Thursday, December 10, 2009

The 7 foods experts won't eat

The 7 foods experts won't eat



How healthy (or not) certain foods are—for us, for the environment—is a hotly debated topic among experts and consumers alike, and there are no easy answers. But when Prevention talked to the people at the forefront of food safety and asked them one simple question—“What foods do you avoid?”—we got some pretty interesting answers. Although these foods don’t necessarily make up a "banned” list, as you head into the holidays—and all the grocery shopping that comes with it—their answers are, well, food for thought:

1. Canned Tomatoes
The expert: Fredrick vom Saal, PhD, an endocrinologist at the University of Missouri who studies bisphenol-A
The problem: The resin linings of tin cans contain bisphenol-A, a synthetic estrogen that has been linked to ailments ranging from reproductive problems to heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. Unfortunately, acidity (a prominent characteristic of tomatoes) causes BPA to leach into your food. Studies show that the BPA in most people's body exceeds the amount that suppresses sperm production or causes chromosomal damage to the eggs of animals. "You can get 50 mcg of BPA per liter out of a tomato can, and that's a level that is going to impact people, particularly the young," says vom Saal. "I won't go near canned tomatoes."
The solution: Choose tomatoes in glass bottles (which do not need resin linings), such as the brands Bionaturae and Coluccio. You can also get several types in Tetra Pak boxes, like Trader Joe's and Pomi.
2. Corn-Fed Beef
The expert: Joel Salatin, co-owner of Polyface Farms and author of half a dozen books on sustainable farming
The problem: Cattle evolved to eat grass, not grains. But farmers today feed their animals corn and soybeans, which fatten up the animals faster for slaughter. More money for cattle farmers (and lower prices at the grocery store) means a lot less nutrition for us. A recent comprehensive study conducted by the USDA and researchers from Clemson University found that compared with corn-fed beef, grass-fed beef is higher in beta-carotene, vitamin E, omega-3s, conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), calcium, magnesium, and potassium; lower in inflammatory omega-6s; and lower in saturated fats that have been linked to heart disease. "We need to respect the fact that cows are herbivores, and that does not mean feeding them corn and chicken manure," says Salatin.
The solution: Buy grass-fed beef, which can be found at specialty grocers, farmers' markets, and nationally at Whole Foods. It's usually labeled because it demands a premium, but if you don't see it, ask your butcher.
3. Microwave Popcorn
The expert: Olga Naidenko, PhD, a senior scientist for the Environmental Working Group,
The problem: Chemicals, including perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), in the lining of the bag, are part of a class of compounds that may be linked to infertility in humans, according to a recent study from UCLA. In animal testing, the chemicals cause liver, testicular, and pancreatic cancer. Studies show that microwaving causes the chemicals to vaporize—and migrate into your popcorn. "They stay in your body for years and accumulate there," says Naidenko, which is why researchers worry that levels in humans could approach the amounts causing cancers in laboratory animals. DuPont and other manufacturers have promised to phase out PFOA by 2015 under a voluntary EPA plan, but millions of bags of popcorn will be sold between now and then.
The solution: Pop natural kernels the old-fashioned way: in a skillet. For flavorings, you can add real butter or dried seasonings, such as dillweed, vegetable flakes, or soup mix.
4. Nonorganic Potatoes
The expert: Jeffrey Moyer, chair of the National Organic Standards Board
The problem: Root vegetables absorb herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides that wind up in soil. In the case of potatoes—the nation's most popular vegetable—they're treated with fungicides during the growing season, then sprayed with herbicides to kill off the fibrous vines before harvesting. After they're dug up, the potatoes are treated yet again to prevent them from sprouting. "Try this experiment: Buy a conventional potato in a store, and try to get it to sprout. It won't," says Moyer, who is also farm director of the Rodale Institute (also owned by Rodale Inc., the publisher of Prevention). "I've talked with potato growers who say point-blank they would never eat the potatoes they sell. They have separate plots where they grow potatoes for themselves without all the chemicals."
The solution: Buy organic potatoes. Washing isn't good enough if you're trying to remove chemicals that have been absorbed into the flesh.
5. Farmed Salmon
The expert: David Carpenter, MD, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany and publisher of a major study in the journal Science on contamination in fish.
The problem: Nature didn't intend for salmon to be crammed into pens and fed soy, poultry litter, and hydrolyzed chicken feathers. As a result, farmed salmon is lower in vitamin D and higher in contaminants, including carcinogens, PCBs, brominated flame retardants, and pesticides such as dioxin and DDT. According to Carpenter, the most contaminated fish come from Northern Europe, which can be found on American menus. "You can only safely eat one of these salmon dinners every 5 months without increasing your risk of cancer," says Carpenter, whose 2004 fish contamination study got broad media attention. "It's that bad." Preliminary science has also linked DDT to diabetes and obesity, but some nutritionists believe the benefits of omega-3s outweigh the risks. There is also concern about the high level of antibiotics and pesticides used to treat these fish. When you eat farmed salmon, you get dosed with the same drugs and chemicals.
The solution: Switch to wild-caught Alaska salmon. If the package says fresh Atlantic, it's farmed. There are no commercial fisheries left for wild Atlantic salmon.
Delicious and easy fish recipes

6. Milk Produced with Artificial Hormones
The expert: Rick North, project director of the Campaign for Safe Food at the Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility and former CEO of the Oregon division of the American Cancer Society
The problem: Milk producers treat their dairy cattle with recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH or rBST, as it is also known) to boost milk production. But rBGH also increases udder infections and even pus in the milk. It also leads to higher levels of a hormone called insulin-like growth factor in milk. In people, high levels of IGF-1 may contribute to breast, prostate, and colon cancers. "When the government approved rBGH, it was thought that IGF-1 from milk would be broken down in the human digestive tract," says North. As it turns out, the casein in milk protects most of it, according to several independent studies. "There's not 100% proof that this is increasing cancer in humans," admits North. "However, it's banned in most industrialized countries."
The solution: Check labels for rBGH-freerBST-freeproduced without artificial hormones, or organic milk. These phrases indicate rBGH-free products.
Don’t be fooled by these 11 health food imposters.

7. Conventional Apples
The expert: Mark Kastel, former executive for agribusiness and codirector of the Cornucopia Institute, a farm-policy research group that supports organic foods
The problem: If fall fruits held a "most doused in pesticides contest," apples would win. Why? They are individually grafted (descended from a single tree) so that each variety maintains its distinctive flavor. As such, apples don't develop resistance to pests and are sprayed frequently. The industry maintains that these residues are not harmful. But Kastel counters that it's just common sense to minimize exposure by avoiding the most doused produce, like apples. "Farm workers have higher rates of many cancers," he says. And increasing numbers of studies are starting to link a higher body burden of pesticides (from all sources) with Parkinson's disease.
The solution: Buy organic apples. If you can't afford organic, be sure to wash and peel them first.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

只有你自己才能決定別人看你的眼光

美國科研人員進行過一項有趣的心理學實驗,名曰「傷痕實驗」。他們向參與其中的志願者宣稱,該實驗旨在觀察人們對身體有缺陷的陌生人作 何反應,尤其是面部有傷痕的人。每位志願者都被安排在沒有鏡子的小房間裡,由好萊塢的專業化妝師在其左臉做出一道血肉模糊、觸目驚心的傷痕。


志願者被允許 用一面小鏡子照照化妝的效果後,鏡子就被拿走了。關鍵的是最後一步,化妝師表示需要在傷痕表面再塗一層粉末,以防止它被不小心擦掉。實際上,化妝師用紙巾 偷偷抹掉了化妝的痕跡。對此毫不知情的志願者,被派往各醫院的候診室,他們的任務就是觀察人們對其面部傷痕的反應。


規定的時間到了,返回的志願者 竟無一例外地敘述了相同的感受--人們對他們比以往粗魯無理、不友好,而且總是盯著他們的臉看 !可實際上,他們的臉上與往常並無二致,什麼也沒有不同;他們之所以得出那樣的結論,看來是錯誤的自我認知影響了他們的判斷。


這真是一個 發人深省的實驗。原來,一個人內心怎樣看待自己,在外界就能感受到怎樣的眼光。同時,這個實驗也從一個側面驗證了一句西方格言:「別人是以你看待自己的方 式看待你。」不是嗎?一個從容的人,感受到的多是平和的眼光;一個自卑的人,感受到的多是歧視的眼光;一個和善的人,感受到的多是友好的眼光;一個叛逆的 人,感受到的多是挑惕的眼光......。


可以說,有什麼樣的內心世界,就有什麼樣的外界眼光。如此看來,一個人若是長期抱怨自己的處境冷漠、不公、缺少 陽光,那就說明,真正出問題的,正是他自己的內心世界,是他對自我的認知出了偏差。這個時候 ,需要改變的,正是自己的內心;而內心的世界一旦改善,身外的處境必然隨之好轉。


畢竟,在這個世界上,只有你自己,才能決定別人看你的眼光。


出自:  新店行道會 http://topchurch.smartweb.tw/index.php?module=faq&mn=2&f=content&tid=6792 

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

First Photo of the Human Soul

The World Weekly News
Early 1990's ...



A surgical operation with complications, a dead patient, and a mysterious photo which offers a surprising take on what happened in the operating room.

An extraordinary event has revolutionized the medical and scientific world, once again raising the possibility of life after death.

It all began with a surgery at a hospital in Frankfurt, Germany. The patient died on the operating table, but a most unusual thing happened a couple of days later when one of the photos taken during the operation revealed the existence of the woman’s spirit. All this has caught investigators and skeptics by surprise, since the photo is real and many have had a chance to see it.

A Risk-Free Operation

When Karin Fischer, a 32 year old German housewife, was admitted to the hospital in Frankfurt for her operation, the commotion and the consequences of her trip to the operating room were the furthest things from her mind. In fact, she had no idea that these were the final moments of her life. The scheduled operation, while not a simple one, was not a high risk surgery; they were going to repair some defective heart valves. But something went wrong, and a series of complications caused her heart to stop beating only forty five minutes into the operation. Her death was signaled by the straight line running across the screen of the heart monitor. Not one of the twelve people on the operating room team saw what the photograph later revealed.

The Surprising Photo

At the moment of her death, Karin was surrounded by twelve people, all of them members of the cardiology operating team: all attempts by the doctors, technicians, and nurses to revive her were ineffective. Professor Peter Valentín, director of the Department of Teaching and Publication, was in the operating room at the time, taking photographs of the procedure. Surgeons are often filmed during operations; these photographs are used not only by scientific publications and medical archives, but also by medical faculty in their university courses. It was Professor Valentín who could not contain his surprise a few days later when he picked up the roll of film from the lab and saw the copies. One of the pictures clearly showed a diffuse and transparent human shape rising toward the ceiling with its arms open. It was a photo of a spirit leaving the body of the dead woman! Pope John Paul II has a copy of the photograph, and it is being analyzed by investigators from the Vatican. Professor Valentín thought at first that someone, presumably the people at the photo lab, had created this startling image as a joke, so he took the copy to another lab to see if one of their experts could determine whether it was some kind of trick.

Peter Valentín’s amazement grew as he listened to the words of the expert. The photo was authentic! A more rigorous and detailed study reached the same conclusion: The image had not been manipulated, and no trickery was involved.

In fact the monitor screen indicating the moment of the patient’s death could be clearly seen in the image, corresponding with the instant in which the spirit was leaving the body. No one there saw anything; the soul is invisible to human eyes. Professor Valentín decided to consult with the clergyman at the hospital, a fairly lucid priest, and not one to waste time on trivialities.

He immediately exclaimed, “Holy Heaven, it’s a human soul!”

The priest insisted on revealing the news: for the first time, someone had managed to photograph a soul. Copies of the photo were sent to many religious centers throughout Europe, as well as to the greatest experts in the field.

The response from the Church was immediate: Pope John Paul II asked for a copy of the photo, so that it could be studied at the Vatican laboratories. There is no official response yet from the Holy See, but they have received the photo and Roman experts are investigating. Their first impression is a positive one, as all signs indicate that this is not a trick, and that the photo is genuine: a human spirit leaving a body which has just passed away.

Science Passes Judgment

One expert on these matters who received the photograph is Dr. Frank Muller, a German scientist who dedicated himself to an exhaustive investigation of this most unusual picture. It’s the first time that an image of the human soul has been obtained. His conclusion is clear: this is the missing proof, the thing many people have been searching for since the beginning. According to Dr. Muller, people’s souls live eternally after leaving the physical body. As he sees it this is a confirmation of what it says in the Bible. This cannot be a trick, given that the best specialists have studied this photo for weeks with the greatest of interest, using the most sophisticated equipment.

Dr. Muller knows that there will always be skeptical people who refuse to believe the evidence. But the skeptics don’t have a convincing alternate explanation, which accounts for the presence of the image on the paper. It’s an extreme case where, once again, the inexplicable plays an important role. There’s no room for any more studies; science has demonstrated that the photograph is authentic, without tricks of any kind. All that’s left is to stop thinking these things over, and to accept things as they are.

In the meantime, many have suggested that this could be the most important photograph ever obtained: another proof of the immortality of the soul.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

藏大量病菌‧開花灑即噴面增肺病風

星洲日報/國際‧2009.09.15

(美國‧華盛頓)許多人在淋浴時,一扭開花灑便朝著臉部噴灑,殊不知可能已被噴得滿臉都是細菌,患上肺病的機率大增!

美國科羅拉多大學微生物學家佩斯的研究團隊,分析了來自全美9個城市公共設施、民房及公寓的50多個花灑頭,結果發現當中30%藏有大量的非典型結核分支桿菌。

這種細菌是導致肺部疾病的病源之一,孕婦、年長者和已經患有其它疾病的患者,由於他們的免疫系統不強,更是患上這類肺病的高風險群。

佩斯說:“當你扭開花灑把水噴灑在臉上時,這意味著你接觸到大量的禽結核分枝桿菌,可能對你的健康不利。”

雖然城市地區的自來水中普遍存有這類病菌,但研究發現,附著在花灑上那層粘膜的禽結核分枝桿菌,比自來水裡的病菌數量高出100倍。

還有,塑料製成的花灑暗藏的病菌數量比鐵製的花灑來得多,建議改用金屬花灑頭以減低風險

研發結果並不代表民眾不能淋浴,定期更換花灑頭便可以減少病原體滋生的機會。

Potong Saga-15Malaysia (Most Funniest Video)



Synopsis


A laugh-out-loud film about a Chinese boy’s misguided attempts at opening an Islamic bank account.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Meter-15Malaysia



Synopsis


The controversial head of UMNO Youth plays a taxi driver who is asked his views on some current Malaysian talking points. He ends up offering a keris to a Chinese boy as a gift.

Preparing for the second wave: lessons from current outbreaks


28 AUGUST 2009 GENEVA -- Monitoring of outbreaks from different parts of the world provides sufficient information to make some tentative conclusions about how the influenza pandemic might evolve in the coming months.

WHO is advising countries in the northern hemisphere to prepare for a second wave of pandemic spread. Countries with tropical climates, where the pandemic virus arrived later than elsewhere, also need to prepare for an increasing number of cases.

Countries in temperate parts of the southern hemisphere should remain vigilant. As experience has shown, localized “hot spots” of increasing transmission can continue to occur even when the pandemic has peaked at the national level.

H1N1 now the dominant virus strain

Evidence from multiple outbreak sites demonstrates that the H1N1 pandemic virus has rapidly established itself and is now the dominant influenza strain in most parts of the world. The pandemic will persist in the coming months as the virus continues to move through susceptible populations.

Close monitoring of viruses by a WHO network of laboratories shows that viruses from all outbreaks remain virtually identical. Studies have detected no signs that the virus has mutated to a more virulent or lethal form.

Likewise, the clinical picture of pandemic influenza is largely consistent across all countries. The overwhelming majority of patients continue to experience mild illness. Although the virus can cause very severe and fatal illness, also in young and healthy people, the number of such cases remains small.

Large populations susceptible to infection

While these trends are encouraging, large numbers of people in all countries remain susceptible to infection. Even if the current pattern of usually mild illness continues, the impact of the pandemic during the second wave could worsen as larger numbers of people become infected.

Larger numbers of severely ill patients requiring intensive care are likely to be the most urgent burden on health services, creating pressures that could overwhelm intensive care units and possibly disrupt the provision of care for other diseases.

Monitoring for drug resistance

At present, only a handful of pandemic viruses resistant to oseltamivir have been detected worldwide, despite the administration of many millions of treatment courses of antiviral drugs. All of these cases have been extensively investigated, and no instances of onward transmission of drug-resistant virus have been documented to date. Intense monitoring continues, also through the WHO network of laboratories.

Not the same as seasonal influenza

Current evidence points to some important differences between patterns of illness reported during the pandemic and those seen during seasonal epidemics of influenza.

The age groups affected by the pandemic are generally younger. This is true for those most frequently infected, and especially so for those experiencing severe or fatal illness.

To date, most severe cases and deaths have occurred in adults under the age of 50 years, with deaths in the elderly comparatively rare. This age distribution is in stark contrast with seasonal influenza, where around 90% of severe and fatal cases occur in people 65 years of age or older.

Severe respiratory failure

Perhaps most significantly, clinicians from around the world are reporting a very severe form of disease, also in young and otherwise healthy people, which is rarely seen during seasonal influenza infections. In these patients, the virus directly infects the lung, causing severe respiratory failure. Saving these lives depends on highly specialized and demanding care in intensive care units, usually with long and costly stays.

During the winter season in the southern hemisphere, several countries have viewed the need for intensive care as the greatest burden on health services. Some cities in these countries report that nearly 15 percent of hospitalized cases have required intensive care.

Preparedness measures need to anticipate this increased demand on intensive care units, which could be overwhelmed by a sudden surge in the number of severe cases.

Vulnerable groups

An increased risk during pregnancy is now consistently well-documented across countries. This risk takes on added significance for a virus, like this one, that preferentially infects younger people.

Data continue to show that certain medical conditions increase the risk of severe and fatal illness. These include respiratory disease, notably asthma, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and immunosuppression.

When anticipating the impact of the pandemic as more people become infected, health officials need to be aware that many of these predisposing conditions have become much more widespread in recent decades, thus increasing the pool of vulnerable people.

Obesity, which is frequently present in severe and fatal cases, is now a global epidemic. WHO estimates that, worldwide, more than 230 million people suffer from asthma, and more than 220 million people have diabetes.

Moreover, conditions such as asthma and diabetes are not usually considered killer diseases, especially in children and young adults. Young deaths from such conditions, precipitated by infection with the H1N1 virus, can be another dimension of the pandemic’s impact.

Higher risk of hospitalization and death

Several early studies show a higher risk of hospitalization and death among certain subgroups, including minority groups and indigenous populations. In some studies, the risk in these groups is four to five times higher than in the general population.

Although the reasons are not fully understood, possible explanations include lower standards of living and poor overall health status, including a high prevalence of conditions such as asthma, diabetes and hypertension.

Implications for the developing world

Such findings are likely to have growing relevance as the pandemic gains ground in the developing world, where many millions of people live under deprived conditions and have multiple health problems, with little access to basic health care.

As much current data about the pandemic come from wealthy and middle-income countries, the situation in developing countries will need to be very closely watched. The same virus that causes manageable disruption in affluent countries could have a devastating impact in many parts of the developing world.

Co-infection with HIV

The 2009 influenza pandemic is the first to occur since the emergence of HIV/AIDS. Early data from two countries suggest that people co-infected with H1N1 and HIV are not at increased risk of severe or fatal illness, provided these patients are receiving antiretroviral therapy. In most of these patients, illness caused by H1N1 has been mild, with full recovery.

If these preliminary findings are confirmed, this will be reassuring news for countries where infection with HIV is prevalent and treatment coverage with antiretroviral drugs is good.

On current estimates, around 33 million people are living with HIV/AIDS worldwide. Of these, WHO estimates that around 4 million were receiving antiretroviral therapy at the end of 2008.

From: WHO Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 briefing note 9