Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Cancer Cures

Cure for Cancer time.

Are you Excited?

I know this amazing woman in Los Angeles who had cancer by the age of 21. Her parents owned a pizza parlor and she ate pizza, soda and bread all the time. High intake of milk, meat, processed salt, processed white flour, and processed sugars are top cancer causes. She changed her diet and now she's in peak health and almost 40. Cancer and tumors present in the body indicates a suppressed immune system mostly due to diet and toxins in your environment.

The A.M.A. represents cancer as this incurable beast when in reality it's much more controllable than we have been led to believe. For instance, the American Cancer Society does not recommend that you avoid eating such things as nitrates, a common food additive found in most meat that is known to be cancer causing. Our food is loaded with things that cause cancer and deprived of the cancer preventing vitamins.

I'll give you a cure for cancer, *bam* Eating the inner core of an Apricot seed or Apple seed. Now how many millions of dollars did that take me to figure out? It seems like there is constantly people raising money for cancer research. Where does it all go? I had a woman call me on accident and I decided to talk to her. She was calling for a number of where to donate her hair to cancer patients. Her hair would go to a chemo patient. See, now, chemo and radiation are totally unnecessary in a majority of cases and they damage the body and destroy the immune system so that it can't recover. People have good intentions that get thrown into a pool of bad science and it ends up doing no real good. I'm not saying that organizations that raise money are wrong or bad, but it's a rat race. They could spend their money and energy in other more productive ways like educating their networks to what they are eating.

So they just keep raising money and say “We’re working on it, we’re getting close”. Truth of the matter is the last thing modern medicine “cured” was Polio…in the 50’s. They are not trying to cure you. They are trying to make money. Who makes more money than drug companies? They are at the top of the Fortune 500s. It makes no sense if they were trying to make you well. Drug companies are the bane of the American people, sucking us dry. They have found anti-depressants and other prescription drugs in tap water and streams. We are forever altering nature by our actions. We must stop the madness and go natural and sustainable. Pre-Industrial revolution.


:The Gorilla:.

♂ Georgilla –če Guerrilla ♀

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Answer to Cancer
Has Been Known for Many Years!

1CureForCancer. com

Vitamin B17 was the subject of great controversy over 20 years ago when some of the world's top scientists claimed that when consumed, the components of certain raw fruit seeds make it 100% impossible to develop cancer and will kill existing cancer in most cases.

The pharmaceutical companies pounced on this claim immediately and demanded that FDA studies be conducted. The results of these studies are found on this site and in a book called "World Without Cancer", by G. Edward Griffin. To order the book call 877-479-3466.

Vitamin B17, also know as Laetrile and Amygdalin is found in most fruit seeds, namely apricot seeds. The apricot seed was claimed as the cure for all cancers over 35 years ago.

It was even more strongly claimed that when one eats about 7 apricot seeds per day they can never develop cancer, just as one can never get scurvy if they have an orange every day, or pellagra if they have some B vitamins every day.

The pharmaceuticals companies together with the medical establishment pushed the FDA into making it illegal to sell "raw" apricot seeds or vitamin B17 with information about its effects on cancer. Even to this day, you can't get raw apricot seeds in your health food store, only the sun dried ones which have all the important enzymes killed off.

Pharmaceutical companies only conduct studies on patented chemicals they invent so that at the end of their study, if the drug gets approved, they have sole rights on its sale. (They make back tons more than the mere 250 million that they invested) They never do studies on foods that can't be patented and that can be sold by any supermarket.

The information on this site is not just for preventing cancer, it is for those that have cancer now and are on chemo or radiation at this moment, as well as for those who have cancer but haven't started any conventional methods yet.

Most of the people that already have cancer clusters in their body, who eat the apricot seeds and/or take the vitamin b17 in tablet form show near to complete tumor regression. Although cancer patients may get rid of their cancer, they also have the problem of the organ damage that the cancer has caused.

This is another issue where other herbs and remedies are necessary for proper organ regeneration. Of course when a person's body is completely eaten up by cancer, the apricot seeds and its extract (laetrile and vitamin b17) would only prolong their life many times longer than chemotherapy and might not completely save them.

However in many cases high levels of the injectable laetrile will help a great deal with the pain.

The information that you're about to read will guide you in how you can guarantee a nearly cancer free life or help your body get rid of cancer if you have it.

Cancer Cures

Are Abundant in nature. These cures are, of course, outside the control of mainstream medicine and they are all labeled "quackery" by the National Cancer Institute and most Western doctors. Such cures include Amazon herbs (like graviola), licorice root, oxygen therapy, sunlight therapy, the injection of phytochemicals from spirulina directly in cancer tumors, the use of fucoidan supplements (which are extracted from sea vegetables), antineoplastins (pioneered by Dr. Burzynski), phytochemicals found in apricot pits (laetrile) and a long list of other natural therapies that both prevent and reverse cancer in many forms.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Foods Containing B17 (Nitrilosides)

Vitamin B17 appears in abundance in untamed nature. Because B17 is bitter to the taste, in man's attempt to improve tastes and flavors for his own pleasure, he has eliminated bitter substances like B17 by selection and cross-breeding. It can be stated as a general rule that many of the foods that have been domesticated still contain the vitamin B17 in that part not eaten by modem man, such as the seeds in apricots. Listed below is an evaluation of some of the more common foods. Keep in mind that these are averages only and that specimens vary widely depending on variety, locale, soil, and climate.

