The article below has to be regarded as a natural cure for lung cancer. D.H was diagnosed with terminal lung cancer in 2000. As of April 2004 he managed an overall decrease in lung  cancer tumor mass by about 90 percent.

by Gang Wu

Ron Pardini is not a medical doctor. Yet he is seen as a hero by his cancer-stricken neighbor, “D.H.” Pardini helped the 78-year-old after D.H. was  diagnosed with terminal lung cancer.

“In 2000 he was told by his doctor he had only a few months to live,” said Pardini, a professor of biochemistry and associate director of the Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station at the University of Nevada, Reno. “But five years later, he is still alive, and has even gained a little weight.”

The cancerous tumors found in D.H.’s lungs have shrunk to 10 percent of what they were in 2000, according  to last year’s computed tomography (CT) scans.

What worked with DH is not a common medical treatment such as chemotherapy or surgical excision. It was a nutritional intervention, drastically increasing the patient’s intake of omega-3 fatty acids, which are often found in fish oil or golden algae oil.

Pardini’s previous research showed that omega- 3 fatty acids significantly depressed the growth of human mammary, ovarian, colon, prostate and pancreatic cancer cells that were injected into athymic mice—also known as nude mice

His studies  also demonstrated that fish oil consumption improves a mouse’s responsiveness to chemotherapy.

Fish oil research was  inspired by observations that Inuit Eskimo populations have less breast and prostate cancer deaths.

So far, though, most studies in this country are limited to animal models, but a case study about D.H., which was published in the recent issue of the Nutrition and Cancer journal, could be a major step forward for human clinical trials.

While beginning to take high dose of fish oil and golden algae oil capsules daily, D.H. also reduced  corn-based foods from his diet. Corn contains omega- 6 fatty acids that Pardini said are found to increase cancer growth.

Pardini is optimistic of what his findings may  contribute to cancer treatment.

“We ha ve good evidence for employing nutritional interventions to improve cancer treatment and patient well-being,” he said.

Pardini wants to be able to provide viable non-toxic,  over-the-counter solutions for the numerous people with fear of cancer in the back of their minds.

The Nutrition and Cancer article is co-authored by Nevada nutrition Professor David Wilson and University of Nevada medical school Professors, Steven Schiff, Stephen Bajo and Randall Pierce.

­A new political era without Democrats and Republicans is being born
­Congressm­an Ron Paul and presidential candidate Ralph Nader.

by Marvin Ramírez

While the mainstream media keep the people living in an illusion with yellow journalism images and entertainment mockery that make many believe that everything is fine in the country – a movement of people denouncing that everything is really not alright, is unfolding.

Three third-party candidates, Congressman Ron Paul, vice presidential candidate and former San Francisco Supervisor Matt González and John Dennis, 8th Congressional District  candidate, will stage a big rally from 2 to 4 p.m. in San Francisco Civic Center on Sept. 4, which promises to be the beginning of a united front against the status quo and the monopoly of politics by a multi-millionaire elite.

It will be a non-partisan, antiwar, anti-Washington and anti-incumbency free speech rally, and is expected to attract a big crowd of Green Party, Republicans and Independents members and sympathizers from many parts or the country.

This denunciation includes violation of the Constitution (Patriot Act, FISA), illegal wars, usurpation of the basic human and bill of rights of the people, taxation without representation, an imposed police state that mostly serves to collect taxes for the international bankers and not serve the people, and the advent and consolidation of a new world government to control the masses and enslave North Americans through the United Nations and the current corrupt banking system.

This enslavement, activists say, is conducted via the private Federal Reserve Bank, owned by the International Monetary Fund, a foreign corporation. Paul wants just that, to take away the power to printing the currency from a private bank and give it back to the government, including the introduction of a new bill to audit the U.S. gold reserves, which are reportedly stored at the New York Federal Reserve and Fort Knox.

Currently, the Federal Reserve Bank prints the paper money (the dollar), which is backed by nothing, and then loans it to the government with interest  – while the people pay the interest. He believes that by having the government to start issuing money, it will eliminate all interest rates that everyone, including the government, now pay on all loans when purchasing automobiles, student loans, real estate, etc.

Paul has championed the cause to remove the Federal Reserve Bank as the issuer of money for a longtime, and has submitted legislation to Congress for it, but it has failed to pass. This would also eliminate the national debt and save the nation from an eminent economic collapse.

“Today’s coming together of third party candidates marks the beginning of the realignment of American politics,” said Green Party leader Ralph Nader, while criticizing the current two-party political system funded by the same money donors that holds a monopoly of the entire U.S.  political system.

“The strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two-party system (Democratic and Republican), which in reality is a one-party system with no possible chance for the changes to occur which are necessary to solve our economic and foreign policy problems,” Paul said in an interview.

“I think its important to build alliances, especially with others whom we may disagree with on other issues, in order to achieve the critical mass we need to truly end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and to keep these conflicts from expanding, as they currently are, into Yemen and Pakistan,” said vice presidential candidate and former San Francisco Supervisor Matt González in an interview to Fog City Journal.

And while many worry of the danger Paul is exposing himself to, with his political revolution challenging the bankers, he doesn’t seem to be dissuaded from his political goal to guarantee Americans their civil liberties, privacy rights, low taxes, low regulation while opposing the police state.

by Raisa Camargo

Editorial cartoonists delight in exaggerating the size of Barack Obama’s ears, but families being torn apart by federal immigration policies are wondering if he’s ever going to listen to them. In the latest attempt to repair the nation’s broken immigration system, more than 500 children paraded outside the White House on July 28 to prevent the deportation of their parents.

Elementary school students Jonathan Monterosa and Edgar, who didn’t reveal his last name, traveled from Chicago to stand and march for more than two hours under a blazing sun.

“We want to keep  ourfamily united,” Jonathan told Hispanic Link.

Edgar added that his father feared deportation as he described his personal terror — and he’d be left alone with nothing to eat.

An estimated four million children are citizens living in the United States, mostly born here to an undocumented parent, according to data collected in  2008 by the Pew HispanicCenter.

The number of children who risk losing their parents overwhelms the 400,000 persons the Immigration Customs and Enforcement Agency (ICE) anticipates deporting this fiscal year. That is nearly a 10 percent increase above the total in 2008 during the Bush administration.

Congressman Luis Gutiérrez of Illinois, speaking before the march, bared the empathy he felt for the children while stressing the importance of immigration reform to a crowd of more than 1,500 persons. He was arrested in May for civil disobedience along with 35 advocates in favor of the DREAM Act outside the White House.

“The next time I come to the White House and they shackle me, I am not going to bring $100 to pay the fine. If they let me go, I am coming back because of these innocent children,” Gutiérrez, who is Puerto Rican, said in Spanish. He repeated his promise severaltimes. “We are not going to permit leaving them without shelter, without justice and left in need of their parents’ love.”

Advocates and children representing organizations in states spread from coast to coast — Florida, Maryland, Illinois, Texas, Illinois, California — waved signs with slogans and wore shirts emblazonedwith such pleas as “Don’t Deport My Mom” and “It’s in your hands, Mr. President.”

Daisy Cuevas, the 7-year-old girl who told Michelle Obama this past spring about her mother’s undocumented status, energetically led the march.

The crowd shouted in unison, “¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido, Obama escucha, estamos en la lucha, aquí estamos y no nos vamos!”

Although the vibrant speeches captivated onlookers across the streets, for parents waiting on their deportation status, the march was more than just a gamble.

Viviana Oxlaj López worried about her six children’s wellbeing if she is deported back to Guatemala. She said her 10-yearold daughter was becoming ill thinking about the separation.  Hispanic Link.

sent by an anonymous author

A few days ago, Elena D’Angelo de Marcone, an Argentine lady of 86 years of age appeared in a public hearing of the Parliament of Tucumán to defend “with tooth and nail the family “  before the attempts to legalize the “marriage” between people of the same sex.

Doña Elena affected to the legislators and all present ones during one of the so many public hearings summoned by the Commission  of General Legislation of the Senate of the Nation, in order to know the opinion and desire the town of the provinces on controversial project of law that tomorrow will be put under voting.

“X X” for them? And that corresponding the psychological characteristics will accompany them until death? , it questioned.

Doña Elena considered that to give the force of law to the unions between people the same sex, “is like using a pair of shoes, both for the left foot, or both for the right foot. Is that how they spend their time?

Are the problems of those minorities are going to condition and change the healthy customs of the Argentine family? “It is possible that we are prepared to go to jail to deny to us to resign to our more expensive moral values? Or is that the laws are turned to so immense and absolute power that they make ever more useless the use of free will? You, men and women, Senators of the Nation are going away to make people in charge of so large felony?  Although in the House of Representatives this law already has been approved, you can still reflect and change history “, she reminded.

“Be that as it may,  they know one thing: the Argentine family lives,barks, and annoys in the belly of each generous and sacrificed mother, and in the heart of each male and courageous man who fights for life and to bring children into the world, or better, into the Mother country. This Mother country ours needs people and not of aborted children, nor drugs and ways to prevent births and less of these sterile pairs that form a culture of death! “, it added. See the problem of  gay marriage in the U.S.A.. http://www.gloria.tv/ ?media=79991

by Jorge Mujica Mexico del Norte

Some news this week… the Senate could hold hearings on the reform. Even more news, the hearings would be led, if they happen to happen, by four Republicans, led by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell along Jon  Kyl plus John McCain andLindsey Graham.

The last ones are, supposedly, about the only Republican Senators who support immigration reform… or at least used to… But the reform these Senators want hearings on is not immigration reform but the 14th Amendment reform. Our readers may wonder why Latinos should care if four Republican Senators discuss the U.S. Constitution, so let’s make it clear: if they change it, they could take away the citizenship status to millions of Latino and other immigrant’s kids.

The 14th Amendment is the one granting citizenship to all persons born between the line where Mexico ends and the line where Canada starts, plus a bunch of islands all over the planet and Alaska. It was approved on July 9, 1868, and it starts with  “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” It was approved to give citizenship to the sons and daughters of former slaves after the Civil War.

These Republicans say they wan to change it because, Lindsey Graham told Fox News “the birthright citizenship is a magnet for illegal aliens to the United States.” Graham added that it would be a move to stop something he calls “birth tourism, in which travel firms in China sell travel packages designed to allow pregnant women to give birth in the US.”. I can see the danger now! Can you imagine 100 million Chinese women coming to give birth in the U.S. each year? By 2015 we would be the Chinese United States!

In The Hands Of The Enemy

The argument is idiotic and the target here is not Chinese, but the sons and daughters of undocumented immigrants. Besides idiotic, it is not new. Back in 2008 the Republican Party discussed an amendment to the 14th

Amendment that read something like “To be a U.S. citizen you would need that at least one of your parents be a citizen of the United States and that neither of both have violated the immigration laws”. It was not approved under the consideration that it could harm John McCain’s presidential campaign…

To change the Constitution you need two thirds of the vote in each chamber in Congress, plus the approval of 34 state legislatures, meaning this amendment to the amendment is going nowhere except maybe …China or further away… As Republican delegates realized two years ago at their National Convention, taking away their citizenship to children of the undocumented would only increase the numbers of those in need of legalization to around 16 million instead of 12.

The question is, then, why proposing the amendment now? The answer is simple: elections.

It seems Republicans already decided Latino voters don’t decide anything. In other words, instead of trying to win back the Latino vote they have lost because of their anti immigrant politics, they are trying to win the white vote they lost in 2008 to Barack Obama. Wise strategy… in the short term, but Latinos will have more and more votes in a few years, so it is a short-sighted strategy for the long term. But obviously the issue here is not pregnant Chinese tourist and neither undocumented parents, but the U.S. perception of immigrants and how far to the right they can take the discussion of the immigration reform.

Democrats responded via Congressman José Serrano, who stated in an editorial that “the Constitution should never be changed for the worst”, and call the attention to the fact that the Republicans’ amendment would not affect undocumented immigrants but their U.S. citizen children, and that would be unconstitutional.

The only answer from the Obama administration came via Janet Napolitano, head of Homeland Security and therefore highest immigration authority, who declared herself “surprised” by the Republicans “they presented this idea instead of discussing immigration reform”. The bad part of her statement is that she added, “Immigration reform depends on the cooperation of the Republican Party. Democrats can’t do it themselves”.

To me that sounds like “immigration reform depends on the enemies of immigration reform”. It is to surrender. If Republicans do not deserve a single Latino vote, it looks to me like Democrats do not deserve a single one either…

México del Norte can read at: http: //mx.groups.yahoo.com/ group/mexicodelnorte/

by Jenny Thompson The Health Science Institute

A California researcher has called on the federal government to “step back on the amount of high fructose corn syrup in our diets.”

Right. I can see it now: Federal HFCS agents roaming grocery store aisles and hanging out beside soda machines where they’ll advise  consumers to step back on their HFCS consumption.

Or maybe this researcher– Dr. Anthony Heaney of UCLA–has something else in mind. Maybe he’s aware that the U.S. government has generously contributed to the HFCS boom by imposing high tariffs to discourage sugar imports, while subsidizing farms thatproduce the raw material for  HFCS: corn.

In any case, Dr. Heaney just wants to help cancer patients  live longer.

Can’t argue with that.

Cancer 101

When Dr. Heaney and his UCLA team recently exposed pancreatic cancer cells to fructose, they found that fructose prompted a dramatic growth of the malignant cells.

In the journal Cancer Research, they wrote, “These findings show that cancer cells can readily metabolize fructose to increase proliferation.” And even worse, they believe that fructose may have this effect on other types of cancer cells–not just pancreatic cancer.

Of course, the Corn Refiners Association immediately responded with a press release, calling the conclusions of the UCLA study “premature.”

Fair enough. After all, it was a lab study, and what happens in a Petri dish can be very different from what happens in the body.

Still, I’d be willing to bet a paycheck that further research will very likely show that fructose does play some sort of role in cancer cell proliferation. For two reasons: 1) HFCS intake has already been linked with increased pancreatic cancer risk, and 2) It’s all about sugar, which is 50% fructose and 50 percent glucose.

About 80 years ago, German Otto Warburg, Ph.D., showed that glucose is a potent fuel for cancer cell growth. And this wasn’t some harebrained theory. It was proof. And it won Dr. Warburg a Nobel Prize.

For decades, the medical community has been aware of the danger for cancer patients who eat foods with added sugars and refined simple carbohydrates. So for every cancer patient, this advice should be considered Cancer 101: Wean yourself from these foods, and then restrict consumption as much as possible.

As for high fructose corn syrup, if you have cancer, you can’t go wrong to avoid it completely. And if you don’t have cancer… well, you can’t go wrong to avoid it completely!

But whatever you do, don’t wait for the government to dream up some bureaucratic Rube Goldberg program designed to step back our HFCS intake.