Will I Ever Be Cured? I’ve been coming across a lot of people lately asking, “Yeah,
but when will I be cured of yeast overgrowth?” This is a very important
question, and the answer has everything to do with your attitude about food and, perhaps,
your definition of “cured.” The allopathic doctors who treat cancer say someone is cured if they
live for five years after the beginning of treatments. It doesn’t matter that they
die one day after the five-year mark, they are statistically marked down as having been
cured. But that isn’t where we’re going with this word. The medical dictionary
says it means: “1. To
heal, to make well, to restore to good health. Cures are easy to claim and, all too often,
difficult to confirm, and 2. A time without recurrence of a disease so that the
risk of recurrence is small.” That also is not what we mean when we say “cured.”
We mean that the disease is no longer present in your body, and, barring a change in your
current lifestyle (which includes diet), it will not return without the reintroduction of
those same toxins/poisons that caused it the first time. Which brings us back to the question asked
in the first paragraph. That person wants to know when she will be cured so that she can
go back to the way she used to eat before she started the program that removed the yeast
from her system. Well, you will be cured when the yeast-count in your body has lowered to
the point where your immune system can handle them without adverse effects. However, as
soon as you return to the Standard American Diet (SAD. i.e., junk food), you will be
reinfected and you will reacquire all the ailments you used to have. Because your
tolerance for those bad foods has been reduced over the period of time that you were
eating well, those ailments will seem, and might actually be, much worse than they
were the first time you had them. So, if you’re one of the people who considers the Standard
American Diet as “normal,” then you will never be truly cured, but only in
remission when you abstain from processed foods, sugars, and grains. If you can change your eating habits permanently to
exclude the offending foods, then I would say you have a 100% chance of a cure. I was talking with Rich about this the other day and told him that I
kept hearing this question about being cured, and that I considered myself cured, however
a lot of people would say I’m just “controlling my symptoms” the same way I
would be if I were taking a drug. But if I’ve permanently changed my eating
habits, and no longer consume sugar, corn, peanuts, soy, or any processed foods, then my
illnesses won’t come back and I can say unequivocally that I have cured myself.
My idea of “normal” eating has changed significantly over the past year, and I
no longer consider the vast majority of food available today as being even close to
“normal.” It’s totally abnormal, and foreign to our systems (as Nature
intended), in its current form. Rich said if you turn it around the other way and say “processed
foods were making me sick” it’s a more realistic way of looking at it. I’d
have to agree, that’s the best way to think about dietary changes. Instead of Hot
Pockets (for example), think about cyanide. If you ate a little bit of cyanide every day
or a few times a week, it wouldn’t kill you right away, but it would make you very
sick, and you would eventually die from it. Everyone knows cyanide is a poison, so
there aren’t very many people who would ingest it on purpose, but the fact is that
processed food is just as poisonous. The only difference is that most people don’t
know it yet (and are told daily that this particular junk food is good for you –
and they wouldn’t lie to you, would they?). Sugar is the number one offender. Not
only is it empty calories with no nutritional value whatsoever, but it kills off your
white blood cells, causing immune-deficiencies, while at the same time it allows fungi to
multiply totally out of control. The number one food in this country today is corn, and we all know by
now how bad corn is. Yet it’s in everything, because it’s cheap to produce.
(Remember, the food industry is not concerned about our health, it’s only concerned
about their profits.) It’s even in commercial meat and dairy products, because the
animals that produced those were fed a diet of corn. Farmers and ranchers know that their
animals don’t do well on corn alone. Eventually they sicken and die. Fortunately for
the ranchers, they’re going to slaughter those animals at an early age anyway, so
they don’t have to worry about the longevity of their livestock. But we should
be worried because we do want to live a long and healthy life. Humans are omnivores, and we need to eat a variety of different foods
in order to be optimally healthy; preferably whole, unprocessed foods. But with the
current state of affairs in the food industry, we’re getting a diet of mostly corn
and sugar, no matter what it looks like or what we think it really is. I was watching a program the other
day where a sample of fast food (McDonald’s was again the unlucky guinea pig) was
tested for corn content. The results will astound you: 56% of a Big Mac contained corn,
75% of a milkshake contained corn, 23% of an order of fries contained corn, 74% of chicken
nuggets contained corn, and 100% of a Coke (dry weight, water removed) contained corn (in
the form of corn syrup as the sweetener). Most people, if asked if any of those items had
corn in them, would say no, but the fact is, it doesn’t matter what it looks like
anymore. If it’s a processed or fast food, it has corn in it. And if it has corn
in it, it has aflatoxin in it. People eat this stuff every day, then wonder why
they have so much sickness and pain, never suspecting their food is the culprit. So the short answer to the question “Will I ever be cured?”
is “Yes, if you stop eating poison.” Otherwise, the best you can hope for is a
pill to mask your symptoms for a few hours at a time. How to Win the War Some famous person (was it General Patton?) said something to the
effect, “How do you win a war? With experience. How do you get experience? By
learning from your failures in battle.” Or something like that. Let’s relate
that ideology to our health issues. How can you get cured of all your ailments? By
learning from your experiences, and those of others who have beaten the enemy. One of the
problems, as the Watchdog column (below) points out, is that the enemy is not only fungi,
or bacteria, or viruses, but other people who claim to provide cures while only treating
symptoms, using drugs that will probably make you sicker. They do this, not in the name of
curing you, but to fatten their own wallets. This is not only your doctor (whose main
guilt is lack of knowledge) or the AMA or the FDA, or even Big Pharma. It is also all the
large food manufacturers who put bad foods and bad chemicals into their products to make
them taste better, have a longer shelf life, or beat their competition by producing the
product cheaper. This also is done in the name of profit, not health, regardless of how
much or how often they claim their product is good for you (e.g., a candy bar that calls
itself chocolate but contains no cocoa also does not contain the antioxidants they claim
on TV, and even if it did, that value is cancelled totally by all the sugar and other
chemical crap in that product.). So, back to the above quote. We have provided you with the ammunition
to fight this war. You can win, but only if you take this seriously. As Lannie
states above, you cannot battle a yeast problem, then expect to go back to the same foods
that caused it without getting sick all over again. You all are experiencing some form of
illness or you wouldn’t be reading this. Therefore, you have some experience.
Now start fighting and gain some more experience – the experience of getting well.
Eliminate the killer foods and the killer drugs and continue to get well. But, you can
never go back to that old way of life or you will also go back to those same old
illnesses. So here’s another quote, this one from Ben Franklin: “Anyone
who would give up essential liberty for temporary security deserves neither liberty nor
security.” OK, that one is usually used as a 2nd Amendment argument, but
in this case, I use it to imply that if you want an “easy life” and you are
willing to let your doctor decide what pills you are going to take for the rest of your
life and you’re going to let the evil marketers on TV tell you what processed
prepackaged foods to eat, then you probably don’t deserve good health. Gee, do I
sound too harsh here? Should I take pity on those who think it is just “tooooo
haaaard” to eat good foods instead of shoving potato chips, popcorn, corn dogs, or
McBarf burgers, etc. into their mouths because it’s easier? Obtaining good health is
a battle you have to fight. There are no magic pills and no magic words that will
make everything OK (even using your Field of Intentions requires some work). You have
to work at this! And if you give up and go back to the programming that big business
wants you to follow, then you have lost the war. You have chosen to let them live your
life for you, sucking your wallet dry on a regular basis, and you will die earlier than
you should. But no doubt you already bought your burial insurance from a TV ad and a plot
where your family can come grieve at the loss, even though you spent your whole life
saving money so they could have the things they want – ummm, lots more junk food?
Silly? So get off your butt, turn off your demon TV, eat some good food, go for a
walk in the fresh air, and gain some experience about health. You have the ammo. Choose to
use it. Watchdog (was Miscellaneous BS) 1. Not health related, but you ought to know because we have mentioned RFID (radio-frequency identification) so often: The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers) has started work on a new protocol — a standard called IEEE 1902.1 also known as RuBee — that is expected to give retailers and manufacturers an attractive alternative to RFID for many applications, especially item-level efforts. … A traditional 900MHz RFID approach “is 99.99 percent radio signal and 0.01 magnetic/inductive. What [RuBee] is doing is 99.99 percent magnetic. There is no radio signal in these tags at all,” Stevens said. … An IEEE statement described RuBee as being “a bidirectional, on-demand, peer-to-peer, radiating, transceiver protocol operating at wavelengths below 450 Khz. This protocol works in harsh environments with networks of many thousands of tags and has an area range of 10 to 50 feet.” The “harsh environment” reference is key to RuBee’s appeal, as RFID’s struggles with getting accurate reads through or near liquids and metals has been the most significant obstacle to its widespread cost-effective deployment. Works in liquids? Like, perhaps, in the human blood stream? They make no mention of using this technology for anything beyond the retail environment, but we all know that if a technology can be used for corrupt purposes, someone will do so (i.e., I bet the government is licking their lips over this one). You can read the rest of their story (if you’re at all interested) at: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1974931,00.asp 2. Now the FDA is in the RFID game too, presumably only to track pharmaceuticals with the stated intent of eliminating counterfeit drugs. However, I suspect that this would also mean that anyone who drives by your house with an RFID reader can tell what drugs you have in there. While the Task Force didn’t actually mandate the use of RFID to track and trace drugs through the pharmaceutical distribution chain — from manufacturer to wholesaler to retailer to consumer — it did point to RFID as “the most promising technology for implementing electronic track and trace in the drug supply chain,” and suggested that “stakeholders move quickly to implement this technology.” More at: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1974892,00.asp Also, World Cup organizers are trying to keep a lid on hooliganism and ticket scalping with embedded RFID chips. This means that not only will they know if a ticket is real, but they can track it. http://ct.enews.cioinsight.com/rd/cts?d=188-351-1-20-159789-44758-0-0-0-1 Big Brother has arrived in full force, folks. 3. When you are eating the diet that
nature intended, you are eating the diet that your body was designed to consume: A diet of
raw fruits and vegetables, nuts, seeds and
leaves, right from nature to your body. That’s the only diet that you were designed
to consume and that is normal. Now, anything that diverts you from that diet is abnormal
and, in fact, anything that takes you away from that diet is going to promote chronic disease. Read about what is a “normal” diet for the human body at: http://www.newstarget.com/019417.html (Note: we will reference this “normal
diet” stuff again when I get the “Is Cooking Good or Bad” article done. So
much to do, so little time. Sigh…) 4. An antidepressant won federal
approval Monday as the first drug to treat seasonal affective disorder, the wintertime
blues that can strike when the days grow short. Wellbutrin XL can be used in
the prevention of major depressive episodes in patients with a history of seasonal
affective disorder, often called SAD, the Food and Drug Administration said. This should be in the “You gotta be kiddin’ me”
category. Winter blues? AKA Cabin fever? Excuse me, but depression is a mental condition.
Yes, your emotion can make an imbalance by causing the brain to increase or decrease
certain hormones and other chemicals, but you don’t need a drug to fix that; you need
to change your attitude. And how about the side effects?
This is what the PDR lists for Wellbutrin XL: Abdominal
pain, agitation, anxiety, constipation, diarrhea, dizziness, dry mouth, heart
palpitations, increased urination, insomnia, muscle soreness, nausea, rash, ringing in the
ears, sore throat, sweating. It also warns that there is an increased risk of seizures
while taking this drug. So
how bad would your “wintertime blues” be if you had to put up with some of these
side effects, and constantly wonder if you were going to have an unexpected seizure? If
you want to banish your winter blues, get a full spectrum light. Anyway, if you want to know more about what Big Pharma is pushing
this week, check out the remainder of this stupid article at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13281682/ 5. If you read the news recently, you
probably noticed headline stories about a new “disease” called Road Rage
Disorder. Also known as Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED), it’s the latest
invention by psychiatrists to sell more drugs and medicalize every human behavior and
emotion. It’s a total scam, of course. Mike Adams
exposes this fraud in its entirety (long article) at: http://www.newstarget.com/019418.html 6. U.S. hospitals have saved an
estimated 122,300 lives in the last 18 months through a massive campaign to reduce lethal
errors, the leader of the national effort said Wednesday. OK, folks, do the math. If it took 18 months to save 122,300 lives,
that makes it 81,533 in one year. And, as previous stats indicate, errors and diseases
contracted while in a hospital are responsible for well over 100,000 deaths per year.
While this might be an improvement over previous stats, it is still a far cry from making
me feel safe about ever checking myself into any hospital. Anyway, their version of the
story can be viewed at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13319878/ 7. The vaccine strain of measles virus
has been found in 85% of samples taken from the guts of children with regressive autism,
according to a study to be presented in Montreal, Canada, by Dr. Stephen Walker of the
Wake Forest University School of Medicine in North Carolina. More at: http://www.aapsonline.org/nod/newsofday295.php Well, as we have said before, it is
very likely that autism is caused by heavy metals, which the MMR vaccine
(measles/mumps/rubella) contains, as do almost all other vaccines. However, one
must also note that big pharma and their lackeys, various professional medical
associations, who all want to make him look bad as a way to refute this claim, are now
slamming the doctor who discovered this. For the other side, see: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article799541.ece
8. Do selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (over-the-counter NSAIDs, like ibuprofen) increase the risk of atherothrombosis (heart attacks)? This web site says they do: 9. The pharmaceutical industry must
embrace, not avoid, new ways to collect and monitor information on drug risks if it wants
to continue to thrive and innovate, several U.S. health experts said on Wednesday.
Regulatory experts, doctors and other scientists at an Institute of Medicine (IOM)
workshop on drug risks and benefits said having more clear data would not only help
patients and doctors, but also allow companies to make better decisions about which drugs
to develop. I think there should be no
direct-to-consumer drug ads, but that’s just me. More at: 10. The new Medicare prescription drug benefit plan is a financial and logistical disaster. The only group that is actually benefiting from the program is Big Pharma. See Mike Adams’ tirade at: http://www.newstarget.com/019420.html 11. In an unprecedented move, the
American Medical Association (AMA) voted on June 13 to call on the U.S. government to
require salt warning labels on
food products and to cut salt content in manufactured foods by 50% within a decade.
The AMA, the largest group of physicians in the U.S., is also asking the Food and Drug
Administration to revoke salt’s
status as a food that is “generally recognized as safe,” noting there is
overwhelming medical evidence that high salt intake dramatically increases risk of heart
disease, hypertension and stroke. Heart disease is the nation’s leading cause of
death. Foods that would require warning labels would include everything from conventional
hot dogs to some canned soups. The Food Products Association, a trade group for the food
and beverage manufacturing industry, and one of the most powerful lobbying groups in
Washington D.C. said the new policy is “misguided,” claiming there is not enough
scientific evidence tying salt to negative health effects. Learn more: http://alerts.organicconsumers.org/trk/click?ref=zqtbkk3um_0-1ax241x3189428 12. The largest retailers and distributors of milk and dairy products in the U.S. are considering eliminating rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormone) from their products. According to the trade journal Dairy Food and Market Analyst, Wal-Mart and Dean Foods have begun pressing suppliers for a larger supply of milk produced without rBGH, in response to increasing consumer demand. The synthetic hormone rBGH is a genetically engineered drug designed to make dairy cows produce more milk. The controversial hormone has been banned in Europe and Canada due to its links to increased risks for cancer and antibiotic resistance. Despite these bans, 18% of U.S. dairy cows, especially those on factory-style farms, continue to be injected with the drug. Over the past few years, millions of consumers have switched to milk and dairy products from organic farms, which ban the use of rBGH and antibiotics. Starbucks, by the way, is still serving up coffee drinks across the country that are laced with rBGH – another good reason to patronize local independently owned coffee shops that offer organic and Fair Trade alternatives. Learn more at: http://alerts.organicconsumers.org/trk/click?ref=zqtbkk3um_0-1ax242x3189428 Some of the major U.S. dairies that have eliminated rBGH in the past year include: April, 2005 - Tillamook’s cheeses (Tillamook, Oregon): the second largest producer of block cheese in the U.S.; June, 2005 - Eberhard Dairy (Redmond, Oregon): central Oregon’s largest dairy processing plant; Nov., 2005 - Alpenrose Dairy in Portland, Oregon; Feb. 2006 - Darigold’s yogurts: a large western U.S. dairy. June 2006 - Garelick: a large East Coast dairy processor, producing 45 million pounds of milk per month; June 2006 - Meadow Gold and Darigold Farms: Montana’s largest milk producers. 13. Justin Knox bit down on the bitter-tasting patch, instantly releasing three days’ worth of a drug more powerful than morphine. He was dead before he even got to the hospital. The 22-year-old construction worker and addict was another victim in an apparent surge in U.S. overdoses blamed on abuse of the fentanyl patch, a prescription-only product that is intended for cancer patients and others with chronic pain and is designed to dispense the medicine slowly through the skin. More at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13344990/ 14. TV and newspaper reports emerging from major medical meetings are so overstated or so lacking in context that viewers and readers would be better off paying no attention to them whatsoever. http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/ClinicalTrials/tb/3504 15. Laugh of the week: The American Medical Association, meeting in Chicago this week, will consider a controversial proposal to fight obesity by taxing soda pop. A committee of the influential doctors’ group is recommending the AMA lobby for a “small” federal tax on sugar-sweetened soft drinks, with proceeds going to anti-obesity efforts such as physical activity programs and healthier school meals. So the bozos admit that soda pop is bad for us, but can you fight that demon with a tax? Come on, serious smokers bitched when cigarette prices went up $20/carton, but it didn’t make very many quit smoking. And children will just demand bigger allowances to compensate for this “small” tax. If you want soda pop to go away, taxing it is not the answer. Their story is at: http://www.suntimes.com/output/health/cst-nws-ama11.html 16. The growing and largely unregulated
phenomenon of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing is alarming experts, who argue that
testing should remain the province of specialists who can advise, educate and counsel
patients. This article http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/12/AR2006061201104.html suggests you might be devastated by
being alone when you get your results. I think this is a scare tactic by those who do not
want to lose a large income source. 17. A world-renowned Alzheimer’s
disease researcher at the National Institutes of Health took advantage of the agency’s
lax oversight by improperly forwarding valuable tissue specimens to a pharmaceutical
company and then accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in consulting fees from it,
according to congressional investigators. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/13/AR2006061301528.html As usual, it’s all about money,
isn’t it? 18. One of the most widely used
treatments for the eating disorder anorexia nervosa, the antidepressant Prozac, works no better than dummy pills
in preventing recurrence in young women who have recovered from it, researchers are
reporting today. Full story at: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/14/health/14prozac.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin 19. The nation’s largest doctors’
group said Tuesday that Americans
who can afford health insurance should be required to buy it, a recommendation
aimed particularly at young adults who tend to postpone coverage. Read this story at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/13/AR2006061301470.html Zeig heil, mein Führer! Now here’s a fine example of an
agency that wants to protect the profits of its members by using more government
oppression. They would turn us into a socialist state because they can charge more for
insurance patients than cash patients, and run more expensive unnecessary tests. 20. A growing understanding of human genetics is prompting fresh consideration of how
much control people have over who they are and how they act. The recent discoveries
include genes that seem to influence
whether an individual is fat,
has a gift
for dance or will be addicted to
cigarettes. Pronouncements about the power of genes seem to be in the news almost daily, and are
changing the way some Americans feel about themselves, their flaws and their talents, as well as the decisions they make. Gee, I’m sorry to be so disagreeable (no, I’m not really J ), but I refuse to buy into this cop-out answer. I am sure genetics
does play a large part in our lives (or else why have genes?), but most of the things the
geneticists say you get from your ancestors are simply a matter of childhood environment,
not your genetics (though I am sure they have just come out with a new drug to fix this J). You smoke because your parents, peers, or hero (e.g., John Wayne)
smoked, not because there is a gene that makes you crave cigarettes. You are fat because
you were fed the wrong foods all your life and you continue to eat that crap, not because
you have a fat gene. “Yeah, but I am fat because my parents and their parents
were fat, so that must be genetic.” Wrong! Your grandparents porked out on grits, so
your parents also porked out on grits, and because they taught you how and what to eat, so
do you. Having “flaws,” by the way, is a judgment by people who feel superior
– there is nothing wrong with you that you can’t change if you so desire.
What are “talents”? Another judgment by society? Your talent might be
insignificant or grand, depending on your mindset. And, as for the decisions you make,
that is a learned skill, not genetics. Change your mind to change your life and you can be
whatever you intend. It is not in your genes; it is in your head. Fix it!
Their text can be seen at: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/15/health/15gene.html?_r=1&oref=slogin 21. Studies now suggest that the
healthful eating habits recommended to lower your risk of cancer may also help prevent the
most common cause of irreversible blindness that occurs among people in developed
countries. Although age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is still not fully understood,
experts say it may stem from damage caused by oxidation reactions. More at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13353057/ I have two points here. 1) I still
refuse to believe in diseases being age-related; they are usually the result of
accumulation of various toxins. Given that they take time to accumulate to
dangerous levels, that gives the appearance that these diseases are age-related. 2)
My eyes got steadily worse until, at age 17, I had to get glasses to see the chalkboard at
school (Chalk? Guess that dates me). They continued to get worse over the years and every
year or two I got stronger prescriptions. Then one day, I discovered that not only couldn’t
I see things clearly in the distance, but I was having to hold my books farther away to
read, so I had to get bifocals. Then I changed my lifestyle with the intent to get healthy
(that happened last summer) and today, I do not need glasses for distance vision and I
only need cheap granny reading glasses if I am reading a book in bed (within a foot of my
face). I suspect that need will go away soon too. Now, what happened? See if you can find
any eye doctor who will say that the shape of your eye (which is what causes your need for
corrective lenses or LASIK surgery) can be changed by what you eat. Ha! Point here is that
obviously the shape of my eyeballs has returned to the original template (i.e., as Nature
intended). Gee, could it be that what makes eyes blow out of shape is the same thing that
makes cows (and people) fat? Some say that is corn and antibiotics. Antibiotics are
mycotoxins. Corn carries dozens of molds that produce… yup, you guessed it:
mycotoxins. Could it really be that simple? Well, hey, it worked for me and I have done
nothing but change what I eat and get more exercise. No doctor will agree with this
assessment and one has already called me “an enigma” (for lack of having an
allopathic answer). Have you got a better (scientific) answer? 22. The company that makes the “uncola”
is accused of telling an untruth in a new marketing campaign that touts 7UP as “100%
natural.” The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) will sue 7UP’s manufacturer, Cadbury
Schweppes, unless the company drops the claim. Although the company removed several
artificial ingredients from the drink, at least one remains: high fructose corn syrup. More at: http://www.cspinet.org/new/200605111.html High fructose corn syrup is made by
extracting starch from corn and altering it with enzymes or acids. That is
definitely not “natural.” I also question “natural citric acid” and “natural
potassium citrate.” And what, exactly are “natural flavors”? Is it really
“natural” if it is a derived chemical or processed in any way? 23. About one-quarter of U.S. bottled water comes from a municipal water source. The industry maintains that no illness outbreaks have ever been linked to U.S. bottled water. However, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) conducted a study of 103 brands of bottled water (over 1,000 bottles were tested in all) and found that one-third contained synthetic organic chemicals and bacteria. One sample even contained arsenic levels above state health limits. The NRDC maintains that city tap water is required to undergo more rigorous testing and has higher purity standards than bottled water. Just what the heck is “a synthetic organic chemical”? More at: http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/bolivia/waterbottle.html 24. A child suffered a seizure after chewing on a cough-suppressing vapor patch, leading Novartis AG to recall the patches Monday. The Swiss drug company warned consumers to stop using its Triaminic Vapor Patches immediately. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13424280/ 25. Gritty rats and mice living in sewers and farms seem to have healthier immune systems than their squeaky clean cousins that frolic in cushy antiseptic labs, two studies indicate. The lesson for humans: Clean living may make us sick. More at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13370762/ 26. The National Cancer Institute is faking results again: The NCI is the federal government’s lead organization in financing
cancer research, with an annual
budget of about $5 billion. Presentation of the results from a recent breast cancer
study demonstrates the NCI’s eagerness to proclaim success no matter what the data
show. … detailed results of the study — appearing in this week’s issue of
the Journal of the American Medical Association — differ substantially from the
interpretation pushed by the press release. More: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13421277/ Ladies, if I were you, I wouldn’t
take these drugs because they both have too many negative side effects. 27. Statins, the cholesterol-lowering drugs taken by millions of Americans, might also reduce the risk of cataracts, a preliminary study suggests. Adults who took statins were found to be 45 percent less likely to develop the most common type of age-related cataracts. Their story is at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13441360/ Now, we have already said this before, but the statin drugs are antifungal (though not a safe version) and LDL cholesterol (the bad stuff) is caused by fungi, so naturally statins help defeat LDL, but what about these cataracts? Well, eyes are one of the moistest places on the body that are also exposed to outside air (along with ears, nose and throat). Those places are greatly affected by fungi and I believe eye problems are predominantly fungal in nature, so it seems logical that an antifungal should help with this problem. 28. “I feel like there were some
patterns that stared me in the face once I began looking at the evidence from medical science. There are so many studies out
there from not just the United States, but from countries worldwide, that indicate a
pattern in which synthetic
chemicals have increasingly played a role in the types of illnesses and diseases that we
are beginning to see at very alarming levels. If you chart on a graph the
production of synthetic chemicals, especially since World War II, and you compare that graph to the
increase in certain diseases – for instance, neurological disorders and cancer –
the graphs are almost one on top of the other in sequence, and synchronized.” Interesting interview by Mike Adams with Randall Fitzgerald, author of The Hundred Year Lie. More at: http://www.newstarget.com/019434.html 29: Forbes magazine says it is time to buy pharma stocks: Standard & Poor’s Equity Research reiterated a “buy” rating on Teva Pharmaceutical Industries after the company received tentative approval of a generic version of blockbuster cholesterol drug Zocor. The Israel-based company said it expects to receive final U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval when Merck’s patent for Zocor expires in late June. In addition, Teva announced that the FDA appealed a May 1 federal court decision, which ruled that the agency’s denial of a review of a six-month generic exclusivity on the drug was unlawful. If you care about stocks, this story can be read at: http://www.forbes.com/healthcare/2006/05/26/teva-pharmaceuticals-0526markets09.html Here I will add Dr. Mercola’s comments on this subject because he believes as I do about the evils (lies) of drug marketing: The health care field has evolved into a facade for the business of selling drugs. The pharmaceutical industry spends more than $4 billion a year to market drugs to consumers in the United States and more than $16 billion to market them to U.S. physicians. Moreover, they have come up with some of the most effective and creative marketing schemes in history. You probably didn’t know that top U.S. drug makers spend 2.5 times as much on marketing and administration as they do on research, and at least a third of the drugs marketed by industry leaders were discovered by universities or small biotech companies Yet drug companies justify their extremely high prices by saying they need this money to cover their high R&D costs. Hogwash. They charge high prices [only] to increase their profits, period. After all, they need to maintain their status as one of the most profitable industries on the planet. One particularly pernicious marketing strategy they use is to create an illness where none existed before so they can offer you an expensive solution. Does this sound too incredible to be true? To be sure, let’s examine the cholesterol issue. In 2001 Dr. Antonio M. Gotto, Jr., dean of Cornell University Medical College, spoke at a press conference at the XII International Symposium on Atherosclerosis. He predicted more than half the population of the United States could one day be taking daily doses of cholesterol-lowering statin drugs. As if to make Dr. Gotto’s prediction true, later in 2001 the drug companies were able to manipulate the National Cholesterol Education Program committee to change the 1993 guidelines for treating those with cholesterol. They modified the recommendations to include anyone with an LDL (bad cholesterol) level from 130 to 100 to be a candidate for drug therapy. This one change increased their potential market in the United States alone by more than 36 million people. This tripled the number of people that were eligible for cholesterol-lowering medications. Then, in 2004, the same federal committee reduced the level even further to 70 It is difficult to obtain estimates, but it is likely that this added tens of millions of potential new candidates for their expensive solution. What is their solution? Using drugs that in no way, shape, or form treat the problem and are required to be taken indefinitely. Lipitor alone generates more than $10 billion a year in annual sales.
30. And on the same subject: Let’s get to the raw truth about
the pharmaceutical industry. Drug companies want to turn every normal human experience
into a diagnosable disease that’s treatable with their high-priced, patent-protected,
brand-name drugs. It used to be that drugs were intended just to treat bonafide diseases
– things like malaria or infections – but now the drug companies have realized that it’s
a much more profitable venture to invent diseases, and then sell drugs to treat
them. More at: http://www.newstarget.com/019443.html 31. A major drug company is blocking
access to a medicine that is cheaply and effectively saving thousands of people from going
blind because it wants to launch a more expensive product on the market More at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicine/story/0,,1799772,00.html 32. Canned light tuna, long
recommended as the safer choice because of its presumably lower mercury content, sometimes harbors at least as much of
that potentially harmful heavy metal as white tuna does, our analysis of Food and
Drug Administration data has shown. That finding raises new concerns about the safety of
canned tuna for pregnant women. Full article at: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/food/tuna-safety/overview/0607_tuna_ov.htm
34. Americans are seeking medical care
in greater numbers than ever before with the number of visits growing at three times the
rate of population growth, according to government statistics published Friday. People made more than 1 billion visits
in 2004 to doctors’ offices, emergency rooms and hospital outpatient departments,
according to the report from the National Center for Health Statistics. More at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13502131/ Duh! We are visiting doctors more and
more because what we eat makes us ill and the drugs we get for that illness make us even
sicker, so we have to go back again and again. Wake up people! Or maybe that direct-to-consumer drug advertising is working! People
are going in and asking if the drug they saw advertised on TV last night is right for
them! It would be interesting to see the statistics correlating hours of TV watched with
number of doctor visits per year... Brainwashing works! 35. Drugmaker Merck & Co.’s
research facility in West Point dumped a chemical compound that included cyanide into the
sewer system, killing more than 1,000 fish in Wissahickon Creek, federal authorities said
Thursday. Full story at: http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=10732 So they aren’t happy to just kill
people, huh? Now they have to poison our fish too. 36. The U.S. House recently voted with the largest phone
companies to privatize the Internet. You need to contact your congress critters about this
because it means there is a very real possibility that very soon, only AT&T customers
will be able to send mail to AT&T customers, or perhaps have to pay an additional fee
to send it to anyone else. That will put an end to these newsletters because I will not
pay their bribe fees to send it to 30 different domains. Some folks are trying very hard
to throw a wrench into this but I doubt they’ll win. For more info, see http://www.cioinsight.com/article2/0,1540,1977188,00.asp 37. Good news from the Public Library of Science (for those of you who genuinely have a watchdog mentality). I just received this note: As an advocate for the Public Library of Science (PLoS), I hope you will be delighted to hear that our newest open access journal - PLoS Clinical Trials - has now launched and is freely available to all at www.plosclinicaltrials.org. PLoS Clinical Trials will peer-review and publish the results of randomized clinical trials from all areas of medicine and public health. The journal will improve the reporting and availability of trial results by considering all randomized trials for publication irrespective of the outcome of the study. As with all PLoS journals, authors keep the copyright to their work, enabling the widest possible redistribution and reuse of content. There aren’t too many there yet because they just opened this site, but keep that link if you want to watch things unfold. |