Would you give a piece of your liver to someone who needs it? It is rumored it’s dangerous to do so.

Well, it’s not that dangerous, they want to assure us. People who donate a piece of their liver to someone in need of a transplant can still live a long and healthy life, according to a new study.

You may not know but live donors can give a piece of their liver. They don’t need to be dead first and, so they say, you won’t end up dead!

I’m being a bit flippant, as usual. But if someone’s life can be saved, by giving a chunk of your liver, I say: go for it!

If the Cosmos, evolution, God, or whatever, wants you out of the way, I suppose you might regret it. You’ll be erased. But cowardice when it comes to helping others should not be an issue.

Mind you, Americans are something else. A few years ago, a woman who was locked out and freezing cold in the snow was left to die by her neighbors; they wouldn’t let her in! Let’s hope that couple were not typical, otherwise a mean world is on the way.

Anyway, I know many good, hearty and courageous souls here. They must be embarrassed by their scaredy-cat fellow citizens.

Back to livers: due to a highly publicized liver donor death in 2002, live liver donation dropped from 500 transplants in the United States each year to just 200 to 300 surgeries.

The present study, hopefully, will do a lot to encourage potential donors to come forward and be counted. There is no arguing, live liver donation is a serious operation with serious risks. The problem is you can’t easily stitch up the liver; it’s very crumbly. So bleeding is a serious problem. Stop taking your omega-3s weeks beforehand, if you wish to become a donor.

What’s the actual risk? Just 1.7 per 1,000 donors, according to the study. I’ve said publicly I wouldn’t risk my life for a 100 to 1 odds, so I had better stick to that.

But better than 500 to 1? Yes, I’m OK with that.

[SOURCE: Johns Hopkins Medicine, news release, Jan. 26, 2012]

PS. A better idea is to get people to look after their livers properly in the first place. I wrote a book on liver health. You can get a copy here:

Order the liver health eBook “Love Your Liver”

It’s a horrifying comment on our drug-sodden society that newborn babies are coming into the world addicted. In fact they get withdrawal symptoms, as soon as mother’s blood supply from the placenta is shut off.

No, I’m not just talking irresponsible, criminal mothers, who take recreation drugs while pregnant (lots of that) but I’m also talking about doctors prescribing drugs in such huge quantities, to pregnant women, that the babies are affected  (lots of that too).

How do you detox a teeny babe, just born and practicing breathing for the first time?

In certain units, I read that up to 25 percent of all babies in a neonatal intensive care unit are being treated for withdrawal. This comes from a report published by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), published online Jan. 30 in advance of appearing in the February issue of the journal Pediatrics.

Major drugs of abuse include prescription painkillers such as oxycodone, codeine, morphine and methadone, the report noted, along with stimulants such as amphetamines and cocaine and central nervous system depressants such as marijuana, alcohol and barbiturates.

Exposure during pregnancy is linked to a host of problems among newborns, including drug withdrawal upon birth — demonstrated by irritability, poor sucking, tremors, seizures, diarrhea, vomiting and shrill crying — and long-term issues such as birth defects, impaired growth and behavioral problems.

As I said, a very sad comment on our sick society and something which adds to the heinous crimes of drug pushers.

Legalize marijuana? Drag me to Hell first.

The “choking game”, deliberately cutting off blood flow to the brain in order to achieve a thrill, has been played by nearly one in seven students who were surveyed at a Texas university, a new study finds.

This so-called ‘game’ is played individually or in groups and is done by choking oneself or others, applying a ligature around the neck, placing a plastic bag over the head, placing heavy objects on the chest (the study also mentions hyperventilating, which is different, in that the airway is not obstructed).

The investigators conducted a survey of 837 university students and found that 16 percent reported having played the choking game and 72 percent of those students said they had done so more than once. The average age when students first played the choking game was 14, and 90 percent of those who had played the game first heard about it from peers.

The news release from Sam Houston State University coyly does not mention the sexual aspect but it’s a well-known phenomenon. Some women like to be throttled during intercourse, to enhance their sexual experience. Sometimes it goes tragically wrong and she dies; the man is charged with murder.

It’s a very silly idea.

It’s quite unsettling to realize that one in seven have tried it, 72% more than once. You’d think college students were not so silly. Apparently, they are.

Can any subscriber tell me if this game has appeared in Europe?

[SOURCE: Sam Houston State University, news release, Jan. 18, 2012]

Here’s another “I Told ‘Em!” One of those things where I was ahead of current thinking by 20 -30 years or so.

As long ago as 1983 I was saying: if fiber was good for us, we could all get healthy by chopping up the carpets and eating those. I never accepted the story whole.

Now, decades later, it seems there is proof I am right!

A new study has shown that a high-fiber diet does not lower a person’s risk of diverticulosis, but a low-fiber diet might, according to a new study published in the February 2012 issue of the journal Gastroenterology. That contradicts what doctors have believed for decades.

Of course, what really does the good it the nutrients present in whole food in its natural state. Fiber is just an incidental. That’s only logical. The definition of fiber is stringy stuff that does NOT get digested. It affects the appearance of our stools but has no nutrient value.

Researchers at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine analyzed data from more than 2,100 patients, aged 30 to 80, who underwent outpatient colonoscopy between 1998 and 2010. The patients were interviewed about their diet, bowel movements and level of physical activity.

Patients with the lowest fiber intake were 30 percent less likely to develop diverticulosis than those with the highest intake!

Moreover, they also found that constipation was not a risk factor, which would surprise many.

Having more frequent bowel movements was linked to an increased risk and that too would surprise many. Those with more than 15 bowel movements a week were 70 percent more likely to develop diverticulosis.

In addition, no association was seen between diverticulosis and physical inactivity or intake of fat or red meat.

Diverticulosis affects about one-third of U.S. adults older than 60. I don’t have any figures for Europe or the Antipodes.

The real use for fiber is as a pre-biotic. It provides a structure for probiotic organisms to thrive.

SOURCE: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, news release, Jan. 23, 2012

Having just had a lousy chest infection, I finally got rid of it by taking honey. Manuka honey, actually.

Don’t be fooled by the supermarket trash, which is mostly from China and is dyed sugar and water (no bees in sight!). But real honey has great health properties.

I wrote a section about its ability to heal MRSA wounds in my comprehensive guide to antibiotic alternatives: How To Survive In A World Without Antibiotics (antibiotics are done)

In addition to burns, raw honey has been used effectively in the treatment of abrasions, acne, amputations, bacterial infections (including MRSA, as I said), eczema, gunshot wounds, leg ulcers, puncture wounds, psoriasis, septic wounds, and surgical wounds. For abscesses or deep wounds that have been cleaned, honey can be packed into the cavity, after which an adhesive dressing is applied

Honey is a magnificent wound healer. Ancient Ayurvedic (Indian) medical practitioners used honey as dressing aids to purify sores and promote wound healing.¹ The Egyptian Edwin Smith Papyrus dating to 1500 B.C. recommended the use of honey in the treatment of burns. During WWI, Chinese and Russian soldiers used honey as a wound-healing agent.²

According to an article recently published in the American Journal of Clinical Dermatology³, honey provides a moist healing environment, deodorizes, rapidly clears infection, and reduces inflammation, edema and exudation (oozing).

Many clinical studies have demonstrated honey’s effectiveness in treating burns. An article in the British Journal of Surgery compared the topical use of honey with silver sulfadiazine (SSD)— one of the most widely-used, common treatments for burns—in 104 cases of superficial burn injuries. In the honey-treated group of 52 patients, 91% of the burns were infection free within 7 days, compared to only 7% of the 52 patients in the SSD group. Pain was also significantly reduced.⁴

Manuka is recognized as the best medicinal honey. This is derived from bees which forage the flowers of the New Zealand manuka shrub, Leptospermum scoparium (Tea Tree). It’s potency is measured by its content of methylglyoxal, believed to be the active ingredient. A trademarked system for testing MGO levels suggests a minimum of 100 mg/kg but strengths range up to 500mg/kg and even 700mg/kg.

The older and vaguer UMF rating (unique manuka factor), should be 10 or greater.

Oh, and I forgot to say… Honey tastes great!

1. Grover, S.K, and Prasad, C.S. “Use of Madhu in Ayurveda.” Journal of the National Indian Medical Association, 10: 7-10, 1985.

2.http://www.medbc.com/annals/review/vol_9/num_1/text/vol9n1p33.htm

3. Molan, P.C., “Potential of honey in the treatment of wounds and burns.” American Journal of Clinical Dermatology. 2(1):13-9, 2001.

4. Subrahmanyam, M. “Topical application of honey in treatment of burns.” British Journal of Surgery, 78(4):497-8, April 1991.

Even mild dehydration may affect our moods and ability to concentrate. In a new study of 25 healthy women, mild dehydration dampened moods, increased fatigue, and led to headaches.

The women in the study had an average age of 23. They were not superbly fit, nor couch potatoes.

Each woman was tested after treadmill exercise and again after treadmill exercise plus a diuretic pill, which was designed to force dehydration (urine loss).

The women were given a battery of tests measuring their concentration, memory, and mood when they were dehydrated and when they were not.

Overall, women’s mental ability was not affected by mild dehydration. But they did feel the tasks were more difficult. They reported more fatigue and felt down.

This was similar to earlier results from the same researchers in a dehydration study on men.

But “women were more fatigued and this was true during mild exercise and when sitting at a computer,” says researcher Lawrence E. Armstrong, PhD. He is a professor of environmental and exercise physiology at the University of Connecticut’s Human Performance Laboratory in Storrs, Conn.

The findings appear in The Journal of Nutrition, Jan 2012.

The message is clear: think about hydration and take regular steps to prevent it. That means drinking fluids with meals and between meals.

Take special care to drink extra if you are exerting yourself and, of course, in hot weather.

How Much?

Forget the 6 – 8 glasses a day nonsense. That’s a typical hoax that “everybody knows”. It’s dangerous and will stress your kidneys. People with even mild heart failure should be particularly careful.

The correct way to gauge your fluid levels is to watch the color of your urine; it should be clear or just mildly yellow. If you have dark urine, you are way under-hydrated.

There is also another cute test you can do:

Put your hand palm down on your lap and watch the veins distend. They should stick out clearly on the back of your hand.

Now raise your hand slowly up to head height and watch the veins. When they collapse will tell you how hydrated you are. If by chest height your veins start to disappear, you are dehydrated. If your hand goes up to eye level without collapsing, you are OK for fluid.

Neat huh?

If you didn’t get the first part of the discussion on this topic, you can read about it here: Cancer is not an apricot deficiency

This article by me provoked a lot of response. It’s amazing how many people want to defend this Laetrile (amygdalin) hokum.

One colleague even quoted research by Dr. Kanematsu Sugiura, the scientist who performed the requested tests at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. He claimed that laetrile inhibited secondary tumors in mice, though it did not destroy the primary tumors. He repeated the experiment several times with the same results (he says).

However, three other researchers were unable to confirm Sugiura’s results. While these uncontrolled and inconclusive results were considered too preliminary to publish, they were leaked to laetrile advocates, resulting in significant public uproar that here was an amazing new cancer “cure” being suppressed.

From that day forward, I don’t anybody in alternative medicine (except me!) followed along. It was a proven deal, that laetrile worked.

Well, it wasn’t. What’s more the basic requirements of science were not met. There has to be reproducibility. If others can’t copy what you did, chances are, you are WRONG.

But in this story it’s even odder because Sugiura disproved himself; he was unable to duplicate his own results.

MSKCC researchers conducted a further controlled experiment in which they injected some mice with laetrile (as Sugiura had done) and others with placebo. Sugiura, who was unaware of which mice had received laetrile, performed the pathologic analysis. In this controlled, blinded follow-up, Sugiura himself was unable to tell which mice had received laetrile and which had placebo.

Subsequently, laetrile was tested on 14 tumor systems without evidence of effectiveness. Given this collection of results, MSKCC concluded that “laetrile showed no beneficial effects.”

The Sloan-Kettering press release was, unfortunately, flawed and this has led to the widespread belief that there was some kind of cover up. Ralph Moss believes there was. I do not believe so.

Why?

Because no other decent science has ever been able to show amygdalin works. What is more it is highly toxic and does not deserve its false reputation of being safe. Amygdalin releases cyanide and there are many reported cases of cyanide toxicity among people who overdose on apricot kernels (something the Hunzas never did, by the way). This is exactly like the chemotherapy story: something toxic that kills cancer cells. Yes they do die! But only when amygdalin is taken in sufficient quantity to put the patient at risk too.

Amygdalin was first isolated in 1830. In 1845 it was used as a cancer treatment in Russia and it was tried as an anticancer agent in Germany in 1892, but was discarded as ineffective and too toxic for that purpose. It re-appeared in the 1920s in the United States, but it was considered too poisonous.

Then in the 1950s, a purportedly non-toxic, synthetic form was patented for use as a meat preservative, and later marketed as laetrile for cancer treatment.

Laetrile is laevo-mandelonitrile-beta-glucuronoside and is NOT the same as amygdalin. That’s another perpetuated myth. I marvel that people dedicated to holistic treatments, who wouldn’t take chemotherapy from a doctor, will take chemotherapy in the form of laetrile. It doesn’t make sense!

The humbug started with Dr. Ernst T. Krebs. He is clearly what we British call a “chancer” or perhaps charlatan. During the influenza pandemic of 1918, he apparently became convinced that an old Indian remedy made from parsley was effective against the flu. He set up the Balsamea Company in San Francisco to market the remedy as Syrup Leptinol, which he claimed was effective against asthma, whooping cough, tuberculosis and pneumonia as well.

During the early 1920s, supplies of Syrup Leptinol were seized by the FDA on charges that these claims were false and fraudulent. See, even if it did work (I’m sure it didn’t), Krebs didn’t seem too bothered with science, just turning a dollar.

During the 1940s, Krebs was at it again, promoting Mutagen, an enzyme mixture containing chymotrypsin, which he claimed was effective against cancer.

He and his son also patented and promoted “pangamic acid” (later called “vitamin B15″), which they claimed was effective against heart disease, cancer, and several other serious ailments. Krebs, Sr., died in 1970 at the age of 94.

Ernst Krebs, Jr. has often been referred to as “Dr. Krebs” although he has no accredited doctoral degree. He attended Hahnemann Medical College in Philadelphia from 1938 to 1941, but was expelled after repeating his freshman year and failing his sophomore year. After taking courses in five different colleges and achieving low or failing grades in his science courses, he finally received a bachelor of arts degree from the University of Illinois in 1942. In 1973, after giving a 1-hour lecture on Laetrile, he obtained a “Doctor of Science” degree from American Christian College, a small, now-defunct Bible college in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

So the son was such a crappy scholar, he failed to qualify as an MD by any honorable route. Ernst Krebs, Jr. doesn’t meet my standards as a medical science leader: more like a phoney, wanting desperately to make dollars and having spotted a market “niche”. [Bruzelius, NJ. The merchants of Laetrile. Boston Sunday Globe, June 17, 1979]

The lack of science is highly revealing.

In 1977, Harold W. Manner, Ph.D., chairman of the biology department at Loyola University in Chicago, achieved considerable notoriety by claiming to have cured mammary cancers in mice with injections of Laetrile and proteolytic enzymes and massive oral doses of vitamin A. What he actually did was digest the tumors by injecting digestive enzymes in amounts equivalent to injecting a woman with a pint of salt water containing about 1 1/2 ounces of meat tenderizer every other day for six weeks. Not surprisingly, the mice developed abscesses where the enzymes were injected, the tumors were liquefied, and the injected tissue fell off. There can be no parallel with human treatments. No microscopic examinations were conducted and the animals were observed for only a few weeks following treatment, no legitimate assessment of this type of therapy could have been made.

In response to political pressure, the National Cancer Institute did two studies involving Laetrile. The first was a retrospective analysis of patients treated with Laetrile. Letters were written to 385,000 physicians in the United States as well as 70,000 other health professionals requesting case reports of cancer patients who were thought to have benefited from using Laetrile. In addition, the various pro-Laetrile groups were asked to provide information concerning any such patients.

Although it had been estimated that at least 70,000 Americans had used Laetrile—only 93 cases were submitted for evaluation. To me, the fact that there were only 93 cases out of tens of thousands speaks volumes. It doesn’t work! Otherwise they would have produced at least 2,000- 3,000 successes.

Twenty-six of the 93 reports lacked adequate documentation to permit any evaluation. The remaining 68 cases were “blinded” and submitted to an expert panel for review, along with data from 68 similar patients who had received chemotherapy. The panel felt that two of the Laetrile-treated cases demonstrated complete remission of disease, four displayed partial remission, and the remaining 62 cases had exhibited no measurable response.

I think that 2 cases out over 50,000 is proof positive that laetrile doesn’t work.

A 2006 systematic review by the Cochrane Collaboration concluded: “The claim that [l]aetrile has beneficial effects for cancer patients is not supported by data from controlled clinical trials. This systematic review has clearly identified the need for randomised or controlled clinical trials assessing the effectiveness of [l]aetrile or amygdalin for cancer treatment.”

The Cochrane database project is a not-for-profit international cooperation, designed to combine medical science databases from over 100 countries.

[Milazzo S, Ernst E, Lejeune S, Schmidt K (2006). Milazzo, Stefania. ed. "Laetrile treatment for cancer". Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2): CD005476. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005476.pub2. PMID 16625640.]

But What About Those Cases Who Recovered?

I get letters from cancer victims who claim they were cured and therefore laetrile works.

Sadly, this proves nothing. While I’m glad for any story of recovery, it is wrong morally and scientifically to hijack the story and claim that laetrile was the real cause. As I revealed in detail in Cancer Research Secrets, a scientific study from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, published in 2010 showed that if just left alone a significant number of people recover naturally from cancer.

You have to prove that what you were doing was not one of these lucky outcomes. You would also have to prove that the patient did nothing else at the same time. If anyone changes their diet and takes laetrile, I know for sure which one would produce the cure: diet. It’s PROVEN, over and over.

Also, a large number of people recover who were on chemo –  but that doesn’t necessarily mean BECAUSE of chemo. You can’t run one rule for orthodox doctors and then switch it to make it easy for alternative doctors!

So I’m sorry to prick any bubbles. Don’t write me that YOU recovered. I’m glad for you. It doesn’t prove laetrile works; it only proves you have a good immune system!

Anyway, it’s time to draw a line under laetrile, I think.

Get Cancer Research Secrets and read up scores of really good, proven cures!

I’m constantly surprised by how little knowledge of geopathic stress is passed around. It is a significant factor in the genesis of cancer, as I explained in my book “Cancer Research Secrets“. Recently, I received a note from correspondent  David Reecher, director of the Aquifers and Health Institute, which I decided to share.

Dear Dr. Scott-Mumby,

I’m Director for “Aquifers and Health Institute”; a non-profit organization created solely for the purpose of making people aware of geopathic stress and the harmful effects it causes if exposed for long-periods of time, over and over again.

As you mention on page 181 of your Cancer Research Secrets, “location can be a factor in disease”. Indeed it can. And that is what drives us each and every day towards making this knowledge public. Just knowing people are getting sick simply because they, or someone they know, positioned their bed or office chair over a location that causes stress (stressor) to the body without being aware of its existence, is our motivation.

I’ve known of you for many years, as you provided the forward to Kathe Bachler’s great book “Earth Radiation”. She was a great pioneer in this field. I visited Ms. Bachler in her home town of Abtenau, Austria a few years back. I believe she had just turned 85 around that time. I didn’t speak German nor did she speak English, but we had excellent translators that made the trip very beneficial for us both.

Thanks to the early pioneers like Kathe Bachler, we know a lot more about what causes geopathic stress today. To keep the subject as simple and scientific as possible, we are only focusing on geopathic stress created by the pressure and friction of moving groundwater inside an aquifer. Scientifically, it is already known by the EPA that under the right conditions, groundwater can and does generate electric fields.

We are currently working with several families who are involved in a large “childhood cancer cluster”. Authorities just completed several years of testing and were unable to find any cause. Of course, the conventional testing only consists of looking for contaminants in the air, water and soil. Once the authorities finished their tests, we began to educate a few of the families about a problem they were not aware of – and with the use of medical equipment for measuring stress responses in the body, we were able to show that the location these children were sleeping, caused a severe stress reaction to those people we tested in the same location (over the stressor) in only 15-30 minutes. We also work with a physicist from New York who developed measuring equipment that also picks up these stress locations.

We currently work with doctors and medical scientists from Austria, Germany & Russia, and wanted to know if we could begin collaboration with you here in the U.S.? As you know, this is a very serious problem that is really simple to correct if the person is aware of its existence. My belief is very similar to yours – give people all of the facts so that they can make their own decision.

Here is a link to our web-site www.aquifersandhealth.org

Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely, David Reecher

As I said, “Cancer Research Secrets” covers this topic in some detail. If you haven’t read it, get yourself a copy (print or download versions) here:

Cancer Research Secrets

There is a lot to be gained from suppressing inflammation, especially when it affects the brain. I saw some astonishing recoveries in the 1980s and 90s, removing inflammatory foods from the diets of kids with autism. I was one of the leading pioneers, worldwide, in treating autism holistically.

Here’s a completely novel way to suppress brain inflammation is autistics! Deliberate infections with parasitic worms!
Last year a case was published in The Scientist (Feb 2011) of a father’s search for a cure for his autistic son, Lawrence, which led him to the “helminth therapy”, or the deliberate infection of the patient with worms; in this case Trichuris suis, the pig whipworm.

No question the patient, Lawrence Johnson, was in a bad way. By his teenage years, he had veered into the dangerous realm of self abuse. He smashed his head against the wall dozens of times a day. He bit himself until he bled. He gouged at his eyes and tore at his face. A normal school experience was virtually impossible. He couldn’t walk a single block from the family’s Brooklyn brownstone without kicking and screaming when a traffic light changed at the wrong moment or streets were crossed in an unacceptable order.

Over the years, the Johnsons tried several treatments to curb Lawrence’s violent and disruptive outbreaks, including every pharmaceutical that could potentially treat his problems—antiseizure medications, serotonin-reuptake inhibitors, atypical antipsychotics, lithium, and others in various combinations.

At best these heavy medications offered momentary reprieves from what the Johnsons called Lawrence’s “freak outs.” But any improvements in the boy’s behavior were usually short-lived.

[http://the-scientist.com/2011/02/01/opening-a-can-of-worms/ accessed 1/22/2012 2.38 pm PST]

By 2005 the Johnson family was at its breaking point. The parents had coped with their almost unmanageable son for over a decade. Something had to be done, or Lawrence would need to be in managed care.

The father trawled PubMed and Medline sites for scientific studies that may help his son’s condition. He wasn’t looking for a “cure” so much as something just to make family life bearable. What he found was data that pointed to a link between some autism symptoms and inflated levels of proinflammatory cytokines, an apparent result of the immune system attacking glial cells in patients’ brains. [D.L. Vargas et al., “Neuroglial activation and neuroinflammation in the brain of patients with autism,” Annal Neurol, 57:67-81, 2005]

Finally, Stewart Johnson stumbled across the work of an Iowa research group on helminth therapy and how it reduced inflammation, especially the auto-immune type, where the immune cells inappropriately attacked cells of the patient’s own body. It was reasonable to hope this might calm his son’s outrageous behavior.

Stewart enlisted the help of Lawrence’s doctor, Eric Hollander, then the head of Mount Sinai Medical Center’s Seaver Autism Center in New York City. Hollander was impressed with Stewart’s research and agreed to help him obtain sterile, treatment-grade T. suis eggs that were being grown and tested in Europe by the German company OvaMed.

There was great difficulty in convincing the authorities of the safety aspect. But finally, common sense won. T. suis has evolved to infect the guts of pigs, and could only colonize humans in a very limited fashion. Like most internal parasites, T. suis cannot complete its entire life cycle in only one host, and in the environment the ova require a 3- to 6-week incubation in moist soil to mature, making inadvertent spread of the parasites to the rest of the family unlikely.

They had Lawrence drink a solution containing 1,000 of the roundworm eggs every two weeks for 5 months beginning in early 2006. But the results were very disappointing. Lawrence’s aggressive and agitated behaviors abated for just four days during the entire 20-week treatment period.

But OvaMed’s president Detlev Goj suggested the dose was too small and recommended Lawrence receive 2,500 eggs every two weeks for a period and see what happened.

This time, the results were astounding. Within 10 weeks of the higher-dose treatment, the autistic boy stopped smashing his head against walls. He stopped gouging at his eyes. The paralysis and frustration that held him and his family prisoners in their own home lifted. The freak outs ceased.

There was no gradual improvement; all the distressing behaviors just disappeared abruptly.

To learn more about good and bad in parasites, read my own report: The Parasites Handbook

Diet Wise has always been my best-seller. If you haven’t got that, you are just not serious about safe, healthy eating (as opposed to fad programs).

But right up there close is my “Cancer Research Secrets”. It sells a lot because people are scared of cancer. This disease does have a dread reputation. You see movie stars wasting away in front of the paparazzi and you figure “Well, they have all the money. They can afford the best available treatment and it’s still killing them.”

What’s wrong with that line of logic is that movie stars might have the money and the most costly doctors. But that doesn’t mean they get the best treatment. Far from it. Jackie Onassis was literally KILLED by experimental unproven treatment from her oncologist.

The truth is that doctors cannot take over our own health. Even if doctors were terrific at what they profess to do, you’d still be crazy to hand over your own body to their care. It’s your life. You should captain the ship.

And when it comes to cancer control, you’d be mad to surrender to conventional care. It’s clear that the “cancer industry” is NOT about curing or even helping people. It’s about profits. They don’t want cures, as can be seen by the fury with which they attack doctors who promote safe and cheap alternatives to their cruel “death machine”.

The only way you are going to learn about the many safe and effective alternative remedies — cures that won’t bankrupt you — is to study them. I’ve written a book to help you understand this more and you should get a copy. One day it may save your life or the life of a loved one.

http://www.CancerResearchSecrets.com

Don’t wait till someone close to you gets cancer. This is one situation where you need to be pro-active. Cancer can be prevented as well as treated successfully. You can only stay safe if you know what you are up against.

Remember, cancer is self-inflicted damage. It comes as a result of our unhealthy lifestyle. Native peoples do not get cancer. Arctic explorer Vilhjalmur Stefansson lived for decades among the Inuit (Eskimos), eating a diet that Western doctors would describe as very, very dangerous (90% fat, meat and fish, zero carbs). Yet they never got cancer; not a single case, until they started on our Western diet.

No apricot kernels, incidentally!  99.9% of native peoples, who are cancer free, do NOT eat apricot kernels. Cancer is not a laetrile deficiency, whatever the tricksters try to tell you.

But it is arguably an oxygen deficiency, an anti-oxidant deficiency, electron deficiency, enzyme deficiency, love deficiency and vitamin C and D deficiency.

OK, I’ve gone a bit jokey and this is a serious topic. But there is a point to these last two paragraphs. You can find out more from the collected writings of an experienced holistic physician, with over 30 years experience. I am not an “information marketer”, I’m the real deal.

Get “Cancer Research Secrets” here: http://www.cancerresearchsecrets.com

(total guarantees apply)

Read it and live long!