Interesting to read that the American Academy of Neurology say chemotherapy is now known to destroy brain function:
Studies in breast cancer patients find rates of chemo brain ranging between 17 and 75 percent.
[One study of 42 women found] ..even nearly eight months after finishing chemo, 61 percent of patients continued to show cognitive decline, and nearly a third had developed new deficits.
Meanwhile, an imaging study found brain volume reductions in breast cancer survivors even 20 years after chemotherapy ended
Chemotherapy is not the only cancer treatment associated with cognitive problems. Chemo brain also occurs with targeted biologic therapies such as trastuzumab (Herceptin) and hormonal therapies, like tamoxifen.
One study found worse deficits in women who received chemotherapy followed by tamoxifen than in women who received chemotherapy only. The difference could be due to the anti-estrogen effects of tamoxifen, a hormone that is important for brain health.
They also conclude that even surgery can create “cognitive impairment” – another way to say “brain damage”:
Cognitive deficits can occur even in the absence of chemotherapy. A study in young men (average age of 31) with testicular cancer found that 40 percent exhibited cognitive impairment after surgery but before chemotherapy. The authors theorize that the deficits could be related to the effects of inflammatory cytokines (chemicals released by the body because of stress that can cause inflammation), which are associated with cognitive decline, or to an immune response to the cancer itself that damaged brain cells.
Unfortunately, to a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. So, rather than get patients to forego dangerous surgery and toxic chemical napalms in favour of lifestyle changes and natural approaches, the authors peer into their own patented chemical toolkit for an answer – and they might as well end up using a hammer:
Certain medications may also help. Physicians may prescribe psychostimulants like methylphenidate (Ritalin), certain antidepressants, or modafinil (Provigil) or armodafinil (Nuvigil), which are approved for excessive daytime sleepiness.
The way corporations make money is to come up with something they can protect by patents. And this means chemicals! So, ever since the takeover of medicine by corporations, every medical problem – whether real or perceived, whether caused by infections, degenerative diseases or our lifestyle – has been turned into a chemical problem. As soon as mental illness is defined as a chemical imbalance, in steps the salesman with some nifty chemicals to sort everything out.
The only problem is that tampering with the brain and body – both far more complex and nuanced than man understands at present – causes more problems than it solves. For example, it was reported this month that teenagers on antidepressants are twice as likely to attempt suicide. Like chemotherapy, it’s a supremely profitable business:
Prescribing antidepressants has become common practice, with 164 million prescriptions written for antidepressants in 2008. Sales of SSRIs, specifically, increased by 32 percent from 2000 to 2004, to a combined total of $10.9 billion.
The SSRIs are associated with a doubled risk of suicide, and the unnatural feeling of no longer being in control of your own brain causes suicide to be “a welcome alternative”:
In tests of Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Celexa, Lexapro and Luvox on children with major depressive disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder and other psychiatric disorders, about 4 percent of patients experienced suicidal thinking, behavior or attempts. In the placebo group, 2 percent of the participants experienced similar problems.
Antidepressants have also been linked to akathisia, which is extreme restlessness and an inability to sit still. The discomfort can be so great that suicide becomes a welcome alternative to feeling this type of agitation. Sometimes akathisia is misdiagnosed as worsening depression, so medication dosage is increased, causing the restlessness to persist.
At least one antidepressant can have a stimulant effect similar to amphetamines, which can lead to suicide. A Food and Drug Administration (FDA) official responsible for evaluating adverse drug effects during the approval process of Prozac repeatedly warned that the drug could have this effect.
Methylphenidate is a nervous system stimulant more or les indistinguishable from the widley-abused amphetamines. “Speed” was eventually classed as a highly addictive drug (or, in cotton wool language, one with “high abuse potential”) and its use steadily declined under the weight of the law and public opprobium. However, the chemical companies were not about to let a goldmine like that get filled in with sand.
Thus it followed that with a little rebranding and re-education of doctors, methylphenidate was marketed under the name Ritalin, and is dispensed so freely via doctors that in 1995, 10-12% of all boys between the ages of 6 and 14 in America were on it. Even GM-polluted Cheerios couldn’t boast that kind of success.
The backlash from this meant that companies selling this stuff had to foght back, so they started funding parent groups demanding its continued use:
The INCB is also concerned that the use of Ritalin is being actively promoted by an influential parent association, which has received significant financial contributions from the preparation’s leading United States manufacturer.
That was back in 1995. How about now? Well, in the last 20 years there has been a 30 fold increase in ADD meds, and currently four million children and teens in America are taking Ritalin right now.
What’s wrong with pouring chemicals into the brain? Plenty! Not only has nearly every one of Amercia’s recent mass shootings (apart from phoney staged events like Sandy Hook) been linked to anti depressants, here’s just a sample of the results of amphetamine-type drugs like Ritalin.
* Shawn Cooper, a 15-year-old sophomore at Notus Junior-Senior High School in Notus, Idaho, fired a shotgun at his fellow students in April. Cooper was on Ritalin.
* Thomas Solomon, a 15-year-old at Heritage High School in Conyers, Ga., shot and wounded six classmates in May. Solomon was on Ritalin.
* Kip Kinkel, a 15-year-old at Thurston High School in Springfield, Ore., killed his parents and two classmates and wounded 22 other students last year. Kinkel was on Ritalin and Prozac, an anti-depressant.
* Eric Harris, one of the Columbine High School killers, was on the anti-depressant drug Luvox. Luvox is prescribed for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and depression.
*Rod Matthews, 14, beat a classmate to death with a baseball bat in 1986 in Canton, Mass. Matthews had been on Ritalin since the third grade.
If anyone doubts the profitable nature of drugs, consider that only this month Pfizer was willing and able to bid $120 billion forAstrazeneca – a 45% mark up on Astrazeneca’s April share price – on the basis of the latter’s new chemical patents just around the corner. I’ve read that Astrazeneca is in charge of all breast cancer information literature produced by the supposedly impartial Cancer Society – and small wonder, with sums like this at stake. Pfizer itself is so profitable that one of their incentives for the takeover was shifting their accountancy base to the UK and saving $1,4 billion a year in taxes.
The bid failed because Astrazeneca claimed their new chemical stuff made the company worth much more than $120 billion. Weirdly, Astrazeneca account for 2% of all British exports. All this from a company selling chemicals via doctors! With massive funds like this changing hands, do you really think they want you to stay healthy?
If a chemical is so toxic that nobody in their right mind would ingest it – if it’s even used as rat poison – how to sell it? That’s easy! Put it in the water and tell people it prevents cavities! Sodium Fluoride and Hydrofluosilicic acid – both classed as highly unstable corrosive poisons – are added to the water in most of the USA and much of the UK. A recent Harvard study found that the IQ of children in fluroidated areas was significantly lower than in non-fluoridated areas – and it was the 30th study to find the same thing.
Fluoride makes no difference at all to cavities. Countries without it have the same or better states of dental health. The situation is quite the reverse: dentists in America are alarmed because children are turning up with their teeth eaten away by the continual, caustic action of fluoride swishing around the enamel.
But people aren’t easily dissuaded from something if a calm professional in a white lab coat recommends it, and of course bone-headed skeptics keep “making the case for fluoride”. It’s long been known that these chemical toxins and industrial waste sludges (which are not the naturally occuring fluoride or its anion, fluorine) accumulate in the bones and cause cancer, especially in children. And then? Well, congratulations – you’re now a customer for the cancer industry. Step right this way for some more chemicals!
When sneaking your chemicals into schools or bribing parents fails, the only thing for it is that last refuge of the scoundrel – government. Monsanto is facing a hefty backlash worldwide from people waking up to the idea of being poisoned by chemical stuff in colourful packaging.
They’ve had the assistance of the ever-corporate media in hushing all this up – a series of worldwide marches last week went completely unreported in the papers – but they’re not about to rely only on the largesse of paid hacks. This handy chart gives you some idea of how well fortified they are within the government of America:
If you’ve trusted me enough to read this far, you’re going to feel in need of some welcome news. So here it is! Apparently a recent study showed those who exhibit a greater sense of trust in others have a proportionately smaller chance of developing dementia:
Anna-Maija Tolppanen, one of the study’s authors and a professor at the University of Eastern Finland: “we have seen some studies that show people who are more open and optimistic have a lower risk for dementia so we thought this was a good question to ask.”
The study tested 1,449 people with an average age of 71. The study participants took a test for dementia. A separate test measured their level of cynicism. Both tests are considered reliable by researchers.
The cynicism test asks if the person agrees with statements like “Most people will use somewhat unfair reasons to gain profit or an advantage rather than lose it”; “I think most people would lie to get ahead”; and “It is safer to trust nobody.”
Those who agreed with the critical statements in the test were considered highly cynical. The people with the highest level of cynical distrust had a 2.54 times greater risk of dementia than those with the lowest cynicism rating.
That’s all for today – stay well!