An article about the history of asbestos and the potential future problems asbestos may cause. People fear that asbestos could cause an epidemic if it is not removed from places of business and homes quickly and appropriately. Despite the fact the government banned the importation of blue and brown asbestos over twenty years ago and finally banned white asbestos in 1999, 3500 people currently die every year from asbestos related diseases. Be it the lung choking asbestosis or the cancer Mesothelioma these diseases make asbestos the biggest industrial killer today.

In the 50’s and 60€™s following World War 2, millions of tons of raw asbestos was imported into the UK to be made into building products and other industrial uses. It was cheap, easy to mine and when added to various building products gave them extra strength and fire retardant properties. Just what was needed to help the post war building boom. However it was not until well into the sixties that it was discovered that the ingestion of its fibres caused terminal damage to peoples lungs. All those people working in the factories using asbestos in their products had already been damaged by the microscopic fibres of asbestos. This was borne out by the climbing death rates in the late 80’s as it can take anything from 5 to 25 years for the asbestos dieses to kill you.

 

 

Aloe may help prevent or aid in the regression of cancerous tumors, a new study suggests. Researchers from Istanbul University in Turkey investigated the use of Aloe vera leaf pulp extract against tumor cells in mice.

In the study, the mice were divided into five groups. The first two groups were control groups, one healthy, and one that received tumor cells but did not receive aloe treatment. The test groups included one group that received aloe prior to receiving an injection of tumor cells, one received aloe with the tumor cell injection, and the last group was given aloe after receiving the tumor cell injection. The mice received aloe injections twice a week for 21 days.

 

 

Dietary considerations can present a Hobson’s choice in diabetes. Even when the intake is nutritious, assimilating it can be another matter. Then there is the problem of progression of diabetic complications if one ends up with excess glucose or fat in the system. Excess carbohydrates in a meal, and the resulting uncontrolled blood sugar levels can be detrimental to any number of tissues, from the lens of the eye, to the neurons, small blood vessels and the kidneys. Fat is also a problem with increase incidences of atherosclerosis, large vessel disease and cardiac complications. What, then is the appropriate macronutrient for the diabetic population? Enough medical literature exists to suggest that in diabetes, proteins are probably the best bet.

Proteins are the natural choice of the body when faced with diabetes. In uncontrolled diabetes, muscle protein is broken down into amino acids to be converted into glucose by the liver. If left to fend for itself, this can create a commotion within the body. Since proteins have to supply enough energy to substitute for carbohydrates, proteins are broken down faster than they are made. The body ends up with a protein deficit, a situation with subtle, yet far-reaching effects on normal body functions. Importantly, for diabetics, a protein deficit has been shown to impair resistance to infections (Ganong WF). Replenishing the depleting protein stores is a vital requirement of all diabetic diets.