Healthy, Natural Living

Full Article

There is no shortage of opinions flying around the internet about measles. Some are easily shared via social media. This particular one I felt I needed to add a bit of my thought process, for the people that feel the family that chooses to not vaccine is the fault of outbreaks.

The eyebrow raisers for me from this PRO-vaccine article

Q: Why do some people still get measles even though they received two shots?

A: In some people, the vaccine doesn’t produce enough antibodies to fight off the measles virus. One reason is “waning immunity.” In the 1960s and ’70s, the systems of immunized people had to regularly fight off the measles virus. Practice makes perfect. But now, immune systems are out of practice and some people who got the shots in the 1960s, ’70s and ’80s may be more susceptible today.

So, this is saying the vaccine doesn’t always work. The people “regularly” FOUGHT-OFF “the measles virus” it does not say they regularly died. It also states “practice makes perfect.” Why did they need to mess with perfection? And now those that were vaccinated in the 60’s 70’s & 80’s are MORE SUSCEPTIBLE!!

Q: What is illness like if you have already been fully vaccinated?

A: In most people, it can be a weaker form of illness than in unvaccinated people, Cherry said.

Well, that sounds like a good deal. People who get the vaccine can still contract measles, but it is a “weaker form.” So, they are less likely to realize they have measles, more likely to socialize with the community, and more likely to spread the virus to others; including the immunocompromised and those unable to get the vaccine.

Q: Have doctors or healthcare providers been overlooking measles?

A: Yes, there have been some cases, according to the California Department of Public Health. The first symptoms are similar to other illnesses, like fever, coughing, sneezing and red, watery eyes. People can have these symptoms for about four days before developing the telltale rash that begins on the head and spreads to the rest of the body. In fact, even after the rash appears, doctors might forget to consider measles.

Now, the doctors don’t recognize the virus, because of the reliance of the vaccine and the assumption it always works, so it is mis-diagnosed, Lord only knows how often. If the telltale rash is mild because of the vaccine, I have to assume that a measles diagnoses is far less likely to happen. The virus is still very contagious once it is activated.

This article from is just as good/bad depends how you want to read it:
Measles Outbreak Traced to Fully Vaccinated Patient for First Time
“Although public health officials have assumed that measles immunity lasts forever, the case of Measles Mary highlights the reality that “the actual duration [of immunity] following infection or vaccination is unclear,” says Jennifer Rosen, who led the investigation as director of epidemiology and surveillance at the New York City Bureau of Immunization.”

“If it turns out that vaccinated people lose their immunity as they get older, that could leave them vulnerable to measles outbreaks seeded by unvaccinated people—which are increasingly common in the United States and other developed countries. Even a vaccine failure rate of 3% to 5% could devastate a high school with a few thousand students, says Robert Jacobson, director of clinical studies for the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group in Rochester, Minnesota, who wasn’t involved with the study.”

Again, it’s “seeded by the unvaccinated” even when there is vaccine failure!

This study shows how one fully vaccinated person spread the virus to 4 other “immunized” people.


Beef Tallow is something most people have never heard of. I know I hadn’t heard of it until I was well into my quest for nutrition. Step by step, day by day, as I changed the contents of my refrigerator and cabinets, I also change my appreciation for the gifts God had given us. My husband’s grandmother was aiding in this new appreciation. She would often remind me of what Jesus said:

When they had all had enough to eat, he said to his disciples, “Gather the pieces that are left over. Let nothing be wasted.” John 6:12

When we started raising our own beef I didn’t get all the “stuff” back from the processor the first time. By the time we sent our second one off, I had learned how easy it was to make tallow, and now, I get that nice piece of suet that the cow grew beautifully for our family; along with all the other cuts. I then render the suet down and make tallow.

Now, I have tallow, what am I going to do with it? I cook with it! It is a great frying oil for chicken and potatoes. On the occasion, I make a pie crust, I will use it in that, too.
It wasn’t until a friend of mine was having some skin challenges that she discovered the benefits of tallow balm. She had amazing results with the balm she had purchased from the internet. She simply said to me one day, “you need to learn how to make this stuff! It is amazing!” The website she was getting it from is a great resource, they share how they make it! Check them out.
At this same time, I had been reading how beneficial tallow balm is for eczema. My nephew has severe eczema and if I can do anything to help his mom help him, I’m in! This could be my nephews legs. I then remembered that grandma always had a jar of tallow sitting next to her chair and when she would apply it she would say, “this is the good stuff, Di.” Of course, this was when I still bought all the name brand, trendy, modern stuff. So, it went right over my head.

Off to my kitchen science lab I went. It took me a few tries to fine tune the recipe. My sister-in-love fell in love with the results from the balm after my first batch, my nephew’s body was getting relief. But, there were some things that I wasn’t happy with so, I made some adjustments. I am now happy with the texture, consistency, aromas, and the spreadability of the balm.
Now, I want to help you understand the benefits of using nourishing tallow balm as our ancestors did before modern science took over the industry.

The most informative article I found was this article “Traditional Nourishing and Healing Skin Care” by Andrew J. Gardner where he shares the traditional use of tallow in skin care for both slight and serious conditions.

Common Sense Principles of Skin Care
We know that the skin is the largest organ of the body and readily absorbs much of what is applied to it, good and bad. That is why so many drugs can be administered through the use of transdermal patches. Therefore, it is an excellent principle and wise precaution not to apply substances to our skin that we would not readily take internally or, in a word, eat. It would be ideal if what we used on our skin were edible, and yet more, a whole food, in which case it would also have the potential of actually nourishing the skin and helping it to heal itself.
Another sound principle of health is to give the body what it needs to maintain and heal itself, since only the body itself can do that job. The modern mentality often seeks to improve on nature or even to supplant nature, which is impossible to do as well as presumptuous and foolhardy to attempt. In the case of skin care, this mentality seeks to manipulate the chemistry of the skin to produce relief or enhancement. It seems logical that such an approach would likely only produce short-term results, if any, and, what is worse, could result in toxicity with possible long-term negative effects on the skin and on the health of the whole body. Therefore, it is no wonder that modern skin care products have to be re-applied, possibly more and more frequently, to maintain their effect, and we can never know all the other harmful effects that their unnatural ingredients may be having on our health.
Indeed, tallow from cows that are only fed grass has a better mineral and micronutrient profile, including higher levels of vitamins. For example, one study found that grass-fed cows have four times the vitamin E of grain-fed cows. Products from grass-fed animals were also found to have three to five times more CLA that those fed a ‘conventional’ diet.

Tallow balm can be used for all manner of skin conditions, including dry, chapped, calloused, cracked and sun-damaged skin, rashes, burning, itching, wrinkles, and so on, because it gives the skin the nutrients it needs to heal itself. It can even be used as a soothing aftershave. One mother applied it all over her baby’s body for eczema, which had been present for a couple months, and it disappeared. Another mother applied it on her baby for a terrible case of diaper rash that did not respond to other “natural” products, and it was gone after three applications. In addition, a man who had had a split lip for over a year and who had already ‘tried everything,’ including ‘natural oils and shea butter,’ had his lip heal in two weeks using tallow balm, and ‘it’s been healed ever since.’ Finally, numerous others have had success using it for calluses, dry and cracked skin, and sunburns, and for moisturizing, smoothing and softening their skin.

Data from: Smith, G.C. “Dietary supplementation of vitamin E to cattle to improve shelf life and case life of beef for domestic and international markets.” Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523-1171

What makes tallow so wonderful for skin care applications?
Tallow fat is 50 to 55 percent saturated, just like our cell membranes, making it helpful for skin health and compatible with our biology.
Tallow is similar to our “sebum” the oily, waxy matter that lubricates and waterproofs our skin.
The following are specifically from grass fed cows:
Tallow contains the abundant fat-soluble activators; vitamins A, D, E, and K, which are necessary for skin health.
Tallow contains conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) which has anti-cancer and anti-inflammatory properties.
Tallow contains palmitoleic acid, which has natural anti-microbial properties.

Vitamins A, D, E, and K, along with essential fatty acids make tallow great for skin health. These nutrients are also great for hormone and immune health as well, because they are absorbed into the body. This is a plus considering many people with thyroid and autoimmune issues have absorption and conversion issues. By rubbing them into your skin, you bypass possible gut malabsorption.

This is how people cared for their skin before chemicals. This is the whole food of skin care. Don’t put anything on your body that you wouldn’t put in your body! A little goes a long way, so a jar lasts an incredibly long time.

Mildly Scented was created with my nephew in mind. This blend contains specific essential oils that many have seen great relief from eczema symptoms. Of course, this is not FDA approved!

Visit ~My Comfy Cabinet~ for ordering details.

When I came upon this article from the World Heath Organization (WHO) I was not surprised how it was written and laid out. As usual it appears very scary. I guess I don’t scare easily and I read through that because, the truth is in here if you can find it.

I enjoyed dissecting the article about antiperspirant so, I am going to do that again. Here is my interpretation:

The very first thing we see is the “scary” numbers in the “key facts.”

Measles is one of the leading causes of death among young children even though a safe and cost-effective vaccine is available.
Only in poor, developing countries we will read that farther into this article.

In 2012, there were 122 000 measles deaths globally – about 330 deaths every day or 14 deaths every hour.
Where? Who? It is the same people that are severely effected by Malaria. In 2012, malaria caused an estimated 627 000 deaths mostly among African children. Where a child dies every minute from malaria.
Why are we not worried about malaria? Did you get a malaria vaccine?

Measles vaccination resulted in a 78% drop in measles deaths between 2000 and 2012 worldwide.
Tuberculosis & Scarlet Fever are recorded having the same decline here in the United States and in developing countries without a vaccine.

In 2012, about 84%* of the world’s children received one dose of measles vaccine by their first birthday through routine health services – up from 72% in 2000.
*We will need this reference later in the article.

Since 2000, more than 1 billion children in high risk countries were vaccinated against the disease through mass vaccination campaigns ― about 145 million of them in 2012.

Measles is a highly contagious, serious disease caused by a virus. In 1980, before widespread vaccination, measles caused an *estimated 2.6 million deaths each year.
According to the CDC, “Measles vaccine was licensed in the United States in 1963. During 1958-1962, an average of 503,282 measles cases and 432 measles-associated deaths were reported each year.”

It remains one of the leading causes of death among young children globally, despite the availability of a safe and effective vaccine. Approximately 122 000 people died from measles in 2012 – mostly children under the age of five.
Effective? Overall, U.S. vaccination coverage is at record high levels. As we continue to read we will read this: “was vaccinated but did not develop immunity+
I think the quote from the key facts applies here “cost-effective”

Measles is caused by a virus in the paramyxovirus family. The measles virus normally grows in the cells that line the back of the throat and lungs. Measles is a human disease and is not known to occur in animals.

Accelerated immunization activities have had a major impact on reducing measles deaths. Since 2000, more than one billion children in high risk countries were vaccinated against the disease through mass vaccination campaigns ― about 145 million of them in 2012. Global measles deaths have decreased by 78% from an estimated 562 400 to 122 000.
*How did it decline from the estimated 2.6 million deaths each year before widespread vaccines to 562,400?

Signs and symptoms
The first sign of measles is usually a high fever, which begins about 10 to 12 days after exposure to the virus, and lasts four to seven days. A runny nose, a cough, red and watery eyes, and small white spots inside the cheeks can develop in the initial stage. After several days, a rash erupts, usually on the face and upper neck. Over about three days, the rash spreads, eventually reaching the hands and feet. The rash lasts for 5 to 6 days, and then fades. On average, the rash occurs 14 days after exposure to the virus (within a range of seven to 18 days).
(The fever has an important role in both viral and bacterial infections. Read my blog “Hot & Bothered”)

*Severe measles is more likely among poorly nourished young children, especially those with insufficient vitamin A, or whose immune systems have been weakened by HIV/AIDS or other diseases.
I found this very interesting because, the number one vitamin that the medical community warns against is vitamin A!

Most measles-related deaths are caused by complications associated with the disease. Complications are more common in children under the age of five, or adults over the age of 20. The most serious complications include blindness, encephalitis (an *infection that causes brain swelling), severe diarrhoea and related dehydration, ear infections, or severe respiratory infections such as pneumonia. As high as 10% of measles cases result in death among populations with high levels of malnutrition and a lack of adequate health care. Women infected while pregnant are also at risk of severe complications and the pregnancy may end in miscarriage or preterm delivery. People who recover from measles are immune for the rest of their lives.
(*Don’t break the fever and the infection will not take over the body.)

Who is at risk?
Unvaccinated young children are at highest risk of measles and its complications, including death. Unvaccinated pregnant women are also at risk. Any non-immune person (who has not been vaccinated or was vaccinated but did not develop immunity) can become infected.
“Unvaccinated young children are at highest risk?” But it has already said, “*Severe measles is more likely among poorly nourished young children, especially those with insufficient vitamin A, or whose immune systems have been weakened by HIV/AIDS or other diseases.”

Measles is still common in many developing countries – particularly in parts of Africa and Asia. More than 20 million people are affected by measles each year. The overwhelming majority (more than 95%) of measles deaths occur in countries with low per capita incomes and weak health infrastructures.
Still common? But as of 2012, about 84%* of the world’s children received one dose of measles vaccine by their first birthday through routine health services – up from 72% in 2000.
I am sadden by the death of so many, please don’t mistake my point or take it out of context. But these death are not occurring in the modern world and the vaccine is not the reason why! Instead of vaccinating them how about we nourish them and teach them proper hygiene?
Roughly one third of the food produced in the world for human consumption every year — approximately 1.3 billion tonnes — gets lost or wasted, according to an FAO-commissioned study.
Kudos, to this France grocer who figured out a way to sell ugly fruit and vegetables at a reduced cost.

Measles outbreaks can be particularly deadly in countries experiencing or recovering from a natural disaster or conflict. Damage to health infrastructure and health services *interrupts routine immunization, and overcrowding in residential camps greatly increases the risk of infection.
*So, vaccinations are routinely happening most of the time.

The highly contagious virus is spread by coughing and sneezing, close personal contact or direct contact with infected nasal or throat secretions.

The virus remains active and contagious in the air or on infected surfaces for up to two hours. It can be transmitted by an infected person from four days prior to the onset of the rash to four days after the rash erupts.

Measles outbreaks can result in epidemics that cause many deaths, especially among young, malnourished children. In countries where measles has been largely eliminated, cases imported from other countries remain an important source of infection.

No specific antiviral treatment exists for measles virus.

Severe complications from measles can be avoided though supportive care that ensures good nutrition, adequate fluid intake and treatment of dehydration with WHO-recommended oral rehydration solution. This solution replaces fluids and other essential elements that are lost through *diarrhoea or vomiting. Antibiotics should be prescribed to treat eye and ear infections, and pneumonia.
*Diarrhea and vomiting cause dehydration which, becomes the greatest complication of measles. Yes, there are antibiotics available to kill infection, if needed.

All children in developing countries diagnosed with measles should receive two doses of vitamin A supplements, given 24 hours apart. This treatment restores low vitamin A levels during measles that occur even in well-nourished children and can help prevent eye damage and blindness. Vitamin A supplements have been shown to reduce the number of deaths from measles by 50%.
Vitamin A treatment=Nourishment! Nourishing young children is key to fighting all disease.

From the MMR package insert:
I encourage you to read through the Adverse Reaction section. Of course, they state these reactions are rare and a coincidence when caused by vaccination, but is declared a public health emergency when caused by a disease.
Here are just a couple statements I pulled from the insert.
As for any vaccine, vaccination with M-M-R II may not result in protection in 100% of vaccinees.
M-M-R II has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or potential to impair fertility.
It is not known whether measles or mumps vaccine virus is secreted in human milk. Recent studies have shown that lactating postpartum women immunized with live attenuated rubella vaccine may secrete the virus in breast milk and transmit it to breast-fed infants.
If you are wondering about the effects from the vaccine read this blog they took the time to search VAERS and reported the total and shared a few stories.

I have shared this image before, but it is appropriate here, too.
My Grandfather with my Dad, and two Aunts. The children are five, three, and one. They all have measels.


Antiperspirants are products that try to prevent sweating by using aluminum. However, most antiperspirants also have a deodorizing component, fragrance; another questionable. I’ll touch on both in this blog.
It might be a surprise to learn that the antiperspirant you use daily is in fact a drug.
The following, is excepts copied from I am going to point out a few things that catch my eye and give you my interpretation of this article.

The agency (FDA) defines antiperspirant as a drug product applied topically that reduces the production of sweat (perspiration) at the site where it is applied. Antiperspirants, according to the Food and Drug Administration, can safely and effectively reduce sweat for up to 24 hours, *if formulated and tested properly. And for most, this means protection against both wetness and odor.
*(Notice that small but powerful word…IF.)
The FDA issued a final rule in June 2003 establishing conditions under which over-the-counter (OTC) antiperspirants are *generally recognized as safe and effective (GRASE), and are not misbranded. The final rule establishes allowable ingredients and labeling for the products.
*(Generally: in disregard of specific instances and with regard to an overall picture. Merriam-Webster)

In October 2004, the agency reopened the record on this final rule to consider one manufacturer’s request to double the length of time–from 24 hours to 48 hours–during which an OTC antiperspirant is considered to be effective. The request in this case, called an enhanced duration claim, applies to the testing and labeling of this particular claim.
Matthew R. Holman, Ph.D., an FDA scientist in the Division of Over-the-Counter Drug Products, says that *the agency needs scientific evidence that extended duration products work. “Manufacturers have to back up such claims with studies,” he says. The FDA must be satisfied that the testing is valid for 48 hours.
*(They need scientific evidence that the EXTENDED DURATION works. Not that this new formulation is safe! If the standards of the OTC monograph are met, premarket approval of a potentially new OTC product is NOT necessary.)

Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the FDA legally defines products by their intended uses. Therefore, drugs are defined as products intended for treating or preventing disease or for affecting the structure or any function of the body. Antiperspirants are considered drugs because they affect the function of the body by *reducing the amount of sweat that reaches the skin.
*(Sweating is an important function of the body. Sweating is the release of liquid from the body’s sweat glands. This liquid contains salt. This process is also called perspiration. Sweating helps your body stay cool. Sweat is commonly found under the arms, on the feet, and on the palms of the hands. Sweating is controlled by the autonomic nervous system. This is the part of the nervous system that is not under your control. Sweating is the body’s natural way of regulating temperature.)

People tend to interchange the words “antiperspirant” and “deodorant,” but as regulated by the FDA, they are not the same. Antiperspirants have an *aluminum-based compound as their main, “active” ingredient, which can be any number of compounds within an established concentration and dosage form. The active ingredient gives antiperspirants their sweat-blocking ability by forming a temporary plug within the sweat duct that stops the flow of sweat to the skin’s surface.
The aluminum-based compound is always the first ingredient listed on the back of an antiperspirant container. A few common active ingredients are aluminum chloride, aluminum chlorohydrate, and aluminum zirconium. An “inactive” is any ingredient besides the active ingredient. Some of the inactive ingredients in an antiperspirant include talc, fragrance, and butane, used as an aerosol propellant.
*(Why am I highlighting aluminum? Research, including one study published in the Journal of Applied Toxicology, has shown that the aluminum is not only absorbed by your body, but is deposited in your breast tissue and even can be found in nipple aspirate fluid (NAF) a fluid present in the breast duct tree. The authors of this study say, “The reasons for the high levels of aluminium in NAF remain unknown but possibilities include either exposure to aluminium-based antiperspirant salts in the adjacent underarm area and/or preferential accumulation of aluminium by breast tissues.)
This study states: “Systemic Al bioavailability after single underarm antiperspirant application may be up to 0.012%. All intramuscularly injected Al, e.g. *from vaccines, may eventually be absorbed. Al distributes unequally to all tissues.” This may not sound like much until you multiply it by one or more times a day for a lifetime, which adds up to massive exposure to aluminum — a poison that is not supposed to be in your body.
*Wait! What did that say? “from vaccines, may eventually be absorbed…” They don’t know!? Another topic, Diana, stay focused.

The monograph states:

…several citizen petitions have raised concerns about the amount of aluminum absorbed from topical antiperspirant drug products. The agency has no data showing that products containing up to 35 percent aluminum chlorhydrates or aluminum zirconium chlorhydrates increase aluminum absorption and is not revising the monograph to provide for powder roll-on dosage forms containing up to 35 percent antiperspirant active ingredient, without additional safety data being provided.

Notice the agency says, it “has no data showing” the “increase of aluminum absorption” it does not state that there is data proving NO absorption of the aluminum.

But different laws and regulations apply to each type of product. Some products, for example, must comply with the requirements for both drugs and cosmetics. This happens when a product has two intended uses, for example, when an antiperspirant is also a deodorant. Cosmetics are defined as substances that cleanse, beautify, promote attractiveness, or alter the appearance, without affecting the body’s structure or function. Deodorants are regulated as cosmetics because they promote attractiveness only by masking odor, not by reducing sweat.
Unlike drugs, neither cosmetic products nor cosmetic ingredients are reviewed or approved by the FDA before they are marketed. But the agency *urges manufacturers to do any necessary testing to prove that their products are safe. And cosmetic makers must put a warning statement on the front labels of those products that have not been safely tested. The agency *can take action against cosmetic products found to cause harm after they are on the market.
*(Urges: : to ask people to do or support (something) in a way that shows that you believe it is very important. Merriam-Webster
*”Can take action” not WILL take action!
Deodorant’s key ingredient is fragrance. What is Fragrance?
The term “fragrance,” under US law, actually means a combination of chemicals that gives a perfume or cologne its distinct scent. These ingredients may be derived from petroleum or natural raw materials, or they may be produced synthetically. Perfume manufacturers typically purchase fragrance mixtures from companies that specialize in developing fragrances (known as fragrance houses) and then combine them to create a unique scent.
It is this chemical combination that is typically kept protected as a “trade secret,” while other chemicals in the products (solvents, stabilizers, preservatives, dyes, and UV absorbers) may be listed on the label. So what is a typical fragrance actually made of? Some common offenders include:
Parabens: Synthetic preservatives known to interfere with hormone production and release.
Phthalates: Another synthetic preservative that’s carcinogenic and linked to reproductive effects (decreased sperm counts, early breast development, birth defects) and liver and kidney damage.
Synthetic musks: These are linked to hormone disruption and are thought to persist and accumulate in breast milk, body fat, umbilical cord blood, and the environment. Resource)

Like prescription drugs, the FDA oversees OTC drugs to ensure that they are properly labeled and that their benefits outweigh their risks. OTC drugs account for more than 100,000 products on the market that involve about 800 active ingredients. The FDA classifies these nonprescription drugs by treatment category, such as laxatives, antacids, and antiperspirants, and evaluates their ingredients. So, rather than review thousands of individual antiperspirant products, the FDA evaluates the far fewer active ingredients found in them.
*Most OTC drugs are subject to rules called monographs, which state requirements for categories of nonprescription drugs, such as what ingredients may be used and for what intended use. If the standards of the OTC monograph are met, premarket approval of a potentially new OTC product is not necessary.
*(Most? How many are not? hmmm???)
The *FDA is mainly concerned about claims being made for a product, Holman says. For example, in the familiar slogan, “strong enough for a man but made for a woman,” the company had to prove that the product was tested in both men and women because there are physiological differences between them. Similarly, testing must confirm marketing statements such as “so effective you could skip a day.”
*(I think that safety should be their main concern!)

The final section from the article:
The Cancer Myth
The rise of the *Internet has made it easy for false health claims, scary stories, and rumors to reach millions of people in a matter of minutes. One such myth says that antiperspirants may cause breast cancer.
*(The internet has provided a way for people to investigate things themselves. But of course “they” are the only ones smart enough!)

But the *NCI says that no existing scientific or medical evidence links the use of underarm antiperspirants or deodorants to the subsequent development of breast cancer. The FDA, the Mayo Clinic, the American Cancer Society (ACS), and the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association agree. Razor nicks may increase the risk of skin infection, but not cancer.
*(Good thing FDA agrees instead of looking into it themselves!

Because of the Internet we can see what the NCI says about antiperpirants.
Can antiperspirants or deodorants cause breast cancer?
However, researchers at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a part of the National Institutes of Health, are not aware of any conclusive evidence linking the use of underarm antiperspirants or deodorants and the subsequent development of breast cancer. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which regulates food, cosmetics, medicines, and medical devices, also does not have any evidence or research data that ingredients in underarm antiperspirants or deodorants cause cancer.
*(So, who is looking into it? Appears there is some finger pointing going on here)
What do scientists know about the ingredients in antiperspirants and deodorants?
More research is needed to specifically examine whether the use of deodorants or antiperspirants can cause the buildup of parabens and aluminum-based compounds in breast tissue. Additional research is also necessary to determine whether these chemicals can either alter the DNA in some cells or cause other breast cell changes that may lead to the development of breast cancer.
*(But WAIT…you just said, “It’s a Myth and The FDA, the Mayo Clinic, the American Cancer Society (ACS), and the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association agree. Razor nicks may increase the risk of skin infection, but not cancer.” Shouldn’t we do the research you’re saying you NEED?)
What have scientists learned about the relationship between antiperspirants or deodorants and breast cancer?
Because studies of antiperspirants and deodorants and breast cancer have provided conflicting results, additional research is needed to investigate this relationship and other factors that may be involved.
*(More studies need to be done. How can the FDA claim they are safe?)

Sweat itself does not smell. The familiar smell of body odor, or B.O, comes from normal skin bacteria breaking down the sweat secretions released from the sweat glands.
Body odor mainly originates from the apocrine glands in the armpits, which release a thick, oily sweat rich in proteins and lipids which bacteria on the skin feed on.
Because of the bacteria and not being used to using natural products for your armpits you will likely have a detox phase. This is totally normal. If you find that you truly cannot go for a few days without deodorant, you will have to use a natural deodorant for a week or so before you body starts to adjust. Many people who try to use natural deodorants without detoxifying their pits, tend to complain that they don’t work. You have to get rid of the decaying matter in your body before you can ask your body not to smell. And remember, sweating is a GOOD thing! We want to sweat…we just don’t want to stink. I would also, suggest a total body cleanse to assist your body in removing toxins.


For details on these products, visit my Facebook page.

As I began my quest for nutrition, (as I call it) I quickly realized I didn’t trust anything that I had once thought was…okay! When I discovered what ingredients are used in vaccines, that rattled my world. If those things are approved to be injected into our littlest, what else have ‘they’ approved as ‘safe?’ My trust for the FDA quickly diminished! That began my lifelong duty to be an avid label reader, every label, every time. I look up definitions and read the studies and other papers from the CDC, FDA, EPA, NEJM, etc. I also, became aware, very quickly, that I am the only one responsible for me and it is MY responsibility to take care of myself and my family. I don’t trust just anyone to care for my children, I don’t care how many degrees they have. So, why do I just trust them to feed and drug my children? I don’t!
I didn’t change everything in one day. I did plenty of research and I still do. That takes time. Once I became knowledgable of things I slowly changed the inventory of our household products. Including food, vitamins, health & beauty product, and even household cleaning products.
The verbiage I found repeatedly was if the “thing” I’m researching falls in line with modern medicine the studies typically say things like: “FDA believes that at the present time there is no reason for consumers to be concerned about the use of cosmetics containing parabens.” Even though, new research has detected the presence of paraben esters in 99% of breast cancer tissues sampled. The study examined 40 women who were being treated for primary breast cancer. In 60 percent of cases, five of the different esters were present. Compared to homeopathy that goes against conventional medicine; “Homeopathy has the potential to harm patients and consumers in both direct and indirect ways. Clinicians should be aware of its risks and advise their patients accordingly. When according this their own study, “Overall, adverse effects ranged from mild-to-severe and included four fatalities.” How many women die from breast cancer? Okay, I am getting off topic, I’ll come back to homeopathy in a later blog.
Back to parabens.
Parabens are chemicals that serve as preservatives in antiperspirants and many cosmetics, as well as sun lotions. Previous studies have shown that all parabens have estrogenic activity in human breast cancer cells.
The study discovered one or more paraben esters in 99 percent of the 160 tissue samples collected from 40 mastectomies. In 60 percent of the samples, all five paraben esters were present.
While antiperspirants are a common source of parabens, the authors note that the source of the parabens cannot be established, and that 7 of the 40 patients reportedly never used deodorants or antiperspirants in their lifetime. What this tells us is that parabens, regardless of the source, can accumulate in breast tissue.
My conclusion: it is better to be safe than sorry. Ditch the man-made chemicals and go back to nature. It has taken me several years to get to where I am now. I make most everything we like, myself. I do enjoy the simple life not easy, or lazy, but most definitely simple. I encourage you to read the labels on all of your products. If you wouldn’t eat it, than you should not be slathering it all over your skin or the skin of your growing, developing children. Your skin is your largest organ.
I just briefly touched on one ingredient, there are several others we avoid.

Infographic via

Are They Quacks?

