This makes more sense…

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Health

To me this makes far more sense than the conventional methods of Chemo and Radiation, in reality these methods actually do more harm than good.

Think of a SWAT team being called because there are some bad guys robbing a Walmart, the SWAT commander comes out and informs the media that they’ve killed all the bad guys…
They may have done, but they also killed all the good guys as well, no discrimination between good and bad. So your immune system has been severely compromised and you are more susceptable to other disease.

English | Español

Prostate Cancer
Bone Metastases “In Dec. 2005 I
started the Issels
Treatment in a
wheelchair. My PSA was 9,500
and it dropped to 15.2 within 3
months. My bone scans of
May 11 and Nov 4, 2006
showed that all bone
metastases were gone. I
gained 25lbs, feel strong again
and can walk without pain.”
Five years after he came to Issels, he continues to enjoy a busy life.
– William Darlington Ontario, Canada (Dec 2010)
>> Watch Bill’s video
(6.9 MB)

Inflammatory Breast Cancer with bone and liver lesions. In June 2006, after 1 month on the Issels Treatment, liver lesions disappeared, and 5 months later bone scan virtually normal and breast tumor almost gone. January 12th, 2008 in her own words: “I am very happy and thankful…” She continues to enjoy her healthy lifestyle and fulltime work.
– Laura Dunford Alberta, Canada (Dec 2010)
>> Watch Laura’s video 7.5MB

Melanoma with multiple,
uncountable lung
metastases
Four weeks into the
Issels Treatment® the patient’s
daughter in her own words:
“Oct 23, 2008: Having had
over 100 small tumors on his
lungs, the new scan showed
that every single one had
completely GONE, Dad is in
REMISSION.” The control CT
scan of Feb 6th, 2009 in
the UK confirmed remission
of all lung metastases.
April 2009: Dad is still in
remission and clear of
cancer.
>> Watch Kenneth’s video

The Issels Treatment® is an Integrative Immunotherapy program that is designed to stimulate the body’s own regulatory, repair and immune mechanisms, to recognize and eliminate cancer cells. It comprises effective state-of-the-art technologies, such as cancer vaccines, and other research-based therapies. This integrative cancer treatment has become internationally
known for its remarkable outcomes with
advanced cancer.

The Issels Treatment® was developed by Josef M. Issels, MD, who was the first to integrate conventional and alternative/complementary therapies into his very comprehensive treatment program that focuses on both the cancer tumor and the body’s internal environment which promotes the tumor growth. Since 1951, thousands of patients* have received treatment for:

Adenocarcinoma, Bone Cancer, Breast Cancer, Cervical Cancer, Colon Cancer, Embryonal Teratoma, Kidney Cancer, Liver Cancer, Lung Cancer, Lymphoma, Mediastinal Cancer, Melanoma, Optic Nerve Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Osteosarcoma, Pancreatic Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Rhabdomyosarcoma, Sarcoma, Squamous Cell Cancer, Stomach Cancer, Teratoma, Testicular Cancer, Thyroid Cancer, Uterine Cancer.

For ADDITIONAL INFORMATION on Treatment and Costs please click here.

* DISCLAIMER: The extent of the response to treatment varies from patient to patient, even with similar diagnosis as the internal bodily environment is unique to each individual patient.

English
Last updated: 4/17/2012

© 2012 Integrative Immunotherapy.
Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Site Map

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

Who’s side are they on….

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Food, Health

The USDA Says It’s OK to Sell You Tainted Meat…

By Alice Wessendorfon 08/29/2011
I want to share a couple of statistics with you. But before I do, I’ll issue a little warning…you may never be able to look a turkey burger in quite the same way again.
According to the feds, at least 10 to 15 percent of ground turkey is contaminated with salmonella.
Ready for another one?
Three-quarters of the salmonella found in that contaminated turkey meat is antibiotic-resistant.
I’m sure I don’t have to tell you how the bacteria ended up that way… right?
Ding, ding…yes, you guessed correctly! That’s right, the factory-farming practice of dosing its livestock up on antibiotics has given birth to new breeds of bacteria that are now resistant to the very drugs developed to combat them.
Just how widespread is this practice? At the end of last year, the FDA finally released the shocking figures. It turns out that 29 million pounds of antibiotics were fed to our food supplyin 2009 alone.
In fact, it’s estimated that more than 70% of the antibiotics sold in the United States are being used on cows, pigs, and chickens that aren’t even sick. They’re being used simply to fatten the animals up and to ward off the effects of the unsanitary conditions typically found on the factory farms where the animals are forced to live out their short cramped lives.
So, let’s recap. The factory-farming industry insists on continuing to follow a dangerous practice that has led to the birth of drug-resistant bacteria that contaminate our food supply, can make us very sick, and, in the worst-case scenario, may even kill us.
So what’s the U.S. Department of Agriculture doing about it?
Hold on to your hat. That would be essentially a whole lot of nothing.
You may recall that earlier this month Cargill, a giant meat processor in the United States, issued a recall on 36 million (yes, million) pounds of ground-turkey products after they were linked to salmonella contamination. At last count at least 79 people had become ill and one had died.
In fact Bill Tomson of the Wall Street Journal reported that during a routine inspection of the plant last year, inspectors found three samples of meat contaminated with the same antibiotic-resistant bacteria…known as salmonella Heidelberg…that was ultimately linked to the illnesses and death that finally prompted the recall.
Yep, that’s right, the USDA was aware of the salmonella contamination well before people started getting sick. Yet nothing was done about it beyond informing Cargill’s management of the findings.
Bet you’re asking “why?” about now. I wondered too. It turns out that selling salmonella-contaminated meat, including the varieties that are contaminated with antibiotic-resistant strains of the bug, is not technically against the law.
Yes, it looks like talking turkey has taken on a whole new stomach-churning meaning and no, sadly, I’m not kidding.
In fact, the USDA simply acknowledges that ground poultry is highly contaminated and encourages us to cook meat thoroughly, to an internal temperature of 165 degrees on a meat thermometer, and assures us that we’ll then be just fine. And if the lag before a recall of the Cargill meat is anything to judge by, apparently the agency is really only interested in issuing a recall only after the products have made people sick.
So as Big Farming execs continue to play Russian roulette with our health with little to no incentive to change their dangerous ways, my advice is the same as always. Make a commitment TODAY to no longer support this industry until it makes some radical changes.
Thankfully, organic and sustainable farming is on the rise and it’s easier than ever to find these foods at your local supermarket or farmers’ market. To find locally grown and sustainable food in your area, try www.localharvest.org and to locate pasture-based farms or ranches, try Eatwild’s Directory of Farms.
Related articles of interest:
Is Antibiotic Resistance Crawling Into a Home Near You?
Is There an Antibiotic-free Dinner Table in Our Future?
Steak with a heaping side of antibiotic resistance
References:
“2009 SUMMARY REPORT on Antimicrobials Sold or Distributed for Use in Food-Producing Animals, Food and Drug Administration Department of Health and Human Services,” fda.gov
“Investigation Announcement: Multistate Outbreak of Human Salmonella Heidelberg Infections,” Center for Disease Control and Prevention, cdc.gov, August 1, 2011
“USDA Fact Sheet: Salmonella Questions and Answers,” United States Department of Agriculture, fsis.usda.gov
“Progress Report on Salmonella Testing of Raw Meat and Poultry Products, 1998-20101,” United States Department of Agriculture, fsis.usda.gov
“Government Knew About Bacteria in Turkey,” WSJ, August 10,2011
“Estimates of Antimicrobial Abuse in Livestock,” Union of Concerned Scientists, ucsusa.org

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

Pasteurized not Raw milk..

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Food, Health

Dangers Of Milk And
Dairy Products – The Facts
By Dave Rietz
Webmaster www.notmilk.com
7-6-2
CALCIUM
Calcium? Where do the COWS get calcium for their big bones? Yes… from plants! The calcium they consume from plants has a large amount of magnesium… necessary for the body to absorb and USE the calcium.
The calcium in cow’s milk is basically useless because it has insufficient magnesium content

PROTEIN
Milk can be thought of as “liquid meat” because of its high protein content which, in concert with other proteins, may actually LEACH calcium from the body. Countries that consume high protein diets (meat, milk and dairy) have the highest rates of osteoporosis

80% of the protein in milk is casein. Casein is a powerful binder… a
polymer used to make plastics… and a glue that is better used to make
sturdy furniture or hold beer bottle labels in place. It is in
thousands of processed foods as a binder… as “something” caseinate.
Casein is a powerful allergen… a histamine that creates lots of
mucus.

BACTERIA
Cow’s milk is allowed to have feces in it. This is a major source for bacteria. Milk is typically pasteurized more than once before it gets to your table… each time for only 15 seconds at 162 degrees Fahrenheit.
To sanitize water one is told to boil it (212 degrees F) for several minutes. That is a tremendous disparity, isn’t it!
Keep in mind that at room temperature the number of bacteria in milk DOUBLE around every 20 minutes. No wonder milk turns rotten very quickly.
PUS
ONE cubic centimeter (cc) of commercial cow’s milk is allowed to have up to 750,000 somatic cells (common name is “PUS”) and 20,000 live bacteria… before it is kept off the market.
That amounts to a whopping 20 million live squiggly bacteria and up to 750 MILLION pus cells per liter (bit more than a quart).
1 cup = 236.5882cc 177,441,150 pus cells ~ 4,731,600 bacteria
24 oz (3 glasses) = 532,323,450 pus cells ~ 14,220,000 bacteria
(the “recommended” daily intake)

CHOLESTEROL
The cholesterol content of those three glasses of milk is equal to what one would get from 53 slices of bacon. Do you know of any doctor who recommends that much bacon per day?
D-3
D-3 always is derived from an animal. The sunlight reaction that converts 7-dehydrocholesterol to vitamin D-3 is a ‘pure’ chemical reaction that occurs in your skin in certain cells.”
Vitamin D-3 can come from four different sources:
Pig skin, sheep skin, raw fish liver, and pig brains. Most of the time, Vitamin D-3 is extracted from pig skin and sold to dairy processors.

LEUKEMIA
According to Hoards Dairyman (Volume 147, number 4)… 89% of America’s dairy herds have the leukemia virus. (more at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/​notmilk/message/835)

DIABETES
The protein lactalbumin, has been identified as a key factor in diabetes (and a major reason for NOT giving cows milk to infants).

CROHN’S DISEASE
Mycobacterium paratuberculosis causes a bovine disease called “Johne’s.”
Cows diagnosed with Johne’s Disease have diarrhea, and heavy fecal shedding of bacteria. This bacteria becomes cultured in milk, and is not destroyed by pasteurization. Occasionally, the milk-borne bacteria will begin to grow in the human host, and the results are irritable bowel syndrome and Crohn’s Disease.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

Nothing short of insanity..

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Health

Nothing short of insanity, where money is more important than life, to big pharma anyway…

49 Sudden Deaths, 213 Permanent Disabilities – And the Silent Plan to Poison Your Child.

Visit the Mercola Video Library
Story at-a-glance
• The HPV vaccine is NOT harmless like it is being promoted and has not been proven to actually prevent cervical cancer
• The HPV vaccine only protects against TWO strains of HPV associated with cancer but there are MORE THAN 100 different strains of HPV in all.
• Dr. Diane Harper, one of the lead researchers for Gardasil blew the whistle on the vaccine, saying the available data suggests the HPV vaccine’s protective effects do not last beyond five years.
• The VAERS database continues to swell with reports of autoimmune disorders contracted after receiving the HPV vaccine. These side effects now include 137 reports of cervical dysplasia, and 41 reports of cervical cancer.
• HPV infection clears up on its own within two years in 90 percent of all cases. It rarely leads to cervical cancer unless the infection becomes chronic and leads to cervical changes that remain untreated. Routine pap smear testing can identify chronic HPV infection and may provide greater protection against development of cervical cancer than reliance on an HPV vaccine that has not been adequately proven to be safe or effective.
By Dr. Mercola
During a Republican debate in Tampa, Florida, presidential hopeful Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota) alleged that campaign contributions from drug company Merck—the maker of Gardasil—played “a pivotal role in Rick Perry’s 2007 executive order that mandated teenage girls in Texas be inoculated against HPV,” CNN reports.
The order did not go into effect, however, as it was later overturned by the legislature.
Still, it’s hard to overlook the potential for undue influence and conflict of interest. Perry responded that the company gave only $5,000 to his campaign.
However, Merck has contributed:
• $28,500 to Perry’s gubernatorial campaigns since January 2001, and
• $377,500 to the Republican Governors Association (one of the largest backers of Perry’s campaigns)
Furthermore, CNN reported that:
“Perhaps more importantly, Perry’s friend, former chief of staff Mike Toomey, spun through the revolving door to become a lobbyist for Merck in Texas, a position he held at the time of the HPV-related executive order.
… Perry’s actions benefiting donors from the pharmaceutical industry don’t appear to stop with Merck.
For instance, drug-maker Novartis Pharmaceuticals has also contributed handsomely to the Republican Governors Association and it has also benefited from Perry’s support. Novartis has donated $700,000 to the RGA since January 2006, although it has only directly donated $5,000 to Perry’s own campaign. In 2009, Perry signed a bill into law mandating meningitis vaccines for all college students, a requirement he expanded again earlier this year.”
CDC Officially Recommends Gardasil for Boys
On October 25, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices voted to recommend giving the HPV vaccine to males between the ages of 11 and 21. They further recommend the vaccine series can be given to boys as young as nine, as well as to men up to the age of 26, especially if they engage in homosexual sex—allegedly to offer partial protection against genital warts, and cancers of the penis and rectum.
Dr. Mercola Recommends…

Every “Like” Helps Support This Cause
Interestingly enough, according to CNN Health, a large portion of the debate was focused on whether it would be cost-effective to vaccinate boys against HPV.
While cost-effectiveness is certainly an important concern, I believe reviewing the safety would certainly trump it. CNN reports that the cost to vaccinate 11- and 12-year old boys would be $38 million.
How is this cost-effective, when anal cancer, for example, has so far stricken a mere 5,820 men this year!
Deaths caused by anal cancer: 770. Gardasil is claimed to be 75 percent effective against anal cancer in men, so crunch the numbers… This is nothing short of insanity.
Why the push to vaccinate boys with Gardasil?
Because “girls aren’t getting vaccinated in the numbers doctors had expected,” CNN reports. “If the boys are also immunized, it reduces the transmission back and forth…” Folks, this is a health emergency in the making. Please do not be deceived into giving this dangerous vaccine to your kids, regardless of their gender.
What Effect Will Gardasil have on Other Cancer-Causing HPV Strains?
Such conflicts of interest can be dangerous in the extreme, especially when you’re talking about mandating a vaccine that has not been proven to actually prevent cancer in the long term, and that appears to carry tremendous long-term health risks, including:
Bell’s Palsy and Guillan-Barre syndrome Seizures Cervical dysplasia, and cervical cancer
Blood clotting and heart problems, including cardiac arrest Miscarriages and fetal abnormalities amongst pregnant women who received the vaccine Sudden death
There’s another important factor to take into account when discussing the potential risks versus alleged benefits of the HPV vaccine, which is discussed in a September issue of New Scientist:
“[W]hat effect will the vaccine have on the other cancer-causing strains of HPV? Nature never leaves a void, so if HPV-16 and HPV-18 are suppressed by an effective vaccine, other strains of the virus will take their place. The question is, will these strains cause cervical cancer? Results from clinical trials are not encouraging. Vaccinated women show an increased number of precancerous lesions caused by strains of HPV other than HPV-16 and HPV-18. ”
High Time to Take an In-Depth Look at HPV Vaccine Risk/Benefit Profile
For those who are still unaware, the HPV vaccine only protects against two strains of HPV associated with cancer (HPV-16 and HPV-18), but there are MORE THAN 100 different strains of HPV in all, and about 15 of them are known to potentially cause cancer IF the infection persists. In more than 90 percent of all cases, however, the infection resolves on its own and does not lead to any health complications.
It’s clear to me that this is another case where the precautionary principle needs to be applied, as currently no one knows exactly whether or not the vaccine will have any measurable effect as far as lowering cervical cancer rates. The results will not be fully apparent until a few decades from now, and in the meantime, countless young girls are being harmed, and we still do not know how Gardasil will affect their long-term health, even if they do not experience any acute side effects.
Sadly, Merck (the maker of Gardasil) is not erring on the side caution here. As recently reported by ActivistPost, the official Gardasil web site completely omits any mention of death as a possible side effect, despite the fact that Gardasil has been linked to 49 deaths. They also fail to mention any of the more serious side effects, many of which have been reported to VAERS, such as Guillain-Barre syndrome, despite the fact that there are 213 reported cases of permanent disability as a result of the vaccine.
New Scientist points out that “one way forward is to build a mathematical model of the disease and use it to test the benefits of vaccination.” However, this is far easier said than done, and one such modeling study included several highly optimistic assumptions that may or may not be accurate, including the assumption that:
• The vaccine offers lifelong protection
• The vaccine has identical effects on young girls and older women
• HPV-16 and HPV-18 will not be replaced by mutated and/or more potent cancer-causing strains
• Vaccinated women will continue to get cervical cancer screenings, and
• Vaccinated women’s natural immunity against HPV will remain unaffected
Is it reasonable to hinge the future of millions of women on a set of assumptions? Two years ago, Dr. Diane Harper, one of the lead researchers for Gardasil blew the whistle on the vaccine, saying that girls and their parents need to receive more complete information before accepting the inoculation. Dr. Harper, who participated in the Phase 2 and 3 trials to get Gardasil approved and authored several papers on it, raised serious questions about the vaccine’s risks-benefit profile. And, according to Dr. Harper, the available data suggests the vaccine’s protective effects do not last beyond five years.
In a 2009 CBSNews interview, she stated:
“If we vaccinate 11 year olds and the protection doesn’t last… we’ve put them at harm from side effects, small but real, for no benefit. The benefit to public health is nothing; there is no reduction in cervical cancers, they are just postponed, unless the protection lasts for at least 15 years, and over 70 percent of all sexually active females of all ages are vaccinated.”
She also says that enough serious side effects have been reported after Gardasil use that the vaccine could prove riskier than the cervical cancer it purports to prevent. Cervical cancer is usually entirely curable when detected early through normal Pap screenings.”
Why Risk Your Life to Prevent an Avoidable Disease?
Deadly blood clots, acute respiratory failure, cardiac arrest and “sudden death due to unknown causes” have all occurred in girls shortly after they’ve received the Gardasil vaccine. These are atrocious risks to potentially prevent cervical cancer one day down the road. Because let’s not forget that the HPV vaccine has not yet been PROVEN to actually prevent any kind of cancer.
The benefit is just one big “maybe.”
So, are the risks involved really acceptable, especially in light of these latest findings? With recombinant HPV DNA thrown into the mix, we now know even LESS about the long-term risks and benefits of this vaccine…
Of course, you need to do your own careful research, but I simply cannot recommend this vaccine.
There are far better ways to protect yourself and your young daughters against cervical cancer. According to the CDC more than 6 million women contract HPV annually, yet less than 3,900 women will die from cervical cancer out of those 6 million. This is because, in 90 percent of all cases, your immune system can clear up the HPV infection on its own. Furthermore, the infection is spread through sexual contact, so it is behaviorally avoidable. In fact, using condoms can reduce the risk of HPV by 70 percent, which is more than Gardasil can claim to do.
The bottom line is that Gardasil is largely ineffective, potentially very dangerous, and a major waste of money. In order to keep your daughter healthy, why not take these simple steps that can prevent HPV and cervical cancer far better than a vaccine ever could:
• Talk to your kids about HPV. This infection is sexually transmitted, so it is 100 percent preventable through lifestyle choices, including the use of condoms.
• Keep your immune system strong. A healthy immune system is better able to handle a heavier emotional and physical stress load. The ideal healthy habits to keep your body and mind strong are detailed in these 12 changes that will cut your cancer risk in half.
Keep Educating Yourself on Vaccines
It is becoming increasingly necessary to continue to educate yourself and your family on the issues surrounding vaccinations of all kinds. There are so many problems; no one article can possibly cover them all. You can find and search all vaccine related articles on my Latest Vaccine News page. I also recommend you familiarize yourself with the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) web site. As a leader for vaccine safety, the NVIC offers information on everything from laws to informed consent to late-breaking vaccine news.
What You Can Do to Make a Difference
While it seems “old-fashioned,” the only truly effective actions you can take to protect the right to informed consent to vaccination and expand vaccine exemptions, is to get personally involved with your state legislators and the leaders in your community.
THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.
Mass vaccination policies are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level, and it is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.
Signing up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org not only gives you access to practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community, but when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call to action items you need at your fingertips to make sure your voice is heard.
So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.
Contact Your Elected Officials
Write or email your elected state representatives and share your concerns. Call them, or better yet, make an appointment to visit them in person in their office. Don’t let them forget you!
It is so important for you to reach out and make sure your concerns get on the radar screen of the leaders and opinion makers in your community, especially the politicians you elect and are directly involved in making vaccine laws in your state. These are your elected representatives, so you have a right and a responsibility to let them know what’s really happening in your life and the lives of people you know when it comes to vaccine mandates. Be sure to share the “real life” experiences that you or people you know have had with vaccination.
Share Your Story with the Media and People You Know
If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don’t share information and experiences with each other, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.
I must be frank with you; you have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the “other side” of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.
We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies to dominate the conversation about vaccination. The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than “statistically acceptable collateral damage” of national one-size-fits-all mass vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn’t be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.
Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More
I encourage you to visit the following web pages on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) website at www.NVIC.org:
• NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
• If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
• Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment by doctors or government officials for making independent vaccine choices.
Connect with Your Doctor or Find a New One that Will Listen and Care
If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don’t want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination.
However, there is hope.
At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they’re starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents. It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.
So take the time to locate a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

Pawns of Big Pharma….

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Health

One out of every two Americans will likely be stricken with some form of cancer. FDA approved cancer treatments are ordinarily not curative. Those treatments, consisting principally of radiation and chemotherapy, offer little hope and much misery for the vast majority of cancer patients. The FDA approved treatments rarely result in longevity greater than if the patient received no treatment at all, yet access to unapproved, experimental treatments depends on FDA allowance. While FDA allows access to experimental drugs sponsored by favored regulatees (large drug companies with a long history of agency drug approvals), it often denies access to experimental drugs sponsored by innovative companies that lack a cozy relationship with the agency. FDA’s control of access is rife with conflict of interest, bias, arbitrariness, and subjective discrimination. Assuming near Godlike power, FDA ultimately determines who may have access to unapproved cancer treatments that hold out hope for a cure and who may not.

