Thursday, October 29, 2009

Dangerous Additives to Your Food

Do you know which seven dangerous food ingredients to watch out for in your groceries? These are the "deadly seven," as I call them, and they can directly promote heart disease, migraines, obesity, outrageous food cravings, osteoporosis, diabetes and even birth defects.

The top three most dangerous ingredients I've found in my research are:

1) Sodium nitrite -- causes cancer, found in processed meats like hot dogs, bacon, sausage. Used to make meats appear red (a color fixer chemical).

2) Hydrogenated oils -- causes heart disease, nutritional deficiencies, general deterioration of cellular health, and much more. Found in cookies, crackers, margarine and many "manufactured" foods. Used to make oils stay in the food, extending shelf life. Sometimes also called "plastic fat."

3) Excitotoxins -- aspartame, monosodium glutamate and others (see below). These neurotoxic chemical additives directly harm nerve cells, over-exciting them to the point of cell death, according to Dr. Russell Blaylock. They're found in diet soda, canned soup, salad dressing, breakfast sausage and even many manufactured vegetarian foods. They're used to add flavor to over-processed, boring foods that have had the life cooked out of them.

Did you know, for example, that:

  • Feeding children hot dogs increases their risk of brain cancer by 300%?
  • Strawberry yogurt, fruit punch and other red-looking grocery products are often colored with dead, ground-up cochineal beetles? The ingredient is called "carmine," and it's made from insects. It's listed right on the label of many of your favorite foods.
  • Food companies now "hide" MSG in safe-sounding ingredients like yeast extract or torula yeast?
  • Many Florida oranges are actually dipped in an artificial orange dye in order to make them more visually appealing? It's the same dye that's been banned for use in foods because of cancer risk.
  • Girl Scout cookies are still made with hydrogenated oils that contain trans fatty acids?
  • Many so-called "healthy" or vegetarian foods also contain the very same offending ingredients as conventional groceries?
  • Eating just one serving of processed meats each day increases your risk of pancreatic cancer by 67%?
  • One artificial color additive causes behavioral disorders in children? And that 80% of children diagnosed with ADHD can be outright cured of the condition in two weeks by avoiding certain ingredients?
  • The #1 ingredient in Slim Fast meal replacement shake (powder form) is sugar?
  • Some guacamole dips don't even contain avocado? Instead, they're made with hydrogenated soybean oil and artificial colors.

Everything I'm sharing here is absolutely true. It's all quite shocking, yes, but this is information you need to know if you want to feed yourself -- and your family -- foods that actually promote health instead of disease.

The truth about metabolic disruptors

Nearly all modern diseases are caused by what I call "metabolic disruptors." These are common ingredients, such as white flour and sugar, that prevent your body from healing. Unfortunately, metabolic disruptors are used in almost all commercially prepared foods, which means most products on your grocer's shelves contribute to poor health. But if you know what to look for, you can fill your cart with foods that will help you live a longer more vibrant life.

Back to the "hidden" ingredients

So how do food companies manage to hide excitotoxins and taste additives to their foods? It's easy: They just keep changing the words to confuse consumers. Once customers learned to avoid MSG / monosodium glutamate, the food companies started using yeast extract.

And now, many companies have switched to "torula yeast," which accomplishes the same thing. Other hidden sources of MSG include:

• Autolyzed vegetable protein
• Hydrolyzed vegetable protein

• Calcium caseinate

• Sodium caseinate

• Textured protein

The ingredients "stacking" trick

Food companies also use the ingredients stacking trick to intentionally leave you with the wrong impression about what's really in their food products.

For example, one company makes a nutrition bar that's absolutely loaded with sugar, but they way they've arranged the ingredients prevents sugar from appearing as the #1 ingredient. Instead, the first ingredient is rice. But looking down the label, you'll find all the following forms of sugar, all in the same nutrition bar:

• Sugar
• Sucrose
• High-fructose corn syrup
• Corn syrup solids
• Dextrose

Add all these up, and the #1 component in the bar is, indeed, sugar (or sugary substances). But the manufacturer has used ingredients stacking to make you think the top ingredient is actually rice.

It's a clever, dishonest technique used by food companies to lie with food labels.

Remember, the longer the ingredients label, the less healthy the food. Read those ingredients lists before buying foods, and if you discover chemical names that you can't pronounce, don't buy the food!

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Mercury Amalgam Toxicity and Removal

Amalgam Removal Does Lower
the Body Burden of Mercury
Australian Risk Assessment of Mercury
Exposure from Dental Amalgam Published August 2000
Prepared by Chem Affairs Pty Ltd PO Box 890 Lane Cove NSW 1595
Published August 2000
This risk assessment was commissioned by the National Health & Medical Research
Council of Australia (NHMRC), as part of a series of recommendations put forward by a
working party which was set up in 1998 to assess the literature about the dangers of
mercury from dental amalgam. NH&MRC have not yet endorsed this document. Although
most of the report claims safety for amalgam on the bases of a supposed "Normal Mercury
Level" in the body it is important to know that there has never been a level of mercury
exposure which is considered safe. The “Normal” levels suggested in this report are far above
the levels set by both the USEPA and the ATSDR.
In point 8 of the Executive Summary the following is stated:
"Amalgam removal has been shown to be effective in reducing mercury levels to the
levels of those in people without amalgam fillings. Chelation treatment has also reduced
levels in the short-term….in one case report, amalgam removal has reduced a very
high urine mercury level to a normal level. This change was accompanied by a decline
in symptoms………."
Potential Biological Consequences of Mercury Released from Dental Amalgam. A
State of the Art Document?
The Australian and other dental associations in the world have consistently claimed that
removing amalgam for the sake of health improvements is unethical as there is no
relationship between mercury from dental amalgam and disease. They still hold this
position. Much of their claims of late are based on a report called "Potential Biological
Consequences of Mercury Released from Dental Amalgam. A State of the Art
Document. [MFR-panel (Swedish Medical Research Council)]A State of the Art Conference
in Stockholm 9-10 April 1992”.
The dental associations come to the following conclusions, which are responded to by Prof.
Murray Vimy, one of the leaders of the International Academy of Oral Medicine and
Toxicology. Note Prof Vimy's credentials - Murray J. Vimy BA, DMD, FAGD, FIAOMT
Clinical Associate Professor Department of Medicine
Dental Association Comments:
"- Mercury released from dental amalgam does not, according to available data, contribute
to systemic disease or systemic toxicological effects.
No significant effects on the immune system have been demonstrated with the amounts of
mercury which may be released from dental amalgam fillings.
- Allergic reactions to mercury from amalgam have been demonstrated, but are extremely
• In very few individuals local reactions such as lichenoid reactions of the mucosa,
may occur adjacent to amalgam restorations as well as adjacent to dental
restorations made of other materials.
• There are no data supporting that mercury released from dental amalgam give rise
to teratological effects.
• The possible environmental consequences of mercury from handling dental
amalgam can be controlled by proper waste management, including the installation
of efficient amalgam separators in dental offices.
• Available data do not justify discontinuing the use of silver-containing dental
amalgam fillings or recommending their replacement."
In the panel: Bergman B (chairman), Bostrom H, Larsson K S, Li5e H
Professor Vimy’s Response:
In An open letter to Sekreterare Tore Scherstén Medicinska Forskningsrådet Swedish
Medical Research Council Box 6713 S-113 85 Stockholm, Sweden December 15, 1992
Re: Potential Biological Consequences of Mercury Released from Dental Amalgam. A
Swedish state of the Art Conference,
April 9, 1992.
Dear Secretary Scherstén:
By now you must have felt the pressure of a number of groups who have criticized your
"conference". In fairness to you, it is apparent that trust was misplaced in an organizing
committee, which had no intention of convening an objective academic scientific forum.
Rather, these individuals had a predetermined agenda, as demonstrated by their public
positions on the issue of amalgam safety taken on many occasions prior to this meeting.
Drs. Larsson, Löe and Bergman are all on the record as defenders of the status quo. Dr.
Bergman's objectivity is tainted by his wife's involvement in the issue; while Dr. Larsson is
on the record as a strong supporter of amalgam. Indeed it was incredible to see this person
act as both presenter and "judge", especially since he has no scientific experimental track
record of his own to demonstrate his expertise in this area. Finally, Dr. Löe, politically,
administratively and economically affiliated with the American dental establishment, is
apparently more concerned with preventing litigation in the U.S.A. than he is with
determining scientific truth. His opening biased remarks made it obvious why he was chosen
as moderator. Dr. Boström was red herring - a physician "yes"-man with absolutely no
research expertise in this area.
The conference presenters showed a general lack of expertise. Most have poor research
records and many had not published research papers on either mercury or dental amalgam.
This is easily determined by reviewing the bibliographies to their written presentations.
They have few if any research papers of their own to cite! The penultimate example was Dr.
Petr Skrabanek, a self anointed "quack catcher". This individual, who has no scientific
expertise of amalgam, is one of a growing group of self appointed watch-dog "experts". In
North America, we have an organization called the National Council Against Health Fraud
which purports to be expert in everything. Dr. Skrabanek's mere presence at the meeting
totally discredited the scientific purpose of the conference. Sweden, a country of many
noted scientists, was better represented by the quality of the expertise in the audience
than by the quality of many conference speakers.
Finally, I understand that my invitation to present a paper at this conference was extended
reluctantly by the organizing committee, and only after political pressure for a more
balanced meeting. If you review the list of speakers chosen it will be obvious that the
intention of the organizers was to "white wash" the conclusions. The conclusions of the
conference were drawn by the organizing committee and do not represent a consensus view
of all the participants or the audience. Since the results were apparently prordained, as I
have just described, they are not credible.
I have enclosed for your information a reprint of a recent medical scientific forum on the
same issue (Goering et. al., 1992). As you can see, there is now international scientific
concurrence on a number of points related to the amalgam mercury issue and its potential
effects on human health; a concurrence which is in marked contrast to the "massaged"
conclusions of the Swedish Medical Research Council's biased organizing committee.
Respectfully yours, [signed Murray J. Vimy BA, DMD, FAGD, FIAOMT Clinical Associate
Professor Department of Medicine (also Private Practice of Dental Medicine)]
A vast wealth of published research exists which clearly demonstrates that removing the
source of the mercury poisoning – the amalgam fillings – will in fact lower the body burden
of mercury. Here is a small taste of this literature:
1. Idiosyncrasy to metallic mercury,
with special reference to amalgam
fillings in the Teeth. Bass M HJ Pediat
23:215-218 (1943)
2. Thrombocytopenia in two children
after placement of amalgam fillings in
primary teeth. Berglund F, Elinder G
Program, Sammanfattningar, Svenska
Läkarsällskapets Riksstämma 27-29
nov 1991
3. Mercury allergy resulting from
amalgam restorations. Engelman M A J
Amer Dent Assoc 66:122-123 (1963 )
4. Chronic illness in association with
dental amalgam: Report of two cases.
Godfrey M E J Adv Med 3:247-255
5. Amalgam-related chronic ulceration
of oral mucosa. Jolly M, Moule A J,
Freeman S Br Dent J 160:434- 437
6. Exercise-induced anaphylaxis:
improvement after removal of
amalgam in dental caries. Katsununa
T, Iikura Y, Nagakura T, Saitoh H,
Akimoto K, Akasawa A, Kindaichi S Ann
Allergy 64:472-475 (1990)
7. A Case of High Mercury exposure
from Dental Amalgam. Langworth S,
Strömberg R European Journal of Oral
Sciences. Jun 1996; 104(3):320-321.
ISSN: 0909- 8836
8. Urticaria following a dental silver
filling - case report. Markow H New
York State J Med 43:1648-1652 (1943)
9. Three cases of linear lichen planus
cused by dental metal compounds. :
Sasaki G, Yokozeki H, Katayama I,
Nishioka K: J Dermatol 1996 Dec
23:12 890-2
10. Generalized allergic reaction from
silver amalgam fillings Strassburg M,
Schubel R : Dtsche Zahnarztliche Zeit
22:3-9 (1967)
11. A case of hypersensitivity to
mercury released from amalgam
fillings. Witek E Source: Czas Stomat
12. Allergic reaction to mercury after
dental treatment. Wright F A C New
Zealand Dent J 67:25l-252 (1971)
13. Description of persons with
symptoms presumed to be caused by
electricity or visual display units--oral
aspects. Bergdahl J, Anneroth G,
Stenman E Scand J Dent Res. 1994
Feb; 102(1): 41-5
14. Long-term mercury excretion in
urine after removal of amalgam fillings
Begerow J, Zander D, Freier I,
Dunemann L Int Arch Occup Environ
Health 1994 66:3 209-12
15. Effect of Replacement of Dental
Amalgam on Oral Lichenoid Reactions.
Bratel J, Hakeberg M, Jontell M:
Journal of Dentistry. Jan-Mar 1996;
24(1- 2):41-45
16. Mercury sensitization in amalgam
fillings. Assessment from a
dermatologic viewpoint Brehler R,
Panzer B, Forck G, Bertram H P Dtsch
Med Wochenschr 1993 Apr 2 118:13
17. Healing of Lichenoid Reactions
Following Removal of Amalgam - a
Clinical Follow-up Henriksson E,
Mattsson U, Håkansson J:. J Clin
Periodont 22(4):287-294 (1995)
18. The Relevance and Effect of
Amalgam Replacement in Subjects with
Oral Lichenoid Reactions Ibbotson S H,
Speight E L, Macleod R I, Smart E R,
Lawrence C M British Journal of
Dermatology. Mar 1996; 134 (3):420-
423. ISSN: 0007-0963
19. Resolution of oral lichenoid lesions
after replacement of amalgam
restorations in patients allergic to
mercury compounds.: Laine J, Kalimo
K, Forssell H, Happonen R P Br J
Dermatol 126(1):10-15
20. Symptoms before and after proper
amalgam removal in relation to serumglobulin
reaction to metals.
Lichtenberg H Journal of
Orthomolecular Medicine Vol 11 No.4.
pp 195-203 1996.
21. Effects of Removing Amalgam
Fillings from Patients with Diseases
Affecting the Immune SystemLindqvist
B, Mörnstad H Medical Science
Research. May 1996; 24(5):355-356
22. Allergy and corrosion of dental
materials in patients with oral lichen
planus. Lundström I M C Int J Oral
Surg 13:16-24 (1984)
23. Amalgam Associated Oral Lichenoid
Reactions: Clinical and Histologic
Changes After Removal of Amalgam
Fillings. Östman P O, Anneroth G,
Skoglund A Oral Surgery Oral Medicine
Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and
Endodontics. Apr 1996; 81 (4):459-
24. Resolution of lichen planus
following removal of amalgam
restorations in patients with proven
allergy to mercury salts: a pilot study.
Smart E R, Macleod R I, Lawrence C M
Br Dent J 178(3):108-112 (1995)
25. The contribution of dental amalgam
to mercury in blood. Snapp K R, Boyer
D B, Peterson L C, Svare C W J Dent
Res. 1989 May; 68(5):780-5
26. Removal of Dental Mercury: Often
an Effective Treatment for the Very
Sensitive Patient Zamm A F J
Orthomolecular Med 5(53):138-142
27. Elimination of symptoms by
removal of dental amalgam from
mercury poisoned patients, as
compared with a control group of
average patients. Lichtenberg H J J
Orthomol Med 8:145-148 (1993)
28. Mercury, selenium, and glutathione
peroxidase before and after amalgam
removal in man. Molin M, Bergman B,
Marklund S L, Schütz A, Skerfving Acta
Odontol Scand. 1990 Jun; 48(3): 189-
29. The relationship between mercury
from dental amalgam and oral cavity
health. Siblerud R LAnn Dent 49(2):6-
10 (1990)
30. A comparison of mental health of
multiple sclerosis patients with
silver/mercury dental fillings and those
with fillings removed. Siblerud R L
Psychol Rep. 1992 Jun; 70(3 Pt 2):
31. Evidence that mercury from silver
dental fillings may be an etiological
factor in multiple sclerosis. Siblerud R
L, Kienholz E Sci Total Environ. 1994
Mar 15; 142(3): 191-205
32. Mercury-Specific Lymphocytes: An
Indication of Mercury Allergy in Man.
Stejskal V, Forsbeck M, Cederbrant K
E, Asteman O J of Clin Immun, Vol. 16,
No.1, 1996, pp. 31-40.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Phthalates, breast cancer, and plastics

One of the most important health concerns for women today is breast cancer. Statistics show approximately 1 in 7 women will get breast cancer. Those are scary odds. As clinicians, we can
make a profound difference. In many cases, we can truly predict and prevent breast cancer; and
we can monitor our progress.

Mammograms and early chemo cocktails are not my idea of prevention.
Now everyone knows you don’t just wake up one day and find out you have breast cancer.
Cancer growth is a process. It takes years before aberrant cells can accumulate to a point where
we can feel or even detect a lump. Most women have no idea that they are exposed to something every day that can dramatically speed cancer growth, excess estrogen and estrogen mimics.
Years ago, it was found that estrogen added to cancer cells caused the cancers to grow like
wild fire. Later researchers accidentally found that cancers cultured in plastic petri dishes had
dramatically accelerated growth even without adding estrogen. It turned out that the phthalates
leeching out of the plastic containers were such potent cast estrogen mimics that they turned
on the growth of cancer cells.
It’s obvious then that synthetic estrogens, whether they are from prescriptions or from estrogen
mimics, can alter our chances for breast and other types of cancer. The bad news is that our
society is swimming in a sea of estrogen.
Estrogen mimics or xenoestrogens are used in plastic bottles that hold pop and bottled water.
They’re also used in plastic wraps that wrap supermarket meats and vegetables, etc. Many of the pesticides and herbicides on our fruits and vegetables have estrogen like activity.
The meats we eat are also increasing our estrogen levels.

Animals are fed estrogen to increase their water weight before slaughter.

One dramatic study demonstrating the effects of zenoestrogens in our drinking water found that
male small mouth bass taken from a drinking water source actually had eggs in their testes.
Most women have no idea they are exposed to something everyday that can dramatically speed cancer growth. These fish were harvested from a river that provides drinking water for millions of people.
One of the best tests to predict and prevent breast cancer is the 2/16 hydroxyestrone test. It measures the ratio of “good” estrogen to “bad” estrogen. This simple urine test can predict years in advance whether your patients have the cellular soil that encourages cancer growth.

The article mentions the 16 alpha hydroxyestrone metabolite is a potent cancer “enhancer”; however, the 2-hydrolase estrogen metabolite actually “protects” us against cancer. If the 2/16 estrogen ratio favors the 16 hydroxyestrone, chances for cancer are significantly elevated. Ratios under 2 suggest an increased risk for breast cancer and with men prostate cancer, while ratios over 2 suggest healthy detoxification pathways and reduced risk.
Anyone concerned about breast cancer should start by reducing plastics, pesticides, and commercial meat exposure and begin the following: Eat at least 1 cup of the Brassica or cruciferous vegetables daily to detoxify the body and help keep this ratio in the correct balance. In fact, this will increase your body’s ability to detoxify harmful liver agents like Tylenol by 20 %.
Cruciferous veggies contain multiple nutrients with potent anti-cancer properties:
diindolylmethane, sulforaphane, and selenium. Researchers at the University of California at Berkeley have recently discovered that 3, 3’-Diindolylmethane (or DIM) in Brassica vegetables has potent anti-cancer activity. DIM is actually derived from the digestion of indole-3-carbinol found in Brassica vegetables. Sulforaphane among other things increases Phase II detoxification and reduces free radical damage. Who would have ever thought that eating simple vegetables could have such strong anti-cancer properties?
Of course for men, cruciferous vegetable consumption is inversely related to the incidence of prostate cancer and reduces homocysteine levels. So you can see, these wonderful cancer preventers are not sexists. Ask us to get a list of these vegetables. And remember, just 1 cup a day can make a profound difference in long term health.
Here are some things you can do in terms of nutrients to affect estrogen ratios. The green drinkthat we carry from Biotics Research, NitroGreens, contains sprouted cruciferous vegetables broccoli, cauliflower, and kale. The sprouted forms are even more potent than the raw or cooked forms. 1 scoop per day is an excellent prevention strategy. It also contains beet and carrot juices which have liver protecting abilities as well. NitroGreens have the alkalizing effect of the grasses.
Also flax seeds: 2 tablespoons of ground up flax seeds on salad, in your NitroGreens shake or with the above mentioned cruciferous vegetables has been shown to improve the 2/16 hydroxyestrone ratio as well. That’s over and above what the veggies will accomplish.
Optimal EFAs (capsules or liquids) are a blend of ultra pure EPA, DHA, organic Flax seed oil, cancer (and eczema) fighting GLA, and a balance of the omega 9 oils. 2 to 3 capsules, 2 times per day will provide excellent protection.
Finally, we can’t even talk about reducing breast cancer without talking about one of the biggest
deficiencies in the Midwest. That is an iodine deficiency.
Iodine protects breast, ovarian, uterine and prostate tissue, and is essential for healthy thyroid
function. Liquid iodine forte should be used at 30 drops per day or use a tableted form called Iodizyme-HP. Iodine levels can be assessed through a 24 hour urine collection for more precise protocols.

Saturday, October 17, 2009

Top 10 Myths About Vitamin D

Top 10 Myths About Vitamin D

By Jared M. Skowron, ND

Myth 1: Vitamin D is a vitamin.

Truth: Vitamin D is a hormone. It’s derived from cholesterol. It activates cellular processes and does not do so as a co-factor.

Vitamin D receptors have direct effects on the following cells: adipose, adrenal, bone, brain, breast, cancer, cartilage, colon, endothelium, epididymis, ganglion, hair follicle, intestine, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, osteoblasts, ovary, pancreatic B, parathyroid, parotid, pituitary, placenta, prostate, skin, stomach, testis, thymus, thyroid and uterus.

Myth 2: Normal activity provides us enough vitamin D from average sun exposure.

The truth: Most people do not get enough sunshine to maintain adequate vitamin D levels. Our ancestors spent most of the day in the sun, farming, fishing and hunting. Our bodies physiologically developed to need that much vitamin D. Today’s indoor society of office workers, television watchers and hermits gets much less sun exposure and vitamin D production. Add on clothing and sunscreen, which also inhibit vitamin D production, and you understand the problem.

Myth 3: Supplemented vitamin D in foods is adequate.

The truth: Vitamin D2 is one-third as effective in the body as naturally occurring vitamin D3. Most foods – milk, most notably – have D2 added. A study that analyzed vitamin D2 levels in milk off supermarket shelves showed almost 50 percent had less than the label claim of 400 IU of D2. A support scientist from the USDA believes no food-label claims are accurate and these labels cannot be trusted.

Myth 4: 1,25(OH)D3 is the best analysis for vitamin D levels.

The truth: Vitamin D is mostly stored in adipose and should not be routinely measured. It then converts to 25(OH)D3, which has a long half-life and is the best analysis of vitamin D levels. It then converts to bi-hydroxy forms such as 1,25(OH)D3, 24,25(OH)D3 and other forms, which have the actual action of the cell receptors. However, this form has a short half-life and is not a good measurement.

Myth 5: The reference range for vitamin D levels is accurate.

The truth: The reference range for 25(OH)D3 is horribly inaccurate and is maintaining our vitamin D deficiency in this country. The current reference range of 20-100 is too low. Levels <25>

Myth 6: Vitamin D supplementation is nontoxic.

The truth: The major consequence of vitamin D toxicity is hypercalcemia, which should be monitored periodically while under therapy. Changes in cardiac rhythms or lithiasis are common concerns. Urine calcium monitoring is not accurate. Serum calcium should be monitored monthly to check vitamin D toxicity, which normally occurs at 40,000 IU/day. Right now, 10,000 IU/day is being proposed as the safe upper limit.

Myth 7: The RDA for vitamin D is accurate.

The truth: People taking only the RDA of vitamin D will lower their 25(OH)D3 levels. The RDA is too low. When treating with vitamin D supplementation, three months of daily dosing is sufficient to max out 25(OH)D3 levels. Five thousand IU/day for three months should elevate 25(OH)D3 by 80 nmol/L, and 10,000 IU/day for three months should elevate 25(OH)D3 by 120 nmol/L. People on 1,000 IU/day will elevate their levels by only 10 nmol/L.

Myth 8: Forms of vitamin D are all the same.

The truth: Vitamin D3 is the preferred form. Avoid D2 at all costs. D3 is derived either from plant sources or from lanolin. Lanolin-derived D3 is more active and absorbable. I take the 10,000 IU capsules of D3.

Myth 9: Vitamin D only treats osteoporosis and rickets.

The truth: The therapeutic benefits of vitamin D are still being discovered. Benefits relative to cancer, cardiac, immune-boosting, diabetes and neurological (such as multiple sclerosis) therapies, as well as low bone density, are just the tip of the iceberg. I test all of my patients for vitamin D deficiency and supplement regularly up to the 75-200 reference range of 25(OH)D3.

Myth 10: Vitamin D should be avoided in pregnancy and breastfeeding.

The truth: Pregnant women should receive 4,000 IU of daily vitamin D supplementation. Breast-feeding women should receive 6,000 IU of daily vitamin D supplementation. Vitamin D, not 25(OH)D3, crosses into the breast milk, and daily doses are preferred over weekly doses. Avoid supplementing the infant and instead supplement the breast-feeding mother directly. If the infant is bottle-fed, supplement with 400-800 IU/day.
Dr. Jared M. Skowron is in private practice in Hamden, Conn., where he specializes in pediatrics and treating autistic spectrum disorders in children. He is the senior naturopathic physician with Metabolic Maintenance and an adjunct professor at the University of Bridgeport, teaching pediatrics, CPD and EENT.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Symptoms is NOT the Cause

Are symptoms good or bad? What do they mean? Who gets them? What should i do when i don't feel good? When is the right time to get adjusted? When should you take medicine, either over the counter or prescription drugs? Is a fever bad? How hi is too hi? How come your kids are never sick? What do you give your kids when they're sick? What can i do to stop these earaches? If you don't give them drugs, what do you do?

My kids won't eat vegetables. My kids are always tired and fussy. Look at these bumps on her arm. Bedtime? What's that? What about the dark circles under her eyes? Bowel movements three times a day, are you kidding me! No milk! Where do they get their calcium? My doctor told me its normal to have 1 bowel movement a week. What do you feed your kids? You get your baby adjusted?!

Many years ago I learned about HERING'S LAW: "All cure comes from the head down, from the inside out, and in reverse order as the symptoms first appeared." I also learned that dis-ease is associated with 2 basic processes: the lack of biochemical elements(whole, pure and natural foods) and the lack of proper elimination(or the accumulation of the bodies toxic wastes), resulting in a lowered immune system. You see, you don't "catch" a dis-ease". You are either working and training to be healthy or working toward dis-ease. The choice is ours! When we focus on natural healing, eating organic, natural foods, and a more healthy lifestyle, the "bugs", "germs", and "viruses" are not a threat.

First, lets choose to reduce or eliminate fast, fake, processed, devitalized food. Start shopping only on the outside aisle of the grocery store. You will be amazed! That's where you are going to find your fruits, vegetables, meats, and dairy. When you are ready for the next step, look for organic produce and dairy products. You want your meals to consist of 6 vegetables, 2 fruits, 1 starch, and 1 protein per day: vegetables provide minerals, fruits provide vitamins, starches provide energy, and protein is needed for building healthy tissue cells. PROPER NUTRITION is the first step to a health. GO GREEN!!

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Immune Boost: This Is Spinal Zap

It came to the point where something had to give. Lilian Garcia's pollen, dust, and food allergies were getting her down. Her allergies were even affecting her job. The recording artist and World Wrestling ringmaster's voice wasn't achieving optimal performance. But that soon changed. While she was cutting a record with singer-songwriter Jon Secada, he suggested chiropractic care. Though the recommendation struck her as unconventional, Garcia was desperate for a solution. She set up an appointment.

The test of efficacy came soon after she started regular chiropractic treatment, during a moment of weakness in the mall. "I saw an ice cream cone and I went for it," Garcia remembers. "I ate two and I had zero complications. It was my first ice cream cone in 12 years." The connection between her allergies and chiropractic care seemed natural. "Something's flowing better."

Terry Rondberg, president of the World Chiropractic Alliance, explains that the spine does play a role in wellbeing. He notes that many factors affect the body's ability to maintain optimal balance. Nutrition, posture, exercise, stress, fatigue are important, but so is the health of your spine.

Chiropractic care was first linked to improved immunity during the deadly flu epidemic of 1917 and 1918. The funny thing was: Chiropractic patients fared better than the general population. This observation spurred a study of the field. The data reported that flu victims under chiropractic care had an estimated .25 percent death rate, a lot less than the normal rate of 5 percent among flu victims who did not receive chiropractic care.

In the years since, studies are finding that chiropractic care is a way to improve immunity. One study, from the National College of Chiropractic in Lombard, Illinois, found that disease-fighting white blood cell counts were higher just 15 minutes after chiropractic manipulation was applied to the back. A similar study investigated the immune system response in HIV-positive patients under chiropractic care. After six months of treating spinal misalignment, the group receiving the chiropractic treatment showed a 48 percent increase in white blood cell counts. Conversely, the group that did not receive chiropractic manipulation experienced a 7.96 percent decrease in immunity cells.

Time—and more studies—will show whether chiropractic treatment is a necessary addition to your immune system's arsenal. Lilian Garcia, however, has all the proof she needs. "I see my chiropractor every week," she says, "and there's no way I'm going to stop."

Chemo Does Not Cure: Often It Inflicts Damage and Spreads Cancer

taxol(NaturalNews) For years now, many of us who advocate natural health and natural approaches to beating cancer have warned against the dangers and the ineffectiveness of chemotherapy. The following report presented at the 27th Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium illustrates how chemo actually spreads cancer cells, as well as points out how little we are being told about the dangers of chemo:

“German investigators from Friedrich-Schiller University in Jena, have shown that taxol (the “gold standard of chemo”) causes a massive release of cells into circulation.

“Such a release of cancer cells would result in extensive metastasis months or even years later, long after the chemo would be suspected as the cause of the spread of the cancer. This little known horror of conventional cancer treatment needs to be spread far and wide, but it is not even listed in the side effects of taxol.”

As has oft been stated, chemo does not cure cancer - it merely attempts to eliminate the tumors and cancer cells that are symptoms of the underlying causes of cancer, and does so with little success and great risks. In some instances it may appear to eliminate tumors and cancer cell masses, though most often it merely destroys some of the cancer cells. In the process, it often inflicts a very high price.

Besides spreading cancer cells, chemo inflicts serious and perhaps irreversible damage to the immune system, the body’s natural first line of defense against cancer and other illness - thus paving the way for the remaining cancer cells or future cancers to overwhelm a body that is even less able to beat the cancer that got past the immune system in the first place.

Chemo also frequently results in serious and even fatal damage, and major organs are also damaged, particularly the liver - which as cancer pioneer Max Gerson observed is always impaired to begin in those who get cancer. The heart is also frequently seriously damaged.

The end result is that chemo kills more patients than it “cures”. Most of those deaths are the result of liver or heart failure. Statistically, it has been estimated that the five year success rate from chemo is only about 3% (meaning only about 3% more patients who opted for chemo survived at least five years than did those who opted to not undergo chemo). But even that meager statistic is misleading in two key ways:

First of all, though survival rates are slightly higher for the first couple of years compared to those who opted out of chemo, after the third year the survival rate for those who opted out is greater than those who were treated with chemo and the gap widens significantly every year after that.

Secondly, and perhaps most important of all, the survival rates compare all of those who either undergo chemotherapy or decide against it. That includes the very large number of people who do little or nothing to address their cancer naturally and merely forego chemo. If chemo survival rates were compared with those of people who not only opted out of chemo, but also chose a non-invasive natural protocol to eliminate the toxins and other causes of cancer, to boost their immune systems and to attack the cancer naturally without inflicting damage to the rest of the body, there would surely be no comparison.

You can bet that it is a comparison the cancer industry never wants to make.

Sources Included:

27th Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, (abstract 6014)
“Conventional Cancer Treatments”
“Hiding the Truth about Losing the War on Cancer”
Buzz up!
8 votes

About the author
Tony Isaacs, is a natural health advocate and researcher and the author of books and articles about natural health including “Cancer’s Natural Enemy” and “Collected Remedies”as well as song lyrics and humorous anecdotal stories. Mr. Isaacs also has The Best Years in Life website for baby boomers and others wishing to avoid prescription drugs and mainstream managed illness and live longer, healthier and happier lives naturally. He is currently residing in the scenic Texas hill country near Utopia, Texas where he serves as a consultant to the Utopia Silver colloidal silver and supplement company and where he is working on a major book project due for publication later this year. Mr. Isaacs also hosts the CureZone “Ask Tony Isaacs” forum as well as the Yahoo Health Group “Oleander Soup”

Monday, October 5, 2009

Ten Swine Flu Lies Told by MSM

msm(NaturalNews) The mainstream media is engaged in what we Americans call “bald faced lies” about swine flu. It seems to be true with this issue more than any other, and it became apparent to me recently when a colleague of mine — a nationally-syndicated newspaper columnist — told me their column on natural defenses for swine flu was rejected by newspapers all across the country. Many newspapers refused to run the column and, instead, ran an ad for “free vaccine clinics” in the same space.

The media, it seems, is so deeply in bed with the culture of vaccinations that they will do almost anything to keep the public misinformed. And that includes lying about swine flu vaccines.

There are ten key lies that continue to be told by the mainstream media (MSM) about swine flu and swine flu vaccines.

Lie #1 - There are no adjuvants used in the vaccines

I was recently being interviewed by a major U.S. news network when the reporter interviewing me came up with this humdinger: There are no adjuvants being used in the swine flu vaccines, he said!
I assured him that adjuvants were, indeed, a crucial part of the vaccine recipe, and they were being widely used by drug companies to “stretch” the vaccine supply. It’s no secret. But he insisted he had been directly told by a drug company rep that no adjuvants were being used at all. And he believed them! So everything being published by this large news network about swine flu vaccines now assumes there are no adjuvants in the vaccines at all.

Lie #2 - The swine flu is more dangerous than seasonal flu

This lie is finally starting to unravel. I admit that in the early days of this pandemic, even I was concerned this could be a global killer. But after observing the very mild impact the virus was having on people in the real world, it became obvious that this was a mild flu, no more dangerous than a seasonal flu. The MSM, however, continues to promote H1N1 swine flu as being super dangerous, driving fear into the minds of people and encouraging them to rush out and get a vaccine shot for a flu that’s really no more likely to kill them than the regular winter sniffles. Sure, the virus could still mutate into something far worse, but if it does that, the current vaccine could be rendered obsolete anyway!

Lie #3 - Vaccines protect you from swine flu

This is the biggest lie of all, and the media pushes it hard. Getting a vaccine, they insist, will protect you from the swine flu. But it’s just flat-out false. Even if the vaccine produces antibodies, that’s not the same thing as real-world immunity from a live virus, especially if the virus mutates (as they often do). As I pointed out in a recent article, statistically speaking the average American is 40 times more likely to be struck by lightning than to have their life saved by a swine flu vaccine. (…)

Lie #4 - Vaccines are safe

And how would any journalists actually know this? None of the vaccines have been subjected to real-world testing for any meaningful duration. The “safety” of these vaccines is nothing more than wishful thinking. The MSM also doesn’t want you to know what’s in the vaccines. Some vaccines are made from viral fragments grown in diseased African monkeys. If that sounds incredible, read the true story here:…

Lie #5 - The vaccine isn’t mandatory

You hear this lie all the time: The swine flu vaccine shot is voluntary, they say. But it’s not true if you’re an employee at a place where vaccines are being mandated. Millions of Americans are now being told by their employers that if they don’t get vaccine shots, they will be effectively fired from their jobs. It’s especially true with health care workers, day care employees and school teachers.

Lie #6 - Getting a vaccine shot is a good bet on your health

In reality, a vaccine shot is far more likely to harm you than help you. According to one viral expert, the actual mortality rate of the swine flu virus is estimated to be as low as .007 percent (…). That means H1N1 swine flu kills less than one person in 100,000. Even if the vaccine works, let’s say, 10 percent of the time, you’d have to vaccine one million people to prevent one death from swine flu. And in vaccinating one million people, you would inevitably harm or kill several people, simply from the vaccine side effects! Your net risk of death is increased by getting a swine flu vaccine.

Lie #7 - The vaccine isn’t made with “attenuated live virus”

When the swine flu vaccines were first being announced several months ago, they were described as being made with “attenuated live virus.” This was directly mentioned in CDC documents, among other places. This term apparently freaked out the American news consumer, and it has since been all but erased from any discussion about vaccines. Now, journalists will actually argue with you and insist the vaccines contain no attenuated live viruses whatsoever. Except they’re wrong. The vaccines are, indeed, made with “attenuated live viruses.” That’s how you make a vaccine: You take live viruses, then you weaken them (”attenuate”) and inject them into people.

Lie #8 - Wash, wash, wash your hands (to avoid exposure)

This idea of washing your hands a hundred times a day is all based on the assumption that you can avoid exposure to the swine flu virus. But that’s impractical. The virus is now so widespread that virtually everyone is certain to be exposed to it through the air if not other means. This whole idea of avoiding exposure to the swine flu virus is nonsense. The conversation should shift to ways to survive exposure via a healthy immune system. Of course, hand washing is a very good idea in a hospital setting. Recent news reveals that doctors are too busy to wash their own hands, resulting in the rampant spread of superbugs throughout most large hospitals in first world nations.

Lie #9 - Children are more vulnerable to swine flu than adults

This is just a flat-out lie, but it makes for good vaccine sales. Vaccines are right now being targeted primarily to schoolchildren. But the truth is that swine flu is extremely mild in children. “It’s mildest in kids,” says Dr Marc Lipsitch of Harvard University. “That’s one of the really good pieces of news in this pandemic.” Reuters actually had the guts to report this story, but most of the larger media outlets are still reporting that children are the most vulnerable.

Lie #10 - There is nothing else you can do beyond a vaccine and Tamiflu

This is where the media lies by omission. The mainstream media absolutely refuses to print just about any story that talks about using vitamin D, anti-viral herbs or natural remedies to protect yourself from swine flu. In the MSM, there are two options and only two: Vaccines and Tamiflu. That’s it. No other options exist in their fictional reality.

Why is the mainstream media so afraid to print the truth these days? Why can’t reporting on swine flu see the light of day… literally, with a mention of sunlight and vitamin D? Apparently, Big Pharma has such a tight grip on mainstream newspapers that no true story on swine flu can ever make it past the editor’s desk.

Killing stories, deceiving the public

It must really be depressing to work for the mainstream media. Even the reporters I know can’t stand it. The truth, they admit, rarely makes it into print.

Over the last few years, I’ve had a couple of job offers from large media outlets. They want to pay me a six-figure salary and stick me behind a desk where they can control what I report. Needless to say, I routinely reject those offers. If I can’t write the truth like I do here on, there’s no point writing at all. In too many ways, the mainstream media has become little more than a corporate mouthpiece, whoring itself out to the highest bidder / advertiser.

It’s no fault of the frontline reporters who actually work there. For the most part, they agree with what I’m saying. It’s the fault of the profit-oriented corporate mindset where news is about selling newspapers rather than actually informing the public.

Important news stories get killed every day in the newsrooms across America. They get killed not because they are poorly investigated or poorly written, but because they upset advertisers and corporate string pullers who shape the news and reject any stories that threaten their own financial interests.

Here in 2009, the distorted reporting on the swine flu vaccine has been one of the greatest media frauds ever perpetrated. The media has in every way contributed to the widespread ignorance of the American people on the subject of vitamin D and natural immune-boosting defenses that could reduce swine flu fatalities. Rather than informing readers, the MSM has made it a point to keep the people stupid, and in doing so, the media has failed its only mission and betrayed the very audience is claims to serve.

Saturday, October 3, 2009

What's in YOUR Vaccine?

Remember: Thimerosal contains mercury.

The questions: "What is in the flu shot and what is in the vaccinations they are giving my child?", are being raised by those that are taking responsibility for their health and that of their loved ones. This brings hope that, one day soon, parents will have the truth and be able to make more logical decisions in the future. ~ Vickie Barker

a representative sample

Vaccine Manufacturer Microbes Antibiotics Chemicals / Heavy Metals Animal ByProducts
Acel-Immune DTaP
diphtheria - tetanus - pertussis
diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis adsorbed
formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80 (Tween-80)gelatin
Haemophilus influenza
Type B
Connaught Laboratories
Haemophilus influenza
Type B, polyribosylribitol phosphate

ammonium sulfate, formalin, and sucrose
Merck & Co., Inc.
measles live virus neomycinsorbitol hydrolized gelatin, chick embryo
Merck & Co., Inc.
rubella live virus neomycin sorbitol hydrolized gelatin, human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue
anthrax adsorbed
BioPort Corporation 517.327.1500 nonencapsulated strain of
Bacillus anthracis

aluminum hydroxide, benzethonium chloride, and formaldehyde
diphtheria - tetanus - pertussis
X 5231
diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis adsorbed
formaldehyde, aluminum phosphate, ammonium sulfate, and thimerosalwashed sheep RBCs
(not licensed d/t expiration)
live vaccinia virus, with "some microbial contaminants," according to the Working Group on Civilian Biodefensepolymyxcin B sulfate, streptomycin sulfate, chlortetracycline hydrochloride, and neomycin sulfateglycerin, and phenol -a compound obtained by distillation of coal tarvesicle fluid from calf skins
recombinant hepatitis B
X 5231
genetic sequence of the hepatitis B virus that codes for the surface antigen (HbSAg), cloned into GMO yeast
aluminum hydroxide, and thimerosal
Medeva Pharmaceuticals 888.MEDEVA 716.274.5300influenza virusneomycin, polymyxinbeta-propiolactonechick embryonic fluid
trivalent influenza virus, types A&Bgentamicin sulphateformadehyde, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80 (Tween-80)chick embryonic fluid
hepatitis A
X 5231
hepatitis A virus
formalin, aluminum hydroxide, 2-phenoxyethanol, and polysorbate 20residual MRC5 proteins -human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue
HiB Titer
Haemophilus influenza
Type B
Haemophilus influenza
Type B, polyribosylribitol phosphate, yeast

ammonium sulfate, thimerosal, and chemically defined yeast-based medium
Connaught Laboratories 800.822.2463rabies virus adsorbedneomycin sulfatephenol red indicatorhuman albumin, human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue
Connaught Laboratories 800.822.24633 types of polio virusesneomycin, streptomycin, and polymyxin Bformaldehyde, and 2-phenoxyethenolcontinuous line of monkey kidney cells
Japanese encephalitis
Aventis Pasteur USA
strain of Japanese encephalitis virus, inactivated

formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (Tween-80), and thimerosal mouse serum proteins, and gelatin
recombinant protein (OspA) from the outer surface of the spirochete
Borrelia burgdorferi
kanamycinaluminum hydroxide, 2-phenoxyethenol, phosphate buffered saline
measles - mumps - rubella
Merck & Co., Inc.
measles, mumps, rubella live virusneomycinsorbitolhydrolized gelatin, chick embryonic fluid, and human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue
measles - rubella
Merck & Co., Inc.
measles, rubella live virusneomycinsorbitolhydrolized gelatin, chick embryonic fluid, and human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue
Connaught Laboratories 800.822.2463freeze-dried polysaccharide antigens from
Neisseria meningitidis

Meruvax I
Merck & Co., Inc.
mumps live virusneomycinsorbitolhydrolized gelatin
(new smallpox batch, not licensed)
Aventis Pasteur USA
highly attenuated vaccinia viruspolymyxcin B sulfate, streptomycin sulfate, chlortetracycline hydrochloride, and neomycin sulfateglycerin, and phenol -a compound obtained by distillation of coal tarvesicle fluid from calf skins
oral polio
3 types of polio viruses, attenuatedneomycin, streptomycinsorbitolmonkey kidney cells and calf serum
Streptococcus pneumoniae
Merck & Co., Inc.
capsular polysaccharides from polyvalent (23 types) pneumococcal bacteria
Pneumococcal 7-valent conjugate vaccine
Wyeth Lederle
saccharides from capsular
Streptococcus pneumoniae
antigens (7 serotypes) individually conjugated to diphtheria CRM 197 protein

aluminum phosphate, ammonium sulfate, soy protein, yeast
measles, mumps, rubella and varicella
Merck & Co., Inc.
live measles (Enders' attenuated Edmonston), mumps (Jeryl LynnTM), rubella (Wistar RA 27/3), and varicella (oka/Merck) strains of virusesneomycinmonosodium L-glutamate (MSG), potassium chloride, potassium phosphate monobasic, potassium phosphate dibasic, sodium bicarbonate, sodium phosphate dibasic, sorbitol, and sucrosehuman albumin, human diploid cells, residual components of MRC-5 cells including DNA and proteins, bovine serum, hydrolized gelatin, and chicken embryo
Chiron Behring GmbH & Company
fixed-virus strain Flury LEPneomycin, chlortetracycline, and amphotericin Bpotassium glutamate, and sucrosehuman albumin, bovine gelatin and serum "from source countries known to be free of bovine spongioform encephalopathy," and chicken protein
Rabies Vaccine Adsorbed
X 5231
rabies virus adsorbed
beta-propiolactone, aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, and phenol redrhesus monkey fetal lung cells
recombinant hepatitis B
Merck & Co., Inc.
genetic sequence of the hepatitis B virus that codes for the surface antigen (HbSAg), cloned into GMO yeast
aluminum hydroxide, and thimerosal
oral tetravalent rotavirus (recalled)
1 rhesus monkey rotavirus, 3 rhesus-human reassortant live virusesneomycin sulfate, amphotericin Bpotassium monophosphate, potassium diphosphate, sucrose, and monosodium glutamate (MSG)rhesus monkey fetal diploid cells, and bovine fetal serum
(not licensed due to expiration) 40-yr old stuff "found" in Swiftwater, PA freezer
Aventis Pasteur USA
live vaccinia virus, with "some microbial contaminants," according to the Working Group on Civilian Biodefensepolymyxcin B sulfate, streptomycin sulfate, chlortetracycline hydrochloride, and neomycin sulfateglycerin, and phenol -a compound obtained by distillation of coal tarvesicle fluid from calf skins
(new, not licensed)
Acambis, Inc.
in partnership with Baxter BioScience
highly attenuated vaccinia viruspolymyxcin B sulfate, streptomycin sulfate, chlortetracycline hydrochloride, and neomycin sulfateglycerin, and phenol -a compound obtained by distillation of coal tarvesicle fluid from calf skins
TheraCys BCG
(intravesicle -not licensed in US for tuberculosis)
Aventis Pasteur USA
live attenuated strain of
Mycobacterium bovis

monosodium glutamate (MSG), and polysorbate 80 (Tween-80)
diphtheria - tetanus - pertussis
Aventis Pasteur USA
Corynebacterium diphtheriae
Clostridium tetani
toxoids and acellular
Bordetella pertussis

aluminum potassium sulfate, formaldehyde, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80 (Tween-80) gelatin, bovine extract US sourced
Typhim Vi
Aventis Pasteur USA SA
cell surface Vi polysaccharide from
Salmonella typhi
Ty2 strain

aspartame, phenol, and polydimethylsiloxane (silicone)
Merck & Co., Inc.
varicella live virus neomycinphosphate, sucrose, and monosodium glutamate (MSG)processed gelatin, fetal bovine serum, guinea pig embryo cells, albumin from human blood, and human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue
yellow fever
Aventis Pasteur USA
17D strain of yellow fever virus
sorbitolchick embryo, and gelatin

Do You Know What's Inside a Flu Shot?

Do You Know What's Inside a Flu Shot?

Each year, just as multiple reminders on the need for and efficacy of getting a flu shot hit the news wires, I start receiving a steady stream of e-mails from readers, all asking the same basic question:

"Should I get a flu shot?"

My answer is an unequivocal no. I never recommend getting a flu shot. Based on everything that I know about flu shots, I think it's pretty clear that their main effect is to tax and possibly weaken one's immune system.

Before I highlight my main reasons for saying no to flu shots, please have a look at the following skit by the Royal Canadian Air Farce - it's quite the humorous look at the main ingredients that go into flu shots, and how little the general public knows about what's being injected into their bloodstreams:

There are a number of reasons why I feel that flu shots should be avoided, and almost all of them are related to the ingredients mentioned in this video.

But here's the most glaring reason: One in a million people who get the flu shot develops a neurological disease called Guillain-Barré Syndrome.

Guillain-Barré syndrome tends to develop without notice, and is marked by extreme muscle weakness and other symptoms related to nerve dysfunction. I once provided ongoing chiropractic treatments to a professional athlete who had to retire early because he developed Guillain-Barré Syndrome, so I know firsthand how debilitating this condition can be.

And let's not miss an obvious point: if one in a million people who get the flu shot can develop a devastating neurological condition, how many others who get the flu shot suffer from a number of uncomfortable symptoms that are never properly or accurately diagnosed? It's just not realistic to think that the ingredients in a flu shot can cause severe neurological damage in a small percentage of the population while leaving everyone else completely uninjured.

The truth is, even if the odds were one in 300 million, I would still say no to getting a flu shot - why take any risk of creating serious damage to my body?

The best defense against the flu and the common cold is to live healthfully every day. And if we do develop the flu or a cold, if we give our bodies time to rest and heal, we can cleanse ourselves of our weakest cells. For more information on this topic, please feel free to view the following articles: