Rather Be Healthy

The power of Monsanto and how they are contaminating the world’s food is frightening and now it’s even worse because of the ignorance of some people in power that have no understanding whatsoever of the damage being done to mankind. Their blinkered minds see no further than their own pursuit of power or they see it but don’t give a damn…

Democrats who had been programmed to blindly vote for Hillary Clinton are picking their jaws up off the floor after learning the truth about Hillary’s ties to Monsanto. The ties run so deep that she’s now being dubbed the “Bride of Frankenfood.” (Tweet this story)

Shockingly, Hillary Clinton’s ties to Monsanto are new information to her liberal support base. It drives home the important point that nearly everyone supporting Hillary Clinton has no idea who she really is, as evidenced by this stunning new video from Mark Dice and Luke Rudkowski.

“Hillary Rodham Clinton’s ties to agribusiness giant Monsanto, and her advocacy for the industry’s genetically modified crops, have environmentalists in Iowa calling her ‘Bride of Frankenfood'” reports the Washington Times. “A large faction of women voiced strong support for Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy until the GMO issue came up, prompting them to switch allegiances to Sen. Bernard Sanders of Vermont, a liberal stalwart challenging her for the Democratic nomination.”

Oh my, how little they really know about the real Hillary Clinton… keep reading to find out more…

Monsanto and Bill Gates are top donors to the Clinton Family Foundation

A quick look at this table of Clinton Family Foundation donors reveals both the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Monsanto as two of the heavy-hitting donors to the Clinton “Crime” Family Foundation.

Bill Gates, of course, pushes vaccines on the world, while Monsanto pushes GMOs. It’s a toxic one-two punch for global depopulation.

Hillary Clinton’s donors also include the drug maker Pfizer, ExxonMobil, Dow Chemical, Goldman Sachs, Procter & Gamble, Coca-Cola and many more. It’s a who’s who compilation of the most evil corporations and institutions on planet Earth, and they’ve all given huge money — tens of millions of dollars — to Hillary Clinton.

All the corporations are, of course, buying influence with the Clintons. This obvious fact was wildly attacked by extreme leftist Democratic party operatives like George Stephanopoulos, who turned out to have hidden his own $75,000 in donations to the same Clinton Foundation. He claims he thought he was donating to halt “deforestation.” Hillaryious!

Hillary Clinton hires former Monsanto lobbyist to run her campaign

If you’re still not convinced that Hillary Clinton has strong ties to Monsanto, ask yourself why she just hired a prominent Monsanto lobbyist to run her campaign.

As True Activist reports:

Hillary Clinton recently announced that she will be appointing long-time Monsanto lobbyist Jerry Crawford as adviser to her “Ready for Hillary” super PAC… Over the years, Crawford has been instrumental in fighting against small farmers in court and protecting Monsanto’s seed monopoly.

Crawford is an “equal opportunity payola operative” who hands out political bribes to members of both parties. “Crawford has mostly worked with Democratic politicians in the past, but has also put his support behind Republican candidates as well. Anyone who was willing to support Monsanto’s goals would receive support from Crawford,” says TrueActivist.com.

Hillary Clinton’s law firm used to have Monsanto as a client

Back in the 1990s, during the era when Vince Foster was murdered for what he knew about the Clintons, Hillary Clinton was a partner at the Rose Law Firm. This law firm counted Monsanto as its client:

“Her history of backing GMO dates back to her early days in Arkansas as a lawyer with the Rose Law Firm, which represented Monsanto and other agribusiness leaders,” reports the Washington Times.

Almost none of today’s activist voters are even old enough to remember the Rose Law Firm, the Clintons’ Whitewater scandal, or even the fact that Hillary Clinton ran the media attacks on all the women who tried to go public with claims of being sexually violated by Bill Clinton. (Yes, Hillary ran the “blame the victim” campaign to protect Bill!)

Yet in an age where progressives demand full transparency on all the issues that matter to them most — immigration, gay marriage, gun control and so on — Hillary finds herself squarely on the wrong side of the GMO issue. She’s a puppet for Monsanto and all its toxic practices that destroy life and destroy the environment.

Hillary Clinton pushes toxic pesticides, herbicides and other agricultural chemicals

At every opportunity, Hillary Clinton pushes toxic chemicals, pesticides and herbicides that contaminate the food supply, promote human diseases like Alzheimer’s and even threaten destruction of the environment. Hillary Clinton, Bride of Frankenfood, is also a “chemical holocaust” pusher who works hard to make sure every woman and child in America eats food laced with cancer-causing glyphosate.

“In the GMO debate, Mrs. Clinton has consistently sided with the chemical companies,” says the Washington Times. “A new scientific study bolstered environmentalists’ concerns by finding the herbicide Roundup could be linked to a range of health problems and diseases, including Parkinson’s, infertility and cancers. The study published last month in the scientific journal Entropy also reported evidence that residue of glyphosate, a chief ingredient in the weed killer, has been found in food.”

That food, of course, enriches Monsanto and the other biotech firms, many of which kick back huge donations to Hillary Clinton as long as she keeps pushing poison.

A vote for Hillary, it turns out, is a vote for Monsanto.

Hillary Clinton hands nuclear fuel resource deal to Russia

It’s not just GMOs, either, that haunt the real history of Hillary Clinton. As The Atlantic reported this year, Hillary Clinton was also instrumental in handing the Russian government a near-monopoly over nuclear weapons uranium supplies.

All the while, money was flowing into the Clinton foundation from uranium interests:

In total, people affiliated with Uranium One or its predecessor gave more than $8 million to the Clinton Foundation between 2008 and 2010. Meanwhile, Bill Clinton received $500,000 for a speech in Moscow, paid for by a bank boosting Uranium One stock.

Why does this matter to the Clinton voter support base? Because progressives are rightly anti-nuclear power and anti-nuke weapons. Yet their gender champion Hillary Clinton is out there promoting the proliferation of nuclear fuel and nuclear weapons, all while raking in millions of dollars for her own foundation in exchange for selling her influence to the highest bidder. Suddenly a Clinton presidency doesn’t sound so “progressive,” does it?

Hillary Clinton parrots Monsanto’s talking points as speaker for the Biotechnology Industry Organization

Just to make sure no one is confused about where Hillary Clinton really stands on the issue of GMOs and biotech, she openly parrots Monsanto’s quack science talking points in public.

In 2014, she spoke at the Biotechnology Industry Organization and practiced running Monsanto’s talking points, saying:

I stand in favor of using seeds and products that have a proven track record … And to continue to try to make the case for those who are skeptical that they may not know what they’re eating already. The question of genetically modified food or hybrids has gone on for many many years. And there is again a big gap between what the facts are and what perceptions are…

During the speech, Clinton basically says that all anti-GMO people are anti-science idiots who don’t know “the facts.” Those “facts,” of course, are all contrived by Monsanto itself and its deep network of financial influence over scientists, universities and even the lamestream media. Hillary Clinton basically concludes that since you don’t know you’ve already been eating GMOs, then it’s safe to keep doing so.

See the sickening video here:

Will anybody stand up and challenge the Bride of Frankenfood?

If you’ve ever wondered why there’s almost no willingness among 100+ million Democrats to challenge Hillary Clinton for the nomination, it’s because Democrats are terrified of Hillary.

As the joke goes, Hillary Clinton not only knows where all the bodies are buried… she ordered them put there in the first place!

For decades, the Clintons were able to control the official narrative and construct a false image of who they really are and what they really believe. But now, thanks to the Independent Media which is now dominating in viewership and is trusted far more than the mainstream media, the Clintons can’t roll out their usual revisionist history and expect it to work.

The simple truth — to the great horror of progressives everywhere — is that Hillary Clinton has long sold out to chemical agriculture and biotech. She’s your RoundUp-Ready she-whore… your Monsanto Matriarch… the “Glyphosate Mamma” armed with fists full of toxic fury. And she wants your vote because she’s gonna dethrone the one percent? Seriously? Pathetic. Hillary Clinton is FUNDED by the one percent!

If you think Hillary Clinton opposes the one percent, you must also believe ExxonMobil opposes drilling for oil.

What you can expect from a Clinton / Monsanto presidency

There are so many ties between Clinton and Monsanto that the evil biotech corporation is practically Hillary’s running mate.

Clinton / Monsanto for President, 2016!

And if Clinton becomes president, you can expect the full Monsanto agenda to be aggressively pushed as national policy:

• A nationwide federal ban on GMO labeling.

• Immediate USDA approval of all experimental GMO crops.

• Extreme, politically motivated attacks against all anti-GMO activists, scientists and journalists.

• Huge increases in taxpayer-funded subsidies for farmers who grow GMO crops.

• Aggressive corporate imperialism push to overturn bans on glyphosate and GMOs by other nations.

• Possibly even attempts by the FDA to outlaw non-GMO Project Verified labels in the same way they attacked hormone-free labels for cow’s milk.

Make no mistake: A vote for Hillary is a vote for Monsanto.

  Follow me:
www.twitter.com/ratherbehealthy

If you’d like to help me as I am now disabled and operate this site on my own then please consider donating, you can do this by going to www.paypal.com then click on Send money.

You’ll be asked to enter the email of the person which is me and my email is [email protected]

I want to talk about calcium, not calcium that you are constantly encouraged to take in an inorganic form but calcium in an organic form that is helpful and very necessary for a healthy body to function.

Firstly let’s look at the tissue in your body; there are two types of tissue, healthy and unhealthy. I know which type is more desirable if given the choice, however, we as 21st century humans are constantly bombarded by the media to consume a form of calcium that doesn’t have a positive effect in the body, in fact it has the opposite effect. The correct form of calcium is a direct supplier of electrons to the energy factories in our body which are mitochondria, mitochondria then manufacture the ATP which is then converted into ADP, the necessary energy, or fuel for the body.The incorrect calcium, the inorganic or non-biological calcium,comes in the form of dolomite (rock), bone meal, oyster shell or coral calcium.This form does not transport electrons so, if anything will work against yourown body and undermine its ability to heal itself

If you watch TV or read magazines, which I suppose most people do, you will have seen commercials or advertisements for calcium in one form or another. In the main, these commercials and ads promote calcium  in a contaminated form. This cannot carry electrons as they have been altered by the food industry, I’m not saying they have done this to harm you, but it’s been done to enable their product to have a longer shelf life or has been diluted of its active nutritional benefits.

The only form of calcium that will help you comes from the earth, vegetable’s provide your body with the an abundance of calcium, broccoli and lettuce to name a couple.

Most people will think that the function of calcium in the body is related to hair, teeth and bones. Yes it is one of the requirements your body has for calcium but certainly not the main one.

When you move a limb or body part, even blinking and or pointing a finger requires a conscious or subconscious action, you don’t think about blinking or scratching an itch, you just do it. Your brain says move an arm or start walking and the part of your body carries out the action.

The command travels from your brain along a very complex network of nerves, the nerves are not just seamless strands, they have breaks in them. In order for the signal to travel along the network it has to jump across the break, this is where calcium comes into play. An explosion happens, a synapse that enables the signal to jump across the break and continue it’s journey to the specific limb or body part. This signal takes second’s, microseconds, nanoseconds to happen so it appears seamless to you, this synapse, the explosion requires a combination of different elements in the correct ratio to each other. Magnesium, Manganese, Sodium and Calcium are four major components.

So eating foods, good organic foods and masticating (chewing) them properly to activate the necessary enzymes for the body to absorb and assimilate is so important.

I want you to take a few minutes thinking about your health or that of a loved one or friend. Are you/they healthy, do you eat the right foods, do you chew your food? I ask you to seriously think about what is happening in your life, since I came to America from England ten years ago. One thing that stood out almost more than anything else was the natural tendency of normal people to reach for a pill when something wasn’t right. It seems that because of TV and media advertising, most people are brainwashed into taking pills. It’s become a standard nowadays to accept ill-health and take pills to address the symptom rather than looking deeper, look for the cause and stop eating or drinking or smoking it.

Some will look upon this post as a bit “out there” or “new age” or “too religious” but God didn’t put us on this planet to be sick, He wants us all to be healthy and live in abundance.

The majority of illness these days are man-made, yes man-made…

It isn’t that research is so much more advanced and that is why disease has been discovered, no, it’s been made and named by the pharmaceutical giants, whos only intention is to make more profit from the demise of the uninformed.

I have to say this, to make it known to the general public, I maybe a very small itch to these terrible people, but I hope I can help people, even one person to find health again.

  Follow me:
www.twitter.com/ratherbehealthy

If you’d like to help me as I am now disabled and operate this site on my own then please consider donating, you can do this by going to www.paypal.com then click on Send money.

You’ll be asked to enter the email of the person which is me and my email is [email protected]

Butter versus Margarine

From a health standpoint, there is an enormous difference between eating butter and margarine. The only reason to choose margarine would be that you actually prefer the taste to that of butter and your budget is limited. If you don’t want to eat butter fair enough but please understand that by eating margarine you are harming your body. With margarine you are just adding one more toxic material into your bodily environment, a toxic material that should be avoided.

When viewed under a microscope margarine is very close to plastic in its composition, so would you spread plastic on your bread, I don’t think so.

If you were to leave a tub of margarine and a tub of butter in your garden for a few days, what you’d find is that all the butter had been consumed by insects and animals. Whereas the margarine would be untouched even animals and insects wouldn’t touch it.

So I ask you to look differently at the ad’s promoting the plastic they want you to believe is edible, ok yes it is edible but it’s certainly not healthy.

Margarine is a creation of the scientific laboratory, really bears no resemblance to butter, except in appearance.  And this appearance is due to the yellow dye that is added to the white margarine to convince consumers that they really are consuming legitimate substitute for butter. Incredibly in the 1930’s, margarine was actually sold with a packet of yellow dye that the consumer could mix in with the margarine to complete the butter masquerade. Today’s margarines are commonly based on a number of cheap oils, including soybean, corn canola and cottonseed oils. These oils typically have had all the nutrient value extracted or processed out of them. Nearly all the protein, minerals, lecithin and other desirable natural components have been removed. Most of the vitamins are also gone.

To make matters worse, the oil that is used to make margarine is first typically hydrogenated to turn in from a liquid into a solid, forming many toxic substances in the process. Margarine then ends up with a large amount of what is known as trans-Fatty acids in them. These trans-fatty acids have been associated with increased disease and compromise of the cardiovascular system, immune system and reproductive system.

Butter, when it comes from a quality source, maintains a high food value. Even when coming from pasteurized cream, butter still maintains a positive food value. In sharp contrast to pasteurized milk and other pasteurized products.

While this may be a bit of an oversimplification, I maintain that limiting yourself to oil and butter in your cooking is the healthy way to go. Few other readily available oils are without some degree of toxicity. Remember that margarine is at least one source of toxicity that you can easily eliminate from your daily diet.

  Follow me:
www.twitter.com/ratherbehealthy

If you’d like to help me as I am now disabled and operate this site on my own then please consider donating, you can do this by going to www.paypal.com then click on Send money.

You’ll be asked to enter the email of the person which is me and my email is [email protected]

Yes this article by Dr Mercola is talking about the USA but the problems created by fluoride relate to everyone using fluoride toothpaste or drinking fluoridated water irrespective of the country you live in. Fluoride is a toxic material, it’s a by-product of aluminium smelting…

Fifty years ago the limited research done at that time did show minimal benefits of using fluoride to prevent tooth decay but further research has proven without a doubt that this is possible to be achieved using 1/100th of the fluoride in toothpaste.

You and your family would be safer and healthier by avoiding fluoride all together..

The US government has finally admitted they’ve overdosed Americans on fluoride and, for first time since 1962, are lowering its recommended level of fluoride in drinking water.1,2,3

About 40 percent of American teens have dental fluorosis,4 a condition referring to changes in the appearance of tooth enamel—from chalky-looking lines and splotches to dark staining and pitting—caused by long-term ingestion of fluoride during the time teeth are forming.

In some areas, fluorosis rates are as high as 70-80 percent, with some children suffering from advanced forms.

The former recommendation called for a fluoride level of 0.7 to 1.2 milligrams per liter (mg/L) of water. The new upper limit set by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is 0.7 mg/L, to prevent these visible signs of toxic overexposure.

Why Is a Drug Added to Water When the Dose Cannot Be Controlled?

It’s quite clear that when you add fluoride to drinking water, you cannot control the dose that people are getting, and fluoride is in fact not only a non-essential mineral but a toxic drug. This alone is one of the reasons why fluoride shouldn’t be added to drinking water at any level.

If a doctor somehow managed to force a patient to take a drug with known toxic effects and failed to inform them of the dosage and frequency, and never monitored their health outcome, they would be medically negligent and liable to legal and medical board action.

Yet water utilities administer this drug without a prescription, at the behest of the government, without any idea of who will get what dose and for how long, and without monitoring for side effects.

Fluoride is added to drinking water to, in theory, prevent a disease (tooth decay), and as such becomes a medicine by FDA definition. While proponents claim this is no different than adding vitamin D to milk, fluoride is not an essential nutrient. Moreover, fluoride isn’t even approved by the FDA for the prevention of cavities.

We now know that at a limit of 0.7-1.2 mg/L causes a great many people to overdose on the drug. Will an upper limit of 0.7 mg/L protect everyone forced to drink fluoridated water?

Considering the fact that people also get fluoride from toothpaste, dental rinses, processed foods, and beverages, the chances of overexposure are still present, even at this lowered level.

Many Will Still Be at Risk for Overexposure at Lowered Fluoride Level

At the previous level, 40 percent of US teens became “collateral damage.” What will the allowable damage be at the new level? The HHS said it will evaluate dental fluorosis rates among children in 10 years to assess whether they were correct about this new level.

Let’s say dental fluorosis goes down to 20 percent. Is 20 percent an acceptable level of harm? How about 10 percent? Who decides what the acceptable level of collateral damage is?

Remarkably, the Sacramento Bee5 reports that: “Recent unpublished federal research found there’s no regional differences in the amount of water kids drink. So it makes sense for the same levels to be used everywhere, health officials said.”

I’d be very curious to review that study, because I have a hard time imagining that kids everywhere drink the same amount of water!

It’s also a ludicrous assumption unless every single child is also exposed to the same amount of fluoride from other sources besides drinking water… and weighs the same… and has the same health status… and we know that’s simply not the case.

According to the HHS, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “uses the 90th percentile of drinking water intake for all age groups to calculate the relative contribution for each fluoride source.”

What this means is that if you drink more water than the 90th percentile, you are not protected by this reduced level. People most likely to fall into that category include infants receiving formula mixed with fluoridated water, people working outdoors (especially in hot climates), athletes, and diabetics.

Dental Fluorosis Is NOT the Only Risk of Water Fluoridation

Barbara Gooch, a dentist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) told NPR6 that “The only documented risk of water fluoridation is fluorosis, and it is primarily a cosmetic risk. Fluorosis in the milder form is not a health risk.”

This hints at a really deficient understanding of the available science on fluoride’s health effects. Dental fluorosis is the most visible form of fluorosis, but it’s far from being “just cosmetic” and of no further concern.

It can also be an indication that the rest of your body, such as your bones and internal organs, including your brain, has been overexposed to fluoride as well.

In other words, if fluoride is having a visually detrimental effect on the surface of your teeth, you can be virtually guaranteed that it’s also damaging other parts of your body, such as your bones. Skeletal fluorosis, which isn’t visible, is very difficult to distinguish from arthritis. Symptoms indicative of early clinical stage skeletal fluorosis include:

• Burning, prickling, and tingling in your limbs
• Muscle weakness
• Chronic fatigue
• Gastrointestinal disorders
• Reduced appetite and weight loss

The second clinical stage of skeletal fluorosis is characterized by:

• Stiff joints and/or constant pain in your bones; brittle bones; and osteosclerosis
• Anemia
• Calcification of tendons, or ligaments of ribs and pelvis
• Osteoporosis in the long bones
• Bony spurs may also appear on your limb bones, especially around your knee, elbow, and on the surface of tibia and ulna

All of this has been known since the 1930s, so it’s rather disingenuous to proclaim that dental fluorosis is the only documented risk of water fluoridation. If 40 percent of American teens have dental fluorosis, how many people suffer from skeletal fluorosis as a result of chronic fluoride overexposure? In one previous study, bone fracture rates also rose sharply with increasing severity ofdental fluorosis. Studies have also demonstrated that fluoride toxicity, caused by overexposure, can lead to:

Fluoride Has No Benefit for Teeth When Swallowed

You are beyond naïve if you believe that fluoride somehow selectively goes to your teeth when you swallow it. Rather, it accumulates throughout your body’s bones and tissues. What little benefit fluoride may have is achieved through topicalapplication. Both the CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO) have noted that there is no discernible difference in tooth decay between developed countries that fluoridate their water and those that do not.7

The decline in tooth decay the US has experienced over the last 60 years, which is often attributed to fluoridated water, has likewise occurred in all developed countries, most of which do not fluoridate their water. So declining rates of dental decay is not in and of itself proof that water fluoridation actually works. It’s also worth noting that well over 99 percent of the fluoride added to drinking water never even touches a tooth; it simply runs down the drain, into the environment, where you can be guaranteed it’s doing nothing that is beneficial…

HHS Still Ignores Major Safety Concerns

According to Fluoride Action Network9 (FAN), in finalizing its new fluoride recommendation, the HHS has whitewashed a number of safety issues, failing to address recent research showing adverse effects ranging from lowered IQ in children (found in no less than 43 studies), underactive thyroid,10 and ADHD.11

For example, one recent study12 linking fluoridated water to higher prevalence of ADHD created a predictive model showing that every one percent increase in the portion of the US population drinking fluoridated water in 1992 was associated with 67,000 additional cases of ADHD 11 years later, and an additional 131,000 cases 19 years later.

FAN points out that the HHS even “resorted to deceit” when it dismissed research showing reductions in IQ. The HHS stated that“A recent meta-analysis of studies conducted in rural China… identified an association between high fluoride exposure (i.e., drinking water concentrations ranging up to 11.5 mg/L) and lower IQ scores…” First of all, there are in all 43 studies reporting a relationship between fluoride exposure and reduced IQ. The study mentioned by the HHS only looked at 27 of them.

But more importantly, when you seek to protect an entire population you have to look at the lowest level at which harm becomes apparent, not the highest. By noting only the upper level of the fluoride concentrations found in this study, it appears the HHS was trying to offer misleading reassurance that their recommended level is well beneath any level where risk may be present. But the lowest level at which IQ reductions were noted in that study was 0.88 mg/L, which isn’t that far from the new recommended upper limit of 0.7 mg/L.

Add fluoride from other sources, and you may very well get into the range of hazard. Interestingly, a number of studies13,14,15,16have specifically shown that children who have moderate or severe dental fluorosis score lower on tests measuring cognitive skills and IQ, suggesting that if 40 percent of our kids have fluorosis, the water fluoridation scheme in the US is likely affecting our children’s IQ as well. As noted by FAN:

“In addition, in toxicology, it is not the concentration of fluoride (mg/liter) that is the relevant parameter but the dose in mg/day (how much you drink), and such a dose has to be compiled from all sources. In the case of the Chinese children in rural villages in these studies, they did not have two sources that US children commonly have: typically they are not bottle-fed and they do not use fluoridated toothpaste.

So, it is likely that some American children are getting higher doses than some of the Chinese children who had their IQ lowered… Because fluoride is an endocrine disruptor and has the potential to lower IQ in children, FAN urges HHS to adopt the Precautionary Principle and end fluoridation now.”

They Got It Wrong—HHS Does Not Consider the Fact That Fluoride Is an Endocrine Disruptor…

According to FAN:

“HHS also stated in its press release that a report on the toxicology of fluoride by the National Research Council of the National Academies (NRC, 200617) ‘found no evidence substantial enough to support effects other than severe dental fluorosis at these levels.’

What HHS failed to state is that the NRC report of 2006 stated18 for the first time that fluoride is an ‘endocrine disruptor,’which means it has the potential to play havoc with the biology and fate of humans and animals. This is far more significant than severe dental fluorosis.”

In 2011, FAN submitted a number of concerns to the HHS, and none of them have been adequately addressed, FAN says. These concerns include:

  Follow me:
www.twitter.com/ratherbehealthy

If you’d like to help me as I am now disabled and operate this site on my own then please consider donating, you can do this by going to www.paypal.com then click on Send money.

You’ll be asked to enter the email of the person which is me and my email is [email protected]

I’ve no doubt in my mind that this problem I suffer from is a difficult thing to overcome but, I will not accept the classification given to it by the medical professionals around the world. I’m sure that 99.9% of MS patients feel it’s nigh on impossible to ignore the pain, discomfort and extreme fatigue that lives in our bodies 24/7 but I’m not one of them. I’ve used a multitude of herbs and supplements in differing combinations, some work better with food or before food on an empty stomach. There are so many variables and to be honest it can be disheartening but, as I’ve said before when a supplement doesn’t have the desired effect then I just see it as another to cross off my list and brings me closer to the right combination or method.

In some ways I have a lot to be grateful for, I’m happy, I have no real financial worries, I don’t have a lot but I do have enough to enable me to keep trying. Something I do have in abundance is love from those that matter, I have an unfailing belief that everything in my life will improve, is that stubbornness? whatever….I’m not accepting defeat period.

  Follow me:
www.twitter.com/ratherbehealthy

If you’d like to help me as I am now disabled and operate this site on my own then please consider donating, you can do this by going to www.paypal.com then click on Send money.

You’ll be asked to enter the email of the person which is me and my email is [email protected]

Dr. Otto Warburg was the man who discovered the cause of cancer, he was awarded the nobel prize in 1931 for his work. Initially it was my understanding that he discovered cancer but he actually discovered the cause which in my opinion is even more valuable than discovering cancer. Many people have recognized a problem, a disease, a tumorous lump growing on someone and labeling it a disease. The cause of that disease is even more important and relevant than the disease itself if you want to do something about it. His work came to be known as the “Warburg Effect” or the “Warburg Hypothesis” which basically entailed that cancer cells live off sugar (glycolysis) and that they also thrive in an anaerobic environment. These causes lead me to believe the opposite would help to reverse the cancer growth. What do you think?

He’s one of the most relevant figures in our history when it comes to cancer, what causes it and how to really treat it. Most people have no idea who this man is though, why is that? is it because of what he has to say about cancer and about disease in general? There’s no question that he was a brilliant man during his time. The first man to discover the cause of cancer is somewhat like the first man landing on the moon! it’s just the micro and macro scale of things.

His discovery led him to certain conclusions. These conclusions that he was led to may be true or false to you but i’m going to leave that up to you to decide. I trust this man (the discoverer of it) more than the American Cancer Society or any other medical organization though because he’s worked to get to a place of excellence and understanding of cancer. Large organizations that take your money for a ‘cure’ or to walk around in a circle wearing pink shirts haven’t done a whole lot with the BILLIONS of dollars poured in for research.

Oddly enough Dr. Otto Warburg gave his two cents on what can be done to treat and heal cancer and what changes need to take place in the human body for the human body to no longer have cancer. Let me say that again! the man who discovered cancer shared practical information on how cancer can cease to exist based on his understanding of cancer in his research.

So what was his thoughts on cancer? First, he was quoted as saying:

His first belief was that cancer itself cannot exist in an alkaline environment. What conclusion could you draw from this? Foods and drinks that are alkaline are beneficial for helping to remove cancer from the human body. From his research his conclusion was that cancer can not live in an alkaline environment. If you have cancer then wouldn’t it be a natural conclusion to put alkaline foods and drinks such as water into your body as much as possible as opposed to acidic foods which may in fact feed the cancer growth? It’s just a thought.

Beyond this Dr. Otto Warburg also said…

“Cancerous tissues are acidic, whereas healthy tissues are alkaline. Water splits into H+ and OH- ions, if there is an excess of H+, it is acidic; if there is an excess of OH- ions, then it is alkaline.”

“All normal cells have an absolute requirement for oxygen, but cancer cells can live without oxygen – a rule without exception. “Deprive a cell 35% of its oxygen for 48 hours and it may become cancerous.” Dr. Warburg has made it clear that the root cause of cancer is oxygen deficiency, which creates an acidic state in the human body. Dr Warburg also discovered that cancer cells are anaerobic (do not breathe oxygen) and cannot survive in the presence of high levels of oxygen, as found in an alkaline state.

Dr. Wargburg understood the importance of oxygen and an alkaline environment around the cancerous growth. He even went so far as to say that “No Disease, including cancer can live in an alkaline environment” too. So from Dr. Warburg some of the best cancer and disease prevention (and healing, according to him) advice would be to give your boxy more oxygen and an alkaline environment.

How do you do that? More deep breathing. More nature. If you live in the city you are being bombarded by chemicals and decreasing oxygen levels. The country and nature have higher levels of pure oxygen and this was one of the keys according to Dr. Warbug to help the body be in an alkaline environment. Not only that but eating alkaline foods such as vegetables and fruits can help to alkalize the body environment as well.

Believe it or not Dr. Otto Warburg also wrote a book entitled “Cancer: It’s cause and it’s Cure” which blows my mind. I recommend listening to the recent interview on my podcast with Ty Bollinger as well as reading the Top 6 Cancer Prevention Foods.

  Follow me:
www.twitter.com/ratherbehealthy

If you’d like to help me as I am now disabled and operate this site on my own then please consider donating, you can do this by going to www.paypal.com then click on Send money.

You’ll be asked to enter the email of the person which is me and my email is [email protected]