Ad

Showing posts with label cancer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cancer. Show all posts

Friday, April 6, 2012

Hyperbaric Chamber Controversy

Here is a PDF regarding the subject of the controversy of hyperbarics... click here


Here is a rather entertaining and informative video regarding the controversy...




Here is an old article regarding the controversy of using hyperbaric chambers in sports...



PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH USE OF
THE HYPERBARIC CHAMBER IN SPORTS:
August 23,1996
Update; Nov. 15,1996The following report was sent to all 26 General Managers in the N.H.L. in January 1995

This past season the Vancouver Canucks were using a hyperbaric (oxygen tank) chamber as part of their training program. At the beginning of the season this chamber was used primarily for speeding up recovery time of injured players. Very soon after this the Canucks began to use it on uninjured players. This is when the problems began.

The Canucks management and training staff had been in touch with myself in mid August of 1993 about trying out our ionization system for a period of two weeks (this try out was canceled two days before we were to start). In our meetings before this, the Canucks management had asked me if our system was similar to their hyperbaric system. I told them it was but I was not about to tell them their system could have major drawbacks. (It would have looked like we were trying to put down their hyperbaric system over ours.) In failing to warn the team at the time I must take partial responsibility over the misuse of the hyperbaric system. Thinking the Canucks had a system similar to the one we were proposing there was no need for them to try our system. They began putting players in the chamber who had no injuries, hopefully to improve endurance, reaction time and balance. Initially this seemed to be the case as the Canucks won 7 of 8 games since the beginning of the season. At this time I could not say anything about the problems until they began to surface.

How does the hyperbaric system work ? The chamber is sealed from the outside atmosphere and pressure is increased on the inside of the chamber. The occupant inside the chamber puts on a breathing device that supplies him with 100% pure oxygen. If the player has an injury, the oxygen together with the increase in pressure pushes the oxygen deeper into the injured area. Recovery time can be cut in half for the injured player. I do not dispute these claims.

Why would there be problems using the hyperbaric system? The system is totally cut off from the outside atmosphere. A natural ion count of 5000 ions per cubic centimeter can be measured in nature. This count can fluctuate but no matter where we go, there are ions. In the hyperbaric tank the ion count would be zero. There is no natural or artificial way to produce ionization in the chamber since the corona discharge from an ionizer would cause the oxygen to ignite. Every human being must have ions to survive. It is this reason why the hyperbaric system is so dangerous.

The Russian ion scientist Tchijewsky tried raising mice, rats, guinea pigs, and rabbits in totally de ionized air. Within two weeks almost all of them had died. Despite the fact the autopsies proved they had died for a variety of reasons - fatty liver, kidney failure, heart degeneration, and , among other ills anemia - Tchijewsky concluded that the real cause of death was the animals' inability to utilize oxygen properly.' An organism receiving the cleanest type of air for breathing is condemned to serious illness if the air does not contain at least a small quantity of air ions."

Tchijewsky's colleague D.A. Lapitsky tried raising small animals in air depleted of oxygen. As they were about to die of suffocation he added neg-ions and found that "animals already near death from asphyxiation began to feel better, sat up sniffed the air, and began to run around the chamber. Their respiration frequency increased. Switching off the ionizer again brought them to the verge of asphyxiation." Lapitsky decided the traditional belief that oxygen alone was the sole prerequisite for the creation and sustenance of life had "demonstrated to be false." Or as Tchijewsky had said, "Death of animals in [de ionized] air must be attributed to the absence of aero ions of oxygen essential to the life activity of an organism." More simply put, without ions we couldn't absorb oxygen in the quantities needed to live. And the fewer ions there are, the lower the efficiency of our minds and bodies.

Tchijewsky also discovered increased performance in athletes using negative ion generators in the late 1940's.

In late November side effects from lack of ionization in the players who were using the hyperbaric chamber for injuries became apparent. Two of these players were Gino Odjick and Pavel Bure. Both had come down with flu symptoms and repiratory problems. The Canucks doctors were unable to find the cause of the respiratory problems. I faxed Pat Quinn on Dec. 16, 1993 with an explanation to these problems and background information on problems with the Hyperbaric chamber. He chose to continue using the chamber. In January I talked with Bruce Newton of the Players Association. I explained the problems with the hyperbaric system but he was unable to help me. "The team and the teams doctors were responsible for any training system and the Players Association had no say over those systems."

The fans of Vancouver began to call the Canucks "TEAM SCHIZOPHRENIC". The Canucks were playing poor at home and great on the road. I contacted Pat Quinn by fax again previous to the playoffs to warn him again. He chose to ignore my advice again. I talked to one of the Canuck players just as the playoffs were starting. He confirmed most of the team was using the hyperbaric tank to increase their play.

Word that this news leaked to me must have gone back to management. At this point management gave the doctors and players permission to speak to the media about how the system worked. (The plan was to bury any controversy before it was started).
Why did the Canucks do so well in the playoffs? First, the playoffs took them away from the hyperbaric chamber for extended periods. Second, the brain under environmental stress from increased positive ions or lack of ions produces hormones and chemicals to deal with this stress. The two main hormones released are melotonin and serotonin. Serotonin is increased and fed into the blood stream. The increased serotonin triggers the release of adrenaline which allows the body to work through the stress. Adrenaline is not quickly renewed as are other chemicals in your body. If a body produces to much serotonin for long duration's, the adrenaline gets used up and the chemical system in the body is unbalanced. This is what was happening with these players. A list of side effects from increasing the serotonin levels in your body for a long period of time are as follows:

Anxiety, nervousness, tremors, sweating, dizziness, lightheadedness, dry mouth, upset or irritated stomach, appetite loss, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach gas, rash and itching.

Less common side effects include changes in sex drive, impotence, abnormal dreams, difficulty concentrating, acne, hair loss, dry skin, chest pains, allergy, runny nose, bronchitis, abnormal heart rhythms, bleeding, blood pressure changes, headaches, fainting when rising suddenly from a sitting position, bone pain, bursitis, twitching, breast pain, fibrocystic disease of the breast, cystitis, urinary pain, double vision, eye or ear pain, conjunctivitis, anemia, swelling, low blood sugar, and low thyroid activity.
In addition, many other side effects affecting virtually every body system have been reported. They are too numerous to mention.

All side effects mentioned are also experienced from the pill Fluoxetine Hydrochloride (PROZAC). Prozac is an antidepressant drug and works on increasing serotonin levels in the body. It is the natural cortisone levels in the body that are triggered by the serotonin. This added adrenaline gives the personality a boost. Long term studies on Prozac and other antidepressants that work on increasing serotonin are finding most patients on these drugs are worse off after treatment than before treatment. The Food and Drug Administration (F.D.A.) has never in their history had as many problems with a drug as they have had with these forms of antidepressants.

Side effects from positive ions winds (such as the Chinook wind in Calgary and the Santa Ana winds in southern California) compiled by a Swiss meteorological report in 1974 are as follows:

Physical side effects: Body pains, sick headaches, dizziness, twitching of the eyes, nausea, fatigue, faintness, disorders in saline (salt) budget with fluctuations in electrolytical metabolism (calcium and magnesium; critical for alcoholics), water accumulation, respiratory difficulties, allergies, asthma, heart and circulatory disorders (heart attacks approx. 50% higher) low blood pressure, slowing down in reaction time, more sensitivity to pain, inflammations, bleeding embolisms of the lungs, and thrombosis.

Psychological side effects: Emotional unbalance, irritation, vital disinclination, compulsion to meditate, exhaustion, apathy, disinclination or listlessness toward work (poor school achievement), insecurity, anxiety, depression (especially after age forty to fifty); rate of attempted suicide about 20% higher, larger number of admittance's to clinics in drug cases.

In over 90 years since ions were discovered, no side effects have ever been found from negative ions.
SOURCE: 



Here is information (only a piece) from Cancer.org about the use of hyperbaric chambers for therapy.  This is positive information that tells me that they are not dangerous and that more illnesses should be treated through the use of this therapy, and that it should be covered by insurance.

What is the evidence?
There is scientific evidence showing HBOT works to treat a number of conditions. The Committee on Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy of the Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine recommends it for treatment of:
  • Decompression sickness
  • Arterial gas embolism (bubbles of air in the blood vessels)
  • Carbon monoxide poisoning (with or without cyanide poisoning)
  • Delayed radiation injury of the soft tissue or bones, including osteoradionecrosis
  • Gas gangrene (a serious infection)
  • Skin grafts and flaps that are not healing well with standard treatment
  • Soft tissue infections in which tissues are dying (necrotic)
  • Anemia due to severe blood loss (when transfusions are not an option)
  • Crushing injuries in which there is not enough oxygen to the tissues
  • Certain wounds that are not healing with standard treatment
  • Thermal (heat) burns
  • Abscess in the brain or head
  • Osteomyelitis (chronic bone inflammation) that does not respond to standard treatment
  • Blockage of the retinal artery (blood vessel in the back of the eyeball)
These are considered to be proven uses of HBOT. For some of these conditions, HBOT is the preferred treatment. For some others, HBOT is one of many treatment options to consider. 
There is conflicting evidence about whether HBOT is helpful in treating fast-spreading infections of the skin and underlying tissues. 
A Swedish study of 94 people with diabetic foot ulcers were divided into 2 groups: one group used HBOT for 85 minutes a day, 5 days a week, for 8 weeks (40 treatment sessions) for treatment, and the other had placebo sessions. Of the group that was supposed to get HBOT, 52% of them had ulcers that were healed at 1 year, while 29% in the placebo group were healed. Of those in the treatment group who actually got more than 35 HBOT sessions, the healing rate was higher, at 61% in the treatment group. This may reduce the risk of foot amputation in some diabetic patients, but more study is needed to be sure that it works. It would also be useful to find out which patients are most likely to be helped by this procedure. 
Early evidence had suggested HBOT might help people with lymphedema (swelling in arms or legs after surgery, which can happen after modified radical mastectomy or other treatments in which lymph nodes are removed or irradiated). A controlled clinical trial published in 2010 looked at 58 women after breast cancer surgery and radiation to the armpit area. There was no difference in arm size between women who had HBOT and those who had standard care, either right away or 12 months after treatment. 
The lack of randomized clinical studies makes it hard to judge the value of HBOT for many of its claims. Available scientific evidence does not support claims that HBOT stops the growth of cancer cells, destroys germs, improves allergy symptoms, or helps patients who have chronic fatigue syndrome, arthritis, multiple sclerosis, autism, stroke, cerebral palsy, senility, cirrhosis, or gastrointestinal ulcers. 
Carefully controlled scientific studies are still going on to find out whether HBOT may be helpful for cluster headaches, migraines, heart attacks, and other conditions. 
Are there any possible problems or complications? 
HBOT is a relatively safe method for selected patients getting approved medical treatments. Complications are lessened if pressures within the hyperbaric chamber stay below three times the normal atmospheric pressure and sessions last no longer than 2 hours. There are some people who should not get HBOT, however. 
Milder problems associated with HBOT include claustrophobia, fatigue, and headache. More serious complications include myopia (short-sightedness) that can last for weeks or months, sinus damage, ruptured middle ear, and lung damage. A complication called oxygen toxicity can result in seizures, fluid in the lungs, and even respiratory (lung) failure. Patients at high risk of oxygen toxicity may be given "air breaks" during which they breathe ordinary air rather than pure oxygen for short periods during treatment. 
People with severe congestive heart failure may have their symptoms worsened by HBOT. Patients with certain types of lung disease may be at higher risk of collapsed lung during HBOT. Pregnant women should be treated with HBOT only in serious situations where there are no other options. People getting certain chemotherapy drugs (such as bleomycin, doxorubicin, or cisplatin) should not get HBOT. Anyone getting disulfiram (Antabuse) or using sulfamylon cream should not get HBOT, nor should anyone with a collapsed lung.
A person with a pacemaker, high fever, or even a cold can be harmed by HBOT. Someone with claustrophobia would likely have trouble being in the HBOT chamber. 
Hyperbaric oxygen chambers can be a fire hazard: fires or explosions in hyperbaric chambers have caused about 80 deaths worldwide. Medical hyperbaric chambers today are generally well-built and have good safety records, but certain cautions must always be observed.
Relying on this treatment alone and delaying or avoiding conventional medical care for cancer may have serious health consequences.
SOURCE: CANCER.ORG

Chemtrails Galore!....5 VIRGINIA ROCKETS DISPERSE TRIMETHYLALUMINUM...chemical that blocks the Sun's rays.

I DID RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET REGARDING THE CHEMICALS BEING RELEASED AND DISPERSED BY THE 5- ROCKETS LAUNCHED BY NASA IN VIRGINIA.  I CANNOT VALIDATE THAT ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IS PERFECTLY ACCURATE BECAUSE I DID, AFTER ALL, FIND IT ON THE INTERNET.  HOWEVER, I CAN TELL YOU THAT I DID MY BEST TO RESEARCH THE TOPIC... 


Remember the 5 rockets that were launched from Virginia...testing the jet streams or something...
"Each of the rockets was fired about 80 seconds apart and released a chemical cloud so that scientists could `see' little-understood winds about 65 miles above the earth's surface. Firing multiple rockets allows scientists to track the high-speed winds over hundreds of miles....
The winds NASA is studying travel at speeds of up to 300 miles per hour in an area of the atmosphere where there are strong electrical currents.
Data gathered from the experiment should allow scientists to better model the electromagnetic regions of space that can damage satellites and affect radio communications. 
Scientists also hope the experiment will help explain how atmospheric disturbances in one part of the globe can be transported to other parts of the globe in a day or two." - Huffington Post


The chemical that those rockets are dispersing, or have dispersed is TRIMETHYLALUMINUM.


Let's look further into this chemical.








Here is something from Colorado.EDU ...that link is to a PDF about the chemical...


3. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
Emergency Overview
EXTREMELY FLAMMABLE. CATCHES FIRE IF EXPOSED TO AIR. 
CAUSES SEVERE DIGESTIVE TRACT
BURNS. 
CAUSES EYE BURNS. CAUSES SKIN BURNS. DECOMPOSITION 
PRODUCTS MAY CAUSE
EYE, NOSE AND RESPIRATORY TRACT IRRITATION. See sections 3, 5, & 6.
Primary Routes Of Exposure 
Eye. Skin. Inhalation (breathing). 
Eye Contact 
Causes burns. 
Skin Contact 
Causes burns. 
Inhalation (Breathing) 
Decomposition products can irritate the eyes, nose, and respiratory tract. 
Ingestion (Swallowing) 
Causes severe burns to the mouth, throat, and stomach. 
Target Organs/Chronic Effects
Lungs and respiratory system. Eyes. Skin. 
Conditions Aggravated By Exposure 
Exposure to this product is not expected to contribute, worsen or aggravate any pre-existing medical conditions. 
This chemical is usually used in ICKnowledge The Cambridge NanoTech Inc. Atomic layer deposition systems.  ...So, this same chemical was launched and dispersed is used in Atomic interactions and technologies.



Here is what News With Views says about this chemical and what it is used for...

The increasing use of atmospheric chemicals like aluminum (coupled with increasing air pollution), can severely impact tree health by depriving trees of water and nutrients normally absorbed through their root systems. The lack of photosynthesis and increased aluminum in our soils may be two prominent reasons for sharp declines in tree health in Shasta, Lake, Sonoma, and Mendocino Counties in California, and other areas across the United States. 
Trimethylaluminum (TMA-NASA’s Night Clouds Experiments), and barium (NASA’s CRRES Program), are just two of the toxic chemicals being used in a myriad of atmospheric heating and testing programs. It is believed that these atmospheric testing programs (including the Alaska H.A.A.R.P. experiments), have exacerbated climate change around the world since the late 1980s.
Global dimming and the persistent jet contrails (first noticed in the late 1980s), that produce man-made clouds, may have serious impacts on crop production. A recent corn crop study in Illinois shows that cloud cover reduces corn crop production while direct sunlight increases production. In addition, increasing man-made clouds reduce the effectiveness of solar voltaic panels. 
D. Wigington wrote an important Solar Power article on: “DIMINISHED SOLAR CHARGE CAPACITIES DUE TO PERSISTENT JET CONTRAILS” in Shasta County, CA on August 18, 2007. “...In Shasta County, California, this past winter, solar voltaic panel output went from just over 30 kW on an otherwise clear winter day, to an output as low as 18 or 19 kW when persistent jet contrails were present. During the summer of 2007 output has gone from just over 40 kW on average, to averages in the low 30 kW range. Again, both these readings are on days when the only obstruction in the sky is expanding and lingering jet trails. 
These jet contrails create conditions that have a substantial negative effect on the function of a solar voltaic panel’s ability to produce power and they reduce the amount of direct sunlight reaching the earth, which may disrupt normal photosynthesis needed for plants and trees to grow normally and produce crops…”


Here is what FourWinds says about this process with these chemicals
Clandestine weather modification is done by continuous high-speed computing generating tolerably accurate short range-predictions of ,1) what will happen without intervention and 2) what will happen towards the desired event given a "fitted"  a trial intervention. When an intervention is found that moves the weather system closer to producing the desired effect, the CWM planes are instructed to execute that intervention. And even as the planes are heading to their assigned targets a new intervention is being computed for achieving the next approximation to what is needed to get what is wanted.   In this way short-range interventions following one after another so that the final goal -- a drought in one place, a flood in another, a hurricane landing on a particular point on a coast  -- is attained. This is clandestine weather modification -- also called weaponized weather modification -- or perhaps more dramatically but no less accurately, playing God with peoples lives.
The new weather modification leglislation passed by Congress has been crafted to conceal, not to regulate this activity. The legislation does not recognize the technology and so these interventions are exempted. (It's like a company continuing to sell  a cancer-causing product simply because the Food and Drug Administration has not officially recognized this effect.)  
Here is a paper on trimethylaluminum ... (here is the paper...KUMMELGROUP)
THE JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS 135, 054705 (2011) 
Atomic imaging of nucleation of trimethylaluminum on clean and H2O functionalized Ge(100) surfaces 

The direct reaction of trimethylaluminum (TMA) on a Ge(100) surface and the effects of monolayer H2O pre-dosing were investigated using ultrahigh vacuum techniques, such as scanning tunneling microscopy (STM), scanning tunneling spectroscopy (STS), and x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and density functional theory (DFT)
Keywords used by AIP  JCP.AIP.ORG

Atomic imaging of nucleation of trimethylaluminum

 Keywords

annealing, chemisorption, dangling bonds, density functional theory, energy gap, germanium,hydrogen compounds, monolayers, nucleation,organic compounds, scanning tunnelling microscopy, scanning tunnelling spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectra 


As you can see, there is nothing good about having trimethylaluminum in our air, at any level of our atmosphere.  


WHAT ARE THEY DOING?????? 



Friday, August 19, 2011

Solar Update 8-19-2011 Including Solar Flare Activity &Forecast


Solar Blares: Listening to the Sun May Improve Space Weather Forecasts

A new method of tracking the propagation of sound waves in the sun's interior provides advance warning of sunspots

Sunspots emerging on the face of the sunSPOTTING THE SPOTS: Surface (gray) and subsurface (blue) activity before and after the emergence of a sunspot. Above, the emerging sunspot is clearly detectable some 60,000 kilometers below the surface, but the surface itself is calm. About two days later, the activity has risen to the surface.Image: The SOHO/MDI Team, SOHO is a project of international cooperation between ESA and NASA
Peering deep into the sun's churning plasma, solar physicists have discovered a way to forecast the emergence of sunspots before they reach the solar surface.

Sunspots are dark patches marking magnetically active regions that often host solar flares and violent belches called coronal mass ejections. Trimming lead times on sunspot detection would allow for better forecasts of space 
weather—bursts of radiation and charged particles from the sun that can cause real problems on and around Earth. Bad spells of space weather can damage power grids, endanger satellites and aircraft, and pose radiation threats to astronauts in orbit.

A group of Stanford University researchers has found that they can identify the signature of sunspots forming at depths of 60,000 kilometers or so, a full day or two before the sunspots bloom on the surface. The researchers reported their findings in the August 19 issue of Science.

"This is the first time that we have detected sunspots before they appear on the solar disk," says Stathis Ilonidis, a Stanford graduate student who co-authored the new study with physicists Junwei Zhao and Alexander Kosovichev.

Ilonidis and his colleagues plumbed the sun's inner workings with a method called
time–distance helioseismology. Working from archival data from the sun-orbiting SOHO spacecraft, the researchers measured how long it takes sound waves to travel from one point on the solar surface to another, some 100,000 to 200,000 kilometers away, along a refracted, or bent, path through the interior. In four locations where a sunspot was soon to emerge, acoustic waves returned to the solar surface with anomalous rapidity—more than a dozen seconds faster than normal. "At these distances, the travel time [through the sun's interior] is about one hour," Ilonidis says. "If there is a sunspot region along one of these paths, the travel time will be a little bit shorter." The emerging sunspot region seems to boost the local speed of sound, thereby hastening the refracted return of sound waves passing through that part of the solar interior.

The researchers also charted sound waves passing through nine quiet regions of the sun, where no sunspots were developing, and found no significant anomalies in the waves' travel time. By looking for sound waves propagating with anomalous speed, solar physicists going forward might be able to predict where sunspots are going to appear and provide longer lead-time forecasts back on Earth.

But Ilonidis acknowledges that more research is needed to test the predictive power of the new method. "What we need to do in the future is have more statistics, to look at more regions—both regions with sunspots and without sunspots—and check the statistics, whether we have false positives or false negatives," he says. "We need to find what is the success rate with our technique."

The strong signature of sunspots rising from the depths highlights how poorly understood is the sun's inner structure. The emerging sunspots speed up sound waves far more than had been expected; a recent analysis had predicted that sunspot regions would hasten the arrival time of sound waves 
by only one second or thereabouts. But Ilonidis and his colleagues found anomalies of 12 to 16 seconds for sound waves passing through a sunspot region. "That was a big surprise, because it's much higher than what we expected from the current theoretical models," he says.

What is more, the researchers found a sort of sweet spot for their soundings, a depth where the sunspot signal is strongest. But why emerging sunspots should reveal themselves clearly at one depth but not at others is a mystery. "We can detect sunspots at a depth of 60,000 kilometers, but if we try to detect them deeper or closer to the surface, the travel-time shift becomes weaker," Ilonidis says. "We don't understand why, only at a specific depth, the detection of sunspots is easier."

Solar physicist 
Philip Scherrer, who is also based at Stanford, notes that theoretical models of how sunspots appear are relatively successful at describing surficial solar activity but much less true to reality at depth. "So what happens deeper, how the dynamo is really generated from the interplay of rotation and convection and existing fields, isn't really understood," he says. "For all of these things you can tune up a model and make it work for a little while, but some basics are still missing."

Theoretical explanation or no, the new finding may soon afford airlines, satellite operators and other watchers of space weather advance warning of impending solar activity. "It will probably help us to make better forecasts for what the sun is going to do," Scherrer says. "Up until now we've waited until we see the magnetic field erupting."
Today's solar forecast...

Coronal Holes: 19 Aug 11

A solar wind stream flowing from the indicated coronal hole should reach Earth on Aug. 22-23. Credit: SDO/AIA.

SPACE WEATHERNOAA Forecasts
Updated at: 2011 Aug 18 2200 UTC
FLARE
0-24 hr
24-48 hr
CLASS M
45 %
45 %
CLASS X
10 %
10 %

Geomagnetic Storms:Probabilities for significant disturbances in Earth's magnetic field are given for three activity levels:active, minor storm, severe storm
Updated at: 2011 Aug 18 2200 UTC
Mid-latitudes

0-24 hr
24-48 hr
ACTIVE
05 %
10 %
MINOR
01 %
05 %
SEVERE
01 %
05 %
High latitudes

0-24 hr
24-48 hr
ACTIVE
05 %
10 %
MINOR
05 %
05 %
SEVERE
01 %
01 %
http://spaceweather.com/




http://www.solen.info/solar/

Solar Update: Solar Activity has been very low during the past 24 hours with no major flare activity taking place. Sunspot 1271 remains the largest sunspot on the visible solar disk and could still produce C-Class flares and perhaps an M-Class event.
The Visible Solar Disk (Early Friday) - SDO



http://www.solarham.com/