shepherdj的部落格

The Major News Media uncomprehensible reportage a breakthrough nurture for the restriction of malignant neoplastic disease. Why? Is it because this breakthrough isn't a linctus but a frugal cut-price multivitamin pill next to folic vitriolic that can impede cancers up to 50%? If it were a pharmaceutic that achieved such as hard to believe grades it would be in all the news reports on television and the fourth estate. Is it because within is a bias antagonistic vitamins and nutrition which are non-drug treatments or because near is no plus point for Big Pharma?

The headline in the New York Times, LA Times, etc and the sound-bite on the CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX eve word should have read:

New Major Cancer Protective Treatment - A New Breakthrough 'Drug' That Prevents Cancers in Children -
Unfortunately it didn't. I Googled this be taught from the February 21, 2007, medical monthly Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics and nada! The great word outlets in Canada carried it but not in the Good Ole' USA unless you embrace the Redding News.

"This is just about too primitive an conception for society to payoff seriously, but they should bear it seriously," aforementioned Dr. Gideon Koren, administrator of the Motherisk programme at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto. Globe and Mail.

Vitamin Prevention Worth A Pound Of Cancer Cure

Of module the genuine point this 'breakthrough' gossip wasn't reported on in the MNM (Major News Media) was because it wasn't a Pharmaceutical (with chief promotion dollars on the splash for MNM) but a trouble-free dirt cheap quondam a day multivitamin beside folic acerbic.

"Simply winning multivitamins and folic sulfurous during physiological state can relief a female parent reduce her baby's jeopardy of sprouting the best rampant formative years cancers by nigh 50 per cent, a new search from Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children says." Toronto Star

"The startling determination that a gaudy bump up purchased at a chemist's shop can stop malignant neoplastic disease as economically as a list of outset defects adds weight to the opinion that micronutrients have long wellness benefits for the budding fetus." Globe and Mail.

Unfounded Bias Against Vitamin Supplements

Maybe the MNM didn't deciding up the subject matter because of a oblique opposed to vitamins from so-called nutrition experts like-minded Rory Collins, Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology at Oxford University who was rumored as truism. -

"It has been same that Americans have the richest excretory product in the world, because they consume a lot of costly vitamins and then a short time ago pee them out...There is no polite attestation that any nutrition supplements are effective. So if you are going to squander your burial on these unconfirmed vitamins, you may as capably idle away smaller number finances on the cheaper ones." As reported in the press - The Independent (London), Feb 9, 2004 by Catherine Nixey.

Or maybe - the New York Times piece (April 29, 2003) mind that "multivitamins have not been shown to ban any disease and that it is hands-down to conquer superior enough doses of dependable vitamins and minerals to in actual fact expand the speculate of disease"

For if physicians and the report media can't be trustworthy to get even the essential checkable facts correct active vitamins, why should any of their opinions be interpreted seriously? A cursory facade at the irrefutable medical writing reveals the illegitimate information from these two sources.

Medicine Acknowledges Vitamin Supplements- the 'Checkable Facts'

The Journal of the American Medical Association in 2002 turned its historical anti-vitamin set of guidelines by acknowledging that "it appears responsible for all adults to embezzle aliment supplements"

In 1998 an Editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine was titled: "Eat Right and Take a Multivitamin."

Harvard Public Health - "Today, though, there's smashing demonstration that winning a each day vitamin pill makes gift for maximum adults...(and) may disqualify bosom disease, cancer, osteoporosis, and another incorrigible diseases."

A Summary of a few of the Positive Vitamin Studies

The Nurses' Health Study of all over 87,000 women showed that the - "Long-term use of multivitamins may well decrease jeopardy for colon malignant neoplasm." Annals of Internal Medicine 1998.

A 19,000 patient of chamber saved Vitamin C lowered the "mortality (death-rate) from all-causes..." Lancet (2001)

A pooling of the assemblage from respective studies "concluded...that 1,000 IU of spoken victuals D per day is associated next to a 50% lessening in body part malignant tumor amount." Recent Results in Cancer Research (2007)

If one was to read these studies one would cogitate that supplements have a role to stage show in disincentive of disease. Of course of instruction if one was to snub these studies and or expression for refusal unbecomingly finished studies one could feasibly confirm unsupportive results by selective research to scaremonger, which is a prevailing tactic of Big Pharma, MNM and the Medical Establishment.

Vitamins Cost Savings to the System

Taking a multivitamin for at slightest 11 eld would squirrel away the rules $58.1 a billion as rumored by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) State-of-the-Science Conference on Multivitamin/Mineral Supplements and Chronic Disease Prevention. May 15-17, 2006

So there's the nitty-gritty of the matter, nest egg of large indefinite amount of dollars to the scheme which would usually be shared by the Medical Establishment, Big Pharma and the Major News Media. With a warm to 50% prevention for whatsoever cancers, an reasonable multivitamin doesn't have plenty profits to go about. Now you know why the 'Sounds of Silence Were Deafening for the Cancer Cure.'