delan1y5z的部落格

The Major News Media missed newspaper writing a brainstorm treatment for the defeat of metastatic tumor. Why? Is it because this find isn't a agent but a unanalyzable discounted multivitamin pill with folic acerb that can bar cancers up to 50%? If it were a pharmaceutical that achieved specified unbelievable results it would be in all the information reports on television and the media. Is it because there is a bigotry antagonistic vitamins and nutrition which are non-drug treatments or because within is no ability for Big Pharma?

The head in the New York Times, LA Times, etc and the sound-bite on the CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX eve info should have read:

New Major Cancer Protective Treatment - A New Breakthrough 'Drug' That Prevents Cancers in Children -
Unfortunately it didn't. I Googled this search from the February 21, 2007, medical magazine Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics and nada! The great info outlets in Canada carried it but not in the Good Ole' USA unless you take in the Redding News.

"This is near too unanalyzable an theory for citizens to purloin seriously, but they should bring it seriously," same Dr. Gideon Koren, decision maker of the Motherisk system at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto. Globe and Mail.

Vitamin Prevention Worth A Pound Of Cancer Cure

Of course the solid purpose this 'breakthrough' intelligence wasn't according on in the MNM (Major News Media) was because it wasn't a Pharmaceutical (with stellar media hype dollars on the band for MNM) but a guileless cheap former a day vitamin pill near folic sour.

"Simply fetching multivitamins and folic venomous during physiological state can give support to a parent weaken her baby's speculate of underdeveloped the furthermost customary immaturity cancers by nigh 50 per cent, a new be trained from Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children says." Toronto Star

"The surprising discovery that a low expand purchased at a chemist's can prevent malignant neoplastic disease as powerfully as a capacity of kickoff defects adds weight to the premise that micronutrients have long eudaimonia benefits for the surfacing vertebrate." Globe and Mail.

Unfounded Bias Against Vitamin Supplements

Maybe the MNM didn't gather up the substance because of a jaundiced eye against vitamins from supposed alimentation experts look-alike Rory Collins, Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology at Oxford University who was reported as dictum. -

"It has been said that Americans have the richest urine in the world, because they guzzle a lot of high-priced vitamins and later lately pee them out...There is no respectable corroboration that any aliment supplements are potent. So if you are active to junked your hard cash on these unproven vitamins, you may as okay throw away little currency on the cheaper ones." As reported in the broadsheet - The Independent (London), Feb 9, 2004 by Catherine Nixey.

Or mayhap - the New York Times nonfictional prose (April 29, 2003) decision that "multivitamins have not been shown to obviate any malady and that it is flowing to reach full adequate doses of consistent vitamins and minerals to in reality reach the danger of disease"

For if physicians and the information media can't be trustworthy to get even the deep-seated checkable facts apt nearly vitamins, why should any of their opinions be interpreted seriously? A perfunctory facial expression at the scientific learned profession literature reveals the wrong information from these two sources.

Medicine Acknowledges Vitamin Supplements- the 'Checkable Facts'

The Journal of the American Medical Association in 2002 reversed its historical anti-vitamin policy by acknowledging that "it appears sensible for all adults to nick nourishment supplements"

In 1998 an Editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine was titled: "Eat Right and Take a Multivitamin."

Harvard Public Health - "Today, though, there's redeeming evidence that winning a daily vitamin pill makes gist for most adults...(and) may foreclose heart disease, cancer, osteoporosis, and some other hardened diseases."

A Summary of a few of the Positive Vitamin Studies

The Nurses' Health Study of terminated 87,000 women showed that the - "Long-term use of multivitamins may well muffle danger for large intestine malignant neoplasm." Annals of Internal Medicine 1998.

A 19,000 longanimous examination found Vitamin C lowered the "mortality (death-rate) from all-causes..." Lancet (2001)

A pooling of the data from several studies "concluded...that 1,000 IU of spoken nutriment D per day is related to beside a 50% narrowing in body part cancer relative incidence." Recent Results in Cancer Research (2007)

If one was to publication these studies one would think that supplements have a duty to tragedy in curb of illness. Of classes if one was to take no notice of these studies and or expression for antagonistic inadequately done studies one could credibly provide evidence glum grades by discriminating investigation to scaremonger, which is a ubiquitous plan of action of Big Pharma, MNM and the Medical Establishment.

Vitamins Cost Savings to the System

Taking a multivitamin pill for at least possible 11 eld would reclaim the group $58.1 cardinal as reported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) State-of-the-Science Conference on Multivitamin/Mineral Supplements and Chronic Disease Prevention. May 15-17, 2006

So there's the constellation of the matter, fund of zillions of dollars to the policy which would in general be joint by the Medical Establishment, Big Pharma and the Major News Media. With a shut to 50% curb for few cancers, an reasonable vitamin pill doesn't have ample profits to go about. Now you cognise why the 'Sounds of Silence Were Deafening for the Cancer Cure.'