Thursday 1 November 2012

Article Of A Landmark Discovery For More Accurate PSA Test


Test that predicts prostate cancer: UK scientists' landmark discovery is cheap, accurate - and offers hope to thousands

By FIONA MACRAE
The first reliable test of whether men are at a high risk of prostate cancer has been developed by British scientists.
The breakthrough raises the prospect of millions being screened for the disease in the same way as women are for breast cancer. An accurate test for prostate cancer is the ‘holy grail’ of research into the disease – but has eluded scientists.
The test has so far proven to be twice as precise as the current method. It focuses on urine rather than blood, meaning it is cheaper and also has the advantage of dispensing with needles.
Deadly disease: Microscopic image of prostate cancer cells. The new test is said to be twice as precise in detecting the cancer
Deadly disease: Microscopic image of prostate cancer cells. The new test is said to be twice as precise in detecting the cancer
The £5.50 kit could be in widespread use in GPs’ surgeries in as little as four years.
Prostate is the most common cancer in British men, affecting 35,000 a year and killing more than 10,000.
Professor David Neal, a prostate cancer specialist at the Cambridge Research Institute, said: ‘This is a vital piece of research that could go a long way to find a long-awaited and much-needed reliable and easy test to identify those men most at risk of developing prostate cancer. If further studies show this can be used in the the clinic, this will be a landmark discovery.’ 
 
Despite its terrible toll, prostate cancer is often described as a ‘Cinderella cancer’, losing out in resources to higher-profile conditions such as breast cancer.
The current blood test measures levels of a protein made by the prostate, and crucially is only used to diagnose the disease rather than predict its onset.
The unreliability of the PSA test also means that older men are not routinely screened for the disease.
False positive and false negative results means it is wrong more often that it is right.
Three in four men with a raised levels of the prostate specific antigen protein are found not to have any cancerous cells when they undergo a biopsy, while one in five with prostate cancer has normal PSA readings.
Surgery: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in British men, affecting 35,000 a year
Surgery: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in British men, affecting 35,000 a year
As a result, many are subjected to the worry of unnecessary tests, while in other cases, fledgling cancers are missed until they have spread to other parts of the body and are much harder to treat.
In developing the new test, scientists from the Cancer Research UK Cambridge Research Institute and the Institute of Cancer Research used results of genetic studies to link low levels of the microseminoprotein-beta protein (MSMB) with signs of the disease.
Low levels of MSMB foretell cancerous changes in the prostate, the journal PLoS ONE reported yesterday.
Researcher Dr Hayley Whitaker said that Initial studies suggest that the test is twice as accurate as the current one.
And at around £5.50 a kit, it is two-thirds of the price. It would be taken at a GP’s surgery and the results would be back within hours.
A trial on 1,200 men is under way and is expected to be finished by Christmas. Further, large-scale trials will also have to be carried out. Men found to have low levels of MSMB could then be closely monitored, with the aim of detecting the disease, if it does indeed develop, as early as possible.
Hope: A CT scan image of the abdomen showing metastatic lesions of prostate cancer. Scientists hope the new test will offer hope to thousands of men
Hope: A CT scan image of the abdomen showing metastatic lesions of prostate cancer. Scientists hope the new test will offer hope to thousands of men
The test could also help in diagnosis by reducing the number of unnecessary biopsies.
In addition, it may also help doctors more accurately distinguish between the more common, slow-growing forms of the disease from the more dangerous, faster-growing varieties.
Dr Whitaker, the study’s lead author, said: ‘We looked in the tissue and urine of over 350 men with and without prostate cancer to find out how much MSMB they had. The protein is easy to detect because it is found in urine and would potentially be a very simple test to carry out on men to identify those most at risk of developing the disease.’
Dr Kate Holmes, of the Prostate Cancer Charity, said: ‘Given the known limitations of the PSA blood test, finding a technique to accurately diagnose prostate cancer is the holy grail of research into the disease, which is why these results are potentially exciting. 
‘However, further research is needed to determine how effective the detection of MSMB in the urine is for predicting the risk of, and potentially even diagnosing, prostate cancer.’
Prostate cancer receives a fraction of the funding and attention given to breast cancer.
Around £40million a year is ploughed into breast cancer research – four times the funding for prostate cancer studies.
And the NHS spends £75million annually on the national breast cancer screening programme for women. 
No such programme exists for prostate cancer.
The technique is one of several potential successors to the PSA test being developed around the world. 
Scientists at Leicester University and Durham University are among those working on alternative methods.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1320308/Test-predicts-prostate-cancer-UK-scientists-landmark-discovery-cheap-accurate.html#ixzz2AzbQ1C3h
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


A video from Surrey University about the new urine PSA test

Monday 29 October 2012

Should I Have Radical Prostatectomy or Wait and Monitor


Your important Prostate Cancer Treatment Options


A new study in the New England Journal of Medicine finds men who opt to surgically remove their prostate gland - a procedure called a radical prostatectomy - are no less likely to die than men who choose wait and monitor their symptoms to see if the cancer progresses.  These findings fall in line with mounting concerns about the over screening and overtreatment of prostate tumors in the U.S.  Each year, millions of men are screened for early disease and, based on the results, many undergo invasive biopsies, surgery or other cancer treatment for tumors that would not have killed them anyway.  The procedures may cause impotence, incontinence and even death; as many as 1,000 to 1,300 men die due to complications associated with treatments prompted by screening.

Because of this research, people should be reminded to seek the knowledge and advice of more than one doctor and get a second opinion to validate their treatment option choice.  

If you have been diagnosed with prostate cancer, you know there are many treatment options with various risks and side effects. Visit www.researchprostatecancer.com for a great resource to learn more about your treatment options or download our free prostate cancer guide. 

Wednesday 17 October 2012

Could Prostate Treatment for Dogs Help Men


Prostate cancer treatment found safe for dogs could eventually be used for men


October 16, 2012 By Mike Lear
Treatment that has been found safe for prostate cancer in man’s best friend could eventually benefit man as well.

Sandra Axiak-Bechtel says the gold nanoparticle therapy that has proven safe in dogs must now be tested for its effectiveness in treatment of prostate cancer.
Scientists at the University of Missouri have found that injecting gold nanoparticles into prostate cancer tumors in dogs is safe for the dogs. Doctor Sandra Axiak-Bechtel, an assistant professor in oncology at the MU College of Veterinary Medicine, says when made radioactive those particles give off a lot of energy for a short period, theoretically killing off a lot of cancer cells faster.
“The gold nanoparticle itself if compared to traditional brachytherapy that is used in people tends to distribute better throughout the tumor and actually cause less side effects.”
The nanoparticles are injected into the prostate tumor, guided by CT scans, while the dogs are under anesthesia.
The idea came from work at the MU School of Medicine and the College of Arts and Science. Axiak-Bechtel says one of their advancements was finding a way to keep those nanoparticles from aggregating, which makes them really hard to use for treatment. “Doctor Kattesh Katti and a whole group at the Department of Radiology have actually coated them with gum arabic, which is a natural and very non-toxic product that keeps them from aggregating. What that means is that we can use them very safely for treatment without having or anticipating any side effects.”
Now that the treatment has been proven safe, the next step is to test its effectiveness.
“At this point we’re way too early in our study to determine whether or not we think this is as effective as brachytherapy or even more effective than traditional brachytherapy.”
If it proves effective, it could be a promising treatment for men. “Because prostate tumors are so similar in the way that they behave in dogs compared to the very aggressive disease in men, we anticipate that any side effects we would see in the dog would be the same as what we would see in a person.”
Axiak-Bechtel says she’s also excited for what the work could mean for dogs.
“It’s a very, very difficult tumor to treat and we just don’t have very effective treatments at this point in time for prostate cancer in dogs, so the ability to not just help men in the future but also help dogs is very important.”
The dogs involved are pets brought to the University for treatment, not research animals.
Share this:
Filed Under: Featured, Health & Medicine, Human Interest, News Tagged With: dogs, gold nanoparticle, prostate cancer, Sandra Axiak-Bechtel, University of Missouri College of Arts and Science, University of Missouri College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri School of Medicine

Tuesday 28 August 2012

Cancer Clinic visit PSA results today

Good news I have just got home from my 3 monthly cancer clinic check up and PSA results.
After a steadily increasing PSA level at each 3 monthly check,today it has gone down!!!
Over the past 9 months it went up from 11.2 to 13.4 to 16.8. Today's reading is 15.7 !!
Which means with the previous rises of 2.2 and 3.4 and if it had gone up again say to 19 or 20 a rise of 2.2 to 3.2.
My actual reading of 15.7 is a difference of 3.3 to 4.3 to what it would have been.

I have been strict on my diet for the past 3 months since my last check up.I have eaten no cheese,organic or not! no butter,grass fed or not! very little red meat!
As I had re introduced cheese and butter to my diet over the previous 6-9 months and my PSA steadily rose,the fact that I have not eaten this over the past 3 months and my count has reduced! I can only conclude that diet and particularly dairy has an effect on PSA levels as my diet and lifestyle had not been changed in any other way!

Tuesday 3 July 2012

Results Of My Isotope Bone Scan Received

Well after 2 weeks of anxious waiting for my results of my bone scan to come in the post, I finally decided to ring my cancer clinic.The clinics secretary's answer phone was on!,I left a message to ring me back.
DAVE RILEY
By 3 pm no call so I rang again and the phone was answered by the secretary who just happened to share the same sir name as me,good omen I thought!
She informed me that she was about to print off the results and post them to me but could not tell me the results over the phone,more frustrating and anxious waiting time! She then informed me that if she spoke to the Dr. and asked his permission she would be able to ring me back and read out the results,this I readily agreed to.
5pm arrived and no call,then at 5.15 the phone rang and it was the clinic secretary with my results.I was feeling really nervous to what I was about to be told!
"There is no sign of any cancer anywhere in your bones, she said, and the shadow that was on your pubic bone on the scan 5 years ago has totally disappeared".
As you can imagine I let out a loud Yessss! great,thank you.
I still have prostate cancer but at least now and hopefully for many years to come it at least is not in the bones.When I had my last scan and an x-ray on my pubic bone area as the spot there had shown on the scan and they wanted a clearer picture of the dark spot.
The Dr's had spent a few days visiting me each day in hospital and couldn't decide on what treatment to give me as they couldn't decide if the spot on my pubic bone was arthritis or cancer that had escaped the prostate and gone into the bone.So they finally decided to put me on hormone drugs and chemically castrate me.
So now the spot on the pubic bone has disappeared it is still not known if it was cancer or arthritis.Has the hormone treatment killed off the cancer cells or my strict diet and anti oxidant foods I eat? or was it not either cancer or arthritis but something else?
Maybe I could have had treatment on my prostate and not had hormone drugs! I and the Dr's will never know.Today I just thank god I'm still here,and feel in pretty good health except a little tired sometimes and don't sleep long at night,and obviously the hormone drugs kill your sex life,but it could be worse if the spot had not shown I may have had other treatment that may have caused me major problems!
So today I feel great relieved the pressure is off at least for a while and I slept a straight 5 hours last night which is good for me,a I'm normally up for a pee every 2-3 hours in the night.
I now await my next PSA blood test in August to see if my cancer count has stabilised or gone down,as it had gone steadily up every 3 monthly clinic visit and that was why the Dr. requested the bone scan.
So now await the blood test in August!

Thursday 21 June 2012

Sugar Intake and Cancer video information


Sugar: The Bitter Truth

Robert H. Lustig, MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology, explores the damage caused by sugary foods. He argues that fructose (too much) and fiber (not enough) appear to be cornerstones of the obesity epidemic through their effects on insulin.

Monday 18 June 2012

Today I went for My Isotope Bone Scan

Well that's the isotope scan done today! Started the day off at 10.30 am with an injection of radioactive fluid into a vein,which is then absorbed into the bones to aid the scan.
DAVE RILEY
I may have been nuclear man for a few hours but didn't feel any more energy!!
Then I had to wait 3hours after the injection for the fluid to circulate before the scan,and had to drink 1&1/2 litres of water during the 3 hours wait.
The machine comes within an inch from your nose when scanning the head ! quite  claustrophobic !
Now have an anxious 10-14 days to wait for the scan result.
Perhaps a positive point is they said in appointment letter once the scan is finished,the scan will be checked and occasionally x-rays taken to interpret the bone scan.When I had a scan 5 years ago they took x-rays after as they saw a small shadow on my pubic bone in the scan and checked it further by the x-rays.As they didn't do any this time hopefully it's a good sign.
Paula said she want's to use me as a night light tonight as she expects me to glow in the dark like a luminous watch ! lol

Friday 1 June 2012


New Prostate Cancer Treatment Drugs Could Pack Double Punch

Two new drugs, Ra-223 and MDV3100, deliver improved survival rates and bone health for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.



SBI!

Wednesday 30 May 2012

Hospital Bone Scan Appointment

I received my appointment for a bone scan at the Nuclear Dept of my local Cancer Hospital  for the 18 th June requested by my Dr. on the 22 nd May at my routine cancer clinic check up.
As the Dr's were not sure 5 years ago on my last scan when a small shadow was showing on my pubic bone, if it was arthritis or cancer cells that had escaped from the prostate.The Dr's put me straight on Hormone treatment as they were not sure whether it was worth operating if the cancer had already escaped the prostate !
This new bone scan is to check if the spot has changed,so fingers crossed it hasn't,but the Dr thinks it may have as my PSA is rising although it has gone up and down before.
Beezid - Save 98% Auction Shopping
Beezid - Home Decor
SBI!

Friday 25 May 2012

PSA level rise at 3 monthly cancer clinic visit

I had my 3 monthly cancer clinic visit Tuesday after having my blood samples taken last week.
Every 3 monthly check is an anxious time hoping PSA levels haven't risen!
Unfortunately since my last visit 3 months ago when my level was 13.4 it is now 16.8 and the Dr's are considering further treatments,another bone scan and maybe going on a trial for a new drug that apparently starves the blood flow to cancer cells.
My PSA seems on the upward trend again.If diet has anything to do with it I have been eating foods I had eliminated from my diet like red meat and butter,also I eat a lot of eggs,I'm going to give them up again and hope it may lower the next PSA  test level!
Beezid - Save 98% Auction ShoppingSBI!

Tuesday 1 May 2012

Prostate Cancer Surgery Doesn't Work Study Finds


Prostate Cancer Surgery Doesn’t Work, Study Finds http://bit.ly/IPAUe2
www.inquisitr.com
A long awaited study regarding the efficacy of prostate cancer surgery is about to be published and researchers warn that the results found that the standard surgical treatment for the disease is ineffective. In the study researchers examined surgical removal of the prostrate grand to “watchful wait...
Beezid - Save 98% Auction Shopping

 ·  ·  · 17 hours ago · 

Thursday 23 February 2012

The Benefits of Vitamin D and Cancer


Stop Using Sunscreen

very interesting article is in this month's Harvard Magazine (not online yet). The theory is that by using sunscreen, people prevent their bodies from producing Vitamin D, and thereby create a higher risk of several types of cancer, far outweighing the risk of skin cancer. Here are some excerpts:
According to a new theory, sealing our skins off from the sun may cause more cancer deaths than it prevents.

Associate professor of medicine Edward Giovannucci notes that UV-B radiation, the source of suntan and sunburn, is also the component of sunlight that enables human skin . . . to synthesize the "sunshine vitamin" -- D -- used by every type of cell in the human body. Animal research has associated a lack of vitamin D with multiple sclerosis, osteoporosis, and pathological processes that underlie several forms of cancer, including those of the colon, breast, prostate, and digestive tract . . . .

"If you look at the cancers as a group," says Giovannucci . . . "you'll see that 30 people dies of these cancers for every one who dies of skin cancer."
The article then discusses several key pieces of evidence:

1) A recent study shows Vitamin D's role in preventing cell proliferation, etc.

2) Northeastern people have higher rates of colon cancer.

3) Fat people have higher rates of cancer along with lower levels of vitamin D (which is fat-soluble).

4) Black people have much lower levels of vitamin D and higher rates of cancer, particularly prostate cancer. Giovannucci says that in a study of the Health Professionals sample, he was able to control for a wide variety of variables affecting the rates of cancer for white vs. black people, but "the only factor we found that showed a significant difference was vitamin D levels."


Also worth noting: 20 minutes in the sun can produce 10,000 units of vitamin D, which is the equivalent of drinking 100 glasses of fortified milk.

In concluding, Giovannucci says: "More sun, and higher rates of vitamin D, correlate with fewer cancers. It might ultimately prevent only a fraction, perhaps 30 percent, of those cancers it seems to affect. But that would still be vastly more cases than any skin cancers it causes. I don't recommend that people go out and get sunburned -- use common sense. But if the studies hold up, vitamin D will be a relatively important factor, since it affects such a large number of cancers. It may be time to rethink the message we are sending about sunlight."
SBI!

Beezid - Home DecorBeezid - Save 98% Auction Shopping

Wednesday 22 February 2012

Cancer Clinic Visit Yesterday-PSA Up

It was a sad day yesterday as I attended a dear friend and neighbour's funeral.He had been fighting prostate cancer for many years,along with diabetes and bad hearing.Through it all right to  his death he joked,smiled and remained cheerful a lovely brave man.
  I had a cancer clinic appointment at the same time as the funeral so had to change the appointment to a later time in the day.The funeral service was a Humanist one and very moving as it was very personal about my friends life.
 The result of my cancer clinic visit was an increase in my PSA from 11.2 up to 13.9.The doctor said he wasn't concerned about it as PSA count can vary and fluctuate,all my other readings eg. creatine,testosterone were Ok,hardly any testosterone! tell me about it! lol.Of course I'm concerned about any PSA increase as during the past 2 years I've lost 3 friends to prostate cancer all living within a 1/4 mile radius from me,perhaps it's something in the water!.
 Since my previous PSA check I have been eating organic cheese and Kerri gold grass fed butter, where as before I had cut out all dairy but usually eat 2 eggs for breakfast most days.
 At the clinic yesterday the doctor was doing a survey and asked about arthritis in the family,and any fractures I may have had that had taken a long time to heal.The survey was to check bone density in prostate cancer patients,He also asked about dairy intake,perhaps at last doctors are looking at diet and cancer as I'm a great believer in this.
 I have always thought that if hospital patients were given the right diet they would recover quicker,and feel it's equally if not more important than any treatment received,perhaps they have even ended up in hospital due to years of poor diet. After all you wouldn't expect a car to run well or at all if you filled it with any fuel but quality petrol or Diesel!
Beezid - Save 98% Auction Shopping

Thursday 2 February 2012

Frequent Nightime Loo Visits

Wow last night was the first time I slept nearly all night without getting up for at least one pee often two or more,I went six and a half hours.The only difference in my lifestyle and diet is I started eating Quinoa 2days ago and ate no wheat or potatoes or meat yesterday.could it be the Quinoa ? it apparently has many health benefits and is low in sugar creating carbs,low fat,wheat free and very tasty with a texture like rice,and can be used in much the same way.

Monday 23 January 2012

Sodium Nitrate in Food and Cancer

Like sodium nitrite, sodium nitrate forms nitrosamines – human carcinogens known to cause DNA damage and increased cellular degeneration. Studies have shown a link between increased levels of nitrates and increased deaths from certain diseases including Alzheimer's, diabetes mellitus and Parkinson's, possibly through the damaging effect of nitrosamines on DNA.[8] Nitrosamines, formed in cured meats containing sodium nitrate and nitrite, have been linked to gastric cancer and oesophageal cancer.[9] Sodium nitrate and nitrite are associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer.[10]World Cancer Research Fund UK,[11] states that one of the reasons that processed meat increases the risk of colon cancer is its content of nitrate. A small amount of the nitrate added to meat as a preservative breaks down into nitrite, in addition to any nitrite that may also be added. The nitrite then reacts with protein-rich foods (such as meat) to produce N-nitroso compounds (NOCs). Some types of NOCs are known to cause cancer. NOCs can be formed either when meat is cured or in the body as meat is digested.
Beezid - Home Decor

Wednesday 4 January 2012

The Truth about Saturated Fat and Unsaturated Fat

THE DANGERS OF CANOLA OIL

Click on subject below

Canola Oil Deadly for the Human Body!
The Canola Oil Story
The Canola Oil Hoax


CANOLA OIL REPORT
Found on http://www.braintherapy.com/canola.htm

The following is adapted from reportage beginning in 1996 by Tom Valentine under the trade names of Search for Health and True Health based in Naples, Florida. Carotec Inc., 941.353.2348. And Maryland based Mary Enig, Ph.D., who is the world authority on palm and coconut oils, and transfatty acids. A search for Enig will turn up dozens of citations including her own website.

It has been very much in vogue in health food circles to praise Canola oil as very healthy oil-high in polyunsaturates, while condemning tropical oils such as coconut or palm oil as being saturated and unhealthy.

The high praise for Canola is propaganda put forth by the Canadian government because "can-ola," a hybridized rape plant, is one of that nation's chief export products. Rapeseed oil contains toxic erucic acid. Canola has much less erucic acid in it.

Health food store operators parrot the hype without checking any facts. Consumers search out various products with Canola oil in them because they believe this is somehow much healthier than other oils. All food grade Canola, including the varieties sold in health food stores, are deodorized from its natural terrible stink with 300 degree F. high-temperature refining. You cannot cook a vegetable oil at that temperature and leave behind anything much edible.

Research at the University of Florida- Gainsesville, determined that as much as 4.6% of all the fatty acids in Canola are "trans" isomers (plastic) due to the refining process. Contrary to popular opinion, saturated fats, especially those found in coconut oil are not harmful to health, but are important nutrition. There are no trans isomers in unrefined coconut butter, for example. This refers to many published research papers by Mary Enig, Ph.D. that refutes all the establishment propaganda condemning saturated fats.

In 1996, the Japanese announced a study wherein a special Canola oil diet had actually killed laboratory animals. Reacting to this unpublished, but verified and startling information, a duplicate study was conducted by Canadian scientists using piglets and a Canola oil based milk replacer diet.

In this second study published in Nutrition Research, 1997, v17, the researchers verified that Canola oil somehow depleted the piglets of vitamin E to a dangerously low level.

In the abstract of the study, the Canadian researchers made the following remarkable statement: It is known that ingestion of oils containing polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) of the n-3 and n -6 series results in a high degree of unsaturation in membrane phospholipids, which in turn may increase lipid peroxidation, cholesterol oxidation, free radical accumulation and membrane damage. All very bad attributes.

That statement is remarkable because PUFA is considered essential to a healthy diet. Yet none of the above listed results of eating it may be considered healthy. So now we have something seemingly brand new to the dietary health arena.

Here the Canadians are condemning any oil that contains essential fatty acids. EFAs cannot stand heat. They turn rancid quickly. Proper processing, i.e., cold pressing, and protection from oxygen for storage is paramount with EFAs. Mainstream toxic commercial food making requires complete removal of EFAs lest shelf life disappear in smelly rancidity.

Absent the removal of EFAs, few manufactured toxic chemical foods would make it out of the warehouse. So, here we have Canadians telling us that their country's main oil export kills little animals. They suggest that perhaps it was the health giving EFAs left in the Canola oil after it had been scorched at temperatures above 300 degrees Fahrenheit to get rid of the EFAs. They don't tell you that whatever EFAs are left in the oil, are now poisonous rancid fats. It may be that the now toxic remnants are what's killing the vitamin E, and killing the little piggies. I think the Canadians produced that deceptive half truth to protect their careers from grant drought.

Firstly, the idea of something depleting vitamin E rapidly is an alarming development. Vitamin E is absolutely essential to human health, and when so much PUFA is available to diet as it is today, the demand evidently becomes even more imperative because tocopherols control the lipid peroxidation that results in dangerous free radical activity, which causes lesions in arteries and other problems.

Canola oil now has been shown to be a very heavy abuser of tocopherols or vitamin E, with the potential for rapidly depleting a body of the important vitamin. The researchers did not know what factors in the Canola oil were responsible. They reported that other vegetable seed oils did not appear to cause the same problem in piglets.

Genetically Manipulated Canola Seed Gets Loose In The Fields

Monsanto announced in April 1997, that it was recalling genetically engineered Canola seed because an unapproved gene slipped into the batch by mistake. The Canola seed had been genetically manipulated to resist the herbicide toxicity of Roundup, which is Monsanto's top money making product. The recall involved 60,000 bags containing two types of Canola seed, which is enough to plant more than 700,000 acres. Both types of seed have the wrong gene in them. The genes in the recalled seed have not been approved for human consumption.

A spokesman for Limagrain Canada Seeds, which was selling the seeds under a Monsanto license, said that experts are trying to determine how the mistake occurred. We may never know how this happened he lamented.

The implications of this error are serious. No one in his right mind is unconcerned about genetic manipulations getting lost.

On January 26, 1998 Omega Nutrition, one of the major producers of organic, cold pressed oils for the health food store market published a press release. The release states that if you are cooking with Canola oil of any quality, you might as well be using margarine. In the case of refined Canola oil, the important health benefits have been processed away- leaving the consumer with the nutrition of say, white flour- and, dangerous trans-fatty acids have replaced a lot of the beneficial omega 3 essential fatty acids.

Oils high in omega 3 are not capable of taking high temperatures. Heating Canola distorts the fatty acid turning it into an unnatural form of trans fatty acid that has been shown to be harmful to health.

SUMMARY

According to Mary Enig, unrefined coconut oil is safe to use in cooking. Finding it is not so easy as a result of the American establishment's highly successful attack on all imported palm and coconut oils. Udo Erasmus, Ph.D., another highly regarded international expert on fats and oils, says both are the same. They are named for their physical state at room temperature. Udo says the only safe oil to use to fry or bake with, is water.

He says no fat can stand the temperatures used in food processing without being adversely affected.

MARGARINE isn't raised as an issue on those pages. So I will make a brief statement here about it. (Oleo) Margarine isn't food. It is a manufactured grease concocted in a machine from various oils and chemicals. Canola and soy fats (oils) are in nearly all margarines. This butter substitute does not exist in nature. It cannot be grown or converted from a natural food as butter and cheese is.

It was invented to win a prize when Napolean III was surrounded and ran a contest for a palatable grease for his otherwise dry bread. Most restaurants substitute it for butter without notice to you. Commercially manufactured ingestables use margarine wherever Canola cannot be used in their recipe that otherwise would use butter. There are licensed dieticians and physicians who, in total ignorance, will sincerely urge you to eat this poison in pursuit of better health. The usual canard is, "It will reduce your cholesterol levels." which is yet another awesome fraud and completely false.

Partially hydrogenated oils- trans-fatty acids, are always poisonous. Mary Enig's original laboratory research is currently the world's standard for understanding the basis for the foregoing statement. Cooks and chefs working recipes that call for shortening or fats input will have to find coconut oil or use saturated animal fat if they are interested in producing something other than poison. I don't eat restaurant food.



Return to Top - Subject Index - Main Index 

THE CANOLA STORY

Toby Maloney

Found on http://www.integrative-medicine.net/page81.html

It's often called Canada's "miracle crop". It's marketed as a healthy alternative, and, for the moment, growers can even make a living. But is Canola oil actually healthy? And for whom? The name Canola, from "Canada oil", was the signal that some sophisticated marketing was going to take place. Canola was the first crop created modern plant breeding methods. It is usually credited to Baldur Stefanson at the University of Manitoba, who took rapeseeed, previously used as a lubricant in ship engines, and bred varieties that were low in erucic acid and glucosinates. In 1979 the Rapeseed Crushers Association decided the new "double low" varieties should be given a different name to avoid association with previous rapeseed products sold as cooking oil. It was no coincidence the new name rhymed with granola. As concerns over levels of saturated fat in other oil products grew, the new product entered the market as an alternative low in saturated fat, but high in desirable oleic acid. Demand skyrocketed and farmers rushed to buy seed.

But before we add the happy-ever-after to this technological tale, there are some important issues to consider. What might seem healthy for city dwellers to consume isn't necessarily healthy for people where it is grown, for workers who handle the materials used, or for the environment. A typical Canola crop starts with seeds treated with fungicide for seedling diseases, and often an insecticide to prevent damage from flea beetles. After the seedlings emerge, herbicides are applied to control weeds. Canola yields can also be affected by a variety of insect problems, for which the remedy is often aerial spraying, and a fungus problem just prior to harvest called Sclerotinia.

This focus on chemicals isn't that different from cereal crops that are grown conventionally and this is not to say that other oilseeds are any better.

The problem is that instead of finding ways to use less or no herbicides and a lot less fuel and synthetic fertilizer, we are promoting a crop that is very difficult to grow organically. Also, Canola is the first crop in Canada to receive a license for "transgenic" varieties - plants altered with genetic material from other plants or animals. Typically, the transgenic varieties are designed by chemical companies to require the application of their favorite brand of herbicide. Given the cancer risk, would you call a food crop that is increasingly dependent on herbicides, fungicides, and even aerial spraying of pesticides, "healthy?" While prairie provinces export thousands of tonnes of Canola oil (and they have begun to make a diesel fuel out of it), if you want to buy a quality cold pressed edible version, you're not going to find a prairie product. This to me is the equivalent of France selling no Champagne, no Beaujolais, just cheap plonk in screw top bottles.

In most cases the best ingredients in oil are seriously damaged or destroyed by the industrial-type processing that occurs. As detailed by oils expert Udo Erasmus, in his 1988 pamphlet Fats that Heal, Fats that Kill, most oil is refined with acids and the same base that unclogs drains. Then the bleaching process removes "every essential nutrient except fatty acids."

Then deodorization by steam distillation distorts some fatty acids into "trans-fatty acids" which interfere with beneficial ingredients in oils. But any of this is mostly irrelevant if we are eating deep-fried doughnuts or French Fries, or frying our food until the oil smokes or eating margarine made from hydrogenated oil.

And for most consumers that is their experience with Canola. And so it is only a cynical manipulation to promote the nutritional value of Canola, when the nutrients don't make it to the table. This manipulation -and the manipulation of seeds, of processes and commodities markets - is only possible because most of our population is no longer involved in food production. That's not healthy.

Toby Maloney is an environmental activist living Boissevain, in the southwestern Manitoba grain belt. This article first appeared in City Magazine. - NL -





Return to Top - Subject Index - Main Index

THE CANOLA OIL HOAX

By Carol Clark Keppler, B.S., M.A.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 13:56:39 -0400

Hoax? An intentional deception? About a cooking Oil? So who cares anyway?

The truth is -- we don't know the truth, or we'd be more than a little concerned. It looks like the American public has been sold a bill of goods -- again. We believed the immunization hype about flu shots for adults, and that the AIDS epidemic was caused by "green monkeys", didn't we?

Here's the latest one -- Canola oil for health conscious Americans! An overnight, instant top seller, Canola oil is on the tip of everyone's tongue -- not to mention in their blood and throughout their bodies.

Big displays in every health food store, touted in ads for healthy french fries by a local burger place, Canola oil is advertised by a local supermarket as being in all their baked goods. Used in salad dressings, in mayonnaise, cereals, cookies and in thousands of foods -- Canola is there with government approval.

WHERE DID IT COME FROM?

How much do we know about it? Here are some facts:

1) Used as a lubricant, fuel, soap and synthetic rubber base as well as an illuminant for slick color pages in magazines.

2) It forms latex-like substances that cause red blood corpuscles to clump together.

3) It's real name is RAPESEED OIL, renamed, CANOLA OIL, (Canada Oil) for obvious reasons. It's one of the main crops grown in Canada where it is being field tested. It's grown in the United States as well.

4) Rape Oil was widely used in animal feeds in England and Europe between 1986-1991 but no longer is used because of the animals that went blind and mad ('MAD COW DISEASE').

5) Experts agree that the effects of ingested Rapeseed Oil take at least 10 years to manifest - so not to be concerned.

6) Rapeseed is a member of the mustard family, one of the most toxic of all plants, and is shunned by insects.

7) Mustard gas, which was banned in war because it blisters lungs and skin, is made from rapeseeds.

8) Irradiation (!) is used to turn the rapeseed oil into acceptable Canola Oil??

What are the effects of Canola oil in our diet over a period of time? I think we're just beginning to see them, but, as yet, no one has put it all together. Symptoms usually come on so slowly one might not be aware that there is a problem.

Strange new diseases involving the nervous system may be caused by Canola oil which dissolves the myelin sheath off of the nerves throughout the body. As a matter of fact, the heating of most oils during the cooking process does the same thing. Very gradually over the years, symptoms develop, which at first are perhaps only annoying, but which eventually will be diagnosed as a disease.

PLEASE VISIT MY BLOG @ cancerresearch.info.blogspot.com, FOR LATEST CANCER TREATMENT BREAKTHROUGHS

News and Opinions from Cancer Research.

New Asprin Can Fight Cancer,Daily Express

http://t.co/nt995sQG
www.emfnews.org www.emfnews.org www.emfnews.org Technology will always be part of the human culture as it makes our life easier than the way it used to be. However, you might also need to notice that it also has its own risk as we speak about the life, especially the health risk like what the cell phone is shown for us. Cancer could be one of many effects that is given by the cell phone as well as the mobile telephone and it becomes main concern for many people. Radiofrequency is one important factor we should know as the reason why cell phone could be really dangerous for our health. Radiofrequency energy that it is emitted by these phones is kind of dangerous and it is important for you to concern much more about that. What do you know about the radiofrequency energy? Have you ever heard of it before? Form of electromagnetic radiation could be the simplest definition of what radiofrequency is and it can be divided into two big forms, which are ionizing (eg, x-rays, radon, and cosmic rays) and non-ionizing (eg, radiofrequency and extremely low-frequency or power frequency). By the time you get so close with that kind of radiation, the chance you get the cancer becomes much bigger than the way it used to be. Non-ionizing might be not dangerous as you see that there are no significant effects that thing to the human health. The general consensus has been that there is no consistent evidence that non-ionizing radiation increases cancer risk. Based on the research of WHO ...