Trouble with Brussels Sprouts
Is the EU Food and Supplements Directive the Real Target?
by Phillip Day

The word was quickly passed.

A million alternative health networks shuddered involuntarily like cobwebs vibrating in the evening breeze as the shocking news spread: the European Union was going to seize the vitamins and the herbals. The drug industry was having its long-awaited spasm and clamping down on 'unregulated' nutritional treatments to shore up the millions in drug revenues it was losing to the vitamin 'quacks'. Something sinister called Codex Alimentarius was casting its Big Brother shadow across the Eurozone. Americans and other world populations looked on with apprehension.

The Campaign for Truth in Medicine received its initial briefing on the Euro move to regulate the alternative health industry's supplements quite a while ago. As we snuffled around, we discovered that getting information on the proposed legislation was like trying to pull a string of sausages out of the jaws of an elkhound. No-one in the EU seemed to be talking or willing to show their hand. Real information was sketchy. The rumour mill chuntered away on overtime.

As different muddy angles on the European vitamin affair began to materialise, our excavations soon began moving away from the draconian European Directive on Vitamin Supplements and settled on an altogether more culpable target - the real zero - the European Union itself.

THE EU SUPPLEMENTS DIRECTIVE - WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT?
On 12th March 2002, while Samantha and I were preparing for our seminar in Norwich, England, the breeze suddenly stiffened and a piece of legislation silently passed hundreds of miles to the south-east. With barely a ripple in the ether, the EU had voted and passed the directive which would limit the upper intakes of hundreds of nutrients to ridiculously low levels - in certain cases, 1/50th or even less of what many nutritional doctors recommend as therapeutic doses.

Like Germany and France, many were now facing the prospect of not just severe censure in the amounts of nutrients they could take, but what they could buy at all. For, hidden within the Trojan Horse 'harmonisation' proposals used to justify entering the launch codes against the nutritional supplements industry, was the realisation that anything not on the EU list of 'accepted' supplements was now in for an outright ban. Manufacturers who wished to field anything atrociously 'new' would be required to spend millions proving benefit through exhaustive 'drug testing' - a state of affairs guaranteed to bankrupt even the most stalwart of the green corporations.

For 13 years, European pharmaceutical conglomerates have been contemplating a standardised market for vitamin and mineral supplements in order to bring these threatening red-headed stepchildren into check. Various attempts to harmonise the industry met with sustained opposition, not least from the UK government and its vitamin consumers. In January 2000, the Brussels Commission, during one of those rare, brief periods in which it was not being found guilty of fraud and accounting corruption, tabled a White Paper on Food Safety. A later document, 500PC0222 (what sort of monster invents that kind of archiving system?) concluded that a wide disparity existed on alternative medicine dosages, and proposed legislation to correct the imbalance. In France and Germany, for instance, no products containing more than one times the Recommended Daily Allowance may be sold without a drug licence.

And this is a problem. Vitamin C's RDA is 40-60mg. Yet the therapeutic dosage of C begins at 500mg and goes up beyond 10,000mg. So if you wish to treat yourself with megadoses of Vitamin C for your cancer, best visit Homebase now and buy up a wheelbarrow in readiness to haul all those expensive, tiny vitamin pills back to base-camp.

MASSIVE PUBLIC BACKLASH TO NO AVAIL
Most UK Members of the Euro Parliament (MEPs) voted against the vitamin initiative, which nevertheless passed. In spite of some 400 million pieces of mail, e-mails, faxes and skywritings thrown at Brussels vociferously protesting this attack on human rights - naturally along with the predictable media black-out - the motion was approved, with 383 MEPs in favour and 139 against. Considerable resources had been expended by the pharmaceutical industry to lobby members for their vote. The public's outrage was ignored.

So where are we now? There is an intervening period currently occurring which is designed to allow member states to pass laws aligning themselves with the new directive. Products that do not comply with the directive will be banned after 1st June 2005. Upper safe limits have been arbitrarily allocated to such a conservative list of nutrients, over which supplement dosage will be regulated, that the vast majority of other, more specialised nutrients not included on the list will be effectively cleared from the shelves of most UK, Dutch and Irish health stores, along with even the common stuff, such as vitamins C and B6, which are always sold in potencies exceeding the EU mandate.

The facts amount to this: unless a concerted effort is made en masse by the affronted citizenry, along the lines of when the public throttled Mrs Thatcher over her poll tax disaster, the Euro super-state will have its way, and in a few short years from now, the Darth Vader vitamin police will be able to screech up outside your vitamin shack and clear your shelves of the recently designated 'contraband' nutrients.

Will mass public protests work? Well, they didn't with the vitamin vote. Maybe if enough people join up with the hardworking international organisations committed to fighting this particular directive, a political 'hot-potato' of sufficient aggravation can be created, which may have the intended effect of getting the Euro-Feds to back off. But for how long? How many months would pass before another effort was mounted to shoe-horn yet another directive down the uncooperative gullet of the beleaguered Euro-citizen? After years of seeing asinine, fourth-grade Gestapo legislation coming out of the EU, hamstringing its member states with an insane web of 'Don't do this…', 'And definitely don't do that…', hopefully we are all getting a clear picture of the kind of corrupt, bureaucratic, totalitarian police state that is coming down the pipe at us who shiver on these northern Euro-shores.

THE COMING SOVIET-STYLE MEGASTATE
Very few Britons know the real goods on the EU, and our politicians with lofty aspirations have perfected the art of duplicity to keep it that way. Some 'think no evil, hear no evil' vacationers I spoke to recently thought Britain integrating into Europe was great, believing the whole EU issue was merely one of convenience, so we wouldn't have to change our currency on our way to enjoy the sun in Alicante. The real story of the EU's ambitions however is more sobering and frightening.

Once Britain is part of the European Union, the move becomes 'irreversible'. What this means is, if we don't like it, then the only way we get out is to declare war against the whole of Europe… and win. The only way we did that last time was with the help of America, Australia, Canada, South Africa and our other allies, which Britain is increasingly being taught to scorn. Since our proud navy, once the most mighty the world had ever seen, has now been reduced to a few non-descript, barely seaworthy frigates, fighting on our own against the Beast of Brussels probably won't fly.

As true 'little Englanders' of a future European Soviet-style state, most in Britain do not know that our trial-by-jury system under habeus corpus is about to be scrapped. Measures are already being implemented to 'harmonise' our once proud legal system and gut the whole idea of being innocent until proven guilty. Your case will eventually be heard by a tribunal of judges, some of whom already have a well known proclivity for corruption and exchanging political favours. The first you will know of the difference is when you are arrested and deported to the Continent under suspicion of having committed a crime and held indefinitely without trial. No prima facie evidence will any longer be required to be presented and tested first in a British court to protect you.

Riots occurring in Britain may be put down with the new Euro-Police, and even by German, French and Spanish troops rumbling through the convenient Tunnel to sort us out. For the first time in 1,000 years, we could have foreign soldiers rousting British citizens on their own soil. Can you see the headlines now… even supposing we will still have a free press?

Our powerhouse economy, the envy of Germany and France, operates in step with those of America and Canada rather than Europe. Under new harmonisation laws designed to bring Britain into the socialism of the Continent, our economic vibrancy would be decimated as it is forced to align itself with the shaky systems of the Eurozone. Tax increases of 20% are on the cards to standardise the member states to the new single economy and stabilise the Euro. A few years ago, Gordon Brown sold 415 tons of our gold bars to Europe - over 50% of our reserve stocks - to prop up the ailing Euro, which nevertheless continued to slide.

The original European Common Market has been subtly changed into the European Union of today through a process of gradualism and progressive treaties, without the British people's understanding or consent. While European politicians make no secret of their desire for an integrated superstate to protect their traditionally wobbly borders, British politicians have consistently fudged the issue, because they know the British people wouldn't take the loss of sovereignty and control over their own affairs.

The Treaty of Rome and its successive amendments decree that once Brussels has acquired a power from the nation states, that power can never be given back (known as the 'acquis communautaire', or 'the ratchet'). If you don't like it. Well, tough.

CORRUPT AND ROTTEN TO THE CORE
It is generally agreed that at least 10% of the EU's £62 billion annual budget goes in fraud and mismanagement. Paul van Buitenen was the EU-appointed auditor who brought down Jacques Santer's European government on fraud charges in 1999 by highlighting the worst financial scandal in Euroland's history. Van Buitenen was able to show that billions of Euros had been 'misappropriated' (read embezzled) by members of the EU élite, such as the notorious French commissioner, Edith Cresson, whose live-in 'dentist' even became an beneficiary. Imagine the British National Lottery. And then imagine it out of control. But then I repeat myself.

Because of his revelations, van Buitenen was subsequently suspended without pay by the EU Commission, the very target of his corruption investigations, while the officials he had accused of serious crimes were themselves suspended on full pay. Van Buitenen was later vindicated when a further panel upheld his accusations, resulting in the resignation of Santer's entire EU Commission in 1999. Also viewed with misgivings has been the Gestapo-like treatment of the EU's own chief accountant, Marta Andreasen, who had the temerity to declare that the EU's £62 billion budget was 'out of control'. Andreasen claimed to have been followed in the streets by a gang of men in an apparent attempt to intimidate her. To this day, anyone trying to expose fraud or corruption within the EU can expect harsh treatment and shady future career prospects. Is it any wonder that most just shut up and do nothing?

NONE DARE CALL IT TREASON
Up to 30,000 directives have slewed themselves onto the UK books since this catastrophically inept euro-federalisation plot began executing itself on Britain in the 1970s. Only a handful of these were even discussed in the UK parliament. During the coming EClubs and Health Reviews, I will take you through some of the most unbelievable developments that have occurred by stealth throughout Europe - measures that should have those of you who lived through the early 1940s twitching in remembrance. As for the vitamin directive, it is my considered opinion that to execute one or even a series of blows against the head of this asinine legislation will be woefully inadequate - another head of the hydra will simply grow in its place.

