Testing the new technology
After losing his forearm in a car crash, 26-year-old Pierpaolo Petruzziello agreed to participate in a one-month medical experiment to test out a robotic hand that can be controlled by a patient’s thoughts. Now, doctors say that the test run was successful, and may open the door for major developments to come.

More progress to come
Unlike most other prosthetics, this robot hand wasn’t implanted directly into Petruzziello, but was connected with a series of electrodes that were attached to the nerve endings on his severed arm.
The Associated Press reports that, at a press conference, the medical team played video footage of the patient controlling the hand’s actions with his mind as the device sat next to him. During the experiment, he learned to wiggle his fingers, make a fist, and grab objects. Said Petruzziello, “It felt almost the same as a real hand… you can’t imagine what they did to me.” Neurologist Paolo Maria Rossini jokingly added, “Some of the gestures cannot be disclosed because they were quite vulgar.” (Awesome.)

See the video here

This experience is very helpful for patients who have suffered only partial loss of a hand or arm
Other similar thought-controlled prosthetic experiments have been successful in the past, but all of those only worked when a limb was completely severed. Scientists hope that this development may offer solutions for patients who have suffered only partial loss of a hand or arm. Although the project lasted only a month, it was still the longest that electrodes had remained connected to a patient’s nervous system.

Further challenges ahead
Doctors acknowledge that the next challenge is to develop a more durable device that can function for years on end. It’s clear, though, that the significance of this particular success shouldn’t be downplayed. There may still be barriers to overcome, but if prosthetic science progresses as rapidly as it has, it should only be a matter of time before someone smashes through them — with a robotic fist or otherwise.

Counting Carbs
It seems like more and more people are counting carbs, or at least paying more attention to the amount and type of carbs they eat. Popular diets such as the Atkins Diet have convinced people that there are good carbs and bad carbs, and the bad carbs need to be avoided and the good carbs limited.

While it’s a good idea to keep your intake of “bad” carbs in check, many health experts recommend that carbohydrates should make up at least 55 percent of a person’s total caloric intake, while others say that number should be as high as 65 percent.

This is fairly high so you don’t want to discount carbs. At the same time, it’s clear these people aren’t talking about the carbs you’ll find in candy, cookies and other highly processed foods, so that’s where the idea of a list of good carbs and bad carbs comes from.

A List of Good Carbs and Bad Carbs
If you had to make a list of carbs that you should eat more of versus carbs you should avoid, it basically breaks down into simple carbs being “bad” and complex carbs being “good.”

Complex and simple are terms that have to do with how the food is broken down into energy (sugar) in the body. Simple carbs are broken down quickly, giving your blood sugar a spike and sending you running back to the kitchen or snack machine within hours of your last fix.

Complex carbs are the ones that give your body the best fuel. They are usually found in foods high in fiber, which break down more slowly, giving you a more steady blood sugar level through the day and making you feel less hungry and irritable when mid-afternoon rolls around.

It’s a great idea to get more of these carbs into your daily diet.

Here is a list of good carbohydrates :
- Fruit
- Vegetables
- Whole grains and foods made from whole grains, such as bread and cereal
- Beans
- Nuts
- Legumes

Bad carbohydrates are :
- Refined grains like white bread and white rice
- Processed foods such as cake, cookies and chips
- Soft drinks
- Alcohol

Just because these foods have less desirable carbs does not mean you should kick them out of your life forever. A list of good carbs and bad carbs should not be seen as a strict rule. Yes, you should get most of your carbs each day from the “good” list, but you certainly don’t have to cut our alcohol or skip the birthday cake, as long as you don’t make it an every day or every meal thing.

Cutting carbs for Weight Loss
Cutting back on the bad carbs can help you lose weight, as well as give you a feeling of more energy and less irritability. Carbs are the fuel that makes your body run. Putting the right fuel in your engine makes a world of difference.

Because the good carb foods tend to have higher fiber and lower calories than many processed bad carb foods, you’ll find yourself feeling fuller while eating fewer calories though it’s possible you’ll be eating a bigger volume of food.

If you think about the kinds of foods you’re adding and the ones you’re giving up, then this makes sense.

It would take a lot more fruit to equal the same number of calories you’d eat in a candy bar, and you’ll probably feel satisfied after one piece or serving of fruit which is much lower in calories than the candy bar. Even better, you’ll feel satisfied for a long period of time and won’t feel the need for another unhealthy snack later in the day.

Postcode lottery

A real problem
Patients in Herefordshire are more than three times more likely to die within a year of diagnosis of lung cancer compared with patients in Kensington and Chelsea, according to the progress report published by the Department of Health.
Cancer Research UK called for urgent action from the Government, adding that there was “no excuse” for the differences in life expectancy between different areas.
The second annual progress report on the Cancer Reform Strategy comes after Mike Richards, the National Cancer Director, estimated that late diagnosis of cancer causes at least 10,000 premature deaths a year.
In an article for the British Journal of Cancer, Professor Richards writes: “These delays in the patient presenting with symptoms and cancer being diagnosed at a late stage inevitably costs lives.
“The situation is unacceptable so the first big step has been to understand why the delays occur.”

Patients not being treated / diagnosed early enough
Every year more than 290,000 people in Britain have some form of cancer diagnosed, and about 150,000 people die.
But while eight out of ten patients with bowel cancer live for more than a year after diagnosis in Telford and Wrekin in the West Midlands, less than six out of ten (57.9 per cent) do so in Waltham Forest, North London.
Ninety-nine per cent of all patients in Torbay, Devon, survive at least a year after a diagnosis of breast cancer, but this figure is 89 per cent in Tower Hamlets.
Harpal Kumar, chief executive of Cancer Research, said: “These shocking statistics confirm that the cancer postcode lottery remains a real problem.
“Patients are undoubtedly not being diagnosed early enough in large parts of the country, nor are they getting equal access to the best treatments, such as surgery for lung cancer.
“It’s a disgrace that such a small proportion of primary care trusts have survival rates that match the best figures in Europe, or even the best rates in Europe ten years ago.
“This needs urgent action.”

A lack of proper diagnostic tests and understanding of symptoms
A separate report by MPs on the All Party Parliamentary Group for Cancer, also published today, suggests that older patients may also be at risk of dying earlier due to a lack of proper diagnostic tests or symptoms.
Mark Simmonds, MP, a Conservative health spokesman, said: “We are concerned by this data, which demonstrates the unacceptable inequalities in treatment and care for cancer patients. In 2000 the Government pledged that reducing health inequalities was a key aim, yet nearly a decade on the gap has widened and five-year cancer survival rates still lag behind those of comparable European countries.”

Andy Burnham’s pledge
Andy Burnham, the Health Secretary, responded: “Cancer treatment in Britain has improved vastly in recent years and this is shown in the falling mortality rates and increasing survival rates.
“However, we know that survival rates vary across the country, particularly in deprived areas, so this year’s report has deliberately focused on local variations so we can highlight to the NHS where they need to take action.
“I hope that the publication of this data combined with the Prime Minister’s pledge to give patients key diagnostic tests within just one week of seeing their GP will save thousands more lives.”

The problem with sugar
The average person eats 153 pounds of sugar a year. That is equivalent to over 1/2 cup of sugar a day. The teenage boy eats twice that much. So you say, “Who cares?” What is wrong with sugar?
There is much scientific evidence written in many medical journals showing that sugar can ruin your health. Do you have any of the following symptoms? Do you fall asleep after meals, have allergies, gas, bloating, extended stomach after meals, joint pains, headaches, chronic fatigue, constipation, diarrhea, over weight, skin problems, high blood pressure or other symptoms? These all can be signs of a sugar problem.

Here’s the problem: The human body was simply not designed to handle refined sugars.Refined sugar is new to the human diet. Metabolizing refined sugar is quite a challenge, but if forced to, the body will struggle to cope with it. This struggle causes serious disturbances, and after time, disease is the guaranteed result.
We have evolved from early man having digestive mechanisms to digest foods. We do not have the digestive mechanisms to digest the glut of sugar that we are eating on a daily basis!

Sugar in your body
Recently, information has emerged as to what happens to the minerals in the body when sugar and other abusive foods are eaten.
Sugar throws body chemistry into biochemical chaos lasting for six to eight hours after consumption. During this period, hormone, fat, carbohydrate, and protein metabolism are greatly disrupted.

After consumption, refined sugar is rapidly absorbed by the body, which dangerously increases the sugar content of the blood. Excess sugar causes production of excess insulin, which signals cells to take up sugar. Cells then absorb sugar, to get it out of the bloodstream. This solves one problem but creates another: Now the body’s cells have too much sugar. To correct this imbalance, cells turn the sugar into saturated fats and cholesterol.

Increased insulin levels not only tell the body to store fat, but they also tell it not to release fat. This makes people get fat and stay fat. It causes fat to be deposited in our cells and organs, resulting in atherosclerosis, fatty liver and kidneys, and obesity.

These fats cause blood cells to become sticky thereby increasing the chances of blood clots, strokes and heart attacks. Sugar increases “bad” LDL cholesterol, decreases “good” HDL cholesterol, and increases triglyceride levels in the blood. If antioxidant vitamins and minerals are deficient, these triglycerides can be oxidized causing serious health problems. In addition, red blood cells are choked by the saturated fats and this reduces their ability to carry oxygen to our tissues.

Hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) is another problem caused by sugar consumption. When insulin is secreted into the blood, it makes blood sugar levels fall rapidly. Insulin levels remain high however, so the body continues to take up sugar beyond the point where it needs to. The result is hypoglycemia. Symptoms include weakness, dizziness, crying spells, insomnia, aggression, and depression.

Sugar in breakfasts or lunches can cause children to do poorly in school. They become hypoglycemic about 60 minutes after eating sugar and this affects brain function. Many teachers claim that their students are “brain dead” after lunch, and this is why.

Sugar-induced hormone imbalances tax and weaken the immune system to the point where it can no longer defend the body. When insulin causes blood sugar to fall excessively low, the adrenal glands secret hormones that pump blood sugar back up. Daily consumption of sugar causes an overworked biochemical balancing act resulting in adrenal exhaustion, which in turn decreases the body’s ability to respond to future stress. Adrenal exhaustion is now a common problem in the chronically ill.

Sugar quadruples adrenaline levels, while increasing both cholesterol and cortisone. Cortisone is known to depress immune function. Studies show that the ability of white cells to destroy harmful bacteria is reduced as sugar consumption rises. This is why children, who eat lots of sugar, are more susceptible to colds, flu, and other infections.

Another point is Fiber Deficiency : Humans were designed to derive energy from complex carbohydrates, which are naturally high in fiber. By contrast, a high sugar diet provides calories without the fiber that is essential to human health. Insufficient fiber causes materials to move too slowly through the digestive tract. This can cause constipation, which is a big problem in our society. It also causes waste to remain too long in the colon where it can serve as food for harmful bacteria, thereby producing gas and toxins, and promoting intestinal inflammation and bloating.

Conclusion
The bottom line is that sugar upsets the body chemistry and suppresses the immune system. Once the immune system becomes suppressed, the door is opened to infectious and degenerative diseases. The stronger the immune system the easier it is for the body to fight infectious and degenerative diseases.
Sugar is implicated in the following diseases and many more: allergies, arthritis, diabetes, hypoglycemia, osteoporosis, gallstones, kidney stones, headaches, yeast infections, and cataracts.

So if you have any of the symptoms or diseases mentioned, remove all forms of sugar from your diet for two weeks, I think that you will be pleasantly surprised. Not only will some of those symptoms disappear but you will be strengthening your immune system, allowing it to do the job it was meant to, defend you against foreign invaders.

Some of the other effects of sugar on the body are:
* Increases overgrowth of candida yeast organism
* Increases chronic fatigue
* Can trigger binge eating in those with bulima
* Increases PMS symptoms
* Increases hyperactivity in about 50% of children
* Increases tooth decay
* Increases anxiety and irritability
* Can increase or intensify symptoms of anxiety and panic in susceptible women
* Can make it difficult to lose weight because of constantly high insulin levels, which causes the body to store excess carbs as fat.

The treatment
An invisible knife that uses high-intensity sound waves to penetrate the body and destroy tumours is set to revolutionise cancer treatment, it is claimed.
In five to 10 years ultrasound could replace conventional surgery and radiotherapy for patients with many different types of cancer, scientists said.

About the technique
The technique is undergoing early trials for liver and kidney cancer in the UK while a French team using a different system has already achieved disease-free results treating men with prostate cancer.
In China, where the technology has been pioneered, anecdotal evidence from studies of thousands of patients is said to be “astounding”.
Ultrasound surgery focuses bursts of high energy sound waves on the tumour, heating it to a temperature of 60 degrees Celsius. The tumour cells are destroyed while surrounding tissue is left unharmed.
Professor Gail ter Haar, who is leading trials of an experimental system at the Royal Marsden Hospital in Sutton, Surrey, England, said the technique could treat tumours up to the size of a small orange.

Testing ultrasounds
At this stage the trials are confined to testing the safety of the technique, but Prof ter Haar said they had already yielded “really exciting results”.
She told the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s annual meeting in Seattle yesterday: “I think there will be cancers for which it will revolutionise treatment, but we’re a long way from knowing which they will be, and exactly how it should be employed”.

What is treatment?
Patients with liver and kidney cancer are taking part in the Royal Marsden studies.
Treatment consists of two-second long bursts of ultrasound delivered to the surface of the body by a machine mounted on a gantry.
A number of bursts are needed to clear an organ of cancer.

Testing accross the world
At a different centre in Oxford, England, Prof ter Haar has been using a commercial device developed in China to treat a similar group of patients.
She has worked with Chinese physicians who have already treated about 3,000 cancer patients with ultrasound.
Although the Chinese trials were not as scientifically rigorous as those in the UK, the anecdotal evidence was impressive.
“The results in China are really quite astounding,” said Prof ter Haar.
“There are patients who are disease free with tumours for which there are no other treatments, particularly in the pancreas.”
She said that theoretically, ultrasound should be suitable for a wide range of solid tumours.
“If you can image a tumour with diagnostic ultrasound you should be able to treat it,” she told the meeting.

Not all cancers can be targeted with ultrasound
However, since the sound beam could not travel through bone or air, certain cancers would be difficult to treat.
Brain tumours and lung cancers deep behind the rib cage fell into this category.

Thinking about the tough cancer areas
Scientists in the UK and United States were working on the problem of getting ultrasound into the brain.
“Its very appealing for the brain because it’s a trackless form of damage,” said Prof ter Haar.
“You only get damage at the focus so you don’t damage the rest of the brain through which you’ve got to travel. If we could solve that problem it would be very exciting.”

Different applications and challenges of ultrasound
Dr Jean-Yves Chapelon from the French research institute Inserm in Lyon described a different ultrasound system now at an advanced stage of development which he had used to treat 242 men with prostate cancer.
The results were due to be published in the next few months.
Dr Chapelon said the treatment was as effective as conventional surgery or radiotherapy, and safer.
In this case the ultrasound beam was delivered through the rectum. After five years of followup, 80 per cent of low-risk patients were found to be disease-free and effectively cured.
For medium-risk patients the success rate was 60 per cent and for patients with high-risk aggressive cancers, 50 per cent. The men had an average age of 71.
Traditional treatments for older men with prostate cancer carry a high risk of impotence and urinary incontinence, but 40 per cent of the patients recovered their potency and only eight per cent were unable to control their urine flow.

Impressive results
Not one patient had died of cancer although the first was treated as long as 11 years ago.
“We believe that this therapy challenges other therapies,” said Dr Chapelon.
However, he said that at present it was still difficult to convince specialists that ultrasound therapy could be as good as conventional treatment.
Prof ter Haar said there was still much work to do before ultrasound became universally available as a cancer treatment.
She expected the process of patient trials, publication of data, and introduction into hospitals to take between five and 10 years.

Other applications for ultrasound
Another possible application of ultrasound might be on the battlefield, according to Dr Shahram Vaezy, from the University of Washington in Seattle.
His team was working on miniaturising ultrasound equipment that could be used to treat wounded soldiers, or accident victims.
A big advantage of ultrasound was that it had the ability to stop bleeding by sealing broken blood vessels, he said.
Dr Vaezy told the meeting: “The application we are pursuing is treating internal bleeding, to develop a non-invasive method of treating patients at the scene of an accident, for example”.