7 Government Health Tips That Could Land You In A Nursing ... · 7 Government Health Tips That Could Land You In A Nursing Home 15 Soy is a Health Food The rise of soy products sold

7 Government Health Tips That Could Land You In A Nursing Home 1


7 Government Lies That Are Destroying Your Health

In North America, we are brought up to be good little citizens, following a ‘script’ that society has written for us. It starts with being born in a hospital, then going to school, getting a job, going to the doctor when we get sick, and of course paying taxes until we die. It’s practically programmed into us that this is the right way to live and is the best for our health.

But what if the government has us trained to fit into a system that doesn’t actually have our best interests in mind.

What if following the government’s program is actually making us sicker and fatter than ever, and just driving us into the ground. All while Big Pharma and Big Agriculture steeple their fingers and laugh as the money rolls in. Money made off of unsuspecting regular people like you and I who are just trying their best to get by.

Get ready for a rude awakening, because I’m here to tell you that no one has your back. To the big corporations and institutions, you’re just a drop in the bucket. In order to stay healthy, you must think critically, educate yourself and take your health into your own hands.

Here are 7 health and nutrition lies perpetuated by the government and large corporations. I believe that these lies are many of the reasons why our population is sicker, fatter, less fertile and more mentally unwell than ever before.1

1 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/02/25/mainstream-nutrition-biggest-lies.aspx


The Medical Institution and FDA are Taking Care of You and Your Family

These days, most of us put our trust entirely in our family doctors. From the moment we emerge from the womb in the hospital and are given a vitamin K shot and antibiotic eyedrops within minutes of being born, until the time we get ‘age-related’ aches and pains and start popping our daily pills, we rely on medical doctors to fix us when we are sick.

This is entirely different from attitudes a few generations ago, when our great-grandparents had deeply ingrained knowledge about nutrition and health. They may not have used advanced surgical techniques or antibiotics, but each individual had a respectable knowledge of home remedies that would naturally encourage the healing of many, if not most, ailments.

The medical profession only became clearly defined a couple of centuries ago, and since then medical doctors have routinely defamed other types of healthcare professions so that they could create a monopoly over the field.

The American Medical Association was founded in the United States in 1847 as a trade lobby, which had been organized for the purpose of stifling competition and driving the homeopaths (and eventually chiropractors) out of business. By the early 1900s, the AMA began to achieve this goal, convincing the public that the MDs were the only ones to be trusted, and calling other wellness professionals ‘quacks’.

A distinctive feature of the AMA’s allopathic school of medicine was its constant self-advertisement and promotion of the myth that its type of medicine was the

Deadly Government Myth #1


only one which was effective. This also created the figure of the medical doctor as “a person of absolute infallibility, whose judgment must never be questioned.”2

Fast-forward to today, where these corrupt methods have successfully convinced most of the Western world that allopathic medicine is the only way to heal from illness.

The problem is that modern medicine is not always safe. In fact, it’s far from it.

Despite the AMA’s claims of improving medical care, records show that the state of American health is declining. According to integrative health expert Dr. Joseph Mercola, “the modern American medical system has bumbled its way into becoming the leading cause of death and injury in the United States”.

A definitive and comprehensive review of the medical industry by five MDs and PhDs found that “American medicine frequently causes more harm than good.”3

They published these staggering statistics:• The annual number of people having in-hospital, adverse drug reactions to

prescribed medicine is 2.2 million.• Dr. Richard Besser, of the CDC, in 1995, said the number of unnecessary

antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections was 20 million. Antibiotics don’t work on viruses, but they are prescribed by doctors ‘just in case’ when the doctor doesn’t know what else to do. We know that repeated antibiotic use comes with many side effects. Besser later said he estimated this number had multiplied many times over by 2003.

• The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million.

• The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million.

• The total number of iatrogenic deaths (deaths caused by medical care) is nearly 800,000.

