Cancer and Vitamin D, GMO Foods, Food Labels, Honey, and Weight Loss

Researcher Says: Breast cancer virtually "eradicated" with higher levels of vitamin D

In a gathering of vitamin D researchers recently held in Toronto, Dr. Cedric Garland delivered a blockbuster announcement: Breast cancer can be virtually "eradicated" by raising vitamin D levels.

"Vitamin D is "the cure" for breast cancer that the cancer industry ridiculously claims to be searching for. The cure already exists! But the breast cancer industry simply refuses to acknowledge any "cure" that doesn't involve mammography, chemotherapy or high-profit pharmaceuticals. "

"Vitamin D is finally gaining some of the recognition it deserves as a miraculous anti-cancer nutrient. It is the solution for cancer prevention. It could save hundreds of thousands of lives each year in the U.S. alone." Even Dr. Andrew Weil recently raised his recommendation of vitamin D to 2,000 IU per day.

This is the vitamin that could destroy the cancer industry and save millions of women from the degrading, harmful cancer "treatments" pushed by conventional medicine. No wonder they don't want to talk about it!

Below I'm reprinting the full statement from Dr. Cedric Garland following the Vitamin D conference recently held in Toronto.

Statement from Dr. Cedric Garland:

"Breast cancer is a disease so directly related to vitamin D deficiency that a woman's risk of contracting the disease can be 'virtually eradicated' by elevating her vitamin D status to what vitamin D scientists consider to be natural blood levels. "

That's the message vitamin D pioneer Dr. Cedric Garland delivered in Toronto Tuesday as part of the University of Toronto School of Medicine's "Diagnosis and Treatment of Vitamin D Deficiency" conference - the largest gathering of vitamin D researchers in North America this year. More than 170 researchers, public health officials and health practitioners gathered at the UT Faculty club for the landmark event.

Garland's presentation headlined a conference that reviewed many aspects of the emerging vitamin D research field - a booming discipline that has seen more than 3,000 academic papers this calendar year alone, conference organizers said. That makes vitamin D by far the most prolific topic in medicine this year, with work connecting it with risk reduction in two dozen forms of cancer, heart disease, multiple scleroses and many other disorders.

Dr. Reinhold Vieth, Associate Professor in the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology at University of Toronto, and Director of the Bone and Mineral Laboratory at Mount Sinai Hospital, organized the event in conjunction with Grassroots Health - an international vitamin D advocacy group founded by breast cancer survivor Carole Baggerly.

Baggerly implored the research group to take action and encourage Canadians to learn more about vitamin D and to raise their vitamin D levels. An estimated 22,700 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in 2009, according to the Canadian Cancer Society's latest figures.

As much as 97 percent of Canadians are vitamin D deficient at some point in the year, according to University of Calgary research - largely due to Canada's northerly latitudes and weak sun exposure. Sunshine is by far the most abundant source of vitamin D - called 'The Sunshine Vitamin' - with salmon and fortified milk being other sources. Vitamin D supplementation helps raise levels for many as well.

Grassroots Health's "D-action" panel - 30 of the world's leading researchers on vitamin D and many other vitamin D supporters - recommend 2,000 IU of vitamin D daily and vitamin D blood levels of 100-150 nanomoles-per-liter as measured by a vitamin D blood test.

Vieth pointed out that natural vitamin D levels of mammals who live outdoors in sunny climates is higher than that - up to 200 nanomoles-per liter. And Garland, whose presentation was entitled "Breast Cancer as a Vitamin D Deficiency Disease" presented data showing that raising one's vitamin D status near those levels decreased breast cancer risk more than 77 percent.

'The Sunshine Vitamin' was once thought of only for bone health, helping the body process calcium. But more recent work has shown that all cells in the body have "vitamin D receptors" which help control normal cell growth. Additionally, Garland presented new evidence that low vitamin D status compromises the integrity of calcium-based cellular bonding within tissues, which when eroded allow rogue cancer cells to spread more readily.

Grassroots Health is trying to raise vitamin D awareness among Canadians. Despite epidemic-level vitamin D deficiency in Canada, fewer than nine per cent of Canadians have ever had their vitamin D levels checked by a professional and most who have do not know their vitamin D blood level.

My Recommendation:
Take a Vitamin D3 supplement daily of at least 2,000 IU to make sure you have enough vitamin D in your body. It is simple and inexpensive, then get some direct sunshine every day just to be sure you have enough.


Genetically Modified Foods

Most Americans do not want genetically modified foods and consider them dangerous. Because the U.S. does not require manufacturers to disclose genetically modified (GM or GMO) ingredients on the product labels, the public is largely unaware of when they are purchasing GM foods.

Such foods are now found in up to 70 percent of all grocery store products. While an unwitting public consumes more and more GM foods, evidence of their dangers continues to mount.

Genetically modified foods are created when genes from another species or created in a lab are inserted into a food's DNA. The foods which have the highest prevalence of genetic modifications include some of our biggest crops: corn, soybeans, canola, tomatoes, lettuce, and potatoes.

Corn oil and high fructose corn syrup are widely used in food items. Virtually every salad dressing and butter substitute contain one or more of corn oil, canola oil or soybean oil.

The European Union, Japan, China, Korea, Australia, and New Zealand require labeling of foods containing GMO content. Despite CBS News showing a majority of Americans want labeling, no such laws exist. A CBS poll also found that 53 percent of Americans wouldn't buy food they knew had been genetically modified.

Experts and consumers are becoming increasingly concerned about GMO foods as evidence of their dangers continues to mount. In a study published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences rats fed genetically modified corn were compared to their parents who had been fed non-GM corn. The results showed a clear difference between the two groups. The rats fed GM food had signs of liver and kidney problems as well as effects on their hearts, adrenal glands, and spleens."


Grass-Fed Beef Is More Nutritious

Most beef cows in America are raised for a short time on grass and then "finished" in confined feeding areas with a diet of grain that is unnatural to them, which boosts E. coli counts in their guts, and which encourages the spread of disease. Grass-fed beef cows eat grass their entire lives, as cows evolved to do. Because their lifecycle isn't accelerated with hormones, animals mature in the spring when forage is bursting with new growth, seeds and nutrients. Those nutrients end up in the meat and result in a healthy and delicious product.

Research suggests grass-fed beef has more nutrients as a result -- as much as 10 times more beta-carotene, three times more Vitamin E and three-times more omega-3 fatty acids.
Grass fed cows are the only sustainable form of raised cattle. By rotating the animals through various pastures through the seasons, we preserve native biodiversity, improve soil fertility and eliminate the waste-management issues associated with confined animal feedlots (a major source of water pollution at conventional farms).

If you want healthier meat (and can afford it) try eating grass-fed beef and see if you prefer the taste over conventionally raised beef. You will be doing yourself and the planet a big favor.


Food Label Lies

It's a fact of the grocery store that the healthiest food often has the least marketing muscle behind it. The best source of fiber and vitamins are fresh vegetables and fruit, and yet it's the processed, packaged junk food fortified with vitamin and fiber powder that screams for attention. The Center for Science in the Public Interest recently published a comprehensive report on the subject, a persuasive indictment delicately called "Food Labeling Chaos."

"Consumers need honest labeling so they can spend their food dollars wisely and avoid diet-related disease," said CSPI senior staff attorney Ilene Ringel Heller, co-author of the report. "Companies should market their foods without resorting to the deceit and dishonesty that's so common today. And, if they don't, the FDA should make them."

Like listening skeptically to a politician speak, however, you can often decipher the truth amid the lies and misdirection by carefully reading food labels. Here we take a look at nine of the most common ways food labels lie, so you can prepare before your next trip to the grocery store.

Made With Whole Grains

You're standing in the grocery aisle, faced with a choice. On the one hand, there are the Thomas' English Muffins of your youth: white and filled with nooks and crannies practically screaming to be filled with pools of melted butter. On the other: Thomas' Hearty Grains English Muffins, which is "made with the goodness of whole grains." You reach, somewhat grudgingly, for the healthy option, since experts tell you that 50% of your grains should be whole grains.

What you don't realize is that unbleached wheat flour is the main ingredient; whole wheat flour is the third on the list, "indicating that the product contains relatively little," according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Once again, one truth – the presence of whole grains, masks another, that whole grains make up an insignificant portion of the food. Some products that trumpet their whole grain credentials (like Keebler's Zesta saltine crackers) use caramel to mimic the brown color that results from the use of whole grains; in fact, according to CSPI, the crackers have almost as much salt as whole grains. Other purportedly healthy crackers have more sugar than whole wheat. So much for healthy whole grains (or truth in advertising).

Ingredients

What could be more straight-forward than ingredient lists? So you might think, but there's a lot of room for deception and misdirection in the average ingredient list.

Exhibit A, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest: the Tasty Living Mocha Cherry Double Chocolate Layer Cake. The first ingredient is enriched bleach flour, and everyone knows that ingredients are listed in order from most to least. This cake must be sort-of nutritious, since it's mostly made out of nutritious wheat flour, right? After all, as Bill Cosby reminded us so many years ago, "Eggs. Eggs are in chocolate cake! And milk! Oh goody! And wheat! That's nutrition!"

Sorry, Bill. The biggest ingredient in this cake is sugar, as the Center for Science in the Public Interest Points out. How is it possible? Just add up all the sugars that go by different names: sugar, corn syrup, high-fructose corn syrup and white grape juice concentrate. Boom! This cake is nearly one-third sugar.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest argues that U.S. nutrition labels and ingredient lists should be a more consumer-friendly. By grouping major ingredients and separating minor ingredients, we'd all be better able to make smarter purchases. Which can of diced tomatoes is 60% tomato and 40% water, and which is 70% tomato? How much fruit is actually in that fruity-looking "health" bar? Right now, there's no way to know ... without a chemistry kit.

Serving Size

A 20 oz. soda fits easily in your hand, fits easily in your car's cup holder and might even come free with a sandwich at the local deli. But even if a reasonable person might perceive that bottle as a single-serving delivery system, there are 2.5 official servings in there, meaning 100 calories per "serving" ... but 240 calories per bottle.

While major soda bottlers have begun spelling out this single-serving conundrum to the junk food-consuming public, most serving size calculations are based on standards developed when Die Hard, Beetle Juice and Rain Man debuted on the big screen. Some are based on standards as old as Star Wars and Saturday Night Fever! Just try to remember the size of the sodas and popcorn customarily dolled out in 1977 at the drive-in, compared to today at the megaplex, and you get a sense for how much our sense of portion proportion has gone out of whack (er, changed) in the last generation.

And yet, the serving size data on our foods reflect a slimmer more restrained era, when an 8 oz soda was a weekly treat, not a single glug between fistfuls of Cool Ranch Doritos (serving size: 11 chips). How many people do you know restrain themselves to 11 chips? Or to a 1/2 cup of ice cream? Or a single cup of cooked pasta?

Made With Real Fruit

Hey wow! That candy has real fruit in it. It must be good for my kid.

The marketing around "real fruit" is so egregious that, for many shoppers, it doesn't pass the sniff test. But we all get weak-kneed when faced with something potentially yummy, so let's take a look at some of those misleading marketing techniques.

Case-in-point: Gerber Fruit Juice Treats for Preschoolers. Its package blooming with pictures of ripe oranges, raspberries, cherries, peaches, grapes and pineapple, its only fruit-like ingredient is fruit juice concentrate, which the Dietary Guidelines for Americans considers just another form of sugar. Not surprisingly, the primary ingredients are also sugar and ... well, sugar (corn syrup).

It's candy. Similarly, Betty Crocker "Strawberry Splash Fruit Gushers" say they're made with real fruit, but the only thing approximating fruit is pear concentrate (sugar) with Red No. 40 for "strawberry" color. Overall, the gushers are half sugar (a.k.a., candy).

Bottom line: If you want real fruit, buy real fruit. If you want candy, buy candy.

(And watch out for the same tricky marketing used on supposedly vegetable-rich products like Knorr "Pasta Sides" Chicken Broccoli fettuccini. As the CSPI points out, there's more salt than broccoli in this pasta dish. Of course, it isn't called Chicken Salt fettuccini ... because presumably no one would buy it.)

Free Range Eggs

Ah, the idyllic red barn. The rays of sunshine streaming over the hillside. You feel good buying those "free range" eggs knowing that the chickens tasked with producing those little protein-filled shells lived happy cage-free lives. The sunny label says so. But those few extra cents you plunk down for the "free range" eggs might be paying a savvy marketer, rather than an ethical farmer, because the government doesn't regulate the use of the phrase "free range" or "cage free" on eggs. Legally speaking, it's meaningless, according to Consumer Reports' Eco Label Decoder.

The Department of Agriculture does have rules for use of the term on poultry. It means chickens must be granted the luxury of exactly five minutes of "access" to the outdoors everyday, a token prize for a short dirty life that can also include an unceremonious severing of the beak, wing-to-wing crowding in a shed that's more hangar than coop, and more chicken poop than you ever want to contemplate while planning a meal.

Those eggs you buy may have been raised ethically, with room enough for hens to roam the yard and peck contentedly at the dirt. But there's no guarantee in the "free range" label.

Fiber

Fiber is fiber is fiber. Right? Who would have any reason to think otherwise? You might if you knew the fibers advertised in many foods are mainly "purified powders" called inulin, polydextrose and maltodextrin, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. These "isolated" unnatural fibers are unlikely to lower blood cholesterol or blood sugar, as other fibers can, and two of the three won't even "help with regularity," according to the CSPI. "Currently, fiber is being added to foods such as ice creams, yogurts, juices and drinks so that manufacturers can brag about their fiber content," the group contends. "But these products do not contain the traditional sources of fiber associated with a variety of health benefits."

There may be nothing harmful about maltodextrin, (made from corn, wheat, rice or potato starch), polydextrose (made from glucose and sorbitol) or inulin (a carbohydrate derived mostly from chicory roots and other plant roots). But these ingredients act more as low-calorie filling agents (and high-value marketing agents) than proven health agents. Put another way, as SNL did at the start of the health fiber craze, "there's fiber, and then there's high fiber." For the real thing, look for foods like whole grains, vegetables, fruits and beans.

Tastes Like Medicine!

Food isn't medicine ... or is it? Certain micronutrients, after all, can prevent diabetes, cure cancer, make you smarter and improve your sex life.

In truth, the FDA allows food manufacturers to make certain pre-approved "qualified health claims" about the health benefits of nutrients in food, but only if those foods meet a range of healthy criteria, like low fat, cholesterol and sodium content. But, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, marketers have stretched this inch into a long mile. For instance, food makers can't say that their product "helps reduce the risk of heart disease" without FDA approval, so they say that it "helps maintain a healthy heart." That's why several public health groups, including the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society, have voiced concern about this trend.

In the most famous recent example, the FDA stopped General Mills from labeling Cheerios with cholesterol reducing claims it wouldn't allow on some prescription drugs. Another, which the California attorney general helped stamp out, was the Kellogg's claim that its children cereals "support your child's immunity" because, even though some are 40% sugar, they are fortified with vitamins. "While a severe deficiency in those vitamins could interfere with the proper functioning of the body’s immune system (and any other system), there is no evidence that Cocoa Krispies actually improves a children’s immune status or wards off disease," CSPI argues. But Kellogg's is far from alone. Even as Kellogg's stopped that line of marketing, Ocean Spray cranberry juice and Juicy Juice berry beverage, Nestlé's Carnation Instant Breakfast and Kraft's Crystal Light all make similar claims.

Other foods make claims about boosting your kid's intelligence (Juicy Juice), or protecting healthy joints (orange juice), or improving heart health (Quaker cinnamon and spice instant oatmeal, which is almost one-third sugar).

Bottom line: Know what is "marketing hype" and what is “real” food. Read the labels and don’t be fooled by the manufacturer’s unrealistic claims.

Allergy symptom prevention

Many people have successfully overcome many of the woes of spring and summer allergies by eating local honey. They say: "You're basically building up your system's defenses against allergens in your environment, since you're taking it in after the bees have processed it."

A recent Seattle Post-Intelligencer article just might turn you into a big fan of local honey – whether or not you suffer from allergies. Because it shows how mass produced honey can actually be dangerous.

According to a five-month Seattle P-I investigation, more than 60 percent of honey consumed in the U.S. is imported. About half of that honey comes from China, but it doesn't take a direct route.

A large portion of Chinese honey is sent to other countries in Asia and the South Pacific. There, the country-of-origin is purposely mislabeled before the honey is shipped off to the U.S. and other countries.

The idea, obviously, is to give honey producers the impression that the honey is from anywhere but China. This practice is called "honey laundering." And besides being deceptive, it can be dangerous because Chinese honey sometimes contains chloramphenicol, an illegal antibiotic with harsh side effects – especially for those who have a sensitivity to the drug.

But here's the heart of the problem: When chloramphenicol contamination is discovered, honey producers usually send it back to the importer. The FDA is rarely contacted, so unscrupulous importers are free to simply ship the honey to a different producer, hoping the antibiotic won't be detected on the second pass.

An executive for Sue Bee (one of the largest honey packers in the U.S.) told the Seattle P-I that chloramphenicol is detected in honey about once a month. When found, it's sent back to the importer. Bill Allibone, president of Sue Bee, explains that the FDA isn't informed because the company never actually takes ownership of the honey.

So be safe and check where your honey is from before buying it. Try to buy honey gathered in North America whenever possible.

A sensible weight loss plan

If you are looking for a better approach to loosing weight then you might want to check out this website: http://www.thedietsolutionprogram.com/burnfat.aspx . This is a common sense program that you can live with and be able to see the changes in your body that come naturally from it.

Visit this website for good information on how to eat to lose fat and reshape your body. I am not advocating that you buy the books which are for sale, but I do think the information they provide is an intelligent and healthier approach to weight loss and body-toning than most other programs available. Ignore the video and just read the information below it.

Until next time, stay healthy and happy

JD Roma