Monday, August 15, 2011

METHAMPHETAMINE NOW PRESCRIBED FOR ADD AND NARCOLEPSY 67

By CodyPhrenism

Meth for ADD?

Does it seem strange? Paradoxical? Unbelieveable? Believe it or not, it is technically lawful to prescribe methamphetamine to any child 6 and over in the United States with ADD, obesity and narcolepsy under the brand name Desoxyn.

It's odd to think that the same government who ravenously handed out fliers entitled "Meth is Death" and "Meth Kills" and labeled meth as the most addictive drug on the earth is now completely fine with readily prescribing methamphetamine to those with ADD, even children. Were the dangers portrayed in these pamphlets and propaganda incorrect or is there more? From their actions, the looks as if United States Government feels it is moral to imprison those who use methamphetamine for up to 10 years for personal use, while allowing this "dangerous drug" to be prescribed to children; it seems as if someone is being paid to rule in favor of the pharmaceutical industry.


Desoxyn

Dangers of Meth

  • Elevation of blood pressure, tachycardia and palpitation. Fatal cardiorespiratory arrest has been reported.
  • Psychotic episodes have been reported at recommended doses
  • Urticaria.
  • Suppression of growth has been reported with the long-term use of stimulants in children
  • Dizziness, dysphoria, overstimulation, euphoria, insomnia, tremor, restlessness and headache. Exacerbation of motor and phonic tics and Tourette's syndrome.
  • Potent neurotoxin, shown to cause dopaminergic and serotonergic degeneration. (Less Dopamine + Serotonin, can cause major depression)
  • Numbness, Heart Attack, Stroke, Death
  • High Addiction Risk



Does this sound a bit cruel for a 6 year old? It seems a little bit ridiculous to me. If an adult chooses to chooses to take methamphetamine then that is their own choice; however it's disgusting to be prescribing 6 year old children meth because they can't sit still in class.

In fact, all popular attention deficit disorder drugs have chemical structures similar to meth (other amphetamines/salts) or Cocaine(Ritalin, Focalin). In fact, Focalin is more potent than cocaine per milligram and lasts longer - these drugs are more potent and just as addictive as cocaine and they are being prescribed to children. There is either a flaw in the way America looks at drugs or in the pharmaceutical industry - I suggest both.

There has been some communication that I don't understand dose dependence, however that is not the case. All of the above side effects have been shown in 5mg doses of Desoxyn - taken straight from the pharmaceutical company site. My goal is not to demonize any sort of drug, however it was to make people aware of the double standards set within law and pharmaceuticals. No harm intended.

RENSE & JONATHAN EMORD - FDA NEW, STEALTH DIRTY TRICK TO TAKE YOUR SUPPLEMENTS

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

THE HEALTHY DRINK THAT MAY DESTROY YOUR SLEEP

Posted By Dr. Mercola August 09 2011


By Dr. Mercola
Dr. Mercola Recommends...
Every "Like" Helps Support This Cause

The pineal gland is a small endocrine gland located between the two hemispheres of your brain. It is sometimes called the "third eye" due to its resemblance to the human retina. While your pineal gland is only about the size of a single grain of rice (5-8 mm), it performs several functions that are extremely important to your body.

One main role of your pineal gland is to produce melatonin, the natural sleep hormone that plays a vital role in your normal sleep function. Melatonin is not only necessary for proper sleep however, it also regulates the onset of puberty and fights against harmful free radicals. When your pineal gland function is suppressed, melatonin production suffers and you are putting yourself at risk for a number of startling conditions including:

Alzheimer's disease Circadian dysregulation Insomnia
Bipolar disease Hormone imbalances: low melatonin Low back pain

When Your Pineal Gland Stress Leads, Disease Follows

Any form of pineal gland stress is concerning due to its integral role in your body, which has been studied for thousands of years. In the third century, a prominent Roman physician named Galen described the pineal gland as the "seat of the soul."

This term was referenced once more by the prominent philosopher René Descartes (1596-1650), who went on to write about the pineal gland in depth. Adding to Galen's thoughts on the gland, Descartes stated:

"My view is that this gland is the principal seat of the soul, and the place in which all our thoughts are formed."

One form of pineal gland stress is known as pineal gland calcification -- the cause of which may be shocking to you. Sodium fluoride, present in your drinking water and certain store-bought products, and other sources such as Prozac (fluoxetine), fluoroquinolone antibiotics and non-stick cookware could all be contributing to the alarming increase in pineal gland calcification.

I have been warning you about the toxic effects of fluoride for years, and during this time more and more scientists have begun to recognize the dangers. There are so many studies highlighting the toxic effects of fluoride on your body, particularly affecting brain function, yet remarkably, a majority of the tap water in the United States, as well as a few other countries, is still heavily fluoridated.

The connection between pineal gland calcification and fluoride intake may very well be one of the most vital pieces of information in the fight against water fluoridation. You see, up until the 1990's, no research had ever been conducted on the impact of fluoride on the pineal gland. However, we now have major universities discovering that your pineal gland is a primary target of fluoride accumulation in your body.

Research Confirms Pineal Gland as a Major Fluoride Collector

Thanks to research first conducted by the University of Surrey in England in 1997, it is now known that the soft tissue of the adult pineal gland contains more fluoride than any other soft tissue in your body. In fact, the levels of pineal gland fluoride examined in the study were high enough to inhibit enzymes.

When your enzymes are damaged, it can lead to collagen breakdown, eczema, tissue damage, skin wrinkling, genetic damage, and immune suppression. It can also cause problems with your:

  • Immune system
  • Digestive system
  • Respiratory system
  • Blood circulation
  • Kidney function

Pineal gland fluoride levels were measured at ~330 parts per million (ppm). The EPA currently sets the maximum allowed level of sodium fluoride in the drinking water at 4 ppm. This is nothing compared to the amount of fluoride found to be stored in the harder tissues of your pineal gland known as hyroxyapatite crystals. Fluoride levels observed in the hard tissue were found to be as high as 21,000 ppm. Hyroxyapatite crystals store more fluoride than any other hard tissue in your body, including teeth and bone.

After researchers concluded that the pineal gland was a major target for extreme fluoride accumulation in your body, they decided to conduct a series of experiments to determine if it was enough to impact the functioning of the gland, particularly melatonin production. Dr. Jennifer Luke from the University of Surrey in England led the researchers in performing the study.

The results were surprising even to the scientists on the research team. Animals treated with fluoride not only had lower levels of melatonin as expected, but female animals experienced an early onset of puberty. Due to the interference of melatonin production in the animals in response to the fluoride treatment, the hormonal triggers that are responsible for puberty were disturbed.

Dr. Luke summarized the findings:

"In conclusion, the human pineal gland contains the highest concentration of fluoride in the body. Fluoride is associated with depressed pineal melatonin synthesis by prepubertal gerbils and an accelerated onset of sexual maturation in the female gerbil. The results strengthen the hypothesis that the pineal has a role in the timing of the onset of puberty."

The Early Puberty Connection

U.S. girls are reaching puberty at younger ages than ever before. In the 1990s, breast development -- the first sign of puberty in girls -- at age eight was considered an abnormal event that should be investigated by an endocrinologist. However, by 1999, following a 1997 study that found almost half of African Americans and 15 percent of whites had begun breast development by age eight, the Lawson Wilkins Pediatric Endocrine Society suggested changing what is viewed as "normal."

Could pineal gland calcification be the cause of early puberty in young girls?

As mentioned earlier, the major study performed by the University of Surrey in England says absolutely YES. The connection between gland calcification and an early onset of puberty was even mentioned as a main point in the study's summary by Dr. Luke.

It is important to remember that the groundbreaking study was conducted in 1997, before the 1999 research that brought to light the epidemic of early puberty. We have known all of this time about the correlation between fluoride exposure and early puberty, yet there has been little coverage of the subject!

The Explosion of Information on Pineal Gland Toxicity

Following the initial breakthroughs on the link between fluoride and pineal gland calcification, scientists began to examine the issue more closely. In 2006, the National Research Council (NRC) released its report: "Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards."

The NRC began working on the report in 2003 as requested by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to review the latest research on fluoride toxicity and assess the EPA's current safe drinking water standards for fluoride. In 2006, the report was released with a summary that backed up the work of Dr. Luke and her research team who conducted the first experiment on the role fluoride plays in pineal gland calcification back in 1997. The summary was printed in the National Academies Press, Washington D.C. P221-22:

"The single animal study of pineal function indicates that fluoride exposure results in altered melatonin production and altered timing of sexual maturity... Recent information on the role of the pineal organ in humans suggests that any agent that affects pineal function could affect human health in a variety of ways, including effects on sexual maturation, calcium metabolism, parathyroid function, postmenopausal osteoporosis, cancer, and psychiatric disease."

Mainstream Medical Community Still in the Dark about Fluoride

There are so many scientific studies showing the direct, toxic effects of fluoride on your body, it's truly remarkable that it's NOT considered a scientific consensus by now. It truly amazes me that the medical (and dental) communities are so stubbornly resistant to connect the dots when it comes to the skyrocketing increase of cognitive decline in adults (Alzheimer's and various dementia's), and behavioral issues in children (ADD, ADHD, depression and learning disabilities of all kinds).

In fact, there have been over 23 human studies and 100 animal studies linking fluoride to brain damage. This includes such effects as:

Reduction in nicotinic acetylcholine receptors Damage to your hippocampus Formation of beta-amyloid plaques (the classic brain abnormality in Alzheimer's disease)
Reduction in lipid content Damage to purkinje cells Exacerbation of lesions induced by iodine deficiency
Impaired antioxidant defense systems Increased uptake of aluminum Accumulation of fluoride in your pineal gland

What is perhaps most surprising is that the harmful effects of fluoride have been known about by conventional medical organizations for over half a century. The Journal of the American Medical Association also stated in their September 18, 1943 issue that fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons that change the permeability of the cell membrane by certain enzymes.

And, an editorial published in the Journal of the American Dental Association, October 1, 1944, stated:

"Drinking water containing as little as 1.2 ppm fluoride will cause developmental disturbances. We cannot run the risk of producing such serious systemic disturbances. The potentialities for harm outweigh those for good."

Yet, this element, or as some may call it, this caustic industrial chemical, is deliberately added to about two-thirds of U.S. public water supplies. Now that it has been established that fluoride is extremely toxic to the health of you and your family, what can be done to prevent exposure?

Limiting Exposure to Toxic Fluoride and Other Substances

As mentioned, fluoride currently contaminates nearly 70 percent of the U.S. public water supplies. Therefore, it is an extreme challenge to limit your exposure even inside the safety of your own home. For people living in areas with fluoridated tap water, fluoride is a part of every glass of water, every bath and shower, and every meal cooked using that water.

Fluoride is not the only toxic substance in your tap water, however.

While chlorine is right at the heart of this matter, there is an even larger threat to your health. It is important to understand that when chlorine interacts with organic matter found in your water, disinfection byproducts (DBPs) form. And these DBPs are far more toxic than the chlorine itself. In fact, DBPs are responsible for the vast majority of the toxic effects of chlorinated water… toxic effects that can potentially lead to…

  • Increased cancer, asthma, and skin irritation risks
  • Respiratory irritation and fatigue
  • Weakening of your immune system

The problem is that a hot steamy shower:

  • Triggers your skin pores to open, which in turn…
  • Spikes a high absorption rate of chlorine and other chemicals directly into your system and…
  • Helps create a 'free pass' of foreign chemicals into your body fluids and bloodstream – unlike drinking tap water where your digestive processes at least get a chance to filter out some of the harmful contaminants.


Important! The producers of this powerful film are allowing a full and FREE preview

through August 13th in celebration of Fluoride Awareness Week (Aug 7 - 13)! You can support Fluoride Action Network by purchasing the Professional Perspectives DVD at a special price of $10 during Fluoride Awareness Week.

Taking Action Against Fluoride

In addition to protecting yourself and your family from toxic consumption of fluoride on a personal level, there is also a political battle over removing it from the water supply altogether.This Fluoride Awareness Week will hopefully bring us a lot closer to that goal by spreading mass awareness.

FAN Advocacy PosterThe Fluoride Action Network (FAN) is an absolutely phenomenal resource for further education, and they're doing much to pressure the U.S. government for change. We are working together to tackle this issue head on. Once we reach the tipping point, which may be as little as 5 percent of the population, we will be able to reverse the policies of water fluoridation.

Please, join the anti-fluoride movement in the US, New Zealand and Canada by contacting the representative for your area below.

Contact Information for Canadian Communities:

  1. If you live in Ontario, Canada, please join the ongoing effort by contacting Diane Sprules at diane.sprules@cogeco.ca.
  2. The point-of-contact for Toronto, Canada is Aliss Terpstra. You may email her at aliss@nutrimom.ca.

Contact Information for American Communities:

We're also going to address three US communities: New York City, Austin, and San Diego:

  1. New York City, NY: With the recent victory in Calgary, New York City is the next big emphasis. The anti-fluoridation movement has a great champion in New York City councilor Peter Vallone, Jr. who introduced legislation on January 18 "prohibiting the addition of fluoride to the water supply."

    A victory there could signal the beginning of the end of fluoridation in the U.S. If you live in the New York area I beg you to participate in this effort as your contribution could have a MAJOR difference. Remember that one person can make a difference.

    The point person for this area is Carol Kopf, at the New York Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF). Email her at NYSCOF@aol.com . Please contact her if you're interested in helping with this effort.
  2. Austin, Texas: Join the effort by contacting Rae Nadler-Olenick at either: info@fluoridefreeaustin.com or fluoride.info@yahoo.com, or by regular mail or telephone:
    POB 7486
    Austin, Texas 78713
    Phone: (512) 371-3786
  3. San Diego, California: Contact Patty Ducey-Brooks, publisher of the Presidio Sentinel at pbrooks936@aol.com.

Contact Information for New Zealand Communities:

  1. New Zealand: Contact Mary Byrne if you live in Hastings, New Plymouth, Hamilton or Wellington. Mary would like to hear from you! Email her at: mbyrne64@yahoo.co.nz

In addition, you can:


http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/08/09/fluoride-and-pineal-gland.aspx?e_cid=20110809_DNL_art_1

THE WELLBEING FILES: SIX SIMPLE STEPS TO FEELING HEALTHY AGAIN

Originally posted within the mikiverse, August 10, 2010.
Aug 09 10:19am By Sarah Brooks-Wilson

You know those days when you just don’t feel very healthy, well I’m having one of those now. I’ve just been on holiday for a week and while I did lots of relaxing, I also did lots of eating and drinking and I didn’t much sleep either. Now I know that’s all part of the holiday spirit and having a break from the day to day routine, but when you get back from holidays, you also want to feel healthy, invigorated and well rested.

Top tips from Miranda Kerr's yoga instructor

So what do you do to make yourself feel better? Well there are some small things you can do to get back on track in just a matter of hours and days. These little health tricks worked for me, so I hope they do for you too.

The mini detox

Give your system a break for the first day after a holiday or long weekend, by increasing the amount of fruit and veggies in your diet. Wake up and have a big bowl of fruit salad with natural yoghurt, eat a big salad with lean meat for lunch and steam some fish and eat it with lots of green veggies for dinner. Snacks should be fruit or a handful of nuts. You’ll be amazed at how much better you feel by the end of the day.

Cut out alcohol

Doctors recommend at least two alcohol-free days a week, but when you’ve over indulged, it’s time to give up drinking for at least a week to give your body a real break. When you drink everyday, your body has to constantly work harder to break it down making you feel lethargic and tired. You will feel so much brighter and alert by not drinking.

Sleep tight

Too many late nights? It’s time to go to bed early every night for a week. By that I mean 9 to 9.30pm. If you can’t fall asleep that early, read until you can’t keep your eyes open. It will give your body a chance to repair itself and you will feel less groggy when you wake up, not to mention more have more energy throughout the day.


Exercise

Make that part of your everyday routine for the next seven days. Even if you only get time for a walk in the park, it’s better than nothing and will get your circulation. Fresh air and movement just gets everything moving inside and out.

Drink more water

Aim for at least seven glasses a day. Drink one glass on rising, have another one before breakfast, one mid morning, and one with lunch and switch that afternoon cuppa to a glass of water instead. Sip one with dinner and one before you hit the pillow. Make sure you always drink a glass of water after going to the loo or if you have a coffee. See, it’s easier than you think.



Quick pampering

Get in a hot bath and give your skin a good old scrub with a loran to get the circulation going. Do it for at least ten minutes, until the skin is slightly red and tingly. Put on a deep cleaning face mask and lie back and chill for 20 minutes. You’ll get out with more than just soft skin; you’ll feel really clean and invigorated.



See it’s not hard and you’ll be raring to go again.

From; http://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/b/lifestylechannels/4404/the-wellbeing-files-six-simple-steps-to-feeling-healthy-again/

THE CODEX, FLUORIDE, AUSCHWITZ, MONSANTO CONNECTION

REPOST. Originally posted within the mikiverse, August 11, 2010.
By Barbara H. Peterson
What do Codex Alimentarius with its official food standards, the fluoridation of our water and food supply, genocide at the Auschwitz concentration camp, and Monsanto, the company responsible for genetically altering the world’s food supply all have in common? Is there a connection that binds these seemingly diverse organizations together? Yes, there is. In fact, they are so inextricably bound that separating them is all but impossible.
Let’s start at the beginning with Auschwitz and connect the dots.
Auschwitz
Auschwitz was known for its “network of concentration and extermination camps built and operated in Polish areas annexed by Nazi Germany during the Second World War. It was the largest of the German concentration camps (Wikipedia).”
Auschwitz also had a factory called I. G. Auschwitz:
I.G. Auschwitz, founded in Kattowitz on April 7, 1941, was intended to be the largest chemical factory in Eastern Europe and at the same time a building block in the process of “Germanizing” the region. According to the plan, the production facilities were to supply the Eastern European market with plastics in peacetime, following their use for wartime production. In addition to German skilled workers and forced laborers from all over Europe, increasing numbers of prisoners from the Auschwitz concentration camp were deployed at the gigantic construction site in Auschwitz. In 1942 I.G. Auschwitz built its own corporate concentration camp, Buna/Monowitz. (Wollheim Memorial)
In fact, I.G. Auschwitz was designed from the very first to be an extremely complex chemical factory, producing, besides Buna, high-performance fuels (including aviation gasoline and fuel oil for naval use), various plastics, synthetic fibers, stabilizing agents, resins, methanol, nitrogen, and pharmaceuticals. (Wollheim Memorial)
I.G. Farben, which consisted of BASF, Bayer, and Hoechst (now known as Aventis), owned I.G. Auschwitz. A man called Frits ter Meer was on the I.G. Farben Managing Board from its foundation, and was responsible for I.G. Auschwitz. I. G. Auschwitz had a cozy relationship with the Auschwitz concentration camp, in that it used forced labor of the prisoners to work in its factory, and also used them as guinea pigs.
Under Frits ter Meers direction, I.G. Farben used a fluoridation program to control the population at the Auschwitz concentration camp in any given area through the mass medication of drinking water supplies.“By this method they could control the population in whole areas, reduce population by water medication (fluoride) that would produce sterility in women, and so on.” (ShopUSI)
Frits ter Meer was ultimately convicted at Nuremberg of plundering and slavery, but his sentence was commuted due to friends in high places. Fritz then went on to become one of the architects of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in 1962/3.
Codex Alimentarius
Codex was created by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Health Organization (WHO) of the United Nations (UN). According to the Codex official site:
The Codex Alimentarius Commission was created in 1963 by FAO and WHO to develop food standards, guidelines and related texts such as codes of practice under the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. The main purposes of this Programme are protecting health of the consumers and ensuring fair trade practices in the food trade, and promoting coordination of all food standards work undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental organizations.(Codex Alimentarius)
The Codex Alimentarius Commission implements the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Program, the purpose of which is to protect the health of consumers and to ensure fair practices in the food trade.(Organic Consumers)
In other words, under the auspices of “protecting the public health and ensuring fair trade practices,” the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Program is implemented by the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The FAO and WHO set the standards, and the Codex Commission implements them. All members of the UN are obligated to comply with these standards.
So, what does Codex have to do with fluoridation, and just how could a mass fluoridation program be implemented without our knowledge or consent under Codex guidelines?
The answer is – WHO has already determined that fluoride should be included in our food and water supply because it is “necessary for public health:”
Many countries that are currently undergoing nutrition transition do not have adequate exposure to fluoride. There should be promotion of adequate fluoride exposure via appropriate vehicles, for example, affordable toothpaste, water, salt and milk. It is the responsibility of national health authorities to ensure implementation of feasible fluoride programmes for their country. Research into the outcome of alternative community fluoride programmes should be encouraged.
Here is the reference document:
A 1994 World Health Organization expert committee suggested a level of fluoride from 0.5 to 1.0 mg/L (milligrams per litre) (Wikipedia)
Currently, compliance with WHO’s directive of the fluoridation of water, salt, and milk varies from country to country. Water fluoridation has been introduced by varying degrees in many countries. View each country HERE. An interesting fact to note is that drinking water is not fluoridated in any part of Germany. Is it mere coincidence that one of the founders of the Codex Alimentarius Commission just happened to be in charge of the fluoridation program at Auschwitz, and that Germany is somehow exempt from fluoridation? Or, maybe they know something that we don’t.
The Public Fluoridation Deception
Most are aware of the water fluoridation program that has been foisted upon us as a “treatment for dental disease” and cure for cavities. This is proven propaganda and has been disputed in the EPA’s own documents, which list fluoride as a contaminant, as well as in countless other professional publications. Yet, the mass water fluoridation program continues, causing food and liquids that use this contaminated water to contain fluoride also. According to our own CDC Department of Health and Human Services:
fluoridated water is diffused throughout the population as residents of non-fluoridated communities increasingly consume foods and beverages processed and bottled in fluoridated communities. Thus, many individuals residing in non-fluoridated communities have benefited from fluoridation policies.”
This is called “Building Capacity to Fluoridate.” (CDC)
So you see, our country is complying with the UN/WHO/FAO/Codex fluoridation policy and we the people don’t even know it. Just like the prisoners at Auschwitz most likely didn’t know that they were being subjected to a fluoridation program and being poisoned with their water until it was too late. If food is produced using fluoridated water, then it contains fluoride. All you have to do is contaminate the water, and the food issue takes care of itself.
The following chart shows just how “in compliance” the U.S. is: Percent of U.S. Population Receiving Fluoride
And if some of you are still wondering if we are really following Codex mandates, wonder no more. Many do not know this, but ‘Codex’ already consists of around 300 official food standards, some of which have been in ‘global effect’ since as long ago as 1966 (Rath Foundation). So it shouldn’t come as a big surprise to find out that fluoridation is just another facet of this program. Here is a list of foods from the Codex Alimentarius site.
The Monsanto Connection
Monsanto, Cargill, BASF, Bayer, and Aventis (or I.G. Farben) are all in partnership under the banner of Crop Science. They are partnered in various ways, such as:
Monsanto and Cargill are in a 50/50 joint venture partnership. Monsanto makes the seeds, which make the crops, and Cargill makes the fertilizer. Cargill also just happens to be responsible for 70-75% of the hazardous waste hydrofluosilicic acid used in fluoridation programs. (Fluoride Action Network)
The U.S. government considers the basic chemical composition of hydrofluosilicic acid, a toxic waste, and fluoride to be the same when dumped in the water supply:
Due to the obviously intriguing aspect of this “waste disposal policy”, there has naturally been quite a bit of curiosity concerning the safety of this public health practice. Apparently, however, there are no government safety studies currently available on fluosilicic acid. This is because the government is basing their fluoridation policy on the assumption that there is no chemical difference, after dilution into the water supply, between pharmaceutical grade sodium fluoride and the industrial grade hydrofluosilicic acid.(Fluoride Action Network)
Oregon, which is very low on the compliance list with only 19.4% fluoridation, is attempting to increase that level considerably. In 2007, HB 3099, the Oregon water fluoridation bill, would have required community water suppliers serving more than 10,000 people to “optimally fluoridate.” Fortunately, it was not passed. If passed, it would have increased the fluoride levels in Oregon to 68%. Good for Cargill and Monsanto, bad for us.
Reasons Not to Fluoridate
The following partial list is compiled from Fluoride Alert:
Fluoride is a cumulative poison.
Chromosome damage
Kidneys
Brain
Alzheimers
Rats dosed prenatally demonstrated hyperactive behavior. Those dosed postnatally demonstrated hypoactivity (i.e. under activity or “couch potato” syndrome)
Lowering of IQ
Early onset of puberty
Affects thyroid gland
Arthritis
Cancer
Infertility
Harms bones – brittle
It is up to us to stand up and say no to mass water fluoridation. If someone wants fluoride, then let him/her take it. I have no problem with that. But to forcibly administer this poison to an unsuspecting and unwilling populace without prior knowledge or consent is criminal. We are not Auschwitz prisoners….yet.
© 2010 Barbara H. Peterson

HEALTH CONCERNS ABOUT DAIRY PRODUCTS

Originally posted within the mikiverse, August 11, 2010.

Many Americans, including some vegetarians, still consume substantial amounts of dairy products—and government policies still promote them—despite scientific evidence that questions their health benefits and indicates their potential health risks.

Osteoporosis
Milk’s main selling point is calcium, and milk-drinking is touted for building strong bones in children and preventing osteoporosis in older persons. However, clinical research shows that dairy products have little or no benefit for bones. A 2005 review published in Pediatrics showed that milk consumption does not improve bone integrity in children.1 Similarly, the Harvard Nurses’ Health Study,2which followed more than 72,000 women for 18 years, showed no protective effect of increased milk consumption on fracture risk. While calcium is important for bone health, studies show that increasing consumption beyond approximately 600 mg per day—amounts that are easily achieved without dairy products or calcium supplements—does not improve bone integrity.2

In studies of children and adults, exercise has been found to have a major effect on bone density.3-5

You can decrease your risk of osteoporosis by reducing sodium and animal protein intake in the diet,6-9 increasing intake of fruits and vegetables,9,10 exercising,4,11 and ensuring adequate calcium intake from plant foods such as kale, broccoli, and other leafy green vegetables and beans. You can also use calcium-fortified products such as breakfast cereals and juices, although these products provide more concentrated calcium than is necessary.

Fat Content and Cardiovascular Disease
Dairy products—including cheese, ice cream, milk, butter, and yogurt—contribute significant amounts of cholesterol and saturated fat to the diet.12 Diets high in fat and saturated fat can increase the risk of heart disease, among other serious health problems. A low-fat vegetarian diet that eliminates dairy products, in combination with exercise, smoking cessation, and stress management, can not only prevent heart disease, but may also reverse it.13,14 Non-fat dairy products are available; however, they pose other health risks as noted below.

Cancer
Prostate and breast cancers have been linked to consumption of dairy products, presumably related to increases in a compound called insulin-like growth factor (IGF-I).15 IGF-I is found in cow’s milk and has been shown to occur in increased levels in the blood of individuals consuming dairy products on a regular basis.16 Other nutrients that increase IGF-I are also found in cow’s milk.

Case-control studies in diverse populations have shown a strong and consistent association between serum IGF-I concentrations and prostate cancer risk.17 One study showed that men who had the highest levels of IGF-I had more than four times the risk of prostate cancer compared with those who had the lowest levels.18 Other findings show that prostate cancer risk was elevated with increased consumption of low-fat milk, suggesting that too much dairy calcium could be a potential threat to prostate health.19,20

Ovarian cancer may also be related to the consumption of dairy products. The milk sugar lactose is broken down in the body into another sugar, galactose. Research suggests that the dairy sugar galactose might be toxic to ovarian cells.21 In a study conducted in Sweden, consumption of lactose and dairy products was positively linked to ovarian cancer.22 A similar study, the Iowa Women’s Health Study, found that women who consumed more than one glass of milk per day had a 73 percent greater chance of ovarian cancer than women who drank less than one glass per day.23

Lactose Intolerance
Lactose intolerance is common among many populations, affecting approximately 95 percent of Asian Americans, 74 percent of Native Americans, 70 percent of African Americans, 53 percent of Mexican Americans, and 15 percent of Caucasians.24 Symptoms, which include gastrointestinal distress, diarrhea, and flatulence, occur because these individuals do not have the enzyme lactase that digests the milk sugar lactose. For those who can digest lactose, its breakdown products are two simple sugars: glucose and galactose. Nursing children have active enzymes that break down galactose. As we age, many of us lose much of this capacity.25 Additionally, along with unwanted symptoms, milk-drinkers also put themselves at risk for development of other chronic diseases and ailments.

Vitamin D
Individuals often drink milk in order to obtain vitamin D in their diet, unaware that they can receive vitamin D through other sources. The natural source of vitamin D is sunlight. Five to fifteen minutes of sun exposure to the arms and legs or the hands, face, and arms can be enough to meet the body’s requirements for vitamin D, depending on the individual’s skin tone.26 Darker skin requires longer exposure to the sun in order to obtain adequate levels of vitamin D. In colder climates during the winter months the sun may not be able to provide adequate vitamin D. During this time the diet must be able to provide vitamin D. Fortified cereals, grains, bread, orange juice, and soy- or rice milk are healthful foods that provide vitamin D. All common multiple vitamins also provide vitamin D.

Contaminants
Milk contains contaminants that range from pesticides to drugs. Milk naturally contains hormones and growth factors produced within a cow’s body. In addition, synthetic hormones such as recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) are commonly used in dairy cows to increase the production of milk.27 Because treated cows are producing quantities of milk nature never intended, the end result can be mastitis, or inflammation of the mammary glands. Treatment of this condition requires the use of antibiotics, and antibiotic traces have occasionally been found in samples of milk and other dairy products. Pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and dioxins are other examples of contaminants found in milk. These toxins do not readily leave the body and can eventually build to harmful levels that may affect the immune and reproductive systems. The central nervous system can also be affected. Moreover, PCBs and dioxins have also been linked to cancer.28

Milk Proteins and Diabetes
Insulin-dependent (type 1 or childhood-onset) diabetes is linked to consumption of dairy products.29 A 2001 Finnish study of 3,000 infants with genetically increased risk for developing diabetes showed that early introduction of cow’s milk increased susceptibility to type 1 diabetes.30

Health Concerns of Infants and Children
Milk proteins, milk sugar, fat, and saturated fat in dairy products pose health risks for children and encourage the development of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that infants below one year of age not be given whole cow’s milk,31 as iron deficiency is more likely on a dairy-rich diet. Cow’s milk products are very low in iron.32 If dairy products become a major part of one’s diet, iron deficiency is more likely. Colic is an additional concern with milk consumption. Up to 28 percent of infants suffer from colic during the first month of life.33 Pediatricians learned long ago that cow’s milk was often the reason. We now know that breastfeeding mothers can have colicky babies if the mothers consume cow’s milk. The cow’s antibodies can pass through the mother’s bloodstream, into her breast milk, and to the baby.34,35 Additionally, food allergies appear to be common results of cow’s milk consumption, particularly in children.36,37 Cow’s milk consumption has also been linked to chronic constipation in children. Researchers suggested that milk consumption resulted in perianal sores and severe pain on defecation, leading to constipation.38

Milk and dairy products are not necessary in the diet and can, in fact, be harmful to health. It is best to consume a healthful diet of grains, fruits, vegetables, legumes, and fortified foods including cereals and juices. These nutrient-dense foods can help you meet your calcium, potassium, riboflavin, and vitamin D requirements with ease—and without health risks.

References
1. Lanou AJ, Berkow SE, Barnard ND. Calcium, dairy products, and bone health in children and young adults: a reevaluation of the evidence. Pediatrics. 2005;115(3):736-43.
2. Feskanich D, Willett WC, Colditz GA. Calcium, vitamin D, milk consumption, and hip fractures: a prospective study among postmenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003;77(2):504-11.
3. Lunt M, Masaryk P, Scheidt-Nave C, et al. The Effects of Lifestyle, Dietary Dairy Intake and Diabetes on Bone Density and Vertebral Deformity Prevalence: The EVOS Study. Osteoporos Int. 2001;12:688-698.
4. Prince R, Devine A, Dick I, et al. The effects of calcium supplementation (milk powder or tablets) and exercise on bone mineral density in postmenopausal women. J Bone Miner Res. 1995;10:1068-75.
5. Lloyd T, Beck TJ, Lin HM, et al. Modifiable determinants of bone status in young women. Bone. 2002;30(2):416-21.
6. Finn SC. The skeleton crew: is calcium enough? J Women’s Health. 1998;7(1):31-6.
7. Nordin CBE. Calcium and osteoporosis. Nutrition. 1997;3(7/8):664-86.
8. Reid DM, New SA. Nutritional influences on bone mass. Proceed Nutr Soc. 1997;56:977-87.
9. Lin P, Ginty F, Appel L, et al. The DASH diet and sodium reduction improve markers of bone turnover and calcium metabolism in adults. J Nutr. 2001;133:3130–3136.
10. Tucker KL, Hannan MR, Chen H, Cupples LA, Wilson PWF, Kiel DP. Potassium, magnesium, and fruit and vegetable intakes are associated with greater bone mineral density in elderly men and women. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;69:727-36.
11. Going S, Lohman T, Houtkooper L, et al. Effects of exercise on bone mineral density in calcium-replete postmenopausal women with and without hormone replacement therapy, Osteoporos Int. 2003;14(8):637-43.
12. Warensjo E, Jansson JH, Berglund L, et al. Estimated intake of milk fat is negatively associated with cardiovascular risk factors and does not increase the risk of a first acute myocardial infarction. Br J Nutr. 2004;91:635-42.
13. Szeto YT, Kwok TC, Benzie IF. Effects of a long-term vegetarian diet on biomarkers of antioxidants status and cardiovascular disease risk. Nutrition. 2004;20:863-6.
14. Ornish D, Brown SE, Scherwitz LW, et al. Can lifestyle changes reverse coronary heart disease? Lancet. 1990;336:129-33.
15. Voskuil DW, Vrieling A, van’t Veer LJ, Kampman E, Rookus MA. The insulin-like growth factor system in cancer prevention: potential of dietary intervention strategies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:195-203.
16. Cadogan J, Eastell R, Jones N, Barker ME. Milk intake and bone mineral acquisition in adolescent girls: randomised, controlled intervention trial. BMJ. 1997;315:1255-60.
17. Cohen P. Serum insulin-like growth factor-I levels and prostate cancer risk—interpreting the evidence. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90:876-9.
18. Chan JM, Stampfer MJ, Giovannucci E, et al. Plasma insulin-like growth factor-1 and prostate cancer risk: a prospective study. Science. 1998;279:563-5.
19. Chan JM, Stampfer MJ, Ma J, Gann PH, Gaziano JM, Giovannucci E. Dairy products, calcium, and prostate cancer risk in the Physicians' Health Study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;74:549-54.
20. Tseng M, Breslow RA, Graubard BI, Ziegler RG. Dairy, calcium and vitamin D intakes and prostate cancer risk in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Epidemiologic Follow-up Study cohort. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005;81:1147-54.
21. Cramer DW, Greenberg ER, Titus-Ernstoff L, et al. A case-control study of galactose consumption and metabolism in relation to ovarian cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2000;9:95-101.
22. Larsson SC, Bergkvist L, Wolk A. Milk and lactose intakes and ovarian cancer risk in the Swedish Mammography Cohort. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;80:1353-7.
23. Kushi LH, Mink PJ, Folsom AR, et al. Prospective study of diet and ovarian cancer. Am J Epidemiol. 1999;149:21-31.
24. Bertron P, Barnard ND, Mills M. Racial bias in federal nutrition policy, part I: the public health implications of variations in lactase persistence. J Natl Med Assoc. 1999;91:151-7.
25. Swallow DM. Genetics of lactase persistence and lactose intolerance. Annu Rev Genet. 2003;37:197-219.
26. Holick M. The vitamin D epidemic and its health consequences. J Nutr. 2005;135:2739S-48S.
27. Outwater JL, Nicholson A, Barnard N. Dairy products and breast cancer: the IGF-1, estrogen, and bGH hypothesis. Med Hypothesis. 1997;48:453-61.
28. Baars AJ, Bakker MI, Baumann RA, et al. Dioxins, dioxin-like PCBs and non-dioxin-like PCBs in foodstuffs: occurrence and dietary intake in the Netherlands. Toxicol Lett. 2004;151:51-61.
29. Saukkonen T, Virtanen SM, Karppinen M, et al. Significance of cow’s milk protein antibodies as risk factor for childhood IDDM: interaction with dietary cow’s milk intake and HLA-DQB1 genotype. Childhood Dibetes in Finland Study Group. Dibetologia. 1998;41:72-8.
30. Kimpimaki T, Erkkola M, Korhonen S, et al. Short-term exclusive breastfeeding predisposes young children with increased genetic risk of Type I diabetes to progressive beta-cell autoimmunity. Diabetologia. 2001;44:63–69.
31. Gartner LM, Morton J, Lawrence RA, et al; American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Breastfeeding. Breastfeeding and the use of human milk. Pediatrics. 2005;115(2):496-506.
32. Pennington JAT, Douglass JS. Bowes and Church’s Food Values of Portions Commonly Used. 18th ed. Baltimore, Md: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.
33. Lucassen PL, Assendelft WJ, van Eijk JT, Gubbels JW, Douwes AC, van Geldrop WJ. Systematic review of the occurrence of infantile colic in the community. Arch Dis Child. 2001;84:398–403.
34. Jarvinen KM, Makinen-Kiljunen S, Suomalainen H. Cow’s milk challenge through human milk evoked immune responses in infants with cow’s milk allergy. J Pediatr. 1999;135:506-12.
35. Paronen J, Bjorksten B, Hattevig G, Akerblom HK, Vaarala O. Effect of maternal diet during lactation on development of bovine insulin-binding antibodies in children at risk for allergy. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2000;106:302-306.
36. Sampson HA. Food allergy. Part 1: immunopathogenesis and clinical disorders. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004;113:805–819.
37. Host A. Frequency of cow’s milk allergy in childhood. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2002;89(6 Suppl 1):33-7.
38. Iacono G, Cavataio F, Montalto G, et al. Intolerance of cow’s milk and chronic constipation in children. N Engl J Med. 1998;339(16):1100-4.

THAI PUMPKIN COCONUT SOUP VEGAN, GLUTEN & LACTOSE FREE

Originally posted within the mikiverse, August 11, 2010.
By ,
In Thailand, pumpkin and coconut milk are commonly paired up to make a variety of soups, curries, and even sweet dishes. Here they are combined with a lightly curried soup that makes for a wonderful vegetarian/vegan entree - similar to those served at Thai or Vietnamese restaurants throughout North America. The addition of lemongrass makes it particularly healthy - great for chasing away cold & flu bugs. This soup is wonderful on its own, or serve it like they do in Thailand: with plain steamed rice or noodles on the side. Enjoy!

Prep Time: 15 minutes

Cook Time: 10 minutes

Total Time: 25 minutes

Ingredients:

  • 6 cups good-tasting faux chicken or vegetable stock (SERVES 2 as a main entree, 4-6 as an appetizer)
  • 1/3 to 1/2 can thick coconut milk (preferably not 'lite')
  • 4 Tbsp. minced fresh lemongrass (see below), OR frozen-prepared (available at Asian stores)
  • 3 kaffir lime leaves, left whole (available fresh or frozen at Asian stores)
  • 3 cups pumpkin or squash, peeled and cut into bite-size chunks
  • 2 cups yam, peeled and cut into chunks
  • 1-2 cups soft tofu, sliced into cubes (or substitute chickpeas)
  • 1 shallot, minced, OR 1/4 cup minced purple onion
  • 3 cloves garlic, minced
  • 1 thumb-size piece galangal or ginger, grated or sliced thinly into matchsticks
  • 1-2 fresh red chilies, sliced, OR 1-2 tsp. Thai chili sauce, OR 1/4 to 1/2 tsp. dried crushed chili
  • 1/2 tsp. turmeric
  • 1/2 tsp. regular chili powder
  • 3/4 tsp. ground coriander
  • 1 tsp. ground cumin
  • 4 Tbsp. soy sauce (use wheat-free for gluten-free diets)
  • 1 tsp. brown sugar
  • 2 Tbsp. fresh-squeezed lime juice
  • 1-2 generous handfuls baby spinach, washed
  • 1/2 cup fresh basil + 1/2 cup fresh coriander for toppings

Preparation:

For more on how to buy and cook with lemongrass, see: All About Lemongrass: Buying, Preparing, and Cooking with Lemongrass.

For a non-vegetarian version of this soup, see: Thai Pumpkin Coconut Soup Recipe.

  1. Place stock in a pot over high heat. If making your stock from cubes or powder, be sure to make it strong-tasting - this will give you the best soup! Now add the lemongrass (include the leftover stalk pieces if using fresh lemongrass), plus the kaffir lime leaves, shallot, garlic, galangal or ginger, and chili. Bring to a boil.
  2. Add the pumpkin (or squash) and yam. Reduce heat slightly and gently boil for 6-7 minutes.
  3. While the soup is cooking, add the spices/flavorings, stirring with each addition: turmeric, chili powder, ground coriander, ground cumin, soy sauce, brown sugar, and lime juice.
  4. When pumpkin and yam are soft enough to eat, reduce heat to low. Now stir in the coconut milk (start with 1/3 can and increase to 1/2 can if you want it creamier or less spicy).
  5. Stir well and taste-test the soup for salt and spice, adding more soy sauce or a little salt if not salty or flavorful enough (this will depend on the taste of your original stock). Add more lime juice if it happens to be too salty or sweet. If it's too sour for your liking, add a little more sugar; also adjust the spice level by adding more chili or chili sauce. If too spicy, add more coconut milk.
  6. Just before serving, add the soft tofu and spinach and gently stir it into the soup (the spinach will wilt instantly and the soft tofu will heat up in seconds). Portion out into bowls and top with the fresh basil and coriander. Note that this soup can be served as is, or with rice or noodles. In Thailand, it is served with rice on the side, each person adding their own directly to the soup. Enjoy!

Other Vegetables: Other veggies that can be added to this soup include: carrots, chopped red or green bell pepper, broccoli, mushrooms, and bok choy.