>MAF Anti-Spam ID:
Boy – is that ever an oxymoronic signature.
Nan, Type 2
Entrenched belief is never altered by the facts…..
02
Sep
Re: apparently the best book on health and longevity
posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (11)
11 Responses to “Re: apparently the best book on health and longevity”
"Nan Eklund" <nanekl…@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041118194314.09736.00000323@mb-m20.aol.com…
> >MAF Anti-Spam ID:
> Boy – is that ever an oxymoronic signature.
Yeah. This guy is on every BG I’ve seen! And many times. Guess his book
isn’t all that great if he has to hawk it like that.
–
See my webpage:
http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm
["a" changed into "@" because my News 'server' thinks *this* article is
spam!]
Nan Eklund <nanekl…@aol.com> wrote:
> >MAF Anti-Sp@m ID:
> Boy – is that ever an oxymoronic signature.
Well, in Dutch "maf" means stupid/silly/strange/etc., so at
least the OP got *that* part right!
["a" changed into "@" because my News 'server' thinks *this* article is
spam!]
yet, in the lancet
(http://people.bu.edu/attilap/index_files/Lancet%20response.pdf), it also
states:
"We agree with Weintraub and Cole that the clinical usefulness of this
technology will eventually have to be verified through large-cohort,
placebocontrolled trials before it is embraced as a viable medical therapy. What
we offer is evidence that these sorts of trials might be worth pursuing."
i.e. – it t’ain’t proven or ready yet…as a result:
"His results were so impressive that a national study was started in July to
research this use of magnets. Currently there are 29 sites in 17 states and
seven podiatric medical centers participating. This study will test
200 patients and should last one year."
November 18, 2004
"All magnets are not the same and manufacturers advertise their products without
significant scientific data. We are currently doing a study testing to see if
this very popular design is effective in relieving pain…It is unclear if any
of the other varieties (i.e., unipolar, bipolar) will work, since rigorous
scientific testing has not been done…and we hope to have the first definitive
trial of permanent magnetic devices completed shortly." -Dr. Michael Weintraub
so, how do you and nikken justify your already ramped up production and selling
of products based upon studies of what – the very expert(s) you cite – say is
not yet ready?
noting that nikken has extensivlyused dr w’s name, it also leads one to wonder
just why this is the case: dr w says on 11/18/04 it’s not yet ready, the company
uses his ‘so far completed’ studies to justify sales…both cannot be true.
paul
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
gg wrote:
> Some weeks ago I was asked to post evidence of magnets.
> The reports I have are copyright and therefore I will post Abstracts –
> Refences and contact information for those who wish to obtain a copy of the
> full report.
> I claim no medical expertise in this subject – but my initional disbelief
> has been changed by my personal experience following an auto accident –
> since then I have been doing some research.
> Best regards
> gregg
> Static Magnetic Field Therapy for Symptomatic Diabetic
> Neuropathy: A Randomized, Double-Blind,
> Placebo-Controlled Trial
> Michael I. Weintraub, MD, FACP, FAAN, Gil I. Wolfe, MD, Richard A. Barohn,
> MD, Steven P. Cole, PhD,
> Gareth J. Parry, MD, Ghazala Hayat, MD, Jeffrey A. Cohen, MD, Jeffrey C.
> Page, DPM,
> Mark B. Bromberg, MD, Sherwyn L. Schwartz, MD, and the Magnetic Research
> Group
> Objective: To determine if constant wearing of multipolar,
> static magnetic (450G) shoe insoles can reduce neuropathic
> pain and quality of life (QOL) scores in symptomatic diabetic
> peripheral neuropathy (DPN).
> CONCLUSION
> Although many questions remain about a precise mechanism
> of action, the present study provides convincing data confirming
> that the constant wearing of static, permanent, magnetic
> insoles produces statistically significant reduction of neuropathic
> pain. Considering their safety and minimal cost
> ($100), our data suggest that the insoles may be used as
> adjunctive or monotherapy. Future studies are needed to identify
> the optimal time to achieve maximum antinociceptive
> effect and to confirm and extend these results. Additional
> search for biologic markers (ie, epidermal nerve fiber biopsy,
> microneurography) will be necessary in future protocols to
> determine if permanent structural changes can be produced.
> Reprint requests to Michael I. Weintraub, MD, Dept of Neurology and
> Medicine,
> New York Medical College, 325 S Highland Ave, Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510,
> e-mail: miwne…@pol.net
> _____________________________________________
> Efficacy of static magnetic field therapy in chronic pelvic
> pain: A double-blind pilot study
> Candace S. Brown, PharmD,a Frank W. Ling, MD,b Jim Y. Wan, PhD,c and Arthur
> A. Pilla, PhDd
> Memphis, Tenn, and New York, NY
> OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine the efficacy of static
> magnetic field therapy for the treatment
> of chronic pelvic pain (CPP) by measuring changes in pain relief and
> disability.
> STUDY DESIGN: Thirty-two patients with CPP completed 2 weeks and 19 patients
> completed 4 weeks of
> randomized double-blind placebo-controlled treatment at a gynecology clinic.
> Active (500 G) or placebo magnets
> were applied to abdominal trigger points for 24 hour per day. The McGill
> Pain Questionnaire, Pain Disability
> Index, and Clinical Global Impressions Scale were outcome measures.
> RESULTS: Patients receiving active magnets who completed 4 weeks of
> double-blind treatment had significantly
> lower Pain Disability Index (P < .05), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity
> (P < .05), and Clinical
> Global Impressions-Improvement (P < .01) scores than those receiving placebo
> magnets, but were more
> likely to correctly identify their treatment (P < .05).
> CONCLUSION: SMF therapy significantly improves disability and may reduce
> pain when active magnets are
> worn continuously for 4 weeks in patients with CPP, but blinding efficacy is
> compromised. (Am J Obstet Gynecol
> 2002;187:1581-7.)
> Reprint requests: Candace Brown, PharmD, 9685 US Highway 70,
> Lakeland, TN 38002. E-mail: csbr…@utmem.edu
> ____________________________________________________________
> Two Configurations of Static Magnetic Fields
> for Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Knee:
> A Double-Blind Clinical Trial
> Neil A. Segal, MD, Yoshitaka Toda, MD, Joseph Huston, MD, Yukihiko Saeki,
> MD, Masatoshi Shimizu, MD,
> Howard Fuchs, MD, Yasunori Shimaoka, MD, PhD, Robert Holcomb, MD, PhD,
> Michael J. McLean, MD, PhD
> Shimizu M, Fuchs H, Shimaoka Y, Holcomb R, McLean MJ.
> Two configurations of static magnetic fields for treating
> rheumatoid arthritis of the knee: a double-blind clinical trial.
> Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001;82:1453-60.
> Objective: To assess the efficacy of a nonpharmacologic,
> noninvasive static magnetic device as adjunctive therapy for
> knee pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
> CONCLUSION
> The results of this randomized, double-blind, controlled,
> multicenter clinical trial indicate a probable superiority of the
> magnetic field generated by the MagnaBloc over that produced
> by a control magnetic device. In this trial, the MagnaBloc was
> compared with a device that had greatly differing field geometry
> and maximal field strength. When normalized and analyzed
> by nonparametric statistical tests, both devices were
> significantly effective in reducing pain and in improving patients’
> pain in both treatment groups. However, there was not
> a statistically significant difference in reduction of pain with
> the MagnaBloc compared with the magnetic control device.
> One reason may be the use of a magnetic control, rather than a
> nonmagnetic placebo device. Without a comparison with a device
> devoid of a magnetic field, it is unclear whether even a weak
> magnetic field may have had a therapeutic effect. In a study of
> the placebo response, Long et al31 showed that 14% of patients
> exposed to sham magnet therapy demonstrated a 50% or
> greater reduction in pain. In our study, if dichotomized by criteria
> used by Long, respondents being defined at 50% reduction
> in pain or greater, 54.8% of the MagnaBloc group and 32% of
> the control group responded to treatment. Thus, our control
> group did not correlate with the placebo response shown by
> Long, and therefore most likely cannot be considered a placebo
> group. In this study, we did not select a true placebo, but rather
> a control device that has not been validated as a placebo. In
> future studies, we hope to employ a more definitive placebo
> device. Because this study compared 2 devices with magnetic
> field gradients, it was really a dose-comparative study.
