How to Use a Mail List
(so others will be proud of you)

I am writing this because some people
have such a difficult time dealing with
mailing lists.  READ THIS and FOLLOW it.

It is possible that:

1.  you are or were subscribed to a list and
you complained about too many messages,
or about the fact that you could not get
off the list; or,

2.  you did not want to be bothered
unsubscribing in the right way, and instead
sent a message to the list asking to be removed
or unsubscribed.

Regardless of which one of these you
might have done, such behavior is
unacceptable and annoying to others on
the list.

It is your responsibility to READ the
first message you get from the list,
as well as the headers and footers of
messages, as they have instructions
on how to get off the list.

But wait, it might not be necessary to
get off the list if you will be happy
to receive only one message a day.

ONE MESSAGE A DAY

To receive only one message a day, go
to http://yahoogroups.com and log in
with the email address to which the
list messages are sent (you should
know your own email address).  Then
click on GROUPS, and change your
DELIVERY OPTION for the list of
interest to DAILY DIGEST or WEB ONLY.
DIGEST means you will get only one
mail a day from the list.  WEB ONLY
means you will get no messages at all,
but you can still post messages to the
list and read the archives.

HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE

There are 4 ways to unsubscribe:

1.  Visit http://www.yahoogroups.com and
change your DELIVERY OPTIONS for the
list in question to UNSUBSCRIBE, then
click on the SAVE CHANGES button.

2.  Reply to any message by setting the
subject to only one word:  UNSUBSCRIBE

3.  Send blank email to:

  cancercure-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

4.  Visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cancercure,
log in with your user name and id, then
use the menu selections to edit your membership


Now, the only reason one of the above will
not work is if you do not know your
own email address (don't laugh - many
people are so unaware about email that
they change email addresses as though
they were changing underwear, and then
they forget what email address they
were using when they subscribed, AND
they unwisely think I should know what
it is.)

Also, some corporate mail servers
assign a different "reply-to" address
than a "from" address, and you have to
know both to unsubscribe. If yours is
such a situation, then ask your
company postmaster or mail admin
what your other email address is.

Now, that having been said, PLEASE do
not gripe at the list itself about
unsubscribing. Be a mature netizen
and do it all by yourself.  It is not
rocket science, and it is your
responsiblity, not mine or someone else's.

As a matter of policy, I do not
unsubscribe people, and I am even less
inclined to do it when they post
messages to the list asking to be
unsubscribed.  Please, do it yourself.

HOW TO POST MESSAGES

It is easy to post a message.  What
seems to be difficult is posting
properly.  Here are the ground rules:

1.  DO send messages on the topics
for which the list was intended

2.  DO keep your messages succinct and
to the point

3.  DO use the best grammar and spelling
you can, so people won't think you are
illiterate (okay, some people are more
gifted at it, but do your best).

4.  DO be polite and genteel in your
comments to create a pleasant atmosphere.

5.  DO check your facts and tell the best
truth you can in your messages.

6.  DO send all chit-chat, weather,
and personal criticisms directly to another
party PRIVATELY, and not to the list itself.

7.  DO reply to messages by deleting the
headers, footers, and all irrelevant text
from the original message before posting
it.

7.  DON'T CHIT-CHAT publicly.

8.  DON'T indulge in OFF-TOPIC banter or
ask how to unsubscribe or gripe about
too many messages.

9.  DON'T put headers, footers, or lengthy
quotations from the original message into
your replies.  If people want to read the
long stuff, they can refer to previous
messages in the archives at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cancercure.

10.  DON'T be nasty, surly, bellicose,
sarcastic, hateful, snotty, or impolite in
your replies.  Especially, do not gripe at
the list owner or moderator publicly - do it
PRIVATELY by sending email to
cancercure-moderator@yahoogroups.com.

If you violate the above rules, do not be
surprised if you get banned from the list or
have your messages go through a moderation
process.  Even the list owner has a private
life, and public nastiness is sure to upset
him and rob him of valuable quality time to
spend with his family.

Beside all that, following the above rules
will make it possible to have a fun, beneficial
list for everyone.


Thanks,
Bob Hurt
List Owner

Note that they were using Vit. D2, an inferior form of Vit. D-Vit. D3 is
more bioavailable and better for you--

Vitamin D hope in prostate cancer
By Emma Wilkinson
BBC News health reporter

Vitamin D is an effective treatment for prostate cancer in some patients, a
UK study suggests.
A once daily dose reduced PSA level - an indicator of severity of disease -
by as much as half in 20% of patients.
There has been much interest in vitamin D in prostate cancer after studies
linking risk of the disease to sunlight exposure, the researchers said.
One expert agreed the findings were encouraging but said it needed to be
tested in a bigger population.
The trial - results of which are due to be published in the journal BJU
International - was set up after one patient got better when his wife
bought
him some vitamin D tablets.
" The role of supplements in the prevention and treatment of prostate
cancer
is an area which deserves a greater level of research attention "
John Neate, The Prostate Cancer Charity
Professor Jonathan Waxman, said the example had prompted him to assess the
effects in a wider group of patients.
Out of 26 men with recurrent prostate cancer, who took a daily dose of
vitamin D2 bought from the chemist, five responded to the treatment.
In two the PSA level, fell by more than half, in two by 25-50% and in one
man it fell by less than 25%.
The effects in one man were sustained for 36 months.
Welcome addition
Study leader Professor Jonathan Waxman, from Imperial College London, said
vitamin D therapy was effective and well-tolerated.
"It's very interesting - there has been no significant trial of vitamin D.
"This is a treatment which is unlikely to have significant toxicity and is
a
welcome addition to the therapeutic options for patients with prostate
cancer."
He agreed that a further trial in a larger number of patients, comparing
vitamin D with a dummy pill was warranted.
One theory is that vitamin D interferes with the effect of the androgen
receptor, which is stimulated by hormones such as testosterone and
implicated in prostate cancer.
John Neate, chief executive of The Prostate Cancer Charity, said it was not
the first study looking at vitamin D in the disease but a consensus on the
benefits had not been reached.
"This small scale study investigating the use of vitamin D as a 'stand
alone' treatment for men with progressive prostate cancer provides a
valuable additional perspective.
"Many men with prostate cancer may wonder whether they should take vitamin
D
supplements to control their disease.
"This study does not answer that question, but maintaining a good level of
vitamin D is recommended as part of a generally healthy lifestyle.
"The role of supplements in the prevention and treatment of prostate cancer
is an area which deserves a greater level of research attention."
Professor Malcolm Mason, Cancer Research UK prostate cancer expert based at
Cardiff University agreed the results were encouraging but more evidence
was
needed.
"We advise men with prostate cancer to consult their doctor before taking
vitamin D supplements."
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/health/8017323.stm

Published: 2009/04/26 23:17:20 GMT

(c) BBC MMIX

*** Be a link in a larger chain--if you see something interesting, pass it
along and share the wealth! ***







**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>
> >> This is a new publication of Dr. Zagon's work ( LDN researcher).  He
>> and his department are doing amazing research which is change the future of
>> medicine.
>>
>> http://www.lifesciencesworld.com/news/view/102772
>> Regulation of cell proliferation by the OGF-OGFr axis is dependent on
>> nuclear localization signals
>> (posted on 23/04/2009)
>>
>> window.google_render_ad();
>> Regulation of cell proliferation by the OGF-OGFr axis is dependent on
>> nuclear localization signalsResearchers at The Pennsylvania State University
>> College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania have discovered that the
>> efficacy of the Opioid Growth Factor (OGF, [Met5]-enkephalin), a
>> clinically important antitumor agent, is dependent on nucleocytoplasmic
>> translocation and reliant on the integrity of nuclear localization
>> signals in the OGF receptor (OGFr). This discovery, reported in the May
>> 09 issue of Experimental Biology and Medicine,
>> provides new insights into the mechanism of an important endogenous
>> system that serves as a tonically active, constitutively expressed,
>> inhibitory regulator of DNA synthesis. This valuable information not only
>> may contribute to understanding the etiology and pathogenesis of diseases
>> related to this native biological system, but to the development of new
>> agents that will enhance effectiveness in treatment. Previous
>> immunohistochemical and immunoelectron microscope studies have detected OGF
and OGFr in
>> both the cytoplasmic and the nuclear compartments. The OGF-OGFr
>> axis is known to regulate cell proliferation by modulating cyclin
>> dependent kinase inhibitors, resulting in a retardation of cells at the
>> G1-S interface of the cell cycle. To address the question of the
>> location and temporal relationships of OGFr nucleocytoplasmic
>> trafficking, a probe of OGFr fused to green fluorescent protein
>> (eGFP) was constructed. Experiments with a human cancer cell, a
>> squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, revealed that translation
>> of OGFr required approximately 5 hours, and transit into the nucleus took
>> 8 hours; OGFr
>> remained in the nucleus for up to 8 days. Transport through the nuclear
>> pore and repression of cell proliferation required two of the three
>> nuclear localization signals (NLS) in OGFr. These results show that the
>> pathway for regulating the cell cycle by the OGF-OGFr
>> complex involves the shuttling of the peptide-receptor complex from the
>> cytoplasm to the nucleus, as well as transport receptors. The
>> research team was comprised of Dr. Ian S. Zagon, Distinguished
>> University Professor, and Dr. Patricia J. McLaughlin, Professor, along
>> with a postdoctoral fellow Dr. Fan Cheng, in the Department of Neural
>> & Behavioral Sciences. Drs. Zagon and McLaughlin discovered the
>> growth related activity of endogenous opioids, identified OGF as the
>> specific peptide, cloned and sequenced OGFr, and collaborated on
demonstrating
>> the remarkable properties of these native peptides in a variety of
>> clinical studies. OGF has proven successful in a Phase I clinical, trial, and
>> Phase II trials for pancreatic cancer and squamous cell carcinoma
>> of the head and neck are in progress. Co-author Dr. McLaughlin states:
>> "Given the extraordinary biological control of the cell cycle by the
>> OGF-OGFr
>> axis, it may be envisioned that either a loss or a gain in transport
>> shuttling pathways could contribute to the onset and progression of
>> disease."
>> Dr. Zagon adds that "The clinical implications of the study speak to
>> whether changes in nucleocytoplasmic machinery related to the OGF-OGFr
>> axis, part of the body's
>> own machinery governing physiological processes, may be involved with
>> understanding the etiology and pathogenesis of human disease, as well
>> as the basis for the treatment of human disorders." Dr. Steven R.
>> Goodman, Editor-in-Chief of Experimental Biology and Medicine
>> said "Zagon and colleagues have discovered that the Opioid Growth
>> Factor (OGF, [Met5]-enkephalin), a clinically important antitumor
>> agent, is dependent on shuttling of the peptide and the OGF receptor
>> from the cytoplasm to the nucleus. This discovery may provide valuable
>> information to understanding the etiology and pathogenesis of diseases
>> related to this native biological system, as well as to development of
>> new agents that will enhance treatment effectiveness".  ###
>> Experimental Biology and Medicine
>> is a journal dedicated to the publication of multidisciplinary and
>> interdisciplinary research in the biomedical sciences. The journal was
>> first established in 1903.
>> http://www.sebm.org/
>>
>
>




**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Well put . . .

From: Info01@...(Jon Barron)
Written by: Jon Barron
Edited by: Kristen Barron

In this issue, Jon offers his congratulations and praise to the medical
community for some of the things they are doing right -- but also offers
a warning that they may also have included some poison pills in their
achievements that may ultimately negate all of the good over time.

Kudos to Medical Doctors
by Jon Barron

Let me be clear. As much as I love to tweak doctors and the medical
establishment (and they do so often deserve it), I am not anti-doctor.
I'm not even anti-modern medicine. There are things doctors can do that
no herbalist or alternative health practitioner can do. Keep in mind
that if your name is John Wayne Bobbitt, you were far better off with a
surgeon than an herbalist after your wife "adjusted" you. (For those of
you who don't remember John Wayne, then go with the fact that a surgeon
is a better choice after an automobile accident.)

Anyway, as much as I like to tweak them, I am also more than happy to
give them their due when they deserve it. And that's what this
newsletter is about -- some kudos to the medical establishment in honor
of the things they are finally getting right. We're talking about things
like the new miracle prosthetics, using probiotics to fight disease,
training the immune system to take on cancer, and manipulating
evolutionary theory to put an end to malaria.

To read the complete newsletter go to:
http://www.jonbarron.org/baseline-health-program/2009-04-27.php

From previous newsletters:

World's Greatest Medical Advancements
World's Greatest Medical Failures
Why Your Doctors Do You Like They Do

> This is a new publication of Dr. Zagon's work ( LDN researcher).  He and
> his department are doing amazing research which is change the future of
> medicine.
>
>
> http://www.lifesciencesworld.com/news/view/102772
> Regulation of cell proliferation by the OGF-OGFr axis is dependent on
> nuclear localization signals
> (posted on 23/04/2009)
>
> window.google_render_ad();
> Regulation of cell proliferation by the OGF-OGFr axis is dependent on
> nuclear localization signalsResearchers at The Pennsylvania State University
> College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania have discovered that the
> efficacy of the Opioid Growth Factor (OGF, [Met5]-enkephalin), a
> clinically important antitumor agent, is dependent on nucleocytoplasmic
> translocation and reliant on the integrity of nuclear localization
> signals in the OGF receptor (OGFr). This discovery, reported in the May 09
> issue of Experimental Biology and Medicine,
> provides new insights into the mechanism of an important endogenous
> system that serves as a tonically active, constitutively expressed,
> inhibitory regulator of DNA synthesis. This valuable information not only
> may contribute to understanding the etiology and pathogenesis of diseases
> related to this native biological system, but to the development of new
> agents that will enhance effectiveness in treatment. Previous
> immunohistochemical and immunoelectron microscope studies have detected OGF
and OGFr in both
> the cytoplasmic and the nuclear compartments. The OGF-OGFr
> axis is known to regulate cell proliferation by modulating cyclin
> dependent kinase inhibitors, resulting in a retardation of cells at the
> G1-S interface of the cell cycle. To address the question of the
> location and temporal relationships of OGFr nucleocytoplasmic trafficking,
> a probe of OGFr fused to green fluorescent protein
> (eGFP) was constructed. Experiments with a human cancer cell, a
> squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, revealed that translation
> of OGFr required approximately 5 hours, and transit into the nucleus took
> 8 hours; OGFr
> remained in the nucleus for up to 8 days. Transport through the nuclear
> pore and repression of cell proliferation required two of the three
> nuclear localization signals (NLS) in OGFr. These results show that the
> pathway for regulating the cell cycle by the OGF-OGFr
> complex involves the shuttling of the peptide-receptor complex from the
> cytoplasm to the nucleus, as well as transport receptors. The
> research team was comprised of Dr. Ian S. Zagon, Distinguished
> University Professor, and Dr. Patricia J. McLaughlin, Professor, along
> with a postdoctoral fellow Dr. Fan Cheng, in the Department of Neural
> & Behavioral Sciences. Drs. Zagon and McLaughlin discovered the
> growth related activity of endogenous opioids, identified OGF as the
> specific peptide, cloned and sequenced OGFr, and collaborated on demonstrating
> the remarkable properties of these native peptides in a variety of clinical
> studies. OGF has proven successful in a Phase I clinical, trial, and Phase
> II trials for pancreatic cancer and squamous cell carcinoma
> of the head and neck are in progress. Co-author Dr. McLaughlin states:
> "Given the extraordinary biological control of the cell cycle by the
> OGF-OGFr
> axis, it may be envisioned that either a loss or a gain in transport
> shuttling pathways could contribute to the onset and progression of
> disease."
> Dr. Zagon adds that "The clinical implications of the study speak to
> whether changes in nucleocytoplasmic machinery related to the OGF-OGFr
> axis, part of the body's
> own machinery governing physiological processes, may be involved with
> understanding the etiology and pathogenesis of human disease, as well
> as the basis for the treatment of human disorders." Dr. Steven R. Goodman,
> Editor-in-Chief of Experimental Biology and Medicine
> said "Zagon and colleagues have discovered that the Opioid Growth
> Factor (OGF, [Met5]-enkephalin), a clinically important antitumor
> agent, is dependent on shuttling of the peptide and the OGF receptor
> from the cytoplasm to the nucleus. This discovery may provide valuable
> information to understanding the etiology and pathogenesis of diseases
> related to this native biological system, as well as to development of
> new agents that will enhance treatment effectiveness".  ###   Experimental
> Biology and Medicine
> is a journal dedicated to the publication of multidisciplinary and
> interdisciplinary research in the biomedical sciences. The journal was
> first established in 1903.
> http://www.sebm.org/
>






**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Acupressure Wristbands Help Cancer Patients
Practitioners of Chinese medicine techniques have long used stimulation
of points on the wrists through acupuncture or acupressure to relieve
nausea. However, mainstream medical doctors have generally dismissed
claims that acupressure wristbands...
http://www.naturalnews.com/026053.html

Pineapple Compound Treats Cancer, Inflammation and Poor Digestion
Nothing brings up the images of summer breezes and relaxation like
pineapple, the sweet juicy treat from the tropics. While thoughts of fun
in the sun ease the mind, eating pineapple can greatly ease the body.
Bromelain, the key enzyme in...
http://www.naturalnews.com/026064.html)

The Consequences of Using Fluoride
Fluoride has been used for over sixty years to help prevent tooth decay.
Over 60% of people in the U.S. receive fluoride in their drinking water;
some water supplies have naturally occurring fluoride in it and some
have fluoride added at...
http://www.naturalnews.com/026103.html

In a message dated 4/23/09 10:34:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
robert-blau@... writes:


> There's a yahoogroup devoted to it:
>

I know but I just can't handle any more groups...I have thousands of emails
already.


**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere
on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello Szukidavis,

Marc Swaenpoel, the South African naturopath who owns the company,
says the capsules and liquid are about equivalent.  The capsules are
cheaper to have mailed to the States because the bottles are lighter.
I originally bought both forms (as well as making two batches myself)
for my wife's breast cancer.  She can't tolerate most herbs and had a
very hard time with this one so we discontinued it.  I give it to the
healthy 14 year old dog as a prophylactic measure.  I take it myself
that way sometimes too.

Mike
Thursday, April 23, 2009, 1:30:07 PM, you wrote:

sac> In a message dated 4/23/09 12:57:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
sac> goldenmike@... writes:


>>  give one capsule to my oldest dog every other day. As long as I
>> hide it in some almond butter he gobbles it up.

sac> Is this preferable to the soup?  Have you seen results?  Is it very
sac> expensive?   What other protocols are you doing and what kind of cancer are
you
sac> dealing with?  Thanks for any helpful information.

sac> Shelley


sac> **************
sac> Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere
sac> on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
sac> (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


sac> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



sac> ------------------------------------

sac> Visit http://cancercure.ws. Yahoo! Groups Links





--
Best regards,
  Mike                            mailto:goldenmike@...

Hello Szukidavis,

It is OK with all other protocols.

Mike

Thursday, April 23, 2009, 1:30:27 PM, you wrote:

sac> In a message dated 4/23/09 12:57:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
sac> goldenmike@... writes:


>>  give one capsule to my oldest dog every other day. As long as I
>> hide it in some almond butter he gobbles it up.

sac> Oh..and does it interfer with other protocols?


sac> **************
sac> Access 350+
sac> FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio
Toolbar!
sac> (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


sac> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



sac> ------------------------------------

sac> Visit http://cancercure.ws. Yahoo! Groups Links





--
Best regards,
  Mike                            mailto:goldenmike@...

In a message dated 4/23/09 12:57:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
goldenmike@... writes:


>  give one capsule to my oldest dog every other day. As long as I
> hide it in some almond butter he gobbles it up.

Oh..and does it interfer with other protocols?


**************
Access 350+
FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 4/23/09 12:57:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
goldenmike@... writes:


>  give one capsule to my oldest dog every other day. As long as I
> hide it in some almond butter he gobbles it up.

Is this preferable to the soup?  Have you seen results?  Is it very
expensive?   What other protocols are you doing and what kind of cancer are you
dealing with?  Thanks for any helpful information.

Shelley


**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere
on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Researchers Link Grilling With Pancreatic Cancer
Bad news for backyard chefs - back to the oven
April 22, 2009 ConsumerAffairs.com
This may make you lose your appetite for burgers on the grill this summer -
data presented at the American Association for Cancer Research 100th Annual
Meeting suggests that meat cooked at high temperatures to the point of
burning and charring may increase the risk of pancreatic cancer
<http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/04/grilling.html> .
And deep frying isn't going to be an alternative, either. Kristin Anderson,
Ph.D., associate professor at the University of Minnesota
<http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/04/grilling.html> School of
Public Health, said the finding was linked to consumption of well-done and
very-well-done meats cooked by frying, grilling or barbecuing.
Cooking in this way can form carcinogens
<http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/04/grilling.html> , which do
not
form when meat is baked or stewed, the researchers said. Anderson and
colleagues conducted a prospective analysis that included 62,581
participants.
"My research has been focused on pancreatic cancer
<http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/04/grilling.html> for some
time, and we want to identify ways to prevent this cancer because
treatments
are very limited and the cancer is often rapidly fatal," she said.
Anderson and colleagues used information from surveys that were a part of
the PLCO (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian) Multi-center Screening
Trial. Participants provided information about their meat intake, preferred
cooking methods
<http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/04/grilling.html> and doneness
preferences.
Over the course of nine years, researchers identified 208 cases of
pancreatic cancer. Preferences for high temperature cooked meat were
generally linked with an increased risk; subjects who preferred
very-well-done steak were almost 60 percent more likely to get pancreatic
cancer as compared to those who ate steak less well-done or did not eat
steak.
When overall consumption and doneness preferences were used to estimate the
meat-derived carcinogen intake for subjects, those with highest intake had
70 percent higher risk than those with the lowest intake.
"We cannot say with absolute certainty that the risk is increased due to
carcinogens formed in burned meat," said Anderson. "However, those who
enjoy
either fried or barbecued meat should consider turning down the heat or
cutting off burned portions when it's finished; cook meat sufficiently to
kill bacteria without excess charring. In addition, the precursors of
cancer-causing compounds can be reduced by microwaving the meat for a few
minutes and pouring off the juices before cooking it on the grill."

*** Be a link in a larger chain--if you see something interesting, pass it
along and share the wealth! ***








**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

There's a yahoogroup devoted to it:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oleandersoup/

--- In cancercure@yahoogroups.com, Mike Golden <goldenmike@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Szukidavis,
>
> Well, you order it from www.sutherlandiaopc.com
>
> I give one capsule to my oldest dog every other day.  As long as I
> hide it in some almond butter he gobbles it up.
>
> Mike
>
> Wednesday, April 22, 2009, 9:03:44 PM, you wrote:
>
> sac> Does anyone know about Sutherlandia OPC?  Where does one get it? Is it Ok
> sac> for a dog?  Etc.
>
>
> sac> **************
> sac> Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from
> sac> anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
> sac> (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)
>
>
> sac> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> sac> ------------------------------------
>
> sac> Visit http://cancercure.ws. Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Mike                            mailto:goldenmike@...
>

Hello Szukidavis,

Well, you order it from www.sutherlandiaopc.com

I give one capsule to my oldest dog every other day.  As long as I
hide it in some almond butter he gobbles it up.

Mike

Wednesday, April 22, 2009, 9:03:44 PM, you wrote:

sac> Does anyone know about Sutherlandia OPC?  Where does one get it? Is it Ok
sac> for a dog?  Etc.


sac> **************
sac> Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from
sac> anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
sac> (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


sac> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



sac> ------------------------------------

sac> Visit http://cancercure.ws. Yahoo! Groups Links





--
Best regards,
  Mike                            mailto:goldenmike@...

Selling cancer chemotherapy with concessions creates conflicts of interest
for oncologists


by Gregory D. Pawelski


I became intensely interested in ovarian cancer by virtue of working
through, enduring and surviving my wife's illness. I've gotten a street
education
by virtue of voluminous reading and hundreds of hours of past and ongoing
personal communication with noted authorities in the field.

The shift in the United States, more than 20 years ago, from the
institution-based, inpatient setting to community-based, ambulatory sites for
treating
the majority of the nation's cancer patients has prompted in large part
additional costs to the government and Medicare beneficiaries. The Chemotherapy
Concession gave oncologists the financial incentive to select certain forms
of chemotherapy over others because they receive higher reimbursement.

This was first brought to attention at a Medicare Coverage Advisory
Committee meeting in 1999, in Baltimore, Maryland. There was a
gastroenterologist
in attendance who complained that Medicare had cut his reimbursement for
colonoscopies from $400 to $108 and how all the doctors in his large,
multi-specialty internal medicine group were hurting, save for two medical
oncologists, whom he said were making a killing running their in-office retail
pharmacies (1).

Typically, doctors give patients prescriptions for drugs that are then
filled at pharmacies. But medical oncologists bought chemotherapy drugs
themselves, often at prices discounted by drug manufacturers trying to sell more
of
their products and then administered them intravenously to patients in their
offices.

Not only do the medical oncologists have complete logistical,
administrative, marketing and financial control of the process, they also
control the
knowledge of the process. The result is that the medical oncologist selects the
product, selects the vendor, decides the markup, conceals details of the
transaction to the degree they wish, and delivers the product on their own
terms including time, place and modality.

A joint Michigan/Harvard study entitled, "Does reimbursement influence
chemotherapy treatment for cancer patients," (2) confirmed that before the new
Medicare reform, medical oncologists are more likely to choose cancer drugs
that earn them more money. A survey by Dr. Neil Love, published in "Patterns
of Care," showed results that the Medicare reforms have not solved the
problem of variations in oncology practice(3).

A patient wants a physician's decision to be based on experience, clinical
information, new basic science insights and the like, not on how much money
the doctor gets to keep. A patient should know if there are any financial
incentives at work in determining what cancer drugs are being prescribed.

It's not that all medical oncologists are bad people. It's just that the
system is rotten and still an impossible conflict of interest. Some
oncologists prescribe chemotherapy drugs with equal efficacies and toxicities. I
would
imagine that some are influenced by the whole state of affairs, possibly
without even entirely admitting it. Social science research shows that people
can be biased by self-interest without being aware of it.(4) There are so
many ways for humans to rationalize their behavior.

There is some innate goodness of people who go into oncology. At the time
when most oncologists practicing today made the decision to become
oncologists, there was no Chemotherapy Concession. Most of them probably had a
personal life experience which created the calling to do battle against the
great
crab. At the time when people make their most important decisions in life,
they are in the most idealitstic period of their lives.

The U.S. government wasn't reducing payment for cancer care under the new
Medicare Modernization Act (MMA) of 2003. They were simply reducing
overpayment for chemotherapy drugs, and paying cancer specialists the same as
other
physicians. The government can't afford to overpay for drugs, in an era where
all these new drugs are being introduced, which are fantastically expensive
(5).

Although the new Medicare bill tried to curtail the Chemotherapy
Concession, private insurers still go along with it. What needs to be done is to
remove the profit incentive from the choice of drug treatments. Medical
oncologists should be taken out of the retail pharmacy business and let them be
doctors again.

It's not that all oncologists are bad people. It's just that it is still an
impossible conflict of interest (i.e. it's the SYSTEM which is rotten). The
solution is not to put the doctors in jail; it's to change the system. (6)


1. Verbatim Transcript of Medicare Coverage Advisory Committee (MCAC)
Meeting, November 15-16, 1999.
http://weisenthal.org/hcfa_1.htm
http://weisenthal.org/hcfa_2.htm
http://weisenthal.org/hcfa_3.htm

2. Jacobson M, O'Malley AJ, Earle CC, Pakes J, Gaccione P, Newhouse JP.
Does reimbursement influence chemotherapy treatment for cancer patients? Health
Aff (Millwood). 2006 Mar-Apr;25(2):437-43.
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/abstract/25/2/437

3. Love N. Editor's Note: Phase I study of the "gap". Patterns of care in
medical oncology. 2005; 2(1)
http://patternsofcare.com/2005/1/editor.htm

4. Dana J, Loewenstein G. A social science perspective on gifts to
physicians from industry. JAMA 2003 Jul 9;290(2):252-5
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content /full/290/2/252

5. www.medicare.gov

6. Pawelski GD. Reimbursements Sway Oncologists' Drug Choices. Online
Journal of Health Ethics 2006;1(1)
http://ethicsjournal.umc.edu/ojs2/index.php/ojhe/issue/view/4






**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Does anyone know about Sutherlandia OPC?  Where does one get it?  Is it Ok
for a dog?  Etc.


**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from
anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Reader,

A radiologist is a doctor, but he's also a businessman. So if the American
Cancer Society says mammogram screening saves lives and all women over 40
should be getting a yearly exam, then it's just good business to embrace that
recommendation and strongly encourage customers…err, patients…to step up to
the compression plates.

After all, radiologists who give mammograms are saving lives, right?

So you can imagine how a radiologist might not exactly warm up to a recent
study that shows the life-saving reputation of mammograms is vastly
overstated. In fact, as a radiologist, you might hope that this study would be
strongly refuted by the ACS.

And it was.

But here's the kicker: The study was conducted by a radiologist.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Division in the ranks
-----------------------------------------------------------

The people who promote mammogram screening are pushing the wrong
statistics, according to John Keen, M.D. – a Chicago radiologist who conducts
mammograms.

Dr. Keen and his brother, Dr. James Keen of the University of Nebraska,
simply set out to analyze the claim that mammography saves lives. To calculate
benefit, the Keens compared several sets of metrics, including survival
percentages (with and without screening), relative risk reduction based on
randomized mammography trials, and a 15- year cumulative breast cancer mortality
program.

Results showed that the average woman has a six percent risk of developing
breast cancer between the ages of 55 and 70. But if you take 1,000 women at
age 50 and give each one a yearly mammogram for 15 years, only about two
lives will be saved.

Of course, this conclusion was disputed by Robert Smith, Ph.D. – the ACS
director of cancer screening. Dr. Smith told Reuters that when 465 women are
screened for seven years, one life would be saved over the course of 20
years.

I wonder if he actually believes that sounds impressive?

-----------------------------------------------------------
Taking a toll
-----------------------------------------------------------

One of Dr. Keen's primary problems with recommending such widespread
screening is the high risk of false positive results, which prompt unnecessary
follow up mammograms, ultrasound tests, and biopsies. Obviously this is quite
stressful for patients, while taking a financial toll on patients and
insurance companies.

What Dr. Keen doesn't mention are the two factors that I'm sure most
radiologists would rather not discuss:

1) Radiation
Yearly mammograms expose women to cumulative doses of radiation that may
prompt cancer growth

2) Compression
Rough handling of breasts can cause tumors to spread, and the intense
compression required for mammography clearly qualifies as rough handling.

In an interview with Reuters, Dr. Keen very accurately characterizes the
medical community's relationship with mammogram candidates: "We don't trust
women to make their own decisions about whether to screen. We just tell them
to screen. We just say mammography saves lives."

In Dr. Keen's view, the patient is making a purchase and he just wants to
let them know what they're buying. "I am saying that women need to be told
the benefits and the harms and they need to make their own decision."

Decide on their own? Doesn't he know you're not supposed to say things like
that in the medical mainstream?

You can find more facts about mammogram risks, as well as information about
safe alternatives to conventional mammography, in the e-Alert "End of the
Day" (2/22/07).

Sources:
"What is the point? Will screening mammography save my life?" BMC Medical
Informatics and Decision Making, Vol. 9, No. 18, 4/2/09, biomedcentral.com
"Study Argues Benefits of Mammograms Overstated" Maggie Fox, Reuters, 4/2/09,
in.reuters.com







**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Newly-found tomb mural depicts ancient Chinese medication
Xinhua News Agency [China], 2009-04-15
A mural unearthed from an ancient tomb in the northwestern Chinese
province of Shaanxi last week depicted how traditional Chinese
medication was practiced 1,000 years ago, archaeologists said Wednesday.
Song Dynasty murals are not rare in and around the ancient Chinese
capital Xi'an, but researcher Sun Bingjun at Shaanxi Provincial
Institute of Archaeology said this was the first found to depict
traditional Chinese medication, prevalent in China for nearly 5,000
years. The mural, about four meters square, had a man sitting on a
chair, whom experts believed was the tomb owner. "Jars and bottles were
seen on a table nearby," said Sun. Two other men were sitting at the
table, one of whom was carrying two bags of herbs and the other
consulting a huge collection of herbal formulas. "The names of the herbs
were still seen on the bags and the papers," said Sun. "We assume the
master of the house was sick and two physicians were making
prescriptions."

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-04/15/content_11189837.htm

Chrysin is Natural Alternative to Toxic Breast Cancer Drugs
Women receiving the standard of care for breast cancer are often
prescribed one of the aromatase inhibiting drugs as follow-up treatment.
Patients are told the drug will prevent a recurrence of their disease.
Aromatase inhibiting drugs are...
http://www.naturalnews.com/026086.html

Also:

Many Doctors are Clueless about Alternative Medicine Research
It's no secret that Americans are turning to complementary and
alternative medicine (CAM) in droves. In fact, last December the
National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) and
the National Center for Health Statistics...
http://www.naturalnews.com/026087.html

Why Hospitals Are Dangerous to Your Health
(NaturalNews) More than one-third of patients receiving injected med. in
the intensive care unit of a hospital may experience an error, according
to a study conducted by researchers from Rudolfstiftung Hospital in
Austria and published in the . . .
http://www.naturalnews.com/026090.html

> http://www.rense.com/general85/msg.htm>
>
> MSG Is Being Sprayed On Fruits, Veggies, Nuts,Grains And SeedsAs They
> Are Growing...Even Those Used In Baby FoodTruth In Labeling.org4-20-9
> In the 1970s, reluctant food processors "voluntarily" took processed
> free glutamic acid (MSG) out of baby food. Today it's back, in
> fertilizers called "Omega Protein Refined/Hydrolyzed Fish Emulsion" and
> "Steam Hydrolyzed Feather Meal," both of which contain hydrolyzed
> proteins; and in a product called AuxiGro WP Plant Metabolic Primer
> (AuxiGro) produced by Emerald BioAgriculture (formerly Auxein
> Corporation), which contains both hydrolyzed protein(s) and "monosodium
> glutamate." AuxiGro is being sprayed on some of the vegetables we and
> our children will eat, into the air we and our children must breath, and
> onto the ground from which it can move into drinking water. Head
> lettuce, leaf lettuce, tomatoes, potatoes, and peanuts were among the
> first crops targeted. On September 12, 2000, the Auxein Corporation Web
> site gave the following information:
>
> Crops registered include: Celery; Fresh Market Cucumbers; Edible Navy
> and Pinto Beans; Grapes; Bulb Onions; Bell, Green and Jalapeno Peppers;
> Iceberg Head Lettuce; Romaine and Butter Leaf Lettuce; Peanuts;
> Potatoes; Snap Beans; Strawberries; Processing Tomatoes; Fresh Tomatoes;
> and Watermelons. Today, there is no crop that we know of that has
> not been approved for treatment with MSG by the U.S. Environmental
> Protection Agency (EPA).
>
> Even in California -- the only state where there are any restrictions on
> the use of AuxiGro -- AuxiGro has been approved for use on a number of
> crops, and Emerald BioAgriculture continues to push for more. Field
> tests in California have been -- and may continue to be -- conducted on
> a variety of crops, and those AuxiGro treated crops may be sold in the
> open market without revealing that they have been treated. We can't tell
> you which crops those are because the CDPR has refused to send records
> of test trials (which are public information) to the Truth in Labeling
> Campaign.
>
> As of June 13, 2002, AuxiGro was registered for use in California on
> tomatoes, almonds, apricots, cherries, plums, nectarines, peaches,
> prunes, grapes (including grapes to be used in wine), and onions. At
> that time, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation said they
> were not aware of any testing of AuxiGro for use on other crops.
> They also said that they did not have any proposals presently in house
> to register additional crops for AuxiGro. It would appear, however, that
> what the CDPR said was not true, for the CDPR subsequently announced
> that Emerald BioAgriculture had applied for permission to use AuxiGro on
> tomatoes (new use), and on melons (new crop) -- and, to the best of our
> knowledge, approval is always preceded by field testing.
>
> On July 7, 2004, Emerald BioAgriculture requested approval of use of
> AuxiGro as a desiccant, disinfectant, fertilizer, fungicide, growth
> regulator - for increased yield and prevention of powdery mildew in
> various crops such as almonds, grapes, and melons. They also asked to
> add cole crops (including broccoli, brussels sprouts, cabbage,
> cauliflower, kale, collards, turnips, rutabaga, mustard, watercress, and
> kohlrabi) to the list of crops approved for AuxiGro use.
>
> Approval for use on organic crops--in all states--has been requested.
>
> What's wrong with using glutamic acid, an amino acid found in protein,
> as a spray on crops?
>
> - In protein, amino acids are found in balanced combinations. Use of
> free glutamic acid as a spray on crops throws the amino acid balance out
> of kilter.
> - It's not the glutamic acid found in protein that is being sprayed on
> crops, it's a synthetic product. The spray being used most widely is
> called AuxiGro. The "free glutamic acid" or so called "L-glutamic acid"
> component being used by its manufacturer, Emerald BioAgriculture,
> contains L-glutamic acid, an amino acid found in protein; but it also
> contains D-glutamic acid, pyroglutamic acid, and other chemicals
> referred to in the industry as "contaminants." The free glutamic acid
> used in AuxiGro is processed free glutamic acid. It is manufactured --
> in chemical plants -- where certain selected genetically engineered
> bacteria -- feeding on a liquid nutrient medium -- excrete the free
> glutamic acid they synthesize outside of their cell membrane into the
> liquid medium in which they are grown. In contrast, the free glutamic
> acid found in protein, and the free glutamic acid involved in normal
> human body function, are unprocessed. free glutamic acid, and contain no
> contaminants.
>
> - No one knows what the long term effects of spraying processed free
> glutamic acid on crops will be.
>
> - That the processed free glutamic acid (MSG) will be absorbed into the
> body of the plant and into the fruit, nuts, seeds, or vegetable it
> produces seems undeniable. If it were not, the plant would not be
> stimulated to grow. Neither Emerald BioAgriculture or the EPA will
> address this issue.
>
> - That there will be residue left on crops has not been disputed by
> Emerald BioAgriculture. But no study of either the amount of that
> residue, or the least amount of processed free glutamic acid needed to
> cause a reaction in an MSG-sensitive person, has ever been done. "It
> should wash off" doesn't mean it will wash off. "It seems unlikely
> that such a small amount would cause a reactions" doesn't mean that a
> small amount will not cause a reaction or have long term health effects.
>
> - Free glutamic acid is known to be toxic to the nervous system. But the
> neurotoxic effects that processed free glutamic acid will have on
> animals that consume the plants on which it is sprayed - effects over
> and above any effects caused by external glutamic acid residue - have
> never been evaluated. Neither are there data on the effects that
> spraying processed free glutamic acid will have on drinking water.
>
> - Consider, also, that children are most at risk from the effects of
> processed free glutamic acid. Their undeveloped blood-brain barriers
> leave them most at risk from exposure to processed free glutamic acid.
> It has been repeatedly demonstrated that infant animals fed processed
> free glutamic acid when young develop neuroendocrine problems such as
> gross obesity, stunted growth, and reproductive disorders later in life,
> and that they also develop learning disabilities. Emerald BioAgriculture
> did not address that particular safety issue in its application to the
> EPA.
>
> - No one knows how little glutamic acid is needed to kill a single brain
> cell or to trigger an adverse reaction.
>
> - Free glutamic acid is a neurotransmitter. It causes nerves to fire,
> carrying nerve impulses throughout the nervous system.
>
> - Free glutamic acid is a neurotoxin. Under certain circumstances, free
> glutamic acid will cause nerves to fire repeatedly, until they die.
>
> - Processed free glutamic acid kills brain cells. The free glutamic acid
> ingested by laboratory animals that caused brain lesions and
> neuroendocrine disorders was very often given in the form of the food
> ingredient "monosodium glutamate." "Monosodium glutamate" is the name of
> a particular food additive. Processed free glutamic acid is the reactive
> component in "monosodium glutamate," just as processed free glutamic
> acid is a reactive component in AuxiGro.
>
> The glutamate industry research done in the 1970s that was submitted to
> the EPA by the Auxein Corporation, that pretended to find that processed
> free glutamic acid is "safe," has been long refuted by independent
> scientists. Indeed, at the present time, neuroscientists attempting
> to develop drugs to block the toxic effects of free glutamic acid are
> using processed free glutamic acid to selectively kill certain kinds of
> brain cells.
>
> - Processed free glutamic acid causes neuroendocrine disorders in
> maturing animals that ingest processed free glutamic acid early in life.
>
> - Processed free glutamic acid causes learning disorders in maturing
> animals that ingest processed free glutamic acid early in life.
>
> - Processed free glutamic acid crosses the placental barrier and causes
> learning disabilities in animal offspring of dams that ingest it.
>
> - Processed free glutamic acid has access to the brain through the
> blood-brain barrier, which is not impervious to the unregulated flow of
> processed free glutamic acid. The blood-brain barrier is immature at
> birth and may continue to develop up to puberty. In certain areas called
> the circumventricular organs, the blood barrier is never impervious to
> the unregulated flow of free glutamic acid. In addition, the blood-brain
> barrier is easily damaged by such events as high fever, a blow to the
> head, drug use, stroke, ingestion of processed free glutamic acid, and
> the normal process of aging.
>
> - The National Institutes of Health recognize glutamic acid as being
> associated with addiction, stroke, epilepsy, degenerative disorders such
> as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and ALS, brain trauma,
> neuropathic pain, schizophrenia, anxiety, and depression.
>
> - For years, free glutamic acid has been produced and used in food
> additives with names such as monosodium glutamate, sodium caseinate, and
> hydrolyzed soy protein. In some people, the processed free glutamic acid
> in food additives causes adverse reactions that include migraine
> headache, asthma, arrhythmia, tachycardia, nausea and vomiting,
> depression, and disorientation. The processed free glutamic acid in
> prescription and non-prescription drugs, food supplements, and
> cosmetics can also cause adverse reactions.
>
> There are badly flawed industry-sponsored studies that have pretended to
> find that processed free glutamic acid does not cause adverse reactions.
> Inappropriate procedures used by the glutamate industry have included
> limiting subjects to people virtually guaranteed not to be sensitive to
> processed free glutamic acid, and/or using processed free glutamic acid
> or other similarly reactive substances in placebos as well as in test
> material. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has based its claim
> that processed free glutamic acid causes only mild and transitory
> reactions on those badly flawed industry-sponsored studies.
>
> - Even the EPA admits that the food additive called "monosodium
> glutamate" causes adverse reactions.
>
> - Even the FDA admits that the food additive "monosodium glutamate"
> contains processed free glutamic acid.
>
> - Even the FDA admits that many consumers refer to all free glutamic
> acid as "MSG."
>
> The EPA's approvals of use of MSG in agriculture are simple,
> straightforward, and in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and
> Cosmetic Act
>
> In reviewing the application of Auxein Corporation (now Emerald
> BioAgriculture) for use of processed free glutamic acid in a spray to be
> applied to crops as they grow, the EPA failed to conform to the
> requirements of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which require,
> in part, that the EPA review any proposed action for validity,
> completeness, reliability, and relationship to human risk. The EPA also
> ignored Executive Order 13045 which requires government agencies to
> consider available information concerning the variability of the
> sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including
> infants and children. For example, Auxein Corporation sent the EPA 14
> industry-sponsored toxicological studies from the literature, all done
> in the 1970's, but failed to mention hundreds of studies in the
> literature that refuted those 14 studies. Auxein Corporation even failed
> to send the EPA independent studies that appeared in the same book(s) as
> the industry-sponsored studies sent to the EPA. For example, although
> processed free glutamic acid causes brain lesions and neuroendocrine
> disorders in infant animals, this special hazard faced by infants was
> ignored by Auxein Corporation. It would appear that Auxein Corporation
> restricted its consideration of "available information" to information
> made available by the glutamate industry; and the EPA, even after having
> been sent abstracts from other "available information," has not
> challenged the Auxein Corporation applications. A more complete
> discussion of the shortcomings of the EPA approvals granted to Auxein
> Corporation has been submitted to the EPA.
>
> Questions about the safety of spraying processed free glutamic acid on
> plants and into the environment have been raised by the Truth in
> Labeling Campaign and by individual consumers. The EPA has refused to
> address those concerns. The EPA, and, in particular, EPA spokesperson
> Dr. Janet Andersen, has failed to respond to allegations that in
> approving the spraying of processed free glutamic acid, the EPA failed
> to consider the reliability, validity, and completeness of the Auxein
> Corporation application or comply with Executive Order 13045 entitled
> Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks,
> except to say that the EPA had complied with executive order 13045.
> Moreover, while responding to letters that asked direct questions of the
> EPA, Andersen failed to respond to most, if not all, of the direct
> questions contained in those letters.
>
> AuxiGro, the first MSG-laced plant "growth enhancer" to hit the market,
> has been approved for spraying on every crop we know of, with no
> restrictions on the amount of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) that
> may remain in and/or on crops when brought to market. Even before
> consumers had an inkling that crops were being sprayed, the Truth in
> Labeling Campaign received reports that MSG-sensitive consumers had
> gotten sick from head lettuce and potatoes.
>
> Federal Register notices chronicling the application and approval of
> processed free glutamic acid are available on the Web via GPO
> Access, the Federal Register, through:
> <http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html>
> http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html
>
> . Application for approval of use of AuxiGro was made to the EPA in
> 1997. Testing of the product was also approved in that year, and many of
> the test crops sprayed with AuxiGro were brought to market without
> notifying consumers. Glutamic acid was granted an exemption from
> establishment of a tolerance limit in January, 1998. AuxiGro was
> also approved for use on a number of crops in January, 1998, and
> approved for use on other crops later. No announcement of these
> approvals was made in the Federal Register.
>
> Due to a technical glitch in the system, the glutes came to need one
> more approval to make their California registrations work. The glutes
> were asking for AuxiGro to be approved for use as a fungicide in
> California, but the EPA had only approved AuxiGro for use as a pesticide
> produce or plant growth enhancer. And when application was made for this
> addition to their approvals, the application was brought to our
> attention; and the Truth in Labeling Campaign filed a formal protest to
> this approval of AuxiGro.
> <http://truthinlabeling.org/msg-objection-s1.html>
> The Formal Objection of the Truth in Labeling Campaign was filed on
> August 16, 2001 with the EPA.
>
> By law, formal objections filed in a timely manner must be responded to
> within six months. Also, by law (we were told) even though the Final
> Rule had not been promulgated, this additional use of AuxiGro would be
> considered approved unless and until the EPA determined that it should
> be otherwise. In July, 2004, we received a conference call from Dr.
> Andersen and a number of other EPA players, including an EPA lawyer -- a
> "courtesy call" telling us that our objections had been discounted and
> that the Final Rule allowing use of AuxiGro as a fungicide would be
> published shortly in the Federal Register.
>
> What's wrong at the EPA?
>
> Neither the EPA nor Janet Andersen, Ph.D., director of the Biopesticides
> and Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD), are stupid. Rather, all
> evidence would appear to suggest that the EPA, which is charged with
> protecting the health of Americans, says it is protecting the health of
> Americans, when in fact the EPA acts to protect the bottom line of big
> business. Don't think for a moment that MSG is the only toxin unleashed
> on the American public by the EPA. Let the words "methyl parathion" and
> "DDT" jog your memory. The EPA, in granting the chemical referred to as
> "L-glutamic acid" an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for
> residues of "L-glutamic acid" on all food commodities when applied/used
> in accordance with good agricultural practices (thereby allowing
> unrestricted amounts of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) residue to
> remain in and on any and all food crops that come under the EPA's
> jurisdiction) violated Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i), Section 408(c)(2)(ii),
> Section 408(c)(2)(B), and Section 408(b)(2)(D) of the Federal Food,
> Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
>
> Neither "L-Glutamic Acid and Gamma Aminobutyric Acid; Exemptions from
> the Requirement of a Tolerance; Final Rule" (Federal Register June 21,
> 2001) nor "Glutamic Acid; Pesticide Tolerance Exemption; Final Rule"
> (Federal Register January 7, 1998), which preceded it, met the criteria
> established by law for granting exemptions from the restriction of a
> tolerance. How did spokesperson Andersen excuse the fact that the EPA
> approved processed free glutamic acid for use in an EPA approved spray?
> First, said Andersen, the free glutamic acid used in the spray is
> naturally occurring, and it's 99.3 per cent pure pharmaceutical grade
> L-glutamic acid. Yet, in admitting that the free glutamic acid in
> AuxiGro is not 100 per cent pure L-glutamic acid, and that it is
> pharmaceutical grade, Andersen contradicted herself, and actually made
> the point that 1) if the free glutamic acid used in AuxiGro were truly
> natural, it wouldn't be "pharmaceutical grade;" and 2) if the free
> glutamic acid used in AuxiGro were truly natural it would be 100 per
> cent, not 99.3 per cent pure L-glutamic acid.
>
> Andersen said something else very interesting. She said that the EPA is
> well aware of the fact that MSG causes adverse reactions. However, when
> Andersen used the term "MSG" she was referring to the one food
> ingredient called "monosodium glutamate," and not to the free glutamic
> acid in "monosodium glutamate" that causes adverse reactions. Failure to
> define terms, asAnderson did (and does) so handily, is both deceptive
> and misleading.
>
> What Andersen did is very clever. What she said makes no sense at all.
> No one has ever claimed that the processed free glutamic acid in AuxiGro
> comes out of a box labeled "monosodium glutamate." So for her to say it
> doesn't, is meaningless. On the other hand, the claim has been made that
> the free glutamic acid in AuxiGro will cause the same brain lesions,
> neuroendocrine disorders, adverse reactions and other diverse disease
> conditions that are caused by the free glutamic acid in "monosodium
> glutamate" and the other food additives that contain processed free
> glutamic acid. That claim is true, but Andersen does not address it. How
> do you refute someone who ignores legitimate questions and spews out
> irrelevant statements as though they pertained to your legitimate
> questions? You don't. The EPA defense of its approval of use of
> processed free glutamic acid in plant "growth enhancers" and its
> registration of AuxiGro has two parts to it: 1) ignoring those who
> question EPA actions, and 2) making the irrelevant statement that
> AuxiGro does not contain MSG (monosodium glutamate).
>
> Neither Andersen nor anyone else at the EPA ever addressed the criticism
> that approvals given by the EPA to allow the use of free glutamic acid
> and the product AuxiGro were inappropriate.The EPA, which approved the
> used of processed free glutamic acid in plant "growth enhancers," made a
> grievous error. But instead of recognizing and remedying that error once
> it was pointed out to them, the EPA began a cover-up. That cover-up
> included use of ambiguous words and phrases, half-truths, and downright
> lies told to consumers. The cover-up continued (and continues still)
> with a variation of those ambiguous words and phrases, half-truths, and
> downright lies told to legislators who inquire about spraying MSG into
> the environment.
>
> You might find the Emerald BioAgriculture sales literature interesting
>
> Sales literature promoting AuxiGro was once found on their Web site, but
> is now long gone. While Federal Register notices included the fact that
> there is processed free glutamic acid (MSG) in AuxiGro, the sales
> literature from Auxein Corporation did not mention the fact that their
> product contains free glutamic acid until the Truth in Labeling Campaign
> began to broadcast that information. In November, 1999, Auxein added
> deceptive, misleading, and untrue statements in an elaboration of its
> Product Page, wherein they essentially make the untrue assertion that
> the glutamic acid used in AuxiGro is chemically and biologically
> identical to that found in plants and animals.
>
> Sales literature did (on September 12, 2000), however, contain the
> following:
>
> "PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS
>
> HAZARDS TO HUMAN AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS &shy; CAUTION"
>
> If you think you might be reacting to AuxiGro sprayed on crops, you
> might want to try to (contact Emerald BioAgriculture (formerly Auxein
> Corporation) at the addresses that follow. (A friend recently told us
> that he tried to contact them by e-mail, but his e-mail was returned
> unopened.) By law, the company is required to forward reports of adverse
> reactions to the EPA. You might want to ask the EPA if Emerald
> BioAgriculture did so.
>
> John L. Mclntyre, Ph.D.
> President & CEO
> Emerald BioAgriculture (formerly Auxein Corporation)
> 3125 Sovereign Drive, Ste. B
> Lansing, MI 48911-4240
> Phone (888) 828-9346
> Fax (517) 882-7521
> mailto:%20sales@...
>




**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Please..do not send these "send to 10 friends" emails to this list.  Thank
you.


**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on
the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

----- Original Message -----
From: BETTY MOONEY
To: Jodi Lynn Brandon
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 9:13 PM
Subject: Fw: A hug certificate




       ---











----------------------------------------------------








                                 ---  A HUG CERTIFICATE

                                 LET'S SEE WHO READS THEIR EMAIL

















----------------------------------------------------








                                 ---  A HUG CERTIFICATE

                                 LET'S SEE WHO READS THEIR EMAIL

                                 A Hug Certificate for You!

                                 This poem ! is very sweet. It will be
interesting to see who sends it back. Forward this on and back. Thanks!

                                 If I could catch a rainbow
                                 I would do it just for you
                                 And share with you its beauty
                                 On the days you're feeling blue.

                                 If I could build a mountain
                                 You could call your very own;
                                 A place to find serenity,
                                 A place to be alone.

                                 If I could take your troubles
                                 I would toss them in the sea,
                                 But all these things I'm finding
                                 Are impossible for me.

                                 I cannot build a mountain
                                 Or catch a rainbow fair,
                                 But let me be what I know best,
                                 A friend who's always there.


                                 This is a Hug Certificate!!

                                 Send One to All Your Friends Who You Think
Deserve A Hug (Which, Hopefully Includes the Person Who Sent It to You). You
might send it to your enemies as well! It'll really tic 'em off!

















------------------------------------------------------------------------


         Internal Virus Database is out of date.
         Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
         Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.11/1820 - Release Date:
11/29/2008 6:52 PM



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I will be out of the office starting  04/20/2009 and will not return until
04/27/2009.

I will be out of office on vacation and will respond upon my return.



*******************************************************************************
This communication may contain privileged and/or confidential information. It
is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing
or using any of this information. If you received this communication in error,
please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety,
whether electronic or hard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic
personal
information about consumers subject to the restrictions of the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or redisclose
such information for any purpose other than to provide the services for which
you are receiving the information.

127 Public Square, Cleveland, OH 44114
*******************************************************************************


If you prefer not to receive future e-mail offers for products or services from
Key
send an e-mail to mailto:DNERequests@... with 'No Promotional E-mails' in
the
SUBJECT line.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Anyone try this?


>  AVE by american biologics
>




**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

From the Moss newsletter. Interesting . . .

From: subscribe@...(Cancer Decisions News Staff)
Date: Sun, Apr 19, 2009, 11:12am (CDT+5)

Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D. Weekly CancerDecisions.com
Newsletter #388 04/19/09

ANNOUNCING REPORT ON COLEY'S TOXINS

This week I am proud to announce publication of my latest online report,
Coley's Toxins: The Sum of Our Hope. Coley's toxins were-and are-among
the most promising cancer treatments ever devised. They have existed in
one form of another for over 100 years. But since the 1960s they have
been effectively banned in the United States, although they are still
available in several other countries (including Mexico and Germany).
What exactly are Coley's toxins (also called mixed bacterial vaccine)?
They are a powerful stimulator of the immune system made up of the
killed byproducts (or "toxins") of two potent bacteria. The first of
these is Streptococcus pyogenes, which causes the skin disease
erysipelas among other illnesses. The other is Serratia marcescens
(formerly known as Bacillus prodigiosus), which potentiates the action
of other bacteria and has independent anticancer activity.

After observing that the skin disease erysipelas sometimes triggers the
"spontaneous" regression of tumors, William B. Coley, MD (chief of the
bone cancer service at what is now Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer
Center in New York) began to use a killed mixture of bacteria in the
treatment of cancer. For many years, Coley's toxins were manufactured by
the Parke-Davis Co. and were accepted by the American Medical
Association (AMA). After Coley's death in 1936, his son, Bradley,
inherited his practice and continued to use the toxins until the early
1960s. But after passage of strict new amendments to the Food and Drug
Act, the FDA refused to "grandfather" Coley's treatment (i.e., accepted
them as a long-established part of medicine, as they did, for instance,
with aspirin) but banned it as a "new drug." This "new drug" was at that
time almost 75 years old.

This brand new 100-page report, with its many illustrations and 285
footnotes, contains the full story of one of the greatest unsung heroes
of modern medicine. William B. Coley devised what was arguably the first
effective non-surgical treatment for cancer and used it on over 1,000
patients between 1892 and 1936. The outcomes in these cases were
meticulously documented by his daughter, Helen Coley Nauts, in a series
of 20 or so disease-specific monographs.

The Coley story is a human drama of the greatest importance in
understanding the struggle between the conventional and alternative
trends in cancer research. It is also a collective tragedy, since this
promising treatment was effectively destroyed by a branch of the US
government, the FDA, and is not widely known, researched or used today.

I first became aware of Coley's toxins in 1974 when I interviewed
Kanematsu Sugiura, DSc, who had been Coley's colleague at Memorial
Hospital in the 1920s. In the following year I interviewed Mrs. Nauts at
her apartment on New York's Park Avenue. I wrote a chapter on William B.
Coley in my first book, The Cancer Industry (1980).
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1881025098?ie=UTF8&tag=cancerdecisio-20&linkCo\
de=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1881025098>
But since then a great deal of valuable new information has emerged
about Coley's heroic struggle to establish this unusual treatment. In
preparation for this new report I interviewed some of the world's
experts on Coley's toxins and elicited their thoughts on the safety and
effectiveness of this treatment. I believe that the basis now exists for
reevaluating Coley's results and reviving what was best in his methods.

It is a great pleasure for me to publish a full account of Coley's
toxins, which will undoubtedly come as a revelation to readers who
suspect that there are more promising treatments available than the
limited options that are usually offered by standard oncology.

ADVANCE COMMENTS ON RALPH MOSS' COLEY'S TOXINS: THE SUM OF OUR HOPE

"I found Ralph Moss's report on the work of Dr. William B. Coley
fascinating. I agree that Coley's procedure should be re-investigated,
particularly in well controlled clinical trials, so that it can be
appraised properly once and for all."

-Jacques Miller, MD, PhD, FRS, discoverer of the immunological function
of the thymus and of the two major subsets of lymphocytes (T cells and B
cells)

"This is a must-read for cancer patients, physicians and cancer
researchers. As usual, Ralph Moss has done an excellent job explaining a
complicated and tragic history that has for too long been ignored by
those responsible for public health. In the treatment of cancer, there
is nothing on the medical horizon more important than the work of
Coley."

-Don MacAdam, chief executive officer, MBVax Bioscience, Inc.

"In Coley's Toxins, Ralph Moss completes the recuperative historical
project begun in his classic book, The Cancer Industry. For the first
time we have a comprehensive history of over a century of research on
the bacterial vaccine therapy.... If enough people join with Ralph Moss
in demanding that the undone science gets done, we may well find that a
safe, affordable, and efficacious treatment for cancer has been
available for over a hundred years."

-David J. Hess, PhD, Professor of Science and Technology Studies,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

"Despite my many years of research on Dr William B. Coley, Ralph Moss
has revealed many new insights into who Coley was, the challenges he
faced in establishing immunology as a new treatment for cancer, and what
his work will mean in the future for patients with cancer."

-Stephen A. Hoption Cann, PhD, University of British Columbia

Coley's Toxins: The Sum of Our Hope :
http://www.cancerdecisions.com/mrstore/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=84\
&products_id=627

Hi Everyone,

"The Low Dose Naltrexone (LDN) and Colloidal Minerals Webring" is a collection
of 24 sites containing a great deal of helpful and useful information about both
LDN and mineral colloids. It can be found at

http://l.webring.com/hub?ring=colloidalmineral

Check it out!

With best wishes,

Dudley Delany, R.N., M.A., D.C.

http://profiles.yahoo.com/dudley_delany



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Patterns: Living Near a Highway Linked to Arthritis

Top of Form

By NICHOLAS BAKALAR

Published: April 13, 2009 NYTimes

The risk for rheumatoid arthritis is not large — about 1 percent of the
population is affected — but a new study suggests a surprising factor that
seems to increase that risk: living near a highway.

Web Link

Exposure to Traffic Pollution and Increased Risk for Rheumatoid Arthritis
(Environmental Health Perspectives)

Environmental pollutants, including cigarette smoke, have been shown to
raise the risk, and this suggests that other factors that increase
inflammation, like car and truck exhaust, may also be associated with the
disease.

In this study, which appears online in Environmental Health Perspectives,
researchers examined the records of 90,297 women enrolled in a larger
investigation of women’s health from 1976 to 2004. Using the location of their
homes in 2000, the scientists calculated the distance each lived from roads with
more than two lanes of traffic. A total of 687 women in the investigation
developed arthritis.

After controlling for age, cigarette smoking, oral contraceptive use and
many other variables, researchers found that the women who lived within 55
yards of a large road had a 31 percent increased risk for rheumatoid arthritis
compared with those living 220 or more yards away.

Does this mean people should not live near highways?

“I wouldn’t advise anyone to move on the basis of one study,” said Jaime
E. Hart, the lead author and a research fellow at Harvard. “There could be a
lot of other things that distance to roadway means besides exposure to
pollutants.”



*** Be a link in a larger chain--if you see something interesting, pass it
along and share the wealth! ***






**************
Great deals on Dell’s most popular laptops – Starting at
$479
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220631252x1201390195/aol?redir=http:%2\
F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B213968550%3B35701427%3Bh)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Please if you can, try to paste the actual article into the email for those
who are unable to open links and attachments.  Thanks All.


**************
The
Average US Credit Score is 692. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221421325x1201417411/aol?redir=http:%2\
F%2Fwww.
freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID%3D62%26bcd%3
DAprilAvgfooterNO62)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]