NO 501c3 NEEDED FOR TRUE CHURCH  “Because that for His name’s sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles.” (III John 7) A great many of the church's problems today are a direct result of the church "taking" and actively pursuing a legal status that makes it inferior to, and a subordinate of, the civil government. The two most significant ways this occurs is by incorporation (state jurisdiction) and the tax-exempt 501c3 status (federal jurisdiction). Scripture simply does not support the notion that the church is an inferior institution to the State. Nor, for that matter, is the church a superior institution to the State. God has ordained both the church and the civil government as His "ministers." The church is the minister of grace, while the State is the minister of justice. Church and State are two distinct and independent spheres of authority (jurisdictions) ordained by God. However, no church can remain separate and distinct from the civil government when it incorporates and/or accepts 501c3 status. For legal purposes an incorporated 501c3 church has subordinated itself, by contract, to the civil government. For theological purposes, that church has made a covenant with the State, a covenant which Scripture in no way supports. What is the solution to the church's current messy state of affairs? It must cease operating as an underling of the State. The solution is for the church to legally operate as it once had in America (and we might add, quite successfully so). Rather than operating as "tax-exempt nonprofit religious corporations," churches once functioned as "free-churches." Just what exactly is a free-church? A free-church operates independent of, and is in no way subordinate to, the civil government. It is the right of any church to operate free of the corrupting and compromising influence and control of the State; and it is a right guaranteed by the Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… A free-church is not some radical-fringe concept. Rather, the free-church was one of the most influential, and certainly one of the most common, institutions in early American history. The worldview of those men who fought for America's independence embraced an uncompromising belief that the church was not an underling, a vassal, or in any way subordinate to any king, parliament, or any other civil government body. The church is the religious institution ordained and established by Jesus Christ Himself, and Christ has never delegated His authority to the civil jurisdiction to rule in the affairs of His church. A free-church is the opposite of a State-Church. The Church Of England is a State-Church system. State-Churches are well known throughout Europe, and there have been State-Churches there for many centuries. Europeans not only have a very low regard for their State-Churches and government-licensed clergy, they often hold them in open contempt, and this is reflected statistically by what is the lowest church attendance in the world. Rather than being quick to criticize the Europeans for not attending church, we should ponder whether their contempt for the State-Church system isn't well deserved. If you're ever inclined to have a church experience that is cold, empty, meaningless and downright depressing, just attend the average European church service (it's little wonder there are so many agnostics and atheists there). A State-Church is a church which is organized by the State, and/or is controlled and regulated by the State, or which exists at the pleasure of the State. Christians in Europe have, for a number of generations, grown up surrounded by nothing but State-Churches. As such, they are generally not offended by the notion that the State controls their church (they just don't bother to show up unless it's Christmas). It's simply a way of life for them which they generally do not question. Americans, on the other hand, are generally offended by the notion of the State creating or controlling their churches, or that their churches would be subordinate to the State. However, this is exactly what has occurred in recent years as a direct result of churches incorporating and seeking a 501c3 status -- they have become State-Churches. A free-church is a church that is truly separate, independent and autonomous from the State. It is established by a local body of Christian believers, or chartered or "planted" by another church body or denomination, without the permission or sanction of the State. The only "sovereign" of the free-church is the Lord Jesus Christ. A free-church cannot incorporate, it cannot seek a 501c3 status, it cannot become a tax collector for the State (withholding agent), it cannot accept government-issued tax numbers (EIN). The term "free-church" was widely used by the American colonists. It was not a term that they coined, but one which they inherited from their fathers and forebears such as the Scottish Covenanters, and the "non-conformist" English clergy, both of whom fled the persecutions of the Anglican State-Church and it's "sovereign head" the British monarchy. Even after American independence there continued to be Christians who fled the religious persecution of their State-Church systems for the freedom of religion America offered them. They too often used the term "free-church" to describe the churches they organized. Such an example of this would be the Evangelical Free Church, which was founded by a group of Scandinavians who settled in America in the mid-nineteenth century. Tragically, the Evangelical Free Church In America today has become a "Free Church" in name only. By incorporating and becoming a 501c3 they, some years ago, decided to abandon those principles that their Swedish, Danish and Norwegian forefathers endured great persecution for. Equally tragic is the demise of the so-called "Free-Church of Scotland." Were they honest it would be renamed the "State-Church of Scotland." So thoroughly has it become a State-Church that Scottish pastors receive their paychecks from the government (and it happened because the Scottish clergy insisted upon it). He who pays the piper calls the tune. The church must cease operating as an underling, subordinate to the State, or in any way dependent upon the State for "privileges and benefits." The solution rests in the church organizing and operating as a church -- the ecclesia, not as something other than what the Lord Jesus Himself ordained and specified. Jesus spoke of the church as a “body” with Himself as the “head” of His church, and we as various “members of the body.” The church is, therefore, not an “organization” (a “legal entity”) but a living, breathing “organism.” This should not be a difficult biblical doctrine to grasp, particularly for the Pastor. Sadly, however, ever since local churches started organizing as tax-exempt non-profit corporations in the mid-twentieth century, and since the incorporated 501c3 church is now the status quo, many folks have a hard time conceiving of the church operating as just a church. For some odd reason, just being a church isn’t good enough anymore for too many Christians. The thinking today appears to be that we must somehow be smarterthan Jesus and His disciples were. They refused to incorporate and that refusal resulted in their persecution (incorporation of all “spontaneous collectivities of persons” became mandatory throughout the Roman Empire by 6 A.D.). We’re told that we live in a far more complex world than the first-century church, and so the church too must inevitably become more complex and just adapt to the complexities of the modern information age. The simplicities of the organizational infrastructure (polity) of the early church are no longer adequate to address the complex world in which we live. Those who hold to such beliefs, whether in word or deed, are in reality, making a public proclamation that Jesus Christ is no longer competent to govern His own church and provide for, and protect it. The courts well-understand that “a church is not an entity recognized in law,” meaning that they have no jurisdiction over the church. However, organizing a church as a church is an especially difficult concept for attorneys to grasp. Few attorneys can comprehend that there are things and issues completely outside the purview and jurisdiction of the civil government, nor do they much care for the idea. After all, it’s hard to get many billable hours out of those churches that understand that the civil government has no jurisdiction over them. A free-church needs an attorney like a fish needs a bicycle. The legal support for the State’s lack of jurisdiction over the church in America is not only the Word of God, but the First Amendment to the Constitution for the United States: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… No church in any nation at any point in history can lay claim to the freedoms and liberties that are guaranteed the church in America. The First Amendment is an act of God’s Providence to safeguard His church and maintain its independence from the State. The First Amendment is the highest form of real protection the church has ever known in history. The solution rests in the church abandoning the phony third-rate protections and benefits of the State and returning to those realprotections and benefits that are ours in Christ Jesus. Although it's not inherently difficult to unlicense a State-Church1and/or organize and operate as a free-church or free-ministry, you'll still need some guidance and direction. Thankfully, there's no need to hire an attorney. All you need is some basic do-it-yourself education, and that's what this ministry offers. We have a couple of options available for you, but for most folks the best one is our National Unlicensed Church Conference. Videos and Syllabus of that conference are available.  Footnotes: 1). We define a State-Church as any of the following: An incorporated church An incorporated 501c3 church A 501c3 "unincorporated association" church  A corporation sole church (contrary to the myths promulgated by the corporation sole peddlers, a corporation sole is a corporation, and it makes little difference whether or not it is also a 501c3. A corporation sole church is a State-Church).

	|   Home   |   Forum   |   Events   |   Catalog   |   Articles   |   Contact Us   |   Site Map   |
	Copyright 2003, Heal Our Land Ministries, All Rights Reserved A word about copyright

Mercury Fillings: The Toxic Effects On The Body & Safe Removal

For the last 150 years a combination of metals known as amalgam (or silver filling) has been used in dentistry as a cheap, effective and pliable material to fill tooth cavities. Now many countries are phasing out the use of amalgam fillings in dentistry due to health concerns, especially resulting from the removal or restoration of old fillings.

Amalgam which consists of silver, mercury, tin, copper and sometimes zinc, indium or palladium, is soft enough to mix and press into the tooth but also durable. While used less often than more attractive tooth-colored materials for the restoration of teeth, amalgam is still used in general dentistry.

The most prominent component of these traditional fillings is mercury and it comprises 50% of the amalgam. There is concern about the amount of mercury being used and subsequently inhaled or absorbed by patients and dentists. Vapor expelled from chewing and shards from a dentist drilling at both the filling and for the removal of the amalgam can mean mercury is consumed, increasing levels of toxic mercury detected in the blood.

Effects Of Mercury Fillings

If you're still on the fence about this research watch the trailer to the groundbreaking film 'Evidence of Harm' on Food Matters TV. It's mind-blowing and a must watch.

Previously considered to be impotent, there has been recent debate over the potential for mercury to be released from amalgam fillings. Sophisticated tests have shown small amounts of mercury in the form of vapor can be released as the amalgam deteriorates.

In the 1980s around 68% of fillings were done with amalgam in Australia, which accounts for a large number of people who still have the silver amalgam fillings, are having them restored, or are yet to have them removed. In America, 25% of people have 11 fillings or more, which is concerning as one study found that for people with more than eight fillings, blood mercury levels were more than double those of people without fillings.

The main exposure to mercury from dental amalgam occurs during placement or removal in restoration of the tooth. Genetic variants can make particular people especially vulnerable to long-term release of mercury from fillings. As mercury is elemental, the body cannot process this substance through digestion and it will either be excreted or remain in the system. Those with the genetic allele ApoE4 protein in the blood have been found to be much more susceptible to chronic neurological conditions due to an inability to properly excrete mercury which can severely impact memory and increase susceptibility to Alzheimer's.

Dental Mercury And The Environment

While mercury exposure for those with amalgam fillings can occur, exposure to dentists and release into the environment is considered a higher and more pressing problem. It has been calculated that in the U.S. alone, approximately 29.7 tonnes of mercury in the form of amalgam are annually discharged to the internal wastewater systems of dental facilities. Shards of amalgam from drilling are suctioned from the patient's mouth but can be inhaled by dentists and also rinsed down the waste drain (even in sinks with specially designed fragment sieves). The capsules that amalgam is stored in have also been found to be disposed of incorrectly due to a low perceived risk of mercury remaining in the discarded capsule and eventually end up in general waste and then landfill. Through these processes, tonnes of fragments of mercury can enter the atmosphere, water and soil.

Safe Removal Of Mercury Fillings

Considering the propensity for mercury to enter and toxify not only our bodies but the environment, the safe removal and restoration of fillings is crucial. The International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology (IAOMT) has established the recommended minimum treatment protocol for safe removal of dental amalgam. It is recommended this be followed whenever amalgam fillings (or other dental metals) are being removed.

The safe removal of dental amalgam involves:

• Patients breathing separate air or from an oxygen supply
• Mercury-absorbing masks are worn by dental staff
• Patients wear eye protection
• Amalgams are removed in chunks rather than being ground out
• High-speed drills are used with copious amounts of water irrigation and coolant to prevent mercury vaporizing
• The air in the operating room is filtered to remove mercury vapor
• A rubber dam is used to isolate the teeth during removal
• The patient exposes minimal skin during the procedure
• High-speed suction is in use at all times in the mouth.