Fruits Range*
blackberry, domestic low
blackberry, wild high
boysenberry med.

choke cherry high
wild crabapple high
market cranberry low
Swedish (lignon) cranberry high
currant med.

elderberry med.

to high
gooseberry med.

huckleberry med.

loganberry med.

mulberry med.

quince med.

raspberry med.

Seeds Range*
apple seeds high
apricot seed high
buckwheat med.

cherry seed high
flax med.

millet med.

nectarine seed high
peach seed high
pear seeds high
plum seed high
prune seed high
squash seeds med.

Beans Range*
black low
black-eyed peas low
fava high
garbanzo low to med.

green pea low
kidney low to med.

lentils med.

lima, U.S.

lima, Burma med.

mung med.

to high
shell low

Nuts (all raw) Range*
bitter almond high
cashew low
macadamia med.

to high

Sprouts Range*
alfalfa med.

bamboo high
fava med.

garbanzo med.

mung med.

Leaves Range*
alfalfa high
beet tops low
eucalyptus high
spinach low
water cress low

Tubers Range*
cassava high
sweetpotato low
yams low

Range* 1000 mg ( milligrams ) = 1 gram

High — above 500 mg nitriloside per 100 grams of food.

Medium — above 100 mg nitriloside per 100 grams of food.

Low — below 100 mg nitriloside per 100 grams of food.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Edward Griffin
A World Without Cancer
The Story Of Vitamin B17

http://video. google. com/googleplayer. swf?docId=4312930190281243507

This movie cracks the nut wide open. One in 3 women get cancer in their lifetime and 1 in 2 men get cancer in their lifetime these days. Tons of things have changed in the past century so it's hard to pin it down. But what it comes down to is this. Nature equips nature for cancer. You fight off cancer all the time. Your pancreas does it for you. Thank your pancreas. *applause* Nature gave you a back up in vitamin B17. When dogs and cats are sick they go outside and eat grass. They seek grass rich in B17. They can smell it out. Animals in nature don't get cancer. Caribou don't get cancer. The native Americans that eat the Caribou don't get cancer. 100% no cancer and they eat salmon and caribou almost exclusively. It's the nitrilocide compounds in the grasses they eat. Same stuff in apple seeds an apricot seeds. B17. B17. B17.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Griffin and the Gorilla
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket..


Edward Griffin
The Science and Politics of Cancer

"With No Treatment, you are statistically better than using western orthodox treatments"

http://video. google. com/videoplay?docid=8257934856995183554&q=vitamin+b17&hl=en

A 2005 speech given by G. Edward Griffin on Laetrile, Amygdalin, Vitamin B17 as cancer therapy. If you are new to this topic, then you might want to watch " G.

Edward Griffin - A World Without Cancer - The Story Of Vitamin B17 "

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Hoxsey Cancer Cure
How Healing Becomes A Crime

http://video. google. com/videoplay?docid=5528328984547372206&q=hoxsey&hl=en

This documentary concerns Harry M. Hoxsey, the former coal miner whose family's herbal recipe has brought about claims of a cancer cure. All starting in 1924 with his first clinic, he expanded to 17 states by the mid 1950s, along the way constantly battling organized medicine that labeled him a charlatan. Hoxsey's supporters point out he was the victim of arrests, or "quackdowns" spearheaded by the proponents of established medical practices. Interviews of patients satisfied with the results of the controversial treatment are balanced with physicians from the FDA and the AMA. A clinic in Tijuana, Mexico claims an 80% success rate, while opponents are naturally skeptical. What is apparent is that cancer continues to be one of humankind's more dreaded diseases, and that political and economic forces dominate research and development.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Jason Vale Beat Cancer 3 Times With Apple and Apricot Seeds

http://video. google. com/googleplayer. swf?docId=-2793380650380830725&hl=en

Jason Vale, Champion arm wrestler has fought and cured cancer 3 times through eating raw apple and apricot seeds that contain a little known vitamin B17. The Big Pharmaceutical giants don't want people to know this little fact so they have encouraged the FDA to ban the sale of raw apricot or Vitamin B17 ~ Amygdalin Laetrile as it is also known. You can however order the seeds online from other countries. Search the web... there are endless testimonials of persons that have sent various cancers into complete remission because of these little seeds. God Bless you... there is always a way to LIFE in his Kingdom!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

This article gives a good low-down on the politics of cancer "research". The Cancer Industry has a perfect crime set up. They have invented an "incurable disease" that only they can treat their expensive ways that inevitably kill most people. Meanwhile they know it's curable and rake in billions every year to research it more and more and more. It is circular logic. The cancer cures are towards the bottom. They have done statistics on patients that receive conventional treatments and patients that underwent no treatment. You were statistically better off with NO TREATMENT.

