Basics of green tea

Green Tea

Common Names: green tea

Latin Names: Camellia sinensis

© Steven Foster

Background

Green, black, and oolong teas all come from the same plant, Camellia sinensis, but are prepared using different methods. To produce green tea, leaves from the plant are steamed, pan fried, and dried.

Tea has been used for medicinal purposes in China and Japan for thousands of years.

Green tea as a beverage or dietary supplement is promoted for improving mental alertness, relieving digestive symptoms and headaches, and promoting weight loss. Green tea and its components, including epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG), have been studied for their possible protective effects against heart disease and cancer.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a topical ointment, sinecatechins (brand name Veregen), which includes extracted components of green tea leaves and is used for the treatment of genital warts.

How Much Do We Know?

Although many studies have been done on green tea and its extracts, definite conclusions cannot yet be reached on whether green tea is helpful for most of the purposes for which it is used.

What Have We Learned?

Green tea contains caffeine. Drinking caffeinated beverages throughout the day seems to prevent a decline in alertness. One study looked at the effect of taking only a main component of green tea—EGCG—on mental capabilities. In that study, mental capabilities in adults didn’t improve.

The FDA has approved a specific green tea extract ointment as a prescription drug for treating genital warts.

Studies of green tea and cancer in people have had inconsistent results. The National Cancer Institute does not recommend for or against using green tea to reduce the risk of any type of cancer.

A small number of studies suggests that both green and black tea might have beneficial effects on some heart disease risk factors, including blood pressure and cholesterol. The research has limitations though, including how the data was evaluated and differences in study populations, so no definite conclusions have been reached.

Green tea extracts haven’t been shown to produce a meaningful weight loss in adults who are overweight or obese. They also haven’t been shown to help people maintain a weight loss.

It’s uncertain whether green tea is helpful for other conditions.

The National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) is funding research on green tea and its extracts, including studies on new forms of green tea extracts for preventing symptoms of inflammatory bowel disease and for lowering cholesterol.

What Do We Know About Safety?

Green tea, when consumed as a beverage, is believed to be safe when used in amounts up to 8 cups per day. Keep in mind that only the amount of added caffeine must be stated on product labels and not the caffeine that naturally occurs in green tea.

Drinking green tea may be safe during pregnancy and while breastfeeding when consumed in amounts up to 6 cups per day (no more than about 300 mg of caffeine). Drinking more than this amount during pregnancy may be unsafe and may increase the risk of negative effects. Green tea may also increase the risk of birth defects associated with folic acid deficiency. Caffeine passes into breast milk and can affect a breastfeeding infant.

Although uncommon, liver problems have been reported in a number of people who took green tea products, primarily green tea extracts in pill form. People with liver disease should consult a health care provider before taking products with green tea extract. People taking green tea extracts, especially those with liver disease, should discontinue use and consult a health care provider if they develop symptoms of liver trouble (such as abdominal pain, dark urine, or jaundice).

Green tea is an ingredient in many over-the-counter weight loss products, some of which have been identified as the likely cause of rare cases of liver injury.

Green tea at high doses has been shown to reduce blood levels and therefore the effectiveness of the drug nadolol, a beta-blocker used for high blood pressure and heart problems. It may also interact with other medicines.

Keep in Mind

Take charge of your health—talk with your health care providers about any complementary health approaches you use. Together, you can make shared, well-informed decisions.

Source: Link 

Diets

All Diets Types and Their Explanations - How to Navigate and Choose the Best One For You

Atkins Diet

"The Atkins Diet is a high-protein, low-carbohydrate weight loss diet developed by Robert Atkins, M.D., during the 1960s. In the early 1990s, Dr. Atkins brought his diet back into the nutrition spotlight with the publication of his best-selling book "Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution".

The Atkins Diet severely restricts the consumption of carbohydrate-rich foods and encourages the consumption of protein and fat. The diet is divided into four phases: Induction, Ongoing Weight Loss, Pre-maintenance, and Maintenance. During the Induction phase (the first 14 days of the diet), carbohydrate intake is limited to no more than 20 grams per day. No fruit, bread, grains, starchy vegetables, or dairy products (except cheese, cream, and butter) are allowed during this phase. During the Ongoing Weight Loss phase, dieters experiment with various levels of carbohydrate consumption until they determine the most liberal level of carbohydrate intake that allows them to continue to lose weight. Dieters are encouraged to maintain this level of carbohydrate intake until their weight loss goals are met. During the Pre-maintenance and Maintenance phases, dieters determine the level of carbohydrate consumption that allows them to maintain their weight. To prevent weight regain, dieters are told to maintain this level of carbohydrate consumption, perhaps for the rest of their lives. According to Dr. Atkins, most people must limit their carbohydrate intake to no more than 60 grams per day to keep lost weight off. In addition to the dietary restrictions discussed above, Dr. Atkins recommends regular exercise and nutritional supplementation as part of his weight loss program.

Note: The dietary recommendations issued by various organizations, including the United States Department of Agriculture, the National Institutes of Health, and the American Heart Association, encourage a daily carbohydrate intake of approximately 300 grams. To stay healthy, you will need to consume five times more what Atkins prescribes in his diets. Can a human being last long enough on this diet without experiencing any side effects? If the dieter dares to cheat on this program, the result can be detrimental and the weight can be regained easily, twice as much as what has been lost during the diet. The quick weight gain brings about eventual depression and the dieter will eventually reach his original weight before the weight loss.

What is so attractive about the diet that so many individuals have taken the time and effort to apply?

High-protein diets are the fad regimens of the moment. Their theory for weight loss consists of eating lots of animal proteins and skipping carbohydrates such as breads, rice and pasta. The theory behind these diets is that if you load up on animal proteins, you will feel fuller faster, so you'll end up eating less.

The Atkins Diet is attractive to dieters who have tried unsuccessfully to lose weight on low-fat, low-calorie diets. Atkins dieters can eat as many calories as desired from protein and fat, as long as carbohydrate consumption is restricted. Consequently, many Atkins dieters are spared the feelings of hunger and deprivation that accompany other weight loss regimens.

The underlying premise of the Atkins Diet is that diets high in sugar and refined carbohydrates cause weight gain, and ultimately lead to obesity. Such diets increase the production of insulin (a hormone secreted by the pancreas). When insulin levels are high, the food we eat is quickly and easily converted into fat, and stored in our cells. By restricting the consumption of carbohydrates, the production of insulin is moderated. In addition, the lack of available carbohydrate (the body's preferred fuel source) forces the body to burn stored fat as energy.

What do the critics say?

Many nutrition experts disagree with the basic premise of the Atkins Diet - the notion that high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets cause obesity. For evidence of the implausibility of the Atkins Diet, some nutritionists point out that the traditional Japanese diet is very high in carbohydrates, low in protein, and very low in fat; however, before the introduction of high-fat and high-protein Western foods, being overweight was rare in Japan. Such findings make sense because ounce for ounce, carbohydrates contain far fewer calories than fats (4 calories from carbohydrates versus 9 calories from fat). These critics blame the over-consumption of calories (from any source) and lack of physical activity as the primary causes of obesity.

One concern about a high-protein diet stems from all the saturated fats one eats - those fats that we're told cause high cholesterol, clogged arteries and, eventually, heart disease. Critics also express concern about the impact of the Atkins Diet on the overall health of the dieter. Depending on the foods chosen by the dieter, the diet may contain a large amount of saturated fat and trans fat, putting those at risk for heart disease in danger. Recent research has found that high-protein diets speed up the progression of arteriosclerosis, the main cause of heart attacks. Moreover, contrary to Atkins' claims, extremely low-fat diets have been found to reverse heart disease. In addition, the lack of grains, fruits, and vegetables in the Atkins Diet may lead to deficiencies of key nutrients, including dietary fiber, vitamin C, folic acid, and several minerals. Finally, high protein diets may increase the risk of osteoporosis and accelerate the rate of deterioration in kidney function associated with aging.

Critics concede that Atkins dieters often experience significant weight loss during the initial stages of the diet. However, these critics argue that the diet has a diuretic effect and that the initial weight loss is due to water loss, not fat loss. Eventually the body restores its water and sodium balance, and the rate of weight loss declines. Critics also note that there is no evidence showing that the Atkins diet leads to greater weight loss than do other diets that provide more carbohydrates, yet the same number of calories.Critics also note high-protein diets can lead to dangerous imbalances - bone loss and kidney problems - because too much protein can overwork the kidneys.

Dr. Atkins was the first person who brought a low-carbohydrates diet to major prominence in the U.S. and I credit him for defying "the system" and offering a weight loss plan that works for some people. He presents scientific fact, but for the most part his recent book provides anecdotal information from many of his patients.

Dr. Atkins claims that some people have a condition of "hyper-insulinism", in which they produce excess amounts of insulin when they eat carbohydrates, which in turn causes fat storage, diabetes, and a craving for more carbohydrates. This theory is scientifically logical but has not been accepted as proven by the medical community.

In Dr. Atkins' "maintenance phase", he advises that persons increase their carbohydrate intake to the point where they do not gain or lose weight.

All that is great, however, how can we understand the whole concept behind his diets and why do people truly believe in it? How does it actually work?

Insulin is a hormone, which is a substance that travels through the body and stimulates chemical reactions. The human body has mechanisms to regulate how much of each hormone is produced, so that their effects can be controlled. With insulin, however, there is no "shut-off" switch as there is with other hormones. The digestion of carbohydrates produces insulin, and there is no way to stop its activity once it is present in the bloodstream. There is also no way to prevent it from being produced when carbohydrates are consumed, even if these are in excess of what the body needs for fuel.

So, the more carbohydrates you consume, the more insulin the pancreas will produce to help digest the sugars of the carbohydrates. The more insulin that is being produced, the more stored fat will be sent to the cells, especially to those around your waist.
I believe Dr. Atkins' diet may be useful for persons who are very sensitive to carbohydrates and have extremely slow metabolic rates.

Dr. Atkins' diet does not restrict protein intake, which is the correct approach. However, his advice to add carbohydrate grams for the maintenance phase so that continued weight loss does not occur is not scientifically sound. There is no indication that a person will continue to lose weight below his ideal bodyweight, taking in consideration his body type and metabolism. Your body is predisposed to a certain weight, even though you interrupt carbohydrates consumption from your diet, the body will still maintain the same weight. After that phase, you will simply need to maintain it and be happy with it.

Extreme dieters will need to understand that all the information mentioned above and below these lines is to make you realize some facts that you've never taken the time to research. When a diet becomes popular, people jump on it without researching in more detail what it can do for their bodies or if the diet fits their standard. It is not because "John Doe has lost some weight on this specific diet" that you will have a similar result. The same goes for diet pills: be careful with them. If they work temporarily for some people, it doesn't necessarily mean they will have the same effect on you.

As for me, experiencing my own programs enabled me to lose weight, maintain it and still eat as much as I want of the right foods. I eat and exercise plenty.

Remember that moderation is important. If you want to eat something that is not healthy, go ahead and eat it. However, make sure to moderate the rest of the day with the right food. The following information should be helpful when it comes to moderation regarding a well-balanced diet.

Here are some good reasons to avoid high-protein diets:

1. They violate almost every known fact about nutritionally balanced eating. For some dieters, these diets can even be life threatening.
2. Popular high protein diet foods are high in cholesterol and saturated fat, which are now established as major culprits in heart attacks and strokes.
3. They overload you with protein, which results in loss of calcium from your bones, which may lead to osteoporosis. Protein overload also pressurizes your kidneys as they try to eliminate large amounts of urea, a by-product of protein metabolism.
4. They forbid foods known to lower the risk of heart disease and many cancers.
5. They deprive you of carbohydrates, the nutrient group most readily converted to energy. Even moderately active people will notice this lack during exercise.
6. They deprive your brain of glucose, which it needs for normal functioning. The result is a slowdown in thinking and reaction time.
7. They deprive you of the enormous benefits of fiber, which is a form of carbohydrate (cellulose).
8. They are deficient in essential vitamins. Indeed, some high protein diets even require you to take vitamin supplements for the sake of your health.
9. They cause potentially dangerous changes in your body chemistry.

10. They deliver temporary weight loss. However, a large part of it is water weight and lean muscle mass - not fat. (You lose water because your kidneys try to get rid of the excess waste products of protein and fat, called ketones, that your body makes.)

Note: Weight gain is usually rapid when you go off the diet.

11. Finally, it's worth knowing that while your body burns up 23 calories for every 10o carbohydrate calories it digests, it only burns up 3 calories for every 100 "fat" calories it digests. Therefore, a high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet makes it easier for you to stay fat!

FYI (For Your Information):
The average Western diet contains TOO MUCH FAT.
That's why an estimated 1 in 3 American children are overweight!
That's why heart disease is the No. 1 killer in America and Europe.
We should be eating less fat, not more.

High protein diets encourage high-fat eating and - for this reason alone - should be avoided.
What are those medical miracles that are being publicized to consumers for their rapid weight loss programs? The magazine Self, in March of 2002 investigated some of the programs that are simply bogus.

"Healthy weight loss" is not a particularly sexy marketing slogan. It is quite impossible to sell these types of slogans to Americans: "Drop pounds by eating fewer calories and increasing physical activity!" Instead, manufacturers of weight loss concoctions resort to selling their products with dubious promises of magically speedy results. Thankfully, separating fact from fiction is easy.

Read full here

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/1516090

Cooking with a microwave

Why cooking with a microwave destroys cancer-fighting nutrients in food and promotes nutritional deficiencies

(NaturalNews) Microwaves absolutely decimate the nutritional value of your food, destroying the very vitamins and phytonutrients that prevent disease and support good health. Previous studies have shown that as much as 98% of the cancer-fighting nutrients in broccoli, for example, are destroyed by microwaving.



To understand why, you have to understand the nature of vitamins and phytonutrients (plant-based nutrients). These are very delicate molecules which are fragile. They are easily destroyed by heat, which is why raw plant foods contain more plant nutrients than cooked foods. Carotenoids, antioxidants and other molecules like DIM (in broccoli) or anthocyanins (in purple corn) are all easily destroyed by microwave energy.

Microwaves "nuke" your food at a cellular level

Microwaving is the worst way to cook foods because microwaves excite the water molecules inside whatever you're cooking, causing heat to be formed from the inside out. This results in a cell-by-cell "nuking" of the food (such as broccoli, carrots, etc.), causing the near-total molecular decomposition of the vitamins and phytonutrients that promote disease.

Microwaved food is not merely "dead" food at every level, it is food that has been molecularly deconstructed, leaving nothing but empty calories, fiber and minerals. Virtually the entire vitamin and phytonutrient content has been destroyed.

Anybody who says microwaving food is a healthy way to cook is wildly ignorant of nutrition and cooking methods. While steaming vegetables is, indeed, a good method for some veggies to help make certain nutrients more bioavailable, microwaving destroys veggies from the inside out at a cellular level.

Don't be fooled by appearances

What's really deceptive about microwave cooking is that the food still appears to be basically the same, but at the cellular level, it's like a nuclear war has taken place. The actual molecular structure has been decimated. If you could see microwaved foods with a powerful microscope, you'd never eat them again because you would recognize just what a nutritional wasteland they really are.

If you want to eat in a healthy way, make sure a significant part of your diet is raw plants. It's okay to eat some steamed, stir-fried or even grilled veggies, but when grilling foods, avoid burning them because all burned parts contain toxic, cancer-causing chemicals that promote colon cancer.

Personally, I am absolutely astonished that more people don't already know all this. I'm even having to talk with my own staff about these issues, as they don't seem to know the full story on microwave cooking. Spread the word: Microwaves promote death because they turn nutritious, healthy food into empty, decimated calories. I gave up using a microwave well over a decade ago, and I don't even own one.

Remember, a person who cooks a lot of their food with microwaves will inevitably have chronic nutritional deficiencies that promote cancer, diabetes, bone diseases, loss of brain function, heart disease and many other health problems. The least healthy people of any society are typically the ones who frequently use the microwave oven to "nuke" their foods.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039404_microwave_ovens_vitamins_nutrients.html#ixzz2MylFmAiT

Shaken Baby Syndrome

Shaken Baby Syndrome often just a cover story for children who are brain damaged by vaccines

(NaturalNews) Child abuse comes in many forms, and can result in serious and permanent health conditions such as Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS), a type of brain damage that typically afflicts children younger than one-year-old. But the cause of such abuse is not always physical trauma as many experts claim -- pediatricians, doctors, and government officials routinely abuse children by injecting them with toxic vaccines, which are often the real cause of SBS and other brain damage-related conditions inappropriately blamed on physical abuse allegedly caused by parents and guardians.



It is not something the mainstream media likes to talk about, or that mainstream health authorities will likely ever admit to, but vaccine-induced brain damage is prevalent in today's society, especially as an increasing number of vaccines are added to the childhood vaccination schedule. And based on the available evidence, as well as many years' worth of lengthy investigation into the matter by prominent truth-seekers, SBS in particular appears quite often to be nothing more than a cover condition for brain damage caused by vaccine injections.

SBS, a convenient cover for vaccine-induced brain injuries

The concept of SBS as a legitimate, trauma-induced form of brain damage was first popularized back in the 1970s when it was hypothesized that babies with serious brain injuries that could not be directly linked to external signs of cranial trauma must have been shaken violently by another person. Physical child abuse was essentially declared to be the sole cause of SBS, and eventually became the go-to diagnosis when dealing with inexplicable types of brain damage observed in children.

As time went on; however, those paying attention to the situation began to observe a curious pattern with SBS and its relation to vaccine injections. Many children who had been developing normally and growing at a healthy rate prior to receiving routine childhood vaccines, for instance, suddenly stopped progressing and their health actually began to deteriorate. And typically after the second and third round of injections, some children began to develop symptoms similar to those commonly associated with SBS.

Multivalent vaccines directly linked to causing SBS

In a report published in a 1998 issue of Nexus Magazine, Dr. Viera Scheibner, Ph.D., wrote extensively about the connection between SBS and vaccines. Through her research, Dr. Scheibner found that multivalent vaccines in particular, which contain antigens for two or more diseases as opposed to just one antigen for a single disease, were closely associated with causing encephalitis and other forms of brain damage. Such vaccines included DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus) and the five-in-one pentavalent vaccine for diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, hepatitis B, and inactivated polio.

Since many of the symptoms associated with vaccine-induced brain damage directly mirror those of SBS, Dr. Scheibner and others became convinced that not all cases of SBS were caused by physically-induced child abuse. They also began to call out the medical community for its reckless blanketing of all SBS cases as having been definitively caused by physical abuse, especially when solid evidence was emerging to suggest otherwise.

"[V]accines like the pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine are actually used to induce encephalo-myelitis (experimental allergic encephalomyelitis) in laboratory animals," writes Dr. Scheibner in her paper, referencing a study published in the American Journal of Pathology back in 1980. "This (condition) is characterized by brain swelling and hemorrhaging of an extent similar to that caused by mechanical injuries," she adds, referencing another study published in the Japanese Journal of Medical Science & Biology several years later in 1985.

Many parents of vaccine-injured children falsely accused of child abuse

What this suggests, of course, is that the steady rise in SBS cases over the past several decades is not necessarily due solely to a corresponding increase in child abuse by parents and caretakers, but also to an increase in vaccine reactions. But the medical establishment continues to ignore this evidence, which has resulted in countless parents being falsely accused by the state of abusing theirchildren following rounds of vaccines that left them injured with SBS-type symptoms.

"Many infants who suffer the so-called 'shaken baby syndrome' may be victims of undiagnosed vaccine damage," adds Dr. Scheibner. "Ever since mass vaccination of infants began, reports of serious brain, cardiovascular, metabolic and other injuries started filling pages of medical journals."

This is not to say that all abuse-related cases of SBS are false, but rather that at least some of them are being misdiagnosed when vaccines are the real culprit. In fact, package inserts for many vaccines, including the hepatitis B and pertussis vaccines, very clearly explain that neurological conditions such as paraesthesia and paralysis, including the infamous Guillain-Barre syndrome and multiple sclerosis, can all arise in response to vaccine injections.

But rather than properly investigate the safety of vaccines, the American justice system, which is heavily influenced by the pharmaceutical and vaccine industries, often blames the parents of vaccine-injured children for harming their children. These same parents may be incarcerated for supposedly inflicting damage on their children, and may even have their children taken away from them byChild Protective Services (CPS).

This is precisely what happened to a family from South Dakota whose prematurely-born son died just a few weeks after birth as a result of vaccine damage. According to reports, the child, whose name was Cameron, received several rounds of vaccine injections just after birth in accordance with recommendations from the family's doctor, but quickly developed serious complications. Not long after receiving the three-in-one Pentacel vaccine (DTaP, IPV, and Hib), and just one day after receiving the hepatitis B vaccine, Cameron died.

Not only did Cameron's parents have to deal with the grief and pain of losing their son, but they also had to deal with false accusations that they were somehow responsible for their child's death. The system tried to claim that Cameron's parents shook him to death, which caused his brain to hemorrhage, and subsequently proceeded to kidnap Cameron's twin brother Dalton and hand him over to CPS. And no acknowledgment was ever made during this process that vaccines could have had anything to do with Cameron's death.

Several years later, medical experts finally confirmed that vaccines, and not physical abuse, were the most likely cause of Cameron's death, and Dalton was eventually taken out of the hands of the state and returned to his family. But it took many years of fighting the system for the family to achieve some kind of justice in the matter, and many other families have since had to endure similar abuse by a government that refuses to recognize the dangers of childhood vaccines.

SBS scam continues due to lack of legitimate, long-term vaccine safety studies

Unfortunately, the SBS scam, which protects the vaccine industry from liability for vaccine-induced health damage and death, is unlikely to go anywhere anytime soon. This is due in large part to the fact that long-term safety studies for vaccines are virtually non-existent, making it extremely difficult for parents of vaccine-injured children to defend themselves against child abuse claims.

"Few published studies on vaccine effects include before-and-after studies of immune parameters or brain function studies such as electroencephalograms, or long-term safety monitoring," says Dr. Harold E. Buttram, M.D., about the lack of proper scientific inquiry into the harmful side effects of vaccines. "Inadequate consideration has been given to the additive or synergistic adverse effects of multiple simultaneous vaccines."

Sources for this article include:

http://www.nvic.org/doctors-corner/Shaken-Baby-Syndrome.aspx

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/salud/esp_salud33d.htm

http://www.vaccineeducation.org/shakenbaby.htm

http://discovermagazine.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039097_Shaken_Baby_Syndrome_vaccine_damaged_children_cover_story.html#ixzz2KswG2VXC

Railway Track Therapy

'Railway Track Therapy' The New Health Mania among Indonesians

A new craze has emerged among some of the people of Jakarta in Indonesiathat an ailing patient can be relieved of his sickness by lying down across the railway lines. They believe that the low-voltage electric current in the tracks will cure them as it passes through their bodies. According to local media reports, these people believe it can cure all kinds of diseases, from diabetes to high-blood pressure to insomnia.

Until recently around 50 people used to visit the railway tracks daily to seek this therapy. In order to curb this dangerous practice the Railway officials have erected signs warning of the dangers of the fad, threatened penalties of a three-month jail term and fines equivalent of £1,200 for those who flout the ban on the practice. After this the numbers have dropped but some people still remain undeterred and come looking for free "electric therapy." 

This dangerous practice came into existence with a local rumour about a man who tried to commit suicide as he was fed up after suffering paralysis from a stroke and medical treatment failed to cure his symptoms. He laid down on the tracks with the intention of killing himself but claimed that the track therapy had instead cured him.

[sources:1,2]

Read full here.... http://www.unbelievable-facts.com/2013/01/railway-track-therapy-new-health-mania.html

Banned Raw Milk

Urgent: Big Ag group trying to ban raw milk sales in South Carolina - your help needed to stop this tyranny
(NaturalNews) It has come to our attention that the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), a national non-governmental organization that claims to represent the interests of American farmers, is right now attempting to covertly eliminate the freedom of South Carolina farmers to sell raw milk at the retail level. One of only a few states that currently recognizes the freedom of individuals to buy and sell raw milk legally, South Carolina is basically being accosted by this Big Ag front group, which will attempt to eliminate raw milk freedom in the Palmetto State at a special meeting to be held on Friday, January 25, 2013, at 12:00 pm.

According to an insider alert we just received, the South Carolina Dairy Advisory Committee (SCDAC) will consider a proposal made by AFBF, which is strongly and vocally opposed to individuals having the freedom to buy and sell raw milk, to eliminate an existing state statute that recognizes the freedom of South Carolina farmers who are properly permitted to sell raw milk at the retail level. In its place, AFBF wants SCDAC to implement policies that reflect its own biased views towards raw milk, which for all intensive purposes would ban the sale of raw milk for human consumption throughout the state.

"Delegates approved a new policy that states only pasteurized milk and milk products should be sold for human consumption," states the heinous proposal that AFBF is pushing SCDAC to adopt. "Delegates approved the measure in light of the potential risks to public health and food safety posed by consumption of raw milk."

Science reveals raw milk is safe

Based on AFBF's track record of lobbying, it is hardly surprising that the organization would side with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in clinging to a completely unscientific and outdated view of raw milk safety. After all, AFBF is the same organization that back in 2012 aggressively opposed reasonable restrictions that would have limited the use of antibiotics in factory-farmed animals, erroneously claiming that doing so would somehow negatively affect public health (when quite the opposite is true).

Now, AFBF is making similar inaccurate claims with its surreptitious attack on raw milk in South Carolina. Based on data published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), raw milk is linked, at most, to causing only 42 sicknesses nationwide every year. And most of these cases cannot definitively be linked to raw milk -- they are merely assumed to be the cause of illness, as the government has a unabashed and completely irrational bias against raw milk.

But even if all 42 of these annual cases could be conclusively linked to raw milk, the overall risk associated with raw milk consumption would still be ridiculously low, as roughly 10 million Americans consume raw milk on a regular basis. The federal government's own data proves that Americans are 35 thousand times more likely to get sick from many other foods legally sold at grocery stores than they are from raw milk (http://www.westonaprice.org/press/government-data-proves-raw-milk-safe).

Take Action

Since the meeting takes place in less than 24 hours, it is crucial that the health freedom community band together as one to immediately oppose this assault on raw milk. NaturalNews readers are urged to contact both David Winkles, Jr., President and CEO of the South Carolina Farm Bureau, and Bob Stallman, President of AFBF, and urge them not to infringe on the freedom of South Carolinians to buy and sell raw milk. In your calls and emails, be sure to explain to these gentlemen that:

1) Raw milk is a safe food, rich in living enzymes and beneficial probiotic bacteria, that can actually improve health. People have been safely consuming raw milk for millennia, and many countries today allow raw milk sales without issue, including in Europe where raw milk vending machines can be spotted on street corners.

2) Scientific data supports the safety of raw milk that is properly regulated.

3) A movement away from regulated raw milk will adversely affect the citizens of South Carolina who rely on it for health.

4) If raw milk is made illegal, other potentially unsafe avenues like underground sales will quickly emerge, similar to what occurred during alcohol prohibition.

You can contact David Winkles, Jr. at:
dwinkles@scfb.org
(803) 936-4211

You can contact Bob Stallman at:
bstallman@fb.org

Remember to be polite, but assertive, in your correspondence. Without enough push-back, we can stop this blatant attack on raw milk from succeeding. But we must act now to show these bullies that we are paying attention, and that we will not succumb to their attempts to steal even more food freedom from Americans.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com

http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/raw_milk_map.htm

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038828_raw_milk_South_Carolina_farm_bureau.html#ixzz2J57hqgUB

Heart attack

Berries dramatically slash heart attack risk

(NaturalNews) Imagine how excited Big Pharma executives would be if they could come up with a drug that could slash women's risk of heart attacks by one-third. To top it off, what if this prescription could be conveniently taken three times a week and -- as an added bonus -- what if the medicine tasted great and had no side effects? Drug makers would have doctors pushing these pills as a "miracle drug" and Big Pharma would rake in millions of dollars.



However, there's no drug that can do all of the above -- but there is a natural food prescription that appears to do what Big Pharma's chemicals can't. According to research just reported in Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association, eating three or more servings of blueberries and strawberries per week appears to slash women's risk of a heart attack by about one-third.
"We have shown that even at an early age, eating more of these fruits may reduce risk of a heart attack later in life," Aedin Cassidy, Ph.D., lead author and head of the Department of Nutrition at Norwich Medical School of the University of East Anglia, said in a media statement.

The scientists behind the study, who are from the Harvard School of Public Health and the University of East Anglia in the UK, note there are high levels of naturally occurring compounds called dietary flavonoids in blueberries and strawberries. These flavonoids are also found in grapes and wine, blackberries, eggplant, and other fruits. According to the new research, berries contain a specific sub-class of flavonoids, called anthocyanins, which help keep arteries open, and may provide other cardiovascular benefits -- including preventing the buildup of heart attack-causing plaque.

The researchers came up with their results by studying 93,600 women between the ages 25 to 42 who were registered with the Nurses' Health Study II. The women filled out questionnaires about their diet every four years for 18 years and, during this time, 405 heart attacks occurred. It turns out that the women who ate the most blueberries and strawberries had a large reduction in their risk of heart attack, about 32 percent, compared to women who ate the berries once a month or less. The findings held up even when the research team looked at possible risk factors for heart attack -- such as age, high blood pressure, family history of heart attack, body mass, exercise, smoking, caffeine or alcohol intake.

"Blueberries and strawberries can easily be incorporated into what women eat every week," Eric Rimm D.Sc., senior author and Associate Professor of Nutrition and Epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, said in a press statement. "This simple dietary change could have a significant impact on prevention efforts."

Sources: 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23319811

http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/127/2/188.long

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-01/aha-sbm011013.php

About the author:
Sherry Baker is a widely published writer whose work has appeared in Newsweek, Health, the Atlanta Journal and Constitution, Yoga Journal, Optometry, Atlanta, Arthritis Today, Natural Healing Newsletter, OMNI, UCLA's "Healthy Years" newsletter, Mount Sinai School of Medicine's "Focus on Health Aging" newsletter, the Cleveland Clinic's "Men's Health Advisor" newsletter and many others.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038766_berries_heart_attack_prevention.html#ixzz2IdD3NMuH

Alzheimer's treatment

Researchers testing promising, non-pharmaceutical Alzheimer's treatment

(NaturalNews) Researchers at Johns Hopkins University are carrying out clinical tests in which a pacemaker-like device is implanted into the brains of patients with early-stage Alzheimer's disease.

"We are very excited about the possibilities of this potentially new way to treat Alzheimer's," said lead researcher Constantine G. Lyketsos.



Alzheimer's is an incurable, degenerative disease that leads to progressive loss of cognitive function, including memory and the ability to perform simple daily tasks. An estimated 5.2 million people over the age of 64 currently suffer from Alzheimer's disease in the United States, and this number is project triple by 2050.

Although researchers have searched effective pharmaceutical treatments for years, none have yielded any promise. The new multi-center trial is designed to test a completely different model of treatment, in which electrical stimulation is delivered directly to the brain in order to slow and even reverse cognitive decline.

"Recent failures in Alzheimer's disease trials using drugs such as those designed to reduce the buildup of beta amyloid plaques in the brain have sharpened the need for alternative strategies," said Paul B. Rosenberg, director the Johns Hopkins University site for the study.

"This is a very different approach, whereby we are trying to enhance the function of the brain mechanically. It's a whole new avenue for potential treatment for a disease becoming all the more common with the aging of the population."

Deep brain stimulation

The device consists of a tiny, pacemaker-like stimulator that sends 130 electrical impulses per second through wires that are implanted in the brain's fornixes. The fornix is essential in transmitting information to the hippocampus, a structure believed to play an important role in memory synthesis and learning. In many early stage Alzheimer's patients, the first symptoms appear in the hippocampus. The electrical current is not detectable by the patient, Rosenberg said.

These "deep brain stimulation" devices have already been in use for 15 years in patients with Parkinson's disease, another neurodegenerative disorder. More than 80,000 people have received the implants, which appear to reduce the incidence of tremors and the need for medication. Other studies are underway to determine whether deep brain stimulation can effectively treat obsessive-compulsive disorders or depression.

In a preliminary study conducted in 2010, researchers found that patients with mild Alzheimer's disease who received the devices experienced sustained increases in glucose metabolism over a 13-month period, whereas the typical course of the disease is for glucose metabolism to decrease. Glucose metabolism is an indicator of nerve cell activity.

The new study will be conducted on 40 patients at five institutions across the United States and Canada. Half the participants will have their devices activated two weeks after surgery, while the other half will have their devices activated one year after surgery. The study is double-blind, meaning that neither doctors nor patients will know which group each participant is in.
The study is funded by the National Institute on Aging (part of the National Institutes of Health) and the medical device company Functional Neuromodulation Ltd.

Sources:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121205102615.htm

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038510_Alzheimers_treatment_natural_remedies_brain_stimulation.html#ixzz2Gb7AXYlt

Dry skin solution

Dry skin? Try upping your vitamin D intake

(NaturalNews) One of the major drawbacks of winter is the effect cold, dry weather has on your skin. The good news is, research shows that upping your vitamin D intake could actually help mitigate that problem and keep your skin looking and feeling better.

One recent study by the Johnson and Johnson Skin Research Center found a link between low vitamin D levels and drier skin, "which was subsequently ameliorated by topical application of vitamin D," according to a summary.

Researchers conducted an observational study of two groups of 83 and 61 subjects. In the first part of the study, blood serum levels and skin conductance measurements were taken in the group of 83 participants following a one-week washout period.

"Results showed subjects with lower levels of vitamin D had lower average skin moisture," the summary said.

Sound vitamin D levels mean moister skin, less irritation

From that group, a subset of 61 study participants with insufficient vitamin D serum levels were given a topical ointment containing vitamin D. "Results showed increased skin moisture and improved clinical grading of dry skin," said the summary. Overall, the findings "suggest a relationship between vitamin D3 levels and hydration of" skin.

"Some people use vitamin D for skin conditions including vitiligo, scleroderma, psoriasis, actinic keratosis, and lupus vulgaris," added a summary of vitamin D in general from the U.S. National Library of Medicine, a division of the National Institutes of Health.

In fact, a number of studies have shown that vitamin D is very crucial in maintaining the correct balance of tissues present in skin. A lack of balance "can lead to wrinkled and parched skin due to disruption in this balancing phenomenon," writes Pratima Sharma for OnlyMyHealth.com. "The relationship between skin balance and vitamin D is a mutually beneficial one. One is responsible for the other, and vice versa."

The skin consists of a special layer designed to convert ultraviolet B radiation from the sun into vitamin D; a lack of sun can hamper this conversion, and in the winter, when it is much more cloudy, that can have a substantial impact on the dryness of your skin.

"Another smart way of treating vitamin D deficiency is by exposing yourself to the sun, optimally," Sharma says. "You need to consider making the most of the morning sun as much as possible."

Boost your 'D' with diet

That said, she and other experts caution that too much exposure to sunlight can also be harmful. Fortunately, besides taking vitamin D capsules and using topical vitamin D-containing lotions, you can obtain much of the supplement in the foods you eat:

-- Catch a plate of salmon. "In addition to providing more than 100 percent of your vitamin D requirements for the day, this fatty fish is chockfull of omega-3 fatty acids, which can help combat dry skin and hair. Other good fish sources containing vitamin D include sardines, cod liver oil and tuna," writes registered dietician Kristin Kirkpatrick, for the Huffington Post. Eggs also contain a healthy dose of vitamin D.

-- Enjoy a glass of sunshine - orange juice. By starting your day off with an eight-ounce glass of fresh, tangy orange juice you can get about one-third of your daily vitamin D requirement. And here's an additional benefit: You get vitamin C as well, which strengthens collagen, an element that is key to slowing the rate of aging of the skin.

-- Grab a cup of yogurt. A regular helping of this tasty food provides about 20 percent of your daily requirement of vitamin D, and comes with the added benefit of being a probiotic food that adds "good" bacteria to your intestinal tract for better digestion and fewer infections.

-- Healthy whole-grain breakfast. Choosing a healthy, whole-grain breakfast cereal to start your day off right can give you a quarter of the daily vitamin D you need, as well as a good dose of fiber, which can help you maintain a better weight. Check the label before you buy and make sure you're getting a cereal fortified with vitamin D.

Sources:

http://www.vitasearch.com/get-clp-summary/40491

http://www.huffingtonpost.com

http://www.onlymyhealth.com/dry-skin-vitamin-d-deficiency-1320819921

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038490_dry_skin_vitamin_D_nutrition.html#ixzz2GSn5KoqU

Psychiatrist and children

Don't let your child see a psychiatrist. Ever
(NaturalNews) If you have a child, don't let him/her see a psychiatrist. Ever.

Read Mike Adams' new article about psychiatry. It's one of the best I've ever read, and I've been researching this pseudoscience for 20 years.

http://www.naturalnews.com

Then read this one, too. It's also excellent. I wrote it.

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/the-liars-liar/

Yes, I know, I'm bragging, which is a sign of a mental disorder: Self-Inflation at the Expense of Sacred Psychiatry Disorder. The preferred treatment is electroshock therapy and MKULTRA re-programming. I'm opting for a walk in the park coupled with two doses of outrage at these fake doctors who poison brains and believe they're healers.

Here is a clue. The government gives psychiatry its fake legitimacy. That's how the game works. The government blesses the medical licensing boards that award psychiatrists permission to drug your children, alter their brains, poison them, and of course make all the fake diagnoses in the first place.

Without the government, these fakes would sink into the waves and be gone forever. Nobody in his right mind or wrong mind would ever step into a psychiatrist's office. It would be like volunteering to stumble out on to a mine field seeded with explosives.

Media, naturally, go along with the psychiatric hoax. Thousands of articles keep coming out of the hopper to support the authoritative pronouncements of these deranged monsters with medical degrees and "training" in diagnosing mental illnesses.

There are no mental illnesses or disorders. There never have been.

There are people with problems, there are people who suffer, there are people who are in desperate circumstances, there are people who have severe nutritional deficiencies, there are people who have been poisoned by various chemicals, there are people who have been abused and ignored, there are people who have been told there is something wrong with them, there are people who are different and can't deal with the conforming androids in their midst, but there are no mental disorders.

None.

It's fiction. It's a billion-dollar fiction. It's a gigantic steaming pile of bullshit. Always has been.

There is not a single diagnostic test for any so-called mental disorder. Never has been. No blood test, no urine test, no saliva test, no brain scan, no genetic test. No science.

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com

So why hasn't psychiatry been destroyed and outlawed? Because there is money in it. Big money. Pharmaceutical money. And because the public is in a trance. Mothers and fathers are quite willing to take their children to these brain poisoners...lambs to the slaughter.

The silence of the lambs.

People are entranced by so-called professionals with fancy degrees who speak technical babble. It all seems real. Because if it weren't real, then...what? People would be forced to admit they are living in a fantasy. And people don't want to admit that. They would rather die than admit that.

But that's what psychiatry is. An elaborate fantasy. If every psychiatrist in the world vanished tomorrow, the world would immediately become a far healthier place.

If every celebrity who outrageously whores for psychiatry would stop on a dime, the world would be a far healthier place right away.

You think Dr. Phil is a fake? He's nothing compared to psychiatrists with their prescription pads. He's a saint by comparison. The drugs are brain poisons. If you really want to know the truth about the drugs, go to breggin.com and read everything Dr. Peter Breggin has ever written about the drugs. He covers the whole slimy waterfront.

There is some horrendous handwriting on wall. Believe me. You can see it all around you if you look. The shrinks are treating younger and younger children with the brain poisons, every day. They're diagnosing children who are practically toddlers and they're drugging them. They're ripping their brains. It's happening. You may not want to know about it, but it's there. It's a crime on the order of murder.

And the bastards at the FDA and the bastards who train doctors in medical schools are going along with it. They're accomplices to the ongoing crime. They have blood on their hands.

Here is a story Dr. Breggin told in his classic book, Toxic Psychiatry. It says it all:

"Roberta was a college student, getting good grades, mostly A's, when she first became depressed and sought psychiatric help at the recommendation of her university health service. She was eighteen at the time, bright and well motivated, and a very good candidate for psychotherapy. She was going through a sophomore-year identity crisis about dating men, succeeding in school, and planning a future. She could have thrived with a sensitive therapist who had an awareness of women's issues.

"Instead of moral support and insight, her doctor gave her Haldol. Over the next four years, six different physicians watched her deteriorate neurologically without warning her or her family about tardive dyskinesia [motor brain damage] and without making the [tardive dyskinesia] diagnosis, even when she was overtly twitching in her arms and legs. Instead they switched her from one neuroleptic to another, including Navane, Stelazine, and Thorazine. Eventually a rehabilitation therapist became concerned enough to send her to a general physician, who made the diagnosis [of medical drug damage]. By then she was permanently physically disabled, with a loss of 30 percent of her IQ.

"...my medical evaluation described her condition: Roberta is a grossly disfigured and severely disabled human being who can no longer control her body. She suffers from extreme writhing movements and spasms involving the face, head, neck, shoulders, limbs, extremities, torso, and back-nearly the entire body. She had difficulty standing, sitting, or lying down, and the difficulties worsen as she attempts to carry out voluntary actions. At one point she could not prevent her head from banging against nearby furniture. She could hold a cup to her lip only with great difficulty. Even her respiratory movements are seriously afflicted so that her speech comes out in grunts and gasps amid spasms of her respiratory muscles...Roberta may improve somewhat after several months off the neuroleptic drugs, but she will never again have anything remotely resembling a normal life."

If the smug scum who run the NY Times put THAT story on the front page right under a huge headline, we might see something good happen in this country.

Chronic whiners want to claim the government has to protect everybody all the time, as if that were possible, as if that were really the government's aim. These whiners are busy-bodies, meddlers, and self-made victims. They sometimes pose as scientists. They love psychiatry. They equate psychiatry with government. You know, "share and care."

They assert that government knows best. At bottom, they're vicious little idiots.

But they're very useful idiots, because the government welcomes their help in keeping the populace in line.

And psychiatry is a cardinal strategy in that regard.

Chemical straitjackets for the lambs.

The silence of the lambs.

Jon Rappoport
The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com


About the author:
The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon
was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of
California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an
investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics,
medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine,
Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon
has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic,
and creative power to audiences around the world.
www.nomorefakenews.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038348_psychiatry_quackery_medical_hoax.html#ixzz2F7lwB3V7

Radiated meat and FDA

FDA quietly increases allowed radiation doses of meats for human consumption

(NaturalNews) Rather than actually take the time to address the root causes of meat and poultry contamination, which more often than not are a direct result of outrageously unsanitary factory farming practices (http://www.naturalnews.com/025716_antibiotic_animals_antibiotics.html), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has instead decided to simply up the doses of radiation that industrial food producers are allowed to blast on their filthy, contaminated meat products.

In the first new rule recently published in the Federal Register, the FDA specifies that "unrefrigerated uncooked meat" can now be irradiated right alongside refrigerated, frozen and cooked meat. And in the second new rule, the FDA increases the amount of ionizing radiation that can be applied to poultry products such as chicken by 50 percent, bumping the dosage up to 4.5 kilograys (kGy) of radiation from the previous 3.0 kGy.

You can view the two published rules here:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-11-30/pdf/2012-28967.pdf

These two rules, which were enacted quietly and without any media fanfare (big surprise), come more than a decade after the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) first petitioned the FDA for their passage back in 1999. And in the years that followed, numerous consumer advocacy and food safety groups decried the proposals, warning that irradiation is dangerous.

But the FDA ignored all the comments made by these groups, which included reputable names like Public Citizen and the Center for Food Safety (CFS), and continued forward with its irradiation agenda. According toFood Safety News (FSN), the FDA actually went so far as to belittle the merit of the input given by these groups, referring to them as "general" comments that did "not contain any substantive information that could be used in a safety evaluation of irradiated poultry."

FDA ignores science showing dangers of irradiation, claims there are no safety issues

This careless dismissal by the FDA is completely bogus, of course, as the CFS and many other groups have repeatedly offered valid scientific evidence showing that irradiating food denatures its quality, nutritional value, and safety. The production of "unique radiolytic products," for instance, which include various mutagens, or radioactive substances, is one major negative byproduct of irradiation that is both proven and undeniable. (http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/campaign/food-irradiation/)

And yet the FDA does not seem to care much about the facts as they concern the safety (or lack thereof) of irradiation, as the rogue agency has been on a crusade for the past several years to irradiate virtually everything that Americans eat. Meat, fruit, spices, breads, you name it -- if the grocery store sells it, then the FDA wants to nuke it for your "safety." (http://www.naturalnews.com/023945.html)

And in the rare case that an irradiated food actually bears a proper irradiation label -- the FDA, after all, has established incredibly lax rules that allow most irradiated foods to be sold to consumers without labels -- the flowery emblem, known as a radura, that has been created for food irradiation is unlikely to have much of an impact anyway, as it was deliberately designed to appear pleasant and insinuate that a product is "natural." You can view the ridiculous irradiation radura here so you know what to look out for:http://www.naturalnews.com/023945.html

If you wish to truly avoid irradiated foods; however, the best way to do this is to purchase only organic or locally-grown and verified foods. You can also learn more about the history of irradiation and how to spot potentially unlabeled irradiated foods by visiting the following two links:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/Irrad/LabelingStatus.cfm and
http://www.organicconsumers.org/irradlink.cfm

Sources for this article include:

http://www.foodsafetynews.com

link: http://www.naturalnews.com/038255_radiation_meats_FDA.html