Archive for July, 2011

Lung Cancer – An Overview of This Common But Tragic Condition

July 30th, 2011

Lung cancer is one of the most common kinds of cancer. In fact, it is the most common cancer in the US, with over 220,000 people being diagnosed with it each year. The number of deaths caused by this condition is around 150,000 per annum, in the US alone. These are the main reasons why learning the most important things about the condition is essential.

Lung cancer is characterized by the transformation of normal lung cells into abnormal cells. These abnormal cells grow rapidly and uncontrollably to form a malignant tumor. This usually happens in walls of the bronchi.

There are over 20 types of lung cancer, but four have been identified as the most commonly occurring. These four have been separated into two groups; non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer. The most common kind of non-small cell cancer of the lungs is adenocarcinoma. It accounts for around 40% of all cases. The most typical thing for it is that it is formed in the outer edges of the lungs and in the smaller airways, in particular.

Squamous cell carcinoma is another type of non-small cell lung cancer. It is responsible for approximately 30% of all cases. The tumor usually grows in the central bronchi, which are the largest branches of the bronchi tree. This form of the condition is the easiest to detect and to treat successfully.

The large-cell carcinomas affect between 10% and 15% of all lung cancer patients. These tumors usually grown in the outer edges of the lungs and tend to spread quickly to nearby tissues and lymph nodes.

Small cell lung cancer is not particularly common, but it is extremely aggressive. It starts in the central bronchi, but has no noticeable symptoms until the later stages of the tumor development. Furthermore, it tends to spread rapidly to other organs and tissues.

Lung cancer is directly linked to smoking and cigarette smoking, in particular. Roughly 4 out of 5 patients are smokers. It has been estimated that up to 90% of all cases are arising directly from the use of tobacco. All these facts suggest that smokers have the highest risk of developing this condition. Pipe and tobacco smokers as well as passive smokers are also more likely to develop this type of cancer. The higher risk is associated with the fact that tobacco contains various cancer-causing and carcinogenic chemical compounds.

Asbestos exposure is also correlated to the development of lung cancer. Thankfully, the use of this material is limited or completely banned in many countries. The exposure to radiation coming from the decay of radon gas is also a serious risk factor. Around 10% of all cases of the condition are estimated to be due to this factor. The presence of specific genes may also increase the risk in some individuals.

Approximately 25% of all people who have lung cancer do not experience any symptoms. Despite this, there are some common warning signs associated with the condition. Coughing up blood is the most disturbing symptom. Smokers and ex-smokers might start having a new cough that is persistent and untypical for them. Chest pain and shortness of breath are other common warning signs. Having repeated respiratory infections might also signal that you have the condition.

Lung cancer is diagnosed after a series of tests. The doctor usually performs an x-ray first, after noticing disturbing symptoms. A CT scan of the chest is also performed. A biopsy is done to confirm the condition. Further tests are necessary to determine the type of lung cancer the patient has.

Lung cancer treatment usually begins with surgery. The surgeons may remove only the tumor, the tumor with part of the lung or the whole lung. Cryosurgery, the killing of the tumor by freezing it, is also an option. The treatment usually continues with chemotherapy and radiation therapy. It should be pointed out that number of patients surviving five years after treatment is around 15%. For this reason, prevention is extremely important.

Comments Off »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Is the Navajo Nation President Being a Hypocrite about Uranium Mining

July 29th, 2011

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, about 80 percent of the electricity in New Mexico is generated each year by burning coal. The irony is that the dominant anti-nuclear group in New Mexico, Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC), has shown no evidence of denouncing coal consumption. According to Don Hancock, an SRIC Administrator who directs the non-profit organization’s Nuclear Waste Safety Program, the group’s “spiritual mentor” is John W. Gofman. The former nuclear physicist is an aging, eccentric author who was discredited by the Atomic Energy Commission and was branded by the nuclear power industry as “beyond the pale of reasonable communication.” As a kind gesture, Hancock gave us a copy of a Gofman “cartoon book,” whose theme revolves around Thoreau’s essay, “Civil Disobedience.” Another cosmic ally is Amory B. Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute, a favorite Don Hancock icon.

While Gofman championed solar energy in his hey day, Lovins presently espouses hydrogen as a primary solution for transportation, wind, and increasing efficiency through natural gas. However, neither wind power nor solar energy is a relevant energy source in New Mexico. Hydroelectricity supplies about 0.7 percent of New Mexico’s electricity generation. Despite the hoopla and hyperbole, all of other renewable energy sources combined supply New Mexico with a mere 0.6 percent of its electricity. Coal is, in a very big way, the overwhelming reason why New Mexicans are not living in darkness and without heat or air conditioning.

