|
|
|
|
News
|
Nightmarish Hospital Visit Capped by Beating, Accident Victim Says
UPPER MARLBORO, Md. (CN) - A man who was hurt in a car crash but was misidentified as a cancer patient claims security guards at Prince George's Hospital beat him up when he tried to leave the hospital to avoid chest surgery he didn't need - "to have a potentially cancerous mass removed from his chest." He adds that one guard repeatedly called him "bitch" as he roughed him up.
READ MORE
Joseph Wheeler says a June 23 car accident put him in the hospital, which is owned by Dimensions Health Corporation. When he woke up hungry on June 24 and asked a nurse for food, she told him he couldn't eat because he was scheduled for surgery, Wheeler claims in Prince George's County Court.
Wheeler says the nurse checked his identification bracelet and told him the surgery was "to have a potentially cancerous mass removed from his chest."
Wheeler says his ID bracelet "contained a name that was different from Mr. Wheeler's, appeared to be that of a woman, and had a birth date that was 13 years prior to his own."
The complaint continues: "Mr. Wheeler, still in serious pain from the car accident and subsequent treatment from injuries sustained, was starting to fear for his safety as the hospital had misidentified him and he was being prepped to go into a surgery that he knew nothing about.
"At this point, Mr. Wheeler's wife, Felicia Ann Wheeler, came into the room to see her husband. Mr. Wheeler immediately told Mrs. Wheeler about what was taking place. The Wheelers decided that it was in their best interest to leave Prince George's Hospital Center and seek medical care for Mr. Wheeler elsewhere."
Mrs. Wheeler confirmed with nurses outside her husband's room that he was scheduled for cancer surgery, and when she told the nurses that she and her husband were leaving, "an argument ensued."
According to the increasingly bizarre complaint, Mr. Wheeler, "hearing the argument, took out his I/V, got out of the hospital bed, put his clothes on, and started to walk out of the room. He was bleeding from the spot on his hand where that I/V had been connected.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/08/25/29858.htm
|
FDA ignored evidence that CT scans are killing 14,000 Americans a year from cancer
(NaturalNews) FDA administrators sought to brush aside evidence that CT scans may be killing thousands of patients a year, say agency scientists.
"I was first ignored, then pressured to change my scientific opinion, and when I refused to do that, I was intimidated and ultimately terminated," said gastroenterologist and former FDA consultant Julian Nicholas.
READ MORE
The controversy stems from a still-pending application by General Electric (GE) for the approval of CT (computed tomography) scans as tests for colon cancer. GE made the request because although the practice of screening healthy patients with CT scans has become increasingly common, many insurers remains reluctant to pay for it.
When the FDA moved to approve the request with minimum fuss, agency scientists objected that the increased cancer risk from the radiation involved in CT scans would outweigh any potential benefit.
Approval would "expose a number of Americans to a risk of radiation that is unwarranted and may lead to instances of solid organ abdominal cancer," Nicholas wrote in an email to the agency.
"The increased radiation exposure to the population could be substantial and would raise a serious public health/public policy issue," agreed FDA medical officer Robert Smith of Yale and Cornell Universities.
Yet these and other scientists say their concerns were dismissed by their supervisors. For example, minutes of one meeting record agency manager Joshua Nipper responding, "We don't need to be reinventing a big bugaboo about radiation."
http://www.naturalnews.com:80/029577_CT_scans_radiation.html
|
Grandmother, 72, has leg amputated after hospital wrongly diagnoses cancer
A 72-year-old grandmother had her leg amputated after being told she had cancer only to find out her leg was healthy all along. Doreen Nicholls underwent the surgery in 2007 and now needs a wheelchair to get about.
According to the Sunday Telegraph, the grandmother was wrongly diagnosed with an extremely rare form of cancer and was told that without a leg amputation, she would die.
READ MORE
Tests carried out after the operation revealed that her left leg, which had been cut off below the knee, was in fact healthy.
Mrs Nicholls told the newspaper that the misdiagnosis, at Birmingham's Royal Orthopaedic Hospital, has destroyed her life.
Despite refusing to accept it was negligent in its treatment of Mrs Nicholls, the specialist hospital has agreed to pay her an out of court settlement which her lawyers described as a 'substantial six-figure sum'. Since being awarded the money, Mrs Nicholls has been able to buy a new prosthetic leg. Mrs Nicholls, of Halesowen, near Birmingham, told the Sunday Telegraph: 'I shall never forgive the hospital for what they've done to me.
'I just want my leg back, money doesn't mean a thing.' Mrs Nicholls told how the hospital called her to go back after the operation and said they had made a mistake and she didn't have cancer.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1219588/Grandmother-72-leg-amputated-hospital-wrongly-diagnoses-cancer.html
|
The truth about sun exposure, sunscreen and skin cancer
I was in the garden with a friend and her 6-month-old baby recently. The second the sun came out, anxiety clouded her face. She darted inside, reappeared with a bottle of sunscreen, and administered it liberally to the squirming infant, and then to herself. Not in the habit of offering unsolicited advice, I bit my tongue. But I was really biting it on this occasion because what I know about conventional sunscreens makes it very hard for me to sit and watch anyone putting such a toxic substance on themselves, let alone on a child.
READ MORE
My friend was just doing what any concerned mother naturally does given what we are told about the sun. She was following the advice of the world's leading doctors and dermatologists to protect her child from something we are told can cause deadly disease.
But when you stop and think about it, the idea that the sun is bad for us is completely nuts! Our species evolved in the tropics, under the sun, without houses, clothes, hats or sunscreen. Skin cancer rates are on the increase yet we get a tiny fraction of the sun exposure our ancestors did. Clearly there is something else at play here.
Did someone say ozone layer? Yes, there are parts of the world (for example, Australia) which have experienced both ozone depletion and an increased incidence of skin cancer, and there is evidence of a link there. But there are many other parts of the world where skin cancer rates are increasing despite the fact there has been no ozone depletion, so this isn’t the explanation we’re looking for. For example, skin cancer rates in Norway increased by 350% for men and 440% for women during the period 1955 to 1984. The ozone layer did not change during this period.
Skin cancer was very rare 100 years ago and is still very rare among many populations. For example, there is virtually no skin cancer in Africa, where people stay in the sun all day long without sunscreen. If you think that's down to the protective effect of darker skin pigmentation, think again: people with African heritage who live in America have very high rates of skin cancer.
http://fresh-network.typepad.com/fresh_network_blog/2009/06/the-truth-about-sun-exposure-sunscreen-and-skin-cancer.html
|
The trouble with mammograms
For years, breast cancer awareness campaigns have urged women over 40 to get a yearly mammogram. When women hesitate to comply, it's often to avoid the discomfort of having their breasts squeezed or the fear of getting called back for more tests, even if it turns out there's no cancer.
READ MORE
But screening poses another downside: A routine mammogram can find cancers that would never have become life-threatening, subjecting women to painful and toxic treatments they never actually needed.
A new study calculates that this is just what happens in as many as one in every three breast cancers diagnosed by a screening mammogram. That research, published July 9 in the British Medical Journal, comes on the heels of several other studies suggesting that some breast cancers found on mammograms would naturally have regressed on their own without treatment.
The studies don't mean that women should abandon mammography, most experts say. But some think it's time to reconsider the way that mammogram screening is done.
"For too long, we've taken a brain-dead approach that says the best test is the one that finds the most cancers -- but that's wrong," says Dr. H. Gilbert Welch of the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice in Lebanon, N.H, who wrote an editorial accompanying the British Medical Journal study. "The best test is the one that finds the right cancers and nothing else."
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-breast-overdiagnosis17-2009aug17,0,7839216,print.story
|
Why has America not won the war on cancer? They say it is our fault!
An eye-opening article on the New York Times’ front page August 3, “Lack of Study Volunteers Hobbles Cancer Fight,” stated that just 3 percent of adult cancer patients participate in cancer-drug clinical trials. It also revealed that more than one in five trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute fail to enroll a single subject with cancer.
READ MORE
According to a Dutch study published in The Lancet Neurology, 10 years after treatment with radiation therapy for brain cancers, 53 percent of patients had problems with memory and attention, but only 27 percent of those treated with surgery had these cognitive challenges (all the patients had a low-grade glioma, one of the most common types of brain cancer).
Why don’t U.S. patients enroll in clinical trials for cancer therapies? Because they understand that trials aren’t designed to help them as individual patients. They also don't understand that the risks may far outweigh the benefits. Recently, there have been extensive reports in major U.S. newspapers, including the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, about the study of long-term side effects in childhood cancer survivors. Those side effects include secondary cancers, heart failure and cognitive dysfunction, as well as an inability to maintain employment. An article in the Wall Street Journal argued that many expensive cancer drugs fail to prolong life beyond a few weeks or months.
|
Death toll linked to Gardasil vaccine rises
"Anaphylactic shock," "foaming at mouth," "grand mal convulsion," "coma" and "now paralyzed" are a few of the startling descriptions included in a new federal report describing the complications from Merck & Co.'s Gardasil medication for sexually transmitted human papillomavirus – which has been proposed as mandatory for all schoolgirls.
READ MORE
The document was obtained from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration by Judicial Watch, a Washington group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, and it has details of 10 deaths just since September.
"Given all the questions about Gardasil, the best public health policy would be to re-evaluate its safety and to prohibit its distribution to minors. In the least, governments should rethink any efforts to mandate or promote this vaccine for children,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The organization's work uncovered reports of about one death each month since last fall, bringing the total death toll from the drug to at least 18 and as many as 20. There also were 140 "serious" reports of complications including about three dozen classified as life-threatening, 10 spontaneous abortions and half a dozen cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome.
The document reveals the case of an 18-year-old woman who got the Gardasil vaccine, was found unconscious that evening, and died. Another woman, age 19, got the drug and the next morning was found dead in her bed.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=68454
|
Hormone pills may make lung cancer more deadly
ORLANDO, Fla. – There's more troubling news about hormone therapy for menopause symptoms: Lung cancer seems more likely to prove fatal in women who are taking estrogen-progestin pills, a study suggests.
Hormone users who developed lung cancer were 60 percent more likely to die from the disease as women who weren't taking hormones, according to results reported Saturday.
READ MORE
The new findings mean that smokers should stop taking hormones, and those who have not yet started hormones should give it careful thought, said Dr. Rowan Chlebowski of Harbor-UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles. He led the analysis and presented results at a meeting of the oncology society in Florida.
It's the latest finding from the Women's Health Initiative, a federal study that gave 16,608 women either Prempro or dummy pills. The study was stopped in 2002 when researchers saw more breast cancers in those on Prempro, the estrogen-progestin pill made by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals. They continue to follow what happens to women in the study.
The new analysis looked at non-small-cell lung cancer, by far the most common type. It found no big difference in the number of lung cancers that developed in hormone users after five years on the pills and more than two years of followup.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090530/ap_on_he_me/us_med_hormones_lung_cancer_4
|
BST, Milk and Cancer
Our favorite chemical company, Monsanto (the producers of Agent Orange, and Aspartame), managed to get their first genetically modified food approved from the FDA in 1993. The food is one that has been consumed by virtually all non-vegan americans - milk! Known as POSILAC, rBST (bovine somatotrophin) or rBGH (bovine growth hormone), this artificial rendition of a cow's natural growth hormones is injected into cows so that they will produce more milk. Theoretically, the addition of this artificial hormone will enable dairy farmers to increase yield (from 10-25%), providing more milk for the consumers and at a cheaper cost.
READ MORE
The public has been weary of BST since its introduction into the food supply. In fact, BST and Monsanto have been heavily criticized for its misleading and incomplete studies of test animals and the company's influence over governing agencies. The FDA has been attacked for "looking the other way" by ignoring concrete scientific evidence that the hormone was not as safe as Monsanto was claiming. Canada and Europe immediately put a moratorium on the use of the artificial hormone. Milk from BST cows is not required to be labeled, and the FDA, dairy industry, and Monsanto stand by their claims that milk from cows injected with BST is just as safe and nutritious and no different than milk from cows who have not been treated.
IGF-1 - The Decisive Factor
Bovine growth hormone, whether naturally produced or artificially made(rBGH or rBST) and injected, works by binding with its receptor, IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor one). IGF-1 is produced naturally in cows and humans, and it regulates cell growth (cell division). Growth hormones are needed for growth, and they are very powerful hormones that work at miniscule amounts. The bovine growth hormone receptor (IGF-1) and the human growth hormone receptor (IGF-1) are exactly the same: the same seventy amino acids in the same order - they are chemically identical.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/255992/bst_milk_and_cancer_pg2.html?cat=58
|
The Diagnosis Every Woman Dreads - Ovarian Cancer
SARASOTA, Fla., May 21 /PRNewswire/ -- As a health care practitioner, Trina Hammack knew the statistics. So when she was diagnosed with ovarian cancer, she knew her prognosis was bleak. Fortunately, Hammack was familiar with a clinic in Mexico offering effective new treatments for ovarian cancer. According to TMD Unlimited, a medical tourism corporation, thousands of Americans diagnosed with cancer will travel to Mexico for cutting edge alternative treatments.
READ MORE
Hammack owns Cornerstone Wellness Center in Monterey, California. Last year, she was feeling fatigued, and her waistbands were getting tight. "I just felt something was wrong, so I made an appointment with my GYN," she said. Her doctor did an ultrasound and told her he suspected she had ovarian cancer and referred her to an oncologist. Standard tests for ovarian cancer are a pelvic exam, a blood test for the CA-125 tumor marker, ultrasound and a biopsy of tissue and fluid samples.
In 2009, over 21,000 women will be diagnosed with ovarian cancer, and nearly 15,000 of them will die. According to the National Institutes of Health, ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer deaths in women, and is known medically as 'the silent killer' because there are often no symptoms and the disease is not discovered until the cancer has spread.
http://news.prnewswire.com/ViewContent.aspx?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/05-21-2009/0005031133&EDATE
|
FDA Should Reconsider Aspartame Cancer Risk, Say Experts
A new long-term animal test from an Italian cancer institute raises serious safety questions about the artificial sweetener aspartame, which is marketed generically as well as under the NutraSweet and Equal brand names.
READ MORE
A dozen toxicology and epidemiology experts and the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest are calling on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to immediately review the study, which found increases in lymphomas, leukemias, and breast cancers in rats. If FDA concludes that aspartame does cause cancer in animals, the agency is required by law to revoke its approval for the controversial sweetener, which is used in Diet Pepsi, Diet Coke, tabletop packets, and countless other foods.
http://www.sweetpoison.com/articles/0607/fda_should_reconsider_asp.html
|
Exclusive Interview with Billy Best, who Fled Chemotherapy at Age 16 and Beat Hodgkin's Lymphoma
(NaturalNews) Even as 13-year-old Daniel Hauser and his family are dealing with the reality of living in a medical police state that labeled them "fugitives from the law" for refusing chemotherapy, another similar case has taken center stage this week: The case of Billy Best.
At age 16, Billy Best was diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma, just like Daniel Hauser. Also like Daniel Hauser, he was ordered to undergo chemotherapy. After five rounds of chemo -- which he describes as nearly killing him -- Billy decided chemo wasn't right for him, and he refused to submit to more chemo.
READ MORE
Fleeing his parents and medical "authorities," Billy discovered his own natural treatments for cancer with the help of concerned citizens, and by changing his diet and taking these natural remedies, he was able to heal cancer and save his own life.
That was fifteen years ago. Today, in sharp contrast to the cancer doctors who claim that teenagers who don't submit to chemotherapy almost always die, Billy Best is alive and well. He joined me for an exclusive interview today to discuss his experience with chemotherapy and health freedom. You can listen to the full interview (32 minutes) here: http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Po...
Quotes from Billy Best
Below you'll find some of what Billy Best offered during this interview.
Journalists: You may use these quotes in your own news stories provided you give proper credit to both Billy Best and NaturalNews.com. Please link back to this story so that readers can download the complete audio interview (which is free of any commercials).
http://www.naturalnews.com/026337.html
|
Another Study Links Fluoride to Bone Cancer
New York – April 29, 2009 -- Blood fluoride levels were significantly higher in patients with osteosarcoma than in control groups, according to research published in Biological Trace Element Research (April 2009). Osteosarcoma, a rare bone cancer, occurs mostly in children and young adults.
READ MORE
Randhu and colleagues measured serum fluoride levels in three equal groups of age-matched and sex-matched patients. Group one had osteosarcoma; group two had non-osteosarcoma bone tumors; and group three had musculo-skeletal pain. (1)
“Mean serum fluoride concentration was found to be significantly higher in patients with osteosarcoma as compared to the other two groups,” write Randhu’s team. “(T)his report proves a link between raised fluoride levels in serum and osteosarcoma,” they write.
This reinforces a 2006 published Harvard study by Bassin showing a link between water fluoridation and osteosarcoma in young boys. (2)
A 1992 New Jersey Department of Health study shows osteosarcoma rates higher among young males in fluoridated vs. unfluoridated regions of New Jersey. (3)
More studies link fluoride to bone and other cancers but are downplayed or ignored by government officials. (4)(5)
Bone defects similar to bone cancer were detected in fluoridated Newburgh NY children as early as 1955. Newburgh is home of the first human health fluoridation experiment begun in 1945.
http://www.thenhf.com/fluoridation/fluoridation_169/fluoridation_169.htm
|
NCI Study Links Aspartame To Leukemia/Lymphoma
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) announced April 20, 2009: ..."on the basis of all the evidence currently available including the [second] published ERF study there is no indication of any genotoxic or carcinogenic potential of aspartame and that there is no reason to revise the previously established ADI (allowable daily intake) for aspartame of 40mg/kg bw/day." Truth be told: aspartame is an addictive excitoneurotoxic, genetically engineered, carcinogenic that interacts with virtually all medications.
READ MORE
EFSA is blinded by allegiance to commercial interests so it invents objections to acclaimed medical research, disregarding the suffering, ruined lives and death their cupidity brings to Europe.
In 2005 the renowned Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences reported a rigorous three years study on 1,800 rats, concluding: aspartame causes significant increases in lympomas/leukemias and is a multi-potential carcinogen. EFSA invented "deficiencies" in the study to protect manufacturers pet poison. The second study, ERF 2007, entirely verified the first. Dr. Morando Soffritti, who led both projects, noted that so much formaldehyde developed in aspartame-exposed rats that their skin turned yellow.
Who is the European Food Safety Authority? In 2002 a review of aspartame a review of aspartame y the European commission, Scientific Committee on Food attempted to pass off this deadly addictive drug as safe. An assessment by the European Anti-Fraud Agency (OLAF) revealed the opinion was written by a single person and not by the entire Scientific Committee on Food. OLAF did not reveal the name of this individual or any scientific expertise or conflict of interest he/she had.
Astonishingly, one unnamed individual writes each opinion of the committees. Next, persons, often industry consultants, review the draft. What is clear: neither the author nor the Committee (including industry consultants) considered or had familiarity with the scientific research detailed in the 2002 analysis.
http://www.thenhf.com/articles/articles_914/articles_914.htm
|
Study Predicts Huge Increase in Cancer Ahead
Just when we're all saturated with alarming news about a pending flu epidemic, new research from the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center concludes a virtual epidemic of an even more dreaded disease -- cancer -- is headed our way. In fact, the scientists say over the next two decades, the number of new cancer cases diagnosed each year in the U.S. will increase by 45 percent. This dramatic spike in incidence is expected to especially hit the growing older Baby Boomers and non-white populations, with an amazing 100 percent increase in cancer expected for minorities.
READ MORE
But while the new study has sobering warnings, it can also be taken as a positive wake-up call. There's no reason to let the new data make you feel hopeless or helpless about a malignancy striking. Bottom line: numerous other studies have shown much cancer can be prevented by living a healthy lifestyle.
To come up with their projections for an impending explosion in the cancer rate, the M.D. Anderson team accessed U.S. Census Bureau statistics, updated in 2008 to project population growth through 2050, and the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry. Then cancer incidence rates were figured out by multiplying the age, sex, race and origin-specific population projections by the age, sex, race and origin-specific cancer incidence rates.
The study, just published online in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, is the first to develop this kind of specific long-term cancer incidence projection. And the results are sobering. According to the researchers, we can expect a 67 percent increase in the number of adults age-65-or-older diagnosed with cancer (from 1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2030) and, for non-white individuals over the same two-decade span of time, the incidence of malignancies will supposedly increase from 330,000 to 660,000.
http://www.naturalnews.com/026194.html
|
Dark Chocolate Fights Cancer
“The great news this Valentine’s Day is that in addition to being decadent and delicious, moderate amounts of dark chocolate may play a role in cancer prevention,” said Sally Scroggs, M.S., R.D., L.D., health education manager at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center’s Cancer Prevention Center.
READ MORE
ecent research indicates that dark chocolate’s chemicals, which act as antioxidants, have been shown to play a role in reducing cancer risks by helping to combat cell damage that can lead to tumor growth. These antioxidants occur naturally in the plant-based cacao bean, the base of all chocolate products. Cacao beans are, in fact, one of the most concentrated natural sources of antioxidants that exist.
“Dark chocolate has a higher percentage of healthy antioxidants, without the increased sugar and saturated fats added to milk chocolate,” Scroggs said.
Chocolate has been a favorite food for centuries, according to the American Dietetic Association. “It has become a symbol for love, indulgence, temptation and now, we can justify it for its health attributes,” Scroggs said.
http://www.newsmax.com/health/dark_chocolate_cancer_/2009/02/03/177895.html
|
The cancer blame game: How blaming the patient is easier than prevention
Dr. Sam Epstein is a cancer expert. In the late 1970s he rocked the cancer establishment with a book, The Politics of Cancer, which argued that the federal government had been corrupted by industrial polluters.
He's followed that up with another zinger: Cancer-Gate: How to Win the Losing Cancer War.
In it, Epstein argues that we're losing a winnable war against the disease, largely because well-meaning institutions have misspent billions targeting treatment, while virtually ignoring strategies for preventing cancer in the first place.
READ MORE
"The Canadian Cancer Society," he says, "has ignored or trivialized these concerns and told the public if you get cancer, it's your own fault." In fact, Epstein contends "it is the fault of the Canadian cancer establishment, who have not informed the public of this vast range, body of information on avoidable causes of cancer."
Barbara Whylie, head of the Canadian Cancer Society, agrees more should be done: "We as a community --not just the Canadian Cancer Society-- we as a community in the past have done less on prevention than we probably should have. That’s changing.
THE NEW CANCER STRATEGY
The Canadian Cancer Society supports a plan for a national cancer strategy. This will include further prevention work if the federal government decides to fund the strategy.
"We need to do more in the prevention area and are committed to doing it… It's one of the areas that we are promoting very aggressively through the Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control."
In the meantime, other than quitting smoking, Canadians know very little about avoidable environmental causes of cancer. That ignorance, says Epstein, has provided fertile ground for the creation of a cancer epidemic.
For example, Epstein points to the birth control pill, or, as he describes it: "the largest unregulated human trial that's ever been conducted."
http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/health/cancer/blame.html
|
Prostate Test Found to Save Few Lives
The PSA blood test, used to screen for prostate cancer, saves few lives and leads to risky and unnecessary treatments for large numbers of men, two large studies have found. The findings, the first based on rigorous, randomized studies, confirm some longstanding concerns about the wisdom of widespread prostate cancer screening. Although the studies are continuing, results so far are considered significant and the most definitive to date.
READ MORE
The PSA test, which measures a protein released by prostate cells, does what it is supposed to do — indicates a cancer might be present, leading to biopsies to determine if there is a tumor. But it has been difficult to know whether finding prostate cancer early saves lives. Most of the cancers tend to grow very slowly and are never a threat and, with the faster-growing ones, even early diagnosis might be too late.
The studies — one in Europe and the other in the United States — are “some of the most important studies in the history of men’s health,” said Dr. Otis Brawley, the chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society.
In the European study, 48 men were told they had prostate cancer and needlessly treated for it for every man whose death was prevented within a decade after having had a PSA test.
Dr. Peter B. Bach, a physician and epidemiologist at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, says one way to think of the data is to suppose he has a PSA test today. It leads to a biopsy that reveals he has prostate cancer, and he is treated for it. There is a one in 50 chance that, in 2019 or later, he will be spared death from a cancer that would otherwise have killed him. And there is a 49 in 50 chance that he will have been treated unnecessarily for a cancer that was never a threat to his life.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/health/19cancer.html?_r=1&emc=rss&partner=rss
|
Cashing in on cancer: The big business of cancer drugs and treatments
A big part of the cancer story is about money.
Canada has a limited budget when it comes to spending on cancer. At the moment, the biggest chunk of that money goes towards a growing roster of cancer drugs and treatments.
When it comes to the cancer industry, big bucks are at stake.
READ MORE
At the recent International Congress on Anti-Cancer Treatment, pharmaceutical companies from around the world attended; they were there to pitch the latest cancer drugs and treatments. There were congratulatory handshakes over announcements of new advancements; drug company reps grinned enthusiastically when asked how business was going.
THE CANCER INDUSTRY
In 2006, cancer drugs will be the fastest growing class of pharmaceuticals in the world, exceeding $37 billion in sales.
Dr. James Holland is an oncologist, chemotherapy researcher and one of the founders of the conference. When he spoke with Marketplace host Wendy Mesley, he was straightforward about why prevention isn't a bigger priority:
MESLEY: This whole [conference] is about treating cancer, which is great, but why isn't there more on prevention?
HOLLAND: Well, this is a conference on therapies... But prevention is the ultimate goal and I think that you're right. Why is there so little done comparatively in cancer prevention? Because there are no companies that are devoted to cancer prevention as there are to cancer treatment.
MESLEY: Why not?
HOLLAND: Because there's no incentive economically for them.
MESLEY: So drug companies won't invest in prevention until there's a product to sell?
HOLLAND: In order to stay viable, any company has to make at least a break-even. They can't potentially invest all the time in charitable undertakings. That's philanthropy.
http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/health/cancer/cashing.html
|
FDA Should Reconsider Aspartame Cancer Risk, Say Experts
A new long-term animal test from an Italian cancer institute raises serious safety questions about the artificial sweetener aspartame, which is marketed generically as well as under the NutraSweet and Equal brand names. A dozen toxicology and epidemiology experts and the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest are calling on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to immediately review the study, which found increases in lymphomas, leukemias, and breast cancers in rats.
READ MORE
If FDA concludes that aspartame does cause cancer in animals, the agency is required by law to revoke its approval for the controversial sweetener, which is used in Diet Pepsi, Diet Coke, tabletop packets, and countless other foods.
The new study, conducted by the respected Ramazzini Foundation and published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, found statistically significant increases in lymphomas and leukemias in rats that were fed as little as 20 milligrams of the sweetener per kilogram of body weight—an amount that’s in the ballpark of what some people consume. The new study is superior to a similar one released in 2005 in that it began exposing the rats to aspartame before their birth.
“Because aspartame is so widely consumed, it is urgent that the FDA evaluate whether aspartame still poses a ‘reasonable certainty of no harm,’ the standard used for gauging the safety of food additives,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But consumers, particularly parents, shouldn’t wait for the FDA to act. People shouldn’t panic, but they should stop buying beverages and foods containing aspartame.”
The Acceptable Daily Intake of aspartame in the United States is 50 mg per kg of body weight. The new study looked at doses less than that (20 mg per kg) and greater (100 mg per kg). Though few people would consume aspartame at the higher dose, the lower does is equivalent to a 50-pound child drinking 2½ cans of diet soda per day, or a 150-pound adult drinking about 7½ cans of diet soda per day. But aspartame also enters the diet through sugar-free or reduced-sugar gums, candies, yogurts, and hundreds of other products. Many aspartame-containing products are likely to be consumed by kids, including sugar-free Kool-Aid, Jell-O gelatin dessert and pudding mixes, and some Popsicles.
http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/newsprint.cgi?file=/news2007/0625-02.htm
|
Red wine antioxidant resveratrol kills cancer
Rochester researchers showed for the first time that a natural antioxidant found in grape skins and red wine can help destroy pancreatic cancer cells by reaching to the cell's core energy source, or mitochondria, and crippling its function.
READ MORE
The study is published in the March edition of the journal, Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology.
The study also showed that when the pancreatic cancer cells were doubly assaulted -- pre-treated with the antioxidant, resveratrol, and irradiated -- the combination induced a type of cell death called apoptosis, an important goal of cancer therapy.
The research has many implications for patients, said lead author Paul Okunieff, M.D., chief of Radiation Oncology at the James P. Wilmot Cancer Center at the University of Rochester Medical Center.
Although red wine consumption during chemotherapy or radiation treatment has not been well studied, it is not "contraindicated," Okunieff said. In other words, if a patient already drinks red wine moderately, most physicians would not tell the patient to give it up during treatment. Perhaps a better choice, Okunieff said, would be to drink as much red or purple grape juice as desired.
Yet despite widespread interest in antioxidants, some physicians are concerned antioxidants might end up protecting tumors. Okunieff's study showed there is little evidence to support that fear. In fact, the research suggests resveratrol not only reaches its intended target, injuring the nexus of malignant cells, but at the same time protects normal tissue from the harmful effects of radiation.
http://www.news-medical.net/?id=36674
|
Actor Ron Silver Dies of Cancer at the Age of 62
Actor Ron Silver, best known for his roll on the hit television show "The West Wing" died of cancer over the weekend at the age of 62.
READ MORE
Actor Ron Silver died on Sunday at the age of 62 of cancer. According to Robin Bronk, the executive director of Creative Coalition, "Ron Silver died peacefully in his sleep with his family around him early Sunday morning. He had been fighting esophageal cancer for two years. He was a talented actor, a scholar and a great believer in participatory democracy. He was an activist who became a great artist and his contributions will never be forgotten."
For those who religiously watched "The West Wing," actor Ron Silver is probably best known for portraying Bruno Gianelli, a slick, fast-talking political strategist to President Jed Bartlet (played by Martin Sheen). Silver also won a Tony award for his role as a Hollywood producers in David Mamet’s "Speed-the-Plow." For those unfamiliar with those works, Silver’s claim to fame may have been an abrupt, political "about face" from liberal democrat to self-style "9/11 Republican" who moved in lockstep with President Bush’s anti-terrorism approach.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/actor-ron-silver-dies-of-cancer-at-the-age-of-62.html
|
Sniffing Out Cancer
We’ve heard from those who know that cancer stinks. Turns out, it really does. Scientists this month have discovered in two separate studies that cancer molecules give off gases that are different from, well, the regular gases our bodies emit.
READ MORE
The studies were both inspired by dogs. The first study, performed by scientists at the Monell Chemical Senses Center in Philadelphia, and presented at the 236th meeting of the American Chemical Society, was developed after years of anecdotal reports of dogs being able to correctly identify melanomas based on their scents.
The researchers wanted to find out if gases, detectable as odors, were composed of different molecules than gases that are given off by healthy skin.
First the team examined healthy skin samples from 25 men and women. They determined that "regular" skin emits about 92 different molecular compounds into the air immediately around it, a combination of organically occurring molecules and those from soap and other environmental sources.
Then they narrowed down the chemicals to six naturally occurring gases, and when samples of skin with basal cell carcinoma (the most common form of skin cancer) were compared to the healthy skin, the chemicals were different.
What this means, say the researchers, is that the carcinoma cells have a different gas profile than regular cells, meaning they have a particular "odor" that could someday be used to help identify various types of skin or other cancers.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/sniffing-out-cancer.html
|
Child Survivors Face Six Times Risk of New Cancers
Survivors of childhood cancer face six times the usual risk of getting entirely new cancers in early adulthood - likely due to the chemotherapy and radiation treatments that cured them, a large study found.
READ MORE
Doctors' ability to cure childhood malignancy has been one of the clearest successes of the war on cancer. About 1 in every 1,000 Americans in their 20s is a cancer survivor.
Several earlier reports have shown a surprisingly high cancer risk as young patients grow older, but the latest study, involving more than 13,000 survivors, gives the most comprehensive assessment yet of this unexpected downside of a medical victory.
When doctors began regularly curing childhood leukemia in the mid-1970s, they gave little thought to the possibility of distant ill effects. But because of the newly recognized risks, doctors now routinely try to use the least damaging treatment that will still cure the disease.
"It's clear that people treated for cancer in childhood are at increased risk of cancer later in life," said Dr. Joseph Neglia of the University of Minnesota. He presented the findings Tuesday at a meeting in New Orleans of the American Association for Cancer Research.
His research shows that while new cancer - especially breast cancer - occurs more often than expected in these patients, it still is rare. And the benefits of having cancer cured in childhood far outweigh any later risk.
Overall, the cancer survivors have a 3 percent risk of developing an entirely new cancer over the next 20 years. This is about six times greater than would be expected among people this age.
http://www.annieappleseedproject.org/chilsurfacsi.html
|
Pop, country singer Dan Seals dies of cancer
NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Dan Seals, who was England Dan in the pop duo England Dan and John Ford Coley and later had a successful country career, has died of complications from cancer. He was 61.
Longtime manager Tony Gottlieb said Seals, diagnosed with lymphoma two years ago, died Wednesday night at his daughter's home in Nashville.
READ MORE
With England Dan and John Ford Coley, Seals had hits including "I'd Really Love to See You Tonight" and "Nights Are Forever," both in 1976. His country hits in the '80s and '90s included "Bop," "You Still Move Me," "Love on Arrival," and a duet with Marie Osmond, "Meet Me in Montana."
"I've loved to play and sing from the moment I knew what it was," he told The Associated Press in 1992. Seals, who is survived by his wife, four children and seven grandchildren, was in hospice care when he died. "He was very positive," said Gottlieb, Seals' manager for about 30 years. "He participated in several clinical trials to assist with research on this type of lymphoma." Gottlieb said a major misconception about Seals is that he was a pop singer who came to country music. In reality, he said, Seals grew up singing country music and crossed into pop. "He was raised in a very rural part of West Texas. His father was an amateur country singer, and he used to play with his dad. They were Hank Williams, Grand Ole Opry people. He was much more of a country singer than a pop singer."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090326/ap_on_en_mu/obit_dan_seals_8
|
American Cancer Society: The World's Wealthiest "Nonprofit" Institution
The American Cancer Society is fixated on damage control— diagnosis and treatment— and basic molecular biology, with indifference or even hostility to cancer prevention. This myopic mindset is compounded by interlocking conflicts of interest with the cancer drug, mammography, and other industries. The "nonprofit" status of the Society is in sharp conflict with its high overhead and expenses, excessive reserves of assets and contributions to political parties. All attempts to reform the Society over the past two decades have failed; a national economic boycott of the Society is long overdue.
READ MORE
The American Cancer Society (ACS) is accumulating great wealth in its role as a "charity." According to James Bennett, professor of economics at George Mason University and recognized authority on charitable organizations, in 1988 the ACS held a fund balance of over $400 million with about $69 million of holdings in land, buildings, and equipment (1). Of that money, the ACS spent only $90 million— 26 percent of its budget— on medical research and programs. The rest covered "operating expenses," including about 60 percent for generous salaries, pensions, executive benefits, and overhead. By 1989, the cash reserves of the ACS were worth more than $700 million (2). In 1991, Americans, believing they were contributing to fighting cancer, gave nearly $350 million to the ACS, 6 percent more than the previous year. Most of this money comes from public donations averaging $3,500, and high-profile fund-raising campaigns such
as the springtime daffodil sale and the May relay races. However, over the last two decades, an increasing proportion of the ACS budget comes from large corporations, including the pharmaceutical, cancer drug, telecommunications, and entertainment industries.
http://www.preventcancer.com/losing/acs/wealthiest_links.htm
|
Dogs Excel on Smell Test to Find Cancer
In the small world of people who train dogs to sniff cancer, a little-known Northern California clinic has made a big claim: that it has trained five dogs -- three Labradors and two Portuguese water dogs -- to detect lung cancer in the breath of cancer sufferers with 99 percent accuracy.
READ MORE
The study was based on well-established concepts. It has been known since the 80's that tumors exude tiny amounts of alkanes and benzene derivatives not found in healthy tissue.
Other researchers have shown that dogs, whose noses can pick up odors in the low parts-per-billion range, can be trained to detect skin cancers or react differently to dried urine from healthy people and those with bladder cancer, but never with such remarkable consistency.
The near-perfection in the clinic's study, as Dr. Donald Berry, the chairman of biostatistics at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, put it, ''is off the charts: there are no laboratory tests as good as this, not Pap tests, not diabetes tests, nothing.''
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9807E6DA143FF934A25752C0A9609C8B63&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=1
|
SHADOW FALLS ON ANTI-ANGIOGENIC DRUGS
For the past dozen years, drugs that inhibit the growth of new blood vessels - a strategy called anti-angiogenesis - have been the main hope of conventional oncology. These drugs were inspired by the work of the late Judah Folkman, MD of Harvard Medical School, who thought that tumors could be controlled by cutting off their blood supply. Drugs based on Folkman's concept include Avastin (bevacizumab), Erbitux (cetuximab) and Sutent (sunitinib).
READ MORE
The clinical benefit of these agents, especially when used alone, is small. They are mainly used in conjunction with standard chemotherapy. Some doctors (such as Stanislaw Burzynski MD, PhD) believe that when used appropriately and in combination they have greater potential than is revealed in phase III clinical trials.
But now, a new study has raised the disturbing prospect that this class of drugs might have the contradictory effect of helping tumors invade normal tissues and organs, i.e., to metastasize. It is the process of metastasis that ultimately kills most patients with advanced cancer.
"People have thought that angiogenesis-inhibiting therapy should hinder metastasis, but these studies show this is not necessarily the case," says Gabriele Bergers, PhD, an associate professor at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), who wrote a paper on this with coworkers at UCSF and the Catalan Institute of Oncology-IDIBELL, in Spain.
http://www.cancerdecisions.com/031509.html
|
The Relationship Between Root Canals and Cancer
When a person in the United States has a toothache, due to an infection in the tooth, rather than cure the infection with 3% food grade hydrogen peroxide, dentists almost always kill the tooth. They will typically drill out the insides of the tooth and fill the tooth with metal rods.
This is called a "root canal." Root canals are a safe haven for microbes. Because no blood reaches the inside of the tooth, the immune system cannot kill any microbes inside the dead tooth.
READ MORE
Microbes do not originate in the root canals, rather they originate elsewhere in the body (such as were cancer cells form). The microbes thrive and some of them hide from the immune system inside the root canals.
These microbes, and other toxins from inside the tooth, periodically come out of the tooth and cause reinfections. It is impossible to cure more than 200 diseases unless all of the root canal teeth are removed properly because even if you killed the microbes of the disease, microbes hiding in the root canals can come out and reinfect the person!!
All of these things have been known about for decades by the American Dental Association.
http://www.new-cancer-treatments.org/Articles/RootCanals.html
|
The Answer to Cancer is Known!
If I sell orange juice for cancer, I am now selling a drug as defined under 21 U.S.C. 352. The law has been formed over years and years of court cases, each one adding to the lock that doctors have over treating disease. There is a list of "diseases" that only doctors are allowed to treat.
READ MORE
This list includes CANCER, ARTHRITIS, DIABETES, HEART DISEASE, and hundreds of other "names" of ailments which the establishment has secured patents on. They own the words of all the diseases and the words TREAT, CURE, MITIGATE etc. If I sell you string beans for you diabetes, I am now selling an illegal unapproved drug. No matter how many people we CURED with apricot seeds, the vitamin B-17 that is found in them and some other aids, it does not matter. As a matter of fact, we have had over a 90 percent success rate with the apricot seeds and other aids, but our records do not matter.
A chemical will never cure cancer. There has never been a chemical drug that has cured any ongoing chronic metabolic disease. But the law is set up so that only a chemical is allowed to Cure a disease. If it's not approved by the FDA, it is not allowed to be used in the treatment for a disease. Only pharmaceutical companies have the money to get something approved. (Approval testings cost approx. 50-300 million dollars)
http://www.apricotsfromgod.info/politics.htm
|
How The Real Cures are Suppressed!
Barry Lynes, author of The Healing of Cancer and The Cancer Cure That Worked, spoke to an audience at Health Action '92, about the importance of creating new laws which govern access to unconventional cancer treatment. His message is not only well-referenced and hot, but it really sizzles at times.
It is important to emphasize again and again and again that finding a cure is not the problem The cures for many cancers, if not most cancers, exist. But they are not being offered to the patient who has cancer ... Being legally permitted to use an alternative cancer therapy is the problem.
READ MORE
Lynes told Health Action '92 that the US Court of Appeals for New York, in 1987, ruled that the patient has a legal right to unconventional cancer treatment. This critically important judicial decision is not the law throughout the United States, but has set a precedent. Lynes also cited a much older US law going back to 1847, made by a US Supreme Court judge who ruled that the individual may resist that which does him or her harm, be it an assassins assault, or a groups attempt to poison.
The critical thing to remember, Lynes counsels, is that it is the fundamental right of the citizen to resist. Another point that Lynes brings up was a Supreme Court decision in 1990, [Cruzan v. Missouri, June 25, 1990] "a competent person has a liberty interest under the due process clause in refusing unwanted medical treatment."
Chemotherapy, according to Lynes, is a useless poison, and he makes his case by referring to research done in 1990 by a top statistician in Germany. Ulrich Abel, Ph.D., spent a year, reviewing numerous chemotherapy trials [several thousand articles]. His conclusion was that chemotherapy cannot extend life when it comes to cancer of the major organs.
http://www.apricotsfromgod.info/curesuppression.htm
|
Dietary Supplement May Prevent Breast Cancer
A compound found in red grapes and red wine suppresses abnormal cell formation that leads to most types of breast cancer, according to U.S. researchers.
The compound, resveratrol, is sold in extract form as a dietary supplement.
Breast cancer forms through a multi-stage process that differs depending on the type of disease, a person's genes, and other factors. However, it's known that increased estrogen fuels many types of breast cancer.
READ MORE
"Resveratrol has the ability to prevent the first step that occurs when estrogen starts the process that leads to cancer by blocking the formation of the estrogen DNA adducts. We believe that this could stop the whole progression that leads to breast cancer down the road," study author Eleanor G. Rogan, a professor in the Eppley Institute for Research in Cancer and Allied Diseases at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, said in a prepared statement.
In laboratory testing, Rogan and her team found that as little as 10 umol/L of resveratrol could suppress DNA adducts associated with breast cancer. A glass of red wine contains between 9 and 28 umol/L of resveratrol.
Rogan and colleagues also found that reseveratrol suppressed expression of CYP1B1 and the formation of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, two known risk factors for breast cancer.
Resveratrol induces an enzyme called quinone reductase, which reduces the estrogen metabolite back to inactive form and reduces breast cancer risk, Rogan explained.
The findings, which were in the July issue of Cancer Prevention Research, will have to be confirmed in human trials, she noted.
http://www.facr.org/article-416.html
|
Who Is The Real Snake Oil Salesman?
On September 11th, our nation was subjected to the most devastating attack since Pearl Harbor. In the months that followed, we set aside our petty differences and came together in common cause to defend our freedom. What many of us do not realize, however, is that on September 10th, the day before Osama Bin Laden’s thugs killed thousands in the World Trade Center bombing, another vicious assault on our freedom occurred.
READ MORE
The perpetrator of this crime, however, was not some fanatical group of foreign extremists. Nor was it some homegrown radical organization. It was the United States Senate. Louisiana Senator John Breaux and his colleagues on the Senate Select Committee on Aging held a hearing on September 10th that was in fact the opening shot in a battle to deny Americans one of their most precious freedoms – the freedom to choose the form of medical therapy they would employ to ensure their own health.
The failure of the committee to provide even a semblance of balance in the representatives it selected to testify would dismay any American. All but two of the dozen witnesses either represented federal agencies with a vested interest in expanding the scope of their influence and power, or were long-standing critics of dietary supplements and alternative medicine. Indeed, the very title of the hearing “Swindlers, Hucksters and Snake Oil Salesmen, the Hype and Hope of Marketing Anti-Aging Products to Seniors” clearly demonstrates that Senator Breaux and his colleagues had made up their minds well in advance of any testimony that might have been presented. Similarly, the Government Accounting Office report you commissioned was titled “Health Products for Seniors, Anti-Aging Products Pose Potential for Physical and Economic Harm.” Most Americans have the impression that the GAO, like the Congress, was supposed to present balanced analyses of issues. The title of the GAO report hardly meets this standard.
http://www.cancer-coverup.com/news/cancer-coverup-news-04-2002.html
|
Challenges Facing Holistic Medicine
When a patient walked into Dr. Geoff Ames' office looking for ways to treat his food allergy, Dr. Ames never imagined it would turn his entire career completely upside down. The patient had already had a positive antibody test (IgG4 RAST) for egg white and egg yolk allergies, so Dr. Ames explained his treatment options: eliminating eggs from his diet or desensitizing his body to eggs. To achieve desensitization, Dr. Ames explained that he sometimes uses a combination of kinesiology and electrodermal testing (known as EAV), which he demonstrated for this patient.
READ MORE
The Commission responded by charging Dr. Ames with "moral turpitude" (yes, the same charge used against sex offenders and child molesters), with violations of interstate commerce (which is a Federal, not State responsibility) and intrastate commerce, and with unprofessional conduct for using a device which the Commission alleged was simultaneously "ineffectual" and capable of causing harm to the patient.
EAV is based on the idea of promoting health by stimulating and balancing the energies of the body. Any imbalances can be treated by applying electricity to acupoints or by supplementing with vitamins, minerals, botanicals, glandular extracts, homeopathic remedies, or any combination of these.
http://www.wachoice.org/theissues/thechallenge.php
|
Pinkwashing-Breast Cancer Deception
"Breast cancer has been transformed into a market-driven industry. It has become more about making money for corporate sponsors than funding innovative ways to treat breast cancer." - Health Studies researcher Samantha King, author of Pink Ribbons Inc.
READ MORE
Wearing pink for breast cancer, or buying pink products, is a demonstration of your support for the enslavement of women by a highly-unethical industry that seeks to turn women's bodies into profit centers. Wearing pink shouts, "I support the ignorance of women! I support Big Pharma! I support male-dominated corporate control over the health of women's breasts!"
Buying pink products sends the same message. Whether it's a can of soup, a pair of pink batteries or even a pink "vacation" (yes, they do exist), these products are jumping on the pink bandwagon for one reason only: consumers buy it. Painting any product pink results in a sales surge.
http://www.healthy-communications.com/pink_washing_the_cancer_deceptio.htm
|
Who Profits from Breast Cancer?
Every October since 1985, pink ribbons are displayed in posters, magazine advertisements, and proudly adorn women's lapels heralding Breast Cancer Awareness Month. The multitudes of runs, hikes, walks, and other fundraising events raise hundred of millions of dollars to conquer that dreaded scourge of the modern woman, breast cancer. High profile companies like Avon, Lee Denim, and Revlon have joined ranks along with the Susan G. Komen Foundation's "Race for the Cure", and the City of Hope Hospital's "Walk for Hope". Popular celebrities lead the charge.
READ MORE
Each year, 180,000 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer and 44,000 will die of the disease. The US has one of the highest breast cancer rates in the world. Fifty years ago the incidence of Breast Cancer for a woman's lifetime risk was one in twenty. Now it has skyrocketed to one in eight. Clearly the so-called war on cancer has not even made a dent in the breast cancer epidemic as the rates continue to climb at the rate of one per cent per year.
The motto of Breast Cancer Awareness Month is "Early Detection is Your Best Protection". The National Cancer Institute stated in 1995 that "Breast cancer is simply not a preventable disease". This tune was reiterated in 1997 by the American Cancer Society who also announced that "there are no practical ways to prevent breast cancer -- only early detection."1 So mammograms are the front line of defense. Celebrities like Rosie O'Donnell offer free t-shirts with the honorable words "I've Been Squished" if you'll make a date with your local x-ray department.
http://www.innerself.com/Health/breast_cancer.htm
|
Vitamin Experts Condemn Harvard Study
January 12, 2009
Today the American Association for Health Freedom (AAHF) and the Alliance for Natural Health (ANH) have together sharply criticized defective and misleading research published on January 7 in The Journal of the National Cancer Institute, which claims that vitamins don’t prevent cancer.
READ MORE
The ANH has released its critique on the study by Dr Jennifer Lin and colleagues at the Harvard Medical School, which concludes that the lack of effects demonstrated could have been predicted before the start of the 8-year study involving over 7,600 women with heart disease or high risk of it who averaged 60 years of age.
“This study was destined from the outset to obtain a negative result” said Dr Damien Downing, medical director of ANH, a practicing medical doctor who has practiced nutritional and environmental medicine for over 25 years. Dr Downing also criticized the journal editor for publishing the study “in the knowledge that the data do not support the conclusions."
http://www.healthfreedom.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=649&Itemid
|
More Countries Imposing Bans on Genetically Modified Foods
Looking back over the past 12 months, there can be very little doubt that, from the perspective of the large multinational producers of genetically modified (GM) seeds and food, 2008 was a very bad year indeed.
READ MORE
Far from moving closer towards the GM industry’s cherished dream of seeing foods grown from patented GM seeds becoming the norm on our dinner plates, it would seem that consumers are, if anything, becoming more suspicious than ever regarding these products. As such, with reports of the dangers of GM food becoming more common almost by the week, and even Prince Charles – the heir to the British throne - now openly stating that the widespread use of GM crops would be the biggest environmental disaster of all time, it is no longer too difficult to envisage a future where the consumption of naturally-grown organic foods, rather than GM foods, might become the norm.
So, as we head into 2009, let’s take a look back at some of the key reasons why the GM food industry’s senior executives and shareholders may be looking with increasing trepidation at the year ahead.
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/2008_gm_multinationals.html
|
|
DISCLAIMER:
This website is for educational purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for the diagnosis, treatment or advice of a
qualified, licensed professional. This site offers medical data and informs about alternative medical options. No one should
consider that this site represents the "practice of medicine." This site assumes no responsibility for how the material herein
is used. Please note that this website is constantly updating its content and, therefore, some of the information may be dated.
Also, be advised that the statements regarding alternative treatments for cancer have not been evaluated by the FDA. |
|
|
|
