The magazine Vector [1999;2(4)] highlights a study that found bicyclists were able to improve their performance after undergoing a short program of chiropractic care.

The study involved six subjects, 4 male and 2 female. Three of the males and both females were competitive, trained racers.

They were initially tested to establish their base line performance score on a CompuTrainer, a stationary, computerized trainer which allows the rider’s own bike to be attached. A computer allows different loads to be applied to the rear wheel. The computer also measures the amount of force being applied to the pedals to help determine whether the rider is pedaling “round” (evenly) throughout the entire revolution. It is also able to measure the difference in the amount of force applied between the right and left leg.

After the riders were examined and adjusted by a chiropractor, they were retested on the CompuTrainer 1-2 weeks later. The trainer settings and testing protocol were identical to the initial test.

Five of the riders reported a lower perceived effort of how hard they were working at the same work load during the retest. Five of the riders also experienced improvement in biomechanical efficiency, pedaling “rounder” as measured by the computer on the trainer. This indicates that a rider can ride longer before fatiguing since the legs are working the pedals more like a motor rather than a piston.

Commentary: Chiropractic care improves all aspects of body performance, physical, mental or athletic, by correcting vertebral subluxations which interfere with nervous system and body function.

Common Heart Tests Not For Everyone

New federal guidelines presented in the February 17, 2004 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine recommend that three common heart tests used to detect problems should not be done on low-risk patients who are experiencing no cardiovascular symptoms.

The three tests in question are the Treadmill Test, Resting EKG and the Electron Beam Computerized Tomography Scan. The new guidelines for their use were issued by the U.S. Preventive Services Task force and replaced ones issued in 1996.

The Task Force Chairman, Dr. Ned Calonge, says that if “you are a low-risk adult with no symptoms, there is really no reason to experience these tests. We do not recommend them because of the risk of false positives.”

According to Calonge, false positives usually lead to further, much more invasive tests such as coronary angiography and unnecessary medical treatment including dangerous medications.

Interestingly, the task force found there was insufficient evidence that the three tests were even effective in adults who were at an increased risk for heart disease.

Inhaled Flu Vaccine Strongly Linked To Bell’s Palsy

The February 26th issue of The New England Journal of Medicine reports that an intranasal (inhaled) flu vaccine used in Switzerland has been associated with a greatly increased risk of developing Bell’s Palsy.

Bell’s Palsy is an acute inflammation of the facial nerve that leads to severe pain and paralysis of the facial muscles that control expressions such as smiling and frowning.

The inhaled flu vaccine in question is called Nasalflu and was first used in the 2000 – 2001 flu season. From October 2000 to April 2001 the Swill Drug Monitoring Center received 46 reports of vaccine recipients developing Bell’s Palsy. Soon after, the vaccine was pulled from the market and a study was begun to examine the extent of the connection. In November 2001 the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention joined the Swiss study.

In that study, 250 patients with Bell’s Palsy were evaluated and compared to 722 people without the disorder. 27.2% of the Bell’s Palsy patients had been vaccinated with Nasalflu while only 1.1% of the people without Bell’s Palsy had been exposed to the vaccine.

Not liking those results, the researchers decided to use a more conservative approach regarding their assumptions about the risk. Using even the most conservative assumptions, Nasalflu users were nearly 20 times more likely to develop Bell’s Palsy than folks who hadn’t. The highest risk of developing Bell’s Palsy was between 31 and 60 after exposure to the vaccine.

Commentary: We feel that further investigation into the Bell’s Palsy connection is highly important since vaccines are dangerous enough as it is. Inhaled vaccines can be even more dangerous because they bypass most of the body’s major defense mechanisms and provide a direct route to the brain for toxins the vaccines contain.

Cancer Patients Not Informed On Treatment Options

A report in the January 2004 issue of the European Journal of Cancer says that when it comes to treatment for cancer, doctors oftentimes do not give patients all the information on different options that they need to make an intelligent, informed choice.

The researchers, led by Dr. C.G. Koedoot of the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam, found that doctors generally discuss palliative chemotherapy which is designed to shrink tumors when a cure is unlikely to occur. Less than half the patients were told about watchful-waiting, which involves treating symptoms as they show up rather than using chemotherapy.

Watchful-waiting and palliative chemotherapy have similar survival rates.

The study involved 95 people with incurable cancer who were interviewed before discussing their treatment options with a cancer specialist. The conversations between doctor and patient were recorded and analyzed.

In 84% of the cases, doctors discussed how long the chemotherapy would last as well as common side effects, such as hair loss and nausea. However, less than half the patients had discussions about the quality of life under chemotherapy and how it would effect their emotions, their work and their sex and social lives.

Watchful-waiting was only discussed in about half of the cases. When it was talked about, it was usually described as “doing nothing.” According to Dr. Koedoot, doing nothing “probably will be interpreted by the patient as being given up [on] by the physician.”

Commentary: Describing watchful-waiting as “doing nothing” also gives patients an impression that the doctor is going to “do something” even though watchful-waiting may be the best option for providing the best quality of life for the time the patient has left.