Anti-abortion group is spreading lies to stop college kids from getting health care

Students for Life of America wants to take access to health care away from nearly half a million students in California.

The head of Students for Life of America, Kristan Hawkins, is very willing to spread utter falsehoods about medication abortion in order to push her dangerous anti-choice agenda.

Her latest round of lies occurred because California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed a bill that requires medication abortion, a nonsurgical procedure, at all public universities in the state. Anti-abortion radicals like Hawkins are furious, so they’ve resorted to making up claims about the safety of medication abortion and are now offering legal assistance to health care workers offended by the procedure.

In fact, SFLA is actively seeking out public university health care employees who oppose the law. The day the law was passed, the organization posted a tweet saying, “if you are a student or employee who is worried how this affects your #consciencerights message us and we will assist you.”

SFLA likely has to try to solicit these sorts of claims because these so-called conscience rights claims are vanishingly rare. Last week, the federal government had to admit in court that, where it had once claimed there were 343 religious rights complaints in 2018, there were actually only about 20 — for the entire country.

The organization is also outright lying about the dangers of medication abortion. Medication abortion is a procedure where a patient takes one medication when they visit the health care facility and a second medication at home. It’s incredibly safe, with serious complications occurring in fewer than 0.4% of patients, and it’s incredibly successful, with an overall success rate of 95-99%.

Ignoring all evidence to the contrary, SFLA calls the procedure a “dangerous,” and Hawkins says it will “put students’ lives at risk.” She also said, “California just ensured women will die in their dormitory bathrooms, bleeding out alone from the abortion pill.” None of that is supported by evidence.

Of course, what really puts students’ lives at risk is a lack of access to safe, legal health care, including abortions. And with approximately 400,000 female students on California’s public university campuses, that access is a necessity.

The post Anti-abortion group is spreading lies to stop college kids from getting health care appeared first on Shareblue Media.

This content was originally published here.

The amazing health benefits of turmeric | MNN – Mother Nature Network

Turmeric, an orange-colored spice imported from India, is part of the ginger family and has been a staple in Middle Eastern and Southeast Asian cooking for thousands of years.

In addition, ayurvedic and Chinese medicines utilize turmeric to clear infections and inflammations on the inside and outside of the body. But beyond the holistic health community, Western medical practitioners have only recently come on board in recognizing the health benefits of turmeric.

Here are some of the ways turmeric may benefit your body.

Blocking cancer

Doctors at UCLA found that curcumin, the main component in turmeric, appeared to block an enzyme that promotes the growth of head and neck cancer.

In that study, 21 subjects with head and neck cancers chewed two tablets containing 1,000 milligrams of curcumin. An independent lab in Maryland evaluated the results and found that the cancer-promoting enzymes in the patients’ mouths were inhibited by the curcumin and thus prevented from advancing the spread of the malignant cells.

Powerful antioxidant

The University of Maryland’s Medical Center also states that turmeric’s powerful antioxidant properties fight cancer-causing free radicals, reducing or preventing some of the damage they can cause.

While more research is necessary, early studies have indicated that curcumin may help prevent or treat several types of cancer including prostate, skin and colon.

Lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease

A study in the American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry revealed that curcumin may improve memory and mood swings in people who suffer from mild cases of memory loss.

Researchers had a group of 40 adults between the ages of 50 and 90 take either a curcumin or placebo pill for 18 months. At the end, the memory and attention of participants who took the curcumin pill improved by 28%.

While the exact reason why turmeric can improve memory isn’t known, doctors believe it’s because the spice has anti-inflammatory properties. “It may be due to its ability to reduce brain inflammation, which has been linked to both Alzheimer’s disease and major depression,” Gary Small from UCLA told NDTV.

Potent anti-inflammatory

Dr. Randy J. Horwitz, the medical director of the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine and an assistant professor of clinical medicine at the University of Arizona College of Medicine in Tucson, wrote a paper for the American Academy of Pain Management in which he discussed the health benefits of turmeric.

“Turmeric is one of the most potent natural anti-inflammatories available,” Horwitz states in the paper.

He went on to cite a University of Arizona study that examined the effect of turmeric on rats with injected rheumatoid arthritis. According to Horwitz, pretreatment with turmeric completely inhibited the onset of rheumatoid arthritis in the rats. In addition, the study found that using turmeric for pre-existing rheumatoid arthritis resulted in a significant reduction of symptoms.

Some research shows that curcumin might ease symptoms of uveitis — long-term inflammation in the middle layer of the eye. Other research shows that taking turmeric daily
for several months may improve kidney function for people with kidney inflammation.

Turmeric's leaves(Curcuma longa) - but turmeric's health benefits come mainly from its root.Turmeric comes from the curcuma longa plant. (Photo: Skyprayer2005/Shutterstock)

Osteoarthritis pain relief

Turmeric may also be helpful with another type of arthritis. Some research has shown that taking turmeric extract can ease the pain of
osteoarthritis. In one study,
reports WebMD, turmeric worked about as well as ibuprofen for relieving osteoarthritis pain.

Indigestion and heartburn aid

Curcumin works with the gallbladder, stimulating it to make bile, which may help with digestion. In Germany, turmeric can be prescribed for
digestive problems. Some research shows that turmeric may help upset stomach, bloating and gas. Turmeric may also help reduce the occurrence of irritable
bowel syndrome (IBS) in people who are otherwise healthy.

Heart disease

Studies have suggested curcumin may help prevent the buildup of plaque that can clog arteries and lead to heart attacks and strokes.

Impact on diabetes

Early studies suggest that taking turmeric daily can cut down the number of people with prediabetes who develop diabetes.

Raw is best

Natalie Kling, a Los Angeles-based nutritionist, says she first learned about the benefits of turmeric while getting her degree from the Natural Healing Institute of Neuropathy. “As an anti-inflammatory, antioxidant and antiseptic, it’s a very powerful plant,” she says.

Kling recommends it to clients for joint pain and says that when taken as a supplement, it helps quickly. She advises adding turmeric to food whenever possible and offers these easy tips. “Raw is best,” she said. “Sprinkling it on vegetables or mixing it into dressings is quick and effective.”

If you do cook it, make sure to use a small amount of healthy fat like healthy coconut oil to maximize flavor. Kling also recommends rubbing turmeric on meat and putting it into curries and soups.

“It’s inexpensive, mild in taste, and benefits every system in the body,” Kling says. “Adding this powerful plant to your diet is one of the best things you can do for long term health.”

Quality matters

Turmeric is for sale at a market
Turmeric is for sale at a market. (Photo: ChiccoDodiFC/Shutterstock)

Safety can be an issue with turmeric, recent research finds. Turmeric is sometimes laced with pigments to enhance its brightness. In some cases those pigments can include lead, which contributes to cognitive issues and other serious issues. Lead is a neurotoxin that has long been banned from food for safety reasons.

Consumer Reports recently tested 13 turmeric products along with 16 echinacea products because these are the two most popular botanical supplements after horehound. Between 2017 and 2018 alone, sales of turmeric grew 30.5%. Of the 13 turmeric products tested, one had lead levels that exceeded Consumer Reports’ threshold standards and one had aerobic bacteria levels that exceeded the group’s set standards.

“Higher aerobic bacteria levels don’t necessarily make a supplement unsafe to take, but they can indicate that products were manufactured or processed in unsanitary conditions,” according to the report.

None of the products had lead levels that exceeded standards set by the nonprofit U.S. Pharmacopeia (USP), but one had lead levels that exceeded Consumer Reports’ stricter threshold. According to James E. Rogers, Ph.D., director of food safety research and testing at Consumer Reports, “No amount of lead is acceptable.”

Earlier this year, a Stanford University study found that the pigments added to turmeric in Bangladesh may contain lead chromate.

In the study, published in Environmental Research, researchers discovered that turmeric was likely the cause of blood lead contamination in Bangladeshis. They didn’t find evidence of contaminated turmeric outside of Bangladesh, and say that food safety checks are incentives for spice processors to limit the lead added to turmeric that will be exported.

However, the researchers caution, “the current system of periodic food safety checks may catch only a fraction of the adulterated turmeric being traded worldwide.” Since 2011, they point out, more than 15 brands of turmeric — distributed to countries including the U.S. — have been recalled due to excessive levels of lead. The research authors suggested that an “immediate intervention” was needed, bringing together producers and wholesalers to find solutions.

How to shop smart

Supplements like turmeric are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as food, not drugs. So they aren’t put through the same safety tests as medications. Therefore, it’s up to consumers to be vigilant about what they buy. Here are a couple of tips from Consumer Reports about how to be safe when buying them:

Talk to your doctor before taking any supplement. Don’t rely on a pharmacist or health store employee for advice. Consumer Reports sent “secret shoppers” to 34 stores in seven states and in most cases the pharmacists were unaware of potential risks of supplements or reactions with prescription medications. Instead, ask your primary health care provider for advice.

Look on the label, but don’t rely on it. Many products have certifications that verify a supplement contains what is on the label. You can read about some of the verification labels here. But just because a product doesn’t contain heavy metals, pesticides or other contaminants, doesn’t mean the supplement is safe for you to take. It depends on your medical conditions and medications.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated with new information since it was published in January 2012.

The amazing health benefits of turmeric
From reducing inflammation to warding off heart disease, turmeric has impressive healing properties.

This content was originally published here.

Cheesesteak destination Max’s shut down by Philly Health Department

One of Philadelphia’s most storied cheesesteak shops was closed for business over the weekend, disappointing both regulars and tourists who flock to the increasingly-famous North Broad Street destination.

Max’s Steaks, which was featured in Rocky sequels Creed and Creed II and recently made a cameo on NBC’s This Is Us, was temporarily shut down due to health code violations, according to a cease and desist sign on its front door.

Also shuttered were the adjacent Eagle Bar and Clock Bar, on Erie and Germantown avenues, respectively. The three locations share an owner and are connected to one another via basement passages, according to Rasul Haqq, who said he works as an assistant manager and security guard at Max’s.

“We never had any serious violations before,” Haqq told a reporter outside the shop on Saturday. “It’s probably been 10 years since this place closed.”

The interior of Max’s Steaks as health inspectors walked through Saturday afternoon

Danya Henninger / Billy Penn

Health officials could be seen inside the establishment, giving it a once-over after crews had come in to fix the issues and give the place a deep cleaning. “It took us 48 hours to do the whole thing,” Haqq said. “Everybody pitched in.”

He and other staffers gathered outside said they expected Max’s to reopen early on Saturday night after inspectors approved the cleanup, but a return visit around 8 p.m. found the gates still half-pulled over the windows and only a few people inside.

Several groups walked up to the locked front door, only to be disappointed. “That spot says it has cheesesteaks,” one teenager said to his friends, pointing to a sign directly across the street. “Nah, we don’t want those cheesesteaks,” came the dejected answer.

Calls to the Philly Health Department’s weekend dispatch center to discover which violations were still outstanding on Sunday were not immediately returned.

Eagle Bar next to Max’s, with newly-cleaned floor mats hanging out to dry

Danya Henninger / Billy Penn

A Health Department report shows the cheesesteak shop at 3653 Germantown Ave. failed its regular inspection on Nov. 7, with the sanitarian in charge citing “imminent health hazards” like live rodents and lack of proper temperature care for opened food ingredients.

While reactions on social media included pearl-clutching about dirty environs, these kinds of violations aren’t that uncommon in a city with old infrastructure.

The Inquirer’s monthly report of Health Dept. violations shows at least 37 restaurants were shut down for being out of code last month, including a Federal Donuts, a Starbucks, and various other facilities ranging from corner groceries to goPuff delivery warehouses.

Once closed, these places usually reopen within days, so it’s a good bet that a newly sparkling Max’s will return to normal operation this week.

This content was originally published here.

Anti-abortion pregnancy clinics team up to target millennials with lies about health care

The groups, which refuse to offer the full range of reproductive health care, hope to target more millennials with phone apps.

Obria, the under-the-radar anti-abortion group that provides misinformation via its “crisis pregnancy centers,” is expanding.

A New Generation, a Florida-based anti-abortion “pregnancy resource center,” just announced it would be affiliating with Obria. Doing so will allow the group to offer more medical services, as Obria is technically a medical clinic.

Of course, those medical services don’t include things like birth control. Instead, it will be the usual fare places like this offer: ineffective abstinence counseling and medically unsound information about abortion.

A New Generation was particularly pleased to join with Obria because Obria aggressively markets to millennials, and A New Generation wants to “better minister” to them, according to the Tampa Bay Times.

Obria has an app that lets people talk to an Obria provider, which A New Generation thinks millennials will find particularly appealing. In fact, the head of A New Generation described it as a “tele-medicine app, so clients will be able to reach us by using their phones and talk to a nurse face-to-face to get the information they need.”

“Tele-medicine app” wildly overstates what Obria offers — and what A New Generation wants to offer. Obria doesn’t offer birth control. Obria doesn’t offer medication abortions. And Obria doesn’t connect people with health care professionals who would give them a full range of reproductive health options.

Despite all the government money Obria is receiving, it still isn’t offering actual medicine. Instead, the organization, which has received $1.7 million in Title X funds, will teach people about “restraint,” California Healthline reports. It won’t use any of the money to provide condoms to fight skyrocketing levels of STDs.

The head of A New Generation frames this partnership as being “able to meet the needs of women with their health care needs” but then clarified: “[W]hen they find themselves in a crisis situation, instead of turning to maybe an abortion provider, they would turn to us, because we’ve already built a relationship with them.”

Obria isn’t building relationships with anyone. It’s using its ever-increasing — and now government-funded — platform to spread lies and to stop people from getting the reproductive health care they want and need. And now, it’s got yet another clinic to help with that endeavor.

The post Anti-abortion pregnancy clinics team up to target millennials with lies about health care appeared first on Shareblue Media.

This content was originally published here.

Instagrammer Says Learning About WWII is Bad for Millennials’ Mental Health

In school, learning about history was probably one of the most bittersweet things. Though the subject was very interesting, it really did put into perspective just how vile and disgusting humans can be. And even though people tried to promote it as a way to prove “just how far we’d come”, judging by the current state of the world, it is clear to see we’ve not really made as much progress as we had hoped.

Now, an Intsgrammer named Freddie Bentley has come forward claiming that teaching history, particularly about WWII is detrimental for Millenials’ mental health. Just when you think things can’t get any worse, I have to bring you this kind of news.

Keep reading for all the details around the issue.

An Instagram influencer claimed that it is “bad” for millennials to learn about WWII.

Reality TV star Freddie Bentley decided to announce this during a segment of Good Morning Britain, leaving the entire country speechless.

We all know WWII was the worst war that the world has ever seen.

The conflict lasted from 1939-1945, and over the six years, saw the death of up to fifty million people, making it the bloodiest war. On one side, we had the Axis powers – Germany, Italy, and Japan – and the other, the Allies – France, Great Britain, the United States, the Soviet Union, and, to a lesser extent, China.

While it seemed global power was in the hands of western Europe, this war shifted power toward the United States and the Soviet Union.

Innocent men and women lost their lives out on the front line defending their respective countries, primarily without a choice. This is why we work hard to honor them for their service.

In a very controversial interview on Good Morning Britain, a twenty-two-year-old Instagrammer decided to vouch to scrap the teaching of the Second World War to students, as it could prove to have a negative effect on their mental health.

The reality star defended his statement by saying this:

“It was a hard situation, World War Two, I don’t want anyone to think I’m being disrespectful,” he said, “I remember learning it as a child thinking ‘Oh my God it’s so intense’.”

Oh boo hoo, Freddie, at least you didn’t have to live through it.

He believes it will worsen mental health in youngsters.

“I don’t think encouraging death or telling people how many people died in the world war is going to make it better.”

Freddie is the classic example of “let’s wipe out history.”

Not teaching these kinds of subjects in schools makes children grow up thinking in a more narrow-minded way, while also encouraging nonchalant attitudes towards important chunks of history.

In simple words: Just because you don’t like it, didn’t mean it didn’t happen.

I think not.

We are not out here to clean the slate and pretend it didn’t happen. Bad things always happen. We can’t sugar-coat wars and expect people to forget what really happened, can we?

Instead, Freddie wanted to replace learning about WWII by learning how to understand mortgages instead.

Brilliant (!)

We can learn about mortgages and learn about the history that has defined us all and the countries we live in.

People quickly moved to social media to share their opinions.

And let me tell you, hardly anyone, besides a few entitled youngsters, agreed with him.

People had other theories about what worsens mental health in Millenials.

This is so true.

Freddie starred in a British TV show named in which people lie about their identity.

I mean, are we really listening to these kinds of people? No thank you.

“Wrap him in cotton wool…”

It seems as if that’s what he wants! Not everything can be ignored, especially not a war that killed millions of people!

This conversation was sparked after candidates on the British version of The Apprentice did not know the dates of the war.

via: Instagram

Fans of the show were left shocked and angry at the candidates’ response to the war. One of the teams was left debating the dates after the task involved them having to find a pre-war copy of a book.

This led to a whole heap of criticism directed towards the British education system.

A war that defined modern Britain and businessmen and women don’t know when it occurred? It’s quite pathetic really. It wasn’t even long ago!

People were also claiming that forgetting about such impactful horrors means it’s easier for history to repeat itself, and with the current political and economic climate of the world, we seem to be drifting closer towards another one.

Are people just choosing to be ignorant or do we have a serious flaw in education?

One person tweeted how the whole team should have been fired for their appalling behavior.

Freddie’s comment just added to the anger of the public.

He also stated this: “There are so many problems going on in the world, like Brexit, that’s not taught in schools. When I left school it hit me like a ton of bricks – I didn’t know anything to do with life.”

First, second and third of all, Brexit is a very recent occurrence that only happened due to the instability of the country.

And now Britain is paying the price for it.

Standing by Freddie’s comments only prove one thing: Some Millenials care about nothing but themselves. And that’s just the sad reality of the situation.

Most Instagram influencers are known for doing sketchy things. keep scrolling to read more about their problematic behavior.

This content was originally published here.

Instagram Influencer, 22, Claims Learning About WW2 Would Hit Millennials’ Mental Health

Freddie Bentley is a British reality television celebrity who is mainly known for his appearance on the reality game show “The Circle” and for his Instagram feed.

He has recently come under fire online after appearing on the TV show Good Morning Britain and arguing an unpopular opinion.

In the piece on GMB, Bentley states that children should not have to learn about WW2. In his opinion, too much time is spent on the subject. He is concerned that the emphasis on the destruction and killing of war is too much for young minds.

“I don’t want anyone to think I’m being disrespectful,” the 22-year-old celebrity said. He added, “I remember learning it as a child thinking, ‘Oh my god it’s so intense.’”

I agree with Freddie Bentley, I once watched Saving Private Ryan and still have flashbacks. Let’s stop this madness #freddiebentley #SaturdayThoughts #Millennialshttps://t.co/HkVelD11ko

— Millennial Mike (@MillennialMike3) November 2, 2019

People on Twitter, of course, did think that he was being extremely disrespectful. Many pointed out the number of young men who were killed fighting in that war so that people like Bentley would have the freedom to become whatever they wanted. Others pointed out that learning about the war was necessary in order to prevent another one in the future.

Lt. Jack Reynolds (aged 22) was famously photographed after being taken prisoner during the Battle of Arnhem. In the photo, he is seen giving the “two-fingered” salute to the German photographer.
Lt. Jack Reynolds (aged 22) was famously photographed after being taken prisoner during the Battle of Arnhem. In the photo, he is seen giving the “two-fingered” salute to the German photographer.

Many on Twitter pointed out Bentley’s age and how he seemed to fit the stereotype of millennial entitlement.

Bentley suggested that school should avoid potentially furthering any mental health issues children may be facing by forcing them to confront the realities of war at a young age. He recommended spending less time teaching the history of wars and more time explaining Brexit or helping children learn personal finance.

Most online commentators seemed to agree that schools could teach additional subjects but rejected his suggestion that these new subjects come at the expense of teaching about WW2.

@piersmorgan Please get GMB to send Freddie Bentley to Auschwitz to educate this boy along with Michael Wilshaw as https://t.co/cOPYquujcE’s hoping Piers

— Janet Turner (@chocibun) November 1, 2019

Bentley’s comments occurred during a segment on GMB in which he debated the question of whether students should be taught about WW2.

The segment followed an episode of the British version of The Apprentice television show. In the episode, one of the teams had difficulty with an assigned task because none of them were familiar with when WWII began.

Many people took to social media after that episode to decry the state of the British education system.

Shocked for 2nd time this week, Apprentice candidates not knowing when WW11 ended and now that famous celebrity Freddie Bentley on GMB stating WW1 and WW2 should not be taught in schools, @GMB @Lord_Sugar

— Colin Richards (@scoobybloobird) November 1, 2019

Bentley came to fame as a contestant on the reality game show, The Circle. Contestants on that show lived each in their own apartment. Their only contact with the other contestants and with the outside world was through a specially-made social network app known as The Circle.

Contestants could choose to represent themselves truthfully or make up a new identity to show the other contestants.

Each week, contestants were put through a sort of popularity contest with the least popular member among the group being kicked off the show. The winner received 50,000GBP.

Another Article From Us: Arnhem Hero Who Flicked V-sign at The Germans Dies at 97

Bentley came out publicly as gay on that show though he chose to present himself as straight to the other contestants. Since the show, he has been popular on Instagram.

This content was originally published here.

Red meat red flags discredited: Fake meat may be worse for your health

Let them eat steak: Hold the shame, red meat is not bad for you or climate change

Will Coggin Opinion contributor
Published 5:00 AM EDT Nov 2, 2019

Imagine ordering dinner at your favorite restaurant. You know what you want without hesitation: a perfectly marbled 8-ounce steak cooked medium rare. Just before you order, your date tells you they’ve read that cows cause climate change and that meat might be unhealthy. Suddenly, the Caesar salad seems like a better option.

We’ve all been steak-shamed before. Ever since Sen. George McGovern’s 1977 Dietary Goals report declared red meat a health villain, Americans have been chided out of eating red meat. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, red meat consumption has fallen more than 24% since 1976. During that time, study after study has attempted to tie red meat to a laundry list of health problems.

Until now. 

So many studies, so many flaws

Three studies published recently in the Annals of Internal Medicine did something too few papers do: Ask whether the previous studies had any meat on their bones. 

The researchers who wrote the report analyzed 61 past studies consisting of over 4 million participants to see whether red meat affected the risk of developing heart disease and cancer. 

All three came to the same conclusion: Decreasing red meat consumption had little to no effect on reducing risk of heart disease, cancer or stroke. 

How can so many studies be wrong?

Steaks and and other beef products for sale at a grocery store.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP

Nutritional research often relies on survey-based observational studies. These track groups of people and the food they eat, or try to tie a person’s past eating habits to a person’s current state of health. The result is something akin to a crime chart from a mob movie with a random red string connecting random suspects trying to figure out “who dunnit.”

Observational studies rely on participants to recall past meals, sometimes as far back as a month. Even when eating habits are tracked in real time using food diaries, issues arise. Research has shown that participants don’t give honest answers and often pad food diaries with typically “good” foods like vegetables while leaving out things like meat, sweets and alcohol. There’s also the matter of having to accurately report portion sizes and knowing the ingredients of the food eaten in restaurants.

Beef may be healthier than fake meat 

The room for error is huge. A much better form of study would be to lock people in cells for a period of time so that you could precisely control what they ate and did and then measure outcomes. Obviously, there are ethical issues with such a structure, which is why observational studies are more common, if flawed.

Some companies like Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat have tried to cash in on the misconception about meat’s healthfulness. According to the market research firm Mintel, 46% of Americans believe that plant-based meat is better for you than real meat. Ironically, the anti-meat messages could be leading people to less healthful options. 

Science on your side: Don’t let vegetarian environmentalists shame you on meat 

Plant-based meat might enjoy the perception of being healthier, but that perception is far from reality. A lean beef burger has an average of nearly 20% fewer calories and 80% less sodium than the two most popular fake-meat burgers, the Impossible Burger and the Beyond Burger. 

Fake meat is also an “ultra-processed” food, filled with unpronounceable ingredients. The National Institutes of Health released a study in May finding that ultra-processed foods cause weight gain. Unlike observational studies, this research was a controlled, randomized study. 

Earth will survive your meat-eating

It’s not just the flawed health claims about red meat that deserve a second look. In recent years, we’ve been told reducing meat consumption is essential to saving the planet. But despite what critics say, even if everyone in America went vegan overnight, total greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) in the United States would only be reduced 2.6%.

Eat better meat: Don’t go vegan to save the planet. You can help by being a better meat-eater.

Since the early 1960s, America has shrank GHG  emissions from livestock by 11.3% while doubling the production of animal farming. Meat production is a relatively minor contributor to our overall GHG levels. In other countries, it may have a higher impact. The solution is not lecturing everyone else to go meat-free. Sharing our advancements would prove to be a more likely and efficient way to reduce emissions than cutting out meat or replacing it with an ultra-processed analogue.

Those who enjoy a good steak now have a good retort the next time they’re criticized for their choice: Don’t have a cow.

Will Coggin is the managing director at the Center for Consumer Freedom.

This content was originally published here.

Why having a sister is good for your mental health | I Heart Intelligence.com

Sure, she can often drive you crazy by using your stuff without asking permission, singing annoyingly, or taking the last piece of candy. At the same time, however, she is one of your closest, most trusted supporters, a true friend, a play buddy, and a great accomplice in pranks.

Of course, we could be listing such wonderful sister qualities endlessly.

But what many people don’t think about is the connection between having a sister and our mental health.

So, if you haven’t called your sister recently to tell her how much you love her, you are about to be given a good reason to do so. Sisters can improve our mental health, and this is how it all works.

А 2010 Brigham Young University Brigham Young University study discovered having a sibling encouraged children to be more kind and helpful. And apparently, if you have a sister, regardless of the age gap, it’s even better.

The research involved 395 families with two or more children, including at least one child between the ages 10 and 14. The adolescent child was filmed while giving answers to questions about a sibling closest in age. A year later, researchers followed up with the families.

“What we know suggests that sisters play a role in promoting positive mental health,” Alex Jensen, an assistant professor at the School of Family Life at BYU, told Motherly, “and later in life they often do more to keep families in contact with one another after the parents pass.”

In addition, the study discovered that having a sister can help you become a kinder and more giving person.

This is due to the fact that sisters promote positive social behaviors such as altruism and compassion when they show love and affection.

But that doesn’t mean that brothers don’t matter. The study found that loving siblings impact each other positively no matter their gender or age differences.

“Sibling affection from either gender was related to less delinquency and more pro-social behaviors like greater kindness and generosity, volunteering, and helping others,” the study’s lead author, BYU professor Laura Padilla-Walker, told ABC News. “Even if there is a little bit of fighting, as long as they have affection, the positive will win out. If siblings get in a fight, they have to regulate emotions. That’s an important skill to learn for later in life.”

Do you have a sibling? If so, how would you describe your relationship? Share your stories with us in the comment section below.

This content was originally published here.

Guns and public health: Applying preventive medicine to a national epidemic – CBS News

It happened again … twice in less than twenty-four hours. Are any of us surprised? And can anybody help?

When a panel of seven doctors was asked how many had seen a gunshot victim within the past week, three hands went up. “I think people think that if their loved one gets to the hospital, that there’s magic there. But sometimes it’s just too much for us,” said Dr. Stephanie Bonne.

If there was ever a time for preventive medicine, it’s now, says a group of doctors. 

“A grandfather was shot yesterday,” said Dr. Roger Mitchell. “A son was shot yesterday. Yesterday – a mother was shot yesterday. And then the day before that, there were five other people that were shot that were connected to Americans in this country.”

They’ve had enough, and seen enough.

“The only thing worse than a death is a death that can be prevented,” said Dr. Ronnie Stewart. “And to go and talk to the mom of a child who was normal at breakfast and now is not here, is the worst possible thing. And honestly, it drives us to address this problem.”

Drs. Stewart, Boone and Mitchell, along with Drs. Albert Osbahr, Niva Lubin Johnson, Chris Barsotti and Megan Ranney were in Chicago this past winter as more than 40 medical organizations, who normally operate separately, joined forces to address the 40,000 firearm-related deaths that occur each year.

Nothing like this has ever happened, they said. “And we recognize that this is an epidemic that we can address,” said Dr. Barsotti.

Their meeting followed a tweet from the National Rifle Association last November that helped fuel a movement: “Someone should tell self-important anti-gun doctors to stay in their lane.”

Someone should tell self-important anti-gun doctors to stay in their lane. Half of the articles in Annals of Internal Medicine are pushing for gun control. Most upsetting, however, the medical community seems to have consulted NO ONE but themselves. https://t.co/oCR3uiLtS7

— NRA (@NRA)

In response, Dr. Bonne, a trauma surgeon in Newark, N.J., snapped a picture pof the waiting room and posted it to Twitter along with this message: “Hey, N.R.A., do you wanna see my lane? Here’s the chair that I sit in when I tell parents that their kids are dead.”

Hey @NRA ! Wanna see my lane? Here’s the chair I sit in when I tell parents their kids are dead. How dare you tell me I can’t research evidence based solutions. #ThisISMyLane #ThisIsOurLane #thequietroom pic.twitter.com/y7tBAuje8O

— Stephanie Bonne (@scrubbedin)

“And you hit send. And then what happens?” asked medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook.

“I was part of a chorus,” Dr. Bonne replied.

A chorus of thousands of medical professionals who responded #ThisIsOurLane.

“Our motto is do no harm, for physicians. But I think the community felt that harm was being done to us by that tweet,” said Dr. Lubin-Johnson.

Dr. Ranney said, “I remember sitting there and thinking, how can you lecture docs, many of whom are gun owners, about what we do and don’t know?”

Dr. Ranney is chief research officer for Affirm, an organization trying to address gun violence through the same tools doctors use to combat problems like obesity, the opioid crisis, and heart disease.

This public health approach is not new: in the 1950s, doctors worked with the auto industry to help make cars and roads safer. In the ’60 and ’70s, they spoke out against the dangers of tobacco; and in the ’80s and ’90s, to combat HIV and AIDS, they promoted safe sex and research.

Today, the focus is gun violence in all its forms. It may surprise you to know that mass shootings make up less than 1% of firearm-related deaths. The leading cause is suicide, followed by homicide, and then accidents.

But good answers on how best to prevent these deaths are hard to come by. That’s because of 1996 legislation defunding any research at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention promoting gun control.

Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark.), who appended an amendment to a spending bill disallowing government funds from beings used to, in whole or in part, advocate or promote gun control, told the House, “This is an issue of federally-funded political advocacy … a[n] attempt by the CDC to bring about gun control advocacy all over the United States.” $2.6 million from the CDC’s budget was re-allocated, and it had a chilling effect on almost all firearm research. 

“What was lost was 20-some years of effort to understand and prevent a huge health problem,” said Dr. Garen Wintemute, whose work on handgun violence lost government funding after Congress passed that 1996 legislation. “Consciously, deliberately, repeatedly, over and over, we turned our back on this problem. It’s as if we, as a country, had said, ‘Let’s not study motor vehicle injuries. Let’s not study heart disease or cancer or HIV/AIDS.’

“And the result, I believe, is that tens of thousands of people are dead today whose lives could have been saved if that research had been done.”

In 2018, Congress said government dollars could be used to research gun violence, just not to promote gun control. But Dr. Wintemute says federal research into gun violence is still underfunded.

While private donations for research are now increasing, Dr. Wintemute has over the years spent more than $2 million of his own money to continue his research at the University of California-Davis.

Dr. LaPook asked, “Are you a wealthy man who can afford to just do that, as a rounding error?”

“It’s not rounding error,” he laughed. “But I live a very simple life. I earn an academic sector, ER doc’s salary.”

“So, you are changing your lifestyle in order to fund this research or have in the past?”

“Yes, that’s correct.”

“What drives you to do that?”

“People are dying,” Dr. Wintemute replied. “Given the capacity to do it, how can I not? It really is just that simple.”

His work has led to some surprising conclusions. For example, his studies revealed that in some states comprehensive background checks as implemented had no effect on the number of firearm-related deaths. That’s in part because of a lack of communication among agencies.

“We have learned that probably hundreds of thousands of prohibiting events every year do not become part of the data that the background checks are run on,” Dr. Wintemute said.

Consider the 2017 shooting of 46 parishioners at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Due to a domestic violence conviction, the shooter should had been stopped from buying any guns, but that information was never shared with the FBUI, which oversees the background check system.

“So you think, okay, it’s not as effective as we want, but it can become effective if we do A, B, and C?” Dr. LaPook said.

“There’s no question about it,” Dr. Wintemute replied.

But it’s policy proposals from doctors on issues like background checks and registrations that concern gun-rights advocates.

Dr. LaPook said, “The point the N.R.A. was trying to make with its [“stay in your lane”] tweet was, what makes doctors experts on gun policy?”

“Doctors are not experts on gun policy unless they do their homework,” said Dr. Wintemute. “What doctors are experts on is the consequences of violence. If doctors choose to be, they can become experts on policy.”

When asked if advocating for gun control part of the mission of Affirm, Dr. Megan Ranney said no. “This is about stopping shooters before they shoot,” she said.

The NRA did not respond to “Sunday Morning”‘s repeated requests for an on-camera interview. However, in a phone conversation earlier this year, two representatives said the organization does support research into gun-related violence, but expressed concern that – say what they will – the ultimate goal of many who advocate such research is to take away the guns of responsible citizens.

Dr. Ronnie Stewart said, “We’re not well-served by this overly-simplistic view of simply two sides fighting each other. We have to work together. And that includes engaging firearm owners as a part of the solution, not a part of the problem.”

For these doctors, the issue isn’t about whose lane it is; it’s about what they can do.

As Dr. Stephanie Boone said, “I know that the house of medicine can fix this.”

And, Dr. Albert Osbahr added, “Enough is enough.”

       
For more info:

       
Story produced by Dustin Stephens.

This content was originally published here.

How Democrats’ ‘Medicare For All’ Will End Your Health Choices Forever

Half of the Democratic presidential contenders taking this week’s debate stage support Sen. Bernie Sanders’ ambitious government takeover of health care, a plan dubbed “Medicare for All.” Current polls show that as many as 70 percent of Americans are willing to jump on the Medicare for All bandwagon, so they’re just giving the people what they want.

But polls also show that Americans who are more likely to support the proposal are also less likely to understand it. When the nation faces the prospect of a total health care overhaul, that’s a frightening thought.

Many developed nations are struggling with government-managed health care, but Sanders’ proposal goes further toward a reckless single-payer system than anything ever tried around the world. The astronomical $33 trillion price tag alone, which Bernie has no concrete plan to fund, will be paid for by generations of Americans. Costs aside, the rosy benefits under Bernie’s proposal, in which the government supposedly covers everything from surgery to dental care, would prove costly in more ways than one.

While many developed nations are currently struggling with their single-payer systems, no one has ever attempted a program as far-reaching as Sanders’ Medicare for All proposal, which seeks to abolish all private insurance and replace it with a government-managed system that completely pays for all procedures. According to its proponents, including leading presidential candidates Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren, organizing all insurance under the government would reduce administrative costs. But in reality, we’d simply be throwing gasoline on a fire.

For one thing, the U.S. government doesn’t have a stellar record of efficiency or quality in health-care management. Just look at the Department of Veterans Affairs’ utter neglect of veteran’s healthcare. Even if Sanders could miraculously fix government mismanagement, his idea of eliminating all cost-sharing between the insurer and the health-care consumer has been proven to worsen costs.

Already, the majority of our health-care spending goes toward only 5 percent of the population, most of whom suffer from preventable chronic illnesses. When President Obama eliminated surcharges for pre-existing conditions, people lost their financial reward for living healthily. Unsurprisingly, life expectancies have fallen in the past years (due to preventable conditions), and health-care costs have grown. Today, over half of health-care is spent on 5 percent of the population, largely on preventable chronic conditions.

Bernie and co. are now proposing to take this failed idea to an extreme: eliminating all personal responsibility for health care. Under his plan, consumers could get a medical procedure done, or new glasses, orthotics, or teeth cleanings, all for free, whether or not the procedures are medically necessary.

An extensive economic study by the RAND Corporation proved just as much: without cost-sharing, consumers are likely to drive up the tab by getting more care than they need. In other words, Bernie’s plan would cost even more than $33 trillion. Although, at that point, what’s a few trillion dollars anyway—right?

The alternative Bernie could offer—rationing services—would be equally harmful. Many nations with single-payer have already been forced to ration their care due to the overwhelming burden of paying for everyone. In Canada, more than 1 million people are waiting for some type of procedure. In the United Kingdom, people are unable to receive a life-changing corrective surgery for their blindness.

To strike a balance between draconian rationing and prodigal spending, the United States has, for decades, successfully employed a freer system. When people have to pay for their choices, whether that’s the choice to have an elective operation or the choice to live unhealthily, everyone makes the choice right for them—without imposing the cost of their choice on anyone else. While 71 percent of Americans appreciate their current private insurance, under Bernie’s plan, they’d no longer have that choice.

Now that many top Democratic presidential hopefuls have rallied behind Bernie’s radical proposal, the American voter is left with their own choice: Do we want an expensive and deeply flawed overhaul of a life-saving sector, or should we continue to try and fix our free market system, which has produced the best specialty care in the world?

If the folks on this week’s debate stage get their way, this may be the last health-care decision you ever get to make.

This content was originally published here.

Dates and Your Health: the Ideal Food or a Sugary Nightmare? – One Green PlanetOne Green Planet

Dates have long been used as sweeteners and a quick snack, or meal even, for centuries. They are cholesterol-free and very low in fat. Plus they’re energy boosters, making them a suitable snack for the health-conscious. Also, they’re rich in vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, A1 and C, proteins, dietary fiber, iron (11 percent), potassium (16 percent), calcium, manganese, copper, and magnesium. The soluble and insoluble fibers and amino acids present in dates can also help to improve the digestive system.

Despite these benefits, one cup of dates has around 29 mg of fructose and a high glycemic index, which can increase blood sugar levels significantly. So, why do many people who choose to eliminate excess sugars from their lifestyle still consume dates? Well, it seems that dates are naturally rich in nutrition despite being rich in fructose, so there’s a trade-off. Some even consider dates the most ideal food.

Here is a nutritional breakdown of ten dates:

Serving Size: 10 dates

As you can see, there are 61 grams of carbohydrates in a serving size and only 6 grams of fiber to counteract those carbs. Even though there is not that much fiber, still, all of the other ingredients, vitamins, and minerals make dates benefit the body immensely. How? Well, as aforementioned, the magnesium found in dates can reduce blood pressure, and they have anti-inflammatory benefits, reducing inflammation in the arterial walls and reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease, arthritis, Alzheimer’s disease, and other inflammation-related health ailments.

Also, the B6 vitamin in dates has been shown by JAMA Internal Medicine to improve brain performance and better test scores. A summary of the health benefits of dates range from:

Ultimately, dates are good for overall health despite their fructose concentration. Even if your diet is a sugar-free one, devoid of high-fructose corn syrup, agave, honey, coconut sugar, and cane sugar, you probably still eat fruit, and dates are a fruit too, with loads of benefits. When picking out your dates, look for plump ones with unbroken, smoothly wrinkled skins, and avoid those that smell rancid or are hardened. Dried dates keep for up to a year in the refrigerator while fresh dates should be refrigerated in tight, sealed containers and can keep for up to eight months. 

Next time you need to sweeten a plant-based recipe, make your own energy bars, or mask the green flavor in your smoothies, look no further than the humble date. Their lovely flavor and beneficial qualities bring sweetness to any food. Sure, they aren’t sugar-free, but they won’t hurt your efforts to reduce your sugar. What you really want to do is reduce artificial and refined sugars from your diet, not the beautiful, natural sugars in whole dates.

We also highly recommend downloading our Food Monster App, which is available for both Android and iPhone, and can also be found on Instagram and Facebook. The app has more than 15,000 plant-based, allergy-friendly recipes, and subscribers gain access to ten new recipes per day. Check it out!

For more Vegan Food, Health, Recipe, Animal, and Life content published daily, don’t forget to subscribe to the One Green Planet Newsletter!

Being publicly-funded gives us a greater chance to continue providing you with high quality content. Please support us!

This content was originally published here.

10 Simple Asanas That Are Good Specifically for Women’s Health

The state of the back and the blood circulation in the pelvis is the basis of female health. Poor blood and lymph circulation can cause all sorts of different problems like gynecological diseases, belly pain, pain in the lower back, hemorrhoids, sexual disorders, and problems with the intestines. In yoga, there are exercises that first and foremost impact important female body functions and can prevent some health issues.

We at Bright Side have collected the basic asanas that help the body to recover and feel great. And the best time to do them is right in the middle of the day — if that’s not possible, you can do them any time that’s convenient for you.

1. Butterfly

How to do it. Sit straight, put your feet together, and spread the knees out to the sides, lowering them as close to the floor as you can. You can lean on the wall with your shoulder blades in order to control your posture. The lower back shouldn’t touch the wall. Stretch upward.

The time: 1-3 minutes.

The effect: Relieving tension from the belly and the inside of the hips, increasing the mobility of the hip joints, and stabilizing the menstrual cycle.

2. Twist

How to do it. Sit down on a plain surface, the back should be straight, and the legs should be crossed so the knees are on top of the feet. Put your left arm behind you and put your right arm on your left knee. When breathing in, stretch upward, and do a twist, hold it for 20 seconds. Repeat on the other side.

The time: 2 minutes.

The effect: Relaxing the back, improving digestion, and decreasing the waist size.

3. Сandlestick at the wall

How to do it. While lying on your back, lift your legs, straighten them, and put them against the wall, you can spread them at shoulder width. Spread your hands to the sides. Relax, stretch your legs, and slowly breathe in, expanding your rib cage and melting your shoulder blades into the ground. Hold this position and try to breathe slowly and deep.

The time: 3–5 minutes.

The effect: Opening the chest, relaxing the shoulders and the belly, increasing the circulation of the lymphatic fluid, decreasing leg swelling, stimulation of the organs of the abdomen, and getting rid of tiredness and bad moods.

4. Hero pose

How to do it. Sit on your knees and then slowly release the legs and lower your buttocks between your heels, the feet should be on the sides of the hips. Press your palms together in prayer position in front of your body. Stretch your neck and your back and open your chest. Breathe deep.

The time: 1 minute.

The effect: Stretching the hip muscles and the muscles between your legs, relieving period pain, and improving the mobility of hip joints.

5. Opening

How to do it. Sit down with your back straight and spread your legs as wide as you can. When breathing in, lift your hands up. When breathing out, lean forward as much as you can, but don’t round your back, instead only lean in as much as you can while keeping your back straight.

The time: 1 minutes, 8–10 times.

The effect: Making the back stronger, getting rid of spasms in the groin, stimulating blood circulation in the pelvis, improving the function of the ovaries, regulating the menstrual cycle, and preventing cellulite.

6. Downward facing hero pose

How to do it. Sit on a mat, your pelvis should be on your heels, spread the knees to the sides — keeping the feet together, lean forward with your chest. Stretch your hands forward as far as you can, put your forehead to the floor, hold this position.

The time: 1 minute.

The effect: Relaxing the lower back and the neck and stimulating blood circulation in the small pelvis area.

7. Downward facing dog

How to do it. From a sitting position on your heels with your knees spread to the sides, put your hands as far forward as you can, stretching well. Lift your pelvis, and straighten your arms and legs. Move the weight of your body to the legs, trying to put the heels on the floor. Keep your legs and back straight, without bending them or rounding the back.

The time: 2 times, 30 seconds each.

The effect: Regeneration of brain cells, bringing color to the face, stretching the back of the hips, decreasing the signs of cellulite, stretching the back, and removing neck spasms.

8. Dancer’s pose

How to do it. From a standing position, lift your right leg behind you, bend it at the knee and grab your ankle with your left hand. Pull it back and up. Drop your right leg and move it forward, repeat on the other leg.

The time: 30–40 seconds for each leg.

The effect: Improving posture, kidney function, and metabolism.

9. Shoulder bridge

How to do it. Lie on your back, bend your legs at the knees, put your feet shoulder-width apart, and put your arms along your body. Lift the pelvis and bend the back, without lifting the shoulders, neck, or head from the floor.

The time: 1 minute.

The effect: Eliminating back pain, making the abs stronger and preventing painful periods, decreasing the amount of waist fat, and improving digestion.

10. Relaxation

How to do it. Lie on your back, and if you need to, put a small pillow or comforter under your head. Bend your knees and pull your feet as close to the pelvis as possible. Spread the knees to the sides and put the feet together. Put your hands by your sides. Relax completely when breathing out.

The time: 3 minutes.

The effect: Relaxing the muscles, a positive influence on the mood, a slow stretching of the lower back and the inside of the hips, stimulating the blood circulation in the small pelvis, and improving the circulation of the lymphatic fluid.

These exercises are also great because you don’t need any special preparation before them. You can do them at home or outside. Do you know any other effective exercises you could share with other people?

Illustrated by Natalia Okuneva-Rarakina for BrightSide.me

This content was originally published here.

Total Ban on Fracking Urged by Health Experts: 1,500 Studies Showed ‘Damning’ Evidence of Threats to Public Health, Climate

By Jake Johnson

A comprehensive analysis of nearly 1,500 scientific studies, government reports, and media stories on the consequences of released Wednesday found that the evidence overwhelmingly shows the drilling method poses a profound threat to public health and the climate.


None

The sixth edition of the Compendium of Scientific, Medical, and Media Findings Demonstrating Risks and Harms of Fracking (the Compendium), published by Physicians for Social Responsibility and Concerned Health Professionals of New York, found that “90.3 percent of all original research studies published from 2016-2018 on the health impacts of fracking found a positive association with harm or potential harm.”

The analysis also found that:

  • 69 percent of original research studies on water quality found potential for, or actual evidence of, fracking-associated water contamination;
  • 84 percent of original research studies on human health risks found signs of harm or indication of potential harm.

“There is no evidence that fracking can operate without threatening public health directly and without imperiling climate stability upon which public health depends,” the Compendium states.

Sandra Steingraber, Ph.D., co-founder of Concerned Health Professionals of New York, said in a statement that “the case against fracking becomes more damning” with the publication of each edition of the Compendium.

“As the science continues to come in, early inklings of harm have converged into a wide river of corroborating evidence,” said Steingraber. “All together, the data show that fracking impairs the health of people who live nearby, especially pregnant women, and swings a wrecking ball at the climate. We urgently call on political leaders to act on the knowledge we’ve compiled.”

None

MUST READ: @PSRenvironment⁩ and Concerned Health Professionals of New York @ssteingraber1 have released the 6th edition of the #fracking science #Compendium! Compiling and analyzing ~1500 studies, this critical resource shows how #FrackingHarmsHealth! https://t.co/QW8ioIYKUU pic.twitter.com/jztVLQgBoI

— PSR Environment (@PSRenvironment) June 19, 2019

None

According to the Compendium, the first edition of which was published in 2014, the “feverish pace” of U.S. fossil fuel extraction — which has accelerated under President Donald Trump — “has spurred a massive build-out of fracking infrastructure,” putting air quality and water sources at risk in communities across the United States.

In addition to the harmful effects of fracking on those who live near oil and gas development projects, the Compendium found, the drilling practice is “also at odds with the emerging scientific consensus on the scale and tempo of necessary climate change mitigation and with rising public alarm about the impending climate crisis that this consensus has amplified.”

“Despite efforts by the gas industry to suppress all health data on fracking, the Compendium documents the serious harm fracking holds for pregnant women, children, and those with respiratory disease,” Walter Tsou, MD, MPH, interim executive director of Philadelphia Physicians for Social Responsibility, said in a statement. “We need to ban fracking.”

The sixth edition of the Compendium comes just days after more than 100 environmental groups sent a letter urging Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf to investigate the link between fracking and the emergence of rare childhood cancers in rural Pennsylvania counties.

As Steingraber — one of the letter’s signatories — told online environmental outlet The Daily Climate on Wednesday, much of the data in the Compendium comes from Pennsylvania, which is home to over 100,000 active oil and gas wells.

“What makes fracking different from any other industry I’ve studied in public health is that there’s no industrial zone,” Steingraber said. “It’s taking place literally in our backyards, and unfortunately some of the best evidence for both polluting emissions and emerging health crises is coming out of southwestern Pennsylvania.”

None

Feds to Sell Even More Public Land for #Fracking Near Sacred Park https://t.co/AJPxc2OuWi @FrackAction @Frack_Off

— EcoWatch (@EcoWatch) February 3, 2019

Reposted with permission from our media associate Common Dreams.

This content was originally published here.

Medicare for All Means Real Choice: One Health Card, Good Anywhere You Go | Common Dreams Views

A new survey out this week is an important step forward to demolishing one of the principle talking points against Medicare for All.

No doubt, you’ve heard this one: “People love their insurance! Under Medicare for All, you’ll lose your private insurance and your doctor.” Uh, no.

A Morning Consult/Politico survey conducted after the first Democratic presidential primary debates found that when people hear the real story—that under Medicare for All you can keep your preferred doctors and hospitals, support climbs to a clear majority of 55 percent. Support among Democrats gets to 78 percent.

Even if you go to a provider that is “in your network,” you may still get hammered with a surprise medical bill by a physician, or other provider on call that night at the hospital, or lab or supplier the hospital generally uses who is “out of network.” That’s not choice, it’s robbery.

For independents it’s a big leap of 14 points, up to 56 percent support. That support eclipses the disinformation peddled by the health care industry, their lobbyists, their mouthpieces in Congress—and too many in the media—that if you lose your private insurance you will lose your preferred doctor or other provider.

The inconvenient truth for the lobbyists and their cheerleaders is that Medicare for All offers real choice, not the illusion of choice under the profit-focused insurance system. Medicare for All means one health card, good anywhere. You can go to any doctor, any hospital or clinic or other provider you prefer.

That, of course, is the opposite of how the present, market-based, insurance system works.

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

OUR CAMPAIGN ENDS TONIGHT – CAN YOU HELP?

We still need to raise $5,000 to keep moving forward.

Please choose a donation method below and help us today:

Nearly all private insurance corporations restrict choice by forcing you into a narrow network, with a limited set of doctors and hospitals that are part of their network, usually dictated by a medical group that contracts with the insurer. Many insurance companies actually re-negotiate with the medical group every year, meaning you get handed a new network and can overnight lose that trusted doctor, the specialists you count on, and which hospitals are in your narrow network.

It gets worse. If you “choose” to go outside the network, to a provider you liked before, or one closer to home, the insurance company slams you with a huge additional charge, or you get rejected when you walk in the door.

Nurses see the damage every day. Our patients denied care, making painful choices of whether to get the care they need, or facing catastrophe with astronomical hospital bills.

Further, even if you go to a provider that is “in your network,” you may still get hammered with a surprise medical bill by a physician, or other provider on call that night at the hospital, or lab or supplier the hospital generally uses who is “out of network.” That’s not choice, it’s robbery, and generally you don’t know you were “out of network” until the bill comes. Check out why so many people are starting GoFundMe accounts to pay for medical bills when they thought they were “in network.”

Under Medicare for All, the two actual bills, H.R. 1384 in the House and S. 1129 in the Senate, narrow networks are gone. All networks are gone. So are all surprise medical bills. So are all out of network charges. So are all premiums, all deductibles, all co-pays for such basics as emergency care, doctor’s visits, mental health, dental, vision, long term care, and so much more.

Nurses see the damage every day. Our patients denied care, making painful choices of whether to get the care they need, or facing catastrophe with astronomical hospital bills.

Imagine that. Under Medicare for all, real choice, guaranteed care. No wonder the desperate lobbyists and all their gang are so desperate to hide the truth.

This content was originally published here.

Sanford Health, top surgeon accused of defrauding, harming patients

Sanford Health, top surgeon defrauded millions from government, complaint alleges


Jonathan Ellis


Sioux Falls Argus Leader
Published 3:28 PM EDT Jun 28, 2019
The Sanford Medical Center stands on Friday, June 28, in Sioux Falls.
Erin Bormett / Argus Leader

Sanford Health and one of its most lucrative surgeons have been accused of defrauding the federal government out of millions of dollars while also harming patients in a stunning complaint filed in federal court.

The 111-page complaint, filed by two Sanford doctors in August 2016, was unsealed by a federal judge late Thursday. On Wednesday, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of South Dakota filed a motion to intervene in the case, bringing the specter of government sanctions and even criminal charges.

The lawsuit alleges that Dr. Wilson Asfora, a neurosurgeon with Sanford, defrauded the federal government by performing unnecessary spine surgeries. The complaint also alleges that Asfora and Sanford had an elaborate scheme in which Sanford bought medical devices from a company owned by Asfora, and that Asfora then implanted the devices in patients, creating an incentive to perform unnecessary surgeries and a violation of federal law.

Dr. Wilson Asfora in 2009.
Argus Leader file photo

More: Sanford Health announces massive merger plan with Iowa’s UnityPoint Health

The court filing, brought by two of Asfora’s colleagues, Drs. Dustin Bechtold and Bryan Wellman, alleges that Sanford’s leadership ignored complaints from doctors and intentionally covered up Asfora’s surgical errors. It also alleges that Sanford and Asfora billed Medicare and other programs for care that was never provided. Those accusations, if true, could get the health system suspended from government health programs, including Medicare, resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenues.

The filing says that Sanford’s executive leadership, including President and CEO Kelby Krabbenhoft, and doctors who were supposed to ensure patient safety, ignored repeated warnings and complaints that Asfora was performing unnecessary surgeries.

SUPPORT INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM: Subscribe to the Argus Leader today

Dr. Allison Suttle, Sanford’s chief medical officer, denied the allegations in a statement to the Argus Leader.

“Dr. Wilson Asfora is an exceptionally talented surgeon who provides excellent care to his patients,” she said. “His unique skills and expertise are a great asset to our region. He has saved the lives of hundreds of patients. The allegations in this lawsuit have been investigated and were found to have no merit. Sanford Health is confident in the care provided to our patients and will continue to provide quality care. We will vigorously defend this baseless suit.”

At one point, in October, 2015, Sanford fired Asfora. The complaint says that Asfora ran into Wellman and another spine surgeon, Dr. Troy Gust, and told them he had “dirt and skeletons” on Sanford. Asfora predicted he would be reinstated, and he was two weeks later.

The complaint includes 50 pages of accounts in which Asfora is alleged to have performed unnecessary surgeries on patients. In those accounts, Asfora not only performed the surgeries, but he also filled patients with unnecessary screws and medical devices manufactured by his company, Medical Designs, that were then billed to the federal government.

Asfora and Sanford, the complaint alleges, received kickbacks by using medical implants in unnecessary surgeries. Medical Designs produced medical screws and spacers used in spinal fusion surgeries. The complaint alleges that Asfora used those devices on spinal fusion surgeries that were unnecessary in order to generate profits for himself.

“One level,” says a summary of one patient’s fusion, “was all that was medically necessary for this patient. Dr. Asfora put in three additional cages, which this patient did not need, but which Dr. Asfora personally benefited from financially. Dr. Asfora never saw this patient prior to surgery. Three of these levels were off-label, medically unnecessary, and medically tainted by kickbacks.” 

It’s not the first time that Asfora and Sanford have been in trouble with violating federal anti-kickback laws. An Argus Leader investigation in 2014 revealed that Asfora formed an entity known as a Physician Owned Distributorship. PODs allow their doctor-owners to profit off of devices that they implant, which critics say increases the likelihood of doctors performing surgeries for financial gain.

Sanford and Asfora agreed to pay $625,000 in fines for violating anti-kickback rules.

Surgeons with the Orthopedic Institute had a separate POD, but they abandoned their POD amid concerns about violating federal law. Asfora continued his POD, which the complaint attributes to more frequent and aggressive surgeries performed by Asfora.

This content was originally published here.

California health care: Some undocumented adults get coverage

California becomes first state to provide health care coverage to some undocumented adults


John Bacon


USA TODAY
Published 9:41 AM EDT Jul 10, 2019
In this May 9, 2019, file photo, California Gov. Gavin Newsom gestures towards a chart with proposed funding to deal with the state’s homelessness as he discusses his revised state budget during a news conference in Sacramento, Calif.
Rich Pedroncelli, AP

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation making California the first state to provide health care coverage to young, undocumented adults, a $98 million measure targeting almost 100,000 people.

The immigrants, ages 19 to 25, are eligible for Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program. The law signed Tuesday was a win for Newsom, who rejected as too expensive a state Senate plan to include adults 65 and older living in the state illegally.

President Trump has called the plan “crazy.” Newsom shrugs off the criticism, calling California “the most un-Trump” state in the nation.

Newsom signed the measure the same day the state forecast an average premium increase of less than 1% for 2020 in the state’s individual insurance marketplace, the lowest such rate change in the state program’s history.

The coverage expansion and the low average premium hike are mostly being funded through restoration of the individual mandate that requires California residents to purchase health insurance for themselves and their dependants. Californians who fail to purchase insurance would face a state tax penalty.

The plan is similar to a part of President Barack Obama’s health care law that Republicans in Congress eliminated as part of the 2017 overhaul to the tax code.

Not that the state is desperate for cash: California is projected to have a surplus of more than $20 billion, the largest in 20 years.

“The bold moves by Gov. Newsom and the Legislature will save Californians hundreds of millions of dollars in premiums and provide new financial assistance to middle-income Californians, which will help people get covered and stay covered,” said Peter Lee, Covered California’s executive director.

Lee said California is “building on the success of the Affordable Care Act” and expanding coverage to hundreds of thousands of people. The California Immigrant Policy Center lauded the inclusion of undocumented young adults but called the plan “bittersweet.”

“The exclusion of undocumented elders from the same health care their U.S. citizen neighbors are eligible for means beloved community members will suffer and die from treatable conditions'” said Cynthia Buiza, executive director of the California Immigrant Policy Center.

Newsom has pledged to further expand coverage in the future. The new rules are effective in January and are part of a larger effort to ensure everyone in the state has access to health insurance.

This content was originally published here.

California Officially Becomes First State To Provide Health Benefits to Some Illegal Immigrants

Thousands of illegal immigrants in California will be able to receive state-funded health insurance under a law signed Tuesday by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The law, SB-104, extends health care benefits to everyone 19 to 25 years of age who is income eligible, regardless of their immigration status, CNN reported.

Officials have estimated about 90,000 people will be covered by the law, with a cost of about $98 million per year. Coverage will take effect in 2020. California will be restoring the individual mandate to have health insurance in order to collect revenue that can pay for the new law. The Obamacare mandate was removed nationally by the GOP-controlled Congress in 2017.

Advertisement – story continues below

California already covers health care for illegal immigrants under 19.

Although Newsom balked at a $3.4 billion-per-year proposal to expand health care coverage for illegal immigrants regardless of age, he has also said that he will increase coverage.

President Donald Trump has condemned the law.

California doesn’t “treat their people as well as they treat illegal immigrants,” he told reporters on Monday, the Associated Press reported.

Advertisement – story continues below

“At what point does it stop? It’s crazy what they are doing. And it’s mean. And it’s very unfair to our citizens, and we’re going to stop it. But we may need an election to stop it, and we may need to get back the House,” Trump said.

But Newsom said California is right where he wants it to be.

Should illegal immigrants get taxpayer-funded health insurance?

Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
0% (0 Votes)
0% (0 Votes)

“If you believe in universal health care, you believe in universal health care. We are the most un-Trump state in America when it comes to health policy,” Newsom said, according to NPR.

At least one Republican state legislator foretold troubles from the law.

“We are going to be a magnet that is going to further attract people to a state of California that’s willing to write a blank check to anyone that wants to come here,” state Sen. Jeff Stone said.

Advertisement – story continues below

“We are doing a disservice to citizens who legally call California their home.”

CNN earlier this month released the results of a national poll on giving illegal immigrants government-funded health care. The poll found that 59 percent of those surveyed were opposed to giving health care to illegal immigrants while 38 percent supported the concept.

Government-funded health care for illegal immigrants has become a central issue as Democrats seek to select their 2020 presidential nominees.

Linda J. Blumberg of the Urban Institute is one of the many critics of insurance for all and said it might create “strong incentives for people with serious health problems to enter the country or remain longer than their visas allow in order to get government-funded care,” The New York Times reported.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

This content was originally published here.

