Medical doctors speak out about why they avoid naked body scanners at airports
For those still contemplating whether or not the radiation emitted from airport naked body scanners is serious enough to avoid, you may be interested to know that many doctors routinely "opt out" and choose the full-body pat down instead because they recognize the inherent dangers associated with any level of radiation exposure. A recent CNN piece explains that for many doctors, avoiding all sources of radiation whenever possible is just the smart thing to do.
Throughout the past year, was covered many stories related to the US Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) controversial naked body scanners, which are now installed and in use at nearly 80 US airports (http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/faqs.shtm). Besides representing an unconstitutional invasion of privacy (http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/faqs.shtm), the scanners blast passengers with full-body doses of health-destroying radiation (http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=22309).
So what do medical doctors who fly have to say about the machines? Well, according to CNN's Elizabeth Cohen who recently conducted her own small investigation, many are concerned about the radiation these scanners emit. In fact, Cohen quotes several doctors who express concern about the cumulative effects of repeated radiation exposure, even if such exposure is supposedly miniscule and below established thresholds for causing harm.
"I do whatever I can to avoid the scanner. This is a total body scan -- not a dental or chest X-ray," said Dr. Len Lichtenfield to Cohen in an email. "Total body radiation is not something I find very comforting based on my medical knowledge."
Another doctor explained that there is "no absolutely safe dose of radiation," and that "each exposure is additive." So even if the supposedly low radiation doses emitted from the naked body scanners are as low as TSA and the machines' manufacturers claim they are, habitual exposure will still cause bodily harm.
Even Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society (ACS) expressed concern about whether the safety of them machines, and whether or not TSA is properly maintaining and testing them for safety. After all, TSA refused to release safety reports for quite some time, and when they did, the bungled reports explained nothing more than TSA's high level of incompetence (http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=117&t=25045).
Back in December, radiation scientists admitted that naked body scanners are fully capable of causing both sperm mutations and cancer, despite insistence by authorities to the contrary (http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=22309). Other reports suggest that nobody really knows how much radiation is actually emitted from naked body scanners due to flawed and inconclusive safety tests (http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=115&t=22322&p=35076)
Sources for this story include:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/03/31/ep.airport.scanners/index.html
Read more
New Report Ranks U.S. Poorly for Maternal Health
According to a new report conducted by the State of the World Mother’s, the United States ranks 33 out of 179 countries surveyed for maternal health. [1] Just last year, the U.S. was at 31. How can a country so developed be drastically behind other countries in taking care of mothers and their newborns? Could it be the medical establishment in the country that is driving the maternal health crisis, or something far more hidden and obscure?
Maternal Health Even Worse in United States
One out of 1,800 women each year dies during or following childbirth, representing the worst maternal death rate of any developed nation. The U.S. also ranked 42 out of 179 for children’s wellbeing, and 89 out of 179 for political status. Washington, D.C., seems to have the highest rate of infant mortality at about 7.9 deaths per 1,000 live births. To put this into a comparable perspective, cities like Oslo and Stockholm rank below 2.0 deaths per 1,000.
Could a Simple Nutritional Factor Be the Culprit?
The requirement for iodine increases over 50% for pregnant mothers http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=33834, but many still fail to receive enough through food. [2] Even physicians may overlook this crucial nutrient need. We know, based upon current meta analyses, that iodine deficiency increases infant mortality. [3] Research also shows that low iodine intake during pregnancy may also harm a baby’s IQ. [4] These findings suggest that, if we increase our awareness around iodine in medicine and the media, we may perhaps see a drop in infant mortality and increase in maternal health.
Were you aware of the state of maternal health in America? What do you think, other than iodine supplementation, could help improve it? Please let us know your thoughts in the comments!
by Dr. Edward Group DC, NP, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM
References:
1. Eliana Dockterman. U.S. Ranks Worst Developed Country for Maternal Health http://time.com/3847755/mothers-children-health-save-the-children-report/. TIME.
2. Zimmermann MB. The effects of iodine deficiency in pregnancy and infancy http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22742605. Paediatr Pernat Epidemiol. 2012 Jul;26 Suppl 1:108-17. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2012.01275.x.
3. Paolo Vitti, MD. Iodine deficiency disorders http://www.uptodate.com/contents/iodine-deficiency-disorders. UpToDate.
4. Sarah C. Bath, PhD, Colin D Steer, MSc, Prof Jean Golding, FMedSci, Pauline Emmett, PhD, Prof Margaret P Rayman, DPhil. Effect of inadequate iodine status in UK pregnant women on cognitive outcomes in their children: results from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC)http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(13)60436-5/fulltext. The Lancet. Volume 382, No. 9889, p331-337, 27 July 2013.
Read more
Study accidentally exposes chemotherapy as fraud - tumors grow faster after chemo
A team of researchers from Washington state had a giant "Oops!" moment recently when it accidentally uncovered the deadly truth about chemotherapy while investigating why prostate cancer cells are so difficult to eradicate using conventional treatment methods. As it turns out, chemotherapy does not actually treat or cure cancer at all, according to the study's findings, but rather fuels the growth and spread of cancer cells, making them much harder to stamp out once chemotherapy has already been initiated.
You might call it the "smoking gun" that proves, once and for all, the complete fraud of the conventional cancer industry. Not only is chemotherapy, the standard method of cancer treatment today, a complete flop, based on the findings, but it is actually detrimental for patients with cancer. Published in the journal Nature Medicine, the shock findings which, not surprisingly, are being ignored by the mainstream scientific community, highlight in full detail how chemotherapy causes healthy cells to release a protein that actuallyfeeds cancer cells and causes them to thrive and proliferate.
According to the study, chemotherapy induces healthy cells to release WNT16B, a protein that helps promote cancer cell survival and growth. Chemotherapy also definitively damages the DNA of healthy cells, a long-term detriment that persists long after chemotherapy treatment is stopped. This combined action of healthy cell destruction and cancer cell promotion technically makes chemotherapy more of a cancer-causing protocol than a cancer-treatment protocol, by definition, a fact that should grab the attention of anyone personally familiar with having, or knowing someone else who has cancer.
"WNT16B, when secreted, would interact with nearby tumor cells and cause them to grow, invade, and importantly, resist subsequent therapy," explained study co-author Peter Nelson from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington, about the findings, which he dubbed "completely unexpected." "Our results indicate that damage responses in benign cells ... may directly contribute to enhanced tumor growth kinetics," added the entire team about what they observed.
Avoiding chemotherapy improves health outcomes, suggests research
What this means, for all intents and purposes, is that the entire process of chemotherapy is completely worthless, and is actually highly detrimental for cancer patients. Anyone searching for a real cure will want to avoid chemotherapy, in other words, and pursue an alternate route. This may include investigating alternative treatments like the Gerson Therapy http://dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5704, or evaluating anti-cancer foods and nutrients like sodium bicarbonate, turmeric, high-dose vitamin C, and vitamin D.
"Whatever manipulations we're doing to tumors can inadvertently do something to increase the tumor numbers to become more metastatic, which is what kills patients at the end of the day," admitted Dr. Raghu Kalluri, author of a similar study published last year in the journal Cancer Cell. This particular study found that cancer drugs, which are typically pushed alongside chemotherapy, cause tumors to metastasize.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/shock-study-chemotherapy-backfire-cancer-worse-triggering-tumor-growth-article-1.1129897
http://naturalsociety.com/chemotherapy-makes-cancer-far-worse/
Read more
Passion for eating healthy food declared a mental disorder by 'expert' psychiatrists
It's no secret to tens of millions of Americans that Big Food is poisoning us daily with their fare. If that were not the case, then GMO-free restaurant chains like Chipotle wouldn't be as popular as they are, and sales of organic foods would not be reaching record levels https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/us-organic-food-sales-reach-record-39-billion-2014 year after year.
Big Food, of course, isn't taking that lying down http://www.frankenfoods.news/. "Mainstream" food producers may be enlisting the help of academia in getting Americans who believe in sustainable, clean food, declared mentally unstable.
As reported by Waking Times, scientists at the University of Northern Colorado, who recently conducted a case study about the obsession with healthy eating, have concluded that such clean-food preoccupation could be a mental disorder. They've even given it a name (because you can't have a disorder without a name, right?) – orthorexia nervosa, or ON for short, and researchers say the condition is made worse by a fear of being unhealthy and shunning low-quality, pesticide-ridden, GMO-laden, gluten-stuffed foodshttp://www.cleanfood.news/.
It's 'mental' to eat processed foods
As the Waking Times reported further:
The psychologists conducting the study argue that healthy eating can become dangerous if one becomes fixated on the types of ingredients in food, how the food is cooked, and what materials are used to prepare it. Those "suffering" from orthorexia may take extra time to prepare their food and carefully consider what they are willing to eat.
The horror.
The news site noted that today, 90 percent of products sitting on grocery store shelves in the U.S. are packed with processed foods, much of which are scientifically engineered to create physical and mental addiction http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23481. As such, these overly processed foods, which are also mega-portioned, have led to all sorts of medical problems – diabetes especially, but also heart disease and cancer, obesity and other chronic conditions. Given that even traditional medical science knows this, why would conscientious efforts by Americans to lower their risk of contracting these diseases – thereby driving the cost of health care down – not be encouraged, rather than vilified and misdiagnosed as crazy?
That just seems silly – at least, for rational people. So what's the problem? Co-author of the recent study, Thomas Dunn, an associate professor at the University of Northern Colorado, notes:
Such draconian diets can lack essential nutrients, and they make the vitamins and minerals a person does get from meals of exclusively, say, leafy greens, impossible for the body to absorb. This can lead to fragile bones, hormonal shifts, and cardiac problems, along with psychological distress and entrenched, delusional thinking.
"Draconian diets?" If the good professor wants to talk about "draconian diets," he needn't look any further than what the average American household consumes on a daily basis: fast foods, processed sugars, sugary soda and food that is manufactured, not served in a natural form. If that weren't the case, then why is there an obesity epidemic in the U.S.?
Eating clean isn't crazy
In Dunn's mind, if you meet two of the following, you might need some mental fixing:
1. You consume a nutritionally unbalanced diet because of concerns about "food purity."
2. You're preoccupied about how eating impure or unhealthy foods will affect your physical or emotional health.
3. You rigidly avoid any food you deem to be "unhealthy," such as those containing fat, preservatives, additives or animal products.
4. You spend three or more hours per day reading about, acquiring or preparing certain kinds of food you believe to be "pure."
5. You feel guilty if you eat foods you believe to be "impure."
6. You're intolerant of other's food beliefs.
7. You spend an excessive proportion of your income on "pure" foods.
Is Dunn part of the emerging medical/academia clique attempting to work with the administration to get more people declared mentally incompetent so the FBI can take their guns away http://fbi.fetch.news/?
The reality is, good nutrition actually helps prevent mental disorders, as we have repeatedly noted. [Here http://dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=22710, herehttp://dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=22489, and here http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23481, for starters]. Clean eating is the key to sound mental health – not processed junk. And it's not "crazy" to eat that way.
Sources:
http://www.wakingtimes.com/2016/01/08/experts-claim-passion-for-eating-healthy-has-become-a-mental-disorder/
http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23481
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/experts-claim-passion-for-eating-healthy-has-become-a-mental-disorder_012016
Read more
Coconut Oil is More Efficacious for Alzheimer's than All Big Pharma
A doctor`s husband made a remarkable reversal of his serious Alzheimer`s problem by ingesting coconut oil daily. Dr. Mary Newport had her husband Steve get off the pharmaceutical Alzheimer`s drugs as his condition just kept worsening with them, along with added negative side effects.
Alzheimer`s disease http://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/aa/alzheimersdisease.php affects over 5 million in the USA, and ranks seventh in deaths from diseases. Steve`s condition has improved greatly since coconut oil was included in his diet.
How Dr. Newport Found the Coconut Oil Solution
Mary had helped her husband Steve volunteer for a promising Alzheimer drug trial, but not in time to be accepted. She researched the new drug and discovered it was a pharmaceutical version of MCT oil, (Medium Chain Triglycerides). Then she realized that both coconut and palm kernel oils naturally contained MCTs.
MCTs are easier to quickly digest than other types of fats. They require less bile and enzyme action for intestinal absorption, and they are metabolized quickly in the liver. Therefore, MCTs expend energy more rapidly and strongly with less fats storing in the blood and tissues.
Metabolizing MCTs creates ketones. Recent research, which led to Big Pharma`s attempt to duplicate naturally occurring MCTs, has shown that ketones help protect against Alzheimer`s, even reverse it. Compared to Big Pharma`s synthetic version of MCT Oil, naturally sourced ketones remain in one`s body over twice as long, eight hours compared to three.
So Mary Newport`s investigation led her to a less expensive solution for her husband without the often predictable side effects of a pharmaceutical. Her sharing of the information benefits all of us. And lately more and more nutritional value has been attributed to coconut oil. But this is all relatively new knowledge.
This is Now; That Was Then
Since a few decades ago, coconut oil http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=33158 was demonized by the food processing industry`s quest to lower their cost, boost profit margins, and create longer shelf life by using hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils. Butter and palm oil were also included in the food industry`s fear campaigns to get consumer consent for using the more unhealthy trans fatty acid oils, including margarine.
Until then, coconut and palm oils were used in all sorts of packaged foods and baked products. Butter was considered okay. That gradually changed until dangerous margarine and partially and fully hydrogenated cooking oils moved onto grocery shelves, packaged foods, and baked products - replacing the falsely demonized coconut and palm oils.
Recent research has debunked the emphasis of cholesterol dangers as exaggerated or even false. Even if saturated fats, such as coconut oil are high in "bad" cholesterol, trans fats or hydrogenated oils have been proven to be worse for human health, even toxic.
Now real science and human experience are proving the health benefits of coconut oil. Almost all health food stores have it. Large quantities can be ordered on line. The ideal coconut oil is organic virgin. But not so ideal has some virtues remaining as well.
Coconut oil is considered a saturated fat because it is solid, though it begins melting above 75 degrees Fahrenheit, or 24 degrees Celsius. In addition to ingesting it, say with dark chocolate to make it yummy, coconut oil is one of the best oils for cooking because of its very high smoke temperature; this makes it less likely to turn toxic from excess heat than olive and other pure vegetable oils.
Yes, saturated fats were falsely demonized and those lies were almost totally accepted by consumers and health professionals until recent years. But that was then, and this is now.
Sources for more information:
Coconut oil for Alzheimer`s An Actual Case http://www.anh-usa.org/coconut-oil-and-alzheimer%E2%80%99s-disease/.
Coconut Oil.com A Compendium of Research Articles on Coconut Oil http://www.coconutoil.com/
MCT Oil Explained http://backacrosstheline.blogspot.com/2007/09/mct-oil-advantages.html
Ketones and Ketosis http://www.lowcarb.ca/tips/tips011.html
Weston A. Price The Importance of Saturated Fats for Biological Functions http://www.westonaprice.org/know-your-fats/528-importance-of-saturated-fats-for-biological-functions.html
Wise Geek on Saturated Fat http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-saturated-fat.htm/
About the author
Paul Fassa is dedicated to warning others about the current corruption of food and medicine and guiding others toward a direction for better health with no restrictions on health freedom. You can visit his blog at http://healthmaven.blogspot.com
Read more
Can Vitamin D Levels Predict Depression?
You probably know that vitamin D plays an important role in your health http://www.dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=33211, helping to absorb calcium and promote bone growth. It’s also possible that you have heard that Vitamin D deficiency has been linked to a variety of health problems, including rickets, breast cancerhttp://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/cc/breastcancer.php, heart disease, and weight gain. But what you most likely haven’t heard is that in addition to these serious issues, experts believe that vitamin D deficiency may be tied to depression.
Vitamin D and Depression
A recent study may confirm the link between low levels of vitamin D and depressive symptoms http://dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=109&t=33595. [1] The study assessed 185 healthy young women over four weeks, measuring their vitamin D levels and symptoms of depression. Researchers found that nearly half of the participants had vitamin D deficiency, and over a third had symptoms of clinically significant depressive symptoms.
When examining data from the study, investigators took factors such as season, body mass index, diet, exercise, and race into account. They found that lower vitamin D levels across the month-long period predicted symptoms of depression http://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/dd/depression.php, and the only other factor that could predict such symptoms was the use of antidepressants.
Vitamin D: A Potent Fighter for Depression?
More research is needed to fully understand the relationship between vitamin D and depression http://dreddyclinic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=109&t=33595 but this study is an interesting start. Vitamin D is an essential nutrient and it’s highly advisable to maintain a healthy level of vitamin D to promote bone growth and reduce the risk of other health problems.
by Dr. Edward Group DC, NP, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM
References:
1. David C. R. Kerr, et al. Association between vitamin D levels and depressive symptoms in young healthy adult women http://www.psy-journal.com/article/S0165-1781(15)00108-0/fulltext. Psychiatry Research. February 25, 2015. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2015.02.016.
Read more
