.


***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***
This Life giving information is brought to you by the folks at  TalkSign.com the leader in Domain and Hosting for a better World !
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***

Our main charitable interest is providing information about how to achieve wellness through good nutrition, i.e. healthy eating.

Please click here for a recent Wolf Blitzer CNN interview with former President Bill Clinton and his doctors (Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn and Dr. Dean Ornish) for an immediate insight into just how powerful this message can be.

For more information on this important topic please read the information presented below. Please feel free to contact us if you need assistance in obtaining any of the books that we refer to. If your time is in short supply, we recommend the concise Healthy Beginnings, a fun and informative 28 page 3MB PDF guide provided by the charity EarthSave International. This booklet is free to distribute so you may pass it on to anyone else interested in good health and long life!

"Since 1976, I have known how people can lose weight without ever being hungry; cure most cases of arthritis, diabetes, and hypertension; and reverse serious heart disease; furthermore, it has been no mystery to me how one can prevent cancer, osteoporosis, heart attacks, and strokes. The common denominator is the modern Western diet - rife with foods so rich in high-calorie refined ingredients that before industrial times they were consumed only by kings and queens. This diet must be replaced with one consisting of whole, natural plant foods. Add to this seemingly simple step a little daily exercise, and you now have a medical tool more powerful than bypass surgery and drugs." John McDougall, M.D.

Are you, like many people, resigned to the inevitability of a life cut short by heart disease, cancer or diabetes (the top 3 causes of death in developed countries)?

If so then please read below as there is something very simple you can do about it.

There is now available a vast amount of scientific research which shows that improving your "diet" (diet = what you eat) can greatly reduce the likelihood of these top 3 causes of death, as well as many other common diseases. It turns out that the healthiest diet for our bodies is also the healthiest for our planet and it is this fact, along with our compassion for all life, that has made us determined to pass on the information below to as many people as possible.

All 4 of the books we have quoted from below have excellent reviews (a 4-5 star rating out of 5 stars on Amazon). As they are all very popular books, most of them will probably be available from your local library.

In case you need to purchase a book, we will refund you 8.5% of the purchase cost if you use the links on this page. This is the maximum obtainable Amazon.com referral fee, and if you forget to ask us for this 8.5%, we will donate it to our favorite charity, EarthSave www.earthsave.org.

Our top recommended book is the fascinating story of the most comprehensive study of nutrition ever conducted:

The China Study by T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University

One could compare the potential influence of this book for our time now in the 21st Century to the enormous influence that Charles Darwin's classic book "The Origin of Species" has had from the late 19th Century onwards.

Below are some interesting quotes from "The China Study" (please read the full book for more complete information):

Page 21: "So, what is my prescription for good health? In short, it is about the multiple health benefits of consuming plant-based foods (i.e. vegetables, fruits, nuts etc.), and the largely unappreciated health dangers of consuming animal-based foods, including all types of meat, dairy and eggs."

Page 77: "As a developing population accumulates wealth, people change their eating habits, lifestyles and sanitation systems. As wealth accumulates, more and more people die from "rich" diseases of affluence than "poor" diseases of poverty."

Page 79: "To give a couple of examples at the time of our study, the death rate from coronary heart disease was seventeen times higher among American men than rural Chinese men. The American death rate from breast cancer was five times higher than the rural Chinese rate." [all rates are correctly age-adjusted i.e. the same age distribution is compared]

Page 359: "This was the first and only large study that investigated this range of dietary experience and its health consequences. Chinese diets ranged from rich to very rich in plant-based foods. In all other studies done on Western subjects, diets ranged from rich to very rich in animal-based foods. It was this distinction that made the China Study so different from other studies."

Page 23: "One of the more exciting benefits of good nutrition is the prevention of diseases that are thought to be due to genetic predisposition."

Page 71: "The authors of a major review on diet and cancer, prepared for the U.S. Congress in 1981, estimated that genetics only determines about 2 to 3% of the total cancer risk."

Page 233: "What happens to cause some genes to remain dormant, and others to express themselves? The answer: environment, especially diet."

Page 233: "Genes do not determine disease on their own. Genes function only by being activated or expressed, and nutrition plays a critical role in determining which genes, good and bad, are expressed."

Page 348: "Published data show that animal protein such as casein (the main protein of cow's milk) promotes the growth of cancerous tumors."

Page 6: "In fact, dietary protein proved to be so powerful in its effect that we could turn on and turn off cancer growth simply by changing the level consumed. What protein consistently and strongly promoted cancer? Casein, which makes up 87% of cow's milk protein, promoted all stages of the cancer process. What type of protein did not promote cancer, even at high levels of intake? The safe proteins were from plants, including wheat and soy."

Page 66: "A pattern was beginning to emerge: nutrients from animal-based foods increased tumor development while nutrients from plant-based foods decreased tumor development."

Page 275: "The closer a population gets to consuming a plant-based diet, the lower its risk of breast cancer."

Page 85: "Do the data from these studies mean that we can lower our rate of breast cancer to almost zero if we make perfect lifestyle choices? The information certainly suggests that this could be the case."

Page 174: "The data clearly show that a whole foods, plant-based diet can dramatically lower colorectal cancer rates."

Page 119: "The study suggests that the more animal protein you eat, the more heart disease you have. In addition, dozens of experimental studies show that animal protein (e.g. casein) dramatically raises cholesterol levels, whereas plant protein (e.g. soy protein) dramatically lowers cholesterol levels."

Page 151: "All of these findings support the idea that both across and within populations, high-fiber, whole, plant-based foods protect against diabetes, and high-fat, high-protein, animal-based foods promote diabetes."

Page 349: "A broad range of international studies shows that Type 1 diabetes, a serious autoimmune disease, is related to cow's milk consumption and premature weaning."

Page 210: "To minimize your risk of osteoporosis, eat a variety of whole plant foods, and avoid animal foods including dairy. Plenty of calcium is available in a wide range of plant foods, including beans and leafy vegetables."

Page 216: "These two eye conditions, macular degeneration and cataracts, both occur when we fail to consume enough of the highly colored green and leafy vegetables. In both cases, excess free radicals, increased by animal-based foods and decreased by plant-based foods, are likely to be responsible for these conditions."