A recent brilliant documentary by Nehst Out entitled Cut Poison Burn (available at cutpoisonburn.com) reveals the desperate and horrible circumstances befalling those who must not only struggle to fight cancer afflicting their loved ones but also a Food and Drug Administration that denies them access to their treatment of choice and condemns them to FDA approved therapies that even their conventional oncologists have deemed incapable of arresting the cancer’s progression. The documentary focuses on the Navarro family’s struggle to save a beautiful young boy, Thomas Navarro, from the ravages of glioblastoma (an aggressive brain tumor). As if the torture endured through rounds of chemotherapy and radiation were not enough, the Navarros must also struggle with an FDA that in their most urgent hour denies them access to a promising experimental cancer treatment and consigns Thomas to a horrible death.

Despite its abysmal track record since President Nixon declared war on cancer in 1971, conventional cancer treatment has become very big business. In 2010, cancer care cost the American public an estimated $125 billion, yet even with expenditures of that enormous size almost all have died either from the treatments administered or from cancer progression, or both. The ugly truth is that the federal government has lost the war on cancer yet compels Americans to purchase the same failed treatments for the disease by locking out promising experimental alternatives. FDA jealously guards the interests of the largest drug manufacturers, commonly allowing access to clinical trials of their cancer drugs, while disallowing access to clinical trials sponsored by individuals and companies that lack a cozy relationship with agency regulators. The consequence is a horrific destruction of innovation in medicine and of hope for terminally ill cancer patients. Federal law allows FDA regulators to possess the power to determine the fate of the terminally ill, yet those regulators have an inherent conflict of interest that influences their decisions. If they leave government service, they will do well financially if they secure positions of employment with major drug companies, but they will limit prospects for such employment if they offend those regulatees by allowing competing innovators to expand treatment uses of experimental cancer drugs.

Because half the American population is bound to contract cancer and most cancers are incurable, a just government would do everything in its power to ensure that those diagnosed with cancer would be informed of and encourage to explore alternatives, provided they were informed of the potential risks and known benefits of each option as compared to the FDA approved treatment. That is not the case, however. For those seeking an alternative to FDA approved treatment and to FDA favored drug manufacturers, the agency has an all too common answer: No (and often “no” without any rational explanation).

FDA jealously guards its gate-keeper role, whereby drugs are only allowed to be marketed if they have been given FDA approval. The system is one FDA Associate Director of the Office of Drug Safety David Graham has described as corrupt, favoring incumbent drug company regulatees even to the extent of approving unsafe drugs like Vioxx and Avandia. Economists schooled in public choice theory regard FDA as a quintessential example of industry capture (whereby the regulators become servants of the agency’s principal regulatees). FDA argues that it must paternalistically police who has access to experimental drugs because to do otherwise would permit unapproved cancer therapies that may be harmful to proliferate, making a mockery of the agency’s costly drug approval process. Companies and individuals would avoid the expense and burden of seeking FDA approval for drugs, the agency contends, choosing instead to make the unapproved drugs available to large segments of the population without seeking agency approval.

That argument is quite fickle, and it rests on a series of false assumptions. At the outset, because FDA approves or disapproves clinical trials, the universe of trials is limited to those trials which the FDA believes hold out some promise of efficacy. In addition, the number of people who are terminally ill with cancer for whom conventional treatments are inefficacious is a set figure and involves people for whom FDA has failed (in other words, despite their dire need there is no FDA approved treatment capable of curing their terminal illnesses). Demand for cancer treatment at any particular moment is inelastic and, so, the notion that an unlimited expansion in patient sales would occur in the market is fictive. Moreover, when conventional treatments are inefficacious, hope for life depends entirely on access to experimental drugs which, by definition, are not FDA approved, regardless of who sponsors them. Finally, in practice FDA does not deny cancer patients access to experimental drugs in toto, regardless of the sponsor. Rather, FDA acts selectively, granting access based on the exercise of subjective, politically influenced opinion. The very same patient denied access to a clinical trial whose sponsor is disfavored by FDA can be admitted to a clinical trial for a different drug by a sponsor favored by the agency.

The system for allowing access is corrupt, heavily subject to political influence, and biased in favor of drug company sponsors favored by the FDA, namely those that have a cozy relationship with the FDA from years of seeking and obtaining approval of drugs. Congressmen Dan Burton and Peter DeFazio know well the corruption within the agency. Each has confronted FDA Commissioners who condemned without recourse patients seeking access to experimental drugs by sponsors disfavored by the agency. Each has demanded reversals of those decisions and in several instances (despite FDA asserting to sponsors and patients that the decisions were medically based and final), the Commissioners have ordered reversals bowing to political pressure, sometimes too late for the patients concerned.

When a patient seeks an experimental drug for a serious or life-threatening condition, an ordeal of extraordinary proportions may confront the person when he or she is least able, physically and emotionally, to endure it. The drug trial sponsor must be contacted and convinced to seek a “compassionate use” exemption from the FDA. That request for exemption comes in the form of either a “single patient investigational new drug” submission by the sponsor or, if the patient may die imminently, an “emergency investigational new drug” submission (which may be made by phone). FDA political appointees exercise enormous subjective discretion in determining if a patient with cancer will be permitted to have access to a clinical trial of an experimental cancer drug. FDA ordinarily allows afflicted patients access to an experimental drug, provided that it is recommended by a physician and is acceptable to the drug company sponsor. In a significant number of cases, however, the FDA refuses access to a clinical trial. Although the agency is loath to admit it, denial of the patient’s choice occurs in those instances where the FDA harbors a bias against the sponsor or the treatment. Sometimes that bias is born of good evidence that the clinical trial is fraudulent or that the experimental drug is too dangerous, but it may also be born of an agency effort to ensure that favored regulatees are protected against new or novel cancer treatments of promise from an individual or company not among those having close ties to the agency.

The decision to deny a dying patient access to an experimental drug is an extraordinary exercise of federal power. That horrific decision is made daily by the directors of FDA’s Division of Oncology Products (Drs. Robert Justice and Patricia Keegan) under the direct supervision of the FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. The FDA has criteria in 21 C.F.R. § 312.305 that limit access, but it exercises considerable discretion in interpreting the criteria, resulting in inconsistent decision making. Repeatedly members of Congress, most notably Congressman Dan Burton from Indiana and Congressman Peter DeFazio from Oregon, have pressured FDA Commissioners to reverse decisions denying access that the Oncology Products Division Directors declared final. While FDA Commissioners protest that their decisions are wholly science based, in fact the subjective criteria and the inconsistencies in decision prove that bias is the norm and that those with political access to the powerful can achieve reversals.

When determining if a patient will be given access to a clinical trial, FDA considers a few subjective factors. First, it requires that the patient have a “serious or immediately life-threatening disease” that is essentially not treatable with FDA approved drugs and devices. In 21 C.F.R. § 312.300(b), FDA reveals the inherent subjectivity in this determination: “Whether a disease or condition is serious is a matter of clinical judgment, based on its impact on such key factors as survival, day-to-day functioning, or the likelihood that the disease, if left untreated, will progress from a less severe condition to a more serious one.” Next, FDA evaluates the treatment, again on largely subjective grounds, assessing whether “[t]he potential patient benefit justifies the potential risks of the treatment use and those potential risks are not unreasonable in the context of the disease or condition to be treated.” FDA then insinuates its anti-competitive bias into the process, deeming even a drug for which clinicians recommend access for the terminally ill be kept from those patients on the basis that allowing the use would “interfere with” potential FDA market approval for the drug or because FDA deems other drugs under another IND or FDA approved drug protocol available for treatment use.

Advertisement

When the drug sponsor is a large pharmaceutical company having a portfolio of several FDA approved drugs seeks a compassionate use exemption, it is ordinarily granted. The subjective factors are all resolved in the sponsor’s favor. When the drug sponsor lacks that cozy relationship, FDA often subjectively concludes the treatment to be one with potential risks that are unreasonable or concludes the condition to be one for which FDA approved treatments remain available. It is, of course, always the case that an FDA approved treatment is available for cancer or that another IND by a favored regulatee is available for treatment use. The factor is thus entirely fungible, depending on the political preference of the regulator. Chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery are conventionally approved to one extent or another for every cancer. So FDA may always conclude that an experimental treatment is unwarranted because the patient could receive treatments that are FDA approved instead or could participate in some other IND for the cancer.

The FDA’s political manipulation of the compassionate use process is one of the greatest examples of arbitrary and capricious agency action. It carries with it consequences acceptable to no one but the FDA bureaucrats who administer the program: destruction of patient hope and life. When a director of the Division of Oncology Products decides to deny a terminally ill patient access to an experimental treatment, that interposition of federal power between doctor and patient has profound consequences. Invariably the patient’s last, best hope for cure is removed by force of law, compelling the patient either to leave the country in search of the same or comparable treatments, return to horrific chemotherapy and radiation treatments that will make life unbearable and may hasten death, or resign to die.

On June 17, 2011, Patricia Clarkson was diagnosed with Stage III multiple myeloma. Although predicting an individual’s life expectancy is in fact impossible, Patricia’s doctor, like many oncologists and hematologists, make those unscientific predictions. Her doctor told her that she had no more than 4 to 5 years of life left. This common practice is not only unscientific but also cruel in the extreme and contrary to medical ethics because it inflicts injury, often causing the patient diagnosed with cancer to experience a profound loss of hope and a feeling of utter helplessness, conditioning them to accept with resignation whatever treatment regimen is recommended even treatments with lethal side effects. Often patients diagnosed with cancer and given an estimate of time left suffer a loss of the will to live and a diminution in their immune system that hastens death.

Patricia underwent a battery of tests, two MRIs, bone scans, and sophisticated laboratory analyses, all confirming the diagnosis of Stage III multiple myeloma. On June 18, 2011, she was hospitalized for sudden acute kidney failure, but she responded well to treatment and was released on June 21. While hospitalized, she was placed on Velcade, a chemotheraphy drug. The Velcade reduced her plasma tumors from 80% to 15%, but she began to experience gastroenterological reactions to the drug and severe pain in her lower back.

She was then given radiation therapy. Her reactions to the Velcade became so severe that her treatment regimen was halted, pending resolution of the reactions. In the interim, one of her oncologists advised that genetic testing revealed that she was missing chromosome 13 and gene p53 (a condition common among 50% of those afflicted with multiple myeloma), which he said would reduce her life expectancy to a year or two. Again, this heartless, unscientific pronouncement only further injured Patricia’s psyche atop the enormous physical suffering she had already experienced.

This oncologist recommended a bone marrow transplant which he said would extend her life one to two years (another unscientific prediction because bone marrow transplants in these circumstances are notoriously unsuccessful). Fortunately Patricia did her own research on bone marrow transplantation and decided that the length of hospital stay, risk of complications, and likely need for more than one transplantation surgery made it a foolish option.

In late November 2011, convinced that there was no conventional option that offered her any hope and that each option given her would come with greater physical disability and pain, decreasing, not increasing, her life expectancy, Patricia began looking for non-conventional alternatives. Having discussed the matter with trusted friends, she became convinced that she might benefit from receiving antineoplastons, a non-toxic, experimental drug discovered over thirty years ago by medical researcher Dr. Stanislaus Burzynski. One of those friends, Mary Jo Siegel, was diagnosed twenty years before with non-Hodgkins lymphoma and was pronounced cured following receipt of the antineoplastons treatment. Patricia traveled to Houston to meet Dr. Burzynski. Dr. Burzynski regretfully informed Patricia that the FDA had ruled that it would not grant any additional compassionate use exemptions for patients to receive his antineoplatons, although FDA had approved numerous exemptions in 2011. After conducting a physical exam and evaluating the test results, Dr. Burzynski recommended that Patricia take sodium phenylbutyrate along with the chemotherapy drug Revlimid until such time as a better option became available. Her local oncologist acknowledged Patricia’s decision to work with Dr. Burzynski, but refused to affiliate with him or provide local medical support, apparently for fear of FDA retaliation against her and her clinic.

Informed that the FDA could only be persuaded to lift its ban on Burzynski’s treatment if enough political pressure were brought to bear, Patricia contacted her member of Congress, Jerry McNerney. In December McNerney’s aides sent Erik Laughner, a consumer safety officer in the FDA’s Division of Oncology Products, a letter requesting a compassionate exemption for Patricia. The request was denied. FDA offered no explanation for its denial. Patricia then turned to Senator Diane Feinstein for help. She wrote to the Senator and asked her to urge FDA to permit participation in the Burzynski clinical trial. Senator Feinstein’s staff sent a letter to the FDA on December 14. On January 6, 2012, the FDA responded with a conclusory denial, reciting that it was aware of no data supporting “the use of antineoplaston therapy as a potentially safe and effective treatment for multiple myeloma.”

Patricia then met with Senator Feinstein’s aides and provided them with more details supporting her request for access to the Burzynski treatment. Dan Morrison of Senator Feinstein’s office later informed Patricia that he did not receive any response to his last inquiry to the FDA. He had no options to give Patricia other than encouraging her to contact the FDA directly by phone (a dead end given that FDA refuses to speak with patients about its compassionate use decisions; it only speaks to its regulatees, the clinical trial sponsors) or send a letter to the White House.

The war on cancer has become a war dominated by “friendly fire,” where the medical troops fighting the battle more often than not kill the civilian patients they are supposed to protect. It is a war we have lost yet continue to wage using the same failed munitions. It is a war the federal government allows to be waged by those with political influence but not by those without that influence who nevertheless have discovered treatments that hold out promise. It is a very corrupt and inhumane war.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

For Patricia Clarkson, the need for access to Dr. Burzynski’s antineoplastons is acute. Because political influence plays such an important part in this sordid business of convincing the FDA to permit a dying person freedom of choice, I urge those who read these words to correspond with the FDA and with their members of Congress to demand that FDA Commissioner Hamburg act now to reverse FDA’s decision to deny Patricia Clarkson antineoplastons treatment. You may register your complaint with Commissioner Margaret Hamburg at the following email address: Margaret.Hamburg@fda.hhs.gov. You should also ask Congressmen Darrell Issa, Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to demand that Commissioner Hamburg reverse her the denial of treatment. You can reach him on Twitter (@DarrellIssa). You should also ask Congressman Dan Burton, member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to intervene on Patricia’s behalf. You can reach him on Twitter (@RepDanBurton).

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

Ginger and your prostate..

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Food, Health

I read this very interesting article about Ginger and your prostate..

By Dr. Mercola

Ginger has a long history of medicinal use, primarily for soothing nausea and easing stomach upset and dizziness. But it’s also a natural immune system booster with anti-inflammatory and pain-relieving properties, courtesy of several bioactive phenolics, including:
• Gingerols
• Paradols
• Shogaols
• Gingerones
• Zingerones
Phenolic antioxidants, which are plant metabolites found throughout the plant kingdom, have been found to play important protective roles against diseases caused by oxidative damage, such as coronary heart disease, stroke, and cancers. (This is in part why regular consumption of vegetables is believed to be so important for heart disease and cancer prevention in particular.)
Previous research has also established that ginger exhibits antiproliferative powers, indicating it may be useful as a chemopreventive agent. Now, a study published in the British Journal of Nutrition has demonstrated, allegedly for the first time, the in vitro and in vivo anticancer activity of ginger, suggesting it may indeed be effective in the management of prostate cancer.
How Whole Ginger Extract Helps Combat Prostate Cancer
The study showed that whole ginger extract exerts significant growth-inhibitory and death-inductory effects in a spectrum of human prostate cancer cells. The extract:
• Impaired cell-cycle progression
• Impaired cellular reproductive capacity
• Modulated the cell-cycle
• Modulated molecules that regulate apoptosis (cell death)
• Induced caspase-driven, mitochondrially mediated cell death in human prostate cancer cells
The authors write:
“Remarkably, daily oral feeding of 100 mg/kg body weight of ginger extract inhibited growth and progression of PC-3 xenografts by approximately 56 percent in mice, as shown by measurements of tumor volume.
Tumor tissue from [ginger extract]-treated mice showed reduced proliferation index and widespread apoptosis [cell death] compared with controls, as determined by immunoblotting and immunohistochemical methods. Most importantly, [ginger extract] did not exert any detectable toxicity in normal, rapidly dividing tissues such as gut and bone marrow.”
Other Health Benefits of Ginger
The phenolic antioxidants (listed at the beginning) are also believed to have particular anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties similar to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and more recent research confirms this. In a 2010 study, ginger was found to be an effective pain reliever for exercise-induced pain. In this case, raw ginger was determined to be slightly more effective than a heat treated form, reducing pain by 25 percent within 24 hours. More importantly however, over the past decade, researchers have discovered that ginger may offer potent cardiovascular benefits by:
• Preventing atherosclerosis
• Lowering cholesterol levels
• Preventing oxidation of low density lipoprotein (LDL)
With cancer and heart disease topping the charts in terms of mortality, making sure to include potent disease fighting foods in your diet on a regular basis would be a no-brainer, and ginger certainly appears to be one such ingredient. In one animal study, mice who received 250 micrograms of ginger extract daily experienced the following beneficial effects over a 10-week period:
44 percent reduction in aortic atherosclerotic lesion 29 percent reduction in cholesterol 33 percent reductions in LDL (bad) cholesterol
27 percent reduction in triglycerides 53 percent reduction in VLDL cholesterol Reduced LDL oxidation and aggregation
The Importance of Maintaining a Healthy Prostate
Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in American men, affecting about one in six men at some point in their life. It’s also the second leading cause of cancer death in men. However, as dire as that sounds, the 5-year relative survival rate of all men with prostate cancer is, remarkably, 100 percent, and the relative survival rate at 10 years is 91 percent, according to the American Cancer Society. The term “relative survival rate” may warrant an explanation. As explained on Wikipedia:
“… 5-year relative survival rates describes the percentage of patients with a disease that are alive five years after their disease is diagnosed, divided by the percentage of the general population of corresponding sex and age that are alive after five years… In contrast to five-year absolute survival rates, five-year relative survival rates may also equal or even exceed 100% if cancer patients have the same or even higher survival rates than the general population. This pattern may occur if cancer patients can generally be cured…”
Still, since the prevalence of prostate cancer is so high, maintaining a healthy prostate is important for all men, including men who are under the age of 60. Because even though you may be able to reverse the damage, ideally you’ll want to prevent these problems from occurring in the first place.
Men over 70 have a 50/50 chance of developing an enlarged prostate, known as benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). This does not equal prostate cancer. However, you do need to address this issue, and unfortunately, the conventional route includes drugs. Some of these drugs can do far more harm than good, and certain ones actually carry a warning label that if you have benign prostate hyperplasia, the drug may increase your cancer risk, and/or may promote a much more aggressive form of cancer.
For more information about this, please review this previous article on prostate health, which includes an informative interview with Dr. Rudi Moerck.
How to Maintain Optimal Prostate Function and Help Prevent Prostate Cancer
Diet is a factor that can greatly impact your prostate health. You’ll want to eat as much organic (preferably raw) food as possible, and liberally include fresh herbs and spices, such as ginger. Make sure to limit carbohydrates like sugar/fructose and grains as much as possible to maintain optimal insulin levels, which will help reduce your cancer risk in general. Highly processed or charcoaled meats, pasteurized dairy products, and trans fats correlate with an increased risk for prostate cancer and should also be avoided.
There are also a number of more specific nutritional therapies that are particularly beneficial for avoiding and/or treating prostate cancer.
• Include prostate-healthy foods in your daily diet: Foods that support prostate health include vegetables and fruits rich in antioxidants, vitamins, cartenoids, and lycopene. One 2009 study identified tomatoes, cauliflower, broccoli and green tea as being particularly beneficial against prostate cancer
• Try saw palmetto: The medical literature contains about 100 clinical studies on saw palmetto for prostate health and reduced incidence of prostate cancer. Trying saw palmetto before you resort to a drug is well worth it, considering the stern warnings that accompany some of these drugs. According to Dr. Moerck, saw palmetto in combination with pumpkin seed or lycopene may be an even more potent combination.Beware that quality is very important when selecting a saw palmetto supplement. Most brands on the market are ineffectual because they use the inactive form of the plant. The highest quality products are the organic supercritical-extracted saw palmetto oils, which are very dark green in color. Only one or two out of every 20 brands will be of this high quality. Dr. Moerck recommends a daily dose of 320 mg of saw palmetto oil (supercritical CO2 extract). Keep in mind that saw palmetto is a fat soluble supplement, so it will not absorb well unless you take it in conjunction with a little bit of fat. I recommend taking it with eggs, which contain phospholipids that enhance absorption of fat soluble nutrients.
• Optimize your vitamin D levels, ideally by exposing your bare skin to natural sun light on a regular basis. (Your skin also synthesizes vitamin D sulfate, which may account for many of vitamin D’s potent health benefits, so sun exposure is really the ideal way to optimize your levels and get the greatest overall health benefits.) Evidence suggests that vitamin D may be one of the most potent variables associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer.There are well over 800 scientific studies confirming the link between vitamin D deficiency and multiple types of cancers, including prostate cancer. For example, according to a 2005 study, men with higher levels of vitamin D in their blood were half as likely to develop aggressive forms of prostate cancer as those with lower amounts. Another study published two years ago found that men with higher levels of vitamin D in their blood were seven times less likely to die from prostate cancerthan those with lower amounts.Testing your vitamin D levels is done by a simple blood test. Anything below 20 ng/ml is considered a serious deficiency state, which will increase your risk of breast- and prostate cancers.The optimal value that you’re looking for is between 50-70 ng/ml. However, research has suggested that maintaining a slightly higher level of 70-100 ng/ml may be optimal for cancer prevention. If you can’t get regular sun exposure, you may want to consider using a safe tanning bed (one that uses electronic rather than magnetic ballasts). As a last resort, you can opt for an oral vitamin D3 supplement. Keep in mind that when using a supplement, regular testing becomes even more important to make sure you’re staying within therapeutic range.
• Consider a vitamin K2 supplement: Another nutrient that has been found to offer significant protection against prostate cancer is vitamin K2. For more information about that, please refer to this previous article. Although I don’t typically recommend taking a lot of supplements, vitamin K is one you may want to seriously consider because many people don’t get nearly enough of it on a daily basis through the foods they eat.
• Exercise your body, and your prostate: Having a well-rounded exercise regimen is essential for overall health, and is now becoming more widely accepted as a critical piece of cancer prevention and treatment. Having sex on a regular basis, which exercises your prostate specifically, is also important.
• Check your testosterone levels: Contrary to popular belief, restoring testosterone levels in aging men does not appear to promote prostate cancer—on the contrary! According to meticulous research by Dr. Abraham Morgentaler, MD, author of Testosterone for Life, men with low testosterone are the ones at greater risk. For an interesting article that contains a lot more information about this, read Dr. Morgentaler’s report Destroying the Myth About Testosterone Replacement and Prostate Cancer. It explains how unfortunate assumptions have led to a dogmatic belief that testosterone replacement increases your risk of prostate cancer—a belief that might now be preventing many men from being optimally healthy.If you are low you can consider trans rectal DHEA cream. I personally use about 50 mg twice a day, and it has done wonders to optimize my testosterone levels as DHEA is converted to testosterone in your body.
So in closing, prostate cancer is a disease that can be managed … if you make the appropriate lifestyle modifications. Ideally, you’ll want to pay close attention to your prostate health early on—avoid waiting until you’re in your 60’s. Incorporating the lifestyle recommendations discussed above can help you prevent prostate problems from developing in the first place.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

Ashamed to be English….

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Food, Health

Apparently, the European Union’s (EU’s) 2007–13 EU Strategy on Nutrition, Overweight and Obesity-related Health Issues is failing to tackle rising obesity. But is it any wonder, when Big Food sponsors the high-level discussions meant to solve the problem, and its propaganda is everywhere?

A growing nation – but not just in numbers

The guidance that we continually see being dressed up and dished out by governments as ‘sound nutritional advice’ is far from living up to its intended function. Recent ANH articles have spotlighted children having their perfectly adequate packed lunches substituted for very poor fast-food alternatives, the wide differences in approach to nutritional advice between dieticians and nutritional therapists (NTs), and simply shocking advice from governments on (so-called) healthy eating. It’s becoming clear that health and dietary advice is being dished up with a large helping of Big Food influence, plus a side order of bonuses for Big Pharma. And thats not to mention junk food masquerading as ‘all natural’ and ‘whole grain’ so that people are literally tricked into thinking they’re getting something healthy. The end result, other than more obese and generally unhealthy citizens, is yet more profits for Big Food and Big Pharma! Is this really a result of an appetite for widespread public health, or a strategy with corporate and big industry interests at its heart?

Don’t matter if you’re fat or thin…

Whether health authorities are offering advice on losing weight or putting it on, the advice generally isn’t very impressive in either case. We were recently alerted to the UK National Health Service’s (NHS) ‘Focus on Undernutrition’ scheme, a dietician-led programme that promotes that, “…the use of food first[as opposed to snacks, fortified foods or supplements]for people who are identified as moderate and high risk of undernutrition”. This sounds like a sensible approach, until you look at the examples of the supposedly ‘nourishing’ snacks and drinks the scheme recommends. How about crisps, sausage rolls, doughnuts, ice cream and chocolate bars – all washed down with a healthy and nourishing Coca-Cola?

In the face of major worries about over-burdened health systems, and huge rises in diseases such as diabetes, obesity and heart disease, where is the proof that a high-sugar diet is ‘nourishing’? This advice flies in the face of everything that is known about the dangers of excessive sugar in the diet and its myriad of negative effects on the body – but it’s consistent with advice given by dieticians to cancer patients. Can it be a coincidence that Big Food is in bed with the British government’s Change4Life initiative, much as it is with the American Dietetic Association (ADA)? In the US, at least, people are starting to take notice of where this junk-biased advice is filtering down from.

Big Food advertising every way you look

Those that profit from the sales of sugary junk foods are covering every avenue. Articles about vitamin B12 deficiencies advise eating sugary, fortified cereals, rather than foods naturally high in vitamin B12 or a good quality supplement. UK radio adverts advertise chicken nuggets, potato waffles and peas as a nutritious meal for children, and television stations and billboards are littered with adverts for processed, convenience foods. All of this advertising has been proven to entice children into eating whatever foodstuff they have just seen on TV, which will have been chocolate bars or burgers and not fresh, organic produce.

The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges (AoMRC) is worried that advertising and sponsorship at the 2012 London Olympics by companies such as McDonalds and Coca-Cola will further deepen the UK’s obesity crisis, and sends out the wrong message. Unsurprisingly, these food firms have rejected the claims, helpfully pointing out that, “Food manufacturers have a good track record of making positive contributions to public health”. It’s doubtful, though, that athletes’ Olympic training includes many Big Macs and fries, with a Coke on the side and a Mars bar to finish.

Coca-Cola is also one of a number of manufacturers collaborating on research into satiety in the hope of, “Producing foods that fill people up quicker and for longer and taste good…[to] help moderate appetite whilst maintaining a healthy balanced diet ”…all the while maintaining sales and profits! Good news then – soon we will have junk foods specifically designed to fill us up so that we don’t want to eat anything else. Not all that healthy, or balanced.

Professionals unite to combat the obesity problem

This very real concern is thankfully being taken seriously, with organisations and doctors uniting to combat the obesity epidemic by tackling issues such as Big Food advertising and sponsorship. AoMRC spokesman Prof Stephenson believes that the problems should be addressed in a similar manner to the advertising restrictions that have been placed on smoking. There is also talk of fat taxes being put in place and an obesity steering group has been set up to help solve the issue.

However, while it’s heartening to see increased recognition of the problem in the mainstream, we doubt that such nanny-state measures, based in the currently fashionable ‘nudge theory’, are the answer. What is needed is a sea change in education about food, nutrition and lifestyle, such that people naturally move away from eating junk food and get more active in a myriad of ways. As always, change from the bottom up beats imposed solutions from the top down – in other words, YOU have the power to change things!

Call to Action
•If you are in the US and a registered dietitians, students, or ADA member, please sign this petition and tell the ADA that you’re fed up with the direction they’re taking
•If you’re a parent be aware of the influence that TV advertising of junk foods can have on your children
•Do your own research and pick fresh, unprocessed organic produce wherever possible. Avoid pre-packed, processed foods and plan meals ahead so that they can easily be made from scratch
•Get outdoors! It’s a wonderful world we live in so get out there and enjoy it!

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

10 creative ways to use lemon juice..

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Health

How to use lemon juice to replace toxic chemicals in your home
by Elizabeth Walling

(NaturalNews) You don’t have to waste money on toxic chemicals to clean your home, treat a cold, or pamper your skin. Lemon juice is a simple, natural alternative that can replace countless bottles of over-priced chemicals.

10 creative ways to use lemon juice
1. Grease removal – A mixture of plain water and lemon juice is tough enough to bust through any grease on your kitchen appliances and counter tops.

2. Disinfect and deodorize your kitchen – Is your refrigerator or cutting board really clean? Surfaces where we prepare and store food need to be clean, but this is also exactly where we don’t want to use toxic chemical cleaners. Lemon juice is excellent for disinfecting these surfaces, and will also remove unpleasant stains and odors.

3. Sooth a cough – Mix some raw honey with an equal amount of lemon juice to ease your coughing. This also works well for a sore throat.

4. Enhance digestion – Fresh lemon juice in water can aid digestion during meals. It’s also a great way to hydrate in the morning when you first wake up.

5. Tone your skin – Use a cotton ball to apply a light layer of diluted lemon juice to your skin. Let it sit for ten minutes and then rinse away with cool water. The lemon juice will naturally exfoliate your skin, and can also lighten dark spots and scars.

6. Clean glass – Lemon juice is just what you need to bring the sparkle back to that dull vase, coffee pot or decanter. You can also use one part lemon juice in ten parts water to shine your windows.

7. Clean and soften your hands – Lemon juice is excellent for removing stains and odors left on your hands. Lightly scrub the lemon juice into your hands with a sponge, then rinse and moisturize as usual. Your hands will feel clean, soft and fresh.

8. Remove tarnish – A simple paste of table salt and lemon juice can make tarnished copper, chrome and brass gleam again. Apply the mixture, allow it to sit for ten minutes, then rinse with warm water and buff gently to shine.

9. Get sun-kissed hair highlights – Chemicals used to lighten hair can be highly toxic. Get natural highlights by spritzing your hair with lemon juice before you go out in the sun. As an added bonus, rinsing your hair with lemon juice removes build-up and gives your locks incredible shine.

10. Clean your toilet – Toilet cleaning products are harsh and unnecessary. A mixture of borax powder and lemon juice will leave your toilet looking (and smelling) as good as new!

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

Sources for this article include:

http://www.greenlivingtips.com/articles/136/1/24-handy-lemon-tips.html

About the author:
Elizabeth Walling is a freelance writer specializing in health and family nutrition. She is a strong believer in natural living as a way to improve health and prevent modern disease. She enjoys thinking outside of the box and challenging common myths about health and wellness. You can visit her blog to learn more:
www.livingthenourishedlife.com/2009/10/welcome.html

Powerful plant steroids…

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Food, Health

Spinach is one of the most nutrient dense foods on the planet. Popeye got it right with this powerhouse but it is too bad he ate it out of a can. Fresh, organic spinach is much more nutrient dense and contains far fewer environmental toxins than the canned stuff. Most children and adults like the flavor and texture of fresh spinach over the canned alternative. Be sure to pump up your body with spinach on a regular basis.

Spinach is native to ancient Persia (Iranian regions). Arab traders carried spinach into India and China. Traders also brought this green leafy vegetable to the Mediterranean regions of Europe and eventually to the US. There are three primary types of spinach on the market. The most popular style on the market today is baby spinach, while one could also get smooth-leaf and savoy (which has curly leaves).

Powerful plant steroids
Spinach contains its own type of plant based steroids called phytoecdysteroids. Phytoecdysteroids are similar to insect molting hormones and have been shown to dramatically increase glucose metabolism. This keeps blood sugar levels stable and minimizes the need for the critical fat-storage hormone insulin. Additionally, phytoecdysteroids increase human muscle tissue growth rates by 20% when applied in a culture medium.

Spinach is extremely rich in blood purifying chlorophyll. This chlorophyll is easily metabolized and used to build new red blood cells and pull out carcinogenic substances from the body. Chlorophyll also provides magnesium which acts to strengthen the blood-brain barrier and protect the neurological system from environmental toxins.

Spinach is an amazing source of glycoclycerolipids that protect the digestive tract from inflammatory damage. These glycoclycerolipids are the main fatty acids that makeup the cell membranes of light-sensitive organs in chlorophyll containing plants. Additionally, spinach is an important source of copper, zinc, and selenium which boost immunity.

Spinach also contains some very newly studied carotenoid anti-oxidants called eposyxanthophylls. The epoxyxanthophylls that have been researched to show remarkable anti-cancer properties include neoxanthin and violaxanthin. Spinach is also rich in the powerful carotenoid anti-oxidants lutein and zeaxanthin. These phytonutrients are extremely important for healthy vision & brain function.

The carotenoids act to protect chlorophyll from intense UV radiation. Under intense sunlight, chlorophyll can convert into an excited form called triplet chlorophyll along with singlet oxygen molecules which act as potent free radicals. The more carotenoids a plant contains the greater the degree of survivability it has and the enhanced nutritional bioavailability it provides.

When purchasing spinach be sure to get it organic as the non-organic commercial varieties are considered one of the most heavily sprayed edible plants in the world. Also, look to get it fresh to avoid chemical preservative agents and aluminum found in the cans. It is also easy to grow as a garden vegetable in areas of mild temperatures.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

Sources for this article include:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinach
http://whfoods.org/genpage.php?dbid=43&tname=foodspice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xanthophyll
http://www.naturalnews.com/032263_superfoods_brain_health.html

About the author:
Dr. David Jockers owns and operates Exodus Health Center in Kennesaw, Ga. He is a Maximized Living doctor. His expertise is in weight loss, customized nutrition & exercise, & structural corrective chiropractic care. For more information go to www.exodushc.com To find a Maximized Living doctor near you go to www.maximizedliving.com Dr. Jockers is also available for long distance phone consultations to help you beat disease and reach your health goals

Ten Top Common Healing Herbs and Spices..

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Food, Health

The Medicine Cabinet in Your Kitchen – Ten Top Common Healing Herbs and Spices

1. CAYENNE – Cayenne pepper has wonderful cardiovascular benefits, including lowering blood pressure. Famed herbalist Doctor John Christopher noted that a couple of teaspoons of cayenne pepper never failed to stop a heart attack in only minutes. When added to food, cayenne increases appetite, improves digestion and relieves gas, nausea and indigestion. It also thins phlegm and eases its passage from the lungs.

2. GARLIC – Garlic is a natural antiseptic and powerful cancer fighter with numerous other health benefits. It helps lower cholesterol, reduces plaque, lowers blood pressure, and lowers the risk of atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries). Garlic is also effective against digestive ailments and diarrhea.

3. TURMERIC – The curcumin contained in turmeric provides powerful anti-cancer properties, especially for smokers and past smokers. Curcumin has clinically proven anti-inflammatory effects, including significant beneficial effects in relieving rheumatoid arthritis and carpal tunnel syndrome. Turmeric is also packed with antioxidants, including vitamins A, C, and E, and may help prevent cataracts.

4. CINNAMON – Cinnamon contains a compound that kills a variety of illness causing bacteria, including the E.coli, Salmonella, and Staphylococcus aureas. Research shows that cinnamon can also stop the growth of the Asian flu virus. Cinnamon helps lower blood pressure and helps regulate menstrual cycles. In addition, cinnamon has a tranquilizing effect that helps reduce anxiety and stress

5. OREGANO – Oregano is a powerful natural antiseptic. It contains 19 chemical compounds with antibacterial actions as well as four compounds that soothe coughs. In addition, oregano helps soothe stomach muscles, making it a good digestive aid, and it helps lower blood pressure.

6. GINGER – Ginger is a wonderful digestive aid which stimulates saliva flow and digestive activity, settles the stomach, relieves vomiting, and eases pain from gas and diarrhea. Ginger is also effective as an anti-nausea remedy. Researchers have found that ginger is more effective against motion sickness than the most commonly used over the counter medication. Ginger is also used as a pain reliever and it helps lower bad cholesterol.

7. FENUGREEK – Fenugreek seeds help treat diabetes, lower blood sugar and lower bad cholesterol. Fenugreek also helps maintain good metabolism, prevents constipation, purifies the blood and helps flush out harmful toxins. Fenugreek seeds and leaves are good for increasing breast milk in lactating women.

8. BASIL – Basil is an herbal carminative which can relieve gas and soothe stomach upsets. Research has also indicated that basil helps prevent aging.

9. CLOVE – Oil of clove is 60 to 90 percent eugenol, which is a potent pain deadening anti-microbial. Clove has earned the official endorsement of the FDA as an effective stopgap measure for tooth pain. Clove also helps lower blood sugar by helping the body use insulin more effectively. Cloves was also found in one study to speed healing of dreaded cold sores.

10. BLACK PEPPER – Black pepper is one of the oldest and most commonly used spices. It has a stimulating effect on the digestive organs and produces an increased flow of saliva and digestive juices. Black pepper can help relieve indigestion as well as flatulence. It also helps improve absorption and utilization of curcumin, which the body normally does not absorb very well.

The above list barely scratches the surface of all the wonderful healing herbs and spices nature has provided for our “kitchen medicine cabinet”. For many more examples see:

http://unitproj.library.ucla.edu/biomed/spice/index.cfm?spicefilename=medspice.txt&itemsuppress=yes&displayswitch=0

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.





My book “Dentistry and how it’s damaging your health” is available here for only $2.99

Sources included:

http://www.healthy-holistic-living.com/healing-herbs.html
http://www.lifemojo.com/lifestyle/10-kitchen-spices-with-healing-power-3852125
http://www.naturalnews.com/026869_cayenne_pepper_health.html
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/120651.php