The skin gun is not science fiction—it’s a prototype medical device that literally sprays skin cells onto burn victims to re-grow skin. Old methods like skin grafts took weeks to heal; the skin gun needs about an hour.
We’ve heard about the spray-on skin gun back in 2008 but we didn’t think it’d become this real, this useful, this fast. Though it is still technically in an experimental stage, the skin gun has already successfully treated over a dozen burn victims. The way it works is by using stem cells from the patient’s healthy skin and mixing it with a solution to come up with the spray paint. And combined with that fancy gun, the rest is easy. Doctors say “skin cell spraying is like paint spraying”.
The video has some graphic burn images, so don’t watch unless you have the stomach for it. This clip will also air on National Geographic’s Explorer: How to Build a Beating Heart. Stem cells have long been a point of controversy but this is really wonderful science at work.
Share this article
Metazene – Niacinamide Gel
Acne vulgaris — or common acne — isn’t just a cosmetic issue: it’s a serious medical problem often leading to permanent skin damage and scarring, and emotional distress with a lifelong psychological impact. Contrary to popular belief attributing it to hygiene, stress, or diet, acne is actually caused by a bacterium, Propionibacterium acnes, feeding on skin oils. When the body dispatches immune cells to deal with the infection the result is irritation, swelling, and, sometimes, nodules or cysts. While acne primarily affects teenagers — and virtually all of them report having acne at some point — it plagues many adults well into their thirties or even forties!
Whether it be short- or long-term, acne can lead to substantial, permanent skin damage with few viable treatment options beyond cosmetic surgery — including dermabrasion, collagen injections, and grafts. As many as forty percent of acne sufferers seek medical treatment at least once. Traditional treatments include benzoyl peroxide creams, oral antibiotics (clindamycin, erythromycin, and tetracycline), and isotretinoin or retinoic-acid products (Accutane™, Roaccutane ™, and Retin-A™).
Benzoyl peroxide is hard on the skin and can cause irritation. Oral antibiotics are troublesome because of bacterial resistance, digestive upset, discolored teeth or skin, sun sensitivity, and interference with other medications. Isotretinoin compounds cause severe health problems, ranging from skin disorders, sun sensitivity, and nausea to vision irregularities, serious birth defects, depression, and even suicide. Side effects and poor results cause many acne sufferers to abandon traditional approaches. There is, however, a safe and effective alternative treatment: Lifelink’s Metazene, a Vitamin B-3 derivative.
Vitamin B-3, or niacinamide, is a potent topical anti-inflammatory. In clinical trials for acne, niacinamide gels proved superior to antibiotics without their side effects, which is why they are used worldwide. When a niacinamide gel is prescribed by a physician in the United States, however, federal law requires that it be made only by a specialized compounding pharmacy, often at considerable expense. Lifelink’s Metazene is the only niacinamide gel available in the United States that is made to pharmaceutical standards and sold over the counter without a prescription. Because Metazene is not compounded one tube at a time, it costs a fraction of what physicians and pharmacies charge.
Some people report amazing results using only Metazene. Others find it dramatically improves the results of traditional acne treatments, often with the added benefit of reducing the dosages for prescription drugs. We cannot, of course, guarantee that Metazene will work for you. What we can guarantee is that unless you try it, you will never know.
Share this article
After 13 years of silence, the quasi governmental agency, the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) Food and Nutrition Board (FNB), yesterday recommended that a three – pound premature infant can take virtually the same amount of vitamin D as a 300 pound pregnant woman. While that 400 IU/day dose is close to adequate for infants, 600 IU/day in pregnant women will do nothing to help the three childhood epidemics most closely associated with gestational and early childhood vitamin D deficiencies: asthma, auto-immune disorders, and, as recently reported in the largest pediatric journal in the world, autism (1). Professor Bruce Hollis of the Medical University of South Carolina has shown pregnant and lactating women need at least 5,000 IU/day, not 600.
The FNB also reported that vitamin D toxicity might occur at an intake of 10,000 IU/day (250 micrograms), although they could produce no reproducible evidence that 10,000 IU/day has ever caused toxicity in humans and only one poorly conducted study indicating 20,000 IU/day may cause mild elevations in serum calcium but not clinical toxicity.
Viewed with different measure, this FNB report recommends that an infant should take 10 micrograms/day (400 IU) and the pregnant women 15 micrograms/day (600 IU). As a single 30 minutes dose of summer sunshine gives adults more than 10,000 IU (250 micrograms), the FNB is apparently also warning that natural vitamin D input “as occurred from the sun before the widespread use of sunscreen” is dangerous. That is, the FNB is implying that God does not know what she is doing.
Disturbingly, this FNB committee focused on bone health, just like they did 14 years ago. They ignored the thousands of studies from the last ten years that showed higher doses of vitamin D helps: heart health, brain health, breast health, prostate health, pancreatic health, muscle health, nerve health, eye health, immune health, colon health, liver health, mood health, skin health, and especially fetal health. Tens of millions of pregnant women and their breast-feeding infants are severely vitamin D deficient, resulting in a great increase in the medieval disease, rickets. The FNB report seems to reason that if so many pregnant women have low vitamin D blood levels then it must be OK because such low levels are so common. However, such circular logic simply represents the cave man existence of most modern day pregnant women.
Hence, if you want to optimize your vitamin D levels ‘not just optimize the bone effect’ supplementing is crucial. But it is almost impossible to significantly raise your vitamin D levels when supplementing at only 600 IU/day (15 micrograms). Pregnant women taking 400 IU/day have the same blood levels as pregnant women not taking vitamin D; that is, 400 IU is a meaninglessly small dose for pregnant women. Even taking 2,000 IU/day of vitamin D will only increase the vitamin D levels of most pregnant women by about 10 points, depending mainly on their weight. Professor Bruce Hollis has shown that 2,000 IU/day does not raise vitamin D to healthy or natural levels in either pregnant or lactating women. Therefore supplementing with higher amounts — like 5000 IU/day — is crucial for those women who want their fetus to enjoy optimal vitamin D levels, and the future health benefits that go along with it.
For example, taking only two of the hundreds of recently published studies, Professor Urashima and colleagues in Japan gave 1,200 IU/day of vitamin D3 for six months to Japanese 10 year-olds in a randomized controlled trial. They found vitamin D dramatically reduced the incidence of influenza A as well as the episodes of asthma attacks in the treated kids while the placebo group was not so fortunate. If Dr. Urashima had followed the newest FNB recommendations, it is unlikely that 400 IU/day treatment arm would have done much of anything and some of the treated young teenagers may have come to serious harm without the vitamin D. Likewise, a randomized controlled prevention trial of adults by Professor Joan Lappe and colleagues at Creighton University, which showed dramatic improvements in the health of internal organs, used more than twice the FNB’s new adult recommendations.
Finally, the FNB committee consulted with 14 vitamin D experts and ‘after reading these 14 different reports’ the FNB decided to suppress their reports. Many of these 14 consultants are either famous vitamin D researchers, like Professor Robert Heaney at Creighton, or in the case of Professor Walter Willett at Harvard, the single best-known nutritionist in the world. So, the FNB will not tell us what Professors Heaney and Willett thought of their new report? Why not? Yesterday, the Vitamin D Council directed our attorney to file a federal Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the IOM’s FNB for the release of these 14 reports.
I, my family, most of my friends, hundreds of patients, and thousands of readers of the Vitamin D Council newsletter, have been taking 5,000 IU/day for up to eight years. Not only have they reported no significant side-effects, indeed, they have reported greatly improved health in multiple organ systems. My advice: especially for pregnant women, continue taking 5,000 IU/day until your (OH)D] is between 50 ng/ml and 80 ng/ml (the vitamin D blood levels obtained by humans who live and work in the sun and the mid-point of the current reference ranges at all American laboratories). Gestational vitamin D deficiency is not only associated with rickets, but a significantly increased risk of neonatal pneumonia (2), a doubled risk for preeclampsia (3), a tripled risk for gestational diabetes (4), and a quadrupled risk for primary cesarean section (5).
Yesterday, the FNB failed millions of pregnant women whose as yet unborn babies will pay the price. Let us hope the FNB will comply with the spirit of “transparency” by quickly responding to our freedom of Information requests.
John Cannell, MD
1241 Johnson Avenue, #134
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(2)Karatekin G, Kaya A, Salihoglu O, Balci H, Nuhoglu A. Association of subclinical vitamin D deficiency in newborns with acute lower respiratory infection and their mothers. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009;63(4):473-7.
Share this article
Early Death by Junk Food? High Levels of Phosphate in Sodas and Processed Foods Accelerate the Aging Process in Mice
Here’s another reason to kick the soda habit. New research published online in the FASEB (Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology) Journal shows that high levels of phosphates may add more “pop” to sodas and processed foods than once thought. That’s because researchers have found that the high levels of phosphates accelerate signs of aging. High phosphate levels may also increase the prevalence and severity of age-related complications, such as chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular calcification, and can also induce severe muscle and skin atrophy.
“Humans need a healthy diet and keeping the balance of phosphate in the diet may be important for a healthy life and longevity,” said M. Shawkat Razzaque, M.D., Ph.D., from the Department of Medicine, Infection and Immunity at the Harvard School of Dental Medicine. “Avoid phosphate toxicity and enjoy a healthy life.”
To make this discovery, Razzaque and colleague examined the effects of high phosphate levels in three groups of mice. The first group of mice was missing a gene (klotho), which when absent, causes mice to have toxic levels of phosphate in their bodies. These mice lived 8 to 15 weeks. The second group of mice was missing the klotho gene and a second gene (NaPi2a), which when absent at the same time, substantially lowered the amount of phosphate in their bodies. These mice lived to 20 weeks. The third group of mice was like the second group (missing both the klotho and NaPi2a genes), except they were fed a high-phosphate diet. All of these mice died by 15 weeks, like those in the first group. This suggests that phosphate has toxic effects in mice, and may have a similar effect in other mammals, including humans.
“Soda is the caffeine delivery vehicle of choice for millions of people worldwide, but comes with phosphorous as a passenger” said Gerald Weissmann, M.D., Editor-in-Chief of the FASEB Journal. “This research suggests that our phosphorous balance influences the aging process, so don’t tip it.”
ScienceDaily (Apr. 28, 2010)
Dr. Zarkov’s note: The ‘klotho’ gene plays a central role both in the body’s calcium regulation and in aging. When this gene has low activity or is defective, the aging process is accelerated; when the gene is highly active, the aging process is slowed. Many people have less-than-optimal klotho gene activity, and high vitamin D levels can exacerbate this condition. Judging from mouse experiments, this problem is especially acute in females. But Japanese researchers reported in 2001 that supplementation with zinc orotate provides a ‘rescue’ from the consequences of low klotho activity, even in females.
Share this article
Zinc tablets may be a new treatment for rosacea, the chronic skin condition which leads to facial flushing. Pilot studies have shown benefits within just four weeks. Now a larger trial is under way.
Around 5 per cent of Britons suffer from rosacea. The exact cause is unknown, but one theory is that it is caused by H. pylori bacteria, found in the digestive system.
The bacteria may stimulate the production of a protein, which causes blood vessels to expand, leading to the characteristic reddening.
Another suggestion is that it’s caused by a tiny mite that lives on the skin – higher numbers have been found on sufferers.
In the new American trial, 80 people will take 200mg zinc sulphate for 90 days. Zinc has been found to be an effective treatment for several skin conditions, including acne and warts, possibly because it works against bacteria.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1268990/Health-news-Zinc-pills-help-relieve-rosacea-hearing-aid-small-jelly-bean-tequila-plant-holds-secret-good-bones.html?ITO=1490