Tuesday, January 27, 2009

The ZRT Laboratory At Home Test for Vitamin D3

How much vitamin D do you need? Most adults need 5,000 IU per day of vitamin D in the winter. Children need about 1,000 IU per every 25 pounds of body weight. However, many people will still be deficient at these doses so after taking the vitamin D for three months, get tested. You can save yourself concerns about how much vitamin D you need plus some money by testing your vitamin D levels in the privacy of your home. ZRT is accurate, has correlated their test with Diasorin RIA, and only charges $65.00 if you order through the Vitamin D Council.

Please read the page below before doing anything, including emailing me with a question already answered on the page below.
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/health/deficiency/
am-i-vitamin-d-deficient.shtml

John Cannell, M.D., 9100 San Gregorio Road, Atascadero, CA 93422, Vitamin D Council
Information on the ZRT At Home Test for Vitamin D3

http://www.zrtlab.com/Page.aspx?nid=12&action
=view&category=14&partner=VitaminD%20Council
25-hydroxy-vitamin D or 25(OH)D is the circulating form of vitamin D and routinely used to diagnose vitamin D deficiency. The Vitamin D Council recommends 25(OH)D levels be between 50 and 80 ng/mL, year around. These levels assure vitamin D metabolism is normalized. Furthermore, levels of 50-80 ng/mL are “natural” levels, that is, levels normally achieved by people who work in the sun. Low vitamin D levels have been associated with most of the diseases of civilization but only a few controlled trials show vitamin D prevents disease. Controlled trials showing vitamin D treats diseases are even rarer. Many such studies are currently being conducted to see if vitamin D really does prevent or help treat disease. While you wait for the studies to be finished, what 25(OH)D level do you want to have while you wait, a natural 25(OH)D level, one humans had when they worked in the fresh air and sunshine, or a level that is the result of a civilized indoor lifestyle?

DisclaimersCalifornia disclaimers regarding testing do not apply to orders through the Vitamin D Council as the Vitamin D Council is a non-profit organization whose executive president, John Cannell, M.D. will be responsible for ordering testing for 25-hydroxyvitamin D. However, by ordering this test, I agree that I have not entered into a doctor-patient relationship with Dr. Cannell; that is, I understand that Dr. Cannell is not my doctor. I also understand that the vitamin D kit I am buying will report my 25-hydroxy-vitamin D level back to me, but what actions I do or do not take after getting the results back is up to me and my doctor, not Dr. Cannell or the Vitamin D Council.

New York State health law prohibits the testing of specimens collected in or mailed from New York and prohibits the transmission of data from our laboratory to NY physicians or residents. Therefore, we are unable to process such orders at this time.

The Vitamin D Council and Dr. Cannell have partnered with ZRT Laboratory to offer selected products to you at a discount. At this time, Vitamin D Council discounts apply to the following products:

Add to Cart View Cart
Vitamin D Kit
$ 65.00
For detection of vitamin D deficiency and monitoring of supplemented levels. Test in blood spot measures total 25(OH)D, the best single measure of overall vitamin D status. Kit contains one test.
Add to Cart View Cart
Vitamin D Multi-Test Kit, four tests
$ 220.00
Save money on testing your family or on retesting yourself after various amounts of vitamin D supplementation. Kit contains four tests.


Vitamin D3 caps, 2000 iu available from
http://www.litalee.com/SFP_shopexd.asp?id=391
Vitamin D3 drops, one drop = 1000 iu
http://www.litalee.com/SFP_shopexd.asp?id=404

Labels: , ,

Drugs are Dangerous

Drugs are Dangerous
By Dr. Christopher Kent, D.C. www.Mercola.com

You can read more about Dr. Kent's work in a special issue of The American Chiropractor.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/1/15/recreational-drugs-far-less-likely-to-kill-you-than-prescribed-drugs.aspx

While approximately 10,000 per year die from the effects of illegal drugs, an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reported that an estimated 106,000 hospitalized patients die each year from drugs which are properly prescribed and properly administered. More than two million suffer serious side effects. [3]

An article in Newsweek [4] reports that adverse drug reactions, from "properly" prescribed drugs, are the fourth leading cause of death in the United States. Only heart disease, cancer, and stroke kill more Americans than drugs prescribed by medical doctors. Reactions to prescription drugs kill more than twice as many Americans as HIV/AIDS or suicide. Fewer die from accidents or diabetes than adverse drug reactions. This study did not include outpatients, cases of malpractice, or instances where the drugs were not taken as directed.

According to another AMA publication, drug related "problems" kill as many as 198,815 people, put 8.8 million in hospitals, and account for up to 28% of hospital admissions. [5] If these figures are accurate, only cancer and heart disease kill more patients than drugs. This situation has not improved since the publication of this information. Null [6] et al have published a comprehensive and well-documented study of deaths associated with medical practice. Here is an abstract:
"A definitive review of medical peer-review journals and government health statistics shows that American medicine frequently causes more harm than good. The number of people having in-hospital, adverse drug reactions (ADR) to prescribed medicine is 2.2 million. Dr. Richard Besser, of the CDC, in 1995, said the number of unnecessary antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections was 20 million. Dr. Besser, in 2003, now refers to tens of millions of unnecessary antibiotics.

The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million. The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million. The total number of iatrogenic (doctor-caused) deaths shown in the following table is 783,936.
A recent article in Archives of Internal Medicine [7] stated that in the seven year period from 1998 through 2005, reported serious adverse drug events increased 2.6-fold, and fatal adverse drug events increased 2.7-fold. Another study concluded that the majority (86%) of the adverse drug reactions for which patients were admitted to a medical intensive care unit were preventable. [8]

The authors conclude: "When the number one killer in a society is the healthcare system, then, that system has no excuse except to address its own shortcomings. It is time to address the belief that the first solution to seek for relief of life's problems is a drug.”
References
1. "Drug deaths." Globe & Mail (Canada). February 27, 1998.
2. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. CDC. 2007;56(05):93-96.
3. Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN: "Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients." JAMA 1998;279:1200.
4. Kalb C: "When drugs do harm." Newsweek. April 27, 1998. Page 61.
5. "Reaction." American Medical News. January 15, 1996. Page 11.
6. 1. Null G, Dean C, Feldman, M, Rasio, D, Smith D: "Death by Medicine." Life Extension. March, 2004. www.lef.org/magazine/mag2004/mar2004_awsi_death_01.htm
7. Moore TJ, Cohen MR, Furberg CD: Serious adverse drug events reported to the Food and Drug Administration, 1998-2005. Archives of Internal Medicine 2007;167:1752-1759.sRivkin A: Admissions to a medical intensive care unit related to adverse drug reactions. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy 2007;64(17):1840-1843.

Labels: ,

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Part II: Antipsychotic Drug Backlash and Non-toxic Remedies for Children

Adapted from Boston Globe
Papers reveal push on drug firm funds
Prominent doctor tied to efforts
By Carey Goldberg
November 25, 2008

Newly disclosed court documents portray Dr. Joseph Biederman, a leading Harvard child psychiatrist, as courting drug company money by promising that his work at Massachusetts General Hospital would help promote the use of antipsychotic drugs for youngsters diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Biederman is one of the central figures in the growing legal and political backlash against potential conflicts of interest in medicine, particularly in psychiatry. He could not be reached for comment yesterday, but Massachusetts General Hospital said it would thoroughly investigate the allegations against him.

This psychiatrist is the country's most prominent advocate of diagnosing bipolar disorder in children, even those under age 6, and using antipsychotic drugs to treat many of them, even when federal regulators have not approved the drugs for that use. Congressional investigators led by Senator Charles E. Grassley, an Iowa Republican, accused Biederman this summer of failing to disclose more than $1 million in payments from drug companies. Harvard Medical School is investigating those reporting discrepancies.

He is now also emerging as a key witness in a huge, multistate lawsuit brought on behalf of more than 2,000 patients, including children, who claim to have been injured by psychiatric drugs known as atypical antipsychotics, including the Johnson & Johnson drug Risperdal, also known as risperidone. Biederman is not a defendant in the case, but the plaintiffs' lawyers submitted more than two dozen documents aiming to present him as an example of how drug companies and researchers conspired to boost "off-label" prescriptions that go beyond federally approved uses of a drug. The plaintiffs' lawyers sought to compel Biederman to let them interview him - a legal fight they won. He is expected to be interviewed under oath by January, 2009.


Anti-Stress Program: Nutritional support for mild panic, hyperactivity, depression, anxiety, insomnia, lack of focus and nervousness

Enzymes for nutritional support of stress

1) A multiple digestive enzyme for digestion. Thera-zyme DGST is excellent for children too young to do the Loomis 24-hour urine test.
2) Thera-zyme SvG - nutritional support to help one to relax and become serene
3) Thera-zyme Adr - supports normal function in children and adults who may suffer from stress, ADHA or ADD, depression, moody or irritable behavior, panic and insomnia
4) Thera-zyme TRMA – supports normal function in children and adults who may be prone to anxiety attacks

Homeopathics for children (and adults)

There are dozens of homeopathics sold in health food stores for every childhood condition and behavior you can imagine: insomnia, crying and screaming, colicky pain, etc. They are labeled according to the symptom so they are very easy to find. The Bach Flower formulas are also excellent for soothing emotional problems. See http://www.bachflower.com/ for Bach Flower information.

Hormonal Balancing

Thyroid glandular- a major anti-stress food. Children diagnosed with ADHD and ADD who are prescribed Ritalin and other similar drugs respond very well to small amounts of thyroid glandular (not Synthroid) without the side effects of Ritalin.

Making a Killing Video by CCHR
http://www.cchr.org/#/videos/making-a-killing-introduction

"SSRIs - S.S.R.Lies," is Mike Adam’s hip hop answer to the child-destroying industry of modern psychiatry.http://www.naturalnews.com/SSRIs_S_S_R_Lies.html

Labels: , , ,

Part I - The Drugging Of Our Children for “Behavior Disorders”

Adapted from The Patriot Ledger

By Jacob Azerrad, author of From Difficult to Delightful in Just 30 Days
Jan 10, 2009

For entire article: http://www.patriotledger.com/opinions/x946309370/JACOB-AZERRAD-How-many-more-Rebecca-Rileys

In a 2007 “60 Minutes” episode, Katie Couric focused on the short life of 4-year-old Rebecca Riley. Diagnosed with bipolar disorder at age 3, she died one year later from an overdose of a psychotropic drug cocktail. The child’s mother has been charged with murder.

Psychiatric diagnostic labels are being used to describe “behavior disorders” in children and they are now being given drugs to control behaviors that we used to think were healthy and normal. There are pills for moodiness, yelling, biting, throwing, kicking, cursing, punching, name-calling and lying. There are pills for whispering in class, for “hyperactivity”, for when grandma dies and for daydreaming.

Is the “terrible twos” now a disease? Is having a tantrum a disease? To diagnose a 2-year-old as bipolar by adult standards is preposterous. Young children are being drugged to a degree unprecedented in our history. Childhood behavior is filled with curiosity about life. A young child has an extraordinary ability in terms of emotions and cognitions. They can get upset very quickly and become angry, depressed or moody because their emotions are so fluid, so available. They can scream or cry one moment and laugh the next. Is this “bipolar” behavior?

Childhood is not a disease. Children act up, throw tantrums, defy authority and they need adults to teach them how to manage difficult feelings and handle disappointment appropriately. There are ways for parents to do this that are effective and don’t involve drugs. It’s up to parents to teach their children that life is meant to be learned, experienced and enjoyed – it’s not just a pill to be swallowed.

Studies in the 1970s and ’80s concluded bipolar disorder was rare in children, but from 1994 to 2003, there was an astounding 40-fold increase diagnosing bipolar disorder in children. In Massachusetts alone, from 1988 to 2003, the prescription of stimulants, antidepressants and anti-psychotics given to children rose more than 300 percent and the number of teenage users is even greater.

From 1993 through the first three months of 2008, 1,207 children who were given Risperdal suffered serious problems. Thirty one died including a 9-year-old who suffered a fatal stroke 12 days after starting therapy with Risperdal. Risperdal is an antipsychotic drug approved for treating but not curing schizophrenia. But recently it’s used more and more to control “behavioral disorders” in children, and for autism. Go to http://www.risperdalsideeffects.com/ for a list of the many serious adverse side effects and litigation information.

An appalling TeenScreen “mental screening” test is being offered to school children to determine if they are “suicidal”.
Go to Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfU9puZQKBY for a scary video on this test and to http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html for a petition against it.
Go to http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/524.html for how Pharma manipulates drug testing.

Part II – More on Resperidal Backlash and Natural Non-Toxic Enzymes and Homeopathics for Your Children

Labels: , ,

Part I - The Drugging Of Our Children for “Behavior Disorders”

Adapted from The Patriot Ledger

By Jacob Azerrad, author of From Difficult to Delightful in Just 30 Days
Jan 10, 2009

For entire article: http://www.patriotledger.com/opinions/x946309370/JACOB-AZERRAD-How-many-more-Rebecca-Rileys

In a 2007 “60 Minutes” episode, Katie Couric focused on the short life of 4-year-old Rebecca Riley. Diagnosed with bipolar disorder at age 3, she died one year later from an overdose of a psychotropic drug cocktail. The child’s mother has been charged with murder.

Psychiatric diagnostic labels are being used to describe “behavior disorders” in children and they are now being given drugs to control behaviors that we used to think were healthy and normal. There are pills for moodiness, yelling, biting, throwing, kicking, cursing, punching, name-calling and lying. There are pills for whispering in class, for “hyperactivity”, for when grandma dies and for daydreaming.

Is the “terrible twos” now a disease? Is having a tantrum a disease? To diagnose a 2-year-old as bipolar by adult standards is preposterous. Young children are being drugged to a degree unprecedented in our history. Childhood behavior is filled with curiosity about life. A young child has an extraordinary ability in terms of emotions and cognitions. They can get upset very quickly and become angry, depressed or moody because their emotions are so fluid, so available. They can scream or cry one moment and laugh the next. Is this “bipolar” behavior?

Childhood is not a disease. Children act up, throw tantrums, defy authority and they need adults to teach them how to manage difficult feelings and handle disappointment appropriately. There are ways for parents to do this that are effective and don’t involve drugs. It’s up to parents to teach their children that life is meant to be learned, experienced and enjoyed – it’s not just a pill to be swallowed.

Studies in the 1970s and ’80s concluded bipolar disorder was rare in children, but from 1994 to 2003, there was an astounding 40-fold increase diagnosing bipolar disorder in children. In Massachusetts alone, from 1988 to 2003, the prescription of stimulants, antidepressants and anti-psychotics given to children rose more than 300 percent and the number of teenage users is even greater.

From 1993 through the first three months of 2008, 1,207 children who were given Risperdal suffered serious problems. Thirty one died including a 9-year-old who suffered a fatal stroke 12 days after starting therapy with Risperdal. Risperdal is an antipsychotic drug approved for treating but not curing schizophrenia. But recently it’s used more and more to control “behavioral disorders” in children, and for autism. Go to http://www.risperdalsideeffects.com/ for a list of the many serious adverse side effects and litigation information.

An appalling TeenScreen “mental screening” test is being offered to school children to determine if they are “suicidal”. Go to Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfU9puZQKBY for a scary video on this test and to http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html for a petition against it.
Go to http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/524.html for how Pharma manipulates drug testing.

Part II – More on Resperidal Backlash and Natural Non-Toxic Enzymes and Homeopathics for Your Children

Labels: , ,

Saturday, January 17, 2009

Organic Farming Saves Money and Promotes Health; How to Have a Bee-Friendly Yard

ORGANIC BYTES #148 Health, Justice and Sustainability News Tidbits with an Edge!10/16/2008

Organic Facts of the Week

  • If organic farming methods were practiced on the entire planet's food-growing land, it would be like taking more than 1.5 billion cars off the road.
  • You can increase your antioxidant intake by 30 percent by choosing organic.
  • Organic foods do not contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs)
  • The average child in America is exposed to five pesticides daily in their (commercial) food and drinking water.
  • The U.S. water system is regularly contaminated above safe limits immediately following chemical fertilizer applications to farm fields.
  • Farms in developing countries that use organic techniques produce an average of 79% more than farms that don't.

Source http://www.rodaleinstitute.org/
ORGANIC BYTES #125 Health, Justice and Sustainability News Tidbits with an Edge!
http://www.organicconsumers.org/organicbytes.cfm 1/4/2008

Vanishing of the Bees

We receive a lot of submissions of that would like their work to be featured in Organic Bytes, but this is honestly one of the best trailers we've seen in a while. As you've probably read about previously in Organic Bytes, vast numbers of bees are literally disappearing all around the world. This movie analyzes why this mysterious phenomenon is taking place and how dramatically it could impact the world's food supply in the short term. The producers are also seeking donations to bring the movie to a wider audience. View this breath-taking trailer here:Watch: http://www.vanishingbees.com/trailer.html

See article on bees in To Your Health - August 2007:http://www.litalee.com/shopexd.asp?id=230
Web Forum Discussion of the Week: Honey Bee Deaths Reaching Crisis Point: How to Have a Bee-Friendly Yard

The following was posted by "Honey Gal" at OCA's web forum: "I'm a beekeeper and teach classes in bee stewardship. One thing folks can do to help, even if you aren't a beekeeper, is to make your yard bee friendly. Plant a flowering herb garden. Bees use herbs medicinally and your plants can help make a difference. I suggest rosemary, sage, THYME (lots of it), marjoram, chives, basil, all the mints and other herbs with flowers. Bees will find them. To do more, plant native flowering bushes, too. In our area (WA) spirea and goldenrod are bee magnets. Try to have flowers in bloom through into fall. Put out a big shallow dish of water with sticks or moss in it (so they don't fall in) and keep it moist. If you can get seaweed, bees are particularly fond of the minerals so I keep a little pile of seaweed in the "bee pond." All these small actions add up and make it a little easier on your local bees."

