Articles

Mercury and Nutrition

by Angela Kilmartin
Founder: Patients Against Mercury Amalgams (PAMA)

Correct and personally appropriate nutrition is a good thing, we all know that and the previous generations knew to eat their greens. Whether we all follow it all of the time is debatable but at least we try and there is much more science behind diet these days. So is this all we need to do to be healthy? pay attention to what we buy and eat? Or should we also pay attention to what we swallow?
What we swallow is not only what we eat and drink.
We swallow bacterial/fungal-laden air, we swallow saliva with its enzyme ptyalin helping begin the digestive process right there in our mouth. We swallow nasal mucous or worse when we have a sinus infection; we may swallow our sexual partners oral and sexual secretions. All of these invaders have to be dealt with by our own immune defense systems otherwise the body becomes distressed, ill or even threatened. Bacteria in our mouth again starts the rescue and defense system. It is in its own interest to do so because if the host dies so the bacterial systems die, too.
Is this all? How big a part do our teeth play? After all it is only due to them that food can be swallowed at all since they bite into it and then chew it up for easier swallowing. Chewing is part of the body¼s defense against dying by choking!
Teeth are alive with nerves and blood supply. They are as much a part of us as our arms and legs, yet dentistry stays apart from medicine. Dentists have little knowledge of this vital link with whole-body health and doctors know little about dentally-caused illnesses.
Time was when teeth reaching their natural end simply rotted or fell out. Infections killed at an earlier age than now but modern medicine keeps us alive far longer and, correspondingly, dentists are able to fill our teeth, keeping us dentate. We can continue to eat, be nourished and live.
Dentists looked for a cheap, durable tooth filling product. In the early 19th century, much was made of metals like tin, silver and gold to plug teeth but these metals had difficulties and mercury was added as a liquid to the cheap tin/silver mixture to make it malleable inside the hole and fit more snugly.
However, under the stress of chewing, biting, hot and cold foods and drinks, the metals expand and contract. This action inevitably causes metal fillings to corrode and creep away from the tooth leaving gaps for more food debris, increased filling size and the swallowing of the cracking metals. Mercury has a room temperature vapourisation ability. So it vaporizes 24 hours a day in our warm mouth. We breathe it, we swallow the cracked bits and its very bad for us. No medical person would give us a drop of mercury to swallow, this is poisonous and we could die or become extremely ill. It is no longer allowed on planes, in thermometers or in vaccines, why is it still allowed in our teeth? Answers are in the PAMA Compilation
Good nutrition is useless in the face of this poisonous onslaught from our teeth 24 hours a day. Refuse silver/mercury/metal fillings and insist on the proper placement of a white composite, not glass ionomer which contains aluminium. Go shopping for a mercury-free dentist who can safely remove old amalgam fillings with the correct protocol. It is very dangerous to proceed without this safe protocol. This is also in the PAMA Compilation (see click here box).
Mercury and Candida infestations go together primarily because the immune system is kept so busy in the presence of poisonous mercury that it has little spare energy for repelling invading opportunistic Candida spores. Candida levels drop once mercury is removed from the mouth. Fasts and diet are quite irrelevant and dangerously weakening until this safe removal takes place. Candidal spores over time dig deeply into subcutaneous membranes such as the gut, sinuses, mouth and can leave weakened spore scars which are easily invaded again if the owner has to have strong antibiotics or drinks too much alcohol or becomes diabetic. Much more is explained in my book CandidaÌ, again found on my site or in any bookshop.
There is also now a school of holistic dentistry thought that continuous Candida is present to act as an absorber and expeller of mercury to which it binds in the gut. On all levels mercury affects the body severely in many different ways from digestion to mental illnesses, bone stiffness to insomnia, hair loss to hormones and so much more. There is a long list of better known illnesses and more minor conditions in the Compilation.

