Steroids and other “chemicals” are dangerous. LifeWave Energy Enhancer patches are training aids that provides a clear alternative to taking banned and potentially harmful substances such as steroids and even chemical and herbal stimulants.

LifeWave’s non transdermal Energy Enhancer patches are designed to increase a person’s energy, stamina, and performance by sending bio-informational signals into the human body instead of chemicals. LifeWave energy patches work even though nothing enters the body except information signals. Athletes, Soccer Moms, the elderly and many others are looking for that “edge” with an added boost of energy to get them through the day. The uses are endless from playing the final 3 holes of a golf course, getting through an exhausting business trip, studying for exams, driving long distances, working in the garden, and so on.

Consumers are looking for the edge that will make their lives easier and enable them to get more out of their day and life. Consider: Nike sells that special shoe to help an athlete perform. Calloway Golf sells that special oversized driver to help you hit the ball further. Olympic athletes wear special swim suits to help them swim faster. And, LifeWave sells a patch to improve your energy and stamina. All these products offer different strategies for individuals to meet or exceed their personal goals. The consumer demands products that supply “the edge” in their daily life. The LifeWave Energy Enhancer supports this need. However, it is not a banned substance as it is non transdermal.

Is LifeWave like a steroid? Can LifeWave show up in the body?

Absolutely not! LifeWave Energy Enhancer patches are training aids that tell the body, through a naturally occurring process, to increase energy, stamina, and performance. Many athletes who use the LifeWave Energy Enhancer patch have been “drug tested”. This includes College and Olympic athletes where stringent testing and guidelines are followed. Testing includes blood analysis and urine analysis. As might be expected, since no chemicals enter the body, there is nothing to test for. You cannot test for something that is not there.

I am an athlete! What can I expect from LifeWave?

First of all, you will experience an increased level of energy. It will not appear as a “caffeine buzz” or any other form of heightened awareness, but as an overall increase in energy, stamina, and performance. In double blind placebo controlled studies with athletes, we have found a 20% increase, on the low side, with an average increase of approximately 40%. People that have a regular fitness program to measure the “before and after” can clearly see the difference.

What does this mean to me?

The patches will help you train better and longer as your stamina increases. Anecdotally, athletes have reported that they are able to get to “the next level” in their training regime with the help of the patches. This is a clear alternative to dangerous steroids or drugs. “LifeWave Energy Enhancer patches are training aids that tell the body, through a naturally occurring process, to increase energy, stamina, and performance.”

Unconventional medicine in the United States. Prevalence, costs, and patterns of use
Eisenberg DM, Kessler RC, Foster C, Norlock FE, Calkins DR, Delbanco TL.
Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Hospital, Boston, MA 02215.
N Engl J Med. 1993 Jan 28;328(4):246-52

BACKGROUND. Many people use unconventional therapies for health problems, but the extent of this use and the costs are not known. We conducted a national survey to determine the prevalence, costs, and patterns of use of unconventional therapies, such as acupuncture and chiropractic.
METHODS. We limited the therapies studied to 16 commonly used interventions neither taught widely in U.S. medical schools nor generally available in U.S. hospitals. We completed telephone interviews with 1539 adults (response rate, 67 percent) in a national sample of adults 18 years of age or older in 1990. We asked respondents to report any serious or bothersome medical conditions and details of their use of conventional medical services; we then inquired about their use of unconventional therapy.
RESULTS. One in three respondents (34 percent) reported using at least one unconventional therapy in the past year, and a third of these saw providers for unconventional therapy. The latter group had made an average of 19 visits to such providers during the preceding year, with an average charge per visit of $27.60. The frequency of use of unconventional therapy varied somewhat among socio-demographic groups, with the highest use reported by nonblack persons from 25 to 49 years of age who had relatively more education and higher incomes. The majority used unconventional therapy for chronic, as opposed to life-threatening, medical conditions. Among those who used unconventional therapy for serious medical conditions, the vast majority (83 percent) also sought treatment for the same condition from a medical doctor; however, 72 percent of the respondents who used unconventional therapy did not inform their medical doctor that they had done so. Extrapolation to the U.S. population suggests that in 1990 Americans made an estimated 425 million visits to providers of unconventional therapy. This number exceeds the number of visits to all U.S. primary care physicians (388 million). Expenditures associated with use of unconventional therapy in 1990 amounted to approximately $13.7 billion, three quarters of which ($10.3 billion) was paid out of pocket. This figure is comparable to the $12.8 billion spent out of pocket annually for all hospitalizations in the United States.
CONCLUSIONS. The frequency of use of unconventional therapy in the United States is far higher than previously reported. Medical doctors should ask about their patients’ use of unconventional therapy whenever they obtain a medical history.

People ask me what I do for my day job. I work on helping physicians save time, save money, and save lives using medical informatics. I’m currently finishing up a paper on using information technology to build an autopilot for healthcare that will be published as a chapter in a least two books. One of my surgeon co-authors has pushed me into expanding the section on medical error. Simultaneously, old friends are calling me from the hospital and asking me to talk to their physicians about medical error they are experiencing in real time.

Since this site is dedicated to those who wish to live long and prosper, understanding this problem and developing strategies to deal with it are essential to avoid becoming a mortality statistic. Inpatient iatrogenic medical error is the third leading cause of death and all sources of medical error (inpatient, outpatient, nursing home, etc.) is the leading cause of death. I intend to post several notes on medical error this month as I work on getting my paper to the publishers and will recommend some steps to take for those of you who might be going into a hospital.

40% of U.S. Public Believes Quality of Care Has Worsened in Last Five Years
Many Say They or a Family Member Have Experienced Medical Error, Report Indicates
[Nov 18, 2004]

Four in 10 U.S. residents believe that the quality of health care in the United States has worsened in the past five years, despite widespread efforts by the health care industry to reduce medical errors following a 1999 Institute of Medicine report that attributed between 44,000 and 98,000 deaths annually to mistakes made in U.S. hospitals, according to a survey released Thursday by the Kaiser Family Foundation, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Harvard School of Public Health, the Scripps Howard/Detroit News reports (Bowman, Scripps Howard/Detroit News, 11/18).

Findings
For the survey — which has a margin of error of plus or minus two percentage points — researchers surveyed 2,012 randomly selected adults across the United States by phone from July 7 to Sept. 5. Findings are summarized below.

* Forty percent of the public believes that the quality of care in the United States has worsened in the past five years, compared with 38% who believe it has stayed the same and 17% who believe it has improved (May Yee, Minneapolis Star Tribune, 11/17).

* About 55% of the public are dissatisfied with the quality of care, up from 44% four years ago (Bloomberg, 11/17).

* Forty-eight percent of the public are concerned about the safety of medical care that they and their families receive (Minneapolis Star Tribune, 11/18).

* Thirty-four percent of the public say that either they or a family member have experienced a medical error at some point.

* People with chronic conditions were more likely to express concern about their quality of care and to report having experienced a medical error themselves or having a family member who did, according to the survey (Kaiser Family Foundation release, 11/17).

* Twenty-one percent of the public say they experienced a medical error that caused “serious health consequences,” with 8% saying the result was death, 11% saying the result was long-term disability and 16% citing severe pain (Minneapolis Star Tribune, 11/18).

* Of those who experienced a medical error, nearly three in four say the physician has “a lot” of responsibility for the mistake, and 11% say they sued for malpractice. Among those who said the medical error resulted in serious health consequences, 14% sued for malpractice (Heil, CongressDaily, 11/17).

Trends in Alternative Medicine Use in the United States, 1990-1997
Results of a Follow-up National Survey
David M. Eisenberg, MD; Roger B. Davis, ScD; Susan L. Ettner, PhD; Scott Appel, MS; Sonja Wilkey; Maria Van Rompay; Ronald C. Kessler, PhD
JAMA. 1998;280:1569-1575.

