@cant sit still,
can't sit still wrote:
Aedes, Ritalin might not be the drug of choice where you live, but it is called for in many school districts.
I hold three medical board certifications, my friend, including pediatrics. It is ILLEGAL for schools to even recommend ritalin to parents. A school district CANNOT have a "drug of choice". Ritalin, concerta, etc are FDA controlled drugs and can only be prescribed by a physician. Most school boards will have policies about recommending a physician evaluation, but they would never take responsibility for formally recommending or requiring a specific drug even if it were legal -- one adverse event and they would be crushed in a lawsuit. A school can prevent a child from entering because of a communicable disease, but they CANNOT under law require Ritalin. EVER. At least not in this country.
Whether pediatricians are overprescribing ADHD meds is a different issue, which has more to do with the diagnosis of ADHD to begin with.
As far as additives go, I'm specifically speaking about ; sucrose, HFCS, dyes, aspartamine and hormones. All of them are added to food. The EU will no longer accept our beef that has hormones.
You did not answer the question. I asked about additive - symptom associations. You have named a number of food additives but not named a single additive that is known to prevent children from concentrating (which is what you said in your previous post).
Yes, DDT did kill mosquitoes. Now the bay in Tumaco has a strata of DDT. It poisons the crustaceans and , of course, enters the food chain.
Yes, agricultural spraying of DDT, which accounted for around the vast majority of all use, did cause considerable environmental harm. But when used for indoor spraying to prevent malaria it has no significant environmental impact. And it has never been associated with human illness either, with all due respect to Rachel Carson who claimed that it had. Look up some of the literature on IRS (indoor residual spraying) of DDT -- it's very effective and FAR less harmful when used this way.
The number one killer in the world is diarrhea.
Look at Table 1.8 in the 2008 UNICEF State of the World's Children report on Child Survival (on page 16).
Perinatal mortality is number one. But of kids who make it out of the newborn period, the number one cause of death is pneumonia
, which in most cases is caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae (pnemococcus) or Haemophilus influenza type B (HiB), both of which are vaccine-preventable (and treatable with antibiotics, incidentally).
The number 2 killer (and formerly
number 1 killer) of children is diarrhea, and the most common cause of diarrheal death is rotavirus, which is vaccine-preventable.
This is not to make the point that vaccines are the sole solution for these problems -- but they are MAJOR interventions for the most common killers of children in the world.
Just a note on infant and child mortality here. The primary causes of death vary from country to country. Malaria is the most common single cause of child death in most of sub-Saharan Africa, and there is of course no malaria vaccine. While HiB and many Pneumococcus serotypes are vaccine preventable, malnutrition and exposure to respiratory viruses and environmental pollutants greatly potentiate pneumonia mortality. Similarly, there are many non-vaccine prevntable causes of diarrhea and intestinal parasitosis, and nutritional status contributes greatly to susceptibility to diarrhea.
I raised this point about vaccines in contraposition to your skepticism about vaccines because of the (well-debunked) association with autism, but then your illustration of global child mortality. Vaccines have played a major role and will continue to do so in reducing infant and child mortality worldwide, even though they are only one of many needed interventions.
It doesn't matter if a person has cholera or whatever, it's the diahrrea that kills them.
It's not as simple as that. The cause of the diarrhea DOES determine their likelihood of mortality, as well as communicability/infection control and clinical management.
You can't vaccinate for dirty water. I'm sure that vaccination has some value.
I completely agree with you. A vaccination program can only truly succeed as part of a comprehensive public health program that includes hygiene and sanitation, nutrition, primary pediatric and obstetrical care, basic infrastructure (i.e. roads), and basic literacy.
However, sanitation alone isn't enough. Rotavirus is spread by direct person-to-person transmission, not just in contaminated water, so improved hygiene and sanitation would probably be insufficient so long as living conditions do not change.
You need to do more complete research.
I just completed a 3 year long postdoctoral fellowship in infectious diseases and tropical medicine at Harvard Medical School and the Harvard School of Public Health; I am a member of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, the Pediatric Infectious Disease Society, the Infectious Disease Society of America, and the American Academy of Pediatrics, and I have publications in textbooks and journals of tropical diseases, with a research article on malaria currently under review. I've done medical work and tropical disease research in four African countries and in the Peruvian Amazon. I have practiced travel and refugee medicine in the United States, as well as general clinical infectious disease / HIV practice. And in my 8 years as a physician and 12 years in the medicine I've studied this field extensively. I'd consider that to be a reasonable background for this type of conversation.