A Gastric Bypass Alternative

The only thing that is going to reverse the obesity and gluttony epidemic is some common sense and honesty and an end to political correctness. We cannot depend on public health officials to fix this because it is not in their financial interest to do so. Obesity means $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for them and the junk food industry. We need more people like MeMe standing up and telling the truth about the industry and the Americans who can't or won't stop digging themselves early graves with their knives, forks and spoons. They need to know the truth about nutrition and they need to know that their excuses are BS. Tough love!

The most the Basal Metabolic Rate can vary is in humans of the same age weight and gender is 35 calories per day. Human bodies cannot defy the immutable laws of physics.

The most weight a sedentary women can maintain on 2000 calories per day is 140 pounds.

These numbers represent a woman who sleeps 24 hour per day

Resting (basal) metabolic rate: 1344 calories per day
Typical daily activities: 604 calories per day (sleeping is an activity) Chemical processes occur when we sleep and they require energy/calories

Total calories burned: 1949 per day

If she were even slightly active she would not even able to maintain 135 pounds. If she were moderately active 130 pounds is all she could maintain and if she did serious workouts 110 pounds is all she could maintain on 2000 calories per day.

Your BMR is approximately your current weight X 10. If you want a more accurate here is a free metabolic calculator http://www.stevenscreek.com/goodies/calories.shtml

If you eat at your BMR you will lose 1 pound per week per 100 pounds of body weight. That is IMO the most you can safely lose. Doctor may say other wise but again IMO many doctors are a menace who want to push junk like Medifast and weight loss surgery.

With the correct mind set and proper technique weight loss is not a chore. Marie Osmond is an example of that. Marie wen from fat and unhealthy to slender, health and sexy.

Eat Less Move More

Eat less and move more..... or let a butcher wreck your digestive system.

Beyond Malpractice: A Goldmine For Lawyers

A way to get more business. The biggest criminals with the deepest pockets are doctors and members of the medical industry. The medical industry is 20% of the US GDP and by 2020 it will be whopping 25%.

Nearly every medical office, hospital and drug company is awash with criminal activity that often results in the deaths and injury of Americans but since the rich in America are above the law rich criminals rarely even get arrested let alone prosecuted or convicted. In fact the largest CRIMINAL fines are against the medical industry but nobody get arrested let alone prosecuted.

There is a goldmine out there. Lawyers can potentially mine $100's of billions dollars from the massive criminal activity of the American medical industry. It is a fact that more than 1/3 and probably 1/2 of what patients pay for health care is waste and fraud and nearly every doctor, hospital, lab, clinic, device company a drug company is doing it. Even with the lower estimate of 1/3 that is $750 BILLION of theft per year which is more than the entire US defense budget. I'd rather see some of that money in the hands of you ambulance chasers than in the hands of the medical Mafia.

Here is an example of how the medical industry steals, kills and maims.

In 2009, Eli Lilly agreed to pay $1.4 Billion in criminal and civil penalties for such off-label promotion of Zyprexa and Pfizer agreed to pay $2.3 Billion for the illegal off-label promotion of Geodon and other drugs.  In 2010, Astra-Zeneca agreed to pay $520 million for the illegal off-label promotion of Seroquel for use in children, and Forest Laboratories agreed to pay $309 million for the illegal off-label promotion of the use of Lexapro and Celexa in children.  However, despite these large penalties by the drug companies, the practice has not stopped.  It is merely a cost of doing business to these pharmaceutical Goliaths and, in fact, caps their liability for these crimes.  Most importantly, these settlements have not stopped the practice of child psychiatrists and other prescribers giving these drugs to children and youth and Medicaid continuing to pay for these fraudulent claims.

There is a toxic environment in most medical practices. I know this because I used to make sales calls on them. That is why pharmaceutical salesmen ply these barracudas with food so even they won't get bitten. Since most doctors are snakes they hire snakes and the snakes they hire are underpaid backstabbing  brutal bitches who when they are not abusing patients are starting shit with co-workers. Some of them are too stupid to know what their bosses are up to but others will stab their boss in the back if they think they can profit from it. Sometimes it takes a crook to catch a crook.

Here is my suggestion to lawyers. Make more Americans familiar with qui tam whistle blower lawsuits. Have your industry send generic information to medical practices, hospitals, drug companies and medical device companies that let disgruntled workers know that they can make a fortune by ratting out their criminal bosses.

A campaign of doctor bashing

When the facts are known Americans will see that the American medical industry is far more sinister than even ISIS or the Nazis and here is why. Even most Nazis believed that what they did was right and ISIS and other Muslim groups believe what they are doing is serving God. The members of the medical industry are not so deluded. They know that they are disease exploiting mercenaries and whores. They know that they are the leading cause of death and injury in the world today. They are deny this holocaust even though they know it is real and that they are the cause. Show them no mercy. If God is a just God he won't. When judges and jury pools learn that the biggest criminals on the planet are doctors and their industry. Make it impossible for this industry to win a court case.

Dangerous and Deadly Doctors

(From NaturalNews) Everyone agrees the Sandy Hook shooting was a tragedy. Lots of people subsequently exploited the deaths of those children to push a political agenda of disarming Americans by claiming "guns kill people."

But compared to what? Swimming pools kill people. Horseback riding kills people. And yes, even childbirth kills people. (Does that mean we should criminalize getting pregnant?)

To make any sense of death statistics, we have to ask, "Compared to what?" Because if we compare deaths by firearms to other causes of death, the picture is very, very different from the doomsday fear mongering scenarios CNN and other gun control pushers have whipped up into a nationwide frenzy. In fact, as the following infographic shows, doctors kill 2,450% more Americans than all gun-related deaths combined.

Your doctor is FAR more likely to kill you than an armed criminal!

It's true: You are 64 times more likely to be killed by your doctor than by someone else wielding a gun. That's because 19,766 of the total 31,940 gun deaths in the USA (in the year 2011) were suicides. So the actual number of deaths from other people shooting you is only 12,174.

Doctors, comparatively, kill 783,936 people each year, which is 64 times higher than 12,174. Doctors shoot you not with bullets, but with vaccines, chemotherapy and pharmaceuticals... all of which turn out to be FAR more deadly than guns.

This is especially amazing, given that there are just under 700,000 doctors in America, while there are roughly about 80 million gun owners in America.

How do 700,000 doctors manage to kill 783,936 people each year (that's over one death per doctor), while 80 million gun owners kill only 31,940? Because owning a gun is orders of magnitude safer than "practicing" medicine!

Check out the following infographic, which can also be viewed in a higher resolution at:
www.naturalnews.com/Infographic-Firearms-vs-...



As the infographic explains, you are over three times more likely to be killed by a drug side effect than a firearm.

On the firearms side of things, you are almost twice as likely to be killed by YOURSELF than by someone else using a gun. But even this number can't be blamed on guns themselves, because if people really want to commit suicide, they will find other ways to accomplish it (such as jumping off buildings or bridges).

Where is the call for "doctor control?"

Despite the statistical fact that you are overall 24.5 times more likely to be killed by your doctor than by a gun -- and it's actually far worse if you spend more time around doctors than you do gang members -- there is absolutely no call in the media for "doctor control."

There's zero talk about making medications safer, or reducing the number of people who are medicated every day in America.

There's no mention of the astonishing fact that surgical procedures do not need to be proven safe and effective before being tried on patients. Surgery in America is, in effect, a grand experiment often conducted with little or no scientific support.

There's no discussion of the fact that psychiatric drugs promote violent shootings as we've seen over and over again across America.

Nope, the entire focus is on how BAD guns are, while the government simultaneously promotes how GOOD vaccines are! ...and chemotherapy, surgery, pharmaceuticals and everything else that's killing us en masse.

Every U.S. hospital is another Sandy Hook

Hundreds of people are killed every single day across U.S. hospitals from pharmaceutical side effects alone. On top of that, hospitals are killing people with superbug infections, fouled up surgeries, and failed heart stents, among other deadly problems.

Sandy Hook was the tragedy the government wanted you to see. But they didn't want you to pay attention to all the deaths happening elsewhere -- in far greater numbers -- such as at hospitals and via pharmacies.

Because all those deaths overseen by doctors and pharmacists are making billions of dollars for the corrupt, criminally-run pharmaceutical industry and the for-profit, corporate-driven health care complex.

While Sandy Hook was mass murder, the U.S. health care system is practically a holocaust. In fact, the U.S. health care system has killed more people than Adolf Hitler -- by far!

Spread the word: If we want to save lives, the most important place to start is at the doctors and drug companies. They are dealers of death who have been granted obscene monopolies by the FDA and state medical boards. Until their stranglehold on U.S. health care is finally broken, millions more innocent Americans will die at the hands of doctors, surgeons and pharmacists.

Share this article, and share the infographic at:
www.naturalnews.com/Infographic-Firearms-vs-...

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038889_doctors_guns_statistics.html#ixzz3ZCJv6Xua

Doctors Suck When It Comes to Weight Loss and Morals

Your Doctor is an Idiot. Especially if he’s one of these guys. Or Dr. Oz.

Posted on January 30, 2014 | 1 Comment

OK, that wasn’t nice.  Or even accurate.  But it drives me nuts when people say “My doctor said _______” regarding diet and weight loss advice.  Fun fact:  Some medical schools provide as little as 2 hours of nutrition training to students, the average being less than 24 hours. (National Institute of Health paper here)  Well, at least they do teach med students to frequently repeat the phrase “make healthy diet choices and get some exercise.”  It’d just be nice if they also taught them to admit that they don’t know exactly what that means.

Case in point – These two doctors (identical twins) had a little contest to compare two extreme diets and see which was better.  What did they learn?  That neither extremely low fat or extremely low carb are sustainable.  What did I learn?  That neither twin can read, because there is ample data already available telling us that eliminating any of the 3 essential macronutrients is a bad idea. But the guy that cut out carbohydrates lost 9 pounds in a month?  Sweet!  Breaking news (if 40 year old data is breaking news) – Yes, ketosis works, but what these guys apparently still don’t know is that most of his initial weight loss was water that will come back as soon as he eats a granola and a bagel for breakfast.  You see, body composition management 101 tells us that every gram of carbohydrate stored in your body holds onto 3 grams of water.  Thus, if the average person depletes their normally stored (ballpark) 500 grams of carbohydrates (which weighs 1.1 pounds), you’ll lose not only that weight but also eliminate the 1500 grams (3.3 pounds) of water that goes with it.  That’s how I can literally pack on 6-8 pounds overnight if I have a carb-fest, and lose it over a few days with some hard work and discipline.  The point is these guys don’t have the most basic understanding of managing weight/body composition.  Perhaps worse, they don’t seems to be aware of the importance of differentiating between losing weight strictly watching numbers on the scale and losing fat while preserving muscle tissue and a strong skeleton. (let alone how to do that).

Why did I have to pick on Dr. Oz in the title?  Because my impression is that he is more interested in his ratings/popularity than in sharing the most completely accurate information, and too many people believe everything he says.  I recall his reaction/reporting on a one day diet experiment he did.  One frikkin day.  That’s not enough time to gather accurate data and his reported symptoms were unfairly attributed to the diet (which was a stupid way to try the diet anyway). He made all sorts of dramatic claims about the diet’s drawbacks, and I have to wholeheartedly disagree with the dietary advice he did give –  I’ll have to come back to that.  The parts of his TV show that I watched were like a bunch of mini-infomercials, where he ran from table to table showing products and telling us whatever the manufacturer claimed on the label.  That’s not even bad science – that’s just being a sellout.

I do want apologize here for calling names…none of these guys nor your doctor are really idiots.  Actually they are GANGSTERS. I completely respect their training and skill in their specialties, I only wanted to illustrate that nutrition is not it.  One of the twins even admits:“He realized that while he and Chris were both doctors, they really didn’t know that much about nutrition and diet.”

So please take away from this is that your doctor is not the best source of diet/nutrition/fitness advice.  Learn from people that manage their bodies for a living or lifestyle.  Better yet, start with their advice but study how everything works for yourself.

If Weight Loss Surgery Doesn't Kill You A Hospital Infection Will

American hospitals are filthy dirty places run by greedy criminals. Consider the following.

Keep in mind:

• We have the knowledge to prevent hospital infection deaths.
• We don't have to wait for a scientific breakthrough. Yet greedy hospitals have failed to act.
• The situation is growing more dangerous because, increasingly, hospital infections cannot be cured with commonly-used antibiotics.

Sometimes connecting the dots reveals a grim picture. Several new reports about hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) show that the danger is increasing rapidly, and that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) isn’t leveling with the public about it.

The CDC falsely claims that 1.7 million people contract infections in U.S. hospitals each year. In fact, the truth is several times that number. The proof is in the data. One of the fastest growing infections is methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), a superbug that doesn’t respond to most antibiotics. In 1993, there were fewer than 2,000 MRSA infections in U.S. hospitals. By 2005, the figure had shot up to 368,000 according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). By June, 2007, 2.4 percent of all patients had MRSA infections, according to the largest study of its kind, which was published in the 

American Journal of Infection Control. That would mean 880,000 victims a year.

That’s from one superbug. Imagine the number of infections from bacteria of all kinds, including such killers as vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) and Clostridium difficile. Julie Gerberding, MD, MPH, director of the CDC, recently told Congress that MRSA accounts for only 8 percent of HAIs. That 8 percent figure was confirmed in a study by Emory University researchers on April 6.

These new facts discredit the CDC’s official 1.7 million estimate. CDC spokesperson Nicole Coffin admits “the number isn’t perfect.” In fact, it is an irresponsible guesstimate based on 2002 data. The CDC researchers who came up with it complained that not having actual data “complicated the problem.”

Numbers matter. Health conditions that affect the largest number of people should command more research dollars and public attention.

The problem doesn’t end there. The CDC has resisted calling on hospitals to implement the key change needed to stop some infections: MRSA screening. A study in the March issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine shows that MRSA infections can be prevented by testing incoming patients for the germ and taking precautions on patients who test positive. The test is a noninvasive skin or nasal swab. Researchers at Evanston Northwestern Healthcare System, a group of three hospitals near Chicago, reduced MRSA infections 70 percent over two years. “If it works in these three different hospitals, it will work anywhere,” said the study’s lead author, Dr. Lance Peterson, an epidemiologist.

That’s fortunate, because the problem is everywhere. The June 2007 survey found that MRSA is “endemic in virtually all U.S. healthcare facilities.” Screening is necessary because patients who unknowingly carry MRSA bacteria on their body shed it in particles on wheelchairs, blood pressure cuffs, virtually every surface. These patients don’t realize they have the germ, because it doesn’t make them sick until it gets inside their body, usually via a surgical incision, a catheter, or a ventilator for breathing. With screening, hospitals can identify the MRSA-positive patients, isolate them, use separate equipment, and insist on gowns and gloves when treating them. Screening is common in several European countries that have almost eradicated MRSA, and some 50 studies show that it works in the U.S. too.

Delay can defeat the purposes of screening. A study released in March in the Journal of the American Medical Association grabbed headlines when it purported to prove that screening is ineffective. But the study, conducted at a hospital in Geneva, Switzerland, was flawed. Many patients did not receive their test results until their hospital results were half over, and 41 percent of MRSA positive patients had already had their surgeries. The excessive delays allowed the germ to spread.

Because the evidence is compelling that screening works, Congress and seven state legislatures are considering making screening mandatory. Illinois, New Jersey and Pennsylvania acted in 2007. Why is legislation needed? Because the CDC, which is responsible for providing guidelines for hospitals on how to prevent infections, has failed to recommend that all hospitals screen patients. The CDC’s lax guidelines give hospitals an excuse to do too little.

It is common for government regulators to become soft on the industry they are supposed to regulate. A coziness develops. Federal Aviation Administration inspectors failed to insist on timely electrical systems inspections, according to news reports. The same may be true at the CDC, where government administrators spend too much time listening to hospital executives and not enough time with grieving families.

The preventable proportion of nosocomial infections: an overview of published reports

S Harbarth, H Sax, P Gastmeier - Journal of Hospital infection, 2003 - Elsevier

... the SENIC data reporting an average reduction effect of 28% for hospital-acquired bacteraemia
after ... at the university hospital and 111 (52%) at the community hospital were considered ... 20 and
30% of all nosocomial infections occurring under current healthcare conditions can ...

Cited by 339 Related articles All 5 versions Cite Save

[HTML] from nih.gov

[HTML] Wound infection after elective colorectal resection

RL Smith, JK Bohl, ST McElearney, CM Friel… - Annals of …, 2004 - ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

... is a particular emphasis by the Joint Commission of Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations ...
infection rate, but the resultant costs from dressing changes and prolonged hospital stays as ...
probably due the extensive growth and availability of the home health care resources over ...

Cited by 335 Related articles All 8 versions Cite Save

[HTML] from oxfordjournals.org

Overview of nosocomial infections caused by gram-negative bacilli

RA Weinstein, R Gaynes… - Clinical Infectious …, 2005 - cid.oxfordjournals.org

... and; National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. Division of Healthcare Quality
Promotion ... During the past 20 years, changes in health care, infection-control practices ... pathogens
associated with consistently increasing proportions of hospital-acquired pneumonias, SSIs ...

Cited by 851 Related articles All 9 versions Cite Save

Hospital-acquired candidemia: the attributable mortality and excess length of stay

SB Wey, M Mori, MA Pfaller… - Archives of Internal …, 1988 - archinte.jamanetwork.com

... We also attempted to match for the most important surgical procedure the cases had undergone
before acquiring the infection. ... sions during the study period. The infection rate for hospital-acquired
Candida bloodstream infections in¬ creased from 5.1 to 10.3 per 10000 ...

Cited by 906 Related articles All 6 versions Cite Save

[PDF] from interfetpthailand.net

Influenza in the acute hospital setting

CD Salgado, BM Farr, KK Hall, FG Hayden - The Lancet infectious diseases, 2002 - Elsevier

... Excess hospital costs are also due in part to absenteeism of healthcare workers who become
ill during an influenza outbreak, since hospitals must cover the ... 17 One study estimated a mean
excess hospital cost of over $7500 per episode of nosocomially acquired influenza. ...

Cited by 302 Related articles All 10 versions Cite Save

Surveillance of Nosocomial Infections A Fundamental Ingredient for Quality

RP Gaynes - Infection Control, 1997 - Cambridge Univ Press

... adverse events.2 A key tenet of the ongoing revolution in health care is the ... in interhospital compar-
isons, several members of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of ... Hospital-acquired
complications in a randomized controlled clinical trial of a geriatric consultation team. ...

Cited by 915 Related articles All 5 versions Cite Save

[PDF] from nih.gov

Feeding back surveillance data to prevent hospital-acquired infections.

R Gaynes, C Richards, J Edwards… - Emerging infectious …, 2001 - ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

... A surveillance system to monitor hospital-acquired infections requires standardization, targeted
monitoring ... is deputy chief, Healthcare Outcomes Branch, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion ...
His main research interests are health-care acquired infections and antimi- crobial ...

Cited by 224 Related articles All 11 versions Cite Save

[HTML] from bmj.com

Neonatal sepsis: an international perspective

S Vergnano, M Sharland, P Kazembe… - Archives of Disease in …, 2005 - fn.bmj.com

... The latest news, research, events, opinion and guidance related to quality and safety in health
care. ... delivered and die at home without ever being in contact with trained healthcare workers
and ... are needed to compare patterns of resistance in babies born in and out of hospital. ...

Cited by 281 Related articles All 8 versions Cite Save

[PDF] from 72.167.42.190

Nosocomial infections in pediatric intensive care units in the United States

MJ Richards, JR Edwards, DH Culver, RP Gaynes - Pediatrics, 1999 - Am Acad Pediatrics

... that children under 2 years of age have the highest nosocomial infection rates in PICUs with up
to 25% of children in this group infected. ... In: Mayhall CG, ed. Hospital Epidemiology and Infection
Control. ... (1989) Epidemiologic study of 4684 hospital-acquired infections in pediatric ...

Cited by 524 Related articles All 5 versions Cite Save

[HTML] from nih.gov

Sensitivity of routine system for reporting patient safety incidents in an NHS hospital: retrospective patient case note review

ABA Sari, TA Sheldon, A Cracknell, A Turnbull - Bmj, 2007 - bmj.com

... Healthcare organisations should consider routinely using structured case note review on samples
of medical ... Thomas E, Petersen L. Measuring errors and adverse events in health care. ... Improving
patient care by reducing the risk of hospital acquired infection: a progress report. ...

Cited by 244 Related articles All 13 versions Cite Save

Create alert

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Next

Just the Tip of the Iceberg

The 48,000 death toll reported by researchers only represents deaths from two conditions caused by HAIs, which means it’s only a smattering of the total carnage these HAIs truly cause.

In the United States, more than 2 million people are affected by hospital-acquired infections every year, and 100,000 people die as a result.

Most people, including most health care professionals, simply do not understand that hospitals account for over ONE-THIRD of the $2.5 trillion the United States spends for "health care." This is TRIPLE what we surrender to drug companies.

It would not be so bad if we actually received major benefits for this investment, but, as this article illustrates, this frequently is not the case.

Why are Hospitals Breeding Grounds for Germs?

Recent studies have shown that hospital-acquired infections are not a normal side-effect of caring for the seriously ill, but are generally caused by poor medical care! This includes not only contaminated medical devices but also spreading germs from patient-to-patient.

Doctors and nurses not washing their hands prior to touching a patient is the most common violation in hospitals. According to findings by The Times, in the worst cases, as few as 40 percent of staff members comply with hand-washing standards, with doctors being the worst offenders.

But even the best hospitals typically boast no better than 90 percent compliance -- which means one out of 10 practitioners may have contaminated hands.

Doctors’ ties and even their white coats have also been implicated as potential causes of infection.

At the University of Maryland, the Wall Street Journal reported that 65% of medical workers said they change their lab coats less than once a week -- despite acknowledging they were contaminated. Worse still, 15% said they change their coat less than once a month, even though superbugs like staph can survive on them for nearly 60 days!

Antibiotic-Resistant Superbugs on the Rise

HAIs are frequently caused by antibiotic-resistant microbes, making the infections increasingly difficult to treat.

In Washington hospitals, for instance, patients infected with the antibiotic-resistant germ called MRSA have skyrocketed from about 140 a year to more than 4,700.

Unlike typical staph bacteria, MRSA is much more dangerous because it has become resistant to the broad-spectrum antibiotics commonly used to treat it, such as methicillin, oxacillin, penicillin and amoxicillin.

This “super bug” is constantly adapting, meaning it is capable of outsmarting even new antibiotics that come on the market.

Because MRSA can be so difficult to treat, it can easily progress from a superficial skin infection to a life-threatening infection in your bones, joints, bloodstream, heart valves, lungs, or surgical wounds.

There are other antibiotic-resistant bugs on the rise, too, including gram-negative bacteria, which can cause severe pneumonia and infections of the urinary tract and bloodstream. According to one New York Times report, this category of bacteria are already killing tens of thousands of hospital patients each year.

What’s Spurring the Rise of Antibiotic-Resistant Bugs?

In order to effectively combat this epidemic problem, it’s important to realize that antibiotic-resistant disease is a man-made problem, caused by overuse of antibiotics both in health care and, even more so, in agriculture. It is not merely a lack of hygiene or proper disinfection techniques that have brought these super bugs to the point of being impervious to nearly all medications we have at our disposal.

About 70 percent of antibiotic use in the United States is for agricultural purposes. Animals are often fed antibiotics at low doses for disease prevention and growth promotion, and those antibiotics are transferred to you via meat and even manure used for fertilizer.

So, the agriculture industry’s practice of using antibiotics, along with the overuse of antibiotics for medicine, is indeed a driving force behind the development of antibiotic resistance in a now wide variety of bacteria that cause human disease.