Why claiming US has 'best health system' is a sick joke

PressTV
by Samuel Metz, the Oregonian

Is the American health care system "the best in the world"? If so, perhaps Oregon is spinning its wheels trying to fix a health care system some U.S. congressmen say isn't broken. Let's hear what these national leaders say and then check reality.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says, "We do start with the notion, however, that we have the best health care in the world." If McConnell had diabetes, he might pause. American diabetics suffer twice as many foot amputations as diabetics in Europe because they cannot afford care to prevent foot infections from turning deadly.

House Speaker John Boehner says we have "the best health care delivery system in the world." But there are 35 other countries in which a pregnant woman and her baby have a better chance of surviving the pregnancy. The United States leads the industrialized world in deaths preventable with timely care. There are 15 other nations providing every citizen with lifesaving treatments denied to many unfortunate Americans.

During one of his presidential debates, Sen. John McCain said the U.S. offers "the highest quality of health care in the world." Did he overlook statistics on lung disease? Americans with emphysema are 25 percent more likely to need hospitalization than people in France (the country with the best record). Asthmatics suffer worse: American asthmatics are eight times more likely to need urgent care than those in France.

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell insisted, in a GOP response to President Obama's 2010 State of the Union address, that the U.S. enjoys "the best medical care system in the world." But 25 other countries have more doctors per capita, hospital beds per capita and doctor visits. And these countries spend less than we do. In fact, we have the most expensive health care in the world.

If simply spending more money qualified as "the best," then New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and U.S. Sens. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.; Ron Johnson, R-Wis.; John Barrasso, R-Wyo.; and Richard Shelby, R-Ala., could be forgiven for imagining we have "the best health care system in the world." Yet that money comes from somewhere, and it's coming from suffering families. A patient diagnosed with lung cancer in this country carries a 7 percent chance of bankruptcy within five years. Most family bankruptcies are precipitated by medical crises, and most of those families had insurance when the crisis began.

Is this what "the best" looks like?

Whatever world these leaders live in, it is not the one that Oregonians (or most other Americans) inhabit. Every other industrialized country provides better care to more people for less money. We cannot do better if our leaders insist the world should learn from us, not us from them.

Oregon draws national praise for its creative responses to health care challenges -- not just our coordinated care organizations and Health Care Transformation Act, but also longer-term efforts to create statewide universal care. Should we give up our efforts at reform and simply enjoy what we have?

Listen to the words of these leaders and then look at the faces of your family. Whom do you believe?

New MRSA Superbug Strain Found in UK Milk

Independent

A new strain of MRSA has been found in British milk, indicating that the superbug is spreading through the livestock population and poses a growing threat to human health.

The new strain, MRSA ST398, has been identified in seven samples of bulk milk from five different farms in England.

The discovery, from tests on 1,500 samples, indicates that antibiotic-resistant organisms are gaining an increasing hold in the dairy industry.

The disclosure comes amid growing concern over the use of modern antibiotics on British farms, driven by price pressure imposed by the big supermarket chains. Intensive farming with thousands of animals raised in cramped conditions means infections spread faster and the need for antibiotics is consequently greater.

Three classes of antibiotics rated as “critically important to human medicine” by the World Health Organisation – cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones and macrolides – have increased in use in the animal population by eightfold in the last decade.

The more antibiotics are used, the greater the likelihood that antibiotic-resistant bacteria, such as MRSA, will evolve.

Experts say there is no risk of MRSA infection to consumers of milk or dairy products so long as the milk is pasteurised. The risk comes from farmworkers, vets and abattoir workers, who may become infected through contact with livestock and transmit the bug to others.

The discovery was made by scientists from Cambridge University who first identified MRSA in milk in 2011. They say the latest finding of a different strain is worrying.

Mark Holmes, of the department of veterinary medicine, who led the study, published in Eurosurveillance, said: “This is definitely a worsening situation. In 2011 when we first found MRSA in farm animals, the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [Defra] initially didn’t believe it. They said we don’t have MRSA in the dairy industry in this country.”

“Now we definitely have MRSA in livestock. What is curious is that it has turned up in dairy cows when in other countries on the Continent it is principally in pigs. Could it be in pigs or poultry in this country? We don’t know.”

The MRSA superbug can cause serious infections in humans which are difficult to treat, require stronger antibiotics, and take longer to resolve. Human cases of infection with the new strain have been found in Scotland and northern England according to Defra, but no details are available.

Dr Holmes said supermarket pressure on farmers to hold down prices was leading to the overuse of antibiotics to prevent cattle getting mastitis, an infection of the udder, that might interrupt the milk supply.

“If farmers were not screwed into the ground by the supermarkets and allowed to get a fair price for their milk they would be able to use fewer antibiotics,” he said.

“Common sense tells us that anything we can do to reduce use of antibiotics will reduce the growth of resistant bugs. We want to wean our farmers off antibiotics and the only way we can do that is with better regulation.”

Vets in Norway and Denmark had much more limited prescribing powers than in the UK, he added.

“Now we definitely have MRSA in livestock. What is curious is that it has turned up in dairy cows when in other countries on the Continent it is principally in pigs. Could it be in pigs or poultry in this country? We don’t know.”

Superfoods, Superherbs and Super Immunity

Reality Sandwich
by David Wolfe

Your immune system is vast and complex. It is designed to detoxify your body as well as protect your body from illness and foreign invaders.

Harmful bacteria, viruses, calcium-forming micro-organisms, and candida are part of our world. Unfortunately, so are toxic chemicals, including everything from pesticides to car pollution to nuclear radiation to most municipal tap waters. In our world, these harmful micro-organisms and the endless list of toxic chemicals assault our immune system consistently. Coupled with these assaults are the daily stresses of life and their deleterious effects upon us.

All of these add up to a weakened immune system: colds and flus, coughs, fevers, chronic health problems, skin disorders, digestive distress, nervous conditions, chronic fatigue, and even cancer. When the body has too much to deal with, it stops being able to get rid of its waste efficiently and requires more support to help it fight off what is attacking it.

Fortunately, our immune system can be improved and empowered to such a point that not only can the harmful microbes be halted and the chemicals detoxified, but also a "stress defense shield" may be built up that can even drive off the effects of daily stress.

From my perspective it appears that a great thrust of research on health and longevity is pointing towards improving our immune system - that within an empowered immune system are the health solutions and longevity answers we're looking for.

We all can learn more about how to empower our own immunity. I believe the best way to activate genius within the immune system is by ingesting certain superherbs and superfoods, taking probiotics and cultured foods, minimizing toxic food exposure by eating pure organic raw-living foods, and making appropriate healthy lifestyle improvements.

In 400 BC Hippocrates said, "Let food be your medicine and let medicine be your food." Both aspects of this phrase must be considered - not just food as medicine, but also medicine as food - that means superfoods (the most nutrient-rich plant foods in the world) and tonic superherbs (herbs that can be taken regularly like food). Out of 40,000+ herbs used worldwide, perhaps only 50-60 of them are tonic superherbs. These superherbs should be taken for long periods, because, like all tonics, they are more like food and they build health treasures within and nourish our "stress defense shield."

Whenever possible, try to include the following superfoods, superherbs, and super products in your daily regime:

Reishi Mushroom: Reishi is Queen of the Medicinal Mushrooms. Reishi is the most well-studied herb in the history of the world. She has been the most revered herbal mushroom in Asia for over 2,000 years. The Daoists consider Reishi an "elixir of immortality" that is celebrated for its ability to significantly improve the functioning of the immune system by protecting us from the onslaught of viruses, bacteria, unwanted guests, pollution, chemicals, molds, and the toxicity that we are often subjected to in our world. Reishi helps build up our "stress defense shield" creating feelings of well-being within, in spite of outer stresses.

Chaga Mushroom: Chaga is the King of the Medicinal Mushrooms. It contains the highest amounts of anti-tumor compounds of any herb. These compounds are in the form of betulin, betulinic acid, and lupeol, which are powerful anti-mutagenic compounds naturally present in the white part of the birch tree's bark (in which the chaga typically grows). Chaga is also extremely high in nourishing phytochemicals, nutrients, and free-radical scavenging antioxidants, especially melanin. Chaga is second only to cacao (the chocolate nut) in antioxidant content. Chaga is the most powerful cancer-fighting herb known and fights all kinds of radiation damage to healthy tissue.

Gynostemma: According to the scientific herbal research being conducted in the People's Republic of China, gynostemma has been identified as the most medicinal of all the Chinese herbs. It contains 120 saponins (immune modulating molecules that are fat soluble on one side of the molecule and water soluble on the other side) - all of which possess specific, dual-directional health-giving properties (e.g. if our immune system is down, these saponins can modulate it up; if our immune system is too far up, they can modulate the immune response down). Gynostemma is a true tonic, you can take it or make tea out of it nearly every day with benefits that accrue the more you consume it. Gypenoside 49 (49th of the 120 saponins) has been identified as a telomerase activator that youthens us genetically.

Ginseng: Known throughout the world for its amazing energy restoring and strength-building properties, ginseng is an adaptogen that helps our bodies "adapt" to stressful environmental conditions. Ginseng root can boost energy, induce mental alertness, improve the ratio of healthy hormones (thereby acting as a subtle aphrodisiac), and increase endurance. Ginseng also helps fight pain and alleviate radiation damage to healthy tissues.

Chlorella: Chlorella is a natural, green, micro-algae, superfood detoxifier. Chlorella is the highest chlorophyll containing plant in the world with 40 times the chlorophyll content of the best wheatgrass juice known. The chlorophyll binds with heavy metals and chemical toxins, helping to eliminate them from the brain and nervous system. Chlorella is also a complete protein source that contains youthening and rejuvenating growth factors.

Zeolites: Zeolites are a form of unique, volcanic mineral compounds with crystalline structures that form a sort of "cage." This "cage" works like a magnet to attract heavy metals, chemicals, and other pollutants (e.g. radioactive isotopes), capturing them and allowing their easy removal (without being re-absorbed) from the body. Zeolites have been shown to have anti-viral and cancer-fighting effects.

Shilajit: Contains 80+ minerals and fulvic acid that assist in the removal of toxins, improve nutrition to cells and help restore electricity to the blood. Shilajit promotes the movement of minerals into muscle, tissue, and bone. It is an Ayurvedic mineral-herb with over 5,000 years of known human usage in the Himalayas. The word "shilajit" translates as "born of stone and destroyer of weakness."

Astragalus Root: This chi-building root is one of the most potent immune tonics used to improve the lungs, strengthen muscles, increase metabolism, reduce stress, and strengthen the genetics. The first telomerase activator product to make it into the market is TA-65, an extract of astragalus.

Camu Camu Berry: This plant-derived Vitamin C source will super boost your immune system and help repair connective tissue. Botanical vitamin C sources (such as Camu) are coming into favor in preference over synthetic ascorbic acid products due to their complete array of vitamin C enhancing bioflavonoids, copper, rutin, and other co-factors that make vitamin C work better. Camu Camu is one of the most concentrated supplies of Vitamin C in the world, and a powerful antioxidant. It is ranked by Dr. James Duke as one of the most powerful, single health-giving botanical substances. Dr. Duke is a world-famous botanist who worked for the USDA's Agricultural Research Service for 30 years while developing one of the world's most comprehensive Phytochemical and Ethnobotanical Databases.

Probiotics: Consuming a combination of good quality probiotics (these include friendly bacteria such as: Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifidus infantis, B. longum, L. bulgaricus, S. thermophilus, L. plantarum, L. salivarius, Enterococcus faecium, etc.) and cultured and fermented foods (that contain live probiotics) such as coconut and other kefirs, unpasteurized sauerkraut and kim chi, etc. will lead to enhanced immunity as the beneficial probiotic bacteria are symbiotic allies to your body that help: fight viruses, candida and other infections; produce B vitamins; and assist in detoxification. Probiotics help build up that "stress defense shield."

We live in a time of unprecedented abundance. Through the Internet and the advancing health freedoms we are all enjoying, we have easy access to these superfoods, superherbs, and super health products.

When you start investigating and utilizing these substances consistently and regularly as part of your overall health and exercise program, you will notice that your immunity will step-by-step be enhanced. Your thoughts will have more clarity. Your overall energy will increase. You will also likely sleep better and perform better in athletic activities. Your overall productivity will improve. Digestive distress decreases. Feelings of well-being begin to dominate your life.

Superfoods and tonic superherbs can be added into anyone's diet. Simply begin with the first one or few that you're drawn to and go from there. Get out a blender and have fun. Make different teas with the superherbs or create new smoothies with the superfoods. Better yet, take your superherb tea and blend it with your superfoods to make the best elixirs ever. Getting healthier and healthier is fun!

Pregnant Women’s Electromagnetic Exposure Linked to Children’s Asthma

Natural Society
by Susan Patterson

Mothers who are in close contact with electromagnetic fields while pregnant could have children with an increased risk of developing asthma, state U.S. scientists. Such devices examined in the study included microwaves ovens, hair dryers and vacuum cleaners.

The study conducted fits in with the ongoing debate as to the impact that long-term exposure to electromagnetic fields, such as power lines, vacuum cleaners, appliances and hair dryers, has on human health. Previous studies that have denied a relationship exists between electromagnetic exposure and health have not measured exposure directly but asked participants to estimate exposure.

Published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, scientists from Kaiser Permanente conducted a study that involved a group of 801 expecting women. The mothers-to-be were fitted with electromagnetic monitors that recorded the amount of low-frequency electromagnetic exposure they received over 24 hours.

Medical records were used to track the children of exposed mothers over a period of 13 years. The study revealed that almost 21 percent of the children had developed asthma; most by the time they were just 5 years old. When these results were compared against the mother’s exposure levels it was found that those who were within the highest amount of exposure were 3.5 times more likely to have a child with asthma than those in the lower exposure group. Children moderately exposed were at a 75% increased risk of asthma than those in the lowest exposure group.

Dr. De-Kun Li, senior research scientist at the Kaiser Permanente in Oakland, California and other researchers suspect that electromagnetic fields, which have previously been linked to an increase in miscarriages, may affect immune response, which can trigger the development of asthma. At the least, states Li, this study suggests a need for further research into the issue.

Similar research revolving around the impact electromagnetic frequencies have on animals and humans found that exposure to these fields negatively alters important proteins found in the brain. The researchers found that 143 proteins in the brain were negatively impacted by radio frequency radiation over a period of 8 months. A total of 3 hours of cell phone exposure were simulated over the 8 month time period, and the results showed that many neural function related proteins’ functional relationship changed the for worse.

About 13 percent of children under the age of 18 have asthma, a condition that is caused by a malfunction of the immune system and the respiratory organs. Asthma is often treated with harsh pharmaceutical drugs that were found to actually kill more people each year than asthma alone, but safer solutions – such as minimizing exposure to electromagnetic chaos – do exist.

Related:  Cell Phones, EMF Negatively Altering Important Regions of the Brain

McDonald's serving up 'restructured meat technology' - you want fries with that?

Natural News

Well, it's that time of year again when McDonald's rolls out its venerable McRib sandwich. Tens of millions of Americans will purchase one - or, judging by the nation's ever-widening belt line, several - but most will do so without knowing all they should know about this popular sandwich.

Besides high caloric content, there are several other reasons why you should avoid the McRib, a boneless pork product smothered in BBQ sauce that famously resembles a rack of ribs, as much as you avoid most of the other "delicacies" served by this fast-food behemoth. In addition, The Blaze reports, there are several "fun facts" about the sandwich you may not have known:

A sandwich 'built' from scratch?: The McRib is a product of Rene Arend, who came up with the idea and design of the sandwich. That said, Richard Mandigo, a professor from the University of Nebraska, who developed the "restructured meat product" that the McRib is actually made of.

According to Chicago magazine, citing a 1995 article by Mandigo, "restructured meat product" is described thusly:

Restructured meat products are commonly manufactured by using lower-valued meat trimmings reduced in size by comminution (flaking, chunking, grinding, chopping or slicing). The comminuted meat mixture is mixed with salt and water to extract salt-soluble proteins. These extracted proteins are critical to produce a "glue" which binds muscle pieces together. These muscle pieces may then be reformed to produce a "meat log" of specific form or shape. The log is then cut into steaks or chops which, when cooked, are similar in appearance and texture to their intact muscle counterparts. ... Such products as tripe, heart, and scalded stomachs are high in protein, completely edible, wholesome, and nutritious, and most are already used in sausage without objection.

Still hungry?

Packed with calories - and ingredients: In a time of labeling, when government entities and the public are pushing for more disclosure, the package for the McRib would have to grow just to list all of its ingredients.

According to the current box labeling, the sandwich consists of just five basic components - a pork patty and BBQ sauce with pickle slices, onions and a sesame bun.

But, as Time magazine points out, a closer examination of McDonald's own list of ingredients reveals that the sandwich contains a total of 70 ingredients, including azodicarbonamide, a flour-bleaching component that is often used to produce foamed plastics (think gym mats and the soles of shoes). In fact, "the compound is banned in Europe and Australia as a food additive," says Time. Other ingredients include ammonium sulfate and polysorbate 80.

Besides, the sandwich itself contains an incredible amount of calories - 500 at least - along with 26 grams of fat, 44 grams of carbohydrates and 980 milligrams of sodium, nearly half the recommended daily amount of about 2,400 milligrams.

Not a good choice for your heart: The ingredients, combined with a dose of 10 mg of saturated fat (nearly half of the recommended daily allowance), make the McRib an enemy of a healthy heart, say the experts.

"Think about that for a second: When you eat a McRib, you're eating the same chemical ingredients and compounds in those disgusting yoga mats at the gym. And that's on top of the fact that it tastes terrible in the first place," writes Rick Paulas, food editor for KCET, a public television network in southern California. "Which means it's time to ask: Why are we still eating this?"

That's a very valid question. In the meantime, that sound you hear is the further tightening of the nation's belt line.

Prescription-Drug-Induced Violence Medicine's Best Kept Secret?

Activist Post

RxISK.org, the first free independent website for researching and reporting prescription drug side effects, has added a Violence Zone to demonstrate and collect data on the links between prescription drugs and violent thoughts and behavior — from mild to suicidal or homicidal.

“Violence and other potentially criminal behavior caused by prescription drugs are medicine’s best kept secret,” says Dr. David Healy, a world-renowned psychiatrist who has written extensively about the lack of data in evidence-based medicine, including in his latest book, Pharmageddon.

Healy says this is a global issue, with medical, legal, ethical, and profound public policy dimensions. “Never before in the fields of medicine and law have there been so many events with so much concealed data and so little focused expertise.”

Can prescription drugs cause you to kill someone? “Absolutely”, says Healy.

The Violence Zone allows users to enter the name of a prescription drug and see the side effects relating to violent acts and thoughts that have been reported to the FDA’s MedWatch System since 2004, as well as to RxISK, for more than 35,000 drug names from 103 countries. The data is presented in tables, tag clouds, heat maps, and interactive graphs, showing what’s happening with other people taking the same drug around the world and in a user’s community.

Users can then select the effect(s) they are experiencing and click on Report a Drug Side Effect to complete a report. This will add their anonymized experience to the RxISK database so that others can benefit from this information, as well as provide them with a personalized RxISK Report linking their symptoms and meds, which they can take to their doctor or pharmacist to facilitate a better treatment conversation.

We are collecting this critical information directly from patients one report at a time,” says Healy. “As more reports are filed, the RxISK database will become the most comprehensive source of independent information on what prescription drugs do and their capacities to relieve aggression or to trigger violence.”

Dr. Dee Mangin, Data Based Medicine’s Chief Medical Officer and a professor and Director of Research in the Department of Public Health and General Practice at the University of Otago in New Zealand, says, “Violence has not traditionally been seen as a medical problem, but the range of drugs now linked to violence has grown, including drugs used in smoking cessation, dermatology, asthma, weight loss, insomnia, and behavior.”

Mangin says some drugs can also cause vivid, frightening dreams. “It’s important to find out if there is a connection between violent dreams or thoughts and your prescriptions so that adjustments can be made before you act on them.”

Raw Story

While oil spills can cause severe environmental damage to the organisms living in the affected waters, the consequences of using oil dispersants to rectify the spill can make the situation even worse, according to a study published in the journal Environmental Pollution, reported NBCNews.com.

The study found that the mixture of oil and dispersant can create a mixture 52 times more toxic than the oil itself.

“There is a synergistic interaction between crude oil and the dispersant that makes it more toxic,” said study co-author and Georgia Tech biologist Terry Snell.

The researchers studied the effect on plankton of oil from the same well that leaked into the Gulf of Mexico during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill mixed with the same dispersant used to clean it up. The potential impact of the toxins can reach all the way to whales through the food chain.

Because the dispersants decrease the size of the oil droplets, it becomes more “bio-available” to organisms living in the water.

A 2010 EPA study did not find that the combination of oil and dispersant was any more toxic than the oil itself, but other studies have also found harmful effects of the mixture on water life.

Belgian Euthanasia to Expand to Minors

National Review 
by Wesley J. Smith

Belgium has jumped head-first off a vertical moral cliff with its euthanasia law. As I have documented here and elsewhere, the Belgians have permitted joint euthanasia deaths of an elderly couple and now couple organ harvesting with the euthanasia killings of people with disabilities and even, mental illness.

Now, the country looks poised to expand the category of killables to minors and Alzheimer’s patients. From the AFP story:

Belgium is considering a significant change to its decade-old euthanasia law that would allow minors and Alzheimer’s sufferers to seek permission to die. The proposed changes to the law were submitted to parliament Tuesday by the Socialist party and are likely to be approved by other parties, although no date has yet been put forward for a parliamentary debate.”The idea is to update the law to take better account of dramatic situations and extremely harrowing cases we must find a response to,” party leader Thierry Giet said.The draft legislation calls for “the law to be extended to minors if they are capable of discernment or affected by an incurable illness or suffering that we cannot alleviate.”

Is anyone surprised? Once a culture accepts killing as an acceptable answer to human suffering, the culture of death is never satiated. It is never enough.

160,000 Flu Shots Recalled: Particles Seen Floating in Vials

Activist Post
by Kenny Valenzuela

The vaccine manufacturing company Novartis has recently made the news this time with the recall of 160,000 dosages of the Agrippal influenza flu vaccination in both the United Kingdom and Italy. The recall was due to ‘particles seen floating in the vials.’

The particles were later determined to be protein aggregates. When researching protein aggregates we soon find that they are not only dangers as misfolded proteins, but they are also toxic and linked to amyloidal diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and diseases related to prions.

These 160,000 doses of Agrippal were so saturated with protein aggregates that they were visible to the naked eye as floating particulate matter. As the video below covers, these toxic injections are referred to as ‘hot batches’ meaning they are concentrated dosages of viral components that have clumped together in a bolus of immune system shocking protein aggregates.

This connection could explain the overwhelming number of sick and ill children being born and raised here in the United States of America which has become the land of the fees and the home of the slaves.

In addition to a growing population of autism spectrum disorder, children and young adults with medicated personality disorders, is the increased number of senior citizens who appear to be losing their grip on reality due to brain-related injuries like Alzheimer’s.

Is it a coincidence that seniors and kids are targeted by the vaccine industry far more often than any other sector of the population? These annual flu shots have the highest level of mercury allowable containing double the amount found in other vaccines offered by these sadistic needle stabbing medical maniacs.

How many of these hot shots go unnoticed or unreported? With the manufacturer stating that protein aggregation is common in vaccine production, we can only assume this is standard operating procedure created as a design aspect rather than a design flaw.

Get Your Flu Shot or Get Fired: Media Hails New ‘Safety’ Policies Forcing Shots on Workers

Natural Society
by Anthony Gucciardi

Don’t want to be injected with the seasonal flu vaccine due to concerns over ingredients like MSG, antibiotics, formaldehyde, and aluminum as admitted by the FDA on their own website? Well then you may lose your job for refusing a ‘safety’ measure, as more and more major corporations are forcing the flu vaccine (among others) on workers in order to keep their job.

But how is this being enabled? Despite being met with massive resistance as vaccination rates are actually declining across the board due to concerns by citizens worldwide, mainstream media organizations like the Chicago Chronicle have been running numerous hit pieces on those who reject the flu vaccine as ‘uninformed’ and just plain old silly.

These articles also champion in the ‘safety’ measures of forced vaccination within mega corporations like Alexian Brothers Health System with unquestioning loyalty towards the companies. Dismissing any legitimate civil or health concerns with a laughable ‘oh, stop’ and no actual response, this mainstream media article was actually published to the tens of millions that read the Chicago Chronicle each month.

Media: ‘Stop’ Questioning Corporations!

When addressing the real concerns regarding how a corporation can force an employee to inject themselves with MSG, antibiotics, aluminum, and other contaminants, the Chicago Chronicle just dismisses it without question. The article reads:

“If your employer can order you to inject or inhale a vaccine, the reasoning goes, what else might it require? Oh, stop. A hospital isn’t out of line when it tells its employees to get vaccinated — or get fired.”

Just as the Chronicle states, the corporate media desperately wants you to please stop asking virtually any questions. After all, it makes whitewashing the news and propagating literal fabrications very challenging. Even the European Union Food Safety Agency asked scientists and consumers to please stop studying genetically modified organisms following the breaking report that GMOs had been linked to tumors.

Of course media pieces like these are actually a bi-product of resistance from the people. As more and more individuals refuse the carcinogen-packed flu shot on a yearly basis, vaccine manufacturers are in a panic. Big Pharma as a whole is in trouble, and the only way they know how to perform damage control is through spending millions upon millions in PR runs.

All of the PR runs and media campaigns to dismiss legitimate concerns (without ever actually addressing them beyond a sarcastic or satirical discount like ‘oh, stop’) cannot, however, stop the emergence of real information to the public regarding GMOs, the contaminants within the flu shot, and other items.

The mainstream media and mega corporations would like you to please stop questioning their actions, but they will never get their wish.

Pediatrics Association Fights against Thimerosal Mercury Ban

Natural Society
by Lisa Garber

The American Academy of Pediatrics and a World Health Organization committee agreed that thimerosal, a vaccine preservative that contains mercury, should not be banned by the United Nations, even though it has been frowned upon in the United States.

Rewind to 1999, however, and you would find the AAP asking for thimerosal’s removal from vaccines in the United States, due to the danger of youths being injected with too much mercury. And there was less evidence then as there is now that these vaccines could contribute to the development of autism and other neurodevelopmental problems. In a curious turn of events, however, the AAP agreed this month with the WHO commission when it advocated the use of thimerosal in vaccines to treat children around the world.

“It was absolutely a matter of precaution because of the absence of more information,” says Columbia University’s Dr. Louis Cooper, then AAP board of directors. “Subsequently an awful lot of effort has been put into trying to sort out whether thimerosal causes any harm to kids, and the bottom line is basically, it doesn’t look as if it does.”

A 2004 safety review by the US Institute of Medicine would come to the same conclusion, as does a 2010 assessment by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Dangers of Thimerosal and Vaccines

Thimerosal, however, is approximately 50 percent mercury. For every child and every dose, 62.5 ug of mercury comes with a vaccination against hepatitis B or MMR. According to the Federal Environmental Protection Guidelines, that’s 100 times the “safe” dose.

Vaccines also have a spotted history and questionable efficacy. An increasing number of people are shunning the injections despite pressure from their places of employment. According to findings by Dr. Danuta Skowronski of the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, the flu shot actually worsens H1N1 symptoms. Just a few of the studies implicating vaccines in contributing to leukemia and lymphoma include:

Bichel, Post-vaccinial Lymphadenitis Developing into Hodgkin’s Disease, Acta Med Scand, 1976, Vol 199, p523-525. Stewart, AM, et al, Aetiology of Childhood Leukaemia, Lancet, 16 Oct, 1965, 2:789-790. [Listed under Vaccine Adverse Reactions.]

Glathe, H et al, Evidence of Tumorigenic Activity of Candidate Cell Substrate in Vaccine Production by the Use of Anti-Lymphocyte Serum, Development Biol Std, 1977, 34:145-148.

These are, admittedly, older studies. While many have been conducted since, a highly profitable industry has also been built around vaccines, rendering many studies heavily biased and unreliable. What’s more, thimerosal isn’t the only harmful additive. Formaldehyde, a known human carcinogen, is another “preservative” found in vaccines.

Short-Sighted Humanitarian Efforts, Profits for Big Pharma

The AAP argues, however, that while thimerosal should remain sparse in American children, those abroad without access to vaccines should not get the same treatment.

If we are to take AAP and the WHO committee’s endorsements at face value, their intentions seem good. Children in impoverished regions of the world are sickened with avoidable diseases, and they argue that vaccines might prevent the illness. Because researchers suggest that it would cost up to five times as much for developing areas to produce vaccines without thimerosal as it would developed areas, shipping mercury-laden vaccines to developing areas seems like a humanitarian effort.

“We need this exception,” says Dr. Walter Orenstein, a member of the AAP Committee on Infectious Diseases, “because thimerosal is so vital for protecting children.”

We get that, but it doesn’t make the move clean.

The effectiveness—never mind the side effects—of vaccines remain hotly debated. Instead of making money off of vaccines, the WHO and UN might think on the physical and fiscal benefits people in impoverished areas might meet with a healthy diet of locally grown organic produce (instead of, say, GMOs courtesy of Bill Gates). Besides, the producers of vaccines like GlaxoSmithKline over at Big Pharma are not our friends, as evidenced in what qualifies as nothing short of the murder of 14 infants in experimental trials of their products.

Everyone should agree, for one reason or another, that more research deserves to be conducted by independent bodies on not only vaccinations and alternative additives, but also in disease prevention on a daily scale, such as through a healthy diet and sanitation efforts. If not, at the end of the day, we know who comes out the loser in this misguided crusade, and who gets to take home the bags of money.

Thimerosal, organic mercury, swine flu and you.

Examiner
BY BILL UNDERWOOD

I read last week how the U.S. Geological Survey did a study that found mercury in fish from every one of 291 streams they tested across the United States. You don’t need me to tell you that mercury is dangerous, but I started researching mercury to find out how dangerous.

However, digging for facts about mercury took me in a completely different direction... back to the swine flu. Many vaccinations, such as the swine flu vaccine now being foisted on an unsuspecting public (I strongly encourage you to read Mark Reinoso’s column), contain a preservative made with mercury. Why? Well, vaccines are often delivered to a doctor’s office in a multi-dose vial with a rubber stopper. You’ve probably seen a nurse or doctor poke a needle through the rubber and draw some fluid into a syringe. After that first puncture, bacteria could enter the vial and contaminate the vaccine, so it needs a preservative.

The most commonly used vaccine preservative is called Thimerosal. Here’s what the FDA has to say about it: “Thimerosal is a mercury-containing organic compound (an organomercurial). Since the 1930s, it has been widely used as a preservative in a number of biological and drug products, including many vaccines, to help prevent potentially life threatening contamination with harmful microbes. Over the past several years, because of an increasing awareness of the theoretical potential for neurotoxicity of even low levels of organomercurials and because of the increased number of thimerosal-containing vaccines that had been added to the infant immunization schedule, concerns about the use of thimerosal in vaccines and other products have been raised. Indeed, because of these concerns, the Food and Drug Administration has worked with, and continues to work with, vaccine manufacturers to reduce or eliminate thimerosal from vaccines. Thimerosal has been removed from or reduced to trace amounts in all vaccines routinely recommended for children 6 years of age and younger, with the exception of inactivated influenza vaccine.”

In other words, ‘we know it’s dangerous; So dangerous that we are trying to reduce it or remove it completely from vaccines. But we’re going to go ahead and put it in flu vaccine.’ And of course that includes the swine flu vaccine. And it is in there, I read the label.

Thimerosal is nearly 50% mercury. Now, there is mercury and then there is mercury. Organic mercury – that contained in Thimerosal – is more dangerous than inorganic mercury, as it tends to hang around in the body longer. How dangerous is it?

According to one report, “In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to ethylmercury, the form of mercury in thimerosal, suffered brain damage years later. Studies on thimerosal poisoning also describe tubular necrosis and nervous system injury, including obtundation, coma and death. As a result of these findings, Russia banned thimerosal from children's vaccines in 1980. Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have also banned the preservative.”

So, basically, we have a vaccine that may not be needed, that was manufactured in a such a hurry by mega-corporations that the government has exempted them from liability, that hasn’t been adequately tested, and that contains a known poison.

What could possibly go wrong?

 

Roundup Herbicide Linked To Overgrowth of Deadly Bacteria

GreenMedInfo

Could Monsanto's glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup be leading to the overgrowth of deadly bacteria in animals and humans consuming genetically-modified food contaminated with it?

This question follows from a new study published in the journal Current Microbiology titled, "The Effect of Glyphosate on Potential Pathogens and Beneficial Members of Poultry Microbiota In Vitro," which found that the active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, known as glyphosate, negatively impacted the gastrointestinal bacteria of poultry in vitro. The researchers presented evidence that highly pathogenic bacteria resisted glyphosate, whereas beneficial bacteria were moderately to highly susceptible to it.

Some of the beneficial species that were found to be suppressed by glyphosate were Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, Bacillus badius, Bifidobacterium adolescentis and Lactobacillus spp. The pathogenic species which were found to resist glyphosate toxicity were Salmonella Entritidis, Salmonella Gallinarum, Salmonella Typhimurium, Clostridium perfringens and Clostridium botulinum.

The researchers stated that "A reduction of beneficial bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract microbiota by ingestion of glyphosate could disturb the normal gut bacterial community." Even more alarming was their observation that the toxicity of glyphosate to the most prevalent beneficial species, Enterococcus, "could be a significant predisposing factor that is associated with the increase in Clostridia botulinum-mediated diseases by suppressing the antagonistic effect of these bacteria on clostridia." Clostridia are a class of anaerobic bacteria including some of the most dangerous known to man, such as C. tetani and C. botulinum, which produce tetanus and botulin toxin, respectively.

Consider that botulin is the most acutely toxic substance known, and that despite the fact it is FDA-approved for use "cosmetically," e.g. Botox injections, it is being looked at as a potential bioweapon because it only takes 75 billionths of a gram (75 ng) to kill a person weighing 75 kg (165 lbs). It has been estimated that only 1 kilogram (2.2 lbs) would be enough to kill the entire human population.

The researchers noted that the glyphosate-sensitive beneficial strains of bifodobacteria, lactobacilli, propionibacteria and enterococci were found to inhibit the growth of C.botulinum. They also found that pathogenic Salmonella and E.coli strains, increasingly found contaminating poultry products, were highly resistant to glyphosate. Lastly, the researchers pointed out that glyphosate also has the potential to induce genetic mutations within bacteria, making it possible for a new level of pathogenicity to emerge following chronic exposure to this chemical.

What Does This Mean For Our Food?

One of the obvious implications of this research is that poultry fed glyphosate-laced genetically modified corn or soy, for instance, would likely experience unhealthy changes in the make-up of their intestinal flora (known as dysbiosis), resulting in increasing harm not only to the animals, but to those consuming them. Factory-farmed chickens are already routinely fed antibiotics, arsenic and even antidepressants, all of which represent serious health threats, both by contributing to the generation of communicable disease vectors, as well as contamination of the meat itself.

This new study adds to a growing concern that concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) chickens may becoming a breeding ground for botulism, and related pathogenic organisms. Deadly botulism outbreaks in cattle, in fact, have recently been linked to poultry litter contamination in Ireland.[i] Also, this month the FDA broadened the use of highly controversial food irradiation by increasing the allowable dose in poultry from 3 to 4.5 Kilograys (keep in mind a Kilogray is equivalent to 2,500,000 chest x-rays (40 millirems each) or 166 times a human lethal dose (5 Grays)), citing concerns that lower levels do not eliminate radiation-resistant spore-forming bacteria such as Clostridium botulinum.[ii]

More Than Just A Food Contamination Problem

Research published earlier this year, also in the journal Current Microbiology, indicated that glyphosate formulations, at concentrations lower than presently used in agricultural applications, are capable of destroying food organisms widely used as starters in traditional and industrial dairy technologies, such as Geotrichum candidum, Lactococcus lactis subsp. cremoris and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. Bulgaricus.[iii] The study authors concluded that Roundup herbicide's inherent toxicity to soil organisms may explain what is behind "...the loss of microbiodiversity and microbial concentration observed in raw milk for many years."

The reality is that GM farming practices, which are heavily reliant on glyphosate-based herbicide formulations, are creating a more serious long-term threat to our food security by drastically altering the composition of the soil, threatening its very fertility and ability to produce food for present and future generations.

Vaccine Bombshell: Leaked Confidential Document Exposes 36 Infants Dead After This Vaccine

VacTruth
By Christina England

A confidential GlaxoSmithKline document recently leaked to the press exposed that within a two-year period, a total of 36 infants died after receiving the 6-in- vaccine, Infanrix Hexa. According to the website Initiative Citoyenne who reported the news, the 1271 page document revealed that GlaxoSmithKline received a total of 1,742 reports of adverse reactions between October 23, 2009, and October 22, 2011, including 503 serious adverse reactions and 36 deaths. Initiative Citoyenne stated:

“It’s not that 14 deaths were recorded by GSK between October 2009 and end in October 2011 as we had originally calculated but 36 (14 from 2010 to 2011 and 22 from 2009 to 2010). In addition to these 36 deaths at least 37 other deaths (sudden death mainly), bringing the total to at least 73 deaths since the launch of the vaccine in 2000, and again, this concerns only the death by sudden death, no further recovery of under-reporting.”

Using the figure of 36 deaths over a two-year period, this averages 1.5 deaths per month, which by anyone’s standard is extremely high. Note that only 1 to 10% of adverse reactions to vaccines are actually reported. Therefore, in reality, the problem could potentially be far more serious and the actual number of fatalities much higher.

THE DEADLY CHEMICAL COCKTAIL

The charts show that many of the babies who died passed away within the first few days of receiving the vaccine. A total of three infants were reported to have died within hours of receiving the vaccine. This tragedy is hardly surprising given the vaccine’s ingredients listed on the GSK Infanrix Hexa product information leaflet, which parents are rarely given the chance to read prior to vaccination, including non-infectious substances from tetanus, diphtheria bacteria, purified proteins of pertussis bacteria, the surface protein of the hepatitis B virus (HBsAg, derived from genetically engineered yeast cells) and inactivated poliovirus. Each 0.5mL dose contains:

diphtheria toxoid
tetanus toxoid
pertussis toxoid
filamentous haemagglutinin
pertactin
recombinant HBsAg protein
poliovirus Type 1
poliovirus Type 2
poliovirus Type 3
purified capsular polysaccharide of Hib covalently bound to tetanus toxoid
aluminium hydroxide
aluminium phosphate
2-phenoxyethanol, lactose
Medium 199
neomycin
polymyxin
polysorbate 80
polysorbate 20
sodium chloride
water

TOXIC DOSES OF TOXIC CHEMICALS

In an interesting article by Dr. Harold Buttram titled “The Ultimate Gamble: Do Childhood Vaccines Result in Genetic Hybridization from Alien Human and Animal DNA Contents?” he highlighted the problems associated with just two of these ingredients, including aluminum, which is a neurotoxin associated with Alzheimer’s disease and seizures, and formaldehyde, which is a known cancer-causing agent commonly used to embalm corpses.

Dr. Harold Buttram also stated:

“It is universally recognized among toxicologists that combinations of toxic chemicals may bring exponential increases in toxicity; that is, two toxic chemicals in combination will bring a ten-fold or even a hundred-fold increase in toxicity.

A classical example of this principle was the Schubert study in which it was found that the amount of lead and the amount of mercury, when each was given separately, would be lethal for one percent of rats tested, would become lethal for one hundred percent of rats tested when combined.

In vaccines this principle would apply at least to mercury and aluminum, both of which are potent neurotoxins.”

CONCLUSION

Considering this information, is it any wonder that babies are dying after receiving vaccinations containing these ingredients? GlaxoSmithKline may try and hide the facts from us but they cannot hide them forever. Infanrix Hexa should be removed from the market immediately.

Cancer curing Dr. Burzynski case dismissed

Examiner
BY JEFFREY PHELPS

After decades and many attempts to silence Dr. Burzynski and his cancer-curing techniques, the Texas Medical Board and the Western medical establishment are again forced to see their case thrown out.

Dead silence is all that remains, over a week since the Texas Medical Board was forced to drop their case against Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski. Other than a couple random small-town newspapers, a questionable blog and Saturday's opinion piece in a tiny Canadian regular, no one in the media has been willing to touch the news that, yet again, all charges were dismissed against a certain doctor that has literally and successfully cured cancer on many occasions.

The Texas Medical Board and the Western medical establishment had been targeting Dr. Burzynski for years and the media was fully willing to document the case against him and chastise his work, prior to the case being dismissed and despite his incredible success record. Strangely, as if the event never occurred, there's been nothing by the media since.

Burzynski Movie: Cancer is Serious Business

A multi-billion dollar a year gravy-train is on the line and the establishment's puppet-media cannot allow everyone to catch on to the fact that many other forms of disease treatment exist and have typically proven to be far more effective than what is (allowed to be) prescribed by Western-trained medical practitioners.

Nonetheless, Dr. Burzynski is now free, again, to continue practicing the cancer-curing techniques that have been the reason for the target on his back since many in the public became aware of the alternative-minded doctor and his successful techniques. Adding to the staggering mountain of evidence in support of alternative and effective cancer treatments and, unfortunately, the medical establishment, their puppets and the ignorant and witting media that continue trying to silence them.

Sandi Kavanagh, for instance, a 48 year old woman from Crystal Lake, IL., was diagnosed in January with an aggressive form of brain cancer, known as Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). As with the vast majority of cancer patients, Kavanagh's cancer did not respond to the traditional radiation and chemotherapy that is largely recommended by almost all (Western) doctors as one of the few options they (are allowed to) give their patients, or risk losing their medical license.

Refusing to give up, Kavanagh and her family began to research for alternative ways to treat her condition, something people are doing more and more often these days. Realizing that “modern” science had nothing more to offer and unwilling to except that she only had “two to three months to live,” according to typical Western medicine, Kavanagh decided to undergo a treatment she found that treats cancer with Antineoplastons. Remarkably (if you are still new to the idea there are actually real "alternative" cancer cures), Kavanagh reports that an MRI scan revealed her tumor shrank by 33 percent after her first procedure, prompting her to continue with Dr. Burzynski's miraculous treatments. Mrs. Kavanagh, ecstatic she's finally found a doctor that is willing to kill cancer cells without killing the rest of her body at the same time, plans to do another scan on December 13, 2012 to continue monitoring her progress.

Perhaps not quite as pleasant to discuss, however, is the story of these miracle Antineoplastons and the very rocky road they've traveled in order to get where they are today. It begins with the man who first discovered their effectiveness in the treatment of cancer in 1967. Dr. Stanislaw R. Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D., was the physician and biochemist researcher responsible for identifying natural occurring peptides and amino acid derivatives, or “Antineoplastons,” as he later named them, in the human body.

He discovered they are the components of a biochemical defense system that controls cancer growth without destroying normal cells, largely deficient in cancer patients, in comparison to healthy individuals. In 1977, after authoring and co-authoring numerous publications, including five on the subject of his peptides research, Dr. Burzynski founded his clinic in Houston, TX where he began to treat patients using his remarkable discovery, with incredible success. Such success, in fact, that soon cancer patients from all over the United States began to travel to obtain this miracle treatment.

Surprisingly, neither the efficacy of Dr. Burzynski's treatment, as evidenced by the rapid recovery of his patients, nor the safety of Antineoplaston as a cancer treatment...with virtually no dangerous side-effects, was enough for the medical establishment to support this medical pioneer, or at the very least, leave him alone to continue his success. Instead, in 1984 the Texas Board of Medical Examiners, under pressure by the (medical establishment-controlled) FDA, began what would end up being a decade long persecution of Dr. Burzynski. There was no way an individual holding a private patent for certain medical devices or treatments, independent of the established order, was going to encroach on many decades of corporate medical monopoly.

After wasting precious resources and taxpayer millions, trying to revoke Dr. Burzynski's medical license, for well over a decade, the Board was completely unsuccessful at proving wrong-doing of any kind. Everything from launching extensive investigations to sending agents out-of-state to convince current and former patients to file unwarranted complaints was attempted. Amazingly, the powers that be, desperate and dedicated to maintaining control over how treatment is administered and keeping century-old chemical-based, assembly-line style medical practices in place, were unusually unable to find a way to silence the doctor.

Despite all this, after years of failure and even after admitting “the efficacy of Antineoplastons as the treatment of human cancers is not of issue in these proceedings”, proving that it really isn't about curing people of cancer, the board launched another investigation in 2008, again attempting to revoke Dr. Burzynski's medical license. This time, however, their attempt was to put Dr. Burzynski on trial for giving terminal cancer patients personalized gene-targeted cancer therapy, tailored to the individual patient's genetic markers and also more effective than the deadly, toxic and carcinogenic radiation or chemotherapy treatments forced on people. Ironically, this type of personalized gene-targeted therapy is considered, by many experts, as the future of modern medicine in cancer treatment. Just not with the help of Dr. Burzynski, if the medical establishment and its puppet FDA have anything to do with it, that is.

Fortunately for the many patients who rely on this medical breakthrough for their very lives, including the general freedom that allows for the creative talents and individualism to flourish within the people, the Texas Medical Board's most recent case against Dr. Burzynski was dismissed on November 19, 2012.

But don't think the official shenanigans end there. Dr. Burzynski has also endured persecution by the Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This, in and of itself, has been a $60 million witch hunt, tax-payer funded of course, beginning in 1983 when the FDA took action to close Dr. Burzynski's clinic. That same year, like all other times, a judge ruled Dr. Burzynski could continue treating patients in the state of Texas. But no matter how many times the public said no, however, the powers that be (the medical establishment, the corporations and those that own them… With almost total puppet media complicity) continue to fight for the end of any successful treatment for diseases, like cancer, so they can continue to control the flow of medicine and the money that follows.

Relentlessly, the FDA, who had previously warned the judge that making such a ruling would push the government to pursue other remedies, such as seizure, condemnation of the drugs or criminal prosecution, convened grand juries to indict Burzynski in 1985, 1990, 1994, and yet again in 1995. Accepting the word “no” from the sovereign people is something they are simply untrained and unwilling to do. Staggeringly, even as all previous attempts at a grand jury investigation resulted in no indictments, the FDA still conducted another investigation between 1991 and 1993.

Sadly, Dr. Burzynski was eventually indicted in 1995 and charged with 75 counts of violating federal law and fraud – facing a maximum of 290 years in federal prison and $18.5 million in fines. But not unlike every other instance where those that control the government attempted to put a halt to anything resembling a change in direction from the billions of dollars raked in by the cancer industry every year, on March 4th, 1997 the judge declared a mistrial and ordered that Dr. Burzynski be acquitted of nearly half the charges. Once again, the government “had not presented sufficient evidence” against him. The FDA eventually dropped 40 of the remaining 41 charges and a second jury finally acquitted him of the final charge. Even the jurors from the first trial showed up to protest in support of Dr. Burzynski.

If history is to repeat itself, as it almost always does, chances are slim this actually represents the end of the US government's attempt at controlling every aspect of the cancer industry. Especially the parts that actually would have a positive effect on skyrocketing cancer rates and would likely be saving the lives of hundreds of thousands per year, in the United States and many other parts of the world, if left to do their magic. But not only has Dr. Burzynski likely not seen the end of ruthless “government” medical oppression, he is nowhere near the first or only case where creative and caring humanitarian doctors, physicians and researchers have been silenced and their remedies memory-holed in support of a society where diseases are to be the reality and a select few making all the money off of their “treatments” are the cure.

Earlier in 2012, Dr. Antonella Carpenter, PhD, much like Dr. Burzynski, targeted for suppression for over a decade, was using a personally-patented, injectable, colored liquid technology to heat and destroy cancer cells, while leaving surrounding tissues almost entirely unharmed. The treatment, Light Induced Enhanced Selective Hyperthermia (LIESH), was using a laser-based technology Dr. Carpenter legally acquired while working for NASA during secret government projects. Almost identical to Dr. Burzynski's story, however, very coordinated and sophisticated efforts were made by professional government trolls to seek out current and former patients that would be fooled into testifying against her after being talked into going back to deadly chemotherapy treatment with falsehoods and fear tactics.

Also like Dr. Burzynski, her reputation was attacked, but her privately owned and patented technologies were silenced in her case, despite no evidence she had ever illegally practiced medicine or that her patients had been victimized in any way. Despite many successfully cured patients, including many that were willing to testify but were ironically never allowed, crooked prosecutors, judges and media in both Arkansas and Oklahoma were eventually successful at fraudulently forcing Dr. Carpenter to pay millions in fines and eventually had all of her equipment seized over the summer by a federal government that answers to the profit and eugenics-driven cancer industry and not to the people who deserve real cures that exist, like Dr. Carpenter's and many others. Her case is currently headed toward the District Court of Appeals.

Dr. Max Gerson, as one of many more examples, developed his world-famous dietary therapy, the “Gerson Diet,” which has proven to heal many illnesses, among them cancer on thousands of occasions. As a result of his proven success, a US Senate Committee moved to provide funding for research of nutritional cancer therapies. Once again, research was unable to go very far and Dr. Gerson struggled as a medical pioneer because he was persecuted by the medical establishment, due to the fact that his therapy went against conventional medicine and the wisdom passed down by those that wish to keep things going just the way they are. The American Medical Association even lobbied to defeat the passing of the funding measure that ended up being defeated by a mere four votes.

In another instance, Royal Ray Rife and Gaston Naessens both invented powerful microscopes that enabled researchers to observe live cancer microbes... A feature modern microscopes still cannot do to this day. This allowed them to develop effective treatments for destroying cancer cells, but both were persecuted for their discoveries and accused of healing the sick without a license.

It has also been known, since (at least) 1974, that around 60 of the 420 or more "cannabinoids" that exist in THC, attained by smoking and/or orally ingesting marijuana, have proven on many occasions, both privately and through professional research, to have numerous different health benefits. Including reducing the size of cancer tumors and killing most forms of cancer cells, almost every time it's been tested. Yet, if you ask your local oncologist or look to your local or national news media, it's as if no one in the government or the world of establishment-based medicine has ever heard of any of these treatments, situations or people, ironically and unfortunately enough.

The bottom line is this; if it's owned or patented by a private individual, or can't be patented at all, and can be used to cure cancer especially, you are not going to be allowed to practice your craft or use the technique or substance as a treatment and especially call it a “cure,” as long as the medical establishment and its puppet FDA can help it, thus far, at all costs and by any means necessary. The unfortunate truth for the establishment and, therefore, the people is and always will be, there's no money in the cure.

More examples include, but nowhere near limited to:

Psychiatrist Wilhem Reich, once regarded as the heir to Sigmund Freud's seat, perished in jail after working with orgone energy to kill cancer cells. The FDA made sure his equipment, books and writings were all destroyed.

Dr. Issels cured his patients of cancer using integrative immunotherapy and the same principals as the Gerson therapy. For it he received a suspended jail sentence and multiple attempts have been made to force the discontinuation of his work.

Biochemist Lawrence Burton was persecuted and defamed for his work to improve immune system function in cancer patients and his discovery of a serum to shrink tumors.

Dinshah Ghadiali was a pioneer in the field of color therapy and was sadly jailed and his equipment, books and writings were destroyed after he successfully treated cancer and other illnesses.

Harry Hoxsey was persecuted and arrested for practicing medicine without a license after curing thousands of patients of cancer by using herbal remedies.

Dr. Kristine Nolfi began helping her patients overcome cancer through nutrition, after curing her own cancer by consuming a vegetarian organic raw food diet. She was subsequently persecuted and stripped of her license.

William F. Koch immigrated to Brazil as a result of the severe persecution he endured for his success curing patients with the use of his homeopathic oxidation catalyst.

Researcher Dr. Johanna Budwig was prevented from publishing her discovery of fatty residues from margarine in soft tumors and also lost her job in the process.

Help spread the word. There really are many different and alternative cures for almost every disease that exists. Start by liking and sharing this article everywhere humanly possible

Pot Shrinks Tumors; Government Knew in '74

Alternet

In 1974 researchers learned that THC, the active chemical in marijuana, shrank or destroyed brain tumors in test mice. But the DEA quickly shut down the study and destroyed its results, which were never replicated -- until now.

The term medical marijuana took on dramatic new meaning in February, 2000 when researchers in Madrid announced they had destroyed incurable brain tumors in rats by injecting them with THC, the active ingredient in cannabis.

The Madrid study marks only the second time that THC has been administered to tumor-bearing animals; the first was a Virginia investigation 26 years ago. In both studies, the THC shrank or destroyed tumors in a majority of the test subjects.

Most Americans don't know anything about the Madrid discovery. Virtually no major U.S. newspapers carried the story, which ran only once on the AP and UPI news wires, on Feb. 29, 2000.

The ominous part is that this isn't the first time scientists have discovered that THC shrinks tumors. In 1974 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice -- lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.

The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on the events in his book, "The Emperor Wears No Clothes." In 1976 President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies, who set out -- unsuccessfully -- to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the "high."

The Madrid researchers reported in the March issue of "Nature Medicine" that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC. "All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation ... Cannabinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats." The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

The Spanish researchers, led by Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutense University, also irrigated healthy rats' brains with large doses of THC for seven days, to test for harmful biochemical or neurological effects. They found none.

"Careful MRI analysis of all those tumor-free rats showed no sign of damage related to necrosis, edema, infection or trauma ... We also examined other potential side effects of cannabinoid administration. In both tumor-free and tumor-bearing rats, cannabinoid administration induced no substantial change in behavioral parameters such as motor coordination or physical activity. Food and water intake as well as body weight gain were unaffected during and after cannabinoid delivery. Likewise, the general hematological profiles of cannabinoid-treated rats were normal. Thus, neither biochemical parameters nor markers of tissue damage changed substantially during the 7-day delivery period or for at least 2 months after cannabinoid treatment ended."

Guzman's investigation is the only time since the 1974 Virginia study that THC has been administered to live tumor-bearing animals. (The Spanish researchers cite a 1998 study in which cannabinoids inhibited breast cancer cell proliferation, but that was a "petri dish" experiment that didn't involve live subjects.)

In an email interview for this story, the Madrid researcher said he had heard of the Virginia study, but had never been able to locate literature on it. Hence, the Nature Medicine article characterizes the new study as the first on tumor-laden animals and doesn't cite the 1974 Virginia investigation.

"I am aware of the existence of that research. In fact I have attempted many times to obtain the journal article on the original investigation by these people, but it has proven impossible." Guzman said.

In 1983 the Reagan/Bush Administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966-76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer, who states, "We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared."

Guzman provided the title of the work -- "Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids," an article in a 1975 Journal of the National Cancer Institute -- and this writer obtained a copy at the University of California medical school library in Davis and faxed it to Madrid.

The summary of the Virginia study begins, "Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabinol (CBN)" -- two types of cannabinoids, a family of active components in marijuana. "Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size."

The 1975 journal article doesn't mention breast cancer tumors, which featured in the only newspaper story ever to appear about the 1974 study -- in the Local section of the Washington Post on August 18, 1974. Under the headline, "Cancer Curb Is Studied," it read in part:

"The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered." The researchers "found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."

Guzman, writing from Madrid, was eloquent in his response after this writer faxed him the clipping from the Washington Post of a quarter century ago. In translation, he wrote:

"It is extremely interesting to me, the hope that the project seemed to awaken at that moment, and the sad evolution of events during the years following the discovery, until now we once again Œdraw back the veil‚ over the anti-tumoral power of THC, twenty-five years later. Unfortunately, the world bumps along between such moments of hope and long periods of intellectual castration."

News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article. This writer stumbled on it through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report web page. The New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors.

Codex Committee: “You Can’t Tell People that Food Prevents Disease!”

Alliance for Natural Health

Not even nutrient-related disease! Our executive director’s gripping report from the front lines.

As we discussed last week, ANH-USA represented US consumers at the international Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses, which met last week in Germany. Our executive director, Gretchen DuBeau, reports that the committee made a number of decisions that may well affect natural health in the US. Here in the US, we have been debating various issues concerning natural health: Will we retain access to a wide variety of dietary supplements in high-nutrient-level dosages? Will we be able to access nutritious, healthy foods, or will selection and quality diminish because of industry or government control? Will we finally achieve mandatory labeling for GMOs? We naturally think that, if we are able to convince our policymakers, our rights will be protected. But we could be wrong. We have to keep a close eye on what happens overseas too.

Codex, which was established by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), is creating international guidelines for member nations to follow. And while these guidelines are supposed to be voluntary, it is conceivable that our country’s food policies could be overridden by international trade law. At the very least, the wrong international guidelines won’t make it easier to keep the right ones here.

One of the most significant outcomes from this meeting would have the effect of squelching free speech even further. In relation to principles underlying food fortification for the prevention of diet-related illness, the committee members emphasized that language indicating that food prevents disease is forbidden and they are opposed to claims that may “mislead”—even if the claim is true. Happily, the US delegation disagreed, and said that while the US has similar policies about food claims, by definition the nutrients in food prevent nutrient-related diseases! The Botswana delegation agreed with us, pointing out that iodine prevents goiter, so therefore nutrients do prevent disease, yet Botswana nevertheless reinforced the ban.

This is at the heart of ANH’s work. We are here to educate consumers about the role that food, supplements (including nutraceuticals), and lifestyle play in optimizing health. And now we are seeing the beginning of international policy preventing health claims related to natural health products and foods. It’s difficult to educate consumers when international leaders are forbidding the discussion!

In another extremely troubling decision, the Codex Committee adopted extremely low Nutrient Reference Values for labeling purposes—that is, the intake levels of essential nutrients deemed adequate to meet most people’s minimal nutritional needs. They are roughly equivalent to our “Recommended Dietary Allowances,” in that RDAs indicate the daily dietary intake level of a nutrient considered sufficient by the Food and Nutrition Board to meet the requirements of 97.5% of healthy individuals in each life-stage and gender group. These new NRVs are far too low to be effective at preventing disease, according to most natural health experts, with even higher nutrient values needed to optimize health—though it was stressed that the actual values weren’t important because they are “just for labeling purposes.”

The committee also adopted single values—what some supposed “average healthy person” might need. And of course that doesn’t work! Children, young people, men, women (with different needs if pregnant), the elderly, and people with a multitude of nutrient deficiencies or excesses, food sensitivities, dietary needs, and illnesses—each would need a very different dosage. So we would advocate a range of values, which can take into account bioindividuality—the “systems biology” approach that considers the great variability in individuals’ genetic backgrounds.

Also under discussion were NRVs associated with reduced incidence of non-communicable diet-related diseases, or NRVs-NCD. Regarding those, the committee said, “Governments are encouraged to use the NRVs-NCD, or alternatively, consider the suitability of the general principles below, including the level of evidence required… in establishing their own reference values for labeling purposes for nutrients associated with diet-related non-communicable diseases.” In other words: member countries should adopt these standards precisely, or at least follow our guidelines if you need to tweak them to your needs.

Did you see that phrase, “including the level of evidence required”? At least here we find an upside: the committee proposed a broader scientific standard than the one it had been using previously. Instead of the “gold standard” of random-controlled trials (RCTs), both WHO and FAO now use something called the GRADE system, which takes into consideration all levels of evidence, including clinical, giving more weight to evidence that is more conclusive. And Codex is inclined to agree with this broader standard. This is extremely positive, as natural health products rarely have patent protection and therefore cannot afford hundreds of millions of dollars for RCTs, but may have an abundance of clinical evidence.

Of course, everyone’s big question is harmonization on supplements—that is, whether the US will accept the limits Codex creates for supplements (in terms of dosages and product availability). Unfortunately, there’s no easy answer to that one. The US delegation made it clear that our country intends to stay flexible—to create our own standards and use our own science, indicating no intention to harmonize at this time. Legally, we are not bound to harmonize. But we are subject to World Trade Organization (WTO) sanctions should conflicting national policy creates trade disputes.

This is unlikely to be an issue, but there have already been conflicts. For example, in 1985 the European Union enacted a ban on the production and importation of meat derived from animals treated with growth-promoting hormones. In 1989, the EU banned the import of US beef produced with growth-promoting hormones, dramatically reducing beef exports to the EU. In 1996, the US claimed that the EU ban adversely affected trade and because their standards exceeded those set by Codex, the WTO should intervene. It did, and a WTO panel ruled in the US’s favor, allowing the US to begin collecting tariffs on $116.8 million worth of imports from the EU—the amount that it lost each year due to the ban.

In other words, while a country may not be obligated to adopt a Codex standard into domestic law, international trade pressures, especially from powerful countries, could create pressure to do so. This is a particular threat when it comes to dietary supplements. Although the US may be able to maintain access to high level nutrients in its supplements, much of the rest of the world will not. And the weight of a standard accepted by 185 countries is almost certain to give determined anti-supplement legislators like Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) reasons, at some point, to introduce a new bill to harmonize.

Of further concern is the fact that Codex is creating principles for food fortification—adding folic acid or calcium to food—which, as we’ve reported, can in some cases be dangerous. For example, it is dangerous to fortify with calcium without any of the essential co-factors. In addition, this is a band-aid approach to treating nutrient deficiencies instead of focusing on the real problem. We need to address farming practices that are destroying the nutrient content of soil and leading to less nutritious food.

What about GMOs (genetically modified organisms)? Europe is not friendly to GMO, so could we gain some ground there? If this meeting is any indication, the answer is likely to be No. The issue of banning GMOs in children’s cereals was quickly dismissed because of a “lack of science” supporting the claim that GMOs are dangerous. We noted that there were dozens of “experts” in the room ready to support GMO.

Here again we have the international trade dispute problem to consider: If state bills requiring GMO labeling were to pass, and it eventually became federal law, and Codex prohibited such labeling, there would absolutely be a WTO dispute and the international standard would be hard to beat.

This meeting revealed the usual problem of the infiltration of special interests. This threatens to outweigh what appears to be positive intent on the part of many participating in the process. The underlying—and most relevant—question is, “Who benefits from harmonized standards on everything from infant formula to fortification of foods?” Answer: the largest companies in the world. Their interests are represented here, but the consumers of the world are not. The tagline on many Codex documents is “safe, good food for everyone,” but the point that was stressed over and over again at this meeting is that “we are here to facilitate trade.”

As Codex continues through its creation and approval process, it is taking on a life of its own that, despite the current intent of the US to maintain independence, may meet us at our front door and demand entrance.

Pesticide Use Increases as GMO Technology Backfires

Wake Up World
by Mary West

The GMO nightmare continues to unfurl, as the crop technology designed to reduce the need for pesticides has backfired. Farmers’ heavy adoption of these modified crops has sparked an increase in “superweeds” and hard-to-kill insects, creating the need to use more toxic herbicides.

Proponents of GMOs have alleged that these crops are a vital tool for weaning farmers off of toxic pesticides, but this claim has been resoundingly refuted by a recent study published in Environmental Science Europe. Chuck Benbrook, a researcher for Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources, found that GMO use has led to a “monsoon in herbicides.” Not only have these crops necessitated the need for higher applications of Roundup, Monsanto’s herbicide, but the problem has also forced farmers to use older herbicides that have more harmful effects, says Benbrook.

Statistics demolish Monsanto’s claim that GMOs reduce the need for herbicides.

The magnitude of the increase in pesticide use is illustrated by the statistics of the study. In the period between 1996, when the use of Roundup-ready crops began, and 2011, herbicide use increased by 527 million pounds, equating to 11 percent.

During the first few years of the use of Roudup-ready crops, these GMOs actually fulfilled Monsanto’s promise of reducing the need for herbicides: they reduced the use of these chemicals by 2 percent between 1996 and 1999. This advantage, however, was short-lived. After this period, weeds started developing resistance to Roundup, which led to farmers’ increasing their application of this herbicide by 21 percent, evidenced by a 19 million spike in its use, Benbrook tells The Guardian. The stepped up use of Roundup eliminated the weak weeds, which gave the resistant weeds, or “superweeds,” the opportunity to proliferate and take over.

Statistics revealing a 24 percent increase in pesticide use between 2009 through 2010 show the problem is only getting worse. Benbrook relates to The Guardian that by this time the problem of resistant weeds had fully kicked in, resulting in the use of greater volumes of Roundup as well as more toxic herbicides such as 2,4-D, a component of the infamous Agent Orange.

What about Bt seeds, the other main biotech product?

Resistance problems leading to pesticide increases are not limited to Roundup-ready crops but also include the other primary biotech product – Bt seeds. These seeds have been engineered to contain a gene present in Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) that is toxic to insects. This product’s purported benefit is that it will take care of the insect problem, but has it worked?

Although it initially reduced the need for insecticides, the resistance problem developed by Roundup-ready crops has now begun to manifest in these crops as well. Just as weeds acquired resistance to Roundup, so also rootworm, the biggest pest of corn, is showing signs of resistance to the Bt technology. In areas of the Midwest where these crops have been popular, agricultural experts are advising farmers to spray other insecticides because the Bt trait is failing.

Greater use of chemicals translates into more health hazards. The harmful effects of pesticides, including Roundup, are not confined to weeds and inserts. Studies show they increase health risks in people and animals exposed to them through food and water. Experts say the use of more chemicals leads to more health hazards. Benbrook aptly characterizes the GMO problem as a “slowly unfolding train wreck.”