(CBS) Afraid of fructose? You may have good reason to be, as an alarming new study shows that the popular sweetener can fuel the growth of cancer.
The study, conducted by scientists at UCLA, found that pancreatic cancer cells grew faster when "fed" with fructose. Study author Dr. Anthony Heaney, associate professor of medicine and neurosurgery at the university's cancer center, said it was likely that fructose would also speed the growth of other cancers as well.
"The bottom line is the modern diet contains a lot of refined sugar including fructose and it's a hidden danger implicated in a lot of modern diseases, such as obesity, diabetes and fatty liver," Heaney said in a written statement.
The study was published in the August 1 issue of the journal "Cancer Research."
Heaney called for government action to reduce American's consumption of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), a leading source of fructose in the Western diet. Fructose also comes from sources such as fruit, vegetables and old fashioned table sugar.
"I think this paper has a lot of public health implications," Heaney said. "Hopefully, at the federal level there will be some effort to step back on the amount of HFCS in our diets."
But the corn lobby (high-fructose is made from corn) felt the research left a bitter taste in its mouth.
"This study does not look at the way fructose is actually consumed by humans, as it was conducted in a laboratory, not inside the human body," the Corn Refiners Association said in a statement, concluding that the root causes of pancreatic cancer are complicated and poorly understood.
Between 1970 and 1990, consumption of high-fructose corn syrup rose 1,000 percent, according to the cancer researchers. The sweetener - a blend of fructose and another sugar called glucose - is found in all sorts of foods and beverages and is the most common sweetener used in American soft drinks.
The association said that overall, sugar is still the most common form of fructose in the American diet.
And don't be fooled by products which replace high-fructose corn syrup with sugar. They also contain high levels of fructose.
Read the full research here.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20012601-10391704.html
Monday, January 30, 2012
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Monsanto: ‘There is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans’
Ethan A. Huff
Natural News
There is a growing body of scientific evidence which proves that genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) are inherently different from natural organisms, including the way the body processes them, as well as how the immune system responds to them.
But Monsanto, the largest purveyor of GMOs in the world, believes that GMOs are no different than natural organisms, and that GMO testing is both needless and valueless.
In the Why aren’t you running human clinical trials on GM crops? section of Monsanto’s Food Safety page, the biotechnology giant explains its opinion that GMOs are “substantially equivalent” to natural organisms.
According to Monsanto, since concentrations of proteins, carbohydrates, and other nutrient factors vary among natural crops, as well as among natural and GM crops, then these differences are automatically unimportant in light of GMO safety.
Furthermore, Monsanto claims that its injection of foreign DNA into its GM crops is also automatically safe because, get this, DNA is present in natural crops as well. Never mind that the injected DNA is foreign and unnatural, and is used to alter the entire genetic structure of GM crops — according to Monsanto, its unnatural DNA is automatically non-toxic because every other plant also has DNA. Case closed.
Using this same absurd illogic, injecting foreign animal DNA into a developing human baby, for instance, must also be safe because that baby contains DNA, right? Or how about drinking antifreeze, which is made of atoms, because your body is also made of atoms? Based on Monsanto’s pseudoscientific nonsense, everything can be considered non-toxic and safe because it is all made of atoms, just like our bodies!
http://www.setyoufreenews.com/2012/01/24/monsanto-there-is-no-need-for-or-value-in-testing-the-safety-of-gm-foods-in-humans/
Natural News
There is a growing body of scientific evidence which proves that genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) are inherently different from natural organisms, including the way the body processes them, as well as how the immune system responds to them.
But Monsanto, the largest purveyor of GMOs in the world, believes that GMOs are no different than natural organisms, and that GMO testing is both needless and valueless.
In the Why aren’t you running human clinical trials on GM crops? section of Monsanto’s Food Safety page, the biotechnology giant explains its opinion that GMOs are “substantially equivalent” to natural organisms.
According to Monsanto, since concentrations of proteins, carbohydrates, and other nutrient factors vary among natural crops, as well as among natural and GM crops, then these differences are automatically unimportant in light of GMO safety.
Furthermore, Monsanto claims that its injection of foreign DNA into its GM crops is also automatically safe because, get this, DNA is present in natural crops as well. Never mind that the injected DNA is foreign and unnatural, and is used to alter the entire genetic structure of GM crops — according to Monsanto, its unnatural DNA is automatically non-toxic because every other plant also has DNA. Case closed.
Using this same absurd illogic, injecting foreign animal DNA into a developing human baby, for instance, must also be safe because that baby contains DNA, right? Or how about drinking antifreeze, which is made of atoms, because your body is also made of atoms? Based on Monsanto’s pseudoscientific nonsense, everything can be considered non-toxic and safe because it is all made of atoms, just like our bodies!
http://www.setyoufreenews.com/2012/01/24/monsanto-there-is-no-need-for-or-value-in-testing-the-safety-of-gm-foods-in-humans/
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Optimum vitamin D blood saturation reduces all-cause mortality by nearly thirty percent
(NaturalNews) The importance of vitamin D for human health has been the topic of extensive research over the past decade. Suboptimal levels of the prohormone are known to compromise immunity, cardiovascular health, bone health and normal metabolism. The result of a new meta-analysis study published in theEuropean Journal of Clinical Nutritionshows that adequate circulating vitamin D reduces the risk of all-cause mortality by 29 percent. Vitamin D has been shown to provide the blueprint required for healthy DNA replication of cellular structures; low levels of the sunshine vitamin dramatically increase the incidence of many cancer lines as genetic mutations proliferate. Millions of at-risk people can protect themselves by ensuring normal blood saturation levels through a simple blood test and prudent sun exposure or supplementation.
Vitamin D deficiency runs rampant in the aging population around the world. Researchers estimate that correcting this deficiency by doubling the typically low vitamin D levels would result in a 20 percent mortality reduction. A body of evidence shows that senior adults with the lowest level of vitamin D blood saturation more than double their risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality.
Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/034773_vitamin_D_mortality_reduction.html#ixzz1kXNDQBwr
Vitamin D deficiency runs rampant in the aging population around the world. Researchers estimate that correcting this deficiency by doubling the typically low vitamin D levels would result in a 20 percent mortality reduction. A body of evidence shows that senior adults with the lowest level of vitamin D blood saturation more than double their risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality.
Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/034773_vitamin_D_mortality_reduction.html#ixzz1kXNDQBwr
Sunday, January 22, 2012
CDC researchers say mothers should stop breastfeeding to boost 'efficacy' of vaccines
(NaturalNews) Remember when it was considered crazy talk to suggest that mainstream medicine viewed humanity as being born lacking in pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, as if these synthetic inputs are necessary miracle nutrients for proper human development? Well, researchers from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently showed that they adhere to this lunatic philosophy, having released a study that recommends women withhold breastfeeding their children in order to boost the "effectiveness" of the rotavirus vaccine.
Ten researchers from the CDC's National Centers for Immunization and Respiratory Disease (NCIRD) released the ridiculous paper, entitledInhibitory effect of breast milk on infectivity of live oral rotavirus vaccines, which claims the immune-boosting effects of breastmilk are a detriment to the efficacy of vaccines. The paper goes on to say that, rather than remove vaccines so that breastmilk can do its job, women should instead remove the breastmilk to allow vaccines to do their job.
Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/034722_breastfeeding_vaccines_CDC.html#ixzz1kDbv7h9B
Ten researchers from the CDC's National Centers for Immunization and Respiratory Disease (NCIRD) released the ridiculous paper, entitledInhibitory effect of breast milk on infectivity of live oral rotavirus vaccines, which claims the immune-boosting effects of breastmilk are a detriment to the efficacy of vaccines. The paper goes on to say that, rather than remove vaccines so that breastmilk can do its job, women should instead remove the breastmilk to allow vaccines to do their job.
Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/034722_breastfeeding_vaccines_CDC.html#ixzz1kDbv7h9B
Friday, January 20, 2012
Kirlian Photography Demonstrates Organic Uncooked Food Have Stronger Energy Fields
19th December 2012
By Ethan A. Huff - naturalnews.com
Food is food, some might claim, and it does not really matter whether or not it is cooked or raw, conventional or organic. The nutritive value remains the same regardless. Or does it? A recent report from Activist Post explains that, based on analysis using a technique known as Kirlian photography, researchers have discovered that the energy fields surrounding raw, organic produce are stronger and more uniform than the energy fields surrounding cooked, conventional produce.
This discovery was made possible by an earlier one stumbled upon by the late Semyon Kirlian, a Russian inventor, back in 1939. Kirlian learned that, when connected to a source of voltage, an object placed in contact with a photovoltaic plate will produce a corresponding image of that object on the plate. And the resulting image will also contain a visual display of the object’s electrical “aura,” of sorts, that both surrounds and emanating from it.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Consumer Alert: 300+ Health Problems Linked To Statin Drugs
A growing body of clinical research now indicates that the
cholesterol-lowering class of drugs known as statins, are associated
with over 300 adverse health effects
-- research boldly flying in the face of national health policy,
medical insurance premium guidelines, statin drug manufacturer
advertising claims, and the general sentiment of the public, with
approximately 1 in every 4 adult Americans over 45 currently using these
drugs to "prevent heart disease."
The Cholesterol Myth
For well over 40 years, statin drugs have successfully concretized a century old myth about the primary cause of heart disease: namely, that cholesterol "causes" plaque build up in the arteries, ultimately leading to obstruction of blood flow, and subsequent morbidity and mortality.
Indeed, the medical establishment and drug companies have been singing the praises of this "cholesterol myth," to the tune of 25 billion dollars in statin drug sales, annually.
While it is true that oxidized low-density lipoprotein is found within the atheromatous plaque that is found in damaged arteries, it is less likely a cause than an effect of heart disease. The underlying damage to the lining of the artery, which could be infectious, chemical, stress and/or nutritionally-related, comes before the immune response that results in plaque buildup there. Blaming LDL cholesterol for causing heart disease, is like blaming the scab for the injury that caused it to form, or, like blaming the band-aid for the scab it is covering -- this is, after all, the inborn and fatal flaw of allopathic medicine which focuses only on symptoms of disease, which it then -- fool-heartedly -- attempts to suppress by any chemical means necessary.
With the National Cholesterol Education Program Guidelines, having been designed by "experts" on the payroll of statin drug manufacturers, requiring ultra-low levels to obtain a strictly theoretical and numerical definition of "health," statin drugs are guaranteed to receive first-line treatment status in the goal of the preventing and treating heart disease through lipid suppression.
What is at question here, is whether the unintended, adverse effects of this chemical class of drugs are less, the same or worse than the purported "cardiovascular" benefits they provide?
Fundamentally, statin drugs damage the muscles and nerves in the body -- so much so that a dose as low as 5 mg a day can kill a human. There are well over 100 studies demonstrating the myotoxic, or muscle-harming effects of these drugs, and over 80 demonstrating the nerve-damaging effects, as well. When you consider that a vast proportion of our body is comprised of muscles and coordinating nerve systems, this drug has the potential to cause damage to the entire body, and undoubtedly does so universally, differing only in the matter of degree -- the damage occurring acutely in those at the tip of the iceberg, asymptomatically in the majority of others at the base.
Moreover, statin myotoxicity is not exclusive to skeletal muscle. If you consider that the heart is also a muscle, in fact, is our most tireless muscle, an obvious red flag should go up. It is a remarkable fact that it took over 40 years before the biomedical research and publishing fields were able to produce a human study, like the one published in the Journal of Clinical Cardiology in Dec. 2009, showing that statin drugs, despite billions of advertising/marketing dollars to the contrary, actually weaken the heart muscle.
These results, while disturbing, are to be expected given the well-known problem associated with statin drug use, namely, the inhibition of the mevalonate pathway necessary to produce the heart-essential nutrient coenzyme Q10. Coenzyme Q10 deficiency itself may be a major contributing cause to heart disease. There is also research that statin drugs deplete the body of the cardioprotective minerals (and associated mineral-protein complexes) zinc and selenium. This finding may also explain why rates of heart failure may be increasing in the general population given these drugs.
While the discovery that statin drugs, instead of preventing heart disease, likely contribute to it, is surprising and counterintuitive, it should not distract from the more disturbing discovery that they contribute to over 300 disease and/or adverse health effects.
Millions of statin drugs users around the globe are risking their lives on a bad bet that taking a magic chemical pill will reduce their risk of dying of a disease that is not caused by a lack of the drug. What is more likely to happen, however, is that the quality and duration of their lives will be reduced, profoundly, along with billions of dollars of squandered cash that could have been spent on authentically medicinal and cardioprotective foods, nutrients, minerals and vitamins.
In light of these findings, a very serious question is raised: are those who are party to the manufacture, promotion, administration and/or prescribing of this chemical class of drugs, in violation of the medical ethical principle of informed consent? And is this ethical violation, insofar as it results in injury to those who have been mislead and/or coerced to take these drugs, also a legal/criminal one?
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/consumer-alert-300-health-problems-linked-statin-drugs?utm_source=www.GreenMedInfo.com&utm_campaign=f5d1625d85-Greenmedinfo&utm_medium=email
The Cholesterol Myth
For well over 40 years, statin drugs have successfully concretized a century old myth about the primary cause of heart disease: namely, that cholesterol "causes" plaque build up in the arteries, ultimately leading to obstruction of blood flow, and subsequent morbidity and mortality.
Indeed, the medical establishment and drug companies have been singing the praises of this "cholesterol myth," to the tune of 25 billion dollars in statin drug sales, annually.
While it is true that oxidized low-density lipoprotein is found within the atheromatous plaque that is found in damaged arteries, it is less likely a cause than an effect of heart disease. The underlying damage to the lining of the artery, which could be infectious, chemical, stress and/or nutritionally-related, comes before the immune response that results in plaque buildup there. Blaming LDL cholesterol for causing heart disease, is like blaming the scab for the injury that caused it to form, or, like blaming the band-aid for the scab it is covering -- this is, after all, the inborn and fatal flaw of allopathic medicine which focuses only on symptoms of disease, which it then -- fool-heartedly -- attempts to suppress by any chemical means necessary.
Death By Statins?
No one can deny that statins do exactly what they are designed to do: suppress cholesterol production and reduce measurable blood serum levels. The question is, rather, at what price do they accomplish this feat, and for what ultimate purpose?With the National Cholesterol Education Program Guidelines, having been designed by "experts" on the payroll of statin drug manufacturers, requiring ultra-low levels to obtain a strictly theoretical and numerical definition of "health," statin drugs are guaranteed to receive first-line treatment status in the goal of the preventing and treating heart disease through lipid suppression.
What is at question here, is whether the unintended, adverse effects of this chemical class of drugs are less, the same or worse than the purported "cardiovascular" benefits they provide?
Fundamentally, statin drugs damage the muscles and nerves in the body -- so much so that a dose as low as 5 mg a day can kill a human. There are well over 100 studies demonstrating the myotoxic, or muscle-harming effects of these drugs, and over 80 demonstrating the nerve-damaging effects, as well. When you consider that a vast proportion of our body is comprised of muscles and coordinating nerve systems, this drug has the potential to cause damage to the entire body, and undoubtedly does so universally, differing only in the matter of degree -- the damage occurring acutely in those at the tip of the iceberg, asymptomatically in the majority of others at the base.
Moreover, statin myotoxicity is not exclusive to skeletal muscle. If you consider that the heart is also a muscle, in fact, is our most tireless muscle, an obvious red flag should go up. It is a remarkable fact that it took over 40 years before the biomedical research and publishing fields were able to produce a human study, like the one published in the Journal of Clinical Cardiology in Dec. 2009, showing that statin drugs, despite billions of advertising/marketing dollars to the contrary, actually weaken the heart muscle.
These results, while disturbing, are to be expected given the well-known problem associated with statin drug use, namely, the inhibition of the mevalonate pathway necessary to produce the heart-essential nutrient coenzyme Q10. Coenzyme Q10 deficiency itself may be a major contributing cause to heart disease. There is also research that statin drugs deplete the body of the cardioprotective minerals (and associated mineral-protein complexes) zinc and selenium. This finding may also explain why rates of heart failure may be increasing in the general population given these drugs.
While the discovery that statin drugs, instead of preventing heart disease, likely contribute to it, is surprising and counterintuitive, it should not distract from the more disturbing discovery that they contribute to over 300 disease and/or adverse health effects.
Millions of statin drugs users around the globe are risking their lives on a bad bet that taking a magic chemical pill will reduce their risk of dying of a disease that is not caused by a lack of the drug. What is more likely to happen, however, is that the quality and duration of their lives will be reduced, profoundly, along with billions of dollars of squandered cash that could have been spent on authentically medicinal and cardioprotective foods, nutrients, minerals and vitamins.
In light of these findings, a very serious question is raised: are those who are party to the manufacture, promotion, administration and/or prescribing of this chemical class of drugs, in violation of the medical ethical principle of informed consent? And is this ethical violation, insofar as it results in injury to those who have been mislead and/or coerced to take these drugs, also a legal/criminal one?
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/consumer-alert-300-health-problems-linked-statin-drugs?utm_source=www.GreenMedInfo.com&utm_campaign=f5d1625d85-Greenmedinfo&utm_medium=email
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Friday, January 6, 2012
Organic v. Monsanto
More than 270,000 organic farmers are taking on corporate agriculture giant Monsanto in a lawsuit filed March 30. Led by the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association, the family farmers are fighting for the right to keep a portion of the world food supply organic—and preemptively protecting themselves from accusations of stealing genetically modified seeds that drift on to their pristine crop fields.
Consumers are powerful. For more than a decade, a cultural shift has seen shoppers renounce the faster-fatter-bigger-cheaper mindset of factory farms, exposéd in the 2008 documentary Food, Inc. From heirloom tomatoes to heritage chickens, we want our food slow, sustainable, and local—healthy for the earth, healthy for animals, and healthy for our bodies.
But with patented seeds infiltrating the environment so fully, organic itself is at risk. Monsanto’s widely used Genuity® Roundup Ready® canola seed has already turned heirloom canola oil into an extinct species. The suing farmers are seeking to prevent similar contamination of organic corn, soybeans, and a host of other crops. What’s more, they’re seeking to prevent Monsanto from accusing them of unlawfully using the very seeds they’re trying to avoid.
“It seems quite perverse that an organic farmer contaminated by transgenic seed could be accused of patent infringement,” says Public Patent Foundation director Dan Ravicher in a Cornucopia Institute article about the farmers’ lawsuit (May 30, 2011), “but Monsanto has made such accusations before and is notorious for having sued hundreds of farmers for patent infringement.”
Even as the megacorporation enjoys soaring stock, the U.S. justice department continues to look into allegations of its fraudulent antitrust practices (The Street, June 29, 2011):
http://www.growswitch.com/blog/2011/07/270000-organic-farmers-sue-monsanto/#.Twdn89RSSgg
Busted! Scientists leave out data to produce bogus findings
(NaturalNews) Clinical trials of drugs and other medical therapies are
carefully carried out and are the very gold standard of scientific
proof, right? According to an in-depth review of this question just
published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ,) the answer is no. In
fact, the BMJ is sounding the alarm that data reported by scientists is
too often not the truth -- because the researchers leave out inconvenient
evidence. The result of facts-gone-missing could well be harming
patients, spiking up healthcare costs by the selling of medical
treatments based on bogus findings, and threatening the very integrity
of medicine.
These warnings come from multiple papers released by the BMJ. The whistle-blowing authors of these articles examined the extent, causes, consequences of hidden facts, figures, and other data scientists discover as they do human trials. It turns out this is no "once in a while" kind of problem, either. The BMJ claims a "large proportion of evidence from human trials is unreported, and much of what is reported is done so inadequately."
In an editorial, Dr. Richard Lehman from the University of Oxford and BMJ Clinical Epidemiology Editor, Dr. Elizabeth Loder, nail the current state of medical research as a "culture of haphazard publication and incomplete data disclosure." They call for full access to raw trial data to allow better understanding of the benefits and harms of many treatments.
Bottom line: when data is left out, the missing facts distort the scientific record and published results of a study. This then leads doctors to make potentially dangerous clinical decisions about what drugs or procedures patients need because the docs are relying on skewed and even bogus "evidence."
http://www.naturalnews.com/034577_quack_science_clinical_trials_BMJ.html
These warnings come from multiple papers released by the BMJ. The whistle-blowing authors of these articles examined the extent, causes, consequences of hidden facts, figures, and other data scientists discover as they do human trials. It turns out this is no "once in a while" kind of problem, either. The BMJ claims a "large proportion of evidence from human trials is unreported, and much of what is reported is done so inadequately."
In an editorial, Dr. Richard Lehman from the University of Oxford and BMJ Clinical Epidemiology Editor, Dr. Elizabeth Loder, nail the current state of medical research as a "culture of haphazard publication and incomplete data disclosure." They call for full access to raw trial data to allow better understanding of the benefits and harms of many treatments.
Bottom line: when data is left out, the missing facts distort the scientific record and published results of a study. This then leads doctors to make potentially dangerous clinical decisions about what drugs or procedures patients need because the docs are relying on skewed and even bogus "evidence."
http://www.naturalnews.com/034577_quack_science_clinical_trials_BMJ.html
GlaxoSmithKline Fined Over Illegal Vaccine Experiments Killing 14 Babies
Vaccine and drug giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) has been fined 400,000 pesos (around the equivalent of $93,000) by an Argentinian judge for killing 14 babies during illegal lab vaccine trials that were conducted between 2007 and 2008.
In addition to killing the children and experimenting with human beings, the judge asserted that the corporation actually falsified parental authorizations so that babies could participate without legitimate parental permission.
Judge Marcelo Aguinsky made the decision after a report was released on the subject by the National Administration of Medicine, Food and Technology (ANMAT in Spanish). Since 2007, 15,000 children below the age of one from Mendoza, San Juan, and Santiago del Estero have been participating in the illegal research. These babies were recruited by GSK from poor families that attended public hospitals. It was found that of the 14 baby deaths, 7 died in Santiago del Estero; 5 in Mendoza; and 2 in San Juan.
GSK Recruited Doctors, Pressured Illiterate Parents into Signing Over Children
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/glaxosmithkline-fined-over-illegal.html
In addition to killing the children and experimenting with human beings, the judge asserted that the corporation actually falsified parental authorizations so that babies could participate without legitimate parental permission.
Judge Marcelo Aguinsky made the decision after a report was released on the subject by the National Administration of Medicine, Food and Technology (ANMAT in Spanish). Since 2007, 15,000 children below the age of one from Mendoza, San Juan, and Santiago del Estero have been participating in the illegal research. These babies were recruited by GSK from poor families that attended public hospitals. It was found that of the 14 baby deaths, 7 died in Santiago del Estero; 5 in Mendoza; and 2 in San Juan.
GSK Recruited Doctors, Pressured Illiterate Parents into Signing Over Children
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/glaxosmithkline-fined-over-illegal.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)