Category: Health

Flax vs Dairy -- Which is More Likely to Fan the Growth of Cancer?

3/31/2025

Over the years people I have known who were undergoing treatment for Cancer have shared with me that their doctors advised them to avoid flax seeds, soy milk and tofu because these contain large amounts of phytoestrogens,which their doctor told them could bind with estrogen receptors and stimulate the growth of cancer.

When someone would tell me this, I would always then ask them this question:

"Are you avoiding milk, cheese and butter too, since these are loaded with animal estrogens?"

And I these people have always told me some version of this:

"No, my doctor said that those are fine for me to eat."

This never made any sense to me -- as mother's milk (and this is true for milk from all mammal mothers -- cows, people, dogs etc.) is actually a hormone-delivery system made by nature to enable a nursing mother to deliver dozens of hormones (not just estrogen, but many others too including cortisol, testosterone and IGF-1) to her baby that stimulate growth -- and the exact percentage of each each of these hormones, as well as the amounts of protein, and fat in mother's milk, is quite different for each species, depending upon how quickly the infants are intended to double their birth weight. Cow's milk for example is designed to put 200-300 lbs on a calf in just six months.

Well just recently someone else I know told me that they are avoiding flax seeds because of concern about cancer -- and again when I asked, I found out that they are still consuming animal products and specifically mentioned butter, which they are not at all concerned about the actual animal estrogen that is present in butter.
Thinking about this, I became curious about how the amounts of phytoestrogens in flax seeds compared to the amounts of actual animal estrogen in butter, and so I reached out Brenda Davis, a dietician who is known around the world, as the author of about a dozen books addressing plant-based nutrition. You may recognize some of them:

After Brenda did some digging, here is the information that she provided to me:

Phytoestrogen Content in Plant-Based Foods:
Food Item     Phytoestrogen Content (mg/100g)
Flaxseed                380
Soybeans               104
Tofu                          27
Tempeh                   18
Miso                        11
Note: Flaxseeds are particularly rich in lignans, a type of phytoestrogen. Healthline+1Wikipedia+1

Estrogen Content in Animal-Based Foods:

Food Item          Estrogen Content (pg/g)
Butter                          539
Gouda Cheese           170
Whole Milk                  33.7
Note: These values represent picograms of estrogen per gram of food. ScienceDirect

Understanding the Measurements:

Phytoestrogens are plant-derived compounds that can mimic estrogen but generally have much weaker effects.
Estrogens in animal products are actual hormones that can interact directly with human estrogen receptors.

Contextualizing the Values:

Flaxseed: Contains approximately 380 mg of phytoestrogens per 100g, primarily lignans.Mount Sinai Health System+4Healthline+4PurpleCarrot Nutrition+4
Butter: Contains about 539 picograms (pg) of estrogen per gram.ScienceDirect+1PubMed+1

Conversion for Comparison:
1 milligram (mg) = 1,000,000 picograms (pg)
Therefore, 380 mg (phytoestrogens in flaxseed) = 380,000,000 pg

Implications:
While flaxseed has a high phytoestrogen content, these compounds are structurally different from the estrogens found in animal products like butter and cheese. Phytoestrogens tend to have weaker effects on estrogen receptors and can sometimes act as anti-estrogens, potentially offering protective benefits against certain cancers. In contrast, the estrogens in animal products are bioidentical to human estrogens and may have more direct hormonal effects.
Understanding the differences in estrogenic compounds between plant-based and animal-based foods is crucial. While both contain compounds that can interact with estrogen receptors, their sources, structures, and potencies vary significantly, and plant estrogens tend to be protective.

So then I did some calculations with the numbers that Brenda provided:

1TBS of flax weighs 9 gms, and dividing the number you gave me (for 100 gms) by 100, I get 3,800 pg in each gram, and 1 TBS of butter weighs 14 grams, and at 539 pg/g that's 7,506 pg of estrogen:

1 TBS of flax seeds has 34,200 pg of phytoestrogen.
vs
1 TBS of butter has 7,506 pg of estrogen

And here is what Brenda had to say about that comparison:

The key factor here isn't just the quantity of estrogenic compounds, but rather their biological activity and how they interact with the body’s hormone system.
1. Potency Matters: Weak vs. Strong Estrogens

Animal estrogens (like estradiol found in butter and dairy) are bioidentical to human estrogens, meaning they directly bind to estrogen receptors and exert a strong hormonal effect. Even at lower concentrations, they can significantly influence hormonal balance and have been linked to increased risks of hormone-sensitive cancers, such as breast and prostate cancer (Ganmaa & Sato, 2005).
Phytoestrogens from flax and soy, on the other hand, are structurally different and have much weaker estrogenic activity—often 100–1,000 times weaker than human or animal estrogens. In many cases, they can act as estrogen blockers, reducing the impact of stronger estrogens in the body (Adlercreutz, 2002).

2. Affinity for Estrogen Receptors: Blocking vs. Activating

Animal estrogens activate estrogen receptors strongly, directly contributing to hormonal activity.
Phytoestrogens, especially lignans from flax, tend to bind preferentially to estrogen receptor beta (ER-β), which has an anti-proliferative effect—potentially reducing cancer risk rather than increasing it (Kuiper et al., 1998).

3. Metabolism & Bioavailability: How Much Actually Affects the Body?

Dairy estrogens are absorbed efficiently and enter circulation in their active form, exerting a direct hormonal impact.
Phytoestrogens require metabolic conversion, and the extent of their effect depends on gut microbiota composition and individual metabolism (Setchell et al., 1984). Some individuals convert them into equol, a metabolite that has a beneficial, mild estrogen-modulating effect.

4. Epidemiological Evidence: What Does the Research Show?

High dairy consumption is associated with increased risks of hormone-sensitive cancers, particularly breast and prostate cancer, due to its estrogen content (Ganmaa et al., 2002).
Flax and soy intake, despite their high phytoestrogen content, are linked to lower rates of these cancers, suggesting a protective rather than harmful effect (Messina, 2016).

5. Contextualizing the Argument -- it's understandable that, at first glance, the numbers might seem surprising. However, when we consider:

The potency difference (animal estrogens are much stronger)
The receptor binding differences (phytoestrogens can block stronger estrogens)
The epidemiological data (phytoestrogens tend to be protective, not harmful)

…it becomes clearer that flax is not just "estrogenic" in the same way as dairy but actually plays a regulatory role that may help balance hormone levels.
Instead of just comparing absolute amounts, a better question is:"Which source of estrogenic compounds is more likely to raise estrogen levels in the body and contribute to hormone-related conditions?"
Dairy estrogens: Strong activators, increase estrogen exposure → Potentially harmful
Flax phytoestrogens: Weak, can block stronger estrogens → Potentially protective
Thus, avoiding flax due to concerns about estrogen while continuing dairy consumption is biologically inconsistent with what we know about how these compounds function.

A big THANK YOU to Brenda for doing all this research for me! And if you'd like to know more about Brenda Davis or her work, you can visit her website, or check out this wonderful interview with her that Vegan Linked did:

0 Comments

Is CDC info reliable?

8/24/2022

0 Comments

On Aug 24, 2022 I screen shot the following from this page on the CDC's website:

"Anaphylaxis...is rare...5 cases per one million vaccine doses"

How well does CDC's statement reflect the published evidence?

The JAMA paper above said this:

"...severe reactions consistent with anaphylaxis occurred at a rate of 2.47 per 10 000 vaccinations."

That's 247 per million!
(almost 50 times higher than what CDC said)

And here is another paper:

And it reported this:

"...37 cases of anaphylaxis were observed, equating to 204.2 cases per million doses administered."

Whose interests is CDC prioritizing...consumers
or investors in the liability-free vaccines?

(And anaphylaxis is but a single type of adverse event of literally HUNDREDS of different types that have been reported following these mRNA shots.) Click HERE to see some of the others that have been reported too.)

0 Comments

BBC: Journalism or Propaganda?

11/2/2021

0 Comments

This is the kind of stuff that drives me crazy! I use to consider the BBC a credible source of news, but now? They are just as much an instrument of big pharma propaganda as is Forbes, (which I previously blogged about HERE.)

In the hopes that more people will read this -- I will keep it bite size by deconstructing just a single passage from the BBC article. This one:

Here is what makes this propaganda -- rather than legitimate journalism.

First -- the study they referenced was a comparison between hospitals that had different percentages of their employees vaccinated against the flu. Then they correlated the percent of staff vaccinated for flu with the likelihood of patients there dying from the flu. But they report that the data also showed that the rate of positivity for influenza in the patients was similar between the hospitals regardless of vaccine coverage in the workers. So just think about that for a moment...since correlation doesn't equal causation anyway, there is no rational basis to conclude that higher vaccination rates in the staff, had anything to do with fewer patients dying -- since flu appears to have been equally prevalent in patients in both populations. Duh.

Then the author provides a second example, that is just as disingenuous -- but in a different way. Do most readers just swallow this BS without doing any critical thinking? Look at this sentence:

"There's no question mandatory vaccinations can save lives."

     But the "evidence" of the second example -- discussing measles, doesn't even mention deaths. It only mentions "cases." Since 2015 there has been only ONE measles death in the US. This in spite of nearly 1300 measles cases documented in 2019 alone! (Such a deadly disease!) And while we hear over and over how deadly measles is -- take note -- those are deaths outside of the US -- where unfortunately, children suffering the extreme impacts of poverty and malnutrition -- and especially vitamin A deficiency -- ARE vulnerable to dying if they get measles. But those deaths reflect the dangers of poverty and malnutrition more than they do measles. Clearly unvaccinated children in the US who do catch measles are not likely to die from it.

      This article is agenda driven propaganda. It reinforces the pharma-profiting narrative and is not unbiased journalism simply seeking to inform. About par for what we see everywhere now that the military-industrial-medical-meat-media complex has a death grip on our government.

0 Comments

Why I don't trust the American Academy of Pediatrics

4/9/2021

2 Comments

Their slogan says, "Dedicated to the health of all children." But after looking at this March 10 article on this page, (screen shot below) I think it would be more truthful if their slogan was, "Dedicated to the fiscal health of all pharma shareholders."

I found so many problematic statements in this article -- how could any objective person with familiarity of the published science fail to see they have cherry picked their sources to support their pro-pharma bias? In the interest of keeping this short I will deconstruct just one statement from this article. They said there were only 4.7 cases of anaphylaxis per million doses:

But the CDC in this report put the number at more than double that, at

11 cases per million doses:

However a more thorough analysis in the Journal of the American Medical Association suggests that there are 247 cases per million doses:

Meanwhile the government's own passive reporting system (which a previous analysis by Harvard suggested only captures a tiny fraction of injuries reported following a vaccine) shows these numbers as of April 2, 2021:

In response to the comment by John (below) I am updating this post -- to include a screen shot -- showing that the fact check site john linked to is funded by Google.

People should keep in mind, that the year 2020, saw the greatest transfer of wealth ever to take place on this planet -- all going to billionaire philanthro-capitalists (Like Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Larry Page.) Arguably, Google has ahuge vested interest in the narrative that has driven our entire response to COVID.

And here is the report (some screen shots from it below) that our government commissioned Harvard to do to study how well VAERS was doing at capturing vaccine reactions. It basically says VAERS captures about 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

Keep in mind, our government has provided billions of taxpayer dollars just for propaganda to influence people to believe that the vaccine is safe and effective.

2 Comments

Vegans and Vaccines -- My comment to Mainstreet Vegan's blog post

12/31/2020

0 Comments

Victoria speaking at a BBQ I organized in the 1990s.

Victoria Moran of Main Street Vegan has been a long time friend of mine. She and Howard Lyman were the very first vegans I ever met -- after I became vegan in 1991. Though Victoria and I do not see eye to eye on some issues, I will always be grateful for the information, inspiration and support she provided me at the beginning of my vegan and parenting journeys.

Victoria just posted a guest article addressing vegans and vaccines. I replied to it and included links to published science, but her anti-spam software, removed the links I had so laboriously included. So here is my comment with the links intact. Be Well my friends!

0 Comments

A look back at Polio to gain some perspective on COVID-19

11/7/2020

2 Comments

(originally posted 4/27/20 - updated with more evidence)

Are you familiar with this book?

It's assembled by pharmaceutical giant Merck -- the company I used to work for. The Merck Manual is well-respected around the world by doctors and scientists. It's considered a sort of medical "bible" by many and summarizes the published science on various diseases.

     My high school biology teacher once told me about what it was like to live through the polio epidemic of the 1950s. He was a child at the time and recalled classmates, "dropping like flies." He told me it was terrifying coming to school each week and learning that more classmates had fallen ill with polio.

     However in recent years, I have struggled to reconcile my teacher's experience with the published science I have read as I looked into the issue of polio a bit more.

     For example, look at this passage from page 2341 from my own 17th edition of the Merck Manual:

2 Comments

You Can Improve Your Odds of Surviving COVID!

9/7/2020

0 Comments

Pharma and big-tech (driven by the billions invested in R&D) are fixated upon selling us all the rushed to market, liability-free vaccine. But in small human trials, many had severe reactions to the vaccine. And it will be used in large populations before any long term safety data is available. We are also told it may only be 30% effective -- but that we should still all get it. Did you know there are less risky ways individuals may improve their odds of surviving COVID-19 if they become exposed and/or infected?

1) Eat to optimize your gut microbiome. Bad outcomes from Covid are linked with high levels of chronic inflammation, and inflammation levels are mediated by gut bacteria. A whole food plant based diet (emphasizing beans and greens) encourages the growth of gut microbes that down-regulate inflammation in the body, while consumption of animal protein encourages the growth of microbes that up-regulate inflammation. (1) (2) (3) (4) (22)

2) Avoid fever reducers -- especially Tylenol. Fever is adaptive, boosting our metabolism and giving our immune system an advantage against invading microbes. But artificially lowering a fever handicaps the immune system. Tylenol may be additionally harmful in the case of COVID-19, because it has been shown to reduce levels of glutathione, an important antioxidant, that protects the liver and lungs and may mitigate COVID-19 harms. Low levels of glutathione have been linked with more severe COVID-19 outcomes. In fact, Tylenol sales skyrocketed from the pandemic and may turn out to be a big reason why so many people have died from this virus. (5) (6) (7)(14)

3) Taking NAC may be beneficial. N-Acetyl Cysteine has been shown to increase levels of glutathione in the body. NAC is used to save people who have overdosed on Tylenol. Studies suggest it may be helpful in preventing some of the more serious manifestations of COVID-19.(8) (9)

4) Make sure you have optimum levels of Vitamin D. Low levels of vitamin D have been linked to worse outcomes from COVID-19. Get your vitamin D levels tested. If low or unknown, 2500 iu of vegan D3 daily is probably safe for most people. (10) (11) (41) (42)

5) Quercetin, Zinc and Vitamin C may be protective. These three nutrients may prevent COVID-19, or may make the disease more mild for those who do get it. (12) (13) (40)

6) Avoid meat, dairy, eggs. A variety of compounds present in them (endotoxin, Neu5Gc, AGES, Saturated fat, Cholesterol) contribute to inflammation, high blood pressure, and insulin resistance/ diabetes, which are well established co-morbidities that increase the odds of death or long-term harms from COVID-19. (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22)

7) Eat sugars, salt and oils very sparingly. Excessive amounts of highly processed carbs like sugar and flour, oils and even too much sodium in the diet have been variously linked with insulin resistance, inflammation, or high blood pressure, all of which make one more vulnerable to harm if they get COVID-19 (22) (23) (24)

8) Seasonal flu shots may increase COVID-19 risk. A number of studies have suggested that influenza vaccine may make one more likely to become infected with other respiratory viruses -- including Coronaviruses. Yet more and more institutions are mandating flu vaccines for school attendance, or employment. This could increase deaths from COVID. (25) (26) (27) (28) (29) (30) (31)

(Update: And since first writing this -- a new study was published suggesting that getting a flu shot is correlated with an increased risk of dying if one then gets COVID-19.) (39)

While the above information may empower you to fare better in the current pandemic -- It can prevent FUTURE pandemics. COVID-19 is just the teaser for what is likely coming if we continue on our current path of using animals for food and research. It's not just a "personal choice" to consume meat, dairy and eggs. Doing so puts everyone at increased risk from future pandemics, and the next one could be more deadly than COVID!

Most people know that emergent diseases like Mad Cow Disease, Ebola, Campylobactor, Listeria, E coli 0157, and Salmonella, come to us from animals, but did you realize that most infectious diseases that spread human to human, originated from humans hunting, farming, eating or using animals in some way? It's not just modern factory farms that put us at risk either. The Influenza pandemic of 1918 predated modern industrial agriculture. Measles, Tuberculosis, H. Pylori, Pertussis and many other pathogens that have plagued us since long before the era of large intensive farms, we got from exploiting non-human beings. Some cancers are linked with by viruses in dairy cows and a variety of zoonotic diseases occur at higher levels in those involved in meat and dairy production. (32) (38)

We can live happy healthy lives without intentionally killing other animals.
So why not do it?

Click here for a printable 1 page PDF of the above points

References:

(1) Tao, W. et al. (2020). Analysis of The Intestinal Microbiota In COVID-1 19 Patients And Its Correlation With The 2 Inflammatory Factor IL-18 And SARS-Cov-2-Specific IgA. medRxiv preprint.

(2) Tomova A, Bukovsky I, Rembert E, et al. The effects of vegetarian and vegan diets on gut microbiota. Front Nutr. Published online April 17, 2019.

(3) Plant-Based Diets and the Gut Microbiota by Carrie Dennett, MPH RDH, CD, Today's Dietitian, Vol 20, No 7 P.36

(4) David, L., Maurice, C., Carmody, R. et al. Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome. Nature 505, 559–563 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12820

(5) https://www.pnas.org/content/115/22/E5243

(6) Polonikov, Endogenous Deficiency of Glutathione as the Most Likely Cause of Serious Manifestations and Death in COVID-19 Patients, ACS Infect Dis, May 28, 2020

(6) Polonikov, Endogenous Deficiency of Glutathione as the Most Likely Cause of Serious Manifestations of Serious Manifestations and Death in COVID-19 Patients, ACS Infect Dis, May 28, 2020

(7) Dimova S, Hoet PH, Dinsdale D, Nemery B. Acetaminophen decreases intracellular glutathione levels and modulates cytokine production in human alveolar macrophages and type II pneumocytes in vitro. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2005;37(8):1727-1737. doi:10.1016/j.biocel.2005.03.005

(8) Jorge-Aarón, Rangel-Méndez, and Moo-Puc Rosa-Ester. “N-acetylcysteine as a potential treatment for COVID-19.” Future microbiology vol. 15 (2020): 959-962. doi:10.2217/fmb-2020-0074

(9) https://drjewilliams.com/glutathione-and-nac-reduce-the-severity-of-covid-19/

(10) Meltzer DO, Best TJ, Zhang H, Vokes T, Arora V, Solway J. Association of Vitamin D Status and Other Clinical Characteristics With COVID-19 Test Results. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(9):e2019722. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.19722

(11) Biesalski, H, Vitamin D deficiency and co-morbidities in COVID-19 patients - A fatal relationship?
Nfs Journal, Aug 20, 2020, pp 10-21

(12) Biancatelli, R., Quercetin and Vitamin C: An Experimental Synergistic Therapy for the Prevention and Treatment of SARS-C0V-2 RElated Disease (COVID-19) Front Immunol, 2020; 11: 1451.

(13) Wessels, The Potential Impact of Zinc Supplementation on COVID-19 Pathogenisis, Front, Immonol, 2020; 11: 1712.

(14) https://hbw.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/RS149912/JJ-Producing-Tylenol-247-As-US-OTC-Sales-Jump-35-On-PandemicDriven-Stockpiling

(15) Tall, Alan R, and Laurent Yvan-Charvet. “Cholesterol, inflammation and innate immunity.” Nature reviews. Immunology vol. 15,2 (2015): 104-16. doi:10.1038/nri3793

(16) Padler-Karavani V, Yu H, Cao H, Chokhawala H, Karp F, Varki N, Chen X, Varki A. Diversity in specificity, abundance, and composition of anti-Neu5Gc antibodies in normal humans: potential implications for disease. Glycobiology. 2008 Oct;18(10):818-30.

(17) van der Lugt, Timme et al. “Dietary Advanced Glycation Endproducts Induce an Inflammatory Response in Human Macrophages in Vitro.” Nutrients vol. 10,12 1868. 2 Dec. 2018, doi:10.3390/nu10121868

(18) Erridge C, Attina T, Spickett CM, Webb DJ. A high-fat meal induces low-grade endotoxemia: evidence of a novel mechanism of postprandial inflammation. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Nov; 86(5):1286-92.

(19) Erridge C. The capacity of foodstuffs to induce innate immune activation of human monocytes in vitro is dependent on food content of stimulants of Toll-like receptors 2 and 4. Br J Nutr. 2011 Jan; 105(1):15-23.

(20) D Estadella, C M da Penha Oller do Nascimento, L M Oyama, E B Ribeiro, A R Damaso, A de Piano. Lipotoxicity: effects of dietary saturated and transfatty acids. Mediators Inflamm. 2013; Epub 2013 Jan 31.

(21) C J Nolan, C Z Larter. Lipotoxicity: why do saturated fatty acids cause and monounsaturates protect against it? J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 May;24(5):703-6.

(22) Giovana Jamar, Daniel Araki Ribeiro & Luciana Pellegrini Pisani (2020) High-fat or high-sugar diets as trigger inflammation in the microbiota-gut-brain axis, Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, DOI: 10.1080/10408398.2020.1747046

(23) R J Suckling, F J He, N D Markandu, G A MacGregor. Dietary salt influences postprandial plasma sodium concentration and systolic blood pressure. Kidney Int. 2012 Feb;81(4):407-11.

(24) G A MacGregor, N D Markandu, F E Best, D M Elder, J M Cam, G A Sagnella, M Squires. Double-blind randomised crossover trial of moderate sodium restriction in essential hypertension. Lancet. 1982 Feb 13;1(8268):351-5.

(25) Wolff GG. Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel during the 2017-2018 influenza season. Vaccine. 2020;38(2):350-354.

(26) Rikin S, Jia H, Vargas CY, et al. Assessment of temporally-related acute respiratory illness following influenza vaccination. Vaccine. 2018;36(15):1958-1964.

(27) Kelly H, Jacoby P, Dixon GA, et al. Vaccine Effectiveness Against Laboratory-confirmed Influenza in Healthy Young Children: A Case-Control Study. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2011;30(2):107-111.

(28) Cowling BJ, Fang VJ, Nishiura H, et al. Increased risk of noninfluenza respiratory virus infections associated with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(12):1778-1783. doi:10.1093/cid/cis307

(29) Dierig A, Heron LG, Lambert SB, et al. Epidemiology of respiratory viral infections in children enrolled in a study of influenza vaccine effectiveness. Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2014;8(3):293-301. doi:10.1111/irv.12229

(30) https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2010/04/new-canadian-studies-suggest-seasonal-flu-shot-increased-h1n1-risk

(31) https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES2015.20.4.21022

(32) Buehring, Gertrude Case et al. “Exposure to Bovine Leukemia Virus Is Associated with Breast Cancer: A Case-Control Study.” PloS one vol. 10,9 e0134304. 2 Sep. 2015, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0134304

(33) Johnson ES. Poultry oncogenic retroviruses and humans. Cancer Detect Prev. 1994;18(1):9-30.

(34) Johnson ES, Griswold CM. Oncogenic retroviruses of cattle, chickens and turkeys: potential infectivity and oncogenicity for humans. Med Hypotheses. 1996 Apr;46(4):354-6.

35) Gandhi S, Felini MJ, Ndetan H, Cardarelli K, Jadhav S, Faramawi M, Johnson ES. A pilot case-cohort study of brain cancer in poultry and control workers. Nutr Cancer. 2014;66(3):343-50.

(36) De Roos AJ, Stewart PA, Linet MS, Heineman EF, Dosemeci M, Wilcosky T, Shapiro WR, Selker RG, Fine HA, Black PM, Inskip PD. Occupation and the risk of adult glioma in the United States. Cancer Causes Control. 2003 Mar;14(2):139-50.

(37) Johnson ES, Zhou Y, Sall M, Faramawi ME, Shah N, Christopher A, Lewis N. Non-malignant disease mortality in meat workers: a model for studying the role of zoonotic transmissible agents in non-malignant chronic diseases in humans. Occup Environ Med. 2007 Dec;64(12):849-55.

(38) Johnson ES, Yau LC, Zhou Y, Singh KP, Ndetan H. Mortality in the Baltimore union poultry cohort: non-malignant diseases. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2010 Jun;83(5):543-52.

(39) https://peerj.com/articles/10112/

(40) www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7482607/

(41) www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096007602030296X

(42) febs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/febs.15495
A slightly condensed printer-friendly PDF of this article is available for download HERE

0 Comments

Let's Deconstruct a CNN Article Promoting Mask Wearing

6/26/2020

0 Comments

CNN has a very broad reach, yet most readers have no idea how flimsy is the evidence they cite to support their framing. So I'd like you to join me now -- on a short exercise in critical thinking.

On June 26th I saw the above article linked to on the main page of CNN's website where the first paragraph begins like this:
(click, "read more" to continue) ---->

0 Comments

Are we Trusting the Wrong People?

5/9/2020

2 Comments

     Remember Brave New World, and Orwell's line about "War is peace"?

    As I see and hear the narrative being crafted by CNN, FOX, MSNBC and other big media -- and then compare their message to published science, I can't help but think about Orwell -- and how the dominant narrative perverts the facts.

At the same time, health information at odds with big media's message is being censored by Facebook, Amazon, Pinterest, Yahoo, YouTube and more. Yet those lacking first hand knowledge of this censorship, often don't realize how pervasive the censorship has become.

The big tech companies claim they are merely removing things that are not true -- but Sanjay Gupta, Nina Shapiro and others aligned with those who hold the power are not getting censored -- even when they say things that can be shown to be factually incorrect. Here is a good example.

Dr. Nina Shapiro is a graduate of Harvard Medical School, a division head of a surgery center and she's taught medicine in academic settings. With those credentials -- you'd think there might be some pressure on her to make factually supportable public statements right?

Shapiro is also the author of the book, "Hype" which claims to be a doctor's guide to "...medical myths and exaggerated claims...and how to tell what's real and what's not." It is that tagline by Shapiro that makes me think of Brave New World. Let me explain.

Nina Shapiro exemplifies Brave New World.

My first exposure to Nina Shapiro was when I stumbled upon an article of hers featured on Forbes where she argues that the right to have or refuse an abortion IS a valid personal choice, but the right to have or refuse other medical interventions -- with documented risks is not. She thinks having an abortion which can be definitively linked with ending a specific life is acceptable while refusing a vaccine which has only a theoretical possibility of preventing a disease which if not prevented has only a theoretical chance of hurting someone is not acceptable. Here is a screen shot of the headline of her article:

But Nina has a big problem with her facts. The only justification she offers for why our fundamental right to decide what happens to our own body should be violated is this statement:

"The dissolution of herd immunity...is...contributing to resurgence of...pertussis, measles, tetanus, and diphtheria."

      Could a medical doctor who graduated from Harvard really be THAT ignorant?

      Tetanus is not a communicable disease.

     The vaccine for Diphtheria is a toxoid --- so there is not even a theoretical basis to suggest that it can prevent the spread of the organism that causes diphtheria.

     And the published science on the Pertussis vaccine not only provides ZERO evidence that this vaccine prevents the spread of the disease --- in fact it is well documented that people properly vaccinated for pertussis can have and spread the illness -- and often don't show any symptoms!

(So only one of the four diseases she mentions -- measles -- is there even a theoretical basis to suggest herd immunity, and we had over 1200 measles cases in the US last year -- and there was not a single death. Measles is not deadly in well-fed populations.)

I notice a disturbing double standard by some of my scientist and doctor friends when it comes to medical information like this.

When I share information that challenges their perspective (particularly on the subject of vaccines) many look at it only long enough to find a single detail they can point to, to discredit the entire article -- even when the detail might not be central to the evidence being presented. But they take the opposite approach to sources that support what they already believe....like this one I just deconstructed by Nina Shaprio.

But sometimes details really do matter a lot. So I ask you...who is really promoting medical myths and exaggerated claims? (For the record -- here is a screen shot of what Nina wrote:

If you liked this post -- be sure to read my
previous post -- comparing COVID-19 to POLIO

2 Comments

Ten Ideas that May Improve Resistance to COVID-19

4/14/2020

1 Comment

COVID-19 has many people feeling anxious, but knowing that things within our own power may improve our odds of having a mild case can be very calming.

So here are my top ten ideas for simple things -- most of which are completely within our power to do, that will likely reduce our risk of being harmed by the COVID-19 virus.

1 Comment

STAT NEWS -- Just Another Pharma Shill?

11/30/2019

0 Comments

Censorship by U.S. media is more common than you realize. Why do you suppose the medical news site, Statnews.com. wouldn't allow me to comment on this article? I waited several days after submitting my comment and then edited it slightly for clarity and resubmitted it a second time. The page just tells me it is, "awaiting moderation." What do you think might be the reason they won't post my comment?

                    Here is a cut and pasted copy of the comment I tried to post on Statnews --
                    on the page with the above article:

This article missed a growing reason why adults are not getting vaccines -- it's CENSORSHIP on vaccine information or any science that challenges the pro-pharma narrative dominating the media. This in turn is fueling vaccine skepticism!

Articles by Helen Branswell exemplify this problem. Branswell has superb credentials, but her writing is PR for pharma thinly disguised as "health reporting."

0 Comments

Do your own critical thinking!

11/20/2019

0 Comments

A decade ago, TIME Magazine's cover
story made the case that people choosing to not get vaccines were sabotaging "herd" immunity and would be responisble for future outbreaks of diseases like measles and whooping cough.

TIME and the corporate controlled media want us to believe it's everyone's duty to get vaccinated -- especially to protect infants for whom these diseases are more dangerous and who may also be too young to get some vaccines.

On page 37 of the this 2008 article, TIME lamented that only 77% of kinder-gardeners in America were completely up-to-date on their vaccines and even said -- that was the country's highest vaccination rate we had ever had!

      Today, ten years later, whooping cough, measles and mumps outbreaks are in the news and "anti-vaxxers" are being blamed.

     But a large body of published science shows that extremely high rates of vaccine coverage do not prevent circulation of these diseases in the community. They may keep vaccinated individuals from showing symptoms -- but vaccinated people can still be silent carriers, making seemingly healthy vaccinated people a bigger threat to infants than their not vaccinated counterparts (since someone who has not recently been vaccinated and becomes infected with Pertussis is more likely to appear to have a cold or cough and thus can be avoided.)

     Also at odds with the media's narrative is the fact that vaccination rates in children have actually soared from 77% to about 94% since TIME published their article:

Though the report emphasizes the fact that there was a very tiny increase in exemptions, the report actually puts the overall rate of vaccinated kinder-gardeners at about 94% now. Here's another screen shot:

     The idea that people refusing vaccines are putting babies too young to be vaccinated at risk hides another unintended public-health consequence of vaccines; infants may actually be more vulnerable to measles now, than they were in the pre-vaccine era.

     Before routine measles vaccination, most mothers had measles in childhood. Studies suggest that babies of mothers who had the actual disease (as opposed to only the vaccine) pass on more protective antibodies to their infants:

Did you hear about the recent measles outbreak in Samoa that killed 6 -- most of whom were babies too young to be vaccinated? The deaths were blamed on falling vaccination rates in Samoa, but it's likely they were due at least in part to vaccinated mothers having less immunity to pass on to their infants.

The media discourages us from seeing something an important fact: High vaccination rates are not preventing circulation of these diseases.

If you have read a lot of the published science on this subject however, this will not surprise you because...

Vaccines do not confer as effective nor as long lasting immunity as actually getting the disease. So as older generations who had immunity from getting the actual disease die off, we are left with a growing proportion of the population whose immunity is only from a vaccine, and this is not sufficient to suppress spread of the disease.
We've also been misled about the true efficacy of vaccines, while the harms have been downplayed.

The pharma-promoting media, in conjunction with our "conflict-of-interest-compromised" regulatory agencies, spin what is happening to support vaccine sales and passage of laws that take away the fundamental right to informed consent for medical procedures -- a direct violation of the Nuremberg Code.

Meanwhile plenty of published science shows whooping cough and mumps are frequently spread in fully vaccinated populations.

Here is a small sampling:

1993:

1994:

1996:

2000:

2019:

And can you think of any population more highly vaccinated than the military? And yet Mumps spread through a navy ship earlier this year. (Though they tried to deny it was mumps by calling it, "Mumps-like.")

     Though the measles vaccine appears to be more effective than mumps or pertussis -- many fully vaccinated against measles have gotten and spread it too...and the vaccine's effectiveness in an individual has been shown to wane with each passing year.

     Meanwhile, growing numbers of parents are coming forward alleging serious adverse events following their child's vaccinations--reactions which left some children brain-damaged, disabled or dead.

     I found this short video of these parents of triplets very moving. Why does our media never tell these family's story? Yet if a child is hospitalized after a case of Chickenpox -- that story makes headlines across the country.

Oh -- looks like Youtube removed that video -- but I found it on another platform -- click the image below to see it.

     America has an epidemic of chronic diseases plaguing fully vaccinated children (allergy, asthma, autoimmune disease, seizures, autism, and psychiatric disorders). A growing body of science suggests various mechanisms by which vaccines are likely contributing to many of these chronic conditions.

     Vaccines are one the fastest growing, most profitable sectors of the pharmaceutical industry -- an industry that has been repeatedly shown to engage in scientific misconduct intended to hide the true harms of their products or overstate benefits.

     Do your own critical thinking.

0 Comments

Tetanus Vaccine Causes Drop in T-Cells

11/8/2019

2 Comments

Me -- day 2 of New Zealand bike trip

Years ago I had an adverse event from a vaccination. But at the time I never connected the two.
Although what happened to me took place after I completed a graduate level course in Immunology, my education had never informed me that vaccines EVER caused harm to anyone. (If you don't want to hear my story and just wish to see the published NEJM article -- simply scroll down to the bottom of this article.)

2 Comments

Cervical cancer -- an example of medical-media-industrial complex fake news

10/11/2019

0 Comments

Here's a great opportunity to see how the medical-media-industrial complex tries to manipulate us. Look at this screen shot of a story about how cervical cancer may soon be eliminated in Australia...

Especially pay attention to the very bottom words on the image above...

0 Comments

Carrot Juice Instead of Sunscreen?

8/4/2019

0 Comments

My daughter Sarina on the beach in Sydney.

When I was a new mother with a ten month old baby, I found myself in the wonderful position of having nothing else to do for a few months other than hang out with my infant daughter in Sydney Australia. Because she was mostly existing on just breast milk at that time, I knew it was important for my baby to get regular sunshine on her body so that she could make adequate vitamin D. Since we were near the ocean -- I made sure we visited the beach every day.

0 Comments

Are you REALLY Pro-Science or just a Cult-Follower of Scientism?

7/23/2019

0 Comments

Me on the job, back in the day

I used to work as a microbiologist for a global pharmaceutical company. My position was unique because I worked with both the marketing and the scientific sides. Usually these are completely segregated areas, and only employees higher up in the ranks and far more invested in the company's success get to see all of what

I saw. But this enabled me to appreciate this bigger picture before I was, "educated" to not find it problematic: How companies create biased science and then use it to shape public health policy.

0 Comments

The Carnivore Diet

7/20/2019

0 Comments

The Carnivore Diet, is the latest incarnation of the controversial low carb diet, but differs from previous versions by taking "low carb" to its farthest extreme and consuming zero plants at all. (With the possible exception of coffee.) Why should you care about this?

0 Comments

Why the Chickenpox Vaccine is NUTS!

6/14/2019

2 Comments

(Note -- this article was originally published on my Compassionate Souls website shortly after my first book came out (about 2001). Neil Miller republished it with permission in his booklet on the Chickenpox vaccine, and 4 years ago I posted it to this blog. I am bringing it to the front of my blog now, because this issue is timely again.)

When I was a child, chickenpox was universally understood to be a generally benign disease in otherwise healthy children. Every spring, chickenpox would wash through the younger grades at my elementary school, and initiate a new group of kids. Most of us remember the disease for its horrendous itching and the occasional scar, but I don't remember any of us fearing it. I grew up accepting Chickenpox as a fact of life, and a normal passage of childhood -- like skinning your knees.

According to the Merck Manual, Chickenpox is a highly contagious infection caused by the

2 Comments

A Tale of Two Infectious Diseases

4/26/2019

4 Comments

Tuberculosis

Measles

Which one are we being told to fear more?

WHY?

4 Comments

What's Wrong with Informed Consent?

2/25/2019

1 Comment

In the Nuremburg Trials which followed the Holocaust, the court drafted what is known as the Nuremburg Code -- rules requiring the voluntary, informed consent of an individual before they are given a medical procedure or are part of a medical experiment. "Informed consent" has been embraced by the global medical community, and most people consider it a basic human right.

So why would well-meaning people push policies that take away our informed consent?

The Cardiovascular Health Study, a project of the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute concluded that all males over the age of 65 exposed to the Western-style diet probably have cardiovascular disease and should be treated as such. Cardiovascular disease costs the US about 1 billion dollars a day in healthcare costs and lost productivity. It's the number one cause of death in our country. Because blocked arteries contribute to many premature deaths, some heart doctors propose that as a public health measure, we put statins in the public water supply -- forcing everyone to be exposed to their risks. Though this might prevent some deaths, it would also deprive everyone of the choice to refuse this medical intervention -- which like ALL medical interventions may have unintended consequences for some. Plenty of people on statins have discontinued them, because of the side effects -- even though not taking them might increase their risk of death.

With most health care we do not have a one-size-fits-all approach. Antibiotics can be life saving. They can also ruin people's health. Differing lifestyles, family histories, and even different times, can make the risk-benefit of any medical intervention unique to each. We also have different values. Joan Rivers died after accepting the small risk of death from elective plastic surgery. She valued looking younger more than avoiding this risk. Some with terminal illnesses, agree to be in medical trials and endure horrific, experimental treatments, for a long-shot at living a little longer. But not all of us would make such choices.

But what happens when the financial incentives for certain medical interventions become enormous....AND then corrupt the science seeking to really understand the risk/benefit of those interventions? Doctors and public health officials can be misled too!

Antidepressants are one case in point. Aggressive "education" of doctors made these drugs blockbusters for pharma while side-effects were downplayed. They were widely recommended for pediatric populations before we had data showing safety in this group. Evidence now suggests antidepressant benefits were actually far more modest than advertised -- and they increased suicides in young people. The book Anatomy of an Epidemic carefully deconstructs the long tr ail of biased science, "bought" researchers and "captured" regulatory agencies that fueled record drug company profits, while sacrificing untold numbers of citizens who fell prey to pharma's scheme. That book is a must read for anyone who cares about public health -- because too many pubic servants are acting like pharma's interests are OUR interests and can be trusted. (Note: after writing this post, I was watching this video --and 10 min in learned about how a medical doctor/Pam Popper's business partner, nearly lost his medical license for appearing on the Oprah show and voicing his opinion that psychological problems were NOT caused by chemical imbalances and no one should take antidepresants.)

So given that history, it should concern everyone, that bills that will increase pharma profits by eliminating informed consent for ALL the recommended vaccines (and there are a lot of them with a lot more in the pipeline) are right now flooding state legislatures. What most people don't know, is that we already had creeping financial incentives from insurance companies that reward doctors who have practices with a high compliance among their patients getting every single vaccine that is recommended.

Could it get any worse?

Yes.

What if Congress passed a law that, gave drug companies complete immunity if their products injured or maimed citizens? Of course to make such a crazy thing more palatable to the public, they would have to include in such a law something that says Health and Human Services would have the task of overseeing the safety on these products and that they would be charged with filing a report every two years discussing what they were doing to assure that these products were being made as safely as possible...

Imagine if a car manufacturer could NOT be sued if someone died because their car brakes were poorly designed or data on crash tests had been fudged to make a car appear safer than it really was....How safe do you think our automobiles would be?

In fact, in 1986, Congress passed the National Vaccine Injury Act, which gave complete immunity to pharmaceutical companies when vaccines injured or killed children. And HHS was tasked with overseeing vaccine safety -- but we now know HHS did not do their job...NOT ONE TIME in over thirty years!

But, as a result of the 1986 law, vaccine companies were incentivized to rush to market with as many new, poorly tested vaccines as possible. None of these vaccines got tested to see if they might harm the immune system, trigger allergies or autoimmune diseases, or cause cancer...not only that, much of the short term safety testing that was done didn't even use a TRUE CONTROL. In fact overall, I have tell you that the "science" they are using to tell us these new vaccines are safe is pretty terrible, HHS has not been doing their job, you can't sue if vaccines hurt your child and oh -- more and more are being mandated for school entry. As a result vaccines are poised to be pharma's best cash cow yet -- and that's saying a lot for an industry that is one of the most powerful in the world (and also has an egregious record of fraud and misconduct.)

It's no surprise given these facts, that growing numbers of parents -- who either witnessed a vaccine reaction in one of their children or heard about someone being tragically harmed by a vaccine, are doing their own research and choosing to NOT do one or more of the recommended vaccines because the risk/benefit of THAT vaccine does not make sense for THEIR child.

Following introduction of the chickenpox vaccine, I met parents who told me that after getting this vaccine for their child, she came down with SHINGLES -- a disease far worse than chickenpox, which was unheard of in children before the chicken pox vaccine was introduced. But soon Chicken pox joined the others as a required vaccine in most states.

Perhaps the worst of all vaccines -- in terms of the risk/benefit for children in wealthy countries is the HPV vaccine. If you have access to the PAP test, you can prevent almost all cervical cancer -- making this vaccine pretty unnecessary. However the HPV vaccine uses a powerful new adjuvant that some science suggests is quite dangerous for some children. An entire meticulously researched book well-referenced to the scientific literature deconstructs the egregious conflicts of interest that paved the way for this vaccine to become recommended -- and even mandated in 3 states. Check out The HPV Vaccine on Trial if you would like to see for yourself what the science really says and how many whistle-blowers have been attacked for trying raise awareness about the shoddy science and terrible safety testing that supposedly showed this vaccine was safe and effective. When a member of the once highly esteemed Cochrane Collaboration failed to fall in-line with pressure to ignore half the published science on the HPV vaccine it led to his firing and then mass resignations of the Cochrane board in protest. And even if you don't have kids this issue could impact you. It appears the CDC is about to recommend this vaccine now for people in the 20s, 30s and 40s. And I know adults who have been forced to get vaccines as conditions of holding on to their jobs.

But it gets even worse. Pharma shills (and those caught in their cult-like mind control) have become impatient with states who still allow parents to refuse a vaccine they don't want for their child. (including in some states the HPV vaccine which has not only harmed many kids, but is for a disease that is not spread by casual contact -- so it cannot be argued that someone eschewing that vaccine poses a threat in a public setting...yet they are claiming that as justification for forcing our young people to get it.

Next week the federal government will be having hearings to consider new federal mandates that will override state laws that do allow parents the right of informed consent on behalf of their child. This would be a travesty of justice -- and I believe would materially harm many children.

Please contact your elected representatives and let them know how much you care about maintaining medical freedom. This page has more information.

I am a microbiologist and I have looked at a lot of the science, and I can tell you that the risk/benefit ratio of every single vaccine varies a lot from one to another...and it varies from one child to another as well. Chickenpox and Diphtheria are not equally dangerous diseases and Hepatitis B does not pose an equal threat to all populations. Parents are not stupid, and when they actually look at the facts and discover that the reasons to vaccinate do not apply equally to all vaccines -- AND that some children really do die or become disabled from vaccines (far more than our media admits too -- that's why the government gave vaccine manufacturers immunity.) THAT is what is undermining our vaccine program -- it's the half truths and the coercion -- not the parent's doing their job and trying hard to make the best decision for their child. No one cares more about the well-being of any individual child, nor appreciates that child's unique family history and environment than that child's parents. That is why parents, not doctors and not the state, must be allowed the basic human right of informed consent and the right to refuse any medical intervention after considering the risks and benefits for their child.

The death rate from infectious disease in America, declined sharply BEFORE vaccines were in widespread use -- and as vaccines for specific illnesses were being introduced the death rate between those we vaccinated for and those we did not (like scarlet fever, TB, Typhoid, Typhus, Malaria) mostly declined at similar rates suggesting that other public health measures (like sanitation) were more responsible for declining death rates than vaccines. So we take away informed consent for vaccines, it will be much easier to take away informed consent for other medical interventions where a stronger argument of saving more lives can probably be made (like putting statins in the drinking water.)

Informed consent is a basic human right. Taking it away on top of giving drug companies immunity if their products injure is a very very bad idea.

1 Comment

<<Previous

How well does CDC's statement reflect the published evidence?

Their slogan says, "Dedicated to the health of all children." But after looking at this March 10 article on this page, (screen shot below) I think it would be more truthful if their slogan was, "Dedicated to the fiscal health of all pharma shareholders."

But the CDC in this report put the number at more than double that, at 11 cases per million doses:

Meanwhile the government's own passive reporting system (which a previous analysis by Harvard suggested only captures a tiny fraction of injuries reported following a vaccine) shows these numbers as of April 2, 2021:

Categories

But the CDC in this report put the number at more than double that, at

11 cases per million doses: