February 18, 2018

OPERATION HEALTH-STORM: CANCER WARS – What Most Doctors REALLY Think About Alternative Cancer Treatments, Fluoride Tea Cancer Risks –

health alert

OPERATION HEALTH-STORM: THE CANCER WARS, marks the beginning of the “New” War On Cancer by the True Democracy Party of America and it’s current Chairman Wade House.

“The Goal of this New Operation is simple. It is to kill Cancer dead, dead, dead. And to give all American’s and others around the World the information to do just that.

This is only the first part of our new series called ‘The NEW Cancer Wars’. This time…it’s personal!” – Wade House

cancer What-doctors-think-768x512

What Most Doctors REALLY Think About Alternative Cancer Treatments

How receptive are most oncologists to using alternative cancer therapies for their patients?

Not surprisingly, most medical practitioners are apprehensive to their patients utilizing cancer treatments that are not considered “standard of care.”

But not for the reasons you may think…which will be explained later in this article.

Most physicians interviewed in Dr. Ivy Lynn Bourgeault’s ( from the Canada Medical Association) research said they opposed the use of alternative cancer therapies for their patients.

Yet, according to Dr. Bourgeault, “54% of people with cancer use alternative therapies and up to half of those patients completely abandon standard medical treatments in exchange for alternative methods.”

Some alternative cancer treatments include:

* Acupuncture

* Traditional Chinese medicine

* Homeopathy

* Naturopathy

* Specific diets (such as low-fat or juicing diets)

* Vitamins

* Energy therapies

* Dietary supplements and herbal remedies

But the question remains… if standard medical methods were working, why are more than HALF of cancer patients turning to alternative medicine for healing? It has to be due to the failure of conventional cancer treatments, or at least ineffective in the eyes of the patients. [ Cassileth BR, Brown H. Unorthodox cancer medicine. CA Cancer J Clin 1988; 38:176-86 ]

In a survey of cancer patients, 39% reported that their doctors reacted with disapproval concerning their request for alternative therapy and 4% refused to continue as their physician because they chose natural medicine.

Still, in that same survey, it was reported that 30% of oncologists supported the use of alternative cancer treatments, while 12% were neutral.

It is unnerving to discover that some doctors refuse to consider alternative cancer treatments when their patients clearly want to discuss and pursue those options.

Interestingly enough, most physicians report being opposed to the alternatives by reason of insufficient knowledge, not because they’re ineffective.

However, 83% of the doctors surveyed reported that continuing education about alternative health services was of interest…but the source of information was primarily from their patients, not from peers or medical research.

A survey from Ontario and Alberta, Canada concluded with remarkable results; namely, 54% of practitioners felt conventional medicine could benefit from the concepts and methods of alternative medicine for the following reasons: most patients were not responding to conventional treatment, their patients requested it and admittedly, alternative medicine is proven effective in treating particular disorders.

* Alternative-Cancer-Treatments

Finally, whether medical practitioners believe in alternative treatments or not, research supports the fact that patients find them helpful, even if it just increases their optimism.

So the question is,… if doctors are open and willing to learn about alternative medicine to treat cancer, and their patients are turning to non-conventional cancer treatments…why isn’t more education recommended to oncologists?

Two words: Flexner Report. Due to an alliance between the American Medical Association (AMA) and big business (the Rockefellers and Carnegies) over 100 years ago, the medical schools in the USA focus solely on prescription drugs for cancer treatment while actively turning people away from natural remedies.

How can we counteract this policy? One solution is to enthusiastically support the patient’s right of choice when it comes to their bodies, as long as all the information has been presented and discussed openly between the doctor and patient. After all, this is still the “land of the free,” right?

The research shows that there is clearly a need for more openness between doctors and their patients with regard to alternative cancer treatments.

This is particularly important because many cancer patients are rejecting conventional treatments, sometimes permanently, in favor of alternative treatments. Interestingly, according to a poll at McGill Cancer Centre, in a poll of 64 oncologists, 58 indicated that they would not utilize chemotherapy for themselves or their families, due to the fact that this archaic, barbaric form of treatment is “too toxic.”

Long ago, medical doctors believed that draining an ailing person’s blood would purge the “evil” infection out of the body. And worse, medical doctors ignorantly recommended cigarWhat Most Doctors REALLY Think About Alternative Cancer Treatmentsettes to their patients using the mantra, “a pack a day keeps lung cancer away.” Both of these ridiculous suggestions have been proven to be pure quackery, but they were widely accepted by the “medical establishment” of their day.

Now is the time to openly discuss alternative cancer treatments as a real solution to conventional medicine.

By Ty Bollinger

SOURCE: thetruthaboutcancer.com/doctors-really-think-alternative-cancer-treatments/

cancer cures TTAC-Doc-Alternative-Graphic




In the October 1, 1944 Journal of the American Dental Association, the ADA warned that “the potentialities for harm (from fluoridation) far outweigh those for the good.”

Contrary to popular opinion, fluoride doesn’t stop tooth decay at all.
* Scientific studies actually prove that fluoride is neurotoxic and causes birth defects, and osteoporosis. Fluoride also damages the immune, digestive, and respiratory systems as well as the kidneys, liver, and brain and can lead to learning disabilities, including dyslexia, ADHD, autism, thyroid disorders, and cancer.

* In 2012, Harvard researchers reported that 26 of the 27 studies they reviewed found that childhood IQ decreased with increased fluoride concentrations. A 2006 report from the National Academy of Sciences reviewed hundreds of studies linking fluoridated drinking water to neurological damage, thyroid disorders, and … yes …. cancer.

* In 1955, the New England Journal of Medicine reported a 400% increase in the number of thyroid cancer cases in the years after San Francisco’s water began to be fluoridated. In 1977, Congress instructed the U.S. Public Health Service to conduct animal studies to determine whether or not fluoride causes cancer. After analyzing the study results in rats, it was found that animals who drank fluoridated water showed an increase in tumors and cancers in oral squamous cells, developed a rare form of bone cancer called osteosarcoma, and showed an increased in thyroid follicular cell tumors.

The most significant finding was the occurrence of an extremely rare form of liver cancer, hepatocholangiocarcinoma in fluoride-treated male and female rats. Also in 1977, it was shown that fluoridation caused about 10,000 cancer deaths in epidemiological studies by Dr. Dean Burk, former head of the Cytochemistry Section at the National Cancer Institute and Dr. John Yiamouyiannis. Despite the findings occurring in 1977, they were not reluctantly released until 1989.

* In 2006, at Harvard University, researchers identified a link between fluoride and osteosarcoma. The study, led by Dr. Elise Bassin and published online in Cancer Causes and Control (the official journal of the Harvard Center for Cancer Prevention), found a strong link between fluoridated drinking water and osteocarcoma, a rare and often fatal bone cancer, in boys. The study confirms studies by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the New Jersey health department that also found increased rates of bone cancer in boys who drank fluoridated tap water. The findings confirmed those of a prior government study back in 1990 that involved fluoride-treated rats.

But There’s More… But There’s More…

Once inside your body, fluoride destroys your enzymes by changing their shape. Your body depends on thousands of enzymes to perform numerous cell reactions. Without enzymes, we would all be dead. Enzymes are sort of like a key that fits the locks inside your cells. However, once fluoride destroys the shape of the enzyme “key,” it no longer fits the lock and your body no longer recognizes the enzymes. These damaged enzymes can lead to collagen breakdown, DNA damage, tissue damage, and immune suppression.

* In early 2010, two separate stories out of India reveal that children are being blinded and crippled partly as a result of fluoride being artificially added to their drinking water. In the Indian village of Gaudiyan, well over half of the population has bone deformities, making them physically handicapped. Children are born normally, but after they start drinking the fluoridated water, they begin to develop crippling defects in their hands and feet.

* On April 12, 2010, Time Magazine listed fluoride as one of the “Top Ten Common Household Toxins” and described fluoride as both “neurotoxic and potentially tumorigenic if swallowed.”Truth be told, in almost every country in the world (including the USA), it’s against the law to “mass medicate” an entire population with a substance that everyone admits is toxic.

The fact that fluorides accumulate in the body is the reason that US law requires the Surgeon General to set a “maximum contaminant level” (MCL) for fluoride content in public water supplies as determined by the EPA. It boggles my mind that thousands of brainwashed dentists proudly proclaim fluoride to be the “wonder nutrient” that prevents cavities and promotes healthy teeth and gums. Let me ask you a question. How can a toxic waste product and a cumulative toxin be described as a “nutrient?”

Unfortunately, if you are a person who has the pleasure of living in a country in which English is the primary language, such as the United States, Great Britain, New Zealand, Australia or Canada, there is an overwhelming possibility that water fluoridation is common, as a part of an executive decision. This means that a decision has been made concerning your health without involving you in the process.

Out of the nearly 320 million people living in the U.S., approximately 72% of them are consuming fluoridated water on a consistent basis. According to the CDC, all 50 states add fluoride to their water supply.


Experts through the decades:

* Expert in Environmental Pollutants: “Even with DDT, you don’t have the consistently strong data that the compound can cause cancer as you now have with fluoride.” – Richard Wiles, co-founder Environmental Working Group (2006)

* Experienced Political Intimidation: “I believe EPA should act immediately to protect the public, not just on the cancer data, but on the evidence of bone fractures, arthritis and mutagenicity and other effects.” – Dr. Wm. Marcus, EPA Chief Scientist and Toxicologist (1992)

* Innovator in Cancer Research: “I know of absolutely no, and I mean absolutely no means of prevention that would save so many lives as simply to stop fluoridation, or don’t start it where it is otherwise going to be started.” – Dr. Dean Burke, biochemist at National Cancer Institute (1982)

* Expert in Cytochemistry: “In point of fact, fluoride causes more cancer death, and causes it faster, than any other chemical.” – Dean Burke, PhD, former Chief of Cytochemistry, National Cancer Institute (1975)

* Expert in Cancer Research: “The plain fact that fluorine is an insidious poison, harmful, toxic and cumulative in its effects, even when ingested in minimal amounts, will remain unchanged no matter how may times it will be repeated in print that fluoridation of the water supply is ‘safe’.” – Ludwig Gross, MD, former Chief of Veterans’ Administration Cancer Research and medical journalist, in Letter to NY Times 6 March 1957

Read More – SOURCE: thetruthaboutcancer.com/fluoride-in-water/



All Tea have High Amounts Of Fluoride

* The Camellia sinensis plant is what produces the tea leaves for white, green, black and oolong teas. When this tea plant grows, the roots absorb fluoride from the soil and deposit the majority of it in the leaves. The tea plant in particular is much more efficient at this process than other plants.May 1, 2012

* Tea contains naturally fairly high amounts of fluoride. The plant picks it up from the soil and brewing process extracts most of it from the leaves.

* Tea plants readily absorb fluoride from soil. As a result, tea drinks invariably contain high levels of fluoride.

* Tea leaves accumulate more fluoride (from pollution of soil and air) than any other edible plant. Fluoride content in tea has risen dramatically over the last 20 years.

* Black tea to contain 7.8 mgs of fluoride, which is roughly the same amount as if one were to drink 7.8 litres of water in an area fluoridated at 1ppm.

* Black tea, a Southern staple and the world’s most consumed beverage, may contain higher concentrations of fluoride than previously thought, …

* Both green and black tea contain fluoride, although green tea contains twice the amount found in black tea.

SOURCE: Google Search: tea has fluoride in it



Green Tea, Fluoride & the Thyroid

August 1999

A. Schuld/PFPC

OPEN LETTER TO: Susan Cameron-Block
Host – Current Health Issues

Dear Susan,

I am writing this letter with the intent to inform on various issues associated with the use of fluorides, especially as it relates to green and black teas, and to voice our concern about the continued promotion of green tea as a drink”beneficial to one’s health” on your radio show “Current Health Issues”.

Tea is very high in fluoride content. Fluoride in tea is much higher than the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) set for fluoride in drinking water.

Tea leaves accumulate more fluoride (from pollution of soil and air) than any other edible plant (1,2,3). Fluoride content in tea has risen dramatically over the last 20 years, as has tea consumption (4).

While in 1976 a Belgian analysis showed content of between 50 and 125 ppm fluoride in 15 varieties of tea (3), a Polish study in 1995 found fluoride content of up to 340 ppm in 16 varieties of black tea (5). A major Canadian study published in 1995 reports average fluoride content in tea to be 4.57 mg/l in the 1980’s (6).

A website by a pro-fluoridation infant medical group lists a cup of black tea to contain 7.8 mgs of fluoride (7), which is roughly the same amount as if one were to drink 7.8 litres of water in an area fluoridated at 1ppm. It is well known that fluoride in tea gets absorbed by the body similarly as the fluoride in drinking water (1,8).

Some British and African studies from the 1990’s showed a daily fluoride intake of between 5.8 mgs and 9 mgs a day from tea alone (9,10,11).

In order to understand a dose/concentration relationship properly, one needs to realize that the level of fluoride at 1 part-per-million (ppm) = 1 mg/l was set in the 40’s when TOTAL intake was considered to be only about 1 mg/day in areas with fluoridated water. It was thought that the fluoridation of water supplies at 1 ppm (1 mg/l) would duplicate this intake, assuming that people would drink 4 glasses of water a day. However, average current total intake of fluorides is approaching the 8mg/day range, according to the last official data available from the US PHS (1991) and other publications (12).

TOTAL intake from ALL sources is the amount to be considered for any adverse health effect evaluation (13,14,15).

The fact that fluorides accumulate in the body is the reason why a MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level) for fluoride content in water needs to be set by the US Environment Protection Agency (EPA) – by law under the US Surgeon General. This is to be done specifically to avoid a condition known as Crippling Skeletal Fluorosis (CSF).

There are NO double-blind studies anywhere proving the efficacy of fluoride as a caries preventative (17). There ARE double-blind studies proving adverse health effects, at the level of 1ppm (1mg/l) in water.(18) There are no studies documenting safety at any intake level.

Read More –
SOURCE: poisonfluoride.com/pfpc/html/green_tea



Do You Know That Tea Bags Contain Frighteningly High Fluoride Levels? Is Your Favorite Tea One Of Them?

Tea is a perfect winter drink. It reminds us of warm fire and cozy environment. But it is also said to be great for drinking it hot even is summer, as it balances the temperature of the body with the outside temperature.

A lot of countries nearer the equator are serving it as a temperature adaptation drink. In addition, the benefits of herbal tea are endless, as it can help prevent or cure even serious illnesses.

But tea drinkers around the world will be disappointed to hear that tea, or more precisely tea bags, have very high fluoride levels. To avoid any confusion, I must point out that I am not talking about calcium fluoride which is a natural element and is safe in trace amounts, but about sodium fluoride and other synthetic fluoride chemicals that result from aluminum mining and phosphate fertilizer production.

How does fluoride get in our tea bags?

It is a well known fact that major metropolitan areas in the United States currently artificially fluoridate its water supply, which means that tea bags are not the only problem, but that there is an additional fluoride load posed by drinking public water and by eating foods and beverages made with it. This water is also used for irrigation, thus fluoridating the soil too.

So, when the seeds of a plant are planted there is no problem, but as it grows and feeds with water, the plant also becomes fluoride-full. The older the leaves are, the more fluoride in them there is, as young leaves contain less of this harmful substance.

Economy blend teas contain the most fluoride and pesticides

Cheap teas contain the most fluoride and pesticides, as the companies that make them use only the old leaves of the plants, while younger leaves are used for premium blends. Even though both cheap and premium blends of teas contain significant amounts of fluoride, studies have shown that the latter contain smaller fluoride concentration.

How does it affect the body?

A study was conveyed in the UK and it analyzed inexpensive tea bags from big supermarkets including Asda, Sainsbury’s and Tesco. It found that drinking tea could push a person’s fluoride intake above the ‘daily recommended level’ (there is no recommended level for a toxic substance), and could thus cause a condition called fluoridation of the body. This can lead to bone and dental disease, and worst of all, pineal gland dysfunctions. It has also been connected to lower IQ and cancer tumor growth.

Read More –
SOURCE: do-you-know-that-tea-bags-contain-frighteningly-high-fluoride-levels/


* { OPERATION: HEALTH-STORM PART 2: Health Wars / Fluoride Wars – “More Poisonous Than Lead” Accelerated Aging and Premature Balding }

* { OPERATION: HEALTH-STORM PART 3: Health Wars – BLACK SEED OIL “The Cure For Everything But Death!” ‘T.D.P. – Live Long, Live Healthy’ BONUS: Moringa OleiferaTree Of Life }

* { OPERATION: HEALTH-STORM PART 4: CHAGA – KING OF PLANTS: Mushroom of Immortality, Diamond of the Forest “Most Powerful Antioxidant Yet Found!” }

* { IODINE SUPERFOOD! Anti-cancer Agent – IODINE & THYROID DEFICIENCIES; Linked To Thyroid and Breast Cancer, Infertility, Obesity, Mental Retardation }

* { GARLIC, NATURES ULTIMATE CURE-ALL: Certified Cancer Killer – 8 Scientific Studies That Prove Garlic Kills Cancer }
(Garlic Promoted) “Natural Killer cells are the most powerful infection fighting cells in the white blood cell arsenal. NK cells kill cancer cells, viruses, fungus and bacteria.”

Garlic started killing Cancer Cells “Within 30 minutes of exposure”

“This research highlights the great promise of (Garlic) plant-originated compounds as natural medicine for controlling the malignant growth of human brain tumor cells,”

“Tumor growth was completely inhibited in mice with Garlic in their system, even after direct injections of fresh cancer cells and transplanted cancer tumors”