The vast majority of the published scientific literature on cancer and cancer research is inherently flawed and non-reproducible, reveals a new review published online in the journal Nature. Researchers C. Glenn Begley and Lee Ellis found that a mere 11 percent of 53 papers on cancer published in reputable, peer-reviewed journals was solid, while the other 89 percent could not be reproduced, implying that it may be false or at the very least misleading.
Preclinical studies are the basis upon which the scientific community at large determines how best to develop treatments for disease, including potential new approaches to treating cancer. But such studies, though sure to contain some minor flaws from time to time, appear to be missing the boat in major ways on a regular basis. And the end result of this intrinsic failure is a cancer treatment system that is not only outdated but potentially completely misguided.
“The scientific community assumes that the claims in a preclinical study can be taken at face value – that although there might be some errors in detail, the main message of the paper can be relied on and the data will, for the most part, stand the test of time,” wrote the authors about their findings. “Unfortunately, this is not always the case.”
When I’m feeling stressed I head outside for a stroll and get some fresh air, but if you’re one of the many people who grab a stress-relieving ball and clench your fists, you’ll be thrilled to hear it may actually be beneficial – and not just for the stress!
It is believed the movements activate brain regions, which are key to the storing and recall of memories. Researchers in the US suggest that those who are short of a pen and paper should try the trick when attempting to commit a phone number or shopping list to memory.
So does it work? Click here to find out!
Well, you’ve asked for it and NaturalCures.com has done it!
The report, Aspartame, The Bitter Truth tells you all you need to know about this dangerous ingredient, which is added to everything from soda to chewing gum.
The NaturalCures.com team of writers have collected some pretty explosive research and articles, and have brought them all together in one great publication. Once you’ve read it, we’re confident you won’t need any more convincing why everyone should cut aspartame out of their diet.
We know aspartame is a subject close to your hearts – because it is to ours. The NaturalCures.com team has been doing a bit of research into the topics that interest you the most and they’ve discovered that aspartame is 8 times more searched for on the NaturalCures.com website than any other illness, disease or condition – including cancer, diabetes or Alzheimer’s.
This report is more than 130 pages long and tells you all you need to know about the killer substance the FDA just won’t ban.
Read about the disturbing side effects, which include depression, brain tumors, migraines and seizures, weight gain, gastro-intestinal problems and in severe cases, even death.
Discover how it is more toxic for men than women, its links to blood cancer, and the shocking story of how it became legal, despite damning research about its toxicity. This is one report you can’t afford to be without.
If you have ever consumed aspartame at some point in your life – either knowingly or unknowingly – the NaturalCures.com team will tell you how to cleanse and detox your body from its unhealthy side effects.
This report really is a one-stop shop for all things aspartame, highlighting the harmful effects of the sweetener and laying out a number of interesting viewpoints. Care about your health? Are you still giving soda containing aspartame to your kids? Discover why you should ditch the sweetener today.
Today, Kevin proves that majority of the studies done around the world are complete scams! Plus, get the latest scoop on natural ways to cure and prevent diseases.
Low Vitamin D Levels Dangerous
Scary: The No Allergy Peanut
Depression Linked To Alzheimer’s
Fish Oil Prevents Breast Cancer
Cherry Juice Good For Gout
What’s Really Causing That Headache?
FDA New Scare Tactic: Do Not Use MMS!
Hamburgers Causing Asthma In Children
Tomatoes Help Prevent Sunburns
Power Of Prayer Very Effective
Shrimp Hooked On Prozac
Video Games Hurting Children
Cuddle Pet To Reduce Stress
The Burning Question: Are Airport Body Scanners Safe?
Pasticcios Great For Heart
Tea Tree Oil Effective For Skin Cancer
Lucky Charms Actually Work
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
April 12, 2012
“What other presidential candidate has the guts to talk about the FDA and Big Pharma being one in the same?” –KTRN
Ron Paul makes a groundbreaking admission to the public on tape – that the FDA and Big Pharma are indeed “in bed together,” both building up their monopolies and only interested in making more money. The Republican presidential candidate confirms that the corrupt corporations are running the show, that the FDA is doing more harm than good and many other eye-opening admittances.
March 5th, 2012
By: Elizabeth Landau
Food allergies are tricky business. They’re on the rise in the United States and no one knows why.
Some children are allergic to many foods, and it’s impossible to know based on preventive testing whether someone will have a mild or severe reaction. And so far there’s no cure.
Researchers at Johns Hopkins University and Duke University are working on a treatment that may one day allow kids with allergies to safely eat the foods that cause them life-threatening reactions. It’s still in the early stages, but Dr. Robert Wood of Johns Hopkins, who has been on the forefront of food allergy research, estimates the treatment could be brought to the public within six to eight years.
In his new study, researchers explored a treatment for children with cow’s milk allergies. The strategy is to desensitize the child by giving small amounts of the allergen (milk). Oral immunotherapy, swallowing small amounts of the allergen, has shown to be more effective than sublingual therapy, which involves putting even tinier quantities of milk under the person’s tongue.
Wood and colleagues found promising results from this small experiment with 30 children ages 6 to 18. These kids were severely allergic to cow’s milk. Wood presented the study, published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology this weekend.
The results suggested that children who went through a year of sublingual therapy followed by one to two years of oral immunotherapy were less likely to have significant allergic reactions when undergoing the oral immunotherapy. Still, it did not eliminate all symptoms.
This is particularly important, because about 20% of the kids that Wood and colleagues work with have significant reactions during the treatment that make the therapy unfeasible, Wood said.
Some participants have shown they can safely eat milk products up to a year after stopping the therapies, Wood said. But only one-third have longterm protection. Others need regular exposure to milk in order to maintain protection against allergic reactions.
“With milk that’s not too hard,” Wood says, because one could “eat pizza a couple of times a week.”
It’s not known yet whether children respond better to this kind of treatment than adults, since there have been so few participants in this research. The big barrier to broadening the scope of the research is funding, Wood said.
This is the first time the sublingual therapy has been studied in terms of its benefit as a precursor to the oral immunotherapy, Wood said.
Other research has shown that immunotherapy techniques may similarly work for children with peanut allergies. But tree nuts may be harder to treat, Wood said, because tree-nut allergic individuals often have multiple kinds of nuts they can’t eat.
Researchers are separately looking at a drug called omalizumab (Xolair), approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of severe asthma, to see if it could help people with food allergies, too.
Do not try the immunotherapy technique at home; these experiments are conducted under medical supervision.
For The Full Report Go To CNN
March 5th, 2012
By: Elizabeth Walling
Nearly 32 million Americans currently take statin drugs to lower their cholesterol levels, but they are probably completely unaware that these drugs can come with side effects like diabetes and memory loss. Why don’t they know? Because until this week, the FDA didn’t require these drugs to carry a warning of these possible dangers.
On Feb. 28 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced the need for new warnings for popular statin drugs like Lipitor, Zocor and Crestor. The new labels warn doctors and patients that statin drugs can cause hyperglycemia (i.e. high blood sugar levels) and increase the risk of developing diabetes.
The research linking cholesterol drugs with diabetes is well established. The connection was first reported in one 2008 study of nearly 18,000 Crestor patients. More research soon followed confirming the risk: one study in 2010 published in the Lancet, another in 2011 published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, and yet another in 2012 published in the Archives of Internal Medicine. That’s a whopping four studies in four years that all confirm statin drugs increase your risk of diabetes.
The FDA also added a warning that statins may cause memory loss and confusion in some patients. These side effects have been reported by some individual statin users, although no official research has been done to verify who is most at risk for memory loss while taking statins.
But the FDA says keep taking statin drugs despite risks
One can’t help wondering about the real purpose of these new statin warnings. The FDA recommends that doctors and patients discuss the risk of memory loss and diabetes, but they also say patients should keep taking these drugs. They don’t want you to throw the baby out with the bath water, so to speak.
“We want healthcare professionals and patients to have the most current information on the risks of statins, but also to assure them that these medications continue to provide an important health benefit of lowering cholesterol,” says Dr. Mary Parks from the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Apparently, we need to keep millions of Americans on statin drugs, but we just want to make sure they are aware that side effects like diabetes and memory loss are normal. Patients don’t need to be alarmed if they develop diabetes or experience memory loss while on cholesterol drugs. Their drugs came with warning labels reminding them that this is normal. And, of course, since this was stated on the warning label, lawsuits are definitely out of the question.
It sounds like Big Pharma doesn’t want you to throw their corporate profits out the window just because of some pesky side effects. These warnings are more about protecting their wallets more than protecting patients.
For The Full Report Go To Natural News
February 24th, 2012
By: Jonathan Benson
No matter how you look at it, autism research is big business. Just like the Susan G. Komen Foundation’s “Race for the Cure” for breast cancer, the autism industry pretends to be looking for the causes of autism and how to cure it, when in reality it is on a never-ending hunt for money to fund so-called research into the bodily changes associated with autism in order to push more profit-generating screenings and drug therapies on the public.
The worldwide propaganda campaign that continues to repeat the lie that vaccines are in no way related to autism is one great example of the medical establishment covering up one of the most obvious causes of autism. Rather than actually investigate how the body responds to vaccines, and how these responses are clearly associated with the neurological damage that is part and parcel of autism symptoms, researchers continue to churn out studies that completely avoid any investigation of this or any other likely cause of autism.
Instead, the vast majority of autism studies, which happen to be funded mostly by the pharmaceutical industry, focus solely on the physical, genetic, and chemical changes that accompany the disease, and ignore trying to identify the causes that lead to these changes in the first place. This approach is deliberate, of course, because it facilitates the development of an endless cycle of drug and behavioral therapies for autism that never get to the root of the problem, which means they will forever generate a continuous stream of new profits.
“To find a disease cause and solution to prevent disease isn’t profitable,” says a recent article in Gaia Health that addresses this important issue. “However, to find even the most miniscule physical, genetic, or chemical change in someone with an existing disease means that even more money can be squeezed out of the research funders like the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), agencies funded by taxpayers. Anything that leads away from causes and focuses on the physiochemical effects of autism always leads to more questions and more research funds.”
The medical establishment seeks to destroy the lives, careers of researchers who actually try to identify causes of, and cures for disease. On the rare occasion that an honest researcher comes along and tries to actually conduct legitimate research into the causes of autism, he or she is eventually cut off from the funding chain, and sometimes even maligned and slandered in the public eye by the medical and media establishment. This is precisely what has happened to Dr. Andrew Wakefield, whose honest research into one cause of autism led to an ongoing barrage of character and career assassination that continues to this very day (http://www.naturalnews.com/Andrew_Wakefield.html).
Be sure to take a look at the sample studies on autism analyzed by Gaia Health that show a clear disinterest by the medical establishment in actually finding causes of, or cures for, autism. These studies are clearly aimed at discovering and promoting new drug and vaccine protocols for treating autism symptoms, rather than actually trying to prevent it from developing in the first place: http://gaia-health.com
For The Full Story Go To Natural News
February 20th, 2012
By: Ethan A. Huff
The mainstream media appears to be priming the public consciousness once again for the inevitable release of a highly-deadly pathogen in the very near future. A recent Reuters report explains that many of the world’s biosafety level-3 (BSL-3) and biosafety level-4 (BSL-4) laboratories, which house some of the deadliest pathogens in existence, may not be as safe and secure as people think they are because federal regulations technically require nothing more than a single locked door at such facilities as a security measure.
According to the report, some labs voluntarily employ rigorous safety and security measures, including the Galveston National Laboratory in Texas, which is a highly-protected complex with at least eight levels of secured entry, closed-circuit video monitoring, and negative air flow and dedicated exhaust systems to prevent the accidental release of deadly pathogens. But many other such labs do not have this same tight level of a security, as federal law does not regulate the safety protocols used by private research labs.
“Galveston’s strict security underlines a little-known fact about hundreds of labs working with bacteria and viruses that could make the 1918-19 Spanish flue epidemic — when as many as 40 million people died — seem like a summer cold,” says the report. “Many of the precautions it takes are not required by law.”
Will the militarized H5N1 avian flu strain be ‘accidentally’ released from an unsecured BSL facility?
The report conveniently comes just a few months after it was first announced that scientists in Europe had deliberately created a weaponized H5N1 avian bird flu strain capable of spreading between humans (http://www.naturalnews.com/034228_bioterrorism_flu_strain.html). And since that announcement, there has been a lot of chatter about whether or not the results of this creation should be published in scientific journals, and what the likelihood is that this vicious strain will someday get released into the wild where it could kill off populations around the world at pandemic levels.
The stage is being set, in other words, for the “accidental” release of one of these pathogens at some point in the future, upon which there will be a host of scapegoats to blame. And since all this private research being conducted on deadly viral and bacterial strains at private BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs around the world is apparently not much of a security concern to the federal government, it appears that it is only a matter of time before something catastrophic occurs.
There are also few specifics on the types of research that must be conducted in BSL-4 labs versus BSL-3 labs, which means that the deadly new H5N1 mutant strain can technically be conducted at either, even though BSL-3 labs are intended for less-serious bacterial and viral strains. This is highly concerning because, according to a 2009 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, there were 400 accidents at BSL-3 labs just in the U.S. alone that year.
For The Full Story Go To Natural News
February 17th, 2012
By: Stephanie Nebehay and Kate Kelland
Two studies showing how scientists mutated the H5N1 bird flu virus into a form that could cause a deadly human pandemic will be published only after experts fully assess the risks, the World Health Organization (WHO) said on Friday.
An Ohio drugmaker began releasing limited supplies of a crucial medication to treat childhood leukemia Thursday, sending hospital pharmacists facing life-threatening shortages scrambling for their share
Speaking after a high-level meeting of flu experts and U.S. security officials in Geneva, a WHO official said an agreement had been reached in principle to keep details of the controversial work secret until deeper risk analyses have been carried out.
“There is a preference from a public health perspective for full disclosure of the information in these two studies. However there are significant public concerns surrounding this research that should first be addressed,” said Keiji Fukuda, the WHO’s assistant director-general for health security and environment.
The WHO called the meeting to break a deadlock between scientists who have studied the mutations needed to make H5N1 bird flu transmit between mammals, and the U.S. National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB), which wanted the work censored before it was published in scientific journals.
Biosecurity experts fear mutated forms of the virus that research teams in The Netherlands and the United States independently created could escape or fall into the wrong hands and be used to spark a pandemic worse than the 1918-19 outbreak of Spanish flu that killed up to 40 million people.
WHO spokesman Gregory Hartl said that because of these fears, “there must be a much fuller discussion of risk and benefits of research in this area and risks of virus itself”.
But a scientist close to the NSABB who spoke to Reuters immediately after the decision said the board was deeply “frustrated” by it.
The only NSABB member attending the meeting was infectious disease expert Paul Keim of Northern Arizona University and he “got the hell beat out of him”, the source said.
“It was a closed meeting dominated by flu people who have a vested interest in continuing this kind of work,” he added.
The WHO said experts at the meeting included lead researchers of the two studies, scientific journals interested in publishing the research, funders of the research, countries who provided the viruses, bioethicists and directors from several WHO-linked laboratories specializing in influenza.
The H5N1 virus, first detected in Hong Kong in 1997, is entrenched among poultry in many countries, mainly in Asia, but so far remains in a form that is hard for humans to catch.
It is known to have infected nearly 600 people worldwide since 2003, killing half of them, a far higher death rate than the H1N1 swine flu which caused a flu pandemic in 2009/2010.
Last year two teams of scientists – one led by Ron Fouchier at Erasmus Medical Center and another led by Yoshihiro Kawaoka at the University of Wisconsin – said they had found that just a handful of mutations would allow H5N1 to spread like ordinary flu between mammals, and remain as deadly as it is now.
This type of research is seen as vital for scientists to be able to develop vaccines, diagnostic tests and anti-viral drugs that could be deployed in the event of an H5N1 pandemic.
In December, the NSABB asked two leading scientific journals, Nature and Science, to withhold details of the research for fear it could be used by bioterrorists.
They said a potentially deadlier form of bird flu poses one of the gravest known threats to humans and justified the unprecedented call to censor the research.
The WHO voiced concern, and flu researchers from around the world declared a 60-day moratorium on Jan. 20 on “any research involving highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 viruses” that produce easily contagious forms.
Fouchier, who took part in the two-day meeting at the WHO which ended on Friday, said the consensus of experts and officials there was “that in the interest of public health, the full paper should be published” at some future date.
“This was based on the high public health impact of this work and the need to share the details of the studies with a very big community in the interest of science, surveillance and public health on the whole,” he told reporters.
Asked about the potential bioterrorism risks of his and the U.S. team’s work, Fouchier said “it was the view of the entire group” at the meeting that the risks that this particular virus or flu viruses in general could be used as bioterrorism agents “would be very, very slim”.
“The risks are not nil, but they are very, very small,” he said.
Click Here For The Full Report From MSNBC