Belmont Abbey 3 - Bowie State 0 (WOMEN'S VOLLEYBALL FINAL)

BELMONT ABBEY DEFEATS BOWIE STATE VOLLEYBALL IN THREE-SET SWEEP

WASHINGTON, DC – Belmont Abbey College swept Bowie State University in three straight sets in the season opener for both teams, defeating the Lady Bulldogs 25-10, 25-8 and 25-11.

A very young Bowie State team was held to a minus .236 attack percentage and managed only five kills on 55 total attacks. On the other side of the net, the Crusaders wrapped up the match with .483 hitting percentage and knocked down 37 kills.

Bowie State sophomores Remi Anderson and Paige McIntosh accounted for two kills each. Fellow sophomore Briana Flowers and freshman Yaje Ngundam recorded one kill each in the setback. Junior Kasi Eisenzimmer paced the Lady Bulldogs with four assists and three service aces, both team highs. Redshirt freshman Marissa Martinez picked up a team-high five digs.

Caitlin Hankins led Belmont Abbey with a match-high nine kills and Hannah Schellenberg added seven kills in the Crusaders victory. Kay Schellenberg accounted for 28 assists to go along with two service aces and three digs.

This causes three-fourths of all breast cancer

Radiation causes three-fourths of breast cancers — and damages your heart, too!

    A top doctor estimates that about three-quarters of all breast cancer cases in the United States are induced by radiation — including medical X-rays, and including mammograms to detect breast cancer.

    Dr. John W. Goffman, M.D., Ph.D. published that finding in a 1996 book calledPreventing Breast-Cancer: The Story of a Major, Proven, Preventable Cause of this Disease. He was a retired Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology at the University of California, Berkeley.

    While the medical profession doesn’t generally accept his exact figure of three-fourths, it’s a medical fact that X-rays cause cancer. This is very well known and accepted. It’s not controversial. Those painless, invisible rays that doctors aim at your chest or a broken bone or an arthritic joint are extremely dangerous. The reason is that X-rays cause healthy cells to mutate, and mutated cells are a well-known cause of cancer.

Continued below...

Breast Cancer Breakthrough BANNED! U.S. Government Blocks Release of Doctor's Life-Saving Book     A mammoth discovery is wiping out most breast tumors better than anything seen yet in modern medicine. It makes surgery, radiation and chemotherapy look like something from the Dark Ages.     A Cornell-educated doctor followed more than 25 years of case studies and PROVED this treatment can cure breast cancer. With the discovery I'm going to tell you about, almost every woman makes it and without losing a breast to surgery or taking any toxic chemicals. Even those with late stage cancer!     You've got to include this treatment if you want to have any REAL hope of defeating breast cancer. Click here now and watch a new video presentation about this important discovery…

    In spite of that, we’re seeing a big, bitter debate over whether women between the ages of 40 and 50 should receive an annual mammogram. In 2009, a task force at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services set off a firestorm by recommending that regular mammography screening shouldn’t start until age 50. This led some people to think the government is out to kill women by denying them mammograms.

    Cheer up. This is one occasion where the government got it right.

    I think the test is of doubtful value for women of any age, but now even establishment medicine agrees that it’s a costly, nearly useless exam for most women under 50. The reasons are complicated, but basically the test detects very few tumors and saves very few lives, and meanwhile it exposes women to massive amounts of dangerous radiation.

    According to Robert Aronowitz, M.D., of the University of Pennsylvania, "You need to screen 1,900 women in their 40s for 10 years in order to prevent one death from breast cancer, and in the process you will have generated more than 1000 false positives and all the overtreatment they entail."

    In other words, the test is incredibly inaccurate. A false positive means the test indicates you have cancer when in fact you don’t. It means return visits to the doctor, additional tests, biopsies, missed time at work, and several days of terror during which you think you’ve got cancer. After the age of 50 (or after menopause) the test is somewhat more useful, but nothing to brag about.

    And let me underline this: women under 50 endure a thousand false positives for every life saved by a "true positive" — a mammogram test where the woman indeed has cancer and is treated successfully.

    Meanwhile, 10 years of screening exposes you to about half the radiation you would have received had you been standing a mile away from the center of the atomic bomb that destroyed the whole city of Hiroshima. In other words, you’re bombarded with one heck of a lot of deadly, cancer-causing radiation. If it weren’t a medical test they’d call it murder.

    My friend Bill Henderson recommends a test you can do by mail, from your home, that he says is more accurate and useful. You can get the details in a Special Report we publish called How to Cure Almost Any Cancer at Home for $5.15 a Day. (Click on that link to learn more about the report.) The test doesn’t specifically reveal which body part has cancer cells, but it lets you know you’ve got cancer somewhere — and you can proceed to get rid of it with the inexpensive home treatments Bill recommends.

    It really is an amazing home system for defeating cancer. I’ve known Bill for years and he’s a man of high integrity. He’s not in this for the money. He wants to help people. You owe it to yourself to learn about his approach.

    Even better is a breast cancer screening test called thermography, that I explain in detail in my book Breast Cancer Cover-Up. Thermography is completely safe, involves NO RADIATION, and detects breast cancer as much as ten years earlier than a mammogram! Breast Cancer Cover-Up goes over all your testing and treatment options for this dreaded type of cancer. If I do say so myself, it's a must read for every woman who has breast cancer or wants to be prepared just in case.

    Meanwhile, I could go on at great length about mammograms (and I will in a future issue). But for now what I find depressing about this debate is that so many poorly informed consumers demand MORE of the very treatments that are killing them.

    The problem is not just mammograms or breast cancer. ALL X-rays of any kind increase your risk of cancer no matter what part of the body is exposed. Why do you think the technician leaves the room while the picture is being taken? The procedure is deadly. And generally we Americans get X-rayed far more than necessary.

    In the past couple of decades the medical and dental professions have made an effort to reduce the number of X-rays and the dose of radiation per X-ray. You should do your part by avoiding them when you can.

    Most readers of this newsletter know that radiation is used not only to detect problems like tumors and fractures but also to treat cancer. High doses of radiation damage and kill existing cancer cells, but as I just said, they can also cause surrounding healthy cells to mutate. It’s very likely that radiation treatment actually increases your risk of more cancer sometime in the future — either a return of the original type of cancer or the birth of a new type you didn’t have before.

    The American Cancer Society — a strong supporter of conventional treatments -- provides some evidence for this on its website. The ACS explains that radiation therapy has the potential to cause DNA mutations that could lead to the development of cancer. It explains that some studies have associated radiation therapy with increased cases of thyroid cancer and early-onset breast cancer.

    The ACS also notes that patients with Hodgkin disease who receive radiation therapy are at an increased risk because the treatment "often delivers lower radiation doses to many areas of the body."

    In the opinion of the ACS, radiation’s benefits generally outweigh the risk, but they admit additional research is needed to maximize the benefits while minimizing the risk of secondary cancers.

Radiation even damages your heart!

    Besides the cancer dangers, published studies confirm a link between radiation therapy for cancer and damage to the heart. Dr. Gofman saw this years ago. He wrote, "Medical radiation, received even at very low doses, is an important cause of death from Ischemic Heart Disease; the probable mechanism is radiation-induction of mutations in the coronary arteries, resulting in dysfunctional clones (mini-tumors) of smooth muscle cells."

    Dr. Gofman was speculating, but a 2007 study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute suggests he was on the right track. The study found that radiation therapy poses a long-term heart disease risk for breast cancer survivors.

    The researchers compared breast cancer treatment options for 4,414 ten-year survivors of breast cancer and found that 21 percent of the group had some form of cardiovascular disease, with heart failure being the most common.

    In general, those patients who were treated with radiation therapy between 1970 and 1986 had about two to three times the risk of heart disease. Although doctors employ radiation more carefully now, it’s a cancer treatment to avoid if you can.

    I’ll give you my take on radiation, as well as most forms of chemotherapy (and keep in mind that I’m not a doctor). Cancer is a systemic disease. The whole body is sick. So merely destroying a tumor or killing cancer cells does little more than buy you time. In all too many cases, the cancer comes back.

    That’s why in this newsletter and in the reports we publish we’re always talking about sound nutrition, detoxifying the body and strengthening the immune system. In the seven years we’ve been publishing cancer information, every bit of evidence we’ve seen indicates this approach is at least as effective as the conventional treatments — and makes you a lot less miserable.

Bowie State University Football: Vs Assumption Box Score and Scoring Summary.

Listen to the Audio Archive from US Sports Radio and BSU TV BOWIE STATE UNIVERSITY FOOTBALL 2012
Assumption vs Bowie State (Sep 1, 2012 at Bowie, MD)

Assumption (0-1) vs. Bowie State (1-0)

Date: Sep 1, 2012  • Site: Bowie, MD  • Stadium: Bulldogs  •  Attendance: 1064

Score by Quarters	1	2	3	4	Score
Assumption	14	0	0	6	20
Bowie State	0	7	7	10	24

SCORING SUMMARY				ASM -BSU
1st	11:57	ASM	Sean Daigle 17 yd pass from Bobby Jordan (Tad Beuchert kick)
			1 play, 17 yards, TOP 0:06	7 - 0
	04:11	ASM	Nick Bolio 1 yd run (Tad Beuchert kick)
			11 plays, 64 yards, TOP 6:00	14 - 0
2nd	01:59	BSU	McINTYRE,Reginald 22 yd pass from JOHNSTON,Jared (DIAZ-AVILES,Mario kick)
			8 plays, 0 yards, TOP 3:14	14 - 7
3rd	10:39	BSU	McNEIL,Douglas 1 yd pass from JOHNSTON,Jared (DIAZ-AVILES,Mario kick)
			9 plays, 60 yards, TOP 4:13	14 - 14
4th	01:54	BSU	DIAZ-AVILES,Mario 37 yd field goal
			12 plays, 65 yards, TOP 5:14	14 - 17
	00:33	ASM	Scott Simonson 31 yd pass from Bobby Jordan (Tad Beuchert kick failed)
			4 plays, 75 yards, TOP 1:12	20 - 17
	00:05	BSU	McNEIL,Douglas 16 yd pass from JOHNSTON,Jared (DIAZ-AVILES,Mario kick)
			4 plays, 65 yards, TOP 0:24	20 - 24

Kickoff time: 1:00 pm  • End of Game: 4:04 pm  • Total elapsed time: 3:04 Referee: Sam Warren  •  Umpire: Keith Anders  •  Linesman: Tim Price  •  Line judge: Quentin Terry  •  Back judge: Bashan Hameed  •  Field judge: Frank Trevino  •  Side judge: Otis Moore  •  Scorer: Tasha Reeves  •  Temperature: 88  • Wind: NW 8 mph • Weather: Partly Cloudy * * * SEASON OPENER FOR BOTH TEAMS * * * Next Assumption Game: 9/7 vs. Saint Anselm - 7 pm Next Bowie State Game: 9/6 at Benedict* - 8 pm *CBS Sports Network Game of the Week

US Sports Conditioning Online Boot Camp Demo

Welcome to another US Sports Online Conditioning Boot Camp! If this is your first time using the US Sports Conditioning Boot Camp, then please go at your own pace. You may lower the volume, to allow your body to become conditioned to these more challenging workouts. In other words: "Challenge by choice"

*Important Message:

This is a free Demo of the US Sports Conditioning Online Boot Camp Workouts:

Once or Twice-Weekly detailed sports conditioning workouts delivered to your inbox. Comprehensive Strength and Conditioning workouts with specific exercises, sets, reps, and weights. Videos and descriptions to help you execute each exercise with proper intensity and good form. Each training cycle will be periodically changed for maximal performance enhancement.

   Click Here to Sign Up

Once per week Delivered Tuesdays 5am EST= $2.75 per month

Twice per week Delivered Tuesday and Thursdays 5am EST=$5.00 per month

Here it is Athletes! Your Free Demo* of our bi-weekly online Sports Conditioning Bootcamps.

Be sure to stay hydrated before, during, and after your workouts.

This program is generally geared towards the Winter Sports Athlete (Basketball, Wrestling, etc.,). We are going to stay with this multifaceted strength and conditioning workout until the first of December. This workout was originally designed as a Basketball  Conditioning program. This can be applied to conditioning for just about any sport*

The weights and intensities listed were originally programmed for a specific athlete. Adjust the weights as you see fit and have SAFETY FIRST in mind.

Equipment needed: Power Gym, Machines,

Week 1 - Day 1 (Friday) of US Sports Conditioning Boot Camp's Demo Program	Week Difficulty:Medium
View Printer Friendly Version

Select		Exercise Name	Set and Rep Combinations
	1	Warmup and Stretch	8 minutes
	2	Video Theraband Internal\External Warmup Rotation (AD)	12 reps, 8 reps, 8 reps
	3	Video Snatch Deadlift	5 reps @ 115 lbs, 4 reps @ 135 lbs, 3 reps @ 160 lbs, 5 reps @ 170 lbs, 2 reps @ 160 lbs
	4	Video Bench Press	10 reps @ 225 lbs, 5 reps @ 270 lbs, 8 reps @ 315 lbs, 10 reps @ 295 lbs, 10 reps @ 270 lbs
	5	Video Dumbbell Bench Press	12 reps @ 105 lbs, 8 reps @ 120 lbs, 8 reps @ 110 lbs
	6	Video Med Ball Chest Pass (standing)	6 reps, 4 reps
	7	Video Med Ball Overhead Throw (standing)	6 reps, 4 reps
	8	Video Dumbbell Fly Stretch	60 seconds
	9	Video Dumbbell Lateral Raise	10 reps @ 41 lbs, 10 reps @ 41 lbs
	10	Video Dumbbell Rear Lateral Raise	10 reps @ 32 lbs, 10 reps @ 32 lbs
	11	Video Dumbbell Side-Lying External Rotation	10 reps @ 26 lbs, 10 reps @ 26 lbs
	12	Video Cable Triceps Pushdown	10 reps @ 170 lbs, 10 reps @ 170 lbs
	13	Video Hanging Bent Knee Leg Raises	15 reps, 15 reps
	14	Video Alternate Heel Touchers	48 reps, 48 reps
	15	Video Med Ball Side Throw (standing)	12 reps, 8 reps, 8 reps

Great Job! Ready To Sign Up For as little as 9 cents per day? Click Here!

Be sure to cool down and stretch after each workout.

To get your very own customized Strength and Conditioning program, Click Here

*Please consult a physician before engaging in any exercise program. US Sports Strength and Conditioning assumes no liability if injury or ailment should occur due to your engagement of this program or any of the US Sports Conditioning Bootcamp Workouts.

"If I could pick only one treatment to cure cancer, this would be it..."

Is Your Office Giving You Cancer?

    The typical office environment in corporate America is furnished with items made to resist wear and tear and to be more stain-proof than the textiles we use in our homes. This is all accomplished with chemicals. No, they aren't good for you. But how bad are they? Let's take a look...

Continued below. . .

The Hushed-up Truth About DMSO     For the first time, we're exposing the hushed-up truth about a secret, fast-acting compound that could completely redefine pain relief as we know it.     For the next 24 hours only, a shocking underground video is being made available to you.     (Although not offensive, it contains adult-oriented material and we suggest viewers be at least 21 years of age.)     Its uses are practically endless!     More importantly--what is it? And how can you get your hands on it?     You'll get all the answers and learn about a special offer here. And for 24 hours only, it's free to you. So, for your health, watch it here now.

    The furniture and carpets are coated with stain repellents and other synthetic materials. Except for maybe the boss's office, the furniture is made of cheap composite materials, not real wood. The walls are doused with paints that give off toxic gases — and the whole airborne nightmare is sealed in with windows that don't open and thick insulation to make the building energy-efficient.

    Some call the whole thing a miracle of modern chemistry and industrial design. But the "miracle" secretes enough toxins in the form of PFCs to make you sick with a host of illnesses — cancer being one of them.

    PFCs are polyfluorinated compounds. One of the scariest things about them is that they last a long time, and they accumulate in the body rather than being flushed out. They never go away.

    And they're found throughout the man-made environment. Dr. Olga Naidenko, a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group, said it best: "This class of chemicals, they are all over the place."

    We already know somewhere between 95 percent and 99 percent of people in the U.S. have traces of PFCs in their blood. I touched on this a few weeks ago in my Teflon update (Issue #211).

    PFOA, the contaminant in Teflon, is only one of the many terminal breakdown compounds of household products containing PFCs. It's also just one of the 15 PFCs known to pollute human blood.

How your office links with your blood

    Curiosity about this health pollutant prompted a recent study, published in Environmental Science & Technology. Lead researcher Michael McClean, associate professor of environmental health at the Boston University School of Public Health, along with his colleagues, looked at the prevalence of PFCs in office environments.

    The team sampled 31 offices in Boston over the course of four days. The offices were located in two separate buildings — one that was fairly new, and another building that was older but had new carpeting. The researchers tested for a variety of PFCs, including fluorotelomer alcohols (FTOHs), sulfonamides (FOSAs), and sulfonamidoethanols (FOSEs).

    Following that, they sampled the blood of each of the 31 workers from those offices, looking for any of 12 PFCs. They restricted the study to workers who had to spend at least 18 hours a week in their offices.

    The results give me chills. For one, FTOHs were particularly high in air samples — and three to five times higher than those found in most homes. In the office workers' blood levels, PFOA, which is a breakdown product of FTOHs, correlated with office air levels of FTOHs.

    The researchers found that the range of PFC levels varies quite a bit from one building to another. Meaning, the corresponding blood levels of PFCs depend on the building where the person works. The newer building was by far a greater source of toxins, with its new paint, furniture, and carpet.

    No surprise, those who work in older buildings without the chemically-coated new furniture and carpet have the lowest levels of PFCs.

Damage from PFCs is appalling

    Every month, it seems like some new illness gets linked with PFC exposure.

    Some of the research points to low birth weight and high cholesterol. Other studies suggest that vaccines for kids are less effective due to PFC exposure. Animal studies show PFCs weaken the immune system. And other health effects, besides cancer, include developmental and reproductive toxicity.

    According to the Environmental Working Group, "PFCs seem destined to supplant DDT, PCBs, dioxin, and other chemicals as the most notorious global chemical contaminants ever produced."

    This puts you in a tough spot if you — like most of us — want to keep your job, whether it's because you love it or need it.

    But there are some things you can do to lessen your exposure.

A few things you can do to stay healthy

    For one thing, officials need to acknowledge that office air is a significant source of exposure for disease-creating chemicals. Indoor air is two to five times more polluted than outdoor air (in some cases, 100 times more polluted).

    If you have any pull in deciding how to outfit your office, consult a resource like theGreenGuard Environmental Institute. They provide indoor air quality certification for certain products, and they're not affiliated with any of the manufacturers they certify.

    Another good source is CenterPoint Energy's Indoor Air Quality quiz. Take it to find out if your facility has "sick building syndrome." And then read their tips on what to do about it.

    Other tips for creating a healthy indoor space are:

• Use only non-toxic paint.
• Make sure there's adequate air ventilation to prevent mold growth and allow escape for airborne toxins. Most ventilation systems bring in very little outdoor air and simply re-circulate indoor air, which further reduces quality.
• Make windows accessible. Too many office buildings have their windows sealed shut.
• Use furnishings that are low in VOCs (VOCs are volatile organic compounds, meaning they escape into the air as gases).
• Consider eco-flooring materials, like cork. It's especially important to stay away from carpeting with stain repellents, because the PFCs that come with them stick around for a long time.
• Require cleaning crews to use non-toxic, natural cleaning supplies, like vinegar and baking soda
• Don't import, if you can help it. Otherwise you risk bringing in products with the same compounds you're trying to avoid. PFC levels in China are going up, for instance.
• Ask to telecommute from your home a few days a week … or all the time.

    Most importantly, read up on this stuff. You can bet big-money companies like DuPont aren't going to write "Caution: May cause cancer" on their flooring labels.

    In fact, in an email reply to health inquiries by WebMD, DuPont spokeswoman Janet Smith said, "The term 'PFCs' is rather a broad umbrella, grouping together chemicals that have different properties and applications, and different toxicity and environmental profiles. These chemicals should be considered individually when discussing questions about health and safety."

    Funny. That's exactly what McClean did in his Boston office-space study.

Don't wait around for the government to take action

    It's a sign of the times that more research these days focuses on the health hazards of chemicals. More chemicals flood our world than ever, and more people are getting sick.

    Some of the PFC class of chemicals are being phased out, like those found in Scotchgard stain and water repellent. Those were forced off the market by the EPA in 2000, and PFOA is on its way out (we hope, anyway, assuming DuPont cooperates).

    But the federal government has been far too slow to acknowledge the hazards of PFCs. They usually just respond with a call for more research, or for voluntary agreements with manufacturers. Given the persistence of these chemicals in our environment, our chance to reverse their impact may be slipping away — at least, if you're waiting for science to do something about it.

    Don't bank on regulation any time soon. Take responsibility and do what you can to make sure your daily environment isn't slowly poisoning you.

Does alcohol cause cancer?

Alcohol and Cancer — The Evidence
(And What about Red Wine?)

    As you probably know, many people are concerned that excessive alcohol use can cause liver damage… kidney problems… raise your blood pressure and create other serious health concerns. But how about cancer? Let's look at the evidence. . .

Continued below. . .

Breast Cancer Survivor was told: "You'll be dead in a year" (Pssst!! That was 12 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 isvirtually 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 12 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 Bill’s 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.

    Some researchers say you may have to add an increased risk of cancer to the list of health problems related to alcohol. This is because a variety of clinical studies have reported outcomes like these:

• The International Journal of Cancer reported a total of 389,100 cases of cancer are attributable to alcohol drinking worldwide…
• A study published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment found that drinking three or more alcoholic drinks per week after a breast cancer diagnosis may increase risk of breast cancer recurrence, especially in postmenopausal and overweight women…
• The journal Nutrition and Cancer published study findings suggesting that drinking one or more alcoholic beverages a day raised the risk of developing colon cancer by 70 percent…
• A study reported in Internal Medicine showed alcohol intake was closely related to growth of liver cancer in patients with type C cirrhosis. (Of course, cirrhosis already indicates excessive drinking.)

    After reading study results like these—it's understandable why some folks are determined to swear off all forms of alcohol.

    Others remain skeptical and want to know…

Exactly HOW can alcohol lead to cancer?

    To tell you the truth… researchers aren't clear on the relationship between alcohol consumption and cancer.

    But the American Cancer Society offers these possible explanations:

• Causes weight gain—Excess alcohol provides extra calories—which can cause weight gain. Being overweight or obese increases the risk of developing various cancers.
• Damages body tissues—Alcohol may irritate and damage various body cells. As these cells attempt to repair themselves, it can change their DNA in ways that may be favorable to cancer growth.
• Lowers folate and other nutrient levels—Alcohol inhibits proper body absorption of folate — also called folic acid or vitamin B9. Researchers believe low folate may increase the risk of breast and colorectal cancers.
• Raises hormone levels—Alcohol may raise body levels of estrogen. Because this hormone plays a role in the growth and development of breast tissue, it may affect a woman's breast cancer risk.

    For these and other reasons, ACS recommends that people limit alcohol intake to two drinks per day for men. They reduce this recommendation to just ONE drink a day for women because their smaller bodies tend to metabolize alcohol more slowly. Frankly, a drink or two per day sounds like too much to me, especially given levels of obesity and diabetes in our society.

    But there's one form of alcohol that may have some benefits. . .

Why some researchers say
a little red wine may be fine!

    The American Cancer Society admits that moderate alcohol use has been linked to lower risk of heart disease. And the ACS acknowledges that other research seems to indicate there are health BENEFITS to drinking certain types of alcohol. The obvious case — you probably know this — is red wine.

    A recent study published in the Journal of Women's Health said that drinking about two glasses of red wine daily lowered estrogen levels in premenopausal women—thereby LOWERING breast cancer risk.

    This study showed that certain chemicals in red wine appear to block the process that converts androgens into estrogen. In essence, these compounds act as natural aromatase inhibitors (AIs).

    Man-made, synthetic AIs are prescribed to women diagnosed with breast cancer to prevent it from returning. But not just any wine contains these natural cancer killers…

    These chemicals are specifically found in grapes, grape juice and in RED wines. Studies show that white wines do not contain the same natural AI compounds. And perhaps most important, other types of alcohol — beer and spirits — have NOT shown these benefits.

    Even with red wine the evidence for health benefits is contradictory. Is it a healthy food or a deadly danger? Hard to say for sure -- but it doesn't matter. Stay with me for a moment, because there's an easy way to reap the benefits of red wine without the possible risks and the excess calories.

    One red wine compound that has received quite a bit of attention is resveratrol. Why so?

    In Issue #61, I showed how some researchers have uncovered what they consider to be amazing antioxidant potential in this grape nutrient.

    Studies indicate resveratrol may help prevent cell damage that can lead to cancers of the brain, breast, eyes, prostate and skin.

    But I'm still not ready to say that resveratrol is the last word in cancer prevention…

    After all, many medical professionals are cautious about the positive effects seen in laboratory research.

    And let's not forget that resveratrol is just one of the red grape components that may have potential anti-cancer properties. It belongs to an entire class of antioxidants calledpolyphenols that work to enhance your overall health.

    Many delicious foods contain these anti-cancer nutrients, such as blueberries, pomegranates, cranberries, and purple potatoes. The spice cumin also belongs to the polyphenol class.

    And you might be surprised to know that tea and coffee are also rich sources of these antioxidants.

    In short, there are a great many sources of these nutrients that carry a lot less risk than drinking red wine.

    And if you're interested in boosting your intake of resveratrol and other anti-cancer nutrients but you find it hard to eat certain foods… or prefer not to drink wine—don't despair!

    You can always take nutritional supplements that contain resveratrol and other polyphenols to help build a natural shield against cancer cell growth.

    In any case, the natural plant compounds are sure to provide healthy total body protection—without any fear of headaches or hangovers!

St. Aug To Play First Three Home Football Games at Durham County Stadium

Saint Augustine’s University To Play First Three Home Games at Durham County Stadium

Saint Augustine’s University will host its first three home football games at Durham County Stadium in Durham, N.C., according to school officials on Wednesday, August 22, 2012.

The Falcons begin the 2012 season with two consecutive home games. They face Wingate University in the season opener Sept. 1 and nationally-ranked University of New Haven Sept. 8.  They visit Southern Connecticut State University on Sept. 15 before returning home against Bowie State University on Sept. 22.

The Wingate contest is scheduled for 1:30 p.m. while the times for the New Haven and Bowie State games have yet to be determined. Durham County Stadium is located on 750 Stadium Drive.

Saint Augustine’s University athletics on www.saintaugfalcons.com