Many cancer victims are finding out the truth about conventional treatments (chemotherapy and radiation) and their lethal side-effects; unfortunately they learn this after they have been poisoned to the point of no return and have gone bankrupt! Don’t let this happen to you….get informed before you allow anyone to put deadly poisons into your body. There are MANY natural ways for you to help your body rid itself of cancer!
“Everyone should know that cancer research is largely fraud.”
Dr. Linus Pauling, 1986 Nobel Laureate
“Think low-fat diets are keeping you healthy? Read below if you want to challenge your beliefs and your health! Listen to the interview with Gary Taubes about good calories vs. bad calories.”
You may want to examine its ingredients a bit closer and find out where the raw materials being used to formulate the vitamins, are coming from…you will be stunned or thoroughly disgusted!”
Is Your Multivitamin Toxic?
by Sayer Ji, founder of GreenMedInfo.com
[previously published in the Well Being Journal]
In episode #11 (season 2) of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, a woman poisons her husband with the chemical sodium selenite. Strange as it may sound, this exotic murder weapon, and it’s close cousin, sodium selenate, are listed as “nutrients” on the labels of most mass-markets vitamins. Even though both sodium selenite and selenate are classified as dangerous and toxic to the environment by regulatory bodies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the European Union, they are the primary forms of the mineral sold on the mass market today. In fact, most mass-market vitamins contain chemicals that the EPA does not allow in our public drinking water at levels above 50 parts per billion per liter. According to the EPA’s Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) standards, the highest allowable level of selenium in public drinking water is 50 parts per billion (equivalent to 50 micrograms, dry weight). To get a sense of how small an allowable limit this is, 50 parts per billion is equivalent to a tablespoon of water in an Olympic-size swimming pool.
How can vitamin manufacturers advertise something as being a “nutrient” when the EPA—out of concern for our health—has barred it from our drinking water at all but exceedingly minute levels? Have sodium selenite/selenate really been shown to be toxic? A brief perusal of toxicology reports from the Hazardous Substances Databank (toxnet.nlm.nih.gov) and PUBMED (pubmed.gov) shows that both forms can be carcinogenic and genotoxic and may contribute to reproductive and developmental problems in animals and humans. The question is not whether these minerals have toxicity, but rather, at what level they overwhelm our capacity for their detoxification and/or biotransformation into non-toxic metabolites?
A word should be said here about the differences that exist between inorganic minerals and biologically active ones:
The selenium that is found in foods like brazil nuts, mustard seeds, and fresh produce grown in selenium-rich soil is infinitely different from the biologically inert forms being put in some multivitamins. In fact, i.e., sodium selenite/selenate can cause cancer, whereas the selenium found within food, or laboratory chelated forms like selenomethionine have all been shown to prevent and combat cancer.
The basic principle that explains this difference is that when you isolate a nutrient or vitamin out of the food complex within which it is naturally found, and where it is inseparably bound to thousands of known and unknown food factors (e.g., enzymes, protein chaperones, glyconutrients, etc.) it is no longer as beneficial to life. This is especially true in the case of vertebrate mammals who are equipped to get their minerals from the plants they ingest or through the biotransformation of inorganic minerals to organic ones by microflora in their gastrointestinal tracts.
The primary reason that sodium selenite/selenate are preferred by some vitamin manufacturers over safer, more beneficial forms like chelated or yeast-grown selenium is because it is more profitable to use raw materials of lower quality.
“You get what you pay for” is a saying that almost always rings true for dietary supplements. Buying industrial waste products, or chemicals that are considered hazardous waste, and repackaging them as “dietary supplements” can be extremely profitable.
Indeed, this is not the first time in American history that such a hoax has been perpetuated on the public. The FDA-approved use of fluoride in our drinking water and the use of radioactive cobalt-60 culled from nuclear reactors for the IRRADIATION OF conventional food illustrates how industrial waste products with known toxicity are eventually converted into commodities or technologies “beneficial to health.” Whereas initially these substances have very high disposal costs for the industries that excrete them into our environment, the liability is converted — through the right combination of lobbying, miseducation and “checkbook science” – – back into a commodity, with the environment and consumer suffering health and financial losses as a result.
Unfortunately, inorganic forms of selenum are not the only problem with mass-market vitamins. Take the multivitamin Centrum, for instance, whose manufacturer Wyeth is one of the most powerful pharmaceutical companies in the world. This vitamin contains the following chemicals:
Chemical: Amount Found in Centrum/ EPA Maximum Allowed Limit in 1 Liter of Drinking Water
1) Sodium selenite : 55 mcg/ 50 mcg
2) Nickelous sulfate: 5 mcg/ 100 mcg
3) Stannous chloride (tin): 10 mcg/ 4 mcg
4) Ferrous fumarate (iron): 18 mg/ .3 mg
5) Manganese sulfate: 2.3 mg/ .05 mg
6) Cupric sulfate: .5 mg/ 1.3 mg
In the left hand column above you will see the quantities of inorganic minerals found within each dose of Centrum. In the right hand column are the maximum quantity allowed by the EPA in one liter of drinking water In the case of stannous chloride (tin), ferrous fumarate (iron) and manganese sulfate there are significantly higher doses in Centrum than are considered safe for human consumption in a liter of water. Although the others listed are at levels well under the EPA’s allowable limit, it is simply amazing that they are found in a product for human consumption at any quantity given their known toxicity.
So, if these chemicals are toxic, how can they be marketed as beneficial to our health?
As of today no law forbids the use of these substances in dietary supplements, despite laboratory research demonstrating their toxicity in animals, and epidemiological and occupational data demonstrating their actual or potential toxicity in humans. This is due to the widespread acceptance in the U.S. of a a chemical and drug industry-friendly “weight of evidence” standard for toxicological risk assessment. Rather than using the “precautionary principle,” which dictates that a substance that is suspected of being harmful should be duly regulated in order to minimize the public’s exposure, the “weight of evidence” paradigm requires a panel of government appointed experts must evaluate all available toxicological data, and must come up with a consensus that the evidence, unequivocally, demonstrates the substance in question poses a serious health risk. Until such an assessment can be made, a number of substances with obvious toxicity are “innocent until proven guilty” and can be portrayed by irresponsible and/or uneducated manufacturers as being beneficial to human health. It is sad and ironic that at a time when smaller dietary supplement manufacturers are being accused of being “unregulated” and having poor quality standards (even when they are incurring great costs by using vastly superior ingredients) that massive pharmaceutical companies who have every resource at their disposal are allowed to market toxic chemicals to consumers under the banner of USP (United States Pharmacopeia) or “pharmaceutical grade” quality, and get away with it.
Ultimately, we need to use common sense in our purchasing decisions and realize that sometimes companies will intentionally mislead the public—with the complicity of regulatory bodies like the FDA—and will advertise a product that has no health benefits; or worse, may actually detract from our health. The fact that Centrum may or may not be “the #1 doctor multivitamin brand” is irrelevant, considering that one does not ordinarily go to a doctor to seek wise counsel on nutrition. It is simply not their specialty.
The irony is that billions of dollars in health care cost —and the suffering these costs represent—could be saved every year if Americans took the simple step of taking a good multivitamin every day. It is advisable to look for product manufacturers that use high quality ingredient, including those from whole foods, as they are easier for our bodies to absorb and to utilize and therefore contribute more significantly to filling the voids in our diet.
For a toxicological analysis of Centrum, visit GreenMedInfo.com’s Consumer Advocacy Page of Centrum: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/vitamin/centrum
Here is a wonderful article explaining why cancer and other so-called genetic diseases are not your destiny. Once you understand how powerful your thoughts and foods are at creating well-being or disease, then you understand how you control your health.
Epigenetics, Processed Foods, and the Fate of the Human Race
By Patrick Earvolino
DNA is destiny. If you attended high school in the twentieth century, then you learned this old saw of genetics, which says the chances of developing a grave disease such as cancer or diabetes are dictated by the makeup of your genes.
Moreover, genetics says, the DNA you pass on to your children is set. Barring anything that might cause a mutation in the structure of your genes—like rummaging though a nuclear waste dump—what you do during your lifetime has no bearing on the genes you pass to the next generation.
Inherent in the DNA-as-destiny message is the idea that genes are static. You receive your genetic inheritance from your parents and you live the consequences. If the genes you got are prone to cancer, you get cancer. If they’re not, well, lucky you.
But the idea of static genes has never been satisfactory. In identical twins, for instance, why does one twin sometimes develop a chronic disease while the other does not? How can two people with identical genes, whose destinies too should be identical, experience such different fates?
The answer is epigenetics.
When the landmark Human Genome Project was completed in 2003, investigators were baffled. After spending nearly 15 years mapping every strand of human DNA, they’d failed to find the over 100,000 genes they’d expected to account for human complexity.
Instead, they discovered our DNA comprises only about 20,000 genes—or approximately the same number, and types, as in a mouse or a fly. Our intricate design, it turns out, owes itself not to genetic diversity but rather to the various mechanisms that govern how our genes are expressed.
Surrounding and interacting with our DNA is a landscape of biochemicals that turn various genes “on” or “off.” Together with non-genetic portions of our DNA that also affect gene expression, these chemicals make up what scientists call epigenes (epi meaning “above” or “on” in Greek).
If genes are the hardware of our construction, then epigenes are the software—orchestrating how our genes cooperate to create the traits and structures that make us us.
Now, scientists have known about epigenes for a long time. After all, a skin cell and a brain cell have the exact same DNA, so it’s obvious that something causes our genes to express differently. But what they didn’t know is that some epigenetic programming appears to be both alterable and heritable.
That is to say, environmental influences—what we eat, what we drink, the chemicals we breathe or ingest, etc.—change how our genes are expressed. And, more stunningly, these changes in genetic expression can be passed on to our children and theirs.
In one seminal study, for instance, the eating habits of a group of Swedish boys during pre-pubescence dictated how long their future grandsons would live.
Price and Pottenger: Prophets of the New Genetics
For most scientists—brought up to believe that DNA is destiny—the discovery that food choices can alter the genetic expression and thus health of our grandchildren is a bombshell. But for two of nutrition’s great pioneers, it’s merely a tragic “I told you so.”
Back in the 1930s, Dr. Francis Pottenger, Jr., conducted a feeding experiment on successive generations of cats that revealed a clear link between nutrition and epigenetic inheritance. In it he fed one group of cats—along with their offspring and their offpring’s offspring—a diet of cooked meat and milk. He fed another group mostly raw meat and milk (i.e., foods more akin to a cat’s natural diet).
The results were dramatic. While the raw-food cats remained in perfect health through generations, the cooked-food cats experienced progressive debilitation—including malformations, disease, and mental deterioration—until, finally, the third generation in the line became decrepit and sterile.
In the same decade, Pottenger’s findings were echoed in human studies by Dr. Weston Price, who crisscrossed the globe to find non-industrialized populations in the process of switching from their traditional whole-food diet to one of modern, processed foods such as refined flour and sugar.
Though ailments such as cancer, diabetes, and other “diseases of civilization” were previously unknown in these cultures, they soon appeared after the adoption of processed foods. And, individuals who made the switch tended to give birth to children with greater tendency to physical defects and mental disorder—just like the offspring of Pottenger’s cooked-food cats.
The message was clear: malnutrition is inherited. And now we know why. Processed foods—devitalized and deficient in essential nutrients—alter epigenes. By eating defective food, we are introducing viruses into our genetic software.
Food is Destiny
To Drs. Price and Pottenger, the implications of their studies were as grim as they were obvious. If humans continued to eat processed foods, not only would they experience degraded health themselves, they would seriously compromise the health of their descendants.
Moreover, if those successive generations also ate deficient foods, they would compound the problem until one day, like Pottenger’s cats, the human species might become so sick and malnourished that it can no longer reproduce itself.
With processed foods the norm for almost a century now, Americans are on the third and fourth generations of our own version of Pottenger’s experiment. And just as he and Dr. Price predicted, our adult population is rife with disease while our children are born with increasing rates of defects and degenerative illness.
Yet the situation isn’t hopeless. Dr. Pottenger found that by changing the diet of some cooked-food cats back to raw foods, he could restore the health of those cats’ descendants within a few generations. It appears that just as compromised foods introduce viruses into epigenetic software, whole foods erase them.
So it’s not too late. We can still reverse this catastrophic trend if we step up and ban the processed foods that are reprogramming our epigenes. But we best get to it. Otherwise, we face the frightening prospect of pushing our species beyond the point of no return.
Why Natural Healing?
The “Hippocratic Oath” seems to be a catch phrase these days,
thrown about without a second thought as to what it truly stands for – by the medical profession and by lay people. Few people can define it nor understand that it is richly based upon natural philosophy.
Hippocrates, known as the “Father of Medicine”, professed: “Let thy food be thy medicine and thy medicine be thy food”. And thus, he practiced the science and art of medicine with these things in mind. His therapeutic approach was based on “the healing power of nature”.
As a Naturopath, I find myself having to reassure patients that eating whole, pure, unadulterated food is not only safe but healing. Their hesitancy for taking in whole foods and whole food supplements while ingesting prescription meds like candy never ceases to astound me.
I routinely ask patients if they aware of the side effects of pharmaceutical drugs and their reply is always, “yes”. When I ask why they hesitate about taking in whole/pure foods the reply is, “I don’t know”…always. This experience presents a laundry list of questions worth examining:
How have we evolved into a society which opts for taking man-made/synthetic drugs riddled with side effects (many poisonous and toxic to the human system) without hesitation?
Why have we forgotten and become so far removed from Mother Nature and her incredible, miraculous healing powers?
Where does the fear of allowing natural foods to help us heal come from? (Modern-day society would not exist had our ancestors not relied upon them.)
Why does it seem we no longer question and seek out truths for ourselves? (Why do we allow television ads to tell us we have a problem and diagnose the solution?)
Speaking as a clinician, it seems we have dropped the art of medicine from our repertoire and just kept the science. Science is NOT exact nor has it answered any real questions about disease thus far. If you feel uneasy about that statement, consider the years of fund raising research without cure to date and consider examining the in-depth studies for answers. Nature is not to be feared, but respected and revered, for it is the true and lasting path to health. My mission is twofold: To teach about the many paths to healing, some less toxic than others and to ensure that every decision about a patient’s healing honors the Hippocratic Oath I swore to uphold. I want to arouse in you, the reader, the independent thinker, to come forth and re-evaluate your own truths about health and healing.
To educate people is to empower them and true healing begins when you believe you have the power to heal yourself.