1. Conventional doctors are egotistical, brainwashed drug pushers who know nothing about health.
Yes, there are some good doctors out there, but unfortunately doctors typically don’t know anything about health. Their expertise lies in disease management and whatever the drug companies have told them.

2. Alternative health doctors and practitioners with their potions, herbs, creams, and supplements are typically no better than conventional doctors.

You may think that OLM is all about the alternative medicine practitioners. While we do feel that the best doctors in the world practice alternative medicine, we prefer a holistic naturopath who understands how the whole body works together. You can’t fix one symptom and/or one organ while ignoring a toxic lifestyle and expect the body to work right. The biggest problem with doctors of both the conventional and alternative varieties is that they tend to think that their one area of expertise, be it drugs, surgery, herbs, or chiropractic, is the answer to everything. First and foremost, if you want to be healthy, you need to adopt a natural, healthy lifestyle. And if your doctor doesn’t address this, he or she’s not the doctor for you. It should be noted that most doctors who say they take a holistic approach do not, and they still have a lot to learn about what really is a healthy lifestyle. You’d be surprised to know how many doctors don’t even know what essential fatty acids are (they think they do, but they don’t).
3. Complementary alternative medicine is for people who can’t make up their minds.

In most cases of complementary alternative medicine, the “alternative” part is so weak and’ half-assed” that there would be no positive results without the conventional medicine. However, with the conventional medicine, it’s extremely hard to get anywhere with alternative medicine because you are too busy adding chemicals to your body.

4. Medicine is very rarely used to restore health.

Whether it be alternative or conventional, medicine is typically used to cover up symptoms so that one can go about a toxic lifestyle unhampered.

5. Health and fitness are not the same thing.

Look at Lance Armstrong! While he is a remarkable man, and a hero in many respects by most standards, he had to be in extremely poor health to get cancer. Health and fitness can go very well together, but they are not synonymous. Powerbars, gelpacks, protein powders, creatine, Gatorade, and caffeine are not healthy.

6. Healthcare in America and most of our modern societies is all about illness –
not about health.

It’s about treating and managing illness. The goal is to make patients feel good enough
to carry their illness through their toxic lifestyles. When is the last time you heard of the
modern medical establishment coming up with a cure for anything?

7. The majority of supplements sold are ineffective.

Synthetic vitamins, fillers, undigestible minerals; the list goes on. Forget buying quality supplements at your local drug store, GNC, multi-level marketing sources, or even at most health food stores. At best, most supplements are weak and ineffective. At worst, supplements are toxic and actually cause deficiencies.
8. Vaccines do more damage than good.

This article is not here to argue whether or not vaccines can eradicate disease. But there are too many vaccines, they contain toxic ingredients, and they are damaging the health of our children. It’s out of control! Why more people don’t see this is absolutely amazing!

9. Pharmacies are the unhealthiest places to be.

There isn’t anything healthy at a pharmacy!

10. There is a cure for cancer, diabetes, and most of the other illnesses plaguing us today.

The cure is a natural, healthy lifestyle. Raymond Francis says it best, “There is only one disease, cell malfunction. There are two causes, toxicity and deficiency.”

11. You and only you are responsible for your own health.

The easy part is accepting this. The hard part is undoing the brainwashing most people have had. Health is much simpler than we make it out to be. Eat mostly raw, nutrient dense foods as free of toxins as you can find. If most of your diet consists of raw fresh fruits and vegetables that have been grown properly (in rich soil), you will prevent almost every disease plaguing man today, and eradicate most as well.

12. Ignore the top disclaimer. That’s only for us not to get sued.

Note: Please remember, the entire list, including number 12 is what we would say only if we had no concern of lawsuits, but we do.

Recently, a couple of federal budget analysts from Washington, D.C., wondered about the profits in pharmaceutical drugs and came up with some interesting figures. Turns out that to purchase the active ingredients for many drugs is often pennies, while a hundred dollar plus price tag is passed on to consumers.

They found that 100 tablets of 20 mg Prozac costs the consumer about $247.47, while the active ingredients only cost $0.11. Yes, that’s right: eleven cents for all one hundred tablets. It’s a 224,973 percent mark-up, a profit margin most business owners dream of – but could never get away with.

Even more profitable, Xanax customers regularly pay $136.79 for a hundred 1 mg tablets, while the active ingredients cost just under three cents. The mark-up is an unbelievable 569,958 percent.

Of course, the active ingredients aren’t the only expense in making these chemical concoctions. Drug companies regularly pay more than a million dollars per drug to their regulators, the FDA, in order to put their drug on the market. Exorbitant fees, which all too often beg the question about any real regulation taking place when the regulatory agency is funded by those it’s supposed to be regulating.

If you were regulating the person writing your paychecks, how hard would you be on them? Maybe, perhaps, you’d cater to them? Catering is exactly what a group of FDA scientists told Congress was happening at the drug approval agency in a letter last October.

In connection to the letter the New York Times reported, “The scientists have documentary evidence that senior agency managers ‘corrupted the scientific review of medical devices’ by ordering experts to change their opinions and conclusions in violation of the law.”

Wow, change their opinions and conclusions. Could this be done in the name of profits, not protection or health? And if this is done at the FDA, the regulatory agency, how credible are studies funded directly by drug companies and their paid researchers, on staff or university bound?

Then, of course, there’s the advertising expense.

A 2008 study found that pharmaceutical companies spend about 24 percent of their sales dollars on advertising and promotion, in contrast to just 13.4 percent on research and development. This promotional expense includes direct to consumer advertising and the continual wooing and “educating” of doctors – their front line sales force.

solution to anything that ails the body. They’re being hit with the message in-person, from drug reps, about 5 times each working day.

Combine that with the fact that drug companies are funding professors at medical schools, the universities themselves, and university bound researchers, and you’ll get an even clearer picture of why medical doctors think drugs are the only viable avenue in health care.

At Harvard Medical School, about 1,600 professors and lecturers confessed earlier this year that they or a family member were taking pharmaceutical dollars. They admitted this after being required to, upon pressure from students protesting the undue role of the drug companies in their education.

Of course, these dollars play a large role in determining what is taught and studied, what is not, and exactly how the findings are presented. UCSF researchers took a look at 192 published studies comparing different drugs and determined that the source of funding for a drug trial greatly influenced the outcome. They found that if the results favored a drug it was “about 20 times more likely” to have been funded by the manufacturer of that drug.

Now, factor into the equation that the pharmaceutical industry spends more to lobby government officials than any other sector, and it’s all too clear why drugs are the dominant health care solution promoted today.

A 2005 investigation by the Center for Public Integrity found that in the seven years prior, the pharmaceutical and health products industry spent more than $675 million to lobby for the influence of public officials, saying it’s lobbying operation is “the biggest in the nation” and that “no other industry has spent more money to sway public policy in that period.” When you combine campaign contributions with those lobbying costs, the drug industry was outdone only by the insurance industry, with which it has close connections.

So if you were wondering where all of those excessive drug profits were going, now you know. They’re buying influence with the FDA, media, doctors, medical schools, professors, researchers and last but not least, politicians. They’re all on the payroll with plenty of extra money to go around. Wonder what each of those influential sources will prescribe for you?

Resources:

Obscene Drug Mark Ups

• -Prescription Drug User Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2009
• -F.D.A. Scientists Accuse Agency Officials of Misconduct
• -Big Pharma Spends More On Advertising Than Research And Development, Study Finds
• -Beyond Advertising: The Pharmaceutical Industry’s Hidden Marketing Tactics
• -Pitching Doctors
• -Drug Lobby Second to None
• -Pharmaceutical Giants Establish Fund for Animal Research
• -Drug Company Funding Of Drug Trials Greatly Influences Outcome
• -Harvard Medical School in Ethics Quandary

Reprinted with permission from NaturalNews.com

Just say the words gonads, testosterone or any of the unprintable slang associated with testicles, sex, and male virility and you’ll get a laugh or at least amused looks. Now, say those words again, but in a context that says, “You’re going to lose that capability, son,” and watch what happens. The collective scream you hear is shrill enough to replace the air raid sirens America abandoned in the 1980s.

New research so fresh that it hasn’t yet appeared in a journal article says flat out that eating sugar reduces testosterone levels in the blood by up to 25 percent across the board. The researchers found 74 men at Massachusetts General Hospital with a range of tolerances to glucose (42 normal blood sugar, 23 impaired glucose tolerance “prediabetic” and 9 actually with Type-2 Diabetes) and gave them 75g of a glucose solution. In many cases, the effect lasted at least 2 hours after ingestion and affected all types of men in the study. Of 66 men listed as having normal testosterone levels in a fasting state before the test, 10 developed a hypogonadal (low testosterone) state at some point during the two hours of the test.ⁱ

The actual intent of the research funded by the National Institutes of Health and the American Diabetes Association was to refine testing methods for low testosterone levels. Current methodology says to test the man in the morning on two different days and get an average reading to see if the man is truly hypogondal or if the low testosterone will pick up later. So far, no one has said that a man should fast before taking the blood test—until now.

The link between sugar, insulin, obesity, diabetes, the metabolic syndrome and testosterone levels had been touched on in other research that has come out recently. Only these researchers worked backwards relative to this new study; they took people with known elements of the metabolic syndrome (diabetes, obesity, and heart disease) and tested their testosterone levels. Many subjects had low testosterone.

In recent research conducted in Berlin, the conclusion read in part “Lower total testosterone and sex-hormone-binding-globulin (SHBG) predict a higher incidence of the metabolic syndrome…Administration of testosterone to hypogondal men reverses the unfavorable risk profile for the development of diabetes and atherosclerosis.”ⁱⁱ

In Finland where similar research is regularly conducted the researchers came up with this gem: “Low total testosterone and SHBG levels independently predict development of the metabolic syndrome and diabetes in middle-aged men. Thus, hypoandrogenism (hypogondal) is an early marker for disturbances in insulin and glucose metabolism that may progress to the metabolic syndrome or frank diabetes.” ⁱⁱⁱ

It seems that these previous studies were waiting for someone else to have a “The Emperor Seems Naked” moment and try out the inverse of their results in which you give sugar to mostly healthy people and see what happens. No longer should low testosterone be considered just a symptom of the metabolic syndrome, but as what both are…a result of too much sugar in our diet.

We at Nancy Appleton Books have already touched on sugar causing the metabolic syndrome in previous articles like 140 Reasons Why Sugar Ruins Your Health. In it we make simple declarative statements about many of sugar’s ill effects:

• Sugar can increase fasting levels of glucose.iv
• Sugar can cause hypoglycemia.viii
• Sugar can lead to obesity.v
• Sugar can cause heart disease.vii
• Sugar can cause metabolic
• syndrome.viii

One way sugar lowers testosterone is through its effect on the adrenal glands.ix
Sugar taxes the adrenal glands and these glands interrelate with the sex hormone glands (testes and ovaries) that produce testosterone and estrogen.^x

These ailments listed above are elements of and highly associated with the metabolic syndrome, which we have linked to the excessive intake of sugar. The research in Massachusetts says that sugar causes low testosterone. Similar research around the world says that low testosterone is highly associated with the various elements of the metabolic syndrome. So how many times do we have to enjoy the circular logic before we simply say that sugar causes both the low testosterone and the ailments in the metabolic syndrome? Put more simply, sugar kills in a multitude of ways and this one affects men where they really live, in the bedroom.

Related Reading:

• Gluten, Candida, Leaky Gut Syndrome, and Autoimmune Diseases
• Hypothyroidism – Natural Remedies, Causes, and How To Heal the Thyroid
• How I Lost Over 150 Pounds, and How My Life Changed
• Is Your Gut Health Making You Fat?
• Healthy Sugar Alternatives & More

Doc’s Eye Bright formula is a must for every “medicine” chest. Eye infections are dangerous. Though pinkeye is usually a viral infection, secondary bacterial infections are common and they can eat right through eye tissue in a matter of hours.

We learned about the efficacy of eyebright for eye infections years ago. We used eyebright tea to flush the eyes when pinkeye reared its ugly head, and discovered that all symptoms disappeared in hours rather than days (as with conventional medicine), but in recent years we have only been able to find loose tea and it was very difficult to strain all the tiny pieces of leaves and stems. This is not a problem with Doc’s formula.

Doc’s formula is excellent. It does burn for a minute when you first use it, and though we have not had the “opportunity” to use it with an infection, it immediately clears the vision, sharpening focus. We will continue to use it to see if it eliminates floaters and improves vision. We’ll report back in few months.

Click here for Shillington’s Eyebright Formula.

The tester for Doc Shillington’s Tooth and Gum Formula is a middle age woman who has suffered from severe and persistent gum disease for many years. Her gums had seriously receded. After four weeks of using Doc’s Tooth and Gum Formula, she reports the following:

I am a skeptic. The claims for this formula seemed too good to be true. They weren’t. Doc Shillington’s Tooth and Gum Formula is miraculous.

My gums had receded to the point the roots of seven of my upper teeth were fully exposed and several of my teeth were loose. A few of my lower roots were exposed as well.

I followed Doc’s recommendation, using salt and baking soda as a toothpaste then rinsing with his formula. Now, weeks later, not one tooth is loose. None of the roots of my lower teeth are exposed and all of the upper gums have significantly improved—at least half of the exposure is gone on each tooth. Most are near normal.

There has been another unexpected change. Food, especially lettuce and spinach, stuck to my teeth. It seemed that my enamel had worn away. Now my teeth are slick again; my tongue slides over them and food doesn’t stick. I love this formula! Available at Green Lifestyle Market.

There’s something really disturbing to me about dowsing my skin or my children’s skin with a bunch of chemicals that I can’t even pronounce. I prefer natural skincare products. But these days the words “all natural” and “from nature” on a label are meaningless; usually it’s just a marketing ploy. Too many companies that started out with the best of intentions have been bought out. The products we once trusted are now filled with the cheapest preservatives, making them no better than their conventional counterparts. I find the lack of conscience in the skincare industry to be very sad and, in many cases, downright infuriating.

Enter Eaurganic. I was so excited when I came across this company. Their ingredients weren’t listed on their site, so I got on the phone with them to learn more. I was assured that these products, made in Canada, were certified organic by a very strict third party certification. In fact, we were told that Eaurganic was the ONLY skin care company in Canada that met this very strict criteria, putting them head and shoulders above the rest.

After receiving the link to a password protected page that contained the product ingredients, I grew a little concerned. There were some chemicals used in the facial cleanser that I wasn’t familiar with and some preservatives in the lotions. They assured me these were mild chemical preservatives and claimed they were necessary. But, why are they necessary? We’ve found companies who make 100% organic, preservative-free skin care products. Granted, they are very few and far between, but they are out there.

I held off judgment until I received the product. The first time I used the facial cleanser, I absolutely loved it. My skin tends to be oily, so there’s nothing like that clean, oil-free feeling. But I know that when my face feels that clean, it’s not a good thing. In the past, every time I’ve used a product that gives me that feeling, I end up swimming in a pool of oil as my skin tries to make up for the oil that’s been lost. It’s a vicious cycle that results in breakouts and the need to wash my face six times a day.

Once again, I decided to keep an open mind. I continued to use the Eaurganic Facial Cleanser and moisturizer. But after about three weeks, I had to discontinue its use. My skin was so oily, it was disgusting.

I talked to a friend who is also the founder of another skin care company. She has created a product line that OLM trusts, (we are not affiliated with them or any ohter company). I told her what was going on with my skin and read her the ingredients in Eaurganic’s cleanser. She confirmed what I had already guessed, that the cleanser itself was causing the oil imbalance. I switched to Tilvee’s Tea Tree Facial Cleansing Bar. After two days, the oils in my skin started to come back into balance, though it took about three weeks to get it totally under control.

If there’s one thing that my skin is teaching me throughout this quest to find real “natural” skincare lines, it’s that I need to not onlybe gentle with it, but to put back what I take away. If I cleanse my face, I need to replace the oils that have been stripped away. My pores don’t secrete lotions or creams, they secrete oil. So if I apply an oil after cleansing, my skin is definitely happier and it’s actually less oily.

If you look on the web, you’ll find rave reviews for Eaurganic. But, for me something just isn’t adding up here. Any company that does not list their products’ ingredients raises a big red flag! The companies that we have come to trust, those that produce truly organic and natural skincare products, are proud to show their ingredients for anyone to see. Eaurganic’s website under ingredients simply lists “54% organic 46% natural/natural origin.” What does that mean? Arsenic is natural, so is kerosene, but I’m not going to put either one on my face!

As for the third party certification, we at OLM have learned to be very skeptical of those claims. Anybody can start their own third party certification company, including the company seeking certification.

Eaurganic is just another company using slick marketing and hyped up claims to sell a not-so-good-for-your-skin skincare product.

An Inconvenient Truth about a Convenient Technology

Once upon a time there was a little girl on a playground who noticed gray smoke pouring out of the windows at a school across the street.

“Fire!” the little girl shouted.

A man sat calmly on a nearby bench. “I don’t see any fire,” he said.

“Fire!” the girl cried again.

“But I only see smoke.”

“Fire!” the girl shouted over and over.

A few hours later, the school burned to the ground.

The moral of this story?  Where there’s smoke, there’s a good chance you’ll find fire. That’s the precautionary principle practiced by most governments in Europe when it comes to the 4.2 billion cell phones in the world, the electromagnetic radiation (EMFs) they emit, and protecting public health. Refusing to adhere to this “better safe than sorry” principle has caused catastrophic health and
environmental effects globally, writes David Gee, author of THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE 20TH CENTURY: Late Lessons from Early Warnings. The book analyzes the dismal failures of governments around the world to respond to early danger signs from carcinogens such as lead, benzene, asbestos, and the depletion of Atlantic fisheries. In fact, David Gee recently testified in Brussels at the European Commission on EMF & Health about the profound danger posed by cell phone radiation, or electropollution, which many scientists are now calling the ”worst toxin in planetary history.”

“All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” – Arthur Schopenhauer

Because of this common-sense precautionary principle, France outlawed cell phone ads to children this past January. Many other countries followed suit: Russia’s Ministry of Health issued a warning that no child under eighteen should use a cell phone, and pregnant women should avoid them completely. Israel’s Health Ministry and Canada’s Dept. of Health issued warnings as well. Germany, the UK, Belgium, India, and Finland have all publicly discouraged children’s use of cell phones, too. What are we doing here in the USA? Not long ago, Sprint signed a two billion dollar contract with Disney Corporation to market cell phones to children under twelve. Ironically, the US government makes more money from cell phone minutes than any other product besides oil.

What is the health impact of 4.2 billion microwave emitting devices on the human body and brain; wireless devices that were never pre-market tested for health?

“Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and radiation damage DNA and enhance cell death rates and therefore they are a ubiquitous, universal genotoxic carcinogen that enhances the rates of cancer, cardiac, reproductive, and neurological disease and mortality in human populations. Therefore there is no safe threshold level…”- Dr. Neil Cherry, Associate Professor of Environmental Health

There is a growing body of evidence – more than 2,000 independent studies worldwide – linking EMFs with serious health issues, from autoimmune and neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, to developmental delays and spectrum disorders like Autism and ADD, to various cancers such as astrocytomas and glioblastomas. Award-winning cancer specialist and
vneurosurgeon Dr. Vini Khurana went so far as to declare that cell phones were more dangerous than smoking and asbestos.

But this is not an article about giving up your cell phone, cordless phone, laptop, iPod, or Wi-Fi technology. That request would be impossible since 80% of our planet is already wireless. Cell phone towers now decorate the Himalayas.

The health risks posed by smoking and asbestos pale in comparison to cell phone radiation, which produces ICRWs (Information Carrying Radio Waves), precisely because our exposure to ICRWs is completely involuntary. We can choose to walk out of a smoky bar or re-insulate an asbestos laden home. We can no longer avoid electromagnetic radiation. One might say this has become a civil liberties issue because our exposure is non-optional, which may be why parents and teachers in Europe have marched in the streets, demanding wireless be removed from schools.

Microwave radiation, in fact, passes through everything between the cell tower and your phone (or computer) at the speed of light (186,282 miles/second) and is instantaneously absorbed into your body and brain. The compelling research from Dr. Om P. Gandhi, a professor and Chair of Electrical Engineering at the University of Utah, dramatically illustrates this: When adults makes a cell phone call, there is 30% radiation penetration into their brains; 50% radiation penetration into the brain of a 10 year old; 75% radiation penetration into a five-year-old. Professor Leif Salford, who headed the research at Sweden’s prestigious Lund University, says “the voluntary exposure of the brain to microwaves from hand held mobile phones is the largest human biological experiment ever.”

But it’s not just human cells at risk. Dr. Robert Becker, twice Nobel Prize nominee, and Dr. Neil Cherry believe EMFs may be permanently damaging all DNA material, plants and animals included, affecting the genetic integrity of all life on earth.

“I have no doubt that, at the present time, the greatest polluting element in the earth’s environment is the proliferation of electromagnetic fields (EMFs). I consider that to be far greater on a global scale than global warming and the increase in chemical elements in the environment.” – Dr. Robert Becker, twice Nobel Prize nominee, author, CROSS CURRENTS: The Promise of Electromedicine, the Perils of Electropollution

Children and teenagers are most at risk due to their developing brains and skulls. Dr. Lennart Hardell, M.D., Ph.D. from Sweden studied teenagers on cell phones and found they are at a five-fold increased risk of brain cancer by the time they reach their mid twenties. (Cordless phone radiation gives them a four-fold risk.) A Spanish study headed up by Dr. Michael Klieeison demonstrated that a two-minute cell phone call disrupted the electrical activity in a child’s brain for up to two hours. How many minutes does our average American teenager spend on a cell phone? Two thousand sixx hundred minutes each month.

Fortunately, there are actions you can take to mitigate the harm posed by EMFs. Thomas Jefferson insisted a free society cannot exist with an uninformed public. So whether you’re a parent, teacher, or concerned human being, educating yourself is the first step; then you can make the best decisions to support the long-term well being of your family, and this planet.

CALL TO ACTION – Ways to Thrive in a Wireless World

1. Limit exposure. Use speaker mode or landlines whenever possible.
2. Use patented noise field intervention technology on all wireless and wired devices. (Wireless routers, digital alarm clocks, and hair dryers emit high levels of EMFs.)
3. Wired headsets act as antennae, tripling the radiation to the head. Use Blue Tube headsets, not unprotected Blue Tooths.
4. Never let your child or teen sleep with their cell phone (or any other electronic device). Texting still exposes them to a near-field plume of radiation.
5. Unplug or remove all electronics from your child’s bedroom.
6. Maintain a potent, nutritionally healthy diet and lifestyle.
7. Take political action, e.g., write to your congressman, demanding that governments adhere to the standards set by the Bioinitiative Report. (www.bioinitiative.org)