Quick reference to topics that are effecting each and every person on the planet to some degree.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Friday, September 21, 2012
Popcorn Lung
 | A Colorado man won $7.2 million in damages after a federal court determined that his chronic lung condition was caused by a chemical used in microwave popcorn. |
The chemical in question, diacetyl, is a natural byproduct of fermentation and is added to many products—in this case popcorn—to add a buttery flavor. What the popcorn packaging never says is that many workers across the United States have been suing in courts since 2004 for the chemical’s link to an obstructive lung disease commonly known as popcorn lung.
Popcorn Lung - Numerous Cases
Wayne Watson, 59, is not the first to win suits in such seemingly bizarre cases. His attorney, Kenneth McClain, has represented many microwave popcorn and flavoring workers, and Dr. Cecile Rose—a witness in Watson’s case and a physician at National Jewish Health—had consulted with the flavorings industry and had found other workers with similar “popcorn lung” conditions.Meanwhile, jurors held Glister-Mary Lee Corporation (the private-labeling manufacturer of popcorn) in Chester, Illinois liable for 80 percent of the $7,217,961 damages. Supermarket chain King Soopers and parent Kroger Co., were held liable for the remaining 20 percent. The defendants’ attorney claimed that Watson’s history of cleaning carpets with harmful chemicals was to blame for his condition, but the same cannot be said of the other plaintiffs currently in federal court in Iowa and state court in New York.
But aside from the chemical in the microwave popcorn, there is another health issue to consider. No one considers the implications of using a microwave, but using the device could have numerous negative effects on your health. Microwave dangers could leave your food completely void of nutritional value and even cause the food to be health-hazardous.
Diacetyl is found in many products, including but not limited to:
- Alcohol beverages
- Milk products
- Mosquito repellant
- Margarine
- Oil-based food products
Additional Sources:
Chicago Tribune
CBS News
Natural News
Monday, September 10, 2012
WHEAT - Perfect Chronic POISON
Modern wheat is a "perfect, chronic poison," according to Dr. William
Davis, a cardiologist who has published a book all about the world's
most popular grain.
Davis said that the wheat we eat these days isn't the wheat your grandma had: "It's an 18-inch tall plant created by genetic research in the '60s and '70s," he said on "CBS This Morning." "This thing has many new features nobody told you about, such as there's a new protein in this thing called gliadin. It's not gluten. I'm not addressing people with gluten sensitivities and celiac disease. I'm talking about everybody else because everybody else is susceptible to the gliadin protein that is an opiate. This thing binds into the opiate receptors in your brain and in most people stimulates appetite, such that we consume 440 more calories per day, 365 days per year."
(CBS News) Modern wheat is a "perfect, chronic poison," according to Dr. William Davis, a cardiologist who has published a book all about the world's most popular grain.
Davis said that the wheat we eat these days isn't the wheat your grandma had: "It's an 18-inch tall plant created by genetic research in the '60s and '70s," he said on "CBS This Morning." "This thing has many new features nobody told you about, such as there's a new protein in this thing called gliadin. It's not gluten. I'm not addressing people with gluten sensitivities and celiac disease. I'm talking about everybody else because everybody else is susceptible to the gliadin protein that is an opiate. This thing binds into the opiate receptors in your brain and in most people stimulates appetite, such that we consume 440 more calories per day, 365 days per year."
Asked if the farming industry could change back to the grain it formerly produced, Davis said it could, but it would not be economically feasible because it yields less per acre. However, Davis said a movement has begun with people turning away from wheat - and dropping substantial weight.
"If three people lost eight pounds, big deal," he said. "But we're seeing hundreds of thousands of people losing 30, 80, 150 pounds. Diabetics become no longer diabetic; people with arthritis having dramatic relief. People losing leg swelling, acid reflux, irritable bowel syndrome, depression, and on and on every day."
To avoid these wheat-oriented products, Davis suggests eating "real food," such as avocados, olives, olive oil, meats, and vegetables. "(It's) the stuff that is least likely to have been changed by agribusiness," he said. "Certainly not grains. When I say grains, of course, over 90 percent of all grains we eat will be wheat, it's not barley... or flax. It's going to be wheat.
"It's really a wheat issue."
Some health resources, such as the Mayo Clinic, advocate a more balanced diet that does include wheat. But Davis said on "CTM" they're just offering a poor alternative.
"All that literature says is to replace something bad, white enriched products with something less bad, whole grains, and there's an apparent health benefit - 'Let's eat a whole bunch of less bad things.' So I take...unfiltered cigarettes and replace with Salem filtered cigarettes, you should smoke the Salems. That's the logic of nutrition, it's a deeply flawed logic. What if I take it to the next level, and we say, 'Let's eliminate all grains,' what happens then?
"That's when you see, not improvements in health, that's when you see transformations in health."
Watch Davis' full interview in the video above.
© 2012 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.
Davis said that the wheat we eat these days isn't the wheat your grandma had: "It's an 18-inch tall plant created by genetic research in the '60s and '70s," he said on "CBS This Morning." "This thing has many new features nobody told you about, such as there's a new protein in this thing called gliadin. It's not gluten. I'm not addressing people with gluten sensitivities and celiac disease. I'm talking about everybody else because everybody else is susceptible to the gliadin protein that is an opiate. This thing binds into the opiate receptors in your brain and in most people stimulates appetite, such that we consume 440 more calories per day, 365 days per year."
(CBS News) Modern wheat is a "perfect, chronic poison," according to Dr. William Davis, a cardiologist who has published a book all about the world's most popular grain.
Davis said that the wheat we eat these days isn't the wheat your grandma had: "It's an 18-inch tall plant created by genetic research in the '60s and '70s," he said on "CBS This Morning." "This thing has many new features nobody told you about, such as there's a new protein in this thing called gliadin. It's not gluten. I'm not addressing people with gluten sensitivities and celiac disease. I'm talking about everybody else because everybody else is susceptible to the gliadin protein that is an opiate. This thing binds into the opiate receptors in your brain and in most people stimulates appetite, such that we consume 440 more calories per day, 365 days per year."
Asked if the farming industry could change back to the grain it formerly produced, Davis said it could, but it would not be economically feasible because it yields less per acre. However, Davis said a movement has begun with people turning away from wheat - and dropping substantial weight.
"If three people lost eight pounds, big deal," he said. "But we're seeing hundreds of thousands of people losing 30, 80, 150 pounds. Diabetics become no longer diabetic; people with arthritis having dramatic relief. People losing leg swelling, acid reflux, irritable bowel syndrome, depression, and on and on every day."
To avoid these wheat-oriented products, Davis suggests eating "real food," such as avocados, olives, olive oil, meats, and vegetables. "(It's) the stuff that is least likely to have been changed by agribusiness," he said. "Certainly not grains. When I say grains, of course, over 90 percent of all grains we eat will be wheat, it's not barley... or flax. It's going to be wheat.
"It's really a wheat issue."
Some health resources, such as the Mayo Clinic, advocate a more balanced diet that does include wheat. But Davis said on "CTM" they're just offering a poor alternative.
"All that literature says is to replace something bad, white enriched products with something less bad, whole grains, and there's an apparent health benefit - 'Let's eat a whole bunch of less bad things.' So I take...unfiltered cigarettes and replace with Salem filtered cigarettes, you should smoke the Salems. That's the logic of nutrition, it's a deeply flawed logic. What if I take it to the next level, and we say, 'Let's eliminate all grains,' what happens then?
"That's when you see, not improvements in health, that's when you see transformations in health."
Watch Davis' full interview in the video above.
© 2012 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.
Saturday, August 11, 2012
Cancer Contributing Foods
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.
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 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:
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.com to learn more from Dr. Epstein.
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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).
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.com to learn more from Dr. Epstein.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Reaching Age 100
Your chances of reaching age 100 could be better than you think – especially if you get some additional sleep and improve your diet.
New research from UnitedHealthcare looks at centenarians and baby boomers, asking the former about the “secrets of aging success” and evaluating whether the latter are taking the necessary steps to celebrate a 100th birthday.
The primary findings: Many boomers are embracing lifestyles that could lead to a long and rewarding life – with two exceptions. More than seven in 10 centenarians – 71% – say they get eight hours or more of sleep each night. By contrast, only 38% of boomers say they get the same amount of rest.
And when it comes to eating right, more than eight in 10 centenarians say they regularly consume a balanced meal, compared with just over two-thirds (68%) of baby boomers. [Related: De-Stressing Secrets from Around the World] The report – “100@100 Survey” – begins with some startling numbers.
As of late 2010, the U.S. had an estimated 72,000 centenarians, according to the Census Bureau. By the year 2050, that number – with the aging of the baby-boom generation – is expected to reach more than 600,000. Meanwhile, an estimated 10,000 boomers each and every day – for the next decade – will turn 65. How to reach 100?
Centenarians point to social connections, exercise and spiritual activity as some of the keys to successful aging. Among surveyed centenarians, almost nine in 10 – fully 89% – say they communicate with a family member or friend every day; about two thirds (67%) pray, meditate or engage in some form of spiritual activity; and just over half (51%) say they exercise almost daily. In each of these areas, baby boomers, as it turns out, match up fairly well.
The same percentage of boomers as centenarians – 89% – say they’re in touch with friends or family members on a regular basis. Sixty percent of surveyed baby-boomers say spiritual activity is an important part of their lives, and almost six in 10 boomers (59%) exercise regularly. [Related: 10 Countries Where Retirees Live Large] Again, sleep and diet are the two areas where baby boomers come up short.
Not surprisingly, the one area where boomers are more active is the workplace. Three-quarters (76%) of surveyed baby boomers say they work at a job or hobby almost every day; that compares with 16% of centenarians.
Finally, researchers turned to cultural affairs and asked centenarians and boomers to identify – from a list of 14 notable people (including President Obama, singer Paul McCartney and actors Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts) – their preferred dinner guest. The top choice among centenarians and boomers alike: the comedian Betty White.
Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/want-to-live-to-100--sleep.html
The primary findings: Many boomers are embracing lifestyles that could lead to a long and rewarding life – with two exceptions. More than seven in 10 centenarians – 71% – say they get eight hours or more of sleep each night. By contrast, only 38% of boomers say they get the same amount of rest.
And when it comes to eating right, more than eight in 10 centenarians say they regularly consume a balanced meal, compared with just over two-thirds (68%) of baby boomers. [Related: De-Stressing Secrets from Around the World] The report – “100@100 Survey” – begins with some startling numbers.
As of late 2010, the U.S. had an estimated 72,000 centenarians, according to the Census Bureau. By the year 2050, that number – with the aging of the baby-boom generation – is expected to reach more than 600,000. Meanwhile, an estimated 10,000 boomers each and every day – for the next decade – will turn 65. How to reach 100?
Centenarians point to social connections, exercise and spiritual activity as some of the keys to successful aging. Among surveyed centenarians, almost nine in 10 – fully 89% – say they communicate with a family member or friend every day; about two thirds (67%) pray, meditate or engage in some form of spiritual activity; and just over half (51%) say they exercise almost daily. In each of these areas, baby boomers, as it turns out, match up fairly well.
The same percentage of boomers as centenarians – 89% – say they’re in touch with friends or family members on a regular basis. Sixty percent of surveyed baby-boomers say spiritual activity is an important part of their lives, and almost six in 10 boomers (59%) exercise regularly. [Related: 10 Countries Where Retirees Live Large] Again, sleep and diet are the two areas where baby boomers come up short.
Not surprisingly, the one area where boomers are more active is the workplace. Three-quarters (76%) of surveyed baby boomers say they work at a job or hobby almost every day; that compares with 16% of centenarians.
Finally, researchers turned to cultural affairs and asked centenarians and boomers to identify – from a list of 14 notable people (including President Obama, singer Paul McCartney and actors Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts) – their preferred dinner guest. The top choice among centenarians and boomers alike: the comedian Betty White.
Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/want-to-live-to-100--sleep.html
Saturday, June 16, 2012
U.S. RADIATION LEVELS
Fukushima forum: Dr. John Apsley says U.S. is feeling the effects of radiation
Dr. John Apsley appeared on the Fukushima forum on Coast to Coast AM on Saturday, June 9, 2012. For more than 30 years Dr. Apsley, author of “Fukushima Meltdown & Modern Radiation: Protecting Ourselves and Our Future Generations” has specialized in cell regeneration and accelerated wound repair. He appeared on the show to deliver his findings on the effects of Fukushima radioactive fall-out on the Japanese people, as well as Americans.Dr. Apsely started off by making a few comparisons between Fukushima and Chernobyl. According to Apsely, the fuel pools at Fukushima contained 7 times the amount of nuclear waste as the fuel pools at Chernobyl. There were also 6 times the number of people in the area surrounding Fukushima and the west coast of the United States as there were in the area around Chernobyl.
With these figures in mind, Apsely says we're looking at a catastrophe that can be anywhere from seven to forty-two times worse than Chernobyl. Initial estimates at Chernobyl indicated that only about 64 deaths were related to the incident. That number has since grown to more than 1 million, and if you also include the number of people who were crippled or maimed the number skyrockets to more than 8 million over the 20-year period since the meltdown.
Apsley says the Japanese people and the American people are not being told the truth. The Japanese government, in order to avoid panic, is lowering the acceptable levels of radiation in food. However, there is no safe level of radiation. Radiation stays in our system for up to 250-300 years and whether it's one rad or 20, it's still radiation.
Apsley also says researchers are working off false comparisons to the A-bombs dropped on Nagasaki when calculating the potential effects and losses. The A-bomb is a clean bomb, meaning that it had a more perfect energy conversion, releasing few radioactive particles into the atmosphere. The meltdown at Fukushima is releasing far more radiation into the atmosphere and if unit 4 were to tumble, it would have the same effect as 1,100 A-bombs.
According to Apsley much more radiation than we've been led to believe has made its way to the American shores. Because of the prevailing winds at the time of the Fukushima incident, the west coast of the United States has been exposed to serious levels of radioactive fall-out. Hardest hit were Colorado and Wyoming. Surprisingly, Jacksonville, Florida falls into this category, too, due to wind currents.
But one of the hardest hit states in the nation is Pennsylvania because of the intense rainfall they had in the area approximately 3 weeks after the explosion. This rainfall carried tremendous amounts of radiation into the area.
According to Apsley, there has been a 48% increase in infant death rates in the Philidelphia area as a direct result of radiation. Vancouver, Canada has also experienced a 60% increase in infant death rates.
Apsley estimates the United States will see 5-15% damage to their overall health compared to what the people in Japan will experience. He's predicting 5-7 million deaths over the next 20 years in Japan and another 8-25 million people will be maimed over that same time span. Most will be newborns who will suffer because of their parent's exposure to the radiation.
The radiation that's made its way to North America is settling into the ground and being absorbed into the food we eat. Apsley advises that we eat super-foods which, when absorbed into our bodies, can help eliminate the radiation. Super-foods include mushrooms, whey products, fruits and vegetables that wake up our immune system.
In the course of his research, Apsley discovered two hospitals located in Hiroshima. After the A-bomb was dropped one hospital had an almost 100% mortality rate while the other was exactly the opposite. The second hospital had almost a 100% recovery rate and it was because the were using a special food diet to help stimulate patients' immune systems to help flush out radioactivity.
Source: Did you miss Coast to Coast last night? Subscribe here or follow me on Twitter at @C2CWriter and get my daily show recaps.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, May 14, 2012
Fukushima Radiation Release is Worse than You Have Been Told
What You Can Do to Protect Yourself
by Steve Hickey, PhD; Atsuo Yanagisawa, MD, PhD; Andrew W. Saul, PhD; Gert E. Schuitemaker, PhD; Damien Downing, MD
(OMNS May 14, 2012) People have been
misinformed about the tragedy at Fukushima and its consequences. There
is a continuing cover up, the reactors have not been stabilized, and
radiation continues to be released. The Japanese College of Intravenous
Therapy (JCIT) has recently released a video for people wishing to learn
more about how to protect themselves from contamination by taking large
doses of vitamin C.
All four parts of the video are also available here http://firstlaw.wordpress.com/. Readers may link to, embed in their webpages, and make copies of the video for free distribution.
Japanese Government Minimizes Danger; Ignores Vitamin C
In the fall of 2011, JCIT presented a
study that Fukushima workers had abnormality gene expression, which may
be avoided using dietary antioxidants, especially vitamin C. The data
was presented in Japan, Taiwan, and Korea. The JCIT sent letters to the
government urging the government to tell the people how they may protect
themselves from radiation. To date, the recommendation has been ignored
by Japanese government and TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Company).
Linus Pauling gained the Nobel Peace
Prize in part based on his calculations of the number of deaths from
nuclear weapons fallout.[1] He was supported by physicist and father of
the Soviet bomb Andrei Sakharov, who also later received the Nobel
Prize for peace.[2] These and other scientists estimated that there
would be an extra 10,000 deaths worldwide for each megaton nuclear test
in the atmosphere. A nuclear reactor can contain much more radioactive
material than a nuclear weapon. Fukushima had six reactors, plus stored
additional radioactive material and nuclear waste.
How Radiation Damages Cells
Ionizing radiation acts to damage living
tissue by forming free radicals. Essentially, electrons are ripped from
molecules. Removing an electron from an atom or molecule turns it into
an ion, hence the term ionizing radiation. X-rays, gamma rays, alpha-
and beta-radiation are all ionizing.
Most of the damage occurs from ionizing
radiation generating free radicals in water, as water molecules are by
far the most abundant in the body. While avoiding unnecessary exposure
to ionizing radiation is clearly preferable, people affected by
Fukushima do not have the luxury of avoiding contamination.
Antioxidants: Free-Radical Scavengers
Free-radical scavengers, as the name
suggests, mop up the damaging radicals produced by radiation. The more
common term for free radical scavenger is antioxidant. Antioxidants
replace the electrons stripped from molecules by ionizing radiation.
Antioxidants have long been used in the treatment of radiation
poisoning.[3-7] Most of the harm from ionizing radiation occurs from
free radical damage which may be quenched by the free electrons
antioxidants provide. Fortunately, safe antioxidants are widely
available as nutritional supplements. Vitamin C is the prime example.
Why Vitamin C?
Vitamin C is of particular importance
and should be included at high intakes for anyone trying to minimize
radiation poisoning. High dose vitamin C provides continual antioxidant
flow through the body. It is absorbed from the gut and helps to
replenish the other antioxidants. When it is used up, it is excreted in
the urine. Importantly, it can chelate, or grab onto, radioactive heavy
metal atoms and help eliminate them from the body. Large dynamic flow
doses of vitamin C (about 3,000 mg, taken 4 times a day for a total of
12,000 mg) would exemplify antioxidant treatment. Higher doses have been
used by Dr. Atsuo Yanagisawa and colleagues. [8,9]
Shortly after the disaster, Dr. Damien
Downing described how supplements can help protect against radioactive
fallout.[10] OMNS issued an update on the response to Fukushima in
Japan.[11] Recently, Dr. Gert Schuitemaker has provided a review of
vitamin C as a radio-protectant for Fukushima contamination.[12]
Persons living in the areas affected by
radioactive contamination can take antioxidant supplements, especially
high doses of vitamin C, to counteract the negative consequences of
long-term low dose radiation exposure, as well as to protect the health
of coming generations.[12,13] People who have a possible internal or
external radiation exposure should take antioxidant supplements to
maintain an optimal antioxidant reserve. Because of the enormous size
and oceanic spread of Fukushima contamination, this literally applies to
everyone.
|
"The International
Society for Orthomolecular Medicine is pleased to have participated in
the making of this important DVD on the protective effects of
intravenous vitamin C on radiation exposure from the Fukushima nuclear
plant in March 2011. We are in full support of the valuable work of Dr.
Yanagisawa and his colleagues, and we very much appreciate the
commitment of Mr. Daisuke Shibata, who has made it possible for the free
distribution of the video around the world. May this orthomolecular
message raise awareness and foster improvement in the treatment of
radiation exposure."
Steven Carter
Director, International Society for Orthomolecular Medicine |
References:
1. The Nobel Foundation (1962) The Nobel Peace Prize 1962, Linus Pauling Biography, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1962/pauling-bio.html.
2. Sakharov A. (1975) The Nobel Peace Prize 1975, Andrei Sakharov, Autobiography, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1975/sakharov-autobio.html.
3. Brown SL, Kolozsvary A, Liu J, et al:
Antioxidant diet supplementation starting 24 hours after exposure
reduces radiation lethality. Radiat Res, 2010; 173: 462-468.
4. Zueva NA, Metelitsa LA, Kovalenko AN,
et al: Immunomodulating effect of berlithione in clean-up workers of
the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident [Article in Russian]. Lik Sprava,
2002; (1): 24-26.
5. Yamamoto T, Kinoshita M et al.
Pretreatment with ascorbic acid prevents lethal gastrointestinal
syndrome in mice receiving a massive amount of radiation. J Radiat Res
(Tokyo) 2010; 51(2):145-56
6. Gaby A. Intravenous Nutrient Therapy: the "Myers' Cocktail". Alt Med Rev 2002; 7(5):389:403
7. Narra VR, Howell RW, Sastry KS, Rao
DV. Vitamin C as a radioprotector against iodine-131 in vivo. J Nucl Med
1993; 34(4):637-40
8. Yanagisawa A. Orthomolecular
approaches against radiation exposure. Presentation Orthomolecular
Medicine Today Conference. Toronto 2011 http://www.doctoryourself.com/Radiation_VitC.pptx.pdf )
9. Green MH, Lowe JE et al. Effect of
diet and vitamin C on DNA strand breakage in freshly-isolated human
white blood cells. Mutat Res 1994; 316(2):91-102
10. Downing D. (2011) Radioactive Fallout: Can Nutritional Supplements Help?, A Personal Viewpoint, OMNS, May 10, http://www.orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v07n04.shtml.
11. OMNS (2012) Vitamin C Prevents
Radiation Damage, Nutritional Medicine in Japan, Orthomolecular Medicine
News Service, February 1. http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v08n06.shtml
12. Schuitemaker GE. Vitamin C as
protection against radiation exposure. J Orthomolecular Med 2011, 26: 3;
141-145. [Also in Dutch: Schuitemaker G.E. Radioactiviteit in Japan:
Orthomoleculair antwoord. Ortho 2011:3, June. http://www.ortho.nl ]
13. Yanagisawa A, Uwabu M, Burkson BE,
Weeks BS, Hunninghake R, Hickey S, Levy T, (2011) Environmental
radioactivity and health. Official JCIT Statement, March 29. http://media.iv-therapy.jp/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Statement.pdf
Nutritional Medicine is Orthomolecular Medicine
Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org
Find a Doctor
To locate an orthomolecular physician near you: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v06n09.shtml
The peer-reviewed Orthomolecular Medicine News Service is a non-profit and non-commercial informational resource.
Editorial Review Board:
Ian Brighthope, M.D. (Australia)
Ralph K. Campbell, M.D. (USA)
Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D. (USA)
Damien Downing, M.D. (United Kingdom)
Dean Elledge, D.D.S., M.S. (USA)
Michael Ellis, M.D. (Australia)
Martin P. Gallagher, M.D., D.C. (USA)
Michael Gonzalez, D.Sc., Ph.D. (Puerto Rico)
William B. Grant, Ph.D. (USA)
Steve Hickey, Ph.D. (United Kingdom)
James A. Jackson, Ph.D. (USA)
Michael Janson, M.D. (USA)
Robert E. Jenkins, D.C. (USA)
Bo H. Jonsson, M.D., Ph.D. (Sweden)
Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D. (USA)
Stuart Lindsey, Pharm.D. (USA)
Jorge R. Miranda-Massari, Pharm.D. (Puerto Rico)
Karin Munsterhjelm-Ahumada, M.D. (Finland)
Erik Paterson, M.D. (Canada)
W. Todd Penberthy, Ph.D. (USA)
Gert E. Schuitemaker, Ph.D. (Netherlands)
Robert G. Smith, Ph.D. (USA)
Jagan Nathan Vamanan, M.D. (India)
Ralph K. Campbell, M.D. (USA)
Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D. (USA)
Damien Downing, M.D. (United Kingdom)
Dean Elledge, D.D.S., M.S. (USA)
Michael Ellis, M.D. (Australia)
Martin P. Gallagher, M.D., D.C. (USA)
Michael Gonzalez, D.Sc., Ph.D. (Puerto Rico)
William B. Grant, Ph.D. (USA)
Steve Hickey, Ph.D. (United Kingdom)
James A. Jackson, Ph.D. (USA)
Michael Janson, M.D. (USA)
Robert E. Jenkins, D.C. (USA)
Bo H. Jonsson, M.D., Ph.D. (Sweden)
Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D. (USA)
Stuart Lindsey, Pharm.D. (USA)
Jorge R. Miranda-Massari, Pharm.D. (Puerto Rico)
Karin Munsterhjelm-Ahumada, M.D. (Finland)
Erik Paterson, M.D. (Canada)
W. Todd Penberthy, Ph.D. (USA)
Gert E. Schuitemaker, Ph.D. (Netherlands)
Robert G. Smith, Ph.D. (USA)
Jagan Nathan Vamanan, M.D. (India)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)