Brain Development in Down Syndrome May Be Enhanced, Doctor Suggests

 

 

Emmalin is very excited with this latest article supporting our beliefs.

 

 

TUCSON, Ariz., March 3, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Genetic diseases are generally thought to be untreatable, but the underlying mechanisms are biochemical and thus can possibly be modified, writes Los Angeles obstetrician P.J. Baggot, M.D., in the spring issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.
Down syndrome results from an extra copy of chromosome 21 (trisomy 21), and thus three copies of each gene instead of two. Either excess or deficiency of various factors can have a detrimental effect on brain development, which involves both proliferation of nerve cells and selective pruning.

Baggot provides three case reports of mothers who attempted to enhance their babies' brain development both before and after birth. They used nutritional supplements, including high-dose vitamins, and stimulation through music and reading aloud.
Four babies (one set of twins) were born lacking typical facial features of Down syndrome, despite confirmation of the diagnosis through chromosome typing. 
 
Intellectual development far exceeded expectations. One child at 34 months met some speech milestones for four-year-olds. A video demonstrated a 17-month infant reading and responding with gestures. A second video showed a 23-month infant reading aloud from flash cards. A third video showed a newborn crawling on the third day of life. These achievements would be admirable in children without Down syndrome.

Previously, six randomized controlled trials showed no benefit from multivitamins in Down syndrome. However, treatments were limited in duration and given late in development; most had no patients under age five. According to Baggot's "five-square" developmental enhancement paradigm, it may have been too late.
"In development, timing is everything," Baggot writes. A valid treatment given too late may have no detectable effect. But correction of nutrient deficiencies earlier, even prior to conception, may have effects years or decades later. Intrauterine factors may have a bearing on adult diseases at ages 60 to 80.

There is now a mouse model for Down syndrome, Baggot writes. The Ts65Dn mouse is trisomic for most of the genes found on human chromosome 21. It has physiologic, anatomic, and functional impairments similar to those in human Down syndrome. Prenatal and postnatal biochemical treatment and environmental stimulation have led to behavioral and cognitive improvement, as well as brain growth and more neural connections.

The replication, survival, and organization of brain cells can be enhanced in many ways, Baggot concludes. "Case reports suggest that several nutrients and drugs are promising. Experiments with mouse models may lead to effective treatments. Proper timing of treatment is crucial."

Importantly, "better understanding of brain development could benefit all children, not just those with Down syndrome."
The Journal is the official, peer-reviewed publication of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), a national organization representing physicians in all specialties, founded in 1943 to preserve private medicine and the patient-physician relationship.

SOURCE Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS)

Where we started-June 2011-December 2013

Emma Reading February 2013

August 2013-Talking at 25 months

August 2013-Reading at 25 months

November 2013-Sorting-2 years 4 months

November 2013-Strong girl sliding

November 2014-Letters

January 2014-Calling the HOGS!!

January 2014-Naming objects

February 2014-80 Word in 5 Minutes

 

 

March 2014-Emma Reading First Book

 

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/1768652#ixzz2vNUpqCQC

Blueberries before blood draws

The more easily blood flows through your arteries and veins, the less your heart has to work.  Now researchers from England and Germany have proven that less than a cup of wild blueberries can have an almost immediate and long lasting effect on how well your vascular system is circulating blood.

Researchers from the University of Reading and the University of Dusseldorf conducted two randomized, controlled, double-blind crossover studies in 21 healthy men between 18 and 40 years old.[1]  They wanted to determine the impact of various amounts of wild blueberries on cardiovascular function.

In the first study, some of the men drank varying amounts of blueberry polyphenols, ranging from the equivalent of 240 grams (3/4 cup) to 560 grams (1¼ cups) of wild blueberries.  Others were given a drink with the same macro and micronutrients but no blueberry polyphenols.

The researchers then measured changes in the men's "flow-mediated dilation."  FMD is the gold-standard technique to measure endothelial function.  The endothelium is the lining of the blood vessels.  FMD is considered a good predictor of cardiovascular disease risk.

The researchers measured changes in FMD at 0, 1, 2, 4 and 6 hours after the men drank the blueberry polyphenols.  They found improvements in FMD at 1, 2 and 6 hours after consumption.  The beneficial effects correlated with levels of blueberry polyphenol metabolites in the blood plasma. In other words, as the blueberry polyphenols were broken down by enzymes into various metabolites, endothelium function in the men improved.  The benefits lasted at least 6 hours.

A second study was conducted to investigate the dose of blueberry polyphenols needed to see beneficial effects.  The researchers tested the equivalent of 100 grams to 560 grams of wild blueberries at 0 and 1 hour post-consumption.  Their results showed that FMD improved in a dose-dependent manner up to the equivalent of about 240 grams of wild blueberries.  Then the effects plateaued.

In other words, the men didn't get any additional benefit in endothelial function by eating any more than the equivalent of ¾ of a cup of wild blueberries. 



Visit GreenMedInfo's database for more health benefits of blueberries.

The current study used wild blueberries.  They are smaller than the cultivated versions most often found in your supermarket, with about twice the number of berries per pound.  They also have less water and a higher skin-to-pulp ratio.  That means the wild versions have more intense flavor and double the antioxidant content.

In North America, the harvest season for wild blueberries is July and August in Maine and Canada.  But you can find fresh frozen berries in supermarkets all year round.

---

[1] Rodriguez-Mateos A, Intake and time dependence of blueberry flavonoid-induced improvements in vascular function: a randomized, controlled, double-blind, crossover intervention study with mechanistic insights into biological activity.  Am J Clin Nutr. 2013 Nov;98(5):1179-91. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.066639. Epub 2013 Sep 4.  PMID: 24004888

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/wild-blueberry-polyphenols-improve-vascular-function

The Family Hope Center is dedicated to helping families of children with developmental delays and special needs. There are thousands of children with mild to profound developmental delays whose parents do not know where to turn, yet refuse to let go of their hope for a better future for their children. These children with developmental delays and special needs are indeed very special because their parents are determined for them to have the best life has to offer.

The Family Hope Center is Here to Help.

We are an international organization with special expertise in the treatment of children and adults. The treatment methods practiced at The Family Hope Center can be effective regardless of the cause of the condition, or the severity of the injury or impairment. We focus first on helping parents and Families understand how the brain grows and develops. Based on this unique understanding, the Team instruct and support the Family in a step-by-step, comprehensive home treatment program to help their Family member achieve an optimal level of function and quality of life. The programs are individually designed to meet each person’s specific needs and the Family’s specific circumstances, utilizing a primarily an in-home treatment program.

The Guiding Principles of The Family Hope Center

• The Family, because of their intense love for their child and natural motivation to help them, can, with the proper training and support, become the best therapists for their brain-injured child.
• Most developmental conditions are caused by injuries to specific areas of the brain, and are not related to the muscles. Therefore the treatment must be centrally directed to the brain, not to the arms and legs. The brain develops and heals with the proper frequency, intensity and duration of sensory stimulation, and the opportunity to develop specific motor functions.
• We put aside such labels as: comatose, vegetable, cerebral palsy, hemiplegia, paraplegia, learning disabled, mentally retarded, autistic, ADD, ADHD, hyperactive, hypoactive, Rett syndrome, dyslexic, epileptic, Down syndrome, stroke, Parkinson’s, etc. These and similar labels, which are simply names given to collections of seemingly unrelated symptoms, can become almost overwhelmingly painful and discouraging.
• Successful treatment of the brain can make these symptoms disappear. At The Family Hope Center we pinpoint the location of the injury in the brain, design and develop a highly individualized tailored treatment plan that specifically targets the injured area, and follow up with support, supervision and on-going counsel.

Online video of open house February 2014

http://vimeo.com/87700862

The Family Hope Center

Toll-Free 1 (800) 888-9370

2490 Boulevard of the Generals, Suite 250, Norristown, PA 19403
local: (610) 397-1737 fax (610) 631-1852

Environmental Working Groups’s 2014 Shopper’s Guide To Avoiding GE Food

 

Consumers have the right to know if their food has been genetically engineered. However, the U.S. government does not require labeling of GE foods or ingredients so that shoppers can make informed decisions. More than 60 other nations, including France, Germany, Japan, Australia, Russia, China and the United Kingdom, require GE labeling (Center for Food Safety, 2013a).
Scientists have not determined whether GE food poses risks to human health. Still, consumers have many good reasons to avoid eating genetically engineered ingredients, including:

Few safety studies: The federal government requires strict safety evaluations before new drugs go on the market but does not mandate similar safety studies for genetically engineered crops.  The government does not require that GE food be tested for carcinogenicity, for harm to fetuses or for risks over the long term to animals or humans.  Few such studies have been conducted by independent scientific institutions.

Superweeds and more toxic pesticides: Genetically modified, herbicide-tolerant crops have spurred so-called “superweeds,” pest plants that have mutated to survive herbicides. More than 61million acres of American farmland are infested with Roundup-resistant weeds (Farm Industry News 2013).  A 2012 survey conducted by the marketing research group Stratus Agri Marketing found that nearly half of American farmers reported finding superweeds in their fields (Stratus Agri Marketing 2013). To control these hardy plants, many farmers have resorted to older, more toxic herbicides like dicamba, and 2,4-D. Both dicamba and 2,4-D are known to cause reproductive problems and birth defects and pose increased risks of cancer.

Increased pesticide use:  Herbicide resistance has led to more, not less, herbicide use. According to estimates published in 2012 by Charles M. Benbrook, research professor at the Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources at Washington State University, herbicide-tolerant crops that stimulated superweed growth caused farmers to use 527 million pounds more herbicide between 1996 and 2011 than would have been the case if those farmers had planted only non-GE crops (Benbrook 2012).

Cross-contamination: According to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), a non-profit group that records the global status of biotech crops, almost 70 million hectares of GE crops were planted in the U.S. in 2012 (ISAAA 2012), up from 64 million hectares in 2009 (ISAAA 2009). As GE crops proliferate, many organic farmers must struggle to prevent cross-contamination of their crops by GE seed or pollen spread by wind, insects, floods and machinery. Unintended GE contamination has become a major issue for organic growers hoping to sell their crops in places that strictly regulate or ban GE foods. According to an estimate by the Union of Concern Scientists, potential lost income for farmers growing organic corn may total $90 million annually (Union of Concerned Scientists 2001).

The agricultural chemical industry developed genetically engineered crops and introduced them to the market with the promise of significantly higher crop yields. While crop yields may in fact be on the rise, the contribution of GE technology is a matter of considerable debate. Some groups attribute the increase in yields to improvements in conventional agriculture (Union of Concerned Scientists 2009).  Any benefits provided by GE technology have been overshadowed by increased use of toxic pesticides and proliferation of herbicide-resistant weeds.  

 

Three ways to avoid GE food

Until Congress or state governments enact mandatory labeling of GE ingredients in food, American shoppers are left in the dark. So if they want to avoid food with GE ingredients, what are they to do?
Option 1: Buy organic. National and state organic certification rules do not allow genetically engineered foods to be labeled “organic.”  When you buy organic, you buy food free not only of synthetic pesticides but also GE ingredients.
 
Option 2: Buy food certified as “Non-GMO Project Verified.”  The non-profit organization Non-GMO Project operates a detailed, voluntary certification process so that food producers can test and verify that, to the best of their knowledge, they have avoided using GE ingredients in their products. The Non-GMO Project is the only organization offering independent verification for GMO products in the U.S. and Canada (Non-GMO Project 2014). (GMO stands for “genetically modified organism,” a term interchangeable with “genetically engineered” or “GE.”)

Option 3: Use EWG’s Shopper’s Guide to Avoiding GE Food to find foods made without ingredients likely to be genetically engineered. Eating only organic and certified GE-free food is not an option for some people. EWG’s Shopper’s Guide to Avoiding GE Food helps consumers find products made without ingredients that are likely to be genetically engineered.  As well, it aims to help shoppers decide which products are the most important to buy organic or certified GE-free.

 

The Factory Four: The most common GE ingredients in food

Avoiding GE ingredients isn’t easy. In fact, some estimates indicate that more than 75 percent of the food in supermarkets is genetically engineered or contains GE ingredients (Center for Food Safety 2013b).  Consumers need to know what to look for to make informed purchasing decisions.
Here are the four most common GE foods and ingredients:

Field corn and corn-derived ingredients
The U.S. is the world’s largest corn producer. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, last year, American farmers planted more corn than any other crop, covering 95 million acres.   (USDA 2013a).  Some 90 percent of corn grown in the U.S. is genetically engineered (USDA 2013b). Most of the crop is field corn cultivated for animal feed, but about 12 percent is processed to corn flour, high fructose corn syrup, corn starch, masa, corn meal and corn oil that end up in foods consumed by people (EPA 2013). Consumers should assume that those ingredients in processed food are genetically engineered.  Less than one percent of the American corn crop is sweet corn, also known as table corn (Iowa State University 2011).

Soybeans and soybean-derived ingredients
Soybeans are the second most planted American crop, covering more than 76 million acres last year (USDA 2013a). Some 93 percent of soybeans grown in this country have been genetically engineered (USDA 2013b). Soybean-based products and soybean-derived ingredients are common on supermarket shelves.  Consumers should assume that products whose labels disclose the presence of soy proteins, soybean oil, soy milk, soy flour, soy sauce, tofu or soy lecithin have been made with GE ingredients unless they are certified organic or GE-free.

Sugar

About 55 percent of the sugar produced in the U.S. comes from sugar beets, 95 percent of which have been genetically engineered (USDA 2013c).  If a product label does not specify that it has been made with “pure cane” sugar, chances are significant that it contains GE beet sugar.

Vegetable oils
Consumers should assume that vegetable oil, canola oil, cottonseed oil, soybean oil and corn oil  are genetically engineered. About 90 percent of American oilseed production is soybeans, which are almost entirely genetically engineered (USDA 2013b). The remaining 10 percent of oilseed crops are cottonseed, sunflower seed, canola, rapeseed, and peanut.  Canola and cottonseed oil primarily come from GE varieties. More than 90 percent of corn oil is derived from genetically engineered corn.

 

Watch list: Foods that could be GE

Papaya: According to the Hawaiian Papaya Industry Association, more than 75 percent of Hawaiian papaya is genetically engineered to resist the ringspot virus (Hawaiian Papaya Industry Association 2013).

Zucchini and yellow summer squash: A few varieties of squash are genetically engineered.   Without adequate labeling, concerned consumers can’t spot GE varieties. If you want to be sure, opt for organic varieties.

Sweet corn:  Most sweet corn sold in supermarkets and farm stands is not grown from genetically engineered seeds, but a few varieties are, so it’s best to buy organic sweet corn.

Many other GE foods could be coming soon to a grocery store near you.  These have either been approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration or are being considered for approval. Among them: salmon, flax, plums, potato, radicchio, rice, tomato and wheat (FDA 2014).

The FDA is considering a producer’s application for GE AquAdvantage salmon. Normal salmon produce growth hormones only in summer months. These fish produce them year round and grow at twice the normal rate. If the FDA approves AquAdvantage salmon, it will be the first genetically engineered animal available in American supermarkets.

The FDA faces two other controversial decisions:  whether to approve apples genetically modified to not to turn brown when sliced, peeled or bruised and new varieties of corn and soybean genetically modified to resist the toxic herbicide 2,4-D (USDA 2013e, 2013f).




References:
Benbrook, C. (2009) Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S.: the first thirteen years. Available: http://www.organic-center.org/reportfiles/GE13YearsReport.pdf Accessed January 6, 2014.
Benbrook, C. (2012) Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S. – the first sixteen years. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:24 
Center for Food Safety (2013a) International Labeling Laws. Available: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/976/ge-food-labeling/international-labeling-laws# Accessed January 7, 2014.
Center for Food Safety (2013b) About Genetically Engineered Foods. Available: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/311/ge-foods/about-ge-foods Accessed January 7, 2014.
Environmental Protection Agency (2013) Major Crops Grown in the United States. Available: http://www.epa.gov/oecaagct/ag101/cropmajor.html Accessed December 3, 2013.
Farm Industry News (2013) Glyphosate-resistant weed problem extends to more species, more farms. Available: http://farmindustrynews.com/herbicides/glyphosate-resistant-weed-problem-extends-more-species-more-farms Accessed December 8, 2013.
Food and Drug Administration (2014). Completed Consultations on Bioengineered Foods. Available: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/fcnNavigation.cfm?rpt=bioListing&displayAll=false&page=1 Accessed January 9, 2014.
Hawaiian Papaya Industry Association (2013) Hawaii Grown Papayas: The Rainbow Papaya Story. Available: http://www.hawaiipapaya.com/rainbow.html Accessed November 25, 2013.
International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) (2009) Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2009 – The First Fourteen Years, 1996 to 2009. Available: http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/41/executivesummary/default.asp Accessed January 7, 2014.
International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) (2012) Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2012. Available: http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/44/executivesummary/default.asp Accessed January 7, 2014.
Iowa State University (2011) Corn Production: Common Corn Questions and Answers. Available: http://www.agronext.iastate.edu/corn/corn-qna.html Accessed January 7, 2014.
Non-GMO Project (2014) The “Non-GMO Project Verified” Seal. Available: http://www.nongmoproject.org/learn-more/understanding-our-seal/ Accessed January 7, 2014.
Stratus Agri Marketing (2013) Glyphosate Resistant Weeds – Intensifying. Available: http://www.stratusresearch.com/blog07.htm Accessed January 7, 2014
Union of Concerned Scientists (2001) Union of Concerned Scientists Comments to the Environmental Protection Agency on the renewal of BT-Crop Registration. Docket OPP-00678B. Available: http://web.peacelink.it/tematiche/ecologia/bt_renewal_ucs.pdf Accessed January 6, 2014.
Union of Concerned Scientists (2009) Genetic Engineering has Failed to Significantly Boost U.S. Crop Yields Despite Biotech Industry Claims. Available: http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/ge-fails-to-increase-yields-0219.html Accessed January 7, 2014.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013a) National Statistics by Subject. Available: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_Subject/index.php Accessed December 3, 2013.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013b) Adoption of genetically engineered crops in the U.S. Available: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-in-the-us.aspx#.Up5PL40h0jU Accessed December 3, 2013.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013c) US sugar production. http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/crops/sugar-sweeteners/background.aspx#.UpN_gI0h0jU Accessed November 25, 2013
U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013d) Organic 101: Can GMOs be used in organic products. Available: http://blogs.usda.gov/2013/05/17/organic-101-can-gmos-be-used-in-organic-products/ Accessed December 8, 2013.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013e) Dow AgroSciences Petitions (09-233-01p, 09-349-01p, and 11-234-01p) for Determinations of Nonregulated Status for 2,4-D-Resistant Corn and Soybean Varieties. Draft Environmental Impact Statement—2013. Available: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/24d_deis.pdf Accessed January 9, 2014.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013ef) Okanagan Specialty Fruits, Inc.; Availability of Plant Pest Risk Assessment and Environmental Assessment for Determination of Nonregulated Status of Apples Genetically Engineered To Resist Browning. [Docket No. APHIS–2012–0025] Federal Register 78:251 (December 31, 2013) p 79658. Available: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/fedregister/USDA_20131104.pdf Accessed January 9, 2014.

 

http://www.ewg.org/