The Injury Board Commentary - Miscellaneous - Most Popular

Lybrel pill that halts periods approved by FDA

Staff Writer — Wed, 30 May 2007 08:00:04 GMT

A new birth control pill called Lybrel, which also prevents women from having menstrual periods, received FDA approval last week.

The low-dose oral contraceptive has received mixed reviews from skeptical consumers and doctors. While some herald the new drug as a freeing, liberating pill that puts an end to the discomforts of cramps, bloating and the like, others say it is unnatural and may have side effects down the road.

A report from LasVegasNow.com highlights the debate:

"It's actually abnormal for a woman not on birth control to miss periods or not have regular cycles. It's not healthy for them," said Martin. "But because the pill balances it hormonally, it is OK for them not to get a monthly cycle."
But those like medical researcher Linda Andrist want more study on Lybrel's long term safety.
"We don't know about bone health, breast cancer, heart disease, strokes especially for young women," said Andrist.

Lybrel is expected to be available at pharmacies by summer 2007.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Staff Writer

Las Vegas hotel guest dies following exposure to Legionnaires' disease at Luxor

Brian Nettles — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 03:21:07 GMT

As if lightning has struck twice, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has again contacted the Southern Nevada Health District and reported that guests of the Luxor in Las Vegas hotel have contracted Legionnaires' disease after vacationing on the Las Vegas Strip. This comes on the heels of the Legionella exposure outbreak reported this past summer at the Aria Resort, another Strip property.

On January 30, the Las Vegas Sun newspaper reported that the Health District was contacted by the CDC and advised that 3 guests of the Luxor hotel have been diagnosed with the virus since this past spring. In the last of the 3 confirmed cases, the guest has died as a result of the exposure to the Legionella bacteria.

The Los Angeles Times recently reported that the Southern Nevada Health District has issued a public health notice to warn the public of this hazardous condition.

Just 6 months ago, the Las Vegas Review Journal reported that water testing performed by local officials confirmed the presence of the type of bacteria that causes Legionnaires' disease was present at the resort. The testing was performed after 6 former hotel guests had been diagnosed with this sometimes deadly disease. Subsequently, the Aria issued a public statement to notify guests of the possible exposure.

Of note, these 2 properties are only about 1 mile apart on the Las Vegas Strip.

Manifestation of the bacteria's symptoms typically occur within 2-14 days of the the exposure period. According to the Southern Nevada Health District, symptoms include: high fever, chills, cough, and fatigue or weakness and/or pneumonia. The Health District recommends that any former guests experiencing such symptoms should see your doctor and inform him or her that you may have been exposed to Legionella.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Brian Nettles

Birth Control Pills Recalled Pfizer – Lo-Ovral-28 and Others

Greg Webb — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 07:45:00 GMT

Women across America who use Lo-Ovral-28, Norgestrel and Ethinyl Estradiol for birth control are likely going to be a bit concerned after they learn that drug manufacturer Pfizer announced a voluntary recall of more than one million packs (14 Lots) of its Lo-Ovral birth control pills because the pills “may not contain” enough inert or active ingredients to prevent pregnancy. This could cause some angst and sleepless nights for many people who have chosen to use the contraceptive.

According to a brief morning bulletin on WROC-TV (Rochester, New York), “The drugmaker says the recall involves certain lots of Lo/Ovral-28 tablets, along with Norgestrel and Ethinyl Estradiol tablets.” Pfizer's PR bulletin on its website says, “Some blister packs may contain an inexact count of inert or active ingredient tablets and that the tablets may be out of sequence. The cause was identified and corrected immediately.”

The medication was distributed nationwide, and Pfizer is urging couples across the nation who normally use the medication to use other “non-hormonal” forms of contraception immediately.

The packaging defects do not “pose any immediate health risks,” Pfizer says; however, looking to the future, one may wonder how many babies could be born nine months from now “as a result of this packaging error”. Maybe we are in for another baby boom.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb

Study Finds Individual Health Insurance Is Abusive

Nick DiCello — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:47:38 GMT

The availability of affordable health insurance coverage is a hot button topic in this country. Millions of americans cannot afford insurance and go without coverage. In this election year, some are proposing the individual health insurance market as a a solution to America's health insurance crisis. A recent study published by Families USA, a consumer advocacy group out of Washington, D.C., however, concludes that the individual health insurance market is wrought with abusive practices. See Families USA's Report.

Most of the 18 million americans who are covered under individual policies or plans, i.e., those not issued inconnection with one's employment or membership in a group or bona fide association, can be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions. Furthermore, applicants can be denied coverage due to their medical history or conditions. Indeed, only five states prohibit insurance companies selling individual policies from cherry-picking the helathiest consumers and excluding everyone else. Even when coverage is issued, most states permit insurance companies selling individual coverage to exclude specific conditions from coverage.

The opportunity to limit risk by only insuring the healthiest members of the population allows for huge profit margins. In 45 states, including the District of Columbia, nothing prevents insurers selling individual coverage from spending less than $0.75 of every premium dollar on actual medical services or treatment. Limted risk, coupled with unfettered minimum medical loss ratios, promotes business models where profits are king, oftentimes at the expense of the insureds.

Unlike in the employer/group context, insurance companies are permitted to undewrite individual applications for insurance to determine the risk of insuring an applicant in light of his or her health history, lifestyle, and physical attributes. Unfortunately, however, some insurers engage in what is known as predatory post-claims underwriting in which little to no medical underwriting is done upon receipt of the application, a policy is issued, and when a substantial claim is made under the policy, the insurer, for the first time, requests medical records and investigates whether the applicant made any misrepresentations in the application that could permit the insurer to cancel or rescind the coverage. When an insurance company rescinds coverage, the insured is often left with substantial medical expenses. Furthermore, rescission can impede one's ability to obtain insurance in the future. One problem with this practice is the applications ask questions about complex medical information dating back several years. Often times the questions are unclear. Most of the time the applications are actually completed by insurance agents who may not ask the question the way it is written or not ask all of the questions. In other words, most consumers are ill-equipped to answer every question on the application with precision. Incorrect answers, however, can form the basis for coverage cancellation at a later time when the insured needs coverage. This practice - of rescinding coverage after claims are made based on information that was available to the insurer during initial underwriting - is illegal in many states and is being exposed through recent lawsuits. See for example Court Awards $9M to Cancer Patient Over Cancelled Coverage.

States must pass legislation to reduce the abuses that currently pervade the individual health insurance market. Relatively speaking, Ohio is among the more consumer-friendly states when it comes to individual insurance regulation. For example, under Ohio law, an insurer cannot rescind coverage on the basis of a misrepresentation in the application without first clearly establishing the misrepresentation was knowingly made by the applicant with intent to defraud the insurance company. In other words, innocent misrperesentations cannot serve as a basis for coverage cancellation.

If you or someone you know has had their claims denied under an individual health insurance policy (includes coverage for spouses and family members) or had that coverage cancelled, you should contact an attorney to discuss your legal rights. Many of the abusive practices plaguing the individual insurance market are expressly prohibited under Ohio law.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nick DiCello

New Laws About Leaving Children Unattended in Cars

Jenny Albano — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:23:28 GMT

As of now twelve states have laws that specifically prohibit parents or guardians from leaving children alone in cars. Some of the states make it a traffic violation that includes a ticket or fine and other states make the offense a misdemeanor with a possible prison sentence. All states have laws that allow authorities to charge parents with child neglect and endangerment if a child dies because he/she was left unattended in a car.

In Florida, the child-in-car law was just recently amended to make it a second-degree misdemeanor to leave a child under the age of 6 alone in a vehicle for more than fifteen minutes or at all if the car is still running. The new rules went into effect on July 1, 2007 and if a parent or guardian is prosecuted they could face up to 60 days in jail and a fine of $500.

An advocacy group called Kids and Cars had been trying to toughen legislation on this issue.

"We're trying to get people to realize it is just as dangerous to leave a child alone in a vehicle as it is to leave him near a body of water," said Kids and Cars founder and president Janette Fennell. "Just in seconds, something can happen."

Fennel said that there are around 30 to 40 cases of hyperthermia deaths, which is death from unusually high body temperatures, of children left in vehicles every year. These rates have been increasing since the 1990s. Many children die from strangulation by power windows or by crashes caused by knocking the car into gear. Abduction is always a danger of leaving a child alone.

Two South Carolina toddlers were found dead after they overheated and died in their mother's car on Monday, July 30. This is just one tragic example of why harsher consequences need to be inflicted on parents or guardians who leave their children in danger in a car by themselves.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jenny Albano

The Subprime Mess and Phil Gramm: An Experiment in Deregulation

Paul Kiesel — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:12:58 GMT

In 1933, a few years following the stock market crash, Congress passes the Glass-Steagall Act, in hopes that regulating banks will help prevent market instability, particularly amongst Wall Street banks. The purpose of the act is to separate commercial banks that focus on consumers from investment banks, which deal with speculative trading and mergers.

The Glass-Steagall Act provided the proper oversight and entity separation that would prohibit banks and other financial companies from merging into giant trusts (conflict of interests) -- giant trusts or corporations being more powerful, naturally, and having the seemingly limitless capital to lobby their corporate interests, however, with a very myopic scope (particularly when it comes to factoring in potential losses -- most banks, as seen in contemporary times, chose not to anticipate losses in the mortgage market; they presumed home prices would continue to appreciate).

In 1999, former Senator Phil Gramm (who is, incidentally, Senator John McCain's economic adviser and cochairs his presidential campaign) set out to completely gut the Glass-Steagall Act, and did so successfully, replacing most of its components with the new Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act: allowing commercial banks, investment banks, and insurers to merge (which would have violated antitrust laws under Glass-Steagall). Sen. Gramm was the driving force behind the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, as he had received over $4.6 million from the FIRE sector (Finance, Insurance and Real Estate donations) over the previous decade, and once the Act passed, an influx of "megamergers" took place among banks and insurance and securities companies, as if they had been eagerly awaiting the passage of Gramm's Act. Everything in between Glass-Steagall and Gramm-Leach-Bliley (i.e. Savings and Loan crisis/bust) was, in large part, the incubation period for what would take place over the nine years that would follow the passage of Gramm's Act: an experiment in deregulation.

Shortly after George W. Bush was elected president, Congress and President Clinton were trying to pass a $384 billion omnibus spending bill, and while the debates swirled around the passage of this bill, Senator Phil Gramm clandestinely slipped a 262-page amendment into the omnibus appropriations bill titled: Commodity Futures Modernization Act. It is likely that few senators read this bill, if any. The essence of the act was the deregulation of derivatives trading (financial instruments whose value changes in response to the changes in underlying variables; the main use of derivatives is to reduce risk for one party). The legislation contained a provision -- lobbied for by Enron, a major campaign contributor to Gramm -- that exempted energy trading from regulatory oversight. Basically, it gave way to the Enron debacle and ushered in the new era of unregulated securities. Interestingly enough, Gramm's wife, Wendy, had been part of the Enron board, and her salary and stock income brought in between $900,000 and $1.8 million to the Gramm household, prior to the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

In 2003, Gramm left the Senate to join UBS, which had acquired investment house PaineWebber due to his deregulation bill. At UBS, Gramm lobbied Congress, the Fed and the Treasury Department. During Gramm's tenor at UBS and as a lobbyist, Congress passed the Responsible Lending Act, billed as an anti-predatory-lending measure, but was called the "Loan Shark Protection Act" by consumer advocates, as it was designed to preempt stronger state laws against anti-predatory lending. The Fed largely ignored the underlying and growing problems within the subprime mortgage/housing markets, as Bernanke famously acknowledged the housing market in April, 2007 as, "[showing] signs of softening," but said that a "sharp slowdown," is unlikely. Then, according to Mother Jones magazine, Henry Paulson became the Treasury Secretary in July, 2007, when, "In 2005, [at] Goldman [he] securitized $68 billion in residential mortgages and $23 billion in 'other assets' primarily related to CDOs," (Mother Jones, August, 2008). With such self-interest, and a lack of the nation's interest, we can see how this subprime mess was allowed to escalate to such great proportions.

