back to carlstonmd.com
03/13/02 - NEWSLETTER
Hello Patients

It seems like forever since the last time I wrote to you. Actually I've been writing all along, as you will see below. It took me a while to transfer hundreds of email addresses by hand. My apologies in advance for inevitable transcription errors.

Also, I've been writing a great deal more for you in the way of web site content. It should be very helpful as it will contain nearly all of the old newsletters and some new articles as well as the usual office directions and links. Keep checking in at carlstonmd.com.

Please note that my new email address is [email protected]. The old one is no more.


In This Issue:
Herbal Medicine Contamination

Those of you who have been reading these newsletters for some time will be dismayed but not surprised by the most recent report of herbal medicine contamination.

PC-SPES and its sister product SPES have been recalled because samples were found to be contaminated with prescription drugs. In the case of PC-SPES the contaminant was the blood thinner warfarin (also known as coumadin or to rats as D-Con). SPES was contaminated with the tranquilizer alprazolam Xanax). Herbs from China have a very bad track record once again unfortunately

This is very upsetting as PC-SPES in particular has some very good research showing its effectiveness against prostate cancer including a study in the New England Journal of Medicine. In most of these studies the researchers tested the combination of herbs for contaminants and found none so this current episode is an aberration. Unfortunately although it is an aberration this will do a great deal of damage to the level of confidence in the quality, integrity and worth of herbal products. In addition researchers will be much less willing to investigate the benefits of herbal treatments (UCSF has already dropped PC-SPES from their research protocols).

Please do you best to make certain that the herbs you use are of the highest quality. If you don't you could literally be risking your life. As you can see the controversy continues. Such is the nature of research.

top

Healthnews
New Analysis Adds To Mammography Controversy
New York, Feb 1, 2002 (Praxis press)

Screening mammography reduces a woman's risk of dying from breast cancer, but it takes a long time for this benefit to become evident, according to a study published in the journal Lancet.

Screening mammography refers to mammography performed in women who do not have any signs or symptoms of cancer. The goal of this test, which is recommended by many health organizations, is to catch cancers in the earliest stage, leading to earlier treatment and better odds of a cure. Early studies suggested that screening mammography saved lives, but many of these studies had flaws. A recent large study found that death rates did not differ for women who were and were not having screening mammography.

At present, the subject of screening mammography remains controversial. Researchers in Canada and the United States used a new approach to analyze data from an earlier study. They focused on a different indicator of breast cancer deaths, and paid special attention to the later years of a screening program, assuming that it would take many years before the lives saved by screening would become evident.

In the first six years of the screening program, rates of breast cancer death did not differ between women who were and were not being screened. However, from the seventh year onward, rates were lower for the women who were having screening. Among women who had been in the program for 8 to 11 years, women who were aged 55 years and older at the start of the study were 55% less likely to die from breast cancer, and women who were aged 45 to 54 years at the start of the program were 30% less likely to die from breast cancer. These results suggest that screening mammography prevents deaths from breast cancer.

Reference:  Miettinen OS, Henschke CI, Pasmantier MW, et al.:
Mammographic screening: no reliable supporting evidence? Lancet. Feb 2 2002; 359:404. [ http://www.thelancet.com/journal/vol/iss/full/llan.359.9304.original_research.19360.1 ]

top

More About Omega-3 Oils

Danish researchers recently learned that women who ate fish markedly reduced the risk of delivering a premature or underweight baby. After noticing that the rates of prematurity and low birth weight newborns was remarkably low in the Faroe Islands, researchers speculated that this could be the result of the high dietary consumption of fish by the islanders. Sure enough when they compared women there who ate no fish with those who did the rate of these problems was 3.6 times greater among the fishless women. This is probably due to the omega-3 oils in the fish.

top

Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) Score Sheet
For many years conventional medicine has proclaimed the benefits of HRT while women start and then stop taking these drugs largely out of a sense that menopause is a natural process and not a disease. Increasingly evidence supports the naturalistic viewpoint. As one example, a recent study found that women who took HRT for years increased their risk of developing breast cancer by 85%.

Here is the current score sheet:

Favoring HRT
  1. Relieves hot flashes, night sweats and many acute menopausal symptoms
  2. Prevents osteoporosis
  3. Improves lipids (cholesterol)
  4. Might be good for the heart
  5. Might reduce the risk of Alzheimer's and macular degeneration
  6. Might improve quality of life
Against HRT
  1. Increases risk of breast cancer
  2. Increases risk of blood clots and gall bladder disease
  3. Worsens heart disease in women who already have it
  4. Might increase risk of ovarian cancer
  5. Might increase risk of dry eyes, asthma, obesity and diabetes
  6. Might damage quality of life

top

back to HERBS

web magic by Majisoft