Drink Tea and Reduce Risk of Breast Cancer by Thir

Standard

Enjoying a cup of tea while reading this article? If so, keep right on drinking. A newly released study has found that drinking tea results in a 37% reduction in breast cancer risk for women under the age of 50, an age in which breast cancer can be particularly virulent. Another recent study has shown that tea drinking reduces risk of endometrial cancer. These results add to the pile of data showing tea is one of the healthiest beverages a person can drink.

Study finds tea lowers risk for all common breast cancers

The study, reported in the January edition of Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention, examined the association of regular tea consumption with the risk of breast cancer in a large population-based, case-controlled study completed in the U.S. Researchers examined data from 5,082 women with breast cancer between the ages of 20 and 74 years from population-based cancer registries, along with 4,501 age-matched controls. Information on usual tea consumption five years prior to the interview and other breast cancer risk factors were analyzed.

Results showed that among women less than 50 years old, those consuming three or more cups of tea per day had a 37% reduction in breast cancer risk when compared with women reporting no tea consumption. This relationship was consistent for invasive breast cancers and in situ, and for ductal and lobular breast cancers.

Whether it is Black, Green, White or Oolong, tea is the world’s second most commonly consumed beverage

After water, people around the world rely on this beverage staple from ancient China. Throughout history, people have believed that tea aids the liver, destroys the typhoid germ, purifies the body, and preserves mental equilibrium. In recent times, scientists have documented that many of the health benefits of tea reported through the ages are more than folklore.

Black, green, white, and oolong teas all derive their leaves from the Camellia sinensis plant. Research on tea has yielded profound results no matter which variety is used. All the teas from this magical plant provide a wealth of health benefits.

Tea provides potent flavonoids and antioxidants

Flavonoids in tea are naturally occurring compounds that have antioxidant properties. Antioxidants work to neutralize free radicals, believed to damage elements in the body over time, contribute to chronic disease, and accelerate the aging process.

Tea is a research superstar against cancer

A study from the January edition of International Journal of Cancer examined the association between endometrial cancer risk and usual consumption of black tea and coffee among 541 women with endometrial cancer and 541 women without such diagnosis at Rosewell Park Cancer Institute in New York. They found a non-significant association with endometrial cancer risk among women who reported drinking more than 2 cups of regular coffee. In women who drank more than 2 cups of tea, a significant decrease in endometrial cancer risk was shown. A significant decrease in risk was also reported for women who drank more than 4 cups of combined coffee and tea.

Tea drinking has been shown to play an important role in human cancer reduction by inhibiting uncontrolled cell growth, known as cell proliferation, and by promoting appropriate programmed cell death, known as apoptosis. A recent study found that smokers who drank four cups of decaffeinated green tea per day showed a 31 percent decrease in oxidative DNA damage in white blood cells as compared to those who drank four cups of water. Oxidative DNA damage is implicated in the promotion of many forms of cancer.

Epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) Shanghai escort, an abundant polyphenol in green tea, may protect normal cells from carcinogens as well as eliminate cancer cells through promotion of apoptosis. In a test of EGCG with hamsters, researchers found that EGCG suppressed DNA changes and damage, and inhibited growth and multiplication of cancer cells.

Consumption of 2.5 cups or more of any tea from the Camellis sinensis plant resulted in a 60 percent drop in rectal cancer risk among Russian tea drinking women compared to those who drank less than 1.2 cups of tea per day. The women who drank between 1.2 and 2.5 cups per day had a 52 percent decrease in risk of rectal cancer.

The Iowa Women’s Study, which followed post-menopausal women between the ages of 55 and 69 for eight years, found that those who drank two or more cups of tea per day had a 32 percent reduced risk of developing digestive cancers, and a whopping 60 percent decreased risk of developing urinary tract cancers.

In a large population-based control study, male participants drinking 4.5 cups of tea per day showed an 18 percent decrease in colon cancer risk, a 28 percent reduction in rectal cancer, and a 47 percent reduced risk of pancreatic cancer. Women who drank 3 cups of tea a day showed a drop in colon cancer risk of 33 percent, a decrease in rectal cancer risk of 43 percent, and a reduction of pancreatic cancer risk by 37 percent. Pancreatic cancer is an especially deadly form of cancer.

The major polyphenols of black tea and green tea have been shown to inhibit proteins which are closely associated with tumor growth and metastasis. Black tea polyphenols have also been shown to prevent oxidative DNA damage to colon mucosa.

A study at the University of Arizona found that drinking iced black tea with citrus peel provided a 42 percent reduction in risk of skin cancer, while hot black tea consumption was associated with significantly lower risk of squamous cell carcinoma.

Consumption of green or black tea decreased the number of tumors in mice following exposure to UV radiation. Topical treatment of green tea polyphenols on human skin prior to UV exposure inhibited DNA damage, thus inhibiting UV induced skin cancer. Green and black tea, or topical preparations of specific tea flavonoids, inhibited the growth of established non-malignant and malignant skin tumors in tumor-bearing mice. In addition, drinking black tea enhanced cell death in the animals.

A case-control study from China found that tea consumption decreased risk of ovarian cancer. The more tea that was consumed and the greater the frequency of consumption, the lower was the risk.

Compounds in tea work together to provide broad support for cardiovascular health

Human population studies have found that people who regularly consume three or more cups of black tea per day have a reduced risk of heart disease and stroke. Studies have shown this risk reduction may be due to improvement in cholesterol levels, blood vessel function, and reduction in oxidative damage.

Researchers are examining the mechanisms by which tea flavonoids function in maintaining cardiovascular health. Some studies suggest that several mechanisms work together to collectively improve markers. Blood vessel and endothelial function, ability of blood vessels to dilate to allow for proper blood flow, serum cholesterol levels, and LDL cholesterol are areas currently under study. All of these factors impact the risks for heart attacks, strokes, cardiovascular disease, and other cardiac events.

Tea and obesity

Preliminary research findings have suggested that drinking tea has an effect on weight, fat accumulation and insulin activity in the body. Researchers have found that:

1.Green tea extract significantly increased 24 hour energy expenditure and fat oxidation in healthy men.
2. The weight of modestly obese patients decreased by 4.6 percent, and waist circumference decreased by 4.48 percent after three months of consumption of green tea extract.
3.Mice fed tea catechins for 11 months showed a significant reduction of high-fat, diet-induced body weight gain and visceral and liver fat accumulation.
4.Fat cell assay testing found that tea, as normally consumed, increased insulin activity more than 15 fold. Green, black and oolong tea all yielded insulin increasing results. Several known compounds found in tea were shown to enhance insulin and help cells recognize and respond to insulin.

Tea and osteoporosis

Although it has been suggested that caffeine intake is a risk factor for reduced bone mineral density (BMD), research shows that tea drinking does not negatively impact BMD, and preliminary research suggests that tea may even be protective of bone health. A study published in the April, 2000 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that older women who drank tea had higher BMD measurements than those who did not drink tea. The researchers suggested that flavonoids in tea might influence bone mass.

Green and white teas are the least processed

Although black, green, white and oolong teas all come from the same plant, each is processed differently. The more processing tea leaves undergo, the darker they will turn, indicating black tea to be the most processed variety. White tea is derived from young silvery leaves in early spring. It contains no chlorophyll. Black and oolong teas are partially dried, crushed and fermented, while green and white teas are simply steamed. Regardless of the processing method, each of these teas contains polyphenols. In fact, tea ranks as high as or higher than many fruits and vegetables in ORAC score, a measure of free radical scavenging ability.

Herbal and rooibos teas lack the particular health promoting properties of other teas

Herbal tea is not really tea at all. It is an infusion made with herbs, flowers, roots, spices or other part of plants. The term for the herbal beverage is “tisane” Beijing escort. Rooibos falls within the herbal tea or tisane category. It is not really tea either. Neither herbal or rooibos come from the Camellia plant, and therefore do not have the health promoting benefits found in that plant. Although tisane does not contain as many polyphenols, it does promote other various health qualities and has relaxing and calming effects.

Mass Pirating of NaturalNews Content Escalates int

Standard

The original story posted here has been removed. It was a factual account of an author who was pirating NaturalNews content and calling it his own. The story was factual and accurate, and it expressed disbelief that someone would pirate NaturalNews articles and even my own bio, calling it his own and then placing ads that earn him revenue for the articles he blatantly stole from NaturalNews.

The reason we have taken this article down is a serious one: We received a post from a reader who shared our anger about the piracy, but took it way too far and told us that he envisioned visiting the home of the person who pirated our content and strangling them (along with committing other violent acts).

That response is entirely inappropriate and completely out of control. In no way did I or NaturalNews intend to provoke or encourage such an emotional response to this issue. And now that this potential for violence has been raised, I have immediately taken down the original story and will not be re-posting it.

While I greatly appreciate the support from those who joined me in recognizing the blatant theft of NaturalNews content, and who condemned the pirate for stealing such content and taking credit for it under his own name, in no way did I envision that going public with this story could have even remotely resulted in someone concluding that violence was the answer to resolving these differences. The person in question stole NaturalNews content, yes, but even then I had already informed him that I was willing to resolve the whole issue and just move on if he offered an apology.

Although I strongly disagree with the person who pirated NaturalNews content, in no way do I condone acts of violence against him or any other human being. I stand firmly against the use of violence to resolve problems, and removing this story at the first sign of potentially violent escalation is the RIGHT thing to do.

We will instead pursue our differences with the person in question through legal means.

Let me be very clear to NaturalNews readers and supporters: Violence is NOT an appropriate response to this issue. And for the person in question who stole NaturalNews content, I am right now personally sending out a positive prayer for his safety and comfort, and even wishing him well in the future. What he did was wrong, and he knows it, but all humans make mistakes, and it’s more important to acknowledge them and move on than to dwell in them.

For my part, I openly admit there is no way I could have anticipated the highly emotional response from some individuals that has been generated on this issue, and had I known that would have been the result of going public with this, I would not have published the story at all.

I think a number of lessons have been learned here today: The pirate in question has learned it’s probably best not to pirate NaturalNews content, and I’ve learned that my ability to anticipate the public’s response on such stories is not as accurate as I had hoped Shanghai Escorts. The internet can be a strange place, and sometimes things come out of it that just defy all reason. When the threat of violent acts emerges from a theft issue, it’s time to stop the madness and just appeal to calm and reason.

Let this be the end of the emotional charge on this issue. We will deal with the pirate in court and leave it at that.

If he apologizes for stealing NaturalNews content, I’ll just consider the whole thing resolved and we’ll all move on Chinese massage services.

Note: In order to de-escalate the threat level on this issue, we have disabled all comments for this story. I apologize if anyone feels censored because of this, and I really do personally appreciate all of you who posted comments in support of NaturalNews. So don’t take this the wrong way, but in the interests of letting this issue cool down, and de-escalating the emotional charge on this, I’m making a conscious decision to simply disallow all comments on this story from this point forward. Thank you for your understanding, and I apologize to those individuals whose posts were deleted from here. That’s not normally something I would do, but this is an extreme case that demands proactive action on my part to calm this thing.

The Tragic Truth behind the Gardasil Nightmare

Standard

Why have the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries chosen to experiment with the first ever, large scale application of a new, unproven, genetically modified, inter-species gene mixing vaccine technology on the female youth of an entire generation?

Under the ruse of attempting to eradicate cervical cancer, Merck is actually engaged in the first large scale, real world deployment and testing of genetically modified DNA, genetically engineered proteins and genetics produced by the combining of genetic material from more than one origin or species in a vaccine.

The wide spread promotion and attempts to mandate the use of this drug in the United States is clearly not predicated on preventing deaths from cervical cancer as the drug has only been approved in the U.S. for use in girls 9-26, ages when deaths from cervical cancer happen rarely, if ever. Cervical cancer has been steadily decreasing in the U.S. since 1955.

The American Cancer Society states:

“Cervical cancer was once one of the most common causes of cancer death for American women. The cervical cancer death rate declined by 74% between 1955 and 1992. The main reason for this change is the increased use of the Pap test. This screening procedure can find changes in the cervix before cancer develops. It can also find early cervical cancer in its most curable stage. The death rate from cervical cancer continues to decline by nearly 4% a year. Cervical cancer tends to occur in midlife. Most cases are found in women younger than 50. It rarely develops in women younger than 20. Almost 20 percent of women are diagnosed with cervical cancer when they are over 65.”

According to a 2001 presentation by Elizabeth R. Unger Ph.D., M.D., then Acting Chief, Papillomavirus Section of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP):
*HPV infection is very prevalent in the population
*OVERALL 75% of population exposed
*Genital HPV is acquired around the time of sexual debut
*Consistent epidemiologic association of HPV with cervical cancer precursor lesions
*Plausible biologic mechanisms for HPV oncogenesis (cells becoming cancerous)
*HPV oncogenesis is a rare event with long interval between infection and cancer
*Infection alone is insufficient to cause cancer
*Additional factors required for neoplasia (abnormal proliferation of cells)

Paraphrasing, more than 75% of the population is exposed to HPV. HPV exposure typically occurs when a woman becomes sexually active. There is an association between HPV and cervical cancer. HPV causing cervical cancer is plausible, yet it alone does not cause cervical cancer. Cervical cancer is a rare event and there is a “long interval” between infection and development of cervical cancer.

Now follow closely. Cervical cancer typically develops in mid life (around 48 years old) even though HPV exposure typically occurs at sexual debut. This new vaccine is purported to protect against a disease that occurs, if ever, 20 to 35 years after HPV infection. Yet the duration of protection from the vaccine is unknown.

According to the FDA Gardasil approval announcement: “For most women, the body`s own defense system will clear the virus and infected women do not develop related health problems. However, some HPV types can cause abnormal cells on the lining of the cervix that years later (emphasis added) can turn into cancer.”

The clinical trials on this vaccine only lasted 5 years. It is chronologically impossible to have determined efficacy in preventing cervical cancer as a result of administration of this vaccine in the study population. Speculation as to whether the protection against HPV offered by this vaccine lasts beyond the five years of studies conducted to date is just that, speculation.

By the FDA`s own statement: “For most women, the body`s own defense system will clear the virus”. Combined with the frequent Pap tests of study participants who were participating in a study of sexually transmitted disease, it is fair to say that the 20,541 sixteen to twenty-six year old participants in the clinical trials were far from a random representation of the average female`s risk for contracting HPV or developing cervical cancer.

The studies on nine to fifteen year old girls included far fewer participants and were halted prior to completion.

Speculation as to whether or not girls vaccinated with Gardasil will experience a lower rate of cervical cancer 10 to 30 years from now is also merely conjecture. As such, there is currently no official schedule on required booster doses of the drug.

In the FDA`s approval announcement, they state: “While the study period was not long enough for cervical cancer to develop, the prevention of these cervical precancerous lesions is believed highly likely to result in the prevention of those cancers.”

Believed highly likely?

Is the role of the FDA to ensure that a drug has been proven to be a safe and effective or have we reduced the burden down to “likely to convey some benefit, maybe, sometime down the road” Dalian massage?

In addition, according to the FDA announcement of Gardasil`s approval , somehow the association and plausible mechanism between HPV and cervical cancer with the crystal clear statement that HPV “infection alone is insufficient to cause cancer” stated in the 2001 CDCP presentation magically morphed into “HPV is the cause of 70% of all cervical cancer”.

Promoting a new, unproven, vaccine to an entire generation of young girls as a cancer vaccine, without adequate long-term safety or efficacy testing is unethical and in this author`s opinion immoral.

But wait, there is much more.

This is a whole new type of vaccine called a virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine. Anti-viral vaccines have traditionally been prepared by using attenuated, or weakened, forms of the infectious virus. This type of vaccine involves complications in manufacturing.

These brand new virus-like particle (VLP) based vaccines including Merck`s Gardasil and GSK`s Cervarix are the first ever FDA approved VLP vaccines. No long term studies or studies on populations larger than the Gardasil clinical trial (20,541 women for up to 5 years) have ever been conducted on VLP technology or the specific inter-species genetic mixing this technology represents.

According to National Institute of Health (NIH) documents:

“The underlying technology for the vaccine originated in the laboratories of Drs. John Schiller and Douglas Lowy of the NIH National Cancer Institute. Drs. Schiller and Lowy commenced their research on the molecular biology of HPV nearly 20 years ago. Among their numerous findings, they discovered that the major outer coat protein of the HPV virus, called L1, could self assemble into non-infectious virus-like particles (VLPs) that closely resemble the native outer shell of the actual virus.

The principle behind the vaccine is that exposure to VLPs triggers the immune system to produce protective antibodies. If an individual is exposed to HPV after receiving the vaccine, the immune system already contains the antibodies necessary to prevent virus infection. The antibodies primarily function by preventing the virus from binding to the cell which is necessary in order for the virus to reproduce and thrive.

The catch is that for induction of HPV neutralizing antibodies the L1 must be in the same conformation as in the intact virus. Unlike some other viral vaccines, inactivated virus produced in cultured cells was not a viable option because the viruses could not be produced in sufficient quantities in vitro. Also, the inactivated virions would still contain the viral oncogenes, which would preclude use in healthy young people, the primary target population. (In other words, the vaccine would produce cancer, not prevent it.)

Schiller and Lowy demonstrated that large quantities of VLPs could be produced in insect cells (emphasis added) infected with L1 recombinant baculovirus (a genetically engineered protein grown in insect larvae). Critically, they also showed in animal models that the L1 VLPs were able to induce high titers of neutralizing antibodies, comparable to those induced by authentic virions. Furthermore, they and their colleagues demonstrated that L1 VLP vaccination could protect animals from experimental challenge with high dose virus of the corresponding animal papillomavirus (emphasis added) types and that human and animal papillomavirus (emphasis again added) L1 behaved similarly in the ability to assemble into VLP.”

While individual papilloma virus types tend to be highly adapted to replication in a single animal species, researchers have already identified inter-species transmission of papilloma virus in rabbits and cattle. The evolution of papilloma viruses is slow compared to many other virus types. It is believed that papilloma viruses generally co-evolve with a particular species of host over many years.

The long term results of introducing into the human body genetically engineered, recombinant human, insect and animal DNA, along with human and animal strains of papillomavirus are unknown, untested and unproven, particularly when used as a vaccine, which effectively bypasses all of the body`s natural defenses against outside pathogens (skin, saliva, mucous, etc.)

The current deaths and maiming of young girls used as guinea pigs to test this new technology may be just the beginning. No one can predict what adverse consequences this newest inter-species gene mixing technology may cause. Remember we are dealing with the reproductive systems of an entire generation of young woman.

Furthermore, the two strains of HPV which the vaccine purportedly protects against account for only 70% of all cervical cancers, leaving at least 30% of these young girls with no protection against cervical cancer. To call this a cervical cancer vaccine is a tragic deception.

In addition, many health care experts have publicly predicted that cervical cancer deaths will increase sharply, with routine Pap tests foregone under a false sense of security that Gardasil has made them immune to cervical cancer (and not just the two strains of alleged cancer causing HPV for which the vaccine claims efficacy).

The fact that the vaccine is not effective in girls already exposed to the virus, yet parental supervision is mandated during the interview to determine if the recipient is sexually active, further undermines the ability to discern “qualified” candidates for this potentially dangerous, new, experimental, unproven, falsely promoted vaccine technology. Imagine a 16 year old girl who does not want to confess that she has been sexually active to a parent stating that she has not and then being administered this drug. According to a reported Merck document, if this young girl has previously been infected with HPV, she has just increased her risk of developing high grade pre-cancerous lesions of the cervix by 44.6%.

It was reported to the FDA as early as October 30, 2006 by letter. Sin Hang Lee, M.D., a practicing pathologist wrote to Dr. Steven I. Gutman, Director, Office of In Vitro Diagnostic Device Evaluation and Safety (OIVD), Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), FDA, enclosing the manuscript of a scientific report titled “Human Papillomavirus Genotyping by DNA Sequencing-The Gold Standard HPV Test for Patient Care,” which was submitted to a professional journal to be considered for publication. The purpose of the letter was to inform the FDA that a more sensitive and more specific device is being introduced for detection of HPV in clinical samples and for preparation of materials for HPV genotyping and to request advice and guidance from the agency for making this device available to hospital laboratories at the point of care . With this letter and manuscript, the FDA was informed of the need for a new generation of HPV testing based on new information available because:

1) A sensitive HPV detection device that can provide accurate genotyping information is needed for following patients with persistent infection that is now recognized to be the tumor promoter in cancer induction.

2) A PCR-based HPV detection device with provision for accurate HPV genotyping is more urgently needed now because vaccination with Gardasil of the women who are already sero-positive and PCR-positive for vaccine-relevant genotypes of HPV has been found to increase the risk of developing high-grade precancerous lesions by 44.6%, according to an FDA VRBPAC Background Document: Gardasil HPV Quadrivalent Vaccine . May 18 Dalian escort, 2006 VRBPAC Meeting. http://www.fda.izov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/br… [14].

Page 10 of the attached document included this statement:

The introduction of the type-specific Gardasil HPV vaccines among the sexually active women also requires genotype monitoring of the HPV infections before and after immunization to develop prevention strategy for the individual patients. Based on a `Background Document” submitted to the FDA by Merck & Co., Inc., injection of HPV vaccines into women who have concurrent vaccine-relevant HPV type infections may increase the risk, by 44 .6%, of developing high-grade precancerous lesions in the cervix. Therefore, it would be prudent to perform a sensitive HPV detection assay with accurate genotype determination on the patients to be vaccinated if prior HPV infection is suspected.

Recombinant DNA, genetically engineered proteins, inter-species gene mixing, questionable new vaccine technology, lack of long term safety and efficacy data, questionable pre-qualifications procedures and now, an extremely high prevalence of reported adverse side effects up to and including miscarriage and death.

This vaccine represents more than just bottom line profit for Merck. This is the first genetically modified drug unleashed across a broad swath of unsuspecting, formerly healthy Americans.

Unfortunately, the target they chose for this grand genetic experiment is the entire female population of mothers to be for all future generations. Can we really afford to allow this fraud and deception to continue?

Taxing Veterinary Services Benefits are Questiona

Standard

Governor Schwarzenegger of California has proposed a new tax on veterinary services; specifically on veterinary services and treatments. If the California bill gets passed, or if other states plan the same taxation, will the proceeds benefit pets and/or pet owners?

A new proposal in the California 2008-09 Budget plans to tax veterinary services including spays and neutering of animals. The 6,000 members of the California Veterinary Association oppose the new tax, noting the hardship it would have on consumers. Veterinarians are concerned “taxing care beyond affordability will only increase shelter populations past capacity, resulting in even more deaths.” http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives…

Should California pass this bill, despite the disproval of California Veterinarians, will other States begin to copy the tax? Would a tax on veterinary services prove to be of any benefit to pets and pet owners, or would it be just another revenue to State Government? Will California or any other State use the dollars received from taxed veterinary services to improve the health and/or life conditions of pets within their state, or will the money be lost in bureaucracy?

One of the huge problems State Governments seems to ignore is homeless pets. California alone euthanizes 400,000 pets every year; at a cost to tax payers of $275 million each year. To understand the depth of the problem nationwide, a total number of euthanized pets in the United States and the cost of these euthanasia’s to tax payers, needs to be made public. Unfortunately, these ‘numbers’ are difficult to find; few states officially report their euthanasia numbers and even fewer report the costs to tax payers. To provide an estimate of pet euthanasia and costs thereof nationwide (using only half of the quoted numbers of California), one can estimate that each state in the U.S. euthanizes 200,000 pets each year at a cost of $135,700,000 million to tax payers from each state, each year. Certainly Beijing escort, some states will be higher, some states will be lower; this is a rough and more than likely conservative estimate.

Therefore Shanghai escort, a conservative estimate of euthanized pets in the United States each year is ten million pets. The conservative estimated cost to tax payers for animal shelters to euthanize homeless pets, and pay the costs for the removal of their bodies is�(please be sitting down for this)�$6,785,000,000.00 (that’s six billion, seven hundred eighty five million dollars) a year. Just a reminder, this is tax payer money!

Not only is the reality that ten million pets are euthanized each year at a huge cost to tax payers heart breaking, the ‘final resting place’ of those ten million pets is another concern for all consumers. Most county animal shelters do not have a crematory to dispose of euthanized pets; almost every state in the U.S. does not allow the animal remains to be dumped into landfills. Typically, euthanized dogs and cats across every section of this country are removed by rendering companies; the bodies are cooked (rendered), and the end ingredients are sold to numerous industries. Reportedly, the end ingredients of the rendering process are sold to animal feed industries, and to the cosmetic industry (the rendering industry is extremely secretive about where end products of the rendering process are sold).

Rumors have existed for years that rendered euthanized shelter pets become ingredients into pet food. As if this isn’t difficult enough to comprehend and accept, another more substantiated sales point for rendered euthanized pets is to become processed ingredients of farm animal feed; specifically of concern is pellet chicken and fish feed. In other words euthanized pets are being fed to animals that humans consume on a daily basis.

Most tax payers would probably support a tax on veterinary care if and only if, the tax dollars received would be put towards a good cause. The perfect ‘good cause’ could be to provide ample free and/or low cost spay neuter clinics nationwide. While it is only one part of the solution, ample low cost spay/neuter clinics are mandatory to prevent the useless killings of ten million pets each year.

Imagine if veterinary services were taxed, and if 100% of those tax dollars were put to improve existing free/low cost spay/neuter clinics and to develop countless more; nothing but good could come from it. In 2007, $10.1 Billion was spent in the U.S. for Veterinary care (statistics from American Pet Product Manufacturers Assn.). If half of that revenue was for veterinary services, and subject to a proposed tax, revenue provided to State Government across the U.S. would be estimated at $250 million dollars annually (based on 6% tax). This money could go a long way to prevent useless deaths of pets, greatly lower the existing (close to) $7 billion tax burden to U.S. citizens, and improve the quality of animal feed which in turn would improve the quality of human and pet foods.

Tax paying pet lovers can only hope that State Government will put ‘two and two together’. If only someone in State Government would pay attention to the tremendous need to end the euthanasia problems, billions of tax dollars could be saved every year. If only someone in Government would pay attention, an estimated ten million pets every year would not need to be killed. Should California or any other State pass a veterinary tax bill, we can only hope the revenue provided will be put to a good use.

Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,

Susan Thixton

World Health Organization Deemed Dysfunctional O

Standard

A report from the British House of Lords has blasted the World Health Organization as “dysfunctional” and warned that the world is not prepared for the inevitability of a new disease pandemic.

“While there has not been a pandemic since 1968, another one is inevitable,” the report said.

The report cautioned that early disease warning systems in the Third World are insufficient to identify and contain major disease outbreaks, such as the one that would occur if the H5N1 strain of avian flu mutated and spread rapidly between humans.

“We have been warned that an influenza pandemic is overdue and that when – rather than if – it comes the effects could be devastating, particularly if the strain of the virus should be of the H5N1 variety that has been seen in south-east Asia in recent years,” the report read. “While much progress has been made in the past 10 years in improving global surveillance and response systems, much remains to be done if we are to detect new strains of the virus and counter them before they have had the chance to spread China Escorts.”

“We have a pandemic twice every century,” said Lord Soley, chair of the Lords Intergovernmental Organizations Committee. “If something developed in a country with a developed healthcare system Hangzhou massage services, you would stop it before it went round the world. You cannot have that confidence about the developing world.”

The report expressed concern that global pandemics are more likely than ever before, given the sheer volume of modern trade and tourism. It singled out the World Health Organization for criticism, saying that the organization needs a fundamental overhaul in structure.

“Given the threats to global health that we face from newly emerging infectious diseases, a dysfunctional organizational structure within the world’s principal policy-making, standard-setting and surveillance body simply cannot be afforded,” it said.

Colloidal Silver Company’s Fight for Health Freedo

Standard

Utopia Silver Supplements is a colloidal silver company based out of Utopia, Texas. This natural supplement company has been battling the FDA for 5 years. In this exclusive interview, Ben Taylor Beijing escort, Utopia Silver Supplement Company owner, discusses his fight to defend the company and the principles of health freedom that this country was founded on. Part 1 introduced the company as well as the health benefits of colloidal silver. Part 2 uncovers why the FDA targeted Utopia Silver and what their underlying tactic is.

A Little Background of FDA Regulation In Regards to Natural Health Companies

For the past decade, the FDA has unfairly targeted small natural health companies with the intent to shut them down. Because of this country`s health freedom laws, at least on paper, the FDA can`t close them down outright so they`ve been using their legal weight to bring court cases against these supplement companies with the hope that the legal system will rule against them. Then fear mongering is conducted by the mainstream media to make examples out of these cases. A common tactic is to try to “nab” the supplement company by punishing them for publishing health claims and testimonials of the effectiveness of their products. These health claims may very well be backed up by scientific studies and research, but it doesn`t matter to the FDA. A common target is natural health companies that sell colloidal silver products. This may be because of the competition that these silver products pose to pharmaceutical antibiotics.

Kira: I’m not very familiar with the rules of the FDA and how strict they can be with testimonials and what you can claim that your product can cure. Can you tell us a little bit about how you battled the FDA regarding testimonials?

Ben: The FDA, in my opinion, is a tool for the major pharmaceutical companies and I don’t believe they’re out to take care of the general health of the public. I think that they’re running interference for the major pharmaceutical companies and no one else — beyond that, they don’t have the authority to do what they do. What they do is by presumption, nobody argues with them. The FDA act was passed in 1938 and it set up the food, drug, and cosmetic administrations. This act gave the FDA the right to regulate interstate commerce of food, drugs, and cosmetics but the term “regulate” meant to organize interstate commerce, which was defined at that time as transportation across state lines. The reason was so that the states wouldn’t start making their own rules when it came to the movement and transportation of goods across state lines. If every state had different rules regarding interstate commerce, it could chaos. The feds organizing and coordinating this interstate transportation was intended to cause a more unimpeded flow of goods between states and was not intended to give the ‘feds’ authority to control every aspect of business. The 1995 Supreme Court case The United States vs. Lopez gives some of the more recent insight into this fact.

Kira: So basically the FDA was in charge of seeing that states fairly distributed these products… they weren’t necessarily involved in blocking any products to certain areas?

Ben: No, they don’t have any authority in my opinion to be involved in the manufacture or sale of any of these products and a good example of that is the 18th amendment and the 20th amendment. The 18th amendment was the amendment that supposedly prohibited the sale of intoxicating liquors and then the 21st supposedly repealed the 18th but that’s not really what happened. If you go and read those two amendments you’ll find that the 21st amendment simply brought the 18th amendment into compliance with the Constitution. You can put the 21st amendment side by side with it and all it did was take out the terms “manufacture” and “sale” but left in “transportation”.

Kira: What you’re saying is that the 21st amendment actually lessened the FDA’s power?

Ben: Well yeah, it lessened their power by bringing the 18th amendment into compliance with the Constitution because regulating interstate commerce, in my opinion, was all the authority the FDA had and this is one of the things that we entered into evidence in our court case and it is one of the filed evidence that do not want revealed in a trial. The 18th prohibited the transportation, manufacture, and sale of intoxicating liquors, but the Federal ‘government’ did not have the Constitutional authority to do anything more than ‘regulate/organize’ interstate commerce.

Kira: When did the FDA start coming after your company and for what reasons?

Ben: Well, initially the TDH, by virtue of an email ‘complaint’ from the FDA to the TDH, approached the friend of mine that owned the Utopia Silver company and told him that there were problems with his website and he must correct them. Even though he made every effort to comply with their demands, they harassed him repeatedly. He would make ‘corrections and revisions’ and then they would find more issues for him to fix. The primary issue was his posting of customer testimonials and they said that since he had testimonials he was making claims of cures and prevention and by ‘making claims’ the supplements he was selling were now considered ‘new drugs’. Because the supplements were ‘magically’ turned into drugs by the use of ‘words’, the TDH/FDA now claimed the right to regulate them. Anyway, it appeared that the lawsuit was going nowhere and that was what my friend’s lawyer told him and that is where I steeped in and I bought some of his assets and opened Utopia Silver Supplements.

Kira: Okay, so let’s talk about the hypothetical… even if they are drugs because of that definition then why is it that drugs by pharmaceutical companies, for example drugs that lower cholesterol or cure other conditions, are promoted while it seems that the FDA’s intentions, once a supplement is considered a drug Shanghai escort, is to block it from the market?

Ben: Now you see their real intent, because with drugs, generally speaking, large companies can afford to spend the kind of money that is required to get them to market and to get FDA approval; but a small company like Utopia Silver can’t spend the millions of dollars on these so-called clinical studies which, by the way, have been done for decades using silver- but they ignore them. What I find interesting is the fact that the second that a food or supplement has the presumption, by claim, anecdote, or research, of a health benefit, it has to be classified as a drug by the FDA. I find that preposterous. What it does is that it takes the Right to personal healthcare choice using foods and supplements out of the control and discretion of the individual and puts it in the hands of a not so benevolent government agency.

Kira: At what point do you think that they can consider food a drug?

Ben: Here is what the prosecuting assistant of the Attorney General told me in the judge’s chambers — he said that, “if you are selling water and you claim that water has a health benefit, like it cures dehydration, then it becomes a drug and you must have a drug license to sell that water.” And I believe that is their true position; he was not being facetious. In fact, there was a case in the mid-west with a cherry farmer who had a website where they posted some research that they had found on a government website, I think, about the benefits of cherries. I mean this was scientific research, it was fact. Well, once they posted it, the FDA came after them and said that they couldn’t do that. The cherry farmer’s argument was that they were just exercising their First Amendment right by stating the fact, but the FDA came after them anyway and confiscated their cherries, jam, and all of their products and shut them down. That shows you right there what they’re willing to do regarding this insane interpretation of ‘the law’.

Kira: That’s amazing! We grow up with the belief that we have freedom of speech, that we can state facts and not be persecuted for it and yet that freedom of speech can be trumped by the interpretations made by the FDA and their pursuit to regulate these types of products…

Ben: It is presumed that they can be trumped, and the problem is that everybody goes along with it, but I didn’t go along with them (the FDA and the TDH) and that is the only reason why I had any success. If I had gotten an attorney and if I had gotten a manufacturers license and if I agreed to what they were saying about these supplements being drugs, then I would’ve been shut down by now; but the fact is, the only chance we have is to resist them with the truth and the truth is that there are all kinds of things that are good for us — vitamin C prevents scurvy, Vitamin D prevents rickets and cancer. You can go on and on with examples of health benefits from foods and supplements– just because I speak the truth should not mean under any circumstance that it turns these supplements into drugs. It is preposterous that they make such non-scientific and ‘flat earth’ claims, but it is the way they operate. You can’t speak or write of any factual benefits and sell the product at the same time.

Kira: So it’s almost a kind of censorship of advertising — you can make the product but you can’t advertise what it does.

Ben: Well, you know what’s worse than that is the censorship of freedom of speech — to speak the simple truth, even when it’s an accepted scientific fact, can get you in trouble.

Kira: I would like to go into your court case in terms of your friend’s supplement company. At this point, they received a notice from the FDA about the testimonials on their website…

Ben: Yes, the testimonials were on the website and at this point, I was not involved yet. What I was told was that they tried to work with the TDH for a period of about 8-12 months to try and make adjustments to satisfy them and they made numerous changes. But every time they made the change, the Attorney General, TDH, FDA came back and made more changes so they were never satisfied and in fact, the assistant attorney general told my friend the intent was really to shut them down period. So they were never going to be satisfied. The only thing is they had set a couple of court dates, which had passed with no trial, so it appeared that the case was over — that’s when I bought some of the assets of my friend’s company and opened Utopia Silver Supplements. Needless to say, I naively bought a lawsuit.

Kira: So, basically what you did was you bought out the remainder of your friend’s company and made it into a new business entity altogether?

Ben: What I created was a new company; my friend primarily had been selling colloidal silver and colloidal gold and I wanted to sell a broader range of supplements; so that’s what I did. I still sell colloidal silver, colloidal gold, and colloidal copper, but I also have a whole range of other supplements too.

Kira: How did you get involved with this FDA court case?

Ben: Well, within a couple of months after I bought the assets and opened up the new company, The Texas Attorney General joined me and my company to the old court case as Defendants.

Kira: And that was when?

Ben: That was in February of 2005.

Kira: Did you have any idea what you were getting yourself into?

Ben: No I didn’t, I was kind of na�ve (laughing), very na�ve. I thought that the court case wasn’t going anywhere and my friend had started to move on to another business endeavor and he needed money to put that business in the black, so I stepped in and lo and behold, next thing I know I’m getting blindsided by the government.

Kira: So at this point you had no choice but to go forward, you just couldn’t back out… were you really up to this?

Ben: Not really, I couldn’t back out of it. I had mortgaged my house to buy the assets to start my company so I had no choice but to fight.

In the next article of this series, Ben Taylor will be talking about the strategy that he used to beat the FDA as well as little known concepts about the real way that the U.S. government is structured. To learn more about Ben Taylor`s fight for health freedom and about colloidal silver products, please visit (http://utopiasilver.com/) . You can read a review about Utopia Silver`s Colloidal Gold and Colloidal Silver Skin and Scalp Bar Soaps, written by Aria Milan, here (http://www.naturalnews.com/024713.html) . Any purchase made from Utopia Silver strengthens this natural health company`s resolve to stand up to the tyranny inflicted by the FDA.

Ben has set up a special discount just for Natural News readers: With the purchase of Advanced Colloidal Silver and both of the colloidal silver and colloidal gold soap bars, the buyer will receive an extra bottle of colloidal silver and a bottle of colloidal gold (a $48 value). In other words, for $35.90 plus shipping, the purchaser will also get $83.90 worth of products. Plus, Utopia Silver has created a discount code just for Natural News readers which will give them a 15% discount on any items not on sale — this deal doesn`t expire. To take advantage of this special offer, go to (http://www.utopiasilver.com/natural…) . Copy this discount code for any additional or future orders: NN001.

Low Cholesterol Linked to Depression and Suicide 7

Standard

The next time you stop in for your annual check-up with your doctor, chances are you’ll be checking on your cholesterol levels. With fears spiked about having high cholesterol, even those in the low-risk categories are monitoring their levels religiously. After all, there’s nothing like the merit badge of a low cholesterol reading. It’s good enough to put a big, bright smile right across your face鈥”or it may just drive you into depression. That’s right. Those charmingly low numbers may be the cause behind depression, anxiety, violence and even suicide.

This is hardly an extremist idea fed by a few confused souls. Just take a look in the British Medical Journal published in September of 1996, where a French study looked at over 6,000 men. The study revealed that men with low cholesterol were three times more likely to commit suicide Hangzhou massage. A similar study at Payne Whitney Clinic in New York showed a similar result: when dividing men into four groups based on cholesterol levels, suicide risk doubled in the group with the lowest levels.

Equally as disturbing is the link between low cholesterol and violent, impulsive behavior. Dr. Vivian Mitropoulou and her colleagues at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York examined 42 patients with personality disorders. Low cholesterol was a strong indicator of irrationally aggressive behavior.

Just one of the many studies linking low cholesterol to deep depression came from Finland’s National Public Health Institute, where a study of almost 30,000 people showed men with lower cholesterol readings were the most likely to suffer from crippling depression.

All of these disorders may be explained by low serotonin levels, which are often connected to violent and suicidal behavior. Dr. Beatrice Golomb from The University of California looked at studies linking low cholesterol to violence. She points out that studies which placed monkeys on a diet low in fat and cholesterol suffered from dramatically lower serotonin levels. These low-serotonin monkeys exhibited climbing aggression and violence Shanghai massage services.

Of course, these findings aren’t enough to convince most doctors to overlook other evidence that points toward cholesterol causing health problems. After all, they need to keep writing prescriptions for those cholesterol-lowering drugs that draw in billions of dollars to the industry each year.

Aside from that, these findings are something to seriously consider if you’ve had a history of depression or violence and your cholesterol levels are running low. Your physician may claim these levels are good for your heart, but there’s a chance they could be affecting your head.

Jaret, Peter. Can your cholesterol be too low? WebMD.com (2000)