Alarming New “Flu” Treatment — A Serious Health Mistake in the Making

Posted By Dr. Mercola | January 12 2012 | 15,409 views

Story at-a-glance

  • A new study is reporting that the cholesterol-lowering drugs known as statins may reduce flu deaths by half, but it did not compare statin drugs against a control group; it compared statin drugs to antiviral medications. What the study actually found was that, more than likely, antiviral drugs were killing people twice as quickly as the statins!
  • Both statins and antiviral flu drugs carry serious side effects and their effectiveness at fighting the flu is dubious at best; antiviral drugs, for instance, only shorten the duration of the flu by one or two days and have been linked to convulsions, delirium or delusions, and death.
  • Safe, effective and natural options, like optimizing your vitamin D levels and avoiding sugar, are readily available for both flu prevention and treatment.

By Dr. Mercola

A new study has led to what is perhaps the most ludicrous recommendation for flu treatment ever — statin drugs!

The researchers reported that statin use may reduce death risk in people hospitalized with the flu, and the media is reporting sensational headlines like “Statins reduce flu death risk by half.”

This is particularly outrageous, because the study was seriously flawed and designed to make statin drugs useful for another condition while they do nothing to address the underlying cause.

To validly determine if statin drugs are effective for flu they need to compare it to placebo, not a poison.

So what did they do?

They compared statin drugs to other toxic drugs, this time antiviral medications. So what the study actually found was that, more than likely, antiviral drugs were killing people twice as quickly as the statins!

What did the Study Really Show?

In the observational study published in The Journal of Infectious Disease, researchers examined data from 3,000 patients hospitalized with the flu, 33 percent of whom were given statins while the rest received antiviral drugs. The results showed that people who did not receive statins were twice as likely to die.

Another way of saying this, of course, is that people who received antiviral drugs were twice as likely to die as those given statins. And what this really means is that the antiviral medications were exceptionally harmful, not that statins were beneficial.

Still, it is not surprising that the drug’s manufacturer and the media are reporting favorable results for statin drugs, even though the researchers themselves pointed out the many limitations to their study, noting, for example:

” … it was difficult to ascertain the underlying functional health status of these patients, which may potentially confound the relationship between statins and severity of influenza.”

Further, one of the study’s authors has been a consultant to numerous drug companies, including Sanofi Pasteur, Novartis, Pfizer, Dynavax, and GlaxoSmithKline, whereas the study itself was funded by the Emerging Infections Program Cooperative Agreement of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which also has worrisome ties to the drug industry.

Statins are Not Wonder Drugs

The drug companies started pushing their statin drugs, which are ordinarily prescribed to lower cholesterol levels, for the flu back in 2009 during the swine flu scare, and they are working hard to get the accepted as “wonder drugs” for the treatment of everything from pneumonia to Alzheimer’s disease.

However, as Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a senior scientist at MIT, explains, statins are dangerous because they suppress the synthesis of a true biological wonder drug, namely cholesterol. And she believes it is actually cholesterol (in high amounts prior to patients’ starting statin therapy) that is responsible for many of the statins’ alleged benefits:

“Statin drugs are particularly problematic because they suppress the synthesis of a biological wonder drug, namely cholesterol. Repeatedly, retrospective studies have shown an alleged benefit for statins, which is actually a benefit derived from the many years of high cholesterol that preceded statin treatment. This game has been played out for sepsis, pneumonia, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, and Alzheimer’s, and these are just the ones I’m aware of. When the proper placebo-controlled study is done, the effect reverses — statins make the situation worse. But these negative results are kept well concealed from the public’s eyes. This is how the myth has been kept alive that statins, instead of cholesterol, are the wonder drug.”

There are, in fact, 304 adverse health effects that may be associated with statin drugs, and this may only be the tip of the iceberg.

The Truth About Antiviral Flu Drugs

Anti-viral flu drugs like Tamiflu and Relenza are conventional medicine’s go-to option for treating the flu, but you should know that they carry serious side effects — and may only shorten the time you are sick by one to two days. These drugs are part of a group of anti-influenza drugs called neuraminidase inhibitors, which work by blocking a viral enzyme that helps the influenza virus to invade cells in your respiratory tract.

The problem is that your nervous system also contains neuraminidase enzymes essential for proper brain functioning, and when blocked with these dangerous drugs, severe neurotoxicity may ensue (especially in the infants and children whose blood-brain barrier has not yet developed sufficiently).

Serious side effects include convulsions, delirium or delusions, suicidal behavior and 14 deaths in children and teens have been reported as a result of neuropsychiatric problems and brain infections. Japan actually banned Tamiflu for children in 2007 because of the steep risks.

It was also around this time that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began reviewing reports of abnormal behavior and other brain effects in more than 1,800 children who had taken Tamiflu. Further, the drug commonly causes a myriad of side effects that, ironically, resemble the flu symptoms the drug claims to treat. You can decide for yourself whether these risks are worth a measly one- or two-day reduction in your flu symptoms:

Nausea Vomiting
Diarrhea Headache
Dizziness Fatigue
Cough Behavioral side effects (such as reports of children jumping off roofs shortly after taking the drug)

Statin Study Highlights Flu Shot Ineffectiveness

Whenever I address the topic of influenza, I like to mention flu shots, simply because the propaganda supporting them is so widespread — and the truth deserves to be heard. Not only is there a shocking lack of evidence supporting the use of the flu vaccine, but a number of studies have actually confirmed the danger and ineffectiveness of the shots.

One major study determined that the best the flu vaccine could do during a season where, in the rare case, the vaccine actually matched the wild-type strains in circulation, was to reduce the risk of influenza infection by a paltry 1 percent relative to unvaccinated controls. This means that despite receiving the shot – riddled, as it is, with side effects such as the debilitating and potentially deadly nerve disease Guillain-Barre Syndrome — there is still an overwhelming likelihood that you will not be protected from the flu as a result of receiving the vaccine.

The reason for this has to do with how flu strains work. Along with the faulty science behind the creation of the vaccine, the act of determining which flu strains will affect your area is pretty much a guessing game. Mainstream medical officials urge you to receive the shot, but health officials are fully aware that it is truly impossible to know for sure which strain to vaccinate against.

With such a wide selection of strains (hundreds, if not thousands), it is very rare for officials to actually pick the correct strains – the best case scenario is that an appropriate match will occur 10 percent of the time, according to the study. Interestingly, as it was not the researchers’ intent, the statin-flu study also highlighted the striking lack of effectiveness of the flu vaccine in preventing flu deaths:

“Our finding that vaccine was not effective in preventing mortality from influenza is likely explained by the timing of our study. We evaluated the impact of statins on influenza mortality in 2007–2008, a year in which the vaccine was not well matched to the circulating viruses … In addition, vaccination status may not impact mortality in the event of vaccine failure regardless of match to circulating strains; 50% of our patients were over the age of 70, an age group in which influenza vaccine is known to be less effective.”

Why Doesn’t the CDC Fund a Study on Vitamin D for Flu Treatment?

Apparently the CDC would rather throw money at a potential cash cow for the drug makers than promote the real natural alternatives that can stop the flu in its tracks without any side effects. Where is the CDC-sponsored study on vitamin D and the flu, for instance?  According to the findings from a 2010 study that didn’t get any widespread attention, vitamin D is a highly effective way to avoid influenza.  In fact, children taking low doses of vitamin D3 were shown to be 42 percent less likely to come down with the flu.

Dr. John Cannell, founder of the Vitamin D Council, was one of the first to introduce the idea that vitamin D deficiency may actually be an underlying cause of influenza, which would help explain its apparent benefits as a flu-fighter. His hypothesis was published in the journal Epidemiology and Infection in 2006, which was followed up with another study published in the Virology Journal in 2008.

Dr. Cannell’s hypothesis received further support and confirmation when, in the following year, the largest and most nationally representative study of its kind to date discovered that people with the lowest blood vitamin D levels reported having significantly more recent colds or cases of the flu. You can find my full recommendations for how to optimize your vitamin D levels in this past article.

There are Effective Natural Options for Beating the Flu

I have not caught the flu in over two decades, and you can avoid it too, without using drugs or getting vaccinated. Following these guidelines will help to keep your immune system in optimal working order so that you’re far less likely to acquire the infection to begin with — and if you do, these strategies will help you to get better, faster.

  • Implement effective tools to address your stress. We all face some stress every day, but if stress becomes overwhelming then your body will be less able to fight off the flu and other illness.If you feel that stress is taking a toll on your health, consider using an effective energy psychology tool such as the Emotional Freedom Technique, which is remarkably effective in relieving stress associated with all kinds of events, from work to family to trauma.
  • Exercise. When you exercise, you increase your circulation and your blood flow throughout your body. The components of your immune system are also better circulated, which means your immune system has a better chance of finding an illness before it spreads. You can review my exercise guidelines for some great tips on how to get started.
  • Take a good source of animal-based omega-3 fats like krill oil. Increase your intake of healthy and essential fats like the omega-3 found in krill oil, which is crucial for maintaining health. It is also vitally important to avoid damaged omega-6 oils like trans fats found in most processed foods, as it will seriously damage your immune response.
  • Wash your hands. Washing your hands will decrease your likelihood of spreading a virus to your nose, mouth or other people. Be sure you don’t use antibacterial soap for this — antibacterial soaps are completely unnecessary, and they cause far more harm than good. Instead, identify a simple chemical-free soap that you can switch your family to.
  • Eat garlic regularly. Garlic works like a broad-spectrum antibiotic against bacteria, virus, and protozoa in your body. And unlike with antibiotics, no resistance can be built up so it is an absolutely safe product to use. However, if you are allergic or don’t enjoy garlic it would be best to avoid as it will likely cause more harm than good.
  • Avoid hospitals whenever possible. I’d recommend you stay away from hospitals unless you have an emergency, as hospitals are prime breeding grounds for infections of all kinds, and could be one of the likeliest places you could be exposed to flu bugs.

For even more details on specific immune-boosting foods and supplements that can help boost your immune function to help you kick your cold or flu faster, without drugs, please see my article The First Thing to do When a Cold or Flu Strikes.

900 Studies Show Statin Drugs are Dangerous

Read the original article here

A new paper cites nearly 900 studies on the adverse effects of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, also called statins, which are a class of drugs widely used to treat high cholesterol. The review provides the most complete picture to date of reported side effects of statins.

Muscle problems are the best known of statin drugs’ adverse side effects, but cognitive problems and pain or numbness in the extremities are also widely reported. A spectrum of other problems, ranging from blood glucose elevations to tendon problems, can also occur as side effects.

The paper summarizes powerful evidence that statin-induced injury to the function of the body’s energy-producing cells, called mitochondria, underlies many of the adverse effects that occur to patients taking statin drugs. Statins lower levels of coenzyme Q10, a compound central to the processes of making energy within mitochondria and eliminating dangerous compounds called free radicals.

Higher statin doses and more powerful statins are linked to greater risk of developing side effects.

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

Statins, which are a class of drugs used to lower your cholesterol, are among the most commonly prescribed medications in the world, and I believe, one of the most unnecessary drugs there are.

Use of statins rose by a whopping 156 percent between 2000 and 2005, rising from 15.8 million people to 29.7 million people. Spending on these drugs jumped from $7.7 billion to $19.7 billion annually over the same period. This is a travesty in light of the overwhelming evidence – nearly 900 studies compiled in the review listed above — showing the damage statins inflict.

The Dangerous Side Effects of Cholesterol-Lowering Drugs

Statin drugs are some of the most unnecessary drugs on the market today.

Why?

Because their use is based on a misinformed notion that cholesterol is the nemesis of good health in the first place. I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: Cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease.

Making matters worse, statins are also some of the most dangerous and are fraught with side effects.

Confusing matters, however, is the fact that statin drugs oftentimes do not have any immediate side effects, and they are quite effective, capable of lowering cholesterol levels by 50 points or more. This makes it appear as though they’re benefiting your health, and health problems that appear down the line are frequently not interpreted as a side effect of the drug, but rather as brand new, separate health problems.

But there’s an ever-growing body of evidence showing that potentially serious side effects begin to manifest several months after the commencement of therapy.

For starters, some of the possible consequences of taking statins in strong doses, or for a lengthy period of time, include:

  • Cognitive loss
  • Neuropathy
  • Anemia
  • Acidosis
  • Frequent fevers
  • Cataracts
  • Sexual dysfunction

Other serious and potentially life threatening side effects include, but are not limited to:

  • An increase in cancer risk
  • Immune system suppression
  • Serious degenerative muscle tissue condition (rhabdomyolysis)
  • Pancreatic dysfunction
  • Hepatic dysfunction. (Due to the potential increase in liver enzymes, patients must be monitored for normal liver function)

According to the latest review published in the American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs, adverse effects are dose dependent, and your health risks are also amplified by a number of factors, such as:

How Statin Drugs Destroy Your Muscles

The most common side effect is muscle pain and weakness, a condition called rhabdomyolysis. Unfortunately, many older adults are likely unable to distinguish between muscle pain related to a statin effect versus an effect of aging, and therefore adverse effects of statins in older adults may be grossly under-reported.

Researchers have now discovered that there is more than one way this condition can arise as a result of taking statins, including:

  • Depleting your body of Co-Q10, a nutrient that supports muscle function. In my view it is medical malpractice to prescribe a statin drug without recommending one take CoQ10, or better yet ubiquinol.
  • Altering the ability of skeletal muscle to repair and regenerate due to the anti-proliferative effects of statins. In one recent study, the viability of proliferating cells was reduced by 50 percent at a dose equivalent to 40 milligrams of Simvastatin – the dose per day used in some patients. This could clearly have a negative effect on your skeletal muscles’ ability to heal and repair themselves, and could lead to eventually becoming more or less incapacitated.

The breakdown of skeletal muscle tissue can in turn also lead to kidney failure.

The industry insists that only 2-3 percent of patients get muscle aches and cramps but according to one study, 98 percent of patients taking Lipitor and one-third of the patients taking Mevacor (a lower-dose statin) suffered from muscle problems!

Adding insult to injury, active people are actually more likely to develop problems from statin use than those who are sedentary. In a study carried out in Austria, only six out of 22 athletes with familial hypercholesterolemia were able to endure statin treatment. The others discontinued treatment because of muscle pain.

The Importance of CoQ10 

There are no official warnings in the U.S. regarding CoQ10 depletion from taking statin drugs, and many physicians fail to inform you about this problem as well. Labeling in Canada, however, clearly warns of CoQ10 depletion and even notes that this nutrient deficiency “could lead to impaired cardiac function in patients with borderline congestive heart failure.”

Coenzyme Q10 is an antioxidant compound that is central to the process of energy production within your mitochondria, and in the quenching of free radicals.

Statins have been found to impair mitochondrial function, which leads to increased production of free radicals.

At the same time, statins also lower your CoQ10 levels by blocking the pathway involved in cholesterol production – the same pathway by which Q10 is produced. Statins also reduce the blood cholesterol that transports CoQ10 and other fat-soluble antioxidants.

The loss of CoQ10 leads to loss of cell energy and increased free radicals which, in turn, can further damage your mitochondrial DNA, effectively setting into motion an evil circle of increasing free radicals and mitochondrial damage.

This explains why statins are particularly dangerous if you have existing mitochondrial damage, as your body relies on ample CoQ10 to bypass this damage.

High blood pressure and diabetes are linked to higher rates of mitochondrial problems, so if you have either of these conditions your risk of statin complications increases, according to the authors of this latest review.

Additionally, since statins can cause progressive damage to your mitochondria over time, and your mitochondria tend to weaken with age anyway, new adverse effects can develop the longer you’re on the drug.

Said co-author Beatrice Golomb, MD, PhD:

“The risk of adverse effects goes up as age goes up, and this helps explain why.  This also helps explain why statins’ benefits have not been found to exceed their risks in those over 70 or 75 years old, even those with heart disease.”

How to Lower Your Cholesterol Naturally

There’s really no reason to take statins and suffer the consequences from these ill-conceived drugs. These simple guidelines have the power to lower your cholesterol naturally, without any dangerous side effects:

If you truly want to normalize your cholesterol levels, following these simple lifestyle changes can get you there:

Drinking This “Popular Poison” is Worse than Smoking

Read the original article here

Posted By Dr. Mercola | November 21 2011 | 59,282 views

Story at-a-glance

  • The soda industry engages in many of the same marketing tactics as Big Tobacco, including forming “independent” front groups, funding research to discredit links to health problems, and making large donations to health organizations
  • Soda is linked to numerous health problems among children and adults, including obesity, liver disease and even violent behavior; frequent soft drink consumption is associated with a 9-15% increase in aggressive behavior, according to new research
  • Processed foods and junk foods are heavily marketed to kids and promoted to schools; manufacturers of sugar-laden processed foods pay “rebates” (aka “kickbacks”) to food service companies that serve school districts across the United States
  • You can fight back against soda and junk-food giants by purchasing healthy, locally grown organic foods instead of processed foods and beverages

By Dr. Mercola

“Soda, which is loaded with sugar primarily in the form of high fructose corn syrup, is a leading contributor to the rising rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease and other chronic diseases facing Americans.

So when I say that drinking a can of soda is just as bad for you as smoking a cigarette (and maybe even worse) it is not an exaggeration.

Drinking soda is in many ways worse for you than smoking, and it is only because of massive marketing campaigns from the industry that these sugary beverages are deemed acceptable for our most vulnerable members of society – our kids.

In the 21st century there would indeed be an uproar if tobacco companies attempted to target our kids, but the soda companies do it everyday.

It’s time to wake up and face the facts: the soda industry is out for your children, and the message they send is every bit as damaging (and manipulative) as the one spewed by Big Tobacco.”

Striking Similarities Between the Soda Industry and Big Tobacco

“If I asked you to quickly recall a commercial or slogan from leading soda companies, like Coca-Cola or Pepsi, could you do it?

Chances are you’d have no trouble recalling the friendly polar bear commercials or “the real thing” logo, and if you asked your kids, they’d probably come up with a few too.

This is just the tip of the iceberg for how beverage big-wigs have gotten their products firmly embedded into the homes of millions of Americans and others worldwide. Coca-Cola, for instance, spends close to $3 billion a year on advertising. With that amount of money it’s no wonder the company has managed to hold on to its wholesome reputation.

They, and other beverage giants, are also in the habit of forming strategic alliances with health organizations that make it appear as though they are looking out for your health, which is about as laughable as Big Tobacco sponsoring a marathon. And like Big Tobacco, they also create front groups to fight anti-soda legislation and science.”

For instance, as Time magazine reported:

  • The American Beverage Association, which represents Coca-Cola, Pepsi and other soft drink producers, has attacked suggestions to tax soda as “discriminatory.” Their organization is touted as a “neutral forum,” but in reality is devoted to discrediting negative press against soft drinks. For instance, in relation to obesity, ABA states, “All of our industry’s beverages can be enjoyed as part of a balanced lifestyle.”
  • The soda industry has created the front group Americans Against Food Taxes, which runs anti-tax campaigns. As Kelly Brownell wrote in Time:
    “The name of the group implies a patriotic, grass roots movement, not a highly financed entity initiated and organized by industry.”
  • Another industry-created front group, Foundation for a Healthy America, recently donated $10 million to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia to research and prevent childhood obesity! Diet Coke has also teamed up with the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) to raise awareness for women’s heart health programs and was the official “Beverage of Choice” for the 2010 winter Olympics.
  • The soda industry funds research to discredit links between soda drinking and health problems. Brownwell writes:
    “The tobacco industry paid scientists who did research disputing links between smoking and lung cancer, the addictive nature of nicotine, and the dangers of second-hand smoke. The soda industry funds scientists who reliably produce research showing no link between SSB [sugar-sweetened beverage] consumption and health. The tobacco industry bought favor from community and national organizations by giving large donations. In an ironic twist, Coca Cola and PepsiCo are corporate sponsors of the American Dietetic Association.”

The Coca-Cola Company Beverage Institute for Health and Wellness (isn’t that name an oxymoron?) even creates continuing education courses for registered dietitians!

The Top Reason to Give Soda the Boot …

“Some of you reading this are undoubtedly thinking, how bad could soda really be? From my perspective, there is absolutely NO REASON you or your kids should ever drink soda. If you were stranded in the middle of a desert with no other fluid available, then maybe, but other than that … none, nada, zip, zero. No excuses.

From a health perspective, drinking Coke or any soft drink is a disaster. Just one extra can of soda per day can add as much as 15 pounds to your weight over the course of a single year, not to mention increase your risk of diabetes by 85 percent. The primary reason why soda is so dangerous to your health?

Fructose.

The fructose content of the high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) used in many popular soda brands has been sorely underestimated. Around 100 years ago the average American consumed a mere 15 grams of fructose a day, primarily in the form of fruit. One hundred years later, one fourth of Americans are consuming more than 135 grams per day, largely in the form of soda.

Fructose at 15 grams a day is harmless (unless you suffer from high uric acid levels). However, at nearly 10 times that amount it becomes a major cause of obesity and nearly all chronic degenerative diseases. Instead of consisting of 55 percent fructose and 45 percent glucose, many soda brands, including Coke, Pepsi and Sprite, contain as much as 65 percent fructose, nearly 20 percent higher than originally believed.

According to one study, the mean fructose content of all 23 sodas tested was 59 percent — higher than claimed by the industry. When you consider that Americans drink an average of 53 to 57 gallons of soda per year (depending on the source of your statistics), this difference in actual fructose content could make a huge difference in your health.

The Down and Dirty About Fructose

The American Beverage Association and other front groups will try to persuade you that fructose in high fructose corn syrup is no worse for you than sugar, but this is not true. ABA also claims there is “no association between high fructose corn syrup and obesity,” but a long lineup of scientific studies suggest otherwise.

For example:

  • Dr. David Ludwig of Boston Children’s Hospital did a study of the effects of sugar-sweetened drinks on obesity in children. He found that for each additional serving of a sugar-sweetened drink, both body mass index and odds of obesity increased.
  • The Fizzy Drink Study in Christchurch, England explored the effects on obesity when soda machines were removed from schools for one year. In the schools where the machines were removed, obesity stayed constant. In the schools where soda machines remained, obesity rates continued to rise.
  • In a 2009 study, 16 volunteers were fed a controlled diet including high levels of fructose. Ten weeks later, the volunteers had produced new fat cells around their hearts, livers and other digestive organs. They also showed signs of food-processing abnormalities linked to diabetes and heart disease. A second group of volunteers who were fed a similar diet, but with glucose replacing fructose, did not have these problems.

Fructose is also a likely culprit behind the millions of U.S. children struggling with non-alcoholic liver disease, which is caused by a build-up of fat within liver cells. Fructose is very hard on your liver, in much the same way as drinking alcohol.

  • Liver burden number one: After eating fructose, 100 percent of the metabolic burden rests on your liver—ONLY your liver can break it down. This is much different than consuming glucose, in which your liver has to break down only 20 percent, and the remaining 80 percent is immediately metabolized and used by the rest of the cells in your body.
  • Liver burden number two: Fructose is converted into fat that gets stored in your liver and other tissues as body fat. Part of what makes fructose so bad for your health is that it is metabolized to fat in your body far more rapidly than any other sugar. For example, if you eat 120 calories of fructose, 40 calories are stored as fat. But if you eat the same amount of glucose, less than one calorie gets stored as fat. Consuming fructose is essentially consuming fat!

Fructose metabolism is very similar to the way alcohol is metabolized, which has a multitude of toxic metabolites that, if consumed in excess, can lead to non-alcoholic liver disease. For a complete discussion of fructose metabolism, see my comprehensive article about this.

Diet Soda is NOT a Safe Alternative to Regular Soda

If you think you’re better off drinking diet soda, think again. In fact, if I had to choose between the two, I’d take regular soda over diet. Instead of fructose, diet soda contains artificial sweeteners, such as aspartame or sucralose (Splenda). With all the research now available on aspartame and its various ingredients, it’s hard to believe such a chemical would even be allowed into the food supply, but it is, and it’s been silently wreaking havoc with people’s health for the past 30 years.

Just to refresh your memory, aspartame has been linked to the following health concerns, and Splenda is associated with many similar problems:

Lymphomas, leukemias, and brain cancer Asthma
Neurological symptoms including headaches, depressed and anxious mood, seizures, memory loss, hallucinations, and dizziness Visual changes
Weakness and fatigue Joint pain
Sleep disorders Weight gain and diabetes
Abdominal cramps, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea Rashes and hives

Does Soda Actually Cause Violence?

It’s a well-known fact that poor diet, particularly one high in sugar, exacts a toll on your emotional health.

For example, one recent study published in the journal Psychology Today found a strong link between high sugar consumption and the risk of both depression and schizophrenia. It’s also a well-known fact that chronic inflammation plays a major role in heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, and cancer. So consuming excessive amounts of sugary beverages can truly set off an avalanche of negative health events — both mental and physical.

A diet high in sugar, fructose and sweetened beverages like soda also causes excessive insulin release, which can lead to falling blood sugar levels, or hypoglycemia. Hypoglycemia, in turn, causes your brain to secrete glutamate in levels that can cause agitation, depression, anger, anxiety and panic attacks.

One 1985 study published in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology found that reducing sugar intake had a positive impact on emotions. And another, the Los Angeles Probation Department Diet-Behavior Program: An Empirical Analysis of Six Institutional Settings, published in 1983, documented the results when juvenile delinquents were given a reduced-sugar diet. They saw a 44 percent reduction in the incidence of antisocial behavior during the subsequent 3 months, after the implementation of the revised diet.

So can drinking soda affect your child’s behavior?

Yes, it can.

A new study further supported this point, and revealed that frequent soft drink consumption was associated with a 9-15% point increase in the probability of engaging in aggressive actions, even after controlling for gender, age, race, body mass index, typical sleep patterns, tobacco use, alcohol use and having family dinners.

Researchers concluded:

“There was a significant and strong association between soft drinks and violence. There may be a direct cause-and-effect relationship, perhaps due to the sugar or caffeine content of soft drinks, or there may be other factors, unaccounted for in our analyses, that cause both high soft drink consumption and aggression.”

The effect is not a new finding, as in 1979 the now notorious “Twinkie Defense” was used in a murder trial for the first time.

As Discovery News reported:

“In a notorious 1979 San Francisco murder trial, lawyers blamed the killer’s actions on his recent switch from a health-food diet to one filled with Coca-Cola and other junk food. Their argument worked. Instead of a homicide ruling, the defendant was convicted of a lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter. The legal strategy became known as the “Twinkie Defense,” and the precedent raised a number of questions that persist, despite years of research on the subject.”

Processed Food “Rebates” Dominate School Cafeterias

Soda manufacturers are not the only ones scheming for a permanent share of your child’s diet. In an article published on La Vida Locavore, Ed Bruske revealed, possibly for the first time, that manufacturers of sugar-laden processed foods pay “rebates” (aka “kickbacks”) to food service companies that serve school districts across the United States.

Bruske obtained documents under the Freedom of Information Act that revealed more than 100 companies paid rebates to Chartwells, a food service management company hired by D.C. Public Schools. As you might suspect, the “rebates” present a conflict of interest that could prompt Chartwells to order food for your children based on the amount of rebate it will receive, versus the food’s nutritional value.

The end result?

School lunches that contain heavily processed foods like muffins, pizza, tator tots and flavored milk in lieu of fresh produce.

According to Bruske:

“Manufacturers pay rebates based on large volume purchases — literally, cash for placing an order. Rebates are said to be worth billions of dollars to the nation’s food industry, although manufacturers as well as the food service companies who feed millions of the nation’s school children every day — Chartwells, Sodexo and Aramark — treat them as a closely-guarded secret.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture requires that food service companies engaged in “cost reimbursable” contracts with schools credit any rebates they receive to their school clients. For more than a year, attorneys for D.C. Public Schools refused to make public an itemized list of rebates collected by Chartwells, claiming the information constituted “trade secrets.” The schools were overruled by Mayor Vincent Gray’s legal counsel after I filed an administrative appeal.

John Carroll, an assistant New York State attorney general investigating rebating practices there, has said rebates pose “an inherent conflict of interest” in school feeding programs because they favor highly processed industrial foods. In cases where schools pay a food service company a flat rate to provide meals, the companies are not required to disclose the rebates they collect. In those cases, Carroll recently told a U.S. Senate Panel, rebates tend to drive up the cost of food, cheating children out of nutrition they might otherwise have on their lunch trays.

Carroll also described cases where rebates discouraged the use of local farm products in school meals. Produce vendors can’t afford to pay a rebate for local apples. But in at least one case, a produce distributor raised the prices of his goods so that he could pay a rebate to a food service company. A Homeland Security sub-committee in the U.S. Senate is investigating possible rebate fraud in contracts across the entire federal government.”

The top contributors to Chatwells’ rebate dollars included Performance Food Group, which paid more than $400,000 over the last three years, followed by General Mills, Kraft Foods, Country Pure Foods and Jenny-O Turkey. Other companies who made the list include:

ConAgra Otis Spunkmeyer Kellog’s
Coca-Cola, Dr. Pepper, 7-Up FritoLay Tyson
Nestle Cargill Meat Solutions Campbell’s Foodservice

Raising a Life-Long Healthy Eater

Food and beverage companies spend $2 billion a year promoting unhealthy foods to kids, and while ultimately it’s the parents’ responsibility to feed their children healthy foods, junk food ads make this much more difficult than it should be. As a result, the state of most kids’ diets in the United States is not easy to swallow.

As The Interagency Working Group on Foods Marketed to Children (IWG) reported:

  • Nearly 40% of children’s diets come from added sugars and unhealthy fats
  • Only 21% of youth age 6-19 eat the recommended five or more servings of fruits and vegetables each day

This is a veritable recipe for disease, and is a primary reason why today’s kids are arguably less healthy than many prior generations. Obesity, type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure — these are diseases that once appeared only in middle-age and beyond, but are now impacting children. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that by 2050, one in three U.S. adults will have diabetes — one of them could be your child if you do not take steps to cancel out the messages junk-food marketers are sending and instead teach them healthy eating habits.

Make no mistake, the advertisers are doing all they can to lure your child in, just as Big Tobacco did generations ago.

So you need to first educate yourself about proper nutrition and the dangers of junk food and processed foods in order to change the food culture of your entire family. To give your child the best start at life, and help instill healthy habits that will last a lifetime, you must lead by example. Children will simply not know which foods are healthy unless you, as a parent, teach it to them first.

My nutrition plan offers a step-by-step guide to feed your family right, and I encourage you to read through it now to learn how to make healthy eating decisions for you and your children.

If you want to get involved on a larger scale, the Prevention Institute’s “We’re Not Buying It” campaign is petitioning President Obama to put voluntary, science-based nutrition guidelines into place for companies that market foods to kids. You can sign this petition now. I also urge you to go a step further and stop supporting the companies that are marketing junk foods and beverages to your children today.

Ideally, you and your family will want to vote with your pocketbook and avoid processed food and sugary sodas while instead choosing unprocessed raw, organic and/or locally grown foods as much as possible. These are the foods your child will thrive on, and it’s important they learn what real, healthy food is right from the get-go.

This way, when they become tweens and teenagers, they may eat junk food here and there at a friend’s house, but they will return to real food as the foundation of their diet — and that habit will continue on with them for a lifetime.

Health Benefits Of Cilantro, One of Nature’s Top Antioxidant Foods

Read the original article here

Posted on ‘Antioxidants for Health and Longevity, Anti-Aging Nutrition and Disease Prevention’, by Stan.  Check out his amazing website by clicking on this link.

The health benefits of cilantro come from beneficial phytonutrients and antioxidants, especially the flavonoid quercetin. Cilantro is also a good source of dietary fiber and iron, magnesium and manganese.

It’s a little-known fact that herbs (and spices) such as cilantro have far greater concentrations of antioxidants than any common fruit or vegetable. Herbs also contain a particularly wide variety of antioxidants as well, which makes them more effective at fighting many different kinds of free radicals. Getting the widest variety of antioxidants is just as important as how much of any one antioxidant you get. Many herbs have also been used for medicinal purposes, further demonstrating their health benefits.

Antioxidants are nutrient compounds found in virtually all plant foods (and also manufactured in your body). The primary job of antioxidants is to protect your cells against the oxidative stress caused by free radicals, considered to be the primary cause of the aging process.

Protecting yourself against free radicals with antioxidants is the most effective way to reduce the risk of many health problems associated with aging. The benefits of antioxidants include powerful protection against all types of degenerative diseases such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, macular degeneration, Alzheimer’s disease, and many more.

Specific Health Benefits of Cilantro

Cilantro contains an antibacterial compound, dodecenal, that has shown to be a safe, natural means of fighting salmonella, a frequent and sometimes deadly cause of foodborne illness.

Cilantro oil (derived from cilantro) has been found to assist the digestive system in the production of digestive enzymes.

Cilantro contains good quantities of an alcohol known as borneol that is capable of destroying viruses and germs that cause colds.

Cilantro is a natural anti-inflammatory and helps to alleviate the symptoms of arthritis.

Regular intake of cilantro helps to reduce bad cholesterol (LDL) and increases good cholesterol (HDL).

The benefits of cilantro may include an ability to help control blood sugar and fight inflammation. The antioxidants found in cilantro help reduce free radical damage from exposure to sunlight. Research shows that daily use of cilantro helps in preventing skin cancer.

Detoxing is One of the Primary Health Benefits Of Cilantro

Cilantro is being used for metal detoxification in combination with chlorella, a green algae superfood, and garlic extracts.

Cilantro has been found to chelate (remove) heavy metals like mercury, aluminum, and lead from the body. Cilantro has been specifically used to remove heavy metals that are in the brain and spinal cord.

Chlorella and liquid garlic extract bind with the mercury and remove it and other toxic heavy metals and carry them out of your body through your elimination systems. Studies done in many different countries prove that chlorella and aged garlic extract are effective for mercury detox and heavy metal poisoning detoxification. They also detoxify a variety of other toxic contaminates as well.

How to Get the Health Benefits of Cilantro Every Day

The benefits of cilantro are so numerous, ideally you’d want to have some every day. However, as with any herb or spice, you may find it impractical to include cilantro in your meal plans that often. There’s an easy way to accomplish this — by making yourself a smoothie every day and adding some cilantro to your recipe.

Fresh smoothies make for some of the most nutritious, delicious and easy-to-make meals you could imagine. They’re a great way to get more of those “good for you” antioxidant-rich foods (that you may not get enough of) into your diet.

I like to use small amounts of cilantro, parsley and basil in my green smoothie recipes to help give them more of the benefits of dark green leafy vegetables. Because they’re so concentrated with antioxidants, you can use a much smaller amount than you would with other greens like kale or spinach, and they won’t overwhelm the flavor of your smoothie recipe.

I don’t stop there, either. I like to use other spices such as cinnamon, cloves, ginger, turmeric and others in my smoothie recipes, mostly for their added antioxidant benefits. Once they’re blended in with all the other ingredients, you can’t really distinguish any one particular taste. You just need to experiment a little to get the flavor just right for you.

To learn more about the art of making smoothies, skip on over to my page on How to Make a Smoothie the Healthy Way and learn all my tricks for making delicious and nutritious smoothies!

To learn more about cilantro and ways to use it, check out The World’s Healthiest Foods/Cilantro

Related Article: Time To Celebrate Cilantro

New Proof that This Common Medical Treatment is Unnecessary and Ineffective

Posted By Dr. Mercola | November 01 2010 | 252,823 views

Read the original article here

By Dr. Mercola
doctor preparing for vaccination

The 2010-2011 flu season is here. With it comes a mixture of good news and bad, but if you and I together spread facts instead of fear, we can once again tip the balance toward health in the US—and worldwide.

Last year, the swine flu “pandemic“—warned to be catastrophic—was actually much milder than health officials warned.

Last year’s flu mortality estimates turned out to be only one-third that of an average year, in spite of the emergence of the new human-bird-pig influenza virus you have come to know as swine flu.

Imagine that. The sky didn’t fall after all.

Last year the United States contracted for the manufacture of more than 170 million doses of swine flu vaccine. Probably the most significant accomplishment of this website was that we were able to contribute to the fact that only 90 million doses were used in the United States.

Armed with the facts, less than one-third of the US population fell for fear mongering. And together, we can do it again.But we have some high hurdles ahead.Flu Shots for All (Science Optional)For the past several years, physicians in America have been insisting that every child age 6 months to 18 years must get an annual flu shot. Making matters worse, health officials have now ramped up those recommendations, telling EVERY person over the age of 6 months get a flu shot, healthy or not, low risk or high.Everyone. Three hundred million of you, every year from the year you are born until the year you die.What will receiving lifelong flu shots every year do to your immune system?With all of those vaccinations, will you be more susceptible to influenza-related complications and death?We really don’t know.Health officials have leapt ahead with recommendations of “flu shots for allwithout safety studies—so by getting a flu shot, you are effectively offering yourself up as a laboratory rat. In other words, YOU are the safety study!No Mystery — These Flu Vaccine Side Effects WILL Occur in the USIt isn’t just an ordinary flu vaccine they are promoting this year—it’s the new trivalent vaccine, which may be even more reactive than the monovalent. This vaccine is a three-in-one, containing influenza A, influenza B, and 2009 pandemic swine flu (H1N1) strains.

Administering this highly suspect formulation to 300 million people has potentially disastrous implications. Red flags were already popping up last year, and this flu season has raised many more.

Australia’s flu season precedes ours, so we can look to them for a preview of vaccine issues. By June of 2010, more than 1,000 adverse reactions in children under the age of 5 resulted in the Australian government’s banning of flu vaccines for that age group. High fevers, vomiting and convulsions were the most widely reported reactions, which are also associated with long-term adverse health outcomes.

CSL’s Fluvax appears to be the main troublemaker. However, CSL has objected to being singled out, claiming any of the other three vaccines on the Australian market could be to blame.

Just like last year where the experience in Australia with the swine flu was replicated precisely in the US, you will see the same happen this fall, winter and spring in the US. This is entirely predictable as is the lack of media coverage that this will receive.

Interestingly, the Sydney Morning Herald recently reported that Australian “public health experts have called for an independent body to monitor drug safety after it emerged that young children were more likely to end up in hospitals because of side effects from a flu vaccine than they were from the disease itself. The analysis contradicts government safety advice that the harm did not outweigh the risk and raises concerns about the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s assessment of the vaccine.”

Mark my words, the US will have the identical experience, and nine months from now you will see in the newspapers that children given the flu vaccine were more likely to wind up hospitalized than from those that actually got the disease.

These drug manufacturers have a horribly unethical track record with disturbing manufacturing errors. Many of the drugs remain indemnified from damage.

H1N1 Vaccine Continues To Provoke Reports of Serious Side EffectsIn the meantime, the 2009 pandemic H1N1 “swine flu” vaccine that has been put into this year’s trivalent seasonal flu vaccine continues to be associated with lots of reports of devastating reactions:

  • In Finland, France and Sweden, narcolepsy was reported in teenage children in response to Pandemrix monovalent swine flu vaccine, leading the Finnish government to suspend its use.
  • In Korea, nearly 2,600 swine flu vaccine side effects were reported as of August 2010, ranging from allergic reactions to fevers to headaches—and including 10 deaths.

Children are not the only ones who seem to react more violently to the 2009 pandemic H1N1 component.

According to Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), a special government committee has been created to investigate last year’s H1N1 monovalent vaccine for signs it may be associated with more adverse reactions. What the committee found out provisionally is there were three signs of trouble with the H1N1 swine flu vaccine used last year.

Fisher outlined these three primary health concerns in a recent NVIC video update:

  1. Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), an autoimmune disease which has been associated with influenza vaccine since 1976, when the swine flu vaccine was first used. In fact, British government health experts acknowledged the link between the H1N1 vaccine and an increased risk of GBS earlier this month. Prior to this public admittance, the government had always denied such a link
  2. Idiopathic thrombocytopenia purpura (ITP), an autoimmune disorder, is a blood clotting disorder characterized by insufficient platelets
  3. Bell’s palsy, a reaction causing temporary facial paralysis

Why are people having these worrisome reactions?

Vaccines Wreak Havoc With Your Immune SystemAll vaccines are immune suppressive—that is, they suppress your immune system, which may not return to normal for weeks to months. Here are just some of the ways vaccines impair and alter your immune response:

  • Some components in vaccines are neurotoxic and may depress your immune and brain function, particularly heavy metals such as mercury preservatives and aluminum adjuvants
  • The lab altered vaccine viruses themselves may further impair your immune response
  • Foreign DNA/RNA from animal tissues can wreak havoc in your body and trigger autoimmunity in some people
  • Vaccines may alter your t-cell function and lead you to become chronically ill
  • Vaccines can trigger allergies by introducing large foreign protein molecules into your body that have not been properly broken down by your digestive tract (since they are injected). Your body can respond to these foreign particles in the form of an allergic reaction

The flu vaccine may also pose an immediate risk to your cardiovascular system. One 2007 study published in the Annals of Medicine concluded that:

Abnormalities in arterial function and LDL oxidation may persist for at least 2 weeks after a slight inflammatory reaction induced by influenza vaccination.

These could explain in part the earlier reported increase in cardiovascular risk during the first weeks after an acute inflammatory disorder.

Add to all those factors the immune-compromising effects of excess sugar in the average American diet, plus inadequate exercise and other lifestyle factors, and you’ve created the perfect setup for health problems far worse than influenza..

So the tradeoff you are making is TOTAL immune system depression (your defense against millions of pathogens) for temporary immunity against ONE infectious disease—in this case a few of the many viral strains of influenza—and that immunity is questionable.

Do you really want to trade in temporary immunity to a few strains of influenza for autoimmune disease or even cancer?

A Special Warning to Seniors!For seniors, this season’s flu vaccine may be one of the most dangerous you’ve ever experienced, because seniors will likely get a vaccine that is FOUR TIMES as potent as that given to the rest of the population, as recently reported by the Chicago Tribune.

In the ACIP Provisional Recommendations for the Use of Influenza Vaccines, dated February 24, it states:

“A higher dose formulation of an inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine (Fluzone High-Dose, manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur, licensed by FDA on December 23, 2009) for use in people age 65 years and older will be available in the 2010-11 influenza season.

“Fluzone High-Dose contains four times the amount of influenza antigen compared to other inactivated seasonal influenza vaccines. …

Studies are underway to assess the relative effectiveness of Fluzone High-Dose compared to standard dose inactivated influenza vaccine, but results from those studies will not be available before the 2010-11 influenza season.” [Emphasis mine.]

So, if you’re age 65 or older, the CDC wants you to take a flu vaccine this fall that not only contains an antigen they previously said you probably already have antibodies to (H1N1), but that is also four times as potent, with no safety evaluation whatsoever until AFTER the season is underway!

This is madness. Seniors are already a group that can withstand the harmful effects of this vaccine the least…

Again, the CDC is asking you to be a part of a large public health experiment, which is why we’re warning you.

Is the Vaccine Safe for Pregnant Women? Nobody Knows!If you are a pregnant woman, you and your unborn child may be the most defenseless of all potential vaccine casualties in the national infuenza vaccine experiment.

Barbara Loe Fisher states she is very concerned about the issue of pregnant women getting flu shots because of the lack of scientific data about the effects of this vaccine—particularly the H1N1 component—on pregnant women and their unborn babies.

She states:

“Last summer the NIH announced they were doing studies in children, adults and pregnant women with the H1N1 swine flu vaccine. About 120 pregnant women were supposed to be enrolled in a study in early September… We have yet to see any announcement of the results of those studies.”

And without any scientific evidence about safety, are you supposed to blindly accept that flu vaccines are safe for you and your unborn child?

Here’s another startling fact making this year’s vaccination policy even more unconscionable.

Flu vaccine has now been officially listed as a Category C drug.

What does this mean exactly?

Category C is for drugs that do not have enough human or animal studies to establish safety, OR adverse fetal effects have been seen in animal studies but there is little  human data.

According to FDA:

“Category C drugs are drugs that are more likely to cause problems for the mother or fetus. Also includes drugs for which safety studies have not been finished. The majority of these drugs do not have safety studies in progress. These drugs often come with a warning that they should be used only if the benefits of taking them outweigh the risks.

If you are a pregnant woman, your doctor may be pressuring you to get a drug that is not approved for you! This is just idiotic.

Thimerasol-containing vaccines are considered hazardous waste and can’t be thrown into a garbage can, poured down a sink or flushed down a toilet because of the mercury—they’re considered environmentally toxic. Yet, they want to inject them into your baby?

Why would anyone, pregnant or otherwise, want to be injected with a substance that is too toxic to dispose of down a drain?

Evidence-Based Medicine Flushed Down the Drain: FLU SHOTS DON’T WORKNot only do flu shots weaken your immune system, expose you to toxins, and cause allergies and other adverse reactions, they don’t work.

Yes, you read that correctly. Besides being fraught with complications, flu vaccines simply don’t work to decrease flu incidence or flu mortality. Flu vaccinations keep coming up short in study after study—way short—when it comes to having any measurable impact on what matters most, which is reducing illness and mortality from the flu.

After the largest flu-vaccination campaign in Canadian history, a Canadian-led study (through the Cochrane Collaboration, a highly respected international network of researchers who analyze the scientific evidence, including the methodology, used in clinical trials) concluded that vaccinating nursing home workers had no effect on confirmed influenza cases among the homes’ elderly residents.

Lead researcher Dr. Roger Thomas explained:

“What troubled us is that [shots] had no effect on laboratory-confirmed influenza. What we were looking for is proof that influenza … is decreased.

 Didn’t find it.

We looked for proof that pneumonia is reduced. Didn’t find it. We looked for proof deaths from pneumonia are reduced.

Didn’t find it.”

In fact, in April of 2010, Michael Osterholm, director of the national Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP), publicly admitted that flu shots don’t work in the elderly.

One factor that may explain this is the “healthy user” effect.

Lisa Jackson’s “Healthy User” EffectLisa Jackson, a physician and senior investigator with the Group Health Research Center in Seattle, found that healthy people tend to choose flu vaccination, while the “frail elderly” didn’t or couldn’t. Her research suggested that flu vaccine itself does not reduce mortality at all.

Healthy (and health-conscious) people tend to get the vaccine AND come down with flu less often, not because of the vaccine itself but because they are healthier to start with.

Jackson concluded:

“The reductions in risk before influenza season indicate preferential receipt of vaccine by relatively healthy seniors… the magnitude of the bias demonstrated by the associations before the influenza season was sufficient to account entirely for the associations observed during influenza season.”

Unfortunately, Jackson’s papers were turned down for publication in the leading medical journals.

If You Think You Have the Flu, the Odds are Five to One You Don’tYou may not be aware that only about 20 percent of flu-like illnesses are actually caused by influenza type A or B, according to CDC. The other 80 percent are caused by more than 200 other bugs that can make you feel just as sick – respiratory syncytial virus, bocavirus, coronavirus, and rhinovirus, to name a few.

Every day you’re around viruses and bacteria, and when you’re healthy, you usually don’t get sick. But even if you do get sick, most healthy adults and children will not have a problem with influenza.

If you do come down with influenza and have a good immune response, you will likely quickly recover without serious complications, as well as obtain natural immunity to that strain of influenza and to similar ones.

Respiratory infections statistically increase with age as the average person’s immune system generally weakens. When a person over age 65 dies of respiratory failure after a flu-like illness, their cause of death is nearly always labeled as influenza even if it is actually due to bacterial pneumonia.

The vaccine industry loves to attribute many deaths in the elderly to influenza because it pumps up the influenza mortality statistics and helps make a case for use of influenza vaccine.

But you have to die of something, and dying of respiratory viruses is quite common. Just remember this when reading flu mortality statistics: very few deaths from respiratory illnesses are actually caused by type A or type B influenza. viruses

You Could Already Be Immune to the Flu!Vaccine-acquired immunity is temporary, whereas the immunity you get by recovering from influenza is longer lasting. Look at Baby Boomers, for example. Evidence shows, if you are an aging baby boomer born prior to 1957, you are more protected and have a lower risk for pandemic H1N1 influenza that circulated in 2009 and other related influenza strains.

Why?

Because you have long-lasting antibodies that help you resist influenza, antibodies that you acquired by recovering from similar strains of influenza in past decades. Unfortunately, if public health officials and drug companies marketing vaccines have their way, your children and grandchildren won’t be allowed the opportunity to develop this important natural immunity to type A and type B influenza strains.

So the question is this: why do we continue doing something that has been proven ineffective many times over? As the saying goes, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.”

The real way to prevent the flu is through optimal lifestyle and nutrition, and getting plenty of vitamin D, lowering stress and getting the right amount of sleep and Western medical science has glossed right over that.

Tom Jefferson is a physician based in Rome and the head of the Vaccines Field at the Cochrane Collaboration. Jefferson leads an international team of researchers who have combed through hundreds of flu-vaccine studies and have concluded the majority of these studies are “deeply flawed.”

Jefferson states:

“Rubbish is not a scientific term, but I think it’s the term that applies… We have built huge, population-based policies on the flimsiest of scientific evidence. The most unethical thing to do is to carry on business as usual.

I couldn’t agree more.

How You CAN Make a Difference!Don’t sit this one out! We’ve got them “on the run.

NVIC Advocacy Poster

Tell everyone. Tell your friends, your family. With a little bit of effort, you can make significant strides toward preserving your freedom to make voluntary health decisions affecting you and your children’s future.

One of the top goals for NVIC is preserving your freedom of choice about if and when to use vaccines. As part of that mission, this non-profit charity has been fighting for your right to make informed VOLUNTARY vaccine choices since 1982.

During this Vaccine Awareness Week, NVIC is launching the online NVIC Advocacy Portal that will give you the tools you need to take action to protect legal medical, religious and conscientious belief exemptions to vaccination in YOUR state.

Right now, you need to register for the NVIC Advocacy Portal today!  And while you are at it, please make a donation to NVIC so they can continue fighting on behalf of all Americans to make sure we don’t lose our informed consent rights when it comes to vaccination.

Your donations to the NVIC help fund efforts that raise vaccine awareness, including the following excellent vaccine resources:

Remember, we DID make a difference last year—the flu vaccine was not mandated! But there are new threats to our freedom this year as health care workers are  being threatened with being fired if they don’t get a flu shot. We need to push back now or, like NVIC’s President said recently, we all could be next to be targeted for punishments if we don’t get a flu shot every year.

By educating people, by giving them the information they weren’t getting, we made the difference last year. And this year, we can do it again. Join with me and NVIC and get involved.

Stay tuned to this newsletter for more updates, or follow the National Vaccine Information Center on Facebook. Together we CAN make a difference!

7 Reasons Why You Should Avoid Agave Syrup

Read the original article here

Is Organic Raw Agave Syrup a Healthy Sweetener?
Posted on March 19th, 2010 by admin.

Agave syrup is a sweetener derived from agave, a desert plant found in the western and southern United States, Mexico, and parts of Central and South America. Agave is more popularly known as the plant used to make tequila but agave syrup (also known as agave nectar) has actually been used for thousands of years as a food ingredient. Mexicans call it aguamiel or “honey water” because it is about 40 percent sweeter than sugar.
Because of the increasing awareness of the dangers of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), people have turned to “healthier” sugar alternatives, which is what food manufacturers are marketing agave syrup to be. But don’t be fooled, Dr. Joseph Mercola warns, because agave syrup is actually WORSE than HFCS!

Before anything else, why is fructose so unhealthy for you? First, your body metabolizes fructose very differently from glucose, the form of sugar every cell in your body uses for energy. Fructose is broken down in your liver in the same way as alcohol and is directly converted into dangerous fats, making you, well, fat.  Consuming too much fructose is a major risk factor for obesity and weight gain, spikes your uric acid levels and impairs your appetite control mechanism, among other things, Mercola explains.
Here are the reasons why Dr. Mercola believes you should avoid agave syrup like the plague:

  1. Agave syrup contains the highest amount of fructose – anywhere between 70 to 97 percent, depending on the brand – among all commercial sweetener s, which is FAR HIGHER than HFCS (55 percent on average).
  2.  Agave syrup is a highly-processed sweetener. Food manufacturers would like you to believe that agave nectar flows from the agave plant to the jar when in reality, the syrup is produced similarly to how cornstarch turns to HFCS. A natural agave syrup is available in Mexico but it is too expensive to produce. What you gets to the States is either the light or dark syrup – due to poor quality control, some of the product gets burnt and turns dark amber in color.
  3. Agave syrup is highly addictive because it’s basically a sweeter and highly-concentrated form of sugar.
  4. Agave syrup may be a highly sprayed crop. The FDA has rejected shipments of the product due to excessive pesticide residues.
  5.  Agave syrup has no nutritional value. It is not whole food or a live one. Processing has stripped it of the nutrients contained in the agave plant, and of natural enzymes to prevent it from fermenting into tequila.
  6. Agave syrup contains large amounts of toxic steroid derivatives called saponins, which are associated with diarrhea, disruption of red blood cells and vomiting. Saponins also stimulate blood flow to the uterus, which is why pregnant women should avoid agave products due to the possible risk of miscarriage.
  7.  Agave syrup may contain an organic, heat-formed contaminant called hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), which has suspected toxic, mutagenic and carcinogenic effects.

Dr. Mercola advises a severely reduced consumption of sugar if you want to improve your health. But if you need to satisfy your sweet tooth, there are healthier alternatives to HFCS and agave. Pure glucose will set you back about a dollar per pound and does not have the harmful effects of fructose when used in moderation. You can also try other health products and natural sweeteners like Lo Han and stevia. Again, the keywords are use in moderation.

————————————————————————-

There’s a Difference Between Agave Nectar and Agave Syrup

The top five cancer-causing foods

Tuesday, April 24, 2007
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

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

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

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

The dangers of hydrogenated oils

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

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

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

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

The acrylamide factor

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

Sodium nitrite (and nitrates)

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

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

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

  1. Hot dogs: The Cancer Prevention Coalition recommends that children should not eat more than 12 hot dogs per month because of the risk of cancer. If you must have your hot dog fix, look for those without sodium nitrite listed among the ingredients.
  2. Doughnuts: Doughnuts contain hydrogenated oils, white flour, sugar, and acrylamides. Essentially, they’re one of the worst cancer foods you can possibly eat. Reader’s Digest calls doughnuts “disastrous” as a breakfast food, and many experts agree it’s probably one of the worst ways to start the day.
  3. French fries: Fries are made with hydrogenated oil and fried at high temperatures. Some chains even add sugar to their fry recipe to make them even more irresistible. Not only do they clog your arteries with saturated fat and trans fat, they also contain acrylamides. They should be called “cancer fries,” not French fries.
  4. Processed meats and bacon: These meats almost always contain the same sodium nitrite found in hot dogs. You can find some without nitrites, but you’ll have to look for them in natural grocers or health food stores. Bacon is also high in saturated fat, which contributes to the risk of cancers, including breast cancer. Limiting your consumption of processed meats and saturated fats also benefits the heart.
  5. Chips / crackers / cookies: These generally contain white flour and sugar as well as trans fats, but it’s not enough to simply look for these ingredients on the label; you have to actually “decode” the ingredients list that food manufacturers use to deceive consumers. They do this by hiding ingredients (such as hiding MSG in yeast extract, or by fiddling with serving sizes so they can claim the food is trans fat free, even when it contains trans fats (the new Girl Scout cookies use this trick).

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

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

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

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

Ginger is an amazing wide spectrum tonic and remedy

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 by: Paul Fassa
Read the original article here.

(NaturalNews) Ginger root is more than a zesty culinary spice. It’s both a general tonic and specific medicinal herb. Ginger is actually the rhizome or horizontal “creeping root” of the Zingiber officinale plant, which belongs to the same family as turmeric and cardamom. Chinese and Ayurvedic medicine has used ginger for centuries. Now mainstream medicine uses various ginger extracts for major health problems.

Ginger Benefits

Ginger has been used effectively for gastrointestinal problems as major as colitis and as minor as motion sickness. It stimulates good digestion. It helps alleviate congestion and minimizes mucous, even helping asthmatics. Various ginger extracts have been shown to improve cardiovascular health and circulation.

Ginger kills off 5-LO enzymes, without which prostate cancer cells die within hours. A component of ginger has demonstrated the ability to slow or stop several types of cancer mestastasis (spreading cancer cells).
Some oncologists use ginger extracts as adjuncts to their toxic therapies, enabling them to shorten the length of their patients’ suffering from chemo or radiation.

It is also an excellent natural anti-inflammatory. More naturopaths and even MDs are picking up on the fact that daily ginger consumption helps sooth daily arthritis pain as well other chronic aches and pains. Even brain inflammation is sometimes handled or alleviated with ginger.

One mainstream medical report asserted that ginger was no better than ibuprofen for arthritic inflammation relief. But ibuprofen is an NSAID (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) with many harmful long term side effects, affecting kidneys, liver, and intestines while damaging the immune system.

With all the concern regarding increased nuclear fallout and radiation from Fukushima, it’s good to know that ginger offers considerable radiation protection. But it needs to be consumed on a daily basis. How to use ginger is in the next section of this article.

It makes sense to use a natural, less expensive anti-inflammatory that is also an immune system enhancing tonic on a daily basis for chronic aches and pains.

How to Use Ginger

Since ginger extracts have so many powerful mainstream medical applications as implied above, your daily or frequent use of ginger roots will certainly provide considerable health benefits as well.

Powdered ginger capsules are handy to have on hand. But either juicing or brewing as a tea from fresh ginger roots are the best ways to use ginger. Make sure the ginger roots you purchase are crisp with smooth outer skins. Avoid the moist, wrinkled roots.

A traditional method is to first skin the roots, then cut several long thin slices that can be placed into a pot of pure water. The more ginger slices the better. Too strong is easily thinned down with added water. Too weak is almost useless as a tonic or remedy.

After bringing the pot to a boil, bring the heat down and let it simmer for around a half-hour. The pot with water and ginger can remain intact overnight for additional steeping. Go ahead and have a cup, but pour the rest into a glass container to refrigerate.

If the tea is strong enough, you can treat it like a concentrate. Pour some into a cup and add hot water each time you have some. If the taste is slightly offensive, add some raw honey.

If you have a slow speed masticating juicer, you can juice a small (two inch long), freshly peeled piece of thick root as part of whatever juice you like to drink. If you make water kefir, you can add a tablespoon or two of this thick heavy ginger liquid into the fermentation process for every pint of water kefir you brew.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.gaia-health.com/articles…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger

http://www.boost-immune-system-natu…

Science Daily excerpt http://www.sciencedaily.com/release…

How to reduce exposure to harmful environmental chemicals

Written by Dr. Mercola

Read the original article here

Yes, you can, but there are about 75,000 chemicals regularly manufactured and imported by U.S. industries. Rather than compile an endless list of what you should avoid, it’s far easier to focus on what you should do to lead a healthy lifestyle with as minimal a chemical exposure as possible:

By optimizing your diet you will amplify the ability of your beneficial gut bacteria to grow and colonize in your intestine. This is one of the most important detoxification mechanisms you have, as the bacteria will greatly facilitate your body’s ability to detoxify these poisons. Just remember, though, every time you eat sugar you damage your good bacteria, reduce their growth and actually increase their pathogenic counterparts, the bacteria, yeast and  fungi that actually cause disease.

Helpful strategies include:

  1. As much as possible, buy and eat organic produce and free-range, organic foods to reduce your exposure to pesticides and fertilizers. Since animal products tend to bioaccumulate toxins from their pesticide-laced feed, concentrating them to far higher concentrations than are typically present in vegetables, I strongly recommend you buy only organically raised animal foods.
  2. Rather than eating conventional or farm-raised fish, which are often heavily contaminated with PCBs and mercury, supplement with a high-quality purified krill oil, or eat fish that is wild-caught and lab tested for purity.
  3. Eat mostly raw, fresh foods, steering clear of processed, prepackaged foods of all kinds. This way you automatically avoid artificial food additives of all kinds, including dangerous artificial sweeteners, food coloring and MSG, as well as the chemicals found in food packaging.
  4. Store your food and beverages in glass rather than plastic, and avoid using plastic wrap and canned foods (which are often lined with BPA-containing liners).
  5. Have your tap water tested and, if contaminants are found, install an appropriate water filter on all your faucets (even those in your shower or bath).
  6. Only use natural cleaning products in your home.
  7. Switch over to natural brands of toiletries such as shampoo, toothpaste, antiperspirants and cosmetics. The Environmental Working Group has a great safety guide to help you find personal care products that are free of phthalates and other potentially dangerous chemicals.
  8. Avoid using artificial air fresheners, dryer sheets, fabric softeners or other synthetic fragrances. if you like the idea of using air fresheners, scented candles, or dryer sheets because you like the scent, then therapeutic essential oils are an excellent, and safe, alternative for all of these uses.
  9. Replace your non-stick pots and pans with ceramic or glass cookware.
  10. When redoing your home, look for “green,” toxin-free alternatives in lieu of regular paint, carpeting and vinyl floor coverings.
  11. Replace your vinyl shower curtain with one made of fabric.

Related Articles of Interest

Beyond Frankenfoods and Toxics: OCA’s Ten Reasons to Buy Organic

  • By Ronnie Cummins
    Organic Consumers Association, August 17, 201

Read the original article here

Oganic foods and products are the fastest growing items in America’s grocery carts. Thirty million households, comprising 75 million people, are now buying organic foods, clothing, body care, supplements, pet food, and other products on a regular basis. Fifty-six percent of U.S. consumers say they prefer organic foods.

Here are 10 reasons why you should buy organic foods and products:

1. Organic foods are produced without the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). Consumers worry about untested and unlabeled genetically modified food ingredients in common supermarket items. Genetically engineered ingredients are now found in 75% of all non-organic U.S. processed foods, even in many products labeled or advertised as “natural.” In addition, the overwhelming majority of non-organic meat, dairy, and eggs are derived from animals reared on a steady diet of GM animal feed. Although polls indicate that 90% of Americans want labels on gene-altered foods, government and industry adamantly refuse to respect consumers’ right to know, understanding quite well that health and environmental-minded shoppers will avoid foods with a GMO label.

2. Organic foods are safe and pure. Organic farming prohibits the use of toxic pesticides, antibiotics, growth hormones, nano-particles, and climate-destabilizing chemical fertilizers. Consumers worry about pesticide and drug residues routinely found in non-organic produce, processed foods, and animal products. Consumer Reports has found that 77% of non-organic produce items in the average supermarket contain pesticide residues. The beef industry has acknowledged that 94% of all U.S. beef cattle have hormone implants, which are banned in Europe as a cancer hazard. Approximately 10% of all U.S. dairy cows are injected with Monsanto and Elanco’s controversial genetically engineered Bovine Growth Hormone, banned in most industrialized nations. Recent studies indicate that an alarming percentage of non-organic U.S. meat contains dangerous antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

3. Organic foods and farming are climate-friendly. Citizens are increasingly concerned about climate-destabilizing greenhouse gas pollution (CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide), 35-50% of which in North America comes from our energy-intensive, chemical-intensive food and farming system. Organic farms and ranches, on the other hand, use far less fossil fuel and can safely sequester large amounts of CO2 in the soil (up to 7,000 pounds of CO2 per acre per year, every year.) Twenty-four billion pounds of chemical fertilizers applied on non-organic farms in the U.S. every year not only pollute our drinking water and create enormous dead zones in the oceans; but also release enormous amounts of nitrous oxide, a super potent, climate-destabilizing greenhouse gas.

4. Organic food certification prohibits nuclear irradiation. Consumers are justifiably alarmed about irradiating food with nuclear waste or electron beams, which destroy vitamins and nutrients and produce cancer-causing chemicals such as benzene and formaldehyde. The nuclear industry, large food processors, and slaughterhouses continue to lobby Congress to remove required labels from irradiated foods and replace these with misleading labels that use the term “cold pasteurization.” The USDA and large meat companies have promoted the use of irradiated meat in school lunches and senior citizen facilities. Many non-organic spices contain irradiated ingredients.

5. Consumers worry about rampant e-coli, salmonella, campylobacter, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and fecal contamination in animal products coming out of the nation’s inhumane and filthy slaughterhouses. The Centers for Disease Control have admitted that up to 76 million Americans suffer from food poisoning every year. Very few cases of food poisoning have ever been linked to organic farms or food processors.

6. Consumers are concerned about billions of pounds of toxic municipal sewage sludge dumped as “fertilizer” on 140,000 of America’s chemical farms. Scientific evidence has confirmed that municipal sewage sludge contains hundreds of dangerous pathogens, toxic heavy metals, flame-retardants, endocrine disruptors, carcinogens, pharmaceutical drugs and other hazardous chemicals coming from residential drains, storm water runoff, hospitals, and industrial plants. Organic farming categorically prohibits the use of sewage sludge.

7. Consumers worry about the routine practice of grinding up slaughterhouse waste and feeding this offal and blood back to other animals, a practice that has given rise to a form of human mad-cow disease called CJD, often misdiagnosed as Alzheimer’s disease. Animals on organic farms cannot be fed slaughterhouse waste, manure, or blood – daily rations on America’s factory farms.

8. Consumers care about the humane treatment of animals. Organic farming prohibits intensive confinement and mutilation (debeaking, cutting off tails, etc.) of farm animals. In addition to the cruel and unhealthy confinement of animals on factory farms, scientists warn that these CAFOs (Confined Animal Feeding Operations) produce enormous volumes of manure and urine, which not only pollute surface and ground water, but also emit large quantities of methane, a powerful climate-destabilizing greenhouse gas.

9. Consumers are concerned about purchasing foods with high nutritional value. Organic foods are nutritionally dense compared to foods produced with toxic chemicals, chemical fertilizers, and GMO seeds. Studies show that organic foods contain more vitamins, cancer-fighting anti-oxidants, and important trace minerals.

10. Consumers care about preserving America’s family farms, world hunger, and the plight of the world’s two billion small farmers. Just about the only small farmers who stand a chance of making decent living these days are organic farmers, who get a better price for their products. In addition study after study has shown that small organic farms in the developing world produce twice as much food per acre as chemical and GMO farms, while using far less fossil fuel and sequestering large amounts of excess CO2 in the soil. Yields on organic farms in the industrialized world are comparable to the yields on chemical and GMO farms, with the important qualification that organic farms far out-produce chemical farms under extreme weather conditions of drought or torrential rains. Of course, given accelerated climate change, extreme weather is fast becoming the norm.

For all these reasons, millions of American consumers are turning to organic foods and other organic items, including clothing and body care products – part of an overall movement toward healthy living, preserving the environment, and reversing global warming.