PH: 0417 632 464
Ross Walter Nutritionist & Naturopath
  • About
  • Contact
  • Treatments
  • Seminars
  • Programs
  • Articles
  • Resources
  • Members
  • Partners
  • Reviews
  • Media
  • Bookings

Science, research, scepticism and the 50th anniversary of the moon landing!

21/7/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
So it's the 50th anniversary of the (alleged) NASA landing and walking on the moon!

At the time it was a massive scientific and technological undertaking, with computers really only in their infancy compared to what we have today! It was seen as a huge triumph of human ingenuity, scientific knowledge, and technical excellence, in the pursuit of a seemingly impossible goal!

However, despite the momentous achievement, there has been ongoing speculation and debate ever since - did it really happen?!

NASA claims that back in 1969, they were able to go 1000 times further in space (with manned spacecraft) than they have been able to go in more recent times, with technology that was 50 years older, at the very first attempt, using NASA's entire computing power that was one-millionth of the computing power in your mobile phone today, but no other country has been able to repeat the feat since.  An interesting summary video of some issues of the moon landing can be found here (45 mins long) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4

Sure, I'm sceptical. I always have been on this and other topics of debate. And there's nothing wrong with being sceptical or questioning the popular beliefs of the day! That is exactly what science is about - challenging popular beliefs with sound theories and then investigating and proving them to be true or better than the current beliefs.

Yet in this day and age, one is seen as being a heretic or a "troll" to question "science", even when one is using published and peer-reviewed scientific studies against the popular beliefs of the day! And the abuse and vitriol against those who question "science" on platforms such as this, is just incredible. The keyboard warriors who hide behind technology to spew such abuse would never say the same things in person, because that's not acceptable. Yet via the interweb, everyone is fair game for their abuse, just because they have a different opinion...

Having rebels or independent thinkers in our society is how we have progressed in many areas of education, science, music, art, technology, and health etc. Suppressing this with  government policies or social media restrictions, or ridiculing others because they have a different belief, is a far worse problem, as eventually you will have no freedoms (of thought or speech) left either. Everyone has a right of their opinion because of their personal education and experiences. And we can have a friendly debate and that's fine! Abuse, violence, threats and bullying of others is not acceptable.

Science is never settled - that's how we again have progressed in our lives, with old beliefs being proven incorrect, and new theories come into being, and the cycle continues.

The same is in the area of health and medicine. Many of my articles are questioning government health policies or popular beliefs. Just because they are popular doesn't make them proven to be correct!

Sadly, much of medical science is corrupted, biased or completely wrong. There are many popular medical beliefs which have become standard treatments and even government policies that were based on poorly designed studies, deliberately manipulated data, fraud, biased or pre-conceived outcomes, being funded by the very company or industry that will financially benefit from a favourable outcome, or completely fabricated studies. Several research reviews have been published which found that up to 70% of health and medical procedures or medicines have no scientific basis! And ironically, the conventional medical industry demands high quality evidence of any competing products (such as from natural health treatments, modalities or products), yet much of what they promote or use isn't adequately proven.

I am sceptical about a lot of science, especially in the area of health and medicine. But I then investigate the studies on both sides of the argument, together with my personal and clinical experiences, to formulate my beliefs. I don't just believe what the media or government says! And I have references to back up my articles, so they are not just my opinion!

It's human to be "wrong", even if it can be amusing or embarrassing to find out that fact, especially with long-held beliefs. We have all been wrong on various beliefs and thoughts in the past. So what, get over it, move on and enjoy your life and you health! It's not worth the stress of worrying about being right or wrong! 
0 Comments

Low water intake and low humidity can increase rate of flu infectionS!

30/6/2019

1 Comment

 
Picture
I have written many articles before on how to prevent and treat the winter head colds and flu infections, without resorting to the useless flu vaccine! I will repeat these articles again shortly, now that it's allegedly flu "season". But first, to correct my own statement, flu does not really occur as a seasonal occurrence, but because of a combination of factors which just so happen to coincide in winter.

One of the least known but common factors which can greatly increase your risks of colds and flu in winter is a very simple one of not drinking enough water in winter! Why is this such a problem, and how does this cause more flu infections?!

Our immune system is the ONLY thing which can protect you from colds and flu. One of the physical barriers in this protection is your mucous membrane barrier, in your respiratory and digestive tracts.  Your mucous membrane barrier is highly populated with your immune system cells and infection-fighting cells, as well as having a layer of mucus across this barrier for additional protection. The mucus barrier makes it more difficult for any infectious organisms to get through it to reach your cells and to infect them to affect your health.

But in winter this mucous membrane barrier is often much weaker because of a lack of water intake, because of these reasons:

1) We generally drink less water in winter as it's colder and we don't sweat as much, hence we often don't feel thirsty or the need to drink as much water as in summer
2) We drink more hot drinks like teas and coffees to stay warm! Unfortunately teas and coffees (and alcohol) are diuretic and cause more fluid loss in the body
3) The air in winter is drier and less humid, which can dry out our mucous membranes
4) We use more heaters and fires etc for warmth, but this too dries out our mucous membranes.

The lack of water means less production of mucus, and therefore less protection against infections like the flu virus.

Studies show that countries and environments with a higher humidity have a greatly reduced rate of flu. Other studies show that people in drier environments in winter have a much higher rate of flu. This is because the survival and transmission of the flu virus is affected by humid conditions, and virus survival rates increase in low humidity. Humid conditions will keep your mucous membranes moist, but drier conditions will dry them out.

In addition to my usual recommendations for prevention and treatment of the winter colds and flu, make sure you are drinking enough water! If you have a cup of tea or coffee to keep warm, have a glass of water too, to negate the diuretic effects of these drinks.

For the relief of symptoms of colds and flu, our supplement and herbal dispensary can help you get over the infection quicker!

1 Comment

What is pain? Why do I have pain when I don't have an injury?

28/6/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
What causes pain, and why do we have pain when we may not have had an injury?

Pain is the result of inflammation in the body.

So what is inflammation?!

Inflammation is a normal process of tissue repair that our bodies undergo, as a result of stressors, an injury or infection. We need inflammation to heal and return to health again! If you cut your finger, inflammatory processes driven by our cells and your immune system will repair the cut. Symptoms of inflammation are:

1) Pain
2) Swelling
3) Redness
4) Heat
5) Loss of movement or function.

These symptoms of inflammation are just part of the repair process. The pain is just your body telling you that the area of injury shouldn’t be used while it is undergoing repair.

Chronic or ongoing or long-term pain is not normal and is a symptom that the above repair process has become dysfunctional and isn’t working to get you back to health again. Again, it is your body trying to tell you that something is wrong, and to do something different to help fix it.

Chronic pain can come and go, or you can have periods of constant low-level pain, with times of much higher pain flares seemingly without reason.

What causes the constant pain and the flare-ups, and what can we do about them?

Chronic pain means that the inflammation process is being constantly triggered, every day. It also means that the healing process is not able to be completed, due to the daily triggers and a dysfunctional immune system which keeps the inflammation and pain occurring.

Anything that can cause inflammation in your body will exacerbate any existing inflammation and this causes more pain. Inflammation can itself be caused by many factors, including:

1) Physical or emotional stress
2) Your dietary intake – excesses of some foods and deficiencies of some nutrients
3) Infections, which can be low-grade or hidden, or past infections that are recurring
4) Dysbiosis - an imbalance in your microbiome
5) Medications
6) Poor quality sleep
7) Allergies and intolerances
8) Toxins, chemicals and radiation exposure.

Hence to fix YOUR chronic pain, all of these factors need to be investigated and resolved! Treating only the symptom of pain with medications will never fix the problem and the pain will not go away. Finding and fixing the root causes of inflammation WILL enable the body to heal, and WILL stop the pain!

If you have chronic pain, or someone you know does, I would like to help reduce the pain so you can have your health and quality of life back again!
 
0 Comments

The Heart Foundation is heartless

2/6/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
The Australian Heart Foundation recently launched a new ad campaign called "Heartless Words", which is exactly what their advert is and says everything about them as an organisation - heartless.

The advert includes lines such as "It's not just my heart I don't care about, it's yours", and "every time I told you I loved you I was lying - you are not my priority", which was quickly removed from the advert after a social media backlash.

Their ironic and idiotic campaign was supposed to highlight heart disease as being one of the major killers of Australians, with their statistics showing a heart disease related death occurring every 28 minutes.

The Heart Foundation appears to be blaming the public for this epidemic of heart disease, when really it's THEM who should be held accountable for this epidemic. The Heart Foundation and other government "health" organisations which have been pushing what they think is a "healthy" diet and lifestyle for decades, which most people would say they are doing, but it's actually making this epidemic WORSE.

The Heart Foundation's advice of low fat (and high carb) diets, with low salt, is actually exactly the opposite of what is current evidence-based nutrition advice for heart health! Their nutrition advice is 50 years out of date for what is current and correct nutrition science.

Another example of the Heart Foundation's incompetence was their "tick of approval" logo which could be applied to packaged and processed foods to show how "healthy" they were! People bought this concept for many years, until McDonald's added  the "tick of approval" to a range of their products. We know that these junk foods are not healthy, so how was this possible? After some investigations, it was finally leaked that the "tick of approval" was simply a "licensing fee", with no actual scientific or nutritional investigations done on the food products which the tick was applied to. It was simply a marketing gimmick to trick the general public for a (initially) $50,000 per product, and later up to $300,000 per product. In other words, the Heart Foundation were deliberately lying to us all for years to mislead us about what foods were healthy for the heart, just for their financial benefit. With such policies, this organisation simply cannot be trusted to give any health advice.

A link to the Heart Foundation's heartless advert can be found here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkNwG60zfVk

My father had a sudden and severe heart attack at age 58. His father died at a similar age, also of a heart attack. Heart health and prevention of heart disease in myself, in my clients, and in the general public, is (pun intended) close to my heart.

I have written many articles on heart health, cholesterol, and many other factors related to heart health, all based on current scientific studies. I have also seen many clients with many different heart related symptoms, and I have treated them and seen amazing improvements in their health!
 
There are many factors which contribute to heart disease, most of which the Heart Foundation don't tell you about. And each person is different, so all the causative factors need to be investigated and treated. Heart disease is a serious issue and prevention is of course the best way to reduce incidences. If you or someone you know has a history of heart disease in their family, or has had heart issues, book in ASAP for a heart health check with me, and I will give the best possible advice to prevent heart disease and reduce symptoms!

0 Comments

Why measles is NOT a health concern, how the measles vaccine is causing MORE infections, AND how it can be prevented

25/4/2019

2 Comments

 
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture

What is measles? In this current (alleged) time of "outbreaks" of measles, I will explain the symptoms, and answer many questions about how dangerous is measles, including why are might be seeing more of it, how you can prevent this infection, and how it can be treated.

If you think the measles alerts in Australia are a bit much, the USA has gone to extremes with several cities mandating compulsory MMR vaccinations where there might be just 1-5 active measles cases in an entire city, or face fines or jail. Another city council tried to force all non-vaccinated people to stay at home for a month until the outbreak is over. Legal action was taken against the council, and the curfew was lifted when a judge found the action to be unlawful.  As you will see in the details below, the real causes of measles outbreaks are perhaps not what you think, nor caused by those who are not up to date with their shots... read on!

This article started out to be a brief one to counter the government and medical propaganda about measles and to alleviate the fear and misinformation that measles is a dangerous health concern. This article is comprehensive and detailed, and answers many questions about measles. This article is fully referenced from published research, with all references and links included.
 
What is measles?
Measles is a highly contagious viral infection (not a disease!) which is also known as rubeola and is very common in childhood. It can take 10 to 14 days after being exposed to develop measles, although simply being exposed to the virus doesn't mean that you will catch the infection! (Mayo Clinic, 2019).

Measles is transmitted via the respiratory tract, in droplets from an infected person which can remain in the air for up to 2 hours (Orenstein, Perry & Halsey, 2004; Paules, Marston & Fauci, 2019).

Measles is traditionally an infection of children under 5 years of age and those with poor nutritional status, especially a vitamin A deficiency (Paules, Marston & Fauci, 2019). Wouldn't it make more sense to fix the cause of poor nutrition, as a safer form of prevention?!

What are the symptoms of measles?
Measles symptoms include, usually in this order (Mayo Clinic, 2019):
- fever
- dry cough
-runny nose
- sore throat
- inflamed eyes (conjunctivitis)
- tiny white spots with blue-white centres on a red background found inside the mouth, lining the cheek (Koplik's spots)
- a skin rash, with large flat blotches that flow into one another.

How long does measles last?
Measles starts with a fever, and worsening symptoms as above for 2-4 days before the skin rash appears (and the fever subsides) and the number of lesions increase for 2-3 days. The rash lasts for 3-7 days before fading. The cough which accompanies measles can last for about 10 days (Orenstein, Perry & Halsey, 2004).

Most people recover uneventfully after 1 week of illness (Paules, Marston, & Fauci, 2019).

How does measles spread?
Measles is spread via mucus droplets through the air, through coughing or sneezing, or touching surfaces and poor hygiene. There is a communicable period of about 8 days when someone with measles can spread the virus to others, usually about 4 days before the rash appears, and for about 4 days after the rash appears (Mayo Clinic, 2019).

Numerous outbreaks of measles can occur even in highly vaccinated populations, especially in children who attend group social events, as the period of highest transmission to others occurs in the first few days of illness before the rash appears (Orenstein, Perry & Halsey, 2004).

Interestingly, but not well known or talked about, is that the MMR vaccine (allegedly to prevent transmission and provide immunity to measles) is a LIVE virus vaccine, meaning that the measles virus, mumps virus, and rubella (German measles) virus in the vaccine are all ALIVE, albeit weakened. Weakened means that it can still cause the infection to which it is allegedly protecting you from!

What are the measles vaccines?
There are several measles vaccines available in Australia, as a combination of several vaccine antigens in one shot:
- MMR-II (Seqirus, 2006) - the most common trivalent measles vaccine, for children over 12 months of age and adults. The same dose is used for babies, children and adults. A follow-up dose is required, but no details are given by the manufacturer for this.
- Priorix (GSK, 2019) - a trivalent vaccine, containing 3 live viruses - measles, mumps and rubella, and given to children over 12 months of age, or adults. A second dose in children is required at 4-6 years of age.
- Priorix Tetra (GSK, 2019) - a quadrivalent vaccine, containing 4 live viruses - measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (chicken pox), for use in children over 12 months of age, or adults, with the same dose being given for each age group. No details given for subsequent doses
- ProQuad (Sequiris, 2018) - a quadrivalent vaccine, containing 4 live viruses - measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (chicken pox), for use in children over 12 months of age, or adults. The time and number of doses will be "determined by your doctor". Also to note for this vaccine (as per the manufacturer's consumer information) is "At least one month should elapse between a dose of ProQuad and all other vaccines". But then this follows in the next sentence: "Your doctor will decide if ProQuad should be given with other vaccines" . What?!

What are some ingredients in the measles vaccines?
The MMR-II vaccine contains chicken embryo cells, human albumin, cow foetus serum, sorbitol, sucrose, pig gelatin, neomycin (an antibiotic) (Australian Government Department of Health, 2018a).
The Priorix vaccine contains lactose, neomycin, sorbitol and mannitol (sugar alcohols) (Australian Government Department of Health, 2018b).

Very recently, an independent Italian research group called Corvelva, has been performing detailed research into the ingredients of the major scheduled vaccines, and finding unbelievable things added to the vaccines or contaminated in the vaccines. Their most recent investigation (April 2019) and resulting disclosure of findings was on the Priorix Tetra (GSK, 2019; Corvelva 2019a) MMRV (Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Varicella or chicken pox) vaccine. In summary, Corvelva found:
  • Very low to negligible amounts of rubella (German measles) virus, far lower than it should have, to the point of being "not detected" in the vaccine, hence the scientists questioning its effectiveness in creating immunity
  • Contamination with many live organisms, of which many are dangerous (Corvelva, 2019a):
    • Proteobacteria
    • Nematodes - parasitic roundworms
    • Influenza A - which can cause flu infections
    • Enterovirus - a group of viruses which can cause many infectious conditions
    • Hepatitis C virus - very dengerous virus capable of causing liver disease
    • Hepatitis B virus - another very dangerous virus which causes liver disease
    • Coronavirus - which can cause respiratory infections
    • Rous sarcoma virus - which causes bone cancer
    • Many animal viruses - from pigs, birds, monkeys, horses
    • And HIV. Yes, The MMRV vaccine contains HIV, the virus associated with AIDS.
Other chemicals and medications were also found in the MMRV vaccine, as well as a very large discrepancy in the different amounts of the ingredients in multiple vials of the vaccine even in the same batch number (Corvelva, 2019b).

Is measles dangerous or deadly?
The World Health Organisation claim that measles kills 100,000 people per year (Mayo Clinic, 2019), but almost all of these are in developing countries (with poor nutrition, sanitation and hygiene). Mortality rates from measles in developing countries is 10-100 times greater than in developed countries (Orenstein, Perry & Halsey, 2004).

While measles is generally a benign or mild condition in about 99% of those infected, measles can cause complications in many body systems or organs. Pneumonia is the most severe complication of measles, usually as a result of a secondary infection of the respiratory tract, but diarrhoea and malnutrition during the illness can also contribute to mortality (Orenstein, Perry & Halsey, 2004).

Being malnourished, which is common in undeveloped countries, is the main reason for measles mortality, with malnourished children having a mortality rate 200-400 times greater than measles-affected children in developed countries with poor sanitation and inadequate medical care (Gabr, 1987, pp1–21; Hoeprich, 1977, pp691-696). However in well-nourished children, measles is NOT a serious infection (Hoeprich, 1977, pp691-696).

Some published studies show that measles can be more deadly when children are exposed to the virus within a family home, with this likely being caused from a prolonged exposure to the virus, rather than from a casual exposure to an infectious person outside the home (Orenstein, Perry & Halsey, 2004).

Measles can cause a more serious infection or complications in someone who immunocompromised (such as with cancer, organ transplants, HIV or other existing infections or conditions) (Paules, Marston & Fauci, 2019), or if someone is taking immunosuppressive medications (such as NSAIDs, steroids, chemotherapy, or other medications), or is malnourished (especially a vitamin A or protein deficiency) (Orenstein, Perry & Halsey, 2004; British Medical Journal, 1976).

Back before the MMR vaccine was introduced (in 1963 in some countries, and later in others), parents used to hold a "measles party"! If a child were to contract measles, the parents would invite other parents with young children to their house so the kids could play together and be exposed to the measles virus. Doing so may or may not result in other children getting measles, but most children then DID get measles naturally (at much higher rates than now) but the children exposed to measles would develop a LIFELONG immunity and protection to measles.

Can I contract measles from the MMR vaccine?
Yes.

Health departments acknowledge that "vaccine-derived" measles CAN and DOES occur approximately 5-12 days after measles/MMR vaccination (Australian Government Department of Health, 2019a).

The government health authorities claim that the vaccine-derived form of measles is not transmissible and should not be classified as measles, but many published studies contradict this belief (Australian Government Department of Health, 2019a; Rosen et al., 2014).

Interestingly the government website (Australian Government Department of Health, 2019a) contradicts themselves on this issue, stating that if someone had the MMR vaccine in a period of 3 weeks before contracting measles, that serology testing should be done to determine whether the person has the wild or natural type,  or the vaccine strain virus infection, and if the wild type was not detected, that the diagnosis IS measles. But they then state that serology testing of a suspected measles case is useless for diagnosis if they received the MMR vaccine 8 days to 8 weeks before testing. Huh?!

Can I contract measles from an unvaccinated person?
Only if they have measles, and only they are in the infectious period of the infection. The likelihood of this happening is very, very small!

An unvaccinated child or adult who has no symptoms does not have the measles (or any other) virus! So despite the popular hysteria about unvaccinated people, they cannot spread infections they do not have to anyone else! As such, isolating unvaccinated people (who don't have measles) during outbreaks will do nothing to reduce the transmission or incidences of measles.

As shown in this article, research shows that vaccinated people can spread measles to others for a period of 4-6 weeks after vaccination, and they can also contract measles from the MMR vaccination they have just had (Nestibo, Lee, Fonseca, Beirnes, Johnson & Sikora, 2012). Hence children and adults are far more likely to get measles from vaccinated people!

How long does measles immunity last?
If you have had measles (or mumps, or rubella, or any other infection) your immune system develops antibodies which provides a lifetime of protection against that particular infection!

Sadly, the same doesn't occur when one has a simulated infection in the form of a vaccine. Because with a vaccine you are bypassing the normal route of entry into the body (via the respiratory and/or digestive tracts, where your innate immune system is present in abundance), so your immune system doesn't work in the same way as a real infection to develop a lifelong immunity from any vaccine.

The short-term duration of "immunity" of a vaccine varies between individuals, with many not developing immunity at all anyway. This short-term immunity creates several larger problems:
  1. There can be higher rates of measles even when an ever-increasing percentage of the population have been vaccinated, as those vaccinated become no longer immune over time and thus susceptible to measles again
  2. Higher risk groups, such as pregnant women and their unborn foetuses, are more susceptible to measles and its complications (including foetal deaths) from a waning measles immunity and from increased incidences.

What are the typical medical treatments for measles?
Typical medical treatments for measles include:

1) Fever reducers - using anti-inflammatory or NSAID (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) such as Ibuprofen (Nurofen etc), Paracetamol or acetaminophen drugs. These drugs can reduce some of the SYMPTOMS of the infection, but what they are really doing is stopping the immune system response against the infection, and makes the infection worse. Fevers are a natural immune system response to an infection - the increased body temperature slows down or stops the replication of the pathogens such as the measles virus and even kills them, and also stimulates the production of more infection-fighting white blood cells! Hence why fevers should be supported rather than suppressed (Roesch et al., 2012; Plaza, Hulak, Zhumadilov & Akilzhanova, 2016).

2) Antibiotics - these are either utterly useless against measles, as measles is a VIRAL infection, and antibiotics only kill bacteria... or these can be very damaging and cause a more serious infection, as antibiotics kill good or beneficial bacteria in your digestive tract that actually make your immune system proteins called immunoglobulins! So why kill your immune system, at the time when you NEED it working to fight an infection?

3) Vitamin A - children (and others) with low levels of vitamin A are more at risk of developing measles, and having more serious symptoms. Vitamin A helps as an antioxidant, fights cell damage, and helps to heal the skin, which is a better treatment for measles! (Mayo Clinic, 2019)

What are some natural treatments for measles?
Anything which supports your immune system to do its job to find and fight infections will help against measles, including:
  • Vitamin A - as a deficiency of this vitamin can increase the risk of contracting measles, it is also recommended in a measles treatment. Can reduce incidences of measles complications, and reduces mortality by 70-80% in those who developed pneumonia (a complication of measles) (Fawzi, Chalmers, Herrera & Mosteller, 1993; Shetty, 2010, p82).
  • Vitamin D - offers immune defence against many pathogens including viruses, by stimulating the body's innate imune system against infections which it hasn't encountered before
  • Vitamin C - vitamin C is also seen to be deficient in those with measles (Cemek, Dede, Bayıroğlu, Çaksen, Cemek & Mert, 2006), hence higher doses of vitamin C can support the immune system to fight infections, and reducing the damage from measles virus
  • -zinc - essential for good immune system function and skin healing
  • Probiotics - improves immune system responses against infections
  • Quality multi-vitamin and/or multi-mineral supplements, to reduce deficiencies which weaken the immune system
  • Herbal medicines - to improve immune system function and those with antiviral actions
  • Breastfeeding - this is extremely important, as breast milk transfers much of the mother's antibodies and immune protection to the baby. If a child hasn't been breastfed, measles can be much more severe (Orenstein, Perry & Halsey, 2004).
  • Protein - mortality rates from measles can be reduced by 66% simply with an improved dietary intake, and addressing any nutrient deficiencies or excesses which can affect the function of the immune system, especially of sufficient protein. A lack of protein in the diet, particularly in undeveloped countries, is a major factor in higher measles mortality rates (British Medical Journal, 1976).
Can measles be prevented without the vaccine?
Yes!

Remember that you, and your children, have an immune system! Our immune systems have kept the human species alive and healthy for millions of years, despite being exposed to the measles virus, and many thousands of other infectious bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites!

So they key to preventing measles (or any other infection) is to keep your immune system strong to do its job. This can be done by looking after your body and your health, by:
  • eating a wide variety of quality foods for nutrients your immune system needs
  • sleeping well, with good quantity and quality sleep
  • reducing stress exposure, and having good stress management or relaxation time
  • reducing exposure to toxins and chemicals in your foods and environment
  • having a good lifestyle - no smoking, limited or no consumption of alcohol and drugs etc, and some exercise
  • having good hygiene practices
  • and controversially, limiting physical contact with children or others who have had the MMR vaccine, because as mentioned above, MMR is a LIVE virus vaccine, and studies have shown that those vaccinated with these 3 viruses CAN and DO shed these viruses in their body fluids for a about 4-6 weeks after the vaccine (Nestibo, Lee, Fonseca, Beirnes, Johnson & Sikora, 2012).
If children or adults who are diagnosed with measles are recommended by the health authorities to be quarantined to prevent the infection spreading to others (Australian of Health, 2019a), those who have been vaccinated should also be quarantined for exactly the same reason! ONLY then will we likely see a reduction in measles incidences.

Should you (or your child) get the measles/MMR vaccine if you suspect you have (or your child has) measles or any other infection?
 Absolutely not.

No vaccines are recommended to be taken when you or a child is already ill, or if immunocompromised, or has a fever. If a child is ill, then they are immunocompromised, and this is a contraindication (a medical factor which is a reason to withhold a medical treatment) as it could cause harm to the person. Immunocompromised people who are vaccinated have a higher risk of complications from the vaccination, including dangerous and severe meningoencephalitis, or a combination of meningitis and encephalitis, being an infection or inflammation of the meninges (protective tissues around the brain and spinal cord) and brain (Paules, Marston & Fauci, 2019).

People who are immunocompromised or on immunosuppressive medications cannot be safely vaccinated with any live virus vaccine (Paules, Marston & Fauci, 2019).

How effective is the measles/MMR vaccine against measles incidences and mortality?
The first measles vaccine was only made available as MMR in 1963 in some countries. By that time the incidences and mortality of measles had already dropped by 99% from their peaks! Rates continued to drop even with only 20-40% of the population vaccinated.

See the attached images for some official referenced statistical charts from various countries showing a huge drop in measles incidences and deaths well before the vaccine was made available.

Figure 1 - Measles hospitalisations and deaths in Australia (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2018).
 
Figure 2 - Measles mortality in the USA. Reference details in the chart.
 
Figure 3 - Measles mortality in England and Wales. Reference details in the chart.

Figure 4 - Measles mortality in France. Reference details in the chart.
 
Despite the results in these charts coming different official sources, they show the same information - a 99% decrease in measles incidences or deaths before the vaccine was introduced.

What these charts do not show are:
1.whether the measles incidences since the vaccine was introduced, are from the wild type measles infection or the vaccine strain
2. the adverse reactions and deaths from the vaccine itself.

To answer the first point, a study published in 2017 investigated a large measles outbreak amongst people who had been recently vaccinated against measles in California in 2015. Using genetic sequencing of samples from the vaccinees with measles symptoms, the study reported that 38% of them were caused by the vaccine strain virus (Roy et al., 2017). Interestingly, in the same study, they mention that the World Health Organisation recommends that the measles virus contain the "type A" measles virus, but that the "wild type A" measles virus no longer exists! So we are being vaccinated with "type A" measles virus to allegedly protect us from the "type A" measles virus in the wild that no longer exists?! How does this make any sense?!

Viruses mutate and adapt to a changing environment. We are told to get flu vaccines annually as they contain different strains of flu virus each year, allegedly to protect us from only those strains. So why are we being vaccinated with a measles strain that no longer exists in the wild?! How will that protect us?

Is getting the MMR vaccine safer than getting measles?
No, not in my opinion, nor when looking at the statistics.

The government and health authorities will tell you that measles in Australia is deadly, and that you should have the MMR vaccine to prevent the disease and complications and possible death. But the last officially recorded death from measles in Australia was in 1995, despite many outbreaks including an outbreak of 168 cases in Sydney in 2012 (National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance, 2016).

In the same period (1995 to 2019) there were 8 deaths attributed to the measles vaccines in Australia, together with 6796 official adverse reaction reports logged. Considering that reporting vaccine adverse events is voluntary and well known to be under-reported  to perhaps only 1% of the actual rates, the possible number of vaccine-caused deaths or adverse events would be even more shocking. Even without taking the under-reporting of adverse events into account, the number of deaths which have been officially caused by the measles/MMR vaccines in the past 25 years in Australia are far in excess of the deaths by measles (Therapeutic Goods Administration, 2019).

Would the family members or friends of those who died from the measles/MMR vaccine say that the vaccine was worth a life? I don't believe so. The cost, in terms of lives lost from the vaccine itself, simply do not justify the very low risk of measles in Australia, which can be prevented and treated in other safer and natural ways, if only the public were actually told the truth about measles and the MMR vaccine.

What testing has been done on the MMR vaccine?
Good quality scientific testing for any medical and vaccine products is essential and at a minimum requires a randomised placebo controlled trial. In this scientific protocol, the scientists randomly assign test subjects into 2 groups - one group gets the medication or vaccine, and the other gets an inert placebo substance, and the test subjects don't know which one they are getting.

The purpose of such tests is to check for the action of the medication or vaccine using various physical, biochemical and physiological tests, to confirm the safety and efficacy (the ability to produce the desired result) of the product. An inert placebo, such as a sugar pill or saline (salt water) is usually used, to look at the differences in results between those who are having the substance compared with those who do not have the substance. In effect, the study is looking for the differences in immune response and any side effects between the 2 groups.

The problem is that vaccines are not classified as medications and do not need to undergo the same trials for regulatory approval to be given to the public! So vaccine manufacturers do not perform placebo controlled trials. Instead they compare their vaccine in test subjects to another group who get a different or earlier vaccine. As such, there are NO randomised placebo-controlled trials of any vaccine which truly shows how safe or effective they are.

In addition, there are no studies done at all on combined multiple vaccine shots being given to babies, children or adults. NONE! Yet every government vaccination program recommends this practice. But, as seen in this article, some MMR manufacturers even state on their own product information inserts that the vaccine has not been tested for safety together with other vaccines, and some MMR manufacturers recommending that other vaccines NOT be given with MMR by a number of MONTHS.

In 1998 there was a major peer-reviewed study published in the prestigious The Lancet medical journal, authored by Gastrointestinal  specialist Doctor Andrew Wakefield, and 10 others. He wasn't the first to point out in a study that autistic children had a high rate of gastrointestinal conditions, but his study became the most widely published and well known. He and his fellow scientists found very similar test results in the gastrointestinal tracts of all children with gut and behavioural issues, 75% had regressed (went backwards in their development, speech and behaviour) after the MMR vaccine and had been diagnosed with autism, and together with previous studies finding the same, that the gut issues appeared to play a part in the behavioural changes in some children  (Wakefield et al., 1998).

Wakefield commented in the study that previous studies had found that measles and rubella were already linked to autism disorders, as was the MMR vaccine in other studies, which showed autistic symptoms appearing within a week of the MMR vaccination (Wakefield et al., 1998).

While Wakefield's study was retracted and he was struck off by the medical authorities after the study was published as it caused a huge controversy in the world's media, health authorities and pharmaceutical companies, he NEVER actually said that MMR caused autism in his study - that was a media misinterpretation of the study. What he DID say on this was "we did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described" (ie autism), and he concluded with "In most cases, onset of symptoms was after measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation. Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine" (Wakefield et al., 1998).

So if Dr Wakefield said that he did not find MMR caused autism, does that prove MMR doesn't cause autism? NO! Why, because as he pointed out in his study, PREVIOUS studies had already found that MMR caused gastrointestinal and neurological symptoms, and those studies reported that MMR appeared to be the linked to autism. Since Wakefield's study, over 157 other peer-reviewed and published studies have confirmed his findings, and linked the MMR vaccine to causing autism. This list keeps on growing... and none of these doctors or scientists have been vilified in the media as Dr Wakefield was. The link to all these studies is here:
ttps://www.scribd.com/doc/220807175/157-Research-Papers-Supporting-the-Vaccine-Autism-Link

Should I get the measles/MMR vaccine when I am pregnant?
Absolutely not.

The most common MMR vaccine approved for use in Australia is actually the MMR-II (Seqirus, 2006). The manufacturer's own product information insert (available here: https://www.seqirus.com.au/docs/401/768/MMR_PI_A181010.pdf) has the following statements related to pregnancy:
  • "Do not give MMR-II to pregnant females"
  • "the possible effects of the vaccine on foetal development are unknown"
  • "the vaccine should not be administered to pregnant females"
  • "there are no adequate studies of the attenuated (vaccine) strain of measles virus in pregnancy"
  • "the vaccine strain of virus is also capable of inducing adverse fetal effects"
  • "Women of childbearing age should be advised not to become pregnant for three months after vaccination against rubella (in MMR)".
Refer above to the screenshot image of the MMR-II vaccine in relation to pregnancy.

Figure 5 - MMR-II Product Information statements regarding vaccination in pregnancy (Seqirus, 2006)

So why do doctors and health departments push this on pregnant women? Doctors are supposed to provide "informed consent", to let you know of possible risks beforehand, and for you to decide whether to get it or not, based on being given unbiased information. They are lying if they say it's safe, when this has never actually been proven (see the above or attached screenshot of the MMR vaccine manufacturer's product information ).

The other measles vaccines have very similar statements about avoiding getting these vaccines in pregnancy, as there are NO studies done by the manufacturers for the safety or efficacy of this (or any other) vaccine in pregnancy.

The ProQuad vaccine has similar statements about pregnancy, but "pregnancy should be avoided for 3 months following vaccination" (Seqirus, 2018).

The vaccine manufacturers also suggest avoiding vaccinations when breastfeeding, as the vaccine either has not been tested in lactation, or in the case of MMR-II, that one or more of the live viruses can be secreted in breast milk to transmit the infection to the baby (Seqirus, 2006).

Will herd immunity (95% vaccination rate) or 100% coverage of measles vaccine (as in MMR) prevent or wipe out measles?
No!

In fact we are seeing the opposite - more incidences of measles as more people get the vaccine! It simply is not possible to eliminate every last virus on the planet, so there will always be incidences.

The official government statistics show that 95% of all Australians have been vaccinated (or 93.5% with MMR), with 95% being the alleged theoretical goal for "herd immunity" that is supposed to protect everyone from preventable diseases (Australian Department of Health, 2019b). Studies say that a "near-prefect" immunisation rate of 93-95% is needed to effectively protect against a measles resurgence (Paules, Marston & Fauci, 2019). But clearly this isn't working when Australia and the USA in particular have reached this "herd immunity" level yet we are seeing some of the highest incidences of measles infections in recent times! Clearly, the vaccination program isn't working to protect people, or the "herd immunity" theory is bust. Herd immunity is a theory, and one that has never been proven to work.

The Australian Government prematurely or optimistically declared that the country was "measles-free" in 2014 (Sydney Morning Herald, 2017)! But we are seeing more and more incidences in the past few years, ironically as MORE people are vaccinated. The outbreaks were ALL blamed on travellers visiting countries which had higher rates of measles infections. Shouldn't the vaccine have prevented them getting the infection or spreading it to others?

What may be a major factor for causing the increased incidences despite reaching the "herd immunity" vaccination rate, is the short-term "immunity" that the vaccine offers, as opposed to the lifetime immunity that the natural measles infection offers. Hence it is the failing MMR vaccines causing the measles outbreaks and complications, and not the failure to vaccinate!

What should I do if I still want to get the measles/MMR vaccine?
If, after doing your due diligence and research of the MMR product information inserts from the TGA or the vaccine manufacturers (see the links in the References) and reading published research on MMR (some provided above and in the References), you still want to get the MMR vaccine, that's your choice. However, there are some other steps you can take to minimise the risks of potential side effects and health damage from the vaccine by also looking at:

1) Getting all children tested with the MTHFR genetic test PRIOR to any vaccines - this simple saliva or blood pathology test is available from your GP or Naturopath, and can let you know if your child has a reduced ability to detoxify chemicals (such as vaccine ingredients) or an increased risk of nutrient deficiencies, which are a huge factor in vaccine damage or side effects. MTHFR is another large topic on its own, and I have written several articles on this in the past - see my website or Facebook page

2) Avoid using fever-reducing medications and/or NSAIDs to hide a fever after a vaccine - fevers are generally safe, and are a natural immune system response to a spreading infection, as a way to stop the spreading or kill the infection by increasing the body temperature. Fevers are a natural defence mechanism against infections! (Plaza, Hulak, Zhumadilov & Akilzhanova, 2016). Stopping the fever will make the infection more severe and last longer. Fever-reducing and NSAID medications deplete glutathione, your body's most potent antioxidant which can lead to vaccine damage and side effects. This can be mitigated by seeing a Nutritionist or Naturopath and preparing before any vaccinations. Always monitor temperatures in small children, and keep up fluid and electrolyte intakes

3) Delay and spread out the vaccines - many children simply cannot take all the scheduled vaccines all at the same time, hence why many see health impacts of this, including deaths. This is because there has never been any studies done to show that having multiple vaccines at once are either safe or effective, despite the government health departments and their recommendations to combine vaccines. To reduce issues, the longer you delay the first and subsequent vaccines , the better, and spreading them out so their bodies can deal with the vaccines and recover fully, before getting more. For more information on this, look for information from US-based Paediatrician Dr Paul Thomas in particular, who has performed research on thousands of his own clients to show that autism rates with children on the government schedule is 1:35 (one in 35, the official government statistic), versus 1:438 for those on Dr Thomas's delayed schedule "vaccine-friendly" plan, or just 1:715 in unvaccinated (Thomas, 2019)

4) Never get your children vaccinated when they are ill - the vaccine will place an additional burden on their bodies and make it harder to deal with the additional infections in the vaccine and toxic ingredients as well as any other infections they may have

5) Isolating or restricting close physical contact after a vaccine - the MMR vaccine is a LIVE virus vaccine, and it sheds in body fluids to infect others for 4-6 weeks afterwards. Hence telling your friends and family to get the MMR (or other) vaccines before seeing your newborn baby is pointless or even dangerous, as those that get the vaccine are more likely to actually infect your baby. Similarly, children who have had MMR are potentially infectious for 4-6 weeks afterwards, and should be kept at home and away from siblings, schools, kindergarten and daycare for this same reason
​
6) Support the immune system and liver detoxification pathways - this can help the child get over the vaccination and any adverse events quicker. This can be done with specific nutritional and/or herbal supplements, good nutrition, quality sleep, some exercise (but not when ill), and good sun exposure (to make vitamin D, which is a huge immune system booster and natural anti-inflammatory hormone).

Conclusion and summary
Health authorities in Australia and overseas are creating a vicious cycle of recommending, and even MANDATING, or forcing people to be vaccinated against measles, which is a LIVE virus vaccine that is known to cause measles in those who receive it, and shed LIVE measles virus in body fluids to infect family members, friends, classmates, and strangers around them, who then get the infection and spread it to others! Even with our constitutional laws of informed consent and no coercion of medical treatments being broken to force parents to vaccinate their children or face financial penalties, and having a 95% vaccine coverage (aka "herd immunity"), IT's NOT WORKING to reduce or stop such infections!

Despite living in a developed country, I see many cases of malnutrition and nutrient deficiencies which are contributing to peoples' health issues. This, together with our stressful and unhealthy lifestyles, a waning short-term immunity from measles vaccines, measles virus shedding from the live vaccines, and scare campaigns from a misinformed media and health departments are causing the alleged increase in measles incidences of late.

The recent increase in incidences of measles is the result of the MMR vaccines failing to cause a lifelong immunity, and not as a result of the failure of some people to vaccinate!

None of the measles vaccines have ever been adequately tested, as they have never used an inert placebo in the control group. This is a deliberate attempt to manipulate the results of safety and efficacy in favour of the vaccine and the manufacturer. As a result, many children suffer lifelong complications of the vaccine which are far worse than the actual measles infection, and many more children die from the measles vaccines than the measles infection.

The government's measles vaccination program is NOT working - it is actually causing far more infections, far more adverse health reactions and deaths from the measles vaccine, compared to the infection that the vaccine is supposed to prevent. 

Measles is generally a very mild or benign infection in almost everyone, especially in developed countries which have had next to no deaths from this infection in many years. But the media and medical authorities are making it out to be a huge health issue,with "outbreak" notices daily when even ONE person is suspected of having this infection. As the studies show, support your immune system, have a good dietary intake of all essential nutrients, and use good hygiene practices and your risk will be very small.

Luckily, there are other simpler, and safer natural ways to prevent and treat measles, without buying into the government and media hype which is actually causing more infections and unnecessary concerns.

Do your own due diligence, as it's your health and your family's health after all. Look after your health and that of your family with good preventative strategies as mentioned above, and with any infection, support your immune system to do its job to get rid of the infection, and you will be fine!

You are welcome to share this article in full, or the attached PDF file to share.
measles_article_2019.pdf
File Size: 1247 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File
2 Comments

Eggs are good for you! Eggs do not raise your cholesterol!

2/4/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
A little while back, the humble egg was demonised and many people were warned off eating them because they (shock, horror!) contained cholesterol and FATS! As a result, many people still have issues or an aversion to eating eggs because they believe they are unhealthy or cause weight gain or other health issues. But is this belief actually true?! Read on...

Back in the 1970s and 1980s, there were plenty of health warnings about not eating foods which contained fats or cholesterol, as it was believed that fats and cholesterol caused heart disease. This theory was quickly disproven, and shown to be the result of very poor research at the time. Many recent scientific studies proves that fats can be good for you (even saturated fats!), as they do not cause heart disease (yes, especially saturated fats and cholesterol!) or weight gain or diabetes or other chronic health conditions. It seems that old beliefs are hard to change in some people, despite all the recent scientific evidence! I have written several articles on heart disease, saturated fats and cholesterol in the past, so have a look for those below.

But back to the eggs... can they be good for you? Absolutely yes! BUT they have to be the right type of eggs, stored properly and even cooked properly for you to get the best benefits! The best  quality eggs will be high in protein, and contain healthy anti-inflammatory omega-3 fats, the same as those found in fish, which is why they are good for you!

The best eggs - are certified organic, fresh (they completely sink when submerged in water), and are from free-range chickens who have access to the sun and grass OUTSIDE!

What to avoid - cracked or old eggs (which float or partly float when submerged), those from chickens fed on grains (as these contain less or no omega-3 oils, but a lot of inflammatory omega-6 oils, and not to mention antibiotics and possible hormones added into their feed), or caged eggs from battery operation chickens (inside in cramped and tiny cages which stresses and weakens them).

Cooking eggs should be done carefully to not overcook them (especially the yolk!). Omega-3 oils are quite intolerant to heat for long periods, but still shouldn't be overcooked. Eggs should be poached or lightly boiled so the yolks are still runny for the best benefits! Eggs are also a great source of proteins, and many other vitamins and minerals.
​
So it is safe to eat eggs regularly! What are your favourite ways to eat eggs?
0 Comments

Stop fracking our food producing farms

1/4/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
Recently I attended the Brisbane screening of a new Australian-made documentary on the environmental damage and health effects of "fracking", or "unnatural gas extraction" methods used in Australia and also around the world. The documentary, called "Pipe Dreams, Fractured Lives", was very well made by a 5th generation beef and lamb farmer from South Australia, David Smith. This is my review of this documentary.

David lives in a very productive rural farming area of SA, much like many similar food crop areas around Australia. Unfortunately, under the rich farming soils are small deposits of methane gas, trapped in rock or shale layers, which mining companies want to get and sell. One mining company constructed an exploration well searching for unconventional (shale) gas about 25km from his family farm. Later, the SA Labor government offered farmers a 10% share of the royalties they received if farmers allowed gas production on their land. Being a very diligent man, David went investigating fracking in detail, and this documentary is the result of his research and travels.

David interviewed many farmers in Australia and USA to find out the impacts or benefits of fracking on their lands and communities. He also interviewed many scientists, engineering professors, biology professors, a former petroleum boss, food and health science professors, and more. What he found and what they said absolutely shocked him.

Firstly, mining companies and their representatives were using lies and intimidation tactics to try to get farmers to sign up to having a gas well on their land. In some cases, miners were installing wells, even before a contract was signed. The intimidation, bullying, and threats of legal action against the farmers to sign up became all too much for some farmers, with at least one committing suicide as a result.

The mining companies promised thousands of dollars, and even millions in royalties to some farmers, when the miners knew that this was not possible. Unfortunately, many miners believed the promises, only to see a fraction of their promised income, due to low extraction rates, dodgy contract clauses, and that gas wells lose capacity quickly, often within 3 years.

To get to the gas trapped in rock or shale, many shafts are drilling either horizontally or vertically deep into the rock. The main problems with fracking are:

1) A lot of chemicals, chemical waste, radioactive waste, and water are pumped into the shafts to push out the gas which is collected. Approximately 50,000 to 120,000 litres of toxic waste is pumped into each well, diluted by a similar amount of water, and there can be up to 20 wells per pad. That's a LOT of chemicals contaminating the environment and destroying natural waterways and aquifers

2) A LOT of water is needed to dilute the waste being pumped into the rock, and about half of that water used comes back up as waste water, which poisons dams, the ground, and animals which drink it. Many farming communities have not been able to use their groundwater for over 10 years after having gas wells on or near their properties

3) Farmers pay for water rights from the aquifers, but when the miners come in, the farmers must reduce their allocation of water, of which most goes to the miners, who do not pay for their water rights at all

4) Methane gas (and other toxic gases) leaks out of poor quality pipes into the aquifers (an underground layer of water-bearing rock) so that water taken from the aquifer for farming or into farmers' houses can smell and taste of methane gas. This is obviously toxic to anyone or anything that uses it

5) Aquifers, when contaminated, are gone forever. There is no backup water in many farming areas. No water means no crops, no income for farmers, less food to communities, prices go up, and imports go up - not great for the economy or the environment

6) Methane gas has a much larger greenhouse gas footprint than that given off from burning coal by over 100 times. With the concerns many have over "climate change" or "global warming", why are we even looking at this fossil fuel, when there are better renewable alternatives?!

7) Many farms and properties around gas wells are worthless, and families have had to walk away from farms in these areas. One couple tried to get a loan from a bank, but this was denied when the bank found they had 4 gas wells on the property

8) State and federal governments are using old and outdated advice and information regarding the safety of fracking. When fracking was approved in Australia, there were very few research studies on the risks and damage it causes. Now there's over 1400 published studies showing the environmental damage and health effects. Farmers and communities are not being told about these

9) Mining companies are planning to build thousands of more gas wells in Qld, through more state forests and prime agricultural land, but much closer to coastal towns, which will have a larger impact on the environment and people nearby

10) Even if a farmer decides against gas wells on their property, there can be a lot of chemical and gas drift and noise from neighbouring farms which can impact their farm and their health. Environmental contamination doesn't stop at property boundaries
11) After signing up to gas wells and getting very little money from them, but getting all the environmental damage, many farmers found out that it would have been more profitable just farming their crops anyway

12)  Within 100 years, all wells would have failed and broken down, releasing even more toxic chemicals into the air, water and environment.
 
Then the health issues were investigated in the documentary. The health impacts of gas wells can include the following symptoms:

- Blood noses
- Asthma and other respiratory conditions
- Burning eyes and mouth, and eye diseases
- Neurological symptoms of the brain and nervous system, including nerve damage and pain
- Mental health effects - depression, anxiety and psychiatric disorders
- Various cancers
- Infertility (in animal stock and humans)
- Sudden deaths of many head of stock
- Spleen and liver conditions, including enlarged organs and burst spleens
- Miscarriages, low birth weights and birth defects
- Skin rashes and lesions
- And many more symptoms.
 
The environmental and health damage of fracking is huge. The cost to farmers, farming land, and natural waterways is incalculable and likely permanent.

Prime agricultural land should be used for its intended purpose, and this purpose only! Allowing gas mining which brings massive environmental damage and health effects to animals and people is INSANE. If the farming land is affected by environmental damage, the cities will be affected too, with toxic food and water, no tourism, and many more problems.

Local, state and federal governments MUST listen to the people on the ground and stop hiding behind government departments or mining companies and their profits. People, food and the environment come first, before profits! No money in the world is worth more than your health.

Stand up to the miners and say "no thanks". Talk to your local, state and federal politician to let them know this damage to the environment and people must be stopped. The politicians are hiding the true damage to Australian farming areas and farming communities. Consider that some of the major political parties who have allowed this to happen, and their actions in this (and inactions) should be taken into account in the forthcoming elections.

For more information on the "Pipe Dreams, Fractured Lives" documentary, please have a look at their website here - http://www.pipedreamsfracturedlives.com.au/. Have a look for screenings of the documentary in your area, or you can request or organise a screening with David Smith.

We have to look after the health of our environment and all Australians too! We all depend on it.
​
0 Comments

do you still need health insurance?

27/3/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
Australia's Health Insurance companies having been told by the federal government that they can no longer offer rebates on natural therapy consultations after April 1 2019! And no, it's not an early April Fools joke!

This decision was based on a corrupt and biased report from a government committee which couldn't find more than a couple of research studies on each modality which showed how effective they are. I've read more studies on effective natural therapy treatments this week than they found in years... which seriously shows their incompetence! The committee's report supported their pre-conceived bias to get rid of government rebates on these natural therapies. 

So the government wants to make it more difficult for you to obtain good, proven, safe and effective treatments from natural  therapies, and use the already clogged, inaccessible, under-financed, under-staffed, inefficient and ineffective medical system instead. Don't they realise we take a huge load off their shoulders, and without what we do, the system will absolutely collapse?! Maybe that might be a good thing, so they can see the benefits we do actually bring to the health of most Australians...

Over 80% of Australians use some form of alternative therapies, from supplements, to herbals, and services like massage, acupuncture, chiropractic, naturopathy and nutrition, and more. The government are making this decision which will affect the rights of up to 80% of Australians to make their own choice as to what they use or who they see when they are not feeling well.  And their decision will cost you more too.
In many countries around the world, their are campaigns by medical and pharmaceutical lobby groups against natural therapies, to make it more difficult for you to access alternative therapies and treatments. We should be able to work together to help you and your family to be well, but it is not in their financial interest for you to be healthy...

So what can you do about this?

1) Speak to or write a letter to your local, state and federal politician, to tell them that you are not in favour of the decision to remove health insurance rebates, especially when it was based on a corrupt process. Let them know that you will be voting for someone else if this decision goes ahead

2) Reconsider how much you are paying for your health insurance! You will be paying more from April 1 - so you will be paying MORE for LESS services! You should see what you can do with your health insurance to REDUCE your costs now! Phone your insurance company to reduce your costs.

3) Consider voting against the 3 major parties which are not interested in giving you alternative treatment options. The current federal government made this decision, the labor party want to inflict further pain on your wallets, by imposing GST on natural therapy consultations, to pay for the recently removed "tampon tax"! And the Greens have a doctor for their leader and who is against natural therapies...

4) Click on this link to have your say to the Federal health minister (Greg Hunt) on this issue, to try and save the health insurance rebates:
​ https://www.yourhealthyourchoice.com.au/save-rebates/

There is still time for your voice to be heard and for the health insurance rebate issue to be reversed! Please take a stand on this issue, or the government will remove all your rights to choose how and what or who you get health advice from. Your elected politician was voted to represent YOU, and they need to know how you feel and what you really want them to do.

If you do nothing, the government  will walk all over you to take away your power bit by bit, so they remain in power. With enough support, people power will win over collusion and corruption in government. You can make a difference!
​
From April 1, I think the joke will be on the government and health insurance companies. What are you planning to do about your health insurance? Will you change how you get your health advice or treatments? Please let me know!
0 Comments

Glandular fever and EBV can lead to ongoing health issues

25/3/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
I've been seeing a lot of people lately with ongoing complications of Glandular Fever, caused by the Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV).

Many people don't know they have had Glandular Fever, unless their doctor tests for it, as it presents just like a flu infection, but usually with a longer period of fatigue afterwards (called the "post-viral fatigue"). Symptoms include enlarged lymph glands in the neck and throat, enlarged spleen, jaundice (yellow skin colour, as the virus can infect the liver in some people), very sore throat and heavy cough, muscle aches, headaches, no appetite, fever, and more.

Glandular fever is sometimes called "the kissing disease" as it is transmitted by saliva! You don't need to kiss to transmit it, but can be from shared food, kitchenware, cups, or saliva on hands. The infection is most common in adolescents and young adults.

Natural treatments for Glandular Fever are the same as for most viral infections - rest and sleep, supporting the immune system to fight the infection, and antiviral nutrients or herbals to kill the virus, and more. There are no current traditional medical treatments for EBV, and you are usually just told to rest and keep fluids up. Not all that helpful...

There can be serious complications of the initial EBV infection, including inflammation of the heart muscle (causing irregular or abnormal heart beats), neurological problems (meningitis, seizures, facial and muscle paralysis), blood clotting disturbances, thyroid conditions, and chronic fatigue which can last for weeks or months afterwards.

Once you have recovered from the initial infection that may not be the end of it, as EBV has a tendency to hibernate when your immune system is fighting it. But when your immune defences are down (because you might not be looking after yourself), it comes out of hibernation again and again to cause havoc around your body. EBV can infect your infection-fighting white blood cells to cause them to multiply rapidly but also reduce their function. This is how EBV is linked to several types of blood cell cancers like lymphomas, and other types of cancers too, including cancer of the breast, stomach, and EBV is also linked to causing AIDS.

EBV is also lead to immune system dysfunction and autoimmune conditions such as Multiple Sclerosis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Type 1 Diabetes, Coeliac Disease, Lupus (SLE), autoimmune thyroid conditions (Hashimoto's and Grave's Disease) and many more. EBV reactivation has also been linked to Lyme disease, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), Bartonella, Chlamydia, and other infections.
 
If you have had Glandular Fever and/or EBV confirmed in the past, the key is to look after your health so that your immune system remains strong and able to keep EBV at bay. If you aren't looking after yourself with lots of stress, poor diet, lack of sleep, poor lifestyle choices etc, then EBV can be reactivated and contributing to your health issues, including some very serious conditions as mentioned above.
​
If you have some of these health issues - thyroid conditions, liver  and digestive problems, heart conditions, and you have had Glandular Fever or EBV confirmed, I can help with improving your immune system to fight the infection, to reduce symptoms, as well as prevent it reactivating. So you can kiss the EBV goodbye!
0 Comments

Diabetes organisations and educators cause more diabetes

21/3/2019

3 Comments

 
Picture
Today I attended an all-day seminar on "carbohydrate counting for health professionals" run by Diabetes Queensland". Except that I didn't quite last the whole day, as partly due to the idiotic information being given, but I had afternoon clients booked in to save me from listening to any more drivel!

I partly wanted to attend to see where Diabetes Qld are up to in relation to actually preventing or treating diabetes, and perhaps spare some of the attendees from the one-sided propaganda which they give. I found that Diabetes Qld are still stuck in 1960s nutrition science, and luckily there were not many attendees who needed saving.

Three of the 7 in total attendees were pharmacists, two dietitians of limited experience, and two rebels - myself and a low-carb advocate blogger friend who went along for similar reasons as myself. A pretty poor turnout really, but perhaps just as well!

The first thing which annoys me are diabetes educators - the diabetes association runs training courses to educate health professionals to advise and help people with diabetes, but this actually makes it all worse. There are limited health professionals who can take the diabetes educator training, and fewer who can actually get the qualification. Doctors are allowed to become DEs, as are pharmacists, nurses, physios, podiatrists and not a lot more. How many of these professionals have any nutritional medicine training or experience? NONE! Yet they are allowed to give nutrition advice on the fastest-growing nutrition-related chronic health condition in the world today! Dietitians can also become DEs, but at least they have *some* nutrition training, even if much of it is wrong. Nutritionists and Naturopaths (like me) cannot take the DE training, and we can't get the qualification or qualification, despite our more current nutrition science training and experience!

I'm still confused as to the meaning of the seminar! It was about "carb counting", but instead of (as I had hoped) counting carbs to LIMIT their intake, and thus reduce blood sugar levels and insulin response (which diabetics need to do), the purpose was to count carbs to INCREASE their intake - which is precisely the opposite of what should happen.

They introduced a new concept of "carbohydrate exchange", to attempt to simplify counting of carbohydrates in terms of grams or calories. They instead recommend counting carbs in blocks of 15gm as "1 exchange" of carbs, so 2 exchanges means 2 x 15gm = 30gm carbs. That was the only "new concept" but I'm still confused as to 1) why, or 2) how this will improve a diabetic's health?!

Some other gems I was told in the seminar:
1) Non-starchy vegetables and some fruit don't count as carbs at all. No need to count them!
2) Diet soft drinks and diet cordials are non-carbs too and are "fine", despite them being linked to actually causing weight gain, diabetes and cancer (which I pointed out)
3) Starchy foods - potato, rice, pasta etc are needed as they "fill you up more"! (Maybe, but not as filling as protein or healthy fats, which give a longer lasting energy)
4) 10% of your daily dietary intake as sugar is fine (12 tsp)
5) Your dietary intake of carbs must not fall below 130gm per day!
6) Dietary fat influences blood glucose levels! NO it doesn't!
7) I was told that alcoholic drinks shouldn't be included in counting carbohydrates! And alcohol can LOWER blood glucose overnight - no it doesn't! And alcohol is "potentially a low-GI snack before bed"! huh?!
8) Despite Diabetes Australia releasing a "position statement" on using a low-carb plan for treating type 2 diabetes, as there is a LOT of published science showing it works, they aren't ready to commit to this yet and they want more studies done
9) But in the next sentence, low carb was bad again, as our muscles and brain can only run on glucose (sugar) - complete BS! (I said this was wrong, but they didn't accept it)
10) Dietitians and DEs shouldn't tell people that they can't have this or that food!
11) Diabetics need to eat more carbs UP to their insulin requirements! (No, they need to reduce carbs to reduce insulin...)
12) "Fad diets are those that cut out certain foods or food groups" and are not recommended! I asked, "according to that definition, vegetarian and vegan diets are fad diets and should also be ignored?"!
13) Counting carbs with the new "exchange" method has been shown to reduce HbA1c (a diabetes pathology test marker) by up to 2% over a couple of month period. I said "I've reduced HbA1c in a type 2 diabetic client by 20% in 2 weeks using a low carb plan..." and they looked shocked and angrily reminded me that we are learning about "counting carbs" not "low carb", ok?!
14) There was a lot of contradictory information being given. And even simple little things like "fats and oils and protein don't have any carbs", meaning that they won't cause high blood sugars is ignored in their "treatment". They seem blind to the obvious
15) Saturated fats and cholesterol are still bad as they cause heart disease! No they don't! The two rebels put forward a few comments on this against the speaker who said "we will agree to disagree"...
16) In the past, diabetes was treated by doctors with a "NO CARB" diet! That was, until 1921 when insulin was discovered! After this, a "LOW CARB" diet was recommended for diabetics, and there was a much lower rate of diabetes! (Now we have an epidemic of diabetes as a result of people being advised to have a HIGH CARB diet instead! Why can't they see this connection? Is it from diabetic retinopathy?!)

Amusingly, there were lollies on the tables, we had to count carbs for a range of processed and packaged crap foods (breads, crackers, cereals etc), NONE of which I either buy or recommend to any clients, morning tea was a carb fest of bakery products and fruit (more carbs), and lunch was not much better. I hope I sowed a few seeds of doubt in the heads of those who attended, as they clearly had no idea about nutrition or how to actually help diabetics, which was why they were there.

It's also very sad and disturbing too, that a high profile health organisation is in complete denial about the causes of diabetes, and current evidence-based treatments. Sure I understand it's difficult to change your mind on an entrenched belief, but at some stage you need to bite the bullet and say "sorry, we got it wrong" and move on, to help people with their health. This is about peoples' lives that are at stake here, it's not just about sponsorship money. It's about real people, and their families. Wake the hell up Diabetes Queensland/Australia.

Treat diabetes with current scientific treatments - see an experienced Nutritionist and/or Naturopath instead. 
3 Comments

What does a naturopath do?

18/3/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
I'm still finding that some people, including new clients, do not know what a Clinical Nutritionist and Naturopath does! I thought I'd post this article to explain...

My philosophy in clinical practice is to:
1) Find the root causes of all health issues in a client
2) Treat all the root causes
3) Treat the whole body, on all aspects of health - physical, mental, emotional, spiritual and environmental.

To do this I need time - 90 minutes for the initial consultation, and 30-60 minutes for follow-up consultations. My consultations are much more detailed than the average 6 minutes your GP allocates to see you! The medical model is very different - mainly to prescribe medications which hide or suppress your symptoms, to make it look like there's nothing wrong. But the root causes are not identified or treated, the problem is still there, and actually will get worse over time or appear as  symptoms or disease in another organ instead.

There's a LOT I need to find out about you, such as:
1) All of your current conditions or symptoms, when they started, how they affect you, their severity, what makes things better or worse, when and for how long the symptoms appear, and more
2) Detailed questioning and investigations into your stresses, energy, digestive function, sleep, hormones, lifestyle, and physical signs (skin, nails, posture, movement, tongue, eyes, and more)
3) Analysis of your weekly food diary, as our food choices (good or bad) contribute the most to how your body works and your health
4) Pathology results analysis, in a holistic and naturopathic way.

I use all this information to identify all the root causes, then design a personalised and prioritised treatment plan to treat all of the root causes. The treatment plan includes a range of holistic recommendations such as food and meal advice, nutritional and herbal supplements if needed, lifestyle advice, and further pathology testing or referral to other practitioners if more information is needed.

The advantage of being able to get to know clients, their health history and lifestyle in detail with longer consultation times, is that I can usually find many root causes which haven't been found or addressed previously. But this can come at a cost, in terms of the time required for clients in consultations, for me to put together this treatment plan, and the cost of these services. While Naturopathic services may seem to be expensive to some people, we are much cheaper than doctors, GPs, specialists, dentists, vets and other medical professionals for the time that we spend with you to work on improving your health!

I believe one of my best abilities is to identify all of the root causes of your health issues, and often find the causes when clients may not have had an answer (or successful treatment) in the past. I am very detailed and thorough in this!

In my next article I will introduce some exciting new services to my clinic!
0 Comments

Are "Low GI" foods healthier?

6/3/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
I'm sure you have heard of the concept of "low GI", or "low Glycaemic Index" in relation to foods, and that allegedly "low GI" foods are a better choice... or are they?!

You have seen the useless Heart Foundation tick of approval logo on product packaging in the past, but was removed when people lost confidence in it as it was just a marketing sponsorship gimmick and nothing to do with how healthy a food was! Next came the useless Health Star Rating system, which is still being used by manufacturers, but being ignored by the public as it is a corrupt system that again does not accurately reflect how healthy a food is. Now there's a new "Low GI Certified" logo being applied to packaged foods that is destined to have the same fate of being entirely useless!

The Glycaemic Index (GI) of a food is a measure of how fast the food spikes your blood sugar levels and for how long. So a higher GI isn't ideal for anyone, especially for those with weight issues, diabetes, or any chronic disease really. This is because having a high blood glucose level causes these conditions, as well as heart disease, and also contributes to many other inflammatory conditions.

The problem with the GI concept is that it generally only applies to foods containing carbohydrates, as these foods have the highest impact on blood glucose levels. Carbohydrates in the form of sugar, starch, grains and cereals (whether they are whole grains or not), breads, bakery products and alcohol, all get digested into glucose to raise blood glucose levels. Different carbohydrates have different GI levels so some turn into blood glucose quickly, and some less quickly. But they all still turn into blood glucose regardless - it doesn't mean that a slower GI food is better, as it just prolongs the inflammatory damage of blood glucose for a LONGER period of time!

In addition, it is known in published studies that carbohydrates when metabolised behave differently in each person! And worse is that someone with insulin resistance, diabetes or other health issue, will have a MUCH stronger reaction to ANY carbohydrate than some one who is relatively healthy. Eating "Low GI" is not going to help improve or fix these health conditions, or prevent them developing in others.

 Reducing and restricting any of the abovementioned carbohydrates really is the first step in reducing blood glucose levels in these conditions. Swapping one carbohydrate for another isn't going to work!

Ignore the "Low GI Certified" label! It is misleading at best, and is just another marketing gimmick which has no reflection on the nutrient content or healthiness of the food. If anything, because the label is applied to packaged foods, that alone should say how unhealthy the "food" is. It's not whole, fresh, or real food. Real food doesn't have or need a label to tell you how healthy it is!

Marketing = lies!

0 Comments

Shocking results in investigation into vaccine ingredients

28/2/2019

8 Comments

 
Picture
I write articles relevant to various health topics, based on published research which I read regularly, or on health topics in the news, or occasionally on health issues which are NOT in the news but should be!

One of the topics which I don't write a lot on, because it is such an emotive and controversial area, is to do with vaccines. This is because people on both sides of the fence can be more than a little enthusiastic (!) about their beliefs.

But this topic, I believe, is a very important one to read, think and talk about. So when some major vaccine research or issue is released,  but doesn't make it to any of the news media, one has to ask why... like in this case.

An independent Italian research group, called Corvelva, have recently been investigating many of the current-day vaccines and their ingredients, and they have released some astonishing findings on a couple of vaccines in early 2019. They will release more reports soon.

I will summarise their findings here.

Infanrix Hexa
This is one of the childhood vaccines, covering 6 possible infections in the one shot, including diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), hepatitis B, haemophylus influenzae B (flu), and Poliomyelitis 1-2-3 (polio). Corvelva found the following in the current Infanrix Hexa vaccine:
- NO individual bacterial or viral antigens for ANY of the 6 microbes that this vaccine is supposed to protect you with! NOTHING! Not a sausage!

However they did find:
- An unknown polymer which combines all protein antigens into a single compound, which makes it impossible for the immune system to identify each antigen and therefore produce antibodies against any or all of the antigens.
- 65 other chemical contaminants, of which only 35% are known.
- Many various other bacteria, parasites (including Blastocystis!) and fungi.
- Lactose - the sugar found in milk. Now you know why people develop dairy allergies and intolerances...
- Various medical drugs, including benzodiazepines (a depressant or tranquiliser drug), malaria medication, antibiotics, and more.

                    
Gardasil 9 vaccine
Corvelva have found the following in the current Gardasil 9 (ie HPV) vaccine:

- Various bacteria and yeasts from laboratory contamination. In fact 54% of the DNA in this vaccine was from over 2 dozen other bacteria, parasite and yeast microbes which shouldn't be there!
- Human and mouse DNA. This can increase the risk of autoimmune conditions by causing immune system dysfunction.
- HPV virus DNA fragments - which are not intended parts of the vaccine per se. These are more contaminants which may be able to be integrated into your DNA and cause autoimmune reactions.
- Molluscum contagiosum virus - a type of pox virus which causes skin blemishes and rashes, now quite common but not so much in the past. Now you know why there's more of it around...
- Other retroviruses - which can become integrated into your DNA, can cause genetic mutations and cancers. This includes Human endogenous retrovirus K, L-BC virus, narnavirus, infectious equine anaemia virus, all which were found in this vaccine.
- Mouse leukaemia virus - which causes a white blood cell cancer.

The premise of vaccinations is that the immune system will mount a response against the simulated infection in the vaccine. In reality, the immune system mounts a response against ALL ingredients in a vaccine, including various adjuvants and excipients such as lactose, egg, peanut oil, aluminium, and various other microbes, including unintended (or are they?!) and often live bacteria and viruses, which can actually cause more infections after the vaccination, or actually cause the infection which the vaccine is supposedly trying to prevent. This discovery by Corvelvo scientists may explain why we are still seeing people getting these diseases, or still seeing more of these diseases and infections when 95% or more of the population (the increasingly increased "herd immunity level") are supposedly vaccinated.

But not all vaccines will result in antibodies being produced in all people! This is why some vaccines need 2-3 shots, as they don't "immunise" enough people with just one shot. And even after the full course, some people are still not "immune". Conversely, some people have reactions to vaccines, some with some minor symptoms, many with serious conditions (nervous system issues, chronic pain, autoimmune conditions, and many other symptoms), and many also die from them. In fact, studies show the death rate from many vaccines is up to 100 times higher than the actual death rate of the actual infection being prevented.

Our current health industry is allegedly built on the belief that vaccines are the only things which have kept us alive for millions of years, despite commercial vaccines only being around for less than 100 years! It is ONLY your immune system which can really protect you from any and all infections! And it does that well, providing you look after your immune system by eating well, getting enough sleep, reducing stress, and many other things you can do to look after your body.

Science is NEVER settled! Science does not have all the answers.  Science is always changing or offering new truths! The purpose of science is to question popular beliefs and perceptions, and investigate independently and thoroughly in the search for truth, using sound and proven scientific principles. Sadly this doesn't happen much any more, with studies frequently being retracted due to poor study design, bias, shonky statistics, and corruption by being funded by the company or industry which benefits from a favourable outcome. There's also no independent checking of medications or vaccines before products are approved for use. Perhaps the Corvelva investigations will be the start of this.

To complicate matters, governments around the world are mandating compulsory vaccinations for everyone, while the same governments (and social media tools) are preventing any discussion or sharing of scientific studies which show the risks or safety issues from vaccinations. That is fascism...

This full article and the Corvelva PDF documents are available below for downloading and sharing.
 

covelva_vaccine_investigations_article.pdf
File Size: 322 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File
corvelva-study-on-the-chemical-composition-profile-of-infanrix-hexa.pdf
File Size: 322 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File
corvelva-metagenomic-analysis-report-on-gardasil-9.pdf
File Size: 477 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File
8 Comments

food intolerances or sensitivities can cause chronic issues

24/2/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
I see a lot of people, mostly children, with intolerances and sensitivities to any number of foods, food ingredients or environmental  substances. The number of people with such intolerances or sensitivities appears to be increasing at a rapid rate. So what might be causing these issues?

But firstly, what are some symptoms to look out for in yourself or your children?

Common symptoms of intolerances and sensitivities can include:
- constant or recurring runny nose, and having to blow nose frequently
- clearing of throat by coughing frequently, especially after waking in the morning
- sinus infections or pressure
- frequent tummy upsets, with sudden or frequent diarrhoea
- bloating of lower abdomen and lots of gas/flatulence
- frequent infections such as throat infections, colds and flu
- foul or smelly breath
- frequent enlarged or infected tonsils and adenoid glands, or had them removed due to being enlarged
- skin rashes, eczema, or itchy skin
- having a horizontal crease across the lower part of the nose
- sunken and/or dark circles under the eyes, as shown in the meme photo.

Many people think that these intolerances are "allergies" and use this term to describe the reactions or symptoms they see. Allergies and intolerances are both immune system reactions to triggering substances, but they are very different! Intolerances such as to dairy or gluten (as in Coeliac Disease) are an IgG immune system response, whereas allergies are a more severe IgE response.

People also believe that if you avoid the food or substance that you are intolerant to in the same way as for allergies - ie, complete avoidance, you actually have a high risk of developing new intolerances to MORE substances. I've seen this in some clients and in published research.

Hence intolerances need to be treated quite differently to allergies! In addition, failure to identify various intolerances and act on them can result in ongoing symptoms and development of chronic health conditions.

Because of the delayed reaction of symptoms  appearing with intolerances, it can be very difficult to identify what are your individual triggers! But there are some very good pathology tests using blood or hair samples which can identify 50-500 different food and environmental triggers which cause intolerance symptoms. Bear in mind that allergy tests will not identify intolerances or vice versa.

If you see the "allergy shiners" under your eyes or other intolerance symptoms or in your children or family, please look into getting an intolerance test to identify what is causing these issues, and then make some adjustments to  dietary intake or lifestyle to reduce exposure, to improve health! I can help with testing and recommendations from the test results!

Do you have any known intolerances and what are they? Or do you suspect some intolerances but are not sure what is causing them?
​
0 Comments

Stevia can cause infertility in males and females

18/2/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
We know sugar in large amounts in our diets are not good, as it causes an excess of glucose, high cholesterol, weight gain, inflammation and over a period of time, many chronic diseases. So some "smart" scientists come up with artificial sweeteners to satisfy our guilty sweet cravings without the "calories" or sugar. But it usually turns out that one by one all artificial sweeteners have major downsides in causing unwanted side effects in your body, such as more weight gain, diabetes and even cancer. So this article may be a surprise to most, being about Stevia, a "natural" alternative sweetener.
​
Stevia comes from a South American plant, Stevia rebaudiana, native to Brazil and Paraguay. The leaves of the plant have traditionally been used in those countries as a sweetener to their tea, for sweet treats and a medicine. Stevia can suppress the growth of oral bacteria to reduce tooth decay, and reduce blood sugar levels. Stevia has also been shown to kill beneficial gut bacteria, which isn't ideal.

Despite these apparent benefits, Stevia has not been universally accepted as being safe for consumption in the USA or Europe or other countries. This decision appears to have been made on many scientific studies since the 1960s showing that Stevia can reduce severely reduce fertility in animals. In males, Stevia greatly affects the metabolism and use of testosterone, the male hormone, and effects on male reproductive anatomy, to affect fertility by over 60% and also affect other general male characteristics which are reliant on male hormones.

In studies on female animals, Stevia was shown to reduce fertility by 57-79%, similar to the results on male studies. The effects on female infertility lasted for months after intake of Stevia was ceased. Stevia has this contraceptive effect as it impacts your hormones and hormone receptors on cells. The contraceptive properties of Stevia have been known for a long time - with early studies in 1968 showing this. Native tribes have traditionally used Stevia for centuries for its contraceptive purposes!

While I am all for natural alternatives to today's mass-produced artificial food and medicines, some plants when ingested do have some negative health consequences, while others can be deadly. Many medications are simply artificial forms of just one (of many) active constituents of a plant. Many Stevia products are similar, being mass-produced or artificial forms of the plant extracts, rather than being the whole leaf.

It appears that Stevia has long-known contraceptive effects, but this hasn't been widely made public. And despite this research, Stevia is still available for sale as a sweetener and  food additive in many processed food products, which is concerning.

I'm not a fan of any artificial sweeteners, and sometimes the real thing is the safest option, but in small amounts only in real foods, such as in fruits or some sweet vegetables.

If you are looking to get pregnant in the near future, you need to really check what you are eating and what chemicals you are exposed to, before planning a family! This is something that I can help with! 
0 Comments

How the EAT-Lancet global diet will be forced on you

31/1/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
This article follows on from my previous 2 articles on the ridiculously proposed EAT-Lancet diet. The EAT-Lancet commission's initial report for a global diet showed WHAT they want everyone to eat. But another report they released on 28th January 2019 explains HOW they are going to make you follow their plans, by forcing governments and "health organisations" to make it happen!

This project has just become a whole lot worse... read on for more details.

Some observations of the new report include:

1) They propose to reduce the influence that the food industry have on food guidelines used by different countries around the world, because of their tendency to prevent health initiatives being implemented

2) They will promote their EAT-Lancet global diet to all levels of government, to all nations and communities and all people, by using international human rights laws, along with government organisations like the World Trade Organisation, European Union, the World Bank, United Nations and others.

3) They will force governments to stop giving subsidies to fossil fuel and food industries (about $5 trillion annually), and redirect those funds to other sustainable energy and food practices... in effect, for themselves to get these funds instead! Can you now see why they want to force this on you?!

4) They want to overcome the powerful energy and food lobby groups which have prevented government policies being made which keep people and the environment unhealthy while they maintain their profits. For example, soft drink companies spent $50 million in the USA during 2016-17 to prevent government initiatives to reduce intake of soft drinks. The group are recommending stronger government structures to reduce conflicts of interest, including public education, social media marketing, government procurement, additional taxes... and subsidies, but they said this was a bad idea before!

5) They will utilise individual agents as influencers to getting their message out to the general public, in a "bottom-up" approach to go with the "top-down" influencing through government policies in all levels to change public opinions

6) They want to make individuals take responsibility for their own health, by reducing social prejudices on obese or unhealthy people or on their gender, religion and race
7) They will increase awareness of access to efficient cooking stoves (?!) to improve nutrition

8) The report admits that the world CAN produce enough food for everyone, but undernutrition and deficiencies still exist in more than one third of the world's population. Ironically, 99% will be deficient with this plan, and only the 1% who are part of the project possibly getting enough...

9) Animal crops which produce red meat are allegedly a problem and intake will be restricted in this global diet, because one third of the world's grain crops go towards feeding them and not us!  Cattle for example are NOT naturally meant to eat grains! The only reason they are fed grains is because grains are high in carbohydrates, which gets turned into fat! So grain-fed cattle become larger and fatter.  And this group want YOU to eat more grains, to fatten you up before slaughter?! 

10) Red meat in excess is blamed in the report as causing obesity! Not in most people as I see it, but it's the carbs, sugar and grains which are! The report says "Animal-source foods, including meat, provide a rich source of highly bioavailable micronutrients, especially for young children, and make an important contribution to high quality diets when consumed in moderation"! So why are they effectively banning animal foods, with the exception of one-fifth of an egg, or one-tenth of a sausage, as per their 7 grams of red meat per day?

11) They are proposing to promote their implementation of the EAT-Lancet diet worldwide, in a similar way to  how cigarettes were demonised and and smokers being alienated, in an attempt to get governments and the public to change and comply to their dietary recommendations

Their goal is to reduce poor nutrition and its ongoing costs on the health system and environment, estimated at $3.5 trillion annually. Ironically, this project will actually INCREASE levels of poor nutrition by causing more nutrient deficiencies in more people than ever before, as reviews of this diet have shown it is deficient in vitamin B12, vitamin D, vitamin K, sodium, potassium, calcium, iron, omega-3 fats, protein and amino acids, and more!

This new report also makes an impossible claim that their plans (along with spending 1% of GDP) will stop the increase in climate change!

I've recently watched George Orwell's 1984 movie again, and the EAT-Lancet global diet being forced on everyone is a blatant New World Order policy, if I've ever seen one. It is unscientific, unproven, biased, elitist, and undemocratic. It is a commercial profit-making enterprise, disguised as a global public health directive, and funded by the world's taxpayers, who are only going to get sicker as a result of this.
​
0 Comments

Is the new EAT-Lancet diet healthy for you? (part 2)

30/1/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
This is part 2 of my article on the new proposed EAT-Lancet "global diet"...

While it would generally be great to see more people eating more quality plant-based foods, which I mentioned in my last 2 articles, there are more than a few problems with this report and the dietary recommendations it makes.

1) There are a lot of published studies which refute the studies they cite as evidence of their reasonings for their recommendations.

2) Nutrition researchers have analysed the nutrient breakdown of the proposed global diet, which was easy to do as they published the quantity and calories of each food item they recommend.  They found many major deficiencies in nutrients if you were to follow their advice! Some of the deficiencies include vitamin B12, vitamin D, vitamin K, sodium, potassium, calcium, iron, omega-3 fats, protein and amino acids, and more! Just one nutrient deficiency will result in health symptoms and diseases, but this many is a health disaster. This objective of the group to provide a healthy diet has failed miserably!

3) There is no one single diet which works for everyone. We've seen that over the past few decades with government food guidelines all over the world, and the epidemics of chronic diseases are being caused by these guidelines that are too slow to respond to good quality scientific studies.

4)  The massive amount of carbohydrates, especially refined and processed carbs (sugary foods and grains) in the EAT recommendations is as bad or worse than what we already have today. For example, they recommend a massive 811 calories or 32% of your daily food intake should be hi-carb grains, and more carbs from starchy vegetables, and another 5% of your daily intake from sugar! This will simply increase the rates of chronic diseases such as obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer.

5) The commission forgets that animal crops rejuvenate the soil with their manure, ironically needed by plants to grow! But plant crops are grown in ever-depleted soils, or are topped up with artificial nutrients instead, not to mention the toxic herbicides, pesticides, fungicides and more that the crops and soil is exposed to. This is not sustainable farming nor environmentally friendly.

6) They recommend many unhealthy fats and oils, including palm oil, which is NOT environmentally friendly as many would know! The palm oil industry is well known for destroying native rainforests to grow specific palm trees. I thought the EAT-Lancet concept was about being sustainable and environmentally friendly?! No, it's not. More native rainforests will be cut down to produce more palm oil from this recommendation, especially when palm oil makes up 2% of this diet (compared to red meats at 1%!).

7) Many of their assumptions are still based on old and incorrect beliefs (based on poor quality studies done in the past), that saturated fats are bad and cause heart disease (which studies show they don't!), or that diabetes is caused by red meat consumption (it's not!), or that salt is bad for you (wrong again),  or eggs are bad  because they are high in cholesterol which is another heart disease risk (it's not!), and other fallacies. As a result, this new diet is just the same old incorrect information, but then made much, much worse.

8) For many decades we have been told that we all need to eat and drink lots of dairy products every day, to get plenty of calcium for healthy bones. The current perception is that dairy is a good source of calcium, which it actually isn't! But suddenly, the EAT-Lancet report says that a World Health Organisation review has shown that regions with low dairy intake actually have lower bone fracture rates! So now dairy should be reduced. I've been saying for a while that dairy is a poor source of calcium and many plant-based foods have a higher % of calcium per gram! Hence by eating more quality plant foods, you can get sufficient calcium in your diet, but this new diet provides only 55% of your daily requirement of calcium!

9) Meat makes up just a tiny 6% of this new diet, of which only 1% is red meat (just 7 grams per day!), or 2% for chicken and fish. There is no good quality evidence for this! This decision is based on personal bias against meat by 31 out of the 37 committee participants  (being 84%) being vegetarians or vegans themselves.

10) There have been NO studies done on this proposed diet! NONE! So how can they possibly be recommending it when they haven't actually tested it?! They have put this recommendation together from a committee looking at different published studies on individual nutrients, but then not actually researching their recommendations as a whole to prove that it will be safe, beneficial and effective in meeting their objectives for our health and that of the environment.

The EAT-Lancet global diet is, in my opinion from reading their recommendations, pretty much more of the same old useless dietary guidelines advice based on the same old nutritional fallacies, but with significantly less meat being recommended and that being replaced by more carbs which ironically will cause even more problems.

Whenever there is a major push for a one-size-fits-all approach to health and nutrition, and where there is no scientific proof, it must be ignored! It simply will not work!

The EAT-Lancet diet should be renamed as the Fat-Lancet diet, because the deficiencies it has, and the high amount of carbs from sugar and grains, and it's reliance on unhealthy fats, will cause more disease and obesity, a worse environmental impact, and more profits to the medical system and the people involved with this proposal.
​
0 Comments

The EAT-LANCET diet - is this new global diet healthy for you?

30/1/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
The latest instalment of nutritional confusion and idiocy of late is from the release of a new report from the EAT-Lancet Commission, which is the collaboration of the EAT group and The Lancet, with the former being a non-profit startup and the latter allegedly one of the world's leading scientific and medical journals. Really they both should know better...

The EAT-Lancet Commission Report was only recently released (Jan 16, 2019), and is a joint report for a "global health diet" that is allegedly healthy for both people and the planet. Sounds great so far... although a single diet for everyone already has my hackles up, as that simply will not work!

The EAT group hide behind other companies and foundations, but mostly funded by a Norwegian billionaire couple, of which Gunhild Stordalen, is a former model turned doctor and environmentalist, and her husband owns a large chain of hotels. Ironically one of their Foundation's slogans on their website is "sustainable business is big business", no doubt being big profits for them. Another of the Foundation's initiatives is the "Zero Emissions Resource Organisation (ZERO)", to limit climate change caused by human activities, and several other climate and health related initiatives. So why then do the two owners of the EAT group and Foundations own a $20 million private jet in which they fly all around the world in?! And the many meetings of the EAT-Lancet group, including 37 scientists were regularly flown around the world to attend... Not very green, sustainable, environmentally friendly. Very hypocritical I think!

The EAT group is, according to them, a global initiative linking food, health, and sustainability across science, business and politics. The project is far more than developing a single global diet, but one which makes many recommendations about sustainable farming and agricultural practices, environmental impacts, and politics - of free trade, and how to get governments to implement the EAT-Lancet recommendations and how to sell it to the world's population. Good luck with that, as there are many renowned critics of the recommendations, and justifiably so, even days after the report has been released.  

The major recommendation of the EAT-Lancet report is that everyone should be eating a LOT less meat and dairy, and replacing these with more plant-based foods!  And by less meat, I mean just 7 grams per day of red meat, or 29 grams per day of chicken or fish! Or just one-fifth of an egg!

If the currently recommended food guidelines are so good for us all (allegedly, but they aren't), then why do this group want to make such drastic changes to our meals?  Simple, because of their personal bias - with 84% of the scientists on the EAT-Lancet panel being vegetarians or vegans themselves.

As I've said before, yes some people need to eat more vegetables to get more nutrients which will improve their health! But any diet is only as good as the quality and quantity of the nutrients in the foods. If a diet isn't providing sufficient nutrients for you, especially for a significant amount of time, such as this proposed global diet which is lacking a lot of nutrients, then your health will suffer with symptoms and disease.

Of course we also need to be more environmentally aware, and be more sustainable with our resources of food and energy production. We aren't doing too well with this, mostly due to general apathy of the issue, or government or industry regulations (or lack of) which allows damage to be done to the environment on a massive scale.
​
How does the EAT-Lancet report's recommendations stand up to my scrutiny?! I will analyse their diet and recommendations in my next article!
0 Comments

Are vegetarian or vegan diets healthier?!

21/1/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
Picture
There's a growing trend amongst food producers or retailers or restaurants to provide more vegetarian and vegan meal options, as well as fully vegan meals or products. The number of people in Australia identifying as "mostly" vegetarian is approximately 12% according to statistics in 2016.

But is going vegetarian or vegan a healthier option for you?

The short answer is... "it depends", or "in many cases, no"!
The long answer follows...

As a Clinical Nutritionist and Naturopath, I analyse my clients' diets for possible deficiencies or excesses which could be contributing to their health conditions. After all, your food makes up your body's cells and enables it to work properly, as long as you are getting the nutrients you need!

I do tend to find that most people eat too many processed or packaged foods, such as grain based foods - cereals, breads and other bakery products, and not enough vegetables. I also tend to see the surprisingly, people aren't eating enough protein (not just meat, but plant based protein too), and not enough healthy fats (but too many bad ones), but I'm mainly taking about vegetables in this article!

With more people eating more plant-based foods to improve their health, that is a great thing! But as with any other foods, there are concerns about quantity and quality, so just because you are vegetarian or vegan, doesn't mean you are healthier than someone who is an omnivore (who eats meat and plant foods)!

Plant food crops grown in large scale monocultures to produce large quantities of single crops are not sustainable, nor good for the environment due to the large amounts of agricultural chemicals used (pesticides, fungicides,and herbicides like Roundup or glyphosate). These mostly toxic chemicals don't come out in the processing of the crops, so you end up eating them, which of course will have some effects on your health. Unless you choose to eat "certified organic" or home grown foods!

Many plant-based diet advocates (including those who push the ridiculous government food guidelines) recommend eating a huge amount of grain-based foods so you get enough fibre. I usually see vegetarians or vegans eating far too many sugary foods or processed grain products which are high in carbohydrates, which leads to high blood sugars, high cholesterol, weight gain, and inflammation. These can contribute to diabetes, and other chronic health conditions, including cancer.

There are some very poor quality "foods" (and I use that term very loosely here) which are marketed as being vegetarian or vegan (see the meme picture) but they are highly processed, full of additives and chemicals, but are nutrient depleted. These "foods" are not going to be good for you, even if they allegedly are "vegan"! And you can just as easily over-eat such "foods" to the detriment of your health.

So just because a food is marketed as being "all natural", "suitable for vegetarians", or "vegan friendly", it doesn't mean that it is healthy or good for you! Highly processed foods which come in a box or plastic packaging are NOT "vegan"! Sorry, but they are not!

We are all different, due to different genetics, ethnicity, and physiology too! There is no one meal plan which is ideal for everyone, and that includes vegetarian or vegan diets. Vegetarian and vegan diets can be a great improvement in SOME people who perhaps haven't been eating enough plant-based foods in the past, but how healthy these diets are really depends on the types of foods chosen, their quality and quantity, and your individual tolerances or intolerances to those foods. I can help you with improving your diets, if you are not getting the benefits or improved health from what you are currently doing!
0 Comments

why detoxes do not work!

18/1/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
I do get asked a lot what I would recommend for a detox. If you think you overdid it with the xmas and new years celebrations, and you have made your list of new years resolutions starting with a detox, then you need to read this article further!

Many people think they are doing their bodies a great service, by having a yearly... well, service... with a detox of a few days or a week at most. It sounds like a good idea in principle!

Assuming that you want to undertake a 7-day detox with a water fast, or juicing, or detox program  pack from your chemist, or some other online detox method, I have some news for you - it won't work! You can't do a weekly detox and hope that it undoes all the damage and toxic accumulation from the previous 51 weeks of the year! It's not possible!

Also, what is it exactly that you want to detox?! Not actually knowing this is also setting up for failing in your detox. Short term detoxes are useless, but targeted detoxes that are tailored against specific toxins, organs or heavy metals CAN and DO work very well! The key is to know what toxins you may have and then setup a treatment plan for that. This can be done with a number of options for testing, such as with a HTMA (Hair Tissue Mineral Analysis) test, Oligoscan or other tests. I can help with these! I've seen some great improvements with targeted detox treatments, including those with high amounts of lead, mercury, aluminium or other toxins or heavy metals.

Many toxic chemicals from foods or household/cleaning/work products are stored in body fat as a "safe" and out of the way place. When you detox, you are generally on a diet, which is actually a restriction of nutrients (NOT a restriction of calories as such) that your body really needs. The reduced food intake will mean that body fat will be broken down to provide energy. That's all good for reducing your weight, but when you lose a reasonable amount of body fat, those stored toxins are also released into the blood. This is not a good thing, and it WILL make you feel worse. This is why you feel terrible on a detox program - you feel like your brain is fuzzy, aching all over, headaches, gut problems and fatigued... This is why you should never detox when you are sick or not feeling well - you will feel worse. And also why you need to support your body to detox when you are losing weight!

A non-specific detox for the body is a great idea, but this needs to be a part of a regular lifestyle, not something you do once or twice per year! It needs to be done all the time! A general detox can be done properly though without feeling terrible when you do it, with a regular and holistic program that covers all aspects of health - physical, mental, emotional, environmental and more.

Detoxing starts with an analysis of what you are normally eating and drinking, and what chemicals you are being exposed to. Then you should be making some changes to reduce your toxin exposure by replacing some items with safer and less toxic ones, and supporting the body's natural elimination channels to remove stored toxins.
​
So perhaps please reconsider your short term "detox" plans on your new years resolutions list! Replace it instead with aiming for a "healthy lifestyle" in 2019 instead, or using testing to find out what toxins your body has first, then use a targeted detox against those. I can help you with this!
0 Comments
<<Previous

    COPYRIGHT

    All articles here are Copyright (c) to Ross Walter Nutritionist & Naturopath (2015-2019). You are welcome to share these articles in your personal or business marketing, in full and referencing this website.
    If you wish to have specific health articles written for your business, please ask via email to ross@rosswalter.com.au  

    Archives

    July 2019
    June 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    March 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    June 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015

    Categories

    All
    5:2 Diet
    Acidity
    Acne
    Acrylamide
    Alcohol
    Alkaline Food
    Allergies
    Aluminium
    Alzheimer's
    Antibacterial
    Antibiotics
    Anti Inflammatories
    Anti-inflammatories
    Anxiety
    Arsenic
    Artificial Sweeteners
    Atherosclerosis
    Autism
    Autoimmune Conditions
    Baby Powder
    Baking Soda
    Bipolar Disorder
    Blending
    Blood Glucose
    Blood Sugar
    Bowel Movement
    Bowels
    BPA Free Plastic
    BPA-free Plastic
    BPA Plastic
    BPS Plastic
    Burns
    Cacao
    Calcium
    Calories
    Cancer
    Cannabis
    Carb Adapted
    Carbohydrates
    Carcinogens
    Causes
    Celebrity
    Cervical Cancer
    Chemicals
    Children's Health
    Chocolate
    Cholesterol
    Chronic Disease
    Codeine
    Coeliac Disease
    Coffee
    Cold And Flu Prevention
    Common Cold
    Constipation
    Contraception
    Cooking
    Cookware
    Corporate Sponsorship
    Cravings
    Dairy
    Dental Health
    Depression
    Detox
    Diabetes
    Dieting
    Dietitian
    Dietitians
    Digestive System
    Documentary Review
    EAT Lancet Diet
    EAT-Lancet Diet
    EBV
    Eczema
    Eggs
    E-health
    Endocrine Disruptors
    Endometriosis
    Endorsements
    Environmental Health
    Epstein-Barr Virus
    Essential Nutrients
    Evidence Based
    Exercise
    Farming
    Fast Food
    Fasting
    Fat Adapted
    Fatigue
    Fats
    Female Health
    Female Hormones
    Fertility
    Fibre
    Fibroids
    Film Review
    Fish Oil
    Fitness
    Flu
    Fluoride
    Flu Vaccine
    Folate
    Folic Acid
    Food Additives
    Food Allergies
    Food Containters
    Food Guidelines
    Food Industry
    Food Ingredients
    Food Intake
    Food Intolerances
    Food Labelling
    Food Labels
    Food Production
    Food Pyramid
    Food Sensitivities
    Food Star Rating
    Fracking
    Fructose
    Genetics
    Glandular Fever
    Glucose
    Gluten
    Gluten Free Food
    Gluten-free Food
    Glyphosate
    GMO
    Goals
    Grains
    Gut Bacteria
    Gut-brain Connection
    Gut Health
    Hand Washing
    Health Funds
    Health Information
    Health Insurance
    Health Star Ratings
    Healthy Fats
    Heartburn
    Heart Disease
    Heart Health
    Heavy Metals
    Herd Immunity
    High Blood Pressure
    Hormonal Issues
    Hormone Disrupting
    Hormones
    HPV
    IBS
    Immune System
    Indigestion
    Infections
    Infertility
    Inflammation
    Influenza
    Insomnia
    Insulin
    Irritable Bowel
    Juicing
    Ketogenic Diet
    LCHF
    Leaky Gut
    Liver
    Low Carb Diet
    Low Fat Diets
    Low GI
    Lung Disease
    Man Flu
    Manuka Honey
    Margarine
    Marketing
    Meal Replacements
    Measles
    Medical Science
    Medications
    Medicinal Cannabis
    Melanoma
    Melatonin
    Men's Health
    Mental Health
    Mental Illness
    Microbiome
    Microwave Meals
    Microwaves
    Miscarriage
    MMR Vaccine
    Moderation
    Modern Diets
    Motivation
    MTHFR
    My Health Record
    Natural Therapies
    Naturopathy
    New Years Resolutions
    NSAIDs
    Nutrient Deficiencies
    Nutrients
    Nutrigenomics
    Nutrition
    Nutritional Medicine
    Nutrition Guidelines
    Nutritionist
    Nutrition Research
    Obesity
    Oestrogen
    Oil
    Omega-3
    Pain
    Painkillers
    Paleo
    Pap Smears
    Pathology Testing
    PCOS
    Personalised Consultations
    Pet Foods
    Pets
    Pharmaceuticals
    PH Of Food
    Plastic
    Plastic Bottles
    PMDD
    PMS
    Polyunsaturated Fats
    Poo
    PPI
    Preconception
    Pregnancy
    Primal
    Privacy
    Processed Foods
    Psoriasis
    Pyrrole Disorder
    Red Meat
    Red Wine
    Reflux
    Research
    Resveratrol
    Reviews
    Rice
    Root Causes
    Roundup
    Salt
    Saturated Fat
    Schizophrenia
    Scientific Research
    SIBO
    Skin
    Skin Cancer
    Skin Conditions
    Sleep
    Sore Throat
    Sports
    Sports Nutrition
    Stevia
    Stress
    Sugar
    Sunburn
    Sunglasses
    Sunlight
    Sun Safe
    Sunscreens
    Talcum Powder
    Thyroid
    Tonsillitis
    Tooth Decay
    Toxicity
    Toxins And Chemicals
    Type 1 Diabetes
    Type 2 Diabetes
    Ulcers
    Vaccination
    Vaccines
    Vegan
    Vegetables
    Virus
    Vitamin D
    Water
    Water Fluoridation
    Weight Gain
    Weight Loss
    Wheat
    Whole Grains
    Winter
    Womens Health
    Would Healing
    Xenoestrogens
    Xeno-oestrogens
    Zinc

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly