Symptoms and Causes of Liver Infection

 Common Liver Ailments

Your liver is a large organ, which performs several important functions in your body. It produces the substances that are required for digestion of fats and carbs from the food you eat. Your liver also helps to clear away the toxic substances present in your digestive tract. Unfortunately, there are several different types of agents that could cause your liver to get infected. Some of the most common liver infections to affect men and women of all ages include Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, Hepatoma (hepatocellular carcinoma) and Plasmodium. Most instances of liver infection or disease are quite serious and should be checked by a doctor without any delay. The early treatment of liver infections can speed up the recovery process to a great extent.
A liver infection generally occurs when harmful microorganisms, like bacteria, viruses or fungi attack the cells and tissues in the liver. There are several factors that could weaken your liver and cause it to get infected. Some of the possible causes of liver infection include:
Being in close contact with a person who is already suffering from a liver infectionExcessive consumption of alcoholHaving food or water that is contaminatedSexual contact with a person who is already infectedSharing needles with an infected personUse of certain medication
It is also possible for a newborn baby to contract a liver infection if the mother is suffering from this problem during childbirth.
There are several different signs and symptoms, which can alert you to the fact that your liver may be infected. Given below are some of the common symptoms of liver infection in men and women:
Jaundice: One of the first and most obvious physical signs of a liver infection is yellowing of the skin and the whites of the eyes. Under normal circumstances, your liver processes a molecule known as bilirubin. However, when infected your liver does not function properly and the levels of this molecule in the body go very high. Bilirubin can also cause your urine to become very dark in color. Never leave this symptom unchecked; in fact, it is best to seek emergency attention in case you realize that you are suffering from jaundice.Abdominal Swelling and Pain: Most types of diseases and infections in the liver cause the organ to become a bit larger than usual. Therefore, you may notice a swelling and tenderness in your abdomen. At times, a liver infection may also lead to distention in the upper right corner of your abdomen.Changes in Stool Color: Your liver is responsible for aiding digestion by producing bile. If the production of bile is affected because of a liver infection, your stools may appear abnormally pale in color. In some cases, the stool may also become very dark, perhaps even black in color, if blood is present in it. If there is a lot of blood mixed in the stool, it may turn red in color too. Changes in your bowel movements may also occur as a result of a liver infection.Weight Loss: Rapid and drastic weight loss or reduction in appetite without any apparent reason is generally a cause for concern. Your doctor may advise you to go in for a test to check for liver a infection in case you lose a lot of weight without actively trying.
Liver infections may cause you to suffer from fever, nausea, vomiting, fatigue and general ill feeling too. In case you notice any of the symptoms mentioned above, consult your doctor without any delay.
The treatment for liver infection usually includes medication. Your doctor will prescribe the drug and its dosage depending upon the type of infection you are suffering from. In addition to the medicines prescribed by the doctor, you could also try a few effective home remedies like:
Mix half a teaspoon of lemon juice in two teaspoons of papaya juice. Blend the two ingredients well before having the mixture. Continue this exercise for at least 3 to 4 weeks. Take equal parts of spinach and carrot juice and drink this mixture once every day, for about 3 to 4 weeks Boil a small piece of dandelion root in a glass of water, for around 10 minutes or so. Allow the tea to cool for a couple of minutes before drinking it. Add a spoon of honey, a dash of lemon juice and a pinch of cayenne to an eight-ounce glass of water and drink the solution on an empty stomach, first thing in the morning.
While these remedies are quite safe if used correctly, it is important to check with a doctor before trying any of them. In addition to home remedies, you are also required to follow a few important self-care measures like:
Maintaining a healthy diet which mainly comprises of fresh fruits, vegetables and whole grains. Drinking a lot of healthy fluids, like fresh water, green tea, coconut water and homemade fruit or vegetable juice Eliminating alcohol, caffeine, red meat, sweets, refined bakery items and fatty food from your diet Reducing your physical activity, so that you can get an adequate amount of rest to help your body recuperate and fight off the infection Eating 5 to 6 small meals, throughout the day, instead of three large ones.

View the Original article

 Ray Charles- "What'd I Say"

Cancer can be cured.

    "The War In Medicine"

   Continued from previous post.

   The FDA Versus Freedom of Speech

The problem is not so much IQ (though certainly that is an issue),
the problem is corruption. Congress has sold America's soul and kept
the proceeds. The majority of members of Congress have gladly and
quickly sold their integrity (i.e. sold their souls) to the highest
bidder.

President Abraham Lincoln said it best:

    "We may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war [civil war]
is nearing its end. It has cost a vast amount of treasure and
blood ... It has indeed been a trying hour for the Republic; but I
see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and
causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of
war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in
high places will follow, and the money power of the country will
endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the
people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the
Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the
safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war.
God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless."
    President Abraham Lincoln

    The passage appears in a letter from Lincoln to Col. William F.
Elkins, Nov. 21, 1864, Hertz II, 954, in Archer H. Shaw, The Lincoln
Encyclopedia (New York: Macmillan, 1950), p. 40

The Politician Auction

Everyone knows what an auction is. Let us suppose a valuable antique
clock is put up for auction. Person A bids $100,000 for the clock.
Person B bids $200,000 for the clock. Person C bids $300,000 for the
clock. Person D bids $1,000,000 for the clock and ends up getting the
clock.

The owner of the clock gets $1,000,000.

The bidding for political favors is somewhat different. I call it a
"Politician Auction." It goes something like this. Person A gives
$100,000 to Politician Joe for political favors. Person B gives
$200,000 to Politician Joe for conflicting political favors. Person
C gives $300,000 to Politician Joe for another conflicting political

favor. Person D gives $1,000,000 to Politician Joe for yet another
conflicting favor. (Note: These payments do not have to be sequential,
politicians usually do not tell you how much the other fellow is giving
them.) The politician tries to keep all of them happy.

But note that Politician Joe has collected $1,600,000, not $1,000,000. In
a "Politician Auction" you have to give the politician the money when
you make the offer. Plus Politician Joe got a whole lot of other favors
thrown in that I won't talk about.

Is it any wonder there are so many, many "double standards" in
government? If is never about what is best for the common person on
the street, it is what is best for the people who buy the Congressmen.

Nowhere is this more evident that in medicine.

For Further Reading

Freedom of Informed Choice: FDA vs. Nutrient Supplements
Common Sense Press (800) 542-3230

"The Doctrine of Commercial Speech in First Amendment Jurisprudence"
Cato Institute Policy Analysis (Sept. 23, 1991)

"The FDA Knows Best... Or Does It? First Amendment Protection of Health

Claims on Dietary Supplements: Pearson v. Shalala"
BYU Journal of Public Law, Volume 15

Copyright (c) 2003, 2012 R. Webster Kehr, all rights reserved

Elvis Presley - Fever

   Acne Removal Reviews
 

    "The War In Medicine"

   Continued from previous post.

   The FDA Versus Freedom of Speech

In any case, Congress has, at the same time, consistently
forbidden Americans from having the choice of letting their
medical doctor work with them using alternative treatments.
As if that weren't bad enough, the restriction is still in
force even after orthodox treatments have totally failed
and the patient has been sent home to die!

To say this another way, Congress has consistently forbidden
Americans to be treated for cancer by herbalists, nutritionists,
etc., even after being sent home to die by orthodox medicine.

Thus we come to the following conclusion:

1) Congress allows you to choose which tobacco product you
will use to slowly and painfully kill yourself, 2) If you get
cancer, Congress forces you to take chemotherapy, which slowly
and painfully kills you, 3) If you get cancer, Congress does not
allow you to have your medical doctor treat you with alternative
medicine, which is painless, builds your immune system and
selectively kills cancer cells, 4) If you get cancer, Congress does
not allow you to go to a non-medical doctor for medical treatments
for cancer, even though it may save your life,
5) To make things even more absurd, even if you have been given
up for dead by the medical community, you still do not have the
legal choice to have your M.D. treat you with alternative medicine
or go to a non-M.D. to be treated.
6) Congress has allowed the FDA, NIH and NCI to crush all valid
statistical information about alternative treatments,
7) etc. etc. etc.

(Note: health insurance companies, which are regulated by the states,
use pretty much the same list.)

You might conclude from this that Congress wants you to die. Or you
might think that Congressmen are stupid. Actually they are stupid (or
should I say "fools"), and they don't care if you live or die. The list above
shows a clear pattern - Congress makes decisions based on what is best
for large corporations (i.e. their major contributers). The job of Congress
is to protect the profits of large corporations. Why would they do that?

Now, let's be logical, who gets most of the profits of large corporations?
Stockholders. Thus, Congress is protecting stockholders. But who are the
stockholders? Usually very rich people and families control the Boards of
Directors of large corporations, directly and indirectly. They also control
Congress both directly and indirectly. Congress can best be thought of as
puppets. The puppeteer is big business and old and new money, but mostly
old money.
    "...the world is governed by very different personages to what is imagined
by those who are not themselves behind the scenes."
    Benjamin Disraeli (1801-1884) Prime Minister of Britain

          Continued

A Good Laugh

   Full Body Detox Reviews
  

Cancer Researchers Could Teach the Aviation Industry a Thing or Two

In an article in the British Medical Journal, researchers G. Smith and J. Pell have undertaken to analyze the effectiveness of parachutes in "gravitationally challenging" situations on the basis of randomized, double blind clinical trials. This methodology has been so engrained into the mindset of cancer researchers world wide as to become accepted as the only way by which scientifically valid results can be viewed as having any value. They were surprised to find that out of an enormous, world wide data base these researchers were unable to find a single randomized, controlled trial to measure the efficacy of parachute intervention in gravitationally challenging situations. This is appalling in view of the billions of dollars worth of scientific studies that have gone into developing this methodology as the gold standard for research involving human life.
While the use of parachutes is often limited to purely volunteer activities, as with posting the colors by dropping from the sky onto the field of an athletic event, there are far more serious applications that beg to be addressed. For decades, brave paratroopers have been mandated to risk their lives by using these unproven devices. One interesting result is that commercial airlines have refused to issue parachutes to their passengers and for good reason. One aviation expert, speaking on condition of anonymity, has stated flat out that his company will not assume the liability inherent in recommending the use of such untested devices for passengers.
There is obviously an immediate and urgent need to correct this deficiency in this major field of human endeavor. The perception that parachutes are of value is based strictly on anecdotal evidence. It is a universally accepted axiom that evidence based conclusions, not supported by randomized clinical trials is sorely wanting. It does not seem at all unreasonable to proceed immediately to correct this sore deficiency that is so pervasive throughout the aviation industry.
An effective clinical trial that would put this controversy to rest immediately does not seem to be beyond the bounds of reason and practicality. Roughly speaking, it could be carried out from a readily available test vehicle such as the old reliable C-130 aircraft. This craft has proven a workhorse the world over and its credentials are impeccable. The entire sequence of events relating to the trial could be carried out in a matter of minutes, seconds if the need be. It need only involve a number of test subjects (patients, if need be to keep the terminology continuous), say 100, each of which would wear a parachute and jump out at the signal of the principal investigator (jump master in the vernacular). It should be noted that a certain number of these candidates would be wearing normal parachutes while a certain number, say 5 for example, would be wearing what appeared by all accounts to be normal parachutes but would, in fact, be packed with ordinary bed sheets. Neither the jumper, the jump master nor the airplane pilot would know which were the dummy packs. For the moment it is not necessary to prescribe just what this number would be. This is better left to a committee of mathematicians from the National Cancer Institute to determine what number of "paracebos" would give the most conclusive data.
The opportunity for excellence in data reduction is manifold. For example, beyond the mere morbidity statistics, we could envision varying degrees of injury, and even predict survival estimates for those who did not suffer the inconvenience of death at impact with the earth. This could easily provide gainful employment for hundreds of research technicians. Of course there would be necessary and proper expenses. Surely the pilot and co-pilot should be rewarded handsomely for their participation, not to mention the principal investigator (jump master). Perhaps the biggest expense of all would be the media blitz to recruit volunteers. It is to be expected that intense pressure must be exerted to raise awareness on the need for such testing and finally get these brave heroes to volunteer. A strong call to their obligation to fellow air travelers world wide and their role as courageous scientists in a brave new venture should be sufficient. As a note on expenses, it should not be necessary to pay these brave souls anything as their participation in such a noble cause should, itself, be reward enough. After all, they did get a free ride on the airplane with complimentary light refreshments, free use of the parachute, free instruction from the jump master and a memorable descent to Mother Earth. What more could a reasonable participant ask? Financial support should be easily forthcoming from the likes of Boeing, Lockheed and the commercial airlines who stand to benefit greatly from the results.
Now of course the above is nonsense - or is it? Even as this is being written, thousands of Americans are being subjected to trials of all sorts, many of which have little or no merit other than the fact that funds needed to be allocated if funding renewal for next years projects is to be maintained. One simply does not return unspent money to Federal Grantors. Over the years, even the terminology has changed. Recent papers have referred to patients not as fellow human beings but as "units" and patient death is now being reported as a "survival event". One of the good things that came out of the holocaust was the Helsinki Accord on the Experimentation With Human Subjects. This noble document has many good clauses, perhaps the best of which was the one requiring the advised consent of the subject. How many times, a thoughtful person might wonder, has this been buried from sight in a pile of forms and mundane paperwork. Money is available in copious quantities but not without the consenting patient. To paraphrase the movie line, "No Buck Rogers, No bucks!".
As one who has enjoyed a rewarding career in the physical sciences, I am all for good research. Its that other kind that I object to - the kind that proceeds blindly down an unproductive path for a half a century and will not yield to introspective examination of its true effectiveness. The criticism that comes flying at anyone who dares to question runs along the lines of how can anything for which we have spent billions upon billions of dollars, the expenditure of thousands of human lives and the efforts thousands of researchers possibly be flawed? There is no discussion allowed on the fact that the per capita cancer death rate in the country has decreased only slightly in the last century despite all of the above.
The first question I would ask is whose point of view is being served? Our present system, adorned as it is in holy writ, is the darling of the NCI and the hundreds of centers and thousands of researchers that feed off of it. A recent expose on CBS "Sixty Minutes" caught Duke University with their hands in the cookie jar whereby they were fudging their numbers to make their drug look good. Perhaps the misplacing of a single decimal point in a particular direction could mean millions of dollars. In this case concern for the well being of patients clearly fell second to making money. A reasonable person might well wonder if this is not the norm in this day of greed and avarice. The point of view of researchers will doubtless be to continue the course regardless of results or the number of poor souls who will die from cancer. I would not go so far as to call this "fiddling while Rome burns" but I think that comes dangerously close to the truth.
Surely the American people are entitled to know just how many of their fellow citizens have died in these trials both in total and on a yearly basis. It seems to me that this is every bit as important as the budgets in dollars. Beyond that, I would personally like to know how many of those in the placebo arms of the trials, those who received only sterilized water, actually had positive responses. This is not as silly as it sounds. There is a recognized phenomena of human behavior that is known as the Hawthorne Effect. This was first recognized in evaluations at the Westinghouse Hawthorne plant in Chicago. Results there showed beyond doubt that humans are capable of unexpectedly positive response from the very fact that attention was being paid to them. Speaking for the hundreds of us who have beaten cancer death sentences using mind/body healing techniques, I should not be at all surprised if this number was higher that anyone might imagine. The resilience of the human spirit is a marvelous thing that is difficult for researchers to quantify.
As one coming from a successful career in the physical sciences where experimentation was a way of life, I am in no way implying that research is necessarily bad. I merely wish to point out that after a half century of far too many disappointing results it might be worthwhile to at least consider the possibility of another approach, drawn from the patient's point of view that appears to have exciting possibilities. As a patient, I am not the least bit concerned with either the politics of cancer research or in peeling back the foreskin of science. I SIMPLY WANT TO GET WELL and anything that can be shown to be promising represents a topic worthy of discussion. Let us therefore look at clinical trials as a purely binary proposition. Think of this as an either/or or black/white proposition. A treatment is administered to a number of patients with only two results possible - a positive response or no response.
Patients receiving this are encouraged to expect a good outcome, not kept in the dark by this statistical nonsense. Quite the contrary, the placebo effect is encouraged to work its wonders in addition to the efficacy of the drug. A 30% placebo effect, added to a 30% drug effect should yield a 60% favorable outcome. The Lord only knows how may good drugs have been passed over because they were not allowed this freedom of expression of all that is good and powerful in the human constitution. Before long this thing we call preponderance of evidence will provide the overwhelming proof that is required for oncologists on the front line of treatment to proceed with cautious optimism. Lives will be saved that would otherwise be lost in the statistically and politically correct clinical trials so pervasive in the country. Of course, this will be greeted with condemnation everywhere, despite the fact that our present system has had such minimal return from the money and lives expended over the last half century.
As for me, I will err on the side of caution. I will not jump out of any airplanes, with or without a parachute and I sure as the world will not submit myself into anybody's clinical trial.
Back in 1993 Gerald White survived a 20 pound kidney tumor that subsequently went metastatic to distant organs. After all medical treatments had failed and the dreadful "only three more months" death sentence had been delivered. He worked out a self- directed program of guided imagery that induced a remission in three months. He has served a three year term as a Director of the National Kidney Cancer Association. Through his webpage he maintains an active world wide mentoring program that has yielded many similar remissions of cases thought to be hopeless. His book has been translated into Chinese and Hungarian. A credible Scientist, in his career before cancer, he achieved some 20 technology patents in 9 countries.

View the Original article

The Highwaymen - Me And Bobby Mcgee

    Full Body Detox Reviews

    "The War In Medicine"

   Continued from previous post.

   The FDA Versus Freedom of Speech

The corruption in Congress, the FDA, NIH, NCI, AMA and ACS,
to name but a few, not only suppresses accurate, life-saving honest
statistical information, but prohibit medical doctors from applying
the information of those statistics.

(Note: Yes, I am aware of Naturopaths (N.D.s), who are licensed
to do some things in some states, and there are some really good
naturopaths who know a lot about treating cancer, but I have some
issues with the profession as a whole, which may be more the fault
of the legal system, I don't know.)

Freedom of Choice in Medicine

Now that we have had a chance to talk about freedom of speech,
we can talk about freedom of choice in medicine, which has been
informally discussed above. But first, let's build a base from
which to work.

Let us talk some more about Congress and tobacco. As mentioned
above, Congress continues to protect the tobacco industry and
continues to allow them to sell tobacco products to Americans
legally. Thus, people have "freedom of choice to die from smoking."

The rationale is that virtually everyone knows the dangers of
cigarettes, etc., thus they should have the right to kill themselves
and smoke if they wish. Thus, people have a legal right to slowly
commit suicide by smoking and chewing tobacco, etc.

(But they do not have the choice of saving their lives by using
effective natural cancer treatments!!)

First of all, the "choice" of smokers is a big lie. A person
cannot comprehend the dangers of smoking until they get emphysema
or lung cancer, and then it is too late. If a person had to spend
a month in a hospital, handcuffed to the hospital bed of someone
dieing of emphysema and lung cancer, then they would comprehend
the dangers of smoking. Likewise, because the tobacco industry
legally adds addictive narcotics to tobacco a person really doesn't
have the choice to stop smoking at will.

            Continued

Ray Charles - Georgia On My Mind

   Ultimate Business Tool Kit!