EU Investigates Ozempic, Weight-Loss Drug Saxenda After Suicidal Thoughts Reported

 By Ludwig Burger and Maggie Fick

July 11, 2023 

https://www.medscape.com/s/viewarticle/994162?ecd=WNL_trdalrt_pos1_230712_etid5632802&uac=149193PV&impID=5632802#vp_2

(Reuters) - The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is investigating Novo Nordisk's diabetes drug Ozempic and weight-loss treatment Saxenda after Iceland's health regulator flagged three cases of patients thinking about suicide or self-harm.

Shares of the Danish drugmaker fell 1% on Monday following the news.

An EMA safety committee is looking into adverse events raised by the Icelandic Medicines Agency, including two cases of suicidal thoughts in those who used Ozempic, which contains the active ingredient semaglutide, and Saxenda, the regulator said.

Another patient on Saxenda, Novo's earlier and less effective weight-loss drug that contains the active ingredient liraglutide, reported thoughts of self-injury, the agency said.

Iceland's drugs regulator did not immediately respond to requests for details.

Novo Nordisk said patient safety was top priority and it treated all reports about adverse events very seriously. Its own safety monitoring so far found no "causal association" between the self-harming thoughts and the drugs, it said in a statement.

The EMA's investigation centres on medicines that contain either semaglutide or liraglutide. Novo's obesity treatment Wegovy, for which demand has surged in the United States, contains semaglutide.

The review was announced weeks after the regulator raised a thyroid cancer safety signal, a means to monitor potentially adverse effects, on several of Novo's products containing semaglutide.

Suicidal thoughts are not listed as a side effect in the EU product information for either drug.

In the United States, however, prescribing instructions for Wegovy recommend that patients are monitored for suicidal thoughts or behaviour.

According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Public Dashboard, there have been at least 60 reports of suicidal ideation since 2018 from patients on semaglutide or their health care providers.

FAERS has received at least 70 such reports since 2010 from users of liraglutide or their health care providers.

Information in these reports has not been verified and the existence of a report is not proof of causation, the FDA says.

The FDA said it monitors safety of drugs throughout their life cycle. Wegovy's trials did not suggest increased risk of suicidal behavior, but the drug's label contains a warning for suicidal behavior and ideation because of risks associated with other weight management drugs, the regulator said.

SENSITIVE

Although Iceland's regulator has flagged only three cases, the issue of suicidal thoughts linked to weight-loss drugs is sensitive and has hobbled previous attempts by the drug industry to develop lucrative weight-loss drugs.

In clinical trials for Ozempic and Saxenda, Novo excluded people with a history of psychiatric disorders or recent suicidal behavior.

Sanofi's Acomplia, which never won U.S. approval, was withdrawn in Europe in 2008 after being linked to suicidal thoughts.

Acomplia was designed to modify parts of the nervous system that regulate appetite. New weight-loss drugs such as Wegovy regulate appetite by mimicking a gut hormone, and not directly interfering with brain chemistry.

Diet pills Contrave by Orexigen Therapeutics and Qsymia by Vivus Inc, approved in the U.S. in 2014 and 2012, respectively, carry warnings on their labels about increased risk of suicidal thoughts.

Markus Manns, senior portfolio manager at Union Investment and a Novo shareholder, said that a low incidence of suicidal thoughts might be acceptable for a drug against Type 2 diabetes but not for a weight-loss drug.

The EMA said on Monday it would consider whether the review should be extended to other medicines of the same class, known as GLP-1 receptor agonists.

The EMA's ongoing thyroid cancer investigation includes all GLP-1s.

Other drugs in the class include Eli Lilly and Co's Mounjaro. Lilly did not respond to a question from Reuters on whether the EMA had contacted them to provide data for the new investigation.

Penny Ward, a visiting professor in pharmaceutical medicine at Kings College in London and an expert on EU drug safety monitoring, said the most likely outcome of the investigation would be a change in the drug's label in the EU to carry a warning of the possible side effect of suicidal thoughts.

Another drug safety expert, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the small size of Iceland's population might have led regulators to consider only a few adverse event cases were a significant proportion and worth investigating.

(Reporting by Ludwig Burger in Frankfurt and Maggie Fick in London; Additional reporting by Bhanvi Satija in Bengaluru, Michael Erman and Patrick Wingrove in New York, Robin Respaut in San Francisco, Louise Breusch Rasmussen in Copenhagen and Jennifer Rigby in London; Editing by Savio D'Souza, Nivedita Bhattacharjee, Sriraj Kalluvila and Barbara Lewis)

HOW SAFE ARE YOU FROM EMF RADIATION IN YOUR ELECTRIC CAR?

 

Is Your Electric Car Zapping You With EMF Radiation?

By ANH-USAOn 01/24/2023 https://anh-usa.org/is-your-electric-car-zapping-you-with-emf-radiation/

Electric cars are becoming more popular, but do they come with new risks?

Electric cars are on the rise. Their share of new vehicle sales almost doubled in the first nine months of 2022. The number of Tesla vehicles on the road rose 33 percent in 2022. Many automakers are planning to switch to electric in the coming years. This may have benefits for the environment, but what, if any, are the human health implications? Concerns about cars as a source of exposure to electromagnetic field (EMF) radiation are well-founded, but these concerns are not exclusive to electric cars.

There are, of course, many different types of cars on the road—different manufacturers, different models, years, gas-powered, diesel, hybrids, and electric. Due to the variety of different cars that are available, the EMF dangers also vary. 

With that said, electric cars can have elevated EMF levels for a number of reasons. They operate on large AC batteries that are generally placed much closer to where people sit; in Teslas, they are placed directly underneath the floor of the car cabin. These batteries emit extremely low frequency (ELF) EMF radiation, and the closer you are to them, the more radiation you are exposed to. Additionally, charging electric cars creates substantial amounts of dirty electricity. Dirty electricity, or electrical pollution, is a form of EMF that is generated by electronic devices that, when they operate, convert AC power to DC, creating high-frequency voltage spikes that flow back into the power grid, piggy-back on existing electrical wiring, and radiate into the environment. It is yet another route of exposure to harmful EMF that has been linked to a variety of negative health outcomes. Studies have shown that taking steps to reduce dirty electricity (by installing filters that short out high frequencies and reduce transients on electrical wiring) reduced headaches, general weakness, asthma, depression, anxiety, and skin irritation.

But almost all cars, including gas powered vehicles, contain EMF-emitting components. Many cars are now equipped with Bluetooth connections for phones, radars for crash prevention, back up cameras, and provide WiFi hot spots, to name just a few examples. All of these components emit EMF. In fact, some informal testing of EMF levels from cars found that gas-powered cars registered EMF readings just as high as electric cars. Consumer Reports also did some testing back in 2010 and found that the Chevy Cobalt, a gas-powered car, emitted far more EMF radiation than the Toyota Prius, a hybrid. Given that nearly all cars are sources of EMF radiation, it is important to look at cars individually, rather than by category, in weighing the risks.

Should we be concerned about the level of EMF emitted by cars? Digging into the details is not reassuring. The FCC set limits for maximum permissible exposure to EMF radiation in 1996. These levels were designed to protect against thermal effects as a result of short-term exposure to EMF radiation—that is, the potential of EMF radiation to heat body tissue like a microwave. 

As we all know, a lot has changed since 1996, and our daily exposure to EMF radiation has increased dramatically. The changing technological landscape spurred scientists to issue an appeal to the World Health Organization, warning of “serious concerns regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to EMF generated by electric and wireless devices.” They go on to explain that “numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines.” These health effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in free radicals, genetic damage, changes in the reproductive system, neurological disorders, and more. These concerns were echoed in an October 2022 paper published in Environmental Health, which flatly stated: “Exposure limits for RF radiation are based on numerous assumptions; however, research studies published over the past 25 years show that most of those assumptions are not supported by scientific evidence.” This all means that our current safety standards are woefully inadequate to protect us from the dangers of constant EMF exposure. 

As we noted with our coverage of cell phone dangers, the problem is that many health and safety studies on EMF, particularly with regard to cell phones, are bought and paid for by the telecoms industry. For example, an analysis of safety studies on cell phone use concluded industry-funded studies were two and a half times less likely than independent studies to find a biological effect from cell phone radiation. 

So, should we be concerned? Experts in the field seem to think so, but their voices are likely to be drowned out by industry-funded studies that conveniently and predictably find no evidence of harm, providing the government cover to keep EMF safety standards rooted in a time when flip phones were revolutionary technology. With the rapid rollout of 5G technology, with its dense network of EMF-emitting “small cells,” this problem is poised to get even worse.

There are ways to lower your EMF exposure in your car. Choose standard options that limit the wireless bells and whistles. You could also opt for used older cars that do not have many of these components. If possible, turn off Bluetooth, though in newer car models this may not be an option. Remember, too, that we need to think about EMF exposure as a whole, so we need to look at our homes (hard wiring computers instead of using WiFi, avoiding smart meters if possible), our cell phone use (using speaker phone whenever possible, avoiding Bluetooth headphones), and our work environment, in addition to our cars, to try to limit our exposure to EMF.

PLEASE wake up…Our freedoms are in jeopardy…Former Pfizer VP speaks out.

 I would really like for everyone to start looking beyond your fear and start looking at the facts that are staring you in the face.  Anyone that goes against the Media, CDC, WHO, or any government appointed scientific view on social media or media in general is being censored, removed, ridiculed etc. In a true democracy, are we not allowed to speak our views…freedom of speech is in our constitution, yet many Doctors are being removed from Social media platforms. Fact checkers on Facebook are actually just popular opinion and not TRUTH. 

There are so many different avenues you can look at for the truth…STOP believing the news you are being spoon fed, like a baby that can’t think for itself, and start using your amazing brain and finding the facts for yourself. Living in fear is what tyranny relies upon. The tyrannical has always used the guise of public safety to implement more and more restrictions and the experiment of how far they can go will continue until we the people wake up and rise up and say NO MORE!

Here is one scientist speaking out on the current agenda. I have researched and read several more truths. DO NOT allow your freedoms to be obliterated by misinformation and FEAR. Do your homework and dig deeper to discover more facts so that you can make an informed decision and not one based solely on FEAR.  

(Lifesitenews, ICAN, the Highwire, plus many more will give you more information)

WAKE UP, before it is too late. Just look around at the atrocities happening in other countries. You have a right to chose how to take care of your health and wellbeing and the freedom to go where you desire without restriction. Your health, your choice!

Former Pfizer VP warns of ‘totalitarian’ health tyranny

“The authorities are adopting a method of incremental implementation of vaccine passports, according to Yeadon. “They’ll start with places you probably don’t go, like if you’re my age, you’re probably not going to nightclubs. So, I’m not personally affected by the news that you’ll need a vax pass to demonstrate that you’ve been vaccinated before you can get into a nightclub.”

“But that’s how they do it. It’s like dropping a cancerous cell into your body and you’re not noticing because you’re immunocompromised and it grows and metastasizes and then it kills you,” he continued. “And that’s what these [vax passes] are going to do. So don’t tolerate them anywhere in your country. The system will form itself, and I cannot see a way of removing them.”

“Once these things are in your country and being used to regulate access to essential services like food, money, fuel, trains and things like that, you’ll never get rid of it,” Yeadon said. “We’ve got to stop it beforehand.”

AND some food for though:

“ First, he addressed “the only possible argument” public health entities could advance to support vaccine passports, and this includes the notion that a vaccinated person is “safer to be around,” presuming that the shots “reduced transmission to others.”

In response, the expert in respiratory pharmacology said, “They do not [reduce such transmission]. It’s not in dispute. SAGE [Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies] doesn’t say so. The U.K. government doesn’t say so. So please, you’re not safer standing next to someone in a bar that’s been vaccinated. Not at all. And the government doesn’t say so either.”

Secondly, the COVID-19 gene-based vaccines cannot be about health because if they were, those “who’ve already been infected with the virus [and recovered],” thus having developed natural immunity, “would be excused from such injections.”

“Why would you waste money giving them to someone who already has superior immunity to anything you get from the vaccine? Also, it’s dangerous to vaccinate people who’ve already recovered from the disease in question,” he said.”

Continue to read: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/former-pfizer-vp-warns-of-permanent-totalitarian-health-tyranny-and-shares-advice-on-how-to-stop-it/

Relationships....

 Oh my word,

I am being blown away by the information and wisdom coming to my inbox lately.

I am an avid follower of shamanism and Alberto Villoldo and he wrote this beautiful piece on relationships/marriage and I know you will all learn or receive something from this if you stay open.

"In many cultures around the world, the Spiritual Seeker is celibate – and that’s a wonderful way of avoiding the complexity and complications of relationships. The shaman understands that we are attracted to those people that we have to learn with and learn through. Most of our early relationships are deeply karmic. We are looking for that person who can help us heal our wounds, who can help us find ourselves. And, of course, we can never do that through the Other. The Other only serves as a mirror for what it is that we need to heal. A friend of mine who is getting divorced recently told me: “I miss the woman that I married, but I don’t miss at all the woman I’m divorcing.” And that’s because she became such a clear mirror for him of what he needed to do to heal himself. I told him, “You have to stop looking for the right partner, and instead work on becoming the right partner.” When we understand that marriage is the arena where we can go to meet Spirit face-to-face, and when we practice deep gratitude for all of those difficult lessons that our partner is offering us, then we can truly evolve our relationship. But if we insist on making the Other wrong, then we are only going to dig ourselves deeper into our hole. Our task is not to look for someone who is going to be more like us, but to find the person that we can commit to a healing journey with. When you think you have found that person, go through a courtship process like the one I did with my wife, Marcela. Examine the seven chakras on the body and make a commitment at the level of each chakra. At the first chakra: How are you going to help each other with your survival needs, your basic identity needs, and are you going to commit to each other in meeting your most fundamental needs? This is where you will learn if you have the foundation to keep building. Do you feel safe? Can you disclose yourself, who you really are, and not who you want others to see you as? Can you trust this person to not hurt you if you show your soft underbelly? This is what it’s all about, and you have to be willing to reveal yourself, and to talk about it – which can be scary and painful. At the second chakra: How are you going to embrace the Other for who he/she is – and all the gifts, blessings and curses? Are you willing to receive them and embrace them and commit to help the Other discover the fullness of their being? At the third chakra: How can you acknowledge, respect and contribute to each other’s power and expression in the world without feeling threatened by it? At the fourth chakra, the heart: How can you dedicate yourselves to practicing unconditional love – and by that I mean love that is not conditioned by our upbringing, by mommy and daddy. Unconditioned love is based on honoring the Other. At the fifth chakra: How can you respect each other’s voice? Can you make a commitment to hear the Other deeply, to be a good listener, to be a careful witness to your partner and invite their voice to be developed to its fullest, versus a hidden whisper for fear of offending. At the sixth chakra: How can you support each other’s vision of your journey in the world? At the seventh chakra: How can you have a joint spiritual practice? You must go through the seven levels of deep commitment that are required for a fulfilling relationship, because if you have only six – say that at your second chakra, your sense of self, you don’t feel you are being received or respected by your partner – it’s not going to work. If you do the work at each of these levels, then you can grow the kind of relationship that can thrive, even in the most challenging of times. Many of us start out hoping we have found the most perfect partner out there … and that lasts for about two weeks (or if you really stretch it, maybe two months). But we can become the right partner by going through this series of initiations. Blessings, ​ ​ Alberto Villoldo - The Four Winds"

Study Suggests Milk Could Increase Breast Cancer Risk

 Study Suggests Milk Could Increase Breast Cancer Risk

Veronica Hackethal, MD

February 28, 2020

Hot on the heels of a review from top nutrition scientists that cautioned against drinking cow's milk comes another study with another caution: drinking milk increases the risk of developing breast cancer, say the researchers. But this finding comes from an observational study, and there may be confounders that are not accounted for, says an expert not involved with the study.   

The latest research was based on data from the long-running larger study called Adventist Health Study-2 (AHS-2), which is looking at diet and health among Seventh Day Adventists in North America. Past results from this study have suggested that Seventh Day Adventists have longer life spans and lower rates of some cancers, perhaps because of healthier lifestyles.

The latest analysis suggests that milk raises breast cancer risk, and the more you drink the higher your risk may be. 

"Consuming as little as 1/4 to 1/3 cup of dairy milk per day was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer of 30%," first author Gary E. Fraser, MBChB, PhD, said in a press statement. Fraser is affiliated with the School of Public Health at Loma Linda University, California.

"By drinking up to 1 cup per day, the associated risk went up to 50%, and for those drinking 2 to 3 cups per day, the risk increased further to 70% to 80%," he added.

The findings were published February 25, 2020 in the International Journal of Epidemiology.

"The AHS study is provocative, but it's not enough to warrant a change in guidelines. The caution being espoused by the authors is not warranted given the observational nature of this study," commented Don Dizon, MD, director of Women's Cancers, Lifespan Cancer Institute at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island. He was not involved with the study and was approached by Medscape Medical News for comment.

Because of its observational design, the study cannot prove that cow's milk causes breast cancer, Dizon emphasized.

"I'd want to see if the findings are replicated [by others]. Outside of a randomized trial of [cow's] milk vs no milk or even soy, and incident breast cancers, there will never be undisputable data," he said.

"Probably the biggest point [about this study] is not to overinflate the data," Dizon added.

He noted that the results were significant only for postmenopausal women, and not for premenopausal women. Moreover, analyses showed significant associations only for hormone receptor-positive cancers.

"We know that breast cancer increases in incidence with age, so this tracks with that particular trend. It suggests there may be confounders not accounted for in this study," he said.

Research so far has been inconclusive on a possible link between dairy and increased risk for breast cancer. Dairy has even been tied to decreased risk for breast cancer, according to the World Cancer Research Fund.

Study Details

The current study included 52,795 Seventh Day Adventist women from North America who did not have cancer at the start of the study. Women had a mean age of 57.1 years, and 29.7% were black. At baseline, women reported their dietary patterns for the past year using food frequency questionnaires. For 1011 women, researchers double-checked food intake with 24-hour diet questionnaires, and verified soy intake by analyzing urine levels of soy isoflavones.

Data on invasive breast cancer diagnoses came from national registries in the US and Canada. Over the course of 7.9 years, 1057 women developed invasive breast cancer. Results were adjusted for a range of factors related to breast cancer risk, including diet, lifestyle, and family history of breast cancer.

Overall, women who consumed the most calories from dairy per day had 22% increased risk for breast cancer, compared with women with the fewest calories from dairy (hazard ratio [HR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05 - 1.40, P = .008). Women who drank the most cow's milk per day had 50% increased risk for breast cancer compared with women who drank the least (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.22 - 1.84, P < .001). 

Drinking full or reduced fat cow's milk did not change the findings (P for trend = .002 and P for trend < .0001, respectively).

No significant association was found between breast cancer risk and cheese or yogurt consumption (P = .35 and P = .80, respectively).

Need for Change?

US dietary guidelines are under review. A new version, which will cover pregnant women and children under age 2 for the first time, is expected later this year.

Current guidelines recommend that adults and children aged 9 and over drink three 8 oz glasses of milk per day, or equivalent portions of yogurt, cheese, and other dairy products.

"Evidence from this study suggests that people should view that recommendation with caution," Fraser said.

Milk Is Complex Topic

A top nutrition scientist agrees. Walter Willett, MD, DrPH, professor of epidemiology and nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts, told Medscape Medical News: "There is little scientific justification for the recommendation of 3 cups of milk per day. This new study adds a further reason for caution.” 

"This was a high-quality study conducted by experienced investigators," Willett said. Strengths of the study include the high soy intake and low consumption of foods from animal sources, factors that are hard to study in other populations.

Willett was a coauthor, along with David Ludwig, MD, PhD, also from Harvard, of the recent review published in the New England Journal of Medicine that questioned the science behind milk-drinking recommendations. An article about this review on Medscape Medical News has attracted a huge number of comments from our readers.  

Milk is a complex topic, Willett explained. As a good source of essential nutrients, especially calcium and vitamin D, cow's milk has been touted to have several health benefits, especially decreased fracture risk. But Willett said calcium recommendations have probably been overstated, and current evidence does not support high milk intake for fracture prevention.

Other benefits include improved nutrition in low-income settings, taller stature, and decreased colorectal cancer risk. But cow's milk has also been linked to increased risk for some cancers, including prostate and endometrial cancer. Many of the benefits derived from nutrients found in milk may be obtained from other sources without these risks, according to Willett.

"Given the risks and benefits, we suggest a possible range from zero to two servings per day of dairy foods, including milk, cheese, and yogurt. If intake is zero or one serving, taking a calcium/vitamin D supplement would be good to consider," he said.

However, Fraser and Willett also suggested another option: replacing cow's milk with soy milk. Analyses from the current study showed no significant association between consumption of soy and breast cancer, independent of dairy (P for trend = .22).

In addition, substituting average amounts of soy milk for cow's milk was linked to a 32% drop in risk for breast cancer among postmenopausal women (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55 - 0.85, P = .002). However, these results were not significant among premenopausal women (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.36 - 1.38, P = .31).

"The suggestion that replacing some or all of [cow's] milk with soy milk may reduce risk of breast cancer is consistent with other studies supporting a benefit of soy milk for risk of breast cancer," Willett said.

"If someone does choose soy milk, picking one with minimal amounts of added sugar is desirable," he added.

Drinking Milk, or Some Related Factor?

Fraser, the lead author of the current study, said in a statement that the results provide "fairly strong evidence that either dairy milk or some other factor closely related to drinking dairy milk is a cause of breast cancer in women.”

That 'other' factor is probably complicated, but may be related to what humans have done to cows. To increase milk production, humans have bred cows to have higher levels of insulin-like growth factor, which in turn has been linked to some cancers, including breast cancer.

Sex hormones in cow's milk may also be involved. About 75% of a dairy herd is pregnant and the cows are by definition lactating. So the milk they produce may have higher levels of progestins and estrogens, which may play a role in hormone-responsive breast cancer. 

Other factors that researchers did not measure in this study, such as poverty and the income of participants, may be at play.

But to know what's really going on, all agree that more research is needed.

"The overall evidence so far has not shown a clear increase or decrease in risk of breast cancer with higher [cow's] milk intake. Thus, this topic needs further examination," Willett said.

Dairy, soy, and risk of breast cancer: those confounded milks

Gary E Fraser,  Karen Jaceldo-Siegl,  Michael Orlich,  Andrew Mashchak,  Rawiwan Sirirat,  Synnove Knutsen

International Journal of Epidemiology, dyaa007, https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyaa007

Published: 25 February 2020 Article history

Abstract

Background

Associations between soy, dairy intakes and breast cancer risk are inconsistent. No studies exist with large numbers of dairy consumers and soy consumers to assess mutual confounding.

Methods

The study cohort contains 52 795 North American women, initially free of cancer, followed for 7.9 years (29.7% were Black). Dietary intakes were estimated from food frequency questionnaires and, for 1011 calibration study subjects, from six structured 24-h dietary recalls. Incident invasive breast cancers were detected mainly by matching with cancer registries. Analyses used multivariable proportional hazards regression.

Results

The participants (mean age of 57.1 years) experienced 1057 new breast cancer cases during follow-up. No clear associations were found between soy products and breast cancer, independently of dairy. However, higher intakes of dairy calories and dairy milk were associated with hazard ratios (HRs) of 1.22 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05–1.40] and 1.50 (95% CI 1.22–1.84), respectively, comparing 90th to 10th percentiles of intakes. Full fat and reduced fat milks produced similar results. No important associations were noted with cheese and yogurt. Substituting median intakes of dairy milk users by those of soy milk consumers was associated with HR of 0.68 (95% CI: 0.55–0.85). Similar-sized associations were found among pre- and post-menopausal cases, with CIs also excluding the null in estrogen receptor (ER+, ER-), and progesterone receptor (PR+) cancers. Less biased calibrated measurement-error adjusted regressions demonstrated yet stronger, but less precise, HRs and CIs that still excluded the null.

Conclusions

Higher intakes of dairy milk were associated with greater risk of breast cancer, when adjusted for soy intake. Current guidelines for dairy milk consumption could be viewed with some caution.

6 Must Have Summer Herbs...

 This was such amazing information and so easily read and understood that I had to share it with all of you. Now, you can easily add these fabulous herbs to your diet.

6 Must Have Summer Herbs

Basil

Basil is so versatile, and its scent is divine. It is high in Vitamin A and is known to be excellent for eye health and vision, eliminating bad bacteria and viruses in the body, reducing inflammation, and promoting a healthy gut.

From pesto to caprese salads, you’ll want to have this plant front and center on your countertop. Pick its fresh leaves and sprinkle liberally in salads, sauces and even desserts for a sweet and savory contrast. 

Stinging Nettle

Stinging nettle has been used for at least 2,000 years to treat arthritis and other inflammatory diseases. It’s most famous as a hair tonic and its other benefits include regulating blood sugar, enhancing circulation, and treating gout and impotence. 

Dried stinging nettle leaves can be steeped to make a delicious herbal tea, while its fresh leaves, stems and roots can be cooked and added to soups, stir-frys, and smoothies. The leaves get their ‘sting’ from histamine and formic acid contained in their underleaf hairs. But once cooked, stinging nettle is nothing but tasty. 

Mint

Mint smells great, grows fast, and has many healing properties. It’s great for reducing flatulence, masking bad breath, relieving headaches, soothing digestion, and has a calming quality that’s good for heart health. 

Having a supply of fresh mint water or tea is a great way to keep cool. The easiest way to enjoy this lovely leaf is to place a handful of fresh mint leaves in a quart pitcher or jar, add spring or distilled water and leave it in the refrigerator overnight for a cold-brewed infusion. Sip, hot or cold throughout the day. 

Dill

Similar to mint’s attributes, a warm dill tea treats an upset stomach, is a light aromatic that freshens breath and adds a tasty zing to any dish. Another surprising benefit of dill is its high calcium content and antibacterial properties. 

Mix this feathery favorite in with your favorite tuna or chicken salad or use it to garnish grilled asparagus. 

Rosemary

Rosemary, fresh or dried, is a pungent, sturdy herb with superb health benefits. Rosemary, high in antioxidants and volatile oils, has long been used for everything such as pain relief, digestion, hair growth, and treating depression. 

One of its lesser known benefits is as a memory enhancer. Studies have shown that rosemary boosts memory and helps students recall facts if they smelled the herb while studying, and again while taking their tests. 

Use a fresh sprig of rosemary or some essential oil as an herbal cheat sheet during your exam for better recall! Also, while cooking, rosemary goes great with a variety of dishes such as soups, salads, stews, fish, and grains. 

Chives

Mild and oniony, chives are a delicious addition to many dishes. They are high in Vitamins A and K. Chives also contain allicin (similar to garlic, onions, leeks), a plant compound that is good for keeping cholesterol levels in check. 

The best way to eat chives is to snip them with scissors instead of chopping and add them to garnishes, salads, sandwiches, soups, and sauces just before serving. 

Who knew these summer herbs had so many healing properties? If you’re interested in a free online course that shows simple healthy recipes to try at home, check out Healthy Eating Tips: Easy Vegan Recipes led by certified rejuvenation chef, Kryssi Gala. 

Written by Gabi Petrylaite @ Changeyourenergy.com

Withholding....

I just read an interesting piece on withholding and it reminded me of my patterns when I first met my husband and for most of my relationships prior to that. It makes so much sense to be now and reading this article made me realize how much I have grown and changed and how much opportunity I still have for growth.

Emotional pain is usually at the root of our tendency to withhold and the most common form of withholding is what we call "the silent treatment", but it encompasses any unwillingness to express your true feelings. It also includes an unwillingness to give support, praise, or positive attention to the people you love.

Madisyn Taylor goes on to explain it further and very succinctly...."We have all known someone who is impossible to please, and many of us have suddenly found ourselves at the other end of a chilly silence with no explanation. At the same time, many of us will recognize our own tendency to withhold our emotions rather than express them. Most of us have seen both sides of the withholding dilemma. Emotional pain is at the root of our tendency to withhold, and withholding causes pain to the people subjected to it. It is a dysfunctional pattern that creates a breakdown in communication and understanding.

No one deserves to be subjected to withholding. Feeling ignored, disrespected, or shut out, and to not know why, is a terrible feeling. The first thing to remember if this is happening to you is that you are not to blame. You are caught in someone else's pain pattern. This person does not know how to express feelings in a healthy way probably because this is what they learned when she or he was a child. The second helpful thing to remember is that the withholder is acting out of pain. They are stuck in a habitual mode of response that is self-defeating and alienating to the people they love. Remembering this will help you feel compassion for the person hurting you. However, if you have suffered too long with this pattern, you may need to get some space. Take some time to look at your own patterns and understand why you have taken part in this drama. If you are dealing with people in a family situation, you can step up to the plate to help break the chain of this behavior pattern.

If, on the other hand, it is you that tends to withhold, understand that this is a learned response and it can be unlearned. Find safe places to begin to express all that you've been holding back. Begin to make an effort to say what you're feeling and thinking. Give praise to someone you love. The more you do this, the healthier you and your relationships will become. What was learned over a course of a life cannot be changed overnight--remember, one day at a time."

I know it is possible to change and be vulnerable and it all starts by opening your heart more and more ever day. The biggest and safest place to start practicing opening your heart further, and being vulnerable in expressing your inner feelings, thoughts and fears, is in a loving relationship. Our greatest opportunity for growth is in our relationships. Remember they mirror who we are and areas we need to address. Go ahead and start expressing yourself today. You and your health will benefit in ways you cannot even begin to imagine.

Independence..............really???

Independence day celebrations everywhere. It got me to thinking (still free) about the original intent behind it all....
Independence is the self-government of a nation, country, or state by its residents and population, or some portion thereof, generally exercising sovereignty. and is often an emancipation from some dominating power.

The self government by it's population.....what a joke!!
In this day and age our independence is slowly being eradicated and many are to oblivious to notice that little by little they are loosing their freedom of choice.
Everyday there are more laws being passed that affect that freedom of choice and it happens so quickly that unless you are paying careful attention, it is done before you can protect yourself.

AND these laws are being passed under the guise of protecting the public at large but really it is about money and greed....all you need to do is really take a closer look!

Pay attention people the country that you thought was democratic and free is laughing at you!

How can compulsory vaccines (proven to be the leading cause of Autism and impaired Immunity) help the greater public??? Should it not be my choice as to how I care for my health and should I not be allowed to decide who I consult for my personal well being?
Watch out for licensure as this is another illusion under the guise of public safety.
What a load of crap....the egos in the room are suffocating!!
The FDA....another joke on us. This organization is supposed to be there to protect the public but look at how many drugs are out there known to have devastating side effects but until someone dies....sorry...till many die...the FDA will line their pockets and those that they truly protect, first.

Independence....we gained it from the world at large, emancipated from one dominating power to another who seems more corrupt and filled with deceit. But at least for this weekend we can be save under the illusion of it all.


How's that for a little venting!!!