Saturday, December 18, 2010

Radio Show Notes3: The Best Buttermilk Cornbread On Planet Earth

You have got to try this buttermilk cornbread (recipe below) because it is so very incredibly awesome. 

(please share this recipe with your family and friends!) Bookmark and Share

In our house, it is an event. When this puppy comes out of the oven, all golden and crispy on the outside ... waiting, ASKING for the butter to go on it. 

If you're making black-eyed peas, you get a LIFE chip (ever play LIFE with your kids? where you get LIFE chips for "inventing a new color", "winning a Nobel Prize", or just "running a marathon"?). Well, here, if you serve your family this buttermilk cornbread with hop 'n John black-eyed peas, you definitely get a LIFE chip. 

The basics
Nothing to it. Just toss everything into a bowl, stir it around, throw it in your iron skillet, then into the oven, and wait until the smell emanating from your oven is, "from God". 

You can play with this recipe, though. The total corn meal/flour amount is 2 cups. But the particular ratio is up to you. I like having 3/4 cup of corn meal to 1/4 cup flour. If you like it softer, trade off for a bit more flour. If you like it cornier, trade off for a bit more corn meal.  

Buttermilk Corn Bread

You’ll Need

  • 1 1/2 cups corn meal
  • 1/2 cup AP Flour
  • 2 teaspoons baking powder
  • 1 teaspoon salt
  • 1 egg, lightly beaten
  • 1 1/3 cups buttermilk
  • 2 Tablespoons vegetable oil
Preheat the oven to 450.

Stir together the dry ingredients and set aside. In a medium bowl, combine the buttermilk, egg, and oil. Then add the dry mixture with the buttermilk mixture. Stir it together until moistened.

Swirl about 1 Tbsp of the oil into your iron skillet (the exact amount is not important), and set the flame to medium-high. Once it's good and hot, pour the corn bread mixture into the iron skillet. It will quickly bubble on the sides (not more than 2 minutes, honestly) and then you just toss the skillet into the oven.  

Bake for 15-20 minutes. Check the cornbread. If the cornbread is begin to pull away from sides of pan ... when it's golden on top ... when it smells wonderful ... it is done. 

 For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Radio Show Notes: What Do Today's Teens Use Most? Marijuana or Cigarettes?

Every generation faces new challenges to keep their kids safe. We've done a great job educating ourselves and our kids about the hazards of cigarettes. But now, it seems they've traded that vice in for another. 

(please share this with any parents you know) Bookmark and Share

(I'm talking about these in the first 10 minutes of the show today)
VIDEO location:

Cigarette usage is down, but they've traded the ciggies in for marijuana in stead.

Here are the data:
A survey of 46,482 students from 396 schools found that 16 percent of eighth-graders, typically 13 and 14 years old, admitted to using marijuana, up from 14.5 percent in 2009.
More than 21 percent of high school seniors, aged 17 and 18, said they had used marijuana in the past 30 days, while 19.2 percent said they smoked cigarettes. This is the first time marijuana use has passed cigarette use in the survey.
The survey found more than 6 percent of high school seniors use marijuana every day, up from 5 percent last year. More than 3 percent of 10th graders and 1 percent of eighth graders said they used marijuana daily, all increases over 2009.

What's the problem? 
"These high rates of marijuana use during the teen and pre-teen years, when the brain continues to develop, place our young people at particular risk," National Institute for Drug Abuse director Dr. Nora Volkow said in a statement.
"Not only does marijuana affect learning, judgment, and motor skills, but research tells us that about one in six people who start using it as adolescents become addicted."
Much has been made, of late, about the legalization of pot; about the fact that it is not physically addictive like the nicotine in cigarettes; about "boutique" brands of weed; about the mini-series WEEDS ... and all this may be the reason why kids more frequently smoke pot. 

What can/should we do about it?
Education. Regardless of what you think about the consumption of marijuana for adults (or alcohol or adults, or tobacco for adults), our kids need to be educated about the impact of this drug on their mental state and performance. 

The world always changes, and we are called to continually step up to those challenging situations. It doesn't mean that there's anything wrong in the world (today's pot was yesterday's LSD, and before that it was alcohol, and before that it was actually opium!!). It simply means that, now that it is our turn at the wheel, we've got to do our part to steer the ship in the right direction. When we're done with our turn, we'll pass it off to the next generation, who will have new challenges to navigate.  

Oh, by the way. What about Binge-Drinking?
The survey found binge drinking, defined as having five drinks or more in a row, was down. Just over 23 percent of high school seniors admitted to binge drinking in the past two weeks, compared to 25 percent in 2009 and 31.5 percent in 1998.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Friday, December 17, 2010

Really Expensive Pee: Buyer Beware

Dietary Supplements (a.k.a., "really expensive pee") are so commonly spiked with ingredients that aren't even on the label, that the FDA has put them on notice. 

(please forward this to anyone who takes "really expensive pee") Bookmark and Share 

Here's the problem.
Over 300 cases of those supplements that you buy because you want to get all healthy, shopping in the, quote, health food store for pills that have skinny smiling people sitting in the lotus position beside a screen-shot of a water fall, sunset, Buddha or something ... over 300 incidents of product adulteration have been flagged by the FDA.  
And those are the only ones they know about. 
Are these tainted pills bad for you? What do you think? The FDA has received reports on well over 100 products that have led to serious injuries, even deaths. The dead people never made it onto the packaging label. 
Listen To This
"These tainted products can cause serious adverse effects, including strokes, organ failure and death," said FDA Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg. 
So the FDA is going to the 5 major trade associations that sell the expensive pee, to inform them that it is "their legal obligations and their responsibility to prevent tainted products from reaching the US market."
The FDA's own laboratory tests revealed a variety of undeclared active ingredients in products sold as dietary supplements like anticoagulants, drugs that prevent blood from clotting and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or NSAIDS, that prevent inflammation and pain. They also found supplements that contained active drugs that had been taken off the market as a safety precaution.
The Bottom Line
Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, principal deputy commissioner, FDA says it's buyer beware. "We want consumers to be aware that there are products masquerading as dietary supplements but pose significant dangers. Warning signs include products that claim to be alternatives to FDA approved drugs, products marketed primarily in a foreign language, marketed though mass E-mails, or sexual enhancers that boast rapid affects."
Need a rule to follow? 
Pills are for sick people. Your best nutrition comes from your food. 

 For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Obesity: Is It About Poverty or Education?

We are in a race between education and disaster. 

(please share this with anyone who thinks education is NOT the answer)
Bookmark and Share

It's true for our politics, for our society, and for our health. Here's the bottom line from research from  the National Center for Health Statistics: education is more consistently related to obesity than poverty. 

As a matter of fact, "Among men, obesity prevalence is generally similar at all income levels, with a tendency to be slightly higher at higher income levels," the team at the National Center for Health Statistics wrote.

So how does that compare with education?
In this study, just over 27 percent of men with a college degree were obese compared with 32 percent of those with less than a high school education, while 23 percent of women with a college degree were obese, compared to 42 percent of women with less than a high school education.
What about their households?
A second study found children and teens living in homes with college-educated adults were less likely to be obese, and found stronger associations between obesity and income.
Just under 12 percent of boys and girls living in prosperous homes were obese, compared to 21 percent of boys and 19 percent of girls in the poorest homes.

Education. That's the key. SOUND education ... not sound-bites designed to sell some product. 

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Good News! FDA: It's now safe to dump your Sweet-n-Low down the drain

Saccharine -- the synthetic sweetener of Sweet-n-Low -- has always been considered a potential carcinogen BUT, and I did not know this, also an environmental hazard!

(please share this with any who still consume synthetic sweeteners of any stripe)
 Bookmark and Share
Just recently, however, the "Calorie Control Council" petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider their designation. The article below doesn't go into detail to say WHY this synthetic is no longer considered to be a threat to our world, only that they've now deemed it safe to loose it into the environment. 

Whew!! Now you don't have to treat saccharine products like your old paint cans, motor oil containers, and organic solvents, which have to be disposed of carefully because they're STILL considered harmful to the environment.  

Nope. You don't even need a haz-mat suit to throw away your Sweet-n-Low packets, now. You can just toss them into the first landfill, trash can, or dumpster you find.  

EPA says saccharin not a threat after all | Reuters
For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

FDA Deflates Male Enhancement Claims

(please share this with anyone who might consider this particular brand of crazy)Bookmark and Share

The Food and Drug Administration is warning men who take Man Up Now capsules to stop taking them immediately.  

The supplement contains a variation of an active ingredient found in Viagra that can lower blood pressure to dangerous levels, the agency says.  It is marketed as an "herbal" and "all natural" sexual enhancement dietary supplements.
The FDA issued the warning after chemists analyzed Man Up Now and found it contains sulfoaildenafil, a chemical similar to sildenafil, the active ingredient in Viagra.  

When mixed with prescription drugs, such as nitroglycerin, the FDA says, Man Up Now can cause blood pressure to drop and that can lead to dizziness or light-headedness.
By Monday morning the FDA had not received any reports of problems surrounding Man Up Now.  But if you are taking the supplement and have had any problems, the FDA suggests seeing a doctor and reporting it to the FDA.
Man Up Now is distributed by Synergy Distribution, LLC and is sold online and possibly in stores, according to the FDA.  CNN contacted Synergy Distribution for comment and so far, hasn't heard back.

FDA warns consumers to avoid sexual enhancement pills – The Chart - Blogs
For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Rent-a-Mom -- Breast Milk Sharing Over the Internet.

I've contacted the the FDA-approved milk-banks as well as the largest breast milk sharing sites to be on my radio program to talk about the pros and cons. Would love to get your thoughts now, and this Saturday!!
(please share this with moms, or someone who knows a mom ... or has a mom) Bookmark and Share 
Here's the deal
Moms who can't get breast milk on their own are getting it from individuals located over the internet. Government agencies are warning that the moms are taking excessive risks, because who KNOWS what could be in that milk. 
It's unregulated by the regulators who regulate things. And, fair enough: there really ARE random sick people out there and your baby is your baby, after all. 

The FDA issued a warning (here is the warning itself) against feeding babies breast milk acquired directly from individuals or through the internet. According to them, "the donor is unlikely to have been adequately screened for infectious disease or contamination risk" and that "it is not likely that the human milk has been collected, processed, tested or stored in a way that reduces possible safety risks to the baby."
They would rather you use breast milk collected from from sources like the Human Milk Banking Association of North America (HMBANA ... Here's their website). the HMBABA  milk donors have been screened and precautions have been taken to ensure the safety of the milk. 
But milk banks can be expensive, running as much as $4.50 for a single ounce of donated milk. That's $36 dollars for an 8-ounce bottle! No wonder these women are turning to breast milk sharing -- which is what women have done since there HAVE been women breast feeding babies. 
To answer the concern about the safety of the milk, the recipients of the Social NetMilk have learned how to do a type of flash heat pasteurization process that has been shown to inactivate HIV in the breast milk of HIV-positive women. 
The unregulated nature of it all makes it kinda weird, but we'll find out where the limits of this process are as soon as there is an accident caused by the Random Sicko. Then, changes will be made to the process, but you certainly can't completely shut down the sharing of breast milk between mothers. 
 For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

What's good for the heart is also good for your BRAIN!!

"In addition to being good for the heart, high levels of HDL ... the 'good' cholesterol ... may protect against Alzheimer's disease, U.S. researchers said on Monday.Bookmark and Share (please share this with someone who happens to have both a heart AND a brain!!) 
They found people over 65 who had the highest levels of high-density lipoprotein or HDL were 60 percent less likely to develop Alzheimer's disease over four years than people with the lowest HDL levels. 
These researchers studied 1,130 people over 65 who were white, black or Hispanic and lived in New York City. When they started the study, the volunteers had no history of memory or thinking problems. 
Over the course of the study, the team used medical and neurological data and did neuropsychological testing to diagnose Alzheimer's disease. They divided people into four groups: those in the highest group had HDL readings of 55 or higher. Those in the lowest group had HDL below 38. 
"The highest HDL group (when compared to the lowest HDL group) had a whopping 60 percent lower risk of developing Alzheimer's disease over four years" according to the lead author. An HDL reading of 60 or higher is considered protective against heart disease, according to the American Heart Association.

