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…

Vitamin B-based treatment may permanently cure vision-robbing eye disease

(NaturalNews) One of 2,000 people in the U.S. is diagnosed each year with keratoconus, a vision-robbing disease usually first spotted during the teenage years. The cause isn’t understood, but it is known to damage the collagen fibers that form the structure of the cornea (the outer surface of the eye). It’s the cornea that allows the eye to focus properly. As keratoconus worsens over time, the cornea degenerates and becomes thinner, bulges outwards and makes clear vision impossible. Standard treatments for the disease in the U.S. include specialized eyeglasses, hard contact lenses, and implanted lenses. However, none of these can permanently correct keratoconus. Severe cases often require corneal transplants, which are not only expensive but may not always “take.” But now there is a stunning development that may soon change this outlook for those suffering from this eye disease. At the 115th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Ophthalmology currently underway in Orlando, Florida, scientist Paolo Vinciguerra, MD, just announced the results of a study showing a vitamin-based treatment that may permanently cure keratoconus in many people. The new treatment, which has already proven effective in Europe and other parts of the world, is called collagen crosslinking and involves applying riboflavin (a B vitamin) to the cornea, which is then exposed to a specific form of ultraviolet light. The results? Collagen fibers regenerate with new bonds forming between them, increasing the strength and stiffness of the cornea. B vitamin may be permanent cure The treatment not only has a high success rate in restoring vision, but it also actually combats the causes of keratoconus — the degeneration of collagen — and reduces the odds the eye disease will ever return. Results of Dr. Vinciguerra’s clinical trial in Milan, Italy, showed the vitamin treatment improved vision in approximately 70 percent of patients. Dr. Vinciguerra’s new study confirmed that adverse effects are rare and the procedure seems to be extraordinarily safe. The treatment is currently in clinical trials in the United States and is expected to receive FDA approval in 2012. In an American Academy of Ophthalmology session entitled “Long-term Results of Corneal Crosslinking for Keratoconus”, Dr. Vinciguerra described the treatment of more than 250 keratoconus patients who received the collagen crosslinking at his clinic. Sixty-eight percent of the 500 eyes treated gained significant visual acuity. What’s more, these improvements remained stable at the end of a 3 year follow-up period. “For many people with keratoconus, collagen crosslinking can provide a better and more permanent solution to their vision problems,” Dr. Vinciguerra said in a media statement. “Given that no current treatment in use in the U.S. offers permanent correction, this effective option represents a significant advance for corneal medicine.” Sources for this article include: http://www.aao.org/ http://www.nkcf.org/en/about-keratoconus.html http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001013.htm

Sucralose found in drinking water supply of more than 28 million Americans

(NaturalNews) If you’ve been diligently avoiding the consumption of chemical sweeteners like sucralose, you may be alarmed to learn that researchers have found sucralose lurking in the drinking water supply of more than 28 million Americans. A recent study tested water samples from 19 water treatment plants in the United States serving more than 28 million people. Researchers analyzed the samples for the artificial sweetener sucralose. Samples tested positive for sucralose in the source water of 15 out of 19 plants. Furthermore, treatment failed to remove the sucralose from the drinking water: sucralose was also found in the finished drinking water from 13 out of 19 plants. Researchers determined that current water treatment methods fail to effectively remove sucralose from our water supply, leaving millions of Americans to unknowingly consume this artificial sweetener every single day. Why is Sucralose in Our Drinking Water? When a person ingests sucralose, a large percentage of it is not broken down and is instead excreted as waste. This waste goes through the water treatment plant, where the sucralose remains intact and goes on to become part of our drinking water supply. Because sucralose has become one of the most widely used artificial sweeteners in commercial soft drinks and snack foods, it is no wonder that it is making an appearance in our drinking water. If sucralose consumption continues to rise, it stands to reason that everyone drinking public water will be ingesting more of this chemical sweetener as well – whether they want to or not. Sucralose is Not Safe for Consumption The public should be aware that the majority of the studies on the safety of sucralose are funded by the creators of the most popular sucralose product on the market. The conflict of interest is obvious and the results of these studies are clearly biased in favor of sucralose. Independent studies aren’t nearly so positive. Questions about the negative impact sucralose has on male fertility, red blood cell count, kidney health, gut flora balance and body weight are serious concerns generated from the results of these studies. Many researchers and health experts are convinced that sucralose should never have been deemed safe for human consumption. Common sense dictates that any chemically-processed food is unfit for human consumption. The fact that these substances are now running rampant through our water supply is an atrocity that violates our right to choose what we put into our own bodies. Sources for this article include: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/09/20/why-are-millions-of-americans-getting-this-synthetic-sweetener-in-their-drinking-water.aspx http://naturalsociety.com/sucralose-contaminating-nations-drinking-water/ http://www.greenmedinfo.com/article/sucralose-found-drinking-water-tested-low-rate-removal-11-and-serving-28-million-people

A handful of walnuts each day significantly lowers breast cancer risk

(NaturalNews) Researchers from Marshall University in West Virginia report in the journal Nutrition and Cancer that small amounts of walnuts eaten daily can significantly lower the risk of breast cancer in women. Walnuts are a naturally great tasting source of healthy Omega-3 fats, minerals, vitamins and protein that have long been associated with good health. Interestingly, it is not only the potent dose of Omega-3 fats that are responsible for the risk reduction, but also a synergistic effect between multiple nutrients provided by the nut. Scientists now confirm that eating two ounces of this super food each day can significantly lower your risk of developing this insidious killer disease. The study was conducted using mice that are genetically predisposed to develop breast cancer tumors. Lead researcher, Dr. Elaine Hardman set out to determine the effect of a typical diet and a walnut-enhanced diet through an entire lifespan. Scientists examined dietary nutrition supplied by the mother through conception and weaning and then by eating walnuts directly. Mice are frequently used for this type of research because they follow similar patterns of breast cancer carcinogenesis when compared to humans. Dr. Hardman found that the group whose diet included walnuts from conception to late life developed breast cancer at less than half the rate of the group consuming a typical diet. In addition, the number of tumors and their sizes were significantly smaller. Of the results, she commented: “These reductions are particularly important when you consider that the mice were genetically programmed to develop cancer at a high rate… we were able to reduce the risk for cancer even in the presence of a preexisting genetic mutation.” Researchers noted that they were unable to determine if the cancer prevention benefits were the result of deletions or additions to the diet. Adding healthy Omega fats from walnuts displaced unhealthy fats and balanced Omega-3 to Omega-6 ratios to lower systemic inflammation and oxidized LDL cholesterol levels that result in cancer development. Other studies including walnuts have shown that there are multiple health benefits achieved from the unique blend of fats, vitamins (especially vitamin E) and minerals in the flavorful nut. The result of this study continues to add to the wealth of scientific evidence that natural nutrients provided by an array of ‘super foods’ significantly contribute to our health. Dr. Hardman concluded: “Food is important medicine in our diet… the results of this study indicate that increased consumption of walnuts could be part of a healthy diet and reduce risk for cancer in future generations.” It’s easy to add two ounces of walnuts (about 14 halves) to your daily diet to prevent breast cancer and a host of other chronic diseases. [Editor's Note: NaturalNews is strongly against the use of all forms of animal testing. We fully support implementation of humane medical experimentation that promotes the health and wellbeing of all living creatures.] Article References: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110901163921.htm http://www.lef.org/news/LefDailyNews.htm?NewsID=11598&Section=NUTRITION http://www.marshall.edu/murc/breast-cancer-risk-drops-when-diet-includes-walnuts-marshall-researchers-find/ http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/233754.php

Busted! Big Pharma epilepsy study rigged to push drug gabapentin

(NaturalNews) If you think being concerned over natural health issues means you automatically dismiss everything that mainstream medicine has to say – think again. Not only are many mainstream researchers coming up with evidence that nutrition and other natural therapies really are effective but now comes a report published in none other than Archives of Internal Medicine , a Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), that blows the lid off an unethical Big Pharma practice. Specifically, the article shows how drug pushing – not science – appears to have been the motivation behind a study that supposedly was testing the drug Neurontin (gabapentin), currently widely used to treat nerve pain. The test was allegedly designed to document how various doses could treat epilepsy. But it turns out the trial was set up to “seed” the results in order to sell the drug, much like a card shark might stack a deck of cards in order to cheat at a game of poker. According to the just published article, when researchers are involved in so-called seeding research, they are conducting clinical trials primarily as marketing tools so the drug can be promoted and sales pushed by doctors. Bottom line: these are promotional trials used for selling drugs and research subjects and physicians may not be told the true purpose of the studies. Surely, promoting a study as true scientific research when it is really a ploy used to market drugs must be illegal, right? According to the new report, Big Pharma is allowed to get away with seeding studies under the current law. However, the authors (Samuel D. Krumholz, B.A., David S. Egilman, M.D., M.P.H., and Joseph S. Ross, M.D., M.H.S., who are consultants at the request of plaintiffs currently suing Pfizer Inc. over the gabapentin seeding study in the U.S.), report the practice is clearly unethical. To prepare their report, entitled “Study of Neurontin: Titrate to Effect, Profile of Safety (STEPS)”, the researchers investigated whether the study was a seeding trial by looking into documents related to the marketing, sales practices, and product liability litigation of Neurontin (gabapentin), prescribed for epilepsy. Because the authors were consultants to the plaintiffs in a lawsuit involving the drug, they had access to depositions and the document database. And that meant they were able to get their hands on damning correspondence, clinical research reports and market research analyses for a look inside the workings of Big Pharma’s pushing of the drug. What did they discover? Although the trial’s supposed purpose was to study dose-titration of gabapentin among 2,759 patients enrolled by 772 investigators, the study was uncontrolled and unblended. In other words, it didn’t meet the basic criteria for a sound drug study. However, articles based on the results of this anything-but-gold-standard-science study managed to be published in two journals – even though the sloppy study design was questioned by two outside sources and that “data quality during the study was often compromised.” But here’s even more compelling evidence something was not on the up and up: the authors cite documents that strongly suggest drug company marketing personnel were involved in collecting the trial data. What’s more, the Big Pharma marketing heads viewed the trial (and not only its results) as a way to push sales of gabapentin. This involvement of the marketing team and the failure to disclose the study’s real purpose from both research subjects and collaborators are the “smoking guns” that mark the STEPS study as a seeding trial, according to the authors. They are calling for institutional review boards (IRBs) to finally take a strong stance in discouraging these types of marketing-over-science trials. “Reform of the current IRB system,” they wrote, “as well as promoting better clinical trial practice in the human subjects research community, are necessary to prevent continued conduct of seeding trials by the pharmaceutical industry.” In an accompanying commentary to the study, G. Caleb Alexander, M.D., of the University of Chicago, noted that seeding trials negatively affect scientific knowledge and clinical care. “The biomedical enterprise depends on good science for its foundation, and good science requires transparency of methods and integrity of purpose,” he wrote. He pointed out the evidence presented by Krumholz and colleagues “strongly supports the conclusion that STEPS meets key criteria of seeding trials.” Dr. Alexander also stated that these unethical seeding trials can detract from the legitimate value of well-designed and well-conducted phase 4 studies of pharmaceutical drugs. “Although the road is long and the hill steep, these and other changes offer the promise of incrementally improving and safeguarding the integrity of the biomedical enterprise. One can only hope that the report by Krumholz et al will contribute to this evolution,” he concluded. Let’s be blunt here: the new report in the Archives of Internal Medicine shows that Big Pharma’s research results cannot always be trusted and may place more importance of skewing data to promote and push drugs on the public than in coming up with true scientifically sound data. For more information: http://archinte.ama-assn.org/current.dtl

Bacanora Minerals Ltd.: Lithium Results for Drilling on La Ventana Property, Sonora, Mexico

Bacanora Minerals Ltd.: Lithium Results for Drilling on La Ventana Property, Sonora, Mexico CALGARY, ALBERTA– – BACANORA MINERALS LTD. is pleased to announce the results of its first drilling campaign on the La Ventana concession within its Sierra Madre lithium project, located in eastern Sonora, Mexico. Read more on CCNMatthews via Yahoo! Finance Oz Minerals [...]

ProAlgaZyme is an algae infusion of plant-structured water

(NaturalNews) One of the simple truths of superior health is that water from plants is healthier than tap water or “processed water.” Plants structure the water, arranging molecules into a life-supporting pattern that’s far more complex and advanced than simple H2O. This is one of the reasons why juicing water vegetables is so good for your health: The water found in the fibers of celery, cucumbers and kale is plant-based “structured water” arranged in a molecular pattern imbued with natural biocompatibility. It’s a myth that all H2O is the same. Water doesn’t merely consist of isolated molecules of H2O floating around. Instead, the molecular bonds of H2O in water are constantly being released and reformed with neighboring molecules. Water is fluid , even from the point of view of its covalent bonds (in the sense of chemistry). It is perhaps the single most miraculous substance in our universe, without which human life would absolutely not exist. Life on Earth depends on water In fact, one of the things that makes planet Earth so unique is that it sits in precisely the “comfort zone” of orbital distance from the sun to allow water to flow. It’s not so cold that the water freezes, nor so hot that the water boils off. Earth is the water planet , and we are water beings (75% or more of our body is water). Juicing is probably the best way to get structured plant-based water into your body. But now there’s another way that’s even easier. An Arizona company has developed a way to grow structured water using distilled water in aquariums full of freshwater algae. The alga, as living aquatic plants, alter the structure of the water in much the same way as a celery plant. But instead of locking all the water inside itself, the alga release it back into the aquarium. Multiply this by hundreds of large aquariums and you get a structured water farm , where the water can be collected, filtered and then distributed to customers who want to drink an algae infusion of plant-based water . That’s how ProAlgaZyme came about. ProAlgaZyme is structured plant water in a bottle I’m not usually a big fan of products in bottles. And even in this case, fresh daily juicing of vegetables is still the best way to get structured water into your body. But for those who don’t have the time to buy, wash and juice organic vegetables on a daily basis, ProAlgaZyme offers a convenient way to add a supplement of structured plant-based water to your daily diet. It’s not a replacement for all the plant medicines found in fruits and vegetables, of course. ProAlgaZyme is just the structured water part and contains no anthocyanidins, carotenoids or other vegetable nutrients. But it is a concentrated source of plant-based water that has helped support remarkable health in many people who consume it. Once again, FDA regulations prohibit me from describing the full extent of how this substance may support human health and healing, but we can say, at the very least, that ProAlgaZyme has been scientifically shown to support a healthy inflammation response .* In addition, ProAlgaZyme may be helpful in supporting cardiovascular health by maintaining HDL and LDL cholesterol already within a normal range.* Those who wish to maintain healthy blood pressure levels may also benefit from the support of ProAlgaZyme.* The ProAlgaZyme algae infusion has been clinically tested , and the results are quite remarkable. I have personally toured the ProAlgaZyme water farm in Arizona, where I also reviewed the scientific literature. I was blown away by the attention to quality in the lab there, and the clinical studies I saw were very exciting. Again, FDA regulations prohibit me from telling you the results of the studies I saw, because the FDA censors nutritional science. It is unlawful in the United States to speak of the scientific findings for nutritional substances you offer for sale. (What a sad commentary on America, huh?) Click here to see ProAlgaZyme in our store. How ProAlgaZyme is made Freshwater algae is grown in large tanks filled with distilled water that’s circulated among the tanks. After a period of growing time, the water is drawn off the algae tanks, filtered, tested for purity and then bottled. ProAlgaZyme has quietly become one of the best-kept secrets inside the nutritional products industry because many other companies use it as their water base in extremely high-potency liquid supplements. There’s even an effort to research ProAlgaZyme as a future pharmaceutical. But of course, we don’t need it to be classified as a “drug” to benefit from the substance right now as a nutritional supplement. That’s what’s so great about the availability of this product right now: It’s affordable and readily available. If you’re interested in seeing how this algae infusion of structured water may help you, try it yourself. It’s on sale now on our store specials page: Click here for the specials page in our store. You only need to take an ounce or two each day to benefit from ProAlgaZyme. You could also, of course, grow your own algae infused water in aquariums at home, but that’s probably far more complex than we care to get into. Each bottle of ProAlgaZyme contains 32 fluid ounces. Until we figure out how to grow our own, ProAlgaZyme is readily available. (And don’t forget to juice raw organic vegetables whenever you have the chance, too!) * These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Compass Minerals International Inc. Reports Operating Results (10-Q)

Compass Minerals International Inc. Reports Operating Results (10-Q) By 10qk. Compass Minerals International Inc. ( CMP ) filed Quarterly Report for the period ended 2010-09-30. Read more » » Read more on Guru Focus Compass Minerals Announces Price Increase on Sulfate of Potash Specialty Fertilizer Great Salt Lake Minerals Corp., a subsidiary of Compass Minerals [...]

95 percent of "preventive" mastectomies offer no benefit, study finds

(NaturalNews) A new study shows that the increasingly popular practice of “preventive mastectomy” in non-cancerous breasts provides no benefit to the vast majority of women. “It’s important for women to understand that, except for one subset of breast cancer patients, they don’t need to do this,” said lead author Isabelle Bedrosian of University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. “Hopefully, it’ll reassure patients wondering if they should.” Approximately 40,000 women die from breast cancer in the United States each year, and another 200,000 cases are diagnosed. Because cancer in one breast is known to increase the risk of cancer recurrence in the other breast, doctors are increasingly recommending that cancer survivors opt to have both breasts removed as a “preventive” measure. And women are opting for it in huge numbers, seeking the peace of mind that it is said to offer. The number of preventive mastectomies in the United States increased two-and-a-half-fold between 1998 and 2003. Today, 11 percent of all women undergoing a mastectomy on a cancerous breast choose to have the non-cancerous breast removed as well. Analysts have attributed this increase to more advanced screening techniques that detect cancers smaller and earlier; popularization of genetic screening and the idea that some genes may predispose families to breast cancer; and wider public acceptance of plastic surgery combined with advances in reconstructive technology. Yet while it has been strongly established that elective mastectomy does reduce the risk of breast-cancer recurrence, there has been no research to suggest that it actually lengthens a woman’s life span. “We have not had real data to guide us,” Bedrosian said. “We can’t sit down with a woman and say, ‘If you do this, this is your expected benefit.’ And when we don’t have those data, then biases become the big drivers of decision making.” In the new study, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute , Bedrosian and colleagues analyzed the records of 107,106 women in the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registry. All the women had undergone a mastectomy to treat breast cancer of Stage III or lower; 8,902 had chosen to have a healthy breast removed, as well. After controlling for other risk factors, the researchers found only a small difference in survival rates between women who had chosen to have two breasts removed and women who had chosen to have only one removed. Upon further analysis, they discovered that this benefit was only present in women under the age of 50 with estrogen receptor-negative, early-stage tumors. In this group, elective mastectomy increased the survival rate by 4.8 percent, amounting to just under five lives saved for every 100 surgeries. Elective mastectomy provided no survival benefit to women outside this demographic. The researchers believe that even when cancers recur, most women will not be killed by them but will instead die of other causes first. Only in women whose cancers lack estrogen receptors and who would otherwise have long lives ahead of them does recurrence appear to pose a serious threat to survival. The most effective breast cancer drugs on the market are those that lower the body’s production of estrogen, which fuels the growth of many cancers. Tumors that lack estrogen receptors do not depend on the hormone for their growth, however, meaning that women with these cancers cannot use the most effective drugs and tend to have higher mortality rates. Breast-cancer specialist Larry Norton of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City expressed skepticism about the study’s methodology and cautioned against doctors and patients giving it too much weight. “This is an observational study, and hence it is impossible to control for confounding variables,” Norton said, “and should not be used for individual clinical decisionmaking.” Norton admitted, however, that ethics make it impossible to perform a true controlled study on the question, since such an experiment might end up increasing cancer mortality in one group of participants. Bedrosian disputed Norton’s criticism, noting that the researchers used rigorous statistical analysis and controlled well for interference from other variables. She believes that the conclusions are, in fact, strong enough to help women make better-informed decisions about elective mastectomy. “We looked at this in multiple different ways, and we got the same answer every time. And the results make good clinical sense. That adds another level of reassurance,” she said. “Our hope is that when women hear the numbers, they will take a second look and decide not to go forward with a preventive mastectomy [in their healthy breast] if it won’t give them a survival benefit.” Victor Vogel, national vice president for research at the American Cancer Society, said the results suggest that women should wait a full year before going through with the removal of a healthy breast. “In a younger woman with [estrogen receptor]-negative disease, an [elective} mastectomy may be considered," he said. "In the vast majority of women older than 50 with ER-positive disease, prudent waiting is probably the most appropriate." Bedrosian said that the point of the study was not to impose "a uniform mandate" that women should never get the procedure, but that their decisions must be well informed. "This is still a decision to be made by the patient after talking with her doctor," Bedrosian said. "We hope this study helps women make better decisions [and] provides some reassurance that perhaps a [preventive] mastectomy is not necessary, perhaps overly aggressive and perhaps a bit too much.” Sources for this story include: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6885581.html http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/180769.php; http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968122,00.html.

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia breakthrough: green tea extract halts cancer progression in majority of patients

(NaturalNews) According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a form of cancer that causes the number of white blood cells called B lymphocytes, or B cells, to increase abnormally. Eventually, the cancerous cells can move through the blood to the liver, spleen, and other organs. When CLL spreads, it is usually treated with an arsenal of side effect-laden chemotherapies. But new research has revealed a natural substance — an extract of green tea — may have the ability to put the brakes on CLL. Mayo Clinic researchers recently announced these findings in Chicago at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). In a phase II clinical trial, epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), the major component of green tea, halted the progression in the majority of CLL patients. The research is the latest in a series of Mayo studies that shows EGCG appears to have a powerful yet non-toxic impact on CLL. About eight years ago, Mayo scientists first tested EGCG in the lab and documented it reduced the survival of CLL cells. This was followed by a successful phase I clinical trial, published last May in the Journal of Clinical Oncology , that showed the leukemia cell count was not only reduced in one-third of the study participants, but a majority of patients in the trial with enlarged lymph nodes due to CLL saw a 50 percent or greater reduction in their lymph node size. The latest phase II clinical trial involved 41 CLL patients who received EGCG and the results were even more dramatic. The majority, 69 percent, of the research subjects had a positive biological response to EGCG — including a 20 percent or greater sustained reduction in blood lymphocyte count and/or a 50 percent or greater reduction in lymph node size. Overall, the treatment was well tolerated with only very mild side effects in most patients. According to Tait Shanafelt, M.D., a Mayo Clinic hematologist who headed study, the results show EGCC “may be useful for stabilizing this form of leukemia, potentially slowing it down.” “These studies advance the notion that a nutraceutical like EGCG can and should be studied as cancer preventives,” Neil Kay, M.D. a hematology researcher whose laboratory first tested the green tea extract in leukemic blood cells from CLL patients, said in the statement to the press. “Using nontoxic chemicals to push back cancer growth to delay the need for toxic therapies is a worthy goal in oncology research — particularly for forms of cancer initially managed by observation such as CLL.” For more information: http://abstract.asco.org/AbstView_74_47574.html http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000532.htm

Next Page »