Home     Log in

Archive for October 12th, 2008

Cancer Lies Impoverish You Before You Die (part 2)

October 12th, 2008 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Uncategorized

Cancer Lies

Lie 1: Conventional medicine can cure your cancer.

Lie 2: It is criminal the way alternative medicine holds out false hope and diverts patients away from reliable medical treatment.

Lie 3: We put the patient’s interests first.

You’ll notice that lie 2 refers back to lie 1.

Conventional medicine has three weapons against cancer.

Surgery

Chemotherapy

Radiation therapy

Surgery is successful if the cancer is removed before it has spread. So it could be described as a cure for cancer.

Radiation therapy is based on the theory that your body is better at fighting the damage done by radiation therapy than the cancer is. So if you almost kill the body there is hope that you will completely kill the cancer.

Chemotherapy is based on the hope that healthy tissue will be better at fighting the poisons administered. All drugs use the patient as a guinea pig, because the drug companies argue that it would be cruel to do placebo controlled tests on patients who thought that they were getting medicine and were getting a sugar pill.

My theory about tests

When alternative medicine has 40% success the drug companies claim that it is the placebo effect. Now the placebo effect should work just as well for conventional medicine as for alternative medicine so if we subtract 40% from the success rate of , we will have the true success rate.

That means that when has a 1.5% success rate the figures would work out like this.

Out of 200 patients

80 are cured by the placebo effect (40%), then

77 of these survivors are killed by the leaving

3 “cures” (1.5%)

If these are the figures expected by the drug companies, it’s not surprising that they refuse to do placebo controlled tests.

Money the only consideration

In 1983, Ezekiel J. Emanuel, M.D. (an oncologist and bioethicist), presented the results of a study that examined the medical records of almost 8,000 cancer patients. Dr. Emanuel found that in cases where was administered in the final six months of life, ONE-THIRD of the patients suffered from cancers that are known to be unresponsive to !

According to Gordon Zubrod, M.D., (a researcher for the National Cancer Institute), is considered to be highly effective only in these cancers:

Burkitt’s
Choriocarcinoma
Acute lymphocytic
Hodgkin’s disease
Lymphoscarcoma
Embryonal testicular cancer

Wilms’ Tumor
Ewing’s sarcoma
Rhabdomyosarcoma
Retinoblastoma

These cancers affect very few people so it isn’t profitable to restrict only to patients that will benefit from it. So if you know of someone who died of pneumonia after being given for you will know that she was killed for profit. Because is not on the list.

What happened to “We put the patient first.”?

If the cancer industry put patients first, patients wouldn’t be given that wouldn’t work.

If cancer patients came first, the industry wouldn’t suppress successful competitors.

1. A Canadian nurse invented an effective brew from four weeds. The cancer industry suppressed all sales of the weeds, and of the finished brew.

2. The CSIRO (a government research organisation) in Australia discovered a native plant that cured . So the cancer industry managed to get it made “on prescription only”, and it is never prescribed.

3. Vitamin B17 was shown to fight cancer. So a concerted campaign was conducted to convince everyone that it would kill them. The campaign took advantage of the fact that most people wouldn’t know that the staple diet in parts of Africa is millet, which is rich in B17. Everyone is scared of cyanide, so it was emphasized that B17 contains cyanide - so does cobalamine, another vitamin that we need.

It looks as if the second lie is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. It should be the victims of who are complaining about the way conventional medicine holds out false hope and diverts patients away from reliable medical treatment.

One cancer specialist resigned from his work because he could no longer live with his conscience. He said that it was usual to get half a million dollars out of each patient before they died.

Prevention

Although the record of conventional medicine for curing cancer is deplorable, it is non existent when it comes to preventing cancer. The only preventive treatment that I ever heard of was the suggestion that all women should have their breasts removed to prevent .

Alternative medicine excels at prevention. Many of the treatments are every day foods for some cultures and others are readily available.

Have you heard of any of these powerful cancer fighters?

Garlic

Onions

Broccoli

Tomatoes

Curry

Selenium

Curry

Apricot Kernels
That’s not an exhaustive list but this page is about health lies, not about proper treatment.

You haven’t got cancer (yet) so why should you care? Wouldn’t it be better to avoid getting cancer in the first place? Read more about these murderous lies about
diethealth.vitheal.com/Saturated-Fat-Food-Lies.html” target=”_blank healthy diets and other health concerns.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Related posts

Tags: , , , , , ,

Gardasil - Hail It As A Cure-Dismiss It As One Big Experiment

October 12th, 2008 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Uncategorized

(Special from The Dallas Examiner; Member NNPA) Man on a mission: Side-stepping the legislature, Governor Rick Perry recently mandated that all Texas schoolgirls entering the sixth grade receive vaccination for the Human Papillomavirus. That mandate is causing quite a stir, but Perry asserts that the mandate is necessary. “Requiring young girls to get vaccinated before they come in contact with HPV is responsible health and fiscal policy that has the potential to significantly reduce the cases of and mitigate future medical costs, “said Governor Perry.

Governor Perry also directed state health authorities to make the vaccine available free to girls 9 to 18 who are uninsured, enrolled in Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program or whose insurance does not cover vaccines. In addition, he ordered that Medicaid offer Gardasil to women ages 19 to 21 and Dallas County Health and Human Services has been prompt to respond to the Governor’s orders. DCJJS currently offers the Human Papillomavirus vaccine through its adult immunization clinic.

“DCHHS wants to provide the vaccine as a weapon against the deadly form of cancer”, said Zachary Thompson, DCHHS Director. “According to the Texas Cancer Registry, there were approximately 1,169 new cases and 391 deaths from in Texas in 2006. DCHHS is awaiting shipment of the HPV vaccine for children through the Texas Vaccine for Children program and will make a formal announcement when it becomes available.”

HPV is harmless in most cases: Many know that the vaccine has been tested for safeness and effectiveness against HPV. But what many do not know is that, according to the Center for Disease Control, HPV infection, in most cases, is harmless. In fact, 90 percent of infections are fought off by the bodies own immune system, rendering the infection inactive or causing it to dissolve on its own. But, there are other strains of HPV that are deemed as “high-risk” because the virus may, in rare cases, develop into persistent infecti9on that can progress to if left untreated (There are more than 100 known strains of HPV, 30 of these are sexually transmitted and are defined as genital HPV). It is estimated that fewer than 4000 Americans die from HPV related yearly. So why the need for an executive order which is used in times of crisis and emergency?

Justification: According to the Supreme Court: It is basic that no showing merely of a rational relationship to some colorable state interest would suffice (in reference to use of executive powers); in this highly sensitive constitutional area, “only the gravest abuses, endangering paramount interests, give occasion for permissible limitation,” Thomas v. Collins, 323 U.S. 516,530. Furthermore, Sherbert v. Verner (1963) posits that before executive powers can be used it must meet a three question litmus test which looks at the following questions: 1. government infringement with respect to its proposed action, 2. if the government has a compelling state interest which justifies government intervention and finally, 3. if compelling interests do not exist are there alternative means by which the government can achieve its goal and thus not burden the citizenry. The question is has the government determined this infection cannot be avoided by behavioral change and has chosen to shift the focus toward vaccination? And, if so, is mandatory vaccination against a disease that is largely sexually transmissible really the answer or is there a larger problem?

Clinical Trials: In initial clinical trials, Merk tested over 20,000 females, giving half of them placeboes and the other half Gardasil. The subjects were followed for approximately four years. More noteworthy, a little more than 1000 subjects, ages ranging from 9 to 16 years of age were a part of the trials and they were followed for only 18 months. Both in the placebo and in the vaccine groups, there are reports of adverse reactions. Gardasil’s own package insert sites as some of the adverse reactions reports of arthritis, headaches, dizziness, nausea, and pain at the injection site. Page 12 of the Merck package insert also cites 102 incidents of serious, adverse reactions such as headaches, dizziness, juvenile arthritis, gastroenteritis, appendicitis, pelvic inflammatory disease and includes 17 deaths out of 21,464 subjects. Merck concluded these deaths have nothing to do with their product. The test group was followed for a period of four years, raising doubts that as to whether Gardasil prevents anything, especially since the incubation period for the infection is about 20 years and usually presents in women in their late 30s and 40s. The only thing known with certainty is the short-term effects of this vaccine. Additionally, the study did not address carcinogens (any potentially cancer causing agent) or genotoxicity (a chemical or agent that causes damage to cellular DNA which can result in mutations or cancer).

Merck’s troubled past: Gardasil is made by Merk, a giant pharmaceutical manufacturer. Merck received licensing for Gardasil from the Food and Drug Administration in June of 2006, while the vaccine was still in clinical trials. In Gardasil’s own packing insert, it asserts that HPV types 16 and 18 are the cause for 70 percent of and Gardasil is reported to be affective against these implications for types 11 and 6. Merck’s package insert goes on to explain that women will continue to need regular screenings and that the vaccine may not protect everyone, raising questions as to whether this vaccine really is 100 percent effective. Merck is the same manufacturer of the drugs Fosomax and Vioxx, pharmaceutical nightmares for Merck and company that have left the company reeling from lawsuit settlements. It is estimated between 88,000 to 139,000 have suffered heart-attacks or strokes as a result of taking the drug Vioxx and more than 55,000 have died. Merck continued to defend Vioxx even after it had been pulled from shelves, better than four years from when they knew there were problems.

According to The San Francisco Chronicle, Dr. David Graham, the scientist and 20 year FDA veteran, that blew the whistle on Merck & Co., said at a Senate hearing in 2004 that policies by the FDA had left the American public “virtually defenseless” against the kind of safety problems that led to Vioxx’ abrupt withdrawal in September 2004. Fox News.com reported that in his testimony, Graham said, “the FDA’s Office of New Drugs unrealistically maintains a drug is safe unless reviewers establish with 95 percent certainty that it is not. That rule does not protect consumers, Graham told the Senate committee. “What it does is it protects the drug,” he said. Additionally Graham told the Senate Finance Committee, “I would argue the FDA, as currently configured, is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx.” According to Reuters, in the same hearing, Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican also raised concerns regarding the reliability of the FDA, saying he feared the FDA had become too intimately involved with drug companies and thought an independent office of drug safety might be need.

In an interview with CBS News Correspondent, Sharyl Attkinson, Dr. Graham characterized the FDA fostering as a work environment where supervisors intimidate employees when they bring attention to products that have questions with regard to safety. In the interview, he discussed problems not only with Vioxx and Fosomax, but also Bextra, Meridia, Crestor, Accutane, and Serevent. Were Gardasil to prove to be another Merck disaster, Governor Perry’s mandate requiring Gardasil to be offered under the vaccine for children’s law which will create total immunity from lawsuits from lawsuits from those who take Gardasil and experience adverse or even life threatening reactions. This is because the Federal Vaccine Liability program shields pharmaceuticals that develop vaccines.

“We were first introduced to the Gardasil vaccine through what is commonly known as direct-to-consumer marketing.” says a mother with her young child in the background, in a Merck commercial. “O-N-E-L-E-S-S! I want to be one less, one less…”is chanted by children while skipping rope and playing. “Who wouldn’t want to vaccinate their children against ?” It is a manufacturer’s way of first, raising awareness about its newest product and secondly, encouraging consumers, when visiting the doctor’s office, to ask for their product and to ask for it by name. If this were a game of poker, one might say it was the only hand that Merck had left to play if it were going to stay afloat financially. In a 2005 interview with Jim Lehrer of NPR, a representative from Merck Pharmaceuticals reported that because of financial hardships (largely attributed to trade mark expiration of Zocor, a cholesterol medication, and lawsuits from Fosomax and Vioxx), Merck, by 2008, would be closing seven manufacturing sites and laying off approximately 11 percent of its workforce. Ironically, 2008 is when the Governor’s mandate is to take affect. There is no word yet on whether sell of the Gardasil vaccine will off-set the financial disparities experienced by Merck & Co.

A costly venture: Gardasil is given in a series of three shots at $140.00 per shot ($420 in total). Some private doctors are already offering the vaccine, others are not stocking for reasons such as: too expensive to store and refrigerate or they have to charge a surcharge in case the insurance company does not pay. Gardasil is currently covered by some insurance companies, but others are waiting until there is more information about the drug (USA Today). But if the vaccine is indeed mandated under the Childhood Vaccination Program, this will guarantee profits for Merck both immediately and in the future as there is “sure to be a need for a booster. After all it is a vaccine,” said Dr. Edwards of the Texas Association of Ob-Gyns. This is a fact that has had little to no discussion in the public arena. Deputy Press Secretary for Governor Perry, Krista Moody, declined to respond to questions about the vaccine mandated by the Governor, stating, “I believe your attached questions should be directed to the CDC, FDA or Merck, as they relate to specifics for drug research and testing.” Both Christopher Loder, Media Relations Officer for Merck & Co. and Heidi Robello, FDR Media Relations agreed to answer questions presented to them in writing, but to date neither has responded.

In summary: The public is being told that the Gardasil vaccine should be hailed as a cure for , but this vaccination is not a cure for cancer. It is a vaccination purported to protect against two of over 100 different strains of HPV, with implications for two more. Furthermore, sexually active men and women, boys and girls can still continue to transmit.

Marian Hubbard Jefferson is the Chair of Lift Every Voice Family and Community Development Project, a nonprofit charity formed to empower, equip and encourage adult survivors of child sexual assault. Marian holds a Masters Degree in Counseling from Prairie View A&M University in Texas.

To learn more about Lift, its passion, mission and purpose; please log onto marianjefferson.org marianjefferson.org

Tags:

Related posts

Tags:

Helpful Information About The Prostate And Prostate Cancer - From A Nurse

October 12th, 2008 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Uncategorized

If you have , are concerned about getting it, or if you’re looking out for the health of someone you love, this article can help. Early is confined to the prostate gland itself; most of the patients with this type of cancer can live for years without any problems. At an advanced age, the risks of surgery for or other more radical treatments may actually be worse than the disease.

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among men in the U.S. In most men, grows very slowly: most men will never know they have the condition. Prostate cancer is a malignant tumor of the prostate gland.

One symptom is difficulty starting urination or holding back urine. Additional symptoms that may be associated with this disease are bone pain or tenderness, and abdominal pain. If cancer is caught at its earliest stages, most men will not experience any symptoms.

Other symptoms might include unintentional weight loss and lethargy. Having one or more cancer symptoms does not necessarily mean that you have . There are several symptoms to be aware of.

There is a newer test called AMACR that is more sensitive than the PSA test for determining the presence of . CT scans may be done to see if the cancer has spread. A prostate biopsy usually confirms the diagnosis.

A urinalysis may indicate if there is blood in the urine. There are several potential downsides to PSA testing; for example a high PSA does not always mean a patient has . One downside to PSA testing is that health care providers are detecting and treating some very early-stage prostate cancers that may never have caused the patient any harm.

Impotence is a potential complication after the prostatectomy or after radiation therapy. If is decided upon after the first round of , most men receive further doses on an outpatient basis at a clinic or physician’s office. In the early stages, surgery and radiation may be used to remove or attempt to kill the cancer cells or shrink the tumor.

Urinary incontinence can be a possible complication of surgery. What you can do now is begin to understand what exactly your treatment options are and where you’re going to begin. An oncology specialist will usually recommend treating with a single drug or a combination of drugs.

Other medications used for hormonal therapy, with side effects, include androgen-blocking agents, which prevent testosterone from attaching to prostate cells. The conventional treatment of is often controversial. Thoroughly discuss your treatment options and concerns with your doctor and other health professionals; it never hurts to get a second or even third opinion or more if necessary.

Prostate cancer that has spread (metastasized) may be treated conventionally with drugs to reduce testosterone levels, surgery to remove the testes, or nothing at all. Since prostate tumors require testosterone to grow, reducing the testosterone level is used to prevent further growth and spread of the cancer. Treatment options can vary based on the stage of the tumor.

Radiation therapy to the prostate gland is either external or internal, both of which use high-energy rays to kill cancer cells and shrink tumors. Some drugs with numerous side effects are being used to treat advanced , blocking the production of testosterone, called chemical castration; it has the same result as surgical removal of the testes.

Consider sites, such as this one, just a starting point where you can begin to learn about . The one thing that you should not do however is rely on any information obtained from the Internet to make your final decision. Make sure to read everything you can get your hands on and mull it all over.

For more information on BestProstateHealthTips.com treatments and symptoms go to BestProstateHealthtips.com BestProstateHealthtips.com Helen Hecker R.N.’s website specializing in prostate and tips, advice and resources, including information on prostate tests and BestProstateHealthTips.com natural treatments

Tags: , ,

Related posts

Tags: , ,

Beware The Sun

October 12th, 2008 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Uncategorized

For the last decade or so Australians have been bombarded with information about the harmful effects of the sun, but it seems that we, along with others from all over the world, are still ignoring the advice and are continually exposing ourselves to not only the minor dangers but also the life-threatening concerns like .

We all know that sunshine feels good; sometimes nothing invigorates you more than heading outside and feeling the warmth of the sun beating down on you. The one thing we all need to remember is that as in all things moderation and precaution are always wise.

Before you next head out to soak up the sun’s rays try to remember these points.

A suntan is not a sign of good health. It’s actually a sign that your skin has been damaged by the sun (ultraviolet radiation). When your skin is damaged by these rays melanin (the chemical responsible for skin colour) comes to the surface for protection against anymore harmful rays. Your skin becomes darker as more and more melanin is required for protection to help with the damage already caused.

The most dangerous type of is the malignant , while not as common as other forms it can be fatal. At most risk are those with fair hair and skin, freckles, those who have difficulty tanning and tend to burn easily in the sun, and those with a family history. Though the good news is that if found early often melanomas can be easily and successfully treated.

Of course is not the only problem caused by the sun. It can also cause premature ageing, wrinkles, dark spots (sometimes called age or liver spots) and rough or scaly patches of skin. It can also cause cataracts and other eye problems.

Another major point to remember is that ultraviolet radiation cannot be felt on your skin, so just because you don’t feel yourself burning doesn’t mean that you’re not. Ultraviolet radiation can damage your skin just as easily on an overcast day as what it can when the sky is clear.

Next time you plan on spending any amount of time outside, just remember to take a few precautionary steps. Not only should you use sunscreen, you should also keep yourself covered when possible and always wear a hat. As an often repeated commercial in Australia states: Slip, Slop and Slap – slip on a shirt, slop on sunscreen and slap on a hat. Try not to be in direct sunlight in the middle of the day as this is when the ultraviolet index is very high: if it’s necessary remember to Slip, Slop and Slap before going outside and to reapply if you’ve been swimming, have sweated a lot or towel dried your skin etc.

By keeping those few points in mind, along with finding shade when possible and wearing sunglasses, we should all be able to reap the benefits the sun can provide and not worry about the long term negative effects it might have.

For more information and other items related to Family Life please visit V Brown at readz.cashhosters.com Family Life.

Tags: ,

Related posts

Tags: ,