Further reading:
The PAMA Compilation available only from www.angela.kilmartin.dial.pipex.com.
Candida the book, online or any bookshop or www.newcenturypress.com for USA or www.centralbooks.com for UK.
The Patients Encyclopaedia of Cystitis, Sexual Cystitis and Interstitial Cystitis available same as for Candida
Top

Sausage, Mash and Sustainability

Counting the cost......
...to the health service
The National Audit Office estimates that the NHS spends £500 million a year treating obesity. Dealing with its proven health consequences (Type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, certain cancers, osteoarthritis, back pain, low self-esteem and depression) costs the NHS £1 billion more, according to a 2004 report by the Parliamentary Health Committee.
The same report calculates the cost of obesity to industry and the broader economy at £3.7 billion. Factor in the burden of people who are overweight (but not obese) and the total annual cost to the nation rises to £7.4 billion.
³Premature deaths among obese employees cost companies £1.1 billion a year.²
All this, along with 30,000 unnecessary deaths a year, could be prevented by eating a wholefood diet containing less fat, sugar and salt ­ and taking regular exercise, such as riding a bike. In May 2004, the same parliamentary committee that audited obesity singled out cycling as a key fat-fighter: ³If the government were to achieve its target of trebling cycling in the period 2000-2010 (and there are very few signs that it will) that might achieve more in the fight against obesity than any individual measure we recommend within this report.²
The same decision to cycle would, of course, help reduce pollutants that damage health, cut carbon emissions and ease traffic congestion, not to mention the well-attested psychological benefits of pedalling away the stress of the day. Healthier living leads, by default, to dividends for the community, the countryside and our children¹s future. A bike is also considerably cheaper than a car ­ and leg power costs us nothing. And if you aren¹t tempted by the pedals, there¹s always Shanks¹s Pony: walking is the simplest, yet perhaps most neglected, forms of exercise ­ and it¹s free.
Što our children
Obesity, heart disease and diabetes are not the only food-related health problems faced by the fast-food generation. Half of Britain¹s schoolchildren suffer from zinc deficiency, associated with a high-fat, refined diet in which fresh foods and the nutrients they contain ­ zinc, iron, protein, calcium, folate, and vitamins A and C ­ are lacking. Among the effects of zinc deficiency is an impaired sense of taste and smell. This makes salty, sugary foods more appealing than subtly flavoured, unseasoned fruit and vegetables ­ so in turn making children less likely to obtain the nutrients they need.
Compared to those with a healthy diet, malnourished children are 51% more likely to exhibit antisocial behaviour at 17. According to Professor Adrian Raine of the University of Southern California (who in 2003 concluded a 14-year study of children who don¹t eat healthily): ³Poor nutrition characterised by zinc, iron, vitamin B and protein deficiencies leads to low IQ, which leads to later antisocial behaviour. These are all nutrients linked to brain development.²
Tracing precise cause and effect in all this is, of course, a tricky business. There¹s no shortage of evidence suggesting that children¹s prospects are damaged by poor nutrition and a high intake of ³empty calories² ­ those found in sugary drinks, say, which provide energy but no nutrition. Take the study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which found that those who ate the most refined carbohydrates (sugar, cereals, white bread) had IQ scores 25 points lower than those who ate the least. ³That study can be criticised,² warns Patrick Holford of the Institute for Optimum Nutrition, ³because it doesn¹t show that refined carbs give you a lower IQ. It could be that poorer people, with lower IQs, eat more refined carbs.² But low income may be a function of poor academic achievement ­ in turn caused by a deficient diet.
Što business
British businesses pay dearly for the obesity epidemic. Premature deaths among obese employees cost companies £1.1 billion a year, while lost working days as a result of sickness leave add another £1.45 billion.
³If businesses don¹t respond, government may prescribeŠ²
And there are other ways of divesting the private sector of money. In 2002, the parents of two teenage girls from the Bronx (weighing 12 stone and 19 stone) tried to sue McDonald¹s for failing to declare ingredients that may have contributed to their obesity. The ³McLawsuit² raised the spectre of similar actions against other food companies selling less than wholesome products. It was good news for consumers as, in March 2004, McDonald¹s discontinued Super Size portions, then (in the UK at least) reduced the salt content of fries, seasoning and ketchup by 23%. For the British food industry, though, it raised tremors of alarm. A year after McLawsuit, public-liability insurance premiums rose by 35% for fast-food companies, pubs and restaurants as litigation loomed. In the same year, JP Morgan identified companies most at risk of an obesity backlash, based on the percentage of ³not so healthy² food in their portfolios. Hershey (95%), Cadbury (88%) and Coca-Cola (76%) headed the list, while by contrast, Danone, Campbell and Nestlé were ³best placed to benefit from obesity concerns². A spate of initiatives followed to shrink portion sizes and reduce salt, sugar and fat in food. Corporate social responsi-bility became a mantra in unexpected quarters and, perversely, obesity had become a driver for sustainability. However, the toll on food manufacturers may not be over yet. According to Tony Goodger of the Meat and Livestock Commission, ³If businesses don¹t respond to the proposals in Choosing Health [the 2004 White Paper], more prescriptive measures may be taken by central government regarding what foods can be sold and how they are promoted. It makes business sense to reposition products at the healthy end of the market.² ­ AP
http://www.greenfutures.org.uk/features/default.asp?id=2351
Top

Patricia Hewitt speaks out on the vision for healthcare in the UK

The Department of Health's Patricia Hewitt MP yesterday made the annual lecture at the Faculty of Public Health, in which she lays out her vision for health.

This is the full text of her speech:
"It is a privilege to be addressing you at such a defining moment in the history of public health.
Not since the great achievements of the 19th century - clearing the slums, releasing the population from the scourge of fatally infectious diseases like cholera or typhoid - has public health had such broad horizons, high aspirations or such a great potential to transform the quality of peoples lives.
But public health isn't merely an achievement of the past. Nor is it merely an aspiration for the long-term. Public health has to be about achieving better health for all people, in the here and now.
Dramatically improved public health yields a double prize:
> a better quality of life for individuals, with all of us living longer, healthier lives
> a viable NHS in the long-term. Improving public health reduces the pressures on our tax-funded system, and allows us to focus on high quality treatment and care when it is necessary
We're faced with an entirely different set of challenges to our forebears, which demand entirely different approaches to the ones which have delivered the great successes of the past.
The UK's biggest killers are no longer infectious diseases, but chronic diseases. The World Health Organisation estimates that if we were to eliminate the major risk factors, such as smoking, obesity, and physical inactivity, at least 80% of all heart disease, stroke and type-2 diabetes would be prevented.
When you consider that one of the biggest risk factors is the way we live our lives, the enormity of the project soon becomes clear.
No amount of legislation, regulation or structural adjustment can compete with the welcome reality that people have the liberty to make their own choices about the way they live.
The success of our Choosing Health programme ultimately depends on the degree to which we are able to find, and work with, people's will to change.
Sustainable social change will never be delivered by conscripting and coercing people into changing the way they behave.
Nor should it.
Sustained health improvement needs willing, collaborative, behavioural and cultural change. We live in a very different society from the one which created the NHS in the 1940s. That was a society accustomed to uniformity, rationing, queues, and deference to authority. Today our society is diverse, querulous, better educated, more meritocratic, and demanding of better, faster services. Our challenge is to create health services which reflect our society.
Our duty is to provide a supportive environment in which people are given the knowledge, the support and the resources to live the healthiest possible life. Which means a new social contract between government and people.
This is the very opposite of the so-called nanny state.
It is about the right of every individual to better health as the basis for a better quality of life: one that is empowered, based in the habits of self-care, aspiration and achievement; and which is ultimately contributing to a more prosperous, productive, sustainable way of living for individuals, communities and the institutions of this country.
The right to a free health service should be balanced by the responsibility to avoid, wherever possible, unnecessary health risks for you and your children.
For example we want personal health plans to be an essential part of the modern NHS. They give the individual the information, support and motivation to take ownership over their own healthy living.
We're interested in people CHOOSING health. I think we have to recognise that this hasn't always been within people's power. We have to recognise that it is easier for some people to make choices than others, usually based on their income and postcode.
It is our responsibility to rectify this.
The role of government is to firstly: create the conditions in which all of us can choose to behave in ways which enhance our health, and secondly: to tackle the underlying causes of illness that are beyond individual control.
On the first, we can make more information, advice and advocacy available, improve childcare and early years, improve health education, school food and sports in schools, improve local housing, estate and neighbourhood design, ensure access to sports facilities for all, and underpinning all of this is our work to tackle poverty, unemployment, and disadvantage.
On the second, government must remove the barriers to health which are beyond individual control by guaranteeing safe water and food, clean air, protection from infectious diseases, and so on.
We can learn from successful measures such as using the tax system to promote lead-free petrol: a good example of using fiscal incentives to change consumer behaviour.
And we need to gear our health services towards prevention: vaccinations, screenings, monitoring, early diagnosis and treatment, as well as changes in behaviour such as smoking cessation and healthy diets.
A modern health service must not simply use ever-more sophisticated (and expensive) medical solutions to tackle poor health. We must tackle the underlying causes. For example, statins are a fantastic advance - but they must not become a substitute for improved diets, stopping smoking, taking more exercise and setting a healthy example for your children.
People have a right to expect government to act as both a facilitator and an arbitrator when it comes to health. A facilitator of equal opportunities, improving nutrition in schools for example, working with industry to erode 'food deserts', (where local shops do not stock healthy fresh food), to make affordable, healthy choices available to all.
They have the right to expect all parts of government to work together to tackle health inequalities and put the social support in place - through Health Trainers, for example - to help people to develop their own capacity, skill and pride in nurturing their own wellbeing.
People also have the right to expect us to arbitrate in cases where one person's choice adversely affects the health of another.
Let me address the issue of smoking. I know that many of you feel our policy to ban smoking in the workplace does not go far enough. But let us be clear: we intend to introduce the biggest ever step forward in tackling second-hand smoke.
Ninety-nine per cent of all public spaces will be smoke-free, freeing people from the harm of second-hand smoke, providing more supportive circumstances in which the 75% of smokers who want to quit stand a better chance of freeing themselves from the tyranny of nicotine addiction.
No previous government has ever attempted to go so far. The legislation to promote smoke-free public places will produce net benefits worth £2 billion a year. It is not only the individual's budget which is hit by smoking, but the national finances as well. As anyone acquainted will health inequalities will know, better health and wellbeing go hand in hand with prosperity. Even today, we are reminded by the National Audit Office that preventing just 2% of strokes that occurred in England last year would have saved care costs of more than £37million. We need to make sure that our health promotion effort reaches beyond those who are best resourced to respond to it. We are creating an equality of opportunity in health that has never existed before. Whoever you are, wherever you live, whatever your income, should not alter your right to aspire to a better state of wellbeing and a better quality of life. This is not just about individual support, but tackling the condition of poverty through joined up government. For example, health services need to form strong partnerships with local government, local schools, and children's centres, social services, police, housing associations, voluntary groups, and self-help groups: * local councils and voluntary groups can provide sports facilities and exercise classes * self-help groups can help people manage chronic conditions * schools can promote healthy eating * the police can work to tackle domestic violence, and so on. Individuals and communities equally have a responsibility to act. Our White Paper on primary and community care services, to be published at the turn of the year, will look at how we gear the local NHS towards local health needs, modern aspirations and lifestyles, and how we bring healthcare closer to our communities. Our public engagement programme, culminating in a thousand-strong event in Birmingham, uncovered a strong desire for primary care services more in tune with modern life. What people told us was they wanted help to become more healthy. Similarly, the Choosing Health consultation sent a very clear message to the heart of government that people want to take responsibility for improving their own health, that they want support from government in doing that, but they do not want telling what to do. So our job is to sustain action on improving health by releasing a neglected source of energy: the power of individuals and the communities in which they live. Extraordinary things are achieved by the actions of ordinary people. Thirty women in Peterborough received training from the local Healthy Living Partnership to run sports and exercise classes for their local communities. Because of the classes they ran, local participation in physical activity increased enormously - particularly among women from ethnic minority communities who had previously struggled to find culturally sensitive forms of exercise. This work went on to win the 2004 Health Service Journal Award for Reducing Health Inequalities. Here's another example from the London Borough of Brent: In Brent, an area with high levels of teenage pregnancy, local teenagers have been recruited to act as advocates for safe sex amongst their peers. Over 40 young black teenagers have been recruited to promote the 'stay safe' message to other local teenagers. This peer-group approach stands a far better chance of success than more traditional approaches. In my constituency in Leicester we have a health scheme in Braunstone, an estate on the outskirts of the city. It is called Calorie Killers, it is run by local men who suffer a range of health problems caused by being overweight, unfit and poor diets, and it is seeing real results. Again - not a top-down professional-led approach, but grass-roots, giving people the information, tools and confidence to help themselves. The question, then, is how do we aggregate these successes for the whole population? How do we put health in the realm of people's comfort zones? How do we reach out, how do we persuade people it is not an exotic, deferrable pleasure, or the reserve of the wealthy? How do we ourselves move from giving very high-level messages to a position where everybody understands that improving health can be as simple as what you put in your supermarket trolley? How, as a public health community, do we invest in the future by making a difference now? Make no mistake, our vulnerability is that if we cannot make this work on a whole population basis, then heart-warming stories will be of no use. How do we as a community systematise health advice so that we invest in the future by making a difference now? We would do well to learn from the excellent work taking place in Sheffield, for example, where a city wide initiative has stopped more than a third of all premature deaths from heart disease in the most deprived sections of the population. This just goes to show the importance to local health communities of securing Health Action Zone resources in the context of "Commissioning for a Patient-Led NHS" to build momentum at a local level in the fight against inequalities. My basic argument is simple: making it work will require a concerted effort from every part of society. We need to be pragmatic, and take an integrationist approach to driving delivery at national, regional and local levels, recognising that joined up action is a fundamental requirement for success. Commissioning a Patient Led NHS sets out our vision for strengthening action across government, at all levels. Strategic Health Authorities and Government Offices, as well as Local Authorities and some PCTs, may share joint Directors of Public Health, where this kind of local arrangement makes sense. We will join-up delivery right across the public sector through Local Area Agreements. Practice-based commissioning will enable PCTs to become a stronger voice for their patients and their local communities, shifting their emphasis from treatment, to prevention and public health. The focus for PCTs will be on commissioning for health and health care, where appropriate in partnership with local government, to meet jointly agreed objectives for health and wellbeing to address inequalities at PCT and neighbourhood levels. PCTs will not only need to ensure that their commissioning processes deliver the desired outcomes of ensuring high quality care, choice of provider and value for money; they will also need to achieve a marked shift in focus from illness to health. In broad terms, this means commissioning within a framework which supports making evidence based decisions which take into account the needs of the population, and at the point of clinical decision-making, the individual, and specifies the expected standards and outcomes, both in terms of individual impact and in terms of addressing health inequalities. In practice, this means developing and engaging with clinical and public health leaders to ensure the engagement of frontline staff, development of best practice and to promote and develop effective and efficient services targeted at patient need. Quite a challenge - but one which is eminently achievable with robust public health support. Directors of Public Health and their teams, where possible as joint appointments with local government, will play a key role in the new system, supporting PCTs and local authorities in their efforts to improve and protect the health of local populations. Monitoring and modelling current and further trends to manage risk, integrate best practice and inform future contracts and plans for provision of health and health care is a key public health skill which PCTs will increasingly require to drive commissioning by turning intelligence into real impacts on people. Think of it as a health delivery system - we have the commissioners, the providers, and the patients - and increasingly the public health support will be the 'glue' - marrying together the diverse sections of the system into one cohesive, sustainable, and person-supporting whole. I am aware of the concerns amongst public health professionals - many of whom are sitting in this room - about the impact of reform on them personally and on the system as a whole. But I believe strongly these changes create a significant opportunity to ensure we achieve a robust public health delivery system, closely aligned with and integrated with health care and local authority services. The changing context of health and healthcare demands new measures of scrutiny, accountability and support, from a wider range of perspectives. This should provide better value for the populations we serve by more robust monitoring of how we are delivering against the PSA targets which are designed to improve the quality of people's lives, and their chances of realising their full potential. We are creating a system driven by the present and future needs of the communities we serve, in which people become the decisive factor, rather than the historic precedents by which of organisational funding. Local authorities are increasingly being restored to playing a pivotal role in improving public health. Health Overview and Scrutiny Committees (OSCs) can make a significant contribution towards this process. As PCTs enlarge, it is all the more important that they are locally accountable. Research commissioned by the Centre for Public Scrutiny suggests that health OSCs, instead of focusing exclusively on the NHS, are increasingly conducting scrutiny reviews that recognise the role local authority Executives play in improving community well-being. Northamptonshire's OSC has recommended that opportunities for physical activity be incorporated in to urban growth strategies, urban regeneration policies and the development of 'unused' land. Through cross-party, evidence-based reviews, health OSCs are helping to identify local health needs, involve and represent patients and the public, build local profiles of health inequalities and tackle the longstanding 'democratic deficit' in health and healthcare. The Centre for Public Scrutiny believes that health Overview and Scrutiny Committees are a one of the main vehicles for tackling the 'democratic deficit' in health and healthcare that has existed since the early 1990's. We are reviewing the role of patient and public involvement in the NHS and looking at new ways to bridge the democratic gap - which exists on the commissioning as well as the provision of services. To deliver real benefits to people in their everyday lives, we have to join up the complex web of relationships which impact upon their health: between the NHS, local government and other agencies who increasingly have shared priorities but, at present, rarely have common boundaries. I've already touched on Joint Appointments but they're only part of the story. For the first time, Public Health is part of a cross-government agenda. Joint PSA targets provide a structural framework to drive action right across government and into communities. A number of new developments will support this leadership role for Local Authorities. The proposed new methodology for the Comprehensive Performance Assessment 2005 contains, for the first time, assessment of a local authority's achievement in promoting healthier communities and narrowing health inequalities. The key lines of enquiry for the corporate assessment also provide a framework for local government action. And we are putting in place local planning mechanisms to focus on health. We are committed to the development of Local Area Agreements which provide a real opportunity to bring public health into the forefront of local community planning. Government recently announced phase two, which will see another 66 areas develop their Local Area Agreement this year to be effective from April 2006. Our Communities for Health pilot areas are already making in-roads into tackling health inequalities, like Get Nottingham Moving, which is targeting resources into the most deprived areas of the city, using small grants to support local action to promote access to physical activity and leisure services. But let us not underestimate the role of the NHS as a corporate citizen. We're the biggest employer in the country. We have an important role to play through promoting health in the workplace, and to contribute to the fight against inequalities as drivers of local economic regeneration. There's a compelling business case for health improvement in the workplace. As many of you will know, there is a growing wealth of evidence which shows that good employment practice leads to better organisational performance - in our case better services for our patients. Put simply - better motivated staff are more likely to deliver better results. Care for your staff and they'll care better for your customer. Many of you may be familiar with the work of Professor Michael West from Aston University who published research with Carol Borrill in 2002 which showed that there was a link between good HR management practice and patient mortality rates. That's a pretty compelling case for me. I'm pleased to say that in the NHS we recognised the importance of model employment practices several years ago. We have had the concept of the 'Model Employer' since shortly after the launch of the NHS Plan in 2000 built around the Improving Working Lives standard which many of you will be familiar with. Although it sounds a bit like 'jargon', model employment practice is nothing complex or sinister though you know. It is about doing some of the basics consistently and doing them well. It's what we would all recognise as good people management! For example, who would argue with the logic of regular appraisal, investment of time and money in development, helping people manage the work life balance or having workplaces which are free from bullying, harassment and discrimination? I doubt that anyone would say they didn't want these things. These things, together with other facets of good people management, can have a huge impact on our ability to deliver services. If we lose a member of staff it can cost over 100% of salary to replace them by the time you've factored in recruitment costs, cost of temporary cover, and so on. For specialist staff the costs can be well in excess of that. The cost is one thing, but also what about the reduced capacity we have to deliver services to patients? On the other side of the coin, being regarded as a good employer is a huge aid to recruitment - people want to work in an arena where they are valued and treated well. This is equally true of the private sector. Healthy workplace initiatives have resulted in: * a 13% reduction in staff turnover at Standard Life Healthcare; * £3.5 million worth of benefit passed on to the customer through increased employee satisfaction at London Underground; * a 57% fall in sickness absence over two years at 3M. So I think the case is pretty convincing all round. But this forum is obviously very interested in public health in its widest sense. Nowhere is off limits anymore. Acute Trusts will need to engage in this agenda, beyond their traditional core business, and mainstream health improvement into all aspects of their business. Leeds Teaching Hospitals have made a promising start, linking Standards for Better Health directly into Performance Management. Just think for a moment about health promotion and development within our workplaces. This is another equally important dimension to model employment practice. Organisations who are 'model employers' are likely to have lower sick absence rates, less stress, and more motivated staff. There's a lot we can do to promote and encourage good physical and mental health amongst our staff and to do things like effective management of sick absence and provision of good occupational health services. If you don't mind me saying, there's a challenge in here somewhere for you - how have you all helped your employers in developing good 'public' health where you work? Have you shared your vast wealth and expertise with your own organisations? Obviously, the NHS has a responsibility to lead by example as a Corporate Citizen. This has to be central to tackling inequalities at a local level. Equally, as a buyer of goods and services, the NHS can improve its environmental impact by greening its supply chain; as a driver for local economic regeneration, opening up procurement to small and medium sized companies will present business opportunities to local suppliers of products and services rather than national or international ones. The success of the Wirral pilot of the North West NHS suppliers bureau means that support will now be given right across the north west to enable the spread of this practice: a clear indication of the potential role of the NHS in regional health and economic strategies. This is most important because of the impact it has on people's lives. People in work have better health outcomes than those out of work. If the NHS can contribute to employment growth, then it must. CONCLUSION Ultimately, we cannot afford for public health to stand on the periphery of health and healthcare delivery. As leaders of the profession, and guardians of the population's health, your rightful place is in the vanguard of change. By improving the quality of commissioning, by working with local government to improve and protect people's health, we have the possibility of a future of increased service efficiency in which we can respond to people's real and changing needs. These reforms will secure for us all a robust, fit-for-purpose public health system and finally enable the NHS to make good its founding principle to become truly a health service and break the cycle of poverty and illness which suppressed so much potential in so many people for far too long. Public health is not an add-on to the Government's programme; it is integral to it. Only if we focus on giving people the ability to lead healthy lives, can we deliver a patient-led NHS. Only by shifting more emphasis towards prevention of ill-health, rather than treating it, can we enable the NHS to meet the health needs of the decades to come. I want to work with you to achieve it."
Top

New UK nutrition guidelines target obesity crisis

By Anthony Fletcher

 

16/11/2005 - New guideline daily amounts (GDAs) on food packaging in the UK will empower consumers with vital nutritional knowledge and help cut rocketing obesity rates. The Food and Drink Federation (FDF) and research organisation IGD are both confident that better information on calories, fat, saturated fat, carbohydrates, protein and sugars, fibre and salt in processed food will help consumers to better balance their diet. They will enable consumers to check and compare the contents of food as well as work out how much a portion contains in relation to the guidance for a daily amount. The first labels will be issued in early 2006. ³We welcome this new research showing what on-pack information consumers find most useful and look forward to seeing the guidance,² said Food and Drink Federation deputy director general Martin Paterson. ³Food and drink manufacturers' live or die by understanding and reacting to their customers needs. This research underlines action already taken by industry to provide useful GDA information to consumers. ³ The FDF Delivering on Our Commitments report revealed that £15bn worth of products will have GDAs on pack by end of 2006.² Equipping consumers with nutritional knowledge is now a key component of the battle to beat rising obesity rates. Figures released in March by the International Obesity Task Force (IOFT) show that the number of overweight European kids is still rising by 400,000 a year. The British Medical Association, representing about three quarters of UK doctors, said that if current trends continue, at least one fifth of boys and one third of girls in Britain will be obese by 2020. Diseases related to obesity are currently costing the NHS over £500 million a year and shortening lives. Food manufacturers and retailers were brought together by food industry research organisation IGD to work with nutritionists, scientists and researchers to establish what kind of helpful information should be put on food labels beyond the legally required details. An agreement was reached some years ago to provide certain types of information on food labels, and this week's announcement extends that agreement to encompass a much wider range of information. "We have been working with the industry for many years to develop helpful information for consumers on food packaging,² said Joanne Denney-Finch, chief executive of IGD. ³The food industry has given its widespread support and commitment to providing this valuable extra information. "GDAs translate the science into consumer-friendly information so we can all keep track of our eating habits, by comparing the contents of food with the GDA. That information will be printed simply and clearly on the back of the pack or tin. ³IGD is in the process of developing a practical guide that will recommend the best way to present this information on pack, balancing consumer requirements with on-pack space and design restraints." The UK's Food Standards Agency (FSA) is also backing the initiative. ³We share the objective of helping consumers to make healthy dietary choices and welcome IGD's work to add further information on the back of packs,² said FSA chair Dame Deirdre Hutton. ³It is fully compatible with the FSA's research into front of pack and we will be announcing the results of our programme very shortly."
Top

Does it work? Grapefruit

By Amy Iggulden (The Telegraph)
(Filed: 15/11/2005)

Amy Iggulden finds out if 'eau de grapefruit' can really give the illusion of youth Women who want to look younger should douse themselves in eau de grapefruit, according to research published in America this week.   Grapefruit's smell may provoke feelings of happiness and sexual arousal in men Dr Alan Hirsch, a psychiatrist at the Smell and Taste Treatment and Research Foundation in Chicago, found that, when asked to sniff pink grapefruit on middle-aged women, more than 50 men judged the women to be six years younger than their actual age. The women, however - no matter what the fragrance - identified the men's ages correctly. How might that work? Dr Hirsch suggests that the smell of pink grapefruit provoked feelings of happiness and - through the release of pheromones (which transmit messages through scent) - sexual arousal in his American male subjects, thereby endearing the women to them. Do experts agree? According to Dr Peter Brennan, a physiologist from Bristol University and an expert on smell and pheromones, it is possible that a chemical compound in pink grapefruit mimics one of the pheromones emitted by humans. "Pheromones emanate from areas such as the underarm, and are thought to generate responses, because of their genetic background," he says. Is grapefruit good for anything else? According to Jane Wilson, a British Dietetic Association nutritionist, grapefruit contains as much vitamin C as an orange (36mg per 100g). The pink varieties also contain lycopene, which is an antioxidant that can protect against coronary heart disease. "One half of grapefruit a day provides one of your five-a-day recommended portions," says Wilson. Claire MacEvilly, nutritionist at the Medical Research Council's Human Nutrition centre in Cambridge, disagrees with US studies showing that the much-touted grapefruit diet - advocates believe the fruit to be an appetite repressant - which has been around since the Seventies, actually works. "There is no miracle ingredient in a grapefruit," says MacEvilly. "These people simply knew they were on a diet, and probably ate more healthily."
Top