Beware for Conficker

Last-minute Conficker survival guide

Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:42PM EDT

See Comments (2105)
Buzz up!on Yahoo!

Tomorrow -- April 1 -- is D-Day for Conficker, as whatever nasty payload it's packing is currently set to activate. What happens come midnight is a mystery: Will it turn the millions of infected computers into spam-sending zombie robots? Or will it start capturing everything you type -- passwords, credit card numbers, etc. -- and send that information back to its masters?

No one knows, but we'll probably find out soon.

Or not. As Slate notes, Conficker is scheduled to go "live" on April 1, but whoever's controlling it could choose not to wreak havoc but instead do absolutely nothing, waiting for a time when there's less heat. They can do this because the way Conficker is designed is extremely clever: Rather than containing a list of specific, static instructions, Conficker reaches out to the web to receive updated marching orders via a huge list of websites it creates. Conficker.C -- the latest bad boy -- will start checking 50,000 different semi-randomly-generated sites a day looking for instructions, so there's no way to shut down all of them. If just one of those sites goes live with legitimate instructions, Conficker keeps on trucking.

Conficker's a nasty little worm that takes serious efforts to bypass your security defenses, but you aren't without some tools in your arsenal to protect yourself.

Your first step should be the tools you already have: Windows Update, to make sure your computer is fully patched, and your current antivirus software, to make sure anything that slips through the cracks is caught.

But if Conficker's already on your machine, it may bypass certain subsystems and updating Windows and your antivirus at this point may not work. If you are worried about anything being amiss -- try booting into Safe Mode, which Conficker prevents, to check -- you should run a specialized tool to get rid of Conficker.

Microsoft offers a web-based scanner (note that some users have reported it crashed their machines; I had no trouble with it), so you might try one of these downloadable options instead: Symantec's Conficker (aka Downadup) tool, Trend Micro's Cleanup Engine, or Malwarebytes. Conficker may prevent your machine from accessing any of these websites, so you may have to download these tools from a known non-infected computer if you need them. Follow the instructions given on each site to run them successfully. (Also note: None of these tools should harm your computer if you don't have Conficker.)

As a final safety note, all users -- whether they're worried about an infection or know for sure they're clean -- are also wise to make a full data backup today.

What won't work? Turning your PC off tonight and back on on April 2 will not protect you from the worm (sorry to the dozens of people who wrote me asking if this would do the trick). Temporarily disconnecting your computer from the web won't help if the malware is already on your machine -- it will simply activate once you connect again. Changing the date on your PC will likely have no helpful effect, either. And yes, Macs are immune this time out. Follow the above instructions to detect and remove the worm.

Yahoo News

Aspartame, aka Artificial Sweetener 951: A History of Fraud and Deception

Aspartame, aka Artificial Sweetener 951: A History of Fraud and Deception

Today we have “Nutra-Sweet”, which is widely used in a plethora of consumables, despite a demonstrated neurological reaction in some people. In February 1996, it was decided to also use the product name “Benevia”. It is estimated that as many as 20,000,000 people cannot metabolize phenylalimine, and this inability is genetically inherited by children. The inability to metabolize phenylalinine can lead to mental retardation in children. This means a risk of retardation for millions of children. A multi-billion dollar enterprise, this substance is said to be “refined” from “natural” substances. Like other “refined” substances, it represents a health threat to the general public. No long term studies have been performed to evaluate the physiological effects of this substance, yet the public is lead to believe it is absolutely safe. Technically, the chemical is called aspartame, and it was once on a Pentagon list of biowarfare chemicals submitted to Congress. [1] Aspartame is in over 4,000 products worldwide and is consumed by over 200 million people in the United States alone. What follows is a skeletal examination of the chronology related to aspartame. A more detailed chronology is given later in this chapter based on information provided to us by the Aspartame Consumer Safety Network.

Aspartame is produced by G.D. Searle Company, founded in 1888 and located in Skokie, Illinois. Searle is now owned by others. It is about 200 times sweeter than the refined sugar that it is meant to replace, and it is known to erode intelligence and affect short-term memory. It is essentially a chemical weapon designed to impact populations en masse. It is an rDNA derivative made from two amino acids, L-phenylalanine, L-aspartic acid and methanol. Originally discovered during a search for an ulcer drug in 1966, it was “approved” by the FDA in 1974 as a “food additive”.

Approval was followed by a retraction based on demonstrated public concern over the fact that the substance produced brain tumors in rats. According to the 1974 FDA task force set up to examine aspartame and G.D.Searle, “we have uncovered serious deficiencies in Searles operations and practices, which undermine the basis for reliance on Searle’s integrity in conducting high quality animal research to accurately determine the toxic potential of its products.” The task force report concluded with the recommendation that G.D. Searle should face a Grand Jury “to identify more particularly the nature of the violations, and to identify all those responsible.” [2]

In 1976, an FDA “task force” brought into question all of G.D. Searle’s aspartame testing procedures conducted between 1967 and 1975. The final FDA report noted faulty and fraudulent product testing, knowingly misrepresented product testing, knowingly misrepresented findings, and instances of irrelevant animal research. In other word, illegal criminal activity. Understandably scared, Searle officials sought to suppress the FDA findings and obstruct justice. They turned to Nixon and Ford administration operative Donald Rumsfeld and elected him “chairman of the Searle organization.” In 1977, the Wall Street Journal detailed the fact that Rumsfeld made efforts to “mend fences” by asking “what Searle could do” in the face of the changes. Also in 1977, Dr. Adrian Gross, a pathologist working for the FDA, uncovered evidence that G.D.Searle might have committed criminal fraud in withholding adverse data on aspartame. [3]

The FDA requested that U.S. Attorney Samuel Skinner be hired to investigate Searle’s aspartame testing procedures in January 1977. Samuel Skinner was the federal prosecutor responsible for convincing the Grand Jury to investigate whether Searle willfully and criminally withheld data that cast doubt on the safety of aspartame. In February 1977, Skinner met with Searle attorneys at the Chicago law firm of Sidney & Austin. Suddenly, newly elected President Carter announced that Skinner would not remain in office, and Skinner thereafter announced that he would be hired by Sidney & Austin. Obviously, Skinner then had to recuse himself from the Searle prosecution. The case was taken over by US Attorney William Conlon, who essentially sat on the case, despite complaints from the Justice Department, which was urging that a grand jury be convened to prosecute Searle Company for falsifying Nutra-Sweet test data. Failing to perform his duty, Conlon also joined Searle’s law firm in January 1979.

Skinner’s defection from the FDA might have been prompted by the results of the review of the Searle studies. David Hattan, deputy director of the FDA Division of Toxicological Review and Evaluation, concedes that anyone reading the original FDA investigation reports is likely to be “shocked” by what they reveal. He says that the ensuing review of the Searle studies, in which he was involved from the time of his arrival in 1978, was one of the most thorough in the agency’s history. It included an unprecedented hearing before a public board of inquiry composed of experts from outside the agency. Arthur Hayes, Jr., then Commissioner of the FDA appointed by Reagan, agreed with Searle and the FDA’s Bureau of Foods (now the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition) that “an appropriate analysis of the data showed no significant increases in tumor incidence in rats exposed to aspartame or DKP, one of the breakdown products of aspartame. The board of inquiry rejected concerns that aspartame’s components could cause neurological damage.[4]

In 1981, under pressure from the soft drink lobby, FDA Commissioner Hayes approved the initial use of aspartame in dry foods and as a tabletop sweetener, discounting public complaints as anecdotal and ignoring three FDA scientists.[5] who voiced the fact that there were serious questions concerning brain tumor tests after having done an in-house study. Hayes was widely profiled as a man who believed that approval for new drugs and additives was “too slow” because “the FDA demanded too much information.” Hayes also ignored the fact that the biased scientific studies paid for by Searle were faulty.[6] After leaving the FDA, Hayes took the post of senior medical consultant for the public relations firm retained by Searle..[7] A subsequent inquiry “found no impropriety”.

In July 1983 it was approved for use in soft drinks in the United States, followed three months later by approval in Britain by the Ministry of Agriculture. All this was done despite the fact that the Department of Defense knew that aspartame was neurotoxic and harmful to human health. These facts were deliberately suppressed by the government. It is also interesting that in 1981 FDA scientist Dr. Robert Condon, in an internal government document, said “I do not concur that aspartame has been shown to be safe with respect to the induction of brain tumors.” All safety was thrown aside because of pressure from Searle. Considering the connections the drug companies have to the medical and intelligence community, it would not be surprising that there were other factors involved in the pressure to adopt aspartame into the diet of the population.

In 1984, the Arizona Department of Health began testing soft drinks to ascertain the level of toxic deterioration by-products in soft drinks. It was determined that soft drinks stored in elevated temperatures promoted more rapid deterioration of aspartame into poisonous methyl alcohol (methanol). The FDA decided to ignore these results. Public complaints about the effects of aspartame began to come in. People complained of headaches, dizziness, vomiting, nausea, blurred vision, seizures, convulsions and a host of other reactions to aspartame.

Also in 1984, the Centers for Disease Control made the fraudulent announcement that “no serious, widespread” side effects of aspartame had been found. It was an outright lie, and this announcement was quickly followed by another from PepsiCo that it was dropping saccharin and adopting aspartame as the sweetener it all its diet drinks. Others followed suit, despite the January 1984 broadcast on CBS Nightly News where the chief scientist for the FDA task force investigating Searle publicly stated that Searle company officials made “deliberate decisions” to cloak aspartame’s toxic effects.

When a human consumes “Nutra-Sweet”, it breaks down above 85° not only into its constituent amino acids, but into methanol, which further breaks down into formaldehyde, which is carcinogenic[8] and very toxic, as well as formic acid and a brain tumor agent called diketopiperazine (DKP). In a meek attempt to ward off further public inquiry, the FDA in 1984 announced that “no evidence has been found to establish that aspartame’s methanol by-product reaches toxic levels”. This was a direct lie, since Medical World News reported in 1978, six years earlier, than the methanol content of aspartame is 1,000 times greater than most foods under FDA control. Furthermore, the methanol in aspartame is “free methanol”, which is never found in nature. Methanol in nature is always accompanied by ethanol and other compounds which mitigate the methanol when introduced into the body.

In 1985, Searle Company was bought by Monsanto, the maker of other insidious substances that manage to find their way into human food, including Bovine Growth Hormone (BGH). Senator Metzenbaum, commenting on the FDA relative to the aspartame issue in 1985 said, “the FDA is content to have Searle conduct all safety tests on aspartame. That’s absurd.”

Supreme Court Collusion in Aspartame Coverup Clarence Thomas Former Monsanto Lawyer

In 1986, the Washington Post reported that the Supreme Court refused to consider arguments that the FDA had not followed proper procedures in approving aspartame, despite arguments that the product “may cause brain damage.” (Supreme Court obstructing Justice). Since Bush-nominated Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
is a former attorney for Monsanto [9],it is unlikely that hundreds of millions of people will find redress. There are also indications of ties between Monsanto and elements in the CIA.

University of Illinois Fraudulent Study on Aspartame

In August of 1987, the University of Illinois, a recipient of funding from Monsanto, issued a study “exonerating aspartame of causing seizures in laboratory animals.” The fact that they were paid by Monsanto automatically invalidates the results. US Senate hearings in 1987 showed that G.D.Searle used “psychological strategy” to get regulators at the FDA “into a yes-saying habit” to “bring them into a subconscious spirit of participation.” .[10] More than half of 69 medical researchers polled by the FDA in 1987 said they were concerned about aspartame’s safety.[11]

FDA Ignores Complaints of Neurological Symptoms

In 1989, the FDA received over 4,000 complaints from people who described adverse reactions. Because the FDA conveniently lists aspartame as a “food additive”, it removes the legal requirement for adverse effect reporting to any Federal agency and the necessity for safety monitoring processes. Research also indicates that aspartame, when combined with glutamine products (such as MSG, widely used in foods) increase the likelihood of brain damage occurring in children.[12]

Aspartame Affecting Airline Pilots

Some of the more interesting developments in 1989 surfaced in the Palm Beach Post on October 14th, where an article by Dr. H.J. Robert described several recent aircraft accidents involving confusion and aberrant pilot behavior caused by ingestion of products containing aspartame.[13] Soft drink makers were notified of this problem in 1991. It is interesting to note that after Samuel Skinner left Sidney & Austin, Searle’s law firm, he was appointed Secretary of Transportation. Hence, he was in charge of the FAA, just in time to head off complaints from pilots affected by aspartame. His wife was employed by Sidney & Austin. Later as George Bush’s Chief of Staff in 1991, during the Gulf War, he was in a position to head off all inquiries relative to aspartame, no matter where they were directed - to the FDA, FAA or Department of Defense. This constitutes criminal negligence and racketeering. George Bush, of course, was an ex-director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

British News: “Nutrasweet Tests Faked”

On July 20, 1990, an article in the national British newspaper The Guardian, entitled “NutraSweet test results ‘faked’”, revealed that the British government had finally been persuaded to review the safety of aspartame after “receiving a dossier of evidence highlighting its potential dangers.” According to The Guardian, the dossier alleged that laboratory tests were falsified, tumors were removed from laboratory animals and animals were ‘restored to life’ in laboratory records.[14] The dossier against NutraSweet was compiled by Erik Millstone, a lecturer at the Science Policy Research Unit at Sussex University and author of two books on food additives. It was based on thousands of pages of evidence, much of which was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. The COT, Committee on Toxicity, was at the time looking into consumption of artificial sweeteners and did not possess the key documents covering alleged mishandling of the safety tests which Millstone was asked to provide.

The British Ministry of Agriculture and Department of Health have never revealed the evidence upon which approval was given in England for the distribution of aspartame, maintaining that “these are matters of commercial confidence.” The British government does not testing of its own but relies on safety tests provided by the manufacturer, which of course constitutes a conflict of interest. The 1990 article quoted the British Department of Health as saying “NutraSweet is not a health hazard on the available evidence, but people do suffer ‘ideosyncratic reactions’ to food additives.” Interestingly, it was pointed out that three out of 14 members of the Committee on Toxicity have direct or indirect links with the artificial sweetener industry, according to David Clark, the Labour Party Agriculture spokeman, who requested a Parliamentary Answer to address questions of conflict of interest. Aspartame is also sold in England under the product name “Canderel.” In 1990, the market for aspartame in England was estimated at £800 million.

Dosing of the Military in the Gulf War

During the 1991 Gulf War, all military personnel were provided free supplies of aspartame-laced soft drinks together with experimental vaccines, nerve gas antidotes and personal insecticides. They were also treated to direct biochemical warfare compounds. The result is Gulf War Syndrome, which is communicable and deadly, and 50,000 military personnel and their dependents are wasting away before our eyes. Criminal negligence? Of course. Criminal conspiracy? Yes. Genocide? Probably - we’re waiting to see.

Aspartame Alters Brain Chemicals That Affect Behavior

Independent tests on animals have shown that aspartame alters brain chemicals that also affect behavior. The chemical nature of aspartame was also shown to defeat its own alleged “purpose” as a “diet aid”, since high doses instill a craving for calorie-laden carbohydrates. Then, the aspartame-carbohydrate combination further increases the effect of aspartame on the brain.[15]

Fraudulent Claims of Aspartame as a “Diet Aid”

Interestingly, even the American Cancer Society confirmed that users of artificial sweeteners gained more weight than those who didn’t use the products, further undermining the supposed “purpose” for the existence of aspartame in the food.[16] Haven’t we heard this kind of criminal fraud before?

The major selling point of aspartame is as a diet aid, and it has been demonstrated that the use of this product actually causes people to consume more food. Normally, when a significant quantity of carbohydrate are consumed, serotonin levels rise in the brain. This is manifested as a relaxed feeling after a meal. When aspartame is ingested with carbohydrates, such as having a sandwich with a diet drink, aspartame causes the brain to cease production of serotonin, meaning that the feeling of having had enough never materializes. You then eat more foods, many containing aspartame, and the cycle continues. Monsanto’s profit from its NutraSweet Division was $993 million in 1990.

Governments Continue Suppression and Coverup on Aspartame

In 1991, the National Institutes of Health.[17] listed 167 symptoms and reasons to avoid the use of aspartame , but today it is a multi-million dollar business that contributes to the degeneration of the human population, as well as the deliberate suppression of overall intelligence, short-term memory[18] and the added contribution as a carcinogenic environmental co-factor. The FDA and the Centers for Disease Control continue to receive a stream of complaints from the population about aspartame It is the only chemical warfare weapon available in mass quantities (should keep the cone-heads happy) on the grocery shelf and promoted in the media. It has also been indicated that women with an intolerance for phenylalinine, one of the components of aspartame, may give birth to infants with as much as a 15% drop in intelligence level if they habitually consume products containing this dangerous substance.[19]

FAA Collusion in Suppression of Facts on Aspartame

The March 1995 issue of The Pacific Flyer published a pro-aspartame article in which it stated, “the Federal Aviation Administration conducted its own cognitive research and, according to experts, found no contraindications that would prevent pilots, or anyone, from ingesting aspartame.” This flies in the face of consistent reports from pilots who maintain they have suffered severe and dangerous repercussions in the air after drinking soft drinks containing aspartame. Virtually every time, symptoms disappeared when aspartame-laced drinks were discontinued.[20] Over 600 pilots have reported this problem.

FDA “Findings” on Aspartame Remain Based on Faked Tests

So, the faked Searle tests remain. The FDA bases its findings on the faked Searle tests, and the Journal of the American Medical Association, examining the FDA findings, based on the faked Searle tests, announced “the consumption of aspartame poses no health risk for most people.” Searle officials argue that the use of aspartame as an artificial sweetener “has been officially approved not only by the FDA, but by foreign regulatory agencies and the World Health Organization” - based on Searle-sponsored aspartame research, not independently conducted tests.

Symptoms of Aspartame Intoxication: Minimal to Severe

The symptoms of aspartame intoxication include severe headaches, nausea, vertigo, insomina, loss of control of limbs, blurred vision, blindness, memory loss, slurred speech, mild to severe depression often reaching suicidal levels, hyperactivity, gastrointestinal disorders, seizures, skin lesions, rashes, anxiety attacks, muscle and joint pain, numbness, mood changes, loss of energy, menstrual cramps out of cycle, hearing loss or ringing in the ears, loss or change of taste, and symptoms similar to those in a heart attack. In addition, aspartic acid chelates (combines) with chromium - which is a necessary element for proper operation of the thyroid gland. People who consume large quantities of aspartame may end up with a false diagnosis of Graves disease and suffer allopathic irradiation of their thyroid gland for no reason. Complaints about aspartame represent 80-85% of all food complaints registered with the FDA. More than 6,000 complaints have been made concerning the effects of aspartame. Thirty independent doctors and scientists have conducted research on the adverse effects of aspartame or have compiled supporting data against its use.The use of NutraSweet® or Equal® should be seriously curtailed or stopped.

Aspartame Use Part of Planetary Biomedical Genocide

The fact that tons of aspartame is pumped into the world population each year, knowingly and deliberately, especially with the historical and documented record of fraud and misrepresentation, constitutes a conspiracy of the highest order, as well as criminal negligence. The rewards of continued use are increased profits for the medical and pharmaceutical industries and chemical companies who produce aspartame and treat people suffering from the effect of it. Aspartame is the only biochemical warfare product on grocery shelves. And, the band plays on ….

Source

GFCF Diet Shows Promise as Natural Treatment for Autism

Autism is a developmental disorder that appears during the first three years of life. It is classified as a neurological disorder that affects social skills and interaction. The number of children diagnosed with autism has been on the rise. The Autism Society of American reports that autism is growing at a rate of 10-17% per year. One out of every 150 boys will be diagnosed with autism; the number is slightly less for girls. Although there is no cure for autism dietary changes can make a difference in functioning of an autistic individual. Research and anecdotal evidence has shown improvements when these individuals follow a gluten-free and casein-free diet.

Gluten and casein are proteins that are naturally occurring in foods that are a staple of the diets of most people. Gluten is found in wheat, barley, and rye. Casein is found in dairy products. In addition to these whole foods, gluten and casein are often found in many processed foods. Careful reading of ingredient lists is necessary as well as familiarity of the other names that gluten and casein can be "hidden" as, such as natural flavorings, curds, caseinate, spices, lactose, and others. The prevalence of these proteins makes it difficult to avoid them but there are numerous manufacturers that produce products using soy, potato, quinoa, and other substitutes.

Research done at the Autism Research Unit at the University of Sunderland in the U.K. has shown behavioral improvement in autistic children after five months of being on a gluten-free and casein-free diet. The researchers hypothesized that autism is a result of incomplete breakdown and increased absorption of proteins in gluten and casein. This irregularity results in changes to neurological processes which accounts for autism symptoms. Direct observation, parental questionnaires, and teacher questionnaires all showed an improvement in these children in numerous behavior areas.

Changing to a gluten-free and casein-free diet is ideally done with the help of a healthcare provider and nutritionist. Healthcare providers who are familiar with autistic treatments, both conventional and alternative, can be found through the "Defeat Autism Now" (DAN) program. Nutritionists can provide listings of "hidden" gluten and casein as well as advise parents on what food their children can eat including rice, potatoes, buckwheat flour, quinoa, soy, fruits, vegetables, sorghum, tapioca, and teff among others.

There is more research that needs to be done to truly prove the benefits of a gluten-free, casein-free diet but preliminary research and anecdotal evidence seem promising.

Sources:

A Gluten-Free Diet as an Intervention for Autism and Associated Spectrum Disorders: Preliminary Findings, (http://aut.sagepub.com/cgi/content/...)

Autism Society of America, (http://www.autism-society.org/site/...)

Defeat Autism Now!, (http://www.autismwebsite.com/practi...)

The Gluten-Free and Casein-Free Diet, (www.gfcf.com)

Depression may Cause Heart Disease and Related Death

Depression may Cause Heart Disease and Related Death

Previous research has already suggested that there a two-directional link between depression and health conditions of the heart. A recent study published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology has added to the body of evidence, having found that being depressed could increase the likelihood that a person gets hit or killed by heart disease.

Details of Study

The study team, comprising members from the Columbia University Medical Center in New York, University of California, Berkeley, Harvard Medical School in Boston, as well as the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, had followed 63,469 women who were part of the Nurses' Health Study; the study subjects were free from cardiovascular disease at the start of the exercise.

Questionnaires were used in 1992, 1996 and 2000 to obtain information on symptoms of depression, while data on antidepressant use was collected in 1996 and 2000. Outcomes looked at were sudden cardiac death, fatal coronary heart disease, and nonfatal myocardial infarction.

Findings of Study

The Mental Health Index (MHI-5) was used to assess the women's symptoms in 1992, and the scale predicted that 7.9% of them had clinical depression. The researchers also found that symptoms of depression were associated with events of coronary heart disease. After controlling for other risk factors for the condition, it was found that those with such symptoms had 49% higher risk of fatal coronary heart disease.

In post-1996 models, the study team used a proxy variable for clinical depression, which consisted of severe depressive symptoms and / or the use of antidepressants, and they found that depressed women had 133% higher risk of sudden cardiac death. This risk could be mainly attributed to the relationship between the use of antidepressants and sudden cardiac death (234% higher risk).

The latter finding is somewhat of a surprise. There are two main possibilities for it - that the use of antidepressants was indicative of women who suffered the worst bouts of depression, which would make sense, or that antidepressants could themselves be contributing to heart problems, which would be bad news. This is especially since antidepressants already have a number of other known side effects. More research into this area will be needed.

William Whang, MD, the leader of the study, said that his team's findings add to growing research which shows depression as an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease, on top of already well-established ones like smoking, hypertension and unhealthy cholesterol levels. And, in fact, the Nurses' Health Study, which covered mainly white females, may understate the risk. "If anything, the impact in African-American women is probably greater," he said. According to him, future research should check out whether proper treatment of depression would lower the risk of negative heart outcomes.

Other Research

The same applies to males too, according to a study recently presented at the American Psychosomatic Society's annual meeting. In that study, information on over 1,200 male twins who had been in the US military during the Vietnam War was used. The men were surveyed on various health issues, including depression, in 1992 and then again in 2005. The researchers found that men who were depressed in 1992 had twice the risk of getting heart disease in the following years, as compared to those who did not suffer from the condition.

Jeffrey F Scherrer, PhD, a research assistant professor of psychiatry at the Washington University School of Medicine and the St. Louis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, summed up his team's research when he said: "Based on our findings, we can say that after adjusting for other risk factors, depression remains a significant predictor of heart disease."

The Depression-Heart Disease Link

After suffering a serious ailment like a heart attack or a stroke, it is easy to slump into a period of depression. This is especially so if the patient is required to make certain drastic changes to his lifestyle and dietary habits. No more smoking, drinking, or eating their favorite foods, for example. Some may even suffer from loss of vital bodily functions, due to partial or full paralysis. Under such circumstances, it is natural to feel down.

But how does depression affect heart health? In the first study, it had been discovered that women who had worse symptoms of depression had a higher likelihood of also having other risk factors for heart disease. In addition, emotional stressors such as depression could cause elevated resting heart rates, making the heart work harder.

Further, depressed persons are more likely to neglect their own health and wellbeing. This may include not eating properly, failing to exercise, and not resting well.

And we cannot rule out the possibility of a vicious cycle taking place, whereby heart disease patients fall into depressive states and then become more likely to suffer worsening heart outcomes. It is thus very important that the depression-heart health link be taken seriously.

Indeed, the American Heart Association had recently made the recommendation that persons who suffer from heart disease undergo regular checks for depression. This is something which you and your loved ones should take note of, and heart patients should be carefully observed for any possible symptoms of depression.

References

Whang W et al. Depression and Risk of Sudden Cardiac Death and Coronary Heart Disease in Women. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2009;53:950-958.

More evidence that depression is hard on the heart (http://www.newsweek.com/id/188508)

Depression Increases Risk For Heart Disease More Than Genetics Or Environment (http://www.sciencedaily.com/release...)

Red and processed meats lower life expectancy

Red and processed meats lower life expectancy

Source

You increase your chances of dying early – and developing cancer – if there’s too much red meat and processed meats in your diet, a new study has found. And if you eat more white meat, you stand a better chance of a longer, and illness-free, life.

Researchers from the National Cancer Institute in Rockville, Maryland reckon that 11 per cent of deaths in men and 16 per cent in women are dying prematurely because they are eating too much red meat or processed meats.

In a survey of 47,976 men and 23.276 women, those in the top fifth of red meat eaters – those who daily ate 62.5 grams per 1000 calories – were far more likely to die than those in the bottom fifth, who ate 22.6 grams per 1000 calories.

Those in the top fifth who could reduce their intake to that of the bottom fifth could reduce their chances of dying from any cause by 11 per cent if male and 16 per cent if female.

Substituting red meat for white was just as good as avoiding meat altogether, the researchers found. In fact, those who had a largely white-meat diet reduced their chances of dying from any disease.

(Source: Archives of Internal Medicine, 2009; 169: 562).

Stroke victims helped by music

Stroke victims helped by music
25 March 2009

There’s new hope for victims of stroke this week. Researchers have found that listening to music can improve their seeing abilities.

Most stroke victims suffer a condition known as ‘visual neglect’, where they just stare without properly focussing on an object.

But researchers from Imperial College London have found that stroke victims who listen to pleasant music can improve their ability to see and focus.

The research team tested three patients with visual neglect following a stroke who all listened to music they liked, music they didn’t like and silence. While listening to music they liked, patients were reporting a 65 per cent improvement in their ability to see, and only a 15 per cent improvement when they listened to music they didn’t like.

All three could see coloured shapes and red lights, which they couldn’t see before, while they listened to pleasant music. The researchers think that music generates positive emotions, which may improve the brain’s signals.

(Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, March 23, 2009; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0811681106).

Source

Many Indian Herbal Medicines Found to Contain Lead, Mercury or Arsenic

Many Indian Herbal Medicines Found to Contain Lead, Mercury or Arsenic

Approximately one in five Indian herbal medicines sold over the Internet contains dangerously high levels of arsenic, lead or mercury, according to a study conducted by researchers from Boston University and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Traditional Indian herbal medicine, known as Ayurvedic medicine, has become increasingly popular in the Western world over the last few years. Research has suggested that traditional Indian herbal techniques can be helpful in treating health problems including high blood pressure, high cholesterol and diabetes.

"But the key thing is we need to separate out what's helpful and ... what needs to be looked at and perhaps set aside," lead researcher Robert Saper said. "Our first priority must be the safety of the public. Herbs and supplements with high levels of lead, mercury and arsenic should not be available for sale on the Internet or elsewhere."

Saper and colleagues conducted an Internet search for Ayurvedic medicines, and purchased a random 230 out of the 673 products that turned up. They ended up receiving 193 of these, which they analyzed for levels of toxic metals.

The researchers found that 20.7 percent of the medicines tested contained toxic metals, and every one of these contained at least one such metal in quantities higher than the maximum recommended daily intake - in some cases, up to 10,000 times higher.

One tradition within Ayurvedic medicine, known as "rasa shastra," involves mixing herbs with metals, minerals and gems. Rasa shastra medicines were more than 100 percent more likely to contain toxic metals than medicines with herbs alone, and also tended to have higher concentrations of mercury and lead. While products manufactured in the United States and India were equally likely to contain toxic metals - 21.7 percent and 19.5 percent, respectively - 95 percent of the potentially toxic products were purchased from U.S. Web sites.

Sources for this story include: news.bbc.co.uk.

Hospitals Are Breeding Grounds for Superbugs

Hospitals Are Breeding Grounds for Superbugs

Do you know what the two most dangerous objects in a hospital are? A doctor's necktie and a doctor's cell phone! It's true: Neckties and cell phones harbor superbugs such as MRSA. This has been proven time and time again by numerous studies you can find written up in the popular press (http://health.usnews.com/articles/h...).

On the pharmaceutical side, superbugs are also caused by the rampant abuse of antibiotics by doctors, who seem to prescribe them for everything under the sun -- including those things that are completely unaffected by antibiotics such as viral infections.

Notably, all these objects -- neckties, mobile phones and antibiotics -- are only introduced to patients through the presence of a doctor, and that effectively makes doctors the single most dangerous thing in any hospital.

Of course, doctors can be extremely useful at times, especially in the emergency room where some kid who fell off the roof while filming a YouTube stunt needs to have his ankles reattached. But outside the realm of urgent care, doctors tend to spread disease a lot more than they spread health.

But don't take my word for it: Here's what others have to say on the subject of superbugs and doctors:

Authors' Quotes on Superbugs and Doctors
Below, you'll find selected quotes from noted authors on the subject of Superbugs and Doctors. Feel free to quote these in your own work provided you give proper credit to both the original author quoted here and this NaturalNews page.

Superbugs are not caped, crime-fighting bacteria found in comic books. They are antibiotic-resistant bacteria that are causing havoc in today's medical system. Why? Because antibiotics cannot kill these superbugs. Antibiotic-resistant infections kill as many as 8,000 patients each year in Canada and cost the health-care system at least $100 million annually.
- Probiotic Rescue: How You can use Probiotics to Fight Cholesterol, Cancer, Superbugs, Digestive Complaints and More by Allison Tannis
- Available on Amazon.com

The bugs that were "successfully" subdued with antibiotics for decades are now taking revenge by producing what is known as "antibiotic-resistant organisms," that is, superbugs that defy antibiotic treatment. Some 90,000 Americans suffer potentially deadly infections each year from a drug-resistant "staph superbug." According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), more people now die from these superbugs than from AIDS diseases. Recent nationwide outbreaks of infections caused by superbugs killed teenagers in U.S.

Source

Worst Food Additives: Causes Dangers Of Heart Disease And Cancer

Worst Food Additives: Causes Dangers Of Heart Disease And Cancer

Many foods could be sabotaging your plan for healthy eating
Chemicals create mutations through chromosome damage, interfere with immune system function, and have been shown to cause a multitude of serious health conditions. Even if all of the food additives used in our foods were safe individually, rarely does any processed / convenience food have only one additive in it. And nobody knows the effects of the many different additives when they are assembled together in a single product. There are literally thousands of various and potentially dangerous combinations.

Have you noticed that the product labels on many foods today seem to be an undecipherable code of scientific mystery words? That’s because more and more manufacturers are opting to use dangerous preservatives, sprays, and chemicals to increase the shelf life of their products and to enhance taste, texture and visual appeal; all at the cost of our nutritional needs.

Many natural ingredients in processed foods are being replaced with their “chemical taste-alikes” to cut costs. So, not only are we bombarded with the toxic chemicals that are in our carpeting, upholstery, cleaning products, etc., we now have to deal with them in the foods we ingest.

Worst Food Additives
Here is a list of some of the worst food additives. Check food labels to make
sure that what you buy does not contain these ingredients.

BHT, legal in the U.S. but banned in England, is associated with liver and kidney damage, behavioral problems, infertility, weakened immune system, birth defects and cancer.

Artificial coloring - contribute to hyperactivity in children; may contribute to learning and visual disorders, nerve damage; may be carcinogenic.

Aspartame and all artificial sweeteners - may cause central nervous system damage, menstrual difficulties, may affect brain and growth development in unborn fetus. Dangerous excitotoxins. Artificial sweeteners: aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal), sucralose (Splenda), neotame, saccharin (Sweet ‘N Low), acesulfame-k )Sunette, Sweet-n-Safe, Sweet One)

Brominated vegetable oil - linked to major organ system damage, birth defects, growth problems; considered unsafe by the FDA, can still lawfully be used unless further action is taken by the FDA . (used in fruit juices to give them a long shelf life)

Carrageenan - stabilizer and thickening agent; linked to toxic hazards, including ulcers and cancer; In addition to suppressing immune function, carrageenan causes intestinal ulcers and inflammatory bowel disease in animals and some research indicates that carrageenan is associated with causing cancer in humans. (This is what researchers use when they want to create cancer cells for laboratory experiments)

Partially Hydrogenated vegetable oils - associated with heart disease, breast and colon cancer, atherosclerosis, elevated cholesterol, depressed immune system, allergies.

Nitrates - form powerful cancer-causing agents in stomach; can cause death; considered dangerous by FDA but not banned because they prevent botulism.

MSG - may cause headaches, itching, nausea, nervous system and reproductive disorders, high blood pressure; pregnant, lactating mothers, infants, small children should avoid MSG; allergic reactions common; may be hidden in infant formula, low fat milk, candy, chewing gum, drinks, over-the-counter medications.(MSG - A dangerous excitotoxin)

Neotame - similar to aspartame, but potentially more toxic; awaiting approval. A dangerous excitotoxin.

Olestra - causes gastrointestinal irritation, reduces carotenoids and fat soluble vitamins in the body.

Potassium bromate - can cause nervous system, kidney disorders, gastrointestinal upset; may be carcinogenic.

Saccharin - delisted as a carcinogen in 1997, however, studies still show that saccharin causes cancer. A dangerous excitotoxin

Sucralose (Splenda)
Tests reveal it can cause up to 40% shrinkage of the thymus gland. It also causes swelling of the kidneys and liver, and liver calcification. Splenda has basically been chlorinated. 3 hydroxyl groups (atoms composed of hydrogen and oxygen) are selectively removed and replaced with 3 atoms of chlorine. The sugar molecule has now been transformed into a chlorocarbon—a chemical agent that has no place in the human diet.

Sulfites - destroys vitamin B1; small amounts may cause asthma, anaphylactic shock; dangerous for asthma, allergy sufferers; has caused deaths; banned on fresh fruits and vegetables, except potatoes.

Sweet 'N Low - contains saccharin. A dangerous excitotoxin.

If the list of ingredients on a package label is long, there are probably a lot of chemical additives in the product, and you're risking your health by eating it.

Children
In children, the organs responsible for detoxifying, or removing harmful substances, are not as effective as those of adults. Unfortunately in many families, children tend to consume more heavily processed foods than adults, (in various snack foods, cookies, cereals, chips, boxed convenience lunches) so these additives have a disproportionately higher impact on them. A parent’s job of providing nutritious foods is made even harder because of the wide array of brightly packaged, tasty, quick and easy foods that are intensely marketed and widely available. Prepared foods and mixes offer convenience, but remember with convenience comes the use of at least some of the 3000 various food additives.

Read Ingredient Labels
Start reading labels, and chose products that are labeled "preservative-free." Scrutinize convenience, or pre-packaged products that claim "no added preservatives." They may nevertheless contain ingredients that were already preserved prior to inclusion in the final product. For example, almost all lard, used in baked goods, is treated with BHA or BHT.

Eating healthy may require some lifestyle adjustments. You’ll probably have to shop more often because all-natural foods will spoil sooner. Most foods are not meant to last months and months. Many people erroneously consider it completely normal to keep their pantry shelves and freezers full of a wide array of ready to eat food choices. Just because you’ve always done it this way doesn’t make it the best choice for your family. Fresh food is plentiful in America—do you really need to re-create an unhealthy, mini grocery store in your kitchen for the sake of convenience?

Eliminate Toxins From Your Foods
You can eliminate many of these toxins from your life by changing how you have choose to manage your meals. Make the time to start cooking foods from scratch. Eat raw fruits and veggies instead of processed snack foods. DON’T BUY CONVENIENCE “SIDE-DISH” MIXES! If you want a delicious rice dish—cook rice (preferably brown rice) in some broth and flavor it with seasonings! Most people don’t believe that it can actually be less expensive to eat more natural, but it’s true. Try it. Get back to eating the natural foods our bodies were intended to eat.

Cravings:
High doses of sugar, salt, and trans fat, which are cheap fillers in convenience foods, cause cravings because they disrupt the brain’s natural chemical balance. The more processed foods you eat, the more you crave them...and the vicious cycle continues. Natural hunger becomes distorted when the body’s chemical balance is upset. Supplying the necessary substances required for chemical balance is the key to overcoming unhealthy cravings. Adding supplements to your diet can be very effective in both removing toxins as well as helping to restore chemical balances.

It’s absolutely imperative that you try to limit processed and pre-packaged foods, because unless you’re eating organic, you may still be exposed to dangerous toxins on the foods you probably consider to be the most healthy! Organic packaged and processed foods have little or no added synthetic colors or preservatives, and of course, organic fruits and vegetables are always your best choice.

Non-organic produce is sometimes exposed to various forms of detrimental processes. For example, sulfur is used to keep dried fruit fresh, formaldehyde is added to disinfect frozen vegetables, and potatoes are coated with maleic hydrazide to inhibit their natural “sprouting” tendencies. Sodium nitrate, a suspected cause of stomach cancer, is used as a preservative for bacon, sausage, ham, and bologna. Even some bagged lettuce is sprayed to extend it's shelf life. Do you like ice cream? You have carboxymethylcellulose, to thank for that super creamy, smooth texture. It has produced tumors in 80% of rats injected with this chemical “stabilizer”. Not even bottled fruit juices can escape profit driven chemical interference. Brominated oils are added to bottled juice to maintain a look of freshness even after months of storage. Aluminum compounds, which are added to baking powder, aspirin, antacids, beer, and table salt, have been discovered in high concentrations in the brain of Alzheimer’s patients.

It's nearly impossible to eat completely "toxin free", so just do the best you can...
Unfortunately, it’s not realistic to expect to totally eliminate all toxins from the foods we eat...not unless you live apart from normal society and raise all your own food! But you can at least try to minimize them whenever possible. About the only time we can consistently assure healthy choices is by the foods we prepare in our homes.

Restaurant food is typically packed with artificial, processed ingredients. Make the meals you prepare at home the one place you know you are doing the right thing for your family.

How can you counteract the damaging effects of preservatives, additives and chemicals?
Many nutrients have the ability to counteract the damaging effects of toxic substances, so one of the best defenses for maintaining good health in our “toxin filled” society is by adding supplements to your daily routine.

Fulvic has the power to attach itself to harmful toxins and flush them from the body. In addition, when you supply your body with proper co-factors, like the ones in Super Multi Liquid Vitamins, you will significantly increase the absorption of the nutrients in your food.

Right now your body’s resources are waging a daily battle against preservatives, additives, toxins, and chemicals. Help protect yourself against disease with products and lifestyle choices that support and enhance natural immune system function to its fullest capacity. With some thoughtful changes you can create lasting health, energy, and well-being for your family.

Source

Cell Phone Health Dangers

Cell phone health dangers

BACKGROUND: Cell phones are everywhere. It is estimated that more than 90 percent of the Western world uses cell phones. Some recent estimates show that more than 3 billion people have cell phones worldwide. As the technology becomes cheaper and more accessible, its usage will likely increase among adults and children. While the device is undoubtedly convenient, several new studies show that cell phones may be harmful.


CANCER LINK? A recent study published in the Journal of Epidemiology found heavy cell phone users were subject to a higher risk of benign and malignant tumors of the salivary gland. Those who used a cell phone heavily on the side of the head where the tumor developed were found to have an increased risk of about 50 percent for developing a tumor of the main salivary gland compared to those who did not use cell phones.


FERTILITY PROBLEMS: A study conducted by researchers at the Cleveland Clinic found cell phone use may be linked to infertility problems. Men who used their cell phones for more than four hours per day had the lowest quality of sperm.


SKIN ISSUES: Nickel allergy is common, and people who are allergic to nickel may get a rash on their cheek or ear if they spend a lot of time talking on a cell phone containing nickel. They might also get a rash on their fingers if they send lots of text messages, according to the British Association of Dermatologists. Not all cell phones contain nickel. Recently, researchers at Brown University tested 22 wireless communication devices and found 10 of them contained nickel.


AFFECTING SLEEP: Researchers at Loughborough University in England found that after a 30-minute exposure to cell phone signals in talk mode, people took nearly twice as long to fall asleep as they did when the phone had been off or in standby mode. The scientists believe the effect probably reflects the time it takes the brain to relax after being agitated by the phone's electrical field.


LIMITING USAGE: Experts from the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute suggest limiting cell phone exposure. Some of their tips include not allowing children to use a cell phone, except for emergencies. The developing organs of a fetus or child are the most likely to be sensitive to any possible effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields. They also suggest keeping your cell phone away from your body as much as possible, avoiding using your cell phones in places like on a bus where you can passively expose others to your phone's electromagnetic field and switching sides regularly while communicating on your cell phone to spread out your exposure.

* Share this:
* Del.icio.us
* Facebook
* Reddit
* StumbleUpon
* Digg
* Google
* Propeller
* Seed Newsvine

2 Comments on this Story
Post a comment (+)
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them; they are not reflective of the views or opinions of Barrington Broadcasting, KRCG, its directors or employees. If you believe a comment violates the Barrington Terms of Use, please report it here.
cell phones

Posted by messenger messenger, messenger - Tuesday, March 10, 2009 at 5:27 a.m.

Hearing aid disruption is the least of our problems.

Our government intelligence agencies are using the cell phone network as well as other signal transmitters to experiment on and tap into people brains and nervous systems, disrupting their thinking and/or read their minds REMOTELY. They can turn your life upside down and to date there's not a damn thing most people can do about it. Dennis Kucinich tried to pass a bill in 200,1H.R. 2977 "The Space Preservation Act of 2001" to among other things, (B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--
(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(ii) chemtrails;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons, etc...

Don't believe it, google, electron mind control, "Robert Duncan", mind control, HAARP, Nich Begich.
Wake up as many people as possible to this extremely dangerous technology. God or aliens help us.
Cell phones cause hearing aid interference

Posted by Donna Hoaglin, Michigan - Saturday, March 07, 2009 at 1:27 p.m.

I do not own a cell phone, but I am harmed by other people's cell phones. If I get within several feet of someone who is carrying a cell phone, my hearing aid will start buzzing and sounds are so distorted, that I can't understand anything that is said to me. This means that I can not go out in public, because so many people are carrying cell phones that I can not avoid them. This also applies to cell towers and Wi-Fi hotspots. Even cordless digital phones cause hearing aid interference, so I use analog corded phones in my home. I can't even go to a doctors office and understand anything that is said, because of the infernal cell phones that are everywhere. This problem has been known for many years by the FCC, hearing aid and cell phone manufacturers, yet nothing has been done about it, and it looks like nothing ever will. So people who wear hearing aids that are useless around these devices that cause hearing aid interference are SOL. I guess the Americans With Disabilities Act doesn't apply to us. We are on our own, with no help in sight. Prisoners in our own homes. I have talked to other hearing aid users, who have the same problems I do, with other people's cell phones interfering with their aids. Sad state of affairs, to say the least.

Source