Reader Q&A Q: We were in a restaurant and there was this literature on the table about bee caps. It contains “royal jelly, pollen, propolis, honey plus 22 essential vitamins” – so the literature goes. Are bee caps really good? A: I Googled “bee caps” and got 7,150 hits, most of which
are from sites “selling a product” (which really means, making a profit from
those whom they can convince that “you can’t live without this miracle stuff.”).
That does not really make the answer yes or no, by itself. So I looked up some of the
components. Royal Jelly (also known as gelee royale or sometimes
just RJ) is a white gelatinous substance secreted from the cephalic glands of “nurse”
worker bees (apis mellifera), apparently for the sole purpose of stimulating growth and
development in the queen bee. Without royal jelly, the queen bee would be no different
from the worker bees and would live about as long (seven to eight weeks). With
royal jelly, the queen bee can live five to seven years. This explains the popular myth
that royal jelly has rejuvenating qualities. It has not lived up to that
expectation for humans, however. I seriously doubt it is a significant anti-aging
substance as many of those sales sites claim. However, royal jelly consists of an emulsion
of proteins, sugars, lipids, and some other substances in a water base. Proteins make up
about 13% of the total. One protein in royal jelly, called royalsin, possesses antibiotic
properties against gram-positive, but not gram-negative, bacteria. About 11% of
royal jelly is made up of sugars, such as fructose and glucose, similar to those found in
honey. Lipids total about 5% of the substance and consist mainly of medium-chain hydroxy
fatty acids, such as trans-10-hydroxy-2-decenoic acid, which is also thought to possess
some antimicrobial properties. Royal jelly also contains vitamins, such as pantothenic
acid, minerals, and phytosterols. It also contains Neopterin, or 2-amino-6-
(1,2,3-trihydroxypropyl)-4 (3H)-pteridinone. Neopterin is also found in humans, though
its precise role is not known, but it appears to play some role in the human immune
system. Then there’s the pollen part: The usefulness of pollen as a human nutrient is very questionable. A
study showed that pollen from at least one species of plant is digestible by mice.
J.O. Schmidt and Patricia J. Schmidt in “Pollen Digestibility and Its Potential
Nutritional Value,” Gleanings in Bee Culture, Vol. 115 (6), June, 1984, pp.
320-322, showed that velvet mesquite (Prosopsis velutina) pollen supports growth
in mice. The caveat, however, is that it appears to take greater consumption of mesquite
pollen by mice to equal the weight gain provided by comparable milk and egg protein-based
diets. That article also sets about debunking some claims made by many promoters: (1)
pollen is not a giant germ killer in which bacteria do not exist; it is rapidly attacked by bacteria, yeast
and other fungi, (2) pollen cannot be called nature’s most perfect
food; it isn’t even perfect for bees, which require supplementary carbohydrates
(nectar or honey) to survive, (3) pollen does not retard aging by peoples in the
Caucasus region of Soviet Georgia (as claimed by some of those sales sites); a study of
eating habits there doesn’t even mention pollen, (4) pollen is not the richest
source of protein known to science; the major constituent of pollen is
carbohydrate, not protein, and the amount of protein varies considerably among
pollens from various sources, (5) bee pollen does not relieve allergy, asthma, and
hay fever; there are no scientific studies to support this (as many of those sales sites claim), on the contrary,
persons eating pollen must be on the lookout for potential allergic reactions, (6) the
claim that pollen improves athletic performance is bull; an extensive study at Louisiana State
University reveals no significant improvement in either training or performance.
Of primary concern, the article states, is the cleanliness of the collected bee pollen.
The kinds of debris and foreign matter that can be found in commercially-sold pollen is
amazing. A partial listing includes: (1) lost bee parts; (2) bits of plants like leaves
and straw; (3) pollinia or stamens from certain plants that stick to bees and pollen; (4)
hair-like threads; (5) various insects, some invisible to the human eye, and (6) mummies
and scales from bee diseases. So, are Bee Caps good for you? Well, I’d guess you won’t die from eating these, but likely a reasonable diet of normal “healthy” food will provide you with the same benefits you might get in bee caps, without having to pay for an additional supplement that is not adding anything significant. But that’s a decision you have to make for yourself. Q: I heard that Congress has declared tomatoes to be a vegetable
(which is what I have been told all my life anyway), but you still call it a fruit. Which
is it, really? A: Tomatoes are, always have been, and always will be, a fruit as far
as the botanists are concerned. Congress had ulterior motives in their recent decision to
declare them to be a vegetable. Their number one reason was that current U.S. tariffs do
not tax the importing of fruits but we do tax imported vegetables. So, by the stroke of a
pen, they have just made a new source of income, even though it is based on a lie.
Secondly, the school lunch program required an increase in the quantity of vegetables
served, and now the tomato slices on hamburgers qualify. I think an additional silliness
happened during the Clinton reign, when he decided catsup, because it contains some
portion of tomatoes, qualified as a vegetable source and satisfied that requirement.
Stupid? Yes. A lie? Yes. But what else do you expect from government? Q: You give a lot of grief to
food additives, but c’mon, aren’t they really necessary? A: Humans
have existed on this planet for about 4.5 million years (some religions say only 6,000,
but whatever your belief, it’s been a long time) and we only started using additives
in the early stages of the industrial revolution. Most animals eat their food when and
where it is grown. Humans, because we live mostly in concentrated urban areas, were forced
to ship and process our food to feed the teeming masses who did not have the space, time,
or ability to grow their own. So, to define food additives, they are those substances that
are added to processed food that supposedly have some “useful” purpose, such as
protection from deterioration or spoilage. Additives are also used to improve taste, flavor, texture, and
appearance, or to restore the nutritive value that was removed by the manufacturing
process and to aid in the processing and packaging (i.e., make it cheaper for the
manufacturer to produce a product that you will continue to purchase). At last count,
there are over 700 additives used in the processing of our supermarket foods. According to
the Food and Drug Administration, manufacturers have to prove that the additives are
necessary (although you know by now that a few bucks on the side can make the FDA look the
other way). Some additives are there to kill bacteria in the food, so there is no (or
delayed) decay. There is nothing, however, to prevent these additives from harming your
body enzymes or internal organs. Milk is an excellent example: Calcium chloride is added
to canned and evaporated milk. It is also used to melt snow and it causes metal parts to
disintegrate. Milk substitutes also contain an array of acids and gases. And if you eat
store-bought bread, choose it very carefully. It takes five times the chemicals to make
whole wheat bread as it does white bread (yet the advertising claims whole wheat is better
for you). Refined sugar is pumped full of acids, then boiled several times, which makes it
the deadliest and most dangerous product on the market (as well as being the preferred
food of fungi). Supermarket meat has about 13 different additives, ranging from dyes to
acids to buffers. I keep telling you folks to read those labels to find out what is in
your food, but even though I tried to help you decipher the enigmatic ingredients lists, I
seriously doubt any of you have stopped eating some favorite snack simply because it
contains a chemical you don’t recognize as being a human toxin. Did that answer your
question? Additives are necessary only because of the lifestyle (and profit demands) that
we have allowed ourselves to be forced into. We here at Love Acres have managed to make
several safe and healthy foods without any additives, but they must be consumed within a
couple days or they will spoil. Those of you who have both husband and wife working
outside the home, and who are too tired at the end of each day to smash some berries and
xylitol into a healthy jam are going to be stuck with supermarket foods, and all those
toxic chemicals that come with them. As always, it’s your choice. Q: I found this in an issue of
Dr. Z’s newsletter and I’d like you to comment on it: My son is 3 1/2 years old. Since he was six months old he has suffered from chronic ear infections. The doctors placed tubes in both of his ears. The last episode lasted for two months. Jason was placed on four types of antibiotics, to no avail. It was finally suggested that his adenoids and his tonsils were to be removed surgically. At that point I decided to look at other alternatives. In addition to the ear infections, my son had terrible mood swings, threw constant tantrums. He showed hyperactive and often destructive behavior. He had recurring sinus infections, constant runny nose and black circles under his eyes. A co-worker recommended that I take my son to see Dr. Z. Her seven year old grandson had experienced dramatic improvements in his health under the care of Dr. Z. I took my son to Dr. Z’s office on a Friday afternoon. With his unusual muscle testing Dr. Z determined my son was allergic to sugar and basically all carbohydrates. He suggested that Jason’s digestion was not working properly, and that he was suffering from candida overgrowth due to his extensive exposure to antibiotics. He recommended that I take him off all carbohydrates and put him on an anti-candida regimen. Needless to say, I was scared to death to face possibly excessive tantrums because of the change of diet. The weekend was very tough. I had a screaming and upset kid. My husband was upset with me trying to change my child’s diet. By Tuesday, five days later, I had a new kid. My Jason had turned into a sweet, mellow, loving child. He was open to new food experiences. Now a week and a half later, I notice a definite increase in his natural positive energy. Sibling fighting between Jason and his brother has decreased by more than 50%. Now I find them late in the evenings sitting in bed and talking. He was an extremely picky eater before. During the last two weeks he has tried all kinds of new foods. The entire family has benefited from this new approach to foods. We all eat the same. Both Mom and Dad have lost a few pounds. The atmosphere in our house is calm and much more loving. Initially my husband was not supportive, but now he has seen with his own eyes the wonderful changes in his son. He is very excited about that. My son’s “ear infections” appear to have vanished. His runny nose is gone. The black circles under his eyes have vastly improved. One day my son was given a piece of cake at school against my clear instructions. He came home a changed boy. He was flipped out and upset and screaming most of the night. These are the clear effects of sugar. -- Suzanne V., Grass Valley, CA A: I seriously believe that there is little I can add to that. Those who say food is not a factor in our health (physical or mental) are clearly idiots. I do not know the person who wrote that letter to Dr. Z, but I have no doubt she isn’t lying. My own body is proof that good healthy food is the best medicine on the planet. And let us not forget, even Socrates said, “Let food be your medicine.” I suspect, in Jason’s case, it was not the elimination of all carbs, but the fact that the carbs he was eating were those that added fungi to his body and fueled those already there (e.g., sugar glazed cereals, donuts, etc.). And, as well, here is a little boy who had a candida problem, which I believe is very common today, in spite of doctor’s claims that candida is a female vaginal problem only. Bull! All of us have or will suffer a yeast problem because of the foods we subject ourselves to. Clean up your diet and you will clean up your health! Q: I have been trying to use
your Field of Intentions stuff when interacting with other people (many of them are
buttheads) and I just can’t seem to make it work. They are not doing what I think
they should be doing and I don’t know if I am responding badly or if this stuff just
won’t work for me. (Some other very personal text
omitted here.) Also, I am having no luck convincing
my brain to eat less. A: At the risk of playing psychologist, as well as rolling two issues
into one, I suggest that one of the problems some people have when attempting
self-directed changes using their Field of Intentions is that they do not
understand the difference between their physical senses and their mental/spiritual senses.
Your physical senses (sight, smell, hearing, taste, touch) are all directed outward
from your inner self. Can you “feel” your stomach digesting? You might feel the
gas bubbles, but can you feel the normal process? No, there are no detectors to provide
the brain with feedback on a conscious level. There are, however, detectors that
provide the subconscious (in this case, the brain’s autonomic processes) with
communications to tell the brain when to start or stop a process. If you are using this
ideology to alter your behavioral issues, you should note that you can observe your own
thoughts (a mental rather than sensory issue), but you cannot observe the thoughts of
other people, so you end up relying on body language signals or trying to determine
motivation based on the words they have spoken (translating outward senses to direct
inward sense). Also, basic human psychology suggests that whatever reason you have
for doing X will be a very salient point to you, and significantly more
salient in thought than in deed. Usually, we interpret other people’s actions (based
on what we think they’re thinking) to be exactly the opposite –
their deeds appear to be more powerful than whatever their driving motivation might have
been. When face-to-face with another person, both of you assume you are doing physical
things in an equal manner, but the reality is that each of you is raising the pressure
with each successive interaction. This is why childhood punching contests always elevate
until one or both participants are crying and/or bloody. That is, we tend to give more
pain than we receive, regardless of what we think we just did. Note also that research in
psychology indicates that your reasons and your pains are always more
palpable, more obvious, than the reasons and pains of other people. That always leads to
an escalation of mutual harm, to the illusion that others are solely responsible and to
the personal belief that your actions are more justifiable than theirs. You only
have to look carefully at the Iraq situation to see this is real (of course, trying to
eliminate racial hatred, however that was fostered, intolerance, avarice, deceit, greed,
etc.). That aside, when dealing with the actions, emotional and physical responses of
others, you have to stop trusting what your conscious brain is telling you about others,
go out on a limb and actually trust them to do what they say they will do. Their
subsequent actions will reveal their true intent. Don’t make it a problem until it
shows itself to be a problem, then deal with it in a case-by-case manner. As for the diet, are you really sure that is what you want? Even if,
consciously, you know you do, is it possible you have a deep-seated (subconscious)
reason to resist the required change? The older we are, the more years of programming we
have to erase before we can put new programs in place (it’s hard to teach an old dog
new tricks). Keep working on it. “Never give up. Never surrender.” – Galaxy
Quest. J Watchdog 1. Some doctors are questioning whether
targeted therapies — designed
to turn cancer into a chronic disease by silencing growth signals inside malignant cells
— are worth the expense to individuals and taxpayers. (You could do the same thing by eliminating refined sugar and eating
antifungal foods.) Most new cancer drugs improve survival
by only a few weeks or months, says researcher Leonard Saltz of New York’s
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Although Erbitux, for example, costs almost $10,000 a month,
studies have not shown that it helps colorectal cancer patients live longer. This USA Today article sounds like they believe these cancer
drugs are helping: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-07-10-cancer-drugs_x.htm
but another one from the same issue http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-07-10-cancer-costs_x.htm
says otherwise: “These costs are out of control,”
says Fran Visco, president of the National Breast Cancer Coalition, which is planning a
conference focused on drug costs in the fall. “We can’t allow it to continue.”
Barbara Brenner of Breast Cancer Action says she is especially troubled by the cost of Avastin, a newer drug used
to treat colorectal cancer that now sells for about $50,000 a year. That price could jump
to $100,000 if Avastin is approved to treat breast and lung cancers, because those
tumors are treated with higher doses of the medication. “It’s really exploiting the
desperation of people with a life-threatening illness,” says Marcia Angell,
former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine. I just love Ms. Angell because she lays it on the line most of the
time, which might be why she is the former editor of NEJM. 2. A study has shown that fish oils are more effective than the statin drug Lipitor in positively affecting the levels of HDL (“good”) cholesterol in obese and insulin-resistant men. HDL cholesterol protects against atherosclerosis by removing excess cholesterol from arterial cells, and low HDL levels can increase the risk of cardiovascular disease, particularly for those who are obese or insulin resistant. In the six-week study, fish oils and Lipitor were given to 48 men, both separately and combined. Fish oil and Lipitor together greatly lowered plasma triacylglycerols and raised HDL cholesterol levels. But only fish oil also influenced HDL cholesterol by altering the production and catabolism rates of HDL apolipoproteins (catabolism is the breakdown of complex molecules metabolically into simpler ones). Lipitor did not increase this effect when combined with the fish oils, and did not produce a similar effect on its own. Coming from the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, those are far out statements. For more see: http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/84/1/37 3. F’ing FDA… again (that’s only a bad word if you
believe it is) J. According to a report by the inspector
general of the Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. FDA has not made tracking post-approval
drug studies a priority, and does not know the status of many of them.