Read more and join the discussion at OCA's web forum http://organicconsumers.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=1942&hl=

Labels: , , ,

Friday, January 16, 2009

United States’ Food Safety System Is In Crisis – Food Borne Illnesses Strike 76 Million People Yearly

America's Food Safety System on Verge of Breakdown, Warns Report

Adapted from Natural News.com
Originally published October 15 2008: http://www.naturalnews.com/index.html
by David Gutierrez

The United States' food safety system is in crisis, with a confusing patchwork of regulations, authority and a dire lack of funding, according to a report released by the Trust for America's Health."One in four Americans is sickened by food-borne illnesses each year," said Jeffrey Levi, the organization's executive director. "That's 76 million people. That number is far too high, and major gaps in our nation's food safety are to blame."One of the biggest problems, according to the report, is that too many federal agencies are involved in food safety, and that the rules regulating oversight authority are confusing. For example, frozen pizza is normally regulated by the FDA, but frozen pizzas that contain meat must instead by regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

"The major problem with the current food system is that no one person is in charge," Levi said. "Instead, there are a total of 15 federal agencies that play a role in administering some 30 laws related to food safety."The current system is also too focused on responding to health outbreaks after they happen, instead of working to prevent them, the trust said. The major tool used by the government to keep food safe is old-fashioned inspections of cow, pig and fowl carcasses, which could easily be replaced by cheaper, more efficient methods.

The U.S. food safety system, the report notes, has not been updated in more than 100 years.Making the problem worse is a lack of funding for food safety inspections at the FDA, which receives only half of all federal food safety funding. Yet foods regulated by that agency are the source of 85 percent of the country's food-related illness outbreaks.The FDA has reduced its food inspection staff by 600 and cut 20 percent of its science staff in the last three years due to funding shortages.Sources for this story include: http://www.washingtonpost.com/

The best way to protect yourself from food-borne illnesses is to take Citricidal tabs (grapefruit seed/pulp extract) http://www.litalee.com/SFP_shopexd.asp?id=274
or liquid: http://www.litalee.com/SFP_shopexd.asp?id=272
You can also get Citricidal toothpaste (dental gel): http://www.litalee.com/SFP_shopexd.asp?id=271,
soap (skin cleanser): http://www.litalee.com/SFP_shopexd.asp?id=273,
ear drops: http://www.litalee.com/SFP_shopexd.asp?id=291,
and nasal spray: http://www.litalee.com/SFP_shopexd.asp?id=290 .

Citricidal products provide general nutritional support for normal function when recovering from fungal, bacterial or parasitical conditions.

Of course, safe food handling and cooking instructions should be followed, especially with meat, poultry, fish and eggs but any food can be contaminated by unsafe food handling, even if it’s organic. Raw milk is not recommended but I disagree because certified organic raw milk is much safer than commercial milk from dairy farms that have less strict sanitation standards than organic dairy farms. See The Raw Milk Controversy: http://www.litalee.com/shopexd.asp?id=190.

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Part III: Safe Methods of Breast Screening: Thermography and Sonography (Ultrasound)

The Benefits of Thermography – Thermographic Breast Screening


Adapted from September 20, 2008 - Issue 1163 www.Mercola.com “ … The establishment ignores safe and effective alternatives to mammography, particularly trans illumination with infrared scanning,” Dr. Epstein points out.Most physicians continue to recommend mammograms for fear of being sued by a woman who develops breast cancer after which he did not advise her to get one. But I encourage you to think for yourself and consider safer, more effective alternatives to mammograms.Thermographic breast screening measures the radiation of infrared heat from your body and translates this information into anatomical images. Thermography uses no mechanical pressure or ionizing radiation, and can detect signs of breast cancer years earlier than either mammography or a physical exam.Mammography cannot detect a tumor until after it has been growing for years and reaches a certain size. Thermography is able to detect the possibility of breast cancer much earlier, because it can image the early stages of angiogenesis (the formation of a direct supply of blood to cancer cells, which is a necessary step before they can grow into tumors of size).

Find Thermography Centers Listed by City & State http://www.thermologyonline.org/Breast/breast_thermography_clinics.htm


How Accurate is Thermography of the Breast http://www.healingwell.com/LIBRARY/breastcancer/article.asp?author=cockburn&id=1


Breast thermography is very accurate in the hands of trained personnel using the correct type of thermography cameras. The accuracy of the examination varies around the world but varies from 87%-96% depending on old the literature is. The 96% reference is from 1999, the most recent published approved study. (USC Norris Cancer Center, Parisky, MD et al)
The following two web sites have many articles, papers and quality assurance guidelines for both doctors and patients and those interested in properly entering the field. International Academy of Clinical ThermologyThe Isabella Tracey Memorial Breast Health Foundation http://www.breastthermography.org/

Ultrasound Imaging (Sonography)
http://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info.cfm?pg=breastus


Ultrasound imaging, involves exposing part of the body to high-frequency sound waves to produce pictures of the inside of the body. Ultrasound imaging (sonography) is safe, noninvasive (no needles or injections) and is uses no ionizing radiation. It gives clear picture of soft tissues that do not show up well on x-ray images. Ultrasound imaging can help detect lesions in women with dense breasts or who have silicone breast implants. Ultrasound may help detect and classify a breast lesion that cannot be interpreted adequately through mammography alone. Using ultrasound, physicians are able to determine that many areas of clinical concern are due to normal tissue (such as fat lobules) or benign cysts. Ultrasound imaging can help to determine if an abnormality is solid (which may be a non-cancerous lump of tissue or a cancerous tumor) or fluid-filled (such as a benign cyst) or both cystic and solid. Ultrasound can also help show additional features of the abnormal area.


Many cancers are not visible on ultrasound and in some cases, ultrasound cannot determine if a mass is cancerous, and a biopsy may be recommended. It is important to choose a facility with expertise in breast ultrasound. Ultrasound depends on the abnormality being recognized at the time of the scan as it is a "real-time" examination. This requires experience and good equipment. One measure of a facility's expertise in breast ultrasound can be found in its ACR accreditation status. Check the facilities in your area by searching the ACR-accredited facilities database.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Part II: Breast Cancer Rates Soar After Mammograms and Some Cancers May Heal Naturally

Part II: Breast Cancer Rates Soar After Mammograms And Some Cancers May Heal Naturally

Adapted from NaturalNews.com

Tuesday, November 25, 2008
by Sherry Baker, Health Sciences Editor

A report just published in the Journal of the American Medical Association's Archives of Internal Medicine (Arch Intern Med. 2008;168[21]:2302-2303) reaches a startling conclusion. Breast cancer rates increased significantly in four Norwegian counties after women there began getting mammograms every two years. In fact, according to background information in the study, the start of screening mammography programs throughout Europe has been associated with increased incidence of breast cancer: http://www.naturalnews.com/breast_cancer.html

This raises two questions: Did the x-rays and/or the sometimes torturous compression of breasts during mammography (http://www.naturalnews.com/breast_cancer.html) actually spur cancer to develop? Or does this just look like an increase in the disease rate because mammography is simply identifying more cases of breast cancer?

The answer to the first question is that no one knows. Regarding the second question, the researchers say they can't blame the increased incidence of breast cancer on more cases being found because the rates among regularly screened women remained higher than rates among women of the same age who only received mammograms once after six years. The scientists concluded that this indicates that some of the cancers detected by mammography would have spontaneously regressed if they had never been discovered on a mammogram and treated, usually with chemotherapy and radiation. Simply put, it appears that some invasive breast cancers simply go away on their own, healed by the body's own immune system.

Per-Henrik Zahl, M.D., Ph.D., of the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, and his research team studied breast cancer rates among 119,472 women (age 50 to 64). These women participated in three rounds of screening mammograms between 1996 and 2001. The scientists then compared the number of breast cancers found in this group to the rate of malignancies among a control group of 109,784 women who were the same ages in 1992. After six years, all participants were invited to undergo a one-time screening to assess for the prevalence of breast cancer.

The researchers were surprised to find that the incidence of invasive breast cancer was 22 percent higher in the group regularly screened with mammography. In fact, screened women were more likely to have breast cancer at every age.

"Because the cumulative incidence among controls never reached that of the screened group, it appears that some breast cancers detected by repeated mammographic screening would not persist to be detectable by a single mammogram at the end of six years," the authors stated in their report. "This raises the possibility that the natural course of some screen-detected invasive breast cancers is to spontaneously regress."

The researchers also conclude that their findings "provide new insight on what is arguably the major harm associated with mammographic screening, namely, the detection and treatment of cancers that would otherwise regress."

This does not mean breast cancer should be ignored or not treated. But the hopeful news is that it appears invasive breast cancer sometimes can be destroyed naturally -- at least in some people -- by the body's own innate defenses.

Little is known about what happens to untreated patients with breast cancer. We know from autopsy studies that a significant number of women die without knowing that they had breast cancer (including ductal carcinoma in situ).

Article: Cancer And Tumors Nutritional Programs http://www.litalee.com/shopexd.asp?id=193

Labels: , ,

Thursday, January 8, 2009

Are Mammograms A Good Idea?

Adapted from September 20, 2008 - Issue 1163 www.Mercola.com


The benefits of mammograms are controversial, while the risks are well established. Mammograms carry a first-time false positive rate of up to 6 percent. False positives can lead to expensive repeat screenings and can result in unnecessary invasive procedures including biopsies and surgeries. Just thinking you may have breast cancer, when you really don’t focuses your mind on fear and disease, and is actually enough to trigger an illness in your body. Also, women have unnecessarily undergone mastectomies, radiation and chemotherapy after receiving false positives on a mammogram.In 1974, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) was warned by Professor Malcolm C. Pike at the University of Southern California School of Medicine that a number of specialists had concluded "giving a women under age 50 a mammogram on a routine basis is close to unethical."Why? Mammograms expose your body to radiation that can be 1,000 times greater than that from a chest x-ray, which increases the risk of cancer. Mammography also compresses the breasts tightly and often painfully, which could lead to a lethal spread of cancerous cells, should they exist.


The breast is highly sensitive to radiation, each 1 rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk by about 1 percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased risk for each breast over a decade's screening,” points out Dr. Samuel Epstein, one of the top cancer experts. Dr. Epstein, M.D., professor emeritus of Environmental and Occupational Medicine at the University of Illinois School of Public Health, and chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, has been speaking out about the risks of mammography since at least 1992. As for how these mammography guidelines came about, Epstein says: “They were conscious, chosen, politically expedient acts by a small group of people for the sake of their own power, prestige and financial gain, resulting in suffering and death for millions of women. They fit the classification of "crimes against humanity."”
Both the American Cancer Society and NCI called Dr. Epstein’s findings “unethical and invalid.” But this didn’t stop others from speaking out as well.


In July 1995, The Lancet again wrote about mammograms, saying "The benefit is marginal, the harm caused is substantial, and the costs incurred are enormous ..."


"The high sensitivity of the breast, especially in young women, to radiation-induced cancer was known by 1970. Nevertheless, the establishment then screened some 300,000 women with Xray dosages so high as to increase breast cancer risk by up to 20 percent in women aged 40 to 50 who were mammogramed annually,” wrote Dr. Epstein.


Dr. Charles B. Simone, a former clinical associate in immunology and pharmacology at the National Cancer Institute, said, "Mammograms increase the risk for developing breast cancer and raise the risk of spreading or metastasizing an existing growth.”


Most physicians continue to recommend mammograms for fear of being sued by a woman who develops breast cancer after which he did not advise her to get one. But I encourage you to think for yourself and consider safer, more effective alternatives to mammograms.

Part II: Surprising News on the Increase in Breast Cancer Among Women Who Get Frequent Mammograms

Part III: Thermography and Sonograms - alternative and safe diagnostic alternatives to mammograms.

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

How To Avoid Foods Containing Genetically Modified Organisms – Go Organic!

Organic Bytes
Health, Justice and Sustainability News
January 7, 2009 - Issue #157

Over the past month, the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has been alerting our nationwide network about Obama's proposed appointment of Monsanto ally and former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack to the position of Secretary of Agriculture. Far from representing the "Change" which Obama has promised, Vilsack has a disappointing record of promoting controversial genetically engineered foods, biopharm crops, and animal cloning, as well as cheerleading for unsustainable biofuels derived from corn and soybeans. In addition Vilsack has come under fire for aiding and abetting chemical and energy-intensive industrial agriculture, including Iowa's infamous Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs).

Although genetically modified (GM) corn is banned in most of the world, it has been approved as "safe" for human consumption in the U.S. for 12 years and is now likely unknowingly consumed, in one form or another, by more than 90% of Americans on a regular basis. In the U.S., food products that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs) do not have to be labeled as such. This is a big problem, considering more than 90% of surveyed consumers say they would avoid products with these ingredients and since most packaged foods on grocery store shelves already contain hidden GMOs.

But a recent series of peer-reviewed studies were published in 2008 confirming previous studies indicating potentially severe health and environmental problems associated with the biotech crops. Recent alarming scientific research includes:

1) A new long term study by the Austrian government confirms previous findings that consumption of GM corn, for as little as 20 weeks, can damage the reproductive system, lower fertility rates and increase illness and death rates in offspring.
Learn more: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_15720.cfm

2) Researchers in Mexico reported in December that some popular varieties of GM corn negatively affect the learning response of bees. Scientists say this may be an indicator of the cause of Colony Collapse Disorder, a recent catastrophic and mysterious die-off of as much as 30% of the world's honey bee population in the past couple of years.
Learn more: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_16249.cfm

3) In Italy, scientists published a study that put the biotech industry in a public relations tailspin. In the study, laboratory tests showed a direct connection between consumption of GM corn and a damaged immune system.
Learn more: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_16248.cfm

Here are some quick tips to help you avoid GMO ingredients and "Frankenfoods."

1) Look for products that voluntarily label themselves as GMO or GE-free.

2) Buy Organic: Products certified as "Organic" are not allowed to contain genetically modified ingredients.

3) Avoid non-organic products that contain the most common genetically engineered ingredients: corn (corn syrup, corn meal, corn oil, etc.), fructose, dextrose, glucose, modified food starch, ingredients including the word "soy" (soy flour, soy lecithin, etc.), vegetable oil, vegetable protein, canola oil (also called rapeseed oil), cottonseed oil, and sugar from sugar beets.
Learn more: http://www.organicconsumers.org/gelink.cfm

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, January 3, 2009

Oh My! Wanna Study? Take a Drug!

Bioethics Professor Seeks to Make Ritalin and Other Mind-altering Drugs OTC for Students Before Exams
by Mike Adams, January 2,2009 http://www.naturalnews.com/News_000642
_students_drug_use_bioethics.html


John Harris, professor of bioethics and director of the Institute for Science, Ethics and Innovation at the University of Manchester is at it again, pushing for OTC drug use by college students who want to "enhance their brain power" before exams. What drugs should they be taking? Amphetamines, he says! Of course, he doesn't mean they should be able to take any amphetamines they want. They should only be able to buy Pharma's amphetamines that just happen to make lots of money for drug companies.

A few weeks ago the medical journal Nature published an editorial authored by several doctors (including John Harris) advocated the use of Ritalin and other mind-altering drugs by students (gee, haven't they drugged enough students with Ritalin already?). See: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/456702a.html http://www.naturalnews.com/News_000593_amphetamines_psychiatric_drugs_brain_function.html http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article5428560.ece

Brain Foods That Are Non-Toxic

When I read this report, I was inspired to think about all of the wonderful non-toxic, non-addictive natural substances that improve mental function, memory, focus, clarity, decrease anxiety and panic and increase energy without the side effects of amphetamines!

Here they are - available to the public without a prescription!

Rhodiola rosea has been used for centuries in Russia and Scandinavia. Soviet researchers classified the herb as an adaptogen, a substance that can increase resistance to stress. Rhodiola has a positive nutritional effect on the mitochondria (the “lungs of the cell) and may also increase metabolism and improve overall brain metabolism. By providing this energy boost, Rhodiola appears to help cells function better under stress. Rhodiola root has a reputation for improving mental performance, memory and rate of learning, decreasing depression, enhancing physical performance, and decreasing fatigue from any cause. Source: “the Herb That Came In From The Cold,” by Peter Jaret , Alternative Medicine, January 2005.

Pregnenolone is the second most abundant steroid (the first is Cholesterol, a steroid alcohol). Pregnenolone is made from adequate LDL cholesterol (it is not bad as you may have been told) in the presence of adequate thyroid hormone. So, hypothyroid people do not make adequate pregnenolone. Pregnenolone has a calming effect because it prevents formation of substances that cause anxiety and panic. So it’s great for “pre-performance jitters.” It also improves memory and focus. See my pregnenolone article for more details: http://www.litalee.com/shopexd.asp?id=205

Thyroid glandular is recommended by all hypothyroid people because they cannot produce adequate pregnenolone. See 3 articles on thyroid: http://www.litalee.com/shopexd.asp?id=180 , http://www.litalee.com/shopexd.asp?id=180 , http://www.litalee.com/shopexd.asp?id=180

Thera-zyme Adr enzyme supports normal structure and function in people who may have pre-performance jitters, feel stressed, have trouble focusing and who may feel panicky, hyperactive, depressed or sad and have many other symptoms due to low blood sugar,

Thera-zyme TRMA enzyme supports normal structure and function in people who may be anxious (sighing a lot) and need immune support.

Organic caffeinated coffee is a prothyroid food that increases focus and has many other benefits. See: April 2001 To Your Health http://www.litalee.com/shopexd.asp?id=165

Labels: , , , ,

Get 

Acrobat Reader
  FREE Plug-in to view 
  or print  our documents!

1- 503-775-2251


Notice: I am a chemist and an enzyme nutritionist, not a medical doctor. I do not diagnose, prescribe for, treat or claim to prevent, mitigate or cure any human diseases. I provide enzymes and other dietary supplements to improve digestion and to nourish and support normal function and structure of the body. If you suspect any disease, please consult your physician.

The statements on this website have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. These statements and the formulations listed are not intended to diagnose, prescribe for, treat or claim to prevent, mitigate or cure any human disease. They are intended for nutritional support only. The third party information referred to herein is neither adopted nor endorsed by this web site but is provided for general informational purposes.


ThemeMagic.com - powerful & affordable self edit web sites and e-

commerce stores.Free web site by esseff Digital, LLC.© 2007, Lita Lee, Ph. D., All rights reserved.
To use any content or information on this site, you must obtain express written permission.