Bilberries promote gastrointestinal health

Eating bilberries will reduce intestinal inflammation and alleviate the effects of colitis. These are the results of the experiments conducted by a team of scientists led by Professor Gerhard Rogler from University Hospital of Zurich, Switzerland. Bilberries, or huckleberries…

Cancer breakthrough: scientists discover harmless bacteria in soil kills cancer tumors

(NaturalNews) Cancer remains one of the most feared diseases on the planet — and cancer patients being treated by mainstream medicine are usually bombarded with radiation and subjected to toxic chemotherapy that destroys healthy cells and weakens the body while trying to kill tumors. Thankfully, as NaturalNews readers are aware, a growing body of research is revealing that many natural substances have cancer prevention and treatment potential, including Mediterranean type foods that fight prostate cancer (http://www.naturalnews.com/025659.html) and walnuts which contain breast cancer preventive phytochemicals. Now there’s evidence a cure for cancer may be all around us and is as common as dirt. In fact, it’s something in dirt. Researcher Aleksandra Kubiak just presented the startling discovery at the Society for General Microbiology’s Autumn Conference currently underway at the University of York in the UK. She and other members of a research team from the University of Nottingham and the University of Maastricht have found that a strain of harmless bacteria that is widespread in soil is actually deadly — not to people but to cancerous tumors. The researchers have developed a therapy using Clostridium sporogenes, a bacterium common in dirt. They found that when spores of the bacteria are injected into cancer patients, they only grow in solid tumors. Inside the cancerous growth, the bacteria produce a specific enzyme that activates a cancer drug. The results? Unlike current chemotherapy, the natural bacteria treatment causes only the cancer cells to be destroyed while healthy cells are left unharmed. “Clostridia are an ancient group of bacteria that evolved on the planet before it had an oxygen-rich atmosphere and so they thrive in low oxygen conditions. When Clostridia spores are injected into a cancer patient, they will only grow in oxygen-depleted environments, i.e. the center of solid tumors. This is a totally natural phenomenon, which requires no fundamental alterations and is exquisitely specific,” head researcher Professor Nigel Minton said in a statement to the media. “We can exploit this specificity to kill tumor cells but leave healthy tissue unscathed.” He added that the new discovery could lead to a simple and safe procedure for curing a wide range of solid tumors. “This therapy will kill all types of tumor cell. The treatment is superior to a surgical procedure, especially for patients at high risk or with difficult tumor locations,” Professor Minton said. “We anticipate that the strain we have developed will be used in a clinical trial in 2013 led by Jan Theys and Philippe Lambin at the University of Maastricht in The Netherlands. A successful outcome could lead to its adoption as a frontline therapy for treating solid tumors.” For more information: http://www.sgm.ac.uk/ http://www.naturalnews.com/033219_cancer_cures_treatments.html

Academics who lend their names to Big Pharma ghostwriting schemes should be charged with fraud, say university professors

(NaturalNews) A college student who pays his friend to write a paper for him is guilty of plagiarism — and if he is caught, he could receive a failing grade or even be expelled from school. But when drug companies secretly pay doctors or academics to pretend as though they wrote journal-published studies actually written by Big Pharma ghostwriters, it is considered a mere “marketing strategy.” But two university professors are working to change this injustice by pushing for such cheats to be prosecuted for fraud. “It’s a prostitution of their academic standing, and it undermines the integrity of the entire academic publication system” said Professor Trudo Lemmens, a Faculty of Law professor at the University of Toronto (UT). He and Professor Simon Stern, also from UT, rightly believe that taking credit for a journal article written by someone else constitutes criminal activity, and should be considered fraud under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). “Guest authorship is a disturbing violation of academic integrity standards, which form the basis of scientific reliability,” said the two in a recent article published in the journal PLoS Medicine . “Pharmaceutical sponsors borrow the names of academic experts precisely because of the value and prestige attached to the presumed integrity and independence of academic researchers.” Back in 2008, for instance, it was revealed that Wyeth Pharmaceuticals (now part of Pfizer) paid ghostwriters to compose articles hyping the supposed benefits of its hormone replacement therapy (HRT) drug Prempro, and solicited academics to then stamp their names on them claiming authorship. The forged articles then appeared in prestigious journals where thousands of doctors ended up reading and absorbing the information as if it was independent, evidence-based medicine (http://www.naturalnews.com/News_000614_Wyeth_medical_journals_ghostwriting.html). If academics who participate in ghostwriting fraud were held accountable in the way Lemmens and Stern are suggesting, it would have the potential to revolutionize the way drugs are approved, as well as the way drug litigation is handled in court. No longer would drug companies be able to use fraudulent medical research to convince the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve a drug, and Big Pharma lawyers would no longer be able to use ghostwritten studies as court evidence to defend the safety of harmful drugs. “[Ghostwritten studies] are often used in litigation to support the manufacturer’s arguments about a drug’s efficacy and safety, or to establish a record of scientific acceptance for Daubert purposes, or to credentialize an expert witness,” added Lemmens and Stern. “Each of those uses, if attempted by a party that had helped to create the article, could risk sanction.” Sources for this story include: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/03/law-professors-academics-guest-authoring-ghostwritten-studies-should-be-charged-with-fraud/

Pharma now pushing for 20 new vaccines in next decade

(NaturalNews) The mainstream media is extremely one sided with its vaccine reporting. It is a PR outlet for the pharmaceutical industry, especially when it comes to the pharmaceutical industry’s sacred cow – vaccines. A recent example is a BBC item announcing a UK research project to come up with twenty new “improved” vaccines over the next decade. As usual, the article strongly implies that those who avoid vaccinations are loony. The history of vaccine injuries and the statistics that indicate vaccines do not offer immunization are ignored by this article. Commenting on BBC Article Highlights The BBC article reports that a group of scientists have responded to a “call to action.” They claim AIDS and malaria vaccines as top research items with other tropical diseases being considered for more research. Comment: There is statistical evidence that proves almost every infectious disease that medical science claimed was eliminated by vaccines had become almost non-existent by the time the particular vaccine was developed. Bugs come and go as environments change. The declining infectious disease occurrences coincide with improved plumbing, sanitation, waste removal, and general cleanliness. Bold vaccine success claims are bogus. The BBC article quotes the scientists as saying, “We must also consider vaccines beyond classic infections, such as insulin-dependent diabetes, cancers and degenerative diseases.” Comment: That’s interesting. They’re creating more product demand for diseases that occur mostly from toxic processed food consumption and environmental pollution. Those who understand this are able to prevent and even cure cancers and diabetes through detoxification and nutritious food. But never mind all that lifestyle change hassle. Medical authorities will provide immunity through inoculations and make themselves lots of loot! Expensive vaccines sold internationally to individuals and governments have less overhead than most other pharmaceuticals. They are cheaper to produce and are usually allowed fast track approval. The liability of lawsuits and heavy fines don’t affect the vaccine industry. They have been exempted from legal financial liability over the last couple of decades as vaccine injury complaints grew exponentially with increased vaccination protocols. Even doctors, especially pediatricians who insist on vaccinating every child often from birth, make a buck off vaccinations. They buy wholesale and sell retail, adding more profit to office visits. But it’s not just sales that have these researchers drooling. Individual researchers share patent royalty fees with vaccine companies for whatever vaccines they develop. The researcher is heavily funded for starters, then the royalty’s passive income kicks in. The Scientist Who Initiated the “Call to Action” Oxford University Professor Richard Moxon, created the series of papers calling for research action into future vaccine research. “We need to find the requisite funds for the research and development of about 20 improved or novel vaccines in the next decade or beyond,” Moxon declared. There you go. Get the funding to pay for research and your high salary during that period, then come up with a new twist on an existing vaccine “improved” to get new patent rights and royalties. This is a familiar ploy. Slightly tweak an expired patent drug and create a new patent. Of course, any totally new vaccine would become a patent windfall with the potential for further “improvements” and patents. Professor Moxon adds, “This call to action comes at a crucial time. In some communities, recent declines in vaccine uptake provide a stark reminder that public confidence and trust in immunization is fragile and requires attention.” Could vaccine immunization trust fragility have anything to do with that mumps outbreak among children and teens vaccinated with MMR (mumps, measles, rubella) inoculations in the New York/New Jersey area a year and a half ago? This incident managed to get publicized by mainstream media, which is very rare. The immediate official response was that the 77% of vaccinated mumps victims hadn’t received their required two shots. But when it was discovered that they had received both jabs, some health authorities proclaimed that the MMR schedule should be upped to three shots. So much for vaccination immunization. As a matter of fact, true life-long immunity occurs from actual exposure to infectious diseases. Either the disease is resisted initially, or the disease infects and is overcome. Then life-long immunity for that disease is established. The fact that more than one inoculation of any vaccine is required indicates true immunity is not granted by vaccination. But the dollars continue to roll in as more vaccinations are required. Maybe, professor Moxon might learn something about immunity from a retired vaccine researcher now whistle blower who said he would never vaccinate his kid. The former vaccine researcher, whose identity is concealed, explains that the immune system is a complex arrangement of skin, nasal and throat mucous membranes, organs such as tonsils and adenoids and lymph nodes as well as the intestinal flora. Intestinal flora (friendly bacteria) not only act to destroy invading pathogens, but trigger lymphocytes (killer cells) in the blood as well. Vaccines merely initiate that last line of defense by activating killer cells unnecessarily, which can create a cytokine storm, unleashing the immune system to overwhelm the person inoculated! There are thousands of vaccinated men, women, and children who’ve experienced seizures, paralysis, and even death from cytokine storms after inoculations. The whistle blower went on to say there are no safe vaccines, even without those toxic preservatives, adjuvants, thimerasol (mercury), formaldehyde, aluminum, and squalene. He added there is no way to ensure absolute purity in each dose since they contain pathogens from other mammal tissues, and that vaccinations often cause the diseases they’re supposed to prevent. So Professor Monox, get your arrogant head out of the authority mindset and its money machine. Maybe the demonstrated lack of vaccine efficacy and the thousands and thousands of unpublicized paralyzed and dead vaccine injury victims and so called SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) babies who got jabbed with these dangerous vaccinations from birth have something to do with the emerging public vaccine wariness you think is so foolish. Sources included in this article include: (1) The Original BBC Article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13714224 (2) Patent fees and Paul Offit http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/offit-congressional-reprimand/ (3) Follow the Money and the Thimerasol http://vactruth.com/2011/08/05/big-pharmas-share-in-the-consumer-price-index/ (4) Jon Rappoport 2002 interview of a former vaccine developer turned whistle blower http://educate-yourself.or/cn/rappoportinterviewvaccineresearcherjan2002.shtml (5) Stats showing disease mortalities dropping even before the vaccines were introduced http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/ (6) UK Site with real vaccine news http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/ (7) S.A.N.E. Vax – USA real vaccine news focusing on Gardasil injuries and deaths http://sanevax.org/ (8) Vaccines lower immunity http://www.naturalnews.com/032484_vaccines_immunity.html (9) Hep B shots linked to SIDS http://www.naturalnews.com/032579_hepatitis_B_vaccines.html (10) Mumps outbreak NY/NJ with vaccinated teens http://www.naturalnews.com/028142_mumps_vaccines.html (11) Another version of the same NY/NJ mumps outbreak http://www.naturalnews.com/028422_vaccines_quackery.html Educate Yourself: Choose from a long list of Natural News vaccine articles http://www.naturalnews.com/vaccines.html

Cold fusion devices produce far more energy than they use; quickly approaching commercial viability

(NaturalNews) Cold fusion is real, but mass American news sources are not covering it. Experiments are currently being duplicated across the world, to add further verification to the body of scientific proof. It is now possible to create energy with commonplace resources at no cost to the environment. Power plants using cold fusion will be constructed before 2012. Natural News has been covering the developments of cold fusion for quite some time, as controlled experiments in Russia, California, Italy, and Japan have consistently proven that cold fusion is real. (Read one of the original articles here (http://www.naturalnews.com/013281.html).) One of these successful experiments was conducted by Professor emeritus of Osaka University, Japan – Yoshiaki Arata. Dr. Arata performed a demonstration of cold fusion at Osaka. A colleague of his wrote, afterward: “Arata’s demonstration was successfully done it demonstrated live data looked just similar to the data they reported in [the] papers. This showed the method highly reproducible.” Read the original article for more details at (http://www.sott.net/articles/show/157573-Cold-fusion-demonstration-a-success-). In addition, Andrea Rossi’s Fusion Energy Catalyzer was tested in a number of different scenarios this year, resulting in a stronger belief that cold fusion may be ready for public use by the end of 2011. On January 14, Focardi and Rossi held a press conference, discussing their 10-kW generator. Another experiment, which took place roughly a month later at the University of Bologna, reported the model generated 15 kW for 18 hours. There are currently plans to hook up roughly 200 of these smaller units, in order to construct two 1 megawatt-producing power plants before the end of the year. If these plants perform up to their potential, then we can hope for the construction of industrial-sized power plants within another year or two. But how does it work? Cold fusion is not really magical, even though it could very well have a miraculous effect on our future. It is a relatively simple chemical reaction that produces excess heat, meaning that if the reaction occurs in water, it will increase the temperature of the water. Powdered nickel fuels the reaction. You put in nickel (one of the most plentiful metals on the planet), and you get heated water. After that point, almost every mechanic in the world would be able to take it from there. Steam engines heat water with coal, then using the expansive properties of the steam to power turbines. A cold fusion device would use the same basic mechanical devices, but it would heat the water through the consumption of nickel rather than combustion. But why has news of cold fusion not yet reached mass media in the United States? Why is there no story in the New York Times that showcases all of this excitement and buzz? The media has been burnt by the dream of cold fusion before. In 1989, Fleishman and Pons first conducted a series of experiments on cold fusion and produced some truly exciting results. In their excitement, they let their findings slip a little too early, before they had been able to thoroughly study the discovery, or realize consistently positive results. They released their miraculous findings, with claims of having discovered the dream machine of the millennium, and they caused a lot of excitement in the scientific community, at least at first. But they had fallen prey to their own unbridled enthusiasm. Confronted with the potential of what they had discovered – a future resplendent with clean, free energy – they jumped the gun a little prematurely. Their method was reproduced across the globe, but many experiments fell flat. In fact, their method was shown to be effective only 30% of the time. And in the world of empirical fact, 30% is an error, not a discovery. It was supposed that the 30% of experiments that did corroborate Fleishman and Pons’ findings were more likely the result of bribes or ‘friendships,’ not cold fusion. Consequently, it was presumed that Fleishman and Pons were frauds, just a couple of jingoists desperately attempting to gain fame and attention. Cold fusion was thought to have been revealed as a hoax, and the scientists became notorious. All but excommunicated, Fleishman and Pons went underground, where they continued to hone their method and make the process easily replicable and consistent. They checked and double-checked their findings, and they spread their idea to other scientists willing to conduct more thorough investigations, such as Andrea Rossi, whose device has, so far, produced the consistency that Fleishman and Pons’ lacked. This discovery could not come at a better time for the world, when oil resources are quickly becoming scarce, and greenhouse gas emissions are continuing to spike, despite the damage they are causing. So, given the reason for optimism in this period in which energy is particularly expensive, why is the mass media refraining from mentioning cold fusion. Why is it not on the front pages of every newspaper? There are a number of possible explanations. First, the scientific community’s pause could very well be a consequence of the unbridled enthusiasm given by the initial experiments conducted in 1989. After such a humiliation, it is easy to see why scientists would remain skeptical, at least on the surface. Meanwhile, Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer is being slated for reproduction in large-scale, cold fusion reactors later this year. If you compare the pace of Rossi’s tests to the scientific norm, then it is clear that scientists are, indeed, excited. As for the press, there are more insidious explanations to be considered. For one, it is a distinct possibility that a number of enormous businesses, such as oil and coal companies are leaning on mass media sources to keep quiet. Cold fusion power plants would drop the price of energy, thereby putting energy companies out of commission. It is in their best interest to slow down the process of integrating cold fusion. But whatever the reason for mass media silence, you can expect to start hearing about cold fusion by the end of the year. By then, it will be impossible to keep quiet a discovery of this magnitude. Sources: (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.11/coldfusion.html) (http://pesn.com/2011/02 /22/9501770_Rossi_cold_fusion_reactor_achieves_15_kW_for_18_hours/) (http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/)

Maybe you aren’t doomed to cancer or other diseases because of your genes; scientists find risk research is inaccurate

(NaturalNews) Countless people have had regular expensive testings and even organs removed because, based on genetic testing, they’ve been told they are sure to get cancer. Think about women having breasts amputated to avoid breast cancer in the future, for example. Others live a life of worry and a feeling of impending doom if they believe test results of “biomarkers” for specific diseases show sooner or later they will probably get heart disease, dementia or some other potential killer. But it turns out, according to a new study, the research about the associations between genes and other biomarkers and various maladies is vastly overstated. Bottom line: were told you are more or less doomed to eventually get a certain disease so you need constant vigilance and testing? Turns out, none of that may be true. Research from John Ioannidis, MD, DSc, an expert in scientific study design at the Stanford University School of Medicine, shows clinicians may be making decisions for their patients based on inaccurate conclusions not supported by other, larger studies. For instance, one widely cited study links the BRCA1 gene mutation with colon cancer; another links levels of C-reactive protein in the blood with cardiovascular disease. Still another claims an association between homocysteine levels with vascular disease. The trouble is, these conclusions turned out to apparently be gross exaggerations. In a statement to the press, Dr. Ioannidis claims these mistakes are “…the result of statistical vagaries coupled with human nature and the competitive nature of scientific publication.” His research paper is published in the June 1 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). “No research finding has no uncertainty; there are always fluctuations,” Dr. Ioannidis stated. “This is not fraud or poor study design, it’s just statistical expectation. Some results will be stronger, some will be weaker. But scientific journals and researchers like to publish big associations.” However, by publishing these popular “big associations”, the medical journals give the papers lots of publicity; the research papers are cited over and over in the mainstream medical community (with little if any critiques of the findings). And soon they are seen as proof linking a biomarker to a disease. The result can be unneeded testing, treatment, and more. It can also cause patients undue anxiety, stress and fear for their future. In all, Ioannidis and colleague Orestis Panagiotou, MD, from the University of Ioannina School of Medicine in Greece, investigated 35 widely cited studies which analyzed the relationships between biomarkers such as the presence of specific genes or infections, levels of blood proteins and other markers and the likelihood of developing conditions such as cancer and heart disease. They found that less than half of the biomarkers in these studies had statistically significant associations with disease risk in larger follow-up studies. What’s more, only one of every five of the original selected studies increased a patient’s relative risk for a condition by more than 1.37, practically no risk at all (A relative risk of 1 means there is no difference between two groups). In addition to statistical findings that don’t show up in additional, bigger studies, Dr. Ioannidis said another problem is that researchers can also superimpose their own bias . “Researchers tend to play with their data sets, and to analyze them in creative ways. We’re certainly not pointing out any one investigator with this study; it’s just the societal norm of science to operate in that fashion. But we need to follow the scientific method through to the end and demand replication and verification of results before accepting them as fact,” he stated. Dr. Ioannidis, the C.F. Rehnborg Professor in Disease Prevention at Stanford, outlined some of these same troubling research worries years ago in a 2005 essay published in the journal PLoS-Medicine entitled, “Why most published research findings are false.” For more information: http://jama.ama-assn.org/

Betrayal of a Nation: Why U.S. health authorities are keeping you vitamin D deficient and who stands to gain

(NaturalNews) Dr. Anne Looker and colleagues at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recently made vitamin D legend, Professor Hector DeLuca of University of Wisconsin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hector_DeLuca), and certain folks at big pharma very happy with her widely-reported analysis of the vitamin D status of Americans. Using definitions of deficiency straight from the November 2010 Food and Nutrition Board (FNB) Vitamin D Report – definitions that no vitamin D scientist I know agrees with, except perhaps Professor DeLuca – Dr. Looker reassured Americans their vitamin D levels were sufficient. Instead of a lower limit of 40, 30, or even 20 ng/ml, Dr. Looker and her CDC colleagues actually said any American with vitamin D levels below 12 ng/ml were “at risk of vitamin D deficiency.” That’s right, she wouldn’t say “deficient” for a person less than 12 ng/ml, all she said is they are “at risk” of being deficient! Why? Dr. Looker falsely reassured Americans that everything is pretty much OK because around 80% of white Americans have levels higher than 20 ng/ml (although only 30% of African Americans do). I carefully read her entire paper; why didn’t I see a “CDC Action Plan for African Americans” for the 70% of Blacks with levels less than 20 ng/ml? Probably for the same reason I didn’t see any “FNB action plan for African Americans” in their recent vitamin D report. Where did Dr. Looker get the idea that 20 ng/ml was OK? From the FNB. Where did the FNB get that idea? Professor Hector DeLuca and the vitamin D analogue scientists, that’s where. What I am about to tell you is a failure of a system, not a person. The National Academy is responsible, as scientists to the USA, to see that the processes that occur in its name are fair, above the appearance of impropriety, and free from avoidable conflicts of interest. I have been to enough vitamin D conferences to know that about half of the scientists who attend these conferences are looking for the new patent that will secure or extend their financial fortune. They do not need America alarmed right now about the fact more than 80% of Americans are actually vitamin D deficient; no, the government might need to do something now, an action that would threaten the value of something that I have just learned about: an imminent river of new vitamin D knockoff commercial patents. Vitamin D knockoff scientists want the government to say that 20 ng/ml is fine, at least until all the phase 2 and phase 3 FDA trials are finished on their newly patented vitamin D “analogue” drugs. In a few years it won’t matter because dozens of knockoff analogues will have been approved for treating vitamin D deficiency, yes prescription-only vitamin D knockoff drugs to treat vitamin D deficiency, instead of vitamin D, I kid you not. After these scientists get their analogues past the FDA, I predict the same scientists will change their tune and start crying for 40 ng/ml as the desirable lower limit, ensuring a vast market for their knockoffs. The creation of vitamin D knockoff patent prescription-only drugs goes something like this: take the cholecalciferol or 25-hydroxy-cholecalciferol molecule, change its structure enough – without changing its actions – and Ola, you can patent it. It must be structurally different enough from natural cholecalciferol to be a unique drug but it must retain its vitamin D efficacy. Ergocalciferol (Drisdol) – the only prescription drug available to treat vitamin D deficiency in the USA – is an example of an analogue, although the path to its discovery and its patent was quite different. The patent on ergocalciferol made the University of Wisconsin’s Department of Chemistry the richest chemistry department in the world. In some countries, ergocalciferol is still the only vitamin D available. For a detailed discussion of how these patents put the National Academies in a very difficult position, read the following blog: Conflict of Interest at National Academy of Science? (http://pandemicsurvivor.wordpress.com/2010/12/08/conflict-of-interest-at-national-academy-of-science/) As I write this, I understand additional vitamin D patent applications are being prepared (I actually know of one application by a member of the recent FNB committee member). These analogue scientists need time; the nutrient, vitamin D, needs to take a back seat for a while. Vitamin D was getting too hot, too many good things being said about it, and too many press stories about too many Americans being deficient. The analogue scientists want a big market when they finish with the FDA. Anyway, after you have your new vitamin D molecule and your patent, you approach the FDA, who will require that you do randomized controlled trials, pitting your new vitamin D analogue drug against . . . what? Vitamin D, right? No: placebo. That’s right, placebo. As I understand the process, and I hope I am wrong, the vitamin D knockoffs only have to prove they are better than placebo, which, if they keep their efficacy, will be a cinch. I even know of a patent application for a drug to treat vitamin D deficiency by inhibiting the 24-hydroxylase (the enzyme that gets rid of vitamin D in the body). If you inhibit the 24-hydroxylase, you will raise 25(OH)D levels and thus treat vitamin D deficiency; this is what big pharma is up to (I kid you not). Can you imagine taking a drug that interferes with a natural enzyme that metabolizes vitamin D in order to increase the amount of vitamin D in your blood, instead of just taking vitamin D? Is this the best that American medicine can do? Very few people seem to know that the recent FNB committee had an unusual guest, an overseer, an official vitamin D advisor, Professor Hector DeLuca (http://host.madison.com/news/article_1b2e3719-0a5f-57d8-b87d-ba89b38d0c31.html), one of the true giants in the field of vitamin D, both academically and financially. Talk about mother-load analogue patents, he wrote the book. He has created so many activated vitamin D knockoffs that he named one after himself, “Hectorol.” Another fact often gets lost; Dr. DeLuca is the only member of the vitamin D community who is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, an extremely difficult membership to achieve, a shadowy process requiring inside advocates and secret votes. I’m told, but could not confirm by calling the National Academies, that blackballing is still used; if so, one negative vote and, “I’m sorry Dr. Holick,” “I’m sorry Dr. Heaney,” and “I’m sorry Dr. Norman.” Anyway, Professor DeLuca and his Department of Chemistry at the University of Wisconsin are experts in making knockoff analogue vitamin D drugs. To be fair, his analogues of activated vitamin D have saved thousands of lives, mainly patients with kidney failure, although activated vitamin D itself works in kidney failure. If the new analogues of cholecalciferol and 25-hydroxy-vitamin D effectively treat vitamin D deficiency, they too will save millions of lives. However, there is just a much easier and cost effective way of treating vitamin D deficiency: plain old, cheap old, nutrient old, vitamin D. As far as the recent FNB report on vitamin D, can you visualize all the scientists on the FNB hard at work, under the watchful eye of their “Special Advisor,” National Academy of Sciences member, Professor Hector DeLuca. I would venture a guess that more than one member of the FNB vitamin D panel dreamt about being in the National Academy himself or herself one day. Then they pondered which lower limit to vote for, the 40 ng/ml opined by most vitamin D scientists or the 20 ng/ml opined by “Special Advisor” DeLuca. Let us see, what will get me into the National Academy of Sciences the quickest? I can’t really complain. First, this is America and I suspect the quickest way to treat the massive vitamin D deficiency pandemic is going to be through private industry, like it or not. Second, it is possible one of the vitamin D knockoff drugs will actually work better than vitamin D; “possible” I said. Third, I get royalties on my own brand of vitamin D so I have my own conflicts of interest. Fourth, before you get too high on your horse about Dr. DeLuca, ask yourself how many lives have you saved in your lifetime? He discovered activated vitamin D, trained dozens of the top vitamin D researchers, and saved thousands of lives. Also, I have no way of knowing how exceptional was the FNB’s decision to make secret the critiques of the 12 top vitamin D experts, experts who were asked to review the FNB’s work. Does the FNB invoke such secrecy frequently? When did it do so last? Did the final FNB report change, based on the opinions of the 12 vitamin D experts, or did the FNB Board (most who admit to not being vitamin D experts) simply comply with Professor DeLuca’s judgment? If the final FNB report did change, what did the report look like before the vitamin D experts’ opinions were weighed? I understand at least one vitamin D expert charged the FNB with racism for its failure to consider the vitamin D plight of African Americans. Is that true? Most members of the Vitamin D Council would like to read all 12 critiques by the 12 top vitamin D experts in the world but – unlike Professor DeLuca or the vitamin D-knockoff pharmaceutical companies – we don’t have the money to legally fight the FNB’s proclamation that the 12 expert critiques by the top vitamin D experts in the world are – and will remain – secret, beyond the reach of Federal Freedom of Information Laws. Sources for this article include: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db59.htm http://pandemicsurvivor.wordpress.com/2010/12/08/conflict-of-interest-at-national-academy-of-science/ http://host.madison.com/news/article_1b2e3719-0a5f-57d8-b87d-ba89b38d0c31.html

Study: Statins cause memory loss, depression

(NaturalNews) The growing list of serious negative side effects caused by statin drugs now includes memory loss and depression, according to a new study published in the Cochrane Library. Researchers discovered that the vast majority of drug trials allegedly showing statins to be safe have been conducted by drug companies, and that way too many people are being prescribed the dangerous medications as a result. Researchers pulled data from 14 drug trials involving 34,000 patients and found that, while statins appeared to help prevent heart attacks and strokes in some patients, there was simply not enough evidence to prove that people with no history of heart disease can safely take the drugs. And yet millions of healthy people needlessly taking statins every day at the direction of their doctors. “[W]e found that evidence of potential harm is not being taken seriously,” said Professor Shah Ebrahim, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. “The adverse effects are not included in the trials.” Amy Thompson, a senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation, added that “[i]t is still unclear whether statins provide any real benefits for people without heart and circulatory disease and who are at low risk.” She and others are thus advising people without any history of heart disease to avoid statins altogether. But do statin drugs actually provide any real benefit for anyone? According to a study published in the British Medical Journal in 2010, for every heart attack allegedly prevented by statins, two people suffer liver damage, kidney failure, cataracts or extreme muscle weakness from taking the drug. And statistically, less than three percent of people experience any benefit at all from taking statins (http://www.naturalnews.com/028988_statin_drugs_side_effects.html). Sources for this story include: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1348435/Statins-cause-loss-memory-depression.html

Super bug breakthrough — manuka honey may reverse antibiotic resistance

(NaturalNews) In less than a week, three different research studies have been released about antibiotic-resistant super bugs. Two were issued as nothing less than dire warnings. For example, as NaturalNews covered earlier, UK scientists are calling for the “urgent need for global action” due to the discovery of a spreading phenomenon — a gene that is turning bacteria into not just super bugs but SUPER superbugs. On the heels of that report, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has just sounded the alarm that an impending “health care disaster” is looming unless Big Pharma can find new drugs to combat deadly antibiotic-resistant super bugs. Tired of all this bad news? Keep reading. Because amid all this gloom-and-doom about the threat of deadly super bugs comes yet another study from a third group of scientists that reaches a new and hopeful conclusion. It turns out these researchers have found a way to battle life-threatening super bugs naturally with manuka honey. In fact, manuka honey could be an efficient way to clear chronically infected wounds and could even reverse super bug bacterial resistance to antibiotics. Those are the results of a report just presented at the Society for General Microbiology’s Spring Conference in Harrogate in the UK. Professor Rose Cooper from the University of Wales Institute Cardiff is investigating how manuka honey interacts with three types of bacteria that commonly infest wounds: Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Group A Streptococci and Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). She and her research team have discovered that honey can interfere with the growth of these bacteria in a multitude of ways. And that makes honey a strong option for the treatment of drug-resistant wound infections. The idea that honey has antimicrobial properties is nothing new. In fact, traditional therapies containing honey were used in the topical treatment of wounds by numerous ancient civilizations. Professor Cooper is particularly interested in the super bug-fighting potential of manuka honey, which comes from nectar collected by honey bees foraging on the manuka tree in New Zealand. Although manuka honey is found in modern wound-care products sold around the world, the anti-infection properties of the honey have not been used much by mainstream medicine. According to a press statement, Professor Cooper’s group believes this is because the mechanisms of the honey’s germ zapping action haven’t been known. So they are working to document just how manuka honey halts wound-infecting bacteria, including super bugs, on a molecular level. “Our findings with streptococci and pseudomonads suggest that manuka honey can hamper the attachment of bacteria to tissues which is an essential step in the initiation of acute infections. Inhibiting attachment also blocks the formation of biofilms, which can protect bacteria from antibiotics and allow them to cause persistent infections,” explained Professor Cooper in a media statement. “Other work in our lab has shown that honey can make MRSA more sensitive to antibiotics such as oxacillin — effectively reversing antibiotic resistance. This indicates that existing antibiotics may be more effective against drug-resistant infections if used in combination with manuka honey.” The researchers believe their findings may increase the clinical use of manuka honey as doctors are faced with the threat of diminishingly effective systemic antibiotics now used to try and control wound infections. “We need innovative and effective ways of controlling wound infections that are unlikely to contribute to increased antimicrobial resistance,” said Professor Cooper. “The use of a topical agent (manuka honey) to eradicate bacteria from wounds is potentially cheaper and may well improve antibiotic therapy in the future. This will help reduce the transmission of antibiotic-resistant bacteria from colonized wounds to susceptible patients.” For more information: http://www.sgm.ac.uk/news/ http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-04/idso-laf040711.php http://www.naturalnews.com/032004_superbug_bacteria.html

Lethal in Japan – the real story on radiation

The headlines we wake up to Monday morning say: A new column of smoke rising from an overheating nuclear plant in Japan drove workers out of the smoldering site dented hopes for a breakthrough in the post-quake atomic crisis raising the risk of uncontrolled radiation. The World Health Organization said today that radiation in food after an earthquake damaged a Japanese nuclear plant was more serious than previously thought, eclipsing signs of progress in a battle to avert a catastrophic meltdown in the reactors. The government of the world’s third-biggest economy has been insisting that there is no widespread threat of radiation but confirmed that fresh foodstuffs are now showing signs of contamination . The double speak has officially started so now we know that the trouble is real, dangerously dark and that we will be treated like cows instead of intelligent human beings. On March 19, 2011 it’s been only three short days we have gone to the brink of an unimaginable catastrophe that does not seem so bad if you read the mainstream press. Only light radioactive showers predicted for the weekend over southern California. Nothing to worry about! The Japanese government said Saturday the 19th radioactive iodine turned has already turned up in tap water in Tokyo and five other areas. Of course they add in the double speak saying that it’s only “small but safe amounts of” of some very dangerous stuff. Best way of conceptualizing this event: The largest nuclear complex in the world is now in the process of becoming the hottest radioactive emitter in the world with deadly plutonium in the mix. Very soon the showers will turn heavy and no one is going to want to be in the jet streams path. Already they are starting to measure the exposure to the people local to the disaster in terms of how many CAT scans of radiation they are being exposed to as if these medical scans were safe, which they are not. Nuclear power plants are really dangerous facilities put in practical use on stipulation that they can “completely seal in radiation,” while radioactive weapons commit an impermissible crime scattering radioactive materials in the environment. – Professor Katsuma Yagasaki At the power plant site itself, with almost all the reactors and spent fuel ponds in various stages of meltdown we have a super lethal situation that can only get worse. Representative Michael Burgess, Republican of Texas, asked for detail about the radiation levels at the Japanese nuclear plant. “Are we talking about radiation equivalent to a chest X-ray? A CAT scan?” he asked. Gregory B. Jaczko , the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission replied, ” Levels that would be lethal with a fairly short period of time .” Harold Denton, a former senior official with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission was faced with the Three Mile Island crisis, holding daily news conferences. Talking about the situation in Japan he said, ” This is certainly far worse than Three Mile Island .” But the Japanese are not rating it that seriously yet but we each passing day they will see and be forced to admit the more than partial destruction of the northern part of their nation, which in all likelihood include the Tokyo metropolitan area of 30 million people. There are brave men fighting what could end up being a losing battle against a nuclear Armageddon for Japan and even other large parts of the northern hemisphere. These men will certainly all die so up close they need to be to shoot their water cannon from fire and police trucks. Some of that lethal stuff is already falling down in “safe” dosages in California and everyone there is being told to not sweat about it — it’s perfectly safe. And even though it can be measured on instruments they want you to believe that your cells will not pick up on the radioactive particles. A diplomat who has access to radiation tracking by the U.N.’s Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization told the Associated Press in Vienna that initial readings show radiation has in fact reached California . But a little is good for you so really don’t worry about a thing. You better believe I am deadly serious that some people will fight for the devil, for the death principle , which is what radiation is. I have seen doctors fight for the right to use deadly mercury in vaccines and most dentists have not completely given up on mercury laden dental amalgam. Almost everyone in medicine and dentistry thinks fluoride is wonderful for the children. Once there were some psychologists who actually went so far as to publish their new philosophy that child sexual abuse really was not such a bad thing after all. No sanity is the watchword here – but yes I agree. Radiation is healthy, going out in the sun, without toxic sunscreen exposes one to healthy radiation that provides the most wonderful biochemical life-giving effects. But we are going to be talking about really nasty radiation coming from Japan and let’s see what the dosages and exposures are in the end. In principle, using the Atomic Energy Control Board’s (AECB) regulatory limits, we can calculate that 0.1 micrograms of plutonium can overdose one person while noting that maximum safe exposure limits is placed at 0.56 micrograms maximum full body exposure and 0.25 micrograms for lung exposure. “Experiments with beagle dogs suggest that about 27 millionths of a gram of insoluble plutonium would be sufficient to cause lung cancer in an adult human being with virtual certainty, with significant risks probably associated with far lower doses,” report International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. According to the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility (CCNR) 0.1 grams would overdose one million people, one gram, ten million people, 100 grams, one billion people and 600 grams, six billion people . “A rapid release of one kilogram of plutonium at ground level in dispersible, inhalable form would cause a public health emergency of the first magnitude. Plutonium air concentrations could be on the order of hundreds of micrograms per cubic meter of air at one kilometer from the release site. Individuals breathing this air would inhale enough plutonium to cause cancer with certainty within minutes,” said Dr. Edwin S. Lyman of the Nuclear Control Institute. This is the nightmare of nightmares. There is an incredible amount of plutonium in this plant that could very well put us all in supercritical danger. 350 tons of uranium is equal to about a kilogram of plutonium. – Dr. Chris Busby The Pentagon has misled the world with claims that its DU is safe. They have lied about depleted uranium regardless of how many of their own soldiers become ill and die from it and from the toxic vaccines they administer in mega doses before troops are deployed into war theaters. The Pentagon has maintained that DU shells are safe because they contain only mildly radioactive uranium when in reality depleted uranium also contains small amounts of plutonium and other highly radioactive elements . Despite the authorities’ attempts at concealment, the truth is out. Since World War II, accumulated radiation has increased the radiation burden to the global community. Nuclear weapons testing, nuclear power plants, radiation accidents like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, and terrible nuclear accidents from earlier years in Russia have all contributed to increasing the overall radiation contamination of the global environment. We cannot escape exposure because we breathe the air, drink the water and eat the food from contaminated soils. When uranium burns into particles, it will enter human bodies ingested with drinking water and food, or inhaled with air. In this case, the whole radiation and chemical toxicity will be released in the body. – Professor Katsuma Yagasaki According to Dr. Katsuma Yagasaki, “DU dust-like particles can enter human bodies, and once taken into the body, they will become tens of millions times more hazardous. Newly released data indicate that low-level radiation is more likely to cause biochemical abnormalities than intensive high-level radiation. It is wrong to make light of the hazard of low-level radiation .” After the “Shock and Awe” campaign in Iraq in 2003, very fine particles of depleted uranium were captured with larger sand and dust particles in filters in Britain. These particles had traveled in 7-9 days from Iraqi battlefields as far as 2400 miles away. The radiation measured in the atmosphere quadrupled within a few weeks after the beginning of the 2003 campaign, and at one of the five monitoring locations, the levels required two official alerts to the British Environment Agency. Within nine days of the start of the Iraq war on March 19, 2003, higher levels of uranium were picked up on five sites in Berkshire. – London Times The Ministry of Defense refused to acknowledge the possibility of any connection between the use of atomic weaponry in Iraq and these readings in England, saying the uranium was of a “natural origin” and there was no evidence that depleted uranium had reached Britain from Iraq. According to Dr. Chris Busby and Dr. Saoirse Morgan, who forced the British government to release the above information, “On the basis of the mean increase in uranium in air of about 500nBq/m3 we use respiration data to calculate that each person in the area inhaled some 23 million uranium particles of diameter 0.25 microns . As far as we know, this is the first evidence that uranium aerosols from battle use have been shown to travel so far.” The military, essential partners in everything nuclear, have been playing with the nuclear fires on the battlefields and the stuff is getting back home. Typical they would not tell us commoners anything about it. Will they tell us when things get completely out of control in Japan? The shattering truth of all this leads us to the conclusion that radiation travels with ease on the winds and the jet stream long, very long distances, so it’s a big mistake to assume we’re out of harm’s way. Busby and Morgan made it perfectly clear that “the evidence from the present analysis is implicit in the results; i.e., the increases found clearly demonstrate that the uranium particles are capable of long-distance travel .” Busby and Morgan continue saying, “Despite many pieces of evidence that the uranium aerosols are long-lived in the environment and are able to travel considerable distances, this is the first evidence as far as we know, that they are able to travel thousands of miles. The distance traveled from Baghdad to Reading following the wind patterns implicit in the pressure systems at the time is about 2,500 miles. Although this transport may be hard to believe at first, the regular desert sand events that occur in the UK should teach us that the planet is not such a large place, and that with regard to certain long-lived atmospheric pollutants, no man is an island .” After traveling 2,500 miles, if the exposure to the English was 23 million uranium particles, it is anyone’s guess the amount of fallout that reached the United States. Odds are that everyone in ?the northern hemisphere was contaminated to one degree or another. Special Note on Iodine: Dr. Miller says, “Radioisotopes pose an important health risk to man in nuclear accidents associated with electric power generation due to their uptake by the thyroid glands. Topical application of tincture of iodine (I) was found to be effective in blocking the thyroid uptake of orally administered 131I [131-Iodine] in humans. Abdominal skin application of tincture of I [iodine] resulted in an approximately 82 percent reduction in the uptake of 131I by the thyroid gland. The effectiveness varied among individuals and may have depended on the quantity applied and on the application site. In each study group, elevated levels of serum I were observed. This may be an attractive alternative method of mass protection from radioisotopes of I following nuclear accidents. Serum I concentrations peaked at approximately two hours after topical application of tincture of I.” Dr. David Brownstein says, “13mg/day of iodine prevents approximately 96 percent of radioactive iodine from binding to the thyroid gland. That is the approximate dosage of iodine ingested daily by the Japanese. This is over 100x the average daily dose ingested by Americans. Please keep in mind it is not just the thyroid gland that is at risk with exposure to radioactive iodine. The breasts, ovaries, uterus, prostate, skin, and other organs all bind and require iodine for optimal functioning. In fact, every cell in our body requires iodine for optimal functioning. Therefore, if we are iodine deficient, exposure to radioactive iodine can potentially result in damage to all the cells of the body. My experience has shown over 95 percent of patients are deficient in iodine. I believe iodine deficiency is one of the underlying causes of the epidemic of cancer of the breast, thyroid, ovaries, uterus and prostate. Furthermore, iodine deficiency is the underlying cause of thyroid disorders including Hashimoto’s disease, Grave’s disease, goiter, and hypothyroidism. Our iodine levels have fallen 50 percent over the last 30 years. During that time, all of the above conditions have been rising at near epidemic rates.”

Next Page »