Thursday, February 28, 2013

The current trend towards fathering children at a later age raises concerns regarding the risk of offspring developing complex multigene diseases.


2013 Feb 26. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2013.18. [Epub ahead of print]

Ageing of the male germ line.

Source

Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, McGill University, 3655 Promenade Sir-William Osler, Montréal, QC H3G 1Y6, Canada.

Abstract

Several studies have demonstrated a decline in the male reproductive system, sperm quality, and fertility with advancing paternal age, yet many of the biological mechanisms that underlie this process remain poorly understood. It is unclear whether the problem arises from the progenitor spermatogonial stem cells (for example, from an accumulation of DNA damage and mutations), from the somatic niche present in the testis (consisting of Sertoli and peritubular myoid cells), or from a combination of the two. Current data, albeit from a small number of studies, suggest that both factors have a role in age-associated germ cell loss. What is clear, on the other hand, is that mounting evidence links paternal age to chromosomal damage and genetic problems in the children of older fathers. The frequency of de novo mutations increases markedly with age, leading to increased risk of breast cancer, cardiac defects, developmental disorders, behavioural disorders, and neurological disease in the children of older men. The current trend towards fathering children at a later age raises concerns regarding the risk of offspring developing complex multigene diseases.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Can this nutrient stop heart failure?

February 27, 2013
Can this nutrient stop heart failure?
As you may know, the media loves to tout poorly done studies that say vitamins don't work. You rarely see them reporting on the studies that say they do work. That's a big reason I write this newsletter. These nutrients can save your life. But the media won't tell you about them. And one of the most important nutrients for your heart is one the media doesn't say much about. That's because CoQ10 works. The drug companies know it, the media know it, and a new study proves it again.

New Video Reveals

The Case Against Detoxing

Why detoxing can actually make your body more toxic... Plus what to do instead to rid your body of pesticides, heavy metals, and other dangerous chemicals

Watch The Video Now

This study was a meta-analysis of the world literature on CoQ10 and heart failure. This is an important study because it looked at a number of previous studies on CoQ10. The results of this study showed that CoQ10 provides significant improvement in the all-important ejection fraction of the left ventricle. And it did so in just 12 weeks. The ejection fraction is an indicator of how strong your heart is pumping blood. In heart failure, this indicator is very low. A "significant improvement" could be the difference between life and death. This analysis showed the supplement improving functional class by 3.67%. When it comes to heart function, any improvement is most welcome.
While your cardiologist totally ignores nutritional supplements, the world is passing him by.
This analysis was based on 100 mg of ubiquinone, the first form of CoQ10. I now prefer Ubiquinol. Your body absorbs it better and you'll likely get the same punch at half the dose.
For heart failure, I like to use a host of nutrients that can help your heart gain strength. These include ribose (Corvalen – 1 tsp, three times daily), the amino acid taurine (1,000 mg daily), resveratrol (one tablet, three times daily), PhosChol (three daily), and Arjuna Heart (two, twice daily from Ayush herbs). You'll find these at www.advancedbionutritionals.com or online.
Yours for better health and medical freedom,
Robert J. Rowen, MD
Ref:
Am J Clin Nutr, January 2013.

RSO video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZXGH6mYr3YRSO

Cancer & Sugar - Strategy for Selective Starvation of Cancer


Cancer and Sugar - Strategy for Selective Starvation of Cancer
According to researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, sugar poses a health risk—contributing to around 35 million deaths globally each year. So high is sugar's toxicity that it should now be considered a potentially toxic substance like alcohol and tobacco. Its link with the onset of diabetes is such that punitive regulations, such as a tax on all foods and drinks that contain "added'' sugar, are now warranted, the researchers concluded. They also recommend banning sales in or near schools, as well as placing age limits on the sale of such products.
Sugar's harmful effects do not stop at diabetes, metabolic syndrome, hyper- and hypoglycemia, GERD and heart disease. Sugar and cancer are locked in a death grip, yet oncologists often fail to do what's necessary to stop their patients from feeding their cancers with sweets.
Whereas many within the mainstream medical community insist on promoting the belief that the link between certain types of food with an increased risk of cancer is "weak" or only "nominally significant." They believe that research "linking foodstuffs to cancer reveals no valid medical patterns." We also find such superficial attitudes promoted in the medical press—all of which lack any kind of medical depth.
An increasing number of medical scientists and many alternative practitioners know that the most logical, effective, safe, necessary and inexpensive way to treat cancer is to cut off the supply of food to tumors and cancer cells, starving them with a lack of glucose. The therapeutic strategy for selective starvation of tumors by dietary modification (ketogenic diet) is one of the principle forms of therapy that is necessary for cancer patients to win their war on cancer.
Researchers at Huntsman Cancer Institute in Utah were one of the first to discover that sugar "feeds" tumors. The research published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences said, "It's been known since 1923 that tumor cells use a lot more glucose than normal cells. Our research helps show how this process takes place, and how it might be stopped to control tumor growth," says Don Ayer, Ph.D., a professor in the Department of Oncological Sciences at the University of Utah.
Dr. Thomas Graeber, a professor of molecular and medical pharmacology, has investigated how the metabolism of glucose affects the biochemical signals present in cancer cells. In research published June 26, 2012 in the journal Molecular Systems Biology, Graeber and his colleagues demonstrate that glucose starvation—that is, depriving cancer cells of glucose—activates a metabolic and signaling amplification loop that leads to cancer cell death as a result of the toxic accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS).[1]
Refined sugars are strongly linked to cancer, not only as a cause of it but also as something that feeds the cancer cells once a person has the disease—Nothing could be more important to consider in the attempt to improve the outcome of cancer treatments. The kinds of sugar so prevalent in today's standard American diet lead to cancer directly by causing inflammation throughout the body but in some places more than others depending on the individual and their constitution. Listen to this video and hear how simple this all really is. Once cancer cells are established in the body, they depend on steady glucose availability in the blood for their energy; they are not able to metabolize significant amounts of fatty acids or ketone bodies,[2]. so they need sugar.

Suppress/ Delay/ Slow/ Kill Cancer

Carbohydrates of one of the three macronutrients—the other two being fats and protein. There are simple carbohydrates and complex carbohydrates. Simple carbohydrates include sugars found naturally in foods such a fruits and fruit juices, sodas, some vegetables, white bread, white rice, pasta, milk and milk products, most snack foods, sweets, etc. But let us not forget the simple sugars added to foods during processing and refining that we may have no awareness of. It's the simple sugars that get most of the credit for causing the insulin response and glycation-associated inflammation that can lead to cancer.
Thus by reducing the amount of simple carbohydrates in the diet, the emergence of cancer can be suppressed or delayed, or the proliferation of already existing tumor cells can be slowed down, stopped and reversed by depriving the cancer cells of the food they need for survival.
Drs. Rainer Klement and Ulrike Kammerer conducted a comprehensive review of the literature involving dietary carbohydrates and their direct and indirect effect on cancer cells, which was published in October 2011 in the journal Nutrition and Metabolism, concluding that cancers are so sensitive to the sugar supply that cutting that supply will suppress cancer.[3] "Increased glucose flux and metabolism promotes several hallmarks of cancer such as excessive proliferation, anti-apoptotic signaling, cell cycle progression and angiogenesis."
Also, eating white sugar (or white anything) causes magnesium mineral deficiencies because the magnesium has been removed in the processing, making sugar a ripe target as a major cause of cancer because deficiencies in magnesium are not only pro-inflammatory but also pro-cancer.

More Ways to Cause Cancer with Sugar

High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) causes cancer in a unique way because much of it is contaminated with mercury due to the complex way it is made. High fructose corn syrup causes selenium deficiencies because the mercury in it binds with selenium, driving selenium levels downward. Selenium is crucial for glutathione production and its deficiency in soils tracks mathematically with cancer rates. Selenium and mercury are also eternal lovers having a strong affinity to bond with each other.
Already touched on briefly, excess sugar spikes insulin levels and insulin's eventual depletion. High insulin and insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) are needed for the control of blood sugar levels that result from chronic ingestion of high-carbohydrate meals (like the typical American diet, that is full of grains and sugars). Increased insulin levels are pro-inflammatory and pro-cancer and can directly promote tumor cell proliferation via the insulin/ IGF-1 signaling pathway.
Dr. Christine Horner has a lot to say to women about insulin and breast cancer:
When it comes to breast cancer, insulin is no friend. One of the biggest reasons is due to the fact that both normal breast cells and cancer cells have insulin receptors on them. When insulin attaches to its receptor, it has the same effect as when estrogen attaches to its receptor: it causes cells to start dividing. The higher your insulin levels are, the faster your breast cells will divide; the faster they divide, the higher your risk of breast cancer is and the faster any existing cancer cells will grow.
There's also another detriment that high insulin levels can inflict. It makes more estrogen available to attach to the estrogen receptors in breast tissue. Insulin regulates how much of the estrogen in your blood is available to attach to estrogen receptors in your breast tissue. When estrogen travels in the blood, it either travels alone seeking an estrogen receptor, or it travels with a partner, a protein binder, that prevents it from attaching to an estrogen receptor. Insulin regulates the number of protein binders in the blood. So, the higher your insulin levels are, the fewer the number of protein binders there will be and therefore the more free estrogen that will be available to attach to estrogen receptors.
In other words, when your insulin levels are up, free-estrogen levels are up, and both of them speed up cell division. That's why high insulin levels increase your risk of breast cancer so much. Eating sugar increases your risk of breast cancer in another way. It delivers a major blow to your immune system with the force of a prizefighter.
Dr. Horner talks about a study conducted by Harvard Medical School (2004) that found that women who, as teenagers, ate high-glycemic foods that increased their blood glucose levels had a higher incidence of breast cancer later in life. "So, encouraging your teenage daughter to cut back on sugar will help her to lower her risk of breast cancer for the rest of her life," she said.

Sugar, Inflammation, Angiogenesis & Cancer

Sugars and the inflammation and acidic environments they create are important constituents of the local environment of tumors. In most types of cancer inflammatory conditions are present before malignancy changes occur. "Smoldering inflammation in tumor microenvironments has many tumor-promoting effects. Inflammation aids in the proliferation and survival of malignant cells, promotes angiogenesis and metastasis, subverts adaptive immune responses, and alters responses to hormones and chemotherapeutic agents."[4]
The entire subject of inflammation, angiogenesis, sugar and cancer is crucial to understanding the links between cancer and the foods we eat. When we begin to zero in on inflammation and the acid conditions caused by excessive consumption of simple sugars, including fructose and high-fructose corn syrup, we begin to see more clearly how food and cancer are intimately connected.
In July 2012 a leading U.S. cancer lobby group urged the surgeon general to conduct a sweeping study of the impact of sugar-sweetened beverages on consumer health, saying such drinks play a major role in the nation's obesity crisis and require a U.S. action plan. In a letter to U.S. Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, the American Cancer Society's advocacy affiliate called for a comprehensive review along the lines of the U.S. top doctor's landmark report on the dangers of smoking in 1964.
The ruckus is about the growing connection between high sugar intake, mineral depletion, dehydration, diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Sugar causes cancer because the tendency of high-carbohydrate consumers tends toward dehydration, which is pro-inflammatory and thus pro-cancer.[5]
Pancreatic cancer cells use the sugar fructose to help tumors grow more quickly.[6] Tumor cells fed both glucose and fructose used the two sugars in two different ways, a team at the University of California Los Angeles found. Their findings, published in the journal Cancer Research, helps explain other studies that have linked fructose intake with pancreatic cancer, one of the deadliest cancer types. Researchers concluded that anyone wishing to curb their cancer risk should start by reducing the amount of sugar they eat.
This is the first time a link has been shown between fructose and cancer proliferation. "In this study we show that cancers can use fructose just as readily as glucose to fuel their growth," said Dr. Anthony Heaney of UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center, the study's lead author. "The modern diet contains a lot of refined sugar including fructose and it's a hidden danger implicated in a lot of modern diseases, such as obesity, diabetes and fatty liver." While this study was done on pancreatic cancer, these findings may not be unique to that cancer type, Heaney said. "These findings show that cancer cells can readily metabolize fructose to increase proliferation."
It has been known for decades that cancer cells thrive on glucose. Moreover, foods that cause a sharp rise in blood glucose (i.e. foods with a high-glycemic index ranking) trigger the secretion of insulin and insulin growth factor (IGF-1), two hormones that also promote cancer growth.
Researchers using rats have found that a low-carbohydrate high-protein diet reduces blood glucose, insulin, and glycolysis, slows tumor growth, reduces tumor incidence, and works additively with existing therapies without weight loss or kidney failure.[7] Such a diet, therefore, has the potential of being both a novel cancer prophylactic and treatment.
Otto Warburg
Dr. Otto Warburg's 1924 paper, "On metabolism of tumors," stated, "Summarized in a few words, the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar." If you've ever made wine, you'll know that fermentation requires sugar. The metabolism of cancer is approximately eight times greater than the metabolism of normal cells. Doctors have known for a long time that cancer metabolizes much differently than normal cells. Normal cells need oxygen. Cancer cells disregard oxygen when adequate glucose is present.
Warburg's hypothesis was of course that cancer growth was caused when cancer cells converted glucose into energy without using oxygen. Healthy cells make energy by converting pyruvate and oxygen. The pyruvate is oxidized within a healthy cell's mitochondria, and Warburg theorized that since cancer cells don't oxidize pyruvate, cancer must be considered a mitochondrial dysfunction.
Most, if not all, tumor cells have a high demand on glucose compared to benign cells of the same tissue and conduct glycolysis even in the presence of oxygen (the Warburg effect). In addition, many cancer cells express insulin receptors (IRs) and show hyperactivation of the IGF1R-IR (IGF-1 receptor/ insulin receptor) pathway. Evidence exists that chronically elevated blood glucose, insulin and IGF-1 levels facilitate tumor genesis and worsen the outcome in cancer patients.
Treating diabetic patients, A. Braunstein observed in 1921 that in those who developed cancer, glucose secretion in the urine disappeared. One year later, R. Bierich described the remarkable accumulation of lactate in the micromilieu of tumor tissues and demonstrated lactate to be essential for invasion of melanoma cells into the surrounding tissue. One year after that Warburg began his experiments that eventually ended for him with a Nobel Prize.
Sugar turns the body into a suitable breeding ground for viruses, bacteria, fungi and cancer by devastating the immune system.
Sugar Feeds Cancer
Knowing that one's cancer needs sugar, does it make sense to feed it sugar? Does it make sense to have a high-carbohydrate diet?
Of the four million cancer patients being treated in America today, hardly any are offered any scientifically guided nutrition therapy beyond being told to "just eat good foods." Oncologists have no shame about this, insisting that diet has little to do with cancer.
Cancer patients should not be feeding their cancers like they would feed cotton candy to their grandchildren. As long as this cancer cell can get a regular supply of sugar—or glucose—it lives and thrives longer than it should. Now imagine oncologists getting enlightened and they start to advise their patients to starve the cancer instead of bombing it to smithereens with chemotherapy and radiation treatments all the while feeding the cancer with sugar!

Resources

  • [1] Nicholas A Graham, Martik Tahmasian, Bitika Kohli, Evangelia Komisopoulou, Maggie Zhu, Igor Vivanco, Michael A Teitell, Hong Wu, Antoni Ribas, Roger S Lo, Ingo K Mellinghoff, Paul S Mischel, Thomas G Graeber. Glucose deprivation activates a metabolic and signaling amplification loop leading to cell death. Molecular Systems Biology, 2012; 8 DOI: 10.1038/msb.2012.20
  • [2] Ketone bodies, also called acetone bodies or simply ketones, are any of three compounds produced when the liver metabolizes fatty acids. The three types of ketone bodies—acetoacetic acid, beta-hydroxybutyric acid, and acetone —are released into the bloodstream after metabolism occurs. Acetoacetic acid and beta-hydroxybutyric acid are used for fuel by the brain and muscles, but the body can't break down acetone and therefore excretes it in the urine. Excess acetone or ketone bodies in the blood and urine can be a sign of a serious metabolic disease, and doctors often use the measurement of ketone bodies as a tool in the diagnosis of such diseases.
  • In healthy individuals, the body uses mostly carbohydrate metabolism to fuel its cells. If sufficient carbohydrates are not available, such as during starvation, the body begins metabolizing fats into ketone bodies to provide the necessary fuel. High levels of ketones in the urine, a condition called ketonuria, indicates that the body is using mostly fat for its energy.
  • A condition that will produce dangerously high levels of ketone bodies is Type I diabetes. Individuals with diabetes mellitus are unable to efficiently metabolize glucose, due to insufficient insulin production or insulin resistance. Their bodies will begin metabolizing fats and proteins to make up for the lack of available glucose for energy. Without treatment, extremely high levels of ketones in the blood and urine can lower the blood's pH and cause a condition called ketoacidosis. It occurs most often in people with uncontrolled diabetes mellitus and is exacerbated when high blood glucose levels, caused by lack of available insulin, further acidify the blood. Ketoacidosis can lead to ketoacidic coma or death.
  • [3] Is there a role for carbohydrate restriction in the treatment and prevention of cancer? Rainer J Klement and Ulrike Kämmerer; Nutr Metab (Lond). 2011; 8: 75; Published online 2011 October 26. doi: 10.1186/1743-7075-8-75 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3267662/?tool=pubmed
  • [4] Cancer-related inflammation; Mantovani A, Allavena P, Sica A, Balkwill F.; Nature. 2008 Jul 24;454(7203):436-44; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18650914
  • [5] http://www.watercure.com/dehydrationandcancerlecturedvd.aspx
  • [6] http://www.cancer.ucla.edu/index.aspx?recordid=385&page=644
  • [7] A Low Carbohydrate, High Protein Diet Slows Tumor Growth and Prevents Cancer Initiation; Victor W. Ho et al; Cancer Res July 1, 2011 71; 4484;
  • http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/71/13/4484.full

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Explosive report: 98% of newborn babies are genetically screened


Explosive report: 98% of newborn babies are genetically screened

by Jon Rappoport
February 27, 2013
www.nomorefakenews.com

"Newborn Screening in America," a report from the Council for Responsible Genetics, states: "Before they are even a week old, ninety-eight percent of the 4.3 million babies born annually in the United States have a small sample of blood taken from their heels."

The report continues: "These newborn bloodspots (NBS) are then screened for a variety of inherited conditions and may later be stored in state-operated databases...parents are often unaware of these screening programs and their consent options."

This shocking national program, flying under the radar, is of course explained as a humane medical undertaking. But there is no across-the-board genetic treatment for any disease or illness. All the "maybe-possibly-in-the-future-cure" nonsense does nothing to justify this rank incursion on newborns and their unsuspecting families.

The report goes on: "With respect to [bloodspot] sample storage and use, there is also little transparency regarding storage procedures or the use of the samples after they have been screened...many states do not have clearly articulated policies about consent for the storage and use of samples or may not effectively communicate these policies to parents."

Then there is the question of who now has, or will have in the future, access to all these millions of blood samples and the results of the genetic screening.

Reliable and trustworthy assurances of citizen-privacy from the government have gone the way of the dinosaur and other extinct species.

Let's see...DNA samples of nearly every newborn baby in America: surveillance and tracking, anyone? We have here the makings of a universal DNA database for "crime prevention."

Controversial legislation introduced to obtain a DNA sample from every adult? It's already being done covertly in hospitals, at birth.

What about technocrats obsessed with re-engineering humans? What about other researchers who want to run comparative DNA studies in thousands of different ways, for any purpose under the sun---who for example are intensely interested in making (or inventing) genetic distinctions between various socioeconomic sectors of society? This newborn database is irresistible.

You can be sure social, medical, and genetic engineers are looking at all this raw data like wild animals look at prey on the plains.

The idea of correlating genetic factors with "failure in life" is the Holy Grail for eugenicists. They will find a way to gain access to the data, because they want to build "a better world" and eliminate the "inferior" people.

Right now, we have rapid abortionists who earnestly believe and advocate the destruction of life after birth as a viable option. They even call it abortion. So a doctor could tell a parent, "The genetic profile of your baby is very problematic. You should consider terminating life..."

Again, all this illegal and immoral collection of genetic data from babies is justified as a "humane medical endeavor." So ask your doctor, "Where is the ironclad proof that you have any genetic treatment for any disease that works across the board?" Don't accept blue-sky predictions and promises.

Get real.

Because the State is getting real. They want control. And taking blood samples from babies is a giant step on the road to a genetic dictatorship.

Jon Rappoport
The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at 

Cancer & Fungus


Cancer & Fungus

arm-hammer.jpg
Cancer is a fungus, can be caused by a fungus, or is accompanied by late-stage fungal infections, and now the Mayo Clinic confirms this. They are not the first to say so though. Many, even from the official world of orthodox oncology, recognize the similarities of cancer and fungal infections, the decay that ties these two together in a dance that all too often ends in miserable death.
The Mayo Clinic[1] is saying that a fungal infection of the gastrointestinal tract mimics cancer and inflammatory bowel disease. The invasive fungus, Basidiobolus ranarum, is typically found in the soil, decaying organic matter and the gastrointestinal tracts of fish, reptiles, amphibians, and bats.
Patients with this fungal infection had non-specific symptoms such as abdominal pain or a mass that could be felt on examination. Before a conclusive diagnosis of the fungal infection was made, most patients were thought to have abdominal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease or diverticulitis. Surgical resection of the area of involvement and prolonged antifungal therapy successfully treated most patients.
Interestingly, a few years ago researchers at Johns Hopkins were surprised that the drug itraconazole, commonly used to treat toenail fungus, can also block angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels commonly seen in cancers. Tumor angiogenesis is the proliferation of a network of blood vessels that penetrates into cancerous growths, supplying nutrients and oxygen and removing waste products.[2] Cancer researchers studying the conditions necessary for cancer metastasis have discovered that angiogenesis is one of the critical events required for metasteses to occur.[3] In mice induced to have excess blood vessel growth, treatment with itraconazole reduced blood vessel growth by 67% compared to placebo. “We were surprised, to say the least, that itraconazole popped up as a potential blocker of angiogenesis,” says Dr. Jun O. Liu, professor of pharmacology. “We couldn’t have predicted that an antifungal drug would have such a role.” Itraconazole was found to reduce the numbers of circulating cancer cells, prevent the worsening of prostate cancers, and delay the need for chemotherapy. However, it has serious side effects when given in the necessary high dosages that include hypertension, low potassium levels and fluid retention. These side effects require treatment with other medications. Effects of high doses of itraconazole could lead to heart failure.[4]
For two decades John Hopkins has recognized the increasing frequency of severe fungal infections in patients with neoplastic diseases. Most fungal infections are caused by the commonly recognized opportunistic fungi Candida spp and Aspergillus spp, and the pathogenic fungi Cryptococcus neoformans, Histoplasma capsulatum, Coccidiodes immitis, and less often by Blastomyces dermatidis. However, recently newer pathogens such as Pheohyphomycetes, Hyalohyphomycetes, Zygomycetes and other fungi of emerging importance such as Torulopsis glabrata, Trichosporon beigelii, Malassezia spp, Saccharomyces spp, Hansenula spp, Rhodotorula spp, and Geotrichum candidum have appeared as significant causes of infection in this patient population.
Dr. Tullio Simoncini does not say that cancer is caused by yeast; what he is telling the world is that the cancer is a yeast overgrowth. What causes the cancer (or a yeast-filled tumor) is another thing. Simoncini has always insisted that tumors are white because they are fungi. Some have made fun of him, but looking around at the extremely sparse information about the subject, I ran into one person saying:
If someone had asked me a year ago what color the inside of a tumor was, I would have guessed red and gray. When they did the biopsy, I asked to see the tissue specimens: five quarter-inch to half-inch strings of vermicelli (Italian for little worms) with little streakings of blood. They didn’t look evil to me, just strings of fat. The entire mass was white inside as the pathology report stated.
Specialists in throat and mouth cancer say that cancers can be red or white patches: any patch that appears randomly and is red or white in color could be a mouth cancer symptom. The white patches in the mouth are called leukoplakia and the red patches are called erythroplakia, which are pre-cancerous conditions. Though these red or white patches are not always cancerous, it could be the result of a fungal infection caused by Candida called thrush.[5] Thrush will lead to a red patch that often bleeds after the white patch disappears. A small amount of this fungus lives in your mouth most of the time. It is usually kept in check by your immune system and other types of germs that also normally live in your mouth. However, when your immune system is weak, the fungus can grow.

Fungal Mycotoxins

It just so happens that a toxin produced by mold on nuts and grains can cause liver cancer, according to University of California Irvine Researchers. And a French case-control study of 1,010 breast cancer cases and 1,950 controls with nonmalignant diseases found that breast cancer was associated with increased frequency of mold-fermented cheese consumption.[6] Fungi produce mycotoxins, which can kill us or cause cancer.
Dr. Wang and Groopman from the Environmental Health Sciences Department at Johns Hopkins published on the effects of mold toxins on DNA in Mutation Research, a leading cancer journal.[7] They said mycotoxins with carcinogenic potency include aflatoxins, sterigmatocystin, ochratoxin, fumonisins, zearalenone, and some Penicillium toxins. Most of these carcinogenic mycotoxins are genotoxic agents. Aflatoxin is a potent genotoxic agent, is mutagenic in many model systems and produces chromosomal aberrations, micronuclei, sister chromatid exchange, unscheduled DNA synthesis, and chromosomal strand breaks. Most strikingly, the relationship between aflatoxin exposure and development of human hepatocellular carcinoma (liver cancer) is demonstrated by studies.
Harrison et al. (1993) examined human breast cancer tissue for evidence of the presence of aflatoxin. The researchers examined human DNA from a variety of tissues and organs to identify and quantify aflatoxin DNA-adducts. Such adducts are considered to be proof of the mycotoxin’s presence in a particular tissue. Aflatoxins may in fact be a risk factor for cancer induction in a variety of organs in man, in the same manner as that of cigarette smoking. [8]
DNA from normal and tumorous tissue obtained from patients with cancer of the breast was examined. Tumor tissues had higher aflatoxin-adduct levels than did normal tissue from the same individual. The result of this study verifies the presence of carcinogenic aflatoxin within the cancer tissue and thus implicates aflatoxin as a cause of breast cancer. That is the same as saying cancer is a fungus or is caused by a fungus and this is what Dr. Simoncini has been saying all along.
Intensive Care Units are particularly on alert with immunocompromised and oncology patients for fungal infections. “Patients with brain tumors used to have a life expectancy of 3-12 months, but better treatment has allowed them to live a bit longer,” said Brenda Shelton, clinical nurse specialist at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. “The last two brain tumor ICU patients we treated died of infection, not of their disease. One patient had a rare fungus, and the other had candidemia. Years ago, you would not see most of these fungal infections in patients with brain tumors because they would not live long enough.”
“The biggest misconception is the belief that fungal infections are rare,” Shelton said. “Another misconception is fungal infections are like every other severe infection. They are harder to manage, harder to eradicate and more frequent than people realize.” One of the most common complications involved in treating patients with hematologic cancer is fungal infections.
Aspergillus niger fungal infection in human lungs produces large amounts of oxalic acid, which is extremely toxic to the blood vessels and which may cause fatal pulmonary hemorrhages. Consequently, oxalic acid (calcium oxalate crystals) in the sputum or lung specimens of patients is also an indication of an Aspergillus infection of the lung. These calcium oxalate crystals are the same as the calcium oxalate found in breast cancers. The presence of oxalates in the breast is indicative of the presence of fungi interwoven within the stages of breast cancer development. Since humans do not make oxalic acid themselves, this is an appropriate conclusion.[9]
Dr. Robert Young states, “Bacteria, yeast/fungi, and mold are not the cause of a cancerous condition but are the result and the evidence of cells and tissues biologically transforming from a healthy state and to an unhealthy state.” Dr. Young astutely observed that, “over-acidification of the body leads to the development of chronic yeast and fungal infections and ultimately a cancerous condition of the cells and tissues.”
If one has cancer, chances are pretty good that one also has a fungal infection to one degree or another.
According to The Home Medical Encyclopedia, in 1963 about one-half of all Americans suffered from an “unrecognized” systemic fungal condition. Far more Americans suffer from fungal infections today as antibiotics, hormone replacement therapies, and birth control pills continue to be consumed like candy. Thus more and more children are becoming infected with candidal meningitis or viral meningitis, which means their systems are suffering under the weight of fungi who put out an assortment of poisons—or mycotoxins.

Sodium Bicarbonate is an Antifungal Agent

The current controversy over sodium bicarbonate and its use in oncology might be relatively new but baking soda has a long history of helping people get through the worst medical conditions. The Eloquent Peasant, an Egyptian literary work dated around 2000 B.C., refers to a peddler selling natron, a natural blend of sodium bicarbonate, chloride and sodium carbonate used in mummification, just one of hundreds of uses this compound has been put to. Baking soda’s first widespread use was probably as a leavening agent for bread and other baked goods. It has been used commercially since 1775, although the now-famous Arm & Hammer brand wasn’t introduced until 1867.[10]
Sodium bicarbonate (Na2HCO3) is recognized by most as ordinary baking soda, which is found in deposits around the globe. Its backbone characteristic is to maintain balance of carbon dioxide, bicarbonate and pH. Sodium bicarbonate is available and sold in every supermarket and pharmacy in the world and is widely used in emergency rooms and intensive care wards in injectable forms but is sold as a common household substance that is used for hundreds of different things.
Read my book, Sodium Bicarbonate, and see that something as inexpensive as baking soda will outperform the most expensive pharmaceuticals. Across a wide range of disorders, including cancer and diabetes, we find conclusive evidence and plenty of theoretical backing to suggest that sodium bicarbonate is a frontline universal medicine that should be employed by all practitioners of the healing and medical arts for a broad range of disorders that are afflicting contemporary man.

[1] H. R. Vikram, J. D. Smilack, J. A. Leighton, M. D. Crowell, G. De Petris. Emergence of Gastrointestinal Basidiobolomycosis in the United States, With a Review of Worldwide Cases. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2012; DOI: 10.1093/cid/cis250
[4] Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions (2011, June 2). Antifungal drug delays need for chemo in advanced prostate cancer, study suggests. ScienceDaily. Retrieved April 9, 2012, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2011/06/110602122353.htm
[6] Le et al. (1986)
[7] Mutat Res. 1999 Mar 8;424(1-2):167-81.
[8] Does Aflatoxin Exposure in the United Kingdom Constitute a Cancer Risk? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1567057/pdf/envhper00412-0095.pdf
[10] Baking soda, used since B.C., is better than effervescent; sodium bicarbonate – good old NaHCO3 – is moving out of the refrigerator and into an amazing array of commercial products from shampoo to industrial cleansers. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_n17_v11/ai_16862358/

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

American Foods Chockfull of Ingredients Banned in Other Countries


Hide this
Previous ArticleNext Article

Story at-a-glance

  • More than 3,000 food additives -- preservatives, flavorings, colors and other ingredients -- are added to foods in the United States. Many of these additives are banned in other countries
  • Ingredients banned in other countries yet allowed in the US include various food dyes, the fat substitute Olestra, brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate (aka brominanted flour), Azodicarbonamide, BHA, BHT, rBGH, rBST, and arsenic
  • Russia has announced a ban on virtually all U.S. meat and meat product imports, effective February 11, due to the feed additive ractopamine in the meats
  • In the US, ditching processed foods is your best bet to avoid potentially harmful food additives. If you live in Europe you may have more options, as you may be able to find processed foods that do not contain any synthetic additives at all

American Foods Chockfull of Ingredients Banned in Other Countries

8,416views| + Add to Favorites
By Dr. Mercola
More than 3,000 food additives -- preservatives, flavorings, colors and other ingredients -- are added to foods in the United States.
While each of these substances are legal to use in the US, whether or not they are safe for long-term consumption -- by themselves or in combination -- is a different story altogether. Many have been deemed too harmful to use in other countries.
When you consider that about 90 percent of the money Americans spend on food goes toward processed foods loaded with these additives, it’s no wonder most people are carrying a hefty toxic load that can wreak havoc on their health.
A list of ingredients that are banned across the globe but still allowed for use in America recently made the news. The list is featured in the new book, Rich Food, Poor Food, authored by nutritionist Mira Calton and her husband Jayson.
The banned ingredients include various food dyes, the fat substitute Olestra, brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate (aka brominanted flour), Azodicarbonamide, BHA, BHT, rBGH, rBST, and arsenic.
Seeing that the overall health of Americans is so much lower than other industrialized countries, you can’t help but wonder whether toxic ingredients such as these might play a role in our unhealthy conditions.
Meanwhile, Russia has announced that it plans to extend a ban on U.S. beef, pork and turkey imports coming into effect this month, due to the feed additive ractopamine in the meats. Ractopamine is a growth stimulant banned in several countries, including Russia.

Processed Foods Depend on Additives

When foods are processed, not only are valuable nutrients lost and fibers removed, but the textures and natural variation and flavors are also lost. After processing, what's left behind is a bland, uninteresting "pseudo-food" that most people wouldn’t want to eat.
So at this point, food manufacturers must add back in the nutrients, flavor, color and texture to processed foods in order to make them palatable, and this is why they become loaded with food additives.
Most commonly, additives are included to slow spoilage, prevent fats and oils from going rancid, prevent fruits from turning brown, fortify or enrich the food with synthetic vitamins and minerals to replace the natural ones that were lost during processing, and improve taste, texture and appearance. When reading product packages, here are some of the most common food additives1 to watch out for:
  • Preservatives: sodium benzoate, sodium nitrite, potassium sorbate, BHA, BHT, TBHQ
  • Sweeteners and artificial sweeteners: fructose, high fructose corn syrup, aspartame, sucralose, acesulfame potassium (acesulfame-K)
  • Artificial colors: FD&C Blue Nos. 1 and 2, FD&C Green No. 3, FD&C Red Nos. 3 and 40, FD&C Yellow Nos. 5 and 6, Orange B, Citrus Red No. 2
  • Artificial flavors
  • Flavor enhancers: monosodium glutamate (MSG), hydrolyzed soy protein, autolyzed yeast extract

Top Offenders to Avoid

According to the Caltons, the following 13 additives are the worst of the more than 150 individual ingredients they investigated during their six-year long journey, which took them through 100 different countries.2
Ingredient Found in Health Hazards
Coloring agents: blue 1, blue 2, yellow 5, and yellow 6 Cake, candy, macaroni and cheese, medicines, sport drinks, soda, pet food, and cheese Most artificial colors are made from coal tar, which is a carcinogen
Olestra (aka Olean) Fat-free potato chips Depletion of fat-soluble vitamins and carotenoids. Side effects include oily anal leakage
Brominated vegetable oil (aka BVO) Sports drinks and citrus-flavored sodas Competes with iodine for receptor sites in the body, which can lead to hypothyroidism, autoimmune disease, and cancer. The main ingredient, bromine, is a poisonous, corrosive chemical, linked to major organ system damage, birth defects, growth problems, schizophrenia, and hearing loss
Potassium bromate (aka brominated flour) Rolls, wraps, flatbread, bread crumbs, and bagel chips See bromine above. Associated with kidney and nervous system disorders, gastrointestinal discomfort
Azodicarbonamide Breads, frozen dinners, boxed pasta mixes, and packaged baked goods Linked to asthma
BHA and BHT Cereal, nut mixes, gum, butter, meat, dehydrated potatoes, and beer BHA may be a human carcinogen, a cancer-causing agent. BHT can cause organ system toxicity
Synthetic hormones: rBGH and rBST Milk and dairy products Linked to breast, colon, and prostate cancers
Arsenic Poultry EPA classifies inorganic arsenic as a "human carcinogen"

What’s With the Double-Standards?

The food industry has already formulated safer, better products for other countries, in which these and other harmful ingredients are banned. So why do they insist on selling inferior versions in America? For clear examples, take a look at a recent article on 100DaysOfRealFood.com.3 In it, Vani Hari shows the ingredient labels of several common foods sold in the US and the UK, such as Betty Crocker’s Red Velvet cake mix, McDonald’s French fries, and Pizza Hut’s garlic cheese bread. Amazingly, while these foods can be created using a bare minimum of additives in the UK (and sometimes none), in the US, they’re absolutely LOADED with chemicals.
“The food industry does not want us to pay attention to the ingredients nor do they care about the negative effects from eating them. They certainly don’t care about the astronomical medical bills that are a direct result of us eating the inferior food they are creating,” Vani Hari writes.
“...We as a collective nation must stop this trajectory of sickness and rising health care costs, by understanding the ingredients we are putting into our bodies. We must challenge the U.S. food industry to discontinue the use of banned ingredients that are not allowed elsewhere in the world. We deserve to have the same quality food without potential toxins.”

Russia Issues Long-Term Ban on US Meat

In related “questionable food” news, Russia recently banned US meat supplies after discovering it contains ractopamine—a beta agonist drug that increases protein synthesis, thereby making the animal more muscular. This reduces the fat content of the meat. As reported by Pravda,4 Russia is the fourth largest importer of US meats, purchasing about $500 million-worth of beef and pork annually.
Effective February 11, Russia will no longer allow US meat imports, stating the ban “is likely to last for a long time.”5 All meat suppliers wishing to sell their meat and meat products to Russia must certify their meat as ractopamine-free—a condition the US has so far refused to comply with.
The drug is banned for use in 160 countries, including China and Russia, but allowed in 24 countries, including Canada and the United States. While the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) considers ractopamine safe and doesn’t test for it, Russia’s chief health inspector, Gennady Onishchenko, claims there are “serious questions” about the safety of the drug. He previously told the New York Times:6
“For instance, use of ractopamine is accompanied by a reduction in body mass, suppression of reproductive function, increase of mastitis in dairy herds, which leads to a steep decline in the quality and safety of milk.”
Ractopamine is also known to affect the human cardiovascular system, and may cause food poisoning, according to Pravda.7 It’s also thought to be responsible for hyperactivity, muscle breakdown, and can increase death and disability in livestock. While other drugs require a clearance period of around two weeks to help ensure the compounds are flushed from the meat prior to slaughter (and therefore reduce residues leftover for human consumption), there is no clearance period for ractopamine.
In fact, livestock growers intentionally use the drug in the last days before slaughter in order to increase its effectiveness. According to veterinarian Michael W. Fox, as much as 20 percent of ractopamine remains in the meat you buy from the supermarket. Despite potential health risks, the drug is used in 45 percent of US pigs, 30 percent of ration-fed cattle, and an unknown percentage of turkeys.

What’s the Simplest Way to Avoid Harmful Food Additives?

Ditch processed foods entirely. (If you live in Europe you may have more options than Americans, as you may be able to find some processed foods that do not contain any synthetic additives.) About 90 percent of the money Americans spend on food is spent on processed foods, so there is massive room for improvement in this area for most people.
Swapping your processed food diet for one that focuses on fresh whole foods may seem like a radical idea, but it's a necessity if you value your health. And when you put the history of food into perspective, it's actually the processed foods that are "radical" and "new." People have thrived on vegetables, meats, eggs, fruits and other whole foods for centuries, while processed foods were only recently invented.
If you want to eat healthy, I suggest you follow the 1950s (and before) model and spend quality time in the kitchen preparing high-quality meals for yourself and your family. If you rely on processed inexpensive foods, you exchange convenience for long-term health problems and mounting medical bills. For a step-by-step guide to make this a reality in your own life, simply follow the advice in my optimized nutrition plan along with these seven steps to wean yourself off processed foods.
When it comes to staying healthy, avoiding processed foods and replacing them with fresh, whole foods is the "secret" you've been looking for. Additionally, the more steps your food goes through before it reaches your plate, the greater your chances of contamination becomes. If you are able to get your food locally, you eliminate numerous routes that could expose your food to contamination with disease-causing pathogens. 

The Key Is in the Dose


The Key Is in the Dose

Description: liquid medicine.jpg
When using nutritional medicines like magnesium chloride, iodine, sodium bicarbonate, vitamin C and alpha lipoic acid, the dose determines the effect. In conventional allopathic medicine they say the dose makes the poison but in the Natural Allopathic Medicine protocol we are not using poisons. In Natural Allopathic Medicine we often take doses to exceedingly high levels without the side effects found in pharmaceuticals that are an ever-present danger even at very low doses.
In allopathic medicine everything, even water and vitamin C are placed on a scale of toxicity with everything being defined as poisonous. And though it’s true that one can drown in water, a large person can safely drink a gallon of it without ill affect and one can put pounds of magnesium chloride in one’s bath and take very high doses of iodine safely for infectious disorders without the serious and dangerous downside of antibiotics. Adverse effects are very rare, and are usually attributed to lack of care or knowledge on the part of the person or prescriber.
It is certainly possible to cure incurable diseases through the use of the right doses of vitamins, minerals and fatty acids (among other things). The dose determines the effect! Low doses do not get clinical results! Through the years the mistake I have seen people making over and over is under-dosing.
The key to the entire protocol is getting the doses high enough. With all protocol items it is best to start out low and get used to each substance and then slowly bring the doses up. What it says on the bottle is a good guide for beginning doses only. The Nascent iodine is a good example. On the bottle it says 1 to 3 drops three times a day. Ten drops a day is only 4 mg. I used to give my three-year-old (she is now seven) 15 drops at each application instead of antibiotics and without vaccines she rarely gets sick.
The Rejuvenate superfood spirulina and chlorella formulas are another case in point. On the jar of Rejuvenate it says a serving size is two scoops. That in fact can be repeated two, three and even four times a day. I know of two men who saved themselves with ultra-high doses of spirulina and/or Rejuvenate. One ran his car at high speed under a truck, which flattened his car and badly broke his back. The other had his leg run over by a tractor! I have been promoting spirulina since it first hit the marketplace 35 years ago and through the years have seen what its nutritional power can do.
When taking something the first time, you need to start with a minimum dose, like putting your toes in the water to check the temperature first. Powders or tonics can be mixed in varying concentrations by using more or less water. In emergency situations when you cannot afford the luxury of driving up the doses slowly, it is best to work with a health professional.
Allopathic medicine demonstrates egotism and/or ignorance with its refusal to consider nutrition as something important when addressing disease, and people pay a huge price in terms of their health because of this. When it comes to emotions and stress as causative factors of disease, allopathic doctors do acknowledge this and they love to medicate people with pharmaceutical anti-depressants. “Just pop a pill and you’ll be fine” is their mantra.
Natural Allopathic Medicine shares many traits with orthomolecular medicine, which is a form of complementary and alternative medicine that seeks to maintain health and prevent or treat diseases by optimizing nutritional intake and/or prescribing supplements; it focuses on using the right nutritional molecules in the right amounts for the individual. There is no question that vitamins and minerals do prevent and treat serious diseases, including cancer and heart disease, when the nutrients are supplied in sufficiently high doses. Cardiologist Dr. Thomas Levy said, “The three most important considerations in effective vitamin C therapy are dose, dose, and dose. If you don’t take enough, you won’t get the desired effects.
Effective doses are high doses, often hundreds of times more than the U.S. Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) or Daily Reference Intake (DRI). Dr. Abram Hoffer said, “Drs. Wilfrid Shute and Evan Shute recommended doses from 400 to 8,000 IU of vitamin E daily. The usual dose range was 800 to 1600 IU but they report that they had given 8,000 IU without seeing any toxicity.” The Shutes successfully treated over 35,000 patients with vitamin E.[1]
Though you might choose to start ten medicinals, you do not want to start all ten on the same day. When using these medicines you use the reactions and feelings of your body to navigate upwards toward higher doses. Our body knows the difference between helpful medicinals and drugs and ones that are doing it harm. I always tell people to feel their way up. If you take a dose of something and there is no reaction then it is safe to keep increasing the dose. I have had people at death’s door recover much in terms of feelings and an unexpected return of strength taking the medicinals in this protocol. The magnesium oil is very strong in this regard.
One can expect to start feeling something positive within days. Sometimes, depending on the medical situation, relief is felt within hours or in the case of nebulization even in minutes. Combining methods of administration is the best way of maximizing intake of medicinals but must be done under close supervision to avoid over-usage. One can use IVs, take medicinal baths, intake orally, use enemas, nebulize and apply transdermally (topically) directly on the skin depending on which item you are using and what you are treating and its severity.
There are many routes of administration for many of my protocol items, but care must be taken to pay attention to your own body and adjust according to how you feel and to consider using multiple routes of administration only under good medical supervision.
The toxicity of a substance is also affected by a number of other factors including the innate chemical activity, the dose and dose-time relationship, exposure route, species, sex and age. Also the ability of a substance to be absorbed, distributed, metabolized and finally excreted from the body affects the toxicity. The toxicity may be affected positively or negatively by the presence of other substances, e.g. alcohol.[2]

[2] The Royal Society of Chemistry;
http://www.rsc.org/images/what-is-poison_tcm18-219648.pdf

Common vitamin allows pancreatic cancer sufferers to live 12 months longer

February 25, 2013
Common vitamin allows pancreatic cancer
sufferers to live 12 months longer
You may have heard that any cancer patient on chemotherapy should not take vitamins, as they may interfere with the chemo. But new research is showing that just the opposite happens. In fact, adding high doses of one vitamin can add a year to your life if you have pancreatic cancer.

As you may know, pancreatic cancer is usually a death sentence. Most people with this form of cancer live only about five or six months. Fortunately, some doctors, like Nicholas Gonzalez, MD in New York, are having better results with this disease than conventional medicine. That's because they're willing to look outside the traditional chemo, radiation, and surgery methods of treatment.

Build stronger bones

with this "liquid magnet" that draws minerals into your skeleton

A new video reveals the three most important secrets to help you build stronger bones naturally... and restore your bone density to where it was when you were years younger.

Watch this video now to learn more about each of these three secrets — and explain how they can help you strengthen your bones and cut your risk of a debilitating fracture by HALF or more...


Watch The Video Now

And now we've learned that even if you use chemo, there's a way to increase your life expectancy. All you have to do is use intravenous vitamin C. In this study, doctors infused 50-125 grams of vitamin C into pancreatic cancer sufferers. They gave the vitamin C once a week for at least 60 days (some took it for nearly 18 months). They also gave the participants their regular weekly chemo treatments. Here's what happened:
During the study, the patients lost an average of only 11 pounds. That's a lot less than expected. The worst side effects experienced (if any) were mild diarrhea and dry mouth. The vitamin C stopped the progression of the cancer for 26 weeks on average. And they all lived an average of 12 months longer than expected. Two of the participants lived for 15 months. And one, remarkably, lived for 29 months – over two years. That means we might be able to improve this treatment.
These results are astounding! My friend and colleague, Robert Rowen, MD (editor of Second Opinion), has used IV vitamin C with great success in fighting cancer. And other studies show that it can reduce inflammation markers in cancer patients by 76%. In fact, this same study found that IV vitamin C decreased tumor markers in 77% of prostate cancer patients and 73% of breast cancer patients.
So if you have any type of cancer, you'll want to talk to your doctor about using high doses of vitamin C intravenously. It could save your life – or at least allow you to live longer and better than you would with chemo alone.
Your insider for better health,