MCVitamins News

Your Nutritional Education Site

1. Marketing and the "All Natural" Trend
2. Cholesterol Reduction
3. Is Your Current Diet Accelerating the Growth Rate Of Cancer?
4. Is Sitting Bad for Your Health … and Waistline?
What the Surprising Research Reveals

Marketing and the "All Natural" Trend 

I remember an old commercial which promoted, "Pure Cane Sugar from Hawaii" making it sound wholesome,  or the old "Twinkies" commercial which told us all how wholesome they were.  Or the Kool Aid Commerical saying it was "pure and good and has the Parent's Magazine seal." (You can actually find these old commercials on YouTube.  

There are new trends, and one of them is "all natural" in labelling. 

Here is an article on the All Natural Trend.

Cholesterol Reduction

Let’s have a quick look at why your cholesterol might be elevated. In my opinion, there are 5 main causes and only one of those would merit treatment with a drug. The 5 causes are:

1. Poor diet.
2. Genetic- but this is VERY rare (< 1% of cases). It may be the one indication for drug therapy in accordance with the guidelines below.
3. Untreated hypothyroidism.
4. Elevated body burden of mercury- high levels of cholesterol are the body’s protective mechanism against some environmental toxins, particularly mercury. Aggressive lowering of cholesterol may result in increased toxicity from these sources. It is proposed that this may be the mechanism of the nerve damage that occurs as a side effect of some statin drugs.
5. Chronic systemic fungal infections- the most common cause by far. Note that anti-fungal medications have been shown to reduce cholesterol levels! Research by Professor AV Costantini published in his book Fungalbionics showed that cholesterol binds fungal mycotoxins- making them less harmful.

See the whole article Cholesterol Reduction 

Is Your Current Diet Accelerating the Growth Rate Of Cancer?

When someone is found to have cancer, the predominant discussion in modern medicine revolves around nothing else but what should be done with the tumor. If treatment interventions show that the tumor is shrinking, great! If the tumor is not shrinking, other strategies are employed to get it to shrink.

With the focus being on the tumor, it is no wonder that nothing much is ever said about diet other than that the patient should eat a well "balanced diet", often put together by a dietician and not a nutritionist.

But, as you may very well know, a "balanced diet" in modern medicine is put together based on the principles of the "four basic food groups". For the majority of cancer patients, this often means an adequate intake of fried chicken, eggs, milk, mashed potatoes, chocolate chip cookies and so on.

The basic idea behind this strategy for a cancer patient is to keep the weight on during those grueling chemotherapy sessions as most patients seem to lose weight.

The question however is whether this diet plan really helps in the treatment of cancer or it simply accelerates the speed with which cancer finally seals the patient's fate.

Now, the four basic food groups diet principles were first extensively promoted in the country by the US Department of Agriculture in 1956 and they quickly became gospel. These principles were adopted in schools, colleges and Universities thereby producing medical practitioners who were blinded into the four basic foods belief system

So much emphasis was placed on meat and dairy products as the key foods that would provide all that is needed for the body to remain in perfect health.

All seemed well and good until an eight page report in the May 27, 1991 edition of the Newsweek magazine created a major crack in this belief system. The report noted that;

"our rates of heart disease and some cancers, particularly of the breast and colon are among the highest in the world".

The report laid the blame for this scenario squarely on the typical American diet that is rich in meat and dairy products as recommended by our dieticians. The report went on to compare the typical American diet to that of the Japanese;

"The traditional Japanese diet is the exact opposite of ours: typically they eat rice, vegetables and a little fish, while the Americans put a big portion of meat in the centre of the plate and a few french fries. Consuming only about a quarter as much fat as we do, and far more carbohydrates, the Japanese live longer than anybody else in the world. That is, until they come here"

The report then quoted Dr Peter Greenwald, director of cancer prevention and control at the National Cancer Institute who observed that;

"The Japanese in Japan have one fifth or one sixth the rate of breast cancer that we do. When they move to Hawaii, the rate goes up"

For the first time in the 35 years that the four basic food groups philosophy had been in existence, a well placed high quality publication directly linked its emphasis on meat to the huge numbers of death from cancer and heart disease. Remember, this is the very same diet that will still be recommended to you when you are diagnosed with cancer and, especially when on chemotherapy.

The link between cancer and meat based diets was further developed by Dr Charles B Simone in his book, Cancer and Nutrition where he states that, the meat based diet system is infact linked to more cancers than that of the colon and breast. In that book he says that according to medical research;

"the mouth, esophagus, stomach, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, ovaries, prostate, rectum, pharynx, endometrium, thyroid, bladder, uterus are just a few of the many body parts prone to cancer arising from diets high in animal fat"

So, a causal relationship can clearly be seen between meat based diet plans and the development of cancer in the body. Common sense will tell you that, if a wrong diet is responsible for the development of disease in one's body, it will definitely accelerate its growth.

But, do we have any concrete results to support the thesis that, once cancer has gained ground in one's system, a meat and dairy product based diet will accelerate its growth?

Dr Arthur B Robinson conducted extensive experiments to prove this thesis. Although his studies focused on one type of cancer, there is no doubt in my mind that they can be generalised for all forms of cancer.

The significant conclusion that he came to was that once cancer has established itself, a "healthful diet" will massively accelerate its growth rate while a "poor diet" will slow down its growth. A healthful diet in this case is the one that is currently recommended by the medical establishment of our day for cancer patients while a poor diet consisted only of vegetables and fruits.

It is essential to take note of the fact that the healthful diet increased the rate of cancer twenty fold while the poor diet reduced its growth rate ten fold. Even though there were no remissions, Dr Robins' findings prove beyond doubt that diet can significantly fuel the growth rate of cancer.

On the other hand, when intelligently used, diet can significantly slow down the growth rate of cancer, thereby giving time to the main alternative treatment to work.

If medical research has established a clear and strong correlation between fat based diets and various forms of cancer, any advice to the effect that you ought to continue with such a diet plan is ill informed. The net effect of such advice is to give the cancer enough fuel to grow at an even quicker pace.

The key danger with a typical meat and dairy diet according to Dr Simone is that it produces too many cancer causing chemicals in the body which are known as carcinogens. These carcinogens are not speedily flushed out of the body since the diet lacks fibre, resulting in these carcinogens being reabsorbed by the body thereby poisoning it.

Not only that. The other problem with fat is that pollutants from the environment which cannot be absorbed by the animal's body are stored in the fat. In addition, the chemicals used in the production process to make the animals grow bigger at a fast rate and at a good profit are stored in the animal fat. In eating meat, you are directly adding these poisons to your own system.

Robert O Young in his book, Sick and Tired: Reclaim Your Inner Terrain, states that;

"all meats properly aged for human consumption are partially fermented and as such will be permeated with toxins and toxin generating microforms. Since the residual fat and "marbling" is part of the marketplace presentation of meats, butchers trim off some fatty material, but not all of it. Consumption of fermented meat and moldy fat may well be one of the most dangerous dietary habits"

So, in view of all this evidence against this so called "balanced diet" which is based of the four basic food groups principle, why does the medical community still recommend it for cancer patients?

Frankly, they have no idea of the damage they are doing. They are clearly victims of an educational system that has endorsed some dangerous practices, believing them to be helpful. That is why Richard Brennan M.D in his book with Helen K. Hosier, Coronary Cancer? God's Answer: Prevent It! concludes that;

"What a world of good the nurses could accomplish if they were better informed about the nutritional way to combat disease"

The sad reality is that they are not better informed. They are actually ill informed resulting in the classic scenario of the blind leading the blind. The onus now rests on the patient to research and find out for themselves what will best help them. In the absence of personal responsibility for your own health, you may very well find that you are unknowingly sealing your own fate by directly feeding the cancer in your body the food it enjoys the most.

By Khumbulani Phiri

Is Sitting Bad for Your Health … and Waistline?
What the Surprising Research Reveals

STILL HAVE QUESTIONS?   EMAIL AND GET YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED

To Your Health

MCVitamins
www.mcvitamins.com 

Sidebar:

A Neuropathy Success - The Sharp Stabbing Pains Are Gone

****************************** *

"This all started 5 or 6 years ago and progressively got worse. It finally got to the point that I had to go to the doctor and see what was going on with my feet. After seeing my regular doctor he sent me to a nerve doctor for tests. For the most part I passed the test and they found no real issue. He then sent me to a foot doctor.