage girls increasingly "resort to a surgeon's
blade" to remedy poor body image, Premier Anna Bligh yesterday
released a discussion paper canvassing ways to regulate non-medical
cosmetic surgery procedures for minors. This excludes operations to
correct abnormalities or deformities.

Leaving the door open for a complete ban on purely cosmetic
procedures, the paper also suggests enforcing a "cooling off" period
between consultation and surgery, requiring parental consent for a
procedure, and compulsory medical and psychological evaluation of
prospective patients.

Ms Bligh said there was "worrying" anecdotal evidence that the number
of young girls having cosmetic surgery was rising. She cited a Gold
Coast surgeon who reportedly treats more than 100 minors a year, and
is seeing a 5 per cent annual increase in these patients.

"I appreciate this can be a difficult time, especially in a young
woman's development, but to resort to a surgeon's blade is an adult
response that is best left until one is an adult," Ms Bligh said.

"The use of cosmetic surgery by children and young people under 18
years for purely cosmetic reasons is an area where significant legal,
social and ethical issues interplay."

Members of the Australian Society of Plastic Surgeons and the
Australasian College of Cosmetic Surgery are already required to abide
by a code of conduct that encompasses many of the regulations flagged.

However, the president of the Australian Society of Plastic Surgeons,
Howard Webster, said there did need to be government regulation of
cosmetic surgery for under-18s to guard against "shonky operators".

He suggested purely cosmetic procedures such as breast implants and
liposuction should be banned for minors, pointing out their bodies
were still growing.

He also said any regulation of cosmetic surgery should be done in
tandem with a crackdown on the advertising industry that promotes
unrealistic body images. "We need to become serious about the damage
being caused to these kids by completely duplicitous advertising," he
said.

The Victorian Medical Board has flagged tougher advertising guidelines
for cosmetic surgery.



Some people are so plastic

Tue, October 30, 2007

By MINDELLE JACOBS

Women are smarter, savvier and arguably more self-confident than we've
ever been. Opportunity abounds. Look at Hillary Clinton, who is poised
to shatter the highest glass ceiling in America.

Society has been telling women for decades to set our sights high,
encouraging us to strive to improve ourselves and make our mark in the
world.

For a growing number of women, however, the path to self-worth still
includes a side trip to a plastic surgeon.

More than 70% of women surveyed in an online poll expressed some
interest in cosmetic surgery, according to a report in the October
issue of the Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

Surprisingly, 40% of the men surveyed were interested as well.

The curious thing is the UCLA researchers who analyzed the responses
found no relation between people's body image and their interest in
cosmetic surgery. Even those who felt comfortable about their bodies
were intrigued by the idea of changing their appearance.

"This isn't about poor body image," says David Frederick, a UCLA
psychology grad student and the lead author of the study. "People
interested in cosmetic surgery did not report less satisfaction with
their body or face than people who are not interested."

I wonder if they're lying to themselves, since 21% of the women and
11% of the men described themselves as unattractive.

And just when you thought the tide was turning -- that women were
beginning to realize men actually like them the way they are --
there's increasing evidence that females are more body-conscious than
ever.

The number of so-called vaginal rejuvenation procedures in the U.S.
jumped 30% between 2005 and 2006, reports the American Society of
Plastic Surgeons (ASPS). Such alterations include vaginal tightening
and reshaping of the labia.

Self Magazine recently did a compelling but disturbing piece on the
growing popularity of vaginal surgery, profiling a 21-year-old woman
who crazily thought her labia were too long. She handed over $5,000 to
a doctor who botched the job, leaving her disfigured and in pain.

In the end, she had to pay thousands more (to a reputable plastic
surgeon) for reconstructive surgery.

"I don't know why it mattered to me what my labia looked like," she
told the magazine. "I mean, it's not like they were a huge problem in
my life."

What makes some women think they have ugly genitals in the first
place? It's not like females compare crotches in change rooms. And
what's a perfect vagina supposed to look like anyway?

I largely blame the porn industry for triggering this bizarre
obsession with the look of a woman's private parts. Not only are women
expected to become writhing sexpots in 60 seconds, we're supposed to
look like porn stars, too.

Enough of this kind of surgery is happening that one of the seminars
at this week's national conference of the ASPS in Baltimore is on
genital rejuvenation. The title of tomorrow's session? "Fringe
Procedure or a New Frontier?"

Are Canadian women also paying for designer vaginas and other genital
refashioning? "You bet they do," says Dr. Richard Warren, a board
member of the Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons.

Once upon a time, the appearance of people's genitals wasn't on the
cultural radar screen, he notes. The mass media and the Internet
changed all that, he says.

"Women look at that and think, 'I guess that's what I'm supposed to
look like.'"

E-mail Mindy Jacobs at mindy.jacobs@sunmedia.ca.

Letters to the editor should be sent to mailbag@edmsun.com.



Technique detects breast hot spots

By Lex Alexander

Staff Writer

MONDAY, OCT. 29, 2007 3:00 AM

GREENSBORO � Could an infrared camera be a better tool than
mammography for detecting possible signs of breast cancer?

At least one Greensboro physician thinks it might be. Elizabeth
Vaughan recently began offering infrared thermography to her patients
as a complement to mammography.

The stakes are enormous. Breast cancer is the second most common type
of cancer in women and the second leading cause of cancer death in
women, after lung cancer. It also is one type of cancer in which early
detection can greatly affect a woman's likelihood of surviving.

That early detection is more likely with thermography, Vaughan says.
The difference, she says, is between structural change and
physiological abnormality in the body.

Mammography, MRI, ultrasound and a physical exam by a doctor all
involve seeing or feeling an abnormality that's already present.

Thermography, however, uses high-resolution infrared, or heat-based,
photography and powerful computer software to look at how cells are
functioning � whether they are producing higher temperatures, or
inflammation.

"There should not be any inflammation in a woman's breasts," Vaughan
says.

That higher temperature can be a sign of cancer, or of other disorders
that could lead to cancer, although the camera detects abnormalities
in function, not cancer itself. The Indigo Merlin camera used in her
practice, the most sensitive developed to date, can detect differences
of as little as 0.0018 degree Celsius.

Temperature matters because tumors grow faster than normal cells and
generate more heat. They require abnormally large amounts of blood �
so much so that sometimes they stimulate the body to create new blood
vessels to feed them. Those changes also generate heat that can be
detected with thermography, Vaughan says.

The ability to detect the difference in temperature, Vaughan thinks,
could prove vital. Currently, she says, breast tumors typically grow
for up to 15 years before being detected. Thermography can detect
abnormalities at least five years before tumors can be detected by
other methods.

"Using thermography can detect an abnormality early enough to have a
chance to change the environment in the breast and correct factors
that may be contributing to breast cancer," Vaughan says, citing diet
changes as an example. "It also gives us a chance to rev up the
woman's immune system."

If the abnormality remains in three to six months after the initial
thermography, Vaughan will refer the patient for a needle biopsy.

Thermography has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration
since 1982 as a complement to mammography.

Mammography should not be replaced by thermography, according to the
American Cancer Society. Its Web site states, "... no study has ever
shown that (thermography) is an effective screening tool for the early
detection of breast cancer."

But a 2006 review of more than 800 research papers stresses the
technique's risk-marker qualities rather than its ability to diagnose.

Thermographs, the review reported, are 10 times more significant a
factor in predicting the development of breast cancer than whether a
close relative has had the disease.

Vaughan points to other reasons to use thermography.

In a mammogram, a woman's breasts are squeezed between two plates
while an X-ray picture is taken. Many women say the procedure hurts,
and if a woman has had breast implants, the squeezing might even
rupture the implants.

Thermography is painless, requiring no contact with equipment.

Another problem with mammography, Vaughan says, is that it is less
effective in younger women because their breasts are more dense. That
makes it harder for X-rays to detect growths.

Thermography works the same way regardless of breast density, she
says, and could be better able to detect younger women's breast
abnormalities earlier. This matters because the most aggressive forms
of breast cancer frequently develop in younger women.

To undergo thermography, a woman enters a room cooled to 69 degrees
Fahrenheit and sits or stands bare-chested for 15 minutes. Then, as
she holds her hands behind her head, the camera takes three pictures
of her breasts � from the front and each side.

The woman then puts her hands in very cold water for one minute, a
procedure that causes the body's surface blood vessels to constrict.
Any new blood vessels created by tumors will not respond to the cold,
however. The camera then gets three more photos from the same angles.
Vaughan sends the high-resolution computer images to a specialist in
Raleigh for interpretation.

Because the process uses no radiation, it can be performed repeatedly
without harming the patient, Vaughan says.

Contact Lex Alexander at 373-7088 or lalexander@news-record.com



British Tribunal Recognizes 'Gulf War Syndrome'

By Mike Wendling

CNSNews.com Correspondent

November 02, 2005

London (CNSNews.com) - A veterans' group says the British government
may be forced to pay thousands of former soldiers for ailments related
to their service in the first Gulf War after a key ruling handed down
this week.

Daniel Martin, 35, a former British Army reservist, won his case in
front of Britain's Pensions Appeals Tribunal after proving he suffers
from "Gulf War Syndrome."

The British Ministry of Defense has publicly denied that the syndrome
exists, instead blaming the soldiers' symptoms on a variety of other
factors and diseases.

Martin suffered from chronic fatigue, memory loss and concentration
problems after serving in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq.

Shaun Rusling of the National Gulf Veterans and Families Association
(NGVFA) said in a phone interview that the U.K. Ministry of Defense
(MoD) could be forced to pay out thousands in compensation and
disability benefits as a result of the ruling.

"The MoD is now boxed into a difficult position which they will
struggle to get out of," Rusling said.

The NGVFA says 3,000 veterans who fought in the 1991 Gulf War have
contacted the group with suspected symptoms. Of those, 1,500 have made
a claim to the Ministry of Defense.

The numbers could be even higher, however. Rusling said 7,000 veterans
have claimed disability benefits from the MoD, and because of the
official line on Gulf War Syndrome, many were discouraged from listing
it on their benefit applications.

"If the MoD has been shown to have lied or misled the public, let's
have a full, open and public inquiry," Rusling said. "They've made
serious mistakes and they're just hoping these mistakes go away and
die rather than admit to them."

The tribunal ruled that the term "Gulf War Syndrome" is an
"appropriate medical label" and stated: "It is highly regrettable that
there was such a delay in the Ministry of Defense accepting this
approach."

The panel also rebuked the MoD for failing to participate in the Lloyd
Enquiry, an independent investigation into the causes of illnesses in
Gulf War vets.

However, the tribunal pointed out that medical evidence indicates that
Gulf War Syndrome is not a single disease or "discrete pathological
entity" -- instead ruling that it is an "umbrella term" for a wide
variety of symptoms.

In a statement, the MoD welcomed this part of the ruling.

"We have always accepted that some 1990/1991 Gulf veterans have become
ill and that some of the veterans believe this ill health is unusual
and related to their Gulf experience," the ministry said in a
statement. "Whilst we acknowledge that the phrase 'Gulf War Syndrome'
is popularly used, the overwhelming consensus of the scientific and
medical community is that there are too many different symptoms
reported for this ill-health to be characterized as a 'syndrome.'"

"The fact that there is, at present, no proper medical basis for
recognizing 'Gulf War Syndrome' as a discrete medical condition does
not prevent a Gulf veteran getting compensation for all disablement
due to service under the War Pension Scheme," the statement read.

A spokeswoman said the ministry would continue to study the ruling and
its impacts on the claims of other Gulf vets.

Veterans groups suspect the symptoms of "Gulf War Syndrome" are the
result of a variety of factors, including vaccinations, depleted
uranium shells, pesticides and even a possible unpublicized chemical
or biological weapons attack by Saddam Hussein's regime.

In the United States, the Department of Veterans Affairs has
identified a link between service in the Gulf and an increased risk of
Lou Gehrig's disease.



Indestructible Food: With Love from America, Inc.

October 30, 2007 at 11:05:19

by Cameron Salisbury

Cam Salisbury is an epidemiologist living in Jacksonville.

There can be no doubt that the United States has one of the most
legally polluted food supplies in the Western world. Antibiotics and
hormones have long been allowed in chicken and cattle feed, a practice
forbidden in Europe. Plastics, which release compounds that interfere
with normal cell division, are present in baby bottles, soda cans, and
milk and water bottles We have more additives of all kinds:
preservatives, dyes, color enhancers, taste enhancers, texture
enhancers, sugar substitutes, emulsifiers, thickeners, all labeled
�GRAS�, generally regarded as safe, by the porous safety net charged
with protecting our food supply: the Food and Drug Administration.

Especially since about 1970, as more chemicals and other
�enhancements,� like genetically modified ingredients, have inundated
the grocery store, other things have also been happening. Consider
that, with no known cause: A girl entering puberty at age eight is no
longer considered an anomaly; the U.S. no longer grows the tallest
people on earth- in fact, we aren�t even in the top 5; our life
expectancy has fallen behind many other nations; we are among the
heaviest people on earth; the rate of the devastating condition known
as autism is mushrooming.

There is no research linking these facts to our food supply because
there seems to be no research whatever on the impact of a degraded
food supply on human health. But the incidental evidence is causing
plenty of unease. The legal contamination of the food supply has now
reached levels where no one can predict the outcome, and the
adulteration just keeps on coming.

Like genetic modification. GM tampering can produce plants with
ingrown pesticides, herbicides, color enhancers, preservatives or
other. The possible results of manipulating a plant�s (or an animal�s)
DNA are limited only by the creativity of the scientist, the money and
motivation of Big Agra, and the unwitting compliance of the uninformed
consumer. The United States produces more genetically engineered crops
than the rest of the world combined, and, unlike 35 other nations,
requires no labeling.

Since virtually all corn and soybeans grown in the U.S. is now
genetically manipulated, frankenfood is a staple in all but the most
obsessively organic kitchens. It is now estimated that approximately
70% of everything in the grocery store contains genetically modified
ingredients. That includes a clear, sweet, inexpensive sludge with an
infinite shelf life that has almost replaced sugar in processed foods
made in the U.S.: High Fructose Corn Syrup.

HCFS is insidious not just because it contains genetically engineered
ingredients of unproven safety, and not because of the unnerving list
of health consequences seen in animal research, but because it
bypasses the satiety center in the brain. We can eat almost all the
pastries, pies, cakes, soda and candy we like without getting that
full feeling that shuts down our compulsion to eat. We and our kids
get rounder and sicker.

We are consuming literally tons of other concoctions from the
chemistry labs run by agribusiness that they would prefer we know
nothing about.

For example, have you noticed the other worldly quality of ground meat
these days? It can now last for months without losing that fresh pink
glow.

That�s because of yet another hushed innovation of the food processing
industry. The use of gases like carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide to
preserve meats poultry and fish is rapidly gaining ground and may soon
replace safe and effective, and preservative-free, vacuum packing. The
healthy pink patina these gases give meat lasts far into the future,
like Styrofoam. This poses a question about the safety of the meat at
the end of, say, three months. Does that deathless fresh color cover
up organisms we�d rather not eat? The European Union has banned this
method of preservation also.

Irradiation, another method of creating indestructible meats, fruits
and vegetables, may soon be coming to a store near you, after
agribusiness finishes pressuring the FDA into sanitizing the name of
the process into something that consumers are more likely to buy. They
prefer �pasteurization.�

Since zapping edibles with radiation kills germs and any other
malfeasants that may be lurking about, food items become �sterilized�
quickly and cheaply. And by the way, it relieves Big Agra of the
responsibility for producing clean food. The filth they leave in the
food will be germ free filth.

Possibly best of all for Big Agra, radiation increases the life
expectancy of a food to what seems like eternity, another bonanza to
the corporate bottom line and something the FDA lists as a benefit.

The statement in the FDA�s 2004 report that radiation induces
�chemical changes [that] can ultimately have biological consequences�
is neither explained nor integrated into their contention that
irradiation �causes little change in the composition of food beyond
that which would occur from cooking.�

Although research has been done on the impact of GM, gas and
irradiation on the vitamin content, taste and texture of foods, I
could find no evidence that the impact of changes to the architecture
of food on the people who will consume it has even been seriously
considered, despite clear evidence from laboratory testing that all
may not be well in the land of falsified edibles.

Genetic engineering, irradiation and gas all work their magic by
changing the molecular structure of food. The low-profile adoption of
new, unadvertised, untested and often unlisted, potential toxins in
the food supply, lobbied hard by corporations and decreed harmless by
the FDA, is a walk into the unknown.

Millions of people who have or will develop severe allergies are
critically sensitive to artificial changes in the chemistry of food.
For an unknown number, the new world of deathless food, with the
unlisted adulteration, will be a deadly disaster.

Were you ever asked if GM food, gassed meat, or irradiated fruits and
vegetables were what you wanted for dinner? Did you ever hear a
discussion of potentially hazardous food additives on the evening
news? A television special? How about PBS, for which Archer Daniels
Midland is a sponsor? Have you ever seen food labeled as genetically
engineered, gassed or irradiated?

No? Well, that�s because Corporate Agriculture and their
co-conspirators, the Corporate Media, unflaggingly engineered our
ignorance. They have been scared witless that we would stop buying and
interfere with their bottom line, shareholder returns, and the CEO�s
salary.

In Britain and the European Union, informed consumers have stood
steadfast against relentless multinational corporate lobbying for the
new forms of food adulteration. While Europeans have held their
governments accountable, and the bullies of Corporate America,
agribusiness, and chemical conglomerates have so far been effectively
stopped in their tracks, the entire issue has passed silently beneath
the radar of most U.S citizens, even as documented cases of food
allergies doubled in the past 10 years.

Each of us is now a participant in a quiet, expanding, experiment to
which we never consented. Since government, Big Agra, and paid
university enablers have committed themselves to the idea that their
chosen forms of food degradation are safe, it appears that, now as in
the past, the potential human toll will remain officially
unacknowledged.

The impact on human health and life of high tech food tampering may
not be recognized for a very long time.



Mailing List Technical Error

We were informed this week of a technical �bug� that affected the
mailing list area of the Hadcorp site. New members were not able to
join the mailing list and multiple attempts to send the weekly
newsletter failed. Once the problem was resolved, the website
automatically sent out every copy that could not be sent initially. We
apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. This problem
should not occur again in the future. Thank you for your support.

Hadcorp Administration




http://www.freewebs.com/implants/