Megyn Kelly interview Lou Pelletier, father of Justina pelletier. Lou Pelletier talks about losing custody of his daughter Justina Pelletier over medical issues. The Kelly File
NewsBusters: To counter accusations that the President lied when he repeatedly told Americans they can keep their health insurance plans if they liked them, the administration has claimed that he was referring to the millions of people covered by their employers.
An article from Forbes Thursday thoroughly refutes this claiming that Obama officials back in 2010 predicted that 93 million Americans would have their plans cancelled as a result of ObamaCare including a vast amount of those with employer-sponsored plans:
If you read the Affordable Care Act when it was passed, you knew that it was dishonest for President Obama to claim that “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan,” as he did—and continues to do—on countless occasions. And we now know that the administration knew this all along. It turns out that in an obscure report buried in a June 2010 edition of the Federal Register, administration officials predicted massive disruption of the private insurance market. [...]
[T]he administration’s commentary in the Federal Register did not only refer to the individual market, but also the market for employer-sponsored health insurance.
Section 1251 of the Affordable Care Act contains what’s called a “grandfather” provision that, in theory, allows people to keep their existing plans if they like them. But subsequent regulations from the Obama administration interpreted that provision so narrowly as to prevent most plans from gaining this protection.
“The Departments’ mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013,” wrote the administration on page 34552. All in all, more than half of employer-sponsored plans will lose their “grandfather status” and get canceled. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 156 million Americans—more than half the population—was covered by employer-sponsored insurance in 2013.
As we found out from Lisa Myers' report Monday, the administration predicted that between 47 and 60 percent of individually-purchased policies would be cancelled under ObamaCare.
Forbes did the math to calculate a total:
51 percent of the employer-based market plus 53.5 percent of the non-group market (the middle of the administration’s range) amounts to 93 million Americans.
What this means is that not only did Obama lie when he repeatedly told Americans that they can keep their plans if they like them, he also lied in Boston on Wednesday when he said he was referring to the majority of Americans coverered by their employers.
Will media report this?
Stay tuned?
Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters - (HT Twitchy)
Sarah Palin - Facebook: President Obama flew in to Boston yesterday to deliver another “ShamWow”-style infomercial for Obamacare, and it went about as well as his entourage’s snarled traffic debacle in Beantown.
As millions of Americans are being kicked off their desired insurance plans and seeing their premiums skyrocket, the President had a lot of 'splaining to do today. For starters we anticipated a Presidential apology for lying to Americans repeatedly when he promised things like, “If you like your current health care plan, you can keep it.” Make no mistake, he knew he was lying when he said that. And make no further mistake, after five years of false Obama claims, no one should actually expect contrition on this administration’s part.
Bloomberg reports that in June of 2010, the administration knew millions would be kicked off existing healthcare plans due to Obamacare; but President Obama continued to knowingly deceive the American people with repeated claims that if we liked our current plan we could keep it.
So, finally busted, did the President apologize? Was remorse and sympathy shown for Americans who now can’t afford health insurance thanks to Obamacare? Nope. He instead informed us that Americans who receive cancellation notices have been on “substandard” plans supplied by “bad apple” insurers. That’s right. Obama didn’t lie to you when he said, “if you like your plan, you can keep it.” Why? Because, you sillies, you DIDN’T REALLY like the plan you chose for yourselves! No arguing. Barack Obama knows best and he’ll tell you whether you actually liked your insurance plan or not. If you’re an elderly bachelor, your old plan was clearly “substandard” because it didn’t offer maternity care. What’s that you say? You don’t need maternity care? Well, according to the President today, he says you do, and any insurance plan that doesn’t offer it is a “junk” plan provided by a “bad apple” insurer.
But don’t worry, the President also promised that only “rich” people making $250,000 or more will see their premium costs rise. This lie is so appalling and so easily debunked that the brazenness with which he made it is simply breathtaking. But who will hold him accountable for it? Media, you know I love you... so let me help you save your hide with the American public by suggesting you fact-check that.
Despite the Obamacare rollout disaster and the broken government website (which HHS Secretary Sebelius admitted is a “debacle” in her testimony before Congress today), the President gleefully highlighted the few people signing up for Obamacare as indicative of his socialized medicine’s “success.” He neglected to mention that the government is forcing Americans to sign up for his program or pay fines that will increase each year we fail to do so.
For sheer chutzpah, the President closed his speech by praising America’s “rugged individualism.” Because nothing says “rugged individualism” like heavy-handed big government forcing individuals to buy a product they don’t want and arrogantly telling them they didn’t really like the product they wisely chose for themselves and could afford.
Thanks for the infomercial, Mr. President. I don’t know anyone who wants your “ShamWow” product, but the IRS will make sure we call that toll free number or go online to order it right now…. well, just as soon as your impossibly broken $600 million website is fixed and your phones lines aren’t busy.
Happy with this, America? Make your voices heard. 2014 is just around the corner.
10/31/13 - Rep. Marsh Blackburn (R-TN) warned on Thursday that President Barack Obama could soon take away the freedom to purchase cheap shoes if his health care reform law was allowed to stand. At a House Energy and Commerce Committee on Wednesday, the Tennessee Republican had grilled Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius because the Affordable Care Act had forced insurers to upgrade some policies that did not meet new minimum government standards.
"Some people like to drive a Ford, not a Ferrari," Blackburn had quipped at the hearing. "And some people like to drink out of a red Solo cup, not a crystal stem. You're taking away their choice." In an appearance on the Fox News Channel on Thursday, host Martha MacCallum concluded that the point about the Solo cup was the "bigger picture" about the health care law.
"I will always go to the mat and fight for freedom, free people, free markets," Blackburn insisted. "And I think for the federal government to come in and take away the choice that people have had in the health care market and say, 'Hey, we don't like what you've been buying, we're going to make you buy this.'"
"What's the next thing going to be? You can't buy that Solo cup? You can't buy an inexpensive blouse? You can't buy a pair of shoes that cost less than another pair?"
She added: "So do they think that the federal government is going to become the determiner of the cost and set prices of everything that you can buy at a quality that they say is worthy? Come on! This is absolutely ridiculous. I am not going to sit here and let them get by with this."
Excerpt: As Eric asks, “If they can’t get a basic website up and running in three years… How on God’s green Earth are they going to administer health care to 300 million Americans? So, with billions upon billions of health related communications clearing through the government medicine portal annually, our very health will be hanging in the balance…Therefore, you must conclude: The Obama administration has our lives in their hands… Ask yourself… Do you trust President Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Kathleen Sebelius and Jay Carney with your life? I certainly do not! Video: Glenn Beck: Day 30 And Heathcare.gov Still Isn't Working…
As the Obamacare rollout continued to be marred by poor enrollment numbers and glitches, one former supporter has come forward with a scathing critique of the President’s signature healthcare law. Sue Klinkhamer spent two years fighting for Obamacare while working for Congressman Bill Foster (D-IL). Now that she has seen the effect of President Obama’s healthcare overhaul on her health insurance rates, however, Klinkhamer is openly admitting she was “very wrong.”
“I wouldn’t have sympathy for them, but so many people who were against this [law] are being forced into it now. This is the problem. You can vote and have your little utopia, but unfortunately, if we have a government, a federal government that makes all of the rules, there’s no place for us to go,” Glenn said on radio this morning. “You can have it in Massachusetts. You could have it in California. Try your little utopian experiment. Do it. But leave me out of it. I don’t want anything to do with it. Did you see the letter from the woman who is actually working on the healthcare plan?”
In an email sent to her former boss, Rep. Foster, and other Democratic colleagues, Klinkhamer reportedly wrote:
I spent two years defending Obamacare. I had constituents scream at me, spit at me and call me names that I can’t put in print. The congressman was not re-elected in 2010 mainly because of the anti-Obamacare anger. When the congressman was not re-elected, I also (along with the rest of our staff) lost my job. I was upset that because of the health care issue, I didn’t have a job anymore but still defended Obamacare because it would make health care available to everyone at, what I assumed, would be an affordable price. I have now learned that I was wrong. Very wrong.
According to the Chicago Sun Times, when Klinkhamer lost her congressional job, she had to buy an individual policy on the open market. Three years ago, it was $225 a month with a $2,500 deductible. As of September 1, the policy cost $291a month with a $3,500 deductible.
And then came the letter from her insurance company stating that her policy was no longer in compliance with Obamacare standards.
“Blue Cross,” she said, “stated my current coverage would expire on Dec. 31, and here are my options: I can have a plan with similar benefits for $647.12 [or] I can have a plan with similar [but higher] pricing for $322.32 but with a $6,500 deductible… Blue Cross also tells me that if I don’t pick one of the options, they will just assume I want the one for $647. … Someone please tell me why my premium in January will be $356 more than in December?”
But her rant continued: “I am a Democrat and I believe in health care for all,” she said. “And I was excited that previously uninsured people could now get insurance on the open market. But this is not affordable to me. Just call it the Available Care Act.”
“It won’t be available either,” Stu quipped. “Wait till you get to the doctors lines and all the other stuff. That will take a while. Once that kicks in, it won’t be available.”
An experimental cancer drug called DCA (dichloroacetate) shows promise in the fight against cancer by altering cancer cell metabolism and inducing apoptosis (cellular suicide); DCA appears to exert anti-tumor effects against several forms of cancer, including brain, endometrial, cervical, prostate, breast, and colorectal cancers
DCA forces cancer cells to shift from their preferred method of generating energy (glycolysis) to the method normal cells prefer (glucose oxidation) and “reawakens” cancer cells’ mitochondria
There are serious side effects reported by some adults self-administering DCA, including peripheral neuropathy and encephalopathy, so more research is needed before DCA can be considered safe
Optimizing your vitamin D level is one of the most important steps you can take to protect yourself from cancer
Certain foods mimic the actions of DCA without ANY side effects, such as broccoli and the spice turmeric
According to the American Cancer Society, the odds you'll develop cancer in your lifetime are one in two, if you're a man, and one in three, if you're a woman.1 But an experimental cancer drug shown to shrink tumors by correcting metabolic oddities in cancer cells shows promise in the fight against this deadly disease. The synthetic drug DCA (dichloroacetate) DOES indeed kill cancer cells, both in the lab and in human beings. However, whether it can reverse tumor growth without harming you in other ways remains to be seen.
The first clinical trial, although small, involving patients with brain cancer (glioblastoma) was encouraging, and the results were published in Science of Translational Medicine in 20102 . However, there is still a great deal more work to be done before DCA can be pronounced a safe and effective cancer treatment.
An interesting aspect of DCA is that it's an inexpensive, non-patentable molecule, which makes it of minimal value to pharmaceutical companies that profit by patenting expensive new drugs. Therefore, clinical trials are slow to get going due to lack of funding by Big Pharma. Researchers must await sufficient money to trickle in from government sources and public donations before moving forward.
In the paragraphs below, my aim is to give you information from both sides of the story—the potential benefits as well as the possible risks.
Rats Fed DCA Showed Dramatic Tumor Regression
The impetus behind most of the DCA research has been cardiologist Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada. In 2007, Michelakis and his colleagues sparked a firestorm of interest when they announced rats fed DCA showed rapid tumor regression without any apparent side effects. Michelakis has been the first to say these results are preliminary and cautions cancer patients to refrain from running out and buying the drug, prior to clinical trials.
Yet, many desperate cancer patients with few remaining options are doing just that, and side effects ARE being reported.
There are currently three clinical trials involving use of DCA to treat cancer that are currently recruiting participants3. Some of these studies plan to combine DCA with other chemotherapy drugs and radiation, all known to have damaging effects in your body. However, if you have cancer and are tempted to participate, there are some things you should know in order to make an informed decision about the risk versus the benefits of this experimental treatment.
Cancer Cells and Healthy Cells Have Different Metabolic Processes
In order to understand how DCA kills cancer cells, it is necessary to understand a bit about how the cellular metabolism of cancer cells differs from that of your normal, healthy cells. Cancer cells have very different metabolic processes than normal cells, in terms of how they derive their energy.4 It's a rather complicated distinction, so please bear with me as I try to explain it in the simplest terms possible.
There are two major pathways your cells use to covert sugar into energy: glucose oxidation and glycolysis:
Glucose oxidationis the primary energy metabolism in normal cells and takes place in your mitochondria, which are the little "power plants" inside your cell; it requires the presence of oxygen, as its name suggests. This is why you breathe and your heart beats to circulate oxygen throughout your body. Glucose oxidation is sometimes referred to as cellular respiration.
Glycolysis takes place in your cell's cytoplasm. It can occur without the presence of oxygen. Glycolysis is less efficient for normal cells, but it is a cancer cell's preferred means of energy metabolism, and it depends on the availability of sugar.
So, when your cells are oxygen-starved they have a backup plan. They can extract energy from sugar without the presence of oxygen, by glycolysis.
Pyruvate is required for glucose oxidation. There is an enzyme (pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase, or PDK) that acts as gatekeeper to regulate the flow of pyruvate into the mitochondria. If PDK is active, it suppresses the transport of pyruvate into the mitochondria, and your cell is forced to rely on glycolysis, even if oxygen is available. If PDK is inactive, pyruvate is shuttled into the mitochondria, even if oxygen is low.
Unlike normal cells, cancer cells are masterful at deriving energy from glycolysis—they have very active PDK. The way to make a cancer cell unhappy is by suppressing PDK, forcing the cell to use glucose oxidation, instead of glycolysis. This is called the Warburg theory of cancer, or the Warburg hypothesis5.
This is where DCA comes in.
DCA Instigates Mass Suicide among Cancer Cells
DCA suppresses PDK (the mitochondrial gatekeeper), and this fires up the cell's mitochondria. Not only does this force the cancer cell to abandon its preferred metabolic process, but it flips the cell's "suicide switch" as well. This happens because mitochondria are the primary regulators of apoptosis, or cellular suicide—they are loaded with sensors that react to abnormalities by pushing the cell's self-destruct button.
When a cancer cell's mitochondria realize it's a cancer cell, it spontaneously kills itself. This is the reason chemotherapy and radiation result in such terrible side effects—your healthy cells actually die much more easily because of this self-destruct button.
The reason cancer is so fast growing is that the mitochondria have been deactivated, so the cells evade apoptosis, as well as being able to grow in the absence of oxygen (glycolysis)6. DCA reverses this.In effect, DCA directly causes cancer cell apoptosis and works synergistically other cancer therapies, such as radiation, gene therapy, and viral therapy. A number of scientific studies have been performed to date, and most are encouraging.
DCA--Cancer Research Review
Most of the studies thus far have been done on cell cultures in the lab (in vitro), as opposed to on cancer patients themselves (in vivo). Yet the results are impressively consistent across the board, suggesting DCA is effective against a wide variety of cancer types. The DCA Site7 has a good list of all clinical studies through 2011.
The study that sparked the DCA excitement appeared in Cancer Cell in January 20078 According to an article in the Edmonton Journal9 in the 2007 rat study, DCA killed lung, breast, and brain cancer cells but left healthy cells alone. The rats' tumors decreased by up to 70 percent in three weeks of DCA treatment, without negative side effects.
This announcement led to a cyclone of excitement from cancer patients everywhere who scrambled to get their hands on the new "cancer cure," in spite of warnings from Michelakis himself (and others) against prematurely self-medicating with the compound.
Several more studies soon followed, including the first clinical trial2 involving brain cancer patients. In that trial, the research team selected five glioblastoma patients with a particularly aggressive form of brain cancer. They treated them with oral DCA for 15 months.
Tumor tissue was compared before and after DCA treatment in three of the five patients. In all three, there were signs that the tumor growth had slowed, and more cancer cells were undergoing programmed cell death after the treatment with DCA. Unfortunately, one of the five patients died. Another had "debulking" surgery before completing the full course of DCA treatment.Below are some of the other DCA cancer studies, all within the past five years. (Note that none of these involved human subjects.)
Endometrial Cancer: DCA causes apoptosis in endometrial cancer cells.10
Prostate Cancer: DCA produces significant cytotoxic effects in prostate cancer cells11
Breast Cancer: DCA has anti-proliferative properties against breast cancer cells and caused apoptosis of those cells12
Colorectal Cancer: DCA reduced colon cancer tumors by 20 to 40 percent13
Cervical Cancer: Researchers concluded DCA is a quick and effective cure for advanced cervical carcinoma14
For comprehensive information about DCA's method of action, history, and related scientific research, refers to The DCA Site7, and to this 2011 article in the International Journal of Cancer15. It should be noted that caffeine may radically increases the effects of DCA16. In fact, this effect is so pronounced that some researchers are working on developing a "DCA-caffeine" cancer treatment protocol.
