ghlcom.com

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home The Latest News
The News

Real Raw Milk Facts : Exposed

E-mail Print PDF

Real Raw Milk Facts is the name of a web site designed to scare you away from using real milk.  It uses stories and videos of people who have had serious health problems that in their minds are connected to drinking milk.  They are very sad stories, and it is horrible that these people had to go through what they did.  But the simple truth is that none of their stories has actually been connected to raw milk.

Let's talk about what the real facts are.

When we had our 10 year high school reunion it was a two day affair.  On day one we had dinner at a nice restaurant, on day two many of us were sick with diarrhea.  As we talked we discovered that anyone who ate the chili beans that were available for dinner the night before was sick.  That is pretty good proof that we had food poisoning from the beans.

If hundreds, or thousands, of people are drinking raw milk from the same source and one gets sick, would you blame it on the milk?  Claiming an epidemic of one is pretty silly.

The most convincing connection (and still not very convincing) is the last one on the page.  In that one 15 people may have been adversely affected from the same milk supplier.  But even in that case, hundreds of people were drinking the milk and they only came up with the 15 by calling everyone who drank the milk and asking if they had had any ill feelings in the last 2 months.  None of them were confirmed to have bacteria from the milk.

I think you could take just about any list of 100 phone numbers and do a survey of anyone in those families that had felt ill in the last 2 months and get more than 15 people who had felt ill in one way or another during the last two months.

To be fair they did find some bad bacteria in two samples of that milk, but that was in two bottles of milk that had sat for 6 weeks after being opened.  By the way, the lady highlighted in that video was never confirmed to have had the bacteria that they claim came from the milk.  They did find one person who had contracted the bacteria in question, he worked at the milk farm, but didn't consume the milk.  He probably should have.  Then he may have had a strong enough immune system to eliminate the problem.

That site also links to a list of milk related suspicions of food poisonings  It claims that the list contains over 7000 instances of food poisoning from raw milk.  But if you actually analyze the list, you discover that 6198 of 7425 reported suspicions are not from raw milk.  The 6198 are from milk products, most of which were pasteurized.

What about the other 1227? Remember its a list of suspected, but not confirmed incidences.  If there is an outbreak of food poisoning, and one of the people involved says they drank raw milk, it will be listed as one of the suspected substances for the outbreak.  Not because there is a history of food poisoning from raw milk, but because the dairy industry did such a good job of promoting pasteurized milk while vilifying raw milk.  No conclusive research has ever been done to back up the claims that raw milk is dangerous.

In other words that site isn't about facts at all, but simply innuendo and sensationalistic scare tactics.

The facts are you are much safer from food poisoning drinking raw milk than when drinking pasteurized milk.  Pasteurized milk has had the beneficial bacteria (pro-biotics) killed off in the pasteurization process.  In raw milk the beneficial bacteria keep bad bacteria in check.  It has actually been shown that you can inject bad bacteria into fresh raw milk and it will neutralize the bad bacteria. (Click HERE for a great discussion about that.)  Without the beneficial bacteria pasteurized milk is a breeding ground for any bad bacteria that get missed in the process, or introduced from contamination that comes later.

Tens of thousands of people have gotten food poisoning from pasteurized milk, and those instances are actually confirmed, not just suspicions.

It has gotten really ridiculous.  When someone gets food poisoning they ask them if they have had any raw milk.  And yet it is very hard to find even one case of confirmed food poisoning from raw milk.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it is impossible to get food poisoning from raw milk.  But it is very very unlikely judging by both history and science.

Most food poisoning actually comes from meat.  So if these anti-raw-milk people really care about your health why aren't they pushing for the elimination of meat sales?  After meat comes vegetables.  Perhaps we should tell people not to eat vegetables too?

It is all so ridiculous.

Dr William G. Winter said, "We know that if every category of food that ever caused an occasional incidence of food poisoning were made illegal, there would be no hamburger, no lettuce, no eggs, no cheese, no hot dogs, no spinach.  Virtually nothing to eat!" (That Link Here)

Of course the vegetables are actually only a problem when waste from the beef cattle wind up in the water used on the veggies.  The major problem with the meat seems to come from the practice of feeding corn to cattle.  See the movie "Food Inc."

There was a much publicized story last year of the authorities warning everyone to not drink raw milk because 12 people in Michigan had gotten sick from raw milk.  When you look into it you find out that the 12 people soon dropped to 8, and then the milk testing all came back clean.  No bad bacteria in the raw milk.  But never a published recanting by the authorities that they had been wrong and jumped the gun on blaming raw milk.  Just silence.

Another argument you will see is that 25 percent of food poisoning came from raw milk before pasteurization was started.  The problem is it is just a made up number.  No scientific study to back up that claim. Just propaganda.

Face reality.  Everyone used to drink raw milk all the time.  If it was so dangerous why did people continue to drink milk at all?

One of our biggest health problems today is that we have made everyone afraid of bacteria, while feeding them junk food which lowers their natural immune response to any bad bacteria.

Bacteria are part of our lives.  Yes, there are bad ones, but mostly there are good ones all around us.  Bacteria help us to survive and to  thrive.  Anti-bacterial soaps and antibiotics are destroying the trillions of good bacteria that work for our good.  Most of our health problems today can be directly traced to bad digestion.  Digestion relies on lots of good bacteria in the gut.  Raw milk helps with that.

Eliminate as many bacteria destroying poisons from your lifestyle as you can.  Eat lots of good whole raw foods to help replenish your supply of gut bacteria.  This can help to raise the effectiveness level of your immune system.  Then if you do happen to get some bad bacteria, which are around us all the time, your body will eliminate them without a problem.

Have a great day!

Live a healthy lifestyle!

Coach G.

For more on milk go HERE.  For a little more detail go HERE. For dangers of food sterilization go HERE. And HERE is a great video about what is going on in California with their raw milk legislation.  Another great article to read would be Is Raw Milk for Babies and Children? For the latest information on which foods have problems go HERE.  Hmmmm... no raw milk or dairy listed.

 

Last Updated on Monday, 11 April 2011 13:53
 

Gluten Intolerance

E-mail Print PDF

There is much confusion out there about wheat and gluten intolerance.  Let's see if we can clear that up.

Wheat is a very complex grain with many health benefits for the human body.  Unfortunately many people are told they should not eat wheat.  This advice comes from a misunderstanding of the relationship between the body and food.

Science these days like to divide things into smaller and smaller pieces to see how those pieces work.  It is supposed that if we can understand how every little particle works we can manage the whole process.  The problem is we lose sight of the forest for the trees.  The big picture is actually more important than the details.  And the details are so complex and intricate, they are beyond our current understanding.

Here is what has happened with wheat in respect to gluten intolerance.  It was discovered 1 percent of the population, with a disease called coeliac or celiac disease, have trouble with a particle from wheat called gluten.  The problem is actually with a variety of proteins generally lumped under the name of gluten.  Upon further research it was discovered approximately another 1 percent of the population have an allergy to gluten type  proteins.  Then it was noticed people who ate lots of wheat based products were having lots of health problems.  Thus it got assumed, by some people, that nearly everyone must have an intolerance for wheat gluten.

So some doctors and some nutritionists, particularly those trying to sell supplements, began to tell everyone they should avoid wheat all together.  And some even went so far as to say people should avoid all grains.

This was very bad advice, and we can see today it is still causing lots of people lots of health problems.  Grains are in important basic food for human life.  People who avoid grains are constantly trying to make up for it with the latest/greatest supplement, but they continue to have many health problems.  (The supplements don't really help because we haven't even been able to determine what all the nutrients are in wheat.  More polyphenols get discovered all the time.)  Their bodies without grains have become so compromised now many can't even digest grain very well if they do eat some.  They are convinced this proves how bad grains are for them.  It only proves how much their digestive systems have been compromised.

Most of these people don't have celiac disease, or wheat allergies.  Remember, when we actually test for these things they are only found in 1 or 2 percent of the population.

The problem occurred when people went from eating whole foods to eating processed foods.  Most of the food in a grocery store today contains some wheat.  But it is not real food.  It is portions of wheat separated out from the whole.  Whole foods have a natural balance with the human body.  When you process food and break it down into it's constituent parts, you destroy its ability to help balance the human body.

It is true that people should avoid the use of wheat by-products.  But it does not follow that you should avoid whole wheat.

The research that showed an association between wheat products and disease, only showed the problems in populations using refined wheat products.  They didn't show up in populations eating whole wheat.

Gluten intolerance is actually just a symptom of a larger problem.  There are basically two things that cause gluten intolerance.  No, genetics is not one of them. (Click here to learn why genetics is not the problem.)  One is a leaky gut, and the other is too much estrogen in the body.  The Standard American Diet (SAD) contributes to both of these.

Leaky gut is actually caused by processed foods and chemicals that are put in our food supply.  Some of the worst offenders are over the counter medications and pain killers.  Another huge offender is processed wheat products.  These things interfere with the digestive system, breaking it down to the point where it can't digest good food like whole wheat.

You can heal your leaky gut over 3 to 6 months time, usually, with a diet of whole foods, no processed foods, and no drugs.  Please be aware that most supplements are also drugs in disguise.

The estrogen overload, so prevalent in our society today, is also partially caused by the consumption of processed foods.  The biggest cause for it is the use of vegetable oils.  Vegetable oils are probably the worst processed foods we consume.  If you want to get over a gluten intolerance you must discontinue the use of all added vegetable oils.  If you read labels at the store, you will find these oils in almost everything.  Avoid corn, cottonseed, canola, soy, safflower, sunflower, and saffron oils.  An increase in the use of coconut oil will help to counter the vegetable oils already trapped in your body fat.  The body needs good fats to heal.

We got a lot of bad health advice in the last half century.  Thanks to looking beyond the mark, and big business trying to sell us stuff, we have ended up with a diet that is slowly, and painfully, killing most people.

Heath will return to us if we return to whole food.  Whole wheat is one of the best foods for the human body.  But if you currently have a problem with wheat, just use wheat grass at first, then wheat sprouts, then gradually get back to eating whole wheat.  Your body will thank you.

 

This information is not intended to diagnose or cure any disease.  It is only an opinion of the author presented after studying much of the research available.  Be sure to discuss these things with a doctor you trust before making any major changes in your lifestyle.

Links to lots of wheat info:

Grain Basics

Wheat For Man

Wheat - A major overview with links to many studies.

The importance of whole foods, and the relation of estrogen overload to allergies (particularly celiac disease)

Leaky Gut

Good fats

More thoughts on celiac disease

 

Last Updated on Tuesday, 22 March 2011 14:46
 

How Healthy Is A Nuclear Meltdown?

E-mail Print PDF

How healthy is a nuclear meltdown?

Well that depends on a lot of factors.

What is the design of the plant?

Is it a partial or complete melt down?

Where you in one of the adjacent buildings that blew up or caught on fire due to other factors connected with the meltdown?

How close are you to a compromised containment vessel?

Is the wind blowing in your direction?

Are you generally healthy with a balanced diet?

How is your thyroid health?

 

The design of the plant makes a huge difference. Newer designs are much better than older ones. Today, we even have designs for nuclear power plants that have a near zero possibility of meltdown.  These designs haven't been built yet, but they exist.

As we continue to build more nuclear plants the designs and operations will continue to improve making them safer and safer.

However, there are still some older plants around the world that have a possibility of serious problems.

So, lets talk about what might go wrong.

No, there will not be a nuclear explosion. The biggest problem with our fears of nuclear power is that our minds connect it with the devastation of a nuclear bomb. However it isn't possible to get a nuclear explosion from a nuclear power plant. Stop worrying about that. Also remember that a nuclear bomb has a completely different kind of fallout than a nuclear power plant. We aren't talking about nuclear bombs today, just nuclear power. [Link to Why-a-nuclear-reactor-will-never-become-a-bomb]

Yes, there can be explosions at nuclear power plants, but they are not nuclear. They usually are caused by hydrogen gases that build up in some areas of the plant when cooling systems aren't functioning correctly. If you look at the explosions that have happened in Japan recently you will note that these explosions are outside of the main core containment vessels. The other type of explosions that happened in the past where steam explosions in some of the older models of nuclear reactors in Russia.

If there is a complete melt down, that is a good thing, as long as the container stayed sealed and didn't release radioactive particles into the air. Theoretically, a complete melt down will simply melt through everything under it and make a big hole in the earth, burying itself very deep in the earth. End of problem.

The problem is when the containment process is compromised in such a fashion that it releases radioactive material into the air. Then we have to be concerned with what kind of radiation was leaked.

There are some radioactive materials that we don't really care that much about, as far as human health goes. Others we need to worry about. The good news is that as we get farther from the disaster area the threat dissipates and falls below the level we need to worry about. By the time you are 200 miles from the disaster area it is generally considered pretty safe. The background radiation that we get all the time from nature is usually stronger than anything a power plant would generate by then.

But, lets talk about the types of materials that might be released in a typical nuclear power plant disaster. For instance at the 3-Mile Island nuclear power plant disaster in 1979 the radioactive material released was mostly xenon. It is considered harmless and is actually starting to be used as an anesthetic with neural-protective properties. There were about 13 million curies of noble gases released, mostly xenon. The material they worry about is iodine-131. There were about 13 to 17 curies of iodine-131 released at 3-Mile Island (about 1 millionth of the amount of the noble gases). This was the worst nuclear disaster in US history, and yet the detectors in the area couldn't even pick up enough radioactive material to see it above the normal background radiation of everyday living.

In other words the nuclear power industry is very safe for the most part, and as time goes by it gets safer. If someone really wanted to worry about disasters related to man made utilities, they would be far more concerned about coal mines and plants, and chlorine storage facilities and all the pollution that they create constantly. If you are down hill or down wind of one of those facilities, that is something to worry about. They constantly cause disease and death.

But back to what can go wrong with nuclear.

There are other radioactive substances that can cause major health problems, but they are generally released in very small amounts, and have little effect because of that. If however you work in a nuclear power plant and get major exposure to some of these, like caesium-137, you can be killed very quickly.

One of the interesting things about caesium-137 is that it has a half-life of 30 years, but in the human body it's half life becomes only 70 days. So if you only get a tiny bit it's not that bad. But if you get a lot it may kill you before the 70 days is up. This was one of the biggest hazards of the Chernobyl accident in Russia in 1986. Luckily, they don't make nuclear facilities like that anymore. Russia still has 11 of that model of reactors in use, but they have had extensive renovations and safety upgrades as well as system upgrades since the Chernobyl accident.

The biggest worry for human health from nuclear power plants is still iodine-131.

The worry about iodine-131 is that if it is inhaled, or ingested (after falling on plants), it can go to the thyroid gland, which likes iodine, and then, because it is radioactive, can cause major problems with the thyroid gland in the form of cancer.

That is why they talk about potassium iodide use for the treatment of those exposed to iodine-131. It provides a source of iodine for the thyroid to use, so that it won't use the iodine-131. If the body doesn't take it in, then if flushes it out.

There are health concerns with potassium iodide use. Too much of it actually shuts down the thyroid. So, if you are ever in a situation to use potassium iodide (living within 200 miles of a compromised nuclear power plant with the wind blowing your direction) only take the recommended dosage, and no more. More is not better. Also note that potassium iodide has no beneficial effect against any other type of radiation exposure.

Let's compare that to the dangers of iodine-131. How great is the concern for cancer? It turns out that the half-life of iodine-131 is only 8 days. So exposures are short lived. The iodine is usually totally gone from the body withing 3 months. Cancer generally takes longer than that to develop and grow into any kind of significant problem. So, even though iodine-131 can initiate the conditions for the growth of cancer in some people (the percentages are very small) if good health practices are in place the damage can be healed in short order. [Link to Iodine Fact Sheet]

In fact the medical community sees the threat of iodine-131 as so small that they use it in large doses for medical treatments. It is actually used to kill cancer cells in the thyroid. It is also used as a trace element for other treatments. [Link: Iodine-131 info]

One caution is that you might set off radiation detectors at the airport after having one of these medical treatments.

It should be mentioned that the risk for children is thought to be much higher than for adults. Because children are in a more active growing condition the effects of radiation, even though short lived, can have a longer effect. However with adults the incidence of thyroid cancer after a nuclear spill can't usually be measured above the normal rate of thyroid cancer for adults.

If you have children in nuclear fallout area, be sure to feed them a variety of whole natural foods grown outside the area of the fallout for at least 6 months. For life would be better, but six months would deal with the immediate threat. If you can't get fresh produce, use lots of whole wheat (that you hopefully have in your food storage from before the disaster began). Be sure to make sprouting wheat one of your ongoing activities. I'm not saying to sprout all wheat before consumption, but some of it regularly.

If you are one who worries about a nuclear meltdown near you, the best thing to do would be to keep your thyroid in good health all the time by avoiding vegetable oils as much as possible and eating a diet comprised of mostly raw whole foods. Coconut oil is a good oil to use to counteract the effects of vegetable oils. Also the antioxidants and polyphenols acquired from a good whole foods diet will go along way towards helping your body remain cancer free, even if you do get a little iodine-131 in your system. If you eat a balanced diet of whole foods your body will have the iodine it needs for your thyroid, then you won't have to worry so much about your thyroid sucking up bad iodine or shutting down because it got too much iodine.

It is interesting to note that there have, several times, been a lower incidence of cancer measured in the decades following release of radioactive materials in the vicinities where the releases took place. No one is sure exactly why this occurs. It could be that the fears of disease provoked people into healthier lifestyles, or perhaps the noble gases released are of more benefit that we think to human health.

So, living near a nuclear power plant could be good for you. It could be bad for you. But just as with any of the other risks in life, give yourself a winning advantage by living a healthy lifestyle. The more you do to improve your health through healthy choices, the less you have to worry about environmental disasters.

 

Additional note:

This article is not intended to make light of the nuclear problems in Japan. Very real threats exist there, but the nuclear problems are only a small part of a much bigger disaster. It's a little disturbing that the media obsesses over the possibility of nuclear problems (exaggerating them), when much larger problems exist that people could actually be helping with, and would help with more if they knew more about what was going on and how to help. With perhaps 10,000 or more dead and half a million homeless, there are lots of places to offer help.

If you would like to help CLICK HERE:

http://www.ldsphilanthropies.org/humanitarian-services/

Hopefully this article helps to put into perspective the dangers of nuclear power plants.  The fear of the unknown is overcome by knowledge.

 

Last Updated on Friday, 18 March 2011 09:16
 


Page 6 of 57

Login Form

Create an account to leave comments and questions.

Sponsors


Join GHL Email List

If We Have Helped You ...

Amazon Recommendations