Women who have harmless genetic variants called VUS (Variants of Uncertain Significance) are falsely being told by nearly half of all breast cancer surgeons that they have the “breast cancer gene” (BRCA1 or BRCA2) and therefore must have the surgery to save their lives. Famously, Angelina Jolie underwent a bilateral mastectomy after being told she carried the gene for breast cancer, but these new findings by Stanford researchers call into question whether her surgery was medically necessary at all.

In essence, Stanford University researchers reveal that unscrupulous cancer surgeons are defrauding patients with “fake science” scare tactics. This is also raising health care expenditures of pension programs, private insurance and public insurance systems such as Obamacare, causing governments to waste huge amounts of money on medically unjustified surgery. Not coincidentally, the more dishonest cancer surgeons can scare women into agreeing to surgical procedures, the more money they make for themselves (regardless of the medical necessity of the procedure). In essence, the “fake science” of misinterpreting genetic testing results has become a lucrative revenue source for the breast cancer surgery industry.

“Our findings suggest a limited understanding among physicians and patients of the meaning of genetic testing results,” said Allison Kurian, MD, associate professor of medicine and of health research and policy at Stanford, as reported in this Stanford media release.

In other words, it’s incredibly easy for doctors to trick patients with sciency-sounding scare stories, knowing that few patients can interpret genetic testing results on their own. Dr. Kurian goes on to explain that doctors are knowingly scaring women who have these non-risky variants into falsely believing they have “breast cancer genes.”

She explains, “Clinical practice guidelines state that variants of uncertain significance should not be considered to confer high cancer risk, and that patients with these variants should be counseled similarly to a patient whose genetic test is normal. However, many of the physicians surveyed in our study stated that they manage these patients in the same way as they do patients with mutations known to increase a woman’s risk.”

When genetic tests show LOW risk, cancer surgeons tell women they are at HIGH risk for breast cancer

In other words, even when genetic results show women to be at very low risk for genetically-caused breast cancer, many doctors invoke “fake science” and tell those women they are at high risk for breast cancer. Sadly, the study also finds that only about half of all women who undergo genetic testing ever discuss the test results with a qualified genetic counselor who can properly interpret the findings.

ACTION ITEM: Never consent to breast removal surgery unless you have a genetic test interpreted by an independent genetic counselor who is qualified to interpret the results (and who has no financial stake in your surgery). Never trust a cancer surgeon who stands to profit from your surgery.

Not surprisingly, the study also found that breast cancer surgeons tend to default to the “most scary” interpretation of genetic test results. When they aren’t sure exactly what all the genetic variants really mean in terms of real risk for the patient, cancer surgeons usually just tell women they’re at “high risk” and command them to undergo surgery. As Stanford explains:

Uncertainties as to the meaning of test results may lead less-experienced surgeons to recommend aggressive treatment in the form of bilateral mastectomies, or cause women to opt for what they may feel is the safest option to manage their cancer.

By “safest option,” they mean surgical removal of both breasts, even if it’s medically unnecessary. That’s a form of so-called “medical violence,” and it’s more common than you might suspect. Follow more news about medical violence against women and children at MedicalViolence.com.

Many cancer surgeons LIE to women in order to make money by maiming them for life

The study also found that up to half of all breast cancer surgeons knowingly and deliberately tell women with harmless VUS mutations that they have the “breast cancer gene” and will develop cancer if they don’t “treat” their genetic “disease” (by surgically removing their breasts).

An earlier study carried out by the same team also found that fewer than 27% of women diagnosed with breast cancer pursue genetic testing, and when testing is done, over 40% are found to NOT have high-risk genetic mutations such as BRCA1 and BRCA2.

The study also found that roughly a quarter of the women who underwent genetic testing did so only after breast removal surgery. “[C]ritical decisions were made about their care before information about their mutation status was available,” says the Stanford media release.

“We’re learning that clinicians’ knowledge of breast cancer genetics can be highly variable,” said Kurian, who is a member of the Stanford Cancer Institute. That’s a nice way of saying that breast cancer surgeons often have no idea what they’re talking about when they interpret genetic testing results.

Many breast cancer surgeons are already known to be sociopathic, deranged individuals such as Dr. David Gorski, a psychopath who surgically maims black women in Detroit for profit. Known as one of the most psychologically unstable surgeons in the nation, Dr. David Gorski spends most of his time trolling critics of the pharmaceutical industry, earning him a steady stream of complaints from patients. Natural News filed a detailed fraud complaint about Dr. Gorski with the FBI.

There’s little doubt that doctors like Dr. Gorski routinely maim women for profit by lying about genetic test results to their patients, scaring them into medically unnecessary cancer treatments. He’s already known for being caught up in an ethics violation conflict of interest regarding a drug trial that failed. He has also been accused of promoting cancer-causing medical interventions that benefited him financially. Even further, one of Dr. Gorski’s colleagues, Dr. Farid Fata, was indicted, convicted and imprisoned by federal authorities for running a massive cancer fraud operation that falsely diagnosed patients with cancer in order to profit from their “treatment.” That’s why Dr. Gorski is already known as a “ticking time bomb” for malpractice and medical lawsuits.

“It’s important for women at high risk of carrying a dangerous mutation to see someone with expertise in cancer genetics when planning their care,” says Dr. Kurian. “Unfortunately, in many cases genetic counselors may not be optimally integrated into the care of newly diagnosed cancer patients, making it difficult to rapidly triage these patients.”

In other words, women who desperately need accurate interpretation of genetic testing results are often just thrown into the meat grinder of breast cancer surgery even when they don’t carry high-risk genetic mutations at all.

Cancer surgeons make money regardless of whether their surgery is medically justified, of course, and they’ve come to find that it’s incredibly easy to scare women into consent by dazzling them with genetic lingo. In this way, cancer surgeons have essentially become the used car salesmen of medicine, lying to their patients in order to earn profits from maiming them for life.

This study was published online in the April 12th issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology. University of Michigan researchers Reshma Jagsi, MD, DPhil, and Steven Katz, MD, MPH, share senior authorship.

Learn more about cancer scams and real cancer solutions at these websites:

CancerScams.com – Exposes cancer scams such as chemotherapy fraud, false diagnosis and fake cures.

CancerSolutions.news – Covers scientific news of anti-cancer foods, lifestyle changes, avoidance of chemicals, cancer treatment protocols and more.

Skeptics.news – Questions the false narratives of the cancer industry by asking skeptical, rational questions and exposing fraudsters and quacks inside the cancer industry.

Anticancer.news – Covers cancer prevention nutrients, foods, medicinal herbs, fitness and more.

Researchers found that patients with thyroid cancer had significantly higher exposure to flame retardants called polybrominated diphenyl ethers compared with healthy controls. Data also showed that cancer patients exhibited higher levels of TCEP, also known as Chlorinated Tris. Polybrominated diphenyl ethers were banned in 2004, while TCEP was banned 16 years ago. (Related: Explore more news about toxic chemicals at Toxins.news.)

“The chemicals are released as household dust and enter our bodies on our food and hands, with the highest levels in children,” said lead researcher Dr Heather Stapleton in an article published in DailyMail.co.uk. The research team also noted cognitive defects among children exposed to the flame retardants during pregnancy or before the age of four.

The findings were slated for presentation at the International Symposium on Fire Retardants.

More studies link flame retardants to thyroid conditions

The recent research was only one of the many studies that established a link between common flame retardants and thyroid cancer risk.

An analysis of dust samples from the homes of 140 participants showed that people who had high exposure to the flame retardant BDE-209 were twice more likely to develop thyroid cancer compared with those who had lower exposure. Data also showed that participants exposed to high levels of TCEP had a fourfold increased odds of developing larger, more aggressive tumors.

“Thyroid cancer is the fastest increasing cancer in the U.S., with most of the increase in new cases being papillary thyroid cancer. Recent studies suggest that environmental factors may, in part, be responsible for this increase…our study results suggest that higher exposure to several flame retardants in the home environment may be associated with the diagnosis and severity of papillary thyroid cancer, potentially explaining some of the observed increase in the incidence of thyroid cancer,” said lead researcher Dr. Julie Ann Sosa in an article in UPI.com.

The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society in Orlando, Florida.

Another study revealed that women exposed to flame retardants were at an increased risk of suffering thyroid conditions. Researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health pooled data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and found that women exposed to toxic flame retardants were more likely to develop adverse thyroid conditions compared with men. The study also showed that women with the highest blood concentrations of flame retardants were at an increased risk of thyroid problems. Older women had a twofold increased risk of thyroid problems, the researchers added. The findings were published in the journal Environmental Health.

Toxic flame retardants prevalent in U.S. households

American households were found to be filled with toxic flame retardants, research showed. A team of researchers at the Silent Spring Institute and the University of Antwerp in Belgium examined dust samples from 16 California homes in 2006 and 2011, and detected 44 of 49 separate flame retardant chemicals in at least one. The research team also found that at least 50 percent of homes examined contained at least one of 36 specific flame retardant chemicals. A majority of households also contained at least one chemical with levels that surpassed the federal safety standards.

An analysis of polyurethane foam samples also revealed that more than 50 percent of couches in American households contained flame retardants that were either deemed toxic or have never undergone safety testing. Researchers also found that 41 percent contained Tris, while 17 percent contained polybrominated diphenyl ethers.

Both studies were published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.

Sources: 

DailyMail.co.uk

Mirror.co.uk

UPI.com

HSPH. Harvard.edu

NaturalNews.com

A recent study by the Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment sought to examine the link between these two facts. The results of the study were disclosed at the ENDO 2017 meeting in Orlando, Florida, at the beginning of this month.

The researchers determined that greater exposure to flame retardant chemicals appears to be linked to an increased risk of papillary thyroid cancer. Families are exposed to these chemicals through household dust, which enters the body via our hands and the food we eat. Children are particularly at risk. (RELATED: Find out which common grocery store foods contain flame retardants, here.)

Flame retardants are endocrine disruptors; in other words, they interfere with the body’s delicate hormonal balance, including the functioning of the thyroid.

For their study, scientists took blood samples from 140 people with or without thyroid cancer. The study participants had all been living in their houses for an average of 11 years, and samples were also taken from the dust in their homes. The study found a distinct link between exposure to flame retardants and the risk of developing thyroid cancer. It also determined that such exposure led to the development of more aggressive tumors in some patients.

Two of these chemicals – decabromodiphenyl ether (BDE-209) and tris (2-chloroethyl) phosphate (TCEP) – were found to carry the greatest thyroid cancer risk. In fact, the study participants who had the highest levels of BDE-209 in the dust samples taken from their homes were 2.3 times more likely to have developed thyroid cancer. In homes where dust was found to contain higher levels of TCEP, patients who had developed thyroid cancer had larger and more aggressive tumors, while where the dust had higher levels of BDE-209, the tumors were not as large or as aggressive.

“Taken together, these results suggest exposure to several flame retardants may be associated with the diagnosis and severity of papillary thyroid cancer, potentially explaining some of the observed ‘epidemic’ in the incidence of this disease,” said Heather M. Stapleton, associate professor of Environmental Chemistry and Exposure Science at the Nicholas School of the Environment.

These particular flame retardant chemicals were phased out in the U.S. in the early 2000s. In like manner, PBDEs were banned in the U.K. in 2004, and TCEP became illegal back in 2001. Nonetheless, these compounds have proven to persist in the environment for many years, and can be found in both food and household dust in large quantities. Yale Environment 360 notes that levels of these chemicals have actually been doubling in the bloodstreams of Americans every two to five years for decades.

Many families also still have older furniture, televisions and other items, meaning they continue to be exposed to risk.

As noted, children are particularly vulnerable to the effects of these chemicals, and those effects are not limited to the development of cancer.

A 2014 study by Simon Fraser University, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, found that children exposed to flame retardant chemicals while still in the womb have an increased risk of becoming hyperactive, and have been found to have a lower IQ at the age of 5.

Sources:

DailyMail.co.uk

DukeHealth.org

E360.Yale.edu

NaturalNews.com

The report mysteriously vanished from the website on the 2^nd of May, with the explanation that it had been leaked, and was not, in fact, the agency’s final word on the glyphosate issue.

And that’s where it gets really interesting, because just a few days later, Jess Rowland mysteriously retired.

Of course, the usual “nothing to see here” rhetoric came thick and fast, with condescending references to “conspiracy theories” thrown in the direction of anyone who dared to question the glaring coincidence.

The latest twist in this saga is even more disturbing: A group of cancer victims who are suing Monsanto in a California federal court, have accused Rowland of actively hiding evidence of the cancer-causing properties of glyphosate. And their accusations are obviously not far-fetched, since the judge presiding over the trial has referred to the relationship between Monsanto and Jess Rowland as “highly suspicious.”

The plaintiffs’ attorneys have introduced into evidence a letter written to Rowland in March 2013, by Senior Toxicologist Marion Copley. Copley worked in the EPA’s Health Effects Division, had been with the agency for 30 years, and was the recipient of numerous awards.

In a sad and ironic twist, Copley herself was dying of cancer at the time she wrote the letter.

Copley started the letter by referencing her decades of pathology experience and expressed the hope that her insights would be valuable to the CARC in its investigation of glyphosate.

Having noted that glyphosate was originally created as a chelating agent – chelators are chemicals or chemical compounds that react with heavy metals, altering their chemical structure and improving both their stability and their ability to bond with other metals or substances – Copley went on to list 14 different mechanisms in glyphosate that could cause cancer:

–Chelators inhibit apoptosis, the process by which our bodies kill tumor cells

-Chelators are endocrine disruptors, involved in tumorigenesis

-Glyphosate induces lymphocyte proliferation

-Glyphosate induces free radical formation

-Chelators inhibit free radical scavenging enzymes requiring Zn, Mn or Cu for activity (i.e. SODs)

-Chelators bind zinc, necessary for immune system function

-Glyphosate is genotoxic, a key cancer mechanism

-Chelators inhibit DNA repair enzymes requiring metal cofactors

-Chelators bind Ca, Zn, Mg, etc to make foods deficient for these essential nutrients

-Chelators bind calcium necessary for calcineurin-mediated immune response

-Chelators often damage the kidneys or pancreas, as glyphosate does, a mechanism to tumor formation

-Kidney/pancreas damage can lead to clinical chemistry changes to favor tumor growth

-Glyphosate kills bacteria in the gut and the gastrointestinal system is 80% of the immune system

-Chelators suppress the immune system making the body susceptible to tumors

Copley then went on to make a truly shocking statement: She noted that while any one of the above mechanisms could, in fact, cause tumors, glyphosate causes all those mechanisms simultaneously.

Her chilling conclusion? “It is essentially certain that glyphosate causes cancer.” [Emphasis added]

Copley went on to point out that Rowland’s credentials were outdated, and that the CARC’s science was at least a decade behind where it should have been. She begged him to put personal gain aside and do what he knew he needed to do in speaking out about the dangers of glyphosate.

She ended her letter, “I have done my duty.”

Jess Rowland, on the other hand, clearly did not do his duty.

Sources:

TROFire.com

DeltaFarmPress.com

Drive.Google.com^[PDF]

NaturalNews.com^[PDF]

TheEcologist.org

In late January, talk show host and Infowars founder Alex Jones cited studies proving that atrazine – the principle chemical in many herbicides – acts as a “chemical castrator” for certain species, thereby changing their gender and altering the species, especially in certain species of frogs.

As reported by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, at Medicine.news, Jones was attacked after making the connection during a recent broadcast, though he – not his critics – was exactly right.

“As the lab science director of CWC Labs, I not only conduct mass spec analyses of pesticides and herbicides in foods, but I also have access to a massive library of published books describing the toxic effects of hundreds of different pesticides. Atrazine is widely documented as a ‘powerful chemical castrator’ that transforms males into hermaphrodites, the animal kingdom version of a ‘metrosexual.’ It’s also widely present in the U.S. water supply. It is undoubtedly one of the chemicals currently responsible for the mass feminization of men in modern society.” (RELATED: Reduce Pest Infestation Of Your Marijuana Plants With Natural Products)

Adams went on to republish an excerpt from the book, “Our Daily Poison – From Pesticides to Packaging, How Chemicals Have Contaminated the Food Chain and Are Making Us Sick (click here).

As Natural News has often reported, atrazine is also known to cause birth defects.

In the book noted above, Adams said one of the most incredible passages is as follows, at it relates to the findings of Tyrone Hayes, a brilliant scientist who has studied how atrazine affects the endocrine systems of males:

We observed that atrazine reduced the size of the larynx, which is the voice box in the males. Since they sing to seduce the females, this meant they were sexually handicapped. We also observed very low levels of testosterone among the adult males; some of them were hermaphrodites, which means they had both ovaries and testes. In certain cases, the males became homosexuals and coupled with other males, adopting a feminized behavior; sometimes they had eggs in their testes instead of sperm. Ultimately, atrazine acted as a very powerful chemical castrator that is biologically active at 1 ppb, and even 0.1 ppb.

That’s not conjecture or supposition – that comes from directly measuring the effects of atrazine on male endocrine and reproductive systems. (RELATED: We have launched two news websites covering all this: Atrazine.news and Pesticide.news. We already run Glyphosate.news as well.)

In 2010 we reported on a study linking atrazine to the human birth defect known as gastroschisis, a condition in which a newborn’s intestines partially develop outside the body. Sometimes, other organs are similarly affected as well, according to researchers from the University of Washington at Seattle, who examined all infants born with the condition between 1987 and 2006.

“They found that cases of gastroschisis were most common in infants whose mothers lived less than 16 miles from areas where surface water was highly contaminated with atrazine,” we reported. “Women who had given birth in the springtime between March and May, when atrazine is used most often,were found to be more likely to have a child with disease.”

As they do with the global warming hoax, the Alt-Left prefers to ignore facts and science to advance their personal agendas. The attack on Jones – and similar attacks on Adams over the years – have their roots in opposition to these indy media pioneers and their zeal to report the truth, no matter who is made to feel uncomfortable.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources:

Medicine.news

GoodGopher.com

NaturalNews.com

Irradiation of localized tissues increases risk for leukemia and brain or testicular cancer

Traffic radar guns emit microwave radiation at frequencies between 10.5 GHz and 36 GHz, with enough intensity to enhance tumor growth by several different means. The radiation is capable of disrupting immune function and enhancing the absorption of carcinogenic substances into cells, so although the radar gun itself may not be directly causing cancer, the microwave radiation is indirectly modifying gene expression and increasing cell proliferation rates, according to scientific research, thus leading to increased risk of cancer. Police officers who rest their active radar guns against their chest, next to their head, or in their lap are irradiating localized tissues.

“Radar guns can affect the health if they are not used properly,” says Johnny Mercer, a motorcycle cop who taught police radar for years, and who says that keeping the gun next to the body for long periods of time increases the risk of cancer, like smokers who get lung cancer after years of tugging back on cigarettes. Mercer also compared the radar gun’s radiation emissions to that of microwave ovens, which have been revealed to adversely affect human blood, heart rate, and heart rate variations when people stand within 3 feet of a running “nuker.”

Hampton, Virginia police prefer to set their radar guns in a bracket attached to the dashboard and are no longer allowed to keep the gun across their lap due to its “devastating effects on health, according to the police Chief there. The Virginia State Police troopers mount their guns outside the car, and they too have been instructed by the Norfolk and Virginia Beach police officials to limit their contact with radiation-emitting radar guns.

National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health warns of radar gun dangers

Officials at the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health are advising police departments to have regular check ups of their radar guns for radiation leakage, and they have advised the cops to mount the units on the outside of patrol cars whenever they can. The guns have been declared unsafe by one radar manufacturing company based out of Kansas called Kustom Signals, Inc.

Of course, the US government and the military downplayed the dangers of the radar guns saying that there was “no problem,” and academic groups said that research was “incomplete” but that the police should “use caution.” That doesn’t change the fact that several police officers are being injured and some are dying who kept the guns in their laps for years. In fact, out of 340 officers, the six cases of testicular cancer all came from officers who said they kept the guns near their family jewels.

For all those concerned now about microwave ovens, in comparison to radar guns, typical kitchen “nukers” produce an average of 2.4 GHz, less than 1/12th that of some radar guns, yet are still capable of causing immediate and drastic changes to the human heart from just three feet away, and with the door closed. According to Dr. Magda Havas of Trent University, people exposed to radiation for just three minutes at 2.4-GHz can experience severe reactions in heart rate changes and altered heart rate variations, indicating an alarm response to stress, also called electrohypersensitivity (EHS) or rapid aging syndrome. This has been studied for decades, as opposed to the police radar guns that are just beginning to “sound the alarms” about cancer (pardon the pun).

Maybe the police need to also get their doctors to check them for heart palpitations, clumping of red blood cells and fluctuations of the parasympathetic nervous system – typical symptoms of radiation exposure from microwave ovens, and not just the radar guns.

Sources:

NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov

PhonesCauseBrainCancer.com

Articles.Courant.com

Articles.DailyPress.com

NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov

NaturalNews.com

Then, after years of abuse, these same people think that some oncologist is just going to magically cut out the damage, the polyp or the tumor, and they’ll be just fine. It rarely ever works out. Why? Cancer is the uncontrolled multiplication of mutated cells that thrive off chemicals, and the more toxic food you eat, the worse it gets. It’s like walking on sharp rocks and jagged shells for years and expecting the doctors to just patch you up and send you home. Well, you can forget about it. You need drastic, major lifestyle changes to prevent and/or beat cancer. Sounds difficult, but if you know what to cut out first, it’s actually pretty easy. Here we go.

These top seven causes of cancer are some of the most popular foods, beverages and even medicines known to Americans. Doctors, dentists and dermatologists refrain from telling their patients the truth, or they may lose all their “clients for life.” Many doctors don’t even know what to tell their patients, because there is zero nutrition education in medical school in America. It’s true. Let’s take a look at the major cancer culprits “cutting up” your health daily.

Top seven causes of cancer, and great alternatives for prevention and healing

#1. Fluoridated water: Want some insecticide in your tap water? You’re in luck! It’s already in there. Municipal tap water often contains toxic sodium fluoride imported from China. It causes cancer, brittle bones and a lowered IQ. The solution? Get a Big Berkey water filtration system for your home. It’s the best filter on the planet, and even removes other people’s medications, heavy metal toxins, bleach, artificial sweeteners and more.

#2. Artificial sweeteners: They should be called the sweet devils, because aspartame, sorbitol and sucralose trick your body into thinking it’s getting something sweet, increasing cravings for sugar and carbs and contributing to weight gain. And, because they’re synthetic and carcinogenic, they warp your cells and lead to cancer of the breasts, prostate, bladder and more. Look into safe alternatives like stevia or xylitol, or just moderate your sugar intake using organic sugar in the raw, or better yet, organic honey.

#3. Nitrites and nitrates in meat: Meat spoils easily, so manufacturers use extra strong preservatives – highly concentrated salts – to preserve them. This goes for nearly all deli meat, barbecued meat, spicy meat, hot dogs, most Chinese food, jerky treats, sausages, and of course, meat in soups. Watch out for monosodium glutamate (MSG), a genetically modified preservative used to add flavoring back into meat products that have been processed with ammonia and bleach to kill the E.coli and salmonella. These salts cause migraines, severe dehydration, and yes, cancer. Want safe alternatives? Use organic sea salt, organic garlic salt and organic jalapeño peppers.

#4. Vaccines: Contained in the infamous polio vaccine were nearly 100 million doses of SV40 – a cancer-causing virus that is now believed to be responsible for causing millions of cancer cases in America, according to the CDC. The information was posted on an official CDC fact sheet entitled Cancer, Simian Virus 40 (SV40) and Polio Vaccine. Though the CDC removed it from their site, RealFarmacy.com archived the damning page before the CDC pulled it. Check it out yourself here.

#5. Chemotherapy: Most MDs and oncologists would never take chemotherapy themselves or recommend it for their relatives, knowing as do that it only has a 3 percent chance of success and totally wipes out the human immune system, while flooding the whole body with chemicals that cause new cancers to develop. Look into medicinal mushrooms and alkalizing the body to naturally beat cancer.

#6. Pharmaceuticals (prescription medications): The number one cause of cancer is consuming chemicals, so why would you ever take prescription medications that are all made in laboratories using chemicals?

#7. Conventional gluten: Also known as “food glue,” most gluten is processed with bleach and toxic dough conditioners, and it all sticks in your digestive tract for days, rotting everything that comes in behind it and fueling chronic inflammation, IBS, dehydration, polyps, and eventually, cancer.

Sources for this article include:

TV.NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

Despite being widely consumed and readily available, approximately nine out of 10 people do not know that there are many established links between alcohol and cancer. Alcohol is considered a carcinogen, and has been linked to seven different types of cancer. Alcohol is not just a drug, but is also a poison that contributes to 88,000 deaths every year. The CDC reports that about 1,600 deaths are directly related to alcohol poisoning. Conversely, there has never been a reported overdose death that was related to cannabis.

In fact, cannabis is less harmful than alcohol in just about every single way. Alcohol causes brain damage, while studies show that cannabis can actually help prevent alcohol-related brain damage. Alcohol use is clearly related to a number of different cancers. Marijuana Policy Project notes that several different studies have shown that cannabis use can help reduce the risk of certain cancers. Cannabis use has even been associated with a lower risk of lung cancer. And despite the government claims that it contributes to head and neck cancers, studies have shown that such claims are actually the opposite of reality.

In addition to not being associated with cancer, cannabis is not associated with other health problems either. Alcohol, on the other hand, is tied to many other conditions. For example, alcohol can damage your heart, liver and pancreas. Damage can be incurred after even just one occasion of binge drinking – never mind what will happen to these organs after many binge drinking episodes.

Studies have shown that in addition to being linked to a variety of health problems, alcohol is also far more addictive than cannabis. MPP reports:

“According to a 1998 report by Drs. Jack E. Henningfield of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and Neal L. Benowitz of the University of California at San Francisco, alcohol’s addiction potential is significantly greater than that of marijuana based on a number of indicators.”

The organization also writes that even federal studies have found that marijuana has a very low potential for addiction, and that it is significantly less addictive than other substances, including legal drugs such as alcohol and nicotine. That’s right; even the federal government has concluded that marijuana is less addictive than booze and cigarettes!

If marijuana is less harmful and less addictive than alcohol, then why is it still illegal?

Sources:

AnonHQ.com

MPP.org

NIAAA.NIH.gov

“Both Monsanto and the EPA knew full well, at least as early as 1981, that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup herbicide, causes cancer in mammals. Earlier studies conducted during the late 1970s and early 1980s appear to have documented cancer-causing effects from glyphosate in rats, mice and dogs, though this information was buried by Monsanto with the blessing of the EPA…

“‘The evidence shows that by 1981 both Monsanto and the EPA were aware of malignant tumours and pre-cancerous conditions in the test animals which were fed small doses of glyphosate in the secret feeding experiments,’ said Dr. Brian John for GM-Free Cymru, about the facts.”

Although concerns were expressed at the time by EPA committees, these concerns were later suppressed under the weight of conflicting evidence brought forward by Monsanto, some of it involving the inappropriate use of historical control data of dubious quality. None of these studies are available for independent examination.”

Even now, the evidence to force feed GMO seed in African nations includes that same 1992 guarantee from the USDA, the EPA and the FDA. They’re just plain “safe.”  Gee, so is plutonium, if you’re not standing anywhere near it.

Photo credit: Sustainablepulse.com

Sources:

NaturalNews.com

Science.NaturalNews.com

Sodium fluoride, a waste byproduct of the aluminum industry, is touted by most mainstream health bureaucracies as one of the greatest public health achievements ever discovered. The American Dental Association praises the medication of the public through fluoridated municipal water supplies, claiming that it has done wonders to prevent tooth decay. A simple investigation beyond the glaringly false rhetoric, however, reveals the dirty reality behind fluoride and the incredible harm it inflicts upon those who ingest it.

Contrary to popular belief, fluoride is not a natural substance; it is the byproduct of the aluminum and nuclear industries’ use of fluorine gas. The Merck Index lists fluoride’s primary use as rat and cockroach poison and it is a known carcinogen. It wasn’t until the 1950s that the FDA was somehow convinced that the poison allegedly helped protect teeth.

Fluoride used in Nazi death camps
The first known instances of deliberate water fluoridation were in Nazi Germany ghettos and prison camps. Sodium fluoride was added to the human inmates’ water to sterilize them and to cause them to become docile, subservient subjects willing to comply with orders.

Charles Perkins, a research chemist, wrote a letter to the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research in 1954 about fluoride. In it, he stated that repeated ingestion of low doses of fluoride over a long period of time will destroy the areas of the human brain that trigger resistance to tyranny and unlawful coercion and control.

Conditions caused by fluoride ingestion
Fluoride ingestion is responsible for causing thyroid dysfunction. The National Research Council (NRC) warns that ingestion of .01 – .03 mg/kg/day of fluoride, which is easily achieved by drinking fluoridated water, can severely inhibit proper thyroid function.

Other problems caused by fluoride include dental fluorosis, a disease of the teeth, weakening of bones and bone loss, bone cancer, kidney problems, and hormone disruption.

Many communities have succeeded in removing fluoride from their water supplies through local campaigns and ballot measures. Since medical professionals and organizations are increasingly becoming opposed to fluoride use, the momentum is stronger than ever to rid the nation’s water supplies of toxic fluoride.

Sources:

Study Links Fluoride to Premature Births – The Batavian
About ‘Fluoride’ – Truth Every Mother Should Know – Greater Things
Fluoride Action Network