Now that you're aware of DCA's cancer-fighting effects, let's take a look at the adverse effects identified thus far.
DCA's Side Effects Can Be Daunting
DCA is not a natural agent—it's a chemical produced in the water chlorination process. It's a small molecule, which accounts for one of its major advantages: DCA is easily absorbed by your body and can reach areas other drugs can't, such as your brain, which is why it's of particular interest for treating brain cancers. This, however, can be a two-edged sword, because any compound that easily permeates your brain can exert all sorts of unexpected and worrisome neurological effects.
DCA is a byproduct of another chemical called trichloroethylene (TCE), a volatile organic compound believed to cause cancer. TCE is used mainly as a solvent to remove grease from metal parts, but is also used in adhesives, paint removers, and typewriter correction fluids. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry reports TCE is "reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen" and may cause birth defects. They state TCE may also cause the following17:
Skin rashes
Nerve, kidney, and liver damage
Impaired heart and immune function
Unconsciousness
Death
When DCA is added to the drinking water of laboratory mice, it causes liver cancer. While DCA may offer hope and a novel approach to treating cancer, it is far from a "miracle cure." Of course, chemotherapy drugs are quite toxic as well!
DCA has been used successfully in children with metabolic disorders, with no signs of toxic poisoning. But adults appear to suffer more adverse effects—especially peripheral neuropathy and encephalopathy, such as the case described in a letter to the editor of the Journal of Neurology18. According to a survey performed by The DCA Site19, there are a fair number of serious side effects reported by those taking DCA, many of them neurological. Research suggests the side effects are at least somewhat dose-dependent, but safe dosing guidelines have not yet been established.
In the online survey, the side effects reported by DCA users include:
Tingling and numbness in the fingers, toes and lips; peripheral neuropathy Leg weakness Hand tremors Ankle swelling Increased urination
Mild nausea Anxiety and depression Dizziness Sleepiness Breathing "heavier" than usual
In some studies, under some circumstances, DCA seems to actually make cancer cells stronger. For example, an in-vitro animal study20 published in May 2010 revealed that some types of colon cancer cells are actually protected by DCA when grown under anoxic conditions or as xenografts in mice (xenografts are tissues transplanted into one species from a dissimilar species). And when DCA is combined with frontline drugs, it sometimes interferes with their effectiveness. The neurological side effects are compounded when DCA is used with other anti-cancer drugs, which are also neurotoxic.
So, if you're already using a cancer medication, DCA's effects are going to be unpredictable and potentially dangerous. This underscores the importance of fully understanding the mechanisms of action of an agent before it enters clinical trials.
A Safer Alternative: FOODS that Cause Cancer Cells to Self-Destruct
What if there were natural agents that induced cancer cell suicide, without the side effects of DCA? As it turns out, these agents DO exist—and you may already have some in your kitchen pantry or supplement cabinet. Here are a few21:
Capsaicin (the compound that makes hot peppers hot)
Se-methylselenocysteine aka methylselenocysteine (found in garlic and broccoli)
Ellagic acid (from pomegranates and other fruits)
There are many all-natural cancer-prevention strategies, and research shows they may cut your risk in half. Consequently, by implementing multiple strategies, you can radically lower your risk of cancer as well as other chronic diseases.
Lifestyle Factors that Influence Your Cancer Risk
A healthful lifestyle encourages proper gene expression, as the science of epigenetics has shown. We now know you are in control of your genes, instead of being controlled by them. You actually have tremendous power to shape and direct your health! Your thoughts, your environmental exposures, and your food choices all directly affect your gene expression.
The best "cancer cure" is to prevent it from taking hold in the first place. Cancer cells are circulating in everyone, all the time. The stronger your immune system is, the less likely your cellular function will run amok. Your diet is extremely important in keeping your immune system strong. One of the primary cancer-promoters is sugar. Cancer cells love sugar and use it to fuel their rapid proliferation (by glycolysis, as discussed earlier). This includes ALL forms of sugar, including fructose and grains. The higher your blood glucose level, the more prolific the cancer cells will be.
According to breast cancer expert, author, and board certified surgeon Dr. Christine Horner:
"To me, sugar has no redeeming value at all, because they found that the more we consume it, the more we're fuelling every single chronic disease," Dr. Horner says. "In fact, there was a study done about a year ago… and the conclusion was that sugar is a universal mechanism for chronic disease. It kicks up inflammation. It kicks up oxygen free radicals. Those are the two main processes we see that underlie any single chronic disorder, including cancers. It fuels the growth of breast cancers, because glucose is cancer's favorite food. The more you consume, the faster it grows."
Your diet is the one of the best ways to either feed or prevent cancer. Processed foods, soft drinks, red meat from CAFO-raised animals, trans fats, and any food containing or contaminated with xenoestrogens promote cancer growth. Plant foods, particularly cruciferous vegetables and flax seeds, as well as many herbs and spices are cancer-preventive. Beneficial fats of particular importance for cancer prevention are omega-3 and omega-9, which effectively slow down tumor growth in estrogen-sensitive cancers, such as those of the breast, prostate and colon.
Generally speaking, your diet should focus on fresh, whole, unprocessed foods (vegetables, meats, raw dairy, nuts, and so forth) that come from healthy, sustainable, local sources, such as small organic farms. For the highest nutrient content, you will want to make raw food a significant portion of your diet.
Personally, I aim to eat about 80 to 85 percent of my food raw, including raw eggs and humanely raised organic animal products that have not been raised on a CAFO (confined animal feeding operation).
For more information about which foods to eat and which to avoid, please consult my comprehensive nutrition plan.
Vitamin D May Cut Your Cancer Risk in Half
There's overwhelming evidence pointing to the fact that vitamin D deficiency plays a roll in cancer development. If there were something close to a silver bullet for cancer, vitamin D would be it.
If you currently have cancer, evidence shows that higher blood levels of vitamin D—probably around 80-90 ng/ml—are beneficial. If natural sun exposure is not practical, then a safe tanning bed or oral supplement are the next best things. Just keep in mind that it's BEST to get your vitamin D from natural sun exposure. It appears vitamin D may play an important role in sulfur metabolism, and taking it orally may not provide the same benefit as deriving it from the sun. To learn the details about how to optimize your vitamin D, including dosage and blood testing, please review our comprehensive vitamin D article.
Vitamin D has been found to offer protection from cancer by several mechanisms, including:
Regulating genetic expression
Increasing apoptosis of defective, mutant cells thereby reducing cancer cell replication
Causing cells to become differentiated (cancer cells often lack differentiation)
Choking off the growth of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones, which is a step in the transition of dormant tumors turning cancerous
Exercise Can Also Slash Your Cancer Risk
If you are like most people, when you think of reducing your risk of cancer, exercise doesn't immediately come to mind. However, there is some fairly compelling evidence that exercise can slash your cancer risk. One of the primary ways exercise lowers your risk for cancer is by reducing elevated insulin levels, which creates a low sugar environment—and remember, cancer cells LOVE sugar! Additionally, exercise improves the circulation of immune cells in your blood. Consider integrating exercise with intermittent fasting to greatly catalyze your healing and rejuvenation.
Restore Your Sleep
Getting proper sleep is critical, both in terms of getting enough sleep and sleeping during the right hours. According to Ayurvedic medicine, the ideal sleeping hours are between 10 pm and 6 am. Modern research has confirmed the value of this recommendation as certain hormonal fluctuations occur throughout the day and night, and if you engage in the appropriate activities during those times, you'll "ride the wave," so to speak. Working against your biology by staying awake when you should be sleeping, or vice versa, interferes with these natural hormone rhythms.
Manage Your Stress
Research tells us that if you experience a traumatic or highly stressful event, such as a death in the family or loss of a job, your risk of breast cancer is 12 times higher in the five years that follows. It is imperative to your health and longevity that you address your emotional well-being. Stress has a direct impact on inflammation, and inflammation drives many of the chronic diseases that kill people prematurely every day.
Meditation, prayer, yoga, and EFT (an energy psychology tool) are all viable options that can help you maintain emotional/psychological equilibrium. I'm sure you can think of others—the bottom line is, find what works best to de-stress yourself and practice it daily.
Avoid as Many Chemicals, Toxins, and Pollutants as Possible
Just as stress is toxic to your emotional health, chemical overload is toxic to your physical health, and both can weaken your immune system. Get rid of as much toxic junk as you can. This includes harsh chemical household cleaners, soaps, personal hygiene products, air fresheners, bug sprays, lawn pesticides, insecticides and the rest. Replace them all with green, non-toxic alternatives.
For more suggestions about how to prevent and heal from cancer, please refer to the cancer section of our website, which contains a wealth of free, research-based information. 12
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sibelius answered questions in Congress this week about the left framed ‘contraception compromise’ or the ‘first amendment un-compromise’ as framed by the right.
Sibelius essentially said that the decision has been made and this mandate along with many other surprises for those who did not follow the ObamaCare fight on in August 2013… PERIOD! The decision has been made and will go into affect regardless of the Constitution, religious freedom or what the American people want.
Remember what Nancy Pelosi said… “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in the bill!” Well, you are beginning to find out.
So why is this so important to progressives? Rush Limbaugh keeps saying that "abortion is the sacrament of liberalism." What makes this so? Let's ask Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, In her book "Women and the New Race", Sanger explains the purpose of birth control:(Page 229)
Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives. So, in compliance with nature’s working plan, we must permit womanhood its full development before we can expect of it efficient motherhood. If we are to make racial progress, this development of womanhood must precede motherhood in every individual woman. Then and then only can the mother cease to be an incubator and be a mother indeed. Then only can she transmit to her sons and daughters the qualities which make strong individuals and, collectively, a strong race.
President Obama himself said that he had done the same thing when he was a community organizer. He got leftist priests and nuns in Chicago to compromise the values of the church.
The backlash over Sibelius' interpretation of the mandate built to a crescendo last week. Obama went to the podium and announced a "compromise." It was nocompromise at all ... In reality, Obama’s contraception mandate tramples religious freedom.
This is not an issue that will go away and may haunt the president through the 2012 Election cycle. It is a huge power grab and the first of many frightening realities of the what is really in the ObamaCare Bill. It should be a flag to all concerned Americans that each us needs to read that bill and insist that our Congressman and Senators read it immediately… and act. It should also be a flag to all Americans about the ideology of the President and his team and what is in our future if Obama survives this and is re-elected.
Socialized Medicine, which ObamaCare is, is he crown jewel of socialism… progressivism. It gives the government the control over one sixth of the U.S. Economy and decisions over who get care and who doesn’t, who lives and who dies, and this fight in addition to being a fight over religious freedom and the first amendment, not contraception, is also a fight over what the government can make each of us buy and pay for from here on out.
One of the best explanations of this fight I’ve heard is:
If you are against murder and someone says, “Okay, you don’t have to kill anyone yourself. We will hire someone to kill them for you.”, there is no resolution to the issue. It goes against your values, against God and against everything you stand for. That is exactly what is happening with the birth control mandate being forced on the Catholic Church by the administration and ObamaCare.
Beck Announces ‘We Are All Catholics Now’ Movement to Stand Up for Religious Freedom
The controversy over the Obama administration’s contraception mandate is at a boiling point, as many Catholic leaders continue to view the president’s so-called “accommodation” as a failure to protect religious liberty.
Now, Glenn Beck is coming forward with a new movement called “We Are All Catholics Now.” The main goal of the initiative is to ask Americans to reach out to Congressional leaders (at the moment, Senators) to encourage the passage of legislation that would protect religious groups’ conscience rights.
Watch Beck discuss the effort on his radio show this morning:
The main push, Beck says, is to support the highway transportation bill, which will likely be voted upon this week. It will include an amendment – Blunt Conscience Protection Amendment – from Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) that would protect religious conscience rights. In the House, Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) is working on companion legislation, though it may not be voted on for a few weeks.
Beck is encouraging individuals to get involved by calling their Senators and letting them know that “we are all Catholics now.” The issue at hand is not about contraception as it has been framed by many media outlets, he says. Instead, it is a religious freedom issue that hinges upon the separation of church and state’s mandate that the government not force churches to violate their values and principles.
Here are his directions for getting involved and making an impact:
Call the Capitol and speak with your Senator. The numbers are: 202.224.3121; 202.225.3121; the toll free numbers for the Capitol Switchboard include: 1-866-220-0044 1-877-851-6437, 1-800-833-6354, 1-888-355-3588, 1-866-808-0065, 1-877-762-8762, 1-800-862-5530.
Call the switchboard, ask to be connected to a Senator from your specific state (it will take two calls, one for each Senator).
Whoever answers:
1. Tell them that you want to tell the Senator to vote for the Blunt conscience protection amendment. 2. Ask them if they know how the Senator will vote on that amendment 3. Tell them you want to be contacted back about how he voted (be sure to ask for accountability — they hate it, but it makes them call you back). 4. When you call, be sure to tell them “We are all Catholics now”. This key phrase will let them know you are part of a larger, organized movement working in support of religious freedom.
You can read more about the movement at GlennBeck.com.
Sitting in yesterday at GBTV was the co-author for Indivisible talking about the importance of his book as well as Glenn’s book Being George Washington during this pivotal times.
He spoke on the importance of uniting and turning back to God for divine intervention was our only chance to turn our country around.
This is the time to stand-up and choose your side.
Governor Palin appeared on On the Record calling this mandate an ‘Un-American Act’
Add this fight to the expected rise in unemployment (even with the job number game) and possible $5 gas prices at the pump… and this might end up being Obama’s Waterloo! Some believe the timing of this fight is an answer to the prayers for intervention being said daily by many Americans.
This is not a fight over contraception and who will pay for it. It is a fight over religious freedom vs. secularism, a fight over the Constitution vs. Progressivism, a fight over limiting the powers of the commerce clause vs. the government being able to force us to purchase and pay for anything they choose, and the fight over the ideology that will control this country. This is not a fight that anyone can afford to sit out.
Tonight, Glenn encouraged GBTV viewers to help him support the Kanzius Cancer Research Foundation, a group dedicated to ongoing research of the Kanzius Non-invasive Radio Wave Treatment project; a cancer treatment without any side effects. Donations will allow the employment of additional chemists and biomedical engineers, creating the potential to conduct clinical trials using actual patients.
The organization’s mission statement explains:
The Kanzius Cancer Research Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. It is made up of a group of dedicated individuals supporting ongoing research for the Kanzius Non-invasive Radio Wave Treatment project; a treatment without any side effects. Our mission is to create national and global awareness of the potentials of this treatment and to raise funds to help accelerate the speed at which research progresses through human trials. We believe that by acting together in support of continuing research and development, we can make a difference in the lives of people who suffer from this disease.
WASHINGTON (BP)--Adult stem cells have restored sight to more than three-fourths of patients blinded by chemical burns to their eyes, according to a new research study.
The results, reported at the International Society for Stem Cell Research meeting in San Francisco, showed success in 77 percent of people in the study after one or two procedures, according to Bloomberg News. It showed partial success in 13 percent of the cases and failure in 10 percent.
Italian researchers tracked participants in the study for an average of three years, some for as many as 10 years.
The procedure involved taking healthy stem cells from a patient's eye and, after growing them, layering the tissue onto the injured eyes, Bloomberg reported. The stem cells were taken from the limbus, which is at the intersection of the cornea and the sclera, the white portion of the eye. The cells produced a healthy cornea in the successful cases, resulting in an eye that is normal in color and appearance.
"The patients, they are happy, even the partial successes," said lead researcher Graziella Pellegrini of the University of Modena's Center for Regenerative Medicine, according to Bloomberg. "We have a couple of patients who were blind in both eyes. Can you imagine for these patients the change in their quality of life?"
The study involved treatment of 112 people.
The method may assist in other therapies, a researcher said. "This is bigger than just the surface of the eye," said Ivan Schwab, a stem cell researcher at the University of California-Davis, according to Bloomberg. Schwab said it may work on regenerating "livers or other organs."
The study is another success for adult, or non-embryonic, stem cells, which have produced therapies in trials for at least 73 ailments in human beings, according to Do No Harm, a coalition promoting ethics in research. Embryonic stem cell research, which results from the destruction of human embryos, has yet to generate successful treatments in human beings. --30--
Tom Strode is Washington bureau chief of Baptist Press.
Beginning at 6.22 mins in the GB American Revival Below (Part 3) and into the beginning of Part 4, Glenn Beck talks about having been diagnosed with Macular Dystrophy… and that he could go blind.
