This article was previously published October 10, 2020, and has been updated with new information. When asked how much radiation women are exposed to from mammograms, Dr. Ben Johnson, author of "No Ma'am-ograms," says, "At least the amount of 100 chest X-rays." It's a statement that would surprise many women who are advised to receive a mammogram as the standard of care for breast cancer prevention in the U.S. — and it's just one of the eye-opening facts presented in the documentary "Boobs: The War on Women's Breasts." The film begins with a written statement informing viewers that all of the information you're about to hear is supported by scientific literature, even though much of it opposes the assertions made by conventional medicine. Doctors from across the United States and around the world — including California, Georgia, Switzerland, Virginia and Arizona — are interviewed, providing expert testimony on why you may want to rethink this controversial procedure. The 'Early Detection' Myth and Biopsy RisksOne myth perpetuated by conventional medicine is that mammography is the most important screening test for breast cancer because it can detect breast cancer "up to two years before the tumor can be felt by you or your doctor."1 However, the film points out that by the time you can feel a cancerous lump in your breast, the cancer has already been growing for two to five years. "Mammograms are not early detection," Johnson says. The myth that mammograms don't spread cancer is also addressed, via the story of one woman who was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer and given only 1 year to live. She made significant changes to her lifestyle and many of the tumors disappeared. The cancer was stable years later, until she received a biopsy and subsequent mammograms, which she says made the cancer spread — and a tumor appeared in the area where the biopsy was done. During a biopsy, a piece of tissue from a tumor or organ is removed so that it can be examined under a microscope, often to determine if it is cancerous. Needle biopsies, for instance, are widely used as part of the traditional allopathic approach to diagnosing breast cancer. But they may accidentally cause malignant cells to break away from a tumor, resulting in its spreading to other areas of your body. One of the harms of using mammography as a screening tool is that it can often lead to overdiagnosis and overtreatment, including false-positive tests and unnecessary biopsies.2 One study from the John Wayne Cancer Institute revealed that a needle biopsy may increase the spread of cancer compared to patients who receive excisional biopsies, also known as lumpectomies.3 They concluded, "Manipulation of an intact tumor by FNA [fine-needle aspiration] or large-gauge needle core biopsy is associated with an increase in the incidence of SN [sentinel node] metastases, perhaps due in part to the mechanical disruption of the tumor by the needle."4 Johnson said he calls biopsies "the kiss of death," describing how the needle gets driven through a billion cells, blows through the cancer and goes out the other side, dragging cells back through and spreading the cancer. Dr. Manfred Doepp, medical director of the Couros Center in Switzerland, agrees that biopsies can spread cancer, while the physical act of squeezing the breast during mammography may also trigger the cancer to spread. The film cites a rapid response published in the BMJ, which states "robust scientific data, published in prestigious medical journals, have lent meaningful support to the concept" that the squeezing motion of mammography is in itself potentially harmful.5 Breast Cancer Overdiagnosed in 1.3 Million WomenThe notion that mammography is an accurate screening tool is another myth busted in the film. Both false positives and false negatives occur, and even the skill of the radiologist in reading the mammogram is a factor in whether or not mammography is able to detect cancer. Overall, when researchers examined trends in early-stage breast cancer and late-stage breast cancer from 1976 to 2008 among women 40 years and older, they found the introduction of mammography in the U.S. was linked to a doubling in the number of early-stage breast cancer cases detected each year.6 However, the rate at which women developed late-stage cancer decreased by 8% during that time, leading the researchers to suggest that only a small number of early-stage cancer diagnosed would progress into advanced disease:7
They concluded that due to the introduction of mammography, breast cancer was overdiagnosed — meaning that tumors were detected that would never lead to clinical symptoms — in 1.3 million women over a 30-year period. Up to 80% of Breast Biopsies Are BenignThe overdiagnosis of breast cancer comes with serious risks, including needless treatments and unnecessary stress and anxiety. In another study cited in the film, it's stated that more than 1 million breast biopsies are performed annually in the U.S., 75% to 80% of which turn out to be benign.8 Sometimes, the benign result isn't uncovered until an unnecessary mastectomy has already occurred. Up to 1 in 4 breast tissue biopsies may be incorrectly diagnosed by pathologists,9 and unnecessary mastectomies have been performed as a result. In a case that went to trial in 2020 in Israel, a woman was diagnosed with breast cancer after a biopsy tested at two medical centers came back positive. She underwent six months of chemotherapy as a result, as well as a partial mastectomy to remove the growth. After the growth was removed, the lawsuit alleges, it turned out to be benign.10 In 2015, researchers with Boston Children's Hospital in Massachusetts revealed that false-positive mammograms and breast cancer overdiagnoses among women ages 40 to 59 cost the U.S. $4 billion each year.11 Mammograms May Not Work for Women With Dense BreastsThe story of Nancy Cappello is also covered in the film. Cappello was diagnosed with breast cancer after receiving two normal mammograms. The cancer was missed because she has dense breast tissue, and was only revealed when her doctor felt a ridge in her breast and prescribed an ultrasound test in addition to a mammogram. Cappello was a pioneer in the movement to teach women about dense breast tissue and how using a mammogram to detect cancer in such tissue is "like finding a polar bear in a snowstorm." She said:12
As a result of Cappello's movement, 38 states have passed mandatory breast density reporting laws. The film states that up to 90% of women may have some degree of dense breast tissue that may affect a mammogram's outcome and could benefit from whole breast ultrasound — a procedure that's not widely available. Women are also interviewed that were told they had dense breast tissue, but not what that meant for the effectiveness of mammography. 'Precancer': Ductal Carcinoma in SituDuctal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) refers to the abnormal growth of cells within the milk ducts of the breast forming a lesion commonly between 1 to 1.5 centimeters (cm) in diameter. While the cells appear malignant under a microscope, they have not invaded surrounding tissue and are considered "precancer," noninvasive or "stage zero breast cancer." Some experts have also argued that DCIS should be considered noncancerous. Despite this, the film tells the story of one woman who had both breasts removed due to a DCIS diagnosis. Such diagnoses now represent 20% to 25% of all "breast cancers,"13 and the standard of care is to treat all DCIS with mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy. According to a review in the British Journal of Cancer:14
Is Radiation From Mammograms Dangerous?There's also the issue that mammograms use ionizing radiation at a relatively high dose, which in and of itself can contribute to the development of breast cancer. In a 2016 study, it's stated, "ionizing radiation as used in low-dose X-ray mammography may be associated with a risk of radiation-induced carcinogenesis."15 They point out that people who carry certain genetic variations or have an inherited disposition of breast cancer, in particular, should avoid ionizing radiation as much as possible — the latter group being one that conventional medicine often recommends for routine or even extra mammography screening. Again, they refer individuals to a different, safer, form of testing: ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).16 A "new and improved" type of mammogram called 3D tomosynthesis, which is basically a CT scan for your breasts, is particularly problematic, as your radiation exposure is even greater than from standard mammograms — and by a significant margin. According to one study,17 annual screening using digital or screen-film mammography on women aged 40 to 80 years is associated with an induced cancer incidence and fatal breast cancer rate of 20 to 25 cases per 100,000 mammograms. Meaning, annual mammograms cause 20 to 25 cases of fatal cancer for every 100,000 women getting the test. The 3D mammogram requires multiple views in order to achieve three-dimensionality, so it stands to reason your total radiation exposure would be considerably higher than from a standard 2D mammogram. Thermography and Ultrasound Use No RadiationIn order to make informed decisions, women should be provided with all of their screening options, along with an explanation of their strengths and weaknesses, and be allowed to utilize the option of their choice. Mammography is only one option, with considerable drawbacks. Other potentially safer options include self and clinical breast exams, thermography, ultrasound and MRI. Thermography and ultrasound use no radiation, and may detect abnormalities that mammograms miss, especially in women with dense breast tissue. These are explained in detail toward the end of the film, but they can be difficult to access in the U.S., as the billion-dollar mammography industry prevents the widespread use of these beneficial tests. It's also important to understand that mammography doesn't prevent breast cancer in any way. Breast cancer prevention involves a healthy lifestyle, avoidance of toxins and attention to certain nutritional factors, such as vitamin D. It is absolutely vital to know and optimize your vitamin D level as it can radically reduce your risk of breast cancer. Ignoring these factors and simply getting an annual mammogram and believing you're protected is the end result being foisted upon many women trusting the advice of conventional medicine. By leading a healthy lifestyle, and seeking to get informed about all of your breast cancer screening options, you can avoid this potentially deadly pitfall.
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/01/01/mammograms-documentary.aspx
0 Comments
We’ve long suspected that fact checking organizations are nothing but a biased censoring mechanism more interested in manipulating opinion than establishing actual facts, but now we have absolute proof, thanks to a lawsuit brought against Facebook by journalist John Stossel.1,2 In 2020, a Facebook fact checker called Science Feedback slapped “False” and “Lacking context” labels on two videos posted by Stossel. The videos featured Stossel’s interviews with experts who discussed the negligible role of climate change in the 2020 California forest fires. While they did not deny climate change is real, they proposed there were other, likely more contributing factors, such as poor forest management. Why were his videos flagged as misinformation? According to Facebook fact checkers, Stossel was “misleading” people when he claimed that “forest fires are caused by poor forest management, not climate change.” But according to Stossel, he never actually made that claim. According to Stossel, the labels damaged his reputation as an investigative journalist and resulted in a loss of followers. Interestingly, when Stossel contacted Science Feedback about its fact checks, two reviewers agreed to be interviewed. With regard to the first video that got flagged, they admitted they’d never even watched it. In the case of the second video, a reviewer explained that they “didn’t like [his] tone.” As noted by The New York Post:3
“The problem is the omission of contextual information rather than specific ‘facts’ being wrong,” the fact checker told Stossel, who says:4
Facebook Claims Fact Checks Are ‘Protected Opinion’So, Stossel sued for defamation, and this is where it gets good, because to defend Facebook, its lawyers had to at least temporarily resort to telling the truth. In their legal brief, they argue that fact checks are protected under the First Amendment because they are OPINIONS, not assertions of facts! Commenting on the case, climate change blogger Anthony Watts writes:5
Facebook Censors The British Medical JournalStossel is far from alone in being censored these days. In the video above, he points out other noteworthy experts who have been censored for their opinions and educated stances, such as environmentalist Michael Shellenberger, once hailed by Time Magazine as a “hero of the environment,” statistician and environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg, once declared “one of the most influential people of the 21st century,” and science writer John Tierney. Of course, I am no stranger to censorship either, having been falsely labeled as one of the “biggest misinformation agents” on the entire internet when it comes to the COVID jab. In these times of Orwellian Doublespeak, I consider this one of most significant achievements I have ever achieved. Think about it for a moment. The entire mainstream media has agreed that I am the most influential spreader of the truth about COVID on the internet. Even my friend and major freedom fighter, Bobby Kennedy, was only No. 2. I couldn’t be more delighted with their award. I might even have it inscribed on my tombstone. Most recently, Facebook even censored The British Medical Journal (BMJ) over an article that highlighted potential problems with Pfizer’s COVID jab trial, and The BMJ is one of the oldest and most respected peer-reviewed medical journals in the world! In early November 2021, The BMJ published a whistleblower report6 that claimed there were serious data integrity issues in the Pfizer COVID jab trial. The article was censored by Facebook and labeled variably as either “False,” “Partly false” or “Missing context.” Some users reported the article could not be shared at all. The Facebook fact check of The BMJ article was done by Lead Stories, a Facebook contractor. The headline of its “fact check” rebuttal read: “Fact Check: The British Medical Journal Did NOT Reveal Disqualifying and Ignored Reports of Flaws in Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Trials.”7 ‘Inaccurate, Incompetent and Irresponsible’ Fact CheckingIn response, The BMJ has slammed the fact check, calling it “inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible.”8,9,10 In an open letter11 addressed to Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, The BMJ urges Zuckerberg to “act swiftly” to correct the erroneous fact check, review the processes that allowed it to occur in the first place, and “generally to reconsider your investment in and approach to fact checking overall.” As noted by The BMJ in its letter, the Lead Stories’ fact check:12
Lead Stories refused to address the inaccuracies when contacted by The BMJ directly. The BMJ also raises “a wider concern” in its letter:
Fact Checkers Are as Biased as They ComeWhen it comes to fact checking, it’s high time everyone understood that fact checks are not done by independent, unbiased parties who are sifting through facts to make sure a given piece is accurate. As Facebook has now admitted in court, these so-called fact checks are nothing more than a declaration of preferred opinion. They’re statements of approved narrative. They have nothing to do with the verification of facts. As reported by the New York Post:13
The New York Post also points out that “The fact-check industry is funded by liberal moguls such as George Soros, government-funded nonprofits and the tech giants themselves.”14 Science Feedback, for example, received seed funding from Google.15 Journalism’s icon, the Poynter Institute — which runs the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) — also funded Science Feedback to build what Poynter describes as “a database of fact checks and of websites that spread misinformation the most.” In a round robin of circular funding, IFCN’s revenues come from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Google, Facebook and government entities such as the U.S. Department of State.16 To top it off, Science Feedback’s crowdfunding is run through the University of California, Merced, so they can avoid taxes in the United States.17 Fact Checkers Protect the Technocratic AgendaOne of the primary funders of the fake fact checking industry that The Post failed to mention is the drug industry. NewsGuard and other fact checking organizations are loaded with Big Pharma conflicts of interest, and their bias in favor of the drug industry is undeniable. Fact checking organizations are also clearly influenced by technocratic organizations such as the World Economic Forum, which is leading the call for a Great Reset. NewsGuard, for example, is partnered with Publicis,18 one of the world’s largest PR companies that has a huge roster of Big Pharma clients, and Publicis in turn is a partner of the World Economic Forum. NewsGuard also received a large chunk of its startup capital from Publicis. No doubt, Big Pharma and The Great Reset are tightly intertwined and work together toward the same goal, which is nothing less than world domination and the enslavement of the global population under a biomedical police state. PR Posing as Free Press Has Unleashed Fake News PandemicPublicis actually appears to be coordinating the global effort to suppress information that runs counter to the technocratic narrative about COVID-19, its origin, prevention and treatment — suppression and censorship that has been repeatedly aimed at this website specifically. It is part of an enormous network that includes international drug companies, fact checkers and credibility raters like NewsGuard, Google and other search engines, Microsoft, antivirus software companies like Trend Micro, public libraries, schools, the banking industry, the U.S. State Department and Department of Defense, the World Health Organization and the World Economic Forum. Mind you, this is not a comprehensive list of links. It’s merely a sampling of entities to give you an idea of the breadth of connections, which when taken together explain how certain views — such as information about COVID-19 and vaccines — can be so effectively suppressed and erased from public discourse. To understand the power that PR companies such as Publicis wield, you also need to realize that PR has, by and large, replaced the free press. This has had a devastating effect, and I don’t think I’m overstating the matter when I say that it is PR masquerading as news that gave birth to the whole “fake news” phenomenon. However, in true Orwellian double-speak, these same fake PR-news pushers claim everyone else is peddling fake news. They want us to believe their PR is the truth, even though its typically devoid of data and flies in the face of verifiable facts. China’s Hidden InfluenceIn addition to fact checkers doing the bidding of Big Pharma and the technocratic elite, the public is also being deceived and manipulated by Chinese propaganda. In a December 20, 2021, New York Times article,19 Muyi Xiao, Paul Mozur and Gray Beltran details how China manipulates Facebook and Twitter to further its own authoritarian aspirations. According to Xiao, Mozur and Beltran, China’s government has “unleashed a global online campaign” to bolster its image and suppress accusations of human rights abuses. To that end, it hires companies to flood social media with fake accounts that are then used to advance China’s agenda worldwide. This includes creating content on demand, identifying and tracking critics that live outside of China, running bot networks to flood social media with tailored propaganda messages to steer discussion and more — strategies referred to as “public opinion management.” Disturbingly, while the Chinese government has long hunted down dissenting voices inside the country and forced them to recant, they’re now hunting Chinese dissenters worldwide. Any user who has connections to the mainland can find themselves in a situation where their family members in China are detained or threatened until or unless they delete the offending post or account. People of Chinese descent who live in other countries may also be detained by police if they return to mainland China, based on the opinions they’ve shared online. China Aims for More Sophisticated PropagandaAccording to the documents the trio obtained, the Chinese police are also working on more sophisticated propaganda maneuvers. For example, rather than relying on bot farms and fake troll profiles to create an appearance of public opinion, they’re looking to grow popular accounts that have an organic following, so that these accounts can later be taken over by government to push whatever propaganda is desired at that time. These are known as “profiles for hire.” As explained in the article, “The deeper engagement lends the fake personas credibility at a time when social media companies are increasingly taking down accounts that seem inauthentic or coordinated.” Facebook Itself Is an Opinion Management ToolOf course, Facebook and Twitter lend themselves to this kind of manipulation because they are essentially “public opinion management” tools. Even if they didn’t start out that way (and that’s a big if), they’ve certainly grown into it. There can be no denying that both platforms have been instrumental in censoring information about COVID-19 on behalf of the drug industry and global technocracy. As reported by The National Pulse,20 email correspondence between Dr. Anthony Fauci and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg reveals Zuckerberg even agreed to send Fauci reports on Facebook users’ sentiments to “facilitate decisions” about COVID-19 lockdowns. An April 8, 2020, email from Zuckerberg reads in part:21
As noted by The National Pulse, this is a “stark example” of how Big Tech corporations and government agencies collude and use user data to restrict our freedoms and liberties.22 Government Colludes With Big Tech to Circumvent ConstitutionIndeed, aside from this, we’ve also had clear examples of politicians colluding with Big Tech to censor on behalf of the government, in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution. This is why I sued U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren. In early September 2021, Warren sent a letter23 to Andy Jassy, chief executive officer of Amazon.com, demanding an “immediate review” of Amazon’s algorithms to weed out books peddling “COVID misinformation.”24,25,26 Warren specifically singled out my book, “The Truth About COVID-19,” co-written with Ronnie Cummins, founder and director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), as a prime example of “highly-ranked and favorably-tagged books based on falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines and cures” that she wanted banned. As a government official, it is illegal for her to violate the U.S. Constitution, and pressuring private businesses to do it for her is not a legal workaround. Since she willfully ignored the law, Cummins and I, along with our publisher, Chelsea Green Publishing, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who wrote our foreword, sued Warren,27 both in her official and personal capacities, for violating our First Amendment rights. The federal lawsuit, in which Warren is listed as the sole defendant, was filed November 8, 2021, in the state of Washington. ‘Fact Checks’ Are Brainwashing AttemptsIs there a fact checking organization you can rely on? The simple and direct answer is no. They all exist for a single purpose — to metaphorically “shout over” anyone whose views differ from the officially sanctioned narrative on a given topic and suppress the truth that interferes with the implementation of their agenda. It’s like two people trying to have a conversation about something while a third person keeps interjecting, screaming at the top of their lungs “THINK THIS! SAY THIS!” Who needs that? They’re useless. By reading them and giving them any credence, all you’re doing is filling your head with propaganda and increasing your likelihood of falling into the pervasive mass delusional psychosis we’re seeing all around us. It’s just one big brainwashing attempt. With any amount of luck, Facebook’s court admission that fact checks are mere opinion pieces will end up triggering the fact blockers’ demise. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/01/01/fact-checkers-misinformation.aspx This article was previously published October 10, 2020, and has been updated with new information. Have you ever heard of breadfruit? It's a rather strange name for a piece of fruit that sounds like it may smell or taste like bread. Instead, breadfruit is grown in tropical regions of the world and, like jackfruit, is a member of the mulberry family.1 Breadfruit trees were originally found in Polynesia. People use the fruit to bake, broil or fry the produce, similar to the way that potatoes are used. Others dry the flesh and grind it into flour to make bread and crusts. Polynesians brought the trees to Hawaii, when anthropologists believe it was colonized 1,000 years before Columbus landed in the Western world. By the time European explorers came to the Western world in the late 1700s, the Polynesian settlers had established an agricultural system that supported hundreds of thousands of people. More About BreadfruitA breadfruit tree thrives in a Caribbean or tropical climate and can grow as tall as 85 feet, producing up to 200 fruits per year. The fruit is round, oval or oblong and can grow as big, or bigger than a basketball. The outer skin is neon green and covered in bumps, which hides the firm flesh people cook like potatoes or plantains.2,3 A single breadfruit yields enough fruit to feed a family of four. When the fruit is ripe, the interior is creamy white or yellow and soft. While it is a fruit, it's treated and cooked more like a vegetable. The texture and taste resemble a potato, a grainy piece of bread or an artichoke heart, depending on the ripeness of the fruit and how it's prepared. Because the taste is bland, it lends itself to culinary creativity. As breadfruit ripens, it becomes sweeter, but it never approaches the sweetness of a papaya or mango. The British are credited with spreading it outside Polynesia. Captain James Cook and botanist Sir Joseph Banks discovered breadfruit in Tahiti and believed it could be the answer to Britain's food challenges of the era. The first time the trees were exported to the West Indies, the expedition was led by Lieutenant William Bligh from the infamous HMS Bounty. Enroute to the West Indies from Tahiti, the lieutenant and members of the crew were cast into a small boat and all breadfruit tree plants were thrown overboard. After returning to England, Lieutenant Bligh was promoted to Captain and led another expedition to Tahiti in 1791, during which he successfully brought breadfruit plants to the Caribbean and Jamaica. Although the plants thrived, the people didn't enjoy the food and ate it only when they had to. Currently, breadfruit trees are grown in more tropical areas in Africa, Australia, southeast Asia and South America. Trees can also be found in the U.S. in Hawaii and South Florida. The fruit, which is packed with nutrients, is a staple in Hawaii. The flesh of breadfruit is high in antioxidants, calcium, carotenoids and fiber. It also contains copper, niacin, magnesium, phosphorus and protein. Interestingly, although it's a fruit, one cup provides 5% of the RDA for protein, 14% of magnesium and 31% of potassium.4,5 Could Breadfruit Be the Next Superfood?Although it has been a traditional staple for centuries, there has been a distinct lack of scientific evidence demonstrating the health impacts of breadfruit. In a recent study from the University of British Columbia, scientists analyzed flour made from breadfruit.6,7 The objectives were to identify any health problems associated with breadfruit flour in consideration of it as a sustainable source of nutrition and to establish it as a functional food. In the lab, using an enzyme digestion model, they found the protein in breadfruit was easier to digest than protein found in wheat. The digested flour was tested for cytotoxicity by applying it to caco-2 cells. These cell lines are used to analyze drug permeability and they have been used for the past two decades "as a model of the intestinal barrier," according to researchers from Italy.8,9 The researchers found no difference between wheat and breadfruit in terms of cytokines and immune factors. When breadfruit-based food was substituted for wheat in a diet for mice, they found there was no sign of illness, death or malnutrition related to the change. Major bacteria and histology of the ileum were similar between the mice fed with breadfruit and those fed with wheat products. The researchers concluded: "No negative health outcomes were observed in studies with in vitro or in vivo models and breadfruit flour is a healthy alternative to other starches for modern foods."10 The combination of scientific evidence and knowledge that the breadfruit tree is high-producing and easily grown may provide health benefits and address food shortages around the world. Susan Murch, Ph.D., is a chemistry professor and one of the researchers on the study. She said:11
Doctoral student Ying Liu shared:12
The Impact Grains Have on HealthThe potential exists to substitute wheat flour for breadfruit flour in baked breads and crusts. While breadfruit flour is gluten-free, wheat products are not. In years past, only people with wheat allergies and celiac disease sought out gluten-free products. After adopting a diet free of gluten products, they often reported a resurgence of good health.13 Gluten is a protein found in wheat and cereal grains.14 When these proteins are in contact with water, they form an elastic bond that gives bread the ability to hold its shape. Gluten can also be found in barley, oats, rye and spelt and may hide in processed foods under a variety of names, including malts or natural flavoring.15 Some people react negatively to just a small amount of gluten because their body identifies it as a toxin. When left unchecked, excessive gluten consumption can predispose a person to nutrient deficiencies along with neurological and psychological conditions. It can have a potentially negative effect on the joints, liver, nervous system and skin.16 In addition, professionals at the Celiac Disease Foundation believe that undiagnosed celiac disease may contribute to the development of "autoimmune disorders like Type 1 diabetes and multiple sclerosis (MS), dermatitis herpetiformis (an itchy skin rash), anemia, osteoporosis, infertility and miscarriage … epilepsy and migraines, short stature and intestinal cancers."17 As you might imagine, a gluten intolerance can trigger signs of gastrointestinal distress, including bloating, diarrhea and belly pain. Beyond this, you might also experience anxiety, confusion, headache, nausea or joint and muscle pain. Although gluten-free food options may look like they help people who have a wheat allergy or celiac disease, it's prudent to approach these cautiously. I believe most processed, packaged gluten-free foods are glorified junk foods because they are some of the most ultraprocessed foods in the store. They lack fiber, are often loaded with toxic amounts of sugar and salt and include unhealthy fats in their list of ingredients.18 Whether you have a sensitivity to gluten or not, nearly everyone can benefit from eating fewer grains, which are high in net carbs. The potential for using breadfruit flour and baked goods may help reduce your exposure to gluten and the glycemic index of the foods you eat. Your Body Needs FiberBreadfruit is high in fiber, which is far more important than science had thought before. In fact, just 1 cup contains 43% of all the fiber you need for the day.19 A low fiber diet can alter your gut flora. In one study using an animal model, a low fiber diet altered the gut flora, which was also passed on to the offspring.20 In some cases, even after the mice were fed high-fiber meals, the gut was unable to repopulate with certain bacteria that had been severely diminished. Past studies have confirmed that the human microbiome has changed over the course of history, as has the human diet.21 In general, researchers have found that people who eat more plant-based foods have a more diverse gut microbiome. The benefits of eating enough fiber include preventing leaky gut syndrome that also triggers anxiety, joint pain, fatigue and bloating.22 Food Integrity Now explains leaky gut syndrome this way:23
Fiber has other health benefits as well. For example, researchers have found an inverse relationship between fiber and heart attack, showing those eating a high fiber diet have a 40% lower risk of heart disease.24 As I've written before, fiber can delay brain inflammation and aging that negatively influence your function. In particular, low fiber diets can be harmful to older adults, as they have a lower ability to produce butyrate, a nutrient that helps delay brain aging. Sustainable Crop May Impact Global HealthBreadfruit is a sustainable, high production crop that has a low glycemic index and may provide one answer to the growing problem of food shortages around the world. It's also easy to grow in the right climate. With winter fast approaching in the Northern Hemisphere, it might be time to think about dramatically reducing your food bill by growing an indoor organic garden. As the cost of organic produce rises due to demand and problems related to the pandemic, many have taken to starting their own backyard gardens and container gardens. If you thought fall was the time to hang up your gardening gloves, you may want to reconsider since you can harvest spinach, beets and carrots well into February. Many herbs and vegetables can be grown indoors with adequate lighting. You'll enjoy the benefits of winter gardening, which include savings on your grocery bill and the assurance that the produce you're harvesting is from organically grown, non-GMO seed. Before diving in, take time to plan your garden. Some plants do well with an extended growing season, while others are planted in the fall to overwinter for an early spring harvest. Still others do best in container gardens indoors. Gardening is good for your health in other ways, as it's a simple way to reduce stress and get a little exercise, something each of us needs. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/12/31/breadfruit-healthy-alternative-to-flour.aspx According to Brook Jackson, a whistleblower who worked on Pfizer’s Phase 3 COVID jab trial in the fall of 2020, data were falsified, patients were unblinded, the company hired poorly trained people to administer the injections, and follow-up on reported side effects was significantly delayed. Her testimony was published November 2, 2021, in The British Medical Journal by investigative journalist Paul Thacker, who noted that:1
December 2, 2021, The Last American Vagabond interviewed Jackson (video above2) about what she saw while working on Pfizer’s trial. Jackson is a trained clinical trial auditor with more than 15 years’ experience in clinical research coordination and management. She had previously held a director of operations position before she was hired in early September 2020 by the Ventavia Research Group, a research organization charged with testing Pfizer’s COVID jab at several sites in Texas. Right from the start, Jackson was struck by the chaotic nature of the operation. She also felt the informed consent was inadequate, considering the novel nature of the mRNA gene transfer technology. On top of that, she found the crash cart contained expired medications, and some important emergency medications — were a participant to suffer an acute adverse event — were missing entirely. Data Forgery Among the Many Problems IdentifiedJackson claims she repeatedly informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues. When she realized her concerns were ignored, she finally filed a complaint with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. In her complaint to the FDA, Jackson listed a dozen incidents of concern, including the following:
Later that same day, Jackson was fired. According to her separation letter, management decided she was “not a good fit” for the company. According to Jackson, this was the first time she’d ever been fired in her 20-year career as a clinical research coordinator. As noted by Thacker:3
Jackson’s disclosures were recently featured in the Italian documentary, “Pfizergate.”4,5 The documentation she gathered are available for download on the COVID Vaccine Reaction’s website.6 Ventavia, Pfizer and FDA Ignore AccusationsStrangely enough, the extent of Ventavia’s effort to defend itself has been to deny that Jackson ever worked on the Pfizer trial — a charge that is verifiably false, as she has documentation proving she was assigned to work on the trial.7 Pfizer has also remained mum on the issue. The company did not reply to any of The BMJ’s questions, one of which was whether Ventavia’s data were incorporated into Pfizer’s safety and efficacy analyses. We do know, however, that none of the problems Jackson raised in her complaint to the FDA were noted or addressed in Pfizer’s briefing document, submitted to the FDA’s advisory committee meeting December 20, 2020, when its emergency use authorization application was reviewed. The FDA went ahead and gave the Pfizer jab emergency use authorization the very next day, despite being in receipt of Jackson’s complaint, which ought to have put the brakes on the FDA’s authorization. At bare minimum, they should have investigated the matter before proceeding. The BMJ has tried to get answers from the FDA as to why it has not inspected any of Ventavia’s trial sites in the wake of Jackson’s accusations, and whether other complaints about the trial have been received. An FDA spokesperson told The BMJ the agency cannot comment as it is “an ongoing matter,” whatever that means. The FDA did say, though, that it has “full confidence in the data that were used to support the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine authorization and the Comirnaty approval.” Considering they’ve not investigated Jackson’s complaints, their vote of confidence doesn’t strike me as particularly convincing. Other Ventavia Witnesses Speak OutJackson wasn’t the only employee to get sacked from Ventavia after raising concerns about the integrity of the Pfizer trial. According to Thacker, several other Ventavia employees either left or were fired. Among them is a Ventavia official who had participated in the late September meeting cited above. Thacker writes:8
According to these whistleblowers, problems persisted after Jackson’s firing. One of them claims there were, on several occasions, not enough staff to test trial participants who reported COVID-like symptoms. Laboratory confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 was the primary endpoint of the trial, so this was a crucial task. An FDA review memorandum from August 2021 states that 477 trial participants with suspected COVID-19 were not tested for infection. “I don’t think it was good clean data,” the former Ventavia employee told Thacker. “It’s a crazy mess.” Such statements clearly fly in the face of statements made by world leaders, health authorities and the mainstream media. Most, like federal health minister for Australia, Greg Hunt, have claimed the COVID shots have undergone “rigorous, independent testing” to ensure they’re “safe, effective and manufactured to a high standard.”9 Nothing we know so far supports such a conclusion. The testing has been far from rigorous and has not been independently verified. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) data show they’re shockingly far from safe; real-world data show effectiveness wanes within a handful of months while leaving you more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 variants and other infections; and manufacturing standards have also been shown lacking, as a variety of foreign contaminants have been found in the vials.10 Science Depends on Rigorous Data CollectionThe video above is a short extract from a November 2, 2021, meeting organized by Sen. Ron Johnson, during which Peter Doshi, Ph.D., associate editor of The BMJ, reviewed some of the many concerns experts have about the integrity of the COVID jab data. He pointed out that Pfizer’s raw trial data will not be made available until May 2025. So far, Pfizer has refused to release any of its raw data to independent investigators and, without that, there’s no possible way to confirm that what Pfizer is claiming is actually true and correct. In other words, we’re expected to simply take the word of a company that has earned a top spot on the list of white collar criminals; a company that in 2009 was fined a record-breaking $2.3 billion in fines for fraudulent marketing and health care fraud.11 Press releases are not science. They’re marketing. Without the raw data, we have no science upon which to base our decisions about the COVID kill shot. Doshi stressed how utterly unscientific a process we’re now following. He also points out that doctors have an ethical duty to not recommend a treatment for which they have no data. Quoting from a 2020 article he co-wrote:12
“The point I am trying to make is very simple,” Doshi said. “The data from COVID vaccines are not available and won’t be available for years. Yet, we are not just ‘asking’ but ‘mandating’ millions of people to take these vaccines … Without data, it’s not science.” FDA Wants 75 Years to Release Pfizer Trial DataIn September 2021, a group called Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT) filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the FDA to obtain the documentation used to approve Comirnaty, including safety and effectiveness data, adverse reaction reports and lists of active and inactive ingredients. In their FOIA application, the PHMPT asked the agency to expedite release of the documents — a reasonable request, considering we have no raw data and the shots are being pushed on children as young as 5. When, after a month, the FDA still had not responded to the FOIA request, the PHMPT sued.13 The FDA initially asked the judge to allow them to delay the full release of all documents — a total of 329,000 pages — until 2076, doling out just 500 pages per month. The judge agreed. A short while later, the FDA claimed it found another 59,000 pages, which would necessitate tacking on another 20 years.14 The full release, according to the FDA, can’t be completed until 2096, at which time most of us will be dead and buried. As noted by Aaron Siri, the lawyer working on the case on behalf of the PHMPT:15
All of that said, the initial release of some 92 pages are so damning, we won’t need hundreds of thousands of pages to make an assessment as to the safety of these shots. In fact, the data are so incredibly bad, it raises serious questions about how the FDA could possibly conclude that the Pfizer shot is safe enough to use, especially on pregnant women and children. Shocking Revelations in First Batch of FOIA DocsIn mid-November 2021, two months after the lawsuit against it was filed, the FDA released the first batch of 91 pages,16,17 which reveal the FDA has been aware of shocking safety issues since April 30, 2021. Cumulatively, through February 28, 2021, Pfizer received 42,086 adverse event reports, including 1,223 deaths, primarily from the U.S., U.K., Italy, Germany, France and Portugal. Of those adverse events, 25,379 were medically confirmed. Below is a chart from one of the documents,18 showing a general overview of the reported outcomes. To have 1,223 fatalities and 42,086 reports of injury in the first three months is a significant safety signal, especially when you consider that the 1976 swine flu vaccine was pulled after only 25 deaths. In the video above, Melanie Risdon with the Western Standard interviews Dr. Daniel Nagase, a doctor in Alberta, Canada, who was stripped of his Alberta medical license after successfully treating COVID-19 patients with ivermectin. Nagase reviews other equally devastating data in these documents. He points out that of the 42,086 patients who were injured at some point during those first three months, 520 of them were diagnosed with a long-term disability or condition as a result. Not recovered at the time of the report were 11,361. That means 27% of those injured had not recovered from their adverse event. When you add it all together: the 1,223 deaths, the 520 long-term disabilities and the 11,361 who had not recovered from their injury, you end up with just over 31%. In other words, nearly 1 in 3 people who got the shot and suffered an adverse effect ended up dead, permanently disabled or with long-term unresolved injury. “This should be front-page news,” Nagase says. How can the FDA look at this and conclude that the shot is safe? Clearly, when people get injured by this shot, they’re often injured very badly. Pfizer Data Prove Shot Is Unsafe for Pregnant WomenOn page 12 of the “Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports Received Through 28-Feb-2021” document,19 you find data on pregnant and lactating women. Here too, the results are hair-raising and should have triggered a complete stop to the injection campaign of pregnant and nursing women. Disturbingly, they did not collect comprehensive data on these women, such as which trimester they were in when they received the shots. This again points to serious problems with Pfizer’s trial data collection. How do you include pregnant women in a trial and don’t collect basic information such as how many weeks pregnant they are? On page 12 we find that out of 124 adverse event cases involving a pregnant woman, only 49 were non-serious and 75 were serious. So, out of the 274 pregnant mothers who reported an adverse event, 27% suffered a SERIOUS adverse event, such as a miscarriage or stillbirth. “That’s an incredible danger!” Nagase says and, again, the FDA has been aware of this danger since April 30, 2021. The data also show there’s danger for breastfeeding mothers. Of the 133 nursing mothers who filed a report, 17 of the breastfed babies — 13% — suffered an adverse event through this secondary exposure (breastmilk), a finding that Nagase calls “absolutely stupendous.”
Children at Risk for Serious Long-Term InjuryPfizer also received 34 adverse event reports involving children under the age of 12, the youngest being 2 months old. Of those, 24 were categorized as “serious” and only 10 were “non-serious.” So, of the children who were injured, 70.6% suffered SERIOUS injury. How can our health agencies approve this COVID shot for children under the age of 12 when a vast majority of injuries, when they occur, are serious ones? What’s more, 13 of the children who were seriously injured remained unresolved as of February 28, 2021. According to Nagase, based on these documents alone, Pfizer’s COVID shot should have been permanently pulled from the market. The reason it wasn’t, he believes, is because the medical and regulatory systems have both been corrupted and usurped by the drug industry. They want to make money off these shots, and our health authorities are covering up proven harms in order to facilitate profitmaking. At the end of the day, only you can decide what’s in your best interest. But please, do review the actual science before you make your decision and don’t blindly trust corporate press releases and unsupported statements of safety. Pfizer’s own data prove it’s not safe by any reasonable definition of the word, and that’s on top of the testimony of Jackson and others who have seen just how shoddy the data gathering is. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/12/31/pfizer-whistleblower-exposes-vaccine-data-cover-up.aspx By Dr. Mercola Your thyroid gland, located in the front of your neck, influences almost every cell in your body. Thyroid hormones regulate your metabolism, and are required for growth and development in children and nearly every physiological process in your body. When your thyroid levels are unbalanced, it can spell trouble for your overall health and wellness. Evidence suggests nearly 60 percent of people with suboptimal thyroid function are unaware of their condition.1 While prevalent, it is often easily treatable and may reverse symptoms of other health conditions. Poor thyroid function is linked to health conditions such as fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, eczema, gum disease and autoimmune disorders. Symptoms of low function and the health conditions affected by low levels are varied, as the hormone is used throughout your body. Women are five to eight times more likely than men to have low thyroid function and 1 in 8 women will develop a thyroid disorder in her lifetime.2 Understanding the basics of how your thyroid functions and what may cause a dysfunction is important to your overall health. Thyroid FunctionYour thyroid gland is shaped like a butterfly on your neck just under your voice box and secretes four hormones: T1, T2, T3 and T4. The number indicates the number of molecules of iodide attached to the hormone. These hormones interact with other hormones, such as insulin, cortisol and sex hormones. Your hypothalamus secretes thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) that triggers the pituitary gland to release thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) that then causes your thyroid to release T4. Almost 90 percent of your thyroid hormone is released in an inactive form of T4. Your liver then converts T4 to T3 with the help of an enzyme. T2 is currently the least understood form of thyroid hormone and is the subject of a number of ongoing studies. When everything is working properly, your body makes enough T4 that is converted to T3 to control the metabolism of every cell in your body. T3 is critical in the communication of messages to your DNA to increase your metabolism by burning fat. In this way, it helps keep you lean. Nutritional imbalances, toxic exposures, allergens, infections and stress can disrupt this hormonal balance, leading to a series of health complications including hypothyroidism, hyperthyroidism and thyroid cancer. Thyroid Cancer Acts Differently Than Other CancersYou may have been swayed by advertisements from an industry-funded foundation3 to be screened for thyroid cancer, but the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has added this screening process to their "don't-do-it category" in recommendations published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.4 The task force believes the consequences of thyroid cancer screening far outweigh the benefits. Although most cancer screenings help detect early disease and increase the potential for successful treatment, in this case early screening may actually backfire. In many cases thyroid cancer screening will yield a false positive result, finding cancers that would never grow into life-threatening tumors.5 However, once discovered, most physicians feel obligated to recommend treatment, which often includes removal of the thyroid gland, and which may have significant side effects. Surgeons may accidently sever nerves that control speech and swallowing, or remove the parathyroid gland that regulates calcium levels in your body. In an accompanying editorial, Dr. H. Gilbert Welch, of Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, discussed problems with overdiagnosis of thyroid cancer. Data from the SEER program demonstrated the incidence of thyroid cancer had remained relatively stable until 1990, after which it tripled.6 However, more interesting is that despite this rapid increase, mortality from thyroid cancer has remained stable, an indication cancers are identified and treated that don't require treatment. Welch said:7
Do You Have Underactive Thyroid Function?In this informative video, Dr. Jonathan Wright discusses the measurement of thyroid function and how it should be compared against symptoms you may be experiencing. This was demonstrated in a recent European study in which researchers compared results of treatment against lab testing and symptoms.8 The authors were interested in the clinical effectiveness of treatment with the drug levothyroxine (Synthroid) after patients were diagnosed with low thyroid function. The number of people diagnosed in the U.S. has risen to the point levothyroxine is the most prescribed medication, outdistancing statins in 2015.9 A study from Johns Hopkins found nearly 15 percent of all older Americans were taking levothyroxine.10 However, as popular as this medication appears to be, the European study found the drug had no significant effect on older Europeans with mild symptoms of hypothyroidism.11 Physicians often order a TSH test as part of a routine panel of blood tests, prescribing drugs when the numbers are slightly elevated, although the patient may not complain of significant symptoms. The study participants had higher than normal TSH level at least twice and had complaints of being tired. The researchers assessed cognitive speed, hand strength, weight and blood pressure prior to splitting the group, giving half levothyroxine and half a placebo. After one year of intervention, the researchers found TSH levels returned to normal in the group taking the drugs, but the participants' complaints did not improve over the year in either group. Flame-Retardant Chemicals Affect Thyroid FunctionThe researchers attributed the changes in TSH levels to age in the population studied, as the average participant was 74 years. However, other research has demonstrated environmental toxins may be responsible for a change in your thyroid function, and even for an increasing number of papillary thyroid cancer.12 Lead researcher Dr. Julie Ann Sosa, professor of surgery and medicine at Duke University School of Medicine, said, "Recent studies suggest that environmental factors may, in part, be responsible for this increase." The research focused on polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), a class of flame-retardant chemicals. Previous animal studies had demonstrated a link between PBDEs and thyroid function, so Sosa and her colleagues collected dust samples from the homes of 140 participants already diagnosed with papillary thyroid cancer who had lived in their home an average of 10 years. The researchers used blood samples to assess exposure to PBDEs and found those living in homes with high levels of BDE-209 were twice as likely to have thyroid cancer. Those with high levels of TCEP dust were four times more likely to have large aggressive tumors. Water Contamination May Trigger Thyroid DiseaseNearly 100 percent of people living in the U.S. have perchlorate in their body, but according to scientists, Arizona is one of the six most perchlorate-polluted states.13 As perchlorate remains stable in water, it may easily invade drinking water supplies. The chemical is known to disrupt health by preventing iodide uptake at the thyroid gland. Your thyroid gland requires iodide in order to produce thyroid hormone.14 Thus if the perchlorate prevents iodide uptake, it reduces the amount of thyroid hormones in your body. Perchlorate may also slow brain development in infants. C. Loren Buck, Ph.D., of Northern Arizona University,15 will lead a two-year study to evaluate the effects of the chemical on citizens in Yuma, Arizona. The process for the biomolecular substitution of perchlorate for iodide is called the Finkelstein Reaction.16 This reaction is not limited to perchlorate in the thyroid gland, but also occurs with other additives found in city water, namely fluoride.17,18 A British study found a strong correlation between areas where fluoride content was highest with higher risk of developing underactive thyroid function. In fact, in areas where the levels of fluoride exceeded 0.3 milligrams per liter (mg/L) the risk of low thyroid function rose by 30 percent.19 In the U.S., the minimum standards for drinking water fluoridation are set at 0.7 mg/L by the U.S. Health and Human Services.20 This means the risk of low thyroid function as a result of poor iodide uptake may be even higher in Americans than those found in the British study, based on higher levels of fluoridation. Natural Strategies to Support Your Thyroid FunctionA diagnosis of suboptimal thyroid function is best made with a combination of blood testing and screening for clinical symptoms. Symptoms of low thyroid function may include:
There are several natural strategies you may consider to help support your thyroid function and improve your health. These include:
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/05/31/screening-thyroid-drugs-often-fail-to-relieve-symptoms.aspx By Dr. Mercola
How Much Iodine Do You Need for Thyroid Health?
Iodine Helps Protect Breast Health Too...
Good Sources of Iodine
Dr. Wright's Thyroid Program
Complicating Matters: Autoimmune Thyroid
The Role of Heavy Metal Toxicity
Eliminating Heavy Metals Requires Special Care
Recommended Types of Thyroid Medications
Treating Overactive Thyroid
Take Control of Your Thyroid Health
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/06/15/hypothyroid-hyperthyroid-disease.aspx
Dr. John Lowe is a skilled clinician, recognized as one of the leading experts on treating thyroid disease with natural medicine. In this interview, he discusses hypothyroidism and the lesser known thyroid hormone resistance, and how thyroid disease is connected to fibromyalgia.
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/02/26/dr-john-lowe-on-thyroid-disease-part-1.aspx A study links thyroid disease with human exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). PFOA is a persistent organic chemical used in industrial and consumer goods including most nonstick cookware and stain- and water-resistant coatings for carpets and fabrics. The study included nearly 4000 adults aged 20 and older whose blood serum was sampled between 1999 and 2006 for PFOA. The researchers found that the individuals with the highest PFOA concentrations were more than twice as likely to report current thyroid disease. Previous animal studies carried out by other scientists have shown that the compounds can affect the function of the mammalian thyroid hormone system. This system is essential for maintaining heart rate, regulating body temperature and supporting many other body functions, including metabolism, reproduction, digestion and mental health. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/02/13/cookware-chemical-linked-to-thyroid-disease.aspx
Are You Experiencing Menopause … or "Thyropause"?
Connecting the Dots
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/12/15/the-menopause-thyroid-solution.aspx By Dr. Mercola
Iodine is Key for Thyroid Health
Why are Iodine Levels Dropping?
Crying Wolff
The Toxic Halides -- Iodine's Fiercest Competitors
Bromides
Great Resource for Learning More
Getting Your Iodine Levels Up
Tips for Optimizing Thyroid Function
The Future of Natural Thyroid Drugs
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/10/20/signs-symptoms-and-solutions-for-poor-thyroid-function.aspx |
Nia Pure NatureThe Provider of premium Quality Health Products To Live Better Lives Archives
March 2022
Categories |