Follow/Subscribe

Gary Null's latest shows and articles:

Categories
Books






Hear Gary Null every day at Noon (ET) on
Progressive Radio Network!

Or listen on the go with the brand new PRN mobile app
Click to download!

 

Like Gary Null on Facebook

Gary Null's Home-Based Business Opportunity


Special Offer: Gary Null's documentary "American Veterans: Discarded and Forgotten" DVD  is now available for $19.95! (regularly $40) Click here to order!
For more info. and to watch the Trailer for "American Veterans: Discarded and Forgotten", Click here!


Gary Null Films

Buy Today!:

CALL 877-627-5065

 

   

Check out our new website "The Vaccine Initiative" at www.vaccineinitiative.org - Educating your choice through Research, Articles, Video and Audio Interviews...  


The latest from
Gary Null -
garynullfilms.com!
Now you can
instantly stream
Gary's films online. Each film costs 4.95, and you can view it straight from your computer!

Check out Big Green TV: Environmental Education for Kids!

Gary Null Award-Winning Documentaries That Make A Difference

Gary Null say NO to GMO!!! part 1.mp4

Gary Null In Huntington - Knocking On the Devil's Door Screening

Dr. Andrew Wakefield response to the measles outbreak in South Wales

Forging his way through the predictable UK media censorship: Dr Andrew Wakefield Responds to Measles Outbreak in Swansea

Entries in Diabetes (9)

Tuesday
Sep112012

Jason Mark -- Whoa, Is Organic Food No Healthier Than Non-Organic? Controversy Erupts Over Study

I had barely drank my first cup of coffee when I heard the news yesterday morning on NPR [3] – organic food, it turns out, may not be that much healthier for you than industrial food.

The NPR story was based on a new study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine [4] which concluded, based on a review of existing studies, that there is no “strong evidence that organic foods are significantly more nutritious than conventional foods.” The study, written by researchers at the Stanford School of Medicine, also found that eating organic foods “may reduce exposure to pesticide residues and antibiotic-resistant bacteria.”

The interwebs were soon full of headlines talking down the benefits of organic foods. “Stanford Scientists Cast Doubt on Advantages of Organic Meat and Produce,” the NY Times [5] announced, as reporter Kenneth Chang pointed out that pesticide residues on industrially grown fruits and vegetables are “almost always under the allowed safety limits.”CBS news [6], running the AP story on the Stanford study, informed readers: “Organic food hardly healthier, study suggests.”

Organic agriculture advocates were quick with their rebuttals. The Environmental Working Group [7] put out a press release playing up the researchers’ findings that organic produce has less pesticide residue. Charles Benbrook, a professor of agriculture at Washington State University and former chief scientist at The Organic Center [8], wrote a detailed critique you can find here [9]. Benbrook noted that the Stanford study didn’t include data from the USDA and US EPA about pesticide residue levels. He also pointed out that the researchers’ definition of “significantly more nutritious” was a little squishy.

Is this the last word on the nutritional benefits of organic foods? Hardly. As Benbrook said, in the coming years improved measurement methods will hopefully allow for better comparisons of food nutritional quality. (You can find an Earth Island Journal cover story on this very issue here [10].)

I’ll leave it to the PhDs and MDs to fight this out among themselves. As they do, I’ll keep buying (and growing [11]) organic foods. Why? Because even if organic foods are not demonstrably better for my health than industrial foods, I know that organics are better for the health of other people – the people who grow our nation’s food.

To his credit, NPR’s new ag reporter, Dan Charles, was careful to note that organic agriculture “can bring environmental benefit[s].” One of the most important environmental benefits organic agriculture delivers is a boost to public health and safety.

Let’s say you’re not worried about the relatively small amounts of pesticides that end up on the industrial foods at the supermarket. (Though you should read this [12] Tom Philpott dissection of the Stanford report when considering your risk of eating pesticide residue.) Well, you should still be concerned about the huge amounts of pesticides that end up in the air and water of farming communities – chemicals that can lead to birth defects, endocrine disruption, and neurological and respiratory problems.

When pesticides are sprayed onto farm fields, they don’t just stay in that one place. They seep into the water and waft through the air and accumulate on the shoes and clothes of farm workers. In recent years in California (the country’s top ag producer) an average of 37 pesticide drift incidents [13] a year have made people sick. Pesticides also find their way into the homes of farm workers. A study by researchers at the University of Washington found that the children of farm workers have higher exposure to pesticides [14] than other children in the same community. When researchers in Mexico looked into pesticide exposure of farm workers there, they found that 20 percent of field hands “showed acute poisoning. [15]

The health impacts on those workers were serious and included “diverse alterations of the digestive, neurological, respiratory, circulatory, dermatological, renal, and reproductive system.” The researchers concluded: “there exist health hazards for those farm workers exposed to pesticides, at organic and cellular levels.”

There are shelves’ worth of studies [16] documenting the health dangers of pesticide exposure. A study published last year found that prenatal exposure to organophosphate pesticides [17] – which are often sprayed on crops and in urban areas to control insects – can lower children’s IQ. A follow-up investigation into prenatal pesticide exposure concluded that boys’ developing brains appear to be more vulnerable [18] than girls’ brains. A study by Colorado State University epidemiologist Lori Cragin found that women who drink water containing low levels of the herbicide atrazine are more likely to have low estrogen levels [19] and irregular menstrual cycles; about three-quarters of all US corn fields are treated with atrazine annually. British scientists who examined the health effects of fungicides sprayed on fruits and vegetable crops discovered that 30 out of 37 chemicals studied altered males’ hormone production [20].

Read more.. http://www.alternet.org/food/whoa-organic-food-no-healthier-non-organic-controversy-erupts-over-study

Monday
Jun042012

Dark Chocolate Could Prevent Heart Problems in High-Risk People

 Daily consumption of dark chocolate can reduce cardiovascular events, such as heart attacks and strokes, in people with metabolic syndrome (a cluster of factors that increases the risk of developing heart disease and diabetes), finds a study published in the British Medical Journal.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death worldwide. Dark chocolate (containing at least 60% cocoa solids) is rich in flavonoids -- known to have heart protecting effects -- but this has only been examined in short term studies.

So a team of researchers from Melbourne, Australia used a mathematical model to predict the long-term health effects and cost effectiveness of daily dark chocolate consumption in 2,013 people already at high risk of heart disease.

All participants had high blood pressure and met the criteria for metabolic syndrome, but had no history of heart disease or diabetes and were not on blood pressure lowering therapy.

With 100% compliance (best case scenario), the researchers show that daily dark chocolate consumption could potentially avert 70 non-fatal and 15 fatal cardiovascular events per 10,000 people treated over 10 years.

Even when compliance levels were reduced to 80%, the number of non-fatal and fatal events potentially averted was 55 and 10 per 10,000 people treated over 10 years, and could still be considered an effective intervention strategy.

Read More:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120531200822.htm

Tuesday
May222012

Doctors Petition White House to Bar Obama, Biden from Eating Junk Food in Public

A physicians nonprofit wants President Barack Obama to stop chowing down on hot dogs in front of news cameras. In a petition being filed on May 10, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine asks the White House to issue an executive order banning staged photo opportunities that show the president, the first family, the vice president, and members of the president’s cabinet eating unhealthy foods—including processed meats—that can cause cancer and obesity.

“The White House would never set up a photo op showing the president buying cigarettes, so why is it okay to show him eating a hot dog?” says PCRM nutrition education director Susan Levin, M.S., R.D. “Processed meats like hot dogs kill more Americans each year than tobacco does, and they cost taxpayers billions of dollars in healthcare. As role model to millions of Americans the president has a responsibility to watch what he eats in public.”

Since taking office, President Obama has posed for the cameras eating a hot dog at a basketball game with British Prime Minister David Cameron, eating cheeseburgers with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, and stopping at a D.C. burger restaurant to share a cheeseburger with a reporter, among other similar instances. His predecessors, including Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan have also been caught on camera eating unhealthy foods, from ice cream to a Big Mac.

Read More:

http://www.pcrm.org/media/news/white-house-bar-obama-biden-junk-food-photos

Tuesday
May222012

Nearly a Quarter of U.S. Teens Have Diabetes or Prediabetes

The prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes among teens is up from 9 percent in 1999-2000 to 23 percent in 2007-2008, according to a new study published in Pediatrics. Researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reviewed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a continuous database analyzing the health and nutritional status of Americans, to find that children ages 12 to 19, about 34 percent of whom are overweight or obese, are at increased risk for several cardiovascular disease risk factors such as high blood pressure, abnormal cholesterol levels, and diabetes. Prevalence of at least one cardiovascular disease risk factor was at 37, 49, and 61 percent for normal weight, overweight, and obese teens, respectively.

Read More:

http://www.pcrm.org/health/medNews/nearly-quarter-teens-have-diabetes-or-prediabetes

Thursday
May032012

Sharon Begley - As America's waistline expands, costs soar

U.S. hospitals are ripping out wall-mounted toilets and replacing them with floor models to better support obese patients. The Federal Transit Administration wants buses to be tested for the impact of heavier riders on steering and braking. Cars are burning nearly a billion gallons of gasoline more a year than if passengers weighed what they did in 1960.

The nation's rising rate of obesity has been well-chronicled. But businesses, governments and individuals are only now coming to grips with the costs of those extra pounds, many of which are even greater than believed only a few years ago: The additional medical spending due to obesity is double previous estimates and exceeds even those of smoking, a new study shows.

Many of those costs have dollar signs in front of them, such as the higher health insurance premiums everyone pays to cover those extra medical costs. Other changes, often cost-neutral, are coming to the built environment in the form of wider seats in public places from sports stadiums to bus stops.

The startling economic costs of obesity, often borne by the non-obese, could become the epidemic's second-hand smoke. Only when scientists discovered that nonsmokers were developing lung cancer and other diseases from breathing smoke-filled air did policymakers get serious about fighting the habit, in particular by establishing nonsmoking zones. The costs that smoking added to Medicaid also spurred action. Now, as economists put a price tag on sky-high body mass indexes (BMIs), policymakers as well as the private sector are mobilizing to find solutions to the obesity epidemic.

Read More:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/30/us-obesity-idUSBRE83T0C820120430

Tuesday
May012012

Dr. Rivkah Roth - Diabetes is Big Business, but for Whom?

This week (April 2012), 1st Quarter net profit financial statements were released in business publications worldwide. Among the company net profit earnings reported were some of the biggest manufacturers of diabetes and diabetes-related medications.

This blog is written by a health professional and not a business savvy individual. It, therefore, does not claim accuracy nor is this list anywhere close to complete. But, it should get us thinking. Here are the reports from just five of the major couple of dozen or so pharmaceutical companies:

•   Merck reported $11.7 billion[1] net earnings from January to March 2012, largely boosted by higher sales of their Januvia and Janumetdiabetes drugs.

•   The Sanofi report exceeds expectations with a 13% increase to $3,2 billion[2] and includes diabetes drugs such as Lantus.

•   Novartis announced an 18%[3] net profit drop to $2.33 billion (still a hefty 3 month profit!) among a sales drop to $13.74 billions.[4] - Any of these "losses" can’t be that devastating considering that Novartis, early this week, announced their plans for a new $550 million production site in its native Switzerland.

•   Nova Nordisk reports an 18% increase to a hefty $822 million net profit[5] and plans on expanding its US-based diabetes sales force by 15% in 2012.[6]

On the other hand, we have a consumer advocacy group calling on the FDA to ban their diabetes drug Victoza[7] over suspicion that it might contribute to thyroid cancer, pancreatitis, and possibly other safety issues not eliminated or excluded by human studies.

Read More:

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/diabetes-big-business-whom


Monday
Apr022012

Dr. Mercola - Corn Syrup Linked to Diabetes

A new study attributed the significant rise of diabetes cases to the growing consumption of refined carbohydrates. The study also supported evidence that the advice from public health regarding limiting their intake of sugary foods and lowering their fat intake might have backfired. Over the past 40 years, the number of obese people and those diagnosed with diabetes has risen dramatically.

Experts blamed these rising health problems on the high numbers of sedentary lifestyles and poor diets.

A study gathered information on food composition and consumption over the years 1909 to 1997. Data from these findings were compared to the rates of disease from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. When researchers evaluated the results they found that the drop in fiber consumption and heavy consumption of corn syrup found in most processed foods were at the root of the problem, not the number of proteins, fats or carbohydrates.

Read More:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2004/05/26/corn-syrup-diabetes.aspx

Monday
Jan302012

High Animal Fat Diet Increases Gestational Diabetes Risk, Study Finds

Women who consumed a diet high in animal fat and cholesterol before pregnancy were at higher risk for gestational diabetes than women whose diets were lower in animal fat and cholesterol, according to researchers at the National Institutes of Health and Harvard University. 

Gestational diabetes is a form of diabetes seen during pregnancy. Gestational diabetes increases the risk for certain pregnancy complications and health problems in the newborn.

Women whose diets were high in total fat or other kinds of fats -- but not in animal fat or cholesterol -- did not have an increased risk.

Moreover, the increased risk for gestational diabetes seen with animal fat and cholesterol appeared to be independent of other, dietary and non-dietary, risk factors for gestational diabetes. For example, exercise is known to reduce the risk of gestational diabetes. Among women who exercised, however, those who consumed higher amounts of animal fat and cholesterol had a higher risk than those whose diets were lower in these types of fat.

Read More:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120125163406.htm

 

Monday
Jan302012

Too much television can give you diabetes

"The message is simple. Cutting back on TV watching can significantly reduce risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and premature mortality," said senior author Frank Hu, professor of nutrition and epidemiology at HSPH. 

"We should not only promote increasing physical activity levels but also reduce sedentary behaviour, especially prolonged TV watching," he added. 

Hu and first author Anders Grontved, a doctoral student and visiting researcher in the HSPH Department of Nutrition, conducted a meta-analysis, a systematic assessment of all published studies from 1970 to 2011 that linked TV viewing with increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and premature death. 

Eight large prospective cohort studies from the United States, Europe, and Australia met the researchers'' criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. 

Read More:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/health-fitness/health/Too-much-television-can-give-you-diabetes/articleshow/8861830.cms