You never thought THIS could cause cancer

Bet you never thought THIS

could give you cancer...

The next time you clink glasses for a toast… or tip up your cup at a football party… or celebrate TGIF a little too enthusiastically… you might want to give a little thought to how much you drink and how often.

A number of studies show a possible link between alcohol use and an increased risk of developing certain cancers. A lot hangs on that word "possible." Is this one more thing we need to worry about? Or is it a scientific guesstimate we can safely ignore? Let's take a look. . .

Continued below. . .

The super-antioxidant from the sea that can undo years of damage to your heart, brain, joints and nerves This astonishing healing discovery is up to 100 times more potent than blueberries, pomegranates, and even green tea catechins. What if I told you that one simple nutrient can improve your cholesterol, boost circulation, enhance memory and mental sharpness, and even help you sleep better? You'd probably be skeptical.  I certainly was… But then I saw the research from Dr. Haengwoo Lee, a Korean biochemist now living near Seattle, Washington, and my jaw nearly dropped to the floor. Dr. Lee has made a startling discovery that few people, even many alternative health doctors, know about. He and his team have found an antioxidant that's up to 100 times stronger than the familiar antioxidants vitamins C and E, antioxidant-rich fruits like blueberries, pomegranates and even green tea catechins. What is this amazing "super-antioxidant"? Learn More Now

Some researchers say there's little evidence to suggest that moderate alcohol consumption puts you at greater risk for developing the most common cancers.

But how about "moderate" use every day? Many of these investigators are uncertain about how much influence regular alcohol use has on cancer risk.

A variety of studies suggest the more alcohol you consume the greater your risk of developing these cancers:

• Breast
• Colon and rectum
• Esophagus
• Larynx
• Liver
• Lung
• Mouth
• Prostate
• Throat

The reason for the uncertainty stems from conflicting study results. Let's take a look at breast cancer as an example…

Several studies used words like "modest¹," "mild²," and "weak³" to describe the connection between alcohol use and breast cancer.

On the flip side, a study⁴ published in the November 2011 Journal of the American Medical Association said that even moderate alcohol use led to an increase in breast cancer risk!

Still other studies claimed to find no link between alcohol consumption and breast cancer.

Just to add to the confusion—one study⁵ even stated that moderate alcohol use could actually REDUCE breast cancer risk!

And if you think you'll get a clearer opinion from health organizations that research and provide cancer information, don't be surprised to learn that…

Even the cancer "experts" don't agree!

David J. Hanson, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the State University of New York, has researched and written on the subject of alcohol and drinking for over 30 years.

On his website Alcohol: Problems and Solutions⁶, Hanson noted the lack of consensus within the medical community about alcohol increasing risk for developing various cancers.

Hanson found that the National Cancer Institute, the National Library of Medicine, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center all say alcohol is not a risk factor for colorectal cancer.

But several other groups disagree, including the American Cancer Society, the Mayo Clinic, and the Colorectal Cancer Coalition. These groups all advise that heavy drinking may increase the odds of being diagnosed with the disease.

One finding is not in doubt: Alcohol and tobacco used together are especially lethal. Combining alcohol and tobacco greatly increases the risk of developing throat and mouth cancers. You can help reduce your risk for developing these cancers if you quit smoking.

If you're thinking there might be good reason for so many folks to sound a warning, you might also be wondering…

How do researchers think alcohol

raises your cancer risk?

Although the medical community can't say for sure exactly how alcohol affects cancer—they do have a few ideas…

According to the American Cancer Society (ACS)⁷, alcohol may raise cancer risk in any of four different ways:

• Damages body tissues—some researchers think alcohol may irritate and damage mouth and throat cells. As the cells try to repair themselves, it may cause DNA changes that lead to cancer. What's more, alcohol changes bacteria in the colon and rectum into acetaldehyde. Studies show this chemical causes cancer in lab animals.
• Decreases nutrient absorption—your body needs the B vitamin folate to help it produce and maintain new cells. Alcohol may reduce your ability to absorb folate in foods. And low folate levels can increase your risk of breast and colorectal cancers.
• Sparks hormone changes—alcohol may raise your estrogen levels. Because this hormone regulates breast tissue growth, it may impact breast cancer risk.
• Triggers harmful chemical reactions—ACS said alcohol may help toxic chemicals enter cells in your digestive tract. It may also slow your ability to break down and flush away these harmful chemicals.

The ACS said there may be other as yet unknown ways that alcohol may contribute to cancer. For this reason, the group recommends limitations of no more than 2 drinks per day for men, and 1 drink a day for women. Maybe I'm straitlaced, but to me that sounds like plenty of drinking.

In addition to this establishment take on alcohol and cancer, I'd also note that a shot of alcohol is a big shot of sugar. As regular readers of this newsletter know, sugar is just about the most pro-cancer food you can eat.

Aside from the fact that many alcoholic drinks are high in sugar, the alcohol itself is quickly metabolized into sugar in your body. This means any alcoholic drink sends your sugar levels soaring, even if it's a drink we don't normally consider sweet, such as scotch or beer.

I always marvel when I meet a diabetic who has enough will power to push away desserts, but drinks alcohol as if it's harmless. The alcohol has to go, too. Think of it as liquid sugar. As for people who have cancer, both alcohol and sugar are out of the question.

Even if the scientific studies produce a mixed bag of results… and you find that you're uncertain about what to believe…

…one thing for sure is that it certainly won't HARM you to limit your alcohol consumption.

And if you drink red wine because of its proven cardiovascular benefits—remember that you also achieve these results with a healthy diet and a regular exercise program.

Resveratrol is thought to be the component in red wine that's responsible for most of the health benefits. Take it as a supplement and avoid any possible downside associated with heavy drinking.

That's an 'ounce of prevention' you can feel good about adding to your glass!

Speaking of foods for which it's hard to figure out the cancer risk, we wrote about another one in the last issue. If you missed it, scroll down and take a look now.

Body Transformation: Liz Coached Herself To A 114 Pound Fat Loss

While in school Liz was tormented because of her weight. Rather than let it rule her life she chose to be proactive. Read on to see how she became a fitness fanatic and lost over 100 lbs!

Email More

by Female Transformation Of The Week Dec 16, 2011

Vital Stats

Name: Liz Taylor
Email: liz@liztaylortraining.com
Bodyspace: MissAllAmerica

Before: Age: 19 Height: 5'3" Weight: 274 lbs Body Fat: 38-39%	After: Age: 21 Height: 5'3" Weight: 160 lbs Body Fat: 25%

Why I Got Started

Growing up I was extremely overweight and teased for how I looked. My parents were never strict with my diet and were gone a lot so I was free to eat what I wanted. Consequently, I found comfort in junk food. If I had a bad day, I wanted to eat. If I had a good day, I wanted to eat. Food was my emotional support.
When I started high school the teasing became almost unbearable. I was walked to class by the Student Resource Officer because students would yell names at me, throw objects at me, and would even block me from entering into school through the doors. When I finally graduated and started college, the weight grew even more out of control. I was buying fast food in-between classes and staying up late at night eating junk food while working on papers.
I began to loathe my reflection so much that I would shower with the lights off so I would not have to see myself in the mirror. If I ever went shopping for new clothes, I would be in the dressing rooms for 10-15 minutes.

My final breaking point was in the middle of a Monday afternoon, I was 19 years old, at the doctor's office, and I had an epiphany. It was as quick as that. I thought to myself, "I am only 19 years old. Do I want to set the foundation of my adulthood of being overweight and hating how I look?"
I was ready to be healthy, happy, and enjoy life so I knew I had to make a change. I wanted to know what it was like to look at myself and be proud. I wanted to know what it was like to not find so much happiness in food, but find happiness in me as a person. I wanted to know what it was like to not have to shop in plus size clothing and be excited to go shopping. I never envisioned myself being fit so I was ready to push myself and make a change in my life forever.

How I Did It

I began to research and read everything on fitness and nutrition that I could. Countless magazines and books were bought and incalculable hours were spent surfing the internet. I watched ample instructional videos to look for specific moves for different body parts and made sure I learned the correct form.
All while doing this I made sure I took notes and applied everything I was learning in my meal preps and my exercise regimen. When I went to the gym if I saw a man or woman I admired or saw them doing an exercise I was interested in, I would simply go up to them and say "My name is Liz and I am trying to lose weight. I am very interested in that exercise I saw you doing, could you please teach me how to do that?"

Over time I began to learn and understand my body and I found out what works and what does not work for me. I did not have a lot of extra money to spend to have someone train me, so I knew if I truly wanted to change my life, I was going to have to work for it.

Poor Showings in Neutral Site Games Keep some (VA) Tech Fans Home

Poor Showings in Neutral Site Games Keep some Tech Fans Home by Chris Coleman, TechSideline.com, December 16, 2011 There are many reasons why a lot of Virginia Tech fans aren't making the trip to the Sugar Bowl on January 3. We went over almost all of them earlier in the week, but one we didn't focus on very much is the fact that Virginia Tech doesn't do very well in neutral site games. Since the ACC era began, Virginia Tech is 6-10 in neutral site games. Virginia Tech on a Neutral Field, ACC Era Year Opp. Site Result 2004 #1 USC Washington, DC 24-13 L 2004 #3 Auburn Sugar Bowl 16-13 L 2005 FSU ACC Championship Game 27-22 L 2005 #16 Louisville Gator Bowl 35-24 W 2006 Georgia Chick-fil-A Bowl 31-24 L 2007 #12 BC ACC Championship Game 30-16 W 2007 #8 Kansas Orange Bowl 24-21 L 2008 ECU Charlotte, NC 27-22 L 2008 #18 BC ACC Championship Game 30-12 W 2008 #12 Cincinnati Orange Bowl 20-7 W 2009 #6 Alabama Atlanta, GA 34-24 L 2009 Tennessee Chick-fil-A Bowl 37-14 W 2010 #3 Boise State Washington, DC 33-30 L 2010 #20 FSU ACC Championship Game 44-33 W 2010 #6 Stanford Orange Bowl 40-12 L 2011 #21 Clemson ACC Championship Game 38-10 L That record doesn't exactly inspire confidence. Three of the wins came against Boston College and Cincinnati in the state of Florida in empty stadiums with no atmosphere against teams with much less talent than the Hokies. The win over Louisville in the Gator Bowl is overshadowed by the ejection of Jimmy Williams and the Marcus Vick stomping incident. The Chick-fil-A Bowl win over Tennessee was gratifying, but the reality is that the Vols went 7-6 that year. Of those six wins, only the ACC Championship Game against Florida State is a game that Tech fans will remember over the long haul. Tech went head-to-head against a solid team, dominated the game, and won the ACC Championship. Unfortunately, there was a stretch between the end of the 2005 season and the beginning of the 2008 season that began to usher in a change in Tech's traveling fanbase. The 2005 season ended with an ACC Championship Game against an unranked Florida State team that was reeling. The Noles had lost three in a row, while the Hokies were 10-1. FSU blew the Hokies off the field, although the final score was close. Sugar Bowl Tickets In the next neutral site game, the Gator Bowl, Marcus Vick embarrassed the Hokie Nation as Tech beat Louisville and their backup quarterback (Brian Brohm was out with an injury). Fast forward to the Chick-fil-A Bowl at the end of the 2006 season, and the Hokies blew a 21-3 halftime lead and lost to Georgia 31-24. At the end of 2007, Tech avenged a regular season loss to Boston College by beating the Eagles 30-16 in the ACC Championship Game. However, the Hokies went on to get upset by a Kansas team that was inferior in talent in the Orange Bowl. Then, to start the 2008 season, Tech got upset by unranked East Carolina in Charlotte. After that stretch, I think we've seen Tech's traveling fanbase steadily decline. Hokie fans have historically spent a lot of money to follow their team around the country, but in that stretch Tech went 0-3 against unranked teams. They lost some games they had no business losing, and Tech fans got tired of spending their money to travel and see their team perform poorly. In many ways, I think it's as simple as that. Nobody really expected the Hokies to beat USC, Auburn or Alabama. Those losses aren't the reason Tech fans stopped traveling as much. It's the Kansas loss (not showing up to play), the Georgia loss (allowing a huge comeback), the ECU loss (losing to an unranked team) and the Boise State loss (spotting the opponent 17-0). In all of those games, Virginia Tech lost moreso than the opponent won. There's also the "what have you done for me lately?" argument. Tech is only 1-3 in their last four neutral site games. You've got the disappointing loss to Boise State to open the 2010 season, and two shellackings at the hands of Stanford and Clemson, with an ACC Championship Game win over Florida State in between. That doesn't inspire Tech fans to spend $2,000 on a trip to New Orleans during the middle of a work week. Looking for something positive? Consider the fact that while the Hokies are just 6-10 in neutral site games, they are 5-0 in neutral site games against opponents ranked #11-20. That's exactly where Michigan sits. Unfortunately, Tech is 1-10 against everybody else. Right now, I think the ACC is a four-bid league. It has the potential to change to a three-bid league or a five-bid league, depending on what certain teams do. Hoping for more than five teams is wishful thinking, and in all likelihood four is the highest number of teams the league will get into the NCAA Tournament this year. There just won't be enough quality, top 50 wins available in conference play. For example, Virginia Tech is scheduled to play the following top 50 teams: Norfolk State (#36, and unlikely to stay in the top 50), FSU (#21), UNC (#30), Duke (#2), at FSU (#21) and at Duke (#2). Throwing out Norfolk State, that's just five top 50 opponents remaining on the schedule, and with such a young team, wins over Duke and UNC are very unlikely. Perhaps a team like UVA or NC State can creep into the top 50, but that remains to be seen. The Hokies really needed to hold on and win that road game at #28 Minnesota. In the eyes of the NCAA Tournament Selection committee, Tech isn't going to have any quality non-conference wins ? as usual.

US Sports Radio The Home of D.C. Divas Football Release 2012 Schedule

The D.C. Divas are one of the most well-known and successful teams in women’s tackle football. Over its ten-year history the Divas have a NWFA Championship in 2006, seven division titles, and a 73-22 win-loss record. Last year former Diva Natalie Randolph made international news as one of the first women to ever coach a boy’s high school football team. Also in 2010, a USA team won the first-ever Women’s World Championship against international teams. Three Divas, Okiima Pickett, Michelle Riddle, and Donna Wilkinson, were on the gold-winning USA team....More

2012 D.C. Divas schedule is

4/14. Pittsburgh (H)
4/21. Bye
4/28. New York (H)
... 5/5.  Columbus (H)
5/12 at New York
5/19. At Boston
6/2. at Pittsburgh
6/9. Boston
6/16. at Columbus
6/23- Round 1
6/30- Round 2
7/7- Round 3
7/21- Round 4
8/4/2012 CHAMPIONSHIP televised on ESPN 3 

 

US Sports Radio the Home of the

The 4th Annual Maryland Crab Bowl

The Mid Atlantic Football Foundation (MAFF) is pleased to announce the 4th Annual Maryland Crab Bowl Powered by Under Armour, December 17th, 2011 at 12:00 pm, at Bowie State University.

Listen to the Maryland Crab Bowl Live On US Sports Radio

We kick it off with the Glory Days Grill Warmup Show at 11:05am EST

Kickoff at 12noon EST

Get Tickets



US Sports Radio Your Radio Home Of

#10 Ranked (USA Today)DeMatha High School Stags



Your radio home of Cool Sports and Talk:

Cool Sports:

DeMatha High School Football and Basketball

Bowie State University Football and Basketball

D.C. Divas Football

coming Summer 2012 The Cal Ripken Collegiate Baseball League



Hot Talk:

The US Sports Coaches Show

Pro Bodybuilding Weekly

Pro MMA Radio

The Sports Journey Featuring Pro Player Shows:

 -The Anthony Armstrong (Washington Redskins) Show

 -The Terrence Austin (Washington Redskins) Show

 -The Darrel Young (Washington Redskins) Show

 -Michigan Regional Sports

And Much More!



Sports, Health, Fitness Blogs, Headlines and More!



Coming Up On US Sports Radio!

Thursday December 22, 2011 7:05pm EST DeMatha High School Basketball: Vs. St. Mary's Ryken



Click Here To Listen

Click Here To Broadcast Your Business Message To Thousands of Targeted Prospects Today!

 

Bodybuilding.com's Feature Bodybuilding Tonya Carter

Our Over 40 Bodybuilder of the Week was...
Tonya Carter

VITAL STATS Name: Tonya Carter E-mail: thayes11@neo.rr.com Age: 42 Where: Ravenna, OH Height: 5'6" Weight: 130 lbs Years Bodybuilding :2 Favorite Bodypart: Arms/Legs Favorite Exercise: Side Lateral Raises/Good Mornings Favorite Supplements: ON Amino Chewables, ON Gold Standard Whey, Jack3d

How Did You Get Started?

After 24 years of smoking, I quit and started researching fitness. I wanted to be happy and healthy. I spectated at a local NPC Natural bodybuilding competition and grew the desire to challenge myself to become one of those competitors. I only had three months of training, by myself that is, and placed 8th in figure. Six months later I tried my luck again and fell into the same placing. I knew I needed more time to train for a higher placing. After all I abused my body for over 24 years and reversing time does not happen overnight...there are no magic pills...it is hard work and dedication.

Click To Enlarge.
Tonya Carter

What Workout Plan Worked Best For You?

The plan that works best for me is when I change my workouts around frequently, but can honestly say that lifting heavy weight with lower repetitions four days a week works best for my body type.

Day 1: Light Lower Body

• Barbell Squats: 3 sets of 10 reps
• Deadlifts: 3 sets of 10 reps
• Good Mornings: 3 sets of 10 reps
• Dumbbell Lunges: 3 sets of 10 reps
• Standing Hamstring Curls: 3 sets of 10 reps
• Standing Calf Raises: 4 sets of 10 reps
• Dumbbell Step-Ups: 3 sets of 10 reps
• ....More

The Crunchy, Go-Anywhere Cancer-Fighting Snack

Simply eating a lot of walnuts may inhibit prostate cancer growth or stop it outright.

That was the finding of Paul Davis, UC Davis Cancer Center researcher. He proved the impact of walnuts by studying mice genetically programmed to develop prostate cancer.¹ The results were startling. Details follow this word about one of the fine books we publish. . .

Continued below. . .

Ten-year breast cancer survivor was told: "You'll be dead in a year" (Pssst!! That was 10 years ago!) Doctors didn't give Wiltrude much hope when they diagnosed her with cancer in the year 2000. Wiltrude, a German psychologist, never thought cancer would happen to her. But it did. And it came as a big shock. One doctor told her, "You'll be dead in a year." Late stage breast cancer is virtually incurable using conventional treatments. Even M.D.s admit it. They talk about "buying you more time." (Don't count on it. The evidence shows you're better off doing nothing than chemo.) When Wiltrude told her doctor she was going to try alternative treatments, he said, "You are committing suicide with what you're doing." But she was determined to find a way to beat her cancer. Thanks to the wonders of the Internet, this European woman came across a book by my good friend Bill Henderson, one of the smartest and wisest people I know when it comes to cancer treatment. She tried Bill's top, number one recommendation — a gentle treatment you can do at home for just $5.15 a day. What's more, the cost goes down to $3.50 after six weeks because you just need a maintenance dose. And it even tastes good. Not only has Wiltrude passed the five-year cancer survival mark, she's survived for ten years. We just interviewed her recently for this publication. The radiologist who tests her every year told her, "You're the only one with this kind of result." You can find out about Bills proven cancer treatment plan in a free video presentation — click here to watch it now. When I ask him about some of the treatments that top alternative doctors use, Bill sort of shrugs and says, "They're fine, but why bother? My treatment works, you can do it yourself, and it costs practically nothing." He's coached thousands of cancer patients with all different types and stages of cancer. Most of the people who follow the detailed, specific plan in this Special Report get over their cancer and live for years. "Almost any kind of cancer is reversible," says Bill. "I never give up on anyone." Click here and watch the free video presentation about Bill's amazing cancer protocol.

In Davis's experiment, the mice eating the human equivalent of 2.4 ounces of whole walnuts daily for 18 weeks had significantly smaller and slower growing prostate tumors than did the control group eating equivalent fats from other sources.

The whole walnut diet slashed prostate cancer growth by 30-40%.²

The study also established that walnuts affected multiple genes which control tumor growth. And walnuts aren't the only nut with healthy benefit. . .

Nuts may be that rare thing — something that's
fun to eat AND good for you

Portable, long shelf life, nutritious, no preparation needed.

One of the most convenient and nutritious snack foods available. Yet nuts get a bad rap for being "too high-fat".

But placing all the focus on their high fat level is missing the big picture. Nuts can be an important part of a low-carb diet. And after many years of hearing the arguments fly back and forth, and doing some experimenting on myself, I've decided carbs are the main enemy, not fats.

It was the cancer connection that was the last straw for me. Refined carbohydrates have a clear role in promoting cancer — not to mention diabetes and heart disease. And nuts are a great way of getting off carbs.

Nuts are a rich storehouse of omega-3 fatty acids and flavonoid antioxidants (carotenes, quercetin, resveratrol, and lutein) — with the added benefit of fighting inflammation. Nuts reduce your risk of:

• Various cancers
• High blood pressure, coronary artery disease
• Strokes
• Arthritis
• Alzheimer's, schizophrenia, and depression.

Nuts have mineral power too, manganese, potassium, calcium, iron, magnesium, zinc, and selenium.

Manganese helps you produce the enzyme superoxide dismutase, a powerful free radical scavenger. Potassium helps control heart rate and blood pressure. And your body needs copper and iron to produce red blood cells.

What's more, nuts are a good source of B-complex vitamins, critical for energy and well-being.

Lastly, they provide high levels of vitamin E — a powerful lipid-soluble free radical scavenger.

Despite the warnings about the "high fat" content of nuts, I couldn't find evidence showing that eating nuts causes weight gain. In fact, replacing pastas and breads with a handful of nuts may control insulin resistance and help you lose weight.

Nuts are rich in this known cancer-fighter

Selenium shows great promise as a cancer preventive. Many studies show it's an effective tool against breast, esophageal, stomach, prostate, liver and bladder cancers. And it's an especially strong free radical scavenger that works synergistically with vitamins C, E and beta-carotene.

A 1996 study by Dr. Larry Clark showed a staggering 42% cancer rate reduction in those who took 200 micrograms of selenium daily for seven years, versus the placebo group. And in the selenium group, death rates were half that of the placebo group. Best results were for prostate, colorectal, and lung cancers.

Jean Carper, in Miracle Cures, called Dr. Clark's findings an "unprecedented cancer intervention study" that "bumped up the respectability of using supplements against cancer several notches."

Many foods contain selenium. But the bioavailable amount is heavily dependent on how selenium-rich the soil is. Soils rich in volcanic ash or in sediment deposited by sea water boast a higher selenium content than do other types of soil.

In the long run, your cancer risk may be determined by selenium levels where you live (assuming you eat locally grown food and don't take a selenium supplement). One theory for why cancer rates are so high in Linxian, China, dubbed "the world capital of cancer", is that the soil is woefully deficient in selenium and zinc.

It's been suggested that one reason American men are five times more likely to die from prostate cancer than Japanese men is that in general, "the Asian diet contains four times the amount of selenium as the average American diet."

What does selenium do? It activates an enzyme called glutathione peroxidase, which scavenges free radicals. Test tube studies show this enzyme inhibits tumor growth and regulates the natural life span of cells — ensuring they die when they're supposed to, instead of turning "immortal".

What else does selenium do?

• Converts hydrogen peroxide to water (preventing lipid peroxidation)
• Acts as an immune stimulant
• Produces antibodies
• Maintains a healthy heart and liver

Dr. Andrew Weil suggests this simple way to bump up your selenium levels,

Eat Brazil nuts!

Just one shelled Brazil nut — grown in central Brazil's selenium rich soil — gives you 120 micrograms of this mineral, getting you more than half way to your daily target of 200 micrograms.³

A staple in the Brazilian diet, these nuts — though high in fat and calories — actually reduce LDL cholesterol (the bad stuff), raise HDL (good cholesterol), and prevent cardiovascular disease and stroke. They're high in vitamin E, the B-vitamins, and minerals. Remember, selenium is more powerful when combined with vitamin E.

Selenium is especially important for those with prostate cancer.⁴

Like many nuts, Brazil nuts can cause allergic reactions in sensitive people, such as itchy mouth, wheezing, tight throat, hives, and even severe anaphylactic reaction. If you experience any symptoms after eating nuts, this issue's health tip is not for you. Consider taking a selenium supplement instead.

Excessive selenium levels may create toxicity. But since most people are deficient, that's a small concern.

What other specific kinds of nuts offer big health benefits? Check these out. Maybe you'll find a new excuse to eat your favorites.

Double the antioxidants of other nuts

You might want to eat a handful of walnuts every day to get the benefit of their potent antioxidant effects.

They deliver a near perfect balance of vitamins, minerals, and fiber — and also boast healthful oleic acid and omega-3 fats which lower deadly artery-clogging LDL cholesterol. Making walnuts part of your daily diet can help ward off cardiovascular disease and cancer.

Dr. Joseph Vinson compared walnuts to nine other nut species high in antioxidants — and found walnut's antioxidants were 2 to 15 times more powerful than vitamin E, doing more for your health than peanuts, almonds, pecans or pistachios.

His analysis also found that eating walnuts in their raw and natural form provides higher nutrient levels, because heating and roasting degrade its antioxidants.

Walnut's other benefits?

• Lower LDL and higher HDL⁵
• Rich source of vitamin E — a powerful lipid soluble free radical scavenger⁶
• Packed with B-complex, magnesium, zinc, calcium, iron, copper, selenium⁷
• Contain melatonin, ellagic acid, vitamin E, carotenoids, and poly-phenolic compounds⁸
• Fights cancer, inflammation, aging, heart attacks, stroke and neurological disease⁹

Walnuts may be particularly helpful for breast¹⁰ and prostate¹¹ cancers. As mentioned at the beginning of this article, a diet rich in walnuts resulted in a 30 to 40 percent reduction in prostate cancer growth in mice.

And then there's:

The raw nut that's not really raw

Almonds have long been a symbol for wellness and health.

Like other nuts, they offer healthy levels of fats, vitamins, minerals, phyto-nutrients, vitamin E, B-complex vitamins, selenium, and other antioxidants. They're also gluten free and part of a Mediterranean diet.

As you might expect, they're protective against coronary disease, cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's, and more.¹²

Almonds' high levels of folic acid are believed to help lower homocysteine levels, cutting your risk of arterial buildup. One study showed that just 3 ounces per day lowered cholesterol by 14%.¹³

Their high fiber improves digestive function, reduces constipation, and lowers colorectal cancer risk.

Almonds help control your blood sugar levels, too, making this snack beneficial for diabetics, the insulin resistant, and the overweight. Plus, munching on a few almonds after work may make you less inclined to overeat at dinnertime.

As with any food, once you heat it, you denature the proteins and make it less bioavailable. But unfortunately, the U.S. government has taken that risk to a whole new level.

Warning — U.S. 'raw' almonds are NOT raw!

In 2001 and 2004, there were small salmonella outbreaks associated with just two specific almond growers. The U.S. Department of Agriculture seized the excuse to mandate pasteurization of U.S. almonds. They make no exceptions for organic almonds, especially after organic almond growers opposed to pasteurization lost a lawsuit on this issue in 2009. All domestically grown almonds must be pasteurized, post 2007.

Not to worry, though. Richard Waycott, CEO of the Almond Growers of California reassures us that they no longer use heat or radiation to pasteurize.

Instead they use propylene oxide!

Per Wikipedia, propylene oxide was once used as a racing fuel, but that practice is now prohibited under the National Hot Rod Association rules for safety reasons. (Ironic, isn't it?) It was used in glow fuel for model aircraft and surface vehicles, typically as an additive in small percentages of around 2% to the typical methanol, nitromethane, and oil mix. And, it's also used in thermobaric weapons.

Warnings from the EPA's Hazard Summary sheet on propylene oxide:

• Short-term exposure causes eye and respiratory tract irritation.
• Skin contact, even diluted, causes irritation and necrosis in humans.
• Depresses the central nervous system (CNS) in humans.
• Causes tumors near the site of administration in rodents.
• Classified as a probable human carcinogen (Class 2B) by the EPA.

But yet, it's 'safe' for fumigating your almonds?

I can't recommend organically grown almonds.

You might be able to get true organic almonds by taking advantage of a loophole or two. You'd need to buy from a retailer or mail order supplier who sells imported almonds, or who buys from a farmer in amounts less than 100 pounds. Of course, this suggests that salmonella was never really the issue — but that's another whole story.

The rest of the nuts

In the space I've got, I can't go into detail on every conceivable nut. But certainly pecans and cashews rank high in popularity and deserve a mention here.

They both possess many of the qualities of other nuts.

Cashews contain small amounts of Zeaxanthin, a flavonoid antioxidant that can be absorbed into your eyes, and may be protective against age related macular degeneration. Cashews also contain healthy levels of selenium.

Pecans contain ellagic acid, which inhibits the DNA binding of certain carcinogens, protecting you from cancer.¹⁴ And they're a rich source of vitamin E.

Lastly, there's the peanut, which isn't actually a nut at all, but a legume. Peanuts boast many of the same nutrients as true nuts, including antioxidants. They protect from cancer (particularly stomach cancer), heart disease, degenerative nerve diseases, Alzheimer's, and more.

However, besides being a common and sometimes serious allergen, peanuts are susceptible to fungal (read: mold) infection from aflatoxin — a very powerful and dangerous toxin known to cause cancer and liver cirrhosis. Roasting helps reduce its toxic load, but other nuts may give you more health benefits with less risk.

The bottom line on nuts

Provided you don't have nut allergies, they provide many health-protective benefits not easily achievable by replacement with other foods. I eat raw nuts, not roasted and salted, and I buy organic whenever possible.

Interesting question: Are pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers actually used much in growing nuts? It doesn't seem to me that nuts would be subject to pests since they're protected by a shell. And they're grown on a tree, so why would a grower need herbicides? A lot of smart people read this newsletter, so maybe someone out there can answer this question. If my guess is right, it may not matter much if you eat nuts that aren't organic.

Nuts are a great option for wholesome gifts during the holidays and any time — much better than candy and cookies. And you do a great favor to diabetics and the insulin resistant to provide nuts at parties and family get-togethers.

Genetically modified foods: Safe to eat?

Lee Euler, Editor Cancer Defeated

Are "Frankenfoods" Really All that Scary? Those who make and eat GM (genetically modified) foods say they're the answer to mass starvation and disease. Those who shun GM technology say it'll be the cause of mass starvation and disease. They call these foods "Frankenfoods," with a nod to Frankenstein, the monster humanoid created by runaway, out-of-control science. GM food is a hot-button issue right now. The subject arouses intense emotions, often based on a minimum of information. Most important of all is the question of how GM foods might affect our long-term health. Let's first look at the facts. Continued below. . . Toxic chemical condemned 8 men to die of prostate cancer . . .but one of them escaped. Here's how he did it! John S. watched helplessly as 7 of his Vietnam platoon buddies died of prostate cancer, one by one. They were exposed to chemicals during the war that caused them to get cancer when they reached middle age. Then, in 2002, John found out it was his turn. He got opinions from three different doctors and they all told him the same thing: he'd need a miracle to survive. John found the miracle he needed. Four years after his diagnosis, he told us, "I am healthy and happy with no symptoms of the disease." He actually wishes he'd gotten the disease sooner so he could have told his Army buddies this secret. It might have saved their lives. We're ALL exposed every day to chemicals similar to the ones that killed these veterans. A man is just about certain to get prostate cancer if he lives long enough. That means John's life-saving secret is big news for men everywhere. Click here and keep reading. . . Don’t Touch My Prostate!  Vietnam vet cures his own prostate cancer! Seven guys from his Vietnam platoon had already died of prostate cancer, one by one.  Some were ONLY IN THEIR 50s!  Exposure to a toxic chemical during the war condemned them to death.  So when John S. got the disease, doctors said he’d need a miracle to survive. That’s when John S. tried an amazing natural prostate cancer breakthrough, one that’s prized in some of the top alternative clinics around the world. The result? He wiped out his cancer COMPLETELY! This same natural remedy can save you, your prostate, and your sex drive from the surgeon’s knife. You need to know this valuable information, because ALL of us are exposed every day to the kind of chemicals that gave these men cancer. When food meets technology GM foods come from genetically modified organisms (GMOs). They consist of food organisms that were modified via molecular biology techniques that promote selective breeding. GMOs undergo much more specific changes than what you get from standard, Luther-Burbank-style mutation breeding, which is time-consuming and not always accurate. The goal behind genetic food modification is to increase desired traits in food sources. For instance a plant such as corn might be modified to produce higher resistance to weed killers and better nutritional content. The science involved is incredible, but scary. For example, a plant geneticist can take a highly drought-tolerant plant, identify the gene that's responsible for drought tolerance, and insert it into a plant that doesn't have it. The new plant then becomes drought-tolerant. Not only can scientists transfer genes from plant to plant, they can also transfer genes between plants and non-plant organisms. The best example of this happened when plant geneticists created a strain of corn that produced its own pesticides against insects. They did it by taking Bacillus thuringiensis (B.t.), which is a natural bacterium that makes proteins lethal to insect larvae, and inserting the B.t. gene into corn. The bulk of GM foods are staple foods like soybean, corn, rice, and canola. Some animal products have been developed, though none are on the market as of this writing. GM foods first entered the market a mere 15 years ago in 1996. By 2010, 10% of the world's crop land was planted with GM crops, and most of those were in North America. And yet it could save the world… The world population is now at 7 billion, on track to double in 50 years. This means having enough food to go around is a big concern. GM advocates say genetically modified food is the answer. For one, GM plantings increase the production of food per acre, which is important since the world is running out of farmland. Plus, GM plants have better pest and disease resistance and can tolerate herbicides. For that matter, GM plants can be created to tolerate cold, drought, and salinity. This means we can grow food in places previously unfit for crops, like the desert, or areas with high salt content. Benefits go beyond even that. Proponents say GM foods can improve nutrition in third world countries by injecting staple foods — like rice — with more vitamins and minerals. And right now, researchers are working to develop GM foods with edible vaccines. Since medicines and vaccines cost a lot to produce, store, and ship to the people who need them most (for instance, people in poor countries), it makes a lot of sense to embed those vaccines in something like a potato. There's also a pro-environmental side. To date, plants like poplar trees have been genetically engineered to clean up heavy metal pollution from contaminated soil. In this case, what we don't know might really hurt us Of course, there's a downside. The biggest one is that we just don't know what the long-term effects of GM foods will be. Already, there's evidence of unintentional harm. A study in Nature showed that pollen from B.t. corn caused high mortality rates in monarch butterfly caterpillars. Even though monarch caterpillars eat milkweed plants, not corn, the fear is that pollen from B.t. corn could contaminate milkweed plants on neighboring fields and destroy the caterpillars. (I should point out this topic is being debated heavily by both sides since the study wasn't conducted under natural field conditions.) Regardless of the study's accuracy, it's not yet possible to make a B.t. toxin that only kills crop-damaging pests while sparing the good insects. On top of that, there's a concern that insects will just become resistant to B.t. crops, or any other kind of crop genetically-modified to create its own pesticide. There's also a concern about gene transfer to non-target species. People are worried the crops that are weed-resistant will crossbreed with weeds to create a "superweed" that withstands all weed killers. But the biggest and scariest disadvantage to GM crops are the unknown human health risks. Life-threatening allergies among children in the U.S. and Europe to things like peanuts and strawberries are a constant concern for millions of parents. The introduction of new genes into our food could create a new allergen. Another potential hazard is the risk that bacteria in our guts could pick up antibiotic-resistant genes found in GM foods. (These are genes added to GM plants as "markers" to tell food geneticists which plants have exotic genes.) It's feasible that this type of transfer could prompt the spread of disease-causing bacteria that are immune to antibiotics. GMOs are already leading food production Regulation is also a problem. In the United States, three different government agencies preside over GM food issues: the EPA looks at environmental safety, the USDA decides whether GM foods are safe to grow, and the FDA decides whether GM foods are safe to eat. Not only does that add layers of bureaucracy to the issue, it also puts the safety of our health in the hands of politicians or, perhaps worse, unelected bureaucrats. In March of 2011, an alliance of consumers, family farmers, and those against corporate agriculture protested what they call the consolidation of our nation's food system. They claim Monsanto, the main producer of GM seeds, effectively controls the U.S. commercial seed market. The alliance charges that the company has bought up independent seed companies, and that it continues to spike prices. They accuse Monsanto of market dominance and worry that seed diversity in this country will decline. Note: Monsanto is the company behind some of the biggest herbicide-resistant GM plants, those grown from "Roundup Ready" seeds. Right now, this trait — resistance to weed-killers -- is embedded in the majority of all soybeans and corn grown in the U.S. The idea is that a crop can be sprayed with Round-Up, killing the weeds but sparing the corn or soybeans. Unfortunately, the weeds are evolving and have developed resistance to Round-Up, much the way bacteria have developed resistance to antibiotics. The top three GMO users, the U.S., Argentina, and Brazil, produce 81% of the world's total corn supplies and 89% of the soybean supplies. China and India are adopting the technology, though Indian citizens are campaigning against this change. Most of Europe is largely opposed to GMOs. Is this the end of true, organic food? I've seen reports that wildlife, such as migrating birds, will not touch GMO corn when grown right next to non-GMO corn. As a matter of fact, no animals appear to consume GM food by choice. What do these animals sense that we're missing? So what I wonder is, when we eat foods genetically altered to produce chemicals designed to kill other forms of life, what type of effect will that have on us? You're probably already eating GMOs, even if you don't realize it. The FDA doesn't require labels on GM foods. Unless you eat and drink organic foods exclusively, you're eating GMOs. If you eat anything pre-packaged and processed, or any foods with corn, soybeans, canola oil, or high fructose corn syrup, you're probably eating GMOs. There's no sign this is going to change. Even Whole Foods agreed to sell GMO, herbicide-resistant alfalfa in January of 2011. Heads of other organic proponents like Organic Valley and Stonyfield Farm have also said they're not opposed to the mass commercialization of GM crops. Will there be any true organic food left at all in another decade? I don't know, but I do know that the quality of the food we eat more or less governs our health. There are no long term studies to assure us, for certain, that GM foods are harmless. We don't know enough at this point. It strikes me as a gamble. A friend of mine who's a biochemist tells me the gene for herbicide resistance "expresses" only in the leaves and stalk of the corn plant, not in the ear which produces the corn kernels we actually eat. It's analogous to a human brain cell being different from a human bone cell — different genes express in different parts of an organism while remaining dormant in the rest of the body. This is the main support for the position that GM foods are safe. The herbicidal gene is present in the part of the corn plant we eat — all of an organism's genes are present in every cell of that organism -- but the gene isn't actually doing anything. This is some comfort, but it's well short of ironclad proof of safety.

The 4th Annual Maryland Crab Bowl Live Saturday On US Sports Radio

US Sports Radio the Home of the The 4th Annual Maryland Crab Bowl The Mid Atlantic Football Foundation (MAFF) is pleased to announce the 4th Annual Maryland Crab Bowl Powered by Under Armour, December 17th, 2011 at 12:00 pm, at Bowie State University. The Crab Bowl is Maryland’s only statewide all-star game, and in its four year history boasts well over 190 active alumni throughout the country at virtually all levels of college football. Listen to the Maryland Crab Bowl Live On US Sports Radio We kick it off with the Glory Days Grill Warmup Show at 11:05am EST Kickoff at 12noon EST Get Tickets US Sports Radio Your Radio Home Of #10 Ranked (USA Today)DeMatha High School Stags Your radio home of Cool Sports and Talk: Cool Sports: DeMatha High School Football and Basketball Bowie State University Football and Basketball D.C. Divas Football coming Summer 2012 The Cal Ripken Collegiate Baseball League Hot Talk: The US Sports Coaches Show Pro Bodybuilding Weekly Pro MMA Radio The Sports Journey Featuring Pro Player Shows: -The Anthony Armstrong (Washington Redskins) Show -The Terrence Austin (Washington Redskins) Show -The Darrel Young (Washington Redskins) Show -Michigan Regional Sports And Much More! Sports, Health, Fitness Blogs, Headlines and More! Coming Up On US Sports Radio! Thursday December 22, 2011 7:05pm EST DeMatha High School Basketball: Vs. St. Mary's Ryken Click Here To Listen Click Here To Broadcast Your Business Message To Thousands of Targeted Prospects Today!

Recent, not past physical activity lowers premature death risk

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) -- Even if you've been a couch potato all your life, starting regular exercise may still help you live longer, according to results of a study published in the November issue of the American Heart Journal.
"We found that recent physical activity levels are much more important predictors of overall mortality than are distant levels of physical activity," reports a team of researchers from the University of California at Los Angeles, the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Sepulveda, California, and Boston University in Massachusetts. The researchers, led by Dr. Scott E. Sherman of the Sepulveda Veterans Administration, studied the records of 2,372 men and women from the Framingham Heart Study, which began in 1948. Participants had estimated their physical activity at assessments during two time periods: 1956-1958 and 1969-1973. For this study, the investigators looked at overall mortality and at the incidence of cardiovascular disease in the 16 years following the second evaluation. All participants were free of cardiovascular disease when the follow-up period began. The men and women who had reported being most active at the second assessment were about 39% to 42% less likely to die over the follow-up period than those who reported being least active, after age and other factors were accounted for. Activity levels reported during the distant past -- the first evaluation -- did not predict later risk of dying. Sherman's team also looked at the relationship between activity level and cardiovascular disease, but these results were not as clear. Distant activity seemed to be related to a lower rate of cardiovascular disease in men, but to a higher rate in women. "There is no obvious explanation for why this should be so," the authors note. The researchers add that this study does not provide information about how much exercise is needed to produce these benefits. They conclude, however, that "for sedentary patients, it may never be too late to start exercising."

NCAA Womens Basketball SHEPHERD KEEPS BOWIE STATE WINLESS WITH 65-54 VICTORY

Date Released: 12/14/2011

SHEPHERD KEEPS BOWIE STATE WINLESS WITH 65-54 VICTORY (SHEPHERDSTOWN, W.Va.) A very young Bowie State women’s basketball team continues to search for its first win of the season after falling 65-54 to the Rams of Shepherd University. The Lady Bulldogs (0-6) were led by senior Juliette Turner and sophomore Chanet Wallace who scored a combined 25 points. The Shepherd Rams were never threatened from beginning to end and led by as much as 20 points (50-30) with 14:22 remaining in the game. Shepherd made 13-of-29 field goals in the first half (44.8 percent), which included 6-of-8 (75 percent) beyond the 3-point arc. In comparison, Bowie State made only 8-of-27 from the field in the first 20 minutes (29.6 percent). Shepherd (5-3) opened the game with a 9-0 run before BSU’s Turner scored on a 3-pointer to stop the run. Shepherd’s Katie Biggs answered with a triple of her own to give the Rams their first double-digit lead of the game at 11-3 at the 16:15 mark. The Shepherd lead grew to 14 points twice and the host Rams cruised into intermission leading by a dozen at 36-24. Bowie State committed 10 of its total 13 turnovers in the first period which resulted in 11 Rams’ points. Bowie State and Shepherd had similar success shooting the ball in the second half. The Lady Bulldogs hit 11-of-28 (39.3 percent) from the floor and 8-of-11 (72.7 percent) from the free throw line. On the other side of the ledger, the Rams hit 13-of-31 (38.7 percent) from the field and 3-of-4 (75 percent) from the charity stripe. Defensively, senior Kimberly Jones swatted away a career-high four shots to go and added 10 points and six rebounds. Gabby Flinchum led Shepherd with 13 points to go along with six rebounds, one assist and one block. Biggs and Jenn Prine also scored in double figures with 12 and 11 points respectively. Emily Daniel grabbed a game-high 10 rebounds for the Rams. Turner paced Bowie State with team-highs 13 points and seven rebounds. Wallace finished the afternoon with a dozen points and six rebounds. Junior Cortney Baynard and Jones rounded out the Lady Bulldogs’ double figure scorers with 11 and 10 points respectively. The Lady Bulldogs hit the road again next weekend (December 18th-19th) participating in the Susan B. Komen Shoot for the Cure hosted by Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Bowie State will play California University of Pennsylvania on opening day at 12:30 pm and will wrap up the weekend against IUP at 2:30 pm on Monday (12/19) in the Kovalchick Convention and Athletic Complex.