Saturday, July 20, 2019

Foods that prevent sun damage and heal your skin

0

by Vicki Batts, Natural News:

The largest organ in the human body is your skin, yet it is so often overlooked. Heart-healthy foods are all the rage, but really, nutrition affects your entire body – inside, and out. While our internal organs are very important, the skin that covers them needs love and attention, too. There are many nutritious foods that can help support healthy skin. In fact, with the right foods, you can help protect your skin against sun damage and other issues.

CBD Bombshell: Cannabis approved by the FDA for treatment of brain and spinal cord glioma cancer tumors

by S.D. Wells, via The Common Sense Show:

This is huge. The FDA just granted orphan drug designation (ODD) to Insys Therapeutics for its pharmaceutical-grade, proprietary cannabidiol (CBD) product for treating cancer tumors in humans. Although glioma tumors affect less than 200,000 Americans, this FDA approval sets a precedent for natural remedies, and could lead to a revolutionary way to legally treat many forms of cancer with natural cures. In justifying preliminary approval of utilizing CBD to treat brain and spinal cancer tumors of this kind, Insys Therapeutics provided the FDA with the scientific rationale for CBD’s benefits, including human experiences with the natural remedy, evidence discovered through in vitro studies, and preclinical animal testing.

What If Almost ALL You’ve Been Told About Cancer IS A LIE?

by Karl Denninger, Market Ticker:

I wish to preface the linked article with a very strong caution — this is one story, one person.  It statistically demonstrates nothing.  Further, the plural of anecdote is not “data”.  But, with that said….

So the period of unknown started in the 3rd week of January 2017 and included the above three items every day (7 days per week) and the canine medicine (1 GRAM PER DAY FOR 3 CONSECUTIVE DAYS) per week.  Take 4 days off and repeat each week.  Each gram of Panacur C has approximately 222 mg of fenbendazole, in case you are trying a different branded product.

This is a guy who had small-cell lung cancer — a particularly nasty form of cancer that usually kills the people who get it, even with extremely aggressive treatment.  Even in “Stage 1” your odds of 5 year survival is only 31%.  Beyond that it sucks.  And what’s worse is that the median survival time, assuming it’s “limited” when found (that is, not known to have metastasized) is only 12-16 months.  It is the most-aggressive form of lung cancer and is nearly-always associated with smoking.  In this particular individual’s case they already knew it had spread — specifically, to the lymph nodes, which is the usual first place it goes.

The sugar industry blocked research linking sucrose to heart disease and cancer from publication 50 YEARS ago, damning report reveals

0

by Mia de Graf, Daily Mail:

  • The researchers at the University of California at San Francisco have uncovered data showing the sugar industry hid research linking sugar to cancer in 1968
  • New documents show the Sugar Association funded an animal experiment called Project 259 to evaluate sucrose’s effects on cardiovascular health
  • But when the data showed a clear link between sucrose and poor heart health, they pulled the plug  
  • The researchers say that, had this paper been published in 1968, it would have led to scrutiny and even regulation of sugar by the FDA

The sugar industry blocked the release of a study showing sucrose directly increases the risk of heart disease and cancer in 1968, newly-uncovered documents reveal.

The research, which was funded and designed by the sugar industry, was intended to dispel fears that fructose-containing sugars affect blood lipids. 

But internal correspondence uncovered by researchers at the University of California at San Francisco, show that industry leaders pulled the plug on its publication after getting wind that it would prove the clearest link between sugar and disease ever found. 

The finding, published today in PLOS Biology, is the latest in a series of bombshell reports from investigative researcher Dr Cristin Kearns and co-author Dr Stanton Glantz, who was the first researcher to reveal Big Tobacco was hiding research on the danger of cigarettes in 1996. 

Last year the duo sent shockwaves through the nutrition world with a study that showed the sugar industry had paid Harvard University’s most respected nutrition scientist to play down the health dangers of sugar, and demonize fats. 

Speaking to Daily Mail Online, they say that, had this new study been published in 1968 as planned, it would have automatically triggered a review of sucrose by the US Food and Drug Administration, which would have likely led to regulation of sugar. 

Instead, they say, it has taken five decades for the scientific community to reach relative agreement that sugar is bad for you, and has a direct link to cancer and heart disease.

‘The sugar industry has been playing the same games as Big Tobacco to protect their financial interests,’ Dr Glantz told Daily Mail Online. 

‘The more we look, the more we see that the sugar industry has had a sophisticated understanding of science for decades, sophisticated enough to manipulate it.

‘This study, if it had been published, would have been quite cutting edge for its time. Had that work moved forward, it would’ve advanced the triglycerides-sugar debate forward by decades.

‘That’s why they killed it.’

Read More @ DailyMail.co.uk

Most cancer is caused by processed food and toxic ingredients, new study confirms

0

by Jhoanna Robinso, Natural News:

A recently published study out of Canada showed that the total amount of cancer rates that can be linked to lifestyle and environmental factors is substantial, at almost 41 percent.

According to the researchers, “We estimated summary population attributable risk estimates for 24 risk factors (smoking [both passive and active], overweight and obesity, inadequate physical activity, diet [inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, inadequate fiber intake, excess red and processed meat consumption, salt consumption, inadequate calcium and vitamin D intake], alcohol, hormones [oral contraceptives and hormone therapy], infections [Epstein-Barr virus, hepatitis B and C viruses, human papillomavirus, Helicobacter pylori], air pollution, natural and artificial ultraviolet radiation, radon and water disinfection by-products) by combining population attributable risk estimates for each of the 24 factors that had been previously estimated.”

The researchers found out that 40.8 percent of cancer cases can be attributed to the above-mentioned 24 factors. “Tobacco smoking was responsible for the greatest cancer burden, accounting for an estimated 15.7 percent of all incident cancer cases (2,485 cases), followed by physical inactivity and excess body weight, which were responsible for an estimated 7.2 percent and 4.3 percent of incident cancer cases, respectively.”

The other factors were responsible for less than four percent of incident cancer cases each. The researchers concluded that combined with exercise and the conscious effort to avoid the environmental factors of incurring cancer, the disease is preventable. (Related: Researchers find ‘interactions’ between cancer cells and their environment.)

Also embedded in the study is the added knowledge that a big part of what is considered as a bad diet is the inclusion of too many sugars, which is common in today’s society. Nowadays, 80 percent of all packaged products contain some form of fructose.

Too much fat intake is also not good for the body. As a matter of fact, a July 2017 study that was published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology showed that saturated fat intake is related to a risk of lung cancer in smokers and those who have quit smoking for the past 10 years. Charred and barbecued meats, on the other hand, can increase the risks of pancreatic and breast cancers.

But what takes the cake are processed foods. According to Hong Kong dietitian Sally Shi-Po Poon, “processed foods” can be said to represent any food that has been altered from its natural state in some way, for convenience’s sake.

Common processed foods include breakfast cereals, canned and frozen vegetables, bread, pasta, savory snacks such as crisps and biscuits, microwave or read-to-eat meals, bread, oils, processed meats such as luncheon meat and jerky, and drinks such as coffee, juice, and milk.

However, not all processed foods are unhealthy, Poon said. For instance, milk needs to be pasteurized, therefore altered from its natural state, in order to remove harmful bacteria from its constitution.

For his part, Health Designer founder and senior dietitian Vin Ip said some processed foods are not detrimental to your health, noting, “Minimally processed foods are almost identical to unprocessed foods and are therefore acceptable to include in our diet.”

What must be avoided at all costs are heavily-processed foods, for instance, deli meats like bacon, salami, and sausages, for they are high in salt, nitrites, and nitrates and are likely to cause cancer. “Eating 50 grams of processed meat every day increases one’s risk of colorectal cancer by 18 percent. That’s the equivalent of about four strips of bacon or one hot dog,” Poon said.

Read More @ NaturalNews.com

Drink cranberry juice to decrease your risk of UTI by half

0

by Ralph Flores, Natural News:

Cranberries aren’t just used for salads and baked goods. A study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition has indicated that drinking cranberry juice regularly could reduce urinary tract infection (UTI) instances in women that previously had the condition. The study also indicated that this could reduce the need for antibiotics worldwide.

In the study, the researchers said that the daily consumption of at least eight ounces of cranberry juice reduced UTI incidents by as much as 40 percent among women who previously had the condition. Based on the findings, the team suggested that cranberries could be a potential alternative to antibiotic treatment.

GMO Impossible Burger Positive For Carcinogenic Glyphosate

by Sayer Ji, Green Med Info:

GMO Impossible Burger tests 11x higher for Glyphosate weed killer residue than Beyond Meat burger.

Two days ago a Monsanto trial jury awarded the plaintiffs over $2 billion dollars, for the connection between the glyphosate-based herbicide, Roundup, and their cancer. Today, Moms Across America announces that the Impossible Burger* tested positive for glyphosate. The levels of glyphosate detected in the Impossible burger by Health Research Institute Laboratories were 11 X higher than the Beyond Meat Burger. The total result (glyphosate and it’s break down AMPA) was 11.3 ppb. Moms Across America also tested the Beyond Meat Burger and the results were 1 ppb.

Turmeric Extract Strikes To The Root Cause of Cancer Malignancy

0

by Sayer Ji, Green Med Info:

A turmeric study published in Cancer Letters is paving the way for a revolution in the way that we both understand and treat cancer.

Titled, “Targeting cancer stem cells by curcumin and clinical applications,” U.S. researchers evaluated the primary polyphenol in the Indian spice known as curcumin for its ability to target cancer stem cells (CSCs), which are believed to be at the root cause of tumor formation and malignancy.

The soda apple holds potential as alternative cancer treatment

0

by Ralph Flores, Natural News:

Research found that Solanum aculeastrum, commonly known as the soda-apple nightshade, could potentially be used to treat cancer. The study, published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, evaluated the anti-cancer activity of S. aculeastrum, as well as tested its ability to inhibit P-glycoprotein and its synergistic effect when combined with doxorubicin treatment.

New Cancer ‘Vaccine’ Completely Kills Tumors Within 10 Days: Study

0

from The Anti Media:

Stanford, CA — There may be fresh hope on the horizon in the battle against cancer, as researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine have developed a new treatment that has had remarkably positive results on mice.

Independent media is under attack — and we need your help to save it! Click here to become an Anti-Media patron.

The treatment is a form of immunotherapy — using the body’s own defense system to fight off pathogens — and involves injecting a “vaccine” made of two types of immune-stimulating agents directly into tumors.

Researchers found that by using this method, tumors in mice were completely eliminated within 10 days. What’s more, the team discovered that within 20 days, even tumors that hadn’t been treated had vanished.

The treatment is novel in, among other things, its specificity. Individual types of cancer can be targeted, with the vaccine being adjusted accordingly. In the case of Stanford’s experiment with mice, for instance, the disease was lymphoma.

In the study, published in Science Translational Medicine, all but three of the 90 mice treated were cured of the cancer on the first try. In the few cases where that didn’t happen, tumors were eradicated after a second injection. The vaccine did not, however, affect other types of diseases in the animal’s body.

In addition to being a relatively inexpensive form of treatment, the team’s method is also far less invasive. Other types of immunotherapy require the activation of the body’s entire immune system, and some even require that cells be removed from the body and genetically engineered before they can fight off cancers.

“Our approach uses a one-time application of very small amounts of two agents to stimulate the immune cells only within the tumor itself,” Dr. Ronald Levy, professor of oncology and senior author of the study, told Stanford Medicine News Center“In the mice, we saw amazing, bodywide effects, including the elimination of tumors all over the animal.”

Of the two immune-stimulating agents that make up the vaccine, one is already approved for use in humans. The other has been tested in unrelated clinical trials. A trial has already been launched to test the effectiveness of the Stanford treatment on human patients with lymphoma.

If all goes well, Levy says, the new treatment could be a game-changer in how doctors approach the treatment of cancers:

“I don’t think there’s a limit to the type of tumor we could potentially treat, as long as it has been infiltrated by the immune system.”

Immunologist Keith Knutson of the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida, who was not involved with the research, told Science Magazine that, at a minimum, the findings open up new doors.

Read More @ TheAntiMedia.com

Depletion of Iron From Tumor Cells Prior To Vitamin C Therapy Quells Cancer

0

by Lew Rockwell, Lew Rockwell:

It is widely known that mega-dose vitamin C transiently produces hydrogen peroxide, an oxidant, to selectively kill cancer cells.  In the late 1970s Linus Pauling and Ewan Cameron were first to report of success utilizing intravenous vitamin C to produce 1-year survival among 22 percent of otherwise hopeless cancer patients (chemotherapy at the time was far less effective).  Subsequent studies concluded oral vitamin C could not possibly reach adequate blood concentrations of vitamin C to produce hydrogen peroxide (cancer cell killing effect) even though the data from that study ran contrary to the conclusions drawn.  [Knowledge of Health 2016]

American Cancer Society Chief Officer Calls Cell Phone Radiation Study a “Game Changer.” So When Will ACS Update Warnings About Harm From Phones, Smart Meters, etc.?

by B.N. Frank, Activist Post:

It’s worth noting that The Telecom Industry has never said that cell phones are safe.

The Federal Communications Commission (which is not a health organization) simply provides safety guidelines which are outdated, misleading, and don’t protect the public.

Recently Newsweek reported that Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, referred to results from a U.S. government study on cell phone radiation as a “game changer.