Dr. Clark had several speeches and seminars at the Health Freedom Conference in Long Beach, CA. Below is a summary of her second speech. Her first speech was summarized in the last e-zine and the Syncrometer workshop will be in the next e-zine..
Dr. Clark started her second speech saying that she finds that lay people are generally more interested in what she has to say than clinicians because the interest in one's own health or the health of a loved one is greater than a professional interest.
There is a lot of talk about factors that cause cancer, and many people try to heed these and do everything they can to prevent cancer and yet they end up coming down with cancer. Dr. Clark calls that the "bankruptcy of our nation's understanding" of the issue.
Dr. Clark say that she discovered the real cause of cancer with the help of her Syncrometer as long as 15 or 20 years ago, rather by accident. At that time, a long list of carcinogens had already been known and the carcinogens were mostly part of what we could call an "industrialized lifestyle". That could lead us to think that progress equals more cancer, but Dr. Clark believes that progress is possible without cancer.
That requires knowing the true cause of cancer. And a list of carcinogens is not a definition of the true cause of cancer and the current definition of a cured cancer case, namely staying alive 5 years without a relapse, does nothing to pinpoint the problem any more either. But Dr. Clark found the factor that causes cancer by accident some 15 years ago, and for a long time thought that that was the most important thing she had achieved in her life.
When she did bio feedback testing with the Dermatron many years ago, she had the idea of testing for parasites. Since all wild animals had parasites, and even most pigs and cattle had parasites, then why should humans not have parasites? And furthermore, parasites can have many stages in their life cycle, as many as 20! And any of these could be in our bodies, even if the parasite does not complete the whole life cycle in our bodies.
Dr. Clark found out that when you remove the Fasciolopsis buski parasite, the cancer can't progress, and that is not the case when you remove any single one on the long list of carcinogens. Her patients could, after she treated this parasite, go back to the oncologist who then confirmed that the condition was now benign. That of course kept her going. Quite a few of the patients would get parasites again and then the malignancy would come back, but if the parasite was gone again, so was the malignancy.
Many brilliant treatments have been developed, many of which are available only in Mexico, and they are often based on brilliant theories and work quite well, such as vitamin A therapy or a therapy to suppress hcG which protects the tumor from the immune system. Her discovery was not a brilliant theory, it was just an accident.
Dr. Clark tested some parasites because she knew that AIDS patients often had Giardia. She would test them for Giardia but soon she tested every patient for the whole set of about 70 different parasites and realized that she got a positive result for F. buski from cancer patients. She thought it was impossible, but kept testing and kept getting the same result and it held up in clinical practice.
Over the next 5 years she kept testing and found other factors in cancer and tumor than just F. buski. In fact, her idea was that testing what is in a tumor in an actual person makes more sense than injecting something into a mouse. That is not very useful. Dr. Clark found copper, cobalt, vanadium, inorganic germanium, nickel, inorganic selenium and chromium in tumors. And responsible for low immunity, she found malonic acid, PCBs, benzene, asbestos, motor oil and wheel bearing grease. These are things that she finds in every tumor and she had tested them all by 1999.
Because it was these same factors in all tumors, Dr. Clark concluded that there had to be a major source containing all these factors to give so many people cancer. It had to be in the air, in the water or in the food! So Dr. Clark tested these for a long time and realized that she could find all these factors in the water of her patients, but not their family members, for example. Dr. Clark tested a thousand cases to make sure that this was the factor she had been looking for.
The next question was where the contamination came from. Dr. Clark found out that it had to do with the chlorination. If chlorine was used that had the NSF stamp (an independent standards agency), it was not a problem. Also the chlorine gas used at the water plants is not the problem. But if for the 2nd chlorination liquid non NSF chlorine bleach is used, she can test all these contaminants.
The problem has become worse now that water filters and water softeners are used that are additionally contaminated with the wrong kind of bleach. Her guess is that 95% of all filters on the market are disinfected with the wrong kind of bleach. Meanwhile, the water departments have improved and are using mostly approved bleach; so they are responsible for only about 10% of the problem at this time. Removing these factors will lead to a cure.
So the clinical setting is: carcinogen --> removal --> improvement. Her setting is: F. buski [and other factors] --> removal --> cure. The removal of carcinogens will not lead to any cures. The excuse that was found for that was that once you have cancer, you will always have cancer, but that is just a rationalization.
So getting the patients to use the correct kind of water was the key to getting them better. And there were all these factors in the water occurring together, but Dr. Clark wanted to know which one was really the culprit, which one was the one that really made the difference. And the immune destroyers were very important, but no single one of them did all the damage, nor was it malonic acid, nor wheel bearing grease. But the one thing she had so far not tested for because she had no samples to test with, were the radio active elements, and when she finally got a hold of test samples, she found that it was polonium. It was present in every tumor and in all bad water and when removed, together with the parasite, the malignancy went away.
Polonium is one element in a series of radioactive elements that contains also cerium and proactinium, uranium and lead. These elements can go into a gene and mutate it, when mustard gas is present. Mustard gas is produced, as Dr. Clark has found out more recently, by F. buski, and that explains its presence in cancer.
2. Server Migration, Website and Web Shop Up and Running Again
We have moved our IT to a new server. When migrating servers of course we try to make it as smooth as possible but there are often unpleasant surprises. That was the case for us and our shop was not working for a couple of days. So if you tried to order or pull up any information pages and were not successful, please try again: https://www.drclark.com.
3. More About the Bird Flu
When I wrote about the bird flu and made reference to the Spanish flu of 1918, I caused a landslide of reactions from my readers. I received many articles avian flu and related subjects and it ranged from the wildest conspiracy theories to seemingly sound information. I will make a few comments here without claiming to know the truth or have a firm opinion on any of it.
Arguments made against the bird flu scare and the Spanish flu connection:
- No one knows what the Spanish flu was because at the time viruses were not detectable. That was done many years later and no one can be certain whether what was found to be the cause of the Spanish flu many years later was the correct cause.
- At the end of WWI, for the first time multiple vaccinations of all sorts were carried out and the Spanish flu appeared in many different places on the planet pretty much around that time and especially in young and sturdy men, which is rather strange (but that was the group that was mainly vaccinated). Even the British Medical Journal mentions it is the only ever known flu pandemic which was specific to young people (http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/ short/332/7544/786?etoc).
- Tests on humans to try and pass the Spanish flu from one person to another failed.
- The cases of people who so far have died from avian flu may have had the virus in them but there is no proof that that virus caused their death. The presence of a virus does not prove it caused a condition. If the same virus is present in all similar cases of symptoms, then we can infer that the virus has something to do with the condition but it is not sure and the process to prove it is not easy. Some viruses are present in many people. For example, certain Herpes viruses are found in over 90% of everyone. If you tested random people dying from, say, lung cancer, you would find that virus in most of them. Concluding that is the cause of the condition would be wrong in this case. In the avian flu there have been very few cases and there has been little research so far.
- There have been many "super bug" scares in the past decades, but none of them have led anywhere. The chance of exactly this avian flu virus to turn into a super bug is small.
- The accompanying bacterial infections which are usually the imminent cause of death in a viral infection, can nowadays be treated with antibiotics. That was not the case in 1918.
A lot more arguments are made but I want to leave some of the work up to you.
Here are a few websites that give background on the avian flu. They do not all have the same focus and my citing them here does not mean I agree with any or all they say, but I have at least found them interesting and those who have been reading my e-zine are well aware that I'm generally critical of the system.
Michael Fumento says we are being Chicken Little, thinking the sky will fall on our heads, if we go for the avian flu scare. Well researched and referenced: http://www.fumento.com/disease/flu2005.html.
Dr. Len Horowitz has his own theories about population control and such. I am not sure I quite agree, but his comparison of the avian flu with the other scares we have seen in the past few years, including SARS (remember?), West Nile Virus and such, is quite revealing: http://educate-yourself .org/cn/lenhorowitzdebunksavianfluhysteria11oct05.shtml.
This website by Hans Tolzin is unfortunately only in German but has the best background information about the Spanish flu: http://www.impf-report.de/.
The magazine Nature has put together a series of articles about the Spanish flu and the avian flu. They are scientific but mainstream: http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/1918flu/index .html.
4. Vitamin C Against Tumors
Linus Pauling published the results of clinical work by him and Ewan Cameron in the early 70ies. Their consistent result was that patients treated with vitamin C intravenously, 10 grams per day, were feeling much better and the median life span was 5 times [!] higher. This was based on comparison of over 100 treated cases with the median life span of 1000 non treated patients in similar circumstances.
Subsequent clinical research by leading US cancer hospitals to disprove Linus Pauling claimed that vitamin C was useless to treat cancer. What an amazing difference.
Many doctors using alternative approaches have been using vitamin C intravenously for cancer and have been reporting that it is very effective.
Now, new scientific research suggests Pauling may have been right after all. In one trial researchers found out that vitamin C in high concentrations will selectively kill cancer cells. I have reported on that research earlier.
It seems that this new research has renewed the interest in studying vitamin C for use with cancer patients. Several universities are about to start clinical trials with intravenous vitamin C. See the article here: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/hea lth_medical/article354063.ece
For the interested reader I have found a couple of well researched articles on vitamin C that reference studies and give a good picture of the current state of knowledge on vitamin C and cancer:
http://www. newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2004/07/20/vitamin_c_and_cancer_new_developments.htm
http: //www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2004/07/09/the_vitamin_c_fanatics_were_right_all_along.htm
5. Clark Seminar in Switzerland Big Success
Switzerland based Dr. Clark Information Center, an independent group of Clark supporters that now runs the website www.drclark.net, has organized a seminar about Dr. Hulda Clark's protocol held in the Italian speaking part of Switzerland on April 1 and 2. Some 50 attendants showed up from Switzerland and Italy, to listen to the speakers, amongst them one of the leading researchers in holistic dentistry, Ottaviano Tapparo; naturopath Claudio Viacava, known from his several Clark related books, product developer Hans Oberboersch and also myself.
It was a wonderful success and thanks to Cristina and her team for organizing such a wonderful opportunity for the public to learn more about the Clark protocol.
More details about the seminar here: http://www.drclark.net/info/seminar_april.htm.
6. Benzene in Pop Soda; Diabetes from Soft Drinks
The German ministry for consumer concerns has analyzed 64 different brands of pop soda and has found benzene in almost half of them (31). Unfortunately they have refused to disclose the concentrations and polluted brands so far.
Benzene is considered carcinogenic and harmful to germ cells. It is harmful in extremely small quantities, in fact no quantity can be termed harmless. The breathing air had been considered the main source of benzene, together with cigarette smoke.
But how does benzene end up in soft drinks? Food chemists suspect it is a reaction between benzoic acid and vitamin C. benzoic acid is often used as a preservative in soft drinks and fruit drinks. It must be declared on the packaging.
Consumer protectionists therefore recommend to use only drinks that do not contain benzoic acid.
*****
Persons who drink sweet soft drinks on a daily basis gains more weight and has a higher risk of diabetes. That is the result of a recent US study observing the life styles of 50,000 nurses. Other factors such as lack of exercise, smoking and unbalanced nutrition may have influenced the result as well. Because people who like to drink soft drinks often are less concerned about their health in general.
In the 90ies, the researchers asked nurses about their food habits and observed their body weight over the course of 4 years. Furthermore, these women took part in medical check-ups. If they increased the intake of soft drinks from less than one glass per week to one or more per day, they gained an average of 8 pounds over these four years. The risk for type II diabetes was increased by as much as 80%! Regular intake of fruit juices increased the body weight, but not the risk for diabetes. The problem seems to be that liquid calories do not saturate the body. Therefore the energy in soft drinks is consumed in addition to the usual food calories, the researchers speculated.
Source: Journal of the American Medical Association, Bd. 292, Nr. 8, S. 927-934, 2004.
Internet source (German): http://www.verbrauchernews .de/gesundheit/lebensmittel/artikel/2006/03/0064/.
7. Health Freedom Update
Health Freedom is a recurring issue in this e-zine and this time I want to give a quick overview over the most important groups in health freedom so you know where to get the latest information.
My personal favorite, because I know her personally and because she has single handedly passed Health Freedom legislation in Minnesota, followed by 13 other states, is Diane Miller with the National Health Freedom Coalition: http://www.nationalhealthfreedom.org.
Diane has been strong on state Health Freedom legislation but has started to be concerned about CODEX as well and has ventured where no one else seems to have ventured, by going to the CODEX meeting in Geneva last year.
Because Diane is doing such great work, I have offered to double any monthly donations to the National health Freedom Coalition. It does not matter how much you can make to support the Coalition, if it is $10 a month or $50 a month or $100 a month or more: just help them out with what you can.
Write to Diane to let her know how much of a monthly donation you are willing to make. If you mention that you came in through us, we will equal your monthly donation! The e-mail address of the Coalition is similars@aol.com.
Another long term fighter has been Dr. Rima Laibow with the Natural Solutions Foundation: http://www.healthfreedomusa.org. The "Vitamin Lawyer", known to many of us who are in the supplements business, namely Ralph Fucetola, has teamed up with Rima Laibow lately.
Their focus is to propose legislation that is in the line of DSHEA (US legislation on supplements which is freedom oriented) as an alternative to the proposed restrictive CODEX legislation.
John Hammell from the International Advocates for Health Freedom (http://www.iahf.com) is mainly focusing on protecting the DSHEA legislation in the US that is both under attack from forces within the US as well as threatened by the proposed CODEX legislation.
John has recently set up another website that is specifically targeted at the CODEX threat: http://www.nocodexgenocide.com.
The European Alliance for Natural Health (ANH), found here on the internet: http://www.alliance-natural-health.org, has been focusing on fighting the impact of the new European supplements directive, which is similar to what the master plan is for the restrictive CODEX regulation. The EU supplements directive will take hundreds of appreciated and perfectly safe supplements from the market and will restrict many high dosed and just as safe vitamins, if ANH is not successful in fighting at least part of this destructive legislation.
Please do support these organizations financially and by spreading the word. There is just not enough awareness about the fact that we are at risk of losing access to the majority of workable nutritional supplements. We have to strengthen our efforts or we will be approaching a world where health is impossible and the pharmaceutical companies are laughing all the way to the bank while we are licking our wounds.