![]() |
|
|
October 18, 2007 at 15:57:54
October is Breast Cancer Propaganda Month: Pinkwashing, Breast Cancer Action and Vitamin D by Mike Adams Page 1 of 2 page(s) |
|
|
You've already seen the headlines touting October as breast cancer awareness month. A zillion products are available in "pink" editions now, and gullible consumers snatch them up at retail outlets without knowing a single thing about where that money goes or even what percentage of their product sale is donated to cancer non-profits. (For many products, the amount donated is mere pennies, and much of the donated money goes to worthless cancer maintenance non-profits that have no interest in actually preventing cancer...) The level of hype and propaganda in this year's breast cancer awareness month has sunk to a new low. The American Cancer Society, as usual, appears to be absolutely worthless in all this, still failing to teach women the No. 1 way to prevent a whopping 77 percent of all cancers: Sunlight and vitamin D. The ultra-wealthy ACS non-profit, with all its ties to pharmaceutical companies and mammography machine manufacturers, still refuses to openly urge women to prevent breast cancer by getting more vitamin D through nutritional supplements or sensible sunlight exposure. In fact, the organization continues to warn people away from sunlight, actually contributing to the mass vitamin D deficiency that's now rampant in western nations (including the U.S., Canada and the U.K.). Vitamin D deficiency greatly reduces the body's ability to halt the growth of cancer tumors. That's why higher amounts of vitamin D circulating through the blood have been shown again and again to dramatically reduce the growth of cancer tumors, keeping them in check and preventing a breast cancer diagnosis. Over 75 percent of all breast and prostate cancers could be avoided through vitamin D therapy alone.
Amazingly, the American Cancer Society appears to have no interest in vitamin D. How could it be that this cancer-centric non-profit wouldn't be interested in a free therapy that could eliminate up to three-fourths of all future cancers? Shouldn't this be the No. 1 headline around the world during breast cancer awareness month? Shouldn't the ACS be screaming this fact to anyone who will listen?
But of course not. In my opinion, the American Cancer Society has no interest whatsoever in actually preventing cancer. In my view, it is only interested in promoting the screening and treatment of cancer because that's what makes money for the financial supporters of the ACS. In fact, the ACS recently restructured its own priorities to focus more on screening and treatment, and less on cancer prevention.
What's missing from the risk factors list?
Hilariously, the ACS now says there are only four major modifiable risk factors that impact your risk of breast cancer. They are:
• Weight
• Alcohol use
• Smoking
• Exercise
Where is vitamin D on the list? It remains suspiciously absent.
Strange, don't you think? The single most powerful anti-cancer nutrient known to modern science -- one that helps halt the growth of virtually all tumors in the body while reducing breast cancer risk by 77 percent -- isn't on the American Cancer Society's list! (See our article reporting this finding at http://www.newstarget.com/021892.html )
Has the ACS failed to read the research on this nutrient? Could the most miraculous anti-cancer nutrient known to modern science have somehow slipped by the astute scientists at the ACS?
Some intelligent outside observers might conclude that the ACS is either hopelessly ignorant about nutrition or that it simply has no interest in promoting anything that would financially harm its primary supporters (drug companies and oncology equipment manufacturers).
Think Before You Pink
Amid all the mindless reporting about breast cancer awareness month in the mainstream media, there is at least one blip of intelligence on the radar: The Think Before You Pink campaign by Beast Cancer Action (http://www.bcaction.org), a much better informed anti-cancer non-profit led by Barbara Brenner in San Francisco. Breast Cancer Action has a rare philosophy of refusing to accept money from pharmaceutical companies or any corporations that profit from the disease.
The American Cancer Society, on the other hand, takes all sorts of money from companies that profit from cancer. Some might argue that's why the ACS -- often called the wealthiest non-profit in the world -- seems to have no interest in actually preventing the disease, but rather focuses on "recruiting" more women into conventional cancer treatments that earn billions of dollars in profits for their primary financial supporters.
Breast Cancer Action has an important message for consumers: Think Before You Pink. It means, essentially, don't be hoodwinked into buying "pink" products unless you know exactly how much money is going to cancer research and where the money's going. A lot of the "pink products" money goes to the Susan G. Komen foundation, which in my opinion is another useless nonprofit engaged primarily in pleasing the interests of its big corporate supporters rather than actually doing anything useful to prevent cancer. Read the book Pink Ribbons, Inc. to learn more about what happens behind closed doors at the Susan G. Komen foundation.
As Breast Cancer Action points out, a lot of the "pink products" marketing is nothing more than Pinkwashing -- a ploy by product marketers to boost sales of products that actually contribute to breast cancer risk! Many cosmetics and personal care products, for example, are loaded with cancer-causing chemicals that soak right through the skin and enter the bloodstream, and yet these products proudly display pink ribbons, enticing gullible women to purchase them while thinking they're doing something useful to stop breast cancer.
If it wasn't for the fact that so many women are being killed by toxic products, it would all be quite hilarious. But the sad fact is that product marketers are exploiting both the pocketbooks and bodies of women in a quest to generate more profits at any cost... including the cost in human lives.
1 | 2
www.NaturalNews.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 3 comments |
|
Balderdash!
Does Mike Adams have a medical degree or any scientific training? I discuss cancer every so often with a good friend and progressive who has a doctorate in molecular biology. He's no fan of the pharm. industry, but he's not a wacko either. Other causes of cancer are genetic--for example, failed tumor suppressor genes as the result of a germline mutation. When I had chemo for a tumor, the positive results were evident after the first treatment and the tumor, which was medium in size, shrank to a speck. (I'm an athletic vegetarian health-nut who takes vitamins regularly. I had no risk factors for the tumor. ) Mike Adams is a dangerous crackpot. by Carol V. Hamilton (15 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 28 comments) on Friday, Oct 19, 2007 at 4:17:51 PM
|
|
Ill informed
The previous commenter said most of it . - The primary source of Vit D is the sun. In Australia we are a nation of sun lovers beach surfing tenis footy et al BUT.....we are also skin cancer capital of the world. Melenomas and some sarcomas kill more Ausies than Breast cancer. The rave if accurate would have the effect of swapping one cancer for an even bigger killer if there is a swap at all. - With the thinning of the ozone layer more UV is getting to the surface more skin cancers and its increasing despite the average person's reduction of exposure. There is now proof that solariums if not careful can cause skin cancers. We now have strict laws controlling solariums as a consequence....people have died. Far more research on your part is warrented by Andris (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 531 comments) on Friday, Oct 19, 2007 at 5:11:06 PM
|
|
Mindless propaganda.
"I know a lot of people read this and think to themselves, "How could the cancer industry be so evil? How could they exploit the lives of women so callously?" Think Enron." So playing fast and loose with the books is the same as mass murder? Bullshit. Enron executives merely lied to others/deluded themselves over how much money their company was making. "In our current system of free market economics, only the strong, dominant corporations survive." This statement is about as wrong as it could be. For a start the current economy is hardly free market and the Big Pharma is one of the least free market areas of it. Secondly plenty of non-dominant companies are surviving and thriving. Apple isn't dominant is it? Or Whole Foods. And of course if the economy was free market non-dominant companies would have an easier time because they would be free of political attacks by dominant companies with more money. You really blew your credibility with this assinine attack on a system you are profoundly ignorant of. by Michael Price (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 33 comments) on Friday, Oct 19, 2007 at 8:33:48 PM
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |