Author: Mike Furci (Page 5 of 65)

Get your doctor to listen

Do you have an appointment with your Dr. coming up? Well, whether it’s for a new condition or for a follow-up to a previously treated condition, you want to make sure your doctor listens to what your saying. You also want to make sure you’re expressing yourself properly. Being a paramedic for over 10 years, and having just finished my RN degree, I’ve seen first hand how important communication is in treating patients.

Doctors can be very busy, and in some cases not very understanding. Patients, on the other hand, can be understandably nervous, emotional and unprepared in communicating whats truly going on. Consumer Reports gives a few tips to ensure your doctor listens and understands you.

Get to the point:
Tell the doctor about your chief complaint (main problem) first, and don’t confuse the issue with unnecessary information.

Focus on one issue at a time:
Doctors schedule appointments long enough to deal with one issue at a time. If you have more than one problem to discuss you should ask your doctor if he has time to discuss it. If he doesn’t schedule another appointment.

Use clear, descriptive language:
Be prepared to describe to your doctor how long you’ve had the problem, how often it occurs, how long it lasts, and how severe it is. Be very specific.

Don’t embellish:
Don’t be the “boy who cried wolf”. Doctors can spot somebody over-acting and superlatives from a mile away.

Speak up:
Nothing gets doctors’ attention more quickly than a direct statement such as, “I feel like I’m not getting my point across to you, doc.” Most of them would rather hear what you’re thinking than have you leave the office angry or frustrated.

Its’ how you think

“You are a living magnet. What you attract into your life is in harmony with your dominant thoughts.”
– Brian Tracy

Calorie disclosure labels at restaraunts don’t change eating habits.

Many cities and counties around the country have imposed regulations that require restaurants to post the calories of all their meals. Big brother’s reason for the legislation? Once consumers saw the ramifications, i.e., number of calories, of their dietary choices, they would opt for a healthier one. However, not surprisingly, the evidence is indicating that mandatory labeling is having no effect on consumer choices.

There is a great concern among many of the people who study calorie labeling that the policy has moved way beyond the science and that it would be beneficial to slow down,” said George Loewenstein, a behavioral economist at Carnegie Mellon University who studies calorie labeling. In a recent editorial in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, he asked: “Given the lack of evidence that calorie posting reduces calorie intake, why is the enthusiasm for the policy so pervasive?”

“In New York, the first big city to adopt menu labeling, NYU researchers studied the eating choices of low-income fast-food diners, focusing on those who saw the labels. “Even those who indicated that the calorie information influenced their food choices did not actually purchase fewer calories,” the study says.”

The Washington Post

If human beings always based decisions on whether something they were doing was unhealthy, we wouldn’t have so many doing drugs, becoming obese or smoking. The fact is, most people disregard obvious information, even if it’s unhealthy, when it’s in-congruent with what they want.

Ron Paul questions the governments ban on raw milk

On May 16th, Representative Ron Paul asked,

“If we are not even free anymore to decide something as basic as what we wish to eat or drink, how much freedom do we really have left?”

Presidential candidate Ron Paul was talking about the FDA ban on the sale of raw milk (non-pasteurized) for human consumption across state lines. The ban began in 1987, but the FDA didn’t really begin enforcing it seriously until 2006 — when the government began sting operations and armed raids of dairy farmers and their willing customers.

The New American reports:

“Even if the FDA were correct in its assertions about the dangers of raw milk, its prohibition on interstate raw milk sales would still be, as Paul termed it, ‘an unconstitutional misapplication of the commerce clause for legislative ends’ …

Saying he is outraged by the FDA’s raids on peaceful dairy farmers and their customers, Paul has introduced legislation to allow the shipment and distribution of unpasteurized milk and milk products for human consumption across state lines, in effect reversing the FDA’s unconstitutional ban on such sales.

A Daily Finance article cited by Dr. Joe Mercola addresses the issue of safety:

On occasion, people do get sick from raw milk. But the number of people sickened by raw milk compared to other foods does not seem to warrant the FDA’s focused, expensive campaign….

No government regulations of interstate commerce in peanuts, kale, or cantaloupes have been suggested, despite the much greater number of people sickened by consuming these foods.

« Older posts Newer posts »