Ever wonder why some people seem to lose weight easily and yet others, on exactly the same regimen, don’t seem to be able to lose at all?

The answer always was that people are different.

But to understand just how different, we need modern science, especially an understanding of DNA variability.

Everyone knows, or thinks they know, about DNA and genes. What few people, including doctors, seem to understand is that genes are not fixed but subject to tiny variations called single nucleotide polymorphisms or SNPs for short (pronounced SNIPs).

These little variations affect the expression of the gene, so that sometimes it doesn’t really manifest properly. If that happens to be a gene connected with how food is processed in the body, you will quickly realize that SNPs may markedly alter how a person responds to a reducing diet.

And so it is.

Read more about a fascinating study that sheds new light on dieting that works, here on my web page:

DNA dieting smart

Muslim’s have threatened to take over my home country, Great Britain, and they show every sign of moving forward swiftly on this, with the complicity of mindless, stupid left-wing socialists who think even evil killers and terrorists are entitled to “social justice”.

I can’t help thinking of Winston Churchill’s warning to the British nation, talking about communists: If you don’t stop them now, you will end up fighting for your life on the streets.

I believe that only peace loving and law abiding people have “rights”, not troublemakers.

It was sent to me. I do not know the author…

A German’s view on Islam and the threat to world peace

A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism. ‘Very few people were true Nazis,’ he said, ‘but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.’

We are told again and again by ‘experts’ and ‘talking heads’ that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honour-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.

The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the ’silent majority,’ is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. Chinas huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed
to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.

And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were ‘peace loving’?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:

Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun…

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, Zimbabweans and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts – the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand. So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on! Let us hope that thousands, world-wide, read this and think about it, and send it on - before it’s too late.

Strong stuff, huh?

After the latest SCENAR teleclass with the Haches, one of my long-time subscribers, Karla Kay, wrote to me with a fascinating story which I am dying to share with you all.

Dear Dr. Keith,

We have a situation here that needs medical observation, consideration, and analyses by a great brain such as yours!

I have a friend, Alaina, who is an “animal person”. She’s lived in Alaska, raised and drove sled dogs, has been involved with horses, dogs, cats, and all animals all of her life. She KNOWS when an animal is sick and/or dying.

She was visiting a friend this AM, whose dog was down. Hadn’t risen for two days, cried/screamed when his back around the kidney area was touched, couldn’t urinate, eyes becoming glazed, not moving. She thought that his problem was kidney stones, and prescribed green olives. Yes, green olives, either with OR without the pimentos. Cheapest kind will do. (This dog is a 100 lbs. Malamute)

They gave the dog 6 green olives as a trial dosage, as he lay there, kept him company for a couple of hours, saw that his eyes had begun to clear, his ears were twitching and swiveling, and he was becoming more alert in general. Six more olives, and they were able to move him, supported by a towel, out to the yard, so that he could urinate.

He was left laying in the sun, and the friends called her to tell her that he had moved to follow the sun himself. He had gotten up and MOVED.

He was brought in the house as it became cooler, and after awhile they invited him out to the yard again, where he again was able to urinate.

Six more olives, and another dose tonight, and it looks as if they will be able to take him to the vet for some other problems.

This isn’t the first time this has worked. The first time was when a cat, who had been diagnosed by a vet as having crystals in his urine and calcification, demanded some of the green olives that his owner was eating while looking at TV (gave him 3-5 slices this time, and worked for subsequent attacks). It still works, and 3 more cats, one small dog, and one very large dog seemingly owe their lives to this cure. We really, in our minds, have enough anecdotal information to want to “spread the word” !

The dosage is probably one olive per 10 pounds, twice a day. Perhaps more often, at first. The animals have no inclination to drink the juice it comes in - and don’t object too strenuously to having the olives, sliced or whole, put down their throats.

My question to you is - (being one of the few doctors in our world I feel comfortable talking to about this-): What could be in green olives that is seemingly making this an effective remedy for kidney stones/problems?

Awaiting your answer -

Karla

P.S. Alaina is going to try it on herself. She is prone to developing “gravel” here in Kingman - high mineral content in our water - Should I let you know if it works on her?

PPS. The olives are in the jars/cans one purchases at any store. In the case of the Malamute, they fed him cocktail olives - expensive ones - that they had around the house for their martinis. I asked about the pimentos - she said it didn’t seem to make any difference. It still worked. The lady with the cat was eating from small cans of sliced olives from the store. Cheapest ones will do!

Alaina hasn’t tried black olives - don’t know if they would be effective.

So, readers: I know that olives contain oleopurines, which are good anti-inflammatory compounds. But that hardly seems enough in the present case. Do any of you have any ideas what else might be at work here?

Of course it would help to have a proper diagnosis but let’s assume it was kidney stones for now.

Know what’s weird here? Hardly anybody is concerned. Doesn’t that say volumes for the fact that they don’t believe their own B*S* anyway? I think it does.

If you had the “latest drug” for pancreatic cancer, that was “proven” to work, but in fact had been tested only on lung cells or ovarian cancer, wouldn’t you worry… just a little?

Well, that’s what patients are now facing. It seems there has been a huge mix up and scientists supposedly doing research into cancer therapies have been testing out on any old cell line, not necessarily the one they claimed. In other words all the science is fraudulent and should be re-done, even if not an intentional mistake (no evidence of that).

The study which stirred all this up is a Dutch study (you’d never get this degree of honesty from an American study or researchers), showing that three of 13 human esophageal cancer cell lines widely used for worldwide research were actually cell lines from lung, colorectal and other malignancies.

Two of the contaminated or misidentified cell lines were involved in research published in more than 100 papers and in the issuance of 11 U.S. patents, which led to clinical trials in patients. Winand N.M. Dinjens, senior author of a short paper published online Jan. 14 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute and head of molecular diagnostics in the department of pathology at the Josephine Nefkens Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam in The Netherlands.

Predictably, “experts” are stating that the unintentional misidentification or contamination of the cell lines is not critical and is even a fairly common occurrence. Well, they would say that, woudn’t they, since they got egg all over their faces…

“From the scientific point of view, it’s not a huge deal, but it’s certainly something you’re glad you found out,” said Charles Saxe, scientific director of the Program in Cancer Cell Biology and Metastasis at the American Cancer Society in Atlanta [Yeah, I'll bet he was real glad]. “This probably doesn’t surprise anybody. The surprise is probably that there were only three.”

The unpleasant surprise for the rest of us, Mr. Saxe, is that you seem to play down mistakes of this order, yet belong to a lobby which wants to jail honest holistic practitioners for staking out part of your money-grabbing territory with something a little less twisted (Saxe works for the corrupt charity known as the American Cancer Society; most countries have a version of this “cancer charity” scam).

“The issue of misidentification/crosscontamination is not a new thing,” said Robert H. Shoemaker, chief of the screening technologies branch at the U.S. National Cancer Institute and author of an editorial accompanying the study, who also did not deem the finding a huge catastrophe.

What? A kid in 2nd or 3rd grade who turned in such sloppy work would be punished by the teacher. If you got an assignment to write about European history and wrote instead about Japanese history, you’d get whalloped— and expect to be, right?

Notice that my concern here is not that this happened or that there was contamination: it’s that nobody in responsible positions seems to give a damn.

It shows just what cycnicism and phoney science is out there. It’s not science: it’s pre-packaging drugs for sale to an unsupecting public.

SOURCE: Jan. 14, 2010, online Journal of the National Cancer Institute; comments from www.medicine.net

I’m their spokesperson. But I also tried the program and I love it. I lost over 20 lbs comfortably and easily. The nice thing is you don’t feel hungry—I’ll explain why shortly.

Check out these videos I helped make:

Fat Release System

See, I have known about the HCG story for weight loss since the 1960s. But I never recommended it for anyone, since I don’t like giving hormones indiscriminately. The idea of taking it as a homeopathic dilution was simple and brilliant: I’m just really mad I didn’t think of it! I’ve been prescribing homeopathic remedies for over 30 years and know just how safe this mode of formulation is.

HCG (human chorionic gonadotrophin) is a hormone that surges in women who get pregnant. Amongst many complex functions, it tells her body to start eating up its own fat if there is a food shortage—this is to help feed the fetus, right?

So if you take the hormone (in this case a safe homeopathic version of it) and stick to a 500 calorie diet, you’ll lose weight.

Well, you say, anyone can lose weight on a 500-calorie diet and that’s true. But you’d be pretty miserable. You’d feel hungry all the time.

What happens with this formula is that your body switches to digesting itself, in a manner of speaking. You get 500 calories from food but maybe another 1,000 calories from the homeopathic fat release. That’s great in two ways: you don’t feel hungry, you lose weight.

There is a fuller explanation at the website and you can watch some videos of me talking with my good friend Jan Hrkach from True Healthy Products. These are the people who market my own “Doctor’s Chocolate”, which I know some of you have enjoyed.

Fat Release System

I’d like you to see all the videos (they are short) so you really understand this breakthrough. If you do us a nice testimonial video on how you lost 10- 50 lbs or more, without feeling hungry, I’ll see to it you get a trial bag of “The Doctor’s Chocolate”.

[by the way, I lost 20 lbs eating that chocolate; some people have lost over 100 lbs just eating the chocolate, so it’s a nice complement to the Fat Release System].

You can also dialogue with me while you do the program, since I’m compiling a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) for them.

To seeing less of you!

Prof.

The truth is, all bio-identicals don’t work as people wish they would. They are NOT natural. Most stuff you buy in that category has been processed in a factory, altered from what Nature made. So in what sense are these products natural?

The science is suspect: several studies have found that black cohosh can help to reduce hot flashes and night sweats, and also to improve mood, but most of this research was funded by companies that make the supplements. There’s also some evidence that red clover could have “modest” benefits for women experiencing hot flashes and night sweats, while improving mental function as well. But it’s not convincing to me.

Now a well-performed scientific study has thrown the cat among the pigeons. I’m sure there will be charges of bad science. But I am a doctor, sympathetic to the idea of herbs being effective and helpful, telling you to beware what you are being told, especially from people who are selling you products.

There is only one bio-identical I allow my wife to take (more of that later). The rest I don’t think work as claimed or could even be dangerous (black cohosh is not safe).

The new study, published in the journal Menopause (Nov/Dec 2009), explains a trial done by Dr. Stacie E. Geller, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Illinois, Chicago. Dr. Geller is not at all hostile to the fact that herbal remedies may work.  Far from it. She says they could be helpful for some women.

But she also points to the fact that over-the-counter remedies are largely uncontrolled and variable and could expose a patient to dangerous levels of some substances. The quantities used in the clinical trial were carefully controlled; something you won’t get on the Internet. So be warned.

Her team looked at red clover, black cohosh and conventional pharmaceutical HRT for comparison and used a placebo for control. They randomly assigned 89 menopausal women to take either HRT, black cohosh, red clover, or placebo for a year. The women were experiencing anywhere from 52 to 71 hot flashes or night sweats every week.

The results were disappointing for enthusiasts of herbal therapy. Symptoms were reduced by 34 percent in women taking black cohosh, by 57 percent in women taking red clover; by 63 percent in women taking placebo, and by 94 percent in women on HRT, which was the only therapy significantly better than placebo.

Dr. Geller is aware of the dangers of HRT and specifically set out to test the damaging effect of each remedy on verbal memory among menopausal women. Black cohosh and red clover had no effect on any aspect of mental function, but there was evidence that HRT had detrimental effects on verbal memory.

Geller suggest that for women who are really suffering from menopausal symptoms and need help, HRT can be a safe option for some, but she says always take the smallest dose possible for the shortest period of time. For those who can’t or won’t take hormones, Dr Geller suggests black cohosh, with the caveat that you treat it just as you  would a prescription drug, consulting with your physician before starting to take it and seeking out a high-quality product.

Just remember, it causes liver damage, even in therapeutic levels. So take extreme care.

Me? I think you’d do well on red clover or placebo! 57- 63% of success isn’t bad for most drugs. The FDA allows drug companies to say “proven effective for…” when it scored only a few percent over placebo. Often that means as little as 35% response.

There is another answer and a very powerful one: Peuraria mirifica. We docs in the know call it “HRT”, meaning herbal remedy from Thailand, get it? This is the one my wife takes.

I’ll be interviewing the world’s number one expert Dr. I. Sandford Schwarz, from his home in Thailand, where he has been involved in the licensing and scientific study of this amazing herbal bio-identical substance for many years.

Well, no. What actually happened was that these x-ray screening programs CAUSED more cancers than they “detected”. Those who had been screened had a far higher rate of cancers; so much so that mass x-ray screening was dropped.

The same thing has happened with mammograms but the entrenched doctors of the cancer industry are not letting on. The truth is already out there, showing mammograms cause more than they “detect”, but they won’t admit it and stop killing women for profit.

Now the latest shock: CAT scans are pretty dangerous and nobody has been paying enough attention. Not until Rebecca Smith-Bindman MD did some poking around. She noticed that radiation doses from CT scans are often high and vary widely, and excessively high doses may contribute substantially to future cancers. Her findings are published in a new study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

CT scans are noninvasive medical tests that combine special X-ray equipment and computers to produce detailed cross sectional images of the body. The number of CT scans performed has exploded over the last three decades, growing from about 3 million yearly in 1980 to about 70 million in 2007.

The new research comes in the wake of the discovery earlier this year that more than 200 stroke patients at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles had received more than eight times the necessary radiation dose when undergoing CT scans. What was even stranger was the very large variation in dose for what was supposed to be the same procedure. Even the FDA is concerned (polite cough… A-hem)

In Smith-Bindman’s study, researchers evaluated radiation doses given to 1,119 patients getting CT scans and found that the differences in radiation exposure were dramatic: much higher than needed but also very variable. Most dramatic, she says, was the dose and the dose range for a multiphase abdomen and pelvic series. While the median dose was 31, the range was from 6 to 90. That’s more than a 10-fold difference.

Her team even went on to assess the lifetime cancer risk linked to the CT scan. They estimated that one in 270 women and one in 600 men who got a CT coronary angiogram at age 40 would develop cancer from that scan. That’s very high in my book.

The message from Smith-Bindman’s timely research is the need for doctors and patients to become more aware of the risks and she also emphasizes the need for more oversight of the scans. This issue pinpoints an old loop of logic - because a lot of peoople are doing it, doesn’t suddenly make it safe or effective. Popular isn’t the same as good, in any degree.

Make sure you are not lulled and just believe this new “magic eye” is OK, because all hospitals are doing it. Make the doctor justify the need or consider refusing and making them work for their diagnosis.

[Just to ram this home, another study by investigators at the National Cancer Institute (USA), also estimated the risk of cancer attributable to CT scans. They concluded that 29,000 future cancers could be related to the 70 million CT scans that were performed in the U.S. in 2007. This includes an estimated 14,000 cases resulting from scans of the abdomen and pelvis; 4,100 from chest scans; 4,000 from head scans; and 2,700 from CT angiograms. One-third of these projected cancer cases would occur following scans performed on people ages 35 to 54. Two-thirds of the cancers would be in women.

NEED I SAY THIS? These may be US statistics but the risks will be the same, whatever territory you live in!]

What kind of insane double-speak is this news conference? First he says that the incidence of childhood deaths are triple what they should be for this time of year (210 deaths). Then says, now that 80% of kiddies are getting Tamiflu, it is helping prevent serious illness. Correct me if I’m wrong but death is a pretty serious illness?

These guys are paid good taxpayers dollars to go out and mouth these insane statements. How can anyone with scientific pretentions put such a contradiction of “facts” into the same interview and hope nobody like me will notice? Tamiflu is NOT helping at all, if the death rate has gone up!

It’s just smoke-and-mirrors and make believe, masquerading as science.

This is Thomas Frieden MD, of the US Centers For Disease Control (CDC), giving his opinion. We’re all happy with part of his report, which is that serious reactions after receiving the H1N1 swine flu vaccine, especially Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), are rare and not significantly higher than those seen from the seasonal flu vaccine.

“The likelihood that we’ll have a 1976-like problem with this year’s H1N1 influenza vaccine is vanishingly remote,” said Frieden.

The flu is falling off dramatically in the US and most other territories. Still, 17 children died in the US last week of laboratory-confirmed H1N1 flu, bringing the number of child deaths to 210. That’s three times the number of flu deaths expected in children at this point in a normal flu season.

Frieden also saids the agency is seeing a dramatic improvement in the treatment of children who are severely ill with influenza, due to the use antivirals like Tamiflu. In most years, only one in five sick children arriving at a hospital have been started on an antiviral. This year, 80% are getting early treatment, which helps prevent severe illness.

“Vaccination is the single best thing you can do to protect yourself and your family against the flu,” Frieden said.

Not if it triples the death rate, you idiot!

During the press conference, Frieden said that a poll had been taken as to whether ‘flu would return later. About 50% said yes, 50% said no — and one expert said “flip a coin.”

That just about sums up the state of their science! Toss a coin…

SOURCE: Dec. 4, 2009, teleconference with Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H., director, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Just to put this in perspective, even the wicked FDA is on the side of science here! The FDA required Roche to print the following disclaimer on Tamiflu lables: “Tamiflu has not been proven to have a positive impact on the potential consequences (such as hospitalizations, mortality, or economic impact) of seasonal, avian, or pandemic influenza.”

So what’s the point of giving it, at such vast expense?

Apparently, an FDA spokesperson told the British Medical Journal, “The clinical trials… failed to demonstrate any significant difference in rates of hospitalization, complications, or mortality in patients receiving either Tamiflu or placebo.” The UK’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) holds the same negative view of Tamiflu.

Roche claims there are ten studies providing Tamiflu is both safe and effective. According to the company, Tamiflu has all sorts of benefits, including a 61% reduction in hospital admissions by people who catch the flu and then get put on Tamiflu.

The problem with these claims is that they aren’t true. They were simply invented by Roche.

A groundbreaking article recently published in the British Medical Journal accuses Roche of misleading governments and physicians over the benefits of Tamiflu. Out of the ten studies cited by Roche, it turns out, only two were ever published in science journals. And where is the original data from those two studies? Lost.

The data has disappeared. Files were discarded. The “researcher” of one study says he never even saw the data. Roche took care of all that, he explains.

I suppose he got his 30 pieces of silver; meanwhile triple the normal rate of kids are dead?!

This is sicker than disease itself.

Here’s a worry: bad behavior as a kid has been linked to early death in men.

The findings are from a study that began following 411 South London boys who were 8 to 9 years old in 1961. Among those who at age 10 displayed antisocial behavior (such as skipping school or being troublesome or dishonest) and who also were convicted of a crime by the age of 18, one in six (16.3%) had died or become disabled by the time they turned 48.

That’s nearly seven times higher than the one in 40 (2.6%) death or disability rate among men who stayed out of trouble when they were young, the study authors noted in their report in the December issue of the Journal of Public Health.

What was surprising is that the increase was not limited to substance abuse or other mental health problems known to be linked with an antisocial lifestyle, but included premature death and disability from a wide variety of chronic illnesses such as heart disease, stroke, respiratory disease and cancer.

It’s not too surprising. The life of a young gangster must be pretty stressful, always trying to stay out of the hands of the police. We know stress raises cortisol levels and cortisol is behind most aging mischief.

[SOURCE: Journal of Public Health, news release, December 2009]

Well, hardly ever. When they do, the drug manufacturers just suppress it. Yet again Merck is in the frame for lying and covering up the fact that Vioxx (rofecoxib) kills. Why are the directors of this organization still walking the streets instead of being in jail for manslaughter, at least?

It has emerged through independent investigation that the fact that Vioxx increased risk for heart attack, stroke and death, were known for years before the drug’s voluntary withdrawal from the market in 2004.

The researchers found 30 trials with a total of 20,152 patients, comparing the anti-inflammatory medication with placebo.

Twenty-one of those trials had been completed by the end of December 2000, and a risk of heart attack, stroke and death among patients taking Vioxx was clear and should have led to a safety warning, Ross said.

The risk for those cardiovascular events was 35% higher among patients taking Vioxx compared with those taking placebo. The association grew as more trials were completed, increasing to 39% in April 2002, when newer data was analyzed, and to 43% in September 2004, according to the study.

Merck’s excuse? (you won’t believe this one!) “Merck believes the article published in The Archives of Internal Medicine in today’s issue related to Vioxx used unreliable methods and reached incorrect conclusions.”

What a cheek! They can use unreliable and incorrect conclusions to push their stuff. But if somebody criticizes them, it’s bad…

“Merck acted responsibly — from researching Vioxx prior to approval in studies with approximately 10,000 patients to monitoring the medicine while it was on the market — to voluntarily withdrawing the medicine when it did,” their statement said. “Our decisions were based on the data from well-controlled clinical trials.”

Usual doublespeak: they relied on well-controlled clinical trials (maybe), BUT THEY IGNORED LOTS OF OTHER TRIALS THAT THEY DIDN’T LIKE, WHICH SAID THEIR DRUG WAS DANGEROUS.

This new finding showed that Merck’s chief executive officer lied before a U.S. Senate committee in November 2004, by stating that earlier clinical trials showed no difference in the risk of heart events between patients taking Vioxx and those taking a placebo.

So much for the US Constitution, never mind medical science and the public good. Big Pharma is contemptible.

[Sources: Nov. 23, 2009, Archives of Internal Medicine; Nov. 23, 2009, statement, Merck & Co.]