http://www.mercola.com/article/sugar/dangers_of_sugar.htm
Contributed by Nancy Appleton, Ph.D
Author of the book Lick The Sugar Habit
In addition to throwing off the body's homeostasis, excess sugar may result in a number of other significant consequences. The following is a listing of some of sugar's metabolic consequences from a variety of medical journals and other scientific publications.
1. Sugar can suppress your immune system and impair your defenses against infectious disease.1,2
2. Sugar upsets the mineral relationships in your body: causes chromium and copper deficiencies and interferes with absorption of calcium and magnesium. 3,4,5,6
3. Sugar can cause can cause a rapid rise of adrenaline, hyperactivity, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, and crankiness in children.7,8
4. Sugar can produce a significant rise in total cholesterol, triglycerides and bad cholesterol and a decrease in good cholesterol.9,10,11,12
5. Sugar causes a loss of tissue elasticity and function.13
6. Sugar feeds cancer cells and has been connected with the development of cancer of the breast, ovaries, prostate, rectum, pancreas, biliary tract, lung, gallbladder and stomach.14,15,16,17,18,19,20
7. Sugar can increase fasting levels of glucose and can cause reactive hypoglycemia.21,22
8. Sugar can weaken eyesight.23
9. Sugar can cause many problems with the gastrointestinal tract including: an acidic digestive tract, indigestion, malabsorption in patients with functional bowel disease, increased risk of Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis.24,25,26,27,28
10. Sugar can cause premature aging.29
11. Sugar can lead to alcoholism.30
12. Sugar can cause your saliva to become acidic, tooth decay, and periodontal disease.31,32,33
13. Sugar contributes to obesity.34
14. Sugar can cause autoimmune diseases such as: arthritis, asthma, multiple sclerosis.35,36,37
15. Sugar greatly assists the uncontrolled growth of Candida Albicans (yeast infections)38
16. Sugar can cause gallstones.39
17. Sugar can cause appendicitis.40
18. Sugar can cause hemorrhoids.41
19. Sugar can cause varicose veins.42
20. Sugar can elevate glucose and insulin responses in oral contraceptive users.43
21. Sugar can contribute to osteoporosis.44
22. Sugar can cause a decrease in your insulin sensitivity thereby causing an abnormally high insulin levels and eventually diabetes.45,46,47
23. Sugar can lower your Vitamin E levels.48
24. Sugar can increase your systolic blood pressure.49
25. Sugar can cause drowsiness and decreased activity in children.50
26. High sugar intake increases advanced glycation end products (AGEs)(Sugar molecules attaching to and thereby damaging proteins in the body).51
27. Sugar can interfere with your absorption of protein.52
28. Sugar causes food allergies.53
29. Sugar can cause toxemia during pregnancy.54
30. Sugar can contribute to eczema in children.55
31. Sugar can cause atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease.56,57
32. Sugar can impair the structure of your DNA.58
33. Sugar can change the structure of protein and cause a permanent alteration of the way the proteins act in your body.59,60
34. Sugar can make your skin age by changing the structure of collagen.61
35. Sugar can cause cataracts and nearsightedness.62,63
36. Sugar can cause emphysema.64
37. High sugar intake can impair the physiological homeostasis of many systems in your body.65
38. Sugar lowers the ability of enzymes to function.66
39. Sugar intake is higher in people with Parkinson's disease.67
40. Sugar can increase the size of your liver by making your liver cells divide and it can increase the amount of liver fat.68,69
41. Sugar can increase kidney size and produce pathological changes in the kidney such as the formation of kidney stones.70,71
42. Sugar can damage your pancreas.72
43. Sugar can increase your body's fluid retention.73
44. Sugar is enemy #1 of your bowel movement.74
45. Sugar can compromise the lining of your capillaries.75
46. Sugar can make your tendons more brittle.76
47. Sugar can cause headaches, including migraines.77
48. Sugar can reduce the learning capacity, adversely affect school children's grades and cause learning disorders.78,79
49. Sugar can cause an increase in delta, alpha, and theta brain waves which can alter your mind's ability to think clearly.80
50. Sugar can cause depression.81
51. Sugar can increase your risk of gout.82
52. Sugar can increase your risk of Alzheimer's disease.83
53. Sugar can cause hormonal imbalances such as: increasing estrogen in men, exacerbating PMS, and decreasing growth hormone.84,85,86,87
54. Sugar can lead to dizziness.88
55. Diets high in sugar will increase free radicals and oxidative stress.89
56. High sucrose diets of subjects with peripheral vascular disease significantly increases platelet adhesion.90
57. High sugar consumption of pregnant adolescents can lead to substantial decrease in gestation duration and is associated with a twofold increased risk for delivering a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infant.91,92
58. Sugar is an addictive substance.93
59. Sugar can be intoxicating, similar to alcohol.94
60. Sugar given to premature babies can affect the amount of carbon dioxide they produce.95
61. Decrease in sugar intake can increase emotional stability.96
62. Your body changes sugar into 2 to 5 times more fat in the bloodstream than it does starch.97
63. The rapid absorption of sugar promotes excessive food intake in obese subjects.98
64. Sugar can worsen the symptoms of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).99
65. Sugar adversely affects urinary electrolyte composition.100
66. Sugar can slow down the ability of your adrenal glands to function.101
67. Sugar has the potential of inducing abnormal metabolic processes in a normal healthy individual and to promote chronic degenerative diseases.102
68. I.V.s (intravenous feedings) of sugar water can cut off oxygen to your brain.103
69. Sugar increases your risk of polio.104
70. High sugar intake can cause epileptic seizures.105
71. Sugar causes high blood pressure in obese people.106
72. In intensive care units: Limiting sugar saves lives.107
73. Sugar may induce cell death.108
74. In juvenile rehabilitation camps, when children were put on a low sugar diet, there was a 44 percent drop in antisocial behavior.109
75. Sugar dehydrates newborns.110
76. Sugar can cause gum disease.111
________________________________________
References
1. Sanchez, A., et al. Role of Sugars in Human Neutrophilic Phagocytosis, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Nov 1973;261:1180_1184. Bernstein, J., al. Depression of Lymphocyte Transformation Following Oral Glucose Ingestion. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.1997;30:613
2. Ringsdorf, W., Cheraskin, E. and Ramsay R. Sucrose, Neutrophilic Phagocytosis and Resistance to Disease, Dental Survey. 1976;52(12):46_48.
3. Couzy, F., et al. "Nutritional Implications of the Interaction Minerals," Progressive Food and Nutrition Science 17;1933:65-87
4. Kozlovsky, A., et al. Effects of Diets High in Simple Sugars on Urinary Chromium Losses. Metabolism. June 1986;35:515_518.
5. Fields, M.., et al. Effect of Copper Deficiency on Metabolism and Mortality in Rats Fed Sucrose or Starch Diets, Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1983;113:1335_1345.
6. Lemann, J. Evidence that Glucose Ingestion Inhibits Net Renal Tubular Reabsorption of Calcium and Magnesium. Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1976 ;70:236_245.
7. Goldman, J., et al. Behavioral Effects of Sucrose on Preschool Children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology.1986;14(4):565_577.
8. Jones, T. W., et al. Enhanced Adrenomedullary Response and Increased Susceptibility to Neuroglygopenia: Mechanisms Underlying the Adverse Effect of Sugar Ingestion in Children. Journal of Pediatrics. Feb 1995;126:171-7.
9. Scanto, S. and Yudkin, J. The Effect of Dietary Sucrose on Blood Lipids, Serum Insulin, Platelet Adhesiveness and Body Weight in Human Volunteers, Postgraduate Medicine Journal. 1969;45:602_607.
10. Albrink, M. and Ullrich I. H. Interaction of Dietary Sucrose and Fiber on Serum Lipids in Healthy Young Men Fed High Carbohydrate Diets. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1986;43:419-428. Pamplona, R., et al. Mechanisms of Glycation in Atherogenesis. Med Hypotheses. Mar 1993;40(3):174-81.
11. Reiser, S. Effects of Dietary Sugars on Metabolic Risk Factors Associated with Heart Disease. Nutritional Health. 1985;203_216.
12. Lewis, G. F. and Steiner, G. Acute Effects of Insulin in the Control of Vldl Production in Humans. Implications for The insulin-resistant State. Diabetes Care. 1996 Apr;19(4):390-3 R. Pamplona, M. .J., et al. Mechanisms of Glycation in Atherogenesis. Medical Hypotheses. 1990;40:174-181.
13. Cerami, A., Vlassara, H., and Brownlee, M. "Glucose and Aging." Scientific American. May 1987:90. Lee, A. T. and Cerami, A. The Role of Glycation in Aging. Annals of the New York Academy of Science; 663:63-67.
14. Takahashi, E., Tohoku University School of Medicine, Wholistic Health Digest. October 1982:41:00
15. Quillin, Patrick, Cancer's Sweet Tooth, Nutrition Science News. Ap 2000 Rothkopf, M.. Nutrition. July/Aug 1990;6(4).
16. Michaud, D. Dietary Sugar, Glycemic Load, and Pancreatic Cancer Risk in a Prospective Study. J Natl Cancer Inst. Sep 4, 2002 ;94(17):1293-300.
17. Moerman, C. J., et al. Dietary Sugar Intake in the Etiology of Biliary Tract Cancer. International Journal of Epidemiology. Ap 1993.2(2):207-214.
18. The Edell Health Letter. Sept 1991;7:1.
19. De Stefani, E."Dietary Sugar and Lung Cancer: a Case control Study in Uruguay." Nutrition and Cancer. 1998;31(2):132_7.
20. Cornee, J., et al. A Case-control Study of Gastric Cancer and Nutritional Factors in Marseille, France. European Journal of Epidemiology 11 (1995):55-65.
21. Kelsay, J., et al. Diets High in Glucose or Sucrose and Young Women. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1974;27:926_936. Thomas, B. J., et al. Relation of Habitual Diet to Fasting Plasma Insulin Concentration and the Insulin Response to Oral Glucose, Human Nutrition Clinical Nutrition. 1983; 36C(1):49_51.
22. Dufty, William. Sugar Blues. (New York:Warner Books, 1975).
23. Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica. Mar 2002;48;25. Taub, H. Ed. Sugar Weakens Eyesight, VM NEWSLETTER;May 1986:06:00
24. Dufty.
25. Yudkin, J. Sweet and Dangerous.(New York:Bantam Books,1974) 129
26. Cornee, J., et al. A Case-control Study of Gastric Cancer and Nutritional Factors in Marseille, France, European Journal of Epidemiology. 1995;11
27. Persson P. G., Ahlbom, A., and Hellers, G. Epidemiology. 1992;3:47-52.
28. Jones, T. W., et al. Enhanced Adrenomedullary Response and Increased Susceptibility to Neuroglygopenia: Mechanisms Underlying the Adverse Effect of Sugar Ingestion in Children. Journal of Pediatrics. Feb 1995;126:171-7.
29. Lee, A. T.and Cerami A. The Role of Glycation in Aging. Annals of the New York Academy of Science.1992;663:63-70.
30. Abrahamson, E. and Peget, A. Body, Mind and Sugar. (New York: Avon, 1977.}
31. Glinsmann, W., Irausquin, H., and Youngmee, K. Evaluation of Health Aspects of Sugar Contained in Carbohydrate Sweeteners. F. D. A. Report of Sugars Task Force. 1986:39:00 Makinen K.K.,et al. A Descriptive Report of the Effects of a 16_month Xylitol Chewing_gum Programme Subsequent to a 40_month Sucrose Gum Programme. Caries Research. 1998; 32(2)107_12.
32. Glinsmann, W., Irausquin, H., and K. Youngmee. Evaluation of Health Aspects of Sugar Contained in Carbohydrate Sweeteners. F. D. A. Report of Sugars Task Force.1986;39:36_38.
33. Appleton, N. New York: Healthy Bones. Avery Penguin Putnam:1989.
34. Keen, H., et al. Nutrient Intake, Adiposity, and Diabetes. British Medical Journal. 1989; 1:00 655_658
35. Darlington, L., Ramsey, N. W. and Mansfield, J. R. Placebo Controlled, Blind Study of Dietary Manipulation Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis, Lancet. Feb 1986;8475(1):236_238.
36. Powers, L. Sensitivity: You React to What You Eat. Los Angeles Times. (Feb. 12, 1985). Cheng, J., et al. Preliminary Clinical Study on the Correlation Between Allergic Rhinitis and Food Factors. Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi Aug 2002;16(8):393-396.
37. Erlander, S. The Cause and Cure of Multiple Sclerosis, The Disease to End Disease." Mar 3, 1979;1(3):59_63.
38. Crook, W. J. The Yeast Connection. (TN:Professional Books, 1984).
39. Heaton, K. The Sweet Road to Gallstones. British Medical Journal. Apr 14, 1984; 288:00:00 1103_1104. Misciagna, G., et al. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1999;69:120-126.
40. Cleave, T. The Saccharine Disease. (New Canaan, CT: Keats Publishing, 1974).
41. Ibid.
42. Cleave, T. and Campbell, G. (Bristol, England:Diabetes, Coronary Thrombosis and the Saccharine Disease: John Wright and Sons, 1960).
43. Behall, K. Influ ence of Estrogen Content of Oral Contraceptives and Consumption of Sucrose on Blood Parameters. Disease Abstracts International. 1982;431437.
44. Tj�derhane, L. and Larmas, M. A High Sucrose Diet Decreases the Mechanical Strength of Bones in Growing Rats. Journal of Nutrition. 1998:128:1807_1810.
45. Beck, Nielsen H., Pedersen O., and Schwartz S. Effects of Diet on the Cellular Insulin Binding and the Insulin Sensitivity in Young Healthy Subjects. Diabetes. 1978;15:289_296 .
46. Sucrose Induces Diabetes in Cat. Federal Protocol. 1974;6(97). diabetes
47. Reiser, S., et al. Effects of Sugars on Indices on Glucose Tolerance in Humans. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1986;43:151-159.
48. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. Aug 2000
49. Hodges, R., and Rebello, T. Carbohydrates and Blood Pressure. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1983:98:838_841.
50. Behar, D., et al. Sugar Challenge Testing with Children Considered Behaviorally Sugar Reactive. Nutritional Behavior. 1984;1:277_288.
51. Furth, A. and Harding, J. Why Sugar Is Bad For You. New Scientist. Sep 23, 1989;44.
52. Simmons, J. Is The Sand of Time Sugar? LONGEVITY. June 1990:00:00 49_53.
53. Appleton, N. New York: LICK THE SUGAR HABIT. Avery Penguin Putnam:1988. allergies
54. Cleave, T. The Saccharine Disease: (New Canaan Ct: Keats Publishing, Inc., 1974).131.
55. Ibid. 132
56. Pamplona, R., et al. Mechanisms of Glycation in Atherogenesis. Medical Hypotheses . 1990:00:00 174_181.
57. Vaccaro O., Ruth, K. J. and Stamler J. Relationship of Postload Plasma Glucose to Mortality with 19 yr Follow up. Diabetes Care. Oct 15,1992;10:328_334. Tominaga, M., et al, Impaired Glucose Tolerance Is a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Disease, but Not Fasting Glucose. Diabetes Care. 1999:2(6):920-924.
58. Lee, A. T. and Cerami, A. Modifications of Proteins and Nucleic Acids by Reducing Sugars: Possible Role in Aging. Handbook of the Biology of Aging. (New York: Academic Press, 1990.).
59. Monnier, V. M. Nonenzymatic Glycosylation, the Maillard Reaction and the Aging Process. Journal of Gerontology 1990:45(4):105_110.
60. Cerami, A., Vlassara, H., and Brownlee, M. Glucose and Aging. Scientific American. May 1987:00:00 90
61. Dyer, D. G., et al. Accumulation of Maillard Reaction Products in Skin Collagen in Diabetes and Aging. Journal of Clinical Investigation. 1993:93(6):421_22.
62. Veromann, S.et al."Dietary Sugar and Salt Represent Real Risk Factors for Cataract Development." Ophthalmologica. 2003 Jul-Aug;217(4):302-307.
63. Goulart, F. S. Are You Sugar Smart? American Fitness. March_April 1991:00:00 34_38. Milwakuee, WI
64. Monnier, V. M. Nonenzymatic Glycosylation, the Maillard Reaction and the Aging Process. Journal of Gerontology. 1990:45(4):105_110.
65. Ceriello, A. Oxidative Stress and Glycemic Regulation. Metabolism. Feb 2000;49(2 Suppl 1):27-29.
66. Appleton, Nancy. New York; Lick the Sugar Habit. Avery Penguin Putnam, 1988 enzymes
67. Hellenbrand, W. Diet and Parkinson's Disease. A Possible Role for the Past Intake of Specific Nutrients. Results from a Self-administered Food-frequency Questionnaire in a Case-control Study. Neurology. Sep 1996;47(3):644-650.
68. Goulart, F. S. Are You Sugar Smart? American Fitness. March_April 1991:00:00 34_38.
69. Ibid.
70. Yudkin, J., Kang, S. and Bruckdorfer, K. Effects of High Dietary Sugar. British Journal of Medicine. Nov 22, 1980;1396.
71. Blacklock, N. J., Sucrose and Idiopathic Renal Stone. Nutrition and Health. 1987;5(1-2):9- Curhan, G., et al. Beverage Use and Risk for Kidney Stones in Women. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1998:28:534-340.
72. Goulart, F. S. Are You Sugar Smart? American Fitness. March_April 1991:00:00 34_38. Milwakuee, WI,:
73. Ibid. fluid retention
74. Ibid. bowel movement
75. Ibid. compromise the lining of the capillaries
76. Nash, J. Health Contenders. Essence. Jan 1992; 23:00 79_81.
77. Grand, E. Food Allergies and Migraine.Lancet. 1979:1:955_959.
78. Schauss, A. Diet, Crime and Delinquency. (Berkley Ca; Parker House, 1981.)
79. Molteni, R, et al. A High-fat, Refined Sugar Diet Reduces Hippocampal Brain-derived Neurotrophic Factor, Neuronal Plasticity, and Learning. NeuroScience. 2002;112(4):803-814.
80. Christensen, L. The Role of Caffeine and Sugar in Depression. Nutrition Report. Mar 1991;9(3):17-24.
81. Ibid,44
82. Yudkin, J. Sweet and Dangerous.(New York:Bantam Books,1974) 129
83. Frey, J. Is There Sugar in the Alzheimer's Disease? Annales De Biologie Clinique. 2001; 59 (3):253-257.
84. Yudkin, J. Metabolic Changes Induced by Sugar in Relation to Coronary Heart Disease and Diabetes. Nutrition and Health. 1987;5(1-2):5-8.
85. Yudkin, J and Eisa, O. Dietary Sucrose and Oestradiol Concentration in Young Men. Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism. 1988:32(2):53-55.
86. The Edell Health Letter. Sept 1991;7:1.
87. Gardner, L. and Reiser, S. Effects of Dietary Carbohydrate on Fasting Levels of Human Growth Hormone and Cortisol. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine. 1982;169:36_40.
88. Journal of Advanced Medicine. 1994;7(1):51-58.
89. Ceriello, A. Oxidative Stress and Glycemic Regulation. Metabolism. Feb 2000;49(2 Suppl 1):27-29.
90. Postgraduate Medicine.Sept 1969:45:602-07.
91. Lenders, C. M. Gestational Age and Infant Size at Birth Are Associated with Dietary Intake among Pregnant Adolescents. Journal of Nutrition. Jun 1997;1113- 1117
92. Ibid.
93. Sugar, White Flour Withdrawal Produces Chemical Response. The Addiction Letter. Jul 1992:04:00 Colantuoni, C., et al. Evidence That Intermittent, Excessive Sugar Intake Causes Endogenous Opioid Dependence. Obes Res. Jun 2002 ;10(6):478-488. Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Society, Toronto, June 17, 2001 www.mercola.com/2001/jun/30/sugar.htm
94. Ibid.
95. Sunehag, A. L., et al. Gluconeogenesis in Very Low Birth Weight Infants Receiving Total Parenteral Nutrition Diabetes. 1999 ;48 7991_800.
96. Christensen L., et al. Impact of A Dietary Change on Emotional Distress. Journal of Abnormal Psychology.1985;94(4):565_79.
97. Nutrition Health Review. Fall 85 changes sugar into fat faster than fat
98. Ludwig, D. S., et al. High Glycemic Index Foods, Overeating and Obesity. Pediatrics. March 1999;103(3):26-32.
99. Pediatrics Research. 1995;38(4):539-542. Berdonces, J. L. Attention Deficit and Infantile Hyperactivity. Rev Enferm. Jan 2001;4(1)11-4
100. Blacklock, N. J. Sucrose and Idiopathic Renal Stone. Nutrition Health. 1987;5(1 & 2):9-
101. Lechin, F., et al. Effects of an Oral Glucose Load on Plasma Neurotransmitters in Humans. Neurophychobiology. 1992;26(1-2):4-11.
102. Fields, M. Journal of the American College of Nutrition. Aug 1998;17(4):317_321.
103. Arieff, A. I. Veterans Administration Medical Center in San Francisco. San Jose Mercury; June 12/86. IVs of sugar water can cut off oxygen to the brain.
104. Sandler, Benjamin P. Diet Prevents Polio. Milwakuee, WI,:The Lee Foundation for for Nutritional Research, 1951
105. Murphy, Patricia. The Role of Sugar in Epileptic Seizures. Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients. May, 2001 Murphy Is Editor of Epilepsy Wellness Newsletter, 1462 West 5th Ave., Eugene, Oregon 97402
106. Stern, N. & Tuck, M. Pathogenesis of Hypertension in Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Mellitus, a Fundamental and Clinical Test. 2nd Edition, (PhiladelphiA; A:Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2000)943-957.
107. Christansen, D. Critical Care: Sugar Limit Saves Lives. Science News. June 30, 2001; 159:404.
108. Donnini, D. et al. Glucose May Induce Cell Death through a Free Radical-mediated Mechanism.Biochem Biohhys Res Commun. Feb 15, 1996:219(2):412-417.
109. Schoenthaler, S. The Los Angeles Probation Department Diet-Behavior Program: Am Empirical Analysis of Six Institutional Settings. Int J Biosocial Res 5(2):88-89.
110. Gluconeogenesis in Very Low Birth Weight Infants Receiving Total Parenteral Nutrition. Diabetes. 1999 Apr;48(4):791-800.
111. Glinsmann, W., et al. Evaluation of Health Aspects of Sugar Contained in Carbohydrate Sweeteners." FDA Report of Sugars Task Force -1986 39 123 Yudkin, J. and Eisa, O. Dietary Sucrose and Oestradiol Concentration in Young Men. Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism. 1988;32(2):53-5.

Alternative Medicine - The Healthy Choice
By Jem Bacchus

Alternative and Conventional Medicines are the two main systems of healing in use today and the utmost caution should be taken to choose wisely.

Being healthy is of crucial importance in the life of everyone. I do not believe that there is anyone who relishes the anguish of disease. Without health you cannot function properly in any area of your life.

Whether enjoying the normal faculties of life or mentally unbalanced, every person would rather be perfectly healthy than endure the tortures of pain, sickness and disease, but there comes a time when we must seek medical help.

It is unfortunate that instead of healing the sick, very often some medicines interfere with the natural process of healing, resulting in additional suffering and further deterioration of health.

In ancient times, illness was cured by the use of herbs and other natural therapies which always proved very effective. Today, those same therapies as well as modern discoveres based on those of ancient times are referred to as alternative medicine and the public has been brainwashed into believing that the treatments are worthless; yet, many diseases that have been deemed 'incurable' are being healed by alternative means but, unfortunately, these cures have never been heard of by countless sufferers.

What is called conventional medicine (also referred to as mainstream, standard, allopathic or orthodox medicine), is man-made synthetic drugs that were not in existence in ancient times. Interestingly, so many diseases were not around in those days as there are today.

The main difference between the two systems is that alternative medicine is concerned about the prevention of disease and pays attention to and deals with the cause by treating the body as a whole. It focuses on preventing disease before it starts. It views the presence of disease as an imbalance of the emotional, mental and physical state of a person and endeavors to support and strengthen the immune system by natural means.

Alternative medicine contends that the body is naturally able to heal itself and remain stable - known in medicine as homeostasis.

On the other hand, conventional medicine is not concerned with preventing disease but rather with using synthetic drugs to cure an already established ailment. It is more interested in treating just the symptoms of disease by scientific techniques and technology instead of treating the whole person.

Many conventional drugs are said to have the potential to damage the liver and kidneys, and cause mental depression, heart falure, cancer and other adverse side effects. Now, if that is so, why are they still being manufactured and sold to the public? Where is the concern for public health and safety?

Note that since the introduction of conventional medicine, instead of there being greater relief from illness, there has been an exponential surge of diseases wreaking havoc in the lives of unsuspecting mortals. Why is this so?

If conventional medicine were the answer to health problems, why are there so many more diseases prevalent today? The interesting thing is that a name is readily given to each new disease and some form of synthetic remedy is quickly manufactured for sale!

Conventional medicine has been so well advertised that the public is convinced that it is the only way they can get relief from devastating illnesses. They jump at the announcement of any new supposedly super healing conventional medicine and with no hesitation embark upon treating themselves. This is especially so in the case of weight loss.

The sad thing is that no real cure is realized from these, whereas there are natural remedies that have been proven to cure. I can personally attest to certain cures that I have experienced through the use of natural remedies.

It is well known that some drug manufacturers have had to withdraw their dangerous medication because of the likelihood of patients suffering heart attack and stroke. Most synthetic drugs, if not all, have dangerous side effects of which the public is unaware. Some are very detrimental to unborn babies. So why are these drugs still being sold and at such exorbitant prices?

The general public is not sufficiently made aware of the dangers of conventional drugs. For obvious reasons, no attempt to do so is made by those who should educate the unwary and encourage the use of alternative medicine.

Obviously, if disease is prevented by natural means before resulting in the breakdown of the immune system which is the body's mechanism of defence against illness, serious diseases such as cancer and other so-called incurable diseases would be revented, and so there would be little need for the administration of expensive conventional medicine since that would be necessary only in case of surgery and other traumatic conditions.

Sad to say, it is reported that nutritional supplements as well as some alternative medicines packaged by some unscrupulous manufacturers are not quite what their labels indicate, and that the potency is far below what is required to be effective. This is not to suggest that they are toxic, but rather that they are not quite as effective as they should be.

If this is so, my personal feeling is that such persons should be exposed and their names posted in full view for all to see. This should curb that undesirable practice. One must therefore be very cautious when choosing nutritional supplements as well as alternative medicines.

Another point that I think worthy of note is about products so readily put on the skin. Most of them are formulated with harmful synthetic substances that get into the blood stream and invariably cause dangerous side effects. As it is said, what you would not eat, you should not put on your skin.

Remember that the skin absorbs and cannot differentiate between synthetic chemicals and natural substances. You may not see the adverse effects now, but years later your skin would speak for itself. You do not want to look older than your age, do you? Then do not poison yourself with the topical application of toxic skin products.

No one should be so busy so as not be able to find time to learn about the natural substances that they could take to protect their own bodies and prevent diseases. Many thousands of persons might have been alive today if only they had known, and had been encouraged to use natural remedies.

I enjoy reading to find out about ancient formulas and treatments that have resurfaced today, as well as new discoveries of natural healing methods and remedies that are gaining momentum amongst health conscious persons.

Ï have collected lots of information on herbal remedies. Among them are such topics as heart health the natural way, aromatherapy essential oils, homeopathy, beautiful skin care, skin diseases, healing for conditions such as acne, hemorrhoids, eczema, etc., weightloss, and many other natural health remedies and detailed information on how to make your own from nature's herbs, vitamins and nutrients.

Many persons seem to be convinced that natural remedies made by God do not have the efficacy of the synthetic remedies made by man!

God who made this world has said "the leaves of the trees for healing of the nations." God is truth and cannot lie. Isn't it time that we took Him at his word?

Why should we put our trust in Satan and his lies and put no confidence in God and His truth?

Since there seems to be no confidence in what God has made, Why don't we make our own water, sunshine, trees, and fresh air? Why do we walk upon God's earth? We should make our own basic items to concoct synthetic remedies instead of corrupting the things that God has made.

You can seek relief from disease either through natural alternative medicine by which you can maintain good health and save; or, through conventional medicine with its ill effects of costly synthetic prescription drugs at the risk of further deterioration of your health. It is up to you to prevent poisoning yourself, avoid unnecessary pain and suffering, and be healthy.

Keep this in mind:

If you really want to fight disease, Natural Medicine is the Healthy Choice; But, if you'd rather be deceased, Synthetic Medicine might be the Deadly Choice!!

This article is written for information only and is not intended to suggest treatment of any disease. Information contained herein is based on facts I have gathered and just want to share with interested persons. Anyone suffering from a disease or has any other medical issue is advised to consult a recognized practitioner.

Jem Bacchus is a certified Natural Health Consultant and takes pleasure in sharing what she has learned with others. She is also author and webmaster of the website http://1-personal-improvement.com

Protect your body with natural remedies. Synthetic drugs are dangerous; do not gamble with your health. Visit our website about acne to get your free newsletter Health the Natural Way .

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/

It works 100% of the time to eradicate cancer completely, and cancer does not recur even years later. That is how researchers describe the most convincing cancer cure ever announced.

The weekly injection of just 100 billionths of a gram of a harmless glyco-protein (a naturally-produced molecule with a sugar component and a protein component) activates the human immune system and cures cancer for good, according to human studies among breast cancer and colon cancer patients, producing complete remissions lasting 4 and 7 years respectively. This glyco-protein cure is totally without side effect but currently goes unused by cancer doctors.

Normal Gc protein (also called Vitamin-D binding protein) , an abundant glyco-protein found in human blood serum, becomes the molecular switch to activate macrophages when it is converted to its active form, called Gc macrophage activating factor (Gc-MAF). Gc protein is normally activated by conversion to Gc-MAF with the help of the B and T cells (bone marrow-made and thymus gland-made white blood cells). But, as researchers explain it themselves, cancer cells secrete an enzyme known as alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase (also called Nagalase) that completely blocks conversion of Gc protein to Gc-MAF, preventing tumor-cell killing by the macrophages. This is the way cancer cells escape detection and destruction, by disengaging the human immune system. This also leaves cancer patients prone to infections and many then succumb to pneumonia or other infections.

The once-weekly injection of minute amounts of Gc-MAF, just 100 nanograms (billionths of a gram), activates macrophages and allows the immune system to pursue cancer cells with vigor, sufficient to produce total long-term cures in humans.

Nobuto Yamamoto, director of the Division of Cancer Immunology and Molecular Biology, Socrates Institute for Therapeutic Immunology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, says this is “probably the most potent macrophage activating factor ever discovered.”


Once a sufficient number of activated macrophages are produced, another Gc-MAF injection is not needed for a week because macrophages have a half-life of about six days. After 16-22 weekly doses of Gc-MAF the amount of Nagalase enzyme fell to levels found in healthy people, which serves as evidence tumors have been completely eliminated. The treatment was fool-proof - - - it worked in 100% of 16 breast cancer patients and there were no recurrent tumors over a period of 4 years, says a report in the January 15 issue of the International Journal of Cancer. [International Journal Cancer.2008 January15; 122(2):461-7]

In another startling follow-up report by Dr. Yamamoto and colleagues, published in the upcoming July issue of Cancer Immunology Immunotherapy, Gc-MAF therapy totally abolished tumors in 8 colon cancer patients who had already undergone surgery but still exhibited circulating cancer cells (metastases). After 32-50 weekly injections, ”all colorectal cancer patients exhibited healthy control levels of the serum Nagalase activity, indicating eradication of metastatic tumor cells,”said researchers, an effect that lasted 7 years with no indication of cancer recurrence either by enzyme activity or CT scans, said researchers. [Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy Volume 57, Number 7 / July 2008] Published in an early online edition of this journal, this confirming report has received no attention by the new media so far, despite its striking importance.

Gc-MAF treatment for cancer has been agonizingly slow to develop. Dr. Yamamoto first described this immuno-therapy in 1993. [The Journal of Immunology, 1993 151 (5); 2794-2802]

In a similar animal experiment published in 2003, researchers in Germany, Japan and the United States collaborated to successfully demonstrate that after they had injected macrophage activating factor (Gc-MAF) into tumor-bearing mice, it totally eradicated tumors. [Neoplasia 2003 January; 5(1): 32–40]

In 1997 Dr. Yamamoto injected GcMAF protein into tumor-bearing mice, with the same startling results. A single enzyme injection doubled the survival of these mice and just four enzyme injections increased survival by 6-fold. [Cancer Research 1997 Jun 1; 57(11):2187-92]

In 1996 Dr. Yamamoto reported that all 52 cancer patients he had studied carried elevated blood plasma levels of the immune inactivating alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase enzyme (Nagalase), whereas healthy humans had very low levels of this enzyme. [Cancer Research 1996 Jun 15; 56(12):2827-31]

In the early 1990s, Dr. Yamamoto first described how the human immune system is disengaged by enzymes secreted from cancer cells, even filing a patent on the proposed therapy. [US Patent 5326749, July 1994; Cancer Research 1996 June 15; 56: 2827-31]

Activated Gc protein has been used in humans at much higher doses without side effect. This Gc macrophage activating factor (Gc-MAF) has been shown to be effective against a variety of cancers including breast, prostate, stomach, liver, lung, uterus, ovary, brain, skin, head/neck cancer, and leukemia.

Although GcMAF is also called Vitamin-D binding protein, the activation of macrophages does not require Vitamin D.

It cannot be said the Gc-MAF cancer cure has gone unheralded. Reuters News covered this developing story in January. But the news story still did not receive top billing nor did it fully elucidate the importance of the discovery, actually made years ago, that the human body is capable of abolishing cancer once its immune system is properly activated.

GcMAF is a naturally made molecule and is not patentable, though its manufacturing process is patent protected. There is no evidence of any current effort to commercialize this therapy or put it into practice. Should such an effective treatment for cancer come into common practice, the income stream from health-insurance plans for every oncology office and cancer center in the world Would likely be reduced to the point of financial insolvency and hundreds of thousands of jobs would be eliminated.

The National Cancer Institute estimates cancer care in the U.S. costs ~$72 billion annually (2004). Furthermore, about $55 billion of cancer drugs are used annually, none which have not significantly improved survival rates throughout the history of their use. If a typical cancer patient had to undergo 30 GcMAF injections at a cost of $150 per injection, that would cost ~$4500, not counting doctor’s office visits and follow-up testing. For comparison, gene-targeted cancer drugs range from $13,000 to $100,000 in cost per year and produce only marginal improvements in survival (weeks to months). [Targeted Oncology 2007 April, 2 (2); 113-19]

Up to this point, the National Cancer Institute is totally silent on this discovery and there is no evidence the cancer care industry plans to quickly mobilize to use this otherwise harmless treatment.

Addendum: Sadly, the treatment you have just read about is not available anywhere. Its inventor is attempting to patent a version of it to profiteer off of it even though there is no need to improve upon the GcMAF molecule - - it worked without failure to completely cure four different types of cancer with no long-term remissions and without side effect. While GcMAF is produced by every healthy adult, there are no centers available to extract it from blood samples and inject it into patients with malignancies. Hopefully, someday, doctors will write protocols to do this and submit them to institutional review boards so GcMAF treatment can be performed on an experimental basis. GcMAF is a naturally-made molecule that cannot be patented. This article was written to reveal that there are proven cancer cures that go unused. Of interest, not one oncologist has requested information about GcMAF since this article was written, while I have been barraged with inquires from cancer patients, their families and some interested physicians who are not cancer doctors.
-Bill Sardi

- - -

Based in Southern California, Bill Sardi is a notedand well-known author, lecturer, speaker, and health researcher, with numerous books and articles to his credit. He can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . Timothy Hubbell, a biochemist from Cincinnati, first called attention to this discovery and provided consultation on the biochemistry.

 

'...still the money pours in for "Cancer Research" from kind-hearted, well-meaning people in spite of the fact that the much-advertised "cures" and "discoveries" invariably turn out, year after year, to be no cure at all but rather an aggravation of the trouble, the proof of this being the steady increase of the disease on all sides... Surely there should be some result to show as a partial excuse for the torturing of so many animals...the public still does not realise that nothing is likely to happen, no progress ever likely or even possible whilst the research is done on demonstrably wrong lines.' Morley Steynor - 1940 Since these words, countless billions of pounds/dollars/animals have been squandered; whilst the disease has steadily reached the point of seriously threatening the continuation of the human species. Clearly, even given the level of intelligence of the research laboratory inmates, the situation could not possibly be explained by sheer, crass stupidity alone.

'A solution to cancer would mean the termination of research programs, the obsolescence of skills, the end of dreams of personal glory. Triumph over cancer would dry up contributions to self-perpetuating charities�It would mortally threaten the present clinical establishment by rendering obsolete the expensive surgical, radiological and chemotherapeutic treatments in which so much money, training and equipment is invested�The new therapy must be disbelieved, denied, discouraged and disallowed at all costs; regardless of actual testing results and, preferably, without any testing at all.'²²

The UK cancer research fund-raising syndicate are clawing in well over �100 million each year. The highly-paid PR. spivs, administrators, organisers, commission-paid agents...aided by an army of semi-conscious supporters - many of whom have seen their relatives and friends destroyed by the treatments produced by the very same organisations that they are supporting - have created by far the biggest fraud, medical or otherwise, in history. Animal research plays a major part in the global scam: 800 ways have been found to artificially induce tumours in animals; not one with an atom of relevance to spontaneously occurring cancer in humans. Dr Linus Pauling, double Nobel Laureate, declared: 'Everyone should know that the "War on Cancer" is, largely, a fraud.'

The Pauling Institute were reduced to advertising in the Wall Street Journal for funds: 'Our research shows that the incidence and severity of cancer depends on diet. We urgently want to refine that research so that it may help to decrease suffering from human cancer. The US government has absolutely and continually refused to support Dr Pauling and his colleagues here in this work...'²⁶

Ascorbate in the Control of Leukaemia

'Hypo-ascorbemia...is caused by humans carrying a defective gene for the production of the liver enzyme, L-gulonolactone oxidase...(due)�to a mutation occurring in a primate ancestor of man. The lack of this enzyme in the human liver...prevents us from synthesising our own ascorbic acid...This defective gene is common to all mankind, therefore chronic hypo-ascorbemia is now our most prevalent disease...It is possible that the chronic sub-clinical scurvy, existing in the victim since infancy, may be a factor in initiating the leukaemia... It is a hard clinical fact that leukaemics have pathologically low levels of ascorbic acid in their blood plasma...what kills most leukaemics is...haemorrhage and infection...Both...are pathognomonic symptoms of scurvy. In the one case where complete remission was achieved and maintained in myelogenous leukaemia, the patient took 24 to 42 grams of ascorbic acid per day... It is inconceivable that no-one appears to have followed this up...in any of the thousands of cases of leukaemia which appear each year. What is wrong with the public-supported charities for cancer and leukaemia...?...without the scurvy, leukaemia may be a relatively benign, non-fatal condition... I wrote�a paper...in attempt to have the therapy clinically-tested..I sent the paper to three cancer journals and three blood journals. It was refused by all...Two...without even reading it...I cannot help wondering how many lives could have been saved and how much suffering could have been avoided had the editors...permitted publication.' Dr. Irwin Stone

Dr. Stone could have hardly expected the fraudsters of the multi-billion dollar/pound 'Leukaemia Research' empire to abandon their solid gold source and admit that the disease responded to a simple, inexpensive, non-patentable regime of vitamin C or fruit and vegetable juices allied to simple herbs; as was demonstrated by Rudolf Breuss²⁹ and others. Nor are the pseudo-researchers interested in pointing the finger at the deluge of cancer-causing synthetics coming from their friends in other vivisection laboratories. The antibiotic chloramphenicol (chloromycetin) '�was tried out for long periods on dogs and found to produce only a transient anaemia, but fatal results have followed its use in human disease.'³¹

'...even one capsule of chloromycetin could cause�leukaemia�I remember a child dying of aplastic anaemia after a general practitioner had prescribed chloromycetin for a cold�For a cold - a virus infection!� The parents were crying, the kid was bleeding. I was warned by several physicians that grave consequences would befall me if I told the parents that their beautiful child was dying because of a doctor's mindless prescription.' Lasko - The Great Billion Dollar Medical Swindle

Not content with merely keeping quiet about the carcinogens pouring from the medical/petrochemical industry, the 'Imperial Cancer Research Fund' have gone out of their way to protect their close brethren in the cancer machine: 'One of the biggest myths in recent years is that there is a cancer epidemic caused by exposure to radiation, pollution, pesticides and food additives. The truth is that these factors have very little to do with the majority of cancers in this country.'

The Cook Report on Cancer Quacks

1994 saw two distinct threats to the Cancer Business: the first UK conference on oxygen therapies, used to treat cancer etc., and a proposed trial, for the first time with NHS monitoring, of a nutritional treatment for cancer. This latter, no doubt, sent shock waves through the industry. Until that time the cartel had successfully blocked all attempts to organise any trial of a safe, effective therapy involving the NHS. After the Bristol debacle, the cancer boys were extra keen that no trial should be allowed to begin, let alone be completed. On realising that a trial request had slipped through the net, the Syndicate turned, naturally, to ITV. ITV being dependent on the petro/pharma mafia for its existence, allocated the task of exposing the 'cancer quacks' to the experts, the Cook team at Central TV. On December 22 1994, the Cook Report was used to attack a doctor using the same treatment - the Gerson Therapy - which was to be used in the trial. The treatment has been used for well over 60 years on a wide variety of chronic conditions including 'terminal' cancer. Cook stated that the therapy had caused deaths in the USA, a total fabrication and an hilarious comment considering the countless millions killed by the orthodox onslaught. Being of an intriguingly low standard of pseudo-journalism, even by Cook Report standards, the piece would not have impressed any half-intelligent viewer but it did give a fascinating insight into the links between ITV and the cancer combine. The Cook team correctly reasoned that those libelled in the programme would not have the finances to sue the petro-backed ITV. Gordon McVie, of the CRC, one of the bodies censured for its part in the Bristol centre scandal, was a natural for the programme and declared: 'If I knew of a doctor who claimed to cure cancer by manipulation of the diet I would ask someone in high places to investigate that claim.' McVie was sent, recorded delivery, the required information but was, unfortunately, too busy to organise the investigation. Early in 1996, the Cook gang were forced to transmit the first apology, on air, concerning one of the practitioners: we still await the rest.

Cannabis compound 'halts cancer'
http://news.bbc.co.uk:80/2/hi/health/7098340.stm

A compound found in cannabis may stop breast cancer spreading throughout the body, US scientists believe.
The California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute team are hopeful that cannabidiol or CBD could be a non-toxic alternative to chemotherapy.

Unlike cannabis, CBD does not have any psychoactive properties so its use would not violate laws, Molecular Cancer Therapeutics reports.

The authors stressed that they were not suggesting patients smoke marijuana.

They added that it would be highly unlikely that effective concentrations of CBD could be reached by smoking cannabis.

CBD works by blocking the activity of a gene called Id-1 which is believed to be responsible for the aggressive spread of cancer cells away from the original tumour site - a process called metastasis.

Past work has shown CBD can block aggressive human brain cancers.

The latest work found CBD appeared to have a similar effect on breast cancer cells in the lab.

Future hope

Lead researcher Dr Sean McAllister said: "Right now we have a limited range of options in treating aggressive forms of cancer.

"Those treatments, such as chemotherapy, can be effective but they can also be extremely toxic and difficult for patients.

"This compound offers the hope of a non-toxic therapy that could achieve the same results without any of the painful side effects."

Dr Joanna Owens of Cancer Research UK said: "This research is at a very early stage.

"The findings will need to be followed up with clinical trials in humans to see if the CBD is safe, and whether the beneficial effects can be replicated.

"Several cancer drugs based on plant chemicals are already used widely, such as vincristine - which is derived from a type of flower called Madagascar Periwinkle and is used to treat breast and lung cancer. It will be interesting to see whether CBD will join them."

Maria Leadbeater of Breast Cancer Care said: "Many people experience side-effects while having chemotherapy, such as nausea and an increased risk of infection, which can take both a physical and emotional toll.

"Any drug that has fewer side-effects will, of course, be of great interest."

But she added: "It is clear that much more research needs to be carried out."

Curing Cancer with Baking Soda:

What MDs and Naturopaths Don’t Know

by Gregory Delaney

Wouldn’t the delusional physicians and the big pharmacology swindlers be embarrassed to find that cancer could be cured with nothing more complicated than ordinary baking soda? Well, no, they wouldn’t be embarrassed because they would be outraged. All of their billions in profits vanishing in a twinkle, would not have these betrayers of Mankind at all happy with such a simple cancer cure. And yet, cancer can be cured with nothing more complicated than ordinary baking soda. And I will explain how.

While the greedy physicians and the cancer industry robber barons have been using every imaginable method for treating the symptoms of cancer, and while millions of people have suffered and died under the most astounding variety of mechanical, chemical, bio-technological and radiological absurdities, little progress in curing cancer has actually been made. And why? Well, to understand why, you would have to understand who is treating cancer before you can understand why it is not being cured. Who are these cancer physicians who claim to know so much yet fail to do anything useful?

Firstly, they are people who admit that they don’t know the cause of cancer or how to cure it. And yet they insist that they be allowed to “practice medicine” anyway! These oncologists admit that no matter what they do, you are going to die anyway, and so why not let them do something since they can make better use of your money than you can. Even though they admit that they don’t know what they are doing, they offer you just two (and only two) choices: (1) let them cut-poison-irradiate-and-transplant you which includes a free estimation of how long you will live or (2) do nothing at all which also includes a free, but much shorter, estimation of how long you will live. And so, with such limited choices, most people prefer to bequeath their savings account to the doctors for choice number one. At best, the physicians promise to drug you into unconsciousness so that you do not feel any pain either from your tumors or from their billing department.

But what happens if you don’t take their advice and choose alternative medicine, instead – you know, the choice that the doctors never mention to their patients? Since it has been proven that hospital patients live longer when the doctors go on strike, then alternative medicine is obviously better than a placebo. But they never mention that, either.

Secondly, these oncologists with all of their fancy degrees and years of microscopic confusion are really nothing more than disciples of fraud. This fraud is known as “symptomatic medicine” and these cancer physicians prove their idiocy on a daily basis by classifying cancer as a “disease.” Would it be a joke on them if it was discovered that cancer really is not a disease at all but merely a “symptom” of something else? Hundreds of millions of dying cancer patients would certainly not be laughing. And millions of billionaire Big Pharma swindlers would not be laughing, either. Would it be a joke if it was discovered that cancer is not a disease at all and that these swindling greed-bags were actually mistaking the symptoms for the disease? I don’t think there would be much laughter in finding this to be true; but it is true and here’s how this simple cure works.

The cancer quacks who are known as “modern physicians” (or oncology engineers), all know that there are many things that cause cancer. Does this ring a bell in their mighty brains? No, of course not. If there are many things that cause cancer, then how can cancer be classified as a disease? Isn’t it true, rather, that the many causative agents are the disease while the manifestations of tumors and malignancies are actually the symptom? This may seem strange but think about it a bit. And you alternative practitioners had better think about it a bit since the physicians have already proven that they are on the wrong track and haven’t thought about it enough.

If many things cause cancer (radiation, chemicals, viruses, sunlight, etc.) then even the dumbest physician knows enough to remove the primary cause. So, patients who work in the bright sun or in chemical factories are advised to avoid these situations. Hooray for the doctors who have common sense! But why are they so few?

Once you remove the primal cause, you are still left with a growing malignancy. (I am referring to the growing tumor and not to the doctors and the Big Pharma executives, themselves.) This cancerous growth has certain attributes that the idiot doctors overlook because they have been trained to use the most expensive methods possible for producing the largest possible profit for themselves and for their hospitals and for their drug suppliers. And after extracting all possible savings accounts, checking accounts, real property and insurance benefits, they send the dying patient home after saying, “We have done everything that we can do.” No, I don’t think many people will be laughing to discover that cancer can be cured with baking soda.

But even after the primary cause of the cancer is removed, why do the cancer cells keep growing? The doctors say because cancer is a disease. However, these practitioners of “symptomatic medicine” are mistaking the disease for the symptom. It is more accurate to say that the cancer is not the disease, itself, but is rather the symptom.

The maniac oncologists cut and radiate and poison and burn the cancer cells in an attempt to kill them. But the alternative practitioner prefers to let the powerful defenses of the body do all the work. And why? Because the body can take care of itself just fine as long as you provide it with what it needs to do the necessary healing. In this case, first remove the causative factors of cancer (such as the oncologists and Big Pharma robber barons) and then get to work on the underlying causes.

All cancer has some common denominators that the physicians think are inconsequential. But, if you think about it a little bit, you will see that the oncologists are full of themselves and not full of knowledge. What they think is the disease, is actually the symptom. And what they think is inconsequential is actually the tiny, little cause for all of this suffering and disease. It’s a joke on the doctors, but nobody is laughing.

Here’s how it works. Normal cells that turn cancerous have specific jobs to do. Brain cells do brainy things, heart cells are on a bungee jumper's rush, liver cells strain today’s whiskey, kidney cells strain the beer and save the water, bladder cells hold the nasty stuff that the others strain, and skin cells enjoy a good suntan on a summer day. They all do different jobs. But when they turn cancerous, they throw all of that specialization aside.

Cancer cells do not evolve; they devolve. They do not perform the task specified in the blueprints of DNA, but they rebel and go it alone. Cancer cells give up being a high level technical worker in the body and become instead the lowest form of life. Worse than any truant teenager – all they do all day is eat, excrete, reproduce and do it all while holding their breath. While holding their breath? What is this little detail that is overlooked by the oncologists?

That’s right. Cancer cells don’t require a lot of oxygen to live. In fact, it is this low oxygen level that allows them to thrive. Or to put it in a way that even a physician can understand, cancer cells become cancerous not because they are the disease, but because they are normal cells reacting to the causative factors of disease. That is, cancer cells become cancer cells because they are normal cells that cannot live in any other way. They are following the First Commandment of Life, “Thou must live” and in order for them to live, they must give up their specific functions in the body and devolve to a lower level of Life that is not so demanding of them. They become cancer cells in order to survive, not because they want to be cancer cells.

From this perspective you can say that cancer is normal. It is not a disease, but rather it is the reaction of certain cells in the body to stress factors that cause these cells to choose de-evolution to a cancerous state as a means of cellular survival. They give up being highly advanced cells – brain, heart, liver, kidney, skin, etc. – and take a step downward to a lower function. They become cancerous as a survival strategy because nature only gives them this choice – or they must die. Cancer is the reaction of cells to various factors that will cause their death if they do not devolve to a lower, cancerous state.

Of course, the Big Pharma scoundrels and the physicians-for-hire want to “treat” cancer. Yes, they have devised a trillion “treatments” none of which do any good except to their bank accounts. There is a lot of money in “treatments.” You can talk about “treatments” for years. You can offer your customers … I mean, your “patients” … years and years of the latest and greatest of treatments. Treatments! Treatments! Treatments! Forever! And all of this time, while the victims are suffering and dying and giving the hospitals their last pennies in vain, the doctors can avoid ever, ever mentioning that most forbidden word of modern medicine – “cure.” Why? Because if they actually cure anyone of cancer, then they can’t get them back for any more treatments!

Cancer is easily cured with nothing more complicated than baking soda, but before telling you how this is done, I want to review something that the Johns Hopkins Hospital has stolen from the alternative medical professionals. They sent out a newsletter in 2007 that has also been circulated by the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Although their newsletter did not credit any alternative health practitioners or natural healing groups as to the source for their information, it was gratifying to see that what Naturopaths have been saying for over seventy years is finally being acknowledged by the swindlers of the Medical Monopoly. I will briefly review the main points of this newsletter below so that you Naturopathic Health experts and you idiots in the entrenched Medical Monopoly are all using the same language when you yell at each other.

All naturopaths already know these things, but because it was new to the physicians and oncologists, here briefly is what the Johns Hopkins Hospital newsletter stated:

1. “Sugar is a cancer-feeder. By cutting off sugar it cuts off one important food supply to the cancer cells.

2. “Milk causes the body to produce mucus, especially in the gastrointestinal tract. Cancer feeds on mucus. By cutting off milk and substituting with un-sweetened soy milk cancer cells are being starved.”

3. “Cancer cells thrive in an acid environment. A meat-based diet is acidic and it is best to eat fish, and a little chicken rather than beef or pork. Meat also contains livestock antibiotics, growth hormones and parasites, which are all harmful, especially to people with cancer.”

4. “A diet made of 80% fresh vegetables and juice, whole grains, seeds, nuts and a little fruits help put the body into an alkaline environment. About 20% can be from cooked food including beans. Fresh vegetable juices provide live enzymes that are easily absorbed and reach down to cellular levels within 15 minutes to nourish and enhance growth of healthy cells. To obtain live enzymes for building healthy cells try and drink fresh vegetable juice (most vegetables including bean sprouts) and eat some raw vegetables 2 or 3 times a day. Enzymes are destroyed at temperatures of 104 degrees F (40 degrees C).”

5. "Avoid coffee, tea, and chocolate, which have high caffeine. Green tea is a better alternative and has cancer-fighting properties. Water – best to drink purified water, or filtered, to avoid known toxins and heavy metals in tap water. Distilled water is acidic. Avoid it.”

6. “Meat protein is difficult to digest and requires a lot of digestive enzymes. Undigested meat remaining in the intestines become putrified and leads to more toxic buildup.”

7. "Cancer cell walls have a tough protein covering. By refraining from or eating less meat it frees more enzymes to attack the protein walls of cancer cells and allows the body's killer cells to destroy the cancer cells."

8. “Some supplements build up the immune system (IP6, Flor-ssence, Essiac, anti-oxidants, vitamins, minerals, EFAs, etc.) to enable the body's own killer cells to destroy cancer cells. Other supplements like vitamin E are known to cause apoptosis or programmed cell death, the body's normal method of disposing of damaged, unwanted or unneeded cells.”

9. “Cancer is a disease of the mind, body, and spirit. A proactive and positive spirit will help the cancer warrior be a survivor. Anger, un-forgiveness and bitterness put the body into a stressful and acidic environment.

10. “Cancer cells cannot thrive in an oxygenated environment. Exercising daily, and deep breathing help to get more oxygen down to the cellular level. Oxygen therapy is another means employed to destroy cancer cells.”

And this ends the good advice that the Johns Hopkins Hospital tosses out … then forgets entirely about. Although they make some basic errors with their assertions because they don’t really understand natural nutrition, it does contain almost everything that naturopaths of all varieties have been practicing and teaching for many years. But, it does not give credit where credit is due. The physicians purloin our knowledge and take it for their own discovery and then they bill their patients for the information that we freely give while pretending to be physicians of great learning. And so, let’s leave these medical maniacs and show how cancer is easily cured with nothing more than baking soda. You will need the above ten points to put the puzzle together. And I will leave you and the physicians to argue about the above data which they have plagiarized without fully understanding.

The newsletter makes much of the importance of avoiding acidic and seeking alkaline but they do not know how to put two-and-two together to make any sense out of the information that they have stolen from us. They do not understand the cheap and easy and effective Naturopathic Way because they follow the fraudulent and profitable and expensive way of symptomatic medicine.

One of the much-overlooked “minor” details of cancer cells is that they thrive in a low oxygen environment. When the body is not able to fully oxygenate, these cells must either die of asphyxiation and toxic build-up or they must devolve to a lower state of existence where they can live and grow without so much oxygen. They become cancerous because there is not enough oxygen for them to remain normally functioning.

In point #1, above, the physicians rightfully state that cancerous cells feed on sugar. Actually, all cells feed on glucose. They absolutely do not seem to understand the difference between what glucose and sucrose do to the blood. What the physicians are missing is that the sucrose table sugar, the white flour products, the red meats, dairy products, coffee, candy and soda pop that the hospital provides from the hospital kitchen and from the Coke and candy machines on every floor, are bad enough on their own. These are the junk foods that the patients, themselves, got sick on. What the physicians do not understand is the blood chemistry that these junk foods unbalance. Yes, they take the necessary chemical tests. But they do not understand their own data because they are looking for a complicated treatment when the simple cure is staring them in the face.

Everybody knows how to stick a toy balloon on the wall after rubbing it on your head. It will stick tightly during dry weather but maybe not at all during damp weather. This is because the electro-static charge is strong during dry weather but gets leaked away during damp weather. Well, the same principle applies to how oxygen sticks to the blood cells during oxygenation, but in an ionic fluid instead of in an electrostatic gas.

As blood cells pass through the lungs, there is a very delicate balancing act that takes place between their cell surfaces and the ionic charges of the surrounding plasma. As they pass through the lungs, these purple-colored blood cells have the ionic charge that they received when picking up carbon dioxide. In contact with lung oxygen, this charge gets reversed so that the carbon dioxide drops off and the reversed charge attracts and picks up oxygen molecules. As their ionic charge reverses as they pick up a full supply of oxygen and their color changes from purple to red, these oxygenated blood cells are carried along through the body until they get into the vicinity of body cells that have a surplus of carbon-dioxide and need some oxygen. At that point, the ionic charges again reverse as the oxygen drops off and the carbon dioxide is attracted and sticks to the blood cell which once again changes to a purple color and is carried to the lungs. Yin and yang, a changing balance of polarities.

But, just like a toy balloon that cannot stick to the wall in wet weather, oxygen cannot stick to a blood cell if the ionic balance of the blood is acidic. This is what the physicians and oncologists are overlooking. Every damned one of them has observed the ringing alarm bell going off but have muffled their ears and closed their eyes because they are looking for some expensive and complicated cure for cancer when both the cause and the cure are actually very simple.

They observe that cancer thrives in an acidic environment but they feed their patients sugar, white flour, red meats, ice cream and cake for dessert at just about every meal. They observe that cancer dies in a high oxygen environment, but they treat their patients to a choice between Coke and Pepsi from the vending machine down the hall. It is either much too simple for them to understand or else they are a witless part of a greedy and voracious conspiracy against the health of all of Mankind. Those are the only two choices. Doctor, take your pick.

The ringing alarm bell that the physicians are overlooking is the blood pH. Every cancer patient that I have ever seen, all without exception, had an acidic blood pH. But while the oncologists are pumping the patient full of chemotherapy, pizzas, pancakes, cokes, ice creams, hamburgers and fries, sweet rolls and jams, followed by radiation and surgery, they are ignoring the fact that cancer thrives in a low oxygen environment.

Oxygen cannot stick to blood cells if the pH of the blood is acidic. And rather than do everything that they can to raise the pH back up to a normal pH of 7.4 so that the blood can function properly, they prefer surgery. All of the advice that they have stolen from Naturopathic medicine about “deep breathing” will do them no good at all. You can breath pure oxygen until you catch on fire but if the blood pH is acidic, then the oxygen will not be able to be picked up by the blood cells. It is chemically impossible. The blood must be normal and normal blood has a pH of around 7.4 pH. Any vestigial traces of oxygen that the acid-drenched blood cells manage to pick up are stripped off early by the oxygen-starved cells along the way and never reach the deeper parts of the body where oxygen is most needed. And because the pH is acidic, carbon dioxide also is not transported efficiently and so builds up within the tissues leading both to cell death and to a cell-to-cancer de-evolution for survival.

So, yes, cancer can be cured with ordinary baking soda. Bicarbonate is found in the blood naturally for the very real purpose of neutralizing acids. Therefore, those who want to cure your cancers should first follow the stolen advise found in the above newsletter. Not that the oncologists understand or follow this advice, themselves, but since they stole it from Naturopathic medicine at least we can all agree that it is good advice. So, go to the health food stores and change your diet immediately.

But also do this: Take a pinch of baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) into your mouth, run it around your teeth and gums with your tongue while being sure to reach into the deepest parts of your gums and teeth and swallow it three times a day – more or less depending on how you feel. Also, drink a glass of water containing a teaspoon of baking soda before going to bed each night. But don’t over do this. Baking soda can kill you if you take too much of it. Take just a little bit and see how it makes you feel. If you feel okay, then take some more. Don’t overdo it but don’t be afraid to experiment. After all, the doctors experiment on you every time you go to see them as they “practice medicine”. So, why not experiment on yourself and save the money and the pain. But by all means change your diet to a natural and alkaline diet. And make baking soda a part of that diet.

The physicians will charge you a lot of money to take a pH test of your blood, but you can start monitoring the pH, yourself, by purchasing some pH test strips from a pharmacy. Test your tongue pH in the morning as well as your urine pH. Practice some yoga or Tai Chi Chuan or other deep breathing exercises and go on long walks to enjoy fresh air and your days on Earth. As your blood pH moves back up to the alkaline side of the chart, your deep breathing will fully oxygenate your blood. The cancer cells cannot survive all of that fresh oxygen so they die. And your T-killer cells, being full of vigor, will kill the cancer cells that remain. It’s as simple as that.

This is not advice that a cancer doctor will give you but it is advice that you can take whether you accept his treatments or not. After all, the normal pH of your blood is 7.4 but if the doctor wants to treat you without regard to what is normal, then maybe you should put yourself in Nature’s hands rather than his. If cancer is normal, then it would be normal for everybody to have cancer. But since it is not normal and since it thrives in situations that are not normal, then doesn’t it make sense to seek the things that are normal so that the cancer just disappears? A physician or oncologist who ignores the pH of your blood and does not know how to make it normal once again, is not qualified to be treating you in any way whatsoever. Avoid such physicians for the idiots that they are.

And whoops, oh dear! I am afraid that tooth decay is also cured with this simple remedy because baking soda kills decay-causing germs on contact. Will the purveyors of toothbrushes and pastes and drilling and filling and billing be pleased? No, those greedy betrayers and swindlers will not be pleased at all. They want you to be sick. But the sweet, happy smile of good health is the natural state of Mankind.

 

© 2008 Bamboo Delight Company

by Gregory Delaney

Wouldn’t the delusional physicians and the big pharmacology swindlers be embarrassed to find that cancer could be cured with nothing more complicated than ordinary baking soda? Well, no, they wouldn’t be embarrassed because they would be outraged. All of their billions in profits vanishing in a twinkle, would not have these betrayers of Mankind at all happy with such a simple cancer cure. And yet, cancer can be cured with nothing more complicated than ordinary baking soda. And I will explain how.

While the greedy physicians and the cancer industry robber barons have been using every imaginable method for treating the symptoms of cancer, and while millions of people have suffered and died under the most astounding variety of mechanical, chemical, bio-technological and radiological absurdities, little progress in curing cancer has actually been made. And why? Well, to understand why, you would have to understand who is treating cancer before you can understand why it is not being cured. Who are these cancer physicians who claim to know so much yet fail to do anything useful?

Firstly, they are people who admit that they don’t know the cause of cancer or how to cure it. And yet they insist that they be allowed to “practice medicine” anyway! These oncologists admit that no matter what they do, you are going to die anyway, and so why not let them do something since they can make better use of your money than you can. Even though they admit that they don’t know what they are doing, they offer you just two (and only two) choices: (1) let them cut-poison-irradiate-and-transplant you which includes a free estimation of how long you will live or (2) do nothing at all which also includes a free, but much shorter, estimation of how long you will live. And so, with such limited choices, most people prefer to bequeath their savings account to the doctors for choice number one. At best, the physicians promise to drug you into unconsciousness so that you do not feel any pain either from your tumors or from their billing department.

But what happens if you don’t take their advice and choose alternative medicine, instead – you know, the choice that the doctors never mention to their patients? Since it has been proven that hospital patients live longer when the doctors go on strike, then alternative medicine is obviously better than a placebo. But they never mention that, either.

Secondly, these oncologists with all of their fancy degrees and years of microscopic confusion are really nothing more than disciples of fraud. This fraud is known as “symptomatic medicine” and these cancer physicians prove their idiocy on a daily basis by classifying cancer as a “disease.” Would it be a joke on them if it was discovered that cancer really is not a disease at all but merely a “symptom” of something else? Hundreds of millions of dying cancer patients would certainly not be laughing. And millions of billionaire Big Pharma swindlers would not be laughing, either. Would it be a joke if it was discovered that cancer is not a disease at all and that these swindling greed-bags were actually mistaking the symptoms for the disease? I don’t think there would be much laughter in finding this to be true; but it is true and here’s how this simple cure works.

The cancer quacks who are known as “modern physicians” (or oncology engineers), all know that there are many things that cause cancer. Does this ring a bell in their mighty brains? No, of course not. If there are many things that cause cancer, then how can cancer be classified as a disease? Isn’t it true, rather, that the many causative agents are the disease while the manifestations of tumors and malignancies are actually the symptom? This may seem strange but think about it a bit. And you alternative practitioners had better think about it a bit since the physicians have already proven that they are on the wrong track and haven’t thought about it enough.

If many things cause cancer (radiation, chemicals, viruses, sunlight, etc.) then even the dumbest physician knows enough to remove the primary cause. So, patients who work in the bright sun or in chemical factories are advised to avoid these situations. Hooray for the doctors who have common sense! But why are they so few?

Once you remove the primal cause, you are still left with a growing malignancy. (I am referring to the growing tumor and not to the doctors and the Big Pharma executives, themselves.) This cancerous growth has certain attributes that the idiot doctors overlook because they have been trained to use the most expensive methods possible for producing the largest possible profit for themselves and for their hospitals and for their drug suppliers. And after extracting all possible savings accounts, checking accounts, real property and insurance benefits, they send the dying patient home after saying, “We have done everything that we can do.” No, I don’t think many people will be laughing to discover that cancer can be cured with baking soda.

But even after the primary cause of the cancer is removed, why do the cancer cells keep growing? The doctors say because cancer is a disease. However, these practitioners of “symptomatic medicine” are mistaking the disease for the symptom. It is more accurate to say that the cancer is not the disease, itself, but is rather the symptom.

The maniac oncologists cut and radiate and poison and burn the cancer cells in an attempt to kill them. But the alternative practitioner prefers to let the powerful defenses of the body do all the work. And why? Because the body can take care of itself just fine as long as you provide it with what it needs to do the necessary healing. In this case, first remove the causative factors of cancer (such as the oncologists and Big Pharma robber barons) and then get to work on the underlying causes.

All cancer has some common denominators that the physicians think are inconsequential. But, if you think about it a little bit, you will see that the oncologists are full of themselves and not full of knowledge. What they think is the disease, is actually the symptom. And what they think is inconsequential is actually the tiny, little cause for all of this suffering and disease. It’s a joke on the doctors, but nobody is laughing.

Here’s how it works. Normal cells that turn cancerous have specific jobs to do. Brain cells do brainy things, heart cells are on a bungee jumper's rush, liver cells strain today’s whiskey, kidney cells strain the beer and save the water, bladder cells hold the nasty stuff that the others strain, and skin cells enjoy a good suntan on a summer day. They all do different jobs. But when they turn cancerous, they throw all of that specialization aside.

Cancer cells do not evolve; they devolve. They do not perform the task specified in the blueprints of DNA, but they rebel and go it alone. Cancer cells give up being a high level technical worker in the body and become instead the lowest form of life. Worse than any truant teenager – all they do all day is eat, excrete, reproduce and do it all while holding their breath. While holding their breath? What is this little detail that is overlooked by the oncologists?

That’s right. Cancer cells don’t require a lot of oxygen to live. In fact, it is this low oxygen level that allows them to thrive. Or to put it in a way that even a physician can understand, cancer cells become cancerous not because they are the disease, but because they are normal cells reacting to the causative factors of disease. That is, cancer cells become cancer cells because they are normal cells that cannot live in any other way. They are following the First Commandment of Life, “Thou must live” and in order for them to live, they must give up their specific functions in the body and devolve to a lower level of Life that is not so demanding of them. They become cancer cells in order to survive, not because they want to be cancer cells.

From this perspective you can say that cancer is normal. It is not a disease, but rather it is the reaction of certain cells in the body to stress factors that cause these cells to choose de-evolution to a cancerous state as a means of cellular survival. They give up being highly advanced cells – brain, heart, liver, kidney, skin, etc. – and take a step downward to a lower function. They become cancerous as a survival strategy because nature only gives them this choice – or they must die. Cancer is the reaction of cells to various factors that will cause their death if they do not devolve to a lower, cancerous state.

Of course, the Big Pharma scoundrels and the physicians-for-hire want to “treat” cancer. Yes, they have devised a trillion “treatments” none of which do any good except to their bank accounts. There is a lot of money in “treatments.” You can talk about “treatments” for years. You can offer your customers … I mean, your “patients” … years and years of the latest and greatest of treatments. Treatments! Treatments! Treatments! Forever! And all of this time, while the victims are suffering and dying and giving the hospitals their last pennies in vain, the doctors can avoid ever, ever mentioning that most forbidden word of modern medicine – “cure.” Why? Because if they actually cure anyone of cancer, then they can’t get them back for any more treatments!

Cancer is easily cured with nothing more complicated than baking soda, but before telling you how this is done, I want to review something that the Johns Hopkins Hospital has stolen from the alternative medical professionals. They sent out a newsletter in 2007 that has also been circulated by the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Although their newsletter did not credit any alternative health practitioners or natural healing groups as to the source for their information, it was gratifying to see that what Naturopaths have been saying for over seventy years is finally being acknowledged by the swindlers of the Medical Monopoly. I will briefly review the main points of this newsletter below so that you Naturopathic Health experts and you idiots in the entrenched Medical Monopoly are all using the same language when you yell at each other.

All naturopaths already know these things, but because it was new to the physicians and oncologists, here briefly is what the Johns Hopkins Hospital newsletter stated:

1. “Sugar is a cancer-feeder. By cutting off sugar it cuts off one important food supply to the cancer cells.

2. “Milk causes the body to produce mucus, especially in the gastrointestinal tract. Cancer feeds on mucus. By cutting off milk and substituting with un-sweetened soy milk cancer cells are being starved.”

3. “Cancer cells thrive in an acid environment. A meat-based diet is acidic and it is best to eat fish, and a little chicken rather than beef or pork. Meat also contains livestock antibiotics, growth hormones and parasites, which are all harmful, especially to people with cancer.”

4. “A diet made of 80% fresh vegetables and juice, whole grains, seeds, nuts and a little fruits help put the body into an alkaline environment. About 20% can be from cooked food including beans. Fresh vegetable juices provide live enzymes that are easily absorbed and reach down to cellular levels within 15 minutes to nourish and enhance growth of healthy cells. To obtain live enzymes for building healthy cells try and drink fresh vegetable juice (most vegetables including bean sprouts) and eat some raw vegetables 2 or 3 times a day. Enzymes are destroyed at temperatures of 104 degrees F (40 degrees C).”

5. "Avoid coffee, tea, and chocolate, which have high caffeine. Green tea is a better alternative and has cancer-fighting properties. Water – best to drink purified water, or filtered, to avoid known toxins and heavy metals in tap water. Distilled water is acidic. Avoid it.”

6. “Meat protein is difficult to digest and requires a lot of digestive enzymes. Undigested meat remaining in the intestines become putrified and leads to more toxic buildup.”

7. "Cancer cell walls have a tough protein covering. By refraining from or eating less meat it frees more enzymes to attack the protein walls of cancer cells and allows the body's killer cells to destroy the cancer cells."

8. “Some supplements build up the immune system (IP6, Flor-ssence, Essiac, anti-oxidants, vitamins, minerals, EFAs, etc.) to enable the body's own killer cells to destroy cancer cells. Other supplements like vitamin E are known to cause apoptosis or programmed cell death, the body's normal method of disposing of damaged, unwanted or unneeded cells.”

9. “Cancer is a disease of the mind, body, and spirit. A proactive and positive spirit will help the cancer warrior be a survivor. Anger, un-forgiveness and bitterness put the body into a stressful and acidic environment.

10. “Cancer cells cannot thrive in an oxygenated environment. Exercising daily, and deep breathing help to get more oxygen down to the cellular level. Oxygen therapy is another means employed to destroy cancer cells.”

And this ends the good advice that the Johns Hopkins Hospital tosses out … then forgets entirely about. Although they make some basic errors with their assertions because they don’t really understand natural nutrition, it does contain almost everything that naturopaths of all varieties have been practicing and teaching for many years. But, it does not give credit where credit is due. The physicians purloin our knowledge and take it for their own discovery and then they bill their patients for the information that we freely give while pretending to be physicians of great learning. And so, let’s leave these medical maniacs and show how cancer is easily cured with nothing more than baking soda. You will need the above ten points to put the puzzle together. And I will leave you and the physicians to argue about the above data which they have plagiarized without fully understanding.

The newsletter makes much of the importance of avoiding acidic and seeking alkaline but they do not know how to put two-and-two together to make any sense out of the information that they have stolen from us. They do not understand the cheap and easy and effective Naturopathic Way because they follow the fraudulent and profitable and expensive way of symptomatic medicine.

One of the much-overlooked “minor” details of cancer cells is that they thrive in a low oxygen environment. When the body is not able to fully oxygenate, these cells must either die of asphyxiation and toxic build-up or they must devolve to a lower state of existence where they can live and grow without so much oxygen. They become cancerous because there is not enough oxygen for them to remain normally functioning.

In point #1, above, the physicians rightfully state that cancerous cells feed on sugar. Actually, all cells feed on glucose. They absolutely do not seem to understand the difference between what glucose and sucrose do to the blood. What the physicians are missing is that the sucrose table sugar, the white flour products, the red meats, dairy products, coffee, candy and soda pop that the hospital provides from the hospital kitchen and from the Coke and candy machines on every floor, are bad enough on their own. These are the junk foods that the patients, themselves, got sick on. What the physicians do not understand is the blood chemistry that these junk foods unbalance. Yes, they take the necessary chemical tests. But they do not understand their own data because they are looking for a complicated treatment when the simple cure is staring them in the face.

Everybody knows how to stick a toy balloon on the wall after rubbing it on your head. It will stick tightly during dry weather but maybe not at all during damp weather. This is because the electro-static charge is strong during dry weather but gets leaked away during damp weather. Well, the same principle applies to how oxygen sticks to the blood cells during oxygenation, but in an ionic fluid instead of in an electrostatic gas.

As blood cells pass through the lungs, there is a very delicate balancing act that takes place between their cell surfaces and the ionic charges of the surrounding plasma. As they pass through the lungs, these purple-colored blood cells have the ionic charge that they received when picking up carbon dioxide. In contact with lung oxygen, this charge gets reversed so that the carbon dioxide drops off and the reversed charge attracts and picks up oxygen molecules. As their ionic charge reverses as they pick up a full supply of oxygen and their color changes from purple to red, these oxygenated blood cells are carried along through the body until they get into the vicinity of body cells that have a surplus of carbon-dioxide and need some oxygen. At that point, the ionic charges again reverse as the oxygen drops off and the carbon dioxide is attracted and sticks to the blood cell which once again changes to a purple color and is carried to the lungs. Yin and yang, a changing balance of polarities.

But, just like a toy balloon that cannot stick to the wall in wet weather, oxygen cannot stick to a blood cell if the ionic balance of the blood is acidic. This is what the physicians and oncologists are overlooking. Every damned one of them has observed the ringing alarm bell going off but have muffled their ears and closed their eyes because they are looking for some expensive and complicated cure for cancer when both the cause and the cure are actually very simple.

They observe that cancer thrives in an acidic environment but they feed their patients sugar, white flour, red meats, ice cream and cake for dessert at just about every meal. They observe that cancer dies in a high oxygen environment, but they treat their patients to a choice between Coke and Pepsi from the vending machine down the hall. It is either much too simple for them to understand or else they are a witless part of a greedy and voracious conspiracy against the health of all of Mankind. Those are the only two choices. Doctor, take your pick.

The ringing alarm bell that the physicians are overlooking is the blood pH. Every cancer patient that I have ever seen, all without exception, had an acidic blood pH. But while the oncologists are pumping the patient full of chemotherapy, pizzas, pancakes, cokes, ice creams, hamburgers and fries, sweet rolls and jams, followed by radiation and surgery, they are ignoring the fact that cancer thrives in a low oxygen environment.

Oxygen cannot stick to blood cells if the pH of the blood is acidic. And rather than do everything that they can to raise the pH back up to a normal pH of 7.4 so that the blood can function properly, they prefer surgery. All of the advice that they have stolen from Naturopathic medicine about “deep breathing” will do them no good at all. You can breath pure oxygen until you catch on fire but if the blood pH is acidic, then the oxygen will not be able to be picked up by the blood cells. It is chemically impossible. The blood must be normal and normal blood has a pH of around 7.4 pH. Any vestigial traces of oxygen that the acid-drenched blood cells manage to pick up are stripped off early by the oxygen-starved cells along the way and never reach the deeper parts of the body where oxygen is most needed. And because the pH is acidic, carbon dioxide also is not transported efficiently and so builds up within the tissues leading both to cell death and to a cell-to-cancer de-evolution for survival.

So, yes, cancer can be cured with ordinary baking soda. Bicarbonate is found in the blood naturally for the very real purpose of neutralizing acids. Therefore, those who want to cure your cancers should first follow the stolen advise found in the above newsletter. Not that the oncologists understand or follow this advice, themselves, but since they stole it from Naturopathic medicine at least we can all agree that it is good advice. So, go to the health food stores and change your diet immediately.

But also do this: Take a pinch of baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) into your mouth, run it around your teeth and gums with your tongue while being sure to reach into the deepest parts of your gums and teeth and swallow it three times a day – more or less depending on how you feel. Also, drink a glass of water containing a teaspoon of baking soda before going to bed each night. But don’t over do this. Baking soda can kill you if you take too much of it. Take just a little bit and see how it makes you feel. If you feel okay, then take some more. Don’t overdo it but don’t be afraid to experiment. After all, the doctors experiment on you every time you go to see them as they “practice medicine”. So, why not experiment on yourself and save the money and the pain. But by all means change your diet to a natural and alkaline diet. And make baking soda a part of that diet.

The physicians will charge you a lot of money to take a pH test of your blood, but you can start monitoring the pH, yourself, by purchasing some pH test strips from a pharmacy. Test your tongue pH in the morning as well as your urine pH. Practice some yoga or Tai Chi Chuan or other deep breathing exercises and go on long walks to enjoy fresh air and your days on Earth. As your blood pH moves back up to the alkaline side of the chart, your deep breathing will fully oxygenate your blood. The cancer cells cannot survive all of that fresh oxygen so they die. And your T-killer cells, being full of vigor, will kill the cancer cells that remain. It’s as simple as that.

This is not advice that a cancer doctor will give you but it is advice that you can take whether you accept his treatments or not. After all, the normal pH of your blood is 7.4 but if the doctor wants to treat you without regard to what is normal, then maybe you should put yourself in Nature’s hands rather than his. If cancer is normal, then it would be normal for everybody to have cancer. But since it is not normal and since it thrives in situations that are not normal, then doesn’t it make sense to seek the things that are normal so that the cancer just disappears? A physician or oncologist who ignores the pH of your blood and does not know how to make it normal once again, is not qualified to be treating you in any way whatsoever. Avoid such physicians for the idiots that they are.

And whoops, oh dear! I am afraid that tooth decay is also cured with this simple remedy because baking soda kills decay-causing germs on contact. Will the purveyors of toothbrushes and pastes and drilling and filling and billing be pleased? No, those greedy betrayers and swindlers will not be pleased at all. They want you to be sick. But the sweet, happy smile of good health is the natural state of Mankind.

 

© 2008 Bamboo Delight Company

EMFs' Biological Influences
Electromagnetic fields exert effects on and through hormones

By JANET RALOFF

Several years ago, Cindy Sage hired an electrician to install a new light in her daughter's bedroom. After he left, Sage swept the room with a gaussmeter to measure the magnetic fields present.

In some 98 percent of U.S. homes, the average strength of magnetic fields ranges from 0.5 to 0.9 milligauss (mG). Until the electrician's visit, the field in Sage's daughter's room also fell within that range. Afterward, it was 3 mG.

Although that reading is somewhat higher than normal, it falls well below the federally permitted 1,000-mG limit for U.S. workplaces. However, this didn't reassure Sage, a Montecito, Calif.-based consultant specializing in electromagnetic field (EMF) issues. The workplace limit "is based on the faulty assumption that only thermal, or heat, effects are important as a potential biological hazard," she says.

Sage called the electrician back to find out what he'd done. It turns out that he hadn't wired the light according to the electrical code. When he rewired the room, its average field dropped to 0.2 mG.

Electromagnetic fields are invisible lines of force that surround all electric devices and wiring. Concern about the potential health effects of these fields was catalyzed in the late 1970s by studies suggesting an association between childhood leukemia and proximity to certain types of power lines or equipment, such as utility transformers.

Several studies suggest "a doubling of childhood leukemia incidence between 1 and 2 mG" and up to a sixfold increase for exposures between 4 and 5 mG, says Sage. There have even been hints of a breast cancer risk in adults exposed to high fields (SN: 6/30/90, p. 404).

More recently, several other sources have been added: large currents on the job (SN: 9/28/91, p. 202), poorly grounded wiring (SN: 8/21/93, p. 124), and appliances (see table). Magnetic fields do not necessarily correlate with the size, power, or noisiness of a device. Moreover, there can be a tremendous difference between models of an appliance. Because it's difficult to shield oneself from magnetic fields, the only practical way to limit exposures is to put distance between oneself and the source.

Sage conducts sweeps of magnetic fields in her clients' homes, offices, schools, and hospitals. She deploys electricians to fix any fields that run dramatically above the national norm. Usually, they trace to code violations that prove easy and inexpensive to fix.

A 1996 report issued by the National Academy of Sciences concluded that while EMFs appear capable of affecting biological tissues, their link to cancer remains unproven. However, Sage argues that until or unless EMFs are exonerated, avoidance of them is a reasonable policy.

Richard G. Stevens of the Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, Wash., emphatically disagrees, arguing that it's premature to sweep homes or even to advocate prudent avoidance. That's not because he believes EMFs are necessarily benign. Indeed, he is the father of the 10-year-old "melatonin hypothesis" (SN: 7/3/93, p. 10), a theory that exposure to certain EMFs may trigger cancer, especially in the breast, by perturbing the body's natural concentrations of this brain hormone.

He says that many questions remain about what types of fields and features of exposure -- such as timing -- underlie any risks. The problem with prudent avoidance is that it may make people less willing to act if the risks are later proved more circumscribed.

Stevens doesn't challenge the idea that fields can bring about potentially disturbing biological changes. Indeed, new studies describing such effects were presented 7 weeks ago at a U.S. Public Health Service conference he helped organize in Washington, D.C. The studies demonstrated a hitherto unrecognized responsiveness of cells, tissues, and animals -- even humans.

Melatonin, a hormone produced by the brain during periods of darkness (SN: 5/13/95, p. 300), is an important natural suppressor of breast cancer cell growth, both in test tubes and in animals. Stevens' melatonin hypothesis holds that because EMFs can depress or shut down melatonin secretion in animals, they may play a role in fostering the growth of malignancies in people.

To test this hypothesis, toxicologist Wolfgang Löscher of the School of Veterinary Medicine in Hanover, Germany, has exposed groups of up to 120 female rats to melatonin-suppressing EMFs of between 100 and 1,000 mG. An equal number of rats received a negligible background exposure of roughly 1 mG; these rats produced melatonin normally. Löscher injected into each rat a chemical that causes mammary cancer, then observed the rats for 3 months.

Compared to the unexposed rats, those in the 100-mG field developed about 10 percent more tumors, animals exposed to 500 mG got 25 percent more, and rats receiving 1,000 mG developed 50 percent more. Tumors also grew as much as twice the size under the influence of EMFs.

To understand why, Löscher has focused on the immune system's T cells, a class of white blood cells whose role is to attack and destroy tumors and foreign substances. T cells from animals raised for 3 months in 500- or 1,000-mG fields proved only half as likely as those from unexposed rats to proliferate when exposed to a foreign substance. "This indicates that EMFs indeed suppress the immune system's response to ongoing processes such as tumor growth," Löscher says.

He has also analyzed rats' production of the enzyme ornithine decarboxylase. This enzyme has to be present in large amounts for any cells to proliferate. "If the melatonin hypothesis were true, then when one exposes rats to EMFs, there should be an increase of this enzyme -- but only in the breast," he says.

That is exactly what he's found in EMF studies that he has replicated several times. "To me," he told Science News, "this is the most convincing data that the melatonin hypothesis may be true."

At the Lawrence Berkeley (Calif.) National Laboratory, Robert P. Liburdy has been probing the underpinnings of EMFs' apparent cancer-fostering effects in test-tube studies of malignant cells. He has found that 12-mG EMFs can suppress the ability of both melatonin and the hormone-emulating drug tamoxifen to shut down the growth of cancer cells (SN: 11/29/97, p. 342).

In a follow-up study that he described in July at a meeting in Bologna, Italy, the activity of another drug proved even more negatively affected by 12-mG fields. Both tamoxifen and this second drug, which goes by the unwieldy moniker ICI-182780, are synthetic estrogens. They have been designed to dock at a cell's estrogen receptor and block it. In the breast, this can starve most cancer cells of the estrogen that normally spurs their growth.

Unlike the ICI drug, which interacts only with the estrogen receptor, tamoxifen can alter the activity of other proteins. Magnetic fields proved more effective against the ICI drug, implying that they interfere with its binding to the estrogen receptor, Liburdy says. If they do, then the body's natural estrogen should be affected similarly. Tests of that possibility are now under way.

Liburdy's studies suggest that "a new melatonin hypothesis is emerging," argues Charles Graham, an experimental physiologist at the Midwest Research Institute (MRI) in Kansas City, Mo. The old hypothesis, Graham notes, focused on how much melatonin the body produced and circulated. While reasonable, it downplayed any relevance for humans because "we saw no decrease in melatonin" among people exposed to EMFs.

If magnetic fields can make cells less sensitive to melatonin, as studies by Liburdy and others now indicate, then EMFs may yet pose a melatonin-mediated cancer threat, he says.

Graham's own research indicates that magnetic fields can alter two other hormones that affect cancer risk -- estrogen and testosterone.

Compared to measurements taken in the presence of negligible background fields, overnight exposure of women to 200-mG EMFs in the laboratory significantly elevated estrogen; other studies have shown that elevated exposure to estrogen over many years can increase a woman's breast cancer risk. In men, the EMFs reduced testosterone -- a hormone drop that has been linked to testicular and prostate cancers (SN: 2/22/97, p. 126).

Graham's most intriguing data come from experiments with what he terms intermittent EMFs. He and Mary R. Cook, also at MRI, began delivering pulsed exposures that cycle on for an hour and then off for an hour throughout the night. During each "on" cycle, the field switches on and off every 15 seconds.

Not only do preliminary studies indicate that intermittent fields "really have an effect," Graham observes, but they emulate real-world exposures, which can vary from second to second in frequency, intensity, and waveform, depending on their source and an individual's distance from it.

In a 3-night study of 24 healthy young men, roughly one-third got steady 200-mG exposures on any given night. Another third received 200-mG fields intermittently, and the remainder slept in the presence of negligible background fields.

At the Energy Department's annual EMF Research Review Meeting in San Diego last November, Graham and Cook reported that the intermittent fields -- and only those fields -- disturbed 6 of 10 measures of sleep quality. They not only contributed to broken sleep and shorter periods of deep, dream-stage sleep, they also led to more reports of feeling unrested in the morning.

In an upcoming report in Bioelectromagnetics, Graham's team links those same intermittent fields to decreased heart rate variability in 77 college-age men. In healthy people, heart rate tends to vary somewhat from second to second in response to the body's need to maintain blood pressure, temperature, and so on. Often, individuals with heart disease exhibit a more stable heart rate -- an indication, Graham says, "that their heart is no longer as well connected to the nervous system."

While the young men that Graham studied exhibited normal heart rate variability during the nights they were exposed to background fields or constant EMFs, that variability diminished substantially on the night each was exposed to intermittent fields. Graham is planning follow-up studies to probe the long-term health implications of this provocative finding.

"What concerns me," Graham says, is that the public "tends to get so worried about the magnitude of a field. The bigger it is, the worse it's supposed to be." In fact, Löscher has found that very high fields, as well as those below a certain strength, have little impact on tumor growth. Only those across a relatively narrow range consistently foster tumors and other negative health effects.

"We've seen the same thing in our studies," Graham told Science News.

Moreover, he says, it's beginning to appear that a field's magnitude matters less than its intermittency or other features, such as power surges called electrical transients.

These surges can pack a big burst of energy into a short period of time. They occur whenever lights or other electric devices turn on, when motors or compressors (such as those in refrigerators and air conditioners) cycle on, or when dimmer switches operate. "Being transient doesn't mean they're rare, just quick," Graham notes. Transients are hard to avoid because they may stem from surges elsewhere -- in a neighbor's house or even power lines up the street.

Little research has been conducted to untangle the potential health impacts of EMF characteristics other than field strength, Graham notes, and money for such EMF studies is all but drying up.

The two major federal programs dedicated to financing research on EMF effects on health are slated to shut down in October. A program funded by electric utilities through the Electric Power Research Institute will, however, continue.

One should expect that "research on EMFs in the United States will take a big nose-dive," says Graham.

One ray of hope, Liburdy notes, comes from the recent proliferation of government funds for endocrine-disrupting pollutants. While magnetic fields are a type of radiation, they functionally resemble many environmental pollutants that mimic hormones. In fact, he observes, EMFs may actually fit the definition of an endocrine disrupter better than these chemicals do. That's because magnetic fields appear to elicit their effects by acting on and through hormones, rather than as hormones.

Exposures to magnetic fields can vary widely throughout the day.

From midnight to 7 a.m., cyclic changes in fields at the head of a second-floor bed suggest a poorly wired thermostat or pump that induces spikes as the boiler in the basement turns on and off. Use of kitchen appliances from 7 to 7:30 a.m. caused small surges. Similar fluctuations between 7:30 and 8:15 depict fields as the author drove her daughter to school. Off-the-chart peaks shortly thereafter reflect commuting on the electric subway system.

The 1- to 2-mG background fields from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. were encountered at the office computer. Photocopying generated an 11 a.m. spike. The 5- to 8-mG exposures from 1 to 3 p.m. occurred during a staff party at a nearby restaurant, and the erratic spikes over the succeeding 4 hours depict fields in local shops, on the subway, and while driving the family car.

Spikes between 10:30 and 11:30 p.m. took place while cleaning the kitchen, turning on the dishwasher, and changing CDs on the stereo.

References:

1995. Questions and Answers about Electric and Magnetic Fields Associated with the Use of Electric Power. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and U.S. Department of Energy.

Afzal, S.M.J., and R.P. Liburdy. 1996. Inhibition of melatonin's action of MCF-7 cell proliferation by magnetic fields associated with video display terminals: A preliminary study. Eighteenth Annual Meeting of the Bioelectromagnetics Society. Victoria, British Columbia.

Cook, M.R., C. Graham, and R. Kavet. 1997. Melatonin and its urinary metabolite: Comparison across age and gender. Second World Congress for Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine. Bologna, Italy.

Cook, M.R., et al. 1996. Gender differences in heart rate variability in 60-Hz magnetic fields. 36th Annual Meeting of the Society for Psychophysiological Research. Vancouver, British Columbia.

Harland, J.D., and R.P. Liburdy. 1997. Environmental magnetic fields inhibit the antiproliferative action of tamoxifen and melatonin in a human breast cancer cell line. Bioelectromagnetics 18:555.

Stevens, R.G., B.W. Wilson, and L.E. Anderson. 1997. The Melatonin Hypothesis: Breast cancer and the use of electric power. Columbus, Ohio: Battelle Press.

Stevens, R.G. 1987. Electric power use and breast cancer: A hypothesis. American Journal of Epidemiology 125:556.

Further Readings:

1997. Breast cancer activists plan to stir EMF doldrums. EMF Health & Safety Digest 15(November-December):20.

Cook, M.R., et al. 1992. A replication study of human exposure to 60-Hz fields: Effects on neurobehavioral measures. Bioelectromagnetics 13:261.

Ezzell, C. 1991. Power-line angst. Science News 140(Sept. 28):202.

Fackelmann, K.A. 1994. Do EMFs pose breast cancer risk? Science News 145(June 18):388.

Raloff, J. 1997. Magnetic fields can diminish drug action. Science News 152(Nov. 29):342.

_____. 1997. Radical prostates. Science News 151(Feb. 22):126.

_____. 1995. Drug of darkness. Science News 147(May 13):300.

______. 1994. That feminine touch. Science News 145(Jan. 22):51.

_____. 1993. EMFs run aground. Science News 144(Aug. 21):124.

______. 1993. EcoCancers. Science News 144(July 3):10.

______. 1990. EPA suspects ELF fields can cause cancer. Science News 137(June 30):404.

_____. 1979. Electric-power lines linked with cancer. Science News 115(April 21):263.

Sage, C. 1994. Policy and science: A plaintiff's view. Land Use & Environment Forum 3(Fall):234.

Sage, C., and J. McGibbon. 1991. Reduction of magnetic field levels through prudent avoidance strategies involving electrical switching and wiring in the home. Annual meeting of the Bioelectromagnetics Society. Salt Lake City.

Washburn, E.P., et al. 1994. Residential proximity to electric transmission and distribution equipment and risk of childhood leukemia, childhood lymphoma, and childhood nervous system tumors: Systematic review, evaluation, and meta-analysis. Cancer Causes and Control 5:299.

Sources:

Charles Graham
Midwest Research Institute
Life Sciences Department
425 Volker Boulevard
Kansas City, MO 64110

Janet Lathrop
EMF Health and Safety Digest
2701 University Avenue, Suite 203
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3236

Robert P. Liburdy
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Life Sciences Division
Mail Stop-Building 934
One Cyclotron Road
Berkeley, CA 94720

Wolfgang Loscher
School of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover
Department of Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Pharmacy
Bunteweg 17, Building 225
D-30559 Hannover
Germany

Cindy Sage
Sage Associates Environmental Consultants
P.O. Box 50806
1225 Coast Village Road, Suite J
Santa Barbara, CA 93108
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Richard Stevens

Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory

Health Division, K4-28

Richland, WA 99352

EBEN HARRELL



HORMONE replacement therapy used by millions of women around the world causes cancer, according to the UN's cancer agency.

It also said yesterday that the combined contraceptive pill, also used by millions, causes more types of cancers than previously thought.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which collates existing oncology studies, declared that consistent evidence emerging from studies in the past few years has lead it to reclassify hormonal menopause therapy from "possibly carcinogenic to humans" to "carcinogenic to humans".

The agency said studies have convincingly shown that doses of oestrogen and progesterone in combination slightly increase the risk of breast cancer. And oestrogen-only treatment, while posing less of a risk for breast cancer, can cause endometrial cancers.

A major US study into HRT in 2002 established a link to breast cancer, while links to endometrial cancers have long been known. But it is the first time the respected international agency has decisively labelled the treatment carcinogenic, effectively ending any remaining doubt.

Dr Peter Boyle, director of IARC, said: "[This report] address exposures that are experienced daily by many millions of women worldwide. It is of enormous public health importance that we identify and understand the full range of effects of these products."

HRT is used to treat women suffering from symptoms caused by perimenopause - the transition before menopause when oestrogen and progesterone levels drop. Symptoms include insomnia, mood swings, hot flushes, reduced mental clarity, vaginal dryness and heavy menstrual periods.

In 2000, approximately 20 million women in developed countries used HRT, although that number has dropped in recent years as the treatment has been linked to cancer. Many doctors continue to prescribe a low-dose therapy for severe cases, but symptom-specific treatments such as lubricants, blood pressure medication and anti-depressants are becoming increasingly popular.

The report also concluded that the combined contraceptive pill causes more types of cancer than previously thought. Previously, the pill had been identified as causing liver cancer. Now, further research has demonstrated that it also slightly increases the risk of breast and cervical cancer, the agency said.

However, the investigation also confirmed that the pill decreases the risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers.

Vincent Cogliano, head of the agency's monographs department, which is widely regarded as the international authority on which substances cause cancer, said: "It's a complicated picture. It doesn't mean women should stop taking the treatment. There are still other reasons to take it. Each woman has to discuss it with her doctor and weigh the risks and benefits."

Worldwide, more than 100 million women - about 10 per cent of all women of reproductive age - currently use combined hormonal contraceptives. Commonly known as "the pill", but also administered through patches and injections, the treatment prevents pregnancy by stopping ovulation and thickening the mucous of the cervix so sperm cannot get through.

Combined hormonal contraceptives can cause weight gain, breast tenderness, depression and a decreased interest in sex. But it has also been shown to reduce the risk of noncancerous breast cysts, infections of the fallopian tubes, iron deficiency anaemia and ectopic, or tubal, pregnancies.

The Sour Sop or the fruit from the graviola tree is a miraculous natural cancer cell killer, 10,000 times stronger than Chemo ..

Why are we not aware of this?  Its because some big corporation want to make back their money spent on years of research by trying to make a synthetic version of it for sale.

So, since you know it now you can help a friend in need by letting him know or just drink some sour sop juice yourself as a prevention from time to time.  The taste is not bad afterall.  Its completely natural and definitely has no side effects.  If you have the space plant one in your garden. The other parts of the tree are also useful.

The next time you have a fruit juice, ask for a sour sop.

How many people died in vain while this billion-dollar drug maker concealed the secret of the miraculous Graviola tree?
This tree is low and is called graviola in Brazil, guanabana in Spanish and has the uninspiring name "soursop" in English. The fruit is very large and the subacid sweet white pulp is eaten out of hand or, more commonly, used to make fruit drinks, sherbets and such. The principal interest in this plant is because of its strong anti-cancer effects. Although it is effective for a number of medical conditions, it is its anti tumor effect that is of most interest. This plant is a proven cancer remedy for cancers of all types. Besides being a cancer remedy, graviola is a broad spectrum antimicrobial agent for both bacterial and fungal infections, is effective against internal parasites and worms, lowers high blood pressure and is used for depression, stress and nervous disorders.

If there ever was a single example that makes it dramatically clear why the existence of Health Sciences

Institute is so vital to Americans like you, it's the incredible story behind the Graviola tree. The truth is stunningly simple: Deep within the Amazon Rainforest grows a tree that could literally revolutionize what you, your doctor, and the rest of the world thinks about cancer treatment and chances of survival. The future has never looked more promising.

Research shows that with extracts from this miraculous tree it now may be possible to..

• Attack cancer safely and effectively with an all-natural therapy that does not cause extreme nausea,
• weight loss and hair loss
• Protect your immune system and avoid deadly infections
• Feel stronger and healthier throughout the course of the treatment
• Boost your energy and improve your outlook on life

The source of this information is just as stunning: It comes from one of America 's largest drug manufacturers, the fruit of over 20 laboratory tests conducted since the 1970's! What those tests revealed was nothing short of mind numbing... Extracts from the tree were shown to:

• Effectively target and kill malignant cells in 12 types of cancer, including colon, breast, prostate, lung and pancreatic cancer..
• The tree compounds proved to be up to 10,000 times stronger in slowing the growth of cancer cells than Adriamycin, a commonly used chemotherapeutic drug!
• What's more, unlike chemotherapy, the compound extracted from the Graviola tree selectivelyhunts down and kills only cancer cells. It does not harm healthy cells!

The amazing anti-cancer properties of the Graviola tree have been extensively researched--so why haven't you heard anything about it? If Graviola extract is as half as promising as it appears to be--why doesn't every single oncologist at every major hospital insist on using it on all his or her patients? The spine-chilling answer illustrates just how easily our health--and for many, our very lives(!)--are controlled by money and power.

Graviola--the plant that worked too well

One of America 's biggest billion-dollar drug makers began a search for a cancer cure and their research centered on Graviola, a legendary healing tree from the Amazon Rainforest.

Various parts of the Graviola tree--including the bark, leaves, roots, fruit and fruit-seeds--have been used for centuries by medicine men and native Indians in South America to treat heart disease, asthma, liver problems and arthritis. Going on very little documented scientific evidence, the company poured money and resources into testing the tree's anti-cancerous properties--and were shocked by the results. Graviola proved itself to be a cancer-killing dynamo.

But that's where the Graviola story nearly ended.

The company had one huge problem with the Graviola tree--it's completely natural, and so, under federal law, not patentable. There's no way to make serious profits from it. It turns out the drug company invested nearly seven years trying to synthesize two of the Graviola tree's most powerful anti-cancer ingredients. If they could isolate and produce man-made clones of what makes the Graviola so potent, they'd be able to patent it and make their money back. Alas, they hit a brick wall. The original simply could not be replicated. There was no way the company could protect its profits--or even make back the millions it poured into research.

As the dream of huge profits evaporated, their testing on Graviola came to a screeching halt. Even worse, the company shelved the entire project and chose not to publish the findings of its research!  Luckily, however, there was one scientist from the Graviola research team whose conscience wouldn't let him see such atrocity committed. Risking his career, he contacted a company that's dedicated to harvesting medical plants from the Amazon Rainforest and blew the whistle.

Miracle unleashed

When researchers at the Health Sciences Institute were alerted to the news of Graviola, they began tracking the research done on the cancer-killing tree. Evidence of the astounding effectiveness of Graviola--and its shocking cover-up--came in fast and furious....

....The National Cancer Institute performed the first scientific research in 1976. The results showed that Graviola's "leaves and stems were found effective in attacking and destroying malignant cells." Inexplicably, the results were published in an internal report and never released to the public...

...Since 1976, Graviola has proven to be an immensely potent cancer killer in 20 independent laboratory tests, yet no double-blind clinical trials--the typical benchmark mainstream doctors and journals use to judge a
treatment's value--were ever initiated...

....A study published in the Journal of Natural Products, following a recent study conducted at Catholic University of South Korea stated that one chemical in Graviola was found to selectively kill colon cancer cells at "10,000 times the potency of (the commonly used chemotherapy drug) Adriamycin..."

....The most significant part of the Catholic University of South Korea report is that Graviola was shown to selectively target the cancer cells, leaving healthy cells untouched. Unlike chemotherapy, which indiscriminately targets all actively reproducing cells (such as stomach and hair cells), causing the often devastating side effects of nausea and hair loss in cancer patients.

...A study at Purdue University recently found that leaves from the Graviola tree killed cancer cells among six human cell lines and were especially effective against prostate, pancreatic and lung
cancers...

Inventor of Radionics. Dr. Albert Abrams

It is said that Dr. Albert Abrams(1863-1924) was the original inventor of Radionics.

He didn't call his device or an idea "Radionics".

He called it "Radio Therapy".

Albert Abrams was born in 1863 in San Francisco.

He graduated first in his class in medicine at Heidelberg University, studied medicine at Berlin, Paris, Vienna and London.

He studied at Heidelberg University under Herman Von Helmholts , who was a famous medical scientist, physical scientist and philosopher.

From that time they maintained a good relationship with each other.

Dr.Abrams got inspiration from Helmholts.

Abrams tried to find a connection between the theories of biology and physics.

This experience destined him to new discovery and reserch.

After this time in Europe, he went back to America to teach pathology at Stanford University, became a dean of the medical school and received a doctorate of pathology.

He carried on reserch work until he died in 1942, at age 61.

---

New discovery: The Relationship between geometric fields and percussion sounds.

Abrams was skilled at diagnosis, especially "percussive diagnosis".

Percussion is a kind of diagnostic technique.

The practitioner make a diagnosis by thumping the abdomen of the patient and listening to the changes in the percussion sound for evidence of a tumor or other disease.

One day, while he was examining a patient with percussive diagnosis, an X-ray machine near the laboratory was turned on without being noticed.

He found the percussion sound turned dull.

This leaded him to examine the relationship between the patient's aspect and percussion sound.

He also found that when a patient faced to the west, the percussion sound became dull but if a patient faced to the south or the north the sound didn't change.

He examined a patient who had lip cancer again and again, he found that the dull percussion sound occured in a similar manner to that of X-ray machine affect only when the patient faced west.

Since then, he examined many cases with many kinds of patients and he found that constricted response of the upper abdomen occuered when it responded to the molecular oscillation of cancer forming its group or the radiation of X-ray machine.

He decided to experiment based on this discovery.

He laid a healthy man facing west and thumping his upper abdomen, told a student to listen carefully the changes of reverberation.

Then, he let a doctor hold a sample of cancer cells near the subject's forehead.

He asked the doctor to touch the man's forehead with the cancer cells in intervals of several seconds.

When a sample of the cancer cells touched the man's forehead, the percussion sound changed from resonant sound to a dull sound.

He concluded that the vibration of a diseased cell sample was received by the human body and affected the human cells.

This phenomenon was published 1916, titled "New Consepts in Diagnosis and Treatment".

---

Electronic responce

When a doctor examins a patient with percussive diagnosis, the patient need to stand up, so, a patient must have the physical strength to stand up.

After many kinds of experimentation, Abrams linked the head of a patient who was bedridden and a healthy assistant using an electrical leed.

Then he thumpped the abdomen of the assistant.

He found that the same response occured in the assistant in the same particular part of his abdomen as in the patient's.

He found a way to examine a bedridden patient with percussive diagnosis.

He concluded that disease has somekind of energy that can run through an electrical lead.

Then he attached two metal disks, one to each end of a 1.8m electrical lead, and put one disk to the patient's forehead while moving other disk to trace the body of his healthy assistant.

He found that percussion sound turned dull when it came to the same particular part of the assistant's abdomen.

1. He could diagnose a bedridden patient with this technique.2. Information about diseases runs through electrical lead. Next to examine if information about a disease behaves like electricity, he attached a variable resister in the middle of an electrical lead.

He connect the electrical lead to a syphilis patient and turned the dial to a variety of resisters. The percussion sound changed at 55 ohm.

When he experimented on a cancer patient, it changed at 50, a gonorrheal patient, at 42.

He repeated similar experiments, and found the ohm rate of many types of disease.

He also found that he could give a patient's diagnosis from the ohm rate.

 He called the rate "Rate" and the numeration table "Rate book".

At first, he used only one variable resister to identify disease, but he tripled it to pinpoint an affected area and named the device "Bio-meter".

The first variable resister identified the name of a disease, such as cancer, and the second one pinpointed an affected area, such as the stomack.

He used that device himself and sold it to other doctors on request.

Next, he found that he was able to identify pathogenic organisms as well.

He put tubercle bacillus in a laboratory dish and connected it through an electrical lead to a healthy assistant.

Then when he adjusted the "Rate" to tubercle bacillus, there was a response.

He found that not only disease but also pathogenic organism could be identified using the device.

Moreover, he found that he could get the same result by using a patient's infected blood.

They called the phenomenon that Abrams discovered "Electronic Reaction of Abrams-ERA".

Invention of "Oscilloclast" curing disease by counterbalancing wave motion.

Once he succeeded in diagnosing patients with the device as described above, he set out to cure disease with the device.

Here are some examples of his experiments.

He set a blood sample of a mararial patient on one side of the device and listned to the percussion sound of his assistant.

Then he set quinine, which had an effect on mararia, next to the blood sample and listned to the percussion sound again.

He found that when he set quinine with the blood sample, the dull percussion sound was cleared.

Thus, the vibration of the quinine neutralized the vibration of the mararial blood sample.

That experiment encouraged him to start practicing ERA seriously.

Abrams set out to invent a vibration radiator like a radio.

He thought that if he neutralized the vibrations of diseased cells with this vibration radiator, he could cure diseases like using quinine and mercurial on malaria and syphilis.

Samuel O. Hoffman, who was a radio science research engineer, helped Abrams to produce "Oscilloclast".

Their intention was to demolish diseased energy with this device.

It is said that they attached an oscillator to their biometer but the details are unknown because there is no circuit diagram nor deos any device remain.

But they recorded successful results using this device.

As I wrote before, information about a disease runs through electrical leads, so they believed it had a quality like electricity.

They concluded that they could cure disease or at least affect disease by inducing electricity.

It was an important point in Radionics when they were abled to cure a disease with the Oscilloclast.

After that, Abrams and his assistants had great success in curing diseases by using the Oscilloclast.

A postgraduate course of ERA was even set up.

Attacked by the American Medical Association.

Abrams taught percussive diagnosis to his students, but there was always ten percent of the group of the students who weren't able to acquire this tecnique.

He was serching for a way to teach percussive diagnosis to this 10 percent by trial and error.

He finally conceived the technique of rubbing together a glass rod and a rubber rod to find the disharmonious area.

This technique consisted of touching an assistant's abdomen with a glass rod and then rubbing the glass rod vertically with a rubber rod.

The rods made squeaky sound under normal conditions, but at a certain point they stuck together and stopped making the sound.

This indicated the disharmonious area the same as the dull sound of percussive diagnosis did.

He taught this technique to the students who couldn't work with the percussive diagnosis.

Some time later, Abrams stopped using a rubber rod when he conceived the technique to rub a patient's abdomen with a glass rod.

When a glass rod came to an disharmonious area it stuck to the abdomen.

The same result occured when he employed the percussive diagnosis.

Then he recorded these certain points on a biometar when the glass rod responded.

This process was important as it evolved into stickpad later.

In 1922, Abrams succeeded in remotely diagonising a patient, who never entered his laboratory, using a sample of patient's blood.

He reported on this success in a physical medicine magazine.

This report aroused the antipathy of the American Medical Association and the association attacked Abrams for inadequate diagnosis.

After Abrams died in 1924, he had been written up in "Scientific American" 18 times.

He wrote several books but he never used the word "Radionics" in his books. He used the word "Radio Therapy" instead.

He didn't invented the word "Radionics".

No one knows who started to call his device "Radionics", but still, Abrams is the originator of Radionics.

He used the oscillator for Oscilloclast but it didn't make any sound and it needed very little electricity to activate something.

It was 1920 when radio was invented.

He may have used these parts for his device because of his insight into this new technology.

(NaturalNews) Everyone needs to cleanse their lymph system of all the wastes that have built up over a lifetime. Cleansing the lymph helps the body to cleanse every organ and system you have. The waste from each cell must be removed or the body will die in its own waste.

The lymph system transports lymphatic fluids but it also works as a filter, removing bacteria, microorganisms, dead cells, and other unwanted substances. In today’s world, our bodies are inundated with an abundance of unwelcome matter and toxins that can block the lymph nodes, decreasing the body's ability to resist disease.

Over time, waste builds up inside the body and starts to clog organs, veins, and lymph which in turn can cause not only cancer but many illnesses such as swollen lymph nodes, skin problems, high cholesterol, sinus congestion, fatigue, and headaches due to a weakened immune system.

When toxic waste builds up in the lymphatic system it impedes the entire body's function. Because the lymph system is the foundation of the immune system, it is vital that its function not be congested by useless wastes that can be naturally flushed out with simple herbs and supplements.

At the end of this article is an herbal recipe for Lymph Clear. The herbs in the formula support one another, and support a solution to clearing the body of environmental causes which have been found in all cancers, but especially Breast Cancer, Lymphatic Cancer and Lymphoma. I have used it as an alternative treatment for many cancers and I have had Naturopaths order this tonic from me to treat their patients for everything from cancers to lymphoedema.

In addition to using Lymph Clear, it is important to change lifestyle, diet and add additional supplements which I recommended here:

Overall Cancer Prevention tips along with additional suggestions for Breast Cancer:

1. Use broccoli and broccoli sprouts. Research has shown broccoli is the best vegetable you can
consume for breast cancer prevention.

2. Omit foods that contain or are grown with hormones like dairy and meats.

3. Supplement with the herb Black Cohosh for breast cancer prevention. This herb has been used for years by herbalists for treating menopause. A new laboratory study now backs its usage and suggests that extracts from Black Cohosh, an herb most commonly used to reduce menopausal symptoms such as hot flashes, may stop breast cancer cells in their tracks. This adds more evidence to a small but growing body of research suggesting that Black Cohosh could have a use in breast cancer prevention.

4. For breast cancer, supplement with DIM (Diindolylmethane), which is intended to reduce your undesirable “BAD” estrogen metabolites.

5. Drink green tea. It has an anti-tumor effect on breast cancer cells. A study by Dr. Maheshwari that was published earlier this year in Cancer Letters showed that green tea is effective in delaying tumor incidence as well as in reducing the tumor burden. Green tea was found to inhibit growth of tumors as well as induce death of breast cancer cells. Epidemiological studies also suggest that the risk of breast cancer is found to be less in Asian countries consuming green tea. These studies have greater clinical significance since the ability of these phytochemicals to activate anti-cancer program of tumor cells might determine the success of chemotherapy.

6. Reduce your processed food, sugar and grain carbohydrate intake.

7. Check for food allergies. Ex: Blueberries are an excellent antioxidant but if you are allergic to them they will do more harm than good. Anyone who is suffering from critical or chronic illness should have a combined IgE and IgG4 allergy test taken. IgE shows what foods cause an instant allergic reaction where IgG4 shows delayed allergy that may take up to 4 days for an allergic reaction. The IgG4 allergies are what I term ‘hidden allergies’.

8. Reduce your exposure to environmental toxins like fertilizers, pesticides, household chemical cleaners, synthetic air fresheners, scented candles, car exhaust, and air pollution. Use Cilantro tincture to remove heavy metals from your body. Or, eat fresh cilantro in salads.

9. Instead of frying your foods bake, boil, or steam them.

10. Normalize your ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fats by taking a high-quality fish oil and reducing your intake of most processed vegetable oils

11. Supplement with vitamin D. Cod liver oil will provide vitamin D, vitamin A and omega-3.

12. Get regular exercise; even if it's just going for a daily walk. One of the primary reasons exercise works is that it drives your insulin levels down.

13. Get a good night's sleep. Research shows when the immune system is compromised, it takes 9 hours of sleep in the dark to restore your immune system.

14. Limit your exposure to radio waves produced by cell phone towers, base stations, phones, computers and WiFi stations.

15. Cultivate a spiritual life. This can be done with brief meditations, introspections, appreciating nature, taking up a hobby, listening to music, readings. In essence, make room in your day for yourself and something you love.

Browning’s Lymph Clear dried herb ingredients:

Black Walnut (juglans nigra): It has been effective for treating colitis, infections, liver, tuberculosis and tumors. Helps regulate blood sugar levels, burns excess toxins and fatty materials, rids the colon of parasites, and contains magnesium which feeds the muscles and the nerves. It has been shown to have oxygenating abilities which may help burn up excess toxins and fatty materials and cleanse the blood. By oxygenating the blood, it kills parasites.

Bloodroot (sanguinaria canadensis): Lymphatic. Showing results as an antibacterial, anti-edemic, anti-gingivitic, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, anti-plaque, antiseptic, expectorant, fungicide, gastrocontractant, respiratory stimulant and more. It is showing great scientific promise in fighting cancers today as it did hundreds of years ago in folklore medicine.

Burdock (arctium lappa): Lymphatic. Helps to eliminate waste in the body, it is an anti-biotic, antiseptic, and antifungal, detoxifying herb.

Chaparral (larrea tridentate): Lymphatic plus it is an antibacterial, antiviral, anti-tumor.

Chelidonium aka Celandine (chelidonium majus): It has been reported to exhibit anti-viral, anti-inflammatory, anti-tumor and anti-microbial properties both in vitro and in vivo. It helps relieve inflammation and chronic disorders of the hepatic and biliary system and inflammation of the respiratory organs.

Cleavers (galium aparine): Is one of the best tonics for the lymphatic system available. It treats swollen glands anywhere in the body and has been useful in the treatment of ulcers and tumors by lymphatic drainage which detoxifies the tissue. It is an alternative, lymphatic, helps remove obstructions, swelling. It is helpful in clearing the urinary tract with basis in the lymphatic drainage, which helps detoxify the kidneys keeping them in good working order.

Dandelion Root (taraxacum officinale): Liver & Pancreas. It acts by straining and filtering toxins & wastes from the bloodstream and its beneficial effects on liver complaints have been well documented by both Asian practitioners and American physicians.

Echinacea Root (echinacea purpurea): Stimulates lymphatic activity and boosts the immune system.

Figwort (scrophularia nodosa): Figwort is among the most useful herbs for the lymphatic system especially for swollen lymph nodes.

Lemon Peel: Alkalizes the body and is excellent for liver and lymph.

Plantain (plantago major): Great for boosting the Immune system, combating infection, counters blood poisoning, removes toxins.

Poke Root (phytolacca americana): Lymphatic. The root has a very favorable influence on the glandular system.

Red Clover (trifolium pretense): Lymphatic. Clinical evidence shows that there is a basis for its long standing tradition in treating cancer.

Red Root (ceanothus americanus): It is an excellent lymphatic remedy. It stimulates lymph and inter-tissue fluid circulation for lymphatic drainage. It is also effective on enlarged lymph nodes and for shrinking non-fibrous cysts.

Sarsaparilla (smilax medica or smilax ornate): Blood tonic, it is especially good for removing these heavy metals if taken properly, it contains calcium, copper, iron, iodine, manganese, potassium, silicon, sodium, sulfur, B-complex and vitamins A, C, and D.

Yellow Dock (rumex crispus): It improves the function of the kidneys, liver, lymph glands, and intestines, thus aiding the body's natural cleansing processes. It has been used to help the body eliminate pollutants, including heavy metals such as lead and arsenic.

What cooking tools and other ingredients you will need:

2 stainless steel or glass 20 quart pots with lids.
A large strainer.
A candy or water thermometer.
Cheesecloth.
4 gallons of distilled water
16 oz of vegetable glycerin
8 to 12 oz of Black Strap Molasses
60 oz of honey
4 Tablespoons Citric acid

For bottling you can use regular canning jars. If using pint jars you will need about 22 jars. If using quart jars you will need about 11-12 to 8 jars. You can cut recipe in ½ for a smaller batch.

Add to Pot 1

1 oz Bloodroot
2 oz Burdock
2 oz Chaparral
1.5 oz Dandelion Root
1.5 oz Echinacea Root
2 oz Poke
2 oz Red Root
1.5 oz Sarsaparilla
2.5 oz Yellow Dock
Add 2 gallons of distilled water

Cover with lid and set on stove on warm heat overnight so that the roots can be softened for extraction.

In the morning turn up the heat and bring the water to a low simmer for about 4 hours then bring to a boil for 15-30 minutes. After boiling turn off heat and strain the liquid into a clean container by laying a layer of cheesecloth over your strainer.

Add to Pot 2

1 oz Black Walnut
1 oz Chelidonium aka Celandine
1 oz Cleavers
2 oz Lemon Peel
1.5 Plantain
1.5 Red Clover
Add 2 gallons of distilled water

Cover and set on counter and let soak in water over night.

In the morning place the pot on the stove on warm/medium heat to steep (not boil) the herbs like you would a cup of tea. Let them steep for at least 4 hours then strain the liquid by laying a layer of cheesecloth over your strainer.

Compost the strained herbs in your garden.

Mixing the pots:

Once the liquid is strained from both pots, mix it together in one of the 20 quart pots and let it simmer for about 15 minutes

Then add:

16 oz of vegetable glycerin
8 to 12 oz of Black Strap Molasses
60 oz of honey
4 Tablespoons Citric acid

Stir and let the mixture mingle for 15 minutes or so. When ready to bottle use a candy thermometer to check the temperature of the liquid. You want the temperature at 190* to prevent any bacteria to grow in the tonics. Maintain this heat temperature throughout bottling.

While waiting for your liquid to reach the accurate bottling temperature prepare your canning jars. Sterilize jars and lids.

Once your bottles are sterilized and your herbal liquid is at the right temperature add the tonic liquid to the hot jars. Fill to ½” from top of jar and cap. Let cool overnight. Check to make sure all the jars are sealed properly then store them. Tonics can be stored for 1 year.

Once you open a jar of tonic for use you must Refrigerate it. The tonic will last for 2 months in the refrigerator once it has been opened. Sediment in the bottom of the jars is normal. Give the jar a little shake or stir to mix the sediment before taking.

DO NOT TAKE IF YOU ARE PREGNANT

Adult Folklore Dosage: 1 Tablespoon 1 times a day for prevention. 1 Tablespoon 2 times a day for lymphoedema. 2 Tablespoon 2 times a day when breast and lymph is congested or cancerous. Refrigerate after opening.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only and is not intended as a substitute for advice from your health care professional. You should not use the information in this article for self-diagnosis or to replace any prescriptive medication. You should consult with a healthcare professional before starting any diet, exercise or supplementation program, before taking any medication, or if you have or suspect you might have a health problem, suffer from allergies, are pregnant or nursing.

Sources:

Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (2007, December 9). Green Tea Shown To Possess Anti-tumor Effect In Breast Cancer.

ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 10, 2007, from ((http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...)

Black Cohosh - International Journal of Cancer November 1, 2007;121(9):2073-83 ((http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre...)

About the author

Leslee Dru Browning is a 6th generation Medical Herbalist & Nutritionist from the ancestral line of Patty Bartlett Sessions; Pioneer Mid-Wife & Herbalist. Leslee practiced Medical Herbalism and Nutritional Healing for over 25 years and specialized in Cancer Wellness along with Chronic Illness. She now devotes her career to teaching people, through her writing, about Natural Healing from An Herbal Perspective.

9-19-9

From Dr. John Cannell MD

 

I'm writing to alert readers to a crucial email from a physician who has evidence vitamin D is protective against H1N1 and to ask you, the reader, to contact your representatives in Washington to help protect Americans, especially children, from H1N1 before winter comes.

 

 

Dear Dr. Cannell:

 

Your recent newsletters and video about Swine flu (H1N1) prompted me to convey our recent experience with an H1N1 outbreak at Central Wisconsin Center (CWC). Unfortunately, the state epidemiologist was not interested in studying it further so I pass it on to you since I think it is noteworthy.

 

CWC is a long-term care facility for people with developmental disabilities, home for approx. 275 people with approx. 800 staff. Serum 25-OHD has been monitored in virtually all residents for several years and patients supplemented with vitamin D.

 

In June, 2009, at the time of the well-publicized Wisconsin spike in H1N1 cases, two residents developed influenza-like illness (ILI) and had positive tests for H1N1: one was a long-term resident; the other, a child, was transferred to us with what was later proven to be H1N1.

 

On the other hand, 60 staff members developed ILI or were documented to have H1N1: of 17 tested for ILI, eight were positive. An additional 43 staff members called in sick with ILI. (Approx. 11-12 staff developed ILI after working on the unit where the child was given care, several of whom had positive H1N1 tests.)

 

So, it is rather remarkable that only two residents of 275 developed ILI, one of which did not develop it here, while 103 of 800 staff members had ILI. It appears that the spread of H1N1 was not from staff-to-resident but from resident-to-staff (most obvious in the imported case) and between staff, implying that staff were susceptible and our residents protected.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

Norris Glick, MD

Central Wisconsin Center

Madison, WI

 

Dear Dr. Glick:

 

This is the first hard data that I am aware of concerning H1N1 and vitamin D. It appears vitamin D is incredibly protective against H1N1.

 

Dr. Carlos Carmago at Mass General ran the numbers in an email to me. Even if one excludes 43 staff members who called in sick with influenza, 0.73% of residents were affected, as compared to 7.5% of staff. This 10-fold difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). That is, the chance that this was a chance occurrence is one less than one in a thousand.

 

Second, if you read my last newsletter, you will see that children with neurological impairments, like the patients at your hospital, have accounted for 2/3 of the childhood deaths for H1N1 so far in the USA. That is, the CDC knows, because they reported it, that patients with neurological impairments are more likely to die from H1N1.

 

The problem is that I cannot get anyone in authority at the CDC or the NIH to listen. I need readers to email or call their senators and congresspersons in Washington.

 

Ask your senator or congressperson to contact the CDC and NIH to complain about CDC and NIH inaction on Vitamin D and H1N1. Also, ask your senators and representative to demand congressional hearings on Vitamin D and H1N1, before it is too late. Here is the link below, just click it and follow instructions to contact your own represenatives.

 

http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

 

 

John Cannell, MD

President

Vitamin D Council

585 Leff Street

San Luis Obispo, CA 93422

 

 

 

Dr. Eisenstein's Comments:

 

Even though the virus is not becoming more deadly the vaccine army comes marching on. However, they have not been able to scare nurses, doctors or in England pregnant women.

 

When will they give up?

 

No one knows what treatment will be effective against the H1N1 Flu. However, the data from Dr. Norris is very compelling, that Vitamin D will be protective for H1N1.

 

 

To lower your families incidence of colds and flu this winter and to lower your probability of Swine Flu, start by measuring their vitamin D levels, keep it above 50ng/ml and by giving the whole family daily probiotics and vitamin D.

 

 

 

Specific Cancer Nutrition - January 21, 2006

Many people are trying to recover from cancer with non-toxic therapies. This is a reasonable goal and it is often achieved. Many want specific suggestions. They often spend a lot more money than necessary and take huge numbers of pills, many of which do not have a direct bearing on their problem and may even block progress. More may not be better!

These suggestions are intended to offer support to supplement whatever medical treatment you decide on. This is not a "cure" for cancer. It is a method of becoming healthy. Anyone with a condition that normally requires the services of a physician is urged to consult one. If you are considering chemotherapy or radiation, ask your oncologist if the suggested therapy ever cures your kind of cancer. If the answer is "no", then THINK ABOUT THIS!

1. Remove the virus. All cancers are viral conditions. A medical diagnosis will not tell you which virus you have. An extract of elder, peppermint, black walnut and burdock has been used historically to assist the body in removing carcinoma, sarcoma, and leukemia viruses. Graviola can be added to this formula. Cat's claw has been used for melanoma. An grape plant extract has been used for lymphoma viruses. Microhydrin or Mega Hydrate help the body fight viruses. Electronic equipment that produce 11,780,000 Hz and possibly 17,033,662 Hz will help with the carcinoma virus. For sarcoma, use 11,430,000. Use all three if in doubt. Sweep 1000 Hz above and below these high frequencies. Lower octaves at 2876 Hz and 2790 Hz will help remove the virus if the source drifts or does .01Hz step sweeps. 727, 2008 and/or 2128 should also be used. Work up to an hour or more daily for each. Brain and lung cancer patients must use shorter treatment times at first. If symptoms of toxicity or edema develop, reduce run times. See http://www.royalrife.com/members/jimmy.html for leukemia frequencies. High voltage negative static electricity has been reported to help the body reduce virus levels quickly. Natural Cellular Defense and EPA/DHA capsules assist the body in virus removal.

2. Remove parasites. Para 3 or the Clark protocol have been used historically. Zappers or frequency equipment can be used. For the human intestinal fluke stages, use 434,000, 432,000, 427,000, 425,000, 423,000 and 421,000 Hz. Or use 1695, 1687, 1668, 1660, 1652 and 1644. Do 3 minutes per frequency.

3. Avoid toxins. It appears that all tumors contain mercury. To help the body remove mercury, take chlorella (3 capsules per meal) and Platinum Plus Essential Amino Acids (2, three times a day on an empty stomach). The amino acids, along with a good multivitamin-mineral, enable your body to make the metallothionein proteins that the body uses to carry toxic metals away. Do not have root canals done. If you are not seeing results in three months, consider having root canals pulled by a biological dentist. Filter your water. Avoid rubbing (isopropyl) alcohol, shampoos and other cosmetics even if they do not list "prop" materials on the labels. Bottled water and beverages may contain isopropyl alcohol as a contaminant. Use 100 proof vodka as your deodorant. Brush your teeth with Uncle Harry's Tooth and Gum Elixir or Perigum. Use Miracle II products. Read Hulda Clark for more on toxins.

4. Enzymes. Cancer patients do not make enough pancreatic enzymes. Dr. William Donald Kelley used to have people take "a handful" of DA34 pancreatic enzymes every 6 hours. I now prefer Biotics Intenzyme Forte at 5-6 every 6 hours. If there is gas or heartburn, consider adding betaine hydrochloride in the middle of each meal. Start with one per meal. It is a good idea to eat one apricot kernel for each 10 pounds of body weight daily in divided doses to aid the enzymes. Example: a 180 pound person might consider eating 6 three times a day.

5. Mix 1 tablespoon of flax oil and 2-4 tablespoons of low fat cottage cheese. It can be sweetened with stevia or honey or fruit. Take 1 batch per 50 pounds of body weight per day with a maximum of 4 batches throughout the day. This is powerful. And cheap. Keep the flax oil in the freezing compartment. It won't freeze.

 

6. Drink water. Divide your weight in pounds by 2. The result is a good number of ounces of pure water to drink per day. If this is an increase for you, ask your physician if there is any reason that you should not drink this much water. Raw homemade juices count as part of this water. Caffeine or sugary beverages do not.

7. Keep elimination working. If the enzymes and betaine hydrochloride do not do this for you, take psyllium, eat dried prunes, cascara - whatever you have to do. We want all methods of elimination to be working. To clean out impacted material from the colon, ask your doctor if you can take 1 teaspoon of magnesium oxide powder in a glass of water at bedtime followed by the juice of a freshly squeezed lemon. Do this nightly for a week, then weekly, or as needed. Standard Process "Okra Pepsin-E3" was Dr. Kelley's choice for bowel cleansing. Clark kidney and liver flushes are also helpful.

8. Build up the immune system. Transfer Factor is good. After one bottle of Transfer Factor Classic, work up to 6 of the TF Advanced per day.

9. Correct your chemistry. See http://www.royalrife.com/hbal.html for details. You can phone 1-800-736-4320 for the name of the nearest doctor who can do the test for you. I have seen tumors grow very rapidly with a dysaerobic imbalance, and shrink very rapidly when it was corrected. You can test for an iodine deficiency: If you are not sensitive to iodine, paint a one inch (2.5 cm) diameter patch of drugstore iodine on your skin. Do not wash it off. If the body absorbs the iodine in less than 24 hours, you need iodine. It can take up to 8 mg per day to saturate the thyroid and leave some for other uses. After two months of iodine use, check your morning underarm temperature. If it is below 97.8 (or if the daytime oral temperature is below 98.6), see http://www.royalrife.com/hypothyroid.html .

10. Radionics. Radionics and Rife are very different and cannot replace each other. These numbers are radionics activations done on resistor based equipment. Activate enzymes, chlorella and other materials with 05000 or 41100 or 09501 for tumors. Use 20580 as the primary setting for lymphoma, melanoma and multiple myeloma. Use 20080 for carcinoma, sarcoma, leukemia, Hodgkin's and multiple myeloma viruses. 15520 is a general anti-viral setting which can also help with lymphoma and multiple melanoma. 20450 is a general setting for bacteria. 38000 can be used for leukemia. Activated herbs must be kept away from electrical equipment. See http://www.royalrife.com/radionics.html for more details.

11. Dental issues. See http://www.royalrife.com/dental.html for charts that show which teeth affect which organs and tissues. Actually, we find that most teeth can affect most tissues. A tooth with a root canal or cavitation can make it very difficult for the affected organ or tissue to regain health. Until it is possible to see a biological dentist, use Uncle Harry's Tooth and Gum Elixir for brushing teeth and as a mouthwash.

12. Hormone-sensitive tumors. Prostate, breast, and uterine cancers along with some others are often hormone-dependent. That is, they grow in the presence of estrogen. Patients can take the estrogen blocker (aromatase inhibitor) Myomin at the rate of 2 three times a day. Or, 2 DIM capsules twice daily can be used to block the formation of 16-hydroxy estrone and raise 2-hydroxy- and 2-methoxy-estradiol. (Or eat 2 pounds of raw broccoli a day!)

13. ANGIOGENISIS INHIBITION: Angiogenesis is the formation of new blood vessels. Tumors must continually grow new blood vessels to increase in size or numbers. They cannot even maintain their size unless they can make new blood vessels. Researcher Bill Peoples has found that a combination of angiogenesis inhibitors will shrink tumors. See his list of non-toxic angiogenesis inhibitors at http://www.royalrife.com/members/angio.pdf or see the list of drugs that do this at http://www.royalrife.com/members/angio2.pdf. Please note that green tea and the elder formula cannot be used together.

Perhaps the best non-toxic product for this is a bindweed extract called Vascustatin or Angioblock. There is also a product called Angiostop. It is a sea cucumber extract . These two can be used together.

14. Magnets. According to Dr. William Philpott, the negative face of a flat magnet has been successfully used as the primary or even only treatment for cancers near the surface of the body. Apply up to 24 hours a day.

15. Oxygen. Halox is a stabilized oxygen solution. Use up to 80 drops in water per day. Each 10 drops should be in at least 4 ounces of water. Or, ozonate water. Cellfood is also a good oxygen supplement. Oxy-Moxy often muscle tests the best.

16. Chinese concepts. Dr. Chi reports that 80% of cancer patients lack some of the half-moons on their fingernails, and have teeth-marks (indentations) on the sides of their tongues. Look at the fingernails. There should be half-moons at the base of the thumbnail and the nails of the first three fingers. Not the pinkies. If there are less than 4 half-moons on each hand, this indicates low cellular oxygenation. Enzymes and Vein Lite have been used by some to increase half-moons.

Look at the tongue. Scallops or indentations along the edge are called "teeth-marks. This can indicate edema, low immunity and poor digestion. Use cooked asparagus or Chi's "Asparagus Extract" as directed on the bottle. There are reports of cancer recoveries from eating asparagus daily. Canned is fine. Puree it and take 1/4 cup twice a day. People have also reported that taking iodine corrects teeth-marks.

17. Sanum remedies. A basic program is the use of Sanum "Pleo-Muc" in the morning and "Pleo-Nig" at night.

18. Brain tumors. There is not much room in the skull to accommodate swelling. Since tumors often swell before they shrink, it is necessary to be cautious in the use of frequencies. Also consider 2 EPA/DHA 3 times a day, and up to 4 "Cyruta Plus" 3 times a day.

19. WARNINGS: Essiac cancels the effect of the elder formula and vice versa. Green tea cancels the effect of the elder formula and some other herbal products. Avoid taking excess numbers of herbs at the same time.

CT scans are extremely harmful even though your oncologist may not have read the research on this. Do a Google search on "ct scan" and radiation. Your oncologist's approval of you will not help much if you are dead! Insist on an ultrasound or MRI instead.

The FDA has not evaluated any of these statements.

"This is my body that I'm supposed to take care of. I should have the right to tell someone what I want to do with this body. I studied. I did research. I came to this conclusion that the chemotherapy was not the route I wanted to take."
~ Abraham Cherrix

 

In late August of 2005, fifteen year old Abraham Cherrix received the devastating news that he had a form of cancer known as Hodgkin's disease. During the next few months Abraham faithfully pursued conventional chemotherapy through its recommended cycle. However, in February of 2006 he learned that chemotherapy had not cured the disease.

Doctors then recommended a higher dosage of chemotherapy combined with radiation and culminating in stem cell treatment, offering Abraham less than a 50% chance of survival under this treatment. This time the Cherrix family did their own research, contacted many other cancer victims and survivors, prayed, and discussed all their options. After reflecting on the brutal side-effects of the previously ineffective treatment and the hope offered by in a natural remedy, Abraham and his family chose to pursue alternative treatment in Mexico. A legal battle has ensued.

The Cherrix family has placed life on hold to pursue treatment for their son. Since early May, the family has been involved in continuous litigation with the Department of Social Services to continue their desired course of treatment. In the Juvenile and Domestic Court, the parents faced charges of neglect, loss of custody of their son, and orders to submit to the recommended cycle of higher dosage chemotherapy and radiation by Tuesday, July 25, 2006.

On Tuesday, minutes before this order was to take effect, the family obtained a stay from the Circuit Court; the parents regained full custody of their son and Abraham is now free to continue his desired course of treatment . . . for the moment. The family is due back in court on August 16, 2006 for another trial to determine whether Abraham may pursue his desired choice of treatment. Both parties will most likely appeal the verdict to a higher Virginia court.

The Cherrix family has found that they are not alone in this type of struggle. Although few families have had the resources to pursue their rights all the way through the judicial system, many have come forward to share personal stories of their legal struggle to obtain medical treatment of their choice.

The Cherrix family is committed to providing the best care for Abraham and to fight for their rights to make informed medical decisions as a family, to disagree with conventional, yet inconclusive treatment, and to pursue long-standing natural cures. The family's business is on hold and their remaining resources are being exhausted through travel, medical care, and extended litigation. Yet they continue to argue this case of national concern.

 

The forced poisoning of Abraham Cherrix,
the tyranny of modern medicine,
and state-sponsored assaults on health freedom

 

Across the nation, an increasing number of families are having their lives destroyed by the greed and arrogance of conventional medicine and its toxic cancer treatments. Families are arrested at gunpoint, jailed, prosecuted and separated from their children by Child Protective Services, all due to the demands of arrogant doctors who insist on treating cancer with conventional chemotherapy that's so toxic, it almost kills the patient before killing the cancer cells.

Conventional medicine is so desperate to push its high-profit services onto patients that it now resorts to kidnapping children and incarcerating parents in order to enforce its "authority" over all health care decisions. But some parents are wising up, and they're fleeing conventional cancer treatment centers to seek safer, more natural alternative treatments elsewhere. That's where this story begins.

Another case of "Gunpoint Medicine" fiasco emerged this week as Abraham Cherrix, a 16-year-old Hodgkin's disease sufferer, decided he didn't want a second round of chemotherapy. The first round nearly killed him, leaving him so frail and weak that he couldn't walk. With the support of his parents, Abraham began to educate himself about alternative cancer treatments, telling his oncologist he did not wish to experience any more chemotherapy.

As he explains, "This is my body that I'm supposed to take care of. I should have the right to tell someone what I want to do with this body. I studied. I did research. I came to this conclusion that the chemotherapy was not the route I wanted to take."

Arrogant doctors insist on poisoning children

But freedom of choice is not allowed by the quack doctors of conventional medicine. As always happens in these cases, the doctor was apparently so enraged by the idea that any patient would not want to submit to his authority that he called the county social services which promptly had the parents arrested and acquired joint custody over the teen. Social services Gestapo members are now in court arguing that the state should force the teen to undergo yet more chemotherapy, as demanded by his doctor.

A judge will now decide Abraham's fate. If the judge orders him back to chemotherapy, Abraham and his family will then become fugitives merely for making their own informed decisions about which type of cancer treatment they wish to pursue. Armed agents will hunt down the family, and Abraham will be effectively forced to undergo chemotherapy at gunpoint. Hence the term, "Gunpoint Medicine."

Conventional medicine's body count

The state, it seems, will used the threat of deadly force to market conventional medicine's chemotherapy treatments. It is difficult to imagine a more authoritarian and tyrannical system of medicine than what we have today in the United States. Just as the Bush Administration unlawfully detains and tortures prisoners in Guantanamo (which the U.S. Supreme Court has recently ruled as blatantly illegal), the U.S. medical system will also use men with firearms to detain and torture patients with treatments that may kill them. As Abraham explains, "Another round [of chemotherapy] would kill me, literally. No joke about it. The first round of chemo almost killed me in itself. There were some nights I didn't know if I would make it."

Conventional medicine is the fourth leading cause of death in the United States. Doctors and their drugs kill more Americans each year than died in the entire Vietnam War. FDA-approved pharmaceuticals kill more Americans each month than were killed by terrorists in the 9/11 attacks. Read Death By Medicine to get the statistics.

And yet, despite there remarkable safety lapses, ignorant doctors continue to insist that alternatives are so dangerous that parents who seek them should be charged with negligence!

Cancer industry lies and Hoxsey's natural cancer treatments

The treatment being sought out by Abraham is the Hoxsey treatment. Widely ridiculed by the American Cancer Society (which has strong ties to chemotherapy drug companies) and the FDA (which routinely promotes Big Pharma and discredits alternatives), the history of Harry Hoxsey and his cancer therapies is a fascinating tour of the oppression, censorship and outright intimidation of conventional medicine when it comes to controlling the medical marketplace.

Hoxsey's anti-cancer salves, based entirely on botanicals that we now know contain powerful anti-cancer compounds, actually work very well on cancer, as health authorities grudgingly admitted in court proceedings against Hoxsey decades ago. But that didn't stop them from attacking Hoxsey as a quack, discrediting his work, having him arrested and raiding his cancer treatment clinics on multiple occasions. This is why Hoxsey eventually moved his clinic to Mexico -- a country where health freedoms are still respected, unlike in the United States. Read more about Harry Hoxsey and the history of medical oppression in our article, What the American Medical Association hopes you never learn about its true history.

Hoxsey & Alternative Cancer Cures - How Healing Becomes A Crime

 

The U.S. is the single most oppressive health regime in the world, where prescription drugs are sold at the highest prices in the world under a monopoly-controlled drug racket enforced by the FDA. Highly corrupt regulators and non-profit disease organizations routinely attack alternative treatments, even as most of their own members are on the take from pharmaceutical companies. The degree of corruption and fraud in U.S. medicine is unprecedented in industrialized nations.

The FDA, for its part, routinely engages in tactics of oppression and tyranny. It once ordered the destruction of recipe books about stevia, a natural herbal sweetener. The FDA has also organized and conducted multiple armed, SWAT-style raids against health clinics, vitamin shops and even a pet food store. Once, the FDA raided a church and confiscated literally tons of church literature that helped people with mental health issues. Senior citizens returning from Canada were also detained and searched for legal drugs that they purchased at discounts across the Canadian border. Again and again, the FDA and the quack promoters of conventional medicine resort to the use of firearms (or the threat of using them) to enforce our modern system of monopoly medicine. It is exactly as if conventional medicine had declared war on the American people.

Some of the more recent examples of Gunpoint Medicine in the U.S. include:

Seattle mother arrested for "kidnapping" her own baby to seek alternative treatments - When a Seattle mom rescued her baby from surgeons who were about to perform a highly invasive kidney procedure on the infant, she was hunted down, arrested at gunpoint, thrown in jail and had her baby stolen from her by Child Protective Services.

State-sponsored medical terrorism: Texas authorities arrest parents, kidnap their teenage daughter, and force her through chemotherapy against her will - When parents of 13-year-old Katie Wernecke decided to refuse radiation treatment on their daughter, they were charged with neglect and had all their children kidnapped by Child Protective Services. A judge ordered the girl to undergo toxic conventional treatments before "releasing her" to her own parents.

As more parents are becoming educated about the dangers of chemotherapy and radiation (treatments that do absolutely nothing to address the underlying causes of cancer, by the way), they are increasingly seeking safer, more natural treatments across the United States and other countries. Cures for cancer do exist, and in fact they are quite numerous and well documented outside the corrupt, tyrannical system of American medicine. But in America, health authorities refuse to acknowledge their existence, and they continue to incarcerate anyone who dares to refuse Big Pharma's toxic chemicals.

Remember: The cancer industry is a billion-dollar commercial enterprise. Cancer is so profitable to drug companies, clinics, oncologists and hospitals that acknowledging a cure for cancer would be devastating to the U.S. economy. With twenty cents of every dollar spent by our government now going to cover health care costs, our nation has, indeed, become economically invested in the continuation of disease. Cancer is too profitable to prevent or cure, which is why the quack promoters of the cancer industry don't teach prevention or cures! They refuse to even acknowledge the ability of simple nutrients like vitamin D to slash rates of some cancers by an astounding fifty percent!

Parents: How to protect yourself from conventional medicine's tyranny

It is now clear that that only way for parents to exercise their health freedom and choose the treatments they believe are best suited for their children is to avoid taking your children to conventional medical doctors and seek naturopathic physicians instead.

Why? Because just one doctor, enraged at the parents' critical thinking about the failures of conventional medicine, can call Child Protective Services and have any parent charged with neglect so that their children are stolen from them by the state. It only takes one phone call from an arrogant doctor, and your entire family can be labeled fugitives.

The solution, then, is to avoid conventional doctors in the first place and seek primary care from naturopathic physicians who understand both conventional and alternative treatments. It's not only good for your health freedom, it's good for your health, as naturopaths actually understand nutrition and the role of the patient in the healing process (conventional MDs receive no formal education in nutrition at all). Plus, no naturopath would ever invoke neglect laws to have your children stolen from you by the state.

When will the tyranny end? In the case of Abraham Cherrix, a judge now has the opportunity to establish a health freedom precedent and rule that parents should be able to seek alternative treatments for their children. A decision is expected within days.

Should the judge order Abraham back to the toxic chemotherapy treatments, it will just be business as usual in the United States of America, where no freedom ever gets in the way of commercial interests. The U.S. is increasingly positioned as the most intolerant nation in the world. We don't tolerate other forms of government, other religions, or even other systems of medicine. And if you don't wave the American flag, support the invasion of other nations and take your daily medications in this country, you're either labeled a traitor or a fugitive; and if you have children, they will be stolen from you by the state.

State-sponsored medical terrorism is alive and well in America today, a place that was once called, "The land of the free" but is now ruled by corporations in the key areas of pharmaceuticals, chemicals and weapons.

It all makes me wonder: With all the talk about "freedom" today, didn't anybody stop to think about the freedoms we desperately need right here at home? The true enemies of freedom, it seems, have medical degrees. They don't wield weapons of mass destruction delivered by rockets, they wield chemical weapons delivered by injection. The day we stand up and declare our freedom from the scourge of conventional medicine and all its oppressive, authoritarian tactics will be a day of genuine freedom for Americans. Until then, we can fight all the wars in the world and yet still be enslaved by a system of medicine at home that absolutely refuses to acknowledge the existence of anything beyond what it controls and profits from.

Want to make a difference? Visit the Life Extension Foundation's Legislative Action Center to find out how you can support health freedom and help stop tyranny in medicine.

Abraham's website, which is still a bit sparse, is found at www.AbrahamsJourney.com.

*SOURCE: - http://www.newstarget.com/019617.html Update June 6, 2008:

FLOYD, Va. — Starchild Abraham Cherrix has plenty of reason to celebrate his 18th birthday Friday. His latest blood results show no indication of the Hodgkin's disease he's battled since 2005, and for the first time in two years he doesn't have to report those results to the Accomack County court.

Update Wednesday August 16, 2006:

After a long legal struggle Abraham and his family have regained the power to pursue the treatment they believe will provide the most effective cure to Hodgkin's disease! On Wednesday, August 16, 2006 Accomack Circuit Court Judge Glen Tyler cleared Abraham's parents of all charges of medical neglect and allowed Abraham to pursue alternative treatment under a doctor of the family's choice. Although prepared for a two-day trial, the family was able to reach a settlement with the Department of Social Services – Abraham will now be able to pursue a preferred course of treatment while being monitored by a board-certified oncologist in Mississippi who is experienced in alternative cancer treatment. With this decision Abraham is now able to resume life with his family and continue fighting for his health. For more information on how to support Abraham, click on the Donate tab or check out the benefit concert being held in Chesapeake, VA on September 24th at Unity Renaissance Church. For information on tickets to this fundraiser call The Heritage Store at 757.428.0100. Your support is fully appreciated.

Update Monday July 25, 2006:

The circuit court suspended the execution of judgment for both the order to submit to chemotherapy and the order awarding the state joint custody. The trial is August 16th.

Update Monday July 24, 2006:

Lawyers filed a motion today to try to stop enforcement of a judge's order requiring Abraham to report to a hospital. Lawyer John Stepanovich said he was waiting for a response to the motion, which was filed at 10:30 a.m. today in Accomack County Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court.

Update Friday, July 21, 2006:

A judge ruled that Abraham must report to a hospital by Tuesday afternoon for testing, evaluation and treatment as doctors deem necessary.

The juvenile court judge also found Abraham's parents neglectful for risking his health by permitting him to pursue alternative treatment of a sugar-free, organic diet and herbal supplements supervised by a clinic in Mexico.

Jay and Rose Cherrix, Abraham's parents, are planning an emergency appeal on Monday to stay the enforcement of the order. Judge Demps sits on the Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court, which means that his Order can be immediately appealed to the Circuit Court of Accomack County.

THE ALIVIZATOS TREATMENT PROTOCAL FOR TREATMENT OF CANCER

My cousin has come to visit me from Alaska. It was through him I learned of the Alivizatos treatment for cancer. I had never heard of it before. He had lymphatic cancer and his daughter-in-law had cancer of the bone, the uterus, and the liver. Treatment through normal channels didn't promise much hope of her surviving.

My cousin Jerry learned of this method but it was in Greece. Dr. Horiton-Tzannis Alivizatos, MD, PhD inventor/developer of the protocol was born on the island of Limnos in the Aegean Sea. While an undergraduate in Medical School, he became interested in cancer research and continued four more years of research at the University of Athens School of Medicine. He is deceased now.

The Alivizatos Treatment is only available at the International Bio Care Hospital located 10 minutes from the International Border in Tijuana Mexico or 35 minutes from down town San Diego. Treatment has been administered in Mexico since February of 1984. For more information please go to the following web site: http://www.alivizatos.com/secciones.php?secc=6#resp12

Jerry, his son and daughter-in-law went to Greece and went through the treatment which consisted of a shot each day, normally for 23 days, at a cost of $40. a shot. They were advised to follow a strict diet, which they did. There was no surgery, x-rays, or invasive procedures. Blood was withdrawn at the beginning of the treatment and the cancer was determined from that. Today they are both cancer free and swear by Dr. Alivizatos' treatment.

Dr. Alivizatos was brought to the United States to appear on the Phil Donohue show. He told about the treatment and what it would do for mankind. He wanted to share it so that people could be cured. Because he appeared on that program AND because he would not tell the AMA everything that was in the serum because he wanted it to be available for all people at a low cost the AMA ruined his reputation and eventually had his license revoked by the Greek authorities. The US had rail roaded him by cooroborating with the Greek authorities so that he could not practice any longer.

Again when there is something to help people that the AMA doesn't have its finger in the pie they dessimate it so that no one can get any help. I see the living proof in my cousin who is healthy today that this treatment worked and is still working at the hospital in Mexico.

I have another friend that I asked all of you in the past to help out by any donation you could make for his chemo shots which were $400 each time. He has now been the benefactor of our lovely medical procedures to where they have cut out his left breast (where he had cancer) and cut into his body to remove his lymph glands. The oncologist told him he would have pain forever where they removed the glands. In addition to that he will have to take their medicine (at what cost) for at least five years and maybe for life. He just yesterday had the second drain removed that they had put into his incision. This is torture for persons having to go through it when they could have an injection every day for 23 days and the cancer would be gone. But the powers that be stop any help they can get because of hospitals and doctors greed. He now has to go chemo therapy all over again and then radiation at what cost? He is a poor person and cannot pay. It is totally heart rending.

http://www.vegan.swinternet.co.uk/mainpages/articles_frame.html

The Dark at the End of the Tunnel

In Britain, at the present time, around one third of general hospital patients are suffering from cancer. Two out of five of the population have, or will develop, the disease. If we accept the figures, for cancer incidence, of 30 percent in 1980, 40 percent now and 50 percent in the year 2010, at the present rate of increase the figure will reach 100 percent around 2080. A multitude of factors suggest that the rise is set to accelerate. The 5-year survival figures, not to be confused with the successful treatment of the disease, for the major cancers are:

• stomach - 5 percent
• trachea, bronchus and lung - 5 percent
• breast - 50 percent
• oesophagus - 5 percent
• large intestine - 22 percent
• pancreas - 4 percent
• liver - 2 percent ¹

There has been no significant increase in survival rates since records began.

The Solid Gold Source

The cancer business is second only, in size, to its big brother, petrochemicals. In the 20 years from 1970 to 1990, in the USA alone, the cancer business was worth an estimated 1 trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000).² If the same percentage of the overall disease bill applies in Britain as in the US, the current expenditure on cancer will be 3 to 6 billion pounds per year. With these kind of amounts involved it is quite understandable why the drug/radiation/scalpel/vivisection cancer cartel have maintained a constant, ruthless campaign to suffocate, at birth, any and all attempts to introduce rational therapeutic regimes to deal with the species-threatening plague.

The Enemy Within

The cancer epidemic has many causative components; virtually all of them either actively promoted by or ignored by the government health departments, the medical trade etc.: the lethal 'doctor's balanced diet', vaccination, antibiotics, antipyretics, analgesics, steroids, routine X-ray screening, animal-'safety-tested' pesticides, herbicides, solvents, dyes, detergents etc., fluoride-waste dumping in public drinking water, radio/chemo 'therapy', nuclear energy, electro-pollution and so on. Ever aware of the need to protect their brethren in the petro-pharmaceutical cancer machine, the cancer P.R. boys, aided and abetted by their on-the-payroll media pals - passing themselves off as unbiased observers - faithfully maintain the line that the whole thing is down to smoking and sun-bathing. One thing that they need to explain is the canine carnage: in a population of 7 million domestic dogs, over a million per year are dying from cancer - or the treatment.³ This constitutes a dog cancer death-rate 50 times that of the human rate, due to the regime of vet-approved vaccines, antibiotics, worming drugs, flea sprays, pesticides, herbicides etc. - all 'safety tested' on animals - tinned dog-meat etc. We are all - humans, dogs, cats - dying, like flies, from the synthetic deluge. The farm animals would exhibit the same syndrome if they were not killed, prematurely, for 'food'. Cancer is, above all else, a nutritional problem. The lethal British diet of meat, dairy produce, eggs, refined carbohydrates, common salt and synthetics, with token amounts of fruit, vegetables and wholewheat bread - all saturated with pesticides - is a recipe for a vast range of maladies, cancer included. 1999 will see 700,000,000 drug prescriptions dished out by British doctors: a deluge of vaccines, antibiotics, analgesics, steroids, antipyretics, anti-inflammatories... all add up to a huge onslaught on the body's immune defences. Acute diseases, the body's efforts to regain health, are being continually suppressed by allopathic treatment. Vaccination has reached a 98 percent uptake in some areas. The vaccines, between them, contain a mixture of animal-derived proteins and viruses, formaldehyde, mercury, aluminium, carbolic acid and so on. This is injected directly into the blood stream and thence to the cells, major organs etc. The immune defences stand no chance.

When alien material from dogs, monkeys, calves, chickens etc. is put directly into the human blood stream, the material is likely to change the genetic structure as the foreign proteins etc. are incorporated into the invaded cells, which, in their mutated form, continue to replicate. The immune defences can then no longer differentiate between self and non-self.

The body is then liable to invade its own cells with a variety of immune and auto-immune diseases, cancer included, as an inevitable end result. Water fluoridation was first popular with the totalitarian regimes of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.⁴ Aside from being a narcotic, fluoride is also a highly toxic, persistent waste by-product of aluminium and fertiliser production, an enzyme-inhibitor, an immuno-suppressant and a listed carcinogen. 'Fluoridated Birmingham has now been compared with non-fluoridated Manchester over the years 1971-1977. After simultaneous standardisation of all data...it was found that over 1,000 excess deaths per year are now linked with fluoridated Birmingham.'⁵ The cavalier use of routine and diagnostic X-rays by the medical trade is a major cancer threat. Prof. John Gofman M.D. PhD., as early as 1980, put the figure for the US alone at 12,000 extra fatal cancers per year. He also stated that around three quarters of breast cancer cases are caused by medical X-rays; this is apart from the huge doses from 'radiotherapy'. The use of the new X-ray toys for mass lung-screenings, head irradiation for ring worm, shoe-fitting, sore throats etc. caused incalculable amounts of cancer deaths. 'I confess that I believed in the irradiation of tonsils, lymph nodes and the thymus gland. I believed my professors when they said the doses we were using were absolutely harmless. Years later the 'absolutely harmless' radiation... was reaping a harvest of thyroid tumours.'⁶ The huge, increasing assault on the immuno-defence systems and the ever-growing deluge of carcinogens will certainly result in a considerable acceleration of the rates of cancer incidence and death. The theoretical 100 percent cancer incidence could well be here around the mid 2,000s.

The Orthodox Cure Hoax

The definition of cure in cancer is the restoration of the cancer defence mechanisms and the elimination of cancer through these mechanisms. If this restoration is not possible, the next best is the constant support, through safe, natural means, of the body's attempts to keep the disease at bay. Neither of these is supplied by orthodox cancer treatment. The cancer research fund-raisers' definition of cancer cure is the apparent lack of symptoms for five years. If, or when, a patient dies a year or two after the five years, from the effects of the treatment, they remain in the 'cure' statistics: cured and dead at the same time.

'Patients may die from secondary growths at any time from a few months to many years after the treatment. Only after a gap of as much as twenty one years does the risk of death from some other cause exceed the risk of death from the original disease.'⁷ Or from the original treatment.

On June 8 1990, at Chelmsford Crown Court, a 42-year old woman was awarded �155,000 damages. She had suffered seven years of cancer treatment. 'She spent 13 months in and out of cancer wards during which she made friends and saw them die. Her hair fell out and she suffered continual nausea during six spells of painful radiological and drug treatment...Surgeons opened her stomach and removed an ovary in an unsuccessful search for breast cancer. Only then was the shattered woman told it had been a mistake.' (Times 9.6.1990) The woman, who lost her career and her marriage, had never believed the diagnosis but had allowed herself to be rail-roaded by the white-coated cancer gods. The precise number of people who have been mis-diagnosed and have then been killed by the onslaught or who have survived and have been put in the 'cure' statistics cannot be estimated. One anonymous cancer statistician commented: 'I wouldn't be surprised if they are curing a lot of leukaemia that never existed.'⁸ In 1940, according to Prof. Hardin B. Jones:¹⁹

'Through re-definition of terms, various questionable grades of malignancy were classed as 'cancer'. After that date, the proportion of cancer cures having 'normal' life-expectancy increased rapidly, corresponding to the fraction of questionable diagnosis included.'

The oldest prong of the lethal trident, cynically known as modern cancer therapy, is surgery. The notion being that the removal of a tumour cures the patient; ignoring the fact that cancer is a whole body, systemic, constitutional disease which eventually manifests a tumour; the location of the growth being due to individual constitutional factors, and the nature of the carcinogen. As for surgery, George Bernard Shaw was of the opinion that, 'The more appalling the mutilation, the more the mutilator is paid.' In medispeak, the more appalling the mutilation the more 'heroic' the surgery; it not being readily apparent whether the heroism is on the part of the patient or the surgeon who must know that one day he will have to stand before the Lords of Karma and explain his actions. The hemi-corporectomy, the amputation of everything below the pelvis,⁹ was one of the bravest operations carried out by the heroic cutters but the greatest scalpel heroism was the 'total exenteration' or 'hollowing out'¹⁰ � the removal of the stomach, internal reproductive organs, pelvic floor and wall, pancreas, spleen, colon, rectum, bladder, ureter and part of the liver: far more fun than the nutritional approach to cancer. Surgery is a massive shock to the system, uses carcinogenic anaesthesia and increases the risk of cancer in the scar tissue. It has a place only where the threat to life processes is immediate, as in digestive obstruction etc. The routine removal of every malignant lump which is surrounded by the body with a defensive shield, is a death sentence. Chemotherapy involves the use of extremely toxic petrochemical drugs in the hope, never realised, of killing the disease before killing the patient. The drugs are designed to kill all fast-growing cells, cancerous or not. All cells caught in the act of division are systematically poisoned. The effects include hair loss, violent nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, cramps, impotence, sterility, extreme pain, fatigue, immune-system destruction, cancer and death.

According to the government's own figures,¹¹ around 2 percent of chemotherapy recipients are still alive after 5 years: the term 'alive' is used, here, in its literal sense: i.e. not yet clinically dead.

'Recently someone very dear to me, someone who can never be replaced, died a premature and totally unnecessary death. He had cancer and he was my father. Although there are safe, effective, natural treatments for this dreaded disease...my father allowed himself to be talked into having chemotherapy. The side-effects of the drugs were horrendous and unspeakably cruel but he persevered with the treatment because he had faith and trust in his doctors and believed every word they told him. Clearly he was dying but he continued taking the awful treatments because he was repeatedly told that he was doing 'so well'. After all, the good doctors wouldn't lie to him, would they?...the truth about his real condition was not revealed to him until my mother accompanied him to the clinic for what was to be his last treatment...the prognosis was "very grim"...my father had less than a month to live... then, and only then, did my father allow us to take him elsewhere for non-toxic treatment...My husband took him to a cancer help centre where he received metabolic therapy...he was one hundred percent more comfortable and relatively free of pain...and he died a peaceful death. He did not die of cancer, however, but of pneumonia, one of the chemotherapy's side-effects. Chemotherapy damages if not destroys the body's immune defence system...had my father been told that chemotherapy would never cure him...he would have allowed us to take him elsewhere...much sooner...I keep thinking of the Hippocratic oath, in particular, the first line, "First do no harm", and, "I will never do harm to anyone. To please no one will I prescribe a deadly drug, nor give advice which may cause his death." I loved my dad very much and to lose him in this cruel horrible unnecessary manner is certainly the heartbreak of my life.'¹²

Whilst toxic chemotherapy has killed untold millions of patients, a systemic approach, using genuine, natural, anti-cancer agents is a valid, if not ideal, approach to cancer. 'Radiotherapy', however, is devoid of any rational basis in theory or practice. After radium was discovered it was tried out in various situations. It was inevitable that 'some enterprising medical men started a fad in using it on cancer victims.¹³ The tumours were shrinking; cancer was being cured. This led to a price rise of 1,000 percent and the birth of a multi-billion dollar industry without an atom of science as its basis. In late 1991 someone at the North Staffordshire Hospital, in Stoke, noticed that the settings on the tumour-burning machine were set too low. Various masterminds, including the local MP, went on air with dire warnings of the consequences to the 1,000 patients who had not received enough of the healing rays. An investigation was ordered. The team undertaking the investigation faced a considerable problem. If they accepted the view of the doctor-in-charge, that the 'under-dosed' patients fared no worse than those given prescribed doses, they might have been asked why patients were, and are, given large doses of immuno-suppressive, carcinogenic radiation, when not necessary. If they decided to preserve the virtue of radiation as a valid therapy by declaring that the UDs died quicker, they risked litigation from the relatives. If they found, as cynics strongly suspected, that the UDs lasted longer, they risked some trouble-maker wanting a further 1,000 patients treated with the radiation machine turned off altogether.

They needed to bring in the Creative Cancer Statistics Squad: pronto.

Finally, the CCSS delivered their verdict: the doctor involved was wrong; the lack of radiation adversely affected the patients. Litigation from the relatives was to be preferred to admitting that the dosage made no difference. In the US, an anonymous National Cancer Institute scientist¹⁴ explained:

'Look, when you've got 10,000 radiologists and millions of dollars worth of radiation equipment, you give radiation treatments, even if study after study shows that a lot of it does more harm than good. What else are they going to do? Like surgeons, they've been trained to cut: so they cut.'

One person who chose to have treatment with the radiation machine turned off altogether was the jockey Bob Champion. Convinced by the early detectors, in spite of feeling well, that he was, '...likely to die of cancer of the lymph gland,' he decided that he did not relish the thought of a treatment that, '...could have ruined his lungs.'¹⁵ - let alone the rest of him - and opted for drugs. He eventually survived the treatment and the 'lymphoma'. His doctor, 'cancer specialist' Ann Barrett, declared:

'He is the only patient in my experience who has come through this disease and achieved such a high degree of physical fitness afterwards. His recovery is even more remarkable when you consider that he refused to have the conventional treatment.' !!!

The plight of the ever-increasing number of parents of child cancer victims facing 'radiotherapy' was well illustrated in October 1993:

'...after learning of the appalling side-effects of radiotherapy...her anxious mother has opted to take her to America for private treatment... "I've been told the radiotherapy will cause brain damage knocking forty points off her I.Q....Her growth would be stunted...she would need hormones to help her growth and sexual development. It is also likely she would be sterile"'¹⁶

Further delights include bone and nerve damage, leading to amputation of limbs, severe burns and, of course, death, at a future time, from cancer and leukaemia due to the highly carcinogenic, immuno-suppressive effects of the huge doses of radiation.

'Chemotherapy and radiotherapy will make the ancient method of drilling holes in a patient's head, to permit the escape of demons, look relatively advanced...the use of cobalt...effectively closes the door on cure.'¹⁷

The five year survival rates for the different onslaughts are: ¹¹

• Surgery - 22 percent
• Radiotherapy -12 percent
• Surgery/radiotherapy combined - 6 percent
• Chemotherapy plus others - 2.5 percent
• Chemotherapy alone - 1.6 percent

� none of which has stopped the cancer industry from carrying out the same procedures, day in, day out, for decades: with the same deadly, inevitable results. Temporarily suppressing, with the scalpel, drug or radiation, the symptoms of cancer does nothing for the victim's chances of survival. Adding gross insult to injury, the treatment involves massive doses of carcinogens and super-poisons.

The patient is subject to a regime diametrically opposed to that which is needed for survival.

Cancer is an acceptable form of suicide for those who have lost the desire to live: this loss being a major factor in the development of the disease in the first place. The great tragedy and scandal is where the victim has a strong determination to live and fight but is then destroyed by the assault from the lethal, useless treatment and not by the cancer.

Early Detection

A boost to the early detection and cure hoax has been the improved methods used in picking up early cancer - real or imaginary. This has led to an increase in numbers of people lasting five years and being put in the cure statistics. Early stage patients are stronger and more likely to survive the assault; whereas, before the improved techniques, patients with more advanced disease succumbed to the disease/treatment before the five years were up. On early detection and orthodox treatment, Prof. H.B. Jones, then the leading US cancer statistician, with over 30 years experience, stated, in 1975:

'It is utter nonsense to claim that catching cancer symptoms early enough will increase the patient's chances of survival: not one scientist or study has proven that in any way. My studies have proved conclusively that untreated cancer victims live up to four times longer than treated individuals. If one has cancer and opts to do nothing at all, he will live longer and feel better than if he undergoes radiation, chemotherapy or surgery, other than used in immediate life-threatening situation.'

One person who, before the reality hit him, may well have smiled at Jones' statement was US Senator Hubert Humphrey. Former vice-president Humphrey, a true believer - until it was too late - in the cancer boys and their early detection was told that he was suffering from bladder cancer. This was duly 'cured' with radiation. Later, in May 1976, the prognosis was that there was no reason for any further treatment. Six months later Humphrey was operated on for the removal of a bladder tumour. His surgeon, Willard Whitmore, declared: 'As far as we are concerned the Senator is cured.' Whitmore added that '...to wipe out any microscopic colonies of cancer cells that may be hidden somewhere in the body' treatment with experimental chemotherapy - 'bottled death' as Humphrey later called it - would begin. Humphrey changed from an active middle-aged man into a feeble, ageing wreck and died within one year in full view of the media who all, apparently, thought he had died of cancer. Any doubts about the brass neck of the Syndicate, in the face of such a spectacular public defeat, were dispelled the very next year by the publication of a book which stated that Humphrey was a '...famous beneficiary of modern radiation therapy' who had '...remained well for three years until the development of a new, more advanced cancer.'²⁰ The use of very expensive body scanners to detect early lumps has been a favourite source of pride with the cancer cartel and their faithful fund-raisers. A letter from an MP stated: 'I have now received the enclosed reply from the...DHSS about the value of body scanners in treating cancer. As you will read, the government does acknowledge the value of body scanners but can give no statistical evidence of this.'²¹ This is fully in keeping with the tradition of orthodox medical practices. Estimates vary from 50 percent to over 85 percent as to the degree of these practices which are, at best, unproven or, at worst, lethal.

Breast Cancer

Around 15,000 women, diagnosed with breast cancer, die each year in the UK. The medical cynics, engaged in the ongoing competition to demonstrate that it is quite impossible to insult the intelligence of the public on matters of health, have always found fertile ground in the field of breast cancer; the crowning achievement being when one of the jokers convinced healthy women to have both breasts removed to prevent breast cancer.

'The American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute, as a showcase project of the "war on cancer", co-sponsored a massive X-ray screening program for breast cancer - on 280,000 women - the notorious mammography follies. With kind smiles and Pollyanna counsel, women were encouraged to affirm their virtue on the altar of technology by exposing themselves to periodic radiation known to increase the risk of the disease. �Emphasis was placed on radiating women over 50, the very age group that would be most vulnerable to induction of cancer by radiation.'²²

By 1989 four random-controlled mammography trials had taken place: in the USA, UK and two in Sweden. In the final, and most sophisticated, trial, in Malmo, it was found that for one woman to have a cancer avoided or delayed it would need 68,000 women to be screened.23 As such a figure is completely meaningless, the grave dangers of mammography are entirely without any possible counter-balancing benefits.

'Breast scanning increases cancer risks for women....middle-aged women who have regular mammograms are more likely to die from breast cancer than those who are not screened...'³⁰

The largest ever trial of mass breast cancer screening was the Canadian National Breast Screening Study, involving 50,000 women and directed by Prof. Anthony Miller. Half of the women were given X-ray screening every year or 18 months and half were given just a physical examination. Within the X-rayed group the cancer death-rate was 'significantly higher.' The danger, according to Miller, was from the fact that mammograms lead to surgery for tiny lumps, encouraging secondaries to grow. Also, according to Miller: '...one potential problem was that surgery, the anaesthetic and radiotherapy, involved in treating women with breast cancer, were interfering with immunity.' No kiddin'? Dr. Irwin Bross, Director of Biostatistics, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, had his funding stopped by the National Cancer Institute when he released his figures linking X-rays with cancer and leukaemia. Bross said that the mammography stunt would cause four or five cancers for every one detected, leading to '..the worst epidemic of iatrogenic breast cancer in history. In my view...the NCI would be better off putting the money allocated for future screenings into a trust fund for the victims of the programme who will develop cancer in 10 to 15 years time.'

According to Prof. Jones: 'With every patient that...boosts his health to build up his natural resistance, there's a high chance that the body will find its own defence against the cancer.' Prof. Jones warned against '...being made into a hopeless invalid through radical medical intervention which has zero chance of extending his life.'

None of which has made any impression on the screeners or the knife/drug/ray tumour-zappers; or on the ever-willing multitude of females, following the camp and determined to be the next sacrifice, virgin or otherwise, at the feet of The Great God of Consensus Medicine.

Bristol

In June 1986, a study, financed by the Cancer Research Campaign and the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, began at the Bristol Cancer Help Centre. The BCHC had approached the Syndicate with a view to the evaluation of the Centre's 'complementary' methods; methods, apparently, designed to try to stop the patients dying from slash/burn/poison for as long as possible. The study involved women who had undergone or, incredibly, were still undergoing, the orthodox onslaught, and offered a golden opportunity for the cartel to deliver a decisive blow to rational cancer treatment: a blow from which the Centre and holistic medicine has yet to fully recover. The report of the study was written by C.E.D. Chilvers, T.J. McElwain, F.S. Bagenal, D.F. Easton, and E. Harris. The opening lines of the report set the tone for the rest of the document: 'Interest in and use of alternative medicines and practices for the treatment of cancer has been growing for several years despite lack of any scientific evidence for anti-tumour effects.'¹⁸ Of the findings, the report stated: 'These results suggest that women with breast cancer attending the BCHC fare worse than those receiving conventional treatment only... the possibility that some aspects of the BCHC regime is responsible for their decreased survival must be faced.' The report implied that women without metastasis - cancer cells spreading - were around 3 times more likely to relapse in the BCHC group. Without subjecting the report to the usual peer or statistical review, the triumphant cancer orthodoxy, at a press conference organised by the ICRF, could hardly conceal their glee at such an easy victory. Whilst the BCHC staff, now showing belated signs that they realised what the trial was all about, looked for holes in which to be swallowed. Karol Sikora, of the cancer unit at the Hammersmith Hospital, had expressed doubts about the report's authenticity and had provisionally agreed to attend the press event to offer the BCHC support. He was later to contact the Centre saying that he would not attend. Walter Bodmer, one of the cancer barons behind the report and director-general of the ICRF, who were funding some of Sikora's work, repeatedly refused on camera to comment on whether he knew anything of a telephone call causing Sikora's about face.²⁴ Sikora later became deputy director of clinical research at the ICRF. After the media blitz had done the required damage, the facts about the report began to emerge: the BCHC women were much more ill than the control group. No constant check was made to see if the Bristol women kept to the regime. No-one ensured that the controls were avoiding the 'complementary' therapies available at the Royal Marsden Hospital, where half the controls were based. Lifestyle, relationships, environmental factors etc. were not taken into account. All BCHC women were classed as 'cancer-free' at the start when nearly half had active cancer, with 19% 'incurable'. 43% of BCHC cases had undergone a mastectomy compared with 36% of controls. 85% of Bristol women were under 55, a group with a worse prognosis. The controls had 73% under 55...etc. The report found itself under a deluge of criticism, mainly in the pages of the Lancet; and a couple of months after the report publication one of the reporters, T.J. McElwain, committed suicide. None of which caused the others involved - Chilvers, Bagenal etc. - to call for official withdrawal of the report; a report which had concluded: 'Other alternative practitioners should have the courage to submit their work to this type of stringent assessment.'

Tamoxifen

Tamoxifen is a drug which is related, structurally, to the infamous DES and is used in the treatment of breast cancer. It is now being promoted as a breast cancer preventative in the UK, despite serious reservations on both sides of the Atlantic. Women are being asked to take a tablet of the drug every day for five years with regular X-rays throughout the period. According to Professor Samuel S. Epstein of the School of Public Health, University of Illinois: 'As relatively few breast cancer patients have taken the drug for more than five years tamoxifen may be a much more potent human carcinogen than is currently recognised.' Studies have suggested an increased risk of uterine cancer, 6.4 times higher for those women taking tamoxifen.²⁷ The literature, sent out by the promoters states: 'Liver tumours develop in rats given large doses of tamoxifen, but not in mice so it is difficult to be sure about the effects in humans.' This has not deterred some ladies from signing up; presumably, having reasoned that they are more like mice than rats. 'Drug maker may quit cancer trial - Healthy women taking part in a clinical trial to prevent breast cancer might have been put at a risk of developing other tumours...the drug may increase the risk of tumours in the womb, liver and bowel. The disclosure, on the eve of the launch...has led to the manufacturer threatening to pull out.'²⁸ Hamish Cameron, head of medical affairs at Zeneca, the drug's makers, stated: 'Should the benefit/risk balance shift adversely, we reserve the right to withdraw that drug supply. If the evidence is quite clear I would hope the trialists themselves would realise that the game is up.' Dr.Richard Bulbrook, one of the original proposers of the tamoxifen enterprise, voiced his concerns: 'Things have changed. There are now so many side-effects reported - there were 41 at the last count - and some of these are fatal.' The USA abandoned the tamoxifen prevention scam on safety grounds: all in sharp contrast to Gordon McVie 'scientific director' of the 'Cancer Research Campaign': 'What we want to know is can we get more mileage out of tamoxifen, possibly by giving it for life.'

On the question of how orthodox cancer treatment 'saves' half the women with breast cancer, Dr Irwin Bross is quite unequivocal - half the women don't have breast cancer in the first place:

'If you are a woman who has been diagnosed as "early breast cancer"...there is one simple scientific fact that you need to know...more than half the time the pathologist is wrong - it is not actually breast cancer...What most women have is a tumour which, under a light microscope, looks like a cancer to a pathologist. Chances are this tumour lacks the ability to metastasize...the hallmark of a genuine cancer... The world's first controlled trial of adjuvant therapies for breast cancer was centralised in my department...Dr Leslie Blumenson and I...made a surprising discovery. More than half of the patients...had tumours...that were more like benign lesions. Our discovery was highly unpopular with the medical profession. Doctors could never afford to admit the scientific truth because the standard treatment in those days was radical mastectomy. Admitting the truth could lead to malpractice suits by women who had lost a breast because of an incorrect medical diagnosis. The furious doctors at the National Cancer Institute...took our highly successful breast cancer research program away from us...they eventually succeeded in suppressing our findings and blocking new publications... Breast cancer and prostate cancer are statistical twins. When the functions of these two sexual organs diminish, the cells often become abnormal and look like cancer cells...The Journal of the American Medical Association reported amazingly high survival rates...of untreated early prostate cancer which showed 7 out of 8 tumours were not cancers. There is no reason for women to panic when they hear "cancer"; panic makes them easy victims.'

The patient who is wrongly diagnosed and has no cancer, and is therefore more likely to survive the 'therapy', is recorded as a 'cancer cure'. The patient who has cancer and is in a weak state is usually killed by the treatment and recorded as having 'died of cancer'. Those who never had cancer in the first place are made far more likely to develop the disease, in the future, from the lethal carcinogenic, immuno-suppressive effects of the surgery, drugs and radiation.

Save the Children

According to the latest Morbidity Statistics from General Practice, UK childhood cancer incidence almost tripled in ten years. In the USA, '...of the 23 children admitted to the largest paediatric ward of the University of Minnesota hospitals in a single day, 18 had cancer.'²⁵ A mother, writing in a women's magazine, said:

'By the time you read this my son Michael, who is just five, will be almost at the end of a year's course of treatment for cancer�To show for it Michael has a scar from one side of his body to the other, where doctors removed a huge malignant tumour and one of his kidneys. Radiotherapy at Bart's hospital left him limp like a rag doll with all the stuffing knocked out of him. Chemotherapy has made all of his hair fall out. The drugs�make him vomit for hours on end�his face is small and mostly pale: his eyes are dark and sullen and shadowed, the way a child's eyes should never be.'

Whilst it is unknown how long this child stood up to his tormentors, before being killed, it is certain that none of the medical inquisitors were hung, jailed for life, thrown into a padded cell or struck off any medical register. It is also certain that anyone approaching the torturers with a suggestion that a regime of metabolic, herbal, nutritional�etc. treatment might effect a safe, effective approach to the illness would have been ignored or ridiculed. In the USA, Food and Drug administrator Robert Young admitted:

'In Boston a hospital tested a new NCI drug...on children. Their kidneys were lost within days...this was no big deal because new... NCI drugs are given out with literally no safeguards for people who will receive them.'

Having killed one child too many for litigatory safety, the cancer boys finally decided to tone down the assault. This led, inevitably, to longer survival times, which became 'great progress in childhood cancer treatment.' Whilst any reduction at all in the level of the drug/radiation lunacy is to be greatly welcomed, the idea that these longer survival times were due to anything other than less lethal treatments is merely wishful thinking. The Autumn 1997 edition of the Leukaemia Research News reported the views of some LRF scientists:

'The intensive therapy given to children to ensure their survival (!)...can result in longer term side effects such as intellectual impairment, heart damage, growth disorders and even second cancers.'

When the second cancers - first cancers if the original leukaemia diagnosis was wrong - and the treatment, kill the patient, the original 'leukaemia cure' still stands in the statistics - cured and dead.

Peritoneal Mesothelioma is the name given to the cancer that attacks the lining of the abdomen. This type of cancer is caused by asbestos exposure, and it affects the lining that protects the contents of the abdomen and which also provides a lubricating fluid to enable the organs to move and work properly.

This disease is sometimes referred to as diffuse peritoneal mesothelioma, and this is where the cancer has spread out. Accountable for around ten percent of mesothelioma cases, this type asbestos-related cancer is the second most common (after Pleural Mesothelioma).

There are a number of symptoms for this disease. However, like all other types of mesothelioma, there is a very long latency period, and symptoms may not become evident for decades after exposure. This means that by the time symptoms have begun, it is often already too late to offer any real constructive treatment. Further delay can be caused due to the fact that the symptoms are generally non-specific and can therefore be attributed to a number of more common ailments. Unless your doctor is aware that you have been exposed to asbestos in the past, he or she is likely to look at other options before even contemplating mesothelioma. It is therefore important to let your doctor know of any exposure to this substance.

The symptoms of peritoneal mesothelioma include: abdominal pains and weakness; weight loss; nausea; loss off appetite; abdominal swelling; bowel obstruction. Depending on the location of the tumour, additional problems can be experienced such as breathing problems and severe pains.

Treatment for peritoneal mesothelioma can also vary, and is dependant upon a number of factors. The doctor, once a diagnosis has been made, will make a recommendation based upon details such as: the extent of the cancer and how advanced it is; the patient�s general condition and health; past medical history of the patient; and the patient�s age.

Treatments include:

Surgery: This entails cutting out part of the lining and tissue from the abdomen in order to remove the tumour. Whether or not surgery is performed and how much tissue is removed will depend on how far the cancer has spread and how big the tumour is. It may sometimes be necessary to remove a lung or part of the diaphragm in order for surgery to succeed in removal of the tumour.

Radiation Therapy: This is where high energy x-rays are used to shrink tumours and kill off cancerous cells in the affected area. There are two ways to administer radiation therapy. The first is through external means, where a machine is placed outside the body and emits radiation through the body. The second is by placing a source of radiation directly to the affected area by way of plastic tubes. As well as administering the radiation treatment through the tubes, doctors are also able to administer any required drugs this way.

Chemotherapy: This is where a combination of drugs is used to try and kill off cancer cells. Drugs can be administered by mouth in tablet form, or you may have to have them administered intravenously via needle into a vein or a muscle. The drug can then enter the blood stream and travel through the body, hopefully killing off any cancer cells along the way.
Peritoneal Mesothelioma is responsible for many deaths each year. Although it is not the most common form of this cancer, many new cases come to light each year. However, with continued research and clinical trials, it may be possible to one day make this a curable disease

En excerpt from the book :
"ALTERNATIVES IN CANCER THERAPY" by Ross, R.Ph. Pelton, Lee Overholser

The Hoxsey Treatment

PERHAPS NO PROMOTER of an alternative cancer treatment has fought longer and harder against the authorities of establishment medicine than Harry Hoxsey did while he was alive. There is a strong tendency for those on both sides, the establishment and the unconventional approaches to cancer treatment, to impugn the motives of the other and to claim to be the exclusive standard bearer of honest, untainted concern for the cancer patient. Often those on both sides are sincere in their beliefs, and this can certainly be said about Hoxsey.

Background

The story begins in the spring of 1840, when Harry Hoxsey's great-grandfather John had a prize horse with a cancerous growth on its leg, a condition for which the local veterinarian had no cure. He decided to let nature take its course and let the animal roam free in the pasture. Amazingly, the cancer shrank, hardened, and fell off. John Hoxsey noticed that the animal went to a certain corner of the pasture and ate a variety of plants— red clover, alfalfa, buckthorn, prickly ash, and others. By treating various sick horses in the area with different formulas derived from these herbs, he developed external and internal treatments for cancer and other ailments, which he later used to treat humans. The formula was passed down from father to son until in 1919 it arrived in Harry Hoxsey's hands with the admonition to use it even if opposed by the "high priests of medicine."

Attack and Counterattack

In his autobiography, You Don't Have to Die, Hoxsey details how he began opening cancer clinics in the 1920s until he operated one of the largest outpatient clinics for cancer in Dallas in the early 1950s, with branches in seventeen states. (6) He lost few opportunities for challenging the medical establishment and promoting his own cures.

The battle between Hoxsey and the medical establishment shows how nasty such fights can become. Morris Fishbein, editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association, published articles denouncing Hoxsey and his late father as charlatans. In his book Hoxsey quotes from one such article, in the American Weekly, by Morris Fishbein and William Engle:

All the other wicked medical fakes, firing hope and darkening it to despair, pale beside the savagery of the cancer charlatans. They look like men, they speak like men, but in them, pervading them, resides a quality so malevolent that it sets them apart from others of the human race....

They slay their patients as guiltily as if they knifed them in the heart, and they stay within the letter of the law. (6)

The article goes on to specifically name Hoxsey and his treatment. For his part, Hoxsey responded with as much emotion in his characterization of Fishbein:

The distinguished author [Fishbein] had inherited from his spiritual father the technique of the big lie: "Make up a lie that's big enough, repeat it often enough and people will believe it!" Adolf Hitler was dead, but the Hitler of American medicine ranted on. (6)

Hoxsey filed a lawsuit for libel, which he won. However, the battle continued until repeated arrests and nationwide attacks by the FDA forced Hoxsey to close his clinics in the U.S. in the

late 1950s. In 1963 Mildred Nelson, Hoxsey's chief nurse, opened the Bio-Medical Center in Tijuana, Mexico, which still offers the Hoxsey treatment.

Certainly the war between Harry Hoxsey and the FDA left no room for learned and temperate discussion. The point of unearthing this old argument is to illustrate the emotions involved on both sides. To this day the intensity of the discussion has hardly subsided when the topic comes up.

A 1990 article in CA—A Cancer Journal for Clinicians relies on unproved allegations to denounce the Hoxsey treatment, concluding, "The Hoxsey medicine for cancer has been extensively tested and found to be both useless (the internal treatments) and archaic (the external treatments)." (14) These statements are simply not true. There has been no definitive study of the formula, but there are several studies that indicate that some of its ingredients may have antitumor effects.

The external treatment that is referred to is a caustic solution developed by Dr. Frederic Mohs in the 1940s for treating skin cancers. This caustic preparation is different from the herbal preparation that is sometimes applied externally. Dr. Mohs later discontinued the use of his formula, and it is rarely used by any practitioners today. (11, 12) His microsurgery technique for removing skin cancers is still in use.

Summary

This sad tale shows the worst of both the establishment and unconventional proponents of cancer treatment. The intensity of the antagonism prevented both sides from engaging in constructive activities, and the conflict has degenerated into a series of brutal attacks—both verbal and legal. Somewhere in the middle of this the real interests of the patients were forgotten. The story of Harry Hoxsey is a cautionary tale for all involved in investigating the treatment of cancer, whatever their opinions and orientation.

Biological Action

The formula used by Mildred Nelson at the Tijuana center (5) contains:

Trifolium pratense (red clover)
Arctium lappa (burdock root)
Berberis vulgaris (barberry bark)
Glycyrrhiza glabra (licorice root)
Rhamnus purshiana (buckthorn)
Zanthoxylum americana (prickly ash)
Larrea tridentata (chaparral)
Stillingia sylvatica (stillingia)
Picramnia antidesma (cascara amarga)
Potassium iodide


Burdock root has shown antitumor effects in animal studies (7, 8), while two other studies were without effect. (9, 15) A constituent of buckthorn, aloe-emodin, had antitumor activity in tests. (10) Another ingredient, cascara, also contains aloe-emodin, but one test with powdered cascara showed no antitumor activity in an animal test. (1) The fact that a particular animal test shows no antitumor activity does not indicate that a compound is without anticancer effect. Different types of cancer react differently. Studies have shown antitumor effects with extracts of barberry. (2, 4) The OTA report states that components of prickly ash (chelerythrine and nitidine) and of stillingia (gnidi-latidin) have shown positive antitumor activities in animal tests. (13) Chaparral was added to the list by Mildred Nelson and is covered in detail in the chapter on that herbal remedy. The other ingredients, red clover, licorice root, and potassium iodide, have not demonstrated antitumor effects in tests.

The clinical evidence is not conclusive. While there is some indication that the components of the Hoxsey formula may have antitumor effects, there are no published studies of the formula itself. There may be synergistic effects between the various components, but without tests, one cannot say.

Clinical Trials

The only clinical evidence for the effectiveness of the Hoxsey treatment comes from the studies of Harry Hoxsey himself. In his book he presents several case studies that are supposed to be definitive cancer cures; however, it is difficult to evaluate these reports without independent confirmation. (6)

Hoxsey wanted the NCI to review his patients records, for he sincerely believed he was curing people. In 1945 he submitted records of sixty patients, and in 1955 he submitted seventy-seven more cases. It was his contention that all were examples of successful treatment of cancer. The upshot was that the NCI contended that his treatments could not be evaluated because the records were incomplete or inconclusive. For his part, Hoxsey countered that the NCI refused to render an opinion because of a Conspiracy against him by the AMA. This is where the matter stands today.

Side Effects

There are no reports of side effects or toxicity in the medical literature. One of the ingredients, licorice root, has produced adverse effects when taken in massive amounts. Another, pokeroot, can be toxic, but is not included in the current formulation. (3) It is unlikely that the level of the herbs taken in the formula would be harmful unless large amounts were consumed.

Dosage

The Hoxsey clinic recommends taking 1 or 2 teaspoonfuls of the powdered formula in a glass of hot or cold water two or more times daily. The use of the external treatments has largely been discontinued, because they are so harsh and painful; therefore they are not covered here.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

How many people have skin or organ CANCER ? How many pets or people have skin cancers which we do not know how to cure ? A CURE HAS BEEN FOUND, TRIED AND WORKS. Please pass this on to every list Worldwide :

Dear Mr. President and others:

Today in America we use Chemo Therapy, Radiation, Surgical procedures, Liquid Nitrogen freezing of nodules of cancer on the skin when an Italian Doctor [Oncologist] Tullio Simoncini has discovered ALL CANCERS ARE A FUNGUS thus one can use Sodium Bicarbonate into tumors for curing same. Skin cancers are cured using 7% Iodine solution with 85 % Alcohol, 5% Sodium Iodine or Iodide plus the balance solution of perhaps 2 % deionized or distilled water. Imagine how many lives could be saved WORLDWIDE accepting what Dr. Bellini and Dr. Simoncini state to anyone who sends an e-mail with questions on Cancer.

http://www.curenaturalicancro.com

http://www.cancerfungus.Com

FEMA has people in flood areas in Trailers FULL OF MOLD/MOULD getting sicker each day they stay in flood areas in trailers which often have been contaminated. Residences with showers or tubs have mold/mould growing inside Professionally as a State of Florida Certified Plumbing Contractor CFC032631 we found only one product available "MOLD ARMOR" from http://www.moldarmor.com which is effective 100% killing any mold it is sprayed on as it also kills Mildew plus removes the stains. The solution contains Sodium Hypochloride as well as Sodium Hydroxide which should be sprayed in and outside of any Trailer or equipment then leave the area allowing no pets or humans to be inside while it works. Such a product made by DAMP RID is well worth government review and use, especially overseas to protect all American's and Illegal Aliens alike.

American or Foreign Corporations have workers or visitors going into Mold/Mould contaminated buildings/buildings/equipment, some in the Government itself PLUS our military and civilians are exposed to heavy toxic mould Worldwide. All vehicles flooded then resold should be treated for Mold/Mould before being sold to the unsuspecting public. Please have the Surgeon General and staff of all VA Medical Facilities/Government Building Professionals and Military and Civilian leadership TEST FOR MOLD/MOULD.

My skin cancer areas are being cured with CVS or Walgreens Iodine Tincture 2% since DEA restricts release of critical 7% Iodine Strong like from Humco in Texarkane Texas which has 1 OZ bottles and we have ordered our own shipment with formula 7 % Iodine, 85% Alcohol, 5% Sodium Iodine, 3% Deionized water solution to speed up the process. I lost my mother to Cancer not knowing of the Dr. Tullio Simoncini discovery and treatment. No one should EVER not be able to see this information NOR not be able to get even skin cancer cure materials without going through the DEA or a Doctor Licensed by the DEA who must account for every drop of 7% Iodine solutions used in America. I can fly to Rome tomorrow and get all of the solution necessary, return and treat myself rather than use 7% Triodine for Horses on my skin. When YOU get skin cancer go to Walter Reed and let them make up a proper solution.

Please have this message reviewed by everyone in every building occupied by military and civilians PLUS all housing in all bases and start saving lives TODAY !


Ralph Charles Whitley, Sr.
a Decorated American Veteran
4532 W. Kennedy Blvd. PMB-276
Tampa, FL 33609-2042 USA
101008
Phone: 813-286-2333
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.