The safe removal of amalgams and prevention of exposure to mercury vapors or debris relies on skilled dentists and staff. As mercury’s detrimental effect to the environment and risks to the body are known, opting for non-amalgam alternatives would seem preferable for future fillings along with selecting reliable dentists for amalgam removal.

For further information on mercury in dentistry and its effect on the body and environment, check out FMTV’s collection of informational videos on the topic here.

About the Author

James Colquhoun

James Colquhoun, filmmaker of Food Matters and Hungry For Change and founder of FMTV. Along with Laurentine ten Bosch, James founded Food Matters, giving people the tools (films, books, website, TV) to take charge of 

Killing cancer by cleaning house

About the author: 

Ty Bollinger

November 2016 (Vol. 27 Issue 8) in Ageing, Blood, Breast cancer, Cancer, Cervical cancer, Clinic (multi-discipline), Diseases, Drugs, Healing, Inflammatory

A faulty housekeeping system in our cells may lie at the root of all cancers, argues noted health freedom advocate Ty Bollinger—and here’s how to fix it.

When a large company decides to cut its costs by merging departments and offloading dead weight, perhaps bringing in a consultant to help expedite the job of ‘cleaning house’, we call this process ‘corporate restructuring’. It happens all the time in the business world as a way to maximize efficiency and ensure that the highest-quality goods and services are made available to customers at the lowest possible prices.

It’s a routine survival tactic that has many parallels with the way our bodies work. Particularly with regard to the cellular system, the human body is designed to target both malignant and dead cells that interfere with healthy ones so they can be flushed from the body, improving the overall ‘quality of life’ for healthy cells that, as a result, are able to function at optimal capacity—a win–win for the state of your health.

Apoptosis is a process of programmed cell death by which the immune system deals with cancer cells before they start to go rogue and form tumours, spreading by metastases.

But there’s another process of programmed cell life that’s referred to as ‘autophagy’, which literally means ‘self-eating’, and is absolutely critical for health maintenance and disease prevention.

Similar to a corporate restructuring consultant, autophagy is the body’s way of scouring the cellular matrix for waste in order to dispose of and/or recycle it. The primary purpose of autophagy is to pick up any bacteria, subcellular organelles or damaged proteins and get rid of them by whatever means possible.

This process, in which cells constantly degrade their own unnecessary cell components to promote new cell growth and maintain homoeostasis, is the mechanism by which balance is achieved between cell synthesis and the degradation and recycling of cell components, all for the purpose of optimizing cell function. Autophagy lies at the heart of cancer prevention and it’s how our bodies attain and maintain optimal health.

In a nutshell, autophagy acts as a type of ‘grease’ for the gears of the natural cellular degradation process, and serves as a mechanism for continuous cell maintenance and regeneration. It also streamlines the process of waste removal from the body, which is a vital part of metabolic health.

Autophagocytosis, another name for autophagy, is also relevant to the functionality of the neurological system. A study published in the journal Experimental Neurobiology explains how the neuronal system, the means by which cells communicate with one another, is intrinsically dependent on autophagy for its growth and repair.

“Neurons have highly dynamic cellular processes for their proper functions such as cell growth, synaptic formation, or synaptic plasticity by regulating protein synthesis and degradation,” the study reveals, while noting that “the quality control of proteins in neurons is essential for their physiology and pathology”.1

Autophagy by its very nature operates within the realm of cellular digestion and enzyme production, and this is why researchers are increasingly pointing to its dysfunction as a factor in neurological disease.

It also protects the communication apparatus of cells, the breakdown of which can lead to brain diseases like Alzheimer’s and dementia, not to mention cancer. If neuronal pathways aren’t constantly being cleared of waste buildup, they eventually lose their capacity to function at all.

Many experts now surmise that autophagy is the single greatest factor in the ageing process. In fact, as evidenced by when autophagy functions as it should, free-radical damage and cellular dysfunction are virtually non-existent, or at least kept to a minimum.

“There is much stronger evidence of a link between autophagy activation and longevity than there is with any other longevity interventions such as exogenous antioxidant supplementation, endogenous antioxidant upregulation, micronutrient replacement, hormone replacement, anti-inflammatory therapy, telomerase activation, or stem cell therapy,” write J.P. Watson, an expert in the molecular biology of ageing, and V. Giuliano.2

A new theory of cancer

Understanding how this process works gives relevance to the cellular life cycle and turns popular cancer theory on its head. While the cancer field remains fixated on gene mutations as the root cause of cancer and unleashes failed drug treatment after failed drug treatment targeted on them, the reality is that DNA damage is merely a symptom of autophagy breakdown, which can only be addressed by therapies that restore metabolic normalcy.

That is what Otto Warburg hypothesized in 1924 as the true nature of cancer when he proposed, in the face of much opposition from his peers, that cancer isn’t a genetic disease but, rather, a metabolic disease characterized by damaged cell metabolism. Mitochondrial dysfunction, in other words—not genetic predisposition—is why otherwise healthy cells suddenly switch to an anaerobic state (without oxygen) and become malignant.

This is the very foundation of the metabolic theory of cancer, which posits that genetic mutations are secondary symptoms of cancer. Science affirms this, yet the cancer industry has shown little concern for trying to set the record straight and has, in fact, gone to great lengths to suppress this vital truth from gaining traction in the public consciousness.3

Boston University professor Thomas Seyfried describes cancer as a metabolic disease that alters the “entire complexion of the cell”, whereas genetic mutations, he says, are just one damaging by-product among many that exacerbate this systemic destabilization process, which lies at the root of most (but not all) cancers.4

Comprehensive DNA sequencing has shown that the mutation signatures of individual cancers vary dramatically from tumour to tumour and even from cell to cell within the same tumour. This renders the targeted-drug model futile, as trying to tackle cancer by focusing on eradicating DNA mutations is like shooting at a moving target—or as Dr Ira Goodman puts it,
“a multibillion-dollar wild goose chase after the wrong target”.5

As for metastasis, the death sentence of nearly every cancer diagnosis, DNA sequencing as a treatment approach has likewise proved to be a spectacular failure for the very same reasons.

“Comprehensive sequencing was unable to find a single mutation responsible for the most important quality of cancer, the single feature of cancer responsible for 90 per cent of all cancer deaths,” writes Travis Christofferson in his book Tripping Over the Truth, which outlines experiments demonstrating the fruitlessness of going after nuclear DNA in an attempt to eradicate cancer.6

So, if damaged DNA isn’t responsible for initiating metabolic disease, what is? Like any other bodily system, cell metabolism can be brought into disarray due to a number of factors, not the least of which are nutrient deficiencies, toxic overload and chronic stress. Insufficient enzyme intakes are also implicated in autophagic breakdown, hence the growing use of enzyme therapy as a way to bring it back up to speed.

The power of enzyme therapy

The late Nicholas Gonzalez, MD, the New York alternative cancer specialist, advocated the use of proteolytic enzyme therapy as a treatment for cancer because, based on the findings of a number of case studies, it’s an unquestionably effective way to optimalize autophagocytosis.

“Proteolytic is a catchall phrase for hydrolytic enzymes that specifically facilitate the chemical breakdown of proteins by severing the bonds between the amino acids that make up those proteins,” writes Jon Barron, an American nutraceutical researcher. “They are different from other enzymes in the body in that they are able to adapt to changing needs.”

The idea of using these enzymes as a cancer treatment originally came from embryologist John Beard who, in 1906, made the proposition that proteolytic digestive enzymes are effective in the treatment of all types of cancer due to their being the body’s primary defence against cancer.

After his death in 1923, Dr Beard’s ideas and methods fell into obscurity for a time, only to re-emerge in the early 1980s, when Dr Gonzalez met William Donald Kelley, a Texas dentist who was using proteolytic enzymes to treat cancer patients. Dr Gonzalez later adopted the therapy as part of his individualized nutrition protocols for cancer that, despite his recent death, are still being used at his New York clinic.

A monograph put together by Dr Gonzalez back in 1986, as part of his fellowship training programme in medical school, reveals how enzyme therapy has helped many cancer patients, who had been told they had only months or even weeks to live, go on to survive for years—thus, making it essentially a formidable cure for cancer. After bringing the treatment back to his clinic, Dr Gonzalez saw first-hand the positive effects of enzyme therapy in his patients, the evidence for which he presented to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Associate Director for the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program Linda Isaacs.

The evidence was so compelling that Dr Isaacs proposed conducting a pilot study of the treatment in patients with one of the most incurable forms of cancer: pancreatic cancer. The results of this study were published in the journal Nutrition and Cancer in 1999, and showed that, of the 11 patients followed in the trial, eight with stage IV (metastasized) disease, nine (81 per cent) of the 11 lived for one year, five (45 per cent) for two years, four (36 per cent) for three years and two for more than four years.7 In comparison, in a drugs trial of either gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil, of 126 patients with pancreatic cancer, none was still alive after 19 months.8

The NCI and National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) went on to fund a large-scale trial not long after that. But because of mismanagement by the researchers—according to Dr Gonzalez, they failed to ensure that patients were following the strict nutritional guidelines set forth for the study—it failed to arrive at the same conclusions. A follow-up investigation conducted by the Office for Human Research Protections, an investigative arm of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), verified that the Columbia University scientists had indeed mismanaged the study, a fact also confirmed by the Food and Drug Adminstration (FDA).

But that didn’t stop Dr Gonzalez and his team from making sure that the truth won out. A peer-reviewed study published in Pancreas and included as part of a lengthy review published in 2007 showed that proteolytic enzyme therapy is indeed an effective treatment for pancreatic and many other forms of cancer.9 In fact, many therapists believe that proteolytic enzymes are arguably the most important factor in cancer prevention at the systemic level.

Dr Gonzalez’s clinic uses it alongside a rigorous diet and detoxification protocol for maximum benefits. “The therapy itself is quite complex, but basically involves three components: diet; aggressive supplementation with nutrients and a pancreas product (containing naturally occurring enzymes); and detoxification,” the clinic says. “The protocols are individualized and each patient receives a diet designed for his or her specific needs. The diets are quite variable, ranging from a pure vegetarian programme to a diet requiring fatty red meat 2–3 times a day.”

For a person who already has cancer, the required daily dosage of pancreatic enzyme supplements is rather intense, ranging from 130 to 175 capsules per day. These supplements contain a range of trace elements, minerals, vitamins, antioxidants and animal glandular products, again customized according to each patient’s particular needs.

The most important part of the protocol, however, is the pancreatic product, derived from animals raised in the pristine environments of Australia and New Zealand, where animal husbandry standards are the highest in the world. This is accompanied by an aggressive detox regimen that helps rid the body of all the metabolic waste products and stored toxins released during the therapy’s highly effective “repair and rebuild” phase.10

Dr Gonzalez’s individualized approach to patient care was birthed out of nutritional training under Dr Kelley, who came up with 10 different diets, as well as 94 variations of those diets, which he ‘prescribed’ to his patients. Because every individual has a unique biological and physiological makeup, he realized, no one dietary approach would work for everyone as a kind of one-size-fits-all cure.

But it’s the enzymes that really do the work. As Dr Gonzalez explained it, they seem to selectively target the proteins on cancer cell membranes and “chew them up”, although the precise mechanism of action has yet to be fully detailed due to a lack of rigorous testing.

“Cell membranes are a little bit fatty, but they also have protein molecules that are receptors, and pores that allow nutrients to get in and waste products to get out . . . that is how cells survive, with the protein pores and membrane. These proteins. . . don’t affect normal tissue,” he said, but with the caveat, “but we haven’t had the trillions of dollars of funding to substantiate that.”

What we do have, though, are plenty of peer-reviewed clinical and animal models to show that the therapy works, not only at Dr Gonzalez’s clinic but also at Dr Kelley’s, who successfully administered the treatment to his patients for years. And Dr Gonzalez credits not himself, but his predecessors, for coming up with this comprehensive healing approach, which deals not only with cancer cells and tumours, but also with the tumour waste that so often causes patients to become ill—hence his focus on detoxification.

“They work for any type of cancer,” Dr Gonzalez told me about his enzymes. “That is why . . . I deliberately chose 26 different types of cancer [in my research]—50 patients and 26 different types of cancer—to make the point that it works for all different types of cancer—leukaemias, lymphomas, blood cancer, solid tumours, breast, colon, rectal, metastatic prostate—and a whole series of them.”

But perhaps most impressive of all is its effectiveness against pancreatic cancer, which is largely considered incurable. One of Dr Kelley’s patients, a woman named Arlene Van Straten from Appleton, Wisconsin, was cured of her pancreatic cancer more than 30 years ago, thanks to the same enzyme therapeutic protocol still in use at Dr Gonzalez’s clinic, a testament to its amazing potential as a universal cancer killer.

Another of Dr Gonzalez’s patients, Brenda Michaels, a 30-year breast cancer and cervical cancer survivor, shares her story.

“I learned that I was extremely toxic, and that I needed to be detoxified . . . I learned about coffee enemas, something that most people go, ‘Oh my God, don’t tell me, don’t share that with me.’ But when I learned about what the coffee bean holds and how it helps to open up those pores in the liver to draw the toxins out of the liver, it made sense to me.

“So instead of pushing all that away because, for a lot of people, the diet is so strict, having to take the pills every so often and waking up in the middle of the night and having to do coffee enemas . . . I was taking 143 different vitamins, minerals, and enzymes a day. Five days on, two days off. And then, in between, I was doing these very heavy detoxifying procedures that he has his patients do . . . I’m in my 60s; I’m the healthiest I feel I’ve ever been.”

What’s so good about these enzymes?

Taking proteolytic enzymes regularly can make all the difference in cancer prevention. Your body can use them to:

• destroy harmful bacteria, viruses, moulds and fungi

• quell damaging inflammation

• purify your blood

• clean out your lungs

• maximize immunity

• dissolve scar tissue

• promote systemic detoxification

• eliminate autoimmune conditions.

The key is to combine proteolytic enzymes with a diet focused on more raw and living foods and fewer cooked and processed foods. And remember to chew your food thoroughly and drink plenty of water throughout the day, as detoxification comes to a grinding halt if you’re dehydrated.

Enzymes for cancer prevention

If we recognize that proper mitochondrial function is the base upon which our cells produce ATP, or cellular energy, it then follows that taking the necessary steps to ensure optimal mitochondrial function is critical for cancer prevention.

One of the best ways to do this, both from a nutrition and detoxification perspective, is by supplementing with proteolytic enzymes.

A recent paper published in the journal Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology spells out exactly why proteolytic enzymes are so important: without them, cellular mitochondria would be unable to synthesize proteins, induce cell apoptosis, eliminate waste and perform all the other necessary functions integral to life.

When these functions are inhibited, the consequences can be devastating: think neurodegenerative disease, the metabolic syndrome and cancer.1

Besides cleaning up the blood and improving lymphatic function, proteolytic enzymes help to:

• control systemic inflammation throughout the body

• repair/rebuild the cardiovascular system

• improve blood flow

• clean up and optimalize the immune system

• prevent and dissolve blood clots and arterial plaque

• increase exercise capacity and recovery times

• break down rogue proteins in soft tissue and blood.

As all pathogens, allergens and rogue (cancerous) cells have protein defence shields, it’s easy to understand why proteolytic enzymes, which possess unique protein-degradation properties, are so essential for cell maintenance and waste removal.

What to look for

A good-quality proteolytic enzyme formula should contain the following enzymes at their active levels:

• Protease: 300,000 HUT (haemoglobin unit on the tyrosine basis)

• Fungal pancreatin: 1,200 USP (United States Pharmacopeia)

• Nattokinase: 540 FU (fibrinolytic units, or its ability to break down the blood-clotting enzyme fibrin)

• Seaprose S: 15,000 U (enzyme units)

• Papain: 72 MCU (milk-clotting units, or how quickly the enzyme digests milk protein; sometimes listed as papain units, or PU, equivalent to 0.1 MCU)

• Bromelain: 336 GDU (gelatin-digesting units, or how fast the enzyme digests gelatin; 1 MCU = 0.67 GDU)

• Amylase: 3,000 SKB [after Sandstedt, Kneen, Blish, the test’s creators; sometimes labelled as DU (brewing measurement), with SKB and DU at a 1:1 equivalency]

• Lipase: 192 FIP (Fédération Internationale Pharmaceutique test methodology).

Excerpted from The Truth About Cancer by Ty Bollinger (Hay House, 2016), available from Amazon

---

It’s mental: psychiatric drug sales double, yet they don’t work

Five-second rule for dropped food is hard to swallow

References

Main article

References
1	Exp Neurobiol, 2012; 21: 1–8
2	www.anti-agingfirewalls.com/2013/04/19/autophagy-the-housekeeper-in-every-cell-that-fights-aging-2/
3	Mercola J. ‘The Metabolic Theory of Cancer and the Key to Cancer Prevention and Recovery’. Mercola.com, 7 February 2016
4	Carcinogenesis, 2014; 35: 515–27
5	Goodman IL. ‘Refocusing Our Efforts Against Cancer’. Townsend Letter, November 2015
6	Christofferson T. Tripping Over the Truth. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2014, pp 147–8
7	Nutr Cancer, 1999; 33: 117–24
8	Drugs Exp Clin Res, 2000; 26: 179–90
9	Alt Ther Health Med, 2007; 13: 46–55; Pancreas (2004; 28: 401–12)
10	Gonzalez N. ‘Enzyme Therapy and Cancer’. Dr-Gonzalez.com, February 2016

Enzymes for cancer prevention

References
1	Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 2015; 16: 345–59

20/20 at 80

About the author: 

Lynne Mctaggart Lynne McTaggart

August 2017 (Vol. 28 Issue 5) in Ageing, Blindness, Blood, Cataracts, Cholesterol, Clinic (multi-discipline), Diabetes, Diseases, Drugs, Eye problems, Glaucoma, Hypertension, Inflammatory

You can keep your eyesight—and even reverse glaucoma or cataracts—just by changing your diet, says Lynne McTaggart

To modern medicine, cataracts and glaucoma are to eyes what grey is to hair: an inevitable sign of advancing years. A measure of how closely associated such conditions like cataract are with ageing is the terminology: the most common form of cataract in the West is a version referred to as 'senile cataract', which develops after the age of 50 and is thought to be analogous to losing your marbles in other regards.

That deteriorating eyesight is considered inevitable as we get older has a great deal to do with current statistics: nearly two-thirds of the over-50 develop cataracts, and a whopping 90 per cent develop them over the age of 60. And some 2 per cent of 40- to 50-year-olds and 8 per cent of 70-year-olds develop glaucoma.

Doctors often don't tell the majority of cataract patients that they're developing the disease until it has become full-blown—largely because they've been taught in medical school that, as nothing can be done other than surgery, they may as well allow it to 'ripen' until the patient can no longer see.

But new evidence shows that diseases like cataracts and glaucoma are preventable, because they have a lot to do with diet, nutritional status and the intake of certain environmental toxins.

In fact, explosive new evidence has now linked the development of cataracts to one of the most ubiquitous drugs used by the over-50s: statins.

A team at the University of Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, examined two databases of men aged over 40: the first included more than 162,000 cases of lens opacities, or cataracts, compared with more than 650,000 healthy controls, while the second included around 45,000 cataract patients matched against about 450,000 controls.

The Vancouver team discovered that the risk increased by 27 per cent in patients taking any of the statin drugs for more than a year,1 and the lens damage was enough to require surgery.

This follows the findings of earlier studies comparing the risk of developing cataracts among type 2 diabetes sufferers with that of patients taking statins. While the diabetes patient runs an 82 per cent risk, the statin user's risk is raised by 57 per cent.

In one study,Canadian researchers at the University of Waterloo in Ontario examined 6,397 patients being treated at an eye clinic for cataracts. Of those, 452 had diabetes, and 56 per cent of them were also taking a statin drug.2

The Ontario team believe that, when all other potential factors are adjusted for, the risk of age-related cataract is similar for both types of patients. This places statins squarely in the same category of risk as one of the chief known causes of cataract.

Drugs are also implicated in glaucoma. Evidence based on more than 3,400 women, aged 40 or older who'd taken part in the 2005-2008 US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), discovered that those taking the contraceptive pill for more than three years were twice as likely to develop glaucoma.3

Yet, perhaps more than any other body part, doctors act as though eyes have a life of their own that's disconnected from the rest of our bodies. The medical profession tends to view eye problems as purely mechanical—a retina that somehow got detached, a globe that somehow got misshapen, or which stubbornly refuses to function correctly or resist going cloudy, a bad toss of the dice that has somehow, without our having anything to do with it, 'just happened'.

Consequently, the prevailing medical approach is to surgically or chemically get those errant lenses or muscles back into line, so correcting vision by attempting to treat the symptoms, but not the underlying cause.

But in most cases, the underlying cause isn't understood and certainly never linked to our diet or any other drugs we may be taking.

However, at least one doctor in the UK took issue with this approach. The late ophthalmologist Stanley Evans went to Africa in 1964 for an extended research programme into the causes and prevention of blindness in Africa.

He planned to stay for five years, but ended up staying for 17 instead on an extended research programme into the causes, prevention, and nutritional correction of blindness and other eye disease. In Africa and at home, Evans also amassed countless anecdotal cases of patients in Africa and the UK (and, indeed, from many other countries too) who were helped or cured simply through diet, supplements and eye exercises.

Evans made the connection between many eye disorders and nutritional deficiencies and, after studying which nutrients were affecting which parts of the eye, he developed a dietary therapy that has helped thousands of patients with a variety of supposedly untreatable illnesses.

When Evans returned to Britain in the early 1980s, he published much of his research in respected ophthalmological journals like The Optician. Even in the 1990s, Evans claimed that the research he had conducted and published for some 44 years was only just being confirmed by other sources.

In fact, he noted, with some amusement, that Roche Pharmaceuticals once organized a conference to study vitamins E, C and A and their role in the prevention of cataracts, accompanied by a great deal of fanfare, when the vitamin division of Roche manufactured the supplement that he had already developed and used on his patients for many years.

Many other orthomolecular physicians, such as Abram Hoffer and Robert G. Smith, and WDDTY's own panel member Dr Damien Downing, have since duplicated Stanley Evans' experience, successfully reversing diseases of the ageing eye simply with a prescription for the right diet and a handful of supplements.

As they have all confirmed in their own work, the chief reason for eye disease as we get older is oxidative stress. This can be caused by environmental toxins like smoking and pesticides, drugs, but chiefly because of a poor diet.

Putting out the fires

The eye's main defence against oxidative stress is antioxidants, particularly vitamin C, vitamin E and glutathione. Vitamin C is a particularly good firefighter because, when it enters a cell, it prevents free radicals from damaging the cell's nuclear DNA as well as the numerous metabolic pathways in the tissues surrounding the cells.

When a cell has adequate vitamin E, the cell membrane can act as a sentinel, preventing oxidation and reducing damage,4 even halting any damage to photoreceptors.

In fact, just having vitamin E sitting in the fatty layer of the cell membrane can prevent oxidation of its fatty acids and proteins,5and may even lower pressure in the eye, the cause of glaucoma.

These powerhouse vitamins can also help to quench fires in the macula, the central part of the retina known to degenerate as we age, and appear to work in synergy.6

But oxidative damage from light consumes vast quantities of these antioxidants; in fact, the concentration of vitamin C in the eye is 20 times higher than its concentration in the blood.7 This means we need to take loads of it and the other antioxidants to achieve any true benefit, particularly if we're already showing signs of developing eye disease.

However, so powerful are these vitamins, says orthomolecular expert Robert G. Smith, that ageing eyes show improvement in such areas as the retina, optic nerve and blood vessels feeding the eyes after just two weeks of taking 600 mg of vitamin C, even in those who don't have a deficiency of the vitamin.8

Here are the main diseases of the ageing eye, and the nutritional ways to combat them with diet.

Glaucoma

What is it? One of the leading causes of blindness in the UK, glaucoma happens when eye pressure, due to an obstruction in the outflow of the aqueous humour (the fluid between the lens and cornea), is increased and eventually damages the optic nerve. The orthodox methods of treating glaucoma are usually surgery or a variety of drugs that aim to constrict the pupil of the eye, inhibit secretion of aqueous humour, aid aqueous outflow and/or even lower hypertension in the eye—with varying levels of success. Surgery is thought to be necessary if the pressure in the eye is very high and drugs have failed to lower it.

What causes it? In Evans' experience, many cases of glaucoma are the result of nutritional deficiency. Vitamin A deficiency, in particular, causes the cornea to soften and its texture to change from a glassy pearl-like appearance to a dull matte surface; it can even cause the cornea to collapse completely.

Aside from not getting enough carotenoids in your diet, too much alcohol destroys vitamin A and may be responsible for changing the permeability of the connective tissues during the early corneal changes caused by vitamin A deficiency. The other main culprits are drugs and a high-sugar diet full of processed foods.

Cataracts

What is it? After excessive oxidative damage, cloudiness develops in the crystalline lens of the eye or lens capsule, absorbing water and swelling. Varying in degree from slight to complete opacity that blocks the passage of light, cataracts are the leading cause of blindness in the underdeveloped countries. But some 11 million Americans also have cataracts, as do one in three Brits.

During most of our life, lens tissue can actively repair itself to keep lens proteins intact, but with old age and damage due to oxidation from absorbing UV rays and ionizing radiation (the kind that has traditionally been considered the most worrisome), the lens tissue can't maintain itself in good condition;9 its crystalline protein becomes cloudy and the absorbed water causes it to swell.

What causes it? Aside from diabetes and drugs like statins, other environmental insults include toxins, trauma, radiation, prescribed and non-prescribed drugs, alcohol and tobacco use.

Although age can be a factor in its onset, it is definitely not the root cause. As Evans often pointed out, many people at age 90 are free of cataracts, and his work in Africa convinced him that it's basically a nutritional disorder. Indeed, he and other doctors have had ample experience demonstrating that, when a person follows a good diet, cataract isn't likely to develop.

When cataract starts, the protein cells of the lens gradually begin to change. When lens protein completes this transformation, it's irreversible, but if you improve your diet and supplement programme before that, cells that are still in the process of changing can be reversed and transparency restored.

"Even when it has begun," noted Evans, "if these measures are taken, its development can in many cases be arrested."

So even if a cataract has been developing for years before you initiate your nutritional therapy, you can improve your visual acuity just by keeping up a good diet. The cataract won't develop further and you can avoid or at least delay surgery for years.

This is always preferable to surgery because, once the crystalline lens is removed, you'll need an artificial lens in the form of thick glasses, contact lenses or an implant—none of which comes without drawbacks or risks. Thick lenses severely curtail sight, whereas contact lenses can cause corneal ulceration and glaucoma as well as other sight-threatening complications.

Even when cataract surgery is successful, there are inherent risks with the use of implants, including glaucoma, intraocular inflammation and damage to the vitreous during surgery, possibly causing retinal detachment.

A bitter pill

The latest evidence shows that patients taking statin drugs have an increased risk of cataracts—just like patients with type 2 diabetes. In one study, type 2 diabetes sufferers had an 82 per cent increased risk, while statin-takers had a 57 per cent increased risk.

Burning out the eye

Robert G. Smith, author of The Vitamin Cure for Eye Disease (Basic Health Publications, 2012), maintains that another main culprit of the eye's oxidative stress is excessive light, which generates free radicals—that is, molecules with an unbound electron—which are extremely reactive and can damage the biochemistry within a cell. And eyes are particularly susceptible because they sit right at the surface of the body.

As Smith wrote: "Believe it or not, whenever we go out into sunlight, virtually all the pigment in our rod photoreceptors is bleached in a few seconds and must be regenerated before we can see again in the dark.

"This pigment is regenerated by vitamin A (retinyl or carotene), which we must obtain from food. After many decades spent outside in bright sunlight (and with inadequate nutrition), the oxidative damage can build up and cause the cells to be dysfunctional or die."

As the years go on, oxidative stress can overwhelm the eye's antioxidant defenses, and become a major factor in age-related eye diseases.1 On the other hand, says Smith, certain foods are constant firefighters and, when consumed regularly, will put out these oxidative fires and keep your eyesight well into old age.

Other potential causes of cataract

•Pilocarpine drops, used for glaucoma

•Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), which can increase cataract risk by 40 per cent1

•Excessive sunbathing (if nutritional status is poor)

•Laser surgery to correct myopia

•Cortisone and other steroids

•Heavy metals; if you smoke, the cadmium goes straight to the lens,2 and lead exposure has also been linked to cataracts.3

Diet to prevent eye diseases of old age

The following diet and supplement plan has been shown to slow or prevent the formation of cataracts and glaucoma. In fact, says Smith, the entire carotenoid family is amazing eye food, but lutein and zeaxanthin, both found in green leafy vegetables, make up the main constituents of the filter in the macula that removes blue light from crossing into the retina.

Eat a high-protein diet. One of the chief reasons that Africans developed cataracts and other eye diseases, Evans discovered, was a major deficiency of protein. Aim for 70-80 g/day and include lots of fish.

Red-coloured seafoods like crab, lobster, shrimp and salmon are rich in astaxanthin, an antioxidant known to improve visual acuity after consuming modest amounts. Just 6 mg/day can improve visual acuity.10

Eat your greens and blues. All carotenoid antioxidants are good for your eyes, but spinach, kale and cabbage, in particular, are rich in lutein, the king of the carotenoid family in terms of eye health.11

Ignore the orthodox anti-egg low-cholesterol advice. Egg yolks are rich in lutein, as are kiwis, grapes and corn. Anthocyanins, found in blue and purple fruit like blueberries, red and purple grapes, and blackberries, can help night vision.12

Go Mediterranean. Cook fresh from scratch and include lots of fresh, organic fruits and vegetables, olive oil, legumes and good-quality protein.

Drink in strict moderation. One to two drinks a day can halve your risk of developing cataracts compared with teetotallers or those drinking any more than that.13

Stop smoking. It's not great for your lungs, but it's almost as bad for your eyes.11

Get off the drugs. Besides statins, steroids and NSAIDs like aspirin, antidepressants, anticoagulants, antacids, antibiotics, certain antipsychotics and even antihistamines have been linked to eye disorders.

Move it. Exercise has been shown to help with eye pressure, cataracts and even short-sightedness. Just 25 minutes of walking every day can make a difference.

Wear shades when the sun shines. Continuously exposing your eyes to intense sunlight is linked to a high incidence of cataracts (see box, page 33).14

Take breaks from your computer. Let's face it: the blue light emitted from computers, tablets and smart phones definitely isn't great for your eyes.

Eye healthy supplements
Antioxidants have been shown to have synergistic effects in repairing or preventing oxidative damage. And besides the beneficial effects of vitamins A and C, vitamin E has been shown to lower pressure within the eye and to protect photoreceptors from oxidative damage.

Vitamin A (as beta-carotene)
Suggested daily dosage: 5000-25,000 IU (but with supervision)

Vitamin C, shown to lower eye pressure at high doses
Suggested daily dosage: 1-10 g

Vitamin E
Suggested daily dosage: 400-500 IU
Fish oils (omega-3)
Suggested daily dosage: at least 1,400 mg EPA and 1,000 mg DHA

B-complex vitamins (B1, B2, B6, B12) at high doses, but often lower in patients with glaucoma
Suggested daily dosage: B-100 complex capsules

Folate (l-methylfolate, not folic acid)
Suggested daily dosage: 1,000 mcg

Alpha-lipoic acid
Suggested daily dosage: 150 mg

Chromium, as patients with glaucoma are often low in this and other minerals
Suggested daily dosage: 200 mg

Zinc
Suggested daily dosage: 50 mg

Magnesium
Suggested daily dosage: 400 mg

Vaccinium myrtillus (bilberry or European blueberry) herbal extract (VME), shown to improve glaucoma
Suggested daily dosage: 200 mg

Ginkgo biloba herbal tincture, which can improve blood flow to the eyes in glaucoma patients15
Suggested daily dosage: 40 mg three times a day

Eye drops containing N-acetylcarnosine (NAC), an antioxidant shown to improve eyesight in most people with cataracts;16 Can-C Eye Drops (available on the internet) have been found to help 90 per cent of patients see better.

---

The gold standard for removing mercury

References

Burning out the eye

1	R. G. Smith, 'Nutrition and Eye Diseases,' in The Orthomolecular Treatment of Chronic Disease, A. W. Saul, ed. (Basic Health, 2014) end box

Other potential causes of cataract

1	Ophthalmology, 1998; 105: 1751-8
2	Arch Ophthalmol, 1997; 115: 1296-303
3	JAMA, 2004; 292: 2750-4

Diet to prevent eye diseases of old age

References
1	Can J Cardiol, 2014; 30: 1613-9
2	Optom Vis Sci, 2012; 89: 1165-71
3	www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/ 131118091418.htm
4	Free Radic Biol Med, 2007; 43: 16-21; Mol Vis, 2009; 15: 855-60
5	Ocul Surf, 2009; 7: 176-85
6	Br J Nutr, 2004; 91: 809-29
7	Eperjesi F, Beatty S, eds. Nutrition and the Eye: A Practical Approach, 1st edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, 2006
8	J Orthomol Med, 2010; 25: 67-76
9	Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 1996; 234: 2-11
10	Altern Med Rev, 2011; 16: 355-64
11	Arch Ophthalmol, 2007; 125: 1225-32
12	Photochem Photobiol, 2005; 81: 529-36
13	Am J Ophthalmol, 2010; 150: 434-40.e1
14	Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2003; 44: 4210-4
1 5	Can J Ophthalmol, 2008; 43: 351-5
16	Peptides, 2001; 22: 979-94