Tuesday, 31 December 2013

As we leave 2013.....

So with Christmas gone and the last of the celebrations of the year ahead of us here, what a great time to think of the year ahead and what we can take with us from the last year.

As I sit here with Daisy the beagle curled up and my lovely son opposite typing away also, studying for his first Oxford exams, It brings home to me how very lucky we are. No matter how we might think our life is tough in parts and precarious at times, we sit here in safety and with those that matter most to me in good heath.

You look around the world and see the destruction and suppression, hunger and cruelty, and it is but a stones throw from any of us. This time of year, the TV is full of appeals for money to save a child's life, to improve the health of others, to improve the life of animals, to prevent cruelty, to provide shelter etc.

It is impossible to give to all and even throwing money at these problems doesn't seem to be enough. We have these same problems decade after decade and who creates them - man himself of course.  These are not problems inflicted by an outside force, but by the very decisions taken at every turn.  If we are still facing the same problems in the 21st Century, then we really need to wake up.

All of us, I believe, have an inbuilt sense of what is right or wrong. We are never taught how to feel, so even if nurture plays a part, nature is there also and we learn a lot by how we feel. Empathy. We all know when greed and exploitation are our motive. We know when we are acting out of revenge and anger or doing an act of kindness.

Neglect of children and cruelty towards them is inexcusable. What defence can there be. It is not gifts that children need but the consistent love and protection of the very guardians/parents that have chosen to have this child.  As adults we have the advantage of knowing the difficulties children face and how scary the world can seem to them, we have been there, they are yet to be adults and what sort of adults do we hope they become? Children are not just the responsibility of parents or guardians, we are all responsible for raising the next generation. What sort of example are we?

All around is excess in possessions and this can breed greed,envy & dissatisfaction. Imagine if this was an excess of pure love, the gap wouldn't need filling with gifts and to aspire to greater love has got to be better than aspiring to have more collateral in what ever form that collateral takes.

The way a nation treats it's animals is indeed a mark of its civility. They are a test of our innate knowing of right or wrong.  I read an horrific story this morning of a couple who tied there dog upside down as a punishment. The dog was so distressed and disturbed, it had to be put down. In what mind would inflicting pain and cruelty onto any animal be considered ok? This is not just our pets of course, and after all, you don't have to have a pet, but it is also the way we treat livestock in our food supply.

Those that campaign for animal welfare do a superb job highlighting the world wide problems with the way we treat animals destined for our table. Surely the meat we want to eat we would rather had been fed well, treated well in life and at the time of death. I'm not promoting vegetarianism, but rightful respect for all life.

Then there are those that have an eye to our environment and put themselves at risk because they care so passionately about saving the planet. The very home in which we all rely, but seem to turn a blind eye when it is being stripped of all that we need to survive. These people deserve our support and not viewed as battling hopeless causes - without their actions, we could be in a much worse state. They are not afraid to take on the corporations and neither are they doing it for their own satisfaction, but for the generations they and us are yet to meet and beyond. For an outcome they may not see materialise in their lifetime, but out of sheer love of the planet. Greenpeace of course are the biggest movement in this and we all owe them more than we might ever realise.

Exploitation on many levels leads to poverty. Stripping assets, resources, taking possession, invasion - and what for?  Exploitation at the hands of governments, corporations, and on a local scale, unscrupulous beings.

2014 I guess is not going to be the year to take your eyes of the likes of Monsanto and the likes of Bayer, GSK, Merck, as they struggle to keep the reins of power and exploitation in their hands

How to gain at the expense of others, cruelty, domination and neglect of care to those around us, whether we know them or not.

What if 2014 saw the reverse of this,  when faced with the decision of cruelty or kindness, the option was always kindness. What if tolerance over intolerance, what if mutual support triumphed over domination and what is we stopped with our constant need to have more stuff.

It is never too late to have a new paradigm. Nature has a way of winning over in the end and she doesn't care how she does it - better we work with her than against her.
If in the process of continuing to live as we do, we wipe ourselves out - she isn't going to care. Nature doesn't favour one species over another. We are all here at her tolerance.

So when a festive season comes round that has no need for appeals to mop up our disgraces to each other, that really would be one to celebrate and the quicker that time comes the better.

To quote the philosopher, Edmund Burke 1729-1797

'Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little'

Friday, 27 December 2013

To Vaccinate or Not to Vaccinate - Find out more on vaccinations and make an informed choice.

To vaccinate or not to vaccinate perhaps ought to be the question that all parents ask themselves. But many do not, many just assume that whatever the vaccine schedule for their country is, they follow it, after all, it is the medical profession that are administering it so it must be ok then?

Well in the short term the majority of children seem fine, some do not though and parents notice changes in behaviour and ability after the vaccinations. In the long term....well are we swapping harmless childhood illnesses for more chronic conditions in later life. Rises in chronic conditions and autoimmune problems could be a knock on effect of vaccination.

By-passing the natural route for immunity could be causing problems in our health in later life. Immunity from vaccination is not permanent and having childhood illnesses in childhood is far safer than having them later in life when they can give rise to more complex experiences.

Do we really need to be so afraid of childhood illnesses, after all, long before the vast amount of vaccinations our children are now subjected to, our parents had to look after us and manage our illness. The vast amount of children survived these illnesses with no problems, managing a fever, good nutrition, rest are all ways of supporting a body as it fights infection.

Isn't it odd that childhood illnesses are never given a high profile as a problem until a vaccine is there, then suddenly the media are declaring a mild childhood illness as a 'killer' disease.

Well parents have a difficult decision in the original question of vaccinate or not if they don't have the facts or the other side of the vaccine story, or perhaps don't know just what they can do if their child gets an illness.

There are 2 talks coming up which might just help. They are London UK based and will be held at the College of Natural Medicine.  Details below


Vaccination - The Question
CNM London

Dr. Jayne Donegan
Dr. Jayne Donegan
Date:Monday 27th January 2014
Time:6.30pm - 8.30pm
(Please aim to arrive by 6.15pm)
Location:CNM London
Tickets:£10 per person
Dr. Jayne Donegan, GP & Homoeopath, was a former strong supporter of the UK’s Universal Childhood Vaccination Programme, but her subsequent research led her to change her opinion. In this seminar Dr Donegan will address:
  • Factors key to historic decreases in deaths from childhood diseases
  • Efficacy of common childhood vaccinations
  • A baby being vaccinated
  • Safety risks versus benefits of modern vaccinations
  • How government & pharmaceutical companies manage vaccine data
  • What historical evidence tells us about protecting children’s health today

MMR – Which is better: The Disease or the Vaccine?
CNM London

Dr. Jayne Donegan
Dr. Jayne Donegan
Date:Monday 2nd June 2014
Time:6.30pm - 8.30pm
(Please aim to arrive by 6.15pm)
Location:CNM London
Tickets:£10 per person
GP & Homeopath, Dr Jayne Donegan will look at the normal course of Mumps, Measles and Rubella, and what parents fear most about these diseases. She will look at what the vaccine does, and take a brief look at 'Germ Theory of Disease' and its pitfalls versus the Holistic Model of Disease. She will also cover basic strategies which will help parents to cope with any acute childhood illness or infection.
There will be an opportunity for questions.
Book online
Call 01342 410 505 or email info@naturopathy-uk.com for further information.
Location Map (opens in new window)

Tuesday, 3 December 2013

Interview with Patricia Peat - Cancer Options. (link)

Great link below to an interview with Patricia Peat from Cancer Options


Patricia has featured in some of my past blogs and really leads the way in integrative oncology treatments.


