You can read this while you wait.
"Experts urge cholesterol tests for 9- to 11-year-olds" by Deborah Kotz Globe Staff / November 12, 2011
In a sweeping set of new guidelines designed to protect children from future heart disease, a panel of experts convened by the government recommended yesterday that all children have a cholesterol screening blood test between the ages of 9 and 11.
The intent is to identify children early on who are at risk of heart disease as adults and encourage them to change their diet and get more exercise, but critics said they feared many children would also be placed on drugs to lower cholesterol....
It's always about the drug$ when it comes to government, if you know what I mean.
I'm not opposed to better diets and exercise; however, what makes you think a lying government cares about the kids?
Some doctors say they worry that a greater number of children will be put on cholesterol-lowering statins at younger ages - and possibly kept on them for years or decades without knowing what benefits or long-term risks they would incur from the drugs. Some people experience muscle pain and liver problems from taking statins. In rare cases, life-threatening muscle damage can occur.
Hey, WHO CARES if PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES are PROFITING?
“The guidelines aren’t well thought out and represent an irrational exuberance for testing,’’ said Dr. Steven Nissen, chairman of cardiovascular medicine at the Cleveland Clinic....
That's GOVERNMENT!!!
--more--"
"Panel says boys should get HPV vaccine also" October 26, 2011|By Deborah Kotz, Globe Staff
A federal advisory committee recommended that 11- and 12-year-old boys routinely receive a vaccine that girls have been given the past five years to stop a sexually transmitted virus — a move that could help increase acceptance of the human papillomavirus shot.
Related: Schoolgirl, 14, dies after being given cervical cancer jab
HPV Vaccine Kills At Least 21 Girls So Far
And now they want to quietly kill your boys so Merck can make out.
Boston-area physicians said the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ unanimous recommendation, which is likely to be adopted by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, will make them more willing to urge parents to seek the vaccine for their sons. Until now, doctors could give the vaccine to preteen boys, but without the official blessing of the nation’s leading disease prevention agency.
“I will now recommend it more strongly,” said Dr. Lydia Shrier, an adolescent medicine physician at Children’s Hospital Boston. “I had to be more vague in the past, saying it was available but wasn’t recommended; usually, parents do what I recommend.”
A majority of panel members also endorsed the vaccine for males 13 to 21, but by the narrowest of margins, with eight of 14 members voting in favor.
About 20 million Americans are infected with human papillomavirus — known commonly as HPV — which has been associated with genital warts and a variety of cancers, including cervical, anal, penile, and an increasing incidence of throat cancer. An estimated 7,000 men develop HPV-related cancers every year.
While the CDC will issue its final recommendation in the next few months, it usually follows the lead of its advisory panel on immunizations.
The vaccine was initially approved and recommended in 2006 for girls and women up to age 26 to prevent cervical cancer and genital warts. Two years ago, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the HPV vaccine for teenage boys and men up to age 26, but the CDC declined to recommend it, stating only that they “may get HPV vaccine.”
That lack of a CDC endorsement led some insurance companies, including Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, to decline to cover the vaccine for males even while providing coverage for females. In August, Blue Cross decided to cover the vaccine in boys and men following a Globe story but required doctors to submit requests for coverage for individual patients. The insurer issued a statement saying it would now provide full coverage without pre-approval for those who fall within the age range that will be officially determined by the CDC.
In determining whether to overturn its initial decision not to recommend the vaccine for males, the committee took into account new research documenting an increase in HPV-related head and neck cancers and showing that the virus was responsible for more than 80 percent of anal cancers, according to Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases.
A study this month in the Journal of Clinical Oncology found that the percentage of throat cancers caused by HPV rose from 16 percent in the 1980s to 72 percent during 2000 to 2004.
“These HPV-related cancers have become an epidemic, and we don’t understand why,” said Dr. Robert Haddad, chief of the center for head and neck oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.
They will say anything to get their needle$ in you.
The vast majority of the throat cancer he treats, he said, is HPV-related — transmitted via oral sex — rather than because of smoking or alcohol abuse and is twice as common in men than women. He and other specialists said they believe the HPV vaccine could reduce the incidence of these cancers although HPV vaccine manufacturers haven’t examined that in studies.
Only two-thirds of Massachusetts girls ages 13 to 17 have received one dose of the HPV vaccine, and just 47 percent have received all three doses required to give full protection against the virus. The federal panel lamented that more teen girls have not received the vaccine.
Did they lament the deaths?
The panel noted that “male vaccination is most cost effective when coverage of females is low,” because it provides a bigger benefit by preventing transmission of the virus from males to unvaccinated females, Schuchat said in a press briefing.
Whether parents will readily embrace the vaccine for their prepubescent sons remains to be seen. While many have been reluctant to get their daughters vaccinated, fearing that it might be perceived as giving them the green light to have sex, they may not have the same hesitation for boys, according to Shrier.
That wouldn't be so bad if it didn't feel so damn good.
Also see: Obama backs decision to restrict morning-after pill sales
So the little girl is given a shot that can kill her but can't get a pill for unwanted pregnancy?
CDC officials said they hope that enough time has passed since the vaccine’s introduction to prove to parents that it’s safe — the most common side effects include injection site reactions, headaches, and fever — and they’re trying to get doctors to spread the word that it’s most effective in 11- and 12-year-olds. New research has shown that they have stronger immune responses to the vaccine than older teens and young adults.
When you no longer trust government and its institutions then no amount of time can win you back -- unless they START TELLING THE TRUTH, the WHOLE TRUTH, and NOTHING BUT the TRUTH!!
--more--"
And they care so much about the girls they won't even ban BPA!
"Study cites possible BPA effect on girls" October 24, 2011|By Associated Press
CHICAGO - Exposure to BPA before birth could affect girls’ behavior at age 3, according to the latest study on potential health effects of the widespread chemical.
Preschool-aged girls whose mothers had relatively high urine levels of bisphenol-A during pregnancy scored worse than other young girls but still within a normal range on behavior measures, including anxiety and hyperactivity.
The results are not conclusive, and experts not involved in the study said factors other than BPA might explain the results....
Pfffft!
--more--"
Related: Canned soup tied to level of BPA
Also see: Massachusetts' BPA
They won't ban it because it's too costly to industry and it is in practically everything.
"Shrinking safety net meets wider toxic risk; US preparing to cut aid for lead poisoning prevention efforts" December 05, 2011|By David Abel, Globe Staff
Programs to fight lead poisoning in Massachusetts have been slashed during the past two years because of squeezed state and federal budgets, and now Congress is poised to eliminate the remaining federal aid - even as scientists last month concluded that the toxic metal can harm children at half the levels previously thought....
Still convinced they care about your kids?
--more--"
Related: So Hungry I Could Eat a Horse
Let me get this straight. They are eliminating funding for lead poisoning and putting funds into the slaughter of horses.
Yes, thankfully the state is looking out for your kids:
"Foster children given powerful drugs, study finds" November 21, 2011|By Benedict Carey, New York Times
NEW YORK - Foster children are being prescribed cocktails of powerful antipsychosis drugs just as frequently as some of the most mentally disabled youngsters on Medicaid, a study suggests....
The drugs include Risperdal, Seroquel, and Zyprexa - among other so-called major tranquilizers - that were developed for schizophrenia but are now used as all-purpose drugs for almost any psychiatric symptoms....
Related: You Are Crazy if You Take Anti-Psychotics
America Asleep in the Streets
Should children really be prescribed that drug?
--more--"
Related: The End of Riley
Doctor Chooses Money Over Medicine
Same with government.
"Foster children more likely to be prescribed psychotropic drugs than nonfoster children, GAO study finds" by Tracy Jan, Globe Staff
WASHINGTON -- Foster children in Massachusetts are nearly four times as likely to be prescribed psychotropic drugs as non-foster children in the state, an alarming figure released in a report this morning by the Government Accountability Office during a congressional hearing....
It's all about the, well, you know....
Hundreds of children in five states, including Florida, Michigan, Oregon, and Texas, -- selected for their geographic diversity and large foster care population -- are on a regimen of five or more psychotropic drugs even though no evidence supports their concomitant use....
No wonder our kids are brain-dead.
“The report we have received from GAO is both shocking and unacceptable,” said Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown, who fired off letters yesterday to the heads of the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families as well as MassHealth to express his concerns. “The very system that is supposed to be protecting these children is failing them.”
That's my point.
Brown is the ranking member of the Senate subcommittee on federal financial management, government information, federal services and international security, which held today’s hearing....
The state’s numbers may be skewed because the GAO only examined Medicaid fee-for-service data, which in Massachusetts includes most foster children, while other children insured by Medicaid are largely covered by managed-care plans.
And, the report said, higher levels of psychotropic drug prescriptions may be appropriate to deal with the increased prevalence and greater severity of mental health conditions among foster children. The study did not review appropriateness of the prescriptions because that would have required a case-by-case review of each child.
But a five-drug cocktail?
--more--"
At least the kid is covered:
"More children have health coverage" November 30, 2011|By Kelli Kennedy, Associated Press
MIAMI - The news comes as the number of uninsured adults has risen in the past few years. While yesterday’s report is promising, analysts worry that increased enrollment may be difficult to sustain as state lawmakers slash budgets....
--more--"
We may have a problem here, parents:
"Alerts not often given on heavy children" December 06, 2011|By Lauran Neergaard, Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Pediatricians are supposed to track if youngsters are putting on too many pounds - but a new study found that less than a quarter of parents of overweight children recall the doctor ever saying there was a problem.
Does that mean doctors aren’t screening enough children, or aren’t frank enough in these tough conversations? Or is the real story parent denial? The research published yesterday can’t tell, but makes it clear that the message too often isn’t getting through....
Yes, it is: Giving Thanks For the Globe: Child Portion Control
I hold the agenda-pushing, gluttonous elite responsible.
Doctors have long tracked children’s height and weight during yearly checkups, but more recent guidelines urge them to calculate a youngster’s body mass index, or BMI, to screen for developing obesity....
Related:
"Researchers calculated the body mass index - a standard measurement of size.... There is growing debate about the accuracy of the standard method of calculating whether someone is overweight.... the system would put nearly half of NBA players in the overweight category"
Are you as FULL UP with the LIES as I am?
The next step is plotting that BMI on a growth chart....
To tackle lack of awareness, Children’s National has begun calculating BMIs for every child age 2 or older who is admitted for any reason.
Related: Drop and Give Me Twenty, Toddler!
Dr. Nazrat Mirza, medical director of an obesity clinic at Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, calls it “a teachable moment.’’
Anytime authority says that beware.
--more--"
Here is another teachable moment:
"Congress wants pizza, fries to stay in schools" November 16, 2011|Associated Press
WASHINGTON - In an effort many 9-year-olds will cheer, Congress wants pizza and french fries to stay on school lunch lines and is fighting the Obama administration’s efforts to take unhealthy foods out of schools.
Related: Massachusetts School Lunch
If the government really cared about your kids would they be SERVING THEM SPOILED SLOP?!! If I were a kid I would be ordering the pizza and fries rather than the entree.
The final version of a spending bill released late Monday would unravel school lunch standards the Agriculture Department proposed this year. These include limiting the use of potatoes on the lunch line, putting new restrictions on sodium, and boosting the use of whole grains. The legislation would block or delay all of those efforts.
The bill also would allow tomato paste on pizzas to be counted as a vegetable, as it is now. The USDA had wanted to only count a half-cup of tomato paste or more as a vegetable, and a serving of pizza has less than that.
That is SUPPOSED TO BE a Reagan-era joke!!!!!
Food companies that produce frozen pizzas for schools, the salt industry, and potato growers requested the changes and lobbied Congress....
You see who Congress REALLY WANT$ to KEEP FED!!!
The USDA’s proposal could have pushed pizza-makers and potato growers out of the school lunch business....
The health, hunger, and nutrition of our kids is a BUSINESS?
No wonder school lunches suck.
--more--"
Makes one want to return to the nipple:
"FDA revokes approval of drug for breast cancer" November 19, 2011|By Deborah Kotz, Globe Staff
Thousands of women with advanced breast cancer who are being treated with the drug Avastin may be taken off the drug after the US Food and Drug Adminimstration announced today that is revoking the medication’s approval for treatment of breast cancer.
The FDA commissioner, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg, said she based her decision on studies concluding that the drug has not been shown to be safe or life-extending for women with breast cancer that has spread.
I think we all know why it was ru$hed onto the market.
Avastin will remain on the market to treat other types of cancer — colon, lung, kidney and brain — and doctors can choose to prescribe it off-label for breast cancer patients, but insurance companies may no longer cover the $88,000-a-year therapy. Blue Shield of California already decided to stop covering Avastin for breast cancer patients last month, anticipating that the FDA would drop the approval based on a recent recommendation by its advisory committee to remove breast cancer as one of the drug’s indications....
--more--"
Yeah, this government REALLY CARES ABOUT YOUR HEALTH!
This is the SAME GOVERNMENT and MEDIA that are IGNORING the RADIATED and OIL-SOAKED FOOD and rolling back all its pollution regulations?
