|
|
|
|
| Dear :
Does the Sun Really Cause Cancer??? Okay, you may have been shocked when I told you the benefits of drinking coffee - strap yourself in for this one..... I know that fair-skinned people come into my offices for appointments and wonder "why does Dr. Val look so tanned?" Isn't she about promoting health and in the meanwhile, exposing herself to the cancer-causing sun rays? I used to belief this lie (even though I knew that I felt better and looked much younger when I would lay out in the sun). Go figure..... Well, I want to start off with some bullet points - if this is all you read, well, then that will be enough! 5 out of 6 sunscreens tested have cancer-causing ingredients in them Skin cancer is caused by being vitamin D and vitamin F deficient (vitamin D comes from the sun - how is that for a contradiction?) Sunlight stimulates the pineal gland which promotes more restful sleep, and improves your mood (don't wear a hat when you go outside - the sun needs to hit the top of your head to stimulate this gland) In hospitals, patients recover more quickly on the sunny side Cholesterol is higher in the winter months and more heart attacks happen in the Northern states between November and February due to lack of sunshine exposure Even chickens that are outside versus inside have 25% lower cholesterol in their eggs. Proper vitamin D levels can help prevent 70% of all cancers - where do we get vitamin D - yep, from the sun or from foods that help absorb it from the sun that we eat Scientists are baffled by the results of a study published in the Feb. 2, 2005 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. In this study, we learn that exposure to sunlight actually reduces the risk of skin cancer. This is important evidence backing up what doctors like Dr. Michael Holick, author of "The UV Advantage," have been saying for years: Sunlight is actually good for you. In fact, the risk of many cancers increases when you do not have sufficient exposure to sunlight. It's remarkable just how baffled the scientists really are with the results of the study. They can't believe everything they've been told all these years could somehow be false. Remember, the conventional medical community has been taught that sunlight is bad for you. You must cover up your skin, wear sunscreen and avoid any sunlight exposure at all if you want to be healthy, they've said. This is the line of propaganda pushed by the sunscreen industry, and of course, the dermatology industry, which has been largely funded by the sunscreen manufacturers - follow the money trail!!! They've been telling people sunlight causes cancer, and you must avoid the sun at all costs. That's all hogwash. Yes, I am going to say it again "HOGWASH!" (The farm girl in me, has fun saying that word, by the way!!) -- Although, I have personally never washed a hog.Sometimes you just have to use common sense - If I take the plants in my home and put them in a dark closet with plenty of water and even some plant food, what will happen?? They will DIE AND WE ARE SLOWLY DYING AS WELL BY AVOIDING THE SUN.What about the teenagers that go out and lay in the sun and their acne clears up - the sun is destroying the bacteria that is causing the acne. No wonder the dermatologist don't want all of those teenagers doing this - there goes all of their acne patients! "Avoiding" the sun is VERY GOOD for lining the pockets of the dermatologist that tell you to avoid the sun - just think about it.............The human body was designed to live in harmony with sunlight. We evolved under natural sunlight, not under fluorescent lights with a lifetime supply of sunscreen on the shelf. We need sunlight in order to be healthy. Now we have additional evidence backing up that notion, and it may finally begin to turn the tide and help doctors and researchers realize they need to stop telling people to avoid sunlight and start telling people to get more sunlight. Of course, it's all about sensible exposure, which is determined by the pigmentation in your skin. The darker your skin, the more sunlight you need in order to generate vitamin D. The lighter, or fairer, your skin, the less sunlight you need. By the way, one of the people commenting on this study was so baffled by the results they said, "It must all be due to vitamin D, and if you want vitamin D, there are better places to get it like drinking milk." It's typical advice from conventional medicine. They're still telling people to avoid the sun and, instead, drink lots of cows' milk. How's that for lousy health advice?
You see, milk doesn't really have much vitamin D in it, especially if it's offered in those typical translucent containers, because light destroys the vitamin D content. Also, this whole line of thinking by conventional medicine misses the point that there may be other characteristics of sunlight that encourage human health aside from just vitamin D. In other words, there's a lot more going on here.
There is probably a phototherapy effect that goes well beyond the biochemistry of vitamin D production. Even if you're just looking at vitamin D, there are so many healing benefits of vitamin D that it's worth promoting sunlight exposure for that reason alone. Vitamin D regulates the growth of cancer cells. It impairs the proliferation of cancer tumors in the body, and at the same time it is extremely important for absorption of calcium in the small intestine.
(This, by the way, helps explain why so many senior citizens get osteoporosis today even though they think they're taking plenty of calcium supplements. The reason is they don't have enough vitamin D to actually absorb the calcium. So they start out with a vitamin D deficiency due to lack of sunlight, and they end up with a calcium deficiency even though they're taking lots of calcium supplements. The end result is, of course, osteoporosis or osteomalacia, the advanced stage of osteoporosis. Once that's diagnosed by conventional medicine, they're usually given hormone replacement therapy or a variety of prescription drugs rather than simply being told to get more sunlight and engage in some form of physical exercise to enhance bone mineral density.)
In the UK, doctors have already been told they're doing a disservice to patients if they tell them to avoid sunlight. They're already being advised to tell people to get more sunlight and not to wear sunscreen every time they go outside, at least not for the first few minutes of sun exposure. So the UK is well ahead of the U.S. in this thinking. The U.S. seems to be the last country in the world to acknowledge any healing benefits of therapies outside of drugs, surgery and radiation. It seems to take forever for U.S. doctors to come around to the idea nature has some wisdom when it comes to healing. Here we're seeing yet another example of how nature actually prevents and even reverses cancer in the human body.
It is not an exaggeration to say sunlight and vitamin D can prevent and even reverse cancers in the human body. We're talking about prostate cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer and now, skin cancers as well. In fact, there seems to be a systemic anti-cancer effect provided by sunlight exposure and vitamin D.
Soo, go out there and soak up some rays!!! It is highly recommended by this doctor!
 |
|
|
Another Vaccination Truth
There was a mumps outbreak in the New York area late 2009 through early 2010 that surprised many because virtually all those infected had been vaccinated for mumps. Approximately 80% of the almost 2000 afflicted had received the required two shots of MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) three in one vaccines. So what are regional health authorities recommending as a solution? A third dangerous MMR shot!
Even a CDC reviewed site admits that mumps in children is a mild disease, and once you've had the mumps, you won't get it again. You've been immunized by having it! Mumps and measles used to occur mostly with children well before puberty.
What's weird about this outbreak is that the average age for the afflicted is 15! In some communities years ago, parents would intentionally expose their kids to children with measles, mumps, or chickenpox to confer future immunity, successfully. So what's with all these vaccinations?
Questioning Medical Authority
The CDC reported that it takes two shots to immunize against mumps. The fact that almost all of those who came down with the mumps did receive both shots was ignored with that comment.
Administering a third MMR shot is raising the stakes for vaccine injury or long term bad health from this vaccination to purportedly prevent mild childhood diseases. Vaccines are loaded with toxins such as thimerosal (mercury), aluminum, and formaldehyde, and they're bypassing much of the immune system by injecting live attenuated viruses directly into the blood.
And there are those who think that a three phase vaccination provides the greatest risk of a cytokine storm, when an overly stimulated immune system feeds on the host with terrible, even lethal consequences.
Double Speak and Double Think
In his novel 1984, George Orwell explained 'double speak' as the ability to make contradictory statements in one statement and 'double think' as the ability for others to hold those contradictions simultaneously. For example: Newborns are required to receive hepatitis B vaccinations; hepatitis B is transmitted sexually or by sharing needles. Huh? (some of you may be in relationships like this where people try to confuse you in conversation that is contradictory -- (I call this crazy-makin'). Reporting on the outbreak, mainstream media (MSM) said the CDC told them that the MMR vaccine was not 100% effective against mumps, but 75% to 85% effective. The percentage range of the mumps victims who did receive both MMR vaccinations was 75% to 85%! These two statements were printed very near each other in the same body of an MSM report. If you agree to "double speak", you're conditioned with "double think." Since an attenuated live virus is being pumped into the blood, the very disease vaccinated against can be given. So if a third shot is administered, maybe closer to 100% of the "immunized" will come down with mumps? Vaccine Industry Scientist Blows the Whistle Investigative journalist Jon Rappaport interviewed a former vaccine scientist in 2009 who used the pseudonym Dr. Mark Randall to avoid harassment and pension loss since he was once of "the inner circle". Here's a small sampling from this revealing interview. "The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions," [After investigating] I realized I was working in a sector based on a collection of lies." Most dangerous? "The DPT shot.. The MMR. As far as I'm concerned, all vaccines are dangerous." ... "They can actually cause the disease they are supposed to prevent. They can cause other diseases ..." (Source below) Sources for more information: A Must Read - Rappaport Interviews "Randall" http://www.alternative-doctor.com/v... Two Vaccines Don't Work; Public Officials Push for a Third Jab, by Heidi Stevenson http://gaia-health.com/articles151/... CNN Mumps Outbreak Report (which was later updated to almost 2000 cases instead of over 1000) http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/0... CDC Vaccine Information FAQ Site Reviewed by CDC http://www.vaccineinformation.org/m... Three Phase Vaccinations More Likely to Create Cytokine Storms. http://blogs.healthfreedomalliance....
Article from Natural News
| |
I hope that you have an awesome day. I appreciate your business and please pass this information on to individuals that you think can benefit from it. I hope that I have blessed your day and you are a blessing to me as well.
Sincerely,
Dr. Val
Naturopathic Doctor
Master Herbalist
Certified Natural Health Professional
This information is not intended for diagnoses, treatment, cure, alleviation, prevention or care of any disease of any kind, in any way. We believe in bringing the body back into balance (homeostasis) so that the body can heal itself as God intended.
|
|
|
