01.11.09
Posted in Book Reviews, Health-related--Natural Alternative Treatments, Treatment Decisions, Uncategorized at 1:37 am by Administrator
Yesterday I checked out a small book called Flax Oil as a True Aid Against Arthritis, Heart Infarction, Cancer and Other Diseases by Dr. Johanna Budwig. Amongst the alternative treatment advocates, Budwig is known for the flax oil and cottage cheese mixture to treat diseases such as cancer. I had read about her years ago, but since I was already trying other healing modalities, outside of the basics, I didn’t spend much time learning about Budwig and her theories. More recently I was encouraged to revisit Budwig’s flax oil and cottage cheese mixture as I had been experiencing very dry skin and started using flax and borage oil. I felt that the oils were helping me and it made me wonder if I should try adding the cottage cheese. Co-incidently, Patti wrote and asked my opinion about Budwig’s diet around the same time and mentioned of a man whose liver cancer appears to be improving using the flax oil cottage cheese mixture. In addition, my father’s myeloma took a big leap, and so I felt more compelled to revisit Budwig’s diet again.
Upon searching the net, I found that the basic idea of the flax oil and cottage cheese mixture was to make the omega 3s in the oil water soluble, and thus more usable to the body. Just taking the oil alone apparently is not used as efficiently by the body. I found in Budwig’s book that it is the cysteine in the cottage cheese that makes the oil water soluble. By the way, the reason I decided to check out one of her books is because I found that the “recipe” for the flax/cottage cheese mixture was not all the same on the net. I wanted to know what Budwig’s actual recommendation was rather than what was everyone else’s modifications. And being that Budwig wrote in German, I didn’t have a good selection to choose from in English but Flax Oil as a True Aid Against Arthritis, Heart Infarction, Cancer and Other Diseases. As it turns out, this little book is a transcript of three of her public presentations. So the amount of information is limited.
Although Budwig’s presentations were relatively short, I am glad that I read them as there was information in there that I did not find highlighted much on the net regarding her views. I had known from the net that along with the flax/cottage cheese mixture, Budwig recommended a vegetarian diet. I also knew that she was against drugs, chemos, radiation, and even supplements. For that view, she did resonate well with me. She also advocated avoiding preservatives, solidified and damaged fats such as hydrolyzed oils, and pesticides as she felt that these things interfered with the body’s fat and protein bonds which is essential to proper cellular functioning. What her book explained much better than what I found on the net was the relationship of the sun and her theory of healing. I had read Kime’s book, Sunlight, so really appreciate Budwig’s insight regarding sunlight, a view which I didn’t not read in Kime’s book. That is, Budwig felt that the electrons stored in our bodies helped to attract photons from the sun. We need good electrons in our bodies such as comes through electron-rich foods and oils such as flax oil to better utilize the photons from the sun, otherwise the sun can be harmful to us. This reminds me of Kime’s book wherein he deals with the common belief that the sun causes cancer. According to the study he cites, the sun only caused cancer in the subjects who were low in antioxidants. Those who had good levels of antioxidants actually “benefitted” from exposure to sun. Budwig’s view was that if we did not have sufficient electrons, then we would not be able to absorb enough photons from the sun and that when we burned during sun exposure, it indicates that we don’t have enough electrons to absorb the sun’s rays safely. Her’s a quote from her book regarding that,
“The living body can only take in and store solar electrons through resonance absorption. To absorb the electrons into the living body, we must already have in the body’s electron system either the same wavelength or a multiplicity of wavelengths. Thus, the human who eats refined foodstuffs or food which lacks electrons, not only cuts off his oxygen enough to suffocate himself, he also cuts himself off from the effects of the sun. When such people cover their skin with a layer of paraffin as sun protection oil, and then lie in the sun, the burn damage is very great, because the electrons, which cannot be stored, and the electron-rich-biological molecule, are missing. It has been proved that all the poisons which affect the action of enzymes, including paraffin and the benzopyrin in cigarettes, have an irritative effect on the entire system of electron absorption, storage and further conduction.”
From that I’m think Budwig is stating that the electrons in our bodies attract the energy from the sun. Without the appropriate electrons we would not attract the energy from the sun, and thus not obtain the full benefits the sun offers to our health. Since flax oil is rich in electrons (according the Budwig), it works synergistically with the energy from the sun by attracting the sun’s photons. It appears to me that Budwig felt that we obtain energy from the sun, and that is why all the electron-photon storage is so important. This passage from her bood seems to sum it up.
“. . . We can store the sun’s energy and the living body is then in a position to summon, depending on the situation, energy from this storage depot of electrons. When these depots are empty, the person then feels irritable, tired, and his limbs become heavy. But we are able to replenish these storage depots by taking in electron-rich seed oils. These are set to receive solar energy.”
In addition to attracting protons, electrons are important because they have a great affinity to oxygen, which stimulates our breathing and our entire being. Kime wrote in his book, Sunlight many other benefits of the sun, provided you’re nourished well enough to benefit from the sun. Such benefits of the sun are conversion of cholesterol to vit D and other hormonal stimulation. John Ott, also wrote several books documenting his observations of the benefits of the sun to man and other living organisms including animals and plants. He stumbled upon the effects of lighting from his hobby of time-lapsed photography. He noticed that plants grew differently depending upon whether certain light waves were filtered or not. He later concluded after many experiments and studies that full-spectrum lighting is the only beneficial lighting to our health. He even advocated not wearing any eyeglasses as that inhibited the full benefits of the sun through the eyes.
All this time I had no idea how important Budwig felt the sun was to our health. So this is another aspect that I agree on with her. Budwig stated that,
“According to the computael findings of those modern physicists, the quantum biologists, there is no entity in nature, in life, which as a higher concentration of solar electrons than man. It then folows that man has a true rapport with sunlight. . .”
“The electrons in our food serve as the resonance system for the sun’s energy.”
If Budwig is correct, then it stands to reason that we should be careful to put electron-rich foods into our bodies, and not dead foods devoid of nutrition. While I have read about the importance of the sun to our health, I had no idea that Budwig also felt strongly about it and is part of her healing modality aside from her flax oil and cottage cheese mixture.
Okay, so now that I’ve got a “little” better understanding of Budwig’s ideas, I have already tried the flax oil and cottage cheese mixture, as have my parents. We started yesterday. HOWEVER, today I noticed on the cottage cheese list of ingredients that it has “citric acid.” Cripes. I’m trying to improve my health, not start taking excitotoxins. . . Whole Foods only had two selections for organic cottage cheese and I bought one of each (Horizon and Clover). Now I notice that both has citric acid as an ingredient. I’m gonna have to find another brand that doesn’t have citric acid in it or learn how to make my own cottage cheese. At any rate, I hope we start noticing some benefits soon.
Marlakins
Permalink
01.12.08
Posted in Health-related--Natural Alternative Treatments, Treatment Decisions, Uncategorized at 2:55 pm by Administrator
This morning I got the chance to pack the emergency herbs I want to take on my trip with me. These herbs are specifically in case I get a UTI away from home. Since I have a history of bone marrow failure, I make it a point to avoid conventional antibiotics because they can suppress the bone marrow. Instead, I have opted to use food and herbal based treatments in the event I need some antibiotics. I developed the need when I had a few bouts of UTIs. A little more detail of what I did when they first started to crop up can be read on my “pages” section titled “Onion Puree Soup Recipe” http://goatrevolution.com/blog2/onion-puree-soup-recipe/. Yesterday I was able to pick up the ingredients, and below is a picture of all the supplies I needed to pack my own herbs. I have veggie capsules, a pill packer (the white tray with the holes), a scale, a spoon, plastic bags, and of course the herbs. Off to the right are a couple of other things I took, Stone Free, by Planetary Herbs, and also Chapparal. But this time, I’m including powdered chapparal in my pills, so will not have to take it separately.
The first time I packed these herbs, some of the ingredients we had were not powdered, so we just put them in the blender and powdered them ourselves. It worked just fine, but it’s easier and less work to just buy the herbs already powdered for you. But if they’re not available powdered (which sometimes they’re not), just powder it yourself. It appears to be more effective powdered because the smaller particles makes it easier for the body to extract the nutrients. Some sources say they are 30% more powerful when powdered.
Below is a picture where the powdered herbs are visible, and the beginnings of the first steps of packing the herbs are about to get underway.
The ingredients I used are Echinacea root, Goldenseal, Uva Ursi, Dandelion Leaf, Ginger root, and Gotu Kola. Since they are all already powdered, the rest of the process is very easy. Take a teaspoon of each ingredient and put them in a bag. I use a regular ziplock bag. My husband has been very interested in herbs, so he’s the one packing them in the following pictures.
Once all the herbs are measured out, we weigh them all out to make sure we have enough powder to fill all the capsules. There are different sized capsules, but we use capsules which hold 1/2 gram each.
Other uses I have for the scale regarding herbs is when I make some teas like Uva Ursi. I would weight out 15 grams of Uva Ursi dried “leaves” for about 2 cups of water worth of tea. I don’t think it has to be that exact, but I just like to make sure I use about 15 grams a day when I was fighting a UTI.
After all the herbs are measured out and weighed, zip up the bag and shake it all around to evenly mix all the ingredients together. We like to write all the ingredients on the bag in case you run out and want to add more stuff later.
One the ingredients are sufficiently mixed, take the veggie capsules and load the pill packer. This is done by opening the veggie capsules and placing the larger ends in the pill packer. Once all the veggie capsules are inserted, pour in the mixed herbs.
After you pour on the herbs, use the small card to help scrape the herbs across the tray and into the capsules. Once the capsules look fairly full, take the pill tapper, and tap in the herbs to pack them tighter into the capsules. Do this about 2 or 3 times as shown below.
It can be seen below after tapping the herbs down how much room is left that can be filled with more herbs. This is why you pack with the tapper. Just go over it again with the card scraper to move the herbs into the capsules until all the capsules are sufficiently packed.
Once they’re packed, lower the top tray. This will expose the upper half of the capsules. Replace all the veggie caps onto the capsules.
This is what they look like with all the capsules capped.
Before removing the capsules, pour the loose herbs back into the plastic bag where the rest of the mixed ingredients are.
This is what they’ll look like just before the filled capsules are ready to be removed from the tray.
Now the last step is to remove them from the tray. Just take a clean bag, and dump the capsules in.
And “viola!” They’re done and ready to rock and roll, heheheh. . .
The last thing I wanted to share was how much I took. When my UTI was in full force, for me that meant pain upon urination, bleeding, the uncomfortable urge to urinate when you just went, etc., I would take two capsules every hour. I did that until the symptoms would all go away, and that usually would be about 3 days for me to start feeling back to my old self. My old self meaning, I don’t feel pain, no bleeding, no uncomfortable urge to go when you know you shouldn’t need to go. I would spread out the pills to two every two hours, then if all were still well, the next day I’d go to every 3 hours, then the next day to 3x a day. And continue that for about another week for good measure. Since you never really know exactly what is going to work, I like to attack at various angles, so I also took the onion puree soups when convenient (meaning when I was home), and unsweetened cranberry juice occasionally (I don’t like to take it too often because all the sugar seems to bother my skin), and I also drink uva ursi tea and dandelion leaf tea for good measure. May sound like a lot of work, but I found it to be worth it. No worries of ruining my gut or my bone marrow, and the peace of mind that I know what’s in my pills. No fillers, artificial ingredients, binders, etc. I thank God for herbs. 
Okay that’s about it, hope I didn’t miss anything. . .
So next post. . . how to roll your own reefers, ha! Just kidding. You figure that one on your own, ha ha!
Okay, off to make myself useful!
Marlakins
Permalink
10.25.07
Posted in Anything goes, Health-related--Natural Alternative Treatments, Treatment Decisions, Uncategorized at 10:31 am by Administrator
I’m just about finished reading Black Markets, The Supply and Demand of Body Parts by Michele Goodwin. I wanted to keep the book a tad longer to go back and review a few things, but alas, it is due today, and not renewable because someone’s waiting on this book, erp! So really quickly, I’m making a few comments while I still have this book on my lap.
While Goodwin does bring up many good points, what appears clear to me is that she is coming from the presumed standpoint that transplants are good. And from there, she discusses the various ways of organ procurement. My personal opinion is that in order to make a good decision of whether we even should be procuring organs for transplant, we need to look more closely at the “process” of procuring organs in addition to the actual transplants themselves. I believe there is more to consider than just that some people sell their organs or that some organs come from cadavers (I realize there are many other aspects of organ procurement discussed by Goodwin, but the bottom line is organs either come from live donors or cadavers).
From a little further reading on the net, it appears that calling some organ donors “cadavers,” is misleading. A so-called “brain-dead” person is technically “not” a cadaver. This person is still alive with a beating heart. I think this is a very import concept to understand because “vital” organs such a the heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, etc. appears to only be transplantable if it is removed “fresh” from a still warm body, not from a cadaver. So technically, there are only live donors. The difference is whether the donor “continues” to live after donation or not. I think this is a very big missing part in Goodwin’s book.
Okay, so words are easy to manipulate. Am I just making a big deal of a technicality of whether a comatose patient is alive or not and can feel pain or not or ever has the possibility of regaining consciousness? Consider the below excerpt from a person who supposedly has been personally involved with harvesting organs for transplantation:
The late Dr Phillip Keep, former consultant anaesthetist at the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital in the United Kingdom, risked his career by publicly saying what the anaesthetist profession had been debating privately for decades,
“Almost everyone will say they have felt uneasy about it. Nurses get really, really upset. You stick the knife in and the pulse and blood pressure shoot up. If you don’t give anything at all, the patient will start moving and wriggling around and it’s impossible to do the operation. The surgeon always asked us to paralyse the patient.”
The full article can be read here
This link gives more details about harvesting organs such as how long organs are viable after harvest and other information such as what is done to the patient to keep his/her organs viable. Organs can actually be no longer viable for transplantations if they are taken from the body only as short as 15 minutes after the heart stops beating.
There is so much more to know regarding what is truly involved with transplants. It’s easy to accept transplants when the details are so watered down to terms such as “donations,” “cadavers,” “gift of life,” “life-saving transplants,” “brain-dead.” etc. What we don’t hear about is all the compromise, pain and suffering, and experimentations on people and animals. Do we ever stop to consider how this “technology” came about? What sacrifices were made? Who were sacrificed? How about the paradox of hoping that another person would die, so that another person could live? Such is the case while “waiting” for an organ to become available from a so-called cadaver. And what of the poor who sell their organs for incredibly small amounts of money? One such example can be read in this article of a Filipino who sold one of his kidneys for $1,750. Apparently, many others have sold their body parts as well because of sheer desperation of their living conditions. Goodwin wrote that in Iraq, some have sold their organs for as little as $750. What kind of world do we live in where we are willing to take someones organs and think it is okay because they were paid for it? Keep in mind that often times more care is given to the organ recipients than to the organ donors. Many of those poor organ donors don’t get follow-up care to make sure their surgeries don’t end with complications. Why not spend more effort into finding out why the need for organ transplants are increasing? Why not find ways to heal our organs, rather than taking organs from others. Instead, we keep pumping ourselves full of drugs and toxins which damage our kidneys and livers, and other organs.
While I do think Goodwin missed a big aspect of transplantation in her book, I do appreciate her insight into the inequality of blacks and whites throughout our history. I had not realized the extent of sacrifice made at the expense of blacks toward the advancement in our western medical knowledge. The grave robbing aspects were also of interest to me as well as medical experiments done on black people that I had never known about, and likely a great majority of people still don’t know about. And while I currently am not in favor of transplants, I did come across a book review of a book called, “Kidney for Sale By Owner, Human Organs, Transplantation, and the Market” by Mark J. Cherry. The book reviewer stated that he used to be against organ transplantation until he read this book. Soooo, I reserved a copy of it at my library, and just last night I picked it up. I want to see what Mr. Cherry has to say and if he can persuade me too that organ transplantation is okay. We’ll see. . . And also Goodwin brings up other very controversial aspects of body parts such as cloning, designer babies, etc. I was a tad disappointed that she didn’t go into more details regarding some of the pictures she included in her book. There were short captions below each picture, but no further details. For instance, she had pictures of facilities where organ parts are harvested, testimony of a witness of organs harvested from Chinese prisoners, etc. What a teaser. . . Okay, off to return Goodwin’s book for the person who is waiting for it.
Toodles for now,
Marla
Permalink
10.15.07
Posted in Anything goes, Health-related--Natural Alternative Treatments, Hmmm Moments, Treatment Decisions, Uncategorized at 10:34 am by Administrator
From reading Black Markets, the Supply and Demand of Body Parts, by Michele Goodwin, the topic of corneal transplants came up. Apparently, there was a scandal regarding inappropriate harvesting of corneas from homicide victims. What I was not aware of, and evidently many other people are not aware of, is “presumed consent.” Presumed consent involves those persons who have *not* specified whether they want to donate organs or not. So once a person dies, and for whatever reason his organs (particularly corneas in Goodwin’s chapter, which discusses presumed consent) have not be specifically barred from donation, then it is taken for granted that his organs can be used for donation. The idea being that, “If he were alive, then he would agree to donate because he didn’t specifically say that he didn’t want to donate.” Ack! I had never heard of that, and apparently, many others including many politicians were not aware of presumed consent in regards to organ harvesting when asked about it.
The particular scandal regarding presumed consent and organ harvesting occurred when it was found that the corneas of many homicide victims were harvested without consent of the donor, or the families and without the families knowing that it was done. Evidently, corneas are easy to take without it being obvious, especially since the deceased eyes are usually closed during viewings. These corneas were later sold and resold for profit. Apparently, cornea transplants are a common thing. I didn’t know that. So I looked up cornea transplants and found that it is estimated that in the U.S. (depending upon which source one reads), there are around 20,000 to 40,000 corneal transplants done a year. Wow, where do all those corneas come from? Well, apparently, lots of them came from homicide victims under the presumed consent reasoning. While not all deaths end in autopsy, all homicide victims routinely are sent for autopsy. And it is during that autopsy where these homicide victims end up “donating” their corneas or anything else deemed harvestable.
Goodwin discusses the arguments for and against presumed consent, which does appear to be a bit controversial.
Another thing that came to my attention was “do corneal transplant recipients need to take any immuosuppressant?” It seems not, and reminds me of other “implants” wherein foreign material is placed inside the body seemingly without the body rejecting them–i.e. metal screws, various plastics, etc. Hmmm. While it is obvious that those items are not naturally supposed to be in the body, it does seem that the body will accept some foreign materials to a certain point. BUT, I do know that places like the Gerson Institute does not accept people with any types of implants because the idea is that once the immune system is fully functioning and in pristine condition, then it will recognize foreign materials and cause the body to reject those foreign items–including metal hip screws, pacemakers, breast implants, etc. I have heard from a man who had corneal implants who claimed that he was not feeling well, so he went on a more healthful diet, which did improve his overall feelings, BUT he also started to reject his corneal implants. The idea is that once on a better diet and his immune system was improving, it also started to recognize that his corneas were foreign and proceeded to attack them. And then again, some of those foreign materials are considered in themselves immunosuppressants, like various plastics are believed to cause cancers and other health problems. Consider the debates on silicone breast implants and pthalates that can leech into foods from various food containers and wraps. But the bottom line is if corneal implants don’t require immunosuppressants, it seems to me that they are not in the same league as full organ transplants. Therefore they don’t seem as “wrong” to me. Although some of the “harvesting” practices do seem questionable because it not only involves “non-consent” issues, but also involves lack of screening of the tissue–i.e. it is common to “not” obtain medical history of homicide victim, so the quality of his organs, or in this case, corneas, can be of questionable quality since transmissible diseases can be passed on through contaminated corneas.
Okay, I’m out of time again. Must dash, but hope to get back with a little more on transplants, particularly since this topic brought back my old interest on the history of transplants. I blew off the dust on my old notes and thought it would be interesting to share some transplant history.
But for now, toodles!
Marlakins
Permalink
04.20.07
Posted in Anything goes, Health-related--Natural Alternative Treatments, Historical Trivia, Hmmm Moments, Treatment Decisions, Uncategorized at 5:41 pm by Administrator
Anyone who has explored alternative treatments for long will likely have run into the controversy of the value or dangers of vaccines. One of the claims is that the recipient of a vaccine can actually come down with the very disease they are being vaccinated against. As a layperson, I had wondered if that was true. First of all, I had no idea how vaccines were made aside from the basic knowledge that vaccines contain a small amount of the virus for which we want to mount an immune response for protection to prevent a full-blown case of the particular virus. Subsequent reading and searching revealed bits and pieces of how vaccines were/are developed and produced. Basically, there are two types of vaccines–1. the attenuated version (weakened virus), and 2. killed version where the virus used in the vaccination is dead. My first question was, “Why do they use “attenuated” vaccines AND “killed virus” vaccines? What’s the difference aside from one is dead and one is weak? Well, today while reading a book called, The Invisible Enemy, A Natural History of Viruses, I found the answer. “Attenuated” vaccines supposedly offers longer-lasting protection against a full outbreak of the virus than the “killed” version of the vaccine. Hmm. So that seems to imply that we don’t have “life-time” protection if one lasts longer than the other. . . I don’t recall ever being told I need to update my vaccines as an adult unless there were unusual circumstances like a bone marrow transplant. I find that a curiosity, and maybe I’ll find my answer to that one somewhere else since I don’t recall running into the answer in the above mentioned book. However, I did find some other answers to questions I had wondered about regarding viruses and vaccines.
Another question I had wondered about was, “Is it possible to actually come down with the very disease we are being vaccinated against?” Just the mention of that is enough to get some incredulous stares, but some books I’ve read say, “yes,”one can come down with an infection from the virus introduced by vaccination. Since those claims are usually from the “anti-vaccine” party, I had wondered what the “pro-vaccine” party would say. Dorothy H. Crawford, author of “The Invisible Enemy” apparently belongs to the pro-vaccine party. She wrote that those who choose not to vaccinate are like the “parasites” of society. Ack! But even she has admitted in her book that, yes, it is true that a recipient of an attenuated vaccine could actually develop the disease of which one is being vaccinated against. It is on page 210 of her book where I learned of the term, “back mutations.” Crawford explains, for example, how the polio vaccines are attenuated, and each batch is tested in animals to make sure that it has lost its capacity to cause paralytic polio before it is released for human use. She futher states that, “But although it is extremely safe, it does cause paralytic polio in around one in every two million of those vaccinated.” (Not comforting to the parents of the one-in-two-million child who develops paralysis). Continuing on, “Somewhat surprisingly, comparison of genetic material from the paralytic and attenuated vaccine strains of polio virus shows very few differences–in most instances just two mutations. In cases of vaccine-associated paralytic polio, further mutations have returned these single changes back to their original form in the virulent virus“. . . There’s our “back mutuation”. . . So it does exist. . . But get a load of the next couple paragraphs she writes.
“In 1983, Philip Minor from the UK’s National Institute for Biological Standards and Controls, set out to see how common back mutations of the vaccine strain of polio virus actually were. He studied his own baby son, David, who was four months old when he had his first dose of oral polio vaccine. Minor collect all his baby’s faeces and detected polio virus in them for the following 73 days. But it was molecular analysis of these viruses which really surprised him. He detected back mutations which increased the virulence of the virus as early as two days after immunization and more followed. To show that this was not just a fluke result, Minor repeated the same experiment two years later on his daughter, Elizabeth, and came up with the same answer. Up until then polio mutants had only been found in rare cases of vaccine-associated paralytic disease, but thankfully the Minor children remained healthy.
“We now know that back mutations occur in almost all those vaccinated, but why these viruses so rarely cause paralysis is not yet clear. However, with this level of reversion to a potential disease-causing virus and circulation of vaccine virus in the community complete eradication of paralytic polio and the virus will probably not be feasible using live attenuated vaccine. For this we may ned to change back to the earlier killed preparation.”
That pretty much confirms it for me that what people like Neil Z. Miller, author of Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective?, and Tim O’Shea, author of The Sanctity of Human Blood: Vaccination is Not Immunization claim. That there is risk that those being vaccinated can actually become infected from the vaccination itself and that the true decline in the incidence of infection may not be attributed to vaccinations, but rather to the cyclic nature of the host of viruses to gain natural immunity in general. For instance, Miller writes that the incidences of polio was already on the decline when vaccines were introduced. Thus, the seeming erradication of polio was not due to the vaccinations, but rather the natural course of host resistance to the disease. That idea is not completely out in left field as Crawford confirms that viruses have a tendency to do this in her example of the flu virus epidemics. (Interestingly, she defines an epidemic as any unusual increase of an infection in a community, so the recent 10 cases of AA in the first few months of the year in San Diego could fit that description since, with their population, they should have been allotted only about 6 cases for the entire year; while a pandemic is an unusual world-wide increased incidence of an infection). Crawford writes that “although flu outbreaks occur every winter, full-blown epidemics only happen every 8-10 years. . . and flu “pandemics” occur on average every 10-40 years. Apparently, this has to do with the genetic makeup of the virus and the natural resistence the hosts develop. Thus, it seems plausible that Miller is right that the viruses, such as polio, were just naturally loosing steam on their own before the vaccines came to take the credit for its eradication. Miller includes statistics on not only polio, but measles, pertussis, and smallpox.
When I first checked out Crawford’s book, The Invisible Enemy, I was just interested in reading up more on viruses because of the recent discussion on the AA forum of the possible causes of AA, and if some sort of virus was involved with some cases of AA. What I wanted to know was once we are infected with a particular virus, does the virus ever leave the body, or do we harbor it for the rest of our lives? Apparently, depending upon the virus, one can either eradicate it, or we can harbor it for life. A virus such as the flu apparently is eradicated, but our bodies develop antibodies against it so that if we are ever exposed to that same virus again, we could fight if off and not develop infection. Other viruses manage to lie dormant in our cells until an opportune time to resurface. These particular viruses are known as latent viruses and include strains such as the herpes variety. Other viruses never quite completely go dormant and continue to cause low level infection in the host such as some cases of viral hepatitis.
Overall, I enjoyed reading The Invisible Enemy. Crawford writes about other interesting viral epidemics, gives an easily understood description of viruses as opposed to bacteria, actual case stories, etc. I have a couple other virology books on hold, and look forward to learning more about viruses. They certainly are very interesting little, tiny animals, ha! Plus, I still have other questions for which I hope to find more answers.
Marlakins
Permalink
02.20.07
Posted in Anything goes, Health-related--Natural Alternative Treatments, Treatment Decisions, Uncategorized at 11:08 pm by Administrator
Tonight I had a new experience. I was allowed to stand in during an acupuncture session and watch the needles get inserted. I’ve seen it on TV, but never in person. So this was nice. After the needles were inserted, the patient was left to relax for about 20 minutes with the needles in place. Since this acupuncturist is a friend of one of my sisters, I was allowed to take pictures. Below is a picture of four needles placed in the back. It’s a little hard to see the two needles on the right side of the picture (I noticed that the aol browsers don’t show pictures as well as other browsers), so I’ve drawn in arrows to point to where the four needles are.
Other needles were placed on other parts of the body like the head, near the ankles, and one on the hand. Below is a picture of the needles in the package. Actually, the needles can’t be seen, but at least you can see that each needle is packaged and sealed individually. They are disposable and discarded after use. Had I thought of it, I should have placed a penny next to the needles to give a size comparison. The needles themselves look about two inches long, but only a very short part of the needle is inserted.
One thing I found out today is that there is a Chinese method of acupuncture and a Japanese method of acupuncture. The Chinese method tends to use more needles than the Japanese. Also in Japan, their acupuncturists don’t use herbs, while in China, herbs are frequently used. I’m not clear as to whether it’s a law prohibition there or not, but that’s the impression I got. It appears that Japanese style acupuncturists here in the U.S. do use herbs, though. Also herbalism is considered more important and respectable in China than in the U.S. Acupuncture is considered more of a profession in the U.S. than is herbalism. I’m not sure why there is a difference in perception in each location, but there it is. Perhaps it’s cultural.
I was told depending upon whether the condition is acute or chronic would determine whether herbs would be recommended or not as well as how many treatments would be involved. For some simple conditions, a single treatment can prove sufficient, while more chronic conditions would require more sessions.
I asked what types of conditions benefit from acupuncture and was told that conditions like chronic pain, nervous conditions, and even strokes respond well to acupuncture. I was told that one of the best things a stroke victim can do is see an acupuncturist as soon as possible to help faciliate a faster recovery.
Okay, it’s getting late. Maybe I’ll try a couple pokes and check back in the morning.
Marlakins 
Permalink
10.10.06
Posted in Health-related--Natural Alternative Treatments, History, Treatment Decisions, Uncategorized at 12:57 pm by Administrator
For anyone interested, another update on Starchild Abraham Cherrix’s progress was posted at Dailypress.com. As a recap for those who may not have been following Starchild’s case, he is a 16-year-old male who developed Hodgkin’s lymphoma when he was 15. He underwent chemotherapy, but his cancer returned several months later. Because of the difficulty he endured with the chemo, and the fact that it failed to cure him, he opted to search for alternative means to treat himself. One of the treatments he chose was the Hoxsey herbal treatment.
As a result of that choice some heated debates have ensued on the net between hardcore mainstream medical advocates and groups who support alternative treatments. The arguments arising from the mainstream medical group is that Hoxsey is/was a “quack” and never cured anyone. The alternative advocates naturally disagree.
Personally, I had heard of the Hoxsey treatment, but only knew very little such as the herbal formula was developed by one of the Hoxsey’s (I later found it was John Hoxsey) when his horse developed cancer. He let his horse out to pasture thinking that this horse didn’t have long to live and wanted him to die in peace. To Hoxsey’s amazement, after three weeks on pasture, his horse’s cancer appeared to be stabilizing. During that time Hoxsey noticed that his horse was feeding on weeds that he didn’t ordinarily feed on. About three months later, the tumor began to dry up and started separating from the healthy tissue underneath. It appeared that his horse had some natural instinct to eat certain vegetation which helped to heal its cancer. From there, Hoxsey started experimenting with those herbs and treating other animals with cancers with reported success. The other thing I heard about Hoxsey was the he had some man named Morris Fishbein from the AMA (American Medical Association) after him for many years in an attempt to shut him down. That was about all I knew of the Hoxsey formula.
With the recent debates regarding Starchild’s choice to use the Hoxsey tonic, and particularly seeing the hostile opposition accusing the Hoxsey tonic of being quackery, I wanted to know more about the Hoxsey story. Surely there must be more to the story for it to raise so much clamor. The searches I did on the internet yielded little new information for me. So I checked out my library to see what they had on the Hoxsey story. I found that there was a book called, “When Healing Becomes a Crime,” by Kenny Ausubel copyrighted in May 2000.
Wow! I had no idea how much controversy Harry Hoxsey and his Hoxsey tonic had stirred since the turn of the century and especially after he first opened his cancer clinic in 1924. Ausubel’s skill as a researcher really shines through in his well-documented book, “When Healing Becomes a Crime.” I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in health issues, and particularly with how the AMA has treated anyone who tried to treat cancer in any other way apart from the standard chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery. The book is a genuine eye-opener of which I would like to share some information which has left an impact on me.
In short, it was in 1840 that John Hoxsey’s horse developed cancer and when he discovered the herbs which he used to treat other animals with cancers. It was his son, John C. Hoxsey who first tried the herbs to treat human cancers. The next generation Hoxsey was Harry Hoxsey, who subsequently opened his cancer clinic in 1924. There are so many details in between, but one important piece of information was the before Harry’s father, John C., died, he made Harry promise that he would use the Hoxsey formula to cure cancers, and that no one was to be turned away due to lack of funds. It’s reported that Harry fulfilled that promise, and to this day (according to Ausubel’s book in 2000) the Hoxsey clinic in Tijuana run by Mildren Nelson has no accounting system set up to track or even send out bills. Payment is on the honor system. One amusing quote was by a woman named Stella Gladis. She claimed that when her surgeon found out that she wouldn’t take chemotherapy and radiation from his friends, that he hollered at her and said, “Why are you going down there? (the Hoxsey clinic) They’ll only take all your money.” Her reply was, “Uh-uh–’cause you already did!” Stella Gladis paid $900 for her Hoxsey treatment, while she estimated her bills from her cancer operations in the tens of thousands of dollars.
In order for Ausubel to complete his Hoxsey documentary and book, he not only dug into historical news articles, including pictures of a couple cancer patients and news articles, but was able to find a good number of people who were still alive who were involved with Hoxsey and his treatments. The personal interviews and news articles provided very compelling information that Hoxsey had many supporters of his treatment who claimed that they were in fact cured of cancer through his tonics. During the trial between Hoxsey vs Hearst, it was reported in the Dallas Morning News that the courtroom was packed with his patients in support of him testifying in court of their cancers which had now been cured. In 1949, Hoxsey actually won a libel lawsuit making him the first “quack” to beat the AMA. Obviously something was happening. Hearst’s defense suggested any seeming recovery could be the result of sponaneous remission. To which Hoxsey’s lawyers pointed out, instances of spontaneous remission in cancer are scarce, about one in 100,000 cases. Had all these oddities somehow found their way to Dallas (Hoxsey’s clinic)? If many of these patients never actually had cancer, they went on, there must be an awful lot of misdiagnosis going on.
Ausubel didn’t stop there, he researched the contents of the Hoxsey formula. He was able to find that there were in fact more than one rendition of the formula, so we don’t really know which is the original formula. However, the ingredients are very similar, to which he consulted with James Duke, Ph.D., who at the time worked for the USDA. Duke collaborated for many years with the NCI and helped lead the way to plant medicines that have produced pharmaceutical drugs such as the cancer drug Taxol from the Pacific yew tree. Dr. Duke ultimately wrote a short article based on his Hoxsey research, published in 1988 in HerbalGram. Duke’s assessment was that the Hoxsey internal tonic ingredients showed very significant chemical and biological anitcancer activity. The formula might or might not work, but in principle it definitely merited serious investigation.
Dr Duke further explains the difficulty of approving herbs in that, “The whole is better than the sum of it’s parts. The suite is what’s most effective. But FDA regulations are such that, if you’ve got several active ingredients, you’ve got to prove not only that every one of them is safe and efficacacious, but that all of them are safe and efficacious. All plants contain thousands of compounds, most of them biologically active. Are we going to have to prove all thousand of them safe and efficacious?”
According to Ausubel, “the NCI did perform laboratory tests on all the Hoxsey herbs using cancer cell lines in petri dishes. Almost all the results were negative. However, many of the testing methodologies used have since been abandoned because they are unreliable, and many scientists find that the outcomes do not match actual results with human subjects.” What’s the explanation for this? Dr. Duke explains, “. . . failure of the Hoxsey herbs to show anticancer activity in the NCI screens [occur] because these experiments have been designed for one very narrow band of activity: the cytotoxic capability to kill cancer cells directly in a dish. . . . While some of the plants may directly kill cancer cells to some degree, most work by indirectly interfering with malignant cell growth through other mechanisms.” Very insightful information coming from a renowned botanist and author of 20 books and over 200 scientific journals. He goes on to say that, “One of the major problems with the NCI screen is that they do not test the plants in the way humans use the plants. I don’t know that they have ever given an oral extract of red clover to a human being, and that’s how it’s used in folklore. If you’re going to test red clover tea, you’ve got to give it to a human being.”
In my opinion, Kenny Ausubel’s book, “When Healing Becomes a Crime,” is very well-written. From the reviews at Amazon.com, it’s obvious I’m not the only one who feels this way. While it’s true Hoxsey never claimed to be able to cure every single cancer patient, there is certainly evidence that many cancer sufferers were being cured who passed through his clinic doors. So why the fury to close down the Hoxsey clinics and force them across the border? The common belief is competition. In Hoxsey’s case, perhaps there’s an additional reason that has something to do with something Hoxsey mentioned, that in the eyes of the AMA, the only thing worse than alternative cancer treatment is “free” medical treatment. And that’s exactly what Hoxsey gave out.
Marlakins 
Permalink
10.06.06
Posted in Health-related--Natural Alternative Treatments, Hmmm Moments, Treatment Decisions, Uncategorized at 12:48 am by Administrator
Patti just turned me on to Dr. Richard K. Bernstein, M.D. I read a little of his story, and look forward to getting a hold of one of his books to learn what else this brilliant man has learned. Dr. Bernstein developed type 1 diabetes at the age of 12, and has lived more than 55 years with it by learning to control his blood sugar level with the help of adjusting his diet. From reading Dr. Bernstein’s explanation of how diabetics were once prescribed high carb diets, and that diabetics also appeared to commonly have high cholesterol levels, I was reminded of another book I have been reading called Syndrome X, the Silent Killer by Gerald Reavenn, M.D., Terry Kristen Strom, M.B.A., and Barry Fox, Ph.D.
Syndrome X refers to the role of insulin resistance and heart disease risk. This book suggests that a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet could increase the risk for heart attack, and that about 50% of all heart attacks may be Syndrome X related. For people suffering from Syndrome X, it is believed that excess insulin in the bloodstream prompts the damage associated with the lining of the coronary arteries. Once this damage occurs, the stage is set for blockages to form, which could later result in a heart attack. I found this link of excess insulin and damage to the coronary artery lining interesting in relation to the information that Dr. Bernstein pointed out about diabetics commonly having high cholesterol levels. Although it is a common belief that high cholesterol puts one at risk for heart disease, there are some experts who believe that it is “not” cholesterol which increases heart disease, but rather the body uses cholesterol to patch up damages made in the arterial lining. According to Sally Fallon and Mary G. Enig, PhD, “Cholesterol is the body’s repair substance. Scar tissue contains high levels of cholesterol. When your arteries develop irritations or tears, cholesterol is there to do its job of patching up the damage.” If that is true, as well as the theory for Syndrome X and insulin resistance, then it makes sense that all the excess insulin in diabetics may be causing damage to their arterial lining, and thus their bodies produce more cholesterol to help patch up the damages occuring in their arterial lining. Hence, one possible connection to the higher cholesterol levels in diabetics. Both Dr. Bernstein and the authors of Syndrome X, the Silent Killer recommend a low carb diet to reduce the glucose intake in the body, which in turn, would reduce the production or need for insulin, which in turn would reduce the damage to coronary arterial lining, and finally would reduce the need for cholesterol to patch up damages.
I find it exciting to see how our food choices can help us greatly manage and even cure our ills.
Marlakins
Permalink
10.04.06
Posted in Anything goes, Health-related--Natural Alternative Treatments, Historical Trivia, Treatment Decisions, Uncategorized at 1:05 pm by Administrator
The knowledge that food affects our health has been evident for thousands of years. Hippocrates clearly understood the relevance of foods to our well-being. Today, even those who espouse current mainstream medicine are familiar with the quote from Hippocrates in 300BC, which has been known as the “Hippocratic Oath”–
“I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfil according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:
“To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art – if they desire to learn it – without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else.
“I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.
“I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.
“I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.
“Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.
“What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.
“If I fulfil this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.”
Translation from the Greek by Ludwig Edelstein. From The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Translation, and Interpretation, by Ludwig Edelstein. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1943
Hmm. Modern mainstream medicine sure has deviated from the original Hippocratic oath so much so that now they even have a “revised” version of it. The modern version can be viewed here.
Since the days of Hippocrates, even though mainstream medicine has veered way off from the importance of foods and health, many other health care advocates have continued to strive to use food as medicine. What has resulted is a myriad of dietary regimes, all claiming health benefits ranging from weight loss to curing the incurable. There are many diets, which even seem completely contradictory to another diet, yet interestingly, regardless of the differences, diseases have resolved. One example is the rage between vegetarianism vs. non-vegetarianism. Along those lines what defines a “vegetarian” also is not clearly delineated as some are “ovo-lacto” vegetarians and others are “vegan.” There are strict vegetarian diets claiming to cure cancers, and at the same time heavy meat diets also claim to cure cancers. We have the “milk diet,” and the “low carb diet,” also known as the “paleo diet.” There is the “Mediterranean diet” and the “Okinawan diet.” We have those who only eat all raw foods, who call themselves “raw foodists,” while on the other spectrum we have “macrobiotics,” by which most of their foods are well cooked. And let’s not forget juicing! The list goes on.
Is it possible that all these diets are right? Is it true that food is our best medicine? I’d like to explore this, and look forward to any comments and experiences regarding foods and how it has affected one’s health–good or bad. . . What we may see is that there is a place and season for everything.
Marlakins
Permalink
08.26.06
Posted in Treatment Decisions at 9:02 am by Administrator
I’m opening this new category as another spinoff from Patti’s suggestion on Steele’s MDS Herb Chronicle. I have reposted her post below as an introduction to this new topic. So, without further ado, I look forward to reading your comments.
Marla,
I wanted to have a very frank discussion about medicine and I’m not sure where to put it so maybe you can take this and run with it and we can all chat about it. Not sure if you want to move it.
If you were faced with let’s say, a cancer, would you (or should we, I, etc.) consider conventional chemo or are we better off to do a Gerson type treatment, etc.? I’ve been giving this a lot of thought regarding my own beliefs in light of mom’s illness and frequently wonder what I would do if I was told I had cancer, specifically. I use that one since that’s the most likely scenario for a person requiring chemo. Would it depend on the “cure” rate a certain cancer has with chemo? Would I do integrative medicine? What would I do? I’m curious if others have thought about this in light of the illnesses that we are all dealing with today.
Patti
Permalink
