22 October 2012
3-D mammograms are all risk, no benefit
Cancer-causing radiation blasted right at a woman’s boobs. Sure, if you want to call that an “advance” in mammograms go right ahead. And I’ll call you delusional when you do.
I’m talking about the “3-D mammogram,” and it takes the bad idea behind mammograms and makes it worse by delivering DOUBLE the radiation because the women STILL have to also undergo the standard mammogram.
That means it’s twice as dangerous… and twice as likely to actually CAUSE the very cancer it’s supposed to detect. But it’s not twice as good. There isn’t even any data to prove it saves more lives or detects more cancers.
All it can claim is a barely noticeable 7 percent improvement in “accuracy.”
Big whoop!
But docs say it’s not about that little bump in accuracy — it’s about eliminating uncertainty for the 10 percent of women who are called back for a second mammogram and a second blast of radiation anyway when the results of the first one are unclear.
Can you believe that logic??? Give EVERYONE double the radiation because of the 10 percent who might get it anyway.
What utter hogwash. But the docs pushing 3-D mammograms don’t give a hoot about the 7 percent, the 10 percent, the 3, or the D. The only number they care about is 50 — as in 50 bucks.
That’s how much extra they make off each 3-D mammogram — 50 bucks a pop. And since the 3-D part of the procedure isn’t covered by most insurance policies, that money doesn’t go through the middleman.
It’s pure profit that goes right into your doctor’s bank account. That’s why he doesn’t just like this procedure… he LOVES it.
But the fact is, women don’t need mammograms in two dimensions, three dimensions, or the Fifth Dimension of the Twilight Zone. Years of breast cancer screenings have led to a massive increase in the number of cancers treated with poisonous drugs and disfiguring surgeries — not to mention cancers potentially caused by radiation from mammograms — but they’ve barely made a dent in the survival rate.
And that’s the only number that REALLY counts.
Follow the common sense path to staying cancer-free instead. Eat right with plenty of healthy organic meats and nutrient-packed raw milk. And don’t forget your immune-boosting vitamins including calcium and vitamin D which, according to one study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, can dramatically drop cancer risks for women.
http://douglassreport.com/2012/10/22/3-D-mammograms-are-all-risk-no-benefit/
Showing posts with label DouglassReport. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DouglassReport. Show all posts
Friday, 16 November 2012
Wednesday, 10 October 2012
Improve Your Immunity with Vitamin B3
21 September 2012
The ordinary vitamin that can wipe out staph infections
MRSA meets its match
Staph bacteria are some of the most dangerous bugs on the planet, including the MRSA germs that kill close to 20,000 Americans every year.
Drugs can’t even kill some of these baddies… so your best bet is to empower your own immune system to wipe them out for you.
That could turn out to be a lot easier than you think — because there’s a simple, safe, and completely natural vitamin that can turn your immune cells into staph-killing machines.
It’s niacin, aka vitamin B3, and in a series of recent lab tests it boosted the killing power of immune cells by 1,000 times.
It didn’t take days or weeks to kick in like many drugs do, either. In a situation where time is critical and every minute counts, it took the niacin just a few hours to turn immune cells into the microscopic equivalent of the Incredible Hulk.
Bacteria won’t like those cells when they’re angry… but you will.
Naturally, the experts are blabbing on and on about how the research is early, and it is. They’re saying we need more study, and we do. And they’re claiming no one should try B3 for MRSA on their own just yet.
And that’s just bullpucky.
This vitamin is safe and cheap. If you or your loved ones are battling this deadly bug, boost those B3 levels ASAP to give your immune system a fighting chance… before it’s too late
http://douglassreport.com/2012/09/21/mrsa-meets-its-match/
The ordinary vitamin that can wipe out staph infections
Staph bacteria are some of the most dangerous bugs on the planet, including the MRSA germs that kill close to 20,000 Americans every year.
Drugs can’t even kill some of these baddies… so your best bet is to empower your own immune system to wipe them out for you.
That could turn out to be a lot easier than you think — because there’s a simple, safe, and completely natural vitamin that can turn your immune cells into staph-killing machines.
It’s niacin, aka vitamin B3, and in a series of recent lab tests it boosted the killing power of immune cells by 1,000 times.
It didn’t take days or weeks to kick in like many drugs do, either. In a situation where time is critical and every minute counts, it took the niacin just a few hours to turn immune cells into the microscopic equivalent of the Incredible Hulk.
Bacteria won’t like those cells when they’re angry… but you will.
Naturally, the experts are blabbing on and on about how the research is early, and it is. They’re saying we need more study, and we do. And they’re claiming no one should try B3 for MRSA on their own just yet.
And that’s just bullpucky.
This vitamin is safe and cheap. If you or your loved ones are battling this deadly bug, boost those B3 levels ASAP to give your immune system a fighting chance… before it’s too late
http://douglassreport.com/2012/09/21/mrsa-meets-its-match/
Saturday, 29 September 2012
Organics beat conventional foods in new study
24 September 2012
Why you should pay more for your food
Love to gamble? Then forget Vegas and head to your local supermarket, where the buy-in is cheap and the stakes are high.
Inexpensive non-organic meats are so loaded with potentially deadly germs that you’re taking your life into your own hands every time you bite into a pork chop or a chicken cutlet.
One new study out of Stanford finds that non-organic meats not only contain more drug-resistant bacteria, but they’re also a third more likely to contain at least three different types of these microscopic monsters than organic meats.
Sounds to me like big news, right? So what’s the headline out of this one? I’m sure you’ve seen some version of it by now — here’s the one that ran in big letters on Stanford’s Web site:
“Little evidence of health benefits from organic foods, Stanford study finds.”
Huh??? You have to wonder if these people read their own study, because along with finding a much lower risk of drug-resistant superbugs in organic meats, the study also found that organic fruits and veggies contain much lower levels of pesticides.
That adds up to HUGE evidence of health benefits from organic foods… yet because the look at close to 250 studies found that many organic foods have the same nutrition levels as non-organics, they’re calling it a tie.
But even that part just ain’t so.
I don’t know how they cherry-picked the studies they used in this analysis, but the ones I’ve seen over the years have been consistent and crystal clear: Organic meats have higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids and other essentials, while organic fruits and vegetables have more antioxidants and other vitamins.
But that’s just the icing on the cake. The fact that you don’t have to char your meats to a crisp to make sure all the potentially deadly germs are killed is a much bigger plus, in my book. And while I’m not going to panic over a little pesticide exposure here and there, keeping your exposure down when you can is definitely going to be better for you in the long run.
http://douglassreport.com/2012/09/24/Why-you-should-pay-more-for-your-food/
Love to gamble? Then forget Vegas and head to your local supermarket, where the buy-in is cheap and the stakes are high.
Inexpensive non-organic meats are so loaded with potentially deadly germs that you’re taking your life into your own hands every time you bite into a pork chop or a chicken cutlet.
One new study out of Stanford finds that non-organic meats not only contain more drug-resistant bacteria, but they’re also a third more likely to contain at least three different types of these microscopic monsters than organic meats.
Sounds to me like big news, right? So what’s the headline out of this one? I’m sure you’ve seen some version of it by now — here’s the one that ran in big letters on Stanford’s Web site:
“Little evidence of health benefits from organic foods, Stanford study finds.”
Huh??? You have to wonder if these people read their own study, because along with finding a much lower risk of drug-resistant superbugs in organic meats, the study also found that organic fruits and veggies contain much lower levels of pesticides.
That adds up to HUGE evidence of health benefits from organic foods… yet because the look at close to 250 studies found that many organic foods have the same nutrition levels as non-organics, they’re calling it a tie.
But even that part just ain’t so.
I don’t know how they cherry-picked the studies they used in this analysis, but the ones I’ve seen over the years have been consistent and crystal clear: Organic meats have higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids and other essentials, while organic fruits and vegetables have more antioxidants and other vitamins.
But that’s just the icing on the cake. The fact that you don’t have to char your meats to a crisp to make sure all the potentially deadly germs are killed is a much bigger plus, in my book. And while I’m not going to panic over a little pesticide exposure here and there, keeping your exposure down when you can is definitely going to be better for you in the long run.
http://douglassreport.com/2012/09/24/Why-you-should-pay-more-for-your-food/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)