kamagra does it work

Mar 16

Radiation!

By Jimmy Scott, Ph.D. Various 1 Comment »

Scary concept to most people. With the nuclear power plant problems in Japan just now, many people have renewed their fears. Lets take a closer look.

When the United States exploded two atomic bombs in Japan in WWII we heard about the horrible devastation caused not only by the blast itself, but perhaps even worse, the radiation. The pictures of people suffering from radiation sickness were difficult to look at. Nobody ever wants to see that again.

Although not a “secret” in the official sense, there was a remarkable story which has remained virtually secret anyway. I learned of this secret many decades ago, when I was a teen, and I cannot recall anyone else who seemed to have learned of it. I read about this in a scholarly book, a section of which was a discussion of the radiation damage from the explosions. That remarkable secret was that there were groups of people, while  living among the others who were damaged and killed by the radiation, who did not develop any signs of exposure to that radiation. How could that be, when we all “know” that nothing can be done to prevent the sad effects of high levels of radiation exposure? Why do we all believe that those people could not possibly survive? How could those folks be protected from the ill effects of their exposure to such high levels or radiation?

The answer is relatively simple. They ate diets rich in seafood and seaweeds. That was their lifestyle.

Fast forward a few decades. In my Health Kinesiology, HK, work I have consulted with various clients who had rather severe issues. Some of them chose to undergo radiation treatments. The question then presents itself: Can we do something to help their bodies better tolerate the radiation? Can we prevent “radiation sickness” or “radiation burns”? Can we help them recover faster? As always with HK we “ask the body”. Through our muscle testing procedures we can find out what the body itself wants, or does not want. What helps or what harms. By doing this carefully and thoroughly we can optimize the person’s life. What I found with these radiation treatments was that by giving the client sufficient amounts of various nutrients we could totally prevent all the negative effects of the radiation! In other words, the body is perfectly capable of repairing damage if it is provided with enough of the appropriate raw materials. This is exactly why those folks in 1940′s Japan were able to withstand the effects of the radiation–they had sufficient raw materials in their bodies to repair the radiation damage!

In modern times when there is some radiation leak the local people are urged to take potassium iodide, KI. The idea is, of course, to provide enough non-radioactive iodine that people will absorb less of the leaked radioactive iodine, thus being a bit more protected. Unfortunately, this approach is usually less than adequate. This is for at least two reasons: 1) It is not only iodine which is released!, 2) the radation damages tissues which require much more than just iodine for protection / repair. For example, the Japanese reactors are also leaking cesium. KI does not protect from cesium, a highly alkaline mineral which competes with lithium, sodium, potassium, and rubidium. Interestingly, non-radioactive cesium, and rubidium, have been used successfully as a cancer treatment (related to their highly alkaline nature).

How much nutrition is necessary for protection? On the simple level, if one needed, say 3 tablets of 10 different supplements “normally”, then with medical radiation the intake would be increased by about 10 / ten, times! Also, intake would have to include perhaps an additional 10 supplements. In other words, supplements could go from 30 pills a day to maybe 600 a day! That is how damaging medical radiation can be. On the other hand, if you are really eating properly and you build up your “metabolic  reserve” (stored nutrients), then your body will probably not get sick to begin with, and if you do get accidently exposed to any radiation then your body should be able to repair the damage and have little if any adverse effect. (Just like those Japanese folks.)

Eating well, by the way, is not done by following the orthodox recommended diet suggestions. I have bioenergetically tested thousands of people over the years, and I consistently find that most people’s bodys prefer a low carbohydrate, organic fresh whole natural foods diet. Grain intake should be very low, and then only eat whole grains. Pasturized products have lost most of their most beneficial components. Non-raw dairy is politely called junk. Artificial colors, flavors, and sweetners are forbidden. Frequent small amounts of a wide variety of foods are perhaps the most important rule of good diet practice. Meats and poultry are OK, if they are not contaminated by antibiotics, hormones, and so on. The so-called studies which condemn meats never seem to compare organic with commercial versions!

That said, there have been studies which concluded that chlorophyll has radiation protection properties. Naturally (pun intended) eating whole dark green vegetables is the best way to get the chlorophyll. Bottles of liquid chlorophyll are available, but the water soluble type has been chemically changed so is not quite like the original plant sources. Crude chlorophyll is a thick oily messy fantastic product. It stimulates new cell growth, rapidly eliminates pain in freshly damaged tissues (I verify that by personal experience with ripped-off toenail), speeds healing (especially with open wounds and burns), and so on. Also, it is a rich source of vitamins A and E. Anyway, get into the habit of eating some dark green veggies every day (broccoli, chard, spinach, beet greens, asparagus, turnip greens, etc.). Oh, and don’t forget, most sea weeds are green, too. That algae really soaks up the sunlight and grows up rich in trace minerals along the way. Protection in so many ways!

Background radiation is generally small. I have a professional grade radiation meter. For years I have periodically checked the radiation levels wherever I happen to be. On the ground in North American and Europe the typical counts–per–minute have been around 15. In the last few years at home I get average counts a little less, about 12. On a flight to and from Europe some years ago I got counts of about 600 at the highest altitudes.
What do these counts mean? 15 is about 0.015 mr / hr (millirem per hour). 600 is about 0.62 mr / hr. American workers are allowed about 5  rem (equals 5000 mr) total dose over a year. That is over 8000 hours at the 0.62 rate. (Note: Sievert is the unit used in some countries. 1 millisievert (mSv) = 100 mrem.)

Obviously the best way to protect yourself is to start well before the necessity to do so! Get yourself super healthy, take some precautions, and do not worry–that stress depletes your nutrient storage. Oh, it is best to get started last year. Otherwise, as they say, “There is no time like the present!”. Start NOW.

Oct 18

A recent issue of the Daily Express newspaper contained about allergy testing. The full article may be seen here:   http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/204814/Allergy-detection-What-works, (by Jane Symons.)

One of the methods (not Health Kinesiology) challenged in the report apparently concluded: “Dylan was deficient in docosahexaenoic acid (an omega-3 fatty acid often abbreviated to DHA), glutamine, niacin, silica, vanadium and sulforaphane.” The author of the article, Jane Symons, then made an unreferenced comment: “There is, however, no recommended intake for DHA, glutamine, silica, vanadium or sulforaphane, which means there is no such thing as a deficiency.” (My emphasis.)

Ms. Symons could use a lesson in scientific methodology.

In the medical world one approach to researching effects is called the “gold standard” of methodology, namely randomized double blind. What this means is that the participants, subjects, are randomly placed in the different treatment groups, such as placebo and drug groups, with neither the subjects nor the researchers knowing which group is which. However, many medical researchers do not have extensive training in scientific methodology. I do.

Depending on the type of data sought there are numerous valid research design options, and choosing an inappropriate one can lead to very misleading conclusions. Consider this example.

Dr Feingold proposed, decades ago, that hyperactive children were reacting to naturally occurring salicylates in food, (or by taking aspirin). He provided evidence, so a larger more elaborate study was needed to verify, or not, his proposal. A “gold standard” study was carried out, by others, in which a group of hyperactive kids were randomly assigned either to a salicylate-free diet or a diet containing salicylates. At the end of the study the entire groups of kids were compared and the conclusion was that there was not a statistically significant difference in the two groups. In other words the conclusion was that salicylates were not a cause of hyperactivity. So what was wrong with that? It was not understood by the researchers that not every kid was a reactor! Only about 10% of the kids reacted to salicylates, but in those kids the effect was obvious to parents and teachers. By lumping all the kids together, both reactors and non-reactors, the real effect was “washed out”. That deficiency in the research design has probably affected many thousands of kids.

Quite often there is simply a binary decision. Either there is an effect or not. So the questions becomes, “Can we demonstrate that a deficiency exists when there is no Recommended Daily Intake?” This is not to determine how much is needed, but only that some is required. There is a simple test we can do. If we can demonstrate that only one single individual requires a specific nutrient, then obviously there is a daily requirement even though that is not yet determined. This is similar to the original description of the platypus: a duck-billed mammal was so unbelievable that unless one specimen was displayed no one would believe it existed.

After massive research, about one minute, I found a perfect example of a required nutrient for which there is no recommended intake. We all accept that it is required, but obviously Jane Symons does not believe it. I urge her to volunteer to be the one subject to prove my point. Is she up to the challenge.

Hypothesis: Some nutrients are required even though there is no recommended intake.
Subject: Any volunteer. Disbelievers preferred.
Human Subject Declaration: Since a human subject is involved then a Form must be provided to the subject for them to give consent, state they understand the research, any possible consequences, and so on. The entire experiment will take only a few minutes. I was once on the Human Subjects Committee at a major American medical school.
Measurement Variables: pulse rate, respiration rate, and muscle tone. Many others could be used, but these three are very simple, inexpensive, and low tech.
Procedure: Seat subject and make baseline measurements of the variables until they stabilize. Any significant change in these measurements after the experimental treatment begins will indicate we have demonstrated the need for this nutrient.
Have the subject place a plastic bag over their head and seal the bag around the neck.
Nutrient Being Evaluated: Oxygen (or more precisely, air).
Expected Result: A drop in each variable to zero.
Conclusion: If the expected result is obtained then we have proved that there is at least one required nutrient for which there has not been established a minimum daily intake and therefore we have also disproved Ms. Symons statement as quoted above. Furthermore, we have demonstrated this even though the subject knows what is being tested and can make any effort they desire to modify their responses. Removal of the bag would also prove the hypothesis, because there would be no reason to do so otherwise! This is a very robust research design.

Well Ms. Symons?

Mar 28

Hello Viewers

By Jimmy Scott, Ph.D. Various 5 Comments »

This is a new site as of 28 March 2010. It takes a while to get everything going, so check back frequently. New content will be added often, but irregularly. I will be commenting on many News Stories, the state of knowledge about Health Kinesiology, nutrition, health topics in general, and other such topics. This will be from an alternative perspective and science based. Check the links shown for still further information. Enjoy and submit your comments, too.

preload preload preload