Juice Company Demands Retraction From Dr. Oz

Dr. Oz recently revealed the results of a study on his show that determined that "10 of three dozen juice samples from five different brands came back with higher than the arsenic limit allowed in drinking water," according to a report by Supermarket News. Now Examiner.com reports that Dr. Oz's findings are backed up by a new study conducted by Consumer Reports. Meanwhile, Dr. Oz announced on a recent show that Nestle, the maker of Juicy Juice, disputed his test results and sent him a letter via their lawyers demanding "a full and unequivocal retraction" of his comments.

Instead, Dr. Oz offered the following clarification on his show:

I'd like to clarify something else I said on the original show. I said, "We're poisoning our own families, and I'm getting asked questions about why the kids aren't doing well and then we find this kind of stuff." I should have said, "We may be poisoning our families. That's my opinion, and I stand by it."

Sixty Percent of Apple Juice Concentrate Comes From China

Dr. Oz's investigation revealed that American apple juice is made from apple juice concentrate, 60% of which is imported from China. Because many countries use pesticides that contain arsenic, this could be cause for concern. The FDA recently disclosed nine test results that found arsenic levels to be above 23 ppb, the FDA's current level of concern (which, they admit does not consider the risk of getting cancer from arsenic).

How To Choose The Safest Apple Juice

Dr. Oz recommends organic apple juice, because none of the organic apple juices tested had arsenic levels that were greater than the safe limit for drinking water, as determined by the FDA. Look for an indication on the package that the apple juice concentrate is from the USA, which has stricter regulations than many other countries. Note that just because something may be packaged in one country, it doesn't mean that the apple juice concentrate is from that country.

Fresh Juice Is Best

One of the best ways to ensure safe apple juice is to make it at home, preferably from fresh, local organic apples that have been washed well. In addition to apples, juices from organic vegetables like celery and green leafy vegetables are wonderful to add to homemade juice. Including vegetables in juice is a great way to incorporate nutrients into a child's diet, and plain apple juice can cause blood sugar levels to spike quite quickly. Remember that fresh organic juice is always going to be a better choice than any kind of processed juice, even the organic varieties.

Would You Kill Someone To Save Five Others? (The government and doctors do it all the time.)

According to an article in Science Daily, a research team at the University of Michigan recently presented a group of test subjects with a very interesting moral dilemma. The subjects were placed in a 3-D virtual setting where there was a switch and two sets of railroad tracks. Along one set of tracks, there were five people hiking. On the other set of tracks, there was just one person hiking.

Is Killing For The Greater Good OK?

In this imaginary setting, a boxcar approached from the distance headed toward the five hikers who had no means of escape. The research subjects had the option of pulling a switch that would reroute the boxcar toward the path of the single hiker, who also had no means of escape. What would you do in this setting? Would you choose to kill the one person in order to save the five?

Interestingly enough, in this setting, 90.5 percent of the subjects decided to pull the switch to divert the boxcar. Most people believe that it is morally wrong to kill someone, but in this case, most of the test subjects thought it was fine to kill someone as long as that action would save others.

In this situation, we assume that the research subjects didn't know any of the hikers. One has to wonder if the response would be different if the test subjects knew or loved the individual hiker but didn't know any of the other five hikers. Of course, there are lots of combinations to consider, as well.

Not too many people would argue that a person has a right to try to save other people if no expenditure of other human life is involved. The question to ask is: "Under what circumstances does a human being have the right to take the life of another human being?" Is killing someone automatically acceptable if one deems it necessary to save some greater number of lives? Or should the guiding principle be to do no harm?

Governments And Doctors Choose To Take Lives Every Day

Even though many doctors have taken an oath to do no harm, the truth is that doctors choose to take human lives every day. It's no secret that many vaccines that patients believe are there to protect them from diseases actually kill or injure the very people they are intended to protect. Killing, you see, is "ok" sometimes when the government (as in the case of mandated vaccines, for example) or doctors decide that it's for the greater good.

Is It Ever Really OK To Kill Someone?

When it comes to personal well-being, it's up to the individual to protect himself. The government isn't going look out for the rights of an individual. The government will always look to protect society as a whole. And, your doctor, too, will probably decide that there are certain times where death is sometimes an acceptable outcome due to his prescribed treatment. Likewise, according to the results of the experiment conducted at the University of Michigan described above, most people seem to think that killing others is justified sometimes. But is it ever really acceptable for another human being to make the God-like decision to take the life of another?

Scientists Want To Rid The World Of Babies With Down Syndrome

According to a recent study published in Genetics in Medicine, there's a new test available that can determine whether or not a woman is carrying a baby with Down syndrome by analyzing her blood sample. This test is of great interest to doctors, because previous testing methods like amniocentesis could sometimes cause miscarriages to occur. Now, according to an article in The New York Times, a San Francisco-based biotechnology company, Sequenom, is offering the test in 20 major cities.

Is The Test Ethical?

Many people are concerned about the ethics of conducting prenatal tests to determine if a fetus has Down syndrome. The study authors also report that false positives can happen. An article in The Atlantic Wire entitled "How Much Eugenics Are We Willing to Tolerate?" expresses concerns about the new testing method leading to more abortions. With previous testing methods, 92% of women who learned that they were carrying a child with Down syndrome chose to abort.

Down Syndrome Can Be Treated

Would these mothers still choose an abortion if they knew that Down syndrome can often be treated? People at The Institutes for the Achievement of Human Potential (IAHP.org) in Philadelphia have done just that for many years. While people at the Institutes don't treat genetic problems, they do conduct neurological evaluations to determine whether children, as a result of their genetic problems, are brain-injured. Once it is determined where the brain injuries exist, a treatment program of neurological organization is used.

Proper nutrition is also vital. Physicist Linus Pauling stated at a 1978 conference, "I admire the work that has been done in these Institutes very much. I know that considerable emphasis is placed on good nutrition for the people who come to the Institutes and that large doses of vitamin C are given to them."

According to an article called Veras Kids by Janet Doman, the Director of IAHP, Down syndrome children used to be referred to as "Mongoloid idiots," which "tells us a great deal more about the intelligence of the label-makers than the intelligence of the innocent children they were labeling." Janet also reports that many Down syndrome children used to be left to starve to death in hospital nurseries, and it still happens. About amniocentesis Janet writes, "How do we explain that we now have a test whose primary purpose is to spot a little hurt baby and get rid of him at the earliest possible moment?"

There Is Hope

For those who think there is no hope for Down syndrome babies, there are stories of many kids whose parents decided they would fight for their children. Here are some clips that show babies and tiny tots with Down syndrome who can play the violin, read, write, do math and more:

Down Syndrome Tot Plays Violin

Down Syndrome Baby Reads

Down Syndrome Child (age 6) Learning

Some of the kids are reading better than "well" children their own ages. Read about success stories at IAHP here.

In Veras Kids, Janet writes about children with Down syndrome: "These children are much more capable and productive than their parents are led to believe is possible. Many of them that carry out The Institutes program with diligence become completely well."

What Researchers Should Be Asking

Clearly, many Down syndrome children are doing some amazing things, often better than their "normal" peers. If brain-injured children can do such remarkable things, the question researchers should be asking is: "Why are so many 'normal' children doing so poorly?" In Veras Kids, Janet shares her dream: "Imagine a world with no more brain-injured children, not because we eliminated them but because we fixed them."