My Blog

Allopathic

What is a Healing Crisis ?

J.Arnold: Posted on 21 January 2012 20:36

Have you ever heard the term 'Healing Crisis' or 'Herxheimer Reaction '?

Chances are you haven't unless you or your animal has been through it.

In our everyday lives we ingest and take into our bodies many toxins and not all of them are effectively dealt with by the liver.

These toxins stay in our bodies and are stored and added to as time goes on. A healing crisis is when the body 'deals with the problem' - like when your skin detox's out excess oils and waste in the form of a big spot or boil but on a larger scale - a scale where there are more, uncomfortable symptoms which may take some time to work through - generally the worse the symptoms, the more toxins there are to be detoxed out of the body in order to achieve a state of good health.

Healing crisis is sometimes seen in dogs who have their diet changed over to a natural raw diet as their nutritional needs are being met more fully from a more bio-available food source which gives their body more strength to enable it to take steps toward better health it was previously unable to.

There may be any of the following experienced: diarrhea, thinning of coat, sores and scabs, gunky ears, gunky eyes, 'wet eczema', hot spots, and in more severe cases even weight loss.

Diarrhea is less common, especially if the dog is fasted before being changed over, and aided with probiotics and/or enzymes, thankfully, but can still happen initially.

Many of us have grown up with the idea that 'healthy' means no problems and no issues - so we expect a healthy dog to look wonderful and have no issues, and we often don't realise that allopathic medicine encourages us to think that the elimination [or suppression] of a symptom, is the same as elimination or the illness/disease - when in fact this is not the case.

If we see a dog who is clearly having some of these symptoms of detox happening, owners can worry and panic, but what they are not realising is that to see these things is a positive, as it tells us that their pets system is strong and healthy enough that it has put a detox into action and is 'spring-cleaning' and eliminating the waste it was unable to before.

So what looks to us like an unhealthy, sick dog, although having some unpleasant symptoms at the time, is, underneath, a stronger and healthier dog than it was before, when it's body was unable to detox the toxins and 'shelved' them within the body to build up and up

- but the biggest thing to remember is that this is a Temporary State, on the journey to better health.

A dog experiencing a healing crisis can be helped and supported in many ways; homeopathy is a wonderful and gentle way which is very effective, as are specific nutritional supplements and aids to support and/or boost the immune system, reiki is very calming and healing and many animals love it and simple basic things like, if your dog is detoxing out through their ears, clean the ears regularly.

Always ensure that your dog has access to clean water, as this is needed for detox within the body, and maybe add some to their food so they have more.

Detox can be short, or it can go on for longer, or it may not be visibly obvious that it happens at all, but the main thing is to remember that if it does happen, the worst thing you can do is panic and change the diet back. Sure, that may stop the symptoms, but it may not do so quickly, but those toxins need to come out, and visually distressing symptoms like hair loss for dogs is a natural part of detoxing.

Many people who change their dogs over to a more healthy diet only ever see good signs, the white of the coat is whiter, the coat gleams like never before, skin issues speedily clear up as do recurrent ear infections and bad breath, etc. etc. but I always make sure people I help know that a healing crisis is a possibility.

Trackback Link

Micro-Chipping

J.Arnold: Posted on 26 October 2011 13:17

I couldn't say this better, so won't:

From: H MCMURRAY
Sent: 25 October 2011 23:15
To: catherine@canine-health-concern.org.uk
Subject: complusory dog microchipping

Dear sir/madam

I am writing to you to make you aware of the dangers of

microchipping. Legislation is soon to be introduced making it

compulsory for dogs in Northern Ireland to be microchipped. I

believe they will try to bring in the same legislation in England.

Are you aware that various scientific studies have shown that

between 1% and 10% of laboratory animals have developed

cancers around the microchip implant.? Outside the laboratory

there have been documented cases of cats and dogs also

developing carcinomas at the implant site. This should not be

surprising, as foreign body tumor genesis (the growth of cancer

cells due to a foreign object being lodged under the skin of an

animal or human) is a well established medical problem.

Here is what Dr. Robert Benezra, head of the Cancer Biology

Genetics Program at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer

Center in New York had to say about RFID implants, "There's

no way in the world, having read this information, that I would

have one of those chips implanted in my skin, or in one of my

family members."

Please check out the following websites for scientific studies and

other cases of microchip implant-induced tumours.

Importantly, they also state that there has been no research

carried out to prove that these implants are safe.

These websites also contain all the latest information on the

whole microchip subject:

http://www.noble-leon.com/

http://www.antichips.com/

http://www.chipmenot.org.uk/

http://www.microchip-implants.co.uk/

But cancer is not the only illness induced by Radio Frequency

Identification (RFID) chips. There have also been cases of

adverse tissue reactions and haemorrhaging due to the chip

being implanted erroneously; the glass of the chip can break

or the chip can migrate to another part of the body when the

dog is playing.Any adverse reactions to implants are supposed

to be reported to the Microchip Advisory Board on behalf of the

British Small Animal Veterinary Association (BSAVA).

However, only one vet in the survey we carried out was aware of

this reporting procedure. But then why would they be aware as

nobody has ever told them there are any risks involved so they

will not be looking for any adverse reactions. M.A.G. have

admitted themselves that there is under-reporting in this area.

And who are the Microchip Advisory Board?

They are predominately made up of microchip manufacturers,

microchip distributors, and companies that run the microchip

databases.

There would appear to be a conflict of interest here.

Why would people making a lot of money from microchipping

want to highlight the dangers of microchipping?

There were various spurious reasons put forward by the

pro-microchipping lobby when trying to push this legislation

through but none stand up to close scrutiny.

The first was because it would help curtail dangerous dogs.

Apart from the fact this would involve forcing a law on

everyone to address a problem created by a miniscule amount

of dog owners, it is patently disingenuous as the sort of

people that own dangerous dogs will simply not get their dogs

microchipped or get them from illegal breeders. The next reason

wheeled out was that it would help if your dog was lost, but a

collar with an address and phone number does the same thing.

(If your dog is stolen, under the Data Protection Act, the

company who runs the microchip database cannot legally tell you

who has stolen your dog, so that argument is also fallacious.

Having a microchip is not proof of ownership)

The next reason given is that it would deter people from letting

their dogs roam. Well the only way to do this would be to fine

the owners and to make it substantial but if you do that the

owners would just take the dog to pound for rehoming or just

take it to the vets to get put down which would probably cost

less than the fine. If an owner doesn’t care enough and lets his

dog risk being run over on the road by letting it wander around

without a lead, then he doesn’t really care about the dog at all,

so he isn’t going to pay any fines.

The idea was partly sold to animal sanctuaries because they were

told it would help them re-unite the animals with their owners.

There is one major flaw in this argument. The vast majority of

animals, particularly dogs that 7 Heaven take in, from whatever

source (and presumably this will be the same for most charities)

are animals that have been given up by their owners.

You can microchip a dog up to its eyeballs but you can’t re-unite

it with an owner that doesn’t want it.In the genuine cases where

a dog escapes, a collar and tag with owner’s details will be just

as good for getting the dog back to its owner. In fact, it would

be better as any member of the public can read the details of the

tag and contact the owner whereas it takes someone with a

scanner to read a microchip. Someone would either have to

phone the dog warden and wait until he collected it and got it

back to the pound before the owner would be contacted or

whoever found the dog would have to get it to their nearest vet

or council to have it scanned and not too many people are going

to go to that trouble. In addition to this, if the dog has changed

hands, the microchip details may not be correct as every time a

dog gets a new owner that new owner must pay to have the details

updated on the microchip database.

So when all the arguments are dispelled the only reason left

would appear to be money. By the microchip manufacturers

own admission a profit of between 200% and 400 % can be

made per microchip. That, of course, is only for the charities

or vets that actually do the microchipping; it doesn’t say how

much profit the actual manufacturers will make.

Certainly the one thing that does not seem to be taken into

account is the dog’s welfare as the dangers are never mentioned

to the public.

We conducted a survey amongst Northern Irleand vets to get

their perspective.

Below are the results of that survey:

*57% of respondents said they were never made aware

of the health risks associated with microchipping implants.

*None (0%) of vets, who said they carried out microchipping,

informed the pet’s owner of the risks.

*72% of respondents do not know the reporting procedure to

implants.(Clearly this is a major factor of why M.A.G. say there

is so little risk involved).

*86% of respondents said they disapprove of anyone other than

a vet carrying out this procedure. The remainder said that those

carrying out implants must undergo proper training or be a

qualified veterinary nurse with additional specific training.

We also asked the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons for their

opinion, taking into account their Guide to Professional Conduct.

Below are the points we put to them. Under the Royal College of

Veterinary Surgeons Guide to Professional Conduct section 1A it

says , “Accessibility, accountability and transparency are

expected.

Where is the transparency involved when clients are not told

about the risk to the animal?

Under section 1B(a) it says “Make animal welfare your first

consideration in seeking to provide appropriate attention for

animals committed to you care.

”How is the welfare of the animal the first consideration when

implanting a microchip when it has no medical or health benefit

to that animal and, in fact, can have adverse side effects?

Under section 1B(b) it says “Ensure that all animals under your

care are treated humanely and with respect”

Carrying out unnecessary medical procedures with potentially

lethal side effects cannot, by any definition, be considered

treating an animal humanely or with respect.Under section

1D(f) it says “Ensure treatment options are offered and

explained, including prognoses and possible side effects.”

Nowhere in vet’s surgeries or animal sanctuaries is there any

literature explaining the possible dangers involved in

microchipping.Under section 1D(1i) it says ‘”obtain

the client’s consent to treatment unless delay would adversely

effect the animal’s welfare (to give informed consent clients must

be aware of the risks)” No consent forms are signed when

microchipping is carried out and no side effects are mentioned.

Under section 1D (2,c) it says “Avoid conflicts of interest.” How

can a conflict of interest be avoided when vets will make money

by carrying out an unnecessary medical procedure. .Under

1C(h,a) A veterinary surgeon must not cause any patient to suffer

by carrying out any unnecessary mutilation .Although

microchipping isn’t strictly mutilation it is an invasive procedure

which is not medically beneficial or necessary. This was their

response – a standard position statement that failed to address any

of the ethical issues‘The RCVS supports the compulsory

permanent identification of all dogs, on the grounds that the

accurate identification of dogs has a positive impact on animal

welfare and may assist in the control of dangerous dogs.

Microchipping is the predominant form of permanent

identification, although the RCVS also acknowledges other forms

of permanent identification.”Please note they do not categorically

state they support microchipping only that it is one form of

permanent identification.It is clear that vet’s own ethical

guidelines are being ignored by the fact that no vet or

organisation that carries out microchipping is getting consent

forms completed or informing people of the risks. This could well

leave them legally liable if anything goes wrong.(There is an

on-going legal case in the USA where Merck, a microchip

manufacturer, is being sued after their implant caused cancer in a

cat)Then there is the crucial aspect of unique ID references that

RFID implants are supposed to ensure. I quote RFID news -

“There are a number of legitimate, very worthwhile potential

uses for ISO 11784/85 transponders, however national animal

registration databases relying on positive and unique

identification is not one of them.”

Here is also a quote from the CGCVE (The Spanish Veterinary

College) –“We are deeply concerned with the intention to use

the ISO standard for identification of companion animals.

The ISO standard, as it is written, cannot guarantee a

unique identification number for each animal.

Without unique identification numbers it is possible that the one

animal is registered in the database, and other animals with the

same identification number are also present in the market.

When this happens, the reliability of any central database is

destroyed.”

After reading this e-mail we would ask you to oppose any

proposed legislation aimed to makemicrochipping compulsory.

It is unethical to carryout a medical procedure that is not

necessary. Compulsory microchipping will not reduce the

number of stray animals, which is why it the legislation was

supposedly introduced, and the whole premise of a unique ID

is fallacious.

We would also appreciate it if you would sign our online petition

to amend the law in Nortehrn Irleand to remove the compulsory

microchipping component of the bill.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/7thheaven/

Thank you

Stephen McMurray

7 Heaven Animal Rescue Trust

Trackback Link

Do You Use Rimadyl or Glucosamine ?

J.Arnold: Posted on 11 September 2011 15:00

Does your dog have Rimadyl ?

Have you ever thought to see if there are natural alternatives which

would work equally well in place of the Rimadyl ?

The article below, from Chris Adams who is the Staff Reporter of THE

WALL STREET JOURNAL, from March 2000, says that 1000 dogs died

after taking Rimadyl, and 7000 had bad reactions to it, so even then it

was known how potentially harmful Rimadyl is for far too many dogs -

and yet now, 11yrs later it is still being used............

Glucosamine, it is known, rebuilds cartilage and is a safer way of dealing with arthritis, the main health issue Rimadyl is used for.

Vet John Foster MRCVS goes a step further and says that where we see

arthritis as a sign of old age, it is more a sign of poor nutrition, and if

pets were fed a natural, more appropriate diet, and not commercial

petfood, they wouldn't get it...........worth a think eh ?

Article Courtesy of Chris Adams

Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

March 13, 2000

You might call it a made-for-TV drug. Approved for human use in the

U.S. but not marketed that way, an arthritis medicine called Rimadyl

languished for nearly10 years in developmental limbo, then emerged

in a surprising new form: Instead of a human drug, it was now a drug

for arthritic dogs.

And it became a hit.
With the aid of slick commercials featuring once-lame dogs bounding

happily about, Rimadyl changed the way veterinarians treated dogs.

"Clients would walk in and say, 'What about this Rimadyl?' " says George

Siemering, who practices in Springfield, Va.

Today, those TV spots are gone.

The reason has to do with dogs like Montana, a six-year-old Siberian husky with stiff back legs, Montana hobbled out of a vet's office in Brooklyn, N.Y., six months ago accompanied by his human, Angela Giglio, and a supply of Rimadyl pills. At first, the drug appeared to work. But then Montana lost his appetite. He went limp, wobbling instead of walking. Finally he didn't walk at all. He ate leaves, vomited, had seizures and, eventually, was put to sleep. An autopsy showed the sort of liver damage associated with a bad drug reaction.

Pet drugs are big business -- an estimated $3 billion world-wide -- and

Rimadyl is one of the bestsellers. It has been given to more than four

million dogs in the U.S. and more abroad, brought Pfizer Inc. tens of

millions of dollars in sales, and pleased many veterinarians and dog

owners. But the drug has also stirred a controversy, with other pet owners complaining that nobody warned them of its risks.

Montana's owner, Ms. Giglio, is among them. After she informed Pfizer

and the Food and drug administration of her relatively youthful dog's death, Pfizer offered her $440 "as a gesture of good will" and to cover part of the medical costs. Insulted by the offer and a stipulation that she agree to tell no one about the payment except her tax preparer, she refused to sign and didn't take the money. "There's just no way in my conscience or heart I can release them from blame," she says.

After reports of bad reactions and deaths started streaming in to the FDA, the agency suggested that Pfizer mention "death" as a possible side effect in a warning letter to vets, on labels and in TV ads. Pfizer eventually did use the word with vets and on labels, but when given an ultimatum about the commercials -- mention "death" in the audio or end the ads -- Pfizer chose to drop them.

Pfizer's director of animal-products technical services, Edward W. Kanara, says that when reports started coming in, "we acted extremely promptly based on the information we had." Pfizer points out that reported adverse events involve less than 1% of treated dogs.

Since Rimadyl's 1997 launch, the FDA has received reports of about 1,000 dogs that died or were put to sleep and 7,000 more that had bad reactions after taking the drug, records and official estimates indicate. The FDA says such events are significantly underreported.

While the numbers include cases "possibly" related to Rimadyl, it is hard to be sure. Many dogs given the arthritis drug are older, and few are autopsied after they die. Pfizer says it analyzed cases of Rimadyl treated dogs that died in 1998 and found a link to Rimadyl to be "likely" in 12%of cases and "not likely" in 22%; it says there was too little information for a judgment about the others".

Trackback Link

Toxic ? Really ?............Really ?

J. Arnold 30/07/11: Posted on 30 July 2011 13:13

I am sure that many have no idea or the faintest clue the level of toxicity

of products sold, everyday household and personal care products sitting

on the supermarket shelves for us to buy and use - after all - surely 'they'

wouldn't be allowed to market and produce and sell anything that was

'really' bad for you, would they ?

would they ................ ?

How many people realise that just basic laundry Fabric Conditioner/

Softener is one of the worst, known to have cancer-causing ingredients

I wonder ?

Oh, but it doesn't get 'inside you' does it ?

does it ..................... ?

Residues are left on your washing which then are constantly in contact

with your 'porous' skin - seeping into your system through your skin.....

Fancy a challenge ?

Go to your supermarket, look up and down the household aisle, pick a

product and go through the label - no, 'really' go through the label.....

..... you might be interested, and horrified at what you find out

- I've done this with Mr Muscle Oven Cleaner below - take a look :

Mr. Muscle Oven Cleaner Aerosol

Johnson Diversey

The list of ingredients given is:

Isobutane - isobutane is an alkane that combines an isomeric with

butane to come up with a compound that is commonly used in the

preparation of aerosol sprays. The isobutane is added to the formula,

giving the spray its propellant qualities, thus eliminating the need

for the hand pump sprayer.

[ http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-isobutane.htm ]

Butane - Butane, also called n-butane,is the unbranched alkane with

four carbon atoms, CH3CH2CH2CH3. Butane is also used as a collective

term for n-butane together with its only other isomer,isobutane (also

called methylpropane), CH(CH3)3.

Butanes are highly flammable, colourless, odorless easily liquefied gases.

The name butane was derived by back-formation from the name of

butyricacid. Inhalation of butane can cause drowsiness, narcosis,

asphyxia, cardiac arrhythmia and frostbite, which can result in instant

death from asphyxiation,acute toxicity and ventricular fibrillation.

Butane is the most commonly misused volatile substance in the UK,

and was the cause of 52% of "solvent related" deaths in 2000. [1] By

spraying butane directly into the throat,the jet of fluid can cool rapidly

to –20 °C by expansion, causing prolonged laryngospasm. [2] "Sudden

Sniffer's Death syndrome", first described by Bass in 1970, [3] is the

most common single cause of "solvent related" death, resulting in 55%

of known fatal cases.

[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butane ]

Diethylene glycol monobutyl ether - * Diethylene glycol butyl ether (DGBE)

is a type of glycol ether. It is primarily used as a solvent in coatings, inks,

cleaners and specialty fluids, or to produce diethylene glycol butyl

acetate. It evaporates slowly and is completely water-soluble. Dow sells

DGBE under the trade name Butyl CARBITOL™ solvent.

Although some glycol ethers have been shown to cause adverse

reproductive effects and birth defects in laboratory animals, DGBE

does not show the same pattern of toxicity as these other glycol ethers.

DGBE has low oral, dermal and inhalation toxicity. Still,when used

improperly, DGBE can cause severe eye irritation and slight corneal injury.

Occupational and consumer exposure is possible because DGBE is used

in a wide variety of industrial and consumer products like cleaning

products, paints, and inks. Skin exposure is the most likely route for

human exposure.

DGBE studies show it is unlikely to cause adverse environmental impact

because it readily biodegrades,does not bioaccumulate and has low acute

toxicity to aquatic organisms.

[ http://www.dow.com/product safety/finder/dgbe.htm ]

Monoethanolamine (MEA) -Ethanolamine, also called 2-amino ethanol or

monoethanolamine (often abbreviated as MEA), is an organic chemical

compound that is both a primary amine (due to an amino group in its

molecule) and a primary alcohol (due to a hydroxyl group). Like other

amines, monoethanolamine acts as a weak base. Ethanolamineis a toxic,

flammable, corrosive, colourless, viscous liquid with an odour similar to

that of ammonia.

[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanolamine ]

Sodium hydroxide - Sodium hydroxide (NaOH), also known as lye, caustic

soda and (incorrectly, according to IUPAC nomenclature)[1] as sodium

hydrate,is a caustic metallic base. Sodium hydroxide forms a strong

alkaline solution when dissolved in a solvent such as water. It is used in

many industries,mostly as a strong chemical base in the manufacture of

pulp and paper,textiles, drinking water, soaps and detergents and as a

drain cleaner.Worldwide production in 1998 was around 45 million tonnes.

Sodium hydroxide is the most used base in chemical laboratories.

[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_hydroxide ]

Water

Smectite - Smectite is a kind of clay produced when water eats away at

rock. Clay is a group of crystalline minerals, mainly hydrous silicates.

[ http://www.smm.org/boghopper/Smectiteandbentoniteclay.html ]

According to the manufacturers own Material Data Safety Sheet the

following are potential issues with this product, and who is most likely

at risk :

The National Library of Medicine does not evaluate information from

the product label or the Material Safety Data Sheet.

[http://householdproducts.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/household/brands?

tbl=brands&id=19001050]

Acute Health Effects: From MSDS:

Routes of Entry: Inhalation. Eye contact. Skin contact.

Potential Acute Health Effects:

Eye: Corrosive. May cause permanent damage including blindness.

Skin: Corrosive. May cause permanent damage.

Inhalation: May cause irritation and corrosive effects to nose,throat and

respiratory tract.

Ingestion: Corrosive. May cause burns to mouth, throat, and stomach.

Medical Conditions Generally Recognised As Being Aggravated By Exposure:

Individuals with chronic respiratory disorders such as asthma, chronic

bronchitis, emphysema,etc., may be more susceptible to irritating effects.

Chronic Health Effects: MSDS:Effects of Chronic Exposure: None known.

Carcinogenicity: MSDS:Contains approximately 0.1% Cristobalite, CAS#

14464-46-1. This formulation is a heavy, viscous liquid. Therefore,

respirable-size particles of dry Cristobalite are not expected to become

airborne and will not be inhaled.

First Aid: MSDS:First Aid Measures

Eye Contact: Flush immediately with running water for at least 15

minutes, keeping eyelids open. Get medical attention immediately.

Skin Contact: Flush immediately with plenty of water for at least15

minutes.

Get medical attention immediately.

Inhalation: If breathing is difficult: remove to fresh air.

Get medical attention immediately.

Ingestion: Do not induce vomiting. Immediately drink plenty of water.

Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person.

Get medical attention immediately.

Health Rating: 3

Flammability Rating: 4

Reactivity Rating: 0

HMIS Rating Scale: 0 =Minimal; 1 = Slight; 2 = Moderate; 3 = Serious;

4 = Severe;

N = No information provided by manufacturer; * = Chronic Health Hazard

MSDS Date: 2001-06-26

* So this product has a ‘serious’ health rating, and a ‘severe’

flammability rating !

* The recommended handling advice for this product is :

MSDS: Handling and Storage

Handling: Avoid contact with eyes, skin, and clothing. Do not taste or

swallow.Avoid breathing vapors or spray mists. Wash thoroughly after

handling. Remove and wash contaminated clothing and footwear before

re-use. Product residue may remain on/in empty containers. All

precautions for handling the product must be used in handling the empty

container and residue. Use only in well-ventilated areas. Do not puncture

or incinerate. FOR INDUSTRIAL USE ONLY.

Storage: Store in a dry, cool and well-ventilated area. Protect from

freezing.Keep container tightly closed. Keep away from heat, sparks

and flame.Pressurized container: protect from sunlight and do not expose

to temperature exceeding 50oC. Do not pierce or burn, even after use.

Keep out of reach of children.