I have hired the aid of several health care practioners, all different types. I do believe that God intended for us to ‘need’ each other. I always consider the possible risks, side effects, and choose non-invasive treatments. At this point in our lives, this has worked for our family.

Proverbs 27:17 As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.

Easy “Google” searches would deem; I think every one of them as “Quacks” and ridicule their practices. Which I find completely unprofessional. I am now aware even MD’s try to discredit DO’s. I have come to grips that there will always be opposition, disagreement, and division. There has been since the beginning and there will continue to be until the end. That is the world we live in and some still think it is flat. God’s Word says,

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth…(Isaiah 40:22 NIV)

One of the first quacks, Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis a Hungarian physician called the “saviour of mothers” who discovered, by 1847, that the incidence of puerperal fever, also known as childbed fever could be drastically cut by use of hand washing standards in obstetrical clinics. The epidemic of women and babies dying is documented from records as early as 1746, where more than 50 percent of mothers who gave birth in a Paris hospital died. In the United States, Europe, New Zealand, Sweden, and wherever conventional midwifery was abandoned and taken over by the obstetricians and medical students, puerperal fever followed.
Doctors often went from touching infected corpses in the cadaver dissection lab, to the maternity ward, where they examined women and delivered babies without handwashing. Doctors were insulted at the suggestion that their hands were dirty, and many had the arrogance to continue to ignore factual evidence showing that they were the cause of maternal suffering and death up until the 1940s when antibiotics were invented.
When I look at God’s Word, He always has our best interest at hand.

“Whoever touches a human corpse will be unclean for seven days. (Numbers 19:11 NIV)

Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes of the United States and Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis of Austria were prominent, long-suffering advocates for women, who tried to get the medical profession to wash their hands and practice more like the traditional midwives did. Both were ignored and even professionally attacked for their views. After years of mental anguish, watching women die needlessly, they left the field of medicine in disgust. Dr. Holmes became a writer. Semmelweis was outraged by the indifference of the medical profession and began writing open and increasingly angry letters to prominent European obstetricians, at times denouncing them as irresponsible murderers. His contemporaries, including his wife, believed he was losing his mind and he was in 1865 committed to a mental institution. Semmelweis died there only 14 days later, possibly after being severely beaten by guards.
Although Dr Semmelweis was the first healthcare professional to demonstrate experimentally that hand washing could prevent infections, it was not until approximately two decades after his death that his work was revisited and he was given credit. Only after Pasteur, Koch, and Lister had produced more evidence of the germ theory and antiseptic techniques was the value of hand washing appreciated.

20140524-224246-81766084.jpgDr. Joseph Goldberger also dealt with critics when he discovered pellagra is was caused from a vitamin defincency. Many critics unable to part from the germ theory of pellagra, raised doubts. Goldberger hoped to squelch those reservations by demonstrating the existence of a particular substance that when removed from the diet of healthy individuals resulted in pellagra. With the cooperation of Mississippi’s progressive governor, Earl Brewer, Goldberger experimented on eleven healthy volunteer prisoners at the Rankin State Prison Farm in 1915. Offered pardons in return for their participation, the volunteers ate a corn-based diet. Six of the eleven showed pellagra rashes after five months.
Expert dermatologists made the actual diagnosis of pellagra to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest on Goldberger’s part. Although many scientific colleagues sang Goldberger’s praises, even mentioning a Nobel nomination, others still doubted. In the pages of the Journal of the American Medical Association, critic W.J. MacNeal challenged the results. One Birmingham physician referred to the experiment as “half-baked.” Still others thought the whole experiment a fraud.
November 1915 the Public Health Service had issued a press release reporting the Mississippi prison-farm experiment and urging that pellagra could be prevented by an appropriate diet; yet throughout the 1920’s many practicing physicians, especially in the American South, were unwilling to accept diet as a more than predisposing cause of pellagra. Chronic resentment toward the East and the well-financed Public Health Service seems to have contributed to this incredulity.
Prior to his work with pellagra in 1910 Goldberger played an increasingly responsible role in field investigations of yellow fever, typhus, and dengue—as well as other, less dramatic, ills. In the course of his investigations he acquired a reputation in the Public Health Service as one of its most gifted epidemiologists.
Seems we are forgetting lessons learned from the past in many areas. Goldberg recommended keeping home gardens for fresh vegetables, and owning milking cows for fresh milk as ways to eliminate the pellagra problem.

Dr. Joseph Goldberger and his young assistant, Dr. William Henry Sebrell, Jr., in 1929 working on pellagra at the Hygienic Laboratory.

Goldberger never lived to see his theory accepted he died in 1929. It wasn’t until 1935 when Conrad A. Elvehjem, an agricultural chemist at the University of Wisconsin, found nicotinic acid to be highly effective for curing black tongue in dogs. Soon clinical trials followed and confirmed that nicotinic acid (niacin) was indeed the elusive “pellagra-preventive factor” (P-P factor).

In 1983, Australian doctors J. Robin Warren and Barry Marshall isolated Helicobacter pylori, the bacterial cause of peptic ulcer disease (P.U.D.). However, decades passed before most doctors prescribed antibiotics to their afflicted patients.
For years, Dr. Barry Marshall hailing from Australia watched in horror as ulcer patients fell so ill that many had their stomach removed or bled until they died. He was tormented because he knew there was a simple treatment for ulcers, which at that time afflicted 10 percent of all adults. In 1981 Marshall began working with Robin Warren, the Royal Perth Hospital pathologist who, two years earlier, discovered the gut could be overrun by hardy, corkscrew-shaped bacteria called Helicobacter pylori. Biopsying ulcer patients and culturing the organisms in the lab, Marshall traced not just ulcers but also stomach cancer to this gut infection. The cure, he realized, was readily available: anti­biotics.

In 1982, when this bacterium was discovered by Marshall and Warren, stress and lifestyle were considered the major causes of peptic ulcer disease. It is now firmly established that Helicobacter pylori causes more than 90% of duodenal ulcers and up to 80% of gastric ulcers. The link between Helicobacter pylori infection and subsequent gastritis and peptic ulcer disease has been established through studies of human volunteers, antibiotic treatment studies and epidemiological studies.
Opposition to their radical thesis came from doctors with vested interests in treating ulcers and other stomach disorders as well as from drug companies that had come up with Tagamet, which blocked production of gastric acid and was becoming the first drug with $1 billion annual sales.
Ulcer surgery was lucrative for surgeons who removed large portions of the stomach from patients with life-threatening bleeding and chronic symptoms. Psychiatrists and psychologists treated ulcer patients for stress.
The concept of curing ulcers with antibiotics seemed preposterous to doctors who had long been taught that the stomach was sterile and that no microbes could grow in the corrosive gastric juices.
A bacterial cause “was just too wild a theory for most people” to accept, and something so ingrained as stress causing ulcers was too difficult to dismiss, Dr. J. Robin Warren, one of two who won the 2005 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine on Oct. 3, said in a telephone interview.
Blame focused on psychological stress in part because many patients had stressful lives and scientists lacked another explanation.
Also, Tagamet and similar drugs, known as H2 blockers, safely made ulcers and their symptoms disappear. But the H2 blockers were not one-shot cures. Ulcers often recurred, requiring repeated courses of the drugs, providing a steady stream of profits.
“The opposition we got from the drug industry was basically inertia,” said Dr. Barry J. Marshall of the University of Western Australia, the other Nobel winner, and “because the makers of H2 blockers funded much of the ulcer research at the time, all they had to do was ignore the Helicobacter discovery.”
“If the drug companies were truly into discovery, they would have gone straight after the Helicobacter,” Dr. Marshall said, but they did not because of the success with H2 blockers.
“Had these drugs not existed, the drug companies would have jumped on our findings,” he added.
*All Photos Source: Wikipedia Public Domain

I have came across some more examples of “Quacks Revealed.” I will add links to this blog as I come across them.
This one is great: Beware of Bicycle Face! Excerpt from 1895 Literary Digest.

The Dream & Lie of Louis Pasteur – Yes, the Same Louis Pasteur that discovered the so-called life saving pasteurization! New York Times Archives Experiments in Deceit

Chocolate Coconut Chews

I am not much of a baker, but if I don’t make something, hubby will buy something. This treat was quick, easy, and satisfied his (and my) palate. The boys ate them up too.
Anytime I can get coconut oil in our diet, that is a bonus. Approximately 50% of the fat in coconut oil is lauric acid, which is rarely found in nature. In fact, coconut oil contains the most lauric acid of any substance on earth. The major fat in breast milk is the same lauric acid that is seen in coconut oil. Your body converts lauric acid into monolaurin, which has anti-viral, anti-bacterial, and anti-protozoa properties. Coconut oil has been reported to inhibit various microorganisms including bacteria, yeast, fungi, and enveloped viruses. Coconut oil is the most easily digestible and absorbed class of fats and does not circulate in the blood stream and is not deposited.
Did you know that multiple studies on Pacific Island populations, who get 30-60% of their total caloric intact from fully saturated coconut oil, have all shown nearly non-existent rates of cardiovascular disease? Coronary Artery Disease is unknown among Polynesian population whose staple diet is coconut (Prior et al, 1981). When these groups migrated to New Zealand however, and lowered their intake of coconut oil, their total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol increased, and their HDL cholesterol decreased.


1/2 cup Coconut Oil
1/2 cup Honey
1/2 cup Cocoa
2 teas Vanilla
dash of Salt
1 1/3 cup unsweetened shredded coconut

Combine all the ingredients except the coconut into a pan. Warm until everything is melted together. Whisk until smooth. Remove from heat mix in coconut. These can be scooped onto a cookie sheet covered with parchment. I opted to fill a silicon tray. Place into a refrigerator until hard. Enjoy!

Now, that I have edited the photo with ‘mint’ green font, I will be adding some mint extract next time. I will start with 1/2 teaspoon.

For more understanding on the benefits of coconut oil.
Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences