Monday, October 31, 2011

Raw Chia Breakfast (dessert)

Raw Chia Cereal/Pudding

Ingredients: 2 servings
  • 2 tbs of chia
  • 2 1/2 cups almond milk
  • 1 tsp of cocoa powder
  • 1 tsp mesquite powder
  • 1 tsp maca powder
  • dash of cinnamon
  • 1 banana
  • 6 prunes (cut in small pieces) Raisins or dates could work too
  • small handful of mixed nuts, chopped (almonds, pecans & walnuts)

Combine almond milk with powders and blend (I like to use my blender to make sure there are no powder lumps.

Cut banana into small bite size pieces (I usually cut the banana in half, for equal amounts per serving), and put nuts in a small bowl broken up as well, then I stick both in the freezer to stay cool while I wait for the chia to gel up a little.  I then pour half the almond mix blend into a bowl, and leave the rest in the blender cup. I add 1 Tbs of chia to each and stir. 

Then stick both in freezer for 20-30 minutes until it thickens up a little.  The chia will gel up a little, and a small freezing crust will form around the bowl. You can stir a few times during the waiting time if you please.  Teh almond milk in the blender cup doesn't freeze up as fast, so it's perfect by the time I'm ready for my second helping:)  There are only 35 calories in one cup of unsweetened silk almond milk, so I have no problem consuming the 2 1/4 cups of almond milk! Just 87 calories (less than one cup of skim milk.

Take it out of the fridge, mix in the banana, prunes and nuts and it's then ready to eat!
Most ingredients...
The rest of the ingredients...cinnamon, mesquite and Maca
 Adding the bananas, nuts and prunes
So yummy! When I got done I wanted another bowl! (so my current routine is to make it with double the amount of milk). With the full 2Tbs of chia and chilling in the fridge this version turns out to be a more gel like consistency...kinda like a pudding.  In this photo I used 1 1/2 cup of almond milk, and put the whole banana, 5 prunes and 2Tbs of chia in one bowl...but now I put half all the ingredients between 2 bowls, just using double the almond milk. 1 1/4 cup of almond milk per serving.
This photo is also not taken after freezing, but after being in the fridge. But after making it many times, I now always stick it in the freezer. Below is an updated photo of what my chia breakfast looks like.
 The 2 serving chilled version with toppings before mixing in...

Then mixed up..the slushiness of the  almond milk give this a dessert taste and feel

Chia seed- Rich in protein, minerals and fiber, chia seeds also contain 500% more calcium than milk and the same amount of omega-3s as wild salmon. In addition, studies have identified chia as a cancer-fight. Chia seeds also have an appetite-suppressing quality, making them an ideal food to incorporate into your weight-loss regimen.

Sunday, October 30, 2011

Dental Health Matters

Having learned about true health, and being more aware and conscious of what I put in my body, several months ago during my transformation to optimal health, I was surprised to realize that my dental routine would need a total makeover as well. For many months now I have changed my routine, using a healthier form of tooth paste (powder) and changed my mouthwash too. The only thing that remained the same was flossing daily. Do you know what's in your dental products and how they affect your teeth? Do you know the "Right" way to brush your teeth, and how different techniques affect your tooth enamel?

The following excerpts on toothpastes and preventing tooth decay are from How To Save Your Teeth: Toxic-Free Preventive Dentistry, by David Kennedy, Doctor of Dental Surgery.

Toothpastes: Do They Help?

In general, toothpastes are often just a cosmetic product with limited decay-preventive value. If you stain your teeth with smoke or tea, then a toothpaste may help reduce the staining. Pleasant flavored toothpastes seem to help motivate children and adults to brush. However, kids may be tempted to swallow the good-tasting stuff, and if it contains preservatives, saccharin, lead, colorings, or fluoride, they will receive a dose of a questionable or toxic substance. The fact that a tube of toothpaste contains a lethal dose of fluoride for a small child has been discreetly obscured from the general public’s knowledge.

And remember when toothpaste tubes stayed rolled up? Many of those tubes contain lead which the toothpaste absorbed and thus gave you an additional daily dose of lead every time you brushed. Until manufacturers furnish complete evidence that their products are effective and harmless, I refuse to recommend them. 

Many dermatologists are aware that some of the additives in toothpaste can cause a rash or sores inside the mouth. Fluoride is particularly notorious in this respect. One patient came to me after going to see a dermatologist about an irritation at the corners of her mouth. She had always had beautiful skin, but for the previous several months, she had a persistent rash. The doctor correctly identified her toothpaste as the culprit, and as soon as she switched to a non-fluoride brand, her problem cleared up. 

The abrasiveness of toothpaste can help polish teeth, but too much abrasion will wear away the enamel and especially the root. Many of the gritty products sold as smokers’ toothpastes are overly abrasive. In time, they may actually cause yellowing of the teeth by wearing down the enamel. Gritty toothpaste should not be used around the root surfaces, since even the mildly abrasive products can damage this area. That does not mean you should not brush around the gums. I’d rather see a root worn down by brushing than rotted away by neglect. Wear is usually a minor problem but root decay can destroy teeth quickly. Baking soda should not wear away enamel, but if it is improperly applied, it can scratch the gums.

Other toothpastes contain bleaching agents that are supposed to whiten your teeth. Teeth can be whitened through the use of a mouth guard which holds the whitener against the tooth surface for several hours, but the topical application of a paste has only little effect on the brightness of teeth. 

Several companies have advertised new toothpastes designed to prevent the buildup of tartar in the hopes that they will reduce gum disease. These tartar-control toothpastes apparently interfere with the remineralization of the teeth. Several of my patients have reported increased root sensitivity after using tartar-control toothpaste. There is little evidence at this time that the tartar itself is the cause of gum disease. It is but one of several factors that contribute to the spread of disease. Since I am concerned about the long-term effects of demineralization, I do not recommend the use of tartar-control toothpastes. Where root sensitivity is a problem, there are toothpastes designed to help remineralize root surfaces. These pastes are best applied after brushing just before bed. That way they will stay on the tooth longer. Just dab a spot on the sensitive root and go to bed. It usually takes six weeks to feel the improvement.

Why haven’t any reliable scientific studies been carried out to determine the comparative safety and effectiveness of the different toothpastes? Maybe because there is no money to be made from such a study. Maybe because large toothpaste manufacturers don’t want you to know that fluoride-containing toothpastes cause allergic-type reactions and gum damage and that a family-sized tube of fluoridated toothpaste contains enough fluoride to kill a small child. 

Many believe the pronouncements and recommendations made by the American Dental Association and leading consumer magazines, but few realize that these organizations have not done the scientific research necessary to show safety. In fact, in many cases, just the opposite has been found – the products they have recommended have been shown to be unsafe! 

For now, the most reliable approach is to use the common, time-tested agents: baking soda and salt, or a mixture of both with hydrogen peroxide. Other natural products and options are listed in the chapter on gum disease. 

Toothpaste is good to the extent that it encourages kids to brush. It is bad if it discourages dry brushing anywhere and anytime. Only a few commercial toothpastes are helpful in controlling tooth decay or gum disease. Feel free to brush without toothpaste; don’t get fixated on the idea that you must have it in order to clean your teeth. 

To prevent tooth decay, Dr. Kennedy recommends the following three-step approach:

  1. The first step is nutritional. The amount of decay is proportional to the length of time the teeth are in contact with sugar. Diet is very important. I can recall the surprise on a very health-conscious mother’s face when she found out that apple juice is a common cause of children’s tooth decay. “But it is natural,” she protested. Decay germs grow faster and produce more acid to damage teeth if sugar is present. Any kind of sugar will do, even the sugar found in dried fruit such as raisins.
  2. The second step is easy. I call it antibacterial. The germs that eat teeth are removed by baking soda. They can be washed away after soda is applied. The soda also helps neutralize any acid present.
  3. The third step may be the most important. The weak grooves in a child’s permanent molar teeth can be completely protected. By sealing them with a bonding material, tooth decay can be sealed out before it begins. If left unsealed, more than 50% of these grooves will decay within just a few years. The twelve permanent molars erupt four at a time at ages 6, 12, and 18. Other permanent teeth may have a significant groove defect that may need sealants but the six and twelve year molars are the critical ones.

Dr. David Kennedy practiced preventive dentistry for over 25 years in San Diego, California. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology from the University of Kansas and a Doctor of Dental Surgery from the University of Missouri at Kansas City. He served for two years in the United States Navy Dental Corps. He has lectured internationally to dentists and professionals on preventive and restorative dentistry and on the hazards of mercury and fluoride. He is a past President of the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology.

Saturday, October 29, 2011

Famous Raw Onion Bread

Famous Raw Onion Bread
My bread substitute...delicious!

3 large red onions
3/4 cup flax seed, ground in a high speed blender
3/4 cup raw sunflower seeds, ground in a food processor
1/2 cup Nama Shoyu (a raw organic soy sauce
1/3 C olive oil

Peel and halve the onions.  Cut the onions with the slicing disk.   Transfer to a large mixing bowl, add the remaining ingredients, and mix until all are thoroughly combined.   Spread 1/2 mixture evenly on 2 dehydrator tray with a teflex sheet.    
Dehydrate at 100 for 24 hours.  Flip the onion bread onto a tray.Dehydrate another 10 hours.  Once dehydrated cut into 9 equal pieces. It can then make 9 sandwiches or 18 pizza bottoms:) 

I like to eat them one slice at a time with avocado, tomato, cucumber, kale chips, fresh baby spinach, and mashed kidney beans with my raw cashew cheezy sauce.  One of my all time favorites!
 Just 5 ingredients!
 Sunflower seeds before blending
  Sunflower seeds after blending
  Flax seeds before blending
   Flax seeds after blending
   3 large red onions after slicing
All Ingredients prepared, measured, ready to be mixed in
   Mix ingredients in with your hands
   Lay half the mixture equally on 2 dehydrator sheets
  Onion bread after 10hrs of dehydrating 
34hrs later...All done:)
 Cut into 9 equal pieces for each onion bread sheet

Friday, October 28, 2011

Cancer Time Bomb

The Cancer Time Bomb Sitting in Your Refrigerator - Will You Stop Consuming It?

By Dr. Mercola

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women. If you're a woman, your chance of getting breast cancer in your lifetime is about one in eight.
Researchers at a breast cancer conference stated that up to one-third of breast cancers could be avoided by making different lifestyle choices, such as the foods you choose to eat.
There is one food you may be surprised to learn, that is directly linked to breast cancer—and that is pasteurized dairy in the form of milk or milk products.
The risk lies in consuming milk from cows treated with a synthetic, genetically engineered growth hormone called rBGH, and unfortunately, this applies to about one third of the dairy cows in America

When you consume dairy products from these cows, every product made from their milk is contaminated with this dangerous hormone—be it cheese, ice cream, yogurt, butter—or just plain milk.
Cows are injected with rBGH to boost their milk production.
But science has proven this practice, although profitable to the industry, comes at a high price to you, as well as to dairy cows. RBGH, or recombinant bovine growth hormone, is a synthetic version of natural bovine somatotropin (BST), a hormone produced in cows' pituitary glands.

Monsanto developed the recombinant version from genetically engineered E. coli bacteria and markets it under the brand name "Posilac."
RBGH is the largest selling dairy animal drug in America.
But it is banned in Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and in the 27 countries of the European Union because of its dangers to human health. Many have tried to inform the public of the risks of using this hormone in dairy cows, but their attempts have been met with overwhelming opposition by the powerful dairy and pharmaceutical industries, and their government liaisons.

Monsanto Lawyers Threaten "Dire Consequences" for Whistleblowers

In 1997, two Fox-affiliate investigative journalists, Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, attempted to air a program exposing the truth about the dangers of rBGH. Lawyers for Monsanto, a major advertiser with the Florida network, sent letters promising "dire consequences" if the story aired.
After attempts by Fox to bribe the reporters to keep quiet failed, the station agreed to air a revised version of the report. An unheard of 83 edits later, the report was shelved and the courts took over. Although a lower court ruled in favor of the reporters for some $425,000, a Florida appeals court denied them whistleblower protection, claiming Fox (and the media in general) have no obligation to tell the truth and have the freedom to report, essentially, fact OR fiction as real news.
They tell their story in an article at PR Watch.
It is stories like this that reignite my determination to bring you factual information about these important issues regarding your health.
Despite decades of evidence about the dangers of rBGH, the FDA still maintains it's safe for human consumption and ignores scientific evidence to the contrary. According to Dr. Samuel Epstein, a well-respected professional in cancer prevention and toxicology and chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, the FDA has responded to evidence that rBGH is unsafe with a wide range of "tenuous and inconsistent claims" based on "highly speculative and misleading calculations…based on a wide range of assumptions," often citing flawed scientific studies that simply are not meaningful.
In 1999, the United Nations Safety Agency ruled unanimously not to endorse or set safety standards for rBGH milk, which has effectively resulted in an international ban on U.S. milk. The Cancer Prevention Coalition, trying for years to get the use of rBGH by the dairy industry banned, resubmitted a petition to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, MD, in January 2010.
They are still waiting for a response. Although the FDA stubbornly sticks to its position that milk from rBGH-treated cows is no different than milk from untreated cows, this is just plain false and is not supported by science.

Differences Between rBGH-Treated and Untreated Milk

According to Dr. Epstein, rBGH milk differs from natural milk nutritionally, pharmacologically, immunologically, and hormonally, and he cites the following differences. RBGH milk contains:
  • Increased levels of insulin growth factor-1 (IGF-1)
  • Contamination with illegal antibiotics and drugs used to treat mastitis and other rBGH-induced diseases, as well as pus from increased rates of mastitis among the cows injected with rBGH
  • Increased levels of the thyroid hormone enzyme thyroxin-5'-monodeiodinase
  • Reduced casein content (a milk protein)
  • Increased concentration of long-chain fatty acids and decreased concentration of short-chain fatty acids
ALL of the factors above can cause or contribute to health problems for people. But people aren't the only ones suffering—as it turns out, the cows getting injected with these hormones are suffering as well.

RBGH Causes 16 Different Medical Problems in Dairy Cows

As mentioned above, the cows receiving this synthetic hormone suffer massively high rates of mastitis, a painful infection of their udders. Monsanto's own data show up to an 80 percent incidence of mastitis in hormone-treated cattle, resulting in the need for routine administration of antibiotics and other drugs. This increases the frequency of allergic reactions and fuels antibiotic resistance. But mastitis is not the only adverse veterinary effect. The Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research (2003) found 16 different harmful medical conditions resulting from rBGH administration to dairy cattle, including:
  • 40 percent increase in infertility
  • 55 percent increased risk for lameness
  • Shortened lifespan
  • Hoof disorders
  • Visibly abnormal milk
From the data presented in this meta-analysis, I think it's a reasonable conclusion that injecting animals with rBGH is cruel and inhumane treatment, besides producing milk that is not fit for human consumption.

RBGH Raises Levels of IGF-1 in Milk by Up to 70 Percent

IGF-1 is a potent hormone that acts on your pituitary gland to induce powerful metabolic and endocrine effects, including cell growth and replication. Elevated IGF-1 levels are associated with breast and other cancers. When cows are injected with rBGH, their levels of IGF-1 increase up to 20-fold, and this IGF-1 is excreted in the milk.
According to some confidential, unpublished industry studies, IGF-1 levels consistently elevate by 25 to 70 percent in rBGH milk. In reality, it is probably worse than that, since standard calculation techniques used by the dairy industry underestimate IGF-1 levels by a factor of four.
In one study, a six-fold increase in IGF-1 levels in milk were found as early as seven days following rBGH treatment.
Not only are IGF-1 levels elevated in the milk of rBGH-treated cows, but a significant portion of this IGF-1 is in the free, or unbound, form, which may be about 10 times as potent as the IGF-1 in untreated milk. And not only does pasteurization NOT destroy this protein, but studies show it actually increases IGF-1 levels by about 70 percent, presumably by disrupting protein binding.  There is a glaring absence of safety margins for IGF-1 in milk, and assurances by industry and government regulators to establish these parameters have been nothing more than empty promises.
Ok, so the levels of IGF-1 are higher in rBGH milk. But does the IGF get absorbed into your system when you drink it, or does your digestive tract break it down and render it inert?
Science tells us unequivocally that  you do  NOT break this down when you swallow it, but you DO absorb it into your bloodstream, as evidenced by both human and animal studies. Infants and young children absorb IGF-1 in even higher concentrations than adults, because their gut wall is more permeable to proteins. Infants and young children show higher levels of cow's milk protein antibodies. The IGF-1 in dairy products appears to be protected during digestion by casein and by dairy's buffering effects.

How Elevated IGF-1 Levels May Raise Your Breast Cancer Risk

Only one of every 10 breast cancer cases is attributed to genetics—the other nine are triggered by environmental factors, some of which are dietary. The fact that increased IGF-1 levels in hormone-treated milk increase your risk for breast, colon, and prostate cancers as has been documented in about 50 scientific publications over the past three decades. Among them is the 1998 Harvard Nurses Health study, which showed that premenopausal women with elevated IGF-1 levels had up to a seven-fold increase in breast cancer. And women younger than age 35 who have elevated IGF-1 have more aggressive breast cancer.
How does IGF-1 contribute to breast cancer?
IGF-1 regulates cell growth, cell division, and the ability of cancer cells to spread to your distant organs (invasiveness). In other words, IGF-1 has potent mitogenic effects in human breast tissue, especially in the presence of estradiol (a form of estrogen). Growth factors such as IGF-1 are "catalysts" for the transformation of normal breast tissue into breast cancer tissue, and are critically involved in the aberrant growth of human breast cancer cells. The following two findings have direct bearing on this link between elevated IGF-1 levels and breast cancer:
  • Specific IGF-1 mammary cell receptors are elevated by a factor of 10 in malignant human breast tissue.
  • IGF-1 plasma concentrations are higher in breast cancer patients than in healthy patients. (As an aside, this is how the breast cancer drug tamoxifen exerts its action—by reducing blood IGF-1 levels.)
According to Dr. Epstein, IGF-1 blocks your natural defense mechanisms against early microscopic cancers—it prevents apoptosis of cancer cells, or programmed cellular self-destruction.
The breast tissues of female fetuses and infants are especially sensitive to hormonal influences and cancer-causing chemicals. Infants and children exposed to high IGF-1 early on may become "sensitized," leading to health problems later in life, such as breast enlargement in infants and young children, and breast cancer in adult women. Yet, despite these elevated risks to children, few schools make rBGH-free or organic milk available, nor do most state governments under low-income food programs. A study authored by Dr. Epstein demonstrated that IGF-1 in rBGH milk is a potential risk factor for both breast and gastrointestinal cancers. And a study published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention concluded that diet can impact cancer risk by influencing IGF-1 level.
The risks don't end with breast cancer.
Ten studies show that consuming milk from rBGH-treated cows raises your risk for colon cancer, and seven studies document this for  prostate cancer. If you want more information on this topic, I recommend reading Dr. Epstein's 2006 book, What's In Your Milk?

Are You Drinking rBGH Milk?

You very well may be drinking rBGH milk, or eating rBGH cheese or yogurt, as no labeling is required. This is despite the fact that surveys show that more than 80 percent of Americans want it labeled, but the government, as usual, continues bowing to industry lobbyists. The good news is, as increasing numbers of consumers and dairies choose to avoid rBGH, you can find labels that say "rBGH-free" or a similar variation. Organic milk is also rBGH-free. According to the Hartman Group, organic milk is now among the first organic product consumers buy.
Organic milk is enjoying an annual growth rate of about 20 percent, while overall milk consumption has dropped by about 10 percent.
Organic milk is certainly preferable to milk that contains this dangerous hormone. However, I still don't recommend drinking any milk that is pasteurized—organic or otherwise. You can avoid the risks of rBGH, as well as pasteurization, by drinking only raw milk that comes from a small farmer you know and trust. The milk issue is really part of the larger problem of genetic manipulation of our food supply. The more you can avoid genetically modified (GM) and highly processed foods, the healthier you and your family will be.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Raw or Cooked

Supercharge your vegetables by learning how to get the most out of them.

Garlic: Raw!
Garlic contains chemicals that relax your blood vessels, helping to protect them from heart disease. Cooking garlic reduces the amount of these vital chemicals, so it’s better to enjoy garlic raw.

Broccoli: Raw!
Broccoli contains cancer-fighting elements that our bodies love. When consumed raw, these chemicals are more readily absorbed into the body.

Spinach: Cooked!
Though raw spinach is still good for you, cooked spinach makes it easier for your body to absorb the calcium it contains. Calcium is essential for bone strength, so make sure you get the most out of your spinach. Steam your spinach rather than boiling it to avoid losing nutrients.

Carrots: Cooked!
Carrots are better for you when cooked. While they are great raw, when cooked, they release more beta carotene (vitamin A). It’s best to cook carrots with the peel intact.

Red Peppers: Raw!
Red peppers are high in vitamin C, which is a water-soluble nutrient. By cooking or boiling red peppers, the vitamins escape and dissolve in the water. It’s best to eat red peppers raw.

Onions: Cooked!
Onions contain a flavonoid called quercetin, which has anti-inflammatory properties. Cooking increases the total amount of flavonoids. Red and yellow onions have more flavonoids than white onions. Bake or sauté onions for 5 minutes; any longer and the onion will begin to lose nutrients

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Creamy Butternut Squash Soup

Creamy Butternut Squash Soup

3 tablespoons olive oil
1 large butternut squash, 2-2 1/2 lbs — peeled, cubed
1 stalk of leeks
1 onion chopped
1 large carrot chopped (I used frozen orange and yellow carrots)
2 stalks celery chopped
bunch of asparagus
1 cup or more of shredded cabbage
1 small container of button mushrooms
1 tsp garlic paste
1 sq inch fresh ginger peeled and minced
1 tsp of garlic powder
1 tsp of onion powder
dash of cayenne (or more to taste)
3 1/4 cups vegetable stock
1 tsp salt and pepper (to taste)


Peel squash with a sharp knife or vegetable peeler. Cut lengthwise, scoop out seeds and cut into 1″ cubes.

Heat oil in a soup pot over medium heat. Then add onions, leeks, celery, carrot, and rest of veggies. Cook until vegetables are lightly browned and begin to caramelize.  Add ginger and garlic, cook until well incorporated and fragrant, around 15 minutes

Add vegetable broth to cover veggies, bring to boil, then turn down to simmer for about 10 minutes.

Once the squash and potatoes are tender, soup is ready. Either eat it hearty with  chunks or blend for creamy smooth.  To thin the soup, add more chicken stock. Salt and pepper to taste.

 All ingredients- add whatever vegetables you like!
 Chop up all ingredients - doesn't have to be exact (you will blend them in the end)
 Heat olive oil on medium, then toss in all veggies and cook while stirring contently for about 15 minutes. Half way add dry spices.
 Add veggie broth to cover veggies
 Turn heat up and bring to boil...then turn down to a simmer for 15 minutes
 Take serving size of soup and blend for freshly blended soup per serving.
 Add salt and pepper to taste
This soup was delicious!
Definitely a soup I will be making lots of in the winter months!

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

8 Things You Can Do about GMO

8 Things You Can Do
If You’re Concerned About the

Lack of Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

2. Look for the USDA Organic seal and buy organic – The National Organic Standards prohibit the use of genetic engineering.

3. Avoid the 5 products that are most likely to be genetically engineered (GE) unless they are USDA certified organic or Non-GMO Project Verified: Corn, Soy, Canola, Cotton, Sugar made from beets (sugar from cane is NOT GMO).

4. When buying produce, look at the PLU # (price look up). If it’s 5 numbers starting with an 8, then you will know it is genetically engineered. If it starts with a 9, it is organic. USDA certified organic per the organic standards prohibits the use of genetically engineering.

5. Eat fresh! While some produce is genetically engineered, most GEs will be found in processed foods containing soy and corn. Eat more fresh vegetables and unprocessed foods. Your body will thank you and you will avoid genetically engineered foods.

6. Download the True Food Shopper’s Guide from the Center for Food Safety for a list of brands with products that claim to be made without genetic engineering (also available via mobile app).

7. Look for products that identify themselves as not genetically modified or Non-GMO, like Non-GMO Project Verified, North America’s first third-party Product Verification Program.

8. When in doubt, ask! Call the manufacturer of your favorite foods and ask if they contain genetically engineered products. This way you get the information you need and you can let the company know how you feel about GEs.

Monday, October 24, 2011

SuperPowder chocolate balls

Raw SuperPowder chocolate ball have become a part of my daily lifestyle. I make a batch every single Monday to last me throughout the week (sometimes Fridays too if I share and run out).  Since I began making it I progressively alter it slightly, making it better each time...making it even more healthy and super;) Here is my current super nutrient dense recipe. 
I always make some with the frozen bananas, but this time I dehydrated some organic blueberries to add to the bunch, and will be adding goji berries to some as well.  These can more appropriately be called SuperPower Chocolate Balls.

  • 1/2 cup of raw cocoa powder
  • 1/2 carob powder
  • 1/2 cup almonds
  • 1/2 cup sunflower seeds 
  • 1/2 cup walnuts
  • 1/2 cup pecans
  • 1/4 cup coconut oil
  • 1 tbs heaped of organic raw Lucuma powder
  • 1 tbs heaped organic raw Mucuna powder
  • 1 tbs heaped organic raw Maca powder
  • 1 tbs level of organic raw Mesquite powder 
  • 1 tbs heaped organic raw Yacon powder
  • 1 tbs level organic raw Shilajit powder
  • 1 tbs level organic raw Deer Antler Velvet powder
  • 2 tbs vanilla raw whey protein powder
  • Himalayan salt (a pinch in 3 tbs of warm use a 1 tbs of the water)
  • 8-10 dates
  • Drizzle of raw honey (or clear raw agave) for extra sweetening
  • 1 raw vanilla bean (extract bean seeds and mix in with coconut oil)
  • 1-2 drop full of liquid vanilla creme stevia (for more sweetening and vanilla flavor)
  • cup of shaved coconut to coat chocolate balls 
  • few tablespoons of coconut milk used to blend dates
  • frozen bananas chopped up into bite size pieces
  • dehydrated organic blueberries
  • organic goji berries 

  • Before beginning, make sure you freeze bite-size pieces of banana the previous day. You can freeze the whole banana, and peal and chop right before use...sticking it back in the freezer until the moment you use it. Also thoroughly wash your hands!  You use your hands for mixing ingredients.
  • Blend the almonds, walnuts, pecans and sunflower's ok to leave in a few chunks for texture
  • Mix together the cocoa powder, carob powder, Mucuna powder, Shilajit powder,  Lucuma powder, Maca powder, Mesquite powder, Yacon powder, Himalayan salt (use a tbsp of the water), drizzle Agave or raw honey, 1-2 a drop full of liquid vanilla creme stevia (fore more sweetening and vanilla flavor). 
  • Blend the dates with coconut milk for a creamy consistency and blend into mix.  I also add the coconut oil and the vanilla bean seeds to the blended mix for more moisture and a creamy outcome
  • Mix all ingredients together now and massage with hands into a nice firm batter
  • Roll into small balls, flatten some for a different shape
  • Roll in coconut shavings and you are done! Store in Freezer
To make the banana, blueberries or goji ones 
  • Take out the bite size frozen bananas from the freezer (don't take out before hand they will get soggy as they defrost and become very hard to coat in chocolate. I take out a couple pieces at a time.
  • Take a mold of the chocolate mix and wrap around the banana pieces. Roll in hand gently and roll in coconut shavings to seal
  • To make it with dehydrated blueberries and goji berries, just mix in the berries with as much chocolate as you'd like the ratio to be, and roll into small balls. Roll in coconut shavings to seal. 
 All 21 ingredients:p  It's not called Super for nothing! All healthy and powerfoods. I soaked the dates in the coconut milk.
Dehydrated the blueberries for about 11hrs
 After blending all nuts, and mixing all dry ingredients, I add the blended dates, coconut milk and coconut oil and mix in with my hands. Usually just one hand.
 Mix until it looks something like this...with no powder left in the bowl
 The extra ingredients to add include, organic goji berries (a superfood!), dehydrated blueberries (I dehydrated frozen organic blueberries for about 11hrs), and frozen organic banana pieces
 I then grabbed a chunk of chocolate and equal amount of blueberries (these turned out soo delicious! And extra bit of chewiness and sweetness)
 It mixed in really well...the blueberries were not 100% dry, so it added a little bit of moisture which was great
 After doing a few blueberry-only balls, I added in the goji berries to the mix...they were fabulous!  After freezing for a little while they almost turn a little crunchy, although only chewy at room temperature. Definitely a do again recipe:)
On the right are the fruit ones, at the bottom the bigger ones are the banana ones, in the middle of the container are the blueberry only ones and at the top are the blueberry and goji berry ones. Then the container on the left are just plain chocolate. 

    Sunday, October 23, 2011

    Cancer: The Forbidden Cures

    Cancer: The Forbidden Cures 



    FORBIDDEN CURE (Full Version) Rick Simpson in Croatia 


    The Cure For Cancer 


    Proof the FDA is suppressing the cure for cancer


    Saturday, October 22, 2011

    Swiss Chard Quinoa Soup

    Swiss Chard Quinoa Soup

    A perfect meal for a cold rainy day ^_^


    • 6 cups vegetable broth (or enough to cover veggies)
    • bowl of frozen carrots/cauliflower/broccoli
    • 1 bunch Swiss Chard, chopped
    • 1 onion pepper, chopped
    • 3 stalks of celery, sliced
    • 1 cup of quinoa, already cooked
    • 1 tsp garlic powder (or more)
    • 1 tsp onion powder (or more)
    • cayenne powder (to hotness preference)
    • 1 tsp garlic paste
    • 1 square inch fresh ginger
    • Himalayan salt and black pepper, to taste
    • 1 tbs of coconut oil (or extra virgin olive oil)


    Heat coconut oil in large pot. Combine all ingredients except quinoa and cook until veggies start to become tender. Cook Quinoa separately. Add in the vegetable broth to cover veggies and turn on high until it boils. When it reaches a boil, turn to medium and simmer covered. Set for 15 m minutes. Keep checking and stir to reach desired veggie tenderness. When soup and quinoa are cooked, combine. Serve and enjoy this hearty swiss chard soup!

     At cool temperatures coconut oil is a solid, but quickly melts at room temperature
     Stir in all vegetables and coat with coconut oil and add seasonings
    Add vegetable broth, bring to boil, then lower heat to medium and simmer until veggies are desired softness (don't overcook!)
     Turn off burner and add in cooked Quinoa
    I made enough for at least 6 large servings
    If you don't like the hint of coconut flavor use olive oil instead

    Friday, October 21, 2011

    Breast Cancer Month

    October is the National Breast Cancer Awareness month in the U.S., and October 21 is National Mammography Day

    Please visit this site for more information abuot Cancer-
    Every piece of information on that site has been rigorously fact-checked and documented.

    Story at-a-glance

    • While increase in breast cancer screenings has resulted in soaring breast cancer diagnoses, rates of invasive breast cancer have still increased in certain populations. According to one recent study, mammography screening may "save" only 1 person for every 2,500 screened.
    • The rate of "false alarms" from mammogram screening is as high as 40 percent, resulting in high rates of unnecessary biopsies and other tests.
    • A growing body of clinical evidence indicates that the "low energy" x-rays used in breast screenings are up to 500 percent more carcinogenic than previously assumed.
    • Breast Cancer Awareness Month is fraught with conflicts of interest, and instead of increasing awareness about the preventable causes of breast cancer, it feeds the cancer industry’s need to raise money for drug research, and to promote its primary means of “prevention”: early detection via x-ray mammography.
    • The primary causes of breast cancer: nutritional deficiencies, environmental toxins, inflammation, and estrogen dominance, are entirely overlooked as the cancer industry is primarily fixated on providing drug therapies to treat symptoms rather than preventing the cause.

    By Sayer Ji
    October is the National Breast Cancer Awareness month in the U.S., and October 21 is National Mammography Day.
    Zeneca Group plc., a pharmaceutical subsidiary of Imperial Chemical Industries and manufacturer of the blockbuster breast cancer drugs Arimidex and Tamoxifen, founded the National Breast Cancer Awareness Month in 1985 in order to promote the widespread adoption of x-ray mammography (and the sale of their products).1
    While the increase in routine screenings has resulted in soaring breast cancer diagnoses, rates of invasive breast cancer have actually INCREASED in certain populations.2

    Shocking Statistic: False Alarms May Be as High as 40 Percent!

    A recent study and editorial published in the New England Journal of Medicine indicated that x-ray mammography screening may "save" only 1 person for every 2,500 screened.
    Among the 2,500 screened at least 1,000 will have a false alarm, 500 would undergo an unnecessary biopsy, and 5 or more would become treated for abnormal finds that would never become fatal, i.e. their lives will be shortened due to medication/surgical/stress-induced adverse effects.
    Given these findings X-ray mammography may be far more effective at generating increased numbers of breast cancer diagnoses than in "preventing" malignancy and mortality associated with the disease. To the contrary, a growing body of clinical evidence indicates that the "low energy" x-rays used in breast screenings are up to 500% more carcinogenic than previously assumed and upon which current radiation risk models that favor mass breast screenings with ionizing diagnostic technologies find justification.
    The success of this highly popularized model of "prevention," which prevents nothing, is explained when we look deeper into who is behind AstraZeneca, the founding sponsor of National Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

    AstraZeneca's Role in the Cancer Industry

    AstraZeneca was in fact a by-product of one of the world's largest chemical (and carcinogen) producers, Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI). Before being acquired by AkzoNobel in 2008, ICI produced millions of pounds annually of known mammary carcinogens such as vinyl chloride. ICI demerged its pharmaceutical bioscience businesses in 1993 to form Zeneca Group plc., which later merged with Astra AB to form AstraZeneca in 1999.
    AstraZeneca's best-selling cancer drug Tamoxifen is actually classified by the World Health Organization as a carcinogen. (To view toxicological data on this chemical visit our Problem Substances Database page on Tamoxifen). Presently all campaign ads and promotional events that are run by the National Breast Cancer Awareness Month foundation (which operates year round) must be "approved," i.e. "pink-washed," by AstraZeneca before being released for public consumption.
    Other experts and organizations have pointed out this glaring conflict of interest:
    "A decade-old multi-million dollar deal between National Breast Cancer Awareness Month sponsors and Imperical Chemical Industries (ICI) has produced reckless misinformation on breast cancer," ~ Dr. Samuel Epstein [a leading international authority on cancer-causing effects of environmental pollutants.]
    "Imperial Chemical Industries has supported the cancer establishment's blame-the-victim attitude toward the causes of breast and other cancers. This theory attributes escalating cancer rates to heredity and faulty lifestyle, rather than avoidable exposures to industrial carcinogens contaminating air, water, food, consumer products, and the workplace."
    ~ Cancer Prevention Coalition

    Prevention as Watchful Profiteering

    Sadly, Breast Cancer Awareness Month has not become a time of increasing awareness of the preventable causes of breast cancer and has instead fed the breast cancer industry's insatiable need to raise money for research into a pharmaceutical cure, and to promote its primary means of "prevention": early detection via x-ray mammography.
    On first account, a pharmaceutical "cure" is as unlikely as it is oxymoronic. Drugs do not cure disease anymore than bullets cure war. Beneath modern medicine's showy display of diagnostic contraptions, heroic "life-saving" procedures, and an armory of exotic drugs of strange origin and power, it is the body's ability to heal itself – beneath the pomp and circumstance – that is truly responsible for medicine's apparent successes. Too often, in spite of what medicine does to "treat" or "save" the body, it is the body which, while against invasive chemical and surgical medical interventions, silently treats and saves itself.
    If it were not for the body's truly miraculous self-healing abilities, and the ceaseless self-correction process that occurs each and every moment within each and every cell, our bodies would perish within a matter of minutes. The mystery is not in how our body succumbs to cancer; rather the mystery is in how, after years and even decades of chemical exposure and nutrient deprivation our bodies prevail against cancer for so long.

    Prevention versus Early Diagnosis

    The primary causes of breast cancer: nutritional deficiencies, exposure to environmental toxicity, inflammation, estrogen dominance and the resultant breakdown in genetic integrity and immune surveillance, are entirely overlooked by this fixation on drug therapy and its would-be "magic bullets" and the completely dumbed down and pseudo-scientific concept that "genes cause disease." (See: DNA: Not The Final Word On Health).
    Billions of dollars are raised and funneled towards drug research, when the lowly turmeric plant, the humble cabbage and the unassuming bowl of miso soup may offer far more promise in the prevention and treatment of breast cancer than all the toximolecular drugs on the market put together. (To view several dozen substances go to GreenMedinfo: Breast Cancer)
    When it comes to the breast cancer industry's emphasis on equating "prevention" with "early detection" through x-ray mammography, nowhere is the inherently pathological ideology of allopathic medicine more clearly evident.
    Not only is the ionizing radiation used to discern pathological lesions in breast tissue one of the very risk factors for the development of breast cancer, but the identification of the word "prevention" with "early detection," is a disingenuous way of saying that all we can do to prevent breast cancer is to detect its inevitable presence sooner than would be possible without this technology. (View our X-Ray Mammography page on our Anti-Therapeutic Actions database).
    If women succumb to the idea of prevention as doing nothing but waiting for the detection of the disease, many will find a similarly deranged logic re-emerge later when the self-fulfilling prophecy of prevention-through-doing-nothing is fulfilled and "treatment" is now required. "Treatment," when not strictly surgical, involves the use of very powerful chemicals and high doses of ionizing radiation which "poison" the cancer cells.
    The obvious problem with this approach is that the application of either form of death energy is not suitably selective, and in the long run, many women die sooner from the side effects of toximolecular "therapy" than from the cancer itself. Why is the obvious question never asked: if exposure to the genotoxic and immune system disabling effects of chemicals and radiation is causative in breast cancer, then why is blasting the body with more poisonous chemicals and radiation considered sound treatment?
    The answer to this question has much more to do with ignorance than it does an intentional desire to do harm. But the results are the same: unnecessary pain, suffering and death.
    Faced with a situation where medieval notions of prevention and treatment of breast cancer are the norm, it is no wonder that when polled over 40% of women believe they will contract breast cancer sometime in their life – well over three times their actual risk. After all, have any of them been given a sense that there is something they can do to actually prevent their disease other than "watchful waiting"?

    Pink-Washing Away the Preventable Causes of Breast Cancer

    Obfuscating the real preventative measures available to women to combat breast cancer, and all cancers for that matter, trusted "authoritative" sources like the Susan G. Komen Foundation publish irresponsible statements like this:
    "It is unclear what the exact relationship is between eating fruits and vegetables and breast cancer risk…little, if any link was found between the two in a pooled analysis that combined data from eight large studies."
    Have we really come to the point where the common sense consumption of fruits and vegetables in the prevention of disease can so matter-of-factly be called into question? Do we really need randomized, double-blind and placebo controlled clinical trials to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that our bodies can benefit from the phytonutrients and antioxidants in fruits and vegetables in the prevention of cancer?
    Another atrocious example of this conspiracy against identifying the obvious causes and cures for diseases like breast cancer is the National Breast Cancer Foundation's website. Go to the bottom of their homepage and type in "carcinogen" in their site wide search box. This is what will appear on the results page:
    "Your search – carcinogen – did not match any documents. No pages were found containing "carcinogen".
    On Susan G. Komen's website the term only emerges three times, and always in the context of minimizing the causative connection between smoking, high saturated fat consumption from meat and breast cancer. If you can remove the reality of carcinogenicity by erasing from the minds of would-be cancer sufferers the word carcinogen, and thereby conceal the link between environmental and dietary exposures of a multitude of toxins, then the obvious "cure" these massive organizations which are vacuuming in billions of dollars of donations every year to find, namely, the removal of carcinogens and detoxification of the system, will never be discovered.

    Final Thoughts

    Examples like these make it increasingly apparent that orthodox medicine, and the world view it represents, is approaching a theoretical end-time perhaps most accurately described as Pharmageddon. Within the horizon of this perspective vitamins are considered toxic, fruits and vegetables simply a source of caloric content (a poor one, at that), and cancer-causing drugs are understood as the only legitimate and, for that matter, legal, way to combat cancer. Are we really at the tipping point, or is there still hope?
    Fortunately there are thousands of scientific studies extant today on the therapeutic value of foods, herbs and spices in breast health, many of which can be found on the government's own biomedical database known as MEDLINE. Decades of research have confirmed the veracity of the Hippocratic phrase: "Let food be thy medicine," and until a prescription is required to obtain and consume organic food, we can still draw from a vast cornucopia of natural substances whose safety and efficacy put the conventional pharmacopeia to shame. 

    Breast Cancer Prevention Month Initiated by GrassrootsHealth

    GrassrootsHealth is changing the current Breast Cancer Awareness Month to Breast Cancer Prevention Month with a focus on taking action to prevent breast cancer with vitamin D testing and education.
    "It's time to take action, women are already fully aware of breast cancer and its consequences," says Carole Baggerly, director of GrassrootsHealth. "When you can project that fully 75 percent of breast cancer could be prevented with higher vitamin D serum levels, there is no justification for waiting to take preventive measures such as getting one's vitamin D level up to the recommended range of 40-60 ng/ml (100-150 nmol/L)."
    According to Dr. Cedric F. Garland of the Moores Cancer Center and the UCSD School of Medicine:
    "This will potentially be the most important action ever conducted toward prevention of breast cancer. The more women who participate in this study, the greater the chance that we will defeat breast cancer within our lifetimes."
    Women across the world are invited to enroll in a 5-year Breast Cancer Prevention Study initiated by GrassrootsHealth. To be eligible to enroll, you must be at least 60 years of age and have no current cancer. A free vitamin D home test kit will be provided for the first 1,000 women to enroll. The study aims to fully demonstrate health outcomes of vitamin D serum levels in the range of 40-60 ng/ml (100-150 nmol/L) and will examine the occurrence of breast cancer among a population of women 60 and over who achieve and maintain a targeted vitamin D serum level in the bloodstream. In addition to breast cancer prevention, short-term effects of vitamin D such as hypertension, falls, colds and flu will also be tracked. More information can be found at
    Funding for this initial enrollment is provided by GrassrootsHealth founder, Carole Baggerly.
    "We are expecting to find like-minded individuals and organizations who will provide support to keep the full enrollment funded; our funding goal for the project is $300,000/year. We have been funded entirely by private individuals and organizations in the past. There is a large group of people who are ready for action to prevent breast cancer. We sincerely hope that those people will help by donating directly to this effort to demonstrate how we can do primary prevention, not just early detection."