Baby acupuncture

This is a video of my son Aldan having four acupuncture needles inserted into his arms for his eczema. He did not cry at all.

Sausage, anybody?

I was talking to a patient today who works for a casing company. He states it is one of only two left in the world who makes this. It is to help with putting together the sausage. I asked if chemicals were used. Hesitantly, he did admit that but that the process is proprietary. My followup question is "it's not Organic, is it?" he CLEARLY shook his head. Something like this really makes me wary of eating hot dogs or anything of the like again, knowing that the sausages contain a multitude of chemicals to produce.

Whatever happened to the quaint German butcher that produced home-made sausages? That we would need to resort to putting chemicals in our food to make it hold together? taste better? not spoil as fast? Pickling the food with preservatives also means pickling our livers with the same chemicals. Let's face it, we live in a chemical world and our bodies are not made to handle chemicals. Happy eating.

Dr. Tang

WHEN PIGS FLY FLU by Don Harte, D.C.

The nation... the world... is on alert. A super zoonotic infection may be on the march. (A zoonotic infection is one that crosses from animal to human.) In this case, the latest flu outbreak is apparently part human, part pig, part bird... hence, "When Pigs Fly Flu." I doubt the CDC will come up with a better name. They surely will not dub it the Mexican Flu, since that would be so un-PC. For the same reason, they will not close the border, though common sense public health standards demand such. If and when this gets out of hand, you will know whom to blame. Ah, when science and politics mix, stupidity almost always arises.

So, what's the deal here? Might we have a catastrophic epidemic, what is known as a pandemic? Yes. Why do I say that? Three reasons. (1) This is very much out of flu season. (2) Many of the dead were young adults, unlike the usual targets of the very young and the very old. (3) Time of the appearance of the disease and death were short. (The Mexican archeologist who gave President Obama a tour was dead from this flu, so it is sometimes reported, the day after.) All three characteristics appeared in the Flu Pandemic of 1918. Certainly gives me pause...

But then, nothing might happen. Let's go back to the Swine Flu of 1976. Government health authorities spread panic, rushed a vaccine to production, which lead to 517 cases of paralysis and other very serious problems, and 23 cases of death, from Guillane-Barre Syndrome. Yes, all this was from the flu vaccine, not the flu. What was the actual toll of the swine flu of 1976 itself? 13 actual cases of the flu, one death. So, mortality-wise, the flu vaccine was 23 times more deadly than the flu itself. (You still trust these people???)

What does this mean? I urge you to think before you line up for the flu vaccine now, which is NOT the same strain as the current flu. (It almost never is.) DO NOT consider it a wise precaution. Besides have little to no preventive value, the substances in the flu vaccine carry substantial health risk. Despite what the "talking heads" of the media and the government may have to say, there will be virtually no benefit, and substantial risk getting this vaccine.

What about when they have the new vaccine ready in a few months? Remember the 1976 disaster. What will you do if you wake up paralyzed? Should you question to alleged experts? You betcha! Keep in mind the vast amounts of money that the pharmaceutical industry is destined to make on this. We are talking BILLIONS. You can be sure that they are leaning on all of their government contacts to make sure that everything (your tax dollars) is in place to enrich their coffers, despite the dangers, despite the lack of effectiveness.

So, what to do, to be prepared? Instead of following the "experts," like sheep, may I suggest that you THINK. Infection? Your defense is your immune system, which is run by your nervous system. My suggestions?
1. Get adjusted! If you are already under chiropractic care, make sure that you maintain your intensive care or your wellness schedule. Even a little extra, just to make sure, wouldn't hurt. Why? Again, your defense is your immune system, run by your nervous system. If you have interference, Vertebral Subluxation (most of the time, there is no pain), your immune system will be at a disadvantage in fighting what seems to be a totally novel virus. Vertebral Subluxation is corrected by chiropractic adjustment. There is no substitute. IF YOU ARE NOT YET UNDER CHIROPRACTIC CARE, call me now.
2. Eat well. Avoid junk food. Avoid excess sugar. Take supplements of Vitamins C and D.
3. Get some sun. (Good for Vitamin D activation.)
4. Get plenty of rest.
5. Have fun. Maintain a good mental attitude. Relax. Maybe meditate.
6. Exercise regularly. Yoga is good, too, but different.
7. Avoid crowds.
8. Make sure that you understand, and act on, #1.

If and when the When Pigs Fly Flu becomes dangerous? Do more of steps 1-8. That will surely be the critical time to get your family and all of your friends in here to get checked for Vertebral Subluxation. If you are not yet a practice member, get here as soon as you can. If it really hits the fan, there might not be any room here. WHAT AM I TALKING ABOUT???

The Flu Pandemic of 1918. 25 to 40 million died. Here's the figures. In 1979, Walter Rhodes wrote that, during the Pandemic, medical doctors in Davenport, Iowa treated 93,590 patients, with 6,116 deaths, in other words, one out of 15 under medical care succumbed to the flu. At the Palmer College of Chiropractic in Davenport, 1,635 flu cases were adjusted, with only one fatality. Outside of Davenport, Iowa chiropractors adjusted 4,735 flu cases, with only six deaths - one out of 866. In 1919, Palmer College of Chiropractic published "The Flu and You." The ratio of flu cases cared for vs. deaths were as follows: Medical care: 1 out of 17 died. Osteopathic care: 1 out of 36 died. Chiropractic care: 1 out of 886!

Do the math. Outside of the BJ Palmer clinic, chiropractic care was 59 times more effective in saving lives than Medicine. Inside the Palmer Clinic, Chiropractic was 110 times as effective. No matter what preconceptions or prejudices you or someone else may have, what works... works. And, it makes sense. If you can't follow this, the time to come to my "Chiropractic: The Big Idea" class is now! It will all make perfect sense.

So, you can follow the so-called experts like sheep, or you can do what intelligent people do, use common sense, and learn from the lessons of history.

Chiropractic vs. Swine Flu

Written By: Dr. Wegmann

With today’s headlines dominated by the swine flu we need to learn more in order to protect ourselves and our families. The 1918 Flu killed an estimated 40 million people world wide. I pray this outbreak does not reach that proportion. I cannot comprehend the psychological impact of death on this scale in society today.

Here’s a little history on the swine flu.

On February 5, 1976, an army recruit died and four of his fellow soldiers were later hospitalized. Two weeks after his death, health officials announced that swine flu was the cause of death and that this strain of flu appeared to be closely related to the strain involved in the 1918 flu pandemic.

On August 20, 2007 Department of Agriculture officers investigated the outbreak of swine flu in Nueva Ecija and Central Luzon, Philippines.

In March and April 2009, more than 1,000 cases of swine flu in humans were detected in Mexico, and more than 100 deaths are suspected to have a connection with the virus. The Mexican fatalities are said to be mainly young adults, a hallmark of pandemic flu. [1]

The nature of a flu tends to be in waves. Flu pandemics typically come in waves. The 1889–1890 and 1918–1919 flu pandemics each came in three or four waves of increasing lethality. [2] I can’t find much information about what wave this flu is on, but researchers are more concerned about this flu than many in the past.

Here are 3 Sure-fire Strategies to help you and your family respond to the threat of the flu.

1. Hygiene- maybe one of the greatest advances of the industrialized nations was the change in the way sanitation and hygiene were practiced. Limiting our exposure to toxins both organic and inorganic makes sense. The body has a built in immune system, but sometimes that system can be overwhelmed. Frequent hand washing, especially when there has been contact with other people or with potentially contaminated surfaces can be very helpful.

2. Chiropractic- One of the most important studies was performed by Ronald Pero, Ph.D., chief of cancer prevention research at New York’s Preventive Medicine Institute and professor of medicine at New York University. It showed the positive effect that chiropractic care can have on the immune system and general health.

Dr. Pero measured the immune systems of people under chiropractic care as compared to those in the general population and those with cancer and other serious diseases. His initial three-year study was of 107 individuals who had been under chiropractic care for five years or more. The chiropractic patients were found to have a 200% greater immune competence than those people who had not received chiropractic care, and they had 400% greater immune competence than those people with cancer and other serious diseases. The immune system superiority of those under chiropractic care did not appear to diminish with age. Dr. Pero stated:

When applied in a clinical framework, I have never seen a group other than this chiropractic group to experience a 200% increase over the normal patients. This is why it is so dramatically important. We have never seen such a positive improvement in a group. [3]

Another study from Patricia Brennan, Ph.D., leading a team of researchers, conducted a study that found improved immune response in her test subjects following chiropractic treatment. The study specifically demonstrated the “phagocytic respiratory burst of polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMN) and monocytes were enhanced in adults that had been adjusted by chiropractors.” [4]

Life Chiropractic University, produce an incredible study from the Sid Williams Research Center in 1994. The researchers took a group of HIV positive patients and adjusted them over a six-month period. What they found was that the “patients that were adjusted had a forty-eight percent (48%) increase in the number CD4 cells (an important immune system component).” These measurements were taken at the patients’ independent medical center, where they were under medical supervision for the condition. The control group (the patients that were not adjusted) did not demonstrate this dramatic increase in immune function, but actually experienced a 7.96% decrease in CD4 cell counts over the same period. [5]

The immune system is affected by the nerve system through the connections with the endocrine and the autonomic nervous system. And chiropractic care improves the function of the nerve system through improving the movement of the spinal bones that encase and protect the spinal cord.

