Are the media justified in how they raise concerns regarding different science?

Health myths, true or false? Fluorid as an equivocal carcinogen? If you have knowledge in the matter, can you tell whether these information are true? Vaccines don't increase immunity? Lowering cholesterol unnecessary?

• Myth #1 Conventional medicine and the healthcare system helps                 sick people.                     Perhaps the                 biggest health myth  today is the public's misconception that mainstream                  medicine and the healthcare system helps sick people. Nothing could                  be further from the truth.                       The freedom of people to choose natural healing,  alternative medicine                 and methods of disease prevention  could soon be threatened by corporate                 lobbyists who will  do anything to protect their wealth at the expense                 of  your health.                     Promoters of                 conventional  medicine claim that all the drug studies, approvals,                  surgical procedures,  all other treatments are based                 on  scientific evidence.  But is it really science? What passes for  "science"                 today is a collection of health myths,  half-truths, intellectual                 dishonesty and  fraudulent  reporting to help serve higher interests. http://preventdisease.com/news/11/101411_Science-Is-Not-Really-Science-Anymore.shtml                     90 percent of                 all diseases  (cancer, diabetes, depression, heart disease, etc.)                 are  easily preventable through diet, nutrition, sunlight and exercise.                  None of these solutions are ever promoted by conventional  medicine                 because they make no money.                     No pharmaceuticals                 actually cure  or resolve the underlying causes of disease. Even                  "successful" drugs only manage symptoms, usually at the                  cost of interfering with other physiological functions that will                  cause side effects down the road. There is no such thing as a  drug                 without a side effect.                     There is no                 financial incentive  for anyone in today's system of medicine (drug                  companies, hospitals, doctors, etc.) to actually make patients well.                  Profits are found in continued sickness, not wellness or  prevention.                     Almost all                 the "prevention"  programs you see today (such as free                 mammograms or other  screening programs) are nothing more than  patient recruitment schemes  designed to increase revenue and sickness. They use free screenings                  to scare people into agreeing to unnecessary treatments that  only lead to further disease. http://preventdisease.com/news/11/012811_mammograms_kill.shtml. http://preventdisease.com/news/12/080812_Surprised-US-Scientists-Find-That-Chemotherapy-Boosts-Cancer-Growth.shtml. Nobody has any                 interest in your health except you. No  corporation, no doctor, and                 no government has any desire  to actually make you well. This has                 served the  short-term financial interests of higher powers in the                  west very well. The only healthy, aware, critically thinking individuals                  are all 100% free of pharmaceuticals and processed  foods.YTH #2 Vaccines prevent diseases and increase immunity.                                                                   The term                     "immunization",  often substituted for vaccination,                     is false and  should be legally challenged. Medical research                     has  well established that the direct injection of foreign proteins                      and other toxic material (particularly known  immune-sensitising                     poisons such as mercury) makes  the recipient more, not less,                     easily affected by  what he/she encounters in the future. This                     means  they do the opposite of immunize, commonly even preventing                      immunity from developing after natural exposure.                         The actual                     frequency of  health problems has been estimated by authorities                     to  be possibly up to 100 times, or more, greater than that reported                      by government agencies. That difference is due to the lack  of                     enforcement or incentive for doctors to report  adverse effects.                     With the anti-vaccination movements  now exposing the truth on                     the internet, the medical  community is now on high alert, defending                     their  claims and being told by vaccine manufacturers that they                      must never let their patients (or parents) think that the risks                      could outweigh the benefits, when in reality, it is  precisely                     the opposite that is true.                           The benefit risk ratio is an important  decision in anyone deciding                   whether to vaccinate or  not. Contrary to popular belief and marketing,                    childhood diseases in a developed country are not as dangerous                    as we are led to believe. Catching a particular disease does  not                   mean you will die from it. Vaccines were actually introduced at a time when                    diseases had already declined to a low risk level. This fact is                    proven, scientifically.                           The main advances in combating   disease over  the last 200 years have been better   food and clean drinking  water...not vaccines. Improved sanitation, less overcrowded   and better  living conditions also   contribute. This is also borne out   in  published peer reviewed research which prove that http://preventdisease.com/news/10/102510_vaccines_did_not_save_us.shtml. All vaccines contain sterility agents, neurotoxins, immunotoxins, and carcinogenic compounds. Some examples include http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102609_Alert_Canadians_Arepanrix_vaccine_analysis.shtml#formaldehyde, a carcinogen found in almost every vaccine,  neurotoxins such as http://preventdisease.com/home/tips100.shtml, http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/results.asp?sc=88, http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102609_Alert_Canadians_Arepanrix_vaccine_analysis.shtml#thimerosal, sterility agents such as http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9927635, http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/results.asp?sc=193 http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102609_Alert_Canadians_Arepanrix_vaccine_analysis.shtml#polysorbate80, and immuntoxins such as http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/results.asp?sc=15, http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/results.asp?sc=103, http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102609_Alert_Canadians_Arepanrix_vaccine_analysis.shtml#sodium_deoxycholate to name a few of many. It is no coincidence that http://preventdisease.com/news/11/020211_more_educated_less_likely_to_vaccine.shtml which contradicts the misconceptions of many health  professionals who      profess that parents don't vaccinate because they are  under-educated,     poor or misinformed. Those who become fully informed  of the dangers of   vaccines never see them in the same light again, as  their motives then   become clear.                           MYTH #3 We must all focus on lowering bad cholesterol.                           Perhaps one                 of the biggest  health myths propagated in western culture and certainly                  in the United States, is the misuse of an invented term "http://preventdisease.com/news/11/050611_bad_cholesterol_not_bad.shtml"  by the media and medical community. Moreover,                 a  scientifically-naive public has been conned into a fraudulent                  correlation between elevated cholesterol and cardiovascular  disease                 (CVD). Cholesterol has not been shown to  actually cause CVD. To                 the contrary, cholesterol is  vital to our survival, and trying to                 artificially lower  it can have detrimental effects, particularly                 as we age. We have become a culture so obsessed with eating foods                        low in cholesterol and fat that many health experts are now    questioning the consequences. Could we really maintain a dietary     lifestyle that was so  foreign to many of our ancestral populations    without any ill effects on our health? Many researchers are now    concluding that the answer to that question is "NO." Current data is now    suggesting that lower cholesterol levels predate the development of    cancer. The 'noddy-science' offered by marketing men to a generally                        scientifically-naive public has led many people to    believe that                     we should replace certain food choices    with specially developed                     products that can help    'reduce cholesterol'. Naturally this                     comes at a    price and requires those who can afford it to pay                        maybe four or five times what a 'typical ordinary' product might                        cost. But is this apparent 'blanket need' to strive  towards                       lowering our cholesterol justified? And,  indeed, is   it healthy? The cholesterol itself, whether being transported                     by    LDL or HDL,                     is exactly the same. Cholesterol is    simply a necessary ingredient                     that is required to  be   regularly delivered around the body for                     the    efficient healthy development, maintenance and functioning                        of our cells. The difference is in the 'transporters' (the    lipoproteins                     HDL and LDL) and both types are    essential for the human body's                     delivery logistics to    work effectively. Problems can occur, however, when the LDL particles are both                        small and their carrying capacity outweighs the  transportation                       potential of available HDL. This  can lead to more   cholesterol                     being 'delivered'  around the body with   lower resources for returning                      excess capacity to the   liver. MYTH #4 Medical screening and treatments prevent death.                           Even though the medical community advocates  for regular screenings                     for those with illnesses,  they may bring little benefit and                     may actually pose  harm to your health. This applies to almost                     every  type of medical screening for cancer and several other                      diseases. Medical screening carries an immense risk in itself,                      not only due to the damage inflicted by screening  techniques                     on the human body, but by the very nature  of medical follow-up                     protocols. These protocols  usually encourage patients to enter                     deeper into more  invasive techniques, which further cripple                     health  and lead to a very high percentage of fatalities.                           In a Swedish study of 60,000   women, 70  percent of    the mammographically detected tumors weren't   tumors at  all. These "false    positives" aren't just financial and   emotional  strains, they may also    lead to many unnecessary and   invasive  biopsies. In fact, 70 to 80 percent    of all positive   http://preventdisease.com/GoogleSearchResults.shtml?q=mammograms&sa.x=0&sa.y=0&cx=partner-pub-0663688274569192%3Ae1bgloqgmc2&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=ISO-8859-1&siteurl=preventdisease.com%2Fnews%2F11%2F010711_fluoride_lie.shtml&ref=www.google.com%2Fcse%3Fq%3Dfluoride%26sa.x%3D0%26sa.y%3D0%26cx%3Dpartner-pub-0663688274569192%253Ae1bgloqgmc2%26cof%3DFORID%253A10%26ie%3DISO-8859-1%26siteurl%3Dpreventdisease.com%252Fhome%252Ftips88.shtml%26ref%3Dwww.google.com%252Fcse%253Fq%253Dmyths%2526sa.x%253D0%2526sa.y%253D0%2526cx%253Dpartner-pub-0663688274569192%25253Ae1bgloqgmc2%2526cof%253DFORID%25253A10%2526ie%253DISO-8859-1%2526siteurl%253Dpreventdisease.com%25252F%2526ref%253D%2526ss%253D710j135556j5%2526ad%253Dn9%2526num%253D10%2526rurl%253Dhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fpreventdisease.com%25252FGoogleSearchResults.shtml%25253Fq%25253Dmyths%252526sa.x%25253D0%252526sa.y%25253D0%252526cx%25253Dpartner-pub-0663688274569192%2525253Ae1bgloqgmc2%252526cof%25253DFORID%2525253A10%252526ie&ss=2304j1921152j6 do not, upon biopsy, show any presence of cancer.                           A prostate (PSA) blood test looks for  prostate-specific                    antigen, a protein produced by the  prostate gland. High levels                    are supposedly associated  with prostate cancer. The problem                    is that the  association isn't always correct, and when it is,                    the  prostate cancer isn't necessarily deadly. Only about 3 percent of all  men die from prostate cancer. The                    PSA test usually  leads to overdiagnosis -- biopsies and treatment                    in  which the side effects are impotence and incontinence. Repeated biopsies   may spread cancer cells                    into the track formed by  the needle, or by spilling cancerous                    cells directly  into the bloodstream or lympathic system. News coverage                     of many  diseases focus too much on treatments and not enough                      on prevention, a trend that could prove risky in the long run                      for most people who don't understand how to take care of  their                     health.                           The biggest single type of story we usually  hear about on the                     news involves treatment, and  narratives lend themselves much                     better to that kind  of story. Stories about prevention, about                     people  exercising and eating right, just don’t make great                     copy.                         If our current                     treatment  approach to health continues, hundreds of years from                      now, mankind may look back at today’s “modern medicine”                      and think: “How could they have been so primitive in ideology                      and so wrong? What lack of humanitarianism in government  allowed                     the medical industries to kill people with  economically driven                     false beliefs and ideas? Why  didn’t government stop them?                     Who were the people in  charge of protecting those citizens?                                                    Preventive                     education  demands increased funding for research into new dietary,                      physical activity, behavioural, socioeconomic, environmental                      and medical approaches for the prevention of chronic  disease.                     Children who grow into teenagers and then  adults require more                     accountability for their own  well-being through health conscious                     decisions which  are motivated by proper practical and theoretical                      applications. They need to know that treatment modalities and                      pharmaceutical applications may not save their health in the                      future. Substantial political and financial  contributions are                     also imperative to invest in  prevention more effectively to                     regulate revisions  and mandate policies which affect the governing                      bodies of health and education. Any procrastination or failure                      to resolve these matters in the next decade will only lead to                      the further deterioration of human health and  healthcare systems.                     Proper leadership and effective  communication regarding these                     preventive measures  may still reverse screening/treatment trends                     and  consequently reverse this thinking to ultimately promote                      a healthier aging population.MYTH #5 Fluoride prevents tooth decay. http://preventdisease.com/news/11/010711_fluoride_lie.shtml.  Drinking any                 amount of fluoride is dangerous to your  health and has NEVER been                 proven to prevent tooth decay.  It's actually the biggest scientific                 fraud ever to be  promoted by national and international Governments.                  Fluoride has been linked to osteoporosis, cancer, auto-immune diseases,                  and even very small concentrations can disrupt DNA  repair enzymes                 by 50%.   The fluoride added to our water is a waste product of   aluminum and    phosphate fertilizer processing. And it’s not even calcium   fluoride    that appears naturally in water, but sodium fluoride, which is a    whole   different thing--and loaded with bad news.   In fact, sodium fluoride has no good news. Except for a few suspect      reports by the people selling the stuff, study after research study      proves that sodium fluoride does not protect our teeth, and it does a      number on our bones. And on other body parts, too, including our  thyroid     gland.   - Fluoride was found to be an equivocal carcinogen by the                                                    National Cancer Institute  Toxicological Program.   - Drinking fluoridated water will double the number of hip                         fractures for both older men and women.     -  Infertility in women was found to increase with water                          fluoridation.                       Food and Drug  Administration (FDA) scientists reported                         a close  correlation between decreasing total fertility rates                          in women between ages of 10 and 49, and increasing fluoride                          levels.                           - Fluoride has never been found to   effectively reducing tooth decay by any notable margin.                         No causation or even correlation was found between the level of  fluoride                         in water and dental caries in any  study.  Fluoride also attacks the pineal  gland. The pineal controls our  inner     clock, provides good sleep, works with our adrenal glands to  handle     stress, keeps the thymus gland fed and cared for, and  communicates 24/7     with the rest of the endocrine system about how  things are going.     Fluoride calcifies our pineal gland into a  non-functioning rock.                           -                          The government classifies sodium fluoride as  environmentally     hazardous waste. Anybody handling it must wear  HazMat protective gear.     Dumping it into rivers is a crime.                          Much of                     the original  proof that fluoride is safe for   humans in low doses                      was generated by A-bomb program   scientists, who had been secretly                      ordered to   provide "evidence useful in litigation"                      against   defense contractors for fluoride injury to  citizens.                       The first lawsuits against the U.S.  A-bomb program were not                       over radiation, but over  fluoride damage, the documents show.                          It seems that the healthiest  people on the planet right now are those that have deviated from the  norms of conventional medical quackery, and have migrated towards  natural health. The proof is in the pudding. Find the healthiest 5  people you know and you'll find they typically don't subscribe to the  health myths promoted by mainstream medicine. Your longevity and aging  gracefully depends on it.                                          http://preventdisease.com is a research specialist, writer and     consumer advocate                                  for healthy lifestyles. He holds     degrees in  Public         Health     and                     Environmental Science  and       is a         professional     speaker on topics                    such   as   disease           prevention,     environmental toxins  and health     policy. Okay I am skeptik about the first two, but the last one is really bothering me the most...The water full of carcinogen..? Could it be true?

• Answer:

  Virtually all information presented by these people is false or deliberately misleading. They are charlatans. They employ scare tactics to drive up their page views, then sell advertising space to the true snake oil salesmen. Sorry, but if it's from a site that posts these conspiracy theories it's wrong or it's information perverted to sound convincing. They are scum. 1. This is where alarm bells ring. "Mainstream medicine" he says, like there are valid alternatives. Then of course he sets the scene, this one is not about being truthful, it's about setting up the pitch. He needs to convince you the legion of people who are going to school, working 18 hour days and breaking their backs to give care to the ill are EVIL, because if they weren't pure satan excrement how could you believe they are part of a vast conspiracy to make (and keep) people sick. He also attacks science, because when he makes later arguments, science will not help his cause. Like I said, this is just groundwork though and is meant to reach out to those who follow alternative medicine. You can tell from his mentioning of them as realistic option, and his mention of "the vast corporate hegemony" attacking it. He mentions how exercise, diet and sunlight are the three things you need to be healthy. But he implies that doctors don't tell people these things, like it's some kind of huge secret the way most of us live is unhealthy. Of course he finishes with "the only healthy people are the ones who don't take medicine" which makes me think he's not all that good at this. Or thinking in general. 2. Vaccines! I just have no words for this one. Is taking yearly flu vaccinations over the top? Shit, probably, just get the flu and run the chance of death you pussy. Vaccines for kids? In my day kids dropped like flies and you know what? We liked it that way! Helped the cream rise to the top! Seriously though this is mostly propaganda. He makes an appeal to intelligence (smart people don't vaccinate). He fully embraces the science he rejected earlier because it proves his point and he uses the anti-vaccination network as proof there is something wrong with vaccinations. That's like saying since the KluKluxKlan exists, black people are subhuman. 3. Fuck you Mr Writer AND fuck the doctors. I'll eat what I like and get a bypass. (At least I am honest.) 4. Medical testing doesn't save lives???   Maybe he's right, I assume cancer just goes away if you don't check for it. Like pulses in babies. I did get a little hot under the collar when he talked about the results of prostate cancer and tried to say the "negative side effects" were worth leaving the cancer untreated. "Don't check for cancer, it might spread the cancer through your system" he said that. He fucking said it. Not me. Him. 5. Helps teeth, only causes the symptoms he mentioned at ludicrously higher doses than we receive. Based off tests on children in India exposed to huge chemical contamination. Since he's using the suffering of children to sell bottled water, is he evil? Yes. Yes he is.