Simple, Inexpensive Health

Just as running barefoot is a simple, inexpensive healthy way to exercise, so I have discovered two other very simple, inexpensive ways to enjoy good (perfect?) health.

Last month, February, my wife had an orange size tumor removed from her colon. It was adenocarcinoma of the colon. She didn't want to do post surgical chemotherapy because of some other health concerns she had. So we went on a search to find what other natural cures there might be for her cancer. We found two things which are extremely simple, inexpensive, and effective. Each one has evidence of 90-95% success rate (compared to chemo's 50% rate). Not only do they each help eradicate cancers of all types, but they help to remove all kinds of diseases, pathogens like fungi, yeast, bacteria, viruses, and parasites.

The first one is called "MMS" which stands for Miracle Mineral Solution. It is a low dosage form of administering chlorine dioxide, commonly used in water purification systems. It is made at home by combining Sodium Chlorite with a food acid like lemon juice, vinegar or citric acid. The acid releases chlorine dioxide, a gas, which can then be taken with water or juice. Chlorine dioxide is a pathogen specific oxidant. It leaves healthy, good cells alone, but it explodes bad cells or molecules it comes in contact with. You can think of it as a pathogen vacuum cleaner. It has been shown to heal malaria, anthrax, cancers of all types, flu, colds, bacteria, viruses, hepatitis A B & C, AIDS, Candida, among many other things, plus it chelates heavy metals out of the system. Its cost is only $25 to $50 per year, and it leaves absolutely no trace residues in the body.

The other one is called the Budwig diet. Dr. Johanna Budwig was a German scientist who worked on the effect of healthy fats and oils on the body. She discovered that flaxseed oil has some very powerful properties that help cells respirate (transport wastes out and nutrients and oxygen in). However, being an oil, it has a hard time passing by the cell membranes. Dr. Budwig discovered that by combining it with the food-based sulphur found in cottage cheese, the oil molecules chained with the sulphur and became a water-soluble oil. This made it possible for the oil to be used by cells much more easily. Dr. Budwig has used this protocol with terminal cancer patients and reversed their disease in just a couple of months. The list of diseases, including cancer, that the Budwig protocol has healed is very long. Interestingly, Multiple Sclerosis is among them! It costs about $9 per bottle of flaxseed oil and cottage cheese is less than $3. That averages to be only $12 every month or so.

We figure that these two diet protocols, each with 90% and better healing records for cancer, will do a lot more for my wife's health than chemotherapy could. Chemotherapy destroys the body's immune system, which is why it is so hard on people, especially people who may have immune systems that are already compromised by autoimmune disease. Plus the drugs used in chemotherapy are known to be carcinogenic by themselves. Many times its the chemotherapy itself that kills people. MMS and Budwig both enhance the body's immune system, and enable it work to its peak proficiency, with no side effects except better health.

I have posted links to each of these protocols on my sidebar. There is a lot more information available on the web.

Ryan
Healthier Than Ever in Vancouver

More on Barefoot vs Shoes

This is an ongoing blog posted discussion at PopSci about someone's new design for running shoes. I got a response from someone with the label meowmix4jo from Las Vegas, Nevada, who said:

"Ryan, if I understood right, you are basically saying that if they flattened All Stars more they would make better running shoes? "

I replied:

I don't know if flattening All Stars would make them better running shoes. What I am saying is that its odd for a shoe maker to claim their shoes promote a "more natural" running style, yet they include so many un-natural characteristics in their design.

What is "natural?" I think bare feet are the most natural thing we have for running. It stands to reason that shoes that try to come close to natural should be true to bare feet -- no artificial curves, curls, arches, uneven surfaces, pinching, fat bulbous spots, and they should be lightweight with flexibility. I think simple aquasox might be better shoes for running in than the hyped up expensive versions we see.

In fact, I told a 65 yr old retired dentist about my barefoot running. He had to stop running because his knees were giving him too much pain. He tried wearing aquasox, practiced the barefoot running forms I taught him, and he was able to resume running again. In just a few weeks of practice, he could run from two to three miles per run, three times a week. He was ecstatic that a simple pair of aquasox did more to help him run successfully than the thousands of dollars he had spent on chiropractors, podiatrists, orthopedic doctors, massage therapists, and on the many various shoes and orthotics he had purchased.

Some of the best runners in the world are the Tuharamara Indians of the Mexican highlands. They run races that last up to three days and nights and cover 150 miles. Their choice of footwear are simple flat sandals they make themselves, called Huaraches.

Ryan
Vancouver, WA

On "Natural' Running Shoes


Someone on the Running Barefoot discussion group (http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/RunningBarefoot/) mentioned an article on the Popular Science website about some newly designed running shoes that were supposed to be much more natural. (See it here: http://www.popsci.com/node/32702) I watched the video and read the report. Then I just HAD to leave my comment about what I saw. This is what I said:

I look at these shoes from the perspective of a true barefoot runner. I have been running exclusively barefoot for almost five years. So I have some questions about this 'natural' shoe.

Why does the toe-box curl upwards? Natural feet rest flat on the ground. What does the upward curl do to the natural movements of the foot? I can only believe forcing the toes of the foot up like that will constrict their natural movements, and will create an artificial stress in the arch of the foot.

Why do those shoes have such a large, built-up heel on them? Natural feet have the heel resting at the same level as the toes and the mid-foot. The video claims there is no need to heel-strike with these shoes -- so why have the big balloon on each heel? Having the heel built-up like that almost guarantees that it will get in the way, almost forcing a heel strike.

What kind of arch support do these shoes have in them? The arch of the foot is designed to flex, contract and expand with each step. If there is an "arch support" in the shoe, then it will interfere with this natural movement and weaken the foot's arch action and strength. Since I have been running barefoot, my arches have become more pronounced because I am actually using them when I run.

I am fascinated by the shock absorption claimed by the little pockets in the forefoot. How much shock can they really absorb? When I run barefoot, I have the benefit of my natural shock-absorbing arch in my foot, my Achilles tendon and calf muscles, plus I have the benefit of up to many inches of bending in my knees if necessary. From my perspective, that little bit of shock absorption contained in about 1/2 inch of space or material just doesn't compare. Proper running technique uses all of the body's natural shock absorbers, making the 1/2 inch of artificial absorption in the shoe unnecessary.

I would be much more interested in a shoe that had no heel whatsoever, and a flat, flexible sole. If they could whack off that bulbous heel, and flatten out that toe box, I might be interested in giving the modified shoe a test run. But - would I BUY it? I run naturally for free - it costs me absolutely nothing to prepare my feet for running. Those (modified) shoes had better offer me something really impressive to make me want to fork out $70-80-90 or more for them.

Ryan
Vancouver, WA