Post has attachment
Fascinating addition of another layer to the tragedy of the fatal South Pole expedition. If true, how loathsome.

*******

The tragic death of Scott of the Antarctic and four companions on the return of his scientific expedition to the South Pole in 1912, has long been blamed on poor planning by Scott.

But the discovery of new documents by University of New South Wales researcher Prof Chris Turney revealed today in the journal Polar Record show how the actions of another expedition member brought about their deaths and why it has been covered-up for over a century.

Through patient detective work, Prof Turney found documents that reveal how the second in command, Lieutenant Edward (Teddy) Evans, later the 1st Baron Mountevans, crucially undermined Scott -- stealing rations from food depots and failing to pass on orders to a dog sled team that would have brought Scott home safely.

"The new documents suggest at the very least appalling leadership on the part of Evans or at worst, deliberate sabotage, resulting in the death of Scott and his four companions," said Prof Turney.

"The documents also show how public records were altered in later recounts of the expedition and why a Committee of Inquiry into the expedition was rapidly shut down almost before it began."

Early on multiple members of Scott's expedition developed doubts about Lieutenant Teddy Evans' role as second in command. Scott himself described Evans in letters as "not at all fitted to be second-in-command," and promised to "take some steps concerning this."

It is likely one of the reasons that Scott sent Evans back to base before he pushed on to the South Pole with four companions. But on the return journey from the Pole, Scott's expedition found rations carefully planted on the journey out had disappeared.

In addition, the updated orders Scott gave to Evans to send a dog team out to meet the returning expedition were seemingly never delivered. Instead Scott and his team were left to die alone and starving in a blizzard.

The documents uncovered by Prof Turney reveal how Evans had a history of taking more than his share of supplies and how public statements were changed to deflect blame from Evans' role in the missing rations after Scott's death.

It even uncovers why the President of the Royal Geographical Society, Lord Curzon, decided not to hold a public committee of inquiry.

"For too long Scott has been held responsible for the death of himself and the men of his party who made the fateful expedition to the South Pole," said Prof Turney.

"These new documents tell a very different story about how Scott's planning for the expedition was undermined, reveal that his orders were fatally ignored and why the man who arguably contributed the most to his death was never held accountable for his actions."

Add a comment...

Post has attachment
I struggle to express how furious this makes me. Whatever the possible risk of cannabis (in any form) to an adolescent, it is surely less than the risk of most of the legal medications (which aren't working very well anyway) and almost certainly far less than not treating him at all.

Anyone in this situation, with medical conditions that profoundly affect life and health, should have the absolute right to try therapies that have track records and potential benefits - regardless of whether it's legal in the country of residence or not. We're not talking some freaky chemical whipped up in a downstairs lab with no provenance or context; we're not talking about a rare herb that purportedly cures something for some tribe in a far-removed location --- this medication is based on a drug that is used recreationally the world over, for centuries; these forms are legal and used in many countries in the world, safely and effectively.

New Zealand government, wake the f*ck up and reassess your priorities. This issue alone had me opposing the National Party. NOTHING, especially not a form of cannabis, is going to be as dangerous to this kid as his current inadequately effective medications and underlying condition.

I realise that medical marijuana may not work for him. It doesn't work for all Parkinson's patients, or all cancer patients, or all of any group (nothing does). But he and his family deserve the chance to try it and not go bankrupt.

(Yeah, it's an issue that's close to home. Even if my daughter with TS could find a doctor willing to prescribe Sativex when she gets old enough, it costs about $1,300 per month.)
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
40 years of additional research and data later, Dr McDougall's position is still valid for the majority of breast cancers.

The argument for early detection and aggressive treatment of breast cancer rests on the belief that this disease can be discovered in its early stages, before it has spread to other parts of the body. In the minds of patients, and many physicians, the process looks something like this:

Step 1: A cancer manifests and starts to grow slowly in the tissue (in this case, the breast).
Step 2: With time, the cancer grows into a larger tumor.
Step 3: Eventually, the cancer spreads to the lymph nodes.
Step 4: Finally, the cancer spreads from the lymph nodes to the rest of the body.

Unfortunately, this step-by-step progression from a harmless mass to a body full of disease almost never occurs. Rather, cancer spreads to other parts of the body via the bloodstream in the very early stages of its development. The spread of cancer to the lymph nodes actually occurs simultaneously alongside the spread of the cancer through the blood vessels (venous system).

On a positive note, the rate of growth (doubling time) depends on several factors, including diet. You can change your future.

Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Eating whole grains daily, such as brown rice or whole-wheat bread, reduces colorectal cancer risk, with the more you eat the lower the risk, finds a new report by the American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) and the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF). This is the first time AICR/WCRF research links whole grains independently to lower cancer risk.

Diet, Nutrition, Physical Activity and Colorectal Cancer also found that hot dogs, bacon and other processed meats consumed regularly increase the risk of this cancer. There was strong evidence that physical activity protects against colon cancer.

"Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers, yet this report demonstrates there is a lot people can do to dramatically lower their risk,” said Edward L. Giovannucci, MD, ScD, lead author of the report and professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health. “The findings from this comprehensive report are robust and clear: Diet and lifestyle have a major role in colorectal cancer."

The new report evaluated the scientific research worldwide on how diet, weight and physical activity affect colorectal cancer risk. The report analyzed 99 studies, including data on 29 million people, of whom over a quarter of a million were diagnosed with colorectal cancer.


http://www.aicr.org/press/press-releases/2017/new-report-whole-grains-link-to-lower-colorectal-cancer-risk-for-first-time.html



Add a comment...

Post has attachment
I wonder if this could have helped me (or still could... I don't like my reaction to SSRIs, even times they have relieved some of the worst of the rain to take them).
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Wow. So a vegan diet heavy on Wonder bread, Oreos, diet Coke and potato chips isn't healthy?

On a serious note, it's good to see attention being given to the fact that it's what is actually eaten - not excluded - that affects health. Calling your diet vegan or vegetarian or omnivorous doesn't actually tell you much about how healthful what you're eating is. I know vegans whose diet is just as processed and health-damaging as any regular Big Mac scoffing milkshake swilling person's. And to date, they've been included in research that draws conclusions about the health of a vegan or vegetarian diet.

And nice to see Dr Kim Williams included in the discussion.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
I knew quite a lot of this, having read extensively much of the scientific and epidemiological research around plant based diets, but his insulin approach was a totally new one to me. Fascinating! And to be 65 with IDDM and his obviously great health is truly remarkable.

My control regime controls both ends. In other words, the traditional method is that you take insulin to bring the blood sugars down. Blood sugars are always ramping up and you're taking insulin to pull it back down again. With my method, I use the insulin to switch that to a continuous blood sugars down ramp instead of a continuous up ramp. I then use fruits to level the down-ramp. My doctors would completely freak out anytime I explained what I was doing and tell me "Ohhh.... you're going to crash and die." So, I just quite telling them.

I take the insulin so that I have a continuous downward trend. Then I use fruits to level it. So, as the blood sugar is coming down, but before it gets low, I'll have a piece of fruit. I have learned how much fruit to take for whatever the circumstance to coincide with the ramp-rate (in electronics that is called slew-rate) of the downward trend and level it off. This way I can maintain my blood sugar levels in the normal (70 to 100 mg/dl) range all the time instead of what is classed as diabetic levels. I didn't want the diabetic levels. I don't want to be a diabetic. I want normal levels. I am able to do it using my method. That always frightened all my other doctors who tell told me "you should never do that." But, I tell them "I have been doing it for decades."

Add a comment...

Post has attachment
So yesterday I learned I'm one of the "1 in 100,000-200,000" who reacts very badly to mycoprotein. When I saw the Quorn Pieces in the supermarket a couple of months ago I was really interested - I'd heard of it for a long time but all the variants so far available in NZ also had milk ingredients (which I totally avoid). These pieces only had egg white (which as a rule I don't eat, but there are times I will overlook their presence in an ingredient list). I saw there was a notice label saying that some people who have sensitivities to fungus or molds might react, but I dismissed that as I eat mushrooms and many fermented foods with no problem. I don't have an "eww" reaction to the fungus being grown in vats - anyone eating ultraprocessed packaged "foods" has to be pretty oblivious to not know how gross the processing of their "food" is.

First time I had them (couple of months ago) - delicious! Very similar to chicken and it was great paired with broccoli stirfried with soy sauce, fresh ginger, fresh garlic and chili. I thought I was onto a winner for those occasional indulgences.

Second time (three weeks ago) - still great. A couple hours later I noticed I was feeling a little "off" but I'd had rather a lot of food that day so wrote it off to simple overeating.

Third time (last night) - holy hell. Two hours after my lunch, I started feeling very weird, which over the next half hour became intense nausea. I spent the next two hours in the bathroom alternately vomiting and sitting slumped against the wall in front of the toilet waiting to start again. That pretty much cleared most of it out and I lay on the couch for another hour or so doing just about nothing because I was feeling faint and just bad. Then I had a shower and went to bed. I'm mostly ok this morning... just weak and shaky and sure not feeling like I want to look at any food. I'd rather be in bed, but I've got deadlines and I am marginally functional.

So, yeah, this is a real thing. And no - it's not due to "unaccustomed fiber" as some people have said - that's bollocks. I eat a whole foods plant based diet for the most part and get tons of fiber every day (usually 30-50g/day). There's more fiber per 100g in beans than quorn and I eat lots of beans. I ate nothing new with the quorn on any of the three occasions - all the food I ate with it are staples in my diet (broccoli, specific seasonings, bamboo shoots, rice). Oh, I also did no Googling of the product or any complaints before I had my last experience - that's all been this morning (and it hasn't done much for my guts to think about quorn). So I didn't set myself up for it (the "first year med student" thing).

I'm not saying that I think mycoprotein necessarily should be pulled from shelves. Obviously it's been in the human "processed food" chain for a couple of decades (from the earliest point - it's been much less time for many markets). But I would suggest that perhaps the incidence of reactions is actually higher and more real than the publicity communicates - and that perhaps more research ought to be done. If it's just a case of "if you're sensitive, you'll have an awful few hours followed by a period of just feeling crap for a while but that's the end of it," well, we can choose not to eat it any more. But if the reactions can be worse, or, as with me, increase over time, or have the potential to cause long-term issues... that could be an issue. Especially if food manufacturers start putting it into all kinds of other foods where you wouldn't expect it (the way they do with milk protein!).

http://www.foodstandards.govt.nz/consumer/generalissues/quorn/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.mycoprotein.org/


Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Evidence against a net benefit of routine universal screening for breast or prostate cancer keeps mounting. Cochrane has asserted this position for quite a while now. This Scientific American article discusses some of the psychological reasons we don't want to accept this, despite the evidence.

http://www.cochrane.org/CD001877/BREASTCA_screening-for-breast-cancer-with-mammography
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded