Many Cancer Patients Over Radiated
February 26, 2010
Natural News
By Mike Adams
One of the advantages of natural medicine is that if you make a mistake on your dosage, it’s usually no big deal because natural medicine is inherently safe. But conventional medicine, with all its toxic chemotherapy poisons and irradiation machines, can be fatal even when simple mistakes are made. Numerous patients have already been killed by miscalibrated chemotherapy pumps that drip poison in to the bodies of patients. And now there’s news from Springfield Missouri where an actively-used brain cancer irradiation machine has been miscalibrated since 2004.
Oops. Gee, didn’t anyone wonder why the burn marks were so severe and patients were losing brain function so rapidly?
Oh, wait. I forgot: Nobody noticed because losing cognitive function is a “normal” side effect of conventional cancer treatments. Harming patients in the cancer industry is now so routine that nobody even notices it anymore!
Nobody bothered to check the machine
The facts of this case are a bit frightening because this could happen anywhere, in any hospital: For the last five years, patients undergoing brain irradiation treatments have been over-exposed to very high levels of radiation. The radiation machine at the CoxHealth hospital in Springfield, Missouri was apparently never calibrated correctly. The incompetent technicians who set up the machine (who probably lost their own brain function as a result of being around so many miscalibrated radiation machines) apparently never bothered to configure it correctly. They just used the default setting the machine came with, which happened to be the “Fry my brain” setting.
Now here’s the really scary part: The massive radiation overdose problem was only discovered when the hospital trained a new physician on the machine. They were apparently going over all the settings and functions of the machine when the new doctor asked something like, “Hey, why is this dosage knob turned all the way up to ‘Hiroshima’?”
Hospital administrators scratched their heads (after which clumps of hair fell out) and then began to realize something was wrong. “This might explain all the severe radiation burns on patients skulls…”
Oops.
So what, exactly, do you do in a case like this? Do you call all the brain cancer patients who suffered radiation burns and a loss of cognitive function and say, “Um, we’re really sorry that we fried your brain because we were too stupid to configure the radiation machine correctly…”
Or do you just hope no one notices because cancer patients are too frightened to know the difference between “treatment” and a radiological assault?
I have a solution to this problem
This accidental irradiation overdose issue is a huge problem all across the country. Radiation machines are often miscalibrated, and there’s virtually no oversight by anyone. Hospitals can openly operate miscalibrated machines for years on end without anyone doing a single thing to stop them.
But I have a simple, highly-effective solution to this problem: Just require cancer doctors to irradiate their own brains using the machines before treating patients. If such a rule were enforced, I’ll bet you that all of a sudden those machines would be correctly calibrated.
Naturopathic physicians, by the way, aren’t afraid to take the same medicine they’re about to prescribe to patients. You need these anti-viral herbs? I’ll take some too just to show you how safe they are, see? No big deal.
But conventional cancer doctors would never inject themselves with chemotherapy or stick their heads under an operating radiotherapy machine. You know why? Because those treatments are dangerous! That’s why they’re reserved solely for patients. Only the patients get poisoned and irradiated.
Why do you think radiology technicians flee the room before they fire up their machines on patients? They flee the room because they don’t want to be anywhere near that radiation!
Cancer doctors aren’t very bright about curing cancer, but they are smart enough to figure out that radiation = cancer. Which makes it all the more hilarious that they use radiation to treat cancer, huh?
Click here for the full report
Smokeless Tobacco Products Cause Cancer
February 23, 2010
Natural News
By S. L. Baker
A recent study published in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology is urging tobacco manufacturers to reformulate a smokeless tobacco product called moist snuff. Researchers from Minnesota have found that the product contains high levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) which are highly toxic, cancer-causing substances.
Used in between the lip and gum, moist snuff has grown in popularity over the years due to increased awareness about the dangers of smoking cigarettes. Commonly thought to be a safer alternative to cigarettes, moist snuff is turning out to have its own slew of dangers. The PAHs found in moist snuff can lead to various cancers including oral, pancreatic, and esophageal. Precancerous oral lesions are typically the first symptoms to appear.
Twenty-three moist snuff products, including samples from the most popular brands, were examined by Irina Stepanov and her team from the University of Minnesota. As many as 28 different PAHs were discovered in the samples, nine of which are known carcinogens. These included naphthalene and chrysene.
Prior to this recent study, trace amounts of only one PAH had ever been found in a smokeless tobacco product. For this reason, the smokeless tobacco products have been marketed as a safer alternative for tobacco users concerned about the toxic effects of cigarettes.
Study researchers hope that the tobacco industry will take action to eliminate these harmful substances from their products. Since many people falsely assume that smokeless tobacco products are safe alternatives to cigarettes, experts insist that findings should be taken seriously by product manufacturers.
Comments by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
The problem with becoming addicted to nicotine is that you always need another hit in some form, and as this report indicates, many people have switched to “smokeless” tobacco products to avoid the carcinogens found in cigarette smoke. But in doing so, they’ve subjected themselves a different profile of carcinogens found in snuff products.
The tobacco industry, of course, has always tried to bamboozle consumers by claiming their products are safe. Cigarettes, remember, were promoted by doctors who said they boost memory and improve your teeth! Big Tobacco has a long history of taking dangerous products and marketing them as safe or even healthy.
The bottom line for all consumers is to avoid processed tobacco products, as they are highly carcinogenic regardless of their form.
In my opinion, it’s probably safer to just smoke natural, unprocessed tobacco leaf than to chew processed tobacco snuff. There’s a considerable amount of evidence to suggest that the really harmful substances in tobacco are added (or altered) by the tobacco companies during manufacturing.
Click here for the full report.
Pesticide Linked to Honey Bee Threat
February 22, 2010
Natural News
By Ethan A. Huff
A U.S. District Judge from Manhattan has banned the sale of spirotetramat, a pesticide produced by Bayer CropScience. Citing allegations by environmental groups and commercial beekeepers that the pesticide is toxic and is killing off the nation’s honeybee population, Judge Denise Cote has declared that sales of spirotetramat must cease after January 15.
According to Cote, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not follow proper procedure when approving spirotetramat. The EPA did not take public comment about the pesticide before approving it and the agency failed to publish both the Bayer application and the approval documents in the Federal Register. The EPA and Bayer CropScience have 60 days to appeal the decision.
According to Bayer CropScience, spirotetramat is perfectly safe and does not harm honeybees, insisting that the pesticide has been extensively tested. The company laments the fact that the chemical was banned because of procedural faults but did not indicate how it would proceed.
According to Aaron Colangelo, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), spirotetramat is a potentially hazardous insecticide that should be pulled from the market and evaluated further. The NRDC in conjunction with the Xerces Society, a wildlife conservation group based in Portland, jointly sued the EPA over its approval of the pesticide.
Amazingly, the EPA admits that it approved spirotetramat illegally but has argued that its actions should have no consequences. This speaks volumes to the agency’s arrogance in how it views its role as a regulatory agency.
Dave Hackenberg, one of Pennsylvania’s largest beekeepers, is appreciative of the judge’s decision. After all, he has been losing more than half of his bees every winter due to what he believes are pesticides. He leases his bees out to various growers every year to assist in pollination but he says that each year, more and more bees are dying. This past year, he lost about half of his bees by midwinter which was the largest amount to date.
Maryann Frazier, a researcher from Penn State University, agrees with the notion that pesticides play a large role in what is now being termed “Colony Collapse Disorder” (CCD), the massive die-off of bees with no clear explanation as to why they died. She believes that a number of factors contribute to CCD and that further research must be done.
Bees are a necessary insect that must be preserved. Without them, there would be no food. According to the Department of Agriculture, bees pollinate over $15 billion worth of U.S. crops.
Click here for the full report
Government Pushing Toxic Chemical to Farmers for Crops
February 22, 2010
Natural News
By Ethan A. Huff
The federal government is pushing farmers to use a toxic byproduct of the coal burning industry to fertilize and loosen the soil in their crop fields. Initiated under the Bush administration as a beneficial use for the substance, efforts by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continue to advocate for the widespread use of synthetic gypsum in agriculture.
Called flue gas desulfurization gypsum, or FGD gypsum, this synthetic powder is produced by coal plant “scrubbers” that remove sulfur dioxide from plant emissions. Sulfur dioxide is the chemical that causes acid rain to occur. FGD gypsum is a white, powdery substance that some believe will help to enrich crop field soil.
The current administration has been pushing for the agricultural use of FGD gypsum despite the fact that it is known to contain toxic heavy metals such as lead, mercury, and arsenic. According to the EPA, the mercury contained in FGD gypsum does not affect plants and runoff into water supplies at “significant” levels. As far as the other heavy metals are concerned, the EPA is holding to the mantra that the levels are minute, contending that using in in crop fields is perfectly safe.
Last year, a coal ash pond just outside of Knoxville, Tennessee, spilled, flooding about 300 acres of land with ash and killing many fish in the area. The spill damaged many homes as well and cleanup costs are expected to be upwards of $1 billion. This catastrophe has prompted the EPA to draft regulations on how to handle toxic coal waste safely.
The EPA would not comment, however, about its support for FGD gypsum in agricultural use in light of the spill and the damage it caused. If the waste from coal plants is toxic and must be dealt with in a manner that keeps it contained, many are wondering why the EPA would promote the same waste for use on crops.
In 2001, the USDA partnered with the EPA to promote FGD gypsum use. Since that time, the amount of the substance used by farmers on their fields has triple. According to the American Coal Ash Association (ACAA), nearly 280,000 tons of the byproduct was spread on fields last year.
Thomas Adams, executive director of the ACAA indicated that almost nine million tons of the roughly 18 million tons of FGD gypsum produced last year was used to make drywall. He believes that finding new ways to recycle the substance is preferable to dumping it in landfills.
Click here for the full report
Avoid Chemicals and Use Common Herbs as Pesticides
February 15, 2010
Natural News
By David Gutierrez
Essential oils extracted from common kitchen herbs and spices can be used as safer, less destructive pesticides, according to research led by Murray Isman of the University of British Columbia and presented at the Fall Meeting of the American Chemical Society in Washington, D.C.
“We are exploring the potential use of natural pesticides based on plant essential oils — commonly used in foods and beverages as flavorings,” Isman said.
Isman’s team has been researching the pest control properties of clove, mint, rosemary and thyme for 10 years, and has found that diluted mixtures of the essential oils from two to four of the plants can be used to both repel and kill agricultural pests. These natural pesticides have been effectively used to fight aphids and mites that would otherwise prey on spinach, strawberry and tomato crops.
The essential oils provide several major advantages over synthetic pesticides. They are significantly less toxic to farm workers and the surrounding environment than synthetic chemicals. Because they break down quickly, they are less likely to cause lasting harm to the environment or human health. Researchers also claim that insects are less likely to evolve resistance to the plant compounds.
Because they are not engineered but simply extracted from foods already deemed safe, essential oil pesticides do not need regulatory approval and can be used on organic crops.
Because the essential oils degrade so quickly in the environment, however — lasting as little as a few hours — they need to be applied relatively frequently. In comparison, synthetic pesticides may remain in the soil for months and resist breakdown long after this time, which is part of what makes them so dangerous. The herb and spice-based pesticides also need to be applied in larger doses than synthetic pesticides.
“They’re not a panacea for pest control,” Isman said. “It comes down to what’s good for the environment and what’s good for human health.”
Click here for the full report
San Francisco’s Toxic Biosolids Good For You?
February 12, 2010
PR Watch
By Organic Consumer Association
Fifteen years ago, CMD’s book Toxic Sludge Is Good for You! first exposed the hidden government and industry PR campaign greenwashing toxic sewage sludge as “biosolids,” an invented PR euphemism used to cynically re-brand toxic waste as “fertilizer” given free to farmers. Today, unfortunately, the biosolids scam is bigger than ever. The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) reports that “San Francisco has come up with an ingenious plot to trick city residents into taking their toxic sewage sludge back and disposing of it in their own gardens. San Francisco is having Synagro, the corporate giant of the toxic sludge industry, ‘compost’ some of the toxic sewage sludge. Then they give it away to San Francisco’s gardeners telling us it’s ‘high-quality, nutrient-rich, organic Biosolids Compost.’ ” OCA has launched a grassroots campaign calling on San Francisco’s mayor to stop the practice, noting “municipal sewage sludge routinely contains thousands of dangerous pathogens, toxic heavy metals, flame retardants, endocrine disruptors, carcinogens, pharmaceutical drugs and other hazardous chemicals coming from residential drains, storm water runoff, hospitals, and industrial plants.”
Click here for the full report
The Kevin Trudeau Show: 2-9-10
Today, Kevin explains how the mainstream media is out of touch with the real world and why Big Pharma believes it’s ‘not about a cure, it’s about repeat business.’
Sodas with High Fructose Corn Syrup Cause Cancer Not Sugar
The New Definition of Child Abuse
The Most Evil Corporation
McDonalds Closing Hundreds of Locations in Japan
17,000 Harmful Chemicals Kept Secret Under Obscure Law
Chemicals Passed Through Breast Milk May Cause Cancer
Plus, Sharry Edwards, the creator of Human BioAcoustic Vocal Profiling Techniques & Technologies, gives you the inside story behind what your voice can really say about you and your health. Click here for your free personality vocal reading and click here for your free nutritional reading or call them at (740) 698-9119. Remember to mention Kevin Trudeau to get each report FREE!
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
Click HERE to listen to The Kevin Trudeau Show RIGHT NOW!!!
China Milk Whistle Blower Accused of Social Disorder
February 3rd, 2010
guardian.co.uk
By Tania Branigan
Chinese police have referred to prosecutors the case of a father who campaigned over toxic baby formula. Zhao Lianhai, whose own child was made ill by the melamine contamination, is accused of trying to provoke social disorder.
The handover to prosecutors comes one day after the government announced a fresh crackdown on tainted milk products.
Zhao was detained in November by police, who say there is “ample evidence” to support a charge of provoking a serious disturbance.
Zhao set up a website for affected families and called for the creation of a national memorial day for victims. At least six babies died and 300,000 were taken ill after drinking products made by Sanlu, a dairy firm that closed as a result. The scare led to product recalls around the world.
“From September 2008 to September 2009, Zhao Lianhai used ‘protecting rights’ as well as the Sanlu milk powder issue as an excuse to hype and agitate people who did not know the truth to disturb social order … by shouting slogans and illegal gathering,” said the police statement, published on the blog of a lawyer.
The statement also cited Zhao’s backing for a young woman who was raped by a guard while in an illegal detention house. Investigators said he had used her case “as a way to hype and agitate many people who did not know the truth and foreign media [to] gather at the [gate of the Beijing public security bureau], disturbing the area’s social order.”
The statement added that evidence included videos, witness accounts and a confession from Zhao.
Zhao’s lawyer Peng Jian said it usually took around a month and a half for prosecutors to decide whether to press charges.
He added: “I cannot predict what the result will be because I heard the case has got a large amount of evidence, which I haven’t had a chance to review yet. If he ends up being prosecuted we will defend him as not guilty.”
Zhao was detained two hours after he and another father whose baby had been taken ill received an official apology from police in Haidian over their previous detention of the other man.
Yesterday, China announced a 10-day emergency campaign to root out tainted products – at least some of which had been confiscated when the scandal first broke out in late 2008. According to the state news agency Xinhua, they had been repackaged instead of being destroyed.
Melamine is normally used to make plastics and fertilisers. But when added to watered-down or poor quality milk, it appears to boost protein levels – allowing substandard products to pass nutrition tests.
Last month, it emerged that officials in Shanghai waited almost a year before warning the public that a company in the city was producing melamine-laced products.
Click here for the full report
Many Chemicals are Corporation Secrets – Contents not Known
February 4th, 2010
Natural News
By Ethan A. Huff
The 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires that manufacturers of products containing potentially toxic chemicals disclose their ingredients to the federal government, however a loophole in the requirement allows manufacturers to arbitrarily withhold information that they deem sensitive to their business. As a result, over 17,000 product chemicals remain secret not only from the public but from government officials.
Each year, over 700 new chemicals are introduced by manufacturers, many of which do not get disclosed either to the public or to government agencies. About 95 percent of new chemical notices submitted to the government request some kind of secrecy. Critics allege that manufacturers are exploiting the original intent of TSCA, abusing it to hide sensitive information about ingredients that are likely toxic and may otherwise get banned.
For the first time in many years, Congress is addressing the issue of disclosure abuse with promises of reforming the regulatory provisions. Consumer and environmental groups, in conjunction with many government officials, are demanding that all ingredient information be made public with no exceptions.
Mike Walls, vice president of the American Chemistry Council, argues otherwise, insisting that public disclosure would reveal confidential information that could benefit competitors and hurt business. He believes that even the names and addresses of manufacturers should not have to be made public because competitors may trace the information and somehow figure out secret recipes.
According to EPA records, more than half of the 65 “substantial risk” reports submitted to agency last March involved secret chemicals. Of these, 151 of them are produced in quantities over one million tons a year and ten of them are used primarily in children’s products.
Last year, a Colorado chemical spill nearly cost a nurse her life after she treated a man who had been exposed to the spill. Following his recovery, nurse Cathy Behr fell seriously ill herself, her lungs filling up with fluid and her liver on the verge of failing. Concerned doctors traced the contamination back to a product called ZetaFlow, produced by Weatherford International. After requesting information Weatherford provided some material but utilized ZetaFlow’s confidential status to withhold the secret ingredients.
To this day, Behr does not know exactly what triggered her near death. She would like to see a list of all the chemicals contained in ZetaFlow. She also believes that the ingredients in all chemical products should be made public information to ensure safety. She continues to suffer from respiratory problems due to the unknown chemicals.
Steve Owens, assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, first arrived in his position back in July and within a week ended confidentiality protection for 530 chemicals. In each of these cases, manufacturers had obtained secrecy for ingredients that were otherwise publicly available on the manufacturers’ websites and in trade journals.
Lynn Goldman, a former EPA official who now works as a pediatrician and epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, explained that the few EPA officials who are in the know about secret chemicals do not have enough information to properly assess risk by themselves and are legally bound not to share the information with anyone else. Officials who could otherwise help are unable to do so because they are not privy to the secret ingredients. Thus the entire system is unable to operate properly due to secrecy.
When specific chemicals are banned for safety reasons, manufacturers often change them slightly and begin using them again as secret ingredients. Heather Stapleton, a Duke University chemist, saw a case like this while researching flame retardants. She labored for months to identify a chemical found in dust samples taken from homes in Boston but was unable to figure it out. While at a conference, she came to realize from a diagram that the mystery chemical was a slightly varied version of another that had been banned for causing reproductive and other damage.
Richard Wiles, senior vice president of the Environmental Working Group (EWG) believes there are thousands of chemicals currently being used that are potentially toxic and people do not even realize they are there. He questions how a regulatory agency like the EPA can even do its job when a great many of the chemicals it is supposed to be regulating are being withheld from the agency and the public.
Federal officials are working towards establishing regulations that would require manufacturers to provide evidence and reasoning why a chemical must remain secret. Under their proposal, the burden of proof would be on manufacturers to establish proof that disclosure would harm business. The EPA would then have 90 days to appeal the claim and prove otherwise if it believed necessary.
Others are not buying this idea, insisting that if public health is to be regarded then no chemical should remain a secret.
Click here for the full report
Asthma Worsens With Vitamin D Deficiency
February 1, 2010
Business Week
By Steven Reinberg
People with asthma who have low levels of vitamin D fare worse than those with high levels of the “sunshine” vitamin, a new study finds.
Researchers found that asthmatics with high vitamin D levels have better lung function and respond better to treatment than asthmatics with low vitamin D levels do.
“Our findings suggest that low vitamin D levels are associated with worse asthma,” said lead researcher Dr. E. Rand Sutherland, from the division of pulmonary and critical care medicine at National Jewish Health in Denver.
In addition, vitamin D levels predict how well “somebody is going to respond to steroidal asthma medications,” he said. “It may be that vitamin D is acting as a modifier of the immune system or a modifier of steroid response in ways that are relevant to people with asthma.”
The report is published in the Jan. 28 online edition of the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.
For the study, Sutherland’s team took the vitamin D levels of 54 asthmatics and assessed lung function, airway hyper-responsiveness, which is the prevalence of airway constriction, and response to steroid treatment.
People with low levels of vitamin D in their blood did worse on the tests that evaluated lung function and airway hyper-responsiveness, the researchers found.
In those with vitamin levels below 30 nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml), airway hyper-responsiveness almost doubled, compared to those with more D in their blood.
Low vitamin D levels were also associated with a worse response to steroid therapy and increased production of the pro-inflammatory cytokine, TNF-alpha. This raises the possibility that low vitamin D levels are tied to increased inflammation of the airways.
The heaviest participants had the lowest levels of vitamin D, the study noted. Asthma is associated with obesity, and this (lack of vitamin D) may be a factor linking the two conditions, Sutherland said.
“There is a potential that restoring normal vitamin D levels in people with asthma may help improve their asthma,” Sutherland said.
But whether vitamin D supplements will help asthmatics isn’t known, he added.
Current recommendations for vitamin D supplements for adults is 400 IU to 600 IU, depending on age, according to the U.S. National Institutes of Health.
“There is likely little harm in adhering to those guidelines,” Sutherland said.
The Institute of Medicine is currently evaluating these levels and expects to announce new guidelines in May.
Sunlight, fatty fish and fish oils are also sources of vitamin D.
Dr. Michael F. Holick, director of the Vitamin D, Skin and Bone Research Laboratory at Boston University School of Medicine, called this “a very nice study that confirms previous observations that vitamin D enhances lung function.”
“It is also known that glucocorticoids [steroids] increase the destruction of vitamin D, thus making patients with asthma at higher risk for vitamin D deficiency, which in turn decreases lung function and makes their disease worse,” he said.
Holick thinks most people, asthmatic or not, get too little D and should take supplements.
“It’s pretty clear that you need a minimum of 1,400 and up to 2,000 IU a day, and if you are obese, you probably need at least one and a half to two times as much, because the fat sequesters the vitamin D,” Holick said. “We now recognize that you can take up to 10,000 IUs a day and not worry about any untoward toxicity.”
Click here for the full report