2 http://www.whale.to/b/mullins32.html 3 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2003/11/26/death-by-medicine-part-one.aspx


• From the preceding statistic, it is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the United States, since the 2001 heart disease annual death rate was 699,697; the annual cancer death rate, 553,251.

We tend to blindly trust the pharmaceutical manufacturers and the pharmacists and doctors who recommend drugs for us and for our children. We believe that since these have been tested by the FDA and are recommended by our doctor or hospital staff, they must be safe.

However, according to an article from the American Journal of Nursing, most drugs are never actually tested on children, but end up being used on them anyway.

The article explains that, “the great majority of medications are developed in concentrations appropriate for adults; therefore, pediatric indications and dosage guidelines often aren’t included with a medication”.

It seems that the industry we trust so readily is basically leaving the safety of drugs for children entirely up to chance. They will release a drug on minimal evidence at best, and wait for problems to arise afterward. It should be noted that most people don’t report issues experienced with medication, since we are trained not to question the medical profession.

“Many of the medications of benefit to children in emergency situations and in the treatment of certain diseases have been approved by the FDA only for use in adults. Testing of these medications in children has been thwarted by several barriers inherent to research in children (for example, ethical concerns about using children as clinical trial subjects, the necessity of obtaining parental consent, and the difficulty of enrolling a sufficient number of children).” 4

4 http://www.nursingcenter.com/lnc/JournalArticle?Article_ID=582832


Dianne Murphy, M.D., director of the FDA’s Office of Pediatric Therapeutics says, “Most pediatric clinical trials involve a relatively small number of patients, and problems might not be detected until the products are in widespread use. And a drug or device might be studied in one pediatric age group, but prescribed and used in another age group in which it has not been studied.”5

The FDA website also openly states that many therapies are developed for adults and then used in children without having been studied in children.

As of 2008, only an estimated 50 to 60 percent of prescription drugs used to treat children had been studied in some part of the pediatric population. The likelihood that any medicine has actually been studied in newborns less than a month old is close to zero.6

These frightening facts should at least encourage you to do your own research before trusting the care of your family to your doctor or hospital.

5 http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm339672.htm6 http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm164427.htm


GMOs are Safe for Human Consumption

Government sources and large-scale agriculture supporters claim that GMO crops are the only way to feed the rapidly increasing population of the earth. They even claim that GMOs reduce the amount of pesticides used by the agricultural industry.

But independent researchers with no industry ties have poked holes in these claims.

A new report from Pennsylvania State University has discredited long-time claims by pro-GMO corporations that GMO crops allow for reduced use of agricultural chemicals.

The authors of the study point out that those who claim GMO crops have decreased insecticide use “do not seem to have considered seed treatments, and so may have overstated [the alleged] reductions in insecticide use.”

This is referring to the large category of insecticides called neonicotinoids, which are applied directly to seeds and then get dispersed throughout the plant’s stem, leaves, flowers and pollen as the plant grows.

These treatments were not previously taken into account in mainstream pro-GMO reporting. However this new study indicates that, when neonicotinoids are included, the trends show a major increase in the amount of US cropland treated with toxic chemicals since the mid-2000s.

These chemicals could be considered even more harmful than those that are



sprayed or surface-applied in the more traditional fashion, since they literally pervade every cell of the plant.

Neonicotinoids have been demonstrated to have high toxicity to bees, butterflies and other pollenating insects. The EU has severely limited their use due to the evidence that they harm bee colonies, while the US has not mandated any limitations.

Neonicotinoids have also been known to harm human embryo cells, having been found in the blood of pregnant women and umbilical cord blood.

• Glyphosate is present in unusually high quantities in the breast milk of American mothers, at anywhere from 760 to 1,600 times the allowable limits in European drinking water.

• Urine testing shows Americans have ten times the glyphosate accumulation as Europeans.7

• A recent study shows that pregnant women living near farms where pesticides are applied have a 60% increased risk of children having an autism spectrum disorder.

Stephanie Seneff, PhD, is a senior research scientist at MIT, has researched biology and technology for over 30 years and has published over 170 scholarly peer-reviewed articles. She recently stated she believes that: “At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic” due to the effects of the heavy use of Roundup (glyphosate) on GMO crops.

She noted that the side effects of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity, and presented data showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the use of Roundup on crops (and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds) with rising rates of autism.8

7 http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/mit-researcher-glyphosate-herbicide-will-cause-half-of-all-children-to-have-autism-by-2025/ 8 http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/mit-researcher-glyphosate-herbicide-will-cause-half-of-all-children-to-have-autism-by-2025/


Yet corporations promoting GMO crops assert that pesticides embodied in crops are safe. The FDA’s policy is to rely on the sellers to verify the ‘safety’ of their product. Because of this attitude, GMOs are extremely common in our food supply.

Since over 90 percent of all corn grown in the US is genetically engineered, as is over 95 percent of soy, this means that virtually every processed food you encounter at your local supermarket that does not bear the “USDA Organic” label likely contains one or more GMO components.

To avoid genetically-engineered foods, keep the following list in mind, and check ingredient lists for additives.

• Corn • Canola • Alfalfa• Soy • Cottonseed • Sugar derived from sugar beets• Zucchini• Crookneck squash• Hawaiian papaya

What ultimate impact these foods will have on your health is still unknown, but increased disease, infertility and birth defects appear to be on the top of the list of most likely side effects.

Why take a chance? Do your research, and make the effort to feed your family clean, whole foods, rather than poorly tested GMOs promoted by reckless profiteers.


Saturated Fat & Cholesterol Cause Obesity and Heart Disease

A few generations ago, hearty farm-dwellers happily dined on butter, eggs, cheese and red meat, and thrived with non-existent rates of heart disease, diabetes or obesity. The government’s recommendations to cut down on saturated fat and cholesterol correspond precisely with the beginning of the rise of these epidemic conditions.

The dangerous recommendation to cut out an entire macronutrient group, which arose from an unproven hypothesis dating in the mid-1950s, has been harming your health and that of your loved ones for about 40 years now. We have become scared of the word ‘fat’, thinking that any we consume goes straight to our hips and to clog our arteries.

This is very far from the truth. Here is the truth about saturated fats:

• Fats provide an excellent dense source of energy which ‘burns cleanly’ in the body

• They provide the building blocks for cell membranes and a variety of hormones and hormone-like substances, without which your body cannot function optimally

• They also act as carriers for important fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E and K • Dietary fats are needed for the conversion of carotene to vitamin A, for

mineral absorption, and for a host of other biological processes.

Thanks to flawed science promoted by the medical and governmental establishments, the common recommendation is for people to get 45–65 percent



of their calories from carbohydrates, 20-35 percent from fat, and 10-35 percent from protein.

This dietary structure has been proven by many sociological studies to be inverse to a traditional diet which supports good health. There are many other problems with the governmental recommendations, especially the fact that most carbohydrates are recommended to come from grains and cereals. The fat recommendation is usually from vegetable oil or canola oil, and the protein is frequently emphasized from non-animal sources such as soy.

Multiple experts have proven that these are actually very harmful recommendations. Most people benefit from 50-70 percent healthful fats in their diet for optimal health, whereas you need very few carbohydrates to maintain good health. Grains, vegetable oils and soy are not healthy sources of nutrition.

The low-fat myth may have done more harm to the health of millions than any other dietary recommendation. The resulting low-fat craze led to increased consumption of sugar and grains, which we now know increases inflammation and goes hand-in-hand with your risk of obesity, diabetes and heart disease—the very health problems wrongfully attributed to saturated fats.

If you’re wondering why the government would ever have promoted such harmful dietary guidelines, have a look at which crops receive all the subsidy money. These are wheat, canola, corn and soy! It’s clear that the government’s nutritional guidelines are in large part mirrored by these same agricultural subsidies, rather than being built upon sound nutritional science.

In short, the reason you’re told to make grains the cornerstone of your diet is because that’s what farmers are paid to grow in the US. This means that grains are artificially plentiful and inexpensive compared to healthier foods like vegetables, for which few subsidies are offered.9

9 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/06/22/food-pyramid-guide.aspx


Although the governmental nutrition guidelines on fat and cholesterol were finally changed in early 2015, this will take years or even decades to trickle through to healthcare practitioners, food producers, supermarkets and the public. For now, we still see “Fat free!” labels plastered all over food packaging and advertisements.

Recently, even after the new fat recommendations, a popular brand of healthy granola bar was forced to remove health claims by the FDA. This was because the bar contains more than 1 gram of saturated fat. This fat comes from natural nuts which are a main ingredient of the bar.10

If even the FDA has not adopted the new fat & cholesterol consumption recommendations yet, it is frustrating to imagine how long it will be before the average person stops being afraid of fat. In the meantime, millions, or even billions of people have been harmed by decades of depriving their bodies of natural dietary fats needed for healthy cells and hormones and a functioning brain.

If it took the government a whole generation to realize the mistake they made with fat and cholesterol, imagine what else they may be telling us to do which is detrimental to our health.

This is why it’s wise to think critically about mainstream recommendations. Stick with an ancestral diet that is nutrient-dense, and certainly not fat-free, but fad-free!

10 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/14/fda-kind-bars_n_7066704.html


Artificial Sweeteners Are Safer Than Sugar

Since increased consumption of sugar and high fructose corn syrup has caused so many widespread health problems, food producers and the government have told us that artificial sweeteners are safe sugar replacements and help promote weight loss.

However, we shouldn’t forget that these are actually false chemicals that trick our brains into tasting sweetness.

Most people use artificial sweeteners to lose weight, or because they’re diabetic and need to avoid sugar. The amazing irony is that studies indicate those who use artificial sweeteners actually gain more weight than those who consume regular sugar. Studies have also revealed that artificial sweeteners can be more metabolically harmful than sugar for diabetics.

In 2005, data gathered from the 25-year long San Antonio Heart Study showed that drinking diet soft drinks increased the likelihood of serious weight gain, far more so than regular soda.

On average, each diet soft drink the participants consumed per day increased their risk of becoming overweight by 65% within the next seven to eight years, and made them 41% more likely to become obese.

There are several potential causes for this, including:• Sweet taste alone appears to increase hunger, regardless of caloric

content.



• Artificial sweeteners perpetuate a craving for sweets, and overall sugar consumption is therefore not reduced—leading to further problems with weight control.

• Artificial sweeteners may disrupt the body’s natural ability to sense when enough has been consumed and produce a sense of satisfaction.

There are also a large number of health dangers associated with artificial sweeteners and aspartame in particular.

Until recently, most sugar substitutes were thought to pass through the gut undigested, contributing no calories and no effect on the digestive system.

However, studies in animals and humans have found that artificial sweeteners influence the gut microbiome and incite changes that have been associated with diseases such as obesity and diabetes.11

Not only was gut bacteria negatively affected, but mice consuming the sweeteners saccharin, sucralose or aspartame had elevated glucose levels in their blood after eating. This indicates that consuming sweet-tasting substances is not innocuous but rather interferes with metabolism and digestive signalling. Stored glucose is still released into the blood because the body expects it when it tastes sweetness.

This is just another example of how profit-driven government-supported food industries are willing to sell products in the mainstream market without sufficient long-term testing to ensure they are safe for our health.

11 http://www.sciencenews.org/article/artificial-sweeteners-may-tip-scales-toward-metabolic-problems


Soy is a Health Food

The rise of soy products sold as health foods is another example of how government subsidies created a false excess of a crop which has then been cleverly marketed to the masses.

Contrary to popular belief, thousands of studies have actually linked unfermented soy to malnutrition, digestive distress, immune-system breakdown, thyroid dysfunction, cognitive decline, reproductive disorders and infertility—even cancer and heart disease.

It is assumed that people in Asian countries consume a lot of soy, and since they are thin, soy must be healthy. It is important to note that people in these countries do not consume as much soy as we assume they do. In fact, in most places, soy based foods are served as a condiment, not a main course and not as a replacement for animal protein.

In addition, these foods are fermented or traditionally prepared, which minimizes the harmful factors. Soy-based foods are also traditionally consumed with seaweed or broth, which both have high nutrient concentration and can help mitigate the harmful effects of the soy.12

However, the way it is eaten in North America leaves all of the harmful properties intact. Soy is a legume, and as such, has the same harmful components that other beans do. Some other harmful properties of soybeans include:

• Soybeans contain phytoestrogens, which mimic the body’s natural estrogen hormones. For men, this can lead to a testosterone imbalance, infertility,

12 http://wellnessmama.com/3684/is-soy-healthy/



low sperm count, and increased risk of cancers. For women, it can cause estrogen dominance, which has been linked to infertility, menstrual troubles and cancer.

• These phytoestrogens are so strong that a baby consuming only soy formula is consuming the equivalent hormones of 4 birth control pills a day!

• The high levels of phytic acid in soy inhibit the body’s ability to absorb important vitamins and minerals, including vitamin D, vitamin B12, zinc, calcium, copper, iron and magnesium (which many people are dangerously deficient in already).

• Soy also contains protease inhibitors, which can block the enzymes that are necessary for the digestion of certain proteins.

• The goitrogens in soy are potent anti-thyroid compounds that can lead to endocrine disruption and thyroid disorders. Infants on soy formula have a much higher risk of autoimmune thyroid disease.

• Soy is often promoted as an alternative food for celiac and gluten intolerant people, but its lectins can be harmful to the intestines and prevent healing even when gluten is removed.

• Over 90 percent of American soy crops are genetically modified, which adds many other risks to the consumption of North American soy products.

In addition to being harmful to our bodies, soy production is harmful to the planet and to livestock who eat it as well.

Genetically modified soybeans are “Round-up ready” which means they contain a gene that allows them to be directly sprayed with pesticides without dying. This mutation means that soybeans can be (and are) sprayed with large amounts of pesticides and herbicides during their cultivation.

Animals who are fed soy can suffer many of the same health consequences as people who consume too much soy, and these harmful properties are then passed on in the meat we eat.

If you are going to eat soy, make sure it is organic and traditionally processed.


13 http://drhyman.com/blog/2010/08/06/how-soy-can-kill-you-and-save-your-life/#close

Say no to processed soy. That includes soy protein isolate and concentrates, genetically engineered soy foods (typically made from Monsanto’s Roundup soybeans), soy supplements, and soy junk foods like soy cheese, soy ice cream, soy oil, and soy burgers. They are processed, and contain unhealthy fats and other additives.13

It’s clear that the subsidizing and promotion of the soy industry has negatively influenced much of our food system, poisoning our meat and encouraging increased use of pesticides. We should think again about trusting out health and wellbeing to a government that brazenly promotes careless practices causing widespread pollution and disease.


Fluoride is Good for Your Teeth

Beginning in the 1950s, the American government began adding fluoride to public water sources, based on shaky science that fluoride helps fight tooth decay.

To this day, there has never been a proper randomized trial done on the ‘benefits’ of fluoride for tooth decay.14 All the while, the debate over the dangers of fluoride has been continuing for more than six decades.

During this time, anti-fluoride activists have publicized numerous studies confirming that fluoride is a dangerous, toxic poison that bio-accumulates in the body while being ineffective at preventing dental decay.

Alongside this debate, it has been observed that tooth decay rates have declined in recent decades, regardless of whether the water was fluoridated. According to data from the World Health Organization, the US, which fluoridates about two-thirds of public water supplies, actually has higher rates of tooth decay than many countries that do not fluoridate their water, including Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Sweden.

Here are some of the main negative effects of fluoridated water:• Fluoride is not a nutrient and is not required for any body processes.• Once fluoride is added to the water supply, there is no way of controlling

the dose; it goes to everyone regardless of age, weight, health, need, or nutritional status. It’s like force-feeding every baby, child, man and woman the same amount of vitamin C every day. Even the simplest common sense shows that this is not logical.

14 http://www.livescience.com/37123-fluoridation.html



• Fluoride accumulates in bone and other calcified tissues over a lifetime; early symptoms of fluoride poisoning of the bones are identical to arthritis, and fluoride accumulation may make bones brittle and prone to fracture

• There are 37 human studies linking modest fluoride exposures with reduced intelligence (nine of these studies found lowered IQ at less than 3 ppm in the water) and 12 human studies linking fluoride with neurobehavioral deficits. There are also three human studies linking fluoride exposure with impaired fetal brain development, and approximately 100 animal studies linking it to brain damage.

• Drinking fluoride doesn’t prevent cavities. Fluoride isn’t a natural building block of teeth. It does encourage minerals to build up on the teeth, but this build-up is different from the natural remineralization that teeth can create to heal themselves. Dental caries are not caused by a lack of fluoride, just as depression is not caused by a lack of Prozac.15

• Fluoride has been shown to be mutagenic, cause chromosome damage and interfere with the enzymes involved with DNA repair in a variety of studies.16

There isn’t much evidence FOR the use of fluoride, and there is plenty against. Why does the government continue to force-feed us this deadly substance through our water?

15 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/07/01/water-supply-fluoridation.aspx 16 http://www.slweb.org/50reasons.html


Vaccinations are Good for Everyone

Public health officials have long insisted that vaccines are the best way to protect public health. As a result, the number of doses of vaccines included in the childhood vaccination schedule has tripled over the past 30 years, from 23 doses of seven different vaccines in 1980 to 69 doses of 16 different vaccines in 2010.17

However, alongside the rise in the number of vaccines, there has also been a significant rise in children with chronic disease and disabilities. Infant mortality has also risen. More full term babies die before their first birthday in the US than in most European countries, and the US gives its infants more vaccines than any other country in the world.

So, could it all be a coincidence? The truth is, we don’t know.

No one has formally and independently studied the health outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children. As a nation, the U.S. is gambling the health of its citizens on assumptions and information straight from the mouths of those raking in the profits from selling vaccines.18

Furthermore, the mass vaccination program takes a one-size-fits-all strategy approach. It does not acknowledge that we are all individuals with different predispositions and health status, which can play a significant role in how we react to vaccines or prescription drugs.

Some other countries have made changes to their vaccine policies:

17 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/11/16/the-greater-good.aspx18 http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/judge-lawsuit-against-mercks-mmr-vaccine-fraud-to-continue/



• In 1975, Japan raised its minimum vaccination age to 2 years old.19 The country’s infant mortality subsequently plummeted, and Japan is now the third lowest in the Western world.20 In comparison, the United States’ infant mortality rate is #33.

• In Australia, the flu vaccine was suspended as of 2010 for children under 5 because an alarming number of children were showing up in the emergency rooms with febrile convulsions or other vaccine reactions within hours of getting this shot.21

Yet the US government continues to ignore these decisions made by other progressive governments, and sticks to the party line of pro-vaccines. Vaccines are not always safe or beneficial, especially not in the large amounts they are currently dosed to children and infants. This is just another reckless way the government puts our health in danger.

Hopefully this report has opened your eyes and encouraged you to educate yourself. This will only help you feel more empowered to take care of the health of yourself and your family!

Don’t just trust the government lies; think for yourself, and thrive.

19 http://www.vaclib.org/basic/japanusa.htm 20 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate 21 http://www.news.com.au/national/parents-hammer-hotline-as-250-adverse-flu-jab-reactions-reported/story-e6frfkvr-1225858600384


Documents

7 Government Health Tips That Could Land You In A Nursing ... · 7 Government Health Tips That Could Land You In A Nursing Home 15 Soy is a Health Food The rise of soy products sold