> overall disease severity; there was not, however, a
> statistically significant difference between the 2 groups for
> percentage of pain reduction. There was a statistically signifi-
> cant difference between groups for S-GADA and subject functional
> assessment of treatment outcome.
> In addition to the clinical outcomes measured, this study was
> useful in elucidating better methods for conducting clinical
> trials with magnetic devices. Certain instruments used did not
> give an adequate picture of what we were treating. Specifically,
> the R-GADA and MHAQ are not validated for studying localized
> knee pain. The trends that we found justify further study.
> As we refine the instruments used, we will be better able to
> assess the true effects of treatment.
> Last, the rationale for use of a magnetic control device was
> to maintain the blind, which we did successfully. However,
> possibly because of our selection of a magnetic control, both
> devices were significantly efficacious in reducing pain from
> baseline of the respective treatment groups. Further studies,
> employing a validated placebo device, a larger sample size, and
> more appropriate instruments to assess localized pain and function
> are warranted.
> Reprint requests to Michael J. McLean, MD, PhD, 437 MCS Vanderbilt
> University
> Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232, e-mail:
> michael.mcl…@mcmail.vanderbilt.ed
> ———————————————————
gg wrote:
> Some weeks ago I was asked to post evidence of magnets.
> The reports I have are copyright and therefore I will post Abstracts –
> Refences and contact information for those who wish to obtain a copy
> of the full report.
> I claim no medical expertise in this subject – but my initional
> disbelief has been changed by my personal experience following an
> auto accident – since then I have been doing some research.
Sorry, but these studies aren’t very convincing! Still got a long way to go
before the ‘evidence’ is there.
–
Katharine
To repeat what others have said requires education; to challenge it
requires a brain.
Maybe I’m paranoid…. This is well written, but since when does the UN let
US nuts influence that kind of decision?
The web page tried to do some long process, so I shut off my browser.
Skinny
—————
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:53:07 GMT, RK wrote:
> Urgent Action Alert
> This Friday, the United Nations will vote on a resolution that
> will ban all forms of cloning, including therapeutic cloning, which is
> a type of stem cell research.
> Click here to take action on this issue.
> http://main.diabetes.org/site/R?i=aLRy1Yzd4ZEFX-HnzLM3OQ..
> On Friday, November 19th, the Legal Affairs Committee of the United
> Nations General Assembly will vote to ban all forms of cloning, both
> reproductive and therapeutic.
> Recently, voters in California passed Proposition 71, which funds stem
> cell research up to $3 billion over 10 years. The American Diabetes
> Association believes that the majority of Americans want stem cell
> research to continue. The passage of the UN resolution would
> undermine this and any other efforts to actively promote and protect
> stem cell research.
> Sadly, the United States is one of the countries leading this
> effort to ban therapeutic cloning and is a prime sponsor of this
> resolution.
> Tell the United Nations to ban reproductive cloning but allow for
> therapeutic cloning. By taking action, you will help demonstrate
> the large number of individuals who support innovative medical
> research to cure and alleviate disease.
> THIS ACTION ALERT IS OPEN TO OUR INTERNATIONAL DIABETES ADVOCATES AS
> WELL.
> Click here to weigh in on this issue now.
> http://main.diabetes.org/site/R?i=PBiIJb_7UjQFX-HnzLM3OQ..
> To unsubscribe from all future e-mail, paste the following URL into your
> browser:
> http://main.diabetes.org/site/CO?i=H-IGYY-PWJEp_IYt1qiCio8uFizeWeKm&c…
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 03:24:00 GMT, Skinny <n…@no.com> Screamed
something into the void that sounded like:
>Maybe I’m paranoid…. This is well written, but since when does the UN let
>US nuts influence that kind of decision?
actually I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the pressure to do this
banning originates with US politicians.
Basically the web site is open to everyone to send in their request to
ignore the motion to ban the research. So for those of us who use it
to send the message to the UN it is our way of saying the US people do
not support what the US government is supporting.
>The web page tried to do some long process, so I shut off my browser.
nothing under handed is going on with the American Diabetes
Association website.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>Skinny
>—————
>On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:53:07 GMT, RK wrote:
>> Urgent Action Alert
>> This Friday, the United Nations will vote on a resolution that
>> will ban all forms of cloning, including therapeutic cloning, which is
>> a type of stem cell research.
>> Click here to take action on this issue.
>> http://main.diabetes.org/site/R?i=aLRy1Yzd4ZEFX-HnzLM3OQ..
>> On Friday, November 19th, the Legal Affairs Committee of the United
>> Nations General Assembly will vote to ban all forms of cloning, both
>> reproductive and therapeutic.
>> Recently, voters in California passed Proposition 71, which funds stem
>> cell research up to $3 billion over 10 years. The American Diabetes
>> Association believes that the majority of Americans want stem cell
>> research to continue. The passage of the UN resolution would
>> undermine this and any other efforts to actively promote and protect
>> stem cell research.
>> Sadly, the United States is one of the countries leading this
>> effort to ban therapeutic cloning and is a prime sponsor of this
>> resolution.
>> Tell the United Nations to ban reproductive cloning but allow for
>> therapeutic cloning. By taking action, you will help demonstrate
>> the large number of individuals who support innovative medical
>> research to cure and alleviate disease.
>> THIS ACTION ALERT IS OPEN TO OUR INTERNATIONAL DIABETES ADVOCATES AS
>> WELL.
>> Click here to weigh in on this issue now.
>> http://main.diabetes.org/site/R?i=PBiIJb_7UjQFX-HnzLM3OQ..
>> To unsubscribe from all future e-mail, paste the following URL into your
>> browser:
>> http://main.diabetes.org/site/CO?i=H-IGYY-PWJEp_IYt1qiCio8uFizeWeKm&c…
Mâck©®
Type 1 since 1975
http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org
http://www.diabetic-talk.org
http://www.insulin-pumpers.org
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the
President, or that we are to stand by the President
right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile,
but is morally treasonable to the American public."
…Theodore Roosevelt
Well written? LOL
Try visiting the American Diabetes Association website
sometime. Sign up for email from them. I don’t mind
being spammed by something that will someday save
my life.
–
RK – t1
*Disclaimer: i’m not a doctor. I only share personal
experience of being a diabetic. I have no textbook
learning, only life itself.
———————-
In tribute to the United States of America and the State
of Israel, two bastions of strength in a world filled with strife and
terrorism.
"Skinny" <n…@no.com> wrote in message
news:cyrvstyrnbqj.9vg8zr6z87fx.dlg@40tude.net…
: Maybe I’m paranoid…. This is well written, but since when does the UN
let
: US nuts influence that kind of decision?
:
: The web page tried to do some long process, so I shut off my browser.
:
:
: Skinny
: —————
:
:
:
: On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:53:07 GMT, RK wrote:
:
: > Urgent Action Alert
: >
: > This Friday, the United Nations will vote on a resolution that
: > will ban all forms of cloning, including therapeutic cloning, which is
: > a type of stem cell research.
: >
: > Click here to take action on this issue.
: > http://main.diabetes.org/site/R?i=aLRy1Yzd4ZEFX-HnzLM3OQ..
: >
: > On Friday, November 19th, the Legal Affairs Committee of the United
: > Nations General Assembly will vote to ban all forms of cloning, both
: > reproductive and therapeutic.
: >
: > Recently, voters in California passed Proposition 71, which funds stem
: > cell research up to $3 billion over 10 years. The American Diabetes
: > Association believes that the majority of Americans want stem cell
: > research to continue. The passage of the UN resolution would
: > undermine this and any other efforts to actively promote and protect
: > stem cell research.
: >
: > Sadly, the United States is one of the countries leading this
: > effort to ban therapeutic cloning and is a prime sponsor of this
: > resolution.
: >
: > Tell the United Nations to ban reproductive cloning but allow for
: > therapeutic cloning. By taking action, you will help demonstrate
: > the large number of individuals who support innovative medical
: > research to cure and alleviate disease.
: >
: > THIS ACTION ALERT IS OPEN TO OUR INTERNATIONAL DIABETES ADVOCATES AS
: > WELL.
: >
: > Click here to weigh in on this issue now.
: > http://main.diabetes.org/site/R?i=PBiIJb_7UjQFX-HnzLM3OQ..
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: > To unsubscribe from all future e-mail, paste the following URL into your
: > browser:
: >
http://main.diabetes.org/site/CO?i=H-IGYY-PWJEp_IYt1qiCio8uFizeWeKm&c…
"RK" <x…@xxx.net> wrote in message
news:nDQmd.32$182.17@fe1.columbus.rr.com…
> Urgent Action Alert
> This Friday, the United Nations will vote on a resolution that
> will ban all forms of cloning, including therapeutic cloning, which is
> a type of stem cell research.
> Click here to take action on this issue.
> [ ... ]
The human has always wanted to act like God, and to gain control over life
and death. This is just a new way of doing it.
All research is for the sake of the good, and almost all research may be
used for the bad.
I am a diabetic, Type I, and have been for 23 years. I would love to get rid
of my diabetes, and I wold like to be sure that my children and grand
children will never have to face it. Still I do not think that stem cells is
the way to go.
I support I ban, and it is greta that the UN finally tries to take an action
in an area where they might acchieve something. We know that its member
countries do not always follow its decisions, and definitely not if there is
money involved. USA is one of those. But if the USA really manages to get a
stem cell ban, and the UN does, than there is a hope for our future.
> To unsubscribe from all future e-mail, paste the following URL into your
> browser:
> http://main.diabetes.org/site/CO?i=H-IGYY-PWJEp_IYt1qiCio8uFizeWeKm&c…
I am really not sure if there is any way to unsubscribe from single news.
That must be done locally.
—————-
Have a nice day!
Bjørn BL.
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:53:07 GMT, "RK" <x…@xxx.net> wrote:
>THIS ACTION ALERT IS OPEN TO OUR INTERNATIONAL DIABETES ADVOCATES AS
>WELL.
Well, it wouldn’t let me in unless I could note my US State of
residence.
I agree with the concept of the research, but I doubt that this method
will achieve anything.
Cheers, Alan, T2 d&e, Australia.
Remove weight and carbs to email.
—
Everything in Moderation – Except Laughter.
just passing it on… I didnt’ write it so dont shoot the messenger.
i’ve a double investment myself. now that my daughter has hashi’s
i dont want to see my grandkids with some autoimmune disease either.
–
RK – t1
*Disclaimer: i’m not a doctor. I only share personal
experience of being a diabetic. I have no textbook
learning, only life itself.
———————-
In tribute to the United States of America and the State
of Israel, two bastions of strength in a world filled with strife and
terrorism.
"Alan" <loralweightandca…@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:mnnop0hddk9dnte080fvfc7l47j4i22ttg@4ax.com…
: On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:53:07 GMT, "RK" <x…@xxx.net> wrote:
:
: >THIS ACTION ALERT IS OPEN TO OUR INTERNATIONAL DIABETES ADVOCATES AS
: >WELL.
:
: Well, it wouldn’t let me in unless I could note my US State of
: residence.
:
: I agree with the concept of the research, but I doubt that this method
: will achieve anything.
:
:
: Cheers, Alan, T2 d&e, Australia.
: Remove weight and carbs to email.
: —
: Everything in Moderation – Except Laughter.
Skinny wrote:
> Maybe I’m paranoid…. This is well written, but since when does the UN let
> US nuts influence that kind of decision?
> The web page tried to do some long process, so I shut off my browser.
> Skinny
> —————
[Snip]
AS I understand it, any nation can propose a draft resolution for
approval. Your reference to "US nuts" in this case would presumably be
a reference to the US representatives to the UN – i.e. the govt.
Of course just because he proposal has been made and is being voted on
does not mean that it will be passed.
Nor does it follow that just because the US wants it, the US will get it.
However, being such an economic power with a great deal of influence,
such things will be "negotiated". How severe the "negotiation" is will
depend on many factors such as trade deals etc and more than anything,
how determined the proposing nation is to make it happen. Such is the
way of international politics.
Considering the US’s determination on other issues, it makes you wonder
what "incentives" were discussed on other resolution proposals.
I am only using the US as an example here. I am sure that all nations
attempt to use as persuasive a method as possible at the time, including
my own.
We just need to remember that when we are wondering why the leaders of a
particular country have acted a certain way when it seems that it is the
opposite of the views of the populace.
——————–
VBH
T2/UK/A1c 5.8/ 1000Met/Dx Oct-03