- Part 3
The following articles were authored by admin

Agent Orange Soy

This is an article from the Organic Consumers Association on GMOs that are being bought to market.

 

Dow’s Agent Orange Soy Among New Fast-Tracked GMOs

Take Action to Stop Agent Orange Soy!

On July 6th the USDA announced petitions for nonregulated status for nine new GMO plants under its so-called “improved” regulatory process. OCA will be launching a campaign of alerts on each of these new petitions in upcoming weeks.

One of the new GMOs is Dow’s 2,4-D tolerant soybean. 2,4-D is an herbicide component of the infamous chemical weapon Agent Orange used during the U.S. war on Vietnam. Today, it is the third-most-used US herbicide and one of the most deadly.

Currently, not much 2,4-D is used on soybeans. Once Dow’s new Agent Orange Soy hits the market, however, use of this toxic pesticide will skyrocket, as the new plants are genetically modified to survive massive doses of the chemical.

Dow’s Agent Orange Soy would be disastrous to the farm economy and dangerous to public health.

The deadline for public comment on these new GMOs under the new fast-tracked process is September 11, 2012.

Take Action to Stop Agent Orange Soy

And stay tuned – we will have more info on the rest of these new GMOS in the coming weeks.

Pharmaceutical Drugs are 62,000 Times More Likely to Kill You than Supplements

Dr. Mercola goes into the myth touted by big pharma that supplements are bad for people.  When in reality drugs taken by americans lead to many more health complications each year than do nutritional supplements…simply amazing.

 

By Dr. Mercola

According to the Council for Responsible Nutrition1, 69 percent of American adults take supplements. But are supplements dangerous? The UK-based, international campaign group, the Alliance for Natural Health International (ANH-Intl) recently revealed data2 showing that compared to supplements, an individual is:

  • Around 900 times more likely to die from food poisoning
  • Nearly 300,000 times more likely to die from a preventable medical injury during a UK hospital stay, which is comparable to the individual risk of dying that active military face in Iraq or Afghanistan

Additionally, the data shows that adverse reactions to pharmaceutical drugs are:

  • 62,000 times more likely to kill you than food supplements
  • 7,750 times more likely to kill you than herbal remedies

The data, which was collected from official sources in the UK and EU, demonstrate that both food supplements and herbal remedies are in the ‘super-safe’ category of individual risk – meaning risk of death from their consumption is less than 1 in 10 million. The group has created an excellent graphic3 showing your relative risk of death from a variety of activities. Besides drugs and hospital injuries, you’re also more likely to die from being struck by lightning or drowning in your bathtub than having a lethal reaction to herbs or supplements…

According to the featured article on NewHope360.com4

“ANH-Intl executive and scientific director, Robert Verkerk PhD, hailed the figures as shedding new light on the vexed question of natural healthcare’s safety. “These figures tell us not only what activities an individual is most or least likely to die from, but also what the relative risks of various activities are to society as a whole. It puts some real perspective on the actual risk of death posed by food supplements and herbal remedies at a time when governments are clamping down because they tell us they’re dangerous.

… According to Dr Verkerk, the new figures should help to pressure UK and European authorities to reduce regulatory burdens on natural health products.”

With a Super-Safe Track Record, Why are Supplements Under Attack?

Vitamins, minerals and herbal supplements have a tremendously safe track record, yet they are often singled out as being potentially dangerous by government agencies like the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This – the notion that dietary supplements are unsafe — was the premise behind the FDA’s Draft Guidance on New Dietary Ingredients (NDI), which would have required the supplement industry to prove the safety of natural ingredients that, in many cases, have been on the market and used safely for decades!

Fortunately, public outcry made the agency agree to take another look at their proposed guidance and to issue a revised draft.5 It’s still not known when the revisions might be completed.

The original NDI draft essentially claimed dietary supplements are unsafe and must be carefully tested in order to “protect consumers.” The proposed safety thresholds even exceeded those required by pharmaceutical drugs — despite extensive toxicological data showing supplements are FAR safer than drugs. As detailed above, drugs are 62,000 times more likely to kill you than supplements!  Why on earth would supplements need more stringent safety thresholds than drugs?

It’s an obvious attempt to eliminate competition for the drug industry.

Data from the United States fully corroborates the featured UK data. For example, according to the latest data from the US National Poison Data System (2010 report)6, NO deaths were attributable to vitamin and mineral supplements that year. And, as noted by Orthomolecular Medicine News Service last year7, Americans easily take more than 60 billion doses of nutritional supplements every year, and with zero related deaths this is an outstanding safety record:

“Well over half of the U.S. population takes daily nutritional supplements. Even if each of those people took only one single tablet daily, that makes 165,000,000 individual doses per day, for a total of over 60 billion doses annually. Since many persons take far more than just one single vitamin or mineral tablet, actual consumption is considerably higher, and the safety of nutritional supplements is all the more remarkable. Over 60 billion doses of vitamin and mineral supplemnts per year in the USA, and not a single fatality. Not one. If vitamin and mineral supplements are allegedly so ‘dangerous,’ as the FDA and news media so often claim, then where are the bodies?”

The Drug Industry is the Real Health Threat

In striking contrast, drugs are known to cause well over 125,000 deaths per year in the US when taken correctly as prescribed – yet the FDA allows fast-track approvals and countless new additions of poorly tested drugs to the marketplace that must later be withdrawn due to their lethal consequences.

It is simply incomprehensible that any rational approach would seek to vilify supplements over drugs when the data in no way, shape or form supports it. The most likely motive for this position is financial greed that can put your life in jeopardy. According to the US National Poison Data System8 the following drug categories are among the most lethal:

  1. Analgesics, sedatives, hypnotics, and antipsychotics
  2. Cardiovascular drugs
  3. Opioids
  4. Acetaminophen combinations
  5. Antidepressants

Slightly lower down on the list you find drugs like muscle relaxants, anti-inflammatory drugs, hormones, antacids, anticoagulants, and antihistamines.

Time to Start a New “Just say NO!” Anti-Drug Movement

The anti-drug slogan coined by Nancy Reagan in the early 1980’s is just as applicable for today’s prescription drug problem as the recreational drug problem of the past. The only difference is that today prescription drugs have eclipsed illicit drugs as the number one source of poisoning deaths. Prescription drugs have also been identified as the primary “gateway” to illegal drug use, beating out marijuana, alcohol and cigarettes.

According to a July 6 press release9

“… Since 2000, the drugs sending people to their graves or to rehab have been shifting away from illicit drugs and toward prescription drugs. The 2011 report on the subject from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention made it clear: prescription narcotic pain reliever overdose deaths now exceed the number of deaths from heroin and cocaine combined.

… ‘Our own clients and people calling in daily for information about our program or help have told us story after story about addictions starting with the use of prescription drugs,’ stated Derry Hallmark, Director of Admissions at Narconon Arrowhead, a premier drug rehab facility in Southeastern Oklahoma. ‘Sadly, prescription medications have become the newest of the gateway drugs. Sadder still are the losses of life and other severe consequences that go hand in hand with drug abuse, which is especially the case with prescription drug abuse.’

Hallmark adds that those addicted to prescriptions will often end up needing treatment or will even start taking illicit drugs. One of the most common examples of this is the connection between those addicted to painkillers that then start taking heroin…”

It’s important to understand that there is a risk of side effects every time you take a prescription drug. No one (except for those who intentionally overdose) expects these medications to kill them, but they can do just that, and it happens far more often than you might think. In a 2011 report by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA), officials emphasized that people should not assume there’s no risk in prescribed medicines10

The truth is, the best  way to avoid all risk, including death, from prescription drugs is to not take them at all. Remember, it’s your body, not your doctor’s and not your pharmacist’s, so it is up to you to make the decision of what drugs to take, if any. Be SURE you are aware of the risks of any medication prescribed to you, and weigh them against any possible benefit. Then you can make a well-informed decision of whether it’s a risk you’re willing to take.

Optimizing Your Health Without Drugs

Of course, of paramount importance is taking control of your health so you can stay well naturally, without the use of drugs or even frequent conventional medical care. If you adhere to a healthy lifestyle, you most likely will never need medications in the first place.

This includes:

  1. Proper Food ChoicesFor a comprehensive guide on which foods to eat and which to avoid, see my nutrition plan. Generally speaking, you should be looking to focus your diet on whole, unprocessed foods (vegetables, meats, raw dairy, nuts, and so forth) that come from healthy, sustainable, local sources, such as a small organic farm not far from your home.

    For the best nutrition and health benefits, you will want to eat a good portion of your food raw, and make sure you’re sourcing your meats and animal products from organically-raised, grass-fed or pastured animals.

    Nearly as important as knowing which foods to eat more of is knowing which foods to avoid, and topping the list is fructose. Sugar, and fructose in particular, acts as a toxin in and of itself, and as such drive multiple disease processes in your body, not the least of which is insulin resistance, a major cause of accelerated aging.

  2. Comprehensive Exercise Program, including High-Intensity Exercise like Peak FitnessEven if you’re eating the healthiest diet in the world, you still need to exercise to reach the highest levels of health, and you need to be exercising effectively, which means including not only core-strengthening exercises, strength training, and stretching but also high-intensity activities into your rotation. High-intensity interval-type training boosts human growth hormone (HGH) production, which is essential for optimal health, strength and vigor. I’ve discussed the importance of Peak Fitness for your health on numerous occasions, so for more information, please review this previous article.
  3. Stress Reduction and Positive ThinkingYou cannot be optimally healthy if you avoid addressing the emotional component of your health and longevity, as your emotional state plays a role in nearly every physical disease — from heart disease and depression, to arthritis and cancer. Effective coping mechanisms are a major longevity-promoting factor in part because stress has a direct impact on inflammation, which in turn underlies many of the chronic diseases that kill people prematurely every day. Energy psychology tools such as the Emotional Freedom Technique, meditation, prayer, social support and exercise are all viable options that can help you maintain emotional and mental equilibrium.
  4. Proper Sun Exposure to Optimize Vitamin D We have long known that it is best to get your vitamin D from sun exposure, and if at all possible, I strongly urge you to make sure you’re getting out in the sun on a daily basis. There is preliminary evidence suggesting that oral vitamin D may not provide the identical benefits, although it’s still better than none at all. To determine the times of year that you can optimize your vitamin D levels through sun exposure, please see this previous article.
  5. Take High Quality Animal-Based Omega-3 FatsAnimal-based omega-3 found in krill oil helps fight and prevent heart disease, cancer, depression, Alzheimer’s, arthritis, diabetes, hyperactivity and many other diseases.
  6. Avoid as Many Chemicals, Toxins, and Pollutants as PossibleThis includes tossing out your toxic household cleaners, soaps, personal hygiene products, air fresheners, bug sprays, lawn pesticides, and insecticides, just to name a few, and replacing them with non-toxic alternatives.

Regimen for Cancer

Certain supplements can help with cancer as told in this article by Dr. Mercola.

By Dr. Mercola

One of the reasons why conventional cancer treatment is such a dismal failure in the United States is because it relies on chemotherapy.

Chemotherapy drugs are, by their very nature, extremely toxic and typically work against your body’s natural ability to fight cancer, e.g. destroying host immunity instead of supporting it.

One of the biggest drawbacks to chemotherapy is the fact that it destroys healthy cells throughout your body right along with cancer cells, a “side effect” that often leads to accelerated death, not healing.

Another devastating side effect of chemotherapy is the way it actually supports the more chemo resistant and malignant cell subpopulations within tumors (e.g. cancer stem cells), both killing the more benign cells and/or senescent cells within the tumor that keep it slow-growing, or even harmless.

As a result, this unleashes a more aggressive, treatment-resistant type of cancer to wreak havoc on the body.

A handful of natural compounds have been discovered, however, which exhibit an effect called “selective cytotoxicity.”  This means they are able to kill cancer cells while leaving healthy cells and tissue unharmed.

This type of cancer treatment is intelligent, targeted and will not result in the death of the patient from “collateral damage” in what is increasingly a failed war not against the cancer being treated, but the patient’s own irreversibly devastated body.

Bromelain in Pineapples Kills Cancer Cells Without Harming You

One such compound is bromelain, an enzyme that can be extracted from pineapple stems. Research published in the journal Planta Medica found that bromelain was superior to the chemotherapy drug 5-fluorauracil in treating cancer in an animal study.i Researchers stated:

“This antitumoral effect [of bromelain] was superior to that of 5-FU [5-fluorouracil], whose survival index was approximately 263 %, relative to the untreated control.”

What makes this impact particularly impressive is that the bromelain worked without causing additional harm to the animals. The chemo drug 5-fluorauracil, on the other hand, has a relatively unsuccessful and dangerous track record despite being used for nearly 40 years.

As written by GreenMedInfo:

“As a highly toxic, fluoride-bound form of the nucleic acid uracil, a normal component of RNA, the drug is supposed to work by tricking more rapidly dividing cells — which include both cancer and healthy intestinal, hair follicle, and immune cells — into taking it up, thereby inhibiting (read: poisoning) RNA replication enzymes and RNA synthesis.…

When a person dies following conventional cancer treatment it is all too easy to “blame the victim” and simply write that patient’s cancer off as “chemo-resistant,” or “exceptionally aggressive,” when in fact the non-selective nature of the chemotoxic agent is what ultimately lead to their death.”

Selective cytotoxicity is indeed a property that is only found among natural compounds; no chemotherapy drug yet developed is capable of this effect. Aside from bromelain, other examples of natural compounds that have been found to kill cancer cells without harming healthy cells include:

    • Vitamin C — Dr. Ronald Hunninghake carried out a 15-year research project called RECNAC (cancer spelled backwards). His groundbreaking research in cell cultures showed that vitamin C was selectively cytotoxic against cancer cells.
    • Eggplant extract: Solasodine rhamnosyl glycosides (BEC), which is a fancy name for extracts from plants of the Solanaceae family, such as eggplant, tomato, potato, Bell peppers, and tobacco, also impact only cancerous cells leaving normal cells alone. Eggplant extract cream appears to be particularly useful in treating skin cancer. Dr. Bill E. Cham, a leading researcher in this area, explains:

“The mode of action of SRGs [glycoalkaloids solasodine rhamnosy glycosides (BEC)] is unlike any current antineoplastic [anti-tumor] agent. Specific receptors for the SRGs present only on cancer cells but not normal cells are the first step of events that lead to apoptosis in cancer cells only, and this may explain why during treatment the cancer cells were being eliminated and normal cells were replacing the killed cancer cells with no scar tissue being formed.”

  • Turmeric (Curcumin Extract): Of all the natural cancer fighters out there, this spice has been the most intensely researched for exhibiting selective cytotoxicity.ii Remarkably, in a 2011 study published in the Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, rats administered curcumin, the primary polyphenol in turmeric, saw a decrease in experimentally-induced brain tumors in 9 out of 11 treated, while noting that the curcumin did not affect the viability of brain cells “suggesting that curcumin selectively targets the transformed [cancerous] cells.”

How Enzymes Might Help Treat Cancer

Bromelainis a proteolyticenzyme (an enzymethat digests proteins). In the Planta Medica study, it was injected directly into the abdominal cavity. Getting enzymes from your digestive tract into your bloodstream isn’t as easy as it would seem, as enzymes are very susceptible to denaturing and must be helped to survive the highly acidic environment in your stomach. They are often given an “enteric coating” to help them survive the journey through your digestive tract.And then, there is the matter of absorption. For nearly 100 years, medical dogma insisted that enzymes taken orally were too large to pass through the digestive tract wall.

However, there is now a good deal of research that they can indeed pass through your intestine intactiii and into your bloodstream and lymphatic system, where they can deliver their services to the rest of your body… one of the mysteries of medical science.

Now that we know this is possible, systemic oral enzymes have been used to treat problems ranging from sports injuries to arthritis to heart disease and cancer, particularly in European countries. But most of the research has been published in non-English language journals.

Is Cancer the Result of Diminished Pancreatic Enzymes?

This systemic use of enzymes is just now taking off in the United States, but the use of enzymes to treat cancer has its roots all the way back to 1911 with John Beard’s The Enzyme Treatment of Cancer and Its Scientific Basis. Beard believed cancer was a result of diminished pancreatic enzymes, impairing your immune response. A study in 1999iv suggests he may have been right on target.

Ten patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer were treated with large doses of oral pancreatic enzymes (along with detoxification and an organic diet), and their survival rates were 3 to 4 times higher than patients receiving conventional treatment. Proteolytic enzymes can be helpful in treating cancer because they help restore balance to your immune system. Dr. Nick Gonzalez in New York City, NY has also done a lot of work on enzymes in cancer treatment and has written a book on the subject.v

Some of the ways proteolytic enzymes can be helpful in the fight against cancer are:vi

  • Boosting cytokines, particularly interferon and tumor necrosis factor, which are very important warriors in destroying cancer cells.
  • Decreasing inflammation.
  • Dissolving fibrin: Cancer cells hide under a cloak of fibrin to escape detection. Once the cancer cells are “uncloaked,” they can be spotted and attacked by your immune system. It is also thought that fibrin makes cancer cells “stick together,” which increases the chance for metastases.
  • German studies have shown that systemic enzymes increase the potency of macrophages and killer cells 12-fold.

Fortunately, you get (or should be getting) many enzymes from the foods you consume—particularly, raw foods. These directly help with your digestive process. The more raw foods you eat, the lower the burden on your body to produce the enzymes it needs, not only for digestion, but for practically everything. Whatever enzymes are not used up in digestion are then available to help with other important physiological processes.

This is one of the reasons why it is so important to eat a diet rich in fresh, organic, raw foods. You may even want to try juicing some of your vegetables, and the core of your pineapple, as a way of getting more nutrients—and enzymes—into your body. In the event you use enzymes in supplement form, it is crucial that, in order for enzymes to be used systemically, they must be consumed on an empty stomach. Otherwise, your body will use them for digesting your food, instead of being absorbed into the blood and doing their work there.

Looking for an Alternative to Chemo for Cancer Treatment?

Dr. Gonzalez is on the front lines and actively engaged in helping people by coaching them with natural alternatives instead of toxic drugs and radiation for cancer. I would personally not hesitate to recommend him to a family member or a friend diagnosed with cancer. His website, www.dr-gonzalez.com, also contains information on how to become a patient, and everything a potential patient needs to know.

Another source for more information about alternative cancer treatments in general is Suzanne Somers’ book, Knockout. She reviews Dr. Gonzalez’ work in one chapter, and Dr. Gonzalez personally recommends the book as a well-researched resource for anyone interested in getting more information.

Additionally, Dr. Gonzalez has written a series of books, two of which have already been published and received five-star reviews: The Trophoblast and the Origins of Cancer and One Man Alone: An Investigation of Nutrition, Cancer, and William Donald Kelley. Three others are in the works, one of which will contain 100 of Dr. Gonzalez’ case reports of patients with advanced cancer who successfully recovered on his program.

Illinois Bees and the Monsanto Connection

This is un-bee-lievable:

 

By Dr. Mercola

An Illinois beekeeper whose bee hives were stolen and allegedly destroyed by the Illinois Department of Agriculture has stirred up a hornet’s nest with his questions on why the state did this, and most importantly, what they did with his bees.

The state claims the bees were destroyed because they were infected with a disease called foulbrood.

But when the 58-year apiary keeper had his hearing—three weeks after the removal of his bees without his knowledge—the state’s “evidence” had disappeared, leaving more questions than answers about the raid on the beekeeper’s hives.

Some people, including the beekeeper, Terrence Ingram, suspect the raid has more to do with Ingram’s 15 years of research on Monsanto’s Roundup and his documented evidence that Roundup kills bees, than it does about any concerns about his hives.

Interestingly, the state’s theft targeted the queen bee and hive he’d been using to conduct the research.

The Ingram Case

A recent article by Tom Kocal in the Prairie Advocate retells the full story of how Terrence Ingram’s bees and hives wound up being taken by the Illinois State Department of Agriculture (IDofAG)i.

While the state claims the removal of the property was due to Ingram’s failure to comply with the Department’s notice instructing him to burn the affected hives, they have been less than open about why the inspectors came in and took the bees and hives without due process.

At a time when the Ingram’s were absent from the property. Ingram claims the Department also conducted three out of four inspections on his private property while no one was home.

While Department inspectors claim his hives had foulbrood—an allegedly highly contagious disease—Mr. Ingram believes he could prove that this was not the case. As reported by the featured Prairie Advocate article:

“Ingram knew that the inspectors could not tell what they were seeing and had warned the Department that if any of them came back it would be considered a criminal trespass. Yet they came back when he was not home, stole his hives and ruined his 15 years of research.”

Ingram initially reported the missing bees and hives as having been stolen on March 14, unaware that they’d been removed by the IDofAG. News of the theft was published in the Prairie Advocate on March 21.

As a result of that article, an area County Farm Bureau manager called the reporter, stating he knew the equipment hadn’t been stolen, but that it had been “destroyed” by the Department of Agriculture because they were infected with foulbrood and Ingram hadn’t disposed of them as instructed.

The most nonsensical part of this story is that Ingram didn’t get a hearing to determine whether his hives were affected by the disease until three weeks after they were removed and destroyed.

Kocal quotes Mr. Ingram as saying:

“I own four businesses. I am here all the time. Yet they took our bees and hives when we were not home. What did they do, sit up on the hill and watch until we left? We had not yet had our day in court to prove that our hives did not have foulbrood!”

Making matters worse, during that April 4 hearing, the Department couldn’t produce any evidence of what they’d done with the bees and the hives. Meanwhile, Ingram ended up being ordered to pay the $500 fine for violating Sections 2-1 of the Illinois Bees and Apiaries Act. According to Kocal:

“There are 2 questions that Ingram wants answered:

1) Did the IDofA, a state agency, have the right to enter Ingram’s property and confiscate a suspected “nuisance,” before Ingram had his day in court?

2) Where are his bees? The “evidence” has disappeared, and the IDofA refuses to tell Ingram where they are, before, during, and after the hearing.

 “I have been keeping bees for 58 years,” Ingram said during an interview at his home and apiary. “I am not a newcomer to beekeeping, and I definitely know what I am doing. I have been teaching beginning beekeeping classes for 40 years…” At the April 4 hearing, Ingram said he felt he was able to show the court that the inspector could not tell the difference between “chilled brood” and foulbrood. He also proved to the court that the inspectors did not know the symptoms of foulbrood.”

15 Years of Research Destroyed

Ingram believes the destruction of his bees and hives is more likely to be related to his research into the effect of Roundup on honey bees. He claims some 250 of his colonies have been killed off over the years by Monsanto’s broad-spectrum herbicide, used in large quantities on both conventional- and genetically engineered crops. Ingram’s research shows that Roundup can lead to what’s called chilled brood, which is an entirely different scenario.

According to Ingram, quoted from Kocal’s article:

 “When Round-Up kills the adult bees there are not enough bees left in the hive to keep the young bees (brood) warm, and the young bees die from the cold (chilled brood). I tried to prove that just because foulbrood can be detected once the hive has been disturbed, doesn’t mean the hive has foulbrood.

Inside a honeybee hive is one of the cleanest places you can find. Anything that is a problem, if the bees can’t remove it, they cover it with propolis, which is an antiseptic… When you go into the comb and cut it up, disturb it like the investigators did, then send it to a lab, it exposes foulbrood to the world. In the beehive, it’s covered up. The bees aren’t affected by it. But you can find it by sending it in to a lab.”

Ingram has studied the effects of Roundup on honeybees for the past 15 years, and he believes he had built up sufficient amount of data to show that the herbicide causes not just bee die-offs, but also Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD)—a mysterious phenomenon that has decimated an estimated one-third of all honey bees since 2006. While some bees inexplicably die, many simply vanish and never return to their hives. Ingram told Kocal that:

“CCD is a calamity that is affecting honeybee colonies across the nation. In fact, I had one queen, which had survived three summers of spraying and three winters. I was planning to raise daughters from that queen to see if she may have had some genetic resistance to Roundup. But she and her hive were taken during the theft. I don’t even know where the bees and my equipment are. They ruined 15 years of my research.”

… “I asked Rep. Sacia to take the teeth out of the current law, preventing untrained inspectors from doing sneak inspections without the beekeeper present, killing their bees and burning their equipment, or forcing organic beekeepers out of business, telling them that they have to use chemicals to keep bees in Illinois. Are the chemical companies really running our food supply?”

… “Is Illinois becoming a police state, where citizens do not have rights?” Ingram asked in desperation. “Knowing that Monsanto and the Dept. of Ag are in bed together, one has to wonder if Monsanto was behind the theft to ruin my research that may prove Roundup was, and is, killing honeybees. Beekeepers across the state are being threatened that the same thing may be done to their hives and livelihood. I was not treated properly, I don’t want to see this happen to anyone else in this state, and I want this type of illegal action to end.”

Monsanto is the New Owner of Leading Bee Research Firm

Ingram is quite correct about chemical companies like Monsanto—they are seeking to take nearly full control of the food supply by controlling virtually every aspect of crop production. So he has cause to be suspicious when it comes to the question of who ordered the theft and destruction of his bees. It wouldn’t be the first time the biotech giant has used questionable tactics to get rid of its adversaries. And research implicating Monsanto as the cause of CCD could definitely cause some harm to the company’s bottom line.

One of the forerunning theories of colony collapse disorder (CCD) is that it’s being caused by genetically engineered crops—either as a result of the crops themselves or the pesticides and herbicides applied on them, such as Roundup. Ingram’s research could potentially have strengthened this theory. Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide is one of the most widely used herbicides there is. As a result, Monsanto has received increasing amounts of bad publicity over their potential role in the devastating demise of bees around the globe.

There’s no doubt that CCD is a serious problem. To get an idea of the magnitude of the importance of bees, the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) estimates that without bees to act as pollinators, the United States alone could lose $15 billion worth of crops.ii Research into the phenomenon is therefore absolutely crucial, to identify the sources of the problem.

Monsanto however, keeping true to form, appears to have taken measures to control the direction of the research into their products’ effect on bees. As I recently reported, Monsanto has purchased one of the leading bee research firms – one that, conveniently, lists its primary goal as studying colony collapse disorder! Monsanto bought the company, called Beeologics, in September 2011, just months before Poland announced it would ban growing of Monsanto’s genetically modified MON810 maize, noting, poignantly, that “pollen of this strain could have a harmful effect on bees.”iii

The ongoing blight of genetically engineered crops has been implicated in CCD for years. In one German study,iv when bees were released in a genetically engineered rapeseed crop, then fed the pollen to younger bees, scientists discovered the bacteria in the guts of the young ones mirrored the same genetic traits as ones found in the GE crop, indicating that horizontal gene transfer had occurred.

But Roundup is not the only herbicide that has come under scrutiny. Newer systemic insecticides, known as neonicotinoids, two prominent examples of which include Imidacloprid and Clothianidin, are also frequently used on both conventional- and genetically engineered crops and have been implicated in CCD. In fact, bee colonies started  disappearing in the U.S. shortly after the EPA allowed these new insecticides on the market. Even the EPA itself admits that “pesticide poisoning” is a likely cause of bee colony collapse as these pesticides weaken the bees’ immune system.

What Can You do to Help the Honeybees?

If you want to learn more about bees and CCD, I highly recommend watching the documentary film Vanishing of the Bees. The film recommends four actions you can take to help preserve honeybees everywhere:

  • Support organic farmers and shop at local farmer’s markets as often as possible. You can “vote with your fork” three times a day. [When you buy organic, you are making a statement by saying “no” to genetically engineered foods]
  • Cut the use of toxic chemicals in your house and on your lawn, and use organic pest control.
  • Better yet, get rid of your lawn altogether and plant a garden. Lawns offer very little benefit for the environment. Both flower and vegetable gardens provide good honey bee habitats.
  • Become an amateur beekeeper. Having a hive in your garden requires only about an hour of your time per week, benefits your local ecosystem, and you can enjoy your own honey!

If you are interested in more information about bee preservation, the following organizations are a good place to start.

  • Pesticide Action Network Bee Campaignv
  • The Foundation for the Preservation of Honey Beesvi
  • American Beekeeping Federationvii
  • Help the Honey Beesviii

References:


Fluoride Toxicity

This is another post by Dr. Mercola on the problems with fluoride in U.S. drinking water.

By Dr. Mercola

In 1994, a tanker truck carrying fluorisilic acid lost a set of wheels, causing its 4,500-gallon load to spill onto Interstate 4 in Volusia County Florida. Forty-seven people were sent to the hospital as a result, and 2,300 in the area had to be evacuated.

The highway was closed for two days, and those who happened to be nearby had breathing troubles and burning sensations on their skin. Even vehicles that drove through the spill had to be professionally decontaminated, as the chemical was so noxious it could cause respiratory problems to bystanders.i

That chemical — fluorosilicic acid – is one of the fluoride variants currently added to about two-thirds of U.S. drinking water supplies – what amounts to pure poison in your tap water, under the guise of protecting your teeth.

Water Fluoridation is the Result of a Massively Successful PR Campaign

If you live in the United States, then you undoubtedly have been exposed to mass psychological conditioning. With the average American being accosted with thousands of advertisements each day, whether blatant or not, many pieces of “conventional wisdom” are actually contrived and implanted into society. One method of doing so is through driving public opinion — the idea that if most people believe it, then it must be true.

The history of this kind of conditioning can be traced back to the early part of the last century, specifically the work of people like Edward L. Bernays, known as the “Father of Spin.” Edward L. Bernays took the ideas of his famous uncle Sigmund Freud, and applied them to the emerging science of mass persuasion. However, instead of using the psychological principles to uncover hidden themes in the human unconscious in the way Freudian psychology does, Bernays used them as a marketing tool.

It was this method that led Bernays to become wildly successful in the field of PR and marketing, conditioning Americans to buy into corporate lies.

Bernays dominated the PR industry until the 1940s, and was a significant force for another 40 years after that. During all that time, Bernays took on hundreds of diverse assignments to create a public perception about some idea or product.

One of Bernays’ first assignments was to help sell the First World War to the American public with the idea to “Make the World Safe for Democracy.” A few years later, Bernays set up a stunt to popularize the notion of women smoking cigarettes …

In the 1930s Edward Bernays was public relations adviser to the Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa) and later was brought on board to promote water fluoridation to the American public – a more than coincidental connection considering it’s been suggested that fluoridating water supplies was a way to protect aluminum and steel producers from lawsuits against the fluorine pollution coming from their plants …

New York City Water Fluoridation Paved the Way for the Entire U.S.

It was, in fact, the Reynolds Aluminum Company that first utilized a pro-fluoride booklet titled “Our Children’s Teeth” (produced by the Committee to Protect Our Children’s Teeth) in court to defend against fluoride injury charges. The booklet included testimonials and statements from scientists that reportedly agreed fluoride posed no harm, but as reported by Associate Professor of Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University James F. Tracy:ii

“ … of the 360 “chemists” and “authorities on nutrition” listed in the brochure, 201 worked for 87 institutions including universities that received over $151 million in grants. In the late 1950s a majority of such grants originated from the foremost proponent of water fluoridation — the Public Health Service. Another major recipient of PHS funding was the American Dental Association (ADA). Exner’s [Dr. F. B. Exner, public health advocate and water fluoridation opponent] research and data proved to be especially valuable in lawsuits brought against the industry and fluoridation proponents. In 1978, shortly after his death, all of his files were lost in an unusual fire.

As the pro-fluoridation propaganda campaign grew to a crescendo in the late 1950s a collaborative surveillance campaign targeting anti-fluoridationists was undertaken by the PHS, the ADA, and the American Water Works Association.

The National Fluoridation Information Service of the Division of Dental Health of the US Public Health Service, an intelligence-gathering setup operating out of the PHS-controlled National Institutes of Health, was formally established to monitor and create databases on fluoridation critics in the medical professions. Fluoride heretics were subject to flailing in the press or outright expulsion from their professional organizations.

Fluoridation was finally launched in New York City in 1965 apart from popular referendum and in the face of continued opposition by handing the choice to the municipality’s five-member Board of Estimate. Behind the final effort to fluoridate were Mary and Albert Lasker. The former was involved in the Committee to Protect Our Children’s Teeth and the latter an advertising executive and associate of Bernays who helped American Tobacco Company make Lucky Strikes America’s best-selling cigarettes.”

Junk Food and Soda Ruins Kids’ Teeth – Not Lack of Fluoride

Following New York City’s decision to fluoridate water, the trend caught on and now upwards of two-thirds of U.S. water supplies contain fluoride. Dr. Karen Sokal-Gutierrez, a pediatrician and former Peace Corps volunteer, pointed out that kids living in El Salvador had near perfect teeth 20 years ago. When she returned to similar villages recently, she noticed the children’s teeth were black, and decay was setting in as young as age 2.

The culprit? Junk food and sodas had replaced many of the staple foods that once made up the children’s diets.

She described one boy who was so emaciated and sick from having all 20 baby teeth decayed that he “looked like a child dying of AIDS.” His parents owned the village store, which meant the boy had “unlimited access to candy.”iii

Dr. Sokal-Gutierrez has been returning to the village and training local health workers about oral health and nutrition. She also trained the dentists to apply fluoride varnish to the children’s teeth.

But the solution here is not fluoride – remember, the children of decades’ past had near-perfect teeth! The solution is to get the junk food and soda out of these kids’ diets.  Even in a study that reported low-fluoride toothpaste alone was as effective as toothpaste combined with application of antiseptic chlorhexidine (CHX) gel,iv the researchers noted that the low number of early childhood cavities was most likely the result of “the telephone contact with oral health professionals, increasing the mothers’ motivation to follow toothbrushing instructions and dietary advice.”

The Real Risks of Fluoride are Becoming “Mainstream” Knowledge

Earlier this year, the New Hampshire House of Representatives voted 253-23 in favor of mandating infant fluoride warnings on all water bills in fluoridated communities (the bill will now go to the Senate). According to the text of the bill, the warning would read, in part:

“According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, if your child under the age of 6 months is exclusively consuming infant formula reconstituted with fluoridated water, there may be an increased chance of dental fluorosis.”

But dental fluorosis is not “just cosmetic.” It can also be an indication that other tissues, such as your bones and internal organs, including your brain, have been overexposed to fluoride as well. There are more than 100 published studies illustrating fluoride’s harm to the brain,v plus 25 published studies directly linking fluoride exposure to reduced IQ in children!

Fluoride is a toxic agent that is biologically active in the human body where it accumulates in sensitive tissues over time, wreaks havoc with enzymes and produces a number of serious adverse health effects—including neurological and endocrine dysfunctions.

Adding insult to injury, even promoters of fluoridation now admit that fluoride’s predominant action is on the surface of the tooth (although even this is now questionable) and not from inside the body – so why are so many Americans still being forced to swallow it? Swallowing fluoride provides little or no benefit to your teeth!

Fluoride compounds like fluorosilicic acid are toxic industrial waste products, which can also be contaminated with lead, arsenic, radionucleotides, aluminum and other industrial contaminants. The story gets even more convoluted, as mentioned earlier, as now declassified files of the Manhattan Project and the Atomic Energy Commission show that the original motivation for promoting fluoride and water fluoridation in the United States was to protect the bomb-, aluminum-, and other fluoride-polluting industries from liability. In the early days some of the sodium fluoride used to fluoridate water supplies in the U.S. came from Alcoa.

A couple of years later, they switched to the even more hazardous waste product hydrofluorosilicic acid from the phosphate fertilizer industry. But none of the studies on fluoride actually used the far more toxic and contaminated hydrofluorosilicic acid that is presently added to the water supply. Rather, they use pharmaceutical-grade fluoride, which while harmful, is not quite as bad as what’s being used for water fluoridation. So, the health hazards are likely FAR worse than any study has so far discerned.

Do You Want Healthy Teeth? Eat a Healthy Diet!

When it comes to oral hygiene and preventing cavities, there’s a virtual war going on. If you listen to conventional health agencies’ and your dentist’s advice, you may still believe that fluoride is the answer.

Think again!

Good oral health and strong, healthy teeth are NOT the result of drinking fluoridated water and brushing your teeth with fluoridated toothpaste. Rather it’s virtually all about your diet.

Dr. Weston A. Price, who was one of the major nutritional pioneers of all time, completed some of the most extensive research on this topic back in the 1900s, and it is still very much relevant today. What he found, and documented in his classic book Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, is that native tribes who were eating their traditional diet had nearly perfect teeth, and were almost 100 percent free of tooth decay — and they did not have toothbrushes, floss, toothpaste, or root canals and fillings.

But when these tribal populations were introduced to sugar and white flour, guess what happened … their health, and their perfect teeth, rapidly deteriorated, just like the kids in El Salvador. By avoiding sugars and processed foods, you prevent the proliferation of the bacteria that cause decay in the first place.

Most people whose diet includes very little sugar and few processed foods have very low rates of tooth decay. So the simple act of limiting, or eliminating sugar, and avoiding processed foods — along with regular cleanings with your natural mercury-free dentist — will ensure that your teeth and gums stay healthy and cavity-free naturally.

Metabolic Syndrome

Following is an article by Dr. Joseph Mercola highlighting metabolic syndrome or the beginning of insulin resistance or diabetes symptoms.  Lifestyle changes–diet and exercise, can often bring one back from the brink of type II diabetes.  This requires patience and determination on the part of the person who is headed in this direction.  Chaning one's eating habits and getting exercise are the means by which the body can become sensitive to insulin again.  There is a supplement I take that was givent to me by my healthcare practitioner to help resensitize my body to insulin. It is from metagenics and can be purchased on Amazon with this link.  It is also available on vitacost.com if you like their site.

Here is the article:

Metabolic syndrome — a group of symptoms including diabetes, pre-diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol that increases the risk of heart disease — is no longer thought to be caused primarily by abdominal fat.

Instead, researchers at Yale University School of Medicine have determined, via new imaging technologies, that insulin resistance in skeletal muscle leads to changes in energy storage, leading to metabolic syndrome.

Insulin resistance, which occurs when the body becomes resistant to the hormone insulin, occurs in skeletal muscle when the muscles are no longer able to make glycogen, a form of stored carbohydrate, from food energy. In turn, insulin resistance in skeletal muscle promotes an increase in fats in the bloodstream, which leads to metabolic syndrome.

Using magnetic resonance imaging techniques, the researchers were able to determine that insulin-sensitive individuals in their study converted carbohydrate energy (from eating a high-carb meal) into glycogen that was stored in the liver and muscle.

Among insulin-resistant individuals, however, the carbohydrate energy was rerouted to liver fat production. The process elevated the participants’ triglycerides in the blood by as much as 60 percent while lowering HDL (good) cholesterol by 20 percent. This occurred even though the participants were young and lean, with no excess of abdominal fat.

More than 50 million Americans suffer from metabolic syndrome, and half of the population is predisposed to it.

The researchers pointed out that there is good news to their findings: insulin resistance in skeletal muscle can be treated with a simple method, exercise.

For the full article, use this link:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/07/18/insulin-resistance-not-belly-fat-to-blame-for-metabolic-syndrome.aspx

The Truth about Cholesterol

There is a persistent myth in the medical community about cholesterol…that all of it is bad.  Actually you need cholesterol for proper body function.  Here is an article by Dr. Mercola on cholesterol.

 

By Dr. Mercola

The idea that high cholesterol causes heart disease is based on the premise that cholesterol is found in the plaque of people with coronary artery disease. But does that automatically mean that cholesterol itself is the root cause, and must be kept at a minimum to prevent plaque formation?

The answer is “no.”

Missing from this hypothesis is the holistic understanding of how cholesterol operates inside your body, and why arterial plaques form in the first place.

Cholesterol is actually a critical part of your body’s foundational building materials and is absolutely essential for optimal health.

As Dr. Robert Rowen points out in this interview, it’s so important that your body produces it both in your liver and in your brain. Cholesterol is also the raw material for all of your steroid hormones and vitamin D. There’s no doubt that you need it.

“Think about this for a second. Your neurons are making it for a reason,” Dr. Rowen says“Just logically speaking, if you take a statin drug, which poisons the enzyme HMG-CoA reductase… Hello? Your brain is not going to make the cholesterol that it needs, so you can expect – you can predict –that there’s going to be a problems, years down the line, and we’re seeing it now with statin drugs affecting the brain.”

So what’s the connection between cholesterol and heart disease?

If your body needs so much of it, what causes it to clog your arteries? The devil is in the details, as they say, and this is definitely true when it comes to cholesterol, because as Dr. Rowen explains, the cholesterol found in arterial plaque is not just any cholesterol, but oxidized, damaged cholesterol.

“There is an excellent research on animals where they fed animals plenty of cholesterol in their diet and they did just fine. But when they gave them even small amounts of tainted cholesterol, meaning oxidized cholesterol, within weeks it showed up in fatty streaks in their arteries,” Dr. Rowen says.

“We know why now. There are receptors in the endothelial cells that are the lining of your arteries. There are receptors there for oxidized cholesterol. It picks it up, and it goes into the endothelial cells. The problem is that oxidized cholesterol does not look native to your macrophages, your immune system. It actually looks like bacteria. The macrophages move in to try and clean up what it thinks is bacteria, which is nothing more than oxidized cholesterol, and it creates a whole bunch of inflammation inside your arterial wall. The real culprit is oxidized cholesterol.”

Where Does Oxidized Cholesterol Come From?

Oxidized cholesterol is introduced into your system every time you eat something cooked in vegetable oil. As soon as the oil is heated and mixes with oxygen, it goes rancid. Rancid oil is oxidized oil, and should not be consumed. This is why I constantly recommend avoiding all vegetable cooking oils, such as canola-, corn-, or soy oil, and replacing them with organic coconut oil, which remains stable and does not oxidize at higher temperatures.

“I am a proponent of eating far more uncooked food and certainly, zero foods cooked in oil,” Dr. Rowen says. “I strongly urge [my patients] to eat more raw uncooked foods, because heat is damaging the oils, which in turn is going to damage the cholesterol and lead to vascular disease problem.”

Another reason for avoiding vegetable cooking oils is that the majority of them (at least in the US) are made from genetically engineered crops; plus they’re heavily processed on top of that. So not only do you have the issue of the polyunsaturated fats being oxidized, you also have these other toxic variables, such as glyphosate and Bt toxin found in genetically engineered corn and soy. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in the broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup, which is used in very large amounts on all of these crops. So there are a number of reasons for avoiding vegetable oils, but the fact that they’re oxidized is clearly a high-priority one.

Why Statins Do NOT Promote Good Health

According to conventional medicine, there are two types of cholesterol:

  1. High-density lipoprotein, or HDL: This is the “good” cholesterol that helps to keep cholesterol away from your arteries and remove any excess from arterial plaque, which may help to prevent heart disease.
  2. Low-density lipoprotein, or LDL: This “bad” cholesterol circulates in your blood and is more prone to oxidation. According to conventional thinking, it can build up in your arteries and form plaque that makes your arteries narrow and less flexible (a condition called atherosclerosis). If a clot forms in one of these narrowed arteries leading to your heart or brain, a heart attack or stroke may result.

The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends keeping your total cholesterol below 200 mg/dL, but what they do not tell you is that total cholesterol level is just about worthless for determining your risk for heart disease, unless it is above 330. Additionally, the AHA updated their guidelines in 2004, lowering the recommended level of LDL cholesterol from 130 to less than 100, or even less than 70 for patients at very high risk. To achieve these outrageously low targets, you typically need to take multiple cholesterol-lowering drugs.

Statin drugs are very effective for lowering your cholesterol across the board. However, as mentioned earlier, they shut down your body’s innate capability to create the cholesterol it needs for proper cellular- and brain function. Statins also prevent your body from generating sufficient levels of vitamin D from exposure to the sun, because the UVB rays in sunlight interact with the cholesterol in your skin and convert it to vitamin D. As Dr. Rowen explains, while statin drugs effectively reduce cholesterol values, they typically do not have an overall beneficial impact on health and longevity.

“Let’s look at some of the statin studies,” he says. “The relative risk is reduced. Here’s the problem with medical studies, and statin is a really good example: Let’s say, you have 100,000 people, and four people are going to get heart disease. Then you give a statin, and now only two do. They’re going to say, “Oh my God! We have a 50 percent reduction in your risk for heart disease.”

I took that a little bit out of proportion by using 100,000, but it’s still a 50 percent relative risk—but your overall risk to begin with was negligible! It’s stupid science. It’s literally foolish, idiotic science... The absolute risk is not changed much at all, but relative risk is changed.

… What they also don’t tell you is that while you might actually save somebody from a heart attack out of those thousands of people you have to treat, there’s someone on the other end who gets toxicity, or maybe Alzheimer’s disease, or maybe some other condition, from taking the drug.

The overall morbidity and mortality is unchanged.

All that drug companies and the FDA are looking for is what symptom or lab level you are suppressing. They’re not looking at it for long-term outcomes. That’s absolute failing of the American medical system, where all that you’re doing is measuring to suppress a symptom or a lab value like cholesterol, and you are not looking at what happens to these people 10 or 15 years later, which is identical to the vaccine problem.”

When Might a Statin Drug Be Advisable?

Contrary to conventional advice, very few people actually need a statin drug. Familial hypercholesterolemia is a genetic defect that can result in cholesterol levels above 330, and these people may indeed benefit from a statin drug.

“Yes, I do think that controlling the total cholesterol would be a benefit for those people,” Dr. Rowen says. “They’re few and far between, but they exist. But I would go with red yeast rice first, before I would [prescribe a] statin… because it has naturally-occurring Lovastatin in it – Mevacor. I would rather use that because it’s a whole food. There are pretty good studies out there showing that whole red yeast rice not only helps protect you from that [high cholesterol], but animals also live longer when they’re on it. Being a whole food, there may be a big advantage to it.

Always – whether you’re using red yeast rice or a statin drug – be sure to take Coenzyme Q10 or ubiquinol, because the same enzyme that makes the cholesterol also participates with CoQ10 production.

… If their total cholesterol is over 300 or 330, I would consider the use of red yeast rice or a statin. That’s the only time I would consider it. Other than that, I would look for ways to reduce the potential impact of toxic cholesterol metabolism… What I try to do first with my patients is to get them to clean up their lifestyle, so that what they’re doing in their life will not have toxic effects on their apparently elevated cholesterol. I’m saying “apparently elevated” because I don’t believe that God makes mistakes.

If you walk into me with a cholesterol of 240, I think that your body has that level for a reason. Maybe, just maybe, your body is crying for more vitamin D. It’s asking your liver to make more cholesterol so that it can convert [vitamin D], or maybe your body wants more testosterone or another steroid hormone, so it’s calling for more raw material.

I don’t know how much I want to interrupt those processes with sledgehammers like statins. I would prefer to get your body not to oxidize the cholesterol by eliminating processed, refined foods. My mantra is “No fast, fried, refined, or processed foods.” That’s first on the list. Keep your diet 70 to 80 percent raw living food, and what you do with the rest – I don’t care if you want to eat meat, chicken, fish, and eggs… just don’t fry it. Eat all the meat you want within that 30 percent. The rest of it, try to keep it organic, not genetically engineered, unprocessed, and raw, so you’re not destroying the fatty acids.

I personally believe that I have found the underlying cause of heart disease or the principal cause of heart disease in this country. That’s the fact that we are heating these essential fatty acids, these unsaturated fatty acids. We’re oxidizing them, and we’re taking them right into our body already rancid. I think that is one of the primary causes.”

Markers for Heart Disease

Dr. Rowen does not treat total cholesterol levels, and neither do I. Rather, we look at the ratios between so-called good and bad cholesterol—the HDL and LDL—as well as your triglycerides. These are far more potent markers for heart disease. I have seen a number of people with total cholesterol levels over 250 who actually were at low heart disease risk due to their HDL levels. Conversely, I have seen even more who had cholesterol levels under 200 that were at a very high risk of heart disease based on the following additional tests:

  • HDL/Cholesterol ratio: Divide your HDL level by your total cholesterol. This percentage should ideally be above 24 percent
  • Triglyceride/HDL ratio: Divide your triglycerides by your HDL level. This percentage should be below 2

In my experience, high triglycerides specifically, and elevated cholesterol in general, is typically related to excessive consumption of grains and sugars. A high-fructose, high grain-carb diet contributes to insulin resistance, which will cause your liver to produce more cholesterol and more inflammatory LDL particles, raise your triglycerides, and increase your risk of metabolic syndrome.

Other heart disease markers Dr. Rowen recommends paying close attention to include:

  • Ferritin levels, because iron participates in the oxidation of cholesterol
  • Homocysteine levels, which can show potential deficiencies in crucial B vitamins
  • Lipoprotein A (LPA), as it affects your blood coagulation
  • 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels, and
  • Blood viscosity

On Blood Viscosity and Heart Disease

Blood viscosity refers to the thickness of your blood. The thicker your blood is, the more pressure is needed to move it throughout your body—hence your blood pressure increases.

“That pressure and that thickness is going to cause sheer on the endothelial cells where blood vessels bifurcate, where your artery splits into two arteries,” he explains.

A blood viscosity test will tell you how thick your blood is. It’s not commonly used, but there are a few labs that perform it, such as Meridian Valley Lab in Washington. If your blood viscosity is high, it’s recommended that you donate blood, as this will reduce it. Donating your blood will also reduce your ferritin (iron) levels.  Certain nutritional supplements may also be helpful, such as vitamin E.

“You can use the already high-quality tocopherol supplements,” Dr. Rowen says. “I would get mixed tocopherols with alpha and gamma, and not the delta… I also like tocotrienols, which might be a more active form.”

As for whole foods, nuts and seeds are great sources of vitamin E, as well as essential fats, combined with natural antioxidants that protect their oils from rancidity. I personally eat about four ounces of raw organic almonds every day.

Another strategy that can help reduce blood viscosity is Earthing or grounding—the act of walking barefoot on the earth. The theory is that when you walk barefoot on the earth, it allows for the transfer of free electrons from the earth into your body, via the soles of your feet. It mediates inflammation in your body by improving the zeta potential—the pulse capacity of your red blood cells—which also helps reduce blood viscosity.

If You’re on a Statin Drug, You MUST Take CoQ10

One in four Americans over the age of 45 are currently taking a statin drug. Unfortunately, few are aware of the need to take coenzyme Q10, or the reduced form, ubiquinol, along with it, to buffer against some of the most devastating side effects of the drug. Dr. Rowen also recommends taking it if you’re using red yeast rice.

The reason CoQ10 supplementation is so important is because statins blocks the CoQ10 pathway, causing it to be depleted. CoQ10 is vital for cellular energy production—without it your cells simply cannot function. As your body gets more and more depleted of CoQ10, you may suffer from fatigue, muscle weakness and soreness, and eventually heart failure. Coenzyme Q10 is also very important in the process of neutralizing free radicals.

As a general guideline, if you’re on a statin drug, you need to take at least 100-200 mg of ubiquinol or CoQ10 per day. If you already have symptoms of statin damage, such as muscle pain, take anywhere from 200 to 500 mg a day. There are no reported side effects of CoQ10 supplementation.

Tips for Optimizing Your Cholesterol Without Drugs

Your body NEEDS cholesterol—it’s important in the production of cell membranes, hormones, vitamin D and bile acids that help you to digest fat. Cholesterol also helps your brain form memories and is vital to your neurological function.

“Please don’t live in fear of your raw cholesterol number,” Dr. Rowen says. “Unless it’s around 300 or higher, I don’t believe that it’s going to be indicative [of heart disease risk].”

The goal of the guidelines below is not to loweryour cholesterol as low as it can go, but rather to optimize your levels so they’re working in the proper balance with your body. Seventy-five percent of your cholesterol is produced by your liver, which is influenced by your insulin levels. Therefore, if you optimize your insulin level, you will automatically optimize your cholesterol. This is why my primary recommendations for safely regulating your cholesterol have to do with modifying your diet and lifestyle as follows:

  • Reduce, with the plan of eliminating, grains and sugars in your diet. It is especially important to eliminate dangerous sugars such as fructose.
  • Consume a good portion of your food raw.
  • Make sure you are getting plenty of high quality, animal-based omega 3 fats, such as krill oil. New research suggests that as little as 500 mg of krill per day may lower your total cholesterol and triglycerides and will likely increase your HDL cholesterol.
  • Replace harmful vegetable oils and trans fats with healthful fats, such as olive oil and  coconut oil (remember olive oil should be used cold only. Use coconut oil for cooking and baking)
  • Include fermented foods in your daily diet. This will not only optimize your intestinal microflora, which will boost your overall immunity, it will also introduce beneficial bacteria into your mouth. Poor oral health is another indicator of increased heart disease risk.
  • Optimize your vitamin D levels, ideally through appropriate sun exposure as this will allow your body to also create vitamin D sulfate—another factor that may play a crucial role in preventing the formation of arterial plaque.
  • Exercise regularly. Make sure you incorporate high intensity interval exercises, which also optimize your human growth hormone (HGH) production.
  • Avoid smoking or drinking alcohol excessively.
  • Be sure to get plenty of high-quality, restorative sleep.

Final Thoughts

“The simplest thing you can do, and the most powerful, is to clean up your diet first,” Dr. Rowen says. “Eat more raw, uncooked, living foods organic, grown around you, ripe when in season – ancient Chinese wisdom…

Get exercise. Exercise can overcome – I’m not going to say anything – but a lot. We know that people have eaten toxic diets for years, including a lot of cooked foods. When they get exercise, it can overcome a lot of that. These are things that cost absolutely nothing for you to do. I like your concept of eating fermented foods, keeping your mouth clean. The so-called antioxidants, particularly vitamin E or the natural vitamin E’s, are good. Especially if you can get it in your food, these don’t cost anything.

I assure you that in most cases, if you start doing these things, you’ll see that your cholesterol drops. Mine is 175. My triglycerides are 100 or less. I use triglycerides as a marker, because the higher that is, it tells me the more refined carbohydrates you’re eating. The more refined carbohydrates you’re eating, the more insulin you’re going to have. The more insulin you have, the bigger your belly… [I]nsulin drives all those carbohydrates into fat, which generates inflammation (which is the same inflammation that might come out of your mouth).

These are the things that you can do that don’t cost a penny, and can alter your health dramatically.”

Lies about GMO Foods

The Lies You’ve Been Told…

Exposure to genetically modified foods and companion pesticides has been linked to a number of health risks including infertility, neurological disorders, birth defects and cancer. Yet despite all the evidence, the collusion between industry and our political leadership and various regulatory agencies has created a system in which industry interests win at every turn. Until or unless enough Americans recognize this, and not only demand change, but also actually change their own habits, the system will continue unabated.

The first challenge is to realize that you’ve been lied to. The entire model of genetically engineered crops as a not only viable but preferable food source is based on a series of lies and misconceptions that have enriched a select few at the expense of everyone else. These myths include:

  • Genetically engineered foods are equivalent to conventional foods.This is simply not true, as no conventional food in the history of mankind has ever been able to splice bacteria, viruses or genetic material from unrelated species into itself. For thousands of years, farmers have selected and saved the best seeds, which has led to improved varieties. But never have they been able to cross a plant with an animal, for example. Nature does not allow this sort of trans-genetic transfer.

    Gene splicing is an imprecise and unpredictable science, and the potential hazards are enormous. The primary motive behind genetically engineered crops is the ability to patent it and claim ownership of it in perpetuity. And the concept of patenting crops and other foods tells you the truth about whether or not they’re really equivalent to conventional foods—you cannot get a patent on something that is too similar to something already in existence.

  • Genetically engineered crops were created for an altruistic purpose; to save a starving world from hunger by increasing yield.Even the statistics from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) demonstrate that this is a promise that cannot be fulfilled. Genetically engineered crops do not produce higher yields. In fact, numerous studies have shown that their yield is lower than that of conventional or organic yields. There are literally hundreds of studies in the developing world demonstrating that organic farming, specifically, outproduces chemical farming and genetically engineered crops by a factor of anywhere between 10-100 to 1.

    Genetically engineering food crops is but a tactic to starve the world into submission. And, it guarantees outrageous profits for perpetuity as farmers world-wide must depend on giant transnational corporations in order to eat, and there’s nothing altruistic about that.

  • Genetically engineered foods are more nutritious.No patented GE crop has ever made the commercial claim to be more nutritious, so this idea was popularized without any factual support whatsoever. Agricultural scientist are, however, warning that genetically engineered crops are nutritionally inferior to both organics and conventionally-grown crops.

From Dr. Joseph Mercola

Some U.S. foods banned worldwide

U.S. Foods Widely Banned from Other Countries

The presence of undisclosed genetically altered ingredients is not the only problem with the US food supply, although it may be one of the most serious. Americans have a long history of trusting government and health officials, and many are now awakening to the disturbing truth that their trust has been sorely misplaced.

If you’re wondering how safe your food really is in the U.S., and whether state and federal regulations truly protect you from consuming hazardous materials, you might want to take a look outside the U.S. to see what other countries think of our foodsiii. What you’ll find is that more and more U.S. foods are being outright banned from other countries. Most recently, Indonesia became the first country to ban imports of U.S. beef after discovering an American dairy cow infected with mad cow disease. According to Rusman Heriawan, Indonesia’s vice agriculture minister, the ban will remain in place until the case has been resolved.

Taiwan had already begun refusing various U.S. meat products, including pork and beef, because they contain a growth-promoting drug, ractopamine, which is banned in 160 countries. The drug comes with the warning “not for use in humans,” and it’s handled like hazardous waste, yet it’s permitted for use in food in America. Other countries all over the world, from the European Union to Saudi Arabia to South America, have also banned foods or food ingredients that typically are allowed in the U.S., such as genetically engineered seeds and plants.

From Dr. Joseph Mercola

Problems with Floride

This is an article by Dr. Mercola detailing his concerns with the floridation of drinking water.

 

By Dr. Mercola

The largest state legislature in the U.S. recently passed a bill mandating infant fluoride warnings on all water bills in fluoridated communities. On March 15, the New Hampshire House of Representatives voted 253-23 in favor of the bill.

Thanks to a 13-2 recommendation from the House Resources, Recreation, and Development committee, there was no debate over the bill on the House floor. The bill will now go to the Senate. According to the text of the bil. the warning would read:

"Your public water supply is fluoridated. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, if your child under the age of 6 months is exclusively consuming infant formula reconstituted with fluoridated water, there may be an increased chance of dental fluorosis. Consult your child's health care provider for more information."

Why Infants Should Not Drink Fluoridated Water

Two years ago, a study published in the Journal of the American Dental Association found that fluoride intake during a child's first few years of life is significantly associated with fluorosis, and warned against using fluoridated water in infant formulaii.

Dental fluorosis – a condition in which your tooth enamel becomes progressively discolored and mottled – is one of the first signs of over-exposure to fluoride. Eventually, it can result in badly damaged teeth, and worse… It's important to realize that dental fluorosis is NOT "just cosmetic."

It can also be an indication that the rest of your body, such as your bones and internal organs, including your brain, have been overexposed to fluoride as well. In other words, if fluoride is having a visually detrimental effect on the surface of your teeth, you can be virtually guaranteed that it's also damaging other parts of your body, such as your bones. After all, bone is living tissue that is constantly being replaced through cellular turnover.

Bone building is a finely balanced, complicated process and fluoride has been known to disrupt this process ever since the 1930s.

While generally supportive of water fluoridation, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) does admit that using fluoridated water to mix infant formula may not be in the best interest of your baby's developing teeth. According to their websiteiii:

"Recent evidence suggests that mixing powdered or liquid infant formula concentrate with fluoridated water on a regular basis may increase the chance of a child developing … enamel fluorosis."

The CDC also states:

"In children younger than 8 years of age, combined fluoride exposure from all sources – water, food, toothpaste, mouth rinse, or other products – contributes to enamel fluorosis."

The lack of formal and easy-to-find warnings about the hazard of using fluoridated water to make infant formula has, and continues to be, a major source of contention. New Hampshire will set a marvelous example for other states if their bill mandating infant fluoride warnings on water bills in fluoridated communities is enacted.

Shifting the Burden of Proof

In writing this article, I was in contact with Jeff Green, National Director of Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, who kindly shared a couple of other success stories with me. A repeated theme in some of the recent cases where communities successfully removed fluoride from their water supply is the shifting of the burden of proof. Rather than citizens taking on the burden of proving that fluoride is harmful and shouldn't be added, a more successful strategy has been to hold those making claims accountable for delivering proof that the specific fluoridation chemical being used fulfills their health and safety claims, and is in compliance with all regulations, laws, and risk assessments already required for safe drinking water.

"It's important to accentuate that these strategic actions focused on the accountability for the actions surrounding the selection and use of the specific substance, rather than just opposition to the public policy where supporters routinely find cover for their actions," Green says.

The word 'Champion' may elicit reverie-like thoughts of a bygone era, but Champions—while rare—can still be found today. A true Champion can be defined as a person in a position of some authority who can reasonably make a probing request, and, most importantly, has the authority to declare that a distorted response—one that does not answer questions directly, or a non-response, simply isn't good enough.

Frank Mora, previous Chairman of a joimt water board in the State of New York, is one example of such a Champion. While neither 'easy' nor 'fast,' Mora's dedication to the ethics of stewardship eventually led to the discontinuation of the addition of fluoride to their water supply in October 2009. The water board, who originally supported the public policy of fluoridation based on endorsements, rejected the use of the hydrofluosilicic acid fluoridation chemical without taking any stance on whether or not it might do harm… Rather the rejection was based on the Board's inability to confirm the compliance of the product with already established laws and regulations for safe drinking water.

Ironically, water fluoridation continued for about a month after the Board made their decision. The reason for this was because the hydrofluosilicic acid they still had on hand would have to have been disposed of as hazardous waste. The cost of proper disposal was considered excessive, so they used up their last reserves before discontinuing it. It's rather amazing to consider that the hazardous waste facility was more committed to identifying the contents and contaminants of the product before they would accept it for treatment than water departments are before adding it to our drinking water!

Endorsements Versus Due Diligence…

A town in Tennessee also found a Champion in its Mayor Robinson, and the town, while keeping its resolution to fluoridate intact, unanimously ended its use of its chosen hydrofluosilicic acid fluoridation substance a couple of years ago, and as of yet have not found a product that is compliant. According to a press release dated June 10, 2011:

"The shift was to a process of sequentially challenging various authorities to dig deeper into the factual basis for endorsements and assurances, and to provide specific documents.

… The Town exchanged letters with the Tennessee Municipal League Risk Management Pool (TML) explaining the Town's inability to extract information on the content and impurities of the product, the refusal of the chemical supplier to provide specific documents required for compliance with law, and evidence that contaminants such as lead and arsenic are admittedly a part of the product. This resulted in TML's lawyerly response that they wouldn't be able to answer with any certainty what liability coverage the Town could count on until TML received a claim.

Not good enough.

"A point that had to be considered," said Robinson, "is that all of these endorsements, and even assurances and guidance from health agencies, doesn't alter the fact that we as the water operator are the only ones that can select and ultimately be responsible for the benefits or harm from consumption of the product. So while it might be nice to take potshots from the sideline, or to repeat the assurances from someone who has no accountability, if we are going to take our role as stewards of the water supply seriously, we don't get to substitute endorsements for due diligence."

What You Might Find if a Champion Performs Due Diligence

Mayor Robinson makes an excellent point, which is that the stewards of the water supply cannot simply substitute endorsements of safety, effectiveness, and regulatory compliance for the public policy, for due diligence on the actual product used. Questions must be asked, and answers must be provided. Ditto for proof in terms of documentation. If it's all on the up-and-up, this should be a fairly straight-forward process. However, those who have taken on the task of performing due diligence on the actual fluoridation chemical have been surprised by the lack of responsiveness and clarity from the very sources of the safety claims. In addition, in the case of the joint water board in New York, they couldn't even get a single straight answer from the chemical manufacturer about their own product.

This isn't surprising when you consider that there's virtually no evidence supporting the safety or effectiveness of the fluoridation chemical used.

"I don't believe we would have known how to navigate through this process without guidance from someone who is fully informed of all of the regulations that should be considered in our decision-making, as even though we are in the business of delivering water, we were not aware of all of the factors, which were not divulged by the sources we usually rely upon," stated Robinson.

First of all, swallowing fluoride provides little or no benefit to your teeth. It works topically, and not particularly effectively at that. According to the findings of a groundbreaking 2010 study published in the journal Langmuiriv, the benefits of even topical application of fluoride are highly questionable. The study discovered that the fluorapatite layer formed on your teeth when you apply fluoride is a mere six nanometers thick. To put that into perspective, you need 10,000 of these layers to get the width of a strand of your hair! Scientists now question whether this ultra-thin layer can actually protect your enamel and provide any discernible benefit, considering the fact that simple chewing will quickly eliminate it.

Secondly, swallowing fluoride exposes every tissue in your body to both a drug and a toxic substance.

There is pharmaceutical-grade fluoride, which is used in certain drugs, and adding it to the public water supply equates to forcing a medication on the entire population, without regard for dose or frequency. However, pharmaceutical grade fluoride is not typically what's added to water supplies… No, the fluoride added to municipal water supplies is the toxic byproduct from the fertilizer industry—a rarely-discussed fact that effectively nullifies most if not all studies pertaining to fluoride—they simply have not studied the correct type of fluoride being added to our water.

Another eye-opening fact is that a pea-sized dollop of fluoridated toothpaste contains about the same amount of fluoride as a large glass of water. The difference is that if you swallow more than a pea-sized amount of toothpaste, you're instructed to immediately contact Poison Control, while there are no warnings issued for fluoridated water, even though there's no way to control the dose any given person will receive on any given day or throughout their lifetime.

Often Overlooked

Advisory from Jeff Green: One element to be addressed is that many of us who are first exposed to issues such as this enter into a world of anger at injustice, where we see the problem so passionately and so clearly that we carry the burden of proof and are in a hurry to tell others to set it right, viewing anyone who does not immediately agree with our view as opposition that must be overwhelmed with facts and a list of "shoulds."

In this state we look angry, and are easily characterized as a zealot, probably because we are. Asking someone without our passion to join us may not be that inviting.

Should we expect that this would be any different when speaking to authorities and asking them to act?

If you are able to suspend your anger at injustice, able to switch your focus from stating the problem to addressing solutions, there are avenues available.

If you would like to elevate your discussions from the argumentative "he said, she said" to letting the facts declare themselves, and you are in a position of authority from which you can champion the performance of due diligence, contact us for access to guidance and further information.

If you are capable of being an advocate of safe drinking water and would like to assist in identifying a champion for due diligence in your community, contact us for approaches and further information.

 Contact Us

10 Facts About Water Fluoridation Everyone Should Know

  1. Bottle-fed infants receive the highest doses of fluoride as they rely solely on liquids for food, combined with their small size. A baby being fed formula receives approximately 175 times more fluoride than a breast-fed infant
  2. There is not a single process in your body that requires fluoride
  3. A multi-million dollar U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) -funded study found no relation between tooth decay and the amount of fluoride ingested by children
  4. Water fluoridation cannot prevent the oral health crises that results from inadequate nutrition and lack of access to dental care
  5. Water fluoridation is a violation of your individual right to informed consent to medication
  6. Forty-one percent of all American children aged 12-15 are now impacted by dental fluorosis, rising to more than sixty percent of children in fluoridated communities
  7. The chemicals used to fluoridate water supplies are largely hazardous by-products of the fertilizer industry and have never been required to undergo randomized clinical trials for safety or effectiveness by any regulatory agency in the world
  8. The U.S. FDA classifies ingested fluoride for purposes of reducing tooth decay as an "unapproved drug"
  9. Ingesting fluoride has been found to damage soft tissues (brain, kidneys, and endocrine system), as well as teeth (dental fluorosis) and bones (skeletal fluorosis). There are also 24 studies demonstrating a strong relationship between fairly modest exposure to fluoride and reduced IQ in children
  10. Fluoridation discriminates against those with low incomes. People on low incomes are least able to afford avoidance measures, such as reverse osmosis filters or bottled water