Five ways to avoid germs while traveling

Five ways to avoid germs while traveling

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- This week while you're traveling, if you happen to spot a man applying hand sanitizer as he gets off an escalator, there's a good chance it's Dr. Mark Gendreau, a senior staff physician at the Lahey Clinic in Burlington, Massachusetts.

Gendreau studies germiness while traveling, and he knows just how infectious travel can be.

"The risk of contracting a contagious illness is heightened when we travel within any enclosed space, especially during the winter months, when most of the respiratory viruses thrive," Gendreau said.

Studies show that germs can travel easily on an airplane, where people are packed together like sardines.

For example, a woman on a 1994 flight from Chicago to Honolulu transmitted drug-resistant tuberculosis to at least six of her fellow passengers, according to a New England Journal of Medicine study.

In 2003, 22 people came down with SARS, or severe acute respiratory syndrome, from a single fellow passenger who had SARS but didn't have any symptoms, according to another New England journal study.

But the airplane isn't the only place along your travel route where germs thrive. Here are five ways to avoid germs while traveling.

1. Sit toward the front of the airplane

"Pick a seat near the front, since ventilation systems on most commercial aircraft provide better air flow in the front of the aircraft," Gendreau advised. If you can afford it, sit in first class, where people aren't so squished together.
Don't Miss

* Bathroom hot spots: How to use a public restroom safely
* In Depth: Empowered Patient

2. Don't drink coffee or tea on an airplane

Monitoring by the Environmental Protection Agency shows that water in airplanes' water tanks isn't always clean -- and coffee and tea are usually made from that water, not from bottled water, according to Victoria Day, a spokeswoman for the Air Transport Association.

The EPA advises anyone with a suppressed immune system or anyone who's "concerned" about bacteria to refrain from drinking coffee or tea on an airplane.

"While boiling water for one minute will remove pathogens from drinking water, the water used to prepare coffee and tea aboard a plane is not generally brought to a sufficiently high temperature to guarantee that pathogens are killed," according to the EPA's Web site.

According to the EPA, out of 7,812 water samples taken from 2,316 aircraft, 2.8 percent were positive for coliform bacteria. Although that sounds like a small number, this means 222 samples contained coliform bacteria.

3. Sanitize your hands after leaving an airplane bathroom

A toilet on an airplane "is among the germiest that you will encounter almost anywhere," said Charles Gerba, an environmental microbiologist at the University of Arizona who's also known as "Dr. Germ."

"You have 50 people per toilet, unless you are flying a discount airline; then it is 75," Gerba said. "We always find E. coli on surfaces in airplane restrooms."

You should wash your hands after using the restroom, but because the water itself might have harmful bacteria (see No. 2 above) and because the door handle on your way out has been touched by all those who went before you, Gendreau also advises sanitizing your hands when you return to your seat.

4. Wash or sanitize your hands after getting off an escalator

Gendreau says tests show that escalators in airports are full of germs.
Health Library

* MayoClinic.com: Health Library

To confirm these tests, here's a fun activity while you wait for your flight this Thanksgiving: Look at your watch, and count how many people get an escalator in a five-minute time period. Multiply that by 12, and you have how many people are on that escalator every hour.

High-volume handrails are why Gendreau sanitizes his hands as soon as he can after he exits an escalator.

5. Wash or sanitize your hands after using an ATM

Gendreau says ATMs, especially in busy places like airports, are full of germs. As with escalators, he sanitizes ASAP after using one.

Gendreau says that keeping healthy while traveling can be summed up in six words: "hand hygiene, hand hygiene, hand hygiene."

Keeping your hands clean is crucial, he says, when you're spending the day touching surfaces that have been touched by hundreds or thousands of people before you.

Source

Eight Ways to Cut Summer Energy Bills

Eight Ways to Cut Summer Energy Bills

With summer finally kicking into gear across the country, you can almost hear the gentle hum of air conditioners ratcheting up. And with it, climbs home energy bills.

These days, the average household spends $1,900 annually on energy (based on electricity and gas usage), according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). But much of that, say energy conservationists, is money wasted.

The good news: Cutting back doesn't mean you need to be a tree-hugging naturalist, suffering stoically as you read by candlelight. These days, you can do right by the environment and your pocketbook—without any major lifestyle sacrifices. In fact, by taking some relatively painless steps, you can cut your bills by one-third or more.

More from SmartMoney.com:

• 13 Simple Ways to Lower Your Electric Bill

• 7 Energy-Saving Eco-Gadgets

• 8 Ways to Cut Your Grocery Bill

Here are eight easy ways to save this summer (including a few tips that will work year-round).

1. Upgrade Your Thermostat

Are you the type who likes to chill after a sticky workday by coming home to a house that's as cool as a meat locker? You can live this dream and cut your energy costs by investing in a programmable thermostat. These handy little devices allow you to cool your home at different temperatures at specific times.

So you could, for example, turn down the AC during the day, when your family is away from home—and crank it up again 30 minutes before the first family member returns. Or, you could turn it down during the wee hours of the morning, when no one's likely to notice a shift in temperature.

Installing a programmable thermostat shouldn't set you back more than $100 to $150—and the energy savings can be substantial. According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), you could cut your heating and cooling bills by 10% annually just by turning your thermostat back 10% to 15% for 8 hours a day.

2. Go Green

Ok—this will require a bit of effort on your part, but the returns are twofold: Planting just three shady trees around your house not only can whack $100 to $250 off your annual heating and cooling costs, according to the DOE, but will most likely make your yard more attractive, to boot. (Leafy trees can shield the house from direct sunlight, keeping temperatures down, while still permitting sunlight to hit your house during the winter months.)

Not interested in nurturing your green thumb? Simply pulling the shades (or drawing your curtains) can cut energy costs as well, says Mel Hall-Crawford, an energy efficiency expert at the Consumer Federation of America.

3. Keep It Clean

Keeping your air-conditioning unit clean and in peak performance is another big money saver. To kick the summer off, your AC unit should have a professional tune up (expect to pay somewhere between $90 and $120), says Maria Vargas, an Energy Star spokesperson at the EPA. (Energy Star is a joint program run by the EPA and the DOE that, among other things, deems certain products energy-efficient.) And air-conditioning filters (regardless of whether you have central air or an individual unit) should generally be checked every month or so to see if they need cleaning or replacement. This is something you should be able to do on your own.

Another item to add to your spring cleaning list: Dusting off your refrigerator condenser coils, says Hall-Crawford. This will make the unit run more efficiently.

4. Buy a Better Bulb

Compact fluorescent light bulbs (called CFLs) require 75% less energy than traditional (officially called incandescent) light bulbs, and last up to 10 times longer, according to the ASE. Be sure to look for CFLs with the Energy Star label, since these bulbs won't have any buzzing or humming problems, promises Energy Star's Reed. These bulbs now come in smaller sizes (called subcompacts) that can fit into any lamp, and they have a wider color spectrum. According to the Alliance to Save Energy (ASE), replacing just four well-used 100-watt incandescent bulbs with equivalent 23-watt CFLs will save you $120 to $200 over three years.

Also, do you still have one of those halogen lamps leftover from your college days? (You know—those tall lamps that didn't cost much more than a couple of pizzas to buy?) Do yourself a favor: Dump it. Not only are these dangerous fire starters, but their bulbs, which can generate temperatures of 700 to 1,100 degrees Fahrenheit, are energy hogs as well, says Vargas. That makes them considerably less inexpensive than they seemed back in the day.

5. Join the Fan Club

A ceiling fan can balance out a room's temperature, allowing you to turn down the AC and still feel cool.

6. Unplug

Even when all of your home electronics are turned off, many continue to suck down energy. The main culprits: televisions, VCRs, DVD players, stereos, phones and microwave ovens. (Generally, anything that has a clock, a remote control or an on/off light falls into this category.) In fact, idle TVs cost U.S. consumers $600 million annually, or $5 per household, according to the EPA. One solution: Plug the items that can truly be turned completely off into a power strip, and then use that as your on/off switch.

7. Fight Leaks

Your pricey, cooled air might be leaking right out of your house. Leaky windows and ducts (which carry the air to the rooms in your home) are two ways that cool air can be lost, making your air conditioner work harder. "We have found that as many as 70% of ducts are installed with leaks," says Vargas. Having your ducts properly sealed and insulated could save you as much as 10% in energy costs, according to the EPA. So if you think your duct system is faulty, try to have it checked out by an HVAC (heating, ventilation and air-conditioning) technician. (One way to find one is to visit the North American Technician Excellence web site.)

8. Be a Savvy Shopper

By far the biggest way to save is to invest in energy-efficient appliances. When shopping around, look for the Energy Star label. There are more than 44 product categories that qualify.

Of course, replacing your appliances (particularly the biggies, like a refrigerator or dishwasher) will require an upfront investment. But if you've got an old clunker, you could recoup your costs quickly. For example, if your central-air-conditioning unit is more than 10 years old, replacing it with an Energy Star-qualified model could cut your operating costs by 30%.
Copyrighted, SmartMoney.com. All Rights Reserved.

Source

Lessen Your Baby's Toxic Load (Part 3): Skin and Bath Products

Lessen Your Baby's Toxic Load (Part 3): Skin and Bath Products

Baby care products such as shampoos, lotions and powders fall under cosmetics` regulations and the FDA is not required to test their safety. The only way to be assured a product will not contain harmful compounds is that it be certified organic, and better yet, certified organic to food standards. Infants and children are extremely vulnerable to the harmful effects of these chemicals because their brains and organs are still growing and developing. You need to know how certain ingredients cause harm, how to read labels to avoid toxins and how to find acceptable substitutes.

MAJOR TOXINS
•PHTHLATES: Phthlates are known to disrupt the endocrine and reproductive systems, especially in young boys and it is suspected that the increase in male infertility is directly related to exposure to phthalates.

Phthalates have been in the news a lot lately but did you know that they are present in most baby care products such as lotions and shampoos? Europe and Canada are taking action, but the US is still dawdling and allowing the FDA to try and convince us they are safe. They aren't. Although the California law will ban 6 types of phthalates in bottles and toys, phthalates in other products such as bath and skin care products have not been addressed, As there is no requirement to fully disclose ingredients on the label, there is no way to determine if they are phthlate free UNLESS you buy certified organic products.

A recent study from the University of Washington determined that children weren't just being exposed through bottles, formula and chew toys, but were absorbing phthalates through their skin when products were applied. Researches checked the urine of 163 infants aged 2 to 28 months. More than 80 percent of these children had 7 or more types of phthalates in their urine. The more a baby was bathed, the more lotions used, the more phthalates were detected. Baby shampoo had been used on more than half the infants within 24 hours of the urine tests. Fourteen percent of the babies had had powder applied and over 30% had lotions applied. These babies had FOUR times the level of phthalates in their urine than those babies whose parents had used no products on them.

The industry counters this study by stating the only phthalate used in baby products is DEP which they claim has been proven safe, so how could 7 or more different types be found? Yes, babies and children are exposed via many routes, but the fact remains that all phthalates were dramatically increased in babies whose parents had done nothing differently other than use shampoos, lotions and powders. This strongly indicates the increased phthalates came from these products. Remember, full ingredient disclosure isn't required, so we don't know exactly what the manufacturer is putting in these products.

•CARCINOGENS or cancer causing agents: "Though its review of 23 peer-reviewed studies of cancer incidence from the past 50 years, EPA has determined that infants up to age two are, on average, ten times more vulnerable to carcinogenic chemicals than adults, and for some cancer-causing agents are up to 65 times more vulnerable. The Agency also found that children from age two to 15 are three times more vulnerable to carcinogens than adults. By incorporating these factors, the new risk assessment methods show that children accumulate up to 50% of their lifetime cancer risk by their second birthday." http://www.ewg.org/node/8683, April 2, 2008. Here are just a few ingredients known or suspected to cause cancer: Alkyl-phenol-ethoxylades, Ammonium laureth sulphate, Benzene, Cocamide (and cocomide)DEA, FDC- (FD&C) Colors, Glycols - Propylene glycol, Diethylene glycol, carbitol, Ethylene glycol.

•FRAGRANCES: "Fragrance" can contain up to 4000 separate ingredients, almost all of them synthetic. Synthetic fragrances cause headaches, dizziness, rashes, skin discoloration, violent coughing and vomiting, asthma and allergic skin reactions. They also affect the central nervous system causing depression, hyperactivity, irritability, inability to cope, and other behavioral changes.

•1,4 DIOXANE: Companies use ethylene oxide to make harsh, petroleum based ingredients gentler. A byproduct of this ethylation is the production of 1,4 Dioxane, a known carcinogen and suspected to cause kidney damage. Recently several supposedly "green" companies were exposed because their products contained this chemical which is direct proof of the presence of petroleum based chemicals. Again, you will not find this listed in the ingredients, especially because it is a byproduct and not part of the formula. If you see any of these ingredients listed on the bottle, stay far away from it: myreth, oleth, laureth, ceteareth, any other "eth," or PEG, polyethylene, polyethylene glycol, polyoxyethylene, or oxynol

•MINERAL OIL: Would you put gasoline on your child? According to Environmental Working Group, 40% of all baby lotions and oils contain petroleum, a non-renewable hydrocarbon made from crude oil. This oil coats your baby's skin in a non-breathable toxic film. According to Australia's National Occupational Health and Safety Commissions (NOHSC), "Prolonged contact with mineral oil has the associated risk of developing skin conditions such as oil folliculitis, eczematous dermatitis, melanosis of the face and plantar warts." Petroleum also disrupts hormones and diminishes the skin's ability to detoxify. It is the 2nd most likely cause of premature skin aging following excessive sun exposure. Mineral oil based sunscreens are now being implicated in promoting skin, colon and breast cancer and in fact, are found in most breast cancer tissue. Petroleum is a known carcinogen, known to adversely effect health, yet still approved as safe by the FDA.

•SODIUM LAUREL SULFATES(SLS)/SODIUM LAURETH SULFATES(SLES): These ingredients are used to make shampoos, soaps, toothpaste etc sudsy. According to the Journal of American College of Toxicology (Vol. 2, No. 7, 1983), SLS can damage the immune system; cause separation of skin layers and inflammation of the skin. The American College of Toxicology states that SLS/SLES can cause malformation of a baby's eyes. These chemicals are absorbed easily through the skin and wind up in the heart, liver, lungs and brain.

•PARABENS: Are often used as a preservative in everything from food to shampoo to baby wipes. Even at very low doses, parabens are known to cause reproductive damage and systemic organ toxicity.

•"NATURAL": This term is not regulated and no guarantee of safety. Most products labeled "natural" contain at least one of the above ingredients and have petroleum chemicals in them.

HOW TO REDUCE YOUR CHILD`S TOXIC LOAD:
•READ LABELS: Carry a list of the above ingredients with you when you go shopping.
•KEEP IT SIMPLE: Before a baby becomes mobile, warm water and a washcloth is usually all you need.
•CHOOSE CERTIFIED ORGANIC: When you do use products, choose products that are certified organic. You can be assured that these products contain nothing but pure, truly natural, non-toxic ingredients that are safe for your baby, your family and the environment. Miessence Baby is an excellent example of a product line certified organic to food standards. (A review of some of the Miessence Baby products will be forthcoming in another article).

Remember, the skin is the largest organ in the body and readily absorbs almost anything placed on it. The above ingredients are just some of the major toxins. There are many more. Assure your children's future health by protecting them now. If you can't pronounce the ingredients or have no idea what something is, if the label reads like a chemistry textbook instead of a garden, don't buy it. Know what you are putting on your baby's (and your own) skin.

How to Build Your Financial Safety Net

How to Build Your Financial Safety Net
In betrayal of 99% of the American taxpayers who opposed the pork-packed financial bailout bill of 2008, Congress passed the bill on Friday, October 3. President Bush signed it into law within minutes, and King Henry (Henry Paulson, Treasury Secretary) went right to work using taxpayer dollars to start buying up bad banking debt that nobody else would touch.

Three days later, in response to the bailout plan, the stock market plummeted and financial institutions around the world were rocked in a dangerous credit crisis that brought the world "to the edge of the abyss," as one prominent mainstream news journalist stated.

Although I strongly disagree with the use of taxpayer dollars to bail out rich, elite bankers who lost money making risky bets on outlandish financial instruments, I'll leave that for another editorial. Today, I'm here to offer you strategies on how to make the most of the post-financial bailout economy and build your own financial safety net, even if things get worse in the global economy.

Here, I'll share down-to-earth strategies on what you can do -- starting right now -- to protect your savings and actually grow your income, despite tough economic times.

To really understand why these strategies are so powerful in building your financial safety net, you'll first need to acknowledge the two greatest risks now facing the U.S. financial system in the post-bailout era:

Risk #1: Hyperinflation

Every time the Fed creates more money to bail out another financial institution, it expands the money supply, diluting the value of any dollars you already hold. As more financial institutions fail (or corporations and even U.S. states), the Fed will likely be forced to create hundreds of billions of dollars in more money, sapping the spending power of your dollars and leading us into accelerated inflation. (I'll show you how to insulate yourself from that risk in this special report.)

Risk #2: Sell off of U.S. debt

The other big risk is that international investors (central banks of other nations, primarily), will now see the U.S. as a hopeless debtor nation, and they will either stop buying U.S. debt, or they might even start selling off the U.S. debt they already hold.

On September 30, 2008, the U.S. debt reached an astonishing $10 trillion. It's going up by $500 billion a year, and that's even before considering the cost of the financial bailout. As of April, 2008, Japan held nearly $600 billion of U.S. debt, China held over $500 billion, and the U.K. held $250 billion. See the statistics for yourself at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta...

The risk is that Japan and China, in particular, could start selling off U.S. debt. If that occurred, it would make it more difficult for the U.S. to sell new debt. Specifically, the U.S. would either have to 1) Offer to pay higher interest rates to new debt buyers, or 2) Print more of its own money to cover expenditures or buy back its own debt, causing more inflation (see Risk #1, above).

Those are the two risks that could seriously threaten you if you don't build a financial safety net first. They both really boil down to losing the value of the money you're earning or saving. For example, your paycheck might stay the same each week, but you'll find that you can buy fewer and fewer things with that paycheck (because the money is worth less).

So how do you build your financial safety net before global financial chaos threatens your economic livelihood? That's what this special report reveals.

This report is easily worth $39, $79 or a lot more. I could have offered it for sale on the website and probably earned at least five figures selling it. But I've decided to make it available at no charge because of the extreme risk of financial harm now facing NaturalNews readers due to the crooks in Washington, at the Federal Reserve, and the legislators on Congress who have betrayed the American people. I do not want to see any harm come to NaturalNews readers, and I want to get this into the hands of as many people as possible.

Click here to read more

Tips for Eating "Real" Food As the biotech giants seek to control and monopolize the food chain, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find foods t

As the biotech giants seek to control and monopolize the food chain, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find foods that have not been genetically modified, especially here in the US. Billions in profits are being generated through GMOs, and we are already aware of some short-term health concerns. The long-term effects of GMOs are not known yet, simply because they have not been in use long enough yet to do sufficient studies. However, we do know that the nutritional components of many modified foods are severely compromised.

Today's post gives several practical tips on how to secure food that is free from genetic tampering. As with all wellness issues, it will take a bit more effort and perhaps more money as well (although convenience foods and GMO-laced products are expensive too) to eat this way, but the rewards are well worth it. As they say, staying well is much cheaper (in numerous ways) than getting well.

Source

Dangerous Chemicals in Food

Dangerous Chemicals in Food

Did you know that some of the foods we are ingesting are actually harmful to us? Lots of food we eat are loaded with potentially harmful chemical additives, preservatives and other dangerous substances.
A good rule of thumb to follow is that if you have to eat anything with these food additives in them, make sure you do so in moderation.

BHA and BHT
BHA and BHT stands for Butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) and Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT). These are food additives that are used as a preservative to keep food from spoilage. BHA and BHT can be found in butter, meats, chewing gum, snack foods, dehydrated potatoes, and even beer. These additives are approved by the FDA as safe for human consumption. However, they are proven carcinogens. There is proof that some people have difficulty metabolizing BHA and this can result in health and behavioral changes.

Saccharin
Sweet n Low is a common brand name of saccharin. It is a sugar substitute. Its purpose is to give a no-calorie substitute for sugar. The problem is that it is proven to cause cancer of the bladder, uterus, and even cancer of the blood vessels.

Sodium Nitrite and Sodium Nitrate
This food additive is commonly used in hotdogs and cold-cuts to preserve their color and flavor. They are also used to prevent botulism, which is a fatal disease that comes from food.
The problem with sodium nitrite and sodium nitrate is they are known to cause cancer. They cause nitrosamines to form in our intestines, and that are definitely a culprit for cancer.

Acesulfamfe-K
Acesulfame-K, much like saccharin, is a sugar substitute. It is commonly used in chewing gum, gelatin dessert, baked goods, and soft drinks. It may also cause cancer, as it has been found in laboratory studies with rats. Acesulfame-K breaks down into acetoacetamide, which causes thyroid problems in rats, rabbits and dogs.

Olestra
Olestra is a fat substitute that makes fattening foods fat-free. It is not absorbed by the body so it causes digestion problems, such as diarrhea and loose stools. It hinders the body’s ability to absorb beneficial nutrients as well.

Source

Do Cell Phones Harm Brains?

Do Cell Phones Harm Brains?
There’s been a great deal of talk lately about cell phone use, and increasingly people tell you they want a few basic rules to stop cell phone invasion that comes from loud conversations in quiet spaces.

But what about harmful effects that cells phones bring to the brain? Today’s Scientific American questions whether cancer fears from cell phone use, are fact of fiction? Listen to Dr. Olsen’s findings on prenatal concerns here. What do you think?

Scientists remain undecided about safety guarantees from mobiles, which is why they advise using an ear piece and speakerphone.

According to researcher Jorn Olsen at UCLA cell phones do not send enough radiation to alter or damage DNA, and for this reason do not tend to lead toward cancer.

Not surprisingly, long-term cell phone use seems to create greater problems, while short term exposure appears to hold less danger, according to most recent studies out there. UK researcher, Laurie Challis pointed out that of the 29,000 men and 38,000 women yearly who develop brain cancer people in industrial nations are twice as likely to develop brain cancer as those in developing countries. The jury is still out on why this is so.

Studies are currently being carried out in several countries on this topic, and yet research so far still shows conflicting conclusions. To complicate the findings further, plenty of anecdotal stories seem support both sides of the debate.

However since scientists cannot rule out harmful risks, some people are playing it safe to avoid increasing brain cancer risks. Which side of the debate are you on? Fact or fiction?

Source

Shooting in Washington Mall

I hope they'll be ok.

Two men shot at mall near Seattle
CNN) -- Two men were in serious condition Saturday evening after shootings at a shopping center in Tukwila, Washington, authorities said.
The men who were shot were taken from the Westfield Southcenter on stretchers and placed in ambulances.

The men who were shot were taken from the Westfield Southcenter on stretchers and placed in ambulances.

Two other people were taken to hospitals with minor conditions resulting from an evacuation of the center.

Authorities said they had one good witness. The mall southeast of Seattle was closed while police search for the shooter.

The men who were shot, believed to be in their 20s, were taken from the Westfield Southcenter on stretchers and placed in ambulances.

"They were close to each other when they were shot," said a spokesman at the scene.

Chris Plummer, who was visiting from Pennsylvania, told CNN affiliate KIRO that he was standing next to the shooter when the man began shooting.
Don't Miss

* KIRO: Witness says shooter was in fight

Plummer told KIRO that there was a fight between a group of 18- to 20-year-olds and that one of them pulled out a gun and started shooting.

A woman who appeared to be to be going into labor and a man who suffered a neck injury during the evacuation also were taken to a hospital, the spokesman said.

Shoppers described a scene of chaos as people rushed for the exits.

"They grabbed their kids and ran out of there," a store manager said.

Source

New research shows vitamin D slashes risk of cancers by 77 percent; cancer industry refuses to support cancer prevention

New research shows vitamin D slashes risk of cancers by 77 percent; cancer industry refuses to support cancer prevention
Exciting new research conducted at the Creighton University School of Medicine in Nebraska has revealed that supplementing with vitamin D and calcium can reduce your risk of cancer by an astonishing 77 percent. This includes breast cancer, colon cancer, skin cancer and other forms of cancer. This research provides strong new evidence that vitamin D is the single most effective medicine against cancer, far outpacing the benefits of any cancer drug known to modern science.

The study involved 1,179 healthy women from rural Nebraska. One group of women was given calcium (around 1500 mg daily) and vitamin D (1100 IU daily) while another group was given placebo. Over four year, the group receiving the calcium and vitamin D supplements showed a 60 percent decrease in cancers. Considering just the last three years of the study reveals an impressive 77 percent reduction in cancer due to supplementation. (The full press release of this study is included below. It provides more details about the findings.)

Note that these astonishing effects were achieved on what many nutritionists consider to be a low dose of vitamin D. Exposure to sunlight, which creates even more vitamin D in the body, was not tested or considered, and the quality of the calcium supplements was likely not as high as it could have been (it was probably calcium carbonate and not high-grade calcium malate, aspartate or similar forms). What does all this mean? It means that if you take high-quality calcium supplements and get lots of natural sunlight exposure or take premium vitamin D supplements (such as those made from fish oil), you could easily have a greater reduction than the 77 percent reduction recorded in this study.

American Cancer Society opposes vitamin D
This research on vitamin D is such good news that the American Cancer Society, of course, had to say something against it. An ACS spokesperson, Marji McCullough, strategic director of nutritional epidemiology for the American Cancer Society, flatly stated that nobody should take supplements to prevent cancer.

If it seems surprising to you that the American Cancer Society -- which claims to be against cancer -- would dissuade people from taking supplements that slash their cancer risk by 77 percent, then you don't know much about the ACS. In my opinion, the ACS is an organization that actually prevents prevention and openly supports the continuation of cancer as a way to boost its power and profits. The ACS is the wealthiest non-profit in America and has very close ties to pharmaceutical companies, mammography equipment companies and other corporations that profit from cancer. Notice the name, too: It isn't the American Anti-Cancer Society, it's the American Cancer Society! What they really stand for is right in the name!

Click here to read more about the ACS and its financial ties to chemical companies, pharmaceutical companies and radiology equipment manufacturers.

The cancer industry is a multi-billion dollar industry, and I've written extensively about the criminal organizations that protect and promote the industry. Just about everything the public is told about cancer by these cancer institutions is a lie. Those "race for the cure" cancer walks are a complete scam (they really aren't searching for any way to prevent cancer or cure cancer, they're only searching for new patented drugs to profit from cancer).

This research on vitamin D is a huge threat to the cancer industry profit mongers because it reveals a way to prevent cancer for free -- by seeking natural sunlight exposure and letting your skin manufacture your own powerful anti-cancer medicine (vitamin D). The idea that the cancer industry could lose 80% of its patients due to widespread education about vitamin D and sunlight scares the living daylights out of the cancer industry. Billions of dollars in cancer profits are at stake here, so the pro-cancer groups have to do everything they can to discredit vitamin D by creating doubt and confusion. The degree of dishonesty at work here is almost unbelievable to those who don't really know what's happening in the cancer industry.

Ten questions to ask yourself about the cancer industry
Consider these questions:

#1: Why does the cancer industry refuse to educate people about cancer prevention?

#2: If people keep donating money for the "search" for a cancer cure, why won't drug companies pledge to "open source" their patents on cancer drugs to benefit the people whose donations funded them in the first place? In other words, why do people donate money for cancer research but then get charged for cancer drugs?

#3: Why does the entire cancer industry so strongly dissuade people from using sunlight exposure to dramatically reduce their cancer risk? (Hint: Follow the money to the sunscreen industry...)

#4: Why have all the really good cancer supplements, clinics and naturopaths been banned, arrested or run out of the country? (Look up the FDA's oppression of Lane Labs over MGN-3 for a fascinating review of this...)

#5: The U.S. has poured billions of dollars into the cancer industry over the last three decades. Cancer cures were promised in the 1970's. Why are cancer rates still essentially the same today as they were in the 1970's?

#6: Why does the cancer industry continue to use chemotherapy, radiation and other toxic procedures to "kill tumors" when the latest science clearly shows that cancer tumors are only the symptoms, not the cause, of cancer? Chemotherapy destroys immune function and causes permanent damage to the heart, brain and liver...

#7: The World Health Organization says that 70% of all cancers are easily preventable through dietary and lifestyle changes. This latest research shows that sunlight and low-cost calcium supplements can slash cancer risk by 77% in women. Why won't conventional medicine embrace this low-cost, safe and highly effective method for preventing cancer?

#8: The cancer industry routinely attacks anti-cancer herbs, superfoods and supplements. Why is the cancer industry opposed to anti-cancer nutrition? Why does it believe that only man, not nature, can manufacture anti-cancer medicines?

#9: Dark skin pigmentation blocks ultraviolet radiation, meaning that people with black skin need far more time under the sun to generate the same amount of vitamin D as someone with white skin. Not surprisingly, black women suffer extremely high rates of breast cancer while black men show similarly high levels of prostate cancer. The white-dominated medical industry pretends to be "mystified" by all this. Why won't conventional medicine simple tell black people the truth about vitamin D, skin pigmentation and cancer? Why do oncologists try to keep black people ignorant about their vitamin D deficiencies?

#10: Why is it illegal for nutritional supplement manufacturers to tell the truth about the anti-cancer effects of their products? Broccoli, garlic, onions and sprouts all have powerful anti-cancer effects, as do dozens of rainforest herbs (Cat's Claw, for example), Chinese herbs and Western herbs. But the FDA threatens and censors any company that dares to mention cancer prevention on its supplement products. Why is the FDA enforcing a policy of nutritional ignorance with U.S. consumers? Why does the federal government want people to remain ignorant of methods for preventing or treating cancer?

You probably already know the answer to all these questions, because the answer is the same for each one: Corporate profits. Cancer is hugely profitable to treat. Substantially preventing cancer would result in a loss of billions of dollars in profits for the oncologists, drug companies, hospitals and clinics that currently prey upon the finances of cancer victims.

The cancer industry is operated like a criminal racket, using false information, intimidation, political pressure and propaganda to protect its power base and keep its corporations profitable. And that, my friends, is exactly why the industry is against the use of sunlight to prevent cancer. Free medicine from the sky? The very thought of it makes the cancer industry cringe. Sunlight doesn't even need a prescription, you see, and it can't be patented, either.

Preventing cancer the healthy way
Let me tell you how I prevent cancer. I take long walks in the desert with no shirt on, and I don't wear sunscreen. I soak up the sun's rays for many hours each week, and I never get a sun burn because I eat lots of antioxidant-rich superfoods, berries and fresh produce.

I drink a raw superfood smoothie each morning, made of fresh produce and superfoods. My two favorite recipes are chocolate (with raw cacao, coconut oil or macadamia nut oil, raw avocado, spirulina, quinoa, banana and almond milk) and super berry (fresh berries, freeze-dried berries, egg white protein, stevia, aloe vera gel, fresh cucumber or watermelon, celery).

I put no personal care products on my skin whatsoever: No deodorants, no fragrance, no skin creams, no cosmetics and no sunscreen. This alone saves me from exposure to hundreds of cancer-causing toxic chemicals added to personal care products. I refuse to use chemical laundry detergent and, instead, use natural laundry soap that grows on trees: Natural soap berries that we sell as a replacement for chemical laundry detergents.

Corporate-controlled U.S. government doesn't want to prevent cancer
The U.S. government doesn't want the population to be free of cancer. That's a strong statement, so let me offer you an undeniable piece of strong evidence to back that up: The artificially low RDA numbers for vitamin D.

One of the best ways to keep the population suffering from cancer is to enforce long-term nutritional deficiencies that lead to cancer. The US government accomplishes this by keeping the recommendations for vitamin D artificially low, practically guaranteeing that anyone who follows the recommendations will eventually be diagnosed with cancer. Vitamin D deficiency is the leading cause of breast cancer.

Most educated nutritionists agree that the daily dose of vitamin D for an adult should be at least 1000 IUs, perhaps as high as 1400. But the U.S. Institute of Medicine (IoM), which controls the recommendations on these things, currently states that adults under 50 only need 200 IUs of vitamin D a day. This policy is, in my opinion, an organized conspiracy to keep the American people diseased by making sure they stay deficient in anti-cancer nutrients. It serves the interests of all the powerful corporations and non-profits that run Washington. And yes, it is a conspiracy. I've documented it in far more detail in my book, Natural Health Solutions and the Conspiracy to Keep You From Knowing About Them, which reveals shocking details, documents and photographs showing how modern medicine is a system that's literally designed to keep the people in a state of chronic disease.

The FDA doesn't want people to prevent cancer either. That's why they've aggressively attacked companies offering anti-cancer nutrients, and completely censored the very mention of the word "cancer" by supplement companies. In fact, the only reason I can print the information you're reading right now is because I sell no food or supplements and my free speech writing is not regulated by the FDA. If I were selling supplements and writing these same words you're reading right now, I would be arrested, charged with federal crimes, and put out of business by state and federal authorities. That's the reality of the oppressive medical environment under which we live today: Health is outlawed, and only disease is allowed to be promoted.

The cancer industry, you see, is not merely incompetent; it is criminal. Intentionally keeping a population sick so that you can profit from disease is a crime against humanity. And yet this is business as usual in America's modern cancer industry.

Discrediting simple, free and safe cancer prevention strategies is also criminal, and yet this is what the American Cancer Society seems to do at every opportunity.

Plotting to profit from the suffering of other humans beings is evil. And yet the entire revenue base of the cancer industry is based on precisely that: Keeping people alive long enough to "treat" them with overpriced toxic chemicals that can be billed to Medicare at 50,000% markups over their manufacturing cost.

Cancer is big, big business. And curing cancer is a threat to all the criminals participating in that industry: The non-profit employees, oncologists, doctors, federal regulators, drug company executives, med school propaganda teachers, pharmaceutical reps and many others. These people cannot allow cancer to be prevented or cured. Their jobs and careers are at stake.

Another outstanding source for learning more about the evils of the cancer industry is G. Edward Griffin

Source

Antidepressant Drugs Destroy DNA of Sperm

Antidepressant Drugs Destroy DNA of Sperm

One of the most important themes emerging in the latest research on food and medicine is the destruction of human DNA by toxic chemicals. In turns out that many medicines cause irreversible DNA damage that's passed on to offspring, resulting in infertility within 3 - 4 generations.

New research now links antidepressant consumption with dangerous increases in the DNA fragmentation of sperm cells. DNA fragmentation more than doubled from 13.8% to 30.3% -- a stunning increase on DNA "errors" that would typically lead to either birth defects or the rejection of the fetus by the mother's body (automatic biological abortion, which is increasingly common).

Just as alarmingly, "Up to 35% of men reported significant changes in erectile function and up to 47% reported ejaculatory problems while receiving paroxetine," the study's authors report.

The bottom line? Taking SSRIs may very well destroy your genetic future. It also means that the laws of natural selection are working against those who take pharmaceuticals.

Source

iPhone could raise brain tumor risk

iPhone could raise brain tumor risk
By Ben Wasserman
Nov 19, 2008 - 11:47:23 AM

News broke that the search giant Google announced on Nov 18 that it just launched a new version of Google Mobile App which allows users to enter their search query by voice. But this new feature comes in U.S. English and for iphone only.



Mobile phone or cell phone is convenient to use, but carries a risk. The industry does not want you to know about it and always down play the adverse effect. Many people have already known that use of cell phone for a long term would increase risk of brain cancer. It does not matter you use iphone or another type. Google Mobile App cannot reduce the risk!



Hardell L and colleagues from University Hospital in Orebro Sweden published a study in the May 2008 issue of International Journal of Oncology saying that evidence is convincing that long term use of the wireless stuff drastically increases risk of brain tumors.



Hardell and colleagues reviewed 10 studies and found that long term use defined as more than 10 years increased the tumor risk by 20 percent. When used on the same side of the head, wireless phone increased the risk of brain tumor by 100 percent.



When you use any modern technology, always consider there might be a risk associated with the application. Google voice recognition technology can’t reduce the risk, not just yet.

This isn't really surprising.

High-Fat Prenatal Diet Programs Baby's Brain for Obesity

High-Fat Prenatal Diet Programs Baby's Brain for Obesity

Obesity 'programmed before birth'
Pregnant woman
Diet in pregnancy may have a lasting impact

Eating a high-fat diet in pregnancy may cause changes in the foetal brain that lead to over-eating and obesity early in life, research suggests.

Tests on rats showed those born to mothers fed a high-fat diet had many more brain cells specialised to produce appetite-stimulating proteins.

The Rockefeller University team say the finding may help explain why obesity rates have soared in recent years.

The study appears in the Journal of Neuroscience.

Previous research on adult animals had shown that when fats known as triglycerides circulate in the blood they stimulate the production of proteins in the brain known as orexigenic peptides, which in turn stimulate the appetite.

We are programming our children to be fat
Dr Sarah Leibowitz
Rockefeller University

The latest study suggests exposure to triglycerides from the mother's diet has the same effect on the developing foetal brain - and that the effect then lasts throughout the offspring's life.

The researchers compared the offspring of rats fed a high-fat diet for two weeks with those whose mothers ate a moderate amount of fat.

They found that the pups born to the high-fat diet mothers ate more, weighed more throughout life, and began puberty earlier than those born to mothers who ate a normal diet.

They also had higher levels of triglycerides in the blood at birth, and as adults, and a greater production of orexigenic peptides in their brains.

Brain cells

More detailed analysis showed that, even before the birth, the high-fat pups had a much larger number of brain cells that produce orexigenic peptides - and they kept them throughout their lives.


The time to start feeding your child a healthy diet is right at the beginning of pregnancy
Dr Ian Campbell
Weight Concern

Their mothers' high-fat diet appeared to stimulate production of the cells, and their subsequent migration to parts of the brain linked to obesity.

In contrast, rats whose mothers had a balanced diet had far fewer of these specialised cells, and they appeared much later after birth.

Lead researcher Dr Sarah Leibowitz said: "We believe the high levels of triglycerides that the foetuses are exposed to during pregnancy cause the growth of the neurons earlier and much more than is normal.

"This work provides the first evidence for a foetal program that links high levels of fats circulating in the mother's blood during pregnancy to the overeating and increased weight gain of offspring after weaning."

The researchers suggest that the foetal brain is programmed so that the offspring can survive on the same diet as their mother - and they believe a similar mechanism may be operating in humans.

Dr Leibowitz said: "We are programming our children to be fat."

Dr Ian Campbell, medical director of the charity Weight Concern, said it had already been known that a high-fat diet in pregnancy made a child prone to a preference for fatty foods - but it had not been clear why.

He said: "The message is clear. We are not just 'what we eat'; we are also to some extent 'what our mothers eat'.

"The time to start feeding your child a healthy diet is right at the beginning of pregnancy."

Professor Ian MacDonald, an expert in the biology of obesity at the University of Nottingham, said there was clear evidence that nutrition before and soon after birth had an on-going impact on the genes.

But he warned against extrapolating too readily from animal studies, particularly as the rats in the latest study were fed a very unnatural diet.

Source

Mobile Phone Use Boosts Cancer Risk by 50 Percent

Mobile Phone Use Boosts Cancer Risk by 50 Percent
(NaturalNews) Heavy users of mobile phones are 50 percent more likely to develop cancer of the salivary glands, according to a new study conducted by researchers at Tel Aviv University and published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.

Researchers studied 500 Israelis who had tumors of the salivary gland, and compared their cell phone usage to 1300 Israelis who did not have such tumors. They found that those who use cellular phones several hours per day against the same side of the head had a 50 percent higher tumor risk than those who used phones less frequently.

Rural residents with heavy mobile phone use had an even higher tumor risk, compared with urban users. The researchers speculated that this could be due to the higher radiation dose needed for mobile phones to function in areas with fewer towers.

A number of studies have linked heavy mobile phone use the health problems such as sleep disruption and brain cancer. While the mobile phone industry often says that studies have proved the devices safe, the researchers noted that these studies tend to look only a short-term exposure, whereas radiation-related health problems may often take up to a decade before symptoms develop.

The researchers said that carrying out studies in Israel, where the level of mobile phone use (and thus radiation exposure) is very high, can give insight otherwise only available from a longer-term study.

"Compared to other studies, the amount of exposure to radiofrequency radiation we saw here was much higher," said lead researcher Siegal Sadetzki. "If you like, you're seeing what could happen elsewhere 'speeded-up' in Israel."

The researchers also noted that many studies look only for brain tumors, and not other health problems like the one examined in the current study. This could be because cancer of the salivary gland is normally quite rare, accounting, for example, for only 0.23 percent of all cancers diagnosed in the United Kingdom each year.

From Natural News

Triclosan - Unnecessary and Dangerous?

Triclosan - Unnecessary and Dangerous?
TRICLOSAN

by M. Angela McGhee, Ph.D., Biology and Marine Sciences

Triclosan, a chemical used for its antibacterial properties, is an ingredient in many detergents, dish-washing liquids, soaps, deodorants, cosmetics, lotions, anti-microbial creams, various toothpastes, and an additive in various plastics and textiles. However, the safety of triclosan has been questioned in regard to environmental and human health. While the companies that manufacture products containing this chemical claim that it is safe, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has registered it as a pesticide. The chemical formulation and molecular structure of this compound are similar to some of the most toxic chemicals on earth, relating it to dioxins and PCBs. The EPA gives triclosan high scores both as a human health risk and as an environmental risk.

Triclosan is a chlorophenol, a class of chemicals which is suspected of causing cancer in humans. Externally, phenol can cause a variety of skin irritations, but since it can temporarily deactivate sensory nerve endings, contact with it may cause little or no pain. Taken internally, even in small amounts, phenol can lead to cold sweats, circulatory collapse, convulsions, coma and death. Additionally, chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides can be stored in body fat, sometimes accumulating to toxic levels. Long term exposure to repeated use of many pesticide products can damage the liver, kidneys, heart and lungs, suppress the immune system, and cause hormonal disruption, paralysis, sterility and brain haemorrhages.

Dioxins, PCBs, chlorophenols and many pesticides are categorized as persistent organic pollutants. In other words, they persist in the environment and accumulate to higher and higher concentrations with each step up the food chain. Virtually, every creature on earth has a measured amount of these pollutants in its body fat. Once absorbed into the fat cells, it is nearly impossible to eliminate these compounds. Triclosan is among this class of chemicals, and humans are among the animals at the top of the food chain. The health risks are considerable.

Employing a strong antibiotic agent such as triclosan for everyday use is of questionable value. Many antimicrobial treatments are toxic and take a shotgun approach to killing all microscopic organisms to which they are applied. However, this approach includes the risk of toxicity to host organisms, that is, the plants or animals (including humans) exposed to treatment for microbial infections. Toxic exposure to living creatures can also occur when food items and objects such as utensils or hard surfaces are treated with disinfectants for microbial contamination. Additionally, the shotgun approach destroys the beneficial bacteria which occur naturally in the environment and in our bodies. These so-called friendly bacteria cause no harm and often produce beneficial effects such as aiding metabolism and inhibiting the invasion of harmful pathogens. Anti-microbial formulas and disinfectants can also cause genetic mutations resulting in drug-resistant bacterial and mutant viruses, producing new strains of harmful microbes for which the human immune system has no defence.

Triclosan has not been completely tested and analyzed for all health and environmental risks, but since it occurs in the category of the chemicals which are known to have the detrimental effects described here, do you want it added to products you use every day?

Source

Mobiles pose neurological health risks

Mobiles pose neurological health risks
Although the link between cell phones and brain tumour remains inconclusive till date, a new study has warned that the ‘technological
Using mobile phone? Beware!
Mobiles pose neurological health risks (Getty Images)
advancement’ can pose number of risks to people’s neurological health.

Recent studies have shown that cell phones increase the risk of developing a brain tumor.

Now, taking examples from real-life scenarios, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) has warned that cell phones can cause risks to people’s neurological health.

Amongst their many illustrations was the example of a 50-year-old female who had suffered nerve damage owing to extensive cell phone usage and was diagnosed with cervical radiculopathy after complaining pain in her fingers and arm while holding her cell phone.

Other examples included instances such as that of a 16-year-old boy who suffered a concussion because he was texting as he walked into a telephone pole, a 29-year-old male who was talking on his cell phone while on an escalator, fell backwards, and lacerated his head.

Also, the experts further revealed that drivers distracted by cell phones were four times more likely to be in a motor vehicle accident.

The boffins have also offered several cell phone injury prevention tips.

They are: never text messaging or using a cell phone while performing any physical activities that require attention, talking hands free by using an earpiece or on speaker mode whenever possible, if your phone rings while driving, let the call go into voice mail and respond later when you are safely parked.

Source

Food Dyes and Additives

Food Dyes and Additives
There are many toxic substances lurking in foods about which consumers are unaware. Many of those foods are the kinds eaten by children because manufacturers market items to be brightly colored and are engineered to taste good in order to appeal to a child's sense of aesthetic.

Important new research has shown that commonly used food dyes, such as Yellow 5, Red 40, and six others, are linked to hyperactivity, impulsivity, learning difficulties, and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in many children. The Center for Science in the Public Interest has petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to ban the use of these dyes, many of which are already being phased out in Europe. For more information about this important subject on the Food Dyes and Children's Behavior web site.

There are also many additives in foods, known as excitotoxins, which are engineered to affect the taste of the food. Read more about this subject on AromaTherapy4U with supporting information from Dr. Russell L. Blaylock and Dr. Colleen Huber - both medical doctors. Another individual who has conducted research on these dangerous toxins is George E. Shambaugh, Jr. M.D. who explains how hidden taste enhancers included in foods actually over-excite neurons in the brain, overworking them and eventually killing them. Various animal tests done with these substances have repeatedly confirmed these findings. Why would you allow your child to eat them? For an informative article about excitotoxins, visit Agriculture Society. To investigate a startling book written by one of the experts on this subject, check out Dr. Russell L. Blaylock's book, Excitotoxins, The Taste that Kills.

Foods you can find these substances in are wide and vast, and would include a majority of processed foods, unless otherwise labeled. Your best bet is to avoid processed foods and eat only whole, real foods. Some organic processed foods do not contain these substances, but the health benefits of any processed food, organic or not, should always be questioned before consumption. Here is a brief list of ingredients that are excitotoxins which are found in many processed foods and should be avoided:

* Carrageenan
* Maltodextrin
* Malt extract
* Natural pork flavoring
* Citric acid
* Malt flavoring
* Bouillon and Broth
* Natural chicken flavoring
* Soy protein isolate
* Natural beef flavoring
* Ultra-pasteurized
* Soy sauce
* Stock
* Barley malt
* Soy sauce extract
* Whey protein concentrate
* Pectin
* Soy protein
* Whey protein
* Protease
* Soy protein concentrate
* Whey protein isolate
* Protease enzymes
* Anything protein fortified
* Flavors(s) & Flavoring(s)
* Anything enzyme modified
* Anything fermented
* Natural flavor(s)
* Enzymes anything
* Seasonings (the word “seasonings”)

Always be aware of anything that reads "hydrolyzed" in an ingredient list. These substances are more often than not full of excitotoxins or glutamates - which is the group of substances to which Monosodium Glutamate or MSG belongs. Check your labels! Don't just assume something you buy that is packaged, boxed, or canned is good for you to eat...it may in fact be deadly!

Source

Sugar and Health

Sugar and Health
For most of the history of humanity man ate a diet of wild game and natural vegetation including some seeds, nuts, and fruit during certain sea-sons. In our era, with the advent of processed foods, mankind's diet has undergone a radical change. People are eating foods that never existed in nature before, foods which the body was never designed to utilize. The result is that the heavy consumption of refined sugar, and refined flour products too, has led to serious health problems for those who regularly eat them. Today 65% of Americans are overweight, and 27% are clinically obese. Even children are starting to show more and more symptoms of this growing health problem. Diabetes is starting to appear more frequently in the very young. When we look at the diet of the typical American, it is easy to see how this has happened. The average American each year consumes 125 pounds of sugar in the form of 300 cans of soda, 200 sticks of gum, 18 pounds of candy, 50 pounds of cakes and cookies and 20 gallons of ice cream. I want to make clear just how much sugar is found in the sodas people are drinking each day. There are 7 to 8 teaspoons of sugar in some form, in the average soda drink. If you have a soda at lunch, one as a snack in the afternoon, one with your dinner, and one as you watch TV or go out for a final snack later in the night, you have consumed 28 spoonfuls of sugar.
Americans are also consuming too many foods which are made from highly refined flour, which act just like sugar in the body, such as pasta, bread and cookies and cakes. In addition to all the many obvious sources of sugar in the typical American diet, sugar is used as an inexpensive additive to improve the taste of many items in which the producers in order to increase profits use cheaper inferior ingredients or use less expensive ingredients. Among these items, you may have guessed, because they taste so sweet, are ketchup, and jams and jellies, which really should have no added sugar and should be made primarily from the fruit. Fruit flavored drinks and fruit flavored yogurts, and especially, sweetened canned fruit have unnecessarily large amounts of sugar in some form in them. But it is also surprising how much sugar, unhealthy sugar, is found in items like peanut butters, bread, soups, pickles, mustard, canned dishes like baked beans, and salad dressings. Even American's general idea of proper cui-sine contributes to this problem. Making potatoes a staple at almost every meal has been an additional negative health factor. Potatoes, among all other vegetables, are the one of the most likely to affect the body in the same way as refined sugar.
A surfeit of carbohydrates in any form will lead to gaining weight and eventual obesity, but it is sugar in all its forms, and refined flour in our diets that do the most harm. They lead to a fast rise in blood sugar, which causes the pancreas to produce a large amount of insulin to lower our blood sugar quickly, because high blood sugar is dangerous to our health. Unfortunately, this strong dose of insulin makes the blood sugar drop below our normal level and makes us feel down in mood. In order to compensate for this psychological effect, we are driven by cravings to seek an immediate repeat of our ingestion of sugar to again raise our blood sugar to make ourselves feel better, and so the cycle continues on and on. This results in our taking in more calories than are necessary to supply energy to the body. The end result is overweight and eventual obesity. The high amounts of insulin also have other deleterious effects.

They make the insulin receptors become less and less sensitive, requiring the pancreas to produce larger and larger amounts of insulin each time, to deal with same amount of high incoming sugar. Eventually the receptors become very insensitive to the incoming insulin, and the person has developed a condition referred to as insulin resistance.
Insulin resistance aggravates another problem which results from the production of insulin in the body. When insulin in the body is high, another hormone called glucagon is low. Glucagon is a hormone which promotes the release and utilization of fat from the fat storage cells for energy. So that when glucagon is present, you will be burning and thus reducing your fat stores. In other words, you will be losing weight and the weight will be a loss of fat. However, the high level of insulin in insulin resistant people keeps them from burning any of their fat stores. They can only burn incoming sugar and carbohydrates, and when they are depleted, they will begin to break down and use muscle tissue as a source of energy. This is, again, because the insulin has blocked getting access to the body's fat by blocking the production of the necessary hormone, glucagon. Now you understand why people who have eaten a lot of sugar, and sugar acting foods like refined flour and grains, and potatoes, in their life all the time have had trouble losing weight, or permanently keeping off any weight they have lost through extreme measures like very strict diets or fasting.
Eventually people on these refined high carbohydrate diets exhaust their pancreas, which stops generating any insulin at all, and they become diabetic, and must take insulin regularly to keep their blood sugar from staying at dangerously high levels.
There is another serious problem with too much sugar, sugar addiction. For many years people have spoken of sugar addiction because of the seemingly addictive behavior of people who have a strong desire for foods with sugar. However, it is only recently that it has been scientifically been shown to be a genuine addiction. Rats fed sugar showed classic signs of withdrawal when their sugar "fix" was taken away from them. When they were allowed to eat sugar again, they binged on it. The sugar had triggered natural pleasure producing opiods in their brains. The effect is similar to morphine and heroin, though not as powerful. Actual studies of these animals' brains showed an accelerated growth of dopamine receptors in the nucleus accumbens in their brains. This helps explain why people who eat sugar regularly, have strong cravings and seek a sugar "fix" many times throughout their day.
You are probably addicted to sugar if you have the following: if you have cravings for food containing sugar, if you can't stop eating after one piece of candy or one bite of cake or other baked goods; if you can't go for more than a few hours without experiencing a letdown with fatigue or irritability or anxiety; if you have to have your sugared coffee and donuts or other baked goods every morning and have and eat candy and other sweets in your home all the time; if you regularly drink sugared sodas during the day to give yourself a pick-me-up because you're dragging.
Nutritionally, refined sugars present another problem. It takes vitamins and minerals to digest and assimilate ingested refined sugars. Unprocessed sugar cane juice is rich in vitamins and minerals and provides some nourishment to the body, though it is still too high in sugar to be good for the body. But refined sugar is an empty calorie, which uses up valuable vitamins and minerals in order to be digested without supplying any of them. Thus, eating a lot of refined sugars depletes the body of these valuable health promoting factors. That's why, you now can understand, even overweight people who have become so because of large amounts of sugar in their diets, can actually suffer from malnutrition.
Here's a list of some of the negative health effects of sugar, and the refined flour products and potatoes that act like sugar within the body. Sugar can:
… cause an increase in insulin being generated in the body
… cause an increase in insulin sensitivity
… overstress the pancreas causing damage
… cause diabetes … cause weight gain and obesity
… produce a significant rise in triglycerides
… reduce helpful high density cholesterol, known as HDLs
… promote an elevation of harmful cholesterol, know as LDLs
… increase total cholesterol
… cause atherosclerosis
… increase systolic pressure
… cause hypertension
… upset the body's mineral balance
… promote tooth decay
… cause hyperactivity, anxiety, concentration difficulties, and crankiness
in children
… lead to alcoholism
… cause depression
If you are seriously craving sugar, you should avoid all sugars. The following is a list of sugars and sweeteners that act like sugars, though you may not have recognized them as sugars before reading this article. Of course, if a label just says "sugar," you will avoid that too!
AVOID THESE SWEETENERS: corn syrup, fructose, high fructose corn syrup, honey, sucrose, maltodextrin, dextrose, molasses, rice milk, almond milk, white grape juice, fruit juice sweetened, brown rice syrup, maple syrup, date sugar, cane sugar, corn sugar, beet sugar, succanat and lactose.
There are many other points to be made if one wishes to guide oneself correctly. Raw sugar and brown sugar, which was at one time sold in a lot of health food stores and still may be found in some supermarkets, is actually highly refined white sugar with some molasses put back in to give it brown color. Fructose doesn't increase leptin, a hormone that decreases your appetite, and doesn't suppress ghrelin, the hormone that makes you hungry. Thus, people who eat food containing fructose are likely to take in more calories, not less. And remember, almost all simple sugars, fructose included, and not just refined white sugar, are metabolized quickly and raise insulin levels too quickly. Just like refined white sugar, they play a role in creating insulin resistance. In addition, fructose is converted into triglycerides more efficiently than glucose elevating triglycerides that are linked to an increased risk of heart disease. Fructose converts to fat more readily than any other sugar, and some believe its prevalence in our present food supply has made it an important factor in making Americans fatter and fatter.
Eating small amounts of fruit will not provide unhealthy large amounts of natural fructose, but fruit juices are best avoided as being too high in fructose for the body to assimilate without generating too much insulin. Aside from limited amounts of fruit, avoid fructose in food just as you would table sugar. One of the best ways to limit your intake of fructose, in general, is to eliminate soda and fruit juices from your diet.
Most artificial sweeteners are increasingly considered to be unhealthy for the body. Aspartame is the technical name for the brand names NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, and Equal-Measure. Aspartame, which is frequently found in diet sodas, accounts for over 75 percent of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA. Many of these reactions are very serious. In addition, Aspartame suppresses serotonin production, the chemical in the brain that contributes to your feeling satisfied after a meal. The end result from ingesting Aspartame, just as it was from people eating fructose, is that people are less satisfied with their food and tend to eat more. Diet sodas may actually be increasing your total intake of calories.
Finally, artificial sweeteners in general, just like real sugar, give you an intense experience of tasting something sweet, which psychologically stimulates cravings to consume even more sweet tasting things.
In general, you will be better off health wise if you only buy products that say "no sugar added." Jams should say fruit only. Often fruit juices are added to the food item, but don't be fooled, this is an unhealthy form of concentrated sugar too, even though it is originally from fruit. And remember, cocaine and heroine are derived from natural sources, but no one would say they are good for your health. A lot of poisons start out as plant material too. So do not be fooled by people who insist certain sugars are healthy because they are made from natural sources.
YOU ARE READY TO GET HEALTHIER AND FEEL BETTER
Always keep in mind
Sugar is nutritionally worthless and is full of fattening calories Sugar creates cycles of emotional highs and lows, and is chemically additive Sugar is very bad for your body's health
READ FOOD LABELS
If sugar appears in the ingredients in the first few listed items:

DO NOT EAT THAT PRODUCT
Always keep in mind except for occasional fruit, it is best if you avoid eating any sugar at all.
Many people are addicted to sugar and should avoid all sugars permanently for optimal health.
And remember refined flour products in bread, bagels, pasta, and cookies and cakes, act just like sugar in your body, as do potatoes and potato products too.
We must eliminate refined food products from our diets and choose carefully, selecting high-fiber, non-starchy vegetables as our carbohydrate choices. In this way, we generate less insulin and avoid any insulin resistance and the adverse health effects that result. Remember, even fruits that are relatively low in carbohydrates will generate some insulin in the body to deal with the sugars they contain. Since one of the goals of low-carb eating is to generate as little insulin as possible, enjoy eating fresh fruit, in reasonable moderate amounts. On the other hand, dried fruits should be much more limited because they have a high concentration of sugars. And remember, as noted above, fruit juices are too high in sugars to be appropriate for a low insulin generating diet. Berries, on the other hand, are a good choice.

Source

A Dangerous Call - Is Your Cell Phone Frying Your Brain?

A Dangerous Call - Is Your Cell Phone Frying Your Brain?


They are both fashion accessories and an essential part of our lives. Yet since they first became widely available in the 1990s, there have been nagging doubts about just how safe mobile phones really are. Could they cause cancers in the brain? Does living near a mobile phone mast raise your risk of other cancers?

Professor Denis Henshaw, head of the Human Radiation Effects Group at Bristol University, says: "We are steeped in denial over the safety of mobile phones and related technologies." He points, as an example, to a recent Austrian study which found a raised risk of breast cancer near phone masts. "We have emission levels in the UK similar to those in Austria and yet there is no warning to people of possible dangers."

Contrast the UK position with that in other countries, where at the very least they take the approach that when it comes to this new technology, its better to be safe than sorry. The German government has taken a more cautious line over wi-fi. Last September, the German environment ministry recommended that people should keep their exposure to radiation as low as possible by replacing wi-fi with a cabled connection. Three years ago, the Vienna Chamber of Doctors put up more than 21,000 posters in surgeries and other places with very specific warnings about mobile phones, such as: "Use your phone as little as possible" and "Men - never keep a phone in your trouser pockets as it can reduce fertility."

A study last month reported that out of 360 men attending an infertility clinic, those who used their mobile the most had the poorest sperm quality. Last October, two Swedish professors pulled together the results of 11 studies involving people who had used mobiles for more than a decade and found they were 20 per cent more likely to develop a benign tumour in the inner ear, and 30 per cent more likely to develop a type of brain tumour known as a malignant glioma.
Last month, the Irish Doctors Environmental Association said that the current thermal-based guidelines were clearly no longer appropriate and called on the government to "immediately start research into the non-thermal effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation". "There is absolutely no doubt these effects exist," says Dr Andrew Goldsworthy, a biologist and expert in low frequency microwave radiation, and honorary lecturer at Imperial College in London.

"For instance, we've known for more than 30 years that electromagnetic fields affect the behaviour of calcium in living cells." He claims that this could explain the symptoms reported by people who say they are affected by pulsed microwave radiation - the sort emitted by mobile phones. "The textbook symptoms of too little calcium - such as fatigue, muscles cramps, irregular heart rhythm and gut problems - are very similar to those reported by people who say they are affected by microwave radiation," he says.

"Mobile phones and the rest aren't going to go away, but could we do more to acknowledge the possible problem so people can make an informed choice about using them and can learn to deal with the effects?"

Source

November 6th, 2008 Cell Phone Radiation Effects, Brain Tumors and Chidren

November 6th, 2008
Cell Phone Radiation Effects, Brain Tumors and Chidren

With 3 billion cell phone users worldwide and more than 260 million in the United States alone—among them 46% of U.S. children aged 8–12, according to Nielsen Mobile figures released 10 September 2008—human exposure to low-energy radiation in the 800- to 2,000-megahertz range is at an all-time high. The most recent attempt to systematically review the epidemiologic evidence for increased risk of brain tumors related to cell phone use indicates that repercussions from this global experiment are coming to light. In a meta-analysis published in the May 2008 issue of the International Journal of Oncology, Swedish researchers found significant associations between long-term cell phone use and brain tumor risk. In July 2008 market research firm MultiMedia Intelligence reported that more than 16 million U.S. teens use cell phones.

“We found that cell phone use is linked to gliomas [malignant brain tumors] and acoustic neuromas [benign tumors of the brain's auditory nerve] and are showing up after only ten years,” says lead author Lennart Hardell, an oncologist and cancer epidemiologist at University Hospital in Örebro, Sweden. Specifically, for studies that included at least 10 years of exposure, there was a doubling in the risk of gliomas for ipsilateral (same-side) but not contralateral (opposite-side) exposures to the head (as reflected by which hand the subject typically used to hold his/her cell phone). A 2.4-fold increase in risk was seen for acoustic neuromas due to ipsilateral exposures, whereas no increased risk occurred for meningiomas (tumors that occur in the membranes covering the brain and spinal cord).

Source

Study Links Cell Phones To Brain Cancer Risk

Study Links Cell Phones To Brain Cancer Risk
By Dr. Mercola
Provider
2008-11-11 10:43 AM
Fonts Size: A+
E-Mail This Email
Printer-Friendly Printer
+ Enlarge This image
Concerns have been raised about whether cell phone use can be linked to the development of brain tumours. Now, a study from Swedish researchers provides evidence backing the claim.
Provider
Concerns have been raised about whether cell phone use can be linked to the development of brain tumours. Now, a study from Swedish researchers provides evidence backing the claim.

Researchers at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, based their findings on questionnaire and interview data obtained from 209 persons with brain tumours and 425 healthy control subjects. In a 2-year study, the team found an increased risk in anatomical areas of the brain exposed to microwaves during a mobile phone call. This risk holds even when statistical adjustments are made for other risk factors including ionizing radiation and laboratory exposures

The researcher pointed out, however, that most of the people in the study used the older analog system, which gives two to three times higher exposure than the digital system, which is now mostly used -- at least in Europe. Larger studies are necessary to make firm conclusions. The investigators have a much larger brain tumour study ongoing with about 1,500 incident patients and 1,500 controls and the results are expected within one year.

In light of their current findings, the authors offer several suggestions about cell phone usage. Use an earpiece to reduce exposure to the brain and, in a car, use an external fixed antenna. Otherwise, your exposure to microwaves might even be higher than using the phone outside the car. In addition, extended conversations should be conducted on a regular corded telephone.

Insofar as children are concerned, since the developing brain might be more sensitive to microwaves, children's exposure should be limited. One useful tip is to find out the specific absorption rate (SAR) value of various cell phone types. The SAR may differ by as much as a factor of 20 between different brands.

Commentary:

It is reprehensible to even consider that someone would allow a child to use a cell phone. The danger is far too great. We all need to reduce our exposure. The best way is to minimize their use to the smallest amount possible. Secondly, only use digital rather than analog phones, as the radiation dose is reduced by up to 90%. Thirdly, only use them with a head set. Please review the other articles for further information.

Source

Ginger Root

Ginger Root
Ginger Root is known as the universal medicine in Ayurveda.

Ginger aids digestion and, and is one of the best herbs for nausea. It relieves spasms and menstrual cramps.

Ginger helps to regulate blood sugar both by stimulating pancreas cells and by lowering lipids (cholesterol, triglycerides) in the blood. Ginger is both an anti-inflammatory and an antioxidant, which boosts the immune system and naturally increases the body's energy levels.


Historically, ginger was one of the most respected herbs for joint health, especially for aging joints. Ginger has relatively high calcium and iron content.

Ginger increases peripheral circulation, so is used clinically for cold hands and feet. Being diaphoretic, it treats some symptoms by promoting sweating.

How to Take Ginger
Ginger should not be used by children under 2 years of age. For adults, ginger intake should not exceed 2 to 4 grams per day (this includes the ginger obtained through diet such as from ginger ale, ginger snaps, and ginger bread).

For nausea, gas, or indigestion: 2 to 4 grams of fresh root daily (0.25 to 1.0 g of powdered root) or 1.5 to 3.0 mL (30 to 90 drops) tincture daily. To prevent vomiting, take 1 gram of powdered ginger (1/2 teaspoon) or its equivalent every four hours as needed, or 2 ginger capsules (1 gram) three times daily. You may also chew a 1/4 ounce piece of fresh ginger.
To relieve arthritis pain: Take fresh ginger juice, extract, or tea, 2 to 4 grams daily; rub ginger oil into painful joint; or place fresh root in a warm poultice or compress and apply to painful areas.
For cold and flu symptoms, sore throat, headache and menstrual cramps: Steep 2 tablespoons of freshly shredded ginger in boiled water, two to three times daily, or place a drop of ginger oil or a few slices of fresh rhizome in steaming water and inhale.
Side Effects
The American Herbal Products Association (AHPA) gives fresh ginger root a class 1 safety rating, indicating that it is a safe herb with a wide dosage range. Side effects associated with ginger are rare, but if taken in excessive doses the herb may cause mild heartburn. Note: People with gallstones should consult a physician before taking ginger.

Ginger Root Supplements
Ginger Root -- Useful digestive aid.
Ginger 6:1 Concentrate -- Jarrow FORMULAS® Freeze Dried Ginger is not subjected to any heat, which ensures the presence of the active compounds that are beneficial to the gastrointestinal tract.
Ginger Liquid -- Doctor Approved. Best known for its ability to relieve nausea due to morning sickness or motion sickness. Organic, convenient liquid form aids in digestion.
Daily Ginger -- Daily Ginger Vcaps integrate fresh juice and important ginger extracts into the digestive system and provide instant and concentrated relief.
Garlic Plus Ginger -- This product contains the harmonious combination of garlic and freeze dried ginger.
Ginger Honey Tonic -- Makes 24 cups tea/ginger ale (herbal). Enhances cell protective activity. Tastes great! Has instant results!
Ginger Wonder Syrup Original -- Makes 24-48 cups of delicious tea/herbal ginger ale. Contains 180 times the protein digesting power of papaya. Stimulates fat digesting bile!

Yellow ginger, or turmeric is also real good.


Belly bites

12 Dangerous Food Additives: The Dirty Dozen Food Additives You Really Need to be Aware Of

12 Dangerous Food Additives: The Dirty Dozen Food Additives You Really Need to be Aware Of

In the United States, more than 3,000 substances can be added to foods for the purpose of preservation, coloring, texture, increasing flavor and more. While each of these substances is legal to use (at least here in the States), whether or not they are all something you want to be consuming is another story all together.

The food colorings that make candy pretty colors have been linked to cancer and tumors of the brain, thyroid, adrenal gland and kidney in animal studies.

With any processed food you run the risk of coming across additives, and reading through ingredient labels can be like trying to decode a puzzle.

Of course, eating largely fresh, whole foods is the best way to stay away from unsavory additives, but, assuming you do include some processed foods in your diet, the following additives are ones you surely want to stay away from. Look for them on ingredient labels and if one turns up, take a pass.

Propyl Gallate

This preservative, used to prevent fats and oils from spoiling, might cause cancer. It's used in vegetable oil, meat products, potato sticks, chicken soup base and chewing gum, and is often used with BHA and BHT (see below).

BHA and BHT

Butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) and butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) are used similarly to propyl gallate -- to keep fats and oils from going rancid. Used commonly in cereals, chewing gum, vegetable oil and potato chips (and also in some food packaging to preserve freshness), these additives have been found by some studies to cause cancer in rats. If a brand you commonly buy uses these additives, look for a different variety, as not all manufacturers use these preservatives.

Food Additives and Your Brain:
Free e-Book

If you want to know more about the effects of food additives on your brain, check out this FREE 300+-page e-book "Neurotoxicity: Identifying and Controlling Poisons of the Nervous System."

Some food additives are neurotoxic, which means they're capable of altering the normal activity of the nervous system -- and even killing neurons. Symptoms include:

* Limb weakness or numbness
* Loss of memory, vision, and intellect
* Headache
* Cognitive and behavioral problems
* Sexual dysfunction

See and Download "Neurotoxicity: Identifying and Controlling Poisons of the Nervous System." Now

Potassium Bromate

This additive is used in breads and rolls to increase the volume and produce a fine crumb structure. Although most bromate breaks down into bromide, which is harmless, the bromate that does remain causes cancer in animals. Bromate has been banned throughout the world, except for in the United States and Japan. In California, a cancer warning would likely be required if it were used, which is why it is rarely used in that state.

Monosodium glutamate (MSG)

MSG is used as a flavor enhancer in many packaged foods, including soups, salad dressings, sausages, hot dogs, canned tuna, potato chips and many more. According to Dr. Russell Blaylock, an author and neurosurgeon, there is a link between sudden cardiac death, particularly in athletes, and excitotoxic damage caused by food additives like MSG and artificial sweeteners. Excitotoxins are, according to Dr. Blaylock, "A group of excitatory amino acids that can cause sensitive neurons to die."

Many consumers have also personally experienced the ill effects of MSG, which leave them with a headache, nausea or vomiting after eating MSG-containing foods. To find out more about the side effects associated with MSG, as well as a complete list of which foods contain it, see our past article MSG: If it's Safe: Why do They Disguise it on the Labels?

Aspartame (Equal, NutraSweet)

This artificial sweetener is found in Equal and NutraSweet, along with products that contain them (diet sodas and other low-cal and diet foods). This sweetener has been found to cause brain tumors in rats as far back as the 1970s, however a more recent study in 2005 found that even small doses increase the incidence of lymphomas and leukemia in rats, along with brain tumors.

People who are sensitive to aspartame may also suffer from headaches, dizziness and hallucinations after consuming it.

Acesulfame-K

Acesulfame-K is an artificial sweetener that's about 200 times sweeter than sugar. It's used in baked goods, chewing gum, gelatin desserts and soft drinks. Two rat studies have found that this substance may cause cancer, and other studies to reliably prove this additive's safety have not been conducted. Acesulfame-K also breaks down into acetoacetamide, which has been found to affect the thyroid in rats, rabbits and dogs.

Olestra

Olestra is a fat substitute used in crackers and potato chips, marketed under the brand name Olean. This synthetic fat is not absorbed by the body (instead it goes right through it), so it can cause diarrhea, loose stools, abdominal cramps and flatulence, along with other effects. Further, olestra reduces the body's ability to absorb beneficial fat-soluble nutrients, including lycopene, lutein and beta-carotene.

Sodium Nitrite (Sodium Nitrate)

Like diet soda? The aspartame that's used to sweeten it increases lymphomas, leukemia and brain tumors in rats -- even in small doses.

Sodium nitrite (or sodium nitrate) is used as a preservative, coloring and flavoring in bacon, ham, hot dogs, luncheon meats, corned beef, smoked fish and other processed meats. These additives can lead to the formation of cancer-causing chemicals called nitrosamines.

Some studies have found a link between consuming cured meats and nitrite and cancer in humans.

Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil

The process used to make hydrogenated vegetable oil (or partially hydrogenated vegetable oil) creates trans fats, which promote heart disease and diabetes. The Institute of Medicine has advised that consumers should eat as little trans fat as possible. You should avoid anything with these ingredients on the label, which includes some margarine, vegetable shortening, crackers, cookies, baked goods, salad dressings, bread and more. It's used because it reduces cost and increases the shelf life and flavor stability of foods.

Blue 1 and Blue 2

Blue 1, used to color candy, beverages and baked goods, may cause cancer. Blue 2, found in pet food, candy and beverages, has caused brain tumors in mice.

Red 3

This food coloring is used in cherries (in fruit cocktails), baked goods and candy. It causes thyroid tumors in rats, and may cause them in humans as well.

Yellow 6

As the third most often used food coloring, yellow 6 is found in many products, including backed goods, candy, gelatin and sausages. It has been found to cause adrenal gland and kidney tumors, and contains small amounts of many carcinogens.

Layoffs hit every corner

Layoffs hit every corner
Eight companies spanning several different industries announce nearly 15,000 layoffs in first week of November.
By Aaron Smith, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: November 8, 2008: 11:40 AM ET

AMERICA'S MONEY CRISIS

* Reid, Pelosi: More aid to carmakers
* Wall Street's eyes on the consumer
* 2 more banks go belly-up
* Year of the bailout - and now GM?
* Layoffs hit every corner

jobs_tally_2.gif
Quick Vote
How secure is your job?

*
Very safe
*
Safe, for the time being
*
Not safe at all

or View results
Have job losses hit bottom?video
Have job losses hit bottom?
More Videos
QUIZ
Are you a good networker?
1. If you only know someone through a social networking site like LinkedIn or Facebook, it's inappropriate to ask him or her for an in-person meeting.
True
False

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The first week of November has been brutal for the job market, with nearly 15,000 announced job cuts from a slew of companies across multiple industries.

Eight companies announced job cuts this week as a means of cost-cutting during desperate times, representing industries as widespread as retail, finance, leisure, pharmaceutical and toy and automobile manufacturing.

On Friday, the Labor Department reported that the U.S. economy sloughed nearly 1.2 million jobs through October. Just in the month of October, the economy lost 240,000 jobs, raising the unemployment rate to 6.5%.

"We're losing jobs just about everywhere," said Robert Brusca, chief economist and Fact and Opinion Economics. "People are slowing their spending on everything. Now, even wealthier people are reluctant to spend money."

Circuit City (CC, Fortune 500), an electronics retailer based in Richmond, Va., kicked off the week by announcing on Monday that it was reducing its domestic workforce by 17%. The company would not comment on the number of employees that would be affected, but according to a recent 10K filing, Circuit City employs about 43,000 people in the U.S. That would mean roughly 7,300 positions are being lost, the biggest of the cuts in November so far.

On Tuesday, the Connecticut-based insurer Hartford Financial (HIG, Fortune 500) reported 500 cuts.

The following day, the British drug company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) said it would cut 1,000 sales positions.

Thursday was particularly gloomy, with four companies announcing cuts: 1,300 from Fidelity Investments of Boston, 1,000 from toy maker Mattel (MAT, Fortune 500), based in El Segundo, Calif., 375 from Borgata Hotel Casino of Atlantic City, N.J., and 850 from La-Z-Boy (LZB), a furniture producer and retailer based in Monroe, Mich.

Ford Motor (F, Fortune 500) was the most recent to announce job cuts, with 2,600 cuts announced on Friday. The battered auto maker said it was trying to hold on to its dwindling cash reserves as it reported a $3 billion operating loss for the third quarter.

Most of the cuts are slated for the U.S., though Mattel said its job cuts will affect its global workforce.

"You have essentially every sector, every industry, furloughing workers, so it's going to get bad - considerably worse - before it gets better," said Richard Yamarone, director of economic research at Argus Research. "If the automotive sector falls, and it's on the ledge, then you could very easily have double-digit employment."

Lakshman Achuthan, managing director of the Economic Cycle Research Institute, said that Hartford and Fidelity are getting squeezed by the plunging value of the stock markets. But he said the other companies - and even the drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline - are getting stifled by a consumer lock-down on any type of spending that is not totally necessary.

"You don't have to buy a La-Z-Boy today, but you might have to go to the doctor, you have to eat, and you have to pay rent," said Achuthan. "[The companies] are seeing that the consumer has been stunned or is frozen and will not make any purchases that he will not absolutely have to make."

As for Glaxo, Achutan said that many Americans get their health insurance through their jobs, and when they lose their jobs, it affects the drugmakers. He said newly-uninsured people are spending their money on food and housing, instead of drugs.

Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute, dismissed any notion that the job market would pick up in 2009, given the omnipresent nature of the layoffs, and the fact that they stem from a "credit freeze on top of a recession caused by a housing meltdown."

"The fact is that we're going to have very high unemployment for several years," said Mishel.

Source