Wisconsin Aims to Jail Amish Farmer..

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Food

As Americans increasingly seek access to healthful, fresh-from-the-farm foods like raw milk, private buying agreements like herdshares are becoming more popular.

A herdshare is a private agreement between a farmer and an individual in which the farmer is paid to take care of an animal, a cow for example that belongs to one or more people.

You essentially pay a onetime purchase fee to “buy a share” of a farmer’s herd, which entitles you to the benefits of owning that cow, such as a certain amount of milk each week.

Wisconsin dairy farmer Vernon Hershberger provides food to members of such a private buying club, supplying them with fresh raw milk and produce.

If you believe that you have a right to eat what you want, without having to get the government’s permission first, it’s hard to imagine what could be wrong with such an agreement, but Wisconsin is one of a handful of states that is aggressively targeting raw-milk farmers, seeking to criminalize their peaceful practice of food production.

Vernon Hershberger’s case is particularly glaring, as even though a jury nullified the case, the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) still tried to put him in jail.

Wisconsin Seeks to Jail Raw Milk Farmer After Jury Finds Him Innocent

On May 20, Hershberger’s trial began at the Sauk County Courthouse. He was charged with four criminal misdemeanors for supplying a private buying club with raw milk and other fresh produce.
1.Operating a retail food establishment without a license
2.Operating a dairy farm as a milk producer without a license
3.Operating a dairy plant without a license
4.Violating a holding order by removing the members’ food from the embargoed refrigerators

However, since Hershberger only supplies food to paid members in a private buying club, he has long maintained that he is not subject to state food regulations, and jurors must have agreed.

On May 25, he was acquitted of three charges of producing, processing and selling milk without state licenses. They did, however, find him guilty of violating a holding order, which required that he not sell any food or milk from his store as a condition of his bail.

Following a Capital Times online article in which it’s reported that Hershberger stated he had continued to supply his buying club members with fresh food all along, the Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion to revoke Hershberger’s bail and instead send him to jail – after he’d already been acquitted! Fortunately, Hershberger will not be going to jail for this “crime,” as on June 13 he was sentenced to pay a $1,000 fine plus $513 in court costs – avoiding jail time, probation and the maximum possible fine of $10,000.

Still, the fact that the motion was filed in the first place is deeply disturbing. The Cornucopia Institute reported:1

“Hershberger’s attorney, Glenn Reynolds, called the motion very disappointing because the bail terms he’s accused of violating are the same activities that led to the charges of which he was acquitted. ‘It seems vindictive in my view,’ he said. ‘He goes to trial and wins and now they want to put him in jail? What is the point of this sort of motion?’”

What’s the point is a very good question, indeed, as it seems clear the state is trying to take a stand against Hershberger for example’s sake … but why?

How Can They Continue to Claim This Is About Safety?

One of the most common excuses given for why farmers are raided, prosecuted, and shut down is that raw foods may be potentially harmful to human health. But those buying these products are doing so willingly, in many cases travelling great distances to access these fresh-from-the-farm foods.

Wisconsin is not doing these food buyers any favors by taking away their right to fresh food. Instead, they are taking a stand against Hershberger because his acquittal could have a major impact on increasing raw milk sales in the state. As noted by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF):2

“‘There is more at stake here than just a farmer and his few customers,’ says Hershberger, ‘this is about the fundamental right of farmers and consumers to engage in peaceful, private, mutually consenting agreements for food, without additional oversight.'”

Back in 2010, after weeks of lobbying by the Wisconsin dairy industry, former Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle vetoed a bill that would have made sale of on-the-farm raw milk legal, stating he “must side with public health and safety of the dairy industry.”

But high-quality raw milk is no more a threat to public health than sunshine or natural supplements (against which similar “public-safety” wars have been aged). CDC data3 shows there are about 412 confirmed cases of people getting ill from pasteurized milk each year, while only about 116 illnesses a year are linked to raw milk. And research by Dr. Ted Beals, MD, featured in the summer 2011 issue of Wise Traditions,4 the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation, shows that you are about 35,000 times more likely to get sick from other foods than you are from raw milk!

So when officials say they are siding with public health and the safety of the dairy industry, they are really only siding with the dairy industry, in an attempt to protect them from all competition. The reason why small-scale organic, raw dairy farms are so threatening to the dairy industry is because they simply cannot produce safe raw milk in a confined animal feeding operation (CAFO). Cows raised under such conditions produce milk that must be pasteurized in order to be safe to drink, as the unnatural diet and environment dramatically alters the nutritional and bacterial composition of the milk, making it otherwise unfit to drink.

The FDA Is Leading the War Against Raw Milk

State-level efforts against raw milk are only part of a larger problem, which is the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) 25-year-old regulation banning raw milk for human consumption in interstate commerce. But even this is up for challenge. Pete Kennedy, president of FTCLDF wrote:

“At the federal level, a bill that would repeal the interstate ban has been introduced the last two sessions of Congress and will likely be reintroduced this session; the bill would allow raw milk to be taken across state lines either by consumers or their agents who obtain it in another state or by producers or their agents delivering it to consumers in another state. The bill would not affect the power of states to determine whether the sale of raw milk would be illegal within its borders.”

Currently, legislation that would either legalize or expand the sale of raw milk has been introduced in Arkansas, Hawaii, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, and Wyoming. A bill is also expected to be filed shortly in Wisconsin, according to Kennedy. Many are simply getting fed up with the FDA and their state governments trying to dictate what its residents are allowed to eat. This is not an issue of a few “rogue” farmers trying to sell an illegal product; it’s an issue of food freedom. Kennedy continued:

“The fight over raw milk stands as a symbol of the much larger fight for food freedom. Who gets to decide what you eat? You? Or the FDA? If the FDA and state agencies are allowed to impose their view of ‘safe food’ on consumers, raw milk won’t be the only thing lost – all our food will be pasteurized, irradiated, and genetically engineered. The effort to reclaim our right to buy and consume raw milk is leading the way for everyone who wants to be able to obtain the food of their choice from the source of their choice.”

Right now, your food freedom is on the chopping block. In North Dakota, a new bill threatens to make herdshare illegal.5 In New Mexico, a bill has been introduced that would ban the sale of raw milk, while a proposed regulation in Illinois that is currently in the drafting stage would similarly restrict access to raw milk. So the time to take action is now…

Stand Up for Your Right to Food Freedom

The effort to reclaim your right to buy and consume raw milk is leading the way for everyone who wants to be able to obtain the food of their choice from the source of their choice. So please, get involved! I urge you to embrace the following action plan to protect your right to choose your own foods:
1.Get informed: Visit www.farmtoconsumer.org or click here to sign up for action alerts.
2.Join the fight for your rights: The Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF) is the only organization of its kind. This 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization provides a legal defense for farmers who are being pursued by the government for distributing foods directly to consumers. Your donations, although not tax deductible, will be used to support the litigation, legislative, and lobbying efforts of the FTCLDF. For a summary of FTCLDF’s activities in 2012, see this link.
3.Support your local farmers: Buy from local farmers, not the industry that is working with the government to take away your freedoms.

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




Pesticides Again Tied to Parkinson’s Disease..

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Food, Health

Research has shown that many pesticides are neurotoxic and can cause disruptions to your neurological system and your brain. The reason why neurotoxins still enjoy widespread use on our food supply is really more about the bottom line for farming operations than it is about the science of human health.

Research has clearly and consistently linked pesticide exposure to Parkinson’s disease. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also considers 30 percent of insecticides to be carcinogenic.

All of these toxic chemicals are permitted on farms growing conventional and genetically engineered crops, and a large number of them can end up on your plate when you purchase conventionally-grown fruits and vegetables and/or processed foods.

But pesticides also have a dramatic impact on the health of our ecosystem. Neonicotinoids, such as Imidacloprid and Clothianidin, kill insects by attacking their nervous systems. These are known to get into pollen and nectar, and can damage beneficial insects such as bees.

These toxic chemicals have been implicated as one of the primary culprits in the mass die-offs of bees, and have subsequently been banned in some countries. The United States, however, is not among these countries…

But the effects of neonicotinoids do not end there. According to recent research by the American Bird Conservancy (ABC), the use of neonicotinoids in seed treatments is also responsible for the death of birds, terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates and other wildlife.

Ecosystem Threatened by ‘Gross Underestimate’ of Toxicity of Neonicotinoids

Nicotine-related compounds called nicotinoids were initially introduced as a new form of pesticide in the 1990s, as widespread pest resistance rendered many older pesticides useless. Many seeds are now “pre-treated” with neonicotinoids, which are water-soluble and break down slowly in the environment.

Today, they are the most widely-used pesticides in the world. In fact, you’d be hard-pressed to find a pesticide that does not contain at least one neonicotinoid insecticide. In California alone, there are nearly 300 registered neonicotinoid products available.

The American Bird Conservancy (ABC), one of the leading bird conservation organizations in the US, is now calling for a ban on the use of neonicotinoids as seed treatments, and wants all pending applications for neonicotinoid products to be suspended pending an independent review of the products’ effects on birds, terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates, and other wildlife.

As reported by the American Bird Conservancy1:

“It is clear that these chemicals have the potential to affect entire food chains. The environmental persistence of the neonicotinoids, their propensity for runoff and for groundwater infiltration, and their cumulative and largely irreversible mode of action in invertebrates raise significant environmental concerns…”

ABC commissioned the world renowned environmental toxicologist Dr. Pierre Mineau to conduct the research, which resulted in a 100-page report2 titled The Impact of the Nation’s Most Widely Used Insecticides on Birds. Mineau’s report reviews 200 studies on neonicotinoids, including industry research obtained through the US Freedom of Information Act.

The report concludes that neonicotinoids “are lethal to birds and to the aquatic systems on which they depend.” Even more disturbing, contamination levels in both surface and ground water around the world are already beyond the threshold found to kill many aquatic invertebrates. According to this shocking toxicology assessment:
•A single kernel of corn treated with this type of pesticide can kill a songbird
•A single grain of wheat or canola treated with the neonicotinoids Imidacloprid can be fatal to a bird
•As little as 1/10th of a neonicotinoid-coated corn seed per day during egg-laying season can affect a bird’s reproductive capability

EPA Accused of Failing to Adequately Assess Environmental Risks

Disturbingly, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not adequately assessed the toxicity of neonicotinoids. Part of the problem, according to the featured report, is that the EPA is “using scientifically unsound, outdated methodology that has more to do with a game of chance than with a rigorous scientific process.” This has led the agency to grossly underestimate the toxicity of these chemicals. Furthermore3:

“The report also charges that there is no readily available biomarker for neonicotinoids as there is for cholinesterase inhibitors such as the organophosphorous pesticides.

‘It is astonishing that EPA would allow a pesticide to be used in hundreds of products without ever requiring the registrant to develop the tools needed to diagnose poisoned wildlife. It would be relatively simple to create a binding assay for the neural receptor which is affected by this class of insecticides,’ said Dr. Mineau.”

Dr. Mineau urges the EPA to require pesticide registrants to also provide the diagnostic tools necessary to diagnose cases of wildlife poisonings. So far, neonicotinoids have garnered the most attention and criticism for their role in bee die-offs—a worldwide phenomenon that took off once these newer pesticides became widely used. As stated by ABC4:

“The serious risk to bees should not be understated, as one-third of the US diet depends on these insect pollinators. The ABC assessment makes clear, however, that the potential environmental impacts of neonicotinoids go well beyond bees.”

Link Between Neonicotinoids and Bee Die-Off is ‘Crystal Clear,’ Lawsuit Maintains

A general consensus among beekeepers is that the bee die-offs are most definitely related to toxic chemicals, and neonicotinoids in particular. The disappearance of bee colonies began accelerating in the United States shortly after the EPA allowed these new insecticides on the market in the mid-2000s. In May, beekeepers and environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the agency over its failure to protect bees from these toxic pesticides.

Meanwhile, France has banned Imidacloprid for use on corn and sunflowers after reporting large losses of bees after exposure to it. They also rejected Bayer´s application for Clothianidin, and other countries, such as Italy, have banned certain neonicotinoids as well.

Neonicotinoids are used on most of American crops, especially corn. As mentioned earlier, these chemicals are typically applied to seeds before planting, allowing the pesticide to be taken up through the plant’s vascular system as it grows. As a result, the chemical is expressed in the pollen and nectar of the plant, and hence the danger to bees and other pollinating insects… Needless to say, since the chemical is taken up systemically through the plant, it could also pose potential health risks to anyone eating the plant since it cannot be rinsed off.

Neonicotinoids affect insects’ central nervous systems in ways that are cumulative and irreversible. Even minute amounts can have profound effects over time. One of the observed effects of these insecticides is weakening of the bee’s immune system. Forager bees bring pesticide-laden pollen back to the hive, where it’s consumed by all of the bees. Six months later, their immune systems fail, and they fall prey to secondary, seemingly “natural” bee infections, such as parasites, mites, viruses, fungi and bacteria.

The EPA5 acknowledges that “pesticide poisoning” may be one factor leading to colony collapse disorder, yet they have been slow to act to protect bees from this threat. The current lawsuit may help spur them toward more urgent action, which is desperately needed as the food supply hangs in the balance.

In March, the EPA sent Jim Jones, overseer of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, to talk to California almond growers and beekeepers, as mass die-offs of bees were seriously threatening this year’s almond crop. But although beekeepers said Jones got the message that bees are in serious trouble, they were dismayed by the fact that he seemed more interested in finding new places for bees to forage rather than addressing the issue of toxic pesticides…

As usual, at the core of the problem is big industry, which is blinded by greed and enabled by a corrupt governmental system that permits the profit-driven sacrifice of our environment. Unfortunately, this motivation reflects an extreme shortsightedness about the long-term survival of the human race, as well as of our planet. Clearly, if the goal of pesticides is to increase food yield to more easily feed 7 billion human beings, this goal falls flat on its face if it leads to the collapse of our food chain.

Pesticides Again Tied to Parkinson’s Disease

A recent meta-analysis published in the journal Neurology6, examined data from 104 studies published between 1975 and 2011, in search for a potential link between pesticides and Parkinson’s disease. As many previous studies, it found one… Parkinson’s disease is a neurological disorder in which neurons in a region within your brain responsible for normal movement begin to die, causing the telltale shaking and rigidity associated with the disease. There’s currently no known cure, which makes preventing the disease all the more important. Mounting evidence suggests avoiding pesticides is an important part of prevention. As reported by Reuters7:

“In 2011, a study of US farm workers from National Institutes of Health found some pesticides that are known to interfere with cell function were linked to the development of Parkinson’s disease. Another study that was published in 2012 also reported that people with Parkinson’s disease were more likely to report exposure to pesticides, compared to people without the condition.”

In this latest analysis, exposure to pesticides was linked to a 58 percent increased risk of developing Parkinson’s. Some pesticides were clearly worse than others. Paraquat (a non-selective plant killer) and two fungicides, maneb and mancozeb, were found to double your risk. One of the study’s authors told Reuters that8:

“[T]he study’s results suggest that people should avoid contact with pesticides or – at least – wear proper protection when handling the chemicals. The use of protective equipment and compliance with suggested, or even recommended, preventive practices should be emphasized in high-risk working categories (such as farming).”

How Modern Farming Methods Have Led to Toxic Food Supplies

Chlorinated hydrocarbons, or organochlorines like DDT were developed after World War II and remained widely used in agriculture for pest and weed control until Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring was published in 1962. That book is credited with beginning the modern environmental movement, and through the involvement of scientists and ordinary concerned citizens many of the organochlorines were later phased out of use, according to the conditions of the Stockholm Convention of 19819. Since then, these chemicals have been replaced by a slew of new herbicides, pesticides and fungicides designed to kill the things that threaten a farmer’s bottom line.

These include not just neonicotinoids, but also glyphosate—the active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup.

Roundup was designed to be used in conjunction with Monsanto’s genetically engineered “Roundup Ready” seeds, which in turn have been genetically altered to withstand otherwise lethal doses of the chemical. This way, only the non-modified weeds die while the crop survives the indiscriminate sprayings. In theory, genetically engineered seeds were supposed to reduce the use of agricultural chemicals. It didn’t work out that way. Today, resistant “superweeds” are taking over large swaths of farm land, and in an effort to stay on top of increasing weed resistance, farmers using Monsanto’s genetically engineered (GE) seeds have progressively started using more and more Roundup.

The increased pesticide residue remains in the foods that wind up on your dinner table, as glyphosate is taken up systemically throughout the plant and cannot be washed off.

About 90 percent of the corn produced in the US is genetically engineered, and GE soybeans account for almost 95 percent of US production. In other words, if you’re eating non-organic corn or soybeans in the United States, you’re eating a genetically engineered crop that’s been repeatedly and thoroughly drenched in glyphosate. The same applies to eating meats from animals raised in confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs), as they’re typically fed GE grains.

The danger to you and your children is very real, according to the latest research. While Monsanto insists that Roundup is safe and “minimally toxic” to humans, a recent report published in the journal Entropy10 argues that glyphosate residues, found in most commonly consumed foods in the Western diet courtesy of GE sugar, corn, and soy, “enhance the damaging effects of other food-borne chemical residues and toxins in the environment to disrupt normal body functions and induce disease.” According to the authors:

“Negative impact on the body is insidious and manifests slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body.”

The main finding of the report is that glyphosate inhibits cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, a large and diverse group of enzymes that catalyze the oxidation of organic substances. This, the authors state, is “an overlooked component of its toxicity to mammals.” One of the functions of CYP enzymes is to detoxify xenobiotics—chemical compounds found in a living organism that are not normally produced or consumed by the organism in question. By limiting the ability of these enzymes to detoxify foreign chemical compounds, glyphosate enhances the damaging effects of those chemicals and environmental toxins you may be exposed to—including other pesticides.

How You Can Avoid Toxic Pesticide Exposure

First and foremost, to limit your exposure to the most common agricultural chemicals, such as neonicotinoids and glyphosate, you want to buy as much fresh organic produce as possible, as synthetic chemicals are not allowed on organic crops. For a good guide to which conventionally grown produce carry the lowest pesticide residues, and which you’re best off buying organic due to their heavy pesticide load, see my recent article, How to Find the Healthiest Fare in Meat and Produce Aisles.

Since years’ worth of these toxins now pollute our soils and waterways, including the sources of most if not all human drinking water, I also recommend investing in a good water filtration system for your home or apartment to ensure you are drinking the purest water possible. Also consider a shower filter, as they may actually cause more damage to your body through your skin than from drinking unfiltered water. Additional recommendations to limit your exposure to toxic pesticides and herbicides include:
1.Grow your own food. While this may be a challenge for many, nearly everyone, even those with a studio apartment or a dorm room can easily grow sprouts that can serve as a large percentage of the organic vegetables that you eat.
2.Detoxify your lawn. If you have a lawn care service, make sure they are not using the organophosphate pesticide trichlorfon. Also, avoid using Roundup to control weeds around your home.
3.Clean out your shed. The pesticide diazinon (sold under the brand names Diazinon or Spectracide) has been banned from residential, but there might be some left in your old garden shed.
4.Use natural cures for a lice infection. Malathion is used for treatment of head lice. Don’t put a neurotoxin on your child’s head.
5.Check your school’s pest control policy. If they have not already done so, encourage your school district to move to Integrated Pest Management, which uses less toxic alternatives.

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




What is Spinach Good For?

Posted by: Stef605  /  Category: Food, Health

Botanical name: Spinacia oleracea

Obscurely referred to for years in England as “the Spanish vegetable,” the name of this leafy green veggie was later shortened to the name we call it today. It’s thought to have originated in ancient Persia. Spinach cultivation spread to Nepal, and by the seventh century, to China, where it’s still called “Persian Greens.” The Moors introduced it to Spain around the 11th century.

According to the USDA, Americans consume nearly 2½ pounds of spinach per year per capita. This easily quadruples the amount eaten 40 years ago, possibly because the boiled-and-canned-to-resemble-seaweed dish once served in school lunches is much improved. Now greener, tastier and crisper by freezing, spinach fresh from the garden is often used for salads and in place of lettuce on sandwiches.

No mere vegetable ever gained the fame that spinach did in the 1960s through the cartoon character Popeye. Often in vain, parents encouraged their children to eat their spinach so they would grow up to be big and strong.

There’s actually some truth to that…

Health Benefits of Spinach

Low in fat and even lower in cholesterol, spinach is high in niacin and zinc, as well as protein, fiber, vitamins A, C, E and K, thiamin, vitamin B6, folate, calcium, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, copper, and manganese. In other word, it’s loaded with good things for every part of your body!

Abundant flavonoids in spinach act as antioxidants to keep cholesterol from oxidizing and protect your body from free radicals, particularly in the colon. The folate in spinach is good for your healthy cardiovascular system, and magnesium helps lower high blood pressure. Studies also have shown that spinach helps maintain your vigorous brain function, memory and mental clarity.

In order to retain the rich iron content of spinach while cooking – lightly – add lemon juice or vinegar.

Spinach Nutrition Facts
Serving Size: One cup (30 grams)

% Daily Value

Amt. Per Serving

Calories

7

Sodium

24 mg

2%

Carbohydrates

1 g

Fiber

1 g

8%

Protein

1 g

Potassium

167 mg

Calcium

29.7 mg

Magnesium

23.7 mg

Folate

58.2

Betaine

165 mg

Studies Done on Spinach

Because of the potentially high incidence of DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltri-chloroethane) contamination1, only buy organic varieties of this vegetable, as much as possible. A known cause of cancer, birth defects and reproductive damage, DDT, while banned in U.S. in 1972, continues to be manufactured and exported to developing nations, most often to fight mosquito-borne malaria. Still widely used on crops imported to the U.S., significant amounts of DDT have been detected. Worse, it can stay in the soil for years. In fact, spinach grown in the U.S. and sprayed with DDT before 1972 has been found to contain traces of DDT.

Spinach Healthy Recipes: Creamed Spinach

Ingredients:
¾ cup raw whole milk
¼ cup water
2 medium garlic cloves, minced
1 tablespoon butter
1½ tablespoons arrowroot
2 pounds spinach, steamed – or 2 pounds chard, steamed, drained
¼ cup grated Parmesan cheese
¼ teaspoon ground nutmeg
Sea salt and freshly ground pepper

Procedure:
1.In a medium saucepan, combine milk, water and garlic. Heat slowly until very hot and steamy. Let stand, covered, for five to 10 minutes. This allows the garlic to soften.
2.Melt butter in another medium saucepan over medium high heat.
3.Whisk in arrowroot, then add hot milk mixture, whisking until smooth. Stir in spinach or chard, and cook until sauce is thick and bubbly and the spinach is tender but still green, about six minutes.
4.Stir in cheese and season with nutmeg, salt and pepper. Serve immediately.

This recipe makes four servings.
(From Healthy Recipes for Your Nutritional Type by Dr. Mercola)

Spinach Fun Facts

Known to thrive better in cooler than warmer climates, Arab farmers were nevertheless able to successfully cultivate spinach in the arid Mediterranean climate through the use of a sophisticated irrigation system, possibly as early as the eighth century.

Summary

Low in calories but packed with nutrients, spinach is one of a number of leafy vegetables becoming more and more prevalent on the salad bar. Its versatility makes it easily adaptable in healthy vegetable drinks and smoothies, lightly sautéed as a stand-along side dish, and added to soups or stir fried vegetables. Best of all, this green superfood is packed with so many healthy attributes, it’s hard to list them all!

References:
1 Chef Boy Ari, “Eats Yer Spinach,” ewg.org, June 2012

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




Obesity and inappropriate lifestyle choices

Posted by: Stef605  /  Category: Health

Killer at Large1, a documentary film by Steven Greenstreet, tackles the topic of obesity, a problem of truly epic proportions where misinformation is a major driver. According to former Surgeon General, Richard Carmona, quoted in the film:

“Obesity is a terror [threat] within; it’s destroying our society from within and unless we do something about it, the magnitude of the dilemma will dwarf 9/11 or any other terrorist event that you can point out.”

Presently, a full two-thirds of Americans are overweight or obese. Childhood obesity has also skyrocketed, tripling over the past 30 years. One in three children between the ages of 10 and 17 is now overweight or obese, and 27 percent of young adults, 17 to 24, are too heavy to join the military.

As a result, today’s children may be the first generation whose life expectancy is shorter than that of their parents….

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an estimated 110,000 Americans die as a result of obesity each year, and about one-third of all cancers are directly related to it.

Data collected from over 60,000 Canadians also shows that obesity now leads to more doctor visits than smoking. One-in-four Americans is also pre-diabetic or diabetic, and heart disease and cancer, both of which are associated with obesity, top the mortality charts.

Clearly, the issue of how to achieve good health has never been more pertinent to more people. Yet despite the enormity of this problem, very little is being done to effectively combat obesity.

The film examines the causes of obesity and suggests ways to reverse this deadly trend. Below, I sum up my own recommendations as well.

It’s quite clear that conventional diet and health recommendations are off the mark… Obesity and related health problems are directly attributable to flawed diet—a diet too high in carbs and poor-quality proteins, and too low in healthy fats.

Yet multinational food corporations and biotech companies have successfully manipulated the system to encourage an increase in the use of cheap foods that contribute to the obesity epidemic.

A recent report exposing the deep conflicts of interest between the processed food industry and the trade organization for food and nutrition professionals in the US also shatters any illusion you may have had that registered dieticians will provide you with well-researched, science-based nutrition advice that will improve your health…

Skyrocketing Obesity is Related to Misleading You on Health Issues

Obesity is the result of inappropriate lifestyle choices, and unfortunately, our government has done an abysmal job at disseminating accurate information about diet and health. It’s one thing for corporations to put out misleading ads – honesty is not in the self-interest of the processed food and beverage industry. It’s another when the government falls in line with for-profit deception and becomes a propagator of corporate propaganda. And this is exactly what has happened… For example, conventional advice that is driving public health in the wrong direction includes:
•Cutting calories: Not all calories are created equal, and counting calories will not help you lose weight if you’re consuming the wrong kind of calories
•Choosing diet foods will help you lose weight: Substances like Splenda (sucralose) and Equal or Nutrasweet (aspartame) may have zero calories, but your body isn’t fooled. When it gets a “sweet” taste, it expects calories to follow, and when this doesn’t occur it leads to distortions in your biochemistry that may actually lead to weight gain
•Avoiding saturated fat: The myth that saturated fat causes heart disease has undoubtedly harmed an incalculable number of lives over the past several decades, even though it all began as little more than a scientifically unsupported marketing strategy for Crisco cooking oil. Most people (myself included) actually need at least 50 to 70 percent of their diet as healthful fats such as organic, pastured eggs, avocados, coconut oil, real butter and grass-fed beef in order to optimize their health
•Reducing your cholesterol to extremely low levels: Cholesterol is actually NOT the major culprit in heart disease or any disease, and the guidelines that dictate what number your cholesterol levels should be to keep you “healthy” are fraught with conflict of interest — and have never been proven to be good for your health

This is just a tiny sampling of the pervasive misleading information on weight and obesity disseminated by our government agencies. A more complete list of conventional health myths could easily fill several books. The reason behind this sad state of affairs is the fact that the very industries that profit from these lies are the ones funding most of the research; infiltrating our regulatory agencies; and bribing our political officials to support their financially-driven agenda through any number of legal, and at times not so legal, means.

Why Eating Fructose Is More Dangerous than Other Sugars

Part of what makesfructose so unhealthy is that it is metabolized by your liver to fat far more rapidly than any other sugar. The entire burden of metabolizing fructose falls on your liver, and it promotes visceral fat2. This is the type of fat that collects around your organs and in your abdominal region and is associated with a greater risk of heart disease.

Dr. Robert Lustig, Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at the University of California, has been a pioneer in decoding sugar metabolism, and his work reveals there are major differences in how different sugars are broken down and used. For example:
•After eating fructose, virtually all of the metabolic burden rests on your liver. With glucose or most other sugars, your liver has to break down only 20 percent. The metabolism of fructose by your liver creates a long list of waste products and toxins, including a large amount of uric acid, which drives up blood pressure and causes gout.
•Every cell in your body, including your brain, utilizes glucose. Therefore, much of it is “burned up” immediately after you consume it. By contrast, fructose is turned into free fatty acids (FFAs), VLDL (the damaging form of cholesterol), and triglycerides, which get stored as fat.
•The fatty acids created during fructose metabolism accumulate as fat droplets in your liver and skeletal muscle tissues, causing insulin resistance and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)3. Insulin resistance progresses to metabolic syndrome and type II diabetes.
•Fructose is the most lipophilic carbohydrate. In other words, fructose converts to glycerol 3 phosphate (g-3-p), which is directly used to turn FFAs into triglycerides. The more g-3-p you have, the more fat you store. Glucose does not do this.
•When you eat 120 calories of glucose, less than one calorie is stored as fat. 120 calories of fructose results in 40 calories being stored as fat.
•Glucose suppresses your hunger hormone ghrelin and stimulates leptin, which suppresses your appetite. Fructose has no effect on ghrelin and interferes with your brain’s communication with leptin, resulting in overeating. That fructose triggers changes in your brain that may lead to overeating and weight gain has also been confirmed through functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) tests.

The Evolutionary Link Between Fructose Consumption and Fat Accumulation

No doubt you’ve heard that consuming more calories than you burn off is the root of your weight problem. Alas, this “conventional wisdom” has been firmly debunked by modern science. The fact is this: Not all calories count equally. It is in fact FAR more important to look at the source of the calories than counting them.

In short, you do not get fat because you eat too many calories and don’t exercise enough. You get fat because you eat the wrong kind of calories.

As explained by Dr. Robert Lustig, fructose is ‘isocaloric but not isometabolic.’ This means you can have the same amount of calories from fructose or glucose, fructose and protein, or fructose and fat, but the metabolic effect will be entirely different despite the identical calorie count. This is a crucial point that must be understood.

The bottom line is that your consumption of carbohydrates, whether in the form of grains and sugars (especially fructose), will determine whether or not you’re able to manage your weight and maintain optimal health. This is because these types of carbs (fructose and grains) affect the hormone insulin, which is a very potent fat regulator. Fats and proteins affect insulin to a far lesser degree.

As long as you keep eating fructose and grains, you’re programming your body to create and store fat…

Research by another expert in this field, Dr. Richard Johnson, chief of the Division of Renal Diseases and Hypertension at the University of Colorado and author of The Sugar Fix and The Fat Switch, further confirms this. His work demonstrates that fructose-containing sugars cause obesity, again not by calories, but by turning on your “fat switch”—a powerful biological adaptation that causes cells to accumulate fat in anticipation of scarcity (or hibernation). His most recent book, The Fat Switch, is of major importance to anyone who has ever struggled with their weight and/or persistent health issues. Five basic truths detailed in his book include:
•Large portions of food and too little exercise are NOT solely responsible for why you are gaining weight
•Metabolic Syndrome is actually a healthy adaptive condition that animals undergo to store fat to help them survive periods of famine. The problem is that most of us are always “feasting” and rarely undergo fasting. As a result, this beneficial switch actually causes damage to contemporary man
•Uric acid is increased by specific foods and causally contributes to obesity and insulin resistance
•Fructose-containing sugars cause obesity not by calories but by turning on the fat switch
•Effective treatment of obesity requires turning off your fat switch and improving the function of your cells’ mitochondria

I highly recommend picking up a copy of this book, which is a useful tool for those struggling with their weight. Dietary sugar, and fructose in particular, is a significant “tripper of your fat switch,” so understanding how sugars of all kinds affect your weight and health is imperative.

What are the Sources of Your Daily Calories?

According to the 2010 Report by the Advisory Committee on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans4, the top 10 sources of calories in the American diet are:

1. Grain-based desserts (cakes, cookies, donuts, pies, crisps, cobblers, and granola bars) 139 calories a day

6. Alcoholic beverages

2. Yeast breads, 129 calories a day

7. Pasta and pasta dishes

3. Chicken and chicken-mixed dishes, 121 calories a day

8. Mexican mixed dishes

4. Soda, energy drinks, and sports drinks, 114 calories a day

9. Beef and beef-mixed dishes

5. Pizza, 98 calories a day

10. Dairy desserts

As you can see, on the whole it’s easy to see that the dietary roots of the American weight problem is linked to carbs—sugars (primarily fructose) and grains—in the form of processed foods and sweet drinks. You’ve often heard me state that soda is the number one source of calories in the US diet, which it was, based on the 1999-2000 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The updated NHANES survey above covers nutritional data from 2005-2006, placing grain-based foods in the top two slots.

Still, soda comes in at number four, and I still believe many people, particularly teenagers, probably still get a majority of their calories from fructose-rich drinks like soda.

I strongly recommend ditching all sodas as a first step to clean up your diet and help normalize your insulin levels. I believe it’s one of the most powerful actions you can take to improve your health and lower your risk of disease and long-term chronic health conditions. Especially when you consider that just one can of soda per day can add as much as 15 pounds to your weight over the course of a single year, and increases your risk of diabetes by 85 percent! If you struggle with an addiction to soda and other sweets, I strongly recommend you consider Turbo Tapping. It’s a simple and clever use of the Emotional Freedom Technique, designed to resolve many aspects of an issue in a concentrated period of time.

My Recommended Fructose Allowance

As a standard recommendation, I advise keeping your TOTAL fructose consumption below 25 grams per day. For most people it would also be wise to limit your fructose from fruit to 15 grams or less, as you’re virtually guaranteed to consume “hidden” sources of fructose through processed food and condiments.

There certainly are exceptions to this rule. People who are aggressively exercising can consume far more, especially if consuming the calories around the time of exercise, but generally, to optimize health, most will benefit from restricting their fructose input.

Fifteen grams of fructose is not much — it represents two bananas, one-third cup of raisins, or two Medjool dates. Remember, the average 12-ounce can of soda contains 40 grams of sugar, at least half of which is fructose, so one can of soda alone would exceed your daily allotment. If your insulin and leptin signaling is fine and you are normal body weight and don’t suffer from diabetes, high blood pressure or high cholesterol, then consuming more fruit is reasonable.

In his book, The Sugar Fix, Dr. Richard Johnson includes detailed tables showing the content of fructose in different foods — an information base that isn’t readily available when you’re trying to find out exactly how much fructose is in various foods. You can also find an abbreviated listing of the fructose content of common fruits in this previous article.

Key Point: Replace Carbs with Healthful Fats!

Keep in mind that when we’re talking about harmful carbs, we’re only referring to grains and sugars, NOT vegetable carbs. When you cut grain/sugar carbs you then need to radically increase:
•The amount of vegetables you eat since, by volume, the grains you need to trade out are denser than vegetables, and
•Healthful fats such as avocados, coconut oil, organic pastured egg yolks, raw grass fed organic butter, olives, and nuts such as almonds and pecans.

Avoid highly processed and genetically engineered omega-6 oils like corn, canola and soy as they will upset your omega 6/3 ratio. Of course you want to avoid all trans fats, but contrary to popular advice, saturated fats are a key component of a healthy diet that will promote weight loss.

A reasonable goal will be to have as much as 50-70 percent of your diet as healthy fat, which will radically reduce your carbohydrate intake. It can be helpful to remember that fat is far more satiating than carbs, so if you have cut down on carbs and feel ravenous, this is a sign that you have not replaced them with sufficient amounts of healthy fat.

Most people will likely notice massive improvement in their health by following this approach as they are presently consuming FAR more grain and bean carbohydrates in their diet, and any reduction will be a step in the right direction. To help you get started on the right track, review my Nutritional Plan, which guides you through these dietary changes one step at a time.

You Can Avoid Becoming a Statistic

Perhaps one of the most powerful scientific discoveries to emerge in the past several years is that the old adage “a calorie is a calorie” is patently false. Furthermore, the idea that in order to lose weight all you have to do is expend more calories than you consume is equally false. The research clearly demonstrates that even if you control the number of calories you eat, if those calories come from fructose, you are at increased risk of obesity and pre-diabetes, which includes insulin and leptin resistance, fatty liver, high blood pressure and high triglycerides.

Conventional advice tells us that obesity is simply the result of eating too many calories and not exercising enough. However, Dr. Johnson’s research, discussed above, shows that a high fructose diet is one of the keys to trapping excess fat and developing metabolic disorders, and that as soon as you throw fructose into the mix, “calories in versus calories out” is no longer a functional equation.

In short, limiting fructose in all its forms, along with other sugars, is imperative in order to avoid “flipping the fat switch” that can trigger your body to accumulate excess fat. And replacing sugar and grain carbs with vegetables and healthful fats is the key to normalizing your weight, metabolic function, and overall health.

Intermittent fasting is another powerful tool that will help you transition your body from obtaining the majority of its fuel from glucose stored as glycogen in your muscles and liver, to the fat stored in your tissues. This is one of the most effective ways to burn your excess body fat, become lean, and eliminate sugar cravings.

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




Cheese—A Nutritional Powerhouse…

Posted by: Stef605  /  Category: Food, Health

Cheese—A Nutritional Powerhouse that Can Help Protect Your Heart, Brain and Bones

If you’re a cheese lover struggling to resist cheese because you’ve heard it’s not good for you, then brace yourself for some really good news. Cheese can be an excellent source of nutrition, a food you may want to include more of in your diet rather than less.

Cheese, especially that made from the milk of grass-pastured animals, is an excellent source of several important nutrients.

One of the most valuable nutrients in cheese is vitamin K2, which the latest scientific studies indicate is even more important to your heart, brain and bones than previously thought. Cheese also provides a cornucopia of vitamins, minerals (including calcium), protein, and fat.

Even if you’re lactose intolerant, there are many cheeses you will likely tolerate just fine. Most of the lactose is removed during the cheesemaking process. Pairing cheese with other foods enhances your absorption of important nutrients.

This article aims to separate fact from myth and will provide guidance on how you can incorporate your favorite cheeses into your daily diet, with joy and gratitude instead of guilt.

Cheese Will Clog Up Your Arteries… and Other Food Fairytales

Although nobody knows for certain when or where cheesemaking first began, cheese has been a staple for thousands of years. Cheese dates back to the domestication of milk-producing animals, between 8,000 and 10,000 years ago.1 The history of cheese can be traced back to the Roman Empire, the Middle East, Tibet, Mongolia, the Ming Dynasty, and of course Europe.

In spite of its rich history and enthusiastic fan base, cheese is much maligned in America due to the saturated fat/cholesterol myth.

Does eating cheese lead to obesity and heart disease? Absolutely not! This unfortunate myth stems from an outdated and seriously flawed hypothesis, perpetuated by decades of wildly successful marketing.

Numerous recent studies have confirmed saturated fat is NOT associated with obesity or heart disease and is actually associated with improved heart health. Most Americans today are consuming inadequate saturated fat. In fact, the Greeks, French and Germans eat much more cheese than Americans but enjoy lower rates of hypertension and obesity.2

I believe one of the primary factors driving obesity is overconsumption of sugar, refined grain and processed food in the standard American diet, made worse by a sedentary lifestyle. Given these facts, many nutritional experts believe that most people need 50 to 70 percent healthful fats in their diet for optimal health, and I agree. Cheese is a delicious way to help you meet that requirement Cheese holds a wealth of good nutrition, including:
•High-quality protein and amino acids
•High-quality saturated fats and omega-3 fats
•Vitamins and minerals, including calcium, zinc, phosphorous, vitamins A, D, B2 (riboflavin) and B12
•Vitamin K2
•CLA (conjugated linoleic acid), a powerful cancer-fighter and metabolism booster

Natural Cheese Versus Fake Cheese

There is a difference between natural cheese and processed “cheese foods.” Natural cheese is a simple fermented dairy product, made with nothing more than a few basic ingredients — milk, starter culture, salt and an enzyme called rennet. Salt is a crucial ingredient for flavor, ripening and preservation. You can tell a natural cheese by its label, which will state the name of the cheese variety, such as “cheddar cheese,” “blue cheese,” or “brie.” Real cheese requires refrigeration.

The starter culture and cheesemaking methods are what give each variety of cheese its particular taste, texture, shape and nutritional profile. The following factors differentiate between one variety of cheese and another:
•Specific starter culture, which is the bacteria or mold strains that ripen the cheese
•Type of milk used (cow, sheep, goat, etc.), and the conditions under which those animals were raised
•Methods of curdling, cutting, cooking and forming the curd
•Ripening conditions such as temperature, humidity, and aging time (curing)

Processed cheese or “cheese food” is a different story. These products are typically pasteurized and otherwise adulterated with a variety of additives that detract from their nutritional value. The label will always include the words “pasteurized process,” which should be your clue to walk on by. Velveeta3 is one example, with additives like sodium phosphate, sodium citronate and various coloring agents. Another clue is that most don’t require refrigeration. So, be it Velveeta, Cheese Whiz, squeeze cheese, spray cheese, or some other imposter — these are NOT real cheeses and should be banished from your shopping cart.

Raw Cheese from Pasture-Raised Animals is the Ultimate

Ideally, the cheese you consume should be made from the milk of grass-fed animals raised on pasture, rather than grain-fed or soy-fed animals confined to feedlot stalls. The biologically appropriate diet for cows is grass, but 90 percent of standard grocery store cheeses are made from the milk of CAFO cows. These cheeses are nutritionally inferior to those from grass-pastured animals. The higher quality the milk, the higher the quality of the cheese… it’s just that simple.

Even cheesemakers will tell you that raw cheese has a richer and deeper flavor than cheese made from pasteurized milk because heat destroys the enzymes and good bacteria that add flavor to the cheese. They explain that raw cheese has flavors that derive from the pastureland that nourished the animals producing the milk, much like wine is said to draw its unique flavors from individual vineyards. Grass-fed dairy products not only taste better, they are also nutritionally superior:
•Cheese made from the milk of grass-fed cows has the ideal omega-6 to omega-3 fat ratio of 2:1. By contrast, the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio of grain-fed milk is heavily weighted on the side of omega-6 fats (25:1), which are already excessive in the standard American diet. Grass-fed dairy combats inflammation in your body, whereas grain-fed dairy contributes to it.
•Grass-fed cheese contains about five times the CLA of grain-fed cheese.
•Because raw cheese is not pasteurized, natural enzymes in the milk are preserved, increasing its nutritional punch.
•Grass-fed cheese is considerably higher in calcium, magnesium, beta-carotene, and vitamins A, C, D and E.
•Organic grass-fed cheese is free of antibiotics and growth hormones.

The FDA Cracks Down on Raw Cheese

For years, federal regulators have been threatening to ban raw milk products, including raw cheese, due to what they claim are increased safety risks. Lately they’ve begun targeting artisan cheesemakers, as this is a fast growing industry in America.4

However, the FDA’s crackdown on raw cheese is based on a flawed argument.5 According to Grist, between 1973 and 1999 there’s not a single report of illness from either raw or pasteurized cheeses. However, since the year 2000, illnesses have begun to appear from raw and pasteurized cheese alike. Most outbreaks have been found to result from post-production contamination and laxity in quality control, not lack of pasteurization.

The truth is that raw cheese is not inherently dangerous, provided high standards are followed in the cheesemaking process. Hard cheeses like cheddar dry out as they age, making them relatively inhospitable to invading bacteria. The FDA’s attack on raw cheese is not based on facts, but simply is an extension of their long-standing hostility toward raw milk in general.

Salt Content Prompts Cries of “Cheesageddon”

Another recent concern is that cheese contains excessively high levels of salt. The Consensus Action on Salt and Health (CASH) is a group interested in reducing the salt in processed foods and is urging the cheese industry to reduce the amount of salt in cheese.6 It is true that American food is the saltiest food in the world. But how much is cheese responsible for the excess sodium in the American diet?

Cheese looks like a minor player when you consider the amount of salt in processed food and restaurant food, and how much more of those are consumed than cheese. Take a look at the table below, which compares salt levels in the saltiest cheeses and in the saltiest restaurant dishes, and you’ll see what I mean. Keep in mind that your sodium intake should be less than about 2,300 mg per day, which is approximately a teaspoon.

About 90 percent of the salt in the standard American diet comes from packaged foods and restaurant foods. Only about 11 percent is attributable to the salt you add during cooking and at the dinner table. Your sodium intake is even lower if you salt your food with natural sea salt instead of processed salt. It seems clear to me that, given all of the nutrition packed into a relatively small piece of cheese, the sodium is not much of an issue, particularly if you minimize processed or packaged foods and don’t eat out often.

Food (Cheeses Listed are the Saltiest Varieties)

Sodium (mg)

Roquefort cheese (100g)5

1,300

Edam cheese (100g)5

1,200

Feta cheese (100g)5

1,200

Chicken McNuggets (100g)7

1,600

Dunken Donuts Salt Bagel8

3,420

Ruby Tuesday Chicken Piccata

4,194

P.F. Chang’s Mu Shu Pork

5,820

Red Robin Buffalo Clucks and Fries

4,479

P.F. Chang’s Pork and Double Pan-Fried Noodles — awarded “Saltiest Food in America”

7,900

Vitamin K2, Vitamin D3, and Calcium — A Whole in One!

Download Interview Transcript

Cheese contains a synergistic blend of nutrients that make it a veritable nutritional powerhouse. When consumed together, vitamins K2 and D3 and calcium are especially powerful for protecting your bones, brain and heart. And cheese contains all three! I recently interviewed Dr. Kate Rheamue-Bleue, a Naturopathic Physician and author of one of the most comprehensive books on vitamin K2.Vitamin K2 plays critical roles in protecting your heart, brain, and bones, as well as giving you some protection from cancer.9 Not only does K2 help channel calcium into the proper areas of your body (bones and teeth), it prevents it from being deposited in areas where it shouldn’t, such as your arteries and soft tissues.

So, taking calcium supplements when you don’t have adequate vitamin K2 is a setup for arterial calcification and cardiovascular problems.

Since cheeses are all produced by different strains of bacteria, they differ in their total vitamin K2 content, as well as their K2 subtypes. Cheeses contain primarily subtypes MK-4, MK-8 and MK-9, in varying proportions. MK-4 is the least biologically active form (but the most abundant form in cheese), so it takes more of it for your body to benefit. MK-7, MK-8 and MK-9 stay active in your body longer so your body can benefit from much lower levels.

According to a 2009 Dutch study,10 subtypes MK-7, MK-8 and MK-9 are associated with reduced vascular calcification even at small dietary intakes (as low as 1 to 2 mcg per day).

When it Comes to K2, How Do Your Favorite Cheeses Stack Up?

In my interview with Dr. Rheamue-Bleue, she identified the cheeses highest in K2 are Gouda and Brie, which contain about 75 mcg per ounce. Hard cheeses are about 30 percent higher in vitamin K2 than soft cheeses. In perusing the nutritional tables myself, I found it interesting that the cheeses highest in vitamin K2 also tend to be the highest in protein and calcium — so the most nutritious overall14. Just realize that the values listed for “vitamin K” in common nutritional tables are of limited value because they don’t specify what TYPE of vitamin K they’re measuring.

As it turns out, scientists have found high levels of MK-7 in one type of cheese: Edam.11 This is wonderful news for those of you who would much rather sit down to a slice of Edam than a bowl of natto! (Natto, a strongly fermented Japanese soybean product, has the highest MK-7 level of any food.)

Earlier I made my case for selecting raw cheeses from grass-pastured, grass-fed animals. However, cheese contains a bacterially derived form of K2, so it doesn’t matter if the cheese was made from grass-fed milk or not — the bacteria used to culture the cheese is the same. Grass-fed dairy is important for the other reasons I’ve already discussed — just not specifically for the K2.

To summarize then, if you’re going to select cheese with your primary goal being a good source of vitamin K2, the best ones are:
•Gouda
•Brie
•Edam
•Other cheeses with lesser, but significant, levels of K2: Cheddar, Colby, hard goat cheese, Swiss, and Gruyere.12

Smile and Say Cheese!

Cheese lovers rejoice! Don’t be afraid to add healthy high quality cheese to your diet. Cheese offers a synergistic blend of vitamins, minerals, amino acids and omega-3 fatty acids, including the magic trio of vitamin D3, vitamin K2 and calcium. This nutrient triad is vitally important for reducing your risk of cardiovascular disease and osteoporosis. And don’t be afraid of raw cheese (as long as it comes from a reputable cheesemaker), which beats ordinary cheese in both taste and nutrition.

Your best option is cheese made from the milk of pasture-raised cows, sheep and goats, as opposed to feedlot livestock fed grain and soy.

Although some cheeses are fairly high in salt, their sodium levels pale in comparison to those in common fast foods, processed foods and popular restaurant entrees that make up a large part of the standard American diet. My top picks are Gouda, Brie, and Edam cheese, but you can’t go wrong with high quality cheddar, Swiss, Colby, Gruyere, and goat cheese. For an extensive website about cheeses, including a database that’s searchable by name, country of origin, type of milk, and even texture, you might enjoy Cheese.com.

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




Vitamin C can kill every virus known to mankind

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Health

If you suffer from fatigue, muscle weakness, achy joints and muscles, bleeding gums or leg rashes – you could be vitamin C deficient. Everything from the common cold to cancer can’t resist the healing power of vitamin C. In fact, there is not a known virus that can survive in the presence of this essential antioxidant.

If you would like to learn more about the health benefits of vitamin C; the best way to consume vitamin C supplements for disease prevention plus much more – don’t miss the next NaturalNews Talk Hour with Jonathan Landsman and Dr. Thomas Levy.

Visit: http://www.naturalhealth365.com and enter your email address for show details + a FREE gift!

How does vitamin C help to kill unwanted viruses and prevent disease?

Vitamin C expert, Dr. Thomas Levy says, “vitamin C is referred to as an antioxidant that donates or gives up its electrons. On the other hand, a toxin, infection or anything that causes a medical symptom in the body is a result of oxidative stress or due to a lack of electrons.” So, it’s really quite simple, if our body lacks enough electrons – we will get sick.

This is the easiest way to understand why a healthy diet – rich in fruits and vegetables (loaded with vitamin C) – does help us to literally prevent disease. Eating enough vitamin C, antioxidant-rich foods make it virtually impossible for our body to experience cellular inflammation. And, remember, inflammation is an essential component to just about every chronic, degenerative disease – including cancer.

Vitamin C has been shown to help detoxify lead, kill cancer cells plus much more

According to the work of Linus Pauling and the Linus Pauling Institute, vitamin C therapy has been shown to prevent, even reverse serious health condition, like cancer. Generally speaking, the Linus Pauling Institute recommends that healthy men and women eat “at least five servings (2? cups) of fruits and vegetables daily” – which provides about 200 mg of vitamin C. Obviously, if you suffer from any chronic disease, greater amounts may be required and not just orally.

Research has shown that as little as 10 mg of vitamin C per day can eliminate the threat of scurvy. Naturally, diseases like cancer and heart disease require much larger quantities. But, the main point is that health problems like, cancer, coronary heart disease, diabetes, gout, high blood pressure and stroke can all be treated with vitamin C therapy.

If you would like to learn more about the health benefits of vitamin C; the best way to consume vitamin C supplements for disease prevention plus much more – don’t miss the next NaturalNews Talk Hour with Jonathan Landsman and Dr. Thomas Levy.

Visit: http://www.naturalhealth365.com and enter your email address for show details + a FREE gift!

This week’s guest: Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D., internationally recognized vitamin C expert

Discover little known truths about the use of vitamin C to kill viruses plus much more – Sun. June 16

Dr. Thomas E. Levy is a board certified cardiologist and has written six books on health-related issues. Most of his work has centered on how to restore and maintain good health in the face of the many different forms of toxicity that all of us face, typically on a daily basis. He no longer has a clinical practice of medicine and cardiology. Rather, he limits himself to research and writing at this time, and he is currently working on his seventh book, Death by Calcium: The Supplement that Kills.

Most of his work over the last ten years has centered on the importance of maintaining a healthy antioxidant status in the body. His work currently is focusing on the importance of liposomal technology as a way to optimally deliver vitamin C, glutathione, and other nutrients into the body orally, appearing to even surpass the bioavailability seen with the intravenous administration of these antioxidants.

If you would like to learn more about the health benefits of vitamin C; the best way to consume vitamin C supplements for disease prevention plus much more – don’t miss the next NaturalNews Talk Hour with Jonathan Landsman and Dr. Thomas Levy.

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




Treat your diabetes naturally with CoQ10..

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Health

Neuropathy, or nerve damage, is the most common cause of injury and death in people with diabetes. Preliminary studies suggest, however, that this debilitating condition may be treatable by boosting your body’s levels of a substance that it is already producing: Coenzyme Q10, or CoQ10.

Approximately 50 percent of all type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients – nearly 2 percent of the world’s population – experience some form of diabetic neuropathy. There are currently no treatments that are capable of preventing the disorder or halting its progression.

But in a recent study published in the journal Neurobiology of Disease, researchers from the University of Miami found that supplementation with CoQ10 was able to decrease neuropathy-induced pain in diabetic mice.

The researchers induced diabetes in 56 obese mice and left another 20 mice unharmed to serve as a control group. They then supplemented the diets of the diabetic mice with CoQ10 and observed both behavioral and physiological markers of pain, as well as biological markers of CoQ10 activity. The researchers found that while CoQ10 had no influence on the diabetes itself, it reduced pain and inflammation in the mice, actually preventing the development of diabetic neuropathic pain.

“Dorsal root ganglia, sciatic nerve, and spinal cord tissues from diabetic mice demonstrated increased lipid peroxidation that was reduced by CoQ10 treatment,” the researchers wrote. “CoQ10 administration was also noted to reduce the pro-inflammatory factors in the peripheral and central nervous system.”

The diabetic mice also lost weight, even though their blood sugar levels did not change. The non-diabetic mice, however, did not lose any weight.

“These results suggest that CoQ10 might be a reasonable preventative strategy for long-term use and using CoQ10 treatment may be a safe and effective long-term approach in the treatment of diabetic neuropathy,” the researchers wrote.

Long-term protective benefits
Evidence suggests that CoQ10 actually helps stem or even prevent the development of diabetic neuropathy itself, and not just the pain associated with the condition. For example, a study published in the journal Anesthesiology in January found that long-term CoQ10 supplementation reduced the rate of progressive loss of nerve function in mice with type 1 diabetes, while a study published the same month in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found the same effect in mice with type 2 diabetes. A 2008 study published in the journal Methods and Findings in Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology found that CoQ10 supplementation actually restored the nerve conduction velocities of diabetic rats to the same levels seen in healthy control rats.

“In addition to its effects on mitochondrial alterations, these positive effects of CoQ10 on diabetic neuropathy can be attributed to its antioxidant activity,” the researchers wrote.

CoQ10 is a substance that is naturally produced by your body in order to help its enzymes carry out a wide variety of processes. Although CoQ10 is best known for its role in helping mitochondria produce adenosine triphosphate (ATP), which provides cells with energy, researchers also suspect that the coenzyme plays other functions in the body such as helping prevent cellular damage. Numerous controlled studies have suggested that CoQ10 supplementation can help treat high blood pressure, and investigations are also ongoing for other benefits including improving cognitive health, fighting heart disease and cancer, lowering high cholesterol and slowing the effects of aging.

You can boost your body’s levels of CoQ10 by eating organ meats, beef, sardines, mackerel or soy oil. You can also buy CoQ10 in supplement form, where it may also be marketed under the names Q10, vitamin Q10, ubiquinone and ubidecarenone.

NaturalNews does not condone nor support the use of animals for experiments or testing of any kind.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.vitasearch.com/get-clp-summary/40696

http://www.naturalnews.com

Homepage

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.jacobteitelbaum.com

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




Life-giving nutrients that your cells CRAVE.

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Health

We all want our hearts humming like finely-tuned muscle car engines. But if you’re suffering from heart failure, your ticker may be pumping with all the efficiency of a worn-out jalopy that’s leaking oil — and your body won’t let you forget it.

With each strained breath, persistent cough, or glance at your swollen limbs, you’re reminded that your heart is letting you down. It can feel like you’re living on borrowed time.

But here’s the good news. If you’re looking to borrow some more precious time, your credit is good with us! In fact, how does adding YEARS to your life sound?

That may all be possible now because of one powerful enzyme that won’t grow you a new heart, but it does the next best thing — it makes your body more efficient than ever at delivering the energy and the life-giving nutrients that your cells CRAVE.

According to research just presented at the annual meeting of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) can cut mortality rates in half for folks who are suffering the daily misery of heart failure.

This new study out of Denmark is turning the mainstream medical establishment on its ear — but that’s just because they never listen very well. You see, it’s been known for years that CoQ10 helps carry energy to your body’s cells, making your heart work more efficiently.

In fact, people who suffer from heart failure often have dangerously low levels of CoQ10 — and it only gets worse over time. And too many of these patients are being prescribed dangerous statins that only exacerbate the problem by blocking CoQ10 from being formed!

Danish researchers followed 420 heart failure patients over 24 months, charting heart episodes for those taking CoQ10 and those who were assigned a placebo. They looked for signs of heart failure worsening, like hospital admissions, transplantation, and even death.

What they found is going to have millions of balky hearts leaping with joy! Taking a daily dose of CoQ10 was enough to cut patients risk of dying from heart failure in half! Patients also suffered dramatically fewer episodes linked to worsening heart failure.

We’ve been telling you about the heart-healthy benefits of CoQ10 for years. This energy expanding enzyme can be found in foods like red meat, fish, poultry, eggs, and broccoli, but you can also buy supplements at just about any health food store.

And here’s the best part — the only side effect you’re likely to experience is more energy and better heart health than you’ve had in years. Heart failure or not, you have a lot of living left to do, friend. Talk to your doctor about putting CoQ10 to the test, and let’s get that heart of yours humming again!

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.




The Cancer Treatment So Successful…

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Health

The Cancer Treatment So Successful – Traditional Doctors SHUT it Down

New York City physician and cancer specialist Dr. Nick Gonzalez focuses on alternative cancer treatment using a three-pronged nutritional approach. He’s had remarkable success treating patients diagnosed with some of the most lethal forms of cancer that conventional medicine cannot effectively address.

Alternative cancer treatments are a kind of “forbidden area” in medicine, but Dr. Gonzalez chose to go that route anyway, and has some remarkable success stories to show for his pioneering work.

He didn’t set out to treat cancer at first, let alone treat patients. His original plan was to be a basic science researcher at Sloan-Kettering, a teaching hospital for Cornell Medical College. He had a chance meeting with William Kelley, a controversial dentist who was one of the founders of nutritional typing. Dr. Kelley had been practicing alternative and nutritional approaches for over two decades at the time, leading him to begin a student project investigation of Kelley’s work in the summer of 1981.

“I started going through his records and even though I was just a second year medical student, I could see right away there were cases that were extraordinary,” he says. “Patients with appropriately diagnosed pancreatic cancer, metastatic breast cancer in the bone, metastatic colorectal cancer… who were alive 5, 10, 15 years later under Kelley’s care with a nutritional approach.”

This preliminary review led to a formal research study, which Dr. Gonzalez completed while doing his fellowship in cancer, immunology and bone marrow transplantation.

The “Impossible” Recoveries of Dr. Kelley’s Cancer Patients

After going through thousands of Kelley’s records, Dr. Gonzalez put together a monograph, divided into three sections:
1.Kelley’s theory
2.50 cases of appropriately-diagnosed lethal cancer patients still alive five to 15 years after diagnosis, whose long-term survival was attributed to Kelley’s program
3.Patients Kelley had treated with pancreatic cancer between the years 1974 and 1982

According to Dr. Good, the president of Sloan-Kettering who had become Gonzalez’ mentor, if Kelley could produce even one patient with appropriately diagnosed pancreatic cancer who was alive 5-10 years later, it would be remarkable. They ultimately tracked down 22 of Kelley’s cases. Ten of them met him once and didn’t do the program after being dissuaded by family members or doctors who thought Kelley was a quack.

The average survival for that group was about 60 days.

A second group of seven patients who did the therapy partially and incompletely (again, dissuaded by well-intentioned but misguided family members or doctors), had an average survival of 300 days.

The third group consisting of five patients, who were appropriately diagnosed with advanced pancreatic cancer and who completed the full program, had an average survival of eight and a half years! In Dr. Gonzalez’ words, this was “just unheard of in medicine.”

One of those patients included a woman diagnosed by the Mayo Clinic with stage four pancreatic cancer who had been given six months to live. She’d learned about Kelley’s program through a local health food store. She completed his treatment and is still alive today, 29 years later.

The Truth about Medical Journals: Why Gonzalez’s Book Was Never Published

However, despite-or rather because of-the remarkable success of the treatment, Gonzalez couldn’t get his findings published.

“We tried to publish case reports in the medical journals; the whole book, parts of the book, individual case reports-with no success,” he says.

This is an important point that many fail to realize.

Those of us who practice natural medicine are frequently criticized for not publishing our findings. My justification for that is that it’s not going to be published anyway, and Dr. Gonzalez’ anecdotal story confirms this view.

His mentor and supporter, Dr. Good, was one of the most published authors in the scientific literature at that point, with over 2,000 scientific articles to his name. He’d been nominated for the Nobel Prize three times, and yet he was refused because the findings were “too controversial,” and flew in the face of conventional medical doctrine.

If the cream of the crop is refused, how does a general primary care physician get an article published?

He doesn’t…

“Robert Good was at the top of his profession: President of Sloan-Kettering, father of modern immunology, and did the first bone marrow transplant in history. Yet, he couldn’t get it published,” Gonzalez says. “He couldn’t even get a single case report published.

In fact, I have a letter from one of the editors, dated 1987, who wrote a blistering letter to Good saying, “You’ve been boondoggled by a crazy quack guy. Don’t you see this is all a fraud?”

It was just the most extraordinary, irrational letter… [Because] the patients’ names were there, the copies of their pertinent medical records were there… Any of them could have called these patients, like Arlene Van Straten who, 29 years later, will talk to anyone… But no one cared. They wouldn’t do it; they didn’t believe it.

They couldn’t believe it.

It was very disturbing to me because I say, “It is what it is.” I come out of a very conventional research orientation, and it was astonishing to me-I had assistance; I had the president of Sloane-Kettering who couldn’t get this thing published because it disagreed with the philosophy that was being promoted in medicine; that only chemotherapy, radiation, or immunotherapy can successfully treat cancer, even though the success rate was abysmal.
The idea that medical journals are these objective and unbiased repositories of the truths about science is total nonsense. Most of them are owned by the drug companies. They won’t publish anything that disagrees with their philosophy.”

By the end of 1987, it was clear that the work would never get published, and since Dr. Good had retired from Sloan-Kettering, they no longer had the power-base to conduct clinical trials.

Dr. Kelley, realizing his work would never be accepted, let alone get published, “went off the deep end,” in Dr. Gonzalez’ words, and stopped seeing patients altogether.

“When I last spoke to him in the summer of 1987, he accused me of being part of a CIA plot to steal his work, and I knew that I had to move on,” Dr. Gonzalez says.

“To this day, of course, I give him credit for his brilliant innovation. It’s kind of like Semmelweis, who ended up going crazy during the 19th century after showing doctors should wash their hands before delivering babies and no one accepted that. Semmelweis just went off the deep end, and that’s what kind of what happened to Kelley, I say with great sadness.”

Starting the Alternative Cancer Treatment Practice

Dr. Gonzalez set up a practice in New York together with his associate, Dr. Linda Isaacs, and started seeing patients using Kelley’s three-pronged approach. The results were impressive.

One of his remarkable success stories includes a woman diagnosed with inflammatory breast cancer, which is the most aggressive form. She’d been given a death sentence.

Today, over 23 years later, she’s still alive and well, and cancer free.

“Here’s a woman that was given six months to a year to live AND developed metastases while getting aggressive multi-agent chemotherapy, yet 23 and a half years later, she’s alive and well, enjoying her life and just doing so well.

We could see that Kelley’s approach really worked and when I report these cases I’m giving Kelley the credit because he developed this treatment,” Dr. Gonzalez says.

Recognition from the National Cancer Institute

In 1993, as part of a legitimate effort to reach out to alternative practitioners, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) invited Dr. Gonzalez to present 25 of his cases in a closed-door, invitation-only session. On the basis of that presentation, the NCI suggested he conduct a pilot study with patients diagnosed with advanced pancreatic cancer, which in conventional medicine is known to be an untreatable, highly lethal form of cancer.

Interestingly, Nestle stepped in to finance this pilot study. It may seem an odd choice, but the business motivation was the same then as it is today-making junk food appear healthier is a good business move, even if it’s only in theory.

Supervised directly by Dr. Ernst Wynder, a premier cancer researcher, the study was completed in early 1999 and published in June that year. According to Dr. Gonzalez:

“It showed the best results for the treatment of pancreatic cancer in the history of medicine.”

Chemo Therapy vs. the Kelley Treatment

To put his results in perspective, the chemo drug, Gemzar, approved for pancreatic cancer dates back to 1997, and the major study that led to its approval had 126 patients. Of those, 18 percent lived one year. Not a single patient out of the 126 lived beyond 19 months.

Dr. Gonzalez’ study had 11 participants, of which:
•Five survived for two years
•Four survived three years
•Two survived five years

Based on these results, the NCI decided to fund a large-scale clinical trial, to the tune of $1.4 million, to test his nutritional approach against the best chemo available at the time.

“My friends say, “Why did you get involved with something like this? How could you trust the NCI?”

Well, the NCI had been very fair, up to that point, and the then-director, Richard Klausner, in face-to-face meetings with him said he thought I was doing something really interesting and needed to be properly supported,” Dr. Gonzalez says.

But that goodwill soon disappeared.

How to Sabotage a Clinical Study 101

About a year after the study was approved, Klausner left the NCI and was replaced by new management with a wholly different attitude.

“[F]rom our first meeting, we knew something has changed significantly,” Dr. Gonzalez says,” and all the people that had initially been assigned to the study, who were supportive and believed we were doing something useful, were taken off it. In fact one of them couldn’t even talk to me. She said she’d be fired if she talked to me; if she took my phone call.

I was told by another person who had supported me at the NIH that I shouldn’t call him at his office; that he was afraid his line was tapped, and I should only call him at home.

That’s how insane the politics over this clinical study got. I couldn’t believe it! I thought this was just something you’d read about or see on TV, or that some paranoid or crazy person would make up. But here I was living it. Coming out of Robert Good’s group, I don’t say that to impress people, but my background is so pure and conventional! It was unbelievable to see that the profession I respected and wanted to join could behave like this.”

Unfortunately, the study was, in the end, sabotaged.

“Turned out the principal investigator at Columbia, who’s supposed to be completely neutral, had helped develop a chemo regimen that was being used against us-a conflict of interest that was never declared,” Dr. Gonzalez explains.

“[T]here are specific requirements for entry into a clinical study. Ours is a nutritional program, and when the first protocol version was written, we had a list of specified criteria… They have to be able to eat… Ours is a nutritional program, so patients have to be able to eat. If they can’t eat, they can’t do the therapy. They have to be able to take care of themselves…

This is a program the patients have to follow at home.

… Initially, the patients could do it and responded to the treatment. Then, there was a sudden change, around 2000-2001, when the Columbia group took total control of the entry of patients in the study. We were excluded from that process, except during the initial months. The thinking was that if we were involved in the admission process, we’d enter the dreaded bias, whereas if conventional doctors were in control, they couldn’t possibly be biased.

Of course, the chief investigator helped develop the chemo regimen used in the study. That’s virtually the definition of a ‘potential bias’!

He started sending us patients that couldn’t eat. We had patients that were so sick we would never have accepted them into our private practice. That were so sick, they died before they got the treatment.

Whether it was a trick to the protocol or not, the Columbia team, the NCI, and the NHI insisted that we had an “intent to treat provision into protocol”. This means that the minute a patient is accepted into the trial, they’re considered treated, even if they never do the therapy. So the chief of the study at Columbia would enter patients that were so sick, several died before they could pursue their treatment. But because of this intent to treat provision into protocol, they were considered treatment failures.

Ultimately, 39 patients were entered for treatment. Maybe at best, being kind and optimistic, maybe five or six actually did it, the great majority were so sick they couldn’t do it.”

As a result, the chemo treatment appeared to be a clear winner in this head-to-head evaluation of treatments against incurable pancreatic cancer.

In 2006, Dr. Gonzalez and his partner filed a complaint with the Office of the Human Research Protection (OHRP), which is a group responsible for making sure federal-funded clinical trials are run properly. After a two-year investigation, the OHRP determined that 42 out of 62 patients had been admitted inappropriately. Unfortunately, this never made it to the media, and the Columbia team was able to publish the research findings without mentioning the results of the OHRP review.

“So the study was a total boondoggle; a waste of $1.4 million,” Dr. Gonzalez says. “Even though I won the grant, all the money went to Columbia. It’s all gone. The data, as far as I’m concerned, is worthless, and the NIH and NCI are using it to show that my therapy doesn’t work.

So that’s how this long journey of 30 years, from when I first met Kelley, has gone.

“I tell people now regarding the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), I wouldn’t send a dog to that group.

They’re not there to help you objectively investigate alternative therapies; they’re there to undermine them. It gives the illusion that the government’s interested in alternative therapies, when in fact that office is being used, as it was in my case, to help undermine promising useful alternative therapies.”

Gonzalez’s Three-Pronged Approach to Cancer Treatment

Although most of the studies done on this approach were done on pancreatic cancer, Dr. Gonzalez uses it to treat ALL cancers, from brain cancer to leukemia. His treatment, which is based on Kelley’s work, consists of three protocols: diet, supplements and enzymes, and detoxification.

The Dietary Protocol:

The cornerstone of the treatment is a personalized diet based on your nutritional – or metabolic type (which happens to be a key component of my own optimized nutrition plan).

Dr. Kelley originally had 10 basic diets and 90 variations that ranged from pure vegetarian and raw food, to heavy-protein meals that included red meat three times a day.

“In terms of diet, Kelley… found that patients diagnosed with the typical solid tumors: tumors of the breast, lungs, stomach, pancreas, liver, colon, uterus, ovaries, and prostate needed a more vegetarian diet,” Dr. Gonzalez explains. “But he had all gradations of a vegetarian diet; one that was 80 percent raw, one that was 80 percent cooked. So even on the vegetarian side, there were all different variations.

Some had minimal animal protein, some had fish, some had also red meat.

A patient with immune cancer (leukemia, lymphoma, myeloma, and sarcomas, (which are connective tissue cancers that are related to immune cancers) tended to do best on a high-fat, high meat diet.

… Then there are balanced people that do well with a variety of foods, both plant foods and animal products, but they don’t tend to get cancer.

Cancer tends to occur on the extremes, the extreme vegetarians-those that tend to be too acid-or extreme meat eaters, who tend to be too alkaline. Balanced people don’t tend to get cancer too much. So we continued the individualized approach, as did Kelley.”

Individualized Supplementation and Enzyme Protocol:

The second component is an individualized supplement protocol, designed for your particular metabolism.

“For example, our vegetarian patients need completely different supplements from our meat eaters. The vegetarians do very well with most of the B vitamins, while the meat eaters don’t. The vegetarians don’t do well with vitamin A, but the meat eaters do. The vegetarians do well with vitamin D; the meat eaters not so well with large doses, and so on,” Dr. Gonzalez explains.

“The meat eaters do well with calcium ascorbate as a vitamin C source, while the vegetarians do well with large doses of ascorbic acid. So the supplement protocols are very individualized and very precisely engineered.”

Omega-3 fats are also prescribed, but even here Dr. Gonzalez prescribes different types of omega-3’s depending on the patient’s nutritional type. In his experience, vegetarians, or carbohydrate types, tend to fare better on flaxseed oil, which contains alpha linoleic acid (ALA) – a plant-based omega 3.

“It is thought that the conversion of the plant-based ALA into the fish-oil based eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is not that efficient,” he says, “But we find that our vegetarian patients actually do it very well and don’t use the fish oil or animal-based omega-3 fatty acids as effectively.”

Chia and hemp seed oils can also be used.

Protein types, on the other hand, appear to need the EPA and the DHA and do better on animal-based omega-3 such as krill oil.

“They don’t do well with flaxseed,” he says. “Those are the people who can’t make the conversion.”

In addition to vitamins, minerals and trace elements, he also prescribes large doses of pancreatic enzymes.

“The essence of Kelley’s work was based on the work of Dr. Beard, which goes back to the turn of the last century, about 110 years ago. Beard was a professor at the University of Edinburg, an embryologist actually, not a medical researcher, who first proposed that pancreatic proteolytic enzymes are the main defense against cancer in the body and are useful as a cancer treatment,” he explains.

When treating cancer, however, he found it’s important to take the right ratio of active and inactive enzymes. The inactive precursors are particularly active against cancer. They also have far longer shelf life, and are more stable.

“That would be my advice – get an enzyme that isn’t completely activated,” Dr. Gonzalez says. “More active isn’t better when it comes to pancreatic enzymes, just like more and more D isn’t better than getting the right dosage. You want the right proportions of activated and inactive-most of it as an inactive precursor.”

His proprietary enzyme formula is manufactured by NutriCology. According to Dr. Gonzalez, pancreatic enzymes are not only useful as treatment for active cancer but are also one of the best preventive measures.

Antioxidants, such as astaxanthin, are also very helpful, both in the prevention and treatment of cancer.

The Detoxification Protocol:

The third component is a detoxification routine. Coffee enemas are used to help your liver and kidneys to mobilize and eliminate dead cancer cells that have been broken down by the pancreatic enzymes.

Coffee enemas, although often scoffed at today, were actually used as part of conventional medicine all the way up to the 1960s, and were included in the Merck Manual, which was a handbook for conventional medical treatments into the 1970s.

“They fell out of favor not because they didn’t work, but because the drug industry took over medicine, so things like coffee enemas were kind of laughed at,” Dr. Gonzalez says. “So Kelley learned about coffee enemas from conventional literature and incorporated them into his program and found them extremely helpful.”

When you drink coffee, it tends to suppress your liver function, but when taken rectally as an enema, the caffeine stimulates nerves in your lower bowels, which causes your liver to release toxins as a reflex. Other detox strategies include colon cleanses and liver flushes developed by Kelley.

It’s important to realize, however, that conventional coffee should NOT be used for enemas. The coffee MUST be organic, naturally caffeinated coffee, and were you to do this at home, you’d also want to use non-bleached filters to avoid introducing toxins into your colon.

“[Organic coffee] is loaded with antioxidants,” Dr. Gonzalez says. “In fact, there are recent studies showing that coffee loaded with antioxidants can have an anti-cancer effect and that coffee may actually help suppress cancer.

But you have to use organic coffee, it has to have caffeine, and you have to use a coffee maker that doesn’t have aluminum, and preferably no plastic.”

Dr. Gonzalez also relies on sodium alginate as a detoxifying agent.

“We have a preparation that we put together and it’s very effective… It’s an algae and it chelates heavy metals and halides. I never use intravenous chelation; we just use sodium alginate.”

He recommends taking three capsules three times a day, away from meals, for six weeks to detoxify your body of heavy metals, such as mercury, and halides.

Final Thoughts

This is one of the most fascinating interviews I’ve ever done, and it is chock full of information-far more than I can summarize here. So please, I urge you to take the time to listen to the interview in its entirety.

In addition to expounding on the subjects mentioned above, Dr. Gonzalez also reviews the benefits of optimizing vitamin D during cancer treatment, and how iodine supplementation can benefit breast cancer-not to mention help protect against thyroid cancer, in light of the current nuclear crisis in Japan.

We discuss the benefits of juicing and chiropractic adjustments, and the importance of regular exercise for cancer patients. We also review the dangers of electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure, in terms of how it may aggravate cancer growth and hinder cancer recovery, and the benefits, along with some surprising precautions, of Earthing or grounding.

For more information about Dr. Gonzalez and his practice, see www.dr-gonzalez.com. He’s also working on a series of books, two of which have already been published and received five-star reviews: The Trophoblast and the Origins of Cancer, and One Man Alone: An Investigation of Nutrition, Cancer, and William Donald Kelley , which is the original monograph of Dr. Kelley’s work that he couldn’t get published 23 years ago.

This written summary is only a small glimpse of the insights that were shared in our interview. If you or anyone you know struggles with cancer I would strongly encourage you to listen to the entire interview
Thankfully Dr. Gonzalez is still on the front lines and actively engaged in helping people by helping coach them with natural alternatives to toxic drugs and radiation. His office is in Manhattan and he can be reached at 212-213-3337.

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




Starve Cancer Out of Your Body…

Posted by: admin  /  Category: Food, Health

Dr. Christine Horner began her career as a board certified general- and plastic surgeon, performing breast reconstructive surgeries on women who’d had full mastectomies due to breast cancer.

In this interview, she shares her extensive knowledge about breast cancer—its causes and its cures, and the pros and cons of various screening methods.

Her interest in breast cancer began while she was still in college, when her mother developed the disease.

Thirteen years later, when her mother’s cancer returned, Dr. Horner became very active with the American Cancer Society.

For a time, she was a vice-president and the Kentucky state spokesperson for the American Cancer Society on breast cancer issues.

“We were trained to say that we don’t know what causes breast cancer and we have no known cures; the best things that women can do are breast exams and mammograms,” she says.

“… In my practice, I was watching women get younger and younger when I was doing breast reconstruction on them.

Finally, I was doing women in their 20s. I thought something is way wrong with this picture.” I thought why don’t we just look through the medical literature and see if there’s anything that research shows that women can do, that’s within our control that will lower our risks. I had no idea what I was going to find… But when I looked, I instantly found thousands of studies that show exactly why we have a cancer epidemic…”

What’s Causing the Cancer Epidemic?

What Dr. Horner discovered was that there are a number of habits we’ve stopped doing in our modern culture that are highly protective. We’ve dramatically altered our diets—shunning our native, whole-foods cuisine for highly processed fare—and engage in very little physical activity, for example.

“We’re telling women that all they can do is mammogram [screening], and it’s extremely disempowering,” Dr. Horner says. “You feel like you have no control over it. But if you look at epidemiological studies… we know that people that live in Asia have a very low incidence of breast cancer or prostate cancer… [W]e have the studies showing that if an Asian woman moves to the United States and adopts our American diet and lifestyle, within one generation her risk will match that of an American woman’s. It’s like “Hello? What are we doing or not doing that they’re doing or not doing that’s making such a big difference? ”

Dr. Horner was eventually introduced to the system of Ayurvedic medicine, and the more she learned about it, the more she felt there were answers therein that needed to be shared with people on a wider scale.

‘[T]here are so many really simple things people can do that can have a dramatic effect on their health,” she says. “Basically, the more you learn about natural medicine, the more you’ll realize that we’re just telling our patients lies– not on purpose, but from what we have been taught from the pharmaceutical companies and so forth.”

She pitched the idea to television stations in Cincinnati to let her talk about complementary and alternative medicine, and ended up being the first syndicated segment on the news related to complementary and alternative medicine, which ran from 1999 through 2002. At that point, she decided to quit her surgery practice to focus on teaching people how to become and stay healthy naturally, and wrote the book: Waking the Warrior Goddess: Dr. Christine Horner’s Program to Protect Against and Fight Breast Cancer, which contains all-natural approaches for protecting against and treating breast cancer. Dr. Horner’s book won the IPPY award in 2006 for “Best book in health medicine and nutrition.”

“[W]e have the answers to the breast cancer epidemic,” she says. “We truly do– and it’s very simple. If you have a terrible diet and lifestyle and you do just one thing, you cut your risk in half. You do more than one thing and they will multiply up together. They don’t add up together. They multiply up together, so it becomes extremely easy to dramatically lower your risk of breast cancer.”

It’s worth mentioning that the same strategies apply for other types of cancer as well. Prostate and colon cancer tumors, for example, are similar to breast cancer tumors, as certain hormones cause them all to grow. Hence, protective strategies that are effective against breast cancer also work on these other types of cancer. Cancer prevention strategies will also virtually eliminate most other chronic disorders.

The Problem with Conventional Cancer Screenings

While diagnostic screenings have their place, some cancer screens are just about worthless… The wisdom of using the PSA test, for example, which checks for prostate cancer, has recently been questioned. Ditto for mammograms.

“Looking at the diagnostic tests that are currently available, none of them are perfect,” Dr. Horner says. “Everything has its pros and cons… [M]ammography produces radiation, which has been shown to increase the risk of breast cancer. It’s like, “Why are you doing the test to look at a disease when it’s actually causing the disease, too?” … It does pick things up at earlier stages, but the problem is that it’s not very specific. So when it looks and it sees something… that looks suspicious, it is wrong 80 percent of the time. In the United States, there’s roughly a million breast biopsies done per year, and 800,000 of them are unnecessary.”

One of the best cancer screening methods is self-examination. But you need to make sure you’re doing it correctly. For more information about how to do a breast self exam, please see this previous article.

MRI’s, which do not use ionizing radiation, are not a practical tool as they are very expensive, and, like mammograms, MRI scans are not very specific. Ultrasound is another technique used in Western medicine. The traditional ultrasound can see whether a mass is cystic or solid. But while a solid mass is generally considered to be something that might be of concern, this is not 100 percent certain either, as cancer tumors can sometimes have cysts in them.

“Now there’s a relatively new ultrasound that uses a color mode,” Dr. Horner says. “It’s called elastography. But there aren’t very many centers in the United States that use it. I go to the Center of the Hoxsey Clinic, to Dr. Arturo Rodriguez at Tijuana. It has a color scale that measures the elasticity of the cell membranes. Cancer cells are very stiff, whereas normal cells have more fluidity to them. It’ll show up as red if it has a lot of stiffness to it, as a cancer cell, or blue if it has elasticity… It’s a very good tool.”

On Thermography

Another form of cancer screen, which is still considered controversial in conventional medicine, is thermography, which gives you an infrared image of your body. By looking at heat and blood vessel patterns you can determine whether there are areas of concern.

“[B]efore you even get a tumor formation, the very first thing that happens is new blood vessels start to grow into the area where the tumor may form. Those blood vessels grow abnormally. They grow an abnormal amount of patterns and they produce an abnormal amount of heat. That’s what thermography is checking for,” Dr. Horner explains.

As with most new technologies, thermography hit some snags in its earlier stages, and fell out of favor in the early 70s. However, the technology has gotten a lot more sophisticated over the years, and is now computerized; eliminating the need for highly trained technicians to evaluate the results.

“The problem we still have today with thermography is that we don’t have standardization,” Dr. Horner explains. “We don’t have a uniform way that people are tested and trained with uniform equipment, and so forth… But there’s definitely a movement… to do standardization, and to get that technology available for women, because this is a technology that has no health detriments associated with it. It does not use radiation or anything harmful to your body.”

Unfortunately, the advocates of mammography perceive thermography as a threat to their business model. So there’s tremendous pressure against it, including from the federal regulatory agencies.

“It’s unfortunate,” Dr. Horner says, “but our country is run by big business. It’s just is, so anytime we want to shift anything culturally like that, and we’re going against established business, we have trouble because it’s all about money.”

For example, many of the presidents of the American Cancer Society were members of the Radiological Association, which is the industry supporting the mammography component. The entire medical field is littered with massive conflicts of interest.

‘We can see that everywhere. You look in the FDA—there are people from Monsanto that work in the FDA. Unfortunately, people think, “the United States is not very corrupt.” But actually, it’s extremely corrupt,” she says.

Still, there are many good reasons for considering thermography. To ensure you’re getting the highest standard of care, Dr. Horner recommends using a practitioner certified by the International Academy of Clinical Thermography, an independent non-profit organization that provides objective, third-party certifications. Their website lists qualified thermography centers across the US, Canada, and some other countries, such as France, Trinidad, and Zambia.

Most Natural Prevention Strategies Can Reduce Your Cancer Risk by Half…

Through her research, Dr. Horner has gathered a large number of cancer-prevention strategies—about 50 in all! Even more astounding is the rate of effectiveness of many of these strategies.

“[I]f you look at the studies, virtually every single thing that has an influence [causes] almost a 50 percent reduction in cancer risk… and if you combine them, like I said, you’ll get these synergistic results where they’ll multiply up as far as their effect is concerned.

I’d say the most important thing is what you do or do not put in your mouth… because you can have huge influences by the foods you consume– the spices, the herbs, and so forth. And, the things that you avoid, that’s going to give you the biggest results. … Vitamin D cuts your risks in half. Turmeric and anti-inflammatories cut your risk in half. I could go through each thing—and I’m telling you the research shows that there’s about 40 to 50 percent reduction [in risk]—so… to say that one is necessarily better than anything else, that’s a really hard thing to claim.”

The Top Four Cancer-Promoting Foods

Dr. Horner brings up an excellent point, and that is that in order to be effective, you must first STOP doing that which is promoting cancer growth (or poor health in general), and then all the other preventive strategies have the chance to really have an impact. Addressing your diet should be at the top of your list, and rather than adding certain foods, you’ll want to eliminate the most dangerous culprits first.

Naturally, processed foods and soft drinks do not belong in a cancer-preventive diet…

Dr. Horner, believes red meat from animals reared in confined animal feeding operations (CAFO’s) is also a MAJOR contributor to cancer. These animals are given antibiotics, growth hormones and other veterinary drugs that get stored in their tissues. Additionally, cooking the meat over high heat creates heterocyclic amines, which further add to its carcinogenic effect.

While I do recommend eating meat, I agree that there is absolutely NO benefit to eating CAFO beef. The ONLY type of meat I recommend is organically-raised, grass-fed meats. It’s hard for a lot of people to grasp the difference between CAFO and organic meat, but truly, they are like two different species in terms of their nutritional content. One is health harming while the other is beneficial.

So when we’re talking about the detrimental impact of red meat on your health, especially in terms of feeding cancer, please understand that we’re talking specifically about CAFO beef, aka “factory farmed” meat. Next on the list of cancer-promoters is sugar (this includes ALL forms of sugar, including fructose and grains).

“To me, sugar has no redeeming value at all, because they found that the more we consume it, the more we’re fuelling every single chronic disease,” Dr. Horner says. “In fact, there was a study done about a year ago… and the conclusion was that sugar is a universal mechanism for chronic disease. It kicks up inflammation. It kicks up oxygen free radicals. Those are the two main processes we see that underlie any single chronic disorder, including cancers. It fuels the growth of breast cancers, because glucose is cancer’s favorite food. The more you consume, the faster it grows.”

Next is the type of fats that you consume. It’s important to remember that every cell membrane is made out of fat, as is your brain. According to Dr. Horner, bad-fats in the diet are a major contributor to ill health and cancer. On the list of fats to eliminate are:
•Animal fats from CAFO-raised animals
•Trans fats
•Partially hydrogenated or hydrogenated fats

Healthy fats of particular importance for cancer prevention are omega-3 and omega-9. According to Dr. Horner, omega-3 in particular serve to effectively slow down tumor growth in estrogen-sensitive cancers such as breast-, prostate- and colon cancers. Fourth on the list of cancer promoters is ANY item that contains xenoestrogens (chemicals that mimic estrogen). This can become a rather long list once you start including any food contaminated with such estrogen-mimicking chemicals, such as BPA, found in the linings of canned goods and in plastics. The list gets truly unwieldy when you include personal care products that contain such chemicals as well…

“There are case reports of five- and six-year-olds going through secondary sex characteristics because of the shampoo that they were using… There are all sorts of different sources where we’re exposed to these chemicals from our foods and from the products that we use.

What we’re seeing is younger and younger puberty. Around the world, the average age is about 16 years old. In the United States, it’s 10 years old now, and sometimes even younger. The problem is that with each menstrual period there is a surge of estradiol, which is the strongest, most abundant form of estrogen, and the one that’s most associated with breast cancer. If you start your period very young, you’ll have more periods in your lifetime than what a person would have, obviously, if they started at an older age.

In addition to that, when a girl goes through puberty, her breast cells become really sensitive to environmental toxins, radiation, and so forth. They’re considered immature. They haven’t differentiated– as a more scientific term for it– so there’s a longer period of time that they’re exposed to these toxins where they have a greater sensitivity.”

Dr. Horner reviews a number of other important factors that influence your cancer risk, so for more details, please listen to the interview in its entirety, or read through the transcript.

Eating for Cancer Prevention

According to Dr. Horner, the research clearly shows that the one food that is the most important for optimal health is plant foods.

“Plants are packed full of nutrients, vitamins, and minerals that are crucial for our health. They also have hundreds of phytochemicals in them. These don’t have any nutritional or caloric value, but they are like natural medicines, and some of them behave exactly like chemotherapy,” she says.

“Every plant has some anti-cancer properties to them. There are some that are standouts. Cruciferous vegetables are something that I really recommend. They’re a family of vegetables that include broccoli, cauliflower, kale, collards, and Brussels sprouts…

All of them have several different chemicals in common. They’ve got indole-3-carbinol, Calcium D-glucarate, and sulforaphane. They have big anti-cancer properties to them, and they inhibit the growth of breast, prostate, colon cancer and a variety of other ones. Of all the families of vegetables to consume, [cruciferous vegetables] are the ones to be aware of, so you can make sure you’re including that in your diet frequently.”

Naturally, you’ll want to make sure the vegetables are fresh, and ideally locally grown and organic. Besides cruciferous veggies, another standout plant for cancer-prevention is flax seed. The lignans in flax seed inhibit the growth of cancer in about a dozen different ways, including the exact same mechanism as the anti-cancer drug Tamoxifen and Arimidex, which shut down an enzyme in fat cells called aromatase that converts androgens into estrogens.

“I hear from patients, “Oh! My oncologist told me not to take flaxseeds, because they’re estrogenic,”” Dr. Horner says.”They don’t understand how plant estrogens or “phytoestrogens” work.

There are all sorts of different strengths to estrogens. Let’s say estradiol, which is the strongest, most abundant form– if it hooks on to the estrogen receptor, it may cause a thousand cell divisions. But if a plant estrogen hooks on, it may cause one. When you flood your system with these plant estrogens, I’d say it’s kind of like a game of musical chairs. There are only certain numbers of receptors, and whoever gets their first, gets it. They’re blocking the strong estrogens from getting on, so that’s why it has an inhibitory effect.”

Other Lifestyle Factors that Influence Your Cancer Risk

Other lifestyle factors that have been found to have an impact on chronic disease and cancer include:
•Vitamin D—There’s overwhelming evidence pointing to the fact that vitamin D deficiency plays a crucial role in cancer development. As mentioned earlier, you can decrease your risk of cancer by MORE THAN HALF simply by optimizing your vitamin D levels with sun exposure. And if you are being treated for cancer it is likely that higher blood levels—probably around 80-90 ng/ml—would be beneficial. The health benefits of optimizing your levels, either by safe sun exposure (ideally), a safe tanning bed, or oral supplementation as a last resort, simply cannot be overstated. In terms of protecting against cancer, vitamin D has been found to offer protection in a number of ways, including:

◦Regulating genetic expression
◦Increasing the self-destruction of mutated cells (which, if allowed to replicate, could lead to cancer)
◦Reducing the spread and reproduction of cancer cells
◦Causing cells to become differentiated (cancer cells often lack differentiation)
◦Reducing the growth of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones, which is a step in the transition of dormant tumors turning cancerous
To learn the details on how to use vitamin D therapeutically, please review my previous article, Test Values and Treatment for Vitamin D Deficiency.
•Getting proper sleep: both in terms of getting enough sleep, and sleeping between certain hours. According to Ayurvedic medicine, the ideal hours for sleep are between 10 pm and 6 am. Modern research has confirmed the value of this recommendation as certain hormonal fluctuations occur throughout the day and night, and if you engage in the appropriate activities during those times, you’re ‘riding the wave’ so to speak, and are able to get the optimal levels. Working against your biology by staying awake when you should ideally be sleeping or vice versa, interferes with these hormonal fluctuations. According to Dr. Horner:

“If we, for instance, go to bed by 10, we have higher levels of our sleep hormone melatonin; there’s a spike that occurs between midnight and 1am, which you don’t want to miss because the consequences are absolutely spectacular. Melatonin is not only our sleep hormone, but it also is a very powerful antioxidant. It decreases the amount of estrogen our body produces. It also boosts your immune system… And it interacts with the other hormones.

So, if you go to bed after 10… it significantly increases your risk of breast cancer.”

•Effectively addressing your stress: The research shows that if you experience a traumatic or highly stressful event, such as a death in the family, your risk of breast cancer is 12 times higher in the ensuing five years.
•Exercise—If you are like most people, when you think of reducing your risk of cancer, exercise doesn’t immediately come to mind. However, there is some fairly compelling evidence that exercise can slash your risk of cancer.

One of the primary ways exercise lowers your risk for cancer is by reducing elevated insulin levels, which creates a low sugar environment that discourages the growth and spread of cancer cells. Additionally, exercise improves the circulation of immune cells in your blood. Your immune system is your first line of defense against everything from minor illnesses like a cold right up to devastating, life-threatening diseases like cancer.

The trick about exercise, though, is understanding how to use it as a precise tool. This ensures you are getting enough to achieve the benefit, not too much to cause injury, and the right variety to balance your entire physical structure and maintain strength and flexibility, and aerobic and anaerobic fitness levels. This is why it is helpful to view exercise like a drug that needs to be carefully prescribed to achieve its maximum benefit. For detailed instructions, please see this previous article.

Additionally it is likely that integrating exercise with intermittent fasting will greatly catalyze the potential of exercise to reduce your risk of cancer and stimulate widespread healing and rejuvenation.

More Information

For more information, please see Dr. Horner’s book, Waking the Warrior Goddess: Dr. Christine Horner’s Program to Protect Against and Fight Breast Cancer. You can also learn more about Dr. Horner on her website, www.DrChristineHorner.com.

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