Root Canals Linked To Cancer and Other Disease

Comment deleted violating the aspect of our terms of use

This is the third in the series of my triple header on Mercola excerpts--this article is great, I have never heard this before.  I like to reference Dr. Mercola's articles from time to time because he has a team of researchers who go through a thousand pages of research per day (according to Mercola on an interview with Dr. Oz.)

<><><><> <> <><> <><> <>

Email : 5308

Previous Article

Next Article

Loading Please Wait

The following post is an ammended version of Mercola's article about the link between root canals to cancer and other diseases:

Mercola states, "Most dentists would be doing an enormous service to public health if they familiarized themselves with the work of Dr. Weston Price.  Unfortunately, his work continues to be discounted and suppressed by medical and dental professionals alike...


Dr. Price was a dentist and researcher who traveled the world to study the teeth, bones, and diets of native populations living without the "benefit" of modern food. Around the year 1900, Price had been treating persistent root canal infections and became suspicious that root-canaled teeth always remained infected, in spite of treatments. Then one day, he recommended to a woman, wheelchair bound for six years, to have her root canal tooth extracted, even though it appeared to be fine...


She agreed, so he extracted her tooth and then implanted it under the skin of a rabbit. The rabbit amazingly developed the same crippling arthritis as the woman and died from the infection 10 days later. But the woman, now free of the toxic tooth, immediately recovered from her arthritis and could now walk without even the assistance of a cane....


Price discovered that it's mechanically impossible to sterilize a root-canaled (e.g. root-filled) tooth.
He then went on to show that many chronic degenerative diseases originate from root-filled teeth—the most frequent being heart and circulatory diseases. He actually found 16 different causative bacterial agents for these conditions. But there were also strong correlations between root-filled teeth and diseases of the joints, brain and nervous system...


Dr. Price went on to write two groundbreaking books in 1922 detailing his research into the link between dental pathology and chronic illness. Unfortunately, his work was deliberately buried for 70 years, until finally one endodontist named George Meinig recognized the importance of Price's work and sought to expose the truth...[Mercola article continues]

Root Canals Can Lead to Heart, Kidney, Bone, and Brain Disease

As long as your immune system remains strong, any bacteria that stray away from the infected tooth are captured and destroyed. But once your immune system is weakened by something like an accident or illness or other trauma, your immune system may be unable to keep the infection in check.


These bacteria can migrate out into surrounding tissues by hitching a ride into your blood stream, where they are transported to new locations to set up camp. The new location can be any organ or gland or tissue.


Dr. Price was able to transfer diseases harbored by humans to rabbits, by implanting fragments of root-canaled teeth, as mentioned above. He found that root canal fragments from a person who had suffered a heart attack, when implanted into a rabbit, would cause a heart attack in the rabbit within a few weeks.


He discovered he could transfer heart disease to the rabbit 100 percent of the time! Other diseases were more than 80 percent transferable by this method. Nearly every chronic degenerative disease has been linked with root canals, including:

• Heart disease
• Kidney disease
• Arthritis, joint, and rheumatic diseases
• Neurological diseases (including ALS and MS)
• Autoimmune diseases (Lupus and more)

There may also be a cancer connection. Dr. Robert Jones, a researcher of the relationship between root canals and breast cancer, found an extremely high correlation between root canals and breast cancer.  He claims to have found the following correlations in a five-year study of 300 breast cancer cases:

• 93 percent of women with breast cancer had root canals
• 7 percent had other oral pathology
• Tumors, in the majority of cases, occurred on the same side of the body as the root canal(s) or other oral pathology

Dr. Jones claims that toxins from the bacteria in an infected tooth or jawbone are able to inhibit the proteins that suppress tumor development. A German physician reported similar findings. Dr. Josef Issels reported that, in his 40 years of treating "terminal" cancer patients, 97 percent of his cancer patients had root canals. If these physicians are correct, the cure for cancer may be as simple as having a tooth pulled, then rebuilding your immune system..."

If you would like to read the full article, I recommend subscribing to Mercola's newsletter at www.Mercola.com.  His database contains this article and many other great ones. 


Wow, I never though a root canal could lead to such problems provided that a person's immune system was weakened.  After reading this, I will be taking care to never be put in a position to have a root canal.


A Votre Sante  (Here's to Your Health), Alix

Deadly Vaccines and Children

This is the first in a triple header of quoted Mercola articles.  While my last two posts were longer and fleshed out articles about World Food and GMOs,  I haven't quoted Mercola in a while.  Nobody does expose quite like Mercola.

"The first principle of the Nuremberg Code—that doctors must obtain voluntary informed consent from the person about to be experimented on—appears to be frequently ignored, especially when it comes to clinical trials of experimental vaccines.

In recent news, the Argentinean Federation of Health Professionals accused GlaxoSmithKline of misleading participants and pressuring impoverished, disadvantaged families into enrolling their children in clinical trials of the experimental Synflorix pediatric pneumonia vaccine.  Fourteen of the children participating in the experimental vaccine trial died...

This certainly is not the first time children have died during drug company trials. It's also not the first time a pharmaceutical company has been accused of being less than completely honest about experimental vaccine or drug risks, when they want to persuade poor, under-educated people into signing up for clinical trials...

For example, according to Nigerian authorities, Pfizer illegally tested an unapproved drug on children with brain infections at a field hospital in 1996. Eleven of the children died and dozens were disabled before the illegal activity was exposed...

Similarly, two years ago, the Indian government suspended Merck's Gardasil study after they discovered that four of the young clinical trial participants had died after receiving Gardasil, and more than 120 girls suffered severe adverse reactions. A civil society-led investigation into the vaccine trial highlighted serious violations of ethical guidelines for clinical research and informed consent rights of study participants or their legal guardians...

Pediatric Anthrax Vaccine—A Disaster in the Making?

[Mercola states that] Last year, I interviewed Dr. Meryl Nass about anthrax, and she was the one who brought this terrible situation to my attention. The idea of public health officials promoting the testing of anthrax vaccine on children is truly unfathomable considering the fact that the military's controversial mandatory anthrax vaccination program has already resulted in many reports of anthrax vaccine injuries and deaths in soldiers and civilian military personnel. Side effects occur in one to two percent of those given anthrax vaccine and 11 percent of all anthrax vaccine adverse event reports are considered serious.

The FDA's definition of a "serious adverse reaction" to a vaccine includes a reaction that leads to:

• Hospitalization
• Permanent disability
• Life-threatening event
• Death...

In Dr. Nass' words:

"It's completely crazy, and it's illegal. It can only be done because the Department of Health and Human Services is denying that there are serious adverse reactions...He's [the D.O.H. researcher] a very unethical researcher. He is a pharmacist with a PhD, and of course where did he go after he left the military? He went to Merck and works as a so-called scientist in their vaccine division… Merck knew that this guy was unethical; that he was cooking the books on the research, and they hired him anyway." "

Again, nobody does expose like Mercola, and I'm glad he is a nationally known leader in cautioning people about the dangers of vaccines.  I have done prior posts on vaccines, and I won't be getting one any time soon.

A Votre Sante (Here's to Your Health,) Alix

World Food Report: Part 2

This is Part 2 of my blog on GMOs, world food policy, and land availability in developing countries.  Again, this is the second half of my favorite post so far:  Freelance writers know that blogs/writing for the general public should be written at the sixth grade level--I didn't do that for this content--nor is this post "short" in order to meet the attention span of the general public.  That's because I'm discovering my readers tend to be in an educated demographic, so I'm "bringing it on." (Bold print and italics have been added for my own emphasis.)

In my last few blogs, I have talked about the ills of GMOs on a world level and their effect on global food production and small farming.  GMO seeds cannot be saved, and farmers in developing can’t afford to buy them year after, risking continual debt.  Many scientists and governmental institutions encourage their use, but GMOs also degrade the soil quality, which is already a big problem in poor countries.

“Even though you know you are overusing your soil and that it will degrade if you do not rest it or plant less aggressively, the degradation happens at some point in the future. … And while fertilizers and other land improvements might be a good investment by conventional calculations, they are of no help if you cannot afford them or cannot even get a loan to finance them.” (Heifer International, World Ark:  “Poverty traps, Why the Poor Stay Poor”)  GMO crops will make this problem worse. 

According to Heifer International, “social exclusion is a poverty problem in its own right; in addition, the more unequal the distribution of wealth, the larger the fraction of the population that is unable to put up collateral for a loan, so fewer children can attend school and fewer businesses and microenterprises can expand…Across countries, there is a danger that rich and poor will become two worlds, separate and unequal, sowing the seeds of future international conflict, terrorist groups [my prior post talks about the inverse relationship between women farmers and terrorism], global environmental destruction, spread of disease without regard to borders, and continued human misery among the poor…"

"People in low-income countries know full well that the rich countries could do much more to help, but have chosen not to.  Debt bondage traps: While credit is needed, the wrong kind of debt from unscrupulous moneylenders can also be a trap. Colluding moneylenders can calibrate loan amounts and interest payments to ensure that a family can never get out of debt.” 

This debt will become even worse if Monsanto begins to sue poor farmers in developing nations for patent violations, as is its policy in North America.  Monsanto regularly sues small farmers in North America (and has a $10 million budget to do so) for patent violations due to inadvertent cross-pollination caused by Monsanto’s GMO crops from neighboring farms.

If government policy encourages use of GMOs in developing countries, inevitably issues arise about big business owning and controlling the seeds themselves.  GM seeds are now being implemented in Iraq, and will most likely polute most farmers crops, destroying thier heirloom seeds that have been cultivated for thousands of years.  Heirloom seed rights are important to poor farmers, and they cannot afford to buy the yearly patent on GM seeds.  Powerful institutions controlling land availability in general, and distribution is not necessarily fair to poor farmers.

Oxfam explains, “In the USA, 4 per cent of farm owners account for nearly half of all farm land. In Guatemala less than 8 per cent of agricultural producers hold almost 80 per cent of land – a figure that is not atypical for Central America as a whole.  In Brazil, one per cent of the population owns nearly half of all land. If governments fail to provide secure access to land for their populations, then powerful local elites and investors are able to ride roughshod over local communities..."

"In recent cases of large-scale land purchases, expropriations are the rule; the principle of free, prior, and informed consent is routinely ignored; and compensation is usually too low, if paid at all. Initial promises of development and jobs often evaporate: the land may remain idle, or the investment is highly mechanized, offering a few jobs to highly skilled males only.  A major World Bank study found that investors were targeting precisely the countries in which institutions were weakest…”

In fact, issues arise in food distribution due to corporate domination of markets.  Oxfam explains, “Only 40 cents of every taxpayer dollar spent on US food aid actually goes to buying food.  A big chunk goes straight into the pockets of US agribusiness companies…Nearly 40 per cent of total food aid costs are paid to US shipping companies, where again, restricted bidding limits competition and pushes up prices. Such aid takes longer to reach those in need. During 2004–08, US food aid to Africa required an average of 147 days for delivery, compared with 35–41 days for food from the African continent.

And in situations where shipping food aid from the USA would be an appropriate response, Oxfam estimates that procuring transport on the open market would allow the American taxpayer to provide 15 per cent more food, enough to feed an additional 3.2 million people in emergency situations. Source: Barrett and Maxwell (2008) Food Aid After Fifty Years: Recasting its Role”

The website www.BillMoyers.com, features interviews done by Bill Moyers explaining the impact of the widening gap between rich and the poor in the world, the domination of corporations,  and what adverse effects that is having. (Full Show: Winner-Take-All-Politics)

More about economics from Oxfam:  “Despite more than doubling the size of its economy between 1990 and 2005, India failed to make even a tiny dent in the number of hungry people…In Brazil, however, where economic growth has been slower, hunger has been rolled back at an incredible pace… Sadly, India failed to prioritize hunger or develop a coherent strategy...In Brazil, the opposite was true. A national crosssectoral strategy launched in 2003, consisted of 50 linked initiatives ranging from cash transfers for poor mothers to extension services for small-scale food producers…

In a region [Ethiopia] recently plagued by drought, sacks of maize stuffed to bursting and piled to the ceiling of a warehouse in Shashemene, Ethiopia, are a welcome sight...This corn was grown right here. By small farmers in the West Arsi Zone...‘We have a stock in our bank and our members are not starving like other people,’ said the bank’s storekeeper at the time. ‘Our experience in the past three years has shown us we can make progress in our lives.’...Rejection of new technologies and trade have the potential to lock farmers into poverty...[But] it is certainly not the case that big [farming] is bad. Whether a farm is ‘bad’ or not depends upon the practices of the farmer or company running it…Nor is it a case of ‘big is beautiful’..., a single large-scale farm imported from Brazil into Tanzania could displace 12,500 smallholder farms.”

There are myths about smallholder farmers including that they have low productivity—but this depends on access to irrigation and fertilizer.  Another myth is that small farmers in developing countries shy away from technology and innovation and that they are not very entrepreneurial.  Another false assumption is that small farm holders aren’t savvy about markets.

Oxfam continues, “Moreover, today’s large farms tend to suffer from a heavy

ecological footprint – due to profligate water use, pollution of groundwater, and reliance on oil-based agro-chemicals and diesel-burning machinery – thus
undermining the human and natural resources on which food production must depend.  If we are to meet the three challenges set out in the previous section, then sustainable models of smallholder production must be where the lion’s share of effort goes. The powerful elites in poor countries that control land and block reform. …

Governments must renew their purpose as custodians of the public good rather than allowing elites to drag them by the nose. … The examples of Brazil and Viet Nam, among others, show that strong political leaders with a clear moral purpose can drive government success.”

A Votre Sante (Here's to Your Health), and to the world's small farmers, Alix

GMOs and Africa

Recently the Gates Foundation, Howard G. Buffett Foundation, and the United Nations World Food Program teamed up with Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) to fund an effort intended to help farmers in poor countries increase their yield and soil quality.  This effort is focused in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, Central America and will support a large number of woman farmers.

WFP is the currently largest single purchaser of food for humanitarian relief.  According to GatesFoundation.org, the Gates Foundation has given 66 million for this program to help Africa, the Buffet Foundation 9.1 million, and the Belgian Government has funded the Congo with $750,000. 

Gates has stated that GMO crops have the "potential to address farmer's challenges more efficiently than conventional techniques." In 2010 the Gates Foundation invested 23.1 million in 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock. (My December 2011 post reviews the film The Future of Food that interviews small farmers who have been exploited by Monsanto's regular practice of litigation for violating seed patents--for cross contamination caused by Monsanto GM seeds. For more about Monsanto and GMOs, see my October 2011 post "Monsanto, lies and cover up?")

An article from the online African Executive states about GM seeds, "Patenting, or claiming intellectual property rights means that farmers who buy GM seeds are forbidden from seed saving by law, and must buy new seed from the company each season...it is ironic that while GM purports to help to solve hunger and poverty in Africa, it may instead place an impossible burden on the poorest farmers...International NGOs working on food security issues are in agreement that patented GM crops present a serious threat to farmers and food rights..." (See my September 2011 post on GMOs to see what countries have already banned them.)

AGRA (Agra-Alliance.org) helps small farmers solely in Africa increase their yield with "the use of improved seeds and farm management techniques" and the improvement of soil quality through organic and inorganic fertilizer.  The Buffet Foundation has given 83 million in the past to small-scale farmers for soil improvement, participatory farm research, and the "development of drought-tolerant and virus resistant crop varieties to increase crop yields."

AGRA states that it "supports the rights of farmers to conserve and utilize their own seeds" and does not fund the development of GMOs.  However, according to Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy, "in Kenya AGRA has used funds from the Gates Foundation to write grants for research in genetically modified agriculture...nearly 80% of Gates funding in Kenya involves biotech and there have been over $100million in grants to organizations connected to Monsanto.  In 2008 some 30% of the [Gates] foundation's agricultural development funds went to promotion or developing genetically modified seeds."  (My December 2011 post reviews the documentary Bad Seed, which explains that GM cotton seeds in India produced 5x less yield than heirloom seeds, leading to the suicide of 400 Indian farmers.)


The following is an excerpt of a petition written in 2012 by the Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria, Friends of the Earth Ghana, Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy:

We the undersigned representing civil society groups are concerned about recent statements that emanated from the first Pan African Biotechnology Stewardship Conference held in Accra, Ghana on the 1st of December 2011, which called on Africans to use biotechnology to provide “poor farmers with healthier, more bountiful crops to reduce hunger and poverty in Africa"...

We are disappointed that an unproven and unsafe technology is being foisted on Africa simply because of the unfortunate continual characterization of Africa as a chronically hungry continent.
It is important to understand that, the agricultural fortunes of the continent have been adversely impacted mainly by externally generated neoliberal policies. Our agricultural systems are threatened by industries that seek to control our food and our livelihoods by destroying our agricultural systems. The move towards intensified, chemical based agriculture is set to undermine the predominant family based agro-ecological food production on the continent. The promotion and introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) with intellectual property rights over seeds represents a serious threat to African farmers rights to reproduce, save and share seeds. It also threatens to erode seed diversity represents new forms of stealing, as all industrial seeds are taken from seeds cultivated, developed and preserved through thousands of years of selection and breeding by our people.

We express total disgust at the manner by which the burden for solutions to every crisis faced by the North is shifted unto Africa...

While the world is advancing towards stricter control of GMOs, it is a different situation in Africa where our leaders are covertly or ignorantly colluding with multinational agribusinesses to colonize our food systems as well as give out our arable lands through dubious land grabbing agreements.
We note that recently many countries have been taking steps to secure their agriculture from pollution through modern biotechnology and to secure the safety of national food systems. We give examples here.

1) Benin Republic has maintained a moratorium on GMOs over the past 10 years.
2) Peru approved the law banning GM production for 10 years.[3]
3) The Mexican States of Tlaxcala and Michoacán each passed legislation banning the planting of genetically modified corn to protect natural plants from further contamination of transgenes.[4]
4) China said GMO is not a priority, stemming from public debate and outcry over the safety of GMO food[5].
5) In the United States: California counties of Mendocino, Trinity and Marin have successfully banned GM crops.
6) In New Zealand: No GM foods are grown.
7) In Germany: There is a ban on the cultivation or sale of GMO maize.
8) In Ireland: All GM crops were banned for cultivation in 2009, and there is a labeling system for foods containing GM to ensure that such foods are identified as such.
9) In Austria, Hungary, Greece, Bulgaria and Luxembourg there are bans on the cultivation and sale of GMOs.
10) In France: Monsanto's MON810 GM corn had been approved but its cultivation was forbidden in 2008. There is widespread public mistrust of GMOs that has been successful in keeping GM crops out of the country.
11) Madeira the autonomous Portuguese island requested a country-wide ban on genetically modified crops last year and was permitted to do so by the European Union (EU).
12) Switzerland banned all GM crops, animals, and plants on its fields and farms in a public referendum in 2005, but the initial ban was for only five years. The ban has since been extended through 2013.
There are several other examples.
It is clear that the Genetic engineering is a technology in search of a market. “Experts in Biotechnology from around the world” and lobbyists from the genetic engineering (GE) industry are pushing the notion that Africa’s only choice is between hunger and GE crops. This is patently false and is merely an arm-twisting effort that African farmers and peoples’must resist. Hunger can be avoided without growing and eating GE crops. Studies have shown that the claim that genetically engineered (GE) crops have a higher yield than natural varieties is virtually a myth...

For these reasons we ask our governments and peoples as a matter of urgency to support ecological-friendly farming which nurtures our soil, cultivates diversity and supplies our families with safe and nutritious food. Ecological agriculture also helps to combat climate change.
We therefore resolve as follows:
1.That there are no successes stories to tell about GMOs other than tales of woes.Africans must not be used as guinea pigs for unverified technologies and the continent must no longer be used as a dumping ground for the products of the biotech companies...

In 2008, after three years of solid work, over 400 scientists, 30 governments from developed and developing countries, as well as 30 civil society organizations, concluded work under the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). About 60 countries endorsed the report at a meeting in Johannesburg in April of that year.The report concluded that modern biotechnology would have very limited contribution to the feeding of the world in the foreseeable future. That report is an excellent blue print for action by African governments rather than getting tied to the apron-strings of speculators and neo-colonial powers whose objective is to exploit, subjugate and destroy food production systems on the African continent

Signed
Environmental Rights Action/ Friends of the Earth Nigeria
Friends of the Earth Ghana
Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy
(Add your organization's name here and reply to mariann@eraction.org and annybassi@yahoo.com on or before 30 January 2012).


To read the entire petition please go to www.foodfirst.org.  In my prior posts onGMOs, I describe their dangers to health, soil quality, as have talked about the myriad of countries that have banned them.  While some African countries have activist movements resisting them, GMO seeds are currently mandated in Iraq--part of the agreement of the post-Iraqi war.  In North America,  Monsanto's crops contaminate farmers fields, and then Monsanto sues them for patent violation.  Foodfirst.org is a great site, and hopefully awareness will be raised about GMOs to prevent their perpetuation.

A Votre Sante, (Here's To Your Health), Alix