The time, it is forever changing

Kedar N. Prasad, PhD

This time the change may be back to the past, and to tell you the truth it really annoys me.

Not that it is a personal annoyance, its more like one huge road block put in your path  because other people's ignorance can really harm your health.

I think it is strange in a Jim Morrison kind of way that some get turned into celebrities by the media  not really based on out come but because they are on TV or they get interviewed by someone else in the TV spotlight.

Just because someone is on TV really does not mean they are an expert in what they plie on their show. Remember that every show has sponsors and producers.  If the recommend something it does not really mean it is effective or effective for you.  All it is is mass marketing.  And where are you when that suggestion fails you?

Its also like aggregator web sites.  They fill their pages with info taken from other sources, make it look as if this was original material, and never give you and thing to assure you it might be bogus while trying to make it look like the latest hot new discovery or cure.

Thinking of something Dannion Brinkley said not too long ago about how he believes that the it is through healthcare that the globalists will find the key to controlling the world.

If you accept Dannion's premise then it won't surprise you when I suggest how crazy it is to find too loud Jillian Michaels on "Everyday Health" as one of their 'talking heads'.

And to me it is even crazier to think she has an interview with David Agus MD about cancer.

Now mind you, I do have to agree with him on the failure of the establishment on the issue of prevention.

Agus states:  " ... we can win the war on cancer — but not the way we’re fighting it now.“We’ve made almost no impact on making people live longer with cancer,” he says in an interview ... noting that the death rate is down only 8 percent over the past six decades.Part of the problem, ..., is the way we think about the disease. “Instead of just trying to shrink the cancer, which buys a little bit of time, I want to change the entire state of your body. But I know, as a cancer doctor, I’m not that good. And I know that I lose two or three patients a week — and I don’t want to do that anymore.”The solution, he explains, is not to treat the disease but to stop it from happening in the first place. “Most cancers are preventable. We’ve got to take aggressive stances in that regard.”He goes on to tell you however, to ditch your vitamins and get your nutrients from food.

And this is where we part ways.  The parting is of course because clearly Agus has failed to do the research that proves, even if it is organic, the nutrient level in food has diminished over the years.  It  is worse for products grown in commercial agriculture.

I of course support organic and buying local but I also know that not everyone can afford this.  And so what does Agus offer you if you fall in the less affluent part of our culture?

Not much.

But our Food Cleansing Healthy Handout does and it is an inexpensive way to make food healthier.

And being that we believe in supplements, the correct choices of supplements so that it isn't a one size fits all, but a targeted approach to regaining your health.  The science on supplements supports my position, even for cancer.  Maybe something will change some day for Agus and he will see the light.

Let's hope, and work to prove Dannion wrong.

If you are looking for conscientious help in the area of supplements for health consider Health Forensics.

Read more: confusion about supplements here.

  

News BUZZ not worth the words: Vitamins & Breast Cancer

I just heard Wolf Blitzer report on this story, and I heard it on the noon news today, as well as in an email sent to me yesterday.

Knowing this infinitesimal bit of BUZZ, I am sure this will be all over the evening network news, and regular news for days. Sanjay Gupta is just about to reply on this "headliner". Gupta says it is an association that something in a multi-vitamin may lead to this 19% reported increased risk.  He also gives that tired and  biased caveat about being able to get all you nutrition from your diet. Not a chance if you eat like those people Jaime Oliver is trying to educate.

If you are a thinking person, please to not fall prey to this BUZZ glut.

And please take the time to review the following commentary I developed at the request of a major news director who is interested in reporting fact, not BUZZ. It is a well known fact that the more times you hear sound bites, the faster you tend to believe them.

Don't become a sheeple...and please read this excerpt from my comments - it is your best insurance against propaganda spread via mainstream media, talking heads, and Big PhRMA. (for the complete article, request it by contacting me)
  
A Word to the Wise By Gayle Eversole, DHom, PhD, MH, NP, ND

In an article recently published on the web site eFitnessNow. a group of people provide you with what they believe to be useful health oriented information.I looked over this entire website and no where could I find any information about the staff and their qualifications as editors, or any information about their backgrounds in health or related health professions.

This may appear cynical on the surface, but it is important to understand today’s way of providing “news” and the way in which it can affect your beliefs.

Recently I listened to an interview on NPR addressing MRSA.I have an interest in this topic as it is something I have been working on with natural and creative approaches since 1993.

I realized that all the journalist-author really did in her book was to compile an amount of data that had already been reported in the news. She also spoke with “researchers” about whom these news articles had been written. There are a lot of reports of findings, yet no constructive outcome or effective treatment has been discovered.

The author and interviewer also avoided looking at other options that the accepted standard mainstream models.

This brings me to an article I posted on my blog, Natural Health News, in February 2009, titled ‘How Mainstream Media Distorts Health Information”. 

We know that there is, and has been, a directed effort to limit you access to vitamins and supplements, and an effort also to try to sway your opinion to the ideas that you can get all the needed nutrients from food and supplements do not help prevent or heal disease.

These concepts have been proven, over and over again, to be false.

But, you must consider that this article reports only a ‘meta-anlysis’.

A meta-analysis is a statistical method attributed to Gene Glass, as defined in the following synopsis -
http://www.bii.a-star.edu.sg/docs/mig/MetaAnalysis.pdf
•In 1976, Glass coined the term meta-analysis
http://glass.ed.asu.edu/gene/papers/meta25.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_V._Glass
statistical analysis of a large collection of analysis results from individual studies for the purpose of integrating the findings.(Glass, 1976, p3)
•Meta-analysis techniques are needed because only summary statistics are typically available in the literature.
•Often used in medical and psychological studies.

Now that you have the background information, let’s move on to the article in question, as reported by eFitnessNow.

A startling connection between multi-vitamins and breast cancer occurrence has prompted doctors to caution older women against a daily multi-vitamin, unless absolutely needed. According to the results of a Swedish study, the vitamins may be linked to breast cancer.
The authors of the study cannot outright confirm the correlation between the two but suggest the matter needs further research. The study was led by Dr. Susanna C. Larsson of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm. The study followed 35,000 Swedish women between the ages of 49 and 83 over a ten year period. All the women were cancer free at the onset, with 974 developing breast cancer throughout the course of the study.
Women who took daily vitamins were 19 percent more likely to develop breast cancer. 9,000 women in the study were vitamin users with 293 developing the often fatal disease. Only 681 of the remaining 26,000 women developed breast cancer. A relatively small number of women who took the daily vitamins were diagnosed with breast cancer, which lends to the suggestion that if there is a risk, it is very modest.
Larsson advises that women who are eating a well-balanced diet do not need a multi-vitamin.
The study has been published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

When you analyze this statement, “The study followed 35,000 Swedish women between the ages of 49 and 83 over a ten year period. All the women were cancer free at the onset, with 974 developing breast cancer throughout the course of the study.”, you find that the statistical impact is 0.02%.
 
If you analyze this statement, “Women who took daily vitamins were 19 percent more likely to develop breast cancer. 9,000 women in the study were vitamin users with 293 developing the often fatal disease.” , you find that the statistical impact is 0.03%.
 
And if you analyze this statement, “Only 681 of the remaining 26,000 women developed breast cancer.” , you find that the statistical impact is 0.02%.
 
And in conclusion, the report says, “A relatively small number of women who took the daily vitamins were diagnosed with breast cancer, which lends to the suggestion that if there is a risk, it is very modest.”

The moral of this story is don’t be fooled by headlines, and yes, digest what you read.

If you do a search for Dr. Susanna C. Larrson you can locate over one hundred articles based on meta-analysis of existing research. She has yet to respond to the inquiry I sent.  Also note that there is no definition of exactly what multi-vitamins were used in the studies.

This is a critical concern, as most vitamin studies done in the mainstream use low quality, synthetic or too low dose products.

Complete article posted here