Unreasonable Happiness Presented by Marcus Lovemore

My New Show On Youtube

2011-10-02T18:16:00.000-07:00

Hey everbody,
Check out my new show on YouTube. You"ll find it at LovemoreLife.com.

Lovemore Live

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

Then pay it forward. Help my Scholarship Students with their tuition and allow me to create more of my Free Programs and Shows for everyone. How? Check out my Gift Shop and pick up an inspirational T-shirt, mug, or button, or just click below to Donate, any amount is greatly appreciated and it all goes to a good cause.

Help out, take a look.

Thank You and Be Well,
Sifu Marcus Lovemore

How The FDA Is Taking Your Supplements Off the Market

2011-09-09T23:37:00.000-07:00

If you take supplements, or if you care for someone who takes supplements, and either of you want to continue to have the freedom to do so, you must read this.

This article is form The Alliance for Natural Health

FDA’s New Sneak Attack on Supplements

July 5, 2011
Print This Post

Just before the July 4 holiday weekend, hoping to limit media attention, the FDA dropped a bomb on dietary supplements. Don’t let them get away with it! A new Action Alert.

On July 1, the US Food and Drug Administration issued draft guidance for complying with the New Dietary Ingredient (NDI) notification protocols contained in the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA). Ever since DSHEA was enacted in 1994, supplement manufacturers have had very little guidance on what counts as an NDI and when or how to send an NDI notification. The government has arbitrarily ignored or enforced this section of DSHEA, doing as it liked, without spelling out the rules.

Why does this matter? Because when you hear New Dietary Ingredient (NDI), substitute “New Supplement” in your mind. What we are dealing with here is whether the supplement industry is allowed to innovate and create new supplements—and if so, under what rules.

Now, seventeen years after the passage of DSHEA, the FDA has finally come out with draft guidance on NDIs—that is, on new supplements. They had to do this because it was mandated by the recent Food Safety Modernization Act.

We have reviewed the very complicated new regulations in detail. In the hands of an agency charged with regulating supplements fairly—one not hostile to supplements the way FDA is—they might be made to work. But in the hands of the FDA, which wants everything, supplements and drugs alike, to go through the vastly expensive new drug approval process, we fear the new rules will be used to forbid the development or sale of any new supplements—where “new” means anything after 1994, when DSHEA was passed.

Please note that many important supplements sold today were developed after 1994. Others the FDA will say were developed after 1994, even though they are just variants of what was “grandfathered” by DSHEA. For example, the FDA has already banned a critical form of vitamin B6, pyridoxamine, because that particular form of B6 couldn’t be shown to have been sold prior to 1994, even though B6 in general was certainly sold prior to 1994.

There are many other important new supplements that could be banned depending on how the NDI process is run. We won’t mention the names because to do so would be to put a target on their back. But we can assure you they are important and many of you are taking them.

The FDA already has the power to pull from the market any supplement, whether “grandfathered” or not, if they are unsafe, do not comply with Good Manufacturing Practices, etc. The oft-repeated claim that the supplements market is unregulated or “the Wild West” is patently false. But the FDA cannot pull a grandfathered supplement arbitrarily. They must show cause. What we don’t want is for the FDA to have the power to ban all new supplements arbitrarily. We fear that they will use this power to ban any supplement innovation unless the supplement is turned into a drug and brought through the drug approval process.

Since nobody can afford to pay for the new drug approval process if the substance is not patented, and supplements generally already exist in nature and cannot therefore be patented, to require full new drug approval is to ensure that there will be no new supplements. This should suit the drug industry very well and, based on past behavior, the FDA as well.

Our Concerns with the New Draft Guidance

The draft guidance clearly outlines the conditions under which an ingredient is considered an NDI (a new supplement) and when it is considered grandfathered. Further, it details the circumstances under which it is necessary to submit a notification for an NDI and when it is not. Not surprisingly, the FDA has applied a very narrow definition of grandfathered dietary ingredients, and so by extension a very broad definition of NDI.

Consequently, according to the draft guidance, almost all new supplements are NDIs, and thus are subject to NDI notification.

Please look carefully at this word “notification.” The term implies that the supplement company is just telling the FDA about the new product. But this is not the case. It is actually an approval process, and the FDA turns down most NDI applications.

Under the new rules, all ingredients/supplements in the food supply before 1994 that have been chemically altered in any way are considered NDIs and therefore subject to NDI notification. Moreover, the definition of “chemically altered” is extremely broad, describing multiple manufacturing processes that include:

certain types of fermentation
exposing ingredients to high temperature baking and cooking (if such treatment is not usually applied to the ingredient in conventional food)
use of a botanical ingredient at a different life stage than previously used—for example, an extract of unripe apples instead of ripe apples

So if the ingredient is not absolutely identical to its pre-1994 counterpart, then it is considered an NDI and subject to NDI notification/approval.

Drug companies can exploit this process by trying to patent common dietary ingredients as drugs before supplement companies have an opportunity to submit their NDI notifications. Once a drug company investigates an ingredient for drug purposes and publishes their findings, the ingredient can no longer be used in supplements. This has happened before—it happened with the pyridoxamine form of vitamin B6 we mentioned above. In other words, what was once a supplement available to consumers at low cost will now be an expensive prescription-only drug, if it is available at all. (And it’s not only the drug that costs more: you’ll need to pay your doctor for an office visit just to get the prescription!)

The draft guidance also states that a synthetic copy of a supplement constituent, or an extract of an herb or other botanical, is not considered a dietary ingredient at all (much less an NDI). Isn’t this good—isn’t it better not to be an NDI? No. If the FDA says it is not an NDI, that means they are saying it can only be sold as a drug—period. This could knock out a number of important supplements currently sold.

The guidance discusses at length the evidence required for a notification (approval)—and the requirements are extensive, including a strong recommendation to include human studies. We sometimes forget that human studies, in addition to being very costly, do not always fit supplements.

In effect, it appears that the draft guidance pushes the scientific standard for NDI notifications closer and closer to the pharmaceutical standard. As we have mentioned many times before, supplements are much safer than drugs, yet because of the big Catch-22 (supplements cannot usually be patented, and no non-patentable substance can be taken through a drug approval process which, on average, costs a billion dollars), it is very difficult for supplement manufactures to meet these standards. If they are met, it will push the price of supplements—already high—beyond consumers’ reach. The industry will die.

In these proposed rules, the FDA has effectively created a de facto pre-market approval system without any of the protections of such a system. The FDA has a very high bar that a supplement manufacturer must reach before they can file, but FDA reserves the right to reverse its decision about the safety of an ingredient at any time. It is important for the FDA to recognize the NDI process was meant by Congress to be an actual notification system, not a pre-approval process run according to arbitrary rules set up by the FDA. Congress gave the FDA power to say no, but this was expected to be rare, while the FDA currently vetoes more often than not, often on trivial grounds.

In general, the draft guidance creates a process that is extremely burdensome and redundant—and is impossible for the FDA to realistically implement anyway.

The FDA even makes the NDI notification specific to the manufacturer, not the ingredient. So if two manufacturers are marketing the same ingredient, at the same quantity—they still each have to submit an NDI notification. They can’t hire a third party to do it for them as a group. This is arbitrary and punitive—there is no reason for this requirement at all.

The FDA also expects a different notification for the same ingredient for every different version of the supplement it is in. For example, the same ingredient at a higher concentration needs a separate notification/approval. Or the same ingredient in a different combination of ingredients requires yet another notification/approval.

The bottom line is that when new and unreasonable burdens are placed on supplement manufacturers, it immediately becomes a financial increase for consumers. And if the pressure becomes too great, the nutritional supplements on which you rely may simply become unavailable.

Please contact the FDA immediately and voice your strong opposition to the New Dietary Ingredient draft guidance!

TO SEND YOUR MESSAGE TO THE FDA

Click THIS LINK to go to the Action Alert page. Once there, fill out the form with your name and address, etc., and customize your letter. We have a suggested message for you, but please feel free to add your own comments to the letter. We’d also love to hear your comments about this article—just add your thoughts below—but remember that the messages below are only seen by our ANH-USA readers and not the FDA, Congress etc.

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

The Truth Behind the Vaccine Coverup, Part 4 (of 5)

2010-11-14T02:50:00.000-08:00

By Russel L. Blaylock, M.D

Dr. Rapin expressed her concern over public opinion when this information eventually gets out. She says (page 197), they are going to be captured by the public and we had better make sure that "a) We council them carefully and b) that we pursue this because of the very important public health and public implications of the data." "The stakes are very high ... ," Dr. Johnson adds.
From this how can one conclude anything other than the fact that at least these scientists were extremely concerned by what was discovered by this study examining the vaccine safety datalink material? They were obviously terrified the information would leak out to the public. Stamped in bold letters at the top of each page of the study were the words "DO NOT COPY OR RELEASE" and "CONFIDENTIAL."
This is not the wording one would expect on a clinical study of vaccine safety. Instead, you would expect it on top-secret NSA or CIA files. Why was this information being secreted?

Vaccine Confidential

The answer is obvious: It might endanger the vaccine program and indict the federal regulatory agencies for ignoring this danger for so many years. Our society is littered with millions of children who have been harmed in one degree or another by this vaccine policy. In addition, let us not forget the millions of parents who have had to watch helplessly as their children have been destroyed by this devastating vaccine program.
Dr. Bernier, on page 198, says, "The negative findings need to be pinned down and published." Why was he so insistent that the "negative findings" be published? Because he said, "Other less responsible parties will treat this as a signal." By that he means, a signal of a problem with thimerosal-containing vaccines.
From this, I assume he wants a paper that says only that nothing was found by the study. As we shall see, he gets his wish.
In addition, on page 198, Dr. Rapin notes that a study in California found a 300 percent increase in autism following the introduction of certain vaccines. She quickly attributes this to better physician recognition. Two things are critical to note at this point.
Dr. Rapin makes this assertion or better physician recognition without any data at all, just her wishful thinking. If someone pointing out the dangers of vaccines were to do that, she would scream "junk science."
Dr. Weil, on page 207, attacks this reasoning when he says, "The number of dose-related relationships are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant." In other words, how can you argue with results that show a strong dose/response relationship between the dose of mercury and neurodevelopmental outcomes? The higher the mercury levels in the children, the greater the number of neurological problems.
He continues by saying that the increase in neurobehavioral problems is probably real. He tells them that he works in a school system with special education programs and "I have to say the number of kids getting help in special education is growing nationally and state by state at a rate not seen before. So there is some kind of increase. We can argue about what it is due to." (page 207)

The "Eureka" Moment

Dr. Johnson seems to be impressed by the findings as well. He says on page 199, "This association leads me to favor a recommendation that infants up to two-years-old not be immunized with thimerosal containing vaccines if suitable alternative preparations are available."
Incredibly, he quickly adds, "I do not believe the diagnosis justified compensation in the Vaccine Compensation Program at this point." It is interesting to note that one of our experts in attendance is Dr. Vito Caserta, the Chief Officer for the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
At this point, Dr. Johnson tells the group about his concerns for his own grandchild. On page 200, he says, "Forgive this personal comment, but I got called out at 8:00 for an emergency call and my daughter-in-law delivered a son by c-section. Our first male in the line of the next generation and I do not want that grandson to get a Thimerosal containing vaccine until we know better what is going on. It will probably take a long time. In the meantime, and I know there are probably implications for this internationally, but in the meanwhile I think I want that grandson to only be given Thimerosal-free vaccines."
So, we have a scientist sitting on this panel who will eventually make policy concerning all of the children in this country, as well as other countries, who is terrified about his new grandson getting a thimerosal-containing vaccine, but is not concerned enough about your children to speak out and try to stop this insanity. He allows a cover up to take place after this meeting adjourns and remains silent.
It is also interesting to note, although he feels the answers will be a long time coming, in the meantime, his grandson will be protected.
Nevertheless, the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Family Practice, AMA, CDC and every other organization will endorse these vaccines and proclaim them to be safe as spring water, but Dr. Johnson and some of the others will keep their silence.

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

The Truth Behind the Vaccine Coverup, Part 3 (of 5)

2010-11-10T16:42:00.000-08:00

By Russel L. Blaylock, M.D

Very Little Knowledge

This conference is concerned with the effects of mercury in the form of thimerosal on infant brain development, yet throughout this conference, our experts, especially the "vaccinologists" seem to know little about mercury except that limited literature shows no toxic effects except at very high levels.
None of the well-known experts were invited, such as Dr. Ascher from Bowman Grey School of Medicine or Dr. Haley Boyd, who has done extensive work on the toxic effects of low concentrations on the CNS. They were not invited because they would be harmful to the true objective of this meeting, and that was to exonerate mercury in vaccines.
Several times throughout this conference, Dr. Brent reminded everyone that the most sensitive period for the developing brain is during the early stages of pregnancy. In fact, he pinpoints the 8-18th weeks as the period of neuromaturation.
In fact, the most rapid period of brain maturation, synaptic development and brain pathway development is during the last three months of pregnancy continuing until two years after birth. This is often referred to as the "brain growth spurt." This is also not mentioned once in this conference, again because if mothers knew that their child‘s brain was busy developing for up to two years after birth, they would be less likely to accept this safety of mercury nonsense these "vaccinologists" proclaim.
The brain develops over 100 trillion synaptic connections and tens of trillions of dendritic connections during this highly sensitive period. Both dendrites and synapses are very sensitive, even to very low doses of mercury and other toxins. It has also been shown that subtoxic doses of mercury can block the glutamate transport proteins that play such a vital role in protecting the brain against excitotoxicity.
Compelling studies indicate that damage to this protective system plays a major role in most of the neurodegenerative diseases and abnormal brain development as well.
Recent studies have shown that glutamate accumulates in the brains of autistic children, yet these experts seem to be unconcerned about a substance (mercury) that is very powerful in triggering brain excitotoxicity.
It is also interesting to see how many times Dr. Brent emphasizes that we do not know the threshold for mercury toxicity for the developing brain. Again, that is not true: We do know, and the Journal of Neurotoxicology states, that anything above 10ug is neurotoxic. The WHO, in fact, states that there is no safe level of mercury.
Concrete Thinking

On page 164, Dr. Robert Davis, associate professor of pediatrics and epidemiology at the University of Washington, makes a very important observation. He points out, in a population like the United States, you have individuals with varying levels of mercury from other causes (diet, living near coal burning facilities, etc.). By vaccinating everyone, you raise those with the highest levels even higher and bring those with median levels into a category of higher levels.
The "vaccinologists" with their problem of "concrete thinking" cannot seem to appreciate the fact that not everyone is the same. That is, they fail to see these "uncertainties."
To further emphasize this point lets take a farming family who lives within three miles of a coal-burning electrical plant. Since they also live near the ocean, they eat seafood daily. The fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides used on their crops contain appreciable levels of mercury.
The coal-burning electrical plant emits high levels of mercury in the air the family breathes daily and the seafood they consume has levels of mercury higher than EPA safety standards.
This means any babies born to these people will have very high mercury levels.
Once born, they are given numerous vaccines containing even more mercury, thereby adding significantly to their already high mercury burden. Are these "vaccinologists" trying to convince us these children don‘t matter and they are to be sacrificed at the altar of the "vaccine policy?"
Recent studies by neurotoxicologists have observed that as our ability to detect subtle toxic effects improves, especially on behavior and other neurological functions, we lower the level of acceptable exposure. In fact, Dr, Sinks brings up that exact point, using lead as an example. He notes that, as our neurobehavioral testing improved, we lowered the acceptable dose considerably and continues to do so.
Dr. Johnson had the audacity to add, "The smarter we get, the lower the threshold." Yet, neither he, nor the other participants seem to be getting any smarter concerning this issue.
Dr. Robert Chen, chief of Vaccine Safety and Development at the National Immunization Program at the CDC, then reveals why they refuse to act on this issue. "The issue is that it is impossible, unethical to leave kids unimmunized, so you will never, ever resolve that issue. So then we have to refer back from that." (page 169) In essence, immunization of the kids takes precedence over safety concerns with the vaccines themselves.

Genetic Susceptibility

If the problem of vaccine toxicity cannot be solved, he seems to be saying, then we must accept that some kids will be harmed by the vaccines.
Dr. Brent makes the statement that he knows of no known genetic susceptibility data on mercury and, therefore, assumes there is a fixed threshold of toxicity. That is, that everyone is susceptible to the same dose of mercury and there are no genetically hypersensitive groups of people.
In fact, a recent study found just such a genetic susceptibility in mice. In this study, they found mice susceptible to autoimmunity developed neurotoxic effects to their hippocampus, including excitotoxicity, not seen in other strains of mice. They even hypothesize that the same may be true in humans, since familial autoimmunity increases the likelihood of autism in offspring. (Hornig M, Chian D, Lipkin WI. Neurotoxic effects of postnatal thimerosal are mouse strain dependent. Mol Psychiatry 2004; (in press).
For the next quotation, you need a little discussion to be able to appreciate the meaning. They are discussing the fact that, in Dr. Verstraeten‘s study, frightening correlations were found between the higher doses of thimerosal and problems with neurodevelopment, including ADD and autism.
The problem with the study was that there were so few children who had received no thimerosal-containing vaccines, a true control group could not be used. Instead, they had to use children getting 12.5ug of mercury as the control and some even wanted to use the control dose as 37.5ug. So the controls had mercury levels that could indeed cause neurodevelopmental problems.
Even with this basic flaw, a strong positive correlation was found between the dose of mercury given and these neurodevelopmental problems.

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

The Truth Behind the Vaccine Coverup, Part 2 (of 5)

2010-11-10T02:41:00.000-08:00

By Russel L. Blaylock, M.D.

Now this next statement should shock everyone, but especially the poor who in any way think that these "vaccinologists" experts have their best interest in mind. Dr. Johnson says on page 17, "We agree that it would be desirable to remove mercury from U.S. licensed vaccines, but we did not agree that this was a universal recommendation that we would make because of the issue concerning preservatives for delivering vaccines to other countries, particularly developing countries, in the absence of hard data that implied that there was, in fact, a problem."
So, here you have it. The data is convincing enough that the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Practice, as well as the regulatory agencies and the CDC along with these organization all recommend its removal as quickly as possible because of concerns of adverse effects of mercury on brain development, but not for the children in the developing countries

The Real Purpose of Child Health Programs

I thought the whole idea of child health programs in the United States directed toward the developing world was to give poor children a better chance in an increasingly competitive world. The policy being advocated would increase the neurodevelopmental problems seen in poor children (also in this country) of developing countries, impairing their ability to learn and develop competitive minds.
Remember, there was a representative of the World Health Organization (WHO), Dr. John Clements, serving on this panel of "experts." He never challenged this statement made by Dr. Johnson.
It also needs to be appreciated that children in developing countries are at a much greater risk of complications from vaccinations and from mercury toxicity than children in developed countries. This is because of poor nutrition, concomitant parasitic and bacterial infections and a high incidence of low birth weight in these children.
We are now witnessing a disaster in African countries caused by the use of older live virus polio vaccines that has now produced an epidemic of vaccine-related polio. That is, polio caused by the vaccine itself. In fact, in some African countries, polio was not seen until the vaccine was introduced.
How does the WHO and the "vaccinologist experts" from this country now justify a continued polio vaccination program with this dangerous vaccine? Now that they have created the epidemic of polio, they cannot stop the program.
In a recent article, it was pointed out that this is the most deranged reasoning, since more vaccines will mean more vaccine-related cases of polio. But then, "vaccinologists" have difficulty with these "uncertainties." (Jacob JT. A developing country perspective on vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis. Bulletin WHO 2004; 82: 53-58. See commentary by D.M. Salisbury at the end of the article.)
Then he again emphasizes the philosophy that the health of children is secondary to "the program" when he says, "We saw some compelling data that delaying the birth dose of HepB vaccine would lead to significant disease burden as a consequence of missed opportunity to immunize." This implies our children would be endangered from the risk of hepatitis B should the vaccine program stop vaccinating newborns with the HepB vaccine.
In fact, this statement is not based on any risk to U.S. children at all and he makes that plain when he states, "that the potential impact on countries that have 10 percent to 15 percent newborn hepatitis B exposure risk was very distressing to consider." (page 18)

Scare Tactics

In other words, the risk is not to normal U.S. children but to children in developing countries. In fact, hepatitis B is not a risk until the teenage years and after in this country. The only at-risk group among children is with children born to drug using parents, mothers infected with hepatitis B or HIV infected parents. The reason for vaccinating the newborns is to capture them before they can escape the "vaccinologist‘s" vaccine program.
This is a tactic often used to scare mothers into having their children vaccinated. For example, they say that if children are not vaccinated against measles millions of children could die during a measles epidemic.
They know this is nonsense. What they are using is examples taken from developing countries with poor nutrition and immune function in which such epidemic death can occur. In the United States, we would not see this because of better nutrition, health facilities and sanitation. In fact, most deaths seen when measles outbreaks occur in the United States happen in these situations:
Vaccination was contraindicated.
The vaccine did not work.
With children who have chronic, immune-suppressing diseases.
In fact, in most studies, these children catching the measles or other childhood diseases have been either fully immunized or partially immunized. The big secret among "vaccinologists" is that anywhere from 20 to 50 percent of children are not resistant to the diseases for which they have been immunized.
Also on page 18, Dr. Johnson tells the committee that it was Dr. Walt Orenstein who "asked the most provocative question which introduced a great deal of discussion. That was, should we try to seek neurodevelopmental outcomes for children exposed to varying doses of mercury by utilizing the Vaccine Safety Datalink data from one or more sites." (page 18).
I take from this no one had ever even thought of looking at the data that had just been sitting there all these years unreviewed. Children could have been dropping like flies or suffering from terrible neurodevelopmental defects caused by the vaccine program and no one in the government would have known. In fact, that is exactly what the data suggested was happening, at least in regard to neurodevelopmental delays.
We should also appreciate the government sponsored two conferences on the possible role of metals, aluminum and mercury being used in vaccines without any change in vaccine policy occurring after the meetings. These meetings were held a year before this meeting and before any examination of the data which was being held tightly by the CDC, which was denied to other independent, highly qualified researchers. (I will talk more about what was discussed in the aluminum conference later.)

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

The Truth Behind the Vaccine Coverup, Part 1 (of 5)

2010-10-30T03:04:00.000-07:00

By Russel L. Blaylock, M.D.

I was asked to write a paper on some of the newer mechanisms of vaccine damage to the nervous system, but, in the interim, I came across an incredible document that should blow the lid off the coverup being engineered by the pharmaceutical companies in conjunction with powerful governmental agencies.

It all started when a friend of mine sent me a copy of a letter from Congressman David Weldon (R-Fla.), M.D. to the director of the CDC, Dr Julie L. Gerberding, in which he alludes to a study by a Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, then representing the CDC, on the connection between infant exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental injury.

In this shocking letter, Weldon refers to Dr. Verstraeten‘s study which looked at the data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink and found a significant correlation between thimerosal exposure via vaccines and several neurodevelopmental disorders including tics, speech and language delays and possibly to ADD.

Weldon questioned the CDC director as to why, following this meeting, Dr. Verstraeten published his results, almost four years later, in the journal Pediatrics to show just the opposite. That is, there was no correlation to any neurodevelopmental problems related to thimerosal exposure in infants. In his letter, Weldon refers to a report of the minutes of this meeting held in Georgia, which exposes some incredible statements by the "experts" making up this study group.

The group‘s purpose was to evaluate and discuss Dr. Verstraeten‘s results and data and make recommendation that would eventually lead to possible alterations in the existing vaccine policy.

Pulling Teeth

I contacted Weldon‘s legislative assistant and he kindly sent me a complete copy of this report. Now, as usual in these cases, the government did not give up this report willingly. It required a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to pry it loose. Having read the report twice and carefully analyzing it, I can see why they did not want any outsiders to look at it. It is a bombshell, as you shall see.

In this analysis, I will not only describe and discuss this report, but also will frequently quote their words directly and supply the exact page number so others can see for themselves.

The official title of the meeting was the "Scientific Review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information." This conference, held on June 7-8, 2000 at the Simpsonwood Retreat Center, Norcross, Ga., assembled 51 scientists and physicians of which five represented vaccine manufacturers (Smith Kline Beecham, Merck, Wyeth, North American Vaccine and Aventis Pasteur).

During this conference, these scientists focused on the study of the Datalink material, whose main author was Dr. Thomas Verstraesten who identified himself as working at the National Immunization Program of the CDC.

(It was discovered by Congressman Weldon that Dr. Verstraeten left the CDC shortly after this conference to work for GlaxoSmithKline in Belgium which manufacturers vaccines, a recurring pattern that has been given the name a "revolving door." It is also interesting to note that GlaxoSmithKline was involved in several lawsuits over complications secondary to their vaccines.)

To start off the meeting Dr. Roger Bernier, Associate Director for Science in the National Immunization Program (CDC), related some pertinent history. He stated that congressional action in 1977 required that the FDA review mercury being used in drugs and biologics (vaccines). In meeting this order, the FDA called for information from the manufacturers of vaccines and drugs. He notes that a group of European regulators and manufacturers met on April 1999 and noted the situation but made no recommendations of changes.

In other words, it was all for show.

The Lid Blown Off

At this point, Dr. Bernier made an incredible statement (page 12). He said, "In the United States, there was a growing recognition that cumulative exposure may exceed some of the guidelines." By guidelines, he is referring to those for mercury exposure safety levels set by several regulatory agencies. The three guidelines were set by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), FDA and EPA. The most consistently violated safety guideline was that set by EPA. He further explains that he is referring to children being exposed to thimerosal in vaccines.

Based on this realization that they were violating safety guidelines he says, this then "resulted in a joint statement of the Public Health Service (PHS) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in July of last year (1999), which stated that as a long term goal, it was desirable to remove mercury from vaccines because it was a potentially preventable source of exposure." (Page 12)

As an aside, one has to wonder, where was the Public Health Service and American Academy of Pediatrics during all the years of mercury use in vaccines and why didn‘t they know that:

They were exceeding regulatory safety levels.
Why weren‘t they aware of the extensive literature showing deleterious effects on the developing nervous system of babies?

As we shall see even these "experts" seem to be cloudy on the mercury literature.

An Earlier Meeting

Dr. Bernier notes that in August 1999, a public workshop was held in Bethesda, Md., at the Lister Auditorium by the National Vaccine Advisory Group and the Interagency Working Group on Vaccines to consider thimerosal risk in vaccine use. And based on what was discussed in that conference, thimerosal was removed from the hepatitis B vaccine (HepB).

It is interesting to note that the media took very little interest in what was learned at that meeting and it may have been a secret meeting as well. As we shall see, there is a reason why they struggle to keep the contents of all these meetings secret from the public.

Bernier then notes, on page 13, that in October 1999, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) "looked this situation over again and did not express a preference for any of the vaccines that were thimerosal free." In this discussion, he further notes the ACIP concluded that the thimerosal-containing vaccines could be used but the "long-term goal is to try to remove thimerosal as soon as possible."

Now, we need to stop and think about what has transpired here. We have an important group here -- the ACIP -- that essentially plays a role in vaccine policy that affects tens of millions of children every year. And, we have evidence from the thimerosal meeting in 1999 that the potential for serious injury to the infant‘s brain is so serious that a recommendation for removal becomes policy.

In addition, they are all fully aware that tiny babies are receiving mercury doses that exceed even EPA safety limits, yet all they can say is that we must "try to remove thimerosal as soon as possible?" Do they not worry about the tens of millions of babies that will continue receiving thimerosal-containing vaccines until they can get around to stopping the use of thimerosal?

The Obvious Solution

It should also be noted that it is a misnomer to say "removal of thimerosal" since they are not removing anything. They just plan to stop adding it to future vaccines once they use up existing stocks, which entails millions of doses. And, incredibly, the government allows them to do it.

Even more incredibly, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Practice similarly endorse this insane policy. In fact, they specifically state that children should continue to receive the thimerosal-containing vaccines until new thimerosal-free vaccines can be manufactured at the will of the manufacturers. Are they afraid that there will be a sudden diphtheria epidemic in America or tetanus epidemic?

The most obvious solution was to use only single-dose vials, which requires no preservative. So why don‘t they use them?

Oh, they exclaim, it would add to the cost of the vaccine. Of course, we are only talking about a few dollars per vaccine at most, certainly worth the health of your child‘s brain and future. They could use some of the hundreds of millions of dollars they waste on vaccine promotion every year to cover these costs for the poor. Then, that would cut into some "fat cat‘s" budget and we can‘t have that.

It was disclosed that thimerosal was in all influenza vaccines, DPT (and most DtaP) vaccines and all HepB vaccines.

As they begin to concentrate on the problem at hand we first begin to learn that the greatest problem with the meeting is that, they know virtually nothing about what they are doing. On page 15, for example, they admit that there is very little pharmacokinetic data on ethylmercury, the form of mercury in thimerosal. In fact, they say there is no data on excretion and the data on toxicity is sparse. Yet it is recognized to cause hypersensitivity, neurological problems and even death, and it is known to easily pass the blood-brain and placental barriers.

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

The Island Secret for Weight loss and Flawless Skin - Coconut Fat!

2010-10-22T03:54:00.000-07:00

Excerpted from Dr. Mercola's: "This is Cooking Oil a Powerful Virus-Destroyer and Antibiotic..."

The Truth about Coconut Oil

The truth about coconut oil is obvious to anyone who has studied the health of those who live in traditional tropical cultures, where coconut has been a nutritious diet staple for thousands of years.
Back in the 1930's, a dentist named Dr. Weston Price traveled throughout the South Pacific, examining traditional diets and their effect on dental and overall health. He found that those eating diets high in coconut products were healthy and trim, despite the high fat concentration in their diet, and that heart disease was virtually non-existent.
Similarly, in 1981, researchers studied populations of two Polynesian atolls. Coconut was the chief source of caloric energy in both groups. The results, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,^[2] demonstrated that both populations exhibited positive vascular health.
In fact, no evidence exists that the naturally occurring high saturated fat intake had any kind of harmful effect in these populations!
That's not what you expected, is it? Based on 60 years of negative public policy towards naturally occurring saturated fats, you would expect these cultures to be rife with clogged arteries, obesity and heart disease.
It may be surprising for you to realize that the naturally occurring saturated fat in coconut oil actually has some amazing health benefits, such as:
Promoting your heart health^[3]
Promoting weight loss, when needed^[4]
Supporting your immune system health^[5]
Supporting a healthy metabolism^[6]
Providing you with an immediate energy source^[7]
Keeping your skin healthy and youthful looking
Supporting the proper functioning of your thyroid gland^[8]

But how is this possible?
Does coconut oil have some secret ingredients not found in other saturated fats?
The answer is a resounding "yes".

Coconut Oil's Secret Ingredient

50 percent of the fat content in coconut oil is a fat rarely found in nature called lauric acid. If you're a frequent reader of my newsletter you already know that I consider lauric acid a "miracle" ingredient because of its unique health promoting properties.
Your body converts lauric acid into monolaurin, which has anti-viral, anti-bacterial and anti-protozoa properties.^[9]
Monolaurin is a monoglyceride which can actually destroy lipid coated viruses such as:
HIV, herpes
Measles
Influenza virus
Various pathogenic bacteria
Protozoa such as giardia lamblia.

Lauric acid is a powerful virus and gram-negative bacteria destroyer, and coconut oil contains the most lauric acid of any substance on earth!
Capric acid, another coconut fatty acid present in smaller amounts, has also been added to the list of coconut's antimicrobial components.
This is one of the key reasons you should consider consuming coconut oil, because there aren't many sources of monolaurin in our diet. But the health benefits of coconut oil don't stop there.

The Benefits of Medium-Chain Fatty Acids

Coconut oil is about 2/3 medium-chain fatty acids (MCFAs), also called medium-chain triglycerides or MCTs. These types of fatty acids produce a whole host of health benefits.
Coconut oil is nature's richest source of these healthy MCFAs.
By contrast, most common vegetable or seed oils are comprised of long chain fatty acids (LCFAs), also known as long-chain triglycerides or LCTs.
Let me tell you why these long-chain fatty acids are not as healthy for you as the MCFAs found in coconut oil^[10] :
LCFAs are difficult for your body to break down -- they require special enzymes for digestion.
LCFAs put more strain on your pancreas, liver and your entire digestive system.
LCFAs are predominantly stored in your body as fat.
LCFAs can be deposited within your arteries in lipid forms such as cholesterol.
In contrast to LFCAs, the MCFAs found in coconut oil have many health benefits, including the following beneficial qualities:
MCFAs are smaller. They permeate cell membranes easily, and do not require special enzymes to be utilized effectively by your body.
MCFAs are easily digested, thus putting less strain on your digestive system.
MCFAs are sent directly to your liver, where they are immediately converted into energy rather than being stored as fat.
MCFAs actually help stimulate your body's metabolism, leading to weight loss.

Coconut Oil Helps Fight Diabetes

Your body sends medium-chain fatty acids directly to your liver to use as energy. This makes coconut oil a powerful source of instant energy to your body, a function usually served in the diet by simple carbohydrates.
But although coconut oil and simple carbohydrates share the ability to deliver quick energy to your body, they differ in one crucial respect.
Coconut oil does not produce an insulin spike in your bloodstream. You read that correctly, Coconut oil acts on your body like a carbohydrate, without any of the debilitating insulin-related effects associated with long-term high carbohydrate consumption!
Diabetics and those with pre-diabetes conditions (an exploding health epidemic in America), should immediately realize the benefit of a fast acting energy source that doesn't produce an insulin spike in your body. In fact, coconut oil added to the diets of diabetics and pre-diabetics has actually been shown to help stabilize weight gain, which can dramatically decrease your likelihood of getting adult onset type-2 Diabetes.^[11]

Coconut Oil, the Friend to Athletes and Dieters

If you live in the United States, you have an almost 70 percent chance of being overweight.
And, by now, I'm sure you're well aware that obesity affects your quality of life and is linked to many health concerns.
One of the best benefits of coconut oil lies in its ability to help stimulate your metabolism.
Back in the 1940s, farmers found out about this effect by accident when they tried using inexpensive coconut oil to fatten their livestock.
It didn't work!
Instead, coconut oil made the animals lean, active and hungry.
However, many animal and human research studies have demonstrated that replacing LCFAs with MCFAs results in both decreased body weight and reduced fat deposition.
In fact, the ability of MCFAs to be easily digested, to help stimulate the metabolism and be turned into energy has entered the sports arena. Several studies have now shown that MCFAs can enhance physical or athletic performance.^[12]
Additionally, research has demonstrated that, due to its metabolic effect, coconut oil increases the activity of the thyroid. And you've probably heard that a sluggish thyroid is one reason why some people are unable to lose weight, no matter what they do.
Besides weight loss, there are other advantages to boosting your metabolic rate. Your healing process accelerates. Cell regeneration increases to replace old cells, and your immune system functions better overall.

Coconut Oil on Your Skin

Besides the mounting medical and scientific evidence that coconut oil has powerful positive health benefits when eaten, it has also been used for decades by professional massage therapists to knead away tight stressed muscles.
However, you don't have to be a professional massage therapist to gain the skin and tissue support benefits of coconut oil. Just use coconut oil as you would any lotion.
Coconut oil is actually ideal for skin care. It helps protect your skin from the aging effects of free radicals, and can help improve the appearance of skin with its anti-aging benefits.
In fact, physiologist and biochemist Ray Peat, Ph.D. considers coconut oil an antioxidant[13] , due to its stability and resistance to oxidation and free radical formation. Plus, he believes it reduces our need for the antioxidant protection of vitamin E.
Like Dr. Peat, many experts believe coconut oil may help restore more youthful-looking skin. When coconut oil is absorbed into your skin and connective tissues, it helps to reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles by helping to keep your connective tissues strong and supple, and aids in exfoliating the outer layer of dead skin cells, making your skin smoother.

Coconut Oil and Your Heart

Heart disease is the number one cause of death in the U.S. And heart disease is often a silent killer. The first sign of cardiovascular disease is commonly a heart attack, and sadly, over one third of heart attacks are fatal.
And despite the propaganda, the truth is this: it is UNSATURATED fats that are primarily involved in heart disease, not the naturally occurring saturated fats, as you have been led to believe.[14]
Plus, the polyunsaturated fats in vegetable and seed oils encourage the formation of blood clots by increasing platelet stickiness. Coconut oil helps to promote normal platelet function.

Coconut Oil in Your Kitchen

I only use two oils in my food preparation.
The first, extra-virgin olive oil, is a better monounsaturated fat that works great as a salad dressing.
However, it should not be used for cooking. Due to its chemical structure, heat makes it susceptible to oxidative damage.
And polyunsaturated fats, which include common vegetable oils such as corn, soy, safflower, sunflower and canola, are absolutely the worst oils to use in cooking. These omega-6 oils are highly susceptible to heat damage because of their double bonds.
I strongly urge you to throw out those omega-6 vegetable oils in your cabinets.
Why?
Reason # 1: Most people believe that frying creates trans-fat. That is not the major problem, in my opinion. Although some are created, they are relatively minor. There are FAR more toxic chemicals produced by frying omega-6 oils than trans-fat.
Frying destroys the antioxidants in oil and as a result oxidizes the oil. This causes cross-linking, cyclization, double-bond shifts, fragmentation and polymerization of oils that cause far more damage than trans-fat.
Reason # 2: Most of the vegetable oils are GMO. This would include over 90 percent of the soy, corn and canola oils.
Reason # 3: Vegetable oils contribute to the overabundance of damaged omega-6 fats in your diet, which creates an imbalance in the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3. As you know from my extensive writing on this subject, I believe that excessive consumption of damaged omega-6 fats contributes to many health concerns.
They are all highly processed and consumed in amounts that are about 100 times more than our ancestors did a century ago. This causes them to distort the sensitive omega-6/omega-3 ratio which controls many delicate biochemical pathways which results in accelerating many chronic degenerative diseases.
There is only one oil that is stable enough to resist mild heat-induced damage, while it also helps you promote heart health and even supports weight loss and thyroid function -- coconut oil.
So, whenever you need an oil to cook with, use coconut oil instead of butter, olive oil, vegetable oil, margarine, or any other type of oil called for in recipes. Even though I don't fully recommend frying foods, if you must fry, by all means use coconut oil -- it's your smartest choice.

Coconut Oil Safety

The medium-chain fats in coconut oil are considered so nutritious that they are used in baby formulas, in hospitals to feed the critically ill, those on tube feeding, and those with digestive problems. Coconut oil has even been used successfully by doctors in treating aluminum poisoning.^[15]
Coconut oil is exceptionally helpful for pregnant women, nursing moms, the elderly, those concerned about digestive health, athletes (even weekend warriors), and those of you who just want to enhance your overall health.
References:

[1] Kaunitz H, Dayrit CS. Coconut oil consumption and coronary heart disease. Philippine Journal of Internal Medicine, 1992;30:165-171.
Prior IA, Davidson F, Salmond CE, Czochanska Z. Cholesterol, coconuts, and diet on Polynesian atolls: a natural experiment: the Pukapuka and Tokelau Island studies, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1981;34:1552-1561.
[2] Prior IA, Davidson F, Salmond CE, Czochanska Z. Cholesterol, coconuts, and diet on Polynesian atolls: a natural experiment: the Pukapuka and Tokelau Island studies, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1981;34:1552-1561.
[3] Dr. Mary G. Enig, Ph.D., F.A.C.N. Source: Coconut: In Support of Good Health in the 21st Century, part 2.
[4] Assunção ML, Ferreira HS, dos Santos AF, Cabral CR Jr, Florêncio TM. Effects of dietary coconut oil on the biochemical and anthropometric profiles of women presenting abdominal obesity, Lipids, 2009 Jul;44(7):593-601. Epub 2009 May 13.
[5] Dr. Mary G. Enig, Ph.D., F.A.C.N. Source: Coconut: In Support of Good Health in the 21st Century.
[6] Baba, N 1982. Enhanced thermogenesis and diminished deposition of fat in response to overfeeding with diet containing medium-chain triglycerides, Am. J. Clin. Nutr., 35:379.
[7] Bruce Fife, ND. Coconut Oil and Medium-Chain Triglycerides.
[8] Raymond Peat Newsletter, Coconut Oil, reprinted at www.heall.com.
An Interview With Dr. Raymond Peat, A Renowned Nutritional Counselor Offers His Thoughts About Thyroid Disease,
[9] Isaacs CE, Litov RE, Marie P, Thormar H. Addition of lipases to infant formulas produces antiviral and antibacterial activity, Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, 1992;3:304-308.
Isaacs CE, Schneidman K. Enveloped Viruses in Human and Bovine Milk are Inactivated by Added Fatty Acids(FAs) and Monoglycerides(MGs), FASEB Journal, 1991;5: Abstract 5325, p.A1288.
Mitsuto Matsumoto, Takeru Kobayashi, Akio Takenakaand Hisao Itabashi. Defaunation Effects of Medium Chain Fatty Acids and Their Derivatives on Goat Rumen Protozoa, The Journal of General Applied Microbiology, Vol. 37, No. 5 (1991) pp.439-445.
Dr. Mary G. Enig, Ph.D., F.A.C.N. Source: Coconut: In Support of Good Health in the 21st Century.
Hristov AN, Vander Pol M, Agle M, Zaman S, Schneider C, Ndegwa P, Vaddella VK, Johnson K, Shingfield KJ, Karnati SK. Effect of lauric acid and coconut oil on ruminal fermentation, digestion, ammonia losses from manure, and milk fatty acid composition in lactating cows, J Dairy Sci., 2009 Nov;92(11):5561-82.
[10] St-Onge MP, Jones PJ. Greater rise in fat oxidation with medium-chain triglyceride consumption relative to long-chain triglyceride is associated with lower initial body weight and greater loss of subcutaneous adipose tissue, International Journal of Obesity & Related Metabolic Disorders, 2003 Dec;27(12):1565-71.
[11] Geliebter, A 1980. Overfeeding with a diet of medium-chain triglycerides impedes accumulation of body fat, Clinical Nutrition, 28:595.
[12] Fushiki, T and Matsumoto, K Swimming endurance capacity of mice is increased by consumption of medium-chain triglycerides, Journal of Nutrition, 1995;125:531.
[13] Raymond Peat Newsletter - Unsaturated Vegetable Oils Toxic, 1996 edition, p.2-4. Daneil R. Doerge, Hebron C Chang "Inactivation of thyroid peroxidase by soy isoflavones in vitro and in vivo", Journal of Chromotography B, September 2002; 777(1,2);25:269-79. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2005/01/26/coconut-oil-part-eight.aspx
Nevin KG, Rajamohan T. Effect of topical application of virgin coconut oil on skin components and antioxidant status during dermal wound healing in young rats, Skin Pharmacol Physiol, 2010;23(6):290-7. Epub 2010 Jun 3.
Marina AM, Man YB, Nazimah SA, Amin I. Antioxidant capacity and phenolic acids of virgin coconut oil, Int J Food Sci Nutr, 2009;60 Suppl 2:114-23. Epub 2008 Dec 27. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19115123
[14] Barry Groves, PhD. Second Opinions: Exposing Dietary Misinformation: The Cholesterol Myth, parts 1 and 2.
Robert H Knopp and Barbara M Retzlaff, Saturated fat prevents coronary artery disease? An American paradox, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 80, No. 5, 1102-1103, November 2004.
Mozaffarian D, Rimm EB, Herrington DM. Dietary fats, carbohydrate, and progression of coronary atherosclerosis in postmenopausal women, Am J Clin Nutr, 2004;80:1175-84.
[15] K. G. Nevin and T. Rajamohan, "Beneficial effects of virgin coconut oil on lipid parameters and in vitro LDL oxidation", Clinical Biochemistry, September 2004; 37(9): 830-835.

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

Excerpts from - How I Cured Stage 4 Cancer in Two Weeks For Less Than The Cost Of A Night At The Movies By Kelley Eidem

2010-07-20T19:12:00.000-07:00

I found this amazing Cancer info last year when I helped my girlfriend's mother with breast cancer. She is cancer free now, no chemo, no radiation, and no drugs. This is recipe was a core part of her recovery.

I did adjust the recipe a little. Instead of regular cod liver oil, I use Blue Ice Butter oil/Fermented cod liver oil, and instead of regular store bought butter, I use raw, unpasteurized butter. I also add as much ginger as the recipe requires garlic. Remember, make sure everything is raw except the bread. Lastly, I make sure the produce and the bread is organic or at least never GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms).

How I Cured Stage 4 Cancer

Two Weeks

For Less Than The Cost

A Night At The Movies

By Kelley Eidem

I would be dead today without my crazy, easy cure. Thanks for stopping by. I'm the author of the book The Doctor Who Cures Cancer. But today I'd like to talk to you about my easy victory over my own Stage 4 cancer. The truth is that I was only able to come up with a key part of this extremely simple cure from what I learned from writing the book. By the way, my vision is this: "Together we can help cure cancer - one person at a time!" That means you play key part in conquering cancer. You can do that by reporting your results here. By doing that, you'll encourage others...in other words you could be saving a cancer victim's life - maybe a new one every day!

So before we begin, if you feel that this article could help someone you love, please take advantage of the email option that's located a few inches to your right, and send it on. You can send out multiple emails all at the same time. Then click on "Share it" at the bottom and "Digg it" and "StumbleUpon" it so more cancer patients can be cured. I'm just one guy. So I need your help getting this fantastic news to more victims of cancer. It's a good idea to go ahead and send this to people who don't have cancer...because there is no telling when your relatives or buddies will need this lifesaving information...next year, five years, whenever. And "Thumbs Up" this article, too.

Please forgive me in advance because I'm going to be talking about cancer in ways that are going to be quite different than the types of discussions you've heard before on this topic. And please bear with me if at times it looks like the discussion has gone into areas that don't fit conventional wisdom. Going outside the box of what we think we know might be the best way at this point to get to a cure.

For several decades, modern medicine has tried a lot of toxic compounds, hoping to 'out-toxic' the cancer. And sure enough, the compounds did out-toxic cancer. Unfortunately, it usually out-toxics the patient as well. The result has been that cancer treatments are usually an expensive, painful and scary proposition. But you already knew that.

I didn't go bald or get sick to my stomach! Fortunately, my Stage 4 cancer was none of the above for me. My advanced cancer treatment cost less than two tickets and popcorn at the movies. My treatment wasn't painful. And I wasn't scared...I didn't lose a minute's sleep...because I knew what to do. If we've learned anything about treating cancer in the last 50 to 60 years it has to be this: half killing the patient isn't half way successful.
As I emphatically told a woman in my store recently, "You gotta be healthy to get well!"
In my own case, I knew by the many lesions I had that I was already sick. I didn't need someone to help make me sicker. I needed to get healthy, so I could get well.

UCLA Researchers Confirm My Method!

Maybe the best place to start with this would be to let you know that researchers at UCLA garnered lots of headlines two years ago because they had done something pretty incredible.

(1) What had the UCLA researchers done?

They shrank tumors by 80% with the heat from habeneros peppers. That is quite extraordinary in terms of what is usually accomplished with toxic drugs. It's also worth noting that in the US the State of New Mexico has the lowest cancer mortality rate of all 50 states. They probably eat more peppers in New Mexico per capita than all the other states, too. In other words, the researchers at UCLA made a great choice in examining the anti-cancer properties of hot peppers.

My own success in curing myself with habeneros peppers preceded the UCLA researchers by seven years. And I didn't shrink my many tumors by 80%...I shrank them 100%.
UCLA's research results did confirm that my own method was an extremely powerful weapon against cancer. I'm eternally grateful for their confirmation. But then, I used habeneros peppers PLUS two more low tech ingredients...running rings around the findings made by the UCLA guys and gals. (By the way, if you absolutely can't tolerate peppers, you can substitute freshly grated ginger...grated daily...not from a jar!)
Research from the Universities of Michigan and Minnesota just scratch the surface of ginger's power against cancer. Not only does ginger cause cancer cell death, it also makes the cancer cells turn on themselves. Speaking technically, that means the tumors go away. (2) (3)

I Had Lesions From Top To Toe. Well, almost.

Let me start from the beginning. One morning as I was about to step into the shower, I noticed a couple of large round looking red splotches on my thigh and calf. They were about the size of a half dollar. I wasn't sure what to make of them, but they stood out like crazy. By the next day, the two red lesions had turned brown. Only they were now accompanied by several more large red splotches. Some were on my upper back, lower back, hips, thighs and calves on both sides of my body. Within 24 hours, they turned brown, too.

At this point, most people would probably have freaked out. I had a darn good reason not to, however. I couple years earlier, I had written a book entitled The Doctor Who Cures Cancer. Gathering the research for the book gave me some critically important information that helped me to develop my own method. I figured, if what I had was cancer, that's not a problem because curing cancer isn't as difficult as we've been led to believe.

No, I wasn't pregnant!

Many years earlier, I'd also learned that the common pregnancy tests sold in drug stores will sometimes produce a positive result if the person taking the test has cancer. A call to the makers of one of the products confirmed that this is true: pregnancy screening tests can sometimes pick up the presence of cancer. It is well known among physicians that home pregnancy tests can show a false positive for pregnancy when the person being tested has cancer. The test isn't real accurate if the result is negative because the test kit requires that a high threshold be met before the test will read positive. Pregnant women easily reach the threshold, but a person with cancer doesn't necessarily produce enough of the hormone to register on the test kit. But if the kit does show "positive" in a non-pregnant person, it is highly accurate for uncovering cancer. It seemed to me that it was worth a shot as a screening mechanism. Since I am a male, a positive test result would tell me what I needed to know.

I did the test, and sure enough, the 'pregnancy' test result came up positive. You might be wondering why a pregnancy test would read positive. I'm glad you asked. ;-) Pregnancy tests screen for the presence of a hormone called HCGH (human chorionic gonaditrophin hormone.) It's the same hormone that is elevated in cancer patients. But in most cases the level in cancer patients aren't high enough to trigger a positive test result. Down below will be listed information on a more sophisticated pregnancy test that's about 97% accurate for detecting cancer. I'll tell you more about that test in a minute.

Pregnancy kit 'says' I'm pregnant!

In my case, my HCGH was high enough to score positive on the test. So there I was, a man, with more than a dozen large lesions AND a positive pregnancy test result! There was no point for me to go to a physician at that point, because (a) I had no insurance, and far more importantly, (b) chemo sucks in treating solid mass tumors, and I had more than a dozen visible tumors! There's no telling how many tumors there might have been hidden within my body.

Then there was reason (C) for not going to see a physician!!! The first thing the doctor would have wanted to do would be to cut out a portion of one of the lesions to have it examined by a pathologist. I had learned something profound when writing "The Doctor Who Cures Cancer" which was later confirmed in a book about Judah Folkman, M.D., (inventor of Angiostat) that the act of cutting out a portion of a tumor activates more tumors to sprout wings. It seemed to me that there were too many tumors raging already to let anyone cut on me spurring further growth.

Here's a real brief recipe list here.

Grate one habeneros pepper each day, putting it on bread
Grate two cloves of garlic each day, putting them on bread
1-2 Tablespoons of Emulsified cod liver oil each day.* TwinLabs makes some wonderfully flavored cod liver oil.I used the cod liver oil because I was not losing any weight or dealing with fluid retention. If I had either of those conditions, I would have used evening primrose oil instead of the emulsified cod liver oil.
Smother the grated garlic and habeneros peppers with real butter and eat it. No margarines of any type, including Smart Balance, etc.

That's it!

The potent active ingredients from the peppers and the garlic disperse quickly. So they must be grated each day, and eaten immediately.

You're probably thinking, whoa that's gotta be hot! Yes, it is. And it will make you breathe deeply! That's a good thing, because heavy breathing pumps the lymph system. As you know, cancer cells often gather there.

What I did was put the habeneros and the garlic on one side of the bread and folded it over. Plus, it's handy to have another half slice at the ready to cut the burning sensation in my mouth.

So let yourself breathe deeply for a minute or two and then eat the extra half slice of bread.
Let me say a word or two about the bread. I used Ezekiel spouted bread. You can get it in the freezer section of health food stores and at Publix. Yes, it costs about $5.00. But keep in mind that all the ingredients together won't cost you more than $20.

Can you use another bread? Maybe. Or maybe not. It is what I used, and I don't like to mess with the success I had.

How well did this recipe of mine work?

All of my lesions went away in about four or five days. I had a dozen or more, so that was pretty good, if you ask me. Since I wasn't fond of the peppers and garlic (LOL!) I quit after the fifth or sixth day. A few days later, three or four lesions came back. So I went back on the three part recipe. The lesions vanished once again in about four days. After that, I continued to take the emulsified cod liver oil for about six months. On occasion I take another bottle of the cod liver oil. And I take fish oil sporadically.

This episode of my raging cancer took place around October of 1998 as best that I can recall. No lesion has returned since that time. It's working for others, too!

Here's a comment given below from a woman who has tried my cure for two weeks:
"I wanted to make sure and report back to you after having followed your protocol for two weeks. I am SO PLEASED to say that the (stabbing, knife piercing) pains in my right breast are completely gone, and so is the lump!"
When you look at the possibility of being cancer free in two weeks, you have nothing to lose and everything to gain. This works. it really works.

You can pick up 2/3's of your cure at the grocery store.

In the first part of this two-part article I mentioned that researchers from UCLA used peppers to shrink tumors 80%. Here's something to keep in mind about that. The researchers don't have a patent on peppers or garlic. The peppers are available at many grocery stores. Garlic is available at every grocery store in the United States, and probably the world over. The point I'm making is that you have access to these ingredients, and you don't need a lab coat or a university degree to buy them. Here's the info on the more sophisticated HCGH test:
The sophisticated test was developed by a Philippine Dr. Manuel D. Navarro in the late 1950's! His son, Dr. Efren Navarro, continues to analyze the test results. The test is called the "HCG Urine Immunoassay."
This HCG test can find cancer 12 to 27 months before other kinds of testing depending on the type of cancer.
When i checked into this two years ago, the test cost about $50. To find out more, call Erlinda Suarez at (847) 359-3634.
The address is 631 Peregrine Dr., Palatine, IL 60067.
Please be aware that the turn around time for the test is about six weeks. So that test is better used to discover cancer before you think you have it.

The best to you.
Kelley Eidem

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

Warning: This Common Food Causes Devastating Offspring Defects in New Research Study by Dr. Mercola

2010-07-13T03:46:00.000-07:00

Before you read Dr. Mercola's article you really need to see this:

Everything You HAVE TO KNOW about Dangerous Genetically Modified Foods from Jeffrey Smith on Vimeo.

Warning:
This Common Food Causes
Devastating Offspring Defects
in
New Research Study
by Dr. Mercola

I strongly believe that one of the most obvious clues about the danger of GMO foods are that just about EVERY species of animal that is offered a GMO food versus a non-GMO food will avoid the GMO one. Many times they will do this to the point of starvation, as they have an intuitive sense of the danger of this food.
Please listen to the interview as Jeffery expands on this point in great detail. It’s one you can use to effectively share with your friends and family who are not yet convinced of the dangers of GMO foods.
If you have more time with them you can bring up the sterility argument that is expanded upon with these new research findings. You might have read this before that genetically modified foods may cause sterility in future generations but now the latest research from Russia provides shocking confirmation of this potential.
This study, which was conducted by the Russian equivalent of the US National Association for Gene Security, has not yet been published, but its findings were recently announced. It’s anticipated that the details will be published later this summer.

Russian Scientists Find Third Generation of Hamsters Sterilized by GM Soy

The release of this new information provides yet another health risk, and confirmation on earlier problems related to fertility, birth weight of offspring, and infant mortality.
In this feeding study they used hamsters, an animal which has not been previously featured in GM safety studies.
One group of hamsters was fed a normal diet without any soy whatsoever, a second group was fed non-GMO soy, a third ate GM soy, and a fourth group ate an even higher amount of GM soy than the third.
Using the same genetically modified (GM) soy that is produced on over 90 percent of the soy acreage in the US, the hamsters and their offspring were fed their respective diets over a period of two years, during which time the researchers evaluated three generations of hamsters.
First they took five pairs of hamsters from each group, each of which produced about seven to eight litters each, totaling about 140 animals.
At first all went well, but serious problems became apparent when they selected new pairs from the offspring.
The first problem was that this second generation had a slower growth rate and reached their sexual maturity later than normal.
However, this second generation eventually generated another 39 litters:
The no-soy control group had 52 pups
The non-GM soy had 78
The GM soy had only 40, of which 25 percent died
So these second-generation GM soy-fed hamsters had a five-fold higher infant mortality rate, compared to the 5 percent normal death rate that was happening in the controls.

Nearly All of the Third-Generation GMO Babies Were Sterile!

But then an even bigger problem became apparent, because nearly all of the third generation hamsters lost the ability to have babies altogether.
Only a single third-generation female hamster gave birth to 16 pups, and of those, one fifth died.
In short, nearly the entire third generation of GM soy eaters were sterile!
But it doesn’t end there.
In the GM soy-fed groups they also found an unusually high prevalence of an otherwise extremely rare phenomenon – hair growing inside the animals’ mouths. (You can see the images here.)
Says Smith:
“… it’s a very rare phenomenon but he [study author, Dr. Surov] had never in his life seen more hair in mouths of hamsters than with these GM soy-fed, third generation hamsters.”
As you may know, genetically modified crops weren’t released until 1996, starting with GM soy, corn and cotton. Modified canola came about a year later.
Please remember humans have MUCH longer life spans than rats and that GMO foods were only introduced in 1996. This is LESS than one generation.
So we’re still nowhere near seeing the full effects of these potential ramifications in humans, as we’re only about 15 years into it. But if the effects are anything like the effects on numerous types of animals, we could be looking at sterility on a grand scale as our great-grandchildren grow up and begin to try to procreate...
The fact that the US is completely unwilling to implement the precautionary principle with regards to GM foods is incomprehensible in light of the findings we already have from animal studies.
Additionally, some 800 genetically engineered food applications have been submitted to the USDA, but not one single environmental impact statement has been prepared. So not only are human health ramifications ignored, but the entire eco system is being jeopardized.

Rampant Conflicts of Interest Put You and Your Family at Great Risk

Unfortunately, it’s clear that the US government is not in a position to make reasonable and responsible decisions related to GMOs at this point, when you consider the fact that the Obama administration has placed former Monsanto attorney and Vice President, Michael Taylor, in charge of US food safety, and serious conflicts of interest even reign supreme within the US Supreme Court!
That’s right. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is also a former Monsanto attorney, but refuses to acknowledge any conflict of interest as he’s hearing Monsanto’s third appeal for deregulation of genetically modified alfalfa seeds.
After corn, soy and wheat, alfalfa is the most widely grown crop in the US, so allowing GM alfalfa to be deregulated could spell disaster in several ways. It’s easily cross-pollinated by bees and wind, and it’s a perennial, meaning GM alfalfa could live on for years, spreading their genetically modified traits far and wide for a long period of time.
It remains to be seen how Justice Thomas rules in this case…
But in addition to conflicts of interest, we’re also dealing with government agencies that refuse to acknowledge the science produced by their own scientists.
Closely tied to the production of GM crops is the use of the herbicide Roundup, which contains glyphosate. Monsanto’s Roundup is the most widely used herbicide in the world, and contrary to the popular belief propagated by industry, pesticide use has significantly increased – DOUBLED since 2005 -- rather than decreased with the use of GM crops.
As it turns out, this is a serious problem for more reasons than one. Not only are GM food crops saturated with more pesticides than ever before, which naturally ends up in your body when you eat them, but glyphosate may also be killing the soil itself.
This startling conclusion comes straight from one of the USDA’s own scientists, Dr. Kremer. However, his employer has opted to more or less ignore his findings, which, according to this article in Grist, include evidence that glyphosate causes:
damage to beneficial microbes in the soil increasing the likelihood of infection of a crop by soil pathogens
interference with nutrient uptake by the plant
reduced efficiency of symbiotic nitrogen fixation
overall lower-than-expected plant productivity

It’s Time to Save Yourself and Your Famiy Because White Knights Don’t Exist in Government

It’s important to realize that the key to ending the ongoing atrocity of GM foods lies not with government, but with you and me.
Consumers are going to have to drive GM foods out, and we CAN do it.
Through educating yourself, your family, friends and community about GMOs, and most importantly of all, through the food purchases you make, you can stop this unregulated science experiment.
Once we reach the tipping point, which is probably as little as five percent of the US population, the market WILL respond. They can’t afford not to!
Once enough people refuse to buy GM food products, it won’t be long before food manufacturers start switching their ingredients.

How to Sniff Out GMOs and Vote with Your Pocketbook

You CAN avoid GMOs, if you know what to look for.
First of all, remember there are eight genetically modified food crops:
Soy
Corn
Cottonseed (used in vegetable cooking oils)
Canola (canola oil)
Sugar from sugar beets
Hawaiian papaya
Some varieties of zucchini
Crookneck squash
Based on this list, anything containing soy or soy derivatives should be avoided, as well as anything containing corn, the most obvious ingredient being high fructose corn syrup.
The easiest way to avoid ending up with GM foods in your shopping cart is to do some pre-planning using this free non-GMO shopping guide.
The Institute for Responsible Technology has also created a free iPhone application that is available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
The shopping guide lists the various derivatives of each crop to be avoided, and even better, it lists hundreds of brand products in 22 food categories that are non-GMO, so if you’re still buying processed foods, at least you can easily select a brand that does not use genetically modified ingredients.

Tipping Point… If Europe Did it, the US Can Too!

Getting into a shopping habit of continually avoiding GM food products will create pressure on the marketplace, without which there is little hope. So take this one step! Download the shopping guide, and make note of which brands to buy and which ones to avoid like the plague that they are.
Europe managed to reach their tipping point in April of 1999, ELEVEN YEARS AGO(!), within a single week of negative media which swayed the shopping habits of consumers enough for food companies to commit to stop using GM ingredients.
The idea that consumers have tremendous power is not wishful thinking. It’s an absolute fact.
Monsanto could probably be effectively bankrupted by the end of this year, if enough consumers were to take individual, proactive steps to avoid purchasing anything even remotely related to their business.
Another point that validates the effectiveness of this consumer-driven strategy is the progress we’re now seeing with high fructose corn syrup. Within the last few weeks, several major corporations have declared they’re taking HFCS out of their products due to consumer demand.

More Educational Material

You can find loads of additional information about GMOs on the site www.ResponsibleTechnology.org.
There you can also order additional guides to hand out to friends, health care practitioners, and decision makers within your community, along with free online videos, pod casts, and articles that you can repost and republish.
Last but not least, I want to put out a call for a very special donation.
The iPhone application was created by someone who generously donated their time to make it, and if you or someone you know is a competent Android developer who is willing to assist in this cause, please contact info@ResponsibleTechnology.org.
You can also make financial donations on their website to help accelerate the tipping point against GMOs.

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

The People Whisperer - My Video Audition for Getting My Show for Oprah!

2010-06-25T19:13:00.000-07:00

Oprah has a contest for people to get their own television/talk show, and I thought this would be a natural fit. Me and Oprah, and millions of adoring fans.

But it's depends on how many votes the video gets. So PLEASE VOTE!

You can VOTE as often as you like, do 10X

So, when you decide to vote many times, all you have to do is go to Oprah's website by CLICKING HERE and vote. Take a look. Tell me what you think. I think it's great!

Share this with everyone you know.

Voting closes July 3.

YOU WANT TO SUPPORT The Video?

CLICK HERE to now vote a lot at Oprah's site.

Remember,

YOUR VOTING NOW

Really Makes a Difference.

I didn't do it alone though. I had a lot of help. First of all, my lovely Katie who did more jobs than I can count including editing, sound, producing, camera operator and managing. Plus an amazing DP Allan Palmer, an amazing producer, and Jayme who gracious gave of his resources as well. Also, I have to mention, I could not do it without my students who gave all their time generously. All in all, it was amazing, and we got it all done in one week.

Thank you everybody.
One last reminder to VOTE!
Sifu Marcus

P.S. To make your voting happens when your go the the site, click the green vote button at the bottom of our video.

Thanks again,

It's Not The Fat That Can Kill You, It's the Chlorine In Your Water!

2010-06-11T03:52:00.000-07:00

One of the most dangerous and common misconseptions of the twenty and twenty first centuries is that fat is the cause of arteriosclerosis, the hardening of the arteries... Its not, bad arteries are.

So what in the modern postindustrial world causes bad arteries and then eventually heart disease? Because heart disease is attributed to 34.3% (CDC numbers) of all deaths in America, that's 1 in 3. When you do the math, that means there are 81 million Americans that are living with one or more types of cardiovascular disease in this county, and if you don't know one of them, then you happen to be one. But here is an interesting statistic, in the 1800's and prior, deaths from heart disease were actually as low as 2% of deaths.

Why?....

Well the popular answer is bad diet and lifestyle. The problem with that is, pre-industrial man ate copious amounts of supposedly terribly artery clogging, cooked, saturated fats and cholesterol. The exact thing that should cause more blocked arteries and heat disease.

So what changed in 100 years and is giving everyone these heart problems, since apparently it's not from fat consumption the thing that is supposedly clogging and hardening our arteries? Because otherwise, we wouldn't see such incongruous statistics in just 100 years. So, if it's not he fat then what?

It's the water.

Once we started congregating the cities and moved away from the agrarian lifestyle, because of the industrial revolution, the need for a clean centralized water supply became essential. But the challenge was not necessarily finding water but keeping it clean. Luckily with the industrial revolution came the revolution in the sciences, particularly chemistry and the love of chemical disinfectants. Most of them totally toxic but supposedly "safe" in small amounts, sure?

The most insidious of these chemicals is chlorine, because chlorine probably has killed more people than any other chemical or disease in the history of the planet.

How?... Read this, it's much more concise and eloquent than I ever could be. It's excerpts for Dr. Merola's site.

The Negative Health Effects of Chlorine

Summary

Federal regulations require chlorine treatment of the water supplied to urban/suburban areas of America and much of Canada from surface sources such as lakes, reservoirs and rivers. That constitutes about 75 percent of water that Americans consume. Water from underground sources generally is not chlorinated unless it is supplemented by surface water. My hometown, Lacey, Washington, and some surrounding communities that are supplied water by Lacey, are fortunate to be among that group; I'd like to see that continue.

Chlorination is inferior water treatment on at least two counts. (1) Although it has greatly lowered infectious waterborne diseases in the U.S. and Canada, chlorination fails against a variety of water problems including parasites and can seriously harm people who use the water. (2) Its cost is unnecessarily high. As of 1996, Andover, Massachusetts' new ozone treatment costs $83 per million gallons of purified water, only two-thirds as much as the old treatment process. The town saves $64,000 annually in chemicals costs alone, [1] and uses less electricity. See later.

Possible damage to people's arteries

When chlorinated water is run through a hose or carried in a pail followed by milk as in a dairy, "very tenacious, yellowish deposits chemically similar to arterial plaque" form; with unchlorinated water this doesn't happen. [2]

CBS' "Sixty Minutes" show July 11, 1992, displayed two laboratory rats, both of them eating standard rat chow and drinking chlorinated water. One rat had clear arteries. The other was also on pasteurized, homogenized milk. When the animals were sacrificed and cut open, the arteries of the milk-drinking rats were clogged. A scientist in a white coat winked at the camera and said, "He [the live rat he was holding] is the only one doing research on that." The researcher didn't say why, but the powerful dairy and chemical lobbies come to mind.

Dairy buckets, hoses and rats' arteries resist the arterial-wall damage known as atherosclerosis. But what can chlorinated water and cow milk, particularly homogenized milk, do to the far more susceptible arteries of humans? Those of young chickens are about as susceptible to such damage as people's arteries. So as a first approximation, J.M. Price, MD gave cockerels (roosters less than a year old) only chlorinated water (without milk). They developed arterial plaques; and the stronger the concentration of chlorine, the faster and worse the damage. Cockerels on unchlorinated water developed no such damage.2

The residents of the small town of Roseto, Pennsylvania, had no heart attacks despite a diet rich in saturated animal fats and milk -- until they moved away from Roseto's mountain spring water and drank chlorinated water. After that, consuming the same diet, they had heart attacks.2 The Roseto example is dramatic enough, but the needed detailed comparisons and follow-up have never been done.

How well does the incidence of heart attacks match the areas where, and times when water is/was chlorinated? Chlorination spread throughout America in the second and third decades of this century, about 20 years before the mushrooming of heart attacks. Light chlorination, we will recall, yielded slow growth of plaques in Price's cockerels; and so chlorination of people's drinking water at the usual low concentration might have been expected to take at least 10-20 years to produce clinical manifestations of atherosclerosis.

A physician team led by William F. Enos autopsied three hundred GIs who had died in battle in the Korean War. These men, who had passed induction examination as healthy, averaged 22.1 years of age. To their shock and amazement, in seventy-seven percent of the 300 the pathologists found "gross evidence of arteriosclerosis in the coronary arteries." In several, one or more heart arteries were partly or completely occluded. [3]

Although Dr. Enos didn't try to explain his grisly discovery, he assumed arterial clogging had developed gradually. Seeming to support that assumption, almost 20 years later pathologists discovered early arterial damage in ninety-six percent of nearly 200 consecutive babies who had died of whatever cause in their first month outside the womb. Two of those babies' coronary arteries were blocked, causing infantile heart attacks. [4] Identified as crib deaths, these were related to functionally deficient vitamin B6. [5]

But did arterial damage in fact develop slowly? The water that the American soldiers had to drink in Korea was so heavily chlorinated that many could hardly tolerate it. In Vietnam too, autopsies of American solders found heart-artery damage. [6] Again, water supplied to them had been heavily chlorinated.2 Did much of the soldiers' arterial damage develop, not gradually but quickly as in Dr. Price's cockerels? The truth -- slow or rapid development of clogging -- may never be known. Interestingly, from 1950 to 1965 while heart attacks mushroomed, on a population level arterial lesions did not increase; [7] the major growth was in clotting.

Other risks of chlorinated water

Chlorine in swimming pools reacts with organic matter such as sweat, urine, blood, feces, and mucus and skin cells to form more chloramines. Chloroform risk can be 70 to 240 times higher in the air over indoor pools than over outdoor pools. [21] And Canadian researchers found that after an hour of swimming in a chlorinated pool, chloroform concentrations in the swimmers' blood ranged from 100 to 1,093 parts per billion (ppb). [22] If the pool smells very much of chlorine, don't go near it.

Taking a warm shower or lounging in a tub filled with hot chlorinated water, one inhales chloroform. Researchers recorded increases in chloroform concentration in bathers' lungs of about 2.7 ppb after a 10-minute shower. Worse, warm water causes the skin to act like a sponge; and so one will absorb and inhale more chlorine in a 10-minute shower than by drinking eight glasses of the same water. This irritates the eyes, the sinuses, throat, skin and lungs, dries the hair and scalp, worsening dandruff. It can weaken immunity, see below.

A window from the shower room open to the outdoors would release chloroform from the shower room air. But to prevent its absorption through the skin requires a showerhead that removes chlorine. The ShowerWiseTM filter and showerhead can be ordered for $69, plus two filters $129 -- from What Doctors Don't Tell You, 1-800-851-7100 or fax 410-223-2619. Others offer comparable products.

Dishwashers pollute indoor air with chlorinated organics created from dishwasher detergents and volatilized in the air for us to breathe. They vent 5 to 7 liters (quarts) of air into the house air every minute of operation. The chlorine reacts with food scraps. [23] Ceramic disks, used instead of detergents, totally avoid the problem and are said to be about 75% less costly than detergent. [24] [25] [26]

Other harm from chlorination

Long-term risks of consuming chlorinated water include excessive free radical formation, which accelerates aging, increases vulnerability to genetic mutation and cancer development, hinders cholesterol metabolism, and promotes hardening of arteries.

Excess free radicals created by chlorinated water also generate dangerous toxins in the body. These have been directly linked to liver malfunction, weakening of the immune system and pre-arteriosclerotic changes in arteries (which, as we saw, struck Dr. Price's cockerels and may have happened to American soldiers in Korea and Vietnam). Excessive free radicals have been linked also to alterations of cellular DNA, the stuff of inheritance. [40] Chlorine also destroys antioxidant vitamin E,2 which is needed to counteract excess oxysterols/free radicals for cardiac and anti-cancer protection.

A study in the late 1970s found that chlorinated water appears to increase the risk of gastrointestinal cancer over a person's lifetime by 50 to 100 percent. This study analyzed thousands of cancer deaths in North Carolina, Illinois, Wisconsin and Louisiana. Risk of such cancers results from use of water containing chlorine at or below the E.P.A. (Environmental Protection Agency) standard and "is going to make the E.P.A. standard look ridiculous," stated Dr. Robert Harris, lead scientist in the study. [41]

A later meta-analysis [B] found chlorinated water is associated each year in America with about 4,200 cases of bladder cancer and 6,500 cases of rectal cancer. Chlorine is estimated to account for 9 percent of bladder cancer cases and 18% of rectal cancers. [42] Those cancers develop because the bladder and rectum store waste products for periods of time. (Keeping the bowels moving regularly lowers such risk.) Chlorinated water is associated, too, with higher total risk of combined cancers. [43] Chlorine in treated water can also cause allergic symptoms ranging from skin rash to intestinal symptoms to arthritis, headaches, and on and on. [44]

Recent research has found a new hazard in chlorinated water: a byproduct called MX. A research team from the National Public Health Institute in Finland discovered that, by causing genetic mutations, MX initiates cancer in laboratory animals. [45] [46] Also, DCA (dichloroacedic acid) in chlorinated water alters cholesterol metabolism, changing HDL ("good") to LDL ("bad") cholesterol [47] -- and causes liver cancer in laboratory animals. [48]

Pass it on and be well,
Sifu

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

The Poison in Your Drinking Water!

2010-05-31T04:25:00.000-07:00

If you live in the United States there is something you must know.

You are drinking a deadly poison everyday which, among other things, can cause bone fractures, hearing loss, tremors, nausea, convulsions, and worst of all death. It's one of the active ingredients in rat poison and you and your loved ones used it today to cook, bathe, or brush your teeth.

It's orderless, tasteless and has no color and it's added to most of your pubic drinking water by law.

The deadly industrial waste product know as Fluoride!

But don't take my word for it. Listen to Christopher Bryson, former producer at the BBC and author of The Fluoride Deception. It's his book, a compilation of over 10 years of investigative research on the subject of fluoride. This is an interview done with him about that book.

In my opinion its the most concise and easy to follow explanation of what can be a a complex subject matter. But in the end don't listen to it because of how it's made, listen because this information could save you or a loved one's life.

The Fluoride Deception pt1

The Fluoride Deception pt2

The Fluoride Deception pt3

The Fluoride Deception pt4

My suggestion is, email this to all your loved ones ASAP and get a filter that filters fluoride (check, most filters do not filter fluoride) or drink and use only natural mineral water from the source and untreated.

Oh... take a look at your toothpaste.

Be Well,
Sifu

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

No More Raw Milk at Whole Foods Market!

2010-05-20T15:34:00.000-07:00

I found this article published by Kimberly Hartke, publicist at the Weston A. Price Foundation. It's a conversation with Mark McAfee, the owner of Organic Pastures the largest raw dairy in the US, about how raw milk and how it has been taken out of Whole Food Markets.

Here is it, hopfully it informes.
Enjoy....

In True Form, McAfee Makes lemoneade Out of Lemons
by Kimberly Hartke, Publicist Weston A. Price Foundation

Mark McAfee, owner of the largest raw dairy in the nation, Organic Pastures, dropped me a surprising email last night. Whole Foods Market, with six hours notice, is dropping raw milk products from its dairy case. Not only in Mark’s state of California, but in Washington state, Pennsylvania and Connecticut. They already removed raw milk from Florida stores, where it was labeled and sold as “pet milk.”
Pennsylvania Whole Foods stores had only recently started carrying raw milk.
Apparently it is a national corporate insurance policy issue, which they are committed to working out. Whole Foods does expect to be able to re-stock store shelves with the product once they have resolved the issue with insurers.
The situation has left raw dairymen to scramble and find new points of sale for their product.
Regulatory Climate May Put the Squeeze on the Market
And, after what has been happening in Wisconsin and other states lately, it seems that there may be some FDA involvement in this corporate “decision.” Unlike ground beef, spinach, peanuts, peppers, and the other obvious sources of mass foodborne illness, the FDA singles out raw milk as “inherently dangerous,” in spite of a lack of evidence. This hostile regulatory climate seems to inform corporate decisions, makes insurers leery and also directs the actions the state regulators.
When Florida stores stopped carrying “pet milk” callers to Whole Foods Corporate were told everything from, “it was a profit driven decision” to “call the USDA if you want more information.”
A blog reader wrote me earlier this week that several Washington state dairies, Jackie’s Jersey Milk and Dungeness Creamery are experiencing business disruptions at the hands the state health officials with recall and shutdowns. She sees this as a “pattern of harassment.”
Wisconsin farm share programs are under a state of siege, because of the harsh bureaucratic interpretation of statute that began suddenly last summer.
Organic Pastures Responds with Optimism and Flexiblity, Offers Customer Hotline

Signs Tell How to Find Milk

As a courtesy to their customers, Whole Foods is placing signs in the dairy case, to let people know where to find their favorite farm fresh dairy brand. The Organic Pastures sign has their 1-877-RAWMILK customer service hotline. The Claravale Farm sign appears to have other health food stores listed. This photo was taken for me by Christine Chessen, founder of CREMA, the California Raw Milk Association, at a Bay area Whole Foods Market location where she shops.
Here is the official statement, released by Organic Pastures late last night:
On Friday, March 12, 2010, with 6 hours notice; Whole Foods corporate offices notified Organic Pastures and all other raw milk producers nationally, that they would not be able to carry any raw dairy products. This decision affected the states of CA, WA, PA, and CT. They told us that they love and support raw milk in California but their insurance company would not insure them until a nation-wide food safety plan was developed for all raw dairy producers. Not a single pathogen, complaint or food safety issue has caused this to occur… this is simply an issue of corporate insurance not allowing a vibrant whole food to be sold.
Organic Pastures already has an active food safety plan and we have submitted it to Whole Foods. This food safety plan has been in affect for over a year and was developed in cooperation with Whole Foods Food Safety Auditors, Dr. Ron Hull, PhD and Dr. Ted Beals, MD (Internationally renowned food safety experts), our extensive experience producing raw milk for over 10 years and industry laboratories. However, our compliance with all State and Federal codes and regulations and our active food safety plan was not enough to prevent Whole Foods from removing all raw dairy products from the shelf… effective 8AM Saturday, March 13, 2010.
Experts Agree, Food Safety is in Everyone’s Best Interest
Christine Chessen, of California Raw Milk Association points to the need for food safety plans for all raw milk producers. She fears that a raw dairy not doing proper testing, can be the downfall of others who are producing safe milk and using food safety measures. She suspects a case in Connecticut which involved a large multi-million dollar lawsuit may be at the root of the insurance carrier’s skittishness.
The Weston A. Price Foundation recommends knowing the source of your milk, if you choose to consume raw dairy, make sure the cows are tested for animal diseases, the milk is tested for pathogens and that the farm is feeding only grass and hay, and that the cows are on pasture, with plenty of sunshine.
Mark McAfee is familiar with challenges, and he rises above them like no one I have ever known. Here is what he has to say:
“This may appear to be a anti-raw milk move by Whole Foods. A deeper look exposes something perhaps very positive. Our best advocates and biggest supporters work for Whole Foods Market. They were the first store to carry OPDC products in CA in 2002. Walter Robb, COO has been a courageous and a steadfast consumer and fighter for raw milk in California with powerful testimony at the state legislature during SB 201 hearings in 2008.”
“In the end, it is hoped that this event will usher in a Whole Foods and OPDC led set of Raw Milk Safety Standards to assist ( not scare or intimidate ) the raw milk producers nationally to rise above liability concerns and have the highest level of confidence in raw milk safety. From all challenges can come very good and welcomed and needed progress. This is one of those times.”
“Every raw milk producer needs a food safety plan. Each one will be different depending on their conditions….but everyone needs to have a RAMP program (Risk Analysis and Management Program, takes into account the human immune system, it doesn’t rely on kill steps like a HACCP program). This is reality and with a RAMP program everyone can sleep better at night including consumers. This takes away just one more thing that the FDA or anyone else can say negative about raw milk. Whole Foods and OPDC in partnership established a RAMP program at OPDC more than a year ago. This program has allowed OPDC to pass the intensive, less than 10 coliform, standards and other measures of cleanliness. We are working around the clock with Whole Foods to set this standard and bring the raw milk back to the shelves quickly. In the books of history this seemingly negative event, should be counted as a bench mark and new day for America and food safety. RAMP to the future. RAMP is a tool, not to be feared, but like a tractor or milking machine… a tool to be used to make our lives better, more secure and healthier.”
In another email, Mark adds enthusiastically,
“We are professional organic lemonade makers. This box of short notice lemons is already making some great juice. When ever there is a shake-up…the changes result in higher sales and more support for raw milk.”
It is the remarkable resilience of men like McAfee, that are ultimately going to win the day for raw milk.

Organic Pastures has a Costumer Service line to help Californians to find raw milk: 1-877-RAW-MILK.

Any comemts? Let me know,
Sifu

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

Soy And The Unknown Dangers - The Evidence Against Soy by Dr. Mercola

2010-05-13T04:39:00.000-07:00

Usually when most people think of getting healthy or cutting out the "bad" foods from their diet, they immediately think of taking a break from eating meat and dairy. This of course usually means the introduction of soy substitutes, soy milk, and soy meats. In fact one can find a soy substitute for just about anything.

But the question arises, is soy actually better for you, is it the healthier way?

Well there is alarming data that says No. Take a look at this article by Dr. Mercola, The Evidence Against Soy.

The Evidence Against Soy

by Dr. Mercola

Dow Chemical and DuPont, the same corporations that brought misery and death to millions around the world through Agent Orange, are now the driving forces behind the promotion of soy as a food for humans. They are financing anti-meat and anti-milk campaigns aimed largely at those concerned about animal welfare and the environment, trying to convince them that imitations such as "soymilk" are not only healthier than the real thing, but better for the earth too.

There is no evidence that consuming soy products can improve health, reduce environmental degradation or slow global warming. In fact, the evidence suggests quite the opposite.
The studies below regarding the effects of soy on health are eye-opening, particularly the review by the American Heart Association -- which no longer supports the health claims about soy endorsed by the U.S. government.

Overall risks and benefits of soy assessed
Latest review by American Heart Association
Soy inhibits iron absorption
Poor iron bioavailability
Poor calcium bioavailability
Calcium and zinc absorbed better from milk than from soy -- even without phytates
Soy provides no benefits with respect to heart disease risk
Soy causes bladder cancer
Soy isoflavones during pregnancy increase breast cancer risk in female offspring
High levels of cadmium in soy formula
Soy linked to peanut allergy and increased risk for asthma
Whole milk vs. soy beverage -- asthma risk
Persistent sexual arousal syndrome associated with increased soy intake
Genistein: Does it prevent or promote breast cancer?

If you were to carefully review the thousands of studies published on soy, I strongly believe you too would reach the conclusion that any possible benefits of consuming soy are FAR outweighed by the well documented risks.
Now, I’m not against all forms of soy. Properly fermented products like natto and tempeh have been consumed for centuries and do not wreak havoc in your body like unfermented soy products do. For example, the enzyme nattokinase—derived from natto--is a safer, more powerful option than aspirin to dissolve blood clots, and has been used safely for more than two decades.

Unfortunately, many Americans still believe that unfermented and processed soy products like soy milk, soy cheese, soy burgers and soy ice cream are good for them.

85 Percent of Consumers Believe the Lies About Soy

The rise of soy as a health food is in large part due to highly successful marketing to otherwise health conscious Americans who set the trend. According to the survey Consumer Attitudes About Nutrition 2008 (by the United Soybean Board), 85 percent of consumers now perceive soy products as healthy.
The survey also found that consumers:

rank soybean oil among the top three healthy oils, with 70 percent recognizing soy oil as a healthy oil, and
depend on soybean oil, commonly sold as vegetable oil, as one of their two most frequent cooking oils
This is a tragic case of shrewd marketing of misinformation and outright lies taking root among the masses, which will likely take some time to undo.
Ever since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved a health claim for soy foods in 1999 (which said diets low in saturated fat and cholesterol that include 25 grams of soy protein a day may reduce the risk of heart disease), soy sales have skyrocketed. In the years between 2000 and 2007, food manufacturers in the U.S. introduced over 2,700 new foods with soy as an ingredient, including 161 new products introduced in 2007 alone.
This has resulted in a booming multi-billion dollar business. From 1992 to 2007, soy food sales increased from a paltry $300 million to nearly $4 billion, according to the Soyfoods Association of North America.
However, the Weston A. Price Foundation, a nonprofit nutrition education foundation, submitted a petition to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in January of this year, asking them to retract its heart-health claim from soy in light of the inconsistent and contradictory evidence showing benefits, and its many proven health risks.

What’s So Wrong With Soy?

Unlike the Asian culture, where people eat small amounts of whole soybean products, western food processors separate the soybean into two golden commodities--protein and oil. And there is nothing natural or safe about these products.
Says Dr. Kaayla Daniel, author of The Whole Soy Story, “Today's high-tech processing methods not only fail to remove the anti-nutrients and toxins that are naturally present in soybeans but leave toxic and carcinogenic residues created by the high temperatures, high pressure, alkali and acid baths and petroleum solvents."
Dr. Daniel also points out the findings of numerous studies reviewed by her and other colleagues -- that soy does not reliably lower cholesterol, and in fact raises homocysteine levels in many people, which has been found to increase your risk of stroke, birth defects, and yes: heart disease. Other common health problems linked to a high-soy diet include:

Thyroid problems, including weight gain, lethargy, malaise, fatigue, hair loss, and loss of libido
Premature puberty and other developmental problems in babies, children and adolescents
Cancer
Brain damage
Reproductive disorders
Kidney stones
Weakened immune system
Severe, potentially fatal food allergies
Most soy, perhaps about 80 percent or more, is also genetically modified, which adds its own batch of health concerns.
Despite these findings, many people still want to believe the hype, thinking that these studies must somehow be wrong. But the content of soy itself should be a clue. For example, non-fermented soy products contain:
Phytoestrogens (isoflavones) genistein and daidzein, which mimic and sometimes block the hormone estrogen
Phytates, which block your body's uptake of minerals
Enzyme Inhibitors, which hinder protein digestion
Hemaggluttin, which causes red blood cells to clump together and inhibits oxygen take-up and growth
High amounts of omega-6 fat, which is pro-inflammatory
You’re Consuming Soy Whether You’re Buying “Soy Products” or Not

Even if you know better than to gulp down large amounts of soy milk, slabs of tofu, and other soy snacks, you are still consuming soy if you’re eating processed food, in the form of soybean oil and lecithin. So depending on your dietary habits, your (unfermented) soy consumption could really add up.
In fact, Dr. Joseph Hibbeln at the National Institutes of Health told CNN.com he estimates that soybeans, usually in the form of oil, account for 10 percent of the average person’s total calories in the United States! When you consider that 90 percent of the money Americans spend on food goes toward processed food, this amount of “accidental” soy intake is not surprising. As a side note, I’d like to make a quick statement here to address some of my readers’ concerns about my reduced CoQ 10 supplement, ubiquinol, which also contain soy bean oil.
Unfortunately, the reduced CoQ 10 (ubiquinol) – which is the optimal form of CoQ 10 that your body needs, especially if you’re over 25 – is only produced by a multi-billion dollar Japanese pharmaceutical company that holds ALL the world patents on it. Hence, there’s no way to replace the soy, even though that would have been my preference.
However, as in all things, moderation is key. If I thought there were ANY significant health risks from consuming this small amount of soy oil, then I would not personally take two a day – which I do. I do however avoid all processed forms of soy products, and severely limit my intake of other unfermented soy, which is easy to do by simply avoiding processed and “fast” foods.

Which Soy Foods Should be Avoided … and How do You Avoid Them?

Because soy is so pervasive in the U.S. food supply, avoiding it is not an easy task.

The best way to completely avoid soy in the food supply is to buy whole foods and prepare them yourself. This may also be your only option if you’ve developed a soy allergy and need to eliminate soy from your diet entirely.
If you still prefer to buy readymade and packaged products, for whatever reason, Dr. Daniel offers a free Special Report, "Where the Soys Are," on her Web site. It lists the many "aliases" that soy might be hiding under in ingredient lists -- words like "boullion," "natural flavor" and "textured plant protein."

Which Soy Foods DO Have Health Benefits?

The few types of soy that ARE healthy are all fermented varieties. After a long fermentation process, the phytic acid and antinutrient levels of the soybeans are reduced, and their beneficial properties -- such as the creation of natural probiotics -- become available to your digestive system.
The fermentation process also greatly reduces the levels of dangerous isoflavones, which are similar to estrogen in their chemical structure, and can interfere with the action of your own estrogen production.

So if you want to eat soy that is actually good for you, following are all healthy options:

Natto, fermented soybeans with a sticky texture and strong, cheese-like flavor. It's loaded with nattokinase, a very powerful blood thinner. Natto is actually a food I eat regularly, as it is the highest source of vitamin K2 on the planet and has a very powerful beneficial bacteria, bacillus subtilis. It can usually be found in any Asian grocery store.
Tempeh, a fermented soybean cake with a firm texture and nutty, mushroom-like flavor.
Miso, a fermented soybean paste with a salty, buttery texture (commonly used in miso soup).
Soy sauce: traditionally, soy sauce is made by fermenting soybeans, salt and enzymes, however be wary because many varieties on the market are made artificially using a chemical process.

Other Unreasonable Happiness Posts You Would Be Interested In

Get Better Now!... Living Mastery
Show Archives:

Did you find this information useful?

Unreasonable Happiness Presented by Marcus Lovemore

My New Show On Youtube

How The FDA Is Taking Your Supplements Off the Market

The Truth Behind the Vaccine Coverup, Part 4 (of 5)

The Truth Behind the Vaccine Coverup, Part 3 (of 5)

The Truth Behind the Vaccine Coverup, Part 2 (of 5)

The Truth Behind the Vaccine Coverup, Part 1 (of 5)

Recommended Reading

The Island Secret for Weight loss and Flawless Skin - Coconut Fat!

Excerpted from Dr. Mercola's: "This is Cooking Oil a Powerful Virus-Destroyer and Antibiotic..."

The Truth about Coconut Oil

Coconut Oil's Secret Ingredient

The Benefits of Medium-Chain Fatty Acids

Coconut Oil Helps Fight Diabetes

Coconut Oil, the Friend to Athletes and Dieters

Coconut Oil on Your Skin

Coconut Oil and Your Heart

Coconut Oil in Your Kitchen

Coconut Oil Safety

Excerpts from - How I Cured Stage 4 Cancer in Two Weeks For Less Than The Cost Of A Night At The Movies By Kelley Eidem

Warning: This Common Food Causes Devastating Offspring Defects in New Research Study by Dr. Mercola

Russian Scientists Find Third Generation of Hamsters Sterilized by GM Soy

Nearly All of the Third-Generation GMO Babies Were Sterile!

Rampant Conflicts of Interest Put You and Your Family at Great Risk

More Evidence of Reproductive Problems from Eating GM Foods

It’s Time to Save Yourself and Your Famiy Because White Knights Don’t Exist in Government

How to Sniff Out GMOs and Vote with Your Pocketbook

Tipping Point… If Europe Did it, the US Can Too!

More Educational Material

The People Whisperer - My Video Audition for Getting My Show for Oprah!

It's Not The Fat That Can Kill You, It's the Chlorine In Your Water!

The Poison in Your Drinking Water!

No More Raw Milk at Whole Foods Market!

Regulatory Climate May Put the Squeeze on the Market

Organic Pastures Responds with Optimism and Flexiblity, Offers Customer Hotline

Experts Agree, Food Safety is in Everyone’s Best Interest

“We are professional organic lemonade makers. This box of short notice lemons is already making some great juice. When ever there is a shake-up…the changes result in higher sales and more support for raw milk.”

Soy And The Unknown Dangers - The Evidence Against Soy by Dr. Mercola