AFTER YEARS OF TELLING PEOPLE CHEMOTHERAPY IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRY AND ELIMINATE CANCER, JOHNS HOPKINS IS FINALLY STARTING TO TELL YOU THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE WAY.

1. Every  person has cancer cells in the body. These cancer cells do not show up  in the standard tests until they have multiplied to a few billion. When  doctors tell cancer patients that there are no more cancer cells in  their bodies after treatment, it just means the tests are unable to  detect the cancer cells because they have not reached the detectable  size.

2. Cancer cells occur between 6 to more than 10 times in a  person's lifetime.

3. When the person's immune system is strong  the cancer cells will be destroyed and prevented from multiplying and  forming tumors.

4. When a person has cancer it indicates the  person has multiple nutritional deficiencies. These could be due to  genetic, environmental, food and lifestyle factors.

5. To  overcome the multiple nutritional deficiencies, changing diet and  including supplements will strengthen the immune system.

6.  Chemotherapy involves poisoning the rapidly-growing cancer cells and  also destroys rapidly-growing healthy cells in the bone marrow,  gastrointestinal tract etc, and can cause organ damage, like liver,  kidneys, heart, lungs etc.

7. Radiation while destroying cancer  cells also burns, scars and damages healthy cells, tissues and  organs.

8. Initial treatment with chemotherapy and radiation will  often reduce tumor size. However prolonged use of chemotherapy and  radiation do not result in more tumor destruction.

9. When the  body has too much toxic burden from chemotherapy and radiation the  immune system is either compromised or destroyed, hence the person can  succumb to various kinds of infections and complications.

10.  Chemotherapy and radiation can cause cancer cells to mutate and become  resistant and difficult to destroy. Surgery can also cause cancer cells  to spread to other sites.

11. An effective way to battle cancer  is to starve the cancer cells by not feeding it with the foods it needs  to multiply.

CANCER  CELLS FEED ON:

a. Sugar  is a cancer-feeder. By cutting off sugar it cuts off one important food  supply to the cancer cells. Sugar substitutes like NutraSweet, Equal,  Spoonful etc., are made with Aspartame and it is harmful. A better  natural substitute would be Manuka honey or molasses but only in very  small amounts. Table salt has a chemical added to make it white in  color. Better alternative is Bragg's aminos or sea salt.

b. Milk  causes the body to produce mucus, especially in the gastrointestinal  tract. Cancer feeds on mucus. By cutting off milk and substituting with  unsweetened soy milk cancer cells are being starved.

c. Cancer  cells thrive in an acid environment. A meat-based diet is acidic and it  is best to eat fish, and a little chicken rather than beef or pork. Meat  also contains livestock antibiotics, growth hormones and parasites,  which are all harmful, especially to people with cancer.

d. A  diet made of 80% fresh vegetables and juice, whole grains, seeds, nuts  and a little fruit help put the body into an alkaline environment. About  20% can be from cooked food including beans. Fresh vegetable juices  provide live enzymes that are easily absorbed and reach down to cellular  levels within 15 minutes to nourish and enhance growth of healthy cells.  To obtain live enzymes for building healthy cells try and drink fresh  vegetable juice (most vegetables including bean sprouts) and eat some  raw vegetables 2 or 3 times a day. Enzymes are destroyed at temperatures  of 104 degrees F (40 degrees C).

e. Avoid coffee, tea, and  chocolate, which have high caffeine. Green tea is a better alternative  and has cancer-fighting properties. Water – best to drink purified  water, or filtered, to avoid known toxins and heavy metals in tap water.  Distilled water is acidic, avoid it.

12. Meat protein is  difficult to digest and requires a lot of digestive enzymes. Undigested  meat remaining in the intestines become putrefied and leads to more  toxic buildup.

13. Cancer cell walls have a tough protein  covering. By refraining from or eating less meat it frees more enzymes  to attack the protein walls of cancer cells and allows the body's killer  cells to destroy the cancer cells.

14. Some supplements build up  the immune system (IP6, Flor-ssence, Essiac, anti-oxidants, vitamins,  minerals, EFAs etc.) to enable the body's own killer cells to destroy  cancer cells. Other supplements like vitamin E are known to cause  apoptosis, or programmed cell death, the body's normal method of  disposing of damaged, unwanted, or unneeded cells.

15. Cancer is  a disease of the mind, body, and spirit. A proactive and positive spirit  will help the cancer warrior be a survivor. Anger, resentment, and  bitterness put the body into a stressful and acidic environment. Learn  to have a loving and forgiving spirit. Learn to relax and enjoy  life.

16. Cancer cells cannot thrive in an oxygenated  environment. Exercising daily and deep breathing help to get more oxygen  down to the cellular level. Oxygen therapy is another means employed to  destroy cancer cells.

CANCER UPDATE FROM JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL,  USA

1. No  plastic containers in micro.

2. No water bottles in  freezer.

3. No  plastic wrap in microwave. (From Patricia: no microwave!!)

Johns  Hopkins has recently sent this out in its newsletters. This information  is being circulated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center as  well.

Dioxin chemicals  cause cancer, especially breast cancer. Dioxins are highly poisonous to  the cells of our bodies. Don't freeze your plastic bottles with water in  them as this releases dioxins from the plastic.

Recently,  Dr. Edward Fujimoto, Wellness Program Manager at Castle Hospital, was on  a TV program to explain this health hazard. He talked about dioxins and  how bad they are for us. He said that we should not be heating our food  in the microwave using plastic containers.

This  especially applies to foods that contain fat. He said that the  combination of fat, high heat, and plastics releases dioxin into the  food and ultimately into the cells of the body. Instead, he recommends  using glass, such as Corning Ware, Pyrex or ceramic containers for  heating food. You get the same results, only without the dioxin. So such  things as TV dinners, instant ramen and soups, etc., should be removed  from the container and heated in something else.

Paper  isn't bad but you don't know what is in the paper. It's just safer to  use tempered glass, Corning Ware, etc. He reminded us that a while ago  some of the fast food restaurants moved away from the foam containers to  paper. The dioxin problem is one of the reasons.

Also, he pointed  out that plastic wrap, such as Saran, is just as dangerous when placed  over foods to be cooked in the microwave. As the food is nuked, the high  heat causes poisonous toxins to actually melt out of the plastic wrap  and drip into the food. Cover food with a paper towel  instead.

This  is an article that should be sent to anyone important in your  life.

Minister orders fluoride to be added to water

The Sunday Times Sarah-Kate Templeton, Health Editor

ALAN JOHNSON, the health secretary, will this week tell health chiefs in areas of England with the highest rates of tooth decay to add fluoride to the water supply to improve the dental health of poor children.

 Johnson will argue that adding the mineral to tap water is necessary to prevent tooth decay among children who do not brush their teeth regularly.

 The health secretary believes the measure is needed to cut health inequalities between children in affluent families whose tooth brushing is supervised and in households where children may not even own a toothbrush.

 “I want the NHS to do much more to prevent rather than just treat disease,” Johnson said.

 “Fluoridation is an effective and relatively easy way to help address health inequalities – giving children from poorer backgrounds a dental health boost that can last a lifetime, reducing tooth decay and thereby cutting down on the amount of dental work they need in the future.

 “We have a duty to help the areas with the worst records on tooth decay to discuss this issue and take the necessary steps to improve their dental health.”

 However, the blanket fluoridation programme will be opposed by campaigners who say the entire population will be forced to take “medication” because a minority fail to brush their teeth.

 The National Pure Water Association said: “By presenting fluoridation as a means of preventing tooth decay, Alan Johnson confirms the practice is medication. Fluoridation is carried out by water companies in violation of their customers’ human right to refuse consent to any medical intervention.

 “Fluoride is only being added to prevent tooth decay among a relatively small proportion of the population, mostly children in deprived areas who do not brush their teeth. These children are already being identified and treated in more effective ways.”

 Some doctors argue that while adding fluoride to water supplies would cut levels of tooth decay among poor children, the long-term medical consequences are unknown.

 Johnson points out that in the Irish Republic, where more than 70% of water is fluoridated, the average number of decayed, missing and filled teeth per child is just 1.3 compared with 2.3 in Northern Ireland, where fluoridation has not been implemented.

 Fluoride is already added to water supplies in areas of northeast England and the West Midlands. Fluoride also occurs naturally in the water supply in some areas.

 In America, 70% of people use fluoridated water and it has been added to the supply of all US cities. In Australia the figure is 67 per cent.

 Of Britain’s 10 primary care trusts with the best child dental health, seven have some fluoride, natural or added, in the water supply. In all 10 of the primary care trusts at the bottom of the tooth decay league table, tap water is not fluoridated.

 Primary care trusts in Notting-ham, Manchester, Westminster and Bradford, which have some of the highest rates of cavities in children’s teeth, are likely to be earmarked for fluoridation.

 Water fluoridation is known to cause a condition called fluorosis, discolouring teeth. There are also medical fears that consuming fluoride for years may increase the incidence of bone fractures and cancers.

 A study from Taiwan found a high incidence of bladder cancer in women in areas with a high natural fluoride content in water.

 Last year three academics accused the government of using inadequate evidence to promote the use of fluoride. They said there was not enough evidence to conclude that the benefits of water fluoridation outweighed the risks.

 The government is also considering adding folic acid to bread to help to prevent babies being born with birth defects.

Health on tap

– About 5m people in parts of the West Midlands, Yorkshire and Tyneside receive water with added fluoride

 – Britain’s first fluoridation scheme was introduced in Birmingham and Solihull in the mid1960s

 – In America about 70% of people have fluoridated water and the compound has been added to the supply of all big cities. In Australia the figure is just less than 70%

 – Fluorides are naturally occurring minerals that can strengthen the tooth enamel, making it more resistant to decay. They also reduce the amount of acid produced by bacteria on the teeth
Have your say
The National Pure Water Association has repeatedly asked the UK Department of Health to cite one scientific or laboratory study from anywhere in the world which proves that fluoridation reduces tooth decay in humans. They have failed to do so. The fact is that there is not a single scientific or laboratory study from anywhere in the world which proves that fluoridation reduces tooth decay in humans. There are, however, hundreds of published scientific papers which show that water fluoridation is dangerous to human, animal, plant and aquatic life, which is no surprise considering the relative toxicity levels of the substance.
That list of dangers to humans reads like a medical dictionary such are the effects noted in scientific papers from around the world. These include collagen disruption leading to breakdown of collagen in bone, tendon, muscle, skin, cartilage, lungs, kidney and trachea, and the inhibition of antibody formation in the blood and confusion of the immune system.
Fluoride kills red blood cells and damages gastric mucosa resulting in the symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome. It is implicated in genetic disorders, low IQ levels in children, pre-senile dementia and Alzheimer's disease, premature ageing and thyroid disorders due to its disruption of iodine in the body. Fluorides have also been used as drugs for modifying human behaviour and moods.
It has also been argued that fluoride increases cancer rates. In a recent study it was found that, pro-rata, 40% more people contracted bone cancer in the Republic of Ireland, which is fluoridated, compared with non-fluoridated but otherwise similar Northern Ireland.
adam, bradford, uk
This must be stopped, there is growing evidence that the immediate effects of fluoridation have adverse effects on the pineal gland, endocrine system with long term adverse effects on bones and teeth.
There is absolutely no way that a safe limit to the amount each person would receive can be controlled.
I have personally written to Allan Johnson asking who will be held responsible since the laws governing the supply of water have been radically changed to mitigate any legal liability of the water companies.
I have also written to my Strategic Health Authority asking if they intend to implement the scheme and if so, when they will be holding their public consulation.
The first patents relating to Fluoride I understand were for instecides and rat poisons.
This situation is truly Orwellian, we have our Health Service mass prescribing a poison.
Even more interesting is that the principle ingredient of Prozac is a fluoride derivative.
David, High Wycombe, Bucks
Fluoride addition in whatever form is toxic, period! It is impossible to compare dental carries statistics between regions as many factors such as sugar ingestion and regular brushing etc have a greater bearing on the health of teeth. Email evrybody you know to say NO to this poison ….contact your MP, your water company and even the ignorant Health secretary .. this must be stopped … it is FORCED "medication"!!
C Radclyffe, Pontypridd, UK.

‘Change’ WHAT Change?

Jim Kirwan

It seems like only a few weeks back that the party-guru's  were screaming from every soapbox about the need for "CHANGE"!  And the then crowded field were all vying for the title of "The World  Champion of Change." I turned them all off and went back to living  amid the rubble. This morning I turned on the Sunday morning shows and  was stupefied by what has been distilled from all that noise about "Who  will bring REAL-CHANGE toAmerica for the next four years"!

Having been gratefully missing-in-action for the last  ten days the language I heard was blatantly insulting. Here's some of what  I learned, and what I thought about it.

Health-Care: It seems both Democrats want to force the  uninsured to buy health-insurance, to the point of garnishing their wages;  fines in one instance, and a sliding scale in the other. It is apparent  that neither idiot actually watched SICKO, or even gave the substance of  its premise a moment's thought: A pity really; because that film laid out  a course to common sense  so then why am I surprised. The core of  the argument is that what American's need health-CARE, not ACCESS  to Health-insurance.

Apparently the Democrats think that having FREE Universal-Health  Care for every person in America is impossible: Obviously forgetting  that we have already paid for it a thousand times over. What needs to happen  here-contrary to the perceived political wisdom of the Money-Changers running for higher office-we need to combine ending the War with providing FREE Universal Health Care for everyone!

If we stopped spending a Million Dollars a Minute on a  continuing genocide in Palestine, on the continuing liquidation of  the population in Iraq, and on a re-staging of the failed war in Afghanistan:  then that money could easily fund Universal Health CARE. This could be  done without the need for Health-Insurance at all, and with change leftover  to begin to repay the Social Security Fund for the hundreds of billions  that government has been stealing from that "fund" since it began!

In fact we could follow current policy and downsize (throw  directly out into the streets) all employees of the criminally-constituted  privatized health insurance plans. The public ought to demand that these  criminal-schemes masquerading Insurance-company's have all their assets  frozen under RICO; and their management staff's should be held for federal  investigation of fraud and grand theft. This would constitute a CHANGE!

What happened to open political debates  and public  input on anything that this government wants to spend our money on? Obviously  there has been no progress there at all!

It's a moot point anyhow because it is against the law,  or will be soon, to question anything at all – especially about the war  or any of its costs, including the deaths of American troops!

On reinstating government ACTION, resulting directly from  any federal investigation by any congressional oversight committees-what's  been done? There has been nothing done about this for the last seven years  when, if ever, will this begin to CHANGE?

Why for instance has no candidate called for on-the-record  fact-checks, during the election process, instead of months afterward when  nothing can be done about all the lies told during the campaign? An excellent  case in point is the current series of frauds that took place in a number  of the early voting situations  that have yet to be unraveled. It's  not brain-surgery: If a corrupted computerized system was used  then  that contest is definitely subject to a thorough investigation, ASAP. If  it is not then possible to verify the vote tolls, as it was under the old  paper ballot system, then the results must be thrown out and a new election  held. How hard is that? It would be costly, but the people who made the  fraudulent machines could be forced to pay for the needed re-run of the  vote  and then at least every voter would KNOW that their vote was  counted and not just manipulated!

What happened to the Truth-in-Advertising laws, are they  still on the books, and does this apply to political rhetoric as well?  These people currently running are worse than snake-oil salesmen from the  nineteenth century  they will PROMISE you anything, and then deliver  the exact opposite. "Freedom & Democracy" becomes 'Slavery  & Fascism' and you will be the ones that voted "for" it.

What about demanding that all political parties be held  to account for what they say they stand for-instead of simply letting them  wander around in the wilderness of vague and misleading concepts that always  end up amounting to nothing more than just another pack of lies?

During the campaigns both parties claim the high-ground  of Party Principles that simply do not exist except in the imagination  of the speaker. Since we cannot hire public mind-readers to interpret what  they're saying maybe their speech ought to be subject to criminal investigations  when they lie! And where by the way is there any access for the public  to be able to use the public's airwaves on a par with what commercial media  now enjoys. The airwaves belong to the people! The private commercial interests  have stolen away even the Public Broadcasting System – which has become  just a minor version of all the other disinformation outlets. And as for  the FCC, if ever there was a criminal organization  it is the Federal  Communications Commission – that has eliminated all real competition and  destroyed all local markets for radio television and the printed news media.

Instead of demanding any of this: the politicians remain  hell-bent on criminalizing both the thoughts and speech of all US citizens  (H.R. 1955 & S 1959). And in the latest twist they've now decided that  judges can any longer be subjected to written complaints from the public,  about the laws they rule on, or the people they supposedly serve. What  happened to the Constitutional right of "redress of grievances"!

This was supposed to be handled by the House of Representatives  but they passed the buck to the Courts, that only the rich can afford to  use, so where does this leave the ordinary person who used to be able to  at least complain directly to the official involved?

 

"It allows judges to redact from their public disclosure  forms personal information about their families that could be used to harm  them.

 

It provides increased funding for judicial protective  services furnished by the U.S. Marshals, and for federal witness  protection programs.

 

It prohibits publishing of personal information about  a judge, law enforcement officer, or witness with the intent to cause harassment, intimidation, or a crime of violence.

 

And it enhances prison terms for assaults and other violent  acts with intent to intimidate or interfere with judges and other federal  officers in performance of their official duties."

The House passed this bill in July by voice vote under  suspension. The Senate has now passed it with an amendment that makes a  few minor refinements, all of which should be acceptable to the House." (1)

In another cynical twist of fate, school teachers in California make  roughly half what a prison guard does, yet the privatized prison systems  make a huge amount of money on each and every body they process, house  or punish. When was the last time a politician suggested doing away with  the Country-Club prisons for the elite-criminals (mostly insiders and politicians)?  For that matter whatever happened to CLOSING Gitmo-as the Bushwhacker promised  he would do! Now there are two real CHANGES that wouldn't take a whole  of brains to complete, yet not one word from anyone on that topic either.

And to top everything off  McCain wants to not only  retain the tax-breaks for the corporations and the super-rich (a proven  disaster for the US Economy), but he wants to give everyone a tax-break:  proving that he is totally unfit to even manage the job he says he wants.  Oh I forgot, he's not running for president, he's running for Commander-in-Chief:  which just happens not to be an elected office, but a subsidiary constitutional  function of the presidency-for which McCain is neither qualified nor physically  able to fulfill until he opens his files on his stay in the Hanoi Hilton  for all to see!

Where's all this CHANGE that all these pampered and sycophantic candidates keep screaming about? Maybe what they meant by "CHANGE" and what the public means by the use of that same term are two completely different and inconsolable positions. . .

Why not ask them about some of the above and see what  these People-who-would-be-Dictators come up with: because the duties and  the responsibilities of the office they're supposedly running for have  nothing to do with what they're mumbling about on the campaign trail.

The public got sucker-punched in the last two versions  of this farce that the media is calling Campaign '08. How many more times  will people continue to believe in this herd of lying criminals? Obama's  just an infant, a child that tells us he can't wait to get into the Lion's  Den-proving that he is definitely a light-weight when it comes to down  and dirty political warfare. We know he's not a threat to anyone   he's just the latest model of "the newest Candidate" who wants  to join that Fraternity-of-Evil who pretends to represent the public in  these final days of the Republic.

kirwanstudios@sbcglobal.net

1) House Passes Conyer's Landmark Bill to Make Judges  Safe.

http://judiciary.house.gov/newscenter.aspx?A=904