A lot of what i send come from NaturalNews. These guys know their stuff. Check out what the Government is trying to do to vitamines and the following taxes on your property and savings. Makes sick just thinking about it and without vitaamins to help cope with the stress...well, you get the picture.
Use the link to tell congress to leave you vitamines alone!
Organic Jan
Health care reform to tax all home sales and savings income
Dear NaturalNews readers,
The U.S. health care reform bill seems to turn up all sorts of new, shocking surprises on a regular basis.
The latest surprise is a 3.8% tax on income from home sales, rental income and other sources -- all due to take effect in 2013.
And where does this tax money go? It goes directly into the pockets of drug companies, cancer clinics, vaccine manufacturers and other industry giants in the "sick-care" industry who prey on Medicare funding to line their pockets.
Read more in my weekend update:
http://www.naturalnews.com/029849_health_care_reform_taxes.html
Your vitamins and supplements are under attack in Washington, but some new bills aim to restore and protect your freedoms. We need your help to send a message to legislators on these important proposed laws:
http://www.naturalnews.com/029840_free_speech_nutritional_science.html
Check this out: Depressioncan be treated with electromagnets(and it works better than drugs):
http://www.naturalnews.com/029848_depression_electromagnets.html
Considering a mammogram? New evidence reveals they really don't work:
http://www.naturalnews.com/029839_mammograms_risk.html
P.S.Check out this brilliant and genuine video from Magnus Mulliner who talks about sugar as a "class A drug" (while holding his beautiful baby):
http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=066E7E0755551223669F7ADF931B65A3
More news continues below on the benefits of green tea, the healing powers of coconut, news about the upcoming Franken-potato, how to support your adrenalswith vitamin Cand much more (see below)...
Today's Feature Stories:
Obama health care reform imposes 3.8% tax on all home sales and home rental income
(NaturalNews) The news about Obama's health care reform just keeps getting worse -- and we only find these things long after the bill has passed, of course. The newest revelation concerns a 3.8% tax on home sales and home rental income which will...
Depression can be treated with electromagnets (better than drugs)
(NaturalNews) A therapy known as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), which involves inducing electromagnetic fields in the brain, may ease the symptoms of depression in hard-to-treat patients better than antidepressant drugs, researchers...
Schoolchildren have access to milk and sugary drinks at lunch, but not water
(NaturalNews) Some school districts around the country have taken drastic measures to improve childhood health by banning sugary soda beverages from their cafeterias, but according to the Los Angeles Times millions of California schoolchildren...
Researchers in India unveil Franken-potato
(NaturalNews) Mad food scientists are at it again, this time targeting potatoes with altered genetics that they say improve the starchy vegetable's nutritional value. Subhra Chakraborty and her team from the National Institute of Plant Genome Research...
Unnecessary stomach drugs exposing millions to side effects
(NaturalNews) Widespread overprescription of potent and expensive stomach drugs is unnecessarily exposing millions of patients to potentially devastating and even fatal side effects, according to a study conducted by researchers from the San Francisco...
The Hormone Pregnenolone is a Memory Enhancer and Healer
Pregnenolone is a hormone produced by the glands, the liver, skin and retina and in the brain itself. Pregnenolone is made from cholesterol in the cells of both the adrenal gland and the central nervous system. Studies have identified pregnenolone...
Green Tea and DHA: Nutrients Promote Health and Assist Weight Loss
Green tea and the Omega-3 fatty acid DHA combine to provide a powerful natural shield against certain forms of cancer, heart disease, stroke and dementia while assisting weight loss and maintenance. Both of these nutrients directly target...
How to Use Vitamin C for Adrenal Support
Many alternative health experts consider vitamin C to be the most important nutrient for adrenal fatigue recovery. Healthy adrenal function requires vitamin C, and some of the highest concentrations of vitamin C in the whole body are found...
Discover the Superfood Power of Coconut
Foods that have an incredible array of health benefits that go well beyond just their nutrient value are considered 'super-foods.' Mothers' milk is considered the most perfect food on the planet for human consumption do to its ideal nutritional...
Help end criminalization of vitamin, supplement makers in America
(NaturalNews) Telling the truth in America is currently illegal... at least as far as food and supplements are concerned. You see, for decades the federal government has suppressed the free speech rights of food and supplement manufacturers, preventing...
Mammograms don't really work, say researchers
(NaturalNews) You now have another good reason to skip that next mammogram, based on new research out of Norway. According to findings by Dr. Mette Kalager and his team from Oslo University Hospital, getting a mammogram appears to cut the risk of dying...
Urban pollution found to raise blood pressure
(NaturalNews) Exposure to urban pollution may be a cause of high blood pressure, according to a study conducted by researchers from the University of Dusiburg-Essen in Germany and presented at a meeting of the American Thoracic Society. "Our results...
Have you noticed mainstream health news getting crazier lately?
(NaturalNews) Mark your calendars. This week goes down in history as the most bizarre health news weeks in the history of the mainstream media. I've noticed more truly strange and illogical health stories this week from the conventional press than ever...
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Saturday, September 11, 2010
New Food as Medicine...Cocoa and Avacado....
No, not together...
...Painless cholesterol cure
works in just 7 days—and drives
the "food police" crazy!
Want to lower your cholesterol so fast it'll make your head spin? It's a breeze, just eat guacamole—or any dish containing avocados!
Most health experts and nutritionists will tell you this rich, delicious Mexican dish is BANNED from any cholesterol-watcher's menu. But not Dr. Steven Pratt. That's because new research shows eating avocados can lower your cholesterol even faster than drugs... without the side effects!
One study found after just 7 days on a diet including avocados, LDL ("bad") cholesterol and triglyceride levels dropped by 22 percent. Meanwhile, HDL ("good") cholesterol shot up 11 percent—something most cholesterol-lowering drugs won't do!
More new on the FFO front:
The active ingredient in FFO is used in toothpaste and as a polisher for class products. It's save to assume, adding FFO to your pets food will also help keep their teeth clean.
There's a product for dogs that cleans tarter and prevents gum disease. There is no such product for humans. I have do some research and it appears this product works well on humans. Check it out...Plaque Attack.
...Painless cholesterol cure
works in just 7 days—and drives
the "food police" crazy!
Want to lower your cholesterol so fast it'll make your head spin? It's a breeze, just eat guacamole—or any dish containing avocados!
Most health experts and nutritionists will tell you this rich, delicious Mexican dish is BANNED from any cholesterol-watcher's menu. But not Dr. Steven Pratt. That's because new research shows eating avocados can lower your cholesterol even faster than drugs... without the side effects!
One study found after just 7 days on a diet including avocados, LDL ("bad") cholesterol and triglyceride levels dropped by 22 percent. Meanwhile, HDL ("good") cholesterol shot up 11 percent—something most cholesterol-lowering drugs won't do!
More new on the FFO front:
The active ingredient in FFO is used in toothpaste and as a polisher for class products. It's save to assume, adding FFO to your pets food will also help keep their teeth clean.
There's a product for dogs that cleans tarter and prevents gum disease. There is no such product for humans. I have do some research and it appears this product works well on humans. Check it out...Plaque Attack.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Sugar: Continued from Part 1.
Continued from Part 1.
What if you were to learn that every day, 25 percent of your calories came from a poison, disguised as a food?
And what if you discovered that this chemical imposter was responsible for your insulin resistance and weight gain?
And elevated blood pressure ...
And elevated triglycerides and LDL ...
And depletion of vitamins and minerals ...
And even gout, heart disease and liver damage?
What if you were to discover that this toxic substance had been dumped into your food in gradually increasing quantities for the last thirty years, with the full knowledge and blessings of the American Heart Association, the American Medical Association, the USDA and the FDA?
Would you be angry?
I wish I could tell you that this is just a dramatic plot from some fiction novel, but it’s actually a shocking reality.
The substance dealing such a crushing blow to your health and responsible for many, if not most of the chronic diseases that are so rampant in our society, is sugar -- and more specifically, fructose.
We now know without a doubt that sugar in your food, in all its myriad of forms, is taking a devastating toll on the health of this nation.
By the end of this article, you will have a solid understanding of how and why this has happened. In order to really grasp this material, you’ll have to learn a little of the biochemistry of energy, which is rather technical. But hang in there -- the knowledge you’re about to gain, and the impact it will have on your health, will be well worth the effort.
I will try my best to make the more technical aspects as simple as I can for you.
Big Gulp, Meet Big Belt
We are eating far more than we were 25 years ago.
On average, men are consuming 187 more calories per day, and women 335 more calories. People who were never heavy before are becoming overweight, and the obese are becoming more so. We are now a “supersized” population.
But why?
Modern science has shown that the obesity epidemic isn’t simply about lack of self-control, but rather a phenomenon driven by biochemical changes that have altered the way your body regulates energy.
Something has caused your appetite regulation system to go awry. Leptin, the hormone responsible for satiety, isn’t working. It isn’t simply a matter of calories in and calories out. Six-month old babies are the latest victims of the obesity epidemic--diet and exercise cannot explain that.
So, what are you eating now that you weren’t eating thirty years ago? What are you doing to yourself that started the day you were born?
Studies show that all of those extra calories are coming in the form of carbohydrates.
What carbohydrates in particular?
Sugar -- specifically, sugared drinks. Soft drinks (41 percent) and fruit drinks (35 percent) make up the majority of these extra calories.
Today, 55 percent of sweeteners used in food and beverage manufacturing are made from corn, and the number one source of calories in America is soda, in the form of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). In fact, the average American drinks 60 gallons of soda every year.
High Fructose Corn Syrup Has Only Been Around One Generation!
HFCS was invented in 1966 in Japan and introduced to the American market in 1975. Food and beverage manufacturers began switching their sweeteners from sucrose (table sugar) to corn syrup when they discovered that high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) was far cheaper to make -- sucrose costs about three times as much as HFCS.
HFCS is about 20% sweeter than table sugar. HFCS is either 42% or 55% fructose, and sucrose is 50% fructose, so it's a wash in terms of sweetness.
Still, the switch from sugar to fructose drastically altered the average American diet. The statistics are beyond alarming:
• Corn syrup is now found in every type of processed, pre-packaged food you can think of. In fact, the use of HFCS in the U.S. diet increased by a whopping 10,673 percent between 1970 and 2005, according to a report by the USDA[i].
• The current annual consumption of sugar is 141 pounds per person, and 63 pounds of that is HFCS.
• Adolescents are taking in 73 grams per day of fructose, mostly from soft drinks and juice drinks -- and 12 percent of their total caloric intake is from fructose alone.
• In the past century, fructose consumption has increased 5-fold.
• Processed foods account for more than 90 percent of the money Americans spend on meals.
You’ve probably heard the statistic that one soda a day is worth 15 pounds of fat per year. However, one soda today does not equal one soda of yesteryear. The original coke bottle was 6.5 ounces. Now, you have 20-ounce bottles and a 44-ounce Big Gulp.
Tragically, many infant formulas are more than 50 percent sugar -- 43 percent being corn syrup solids. You might as well be giving your baby a bottle of Coke or Pepsi.
No wonder there is an obesity epidemic.
The War on Fat
Sugar’s rise to power was really an accidental by-product of three political winds, beginning with the Nixon administration:
1. In 1972, Richard Nixon wanted to reduce food costs as part of his “war on poverty.” He partnered with the USDA to do whatever means necessary to bring food costs down.
2. In 1975, HFCS was introduced, replacing sugar because it was cheap and readily available.
3. In the mid 1970s, dietary fats were blamed for heart disease (more about this later), giving rise to the “low-fat craze.” Market response was an explosion of processed convenience foods, all nonfat and low fat, most of which tasted like sawdust unless sugar was added. Fructose was used to make fat-free products more palatable.
In 1982, the American Heart Association (AHA), the American Medical Association (AMA), and the United Stated Department of Agriculture (USDA) reduced fats from 40 percent of your diet to 30 percent. You eagerly complied, believing you were lowering your risks for both obesity and cardiovascular disease.
Yet, as the low-fat craze spread, so did rates of heart disease, diabetes, and obesity -- the very illnesses you thought you were preventing. Clearly, the plan wasn’t working.
Justification for Low-Fat Diet
But how did the war on fat start, in the first place?
It began with a study called the Seven Countries study by Ancel Keys[ii], a Minnesota epidemiologist who used multivariate regression analysis to examine diet and disease. He compared the diets of seven countries, and his main conclusion was that saturated fats were responsible for cardiovascular disease. After much heated public debate, this notion that saturated fats caused heart disease was widely adopted, especially once he made the cover of Time Magazine in 1980.
Keys’ study laid the foundation for nutrition science, education, and public policy for the next three decades.
There was only one problem. His conclusions were dead wrong.
Keys’ neglected to perform the converse analysis demonstrating that the effect of saturated fat on cardiovascular disease was independent of sucrose. In other words, sucrose and saturated fat were co-mingled into his data. In retrospect, it is impossible to tease out the relative contributions of sucrose versus saturated fat on cardiovascular disease in this study because the original data is long gone and Keys has passed on.
Additionally he never separated out the issue of how the fat was consumed. There is a major difference in raw and cooked animal fat, especially fat cooked at high temperatures, which clearly produces known carcinogens.
Nevertheless, lowering fat (without regard to sugar) became the nutritional model that persists to this day, despite copious evidence that it doesn’t work.
As your fats went from 40 percent to 30 percent, your carbohydrates went from 40 percent to 55 percent. And this carbohydrate increase was of the worst possible kind: SUGAR.
Proof that Sugar Cause Obesity
The American Beverage Association claims there is “no association between high fructose corn syrup and obesity.”[iii]
However, a long lineup of scientific studies suggest otherwise:
• Dr. David Ludwig of Boston Children’s Hospital did a study of the effects of sugar-sweetened drinks on obesity in children[iv]. He found that for each additional serving of a sugar-sweetened drink, both body mass index and odds of obesity increased in the children he studied.
• Dr. Kelly Brownell of Yale University did a systematic review and meta-analysis of 88 studies about the association between soft drink consumption and health outcomes[v]. He found clear associations between soft drink consumption and higher body weight.
• The Fizzy Drink Study in Christchurch, England explored the effects on obesity when soda machines were removed from schools for one year. In the schools where the machines were removed, obesity stayed constant. In the schools where soda machines remained, obesity rates continued to rise[vi].
• A study by Schulze in JAMA in 2004[vii] provides further evidence that sugared drinks cause type II diabetes.
• A similar study in 2008 of African American women[viii] demonstrated higher intake of both sugar-sweetened soft drinks and fruit drinks leads to higher rates of type II diabetes.
• In a very recent study[ix], sixteen volunteers were fed a controlled diet including high levels of fructose. Ten weeks later, the volunteers had produced new fat cells around their hearts, livers and other digestive organs. They also showed signs of food-processing abnormalities linked to diabetes and heart disease. A second group of volunteers who were fed a similar diet, but with glucose replacing fructose, did not have these problems.
But it doesn’t stop at soft drinks.
Sweetened fruit drinks are contributing to your expanding waistline as well. High fruit juice intake (sucrose) is associated with childhood obesity, especially in low-income families[x].
What is it in soft drinks and juice drinks that is damaging your health?
Primarily, it’s the fructose. Read on to discover exactly how and why this is so.
Fructose is NOT the Same as Glucose
Glucose is the form of energy you were designed to run on. Every cell in your body, every bacterium -- and in fact, every living thing on the Earth -- uses glucose for energy.
Fructose is not the same molecule. Glucose is a 6-member ring, but fructose is a 5-member ring. Sucrose (table sugar) is 50 percent glucose and 50 percent fructose, and HFCS is 42-55 percent fructose.
If you received your fructose only from vegetables and fruits (where it originates) as most people did a century ago, you’d consume about 15 grams per day -- a far cry from the 73 grams per day the typical adolescent gets as a bolus from sweetened drinks. In vegetables and fruits, it’s mixed in with fiber, vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and beneficial phytonutrients, all which moderate the negative metabolic effects.
It isn’t that fructose itself is bad -- it is the MASSIVE DOSES you’re exposed to that make it dangerous.
Before you can understand the differences between how your body metabolizes glucose and fructose, you have to have a basic understanding of LDL.
There are Two Types of LDL -- and Only One is Bad
In the 1970s, low-density lipoproteins (LDLs) were discovered. LDLs were found to be higher in people with cardiovascular disease, so the focus of medicine and nutrition became lowering your LDLs.
One of the crucial pieces of the puzzle that wasn’t recognized at the time was that there are two kinds of LDL: Pattern A and Pattern B.
1. Pattern A LDLs are large, light, buoyant “floating” LDLs that don’t get under your endothelial cells, and they don’t cause plaque formation. They are harmless.
2. Pattern B LDL (or VLDLs) are smaller, denser LDLs that are able to wedge themselves under your epithelial cells and therefore roughen surfaces and stimulate plaque formation. These are the bad guys.
Unfortunately, when you get a standard lipid profile at your annual check-up, the LDL measured is a combination of both types. Lab measurements lump them together unless you have a very specialized panel, which most physicians don’t order.
To decipher whether or not you have an excess of the bad type, you can look at your triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels. (HDL, or “high density lipoprotein is commonly called “good cholesterol.”)
Here is a simple way to determine if you have too much bad LDL:
1. If your triglycerides are low and your HDL is high, then the LDL you have is the good variety.
2. If your triglycerides are high and your HDL is low, then the LDL you have is the bad variety. The triglyceride-to-HDL ratio is a far better indicator of cardiovascular disease than the total cholesterol-to-HDL ratio that everyone uses.
Now, here’s the bottom line: Dietary fat raises your large, buoyant LDL -- the one that is harmless. Dietary sugar raises your small, dense LDL -- the one that correlates with heart disease!
So, what has happened over the past 30 years was that sugar was added to our low-fat foods to improve palatability -- in the form of either HFCS or sucrose -- and a high-carb, high-risk diet was created -- simply the worst combination for your health.
And the fiber was eliminated.
Fiber Foregone
Fiber is an important nutrient (although not acknowledged as such by the government) and offers many health benefits, particularly if the fiber comes from vegetables.
A high-fiber diet may offer some protection from colorectal cancer, although the research is unclear exactly how this works and what all the factors are. The benefits of vegetable fiber are not yet completely understood. We do know that the risk of colorectal cancer is lower among populations with high intakes of vegetables and fruits, and there is some evidence that vegetable fiber may offer some protection from prostate cancer.
Fiber has three important roles:
• It reduces the rate of intestinal carbohydrate absorption, reducing your insulin response.
• It increases the speed of transit of intestinal contents to your ileum, which speeds up release of satiety hormones.
• It inhibits absorption of some free fatty acids to your colon, which would become short chain fatty acids, which suppress insulin.
Thousands of years ago your ancestors likely consumed 100 to 300 grams of fiber every day. Now, you are lucky to get 12 grams daily.
Why is this?
• Fiber-less foods are cheap.
• They have a longer shelf life and are easier to ship. This makes them easier to export to other countries.
• Fiber-rich foods take too long to prepare and eat, and are often less appealing to the general public.
The standard American diet (SAD) is typically loaded with processed foods full of sugar, and devoid of most nutrients and fiber. Sounds like the perfect recipe for an explosion of chronic disease.
The Molecule that Makes Fat Stick to You
Obesity is a disorder of excess fat accumulation. But what regulates fat accumulation?
Fat is a metabolically active tissue. Your adipose tissue is in a perpetual state of flux with free fatty acids (FFAs) being converted into triglycerides and back again, in an ongoing cycle.
FFAs can move in and out of your cells, across cell membranes, but triglycerides (three fatty acid molecules plus one glycerol molecule) are too big to cross. Fat enters and exits a cell as FFA, but is stored as a triglyceride. When fuel is needed, the triglyceride is broken down into FFAs, which can then be burned as fuel.
The glycerol molecule, which is a primary component of a triglyceride, comes from something called glycerol-3-phosphate (g-3-p), or “activated glycerol,” which originates from the metabolism of glucose. The amount of G-3-p you make determines the rate that FFAs are “esterified” into triglycerides inside your fat cells[xi].
The rate of deposition of fat into your fat cells is dependent on the presence of g-3-p. The more g-3-p that is available, the more fat is deposited.
Carbohydrate Biochemistry 101
I promised you a crash course in biochemistry -- so here we go.
Much of the following information comes from the important work of Dr. Robert Lustig[xii] Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco.
In order to appreciate just how damaging fructose is to your body, it is crucial to have a basic understanding of how different types of carbohydrates are metabolized.
We’ll start with glucose since it’s the basic carbohydrate energy source for all living cells.
I. Glucose Metabolism
Glucose is the basic fuel for living organisms, from bacteria to humans, and is the primary energy source for your brain. It is a product of photosynthesis and is found in rice, corn and other grains, and bread and pasta.
Once you take in glucose from a meal -- like, say, from two slices of bread -- 80 percent of it is used by all of the organs of your body -- every single cell. The remaining 20 percent goes to your liver to be metabolized and stored.
The following is what happens to that 20 percent, once it reaches your liver:
• Whatever glucose your body doesn’t need immediately gets converted into glycogen for storage in the liver. Glycogen is your body’s non-toxic short-term energy storage package, where it can be easily converted to energy when you need it. Your liver has no limit to how much glycogen it can store without detrimental effects. (That is what athletes take advantage of when they “carbo-load.”)
• A small amount of pyruvate is produced, which ends up being converted to ATP (the chemical storage form of energy) and carbon dioxide. An even smaller quantity of citrate is produced from this process through the “citrate shuttle,” which ends up as VLDL (very low density lipoproteins, the bad ones) in a process known as de novo lipogenesis -- but we’re talking about a very small amount (less than one calorie from two slices of bread).
• Insulin is released by your pancreas in response to the rise in blood glucose (i.e., blood sugar), which helps the glucose get into your cells. Without insulin, your cells would not be able to process the glucose and therefore would have no energy for movement, growth, repair, or other functions. Insulin is key to unlocking the door of the cell to allow the glucose to be transferred from the bloodstream into the cell.
• When you consume 120 calories of glucose, less than one calorie contributes to adverse metabolic outcomes.
This is all very normal, and it’s how you were designed to operate.
II. Ethanol Metabolism
Ethanol, or ethyl alcohol, is the favorite carbohydrate of many. But it is also a carbohydrate that undergoes a very different metabolic process, leaving in its wake a trail of toxins a mile long.
Ethanol is an acute central nervous system toxin and a chronic hepatotoxin due to the fact that it must be metabolized almost completely in the liver.
After consuming an alcoholic beverage, 10 percent of the ethanol gets broken down by the stomach and intestine as a “first pass” effect, and another 10 percent is metabolized by the brain and other organs. The fact that ethanol is partially metabolized in your brain is the reason you experience that familiar “buzz.”
The remaining 80 percent hits the liver, where it must be broken down. This is four times the load on the liver as the same number of calories from glucose.
But the metabolic process in the liver is quite different from that of glucose.
This metabolic cascade can be summarized as follows:
• The liver converts ethanol to aldehydes, which produce free radicals that damage proteins in the liver.
• Some of these aldehydes are converted to glucose, but a large amount of excess citrate is formed in the process, stimulating “junk chemicals” that result in free fatty acids (FFAs), VLDL and triglycerides. As compared to the 1 calorie from glucose that was converted to VLDL (see previous section), the same caloric intake from ethanol produces 30 calories of VLDL that are transported to your fat cells and contribute to your obesity, or participate in plaque formation. This is what leads to the dyslipidemia of alcoholism.
• The resulting lipids, together with the ethanol, lead to an enzyme that begins an inflammation cascade, which in turn causes hepatic insulin resistance, liver inflammation and cirrhosis.
• Fat globules accumulate in the liver as well, which can lead to fatty liver disease.
• Free fatty acids (FFAs) leave the liver and cause your skeletal muscles to become insulin resistant. This is a worse form of insulin resistance than hepatic insulin resistance and can lead to type II diabetes.
• After a 120-calorie bolus of ethanol, a large fraction (about 40 calories) can contribute to disease.
Why am I including a discussion of ethanol metabolism in a report about fructose?
Because, in nearly every way, fructose is metabolized the same way as ethanol, creating the same toxins in your body.
III. Fructose Metabolism
Now we finally come to fructose.
When you consume fructose, 100 percent of it goes directly to your liver to be metabolized. This is why it is a hepatotoxin -- it overloads the liver. Fructose metabolism creates the following adverse effects:
• Fructose is immediately converted to fructose-1-phosphate (F1P), depleting your liver cells of phosphates.
• The above process produces waste products in the form of uric acid. Uric acid blocks an enzyme that makes nitric oxide. Nitric oxide is your body’s natural blood pressure regulator, so when it is blocked, your blood pressure rises -- leading to hypertension. Elevated uric acid levels can also cause gout.
• Almost all of the F1P is turned into pyruvate, ending up as citrate, which results in de novo lipogenesis, the end products of which are FFAs, VLDLs, and triglycerides. The result -- hyperlipidemia.
• Fructose stimulates g-3-p (activated glycerol), which you will recall is the crucial molecule for turning FFAs into triglycerides within the fat cells. Remember, the rate of deposition of fat into fat cells is dependent on the presence of g-3-p. The more g-3-p that is available, the more fat is deposited. Fructose is the carbohydrate most efficiently converted into g-3-p11. In other words, fructose is the most lipophilic carbohydrate.
• FFAs are exported from the liver and taken up in skeletal muscle, causing skeletal muscle insulin resistance.
• Some of the FFAs stay in the liver, leading to fat droplet accumulation, hepatic insulin resistance and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)[xiii][xiv].
• Insulin resistance stresses the pancreas, which pumps out more insulin in response to rising blood sugar as your cells are unable to get the sugar out of your bloodstream, and this can progress to type II diabetes.
• As with a bolus dose of ethanol, a 120-calorie bolus of fructose results in a large fraction (again, about 40 calories) that directly contributes to disease.
Do these symptoms sound a bit familiar to you? Hypertension, lipogenesis and dyslipidemia, obesity, inflammation, insulin resistance, and central nervous system leptin resistance?
If you are thinking it sounds a lot like classic metabolic syndrome, you are dead on!
The point to take away is: consuming fructose is consuming fat. Fructose is not really a carbohydrate -- a high fructose diet is a HIGH FAT diet. A high-fat diet that creates a vicious cycle of consumption that won’t turn itself off.
You can see by comparing the metabolism of fructose with the metabolism of ethanol that they are very similar. In fact, when you compare the metabolism of 150 calories of soda with 150 calories of beer (a 12 ounce can of each), about 90 calories reach the liver in either case. Fructose causes most of the same toxic effects as ethanol because both come from sugar fermentation.
Both ethanol metabolism and fructose metabolism lead to visceral adiposity (belly fat), insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome.
Studies are accumulating that bear this out.
For example, high-fructose diets were shown to cause dyslipidemia in healthy people with and without a family history of type II diabetes, a recent study showed[xv].
Two other studies were done using medical students, both looking at biological responses to fructose loading. In the first, the med students were given either a large glucose load or a large fructose load. In the students given fructose, almost 30 percent of the calories ended up as fat. In the students given glucose, almost none ended up as fat.
In the second study, medical students were given a high-fructose diet for 6 days. In just that short time, their insulin resistance and triglycerides doubled!
The Neurochemical Basis for Gluttony
You eat as a result of the activation of the “reward pathway” (also known as the hedonic pathway) of your brain.
Your brain’s pleasure center (aka ventral tegmental area, or VTA, and nucleus accumbens, or NA) is the root of all behavior, driven by chemical messengers that are intimately tied into the energy processes I have outlined above.
The part of your brain that responds to what you eat is the same part that responds to nicotine, morphine, amphetamine, ethanol, sex and exercise! That is why people taking narcotics tend to overeat.
Leptin and insulin are modulators of these reward responses, decreasing this VTA-NA activity. In other words, leptin and insulin cause your brain to send you signals to stop eating.
Fructose undermines these normal satiety signals, increasing caloric consumption both directly and indirectly:
1. Fructose does not stimulate a leptin rise, so your satiety signals are diminished.
2. Glucose suppresses ghrelin (the hunger hormone—it makes you want more food), but fructose does not.
3. By raising triglycerides, fructose reduces the amount of leptin crossing your blood-brain barrier.
4. Fructose increases insulin levels, interfering with the communication between leptin and your hypothalamus, so your pleasure signals aren’t extinguished. Your brain senses starvation and prompts you to eat more.
5. Fructose decreases the production of malonyl-CoA, which may help promote a sense of energy adequacy.
Along with causing insulin resistance, fructose alters the hedonic response to food thereby driving excessive caloric intake, setting up a positive feedback loop for overconsumption.
Big Fat Lies From the Corn Industry
Now that scientific studies have shown the metabolic similarity between HFCS and sucrose, the Corn Refiners Association has embarked on a vociferous campaign to convince the public that their product is equal to table sugar, that it is “natural” and safe.
Of course, many things are “natural” -- cocaine is natural, but you wouldn’t want to use 141 pounds of it each year.
The food and beverage industry doesn’t want you to realize how truly pervasive HFCS is in your diet -- not just from soft drinks and juices, but also in salad dressings and condiments and virtually every processed food. The introduction of HFCS into the Western diet in 1975 has been a multi-billion dollar boon for the corn industry.
Now the corn industry has come up with another product it’s using in beverages called “crystalline fructose.” This is produced by allowing the fructose to crystallize from a fructose-enriched corn syrup, resulting in a product that is 99.5 percent pure fructose -- a fructose level twice as high as regular HFCS!
Clearly, all the health problems associated with HFCS could become even more pronounced with this product.
Making matters worse, crystalline fructose may also contain arsenic, lead, chloride and heavy metals -- a virtual laundry list of toxic agents you should clearly avoid. In fact, more than one study has detected unsafe mercury levels in HFCS[xvi]. If you have children, all of these contaminants can impact your child’s development and long-term health.
Why doesn’t the FDA regulate fructose since it poses the same health risks as ethanol -- and it regulates ethanol?
The FDA doesn’t touch chronic toxins. They regulate only acute toxins, and ethanol falls into that category because it produces immediately toxic neurological effects. Fructose doesn’t get metabolized in the brain, so it’s effects, although damaging, are cumulative and magnify over time.
Also realize that nearly all HFCS is made from genetically modified corn, which comes with its own set of risks.
The FDA classifies fructose as GRAS: Generally Regarded As Safe. Which pretty much means nothing and is based on nothing.
It is interesting to note that soda taxes[xvii] have recently been proposed both in New York and California, and legislation for the removal of soft drinks from schools has been enacted in several states.
What’s a Sugarholic to Do?
Ideally, I recommend that you avoid as much sugar as possible. This is especially important if you are overweight or have diabetes, high cholesterol, or high blood pressure.
In fact, I believe that the positive health impacts of breaking the country’s sugar addiction would be even greater than if everyone stopped smoking, because elevated insulin levels are the foundation of nearly every chronic disease known to man, from cancer and arthritis to cardiovascular disease.
I also realize you don’t live in a perfect world, and following rigid dietary guidelines is not always practical or even possible.
If you want to use a sweetener occasionally, this is what I recommend:
1. Use the herb stevia
2. Use organic cane sugar in moderation
3. Use organic raw honey in moderation
Avoid ALL artificial sweeteners, which can damage your health even more quickly than HFCS.
And I don’t recommend agave syrup since it is a highly processed sap that is almost all fructose. Your blood sugar will spike just as it would if you were consuming regular sugar or HFCS. Agave has gained meteoric popularity due to a great marketing campaign, but any health benefits present in the original agave plant are processed away.
Be sure to eat your sugar with fiber ... as in a piece of fruit. As Dr. Lustig says, “When God made the poison, he packaged it with the antidote: fiber.”
Wait 20 minutes before second portions at meals, giving your brain a chance to receive satiety signals.
And exercise regularly. Dr. Ludwig recommends you “buy your screen time with physical activity.”
Exercise is important for several reasons, some of which might surprise you:
• Exercise improves skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity (insulin works best in your muscles)
• Exercise reduces stress and lowers cortisol, which decreases appetite
• Exercise suppresses ghrelin, thereby decreasing appetite
• Exercise speeds up metabolic cycles, reducing citrate levels, thus reducing fat production
• Exercise can make you sharper, reduce arthritis, lift your mood, strengthen your bones, and even slow down aging
Avoid so-called energy drinks and sports drinks because they are loaded with sugar, sodium and chemical additives.
Rehydrating with pure, fresh water is a better choice.
If you or your child is involved in athletics, I recommend you read my article Energy Rules for some great tips on how to optimize your child’s energy levels and physical performance through good nutrition.
A Word of Warning About Infant Formula
And finally, be extremely careful about the infant formula you are feeding your baby. Nearly all infant formulas have as much or more high fructose corn syrup than a can of soda -- in addition to many other things that are extremely detrimental to your baby’s health and development.
You have learned that, metabolically, there is very little difference between ethanol and sugar, so by giving your infant formula, you might as well be giving him a bottle of beer or soda!
And studies have shown that the earlier you expose kids to sweets, the more they crave them later.
It is important for pregnant women to keep their blood sugars well managed not only for their own health, but also for the long-term health of their children.
Researchers have found that children born to mothers with gestational diabetes (high blood sugar during pregnancy) had an 82 percent chance of becoming obese between the ages of 5 and 7 through a phenomenon called “metabolic imprinting.” Even mothers with elevated blood sugar, short of gestational diabetes, had children with a significantly increased risk for obesity.[xviii]
I advocate breastfeeding if at all possible -- it is by far the healthiest option.
One of the most clear-cut, non-debatable topics in health care is that breast milk is the best source of nutrition for newborns. The benefits to the baby and the new mom are enormous. Breastfed infants have shown lower obesity rates in later childhood[xix].
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Dr. Robert H. Lustig, Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at University of California, San Francisco, for sharing his incredibly important insights, without which this article would not have been possible. Much of the above information came directly from Dr. Lustig’s work related to central regulation of energy balance, and I am very grateful for his willingness to share it with me so that I can pass it along to you.
________________________________________
[i] Wells H.F. and Buzby J. c. “Dietary assessment of major trends in U.S. food consumption, 1970-2005. USDA Economic Research Service, Economic Information Bulletin Number 33, March 2008.
[ii] “Ancel Keys—villain or hero?” Stop Trans Fats.
[iii] American Beverage Association, News Release, March 25, 2004
[iv] Ludwig D.S., Peterson, K.E. and Gortmaker, S.L. “Relation between consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: a prospective, observational analysis” The Lancet Feb 17, 2001 Volume 357, Issue 9255, pp 505-508
[v] Vartanian L.R., Schwartz M.B. and Brownell K.D. “Effects of soft drink consumption on nutrition and health: A systematic review and meta-analysis” AJPH April 2007, vol 97, No. 41, pp 667-675.
[vi] Esterbrook J. “Schools that can soda cut obesity,” CBS News Health April 23, 2004
[vii] Apovian C.M. “Sugar-sweetened soft drinks, obesity, and type 2 diabetes” JAMA 2004;292:978-979
[viii] Palmer J.R., Boggs D.A., Krishnan S., Hu F.B., Singer M., and Rosenberg L. “Sugar-sweetened beverages and incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus in African American women” Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(14):1487-1492.
[ix] Stanhope K.L., et al. “Consuming fructose-sweetened, not glucose-sweetened, beverages increases visceral adiposity and lipids and decreases insulin sensitivity in overweight/obese humans” J Clin Invest. 2009 May 1;119(5):1322-1334
[x] Faith M.S., Dennison B.A., Edmunds L.S., Stratton H.H. “Fruit juice intake increased adiposity gain in children from low-income families: weight status by environment interaction” Pediatrics 118:2066-2075.
[xi] Taubs G. Good Calories, Bad Calories: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on Diet, Weight Control, and Disease, 2007, Knopf; and Medical Grand Rounds presentation, Datmouth-Hitchcock,
[xii] Robert H. Lustig, MD: UCSF faculty bio page, and YouTube presentation “Sugar: The bitter truth” ; and “The fructose epidemic” The Bariatrician, 2009, Volume 24, No. 1, page 10)
[xiii] Lim J.S., Mietus-Snyder M.L., Valente A., Schwartz J.M., and Lustig R.H. “Fructose, NAFLD, and metabolic syndrome,” Dept. of Pediatrics and Medicine, University of California, San Francisco 2009
[xiv] Ouyang X., Cirillo P., Sautin Y., McCall S., Bruchette J.L., Diehl A.M. Johnson R.J., Abdelmalek M.F. “Fructose consumption as a risk factor for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease” J. Hepatol. 2008 Jun;48(6):993-9
[xv] Le K.A., Ilth M., Kreis R., Faeh D., Bortolotti M., Tran C., Boesch C., and Tappy L. “Fructose overconsumption causes dyslipidemia and ectopic lipid deposition in healthy subjects with and without a family history of type 2 diabetes” Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jun;89(6):1760-5
[xvi] “Why is the FDA unwilling to study evidence of mercury in high-fructose corn syrup?” 20 Feb 2009, Grist
[xvii] Brownstein J. “Public health leaders propose soda tax” ABCNews/Health, September 17, 2009
[xviii] Hillier T.A., Pedula K.L., Schmidt B.A., Mullen J.A., Charles M., Pettitt D.J. “Childhood obesity and metabolic imprinting: The ongoing effects of maternal hyperglycemia” Diabetes Care September 2007 vol. 30 no. 9 pages 2287-2292
[xix] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Early Childhood Learning and Knowledge Center (ECLKC) “Prevention of overweight and obesity in infants and toddlers”
What if you were to learn that every day, 25 percent of your calories came from a poison, disguised as a food?
And what if you discovered that this chemical imposter was responsible for your insulin resistance and weight gain?
And elevated blood pressure ...
And elevated triglycerides and LDL ...
And depletion of vitamins and minerals ...
And even gout, heart disease and liver damage?
What if you were to discover that this toxic substance had been dumped into your food in gradually increasing quantities for the last thirty years, with the full knowledge and blessings of the American Heart Association, the American Medical Association, the USDA and the FDA?
Would you be angry?
I wish I could tell you that this is just a dramatic plot from some fiction novel, but it’s actually a shocking reality.
The substance dealing such a crushing blow to your health and responsible for many, if not most of the chronic diseases that are so rampant in our society, is sugar -- and more specifically, fructose.
We now know without a doubt that sugar in your food, in all its myriad of forms, is taking a devastating toll on the health of this nation.
By the end of this article, you will have a solid understanding of how and why this has happened. In order to really grasp this material, you’ll have to learn a little of the biochemistry of energy, which is rather technical. But hang in there -- the knowledge you’re about to gain, and the impact it will have on your health, will be well worth the effort.
I will try my best to make the more technical aspects as simple as I can for you.
Big Gulp, Meet Big Belt
We are eating far more than we were 25 years ago.
On average, men are consuming 187 more calories per day, and women 335 more calories. People who were never heavy before are becoming overweight, and the obese are becoming more so. We are now a “supersized” population.
But why?
Modern science has shown that the obesity epidemic isn’t simply about lack of self-control, but rather a phenomenon driven by biochemical changes that have altered the way your body regulates energy.
Something has caused your appetite regulation system to go awry. Leptin, the hormone responsible for satiety, isn’t working. It isn’t simply a matter of calories in and calories out. Six-month old babies are the latest victims of the obesity epidemic--diet and exercise cannot explain that.
So, what are you eating now that you weren’t eating thirty years ago? What are you doing to yourself that started the day you were born?
Studies show that all of those extra calories are coming in the form of carbohydrates.
What carbohydrates in particular?
Sugar -- specifically, sugared drinks. Soft drinks (41 percent) and fruit drinks (35 percent) make up the majority of these extra calories.
Today, 55 percent of sweeteners used in food and beverage manufacturing are made from corn, and the number one source of calories in America is soda, in the form of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). In fact, the average American drinks 60 gallons of soda every year.
High Fructose Corn Syrup Has Only Been Around One Generation!
HFCS was invented in 1966 in Japan and introduced to the American market in 1975. Food and beverage manufacturers began switching their sweeteners from sucrose (table sugar) to corn syrup when they discovered that high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) was far cheaper to make -- sucrose costs about three times as much as HFCS.
HFCS is about 20% sweeter than table sugar. HFCS is either 42% or 55% fructose, and sucrose is 50% fructose, so it's a wash in terms of sweetness.
Still, the switch from sugar to fructose drastically altered the average American diet. The statistics are beyond alarming:
• Corn syrup is now found in every type of processed, pre-packaged food you can think of. In fact, the use of HFCS in the U.S. diet increased by a whopping 10,673 percent between 1970 and 2005, according to a report by the USDA[i].
• The current annual consumption of sugar is 141 pounds per person, and 63 pounds of that is HFCS.
• Adolescents are taking in 73 grams per day of fructose, mostly from soft drinks and juice drinks -- and 12 percent of their total caloric intake is from fructose alone.
• In the past century, fructose consumption has increased 5-fold.
• Processed foods account for more than 90 percent of the money Americans spend on meals.
You’ve probably heard the statistic that one soda a day is worth 15 pounds of fat per year. However, one soda today does not equal one soda of yesteryear. The original coke bottle was 6.5 ounces. Now, you have 20-ounce bottles and a 44-ounce Big Gulp.
Tragically, many infant formulas are more than 50 percent sugar -- 43 percent being corn syrup solids. You might as well be giving your baby a bottle of Coke or Pepsi.
No wonder there is an obesity epidemic.
The War on Fat
Sugar’s rise to power was really an accidental by-product of three political winds, beginning with the Nixon administration:
1. In 1972, Richard Nixon wanted to reduce food costs as part of his “war on poverty.” He partnered with the USDA to do whatever means necessary to bring food costs down.
2. In 1975, HFCS was introduced, replacing sugar because it was cheap and readily available.
3. In the mid 1970s, dietary fats were blamed for heart disease (more about this later), giving rise to the “low-fat craze.” Market response was an explosion of processed convenience foods, all nonfat and low fat, most of which tasted like sawdust unless sugar was added. Fructose was used to make fat-free products more palatable.
In 1982, the American Heart Association (AHA), the American Medical Association (AMA), and the United Stated Department of Agriculture (USDA) reduced fats from 40 percent of your diet to 30 percent. You eagerly complied, believing you were lowering your risks for both obesity and cardiovascular disease.
Yet, as the low-fat craze spread, so did rates of heart disease, diabetes, and obesity -- the very illnesses you thought you were preventing. Clearly, the plan wasn’t working.
Justification for Low-Fat Diet
But how did the war on fat start, in the first place?
It began with a study called the Seven Countries study by Ancel Keys[ii], a Minnesota epidemiologist who used multivariate regression analysis to examine diet and disease. He compared the diets of seven countries, and his main conclusion was that saturated fats were responsible for cardiovascular disease. After much heated public debate, this notion that saturated fats caused heart disease was widely adopted, especially once he made the cover of Time Magazine in 1980.
Keys’ study laid the foundation for nutrition science, education, and public policy for the next three decades.
There was only one problem. His conclusions were dead wrong.
Keys’ neglected to perform the converse analysis demonstrating that the effect of saturated fat on cardiovascular disease was independent of sucrose. In other words, sucrose and saturated fat were co-mingled into his data. In retrospect, it is impossible to tease out the relative contributions of sucrose versus saturated fat on cardiovascular disease in this study because the original data is long gone and Keys has passed on.
Additionally he never separated out the issue of how the fat was consumed. There is a major difference in raw and cooked animal fat, especially fat cooked at high temperatures, which clearly produces known carcinogens.
Nevertheless, lowering fat (without regard to sugar) became the nutritional model that persists to this day, despite copious evidence that it doesn’t work.
As your fats went from 40 percent to 30 percent, your carbohydrates went from 40 percent to 55 percent. And this carbohydrate increase was of the worst possible kind: SUGAR.
Proof that Sugar Cause Obesity
The American Beverage Association claims there is “no association between high fructose corn syrup and obesity.”[iii]
However, a long lineup of scientific studies suggest otherwise:
• Dr. David Ludwig of Boston Children’s Hospital did a study of the effects of sugar-sweetened drinks on obesity in children[iv]. He found that for each additional serving of a sugar-sweetened drink, both body mass index and odds of obesity increased in the children he studied.
• Dr. Kelly Brownell of Yale University did a systematic review and meta-analysis of 88 studies about the association between soft drink consumption and health outcomes[v]. He found clear associations between soft drink consumption and higher body weight.
• The Fizzy Drink Study in Christchurch, England explored the effects on obesity when soda machines were removed from schools for one year. In the schools where the machines were removed, obesity stayed constant. In the schools where soda machines remained, obesity rates continued to rise[vi].
• A study by Schulze in JAMA in 2004[vii] provides further evidence that sugared drinks cause type II diabetes.
• A similar study in 2008 of African American women[viii] demonstrated higher intake of both sugar-sweetened soft drinks and fruit drinks leads to higher rates of type II diabetes.
• In a very recent study[ix], sixteen volunteers were fed a controlled diet including high levels of fructose. Ten weeks later, the volunteers had produced new fat cells around their hearts, livers and other digestive organs. They also showed signs of food-processing abnormalities linked to diabetes and heart disease. A second group of volunteers who were fed a similar diet, but with glucose replacing fructose, did not have these problems.
But it doesn’t stop at soft drinks.
Sweetened fruit drinks are contributing to your expanding waistline as well. High fruit juice intake (sucrose) is associated with childhood obesity, especially in low-income families[x].
What is it in soft drinks and juice drinks that is damaging your health?
Primarily, it’s the fructose. Read on to discover exactly how and why this is so.
Fructose is NOT the Same as Glucose
Glucose is the form of energy you were designed to run on. Every cell in your body, every bacterium -- and in fact, every living thing on the Earth -- uses glucose for energy.
Fructose is not the same molecule. Glucose is a 6-member ring, but fructose is a 5-member ring. Sucrose (table sugar) is 50 percent glucose and 50 percent fructose, and HFCS is 42-55 percent fructose.
If you received your fructose only from vegetables and fruits (where it originates) as most people did a century ago, you’d consume about 15 grams per day -- a far cry from the 73 grams per day the typical adolescent gets as a bolus from sweetened drinks. In vegetables and fruits, it’s mixed in with fiber, vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and beneficial phytonutrients, all which moderate the negative metabolic effects.
It isn’t that fructose itself is bad -- it is the MASSIVE DOSES you’re exposed to that make it dangerous.
Before you can understand the differences between how your body metabolizes glucose and fructose, you have to have a basic understanding of LDL.
There are Two Types of LDL -- and Only One is Bad
In the 1970s, low-density lipoproteins (LDLs) were discovered. LDLs were found to be higher in people with cardiovascular disease, so the focus of medicine and nutrition became lowering your LDLs.
One of the crucial pieces of the puzzle that wasn’t recognized at the time was that there are two kinds of LDL: Pattern A and Pattern B.
1. Pattern A LDLs are large, light, buoyant “floating” LDLs that don’t get under your endothelial cells, and they don’t cause plaque formation. They are harmless.
2. Pattern B LDL (or VLDLs) are smaller, denser LDLs that are able to wedge themselves under your epithelial cells and therefore roughen surfaces and stimulate plaque formation. These are the bad guys.
Unfortunately, when you get a standard lipid profile at your annual check-up, the LDL measured is a combination of both types. Lab measurements lump them together unless you have a very specialized panel, which most physicians don’t order.
To decipher whether or not you have an excess of the bad type, you can look at your triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels. (HDL, or “high density lipoprotein is commonly called “good cholesterol.”)
Here is a simple way to determine if you have too much bad LDL:
1. If your triglycerides are low and your HDL is high, then the LDL you have is the good variety.
2. If your triglycerides are high and your HDL is low, then the LDL you have is the bad variety. The triglyceride-to-HDL ratio is a far better indicator of cardiovascular disease than the total cholesterol-to-HDL ratio that everyone uses.
Now, here’s the bottom line: Dietary fat raises your large, buoyant LDL -- the one that is harmless. Dietary sugar raises your small, dense LDL -- the one that correlates with heart disease!
So, what has happened over the past 30 years was that sugar was added to our low-fat foods to improve palatability -- in the form of either HFCS or sucrose -- and a high-carb, high-risk diet was created -- simply the worst combination for your health.
And the fiber was eliminated.
Fiber Foregone
Fiber is an important nutrient (although not acknowledged as such by the government) and offers many health benefits, particularly if the fiber comes from vegetables.
A high-fiber diet may offer some protection from colorectal cancer, although the research is unclear exactly how this works and what all the factors are. The benefits of vegetable fiber are not yet completely understood. We do know that the risk of colorectal cancer is lower among populations with high intakes of vegetables and fruits, and there is some evidence that vegetable fiber may offer some protection from prostate cancer.
Fiber has three important roles:
• It reduces the rate of intestinal carbohydrate absorption, reducing your insulin response.
• It increases the speed of transit of intestinal contents to your ileum, which speeds up release of satiety hormones.
• It inhibits absorption of some free fatty acids to your colon, which would become short chain fatty acids, which suppress insulin.
Thousands of years ago your ancestors likely consumed 100 to 300 grams of fiber every day. Now, you are lucky to get 12 grams daily.
Why is this?
• Fiber-less foods are cheap.
• They have a longer shelf life and are easier to ship. This makes them easier to export to other countries.
• Fiber-rich foods take too long to prepare and eat, and are often less appealing to the general public.
The standard American diet (SAD) is typically loaded with processed foods full of sugar, and devoid of most nutrients and fiber. Sounds like the perfect recipe for an explosion of chronic disease.
The Molecule that Makes Fat Stick to You
Obesity is a disorder of excess fat accumulation. But what regulates fat accumulation?
Fat is a metabolically active tissue. Your adipose tissue is in a perpetual state of flux with free fatty acids (FFAs) being converted into triglycerides and back again, in an ongoing cycle.
FFAs can move in and out of your cells, across cell membranes, but triglycerides (three fatty acid molecules plus one glycerol molecule) are too big to cross. Fat enters and exits a cell as FFA, but is stored as a triglyceride. When fuel is needed, the triglyceride is broken down into FFAs, which can then be burned as fuel.
The glycerol molecule, which is a primary component of a triglyceride, comes from something called glycerol-3-phosphate (g-3-p), or “activated glycerol,” which originates from the metabolism of glucose. The amount of G-3-p you make determines the rate that FFAs are “esterified” into triglycerides inside your fat cells[xi].
The rate of deposition of fat into your fat cells is dependent on the presence of g-3-p. The more g-3-p that is available, the more fat is deposited.
Carbohydrate Biochemistry 101
I promised you a crash course in biochemistry -- so here we go.
Much of the following information comes from the important work of Dr. Robert Lustig[xii] Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco.
In order to appreciate just how damaging fructose is to your body, it is crucial to have a basic understanding of how different types of carbohydrates are metabolized.
We’ll start with glucose since it’s the basic carbohydrate energy source for all living cells.
I. Glucose Metabolism
Glucose is the basic fuel for living organisms, from bacteria to humans, and is the primary energy source for your brain. It is a product of photosynthesis and is found in rice, corn and other grains, and bread and pasta.
Once you take in glucose from a meal -- like, say, from two slices of bread -- 80 percent of it is used by all of the organs of your body -- every single cell. The remaining 20 percent goes to your liver to be metabolized and stored.
The following is what happens to that 20 percent, once it reaches your liver:
• Whatever glucose your body doesn’t need immediately gets converted into glycogen for storage in the liver. Glycogen is your body’s non-toxic short-term energy storage package, where it can be easily converted to energy when you need it. Your liver has no limit to how much glycogen it can store without detrimental effects. (That is what athletes take advantage of when they “carbo-load.”)
• A small amount of pyruvate is produced, which ends up being converted to ATP (the chemical storage form of energy) and carbon dioxide. An even smaller quantity of citrate is produced from this process through the “citrate shuttle,” which ends up as VLDL (very low density lipoproteins, the bad ones) in a process known as de novo lipogenesis -- but we’re talking about a very small amount (less than one calorie from two slices of bread).
• Insulin is released by your pancreas in response to the rise in blood glucose (i.e., blood sugar), which helps the glucose get into your cells. Without insulin, your cells would not be able to process the glucose and therefore would have no energy for movement, growth, repair, or other functions. Insulin is key to unlocking the door of the cell to allow the glucose to be transferred from the bloodstream into the cell.
• When you consume 120 calories of glucose, less than one calorie contributes to adverse metabolic outcomes.
This is all very normal, and it’s how you were designed to operate.
II. Ethanol Metabolism
Ethanol, or ethyl alcohol, is the favorite carbohydrate of many. But it is also a carbohydrate that undergoes a very different metabolic process, leaving in its wake a trail of toxins a mile long.
Ethanol is an acute central nervous system toxin and a chronic hepatotoxin due to the fact that it must be metabolized almost completely in the liver.
After consuming an alcoholic beverage, 10 percent of the ethanol gets broken down by the stomach and intestine as a “first pass” effect, and another 10 percent is metabolized by the brain and other organs. The fact that ethanol is partially metabolized in your brain is the reason you experience that familiar “buzz.”
The remaining 80 percent hits the liver, where it must be broken down. This is four times the load on the liver as the same number of calories from glucose.
But the metabolic process in the liver is quite different from that of glucose.
This metabolic cascade can be summarized as follows:
• The liver converts ethanol to aldehydes, which produce free radicals that damage proteins in the liver.
• Some of these aldehydes are converted to glucose, but a large amount of excess citrate is formed in the process, stimulating “junk chemicals” that result in free fatty acids (FFAs), VLDL and triglycerides. As compared to the 1 calorie from glucose that was converted to VLDL (see previous section), the same caloric intake from ethanol produces 30 calories of VLDL that are transported to your fat cells and contribute to your obesity, or participate in plaque formation. This is what leads to the dyslipidemia of alcoholism.
• The resulting lipids, together with the ethanol, lead to an enzyme that begins an inflammation cascade, which in turn causes hepatic insulin resistance, liver inflammation and cirrhosis.
• Fat globules accumulate in the liver as well, which can lead to fatty liver disease.
• Free fatty acids (FFAs) leave the liver and cause your skeletal muscles to become insulin resistant. This is a worse form of insulin resistance than hepatic insulin resistance and can lead to type II diabetes.
• After a 120-calorie bolus of ethanol, a large fraction (about 40 calories) can contribute to disease.
Why am I including a discussion of ethanol metabolism in a report about fructose?
Because, in nearly every way, fructose is metabolized the same way as ethanol, creating the same toxins in your body.
III. Fructose Metabolism
Now we finally come to fructose.
When you consume fructose, 100 percent of it goes directly to your liver to be metabolized. This is why it is a hepatotoxin -- it overloads the liver. Fructose metabolism creates the following adverse effects:
• Fructose is immediately converted to fructose-1-phosphate (F1P), depleting your liver cells of phosphates.
• The above process produces waste products in the form of uric acid. Uric acid blocks an enzyme that makes nitric oxide. Nitric oxide is your body’s natural blood pressure regulator, so when it is blocked, your blood pressure rises -- leading to hypertension. Elevated uric acid levels can also cause gout.
• Almost all of the F1P is turned into pyruvate, ending up as citrate, which results in de novo lipogenesis, the end products of which are FFAs, VLDLs, and triglycerides. The result -- hyperlipidemia.
• Fructose stimulates g-3-p (activated glycerol), which you will recall is the crucial molecule for turning FFAs into triglycerides within the fat cells. Remember, the rate of deposition of fat into fat cells is dependent on the presence of g-3-p. The more g-3-p that is available, the more fat is deposited. Fructose is the carbohydrate most efficiently converted into g-3-p11. In other words, fructose is the most lipophilic carbohydrate.
• FFAs are exported from the liver and taken up in skeletal muscle, causing skeletal muscle insulin resistance.
• Some of the FFAs stay in the liver, leading to fat droplet accumulation, hepatic insulin resistance and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)[xiii][xiv].
• Insulin resistance stresses the pancreas, which pumps out more insulin in response to rising blood sugar as your cells are unable to get the sugar out of your bloodstream, and this can progress to type II diabetes.
• As with a bolus dose of ethanol, a 120-calorie bolus of fructose results in a large fraction (again, about 40 calories) that directly contributes to disease.
Do these symptoms sound a bit familiar to you? Hypertension, lipogenesis and dyslipidemia, obesity, inflammation, insulin resistance, and central nervous system leptin resistance?
If you are thinking it sounds a lot like classic metabolic syndrome, you are dead on!
The point to take away is: consuming fructose is consuming fat. Fructose is not really a carbohydrate -- a high fructose diet is a HIGH FAT diet. A high-fat diet that creates a vicious cycle of consumption that won’t turn itself off.
You can see by comparing the metabolism of fructose with the metabolism of ethanol that they are very similar. In fact, when you compare the metabolism of 150 calories of soda with 150 calories of beer (a 12 ounce can of each), about 90 calories reach the liver in either case. Fructose causes most of the same toxic effects as ethanol because both come from sugar fermentation.
Both ethanol metabolism and fructose metabolism lead to visceral adiposity (belly fat), insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome.
Studies are accumulating that bear this out.
For example, high-fructose diets were shown to cause dyslipidemia in healthy people with and without a family history of type II diabetes, a recent study showed[xv].
Two other studies were done using medical students, both looking at biological responses to fructose loading. In the first, the med students were given either a large glucose load or a large fructose load. In the students given fructose, almost 30 percent of the calories ended up as fat. In the students given glucose, almost none ended up as fat.
In the second study, medical students were given a high-fructose diet for 6 days. In just that short time, their insulin resistance and triglycerides doubled!
The Neurochemical Basis for Gluttony
You eat as a result of the activation of the “reward pathway” (also known as the hedonic pathway) of your brain.
Your brain’s pleasure center (aka ventral tegmental area, or VTA, and nucleus accumbens, or NA) is the root of all behavior, driven by chemical messengers that are intimately tied into the energy processes I have outlined above.
The part of your brain that responds to what you eat is the same part that responds to nicotine, morphine, amphetamine, ethanol, sex and exercise! That is why people taking narcotics tend to overeat.
Leptin and insulin are modulators of these reward responses, decreasing this VTA-NA activity. In other words, leptin and insulin cause your brain to send you signals to stop eating.
Fructose undermines these normal satiety signals, increasing caloric consumption both directly and indirectly:
1. Fructose does not stimulate a leptin rise, so your satiety signals are diminished.
2. Glucose suppresses ghrelin (the hunger hormone—it makes you want more food), but fructose does not.
3. By raising triglycerides, fructose reduces the amount of leptin crossing your blood-brain barrier.
4. Fructose increases insulin levels, interfering with the communication between leptin and your hypothalamus, so your pleasure signals aren’t extinguished. Your brain senses starvation and prompts you to eat more.
5. Fructose decreases the production of malonyl-CoA, which may help promote a sense of energy adequacy.
Along with causing insulin resistance, fructose alters the hedonic response to food thereby driving excessive caloric intake, setting up a positive feedback loop for overconsumption.
Big Fat Lies From the Corn Industry
Now that scientific studies have shown the metabolic similarity between HFCS and sucrose, the Corn Refiners Association has embarked on a vociferous campaign to convince the public that their product is equal to table sugar, that it is “natural” and safe.
Of course, many things are “natural” -- cocaine is natural, but you wouldn’t want to use 141 pounds of it each year.
The food and beverage industry doesn’t want you to realize how truly pervasive HFCS is in your diet -- not just from soft drinks and juices, but also in salad dressings and condiments and virtually every processed food. The introduction of HFCS into the Western diet in 1975 has been a multi-billion dollar boon for the corn industry.
Now the corn industry has come up with another product it’s using in beverages called “crystalline fructose.” This is produced by allowing the fructose to crystallize from a fructose-enriched corn syrup, resulting in a product that is 99.5 percent pure fructose -- a fructose level twice as high as regular HFCS!
Clearly, all the health problems associated with HFCS could become even more pronounced with this product.
Making matters worse, crystalline fructose may also contain arsenic, lead, chloride and heavy metals -- a virtual laundry list of toxic agents you should clearly avoid. In fact, more than one study has detected unsafe mercury levels in HFCS[xvi]. If you have children, all of these contaminants can impact your child’s development and long-term health.
Why doesn’t the FDA regulate fructose since it poses the same health risks as ethanol -- and it regulates ethanol?
The FDA doesn’t touch chronic toxins. They regulate only acute toxins, and ethanol falls into that category because it produces immediately toxic neurological effects. Fructose doesn’t get metabolized in the brain, so it’s effects, although damaging, are cumulative and magnify over time.
Also realize that nearly all HFCS is made from genetically modified corn, which comes with its own set of risks.
The FDA classifies fructose as GRAS: Generally Regarded As Safe. Which pretty much means nothing and is based on nothing.
It is interesting to note that soda taxes[xvii] have recently been proposed both in New York and California, and legislation for the removal of soft drinks from schools has been enacted in several states.
What’s a Sugarholic to Do?
Ideally, I recommend that you avoid as much sugar as possible. This is especially important if you are overweight or have diabetes, high cholesterol, or high blood pressure.
In fact, I believe that the positive health impacts of breaking the country’s sugar addiction would be even greater than if everyone stopped smoking, because elevated insulin levels are the foundation of nearly every chronic disease known to man, from cancer and arthritis to cardiovascular disease.
I also realize you don’t live in a perfect world, and following rigid dietary guidelines is not always practical or even possible.
If you want to use a sweetener occasionally, this is what I recommend:
1. Use the herb stevia
2. Use organic cane sugar in moderation
3. Use organic raw honey in moderation
Avoid ALL artificial sweeteners, which can damage your health even more quickly than HFCS.
And I don’t recommend agave syrup since it is a highly processed sap that is almost all fructose. Your blood sugar will spike just as it would if you were consuming regular sugar or HFCS. Agave has gained meteoric popularity due to a great marketing campaign, but any health benefits present in the original agave plant are processed away.
Be sure to eat your sugar with fiber ... as in a piece of fruit. As Dr. Lustig says, “When God made the poison, he packaged it with the antidote: fiber.”
Wait 20 minutes before second portions at meals, giving your brain a chance to receive satiety signals.
And exercise regularly. Dr. Ludwig recommends you “buy your screen time with physical activity.”
Exercise is important for several reasons, some of which might surprise you:
• Exercise improves skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity (insulin works best in your muscles)
• Exercise reduces stress and lowers cortisol, which decreases appetite
• Exercise suppresses ghrelin, thereby decreasing appetite
• Exercise speeds up metabolic cycles, reducing citrate levels, thus reducing fat production
• Exercise can make you sharper, reduce arthritis, lift your mood, strengthen your bones, and even slow down aging
Avoid so-called energy drinks and sports drinks because they are loaded with sugar, sodium and chemical additives.
Rehydrating with pure, fresh water is a better choice.
If you or your child is involved in athletics, I recommend you read my article Energy Rules for some great tips on how to optimize your child’s energy levels and physical performance through good nutrition.
A Word of Warning About Infant Formula
And finally, be extremely careful about the infant formula you are feeding your baby. Nearly all infant formulas have as much or more high fructose corn syrup than a can of soda -- in addition to many other things that are extremely detrimental to your baby’s health and development.
You have learned that, metabolically, there is very little difference between ethanol and sugar, so by giving your infant formula, you might as well be giving him a bottle of beer or soda!
And studies have shown that the earlier you expose kids to sweets, the more they crave them later.
It is important for pregnant women to keep their blood sugars well managed not only for their own health, but also for the long-term health of their children.
Researchers have found that children born to mothers with gestational diabetes (high blood sugar during pregnancy) had an 82 percent chance of becoming obese between the ages of 5 and 7 through a phenomenon called “metabolic imprinting.” Even mothers with elevated blood sugar, short of gestational diabetes, had children with a significantly increased risk for obesity.[xviii]
I advocate breastfeeding if at all possible -- it is by far the healthiest option.
One of the most clear-cut, non-debatable topics in health care is that breast milk is the best source of nutrition for newborns. The benefits to the baby and the new mom are enormous. Breastfed infants have shown lower obesity rates in later childhood[xix].
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Dr. Robert H. Lustig, Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at University of California, San Francisco, for sharing his incredibly important insights, without which this article would not have been possible. Much of the above information came directly from Dr. Lustig’s work related to central regulation of energy balance, and I am very grateful for his willingness to share it with me so that I can pass it along to you.
________________________________________
[i] Wells H.F. and Buzby J. c. “Dietary assessment of major trends in U.S. food consumption, 1970-2005. USDA Economic Research Service, Economic Information Bulletin Number 33, March 2008.
[ii] “Ancel Keys—villain or hero?” Stop Trans Fats.
[iii] American Beverage Association, News Release, March 25, 2004
[iv] Ludwig D.S., Peterson, K.E. and Gortmaker, S.L. “Relation between consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: a prospective, observational analysis” The Lancet Feb 17, 2001 Volume 357, Issue 9255, pp 505-508
[v] Vartanian L.R., Schwartz M.B. and Brownell K.D. “Effects of soft drink consumption on nutrition and health: A systematic review and meta-analysis” AJPH April 2007, vol 97, No. 41, pp 667-675.
[vi] Esterbrook J. “Schools that can soda cut obesity,” CBS News Health April 23, 2004
[vii] Apovian C.M. “Sugar-sweetened soft drinks, obesity, and type 2 diabetes” JAMA 2004;292:978-979
[viii] Palmer J.R., Boggs D.A., Krishnan S., Hu F.B., Singer M., and Rosenberg L. “Sugar-sweetened beverages and incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus in African American women” Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(14):1487-1492.
[ix] Stanhope K.L., et al. “Consuming fructose-sweetened, not glucose-sweetened, beverages increases visceral adiposity and lipids and decreases insulin sensitivity in overweight/obese humans” J Clin Invest. 2009 May 1;119(5):1322-1334
[x] Faith M.S., Dennison B.A., Edmunds L.S., Stratton H.H. “Fruit juice intake increased adiposity gain in children from low-income families: weight status by environment interaction” Pediatrics 118:2066-2075.
[xi] Taubs G. Good Calories, Bad Calories: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on Diet, Weight Control, and Disease, 2007, Knopf; and Medical Grand Rounds presentation, Datmouth-Hitchcock,
[xii] Robert H. Lustig, MD: UCSF faculty bio page, and YouTube presentation “Sugar: The bitter truth” ; and “The fructose epidemic” The Bariatrician, 2009, Volume 24, No. 1, page 10)
[xiii] Lim J.S., Mietus-Snyder M.L., Valente A., Schwartz J.M., and Lustig R.H. “Fructose, NAFLD, and metabolic syndrome,” Dept. of Pediatrics and Medicine, University of California, San Francisco 2009
[xiv] Ouyang X., Cirillo P., Sautin Y., McCall S., Bruchette J.L., Diehl A.M. Johnson R.J., Abdelmalek M.F. “Fructose consumption as a risk factor for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease” J. Hepatol. 2008 Jun;48(6):993-9
[xv] Le K.A., Ilth M., Kreis R., Faeh D., Bortolotti M., Tran C., Boesch C., and Tappy L. “Fructose overconsumption causes dyslipidemia and ectopic lipid deposition in healthy subjects with and without a family history of type 2 diabetes” Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jun;89(6):1760-5
[xvi] “Why is the FDA unwilling to study evidence of mercury in high-fructose corn syrup?” 20 Feb 2009, Grist
[xvii] Brownstein J. “Public health leaders propose soda tax” ABCNews/Health, September 17, 2009
[xviii] Hillier T.A., Pedula K.L., Schmidt B.A., Mullen J.A., Charles M., Pettitt D.J. “Childhood obesity and metabolic imprinting: The ongoing effects of maternal hyperglycemia” Diabetes Care September 2007 vol. 30 no. 9 pages 2287-2292
[xix] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Early Childhood Learning and Knowledge Center (ECLKC) “Prevention of overweight and obesity in infants and toddlers”
Part 1 of Sugar is Bad but Sweetners are Deadly...
This is part one. If you've already read it, then go to part two. I have separated them for your concenience.
Sugar is Bad but Sweeteners are Deadly!
Scientists have proved for the first time that fructose, a cheap form of sugar used in thousands of food products and soft drinks, can damage human metabolism and is fueling the obesity crisis.
Fructose, a sweetener usually derived from corn, can cause dangerous growths of fat cells around vital organs and is able to trigger the early stages of diabetes and heart disease.
Over 10 weeks, 16 volunteers on a controlled diet including high levels of fructose produced new fat cells around their heart, liver and other digestive organs. They also showed signs of food-processing abnormalities linked to diabetes and heart disease. Another group of volunteers on the same diet, but with glucose sugar replacing fructose, did not have these problems.
Sources:
Grist December 15, 2009
J Clin Invest 2009
Times Online 2009
Dr. Mercola's Comments:
This study takes its place in a growing lineup of scientific studies demonstrating that consuming high-fructose corn syrup is the fastest way to trash your health. It is now known without a doubt that sugar in your food, in all it’s myriad of forms, is taking a devastating toll.
And fructose in any form -- including high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and crystalline fructose -- is the worst of the worst!
Fructose is a major contributor to:
• Insulin resistance and obesity
• Elevated blood pressure
• Elevated triglycerides and elevated LDL
• Depletion of vitamins and minerals
• Cardiovascular disease, liver disease, cancer, arthritis and even gout
A Calorie is Not a Calorie
Glucose is the form of energy you were designed to run on. Every cell in your body, every bacterium -- and in fact, every living thing on the Earth--uses glucose for energy.
If you received your fructose only from vegetables and fruits (where it originates) as most people did a century ago, you’d consume about 15 grams per day -- a far cry from the 73 grams per day the typical adolescent gets from sweetened drinks. In vegetables and fruits, it’s mixed in with fiber, vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and beneficial phytonutrients, all which moderate any negative metabolic effects.
It isn’t that fructose itself is bad -- it is the MASSIVE DOSES you’re exposed to that make it dangerous.
There are two reasons fructose is so damaging:
1. Your body metabolizes fructose in a much different way than glucose. The entire burden of metabolizing fructose falls on your liver.
2. People are consuming fructose in enormous quantities, which has made the negative effects much more profound.
Today, 55 percent of sweeteners used in food and beverage manufacturing are made from corn, and the number one source of calories in America is soda, in the form of HFCS.
Food and beverage manufacturers began switching their sweeteners from sucrose (table sugar) to corn syrup in the 1970s when they discovered that HFCS was not only far cheaper to make, it’s about 20% sweeter than table sugar.
HFCS is either 42% or 55% fructose, and sucrose is 50% fructose, so it's really a wash in terms of sweetness.
Still, this switch drastically altered the average American diet.
By USDA estimates, about one-quarter of the calories consumed by the average American is in the form of added sugars, and most of that is HFCS. The average Westerner consumes a staggering 142 pounds a year of sugar! And the very products most people rely on to lose weight -- the low-fat diet foods -- are often the ones highest in fructose.
Making matters worse, all of the fiber has been removed from these processed foods, so there is essentially no nutritive value at all.
Fructose Metabolism Basics
Without getting into the very complex biochemistry of carbohydrate metabolism, it is important to understand some differences about how your body handles glucose versus fructose. I will be publishing a major article about this in the next couple of months, which will get much more into the details, but for our purpose here, I will just summarize the main points.
Dr. Robert Lustig[i] Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco, has been a pioneer in decoding sugar metabolism. His work has highlighted some major differences in how different sugars are broken down and used:
• After eating fructose, 100 percent of the metabolic burden rests on your liver. But with glucose, your liver has to break down only 20 percent.
• Every cell in your body, including your brain, utilizes glucose. Therefore, much of it is “burned up” immediately after you consume it. By contrast, fructose is turned into free fatty acids (FFAs), VLDL (the damaging form of cholesterol), and triglycerides, which get stored as fat.
• The fatty acids created during fructose metabolism accumulate as fat droplets in your liver and skeletal muscle tissues, causing insulin resistance and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Insulin resistance progresses to metabolic syndrome and type II diabetes.
• Fructose is the most lipophilic carbohydrate. In other words, fructose converts to activated glycerol (g-3-p), which is directly used to turn FFAs into triglycerides. The more g-3-p you have, the more fat you store. Glucose does not do this.
• When you eat 120 calories of glucose, less than one calorie is stored as fat. 120 calories of fructose results in 40 calories being stored as fat. Consuming fructose is essentially consuming fat!
• The metabolism of fructose by your liver creates a long list of waste products and toxins, including a large amount of uric acid, which drives up blood pressure and causes gout.
• Glucose suppresses the hunger hormone ghrelin and stimulates leptin, which suppresses your appetite. Fructose has no effect on ghrelin and interferes with your brain’s communication with leptin, resulting in overeating.
If anyone tries to tell you “sugar is sugar,” they are way behind the times. As you can see, there are major differences in how your body processes each one.
The bottom line is: fructose leads to increased belly fat, insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome -- not to mention the long list of chronic diseases that directly result.
Panic in the Corn Fields
As the truth comes out about HFCS, the Corn Refiners Association is scrambling to convince you that their product is equal to table sugar, that it is “natural” and safe.
Of course, many things are “natural” -- cocaine is natural, but you wouldn’t want to use 142 pounds of it each year.
The food and beverage industry doesn’t want you to realize how truly pervasive HFCS is in your diet -- not just from soft drinks and juices, but also in salad dressings and condiments and virtually every processed food. The introduction of HFCS into the Western diet in 1975 has been a multi-billion dollar boon for the corn industry.
The FDA classifies fructose as GRAS: Generally Regarded As Safe. Which pretty much means nothing and is based on nothing.
There is plenty of data showing that fructose is not safe -- but the effects on the nation’s health have not been immediate. That is why we are just now realizing the effects of the last three decades of nutritional misinformation.
As if the negative metabolic effects are not enough, there are other issues with fructose that disprove its safety:
• More than one study has detected unsafe mercury levels in HFCS[ii].
• Crystalline fructose (a super-potent form of fructose the food and beverage industry is now using) may contain arsenic, lead, chloride and heavy metals.
• Nearly all corn syrup is made from genetically modified corn, which comes with its own set of risks.
The FDA isn’t going to touch sugar, so it’s up to you to be proactive about your own dietary choices.
What’s a Sugarholic to Do?
Ideally, I recommend that you avoid as much sugar as possible. This is especially important if you are overweight or have diabetes, high cholesterol, or high blood pressure.
I also realize we don’t live in a perfect world, and following rigid dietary guidelines is not always practical or even possible.
If you want to use a sweetener occasionally, this is what I recommend:
1. Use the herb stevia.
2. Use organic cane sugar in moderation.
3. Use organic raw honey in moderation.
4. Avoid ALL artificial sweeteners, which can damage your health even more quickly than fructose.
5. Avoid agave syrup since it is a highly processed sap that is almost all fructose. Your blood sugar will spike just as it would if you were consuming regular sugar or HFCS. Agave’s meteoric rise in popularity is due to a great marketing campaign, but any health benefits present in the original agave plant are processed out.
6. Avoid so-called energy drinks and sports drinks because they are loaded with sugar, sodium and chemical additives. Rehydrating with pure, fresh water is a better choice.
If you or your child is involved in athletics, I recommend you read my article Energy Rules for some great tips on how to optimize your child’s energy levels and physical performance through good nutrition.
Read More in Part 2 of the this story.
________________________________________
[i] Robert H. Lustig, MD: UCSF Faculty Bio Page, and YouTube presentation “Sugar: The bitter truth” and “The fructose epidemic” The Bariatrician, 2009, Volume 24, No. 1, page 10)
[ii] “Why is the FDA unwilling to study evidence of mercury in high-fructose corn syrup?” 20 Feb 2009, Grist
Related Links:
Dramatic Example of How the Food Industry Lies to You About Corn
Guess Who Funds High Fructose Corn Syrup Studies?
Sugar is Back on Food Labels—This Time as a Selling Point
Sugar is Bad but Sweeteners are Deadly!
Scientists have proved for the first time that fructose, a cheap form of sugar used in thousands of food products and soft drinks, can damage human metabolism and is fueling the obesity crisis.
Fructose, a sweetener usually derived from corn, can cause dangerous growths of fat cells around vital organs and is able to trigger the early stages of diabetes and heart disease.
Over 10 weeks, 16 volunteers on a controlled diet including high levels of fructose produced new fat cells around their heart, liver and other digestive organs. They also showed signs of food-processing abnormalities linked to diabetes and heart disease. Another group of volunteers on the same diet, but with glucose sugar replacing fructose, did not have these problems.
Sources:
Grist December 15, 2009
J Clin Invest 2009
Times Online 2009
Dr. Mercola's Comments:
This study takes its place in a growing lineup of scientific studies demonstrating that consuming high-fructose corn syrup is the fastest way to trash your health. It is now known without a doubt that sugar in your food, in all it’s myriad of forms, is taking a devastating toll.
And fructose in any form -- including high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and crystalline fructose -- is the worst of the worst!
Fructose is a major contributor to:
• Insulin resistance and obesity
• Elevated blood pressure
• Elevated triglycerides and elevated LDL
• Depletion of vitamins and minerals
• Cardiovascular disease, liver disease, cancer, arthritis and even gout
A Calorie is Not a Calorie
Glucose is the form of energy you were designed to run on. Every cell in your body, every bacterium -- and in fact, every living thing on the Earth--uses glucose for energy.
If you received your fructose only from vegetables and fruits (where it originates) as most people did a century ago, you’d consume about 15 grams per day -- a far cry from the 73 grams per day the typical adolescent gets from sweetened drinks. In vegetables and fruits, it’s mixed in with fiber, vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and beneficial phytonutrients, all which moderate any negative metabolic effects.
It isn’t that fructose itself is bad -- it is the MASSIVE DOSES you’re exposed to that make it dangerous.
There are two reasons fructose is so damaging:
1. Your body metabolizes fructose in a much different way than glucose. The entire burden of metabolizing fructose falls on your liver.
2. People are consuming fructose in enormous quantities, which has made the negative effects much more profound.
Today, 55 percent of sweeteners used in food and beverage manufacturing are made from corn, and the number one source of calories in America is soda, in the form of HFCS.
Food and beverage manufacturers began switching their sweeteners from sucrose (table sugar) to corn syrup in the 1970s when they discovered that HFCS was not only far cheaper to make, it’s about 20% sweeter than table sugar.
HFCS is either 42% or 55% fructose, and sucrose is 50% fructose, so it's really a wash in terms of sweetness.
Still, this switch drastically altered the average American diet.
By USDA estimates, about one-quarter of the calories consumed by the average American is in the form of added sugars, and most of that is HFCS. The average Westerner consumes a staggering 142 pounds a year of sugar! And the very products most people rely on to lose weight -- the low-fat diet foods -- are often the ones highest in fructose.
Making matters worse, all of the fiber has been removed from these processed foods, so there is essentially no nutritive value at all.
Fructose Metabolism Basics
Without getting into the very complex biochemistry of carbohydrate metabolism, it is important to understand some differences about how your body handles glucose versus fructose. I will be publishing a major article about this in the next couple of months, which will get much more into the details, but for our purpose here, I will just summarize the main points.
Dr. Robert Lustig[i] Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco, has been a pioneer in decoding sugar metabolism. His work has highlighted some major differences in how different sugars are broken down and used:
• After eating fructose, 100 percent of the metabolic burden rests on your liver. But with glucose, your liver has to break down only 20 percent.
• Every cell in your body, including your brain, utilizes glucose. Therefore, much of it is “burned up” immediately after you consume it. By contrast, fructose is turned into free fatty acids (FFAs), VLDL (the damaging form of cholesterol), and triglycerides, which get stored as fat.
• The fatty acids created during fructose metabolism accumulate as fat droplets in your liver and skeletal muscle tissues, causing insulin resistance and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Insulin resistance progresses to metabolic syndrome and type II diabetes.
• Fructose is the most lipophilic carbohydrate. In other words, fructose converts to activated glycerol (g-3-p), which is directly used to turn FFAs into triglycerides. The more g-3-p you have, the more fat you store. Glucose does not do this.
• When you eat 120 calories of glucose, less than one calorie is stored as fat. 120 calories of fructose results in 40 calories being stored as fat. Consuming fructose is essentially consuming fat!
• The metabolism of fructose by your liver creates a long list of waste products and toxins, including a large amount of uric acid, which drives up blood pressure and causes gout.
• Glucose suppresses the hunger hormone ghrelin and stimulates leptin, which suppresses your appetite. Fructose has no effect on ghrelin and interferes with your brain’s communication with leptin, resulting in overeating.
If anyone tries to tell you “sugar is sugar,” they are way behind the times. As you can see, there are major differences in how your body processes each one.
The bottom line is: fructose leads to increased belly fat, insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome -- not to mention the long list of chronic diseases that directly result.
Panic in the Corn Fields
As the truth comes out about HFCS, the Corn Refiners Association is scrambling to convince you that their product is equal to table sugar, that it is “natural” and safe.
Of course, many things are “natural” -- cocaine is natural, but you wouldn’t want to use 142 pounds of it each year.
The food and beverage industry doesn’t want you to realize how truly pervasive HFCS is in your diet -- not just from soft drinks and juices, but also in salad dressings and condiments and virtually every processed food. The introduction of HFCS into the Western diet in 1975 has been a multi-billion dollar boon for the corn industry.
The FDA classifies fructose as GRAS: Generally Regarded As Safe. Which pretty much means nothing and is based on nothing.
There is plenty of data showing that fructose is not safe -- but the effects on the nation’s health have not been immediate. That is why we are just now realizing the effects of the last three decades of nutritional misinformation.
As if the negative metabolic effects are not enough, there are other issues with fructose that disprove its safety:
• More than one study has detected unsafe mercury levels in HFCS[ii].
• Crystalline fructose (a super-potent form of fructose the food and beverage industry is now using) may contain arsenic, lead, chloride and heavy metals.
• Nearly all corn syrup is made from genetically modified corn, which comes with its own set of risks.
The FDA isn’t going to touch sugar, so it’s up to you to be proactive about your own dietary choices.
What’s a Sugarholic to Do?
Ideally, I recommend that you avoid as much sugar as possible. This is especially important if you are overweight or have diabetes, high cholesterol, or high blood pressure.
I also realize we don’t live in a perfect world, and following rigid dietary guidelines is not always practical or even possible.
If you want to use a sweetener occasionally, this is what I recommend:
1. Use the herb stevia.
2. Use organic cane sugar in moderation.
3. Use organic raw honey in moderation.
4. Avoid ALL artificial sweeteners, which can damage your health even more quickly than fructose.
5. Avoid agave syrup since it is a highly processed sap that is almost all fructose. Your blood sugar will spike just as it would if you were consuming regular sugar or HFCS. Agave’s meteoric rise in popularity is due to a great marketing campaign, but any health benefits present in the original agave plant are processed out.
6. Avoid so-called energy drinks and sports drinks because they are loaded with sugar, sodium and chemical additives. Rehydrating with pure, fresh water is a better choice.
If you or your child is involved in athletics, I recommend you read my article Energy Rules for some great tips on how to optimize your child’s energy levels and physical performance through good nutrition.
Read More in Part 2 of the this story.
________________________________________
[i] Robert H. Lustig, MD: UCSF Faculty Bio Page, and YouTube presentation “Sugar: The bitter truth” and “The fructose epidemic” The Bariatrician, 2009, Volume 24, No. 1, page 10)
[ii] “Why is the FDA unwilling to study evidence of mercury in high-fructose corn syrup?” 20 Feb 2009, Grist
Related Links:
Dramatic Example of How the Food Industry Lies to You About Corn
Guess Who Funds High Fructose Corn Syrup Studies?
Sugar is Back on Food Labels—This Time as a Selling Point
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Early results of an experimental study using Organic Sulfur
The Sulfur Study
Early results of an experimental study using Organic
Sulfur
By Patrick McGean, Director
Cellular Matrix Study
The Cellular Matrix Study (referred to here as “The Sulfur Study”) was organized in 1999. This study was inspired by a fatal type of breast cancer, a type of germ cell reproductive cancer that had been reported to respond to organic sulfur.
While researching this cancer, it became obvious that the sulfur cycle plays an important role in the regeneration of our cells. The Study also found that the use of chemical fertilizers had effectively broken the sulfur cycle in countries that use these fertilizers.
Diseases we hadn’t even heard of have become typical, cancer has grown at an unprecedented rate, and the quality of our food has been greatly diminished. Is there a correlation here?
Since 1954, rates of disease in the U.S. have gone up approximately 4,000 percent. And in 1954, chemical fertilizers were mandated by our government. Fertilizers such as ammonium nitrates and sulfates, which lack bioavailability, appear to have broken the sulfur cycle. This appears to have contributed to the decline of our health, wealth, mental acuity, and quality of life. We believe that when the Study is completed, it will clearly demonstrate a connection between the lack of sulfur and the inability of cells to regenerate in a healthy manner.
Linus Pauling said that all modern diseases can be attributed to a mineral deficiency. Though Pauling is best known for his work with vitamin C, his statement was about minerals. Most researchers say that sulfur is one of the most important of the trace minerals, around the fourth to sixth most important.
What Sulfur Does
Sulfur enables the transport of oxygen across cell membranes, and oxygen is necessary for healthy cellular regeneration in mammals. Plants, on the other hand, require carbon dioxide for cell regeneration, and plants can store sulfur, while man cannot. Man eliminates carbon dioxide, and plants eliminate oxygen. Thus, the sulfur cycle is symbiotic and vital for life as we know it.
When many health professionals are asked about sulfur, they state as if reading from a cue card, “We get all the sulfur we need from the food we eat.” That was true until man decided to change the way we grow our food and what we feed our crops.
In 1920, Otto Warburg began his study of cancer in both plants and man, for which he received a Nobel Prize in 1931. He proved that cancer in man is anaerobic. Anaerobic, by definition, is cellular metabolism without oxygen. “Cancer” in plants is linked to too much intracellular oxygen, or aerobic metabolism. The use of a gas we are intended to eliminate for cellular regeneration is not a healthy program for plants or man.
Why Most MSM Supplements Don’t Work
The Study’s initial research of organic sulfur had its participants go to the store to buy MSM (methylsulfonylmethane). But what we hoped to observe did not coincide with what the literature said about MSM. Except for gastrointestinal improvements, our initial group had little improvement.
When we found an article about the 16 “deadly” additives found in MSM—the anti-caking additives, we realized why our early participants were not reporting any health improvements. These additives benefit only the packaging industry; our health is apparently a lesser concern to them.
Sulfur, with an atomic number of 16, is known to bond with almost every other mineral. Sulfur has demonstrated its ability to detoxify heavy metals in conjunction with the transport of oxygen across the cell membrane, thus allowing regeneration. Sulfur is also the key player as a precursor for the utilization of amino acids, the body’s building blocks. Of all of the amino acids, some 70 percent are sulfur-based.
This detoxification cannot happen with MSM that contains anti-caking ingredients, because these excipients block the bioavailability of sulfur to the cells. The same thing happens when organic sulfur is released into the ocean, or evaporates and falls with rain—that sulfur is bound up by the chemical fertilizers as sulfites and sulfates.
It soon became clear that the Study had to find a pure, uncontaminated form of MSM. After a thorough search, we believe we have found it in the form of Organic Sulfur—coarse crystal flakes which are fresh from the precipitator and have had no further processing. This Organic Sulfur is supplied to the members of the Study, and we follow them with photographs of their faces in an effort to observe the cellular regeneration they experience.
The photographic followup, the newest aspect of the Study, is too recent in its implementation to be able to share the results. However, the reports on health, diet, and medications have been very interesting. As in the beginning of the Study, many of these participants had been taking MSM in tablet or capsule form for many years. Our efforts to find a pure form of MSM was worth the effort, as their responses have clearly indicated.
Preliminary Findings
We are seeing cellular regeneration in the face photographs of our Study participants, but it takes up to seven years to regenerate all the cells in the body when the cells are healthy. Damaged cells from trauma or chemical processes cannot regenerate unless the ability to transport of oxygen across the cell membrane is functioning. Oxygen is a large molecule, so nutrient uptake is also improved when the cell membrane becomes pliable and healthy. The purity of the sulfur is an important factor.
Old scar tissue and various types of fibroids have been reported to resolve. This is an example of cellular regeneration in cells that have been scarred and unable to regenerate over the years following a trauma.
The skin is the largest organ in the body, and it’s like a huge kidney or lung. Sulfur is known as “the beauty mineral,” and what we really are saying is that the skin is more beautiful if its cells are able to regenerate. The skin is the backup for the liver, and someone in liver distress shows it in the cells of their face and skin. When the internal filters are working well, the extracellular fluids are not polluted and the immune system is allowed to protect the body from infections.
Lab and clinical data have not been made available from the doctors or clinics who have seen our Study members. However, we can report the following dramatic examples of cellular regeneration:
• Cancer is an anaerobic condition by definition. Study members who had cancer and used chemotherapy who took 30 grams of sulfur during the chemotherapy had no side effects—there was no hair loss, nausea, or diarrhea. There was, however, a surprisingly greater reduction of cancer cells counts, as reported by their oncologists. Lymphomas have been responding to Organic Sulfur both in decreased pain and decreased size of tumors.
• Arthritis: Organic sulfur, by comparison to commercially available MSM, is a remarkable mineral for arthritis, and produces the effects which have been reported. Those who had been taking Organic Sulfur reported much less pain and increased mobility. Many reported the straightening of finger joints, along with the resolution of internal scar tissue around the joints.
• Osteoarthritis has been reported to respond to the ingestion of organic sulfur. As can be observed in old photographs of our relatives prior to 1960, most people were not bent over prior to the historical breakdown of the sulfur cycle through fertilizer use.
• Osteoporosis has also been addressed, though the numbers are too few to be significant. Bone density tests are demonstrating reversal of bone thinning, or loss of bone density.
• Skin conditions including acne, psoriasis, rosacea, toenail fungus, burns, liver spots, and disorders associated with Lupus Erythematosus have been eliminated. Sulfur can be used both internally and externally, but the cells which demonstrate the problem originate from the endothelial layer of the skin, which is better addressed by internal use.
• Cardiovascular: The results which were the most startling was the number of open-heart procedures which had been scheduled and were subsequently cancelled when the individual’s EKG returned to normal. This happened in as little as six weeks of ingesting Organic Sulfur. 54 cases like this have been reported. Our blood vessels also regenerate, and we believe that these cancelled surgical procedures could be an example of such regeneration. The group has also seen the reduction of scar tissue, high blood pressure, and the breakdown of calcium plaque in the arteries. Thus, we believe organic sulfur would be likely to benefit Alzheimer’s sufferers as well.
• Diabetes is helped, because sulfur is necessary in the production of insulin as well as other sulfur-based amino acids necessary for the metabolism of carbohydrates.
• Gastrointestinal disorders including acid indigestion, GERD, irritable bowel syndrome, leaky gut, and chronic constipation have been addressed with a dosage of organic sulfur at a 4 percent level of body weight twice daily. Other digestive disorders such as ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s Disease have not been observed to date, but we feel that the symptoms found in the literature will be alleviated with the use of sulfur.
• Liver: One of our members regenerated his liver after suffering 25 years from Hepatitis C, after 15 months of taking two tablespoons of organic sulfur twice a day.
• Parasites find that the lining of the stomach and intestines too “pliable or slippery” to sink their hooks into.
• Migraines and headaches have been alleviated. Migraines seem to take longer than other types of headaches, and the sulfur can often can produce a migraine which then may require more sulfur to address the possible detoxification process that is occurring.
• ADD, ADHD, hyperactivity, depression, and mood swings are greatly relieved with the use of organic sulfur. Organic sulfur acts as a stabilizer or mood elevator and relaxes the nervous system. We have reports of people getting off antidepressants and Ritalin within as little as three days of starting to take Organic Sulfur. Those who had been on antidepressants for a long time took a little longer. The ability of the body to produce its own glutathione appears to be the reason.
• Respiratory: Just as impressive were the Study members who were suffering from lung dysfunctions such as allergies, asthma, and emphysema. Those with more serious conditions stopped depending upon the bottled oxygen they had been carrying around, in spite of the fact that they might have continued smoking.
• Glaucoma relief has been reported by Dr. Eldon Haus, MD and by a few members of the Study. It appears that there is regeneration of the cells of the “drainage” system of the trabecular meshwork at the inner base of the iris. Subjects who suffer from increased intraocular pressure found that the drops they used to control their eye pressure often inhibited their ability to drive or read, where sulfur has not demonstrated any such corneal disturbance.
• Hair: Gray- and white-haired members have experienced a return to their natural color hair. The natural color that gradually returns to the nape of the neck indicates the regeneration of the pigment glands at the base of the hair follicle. (NaturoDoc Note: Reversal of hair loss is also being reported by our users.)
• Teeth and gums: The power of oxygen may be best demonstrated in its ability to eradicate gum disease. Organic sulfur, when used as an additive to toothpaste or tooth powder, appears to eliminate the plaque buildup on the teeth, but more importantly, it appears to regenerate the gums and “tighten” previously loose teeth.
Cellular Regeneration Requires Oxygen Transport Across Cell Membranes
Cellular regeneration appears to be closely tied to the body’s ability to transport oxygen across cell membranes. As stated earlier, this is a primary function of organic sulfur.
A study of the periodic table of elements shows sulfur, selenium, and tellurium as being the only three oxygen transport minerals. Further study shows that chlorine and fluorine are detrimental to such oxygen transport, yet these elements have been added to make our teeth “healthier” and our water “more pure” or free from bacterial infestation. These elements are poisonous at higher concentrations, and they block the uptake of both oxygen and sulfur. Drinking city tap water is discouraged in the Study for this reason.
The Study believes that a widespread deficiency in the mineral sulfur may be responsible for the great increase in disease in the U.S. Healthy cellular metabolism is the basis for cellular regeneration of all of our cells. This is the bottom line for the human body. Without intracellular oxygen, we begin to degenerate long before our biological clock runs out.
We began life as a single cell, and from that one cell we have made and regenerated all the cells of our body in a healthy manner, unless that regeneration is stymied by the food we eat.
Since 1954, our food supply has been devoid of sulfur, thanks to the use of chemical fertilizers and the overprocessing of our foods. Unfortunately, our nation is not about to cease the use of these profitable chemicals, which involve commercial agribusiness, medicine, insurance, as well as genetic and designer foods. However, we can regenerate our internal sulfur cycle with organic sulfur, provided that this sulfur compound has not suffered the same indignities of science that our food supply has and continues to suffer.
Finland, alarmed over the increasing disease rate of its population, took a hard look at chemical fertilizers and banned all of them, fearing the levels of cadmium. They were not aware of the sulfur connection or Krebs cycle. Since doing so, they have become a leading supplier of “Bio-Friendly” or completely organic foods in Europe. They have also seen their disease rates drop to one tenth of the 1985 levels. In 1985, the U.S. was at the same marked disease level as Finland. Why are we not following suit and banning all chemical fertilizers? It appears that the epidemiology of those countries using chemical fertilizers have an increase in disease, while those that use organically based fertilizing methods do not.
Organic sulfur is a food, not a drug. Organic Sulfur is not stored in the body and it is considered to be nontoxic. Attempts to kill mice, rats, and Oregon State Death Row inmates failed to reach a toxic level even at 200 grams or almost half pound a day.
________________________________________
Since 1999, there have been 1,100 members of the Study, and new participants are welcome. The Study is based upon and supported solely by this work. If you would like to become a participant in the Study, please contact:
Cellular Matrix Study
801-290-2013 (U.S.)
Email: organicsulfur@sisna.com
________________________________________
Related products available in the NaturoDoc Store:
SuperSulfurCrystals™
If you would like to purchase Organic Sulfur without joining the Study, it is available through the NaturoDoc Store as SuperSulfur™. We are impressed with the performance of this organic sulfur, in the form of 99.7% pure crystalline flakes with absolutely no added fillers. It’s vastly different from regular MSM. We view this to be a primary material for boosting health and longevity.
Consult the Doc
Search Email us
Copyright © 1999-2008, NaturoDoc LLC. All rights reserved.
View our privacy policies.
Early results of an experimental study using Organic
Sulfur
By Patrick McGean, Director
Cellular Matrix Study
The Cellular Matrix Study (referred to here as “The Sulfur Study”) was organized in 1999. This study was inspired by a fatal type of breast cancer, a type of germ cell reproductive cancer that had been reported to respond to organic sulfur.
While researching this cancer, it became obvious that the sulfur cycle plays an important role in the regeneration of our cells. The Study also found that the use of chemical fertilizers had effectively broken the sulfur cycle in countries that use these fertilizers.
Diseases we hadn’t even heard of have become typical, cancer has grown at an unprecedented rate, and the quality of our food has been greatly diminished. Is there a correlation here?
Since 1954, rates of disease in the U.S. have gone up approximately 4,000 percent. And in 1954, chemical fertilizers were mandated by our government. Fertilizers such as ammonium nitrates and sulfates, which lack bioavailability, appear to have broken the sulfur cycle. This appears to have contributed to the decline of our health, wealth, mental acuity, and quality of life. We believe that when the Study is completed, it will clearly demonstrate a connection between the lack of sulfur and the inability of cells to regenerate in a healthy manner.
Linus Pauling said that all modern diseases can be attributed to a mineral deficiency. Though Pauling is best known for his work with vitamin C, his statement was about minerals. Most researchers say that sulfur is one of the most important of the trace minerals, around the fourth to sixth most important.
What Sulfur Does
Sulfur enables the transport of oxygen across cell membranes, and oxygen is necessary for healthy cellular regeneration in mammals. Plants, on the other hand, require carbon dioxide for cell regeneration, and plants can store sulfur, while man cannot. Man eliminates carbon dioxide, and plants eliminate oxygen. Thus, the sulfur cycle is symbiotic and vital for life as we know it.
When many health professionals are asked about sulfur, they state as if reading from a cue card, “We get all the sulfur we need from the food we eat.” That was true until man decided to change the way we grow our food and what we feed our crops.
In 1920, Otto Warburg began his study of cancer in both plants and man, for which he received a Nobel Prize in 1931. He proved that cancer in man is anaerobic. Anaerobic, by definition, is cellular metabolism without oxygen. “Cancer” in plants is linked to too much intracellular oxygen, or aerobic metabolism. The use of a gas we are intended to eliminate for cellular regeneration is not a healthy program for plants or man.
Why Most MSM Supplements Don’t Work
The Study’s initial research of organic sulfur had its participants go to the store to buy MSM (methylsulfonylmethane). But what we hoped to observe did not coincide with what the literature said about MSM. Except for gastrointestinal improvements, our initial group had little improvement.
When we found an article about the 16 “deadly” additives found in MSM—the anti-caking additives, we realized why our early participants were not reporting any health improvements. These additives benefit only the packaging industry; our health is apparently a lesser concern to them.
Sulfur, with an atomic number of 16, is known to bond with almost every other mineral. Sulfur has demonstrated its ability to detoxify heavy metals in conjunction with the transport of oxygen across the cell membrane, thus allowing regeneration. Sulfur is also the key player as a precursor for the utilization of amino acids, the body’s building blocks. Of all of the amino acids, some 70 percent are sulfur-based.
This detoxification cannot happen with MSM that contains anti-caking ingredients, because these excipients block the bioavailability of sulfur to the cells. The same thing happens when organic sulfur is released into the ocean, or evaporates and falls with rain—that sulfur is bound up by the chemical fertilizers as sulfites and sulfates.
It soon became clear that the Study had to find a pure, uncontaminated form of MSM. After a thorough search, we believe we have found it in the form of Organic Sulfur—coarse crystal flakes which are fresh from the precipitator and have had no further processing. This Organic Sulfur is supplied to the members of the Study, and we follow them with photographs of their faces in an effort to observe the cellular regeneration they experience.
The photographic followup, the newest aspect of the Study, is too recent in its implementation to be able to share the results. However, the reports on health, diet, and medications have been very interesting. As in the beginning of the Study, many of these participants had been taking MSM in tablet or capsule form for many years. Our efforts to find a pure form of MSM was worth the effort, as their responses have clearly indicated.
Preliminary Findings
We are seeing cellular regeneration in the face photographs of our Study participants, but it takes up to seven years to regenerate all the cells in the body when the cells are healthy. Damaged cells from trauma or chemical processes cannot regenerate unless the ability to transport of oxygen across the cell membrane is functioning. Oxygen is a large molecule, so nutrient uptake is also improved when the cell membrane becomes pliable and healthy. The purity of the sulfur is an important factor.
Old scar tissue and various types of fibroids have been reported to resolve. This is an example of cellular regeneration in cells that have been scarred and unable to regenerate over the years following a trauma.
The skin is the largest organ in the body, and it’s like a huge kidney or lung. Sulfur is known as “the beauty mineral,” and what we really are saying is that the skin is more beautiful if its cells are able to regenerate. The skin is the backup for the liver, and someone in liver distress shows it in the cells of their face and skin. When the internal filters are working well, the extracellular fluids are not polluted and the immune system is allowed to protect the body from infections.
Lab and clinical data have not been made available from the doctors or clinics who have seen our Study members. However, we can report the following dramatic examples of cellular regeneration:
• Cancer is an anaerobic condition by definition. Study members who had cancer and used chemotherapy who took 30 grams of sulfur during the chemotherapy had no side effects—there was no hair loss, nausea, or diarrhea. There was, however, a surprisingly greater reduction of cancer cells counts, as reported by their oncologists. Lymphomas have been responding to Organic Sulfur both in decreased pain and decreased size of tumors.
• Arthritis: Organic sulfur, by comparison to commercially available MSM, is a remarkable mineral for arthritis, and produces the effects which have been reported. Those who had been taking Organic Sulfur reported much less pain and increased mobility. Many reported the straightening of finger joints, along with the resolution of internal scar tissue around the joints.
• Osteoarthritis has been reported to respond to the ingestion of organic sulfur. As can be observed in old photographs of our relatives prior to 1960, most people were not bent over prior to the historical breakdown of the sulfur cycle through fertilizer use.
• Osteoporosis has also been addressed, though the numbers are too few to be significant. Bone density tests are demonstrating reversal of bone thinning, or loss of bone density.
• Skin conditions including acne, psoriasis, rosacea, toenail fungus, burns, liver spots, and disorders associated with Lupus Erythematosus have been eliminated. Sulfur can be used both internally and externally, but the cells which demonstrate the problem originate from the endothelial layer of the skin, which is better addressed by internal use.
• Cardiovascular: The results which were the most startling was the number of open-heart procedures which had been scheduled and were subsequently cancelled when the individual’s EKG returned to normal. This happened in as little as six weeks of ingesting Organic Sulfur. 54 cases like this have been reported. Our blood vessels also regenerate, and we believe that these cancelled surgical procedures could be an example of such regeneration. The group has also seen the reduction of scar tissue, high blood pressure, and the breakdown of calcium plaque in the arteries. Thus, we believe organic sulfur would be likely to benefit Alzheimer’s sufferers as well.
• Diabetes is helped, because sulfur is necessary in the production of insulin as well as other sulfur-based amino acids necessary for the metabolism of carbohydrates.
• Gastrointestinal disorders including acid indigestion, GERD, irritable bowel syndrome, leaky gut, and chronic constipation have been addressed with a dosage of organic sulfur at a 4 percent level of body weight twice daily. Other digestive disorders such as ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s Disease have not been observed to date, but we feel that the symptoms found in the literature will be alleviated with the use of sulfur.
• Liver: One of our members regenerated his liver after suffering 25 years from Hepatitis C, after 15 months of taking two tablespoons of organic sulfur twice a day.
• Parasites find that the lining of the stomach and intestines too “pliable or slippery” to sink their hooks into.
• Migraines and headaches have been alleviated. Migraines seem to take longer than other types of headaches, and the sulfur can often can produce a migraine which then may require more sulfur to address the possible detoxification process that is occurring.
• ADD, ADHD, hyperactivity, depression, and mood swings are greatly relieved with the use of organic sulfur. Organic sulfur acts as a stabilizer or mood elevator and relaxes the nervous system. We have reports of people getting off antidepressants and Ritalin within as little as three days of starting to take Organic Sulfur. Those who had been on antidepressants for a long time took a little longer. The ability of the body to produce its own glutathione appears to be the reason.
• Respiratory: Just as impressive were the Study members who were suffering from lung dysfunctions such as allergies, asthma, and emphysema. Those with more serious conditions stopped depending upon the bottled oxygen they had been carrying around, in spite of the fact that they might have continued smoking.
• Glaucoma relief has been reported by Dr. Eldon Haus, MD and by a few members of the Study. It appears that there is regeneration of the cells of the “drainage” system of the trabecular meshwork at the inner base of the iris. Subjects who suffer from increased intraocular pressure found that the drops they used to control their eye pressure often inhibited their ability to drive or read, where sulfur has not demonstrated any such corneal disturbance.
• Hair: Gray- and white-haired members have experienced a return to their natural color hair. The natural color that gradually returns to the nape of the neck indicates the regeneration of the pigment glands at the base of the hair follicle. (NaturoDoc Note: Reversal of hair loss is also being reported by our users.)
• Teeth and gums: The power of oxygen may be best demonstrated in its ability to eradicate gum disease. Organic sulfur, when used as an additive to toothpaste or tooth powder, appears to eliminate the plaque buildup on the teeth, but more importantly, it appears to regenerate the gums and “tighten” previously loose teeth.
Cellular Regeneration Requires Oxygen Transport Across Cell Membranes
Cellular regeneration appears to be closely tied to the body’s ability to transport oxygen across cell membranes. As stated earlier, this is a primary function of organic sulfur.
A study of the periodic table of elements shows sulfur, selenium, and tellurium as being the only three oxygen transport minerals. Further study shows that chlorine and fluorine are detrimental to such oxygen transport, yet these elements have been added to make our teeth “healthier” and our water “more pure” or free from bacterial infestation. These elements are poisonous at higher concentrations, and they block the uptake of both oxygen and sulfur. Drinking city tap water is discouraged in the Study for this reason.
The Study believes that a widespread deficiency in the mineral sulfur may be responsible for the great increase in disease in the U.S. Healthy cellular metabolism is the basis for cellular regeneration of all of our cells. This is the bottom line for the human body. Without intracellular oxygen, we begin to degenerate long before our biological clock runs out.
We began life as a single cell, and from that one cell we have made and regenerated all the cells of our body in a healthy manner, unless that regeneration is stymied by the food we eat.
Since 1954, our food supply has been devoid of sulfur, thanks to the use of chemical fertilizers and the overprocessing of our foods. Unfortunately, our nation is not about to cease the use of these profitable chemicals, which involve commercial agribusiness, medicine, insurance, as well as genetic and designer foods. However, we can regenerate our internal sulfur cycle with organic sulfur, provided that this sulfur compound has not suffered the same indignities of science that our food supply has and continues to suffer.
Finland, alarmed over the increasing disease rate of its population, took a hard look at chemical fertilizers and banned all of them, fearing the levels of cadmium. They were not aware of the sulfur connection or Krebs cycle. Since doing so, they have become a leading supplier of “Bio-Friendly” or completely organic foods in Europe. They have also seen their disease rates drop to one tenth of the 1985 levels. In 1985, the U.S. was at the same marked disease level as Finland. Why are we not following suit and banning all chemical fertilizers? It appears that the epidemiology of those countries using chemical fertilizers have an increase in disease, while those that use organically based fertilizing methods do not.
Organic sulfur is a food, not a drug. Organic Sulfur is not stored in the body and it is considered to be nontoxic. Attempts to kill mice, rats, and Oregon State Death Row inmates failed to reach a toxic level even at 200 grams or almost half pound a day.
________________________________________
Since 1999, there have been 1,100 members of the Study, and new participants are welcome. The Study is based upon and supported solely by this work. If you would like to become a participant in the Study, please contact:
Cellular Matrix Study
801-290-2013 (U.S.)
Email: organicsulfur@sisna.com
________________________________________
Related products available in the NaturoDoc Store:
SuperSulfurCrystals™
If you would like to purchase Organic Sulfur without joining the Study, it is available through the NaturoDoc Store as SuperSulfur™. We are impressed with the performance of this organic sulfur, in the form of 99.7% pure crystalline flakes with absolutely no added fillers. It’s vastly different from regular MSM. We view this to be a primary material for boosting health and longevity.
Consult the Doc
Search Email us
Copyright © 1999-2008, NaturoDoc LLC. All rights reserved.
View our privacy policies.
The 10 biggest health care lies in America
This is a large amount of information but it covers just about everything pertaining to the medical profession and its foibles.
The 10 biggest health care lies in America
Mainstream health care isn't based on "health" or "caring." It's actually based on an ingrained system of medical mythology that's practiced -- and defended -- by those who profit from the continuation of sickness and disease. This system of medical mythology might also simply be called "lies", and today I'm sharing with NaturalNews readers the top ten lies that are still followed and promoted under mainstream health care in America today.
Lie #1) Vaccines make you healthy
Vaccines have emerged as the greatest and most insidious mythology yet fabricated by western medicine. The idea that vaccines protect you from infectious disease is blatantly false in the long term because this year's flu shot actually makes you more susceptible to next year's influenza (http://www.naturalnews.com/028538_s...).
On top of that, even the theoretical short-term effectiveness of vaccines is dwarfed by the far more effective protection offered by vitamin D and other immune-modulating nutrients. (http://www.naturalnews.com/027385_V...)
Lie #2) Pharmaceuticals prevent disease
The big push by Big Pharma is now focused on treating healthy people with drugs as if pharmaceuticals were nutrients that could somehow prevent disease. This is the new push with cholesterol drugs: Give 'em to everyone, whether they have high cholesterol or not!
But pharmaceuticals don't prevent disease, and medications are not vitamins. Your body has no biological need for any pharmaceuticals at all. People who believe they need pharmaceuticals have simply been the victims of "fabricated consent" engineered by Big Pharma's clever advertising and P.R. spin.
Lie #3) Doctors are experts in health
Doctors don't even study health; they study disease. Modern doctors are taught virtually nothing about nutrition, wellness or disease prevention. Expecting a doctor to guide you on health issues is sort of like expecting your accountant to pilot a jet airliner -- it's simply not something he or she has ever been trained in.
That's not to say doctors aren't intelligent people. Most of them have high Iqs. But even a genius can't teach you something they know nothing about.
Lie #4) You have no role in your own healing
Doctors, drug companies and health authorities all want you to believe that your health is determined by their interventions. If you believe them, you have virtually no role in your own health or healing -- it's all managed by their drugs, their screening, their surgeries and their interventions.
Lie #5) Disease is a matter of bad luck or bad genes
Western medicine wants you to believe in the mythology of spontaneous disease -- disease that strikes without cause. This is equivalent to saying that disease is some sort of voodoo black magic and that patients have no way to prevent disease through their own diets or lifestyle choices.
It's funny, actually: Western medicine claims to be driven by scientific, rational thinking, and yet the entire industry still fails to acknowledge that chronic disease always has a cause and that most of the time, that cause has everything to do with nutritional deficiencies, exposure to toxic chemicals and a lack of exercise.
Disease is almost never a matter of bad luck or bad genes.
Lie #6) Screening equals prevention
Western medicine doesn't believe in disease prevention. Rather, the industry believes inscreening while calling it prevention. But screening isn't prevention by even the wildest stretch of the imagination. In fact, virtually all the popular screening methodologies actually promote diseases.
Mammography, for example, emits so much radiation that it causes breast cancer in tens of thousands of women each year (http://www.naturalnews.com/027558_m...). Imaging dyes used in radiological scans can cause horrific side effects, and psychiatric "disorder" screening is little more than a thinly-disguised patient recruitment scheme disguised as medicine.
Real prevention of disease must involve disease prevention through nutrition, patient education about the causes of disease and lifelong changes in eating habits. Yet western medicine teaches absolutely none of these things. Heck, it doesn't even believe in such ideas.
Lie #7) Health insurance will keep you healthy
This is a favorite lie of those who recently pushed for the Big Pharma-sponsored health care reform that has swept across America. The lie supposes that merely having health insurance will provide some sort of magical protection against disease. But in reality, health insurance doesn't make you healthy! It is only YOU and your choices about foods, exposures to toxic chemicals, pursuit of exercise and time in nature that can make you healthy.
Health insurance is, in effect, a wager that you will get sick. How does gambling on your sickness provide any protection whatsoever for your health? It doesn't. Personally, I'd rather bet on health than sickness, and the way to do that is to invest in nutritional supplements, organic produce, superfoods, physical fitness and non-toxic personal care products.
Lie #8) Hospitals are places of health and healing
If you want to stay healthy or get healthy, a hospital is the very last place you want to find yourself: They are unhappy, unhealthy places that are infested with antibiotic-resistant superbugs. Hospitals usually serve disease-promoting foods and lack health-enhancing sunlight, and potentially deadly mistakes with pharmaceuticals or surgical procedures now appear to be frighteningly common in U.S. hospitals.
Certainly, emergency rooms in hospitals play an important role in urgent care for injuries and accidents -- and emergency room physicians do an amazing job saving lives -- but for people with chronic, degenerative disease, a hospital is a very dangerous place to be. Unless you really need immediate critical care, try to avoid hospitals.
Lie #9) Conventional medicine is "advanced" state-of-the-art medicine
Even though doctors and health authorities try to pass off western medicine as being "advanced" or "modern," the whole system is actually pathetically outdated and stuck in thegerm theory of disease. Western medicine has yet to even acknowledge the role of nutrition in preventing disease -- something that has been scientifically documented for at least the last several decades. Western medicine fails to acknowledge mind-body medicine and hilariously believes the mind plays virtually no role in healing.
Neither does western medicine acknowledge the bio energy field of living systems, nor that organ transplants carry memories, nor that living food is qualitatively different from dead food. Seriously: Conventional doctors still believe that dead food is exactly the same as living food! (And the USDA food pyramid still makes no distinction between the two...)
"Modern" medicine isn't so modern, it turns out. It is, in fact, hopelessly outdated and desperately needs to upgrade its approach to health and wellness if it hopes to survive the next hundred years.
Lie #10) More research is needed to find "cures"
This lie is especially hilarious because western medicine does not believe in any "cure" for any disease. They aren't even looking for cures! This lie has been repeated since the 1960's, when cancer scientists claimed they were only a few years away from curing cancer. Today, four decades later, can you think of a single major disease that western medicine has cured? There aren't any.
That's because drug companies make money from sick people, not cured people. A patient cured is a patient lost. It is far more profitable to keep patients sick and pretend to "manage" their disease through a lifetime of pharmaceuticals. So when drug companies and disease non-profits claim to be searching for a "cure," what they're really doing is taking your money to fund more drug research to patent more medications that don't actually cure anything.
Remember this the next time you're asked to donate to some search for "the cure." The cures already exist in nutrition, herbal remedies and naturopathic medicine, but Big Pharma and the conventional medicine cartel isn't interested in real cures -- they only want to promote the ideaof a cure while pumping patients full of drugs that don't cure anything.
Beyond the ten lies
When it comes to western health care, there are more than 10 lies, of course, but these big 10 lies are perhaps the most relevant to your own health decisions. By avoiding being suckered in by these lies, you can take charge of your own health and avoid the health care scam by staying healthy!
Staying healthy isn't as difficult as you think, and it doesn't require health insurance or disease screening. It only requires making informed, intelligent decisions about what to eat, what to put on your skin and how to get more sunshine and physical exercise. Once you do these basic things, you'll find that you are no longer held victim by a western medicine health care system based on lies and outdated medical mythology.
It's time for a revolution in medicine... A revolution that finally advances past the mental roadblock of a system of medical mythology stuck in the 1940's. Don't get me wrong, 1940's medicine was great in the 1940's. But this is no longer the 1940's, and the germ theory of disease is hopelessly outdated when it comes to the primary diseases that are striking the population today. Yet the profiteers of our dishonest, outmoded health care system are doing everything in their power to keep us all stranded in the past, a past based on treating the body like a chemical battleground and attacking every disease with a patented pharmaceutical.
That whole approach to health care is so far outdated that it's hilarious it can still be pushed with a straight face. No wonder doctors only spend an average of two minutes with patients these days. That's the limit of how long they can hold their faces without breaking out in laughter at how stupid this whole "treat the symptoms and forget the causes" approach to health care really is. Even they know it! That's why most doctors actually eat superfoods and take vitamins themselves, even if they never dare suggest it to patients.
True fact: It is illegal in every U.S. state for a doctor to recommend any vitamin, nutrient or food for the prevention or treatment of any disease. Doing so can cause a doctor to have his medical license permanently revoked. How crazy and outdated is that?
Share1432
Buzz up!26 votes
8diggsdigg
About the author: Mike Adams is a natural health author and technology pioneer with a passion for sharing empowering information to help improve personal and planetary health He has authored more than 1,500 articles and dozens of reports, guides and interviews on natural health topics, impacting the lives of millions of readers around the world who are experiencing phenomenal health benefits from reading his articles. Adams is an independent journalist with strong ethics who does not get paid to write articles about any product or company. In 2007, Adams launched EcoLEDs, a maker of super bright LED light bulbs that are 1000% more energy efficient than incandescent lights. He also founded anenvironmentally-friendly online retailer called BetterLifeGoods.com that uses retail profits to help support consumer advocacy programs. He's also the CEO of a highly successful email newsletter software company that develops software used to send permission email campaigns to subscribers. Adams also serves as the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a non-profit consumer protection group, and regularly pursues cycling, nature photography, Capoeira and Pilates. He's also author of numerous health books published by Truth Publishing and is the creator of several consumer-oriented grassroots campaigns, including the Spam. Don't Buy It! campaign, and the free downloadable Honest Food Guide. He also created the free reference sites HerbReference.com andHealingFoodReference.com. Adams believes in free speech, free access to nutritional supplements and the ending of corporate control over medicines, genes and seeds. Known as the 'Health Ranger,' Adams' personal health statistics and mission statements are located at www.HealthRanger.org
Alzheimer's drugs cause brain damage and actually worsen memory loss
Wednesday, April 21, 2010 by: S. L. Baker, features writer
http://www.naturalnews.com/028622_Alzheimers_brain_damage.html
ig Pharma drugs that are being used on humans right now and promoted as potential treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD) could cause the very brain damage and memory loss they are supposed to treat. That's the conclusion of University of California at San Diego (UCSD) scientists who just published their groundbreaking findings in theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Nitrits may cause AZ and Diabetes
Astrxathins may prevent AZ
Consider the Cause of Alzheimer's Disease (Opinion)
Monday, November 09, 2009 by: Hesh Goldstein, citizen journalist
See all articles by this author
Email this author
We, Americans, are losing our minds to Alzheimer`s disease. It is an epidemic and it is not typical of what`s going on in the rest of the world. The World Health Organization estimates that there are 18 million people with Alzheimer`s. Over 4 and1/2 million Americans have the disease. We account for 25% of all Alzheimer`s cases, even though we represent only 4.6% of the world`s population. Europe is experiencing half our rate of disease. For Americans over 85 years of age, 50% are thought to have Alzheimer`s. The question is: Why?
Alzheimer`s was first discovered in 1906, about 20 years after aluminum cookware was introduced. It is not a part of normal aging says the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The NIH contends that the cause of Alzheimer`s is not known. They say, "Prior theories regarding the accumulation of aluminum, lead, mercury, and other substances in the brain have been disproved".
Do not believe that?! Federal agencies have a talent for not finding environmental causes for many diseases. They live by the motto, "Do not seek and thou shall not find". Kind of like their outlook about mad cow disease. Genetic triggers and lifestyle choices get the research dollars for pretty obvious reasons: Their findings don`t hurt polluters` profits.
Initially, it was thought that aluminum might be the sole cause of Alzheimer`s. Persons with Alzheimer`s have been found to experience increased absorption of aluminum in the brain, as well as to exhibit densities of senile plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. However, there are no reports that suggest plaques and tangles do not always signify Alzheimer`s, and vice versa.
Further clouding the issue are patients on kidney dialysis machines. They are unable to excrete aluminum, plus they may also be treated with medicines that include aluminum. However, reports say that dialysis patients don`t develop Alzheimer`s, although they can develop dialysis dementia if the equipment doesn`t filter out aluminum. And therein lies the problem. The process of kidney dialysis requires very purified, non-fluoridated water. Do you get the feeling that fluoride is aluminum`s partner-in-crime?
Aluminum, along with fluoride, is in our drinking water, foods, beverages, processed foods, and consumer products. Europe, which is largely unfluoridated (the U.S. is over 60% fluoridated), has half our Alzheimer`s rate. It doesn`t take rocket science to see a definite correlation.
There are other intriguing issues as well. Why do people with thyroid disease have an increased risk for Alzheimer`s? In the U.S., thyroid disease has reached even greater epidemic levels than Alzheimer`s, with as many as 20 million American victims. Besides problems with iodine intake, a common cause of thyroid disease is radiation.
There are also unbelievable similarities between Alzheimer`s and Creutzfeldt-Jacob Disease (CJD) aka mad cow disease. Mad cow disease is linked to feeding animal parts back to vegetarian animals through livestock feed and fertilizer. So what do radiation, livestock feed, fluoride, and fertilizer have in common which may have led to the emergence of the Alzheimer`s epidemic? The phosphate fertilizer industry!
Fertilizer use was not a common practice in the U.S. until after 1870, when phosphate and lime were applied to crops like cotton and tobacco. By the end of World War II, an era of intensive agriculture began. Of the phosphate produced in Florida, about 95% is used in agriculture (90% goes into fertilizer and 5% into livestock feed supplements). The remaining 5% is used in a variety of foods and beverages, plus personal care, consumer and industrial products - so says the Cargill Fertilizer Company, the largest producer of phosphate fertilizer in the country and the largest source for the fluoride products, which are added to the water supplies in the country.
George Glasser writes in the Earth Island Journal, "Radium wastes from filtration systems at phosphate fertilizer facilities are among the most radioactive types of naturally occurring radioactive material wastes. Uranium and all of its decay-rate products are found in phosphate rock, fluorosilicic acid (fluoride) and phosphate fertilizers".
The Florida Institute of Phosphate research says, "Removal of uranium as a product is no longer profitable and all of the extraction facilities have been dismantled. The uranium that remains in the phosphoric acid and fertilizer products is at a low enough level that it is safe for use". Hello! This is not very reassuring as chronic exposure to low levels of contamination can be as dangerous, or more so, than chronic high levels of exposure or acute occurrences.
Of particular interest is calcium silicate, another by-product of the phosphate fertilizer industry used as an anti-caking agent in iodized table salt. Is calcium silicate also radioactive? Would that have a significant impact on the thyroid? Given the relationship between Alzheimer`s and thyroid disease, Alzheimer`s may be destined to increase exponentially.
The phosphate fertilizer industry seems to be the common thread in Alzheimer`s and maybe also in thyroid and mad cow type diseases. Aluminum by itself may not cause Alzheimer`s, but in combination with the radioactive products of the phosphate fertilizer industry, it could be wreaking havoc on our health. Ponder this: flu vaccines contain enormous amounts of mercury and aluminum - two substances that do wonders for the brain. Guess who the "powers" scare into taking flu vaccines? The elderly. Guess which section of the population is succumbing to Alzheimer`s type symptoms? The elderly. Draw your own conclusions.
Whatever the cause, we deserve real answers to the Alzheimer`s epidemic, not the red herrings of research on genetics and lifestyle. The number of American victims is totally out of proportion to the incidence of Alzheimer`s worldwide. Yet, organic sulfur crystals have been proven to reverse Alzheimer`s. Why doesn`t anyone tell us that?
Something truly has gone terribly wrong when the Almighty Sign ($$) takes precedence over health!
The 10 biggest health care lies in America
Mainstream health care isn't based on "health" or "caring." It's actually based on an ingrained system of medical mythology that's practiced -- and defended -- by those who profit from the continuation of sickness and disease. This system of medical mythology might also simply be called "lies", and today I'm sharing with NaturalNews readers the top ten lies that are still followed and promoted under mainstream health care in America today.
Lie #1) Vaccines make you healthy
Vaccines have emerged as the greatest and most insidious mythology yet fabricated by western medicine. The idea that vaccines protect you from infectious disease is blatantly false in the long term because this year's flu shot actually makes you more susceptible to next year's influenza (http://www.naturalnews.com/028538_s...).
On top of that, even the theoretical short-term effectiveness of vaccines is dwarfed by the far more effective protection offered by vitamin D and other immune-modulating nutrients. (http://www.naturalnews.com/027385_V...)
Lie #2) Pharmaceuticals prevent disease
The big push by Big Pharma is now focused on treating healthy people with drugs as if pharmaceuticals were nutrients that could somehow prevent disease. This is the new push with cholesterol drugs: Give 'em to everyone, whether they have high cholesterol or not!
But pharmaceuticals don't prevent disease, and medications are not vitamins. Your body has no biological need for any pharmaceuticals at all. People who believe they need pharmaceuticals have simply been the victims of "fabricated consent" engineered by Big Pharma's clever advertising and P.R. spin.
Lie #3) Doctors are experts in health
Doctors don't even study health; they study disease. Modern doctors are taught virtually nothing about nutrition, wellness or disease prevention. Expecting a doctor to guide you on health issues is sort of like expecting your accountant to pilot a jet airliner -- it's simply not something he or she has ever been trained in.
That's not to say doctors aren't intelligent people. Most of them have high Iqs. But even a genius can't teach you something they know nothing about.
Lie #4) You have no role in your own healing
Doctors, drug companies and health authorities all want you to believe that your health is determined by their interventions. If you believe them, you have virtually no role in your own health or healing -- it's all managed by their drugs, their screening, their surgeries and their interventions.
Lie #5) Disease is a matter of bad luck or bad genes
Western medicine wants you to believe in the mythology of spontaneous disease -- disease that strikes without cause. This is equivalent to saying that disease is some sort of voodoo black magic and that patients have no way to prevent disease through their own diets or lifestyle choices.
It's funny, actually: Western medicine claims to be driven by scientific, rational thinking, and yet the entire industry still fails to acknowledge that chronic disease always has a cause and that most of the time, that cause has everything to do with nutritional deficiencies, exposure to toxic chemicals and a lack of exercise.
Disease is almost never a matter of bad luck or bad genes.
Lie #6) Screening equals prevention
Western medicine doesn't believe in disease prevention. Rather, the industry believes inscreening while calling it prevention. But screening isn't prevention by even the wildest stretch of the imagination. In fact, virtually all the popular screening methodologies actually promote diseases.
Mammography, for example, emits so much radiation that it causes breast cancer in tens of thousands of women each year (http://www.naturalnews.com/027558_m...). Imaging dyes used in radiological scans can cause horrific side effects, and psychiatric "disorder" screening is little more than a thinly-disguised patient recruitment scheme disguised as medicine.
Real prevention of disease must involve disease prevention through nutrition, patient education about the causes of disease and lifelong changes in eating habits. Yet western medicine teaches absolutely none of these things. Heck, it doesn't even believe in such ideas.
Lie #7) Health insurance will keep you healthy
This is a favorite lie of those who recently pushed for the Big Pharma-sponsored health care reform that has swept across America. The lie supposes that merely having health insurance will provide some sort of magical protection against disease. But in reality, health insurance doesn't make you healthy! It is only YOU and your choices about foods, exposures to toxic chemicals, pursuit of exercise and time in nature that can make you healthy.
Health insurance is, in effect, a wager that you will get sick. How does gambling on your sickness provide any protection whatsoever for your health? It doesn't. Personally, I'd rather bet on health than sickness, and the way to do that is to invest in nutritional supplements, organic produce, superfoods, physical fitness and non-toxic personal care products.
Lie #8) Hospitals are places of health and healing
If you want to stay healthy or get healthy, a hospital is the very last place you want to find yourself: They are unhappy, unhealthy places that are infested with antibiotic-resistant superbugs. Hospitals usually serve disease-promoting foods and lack health-enhancing sunlight, and potentially deadly mistakes with pharmaceuticals or surgical procedures now appear to be frighteningly common in U.S. hospitals.
Certainly, emergency rooms in hospitals play an important role in urgent care for injuries and accidents -- and emergency room physicians do an amazing job saving lives -- but for people with chronic, degenerative disease, a hospital is a very dangerous place to be. Unless you really need immediate critical care, try to avoid hospitals.
Lie #9) Conventional medicine is "advanced" state-of-the-art medicine
Even though doctors and health authorities try to pass off western medicine as being "advanced" or "modern," the whole system is actually pathetically outdated and stuck in thegerm theory of disease. Western medicine has yet to even acknowledge the role of nutrition in preventing disease -- something that has been scientifically documented for at least the last several decades. Western medicine fails to acknowledge mind-body medicine and hilariously believes the mind plays virtually no role in healing.
Neither does western medicine acknowledge the bio energy field of living systems, nor that organ transplants carry memories, nor that living food is qualitatively different from dead food. Seriously: Conventional doctors still believe that dead food is exactly the same as living food! (And the USDA food pyramid still makes no distinction between the two...)
"Modern" medicine isn't so modern, it turns out. It is, in fact, hopelessly outdated and desperately needs to upgrade its approach to health and wellness if it hopes to survive the next hundred years.
Lie #10) More research is needed to find "cures"
This lie is especially hilarious because western medicine does not believe in any "cure" for any disease. They aren't even looking for cures! This lie has been repeated since the 1960's, when cancer scientists claimed they were only a few years away from curing cancer. Today, four decades later, can you think of a single major disease that western medicine has cured? There aren't any.
That's because drug companies make money from sick people, not cured people. A patient cured is a patient lost. It is far more profitable to keep patients sick and pretend to "manage" their disease through a lifetime of pharmaceuticals. So when drug companies and disease non-profits claim to be searching for a "cure," what they're really doing is taking your money to fund more drug research to patent more medications that don't actually cure anything.
Remember this the next time you're asked to donate to some search for "the cure." The cures already exist in nutrition, herbal remedies and naturopathic medicine, but Big Pharma and the conventional medicine cartel isn't interested in real cures -- they only want to promote the ideaof a cure while pumping patients full of drugs that don't cure anything.
Beyond the ten lies
When it comes to western health care, there are more than 10 lies, of course, but these big 10 lies are perhaps the most relevant to your own health decisions. By avoiding being suckered in by these lies, you can take charge of your own health and avoid the health care scam by staying healthy!
Staying healthy isn't as difficult as you think, and it doesn't require health insurance or disease screening. It only requires making informed, intelligent decisions about what to eat, what to put on your skin and how to get more sunshine and physical exercise. Once you do these basic things, you'll find that you are no longer held victim by a western medicine health care system based on lies and outdated medical mythology.
It's time for a revolution in medicine... A revolution that finally advances past the mental roadblock of a system of medical mythology stuck in the 1940's. Don't get me wrong, 1940's medicine was great in the 1940's. But this is no longer the 1940's, and the germ theory of disease is hopelessly outdated when it comes to the primary diseases that are striking the population today. Yet the profiteers of our dishonest, outmoded health care system are doing everything in their power to keep us all stranded in the past, a past based on treating the body like a chemical battleground and attacking every disease with a patented pharmaceutical.
That whole approach to health care is so far outdated that it's hilarious it can still be pushed with a straight face. No wonder doctors only spend an average of two minutes with patients these days. That's the limit of how long they can hold their faces without breaking out in laughter at how stupid this whole "treat the symptoms and forget the causes" approach to health care really is. Even they know it! That's why most doctors actually eat superfoods and take vitamins themselves, even if they never dare suggest it to patients.
True fact: It is illegal in every U.S. state for a doctor to recommend any vitamin, nutrient or food for the prevention or treatment of any disease. Doing so can cause a doctor to have his medical license permanently revoked. How crazy and outdated is that?
Share1432
Buzz up!26 votes
8diggsdigg
About the author: Mike Adams is a natural health author and technology pioneer with a passion for sharing empowering information to help improve personal and planetary health He has authored more than 1,500 articles and dozens of reports, guides and interviews on natural health topics, impacting the lives of millions of readers around the world who are experiencing phenomenal health benefits from reading his articles. Adams is an independent journalist with strong ethics who does not get paid to write articles about any product or company. In 2007, Adams launched EcoLEDs, a maker of super bright LED light bulbs that are 1000% more energy efficient than incandescent lights. He also founded anenvironmentally-friendly online retailer called BetterLifeGoods.com that uses retail profits to help support consumer advocacy programs. He's also the CEO of a highly successful email newsletter software company that develops software used to send permission email campaigns to subscribers. Adams also serves as the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a non-profit consumer protection group, and regularly pursues cycling, nature photography, Capoeira and Pilates. He's also author of numerous health books published by Truth Publishing and is the creator of several consumer-oriented grassroots campaigns, including the Spam. Don't Buy It! campaign, and the free downloadable Honest Food Guide. He also created the free reference sites HerbReference.com andHealingFoodReference.com. Adams believes in free speech, free access to nutritional supplements and the ending of corporate control over medicines, genes and seeds. Known as the 'Health Ranger,' Adams' personal health statistics and mission statements are located at www.HealthRanger.org
Alzheimer's drugs cause brain damage and actually worsen memory loss
Wednesday, April 21, 2010 by: S. L. Baker, features writer
http://www.naturalnews.com/028622_Alzheimers_brain_damage.html
ig Pharma drugs that are being used on humans right now and promoted as potential treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD) could cause the very brain damage and memory loss they are supposed to treat. That's the conclusion of University of California at San Diego (UCSD) scientists who just published their groundbreaking findings in theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Nitrits may cause AZ and Diabetes
Astrxathins may prevent AZ
Consider the Cause of Alzheimer's Disease (Opinion)
Monday, November 09, 2009 by: Hesh Goldstein, citizen journalist
See all articles by this author
Email this author
We, Americans, are losing our minds to Alzheimer`s disease. It is an epidemic and it is not typical of what`s going on in the rest of the world. The World Health Organization estimates that there are 18 million people with Alzheimer`s. Over 4 and1/2 million Americans have the disease. We account for 25% of all Alzheimer`s cases, even though we represent only 4.6% of the world`s population. Europe is experiencing half our rate of disease. For Americans over 85 years of age, 50% are thought to have Alzheimer`s. The question is: Why?
Alzheimer`s was first discovered in 1906, about 20 years after aluminum cookware was introduced. It is not a part of normal aging says the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The NIH contends that the cause of Alzheimer`s is not known. They say, "Prior theories regarding the accumulation of aluminum, lead, mercury, and other substances in the brain have been disproved".
Do not believe that?! Federal agencies have a talent for not finding environmental causes for many diseases. They live by the motto, "Do not seek and thou shall not find". Kind of like their outlook about mad cow disease. Genetic triggers and lifestyle choices get the research dollars for pretty obvious reasons: Their findings don`t hurt polluters` profits.
Initially, it was thought that aluminum might be the sole cause of Alzheimer`s. Persons with Alzheimer`s have been found to experience increased absorption of aluminum in the brain, as well as to exhibit densities of senile plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. However, there are no reports that suggest plaques and tangles do not always signify Alzheimer`s, and vice versa.
Further clouding the issue are patients on kidney dialysis machines. They are unable to excrete aluminum, plus they may also be treated with medicines that include aluminum. However, reports say that dialysis patients don`t develop Alzheimer`s, although they can develop dialysis dementia if the equipment doesn`t filter out aluminum. And therein lies the problem. The process of kidney dialysis requires very purified, non-fluoridated water. Do you get the feeling that fluoride is aluminum`s partner-in-crime?
Aluminum, along with fluoride, is in our drinking water, foods, beverages, processed foods, and consumer products. Europe, which is largely unfluoridated (the U.S. is over 60% fluoridated), has half our Alzheimer`s rate. It doesn`t take rocket science to see a definite correlation.
There are other intriguing issues as well. Why do people with thyroid disease have an increased risk for Alzheimer`s? In the U.S., thyroid disease has reached even greater epidemic levels than Alzheimer`s, with as many as 20 million American victims. Besides problems with iodine intake, a common cause of thyroid disease is radiation.
There are also unbelievable similarities between Alzheimer`s and Creutzfeldt-Jacob Disease (CJD) aka mad cow disease. Mad cow disease is linked to feeding animal parts back to vegetarian animals through livestock feed and fertilizer. So what do radiation, livestock feed, fluoride, and fertilizer have in common which may have led to the emergence of the Alzheimer`s epidemic? The phosphate fertilizer industry!
Fertilizer use was not a common practice in the U.S. until after 1870, when phosphate and lime were applied to crops like cotton and tobacco. By the end of World War II, an era of intensive agriculture began. Of the phosphate produced in Florida, about 95% is used in agriculture (90% goes into fertilizer and 5% into livestock feed supplements). The remaining 5% is used in a variety of foods and beverages, plus personal care, consumer and industrial products - so says the Cargill Fertilizer Company, the largest producer of phosphate fertilizer in the country and the largest source for the fluoride products, which are added to the water supplies in the country.
George Glasser writes in the Earth Island Journal, "Radium wastes from filtration systems at phosphate fertilizer facilities are among the most radioactive types of naturally occurring radioactive material wastes. Uranium and all of its decay-rate products are found in phosphate rock, fluorosilicic acid (fluoride) and phosphate fertilizers".
The Florida Institute of Phosphate research says, "Removal of uranium as a product is no longer profitable and all of the extraction facilities have been dismantled. The uranium that remains in the phosphoric acid and fertilizer products is at a low enough level that it is safe for use". Hello! This is not very reassuring as chronic exposure to low levels of contamination can be as dangerous, or more so, than chronic high levels of exposure or acute occurrences.
Of particular interest is calcium silicate, another by-product of the phosphate fertilizer industry used as an anti-caking agent in iodized table salt. Is calcium silicate also radioactive? Would that have a significant impact on the thyroid? Given the relationship between Alzheimer`s and thyroid disease, Alzheimer`s may be destined to increase exponentially.
The phosphate fertilizer industry seems to be the common thread in Alzheimer`s and maybe also in thyroid and mad cow type diseases. Aluminum by itself may not cause Alzheimer`s, but in combination with the radioactive products of the phosphate fertilizer industry, it could be wreaking havoc on our health. Ponder this: flu vaccines contain enormous amounts of mercury and aluminum - two substances that do wonders for the brain. Guess who the "powers" scare into taking flu vaccines? The elderly. Guess which section of the population is succumbing to Alzheimer`s type symptoms? The elderly. Draw your own conclusions.
Whatever the cause, we deserve real answers to the Alzheimer`s epidemic, not the red herrings of research on genetics and lifestyle. The number of American victims is totally out of proportion to the incidence of Alzheimer`s worldwide. Yet, organic sulfur crystals have been proven to reverse Alzheimer`s. Why doesn`t anyone tell us that?
Something truly has gone terribly wrong when the Almighty Sign ($$) takes precedence over health!
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Sound Logic...Not What You Think?
Be sure to play link in Bold below
Giant hexagon of clouds spins on Saturn while clouds disappear from Jupiter
Here at NaturalNews, we normally report on Earthly events, but right now some rather grand events are taking place in our solar system that you may want to know about.
For starters, there's the odd fact that one of Jupiter's huge red stripes -- which is really a massive storm system many times larger than planet Earth -- has suddenly disappeared (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...). Known as the "Southern Equatorial Belt", this storm system isn't exactly permanent: Jupiter's belts undergo striking transformations every 10 - 15 years, according to astronomers.
Far more bizarre and mysterious is something that NASA's Cassini spacecraft first noticed in 2007. There is a large rotating hexagon circling the north pole of Saturn. (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/c...)
This isn't some conspiracy theory. It's not some sort of far-fetched interpretation of random organic structure. It is quite clearly a massive hexagon, and it's circling the north pole of Saturn as we speak. And by "massive", I mean this hexagon is larger than the planet Earth.
Straight from the NASA website: "This is a very strange feature, lying in a precise geometric fashion with six nearly equally straight sides," said Kevin Baines, atmospheric expert and member of Cassini's visual and infrared mapping spectrometer team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. "We've never seen anything like this on any other planet. Indeed, Saturn's thick atmosphere where circularly-shaped waves and convective cells dominate is perhaps the last place you'd expect to see such a six-sided geometric figure, yet there it is."
The hexagon, according to NASA, is 60 miles thick (deep) and an astonishing 15,000 miles wide.
That means four Earths would fit inside it. Yes, it's really that big. And of course, it seems entirely unnatural. Clouds don't form hexagon shapes and then maintain those structures as the edges orbit the center. Looking at this shape, it is difficult to explain it as "natural."
But that's not all there is to see here.
The all-seeing eye pyramid inside the hexagon
As I was studying this animation from NASA, something struck me as particularly interesting.Inside the hexagon there's a three-sided pyramid shape. It appears quite clearly as a lighter-shade triangle set against the background of the hexagon. Imagine a pyramid placed on top of the hexagon and you'll see it.
There's even more: Inside the pyramid is the shape of the all-seeing eye. You can clearly see it in the center of the pyramid shape, which is inside the hexagon.
Here's a still image from the NASA animation: http://www.naturalnews.com/images/S...
In it, you can just barely make out the shape of an inverted pyramid, plus two concentric circles in the center. Here's an overlay of lines showing the structure of the pyramid, plus the all-seeing eye: http://www.naturalnews.com/images/S...
Now here's where this gets even more bizarre...
The all-seeing eye and the pyramid
Do you recognize this all-seeing eye with the pyramid? If not, just whip out a dollar bill from your pocket and glance at the back. There it is!
Yes, your U.S. currency contains the exact same image: An all-seeing eye, centered inside the top of the pyramid, looking over you from the back of a dollar bill.
Here's a zoomed-in image showing you this from the back of a U.S. dollar bill:http://www.naturalnews.com/images/D...
Reality check
Please note what you're thinking right now as you're reading this. So far, I have not presented anything other than what is evident. There is a spinning hexagon of clouds on Saturn's north pole. Inside the hexagon is a triangle (pyramid). Inside the triangle are two concentric circles that look a lot like a human eye.
This shape looks a whole lot like the pyramid with the all-seeing eye on the back of the U.S. dollar.
Notice I haven't mentioned anything about any conspiracy, or aliens, or anything of that kind. These are just observations of the world around us.
Granted, they are fascinating observations. In fact, if you told most people what I've printed here in this article so far, they would think you were absolutely nuts.
And yet all I've done so far is republished NASA photos from the Cassini spacecraft and shown pictures from the back of U.S. currency. I've also pointed out some eerie similarities between the two.
But anyone with half a brain, upon seeing these pictures, would begin to wonder: Is this just a coincidence? And why is there a 15,000-mile wide spinning hexagon on Saturn in the first place?
I've mentioned this to quite a few people, and no one I talked to was even aware of this. So what's it doing there?
Natural phenomenon or intelligent design?
There are really one two possibilities for explaining the giant hexagon on Saturn: It is either anatural phenomenon or it was intelligently designed. (Well, I suppose there's a third possibility: That the whole thing is some sort of grand NASA hoax and the pictures were faked... but to what end?)
I can't wait to see the debates about this on our Facebook page, by the way, because "intelligently designed" could include anything: God, an alien race, a supernatural being, a previous Earthly civilization, a civilization from a parallel universe... who knows?
"Intelligently designed" means some conscious, intelligent being (or group of beings) intentionally created it. If so, you'd have to wonder: For what purpose? What would a giant spinning hexagon on Saturn actually accomplish?
Cymatics and the physical structure of sound
The far more likely explanation for the giant hexagon on Saturn may be that it is a natural phenomenon. And the only phenomenon I'm familiar with that might explain this involves the field of cymatics.
Cymatics is the study of how sound can alter the physical structure of materials, creating interesting structural patterns. To see this for yourself, you can turn a stereo speaker on its edge (with the speaker facing up), then place a liquid pudding of corn starch and water on top of a layer of plastic wrap, on top of the speaker. When you crank up the music, the corn starch creates bizarre and fascinating shapes due to the expression of the structure of the sound.
See an example of this "DIY cymatics" on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaYv...
I've been thinking that the giant hexagon on Saturn could theoretically be caused by very low-frequency sound waves emanating from some sort of geological action on the planet's surface. Perhaps these sound waves are being focused toward the north pole of the planet in much the same way that earthquake shockwaves can "bounce" off subterranean geological features. These sound waves could theoretically create a "cymatic" effect that we're seeing as a giant hexagon swirling around the pole.
It sounds far-fetched, I know. But not nearly as far-fetch as "aliens built it." When it comes to bizarre phenomena like this, all the explanations sound far-fetched.
You can come up with your own theory to explain all this, of course. But make no mistake: There is a giant hexagon of clouds 15,000 miles wide swirling around the north pole of Saturn, and even NASA has no idea why or how it got there. Who or what maintains the hexagon structure and keeps the clouds swirling in a six-sided geometric pattern?
Or is this a "natural" event taking place on a massive scale? If it's natural, it would demonstrate that nature can create some astonishingly complex (and large-scale) designs in the worlds around us. That's particularly interesting because the FDA believes nature is incapable of creating even a single plant-based nutrient that has any beneficial effect whatsoever on the human body.
There's a lot of denial in Washington about the power and "creativity" of nature. Maybe those folks should look toward the heavens and take note of what's really happening in our universe... because some of it is pretty darned spectacular.
Just ask NASA.
Please let us know YOUR thoughts on this giant hexagon on Saturn. Is it a NATURAL event? Was it created by MAN? Was it put there by GOD? Is it an elaborate NASA HOAX?
Giant hexagon of clouds spins on Saturn while clouds disappear from Jupiter
Here at NaturalNews, we normally report on Earthly events, but right now some rather grand events are taking place in our solar system that you may want to know about.
For starters, there's the odd fact that one of Jupiter's huge red stripes -- which is really a massive storm system many times larger than planet Earth -- has suddenly disappeared (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...). Known as the "Southern Equatorial Belt", this storm system isn't exactly permanent: Jupiter's belts undergo striking transformations every 10 - 15 years, according to astronomers.
Far more bizarre and mysterious is something that NASA's Cassini spacecraft first noticed in 2007. There is a large rotating hexagon circling the north pole of Saturn. (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/c...)
This isn't some conspiracy theory. It's not some sort of far-fetched interpretation of random organic structure. It is quite clearly a massive hexagon, and it's circling the north pole of Saturn as we speak. And by "massive", I mean this hexagon is larger than the planet Earth.
Straight from the NASA website: "This is a very strange feature, lying in a precise geometric fashion with six nearly equally straight sides," said Kevin Baines, atmospheric expert and member of Cassini's visual and infrared mapping spectrometer team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. "We've never seen anything like this on any other planet. Indeed, Saturn's thick atmosphere where circularly-shaped waves and convective cells dominate is perhaps the last place you'd expect to see such a six-sided geometric figure, yet there it is."
The hexagon, according to NASA, is 60 miles thick (deep) and an astonishing 15,000 miles wide.
That means four Earths would fit inside it. Yes, it's really that big. And of course, it seems entirely unnatural. Clouds don't form hexagon shapes and then maintain those structures as the edges orbit the center. Looking at this shape, it is difficult to explain it as "natural."
But that's not all there is to see here.
The all-seeing eye pyramid inside the hexagon
As I was studying this animation from NASA, something struck me as particularly interesting.Inside the hexagon there's a three-sided pyramid shape. It appears quite clearly as a lighter-shade triangle set against the background of the hexagon. Imagine a pyramid placed on top of the hexagon and you'll see it.
There's even more: Inside the pyramid is the shape of the all-seeing eye. You can clearly see it in the center of the pyramid shape, which is inside the hexagon.
Here's a still image from the NASA animation: http://www.naturalnews.com/images/S...
In it, you can just barely make out the shape of an inverted pyramid, plus two concentric circles in the center. Here's an overlay of lines showing the structure of the pyramid, plus the all-seeing eye: http://www.naturalnews.com/images/S...
Now here's where this gets even more bizarre...
The all-seeing eye and the pyramid
Do you recognize this all-seeing eye with the pyramid? If not, just whip out a dollar bill from your pocket and glance at the back. There it is!
Yes, your U.S. currency contains the exact same image: An all-seeing eye, centered inside the top of the pyramid, looking over you from the back of a dollar bill.
Here's a zoomed-in image showing you this from the back of a U.S. dollar bill:http://www.naturalnews.com/images/D...
Reality check
Please note what you're thinking right now as you're reading this. So far, I have not presented anything other than what is evident. There is a spinning hexagon of clouds on Saturn's north pole. Inside the hexagon is a triangle (pyramid). Inside the triangle are two concentric circles that look a lot like a human eye.
This shape looks a whole lot like the pyramid with the all-seeing eye on the back of the U.S. dollar.
Notice I haven't mentioned anything about any conspiracy, or aliens, or anything of that kind. These are just observations of the world around us.
Granted, they are fascinating observations. In fact, if you told most people what I've printed here in this article so far, they would think you were absolutely nuts.
And yet all I've done so far is republished NASA photos from the Cassini spacecraft and shown pictures from the back of U.S. currency. I've also pointed out some eerie similarities between the two.
But anyone with half a brain, upon seeing these pictures, would begin to wonder: Is this just a coincidence? And why is there a 15,000-mile wide spinning hexagon on Saturn in the first place?
I've mentioned this to quite a few people, and no one I talked to was even aware of this. So what's it doing there?
Natural phenomenon or intelligent design?
There are really one two possibilities for explaining the giant hexagon on Saturn: It is either anatural phenomenon or it was intelligently designed. (Well, I suppose there's a third possibility: That the whole thing is some sort of grand NASA hoax and the pictures were faked... but to what end?)
I can't wait to see the debates about this on our Facebook page, by the way, because "intelligently designed" could include anything: God, an alien race, a supernatural being, a previous Earthly civilization, a civilization from a parallel universe... who knows?
"Intelligently designed" means some conscious, intelligent being (or group of beings) intentionally created it. If so, you'd have to wonder: For what purpose? What would a giant spinning hexagon on Saturn actually accomplish?
Cymatics and the physical structure of sound
The far more likely explanation for the giant hexagon on Saturn may be that it is a natural phenomenon. And the only phenomenon I'm familiar with that might explain this involves the field of cymatics.
Cymatics is the study of how sound can alter the physical structure of materials, creating interesting structural patterns. To see this for yourself, you can turn a stereo speaker on its edge (with the speaker facing up), then place a liquid pudding of corn starch and water on top of a layer of plastic wrap, on top of the speaker. When you crank up the music, the corn starch creates bizarre and fascinating shapes due to the expression of the structure of the sound.
See an example of this "DIY cymatics" on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaYv...
I've been thinking that the giant hexagon on Saturn could theoretically be caused by very low-frequency sound waves emanating from some sort of geological action on the planet's surface. Perhaps these sound waves are being focused toward the north pole of the planet in much the same way that earthquake shockwaves can "bounce" off subterranean geological features. These sound waves could theoretically create a "cymatic" effect that we're seeing as a giant hexagon swirling around the pole.
It sounds far-fetched, I know. But not nearly as far-fetch as "aliens built it." When it comes to bizarre phenomena like this, all the explanations sound far-fetched.
You can come up with your own theory to explain all this, of course. But make no mistake: There is a giant hexagon of clouds 15,000 miles wide swirling around the north pole of Saturn, and even NASA has no idea why or how it got there. Who or what maintains the hexagon structure and keeps the clouds swirling in a six-sided geometric pattern?
Or is this a "natural" event taking place on a massive scale? If it's natural, it would demonstrate that nature can create some astonishingly complex (and large-scale) designs in the worlds around us. That's particularly interesting because the FDA believes nature is incapable of creating even a single plant-based nutrient that has any beneficial effect whatsoever on the human body.
There's a lot of denial in Washington about the power and "creativity" of nature. Maybe those folks should look toward the heavens and take note of what's really happening in our universe... because some of it is pretty darned spectacular.
Just ask NASA.
Please let us know YOUR thoughts on this giant hexagon on Saturn. Is it a NATURAL event? Was it created by MAN? Was it put there by GOD? Is it an elaborate NASA HOAX?
Friday, May 14, 2010
Do healing foods work better than Big Pharma's drugs? The results speak for themselves
The drug industry is constantly trying to convince you that drugs are good for your health while nutritional supplements and healthy foods are somehow bad for you. This same line of nonsense is also repeated by the FDA, which goes out of its way to censor the truth about the healing properties of natural foods like walnuts, cherries and berries. (http://www.anh-usa.org/wp-content/u...)
The drug industry and the FDA are, of course, just plain wrong about all this. Although their advertisements show happy, healthy people taking pharmaceuticals, in the real world, people who take their drugs are extremely unhealthy, depressed and highly toxic.
But don't take my word for it: Check out the people walking in and out of pharmacies versus the people who visit health food stores:
• People who visit pharmacies tend to have toxic livers, poor kidney function (because drugs damage the kidneys), wild mood swings, terrible digestion and elimination capabilities, poor skin health, poor posture, low energy, sleep disorders and sexual dysfunction. They tend to be suicidal while living in chronic pain. They have huge medical expenses that often send them into bankruptcy.
• People who visit health food stores tend to have healthy skin, happier outlooks, better energy, better sex lives, healthy sleep, healthy hearts, healthy liver function and greatly improved brain function. They are more creative, adaptable and optimistic, and they tend to enjoy their lives. They spend relatively little on health care expenses while investing their money in organic foods, green products, medicinal herbs and nutritional supplements.
The choice is up to you
Which group would you prefer to join? You can choose either one by deciding what to put in (or on) your body. If you choose to contaminate your body with pharmaceuticals and medications, you will experience increased liver and kidney toxicity, reduced cognitive function, skin health problems, sexual dysfunction, mood disorders and other such problems.
On the other hand, if you choose to nourish your body with superfoods, organic products, healing herbs and nutritional supplements, you will experience a more healthful and joyful life with improved brain function and memory, healthy skin, stable moods, abundant energy, restful sleep and healthy fertility, among other benefits.
The pharmaceutical industry wants you to choose their drugs, of course, and they don't care what happens to your health and happiness as a result. In fact, the worse your health gets after taking their drugs, the more of their drugs you'll need! The side effects of one drug become the "disease" that's treated by another drug, so it's all great for repeat business!
Keeping you ignorant
What the drug industry and the FDA absolutely do NOT want you to learn is that healing foods, herbs and supplements make virtually all pharmaceuticals obsolete. If you really knew the truth about what these items can do to protect your health and cure degenerative disease, you'd probably never take another chemical pill in your life. That's why the FDA works so hard to censor nutritional supplements and make sure they can't make truthful, scientifically-validated claims on their labels. (http://www.anh-usa.org/tell-the-fda...)
The FDA has even gone after healing foods. The scientific literature says conclusively thatwalnuts lower high cholesterol. It's the natural result of eating the healthy plant-based oils in the walnuts. The FDA, however, has threatened walnut companies with fines and imprisonment for merely linking to scientific studies that describe the health benefits of walnuts.
This is how the FDA keeps people in the dark and achieves its agenda of censoring the truth about foods and supplements while promoting toxic pharmaceuticals that keep the drug companies in business.
Change your decisions and you'll change your life
It's up to you to determine how the rest of your life will be experienced. If you continue to find yourself standing in line at the local pharmacy, or if you look in your medicine cabinet and notice a half-dozen prescriptions, let that be a wake-up call. These drugs will never give you health or happiness. They will never create the life you're truly looking for.
Instead, take a walk to the other side of the street. Walk into a health food store. Ask the friendly staff how to get started with healthy living. These people are incredibly helpful, by the way, so don't be afraid to ask questions.
Spend your money at the health food store instead of the pharmacy and your entire life will improve as a result. As you improve your physical health, your brain health will get better, too, and you'll notice life getting better in many ways: Improved relationships, enhanced career (because having a healthy mind improves your job performance, too!), improved self image, increased stamina and much more.
You'll sleep better, eat better, think better, poop better and feel better. Everything your body is supposed to do naturally will simply work better as you align yourself with the natural laws of health and nutrition. You can embrace those laws by visiting practically any health food store and taking advantage of the remarkable health-enhancing products they carry.
So find your local health food store and give them a visit! I even support Whole Foods, too. I realize there has been some controversy about Whole Foods, but compared to all the other grocery stores, Whole Foods has achieved some astounding accomplishments. I'm glad Whole Foods is successful, because I sure wouldn't want to go back to shopping at some conventional (toxic) grocery store, would you?
Remember, you vote with your dollars -- both in terms of what industries you support as well as what health outcome you will create. If you invest your dollars in natural health products, you will get a healthy result.
So the next time you have a choice between pharmaceuticals versus healing foods, walk over to the health food store and choose healing foods!
About the author: Mike Adams is a natural health researcher and author with a strong interest in personal health, the environment and the power of nature to help us all heal He has authored more than 1,800 articles and dozens of reports, guides and interviews on natural health topics, impacting the lives of millions of readers around the world who are experiencing phenomenal health benefits from reading his articles. Adams is an independent journalist with strong ethics who does not get paid to write articles about any product or company. He is the writer and singer of 'I Want My Bailout Money,' 'Don't Inject Me' and other popular hip-hop songs on socially-conscious topics. He also founded an environmentally-friendly online retailer called BetterLifeGoods.comthat uses retail profits to help support consumer advocacy programs. He's also a veteran of the software technology industry, having founded a personalized mass email software product used to deliver email newsletters to subscribers. Adams is currently the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a 501(c)3 non-profit, and pursues hobbies such as Pilates, Capoeira, nature macrophotography and organic gardening. Known as the 'Health Ranger,' Adams' personal health statistics and mission statements are located at www.HealthRanger.org
Submitted by Organic Jan and Flea Free Organically
The drug industry is constantly trying to convince you that drugs are good for your health while nutritional supplements and healthy foods are somehow bad for you. This same line of nonsense is also repeated by the FDA, which goes out of its way to censor the truth about the healing properties of natural foods like walnuts, cherries and berries. (http://www.anh-usa.org/wp-content/u...)
The drug industry and the FDA are, of course, just plain wrong about all this. Although their advertisements show happy, healthy people taking pharmaceuticals, in the real world, people who take their drugs are extremely unhealthy, depressed and highly toxic.
But don't take my word for it: Check out the people walking in and out of pharmacies versus the people who visit health food stores:
• People who visit pharmacies tend to have toxic livers, poor kidney function (because drugs damage the kidneys), wild mood swings, terrible digestion and elimination capabilities, poor skin health, poor posture, low energy, sleep disorders and sexual dysfunction. They tend to be suicidal while living in chronic pain. They have huge medical expenses that often send them into bankruptcy.
• People who visit health food stores tend to have healthy skin, happier outlooks, better energy, better sex lives, healthy sleep, healthy hearts, healthy liver function and greatly improved brain function. They are more creative, adaptable and optimistic, and they tend to enjoy their lives. They spend relatively little on health care expenses while investing their money in organic foods, green products, medicinal herbs and nutritional supplements.
The choice is up to you
Which group would you prefer to join? You can choose either one by deciding what to put in (or on) your body. If you choose to contaminate your body with pharmaceuticals and medications, you will experience increased liver and kidney toxicity, reduced cognitive function, skin health problems, sexual dysfunction, mood disorders and other such problems.
On the other hand, if you choose to nourish your body with superfoods, organic products, healing herbs and nutritional supplements, you will experience a more healthful and joyful life with improved brain function and memory, healthy skin, stable moods, abundant energy, restful sleep and healthy fertility, among other benefits.
The pharmaceutical industry wants you to choose their drugs, of course, and they don't care what happens to your health and happiness as a result. In fact, the worse your health gets after taking their drugs, the more of their drugs you'll need! The side effects of one drug become the "disease" that's treated by another drug, so it's all great for repeat business!
Keeping you ignorant
What the drug industry and the FDA absolutely do NOT want you to learn is that healing foods, herbs and supplements make virtually all pharmaceuticals obsolete. If you really knew the truth about what these items can do to protect your health and cure degenerative disease, you'd probably never take another chemical pill in your life. That's why the FDA works so hard to censor nutritional supplements and make sure they can't make truthful, scientifically-validated claims on their labels. (http://www.anh-usa.org/tell-the-fda...)
The FDA has even gone after healing foods. The scientific literature says conclusively thatwalnuts lower high cholesterol. It's the natural result of eating the healthy plant-based oils in the walnuts. The FDA, however, has threatened walnut companies with fines and imprisonment for merely linking to scientific studies that describe the health benefits of walnuts.
This is how the FDA keeps people in the dark and achieves its agenda of censoring the truth about foods and supplements while promoting toxic pharmaceuticals that keep the drug companies in business.
Change your decisions and you'll change your life
It's up to you to determine how the rest of your life will be experienced. If you continue to find yourself standing in line at the local pharmacy, or if you look in your medicine cabinet and notice a half-dozen prescriptions, let that be a wake-up call. These drugs will never give you health or happiness. They will never create the life you're truly looking for.
Instead, take a walk to the other side of the street. Walk into a health food store. Ask the friendly staff how to get started with healthy living. These people are incredibly helpful, by the way, so don't be afraid to ask questions.
Spend your money at the health food store instead of the pharmacy and your entire life will improve as a result. As you improve your physical health, your brain health will get better, too, and you'll notice life getting better in many ways: Improved relationships, enhanced career (because having a healthy mind improves your job performance, too!), improved self image, increased stamina and much more.
You'll sleep better, eat better, think better, poop better and feel better. Everything your body is supposed to do naturally will simply work better as you align yourself with the natural laws of health and nutrition. You can embrace those laws by visiting practically any health food store and taking advantage of the remarkable health-enhancing products they carry.
So find your local health food store and give them a visit! I even support Whole Foods, too. I realize there has been some controversy about Whole Foods, but compared to all the other grocery stores, Whole Foods has achieved some astounding accomplishments. I'm glad Whole Foods is successful, because I sure wouldn't want to go back to shopping at some conventional (toxic) grocery store, would you?
Remember, you vote with your dollars -- both in terms of what industries you support as well as what health outcome you will create. If you invest your dollars in natural health products, you will get a healthy result.
So the next time you have a choice between pharmaceuticals versus healing foods, walk over to the health food store and choose healing foods!
About the author: Mike Adams is a natural health researcher and author with a strong interest in personal health, the environment and the power of nature to help us all heal He has authored more than 1,800 articles and dozens of reports, guides and interviews on natural health topics, impacting the lives of millions of readers around the world who are experiencing phenomenal health benefits from reading his articles. Adams is an independent journalist with strong ethics who does not get paid to write articles about any product or company. He is the writer and singer of 'I Want My Bailout Money,' 'Don't Inject Me' and other popular hip-hop songs on socially-conscious topics. He also founded an environmentally-friendly online retailer called BetterLifeGoods.comthat uses retail profits to help support consumer advocacy programs. He's also a veteran of the software technology industry, having founded a personalized mass email software product used to deliver email newsletters to subscribers. Adams is currently the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a 501(c)3 non-profit, and pursues hobbies such as Pilates, Capoeira, nature macrophotography and organic gardening. Known as the 'Health Ranger,' Adams' personal health statistics and mission statements are located at www.HealthRanger.org
Submitted by Organic Jan and Flea Free Organically
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