Context A prior national survey documented the high prevalence and costs of alternative medicine use in the United States in 1990.
Objective To document trends in alternative medicine use in the United States between 1990 and 1997.
Design Nationally representative random household telephone surveys using comparable key questions were conducted in 1991 and 1997 measuring utilization in 1990 and 1997, respectively.
Participants A total of 1539 adults in 1991 and 2055 in 1997.
Main Outcomes Measures Prevalence, estimated costs, and disclosure of alternative therapies to physicians.
Results Use of at least 1 of 16 alternative therapies during the previous year increased from 33.8% in 1990 to 42.1% in 1997 (P<=.001). The therapies increasing the most included herbal medicine, massage, megavitamins, self-help groups, folk remedies, energy healing, and homeopathy. The probability of users visiting an alternative medicine practitioner increased from 36.3% to 46.3% (P=.002). In both surveys alternative therapies were used most frequently for chronic conditions, including back problems, anxiety, depression, and headaches. There was no significant change in disclosure rates between the 2 survey years; 39.8% of alternative therapies were disclosed to physicians in 1990 vs 38.5% in 1997. The percentage of users paying entirely out-of-pocket for services provided by alternative medicine practitioners did not change significantly between 1990 (64.0%) and 1997 (58.3%) (P=.36). Extrapolations to the US population suggest a 47.3% increase in total visits to alternative medicine practitioners, from 427 million in 1990 to 629 million in 1997, thereby exceeding total visits to all US primary care physicians. An estimated 15 million adults in 1997 took prescription medications concurrently with herbal remedies and/or high-dose vitamins (18.4% of all prescription users). Estimated expenditures for alternative medicine professional services increased 45.2% between 1990 and 1997 and were conservatively estimated at $21.2 billion in 1997, with at least $12.2 billion paid out-of-pocket. This exceeds the 1997 out-of-pocket expenditures for all US hospitalizations. Total 1997 out-of-pocket expenditures relating to alternative therapies were conservatively estimated at $27.0 billion, which is comparable with the projected 1997 out-of-pocket expenditures for all US physician services.
Conclusions Alternative medicine use and expenditures increased substantially between 1990 and 1997, attributable primarily to an increase in the proportion of the population seeking alternative therapies, rather than increased visits per patient.

One of the core issues in managing the human internal ecosystem with electromagnetic frequencies is tipping the balance in favor of more harmless organisms, i.e. find the bad guys and shoot them without harming the good citizens.

Professor Ewald articulates this as a public health strategy in the PBS series on Evolution:

Q: How does understanding the evolution of virulence help us to manage infectious disease?

A: For most of the last two centuries people have been using interventions to knock down infectious diseases as much as possible. The idea is that we’re going to use weapons like vaccines and antibiotics or hygienic interventions to reduce the frequency of infection as much as possible.

My point is that there’s another way of controlling these disease organisms. Instead of using these weapons — antibiotics and vaccines and hygiene improvements — as a way of knocking down the organism, we can use those interventions to control the evolution of the organisms instead of getting the organisms evolving around our interventions. We can get the organisms to evolve to be less harmful than they have been in the past. Essentially, what I’m saying is we can use interventions like vaccines or like hygienic improvements to domesticate these organisms.

That argument may seem a little bit surprising, but we’ve already domesticated organisms in many ways. One of the most obvious ways is when we make live vaccines in the laboratory. We’re actually taking harmful organisms [and] changing the course of their evolution, making them evolve to be mild enough that we can then introduce them into people as a vaccine.

Professor Ewald comments on trying to avoid nosocomial infections in an Omni interview:

Omni: Can we avoid being infected at the hospital?

Ewald: Unfortunately, we’re at the mercy of the hospital. When my daughter was born, in a good hospital in Washington State, my wife and I were appalled that a nurse stuck her finger in the baby’s mouth to quiet her. We tried to explain why we didn’t think it was a good idea, and she was offended. When we talked to the pediatrician, he got indignant and said, “I do it all the time myself.”

Many of the questions about electronic medicine can only be answered adequately by understanding that our body is like a rain forest with more foreign organisms than our own cells. The life and behavior of these visitors determines our health, longevity, mental stability, and affects everything about us and our lives. Ewald’s book is the best introduction to evolutionary biology I have seen and there are clues interpersed throughout the book that will help those doing research on electromagnetic devices and healing. Highly recommended!

According to conventional wisdom, our genes and lifestyles are the most important causes of the most deadly ailments of our time. Conventional wisdom may be wrong. In this controversial book, the eminent biologist Paul W. Ewald offers some startling arguments:

• Germs appear to be at the root of heart disease, Alzheimer’s, schizophrenia, many forms of cancer, and other chronic diseases.
• The greatest threats to our health come not from sensational killers such as Ebola, West Nile virus, and super-virulent strains of influenza, but from agents that are already here causing long-term infections, which eventually lead to debilitation and death.
• The medical establishment has largely ignored the evidence that implicates these germs, to the detriment of public health.
• New evolutionary theories are available, which explain how germs function and offer opportunities for controlling these modern plagues-if we are willing to listen to them.

Arthritis after Vioxx®
The Media’s Focus on Prescription Pain Killers Ignores
Natural Remedies for Preventing and Treating Arthritis
By Richard P. Huemer, MD – LE Magazine February 2005

Last fall, doctors and patients were stunned by Merck’s voluntary worldwide withdrawal of its arthritis drug Vioxx® (rofecoxib) from the market, the largest prescription drug withdrawal in history. Vioxx® and other COX-2 (cyclooxygenase-2) inhibitors had been promoted as “wonder drugs” because of their ability to relieve arthritis pain without causing the stomach problems associated with other pain medications.

This startling decision to abandon Vioxx® followed the report of a significant increase in heart attacks and strokes among long-term users of the drug. An estimated 80 million people had taken Vioxx® by the time it was withdrawn, and annual sales of the drug exceeded $2.5 billion. The news media speculated on which drugs might fill the gap left by Vioxx®, while devoting curiously little attention to natural arthritis remedies.

Although Merck’s announcement came as a surprise to many, doubts about the drug had surfaced years earlier. In early 2001—less two years after the FDA approved Vioxx®—the FDA’s Advisory Committee on Arthritis met to discuss potential cardiovascular risks associated with Vioxx®.

Critics Blast FDA, Merck

Commenting on the 2001 FDA Advisory Committee meeting, Eric J. Topol, MD, wrote a stinging editorial in the October 21, 2004, issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, titled “Failing the Public Health—Rofecoxib, Merck, and the FDA.” Dr. Topol charged that the FDA never exercised its initiative to mandate a trial of rofecoxib (Vioxx®) and a similar drug, celecoxib (Celebrex®), in relation to their cardiovascular risks or benefits, despite evidence suggesting a correlation. Nor did Merck embrace the idea of conducting a trial to assess cardiovascular risk or benefit associated with Vioxx®. Instead, Merck sponsored educational symposia and commissioned medical articles to debunk the cardiovascular concerns associated with Vioxx®, while spending more than $100 million a year to promote the drug with direct-to-consumer advertising.

In November 2004, Dr. David Graham, associate director for science at the FDA’s Office of Drug Safety and a 20-year FDA scientist, testified before Congress about the FDA’s failure to protect the public health, calling the agency’s oversight of the drug “a profound regulatory failure.” Although concerns about the safety of Vioxx® had been building for several years, the FDA maintained that the drug’s benefits of providing pain relief with minimal gastrointestinal side effects warranted keeping it on the market, albeit with a warning about heart risks. Vioxx® was finally taken off the market on September 30, 2004, following the release of a study showing that the drug doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke in long-term users.

By this time, millions of Americans had used the drug, and Dr. Graham estimated that Vioxx® had caused 88,000-139,000 excess cases of heart attack and stroke. “I would argue the FDA as currently configured is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx®. We are virtually defenseless,” said Dr. Graham. During his testimony, Dr. Graham noted that he felt pressured by supervisors to water down his findings from a study of patient insurance records indicating that Vioxx® increased heart attack risk. US Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican, said he worried that the FDA was “far too cozy” with drug companies, noting that an independent drug safety office might be needed.

The second major flu of the season is going around and I now see cases in California, Chicago, Florida, Boston, Minnesota, and Washington, D.C. with the same frequencies. It is not as complex as the Florida flu but can be more serious as it contains a corona virus like SARS, although not as virulent. The flu package contains the usual parasite, typical virus, corona virus, candida, random organisms, and a flu signature frequency.

I call this the Chicago Flu since that is where I first saw it. There may be some variability in the parasite and virus strains. However, the F100 program below is working on about a dozen people.

repeat 7
dwell 720
duty 50
program b
vbackfreq a 8103.083928 0 50
converge .1 .001
vbackfreq a 403.42879 0 50
converge 1.9 .01
#2663667 flu signature frequency
6602.570374 #scalar octave
vbackfreq a 20.08554 0 50
converge 6 .01
33464 #corona virus
converge 18 .01
#386667 candida
19251.02 #scalar octave
converge 2.1 .01
converge 2.1 .01
#566675 666666 667666 445444 666346 567787 other organisms
28213.09 33191.35 33241.13 22177.35 33175.41 28268.45 #scalar octaves
#455655 365666 254536 164665 parasite
22685.73 18205.44 12672.60123 8198.187613 #scalar octaves
#367654 246556 166546 65656 #virus
18304.41 12275.30 8291.837088 3268.819761 #scalar octaves
end repeat

How old cells can regain youth
Researchers find a youthful environment invigorates regeneration in old tissue
By Laura M Hrastar, New Scientist, February 17, 2005

Old cells may regain a youthful phenotype when exposed to a young cell environment, say researchers in Nature this week. The results, say the authors, indicate that aged satellite cells have an intrinsic ability to regenerate.

“We know old tissue repairs poorly, but it’s not because there aren’t stem cells ready to do the repair,” coauthor Thomas Rando told The Scientist. “The problem is, with age, the environment the stem cells hit changes, [and] it makes them less responsive.”

To study how systemic factors affect satellite cell regeneration, researchers from Stanford University and VA Palo Alto Health Care System in California created fusions of the circulatory systems of old mice and young mic-a technique known as parabiosis. The young mice were transgenic, expressing either green florescent protein or a distinct CD45 allele.

Five days after injuring the mice’s hindlimbs, researchers found nucleated embryonic myosin heavy chain, a specific marker seen in regenerating myotube-nascent myofibers-in the old parabiotic animals. Because these cells did not contain transgenic markers, researchers determined that activation of resident progenitor cells-not engraftment of younger cells onto old tissue-was the cause of new growth.

Satellite cells in old parabiotic mice also showed similar upregulation as young mice controls of Notch ligand Delta, the binding protein necessary to activate the Notch signaling pathway for cell regeneration. The young parabiotic mice showed inhibition of Delta when compared with young mouse controls.

The new findings support the groups’ previous work that showed the diminished expression of Delta related to age decreases Notch signaling, which reduces stem cell proliferation and impairs cell regeneration.

In the current study, researchers also found that culturing old satellite cells in young mouse serum restored upregulation of Notch ligand and Notch activation, whereas adding old mouse serum to young satellite cells inhibited the effect.

The antioxidant/anticancer potential of phenolic compounds isolated from olive oil
Owen RW, Giacosa A, Hull WE, Haubner R, Spiegelhalder B, Bartsch H.
Eur J Cancer. 2000 Jun;36(10):1235-47

In our ongoing studies on the chemoprevention of cancer we have a particular interest in the health benefits of the Mediterranean diet, of which olive oil is a major component. Recent studies have shown that extravirgin olive oil contains an abundance of phenolic antioxidants including simple phenols (hydroxytyrosol, tyrosol), aldehydic secoiridoids, flavonoids and lignans (acetoxypinoresinol, pinoresinol). All of these phenolic substances are potent inhibitors of reactive oxygen species attack on, e.g. salicylic acid, 2-deoxyguanosine. Currently there is growing evidence that reactive oxygen species are involved in the aetiology of fat-related neoplasms such as cancer of the breast and colorectum.