40 percent of Americans want to foot the bill for illegal aliens’ health care, poll finds

Most Americans don’t believe that their tax dollars should go to fund health care benefits for those who have entered the country illegally, but a surprisingly high minority does, according to a new CNN poll.

The CNN survey of 1,613 American adults — conducted June 28-30 by independent research company SSRS — found that while 58 percent of Americans are opposed to the idea of taxpayer-funded health insurance for illegal aliens, 38 percent of respondents were on board with the idea; 3 percent were undecided.

Unsurprisingly, two-thirds (66 percent) of Democrats surveyed said they supported taxpayer-backed health insurance for illegal immigrants, while only a scant 10 percent of self-described Republicans supported it. And 63 percent of independents said they opposed the idea, as opposed to the 34 percent in favor of it.

The poll also found similar enthusiasm levels between Republicans and Democrats on voting in next year’s presidential election. At least 75 percent of Democrats answered that they were “extremely/very enthusiastic” compared to 73 percent of Republicans.

The CNN/SSRS poll has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.

Not so long ago, a debate about whether or not to open up publicly funded health insurance benefits to illegal aliens would have sounded like the satire of past election cycles, but that’s just where things are right now in the 2020 Democratic primary.

At one of last week’s two Democratic debates, every single Democratic candidate raised their hands on stage in favor of giving health care to illegal aliens.

On the campaign trail, former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., have both spoken in favor of public health care benefits for illegal immigrants.

At an event in June, Democratic candidate and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said that he would “absolutely” include coverage for an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in his trademark Medicare for All proposal.

Meanwhile, the state of California has gone out ahead of the 2020 Democratic field and has begun offering state medical benefits to illegal alien adults. President Donald Trump criticized the move Monday, telling reporters that California’s elected officials “don’t treat their people as well as they treat illegal immigrants.

Estimates put the current cost of illegal immigration to the U.S. somewhere between $75 billion and $150 billion every year; however, those estimates don’t account for the record-breaking border numbers the U.S. has seen over the last few months or what will happen if the U.S. incentivizes even more illegal immigration with new health care entitlements.

This content was originally published here.

BREAKING: Google Just Scrubbed Natural Health Websites From Its

***CENSORSHIP IS REAL. YOU CAN MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE BY SHARING THIS ON SOCIAL AND FORWARDING IT VIA EMAIL. THANK YOU!!***

Earlier this month, in one devastating algorithmic stroke, Google removed many of the top natural health and health freedom websites from their organic search results — some losing as much as 90% of their traffic. In fact, the term “organic” should no longer be used to describe Google’s referral traffic, as a jaw-dropping undercover investigation by Project Veritas reveals: Google surreptitiously manipulates its search results and auto-suggestions to conform to a very specific set of sociopolitical and economic agendas intended to manipulate elections and promote private interests.

We live in amazing times, albeit intense, filled with incredible darkness and light.

But thanks to the power of the internet, we have a level of freedom of information never enjoyed before by any previous generation on Earth — and that information is the very life’s blood of democratic ideals, and the necessary ingredient for informed consent and health freedom, our primary advocacies.

But what happens when the gate-keepers of the content that flows through this incredible invention, like Facebook and Pinterest, censor and shadow ban certain of its users or content, or their ability to send you messages via email service provider platforms like Mailchimp, as we’ve recently experienced on GreenMedInfo.com? Where do we go for information then? 

Why not skip the social media filtering and email platform censorship and go back to using Google, you might ask. Aren’t they the very archetype and modern-day oracle of fairness, having become synonymous with looking for and finding objective answers. 

After all, wouldn’t you expect that if you typed in turmeric research, GreenMedInfo.com would come up on the first page, given we have the world’s largest, open access resource on the topic which curates over 2,700 peer-reviewed studies relevant to over 800 diseases, on the topic? Whereas a few years ago, our search traffic was growing, today it’s as if we don’t exist on the internet any longer (unless you specifically search for us by name). 

Instead, today, you find first page google results on turmeric like: “Turmeric May Not Be a Miracle Spice After All” from Time.com, or “Turmeric: Uses, Side Effects, Interactions, Dosage, and Warning” from WebMD.com, which overlook much of the research we have gathered, and make turmeric sound like it’s just another drug that you have to be very careful take. 

Apparently, this is entirely by design! On June 3rd, in fact, Google rolled out its latest core algorithm change, which obliterated the organic search results for the majority of the top sites in the natural health and health freedom advocating sector of the internet. Sites like DrAxe.com, Kellybroganmd.com (stats depicted in the image below), and Naturalnews.com saw most of their traffic removed overnight. 

Mercola.com, perhaps the most heavily hit of all, broke the story in its two-part report: “Google buries Mercola in their latest search engine update, Part 1 and 2.” 

Mercola.com has been a source of whistle-blowing information about Big Pharma and Big Tech collusion for decades, so it is no surprise why Google would take this action against his platform, and similar ones. In fact, signs of the coming purge came back in 2016, when GlaxoSmithKline signed a $715 million contract to partner with Google. Google, it appears, has become a pay-to-play operation, and contains a specific sociopolitical and economic agenda that is built directly into its search algorithms. 

Amazingly, on the same day of Mercola’s report, June 24th, an investigative reporter by the name of James O’ Keefe, founder of Project Veritas, released an undercover video of a top Google executive and a whistleblower from within Google, revealing how the company is manipulating search results to unduly influence elections, but how they are applying an Orwellian-type narrative to the autosuggestions, search results, and google news aggregator feed used by billions daily. This is a must watch video, and was almost immediately removed by Youtube (owned by Google), further validating how badly they don’t want the information to get out there. 

Amazingly, the timing of this video could not be worse for Google. As reported by the Wall Street Journal on June 24th, the Justice Department is preparing an anti-trust case against Google. Additionally, on June 19th, Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced Senate Bill 1914“A bill to amend the Communications Decency Act to encourage providers of interactive computer services to provide content moderation that is politically neutral,” which would strip Big Tech companies of the immunity they presently enjoy from lawsuits for exactly the type of political manipulation Project Veritas’ video above exposed. 

Until Google is held accountable for their actions, and there is industry reform, it will be difficult to get around their full spectrum dominance (gmail, google, youtube, google calendar, google documents, etc.) unless we find better, privacy-secured, platforms.  And there are quite a few you may not have heard about, including the internet browser alternatives to Google Chrome, such as Brave Browser and Opera, search engines like Startpage.comduckduckgo.com or ecosia.org, and email programs like protonmail.com. You can also use the communications app Signal, which provides a level of encryption that may be the best out there. 

Lastly, this newsletter is one of the only lifelines people will have to receive our content in the future. And we highly encourage you to share it with others. They can sign up here and receive our most information-packed gift ever here, a 500+ page natural remedy guide entirely backed up by peer-reviewed science. It’s truly an invaluable resource and we are happy to give it away to support our readers taking back control of their health. Download it here. You can also read my recent Founder’s Statement about Recent Censorship Events, to get a greater sense for the context of what is happening to us and similar projects like ours. 

ADDENDUM: TESTING THE HYPOTHESIS THAT GOOGLE IS MANIPULATING THEIR RESULTS

In order to confirm that O’ Keefe’s accusations against Google are correct, and that they are engaged in manipulating search term auto suggestions, I typed into Google “Vaccines cause…” to see what results it would retrieve. This is the result: 

In order to ascertain what the actual search volume for the term in question is, we went to another Google product called Google trends which allows you to see the volume, and what people are searching for, over time. So, we compared the searches: “Vaccines Cause Adults” with “Vaccines Cause Autism.” You’ll see the profound disparity in volume between the two, in favor of the latter. 

You can visit the google trends search and see for yourself here.

Amazingly, Google states that the auto-suggestions are “predictions, not suggestions.” Here’s their official statement: 

“You’ll notice we call these autocomplete “predictions” rather than “suggestions,” and there’s a good reason for that. Autocomplete is designed to help people complete a search they were intending to do, not to suggest new types of searches to be performed. These are our best predictions of the query you were likely to continue entering.

How do we determine these predictions? We look at the real searches that happen on Google and show common and trending ones relevant to the characters that are entered and also related to your location and previous searches.”

Clearly, this demonstrates with Google’s own data that they are intentionally removing certain auto-suggestions from their search to cover up the truth about what people are actually searching for. This also corroborates the hypothesis that they are censoring sites critical of vaccines, or which question vaccine safety; namely, natural health and health freedom promoting websites like our own. 

This content was originally published here.

California to Give Illegal Aliens Health Care Benefits | Trending

A budget agreement between California lawmakers and Governor Gavin Newsom will give younger illegal aliens access to the Medi-Cal program,  the state’s health insurance program for low-income Californians. Sacramento Bee: Lawmakers want to use an “extraordinary” state budget surplus to…

This content was originally published here.