Some justice was served, however, this spring, as UBS became one of the subprime debacle's biggest losers, having to write down $37 billion -- the same amount as their previous four years of profits combined. UBS also made the public aware that two-thirds of its losses were due to reckless investing in collateralized debt obligations (CDOs).

Now, Gramm has a second chance of extending his out-of-touch and ill-performing policies, as Senator John McCain appointed Gramm to be his "economic expert" and cochair of his presidential campaign, last year. Also, it is likely that if Senator McCain were to win in November, Gramm would be our next Treasury Secretary, which means more of the same deregulatory mess and the continuation of failed and insidious economic policies.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Kiesel

Rick Perry, Opposer of "Frivolous Lawsuits", Sues Virginia

Greg Webb — Wed, 28 Dec 2011 16:36:23 GMT

Presidential candidate Rick Perry of Texas, who continually touts his record in Texas for taking away his citizens' rights to sue for harms done to them ("tort reform" measures like capping awards for medical malpractice and other personal injuries), seems to think it is OK to sue the Commonwealth of Virginia . Mr. Perry found Virginia's requirement that a Presidential candidate obtain 10,000 signatures before being placed on a primary ballot to be too "onerous" and "problematic" (Query: if this requirement was too onerous, how is he going to manage being President of the United States?). This wannabe President has trumpeted to anyone who will listen to him about his legacy of taking away Texas citizens' rights to sue, their rights to challenge big business, or big insurance companies, all of whom seem to be prospering in Texas and across the country. Apparently, when he wants to sue for a perceived wrong, he can justify a lawsuit. And the fact that the Virginia requirement was well-known and clear to Mr. Perry - and all of the candidates - when he entered the race, seems to be of little importance. His lawsuit does not qualify as "frivolous", even though the Virginia requirement is clear as the print on this page.

It seems as if most of Mr. Perry's competitors in Virginia, like Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, did not have the same problem as Mr. Perry. This is despite Mr. Perry having a sizeable advantage over Mr. Paul in campaign money. Despite the money in his coffers, Mr. Perry claims that Virginia's "ballot access rules are among the most onerous and are particularly problematic in a multi-candidate election." Interesting theory, considering most of the other candidates (excluding Newt Gingrich) seemed to find the rules quite negotiable.

The hypocrisy of some politicians is rather perplexing, especially those self-righteous politicians who have little problem denouncing all of those so-called "ne'er-do-wells" who have the temerity to bring a lawsuit for an injury, like that caused by a defective product that kills or maims a family member, or like a health care provider who negligently injures or kills, or like a large corporation that willfully and knowingly releases or dumps toxic substances into the air or groundwater (or ocean - e.g., BP). Those latter suits are "frivolous" according to Mr. Perry and his cronies in the Texas legislature, but his lawsuit against Virginia, upon being denied access (Virginia sure has a lot of gall, does it not?) because of his inability to qualify under a well-known state requirement, becomes fodder for a lawsuit. Perhaps Mr. Perry should have been a little better organized, or used some of the many millions his campaign has banked (where did that money come from?) to work a little harder in Virginia. But, in light of, and despite of, his campaign's failure to follow the rules Virginia clearly established, he now seeks redress through the courts, claiming his constitutional rights have been violated. What an amazing turn of events.

Is not Mr. Perry a strong proponent of "states' rights"? What happened to Virginia's rules? These are rhetorical questions, because the answers are clear - Virginia's rights and rules do not matter when they do not comport with Mr. Perry's presidential aspirations. Oops.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb

H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccine, Possible Side Effects and the Potential Dangers of Squalene

Teresa Allen — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 01:33:59 GMT

UPDATE: November 13, 2009

The NVIC has just posted a Vaccine Ingredients Calculator for the H1N1 vaccine and the seasonal flu vaccine. You put in your weight, age etc. and the vaccine and click 'calculate'. It will tell you how much mercury the EPA states is acceptable for you.

Click here to go to the VIC.www.vaccine-tlc.org/calc.html

I put my info in and it said that based on the EPA standards of mercury that I can handle would be 8 micrograms. The H1N1 vaccine has 25 micrograms.

UPDATE: November 10, 2009

Thank you, Anais, for sharing this.

A brave and highly educated spanish nun,doctor and theologian, living in a monastery, but very much involved in the matters of the world, explains the H1N1 flu. This is the clearest and most sensible information I have been able to find. Hope it helps everybody to make an informed and free decision.
More ...

The youtube version is in 6 parts here.

UPDATE: November 3, 2009

Please go and listen to this interview! Very informative! Very good interview with Dr. Russell Blaylock: (Dr. Blaylock is a board certified neurosurgeon, author and lecturer. For the past 25 years he has practiced neurosurgery in addition to having a nutritional practice. He recently retired from both practices to devote full time to nutritional studies and research.) http://articles. mercola.com/ sites/articles/ archive/2009/ 11/03/What- We-Have-Learned- About-the- Great-Swine- Flu-Pandemic. aspx Just a couple of things from the interview:

UPDATE: October 27, 2009

The shocking truth about why Obama announced a National Public Health Emergency in the US this weekend.

October 21, 2009
ALERT: Special Swine Flu Update

*UPDATE: 10/14/2009* -

(Taken from Peninsula - Palo Alto Daily News )

"...the current stock of U.S. swine flu vaccines does not contain adjuvants, according to Anne Schuchat, MD, in an informational video produced by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Schuchat does acknowledge that there is an emergency provision to use them — should the pandemic accelerate."

*UPDATE: 10/5/2009* - According to the CDC, neither the 2009 H1N1 vaccine nor the 2009 seasonal flu vaccine used in the United States contains squalene.

A Glimpse into the Scary World of Vaccine Adjuvants

The U.S. government has contracts with several drug companies to develop and produce swine flu vaccines. At least two of those companies, Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline, are using an adjuvant, Squalene, in their H1N1 vaccines.

Meryl Nass, M.D., who is an authority on the anthrax vaccine, states

“A novel feature of the two H1N1 vaccines being developed by companies Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline is the addition of squalene-containing adjuvants to boost immunogenicity and dramatically reduce the amount of viral antigen needed. This translates to much faster production of desired vaccine quantities.”

There is a difference between 'good' and 'bad' squalene. The difference is the way it enters the body. Injecting squalene is an abnormal route of entry. Injecting squalene into the body causes your immune system to attack ALL of the squalene in your body, not just the vaccine adjuvant.

According to the European website Without Concent :

What you don't know can hurt you.

WithoutConcent is about informed concent. We promote transparency in the pharmaceutical industry and the governments that regulate it...because you can't make good choices with bad information - or no information at all.

Clinical trials with "fast-track" swine flu vaccines that contain and adjuvant - substance that turbocharge the immune system's response to the vaccine - are underway on four continents. The adjuvant is an oil called squalene, which causes incurable autoimmune disease in animals. Autoimmune diseases occur when the immune system attacks the body instead of defending it.

Over the past 35 years, scientists in laboratories like UCLA Medical Center and the Karolinska Institute, which awards the Nobel Prizes in Medicine and Physiology have published papers showing how squalene injected into rodents will cripple them. They used squalene to induce diseases like rheumatoid arthritis in animals (the animal version is called "adjuvant arthritis") in order to search for a cure in humans.

This website also states:

The European Medicines Agency report on GlaxoSmithKline's new swine flu vaccine called "Pandemrix" says on pg. 17 that it contains 10.69 milligrams of squalene.

An appendix to the report says on pg. 29 that subjects injected with the vaccine suffered "Headache, Tiredness, Pain, redness, swelling or a hard lump at the injection site; Fever, Aching muscles and joint pain." It says these complaints were "very common" - occurring with more than 1 in 10 doses of Pandemrix.

In 1 out of 1,000 doses, subjects reported "Allergic reactions leading to a dangerous decrease of blood pressure, which, if untreated, may lead to collapse, coma and death; Fits, Severe stabbing or throbbing pain along one or more nerves and Low blood platelet count which can result in bleeding or bruising." In 1 in 10,000 doses, volunteers reported "Temporary inflammation of the brain and nerves causing pain, weakness and paralysis that may spread across the body; and Narrowing or blockage of blood vessels with kidney problems."

We're not going to tell you what to do about this - except to get informed. Your health could depend on it.

According to Jeffry John Aufderheide of justgetthere.us

"As to my knowledge, this information is the first of its kind validating the ingredients and the intent to use them on the population. Buyer beware of this vaccine as we are likely to see an onslaught of damaged men, women, and children if there are forced vaccines. The ‘new’ experimental vaccine is certainly unlike any other that we, as Americans, have been exposed to in the past."

On Fox News, a Doctor recently said that the H1N1 Swine Flu virus is losing its virulence and the vaccine has levels of Squalene, even going so far as to say you would rather get Swine Flu than seasonal flu.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1z7KSEnyxw

More video from the National Vaccine Information Center

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5wHP5zLcP4

I, for one, will not be getting the H1N1 vaccine. However, no matter what you decide to do, please be sure to educate before you vaccinate.

I have removed the 'side effects' listed in the vaccine insert. Please do your own research into this.

..."Vaccine Safety Testing Only Done for ONE Week Now we are being told that this new fast tracked, poorly tested vaccine is very safe and effective. The results of the testing on this vaccine were reported in the New England Journal of Medicine.39 It is instructive to learn that the tests for safety and to assess complications lasted only 7 days after the vaccine, an incredibly short period of follow-up. Gullian Barre paralysis can occur even months after a vaccine as can seizures, behavioral problems and neurodevelopmental disorders in children. It is interesting to note that the authors of the safety study for our swine flu vaccine were all employees of the maker of the vaccine CSL Biotherapeutics and eight held equity interest in the company.39 This admission is part of the disclosure policy of the New England Journal of Medicine. It is always important to keep in mind when you hear about this vaccine being safe and produced just like the seasonal flu vaccine -- What else do they not know about this vaccine that they will discover months, years or even decades later. Once injected with the vaccine and you develop a complication there will be little that can be done to treat the life-long degenerative disorder it produces. You will just be a sad story on 60 minutes."

For the amount of mercury given in the vaccines to be considered safe, I would have to weigh a minimum of 551 pounds (250 kilograms).

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Teresa Allen

Vitamin Supplements: Be Very Careful

Jerry H. Trachtman — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:05:56 GMT

Most of us take, or at some time in our life have taken, vitamin supplements. We see and hear the health claims of many vitamin manufacturers and marketers, and we don’t think of vitamins as medicines or as being potentially harmful. However, some recent medical studies might indicate that not only is there a questionable benefit to taking vitamin supplements, but certain supplements may actually be detrimental to good health. Add to that the fact that there is minimal regulation of the vitamin supplement industry, and the door is left open for potentially disastrous results.

A study to investigate vitamin E’s ability to protect men against prostate cancer was funded in part by the National Cancer Institute and the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (National Institutes of Health). The study started in 2001, and involved 35,533 healthy men over age 50 from 427 study sites in the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico. The results originally reported in 2008 found there was no significant reduction in prostate cancer with Vitamin E supplementation. But the investigators saw a trend toward a higher rate of prostate cancer, and decided to continue following the men after the study ended. The data collected by the study up to July 5, 2011 disclosed a 17% higher incidence of prostate cancer in the men who had taken 400 IU of vitamin E daily. Quite unexpectedly, it was found that not only did vitamin E fail to reduce the risk of prostate cancer, but it actually increased the risk.

A recent report of another study was published in the October 10, 2011 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine. This study involved 38,772 women between the ages of 55 and 69 years, with an average age of 61.6 years at the beginning of the investigation. As was expected, most of the vitamin supplements studied were not associated with a reduced total mortality rate. But unexpectedly, vitamin B6 , folic acid, iron, magnesium, and zinc were associated with a 3% to 6% increased risk of death, and copper was associated with an 18% increased risk of death, when compared to corresponding nonuse. Some medical doctors/commentators have suggested that this study adds “to the growing evidence” demonstrating that certain supplements can be harmful. They further state that, “Those supplements do not replace or add to the benefits of eating fruits and vegetables and may cause unwanted health consequences.”

Another report recently published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism brings to light some examples of mislabeling and mis-formulation of vitamin supplements made in the United States. A 58 year old man had been complaining for several weeks of fatigue, excessive thirst, excess urination, and poor mental focus. For two months, he had been taking a vitamin D3 supplement. When the supplement was tested, it was discovered that each capsule contained 186,400 IU of vitamin D3 instead of the 1,600 IU stated on the label. In addition, the instructions on the label mistakenly recommended 10 capsules a day, instead of one. In excess of a thousand times more vitamin D3 than what the manufacturer stated on the label was ingested daily for two months, and it took a year for the vitamin D levels in the body to normalize and for the symptoms to disappear.

Gary Null, Ph.D refers to himself as “America’s leading health and nutrition expert,” markets dietary supplements, and operates health food stores in New York City. In 2010, Mr. Null claimed he was nearly killed by one of his own supplements. He sued the manufacturer with whom he had contracted to produce the supplement, claiming that it contained 1,000 times the labeled dose of vitamin D, caused him kidney damage, severe pain, and led to the hospitalization of six consumers also poisoned by the excessive dose of vitamin D. The Los Angeles Times wrote about Mr. Null’s lawsuit, and noted that it was common for dietary supplements to contain doses “wildly different than those indicated on their label” as a result of weak regulation of the industry.

Most physicians will suggest that a well balanced diet is the surest path to a healthier lifestyle. Before consuming any over the counter vitamin supplements talk to your family physician. If you start taking vitamins and have symptoms or feel that something is not quite right, stop taking them until your doctor eliminates the supplement as the cause.

It’s beginning to look like medical science is catching up with what mom knew all along. Eat your fruits and vegetables.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jerry H. Trachtman

Happy New Year: My first blog entry

Robert Roe — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 09:00:00 GMT

I'm new to Injury Board and am excited to be part of an organization that approaches the practice of law in a professional and caring manner. I thought it would be difficult to decide what to write for my first blog entry. I thought it would need to be original, witty, unique, and somehow perfect. Since I don't write for a living, that seemed overwhelming and I didn't think I would ever get my first entry off the ground. In the end, it was a personal experience that moved me to write:

While traveling home from a conference, I received a phone call from a client. I was in a public place, but his questions were about the general process and I was able to spend about 15 minutes answering them. When I hung up, the gentleman next to me asked "do you deal with all your clients that way?" Not sure what I had done wrong, I answered yes. He shook his head and said "I never get that kind of personal service from my lawyer."

Unfortunately, his experience is not an anomaly. Attorneys often forget to communicate effectively with their clients. Attorneys must strive to not only be masters of the courtroom, but also great communicators with their clients. Few clients understand the process of a claim or lawsuit. Taking the time to communicate with a client about the process, about the status of the case, and about the client's role makes the client happy and allows the attorney to do a better job.

I encourage attorneys to resolve to communicate effectively in this New Year. I know I will.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Robert Roe