Stressful conditions lead to altered measures of immune function, and altered susceptibility to a variety of diseases. Many stimuli, which primarily act on the central nervous system, can profoundly alter immune responses. The two routes available to the central nervous system are neuro-endocrine channels and autonomic nerve channels. [6]

3. Masks- no mask can provide a perfect barrier but products that meet or exceed the NIOSH N95 standard are thought to provide good protection. The rationale behind masks is to limit airborne secretions to stop the virus from spreading from person to person. The use of masks is not uncommon in the hospitals where the potential of infection can be greater in compromised patients. It would be unethical and potential deadly for a surgeon to operate without first washing their hands and using a mask.

As I stated previously I pray this flu does not turn pandemic. Millions of people’s lives will be at stake. I do hope you adopt some of the ideas I shared with you; starting first with the hygiene. I encourage you to explore the wonders of chiropractic if you currently know little about chiropractic. Finding a great chiropractor can be a challenge. Many chiropractors simply operate as “pain” doctors, never fully utilizing or understanding the miraculous results when applied properly.

[1]. Deadly new flu virus in US and Mexico may go pandemic”. New Scientist. 24 April 2009. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17025-deadly-new-flu-virus-in-us-and-mexico-may-go-pandemic.html.

[2]. U.S. Institute of Medicine; Stacey L. Knobler, Alison Mack, Adel Mahmoud, Stanley M. Lemon (editors) (2005). The Threat of Pandemic Influenza:

[3]. Pero R. “Medical Researcher Excited By CBSRF Project Results.” The Chiropractic Journal, August 1989; 32.

[4]. Brennan P, Graham M, Triano J, Hondras M. “Enhanced phagocytic cell respiratory bursts induced by spinal manipulation: Potential Role of Substance P.” J Manip Physiolog Ther 1991; (14)7:399-400.

[5]. Selano JL, Hightower BC, Pfleger B, Feeley-Collins K, Grostic JD. “The Effects of Specific Upper Cervical Adjustments on the CD4 Counts of HIV Positive Patients.” The Chiro Research Journal; 3(1); 1994.

[6] Felton DL, Felton SY, Belonged DL, et al. “Noradrenergic sympathetic neural interactions with the immune system: structure and function.” Immunol Rev. 1987 Dec;100:225-60.

Patient Safety - Carjacking article

re : Warning from police please read:

I don't know if this is accurate, but better safe than sorry……A Warning..!!!! Just last weekend on Friday night, we parked in a public parking area. As we drove away I noticed a sticker on the rear window of the car. When I took it off after I got home, it was a receipt for gas. Luckily my friend told me not to stop as it could be someone waiting for me to get out of the car. Then we received this email yesterday....WARNING FROM POLICE; THIS APPLIES TO BOTH WOMEN AND MEN. BEWARE OF PAPER ON THE BACK WINDOW OF YOUR VEHICLE - NEW WAY TO DO CARJACKINGS (NOT A JOKE). Heads up everyone! Please, keep this circulating....You walk across the parking lot, unlock your car and get inside. You start the engine and shift into Reverse. When you look into the rear view mirror to back out of your parking space, you notice a piece of paper stuck to the middle of the rear window. So, you shift into Park, unlock your doors, and jump out of your car to remove that paper (or whatever it is) that is obstructing your view. When you reach the back of your car, that is when the carjackers appear out of nowhere, jump into your car and take off. They practically mow you down as they speed off in your car. And guess what, ladies? I bet your purse is still in the car. So now the carjacker has your car, your home address, your money, and your keys. Your home and your whole identity are now compromised! BEWARE OF THIS NEW SCHEME THAT IS NOW BEING USED. If you see a piece of paper stuck to your back window, just drive away. Remove the paper later. And be thankful that you read this email. I hope you will forward this to friends and family, especially to women. A purse contains all kinds of personal information and identification documents, and you certainly do NOT want this to fall into the wrong hands.

I may also add....look around before you open your car door and make it a habit to lock your car doors before you start your engine. I've never heard of this style of carjacking before, but it's very possible. This is a good piece of information; what will they think of next!

The bipolar child is a purely American phenomenon

Psychology Today

"The bipolar child is a purely American phenomenon": An interview with
Philip Dawdy
By Christopher Lane, Ph.D. on April 7, 2009 - 12:17pm in Side Effects
Philip Dawdy, a prize-winning investigative journalist, has for
several years written a powerful, well-researched, and well-regarded
weblog, Furious Seasons, which focuses on American psychiatry, mental
health, and the way we think about treatment options. Given his
intensive work on the issues, I wanted to ask him several burning
questions about ADHD, bipolar disorder, and other controversies in
American psychiatry.
You've written extensively about the psychiatric diagnosis of teens
and preschoolers. How do you account for the astonishing rise in the
number of diagnoses we're seeing in these age groups, especially with
regard to ADHD and bipolar disorder?
To me, you can lay all of this squarely at the feet of the pharma
companies, which had a slew of newish drugs come online in the 80s and
90s and wanted them taken by as many humans as possibleâC"consequences
for the patients be damnedâC"and a crew of child psychiatrists at
Harvard/MGH who see deeply-flawed, ill-for-life children where other
psychiatrists might see personality disorders and issues that will
burn out over time. The pharma companies and the Harvard crew worked
hand-in-hand to bring America a generation of ADHD kids and bipolar
children, and their profound influence can be seen in the millions of
children and teens who now carry lifetime diagnoses and take gobs of
psychotropic drugs each day, often to their detriment.
That may sound extreme to some people, but it's worth noting that the
rest of the world has not embraced these diagnostic and treatment
paradigmsâC"except Britain, where there was an initial embrace of ADHD
and stimulants, but where there's now a significant backlash.
Meanwhile, in France and Italy ADHD is rarely diagnosed and it's
difficult to see where French and Italian culture have suffered as a
result. As for bipolar disorder in kids (meaning pre-teens and
younger), it's simply not an issue in the rest of the world. The
bipolar child is a purely American phenomenon, as big a metaphor of
our times as credit swaps, subprime loans, and government bailouts.
Why do you think so many more teenage and younger boys than girls are
being diagnosed with ADHD, and what does that say about our culture,
education system, parental expectations, and so on?
The data I'm familiar with pegs the boy-to-girl ADHD ratio at 3 to 1,
which is pretty dramatic. I suspect that boys get pegged with the
diagnosis more than girls do for two reasons: One, boys have always
been far more energetic and physically exuberant than girls, a point
going back through history, perhaps because they are developing their
hunter-gatherer beings. And, two, the hyperactivity piece of ADHD is
quite easy to spot and probably leads to greater pressure for kids to
be diagnosed because hyperactive boys can be disruptive, especially in
school environments.
As out there as this may sound, I think we are as a culture cheating
boys of their inherent natures and I have real questions about how
that affects their psychosocial development long-term and what it will
all mean for manhood a couple of generations down the road (I'm
concerned about comparable issues with girls as well). What's more, I
think the educational system places too much emphasis on having quiet,
compliant kidsâC"far more so than in the past. When I was a kid in the
1970s, boys were pretty much allowed to engage in all kinds of
wildness at recess in elementary school and after school, but from
what I hear that's being discouraged today. Why the change I couldn't
say, but I do know that there's been a real push in our culture to
silence outward signs of male aggressiveness, both in kids and adults.
As for parents, I think they are under a lot of self-imposed pressure
to have perfect kids with high grades who get into top universities or
they've somehow failed as parents. The ADHD drugs and the diagnosis
itself have been foisted on them as a way to have their kids better
liked among school peers and to achieve higher grades and perform
better on the many, many standardized tests kids must take these days.
What's interesting to me is that parents and our culture may well have
been sold a bill of goods here, as the recently released MTA study (a
long-term tracking study of kids through teens with ADHD, both on and
off-meds) showed that long-term treatment with stimulants didn't
appreciably improve GPAs and other test scores.
What influence do you think patent cycles exert over such diagnostic
trends? I'm thinking especially of the move to "bundle" depression
with bipolar disorder when the patents for so many SSRI
antidepressants ran out.
I think there is some influence here, even though diagnostic trends
should ideally be driven by unbiased science, independent of the needs
of pharma companies. What I've noticed over time is that, as you
suggest, there's been a great rush to get a drug approved for as many
indications as possible as it nears the end of its on-patent life,
likely because the drug companies can then market said drug directly
to the public. Certainly, that's part of what went on with Paxil and
social anxiety disorder in the late-1990s and, right now, I'm noticing
an epic push by Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca to have their atypical
antipsychotics (Zyprexa and Seroquel, respectively) approved for a
wide range of indications (including ones like depression) before the
drugs go off-patent in a few years.
Perhaps the most egregious example of a pharma company trying to
influence diagnostic trends came in 2002 when Eli Lilly launched a
massive sales campaign to convince PCPs that patients walking into
their offices complaining of depression actually had bipolar disorder
type 2 instead, and that Zyprexa was the perfect fix for that. The
results were utterly disastrous for patients, what with all the weight
gain and diabetes they experienced as a result. Interestingly, female
patients were the primary target of the campaign.
Do you think the black-box warnings that the FDA issued against
pediatric antidepressant use were effective as a deterrent?
I'm not sure they were much of a deterrent since there's been 14
percent growth in antidepressant prescriptions since 2004, according
to IMS Health. But to the degree that the black box on suicidality
gave patients and doctors important information that had long been
hidden from them by both the pharma companies and some researchers, I
think the warnings were a boon. It has at least forced people to think
long and hard about what drugs they are taking, and to pay closer
attention to side effects and any strange emotions that might arise
upon first taking the drug or changing a dosage.
Why do you think Bipolar II disorder is controversial as a diagnosis?
I may be the only writer in America who thinks BP2 is controversial
and I can hardly think of any doctors who do. For me, it's a
questionable classification and something of a cop-out by the DSM
writers for a couple of reasons: One, BP2 isn't bipolar disorder,
properly understood. There's no mania, there's no hospitalization for
mania, and there's no one running naked down the street. The most
prominent features of BP2 are depression (and that covers the vast
majority of a person's time who is diagnosed with BP2) and bursts of
energy, broadly understood. To me, that sounds a whole lot more like
depression and agitation than it does manic-depression.
Two, the minute someone gets hit with a bipolar disorder diagnosis of
any subtype, then they are faced with a profoundly bad set of social
assumptions; they get stigmatized by friends and family; and they lose
their jobs. I know of multiple cases along these lines, including one
of a sheriff's deputy in King County, Washington who was fired from
her job as soon as the brass learned she had BP2, even though she had
a stellar track record as a cop and had done nothing wrong on the job.
That hardly seems fair when we're talking about a disorder that
doesn't involve hallucinations or psychosis and has none of the
off-the-charts impulsivity of true manic-depression. While it's nice
of researchers and mental-health advocates to claim that we've got to
end this kind of stigma, in the real world that would take generations
and by then people with BP2 today will have reached the ends of their
natural lives.
Why BP2 wasn't called something else is beyond me, but the diagnosis
has sure caused a lot of unfair social damage.
Much of the rationale for medicating teens and preschoolers has to do
with arguments about early intervention. You've written that you find
such claims questionable and their underlying philosophies flawed.
Explain why.
Let me restrict this to psychosis. What you are referring to is the
prevention paradigm, or the use of psychotropics as prophylactics, all
of it trading off kindling theories of mental illnesses and disorders.
They are interesting theories, but in the real world they've not
turned out to be successful. Simply put, there is very little
long-term or short-term research to prove their validity. For example,
the PRIME study at YaleâC"which sought to identify kids at risk of
psychosis and then gave them Zyprexa to prevent psychosis from ever
arisingâC"was an epic failure and certainly raised questions about the
ethics of giving kids dangerous drugs for disorders that they, at
least in some of the cases, didn't even have.
The trouble is that the prevention paradigm is deeply seductive. If
true, psychiatry would be like cardiology where high cholesterol is
considered a risk factor for heart disease and people with high
cholesterol are given statins to prevent heart attacks. But psychosis
isn't so simple andâC"from what I've seen to dateâC"researchers have
not been able to predict with a high degree of accuracy who will
develop psychosis. That's why I find the whole thing suspect. Perhaps
I'll be warmer to researchers' claims here when they can predict
psychosis with great accuracy and replicate their findings in many
studies across different population subtypes.
As you noted on your site, the St. Petersburg Times recently reported
that in 2007 23 infants less than one-year-old were given
antipsychotics. Given all the media attention to the death of Rebecca
Riley, aged 4, from an overdose of antipsychotics (and a diagnosis of
bipolar disorder at age 2), how is it possible for psychiatrists to
continue prescribing to infants in such numbers without more
oversight?
Doctors have great powers to prescribe drugs off-label for whatever
they see fit and, to a degree, that's fine. What's gone on with
antipsychotics prescribed to infants and toddlers is simply
inexplicable to me. The drugs are known to cause huge problems in
adults, so why the heck would a doctor give them to little kids,
especially infants? It boggles my small mind.
There probably is no acceptable way to introduce oversight into this
situationâC"outside of insurance provider overviewâC"without trampling
all over doctors' traditional freedom to prescribe off-label. I'm no
fan of bans or restrictions, but this does strike me as a situation
where there needs to be a serious rethinking of what we are
doingâC"and maybe there should be a ban on the use of these drugs in
kids under, say, 6 years of age.
That said, perhaps the most effective short term fix is for parents
themselves to get educated about the problems with these drugs and to
demand a second opinion when a doctor tries to prescribe them to their
child.
Your web site Furious Seasons, which has earned you awards, includes
extensive documentation about Zyprexa. What will readers of your site
learn about the drug and its side effects?
Hopefully, they'll learn that this is a drug that causes rapid weight
gain, hyperglycemia, diabetes, lipid problems and the like in a high
percentage of patients, and that it's a drug the use of which demands
great caution. They'll also learn that Eli Lilly actively lied to
doctors and patients about problems with the drug and that the company
has had to settle almost $3 billion in lawsuits and has pleaded guilty
to a criminal misdemeanor charge in federal court for off-label
marketing of the drug for use in dementia.
One classic example: in April 2002, Japanese regulators forced Lilly
to warn doctors in Japan abut hyperglycemia and diabetes problems with
the drug, but at the time same time the company claimed in internal
documents that this did nothing to affect the safety of the drug in
the US market. Two months later, Lilly rolled out its extensive
Zyprexa marketing campaign to PCPs, which I referred to above. That is
some of the worst corporate behavior I have ever seen in my 15 years
as a reporter.
Some months ago, the government's Clinical Trials web site signaled
that the antipsychotic Seroquel was being tested for people with
public-speaking anxiety. What can and should the FDA be doing to stop
such clear signs of "mission creep" over pharmaceuticals?
I don't think the FDA has any interest in stopping this kind of
behavior, and it likely doesn't even have the regulatory authority to
do so. For instance, in the last two years the agency has approved
antipsychotics for use in pediatric bipolar disorder and in treatment
resistant depression. Neither diagnosis exists in the current edition
of the DSM, but the agency seems just fine with this situation. It
even went to great lengths to justify the diagnosis of pediatric
"mania" bandied about by some researchersâC"which amounted to little
more than agitationâC"to the point where the FDA's chief of psychiatry
products, Thomas Laughren, was actively involved in a conference where
researchers and pharma companies joined to design clinical trials of
this kiddie mania.
Likely the best solution here is for Congress to pass legislation
requiring the FDA to only approve psychiatric medications for
disorders that appear in the then-current edition of the DSM. I cannot
think of a more effective way to stop Big Pharma's making up of
disorders which they then repurpose their drugs to "treat."
Final questions: How do you keep up with all the news in pharmacology,
and what are your standard sources of information?
My sources are a mix of traditional media coverage of the field
(although that's sadly declining as newspapers fade away), as well as
original research in journals, plus items that get sent my way by my
many dedicated readers. On top of that, I've been an investigative
reporter (mostly of government and law enforcement) for a decade and I
know where to snoop. Suffice to say, I read a ton of journal articles
and reportage. It's gotten to the point where I've not read a novel or
nonfiction book outside of the mental health world in about three
years.
Philip Dawdy is the author and editor of the award-winning weblog
Furious Seasons. Christopher Lane is the author of Shyness: How Normal
Behavior Became a Sickness.

--

Yours in good health, happiness, and gratitude,

Dr. Alan C. W. Tang, DC FIAMA
Family Care Wellness & Rehab
805 Plainfield Rd, Darien, IL 60561
(630) 789-8080 http://www.FamilyCareWellness.com
Don't just manage symptoms, *FIX* the problem
The information contained in this e-mail message may be doctor-patient
privileged and may contain confidential health information and may be
legally protected from disclosure by federal law, the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Any reader of this
message who is not the intended recipient is hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, disclosing, copying, acting upon or
otherwise using the information of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, you are
asked to not read the pages which are affected. Please immediately
notify us by reply e-mail, or telephone call, at 630-789-8080 of the
error and delete and destroy this e-mail. Thank you.

Acupuncture Comic