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Can chess check-mate Alzheimer's?

It's not about CHESS itself. 

Don't get me wrong, I like chess. I am, admittedly, awful at it, but I like it anyway. 

Pathetic, really. Kind of strange to like something that you're totally terrible at ... like watching a dancer who is the only one on planet Earth who enjoys his dancing. 

(please pass this to someone who is, frankly, confused by CHESS) 
Bookmark and Share

Nevertheless, what is important here is that you are engaged in your life and doing something that puts your neurons on SOME kind of mental treadmill. And what is really cool about this is that it doesn't matter what it is, as long as it's something that you find some pleasure in -- even if you are wonky at it. 

So. Do this. 
Go play something: an instrument, a competitive sport where you can beat up on someone in basketball, bowling or badminton, or walk or dance or do puzzles because it's fun. If you want your brain to work, you have to work your brain. 

This is just a little uncommon common sense. 

 For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

VIDEO: Frosted Chocolate Covered Sugar Bomb Cereals

This video from CNN reports on the new research on the sugary cereals that contribute to overweight, obesity, and early-onset diabetes in kids. 
(please share this with someone who eats Sugar Smacks, Fruit Loops, Frosted Flakes, and the like) Bookmark and Share 
Here's what they found
... and this is just crazy, I know, but they actually found that, if you choose NOT to serve your children cereal that is absolutely saturated in sugar and food dye ... well they get less calories. 

Can you imagine? Can you, like, believe it? I told you. It's crazy, and SO very hard to believe. But these researchers also found that kids enjoyed the other cereal just as well, and were MORE likely to add fruit to their bowls. 

You know what? 
You're kids ARE going to ask for the box with the cool bandanna'd Tiger, the psychedelic rabbit, and the Sugar-Smakin' Frog ... because they'd like to have Halloween all year round. 

That doesn't mean you have to give it to them. 

Of course they will ask for it; they're children. But don't have to say yes to your children ... you really can give them foods that won't harm them; you're the adult. 

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Monday, December 13, 2010

Challenge the Dogma: Should kids eat breakfast?

Here's what we're told about our kids. Skipping breakfast could lead them to overeat at later meals, and eventually pack on extra pounds. 

(please forward this to a parent of school-aged kids) Bookmark and Share

Does this even make sense?
It sounds like someone's selling the "spending to save" idea, but for kids!! In this way of thinking, kids need to eat more now, so they won't eat more later. But this is THEORY, and no one has actually looked to see if this is true. 
Tanja Kral of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, however, did just this, and the results are published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Here's the link to the research.

Here's what they did
They saw a large group of kids twice each day. In the morning, they had them either A) eat a breakfast; or B) not eat a breakfast. Whether they happened to eat breakfast that time changed each day. 

Next, the kids came back for lunch every day, and were allowed to eat as much as they wanted. This allowed the researchers to see whether skipping breakfast actually made them eat more later on at lunch. Great study. Simple. 

Here's what they found
Not surprisingly, kids said they felt hungrier throughout the morning when they did not eat breakfast. However, that did not translate into larger lunches.

"We found that despite differences in feelings of hunger and fullness, children who regularly consume breakfast did not make up for the missing calories from a skipped breakfast on a single occasion by eating more later in the day," said Kral.

As a result, the kids who ate breakfast ended up consuming more calories overall, and more than they needed to maintain their current weightsThe average kid took in 362 more calories on days when they did eat breakfast, pushing them about 20 percent over their estimated daily energy requirement.

Bottom line
The reasons for kids to eat breakfast have as much to do with their ability to concentrate and focus as anything. But the notion that they MUST eat to prevent more eating later in the afternoon is wrong. 

So, should your child eat breakfast, or not? 
This isn't an easy question to answer precisely because the needs of every child is different (who is surprised by this, really?), and you can't apply a one-size-fits-all solution to it. 

Kids who eat breakfast -- on average -- do better academically than kids -- on average -- who don't. That, we do know. So, again, there is no easy answer here, but maybe there's a middle ground: have a little breakfast (of real food). Just lose the sense that more is better because, in this case, more is just more. 

For more information: Click here to visit Will Clower's website.

Ten Worst Drug Recalls in FDA History

We are a pill culture. Your doctor is more likely trust meds to solve your health issues than to A) do nothing and allow your body to heal itself, or B) coach you to change your behavior. 

Of course, there are times when drugs are necessary. But when you look at this list below, you're reminded of why we need to educate ourselves about the dangers of putting drugs in your body -- for ANY reason. 

(please forward this article to any who still has faith in the parade of pills we are coached to consume)Bookmark and Share 
Below are the 10 worst recalls in FDA history -- the 10 best reminders as to why our predisposition to throw pills at everything is drastically overplayed. 

When you look at this list below, notice how LONG it took the FDA to recognize the damage and death caused by these meds before pulling them off the shelves. In each instance, the drug was deemed to be GOOD for you in some way, without being BAD for you ... until the moment when it was not. 
1) Fenfluramine/phentermine (Fen-Phen)
  • Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories
  • Recalled: 1997 (after 24 years on the market)
  • Financial damage: Awards to victims close to $14 billion, making it one of the most costly products liability cases in history.
Fen-Phen’s was a hugely popular weight loss drug, its popularity peaking in the 90’s. It is estimated that as many as 6.5 million people took it to help fight obesity. After consumers began experiencing heart disease and other  pulmonary problems, the FDA set the recall in motion.  American Lawyer reported that more than 50,000 Fen-Phen victims have filed suits against Fen-Phen’s maker Wyeth, and legal expenses combined with awards may have exceeded $21 billion.  Lengthy time in the marketplace combined with the severity of both the public reaction and the significant awards granted to its victims make its impact unprecedented.

2) Diethylstilbestrol (DES)
  • Maker: Multiple manufacturers (DES was never patented as it was created with British public funds)
  • Recalled: 1975 (after 37 years on the market)
  • Financial damage: Steep, but difficult to quantify because each manufacturer paid out legal damages correlated with its respective market share (a new way of awarding damages in these cases).
DES was prescribed for more than thirty years to prevent miscarriages and other complications during pregnancy.  It was not until 1971 before it was connected to a rare tumor that kept appearing in the daughters of women who had taken it. The FDA only banned DES prescriptions to women because no such problems have been found in men. In fact, it can still be prescribed to men to treat estrogen deficiency.   Litigation over DES led to a landmark products liability award that heavily influenced how both courts and the FDA approach oversight of drugs with multiple manufacturers.

3) Cerivastatin (Baycol)
  • Maker: Bayer
  • Recalled: 2001 (after four years on the market)
  • Financial damage: Litigation-related damages totaled $1.2 billion
Baycol, prescribed to patients as a treatment for high cholesterol, is reportedly responsible for more than 100,000 deaths and about as many lawsuits.  It was connected to a severe muscle disorder known as rhabdomyolysis, which clogs the kidneys with protein from dying muscle tissue.
4) Rofecoxib (Vioxx)
  • Maker: Merck
  • Recalled: 2004 (after five years on the market)
  • Financial damage: nearly $6 billion in litigation-related expenses alone
Vioxx is considered to be the largest drug recall in history, and one which elicited one of the greatest public outcries.  Vioxx, prescribed to more than 20 million people as a pain reliever for arthritis, was found to be responsible for increased risk of heart attack and stroke.  Both Merck and the FDA were roundly criticized for ignoring  evidence of the dangers of Vioxx before its eventual recall. The Lancet reported that as many as 140,000 people could have suffered from serious coronary heart disease from taking the drug in the US alone. Merck settled Vioxx litigation in the US for $4.8 billion, with close to $1 billion in legal expenses.
5) Valdecoxib (Bextra)
  • Maker: Pfizer
  • Recalled in 2005 after just one year on the market.
  • Financial damage: Over $2 billion in legal awards and expenses.
Bextra, like Vioxx, is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, that was prescribed to treat prescribed to treat arthritis and pain from other inflammatory disorders. It was removed from the market not long after Vioxx over similar concerns – increased risk of heart attack and stroke.  In some cases, it was also found to cause a fatal skin condition.  Although less publicized and the subject of fewer law suits, Bextra still resulted in $1.8 billion in legal awards against Pfizer and it’s subsidiary Pharamcia & UpJohn (not including expenses). The reason Bextra is on this list, however, is because it gave rise to one of the largest criminal fines ever imposed in the US.  Pharmacia & UpJohn Company was fined $1.195 billion, in addition to legal awards, after admitting to criminal wrongdoing, specifically with ‘intent to defraud or mislead’ in relation to the promotion of the drug.
6) Troglitazone (Rezulin)
  • Maker: Warner-Lambert
  • Recalled: 2000 (after one year on the market)
  • Financial damage: Warner-Lambert grossed $2.1 billion in sales before recall
The Rezulin saga, originally aired by the Los Angeles Times, was an ugly view into the process by which Rezulin was eventually removed from the market, but only after the FDA seemingly delayed the process due to complaints by Rezulin’s manufacturer.  A FDA doctor who voiced concern over the drug was later removed from his position at the behest of Warner-Lambert, an action that delayed the recall process.  Rezulin, an anti-diabetic and anti-inflammatory drug,  was eventually found to be causally connected with hepatitis.

7) Able Laboratories Generic Prescription Drugs
  • Maker: Able Laboratories
  • Recalled: 2005
  • Financial Damage:  Able Laboratories had $103 million in annual sales before recall
On May 23, 2005, all of Able Laboratories’ products were removed from the market due to questions surrounding the quality of the manufacturing process.  Some drugs were found to be too potent; others not potent enough.  Moreover, four of its managers were found to have fraudulently distributed misbranded and adulterated drugs.  The recall put Able Labs out of business.
Terfenadine (Seldane)
  • Maker: Hoechst Marion Roussel (now Aventis)
  • Recalled: 1997 (after 13 years on the market)
  • Financial damage: Seldane was a big moneymaker for Hoechst Marion Roussel for such a long period (the year before it was pulled it sold $440 million worth of Terfenadine worldwide).  In addition to its legal expenses, the loss of market share alone to drugs such as Loratadine (Claritin) was steep.
Seldane was a popular antihistamine brought to market in 1985 to treat allergies without causing drowsiness.  The FDA sought a recall from the manufacturer after cases of cardiac arrhythmia (abnormal electrical activity in the heart) appeared in patients taking Seldane with other drugs.  The recall is notable mostly for its scale; more than 100 million patients worldwide used Terfenandine as of 1990.  Following Seldane’s recall, Hoechst was able to mitigate its damages to some degree by introducing Allegra, a drug very similar to Seldane but without its side effects.
9) Phenylpropanolamine (PPA)
  • Maker: No principal manufacturer, widely manufactured across the industry
  • Recalled: in 2000 (at least 60 years on the market)
  • Financial damage: untold millions, if not billions (one manufacture alone settled for $15 million)
PPA, a psychoactive drug that saw many uses over its long history, is unique because it was never formally approved by the FDA. For decades it was used for everything from dieting to cold medication to treatment of psychological disorders, existing in a kind of limbo where it was neither banned nor fully endorsed.  That is, until an analysis by Yale University in 2000 recognized its connection with cardiac events and stroke, particularly in women.  The study estimated that 1 woman may have a stroke due to phenylpropanolamine for every 107,000 to 3,268,000 women who use products containing phenylpropanolamine as an appetite suppressant within a three-day window. The FDA estimates that between 200 to 500 strokes per year would have been prevented if PPA was replaced with something that presented less risks.  More than 25,000 lawsuits have been filed against a variety of drug companies, and awards for damages across the pharmaceutical industry number in the hundreds of millions, if not billions.
10) Mibefradil (Posicor)
  • Maker: Roche
  • Recalled: 1998 (after one year on the market)
  • Financial damage: Analysts had projected $2.9 billion in sales within 4 years
In only one year on the market, Posicor was linked to 123 deaths.  Considered relatively safe when taken alone, Posicor became potentially deadly when combined with any of 25 different drugs.  The large number of deaths are troublesome considering that the drug was prescribed to no more than 200,000 people worldwide in the space of one year, a relatively small number.  Posicor is on this list for stimulating debate surrounding policies encouraging the FDA to hasten the approval of certain drugs. It is often cited as a strong example of what can go wrong when drugs are rushed to market.

Search This Blog