I think ‘my’ recommendations for handling and storage of this product

would be, ‘ don’t pick it up off the shop shelf, and don’t give it space

in your home’ !

And the recommendations for disposal:

MSDS: Undiluted product is regulated under environmental and

transportation laws as a corrosive waste. If possible, recycle empty

aerosol cans to the nearest steel recycling centre. Use up package or

give to someone who can. Dispose of according to all federal, state

and local regulations.

- now I wonder how many people who buy this product know, or take

any notice of that ??

So here we have a product which is highly dangerous through every

way it can enter your body, and where on almost every occasion

when it ‘does’ come into contact with you, you are advised to ‘Get

medical attention immediately’ - and this product is sold as a common,

bog standard household oven cleaner, with an advertisement which

shows the user dressed skimpily in shorts and a vest with bare arms and

seemingly not a care in the world, where people with such common

conditions as asthma may be even more susceptible to irritation and

corrosive effects to nose, throat and respiratory tract when breathing

in the fumes, which is very hard not to do when spraying an aerosol

into an oven which is like a box and enclosed on all sides except the

one where your head is [the fumes have to go somewhere] - and does

the user in the advert wear a gas-mask ??

Oh, and just to add the last touch - “Effects of Chronic Exposure:

Noneknown.”

No, I think we’ll leave Mr.Muscle on the shelf and maybe have a slightly

dirtier oven or use a bit more elbow grease. :o)

Trackback Link

The Effect of Toxins On The Dog - Most Specifically AntiBiotics & Steroids

J.Arnold: Posted on 02 July 2011 12:29

Toxins are everywhere in our lives, in pollution, in pesticides and

fertilizers used on our crops, and subsequently, in the ingredients used

in our foods.

Some extra toxins are added as colourant agents, preservatives,

sweeteners; yet more are added or present under the guise of ‘being

good for us’ - like flouride in our toothpastes and mouthwashes.

The liver cannot eliminate all toxins, so some are always there,building

up within our, and our pets, bodily systems making it essential therefore

that we do all that we can to eliminate as many as possible by not using

chemicals in the home and our environment, using chemical free personal

care products and flouride free oral products.

The body still tries to deal with the toxins in our system, so putting stress

on, and lowering our immune system all the time to a certain extent.

Some ways toxins affect the body [human or dog] are through problems

with the skin like psoriasis, excema, itching rashes, blisters.

Toxins can also cause seizures to occurr in sensitive individuals.

With the toxins which build up which the body is unable to deal with

effectively, they can cause immuno-issues because of rna dna changes

brought about by the introduction of different toxins to the body as

discussed in my previous Blog on the negative consequences of

over-vaccination.

With anti-biotics, we have the problem that often-times we cannot

absolutely know that the one being given is the correct one and thus

can not only delay the issue being dealt with, and prolong the pets

discomfort and illness, but they pose a serious risk as new strains

emerge which are resistant to the anti-biotics available, meaning

more strains of diseases are in existance.

There is also the fact that anti-biotics kill 'All' the bacteria in the gut

- good and bad - upsetting the fine balance needed of both good and

bad gut bacteria and can thus cause immune problems as at least 80%

of the immune system is in the gut, aswell as candida and leaky gut

problems. Major health problems can be caused by yeast and candida

problems, and gut damage, needing long term attention and probiotics

to help replenish the good bacteria needed there.

There are now strains of bacteria so anti-biotic resistant, that they

pose a serious threat to those infected and can cause the death of

those infected as there are no allopathic medicenes to treat them.

Professor Graham Bell, from McGillUniversity in Canada warns that

the new antibiotics pose "a serious and unprecedented" risk to public

health. He warns that regulatory authorities tend not to look many

years ahead when deciding whether to grant licences to new drugs.

"They are poorly designed to detect even grave and highly probable

risks to public health arising from the population biology of microbes.

"Instead of dismissing the possibility that widespread resistance will

evolve, we should use the bitter experience that we have gained from

conventional antibiotics to plan for it." Learn about safe, effective,

natural alternative to antibiotics.

( http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/antibiotics.htm )

Books have been written by a number of qualified doctors to raise

awareness of the dangers linked with anti-biotic over-use :

Paul A. Offet M.D. - “Breaking the Anti-biotic Habit”

Dr Mary Ann Block - “No More Amoxycillin”

Dr John McKenna - “ Natural Alternatives to Antibiotics”

David A. Holland, M.D -Antibiotics -- to Take or Not to Take?

"Antibiotics Kill Your Body's Good Bacteria, Too, Leading toSerious

Health Risks"

Drs. Schmidt, Smith, and Sehnert - “Beyond Antibiotics”

[www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/community/anitbiotic-resistance.htm]

Anti-biotics also commonly have side effects which range from a

small rash, to allergies, to anaphylaxis.

Some antibiotics have been reported in the medical literature as causing

asthma in certain individuals include penicillin, ampicillin, amoxycillin,

cephalosporins, tetracycline, spiramycin, and erythromycin, other drugs

and antibiotics have also been reported to cause asthma.

( http://www.whale.to/drugs/antibiotics_asthma.htm )

The most common side effects with antibiotic drugs are diarrhoea,

feeling sick and being sick but more serious side effects, include the

formation of kidney stones with the sulphonamides, abnormal blood

clotting with some of the cephalosporins, increased sensitivity to the

sun with the tetracyclines, blood disorders with trimethoprim, and

deafness with erythromycin and the aminoglycosides. Colitus is also

an unpleasant side effect, more common in older people.

"It is ironic that this humbled fungus, hailed as a benefactor of

mankind, may by its very success prove to be a deciding factor in the

decline of the present civilization." -Dr.John I. Pitt, The Genus

Penicillum, Academic Press, 1979

More specifically with animals:

Richard J. Holliday, DVM - "Antibiotics disrupt the normal population

of beneficial microbes in the gastrointestinal tract of all animals,these

beneficial bacteria are the first line of defense against most diseases,

without them the animal is more susceptible to other infections.

Antibiotics depress the immune system by decreasing the number of

circulating white blood cells. This lowers the animal's ability to fight

infections. Some antibiotics, such as chloramphenicol, can cause

irreversible damage to the bone marrow. Many bacteria develop

resistance to the effects of antibiotics, This resistance can be passed

to other bacteria, The concern is that if humans are exposed to resistant

bacteria from animals then the use of antibiotics may be Ineffective in

treating any resulting disease. This is the major controversy regarding

the use of antibiotics on a regular basis in food producing animals."

RichardJ. Holliday, DVM

And so to Steroids.....

Ronald Hoffman, M.D. - "Steroid injections for arthritis and bursitis are

another favorite tool of orthopedists. As we’ve noted, they are

progressively less effective, and repeated injections can damage joints

and induce osteoporosis. In the case of Rheumatoid Arthritis, doctors

often prescribe more powerful second-line drugs.These are the so-called

DMARDs (disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs). These agents are

designed not just to control symptoms but actually to delay progression

of the disease. Unfortunately, many of them can cause severe adverse

effects. They include such drugs as hydroxychloroquine sulfate, gold,

penicillamine, sulfasalazine, prednisone, azathioprine, and

methotrexate. The last-named is a powerful chemotherapy drug used

in the treatment of cancer. Some of these drugs possess potent

immunosuppressive effects."

One of my own dogs in the past was given a course of steroids when it

appeared she had Enteritis, which is very serious in collies [she was a

Rough Collie] - it took months for her to pick-up and looking back now

I don’t think she ever totally did, as every year after that for the rest

of her life, as autumn came on, she would go down and ‘need’ further

steroids.

Dr. Jeffrey Levy - "Corticosteroids (cortisone-typeanti-inflammatory

drugs) are the most abused and dangerous class of drugs. Not only do

they not cure the underlying cause of the problem, they usually make

the underlying problem, that is, the real problem, worse." Dr. Levy

Dr. Joseph Mercola - "...the treatment of a patient with prednisone at

60mg per day for about three months can actually cause AIDS. This

treatment and doses often given to patients suffering from lung fibrosis,

thrombocytopenia, or other chemically induced chronic illnesses.""...

AIDS is caused by the heavy use of corticosteroids and/or cytotoxic drugs

to treat many health problems. Fauci described in detail the effects of

corticosteroids on the immune system. These effects resemble the

immune abnormalities that are found in patients suffering from AIDS or

Idiopathic CD4 T cells lymphocytopnea (ICL) which are also described

by Fauci et al" Dr. Mercola

Steroids mimic the action of the adrenal glands, the body's most powerful

regulator of general metabolism.

Steroids cannot cure one single condition, the way they work is that they

suppress the body's ability to express a normal response. Occasionally this

type of suppression will give the body a chance to heal itself. But more

often, the effect is immediate, devastating and can cause permanent

damage.

Steroids can routinely cause over-activity of adrenal hormones, which

produces Cushing's disease. They can also cause muscle wasting,

hyperglycemia, water retention, bruising, insomnia, serious mood

changes, menstrual problems, impotence, loss of libido, or even allergic

shock and diabetes.

(Source: Physicians DeskReference).

In “Coping With Prednisone and Other Cortisone-Related Medicines:

It May Work Miracles, but How Do You Handle the Side Effects?” by

Eugenia Zukerman,Julie R., MD Ingelfinger; we find out about some

unpleasant side effects :

“When flutist Eugenia Zukerman developed a rare lung disease and

began taking the powerful drug prednisone as part of her treatment,

she was subjected--with little choice and less preparation--to a

barrage of side effects: intense mood swings, bloating, changes in

her hair and skin, gastrointestinal problems, and more. Physician

(and sister) Julie was shocked to discover how few materials were

available to help patients cope with this difficult medication.

Together, the distinguished sisters created a highly readable, easy-

to-understand, and complete guide through the treatment experience.”

The major side effects from abusing anabolic steroids can include liver

tumors and cancer, jaundice (yellowish pigmentation of skin, tissues,

and bodyfluids), fluid retention, high blood pressure, increases in LDL

(bad cholesterol), and decreases in HDL (good cholesterol). Other side

effects include kidney tumors, severe acne, and trembling. In addition,

there are some gender-specific side effects:

# For men - shrinking of the testicles, reduced sperm count, infertility,

baldness, development of breasts,increased risk for prostate cancer.

# For women - growth of facial hair, male-pattern baldness, changes in

or cessation of the menstrual cycle, enlargement of the clitoris,

deepened voice.

# For adolescents - growth halted prematurely through premature

skeletal maturation and accelerated puberty changes. This means that

adolescents risk remaining short for the remainder of their lives if they

take anabolic steroids before the typical adolescent growth spurt.

In addition, people who inject anabolic steroids run the added risk of

contracting or transmitting HIV/AIDS or hepatitis, which causes serious

damage to the liver.

Scientific research also shows that aggression and other psychiatric side

effects may result from abuse of anabolic steroids. Many users report

feeling good about themselves while on anabolic steroids, but researchers

report that extreme mood swings also can occur, including manic-like

symptoms leading to violence. Depression often is seen when the drugs

are stopped and may contribute to dependence on anabolic steroids.

Researchers report also that users may suffer from paranoid jealousy,

extreme irritability, delusions, and impaired judgment stemming from

feelings of invincibility.

The question is, how do we know when these drugs really ‘are’ ‘needed’

- and with the over-use of antibiotics and steroids in today’s world - is

what would routinely be prescribed by a vet for your pet, actually, really,

steroid abuse and over-use ?

As we really cannot know unless we are qualified in those areas ourselves,

I would rather stick to homoeopathy and holistic therapies as much as

possible, where side effects are much less common, and less severe.

There is also the fact that steroids actually act very quickly to cause

damage to your body; permanent, crippling damage can occur weeks

after you've begun treatment, which is very different from what the

doctors tell you, which is that it is only over long-term use that

problems occurr :

* Osteoporosis can occurwithin a matter of months. Steroids cause 8%

reduction in bone mass after four months (Ann Int Med, November 15,

1993), the equivalent of the effect on your bones of having your ovaries

removed. Even low doses of inhaled steroids (400 micrograms per day)

reduce bone formation (The Lancet, July 6,1991).

* Low doses (10-15 mgprednisone) for a year can cause cataracts (Surv

Ophthalmol, 1986; 31: 260-2).

* Topical steroids may begin to cause eye damage or raise pressure

after two weeks. Extensive visual loss can be caused by a 1 per cent

hydrocortisone ointment, which is available OTC(BMJ, August 20-27,

1994).

* Rub-on steroids have caused Cushing's syndrome in children as soon

as a month after treatment has begun(Arch Dis Child, 1982; 57: 204-7).

* Inhaled steroids slowth growth in children after six weeks (Acta Ped,

1993; 82: 636-40. See also, The Lancet, December 14, 1991).

* Bilateral cataracts and glaucoma induced by long term use of

steroid eye drops

* Dr. Al-Bayati - "High doses of corticosteroids and other

immunosuppressive agents cause AIDS"Dr. Al-Bayati

J.Arnold

Trackback Link

Cat/Dog-Toxic Xylitol Now put in Meds.

Posted on 04 March 2011 15:43

Have you heard of Xylitol ?

Many will know it as a sweetener used in many diabetic and weight loss products, well what you need to know now, is that it is highly toxic to cats and dogs and is very rapidly finding its way into all sorts of products where any sweeteners are used.

It is now found in sweets, foodstuffs, vitamins, medical syrups and medications that used to use other sweeteners because it is much cheaper for manufacturers than other sugar substitutes because less is needed.

It is so dangerous for cats and dogs that just a few breath mints containing xylitol can put your dog into a hypoglycemia-induced seizure, and more could mean liver failure.

It's nice to think your vet might be up to date on every single formulation of every single species of animal he/she might treat, but possibly a tad unrealistic, so it's very important you don't assume anything and check everything yourself before you buy it, or accept it, or give it - that is, if you choose to use allopathic preparations and methods.

Trackback Link

Recent Posts

Categories

Allopathic

What is a Healing Crisis ?

Micro-Chipping

Do You Use Rimadyl or Glucosamine ?

Toxic ? Really ?............Really ?

The Effect of Toxins On The Dog - Most Specifically AntiBiotics & Steroids

Cat/Dog-Toxic Xylitol Now put in Meds.