LifeCare Chiropractic

The Best Chiropractic Care in Mesa, Arizona

adverse effects

WHAT EXACTLY DOES “SAFE” MEAN WHEN PREGNANT?

by

You’re pregnant.  You’re concerned with pretty much everything you do and how it may help or harm your baby (or at least you should be..).  So, of course, you value your doctor’s opinion on what is safe or not.

Interestingly, while volunteering at the Komen 3-day in the medical tent, I worked on a pregnant woman who was experiencing gestational diabetes.  When I queeried why she was sporting a Diet Coke when she was a. pregnant and b. experiencing GDM, she explained that her OB did not want her using stevia, but diet Coke was ok because Nutrisweet doesn’t cross the placenta.  Huh?

First of all, it doesn’t have to cross the placenta to wreak havoc on mom’s physiology and, in turn, her developing baby.  Second, I may have missed it, but I don’t think there’s ever been a study on whether Nutrisweet crosses the placenta, let alone a study that suggests that stevia is harmful during pregnancy.  Worse, she was on metformin and her doctor was going to increase the dosage further to control the blood sugar (that was probably being thrown off by the diet Coke…).

Anyway…the bottom line is that sometimes I think many doctors don’t read beyond the headline or the conclusion of a medical study.  If, of course, they are reading them at all.  Worst case scenario, the doctor is spoon fed information by the reps that have an obvious bias towards their product.

So what does all this rambling have to do with this particular study on the H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy?

If you happen to be under the care of a “conclusion reading” doctor, you would be guided by the conclusion of this article…”Review of reports to VAERS following H1N1 vaccination in pregnant women did not identify any concerning patterns of maternal or fetal outcomes.”

Doesn’t sound too threaten, right?  Here’s the actual findings from the study based on adverse effects reported to the Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System for the 2009 H1N1 vaccination:

  •  294 reports of adverse events
  • 2 maternal deaths
  • 59 hospitalizations
  • 95 spontaneous abortions
  • 18 stillbirths
  • 7 preterm deliveries
  • 3 threatened abortions
  • 2 preterm labors
  • 2 preeclampsia
  • 3 cases of additional fetal problems

Now, this kind of study says nothing about the actual incidence of how often this happened.  But certainly, these findings do not match up with the conclusions from anything but a sterile reporting style.  So yes–there WERE no strong patterns seen.  This may have been true.  But, try explaining this to one of the women on this list.  They would tend to disagree.

So, the bottom line is that you need to make sure that your doctor not only stays current with the medical literature, but that he or she goes beyond the title or the conclusion to read more into the study for a better picture.  If they’re not, maybe it’s time to find a new one who does…

 

HAD A SPINAL FUSION? WAS THIS MATERIAL USED?

by

I would have to say that in all but the most astute, few dug deep enough into their surgical procedure of fusion to find out how the surgeon was going to help the bones fuse together.  As a chiropractor, obviously the idea of fusion scares the heck out of me and I fear that far to few of spinal fusion patients have undergone a solid course of chiropractic care.

Back in 2002, the FDA approved the use of a type of cement in spinal surgeries.  This cement, called recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2), was designed to cause your body to produce more bone to allow a faster and more complete fusion between the vertebrae that we being fused. 

Sounds great, right?  Unfortunately, in most of the studies conducted on this compound (the manufacturer was Medtronic and the product was called Infuse (R)) they left a little something out.  Adverse effects.

Of 13 studies done by Medtronic, not a single one reported adverse effects related to the use of this compound.  In this particular study, the authors took a new look at the data and found an adverse effects in 10 to 50% of the patients that received the compound.  Additionally, there were very strong financial ties between the researchers of these studies and Medtronic.  The authors of this current study call the original research “biased and corrupt.”

Wow.  I have had a select few patients in my office who, quite frankly, we tried everything possible to keep them from having surgery and we not successful.  I see a need in the right time and place for spinal fusion when EVERYTHING else has failed.

But what about the patients that were steered into spinal fusion far too soon (it is well documented that those who see a surgeon or primary care doctor first instead of a chiropactor, are more likely to have surgery)?  And what if these patients had a surgery that used this compound and they were in the percentage that experienced adverse effects?

All too often in medical research the story is the same.  The data is manipulated to favor the funding biotech or pharmaceutical company.  The doctor or surgeon places false benefit on the product leading to recommendation to patients.  It is ultimately the patient that may pay for this transgression.

The bottom line is that we need to always, always, always do our due diligence with anything being done to our bodies if it was not in the original plan by Mother Nature.

Read More….