With the EU, we are dealing with a jungle of vested interest bureaucracies that have to justify their continued budgets and very reasons for existing. Corruption is commonplace and nobody thinks anything of it. Perhaps understandably, Euroland has gained the hearty support of politicians everywhere because it guarantees their survival and continued junk-funding in perpetuity even if they fall from power in their own countries. Tony Blair is considering himself a future President of Europe once he is out of power in Britain, which is why he has been greasing the Spanish vote by trying to give them back Gibraltar. In an impromptu referendum which the British government predictably failed to recognise, 20,000 Gibraltarians voted 'no' to going back to Spain. 44 voted yes. The 20,000 were so outraged that anyone could have voted for Spain that efforts were then made to hunt the 44 down and boot them off the Rock….

THE REAL GOAL - INDEPENDENCE
No. There is an altogether simpler solution to the vitamin problem, and one that will send shivers of fear throughout Brussels and its puppy-dog, Legoland co-parliament in Strasbourg - and one I think fitting for a Credence project in the coming months. Britain must do the one thing that makes sense; the one thing Euroland dreads, and that is to execute our veto and leave the EU. Britain for decades has been told by its treacherous left-wing liberal élitists that it is garbage; that it is 'The Sick Man of Europe'; that it can't even win football and cricket matches, that it needs the new socialist megastate. We have been made to feel guilty about our history, our achievements, our military might, our financial prowess, our fishing industry, our monarchy, our coal and steel, our North Sea Oil, our great statesmen and -women, our countryside, our erstwhile morality and incorruptibility. In short, we have been emasculated by fifth-columnists from within our own country, who have forbidden us, through political correctness, to speak our minds. They have encouraged the weaker among us to snigger at every British institution. We have been repeatedly told that Britain's only hope is to throw in her lot with the Continent.

The irony however is more interesting and heartening. Like a drug-dealer telling his customers that they cannot do without him, The European Union has got itself into such a mess, it may in fact need Britain's gold reserves, financial markets, pensions funds and other paraphernalia herself to survive. You see, Britain is not rubbish, but in fact the fourth largest economy on Earth. She is the prize on which the empire-building politicians of Germany and France have set their sights (what's new?). She has the greatest, most prolific financial trading centre in the world based in London, whose earning power alone exceeds that of many nations. We have the greatest innovators. We pioneered the Internet, the jet engine, free-market economics and television. We have brilliant artists, businessmen, industrialists and scientists. We once had a system of education and government that was so much the envy of the world that other nations to this day still copy them. Britain, described as 'crap' by three politicians in this country, is still 'crap' enough to be the number-one destination of choice in Europe for immigrants, entrepreneurs and inward investment capital. Like the brilliant kid repeatedly told by his peers that he is a worthless failure, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England have been cowed into believing the worst of themselves by the politically correct legions of the left who have always hated what Britain has traditionally stood for. How many of these snivellers have ever been to Russia and seen for themselves what their 'equality' achieves in reality?

Many have also bought into the idea that the EU will safeguard peace in Europe. In fact, all the stark and realistic indications are so very clearly before us that the EU's catastrophic ineptness may guarantee war in Europe within the next twenty years for reasons we will examine in the next issue. Europe has been relatively peaceful and warless, not because of Jacques Santer, Francois Miterrand and Helmut Kohl, but because NATO has been visibly willing to unleash hell on any invader or usurper who threatens the Continental status quo. No wonder the EU sees it as 'Top Priority' to rubbish our erstwhile ally America, marginalise NATO, form its own European army, federal police force, intelligence agencies and punitive justice system with Germany and France as the most influential players. Am I the only one getting goose-bumps at the déjà vu of goose-steps?

All this over a bottle of Vitamin C? The supplements issue is just the tip of the iceberg. If the EU is such a great idea, why has Switzerland, with all its banks, resolutely refused to join? Why did Norway vote to stay out? Why did Greenland successfully negotiate her own withdrawal? These nations are strong and independent today, managing their own affairs without the corrupt nannying of Brussels. Why did Denmark's citizens begin rioting in the street when their 'no' vote to Maastricht was fiddled? For the first time in its history, Danish police fired on Danish citizens. You see, Norway, Switzerland and Denmark have some quite recent memories of what European integration tried to do for them and they don't want to repeat the experience. They just want to be left in peace doing what Norway, Switzerland and Denmark do best.

STANDING UP FOR WHAT YOU STAND FOR
I am proud to be an Englishman. I am also proud to be associated with my chums in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland through the British political union, whatever the colour of their skin and slant of their beliefs. I think our true foreign immigrants, now British to their boots, have given a tremendous pool of skill and resourcefulness to our nation. Remember, you Scots chaps, Welshers and Ulstermen, our kin have shed blood together as brothers-in-arms in the far-flung corners of the world. Let's face facts. The reality is, our great-grandfathers drowned in the mud along with their horses at Passchendaele to liberate the French and the Belgians. Our grandfathers bulldozed the Nazi menace into scrap with the help of our American allies. Britain has bailed France out of trouble more times than a cat scratches its fleas. Britain never had the bad manners to start a war, but we've finished plenty. Our common law is the law of freedom, as enshrined in Magna Carta and the Declaration of Rights. It states that a citizen is innocent until proven guilty. A Britisher may do anything he desires, unless specifically forbidden by law. In Europe, under corpus juris, or Justinian, Napoleonic law, a citizen can do nothing unless specifically permitted by all those directives.

The poor Brits, dumbed down for years with their force-fed diets of junk TV, porn and insulting soaps, labouring under the overweight baggage of political failures such as Chris Patten, Leon Brittan, Edward Heath and Neil Kinnock, have sat silently appalled as their country has been sold down the Seine for a pocket full of beans and the promise of unaudited expense accounts. They have stirred themselves with anger over the vitamin issue, yet their sights are still aimed too low.

I've got a more worthy and effective target - The destruction of Britain's integration dealings with the EU altogether and the reclamation of our historical right to determine our own future, whatever that may be. "But that's isolationist! That's insular! That's so damned… British!" No, actually it makes perfect sense to over 60% of Britons who, according to surveys, don't want to scrap the pound and thus move into EU integration. And the politicians in Brussels know it. They realise we would reclaim our fishing industry, our agriculture industry, we would be free to adjudicate our North Sea oil and international trade without the chafing restriction of Belgian handcuffs. They see that we buy far more from the EU than it does from us, and even the terminally blinkered in Brussels would be insane to jeopardise this most valuable of trades, given the Union's current financial state of affairs. Won't the Germans still want to sell us their cars, the French their fine champagne and wines, the Dutch their bacon, and the Mediterranean countries their tourist destinations? Why do we need to pay the EU £1.3 million EACH HOUR to be a part of this most cataclysmic con-trick which always works against Britain's best independent interests?

If Britons must make a decision on Europe that will forever destroy her nationhood, sovereignty and individual, strident cadence, we would do well to get ourselves properly educated on the subject. For, if we mess up this time around, it's going to take a little more than Women's Institute cucumber sandwiches and Countryside Alliance placards to straighten out the mess for our children's sake. As Peter Hitchens concludes in his The Abolition of Britain:

"All citizens must consider whether they wish to endorse the burial of a great and civilised nation, or whether they wish to halt a process which they never asked or voted for, or were even asked whether they wanted, which has brought about misery, decadence and ignorance, and which threatens to abolish one of the happiest, fairest and kindest societies which has ever existed in this imperfect world."

I envision one Britain of the future. One that is eminently do-able. One that is independent, prosperous, democratic, well defended, dynamic, modern, flexible, competitive and unafraid. One that can look itself in the mirror and wink as it adjusts the suit and tie. One the world may truly behold and enviously acclaim. A Britain who is a friend to those in trouble. Who won't leave our erstwhile friends in the dirt. You know, the good, old bloke of a Brit who keeps his eye on the ball and won't run under fire.

Vitamins may be the flavour of the moment, but the real question remains: Brussels and mash anyone?

"Treason doth never prosper. What is the reason? For if treason doth prosper, none dare call it treason." - Sir Julian Hurrington

"There is nothing frightening, 'extreme', or negative about leaving the EU and keeping our hard-won right to govern ourselves. It would be a liberating, positive thing to do. And we would be very much richer in every way because of it." - Lord Pearson of Rannoch

"Either some Caesar or Napoleon will seize the reins of government with a strong hand or your country will be as fearfully plundered and laid waste by barbarians in the Twentieth Century as the Roman Empire was in the Fifth; with the difference that the Huns and Vandals who ravaged the Roman Empire came from without, and your Huns and Vandals will have been engendered from within your own country and by your own institutions." - Thomas Macawley writing to H.S. Randall, 1857

Belgium to Ban Fluoride Tablets, Chewing Gum

Belgium will ban the sale of tablets and chewing gum which contain fluoride elements because of the risk that they might cause a brittle bone condition, a Health Ministry spokesman said Tuesday.

But the ban will not include toothpaste with fluoride, which protects teeth from decay, Tom Ruts said.

The move is believed to be the first such ban in the 15-nation European Union (EU), and may spark renewed debate about the safety of fluoride, which some countries add to public drinking water supplies as a means of improving dental health.

The ban will probably come into force by late August, Ruts said.

Belgian Health Minister Magda Aelvoet also made comments about the plan in the latest issue of Belgium's weekly magazine, Humo.

Aelvoet told the magazine she hoped her EU partners would follow the example. In these cases, a harmonization within the European Union is of course desirable but I can't always wait until the European Union is ready, she was quoted as saying.

We will however communicate our official decision to the other European member states in the hope that they will follow us swiftly, said the minister.

Fluoride supplements -- such as fluoride tablets and fluoride chewing gum -- are promoted by dentists to fight dental caries. They have been sold in Belgium without a doctor's prescription.

The ministry made the decision after the results of a study commissioned by an advisory board found that excessive use of fluoride products could cause fluoride poisoning, damage the nervous system and foster osteoporosis, where bones become weak and fragile, said the spokesman.
http://alertwizard.hoovers.com/display.php?repo=newsedge&ipage=1777445&exp=fluoride
30th July 2002, 10:13 AM BRUSSELS, Jul 30, 2002 (Xinhua via COMTEX)

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: …. Which is of course what researchers and Credence have been saying for years. Belgium can be applauded for taking this first if token step in breaching the dam of wilful ignorance and stupidity in regard to fluoride compounds. But where is the intellectual consistency, pray, in banning the tablets and not the highly dangerous industrial toxin wastes, labelled 'fluoride', routinely disposed of in the public water supply of many countries with its bubble-gum 'it's for your teeth' mantra chanted from the walls of every dental waiting room? All power to the elbow of CTM's fellow anti-fluoride activist organisations for their excellent work and future victory to rid the public of this menace.

Bulletin from the Australian Front
by Phillip Day

So, here we are down under and ready for action. Fly into Melbourne and one is struck by the prosperity, tidiness and gosh darn friendliness of the place. The city oozes 'We've arrived!' as a country. Modern, dynamic, places to go, people to see. Can't see any litter strewn around the roads. Strewth, no one even breaks the speed limit. Also extremely un-European is the Australian habit of actually listening to what you have to say without burying you under an avalanche of 'what I think'.

Weather is briskish down south. Glad I brought my thermals. The white rental van is a darling, so we named her Blanche Five. Slogging around in the three-tonner was a drag and every hill a siege. At least with this puddle-jumper, we've got a stereo and a couple of seat belts. Things are looking up.

And so, to all Australians and New Zealanders, let's get the show on the road. Let's have some fun, some laughs and have a chat about what we can do to improve our lot by looking at the great news science has to offer. I don't know about you, but life can be fun, exciting, healthy and definitely beats the alternative if you'll let it. If you agree, or just want to know how, make a date, come along and join in.

Your future is not orange.

If you're willing, it can be a lot brighter than that.

The "Healthy at 100!" Tour by Phillip Day
Australian/New Zealand Tour Details and Schedule: www.credence.com.au/tour
Telephone Ticket Sales: (03) 9891 7883
Fax: (03) 9891 7766

Escalating Incidence of Childhood Cancer Is Ignored by the National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society

PRESS RELEASE: Since passage of the 1971 National Cancer Act, launching the "War Against Cancer," the incidence of childhood cancer has steadily escalated to alarming levels. Childhood cancers have increased by 26% overall, while the incidence of particular cancers has increased still more: acute lymphocytic leukemia, 62%; brain cancer, 50%; and bone cancer, 40%.

The federal National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the "charitable" American Cancer Society (ACS), the cancer establishment, have failed to inform the public, let alone Congress and regulatory agencies, of this alarming information. As importantly, they have failed to publicize well-documented scientific information on avoidable causes responsible for the increased incidence of childhood cancer.

Examples include:
Over 20 U.S. and international studies have incriminated paternal and maternal exposures (pre-conception, during conception and post-conception) to a wide range of occupational carcinogens as major causes of childhood cancer.

There is substantial evidence on the risks of brain cancer and leukemia in children from frequent consumption of nitrite-dyed hot dogs; consumption during pregnancy has been similarly incriminated. Nitrites, added to meat for coloring purposes, have been shown to react with natural chemicals in meat (amines) to form a potent carcinogenic nitrosamine.

Consumption of non-organic fruits and vegetables, particularly in baby food, contaminated with high concentrations of multiple residues of carcinogenic pesticides, poses major risks of childhood cancer, besides delayed cancers in adult life.

Numerous studies have shown strong associations between childhood cancers, particularly brain cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and leukemia, and domestic exposure to pesticides from uses in the home, including pet flea collars, lawn and garden; another major source of exposure is commonplace use in schools.

Use of lindane, a potent carcinogen in shampoos for treating lice and scabies, infesting about six million children annually, is associated with major risks of brain cancer; lindane is readily absorbed through the skin.

Treatment of children with Ritalin for "Attention Deficit Disorders" poses risks of cancer, in the absence of informed parental consent. Ritalin has been shown to induce highly aggressive rare liver cancers in rodents at doses comparable to those prescribed to children.

Maternal exposure to ionizing radiation, especially in late pregnancy, is strongly associated with excess risks of childhood leukemia.

It is of particular significance that the cancer establishment ignored the continuing increase in the incidence of childhood cancer in its heavily promoted, but highly arguable, March 1998 "claim to have reversed an almost 20-year trend of increasing cancer cases."

The failure of the cancer establishment to warn of these avoidable cancer risks reflects mindsets fixated on damage control -- screening, diagnosis, and treatment -- and basic genetic research, with indifference to primary prevention, as defined by research and public education on avoidable causes of cancer. For the ACS, this indifference extends to a well-documented longstanding track record of hostility, such as supporting the Chlorine
Institute in defending the continued global use of chlorinated organic pesticides, and assurances in the 2002 Cancer Facts and Figures that cancer risks from dietary pesticides and ionizing radiation are all at such low levels as to be "negligible." This indifference to primary prevention is compounded by conflicts of interest, particularly with the giant cancer drug industry. Not surprisingly, The Chronicle of Philanthropy, the nation's leading charity watchdog, has charged that: "The ACS is more interested in accumulating wealth than saving lives."

The minimal priorities of the cancer establishment for prevention reflects mindsets and policies and not lack of resources. NCI's annual budget has increased some 20-fold since passage of the 1971 Act, from $220 million to $4.2 billion, while revenues of the ACS are now about $800 million. NCI expenditures on primary prevention have been estimated as under 4% of its budget, while ACS allocates less than 0.1% of its revenues to primary prevention and "environmental carcinogenesis."

It should be particularly stressed that fetuses, infants and children are much more vulnerable and sensitive to toxic and carcinogenic exposures than are adults. It should also be recognized that the majority of carcinogens also induce other chronic toxic effects, especially in fetuses, infants and children. These include endocrine disruptive and reproductive, haematological, immunological and genetic, for which there are no available incidence trend data comparable to those for cancer.

The continued silence of the cancer establishment on avoidable causes of childhood, besides a wide range of other, cancers is in flagrant denial of the specific charge of the 1971 National Cancer Act "to disseminate cancer information to the public." As seriously, this silence is a denial of the public's inalienable democratic right-to-know of information directly impacting on their health and lives, and of their right to influence public policy.

Whether against cancer or terrorism, war is best fought by pre-emptive strategies based on prevention rather than reactively on damage control. As importantly, the war against cancer must be waged by leadership accountable to the public interest and not, as is still the case, special agenda private interests. The time for open public debate on national cancer policy is long overdue.

www.preventcancer.com. Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition and Professor Emeritus of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, University of Illinois School of Public Health, Chicago, and Quentin D. Young, M.D., Chairman of the Health and Medicine Policy Research Group, Past President of American Public Health Association, Chicago

CTM COMMENT: It is incredible the extent to which cancer charities go to trumpet their supposed successes with existing treatments and their 'war on cancer'. Then again, perhaps it is not so incredible. The American Cancer Society, for example, the most well funded 'charity' in the history of mankind (this charity even makes political contributions) has a clause in its charter which states that it will disband itself the very day a cure for cancer is found. Now that's what we call motivation to win the war on cancer: "Hey staff! As soon as you have succeeded in beating cancer, you're out of a job!"

The facts come down to this: The leading cancer charities are fund-raising institutions for the pharmaceutical cartel and are going to say and do almost anything to convince you that they are worth investing in. In an age where more people are dying of cancer than ever before, after the billions that have been poured into the bottomless pit of shadowy special interests and cancer quangos, can these cynical and self-serving 'charity' opportunists get away with their obscene and heartless fraud for much longer at our expense?

How Cola, Coffee and Chocs can Help Beat Cancer
By Michael Leventhal

Coffee, cola and chocolate could be good for us after all, say scientists.

Common compounds in all three may form the basis of new drugs to tackle cancer and heart disease.

New research suggests that caffeine and theophylline may help block cell growth and blood clotting. They appear to target an enzyme which helps trigger signals that control the growth, movement and survival of cells.

Scientists recently found that the enzyme, p110 delta, is also responsible for orchestrating the body's response to infection. It is thought to be linked to inflammation and irritable bowel disease. Researchers at University College London genetically engineered insect cells to produce the p110 delta.

In laboratory tests they found that caffeine and theophylline both blocked a key biochemical process crucial to the functioning of the enzyme.

Professor Peter Shepherd, at the university's Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, said: "We've shown that caffeine-like compounds play a novel role in blocking enzymes known to play a critical role in a range of cellular functions in the body."

"Alongside possible advances in cancer treatment, this research suggests that caffeine-type drugs could be used to treat heart disease and inflammatory illnesses." Theophylline was already known to have anti-inflammatory properties and has been used for many years as an asthma treatment.

However, Professor Shepherd warned people not to overdose on coffee, tea, cola or chocolate. "The study relied on using high concentrations of caffeine that would be unhealthy for human use," he said.

The research is published in the August edition of the Journal of Biological Chemistry.
Daily Express 21 August 2001

CTM COMMENT: As usual, we only get half the picture. But what about the sucrose contained in the junk foods so enthusiastically endorsed by our 'experts'? It has long been known that sugar feeds cancer, as it promotes a process of fermentation in the body. Diets that exclude processed foods and high glycaemic carbohydrates such as bread, pasta, grains, candies, cokes, twinkies, ding dongs, etc. while promoting high-enzyme-activity foods such as vegetables, legumes, etc., have consistently been shown to 'starve' the cancer and promote healing in the patient. This is the basis for the Gerson therapy and countless other successful off-shoot strategies examined over the years. For more information on these incredible cancer strategies, CTM refers the interested reader to the following works of Credence Publications:

Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know the Truth by Phillip Day
Great News on Cancer in the 21st Century by Steven Ransom
Food for Thought by Phillip Day (a recipe guide)
www.credence.org

Article from the Cancer Prevention Coalition

For those of you who are using the Cancer Prevention articles, here's the latest.

THEY MAKE YOU SMELL, FEEL, AND LOOK GOOD BUT CAN COSMETICS INCREASE YOUR RISK OF CANCER?

Tough standards are essential for phasing out diethanolamine (DEA) from cosmetics and toiletries.

In a petition to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) previously released, the Cancer Prevention Coalition (CPC) urged the labelling or phasing out of DEA in cosmetic products. DEA is a precursor of nitrosodiethanolamine (NDEA), a proven carcinogen as recognized by four Federal agencies and institutions and the World Health Organization. The proposed label would read, "Caution -This product may contain N-nitrosodiethanolamine, a known cancer-causing agent."

DEA-based detergents are widely used in shampoos, lotions and creams. Since 1976, workers exposed to NDEA in metal working fluids, at levels similar to those in cosmetics, have been warned of cancer risks and steps are taken to protect them.

Aubrey Hampton, founder of Aubrey Organics, noted that DEA is not an essential ingredient in hair and skin care products. There are natural, safe and effective alternatives to DEA that pose no financial hardship for the manufacturer or the consumer"

In 1979, the FDA urged the cosmetics industry to take "immediate action to eliminate" NDEA in cosmetics. However, the FDA has taken no subsequent action while industry remains unresponsive. In striking contrast, the EEC has sharply reduced permissible uses of DEA. German cosmetic industry has also resolved this problem by phasing out DEA detergents, thereby preventing the formation of NDEA.

Dr. William Lijinksy, leading international nitrosamine researcher, emphasized, 'The continued use of DEA is unacceptable especially in view of the overwhelming scientific evidence of its cancer risks and the availability of safe alternatives."

Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., professor of environmental and occupational medicine at the University of Illinois School of Public Health and chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition said that, "Faced with escalating cancer rates, the FDA and other health agencies should take overdue action to reduce avoidable exposures to carcinogens. NDEA in cosmetics, used by many million consumers for many decades, is a prime example of such an avoidable carcinogen".
www.preventcancer.com
28th July 2002

Conservative Central Office
32 Smith Square
London SW1P 3HH
Tel: 020 7984 8238 Fax: 020 7984 8207
E-mail: office@hannan.co.uk Website: www.hannan.co.uk

12 August 2002

Mr John Ireland

Dear Mr Ireland

Thank you very much for taking the trouble to write to me on this very important issue of the food supplements, herbal remedies and medicines review. As I see it, this is an area in which people should be allowed to decide for themselves on the efficacy of a given treatment. Only in cases where there is a demonstrable risk should legislators be allowed to intervene. It may surprise you to learn that, as with so much of the legislation which comes from the EU, this legislation arose as the result of heavy lobbying by pharmaceutical companies, in whose interest it clearly is to restrict the trade of their competitors. I was not a little surprised to discover that one of the European Commissioners sits on the board of a company which has engaged in such lobbying.

In spite of the opposition of the Conservative Party, the European Parliament voted for a second reading of the Food Supplements Directive. As a result you will now need to influence the British Government's policy which means writing to your Westminster MP.

The Pharmaceutical Review is now under consideration in Committee and is expected to go to the vote in Parliament in October, and the report on Herbal Medicines has not yet appeared. However, you may expect me to press for the maximum in consumer choice in both cases when the time comes.

The EU sees itself more and more as the guardian of our physical and moral health and enacts laws which no popularly-elected parliament or government would get away with. This is in inverse proportion to turnout at European elections which has been successively smaller at each election.

I have taken the liberty of enclosing an article 1 wrote on food supplements some months ago.

Yours sincerely
DANIEL HANNAN MEP
Enc.
* * * * *

Hugh Robertson Esq. M.P.
House of Commons
Westminster
London

19th August 2002

Dear Mr Robertson

I enclose a very disturbing letter I have received today concerning the EU Food Supplements Directive, from Daniel Hannan M. E. P.

Is it possible to register a very strong protest in Parliament against this legislation, as it is a gross infringement of human rights?

Are you able to ascertain the names of the pharmaceutical companies that have been involved in the heavy lobbying mentioned by Mr Hannan?

Is there a register of EU Commissioners interests which will indicate which Commissioner sits on the board of the lobbying pharmaceutical company concerned?

I hope you may be able to help me with these questions, as I would like to make my views known to these people.

I look forward to your view on this issue.

Yours sincerely

John Ireland

Dead Wrong

The drug treatment of depression is one of the Greatest fallacies in the history of medicine.

It is estimated that 28 million Americans now take prescribed (doctor-controlled) anti-depressant medications. Production of these drugs has consequently become a huge business, with "global sales estimated at $6 billion a year and rising." Prozac sales alone amounted to more than $1.7 billion in 1999 - a third of the Eli Lilly and Company's total business - while prescriptions for its major current competitors, Zoloft and Paxil, also continue to rise rapidly. Despite the side-effects experienced by a quarter of Prozac users, Lilly recently spent $15 million to advertise the drug directly to the public - to increase patients' demand for it from their physicians. And at a time that our churches, moral guides to the nation, face many grave financial problems, the major backer of the Public Broadcasting System's "Religion and Ethics Newsweekly" is the Lilly Foundation. More at http://www.redflagsweekly.com/Thursday_report/2002_august15.html

Blockbuster Depression: Drug Deals for Drug Makers
On July 14th, 2002, in an unprecedented alchemy of corporate drug deals synthesized behind closed doors, a $60 billion transaction allowed Pfizer Inc. to acquire Pharmacia Corporation, creating the largest pharmaceutical company in the world. With anticipated annual revenues of $48 billion, the newly concocted Pfizer-Pharmacia mega-company will have unsurpassed global dominance on some of the most lucrative pharmaceutical drugs available on the market. The potential side-effects of the merger on consumers seems to have gone unnoticed.
By Nathaniel S. Lehrman, MD Aug 15, 2002
More at:http://www.alchemind.org/News/pfizer_pharmacia_merger.htm

Does Your Child Have ADHD?
Consider Fish Oil Over Ritalin
by Dr Burgess

Children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have problems paying attention, listening to instructions, and completing tasks; they also fidget and squirm, are hyperactive, blurt out answers, and interrupt others.

It is conservatively estimated that 3-5% of the school-age population has ADHD. Although drugs, such as Ritalin, are frequently used to treat ADHD, they are fraught with complications. Disadvantages include possible side effects, including decreased appetite and growth, insomnia, increased irritability, and rebound hyperactivity when the drug wears off.

One would not expect to find that a single cause or even a handful of factors could explain why ADHD appears to be so rampant in our society. Because it is accepted that both genetic and environmental factors play a role in ADHD, many other factors-both intrinsic and extrinsic-could influence an individual's fatty acid status.

Inefficient Conversion of ALA (Flax Oil) To EPA And DHA

A possible cause for the low fish oil status of the ADHD children may be impaired conversion of the fatty acid precursors LA and ALA to their longer and more highly unsaturated products, such as EPA and DHA (fish oil fats).

It appears that children with ADHD just are not able to chemically convert the plant omega-3, ALA to fish oil very well. The problem is further worsened when omega-6 fats are consumed and the ideal omega-6:3 ratio of 1:1, progresses to the typical standard American ratio of 15:1. Many of these children have ratios which are even worse and can be as high as 50:1.

This study provides the research evidence supporting the use of the omega-3 fats found in fish oils to effectively address the underlying deficiency that is present in most of these children and appears to be contributing to the ADHD.
American Journal Clinical Nutrition, January 2000:71(1), 327-330

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT: Over one million American children take drugs for ADHD. Clearly it's not the answer, especially when there are better options. Omega-3 oils, specifically fish oil, is probably the single most important nutrient for a child with ADHD to take. Water should be used as the primary beverage, taking care to avoid fruit juices, soda and milk. Restrict sugars and grains which cause elevated insulin levels. I would highly recommend Dr. Stoll's book 'The Omega-3 Connection.' He is a Harvard psychiatrist who has done a great job compiling evidence supporting the use of fish oils.
www.mercola.com

Australia's Fluoridation Proponents Won't Debate

One would imagine that those who advocate fluoridation would seize every opportunity with a white knuckle grip to address their nation's citizens in order to educate them on the supposed benefits of enforced public medication. However, are we surprised that Geelong's esteemed citizens are being fobbed off in Professor Paul Connett's attempts to raise a high-profile debate between the public and their leaders in Victoria's southern coastal city? Have the authorities turned chicken? Michael Connett enlightens:

Last year, the Association for Science in the Public Interest (June 2001) and the American College of Toxicology (November 2001) both held debates on the policy of water fluoridation - which my father, Paul Connett, attended. The debates never took place, however, as both organizations, despite sending invitations to the main institutions in the US that promote fluoridation (e.g. ADA, CDC, NIDCR), failed to find one proponent among them who would agree to an open, public debate.

Such was the case this past weekend in Australia (see message below), where proponents of fluoridation (including the Australian Dental Association) again refused an invitation to debate.

As noted by the Salt Lake Tribune, fluoridation proponent's refusal to debate is "a studied insult to the voters and to the Jeffersonian idea of an informed citizenry making informed public decisions." See http://fluoridealert.org/news/utah/f-debate.htm
See also http://fluoridealert.org/news/nz/advocates-debate.htm
Michael Connett

Message from David McRae, Geelong, Australia:

The statement, recorded below, is the record of the motion passed at the highly successful and quite extraordinary public 'debate' on water fluoridation, held in Geelong, Australia, on Saturday 27th July.

The 'debate' was extraordinary due to the very large yellow chicken, sitting in a chair on the stage, debating with Professor Connett. The chicken was in place of a representative of the Australian Dental Association. They were invited to send someone to argue for the benefits of water fluoridation, but sent a letter stating that they would not send anyone to "this forum ...nor any similar event that may be proposed in the future." The chicken was duly recruited to stand in their stead, and was regularly invited to say something to the professor. The Mayor of Geelong, councillors and other officials expressed surprise that this was the best that the ADA could provide.

The motion read as follows:

'To send a statement to the Victorian Health Minister John Thwaites, the Chairman of Barwon Water and the Council of the City of Greater Geelong, that - having heard a scientific presentation/debate on the dangers and ineffectiveness of water fluoridation, and having noted that those promoting fluoridation were unable to defend the practice in open, public debate, we call upon the Victorian Government and Barwon Water to cease any plans to fluoridate the Barwon Water supply.

We further call upon the government of the State of Victoria to conduct a review of water fluoridation, carried out by independent personnel, not beholden in any way to the Victorian government or its health department, the Australian Dental Association, or any other known pro or anti fluoridation bodies.'

The motion was carried:
Against - 0
Abstained - 1
In favour - all the rest (78 attended the meeting)
(The mayor and councillors did not vote)

The meeting sent a very strong statement, and will hopefully prove to be a turning point in the fiasco of water fluoridation (a scientific and policy disgrace) in Australia.

Sincerely
David McRae
mcraedavid@hotmail.com

-------------------------------------------

People and organizations approached, that have failed to provide a speaker to support fluoridation

1. Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch Dr David Curnow (vice president) and Garry Pearson (CEO). The ADA, this year has been vigorously lobbying MPs and the government with fluoride promotional packages.

Response: "not available to participate in the proposed fluoride forum… nor any similar event that may be proposed in the future."

"Dentists are personally convinced of the validity of this measure (fluoridation), having seen dramatic improvements in community dental health."

Mr Pearson went on to say that the ADA is "not a research body" and relies on other organizations for their fluoridation information.

In our opinion, for a health issue so embroiled in controversy regarding its status as either anacea or poison¹, this comment by the ADA reflects a serious lack of professional responsibility.

2. Health Minister Thwaites

Numerous statements reported in the Geelong and Melbourne press, saying that Geelong should be the next place to be fluoridated. Has toned his statements down lately, saying that public opinion should be gauged.

No response.

3. Dr P Woodruff (Geelong dentist)

Has been in Geelong Advertiser articles saying that fluoridation would be good for Geelong "I am not a public speaker."

4. Dr P Robins (Geelong dentist)

Has written letters to the newspaper saying that Geelong should be fluoridated. Dr Woodruff refused to comment, on behalf of Dr Robins.

5. Dr H Savery (retired medical practitioner, Geelong)

Newspaper letters and articles claiming that fluoridation is effective and safe and would be good for Geelong.

"Debate? I am too old for that sort of thing."

6. Dr John Reed (Geelong dentist)

Writer of a recent article in the Geelong Independent, singing the praises of fluoridation.

No response.

7. Barwon Health, Chairperson and CEO

The major healthcare organization in this region.

No response.

Date:31/07/2002 7:38:03 AM GMT Daylight Time

Quarter-Million Doctor-Induced
Deaths Annually: Iatrogenocide?

IATROGENIC [Gk., iatros, physician, genein, to produce], caused by treatment or diagnostic procedures. An iatrogenic disorder is a condition caused by medical personnel or procedures or through exposure to the environment of a health care facility, including fears instilled in patients by remarks or questions of examining physicians. See also: 'nosocomial', (iatrogenesis, iatrogeny, n.) ~Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 5th Edition, 1998

It is well known that many new drugs, devices, surgeries and treatments are touted as miracles of modern medicine. However, there are two sides, possibly two hundred sides to such claims. This article focuses on a dark side. Caveat Emptor: Buyer Beware.

Ninety-five percent of the people I know are doctors, scientists or activists in health care issues and/or victims of iatrogeny -- including myself. They have commanded my honor and respect since many of these people are addressing epidemic iatrogeny in their work.

A generation ago, people trusted their doctors blindly and implicitly. The personal bonds people used to form with their doctors have largely been replaced with the cold hard contemporary reality that medicine has become a $multi-billion per year business with little room for compassion. The healthcare market place is not kind and people have lost trust. Iatrogeny plays a large and ugly role in this.

A recent study published in The Journal of The American Medical Association (2000:284:94) by Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, showed that in the U.S. there are:

· 12,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery
· 7,000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals
· 20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals
· 80,000 deaths/year from nosocomial infections in hospitals
· 106,000 deaths/year from adverse effects of medications

This totals 225,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes, placing iatrogeny as the third leading cause of death in the U.S., second only to heart disease and cancer. The scary part is that this does not include disabilities and disorders; just deaths in hospitalized patients. In any event, when one ponders that more than four times as many people die in one year from doctors' mistakes than died in the entire Vietnam War, one is aghast at why this information isn't making headlines or why huge think tanks funded by medicopolitical interests haven't formed.

We have the American Heart Association to address heart disease, Richard Nixon's "War on Cancer," and even groups like "Mothers Against Drunk Driving." Organizations have been formed to address almost every sort of issue, save iatrogeny.

My guess is that medicopolitics have not figured out a way to capitalize on all these deaths and disorders, ... yet. There is, however, a small "experts" consortium that does address iatrogeny in the journals, but such studies are few and far between. Funding such studies doesn't appear to be sound business practice.

Iatrogeny is not exclusive to the U.S. The British Medical Journal stated March 18, 2000 that, "In Australia, medical error results is as many as 18,000 unnecessary deaths, and more than 50,000 patients become disabled every year."

Studies released in the last 10 years show similar trends in the UK, Canada and New Zealand. New Zealand has a large percentage ratio of adverse drug reactions comparable to the U.S. It should be noted that the U.S. and New Zealand are the only countries that allow aggressive pharmaceutical drug advertisements.

One very interesting statistic show deaths attributed to addictive drugs in the UK between 1990 and 1995:
· Benzodiazepines - 1,810
· Methadone - 676
· Heroin - 291

This emphasizes my point that millions of dollars are given to organizations for deaths and disabilities from a myriad of causes, except iatrogeny. Here we have two legal prescription drugs causing more deaths each, than heroin.

Many can pooh-pooh these statistics and claim that to err is human, etc., however there comes a point when one must look deeper. The facts and statistics are too overwhelming to ignore. Those in power have choices to make. They can rationalize, deny or take responsible action against epidemic iatrogeny.

The latter seems to be slow in genesis. There has been much denial and silence from the allopathic medical industrial complex. Since medicine has become an arm of business and since business and politics are such passionate bedfellows, one must look at some other interesting facts.

Drug companies spend huge fortunes for political influence. In fact lobbying for pharmaceutical interests in the first half of 2000 reached $42.9 million; and it was estimated that $230 million would be spent during the election. George Bush welcomed $1.7 million from drug companies just for his inauguration celebrations (British Medical Journal January 27, 2001).

Drug companies are a business and have always been a business. They do not give such an investment without an expected return with profits. Perhaps this is why officials turn a blind eye to the fact that doctors and hospitals are responsible for nearly a quarter-million deaths in the U.S. per year. Or perhaps this is why the pharma-companies manufacture pesticides and chemicals that cause cancer and disease and then manufacture drugs to treat diseases they cause that can cause even more disorders to create a market for more drugs -- and more profit.

The scenario above describes a very lucrative cycle. Perhaps this is why funding for disease research successfully diverts attention from the pharmocartels' own carcinogenic and deadly products. One need not look too hard for reasons why doctors' and hospitals' mistakes are the third leading cause of death in America -- with no end in sight.

Many believe that Barbara Starfield's study cited earlier is just the tip of the iceberg. After all, the study only looked at hospitalized patients. What of the in home and outpatient errors? There are more people to consider in these groups, and certainly more iatrogeny. Could it be that iatrogeny is the leading cause of death in the U.S.? In the World?

As startling and unsupported as that sounds, it may very well be true. At any rate, the iatrogenic holocaust makes World War II deaths pale in comparison. Yet only patronizing and minimal attempts to recognize and correct iatrogeny have been made.

Murder Or Mistake?
The fine line between murder or mistake is a hot potato. If you saw your neighbors being killed one by one or en masse, yet did nothing about it, or took up for the killers, you could be guilty of "accessory to murder" or "accessory to murder after the fact." Many analogies and ethical juxtapositions could be generated in such a debate. One could even make the argument for a global elitist plan at population control allowing iatrogeny to gain such momentum.

Regardless of etiology, Iatrogeny is real. It is rampant and far from being under control. By making iatrogeny, through semantics, sound as if it is an infectious disease beyond the control of physicians and hospitals, we allow the medical profession and pharmaceutical cartels to distance themselves from responsibility and relieve them from the culpability for what mirrors negligent homicide.

It would be humanly impossible to eliminate genuine mistakes entirely. "But how many times does a mistake happen until it's not just a mistake anymore, but negligence?"

This author believes that 225,000 deaths every year may be an example of when mistakes cross over to the darkness of negligence. If so, then we are witnessing the greatest holocaust to befall mankind ever.

In closing, I leave you with my own definition of a freshly coined word:
Iatrogenocide - [Gk, iatros, physician, genein, to produce, cide, killing] The extermination of a population in a systematic fashion through medical error.

For more information on iatrogeny, contact me at freeyurko@bizland.com
Author anonymous. Originally published in The Journal of Degenerative Disease, February/March 2002: 3(3rd); pages 37-38; Later published in the Idaho Observer, March 2002

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: This article further highlights the research we reported in Health Wars, including Barbara Starfield's work at Johns Hopkins University. The public must stir itself to contemplate what is being discussed here. I see countless of unnecessary deaths occurring each year due to the citizen's unwillingness to re-classify medicine as a flawed human endeavour from that of dogmatic religion. I have no joy in seeing my often professionally criticised position re-endorsed. Death by Doctoring is a deadly denial and is completely preventable. It's in a neighbourhood near you. Please be educated on the issues involved.
Health Wars by Phillip Day
www.credence.org

A big thank you to What Doctors Don't Tell You for this vital piece of information!

WELCOME to the first edition of the What Doctors Don't Tell You e-news broadcast. The service will be occasional during the summer months, but we intend to make it weekly once the holiday period has ended.

JUST ANOTHER BILL?

Our first report is a call to arms! An innocuous-sounding Mental Health Draft Bill is being prepared for the UK parliament for review after September. It is intended to revise the Mental Health Act, 1983.

If you're of good mental health, you might switch off straight away. Perhaps you see it as another piece of legislation that is probably necessary to deal with a sector of our community with which you have little experience.

Unfortunately it is far more insidious, and if you are in any way 'eccentric' - for instance, you might have decided not to give your children the MMR - then listen up.

MPs, doctors, and those in psychiatric medicine are currently looking at the proposals that will formulate the bill. As they stand, the proposals give a doctor an absolute right to enter your home, and to drug and pacify you against your will.

Now, what will determine the doctor's decision to enter your home? Fundamentally, it will be whether he feels you have a 'mental disorder', which, in the new draft proposals, is defined as "any disability, or disorder of mind or brain which results in an impairment or disturbance of mental functioning."

It's a wonderfully loose definition. Are you showing some impairment or disturbance of mental functioning if you decide not to vaccinate your children? We're sure you can think of your own examples of something you stand for that goes against convention.

Clearly, these proposals are a violation of basic human rights, and give the doctor the power of judge and jury, and you will have no recourse to plead your innocence.

So what can you do? There's a very short window of opportunity to make your voice heard. E-mail, or better still, write to your local MP (log onto: http://www.locata.co.uk/commons for his details), and let him know what you think about these proposals. You can also e-mail directly to the secretary of state for health, Alan Milburn, MP, by logging onto: http://www.health.gov.uk.

Whoever you decide to lobby, please be courteous and constructive, and point out the infringement to personal liberties the draft proposals represent.

WE HAVE UNTIL 16 SEPTEMBER TO MAKE OUR VOICES HEARD.

IF THIS CONCERNS YOU, PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO A FRIEND. WE NEED TO ADD AS MANY VOICES AS POSSIBLE.
What Doctors Don't Tell You, www.wddty.co.uk

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: This is yet another bill that is supporting the world's pharma cartel. To understand their power, and the way they infiltrate and influence every sector of society, I recommend you read Secrets of the Drugs Industry. To order your copy, please log onto What Doctors Don't Tell You: http://www.wddty.co.uk today.

Have you noticed that barely a day goes by that we don't have some new battle to fight to protect freedoms and rights we hitherto took for granted? Twenty years ago, the average citizen never really saw themselves as an 'activist'. Walking around with a banner, or forming a 'pressure group', was alien to them and was what 'those other people' did. Just before Samantha and I left to fly to Australia for our tour last week, we had to commence yet another war at home - form another pressure group - to block the building of a new mobile telephone mast tower within 40 meters of my pillow in the UK. This is the second of such wars, the first having been successfully waged by us against the previous mobile telephone company who backed off when we found an alternative site for their equipment.

What we have to be careful of here is girding ourselves with the illusion that we can leave it to others to protect our freedoms. There is only one way, and that is to mount a sustained and concerted attack in large numbers against these efforts to despoil our rights and freedoms. IF WE DO NOT DO THAT, legislation will be passed, directives put onto the statute books and enforcement agencies notified. And that, as they say, will be that.

Citizens are now waking up to the fact that this is a different era we live in today. The present governing élite, which appears to have a passion to change our society according to their own minority dictates, are banking on you not getting organised enough to matter. Laws and measures are being rammed through with or without the public's consent. We must show them consistently how very wrong they have read the public's mood and tolerance.

HEALTHY AT 100! WITH PHILLIP DAY

Perth - Adelaide - Melbourne - Canberra - Sydney - Darwin - Brisbane - New Zealand
(and everywhere in-between)

After his highly successful and mammoth, no-holes-barred Antipodean Health Wars tour of 2001, internationally acclaimed health researcher, and world-class lecturer Phillip Day is returning to Australia and New Zealand. Phillip's hugely popular health presentations, known and respected around the world, come together in a blockbuster lecture set for the forthcoming tour which will also contain explosive material from his new book, The Mind Game.

Phillip is author of Health Wars, World Without AIDS, Food For Thought, Cancer: Why We're Still Dying To Know The Truth and The Mind Game. Famous for dealing with awkward subjects and explaining solutions in his own unique style, Phillip is currently undertaking a monster 166-date tour of the UK and Ireland ("We even got helicoptered out to the Scilly Isles in a Force 8 gale!"). Phillip has decided to compact his current NINE-HOUR, THREE-SESSION extravaganza of incredible, uplifting and empowering health and wellness information into a one-evening blockbuster Australians and New Zealanders are going to remember for the rest of their lives. The title of the talk? HEALTHY AT 100.

For those new to the Phillip Day experience:

"My subject is Life Management: all the things we should have been taught at school about how to survive in the outside world, but weren't. How many of us are dying unnecessarily? How many of us are not living, but just existing? How many are crippled with the misery of illnesses to which we do not know the answers? How many enslaved by debt when a simple strategy can move us through the woods to the green pastures beckoning? Who among us is terrified by what is happening in the world today? How many are fearful of violence, fearful of what our nations have become, fearful of losing our security? How many are just plain fearful?

This is a wake-up call to all the ordinary, decent citizens out there who want to take their precious country back from the violence, the sleaze, the pop-pornography, the fiscal rape of the tax-payer and from a healthcare system still following the wrong course with the maximum of precision. If you feel outraged over what your nation has become, do you know that millions of people think the same way you do, but have stayed silent over issues our grandfathers took for granted? These millions are now stirring and are determined to say 'Enough!' Come along and discover how you can join us and make a difference."

THE WORKSHOP - (Bring a notepad and a sharp pencil!)
Come prepared! Use Phillip's famously unique, often humorous, poignant and intelligent insights to learn and master the tools and skills you can use IMMEDIATELY to make incredible, positive and lasting changes in your life. WHATEVER YOU DO, don't miss this chance to hear the talk that has been educating and ENTHRALLING AUDIENCES EVERYWHERE. This information can literally change your life!

DON'T PANIC IF YOU CANNOT WRITE FAST ENOUGH! BOOKS AND TAPES WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR SALE AT THE MEETING VENUES.

SO WHAT'S IT ALL GOING TO BE ABOUT?

Find out the SIX ASTOUNDINGLY SIMPLE REASONS why the Karakorum, Abkhasians and Hunzakuts are routinely LIVING TO A HEALTHY AND MOBILE 100+ in the absence of Western healthcare, and how you can too!

Why are 1 in 2 over 70 years of age expected to get Alzheimer's disease and other 'mental impairment problems'? WHAT CAN YOU DO to prevent this? How does the liver play a vital role?

What are the twelve foods you must AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE?

Find out the ten ways you can BURN BODY FAT RAPIDLY!

How can the number one killer, heart disease, BE SO EASILY AND CHEAPLY PREVENTED? Why is this life-saving information, researched to the highest levels of biochemistry, NOT BEING CIRCULATED?

What can you do naturally to PREVENT AND TREAT CANCER, according to leading experts? Why is the public deliberately denied this life-saving protocol?

Discover the HARMFUL TOXINS we innocently allow into our bedrooms and bathrooms that are contributing to our misery, physical handicap and early death.

Why are women today SUFFERING an astonishing increase in hormonal problems, breast cancer, cysts, fibroids and gynaecological problems? WHAT CAN BE DONE simply to remove this misery from so many lives?

How is psychiatry behind the DAMAGING OF OUR SOCIETIES today? Why can this branch of 'medicine' justifiably be labelled A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY?

Who are the 'Dark Gods' of psychiatry, who spawned two world wars, have revolutionised the educational system TO PREVENT CHILDREN LEARNING CORRECTLY, introduced political correctness, LEGALLY REPLACED PARENTS as the arbiters of the family, maimed and brain-damaged HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF TRUSTING PATIENTS with drugs, psychosurgery and electrocution, and today preside over the DOPING UP OF OUR SCHOOLKIDS AND ELDERLY, the destruction of our RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS, the non-effectiveness of our political and legal systems and THE SUBVERTING OF OUR LAWS? What can be done to expose them and GET SOCIETY BACK ON TRACK?

What's really behind 'mental illnesses', such as ADD/ADHD, Aspbergers, autism, schizophrenia, over-eating, epilepsy, addictions, depression, insomnia, anxiety, anorexia, bulimia, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, ALS (motor neuron) and others? Are there SIMPLE AND STRAIGHT-FORWARD MEASURES you can use for yourself to help or reverse these conditions?

What about AIDS, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, osteoporosis, asthma, heartburn, diabetes, Crohn's, vaccination mania, stroke, foot and mouth disease, mad cow and other ailments afflicting our societies today? What is the GREAT NEWS we can bring to bear to eradicate these from our own bodies, our families and our nations?

Why do people do what they do? Why are some MOTIVATED AND SUCCESSFUL and some aren't? Why are some POPULAR and some aren't? Why do people get addicted to moods and destructive behaviour in relationships and business? What can be done to coach ourselves to avoid these painful blights on our lives and set ourselves on the road to peace, laughter and progress? What can we do TODAY to TURN THE CORNER, climb out of the rut and enjoy a healthier, wealthier, happier, fulfilling and LONGER life and RECLAIM OUR NATIONS?

Phillip Day: "My job for the past 17 years has been to grasp an understanding of human behaviour and assist people to develop the TOOLS AND SKILLS to HELP THEMSELVES, regardless of the condition in which I found them. My message to you for 2002 is simple: Whether you are sick, unhealthy, depressed, demotivated, disliking your job, fed up with a relationship, broke, fearful, beset by feelings of doom or just plain, flat-out BORED WITH YOUR EXISTENCE, if you do only ONE POSITIVE THING for 2002, start the revolution in your life and your nation with a visit to any one of my meetings for a complete mental and physical 60,000-MILE SERVICE! Let's get you up on the rack, change your oil and get the wheel nuts off to see WHAT CAN BE DONE. Get ready for some action and let's have some fun!"

Ticket sales are at: http://www.credence.com.au/tour/

The tour schedule is being constantly updated, so please check regularly

Please note: Admission will only be granted to those in possession of a valid ticket.
Please arrive in time to ensure that you secure a suitable seat.
No recording devices are permitted without express permission from Credence Events Management. All net door proceeds will go towards the Campaign for Truth in Medicine and Cancer Prevention Coalition, assisting these two worthy organisations in their missions to press for real medical and scientific reform.

Pessimism Can Harm Your Health

Pessimistic people report more knee pain and worse functioning than those with similar knee problems who don't have such a negative outlook. Outlook, especially one that is negative and expecting the worst, "really affects the physical health of a person."

Researchers measured physical pain, functioning and outlook in 480 patients at least 65 years old who were suffering from arthritis. All of the study participants experienced pain in their knees on most days, which caused a certain amount of disability.

The researchers measured physical functioning and disability from pain by surveying patients and watching them perform day-to-day activities. Outlook was measured by asking people to rate how much they agreed with optimistic statements such as "I always look on the bright side of things" or pessimistic statements such as "If something can go wrong for me, it will."

The investigators found that people who appeared to be pessimistic were less able than others to perform all of the measured daily activities, which included walking, lifting an object, climbing stairs and getting in and out of a car.

Optimism, in contrast, appeared less connected to health, with people characterized by a more cheery outlook appearing no better able of performing most functions than others.

People who are pessimistic don't believe things will work out for them, and so they never try to achieve anything. They don't get a chance to find out if they can or can't do it.

As such, if pessimistic people don't even try to maintain certain health behaviours, such as exercise, they are less likely to keep up their physical conditioning, and so will feel more pain and function less well than their more upbeat peers.

And when negatively inclined people do try to exercise they may be more likely to feel pain, which just reaffirms their expectation that nothing works in their favour, so they might as well stop trying. It becomes a type of "negative self-fulfilling prophecy".

Optimistic people may be more likely to try to exercise. Although their efforts might keep their condition from deteriorating, they still may not actually improve, she added. Optimists are more likely to try, but they are not more likely to succeed.
Journal of Behavioral Medicine June 2002;25:219-231
Per www.mercola.com

Ritalin and Cancer?

American Academy of Pediatrics Guidelines for Treating Behavioral Disorders in Children with Ritalin Ignores Evidence of Cancer Risks warns Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.

Based on an industry-funded multi-university trial on 282 pre-teen children treated with Ritalin for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorders (ADHD), just published in Pediatrics, the American Academy of Pediatrics has endorsed the use of the drug. However, the Academy ignores clear evidence of the drug's cancer risks of which parents, teachers and school nurses, besides most pediatricians and psychiatrists, still remain uninformed and unaware.

Some 40 years after the drug was first marketed by Ciba Geigy, carcinogenicity tests were conducted at the tax payer's expense by the National Toxicology Program, the results of which were published in 1995.

Adult mice were fed Ritalin over a two-year period at dosages close to those prescribed to children. The mice developed a statistically significant incidence of liver abnormalities and tumors, including highly aggressive rare cancers known as hepatoblastomas. These findings are particularly disturbing as the tests were conducted on adult, rather than young mice which would be expected to be much more sensitive to carcinogenic effects.

The National Toxicology Program concluded that Ritalin is a "possible human carcinogen," and recommended the need for further research. While still insisting that the drug is safe, the Food and Drug Administration admitted that these findings signal "carcinogenic potential," and required a statement to this effect in the drug's package insert. However, these inserts are not seen by parents or nurses.

The Physicians' Desk Reference admits evidence on the carcinogenicity of Ritalin, now manufactured by Novartis, qualified by the statement that "the significance of these results is unknown," apparently not recognizing that this is more alarming than reassuring. Apart from cancer risks, there is also suggestive evidence that Ritalin induces genetic damage in blood cells of Ritalin-treated children.

Concerns on Ritalin's cancer risk are more acute in view of the millions of children treated annually with the drug and the escalating incidence of childhood cancer, by some 35% over the last few decades, quite apart from delayed risks of cancer in adult life.

These risks are compounded by the availability of alternative safe and effective procedures, notably behavior modification and biofeedback.

There is no justification for prescribing Ritalin, even by highly qualified pediatricians and psychiatrists, unless parents have been explicitly informed of the drug's cancer risks. Otherwise, prescribing Ritalin constitutes unarguable medical malpractice.

CONTACT: Cancer Prevention Coalition National Office: 2121 West Taylor Street, MC 922, Chicago, IL 60612, e-mail epstein@uic.edu.
www.preventcancer.com

Ritalin: What Every Citizen Should Know
by Phillip Day

In my recently released book, The Mind Game, we examine the abysmal Ritalin in some detail. Dr Epstein's research is also extremely timely, coming at a stage where Ritalin is prescribed to more of our young than ever since its infamous 1955 release onto the market.

RITALIN (methylphenidate)
Profile: An amphetamine similar to cocaine. Previously manufactured by CIBA Pharmaceutical Company, now made by Novartis. Primary treatment used in ADHD. Today used by millions of children in America alone. Side-effects published by the International Journal of the Addictions list over 105 adverse reactions to Ritalin, including anxiety, hair loss, convulsions, nausea, insomnia, headaches, stomach pains, weight loss, slowing of growth, and compulsive nervous behaviours. A 1975 study in the Canadian Medical Association Journal reported that "Findings suggest that children who take [Ritalin] even in moderate doses for several years may in some cases fail to grow at expected rates."

CIBA issued the following Ritalin advisory in 1985:

DRUG DEPENDENCE: Ritalin should be given cautiously to emotionally unstable patients, such as those with a history of drug dependence or alcoholism, because such patients may increase dosage on their own initiative. Chronically abusive use can lead to marked tolerance and physic dependence with varying degrees of abnormal behaviour. Frank psychotic episodes can occur, especially with parental abuse. Careful supervision is required during drug withdrawal, since severe depression as well as the effects of chronic over-activity can be unmasked.

Note that, by the admission of the manufacturers themselves, the purpose of Ritalin is to 'mask' the symptoms of 'over-activity', not cure them. And what is the definition of parental abuse in today's world? Apart from the obvious, can it also be when children and teenagers disagree with their parents? Suicide and suicidal tendencies have dogged withdrawal from Ritalin from its outset. Even psychiatry's bible, the DSM-III-R, states that "suicide is the major complication" of withdrawing from Ritalin and similar drugs. The tragic legacy these drugs have bequeathed to our children is discussed in Part 1 of my new book in the chapter entitled 'The Great Childhood Maddening'.

ENHANCES PERFORMANCE?
If Ritalin really worked to improve school performance, there should be abundant proof of this in the scientific literature. There isn't. The number of well-designed studies in which Ritalin has been shown to enhance long-term learning is a telling 'zero'. The litany of condemnation and negative reporting however is legion. A sampling of these is given below:

1.Breggin, Peter, "The Scapegoating of American Children", Wall Street Journal, 7th November 1989, p.1
2.Physicians Desk Reference (PDR)
3.Weiss, Gabrielle, et al, "Effect of Long-Term Treatment of Hyperactive Children with Methylphenidate", The Canadian Medical Association Journal, Vol.112, No.2, 25th January 1975, p.164
4.Kohn, Alfie, "Suffer The Restless Children", Atlantic Monthly, November 1989, p.98

"…all the conclusions converged: 'stimulant drugs have little, if any impact on… long-term academic outcome." (The Learning Mystique, 1987)

"…we again find no support for the assumption that 'learning' - in any general sense - improves as a consequence of drug treatment." (American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1976)

"The belief that long-term drug intervention will continue to be of value or produce better outcome in hyperactive children has not been substantiated by this or other studies." (Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 1981)

"The ideal dose for the suppression of conduct problems may actually impair cognitive effects which, theoretically, could negate any beneficial effect on academic achievement or even exacerbate the child's learning problems." (Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1983)

"The present results suggest that continued use of Ritalin and possibly other drugs to control hyperactivity may result in compliant but academically incompetent students…. The control of hyperactivity by medication, while effective, may be too costly to the child, in that it may retard his academic and social growth, a human cost that schools and society can ill afford." (Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 1975)

Educator Larson has his own opinions after years of observing children on long-term Ritalin prescription: "…as near as I can tell, and this is completely unscientific, but by our work with them, they have got brain damage. The tragedy is deepened by the fact that the labelling of children with ADD is not because of a problem the kids have; it is because of a problem teachers who cannot tolerate active children have."

To neurologist Fred Baughman, the greatest tragedy is that, after being diagnosed, children believe they have something wrong with them that only a drug can fix. More poignantly, the child sees that his parents and schoolteachers believe this also.

For more information on this subject, or to purchase a copy of Phillip Day's book The Mind Game, please visit www.credence.org or call your national Credence office.

Sex Attack Doctor Jailed

Despite a previous indecent assault conviction, resulting in a six-year licence suspension, London psychiatrist Kolathur Unni was judged "fit to practice." And what did Unni do once he was declared "fit"? He sexually abused another patient.

This month, Unni was sentenced to 18 months in jail for that "sex attack," and the judge told Unni that he "should never be allowed to practice as a doctor in this country [England] or anywhere again." However, once the verdict was in, more of Unni's past was revealed, as jurors exchanged looks of horror… Full story at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/england/newsid_2093000/2093610.stm
news.bbc.co.uk - BBC News online 4th July 2002

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: Unni's case is the tip of the iceberg for human rights violations within psychiatry. Often, people have asked me why psychiatry's hierarchy doesn't do more to keep its house in order. Well, in certain cases, even the hierarchy within the 'mental health' industry has been found guilty of gross abuses of their patients' human rights. Today's psychiatrists, according to studies, have the shortest marriages of seven branches of medicine studied and are most likely to have extra-marital affairs, as are their spouses. But extra-marital affairs with whom… and where…?

"Barbara Noel felt herself floating towards consciousness. It was Friday, 21st September 1984, and she was in her psychiatrist's office in Chicago, waking from a dose of sodium amytal, a barbiturate he had been giving her in order to help her explore her subconscious. This morning though, instead of awakening dreamily by herself, she says she felt a weight on top of her. A man was breathing heavily onto her shoulder. Still sedated, Noel moaned and stirred. The breathing stopped, and the body on top of her carefully lifted away. Pretending to sleep, Noel opened her eyes a crack. She could make out a person standing at a sink with his back to her. He was bald, with a tanned back and stark white buttocks. Noel's heart stopped. The man, she says, was Dr Jules Masserman, her psychiatrist of 18 years."

Subsequent action against Dr Jules Masserman solicited a fervent denial by the latter of the charges. Psychiatrists all over the world winced as they followed the descending fortunes of Masserman, the 1979 president of the American Psychiatric Association. The case was finally settled when Masserman agreed to pay malpractice settlements to Noel and three other women. He also signed an agreement never to practise psychiatric therapy again in the United States.

This is one of a host of cases highlighted in my book The Mind Game, illustrating the politics of the madhouse existing within psychiatry, which has such a dismal and pathetic record of policing its own. Remember, this is the only 'social service', outside of the police, which can have you off the streets and sectioned into a mental institution, with precious little you can do about it. Remember also that if you are arrested for a crime, you can make that telephone call to your lawyer in the hope that justice will prevail (if you have been wrongly accused). But who's going to listen to you under a section order? What rights do you have if you have already been labelled with any one of an increasing and bewilderingly arbitrary number of bizarre 'mental illnesses'?

There are many mental health professionals who are working with all good intention within psychology and psychiatry, to be sure, and some of them do great work. Our goal at CTM is not to be obstructive or needlessly critical, but to assist in bringing psychiatry back within the law and moral code. We also wish to encourage the citizenry to research and implement the host of natural and sensitive measures that have a proven track record against mental disorders. And this is the best news of all. Find out today what you can do to get involved.

The Mind Game by Phillip Day
www.credence.org

Parents Pressured to Put Kids on Ritalin

N.Y. court orders use of medicine

Some public schools are accusing parents of child abuse when they balk at giving their kids drugs such as Ritalin, and as judges begin to agree, some parents are medicating their children for fear of having them hauled away.
more at http://www.usatoday.com/life/health/child/lhchi193.htm

Psychotropic Drugs to be Administered to Defendants

Today, August 20th, 2002, the Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics (CCLE) filed an amicus curiae brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a St. Louis dentist. Dr. Charles Sell is appealing to the Court to stay a lower court's decision to have him forcibly drugged in order to stand trial. In May, the Eighth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruled that Dr. Sell could be injected with psychotropic drugs in order to make him "mentally competent" to stand trial for insurance fraud. More at http://www.alchemind.org/News/sell_ussc1.htm

School Lunches Making 'Em Sick

The US spends over $7 billion on foods for school lunches that are sickening children. More at http://mercola.com/2002/aug/17/school_lunches.htm

US Drug Usage Explodes

Physicians are prescribing medications at a far faster clip than they did two decades ago, a trend that is likely to result in a doubling of drug spending in the next 5 years.

Between 1985 and 1999, the prescribing rate rose 34%, from 109 to 146 prescriptions per 100 visits, the study found. All major therapeutic classes, except for microbial agents such as penicillin and tetracycline (which fell 12%) experienced increases during the study period.

About two thirds of the increase can be accounted for by an aging patient population and more complicated medical conditions, the research found. But other factors, such as the availability of new drug formulations to treat chronic conditions, wider health insurance and drug coverage, and growth of direct-to-consumer advertising are also believed to contribute to the increased prescribing rate.

The trend is likely to continue as baby boomers grow older and scientific discoveries lead to better treatment of acute and chronic conditions, concludes study author Catharine Burt, chief of the ambulatory care statistics branch of the National Center for Health Statistics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The analysis is based on data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, a survey of office-based physicians conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics. The survey captures all "drug mentions", meaning prescriptions, over-the-counter preparations and immunizations ordered, supplied or administered during a visit.

Psychiatrists had the largest increase in drug mentions, jumping to 178 drugs per 100 visits in 1999, from 82 per 100 visits in 1985.

Just six therapeutic classes accounted for 80% of the increase in the overall drug mention rate. Those classes include central nervous system drugs, hormones, respiratory medications, pain relief agents, metabolics/nutrients and cardiovascular-kidney drugs.

Antidepressants accounted for 13.5% of the increase in overall ambulatory drug prescribing. Cholesterol-lowering drugs and heart medications called ACE inhibitors were also top contributors.

For seniors, the largest increase was for drugs affecting the blood and blood-forming tissues, which jumped 187% during the study period. For adults 45 to 64, metabolic drugs, including cholesterol-lowering medications, had the largest increase in drug mentions, up 109%.

Central nervous system drugs had the highest increase for children, up a startling 327%. The study finds that the attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder drug Ritalin was among the most frequently mentioned drugs in this class during children's visits in 1999.
Health Affairs, July/August 2002

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT: The US currently spends about 1.5 trillion dollars for healthcare, and that is projected to double in less than ten years. As the late Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois was fond of saying in reference to the Defense Department budget, a billion dollars here, a billion dollars there, and before you know it you are talking real money. Well, we are talking much more than a few billion dollars: nearly 1.5 trillion dollars is far beyond even Bill Gates' net worth. The real tragedy is that we spend all this money on disease management focused on drugs and surgery, and our return on this investment is profoundly poor.

Contributing a hefty part of these costs, retail pharmacies filled 3 billion prescriptions in 2000. And, as the article states, psychiatrists are leading the pack when it comes to increasing their use of drugs. This is, in part, related to the clear increase in depression and the apparent effectiveness of the second-generation antidepressants at relieving symptoms for many.

However, these drugs DO NOT treat the cause; at best, they are symptomatic band-aids, and at worse they cause side effects that can lead to premature death.

So what are your options? Review the recent article (focused on ADHD but applicable to other depression sources) to review those in more detail, but in short, my major focus now is on increasing your fish oil intake and lowering your omega-6 oils.
www.mercola.com

Water or Coke?

WATER

1. 75% of Americans are chronically dehydrated.
2. In 37% of Americans, the thirst mechanism is so weak that it is often mistaken for hunger.
3. Even MILD dehydration will slow down one's metabolism as much as 3%.
4. One glass of water will shut down midnight hunger pangs for almost 100% of the dieters studied in a University of Washington study.
5. Lack of water, the 1st trigger of daytime fatigue.
6. Preliminary research indicates that 8-10 glasses of water a day could significantly ease back and joint pain for up to 80% of sufferers.
7. A mere 2% drop in body water can trigger fuzzy short-term memory, trouble with basic math, and difficulty focusing on the computer screen or on a printed page.
8. Drinking 5 glasses of water daily decreases the risk of colon cancer by 45%, plus it can slash the risk of breast cancer by 79%, and one is 50% less likely to develop bladder cancer.

And now for the properties of COKE

1. In many states (in the USA) the highway patrol carries two gallons of coke in the truck to remove blood from the highway after a car accident.
2. You can put a T-bone steak in a bowl of coke and it will be gone in two days.
3. To clean a toilet: Pour a can of Coca-Cola into the toilet bowl and let the "real thing" sit for one hour, then flush clean. The citric acid in Coke removes stains from vitreous China.
4. To remove rust spots from chrome car bumpers: Rub the bumper with a rumpled-up piece of Reynolds Wrap aluminium foil dipped in Coca-Cola
5. To clean corrosion from car battery terminals: Pour a can of Coca-Cola over the terminals to bubble away the corrosion.
6. To loosen a rusted bolt: Applying a cloth soaked in Coca-Cola to the rusted bolt for several minutes.
7. To bake a moist ham: Empty a can of Coca-Cola into the baking pan, wrap the ham in aluminium foil, and bake. Thirty minutes before the ham is finished, remove the foil, allowing the drippings to mix with the Coke for a sumptuous brown gravy.
8. To remove grease from clothes: Empty a can of coke into a load of greasy clothes, add detergent, and run through a regular cycle. The Coca-Cola will help loosen grease stains. It will also clean road haze from your windshield.

For Your Info:

1. The active ingredient in Coke is phosphoric acid. Its pH is 2.8. It will dissolve a nail in about 4 days. Phosphoric acid also leaches calcium from bones and is a major contributor to the rising increase in osteoporosis.
2. To carry Coca-Cola syrup (the concentrate), the commercial truck must use the Hazardous Material place cards reserved for highly corrosive materials.
3. The distributors of coke have been using it to clean the engines of their trucks for about 20 years!

Now, what would you give to your child?
CTM regional correspondence