Another use for Statins?

I'm sure the makers of the wonder drug 'statins' must be clapping their hands as it now seems that not only can it reduce your cholesterol but apparently it could have the possibility to prevent cancer.......

Reported on the BBC website, it suggests that a by-product of cholesterol can fuel the growth and spread of breast cancer.

As you read through the story it really comes back to the fact that obesity can be a  factor in breast cancer and other cancers, which probably everyone knows, and that is due to the fat producing hormones such as oetroegen which in higher levels, can increase the risk of certain cancers.  

So taking statins are not the answer to losing weight though. High cholesterol is not only related to weight of course nor is it always related to food. 
There are suggestions that there is a link between statin use and heart attacks due to the decrease of the CO Q10 enzyme through the taking of statins.  So how fortuitous for the makers to have this discovery.....Of course it is one of those headline grabbing stories that when you read it, it is a very small study so far and in its infancy, but this is a drug that is out there and if anyone was considering not taking it for the original reason it was prescribed for them, now they might be persuaded to keep taking it for a different reason, but one yet totally not proven and a result that can be achieved without a drug.

Far better if these stories came up only when all tests are done and proven in its effectiveness plus all trials which didn't come out favourable were published also - All trials!

Perhaps cholesterol isn't the problem but what we should be investigating is the cause of the problem that requires the body to use it. Fix that and no reliance on a drug.

It is interesting though, that our bodies make and recycle cholesterol - it wouldn't do that if it wasn't crucial in our survival. Weight gain seems to be one of the factors for increasing cancer, but that's down to us as individuals in what we eat.  Our high sugar content in our diet has more of an impact on our obesity and hence may be increasing our risk of cancers.  Is the answer really in a pill?  If we do develop an illness, the conditions that brought about that need to change or the ground is still the same and the same growth can occur. So it comes back to what we do and not what pill we take. Pity that study is never done!  but no money in that medicine.

Sunday, 17 November 2013

To Alkaline or Not to Alkaline

I managed to catch some of a UK series called 'Health Freaks' which I think was a Channel 4 programme. In it, for those who have missed its delights, you find 3 doctors who sit and listen and pass a judgement on various 'cures' that members of the public present for a variety of conditions. - You know I really shouldn't watch these programmes as I'm sure they do the blood pressure no good what so ever.

If the idea meets with the 3 'experts' approval then it might get trialled. I have to say the criteria is really arbitrary at this stage and seemingly harmless 'cures' that have worked for the individual concerned are dismissed.

One cure that was totally dismissed was the taking of cider vinegar and honey in a little water for arthritic pain. The lady who presented this was indeed happy with its results and she was clearly given it by someone else that had success with it, in fact it is one that i have suggested to many people, and in those that have used it regularly have also been pain free and not needed the use of medical drugs. It just so happened that this lady also lost some weight, which of course would always help arthritis, but that has not been a factor in those I know that use this cure. The 3 docs, decided that it was the weight loss that did it.

The rationale behind it is one of lessening the acidity in the body. On that basis the doctors dismissed it instantly - stating that scientifically we cannot alter the ph of our bodies.......Well we clearly can to some extent, or why else do they prescribe antacids! Of course various organs of our body require different ph levels and much of maintaining this is down to the kidneys.

But something else must be happening then, many of us will know people who suffer arthritis or rheumatics and they know that for them, avoiding strong acid forming foods helps relieve the pain. Onions, tomatoes, potatoes etc are often those cited as causing inflammation. My own fathers hands will swell around the knuckles if he eats tomatoes. If you look up Gout, all medical websites will advise people to cut out acid forming food - so doctors, which is it to be?

There is much talk about alkaline diets being beneficial for people with serious health issues - well on the basis of these 3 doctors views - that would seem a pointless regime to follow then if our kidneys will deal with it all anyway.

So I thought I would have a look and see what is out there and what makes sense. This was the best explanation from a doctor I could find, that works well for an everyday view of the subject......

When people encourage you to "alkaline your blood," most of them mean that you should eat plenty of foods that have an alkaline-forming effect on your system. The reason for making this suggestion is that the vast majority of highly processed foods - like white flour products and white sugar - have an acid-forming effect on your system, and if you spend years eating a poor diet that is mainly acid-forming, you will overwork some of the buffering systems mentioned above to a point where you could create undesirable changes in your health.

For example, your phosphate buffer system uses different phosphate ions in your body to neutralize strong acids and bases. About 85% of the phosphate ions that are used in your phosphate buffer system comes from calcium phosphate salts, which are structural components of your bones and teeth. If your body fluids are regularly exposed to large quantities of acid-forming foods and liquids, your body will draw upon its calcium phosphate reserves to supply your phosphate buffer system to neutralize the acid-forming effects of your diet. Over time, this may lead to structural weakness in your bones and teeth.

Drawing on your calcium phosphate reserves at a high rate can also increase the amount of calcium that is eliminated via your genito-urinary system, which is why a predominantly acid-forming diet can increase your risk of developing calcium-rich kidney stones.

This is just one example of how your buffering systems can be overtaxed to a point where you experience negative health consequences. Since your buffering systems have to work all the time anyway to neutralize the acids that are formed from everyday metabolic activities, it's in your best interest to follow a diet that doesn't create unnecessary work for your buffering system.

So given that there is logic to the theory, and ph levels can be controlled by diet and need to be if the buffering system is under pressure through years of bad diet, what a pity that this innocent concoction of cider vinegar and honey wasn't explored.

Still the programme that featured duck tape reducing verrucas, it was agreed that it worked but sadly never said why! Odd that what ever is in duck tape, wasn't considered to be a problem leeching into the skin - where as other such remedies were dismissed on that basis.

Many 'cures' were dismissed on the grounds there was no medical evidence...which was odd as clearly there never will be if no one does the trials and surely that was what this programme was about.....you see, I knew it was a mistake to watch it.

So despite the dismissing of influence of diet over ph by the TV Doc's, there are doctors out there that go that extra mile in the chemistry of the body and hence can show some sound evidence as to what goes on with the acid/alkaline balance in our bodies and why recommending including more alkaline forming foods in the diet is advantageous to health in the long term.

Of course the programme at several junctions mentions that it is essential for viewers to follow the advice of their GP's....Is this always the case?....The latest stats state that 250.000 people world wide die from taking the prescribed meds, in the right dose, at the right time, every year....

But then I think it was Mark Twain that said one should be careful of reading health books, as you might die of a misprint.

Perhaps in this age, it could be death by Wikipedia or overzealous drug companies and ill informed doctors.

Where does that leave us all?

Monday, 14 October 2013

March Against Monsanto

On Saturday 12 October, demonstrators in an estimated 400 cities in 50 countries took to the streets to protest against the corporate psychopathic organisation - Monsanto.

How many people out there still don't know who Monsanto are and why those of us that marched feel so moved to do so?

Monsanto are one of the main players behind the GM seed.  In the thousands of years that we have been farming on this planet, these farmers have never needed genetically modified seed.It has never been about a monoculture system of farming.  When I was at school in the 70's, we learnt the importance of crop rotation and why it was important to do this to allow the land to recover and not to replant the same crop in the same place year in and year out. Farmers for thousands of years have been following these rules and working in harmony with nature. But now we are the age of the monoculture, and so we have had to become the age of the nutrient depleted food - the land does not recover, it does not support more than one crop - it is stripped of its nutrients and destroyed with stronger and stronger pesticides.

Our health suffers as a result of that nutrient depletion. Iodine is scarce in soil these days - is this a factor in the rising number of under active thyroid cases in people and all the knock on effects in the body that brings?

For the last 20 years or so, we have had to contend with the idea that genetically modified seeds are the way forward. Yes they are if you are the pesticide corporation and have the technology to make a seed resistant to your pesticide, even if that means crossing genes in nature that would never naturally be crossed.

Creating a GM seed gives the corporation the right to patent it. Nature provided seeds for free and in abundance, she did so that food was there for everyone. Even William the Conqueror ensured everyone had a strip of land to grow their own food on.  If the likes of Monsanto and Bayer and Syngenta have their way, there will only be their sterile seeds, you won't be able to save them, you will need to buy more and more each year.

It is so well documented just what that has meant to the farmers in India with the BT cotton.  Sold by Monsanto as the seed that will yield more and pest resistant - well if only that was true. Farmers went from growing crops that reproduced themselves to a sterile seed that yields less and needs buying again every year.
Like the over use of antibiotics, we have viruses that are resistant to anything we can medically throw at them, so man has done the same to pests. The over use of pesticides has created resistance to them in the pest.  Nature will keep evolving to ensure survival, be it pest or predator.

The long term effects on the livelihoods of farmers has been devastating in India, with nearly 300, 000 taking their own lives as they can not meet the rising cost of Monsanto's products and the yield is less.

We might think that we kicked Monsanto out of Europe, but GM is in the food chain.  One of these monoculture GM crops is corn....despite the fact that cows are designed to eat grass not grain,  Cattle is so often grain fed and that is where the GM enters the food chain.  Buy organic grass fed beef and meats!

But it means we are not free of GM. Imported goods, especially from the US.  We need to know what is in our food, what is the food chain.

It is important we don't lose the rights over nature that were given to us all.  Nature is about abundance and not about profit and creating shortage.

The GM argument is that with rising populations we need GM food.  How will producing sterile seeds help in the 'abundance of food' we need to feed the rising population. Nature has it covered. From one plant, thousands of seeds come and from that thousands more. The shortage argument is redundant then.

The London march was impressively organised and good humoured. We held up the traffic on the Embankment, up to and around Trafalgar Square, onto the green outside Westminster where we treated to a host of great speakers and of course Vandana Shiva,

How come this global event has not been covered by the news?

Click on the first link to see a message from Vandana and on the 2nd link to see some great videos, pictures and comments on the forum.  You can see Vandana's whole address to the crowd on there also.



Saturday, 21 September 2013

First Do No Harm....

Having risked a look at the BBC news website, I read it for the propaganda don't you know!, I see the main headline on the health section is that of the HPV vaccine, that which is supposed to cut the deaths and occurrences from and of, cervical cancer, is being considered for boys!!
This is not the first time this has been mooted and the justifications for it....well nothing that sex education couldn't address.  At one time, smoking was said to be the main cause of mouth or throat cancer, now it is being suggested that it is oral sex. It could seem that the cause much depends on what you want to promote as a cure.

Whatever the question of cause, is vaccination the answer?

This Gardasil vaccine is not without it's problems and proven complications, although the term 'proven complications' is hardly adequate when that has meant the deaths of many young girls (and one is enough if it is your daughter!) and the huge impact on the health of many others.

According to the published VAERS report on the HPV vaccine up to March 2013

The number....

Disabled   =  935
Deaths  =     133
Did not recover  = 5,875
Had Abnormal PAP smears = 519
Cervical Cancer developed = 62
Cervical Dysplaysia  = 209
Life Threatening = 551
Emergency room admissions = 10,335
Hospitalised = 2,954
Extended hospital stays = 227
Serious = 3,963
Adverse events = 29,362

Given that it is also accepted that resulting conditions are massively under reported - these figures could be way higher.

But here we are blindly going down this track. 

If the death of a young man or woman occurs as a result of taking an illegal substance, it hits the headlines big time, but if that death occurs as a result of a vaccination, then that's a coincidence and no one hears about it. Not that i'm advocating the taking of illegal substances, just the recognition of 'agenda' when reporting.

So there will be many here in the  UK facing the dilemma of do they or don't they have the vaccine, and we are all brought up believing the 'white coat'. These 'white coats' can only tell you what the drug company tells them.

Interestingly on page 7 of the Guardian yesterday, our government has had to take a U-turn on the link between the swine flu jab and narcolepsy. What it describes as 'fresh evidence' is the  proven link between the GSK Pandemrix vaccine and this condition developing.. Yet i'm sure this vaccine was 'sold as safe' 1 in 55.000 jabs has caused a problem, 900 people and that is only those that get reported all the way along the line. It is recognised that symptoms as a result of medication taking or jabs etc are under reported. Often only 10%.

So this vaccine was not completely safe and those effected are going to be asked to apply for compensation from the government within 3 weeks of the announcement.

If you read the above carefully, you will see that GSK made the vaccine but we the tax payers are footing the compensation bill (governments don't have their own money - they play about with ours)
So why are they doing this? Is GSK a struggling drug company that the government has got to bail out...well hardly! 
It turns out, like many vaccines, GSK had an indemnity clause written into the contract when providing the drug for the government. This means the government is ultimately responsible for picking up the bill.

This little snippet, gets a mention in the Guardian, but surely this is a story in itself.

If these vaccines are so safe, why doesn't the drug company back its own products?

Does Russell Hobbs get the government to underwrite all the kettles they sell in case they blow up when the public use them?

Could GSK not get an insurer to take their money? - that all most seems impossible to believe.

What could possibly be wrong or go wrong with an extensively tested drug that has been deemed fit for purpose to be used on the public?

Not sure it fills me with confidence that the developer of the drug, won't or can't back it financially if it goes wrong.

This was a page 7 article not a headline grabbing one yet when we had the measles furore, this made front page news as the drive was to scare people into getting their children vaccinated.  The effect of vaccines when they cause a problem gets buried on page 7 or as on the BBC website, one of those 'click on to reveal more' stories. Not exactly lead story, yet it could end up costing the tax payer a lot of money.

The story of a young man's death at the time attributed to measles, also hit the main headlines, despite the inquest showing this not to be the cause.  Again, it fitted with the agenda

Right now, that lead story on the BBC is the HPV for boys. I wonder if the complications that might arise will take the same prominent position?

When those that are responsible for developing drugs, testing them and then present them as safe, are one and the same, where are the safe guards for the public?

Now given that articles that discuss vaccinations are being monitored, perhaps those that call for openness and that doctors get given all the facts, not just the cherry picked studies the drug companies want to present, this can be seen that these matters need addressing and the 'truth' in medicine be restored.  After all, Dr's take an oath that says, first do no harm - may be we should get the drug companies to sign up for that one also!

Sunday, 4 August 2013

A Bold Statement, But Does it Read True?

Today I was visiting a local fund raising event held by the Round Table. There were various charity stalls raising money for their individual causes.

It is difficult right now for people to know what and whom to support and very often some small and very good charities get overlooked by the bigger guys who have more money to spend to attract more money. All part of the irony of these big charities, they become big employees and businesses in themselves so that a good sum of the money raised has to go to keeping the charity viable enough to raise funds - it's not just about money in one door and straight out to the cause that it is being given to, but we often forget that.

It is important too that we are given the correct information on what the charities are doing with that money and what is being achieved.

So I was slightly alarmed to see one of the UK's biggest charities for one of the most emotive health areas using a bold advert that perhaps isn't giving the complete picture.

The stall that was manned by i'm sure a very well meaning group of volunteers for Cancer Research UK, had a very large 'pull up' banner that read

Preventing, Controlling and Curing All Cancers

This is quite a statement to make and given that one never knows if something has been prevented, that is a difficult claim to make.  Controlling, well there is some measure there in an individual, but as for the last claim of curing all cancers.....that is mighty big statement and one might think quite misleading.

If they are curing all cancers, then right now we shouldn't be seeing anyone dying from any cancer and clearly that is not true!

Many of these large cancer based organisations would come down hard on anyone claiming a cure for cancer, as the 1939 cancer act doesn't allow for anyone other than medical practitioners, nurses, pharmacists or members of parliament to speak of the disease in that way.

So for this charity to say it is curing cancer, has the potential for the public, who are desperate to see an end to this cruel illness, to think that it has the answer, the cure, for their relative, friend, self etc and put money their way under that illusion.

To make such a claim, you have to be showing figures that are conclusive with no provisos.
This is a painfully difficult disease to treat with a generic method, as cancers are as individual as the individual, especially in the trigger for their development.

Having recently lost a sister to cancer, I know full well they are not curing all cancers and yet money pours into them by the millions.

To say they are still looking for the cure would be more accurate, but we have heard that story year in and year out, we are always 'just around the corner' from the cure...well its a mighty long corner and I guess at the end of it, we will know that only a totally individual rethink to life, nutrition, stress relief and a more imaginative approach to treatment will indeed lead to better health and improved recovery rates.

But as yet a cure to all cancers is not exactly the truth.

Friday, 19 July 2013

The side effects of the NHS treatments for cancer - help us to help this special charity to offer different options

We know that the treatments that the NHS have on offer to treat cancer have some dreadful side effects but the report from the Macmillan Charity today shows just what the extent of that is.

The BBC health page today.....

A report from the Macmillan Charity has shown that our NHS methods of treating cancer  are causing hundreds of thousands of people to develop, chronic fatigue, pain,sexual and urinary difficulties etc when healthy cells are destroyed and damaged due to conventional cancer treatments.

Macmillan are proposing 'support' for this - after all, it is only support they have left to offer and I'm sure they would like your money to help them to do that!

But what if we didn't have to have these 'double edged sword' treatments. What if the figures that Macmillan have come up with don't have to be the case.

350.000 people left with sexual difficulties
240.000 left with mental health problems
150.000 urinary problems
90.000 constant diarrhoea and bleeding problems
New cancers to develop and the threat of the existing cancer recurring.
Vast increase in heart disease and osteoporosis etc etc.

It is proven that those that have had cancer will have more physical health problems than those that haven't.

Well to many of us, it isn't surprising.....we are not interested in treating the cancer we are interested in treating the person with cancer.  That is the way that you can start to ensure the body is really addressing the changes that need to happen to get back to health and 'life'   No point keeping putting healthy fish in sewage water and expect them to survive.
If cancer cells have developed the environment needs changing!

A group of therapist friends of mine have come together to do a sponsored walk for a fantastic charity call Yes to Life.   www.yestolife.org.uk  check them out!
We are 4 women of a certain age and this is a definite challenge for us.  It will be a 25.5 mile walk from Kings Norton near Birmingham along the Stratford Upon Avon canal to Stratford. 

Yes to Life support proven and effective methods of treating the person with cancer that help them regain their health. Methods that support the healthy cells and thus support recovery. Methods that engage the person into someone actively seeking to help their own body rather than being 'done to'  This approach certainly leaves a person with no where to go after the hospital has decided they have done their bit. 

Yes to Life say while you are alive, there is work to be done and a change can happen. They will support that change.

So please dig deep, this is a charity that supports the work that therapists and those in alternative medicine do and is at the fore front of integrative oncology in the UK

This charity doesn't fund research via drug companies, it is totally independent and there to support what ever the individual requires.

Pass the details on to whoever you think might want to support us also, we'll take anyone's money for them!

Sunday, 14 July 2013

Japan removes Govt backing for Gardasil

For those of you that have children possibly having to have the Gardasil vaccine next school term, you might like to know that the Japanese Govt have withdrawn their support for the vaccine.

One of the best stories I have seen on this from the Home Health Economist site is as follows....

Japan suffers from one of the lowest fertility rates in the world – 1.39 (2011)  - well below 2.1 population replacement level. This combined with a rapidly aging populace has become such a worry for the government that women are actually now being paid to have babies.
According to the Wall Street Journal, a Japanese program that pays new parents $3,300 per year for every new child until age 15, along with offering less direct incentives, like state-supported daycare and tuition waivers, was implemented in 2009.
The result?  The fertility rate barely budged.
With cash offers for babies not yet working, Japan is being extremely cautious in implementing any long term health initiatives which affect women’s reproductive organs.

On June 14, 2013, Japan’s health ministry raised eyebrows around the world by deciding to formally withdraw its recommendation for HPV vaccination (Gardasil, Cervarix) to protect girls against cervical cancer.
The reason? Hundreds of complaints from Japanese citizens about possible side effects such as long-term pain, numbness and even paralysis.
In an attempt to avoid completely alienating the World Health Organization, which recommends the HPV vaccine used by many developed nations, the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare insisted that it is not suspending the use of the vaccine, but simply instructed local Japanese governments not to promote it until more study is conducted on its safety.
Mariko Momoi, vice president of the International University of Health and Welfare, who headed the task force on the matter said:
“The decision (not to recommend the vaccination) does not mean that the vaccine itself is problematic from the viewpoint of safety. By implementing investigations, we want to offer information that can make the people feel more at ease.”
Blah, blah, blah.  The best government-speak in the world doesn’t drown out this message which is LOUD and clear.  The Japanese health ministry doesn’t trust the HPV vaccines Gardasil or Cervarix.
It is important to note that it is rare for the Japanese health ministry to withdraw a recommendation for a vaccine that is used regularly by local governments and is spelled out as part of revisions to the Preventative Vaccination Law approved in April 2013.

The cervical cancer vaccine is still available to girls for free under subsidies provided by the law although medical institutions must now inform them beforehand that the ministry does not recommend it.
So far, an estimated 3.28 million people have received the vaccination in Japan alone. However, 1,968 cases of possible side effects, including body pain, have been reported.  Side effects in the United States are shown in the chart to the right, courtesy of SaneVax.org.
The ministry’s task force discussed 43 of the 1,968 adverse cases in Japan. Based on its analysis into the matter, the task force concluded that the ministry should withdraw its recommendation until it can offer appropriate information about what caused the sometimes debilitating side effects.
The ministry’s investigation is expected to take several months.  At that time, a decision will be rendered whether to reinstate recommendation for HPV vaccination or continue to withhold it.
Mika Matsufuji, head of a group of parents who say their children have suffered side effects from the cervical cancer vaccine, said:
“We welcome the decision not to recommend the vaccination even though it is a small step. Parents can decide whether their children should receive the vaccination or not.”
Japan Bucks the Vaccination Trend Once Again
This is not the first time Japan has bucked the trend toward more vaccinations.
In 1975, Japan eliminated all vaccines for children under the age of 2.   The country’s infant mortality rate subsequently plummeted to the lowest level in the world.  Japan changed its infant vaccination schedule again in 1995, but it remains one of the least aggressive in the world with Japan’s infant mortality rate (IMR) remaining low as well (third in 2009).  The United States ranks 34th

Worth noting. Japan are quite the leaders in this and have a vested interest in protecting female fertility.

Odd how no one wants to question the World Health Organisation, but perhaps they should!

According to the published VAERS report on the HPV vaccine up to March 2013

The number....

Disabled   =  935
Deaths  =     133
Did not recover  = 5,875
Had Abnormal PAP smears = 519
Cervical Cancer developed = 62
Cervical Dysplaysia  = 209
Life Threatening = 551
Emergency room admissions = 10,335
Hospitalised = 2,954
Extended hospital stays = 227
Serious = 3,963
Adverse events = 29,362

Given that it is also accepted that resulting conditions are massively under reported - these figures could be way higher.

This truly has to be an indication to all responsible govt's that a hold on this vaccine ought to occur.

Wednesday, 3 July 2013

Can we afford the world we have created or do we need 'new science'

In a world that is becoming increasingly more expensive to maintain the way we expect it to be, isn't it time we did a stock take?  What are we getting for our money?  Who is making that money? and  is it what we really want?

For a world that seems to have become more 'scientific' and less spiritual, you would expect a fairly efficient system based on well founded science.....sadly not.

What we have is very blinkered thinking. It is as if science sets out to find what it is looking for. Data smudging or data ignoring to get the desired result. In medicine this happens a lot (Bad Pharma!) So a lot of money is ploughed into research to discover what exactly - what they hoped to find in the beginning - doesn't sound like science to me.

I have a friend that worked in the engineering industry, the same applied, if the results were not quite as you expected - configure them differently or change what you expected...

So why bother carrying out studies if you know what you what you are going to get at the end of it?

This is the 'evidence based' approach that is held up in all areas of science as the only way to go.
And this is fine if the actual evidence is looked at in its entirety and not cherry picked.
The deviants to the expectations might lead to further and more exciting discoveries - but of course research is paid for by someone with an agenda for the product or the medicine etc. They might also lead to reasons not to proceed, but that might prove too costly and perhaps that is why certain studies are then ignored......so how scientific is this?

Our ever rising fuel bills are something we should all be challenging....Google 'free energy' Tesla came up with this concept years ago - when you google it you find many people out there with machines and concepts to produce free energy....How transforming to the world this could be.

Energy costs impact on nearly every aspect of our lives and add an extra financial burden on so many levels.  Not just financial but the destruction of the planet.  Not satisfied with drilling oil, there is the devastation of the Tar Sands and soon fracking for shale gas here in the UK as in other parts of the world.

So what if the free energy devices were not dismissed by scientists as 'not possible' and explored for their potential...Who knows that if they are proved to work on a commercial scale - the impact of that on all our lives would be incredible.  A whole new, cleaner industry but with the benefits of producing what some believe to be a health giving electricity 'field', totally sustainable, clean and cheap!!

Who do you think might just want to stop any exploration into this concept?

But we seem to be happy to keep buying more and more power driven devices commercially thrust upon us as 'must have' technology, yet we face the prospect of power cuts in the years to come.
The cost of fuel now, sees many struggling people having to have their own 'power cuts' as the expense is too great already...so why are we not exploring options of 'free energy'

My local supermarket acts like the 'village store' it has developed an ethos that it thinks will appeal to its local customer base much like the village store it replaced....except the original one had local veg and eggs and dairy etc.  This new supermarket village store has a strange concept of the word 'local'  So why are we paying for carrots and potatoes to come in from Israel and Italy etc, when here we are surrounded by farming counties.

If you added the true cost of freighting this stuff in from such a distance, it would cost a fortune. I mean the true environmental cost of airmiles and environmental damage. If it had to be taxed to cover that, would we still want unseasonal crops in our stores - i guess not, but we will end up paying the price in the long run!

How about going back to eating local food, seasonal food from farms and farmers you know and trust and hopefully organic farms that might compete better if the imported food they were up against was sold at its true price!

Then we come to medicine - well we all know just how greedy big pharma is. But if we did a true stock take there what on earth might we find?

Look at the cancer industry - a multi-billion industry and has been for years and years and years...so where are the results?  More people dying of cancer than ever before, survival rates...well to quote Phillip Day, health journalist, 'if you survive beyond 5 years and die, you are a dead survivor!'  Improvements verses cost - if it was any other industry it would have collapsed.

We see increasingly more expensive medicines hit the market that our NHS can ill afford, but once off license the generic version is so much cheaper...then of course you get the drug companies that want to tweak it slightly and reapply for a patent as was the case recently in India, and good for them, they refused it telling that company the difference was not significant enough...the fact is they tried as a way of just making more money!

We are about to be hit by a plethora of new vaccines - one of the best money makers going. Shingles, Chicken Pox, Rotavirus (see previous blog)
Watch the media play each of these illnesses up. As soon as someone has a way of making a buck from something, it becomes a deadly disease.   Now there aren't many of us that haven't had chicken pox and every parent expects their child to get it, now we will soon be hearing how lethal chicken pox is....I guess they will go with the economics...how much work time is lost in parents taking time off to look after sick children, this was one of the arguments for the rotavirus and measles etc  Governments can waste money at will but our sick children needing parental time, well that can't happen can it???  Children getting childhood illnesses makes for stronger healthier adults.

And if the argument for vaccinating for every known illness (or at least those that they have developed one for thus far - the others are still ok to get at this stage) is to prevent death and maiming etc as is the usual scare approach, then when will the governments of the world ban smoking - huge impact on our NHS resources and loss of work time due to associated illnesses with it. How about alcohol - big social impact, costs on local authorities, police and NHS services and the knock on effects on the family and community.

So when we look at our priorities and do a stock take, it all starts to look like madness!

Put up with rising fuel costs - not explore free energy concepts.

Put up with flawed data that is pedalled under the title of 'evidence based'

Plough endless money into drug companies yet the results don't equal expenditure

Costly drugs and vaccination programmes that could well be storing up bigger health problems.

Flying food in from all over the world that we can grow here.

Can we afford to keep living like this?

Time to take the blinkers of science and explore what else can be achieved.

Monday, 1 July 2013

So now the Rotavirus Vaccine will hit UK infants!! It is now deemed a deadly disease!

The BBC  today announce that we are due for yet another vaccine, this time for Rotavirus.
It is incredible the way an illness is viewed and how that changes when the government has a 'plan' for it.
Until a vaccine existed, the Rotavirus was a sickness and diarrhoea bug, nearly every child would get it, several times sometimes, but it is clearly something that helps build immunity. As we get older we are less susceptible to it and in fact you hardly ever hear of adults getting S & D.

Suddenly it is termed 'killer diarrhoea' and great emphasis on the complications that arise with this virus, plus the expense to the NHS and loss of working time (to look after a child!!!)

All the figures that make it look like an absolute 'must have' vaccine. Yet more fear instilled in parents. The best way of making people comply is fear!! Fear based medicine - How can that be right?

It is nothing short of a miracle it seems that our children make it to adult hood, having run the gauntlet of all these deadly and extremely harmful diseases that in my day were just childhood illnesses we all got and were 'nursed' through by our mothers.

So all of us that survived several bouts of sickness and diarrhoea as children, and got the measles and chicken pox, bouts of flu and all manner of other things, are walking miracles it seems.

I blogged on this earlier on and here is part of that blog

By the age of one, your child will have had a possible 25 vaccines and thank goodness none are compulsory!

Well what is the Rotavirus and what is the history behind this vaccine.

The Rotavirus is something that all children will very likely get and that we as children all probably had as well, the great thing is that after the first bout of it, your own immunity offers a good deal of protection to the second bout and therefore it is less severe and as we move into adult hood, our own immunity has us virtually covered for it - perfect!! just as it should be, a healthy immune system that has developed its own defence to this virus and the cases of it occurring in adult hood are rare.

So what are the symptoms of this virus and what should we do if our children get it?
First it is a sickness and diarrhoea bug with a possible fever. Well, children get these symptoms quite often and can come from all manner of viruses, so are we going to vaccinate them for all of them eventually?
This is a virus that can so easily be prevented by good hygiene, such as hand washing after going to the toilet, washing hands before eating and being careful in general cleanliness between children - do we really need a vaccine to replace general basic hygiene?
Well the rotavirus like most of these viruses are quite contagious and any illness between children can spread quickly, but that is the beauty of getting childhood illnesses and having them over and done with so we become healthier and stronger adults.

The NHS website states that only 1.5% of children that get gastroenteritis require hospitalisation and that is due to the child being allowed to get dehydrated. This site infers that this is a mild condition that can in the majority be managed very easily
When anyone suffers diarrhoea , dehydration is a possibility and so it is important to keep fluids up and the sugar/salt balance in the body stable with rehydration solutions. Fluids are more important than food at this point and my favourite solution for sickness and diarrhoea is a small amount of Coca Cola with a pinch of good sea salt for older children and for babies, there are numerous preparations that you can get from your chemist that mimic this.
It gives a good salt/sugar balance and is the best use of this drink that in usual circumstances I wouldn't touch.
Keep the communal areas well sanitised, so handles and toilets and towels etc should all be kept clean and minimise the cross infection. Washing of toys as the germs can live on toys for a bit longer.
So are we to vaccinate for the absence of basic hygiene and good parenting and risk all that vaccines can do to our children.
Fever is a natural response in the body and so again good parenting to manage the fever by watching to make sure it doesn't make your child delirious or risk a fit, but can be allowed to do its job in the body, keeping it under control by sponging down with warm water and not reaching for the tablets or for the Imodium.
Roughly 4 children a year die from this virus, and of course no death is acceptable, but do we ban cars that cause many more children's deaths a year, or smoking that causes the NHS to spend far more on treating the effects of this unnecessary activity - of course not, but why not?

In June 2007 there was a call for a vaccine to prevent this virus and of course drug companies were only too willing to oblige as yet another way for them to make money. But this first attempt at the vaccine was withdrawn as it caused intussusception, which is when the bowel folds in on itself and cause obstruction - the exact opposite to the Rotavirus then!

Why did the vaccine effect the bowel in this way?  What has changed? Well when it comes to getting your baby vaccinated with this little number, ask your Dr what went wrong with the first one and why it would have done that and what possibly can go wrong with this one, after all they didn't put the last vaccine out thinking it would do that now did they?
So we don't want to go from symptoms that we as parents can manage to a problem we can not or that can lead to further problems for our children's health later in life with this mass of vaccines and the accumulative effect of vaccine adjuvents.
Drugs can not be tested on children, so it really is 'guess work' to some extent, how these things will pan out in our children's bodies.

This virus is a bigger problem in developing nations where clean drinking water and sanitation are not possible, but to give a vaccine is still not the answer, in fact from the study carried out on a group of 8000 Bangladeshi Children and was published in the British Medical Journal, we ourselves could learn something for our children.

This was a very thorough study that was given much praise in the way it was carried out.
Basically it looked to see if zinc would shorten the length of the condition and prevent less hospital admission and improve both morbidity and mortality.
One group was given just the Oral Rehydration Solution and the other group were given both the ORS and just 20mg of zinc!
The combination technique using the zinc very significantly lowered the rates of morbidity and mortality.It also cut the use of antibiotics!
The overall conclusion was that this therapy had substantial benefits from a simple and inexpensive treatment.

Now the World Health Organisation (WHO) reviewed the findings of Abdullah Baqui from the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and concluded that zinc supplements are efficacious in reducing the severity and duration of the illness, however it said further research was needed to ascertain whether the use of zinc was practical in the developing world.

Just 20mg of zinc per person as opposed to a vaccine that will be costing more than zinc. Zinc being a safer method also.

Unbelievable - so what might be the real reason WHO wouldn't want to go for a cost effective option that had such a well controlled study backing it, the kind they put so much store behind.
Actually who wouldn't want to go for a cost effective option?

How powerful are the drug companies?

No patent on zinc of course so no money to be made.

Don't forget that zinc could help your child's condition too - seek the help of  an expert in vitamins and minerals which is not, in most cases, your Dr, I hasten to add

Please ask your doctor or nurse to tell you what is in the vaccines you are letting your children have. You don't just want to be told that its nothing that isn't safe, that is not the same answer. If they can't tell you - come back when they can and that you are satisfied you know the ingredients.

Supermarkets sell many products that we make decisions on not to buy because of their ingredients, do the same for vaccines.

Don't be a sheep - be a parent.

Taking some time off work to look after our children when they are sick should be acceptable in a civilised country and sticking yet another jab into these little bodies is not the answer - it is creating a bigger problem.

At any one vaccine appointment with a nurse, your child could be vaccinated for several conditions all at once. Nature doesn't give us all these diseases in one go, she knows our bodies couldn't cope with it, so what do we think we are doing?

Remember that none of these can be tested on children, that is unethical!  not unethical to give them once someone has deemed them ok though - but how can that arise?

I have left lots of questions hanging in the air - that i did deliberately as these are the questions we should have the answers to before we agree to this.

Remember vaccines are not compulsory and don't fall victim to peer pressure or assume they are safe.

What are we going to see a rise of in a few years as a result of this vaccine then!

Tuesday, 18 June 2013

BBC website today. 'Does a Child Die of Hunger Every 10 Seconds?' Nutrition over Vaccines

Extremely interesting story on the BBC website today 'Does a Child Die of Hunger Every 10 Seconds?'

Well when you read the story   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22935692, you see that the story is critical of the manipulation of the facts by playing with statistics.  Everyone I'm sure will know the quote accounted to Disraeli, 'Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics'  but look at what this story is about.  It is looking at children's deaths through hunger and why that is occurring.

Stats can be used to shock and of course if you are the charity that wants to touch the nerve and pocket of people to give money to help, then it is tempting to present the figures in a way that conjures up the most shocking image. 

An image of a child dying every 10 seconds is indeed a harrowing one and not true as you might be lead to believe by that stat. So surely it has to be better to look at the cause of this and promote that accurately, then we are all aware of what needs fixing.

This is a good article and I like the way that it is highlighting the importance of health on nutrition.

If you are wanting to give money, you want it to be in sustaining health and not a 'one off' attempt at providing a bowl of rice!

The west might not be starving, but it also has a good way to go to understand the importance of nutrition.

It goes on to state that it is not hunger and it's not that children in these stricken countries are going to bed hungry, they are just not receiving a broad enough range of food to give the spectrum of nutrients that are important for the body to survive.

It is stating that we don't need to be relying on grain, it is not enough and so therefore we do not need GM wheat to feed the world! Or GM corn, we need the variety of fruit/vegetables,dairy and of course the education of a population to know why that is important. Again, a good many in the developed world could do with that lesson!

Most of all, we need this food to be good quality, and not over bred, not GM fed, sustainable and organic....not difficult in this world!  We have been doing it for millenia! 

Isn't it amazing that here in the UK, a doctor has very little time for talk on optimising nutrition to sustain health, in fact almost the opposite in a recommended cancer diet here....but then all the emphasis is on the plethora of drugs....

In poor countries, drugs are not affordable, so guess what...food and nutrition are recognised as crucial in maintaining health.  When the chips are down, it is back to good old nutrition, clean water  and sanitation.  The very basis of eradication of most major viral illnesses,way way before vaccines.

This is a story on lack of nutrition, not a lack of food. There is no vaccine for this - Mr Gates!!, there is only food and nutrients...So look at the paragraph that states children rarely die of starvation, they die of disease because they are malnourished.....yes Mr Bill Gates and the pro vaccine lobby...malnourished!  In fact the article says that infectious diseases such as measles, in a well nourished child, would be just shrugged off   It's not being referred to here as a 'killer disease' whoever catches it, only in those undernourished (not underfed!!) and not the un-vaccinated!

In 2013, it should not be beyond the wit of man to be able to feed the children of the world properly. (No, this is not an opportunity for MacDonalds!!)  Never has the world seemed so small and so accessible.  Tracking devices to see where tribes in Africa are so they can be vaccinated - I hope the same mechanisms are being used to know where food needs to be aimed at.

So education, nutrition, clean water and sanitation are at the base of saving lives...not rocket science is it? Not a reliance on drugs, just the political will to achieve it....G8!!!

Having said that with the developing world in mind.....we can apply that to many in the developed world also!

Be wary of what statistics hide and promote for the organisation using them. Here my thoughts turn to the vaccination programmes and scaremongering that goes on to frighten people to do it....just remember this BBC report....a well nourished child will 'shrug off' measles...It is not the killer the media would have you believe. And just look at the importance placed on nutrition....are we finally waking up?

Saturday, 15 June 2013

How The Vaccinated Could Ensure They Are Protected From The Un-vaccinated & Leave Us All With Choice.

Is it right that someone's medical choice impacts on another?

Well the pro vaccine campaigners are convinced that we should all get vaccinated to protect those that can't and to increase the chance of 'herd immunity'

Both arguments are flawed. I have written before on asking one parent to risk the health of their child for that of the health of another.  If the vaccine has awful side effects on the child that has to take it, then we end up with two sick children and if vaccines are so safe that you can give them to newborns and even to the unborn via the mother, then what's the problem with giving them to sick children whom we are told need protecting from these so called 'deadly' illnesses.

We don't know if the unborn are healthy or possibly developing a problem in the womb that then may be exacerbated by a vaccine at this all important developmental time.

As for the concept of 'herd immunity' this term was coined for natural immunity, where exposure to the virus as it would naturally enter the body would give protection and not necessarily exhibit the symptoms. The key point here, is how it would naturally enter the body and allow the immune system to work correctly and not by pass crucial stages.

But for those pro vaccine, they work on the basis that you need at least 95% of the population to be vaccinated to ensure that the virus is eradicated or at least minimised sufficiently.
So they want everyone, regardless of your own choice over your health, to be vaccinated to protect them.

The problem is that vaccines do not equal immunity. Vaccines fail, we know that because some of the largest outbreaks of the viruses vaccinated for at present appear in communities of either total or highly vaccinated areas. So perhaps they need lots of us to have them to account for the failure rate. If vaccines were 100% effective, the vaccinated wouldn't need to 'fear' the un-vaccinated and wouldn't require us all to be party to their regime.

Should people be subjected to this form of medical abuse? Surely making a medical procedure mandatory in a person with full mental capacity is abuse of the body.  What are you going to do for those that don't want it - arrest them and force a vaccine into their arm??? can you just picture what kind of world and control that looks like?  It should conjure up a very ugly scenario and totally inhumane.

So who is going to take the responsibility for vaccine damage under mandatory rules? Or will this only come about once governments think they have a way around it....under 3's perhaps are not eligible for government compensation etc etc, so when things go wrong, they can say it must be just part of natural development at that stage. or the excuse that this is when such problems could show themselves and nothing to do with the vaccine.....They sound familiar statements do they not?

So to all the  pro vaccine and mandatory vaccine campaigners out there, I ask you to be careful what you wish for and where that can lead and what kind of world that looks like. Remove your ego from it, the bit that makes you think you are right and the rest should have no choice but comply with yours, then decide how you are going to inflict that on your fellow man, woman and child and you start to look like an SS guard!

After all fining people or putting them in prison isn't getting you to your ultimate goal of vaccinating everyone - for that to happen you have to carry out a medical procedure under their duress and with force.....that is when it starts to look ugly!

Those that are anti-vaccine or wish to choose which of the vaccines they get are less about stopping others and more about choice over their own health.

There is a very simple answer to this.  Those that wish to be vaccinated should be, and quite rightly so! They should then get an antibody test and if immunity hasn't occurred, they could get the vaccine again, and they could keep repeating that until they show sufficient immunity.  After all, they seem quite happy to take the vaccines and all the nasty adjuvants the rest of us choose to avoid, so rather than waste a procedure on those that don't want it, keep giving it to those that do until they are fully protected.  Once they are fully protected they then have nothing to fear from the 'unclean'

Those of us happy to risk life and limb with measles or chicken pox or shingles or mumps etc etc are free to do so and would seek the help of natures medicine at that time, given the fact that the medical profession have nothing to treat these illnesses with anyway, hence their driving need to vaccinate for them. The fact that they are viral and antibiotics do not work on viruses, we need to go back to nature and find a good herbalist or homoeopath or orthomolecular practitioner to assist the body at that time.

Viruses are great at mutating to survive, so I just hope the vaccine makers are ready to respond when things like measles mutates and current vaccines fail. But of course they will be, a chance to make more money.

Or perhaps we all try and keep our immune systems as healthy as possible, the way nature intended and don't create a super measles virus etc.

There is a very strong theory that we might just be swapping childhood illnesses such as mumps, measles etc for more cancers, asthma, eczema, and other chronic  illnesses that are in the rise as vaccines are on the rise.

So be careful what you think you want with regard to health, the long term scenario may not be desirable either in the administration of it or the consequences of mutation.

Thursday, 13 June 2013

Bilderberg and Its Fringe.

The weekend saw quite a remarkable event take place and in the most unlikely places of Watford.

The 61st meeting of the Bilderberg group at the Grove Hotel.  A meeting of heads of state, politicians, CEO's - 'the great and the good'  Up until now the venue and who attends has always remained secret, but this year a list of who was to attend was released and of course the venue which given the amount to security surrounding it, could hardly remain a secret.

What the agenda is or what gets discussed is never disclosed and it is this more than anything that can disgruntle people.

It can lead to conspiracy theories and scare stories, some of which may be true stories (often more scarier than fiction) and conspiracy theories in the past have been shown to be fact.

What is not right is that ministers that are publicly elected, that should remain aware that they are servants of the citizens, given a job at the expense of those that elected them, should make them accountable in the undertaking of that job. That is pretty simple.

We haven't voted them in as to who can be the most clandestine or underhand or corrupt.  We haven't voted them in to work secretively on our behalf.

We voted them in to work to improve the 'lot' of all concerned with the resources at hand and not at the expense of the planet or others.

If we the public are considered too stupid to know the truth and be party to what is being discussed then we must have been too stupid to vote them in or make a wise decision on who best we put forward for the job.

This Bilderberg meeting is allowing CEO's access to heads of state and politicians alike in meetings that are not documented and without an agenda. Is it any wonder then that people start to worry what is traded for what?

The likes of Bill Clinton and Tony Blair are reported to have attended the meetings just a couple of years prior to their coming to power. Could be a coincidence of course and the conclusion over their terms of office as a source of good or bad in the world, i'll leave to you to decide.

The Bilderbergs founding members did it no favours and that with the presence of some dubious members that some would regard as criminals, continue to put this so called 'informal gathering' under a very strange light indeed.

The past is a good teacher and such groups rarely seem to work for the greater good of all, but with an eye on an increasing population and limited resources, it is no wonder that people feel that part of the agenda could supposedly be how to limit that number. Who is going to control the assets? Are we aiming for an even bigger federal European state? and just who is calling the shots?

If your MP attended this meeting, remind him/her who pays their salary and so who are they answerable to.

Great little video clip that sums up the day well.


Thanks to the person that posted the clip - nicely done!

Friday, 7 June 2013

When Will Our Government Have The True Political Will to Address The Cause of Cancer?

With the news today informing us that we are seeing an ever increasing risk of developing cancer and that despite the fact that the figures suggest more people survive it....that word survive is if you make it past the magic 5 year figure. The fact that many who do 'survive' do so at a cost. The conventional treatments currently on offer often leave people unable to continue to work or have a 'normal' life as they can be in a very weakened state, suffering pain and immobility. The psychological effects are enormous as well and all can require constant medical attention and support.

Yes we are living longer and that will have an impact but that is only part of the problem. The report says lifestyle is a factor and perhaps in more ways than this news story suggests.
Obviously excess alcohol and smoking will increase the risk in some to many illnesses of which cancer is one, but when we see a rise in breast cancer in younger women, can we only blame these two factors? Weight and lack of exercise can also play a part, but we are seeing an increase in thyroid problems and there is research to show that this could be playing a part in cancer development and especially breast cancer -

see link http://www.canceractive.com/cancer-active-page-link.aspx?n=1671

Why the thyroid problems? is it lack of Iodine causing underactive thyroid? or do we need to be looking at why immune systems start to attack themselves and cause overactive thyroids - Graves disease etc?

Our immune systems are under attack all the time and we need to make sure that we supply our bodies with good nutrients and the best food we can give it, especially at times of stress.

An increase in vaccinations in children and in adults with travel jabs and flu jabs is also something that we didn't have attacking our immune systems in an unnatural way 40 years ago to the extent that we have it now. Increase in antibiotic use and the resistance giving rise to new viruses - viruses have been linked to causing cancer.

So since the 1970's we see increasing thyroid problems, since this time also with the coming of supermarkets and the increase of poor quality food that they offer, the high sugar content of our diets, fast food outlets, although the word 'fast' may be appropriate, 'food' is disputable!

Dr Andrew Saul, author of many books on a nutritional approach to healing and health, and the man behind doctoryourself.com, uses a phrase which I love.  He says 'Stack the deck in your favour'  I'm a big fan of stacking the deck in your favour.

We don't know if we have been successful but we sure know when we haven't and our current approach to health on mass is clearly not working.

If we were truly committed to lowering numbers of cancer incidents, then lets sort this out, increase tax on high sugar food, do the same to fast food outlets, after all, we know cancer loves sugar. fast food is part of our global obesity problem, another factor that the report blames. Ban high fructose corn syrup!, we didn't use to have it. The government increase taxes on smoking as they perceive this to be a risk.

Get the water situation cleaned up. Since the contraception pill and HRT have become the norm for many women, there is a lot of oestrogen in our water supply.  Who is responsible for clearing that up?  Water companies say its the drug companies, and drug companies say its the water boards.

But surely this should be looked at when we are seeing a rise in female cancers and prostate cancer in men.

We need to stop looking in the same empty cupboard for the reason and solution and start exploring  other avenues seriously and yes there may well be lobby's that don't want the finger pointed at them to clean up their act, but the fact that we can not sustain the financial costs of this ever increasing disease, means we have to look for causes and address them.

Vitamin D and C in good therapeutic doses are important in maintaining health and getting the balance right.  Exercise over yet another 30mins in front of the TV watching some excuse for a programme are things we can all do, but government have to have the political will to truly tackle it despite the various food lobbyists, and corporations.

If cancer is something that should raise its head, then lets look at better ways to treat it. Integrative oncology includes looking at the factors that lead to it developing in the individual as well as the best way forward with minimising the awful side effects of the current treatment.

There are many interviews on this blog site with those that lead the way in integrative oncology and have done for years - what a pity our approach until now has never changed despite year on year of ever worsening figures.  How unscientific is that?

It is a multi billion pound industry and the amount of money raised and given to research is not working....we really need to be looking at other methods, as so far the answer hasn't come from a test tube or petri dish in a lab to any great extent,  despite valiant efforts - so lets invest some of that money into new areas of research that already exist but could do with the funds to carry out the big studies the NHS requires before it will accept them.

Lets not make the 1:2 prediction for 2020 become a reality.

Lets stop looking at the symptoms and start really looking for the cause.  I know there is less money to be made in this approach, but can we really afford the next batch of wonder drugs from the pharmaceutical giants?

Gene therapy is one approach, but we can't keep removing bits of ourselves due to our genes showing a potential risk. We have to ensure a healthy immune system so genes do not cause a problem and cell mutation proliferates what ever the reason.

Those of us with heart problems in the family are a bit scuppered with this approach. We have to pursue diet and exercise as I'm not sure a heart removal is going to be an option for sustained health!!!

Time for a new paradigm!