Kamis, 29 Mei 2008
Rabu, 28 Mei 2008
Vaccines
I am a label reader. Whenever I'm thinking about buying food in a box, which is rare, I typically read the whole label to look for sinister ingredients. So when I got a booster vaccine for tetanus last week, naturally I asked for the product information.
Along with a nice dose of tetanus and diphtheria toxoids, my medial deltoid received 0.28 mg of aluminum, up to 0.3 micrograms of mercury, and up to 100 micrograms of "residual formaldehyde". I got the vaccine because I like being able to chew, but I wasn't able to lift my arm for several days. I don't know if that was due to an immune response to the tetanus and diphtheria (probably) or if it was caused by the aluminum, mercury and formaldehyde they injected into my arm.
We work with formaldehyde in my lab, and I can tell you it is not to be messed with. I had to take an entire training course just to use it, during which I learned that if there's enough of it to smell, it's toxic. 0.1 parts per million in the air is enough to cause a burning sensation in the mucous membranes. We always use it in the fume hood. Formaldehyde is a toxin, a carcinogen, and a teratogen (causes birth defects). So I'm sure you'll understand why I wasn't too happy about having 100 ug of it injected into my body.
I'm not criticizing the concept of vaccines, I just wish they'd make more of an effort to clean them up!
Along with a nice dose of tetanus and diphtheria toxoids, my medial deltoid received 0.28 mg of aluminum, up to 0.3 micrograms of mercury, and up to 100 micrograms of "residual formaldehyde". I got the vaccine because I like being able to chew, but I wasn't able to lift my arm for several days. I don't know if that was due to an immune response to the tetanus and diphtheria (probably) or if it was caused by the aluminum, mercury and formaldehyde they injected into my arm.
We work with formaldehyde in my lab, and I can tell you it is not to be messed with. I had to take an entire training course just to use it, during which I learned that if there's enough of it to smell, it's toxic. 0.1 parts per million in the air is enough to cause a burning sensation in the mucous membranes. We always use it in the fume hood. Formaldehyde is a toxin, a carcinogen, and a teratogen (causes birth defects). So I'm sure you'll understand why I wasn't too happy about having 100 ug of it injected into my body.
I'm not criticizing the concept of vaccines, I just wish they'd make more of an effort to clean them up!
Selasa, 27 Mei 2008
Exercise Didn't Keep Us From Getting Fat
One of the surprising things I noticed when I was poring over data from the NHANES survey (US CDC National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) from 1975 to 2006 is that the number of inactive people has diminished in that same time period from 50% to 24%. This is shocking to most people. We have this romanticized idea that in the 1970s people were more active, as if everyone chopped wood and walked 15 miles to work in the morning. The reality is, there were office jobs, housewives and cars without the large numbers of runners and gym-goers we have today.
Granted, NHANES data are self-reported and should be taken with a grain of salt. However, Chris at Conditioning Research pointed me to a study looking at changes in energy expenditure from the 1980s to the present in North America and Europe. It doesn't suffer from the same biases because it's based on direct measurement rather than self-reporting. Here's the executive summary: we're expending slightly more energy than we used to, partly because we exercise more and partly because it takes more energy to move our heavier bodies around.
I'm certainly not blaming the obesity problem on an increase in physical activity, but I do think we can safely rule out inactivity as the reason we've gotten fatter. In my mind, this only leaves one major possible cause for the obesity epidemic: changes in diet. Don't get me wrong, I think exercise is good. It has numerous positive effects on physical and mental health. But it's not as powerful of a tool for fat loss and general health as diet.
Anecdotally, I do know several people who lose fat when they exercise regularly. I also know some who don't lose fat when they exercise. Exercise and a healthy diet converge on some of the same metabolic pathways, such as sensitivity to insulin. But diet changes are far more effective than exercise at correcting metabolic problems. The reason is simple: the problems a person corrects with a good diet are caused by a poor diet to begin with.
Granted, NHANES data are self-reported and should be taken with a grain of salt. However, Chris at Conditioning Research pointed me to a study looking at changes in energy expenditure from the 1980s to the present in North America and Europe. It doesn't suffer from the same biases because it's based on direct measurement rather than self-reporting. Here's the executive summary: we're expending slightly more energy than we used to, partly because we exercise more and partly because it takes more energy to move our heavier bodies around.
I'm certainly not blaming the obesity problem on an increase in physical activity, but I do think we can safely rule out inactivity as the reason we've gotten fatter. In my mind, this only leaves one major possible cause for the obesity epidemic: changes in diet. Don't get me wrong, I think exercise is good. It has numerous positive effects on physical and mental health. But it's not as powerful of a tool for fat loss and general health as diet.
Anecdotally, I do know several people who lose fat when they exercise regularly. I also know some who don't lose fat when they exercise. Exercise and a healthy diet converge on some of the same metabolic pathways, such as sensitivity to insulin. But diet changes are far more effective than exercise at correcting metabolic problems. The reason is simple: the problems a person corrects with a good diet are caused by a poor diet to begin with.
Selasa, 20 Mei 2008

Hindari Pikun Dengan Centella Green Tea
Seiring pertumbuhan usia tidak hanya kinerja fisik yang menurun tetapi juga kemampuan berpikir diakibatkan makin melemahnya daya kerja otak (pikun) dan salah satu penyebab pikun yang utama adalah Alzheimer, keadaan dimana rusaknya jaringan otak yang disebabkan oleh kurangnya gizi, sirkulasi darah ke otak yang kurang lancar dan faktor keturunan. Dampak pikun yang sangat terasa adalah menurunnya kinerja memori dan kemampuan memecahkan masalah sehari-hari. Bahayanya penyakit ini apabila menyerang di usia produktif dimana memori atau otak sangat diharapkan sekali penggunaannya dalam meningkatkan produktifitas kerja, istilah yang ngetrend saat ini adalah "Smart Worker", orang yang mempunya produktifitas tinggi dengan memanfaatkan semaksimal mungkin kinerja otak (akal sehat).
Selain itu penyakit ini perlu diwaspadai karena dapat mengganggu kehidupan penderita juga kehidupan orang lain di sekitarnya. Orang yang pikun seringkali lupa apa yang baru saja diperbuat, semisal makan, minum vitamin atau obat, menaruh barang, dan lain-lain. Didalam bisnis penyakit pikun sangat berbahaya karena sering lupa akan janji, commitment, dan yang lainnya yang berdampak pada komplen atau ketidak puasan pelanggan atau partner kita sehingga dapat menghancurkan secara bertahap bisnis yang kita bangun dengan susah payah.
Pegagan/ Antanan (centella asiatic. linn) diyakini memiliki khasiat membantu meningkatkan daya ingat, senyawa aktif yang terkandung dalam Pegagan diyakini mampu merevitalisasi sel- sel otak serta melancarkan aliran darah ke otak sehingga kinerja otak dapat termaintain dengan baik, karena manfaat tersebut pegagan dikenal juga sebagai ”herbal makanannya otak”. Di antara sekian banyak kandungan bahan aktif pada pegagan seperti asam bebas, mineral, vitamin B dan C, senyawa utama yang dikandungnya adalah triterpenoid glycoside. Triterpenoid merupakan senyawa aktif penyembuh luka yang luar biasa, senyawa aktif lainnya yang terkandung dalam Pegagan juga berfungsi sebagai penenang, antistres dan anticemas. Peganan”.
Fungsi lain yang tak kalah hebat dari pegagan ialah kemampuannya dalam merevitalisasi sel lain. Kandungan Asiaticoside-nya berfungsi meningkatkan perbaikan dan penguatan sel-sel kulit, stimulasi pertumbuhan kuku, rambut, dan jaringan ikat. Saponin yang terkandung dalam tanaman ini mempunyai manfaat mempengaruhi collagen (tahap pertama dalam perbaikan jaringan), misalnya dalam menghambat produksi jaringan bekas luka yang berlebihan.
Centella Green Tea diproduksi oleh PT. Liza Herbal International (Dr. Liza), perusahaan herbal berdomisili di Bogor, Jawa Barat yang telah berhasil memproduksi produk-produk Herbal Alami unggulan yang telah terdaftar di Badan POM, Dinas Kesehatan, mendapatkan Sertifikat Halal dari MUI, mendapatkan penghargaan Juara I dari Pemda Propinsi Jawa Barat dan telah melalui test serta supervisi para ahli dan profesor dari Lab IPB Bogor. Produk-produk herbal berkualitas Dr. Liza diproses dari 100% tumbuhan herbal alami Indonesia tanpa bahan kimia tambahan lainnya.
Anda dapat menikmati minuman kesehatan ini dengan rasa khas teh hijau bercampur aroma daun jeruk yang segar. Centella Green Tea, dihasilkan dari formulasi yang tepat, menghasilkan minuman kesehatan yang baik bagi anda dan keluarga.
Sumber : http://www.lizaherbal.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=44&Itemid=36
NB:
SehatHerbal.Com menyediakan produk Ektrak Centella + Green Tea baik yg dalam bentuk kasar/aur RP. 50.000/botol atau pun teh celup Rp. 30.000/kotak. Pemesanan bs ke 081310343598, email sehatherbal@gmail.com.
California "Raw" Almonds
I bought about a pound of almonds yesterday for a backpacking trip I'll be doing this weekend. I like to soak raw almonds, then lightly toast them. It sweetens them and breaks down some of their anti-nutrients.
When I arrived at the grocery store, the only raw almonds they had were from California. I prefer to buy domestic products when I can, but in case you haven't heard, "raw" almonds from California are no longer raw. They are required to be sterilized using steam or antiseptic gases, despite their relative safety as a raw food.
The worst part is that they are not required to label them as pasteurized; they can still be labeled as raw. The Almond Board's argument is that there's no difference in quality and pasteurized almonds are safer. I find this highly offensive and deceptive. It flies in the face of common sense. If you walked up to someone in the street and asked them what the phrase "raw milk" means, would they say "oh yeah, that means pasteurized"? A raw seed can sprout. A pasteurized seed can't. Remember all those enzymes that break down anti-nutrients when you soak beans, grains and nuts? Denatured by heat.
I tried soaking them like I would regular raw almonds. I covered them in water overnight. In the morning, I noticed that the soaking water was milky and had an unpleasant smell. The outer layer of the almonds (the most cooked part) was falling apart into the water. They also didn't have the crisp texture of soaked raw almonds.
Tonight, I toasted them lightly. They definitely taste "off", and the texture isn't as good. There's no doubt about it, pasteurized California almonds are inferior. Despite my preference for domestic products, I'll be buying Spanish almonds the next time around. If enough of us do the same, we'll hit the Almond Board in the only place that counts: its wallet.
One of the most irritating things is that the new rule is designed to edge out small producers. I can't see any other reason for it. Raw almonds are a safe food. Far safer than lettuce. Should we pasteurize lettuce? Pasteurization requires specialized, expensive equipment that will be prohibitive for the little guys. I'm sure the bigger producers will generously offer to fill the production gap.
When I arrived at the grocery store, the only raw almonds they had were from California. I prefer to buy domestic products when I can, but in case you haven't heard, "raw" almonds from California are no longer raw. They are required to be sterilized using steam or antiseptic gases, despite their relative safety as a raw food.
The worst part is that they are not required to label them as pasteurized; they can still be labeled as raw. The Almond Board's argument is that there's no difference in quality and pasteurized almonds are safer. I find this highly offensive and deceptive. It flies in the face of common sense. If you walked up to someone in the street and asked them what the phrase "raw milk" means, would they say "oh yeah, that means pasteurized"? A raw seed can sprout. A pasteurized seed can't. Remember all those enzymes that break down anti-nutrients when you soak beans, grains and nuts? Denatured by heat.
I tried soaking them like I would regular raw almonds. I covered them in water overnight. In the morning, I noticed that the soaking water was milky and had an unpleasant smell. The outer layer of the almonds (the most cooked part) was falling apart into the water. They also didn't have the crisp texture of soaked raw almonds.
Tonight, I toasted them lightly. They definitely taste "off", and the texture isn't as good. There's no doubt about it, pasteurized California almonds are inferior. Despite my preference for domestic products, I'll be buying Spanish almonds the next time around. If enough of us do the same, we'll hit the Almond Board in the only place that counts: its wallet.
One of the most irritating things is that the new rule is designed to edge out small producers. I can't see any other reason for it. Raw almonds are a safe food. Far safer than lettuce. Should we pasteurize lettuce? Pasteurization requires specialized, expensive equipment that will be prohibitive for the little guys. I'm sure the bigger producers will generously offer to fill the production gap.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)