New science proves that cancer is reversible
Organized medicine insists that cancer cannot be cured

by Mike Adams
www. newstarget. com
Originally published August 3 2004

Fascinating new research is showing that cancer is reversible. A cloning experiment conducted on cancer cells showed that those very same cells can revert to healthy cells and result in the creation of a healthy organism, free of cancer. This is ground-breaking new research on cancer because it shows that malignancy is not the inevitable fate of cancer cells.

There's more to this than you might suspect. The official position on cancer by the National Cancer Institute and organized medicine has long been that cancer is not reversible -- once a person has cancer, they can never be cured. In fact, the word "cure" has typically been grounds for a lawsuit by the FDA (or certainly the oppression or regulation of any therapy making such a claim). It's a convenient position by organized medicine, because as long as they can get people to believe the idea that cancer cannot be cured, they can outlaw all anti-cancer therapies based on the idea that since there is no such thing as a cure, anything claiming to offer a cure must be quackery.

It's circular reasoning, of course, based on a faulty premise that has now been proven false by this new scientific research. Cancer cells can revert to healthy cells, and healthy organisms can be produced from malignant cancer cells.

You probably won't hear much about this in the popular press or from the National Cancer Institute. This scientific finding is incompatible with the commonly held beliefs of those in charge of cancer research and cancer propaganda. And, as is common in modern medicine, any scientific evidence that is incompatible with their current beliefs is simply tossed aside and ignored. See, modern medicine isn't really about the search for scientific truth; it's about the search for selective truth -- any sort of truth that agrees with their current belief systems and supports their financial interests. In that sense, modern medicine is more like a religion. It is based on a series of dogmatic beliefs that don't hold water under scientific scrutiny. The hard science says that cancer cells can revert to healthy cells, but the industry says cancer cannot be reversed.

This is not new information for naturopathic physicians, Chinese medical practitioners, and holistic nutritionists -- we've known for a long time that cancer is reversible. In fact, cancer is one of the diseases that is the easiest to reverse. And because this website does not sell any products whatsoever, under free speech guidelines, I can tell you the truth about cancer, and state without qualification that there are many cures for cancer that are both well proven and readily available to those suffering from this chronic disease.

Cancer Cures

These cures are, of course, outside the control of mainstream medicine and they are all labeled "quackery" by the National Cancer Institute and most Western doctors. Such cures include Amazon herbs (like graviola), licorice root, oxygen therapy, sunlight therapy, the injection of phytochemicals from spirulina directly in cancer tumors, the use of fucoidan supplements (which are extracted from sea vegetables), antineoplastins (pioneered by Dr. Burzynski), phytochemicals found in apricot pits (laetrile) and a long list of other natural therapies that both prevent and reverse cancer in many forms.

The bottom line is that science is now proving that cancer is reversible, thereby verifying something that the natural healing community has both known and practiced for literally thousands of years. In time, perhaps western medicine will pull its head out of the dark ages and come to recognize that the human body is a remarkable healer. It can conquer cancer and other chronic diseases if simply given the chance and the proper nutrients. The cure for cancer exists right now, today, and it is available to those who are willing to recognize it.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Cure for AIDs and Cancer has Been "Lost"?

A Federal Jury found that Cedars Sinai Medical Center and UCLA have lost the Vaccines intentionally and awarded Dr. Sam Chachoua $10-million dollars.

Cancer is the perfect racket. You create this image of a disease that isn't really accurate. Then you get people to fear it by not informing them how to cure these ailments and letting them die and treating them with horrible methods to make people think it's impossible to cure because those chemicals and techniques also poison you and make it much worse. Then you take in more money each year to "look for the cure". The last thing they cured was Polio. There is no money in curing disease. They figured that out. You must take health into YOU OWN HANDS.

I'll give you a cure for cancer, *bam* Eating the inner core of an Apricot seed or Apple seed (info on my page). Now how many millions of dollars did that take me to figure out? I'm not saying that all organizations that raise money are wrong or bad, but it's a rat race. They could spend their money and energy in other more productive ways.

NBC News clip: "Most effective treatment for AIDS and cancer in History LOST
(There's some very poor quality sound in 2 places)

The Cure for AIDs has Been "Lost"

Add to My Profile

YouTube Comment Written by user: Phbal

My dad, J R Chapman, & I met Dr. Sam in ' 4. Dad had stage 4 lung cancer/metas. US docs told dad he'd die. 9 weeks later, after Dad began Dr. Sam's treatment, He was cured & cancer free. All med/records documenting my dad's progress from start of conventional therapy to the end of Dr. Sam's treatment as well as how Dr. Sam, unequivocally, saved my father's life. God bless you Sam and keep you safe.

World needs to know the truth about cancer & the obscene profits behind its man made disease

#1. You have a Man, Doctor, Scientist who has been hopefully working, then fighting, now struggling, for about 23-years to get his treatments recognized and to bring significant health to the world. The system, to bring new effective treatments to the masses turned their backs on him, (and on others!) which could have saved his father, if they would have done.. what's good for the ALL.

#2.The Medical Industry blatantly stole his treatments.. So he sued Cedars Sinai and UCLA in part, to prove to everyone that his treatments were one of the most effective treatments on the planet and when he wins this court battle, the media would announce this to the world. This would rid much suffering, such as you are going thru now.

#3. Finally, one of the most happiest days of his life came, where all that he had been thru, had paid off. He had won! A Federal Jury found Cedars and UCLA guilty of breach of contract (stole the cancer, AIDS and Heart vaccines) and awarded Dr. Sam Chachoua $1 Million Dollars (should have been $5 Billion.


#4. Tom Snyder, Producer for NBC NEWS, for some reason was the only one who had the guts to put it on the air. The news clip started off with... "IT HAD PROMISED of BEING ONE of the MOST EFFECTIVE TREATMENTS FOR AIDS and CANCER in HISTORY" and a FEDERAL JURY FOUND CEDARS SINAI and UCLA HAVE LOST THE VACCINES INTENTIONALLY!

#5. Then that Happiest Day begin to get smashed. They immediately pulled that clip off the air, fired Tom Snyder. One other media had the guts to print the story, that was CHRYSTYNE JACKSON of EXPLORE MAGAZINE. Other than that, all news of the treatment, the stealing of it, the suppression had been suppressed.

#6. Within a few weeks Judge Margaret Morrow took away the $1 million, stating that Dr. Sam did not have a paper trail to prove the $12 million that he paid to develop the vaccines.. S..T (PICASSO PAID .5 cents for canvas and .1 cents for brushes, but his paintings are worth millions.) Such an easy issue to win, but not when you have your attorneys paid off and a Judge who was unexpectedly switched in the middle of the trial.

#7. The Judge who is married to one of the Deans of UCLA and had worked for a law firm that represented Cedars Sinai (copies of the Marriage License and employment record were not allowed to be submitted.) She also gave UCLA Summary Judgment (let them go free, without being tried.) early on in the trial.

All of this is evidence in Fed Court and Cedars admitted to doing the testing but played down the Over 99% efficacy they demonstrated. Cedars successfully kept away from the jury the success of human trials at USC. This is not an advertisement, I just feel it's too important to be dismissed.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Illusion of Disease
By Mike Adams

NewsTarget. Com

There is a curious tendency in conventional medicine to label a set of symptoms as a disease. For example, I recently spotted a poster touting a new drug for osteoporosis. It was written by a drug company and it said this: "Osteoporosis is a disease that causes weak and fragile bones." The poster went on to say that you need a particular drug to counteract this "disease.


Yet the language is all backward. Osteoporosis is not a disease that causes weak bones. Osteoporosis is the name given to a diagnosis of weak bones. In other words, the weak bones happened first, and then the diagnosis followed.

Another drug company defines osteoporosis as "the disease that causes bones to become thinner." Again, the cause and effect are reversed. And that's how drug companies want people to think about diseases and symptoms: First you "get" the disease, then you are "diagnosed" just in time to take an expensive new drug for the rest of your life.

But it's all hogwash. There is no such disease as osteoporosis. It's just a name for a pattern of symptoms that indicate you've let your bones get fragile. And to treat it, western doctors will give you prescriptions for drugs that claim to make your bones less brittle.

We should really call it Brittle Bones Disease, and describe the treatment in plain language - exercise, vitamin D, mineral supplements with calcium and strontium, natural sunlight, and the avoidance of substances like soft drinks, white flour, and added sugars, which strip away bone mass.

Diabetes is another condition given a complex name that puts its solution out of reach of the average patient. Type 2 diabetes isn't technically a disease. It's just a natural metabolic side effect of consuming refined carbohydrates and added sugars in large quantities without engaging in regular physical exercise.

The name "diabetes" is meaningless to the average person. It should be called Excessive Sugar Disease. If it were called Excessive Sugar Disease, the solution to it would be rather apparent.

Cancer is another disease named after its symptom. To this day, most doctors and patients still believe that cancer is a physical thing: a tumor. In reality, a tumor is only a side effect of cancer, not its cause. A tumor is simply a physical manifestation of a cancer pattern that is expressed by the body.

When a person "has cancer," what they really have is a sluggish or suppressed immune system. And that would be a far better name for the disease: Suppressed Immune System Disorder.

If cancer were actually called that, it would seem ridiculous to try to cure it by cutting out tumors and destroying the immune system with chemotherapy. These are the two most popular treatments for cancer, and they do nothing to support the patient's immune system or prevent future occurrences. That's exactly why most people who undergo chemotherapy or the removal of tumors end up with yet more cancer down the road.

The cure for cancer already exists, and it's found in every human body. Your body kills cancer cells as a routine daily task, and it has done it thousands of times in your lifetime.

All we have to do is stop poisoning our bodies with cancer-causing chemicals and start feeding ourselves the materials our bodies need to beat chronic disease. Instead of searching for new technological cures, our money and time would be better spent making people aware of the existing cures and prevention strategies available right now.

Here's another example: high cholesterol. Conventional medicine says that high cholesterol is caused by a chemical imbalance in the liver, the organ that produces cholesterol. Thus the treatment is drugs (statin drugs) that inhibit the liver's production of cholesterol. Upon taking these drugs, the high cholesterol (the "disease") is regulated.

But the fatal flaw in this approach is once again evident: The symptom is not the cause of the disease. There is another cause, one that is routinely ignored by conventional medicine, doctors, drug companies, and even patients. The root cause of high cholesterol is primarily dietary. A person who eats foods that are high in saturated fats and hydrogenated oils will inevitably produce more bad cholesterol. It's simple cause and effect, not some bizarre behavior by the liver.

"There's a great deal of ego invested in the medical community, and they sure don't want to make health sound attainable to the average person.


If the disease were accurately named, it would be called Fatty Food Choice Disease. That would make more sense to people. And the obvious solution to the disease would be to choose foods that aren't so fatty. Of course, that may be a bit of an oversimplification, since you have to distinguish between healthy fats and unhealthy fats. But at least the name would give patients a better idea of what's actually going on.

Outside the United States , the names of diseases in other languages (such as Chinese) more accurately describe their actual causes. In western medicine, however, the name of the disease obscures the root cause. That makes all diseases sound far more complex and mysterious than they really are.

That's a shame, because the treatments and cures for virtually all chronic diseases are actually quite simple and can be described in plain language. Preventing and reversing these diseases only requires language that describes things like making different food choices, getting more natural sunlight, drinking more water, engaging in regular physical exercise, avoiding specific toxins, supplementing your diet, and so on.

There is a degree of arrogance in the language of western medicine, and this arrogance propagates the separation between doctors and their patients. Separation never results in healing. In order to create healing, we must bring together healers and patients by using plain language that real people understand and that real people can act upon.

There's a great deal of ego invested in the medical community, and they sure don't want to make health sound attainable to the average person. Making the language of disease complicated keeps it out of reach of the public.

But health is attainable by every single person. It isn't rocket science. It's not complex. And it doesn't require a prescription. Health is easy, it is straightforward, and it is direct. And, for the most part, it is available free of charge if you invoke the healing power of sunlight, pure water, stress reduction, exercise, and healthy food choices.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Cheap, Safe Drug Kills Most Cancers

It is already used for other illnesses and has been proven safe but I don't think this has gone through human trials though. Very promising. We are getting close to really understanding the mechanism of cancer and not just saying "Yeah, we're getting close" to finding a cure.

There are many cures fr cancer, you only need look or ask me :-)

DCA Cancer Cure

Add to My Profile

DCA-Dichloroacetate Cancer Cure

http://view. break. com/330550 - Watch more free videos

DCA from Wikipedia

http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Dichloroacetate

Apoptosis from Wikipedia

http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Apoptosis

Cheap, Safe Drug Kills Most Cancers
Andy Coghlan, New Scientist
January 20, 2007

It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that kills almost all cancers by switching off their “immortality”. The drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe. It also has no patent, meaning it could be manufactured for a fraction of the cost of newly developed drugs.

Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, and his colleagues tested DCA on human cells cultured outside the body and found that it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, but not healthy cells. Tumours in rats deliberately infected with human cancer also shrank drastically when they were fed DCA-laced water for several weeks.

DCA attacks a unique feature of cancer cells: the fact that they make their energy throughout the main body of the cell, rather than in distinct organelles called mitochondria. This process, called glycolysis, is inefficient and uses up vast amounts of sugar.

Until now it had been assumed that cancer cells used glycolysis because their mitochondria were irreparably damaged. However, Michelakis’s experiments prove this is not the case, because DCA reawakened the mitochondria in cancer cells. The cells then withered and died (Cancer Cell, DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2006.10.020).

Michelakis suggests that the switch to glycolysis as an energy source occurs when cells in the middle of an abnormal but benign lump don’t get enough oxygen for their mitochondria to work properly (see diagram). In order to survive, they switch off their mitochondria and start producing energy through glycolysis.

Crucially, though, mitochondria do another job in cells: they activate apoptosis, the process by which abnormal cells self-destruct. When cells switch mitochondria off, they become “immortal”, outliving other cells in the tumour and so becoming dominant. Once reawakened by DCA, mitochondria reactivate apoptosis and order the abnormal cells to die.

“The results are intriguing because they point to a critical role that mitochondria play:
they impart a unique trait to cancer cells that can be exploited for cancer therapy,” says Dario Altieri, director of the University of Massachusetts Cancer Center in Worcester.

The phenomenon might also explain how secondary cancers form. Glycolysis generates lactic acid, which can break down the collagen matrix holding cells together. This means abnormal cells can be released and float to other parts of the body, where they seed new tumours.

DCA can cause pain, numbness and gait disturbances in some patients, but this may be a price worth paying if it turns out to be effective against all cancers. The next step is to run clinical trials of DCA in people with cancer. These may have to be funded by charities, universities and governments: pharmaceutical companies are unlikely to pay because they can’t make money on unpatented medicines. The pay-off is that if DCA does work, it will be easy to manufacture and dirt cheap.

Paul Clarke, a cancer cell biologist at the University of Dundee in the UK, says the findings challenge the current assumption that mutations, not metabolism, spark off cancers. “The question is: which comes first?” he says.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Chemo Drugs 'Destroy Brain Cells'

Chemotherapy Can Cause Severe Side Effects

Drugs used to destroy cancer cells may actually be more harmful to healthy cells in the brain, research suggests.

A team from New York's University of Rochester found several types of key brain cell were highly vulnerable to the drugs.

They say it might help explain side effects such as seizures and memory loss associated with chemotherapy - collectively dubbed 'chemo brain'.

The research is published in the Journal of Biology.

This is the first study that puts chemo brain on a sound scientific footing

Dr Mark Noble
University of Rochester

Drug therapy for cancer can prompt a wide range of neurological side effects, even the onset of dementia.

But they were thought not to be directly linked to the drug treatment itself.

Instead, some doctors have put them down to the patient's vulnerable psychological state.

The latest study found that dose levels typically used when treating patients killed 40% to 80% of cancer cells - but 70% to 100% of human brain cells grown in the lab, and caused serious damage to brain cells when given to mice. Several types of healthy brain cell continued to die for at least six weeks after exposure.

Common drugs tested
Lead researcher Dr Mark Noble said: "This is the first study that puts chemo brain on a sound scientific footing, in terms of neurobiology and cellular


The Rochester team carried out tests with three drugs used to treat a wide range of cancers: carmustine, cisplatin and cytosine arabinoside. All three drugs were toxic to several types of brain cell whose job is to repair other cells in the brain - even at very low concentrations. They also killed off oligodenrocyte cells, which play a key role in the transmission of messages around the nervous system.

The researchers suggest damage to cells in the hippocampus, which is responsible for memory and learning, is most likely to explain chemo brain symptoms. Professor John Toy, Cancer Research UK¿s medical director, said: "The doses of therapy needed to treat cancer while leaving the body's healthy cells as unharmed as possible is a fine balance judged by experienced specialists.

*---Translation: “We have to carefully measure the poison we’re giving you so that you don’t die.

We’re good at it because if you die, we stop getting money”
"They aim to maximize benefits and minimize damage. Unfortunately side-effects can include toxicity to the brain.

*---Brain Toxicity seems unimportant to this “Cancer Specialist”. The body is not Berlin in 1943, you can’t just kill indiscriminately. These are the same people that loved putting leeches on us to drain the humors. This is one of their new ideas.

"This research in mice may hopefully suggest new ways of researching how this toxicity might be overcome.

*---Instead of realizing that Chemo is not the way, they want to spend more money, the name of the game, on “research” instead of looking upon successes all over the world in Alternative cancer research.

"It is important to remember, however, that all presently available cancer treatments have gone through extensive clinical trials to ensure that their benefits outweigh unwanted effects.

*---This is the assumption of every Western doctor. “The research says this”. How long have these drugs been around? How about long term studies? The drug regulation bureaus in this country are atrocious. Aspirin is on the market now having never been approved. Oh guess what, it dissolves your stomach lining, but Bayer aspirin is still allowed to suggest taking it everyday.

"No patient should stop their treatment because of this research.


*---And then we come to the point. After the research to confirms the Chemo drugs carpet bomb the cells in your body and do heavy damage to the brain we get the AMA claptrap “YOU SHALL NOT SEEK ALTERNATIVES”. This is the standard in America. STAND IN LINE. TAKE THIS PILL.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Myth of Sunscreen

This one is big. This is their game. They lie to you and then sell you something expensive that you have to use frequently. It again comes down to proper nutrition and natural remedies as it always does. If you don't have an aloe plant I'd recommend you get one. They grow well and easy.

I just read about how sun screens give you cancer by blocking Vitamin D absorption through the skin and because they contain toxic ingredients like parabens and PG. This all soaks into your skin and leaves petroleum and toxic residues in whatever water you are in. Sun screens are a drug. They have "active ingredients" labeled as they do a drug. Those ingredients soak right in causing cell damage and cancer.

Then I open People Magazine and they are selling 70 SPF lotion. 70 SPF.........Way more than you need. Marketed in a magazine that millions of woman read. The companies who carry these ads should be held equally responsible. They are lying, false advertising and that is illegal in this country. But we all know that corporations are allowed to break the law while the FTC and FDA routinely sue people who recommend cheap effective cures.

It's amazing that this is so wrong. A country (not sure which one) just funded a major study into Vitamin D. Vitamin D prevents cancer. If you do a study of people with cancer you will find they have Vit. D deficiencies.

This explains a bit about the American Cancer Society and how they have no interest in preventing cancer, only treating it in expensive ways. We never had sunscreen before 50 years ago. Did they run from tree to tree avoiding the sun? Of course not. The sun is very vital to health. Also sunlight hitting your eyes is very healthy. Try not to always block the sun with glasses.

The scientific evidence, however, shows quite clearly that sunscreen actually promotes cancer by blocking the body's absorption of ultraviolet radiation, which produces vitamin D in the skin. Vitamin D, as recent studies have shown, prevents up to 77 of ALL cancers in women (breast cancer, colon cancer, cervical cancer, lung cancer, brain tumors, multiple myeloma... you name it). Meanwhile, the toxic chemical ingredients used in most sunscreen products are actually carcinogenic and have never been safety tested or safety approved by the FDA. They get absorbed right through the skin (a porous organ that absorbs most substances it comes into contact with) and enter the bloodstream.

The benefits of sunscreen are a myth. Proponents say sunscreen prevents sunburn, but in fact, the real cause of sunburn is not merely UV exposure: It is a lack of antioxidant nutrition. Start eating lots of berries and microalgae (spirulina, astaxanthin, blue-green algae, etc.), and you'll build up an internal sunscreen that will protect your skin from sunburn from the inside out. Sunburn is actually caused by nutritional deficiencies that leave the skin vulnerable to DNA mutations from radiation, but if you boost your nutrition and protect your nervous system with plant-based nutrients, you'll be naturally resistant to sunburn. The same nutrients, by the way, also protect the optic nerve and eyes from radiation damage. That's why the consumption of berries and carrots, for example, has historically been associated with healthy eye function. (The same nutrients that protect the eyes also protect the skin.


Medical nonsense
If sunscreen is so bad for humans, you might ask, then why do so many doctors recommend using it? This might be hard for you to believe, but it wasn't too long ago that doctors routinely recommended smoking cigarettes, too.

The Journal of the American Medical Association, in fact, ran numerous ads promoting Camels as "recommended by more doctors than any other cigarette!" Doctors talked up the "benefits" of smoking cigarettes, urging people to start smoking in order to improve brain function or even -- get this -- make their teeth stronger!

The truth is doctors are easily influenced by commercial interests and can be readily convinced to recommend practically any product, no matter how toxic, unhealthy or deadly to consumers. Just look at how many doctors wrote prescriptions for Vioxx, for example, after being visited by a Vioxx drug rep pushing it as a "miracle drug" for joint pain.

Also keep in mind that doctor-prescribed medications are the fourth leading cause of death in America today. About 100,000 Americans die each year from following the advice of their doctor. Does it really make any sense to get your health advice from a group of professionals who kill more Americans each year than all the terrorists have ever killed in the history of this country? Besides, doctors know that if they start recommending sunlight and vitamin D, they'll lose patients and profits because people will start getting well and have no need to keep visiting the doctor. Vitamin D, as you will learn in our free report, The Healing Power of Sunlight and Vitamin D, prevents not only cancer, but also diabetes, osteoporosis, depression, heart disease and obesity. It's the miracle nutrient of the millennium, and yet the entire medical profession tries desperately to pretend that vitamin D has no biological function whatsoever. Hence the support of sunscreen (the anti-vitamin D product).

Sunscreen directly promotes vitamin D deficiency. You show me a person who regularly uses sunscreen, and I'll show you a person who's on the road towards cancer and other degenerative diseases.

People who use sunscreen are killing themselves and they don't even know it!

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

The sunscreen marketing con
The marketing of sunscreen is another great example of consumer product companies fabricating a need in order to sell a high-profit product made mostly with toxic chemicals. There is no need for sunscreen, but the cancer industry and sunscreen manufacturers have created a fictitious need through a campaign of fear and disinformation, hypnotizing practically the entire population into believing one of the most ridiculous ideas in the universe: that sunlight is bad for human health.

Think about it. Our ancestors did not have indoor lighting; they exposed their skin to the sun regularly. They didn't run and hide from the sun, they used it as nourishment to generate a crucial vitamin that supports human health in a multitude of ways. The idea that "the sun is bad for you" makes about as much sense as "water is bad for you" or "the Earth is flat." This persistent myth was invented, marketed and publicized by an industry that profits from a gullible public believing demonstrable falsehoods.

But why would the cancer industry go along with the deception, you might ask? Because the continued commercial success of the cancer industry depends on more people getting cancer. In previous articles, I've clearly shown that the cancer industry has no interest whatsoever in preventing cancer. The industry, in fact, takes steps to interfere with prevention efforts and thereby ensure the growth in the number of future cancer patients.

The American Cancer Society, for example, still will not recommend that anyone take vitamin D supplements, even though the vitamin can prevent nearly 4 out of 5 cancers. The cancer industry simply has no interest in preventing cancer. It is only interested in treating cancer and profiting from those treatments. (That's why genuine cancer cures have been routinely suppressed, censored or discredited in the United States.
) Read my book, Natural Health Solutions and the Conspiracy to Keep You From Knowing About Them, to learn the shocking truth about how the cancer industry really operates in America today

Mercury, Vaccines, Autism, Robert Kennedy, graphs, etc



Robert Kennedy on the Vaccine Autism Coverup









Bush Veto of Child Healthcare Bill Leaves Mercury in Vaccines

From Health World


Without the usual television cameras, US President George Bush has vetoed a bill that was to expand a children's health insurance program. What the press avoids to mention in their reporting of the event however, is that the bill contained an important passage that would have mandated the elimination of toxic mercury from flu vaccines, a development sharply opposed by pharmaceutical companies.

Thimersal, the mercury compound used as a preservative in many vaccines has been quietly phased out in Europe, and in many of the vaccines used in the US (flu vaccines still contain it), but the situation is different in developing countries. Even vaccines that are thimersal-free in the West, still contain the toxin when produced for export to developing countries in Africa, Asia or South America. The presence of mercury allows substantial savings for pharmaceutical companies but it has been fingered as the cause of an autism explosion. Autism was a practically unknown affliction some decades back, but now one in every 150 children is affected. The change happened in the last few decades, coinciding with an almost uncontrolled proliferation of vaccines on the childhood 'vaccination schedule'.

http://www. healthy. net/scr/news. asp?Id=9434









Friday, April 04, 2008

Jenny McCarthy treating vaccine injury, not autism; will lead rally with Jim Carrey

Jenny McCarthy was on Larry King Live last night and she was very clear that she thinks her nearly six year old son, Evan, would not have suffered from autism if it wasn’t for vaccinations. She said that autism is a global epidemic, and that she and the autism community are not anti-vaccination, but that they’re anti-toxin and anti-schedule. She’s says “we’re not treating autism, we’re treating vaccine injury.”

Larry asked Jenny about the schedule and she said that back in 1987 there were 10 shots scheduled for children and today it’s 36, which is “too many too soon.” She says we need an alternate schedule, and that the mercury has not been removed from vaccines and that the shots also include aluminum, ether, and antifreeze.

MCCARTHY: I personally haven’t heard of that many people falling off the map that we needed to implement 26 new shots in this time. And isn’t it ironic, in 1983 there was 10 shots and now there’s 36 and the rise of autism happened at the same time?

And parent after parent after parent says I vaccinated my baby, they got a fever and then they stopped speaking and then became autistic.

KING: Is your link scientific or statistical?

MCCARTHY: Well, I believe that parents’ anecdotal information is science-based information. And when the entire world is screaming the same thing — doctor, I came home. He had a fever. He stopped speaking and then he became autistic. I can’t — I can see if it was just one parent saying this. But when so many — and I speak to thousands of moms every weekend and they’re all standing up and saying the same thing. It’s time to start listening to that. That is science-based information. Parents’ anecdotal is science-based information…

KING: Jenny, will you agree that some cases have nothing to do with vaccines, which makes it more puzzling?

MCCARTHY: Absolutely. You know, environmental toxins play a role. Viruses play a role. Those are all triggers. But vaccines play the largest role right now and something needs to be done. You know, testing these kids for immune issues, you know, that would help so much, changing the schedule. You know, I don’t understand — as a precautionary measure, why don’t they do this?

If everyone is screaming this and they’re so worried about parents going into offices right now telling the pediatrician j everyone is going I’m too scared to vaccinate my child. This is the new parents’ number one fear — I am afraid to vaccinate.

I am not trying to start this global non-vaccinating world. I’m trying to implement change.


Jenny says that her son Evan hasn’t “recovered,” but that he no longer qualifies as autistic for special services. She compared it to being hit by a bus. You can get better but you’re never quite the same. She called him a “a wonderful example of hope and possibility for parents out there.”

They had journalist David Kirby, the author of “Evidence of Harm” on. He discussed the case of Hannah Polling, in which the “vaccine court,” a special court created by the US government to shield the pharmaceutical companies from large lawsuits, ruled that vaccines did contribute to Polling’s autism. In that case Kirby notes that Polling had an underlying mitochondrial disorder that was exacerbated by the vaccines. Kirby says, like McCarthy, he’s not anti-vaccination but thinks that the schedule should be individualized to each child. He said you could for example specifically test for the genetic defect that causes a mitochondrial dysfunction and make sure that those children, who are genetically more susceptible to autism, be given less vaccinations at once.

At the end of the show there was a panel of doctors trying to sum up the issue. Earlier they discussed the importance of vaccination and how childhood illnesses have been eradicated. The discussion got heated and McCarthy plainly said “that’s bullshit” when one doctor said vaccines have been a boon to families. She said “my son died in front of me,” and talked about how her son died for two minutes and went into cardiac arrest. She asked “are we considered acceptable losses?”

Clip of McCarthy saying “that’s bullshit!”

I clipped the rest of the show and the links are below if you would like to watch it. This is an important issue that touches so many families and I can’t imagine the heartbreak of having a child with autism. Good for Jenny for having the courage to speak out about this. There are no clear-cut answers and there needs to be more study into this, but it seems as if the pharmaceutical companies have been shielded from scrutiny due to the reasonable fear that people will stop vaccinating.

Larry read out a statement from Jim Carrey at the end of the show that “Vaccines are more a profit engine than a means of prevention. And that’s why there are so many vaccines.”

Jenny and Jim Carrey will lead a march on Washington on June 4th, and you can learn about it on

MCCARTHY: Jim and I are going to lead a march and rally in Washington, D.C. And I’m announcing it right here on June 4th. You can go on for more information. We will be there and we’re asking every parent that can make it there in Washington on that day, every grandma, mom, dad, to be there with us marching, rallying. You have a voice that day.

KING: Are you raising money?

MCCARTHY: Oh, no. This is a day — you know, I’ve been talking to parents across the country, thousands of them. And they’re so dying to have a voice one day. So we’re bringing the media. We’re bringing the attention, and now I’m asking every parent that’s watching this right now, come there that day and you will be heard.

KING: Where do you go online?


Jenny McCarthy on Larry King Live 4/2/08, Part 1
Jenny McCarthy on Larry King Live 4/2/08, Part 2
Jenny McCarthy on Larry King Live 4/2/08, Part 3
Jenny McCarthy on Larry King Live 4/2/08, Part 4
Jenny McCarthy on Larry King Live 4/2/08, Part 5
Jenny McCarthy on Larry King Live 4/2/08, Part 6
Jenny McCarthy on Larry King Live 4/2/08, Part 7

Original article from: Cele|bitchy