Is it only me, or does NASA seem preoccupied with toilet topics? First, there’s the $19 million toilet seat fiasco (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19623499/) followed by the toilet seatbelt humor (every action has an equal and opposite reaction), and now we get to hear that astronauts are drinking their own pee.

Is that really new? I know some experimental health people who drink their own pee all the time. They say it boosts their immune system function. Maybe they should work at NASA, huh? Skip the $154 million worth of recycling equipment; just be your OWN urine recycler!

But drinking your own pee in zero gravity might not be as easy as it sounds. That golden shower, folks, is not a meteor shower… Aaargh!

In the spirit of afterburner NASA toilet humor, I’ve released this CounterThink cartoon that wonders what happens to all the SOLID waste on board the Space Shuttle. Do they keep it on board and bring it back to Earth? If not, do they jettison it into space, encircling planet Earth with a high-orbit ring of astronaut potty? Do they eventually become rings around Uranus?

And what happens when all this solid waste falls back to Earth?

These are serious questions, folks. In no way am I attempting to exploit an uncomfortable situation aboard the space shuttle to create cheap bathroom humor.

A team of researchers from Duke University, Miami University and the Udall Parkinson’s Disease Research Center of Excellence has found that people who were exposed to pesticides were substantially more likely to develop Parkinson’s disease than closely related people who did not use so many pesticides, according to a study published in the journal BMC Neurology.

Parkinson’s disease is a degenerative neurological condition resulting from the damage or death of the brain cells that regulate muscular movement. When cells become unable to produce the neurotransmitter dopamine, a wide variety of problems, such as slurred speech, stiffness, tremors, and problems with balance and movement, occur. Approximately one million people in the United States - one in 300 - suffer from the disease. In the United Kingdom, approximately one in 500 people, or 120,000 people, are affected.

The researchers surveyed 319 people with Parkinson’s disease on their pesticide use, and compared that use to more than 200 healthy family members and other unaffected people. The purpose of comparing relatives was to control as much as possible for genetic and non-pesticide environmental factors by looking only at people with similar backgrounds.

“Previous studies have shown that individuals with Parkinson’s disease are over twice as likely to report being exposed to pesticides as unaffected individuals,” lead researcher Dana Hancock said, “but few studies have looked at this association in people from the same family or have assessed associations between specific classes of pesticides and Parkinson’s disease.”

People who had been exposed to pesticides had 1.6 times the Parkinson’s risk of people who had not been exposed, while those exposed for more than 200 days in a year had more than two times the risk. The pesticides with the strongest connection to Parkinson’s disease were insecticides and herbicides. Home and garden exposure were more strongly linked to increased risk than occupational use.

Broken down by sex, men who frequently used pesticides were 2.15 times more likely to develop the disease than men who did not use the chemicals, while women were 2.43 times more likely.

The researchers also compared rates of well-water drinking and living or working on a farm between people with and without the disease. They did not find a correlation between Parkinson’s disease and any of these behaviors, which are commonly used as surrogate measures of pesticide exposure. Instead, the effect turned up only when they looked directly at chemical exposure.

Scientists have known for some time that the risk of Parkinson’s disease is influenced by genetics, but the gene defects that have been linked to the disease account for only a small fraction of cases. Environmental factors have also been implicated, particularly in light of the fact that the disease was mostly unknown prior to the industrial revolution but has become a common ailment since then.

Prior studies have found links between pesticide exposure and Parkinson’s risk, but they have not been thought conclusive. Kieran Breen, director of research at the Parkinson’s Disease Society, cites a study of 10,000 Parkinson’s patients that found only 1,000 had been exposed to pesticides over the long-term. The current study, Breen said, “strengthened the fact that pesticides play a key role” in risk of the disease.

“I think there is very strong evidence now linking [pesticide exposure and Parkinson’s risk,]” Hancock said. The next step, Hancock said, is to discover the biological mechanisms by which pesticides increase the risk of the disease.

The findings of another study on the links between Parkinson’s and pesticides, commissioned by the British Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, are expected this summer.

“These days, a number of health sites display logos from the World Wide Web Health Awards as if they constitute a quality seal. In fact, on the WWW Health Awards home page, they market themselves as “providing a ’seal of quality’ for electronic health information,’” writes WebWatch director Beau Brendler. “We wanted to know more about these awards, since they give out dozens [of awards] twice a year.”

Consumer Reports began with information on the awards’ Web site, which listed a related page, HealthPrograms.com. This site consisted mostly of broken links or blank pages “under construction.” It did contain, however, logos for the “Consumer Health Publishers Association” and the “Online Health Association.”

The Web sites of these two associations, like that of HealthPrograms.com, were also mostly under construction, but Consumer Reports was able to trace them to the company American Custom Publishing Corporation. A phone call to the company confirmed that American Custom Publishing does, in fact, administer the World Wide Health Awards.

“What does American Custom Publishing do for a living?” Brendler writes. “Well, they print brochures for the pharmaceutical industry and others. Their client list includes Liberty Medical, Pfizer, CVS, General Electric, Humana, ‘and hundreds more!’”

According to Brendler, it costs only $52 to be considered for an award, and nearly anyone can sign up to be a volunteer judge. But the health awards’ Web site does not reveal what process or standards are used to decide upon winners.

“How valuable are awards handed out by a company that prints brochures for the pharmaceutical industry?” Brendler says. “Are consumers fooled by awards logos into thinking that … a Web site produced by Takeda Pharmaceuticals to sell its Rozerem sleep drug (a gold medal) … in the, yes, patient education information category, is an unbiased source of information?”

“Why give an award to a drug company as a recognition of excellence in patient education?” Brendler added. “Isn’t that like giving some sort of public service award to Sepracor for its pretty-blue-butterfly Lunesta commercials on TV?”

A study was performed in 1991 involving 36 patients who had head and neck cancer and were undergoing surgery to treat it. An article about the study appeared in the International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. The study was conducted to see whether hypnosis played a role in recovery after surgery for patients suffering from 2 particular types of cancers.

The study consisted of 36 participants who were diagnosed with head and neck cancer and were undergoing surgery. Twenty-one patients served as the control group and received no hypnosis. Fifteen patients received hypnotherapy. The researchers wanted to compare length of hospital stay, surgical complications, and blood loss between the hypnosis group and the control group.

Results from this study were significant between the two groups. Researchers found that those who received hypnotherapy had a much shorter hospital stay than the control group who received standard care.

Researchers also found some differences among the group that received hypnosis. Those who were more highly hypnotizable experienced fewer complications after the surgery. Also, the researchers found that those who were more hypnotizable also had less blood loss during the surgery.

The study concluded that hypnosis can help prevent postoperative complications. A reduction in complications after surgery also reduces the length of hospital stay after the operation. Fewer complications also suggest a quicker recovery time. A shorter hospital stay means lower medical bills.

Patients going through cancer treatment already experience a high level of stress and anxiety with rehabilitation. Hypnotherapy ensures that the healing time and treatment period is shorter and more easily dealt with. The procedure may not only show physical improvements, but emotional ones as well. By taking such a small step, doctors can now further help improve the lives of their patients. Financial, physical, and emotional strains may be lifted with the help of hypnotherapy.

Source:

Rapkin, D.A., Straubing, M. and Holroyd, J.C. (1991). Guided Imagery, Hypnosis and Recovery from Head and Neck Cancer Surgery: An Exploratory Study. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 39(4). 215-226.

About the author
Steve G. Jones, M.Ed. has been practicing hypnotherapy since the 1980s. He is the author of 22 books on Hypnotherapy. Steve is a member of the National Guild of Hypnotists, American Board of Hypnotherapy, president of the American Alliance of Hypnotists, on the board of directors of the Los Angeles chapter of the American Lung Association, and director of the Steve G. Jones School of Clinical Hypnotherapy.
Steve G. Jones, M.Ed. is a board certified Clinical Hypnotherapist. He has a bachelor’s degree in psychology from the University of Florida (1994), a master’s degree in education from Armstrong Atlantic State University (2007), and is currently working on a doctorate in education, Ed.D., at Georgia Southern University. Learn more at:
http://www.betterlivingwithhypnosis.com/