Weight Loss and Good Health; They Can Go Together!

We are a culture obsessed with esthetics. Everyone wants to lose weight and be thin to look like the models in magazines and stars on TV and in movies. The problem is, we as Americans are more concerned with the way we lookthen how healthy we are. If you treat your nutrition properly however, you can have both.

The amount of “diets” out there today to lose weight are growing on a daily basis. Some are nutritionally sound and some are seriously flawed. Most of them are short-term fixes for rapid weight loss with no concern for overall nutrition. Some purport to be healthy nutritional diets allowing weight loss while increasing nutritional competence. Most of them fail miserably at this.

Nutrition has gone through faddish times. During the early to mid 60s, which we’ll call the Atkins protein era, the emphasis was on a very high protein diet (usually to the expense of fresh whole vegetables, fruits and grains). There were many fortified foods that supplied the diet with increased amounts of protein. Not much attention was given to the source of the protein or the completeness of it either.

During the early to mid 70s the shift was made to carbohydrate-based diets. By the end of the 1970s, the focus of diets were extremely high carbohydrates, most of them complex, more fresh fruits and vegetables. This was a healthier alternative to the high protein situation. However, still not the most healthful diet.

By the mid 1980s the attention had shifted away from very high carbohydrates, to more moderate carbohydrate levels, complex carbohydrates, and more fresh fruits and vegetables. The USDA for the first time in 30 years changed their attitude of what constituted good nutrition by replacing the “four food groups,” (one of the groups being the dairy group, an absolute absurdity) with the “food pyramid.” Although the food pyramid falls short of absolute good nutrition, itcomes a lot closer to what the ideal should be

. A healthy diet must follow a healthy lifestyle and there are many, many opinions as to what constitutes good nutrition. As a participant in the University of Pittsburgh Medical School Weight Loss Study and having lost and kept off over 50 pounds for 20 years now, I feel that I’m an excellent spokesperson for the healthy diet.

Diets of whole foods are always preferred over diets that are composedof things that are not whole, or are processed or synthetic. A diet should be based mostly on fresh fruits and vegetables with the most complex carbohydrate coming from vegetable source. The protein component of the diet should be mostly from vegetable source with a minimum of animal protein and that animal protein being from good protein sources such as fin fish, shellfish and certain types of poultry. Occasional red meats can be eaten but they should be limited and small portions should be served.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned in the weight loss study through the thousands of people who have participated, it’s that eating less calories than your body actually requires to sustain its weight is the only way you can lose weight. Even when exercising sufficiently and burning many calories through exercise, unless you eat less calories than your body is going to expend on a daily basis you will never, ever lose fat.

Chiropractic Care Beats Medication for Neck Pain, Makes Headlines

New research published this month in the Annals of Internal Medicine finds spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) and exercise more effective at relieving neck pain than pain medication.

The study divided participants into three groups that received either SMT from a doctor of chiropractic, pain medication (over-the-counter pain relievers, narcotics and muscle relaxants) or exercise recommendations. After 12 weeks, about 57 percent of those who met with DCs and
48 percent who exercised reported at least a 75 percent reduction in pain, compared to 33 percent of the people in the medication group. After one year, approximately 53 percent of the drug-free groups still reported at least a 75 percent reduction in pain; compared to just 38 percent pain reduction among those who took medication.

The study, funded by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine and co-authored by ACA's 2011 Researcher of the Year Dr. Roni Evans, is making headlines across the country. The results of the study have appeared in AARP Blog, The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, WebMD and "World News with Diane Sawyer" among other media outlets.

THE TRUTH ABOUT ANTIBIOTICS

When it comes to viral infections, antibiotics work because of the belief behind them, and can actually do more harm than good

AS YOU READ THIS, MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS OF PEOPLE are needlessly taking antibiotics for viral illnesses.

Mind you, I am definitely an antibiotic supporter. They have been lifesavers in many situations. Ever since I saw a movie in grade school on antiseptic surgery's founder, Joseph Lister's life and work, I was astonished by the prospect that there was a time when the world knew nothing of "germs." We know a lot more now, so why do medical doctors still allow adult patients to take so many antibiotics in situations when they know such treatment is useless?

The American Academy of Pediatrics wised up many years ago when it realized parents refused to leave pediatrician's offices without a prescription for an antibiotic. They wanted a pill to stop their child's runny nose, whether the doctor thought it was needed or not. (Isn't that what parents were investing their time and hard earned money in to be there? "Where's my kid's drugs?!")

The academy decided it was time to put a stop to this nonsense, and released a policy paper instructing pediatricians not to give any more antibiotic prescriptions for non-bacterial illnesses — period! This was especially in reference to Otitis Media, or middle-ear infection, one of the biggest over-prescribed for culprits.

Now, to the adults: If I see one more patient in my office telling me, "Well, I went to my M.D. and he finally gave me an antibiotic. As soon as I started to take it, I felt better!" I think I am going to go crazy!

Don't people understand it is psychosomatic? You feel better because you are making yourself feel better! You believe you will feel better, so you do! It's called the power of the mind over the body, and it is a function of the body's ability to heal itself.

As far back as the 1950s, Dr. Joseph Murphy — quite coincidental, but we are in no way related — wrote "The Power of Your Subconscious Mind." This book has been re-released several times, and it remains the original cornerstone of the mind-body movement.

Since the 1960s, more and more authors and experts in the field of mind-body medicine, eastern philosophy and self healing have expanded on Murphy's original ideas.

Consider this:

1.All colds, bronchitis, coughs, even the flu, are caused by viruses, not bacteria. Antibiotics are useless!

2.Studies in Europe have shown taking antibiotics may actually reduce your immune system's ability to fight viruses. That's right! You are making the problem worse!

3.Overuse of antibiotics by misinformed adults is producing strains of super bugs, or bacteria we cannot control. Consider the killer Staph infections lately, toxic shock and the return of Tuberculosis. These are caused by people overusing antibiotics.

What should you do when you feel a cold coming on? I have always believed it's a depressed immune system, not the presence of the virus alone, that causes viral infections to take hold. Build your immune system by eating right, exercising, thinking positive thoughts, resting and practicing holistic healthcare.

Feel the sniffles? Rest, eat well, stay regular with your chiropractic adjustments and get some more rest. Think positive and have your thoughts trained on a fit, healthy, well state of existence. You'll be surprised at how quickly your body will do the work — and heal itself.

The Medical Conspiracy to "Contain and Eliminate" the Chiropractic Profession Continues...

The medical profession has a long history of opposing alternative healing professions.

While always claiming public safety as its reason for the attacks, the true reasons often involve protecting their monopoly of the healthcare market.

Medicine's opposition to chiropractic was its strongest under the leadership of Morris Fishbein, Secretary of the American Medical Association from 1924 to 1949, who led a 50-year anti-chiropractic campaign in both professional publications and the public media.

professional publications and the public media.

Historical Antitrust Lawsuits Against Medical Societies

In 1975 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of Goldfarb vs. the Virginia State Bar, that learned professions are not exempt from antitrust suits.

In 1982 the Court ruled that the FTC could enforce antitrust laws against medical societies.

These two suits paved the way for five chiropractors to file an anti-trust suit against the American Medical Association (AMA) and several other heath care agencies and societies in Federal District Court (known as the Wilkes Case).

Judge Susan Getzendanner found the AMA and others guilty of an illegal conspiracy against the chiropractic profession in September of 1987, ordering a permanent injunction against the AMA and forcing them to print the court's findings in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Even with success of the Wilkes Case and other anti-trust litigation, the AMA continues to this day to wage a campaign against chiropractic.

The American Medical Association (AMA) has maintained a decades-long battle against "alternative" healing traditions, dating back to the 1920s and arguably even earlier. The courts eventually ruled in favor of the chiropractors in 1987, finding the AMA guilty of a conspiracy to take down the chiropractic profession, as the above article recounts in detail.

But was this the end of it? Has the AMA resigned itself to the fact that chiropractic, as well as other forms of natural medicine, are here to stay? Not a chance.

The AMA's Bedfellows

Even with the success of the Wilkes Case, the AMA has continued to wage war against natural medicine for the past 20 years—but in more covert ways. It's the "Cold War" phase of this battle, but every bit as fierce. And now the AMA has rallied up a few significant allies, including:

•The American Dental Association (ADA)
•The American Cancer Society (ACS)
•The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and
•The American Psychiatric Association (APA)

… not to mention governmental regulatory agencies; all willing to march toward a common goal—a monopoly on medical care in this country. Together, they form a formidable lobbying force that controls just about every regulatory and legislative body in America. The truth is that chiropractic, naturopathic, and osteopathic medicine have PROVEN to be medically effective and cost effective for the patient, and the AMA can't stomach this, viewing natural medicine as a huge threat to their bottom line.

Federal Courts Rule AMA "Guilty as Charged"

In 1987, the federal courts found the AMA and several other medical groups guilty of seeking to create a healthcare monopoly. Specifically, they were found guilty of the following actions (published in the January 1988 issue of JAMA):

1.Systematic defamation of naturopathic, chiropractic, and osteopathic physicians

2.Publishing and distribution of propaganda specifically intended to ruin other healthcare professionals' reputations

3.Forcing MDs to refuse collaboration with naturopathic, chiropractic, and osteopathic physicians in the co-management of patients

4.Denying hospital access to naturopathic, chiropractic, and osteopathic physicians
The attack on osteopathic medicine has largely faded away since then, but chiropractic and naturopathic practitioners, as well as other legitimate natural medicine practitioners, continue to be the targets of suppression and misrepresentation. The war isn't over, but the rules of engagement have changed.


AMA Declares New War on Natural Medicine in 2006

In 2006, the AMA declared war on natural medicine by publicly stating on its website its intention to forcibly oppose licensure and practice of naturopathic physicians. Although they quickly removed this from their site, the following is a direct quote from that post, according to Naturopathy Digest:

"RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association work through its Board of Trustees to outline a policy opposing the licensure of naturopaths to practice medicine and report this policy to the House of Delegates no later than the 2006 Interim Meeting. (Directive to Take Action) Fiscal Note: Implement accordingly at estimated staff cost of $10,836."

Translation: Eliminate the competition.

According to The Integrator Blog, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) joined the battle with a statement that their goal was to "thwart the growing threat of expansion of scope of practice for allied health professionals" and included psychologists on the list of medical practitioners who needed to be "thwarted" (in addition to naturopaths, chiropractors, and midwives). The APA pledged their allegiance to the AMA in assisting them with "coordinating research to help medical specialty societies and state medical associations fight expansions in non-medical scope of practice, and improve information sharing among those groups."

Other medical associations have made similar pledges, such as the Minnesota Medical Association and the New York Academy of Family Physicians. They maintain that their position is based on concern for quality of care and patient safety, but the REAL agenda is just an attempt to destroy the competition.

As Chiropractor Louis Sportelli writes in his 2010 article in Dynamic Chiropractic:

"Just look around and you will see clear and compelling evidence that the long-standing war between the AMA and everyone else who does not come under the AMA umbrella is far from over. The names have changed, the venue has changed, but the intent has remained the same: to maintain monopolistic control over the delivery of health care."

Old Mission, New Tactics: AMA Learns How to Discriminate with Impunity

In 2010, the AMA House of Delegates introduced a resolution regarding scope of practice that contains limitations on who can be considered a legitimate physician, and who can medically diagnose. Specifically, the AMA's "Definition of a Physician" (H-405.969) contains the following language:

"The AMA affirms that a physician is an individual who has received a 'Doctor of Medicine' or a 'Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine' degree."

This is proof, without a doubt, that the AMA as well as individual state medical associations intend to continue doing everything they can to prevent you from accessing natural healthcare. Texas and Connecticut medical associations were the first to join the cause, and others will likely follow. Similarly, the AMA's "Comprehensive Physical Examination by Appropriate Practitioners" reads as follows:

"…the performance of comprehensive physical examinations to diagnose medical conditions [should be limited] to licensed MDs/DOs or those practitioners who are directly supervised by licensed MDs/DOs."

It's Not Just the AMA

Perhaps it's time to take a real look at medical associations, and the concern that they may be doing more harm than good. For groups who claim to exist in order to protect your health, they inevitably end up sabotaging it. It isn't just the AMA. Other medical associations that claim to exist for the betterment of public health include the following:

•American Dental Association (ADA): Continues to support the use of mercury fillings and demonizes biological dentists who oppose the use of mercury in dentistry; continues to support fluoridation, in spite of the evidence it does more harm than good.

•American Cancer Society (ACS): This charity has close ties to the mammography industry, the cancer drug industry, and the pesticide industry; has rampant conflicts of interest; consistently promotes drugs and screening procedures while ignoring environmental causes of cancer.

•National Cancer Institute (NCI): Has spent billions of taxpayer dollars promoting treatments while ignoring strategies for preventing cancer; abundant ties to the cancer drug industry (for more information, read Samuel Epstein's new book, National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society: Criminal Indifference to Cancer Prevention and Conflicts of Interest)

•American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP): Claiming to be protecting your children, the AAP is largely funded by vaccine manufacturers but refuses to disclose just how much money it gets from them; partners with Congress to protect pediatricians and drug companies from liability for vaccine injuries, while preventing you from getting truthful vaccine information.

Actions Speak Louder than Words

When someone's words differ from their actions, chances are that their actions more accurately reflect their values—and this is true for organizations, as well as individuals. Although medical associations claim to have your best interests at heart, their actions tell a different story. It's time to begin holding them accountable for their behavior and stop letting them hide behind the same old tired rhetoric.

You have a right to make your own choices about your healthcare, be it allopathic or naturopathic—whether you see an MD, an ND, or a DC should be YOUR decision and yours alone.

Scientific Study Validates Maintenance Adjustments

A recent clinical trial published in the August 2011 edition of the medical journal Spine proves that "Spinal maintenance adjustments show long term benefit for chronic low back pain".

To obtain long term benefits of reduced pain and increased range of motion, the authors recommend on-going maintenencae therapy spinal adjustments bi-weekly.

You can read the study abstract at: http://journals.lww.com/spinejournal/Fulltext/2011/08150/Does_Maintained_Spinal_Manipulation_Therapy_for.2.aspx. (cut and paste in your browser).

The reason this study was so significant? It was performed by MD's, not chiropractors, and published in the premier international journal for spinal research and surgery!

This study validates what we have been saying for 100 years: That regular chiropractic adjusments help you maintain an active lifestyle.

Chatham-Madison Kiwanis - Serving Madison, Chatham and Surrounding Towns: July 19 Program: Dr. Joe Murphy spoke on “How to be Healthy”

Chatham-Madison Kiwanis - Serving Madison, Chatham and Surrounding Towns: July 19 Program: Dr. Joe Murphy spoke on “How to be Healthy”

The Great American Dairy Myth:Learn How to Live Long and Stay Healthy Without the Cow!

I have long been a proponent of a non-dairy diet. My 4 children were raised that way and are healthier than most. My youngest two, ages 5 and 3, have never had dairy since birth, nor has their mother during their nursing. Both youngsters have less colds and sickness than any of their peers. I counsel my patients to avoid dairy at all costs.

So what’s the problem with dairy you may ask?

Cow’s milk and milk products are the most pervasive food allergy causing substances on the planet that are both easily obtained and widely used as foods. A protein in milk, casein, appears to be the major cause of adverse reactions. Casein is in milk of all forms, including lactose-free or low-lactose products. Casein is a very large and convoluted protein, and it is often mistaken for a foreign substance by our immune systems. And truly it is, because cow’s milk is meant for baby cows, not humans.
A human infant’s intestinal tract is designed to digest mother’s breast milk from birth to at least nine months of age, preferably to 12 months. Breast milk contains immune factors which protect against foreign substances. Breast milk contains three times the lactose, one third the calcium, a more absorbable form of iron, and higher amounts of essential fatty acids than cow's milk. Cow’s milk formula feeding prematurely exposes an infant's fragile intestine to cow's milk, and through a long series of maladaptive biological functions, the infant becomes sensitive (allergic) to that cow's milk.
Milk Allergy and Lactose Intolerance are not the same issue. Lactose intolerance means that the enzyme lactase is not produced by the body in sufficient quantity to digest lactose (milk sugar) resulting in gastric symptoms, such as cramping, gas, bloating and/or diarrhea. One can be lactose intolerant and yet ingest low-lactose, or lactose-free milk and dairy products without ill effects. Allergy to casein is another matter, and has nothing to do with lactose.

Why, then, is our American culture so hung up on cow’s milk? The problem is multi-factorial and has both cultural and economic roots. Milk and milk products are big business in America, and many in my generation were raised to believe that milk is an “essential food”; you can not live properly without it. Nothing could be further from the truth!


Many of us were raised at a time when the American Dairy Association touted dairy as “one of the 4 food groups”. Even today, dairy has it’s own section on the USDA Food Pyramid. In reality, we neither need dairy nor should we look at it as a separate or essential food category in our diet.

Two-thirds of the world’s population cannot tolerate milk and a rapidly growing number of Americans are allergic to cow's milk. In fact, cow's milk allergy is one of the most common food allergies. Many cultures never ingest milk products and are healthier than Americans by far. These cultures get much of their protein from legume sources and their calcium from legumes and vegetables.

One of the biggest untruths the American Dairy Association uses to promote cow’s milk as “essential” is that it is the only good source of dietary calcium. It’s time to debunk that myth as well. There are many excellent sources of calcium in other foods, such as dark green leafy vegetables, legumes, some fruits and figs. Many cultures that eat no dairy have better health and stronger bones by getting their calcium from fish, green vegetables, and legumes.

As far as protein: Yes, milk is high in protein, but at what cost? If casein is one of the most allergic proteins to humans, why ingest it at all? Soy and other legumes are much better alternatives. Even lean meats are. If you are not a vegan, sustainable fin fish that is low in mercury, like salmon and tilapia, are a fantastic source of calcium and protein.

Concerning soy products: Much misinformation was circulated in the recent past attempting to tarnish soy’s clean image. Don’t believe it! Cultures that have eaten soy and vegetable based diets are the healthiest on earth. Their people have greater longevity, lower cancer rates and lower rates of chronic illness. We, the great “milk” drinkers have lower levels of energy, greater obesity, and shorter life spans.

My suggestion to everyone is this: Eliminate dairy as much as possible. Eat more vegetables, fruits and whole foods. Eat more fiber and less fat, and never, never give babies milk to drink or cheese to eat. You will live happier, healthier and longer I promise you.