HealthBeat News

Author: Wellness Club

  • Why that Little Pink Ribbon Has Me Seeing Red

    By Dr. Dana Myatt

     

    October is “Breast Cancer Awareness Month,” and the little pink ribbons are as plentiful as Halloween candy.

    Pink is everywhere – on kitchen appliances, on NFL football players, even pink beer…

    Have you ever given money to breast cancer research or purchased a “little pink ribbon” to show your support and solidarity? If you have, I believe you’ve been duped by Big Pharma’s and Big Government’s bogus “research projects,” and thrown good money toward a losing game.

    Before you shoot the messenger, let me explain why the “little pink ribbon” has me seeing red.

    Problems abound with breast cancer fund-raising and research:

    First, Money often doesn’t go to actual research.

     

    As much as 90% of revenues can be spent on “administrative” and “fundraising” costs. Depending on which charity your money goes to, the actual money generated for gifting can be less than 10%. That’s ugly.

    To find out which charities retain most of their revenues for genuine research contribution, check out your favorite charity at http://www.charitynavigator.org/

    For example, in past years we reported that the Coalition Against Breast Cancer had a very poor record and spent the majority of it’s income on “administrative costs.” In 2011 according to CharityNavigator.org the Coalition Against Breast Cancer was shut down for fraud:

      • New York’s Attorney General filed a lawsuit to shut down Coalition Against Breast Cancer, calling it a sham charity, for fraudulently raising millions of dollars under the guise of fighting breast cancer, only to funnel the money to organization insiders and fundraisers.
      • In August 2011, The Wall Street Journal reported that two of the people behind this organization plead guilty to grand larceny, scheming to defraud and falsifying business records. They still face a civil lawsuit.

    The American Breast Cancer Foundation spends 76% of it’s income on administrative and fund-raising costs

    The United Breast Cancer Foundation spends 71% of revenues on admin and fundraising

    Even the mighty Komen Foundation has been hit with controversy, and has been accused of overstating the supposed benefits of mammograms while downplaying the risks. Interestingly, General Electric, one of the world’s largest manufacturers of mammography machines, is a major corporate donor to the Komen Foundation…

    And “Think Before You Pink,” a service of Breast Cancer Action, offers some additional tips and insider information about donating to breast cancer research:

    When you “give to the cure,” you might want to verify where your money is going and how much of it is actually being spent on breast cancer research.

    Second, Money funds more conventional cancer research, but conventional research, diagnosis and treatments are not improving cancer mortality rates significantly.

     

    Conventional breast cancer treatments don’t work. At least not very well. Cancer research organizations that put money into Big Pharma are betting on the wrong horse.

    Despite press releases and proclamations which tell us that we’re “winning the war on breast cancer” (thanks, of course, to all of our collective millions of giving), the truth is that conventional cancer diagnosis and treatment have gotten us next to nowhere.

    According to statistics published by the National Cancer Institute, the breast cancer rate has declined 1.7% between 1998 and 2007. That, they say, is a “significant” change.(1)

    Of course, we are led to believe that this 1.7% drop is due to improvements in diagnosis (mammograms) and conventional treatment. But the statistics show otherwise.

    Instead, the single biggest drop in breast cancer rates of all time occurred in 2002-2003 when women flocked away from conventional hormone replacement therapy (HRT) after news “broke” that it increased breast cancer risk. According to the National Cancer Institute, breast cancer rates fell 6.7% — a heck of a lot bigger drop than the 1.7% being touted – when over 40 million women stopped taking conventional hormone prescriptions. (2) Actually, the association between HRT and breast cancer was known as early as the 1960′s. (3) For shame.

    In Canada, a 9.6% drop in breast cancer rates was noted when hormone replacement therapy use declined.(4)

    Whether it be a 6.7% or a 9.6% drop, that’s a much bigger improvement that our 1.7% “statistically significant” decrease claimed in the US as a result of millions of dollars of mammogram screenings and expensive chemotherapy.

    The single biggest drop we’ve seen in recent years in breast cancer happened when women flocked away from conventional hormone therapy in droves. In other words, the best thing that conventional medicine has done to stem the tide of breast cancer is to have women “just say no” to a breast-cancer-causing conventional hormone treatment!

    So, the “significant” 1.7% decrease in breast cancer rates in over a decade includes the 6.7% drop in breast cancer due to women discontinuing conventional hormone replacement therapy. Instead of a new drug or surgical treatment being responsible for this modest decline in breast cancer rates, the decline is actually due to women avoiding a dangerous conventional drug.

    This also begs the question — if we are to believe that a 1.7% drop in cancer incidence is “significant,” how come the 2.7 increase between 1995-1998 was not also “significant”? And how come the 6.7% drop when millions of women stopped conventional HRT isn’t WAY significant? (1) Are we perhaps over-selling the “winning the war” statistics in order to give people a warm fuzzy and encourage them to keep contributing?

    Much more is known about how to prevent cancer than how to cure it.

    Of the millions of dollars raised and donated to conventional cancer research, how come none of this money — nay, not even a little bit of it — is spent educating women on prevention? After all, an ounce of prevention really IS worth a pound of cure.

    Forget the measly 1.7% decline in breast cancer rates over the past 9 years, let’s talk about what is known about prevention. The preventive aspects of breast cancer, and how much the risks can be lowered, make the “statistically significant 1.7%” look even more ridiculous. Consider the truly huge improvements in breast cancer rates that could be achieved with known preventive measures.

    Overweight/obesity. Fat cells manufacture estrogen. We already know about the estrogen/breast cancer connection. The fatter a woman, the more breast cancer risk, at least for post-menopausal females. How big is this risk?

    Women who gain 55 pounds or more after age 18 have a 50% greater risk of breast cancer compared with those who maintained their weight. A gain of 22 pounds or more after menopause was associated with an increased risk of 18%, whereas losing at least 22 pounds after menopause and maintaining the weight loss was associated with 57% lower breast cancer risk. In case you missed this, let me repeat, a whopping FIFTY-SEVEN PERCENT DECREASED RISK by losing 22 pounds. (5)

    This is incredible news. Instead of putting pink ribbons on buckets of fast-food chicken, why aren’t these “concerned” cancer organizations telling women to back away from the fried chicken, shed a few pounds and drop their risk of breast cancer like a rock?

    Exercise. Invasive, estrogen-receptor negative cancers (less common, more deadly) can be reduced 55 percent by long-term, strenuous physical activity or 47% by long-term moderate physical activity. This amounts to 5 hours of exercise per week. (6) Let’s see…. a 47% drop compared to a 1.7% drop? “Long-term means you start exercising when you are a young woman and continue weekly exercise throughout life. Shouldn’t some of the “little pink ribbon” money be spent educating young women about the profound reduction in cancer risk from a modest amount of exercise, instead of just selling annual mammogram screening?

    Even if you didn’t start exercising as a younger woman, it’s never too late to benefit. In one study from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) as little as 1.25 to 2.5 hours per week of brisk walking reduced a woman’s risk by 18%. (7) Let’s see… 18% vs. 1.7%… Did you hear any of this from the “little pink ribbon” sponsors?

    Alcohol contributes a small additional risk. Women who drink 2-5 drinks per day have 1 1/2 times the risk as non-drinkers. The effect is magnified in women who use conventional hormone replacement therapy. (8) This amounts to a small increase in risk, but remember — all the millions of dollars of “little pink ribbon” money have amounted to only a small decrease in risk.

    Why should you and I fund Big Pharma’s search for newer, deadlier, ineffective drugs that they are going to profit from? Fund your own darned drug studies I say …

    Alrighty, so you run your butt off in a “race for the cure,” to raise money to assist drug companies in researching more drugs. Some of these drugs cost upwards of $10,000/month to the patient (while costing the drug companies a pittance).

    And then YOU get breast cancer. Do you get a discount because you helped Big Pharma fund a drug that might increase your survival by maybe 8 weeks? NO. You, or more likely your insurer, will be paying full price for your treatment.

    Mike Adams sums this warped situation up succinctly:

    “For most diseases, the race for the cure is really just a way for drug companies to shift R&D costs to suckers. You fund the R&D, and then you get to pay full price for the drug they drummed up thanks to your generous donation. “ – Mike Adams

     

    Dr. Myatt’s Summary:

    Millions of dollars spent over the last 3 decades and what do we have? A mere 1.7% reduction in breast cancer mortality. And most if not ALL of this decrease is due to declining use of conventional hormone therapy.

    On the other hand, we already know simple ways to slash breast cancer risk by up to 50% and more.

    Until some of the “little pink ribbon” money goes toward public education about how to reduce risks, and some of the money goes to research non-toxic treatments, and until the “little pink ribbon” folks don’t whore their honor by allowing their icons on junk food and toxic perfumes, I’m keeping my money closer to home.

     

    References

    1.) Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Krapcho M, Neyman N, Aminou R, Waldron W, Ruhl J, Howlader N, Tatalovich Z, Cho H, Mariotto A, Eisner MP, Lewis DR, Cronin K, Chen HS, Feuer EJ, Stinchcomb DG, Edwards BK (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2007, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2007/, based on November 2009 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, 2010. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html#incidence-mortality

    The joinpoint trend in SEER cancer incidence with associated APC(%) for cancer of the breast between 1975-2007, All Races Female

    Trend Period

    -0.5 1975-1980

    3.9* 1980-1987

    -0.1 1987-1995

    2.7 1995-1998

    -1.7* 1998-2007

    If there is a negative sign before the number, the trend is a decrease; otherwise it is an increase. If there is an asterisk after the APC then the trend was significant, that is, one believes that it is beyond chance, i.e. 95% sure,

    2.) NCI website accessed 10-26-10:

    http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/2007/breastincidencedrop

    3.) McCarthy JD. Influence of two contraceptives on induction of mammary cancer in rats. Am J Surg. 1965 Nov;110(5):720-3.

    4.) Breast Cancer , accessed 10-26-10: http://www.breastcancer.org/symptoms/new_research/20100924.jsp

    5.) Morimoto LM, White E, Chen Z, et al. Obesity, body size, and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer: the Women’s Health Initiative (United States). Cancer Causes Control. Oct 2002;13(8):741-751.

    6.) NCI website accessed 10-26-10:

    Ref: http://www.cancer.gov/aboutnci/ncicancerbulletin/archive/2008/102108/page8

    7.) http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/BreastCancer/DetailedGuide/breast-cancer-risk-factors

    8.) http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/BreastCancer/DetailedGuide/breast-cancer-risk-factors

  • Senate Declares Naturopathic Medicine Week

    Senate Passes Naturopathic Medicine Week Resolution

    Washington, D.C., September 11 – The U.S. Senate last night unanimously passed a resolution designating October 7 – October 13 as Naturopathic Medicine Week.

    The resolution recognizes the value of naturopathic medicine in providing “safe, effective, and affordable health care…” and encourages Americans to learn about the role of naturopathic physicians in preventing chronic and debilitating conditions.

    According to Jud Richland, AANP’s CEO, “Passage of this resolution is an historic achievement for naturopathic medicine.  The Congress has now officially recognized the important role naturopathic medicine plays in effectively addressing the nation’s health care needs as well as in addressing the increasingly severe shortage of primary care physicians.”

    For the latest information about Naturopathic Medicine Week, visit the NMW page on AANP’s web site(http://naturopathic.org/naturopathicmedicineweek).

    The resolution (Sen. Res. 221) is available here.

  • Maxi Greens Are Back!

    Regular and new customers have been as frustrated as we were at the recent back-orders for Maxi Greens – Dr. Myatt’s premier Complete Green Food / Flavonoid / Phytonutrient-Rich Daily Herb Formula and companion to Maxi Multi – Dr. Myatt’s state-of-the-art formulation of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants and bioflavonoids with highly concentrated plant enzymes for optimal assimilation.

    Dr. Myatt is unyielding in her quality standards, and that delayed the manufacture of this latest batch of Maxi Greens – it seems that the very highest quality ingredients that this supplement contains are in short supply world-wide.

    The wait is over now, and Maxi Greens are once again in-stock and available. Dr. Myatt’s high standards of quality and potency have been met and we believe you’ll agree, it is worth the wait.

    To celebrate, for the month of October only, and on orders placed on-line only, enter the coupon code ” TopQuality ” (just exactly the way it is spelled here, but without the quotes) when you order Maxi Greens and you will receive 10% off each bottle of Maxi Greens that you order.

    So, what are you waiting for? Order now and save 10% on Maxi Greens – Dr. Myatt’s premier Complete Green Food / Flavonoid / Phytonutrient-Rich Daily Herb Formula.

    And Wellness Club Members – you’ll save 10% on Maxi Greens in addition to your usual 10% Wellness Club Member discount – so why wait. Order today and save some serious green on Maxi Greens!

     

    Click Here to get your Maxi Greens

     

    Not a Wellness Club Member? Click here to become a member and save 10% on every order – and get free shipping on orders over $150!

  • A Brief Comment On ObamaCare

    Whether you are for it or against it, you must admit that ObamaCare or the Affordable Care Act has ignited a political firestorm in America with politicians on all sides of the issue vying to outdo each other in their foolishness and dramatics.

    Such is the state of the political climate in our country today – with our elected “representatives” often forgetting the definition of that word and people of all political stripes forgetting that civilized “democracy” is not defined as “two wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for dinner.”

     

    With that in mind, we recently received this little look at how the various medical specialties are viewing ObamaCare:

     

    The American Medical Association has weighed in on Obama’s new health care package.

    The Allergists were in favor of scratching it, but the Dermatologists advised not to make any rash moves.

    The Gastroenterologists had sort of a gut feeling about it, but the Neurologists thought the Administration had a lot of nerve.

    Meanwhile, Obstetricians felt certain everyone was laboring under a misconception, while the Ophthalmologists considered the idea shortsighted.

    Pathologists yelled, “Over my dead body!” while the Pediatricians said, “Oh, grow up!”

    The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, while the Radiologists could see right through it.

    Surgeons decided to wash their hands of the whole thing and the Internists claimed it would indeed be a bitter pill to swallow.

    The Plastic Surgeons opined that this proposal would “put a whole new face on the matter”.

    The Podiatrists thought it was a step forward, but the Urologists were pissed off at the whole idea.

    Anesthesiologists thought the whole idea was a gas, and those lofty Cardiologists didn’t have the heart to say no.

    In the end, the Proctologists won out, leaving the entire decision up to the asses in Washington.

  • This Simple Activity Cuts Diabetes Risk 40%

    By Nurse Mark

     

    I remember my grandfathers – both of them. My maternal grandfather was a watchmaker. The old-fashioned kind of watchmaker, who could actually make a functioning watch out of brass and steel – not just a fumble-fingered clerk who might not be able to replace the battery in your new electronic watch without destroying it. In fact, Grandpa Pass wouldn’t have those newfangled quartz watches in his shop.

    Grandpa Pass didn’t own an automobile either. He really didn’t need to. His home was about a mile and a half from his watch and clock repair shop and he walked to work in the morning and back home again in the evening  – rain or shine, every day of his working life.

    And that working life spanned many decades. Grandpa Pass died in his 85th year having enjoyed good health right up to his final days.

    Did Grandpa Pass plan it that way? Was he some sort of a health nut or fitness buff? Hardly.

    Grandpa Pass worked at a very sedentary job – hunched over a workbench manipulating the tiny pieces of clocks and watches. He would occasionally stand to serve a customer at the counter, but there was no great physical labor to his work.

    So how did he do it? What was the secret to his remaining healthy and free from doctors and drugs right up to the end?

    Perhaps it was that mile-and-a-half of walking – about 30 minutes – twice a day, every day, for decades.

    According to a study just released by researchers at Imperial College London and University College London using data from a survey of some 20,000 people across the U.K., people who walk to work are 40 per cent less likely to have diabetes than those who drive.

    And it’s not just diabetes – they also found that people who walk to work were 17% less likely to have high blood pressure than people who drive. And of course, the walkers are far less likely to be overweight too.

    Wow – the drug companies would love to be able to sell a pill that would do all that!

    Moderation: the secret to longevity and health?

     

    Grandpa Pass was not an exercise fanatic – in fact, he really didn’t “exercise.” He just walked a half-hour or so each way to work and back. That might be called “moderate” exercise.

    He enjoyed the healthy, fresh foods that Grandma Pass prepared for him – in moderation.

    Perhaps there are lessons in this for us in our more modern world.

    Not everyone lives within a mile or two of their work so as to be able to walk, or even 5 miles which would be bicycling distance.

    But we can all find a half-hour or so each day for some moderate exercise.

    Not everyone has access to all those farm-fresh, wholesome, and natural foods that Grandma would prepare from scratch preserving their nutrition and freshness, either.

    But we can all eat in moderation, and we can all make sure that we make up for the nutritional depletion that has come from or modern industrial farming methods – even the USDA is acknowledging that two-thirds or more of Americans are mineral and vitamin deficient.

    Making sure that we get all our vitamins, minerals, and essential nutrients is the easy part – with a basic daily regimen of:

    • An optimal dose multiple vitamin, mineral, antioxidant and bioflavonoid formula.
    • A green food formula that provides flavonoids and phytonutrients.
    • High-potency Omega-3 essential fatty acids.

     

    Dr. Myatt has put together a time and money-saving package of essential daily supplements – her Maxi Health Foundation Bundle – that saves you from having to shop around and drive all over town in order to find the best-priced , highest quality, optimal dose supplements. Each Maxi Health Foundation Bundle is a one-month supply of these essential health-saving nutrients for one person – at a substantial savings compared to locating and buying these items separately.

    We’ll help with the vitamins, minerals, and essential nutrients – the exercise is up to you!

     

    References:

    Anthony A. Laverty, MSc, Jennifer S. Mindell, PhD, Elizabeth A. Webb, PhD, Christopher Millett, PhD.: Active Travel to Work and Cardiovascular Risk Factors in the United Kingdom. http://www.ajpmonline.org/webfiles/images/journals/amepre/AMEPRE_3837-stamped-080613.pdf