A new study from Zheijian Provincial People's Hospital in Zheijiang, China indicates that a compound in turmeric known as curcumin, which gives the spice its characteristic saffron-like color, is capable of inducing programmed cell death (apoptosis) within triple negative breast cancer cells.^[1]

Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), so named because the cells do not have the characteristic receptors for estrogen, progesterone and Her2/neu, is considered the most treatment resistant, primarily because these 'missing receptors' are required for many of the most popular conventional treatments to work, e.g. Tamoxifen targets estrogen receptors.

For this reason, TNBC is considered the most aggressive, the most likely to be treated with less-targeted (and therefore more toxic) forms of chemotherapy, and the soonest to return when treatment fails.

Approximately 15-25% of all breast cancer cases are triple negative. Unfortunately, however, the most visible non-profit foundation dedicated to bringing awareness to the condition, the Triple Negative Breast Cancer Foundation, is focused almost exclusively on raising awareness and money for a future pharmaceutical "cure" - much in the same way as its partner, Susan G. Komen, and the larger breast cancer awareness organization, Breast Cancer Awareness Month, act as if removing and addressing the obvious causes of cancer, e.g. carcinogenic chemical and radiation exposures, were not the first priority. For those suffering through or recovering from treatment right now, or trying to decide what to do with a new diagnosis, this latest Chinese study is promising.

In many ways we are searching for real science, not funded by the GMO companies themselves, to tell us the truth about genetically modified organisms and their dangers. Because these companies control access to their chemicals and any related research, what we have is little. But from the little we know, there is much to fear concerning genetically modified organisms.

Most recently, scientists in Canada conducted a study on pregnant and non-pregnant women, looking for the chemicals found in pesticides related to genetically modified foods. What they found was frightening indeed.

100% of Women Had At Least 1 of These Toxins

According to GreenMedInfo.com, the scientists were looking for 5 basic toxins. Those include:

• Glyphosate (Monsanto's Roundup herbicide)
• Gluphosinate (an herbicide)
• AMPA (a metabolite of glyphosate)
• 3-MMPA (a metabolite of gluphosinate)
• Cry1Ab (the Bt toxin of gluphosinate)

All women had at least one of the toxins present in their blood, but there were differences between the pregnant and non-pregnant women. A large percentage of non-pregnant study subjects had both glyphosate and gluphosinate in their blood, while the pregnant women did not. However, 100% of pregnant women studied had 3-MPPA in their blood and 93% had Cry1Ab. Even more troubling - 100% of fetal cords studied had 3-MPPA and 80% had Cry1Ab.

Giving up gluten in the diet can be a challenge for some people. How would you feel if I said that in order to be TRUE gluten free, you have to give up processed dairy foods? Cheese, yogurt, milk, butter, sour cream, etc.

Could feeding cattle grain be contributing to this process?

Is gluten found in standard store bought milk? Is gluten the only protein in grain that causes or contributes to poor health in those with gluten sensitivity? Dr. Ford and I answer these questions in this breakthrough interview that you won't want to miss if you are on a gluten free diet...

I'm sure by now many of you have heard about the Stanford study claiming that organic foods are no healthier or safer than conventional alternatives.

There were so many problems with this study and the media reporting of it that it's difficult to know where to start. To begin with, their results did not, in fact, support the claim that organic foods are "no healthier or safer" than conventional alternatives. Their data - if we are to take them at face value - suggest only that organic produce is no more nutritious than conventional produce. From their own conclusion:

The published literature lacks strong evidence that organic foods are significantly more nutritious than conventional foods. Consumption of organic foods may reduce exposure to pesticide residues and antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

According to the authors, organic foods are no more nutritious than conventional foods. But, ahem, eating organic foods may reduce exposure to pesticide residues and antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Somehow that last bit just slid right by in most of the media coverage of the study. The headlines were all about how organic is no better than conventional in terms of nutrient content, but few articles analyzed the significance of the increased exposure to pesticide and antibiotic resistance bacteria. No mention of the fact that pesticides, herbicides and other harmful chemicals that have been shown to cause health problems - especially in vulnerable populations like children. No mention of the 2010 report issued by a panel of scientists convened to study the effects of environmental toxins on cancer urging Americans to eat organic produce grown without pesticides, fertilizers or other chemicals, because the U.S. government has grossly underestimated the number of cancers caused by environmental toxins. No mention of the especially high risk these chemicals present to unborn children, such as lifelong endocrine disruption, hormone imbalances and other problems.

As important as those omissions are, I'd like to focus instead on nutrient content - since that is what the media coverage of the study primarily focused on. Is it really true that organic foods are no more nutritious than conventional foods?

Tea began as a medicine and grew into a beverage

~ Kakuzo Okakura, Book of Tea

We can imagine that, before the advent of civilization, with all its familiar trappings of pyrotechnology and pottery, tea leaves (which are quite bitter) would not have been nibbled on for recreation. Likely they would have been used only occasionally in small amounts, for the purposes of harnessing their intensely concentrated medicinal properties. Only later, as Okakura ruminated, would tea be consumed regularly in the form of a drinkable infusion.

The beauty of tea's transition from a medicine to a beverage is that drinking tea in small amounts daily, may prevent the need for using 'heroic' megadoses of green tea at any time later in life after a serious disease sets in. Food (and beverage) is medicine, assuredly, but it is best used preventively - in small, hopefully enjoyable, doses -- before a problem digs in its roots.

So, what are the health benefits of tea, particularly green tea? We think of it as an antioxidant, and indeed, of the 69 beneficial 'pharmacological actions' we have identified tea possessing on our natural medicine database project thus far, reduction of oxidative stress is top on the list.[i] But what of the other 68 actions mentioned?

Did you know that green tea is capable of reducing the formation of the fat cells known as adipocytes (anti-adipogenic), which is one reason why it has been studied for its possible ameliorative role in weight gain and obesity.[ii] Green tea has also been found to modulate AMP-activated protein kinase which reduces fatty acid and cholesterol synthesis, as well as gluconeogensis (the production of sugar from protein in the liver).[iii]

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has been sued in federal court for conducting illegal experiments on human beings. A federal judge will now determine whether the EPA has violated federal law and the most sacrosanct moral standards of scientific research or whether the EPA has been lying to Congress and the public about the dangers of air pollution.

Based on thousands of pages of documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, since 2004 and continuing through the Obama administration, the EPA has intentionally exposed hundreds of human subjects to extraordinarily high levels of air pollutants such as diesel exhaust and fine particulate matter, known as PM2.5. The experiments occurred at an EPA facility located at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine.

Many study subjects were health-impaired: suffering from asthma, metabolic syndrome, and old age (up to 75 years). Financially needy, they enrolled in these experiments for $12 per hour.

Since 1997, the EPA has regulated PM2.5, a major component of diesel exhaust, on the basis that it kills people after long-term exposure. In 2004, the EPA determined that PM2.5 could also kill on a short-term basis - within hours or days of exposure. The EPA also determined that there is no safe level of exposure to PM2.5 - any inhalation can kill. The EPA says that health-impaired people and the elderly are most vulnerable. The EPA also cites "strong evidence" that PM2.5 and diesel exhaust cause cancer.

What you think is going on in your head may be caused in part by what's happening in your gut.

A growing body of research shows the gut affects bodily functions far beyond digestion. Studies have shown intriguing links from the gut's health to bone formation, learning and memory and even conditions including Parkinson's disease. Recent research found disruptions to the stomach or intestinal bacteria can prompt depression and anxiety - at least in lab rats.

Better understanding the communication between the gut and the brain could help reveal the causes of and treatments for a range of ailments, and provide diagnostic clues for doctors.

Analysis of bacterial cells killed by manuka honey shows it has a unique mode of killing microbes, researchers report.

The findings are reported in a recent issue of the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents by a team of Australian researchers.

"Manuka honey differed from the profiles of other antibacterial agents, indicating a unique mode of action and its potential value as a novel antimicrobial agent," they say.

Honey has traditionally been used as an antibacterial agent, says microbiologist Associate Professor Dee Carter from the University of Sydney.

She says one reason for this is because it contains glucose oxidase that generates small amounts of hydrogen peroxidise in the presence of water, which is toxic to microorganisms.

Honey that comes from the bees foraging on the New Zealand manuka plant (Leptospermum scoparium), however, can have very high levels of antibacterial activity, even if the hydrogen peroxide in it is broken down.

Depression is a pervasive health issue today. According to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), one in 10 American adults report some form of depression.^[i]

Eleven percent of the U.S. population over the age of 12 is on antidepressant medication.^[ii]

However, mounting evidence shows the drug approach is not helping this trend. On the contrary, it may be fueling it...

At best, beneficial results from antidepressants are comparable to placebos, and at worst, they can cause devastating side effects, including suicidal and homicidal tendencies, and deterioration into more serious mental illness.

Meanwhile, research has shown there ARE effective treatments for depression.

The problem is, they're not drugs, so there's no way to make a profit on them...

And that may be why you don't normally hear about these strategies.

I will list them at the end of this article, and by the time you've reviewed the many side effects of these drugs, which is the main topic of this article, you will hopefully be motivated to give those drug-free alternatives a try.

Most of us are aware that there are lots of dangerous materials like additives, dyes, pesticides and carcinogens in our foods. What many of us are not aware of is that in the containers that our foods come in, especially take out, there are chemicals in the materials that may be even more harmful than the additives, dyes and pesticides.

By now you have probably heard of the dangers of the toxic chemical Bisphenol A (BPA). This chemical can be found in polycarbonate plastic food containers, bottles and takeout food containers. Numerous articles have been written on breast cancer and prostate cancer that result from exposure to the BPA contained in packaging and containers that carry food stuffs.