Category: Cancer (Page 3 of 7)

The dark side of soy

The vast majority of soy at your local market is not a health food. 91% of soy grown in the US is genetically modified (GM) soy that is contaminated with large pesticide residues. The genetic modification is done to impart resistance to the toxic herbicide Roundup, so they can spray it over the soy plants to improve crop production by killing the weeds. This is solely meant to increase farming efficiency and provide you with less expensive soy. In other words, cheap as opposed to healthy.

For centuries, contrary of what Americans have been told, Asian people have been consuming non-GM fermented soy products such as natto, tempeh, and soy sauce in SMALL amounts. Western food processors separate the soybean into two commodities?protein and oil. And there is nothing natural or safe about these products that many Americans consume.

Dr. Kaayla Daniel, author of The Whole Soy Story, points out thousands of studies linking soy to malnutrition, digestive distress, immune-system breakdown, thyroid dysfunction, cognitive decline, reproductive disorders and infertility?even cancer and heart disease.

Here is just a sampling of the health effects that have been linked to soy consumption:

* Breast cancer
* Brain damage
* Infant abnormalities
* Thyroid disorders
* Kidney stones
* Immune system impairment
* Severe, potentially fatal food allergies
* Impaired fertility
* Danger during pregnancy and nursing

Soy proponents will argue that soy-based foods (they lump the fermented ones with the unfermented) will protect you from everything from colon, prostate and breast cancer to strokes, osteoporosis, and asthma. However, proponents never mention the studies that illuminate soy?s downside and all of the dangers posed to your health, which are based on sound research.

Another unfortunate fact is that 80 percent of the world?s soy is used in farm animal feed, which is why soy production is contributing to deforestation. Some soy propagandists have suggested that the solution to this is for all of us to become vegetarians?a reckless recommendation rooted in total ignorance about nutrition?whereas a far better solution is a major overhaul in how farm animals are fed and raised.

Thumbs up review of Nutrition and Physical Degeneration by Weston A Price, DDS

Nutritional and Physical Degeneration is one of the most ground-breaking books ever written on the link between nutrition and health. Dr. Weston A. Price, a dentist from Cleveland, became very disturbed by what he saw in his patients. He started to see a link between the decay he found in the mouths of his patients and pathologies found elsewhere in the body like diabetes, arthritis, osteoporosis, gastrointestinal complaints, and more. Dr. Price also found that crowded, crooked teeth were becoming more and more common, along with facial deformities like overbites, narrow faces, lack of well defined cheek bones, and underdevelopment of the nose. Dr. Price did not believe these problems to be in any way normal; He believed they were the result of poor nutrition. The worse a person?s diet was the more decay he found in their mouth. The more decay a person had in their mouth, the higher the rate of pathologies in other areas of the body.

More than 70 years ago Dr. Price decided to search the world for primitive people who lived entirely on indigenous foods. His travels took him from islands in the South Seas to Alaska to Africa and many places in between. He visited Australian Aborigines, Swiss villages, Eskimos, traditional American Indians, Amoazonian Indians, African tribes, and more. Dr. Price and his wife Florence traveled for ten years during the 1920’s and 30’s when groups of people completely isolated from civilization could be found.

Throughout his travels, Dr. Price kept a record of his findings with pictures and detailed assessments. What he found, to be called astounding, is an understatement. Dr, Price discovered that primitive people untouched by civilization, who subsided on a diet of indigenous food, had outstanding physical development with little to no dental problems, heart disease, diabetes, or any other diseases we know believe to be a normal consequence of life.

Dr. Price?s findings were not surprising to other investigators and explorers. However, the excepted explanation at the time was that primitive people were ?racially pure? and that the maladies we see in civilization were due to ?race mixing?. This theory was untenable to Dr. Price who found that the individuals in groups he studied who abandoned their traditional diets for foods provided by traders or missionaries, or who moved to a more civilized area were found to develop tooth decay and degenerative conditions.

The diets of these primitive groups of people were vastly different. Some were mostly cooked food while in others most of the food was consumed raw including animal sources. Some diets were based on sea food, others on domestic animals and others on wild game. Some diets were based on dairy while others consumed a variety of fruits and vegetables and grains.

The common thread between all the groups Dr. Price investigated was none of them contained any refined devitalized foods like white sugar, flour, pasteurized or skim milk, and refined or hydrogenated vegetable oils. All the diets contained animal foods of some type and some salt. Dr. Price analyzed the primitive diets and found they all contained four times the amount of water soluble vitamins and minerals, and ten times the amount of fat soluble vitamins compared to the modern American diet.

Unfortunately, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, the permanent record of his travels, is nonexistent to today?s modern medical community. This book is more important to our health and welfare today than it was 60 years ago. Our food supply, if it could be classified as food, is devoid of almost all nutritive value. We need to incorporate the fundamentals of primitive nutrition and return to nutrient dense whole food. We need to get back to local farming and turn away from manmade supermarket garbage that is destroying our health.

Anyone interested in becoming truly healthy needs to read Nutrition and physical degeneration

Beers to your health

Researchers are always looking for the magic bullet to kill cancer, and now they may have found it in a surprising place, a glass of beer! (Who knew?) It turns out that hops, which is the flavor component of beer, contains a cancer-fighting compound called xanthohumol.

Xanthohumol turns out to be toxic to several kinds of human cancer, including prostate, ovarian, breast, and colon. Further, it inhibits enzymes that can activate the development of cancer, and also helps detoxify carcinogens. It even seems to slow down tumor growth in the early stages. Scientists are trying to produce hops that contain even more xanthohumol, and the Germans are racing to develop a “health” beer.

Beers that provide the most benefits contain the most hops, and include strong brews such as ale, stout, and porter. In general, the darker the beer, the better. For those who can’t stand beer, herbal supplements made from hops contain the highest concentrations of beneficial elements.

NewsMax.com Health Alerts

Master your health

Do genetics control our bodies or can we control our genetics? Many scientists now believe genetics do not control life but are controlled by environmental factors such as our mental attitudes. This is a mind blowing, culture bending new way of thought that is starting to gain popularity.

“Mind over matter” is a well known saying that has merit. The power of the mind over the body has been shown time and time again. Science shows us everything is made of atoms and that atoms are energy. Therefore, everything is energy. It is no stretch to think that our positive mental energy created by a positive mental attitude would transfer to better health.

Reduce your risk of cancer

Did you know if you want to reduce your risk of cancer, you should join a study. Promoters of vegetarianism have been singing the praises of a report on two studies in the British Journal of Cancer. The report notes two prospective studies, the Epic-Oxford cohort and the Oxford Vegetarian study, examining cancer incidence among vegetarians. The report studied 61566 British men and women, comprising 32403 meat eaters, 8562 non-meat eaters who ate fish and 20601 vegetarians. The average follow-up was 12.2 years. Vegetarians had less bladder, stomach and blood cancer than meat and fish eaters. However vegetarians had higher rates of colon, rectal and cervical cancers. These numbers as with many studies are deceiving.

According to this report the chance of a meat eater developing bladder cancer is 1 in 518; for vegetarians it was 1 in 1677; for fish eaters it was 1 in 1400. Even though the report shows meat eaters are over three times more likely to develop bladder cancer, it?s still only a .19% chance. Your chance of developing cervical cancer if you?re a meat eater was 1 in 1982; for fish eaters it?s 1 in 890; for vegetarians it?s 1 in 948. Judging by this report, a vegetarian female is twice as likely to develop cervical cancer compared to her meat eating amigo, but still only a .10% chance. The play on numbers in this report is inexcusable but all too common.

The differences in the various cancer rates between the 3 groups overall were insignificant; however the fish eaters were found to have the largest reduced cancer risk. Curiously, which you don?t see reported in mainstream sources, there was no difference found in all cause mortality between the diet groups. However, all the diet groups had a 50% less reduced risk of all cause mortality compared to the general population. Hmmmm.

In another analysis of two studies, the Oxford Vegetarian Study and the Health Food Shoppers Study, researchers compared the mortality of vegetarians and non-vegetarians. Mortality rates were 52% and 59% of the general population respectively. However, strangely unreported by vegetarians, there was no difference in mortality rates between vegetarians and non-vegetarians in either study. Researchers concluded that the benefits found in the subjects of both studies compared to the general population may be attributed to non-dietary factors.

« Older posts Newer posts »