Roughly half of all drug approvals involve a commitment by the manufacturer to at least
one post-approval study commitment. Companies are required to give the FDA annual progress
reports on these studies, but 35
percent of the reports due in 2004 were either missing entirely or contained no
relevant information. The FDA validated less than a third of the reports. The FDA has little to no power to punish
drug companies that leave such studies unfinished. Why the heck not? Aren’t they supposed to be a regulatory agency
for the federal government? The inspector general said the
FDA should improve its monitoring of the studies, upgrade its tracking system, and ask
manufacturers to provide better information. Reuters has
the article at: http://today.reuters.com/News/newsArticle.aspx?type=healthNews&storyID=2006-07-10T122013Z_01_N07300060_RTRUKOC_0_US-FDA.xml but even better, if you can handle the
big language, is the 45-page report (in .pdf format, readable on all computers)
from the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. See that
one at: http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-01-04-00390.pdf 4. More
on AdverGaming: If you have a high-speed internet connection (this will be too frustrating
from dial-up), you might want to check out http://adage.com/vidt?pId=17, a site that contains audio/video presentations of various marketing
tactics. Although that page contains several subjects, the first two on their list (as of
today anyway) are directly related to how the food manufacturers are brainwashing your
children (or you) into buying (or demanding parents buy) foods that really aren’t
good for you. The two I think you should watch are Food Marketers Rush to Advergames
and Supersizing the Cheeseburger Business. Both of these will slip out some
psychology secrets of how they implant desires in your head to go buy more junk food. 5. Think all your mercury poisoning comes from amalgam fillings or tuna? Do you live downwind or downstream from a cement plant? WASHINGTON, DC, July 31, 2006 — The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reported that, across the country, cement kilns are responsible for thousands of pounds of mercury pollution each year. Despite this, the EPA has ignored both federal law and court orders that require this pollution to be controlled. “It is beyond irresponsible,” said Earthjustice attorney James Pew. “Cement kilns are some of the worst mercury polluters in the country, yet the EPA simply allows them to continue polluting. There are technologies that can reduce mercury output from cement kilns, but the EPA just pretends it doesn’t exist. Meanwhile, our streams and lakes get contaminated and we’re told that it’s no longer safe to catch and eat fish.” More at: http://www.enn.com/net.html?id=1595 6. It isn’t all super-sizing. How many M&Ms are enough? It depends on how big the candy scoop is. At least that’s a key factor, says a study that offers new evidence that people take cues from their surroundings in deciding how much to eat. It explains why, for example, people who used to be satisfied by a 12-ounce can of soda may now feel that a 20-ounce bottle is just right. I suggest everyone read this one if you want to understand the psychology of a successful diet plan. More at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14108243/ 7. Eating more vegetables and fruits,
sources of so many antioxidant vitamins and phytochemicals, seems like a powerful step to
lower the risk of cancer and other health problems. However, large population studies have
shown mixed results about such benefits. Now research suggests that this may be due to different parts of our diet interacting
and altering the effect of any single change in our eating habits. The vitamin C in
fruits and vegetables is water-soluble, so it is unaffected by dietary fat. But
beta-carotene and the other carotenoids, as well as vitamin E, are fat-soluble and require
some fat for best absorption from the digestive tract. However, research suggests that
only three to five grams of fat may be needed. That amount is in one teaspoon of oil,
three ounces of poultry or other lean protein, or a tablespoon of nuts eaten along with
the vegetables or fruit. More at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13908946/ We’ve already told you that eating
fat isn’t a problem unless it is eaten with sugars, at which point your body uses the
sugars and stores the fats for later use. This article illustrates some other such
combinational problems. 8. We told you about
this kid before, but here’s the results: NORFOLK, VIRGINIA -- A judge ruled
Friday that a 16-year-old boy fighting to use alternative treatment for cancer must report to a hospital by Tuesday and
accept treatment doctors deem necessary, the family's attorney said. The
judge also found Starchild Abraham Cherrix's
parents were neglectful for letting him pursue alternative treatment after he rejected
doctors' recommendations for a second round of chemotherapy, lawyer John
Stepanovich said. Jay and Rose Cherrix of Chincoteague must continue to share custody of
their son with the Accomack County Department of Social Services, as the judge had
previously ordered, Stepanovich said. The parents planned to appeal, the lawyer said. - Published July 22, 2006, Chicago
Tribune Don’t you just hate
it when the judge orders a child to murder himself? However, four days later (same
newspaper): ACCOMAC, Va. -- A judge ruled Tuesday that a 16-year-old cancer patient
who has refused conventional medical treatment does not have to report to a
hospital as previously ordered; he scheduled a trial to settle the dispute. This version at
(requires sign-up): 9. We have linked senators to Big Pharma profits before, but now we know they are deeper into the healthcare industry and have even more reasons for not letting people be cured. HCA, the nation’s largest for-profit hospital operator, was close to a deal last night to sell itself to a consortium of private equity investors for about $21 billion, people involved in the talks said. The investors would also take on about $10.6 billion of HCA’s debt, making the deal the largest leveraged buyout in history. The buyout group is led by the family of Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader, whose father, Thomas Frist Sr., and his son, Thomas F. Frist Jr., founded HCA. The other investors are Bain Capital, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Company and Merrill Lynch’s private equity arm, these people said. More financial news at: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/24/business/24hospital.html?ex=1154491200&en=b5e5f0ec866d8aee&ei=5070 And, as an “oh by the way,” here’s the lowdown on HCA itself: HCA Inc. was incorporated in Nevada (a state where incorporation is very easy) in January 1990 and reincorporated in Delaware in September 1993. HCA is a health care services company in the United States. At December 31, 2005, the Company operated 182 hospitals, comprised of 175 general, acute care hospitals; six psychiatric hospitals; and one rehabilitation hospital. The 182 hospital total includes seven hospitals, six general, acute care hospitals and one rehabilitation hospital owned by joint ventures in which an affiliate of HCA is a partner, and these joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method. HCA operated 94 freestanding surgery centers, seven of which are owned by joint ventures in which an affiliate of HCA is a partner and these joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method. The Company's facilities are located in 22 states, England and Switzerland. HCA's provides the communities; the Company serves a comprehensive array of health care services in the most cost-effective manner possible. The Company's general, acute care hospitals typically provide a full range of services to accommodate such medical specialties as internal medicine, general surgery, cardiology, oncology (cancer), neurosurgery, orthopedics and obstetrics, as well as diagnostic and emergency services. Outpatient and ancillary health care services are provided by the Company's general, acute care hospitals, freestanding surgery centers, diagnostic centers and rehabilitation facilities. The Company's psychiatric hospitals (notice the shrinks are prescribing more and more drugs these days, rather than just talking to their patients?) provide a full range of mental health care services through inpatient, partial hospitalization and outpatient settings. HCA currently owns, manages or operates hospitals; freestanding surgery centers; diagnostic and imaging centers; radiation and oncology therapy centers; comprehensive rehabilitation and physical therapy centers; and various other facilities. Most of the Company's general, acute care hospitals provide medical and surgical services, including inpatient care, intensive care, cardiac care, diagnostic services and emergency services. The general, acute care hospitals also provide outpatient services such as outpatient surgery, laboratory, radiology, respiratory therapy, cardiology and physical therapy. Each hospital has an organized medical staff and a local board of trustees or governing board, made up of members of the local community. The Company's hospitals do not typically engage in medical research and education programs. However, some of the Company's hospitals are affiliated with medical schools and may participate in the clinical rotation of medical interns and residents and other education programs. At December 31, 2005, HCA operated six psychiatric hospitals with 600 licensed beds. The Company's psychiatric hospitals provide therapeutic programs including child, adolescent and adult psychiatric care, adult and adolescent alcohol and drug abuse treatment and counseling. Outpatient health care facilities operated by HCA include freestanding surgery centers, diagnostic and imaging centers, comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation and physical therapy centers, outpatient radiation and oncology therapy centers and various other facilities. These outpatient services are an integral component of the Company develops health care networks in select communities. At December 31, 2005, HCA had approximately 191,100 employees, including approximately 51,300 part-time employees. Company info found at: http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp?userID=50297375&h=2hl5Awnf1dGv9GThfIuydQ&username=mad_scientist&symb=HCA 10. 25 Jul 2006 -
The Center for Science in the Public Interest issued a report today that found that nearly
one in five scientists appointed
to a sample of expert panels convened by the National Academy had "direct financial
ties" to companies with a stake in the outcome of the debate. More at: http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/24056/ 11. PORTLAND —
Gov. Ted Kulongoski said Wednesday that Oregon and Washington state will form a
prescription-drug-buying cooperative to leverage their combined buying power to get
medicine for the uninsured. … The announcement comes at the same time as a report
from the Heinz Family Philanthropies that found Oregon could save up to $17 million a year
by changing how the state
buys prescription drugs. Sounds like a nice
idea, but does this mean the state government will decide what drugs you take and when?
Get the rest of that story at: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2003155117_drugpurchasing27m.html 12. “I was taught, back in medical school, never to shave an eyebrow because it could result in permanent brow alopecia (bald brows). WRONG!” Excerpt from: Why Do Men Fall Asleep After Sex? by Dr. Billy Goldberg and Mark Leyner. See, no one is infallible and some, very clearly, are taught lies.
|