Video Basal Cell Carcinoma

Natural fruit 10,000 Times More Effective Than Chemo

Check out this amazing natural food:
 

https://www.amazonthunder.com/happytails

Satisfy Bacon Craving Without Risking Pancreatic Cancer

The meat-eaters among you may truly believe that bacon makes everything better; and folks from Iron Chefs to everyday-Joe's will pay up to $35 a pound for gourmet bacon cuts. However, these delectable pieces of smoked pig are highly processed with numerous toxic chemicals such as nitrites, sodium nitrate, and other products that cause cancer.

 In particular, your risk of pancreatic cancer increases two-fold after eating processed meats such as bacon and sausages, reports the British Journal of Cancer. As little as one sausage or two slices of bacon can increase your risk factors for pancreatic cancer by 51 percent.

If you're one of the devoted, living on a bacon diet, adding it to brownies, crumbling it on ice cream or just eating it plain -- think about this before you eat it again. Some of the chemicals used to give bacon its distinctive and delicious flavor are altered by your body into toxins that actually change the nature of your DNA, says The Guardian. The damage goes deep and processed meats contribute to colorectal, breast, and pancreatic cancer.

If you respect your body, or even if you're just simply scared to hell of cancer, it's never too late to make a different food choice and reach for a more nutritious tasty morsel.

What's a bacon lover to do?

Giving up the bacon diet may be as painful to some as relinquishing candy bars or sodas for sugar addicts. But you can still satisfy your bacon craving by eating homemade, seasoned turkey crisps. Organic, free range turkey is lower in fat than bacon, and has no added chemicals, hormones or antibiotics.

 It's minimally processed and supplies a natural source for the amino acid, L-tryptophan, which stimulates the release of the neurotransmitter serotonin. Researchers believe there is a link between low serotonin levels and depression. Naturally stimulating serotonin levels may improve your moods and provide a healthy alternative to taking dangerous, pharmaceutical drugs.

Eating turkey also protects you from the risks of pancreatic cancer because it contains selenium, an essential trace mineral. Selenium boosts the immune system, supports thyroid function and provides antioxidants to help eliminate cancer-friendly free radicals.

Making turkey crisps

The easiest way to make turkey crisps is by using organic, sliced turkey that's been minimally processed. Alternatively, you can roast an organic turkey and slice it thin.

It's as simple as melting enzyme-rich, organic or raw butter in a stainless steel pan and placing several turkey slices in the butter to cook. If you don't eat butter, use one of your favorite oils like coconut or walnut to coat the pan. Season with spices, like organic garlic and onion powder and cook on a medium-high heat. Repeatedly turn the meat until it's golden brown and leathery in appearance -- like bacon. Drain it on a paper towel and serve like bacon. Use smoked turkey or add a few dribbles of organic smoke flavor as you're cooking. The organic smoke liquid is available at health food stores and is chemical free.

Don't be shy about how you prepare turkey crisps. Sprinkle some cinnamon and pure maple sugar on them for a sweet treat; douse them with organic, grade B maple syrup alongside breakfast pancakes; shake on thyme and sage for a savory, Thanksgiving-flavored snack. Store extras in the fridge in a plastic bag and eat as you like -- if you actually have leftovers.

Substituting organic turkey crisps for bacon can turn a cancer-causing bacon diet into nourishing nutrition that reduces your risk of pancreatic cancer.

GMO Pervasivenes In Supplements & Big Pharma

The concern over eating genetically-modified foods is growing as more people learn about the harmful effects of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). Although not readily publicized by the mainstream media, GMOs have been linked to various health complications such as tumors, organ failure, DNA damage, immune system disturbances, and nfertility, among others.

Simultaneously, GM contamination of conventional and organic foods is increasing.
The toxic hand of GMOs does not stop in our food supply. GMOs are used in various prescription medications and vaccines, and GMOs in vitamins and supplements is also common. There are numerous examples.

GMO methods are being used to create edible vaccines, as, for example, a way of incorporating swine flu virus into corn, allowing mass vaccinations. A large share of insulin medications is produced by genetic engineering. Companies are producing pharmaceutical proteins (including antibodies) in GM plants, as, for example, in the US, where rice has been engineered to produce the alpha-antitrypsin protein used to treat liver disease and hemorrhages.

This same process is being used in the production of additives and vitamins:

“Genetically modified organisms are being used to produce flavors, binders, enzymes, food additives and vitamins. Genetic engineers identify an organism that produces a particular additive, then they genetically alter it. It is then placed in an incubator of sorts, where the organism grows and multiplies. After it has reached maximum growth, the vitamin is isolated and extracted.” – Source: www.hemphealer.com

Today, GMO corn is used in most major brands of vitamin C supplements. “Ninety-nine percent of the vitamin C used commercially in supplements in the U.S. is derived from genetically engineered corn.” (source: www.life-enhancement.com) GM soy derivatives are common in Vitamin E. Corn oil and/or soybean oil can be often found in gel-tablet supplements. GM wheat derivatives are also common in over-the-counter supplements. GMO’ed food additives are added to all types of vitamin-fortified foods.

“GM microorganisms are used to make vitamin B2 (riboflavin), vitamin C (ascorbic acid), xanthan (a thickener), citric acid, and enzymes used in cheeses, breads and baked goods, alcoholic beverages, and juice.” – Source: Organic Consumers Association

Although GMOs in vitamins and supplements are not revealed on labels, it is likely that most generic and brand-name supplements are, already, GMO products.

Fortunately, there are organic companies out there that are committed to offering GMO-free vitamins, such as NutriGold and NOW Foods. The Non-GMO Shopping Guide offers a comprehensive list of vitamins and supplements from companies enrolled in the Non-GMO Project Standard: nongmoshoppingguide.com

Nervous System Damage From The Chemtrail Filled Sky

Chemtrails rain aluminum nanoparticles on man, beast, and land. “Chemtrails” is a spin-off from “contrails,” which are the condensation trails sometimes left behind flying aircraft. Some believe these contrails are chemical trails being deliberately sprayed from aircrafts for unknown reasons.

There is current concern in the United States about the increasing number of neurodegenerative patients. Since 2000, the number of Alzheimer’s patients has increased from 4.5 million to 5.4 million in 2012. One in eight people 65 or older have Alzheimer’s. A yearly increase seems inevitable because of the aging population, but environmental factors also play a role.


The article “Chemtrails, Nano-aluminum, and Neurodegenerative and Neurodevelopmental Effects” by Russell Blaylock, M.D., in the National Health Federation magazine “Health Freedom News” warns against one of these environmental hazards: chemtrails.

Blaylock, who has retired from neurosurgery to do research, write, and teach, began to notice chemtrails a few years ago and writes, “Of particular concern is that there are now so many—dozens every day are littering the skies.” Chemtrails are made from aerosols, usually spread by non-passenger jets.

 What at first looks like contrails turns into ribbons of clouds that spread out making the sky look over-cast. They contain various toxic, and biological substances. Blaylock concentrates on the effects of the nano-aluminum particles, as mentioned in Part 2 of “Chemtrails Over Las Vegas” in the August 26, 2005, Las Vegas Tribune.

Chemtrails are not admitted as a threat or as existing by governments, but their existence occasionally comes out in the media. TV station KNBC Los Angeles, Calif. hosted Toxic Sky with Paul Moyer, an account of sickness of children and record amounts of barium and aluminum in the water supply after chemtrails were seen over San Bernardino.

In Aug. 2005 the Las Vegas Tribune had a two-part article detailing the chemtrails over Las Vegas, the ensuing chemtrails sickness, and previous chemtrail history from other sources. In the Las Vegas Tribune report, the U.S. Air Force on their website called chemtrails a “chemtrail hoax,” but “scientists working at Wright Patterson Air Force Base confirmed to the Ohio newspaper, Columbus Alive, that they were involved in aerial spraying experiments. One involved aluminum oxide spraying related to global warming and the other involved barium stearate and had to do with high-tech military communications.”

Individuals who have noticed health problems, die-off of livestock or crops concurrently with the appearance of chemtrails have investigated on their own, having their blood, soil, water, and atmosphere tests made to compare with the norms. A compendium of these reports both documented and anecdotal is on “Strange Days Strange Skies” online.

The documentary film What in the World Are They Spraying? produced by G. Edward Griffin, Michael Murphy, and Paul Wittenberger shows the impact on the environment of chemtrails. For instance, the snow on Mount Shasta normally has 7 parts per billion (ppb) of aluminum, but over the last four or five years it has increased to 61,000 ppb.

Soil in northern California is turning alkaline, disrupting the root systems of trees. Farmers have noted that some plants will no longer grow in Hawaii. Fishermen see fewer bugs for the fish. These are a few examples from the above documentary.

True to his specialty, Blaylock chooses to write about the neurotoxin nano-aluminum, one of the main ingredients of today’s chemtrails. He states in his article that “studies have shown that these particles pass along the olfactory neural tracts, which connect directly to the area of the brain that is not only most affected by Alzheimer’s disease, but also the earliest affected in the course of the disease.”

Aluminum nanoparticles are also very easily absorbed from the GI tract, unlike ordinary aluminum that is usually not absorbed. Because of their small size, the nanoparticles can go through the brain-blood barrier, penetrate cell membranes, and disrupt mitochondria.

Nanoparticles can accumulate in the bone marrow, spleen, lymph nodes, and heart, as reported in “Manufactured Aluminum Oxide Nanoparticles Decrease Expression of Tight Junction Proteins in Brain Vasculature,” published in the Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology (December 2008). When inhaled, they inflame the lungs, bringing on asthma or other pulmonary ailments.

In his article, Blaylock predicts an “explosive increase in neurodegenerative diseases occurring in adults and the elderly in unprecedented rates as well as neurodevelopmental disorders in our children” if these cloud projects are not stopped.

The danger to children is the greatest since they are more likely to be outside. Also, they are smaller and not fully developed. Some of the advice from the Stop Spraying California website is to stay inside on chemtrail days, drink lots of water, and eat ice cream.

Chelating foods that flush toxic metals out of our systems such as chlorella and cilantro may help. And remember to keep the immune system in top shape.

 <iframe width="440" height="260" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/f9k-pc07iHA?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Are Cancer Patients Hopes To High With Chemo?

(Reuters Health) - At least two thirds of people with advanced cancer in a new survey believed the chemotherapy they're receiving might cure them, even though the treatment is only being given to buy some time or make them comfortable.

"Their expectations are way out of line with reality," Dr. Deborah Schrag of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston told Reuters Health.

Her team reports in the New England Journal of Medicine that 69 percent who were terminally ill with lung cancer, and 81 percent with fatal colorectal cancer, did not understand that their chemotherapy was not at all likely to eliminate their tumors.

When lung cancer or colorectal cancer has spread, chemotherapy may extend survival for weeks or months at a cost of some substantial side effects.

Perhaps ironically, the patients who had the nicest things to say about their doctors' ability to communicate with them were less likely to understand the purpose of their chemotherapy than patients who had a less-favorable opinion of their communication with their physician.

"This is not about bad doctors and it's not about unintelligent patients," said Schrag. "This is a complex communication dynamic. It's hard to talk to people and tell them we can't cure your cancer" because doctors find it uncomfortable to hammer home grim news and patients don't want to believe it.

"If patients actually have unrealistic expectations of a cure from a therapy that is administered with palliative intent, we have a serious problem of miscommunication that we need to address," write Drs. Thomas Smith and Dan Longo of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in a commentary accompanying the study.
"This may explain why two months before death, half of all patients with lung cancer have not heard any of their doctors use the word 'hospice,'" they write.
TONING DOWN OPTIMISM ‘HARD'

The study "suggests we need to spend a little more time" explaining the hard facts to patients, said Dr. Hossein Borghaei, an oncologist at the Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia, who was not involved in the research. "Medical oncologists are going to need to tone down their optimism and enthusiasm, but it's hard."

The findings are based on interviews with 1,193 patients, or their surrogates, who had been diagnosed with cancer that had spread. All were receiving chemotherapy.
"The fact that 20 to 30 percent of respondents recognized that chemotherapy was not at all likely to cure them shows that at least some patients were able to accept this reality and to acknowledge it to an interviewer," the researchers wrote.

"These are not trivial issues. Chemotherapy near the end of life is still common, does not improve survival, and is one preventable reason why 25 percent of all Medicare funds are spent in the last year of life," write Smith and Longo.

"There is a lot of harm in not having patients understand the finality of the disease," said Borghaei. Chemo drugs "are very powerful, they have a lot of side effects, the chemotherapy is going to harm you more than it helps you, and it can actually shorten your life. All of this should be taken into account."

Smith and Longo said the results are probably due, in varying degrees, to patients not being told their disease is incurable, patients not being told in a way that let them understand, patients choosing to not believe the message, or patients being too optimistic. "It is probably a combination of all four possibilities," they said.

Borghaei said the study "doesn't take into account what patients bring to the table when they are diagnosed with incurable cancer."

Many patients insist that they are going to beat the odds once they hear the news.
"What are you supposed to do, stand in front of someone with advanced disease and argue with them?" said Borghaei. "It's not productive. But I hear that all the time, especially from the younger patients."

"I think it serves as a stark reminder to physicians: just slow down, maybe take a few minutes to realize how hard this is," said Schrag. "Recognize that this is not one conversation, but typically a series of conversations to see if they've understood it, and how they're acting on it."
When a cure is extremely unlikely, "We have to make sure people have the opportunity to plan and prepare for what is much more likely to happen," she said.

Do Antibiotics Permanently Kill Off Beneficial Bacteria?

It’s an accepted concept by now that taking antibiotics in order to quell an infection disrupts the personal microbiome, the population of microorganisms that we all carry around in our guts, and which vastly outnumbers the cells that make up our bodies.

That recognition supports our understanding of Clostridium difficile disease — killing the beneficial bacteria allows C. diff room to surge and produce an overload of toxins — as well as the intense interest in establishing a research program that could demonstrate experimentally whether the vast industry producing probiotic products is doing what it purports to do.

But implicit in that concept is the expectation that, after a while — after a course of antibiotics ends — the gut flora repopulate and their natural balance returns.

What if that expectation were wrong?

In a provocative editorial published this week in Nature, Martin Blaser of New York University’s Langone Medical Center argues that antibiotics’ impact on gut bacteria is permanent — and so serious in its long-term consequences that medicine should consider whether to restrict antibiotic prescribing to pregnant women and young children.

Early evidence from my lab and others hints that, sometimes, our friendly flora never fully recover. These long-term changes to the beneficial bacteria within people’s bodies may even increase our susceptibility to infections and disease. Overuse of antibiotics could be fuelling the dramatic increase in conditions such as obesity, type 1 diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease, allergies and asthma, which have more than doubled in many populations.

Among the findings he cites in support: The population-level observation that the incidence of infection with H. pylori, the bacterial cause of gastric ulcers, has declined over decades just as the incidence of esophageal cancer has risen. In addition, he offers his own research group’s observation that children who don’t acquire H. pylori are at greater risk of developing allergy and asthma, and their findings that eradicating H. pylori affects the production of the two hormones, ghrelin and leptin, that play a role in weight gain.

Are antibiotics to blame for the decline in H.pylori? Blaser points out that the organism is vulnerable to the same antibiotics that are prescribed to children for ear infections and colds — and that children routinely receive up to 20 courses of antibiotics before they reach adulthood. In addition, he says, one-third to one-half of women in the industrialized world receive antibiotics during pregnancy.

 Couple that with the increasingly large percentage of children born by Caesarean section — who by skipping their trip through the birth canal miss their first exposure to friendly bacteria — and the result, he says, is that “each generation… could be beginning life with a smaller endowment of ancient microbes than the last.”

Finally, he points to evidence that antibiotic use permanently changes the composition of the gut microbiome, altering the balance of bacterial species and maintaining resistant bacteria in the gut.

The function and influence of the microbiome — in the gut, on the skin and everywhere in the body — is a huge research issue right now, with the founding by the National Institutes of Health of the Human Microbiome Project, not to mention continuing debates over the accuracy of the “hygiene hypothesis” and speculation that altering gut flora could influence everything from obesity to depression.

 This proposal dovetails with those inquiries — and also (you knew I had to get there eventually) with ongoing concern about antibiotic over-use encouraging the emergence of resistant organisms.

It’s understood that antibiotics are already over-prescribed in adults and children; reining in over-prescribing is one of the most difficult tasks in controlling the spread of superbugs. This new hypothesis, Blaser says, ought to put more force behind the push to reduce antibiotic overuse, especially in early life:

We urgently need to investigate this possibility. And, even before we understand the full scope, there is action we should take.

Cite: Blaser MJ. Stop the killing of beneficial bacteria. Nature 476, 393–394 (25 August 2011). doi:10.1038/476393a


NOTE:

Pathogenic Bacteria and Antibiotics:

In an attempt to destroy all bacterial infections antibiotics were created, however they can not selectively kill only the bad bacteria.  Antibiotics are indiscriminate, they kill off the weaker bacteria too, often this is the beneficial bacterial that your body needs to keep the more harmful bacteria in check.

When the beneficial bacteria is destroyed this enables the antibiotic resistant bacteria to replicate without competition from the beneficial bacterial.

Whatever was making you sick before is still bothering you, but now you are also faced with antibiotic risks and the risks of long term antibiotic use.   The antibiotics have caused an imbalance to your body because the antibiotics have also killed the friendly bacteria, creating a bacterial imbalance.

Eventually the more pathogenic bacteria end up resistant to antibiotics.  When normal antibiotic use doesn't completely destroy the bacterial infection, then your body is really out of balance.

Bacteria are a highly intelligent and adaptable life form, like all life forms their goal is to survive.

Some bacteria are naturally immune to antibiotics and others quickly adapt a resistance in order to survive.

Through pharmaceutical use we have created highly adaptable, antibiotic resistant bacteria, they do this through evolutionary trial and error.

Bacteria create new generations 500,000 faster than humans
replicating every 20 minutes.

The pathogenic bacteria become stronger and more resistance to an increasing number of antibiotics, more potent, more dangerous and creating body imbalances that are more difficult to restore.

Learn more:  http://www.natural-health-home-remedies.com/bacteria.html

Prescription Drugs Now Leading Cause Of Accidental Death

Becca Wolford, Contributing Writer Waking Times

I read a very disturbing news article today: Prescription drug deaths now outnumber other deaths in the U.S., this includes accidental traffic deaths.

Prescription medications have become the leading cause of illness, disability, and death.

Have you looked at the information sheets that come with the prescriptions? There are often pages upon pages of warnings and adverse effects to be aware of. Some medications’ side effects are worse than the illnesses that they are prescribed for.

These deaths are not only from accidental overdoses, but from the side effects and also from mixing with other prescription drugs.

“Most drugs approved by the FDA are under-tested for adverse drug reactions, yet offer few new benefits. Drugs cause more than 2.2 million hospitalizations and 110,000 hospital-based deaths a year. Serious drug reactions at home or in nursing homes would significantly raise the total.” (www.ssrc.org)

This does NOT mean that all prescription drugs are dangerous and should never be used. There are, of course, circumstances where the aid of prescription medication is needed. The point I am making is, often health care providers are too quick to have you pop a pill, or 10, instead of treating the CAUSE.

It’s very easy to treat symptoms, but treating symptoms will not heal the cause.

Let’s look at holistic medicine, for example.

Holistic medicine treats the whole person – mentally, physically, emotionally, and spiritually. How is this done? By retaining proper balance in all aspects of one’s health.

If one aspect is not working properly, it will affect the other parts. For example: Let’s say you’ve got a headache. There could be many possible reasons why your head is hurting – are you eating foods poor in nutritional value?

Do you you have a back-ache? Are you stressed? Do you have trouble sleeping? Any of these could be the reason for the headache. Instead of just treating the headache, you need to get down to the main reason FOR the headache, and treat the reason, the main CAUSE – then the rest of your systems will balance back out.

What if you just treated the headaches by taking pain medications a couple times a day over the course of week, month, year? You’d be ingesting medications that are helping the headache, but the cause is still there (let’s say it is from stress), so the headache will continue. And by then you’ve filled your body with pain-relieving chemicals, some of which could be addictive.

What if, instead, you looked at the perceived cause of your stress (the root of the headache) and took measures to reduce stress in your life? You could do this in many ways: proper nutrition, removing toxins, exercise, yoga, meditation, lifestyle changes, removing things from your life that no longer serve you, counseling…and so on?

I could write pages and pages on this topic, but will save some for another day.

Please be aware when using prescription drugs. Are you treating the cause, or just the symptom?

NOTE:

Socrates, in the 4th century BC, cautioned against treating only one part of the body "or the part can never be well unless the whole is well." These phrases define holism, but do they truly give the whole picture?

To understand what something is we must also know what something isn't.

Reductionism is the opposite of Holism, and is a process that breaks down complex systems and analyzes the smallest parts in isolation, it is the way western medicine sees things. Even simple systems work in whole concepts rather than isolated segments. Think about something as simple as a cake.

What is the most important component in a cake? Is there any one ingredient of prime importance, or does a cake requires many ingredients, each one equally important and vital to the essence of a whole cake?

Can a cake be a cake if any of it's individual ingredients are viewed in isolation? Is flour a cake? Are eggs a cake?

Read more What Is Holism?

Rebounding Is The Best Exercise For Your Immune System

Let’s be honest about the immune system, most of us really have no idea what it is, or exactly how it works, we’re just glad we have one. The immune system is incredibly complex because your body has many lines of defense to rid itself of foreign invaders. In this post I’m going to address one critical component of your immune system. That is your lymphatic system. Here’s a quick anatomy lesson (I’m going to try to keep this really simple) Your lymphatic system is composed of your tonsils, thymus, bone marrow, spleen, lymphatic fluid, vessels, and lymph nodes. The thymus and bone marrow produce white blood cells called lymphocytes. Your blood vessels deliver oxygen and nutrients to your cells. Your lymph vessels are like blood vessels except they are full of clear lymphatic fluid that carries white blood cells (B cell and T cell lymphocytes) throughout your body so they can attack invaders and infected cells. Your lymphatic fluid also carries dead cells, metabolic waste, and toxins away from healthy tissue to be eliminated through sweat, mucus, urine, and liver bile which is carried out in your poop. Lymph nodes are like holding stations that filter the lymph fluid and capture microbes for B and T cells to deal with. They are located in your armpits, groin, neck and around the blood vessels of your chest and abdomen. (End of anatomy lesson) Every day we are bombarded with toxins in our environment and in our food which is why detoxification is such a critical process in your body. If the detox process is hindered, toxins will build up in your body eventually causing acidity and toxemia. These are the root causes of nearly all disease. You have about three times more lymphatic fluid than blood, but here’s the catch, there’s no pump! Muscle contractions in your body encourage the lymphatic fluid to circulate through a series of one-way valves in your body. So the more you move your body, the more you move your lymphatic fluid. One of the lesser talked about benefits of exercise is that it moves your lymphatic fluid, which promotes detoxification in your body. Your skin is the largest detoxification organ and if you exercise vigorously enough to raise your body temperature you will sweat, expelling toxins out through your skin. The Best Exercise for the Lymph System Back in 2004 when I first started to research natural therapies I read every natural cancer survival testimony I could find. I found many common threads, and one of them was jumping on a mini trampoline, aka Rebounding. I figured since so many natural survivors and health practitioners were doing it there must be something to it… Rebounding creates an increased G-force resistance (gravitational load) and positively stresses every cell in your body. As a result, it strengthens your entire musculoskeletal system: your bones, muscles, connective tissue, and even organs. And it promotes lymphatic circulation by stimulating the millions of one-way valves in your lymphatic system. Sounds pretty good right? In addition, rebounding is very low impact and allows you to do jumping and aerobic exercises for much longer intervals than you could on solid ground without tiring out or creating harmful oxidative and adrenal stress. NASA produced an interesting report about the benefits of rebounding you can read Here. Here are the three basic Rebounding Exercises: The Health Bounce is gently bouncing up and down on a rebounder without your feet leaving the mat. It is very low impact and very effective at moving your lymphatic system. Most folks can easily do this for an hour or more while watching tv. The Strength Bounce is jumping as high as you can. It strengthens primary and stabilizer muscles throughout your body, improves your balance, and moves your lymphatic system like nothing else. That’s what you want to work up to. Aerobic Bouncing is jumping jacks, twisting, running in place, bouncing on one leg at a time, dancing, and any other crazy maneuvers you can think of. Doing these high intensity aerobic exercises will get your blood pumping and your sweat on. If you are too weak to jump you can sit on the rebounder and bounce gently in a seated position. I bought my rebounder in 2004 a few months after abdominal surgery, and found it too painful to really jump on at first, so I just did the health bounce. As my body healed, the pain went away and I started doing the Strength and Aerobic Bouncing. When fighting cancer I did this 2-3 times per day. My typical routine is to warm up for a couple minutes with the health bounce, 5-10 minutes of strength and aerobic bounce variations, and finish up with another couple minutes of the health bounce. I put on headphones and listened to worship music or healing scriptures while bouncing. This is an amazing way to start the day. To maximize the benefit of your rebound workout: -Drink 12-16 oz of clean filtered water beforehand. -Do it outside and connect with God and nature. (If nature permits) -Take at least 10 deep breaths of fresh air. In through your nose, hold it for a few seconds, then push it out through your mouth. -Get sunlight on as much of your body as you can. -If possible do it with enough intensity to break a sweat. Give yourself 7-20 minutes. Sweating is important but it also means you’ll need a shower afterward. The nice thing about rebounding is you can still get a benefit from it even if you don’t break a sweat. Try to get at least one sweaty rebounder workout per day. I do it first thing in the morning before I shower for the day. If you can’t do it outside, do it inside. Just do it! My wife Micah even used rebounding workout dvd to lose her baby weight after Marin was born. Not all rebounders are created equal. The quality of the frame, springs and mat are extremely important. Cheap rebounders are harder on your joints and can cause injury, also they wear out quickly, and have no warranty.

Mandatory Chemo For Children With Cancer?

Most people have some second or even first-hand experience with cancer. Whether you’ve watched a loved one struggle, or if you are a survivor yourself, you know how difficult the battle can be.

And if you’ve gone through it or seen someone go through chemotherapy treatments, you know the poison meant to kill cancer cells can severely weaken the entire body, seemingly destroying healthy cells as well. The treatment can be especially dangerous for children with cancer.

Fortunately, if diagnosed with cancer, we all get a say in how our illness is treated. Right?

That’s what the Minnesota family of 8-year old Sarah Parisian thought as doctors tried to force chemotherapy on their young and vibrant child. They were wrong.

Sarah recently had 90 percent of a brain tumor removed and doctors were recommending a year of
chemo to kill the rest of the cancer cells. Her family was not convinced. Suffering from nausea, weight and hair loss, sore throat, and sleeping 22 hours a day, they wanted to seek out alternative treatments for their otherwise happy child.

The medical establishment, undermining their rights as parents and accusing them of making decisions detrimental to the child’s health, took them to court.

Eventually, an agreement was reached, allowing for Sarah’s treatment to combine chemo with alternative treatments. Though, I’m not entirely sure how much of an “agreement” it was considering the Parisian family was threatened with loss of custody if they didn’t cooperate. Now, Sarah will receive less than the originally-recommended chemo chemicals and be able to supplement them with alternative therapies.


So, why the fuss? What’s wrong with chemo?

If you’ve seen someone go through chemotherapy, you can tell it isn’t the most health-promoting treatment. No, chemotherapy uses a mixture of poisons to kill cancer cells. But, in the process, it wreaks havoc on healthy cells and the rest of the body.

One of the ingredients in chemo has actually been labeled as carcinogenic by the World Health Organization. Yes, the chemical used in a drug to kill cancer has been found to cause cancer.

Also, there is substantiated concern that chemo creates stronger cancer cells, those that resist treatments.

Still, chemotherapy is used as the first-line of treatment for many types of cancers, and mainstream doctors balk at the idea that anything other than this slew of poisons could have promising effects on this life-threatening disease.

Similar to mandatory vaccinations, mandatory chemotherapy is evidence that the medical establishment thinks people are too dumb for their own good—that they somehow know what’s best for everyone. This despite the fact that they hide behind a crooked system where profit is king and health actually takes a backseat.

The case of Sarah Parisian isn’t the first of its kind and it likely won’t be the last.

Regardless of your diagnosis, arm yourself with information and be prepared to fight for the right to care for your own body, and that of your child’s, on your own terms, or risk letting the establishment step in and do it for you.

While chemotherapy has been found to negatively impact future DNA for generations; turmeric, garlic, ginger, and papaya rest among many cancer fighting foods. Marijuana oil has even been used to save lives from cancer death.

The Story Of Vaccinations

Dr Coldwell States Every Cancer Can Be Quickly Killed

SOPA Threatens Freedom Of Health Speech

'Identifying threats to health freedom and freedom of health speech often requires connecting the dots between seemingly unrelated verbiage in one piece of legislation and a trade agreement, for instance, or reading between the lines to identify the full intent or scope of a provision or phrase added to an unrelated bill.

And this is the case with the Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA), which contains language that could one day target websites that sell, promote, or otherwise talk about the benefits of dietary supplements.

Section 105 of SOPA, entitled Immunity for Taking Voluntary Action Against Sites that Endanger Public Health, provisions that service providers, network providers, advertising services, search engines, domain name registry services, and other parties that handle internet content will be immune from prosecution should they decide to arbitrarily pull sites that "endanger the public health."'

Medical Doctors Cluelss Why Surge In Thyroid Cancer

'Thyroid cancer, which affects about 11 people per 100,000 each year, seems to be on the rise. It's a trend that baffles medical researchers.
National Cancer Institute statistics suggest that in recent years the number of cases of this often curable cancer has increased by about 6.5%. Over a decade, that has added up to make thyroid cancer the fastest-increasing cancer, says Tod Huntley, an otolaryngologist and head and neck surgeon with the Center for Ear, Nose, Throat and Allergy in Indianapolis.

"Ten years ago, if I saw four new thyroid cancer patients a year, it would have been a lot," says G. Irene Minor, a radiation oncologist with Indiana University Health Central Indiana Cancer Center. "Now sometimes I see that many in a month, and I have seen three in a week."'

NOTE: I'm embarrassed that anyone could make such an imbecilic statement. Shall we give them a clue?

The thyroid gland is the first to uptake radioactive iodine. Yes, radioactive iodine has a half life of only 8 days, ONCE IT STOPS SPEWING. Ten months after Fukushima, it has not stopped yet, once it does, then every 8 days the amount of iodine is diminished by half, so it actually takes about 80 days for it to disappear.

If the thyroid gland has insufficient iodine it WILL UPTAKE ANY IODINE AVAILABLE.....which would be radioactive. Most of you have found your way to this Blog from the Radiation page. Japanese visitors represent my 2nd largest group of people to this site.

Dr Christine Horner Talks About Breast Cancer

PLEASE Read this whole article and/or listen to the full video, it may save your life.


Dr. Christine Horner began her career as a board certified general- and plastic surgeon, performing breast reconstructive surgeries on women who'd had full mastectomies due to breast cancer.

In this interview, she shares her extensive knowledge about breast cancer—its causes and its cures, and the pro's and con's of various screening methods.

Her interest in breast cancer began while she was still in college, when her mother developed the disease.

Thirteen years later, when her mother's cancer returned, Dr. Horner became very active with the American Cancer Society.

For a time, she was a vice-president and the Kentucky state spokesperson for the American Cancer Society on breast cancer issues.

"We were trained to say that we don't know what causes breast cancer and we have no known cures; the best things that women can do are breast exams and mammograms," she says.

"… In my practice, I was watching women get younger and younger when I was doing breast reconstruction on them.

Finally, I was doing women in their 20s. I thought something is way wrong with this picture." I thought why don't we just look through the medical literature and see if there's anything that research shows that women can do, that's within our control that will lower our risks. I had no idea what I was going to find… But when I looked, I instantly found thousands of studies that show exactly why we have a cancer epidemic…"

What's Causing the Cancer Epidemic?

What Dr. Horner discovered was that there are a number of habits we've stopped doing in our modern culture that are highly protective. We've dramatically altered our diets—shunning our native, whole-foods cuisine for highly processed fare—and engage in very little physical activity, for example.

"We're telling women that all they can do is mammogram [screening], and it's extremely disempowering," Dr. Horner says. "You feel like you have no control over it. But if you look at epidemiological studies… we know that people that live in Asia have a very low incidence of breast cancer or prostate cancer… [W]e have the studies showing that if an Asian woman moves to the United States and adopts our American diet and lifestyle, within one generation her risk will match that of an American woman's. It's like "Hello? What are we doing or not doing that they're doing or not doing that's making such a big difference? "

100 Countries Claim Sunlight Prevents Cancer

For the same reason that the conventional energy industry has not harnessed the full potential of solar energy (its free!), sunlight and its indispensable byproduct in our skin: vitamin D, represents a serious threat to the medical establishment, whose questionable and aggressive promotion of vaccination and drug-based strategies in place of inexpensive, safe and effective vitamin D supplementation (or better, carefully meted out recreation and sunlight exposure) for immunity, has many questioning their motives.

Vitamin D, after all, has a vital preventive role to play in hundreds of conditions, due to the fact that 1 in every 10 genes in the human body depends on adequate quantities of this gene-regulatory hormone to function optimally. In other words, the very genetic/epigenetic infrastructure of our health would fall apart without adequate levels.

Even the risk for developing cancer, one of the most feared health conditions of our time -- and the one the medical establishment has had the least success preventing and treating -- is intimately connected to your vitamin D status.

Indeed, a groundbreaking new meta-analysis on the sunlight-vitamin D connection, published in the journal Anticancer Research and based on data from over 100 countries, found that "a strong inverse correlations with solar UVB for 15 types of cancer," with weaker, though still significant evidence for the protective role of sunlight in 9 other cancers.

The relevant cancers were:

"Bladder, breast, cervical, colon, endometrial, esophageal, gastric, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, rectal, renal, and vulvar cancer; and Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Weaker evidence exists for nine other types of cancer: brain, gallbladder, laryngeal, oral/pharyngeal, prostate, and thyroid cancer; leukemia; melanoma; and multiple myeloma."

Sunlight exposure, after all, is essential for health from the moment we are born. Without it, for instance, infants are prone to developing neonatal jaundice. The very variation in human skin color from African, melanin-saturated dark skin, to the relatively melanin de-pigmented, Caucasian lighter-skin, is a byproduct of the offspring of our last common ancestor from Africa (as determined by mitochondrial DNA) migrating towards sunlight-impoverished higher latitudes, which began approximately 60,000 years ago. In order to compensate for the lower availability of sunlight, the body rapidly adjusted, essentially requiring the removal of the natural "sunscreen" melanin from the skin, which interferes with vitamin D production.

While a life-saving adaptation, the loss of melanin likely has adverse health effects, which include losing the ability to convert sunlight into metabolic energy, increased prevalence of Parkinson's disease (which involves de-melanization of the substantia nigra), and others effects which we will discuss in detail in a future article. For now, it is important to point out that within the span of only 60,000 years (a nanosecond in biological time), many of the skin "color" differences among the world's human inhabitants reflect how heavily genetically-conserved was the ability of the human body to produce vitamin D.

It should also be pointed out that vitamin D is to sunlight, what ascorbic acid is to the vitamin C activity in food. In other words, sunlight likely provides a greater spectrum of therapeutic activity (when carefully meted out, preferably during solar noon) than supplemental vitamin D3, which is almost exclusively derived from UVB irradiated sheep's lanolin.

For further research, the following link reveals 50 therapeutic effects of sunlight exposure, as culled from research housed on the National Library of Medicine.

Smear Campaign Against Natural

The Federal government has launched a double assault against the dietary supplement industry recently, which includes onerous new labeling requirements (Durbin bill, proposed) and testing requirements (New Dietary Ingredient guidelines, proposed) which would literally demolish the supplement industry.

To pull off these draconian measures the news media appears to be working in concert with government in a brainwashing effort to gain public support for these draconian measures. And that means dietary supplements, which are safer than aspirin, tap water or table salt, must be made to appear risky and unsafe.

The smear campaign against dietary supplements began August 27 in The New York Times with an article that reveals potential problems with foreign-made supplements that creep past US Customs and FDA inspectors. But these products do not represent the vast majority of dietary supplements sold in the marketplace today.

Then the Wall Street Journal followed with its version of yellow journalism in an article published on August 30 about an unproven liquid dietary supplement that is being touted for Alzheimer’s patients. But commonly-prescribed drugs for this condition are no better and are far more expensive. If neither drug or supplement are effective, why not help families searching for a remedy that saves their money?

Then in the early-online September 12 issue of Time magazine an article entitled "Nutrition In A Pill?" is featured where one of Time’s top reporters is dispatched to record his six-month-long personal experience taking supplements. But the report appears to be set up to mischaracterize dietary supplements as a waste of money.

Here is a more in-depth analysis of these scurrilous news reports:

FDA Wants Your Natural Supplements & To Limit Your Health Choices Even Further

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is on a mission to seize control of the dietary supplement industry, and cripple it from being able to freely innovate and market potent, effective health products to consumers.

In fact, as we reported a few weeks ago, the agency's draft guidance proposals threaten to actually ban many supplements that were introduced after the passage of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), but that are safely and effectively used by millions of Americans today -- and YOUR help is required to stop this affront to health freedom

NOTE: Don't be deceived into believing this is about safety or health. This is about eliminating your access to natural remedies, natural foods and to force YOU to use toxic Pharmaceuticals. Remove $$$ given to FDA by Pharmaceutical companies and the focus will change