MySpace


MySpace.com | rss | sign in
donna

donna christian


Last Updated: 9/21/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Female
Status: Married
Age: 55
Sign: Virgo

City: Augusta
State: Texas
Country: US
Signup Date: 7/12/2006

Blog Archive
[Older      Newer]
 /  / 
Saturday, August 22, 2009 
3:15 PM 
2 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Wednesday, May 27, 2009 

The top five cancer-causing foods 

Ever wonder which foods should be strongly avoided by those at high risk for cancer? We can begin identifying cancer-causing foods once we know which ingredients in our food cause cancer. Some of those ingredients are food additives and chemicals used to enhance taste, while others are used strictly for appearance or to increase product shelf life. The key to avoiding cancer-causing foods is knowing which ingredients are carcinogens -- or cancer promoters -- and then reading food labels to permanently avoid consuming those ingredients.

Cancer tumors develop, in part, by feeding on sugar in the bloodstream. If you eat lots of sugary snacks loaded with simple carbs, you're loading your bloodstream with the chemical energy needed for cancer cells (and tumors) to proliferate. No biological system can live without fuel for its chemical processes, including cancer cells. Thus, one of the strategies to pursue for any anti-cancer diet is to eat low-glycemic diet. That means no refined sugars... ever! No refined grains (white flour, for example), no heavy use of sweeteners and the lifetime avoidance of sugary soda pop. Aside from starving tumors, eating foods low in sugar and avoiding simple carbs will also keep your weight in check while helping prevent blood sugar disorders such as type-2 diabetes.

What to avoid on the labels: high-fructose corn syrup, sugar, sucrose, enriched bleached flour, white rice, white pastas, white breads and other "white" foods.

The dangers of hydrogenated oils

Hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils -- another danger -- are developed from otherwise harmless, natural elements. To make them hydrogenated, oils are heated in the presence of hydrogen and metal catalysts. This process helps prolong shelf life but simultaneously creates trans fats, which only have to be disclosed on the label if the food contains more than 0.5 grams per serving. To avoid listing trans fats, or to claim "trans fat free" on their label, food manufacturers simply adjust the serving size until the trans fat content falls under 0.5 grams per serving. This is how you get modern food labels with serving sizes that essentially equate to a single bite of food. Not exactly a "serving" of food, is it?

Besides being a cancer factor, trans fats promote heart disease, interrupt metabolic processes, and cause belly fat that crowd the organs and strain the heart. The essential fatty acids that the hydrogenation process removes are responsible for a number of processes in your body. When trans fats replace these essential fatty acids, they occupy the same space without doing the same job. The "anchor" portion of the fatty acid is in place (which is how the body recognizes the fatty acid and puts it to work) but the chemically active part of the fatty acid is twisted, distorted, and missing vital parts.

After the hydrogenation process, the fatty acid can't biochemically function in the same way. Things like brain cell function, hormones, gland function, oxygen transport, cell wall function (keeping things in or out of your cells) and digestive tract operation (putting together nutrients and blocking allergens) are adversely affected.

Food manufacturers don't tell you this on the product label, of course. Your body needs essential fatty acids and you are programmed to keep eating until you get them. If you're only eating trans fats, you'll never feel fully satiated, because your body will never get the fatty acids it needs for essential function. Since cancer needs high blood sugar and low oxygen levels, a person with lots of belly fat who just can't seem to put down those trans fat cookies or crackers (also loaded with flour and simple sugars) presents the ideal environment for the development of cancer.

The acrylamide factor

Since trans fats are often formed during the frying process, we should also talk about acrylamides. Acrylamides are not added into food; they are created during the frying process. When starchy foods are subjected to high heat, acrylamides form. A Swedish study found that acrylamides cause cancer in rats, and more studies are under way to confirm the understanding that acrylamides also cause cancer in humans.

Sodium nitrite (and nitrates)

Food companies add sodium nitrite into certain foods on purpose. This carcinogen is added to processed meats, hot dogs, bacon, and any other meat that needs a reddish color to look "fresh." Decades ago when meats were preserved, it was done with salt. But in the mid 20th century, food manufacturers started using sodium nitrite in commercial preservation. This chemical is responsible for the pinkish color in meat to which consumers have grown accustomed. Although today the use of refrigeration is largely what protects consumers from botulism and bacteria, manufacturers still add sodium nitrite to make the meat look pinkish and fresh.

The nitrites themselves are not the problem. People get more nitrites from vegetables than they do from meat, according to research by the University of Minnesota. During the digestion process, however, sodium nitrite is converted to nitrosamine, and that's where the cancer problems begin. Nitrosamine is a carcinogen, but since it is not technically an ingredient, its presence can be easily overlooked on the packaging. Nitrosamines are also found in food items that are pickled, fried, or smoked; in things such as beer, cheese, fish byproducts, and tobacco smoke.

Knowing about all these ingredients doesn't mean there is simply a "short list" of foods that should be avoided. You have to vigilant and read labels constantly. Here are the five worst offenders:

Hot dogs: The Cancer Prevention Coalition recommends that children should not eat more than 12 hot dogs per month because of the risk of cancer. If you must have your hot dog fix, look for those without sodium nitrite listed among the ingredients.

Processed meats and bacon: These meats almost always contain the same sodium nitrite found in hot dogs. You can find some without nitrites, but you'll have to look for them in natural grocers or health food stores. Bacon is also high in saturated fat, which contributes to the risk of cancers, including breast cancer. Limiting your consumption of processed meats and saturated fats also benefits the heart.

Doughnuts: Doughnuts contain hydrogenated oils, white flour, sugar, and acrylamides. Essentially, they're one of the worst cancer foods you can possibly eat. Reader's Digest calls doughnuts "disastrous" as a breakfast food, and many experts agree it's probably one of the worst ways to start the day.

French fries: Fries are made with hydrogenated oil and fried at high temperatures. Some chains even add sugar to their fry recipe to make them even more irresistible. Not only do they clog your arteries with saturated fat and trans fat, they also contain acrylamides. They should be called "cancer fries," not French fries.

Chips / crackers / cookies: These generally contain white flour and sugar as well as trans fats, but it's not enough to simply look for these ingredients on the label; you have to actually "decode" the ingredients list that food manufacturers use to deceive consumers. They do this by hiding ingredients (such as hiding MSG in yeast extract, or by fiddling with serving sizes so they can claim the food is trans fat free, even when it contains trans fats (the new Girl Scout cookies use this trick).


Besides avoiding these foods, what else can consumers do to reduce their risk of cancer? The main things are simple: Eat unprocessed foods and base your diet largely on plants. Consume foods that have omega-3 fats and other essential fatty acids. Eat lots of fruits and vegetables; many common ones have known cancer-fighting properties. Get regular vigorous exercise, since tumors cannot thrive in highly oxygenated environments. Keep your blood sugar stable to avoid being an all-you-can-eat buffet for cancer cells.

Eat foods high in natural vitamin C, a nutrient that deters the conversion of nitrite into nitrosamine and promotes healthy immune function. Make sure you get adequate amounts of cancer-fighting vitamin D through exposure to sunlight -- about 10 to 15 minutes each day if you have fair skin, or ten times as long if you have dark skin pigmentation. Stay well hydrated to ensure that your body rids itself of toxins. Avoid smoking and don't use conventional fragrance, cosmetics and personal care products -- virtually all of them contain cancer-causing chemicals.

Preventing cancer is actually quite straightforward. Even the World Health Organization says that 70 percent of all cancers can be prevented with simple changes in diet and lifestyle. The truth is that most people give themselves cancer through the foods, drinks and products they choose to consume. In my opinion, over 90 percent of cancers are easily preventable.

By the way, don't you find it interesting that the cancer industry seems to have no interest whatsoever in urging people to avoid eating sodium nitrite, or to stop using cancer-causing skin care products, or to get more sunlight on their skin so they can prevent cancer with vitamin D? As you'll read in many other articles I've written here, it is my firm belief that the cancer industry has no interest whatsoever in preventing cancer, and it primarily interested in treating cancer for profit. This view is generally agreed upon by noted cancer experts such as Dr. Samuel Epstein and Dr. Ralph Moss. See www.PreventCancer.com to learn more from Dr. Epstein.
Mike Adams

12:49 AM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Wednesday, May 27, 2009 

The Flouride Controversy

　

By Dr. Ted Spence

Fluoride is a very controversial topic, but how controversial I did not realize. The data reveals that fluoride is a chemical toxin. As you can see by my studies and degrees, I place a large amount of confidence in nutritional methods for over coming disease and place little in toxic drugs, synthetic chemicals and especially toxins, like fluoride.

A few years ago, I was asked by the head of our local health department to conduct a review of existing journal research on the toxicity of fluoride with emphasis on its cancer causing potential. I went to the National Medical Library and produced for him some 40 articles on the toxicity of fluoride. When we reviewed them, there was some discrepancy in whether or not fluoride was mutagenic.

Well, half of the articles said that it was and half said that it was not. But it can not be both ways ... We wondered what was wrong. Then the element of bias entered the picture, since Proctor and Gamble has paid for some of the "negative-concluding" research. We were still puzzled.

My only goal is to tell this information to the patients and let them decide. Isn't that fair ... after all it is their decision? It is the patient's choice ... isn't it? The toxicity of fluoride has caused many countries to rethink the fluoride issue and many have rescinded fluoride in favor of the health of their people.

Those banning fluoride are Sweden, Norway, Denmark, West Germany (now unified), Italy, Belgium, Austria, France, and The Netherlands. Despite these retractions of fluoride, the US still presses on with the goal to fluoridate (poison) every community water supply in the United States.

All allopathically-trained dentists are very familiar with the ADA and other "authoritative" positions on fluoride. They rarely mention its toxic potential or the few studies revealing increased tooth decay after fluoride use. The research of Burk and Yiamouyiannis revealed that every major city with fluoride had increased rates of cancer. Not a fair trade for "good looking teeth".

If you don't want to look at this data, that is your decision. As health professionals, we don't want to harm patients in any way and fluoride produces great harm. I am referring to taking fluoride internally, where it has been found to cause unscheduled DNA synthesis, sister chromatid exchanges and yes, mutagenic effects on the cells.

These terms may not bother some people at all, but they mean that there will be an increase in cancer after the ingestion of fluoride. Tsutsui, et al found that the addition of fluoride to healthy liver cell, in vitro, could establish changes that can only be described as cancerous.

The ADA's official position is that this stuff is safe, yet there have been deaths of children in the dentists office due to fluoride, albeit very few. The point I am trying to make is that this is not to be taken lightly. In a letter [to me] from the ADA apologizing for fluoride, that stated, "There are three basic compounds commonly used for fluoridating drinking water supplies in the United States: sodium fluoride, sodium silicofluoride, and hydrofluorosilicic acid."

Now any chemist can tell you that these are not the sodium fluoride we are all told about. Sodium hydrofluorosilicic acid is one of the most reactive chemical species know to man. Its toxicity is known in many chemical circles. It will eat through metal/ plastic pipes and corrode many materials including stainless steel and other metals. It will dissolve rubber tires and melt concrete. This is added to our water to produce "healthy teeth".

Fluoride Does the Following:

inactivates 62 enzymes (Judd)
increases the aging process (Yiamouyiannis)
increases the incidence of cancer and tumor growth (Waldbott/Yiamouyiannis)
disrupts the immune system (Waldbott)
causes genetic damage (Tsutsui, et al)
interrupts DNA repair-enzyme activity (Waldbott)
increased arthritis and
is a systemic poison.

"Fluoride is a highly toxic substance.... "

L P Anthony, DDS editor of the Journal of the American Dental Association - 1944

Funny how times change, but truth does not change.

"....we have very strong circumstantial evidence of systemic toxicity of the so-called absolutely safe concentrate of fluoridated water"

Roy E Hanford, MD, "Where is Science Taking US? reprint from Saturday Review

"Don't drink fluoridated water .... Fluoride is a corrosive poison which will produce harm on a long term basis." Dr Charles Heyd, Past AMA president

Some 61,000 cancer deaths in the US result from fluoridation each year. I repeat 61,000. (Burk and Yiamouyiannis) One study found that fluoride elevates cancer mortality 17% in 16 years in large cities. (from Gerald Judd, PhD) "You have been led to believe the fluorine makes teeth harder. The fact is, it actually makes teeth softer." (George Meinig, a founder of the American Academy of Endodontics)

The US sees a 22% increase in decay every 16 years from fluoride use and a 50% decline in decay every 20 years compared with Finland's 98%, Sweden's 80% and Holland's 72%. And they are non-fluoridated. (Gerald Judd)

My only goal is to tell the truth about the ill-effects of a known toxin. I mentioned the paper being published by the Health Freedom News on the neurotoxicity of fluoride. Fluoride is a potent neurotoxin and this has been known for some time; at least since the early 1940s, well before the fluoridation experiment with Grand Rapids.

Dr Gerard Judd, PhD (chemistry), [ emeritus Manhatten project] found that fluoride can inactivate 62 enzyme systems. As a naturopath, nutritionist and master herbalist, I cannot endorse a substance that has known detrimental effects.

Geoffrey Smith stated, "Recent studies suggest that fluoride may be genotoxic." (p 79, Smith) And added, "There is now a substantial body of evidence suggesting that fluoride is mutagenic." (p 93, Smith) Gibson also noted, "Fluoride is one of the most toxic inorganic chemicals in the Earth's crust, ... However, with increasing experience, doubts about both safety and efficacy have arisen." (p 111, Gibson)

And he added, "A possible link between fluoridation of public water supplies and an increase in the cancer death rate has been debated for over 20 years and there is now no doubt that fluoride can cause genetic damage." (p 111, Gibson)

Gibson noted, "Inhibitory effects of fluoride on different enzyme systems have been demonstrated." (p 111, Gibson) And, "A section of the population may therefore be at risk of compromised immune system function from water fluoridation schemes." (p 112, Gibson)

Get the drift; fluoride is not everything it is cracked up to be. Mutagenic, enzyme inhibition, genetic damage, increased cancer rates, genotoxic and controversial, all describe fluoride.

Tsutsui et al noted, a significant increase in chromosome aberrations at the chromatid level, sister chromatid exchanges, and unscheduled DNA synthesis was induced by NaF in a dose- and timedependent manner.

These results indicate that NaF is genotoxic and capable of inducing neoplastic transformation of Syrian hamster embryo cells in culture." (p 938, Tsutsui et al) There, you can see the controversy for yourself. Fluoride is toxic, fluoride is non-toxic; fluoride causes cancer, fluoride doesn't cause cancer. Who do we believe?

The fluoride controversy comes down to

... Who Do We Really Believe?

Here's two articles on mutations caused by fluoride:

Sodium Fluoride-induced Morphological and Neoplastic Transformation Chromosome Aberrations, Sister Chromatid Exchanges, and Unscheduled DNA Synthesis in Cultured Syrian Hamster Embryo Cells, Takeki Tsutsui, Nobuko Suzuki and Manabu Ohmori, Can Res, 44:938-941, 1984 (March)

Sodium Fluoride-induced Chromosome Aberrations in Different Stages of the Cell Cycle: A Proposed Mechanism, Marilyn J Aardema, et al, Mutation Research, 223:191-203, 1989

The titles say it all.

Therefore, because of this controversy my feelings on this matter is that is should be up to the patient. They need both sides of the story to make an "intelligent" decision. I only mean to give them the other side. References are cited for your use and reading enjoyment.

The EPA found that at 2 ppm salmon were sterile, yet at 1 ppm it is placed in our water supply. [Dr Richard Foulkes] Fluoride only helps [if it helps] children up to age 12. Yet, everybody is "forced" to drink it. Oscar Ewing, who pushed fluoride in the legislature, told the senators not to drink it.

The last thing I would say it that by endorsing fluoride you totally eliminate the real prevention of tooth decay ... good sound nutrition. Tooth-brushing [important as it is] does not stop tooth decay.

Fluoride [a toxic] does not stop rampant tooth decay. [Fluoride only hardens to outer surface of the enamel and may prevent calcium from being deposited when a tooth is re-mineralized.] Nutrition stops tooth decay. I have developed a nutritional supportive program which will totally stop tooth decay in less than two weeks.

I have watched many children go from all 20 carious deciduous teeth, to 20 ebernated [hardened] teeth, which are non-painful and hard as rock. I have never seen fluoride do this [after 21 years of dentistry] and fluoride is not even a part of my caries prevention program.

Ted H Spence, DDS, ND, PhD/DSc,MH

References:

On Neurotoxicity:

Varner, J A, et al, "Chronic Administration of Aluminum Fluoride or Sodium Fluoride to Rats in Drinking water: Alterations in Neuronal and Cerebrovascular Integrity", Brain Research, 784(1-2):284-298, 1998, 1998, Feb 16.

Isaacson, R L, et al, "Toxin-Induced Blood Vessel Inclusions Caused By the Chronic Administration of Aluminum and Sodium Fluoride and Their Implications in Dementia", Ann NY Acad Science, 825():152-166, 1997, Oct 15.

Varner, J A, et al , "Chronic Aluminum Fluoride Administration, Part I: Behavioral Observations", Behavior Neural Biology, 61(3):233-241, 1994, May.

Burgstahler, A W, Colquhoun, J, "Neurotoxicity of Fluoride", Fluoride, 29:57-58, 1996 and

Li, X S, Zhi, J L, Gao R O, "Effects of Fluoride Exposure on the Intelligence of Children", Fluoride, 28:182-189, 1995 and

Mullenix, P J, et al, "Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride on Rats", Neurotoxicity and Teratology, 17:169-177, 1995 and

Zhao, L B, et al, "Effect of Fluoridated Water Supply on Children's Intelligence", Fluoride, 29:190-192, 199

Waldbott, George, MD, Fluoride: The Great Dilemma, 1978, Coronado Press, Lawrence, KS

Yaimouyiannis, John, Fluoride: The Aging Factor, 1993, Health Action Press, Delaware

12:47 AM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Wednesday, May 27, 2009 

Processed Meat Unsafe For Human Consumption

　

World cancer experts have finally declared what NewsTarget readers learned nearly four years ago: That processed meats cause cancer, and anyone seeking to avoid cancer should avoid eating all processed meats for life.

Hundreds of cancer researchers took part in a five-year project spanning more than 7,000 clinical studies and designed to document the links between diet and cancer. Their conclusion, published in the World Cancer Research Fund's report, Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity and the Prevention of Cancer: a Global Perspective (2007), has rocked the health world with a declaration that all people should immediately stop buying and eating processed meat products and that all processed meat should be avoided for life!

Processed meats, the report explains, are simply too dangerous for human consumption. And why? Because they contain chemical additives that are known to greatly increase the risk of various cancers, including colorectal cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, leukemia, brain tumors, pancreatic cancer and many more. The report, published at this DietAndCancerReport.org website also recommends that consumers:

• Avoid all sugary soft drinks for life.
• Exercise at least 30 minutes a day.
• Get lean and fit, without becoming underweight.
• Limit consumption of ALL meats (even fresh meat).
• Breastfeed all infants for their first six months, avoiding infant formula.

Sadly, the WCRF still does not recommend that consumers use nutritional supplements to help protect themselves from cancer, indicating that the group still has a lot to learn about the role of medicinal mushrooms, sea vegetables, microalgae, Chinese herbs, rainforest herbs and superfood extracts in preventing and reversing cancer. But at least the group's recommendation that consumers now avoid all processed meat products is a huge step in the right direction. It is the first time that any internationally-recognized cancer organization has found the courage to make a partial proclaimation about the health hazards of the chemicals found in processed meat products. It's almost as big a deal as when the American Medical Association, after years of taking millions of dollars from tobacco companies, finally admitted that smoking causes lung cancer and heart disease. (A decade after the scientific evidence was irrefutable, of course, but then again, the AMA was making money off Big Tobacco by running tobacco ads in JAMA...)

What is "processed meat" exactly?

A woman asked me this question at a recent live event where I was warning the audience about the dangers of chemicals found in popular grocery products. Frankly, I was surprised to hear the question. But I've since learned that many people really don't know the difference between processed meat and non-processed meat ("fresh" meat).

Here's the difference:

Fresh meat usually has only one ingredient: The meat! Fresh meat is refrigerated and has a very short shelf life (just a few days, usually). It's usually packaged in simple wrappers, with no fancy logos or color printing.

Processed meat has many ingredients and is usually packaged for long-term shelf life. These products almost always contain sodium nitrite, the cancer-causing chemical additive that meat companies use as a color fixer to turn their meat products a bright red "fresh-looking" color. Processed meat products include:

• Bacon
• Sausage
• Pepperoni
• Beef jerky
• Deli slices
• Hot dogs
• Sandwich meat (including those served at restaurants)
• Ham
• Meat "gift" products like Christmas sausages
• Meat used in canned soups
• Meat used in frozen pizza
• Meat used in kid's lunch products
• Meat used in ravioli, spaghetti or Italian pasta products

... and many more meat products.

Unless it says "NITRITE FREE" on the front label, you can bet it's made with cancer-causing sodium nitrite!

(Hint: You will only find nitrite-free meat products in two places in the grocery store: 1) In the fresh meat section where you can buy freshly-ground hamburger, for example, and 2) In the freezer, where you can find "natural" meat products that are nitrite-free.

What are the

dangerous chemicals in processed meats?

Sodium nitrite is one of the most dangerous chemicals added to processed meats. Please be aware:

• You MUST read the ingredients list to find the sodium nitrite! Meat product companies do not list this ingredient on the front of the package.

• Even ORGANIC meat products and NATURAL meat products can still contain sodium nitrite. So read the labels to be sure, and avoid buying any meat product made with sodium nitrite.

• Be especially careful of food for kids! Virtually all packaged food products containing meat and marketed to children contain sodium nitrite! (Read the ingredients to protect your children.)

Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is a second dangerous chemical found in virtually all processed meat products. MSG is a dangerous excitotoxin linked to neurological disorders such as migraine headaches, Alzheimer's disease, loss of appetite control, obesity and many other serious health conditions. Manufacturers use MSG to add flavor to dead-tasting processed meat products.

Essentially, dead meat products look and taste dead (because they are), so meat companies use the following three ingredients to make them look fresh and taste interesting:

Sodium nitrite makes the meat look red and fresh. (But it promotes cancer.)

MSG makes the meat taste savory. (But it causes neurological disorders.)

Processed salt makes the meat taste more interesting. (But it causes nutritional problems and high blood pressure.)

On top of these three chemical additives, processed meats also contain saturated animal fat that is often contaminated with PCBs, heavy metals, pesticide residues and other dangerous substances.

You can learn more about dangerous chemicals in the food supply in my book, Grocery Warning, available from Truth Publishing.

Or you can download my free Honest Food Guide from www.HonestFoodGuide.org which reveals the true health dangers of numerous chemicals added to processed foods. The Honest Food Guide has now been downloaded by over one million people.

Protect yourself and your family

Processed meats promote cancer. There is simply no question about the scientific validity of that statement, and anyone who disagrees with it is either working for the meat industry or hopelessly behind the times on their nutritional research.

The processed meat industry, of course, insists that processed meat is perfectly healthy and that you can eat all you want. It's no surprise, of course: Big Tobacco insisted that cigarettes aren't really bad for your health and that nicotine isn't addictive, either. No industry is really willing to admit that its products are hazardous to human health, and the processed meat industry is no exception.

To protect yourself from these dangerous processed food products, here are the action steps to take:

1) Check the ingredients of all processed meat products in your refrigerator and pantry. Throw out any products containing sodium nitrite or MSG (monosodium glutamate).

2) Inform your spouse, roomates or children of what you're doing and why you're doing it. Show them the sodium nitrite right on the label of the products as you throw them out. Let them know that the World Cancer Research Fund now recommends that ALL consumers avoiding eating processed meats for life!

3) Boycott all processed meat products for life! Never buy processed meats again. That includes shopping at the grocery store, eating at a restaurant or consuming foods at a social event.

4) Spread the word. Tell others about the dangers of sodium nitrite. Print out the Honest Food Guide (www.HonestFoodGuide.com) and share it, if you want. Let people know that processed meats are dangerous for their health.

What's next: The future of processed meats

My research tells me that chemical additives in processed meats are emerging as the next big food safety issue to hit mainstream awareness. Just a few years ago, most consumers had never heard of trans fats or the dangers of hydrogenated oils, for example. But once that issue went mainstream, fast food restaurants all over the country announced changes to avoid hydrogenated oils.

I believe that sodium nitrite in processed meats is the next big food safety issue that's about to break into mainstream awareness. More and more consumers are suddenly aware that hot dogs promote cancer, or that bacon consumption is incredibly bad for your health. As awareness of this issue builds, there's going to be increasing political pressure to pass laws that protect the public by strictly limited or banning the use of sodium nitrite in processed meats.

The meat industry, of course, which seems to have absolutely no respect for human or animal life, will fight this every inch of the way. The people in charge of meat-producing companies exhibit zero concern for the health of the consumers who actually eat their products, and they remain entirely focused on the profits to be had from selling more toxic meat products to gullible consumers.

But just like Big Tobacco's marketing methods and fraudulent science was finally exposed as wholesale fraud, the processed meat industry is going to have to face scientific facts sooner or later: Sodium nitrite promotes cancer, and eating processed meat products substantially increases your risk of cancer. There's no denying it or arguing about it, at least not by any sane person. Eating cancer-causing chemicals is blatantly and irrefutably dangerous to your health.

Why some people commit nutritional suicide

Of course, many low-income, low-education consumers still continue to smoke cigarettes AND eat processed meat products. (Attend any NASCAR event and you'll find a whole crowd of 'em!) But the smart consumers (who represent the real future of human civilization, by the way) are wising up and increasingly opting for healthier foods made without dangerous chemicals.

There are people in society today who exhibit a strong desire to commit nutritional suicide. For those people, there is beef jerky, hot dogs, frozen pizza, cigarettes and over-hyped "energy" drinks. The future of these people is easy to see: Cancer, diabetes, heart disease, chemotherapy, pharmaceuticals, pain, death and bankruptcy.

Thankfully, there are other people who believe in taking care of their health and in living informed lives with outstanding health. For these people, there are living foods, superfoods, raw cacao, sprouts, rainforest herbs, sunshine, juicing and joyful exercise. Their future is also clear: Exceptional mental performance, freedom from chronic pain, excellent vitality and longevity, spiritual awareness, abundant living and much more.

Which group do you want to belong to?

You make that decision every time you shop for food. When you buy processed meats, you put yourself on a timeline track towards disease, suffering and medical victimization. But when you avoid meat products and focus on a plant-based diet, you are creating a future filled of abundance and health. It's up to you to decide which of these futures you'd rather create.

Regardless of which future you choose, there's no judgement from me. You're free to do what you want with your life and your own body. Some people choose to abuse their bodies as chemical playgrounds, living in the moment and dying young. That's their choice. Others choose to extend their lives and honor their bodies, living an extended, purpose-filled life. That's fine, too. I don't really care how people live their lives, I just want people to live consciously and understand that their decisions create results.

Anyone who decides to eat processed meat products on a repeated basis is simply creating a result. That result is cancer, and over enough years, that cancer will grow to the point where it shows up on a scan. That's when the doctor says, "You have cancer" and starts prescribing even more toxic chemicals known as chemotherapy agents. This is not a disease with an unknown cause. In fact, cancer is incredibly easy to both prevent AND cure -- but only if you understand the fundamentals of nutrition.

For now, just remember:

Processed meats = sodium nitrite = cancer

If you don't want cancer, don't eat processed meats. Ever.
Mike Adams

12:36 AM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Wednesday, August 22, 2007 
One of the most common questions I'm asked concerns my recommendations for milk or milk alternatives. My answer on this question has evolved over the years, so today, I'll share my latest preferences for milk and milk-like beverages.

Thumbs down: Soy milk

A few years ago, I recommended soy milk as a natural alternative to cow's milk. But since then, far better alternatives have emerged (see below). Also, more information has appeared regarding the environmental impact of soybean farming (the Amazon rainforest is being devastated by clear cutting to create soybean agricultural lands) as well as the frightening fact that most soybeans grown today are genetically modified (GMO) varieties.

On top of this, most popular soy milk brands (I won't name names, but these are likely the ones in your grocery store) have been bought out by big, profit-seeking food and beverage corporations, and as a result, they've been sugared up and made nutritionally inferior. Check the ingredients on "plain" soy milk the next time you're at the store: It's loaded with sugar!

Without question, most soy milk has become too mainstream, too sugary and too much controlled by the same food and beverage giants that are still manufacturing and marketing other products that promote degenerative disease. Because of these reasons, I no longer recommend soy milk (unless you make it yourself or get it from a small, truly natural company).

Thumbs down: Processed cow's milk

I'm also not thrilled about processed milk from cows. By "processed," I mean homogenized and pasteurized. The pasteurization kills all the beneficial microorganisms, and homogenization artificially modifies dairy fats in a way that ultimately harms the human cardiovascular system when consumed. Processed "mainstream" milk is also taken from dairy cows pumped up with antibiotics, rBGH (Bovine Growth Hormone) and usually treated very poorly in terms of ethics. Even the popular brands showing happy cows and claiming to be organic are under intense fire by the Organic Consumers Association (www.OrganicConsumers.org) for exploiting certain loopholes that allow non-organic cows to be suddenly considered "organic" on the day they're giving milk.

Processed cow's milk is bad for your health and bad for the cows who give it. It's great for corporate profits, however, and that's why milk continues to be so heavily marketed as a nutritional beverage. They've even managed to so strongly influence the USDA that the latest dietary recommendations by this government agency essentially recommend that everyone should drink more milk. And it's no surprise that infant formula manufacturers have, for decades, tried to convince nutritionally ignorant mothers that cow's milk is better for their baby than human breast milk. (An odd idea, isn't it?)

Thumbs up: Raw milk

Over the last two years, I've become a proponent of raw milk (especially raw fermented milk, see below). Raw goat's milk is my personal recommendation, but even raw cow's milk has merit. What's so good about raw milk? Because it's not homogenized or pasteurized, it's nutritionally superior to dead, cooked milk. Raw milk seems to be far easier to digest, and it contains living bacteria cultures that enhance digestion and even soothe the digestive tract.

It's no surprise, then, that raw milk is under attack by both federal regulators and some members of the processed milk industry. They don't want people to find a "superior" milk that isn't as profitable to sell (because it has reduced shelf life), so they're trying to destroy the raw milk market and limit consumer choice to processed, dead milk. (The same is true in the almond industry, where the Almond Board of California is now trying to irradiate all almonds grown in the state, yet have them labeled as "raw" even when they're dead.)

This attack on raw milk is dressed up to look like a public safety concern. Raw milk is dangerous, regulators claim, because the live cultures might get contaminated with unfriendly bacteria and harm someone. The preferred alternative, it seems, is to kill all the food so that it harms everyone equally.

In terms of choosing raw milk, the typical choices are raw cow's milk and raw goat's milk. Raw goat's milk is more compatible with human nutritional needs (and is especially beneficial to infants when mother's milk isn't available), but it has a stronger taste that not everyone enjoys. I encourage you to try both raw goat's milk and raw cow's milk, then decide what you like best. The proteins in the goat's milk are, no doubt, easier for humans to digest.

Thumbs way up: Fermented raw milk

The best dairy beverage for your health is, in my opinion, fermented raw milk. If you take raw milk and inoculate it with bacterial cultures, then let it sit for a day or two, you end up with a living, predigested, nutritionally superior beverage that's so packed with life it's actually fizzy (carbonated due to the off-gassing of bacteria) when you make it yourself at home.

One form of this fermented milk is called Kefir. It's an incredible beverage when you make it yourself. The store-bought kefir just isn't the same because it's usually dead, flat and pasteurized. But home-made kefir is something else entirely! It's alive, energetic and completely natural.

I was recently treated to some kefir made from raw goat's milk by a raw foods chef in Tucson -- a man I hope to feature on NewsTarget videos later this year. He makes kefir in jars on his kitchen countertop, using a kefir culture that's been passed down from one raw foodist to another for years... maybe even decades. It contained no sweeteners or additives of any kind; just raw goat's milk cultured with bacteria. After drinking it, I noticed an immediate energetic difference, and in the days that followed, I was amazed at the therapeutic effect on my digestive and eliminative processes. Since then, I've really upped my intake of fermented foods in general.

Store-bought kefir is tricky. Definitely avoid non-organic kefir of any kind, and I strongly recommend that even when you buy organic kefir, avoid products made with added sugars. This is a fermented beverage, not ice cream. Don't think it's supposed to taste like a milkshake. It's a slightly bitter beverage when you drink it plain, but that's what kefir is supposed to be.

Thumbs way up: Raw almond milk

Another current favorite at my house is raw almond milk. It's made from raw, soaked almonds, water, vanilla and a pinch of sea salt. I've posted a video on how to make this yourself using a Vita-Mix. (Click here to see the video.)

Raw almond milk is both delicious and nutritious. While it doesn't have the protein content of animal milk, it's rich in plant-based fats and various anti-cancer phytonutrients. Once you make a batch, you'll need to drink it within a day or two, since it tends to sour very quickly (it's alive, raw and nutritious, obviously), but I've found that you can preserve it in the refrigerator for several days longer by adding a couple of drops of food-grade hydrogen peroxide.

Many raw food proponents are now drinking a combination of raw almond milk and raw goat's milk kefir. That's a combination I'm enjoying, too. It's good to have a balance of both plant and animal-based milks, but only if they're from ethically treated, naturally raised animals who are not exposed to antibiotics, toxic chemicals or conventional veterinary care (which is all based on chemicals, just like human health care).

Mike's Milk Matrix

Okay, here's the low down on milk products and milk alternatives as I see it:

Soy milk: Not recommended. Too many GMO soybeans, bad environmental impact and some possible undesirable estrogen effects. The isoflavones are good for preventing cancer, however.

Processed cow's milk: It's just gross. Homogenized, pasteurized, milked from unhealthy cows and containing alarmingly high levels of pus, this liquid is nothing less than frightening. Flee it.

Raw cow's milk (organic): This is an acceptable dairy beverage. If it's from healthy cows treated with kindness and good nutrition, this raw beverage is far better than processed cow's milk.

Row goat's milk (organic): Even better than raw cow's milk, since the goat's milk is easier to digest and more compatible with human nutritional needs.

Fermented milk from cows or goats (organic Kefir): A great choice! It's alive, nutritious and great for digestive health. Make it yourself for best results. If you buy it, avoid the sugared-up kefir products in the store.

Raw almond milk: A top choice for vegans, one of my favorite beverages. Make it yourself with raw almonds, water a nut milk bag and a blender.
3:20 PM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Wednesday, August 01, 2007 
The ancient Celts, the bulk of whom, history says, inhabited the central and western parts of Europe, were in fact, Israelites whose origins are traced from that region in Europe through which flows the River Danube, and from the Near East.
The Anglicized "Celt," or "Kelt," is nothing more than the generic name of the ancient people who inhabited Northern and Western Europe.
They were regarded, by ancient writers, as "all the fair-haired peoples dwelling north of the Alps," and the name "Celt" comes from the Greek language, for the Greeks termed them all "Keltoi."
The Kelts were classified as falling into two loosely divided groups, which shaded off into each other.
The first was distinguished by "a long head, a long face, a narrow aquiline nose, blue eyes, very light hair and great stature," and these lighter-complexioned "Kelts" were usually termed "teutonic" by early writers.
The other group was marked by "a round head, a broad face, a nose often rather broad and heavy, hazel-gray eyes, light chestnut hair, and were said to be thick-set and medium height."
It is fascinating that the ancient "Teutons," whose name is generic for "Germans," appear in history along with the Cimbri, universally held to be Celts,
but coming from the same region as the Guttones (Goths, which was a Roman name for these peoples) by the shores of the Baltic and North Sea.
The Belgic tribes in northern France were the Cimbri, and had, according to history, migrated into the region from east of the Rhine.
The dominance of the Celts in northwestern Europe and the British Isles is well known.
Ancient writers spoke of the Gauls, who gave their name to modern-day France, as the "Cimbri," and identified them with the Cimmerians of an earlier date, who are mentioned by Homer.
They are identified as migrating through the mouth of the Danube, and early Celts are said to have been "continually moving westward." The "Belgae" were also Cimbri in origin. They spread across the Rhine and gave their name "to all northern France and Belgium" (Encyclopaedia Britanica, 11th edition, Vol. 5, page 612). Even in language the ancient Celts were identified as having come from the Near East. In 1831, James Pritchard was one of the first to demonstrate the true relationship of the Celts in his publication Eastern Origin of the Celtic Nations. A famous Bavarian historian, J.C. Zeuss (l806-I856), demonstrated conclusively the Indo-European origin of the Celtic dialects. Rediscovering old Irish manuscripts, he published a striking study in Celtic philology, called Grammatica Celtic, publishing the work in 1853. But who were these "Cimbri," or "Khummee," who were migrating along the river valleys of the Caucasus and the Carpathians? Omri began to reign in 929 B.C., having been placed on the throne by the army, during the siege of Gibbethon, a Levitical city in Dan. The death of Elah and the usurpation of Zimri led to the declaration by the army that their general, Omri, was now king of Israel. His "...chief [achievement] was the foundation of Samaria, which thenceforth became the capital city of the Kingdom of Israel" (Encyclopedia of Biblical Literature, John Kitto, Vol. 3, page 365). Omri, while appearing from biblical records to be one of the lesser kings of Israel, nevertheless became one of the most important to the Assyrians, the Moabites, and other kingdoms to the north and east of Palestine. In Hasting's Bible dictionary under the article "Omri," the Assyrian spelling is given as "Humri or Humria" with the comment that the equivalent of the Hebrew-Canaanite y with the Assyrian h is illustrated by Schrader; Cot 2 i p.179. Several other examples are given, including the identification of "Ammi-rabi" (Amraphel) with Hammurabi, demonstrating how some languages pronounce the h like a k while others leave it silent. An extensive inscription from the Moabite stone published in Hasting's Bible dictionary (Vol. 3, page 621) reads "Omri was King of Israel and oppressed Moab a long time (lit. many days), for Chemosh was wroth with his land. And his son succeeded him (i.e. Omri), and he too said 'I will oppress Moab' in my time (i.e. of Mesha) he said thus. But I saw (my desire) on him and his house, and Israel perish with an everlasting destruction." (This merely implies that Ahab, who was a son of Omri, was finally compelled to relinquish his hold on Moab and is an exaggeration.) "So Omri obtained possesion of the land of Mehedeba, and dwelt therein during his days and half the days of his son, forty years..." Hasting's says, "These dates (following information on difficulties in the chronology of Omri's reign) harmonize better with the results of Assyriology, with the deep impression which Omri had produced in western Asia by his military prowess." This impression was no fleeting one, but extended over a very long period. We have clear indication of this in the fact that Palestine was called Bit Humri or 'land of the house of Omri,' from the time of Shalmaneser II (860) to that of Sargon (722-705). 'The usurper Jehu is called on Shalmaneser's black obelisk "Ja'ua agal Humari," "Jehu, son of Omri." And no less deep was the impression produced in Israel and Judah. 'The reference to the "statutes of Omri" in Micah 6:16 is an indication of this, his name being coupled with that of his son Ahab.'" "Bit Humri" is the equivalent of "Beth Omri" in the Hebrew, or the "House of Omri," which was the name applied to all Israel by the ASSYRIANS! Thus, when Shalmaneser's army brought hundreds of thousands of captured Israelites as slaves into the land of Assyria, the Assyrian army and local populace only knew them as "Bit Humri." And never referred to them as Hebrews, Israelites, or by any other Israelitish or Jewish term! In any number of languages, the h is silent. However, in other languages the h has a hard sound, pronounced by forcing the sharp sound against the hard palate, as in the English word "how." In some languages, such as German, the h can be pronounced quite similarly to the English k. Thus "Bit Humri" was pronounced by some "Kumri" and by the Greeks "Kimri," "Cimri" or "Gymri." These peoples are also found in history as the "Cimmerians." The "Bit Humri," or the "Kumri," who were known by the Greeks as the "Kimbri," are said to be the progenitors of the Celts! The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. 20, page 105, says: "The inscription of Mesha throws welcome light upon his conquest of Moab; the position of Israel during the reign of Omri's son Ahab bears testimony to the success of the father; and the fact that the land continued to be known to the Assyrians down to the time of Sargon (after Shalmaneser, who carried away the hulk of the northern ten tribes into captivity) as 'the house of Omri' indicates the reputation which this little-known king enjoyed." The Cimbri are identified as a "teutonic tribe" who first make their appearance in Roman history in about 113 B.C., and who had been "wandering along the Danube for some years warring..." The Encyclopaedia Britannica says, "The original home of the Cimbri has been much disputed. It is recorded in the Monumentum Ancyranum that a Roman fleet sailing eastward from the mouth of the Rhine (about 5 A.D) ...at the farthest point reached the [region] of a people called Cimbri, who sent an embassy to Augustus." Several early writers agree in saying that the Cimbri occupied a peninsula, and in the map of Ptolemy JUTLAND appears as the Cimbric "Chersonese." Under the article "Cimmerii," the Britannica 11th edition says they were "an ancient people of the far north or west of Europe first spoken of by Homer." Herodotus, the famous historian (Herodotus iv. 11-13) regards them as the "early inhabitants of south Russia, driven by the Scyths along by the Caucasus into Asia Minor, where they maintained themselves for a century. This authority also reveals that "later writers identified them with the Cimbri of Jutland, who were probably Teutonized Celts..." The Encyclopedia Biblica says of Assyrian reference to Omri: "On inscriptions from the time of Shalmaneser II (854) down to Sargon (720) we find the northern kingdom designated as Mat Bit-Humri, 'the land of the house of Omri'; or simply Mat Humri, 'Land Omri,' Jehu even is called 'son of Omri' (Schrader Kat 190 ff.). The use of this phrase shows great was the reputation which Omri enjoyed abroad." The Encyclopedia Biblica also lends support to the very great possibility that the captured Israelites, who had already become corrupt while they were yet in the land, carried the names of Baal with them in their migrations, explaining the many names of Baal persisting in Ireland until modern times! It says, "The dynasty which the [Omri] founded lasted for half a century, and was only overturned by the hatred of the prophets to the worship of Baal" (Encyclopedia Biblica, 3500).
1:50 AM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Saturday, June 30, 2007 

Hidden Names & Symptoms of MSG Poisoning

Foods ALWAYS contain MSG when these words are on the label
:

MSG
 Gelatin
 Calcium Caseinate
 
Monosodium Glutamate
 Hydrolized Vegetable Protein
 Textured Protein
 
Monopotassium Glutamate
 Hydrolized Plant Protein
 Yeast Extract
 
Glutamate
 Autolyzed Plant Protein
 Yeast Food or Nutrient
 
Glutamic Acid
 Sodium Caseinate
 Autolyzed Yeast
 


 Foods made with the following products often contain MSG
 

Annatto
 Flavoring Seasonings (Most assume this means salt pepper or spices & herbs which it sometimes is)
 Protein fortified anything
 
Anything enriched or vitamin enriched
 Flowing Agents
 Protein Fortified Milk
 
Barley Malt
 Gums
 Reaction Flavours
 
Bouillon
 Lipolyzed butter fat
 Rice or Brown Rice, Syrup
 
Broth
 Low or No Fat items
 Soy Protein
 
Caramel Flavoring (coloring)
 Malt Extract or Flavoring
 Soy Protein Isolate or Concentrate
 
Carrageenan
 Malted Barley (flavour)
 Soy Sauce or Extract
 
Citric Acid (when processed from corn)
 Maltodextrin
 Spice
 
Corn syrup and corn syrup solids (partly depends upon process used)
 Milk Powder
 Stock
 
Cornstarch
 Modified Food Starch
 Ultra-pasteurized anything
 
Dough Conditioners
 Natural Chicken
 Wheat
 
Dry Milk Solids
 Pectin
 Whey Protein Isolate or Concentrate
 
Fermented anything
 Protease
 Whey Protein or Whey
 
Flavours & Flavouring
 Protease enzymes
 Yeast Nutrients
 

 

The book, Battling the MSG Myth, will simplify your life by giving in depth facts about these hidden substances and the common foods in which they are found. Find tips on label reading, shopping, and cooking. Enjoy good eating by learning how to avoid all the common foods and supplements that contain MSG, aspartame, L-cysteine, and sulfites. Learn how to substitute healthy alternative products that can be found in most supermarkets. 

Have you been tested for, suffer from, and found little relief from any of the following conditions?
 

1. Severe headache
2. Nausea, diarrhea, vomiting
3. Irregular heart beat or blood pressure, racing heart
4. Depression or mood change, bipolar, SAD
5. Abdominal pain, cramps, bloating, colitis, IBS
6. Balance problems, dizziness, or seizures, mini-strokes
7. Tenderness in localized areas, neck, back etc.
8 Sleep disorders
9. Blurred vision or difficulty breathing
10. Chronic fatigue or sleepiness
11. Excessive perspiring or shuddering and chills
 12. Shortness of breath, chest pains, asthma
13. Swelling, pain, or numbness of hands, feet, jaw
14. Pain in joints or bones
15. Flushing or tingling in face, chest, pressure behind eyes
16. Gagging reflex or difficulty swallowing
17. Hyperactivity, behavioral problems
18. Chronic post nasal drip
 19. Skin rash, itching, hives
20. Bloated face, dark circles under strained eyes
21. Extreme thirst or dry mouth
 22. Difficulty concentrating and poor memory
 23. Slowed speech
  24. Chronic bronchitis-like symptoms, allergy reactions, dry cough, hoarseness or sore throat
 25. Heavy, weak feeling in arms and legs
 26. Irritable bowel or colitis
 27. Attention deficit disorder, anxiety attacks, rage, panic attacks
   28. Neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's, fibromyalgia, MS, Parkinson's
  29. Pressure behind eyes or on head, neck, shoulders
  30. ADD, ADHD, Rage Disorders
   31. Asthma
   32. Weight problems, obesity, hypoglycemia
 
 
If any of these conditions plague you, you may be a victim of the myth that monosodium glutamate (MSG) is a safe food additive. The truth is that the average person eats much more glutamate than what is considered to be a safe and normal amount in the typical American diet. MSG is in everything from crackers and soda pop to vitamins and toothpaste.

 

11:40 AM 
1 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Saturday, June 30, 2007 
Hidden Sources Of MSG In Foods
From the book 'Excitotoxins - The Taste That Kills'
By Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD
3-6-3

 ..> ..>
What if someone were to tell you that a chemical (MSG) added to food could cause brain damage in your children, and that this chemical could effect how your children's nervous systems formed during development so that in later years they may have learning or emotional difficulties?
What if there was scientific evidence that these chemicals could permanently damage a critical part of the brain known to control hormones so that later in life your child might have endocrine problems? How would you feel?
Suppose evidence was presented to you strongly suggesting that the artificial sweetener in your diet soft drink may cause brain tumors to develop, and that the number of brain tumors reported since the introduction of this widespread introduction of this artificial sweetener has risen dramatically? Would that affect your decision to drink these products and especially to allow your children to drink them? What if you could be shown overwhelming evidence that one of the main ingredients in this sweetener (aspartate) could cause the same brain lesions as MSG? Would that affect your buying decisions?
And finally, what if it could be demonstrated that all of these types of chemicals, called excitotoxins, could possibly aggravate or even precipitate many of today's epidemic neurodegenerative brain diseases such as Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, ALS, and Alzheimer's disease? Would you be concerned if you knew that these excitotoxin food additives are a particular risk if you have diabetes, or have ever had a stroke, brain injury, brain tumor, seizure, or have suffered from hypertension, meningitis, or viral encephalitis?
Would you also be upset to learn that many of the brain lesions caused by these products in your children are irreversible and can result from a SINGLE exposure of these products in sufficient concentration?
How would you feel when you learn the food industry hides and disguises these excitotoxin additives (MSG and Aspartate) so they can't be recognized? Incredulous? Enraged? The fact is many foods are labeled as having "No MSG" but in fact not only contain MSG but also are laced with other excitotoxins of equal potency and danger.
All of the above are true. And all of these well known brain toxins are poured into our food and drink by the thousands of tons to boost sales. These additives have NO OTHER purpose other than to enhance to TASTE of food and the SWEETNESS of various diet products.
Hidden Sources Of MSG
As discussed previously, the glutamate (MSG) manufacturers and the processed food industries are always on a quest to disguise the MSG added to food. Below is a partial list of the most common names for disguised MSG. Remember also that the powerful excitotoxins, aspartate and L-cystine, are frequently added to foods and according to FDA rules require NO LABELING AT ALL.
* Food Additives that ALWAYS contain MSG *
 
Monosodium Glutamate
Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein
Hydrolyzed Protein
Hydrolyzed Plant Protein
Plant Protein Extract
Sodium Caseinate
Calcium Caseinate
Yeast Extract
Textured Protein (Including TVP)
Autolyzed Yeast
Hydrolyzed Oat Flour
Corn Oil  
 
* Food Additives That FREQUENTLY Contain MSG *
 
Malt Extract
Malt Flavoring
Bouillon
Broth
Stock
Flavoring
Natural Flavors/Flavoring
Natural Beef Or Chicken Flavoring
Seasoning
Spices
 
* Food Additives That MAY Contain MSG Or Excitotoxins *
 
Carrageenan
Enzymes
Soy Protein Concentrate
Soy Protein Isolate
Whey Protein Concentrate
Also: Protease Enzymes of various sources can release excitotoxin amino acids from food proteins.
Aspartame - An Intense Source Of Excitotoxins
Aspartame is a sweetener made from two amino acids, phenylalanine and the excitotoxin aspartate. It should be avoided at all costs. Aspartame complaints accounts for approximately 70% of ALL complaints to the FDA. It is implicated in everything from blindness to headaches to convulsions. Sold under dozens of brand names such as NutraSweet and Equal, aspartame breaks down within 20 minutes at room temperature into several primary toxic and dangerous ingredients:
1. DKP (diketopiperazine) (When ingested, converts to a near duplicate of
a powerful brain tumor causing agent)
2. Formic Acid (ant venom)
3. Formaldehyde (embalming fluid)
4. Methanol (causes blindness...extremely dangerous substance)
Common Examples:
Diet soft drinks, sugar free gums, sugar free Kool Aid, Crystal Light, childrens' medications, and thousands of other products claiming to be 'low calorie', 'diet', or 'sugar free'.
A Final Note...
Dr. Blaylock recounted a meeting with a senior executive in the food additive industry who told him point blank that these excitotoxins are going to be in our food no matter how many name changes are necessary...
11:28 AM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Saturday, June 30, 2007 

The Titanic and the United States

Website Mission Statement by Frosty Wooldridge

December 12, 2003

Much like the Titanic that sank on April 15, 1912, the United States stands at a critical juncture in the history of our nation. Few realize it, but, like the Titanic, this nation smashed into a piece of legislation in 1965 that was never asked for or approved by the American public.

In 1965, our 'Captain' Lyndon B. Johnson along with helmsman Senator Teddy Kennedy drove America into an 'iceberg' of massive, unrestricted immigration that opened up the flood gates with the 'Immigration Reform Act'. At first, the flow of one million immigrants annually wasn't noticed. We were benevolent. Our country was big. There was plenty of room and resources.

However, the massive flow of humanity from that hit is still pouring into our country 38 years later and few seem to notice--much like the party-goers and dancing on the Titanic that kept up for hours after hitting the iceberg in the North Atlantic. However, even the invincible Titanic could not survive the onslaught from the constant flow of incoming water--slowly, methodically stealing its ability to stay afloat.

Today in the United States, 70 million immigrants later and pouring in at 2.3 million annually--both legal and illegal--our nation shudders from San Francisco to New York and from Chicago to Miami. We rose from 200 million to nearly 300 million in three decades. What was once a benefit to our country is now a full-scale overpopulation and societal crisis.

The Titanic From stem to stern, our English language is under assault and our schools are drowning in ethnic violence, rapes, drugs and gang warfare. In California, Texas, Florida and Arizona, our hospitals suffer bankruptcies from non-paid services for 350,000 annual 'anchor babies'. Ten million illegal immigrants displace jobs from America's working poor and depress wages for many others. Leprosy, tuberculosis, Chagas Disease, hepatitis and other diseases 'pour' into our country within the bodies of illegal immigrants who avoid health screening before coming on board the United States. Even worse, clashing cultures with religions that celebrate 'female genital mutilation' and subjugation of women are growing in enclaves around our country. As Lincoln said, "A house divided against itself can not stand."

On the environmental front, our nation explodes toward an added 200 million people that will approach half billion by mid-century. We are creating an 'irreversible crisis' with 'unsolvable problems'. California is slated to add 20 million in 30 years. Colorado will add five million by mid century. Arizona will add four million. They already don't have enough water. Florida can not survive another five million people. New York shudders with its population problems. Air pollution poisons what we breathe and massive sprawl devours our once lauded spaciousness. Species extinction accelerates as we add numbers. Much like the Titanic, our standard of living drops and our quality of life sinks with the influx of unrestricted immigration. Soon, we too, will become like the countries of Bangladesh, India and China.

On the employment front, our leaders are outsourcing and offshoring our jobs to Third World countries while they import the Third World into our country. America's middle class is being driven into the unemployment lines. Our schools are becoming dysfunctional towers of Babel with over 140 languages. We can not stay afloat with this kind of linguistic chaos. Yes, we have compassion for immigrants, but it's our country and our children. Their leaders need to take care of them in their countries. Unfortunately, Congress and leadership of this nation refuse to step below the water line to see how fast we are sinking. We're $6.8 trillion in debt. There were 20 different languages on the California recall ballot. Whose country is this anyway? Our leaders are standing in the wheelhouse totally insulated and isolated from those of us who shovel the coal, build houses, repair cars, teach our kids, drive school busses and plow roads.

We can not save the world, but we can destroy our country if we fail to act.

Like the Titanic that cracked in half before plunging to the depths because no one stopped the incoming water, the United States like all great nations before us, could sink. You can see the signs all around our country. If you look around you, we're shuddering from bow to aft - from the stacks to the rudder. Who is steering our nation and why are they heading toward more icebergs instead of changing course? What can you do? You are just as much an American patriot as Paul Revere, Betsy Ross, Thomas Jefferson, Teddy Roosevelt, Susan B. Anthony, Lincoln and the soldiers from Valley Forge to the Jungles of Vietnam and deserts of Iraq. It's time to start riding, stitching, writing, charging, demonstrating and fighting for our country within our country. We need to seal our borders against this incursion.

Since our leaders won't stop this invasion of an 'unarmed army' of legal and illegal immigrants, it's up to you. Our children face a dangerous future if we fail to take action. It wasn't George Washington who beat the British army. It was every militiaman who shot from fence lines and trees. It wasn't Ike who won WWII. It was every GI who slung a rifle over his soldier. Susan B. Anthony marched and Dr. Martin Luther King demonstrated. They, in their time, paid the price for defending America so we could enjoy our freedom. This is your time.


Frosty Wooldridge

1:48 AM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Saturday, June 30, 2007 
..> ..>
 
.. #BeginEditable "Body" -->

By Dr. Ted Spence

Fluoride is a very controversial topic, but how controversial I did not realize. The data reveals that fluoride is a chemical toxin. As you can see by my studies and degrees, I place a large amount of confidence in nutritional methods for over coming disease and place little in toxic drugs, synthetic chemicals and especially toxins, like fluoride.

A few years ago, I was asked by the head of our local health department to conduct a review of existing journal research on the toxicity of fluoride with emphasis on its cancer causing potential. I went to the National Medical Library and produced for him some 40 articles on the toxicity of fluoride. When we reviewed them, there was some discrepancy in whether or not fluoride was mutagenic.

Well, half of the articles said that it was and half said that it was not. But it can not be both ways ... We wondered what was wrong. Then the element of bias entered the picture, since Proctor and Gamble has paid for some of the "negative-concluding" research. We were still puzzled.

My only goal is to tell this information to the patients and let them decide. Isn't that fair ... after all it is their decision? It is the patient's choice ... isn't it? The toxicity of fluoride has caused many countries to rethink the fluoride issue and many have rescinded fluoride in favor of the health of their people.

Those banning fluoride are Sweden, Norway, Denmark, West Germany (now unified), Italy, Belgium, Austria, France, and The Netherlands. Despite these retractions of fluoride, the US still presses on with the goal to fluoridate (poison) every community water supply in the United States.

All allopathically-trained dentists are very familiar with the ADA and other "authoritative" positions on fluoride. They rarely mention its toxic potential or the few studies revealing increased tooth decay after fluoride use. The research of Burk and Yiamouyiannis revealed that every major city with fluoride had increased rates of cancer. Not a fair trade for "good looking teeth".

If you don't want to look at this data, that is your decision. As health professionals, we don't want to harm patients in any way and fluoride produces great harm. I am referring to taking fluoride internally, where it has been found to cause unscheduled DNA synthesis, sister chromatid exchanges and yes, mutagenic effects on the cells.

These terms may not bother some people at all, but they mean that there will be an increase in cancer after the ingestion of fluoride. Tsutsui, et al found that the addition of fluoride to healthy liver cell, in vitro, could establish changes that can only be described as cancerous.

The ADA's official position is that this stuff is safe, yet there have been deaths of children in the dentists office due to fluoride, albeit very few. The point I am trying to make is that this is not to be taken lightly. In a letter [to me] from the ADA apologizing for fluoride, that stated, "There are three basic compounds commonly used for fluoridating drinking water supplies in the United States: sodium fluoride, sodium silicofluoride, and hydrofluorosilicic acid."

Now any chemist can tell you that these are not the sodium fluoride we are all told about. Sodium hydrofluorosilicic acid is one of the most reactive chemical species know to man. Its toxicity is known in many chemical circles. It will eat through metal/ plastic pipes and corrode many materials including stainless steel and other metals. It will dissolve rubber tires and melt concrete. This is added to our water to produce "healthy teeth".

Fluoride Does the Following:

inactivates 62 enzymes (Judd)
increases the aging process (Yiamouyiannis)
increases the incidence of cancer and tumor growth (Waldbott/Yiamouyiannis)
disrupts the immune system (Waldbott)
causes genetic damage (Tsutsui, et al)
interrupts DNA repair-enzyme activity (Waldbott)
increased arthritis and
is a systemic poison.

"Fluoride is a highly toxic substance.... "

L P Anthony, DDS editor of the Journal of the American Dental Association - 1944

Funny how times change, but truth does not change.

"....we have very strong circumstantial evidence of systemic toxicity of the so-called absolutely safe concentrate of fluoridated water"

Roy E Hanford, MD, "Where is Science Taking US? reprint from Saturday Review

"Don't drink fluoridated water .... Fluoride is a corrosive poison which will produce harm on a long term basis." Dr Charles Heyd, Past AMA president

Some 61,000 cancer deaths in the US result from fluoridation each year. I repeat 61,000. (Burk and Yiamouyiannis) One study found that fluoride elevates cancer mortality 17% in 16 years in large cities. (from Gerald Judd, PhD) "You have been led to believe the fluorine makes teeth harder. The fact is, it actually makes teeth softer." (George Meinig, a founder of the American Academy of Endodontics)

The US sees a 22% increase in decay every 16 years from fluoride use and a 50% decline in decay every 20 years compared with Finland's 98%, Sweden's 80% and Holland's 72%. And they are non-fluoridated. (Gerald Judd)

My only goal is to tell the truth about the ill-effects of a known toxin. I mentioned the paper being published by the Health Freedom News on the neurotoxicity of fluoride. Fluoride is a potent neurotoxin and this has been known for some time; at least since the early 1940s, well before the fluoridation experiment with Grand Rapids.

Dr Gerard Judd, PhD (chemistry), [ emeritus Manhatten project] found that fluoride can inactivate 62 enzyme systems. As a naturopath, nutritionist and master herbalist, I cannot endorse a substance that has known detrimental effects.

Geoffrey Smith stated, "Recent studies suggest that fluoride may be genotoxic." (p 79, Smith) And added, "There is now a substantial body of evidence suggesting that fluoride is mutagenic." (p 93, Smith) Gibson also noted, "Fluoride is one of the most toxic inorganic chemicals in the Earth's crust, ... However, with increasing experience, doubts about both safety and efficacy have arisen." (p 111, Gibson)

And he added, "A possible link between fluoridation of public water supplies and an increase in the cancer death rate has been debated for over 20 years and there is now no doubt that fluoride can cause genetic damage." (p 111, Gibson)

Gibson noted, "Inhibitory effects of fluoride on different enzyme systems have been demonstrated." (p 111, Gibson) And, "A section of the population may therefore be at risk of compromised immune system function from water fluoridation schemes." (p 112, Gibson)

Get the drift; fluoride is not everything it is cracked up to be. Mutagenic, enzyme inhibition, genetic damage, increased cancer rates, genotoxic and controversial, all describe fluoride.

Tsutsui et al noted, a significant increase in chromosome aberrations at the chromatid level, sister chromatid exchanges, and unscheduled DNA synthesis was induced by NaF in a dose- and timedependent manner.

These results indicate that NaF is genotoxic and capable of inducing neoplastic transformation of Syrian hamster embryo cells in culture." (p 938, Tsutsui et al) There, you can see the controversy for yourself. Fluoride is toxic, fluoride is non-toxic; fluoride causes cancer, fluoride doesn't cause cancer. Who do we believe?

The fluoride controversy comes down to

... Who Do We Really Believe?

Here's two articles on mutations caused by fluoride:

Sodium Fluoride-induced Morphological and Neoplastic Transformation Chromosome Aberrations, Sister Chromatid Exchanges, and Unscheduled DNA Synthesis in Cultured Syrian Hamster Embryo Cells, Takeki Tsutsui, Nobuko Suzuki and Manabu Ohmori, Can Res, 44:938-941, 1984 (March)

Sodium Fluoride-induced Chromosome Aberrations in Different Stages of the Cell Cycle: A Proposed Mechanism, Marilyn J Aardema, et al, Mutation Research, 223:191-203, 1989

The titles say it all.

Therefore, because of this controversy my feelings on this matter is that is should be up to the patient. They need both sides of the story to make an "intelligent" decision. I only mean to give them the other side. References are cited for your use and reading enjoyment.

The EPA found that at 2 ppm salmon were sterile, yet at 1 ppm it is placed in our water supply. [Dr Richard Foulkes] Fluoride only helps [if it helps] children up to age 12. Yet, everybody is "forced" to drink it. Oscar Ewing, who pushed fluoride in the legislature, told the senators not to drink it.

The last thing I would say it that by endorsing fluoride you totally eliminate the real prevention of tooth decay ... good sound nutrition. Tooth-brushing [important as it is] does not stop tooth decay.

Fluoride [a toxic] does not stop rampant tooth decay. [Fluoride only hardens to outer surface of the enamel and may prevent calcium from being deposited when a tooth is re-mineralized.] Nutrition stops tooth decay. I have developed a nutritional supportive program which will totally stop tooth decay in less than two weeks.

I have watched many children go from all 20 carious deciduous teeth, to 20 ebernated [hardened] teeth, which are non-painful and hard as rock. I have never seen fluoride do this [after 21 years of dentistry] and fluoride is not even a part of my caries prevention program.

Ted H Spence, DDS, ND, PhD/DSc,MH

References:

Waldbott, George, MD, Fluoride: The Great Dilemma, 1978, Coronado Press, Lawrence, KS

Yaimouyiannis, John, Fluoride: The Aging Factor, 1993, Health Action Press, Delaware

On Neurotoxicity:

Varner, J A, et al, "Chronic Administration of Aluminum Fluoride or Sodium Fluoride to Rats in Drinking water: Alterations in Neuronal and Cerebrovascular Integrity", Brain Research, 784(1-2):284-298, 1998, 1998, Feb 16.

Isaacson, R L, et al, "Toxin-Induced Blood Vessel Inclusions Caused By the Chronic Administration of Aluminum and Sodium Fluoride and Their Implications in Dementia", Ann NY Acad Science, 825():152-166, 1997, Oct 15.

Varner, J A, et al , "Chronic Aluminum Fluoride Administration, Part I: Behavioral Observations", Behavior Neural Biology, 61(3):233-241, 1994, May.

Burgstahler, A W, Colquhoun, J, "Neurotoxicity of Fluoride", Fluoride, 29:57-58, 1996 and

Li, X S, Zhi, J L, Gao R O, "Effects of Fluoride Exposure on the Intelligence of Children", Fluoride, 28:182-189, 1995 and

Mullenix, P J, et al, "Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride on Rats", Neurotoxicity and Teratology, 17:169-177, 1995 and

Zhao, L B, et al, "Effect of Fluoridated Water Supply on Children's Intelligence", Fluoride, 29:190-192, 199

1:26 AM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate