Friday, September 14, 2012 by: Helmut Beierbeck
(NaturalNews) All of us, identical twins excepted, are genetically unique. Of course, everyone’s genes encode all the proteins needed for life, but the sum total of all our biochemical processes varies considerably from person to person. One of the consequences of this genetically determined biochemical individuality is that different people have quantitatively different needs for the nutritionally important minerals, vitamins, essential amino acids, etc.
In his book, Biochemical Individuality, biochemist and nutrition pioneer Roger Williams showed that requirements for any given nutrient may vary from person to person by a factor of five or more. Given the large number of genes affecting metabolic processes, it is likely that all of us have at least some nutritional needs that fall well outside the so-called normal range. These exceptional needs might be due to differences in digestion, absorption, excretion, enzyme patterns or other causes.
Biochemical individuality may well explain why clinical trials fail to find nutrients effective in disease prevention. These trials typically include participants chosen at random and test nutrients in amounts judged adequate for most people. Participants with average needs for the nutrient in question may have that need met by their diet plus any supplements they might take on their own; for them, the ‘therapy’ confers no further benefit. For people with exceptional needs, on the other hand, diet plus daily supplements, plus “therapy” might still not be enough to reach therapeutically effective nutrient levels – the levels needed to ensure proper functioning.
Essential nutrients are substances that the body cannot make, or cannot make in adequate amounts. Given the sad state of today’s diet, it is more than likely that many of our chronic “lifestyle” diseases are the result of dietary shortcomings and will; therefore, respond to dietary interventions. Unmet nutritional needs will sooner or later lead to health problems.
The science of nutrition has made tremendous strides since Williams’s book was published. It is now recognized that the gene-nutrient connection is a two-way street. Not only do nutrient requirements depend on genetic individuality but nutrients in turn are crucial for genome stability; they act as antioxidants and co-factors for enzymes involved in DNA metabolism and repair. In fact, genome damage caused by even moderate micronutrient deficiencies rivals damage from environmental factors like chemical carcinogens or radiation.
The sharp drop in the cost of gene sequencing has now made it possible to screen individual patients for biomarkers of DNA vulnerability to micronutrient deficiencies, prescribe the appropriate nutritional therapy, and assess the effect of that therapy on DNA stability. Instead of diagnosing and treating diseases caused by genome damage, one can identify and nutritionally prevent the most fundamental initiating cause of developmental and degenerative disease-genome damage itself.
Of course, we still need to take good care of ourselves or all the gene therapy will be for naught.
Roger J. Williams, Biochemical individuality, John Wiley & Sons, 1963
Bland J, The future of nutritional pharmacology, Altern Ther Health Med 2008;14(5):12-14
Fenech M, Genome health nutrigenomics and nutrigenetics – diagnosis and nutritional treatment of genome damage on an individual basis, Food Chem Toxicol 2008;46(4):1365-1370.
About the author:
Helmut Beierbeck has a science background and a strong interest in all scientific aspects of health, nutrition, medicine, weight loss, or any other topic related to wellness. You can follow his ruminations on his blog http://healthcomments.infoand leave comments on this or any other health-related topic.
Mayor Bloomberg’s soda ban will cause New Yorkers to poison themselves with more aspartame
Sept 14, 2012
Ah, the hilarity of the nanny state knows no bounds, it seems. Especially not in New York City, where Mayor Bloomberg oversaw a large-sized soda ban that just became law. The really hilarious part of the law? It does not apply to aspartame-laced “diet sodas” which, by any honest measure, are far more toxic to your health than regular sodas made with HFCS.
HFCS may cause diabetes and obesity, but aspartame causes neurological damage and early-onset Alzheimer’s. But that’s just what New York needs, it seems: A wave of crabby soda-drinking senior citizens who are half blind and can’t remember where their apartment building is located. (Or has that already happened?)
That the New York city health board actually thinks diet soda is healthier than regular soda is a sad, sad commentary on the state of nutritional ignorance in NYC. So under this nanny state plan, citizens will be pushed to consume more neurotoxic aspartame — gee, what a brilliant plan! Why not ban vitamins, too, and just force everybody to take a daily chemotherapy pill and call it a “public health initiative?”
Soda prohibition will only create a new black market
I’m mesmerized by the arrogance of nanny state governments that think they can alter reality via decree. Bloomberg and the entire city health board somehow believes they will magically make people healthier by taking away their choice. So instead of actually educating New Yorkers about the dangers of HFCS and phosphoric acid — two of the primary health-destroying ingredients in sodas — they pull a nanny state / police state fast one and criminalize the selling of those sodas.
This, of course, will only create a black market in high-capacity sodas. So now, instead of people buying their sodas at legitimate establishments with relative compliance with public health regulations, they’re going to be buying “contraband” sodas in dark alleys where crime runs rampant. This is the upshot of all such prohibition laws by any government: economic transactions that used to be above the board are now driven underground. (Marijuana, see?)
Before long, tyrants like Bloomberg will dutifully announce “there is a crime wave of illicit soda sales taking place!” and therefore the city needs to create a soda prohibition task force to hunt down soda sellers and infiltrate their operations.
Yep, it’s time to declare the “War on Soda” … kind of like the War on Drugs, except even more of a waste of taxpayer money.
Then we’ll see the NYPD hiring “undercover soda buyers” to infiltrate soda selling establishments, posing as regular customers. They’ll ask for — OMG! — a “13 oz. soda” and see if the vendor actually serves it up. If they do, they’re arrested on the spot and processed as a soda criminal. Because, you know, they’re obviously a danger to society and need to be taken off the streets, right?
You see, the problem with creating new laws is that you then criminalize an entire segment of the population; then you need law enforcers to hunt those people down and “process” them with fines or criminal penalties. So instead of gaining public health, the city actually loses public freedom and creates a new crime enforcement overhead paid by taxpayers.
A nation with the most laws has the least freedom
The more laws you create in any jurisdiction, the less freedom you have remaining. Laws always have good intentions, of course, but they also have unintended consequences (such as driving people to drink more aspartame).
Such is the problem with trying to micromanage everybody from a centralized government: You can never successfully shape their behavior to your liking because people are individuals and they want to make up their own minds about things. Even if they do stupid things like drinking a Big Gulp soda sweetened with genetically modified corn syrup tainted with mercury. Yeah, it’s STUPID beyond belief, but it’s still their choice.
With this soda ban, Mayor Bloomberg is treating the citizens of New York like stupid little children. Or even like house pets. “Bad soda drinker! Bad!” It is a silly, dignity-crushing stance for any government to take, and it only breeds contempt among the People who increasingly see their local government “rulers” as power-hungry maniacs trying to micro-manage every little detail of their private lives.
What’s next? Is Bloomberg gonna pull a Singapore and ban chewing gum, too?
Or how about banning “dirty thoughts?” That could be a real windfall for the prison industry system.
Mark my words: In a year, New York’s obesity problem will be WORSE
The really hilarious realization in all this is that banning large sodas won’t make a bit of difference in the city’s obesity problem. A year from now — or five — you’re going to have even more cases of obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer.
And why is that? Because most of these diseases are caused by nutrient deficiencies. Banning diet soda does nothing to get people more vitamin D, selenium, zinc or magnesium — the things that help prevent chronic degenerative disease. Diabetics, in particular, usually lack chromium, magnesium and vitamin D.
Banning people from buying large sodas does not magically make people take up exercise or consume fresh fruits and vegetables. You can’t legislate people to want to be healthy, especially when half the people writing and passing these laws are obese, cancer-ridden desk jockeys in desperate need of a colon cleanse.
Look, society is SICK. Disease is rampant. The food supply is toxic. People are eating themselves to death with GMO, HFCS, MSG, aspartame and more. But that’s mostly because huge food corporations dominate the legislation process and the poisons they put into the foods never get questioned.
Mayor Bloomberg doesn’t question aspartame, MSG or GMO. Neither did Michelle Obama with her newly-release grocery shopping guide. There’s never any real talk about the real poisons in your food. Instead, it’s just this watered-down nanny state mish-mash of pure political bunk.
I don’t drink soda, but that’s because I’m an intelligent person who doesn’t wish to poison my body with phosphoric acid and mercury-laced HFCS. I don’t need some silly government mandate to tell me that soda is poison. That should be obvious to anyone with half a brain.
I also don’t smoke marijuana, don’t eat bacon and don’t drink coffee. But again, that’s my choice. I don’t believe any one group of people has the right to tell another group of people what they can eat, drink or smoke. So why do we bow down, lick boots and surrender our freedoms over these things to the government?
Folks, if you live in NYC, you need to leave anyway. Not due to Bloomberg’s silly nanny state initiatives, but because the city will become a death zone in the coming economic collapse. NYC is the absolutely last place you want to be when it all comes down.
Maybe Bloomberg should just ban financial collapses, huh? That’s the ticket!
Pet monkey that was routinely fed Frosted Flakes lashes out and attacks woman
Authorities became aware of the case in August, when a woman from Paso Robles, California, sought treatment at a hospital after being severely bitten on her arm and fingers several times. According to the hospital, it was not the first time she had been bitten. After treating the woman, the hospital reported her to the San Luis Obispo County division of Animal Services.
Upon investigating, officials identified the monkey as a 22-year-old Javan macaque named Jennaeve. The animal was being kept in the space far too small for her (a dog kennel) inside a trailer occupied by the injured woman and her boyfriend, and fed a diet consisting only of junk food.
Macaques are classified as wild animals under California law, and are illegal as pets. Their bite can do damage similar to that of a dog.
“This kind of animal is never meant to be kept domestically. It is illegal,” said Animal Services Manager Eric Anderson.
“And that is entirely the wrong kind of diet.”
Quarantine and investigation
Jennaeve is now undergoing a 60-day quarantine under the supervision of Zoo to You, an organization with facilities for rescued animals. It is unclear what will happen to her upon her release.
The monkey’s poor diet and living conditions caused her to develop obesity (upon being taken into custody, and she weighed twice as much as she should) as well as tumors on her neck, shoulder and rump. She has been examined by a local vet and is being treated for her various health conditions.
Zoo to You director David Jackson said that Jennaeve’s health is improving and that she is adjusting well to her surroundings. She has shown no signs of aggression, but has engaged in a few social activities.
“Like anybody, she is a little overwhelmed being in a new place surrounded by new people,” Jackson said. “But she is getting the proper diet of fruits, vegetables and monkey chow, sunlight, room to roam and a place to hide and climb.”
Officers from the Department of Fish and Game are attempting to figure out who the illicit owner of the monkey is, so that they can be charged with unlawful possession of a restricted species and billed for the quarantine’s costs resulting from the monkey-inflicted bites.
Local media reported that the woman who was bitten had been caring for the monkey and lived in the trailer where it was being confined, but that authorities suspects her boyfriend of being Jennaeve’s official “owner” and of being the person who illegally purchased her.
Anyone convicted of unlawfully possessing a restricted species can be sentenced to up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.
According to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), the exotic pet trade is the third most profitable criminal enterprise in the world, exceeded only by arms and drug trafficking. PETA advises against keeping wild animals as pets because in many cases, the animals have been “gathered” in ecologically damaging ways and smuggled out of the wild under abusive conditions. Because wild animals have different needs than domestic animals such as dogs and cats, uninformed “pet owners” often subject exotic animals to even further neglect and abuse. Many such people are then injured by the abused and frightened animals.
McDonald’s to post calories for its menu
By Agence France-Presse
Wednesday, September 12, 2012 20:37 EDT
WASHINGTON — First they began offering salad, then they added fruit. On Wednesday, McDonald’s announced it would put something else on its menu to help customers watching their waistlines: calorie counts.
The fast food giant said that starting next week, it will begin listing calorie information at its more than 14,000 restaurants and drive-through windows across the United States.
“At McDonald’s, we recognize customers want to know more about the nutrition content of the food and beverages they order,” said Jan Fields, president of McDonald’s USA.
“As a company that has provided nutrition information for more than 30 years, we are pleased to add to the ways we make nutrition information available to our customers and employees,” she said in statement.
McDonald’s over the years has come under fire for offering too few healthy menu items at a time when obesity, the number one public health scourge in the United States, afflicts one in three Americans.
The company on Wednesday announced additions to its menu that it said would give consumers more wholesome choices, without mentioning the obesity issue as such.
America’s most popular restaurant, McDonald’s serves more than 25 million customers every day.
The company said the new menu offerings would include more fruit and vegetables such as blueberries and cucumbers in season, and that it would also add more grilled chicken items.
But the changes coincide with additions to the chain’s most calorie-laden fare with menu items such as the Angus Bacon and Cheese hamburger, which serves up a hefty 790 calories.
McDonald’s also this year began offering its mammoth, super-sized soft drinks for the same $1 price as its smallest beverages, at a time when sugary beverages have been fingered as a main culprit for everything from America’s increasing girth to an epidemic of diabetes.
Nevertheless, food and nutrition experts were encouraged by the decision to post the calorie count of its menu, although some said they suspected they were prompted by an awareness that mandatory guidelines from the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will soon go into effect making such postings mandatory for most large retail food establishments.
“My guess is that they are doing this because they think they will have to as soon as the FDA rules come out,” Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition and public health at New York University, told AFP.
“I want to see how they do it before breaking into applause,” she said.
Scotts Miracle-Gro busted for illegally using pesticides on its bird seed, falsifying documents and killing wild birds
Earlier in the summer, consumers from at least six U.S. states banded together to file a class-action lawsuit against Scotts after the company admitted to lacing several of its bird seed products with illegal insecticides, and knowingly selling these tainted products to consumers for more than two years (http://www.naturalnews.com/036253_Miracle-Gro_poison_chemicals.html). The two insecticides in question were Storcide II (chlorpyrifos-methyl) and Actellic 5E (pirimiphos-methyl).
Neither of these two insecticides had ever been approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for use in bird foods. Storcide II, in fact, is specifically labeled to warn users that it is highly toxic to birds, making it wholly unfit for use in bird feed. After word got out that the two chemicals were being used on the company’s Country Pride, Morning Song, Scotts Songbird Selections, and Scotts Wild Bird Food brands of bird seed, Scotts voluntarily recalled these products back in 2008.
“In the plea argument, Scotts admitted that it applied the pesticides Actellic 5E and Storcide II to its bird food products even though EPA had prohibited this use,” said the EPA in a recent press release about the judgment. “Scotts admitted that it used these pesticides contrary to EPA directive and in spite of the warning label appearing on all Storcide II containers stating, ‘Storcide II is extremely toxic to fish and toxic to birds and other wildlife.’”
Scotts also pleaded guilty to falsifying pesticide registration documents, distributing pesticides with misleading and unapproved labels, and distributing unregistered pesticides. The EPA had learned, after all, that a former Scotts worker manipulated key company documents back in 2008 so the company could avoid having to gain approval for the use of certain chemicals in its products.
In a recent press release, Scotts CEO Jim Hagedorn denied that his company had any knowledge of such illegal activity while it was taking place, but apologized for it anyway. Hagedorn insists that this indicting situation is atypical of Scotts’ core company values, and that the company has “learned a lot” from it.
Sources for this article include:
This fact may come as a surprise to many who have bought into the idea that eating more fresh produce is automatically beneficial for health, regardless of how that produce was grown. Thinking that they are doing their bodies a favor, millions of Americans have incorporated conventional fruits and vegetables into their everyday diets, not realizing that the resulting cumulative effect of fluoride exposure from these foods could be harming their health.
Many food crops uptake fluoride chemicals from water, soil
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), nearly 75 percent of the U.S. population is being forcibly medicated with fluoride chemicals via their water supplies. This means that a significant percentage of U.S. crops are also irrigated using this same fluoridated water, particularly in the “Bread Belt” states, many of which are almost entirely fluoridated. (http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/statistics/2010stats.htm)
While not all crops uptake fluoride from water in the same amounts, many absorb significant amounts of fluoride through their root systems every time they are watered. Tea plants, for instance, are among the worst when it comes to absorbing fluoride from soil and water, and storing it in their leaves (http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/phytochemicals/tea/). Grapes are another crop that tends to accumulate fluoride in high levels as well.
According to data collected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for its National Fluoride Database of Selected Beverages and Foods, fresh fruits and vegetables have relatively low levels of fluoride compared to what is found in fluoridated water, reconstituted juices, dried fruit, and other sources (http://www.fluoridealert.org/content/fresh_foods/). But levels can vary, and particularly in the case of conventional produce, fluoridated pesticides and herbicides can add to overall fluoride exposure and intake levels.
Fluoridated pesticide, herbicide residues often lurk on conventional food
Because of its extreme toxicity, fluoride is often added to pesticides and herbicides in order to protect conventional crops from insect damage and disease. But just like with fluoridated irrigation water, fluoridated crop chemicals often absorb directly into plants, or at the very least, linger on the skins of the fruits and vegetables they produce, which adds to their fluoride toxicity.