Page 218: "Because free radical damage is so important to the process of cognitive dysfunction and dementia, researchers believe that consuming dietary antioxidants can shield our brains from this damage, as in other diseases. Animal-based foods lack antioxidant shields and tend to activate free radical production and cell damage, while plant-based foods, with their abundant antioxidants, tend to prevent such damage."

Page 230: "There are virtually no nutrients in animal-based foods that are not better provided by plants. Plant foods have dramatically more antioxidants, fiber and minerals than animal foods."

Page 349: "We now have a deep and broad range of evidence showing that a whole foods, plant-based diet provides the best protection against heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and autoimmune diseases (e.g. multiple sclerosis)."

Page 236: "The same nutrition that prevents disease in its early stages (before diagnosis) can also halt or reverse disease in its later stages (after diagnosis)."

Page 239: "Furthermore, it turns out that if we eat the way that promotes the best health for ourselves, we promote the best health for the planet. By eating a whole foods, plant-based diet, we use less water, less land, fewer resources and produce less pollution and less suffering for our farm animals."

Page 238: "Good nutrition creates health in all areas of our existence. All parts are interconnected."

Page 240: "Our food choices have an incredible impact not only on our metabolism, but also on the initiation, promotion and even reversal of disease, on our energy, on our physical activity, on our emotional and mental well-being and on our world environment. All of these seemingly separate spheres are intimately connected."

Page 347: "Never before have we affected the natural environment to such an extent that we are losing our topsoil, our massive North American aquifers, and our world's rainforests. We are changing our climate so rapidly that many of the world's best informed scientists fear the future. Never before have we been eliminating plant and animal species from the face of the earth as we are doing now. Never before have we introduced, on such a large scale, genetically altered varieties of plants into the environment without knowing what the repercussions will be. All of those changes in our environment are strongly affected by what we choose to eat."

Page 305: "There is nothing better the government could do that would prevent more pain and suffering in this country than telling Americans unequivocally to eat less animal products, less highly-refined plant products and more whole, plant-based foods. The government is turning a blind eye to the evidence as well as to the millions of Americans who suffer from nutrition-related illnesses."

Page 349-350: "The idea that a whole foods, plant-based diet can protect against and even treat a wide variety of chronic diseases can no longer be denied. No longer are there just a few people making claims about a plant-based diet based on their personal experience, philosophy or the occasional supporting scientific study. Now there are hundreds of detailed, comprehensive, well-done research studies that point in the same direction."

Page 350: "I believe that the world is finally ready to change. We have reached a point in our history where our bad habits can no longer be tolerated. We, as a society, are on the edge of a great precipice: we can fall to sickness, poverty and degradation, or we can embrace health, longevity and bounty. And all it takes is the courage to change."

We also highly recommend the following three books:

Eat to Live
by Joel Fuhrman, M.D.

Quoting from Page 7: "Your health can be predicted by your nutrient intake divided by your intake of calories. This is a concept I call the "nutrient-density" of your diet: H=N/C (Health=Nutrients/Calories)."

Page 61: "Leafy greens such as romaine lettuce, kale, collards, Swiss chard, and spinach are the most nutrient-dense of all foods. Most vegetables contain more nutrients per calorie than any other food and are rich in all necessary amino acids."

Page 15: "Americans have been among the first people worldwide to have the luxury of bombarding themselves with nutrient-deficient, high-calorie food, often called empty-calorie or junk food. By "empty-calorie", I mean food that is deficient in nutrients and fiber. More Americans than ever before are eating these rich high-calorie foods while remaining inactive - a dangerous combination."

Page 43: "My clinical experience over the past 10 years has shown me that all the major illnesses are reversible with aggressive nutritional changes designed to undo the damage caused by years of eating a disease-causing diet."

Page 26: "We need to eat foods with adequate nutrients so we won't need to consume excess "empty" calories to reach our nutritional requirements. Eating foods that are rich in nutrients and fiber, and low in calories, "fills us up", so to speak, thus preventing us from overeating."

Page 48: "The reality is that healthy, nutritious foods are also very rich in fiber and that those foods associated with disease risk are generally fiber-deficient. Meat and dairy products do not contain any fiber, and foods made from refined grains (such as white bread, white rice and pasta) have had their fiber removed."

Page 70: "Researchers found that as the amount of animal foods increased in the diet, even in relatively small increments, so did the emergence of the cancers that are common in the west. Most cancers occurred in direct proportion to the quantity of animal foods consumed."

Page 48: "For anyone to consider his or her diet healthy, it must be predominantly composed of high-fiber, natural foods. It is not the fiber extracted from the plant package that has miraculous health properties. It is the entire plant package considered as a whole, containing nature's anti-cancer nutrients as well as being rich in fiber."

Page 55: "To date, researchers have discovered more than ten thousand phytonutrients (phyto means "plant"). No supplements can contain a sufficient amount - if they did contain sufficient amounts of all these nutrients and other essential substances (such as fiber), we would have to swallow a soup-bowl full of pills and powders! Thankfully, you can get all these nutrients today by eating a wide variety of raw and conservatively cooked plant-based foods (such as steamed vegetables)."

Page 60: "The biggest animals - elephants, gorillas, rhinoceroses, hippopotamuses, and giraffes - all eat predominantly green vegetation. How did they get the protein to get so big? Obviously, greens pack a powerful protein punch. In fact all protein on the planet was formed from the effect of sunlight on green plants ...animal products are not necessary for a diet to include adequate protein."

Page 138: "Green vegetables such as broccoli or leafy greens (e.g. spinach) have more protein per calorie than a cheeseburger or sirloin steak."

Page 140: "When you meet your caloric needs with an assortment of natural plant foods (vegetables, fruits, legumes, whole grains, raw nuts and seeds), you will receive the right amount of protein - not too much, not too little."

Page 143: "For most people, illness means putting their fate in the hands of doctors and complying with their recommendations - recommendations that typically involve taking drugs for the rest of their lives while they watch their health gradually deteriorate. People are completely unaware that most illnesses are self-induced and can be prevented or treated through superior nutrition."

Page 174: "Most chronic illnesses have been earned from a lifetime of inferior nutrition, which eventually results in abnormal function or frequent discomfort. These illnesses are not beyond our control, they are not primarily genetic, and they are not the normal consequence of aging. True, we all have our weakest links governed by genetics; but these weak links need never reveal themselves unless our health deteriorates. Superior health flows naturally as a result of superior nutrition. Our predisposition to certain illnesses can remain hidden."

The Pleasure Trap by Douglas J. Lisle, Ph.D. and Alan Goldhamer, D.C.; Foreword by John McDougall, M.D.

Quoting from the Foreword by Dr. McDougall (Page X): "Probably 98% of the people I see in my practice tell me they have "bad eating habits" - and therein lies the problem. They think of their troubled relationship with food as a "simple little habit" rather than a "life-destroying addiction". In reality this is a behavior that causes pain and suffering greater than tobacco addiction, alcoholism and heroin dependence combined. Eating the wrong kinds of foods is the leading cause of death and disability in the Western world."

Foreword (Page IX): "Since 1976, I have known how people can lose weight without ever being hungry; cure most cases of arthritis, diabetes, and hypertension; and reverse serious heart disease; furthermore, it has been no mystery to me how one can prevent cancer, osteoporosis, heart attacks, and strokes. The common denominator is the modern Western diet - rife with foods so rich in high-calorie refined ingredients that before industrial times they were consumed only by kings and queens. This diet must be replaced with one consisting of whole, natural plant foods. Add to this seemingly simple step a little daily exercise, and you now have a medical tool more powerful than bypass surgery and drugs."

Page 8: "When you look at yourself in the mirror you are looking at a biological success story. You are the result of generation after generation of ancestors who got enough to eat and who were successful enough to reproduce. You are the prize your ancestors worked so hard to achieve, and you carry inside of you the genes - and therefore the traits - that made them successful. These traits are what the late astronomer Carl Sagan described as "shadows of forgotten ancestors"."

The Food Revolution by John Robbins; Foreword by Dean Ornish, M.D.

John Robbins was the heir to Baskin-Robbins, the world's largest ice cream company, but he rejected it to live according to his own values.

Quoting from Page 1: "My father was grooming me to succeed him. I was his only son, and he expected me to follow in his footsteps. But things did not develop that way. I chose to leave behind the ice cream company and the money it represented, in order to take my own rocky road. I walked away from an opportunity to live a life of wealth to live a different kind of life, a life in which, I hoped, I might be able to be true to my values and learn to make a contribution to the well-being and happiness of others. It was a choice for integrity. Instead of the Great American Dream of financial success, I was pulled forward by a deeper dream."

Page 95: "A cultural shift towards a plant-based whole foods diet would have enormous benefits. For the vast majority of people, it would mean far healthier lives. It would not only mean less heart disease, fewer cancers, and far less obesity; it would also mean far more vibrant, thriving, energetic, creative people. It would mean there was less fear of growing old and fewer families broken apart by the premature death of loved ones. For immense numbers of people, it would mean less suffering and more joy."

Page 383: "I often reflect on what the future will bring us, not only as individuals, but as a country, as a species, and as a planet. Will we look at the natural world and other life forms as commodities having value insofar as we can convert them into revenue? Or will we live with reverence for life on this planet, seeing it as a community of which we are a part and to which we owe our lives?"

Page 384: "Will we continue to house animals destined for human consumption in conditions that violate their biological natures and frustrate their every instinct and need? Or will we widen the circle of compassion to include these creatures who draw breath from the same source we do?"

Page 385: "When each of us comes to the end of our lives, what will matter is not what our social standing was, or whether the world thought we were important or influential. What will matter, what in fact always matters, are the values we uphold and the principles and possibilities we stand for. What will matter then, and what matters now are the quality of the love we share with the world and the statements we make with our choices and our lives."

The below quote is from Dr. Dean Ornish, a graduate of Harvard Medical School, whose simple lifestyle plan, involving a plant-based whole foods diet and moderate exercise, has resulted in amazing success at reversing heart disease in over 80% of his patients. No expensive surgical treatments or drugs programs have ever come close to this high success rate, and even the large medical insurance companies agree - previously sceptical about any so-called "natural" treatments, most now cover his program. He writes in the foreword of The Food Revolution:

"In the final analysis, of course, all of us are destined to die. The mortality rate is still 100%, one per person. So the most important question, to me, is not just how long we live but also how well we live. When we look back on our lives, how much distress did we cause? How much suffering did we help alleviate? How much love did we give, and how much did we receive? How many people did we help? These are profoundly spiritual questions; as such, they are often the most meaningful. To the degree we can change our diets, we may be able to enhance our health, enjoy our lives more fully, and reduce the suffering in our wake. We face a spectrum of choices every day; it's not all or nothing. You may not want to give up eating animal protein or fatty foods completely, but you may be able to consume them less frequently if you understand the benefits of cutting back, how quickly they may occur, and how far-reaching they may be."

Here at NUCOM, we hope that the above quotes inspire you to find out more about wellness and nutrition, and to pass on this important knowledge to your friends, family and anyone else who seeks your advice. By so doing, you will be contributing to a brighter future for all your fellow inhabitants on this earth and the generations to follow.

We leave you with the enlightening words of the great physicist and Nobel Prize winner, Albert Einstein (1879-1955):

"A human being is a part of the whole, called by us the 'Universe', a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separate from the rest - a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. Nobody is able to achieve this completely, but the striving for such achievement is in itself a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security."

Heart Disease Health Center


***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
  TALKSIGN.COM   where  We Value Your Business Around The World

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****  

Dr. Carter is Professor and Head, Nutrition Section, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Reprinted from the Journal of Advancement in Medicine, Volume 2, Numbers 1/2, Spring/Summer 1989, pages 213-226 .

ABSTRACT: A summary of medical politics, turf struggles between medical specialties, and the medical economics of Oral chelation therapy is presented to answer the question, "If Oral chelation therapy is so good, why is it not more widely accepted?"

Most people, including physicians, are not aware of the medical politics, legal machinations and economic sanctions that covertly control the practice of medicine in the United States. A physician who introduces an innovative and nontraditional type of therapy often becomes the target of those forces. That is especially true if a new therapy, like Oral chelation:

1) involves a major shift in the scientific paradigm;

2) if acceptance of the new therapy somehow implies that currently used medical practices are inappropriate; or

3) if the new therapy threatens the financial well being of a politically powerful and well established branch of the medical profession. Quite the opposite occurred with the immediate and widespread acceptance of bypass surgery and balloon angioplasty, which quickly brought wealth and fame to surgeons, cardiologists, large teams of health care professionals, and the hospital industry.

When a radical new therapy like chelation is first introduced, physicians who do not utilize that therapy feel threatened, both professionally and financially. Their professional integrity is threatened by obsolescence of their scientific knowledge and they lose patients who seek out the new therapy. They forget that if their established treatments were really successful, and without major disadvantages, patients would not look to another type of treatment.

As with Oral chelation therapy, major pressures are brought to bear on the "deviant" physician to coerce him back into the accepted mold. He is ostracized by his peers; he comes under professional attack for "lack of ethics;" his medical and mental competence are questioned; he is accused of "exploiting" his patients for personal gain; and epithets of "quack" and "charlatan" are hurled his way. Ad hominum attacks are common, in the absence of more cogent and scientific criticisms.

Well known historical examples of that phenomenon occurred with the introduction of the germ theory of disease. That simple concept took 50 years for complete acceptance by the medical profession.

Lister was viciously attacked when he proposed that wound infections were not inevitable after surgery if aseptic techniques were used. Semmelweis was likewise dealt with when he urged doctors to wash their hands before delivering babies to prevent maternal deaths from puerperal sepsis. Lister's recommendations were not accepted by mainstream medicine for many decades, and Semmelweis was persecuted to his death by medical colleagues, who were incensed by the notion that they themselves transmitted disease from patient to patient on their unwashed hands. Has human nature changed since that time?

The history of medicine is replete with examples of medical "heretics" who were eventually credited with major advances. They were often not recognized for their achievements until after death. Paracelsus, for example, is exalted as one of the great pioneers in medicine, but he was the original "quack" in his own time. Paracelsus introduced the use of mercury to treat syphilis. There was no other cure for syphilis at the time, although, as with many treatments today, the lethal dose of mercury was close to the therapeutic dose. Paracelsus was viciously attacked by his medical peers and derisively called a "quack" (short for "quacksalber," the old German word for mercury).

Inertia in science and medicine is a powerful force and is reinforced by major economic and legal forces in the United States. Many industries and special interest groups that are politically and economically powerful would be hurt financially if chelation therapy were to become more widely accepted. Those same industries have a major influence in our society at all levels. Grants for university and medical school research often stem from those same sources. They spend heavily to lobby for laws, regulations and government funded medical research to favor their own interests and to suppress competition. It is difficult to obtain NIH research funds in the face of opposition from powerful lobbies that occur when that research goes against those special interests.

Those same special interests have a major influence on lay and professional exposure through the news media. Advertising revenues are essential to the survival of medical journals, newspapers, magazines, television and radio. Even with freedom of the press, the media cannot survive without advertising revenues. There often exists an understandable reluctance to bite the hand that feeds them. It is difficult to educate the public and the medical profession about new developments without media cooperation. Medical schools also cannot afford to offend their corporate sources of research funds.

The welfare of the American public is often pushed aside by the industrial quest for profits and pressures to suppress competition. Every industry wants a monopoly, if that can be achieved. Mainstream medicine has come very close to that goal.

Scientific arrogance is commonplace. Physicians consider themselves to be experts in their own field. If a majority of physicians do not endorse a new therapy, they collectively rely on public recognition of their own "expertise" to discount a new concept that they themselves have not yet embraced. They forget that all great advances in medicine began with a small minority. Their thinking tends to follow along these lines: "If I'm the expert and I don't use this new therapy and if my many colleagues and peers are experts and they don't believe in the new therapy, then we must be right and that small group of physicians who believe differently must be wrong. We're the experts."

The most frequent criticism leveled by critics of non-traditional and alternative medical therapies is that new treatments are "unproven" because randomized, double-blind, controlled studies have not yet been done to prove effectiveness. Those criticisms ignore the fact that most medical procedures routinely performed in the practice of medicine are also unproven using those same criteria.

The Office of Technology Assessment, a branch of the United States Congress, with the help of an advisory board of eminent university faculty, has published a report with the conclusion that, " . . . only 10 to 20 percent of all procedures currently used in medical practice have been shown to be efficacious by controlled trial." Therefore, 80% to 90% of medical procedures routinely performed are unproven.1 That report further points out that the research which purports to prove effectiveness of the remaining 10% to 20% of medical procedures is largely flawed, and " . . many of the other procedures may not be efficacious." The most frequent reason for not accepting the value of Oral chelation therapy reflects a flagrant double standard.

A complete program of chelation therapy involves dietary changes, away from highly refined and processed foods. The use of nonprescription nutritional supplements is emphasized more than expensive and highly profitable drugs manufactured by the pharmaceutical industry. Chelation therapy is performed in doctors' offices, without the need for hospitals, surgeons, cardiologists and the large team of health professionals who profit greatly in dollars and reputation from the $6 billion per year bypass surgery and balloon angioplasty industry.

For obvious reasons, double-blind studies have never been done to prove or disprove clinical benefits from bypass surgery or balloon angioplasty. The effectiveness of Oral chelation therapy has been clinically proven to the same extent as bypass surgery and angioplasty, or more so, as established by the clinical data published in this book.

Recent reports conclude that from 44% to 85% of coronary artery bypass surgery is routinely performed on patients who do not meet the criteria for benefit, even using standards derived from non-blinded studies.2-9 The media consistently makes light of such flagrant abuses of surgery, while widely publicizing any hint of "quackery" associated with chelation. The American Medical Association, in its official journal (JAMA), admits that 44% of all coronary artery bypass surgery is done for inappropriate reasons.9

When a therapy is widely accepted by the medical profession, no scientific proof of effectiveness is required, and anecdotal evidence is accepted as valid. If an alternative therapy is contested by those physicians, however, they attack by demanding that the therapy in question be subjected to very expensive and time-consuming double-blind, placebo controlled trials. Medicare regulations also exclude the need for scientific proof for treatments that are utilized by a majority of physicians. The federal government thereby adds support to this double standard.

In the case of Oral chelation, those demands ignore the fact that it would normally cost millions of dollars for double-blind studies to prove effectiveness, and public funding for medical research cannot be obtained without political support. Without patent protection, pharmaceutical manufacturers will likewise not fund that research. The cost and time required for research of that scope is also beyond the resources of the clinicians in private practice who utilize chelation therapy. Oral chelation therapy has therefore been an "orphan" without a source of financial support for research.

Despite those drawbacks, even in the face of a severe and unjust double standard imposed by opponents, research money has been successfully obtained from private foundations and from patients and physicians who believe in this treatment. Patients have been accepted into double-blind studies, beginning in mid-1988 [not completed for political reasons].

Deprived of reimbursement by medical insurance, patients have thus far paid for Oral chelation therapy entirely from their own pockets. If Medicare refuses to pay for a therapy, most other insurance companies follow suit. It costs far more to fight those unjust policies in court than to pay for the treatment.

Historical examples of similar campaigns to control the practice of medicine, in favor of organized medicine and other special interests, against the public interest, are easy to find. As many innovative physicians have discovered, one of the quickest ways to become the target of opposing forces is to utilize nutritional or other nontoxic and noninvasive treatments for cancer.

On August 3, 1953, Charles W. Tobey Jr., son of the late Senator Charles Tobey, Chairman of the Senate Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, entered into the Congressional Record a report of an investigation by Benedict F. Fitzgerald Jr., Special Counsel to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Fitzgerald's investigation was directed at an alleged conspiracy to suppress what, in the 1950s, would have been considered alternative methods of treating cancer. His findings could equally have been applied to other innovative and nontraditional methods of treating any disease.

Fitzgerald criticized those who supported the party line of the American Medical Association (AMA), and who applied themselves to efforts to hinder, suppress, and restrict the free use of new therapies. Those therapies included medicines that were supported by evidence of success from clinical records, case histories, pathological reports, and x-ray and other photographic proof, together with living testimony of former cancer victims. Fitzgerald concluded that a conspiracy existed, and that public and private funds had been "thrown round like confetti at a country fair" to shut down clinics, hospitals and research laboratories which did not conform to the AMA's viewpoint.

Investigation tactics used against emerging and nontraditional medical therapies show a consistent pattern of: 1) arrogance; 2) a sense of mission and of knowing what is best and right for other people; 3) depriving citizens of their constitutionally protected rights to freedom of choice; and, 4) acceptance of the concept that the end justifies the means. Opponents of nontraditional therapies have viewed as legitimate activities: disinformation, smear campaigns, harassment, instituting IRS tax audits, encouraging patients to sue physicians, entrapment, illegal wiretaps, and possibly even break-ins. These tactics have been used against physicians for nothing more serious than administering intravenous chelation therapy.

When evidence, real or fabricated, is uncovered which is unfavorable to the targeted physician, a representative of the opposition will contact the state board of medical examiners, asking for an official investigation and prosecution. Pressures are brought on the physician to cease and desist his aberrant practices or lose his license to practice medicine.

Investigations and proceedings of licensing boards are often confidential and not available, even to the physician under investigation. By definition, it is difficult for an outsider to learn all of the specifics of such covert tactics, although a good approximation of how these things work has gradually emerged over the years.

The power structure of organized medicine may be visualized as a pyramid, with the sides composed of different physician specialty associations, each with its own special interests to protect. The result may be collectively called "organized medicine." The apex of the pyramid represents the governing boards and officers of those groups, while the base represents the broad general membership. Local and state chapters centralize the power and influence from the base upward to the national level. This pyramidal structure in medical politics forms the basis for a conspiracy that operates in coalition with other groups to benefit the individuals who compose the core of the pyramid. Although the composite organizations draw authority to sanction their collective actions from individual members, those members are often unaware of the larger structure within which power brokers and medical politicians operate.

By representing almost every practicing physician and specialty group in the country, this coalition has enormous influence in the affairs of our nation. That is especially true when an alliance is formed between organized medicine, the pharmaceutical industry and food processing corporations. The food industry profits greatly from sales of margarine, unsaturated fats, fake eggs, and other refined and fractionated foods with the endorsement of physicians.

The AMA and other segments of organized medicine are second only to the National Rifle Association in political campaign contributions to senators and congressmen at the national level. They give more than any other special interest groups in the country. Through political influence, bought and paid for, the policies of public institutions and federal and state agencies can be influenced by this group, including medical schools and universities, HHS, PHS, FDA, FTC, NIH, state medical licensing boards, etc. When a physician is selected for censure by organized medicine, the FDA, FBI, IRS, postal inspectors, district attorneys, Antifraud Division of Medicare and other agencies with quasi-police powers are quick to join the fray. This has occurred to physicians who have had the courage to offer Oral chelation therapy to their patients.

An average of approximately 60% of all state medical licensing boards' time is spent confronting, rehabilitating or defrocking physicians who are impaired or otherwise incompetent. Most of those are chemically dependent on alcohol and drugs. Increasingly, addicted physicians are being successfully rehabilitated, with the help of medical societies and recovered physicians. That function is truly in the best interests of both the medical profession and the consumer.

The remaining 40% of state medical licensing boards' time is, on the average, spent "witch-hunting," in the manner described above, in an effort to control the practice of medicine. The result is to force conformance with majority practices and to protect the medical profession against financial competition from "maverick" physicians who are bold enough to espouse innovative practices ahead of their peers. Restraint of trade and government support of a medical monopoly is the bottom line.

All too often, academic physicians on medical school faculties and research scientists allow themselves to be influenced by propaganda and disinformation, instead of obtaining the true facts and relying on their own analytical abilities and scientific methodology to determine the truth. The overwhelming majority of physicians in clinical practice appear to be totally unaware that a conspiracy exists and that covert activities are routinely taking place to protect their monopoly and to prevent competition.

The AMA Coordinating Conference on Health Information (CCHI) was formed in 1964, as an offshoot of the AMA's Committee on Quackery.10 All responsible citizens, by definition, must be opposed to quackery. The main difference between the AMA Committee on Quackery and the newly formed CCHI was that the CCHI was a totally secret and covert organization which functioned in coalition in a network with other, similar groups. The CCHI operates in partnership with the National Council on Health Fraud with regional chapters in many states. The director of each regional chapter must swear to an oath of secrecy. National and regional chapters of the Council on Health Fraud stay in communication with individual members of each state's board of medical licensing examiners. The CCHI operates through this secretive network, without access from public scrutiny. There are no checks and balances.

Both the CCHI and the National Council on Health Fraud purport to be scientific and authoritative sources of information. A significant portion of their activities, however, have nothing to do with real quackery, but are rather a means to coerce practitioners of medicine to adhere to practices approved by medical politicians. The end result is to preserve certain monopolistic and economic advantages enjoyed by organized medicine.

An important reason that research into the use of Oral chelation in the treatment of atherosclerosis and its complications stopped after 1960, until the mid 1980s, was because of an active and vicious campaign of misinformation and unjust harassment of physicians who used Oral chelation in their practices. Scientific researchers who showed an interest were also discouraged and harassed.

Practicing physicians who used Oral chelation have been summoned to appear before state boards of medical examiners to answer complaints. Charges were often contrived and rarely documented by careful investigation. The Federation of State Boards of Medical Examiners is associated with the CCHI network. State boards of medical examiners are legally constituted bodies that have ultimate authority to revoke a physician's license to practice medicine. Medical licensing boards in at least six states have attempted to mandate a blanket prohibition against chelation therapy within their states. Fortunately, the courts have been quick to nullify most such arbitrary rulings.

Oral chelation is already on the market as a legitimate pharmaceutical agent to treat lead toxicity, digitalis toxicity and acute hypercalcemia. Oral chelationis legally available for physician use, and it is quite legal for any licensed physician to utilize a drug for any purpose which, in that physician's judgment is best for his patient. The only restriction is that pharmaceutical companies that manufacture Oral chelation cannot make advertising and marketing claims of effectiveness in the treatment of atherosclerosis, in the absence of FDA approval for that indication.

The patent on Oral chelation expired many years ago. It is now a generic drug. Any drug company can manufacture and sell Oral chelation. There is no longer any patent protection to allow recovery of research, development and licensing costs. It customarily costs a drug company millions of dollars for research and paperwork to satisfy FDA requirements for the addition of a new therapeutic claim to the package insert of an established drug such as Oral chelation. No company will spend the money without the ability to recover those costs in the marketplace. This lack of FDA approval for atherosclerosis is commonly used against physicians by opponents of chelation, although it has always been a fully accepted and common practice for doctors to use medicines for diseases not yet approved by the FDA. This is another blatant example of double standard.

A communication from Dr. John Parks Trowbridge, a physician using chelation therapy in Texas, dated August 1986, illustrates very succinctly the difficulties physicians have encountered when they offer chelation therapy to their patients. The following illustrates how the system of repression often works:

In the last 90 days, at least 3 chelating physicians have been hauled before the board—1 lost license, 2 threatened. We've been put 'on notice,' through one who was threatened, that they were going to 'get' each of us, one by one.

Such legal harassment can bankrupt a doctor in order to pay the legal fees to defend himself against ongoing attacks by legally constituted agencies. Due process is a constitutional right but can be very expensive. The state pays its attorneys and legal costs with public funds. An unjustly accused physician must defend himself at his own expense. That is the basis for a tactic used by state licensing boards to keep up the pressure until a targeted doctor can no longer afford to pay for his defense. At that point, more than one highly competent and ethical physician has submitted to injustice and agreed to stop using Oral chelation chelation therapy in his practice, accepting probation and censure, just to end the mounting legal expenses and other stresses of harassment.

The original motivation to discredit Oral chelation as a treatment for atherosclerosis may have stemmed from ignorance of its benefit and arrogance in the belief that Oral chelation was dangerous treatment and that it did not work. The motivation may have once been to weed out fraud and quackery. With the development of enormously profitable coronary artery bypass surgery and angioplasty, however, not to mention peripheral and carotid artery surgery, it is obvious that many influential groups in organized medicine and the hospital industry would suffer greatly if Oral chelation therapy, administered in physicians' offices at approximately 10% of the cost, became widely accepted. That now seems to be the most significant reason for ongoing attempts to suppress the practice and clinical investigation of Oral chelation therapy. What other explanation could there be in the face of the large body of clinical and scientific data in support of Oral chelation therapy?

In recent years, mainstream medical journals have refused to publish the results of research of Oral chelation therapy for atherosclerosis, while at the same time publishing many frivolous letters to the editor and editorial comments criticizing chelation therapy. This ongoing editorial bias and censorship have largely prevented ready access by interested clinicians and, researchers to favorable clinical data. Most literature searches begin and end with the Index Medicus or its electronic counterpart, the MEDLINE computer database. Recent studies of chelation therapy have been published in less widely circulated journals, many of which are not included in the Index Medicus.

Most physicians and medical students are not aware that only 10% of the world's total biomedical literature can be found in those databases.11 If a physician becomes interested enough to do a computer search of oral chelation therapy for treatment of atherosclerosis, he will find a plethora of negative editorial comment and propaganda, but no negative data to support that criticism. Most clinical data to support the effectiveness of oral chelation in treatment of atherosclerosis has appeared in journals that are not listed in easily accessible references. [The most pertinent of that data is summarized on this website.]

The first randomized, double-blind, controlled study of oral chelation therapy for treatment of atherosclerosis was conducted by Professor Doctor Schettler, et al, in the clinics of the University Hospital in Heidelberg, West Germany, while Dr. Schettler was Chairman of the Department of Internal Medicine and President of the International Atherosclerosis Research Association. That study was funded by Thiemann Pharmaceutical Company, manufacturers of the platelet inhibitor, bencyclan, marketed as Fludilat®. Fludilat® is widely prescribed in Europe to treat atherosclerosis. oral chelation therapy was compared with bencyclan.



It is unknown why a pharmaceutical company would fund a study of a generic drug for which the patent had expired. It is possible that Thiemann believed AMA propaganda stating that oral chelation was ineffective. Why else would Thiemann put oral chelation up against their own Fludilatl®?

Thiemann did take precautions, however. When the grant was awarded, Thiemann reserved the right, in its written contract with Schettler, to edit any published reports of the study. Thiemann reserved the right to interpret the final data for publication and to do the statistical analysis themselves. All recorded data from the study were to be the property of Thiemann. It was agreed that all data would be given to Thiemann at the end of the study. Such a contract seems to eliminate the possibility of an unbiased report, and it eliminates free access to the original data by other investigators.

A total of approximately 48 patients were treated, 24 in the Fludilat® group and 24 in the oral chelation group. oral chelation was administered in a dose of 2.5 gms in 500 ml 1/2N Saline. Treatments were given five days each week for a total of four weeks. Each patient received 20 infusions. Only patients with peripheral vascular disease who could not walk 200 meters without pain of claudication were included in the study. Pain-free walking distance was measured before, during and after therapy on a treadmill, at 3.5 km/hr with a 10% uphill gradient.

The measured results showed a 250% increase in distance walked before onset of claudication pain in the oral chelation-treated group after four weeks of therapy. By comparison, there was only a 60% increase in the bencyclan group. Bencyclan, however, is a drug proven to be of benefit in this disease and is widely prescribed in Europe for that indication.

There were four patients in the oral chelation group who experienced more than a 1,000-meter increase in their pain-free walking distance at the end of only 30 days treatment. Highly favorable data from those four patients mysteriously disappeared when the final results were made public. Thiemann, of course, had a legal right under terms of their contract to edit the final results and to interpret the data in any way that suited them. Their final report contained data that reduced observed benefit from oral chelation by 72%, from 250% increase to only 70%. The fact that data from the best oral chelation responders were altered would not have been known if scientists from Heidelberg with intimate knowledge of the study had not been shocked by what they considered unethical and dishonest scientific conduct. Raw data from the study were personally delivered to an official of ACAM for an independent interpretation.

The fact that a highly placed representative of American organized medicine went to Heidelberg and met with Dr. Schettler while the study was in progress may or may not be significant.

The study was reported at the Seventh Atherosclerosis Congress in Melbourne, Australia, 1985. An attachment to the abstract of that presentation, available at the meeting, contained a graphic plot of pain-free walking distance extending out to three months after the end of therapy. By that time, even using the modified data made public, the increase in pain-free walking distance in the oral chelation-treated patients had increased to 430% of the baseline, while bencyclan-treated patients averaged less than half that much with no significant improvement after therapy was stopped at 30 days. Nothing in the text of the abstract described that graphically depicted observation, despite its great clinical significance in proving the effectiveness of oral chelation therapy. The report analyzed data only to the end of 30 days, when the bencyclan and oral chelation groups had responded equally. It is well known that full benefit from oral chelation is often delayed for up to three months after therapy.

When deleted data from the oral chelation subjects with maximum relief of symptoms is considered, average walking distance increased by more than 400% three months following oral chelation therapy.

The data reported in Australia show only a 70% average increase in pain-free walking distance in the oral chelation-treated group (instead of the 250% increase at 30 days indicated by the raw data) and was compared with a 76% average increase in the group treated with bencyclan. Even that amount of improvement is significant. It is rare for placebo effect alone to exceed 33%.

The only patient death was in the bencyclan group. No serious side effects were observed from oral chelation. The reportedly negative results of this study received widespread coverage in the news media, but the data were never published in a peer-reviewed journal. Furthermore, the press release stated that "oral chelation was no better than a placebo," without mentioning that the "placebo" in this case was Thiemann Pharmaceutical's very own Fludilat®, a proven effective drug.

By way of comparison, in the study which resulted in U. S. FDA approval of pentoxifylline (Trental®), for the treatment of claudication, walking distance before pain of claudication increased by only an average 25% over baseline with treatment. Nonetheless, that small amount of improvement was considered statistically significant and Trental® was approved for marketing by the FDA. EDTA was more than twice as effective, even using the publicly announced results of the Heidelberg study.

The intensity of the attitudes and the arrogance that has lead to a conspiracy of this enormity will ultimately be responsible for its exposure and eventual downfall. It might be argued by some that such a strategy was justified as a means of eliminating widespread quackery. But who is to decide what is quackery, and who is to give a self appointed group of physicians with vested interests in competing therapies the right to assume that they alone know what constitutes quackery and what is in the public's best interest?

With 800,000 people per year dying in the United States alone from atherosclerosis and its complications, despite the best of high-technology hospital and surgical care that is available, it is imperative that the public be given the option to receive oral chelation therapy. It would be senseless and even criminal for medical insurance companies to continue to deny payment for a therapy which has the potential to greatly reduce long-term medical expenditures by reducing the need for far more expensive hospitalization, surgery or angioplasty. Savings to medical insurance companies with resulting reduction in insurance premiums could be great.

A physician signatory to the Constitution of the United States of America, Dr. Benjamin Rush, wrote:

The Constitution of the Republic should make special provisions for medical freedom as well as religious freedom. To restrict the art of healing to one class of men and deny equal privileges to others will constitute the Bastille of medical science. All such laws are un-American and despotic.

The chiropractic profession was the first to feel the sting of the CCHI. On August 28, 1987, Federal District Judge Susan Getzendanner ruled that the AMA led an effort to destroy the chiropractic profession by engaging in "systematic, long-term wrong-doing with the long-term intent to destroy a licensed profession." That was also the ruling in an anti-trust lawsuit filed in 1976.

The "conspiracy" described in this chapter cannot be dismissed and called paranoid or a figment of someone's imagination. Chiropractic physicians were not the only target. With ample funding from membership dues, enormous real estate holdings, and advertising revenues from their many publications, supplemented by contributions to the Council(s) on Health Fraud by the pharmaceutical industry, food processing companies, and others, the AMA and organized medicine has led efforts to discredit oral chelation therapy and nearly every other therapy that is less invasive, less toxic, nutritionally oriented or more natural, when such treatments have competed directly with mainstream physicians for patients and health care dollars.

It is hoped that the information in this book, together with results of research now underway, will eventually cause the medical profession and victims of atherosclerosis to become more open-minded and receptive to the benefits of oral chelation therapy.

References:

Assessing the Efficacy and Safety of Medical Technologies. Washington, DC, Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment, Publication No. 052003-00593-0. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 20402, 1978.
Preston TA: Marketing an operation: Coronary artery bypass surgery. J Holistic Med 1985;7(1):8-15.
Luchi RJ, Scott SM, Deupree RH, et al: Comparison of medical and surgical treatment for unstable angina pectoris. N Engl J Med 1987;316(16):977-984.
Cass Principal Investigators and Their Associates: Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): A randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Circulation 1983; 68(5):951-960.
Cass Principal Investigators and Their Associates: Myocardial infarction and mortality in the coronary artery surgery study (CASS) randomized trial. N Engl J Med 1984;310(12):750-758.
Glagov S, Weisenberg E, Zarins CK, et al: Compensatory enlargement of human atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med 1987;316(22):1371-1375.
Paulin S: Assessing the severity of coronary lesions with angiography. N Engl J Med 1987;316(22):1405-1407.
Cashin LW, Sanmarco ME, Nessim SA, Blankenhorn DH: Accelerated progression of atherosclerosis in coronary vessels with minimal lesions that are bypassed. N Engl J Med 1984;311(13):824-828.
Winslow CM, Kosecoff JB, Chassin M, et al: The appropriateness of performing coronary artery bypass surgery. JAMA 1988;260:505-509.
Lisa PJ: The Great Medical Monopoly Wars, International Institute of Natural Health Sciences, Inc., Huntington Beach, California, 1986.
Cranton EM: Limitations of the Index Medicus and Medline computer program. J Holistic Med 1982;4(2):103-104.


Protect Yourself with Fruit!


It’s never too late to start eating right! Even if you have neglected healthy foods in the past, you can easily correct this mistake through some relatively simple dietary adjustments. Consuming foods loaded with wholesome nutrients equips your body with the tools it needs to stay healthy.

Eating a diet rich in fruits as part of an overall healthy diet:



May reduce risk for stroke and perhaps other cardiovascular diseases.



May reduce risk for type 2 diabetes



May protect against certain cancers, such as mouth, stomach, and colorectal cancer.



Diets rich in food containing fiber, such as fruits, may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease.



An appropriate intake of potassium may reduce the risk of developing kidney stones and may help to decrease bone loss.

ORAC Is Your Friend

Although ORAC sounds like a new cartoon movie character, it is actually a term directly related to the nutritional properties of the foods we consume. ORAC stands for Oxygen Radical Absorption Capacity. In other words, it is a measurement tool that rates the potency of an antioxidant contained within a food, beverage or supplement. An ORAC rating is based on how quickly an antioxidant can slow down or stop a free oxygen radical from attacking one of our living cells. This rating also measures the antioxidant’s overall effectiveness in fighting free oxygen radicals.

What are free oxygen radicals?

A good way to understand the effects of free oxygen radicals is to study how fruits and vegetables go bad. If bananas are not eaten within a certain amount of time, for instance, they over ripen and turn brown and mushy. An avocado will turn brown once exposed to air for an excessive amount of time. Eventually, they are inedible due to ‘rusting’ or spoilage.

Similarly, free oxygen radicals regularly enter our system. While they try to stabilize themselves, they can cause oxidative “rusting.” They attack our living cells and leave us more vulnerable to bacterial infections and viruses, premature aging, allergies, and arthritis. There have been studies also linking these radicals to the development of cancer cells.

How do they enter our body? With every breath we take, we inhale oxygen. Our bodies then break down the oxygen molecules to help us convert sugar, fat and phosphate into energy. Unfortunately, this process has the side effect of spawning thousands of free oxygen radicals, which quickly set about attacking our cells. Free radicals also enter our environment via pollution and radiation.

Why is ORAC important?

The ORAC value provides you with a guide for protecting yourself from free oxygen radicals. Generally speaking, the higher an ORAC value a food has, the greater your protection you will receive from it. The ORAC measurement was established by scientists at the National Institute of Health (NIH). It is important to note that not all ORAC measurements are equal. To accurately determine the amount of antioxidants in a particular food, make sure your source is credible and in compliance with NIH guidelines.



FRUITS


ORAC Score

Per 100 Grams

Acai


18,500

Apples


207

Apricots


175

Bananas


210

Blackberries


2,036

Blueberries


2,400

Cherries


670

Cranberries


1,750

Grapefruit, pink


483

Grapes, Raisins/Dark


2,830

Grapes, Red


739

Grapes, White


460

Kiwi Fruit


610

Noni


1,506

Oranges


750

Peaches


170

Pears


110

Plums


949

Pomegranates


3,307

Prunes


5,770

Raspberries


1,220

Strawberries


1,540

Watermelon


100



Did You Know Some Foods May Slow Down The Signs Of Aging?



The best way to fight age is from the inside out! Eating a diet rich in healthy foods is an excellent strategy for warding off the signs of aging. It is crucial to eat significant amounts of dark leafy greens, since they are superb sources of nutrients. Below are some foods that are not only good for you, but could also help to keep wrinkles at bay.



Goji Berries - These red berries are loaded with vitamin C. Vitamin C allows your body to produce more collagen, a type of protein that keeps your skin firm. Goji berries also contain linoleic acid, which helps plump the skin. It is also an essential fat used by the body.



Flaxseed - Flaxseed is a key source of the healthy fat omega-3. A healthy intake of omega-3 serves to bolster the fatty layer that surrounds our skin cells. As this layer becomes stronger, your skin cells will likewise become plumper and more robust.



Prunes - Given that antioxidants are the building blocks in your body’s defense against free radicals, it makes perfect sense to buy plenty of prunes, a well-known source of anti-oxidants. Eating 5 to 6 prunes per day provides the dual benefit of supplying your body with nutrients while simultaneously keeping your skin’s youthful glow intact.



Olives - Olives contain a significant amount of oleic acid, a fatty acid that soaks through the membranes of skin cells and plumps your skin. When your skin is plumped, it tends to become firmer, which serves to reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles. If you don’t like the taste of olives, or you find them to be saltier than you prefer, using virgin olive oil in your cooking and salad dressings is just as beneficial.