Rather Be Healthy

Are researchers hiding the truth on breast cancer treatment?

Breast cancer. Those words have the ability to send a chill up your spine unlike any other two words in the English language.

It’s rare to meet a person whose life hasn’t been touched in some way by this terrible disease. According to the American Cancer Society, one out of every eight American women will face the frightening news of a breast cancer diagnosis at some point in their lives.

When women are diagnosed with breast cancer, one of the first questions out of their mouths tends to be, “When do I start chemotherapy?”

And, believe me, I get it. Chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery have been heralded by drug companies and the physicians who worship at the altar of Big Pharma as some of the greatest medical breakthroughs of the past century.

Well, you’re going to want to sit down for what I tell you next.

According to a new study in the Annals of Oncology, dozens of breast cancer researchers have engaged in a pattern of obvious — and presumably intentional — deceit as they reported their research findings.

In plain English, they lied. On purpose.

A research team headed by a leading scientist from the Ontario Cancer Institute found that medical journals are reporting inaccurate — or at least incomplete — information, as breast cancer researchers hide key facts.

“Investigators want to go overboard to make their studies look positive,” Ian Tannock, a senior author of the study, told Reuters in a brave and candid admission that surely will not win him any fans among his peers.

Tannock and his team reviewed 164 breast cancer studies and found that in a staggering two-thirds of cases, researchers failed to include any — that’s right, any — information about the serious side effects of chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery in their abstract summaries. A full one-fifth of studies omitted information about significant side effects from their results tables.

Why are these omissions so important? Because researchers know that most busy doctors only read the abstracts of studies — and those who read beyond the abstracts often skip right to the results tables. There was a fairly blatant attempt to ensure the typical reader wouldn’t catch on to the harmful cancer treatment side effects that researchers uncovered during their work.

Despicable, right? Criminal even? It gets worse.

Tannock said that what surprised him most was that in a third of the studies he and his colleagues reviewed, if researchers did not get the results they hoped for, they simply changed their goals. They reported results that were, in many cases, completely different from what the studies were designed to test.

Why would research scientists engage in such shady dealings? The answer is as simple as it is predictable — they did it for money and influence. And plenty of both.

It’s no secret, Tannock said, that researchers “gain more influence with positive studies.” And in an industry where researchers are constantly hunting for tenured jobs, publication credits, or the next big grant, influence is everything.

Influence with Big Pharma and their deep research pockets is what many scientists are after. Researchers conducting studies sponsored by drug companies often feel tremendous pressure to report positive results.

I know that deciding on a course of cancer treatment is difficult and deeply personal. These are decisions that I hope you never have to make.

But before your doctor recommends chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery, you deserve — at the very least — a full accounting of the risks. And you need to know that there appears to have been an effort to hide this information from the very people providing your care.

There are alternative and safe breast cancer treatments like iodine, which kills breast cancer cells while leaving normal cells intact. And if you are enduring chemotherapy, take a moment to visit Dr. Wright’s website at www.wrightnewsletter.com and search “chemotherapy” for a wealth of advice on simple things you can talk to your doctor about doing — such as taking herbal supplements or fish oil — to feel better quickly.

There are many simple, natural products that can help with breast cancer treatment side effects — side effects that, sadly, some researchers hoped you’d never learn about.

Yours in good health,

Bob Reagan

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

Ambien, Edluar, Zolpimist and other drugs that contain the active ingredient zolpidem are the most widely used sleeping pills in the United States. In 2011 alone, an estimated 40 million prescriptions for such drugs were dispensed.1

These drugs have long been linked to “next-morning impairment,” as some of the drugs effects still linger in the morning, making driving or operating heavy equipment dangerous.

Now new research submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has made it clear how significant this risk actually is, and the FDA is requiring drug makers to cut the current recommended doses nearly in half as a result.

FDA Requires Lower Doses for Sleeping Pills

According to a press release from the FDA, the recommended dosage of zolpidem for women, who appear more susceptible to its effects than men, should be lowered from 10 milligrams (mg) to 5 mg for immediate-release products (Ambien, Edluar, and Zolpimist) and from 12.5 mg to 6.25 mg for extended-release products (Ambien CR).2

For men, the FDA has “informed the manufacturers that the labeling should recommend that health care professionals consider prescribing these lower doses (5 mg for immediate-release products and 6.25 mg for extended-release products).”

Ellis Unger, M.D., director, Office of Drug Evaluation I in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said:3

“To decrease the potential risk of impairment with all insomnia drugs, health care professionals should prescribe, and patients should take, the lowest dose capable of treating the patient’s insomnia. Patients who must drive in the morning or perform some other activity requiring full alertness should talk to their health care professional about whether their sleep medicine is appropriate.”

New Data Shows Sleeping Pills May Increase Your Risk of a Car Accident the Next Day

The new requirements came after studies recently submitted to the FDA revealed that blood levels of zolpidem above 50 ng/mL may impair driving to a degree that increases the risk of an accident. The studies showed:4
•After taking 10 mg of Ambien (or other zolpidem-containing drugs), about 15 percent of women and 3 percent of men had zolpidem concentrations in excess of 50 ng/mL eight hours later
•Three cases in women and one in a man showed levels in over 90 ng/mL 8 hours after use
•For extended-release drugs taken at doses of 12.5 mg, about 33 percent of women and 25 percent of men had zolpidem concentrations in excess of 50 ng/mL eight hours later; 5 percent of patients had levels over 100 ng/mL
•For extended-release drugs taken at doses of 6.25 mg, 15 percent of women and 5 percent of men had zolpidem levels over 50 ng/mL; among elderly men and women, 10 percent had such levels

It’s noted, too, that any insomnia drug has the potential to make you feel drowsy or impair your driving the next day – even if you feel fully alert. The FDA reported:5

“FDA is also reminding the public that all drugs taken for insomnia can impair driving and activities that require alertness the morning after use. Drowsiness is already listed as a common side effect in the drug labels of all insomnia drugs, along with warnings that patients may still feel drowsy the day after taking these products. Patients who take insomnia drugs can experience impairment of mental alertness the morning after use, even if they feel fully awake.”

Sleeping Pills Increase Your Risk of Death, Cancer

Driving while you’re still under the effects of a sleeping pill (and don’t know it) can quickly be deadly, but these drugs appear to increase your risk of death even independent of this.

Research involving data from more than 10,500 people who received sleeping pills (hypnotics) showed that “as predicted, patients prescribed any hypnotic had substantially elevated hazards of dying compared to those prescribed no hypnotics” and the association held true even when patients with poor health were taken into account – and even if the patients took fewer than 18 pills in a year.6 The study suggested that those who take such medications are not only at higher risk for certain cancers, but are nearly four times more likely to die than people who don’t take them.

Sleeping pills linked to these risks included benzodiazepines (such as temazepam), non-benzodiazepines (such as Ambien, Lunesta, and Sonata), barbiturates, and sedative antihistamines.

Treating sleeping troubles with drugs is a risky bet, too, because they are notorious for being addictive, which means that once you want to stop taking them, you’ll likely suffer withdrawal symptoms that could be worse than the initial insomnia. Some, including Ambien, may also become less effective when taken for longer than two weeks. Ambien may also make you want to eat while you’re asleep – and the sleep eating can include bizarre foods such as buttered cigarettes, salt sandwiches and raw bacon. Other bizarre side effects reported from various sleeping pills include:
•Sleep walking and even sleep driving
•Hallucinations
•Confusion and disorientation
•Complete amnesia from events, even those that took place during the day
•Depression

Bizarre occurrences related to sleeping pills have become so common, the American Academy of Forensic Sciences has held a presentation on the odd effects of Ambien impairment on the body. Ambien-related accidents tend to stand out from other traffic accidents in that patients typically slam into parked cars or light poles or drive in the wrong direction.

Is it Worth the Risk to Sleep for 11 More Minutes?

An analysis of studies financed by the National Institutes of Health found that sleeping pills like Ambien, Lunesta and Sonata reduced the average time to go to sleep by just under 13 minutes compared with fake pills, while increasing total sleep time by just over 11 minutes – but, the participants believed they had slept longer, by up to one hour, when taking the pills.7 When people wake up after taking sleeping pills, they may, in fact, simply forget that they had been unable to sleep!

But unlike getting a restful night’s sleep, which will leave you alert and refreshed, getting slightly more sleep (or what you think is more sleep) by taking a sleeping pill is not the same thing. Author and sleeping pill researcher Dr. Daniel Kripke reports that sleeping pills make your brain less active, and, as the FDA recently realized, that depressed activity doesn’t typically simply vanish when the sun comes up. He noted that:8

“…almost all sleeping pills produce immediate impairments in memory and performance. Further there is extensive evidence that sleeping pills on average impair performance and memory on the following day.”

What’s REALLY Keeping You Awake?

As explained by sleep expert Dr. Rubin Naiman in a previous interview, insomnia is the most commonly reported sleep disorder. To understand why insomnia occurs, you need to understand that sleep is the outcome of an interaction between two variables: sleepiness, and what Dr. Naiman refers to as “noise.”

Ideally and under normal conditions, your sleepiness should gradually increase throughout the day, peaking just before you go to bed at night. In order to get a good night’s sleep, you want your sleepiness level to be high, and the noise level to be low. More often than not, the reason why people can’t fall asleep is not because of lack of sleepiness, but rather because of excessive noise. If “noise” is conceptually greater than your level of sleepiness, you will not fall asleep. “Noise” can be any kind of stimulation that inhibits or disrupts sleep, and is generally classified into three zones:
1.Mind – The most common type is referred to as “cognitive popcorn” – unstoppable thoughts running through your mind at night.
2.Body – Such as physical pain, discomfort, indigestion, side effects from prescription drugs, or residual caffeine from drinking coffee too late in the day.
3.Environmental – Environmental noise is usually obvious, such as noises in your room or house, a snoring partner, music, lights, or a bedroom that’s too warm.

To help you get to sleep, you need to find out where your “noise” is coming from. If it’s in your mind, try using the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT), which can help you address any emotional issues that might keep you tossing and turning at night.

If it’s environmental, take steps to remedy the problem, such as making your bedroom cooler (the ideal temperature to promote sound sleep is actually quite cool – between 60 to 68 degrees F (15.5 to 20 C)) or darker. Many fail to consider, for instance, that the use of lights, such as your TV, iPad, and computer, before going to bed can significantly interfere with your sleep. These emit the type of blue light that will suppress melatonin production and hamper your ability to fall asleep. Ideally, you’ll want to turn them off at least an hour prior to bedtime.

For use in the evening, you can purchase “low blue lights,” which emit an amber light instead of the blue that suppresses melatonin production. Therefore, these bulbs are ideal for areas such as your bedroom, bathroom, or living room in the evening. Dr. Naiman actually takes a small amount of melatonin each night even though he does not have any sleep problems because – like most people living in developed countries – he believes he’s overexposed to light at night, which contributes to melatonin deficiency.

Tips for Getting to Sleep Naturally

If you’re having even slight trouble sleeping, I suggest you review my 33 Secrets to a Good Night’s Sleep for helpful guidance on how to get restful sleep. For example:
1.Cover your windows with blackout shades or drapes to ensure complete darkness. Even the tiniest bit of light in the room can disrupt your internal clock and your pineal gland’s production of melatonin and serotonin. (Even the faint glow from your clock radio could be interfering with your sleep.)

Also close your bedroom door, get rid of night-lights, and refrain from turning on any light during the night, even when getting up to go to the bathroom.
2.Keep the temperature in your bedroom at or below 70 degrees F (21 degrees Celsius). Many people keep their homes and particularly their upstairs bedrooms too warm. When you sleep, your body’s internal temperature drops to its lowest level, generally about four hours after you fall asleep. Scientists believe a cooler bedroom may therefore be most conducive to sleep, since it mimics your body’s natural temperature drop.
3.Check your bedroom for electro-magnetic fields (EMFs). These can disrupt your pineal gland and the production of melatonin and serotonin, and may have other negative effects as well.

To do this, you need a gauss meter. You can find various models online, starting around $50 to $200. Some experts even recommend pulling your circuit breaker before bed to kill all power in your house. Move alarm clocks and other electrical devices away from your head. If these devices must be used, keep them as far away from your bed as possible, preferably at least 3 feet.

If you’ve made the necessary changes to your sleep routine and find you’re still having trouble sleeping, a high-quality melatonin supplement may be helpful and far less damaging than sleeping pills. The amount of melatonin you create and release every night varies depending on your age. Children usually have much higher levels of melatonin than adults, and as you grow older your levels typically continue to decrease.

Researchers believe this may explain why many older adults occasionally experience disrupted sleep patterns. With less melatonin in their blood, the stimulus to fall asleep, stay asleep, and wake feeling rested can potentially be compromised, which is why some older adults may benefit from extra melatonin – likewise if you perform night shift work, travel often and experience jet lag, or otherwise suffer from occasional sleeplessness due to stress or unexplained reasons.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

Crabtree & Evelyn Launches Spring Gift Collection

Hello,

Hope you are well!

The Spring Gift Collection is now available to buy online at Crabtree & Evelyn!

We have collaborated with Central Saint Martin’s College of Arts and Design to create an exclusive print for Hand & Body Spring Limited Edition Gift Collection where you can find the perfect gift for your loved one on Valentine’s Day.

Code:
http://www.awin1.com/cread.php?awinmid=2367&awinaffid=164818&clickref=&p=http://www.crabtree-evelyn.co.uk/collections/spring-gift
We also have another offer for you to promote – when you spend over £25 you receive a FREE tote bag.

You need to enter the code BAG in the checkout* and this offer will be valid while stocks last.

*only one bag per order and only on full price items.

Five Strategies for a Healthier Gut in 2013

By Jeff Leach

In the summer of 2008, a 26-year-old man from Shanxi Province walked into a lab at Shanghai Jiao Tong University, and 23 weeks later walked out 113 pounds lighter.

He had not participated in a clinical trial of some new secret weight loss pill, or signed up for a punishing Biggest Loser-style exercise program, nor had he been fussed over by behavioral scientists who made his plates and drinking cups smaller with each passing week.

The researchers, who were microbiologists, had simply put the man’s gut microbes on a diet.

One of the huge mysteries in studies of diet and exercise is the difference between people who get the same treatment but have remarkably different outcomes. Inevitably, some people in a study show little improvement despite weeks or even months of following what might seem like draconian changes in their normal diet and lifestyle.

Other people apparently drop weight just by getting out of bed in the morning, and also improve their circulating triglycerides, total cholesterol, and biomarkers of inflammation with apparent ease. We all know someone like this in our daily life.

But why are there such extreme differences between people?

Is your DNA to blame?

Our human genes may be involved in some cases but we generally share more than 99 percent genetic similarity with other people; more interestingly, the huge differences in peoples weight gain/loss may be driven more by the different bacteria in our intestines, which can be more than 90 percent different between one person and the next.

In addition to the familiar human genome that we inherit from our moms and dads, each of us also has hundreds of trillions of microbial symbionts, each with their own genomes. Research programs such as the Human Microbiome Project1 have revolutionized our understanding of our microbial bodies, which outnumber our human cells 10 to one, and account for more than two pounds of your body weight. We know microbes in your gut can change profoundly throughout life, and that you can change them through diet, medications, and hygiene, for example.

We also know that how you enter this world – C-section versus vaginal birth – can impact your initial “seeding” of microbes,2 which further change during breast- or formula-feeding, and what you eat later in life also affects your gut microbes and even how healthy you are as a senior citizen.3 We know that people in more traditional societies have different microbes than those in more Westernized populations,4 and that diet can play a role in these differences. You can also change the health prospects of a mouse overnight by changing its diet and thus its microbes.

The American Gut Project Seeks Valuable Answers

Advances in bioinformatics (fancy word for data analysis) and refinements of DNA techniques – not to mention a significant increase in computing power – is changing everything. The evidence that life events and diet can shape our gut microbes is increasing, but which direction should we nudge them? What is a healthy or optimal mix of gut microbes?

The honest answer is nobody knows (yet), but projects are underway – that you can participate in – to help us to better understand the role bacteria play in our health and lifestyle. The American Gut Project5 is one of the most ambitious of these projects, and I encourage you to join, to learn more about your own gut, and how it’s affecting your health. The deadline is February 2. To learn more, and for instructions on how to participate, please see Dr. Mercola’s article: “American Gut” – One of the Most Important Health Projects of the 21st Century.

The project is crowdfunded, meaning it’s funded by volunteer donations. In return, you get certain “Perks,” which include:
•A list of the dominant microbes in your gut
•Visualizations showing how you compare to the general population
•Charts showing the dominant kinds of microbes along with descriptions of what they are most associated with
•If your donation covers multiple sample kits, you may be able to see how your microbes change over time (if all the samples are from you), or how your microbes compare to those in your family members, for example

Here’s a summary of how many sampling kits you receive with your donation (The entire cost below goes directly to the Project). Kits will be mailed out starting in February, 2013:
•$99 — One kit, which can be used for either a stool, skin or oral sample
•$180 — Receive two kits, which can be used by yourself, either by sending in two different types of samples (stool and oral sample, for example), or by sending them in at different times to see how your microbes change over time. Or the kits can be used to send in one type of sample from two different people
•$260 — Receive three kits
•$320 — Receive four kits
•For donations of $500 and over, please see the American Gut Project IndieGoGo website

The kits contain pre-labeled test tubes and instructions for how to properly collect your samples. Each sample must be mailed to the University of Colorado within 48 hours of collection. (You will be responsible for the postage: $1.95 per sample.)

Five Strategies to Improve Your Gut Health

In the meantime, as you contemplate your New Year’s resolution to join the gym (again), lose weight, improve your diet, or to purchase the latest gizmo to track your every move, you might want to consider whether your microbes will support your decision. After all, they’re in control. Below are five suggestions on how you might improve the health of your gut microbes (and some other microbes in your life) in 2013.
•Avoid antibiotics. It’s a familiar story by now: overzealous use of antibiotics are driving antibiotic resistance among microbes at an alarming rate. But it gets worse: the average child in the developed world will likely receive 10-20 courses of antibiotics before his or her 18th birthday. This, coupled with the low therapeutic doses in animal feed – and ipso facto food, may be shifting our gut microbes into an unhealthy state and possibly contributing to the metabolic disease of obesity.6

It’s also well documented that following a course of broad-spectrum antibiotics, it could take weeks, months or even years for your gut microbial community to bounce back – if at all. During this period of imbalance, opportunistic pathogens can set up shop. Or worse. While antibiotics are clearly needed in some scenarios, ask more questions in 2013 before downing them without a care.
•Open a window. For 99.99 percent of human history the outside was always part of the inside, and at no moment during our day were we ever really separated from nature. Today, a National Activity Survey7 found that between enclosed buildings and vehicles, modern humans spend a whopping 90 percent of their lives indoors.

Though keeping the outside out does have its advantages – protection from the elements and decreasing your chances of being eaten by a zombie – it has also changed the microbiome of your home. Studies8 show that opening a window and increasing natural airflow can improve the diversity and health of the microbes in your home, which in turn benefit the inhabitants. In the not-so-distant future, building codes will likely reflect the biological benefits of rewilding our living and workspaces. Never hurts to get a head start.
•Adopt an ecological perspective. In 2013, familiarize yourself with the writings of Aldo Leopold, John Muir, and other important and interesting – past and present – naturalists and ecologists. The human-microbial superorganism is a vast ecological system, subject to the same rules of resistance, resilience, and balance as any ecosystem on the planet. The sooner you learn to tend your microbial garden, the sooner you will understand how human ecology and your health is nothing more than understanding our history and place in the larger biosphere.9
•Eat more plants. This is not a hard one. I don’t mean to give up meat, but I mean to eat a greater diversity and quantity of whole plants. This is the single most important (in my opinion) dietary strategy for improving the diversity and health of your gut microbiome. In short, your gut microbes thrive on a diversity of fermentable substrates (aka dietary fiber). But not all fiber is the same (physically or chemically), so consuming a diversity of whole plants will assure as steady flow of substrates for your resident microbes.

And make 2013 the year you eat more of the whole plant, not just the soft and tasty parts. Consume the entire asparagus, not just the tip; consume the trunk of the broccoli, not just the crown; consume all of the greens at the top of the leek, not just the bulb. By doing so, you will guarantee that the harder-to-digest portions of the plant will extend the metabolic activity of your microbiome deep into your bowels. Also track how many species of plants you eat in a week – shoot for 30-40, or more.
•Get your hands dirty. More to the point: start a garden. Getting your hands dirty and covering more of your body (and food) with mother nature’s blanket will help you not only connect with the natural world we have tried so hard to remove ourselves, but will reacquaint your immune system with the trillions of microorganisms on the plants and in the soil. The loss of this interface with the terra firma of our evolutionary past – body to soil, body to nature – is where the wheels came off the wagon.

As people of the world move from poverty to middle class, they also move from the gritty reality of our ancestral life to the promise of modern development and its triple-washed produce and squeaky-clean surroundings. Reconnecting with ecosystems, through gardening or some other ‘outside’ means, will allow you to understand and manage your inner-ecosystem. There is no better way.

About the Author

Jeff Leach is the Founder of the Human Food Project and the author of Honor Thy Symbionts. His opinions on health and nutrition have appeared as Op-ed articles in the New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Sydney Morning Herald and his peer-reviewed research has been published in the British Journal of Nutrition, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, BioScience and Microflora, Journal of Archaeological Science, Public Health Nutrition and many others. He splits time between New Orleans and Africa.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

“Cancer is Man-Made,” Scientists Admit
How to overcome cancer in 10 natural ways

A recent study by University of Manchester scientists has strongly suggested that … cancer is a modern, man-made disease caused by environmental factors such as pollution and diet.

In the extensive study conducted at the University’s KNH Centre for Biomedical Egyptology, scientists examined hundreds of mummies and found … no signs of cancer—except for one isolated case.

Professor Michael Zimmerman said: “In an ancient society lacking surgical intervention, evidence of cancer should remain in all cases.” Therefore, the virtual absence of tumors and malignancies in mummies must necessarily be interpreted as evidence that cancer was indeed rare in ancient times.

The 17th Century Ushers Cancer In

It wasn’t until the 17th century that the first reports of cancer appeared in scientific literature—such as cancer of the scrotum (found in chimney sweeps in 1775, caused by soot particles); and nasal cancer found in users of snuff (finely ground tobacco) in 1761.

The University of Manchester study indicates that cancer-causing factors exist only in modern, industrialized societies—and cancer is fueled by the excesses of modern life.

The food you eat … the air you breathe … the clothes you wear … the water you drink … the personal care products you use … the medications you take … the water you bathe in … virtually everything you consume, and everything you do—or are exposed to—causes cancer these days!

Here are Just a Few Factors Present in
Modern Life That Cause Cancer:

Tobacco (including second-hand and third-hand smoke)
Genetically modified food
Most laundry detergents
Commercial hair dyes
Air pollution (including carbon monoxide, methylene
chloride, and acrolein)
Granite countertops (which emit radon)
Rancid peanuts and seeds
Canola oil
Canned tomatoes
Food laced with pesticides
Chemicals from aerosol cans
Mammograms
X-Rays
Food microwaved in plastic containers (including
plastic wrap, the plastic trays that come with frozen
TV dinners, and even plastic baby bottles)
Environmental pollutants (such as asbestos, benzene, and
formaldehyde)

Professor Rosalie David, at the Faculty of Life Sciences, said:
There is Nothing in the Natural Environment That Can Cause Cancer … So It Has to Be a Man-Made Disease

Given the prevalence of cancer-causing factors in the modern world, what can you do to escape cancer?

Many scientists agree that a healthy diet … regular physical activity … and maintaining a healthy weight can prevent about one-third of the most common cancers.

But … eating healthy is not a guarantee that you’ll never get cancer. Even those who think they have a healthy diet are not immune to cancer. Consider the case of Linda McCartney, the late wife of Beatle Paul McCartney. She was a life-long vegetarian, who also wrote a book on vegetarian cooking and produced a line of frozen vegetarian meals. Yet, despite her healthy eating, she died of breast cancer at the age of 56.

Regular physical activity—although definitely a healthy thing to do—is not a guarantee either. Consider Lance Armstrong, 7-time Tour de France cycling champion. He engaged in more physical activity than most people, and yet he was diagnosed with Stage 2 testicular cancer.

Maintaining a healthy weight also does not assure you of immunity from cancer. Many physically fit celebrities have fallen prey to cancer—Patrick Swayze, Jaclyn Smith, Robert Urich, Suzanne Somers, Farrah Fawcett, Ryan O’Neal, to name a few.

Extraordinary Natural Cures for Cancer

In the years I’ve spent as Editor of Underground Health Reporter eAlertTM, I’ve written about dozens of cancer cures that are stunningly effective. From among them, I’ve compiled the cures that have been consistently hailed by alternative health practitioners as “the best of the best.”

A gold-colored spice derived from the ginger family reverses the growth of cancer cells by 98%, and rivals the effectiveness of chemotherapy (page 16)

When the cancer-fighting properties of this spice were first discovered by Western medicine, an American pharmaceutical company tried to patent it in order to rake in millions of dollars in profits. Health practitioners from India were OUTRAGED, considering they have been using this herb for thousands of years to heal cancer and treat major diseases.

A natural anti-cancer formula that kills virtually 100% of cancer cells within 48 hours (page 32)

Dick’s esophageal cancer surgery left him with septic shock, two staph infections, and a metastasized cancer recurrence two years later. Radiation reduced his cancer by about 55% but couldn’t eliminate it completely. But after six months on this anti-cancer formula, a bronchial scope and CT scan showed no cancer in Dick’s esophagus or trachea!

A 4-herb tea that reduces pain and causes a recession in cancer growth in patients suffering from pathologically proven cancer (page 72)

A compound from the bark of a little-known fruit tree is the only cancer treatment that destroys drug-resistant—and chemo-resistant—cancer cells. It’s 10,000 times more effective than a commonly used cancer drug—and no, it’s not graviola (page 50)

Over the course of 20 years, and with the help of a $5 million dollar fund established by the NCI, the Professor Emeritus of Pharmacognosy at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, has proven the viability of this natural extract as an effective cancer treatment.

Two inexpensive food items combined together in specific proportions are proven by numerous independent clinical studies to provide a powerful and effective means of treating even the most advanced cancers—90% cure rate(page 96)

A Chinese healing practice that dissolves a cancer patient’s orange-sized tumor in 40 seconds (page 113)

There are hundreds of health practitioners who specialize in this healing practice in the U.S. and many parts of the world. In one study, cancer cells were cultivated in Petri dishes. Masters of this healing practice emitted healing energy upon them and instantly killed all the cancer cells in the Petri dishes.

A medicinal mushroom that is proven by a National Institutes of Health study to cure cancer—especially breast cancer (page 115)

A natural substance that creates an oxygen-rich environment in the body which causes cancerous tumors to shrink—and inhibits the growth of other tumors, as well as pathogens, viruses and harmful bacteria (page 57)

A vegetable with such powerful cancer-fighting properties that many natural health practitioners claim that it could be sold as a prescription drug (page 86)

An “eleventh hour” cancer remedy made from the juice of cereal grasses proves effective in curing advanced terminal cancer(page 126)

According to the American Cancer Society, 41% of all adults will develop cancer in their lifetimes … or die from it! That’s 4 out of 10 … or 2 out of 5 people. ==>

In fact, you might already have undiagnosed cancer right now … and not even know it.

Whether you or a loved one already suffers from cancer … or you fear that cancer might strike you or your family one day, you must get the full story on 10 powerful natural cancer cures that have helped many thousands of cancer patients reclaim their health and their lives.

Click here now to discoverall the research studies, medical reports, inspiring real-life stories of those who have successfully used these 10 amazing natural therapies to cure their cancer.

Wishing you the best of health,

Danica Collins

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

ANH REGIONS

AMA Pediatrics Group Wants to Keep Mercury in Our Vaccines—Action Alert!
January 15, 2013
Print This Post

Would you be surprised to learn that vaccine makers are among their corporate donors? And that their recommendations influence the FDA? Take Action!

In 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), together with the US Public Health Service, jointly recommended that thimerosal, a vaccine preservative that contains mercury, should be removed from vaccines. In response, the FDA removed thimerosal, or limited it to trace amounts, in all vaccines except flu shots. Now the AAP has reversed itself and says it wants the mercury left in.

In January, the UN Environmental Program will be working on a global treaty to reduce health hazards by banning certain products and processes that release mercury into the environment, and thimerosal in vaccines is one of those products under discussion.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has stated that thimerosal should be left in vaccines and should not be banned. They argue that the mercury compound helps control the growth of bacteria and fungi in multi-dose vaccines (though not necessary for single-dose vaccines). In the developing world, multi-dose vaccines are a mainstay because single-dose vials would cost far more and require new networks of cold storage facilities and additional capacity for waste disposal, according to the WHO statement.

In a direct reversal from their previous position, AAP has endorsed WHO’s report. This could shift the FDA’s stance on the issue, and might even bring back thimerosal into other US vaccines.

Nor is this the first time the AAP has done something that strikes us as hard to explain without looking at their donors. The group previously said that boys should receive the HPV vaccine, which is dangerous and offers few benefits for boys relative to the risks; advocated that children receive cholesterol screenings, which could lead to big business for the drug companies selling statin drugs even though statins are the last thing growing bodies need; and recommended sports drinks for kids that are full of sugar and questionable additives, and expensive for consumers but that are very lucrative for the sellers. We worry that all these decisions were influenced, not by the needs of children, but by the funding needs of the organization.

Consider also AAP’s stance on organic food. While recognizing that there are lower pesticide levels and a lower risk of exposure to drug-resistant bacteria in organic food, the AAP is still unsure whether organic food is beneficial! They made the following ridiculous statement about organic milk:

The AAP found no individual health benefit from purchasing organic milk, but emphasizes that all milk should be pasteurized to reduce the risk of bacterial infections. Raw milk increases the risk of serious infection with bacteria including Salmonella, E. coli, Listeria, Campylobacter and Brucella.

The truth, of course, is that raw milk bought from a reliable source (not an industrial farm) is usually healthier that pasteurized milk. As we noted last year, the CDC determined that pasteurized milk products cause nearly twice as many illnesses as raw milk products; moreover, the pasteurization process destroys delicate proteins, enzymes, immune factors, and vitamins, and inhibits mineral availability. The very healthiest milk would therefore be raw, grass-fed—and organic.

Why would AAP take such an illogical position on organic food for children? Many have noted the presence of drug, vaccine, and junk food companies at the AAP’s annual conferences. IRS docs show that AAP received large contributions from drug companies with ties to statins. Is that why the group recommends statins for children?

Is all of this a coincidence? Not likely. We believe such conflicts of interest within the AAP directly affect their recommendations—and this, in turn, harms children, because some pediatricians and other health professionals blindly accept those recommendations. The organization actively solicits sponsorships from industry. And while they list some of their “corporate friends”—Merck, Sanofi Pasteur, Pfizer, Pediatrics Insurance Consultants, Abbott, Mead Johnson, Nestlé—this is not a complete list, nor does it reflect funding across all their program areas.

Action Alert! Contact AAP and ask them to reveal the names of all their donors—particularly the drug companies, vaccine manufacturers, and junk food companies—together with the amount of each contribution and which program area it was for. We’ll also send a copy of your message to the American Medical Association—and Congress. We need to know who is influencing policy that directly affects your children’s health! Please send your message today!

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

FTC Proceeds with Raw Power Grab on Health Claims—In Effect Thumbing Its Nose at Congress

Posted By ANH-USA On January 22, 2013 @ 4:00 pm In Uncategorized | 9 Comments

Food company POM Wonderful’s battle with the FTC [1] ends (for now) with the agency making up its own law and quashing free speech. Action Alert! [2]

Last year, an administrative law judge (ALJ)* [3] for the Federal Trade Commission upheld the pomegranate juice manufacturer’s right to make what the FDA would call structure/function claims [4] in ads. Structure/function claims include statements such as “calcium helps build bones.” They don’t directly talk about curing a disease. At the same time, the ALJ found that some of the company’s claims went too far (specifically where they claimed the juice could help heart disease, prostate cancer, and erectile dysfunction).

Because the ALJ’s decision was a partial victory for both POM Wonderful and the FTC, both sides appealed, which necessitated a ruling from the FTC as a whole. Last Wednesday, the Commission took a much more unreasonable line [5]. It found that thirty-four of POM’s forty-three claims were implied disease claims—fifteen more than the ALJ had found. The full Commission further ruled that a double-blind random-controlled trial (RCT) is required for any “efficacy” claim and two double blind RCTs for any claim that might seem to be related to a disease. The $35 million on peer-reviewed scientific research [6] previously spent by POM was brushed aside because the studies were not RCTs, which are commonly used for drug testing.

This is a major one–two punch. The FTC is being draconian about what it considers an implied disease claim. One commissioner noted in remarks accompanying the decision [7]: “It is difficult to imagine any structure/function claims that POM could associate with its products in the marketplace without such claims being interpreted, under the FTC precedent set in this case, as disease-related claims.”

In making these judgments, the agency has relied on what is legally called its own “net impression,” i.e., totally subjective judgment, and has ignored the ALJ’s request for a higher standard of “extrinsic evidence,” the sort of evidence that would come for example by testing how consumers actually interpret a label.

The agency is also requiring the hugely expensive pharmaceutical standard of the double-blind RCTs. As we have often noted, companies do not usually attempt RCTs because of their expense, unless they hold a patent on the substance being tested. And it is not possible to patent natural substances such as food. The FTC understands this. In effect, they are saying that food manufacturers will not be allowed to talk about health benefits, period. It is a complete gag order.

The ruling also blurs the line between the FTC and the FDA. The double-blind RCT for disease claims is an FDA labeling standard for drugs. The FTC is supposed to regulate advertising, not decide what is a drug. Its mandate is to ensure that advertisements are not deceptive or misleading—something that certainly does not require the pharmaceutical RTC standard! Now the FTC is unnecessarily and arbitrarily deciding to use an FDA drug standard for disease claims in advertising. Some industry observers even wonder whether the FDA has asked the FTC to do this because the FDA would not be able to go this far on its own.

There is absolutely no statute justifying this. It is making up law without congressional approval. Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) in particular has already tried and failed to give the agency the power to do this—in a sneaky and underhanded way. You may recall that in 2010, Waxman tried to slip an amendment into a totally unrelated bill [8]. That amendment, which was intentionally written in obscure language that nobody but an expert could understand, would have given the FTC expanded powers and rulemaking authority, giving them the power to create new kinds of regulations without going back to Congress. (It lost that authority in the 1980s because Congress thought the FTC was abusing it. How ironic.) With your help, the amendment failed [9]. Having in effect been told no by Congress, the agency is just going ahead anyway, seemingly on a case-by-case basis, creating regulations with no legal basis.

Who benefits from such a change in policy? Just follow the money. If the FTC prevails in requiring double-blind RCTs, only pharmaceutical companies will be able to make health claims on their patented and FDA-approved products.

The Commission’s decision directly affects only POM Wonderful (along with all its affiliated companies despite the fact that POM was the only company at issue here!). But it sets a powerful precedent and makes it clear that the FTC will try to enforce this as widely as possible.

Food, drug, and constitutional law attorney Jonathan Emord called the decision “arbitrary and capricious” [10] and said, “The breadth of [the FTC’s new two-RCT] requirement is truly astonishing….After today’s decision, the health marketplace will be dumbed down considerably to the detriment of health conscious consumers….In the end, that will mean a loss in public health as there will now be a multi-million dollar entry fee imposed on any who would wish to convey a health benefit to consumers in the market.”

This is just one more reason we need to pass the Free Speech about Science Act [11], which would allow natural product companies to cite peer-reviewed science in their advertising.

For now, we need to let Congress know that the FTC is trying to make an end run around the legislative process. Having been turned down by Congress, the FTC is proceeding as though empowered anyway. Action Alert! Let’s be sure that Congress understands that voters are watching, and voters care about this example of agency lawlessness. Please take action now.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

Why Do Americans Consume Such a Bad Diet?

According to a new health analysis bearing the revealing title: US Health in International Perspective: Shorter Lives, Poorer Health1, Americans come in dead last in a comparison of 17 affluent nations.

The research was unable to uncover any single cause or “rallying point for action.” Instead, it calls for more research to “ferret out the effects of our current policies.”

C’mon! You’ve got to be kidding me.

Considering the fact that human health tends to be primarily affected by a) nutrition, b) exercise, and c) toxic exposures, do they seriously believe that we can improve public health while ignoring these three basic areas?

What Does the Human Body Require to Be Healthy?

A staggering two-thirds of American adults are overweight, and more than one-quarter of adults fall into the obese category. One in four Americans is pre-diabetic or diabetic. It should be obvious that diet and exercise are critical factors here. The National Institutes of Health even states that four of the six leading causes of death in the United States are linked to unhealthy diets.

The question is why are so many people unable to regulate their weight and insulin sensitivity? The following points are well worthy of careful consideration when pondering this issue:
•The top two crops grown in the U.S. are corn and soy. High fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated soybean oil are two of the most popular ingredients made from these crops.2 High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has repeatedly been shown to be a driving factor behind being overweight and having poor health outcomes. HFCS is pervasive and in many processed food items some individuals would never expect, including so called diet foods and ‘enhanced’ water products. Even most infant formulas contain the sugar equivalent of one can of Coca-Cola.

Furthermore, soybean oil is another common unhealthy ingredient in many processed foods and soybeans can be severely and systemically contaminated with high amounts of the potent herbicide glyphosate. Additionally, over 85 percent of all corn grown in the US is genetically engineered (GE)3, which further increases the risk of high glyphosate contamination.The safety of either of these items has never been proven. According to a recent report by the Environmental Working Group (EWG)4, Americans are eating their weight and more in GE foods each and every year.
•Thirty-three percent of American adults are also completely sedentary, and more than half of adults over the age of 18 never engage in any vigorous leisure-time physical activity lasting 10 minutes or more per week.
•According to a study by the EWG5, blood samples from newborns contained an average of 287 toxins, including mercury, fire retardants, pesticides, and chemicals from non stick products. Of the 287 chemicals EWG detected in umbilical cord blood, it’s known that 180 cause cancer in humans or animals; 217 are toxic to your brain and nervous system; and 208 cause birth defects or abnormal development in animal tests. Clearly, when babies are born loaded with toxic chemicals, it’s a sign that toxic exposure is too high.
•While there are many types and routes of toxic exposure, one would be remiss to overlook Americans use of pharmaceutical drugs, as drugs have, on average, 70 different potential side effects, and are responsible for the premature death of at least 106,000 Americans per year, when taken as prescribed. Americans pop the most pills of any other nation, and that includes children. Americans also receive the most amount of vaccinations.

So…. let’s think… What could possibly be the root of Americans’ failure to thrive? The Atlantic6, reporting on the findings writes:

“In presenting their findings… the authors seemed to be urging the U.S. to do some soul searching. Our culture ‘cherishes independence’ and ‘wants to limit the intrusion of government in our personal lives,’ said Steven Woolf, director of the Center for Human Needs at Virginia Commonwealth University, the panel chairman.

While those values serve us in some ways, he said, our resistance to regulation ‘may work against our ability to achieve optimal health outcomes.'”

Aha! So it’s Americans’ striving for independence and freedom of choice that is to blame for such poor dietary choices and health outcomes?! They mean to tell us that we’re all so inept at making healthy choices, we need to abandon our independent spirits and embrace more nanny state regulations that might finally whip us into shape. Honestly, I feel like I’m reading something out of The Onion… It’s all so backwards.

Why Do Americans Consume Such a Bad Diet?

For the sake of brevity, I will limit my comments to the issue of diet here. But first, let’s consider a few of the questions we need to ask:
•Do Americans purposefully consume excessive amounts of fat-promoting, health-harming HFCS because they love it and refuse to eat foods that don’t contain it, or are there other reasons why Americans can’t seem to control their waistlines?

And do they really intentionally consume far too many carbohydrates, sugar and processed foods in place of healthy fats like avocados, olives, coconut oil, butter, nuts, eggs and olive oil, which cause them to be adapted to burning carbs as their primary fuel rather than fat, or is this type of diet a more or less inevitable side effect of NOT thinking independently and seeking out real nutritional facts, but rather mindlessly buying what’s available in the store and advertised as healthy on TV?
•Do Americans really want to consume more genetically engineered foods than any other country?
•Do freedom-loving Americans who “cherish independence” seek to buy more or less whole, unadulterated, unprocessed foods that might help improve their health and, at the very least, reduce toxic exposure?

I propose considering the following facts before blaming America’s failing health on the average shopper’s pesky determination to make independent, foolhardy choices:
•The US government subsidizes the very crops identified as being the most harmful to human health and the environment; the top three being corn, wheat, and soybeans. And nearly all of the corn and soybeans grown are genetically engineered varieties.

By subsidizing these, the US government is actively supporting a diet that consists of these grains in their processed form, namely high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), hydrogenated soybean oil, and meats loaded with antibiotics – all of which are now well-known contributors to obesity and chronic disease. These junk-food subsidies make it much cheaper to buy a burger, fries and soda from a fast-food restaurant than it is to buy grass-fed beef and veggies. It’s not that these foods necessarily cost more to grow or produce; rather the prices for the junk foods are being artificially reduced by the government.
•The US further promotes use of HFCS in food manufacturing by imposing import tariffs on foreign sugar, raising the price of sucrose above those in other countries.
•When the dangers of HFCS finally began to seep into the American consciousness, consumer demand forced many companies to reformulate their processed foods using other types of sweeteners, or ditching sweetening agents altogether. Today, you can find a number of food products marked “No HFCS” and government intervention had nothing to do with this beneficial change.
•The US government has repeatedly refused to take any action to label genetically engineered foods, despite overwhelming public support and demand for labeling.
•The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has repeatedly harassed, raided, and shut down small farms producing healthful organic and raw foods, such as raw dairy and cheese, along with private co-ops procuring and delivering such foods to health-conscious customers.

Americans Die Earlier and Live in Poorer Health

These are examples of Big Government making health decisions for you. How have they been working out so far? The proof is in the pudding, and the featured report7 tells us that what we’ve been doing so far is NOT working.

According to the report, Americans die earlier and live in poorer health than people in other developed nations, which included Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands and the U.K.

Of these 17 affluent countries, the US ranks last overall, and near the bottom in nine key areas of health, including low birth weight; injuries and homicides; teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections; HIV and AIDS; drug-related deaths; obesity and diabetes; heart disease; chronic lung disease; and general disability. At 75.6 years, American men have the lowest life expectancy among the countries reviewed, and American women ranked second-to-last at 80.7 years. The infant mortality rate in the US is equally abysmal, with 32.7 deaths per 100,000, while most others range between 15 and 25 deaths per 100,000.

Interestingly, the US lags behind all these nations even though smoking rates in the US are far lower than many of the other nations, indicating that, apparently, there’s more to good health than quitting smoking. Or, alternatively, that even smokers can enjoy a modicum of health IF they’re able to compensate with other healthy lifestyle strategies. So, again, how are more nanny state regulations going to improve the situation when they clearly are not willing to accept the sources of the problem in the first place?

The truth is, in order to regulate away this problem, the US government would have to cut all ties with industry and eliminate its conflicts of interest and massive revolving doors with the very industry it is mandated to regulate.

The likelihood of that happening appears slim to none, considering that Big Ag and Big Pharma are two of the biggest and strongest lobbying groups of all business sectors vying for favors from our legislators8. And they’re getting them—which is how we got into this abhorrent mess in the first place, where what is good is portrayed as bad, and that which is bad is ignored. The answer is to promote more independence of choice, and limiting the intrusion of government in our food choices—the very things these reviewers claim are part of the problem… The report also found that Americans:
•Have a long-standing pattern of poorer health that is strikingly consistent and pervasive over the course of their lifetimes. Overall, Americans die and suffer from illness and injury at rates that are unnecessary
•Even affluent Americans with higher education and insurance who engage in healthy behaviors (such as not smoking and maintaining a healthy weight) are in worse health than similar people in other nations
•Consume the most calories among peer countries
•Have more alcohol-related accidents
•Spend more than $8,600 per person per year on health care, which is more than twice the amount spent by the UK, France, and Sweden

How Can the Wealthiest Industrialized Nation be the Sickest?

Since the mid-1990s, the number of Americans suffering from at least three chronic illnesses nearly doubled. Life expectancy has decreased and infant mortality has increased. Illnesses once rare are now common, with some approaching epidemic levels. For example:
•Autism now affects one in 88 children (CDC), compared to one in 25,000 in the mid-1970s
•Type 2 diabetes rates in the U.S. increased by 176 percent between 1980 and 2010
•Celiac disease is four times more common now than 60 years ago
•Alzheimer’s disease is rising at alarming rates. It’s estimated that 5.4 million Americans (one in eight older Americans) now has Alzheimer’s disease, and nearly half of those age 85 and older have it; AD rates have doubled since 1980
•New infectious diseases are increasing in number, according to a 2008 study

In his documentary, Jeffrey Smith makes a convincing argument that one of the primary forces driving these illnesses is America’s changing food supply. And one of the most profound changes is genetically engineered food. Proving GE food is causing Americans to be sick is a tall order, but the evidence presented in this film is very compelling and should not be ignored.

GMO Report Disproves FDA’s Safety Claims

There is a significant compilation of scientific evidence that casts serious doubt on the claims made by industry and government officials about the safety of GE foods. Consider this report by The Atlantic9 The authors of the report “GMO Myths and Truths”10 took a science-based approach to evaluating the available research, arriving at the conclusion that most of the scientific evidence regarding safety and increased yield potential do not at all support the claims.

In fact, the evidence demonstrates the claims for genetically engineered foods are not just wildly overblown – they simply aren’t true. Not only are GE foods less nutritious than non-GE foods, they pose distinct health risks, are inadequately regulated, harm the environment and farmers, and are a poor solution to world hunger.

The authors of this critical report include Michael Antoniou, PhD, who heads the Gene Expression and Therapy Group at King’s College at London School of Medicine in the UK. He’s a 28-year veteran of genetic engineering technology who has himself invented a number of gene expression biotechnologies; and John Fagan, PhD, a leading authority on food sustainability, biosafety, and GE testing. If you want to get a comprehensive understanding of genetically engineered foods, I strongly recommend reading this report.

11 Basic Guidelines for General Health and Longevity

Leading a common sense, healthy lifestyle is your best bet to produce a healthy body and mind, and increase your longevity. Unfortunately, the pharmaceutical industry, the food industry, and even government itself sure won’t make it easy for you to avoid the garbage that ruins your health. The following guidelines form the basic tenets of optimal health and healthy weight—foundational strategies that will not change, regardless of what marvels modern science comes up with next. For more comprehensive guidance, please see my fully updated nutritional plan, which takes you from beginner’s stage to advanced:
1.Eat a healthy diet, paying very careful attention to keeping your insulin levels down (my free nutritional plan will help guide you through your dietary changes with minimal effort)
2.Replace sweetened drinks (whether they’re sweetened with sugar, HFCS, or artificial sweeteners) with plenty of pure, clean water
3.Avoid all genetically engineered foods. There are nine primary GE food crops, but their derivatives are in over 70 percent of supermarket foods, particularly processed foods. GE ingredients can hide. For example, every can of soda containing high fructose corn syrup most likely contains GE corn. Make sure none of the following are on your grocery list, unless they are USDA certified organic:

Soy

Cottonseed

Corn

Canola Oil

Hawaiian papaya

Alfalfa

Sugar from sugar beets

Some varieties of zucchini

Crookneck squash

Avoid any product containing aspartame, which is derived from a GE organism. And avoid any milk products that may have rBGH. I recommend consuming only raw, organic milk products you’ve obtained from a trustworthy local dairy farmer. The Institute for Responsible Technology has put together a helpful Non-GMO Shopping Guide you can download and print. They even have an iPhone app.
4.Optimize your gut flora with fermented foods, such as fermented vegetables, which you can easily and inexpensively make at home
5.Consume healthy fats, like butter, eggs, avocados, coconut oil, olive oil, and nuts, especially macadamia nuts which are higher in fat and lower in protein
6.Eat plenty of raw food
7.Exercise regularly. Make sure to incorporate high intensity interval training at least once or twice a week
8.Get an appropriate amount of sunlight to optimize your vitamin D levels
9.Limit toxin exposure
10.Get plenty of sleep
11.Manage your stress

Let’s face it, government health recommendations and regulations relating to diet and health have failed miserably, and the featured report delivers the somber statistics of where we’re at on the global scene. While spending twice as much on health care per capita, we’re not getting results. I believe we’ll keep seeing more of the same until or unless we change our stance on what a healthy diet is, and what constitutes a healthy lifestyle. We need to move away from the idea that being on a dozen medications means you’re doing something right for your health… This is NOT health care. This is disease management, and it comes at a very steep price, namely your longevity.

Until or unless the US government takes industry to task, our regulators and legislators cannot be trusted to usher Americans toward better health. In the meantime, it is up to YOU to take control of your health, and do what is right for you, to live a healthier, longer, drug- and disease-free life. Proper nutrition, exercise, and avoidance of toxins are three critical factors to address in this process, and this website contains literally tens of thousands of freely available articles to help you do just that.

By buying organic, you will dramatically reduce your exposure to pesticides, hormones and antibiotics, as those are used on nearly all GE crops. When shopping locally, know your local farmers. Many are too small to afford official certification, but many still adhere to organic, sustainable practices. The only way to determine how your food is raised is to check them out, meeting the farmer face to face if possible. Yes, it does take time but is worth it if you are really concerned about your family’s health.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

More people than ever are reportedly sick this winter,1 including those who got their flu vaccination. But while the push for vaccination reaches a fever pitch, the hard evidence has yet again shown that flu vaccines rarely work, and when they do, they don’t offer much in terms of protection.

There are many other, far more effective ways to prevent the flu and other flu-like illness, such as dietary interventions, making sure your vitamin D and gut flora are optimized, being more meticulous about washing your hands, getting enough exercise and sleep, and eating foods that support your immune system like oil of oregano and garlic.

Multiple Epidemics Emerging at Once

According to the New York Times,2 the United States is in the middle of not just one, but three emerging flu or flulike epidemics:
•An early start to the annual flu season with “an unusually aggressive virus”
•A surge in a new type of norovirus (“stomach flu”), known as the Sydney 2012 variant, and
•“The worst whooping cough (pertussis) outbreak in 60 years”

Boston has declared a health emergency, as hospitals are filling up. In New York, many are also coming down with laryngitis, characterized by a sore, scratchy throat, and sometimes loss of voice. Other infections also appear to be widespread. One of the researchers on my staff was recently ill with severe flu-like symptoms. She told me:

“I just went through this over Christmas/New Years. I was around an Alzheimer’s patient who’d been sick. I was helping him get seated in a chair when he began coughing in my face. Two days later I had a fever of 101.2 and really felt bad. I also was coughing. I went to my doctor, who did a flu test. But it was NOT the flu… a few tests later,

I found out I had strep with a cough. It lasts about a week, the fever about three days. The doctor said it’s ‘terribly contagious’ and it’s going around ‘all over.’

Since then I’ve talked to many people locally who said they came down with this ‘flu’ even though they had a flu shot (I never get them myself)… yet I’m the only one I’ve talked with whose doctor bothered to actually do tests to determine whether it was flu or not — everybody else’s doctor just assumed it was flu. Makes me wonder how much of this reported ‘flu’ is flu, and how much is this strep-with-cough thing that I had?”

Is Vaccination the Answer?

According to Google Flu data,5 this year’s flu season is the worst we’ve seen in quite some time, reaching a peak, or “Intense” level as of mid-December 2012. It all sounds ominous, to say the least, and clearly you should take precautions to avoid becoming a statistic. But the official solution to all these outbreaks remains disappointingly weak. “Get vaccinated” is the mantra, even though the scientific evidence backing such a recommendation is flimsy at best. Forbes magazine, for example, recently presented a slide show6 of “how to ward off the flu,” beginning with a flu shot recommendation:

“It’s good news if have already been vaccinated so far this season. But if you have not already had the vaccine, it is still recommended that you get it,” Forbes states.

A new flu strain, the “H3N2 type variant,” has been identified as being particularly aggressive, and is believed to be the cause of many if not most of the illnesses.7 Interestingly, according to Dr. Joseph Bresee, a medical epidemiologist in the influenza division at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the H3N2 component in this year’s seasonal flu vaccine “has been a good match against almost all the confirmed H3N2 samples the agency has tested,” the New York Times reports.8

Still, effective or not, vaccines are “flying off the shelves” and manufacturers are reporting shortages9 of both flu vaccines and Tamiflu — the potentially dangerous antiviral recommended if you’ve already contracted the flu — in part due to the early onset of the flu season. Michael Szumera, a spokesman for Sanofi told Fox Business:10

“At this point we are not able to make any more vaccine because we are gearing up for next year’s vaccine.”

According to one report, 112 million Americans had been vaccinated against the flu by late 2012. Walgreen’s recently reported they’d administered 5.7 million flu shots so far this season — up from 5.3 million in 2012.11 The fact that many flu shot recipients are still coming down with serious influenza should be a testament to the ineffectiveness of the flu vaccine — not a selling point for it… Especially when you consider the fact that the vaccines available this year are a good match to the actual influenza type A and B strains in circulation.

The Battle over Flu Vaccine Continues as Flu Spreads

The power of the media to modify behavior is being milked for all its worth this season, with “superstars” of every caliber getting their flu shots on air. For example, Piers Morgan, host of Piers Morgan Tonight on CNN, rolled up his sleeve to receive his first ever flu shot on the Dr. Oz show.12

This is a Flash-based video and may not be viewable on mobile devices.

Dr. Oz then went on to satisfy the station’s advertisers by reciting the conventional vaccination recommendations while completely ignoring the issues of safety and effectiveness — or rather the lack thereof. No mention was made about individual susceptibly that might make you more prone to vaccine damage, or the questionable rationale for vaccinating pregnant women, babies and all Americans each and every year, starting from the age of 6 months throughout childhood and adulthood until the year of death…

Coming from someone like Dr. Oz, such nonchalance is disappointing to say the least. Avoiding the issue of side effects, which can be just as lethal as the flu itself, is nothing short of irresponsible. Some states, such as New Jersey and Connecticut, now have mandates in place preventing children from attending school unless they receive the flu vaccine each year. This is a draconian over-reach that can place young children at grave risk. To see a powerful profile of a flu vaccine victim (in this case a former nursing professor), please see my previous article The Hidden Risks in This Heavily Promoted Seasonal Routine.

How is Firing Competent Nurses in the Best Interest of Patients?

In related news, some states are now taking corrective action against health care workers who refuse to get vaccinated. In one Indiana hospital, eight nurses were recently fired for not complying with the hospital’s new mandatory vaccination rule, announced in September 2012.

One of them was Ethel Hoover, who had worked at the hospital for 22 years, with a stellar work record. How can you possibly justify firing a highly skilled veteran nurse who doesn’t want to get a flu shot, only to replace her with a vaccinated but less experienced newcomer? Seriously… How does this translate into patient safety? If you were seriously ill, who would you rather have tending to your health? Hoover told ABC News:13

“‘This is my body. I have a right to refuse the flu vaccine. For 21 years, I have religiously not taken the flu vaccine, and now you’re telling me that I believe in it.’ …When Hoover first heard about the mandate, she said she didn’t realize officials would take it so seriously. She said she filed two medical exemptions, a religious exemption and two appeals, but they were all denied. The Dec. 15 flu shot deadline came and went. Hoover’s last day of employment was Dec. 21.

Fellow nurse Kacy Davis said she and her colleagues were ‘horrified’ over Hoover’s firing, calling her their ‘go-to’ nurse and a ‘preceptor,’ ABC News reports.

…Alan Phillips, who represented several nurses at the hospital, says his clients had the right to refuse their flu shots under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,14 which prohibits religious discrimination of employees. Religion is legally broad under the First Amendment, so it could include any strongly held belief, he said, adding that the belief flu shots are bad should suffice…

Phillips, who is based out of North Carolina, has made a name for himself fighting for employees’ rights to get out of mandated flu shots, but he has never needed to go to court. Although he usually handles a couple dozen health care workers per year, he had 150 this fall in 25 states.”

If the administrators who made this ludicrous decision were to ever step back and look at the scenario rationally and holistically, they would soon realize that they fired a valuable veteran employee and would most likely replace her with a rookie, an inexperienced nurse that could not provide anywhere near as competent care to the patients. If they ever bothered to independently use their own brain cells, rather than rely on the CDC and the media, they would quickly realize that there is no solid evidence to support the effectiveness of the flu vaccine. Watching the Cochrane video below would have been a major start in the right direction. Once viewed, it probably wouldn’t take long for them to realize that they seriously compromised patient care in their hospital by firing this nurse.

When Propaganda Spin Goes Hilariously Bad…

A recent Activist Post by Janet C. Phelan15 points out just how ridiculously bad a lot of the reporting passing for “news” is today:

“In an article entitled, ‘Flu reaches epidemic level in U.S.,’ says CDC, reporter Sharon Begley pumps up alarm concerning the virulent and epidemic nature of the current flu sweeping the country. However, the report admits it lacks documentation of the very numbers it purports to use to buttress its claims.

While the Reuters article, published on January 11, solemnly announces that a pandemic is officially at play when the flu achieves a rate of 7.2 % of deaths during a time period, it also earnestly states that there is no definitive count of the total deaths caused by the flu. Wait a minute here… So the exact percentage of deaths caused by flu is known but the number of flu deaths is not?

I wasn’t planning to go on a rant about the idiocy of our mainstream media at this juncture, but it does appear that a few things must be said. First of all, reporters must be schooled in statistics in order to complete a journalism graduate program. That course is not for wimps, I can assure you… anyone who had been in my class at the University of Missouri Graduate School of Journalism would have received a failing grade if they had produced this article…”

“Gold Standard” of Scientific Inquiries Blast Flu Vaccine Claims

Again and again you hear that the influenza vaccine is a first-line, essential prevention tool against the flu. And yet, science does not support this blanket recommendation. According to Dr. Tom Jefferson with the Cochrane Collaboration — an international, independent, not-for-profit organization of over 28,000 contributors from more than 100 countries — “the response to the [flu] virus is driven by vested interests.” The following video is from 2009, when the H1N1 swine flu pandemic had just been announced. But he’s talking about the seasonal flu vaccine when he states:

“…they do not have a good track record. The evidence from the hundreds of studies that we’ve synthesized, is that sometimes they work a little, and sometimes they don’t. In general, the quality of the literature is such that it is very difficult to understand if they actually work.”

So, are you thinking about vaccinating your infant with the flu vaccine? Then I highly recommend reading the independent study review from the Cochrane Collaboration16 first, published as recently as August 15, 2012. According to these independent research reviewers:

“The review authors found that in children aged from two years, nasal spray vaccines made from weakened influenza viruses were better at preventing illness caused by the influenza virus than injected vaccines made from the killed virus. Neither type was particularly good at preventing ‘flu-like illness’ caused by other types of viruses. In children under the age of two, the efficacy of inactivated vaccine was similar to placebo.

It was not possible to analyse the safety of vaccines from the studies due to the lack of standardisation in the information given, but very little information was found on the safety of inactivated vaccines, the most commonly used vaccine in young children. Influenza vaccines were associated with serious harms such as narcolepsy and febrile convulsions. It was surprising to find only one study of inactivated vaccine in children under two years, given current recommendations to vaccinate healthy children from six months of age.”

Their independent review of flu vaccines for adults17 also cast serious doubt on the blanket recommendation to use flu vaccine as the primary form of protection against the flu:

“Over 200 viruses cause influenza and influenza-like illness which produce the same symptoms (fever, headache, aches and pains, cough and runny noses). Without laboratory tests, doctors cannot tell the two illnesses apart. Both last for days and rarely lead to death or serious illness.

At best, vaccines might be effective against only influenza A and B, which represent about 10 percent of all circulating viruses.

Authors of this review assessed all trials that compared vaccinated people with unvaccinated people. The combined results of these trials showed that under ideal conditions (vaccine completely matching circulating viral configuration) 33 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms. In average conditions (partially matching vaccine) 100 people need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms.

Vaccine use did not affect the number of people hospitalized or working days lost but caused one case of Guillian-Barré syndrome (a major neurological condition leading to paralysis) for every one million vaccinations.

Fifteen of the 36 trials were funded by vaccine companies and four had no funding declaration. Our results may be an optimistic estimate because company-sponsored influenza vaccines trials tend to produce results favorable to their products and some of the evidence comes from trials carried out in ideal viral circulation and matching conditions and because the harms evidence base is limited.”

Simple Graphic Illustration of How the Flu Infects You

The following video offers an excellent, rapid-fire cliff-notes-type education on flu viruses, where the “H” and “N” flu classifications come from and their transmission, along with common flu symptoms. Bear in mind that I obviously do NOT recommend or advise getting a flu vaccine, which is listed as one of the prevention methods at the end of this video. I recommend that anyone thinking about getting a flu shot carefully consider the risks of the vaccine and influenza and make an well educated decision for themselves.

Insider Expert Reveals Previously Unrevealed Physician Flu Incentives

An article in Infectious Diseases in Children, titled “Influenza vaccination makes sense for everyone,”18 written by Dr. Richard Lander, MD, a pediatrician in private practice in northern New Jersey and a member of the Infectious Diseases in Children Editorial Board, offers an insightful glimpse into the motivations behind the at times near-rabid push for flu vaccinations. In short, it’s a money-maker.

No, Dr. Lander most certainly did not intend for this to be the conclusion after reading his article, but it does spell out the financial incentives for pediatricians and other physicians to “sell, sell, sell!” the vaccine to as many as possible. When you read his disclosure, the root of his pro-vaccination stance becomes quite obvious as it too is the color of green… Not only is he co-owner of the National Discount Vaccine Alliance, he’s also a speaker for Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and Sanofi-Pasteur.

Here, for the first time, a real doctor, in real time, with real numbers reveals exactly how profitable giving the flu vaccines is for doctors. He writes:

“Before the influenza season began, physicians had been told to get ready for a bad season. With this in mind, my practice started vaccinating during the summer as soon as our influenza vaccines arrived. We gave it to the kids as they came in for their well appointments, we reached out to our high-risk patients (asthmatics, immunocompromised patients and cardiac patients), and we organized influenza parties, which assembled large numbers of patients to receive influenza vaccines at the same times… These visits did not allow for discussions about the child’s 5-year history of encopresis or behavioral problems. We all hope to be effective in reaching large numbers of patients.

It is undeniable that vaccinating against influenza is good for patients. As luck would have it, vaccinating against influenza is good for the financial health of your practice as well. For example, let’s calculate monies generated for administering influenza vaccine for a doctor with a panel of 2,000 patients. We’ll be conservative and consider that only 1,000 patients will get their influenza vaccine in your office. Some of the 1,000 not receiving the vaccine in your office might be infants younger than 6 months of age and not eligible for the vaccine, and some patients will go to retail-based clinics or refuse the vaccine.

I know you are all financially savvy and you have purchased influenza vaccines at the lowest possible price… The fee you receive has been set by your contract with each managed care organization and you are seeing a 10% to 25% profit.

If your practice purchased the vaccine at approximately $10, the profit on these 1,000 patients will range from $1,000 to $2,500. Additionally, you are receiving a vaccine administration fee, which should range from $14 to $30. This amounts to $14,000 to $30,000 for the 1,000 patients. Furthermore, in my practice, we do not vaccinate if a patient has not received a well visit in the last 12 months. If 100 patients who call for a flu shot ending up scheduling a well visit, you should be generating an additional $10,000. Bottom line: $25,000 to $42,500, which is not bad! Influenza can be devastating. Offering influenza vaccines to your patients is good for their health. It is good for the whole community. Giving influenza vaccine is also good for the financial health of your practice.”

How to Protect Yourself During the Flu Season

Again, as with Dr. Oz, what really disturbs me here is the complete lack of safety discussion. In fact, he actually states that these vaccine-drives “do not allow for discussions” about a child’s potty habits or behavioral problems — both of which could be very important clues or indicators that a child might be more prone to vaccine damage, and likely would be best served by having their gut flora checked before receiving another vaccine. For more information about this novel but promising way to prevent vaccine damage, please see my interview with Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride. Honestly, what’s more important here? Making a buck or making sure that each and every patient is unlikely to be harmed by the treatment?

Avoiding a serious case of influenza is not about vaccination but more about maintaining a healthy, well functioning immune system. By following these simple guidelines, you can help keep your immune system in optimal working order so that you’re far less likely to acquire the infection to begin with or, if you do get sick with the flu, you are better prepared to move through it without complications and soon return to good health.
•Optimize Your Gut Flora. This may be the single most important strategy you can implement as the bacteria in your gut have enormous control of your immune response. The best way to improve your beneficial bacteria ratio is avoid apply avoid sugars as they will feed the pathogenic bacteria. Additionally, processed foods and most grains should be limited and replacing with healthy fats like coconut oil, avocados, olives, olive oil, butter, eggs and nuts. Once you change your diet than regular use of fermented foods can radically optimize the function of your immune response.
•Optimize your vitamin D levels. As I’ve previously reported, optimizing your vitamin D levels is one of the absolute best strategies for avoiding infections of ALL kinds, and vitamin D deficiency may actually be the true culprit behind the seasonality of the flu – not the flu virus itself. This is probably the single most important and least expensive action you can take. Regularly monitor your vitamin D levels to confirm your levels are within the therapeutic range of 50-70 ng/ml.

Ideally, you’ll want to get all your vitamin D from sun exposure or a safe tanning bed, but as a last resort you can take an oral vitamin D3 supplement. According to the latest review by Carole Baggerly (Grassrootshealth.org), adults need about 8,000 IU’s a day. Be sure to take vitamin K2 if you are taking high dose oral vitamin D as it has a powerful synergy and will help prevent any D toxicity.
•Avoid Sugar and Processed Foods. Sugar impairs the quality of your immune response almost immediately, and as you likely know, a healthy immune system is one of the most important keys to fighting off viruses and other illness. It also can decimate your beneficial bacteria and feed the pathogenic yeast and viruses. Be aware that sugar (typically in the form of high fructose corn syrup) is present in foods you may not suspect, like ketchup and fruit juice. If you are healthy than sugar can be consumed but the LAST thing you should be eating when you are sick is sugar. Avoid it like poison while you are sick.
•Get Plenty of Rest. Just like it becomes harder for you to get your daily tasks done if you’re tired, if your body is overly fatigued it will be harder for it to fight the flu. Be sure to check out my article Guide to a Good Night’s Sleep for some great tips to help you get quality rest.
•Have Effective Tools to Address Stress. We all face some stress every day, but if stress becomes overwhelming then your body will be less able to fight off the flu and other illness. If you feel that stress is taking a toll on your health, consider using an energy psychology tool such as the Emotional Freedom Technique, which is remarkably effective in relieving stress associated with all kinds of events, from work to family to trauma.
•Get Regular Exercise. When you exercise, you increase your circulation and your blood flow throughout your body. The components of your immune system are also better circulated, which means your immune system has a better chance of finding an illness before it spreads. Be sure to stay hydrated – drink plenty of fluids, especially water. However, it would be wise to radically reduce the intensity of your workouts while you are sick. No Peak Fitness exercises until you are better.
•Take a High-Quality Source of Animal-Based Omega-3 Fats. Increase your intake of healthy and essential fats like the omega-3 found in krill oil, which is crucial for maintaining health. It is also vitally important to avoid damaged omega-6 oils that are trans fats and in processed foods as it will seriously damage your immune response.
•Wash Your Hands. Washing your hands will decrease your likelihood of spreading a virus to your nose, mouth or other people. Be sure you don’t use antibacterial soap for this – antibacterial soaps are completely unnecessary, and they cause far more harm than good. Instead, identify a simple chemical-free soap that you can switch your family to.
•Tried and True Hygiene Measures. In addition to washing your hands regularly, cover your mouth and nose when you cough or sneeze. If possible, avoid close contact with those, who are sick and, if you are sick, avoid close contact with those who are well.
•Use Natural Antibiotics. Examples include oil of oregano and garlic. These work like broad-spectrum antibiotics against bacteria, viruses, and protozoa in your body. And unlike pharmaceutical antibiotics, they do not appear to lead to resistance.
•Avoid Hospitals. I’d recommend you stay away from hospitals unless you’re having an emergency and need expert medical care, as hospitals are prime breeding grounds for infections of all kinds. The best place to get plenty of rest and recover from illness that is not life-threatening is usually in the comfort of your own home.

Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Vaccine Exemptions

With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it’s critical to protect your right to informed consent to vaccination and fight to protect and expand vaccine exemptions in state public health laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and the leaders in your community.

THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.

Mass vaccination policies are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact. It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your Smart Phone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up-to-date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choices and get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call to action items you need at your fingertips..

So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

Share Your Story with the Media and People You Know

If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don’t share information and experiences with each other, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you; you have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the “other side” of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination. The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than “statistically acceptable collateral damage” of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn’t be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the following web pages on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) website at www.NVIC.org:
•NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
•If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
•Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers, school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.

Connect with Your Doctor or Find a New One that Will Listen and Care

If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don’t want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination.

However, there is hope.

At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they’re starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents. It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So take the time to locate a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

Sale:

please copy and paste these codes into your browser to snatch up these bargains.

Code:
http://www.awin1.com/cread.php?awinmid=2367&awinaffid=164818&clickref=&p=http://www.crabtree-evelyn.co.uk/sale/view-all-sale 3 for 2 promotion:

Code:
http://www.awin1.com/cread.php?awinmid=2367&awinaffid=164818&clickref=&p=http://www.crabtree-evelyn.co.uk/sale/3for2-500mls-sale
To help you in your promotions we have included some of our top bestsellers from the sale below:

Lovely Hands 6x25g
40% off – now £10.80

Code:
http://www.awin1.com/cread.php?awinmid=2367&awinaffid=164818&clickref=&p=http://www.crabtree-evelyn.co.uk/gifts/gifts-for-her/lovely-hands-6x25g-44870.html
La Source Body Lotion
3 for 2 – £12.50

Code:
http://www.awin1.com/cread.php?awinmid=2367&awinaffid=164818&clickref=&p=http://www.crabtree-evelyn.co.uk/bath-and-body/lotion-and-cream/la-source-body-lotion-500ml-163581.html
La Source Bath and Shower Gel
3 for 2 – £12.50

Code:
http://www.awin1.com/cread.php?awinmid=2367&awinaffid=164818&clickref=&p=http://www.crabtree-evelyn.co.uk/sale/view-all-sale/la-source-shower-gel-500ml-163580.html
Pomegranate, Argan & Grapeseed Shower Gel and Body Lotion Duo
50% off – now £12.50

Code:
http://www.awin1.com/cread.php?awinmid=2367&awinaffid=164818&clickref=&p=http://www.crabtree-evelyn.co.uk/gifts/gifts-for-her/pomegranate-duo-medium-gift-44619.html
West Indian Lime Aftershave Balm
40% off – now £7.20

Code:
http://www.awin1.com/cread.php?awinmid=2367&awinaffid=164818&clickref=&p=http://www.crabtree-evelyn.co.uk/gifts/gifts-for-him/west-indian-lime-after-shave-balm-50ml-79968.html
Don’t forget free delivery when you spend over £40!