Sulfuryl fluoride is one such pesticide that is commonly used to treat conventional cereal grains, dried fruit, tree nuts, cocoa beans, coffee beans, and other foods. Though the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is said to currently be in the process of phasing out the use of sulfuryl fluoride (http://www.ewg.org/release/epa-bar-fluoride-based-pesticide), the chemical is still being used on a wide variety of conventional food crops, unbeknownst to consumers.
There are, in fact, more than 150 different fluoridated pesticides currently approved for use on conventional crops, none of which are typically indicated on produce labels. Chances are that if you eat conventional fruit, vegetables, or nuts, you are more than likely eating varieties that have been sprayed or fumigated with fluoride chemicals, which are prohibited from use on organic crops.
As we reported on recently, conventional grapes are often sprayed with the fluoride-based chemical pesticide cryolite, which is often sold under the trade name Kryocide. This particular pesticide actually contains substances that facilitate the passing of fluoride across the blood-brain barrier and directly into brain tissue, which makes it exceptionally toxic. (http://www.naturalnews.com/036753_fluoride_pesticides_grapes.html)
This compounded exposure to fluoride from fluoridated irrigation water, fluoridated pesticides and herbicides, airborne fluoride chemicals, and fluoridated water used during processing or reconstitution after harvest renders many conventional fruits and vegetables fluoride saturated.
Admittedly, many organic crops are also exposed to fluoride via irrigated water just like conventional crops are. But at least organic crops are not sprayed with fluoridated pesticides after harvest, and many organic foods are processed after harvest using purified water, as indicated on their ingredient labels, which means they contain less overall fluoride than their conventional counterparts.
The Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has also created a helpful guide entitled 7 Ways to Avoid Fluoride in Beverages and Food that will help you discern how best to avoid fluoride when shopping for other types of food: http://www.fluoridealert.org/content/grocery_guide/
Top 10 Foods That Contain High Fructose Corn Syrup
It’s super cheap—cheaper than sugar—and that means processed food manufacturers can load up on it, sweetening their goodies at rock-bottom prices and further driving our waistlines out. It’s high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and it’s found in some pretty surprising places. In fact, the foods with high fructose corn syrup may be foods you eat every single day.
While this Huffington Post article on the hidden presence of HFCS says “the jury is still out” on whether it’s dangerous or any more dangerous than sugar, we know differently. This cheap sweetener has been linked to obesity, learning ability and memory, and high blood pressure, to name a few health issues. As if that isn’t enough, it has also been shown to contain toxic mercury.
So, while some would have you believe HFCS is no more dangerous than white sugar (as if that isn’t bad enough), we know differently.
Big money is made in the corn industry—big, big money—and therefore big money is spent counteracting every study and inkling that suggests any product of the industry is less than great for you (HFCS included). Of course consumers are increasingly realizing that HFCS and foods with high fructose corn syrup can be health-damaging, so manufacturers decided to change things up.
As the morbid health effects of high fructose corn syrup continue to be brought to the forefront of the media, the Corn Refiners Association has decided in the past to give their cheap product a new name – corn sugar.
Staying informed on the latest research and watching your foods like a hawk can help keep you and your family safe.
Foods with High Fructose Corn Syrup
Here are some foods with high fructose corn syrup that you may have never expected to contain the ingredients – foods you may be eating every day.
- Frozen pizzas
- Cereal bars
- Cocktail peanuts
- Boxed macaroni and cheese
- Salad Dressing
- Canned Fruit
This is just another reason to steer clear of highly processed foods. Americans consume a whopping 35 pounds of HFCS each year, showing just how prevalent foods with high fructose corn syrup are.
Stick with the natural stuff. If it comes in a box, bag, or can, be extra suspicious, or even better—just stay away.
Health Basics – Artificial food is really a taste of chemotherapy
This scientist is one of hundreds, if not thousands, who is paid to make ANYTHING which will help the food industry executives spend less money trying to make cheap and high-profit food TASTE good and LOOK appetizing. That’s the key, looks and taste, because quality does not matter at all. In fact, bad quality food, like what is so prominent in America, makes the food industry gurus money later on, especially when additives are used as fillers to “beef up” the processed product. Take a look:
Pink slime – The smoking gun of murderous food
Surprise ripped across America in April, just four months ago, as a mass wave of consumers discovered that hamburger meat often contains ammonia-treated beef, a.k.a. “pink slime.” This is a food industry strategy to use cheap animal connective tissue instead of meat. It’s still being served in schools across America as part of a plan to save lots of money. It should be called “The U.S. Public School MEAT AND DISEASE BILL.” Defenders of pink slime say it’s okay to eat it once cooked, just never touch it when it’s raw with your bare hands (E-coli). (http://yourlife.usatoday.com)
Parents wonder how their kids come down with so many “throwing up” viruses and random infections, but that’s no big deal, because the local and state governments have a solution: just bring the kids up to the school or Walmart for that swine flu, HPV, and MMR booster vaccine from Merck (or some other fraudulent Big Pharma “distributor”) and they’ll be JUST FINE! (http://www.naturalnews.com)
This treating of food with ammonia is nothing new, in fact, it was cleared by U.S. health officials 40 years ago (http://www.healthyeatingadvisor.com/food-additives.html). Worse yet, just 55 years ago, the “Delaney Clause of the Food Additives Amendment” states that “any additives shown to cause cancer in humans or animals are not permitted to be added to our food.” The FDA, paid off by Big Pharma, relaxed this standard to allow small amounts, which are now in three out of four common food products, fueling the lucrative cancer business. It’s enough to make you afraid to eat non-organic foods of any kind.
The ultimate food “poison” in America
Worse than pink slime, the ultimate food poison would be an artificial sweetener combined with genetically modified bacteria. But there’s no way America would do that to its people, because that would cause disease and cancer, and wouldn’t really benefit anyone in any way, right? Too late, it’s already done. This is not a conspiracy theory either, this is reality. A 1999 investigation found out aspartame is made with genetically modified bacteria. An article by The Independent titled “World’s top sweetener is made with GM bacteria” revealed that two of the largest health threats, artificial sweeteners and genetically modified organisms, were joining forces. (http://naturalsociety.com)
What makes aspartame so lethal? Artificial sweeteners TRICK THE BODY into using them like food, because they taste sweet, so the genetically modified bacteria enters the blood “Trojan horse style,” and can thoroughly infect the system, much the same way that a virus you download by accident would rip apart your computer. This GMO sweet bacteria invasion does collateral damage to the immune system, assisting cancer cell development and total cell annihilation, like nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists, only this war is going on inside your blood and is attacking your vital organs.
The 70-year lie
Most forms of cancer generate from the mutation of (formerly) healthy cells, which were bombarded with artificial food agents, synthetics, hormones from animals, chemical food ingredients, and genetically modified organisms. Scientists knew seven decades ago artificial food agents caused cell mutation, and they also knew that chemotherapy was a pseudo-fix. Chemotherapy was first discovered by Nazi scientists to cause cancer to recede, including tumors, but they watched as the cancer came back within just a few years, and usually with quite a vengeance. Scientists and the U.S. government knew 70 years ago that chemotherapy was basically useless for helping cancer victims over the long term. This is well documented. (http://www.naturalnews.com/036034_history_medicine_investigation.html)
That’s right, back in the 1950s, German and American scientists got together and watched chemotherapy do its little SUPERNOVA trick, where it “shined” real bright at first, making them believe that it worked, and then the chemicals in the chemo itself caused so much acid and immune cell destruction in the body, that even if the targeted area was healed, the toxic blood disabled the immune system and the remaining “suffocated” cells simply mutated and multiplied uncontrollably, and subsequently found a new home, a new place to attack the body. (http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/dying-to-have-known/).
Put it this way, would you walk into a scientific laboratory, where they make chemical food agents and process food with bleach and ammonia, and start drinking samples to see what happens? Would you drink chemo test samples at a medical lab that didn’t test for results, because they already knew the results back in the 1950s? (http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/cancer/to-the-cancer-patient/)
In the United States, food additives are not approved or denied based on whether or not they cause disease, but rather whether or not they have positive economic and financial implications. You probably had no idea that “Big Pharma” executives and their cohorts invest in the “bad food” and “chemotherapy and radiation” business, ensuring dividends from the latter by increasing chemical consumption on the front end. (http://www.naturalnews.com/028602_health_insurance_fast_food.html). The fact is that there are more than 3,000 different food additives that are purposefully added to our food supply today.
What is the moral to this story? Artificial food is just the front end of chemotherapy. If you are currently seeking prevention, and this article is enough to put the artificial food and cancer scam into perspective for you, there is a remedy available. It’s out there ready and waiting for you, so it’s time to do a little homework. (http://www.truthpublishing.com)
Sources for this article include:
Filed Under: HEALTH/EUGENICS
About the Author: