“There are no uncurable diseases, only uncurable people” Ken Rolha
Dr. Kimberly Young is a licensed psychologist and an internationally known expert on Internet addiction. She founded the Center for Internet Addiction in 1995 and is a professor at St. Bonaventure University publishing numerous articles and books including as Caught in the Net, the first to identify Internet addiction, Tangled in the Web, Breaking Free of the Web, and Internet addiction: A Handbook and Guide for Evaluation and Treatment. Her work has been featured in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The London Times, USA Today, Newsweek, Time, CNN, CBS News, Fox News, Good Morning America, and ABC’s World News Tonight. She has received the Psychology in the Media Award from the Pennsylvania Psychological Association and the Alumni Ambassador Award for Outstanding Achievement from Indiana University at Pennsylvania. She serves on the advisory board for The Internet Group in Toronto and the Japanese Ministry for the prevention and treatment of Internet Addiction.
Dr. Young founded the first US-based inpatient hospital clinic for Internet Addiction at the Bradford Regional Medical Center and she created the 3-6-9-12 Screen Smart Parenting Guidelines the first parenting guidelines based on a the developmental age of the child (ages 3-6-9-12 and beyond).
She has testified for the Child Online Protection Act Congressional Commission and she has been a keynote speaker at the European Union of Health and Medicine, the International Conference on Digital Culture in Seoul, Korea, the US Army War College in Pennsylvania, and the First International Congress on Internet Addiction Disorders in Milan, Italy. She also served on the National Academy of Sciences panel for the Digital Media and Developing Minds colloquia.
She is on the editorial board of the Journal of Behaviorial Addictions, the American Journal of Family Therapy, Addicta: The Turkish Journal of Addiction, the International Journal of Cyber Crime and Criminal Justice, and on the advisory board of CyberPsychology: Journal for Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, and a member of the American Psychological Association.
Diabetes is one of the most rampant diseases of our time. According to the American Diabetes Association, in 2012, 29.1 million Americans, or 9.3% of the population, had diabetes. 
In fact, diabetes is growing at a fairly fast rate. A study completed by the CDC & Research Triangle Institute concluded that If recent trends in diabetes prevalence rates continue linearly over the next 50 years, future changes in the size and demographic characteristics of the U.S. population will lead to dramatic increases in the number of Americans with diagnosed diabetes.
According to the current mainstream approach, the major goal in treating diabetes is to minimize any elevation of blood sugar (glucose) without causing abnormally low levels of blood sugar. Type 1 diabetes is treated with insulin, exercise, and a diabetic diet. Type 2 diabetes is treated first with weight reduction, a diabetic diet, and exercise.  Currently the belief is “Diabetes is a chronic disease that has no cure.”– The American Diabetes Association.
But what if we could not only prevent diabetes before it happened, but also reverse it once it shows up?
6 Test Subjects Reverse Diabetes In 30 Days
In the film Simply Raw: Reversing Diabetes in 30 Days, six test subjects were used, all of whom had varying lifestyles and conditions but were all diabetic- five type 2, and one type 1. Each subject was taking insulin.
Before we get into the results of this film, let’s take note of what is established about type 1 and type 2 diabetes. This information is from The National Diabetes Education Program:
Type 1 diabetes – the body does not make insulin. Insulin helps the body use glucose from food for energy. People with type 1 need to take insulin every day.
Type 2 diabetes – the body does not make or use insulin well. People with type 2 often need to take pills or insulin. Type 2 is the most common form of diabetes.
The participants of the program were as follows:
- Austin (age 25) was not only a type 1 diabetic, but he also had a drinking problem.
- Kirt (age 25) had a blood sugar reading of 1200. Normal is below 100. His doctor told him, “You should be dead.”
- Bill (age 58) was seeing a cardiologist and had neuropathy. He could not feel his feet.
- Michelle (age 36) was quite obese.
- Henry (age 58) took insulin plus 9 pills daily. Blood sugar was at 464.
- Pam (62) was quite obese. Her father, brother and sister are also diabetic.
The approach Gabriel Cousens takes to cure people of diabetes is all about changing their diet. He states that research shows that in terms of health, meat eaters have 4 times more breast cancer, 3.6 times more prostate cancer, 4 times more diabetes, and much more in general chronic disease. If you’re just having milk, that’s 3 times more leukemia.
Given his position on diet, he believes in taking a mainly raw approach to eating and consuming a plant based diet. His team prepares raw, well-balanced and whole meals for the test subjects throughout the 30 day period. The food becomes their medicine.
With medical supervision, all of the subjects took their medication as needed and ate the food that is provided to them by Gabriel and his team at the Tree Of Life Rejuvenation Center.
By Day 3 of the program Kirt, Bill and Henry were able to stop taking insulin and medication. Their blood sugar levels had already dropped to the normal range after just 3 days of changing their diet. Pam was able to cut her insulin intake by 1/3. Austin, the type 1 diabetic, was able to cut his insulin intake down to half. And Michelle saw her blood sugar at around 362. This discouraged her to the point where she didn’t want to stay in the program any longer, although she did.
By day 12 of the program, Henry’s blood sugar had dropped 256 points compared to day 1. He was not using medication to lower his blood sugar levels. Although he was seeing great results, Henry felt he was too old for the program and requested to go home. His family arrived on day 17 and he went home. By that time, he was no longer taking 17 medications, he had lost 30 pounds and his blood pressure had decreased. In Henry’s case, his addiction to the food he used to eat was too difficult to overcome.
By the very last day, day 30, incredible results were seen that intensely challenges the current belief that diabetes has no cure.
- Kirt no longer needed medications. His blood sugar had dropped 214 points to as low as 73 (normal) without medication. It was later found out he was type 1 diabetic since the beginning. Status: Within normal range.
- Bill stopped taking 19 medications and lost 32 pounds. His blood sugar dropped 214 points to 74 (normal) without medication or insulin. Status: Within normal range.
- Michelle stopped taking all of her medications and lost 23 pounds. Her blood sugar dropped from 291 to 109 without the use of medication. Status: Within normal range.
- Pam lost 26 pounds while her blood sugar dropped 167 points down to 112 without medication. Status: Within normal range.
- Austin, who is type 1 diabetic, lost 20 pounds and reduced his insulin from 70 units down to 5. Status: Drastic improvement in diabetic condition.
As you can see, all participants had drastic turn-arounds in their health and all had their diabetes either completely reversed or severely under control. A type 1 diabetic (Kirt) had his diabetes completely cured -something that is considered impossible. All type 2 diabetics no longer needed insulin.
What Does This Tell Us?
Like many things in modern medicine, we don’t have all of the answers and in a lot of cases we have a difficult time admitting that what is currently mainstream isn’t always the best course of action.
People everywhere are taking alternate routes to achieve results equal to and sometimes better than what is made available to them through mainstream voices like doctors and government appointed professionals. I feel it’s important that people know their options and have a fair chance of hearing them out. I know many people with diabetes who aren’t aware of the power of food in transforming their condition yet are taking insulin and following mainstream ideas as if it’s the only truth.
It isn’t to say that the mainstream is bad, it’s simply that we are missing out on other options in a big way. After all, the American Diabetes Association makes claims about there being no cures yet the above results would suggest there is more to that story.
Have you ever tried raw food to cure your diabetes? We are curious to hear some real live results from others.
In an age where cancer rates are rising incredibly fast, the need for alternative treatments is becoming even more prominent. Research is being put into a number of different avenues with one supporting Dr. Marty Pagel, PhD, from the University of Arizona Cancer Center, who will test the effects of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) on breast cancer patients. He is receiving a $ 2 million grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to find to perform the study.
An important note to understand right off the top- any treatment for cancer will react differently in various patients and also to various types of cancers. Traditional methods can work well on some cancers and terribly on others. The same can be said for various natural cures. On top of this fact, the state of the human body receiving treatment with either method also plays a big role. Do they have access to clean organic food? Clean water? Do they believe and feel they can overcome their disease? These are all important factors with any treatment.
A number of studies in the past have shown interesting in vivo results surrounding the use of sodium bi-carbonate on cancer tumors. While research is not fully complete on the matter, early results are already showing some powerful effects of tumor metastasis. This of course encourages funding for further research as early signs are looking good.
Dr. Robert J. Gillies and his colleagues have already demonstrated the effectiveness of baking soda in alkalinizing the area around tumors in mice. The same researchers found that bicarbonate increases tumor pH and also inhibits spontaneous metastases in mice with breast cancer. 
Lemon has shown to contain anti-carcinogenic properties as it contains limonoides which are phytochemicals found in a number of citrus fruits.  Lemon also has been shown to have strong anti-microbial effects which has been tested in research exploring the idea that cancer is very much like a fungus within the body.  When treating cancer as a fungus, various methods can be used and some have found that lemon and bicarbonate can help fight the fungus causing various types of cancer.
Lemons are also effective in helping the body detoxify. They are rich in vitamin C and help your body neutralize cell-damaging free radicals. Limonene, a substance found in lemons also helps to stimulate lymph flow which is important in removing carcinogens from the body. A weak or under performing lymph system is a big part of disease promotion.
Lemon is also used to help balance Ph. They are taken together as it is believed that lemon is one of the safest ways to introduce high alkaline substances into the system. These methods of treatment are able to approach carcinogenic cells and destroy them without destroying healthy cells. This is another key factor as chemotherapy destroys all cells which includes the healthy ones.
Together lemon and baking soda help to fight cancerous cells or diseases in the body while helping to increase the body’s ability to clean itself up of what may be causing the diseases in the first place. Having lemon as a part of your diet is certainly healthy and taking this combination as a detox can also be helpful even if you don’t have an illness.
One method I have found for introducing this into your body as a drink is to mix 1/2 a teaspoon of baking soda into 250ml of water with about 1 half of a lemon. Please check into more recipes that might work for you. I have personally taken this mixture if I ever had stomach issues or was feeling like I might be getting sick. It has been very successful each time I’ve used it. Of course, always do your own research and check with a health professional if you wish.
2. Researchers examined human DNA from a variety of tissues and organs to identify and quantify aflatoxin DNA-adducts. Such adducts are considered to be proof of the mycotoxin’s presence in a particular tissue. Their finding? “Tumor tissues had higher aflatoxin-adduct levels than did normal tissue from the same individual.”
February 5th, 2014
Studies show how people suffering from cancerous tumors due to malnutrition and cachexia (high levels of inflammatory cytokines in their cells which causes weakening or severe illness) responded exceptionally well to treatment with naringin, a compound found in grapefruit. While laboratory animals have been tested most prominently for their response to naringin, there are hundreds of other studies carried out on people, as well. In many of these studies ‘complete tumor regression’ ensued.
In one instance, women suffering from cervical cancer who used naringin experienced a ‘marked ability to inhibit preclinical models of epithelial cancer cell growth and tumor formation.” In other studies, naringin caused apoptosis (suicide) of cancerous cells. Naringin is both a chemopreventative substance and anti-carcinogenic. Specifically, SiHa cancer cells were affected by this citrus compound:
“Naringin showed a 50% inhibition of SiHa human cervical cancer cells at a concentration of 750μM. SiHa cells exhibited apoptotic cell death, intranucleosomal DNA fragmentation, morphological changes and decline in the mitochondrial transmembrane potential. “
Furthermore, utilizing naringin in these patients, an increased expression of caspases, p53 and Bax, a death receptor and adaptor protein which help to cause cancerous cell death, were increased. This means that naringin works by both inhibiting cancerous cell formation through mitochondrial pathways and through increasing death-receptor pathways.
When naringin was administered to help women suffering from breast cancer, it inhibited cancerous cell proliferation and also induced apoptosis in TMBC cells (cancerous cells). Breast cancer cell lines were destroyed and could not re-establish as a full-fledged tumor. Interestingly, many women develop breast cancer as a result of being exposed to radiation in mammography and chemotherapy, but naringin even protects against radiation-induced chromosome damage.
What’s more, naringin acts as a free-radical scavenger, namely through its antioxidant activity. And since free radicals are part of what causes cellular DNA damage, and the formation of aberrant chromosomes which often lead to cancer and other diseases, naringin is also a protector of healthy cells in the body. It is through this activity that naringin can protect us against radiation-induced free-radicals. Mice treated with naringin in lab prior to being exposed to unhealhty levels of radiation showed fewer chromosomatic breaks, centric rings, and aberrations – all precursors of cancerous cell growth, and chromosomal DNA damage.
While the exact dose of grapefruit naringin to be administered in humans for the most efficacious results has yet to be studied, we can be sure that this citrus flavanoid shows great promise in reducing both cervical and breast cancers, and possibly others.