Say Goodbye to Acne with the Acne 12-Week Intensive from Seasons

Want clear skin without harmful medication?

At Seasons, it is our goal to help you look and feel your best – as naturally as possible! The latest in our lineup of services, the Acne 12-Week Intensive, is a highly-specific treatment based on the type of lesions and the severity of the acne.

The Acne 12-Week Intensive includes includes:

• A consultation with our Seasons Skin Care Specialist
• An individualized acne treatment plan Complexion Analysis using VISIA
• A series of 12 LED Light Treatments and/or Skin Rejuvenation Treatments using IPL
• Deep-pore cleansing and exfoliating treatments
• 30 days of skin care products specially formulated for acne-prone skin
• The Acne 12-Week Intensive take-home packet including a specialized morning and evening regimen
• Complimentary maintenance and extractions as needed during treatment
• A 10% discount on acne skin care products during treatment

The Acne 12-Week Intensive Package, an $850 value, is offered at just $650. There’s no better way to stop acne dead in its tracks! Beautiful skin CAN be yours.

Seasons Welcomes New Family Member: Ryder Brooks Walpole

Seasons Marketing Coordinator, Blair Walpole and husband, J., welcomed healthy baby boy Ryder Brooks Walpole on Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 6:29 p.m. Ryder was 20 inches long and weighed 8 lbs. and 10 ounces.

“Ryder is our little miracle,” says Walpole. “Our lives have been turned upside-down; he has stolen our hearts.” Since his long-awaited arrival, he has attended all 3 Louisiana Tech home football games. He is certainly following his parents footsteps as one of the youngest Louisiana Tech fans! “We look forward to every stage of his life; he surprises us everyday with something new! Being a parent is one of the greatest gifts.”

Smartphones, Seasons, and Special Offers!

Everywhere you look, smartphones have become more than just a communication device.

They are an accessory we can’t live without. At Seasons, utilizing the latest technology is a commitment, both for your health and wellness as well as your convenience.

One fun way we’re utilizing technology for your convenience is with the use of QR Codes. Notice below a barcode arranged in a square pattern. Each QR code is embedded with data that will take your smartphone on a journey! A QR code might contain a coupon. It could contain information about products. Or it might even link to a website. QR codes are a quick and easy source of information for consumers.

So how do you read a QR code? Depending on the type of smartphone you have, you’ll need to download a free app called a code reader. We’ve tried RedLaser and QRReader, but there are many that work well. Once you’ve downloaded a code reading app, just scan the QR code using your camera and watch the magic happen! Who knew technology could be so much fun?

 

Handle with Care: 7 Steps to Cure Medical Debt

 

Best of the Best

It’s that time of year again. Northeast Louisiana will cast its vote for Best of the Best.

Each year, Delta Style Magazine asks local readers to to cast their votes for “Best of the Delta,” culminating in a list of the Top 3 in each category available. In 2010, Seasons – The Spa was honored to be named “Best of the Delta” in the category of Medi-Spa by the readers of Delta Style Magazine. And now we turn our attention to 2011.

This year, Seasons  is nominated in three categories including Best Medi-Spa, Best Day Spa, and Best Massage Therapist – Bethany Cox. We are so very grateful to our clients and friends for the nomination in each of those categories. That means you’ve already voted us in the Top 3 in each of those categories.

To cast your vote for Best of the Delta finalists, click here and we’ll link you to the final ballot.

 

Why Doesn’t My Endocrinologist Know All Of This?

Historically, relying on a consensus statement to treat or not to treat a particular patient has been shown to result in poor care and, as such, society consensus statements and practice guidelines are considered to be worst level of evidence in support of a particular therapy or treatment. A number of organizations, including the World Health Organization and others, have ranked the strength and accuracy of various types of evidence used in the medical decision process. In all scoring systems, the highest strength of evidence is randomized control trials and meta-analyses, with lower scores for other types of evidence. All grading systems place consensus statements and expert opinion by respected authorities (societies) as the poorest level of evidence, because historically they have failed to adopt new concepts and treatments based on new knowledge or new-found understanding demonstrated in the medical literature (1-6).

For instance, a recent study published in the 2009 Journal of the American Medical Association studied the evidence supporting the practice guidelines and consensus statements published by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association. It was found that only 11% of the recommendations, practice guidelines and consensus statements were based on quality evidence and over half were based on poor quality evidence that was little more than the panel’s opinion. The review also found that even the strongest (Class 1) recommendations, which are considered medical dogma, cited as a legal standards and often go unquestioned as medical fact, were only supported by high quality evidence 19% of the time and not revised based on new evidence (6).

Similarly, the Endocrine Society, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the American Thyroid Association also have a long history of guidelines and recommendations that are not supported by the medical literature and fail to adjust or abandon recommendations when new understanding and knowledge contradicts their recommendations. A case in point is the recommendation by these societies that a normal TSH adequately rules out thyroid dysfunction, despite massive amounts of literature that demonstrate this not to be the case (see Diagnosis of Hypothyroidism) or that T4 only replacement is adequate for most patients. A doctor who simply follows outdated society treatment guidelines that relies on a simple laboratory test and ignores the clinical aspects of a patient is not practicing evidence-based medicine. (1-7). Such doctors may be adequate as lab technicians, but as doctors and clinicians they fall short (1-7). This method of practice is consistently rebuked as improper and poor medicine, but has become the standard used by a large percentage of endocrinologists and physicians who feel medicine can be related to simply reading “normal” or “abnormal” in a laboratory column.

Discussing the lack of scientific basis of most medical society’s consensus statements and treatment guidelines in Internal Medicine News, Dr. Diana Petritti states, “Expert opinion and consensus statements can be quite misleading when used as the basis for a practice. Expert opinions imply that there is something that the experts know that clinician doesn’t know. I don’t think it’s always appreciated that it’s only opinion. There is a tendency to make guidelines and recommendations seem authoritative. I believe that physicians think that there is a great deal more behind authoritative recommendations than there might be when you lift the lid of the box and see what’s underneath(8).”

There has been significant concern by health care organizations and medical experts that physicians are placing too much reliance on consensus statements and failing to learn of new information presented in medical journals. Thus, they lack the ability to translate this new information into treatments for their patients. The concern is that doctors fail to practice evidence-based medicine, erroneously relying on what they have previously been taught and on “expert” societies instead of changing treatment philosophies based on new information as it becomes available. This is especially true for endocrinological conditions, where physicians are very resistant to changing old concepts of diagnosis and treatment — despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary — because it is not what they were taught in medical school and endocrinology residency.

This concern is particularly clear in an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine entitled “Clinical Research to Clinical Practice: Lost in Translation” (9). The article was written by Claude Lenfant, M.D., Director of National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, and it is well supported. He states that there is great concern that doctors continue to rely on what they learned 20 years before and are uninformed about scientific findings. According to Dr. Lenfant, medical researchers, along with public officials and political leaders, are increasingly concerned about physicians’ inability to translate research findings in their medical practice to benefit their patients. He says that very few physicians learn about new discoveries from reading medical journals or by attending scientific conferences; thus, they lack the ability to translate new knowledge in the field into enhanced treatments for their patients. He states that a review of past medical discoveries reveals how excruciatingly slow the medical establishment is to adopt novel concepts, noting that even simple methods to improve medical quality are often met with fierce resistance. “Given the ever-growing sophistication of our scientific knowledge and the additional new discoveries that are likely in the future, many of us harbor an uneasy, but quite realistic suspicion that this gap between what we know about disease and what we do to prevent and treat them will become even wider. And it is not just recent research results that are not finding their way into clinical practice; there is plenty of evidence that ‘old’ research outcome have been lost in translation as well (1).”

Dr. Lenfant discusses the fact that the proper practice of medicine involves the combination of medical knowledge, intuition and judgment and that physicians’ knowledge is lacking because they don’t keep up with the medical literature. He states that there is often a difference of opinion among physicians and reviewing entities, but that judgment and knowledge of the research pertaining to the patient’s condition is central to the responsible practice of medicine. “Enormous amounts of new knowledge are barreling down the information highway, but they are not arriving at the doorsteps of our patients. (9).”

These thoughts are echoed by physicians who have researched this issue as well, such as William Shankle, M.D., Professor, University of California, Irvine. He states, “Most doctors are practicing 10 to 20 years behind the available medical literature and continue to practice what they learned in medical school….There is a breakdown in the transfer of information from the research to the overwhelming majority of practicing physicians. Doctors do not seek to implement new treatments that are supported in the literature or change treatments that are not (10).”

This view is echoed by the Dean of Stanford University School of Medicine who states that in the absence of translational medicine the delivery of medical care would remain stagnant and uninformed by the tremendous progress taking place in science and medicine (11).

This concern has also received significant publicity in the mainstream media. An example is an article by Sidney Smith, M.D., former president of the American Heart Association, published in 2003 in the Wall Street Journal entitled “Too Many Patients Never Reap the Benefits of Great Research.” Dr. Smith is very critical of physicians for not seeking out available information and applying that information to their patients, arguing that doctors feel the best medicine is what they’ve been doing and thinking for years. They discount new research, Dr. Smith says, because it is not what they have been taught or practiced, and they refuse to admit that what they have been doing or thinking for many years is not the best medicine. He states, “A large part of the problem is the real resistance of physicians…; many of these independent-minded souls don’t like being told that science knows best, and the way they’ve always done things is second-rate (12).” The National Center for Policy Analysis also expresses concern for the lack of ability of physicians to translate medical therapies into practice (13).

A review published in The Annals of Internal Medicine found that there is clearly a problem of physicians not seeking to advance their knowledge by reviewing the current literature, believing proper care is what they learned in medical school or residency and not basing their treatments on the most current research. The review found that the longer a physician is in practice, the more inappropriate and substandard the care (14). Thus, it is not a surprise that the scientific evidence as expressed in the literature is often opposite to what is continually repeated as dogma by most physicians and those considered to be “experts.”

Another example is a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (15). In reviewing the study, the National Institute of Medicine reports that there is an unacceptable lag between the discovery of new treatment modalities and their acceptance into routine care: “The lag between the discovery of more effective forms of treatment and their incorporation into routine patient care averages 17 years.” (16) In response to this unacceptable lag, the Business and Professions Code passed an amendment relating to the healing arts. This amendment — CA Assembly Bill 592; An Act to Amend Section 2234.1 of the Business and Professions Code — states: Since the National Institute of Medicine has reported that it can take up to 17 years for a new best practice to reach the average physician and surgeon, it is prudent to give attention to new developments not only in general medical care but in the actual treatment of specific diseases, particularly those that are not yet broadly recognized [such as the concept of tissue hypothyroidism, chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia] (17).

The Principals of Medical Ethics adopted by the American Medical Association in 1980 states that a physician shall continue to study, apply, and advance scientific knowledge, make relevant information available to patients, colleagues, and the public (18). This has, unfortunately, been replaced with a goal of providing merely “adequate” care. The current insurance reimbursement system in the United States fosters this thinking, as the worst physicians are financially rewarded by insurance companies. While it is true that the best physicians are continually fighting to provide cutting edge treatments and superior care that the insurance companies deem not medically necessary, even these physicians eventually get worn down and are forced to capitulate to the current system that promotes substandard care.

This was clearly demonstrated in a study published in the March 2006 edition of The New England Journal of Medicine entitled “Who is at Greater Risk for Receiving Poor-Quality Health Care.” The study found that the majority of individuals received substandard, poor-quality care, and that there was no significant difference among different income levels or whether or not the individual was covered by insurance. It used to be the case that only those in low socioeconomic classes without insurance received poor-quality care. But insurance company restrictions on treatments and diagnostic procedures have made the same poor care afforded to those of low socioeconomic status the new standard-of-care for society at large (19). An example of this is a physician’s failing to spend the time to adequately assess a potential hypothyroid patient and instead simply does a TSH test.

Most physicians will satisfy their required amount of continuing medical education (CME) by going to a conference a year, usually at a highly desirable location that has skiing, golf, boating, etc. Physicians are rarely monitored as to whether or not they actually showed up for the lectures or went skiing instead. One must also understand that the majority of conferences organized by medical societies are in fact sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. These payments by pharmaceutical companies are called unrestricted grants, so that the society has free reign to do what they want with the money and thus can claim there is no influence of lecture content by the companies. The problem, however, is that if the society wants to continue getting these “unrestricted” grants, they must think twice about providing content that the sponsoring pharmaceutical company might disapprove of. Consequently, ground breaking research that goes against the status quo and does not support the drug industry receives little attention.

Evidence-based medicine involves the synthesis of all available data when comparing therapeutic options for patients. Evidence-based medicine does not mean that data should be ignored until a randomized control trial of a particular size and duration is completed. A physician who tries to avoid the need of being a physician and is fine with just being a technician or health care provider will adamantly defend the “one-size fits all” method of diagnosis and treatment. But the best doctors who truly practice evidence-based medicine and not merely the perception of such will not rely on consensus statements to best provide their patients. Instead of relying on old dogma, the best physicians will seek out and translate both basic science results and clinical outcomes to decide on the safest, most efficacious treatment for their patients. Further, the best physicians will continually assess the current available data to decide which therapies are likely to carry the greatest benefits for patients and involve the lowest risks.

References

 

Peaches: A Sweet Approach to Weightloss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BIA Explained: Measuring Muscle Mass and More

The following guest post was written by Dr. Joseph A. Debé,  a graduate of Southern California University of Health Sciences. He is a Chiropractor with Board Certification in Nutrition, a licensed Certified Dietitian-Nutritionist, as well as a Certified Chiropractic Sports Practitioner. You can read more of Dr. Debé’s posts at www.drdebe.com.

Most individuals embarking upon a weight-loss program set a goal to lose a certain number of pounds. They often become obsessed with checking their progress on the bathroom scale. Although a change in body weight is of importance, it is really very incomplete data. The issue is that the scale does not tell you what type of body tissue you are losing or gaining. It is very common for people to think they are achieving a desirable result in losing weight when in fact they are losing lean, healthy tissue and not fat. It is also very possible to see no change on the bathroom scale as your body is simultaneously building lean, healthy tissue and burning fat.

The numbers people should be concerned with are those concerning their body composition rather than body weight. There are a number of methods available to measure body composition including dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), radioisotope dilution, and computerized tomography scanning. These methods are not readily available, however. The more commonly used techniques include hydrostatic (underwater) weighing, skinfold testing, near-infrared interactance, bioelectrical impedance, girth or circumference measurements, and body mass index (weight divided by height squared). Of these methods, under-water weighing was long considered the gold standard. In the last couple of years, a company called RJL Systems has developed advanced computer software, based on DEXA, for use with their bioelectrical impedance analyzer. This system is more accurate and reproducible than underwater weighing. What’s more, it gives additional extremely valuable information not available with the other techniques.

Bioelectrical impedance analysis works in the following way. The subject lies down on a flat surface and has electrodes attached to the wrist and ankle of their dominant side. A device is attached to the electrodes, which sends a very weak electrical current through the body (nothing is felt). The device measures the voltage drop of this current and yields two measurements: resistance and reactance. The values for resistance and reactance are entered into a computer program along with the subject’s height and weight. Mathematical analysis of these data yields the body composition measurements.

Electrical resistance is a measure of ability to conduct an electrical current. A good conductor has low resistance. The extracellular water (ECW) or fluid found outside the body cells, in combination with electrolytes, is the main conductor of the body. Fat, which has a low water content, has a high resistance. The resistance value is used to give a measure of the extracellular volume of the body.

Electrical reactance is an indication of capacitance – the ability of the body cells to store an electrical charge. Reactance is directly proportional to intracellular volume.

All other commonly available methods of measuring body composition divide tissue into two compartments: fat and fat-free mass (FFM). This is valuable information. However, the RJL Fluid and Nutrition Analysis takes things one step further. Not only does it measure fat and fat-free mass, but it further sub-divides fat-free mass into the compartments of body cell mass (BCM) and extracellular tissue (ECT). Measures of total body water (TBW), extracellular water (ECW), intracellular water (ICW), and phase angle are also made. Also, an estimate of basal metabolic rate is given. Now, let’s see what all this means and how it is of value to people trying to lose weight, bodybuilders, endurance athletes, individuals on detoxification or anti-aging programs, and the acutely and chronically ill.

Body cell mass (BCM) is one of the most important values obtained with this testing. BCM is the measure (given in pounds and as a percentage of body weight) of all the living metabolically active tissue in the body – muscle, organ, and blood cells. Contained within BCM are all the body’s intracellular water (ICW), and proteins and other solids. With serial testing, a change in body cell mass is due primarily to a change in muscle mass. Changes in BCM can be picked up within 72 hours. Increases in BCM equate with anabolism – the process of converting food into living tissue. Decreases in BCM are involved in catabolic (breaking down) processes. BCM is the tissue that is consumed (with negative consequences) in illness, disease, aging, under-nutrition, and athletic overtraining. Decreasing BCM from any cause leads to weakened immunity, failure to thrive, and eventually death.

In the early stages of catabolism, there is no change in fat-free mass (FFM) as healthy cells break down and BCM becomes extracellular tissue (ECT). The other methods of body composition analysis that measure only FFM are insensitive to these changes. The RJL system, by dividing FFM into BCM and ECT, can detect catabolism in the earliest stages and allow for early intervention and a more successful outcome. Decreases in BCM have been measured in asymptomatic HIV patients when other methods of analysis yielded normal values. Maintaining BCM can prolong survival in AIDS patients.

Another important application of BCM measurement is in weight loss programs. It is critical to track BCM during weight loss so that lifestyle changes can be made, if necessary, before damage is done. With improper weight loss programs, BCM decreases and the body’s set point (resting energy requirements) is reduced. The body will then store fat more easily. BCM measurements are also invaluable to the bodybuilder. Increasing BCM means muscle is being built, decreasing BCM means muscle is being broken down, regardless of what the bathroom scale implies. A normal value for BCM may range from 30% to 55% of body weight.

Intracellular water (ICW) is the potassium based fluid volume located in the BCM. Extracellular water (ECW) is the sodium based fluid volume located in the extracellular tissue (ECT). ECT is also made up of proteins and other solids and includes such tissues as the tendons, skin, bones, and other connective tissues. ECW is located between the cells, within blood vessels, and other spaces such as the intestines. ECW and ICW are measured in liters and expressed as percentages of total body water. Normal values for ICW range from 41% to 70%. Normal values for ECW range from 29% to 61%.

Changes in ICW mirror changes in BCM, and changes in ECW reflect changes in ECT. The balance between ICW and ECW indicate whether the body is in an anabolic or catabolic state. Sarcopenia, the loss of lean body mass that occurs with aging, can be seen in decreasing ICW and increasing ECW values.

Hydration is critical to the metabolic performance of the muscle cell. According to Haussinger, et al, from the May 22, 1993 issue of The Lancet, “An increase in cellular hydration (swelling) acts as an anabolic proliferative signal, whereas cell shrinkage is catabolic and anti-proliferative. Cellular hydration state is mainly determined by the activity of ion and substrate transport systems in the plasma membrane.” Hormones, anabolic steroids, cytokines, free radicals, chemotherapeutic and other drugs, amino acids and creatine monohydrate are among the compounds that influence ICW.

TBW, ECW, and ICW can reveal dehydration, water retention, and effectiveness of treatment in correcting these conditions. Fluid changes usually occur first in the ECW. For example, in dehydration the ICW only begins to decrease after there has been significant depletion of ECW. Importantly, the RJL system can be used to measure hydration status in endurance athletes, as a small loss of body water can adversely affect performance.

Another valuable bit of data produced by this system is the phase angle, which is a mathematical relationship between resistance and reactance. The phase angle is an indication of the health of the body cell membranes. With ill health the cell membrane fails, allowing leakage of the cell’s contents. With a decrease in the number of the body’s cells the reactance and phase angle both decrease. The higher the phase angle the greater the state of health and fitness. As health improves, so does the phase angle. The normal range for the phase angle is 4° to 12°. A study of patients with congestive heart failure found altered reactance, suggesting a change in cell membrane permeability. These values improved with treatment. Other studies have found the phase angle to very accurately predict disease progression in AIDS patients. The lower the phase angle the worse the prognosis.

The RJL Fluid and Nutrition Analysis system is used in hospital settings to monitor patients with a wide variety of conditions. Its breadth of information, accuracy, and repeatability allow for early intervention and improved outcome with patients suffering: burns, cancer, edema-dependent hypertension, AIDS, congestive heart failure, pulmonary edema, kidney disease, blood infection, and post-surgery.

In addition to giving important information on anabolic/catabolic states and the nature of tissue and fluid change to dieters, bodybuilders, and endurance athletes, the RJL system is extremely valuable to individuals engaged in metabolic detoxification programs. My own personal experience is a good example. I was tested with the RJL system immediately before starting and one week into a detoxification program. In that one week, I lost six pounds of body weight. Importantly, my BCM did not change; indicating that I was not in a catabolic state which can be a concern on this type of program. Three and a half pounds of my weight loss were in the form of fat. I lost a liter of body fluid, with all of it coming from the ECW compartment, none from ICW. This was probably due to the fact that the first place the body stores toxins is where they will do the least harm – in the ECW. As my body excreted toxins, there was less of a demand to retain ECW to dilute them. The week of detoxification also resulted in an increase in my phase angle, indicating improved health.

Testing with the RJL system is fast, safe, inexpensive, and non-invasive. I recommend for people to be tested at intervals of about 4 to 6 weeks for general purposes. In cases of illness or intense dietary and activity changes, testing can be performed once per week or more often.

Dr. Joseph A. Debé

www.drdebe.com

 

What is Functional Medicine?

The following guest post was written by Dr. Ron Grisanti, a board certified chiropractic orthopedist with a master’s degree in nutritional science from the University of Bridgeport. You can read more of Dr. Grisanti’s posts at www.FunctionalMedicineUniversity.com and www.Clinical-Rounds.com.

It’s a science-based, natural way to become healthy again

Functional Medicine is patient-centered medical healing at its best. Instead of looking at and treating health problems as isolated diseases, it treats individuals who may have bodily symptoms, imbalances and dysfunctions.

As the following graphic of an iceberg shows, a named disease such as diabetes, cancer, or fibromyalgia might be visible above the surface, but according to Functional Medicine, the cause lies in the altered physiology below the surface. Almost always, the cause of the disease and its symptoms is an underlying dysfunction and/or an imbalance of bodily systems.

If health care treats just the tip of the iceberg, it rarely leads to long-term relief and vibrancy. Identifying and treating the underlying root cause or causes, as Functional Medicine does, has a much better chance to successfully resolve a patient’s health challenge.

Using scientific principles, advanced diagnostic testing and treatments other than drugs or surgery, Functional Medicine restores balance in the body’s primary physiological processes. The goal: the patient’s lifelong optimal health.

How Functional Medicine Heals a Key Health Care Gap

Today’s health care system is in trouble because it applies a medical management model that works well for acute health problems to chronic health problems, where it is much less successful.

If you have a heart attack, accident, or sudden lung infection such as pneumonia, you certainly want a quick-thinking doctor to use all the quick-acting resources of modern medicine, such as life-saving technology, surgery and antibiotics. We are all grateful about such interventions.

However, jumping in with drugs, surgery and other acute care treatments too often does not succeed in helping those with chronic, debilitating ailments, such as diabetes, heart disease or arthritis. Another approach is needed.

The Two-Pronged Healing Approach of Functional Medicine

To battle chronic health conditions, Functional Medicine uses two scientifically grounded principles:

1. Add what’s lacking in the body to nudge its physiology back to a state of optimal functioning.
2. Remove anything that impedes the body from moving toward this optimal state of physiology.

Plainly put, your body naturally wants to be healthy. But things needed by the body to function at its best might be missing, or something might be standing in the way of its best functioning. Functional Medicine first identifies the factors responsible for the malfunctioning. Then it deals with those factors in a way appropriate to the patient’s particular situation.

Very often Functional Medicine practitioners use advanced laboratory testing to identify the root cause or causes of the patient’s health problem. Old-fashioned medical diagnosis helps too, in the form of listening carefully to the patient’s history of symptoms and asking questions about his or her activities and lifestyle.

For treatment, Functional Medicine practitioners use a combination of natural agents (supplements, herbs, nutraceuticals and homeopathics), nutritional and lifestyle changes, spiritual/emotional counseling, and pharmaceuticals, if necessary to prod a patient’s physiology back to an optimal state. In addition, educating the patient about their condition empowers them to take charge of their own health, ultimately leading to greater success in treatment.

Treating Symptoms Versus Treating the Person

In the dominant health care model today, medication is used to get rid of people’s symptoms. If the patient stops taking the medication, symptoms generally return.

Functional Medicine approaches health problems differently. Instead of masking the problem, it aims at restoring the body’s natural functioning. Although Functional Medicine practitioners may prescribe pharmaceuticals, they are used to gently nudge the patient’s physiology in a positive direction so the patient will no longer need them.

For example, conventional doctors would normally prescribe pharmaceuticals like Prilosec, Prevacid or Aciphex to treat acid reflux or heartburn. When the patient stops taking such drugs, the heartburn symptoms come back. In contrast, a Functional Medicine practitioner might find that a patient’s acid reflux is caused by Helicobacter pylori bacteria. Eradicating the Helicobacter pylori might very well lead to the end of heartburn symptoms, permanently.

It’s also important to note that in Functional Medicine, treatment for similar symptoms might vary tremendously for different patients, according to their medical history and results of laboratory tests. Factors that can come into play in producing the same symptoms include toxic chemicals, pathogenic bacteria, parasites, chronic viral pathogens, emotional poisons like anger, greed or envy, and structural factors such as tumors or cysts.

The Roots of Functional Medicine

You may be surprised to learn that Functional Medicine isn’t new. It actually represents a return to the roots of modern scientific medicine, captured in this statement by Sir William Osler, one of the first professors at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and later its Physician-in-Chief: “The good physician treats the disease; the great physician treats the patient who has the disease.”

Another important saying by Osler is “If you listen carefully to the patient, they will tell you the diagnosis.” This encapsulates the importance placed in Functional Medicine on taking a thorough history from the patient.

Your Experience of Functional Medicine

We have titled this web site, “Your Medical Detective,” because patients often feel their Functional Medicine practitioner is leaving no stone unturned in their relentless research to pinpoint the causes of a particular patient’s symptoms.

When you consult a Functional Medicine practitioner, the first step is always your history. Practitioners are trained on how to unravel and make sense of a complicated story. Often clues in the story lead to the identification of key imbalances.

The next set of clues comes from a comprehensive physical examination, which includes many nearly forgotten examination procedures used by famous diagnosticians (both living and long gone), such as chapman reflex points, ankle brachial reflex and nail inspection.

The final set of clues comes from advanced laboratory testing. Innovative, cutting-edge lab tests help the practitioner look deeply into a patient’s physiology to identify how it has been compromised and how physiological balance can be restored.

After diagnosis and treatment, a Functional Medicine patient can expect his or her symptoms to diminish in severity, with a renewed sense of well-being and significant increase in health and vitality.

While there is no substitute for face-to-face treatment from a trained Functional Medicine practitioner, this site educates you on the Functional Medicine perspective and on the kinds of clues and treatments that may be key to restoring you to optimal health.

 

 

Seasons Team Members Rockin’ and Rollin’

Running is addicting, or so we’ve heard. Two members of the Seasons team have become addicts. On Sunday, February 13th, Trevor Torres and Bethany Cox both completed their second half-marathon, the “Rock ‘n Roll Mardi Gras” in New Orleans, LA. Along with 17,000 others, these two athletes completed the 13.1 mile run benefiting the American Cancer Society.

Training for a half-marathon can be strenuous. It takes weeks, even months, to train for the 13.1 mile trek. “I made sure I gave myself a couple days rest within the week, which helped my muscles recuperate after the long run days. Two weeks before the race was my longest run.” Most runners, like Bethany, follow a training schedule to prepare and build up their endurance for the big day. “The race itself was such an adrenaline rush…and the weather was perfect!”

The “Rock n’ Roll” marathon series is known for having great local music and entertainment along the race routes. “This was my second half marathon in the Rock ‘n Roll series and I really enjoy the live bands along the entire course that make it entertaining!” said Trevor. “It gives you something to look forward to every mile and a headliner band at the finish line!”

 

Next Page »