I repeat, 3 most important medical discoveries to date; antibiotics, anesthesia, and immunizations.

Americans need drug companies to integrate their products into our fast food. Just like caring for cattle, you put the antibiotics in their feed. I am thinking "New Pop-Tarts With Zoloft" for example.. the catchphrase could be "Diabetes? Who cares!"

Yes, she mentioned allergies, however underlying these allergies are much more serious problems such as cancer (which she mentioned). Her speech was off the mark and the science was bad in a few places, however the underlying concept is accurate. In addition to this, you link articles showing that there are few or no studies showing the dangers of proteins such as BGH, however her point was that there are no human studies done to prove that it is safe. A 1950's study showing BGH doesn't help dwarves grow doesn't prove it isn't linked with human disease. Also, while her statements about BGH don't seem very scientifically credible, she does actually point out the real problem, the link that BGH has with complications such as mastitis, and the subsequent need for large doses of antibiotics.

>> ^marinara:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1679775/
doesn't mention frankenfoods at all
"top allergy in U.S.: milk, eggs, peanuts, tree nuts (e.g., walnuts, almonds, cashews, pistachios, pecans), wheat, soy, fish, and shellfish"
(http://www.foodallergy.org/downloads/FoodAllergyFactsandStatistics.pdf)
fish shellfish treenuts peanuts eggs aren't frankenfoods, neither is milk even though the TED talker says it is.
(ok my argument here doesn't prove anything)
BGH is nasty for different reasons, like causing girls to enter puberty years earlier.
unless it doesn't
"Is bST a hormone?
Yes. However, there are two types of hormones: steroids and proteins. bST is a protein hormone. Protein hormones have no activity when taken by mouth, while steroid hormones do have activity. For example, insulin is a protein hormone.
Insulin has no activity if taken orally. Therefore, a diabetic has to have injections of insulin. Like insulin, the protein hormone bST has no activity when taken by mouth. In contrast, hormones used in birth control pills are steroids and therefore are effective when taken by mouth. Again, bST has no effect when taken by mouth.
Furthermore, studies were conducted in the 1950's to determine if children suffering from dwarfism could be given direct injections of high levels of bST to stimulate growth. The conclusion of the study was that somatotropin from cows is not active in humans even if injected. Why? The structure of human somatotropin is so different from bovine somatotropin, that injections of high levels of bovine somatotropin into children have no influence on growth and development."
from monsanto's website
actually NYT says milk does not cause puberty in girls
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/08/health/08real.html
finally here's a real long press release that says that really, no scientific studies have ever been done to link animal hormones to human health problems. Animal products have been tested, but no human studies.
http://envirocancer.cornell.edu/factsheet/diet/fs37.hormones.cfm

Three most important medical discoveries ever;
Antibiotics, vaccinations, and anesthesia.

and there are a host of reasons why we live longer... education, access to food, sewage, cleanliness, peace (the liklihood of dying a violent death), better living and working conditions, electricity,... clean water...etc...along with access to things like antibiotics.

As per WIkipedia :

There are five types of veal:

* Bob veal, from calves that are slaughtered when only a few days old (70-150 lb.) up to 150 lb.[2]
* Formula-fed (or "milk-fed") veal, from calves that are raised on a milk formula supplement. The meat colour is ivory or creamy pink, with a firm, fine, and velvety appearance. They are usually slaughtered when they reach 18–20 weeks of age (450-500 lb).[3]
* Non-formula-fed ("red" or "grain-fed")[4] veal, from calves that are raised on grain, hay, or other solid food, in addition to milk. The meat is darker in colour, and some additional marbling and fat may be apparent. Usually marketed as calf, rather than veal, at 22–26 weeks of age (650-700 lb).
* Rose veal UK is from calves reared on farms in association with the UK RSPCA's Freedom Food programme. Its name comes from its pink colour, which is a result of the calves being slaughtered at around 35 weeks.[5]
* Free-raised veal, The veal calves are raised in the pasture, have unlimited access to mother’s milk and pasture grasses. They are not administered hormones or antibiotics. These conditions replicate those used to raise authentic pasture-raised veal. The meat is a rich pink color. Free-raised veal are typically lower in fat than other veal.[citation needed] Calves are slaughtered at about 24 weeks of age.

The veal industry's support for the dairy industry goes beyond the purchase of surplus calves. It also buys large amounts of milk by-products. Almost 70% of veal feeds (by weight) are milk products. Most popular are whey and whey protein concentrate (WPC), by-products of the manufacture of cheese. Milk by-products are sources of protein and lactose. Skimmed milk powder, casein, buttermilk powder and other forms of milk by-products are used from time to time.[6]





Source- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veal

I wanted to know a little bit more. Found the video to be funny, very crude.

Ha! Brilliant idiot: "Homoeopathic remedies take longer than the 'quick fix' medicines but there's nothing bad in there for them"... you are actually spot on Ms.

They take longer because they do nothing, it's just your own defenses doing their job (which in a lot of cases IS actually a good thing to let happen, this over reliance on Antibiotics is a bad thing) . And there IS nothing bad in there because it's just sugar or lactose... well done...


Hey, wait! They're not shaking it the right way... oh man, they're going to create terrible homoeopathic medicine... don't they know anything? It has to be "vigorously shaken by ten hard strikes against an elastic body"... amateurs!


And it's a standard bullshit speak to stare bald faced at facts that say your product contains nothing of benefit at all and just wave it away with "well, science can't measure what's _really_ in these 'medicines'"

I didn't know that people were taking this crap over vaccines... that's horrible.

F*ck I hate homoeopathy, hate that SO MANY people are suckered in by it because the mainstream media (at least here in Australia) don't seem to say anything against it, and such large 'professional' companies sell it in chemists that it just gets lumped in with natural remedies. I'm all for natural remedies when they've been shown to actually do good, and am also all for letting the body fight off illnesses when it can compared to attacking it with drugs. But MAN, you just KNOW that 90% of the people who make this shit know that it's shit.


ARRRGH! Seething at the STUPID mother who says 'if people did a little more research'... FUCK! She has obviously done NONE... it really isn't hard AT ALL to find out what a steaming pile of crap homoeopathy is, and it's not like it's complicated to understand. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE 'MEDICINE' AT ALL

Crappy science on this vid, depending on the antibiotic there can be pretty severe interactions. Metabolic and liver issues are way at the top of issues:

http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=A7B5A5594CC2FFDBED4D7A78457C6969.inst3_3a?docId=5002334780
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/antibiotics-and-alcohol/AN01802
http://www.goaskalice.columbia.edu/5144.html

I never drink with alcohol, I drink alone.
*forever alone*
>> ^Tymbrwulf:

>> ^bamdrew:
The poster was careful to keep 'antibiotics' specifically in the title.
I imagine the reason doctors say "don't take medicine with alcohol" is because this simplifies explaining which ones should be fine (most antibiotics) and which ones won't be (most everything else), with the worst result being that you don't drink as much as you would normally (vs. accidentally drinking with the wrong one and ending up with liver problems).

I'm just arguing the fact that the original reason might have been "tradition" but currently, it is the consensus of all doctors to reduce risk where we can. This is why we use "don't drink with alcohol" as a blanket statement. Alcohol is, after all, a drug.

>> ^bamdrew:

The poster was careful to keep 'antibiotics' specifically in the title.
I imagine the reason doctors say "don't take medicine with alcohol" is because this simplifies explaining which ones should be fine (most antibiotics) and which ones won't be (most everything else), with the worst result being that you don't drink as much as you would normally (vs. accidentally drinking with the wrong one and ending up with liver problems).


I'm just arguing the fact that the original reason might have been "tradition" but currently, it is the consensus of all doctors to reduce risk where we can. This is why we use "don't drink with alcohol" as a blanket statement. Alcohol is, after all, a drug.

The poster was careful to keep 'antibiotics' specifically in the title.

I imagine the reason doctors say "don't take medicine with alcohol" is because this simplifies explaining which ones should be fine (most antibiotics) and which ones won't be (most everything else), with the worst result being that you don't drink as much as you would normally (vs. accidentally drinking with the wrong one and ending up with liver problems).



>> ^Tymbrwulf:


Changes in the blood concentration of active metabolites may alter the effects and side-effects of that particular drug. This may reduce drug effectiveness or increase rate and intensity of side-effects.
Of course none of this may happen, but we advise you NOT to mix these drugs with alcohol in order to ultimately reduce the risk to the patient.

There is parts of this video that I agree with, and parts with which I must disagree. The truth is that yes, there are antibiotics and drugs that do not interact with each other when mixed with alcohol, but here is the reason with which it is advised against mixing the two:

Many, many drugs are metabolized in the liver. One of the many effects of acute alcohol intake will put a strain on your liver and occupy enzymes that would be otherwise used for digestion of the drug you are taking. This has an effect on the availability the drug to bind to these and alters the number of metabolites of that drug in the body (either increased or decreased).

Changes in the blood concentration of active metabolites may alter the effects and side-effects of that particular drug. This may reduce drug effectiveness or increase rate and intensity of side-effects.

Of course none of this may happen, but we advise you NOT to mix these drugs with alcohol in order to ultimately reduce the risk to the patient.

I wonder if this works on antibiotics?

jwray, don't miss the forest for the trees. His main problem with HFCS is that its the product of government subsidies for special interests that, along with tariffs protecting the cane sugar industry, resulting ultimately in a higher effective cost for Americans. Additionally, another problem with the subsidies is that it pays for farmers to produce corn, and with such a surplus of corn, the industry pushes its supply of corn into whatever supply chain it can....including things such as HFCS, corn ethanol, corn-fed beef, all of which have deleterious effects on the health of our society and economy.

He believes that the biggest impact of corn subsidies on our public health result from using antibiotics that should be judiciously restricted for human health is indiscriminately given to keep corn-fed cattle alive while fattening to slaughter, which simultaneously selects for bacteria that are resistant to said antibiotics.

AFAIK the current belief is that "superbugs" have arisen from people taking, for example, HALF of a course of anti-biotics. Of course, the more resilient bugs survive against the onslaught of the anti-biotic the longest, people think they're better and they stop taking the medication.

Meanwhile, the more resilient bugs are still alive because you didn't take the whole course. They breed with other more resilient bugs and create a host of "more resilient bugs".

Then, someone takes a nice strong antibiotic for those more resilient bugs. Same happens. Then the same happens again, and before you know it you've got bugs that are virtually impervious to antibiotics.

I was led to believe that "superbugs" weren't an inevitable side-effect of the use of antibiotics, but rather an effect of people not medicating correctly + time.

It's selective breeding, like we do with animals.