ClimateGate scandal demonstrates intellectual protectionism of modern scientists

November 30, 2009  by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) The inconvenient release of private email conversations among climate change scientists has been a boon for climate change skeptics. What emerges from the leaked emails is a depiction of a group of scientists who practice "intellectual protectionism" — meaning they know they’re right and they’ll do anything to protect their beliefs, even if it means hiding or manipulating data.

Sound familiar? Scientists in the pharmaceutical industry have been practicing this for decades. If you think the ClimateGate emails are revealing, just imagine what kind of similar emails are flying around between Big Pharma scientists who routinely manipulate study data and commit scientific fraud in the name of medicine. Time and time again, we see revelations of manipulated clinical trials where data was intentionally distorted in order to make a dangerous, useless drug appear to be safe and effective.

What ClimateGate scientists and Big Pharma scientists have in common is that they have both abandoned the core principles of good science in their quest to be right. Rather than asking questions of nature and humbly listening to the answers provided by the data, these scientists have staked out a position and decided to defend that position at all costs — even if it requires hiding or distorting data!

That approach is entirely unscientific, of course. In my mind, it now puts much of the recent global warming science in the same category as Big Pharma’s research: Pure quackery.

As Christopher Booker explains in The Telegraph, "The reason why even the Guardian’s George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated. What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)." (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/…) …

Advertisements
Published in: on November 30, 2009 at 11:57 am  Leave a Comment  

Natural Help for Sinus Infections

November 25, 2009 by: Tony Isaacs, citizen journalist

(NaturalNews) As fall allergy season heads into winter cold season, many of us are prone to suffer from sinus infections. Symptoms of sinus infections, or sinusitis, are similar to a common cold, but last longer. If symptoms last longer than two weeks, you probably have sinusitis. Sinus infections can last from three weeks up to three years if left untreated. Fortunately there are several natural remedies which may relieve and conquer sinus infections. Here are some of the best:

* Colloidal Silver can be used to irrigate the sinus cavities as well as taken internally to help fight off the infection. To irrigate the sinus cavities thoroughly, use a pump spray or squirt bottle and use a good amount of silver to get in all the sinus passages.
* Grapefruit seed extract is a wonderful supplement for sinus infection which can make a sinus infection disappear after only couple of days. Do not take the drops on an empty stomach, especially early in the morning.
* Using a neti pot helps keep your nasal passages healthy with all the pollution, pollen, dust and other irritants in the air. All you need to use in it is non-iodized salt, preferably sea salt.
* Potassium supplements help dry up mucous.
* Drink apple cider vinegar throughout the day in large glasses of water. ACV thins mucus.
* Cayenne pepper tincture will help clear the sinuses and it is also a great overall cold remedy.
* Let a hot shower run onto your forehead and nose and then clear all the mucus from your sinuses. Do this several times a day.
* Oil Pulling, a wonderful remedy from India, often alleviates sinus congestion within about 10-15 minutes.
* Licorice root helps reduce inflammation and stimulates the immune system to fight sinus infections. There are two types of licorice products.
* Eucalyptus soothes sore throats. It also has antiseptic properties and can help shrink swollen tissues such as swollen sinus passages.
* Peppermint can help calm mucous membranes. You may drink peppermint tea or steep the peppermint and breathe in the steam. You can also use peppermint in aromatherapy. The scent of peppermint when inhaled helps to ease your breathing.
* Drink eight to ten glasses of water every day.
* Drink warm tea to help dilute mucus.
* Ginger has long been known to relieve and prevent headaches. It is also an anti-inflammatory and can help relieve pain. Take in tincture or capsule form according to directions.
* Lemon balm is helpful in fighting off viruses and bacteria. Steep the dried leaves for 10 minutes in hot water. Strain and drink the tea warm. Alternatively, lemon balm tea can be used as a gargle.
* Echinacea often will knock out a cold in only a matter of days when taken in quantity. It helps boost the immune system and makes it function better. Take in tincture or capsule form with increased dosages at the onset of illness and decrease after three or four days. Do not take if you have an allergy to ragweed.
* Vitamin C and zinc can help shorten the duration of colds as well as reduce cold symptoms. Sinus infections often come as a result of lingering colds. If you fight a cold early, you can help stave off a sinus infection. Take capsule or lozenges during cold season, especially with the onset of any symptoms.
* Foods high in antioxidants help to build the immune system and prevent infections in the first place. Some of these foods include blueberries, cherries, artichokes, cranberries and pomegranates.
Sources included:
www.earthclinic.com/CURES/sinus_inf…
www.herbalremediesinfo.com/herbal-r…
www.learningherbs.com/natural_remed…
www.tbyil.com/remedies.htm

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Published in: on November 25, 2009 at 11:31 am  Leave a Comment  

Astonishing Study Puts You in Control of Your Genes

By Dr. Al Sears on 11/24/2009

We used to believe that there was nothing you could do about your genes. You were stuck with what you were born with. In fact, you can turn your genes on and off or not use them at all.

A new study proves you can alter your genes with what you eat. It showed that more than 1,000 genes were changed in just six months simply by getting more of a key nutrient.

What has the power to do this? Omega-3s, the essential fats that your body uses to power up the heart and brain. It turns out that omega-3s don’t just guard your heart from inflammation and hardening of the arteries. They change your genes so that they are less likely to produce these things in the first place.

This transforms the way we think about our family and our future. You’re not bound to a lifetime of poor health and disease, just because of your family’s “bad” genes. You can take control – and help change the cards you were dealt.

Omega-3s aren’t the only nutrients that alter your genes. There are others. Today, I’ll tell you which four all-natural “superstars” you can start taking to re-map your genes. I’ll show you which nutrients can shut down the genes that cause heart disease and slow down the ones that cause aging.

Omega-3s Halt Heart Disease

The real cause of heart disease is inflammation. Inflammation causes plaque to build-up in your arterial walls. And causes hardening of the arteries.

The study, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, shows that taking high doses of omega-3s tells your genes to focus on preventing inflammation and hardening of the arteries.

The omega-3s – specifically EPA and DHA – transforms the expression of 1,040 genes after just six months. EPA and DHA are two types of omega-3 fatty acids.

According to the researchers, “These results are the first to show that intake of EPA plus DHA for 26 weeks can alter the gene expression… to a more anti-inflammatory and anti-atherogenic status.” [1]

Put simply, once your “good” genes get switched on, it’s like having 24/7 protection for your heart.

Engineer Yourself to Better Health

The new study confirms that the food you eat – and your environment – directly influences which genes are turned on and off in your body.

Only you can take care of the personal responsibility part. That means eating natural, unprocessed foods like our ancestors did.

This includes:

  •     * Animal protein, like wild-caught fish, organic, grass-fed beef, and free-range chicken.
  •     * “Good fats”  foods like almonds, walnuts, eggs, and Haas avocados.
  •     * All kinds of vegetables – especially dark leafy greens like spinach and kale.
  •     * Fruits. Great choices are blueberries, apples and blackberries.

It also means exercising your heart and lungs like I describe in my PACE program. The right type of physical exertion affects gene expression. Short bursts of intensity followed by recovery trains your body to be able to respond to your environment.

This is the same type of exercise that our caveman ancestors did when hunting prey. And I’ve yet to see evidence of cavemen dying of heart disease.

Once you’ve taken control of your health by eating nutritious foods and exercising, the last step to rewriting your genetic code for a healthier heart is the easiest.

Re-Write Your DNA with These 4 All-Natural Superstars

Here are four nutrients that have a positive impact on gene expression:

Omega-3s – Today’s food supply gives us an overabundance of omega-6 fatty acids – the ones that can cause inflammation if left unchecked. Omega-3s balance out these omega-6s in your body. Ideally, you want an omega-6 to omega-3 ratio of 2:1. If you’re a typical American, you probably have a ratio of 20:1.

The key is getting that ratio down to healthy levels. When you get more omega-3s in your system, your cells get to work. They tell your genes not to produce inflammation and hardening of the arteries.

The most widely available source of EPA and DHA is cold water oily fish such as salmon, herring, mackerel, anchovies and sardines. Eggs and grass-fed beef are also good sources. Grass-fed beef has double the omega-3s of grain-fed beef.

You can also get omega-3s in some plant-based sources such as flax seeds, sacha inchi nuts, butternuts, walnuts, and chia seeds. But these omega-3s are in the form of ALA, alpha linolenic acid, which then has to be converted to DHA and EPA in the body.

The easiest way to ensure you’re getting enough omega-3s is by taking a quality fish oil supplement. I recommend 1-3g every day.

Resveratrol – You’ve probably heard all about the anti-aging properties and heart benefits resveratrol provides. Resveratrol slows down the aging clock, by activating sirtuins (your “anti-aging” genes).

But here’s what you may not know… in a recent study, researchers explored the influence of resveratrol on gene expression. What they found was significant. It turns out that as we age, gene expression in different tissues of the body change as genes are switched on and off.

In the heart alone, there are at least 1,029 genes whose functions change with age. Resveratrol was found to counteract this age-related genetic change 92 percent of the time [2]. It’s found in red grapes and in red wines  the cooler regions of France. I recommend 200 mg per day.

Vitamin B12 – This cheap nutrient protects your heart by reducing blood levels of a simple inflammatory protein known as homocysteine. But recent research also shows it prevents your cells  dying young.

It does this by lengthening your DNA’s telomeres. Telomeres are like a ‘tail’ on the end of all your DNA strands. They’re in every cell in your body. Every time your cells divide, your telomeres get shorter. Finally, when there’s no more telomere left, your cell stops dividing and ultimately dies. And, as you can guess, when your cells stop dividing, you die.

The easiest way to get B12 is to eat foods rich in the stuff. That includes grass-fed beef, tuna and salmon. Otherwise, supplementing is a great option. I suggest you take anywhere  100 – 500 mcg every day.

Vitamin C – This powerful antioxidant helps your cells and DNA live longer by preventing telomere shortening. It does this by neutralizing harmful free radicals that can cause abnormalities in your DNA and genetic code.

The best way to get vitamin C is to eat fruits like kiwis, oranges, grapes and strawberries. Supplement with at least 3,000 mg every day.

References:

   1. M. Bouwens, O. et al. “Fish-oil supplementation induces anti-inflammatory gene expression profiles in human blood mononuclear cells” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Volume 90, pages 415-424. June 2009

   2. University of Wisconsin-Madison (2008, June 8). Substance In Red Wine, Resveratrol, Found To Keep Hearts Young. ScienceDaily. Retrieved

(And I’d also probably add Vitamin D to the list!)

Published in: on November 24, 2009 at 4:06 pm  Leave a Comment  

Drug Companies Oppose Simple Surgical Cure for Multiple Sclerosis

November 22, 2009

An Italian medical researcher and vascular surgeon, Dr. Paolo Zamboni, seeking a cure for his wife’s Multiple Sclerosis, has discovered a treatment based on a simple surgical procedure similar to angioplasty that appears for all intents and purposes to cure the disease (see news article below).

What the researcher discovered is that many Multiple Sclerosis victims have a peculiar narrowing of the arteries that drain blood from the brain (i.e., the jugular vein and other arteries). This unusual narrowing of the arteries – thought to be caused by excess iron buildup in the body – apparently prevents proper drainage of the blood from the brain, and may even cause iron to cross the blood brain barrier and accumulate in the brain.

When the doctor performed a simple surgery on his wife to “unclog” these arteries, she experienced a complete recovery. Since then, over 100 other Multiple Sclerosis victims have also enjoyed startling remissions of their MS symptoms after undergoing the surgery.

Similar to Angioplasty

The procedure is similar to angioplasty, in which a catheter is threaded into the groin and up into the arteries, where a balloon is inflated to clear the blockages. But instead of clearing blockages to the arteries in the heart, the procedure clears blockages to the arteries that help drain blood from the brain.

Drug Companies and Multiple Sclerosis Societies Up in Arms

Not surprisingly, the drug company-related Multiple Sclerosis societies (i.e., the so-called non-profit “educational” foundations that seem to exist almost solely to direct Multiple Sclerosis victims to information on drug treatments) are in an uproar over the new discovery. Following the classic pattern of ad hominem attacks — i.e., attacking the man rather than the discovery — many are questioning the good doctor’s motives, his credentials, his educational background, and other factors.

Still other skeptics are urging victims of Multiple Sclerosis to forego the treatment until more is known. Some are even urging Multiple Sclerosis patients not to get tested for narrow arteries, even though the simple ultrasound test for narrowing arteries is relatively inexpensive and very safe and simple.

This Will Blow Your Mind…

When you take a look at the unbelievable array of drugs commonly prescribed to Multiple Sclerosis patients, you might begin to understand why the drug companies and their associated foundations (funded by the drug companies) are not too eager to see Dr. Zamboni’s simple, inexpensive treatment become widely used.

You can check the entire list of drugs at the link in the paragraph above, or read below for the short version of the list, which includes the annual cost of the most common drugs prescriped to Multiple Sclerosis patients:

* Avonex: Minimum price = $23,736 annually; Maximum price = $30,660 annually

* Betaseron : Minimum price = $22,272 annually; Maximum price = $32,616 annually

* Copaxone : Minimum price = $23,208 annually; Maximum price = $33,804 annually

* Rebif was : Minimum price = $25,068 annually; Maximum price = $30,756 annually

* Tysabri : Now costs $31,332 for the drug itself, with additional charges for the infusion facility or clinic fees.

Gee, can you imagine why the drug companies and their “non-profit” foundations don’t want Dr. Zamboni’s simple, straightforward and inexpensive surgical treatment ever to see the light of day?

See videos on the new treatment at this link.

— Spencer…

Published in: on November 23, 2009 at 11:24 am  Leave a Comment  

The Dangers of Genetically Modified Food

France Finds Monsanto Guilty of Lying

Posted by: Dr. Mercola  November 21 2009

France’s highest court has ruled that U.S. agrochemical giant Monsanto had not told the truth about the safety of its best-selling weed-killer, Roundup. The court confirmed an earlier judgment that Monsanto had falsely advertised its herbicide as "biodegradable" and claimed it "left the soil clean." Roundup is the world’s best-selling herbicide.

French environmental groups had brought the case in 2001 on the basis that glyphosate, Roundup’s main ingredient, is classed as "dangerous for the environment" by the European Union.

In the latest ruling, France’s Supreme Court upheld two earlier convictions against Monsanto by the Lyon criminal court in 2007, and the Lyon court of appeal in 2008, the AFP news agency reports.

Monsanto already dominates America’s food chain with its genetically modified seeds. Now it has targeted milk production. Just as frightening as the corporation’s tactics, including ruthless legal battles against small farmers, is its decades-long history of toxic contamination.

Sources:

BBC October 15, 2009

Vanity Fair May 2008

Vanity Fair June 19, 2009

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

Monsanto is a very dark cloud hanging over the future of health and food safety in the United States. This powerful entity has already managed so many reprehensible acts it boggles the mind, including:

  • Leading the world into a new age of potentially hazardous genetic modification of seeds.
  • Not allowing farmers to save their seeds to replant the next year — a practice that has been done for generations. Instead, they aggressively seek out and sue farmers they suspect of doing so.
  • Suing farmers who have not been able to prevent the inevitable drift of Monsanto’s GE pollen or seed onto their land for patent infringement!
  • Producing two of the most toxic substances ever known — polychlorinated biphenyls, known as PCBs, and dioxin (Agent Orange).

Now France’s highest court has confirmed an earlier judgment that Monsanto falsely advertised its Roundup herbicide as "biodegradable" and said it "left the soil clean" — claims that could not be further from the truth.

The Reality about Roundup

Monsanto long used the slogans, “It’s Safer than Mowing," "Biodegradable," and “Environmentally Friendly" to describe Roundup — until the real effects of this toxic herbicide were revealed and they were forced to discontinue their deceptive advertising.

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in RoundUp, is the most commonly reported cause of pesticide illness among landscape maintenance workers in California. Additionally:

  • The surfactant ingredient in Roundup is more acutely toxic than glyphosate itself, and the combination of the two is even more toxic.
  • Glyphosate is suspected of causing genetic damage.
  • Glyphosate is acutely toxic to fish and birds and can kill beneficial insects and soil organisms that maintain ecological balance.
  • Laboratory studies have identified adverse effects of glyphosate-containing products in all standard categories of toxicological testing.

In one animal study, rats given 1,000 mg/kg of glyphosate resulted in a 50 percent mortality rate, and skeletal alterations were observed in over 57 percent of fetuses!

This is very concerning because millions of pounds of Roundup are used every year on U.S. gardens, lawns and farms, especially on GM crops that are engineered to be Roundup resistant. Roundup works by inhibiting an enzyme called EPSP synthase, which is necessary for plants to grow. Without it, plants are unable to produce essential proteins so they slowly yellow and die.

Monsanto developed a cash cow when they created not only Roundup, but also their genetically modified “Roundup Ready” crops.

Roundup Ready soybean, cotton and corn crops are the world’s largest group of genetically modified crops. In fact, the GM Roundup Ready gene is part of more than 75 percent of soybeans, 65 percent of cotton and 10 percent of corn grown in the United States.

This particular variety of GM crops became so popular because it allows farmers to spray Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide directly onto their fields without harming the crops. Ordinarily, if you were to spray Roundup, or any other glyphosate-based herbicide, onto a plant, it would die.

Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crops, however, produce an enzyme that has the same function as EPSP synthase, but is not affected by Roundup.

As you might imagine, the use of Roundup herbicide has increased dramatically since the GM Roundup Ready crops were introduced, and serious problems have been reported ever since.

Roundup Residues are Toxic

It’s widely known that GM Roundup Ready crops, which are very common in the United States, contain Roundup residues. A study published earlier this year even showed, for the first time, just how toxic these residues may be to your health. 

The study found that residues of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide found in GM food and feed can cause cell damage and death, even at very low levels. The authors of the study said their research "… points to undesirable effects which are currently masked or hidden from scientific scrutiny."

Even when researchers tested formulations of Roundup that were highly diluted (up to 100,000 times or more) on human cells, the cells died within 24 hours.

They also found damage to cell membranes and DNA, along with an inhibition of cell respiration.

Further, the researchers discovered that the mixture of components used as Roundup adjuvants actually amplified the action of the glyphosate, making at least one of its metabolites even more toxic. The researchers wrote:

“This work clearly confirms that the adjuvants in Roundup formulations are not inert. Moreover, the proprietary mixtures available on the market could cause cell damage and even death around residual levels to be expected, especially in food and feed derived from Roundup formulation-treated crops.”

With findings like these, you can see just how outrageous Monsanto’s claims really were. Roundup is not “biodegradable,” safe or in any way good for people or the environment.

Not by a long shot.

Monsanto’s Sordid Past

It does not come as a surprise that Monsanto lied about Roundup, given their extremely under-handed track record. There is easily enough “dirt” on Monsanto to fill an entire book.

Perhaps their biggest assault to your food supply is what’s known as terminator technology. These are seeds that have been genetically modified to “self-destruct.” In other words, the seeds (and the forthcoming crops) are sterile, which means farmers must buy them again each year.

The implications that terminator seeds could have on the world’s food supply are disastrous: the traits from genetically engineered crops can get passed on to other crops. Once the terminator seeds are released into a region, the trait of seed sterility could be passed to other non-genetically-engineered crops, making most or all of the seeds in the region sterile.

If allowed to continue, every farmer in the world could come to rely on Monsanto for their seed supply!

Monsanto — the convicted liar’s club — has also worked its way into varying high-level positions in the U.S. government, ironically in positions that are meant to protect your food safety!

The New Senior Advisor for the FDA is a Former Monsanto VP!

Michael Taylor, a former vice president of public policy and chief lobbyist at Monsanto Company, is the new senior advisor for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Who is Michael Taylor? He is the person who “oversaw the creation of GMO policy,” according to Jeffrey Smith, the leading spokesperson on the dangers of GM foods. Smith continues

“If GMOs are indeed responsible for massive sickness and death, then the individual who oversaw the FDA policy that facilitated their introduction holds a uniquely infamous role in human history. That person is Michael Taylor. He had been Monsanto’s attorney before becoming policy chief at the FDA. Soon after, he became Monsanto’s vice president and chief lobbyist.”

The FDA policy being referred to is the 1992 GMO policy, which stated:

"The agency is not aware of any information showing that foods derived by these new methods [genetic engineering] differ from other foods in any meaningful or uniform way."

In reality, there was major concern among FDA scientists that GM foods were in fact different than natural foods, and that their creation could prompt unknown and unpredictable health problems.

Along with being a key player in the initial pushing of GM foods onto Americans’ plates (without any required safety studies), Taylor also oversaw the policy regarding Monsanto’s genetically engineered bovine growth hormone (rbGH/rbST)

This growth hormone, which has been banned in Canada, Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand because of cancer risks and other health concerns, was approved in the United States while Taylor was in charge at the FDA. Smith writes:

“Taylor also determined that milk from injected cows did not require any special labeling. And as a gift to his future employer Monsanto, he wrote a white paper suggesting that if companies ever had the audacity to label their products as not using rbGH, they should also include a disclaimer stating that according to the FDA, there is no difference between milk from treated and untreated cows.”

Taylor’s white paper, which again was untrue as even FDA scientists acknowledged differences in the rbGH milk, allowed Monsanto to sue dairies that labeled their products rbGH-free.

Unfortunately, the connections do not end there. You can find out more about all of Monsanto’s key players who are now part of the Obama administration here

You Can Fight Back Against Monsanto

By boycotting all GM foods and instead supporting organic (and local) farmers who do not use Monsanto’s GM seeds, you are using your wallet to make your opinions known. This means abstaining from virtually all processed food products (most are loaded with GM ingredients) and sticking to fresh, locally grown, organic foodstuffs instead.

Monsanto reported a fourth quarter loss of $233 million in October 2009, largely due to a drop in sales of its Roundup brand — so I am confident that many are wising up to the underhanded dealings of this evil company.

If you want to help keep Monsanto from expanding their stronghold on the world’s food supply, please also continue to stay informed.

Monsanto is the poster child for manipulation and corporate greed, so please, forward this article on to your circle of influence, and make the choice to boycott any product that this unethical company is associated with.

Related Links:

Why are Monsanto Insiders Now Appointed to Protect Your Food Safety?

Monsanto’s Many Attempts to Destroy All Seeds but Their Own

Monsanto’s Dream Bill — HR 875

Published in: on November 21, 2009 at 3:51 pm  Leave a Comment  

Cancer industry desperately needs mammogram screenings to recruit patients and generate repeat business

November 19, 2009  by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) Any time you threaten to take away repeat customer from the businesses that make up the cancer industry, you’re in for a political fight. After the United States Preventive Services Task Force released new recommendations advising against mammograms for women under 50 (and recommending only bi-annual screenings after that), the cancer industry went berserk.
Mammograms, you see, are the bread and butter of the for-profit cancer industry. They serve two very important purposes:
Purpose #1: RECRUIT patients. Mammograms are a clever tool for recruiting patients into a highly-profitable regimen of chemotherapy drugs, radiation and surgery that, nine times out of ten, isn’t even medically justified. How’s that? Because the detection technology behind mammograms is now so advanced it can detect tiny tumors present in virtually everyone, whether they’re dangerous or not. This has lead to a huge increase in "false positives" and dangerous over-treatment of cancers that would be better off just left alone (or treated with anti-cancer nutrients and superfoods).
But mammograms are a great way to scare women into unnecessary cancer treatments. So they’re pure genius when it comes to recruiting new patients using the fear tactics the cancer industry has come to rely on.
Purpose #2: CAUSE more cancer. The second purpose of mammograms is to cause cancer by exposing women’s breasts (and heart tissues) to ionizing radiation. When subjected to repeated exposure of such radiation, the human body will undergo DNA mutations and inevitably be afflicted with cancer. This is how the cancer industry can make predictions like "one out of every three women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in her lifetime…" — they know this to be true because they are the ones causing the cancer in the first place!
If you took your car to a mechanic to have the oil changed, and that mechanic poured corrosive bits of metal into your car’s engine that caused long-term engine damage, would you continue to take your car to that same mechanic year after year? And if so, would you PAY that mechanic to repair the damage he actually caused?
That’s what women are essentially doing when they receive mammograms. Each year, as they dutifully get their mammograms, they are exposing themselves to the very kind of radiation that causes cancer, practically guaranteeing they will eventually be diagnosed with cancer. (At which point the oncologist will say something like, "See? Good thing we do these mammograms every year, or we wouldn’t have caught this tumor!")
The false cancer slogan that "early detection saves lives" would be more accurately modified to read: Repeated exposure to radiation causes cancer.

More destructive than X-raying your feet!

Did you know that in the 1940’s, shoe stores used to have their own X-ray machines? Customers would try on a shoe, stick their foot in the X-ray fluoroscope machine, and see on the viewing screen how their bones fit in the shoes.
It seemed like a really neat idea, and it sold a lot of shoes. But at the same time, it also dosed customers’ feet with an astonishing 20 – 100+ rems per minute of radiation. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoe-f…). As you might suspect, a lot of these shoe store customers developed very serious health problems with their feet, including DNA mutations and cancerous lesions.
Even long after the radiation risk of such shoe-fitting machines was known to be extremely harmful, doctors stayed silent about it. The machines were never banned, either… they were quietly phased out in the 1950’s after raising the cancer risks of literally millions of people.
Mammograms are the modern-day version of the X-ray shoe-fitting machine. They’re represent a harmful, cancer-causing technology that people mistakenly think offers some benefit for them. But every time you use the machine, your risk of cancer goes up another notch. Meanwhile, just like in the 1940’s, most conventional doctors stay silent about the cancer risks resulting from such radiation! (But more and more informed doctors are finally speaking out against mammography…)
If you were an evil genius who wanted to design and manufacture a cancer-causing machine, it would be difficult to beat the present-day mammography machine. It exposes human tissue to high-powered radiation that, if repeated often enough, practically guarantees cancer will eventually develop. In one sense, it’s sort of a "slow suicide machine" that takes years (or decades) to complete its work on your body. But before you die, you get to spend your life savings on "treatments" that will leave you bankrupt just before they leave you dead.
That’s the whole point of the cancer industry, after all: To maximize profits from cancer. Mammography is a key piece of the puzzle in accomplishing precisely that.

Repeat business

The truth us, mammography offers no net saving in lives at all. In fact, the procedure harms far more women than it helps. (http://www.naturalnews.com/010886_c…)
But at the same time, it’s a "perfect weapon" for generating lucrative repeat business. If you’re an oncologist, the best way to ensure you’ll have a cancer patient to treat at age 55 is to start exposing them to radiation at age 40 (or earlier). It’s sort of like a diabetes clinic offering free candy to children: At some point, after they eat enough processed sugar, they’ll come back as repeat customers suffering from diabetes.
That’s why the cancer industry freaked out when a U.S. govt. task force issued its new cancer screening guidelines. All of a sudden, the cancer industry realized it would lose a lot of repeat business if the screenings stopped. So they lobbied hard for some sort of reversal.
And they nearly got it. Today Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius went on the air to announce that the task force announcing the new mammography recommendations, "does not set federal policy and they don’t determine what services are covered by the federal government." She went on to explain, "My message to women is simple. Mammograms have always been an important lifesaving tool in the fight against breast cancer and they still are today." (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap…)
In other words, keep getting your breasts irradiated. It’s important for the U.S. economy! The disease industry is counting on your future cancer, didn’t you know?

Confused?

The Associated Press says the new mammography recommendations from the government panel have "left women across the country confused about which advice to take."
Confused? Really?
Let’s see, there’s a machine that smashes your breasts, that hurts like the devil, and that blasts your breasts, heart and lungs with cancer-causing radiation.
All the evidence now points to the fact that the risk of harm caused by the machine is far greater than the risk of have your life saved by early cancer detection — especially for women under 50.
So what is there to be confused about? The only confusion that exists is caused by the cancer industry itself which has always operated on the principle of keeping women uninformed and confused, knowing full well that people who are confused can be more easily manipulated with fear into surrendering to high-profit treatments like chemotherapy.
That’s the whole point of the industry, after all: To make money treating cancer, whether the patient needs it or not.

Big, big money to be made by giving women cancer

The cancer industry likes to hide behind the false idea that it’s "helping people" or "saving lives," but in reality, it’s a for-profit industry that’s out to maximizing profits just like every other business. And as we all know, medical corporations have absolutely no ethics: They will engage in outright criminal fraud, bribery of doctors, falsifying clinical trial data, price-fixing their products and overcharging Medicaid programs, and other similar crimes, all of which have been documented here on NaturalNews.com. (Use the search box, top right, to find articles on any of these topics if you wish.)
For these same corporations to intentionally cause cancer in women as a strategy for future profits is just standard operating procedure. They don’t even think about acting with integrity or compassion: It’s all about the money. So what if a few million women have to die along the way, right? We’ve got shareholders to think about!
Cancer is a $200 billion a year business, Suzanne Somers told me yesterday in an exclusive interview with NaturalNews (http://www.naturalnews.com/027526_S…). That gives the industry 200 billion reasons to keep on exposing women to radiation and creating more repeat business. That’s why the cancer profiteers will fight these new recommendations tooth and nail — their livelihoods depend on making sure more women get cancer!
Mammography is, by any honest assessment, pure quackery. It’s no more accurate at detecting tumors needing acute treatment than just waving your hand over someone and guessing whether they have a tumor that needs treatment. In fact, waving your hand over someone is a lot less harmful, so it’s actually better.
A far better alternative is thermography. It can detect breast cancer tumors using the infrared heat emitted by a tumor’s blood supply. It’s non-invasive, safe, affordable and doesn’t involve deadly radiation.
And remember, even if you’re diagnosed with breast cancer, chemotherapy does not work on breast cancer! You’ll need a different, more natural approach. Read Suzanne Somers’ book "Knockout" to find some answers, or read about Vitamin D here on NaturalNews:
http://www.naturalnews.com/vitamin_…

Published in: on November 19, 2009 at 3:33 pm  Leave a Comment  

Suzanne Somers speaks out against the conventional cancer industry: mammograms, chemotherapy vs. alternative cures

November 18, 2009  by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) As the author of the New York Times bestseller, "Knockout: Interviews with doctors who are curing cancer," Suzanne Somers is making waves across the cancer industry. Her powerful, inspired message of informed hope is reaching millions of readers who are learning about the many safe, effective options for treating cancer that exist outside the realm of the conventional cancer industry (chemotherapy, surgery and radiation).
Recently, Suzanne Somers spoke with NaturalNews editor Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, to share the inspiration for her new book Knockout. "People are just starving for some new information… for other options, for hope in [treating] cancer," she explained.
The full interview with Suzanne Somers is available as a downloadable MP3 file from NaturalNews.com: http://naturalnews.com/Index-Podcas…
In it, Somers explains why she’s so concerned about the current course of the cancer industry:
"In 2010, cancer will be the biggest killer in the world. I fear for everybody walking into the present cancer protocol. It’s going to make billions and billions of dollars for the industry, which is already a $200 billion-a-year business. It’s going to bankrupt families. It causes expensive deaths. It emaciates people and they die anyway. Why not look into the options that are offered in Knockout? Why not look into Dr. Burzynski out of Houston? Why not look into Dr. Gonzalez in New York or Dr. Forsythe out of Nevada? [They] have a different protocol that doesn’t require harsh chemicals or degrading the body."
In the interview, Suzanne also explains the limitations of chemotherapy and why the cancer industry has failed the people:
"There are only three kinds of cancer that respond to chemotherapy: Testicular cancer, childhood leukemia, some lymphomas including Non-Hodgkin’s," she says. "For all of us who have raised money marching, going to black-tie fundraisers, we’ve thrown billions and billions of dollars at pharmaceutical companies and the FDA to find a cure, and it has failed. They do not have a cure."

Mammograms causing more harm than good

In the NaturalNews interview, Somers also discusses the problems with mammograms. When asked for her thoughts on the US government’s sudden change in position that now says women under 50 should never receive mammograms, Somers explained:
"I have information so shocking in Knockout about mammograms that I have been reluctant on television to even bring it up, because to say anything negative about mammograms is going against the gold standard. So I was thrilled when I saw this report yesterday. Nobody’s saying the real truth [about the harm caused by mammograms]. They don’t want to open Pandora’s Box …you mean a lot of the women who faithfully had mammograms got their cancer from mammograms?"

What’s in the "Knockout" book

Suzanne Somers’ book presents a collection of interviews from leading doctors who have developed and now apply natural cancer therapies to patients, producing outstanding results. To gather information for her book, Somers explains, "I called doctors, I interviewed their patients, I talked to hundreds of people, I interviewed science writers, PhDs, neuroscientists, nutritionists… even the scientific advisory board of Life Extension."
And rather than preaching to people about what they should or shouldn’t do, Somers’ book simply provides new information and new options to men and women who want to know more before making a potentially deadly decision about chemotherapy. "You’ve got to get smart and connect the dots and ask yourself, with all the money going into [conventional] cancer, do they have an answer? The answer is no. We’re on our own, so let’s look at these independent doctors who are having success," Somers says.
The information presented in Somers’ book, not surprisingly, has raised the ire of the conventional cancer industry and all their powerful allies (including more than a few organizations in the mainstream media). That’s why Somers’ message has been viciously attacked by conventional cancer and chemotherapy pushers who see the information presented in Knockout as a threat to their authority (and repeat business). "My message interferes with Big Business’s bottom line," explains Somers. "But until what Big Business is doing is good for us, and for the betterment of our health and mankind, then I think people have to speak out about it."
And she’s speaking out with a powerful, inspired voice. Listen to the full interview with NaturalNews editor Mike Adams here: http://naturalnews.com/Index-Podcas…
After hearing the interview, pick up the book yourself at your local book retailer or online. Here’s the Amazon.com link: http://astore.amazon.com/wsdm-20/de…
"The war on cancer is a dismal failure," says Somers. "If this were a military project, the people in charge would be fired. It’s not working."
But there are real solutions for cancer, and there are doctors delivering "alternative" cancer treatments right now that are producing astonishing results (putting conventional chemotherapy to shame). Suzanne’s book lists a wealth of resources where you can find more information about natural cancer treatments and the clinics that offer them.
Here’s a short list of some of the health experts she mentions (many more are listed in her book):
Dr. Julian Whitaker
Los Angeles, CA
http://www.whitakerwellness.com
Dr. Burzynski
Houston, TX
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com
Dr. Gonzalez
New York, NY
http://www.dr-gonzalez.com/index.htm
Ralph Moss
http://www.CancerDecisions.com
Dr. Russell Blaylock
http://www.RussellBlaylockMD.com
Dr. Forsythe
Nevada
http://www.DRforsythe.com

Published in: on November 18, 2009 at 3:01 pm  Leave a Comment  

American Cancer Society admits mammograms and cancer screenings are over-hyped

November 18, 2009 by: E. Huff, staff writer

(NaturalNews) Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, recently participated in an interview with the New York Times concerning a Journal of the American Medical Association analysis of breast and prostate cancer screening. The study questioned the legitimacy of such screenings in saving lives, a notion confirmed by Dr. Brawley as legitimate.
Adding that the supposed benefits of screening have been "exaggerated", Dr. Brawley’s comments have fueled a firestorm of controversy since they fly in the face of what the organization has been saying and promoting for years.
Cancer screenings essentially have no benefit
Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) cancer screenings are considered by many to be ineffective in identifying legitimate cancers and in reducing prostate cancer deaths. Eric Larson, a physician serving as executive director of the Group Health Center for Health Studies in Seattle, is one such person.
Because there has been no demonstrated benefit to screenings (and they often lead to needless procedures and complications), Mr. Larson continually refuses to receive annual PSA cancer screenings until any alleged benefit can be proven scientifically. Since PSA screenings first began, the number of prostate cancer diagnoses have increased while advanced and late-stage cancers have remained roughly the same.
Breast cancer screenings, primarily in the form of mammography, have a similar track record of failure. The journal report notes that since screenings began, there has been a 40 percent increase in diagnoses and a near doubling of early-stage cancers with only a 10 percent decrease in late-stage cancers that spread throughout the body.
Screenings reveal far more incidences of both breast and prostate cancers but do virtually nothing to curb their promulgation and the outcome that ensues. Researchers note that, if screenings lived up to the promises made about them, late-stage cancers that were formerly incurable because they were found too late would now be discovered earlier when they could be cured. Unfortunately, this has not been the case.

Screenings fail to properly identify cancers resulting in unnecessary treatment

While some still see screening as essential and beneficial, despite evidence to the contrary, others recognize the potential dangers of screening.
Dr. Laura Esserman of the University of California, San Francisco, and Dr. Ian Thompson of the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, both believe that prostate and breast cancer screenings pose inherent problems that people must be aware of before getting them.
Cancer screenings often identify cancers that should not be identified due to the fact that, if left alone, they would never spread or cause harm. Dormant cancers that will never spread in the body are often pinpointed by screenings and treated as though they are harmful. Detection of these innocuous cancers can be attributed to the tremendous increase in diagnoses over the years.
Screenings are wholly unable to differentiate between innocuous and deadly cancers. Harmless cancers are often identified and aggressively treated. Malignant cancers are often missed or discovered too late, proving the point that screenings are largely useless.

Cancer industry generally refuses to admit a problem exists

What astounds concerned doctors and researchers is the fact that analysis into how to properly differentiate between malignant and benign cancers when screening has never been performed and does not seem to be a priority for the cancer industry. Screenings are pushed despite their inability to properly diagnose with no effort being made to develop useful screening methods.
Objection to "overdiagnosis" using flawed screening methods is considered a major faux pas in mainstream cancer circles. Regardless of documented evidence citing flawed methodology, many in the industry refuse to accept that the existing screening procedure is both flawed and dangerous.

Mammography can actually cause cancer

Aside from unneeded treatments that may result from improper diagnoses, women screened for breast cancer using mammography undergo tremendous exposure to ionizing radiation every time they are screened. Exposure to this radiation is often implicated in causing the very malignant cancers that are meant to be detected. Continual exposure to excessive levels of radiation due to receiving annual mammograms greatly increases a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer.
Mammograms have about a 70 percent failure rate, routinely detecting non-existent tumors. Consequently, many women undergo invasive biopsies needlessly.

Thermography preferable to mammography

Women with a continued interest in breast cancer screening would do well to choose thermography rather than mammography. Thermography utilizes digital infrared imaging, a safe detection method that analyzes body heat levels in and around the breasts. By analyzing blood vessel circulation and metabolic changes that typically accompany the onset of tumorous growths, thermography is arguably the most effective, accurate, and safest breast cancer detection method.
A healthy, cancer-preventative diet is the best way to prevent the onset of malignant cancers. Keeping the body in an alkaline state by feeding it a diet rich in natural foods will safeguard the body from becoming an environment in which cancer can thrive and replicate.
Vitamin D, curcumin, chaparral, garlic, and aloe vera are a few of the many beneficial nutrients that will serve the body well in preventing cancer. Raw brazil nuts, rich in selenium, and saw palmetto are two superb nutrients for maintaining a healthy prostate.
Sources for this story include
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/21/h…
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/CancerPrev…
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Prosta…
http://www.naturalnews.com/010886_c…
http://www.breastthermography.com/

Published in: on November 18, 2009 at 2:58 pm  Leave a Comment  

H1N1 “super flu” plague in Ukraine spark concern, conspiracy theories about origins

November 16, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Here’s what we know with some degree of certainty about the H1N1 virus in Ukraine right now: nearly 300 people have died from the viral strain, and over 65,000 people have been hospitalized (the actual numbers are increasing by the hour). The virus appears to be either a highly aggressive mutation of the globally-circulating H1N1 strain, or a combination of three different influenza strains now circulating in Ukraine. Some observers suspect this new "super flu" might be labeled viral hemorrhagic pneumonia (meaning it destroys lung tissue until your lungs bleed so much that you drown in your own fluid), but that has not been confirmed by any official sources we’re aware of.
Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko has issued emergency quarantine orders for nine of the country’s regions and ordered the deployment of mobile military hospitals. He announced that the nation had been simultaneously hit with two different seasonal flu strains plus H1N1 — and then hinted that all three might have recombined into the deadly new Ukrainian super flu.
In his own words, as reported by Daily Mail, "Unlike similar epidemics in other countries, three causes of serious viral infections came together simultaneously in Ukraine: two seasonal flus and the Californian flu. Virologists conclude that this combination of infections may produce an even more aggressive new virus as a result of mutation."
On November 6, Ukraine’s Deputy Health Minister Zinovy Mytnyk announced that over 600,000 citizens had already caught the new flu. British scientists are now conducting tests on the new viral strain to find out why it appears to be so deadly (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor…).
The mainstream media is blaming Ukraine’s poor health care system for the relatively high rates of hospitalization and death (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/w…), but they refuse to mention (yet again) the vitamin D deficiency found across this population living at high latitude in the winter, where sunlight is relatively scarce.
Here’s a useful blog for staying up to date on the Ukrainian plague:
http://ukraineplague.blogspot.com/

What we don’t know

Now here’s what we don’t know about the Ukraine outbreak:
What is the actual genetic composition of this mutated strain?
Scientists have not released any meaningful news about the genetic sequence of the Ukraine strain. For the moment, the WHO is somewhat quiet on the matter. The last WHO update was from November 3 (and the situation has become considerably worse since). (http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_11_…).
Was this viral strain released as a bioweapon?
There are numerous reports circulating widely across the ‘net that cite aerial spraying across Kiev in the days before the new "super flu" outbreak. People are speculating that this was a bioweapon attack intentionally unleashed upon the Ukrainian population. So far, NaturalNews can find no credible information supporting this theory, but it remains a possibility to be researched further.

Does Baxter Pharmaceuticals have anything to do with the outbreak?
You may recall that earlier this year, Baxter shipped live avian flu viral material to labs in 18 countries, including one in the Ukraine. (http://www.naturalnews.com/025760.html) There is suspicion that Baxter could be tied to a planned outbreak of a weaponized virus as a population control bioweapon of some sort, but NaturalNews has not been unable to find any credible information sources supporting this theory. Lacking any better leads on this subject, as far as we can tell right now this remains an unproven conspiracy theory. (If anyone has more credible info on this, please send it our way for review.)
It is plausible that Baxter had something to do with this, but we just don’t have any convincing evidence to back it up at this point.

H1N1 vaccines likely offer little protect against the Ukraine super flu

People receiving H1N1 vaccine shots right now need to know that currently-available H1N1 vaccine shots may offer no protection whatsoever against the "Ukraine Strain." That’s because once the virus mutates, changing it genetic structure, it can instantly render all existing vaccines obsolete.
Depending on the degree of genetic changes, there is a possibility that some level of immunity may be conferred to people who already have H1N1 antibodies, but here’s the dirty little secret the vaccine industry doesn’t want you to know: People who built their own natural immunity to H1N1 through exposure rather than vaccines have a much greater likelihood of exhibiting natural immunity to genetic variations of H1N1. In other words, people who overcame H1N1 exposure on their own, without being vaccinated, have a far stronger defense against H1N1 variations that might appear.
This is yet another reason why flu vaccines are so dangerous: The deny your immune system the important opportunity to exercise its own adaptive defenses and build stronger protections against future infections.
One possible scenario that could unfold with all this is that the Ukraine strain might spread around the world, wiping out those who got vaccinated against H1N1 because their immune systems suffer from a suppressed ability to naturally generate antibodies to a new strain. Meanwhile, drug companies will try to scramble and create a whole new batch of "super flu" vaccines, but they’re always too little, too late. Theoretically, millions of people could die around the world while waiting in line for yet another vaccine shot.
All they really need is vitamin D3, some herbal anti-virals, a healthy diet and plenty of rest, but no one is telling them that.
Even the Ukraine super flu is no match for a healthy immune system. Remember: Out of 65,000+ hospitalizations, fewer than 300 people have died so far. That’s still a very low mortality rate, even if the spread of the viral infection seems aggressive…

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Published in: on November 16, 2009 at 12:24 pm  Leave a Comment  

Million Hit By ‘Plague Worse Than Swine Flu’

(Further to 2nd November post on Baxter)

Sunday November 15,2009  By Greg Miskiw

A DEADLY plague could sweep across Europe, doctors fear, after an outbreak of a virus in Ukraine plunged the country and its neighbours into a state of panic.

A cocktail of three flu viruses are reported to have mutated into a single pneumonic plague, which it is believed may be far more dangerous than swine flu. The death toll has reached 189 and more than 1 million people have been infected, most of them in the nine regions of Western Ukraine.

President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko has called in the World Health Organisation and a team of nine specialists are carrying out tests in Kiev and Lviv to identify the virus. Samples have been sent to London for analysis.

President Yushchenko said: “People are dying. The epidemic is killing doctors. This is absolutely inconceivable in the 21st Century.”

In a TV interview, the President added: “Unlike similar epidemics in other countries, three causes of serious viral infections came together simultaneously in Ukraine – two seasonal flus and the Californian flu

“Virologists conclude that this combination of infections may produce an even more aggressive new virus as a result of mutation.”

Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko has been touring hospitals where victims are being treated and presidential elections in January could be cancelled .

Four men and one woman have died from the flu in Lviv, said emergency hospital chief doctor Myron Borysevych. Two of the dead patients were in the 22-35 age group, with two others over 60. He diagnosed the disease as viral pneumonia.

“We have sent the analyses to Kiev. We don’t believe it’s H1N1 swine flu. Neither do we know what kind of pneumonia it is.”

Universities, schools and kindergartens have been closed, public meetings have been banned and theatres shut. Last week several border crossings in the country were also closed.

Last night reports emerged of profiteering over face masks, which have sold out since the outbreak. There are also incidents of anti-virus medication being sold for exorbitant prices. A spokesman for the World Health Organisation said: “We do not have a time scale for the results of the tests in London, although some preliminary results have been obtained. I cannot tell you what they are.

“We did not have enough of the virus samples so we will have to grow some more before we can come to a conclusive decision about its nature.”

Neighbouring Poland has called on the EU to take action, fearing the mystery virus may spread westwards.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk has written to European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso and the Swedish Prime Minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt, who holds the EU presidency, saying: “The character of this threat demands that rapid action be undertaken at the European Union level.”

Russia, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary and Romania, countries that border Ukraine, have already launched health checks on Ukrainians entering their territory.

Slovakia has closed two of five border crossings.

A doctor in Western Ukraine who did not want to be named, said:” We have carried out post mortems on two victims and found their lungs are as black as charcoal.

“They look like they have been burned. It’s terrifying.”

(Everyone should boost their immune systems now, just in case)

Technorati Tags: ,,,,

Published in: on November 16, 2009 at 12:13 pm  Leave a Comment