According to the Harvard School of Public Health, about 2400 people die every year from the air pollution caused from each million tons of sulfur dioxide emitted. In 1999, it is estimated that over 1.05 billion tons were produced, releasing 11.856 million tons of sulfur oxides and more than 5 million tons of nitrous oxides. Having personally inspected the first floor library of SRIC headquarters, no anti-coal mining literature was discovered. There appears to be scant fund-raising interest from these environmental activists to close down New Mexico’s large coal mines. In fact, more U.S. coal mining deaths were reported in 2005 than deaths from uranium mining (zero). StockInterview.com heard no worries at SRIC over the blackening of coal miner’s lungs, but the staff appeared very concerned over the radon gas emitted from uranium mining. Uranium mining in New Mexico came to a standstill about twenty years ago. Coal mining continues as it has for seven decades.

Don’t expect the coal mines of New Mexico to be closed any time soon, though. No matter how deadly coal mines are, coal production is irreplaceable at this time. According to the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, tax revenues from coal in 2001 exceeded $30 million. Nearly one-half of the state’s energy needs are met through coal-generated power. The coal industry employed 1,800 people in 2001. New Mexico is the country’s leader for methane gas production from coal beds. Coal is the state’s third largest source of revenues.

An EPA Toxic Release Inventory report published in 2000 reported that two power plants and their coal mines in New Mexico’s San Juan County released 13 million pounds of chemical toxins into the Four Corner’s area (New Mexico, Arizona, Utah and Colorado). It was also reported that 6.5 million tons of solid waste was buried by the two San Juan County power plants on their sites or at nearby coal mines. Those airborne toxins were miniscule compared to over 300 million pounds of other emissions, such as particulates and nitrogen dioxide released into the air, and which can travel for hundreds of miles. Reports confirm those power plants were among the worst polluters in the United States. The eighth worst emitter was Giant Refining, about 17 miles from Gallup, New Mexico, which emitted 608,000 pounds according to the EPA report. Any visitor to the Gallup area can readily smell the stench circulating in the air.

Does Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley Jr Have Double Standards?

Why haven’t the Navajo banned coal mining on the reservation as they have uranium mining? According to Anna Frazier, a Navajo affiliated with a local environmental group, “Our Navajo Nation is certainly not going to do that. They would rather have the revenues coming in from the coal companies and the power plants.” According to a news report published in Indian Country newspaper, “The Navajo Nation receives the bulk of its annual $100 million operating expenses from royalties, leases and taxes from its coal, oil and gas. These revenues provide operational expenses for the tribal government, including the salaries of the 88-member Navajo Nation Council, the tribe’s annual budgets show.”

For more than 35 years, Peabody Energy has operated massive mines on Navajo territory. The closure of one such coal mine, the Black Mesa, sent the Navajos rushing for their Maalox. Ironically, it was environmental activists that forced Southern California Edison to close their Mojave Generating Station nearly 300 miles away in Laughlin, Nevada. The utility was given a choice: cough up $1 billion to stop polluting the Grand Canyon or shut it down. It had been called “one of the dirtiest coal plants in the West,” and air emissions from that plant reportedly polluted half a dozen other national parks in the Southwest. But, that coal mine provided about 15 percent of the Navajo’s annual budget. George Hardeen, the Navajo president’s media voice, complained about the mine closing last October, “This is going to have a terrible effect on this entire region because the Navajo economy is so fragile.”

John Dougherty complained about the Navajo Nation’s tactics in the Phoenix New Times newspaper in March 2005, observing, “Environmental groups have long exploited the Native American tradition of sacred places to fight their battles to preserve wilderness areas…It’s always the soulful Native American who steps forward as the high priest of sacred geography. In the background lurks the environmentalist equipped with charts and data on tree-trunk diameters and spotted-owl nesting sites.” Dougherty concluded, “The cries of environmental destruction and cultural murder from Navajo and Hopi leaders ring hollow.”

What are not going to be ringing at all will be the cash registers at Albertsons supermarket in Bullhead City, near Laughlin (Nevada), which closed down this week. That’s because the Mojave power station closed as advertised because of the dirty Black Mesa coal. Mike Conner, president of the Bullhead Area Chamber of Commerce, said, “The community will be devastated.” Across the river in Laughlin, Buddy Borden of the University of Nevada at Reno told a group of community leaders the area “will take an almost $21 million hit” in lost power plant payrolls. The facility will lay off 375 employees, who had an average annual wage of $87,000. Like dominoes falling, jobs in Nevada, Arizona and in the Navajo Nation were lost.

Recently, Navajo president Joe Shirley Jr. considered replacing budget shortfalls with casinos, four in Nevada and two in New Mexico. Last March, Senator John McCain forecast the Navajo casinos would fail because of their remote locations. Shirley quipped back in the Arizona Republic newspaper, “I beg to differ with him.” One coal mine that won’t be on the Navajo reservation is the first to receive an operating permit in six years. Peabody Energy announced a coal mine on Lee Ranch, one of New Mexico’s largest landowners. It is projected to produce 102 million tons of coal over the next thirty years.

For the time being, the Navajos hope to solve their economic quagmire by just putting up more casinos across a New Mexico landscape, already replete with “truck stop casinos.” One can soon get bored guessing when the next casino will surface while driving across either Interstate 40 or I-25, the state’s main arteries. First you see a sign announcing which tribal land you are entering, then the ubiquitous billboard describing which has-been musical act is “now appearing,” and then finally the combination truck stop, casino, restaurant(s) and discount smoke shop whizzes by. One aging Navajo told us, “It’s bad for the families, and it sets a bad example for the younger ones.”

On Navajo reservation land and just in New Mexico alone, Joe Shirley Jr may control more than 75 million pounds of uranium, with a gross value presently exceeding $2.7 billion. Some say the number could run much higher, into the hundreds of millions of pounds. Don’t expect Mr. Shirley to over turn his ban on uranium any time soon. Dr. Fred Begay, a Navajo and nuclear physicist at Los Alamos, whose career has been featured on BBC Television and in the pages of National Geographic and celebrated by the New York Academy of Science, explained the problem, “The Navajo don’t get it. They think that they’ll have miners. They have illiteracy on mining and uranium.” Dr. Begay clarified that the Navajo have failed to differentiate between conventional uranium mining and ISL operations, which he considers safe, “They think that miners are going in there and digging it out.”

Perhaps the illiteracy about mining extends to geochemistry. Coal is big money in New Mexico, and a little-known fact about the composition of coal may enlighten more than just environmentalists. Former Oak Ridge National Laboratory researchers J. P. McBride, R. E. Moore, J. P. Witherspoon, and R. E. Blanco reported in Science magazine (Dec 8, 1978: “Radiological Impact of Airborne Effluents of Coal and Nuclear Plants”) the shocking conclusion that “Americans living near coal-fired power plants are exposed to higher radiation doses than those living near nuclear power plants that meet government regulations.”

In an article entitled “Coal Combusion: Nuclear Resource or Danger,” researcher Alex Gabbard, explained, “Coal is one of the most impure of fuels. Its impurities range from trace quantities of many metals, including uranium and thorium, to much larger quantities of aluminum and iron to still larger quantities of impurities such as sulfur. Products of coal combustion include the oxides of carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur; carcinogenic and mutagenic substances; and recoverable minerals of commercial value, including nuclear fuels naturally occurring in coal.”

Did you know that the amount of radioactive thorium contained in coal is about 2.5 times greater than the amount of uranium? For a large number of coal samples, according to Environmental Protection Agency figures released in 1984, average values of uranium and thorium content have been determined to be 1.3 ppm and 3.2 ppm, respectively. Uranium and thorium are IN coal.

Comments Off »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

NRC Ruling in New Mexico Moves

July 28th, 2011

“The judge’s decision was wrong,” yelped environmental activist Chris Shuey into his cell phone, during a chat with StockInterview.com this past Friday. “It sets a horrible example for other mining companies.” Shuey, whose Southwest Research and Information Center is based in Albuquerque, New Mexico, clearly didn’t like the recent federal ruling in favor of Texas-based Uranium Resources’ (OTC BB: URIX) subsidiary, Hydro Resources Inc. (HRI). For nearly two decades, Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC) and Chris Shuey have clung to a fanatical position: Uranium mining is bad. Federal and local government regulatory panels disagree, having voted SRIC and Mr. Shuey down every step of the way.

A January 6th ruling by a three-judge panel of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in Rockville, Maryland shot down Shuey’s challenges of radiological air emissions. “The NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) and the judge continue to support mining,” Shuey lectured into his mobile phone. “We continue to legally challenge.” For more than eight years since the NRC granted HRI a materials license to perform ISL mining at four sites in McKinley County, SRIC has engaged in what the licensing board calls “protracted litigation” to stop HRI from supplying much-needed uranium for U.S. utilities. The recent federal ruling stated, “HRI’s operations will not be inimical to public health and safety.”

Other uranium companies in the area rejoiced on the ASLB ruling. According to an historic geological report, authored by McLemore and Chenoweth in 2003, suggested about 588 million pounds of uranium remains after the area produced 348 million pounds through year 2001. An asset valued at greater than $21 billion, and growing more valuable each month, is certainly worth celebrating. The recent ruling may help accelerate the permitting and development of uranium assets in New Mexico.

“It helps that the regulatory community shed light on the inaccuracies, and on the disingenuous approaches the anti-nuclear contingent brings to the argument,” explained Juan Velasquez, Vice President of Environmental and Regulatory Affairs for Strathmore Minerals (TSX: STM; Other OTC: STHJF) in a telephone interview from Strathmore’s permitting office in Santa Fe, New Mexico. “Anything that moves those properties closer to production is a good thing for Strathmore, for the environment and for the country as a whole, as we move forward and look toward energy independence.” William Sheriff, Director of Corporate Development for Energy Metals (TSX: EMC), agreed, “I think the rulings by the NRC (on URI, and HRI’s applications, are very positive. It’s just another step toward production.” Dallas-based Sheriff is considered one of the leading prospect developers in the United States. Energy Metals Corp also plans to develop properties in New Mexico’s Grants Uranium Belt over the next decade. Velasquez, who was now more optimistic Strathmore’s Church Rock project would move forward to production, added, “The decision gives some faith to those of us that are regulated that the NRC does use common sense in coming to its decisions.”

StockInterview.com solicited an opinion from a Santa Fe attorney not involved in the recent case, but who was familiar with the ruling. While asking that he not be named in this article, the lawyer stated, “It was a very reasonable decision, and what one might expect. The decision was scientifically sound.” Chris Pugsley, HRI’s attorney at the Washington, DC-based law firm Thompson and Simmons, which defended the case, echoed that attorney’s sentiments, saying, “It was a decision based upon sound technology and extensive industry experience. The ruling was an endorsement that ISL mining is environmentally safe and will be the future of the domestic uranium mining industry.” Pugsley added, “This was sound science and the proper interpretation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s regulations and requirements.” John DeJoia, Strathmore’s Vice President of Technical Services, concluded, “It makes me feel very optimistic about the production of uranium, domestically and especially in the Gallup (New Mexico) area. It validates the original determination by the NRC.”

These weren’t the first legal setbacks for SRIC. In November, New Mexico’s McKinley County Water Board denounced SRIC’s allegations of groundwater contamination, a cause the environmental group championed for a decade. The Water Board criticized the group, writing, “What we find however, are unsupportable propositions. The expert witness from the Southwest Research and Information Center provides lots of speculation, theories that could never be proved or disproved and headlines of gory consequences. This is not science. Science asks that we look at the data and come to a conclusion based on the evidence presented.” They concluded, “The mining operation as proposed by HRI and approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is safe and effectively protects our groundwater sources.”

In a July 20th ruling, the ASLB used stronger language, labeling much of SRIC’s arguments of possible contamination of Crownpoint water wells by HRI’s operations as “insubstantial” and “disingenuous.” In a separate January 6th ruling, the ASLB described a key SRIC claim as a “groundless assertion.” It has been one defeat after another for SRIC and their lead attorney, Eric Jantz. His law firm, New Mexico Environmental Law Center, had recently hosted “A Special Evening with Ted Turner,” the maverick billionaire, as a fund raiser to help stop uranium mining. On January 11th, five commissioners comprising the full commission of the NRC rejected SRIC’s appeal. They refused an SRIC petition to review the groundwater case. Strathmore’s Velasquez said of the recent legal decisions nullifying SRIC’s challenges, “If you are an environmentalist, it has to make you wonder at what point you are going to stop being taken seriously.” As the spot price of uranium continues its march to $40/pound and higher, the SRIC voice may need to find a new audience or a new cause.

ISL Mining and “Pristine” Groundwater

According to the World Nuclear Association (WNA), “ISL mining means that removal of the uranium minerals is accomplished without any major ground disturbance. The WNA explains ISL, or In Situ Leaching. as follows, “Weakly acidified or alkaline groundwater with a lot of oxygen injected into it is circulated through an enclosed underground aquifer which holds the uranium ore in loose sands. The leaching solution with dissolved uranium is then pumped to the surface treatment plant.” According to the WNA, over 20 percent of the world’s uranium is mined using the ISL method. At least four uranium companies plan to develop ISL operations in New Mexico: Uranium Resources (URI), Strathmore Minerals, Energy Metals and Max Resources (TSX: MXR). URI, Strathmore Minerals and Energy Metals specifically plan for the development of operations in the Churchrock or Crownpoint areas. None of the properties are located on the Navajo reservation.

Comments Off »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Hazards around the House

July 27th, 2011

Do you have hazards around your house? I mean besides the toy fire truck in the middle of your hall floor in the dark in the middle of the night? Besides the Razor scooter that your little girl left behind your car that you didn’t see when you had to back up. Eighty-nine dollars later you learn to look for hazards around your house. If you have kids, you have constant hazards around your home. There are other potential hazards in your house that are not child’s play. I am speaking of environmental hazards than can affect your home. You should consider environmental hazards in your home or when you are considering purchasing a home.

In my experience of inspecting homes in Charlotte, NC I have come across some common environmental hazards you should be aware of. Some of these hazards are asbestos, carbon monoxide, lead, radon, carbon monoxide, and groundwater contamination. In this article I hope to identify the basic environmental hazards and to describe the warning signs, characteristics, causes and solutions of the various environment hazards most commonly found in the real estate transaction.

Asbestos is a mineral that was once used as insulation because it was resistant to fire and contained heat effectively. Asbestos was used in residential buildings up until it was banned in 1978. In my inspections I usually found asbestos in older homes on heat ducts at the joints. It’s usually that white wrap on the joints of metal ducts. Asbestos can be found covering pipes, ducts, and heating and hot water units. Its fire resistant properties made it a popular material for floor tile, exterior siding and roofing products. Today we know that breathing asbestos fibers may result in a variety of respiratory diseases. Just the presence of asbestos is not necessarily a heath hazard. Asbestos is only harmful when it is disturbed or exposed causing it to become airborne. This often happens during renovation. Asbestos is highly friable. As it ages it breaks down easily into tiny fragment and particles. When these particles become airborne, they pose a risk to humans. Asbestos is costly to remove because the process requires state licensed technicians and specially sealed environments. Removal itself may be dangerous. Improper removal may further contaminate the air within the structure. The waste generated should be disposed of at a licensed facility. This further adds to the cost of removal. An alternate method of control that may be preferable is encapsulation. Encapsulation is the sealing off disintegrating asbestos. More information on asbestos-related issues is available from the EPA (telephone: 1-202-554-1404). The EPA has numerous publications that provide information on asbestos.

Lead-based paint was used on houses built prior to 1978. Lead-based paint may be on any interior or exterior surface. It is particularly common on doors, windows and other woodwork. About 75% of all private houses built before 1978 have lead present. That is approximately 57 million homes. Crawling babies can ingest lead dust from the hands. It can also be ingested in water from lead pipes or lead solder. Elevated levels of lead in the blood can cause serious damage to the brain, kidneys, nervous system and red blood cells. The degree of harm is related to the amount of exposure and the age at which the person was exposed. Presently, there is no federal law that requires homeowners to check for the presence of lead-based paint. Lead-based paint hazards must be disclosed however. In 1996 the EPA and the Department of Housing and Urban Development issued regulations requiring disclosure of the presence of any known lead-based paint hazards to potential buyers or renters. A lead based paint disclosure statement must be attached to all sales contracts and leases regarding residential properties built before 1978. Buyers or renters must be given ten days in which to conduct risk assessments or inspections for lead-based paint hazards. Buyers are not bound by any real estate contract until the ten-day period has expired. Real estate agents are to ensure that all parties comply with the law. For more information and pamphlets on lead-based hazards, call The National Lead Information Center, 1-800-424-5323

Radon is a radio active gas produced by the natural decay of radioactive substances. Some areas are known to have more significant amounts than others. Radon is found in every state. The highest concentrations can be found in the plains states, the upper Midwest and Northeastern United States. In the open air, radon usually dissipates into the atmosphere and is not likely to cause harm. When radon enters buildings and is trapped in high concentrations, it causes health problems. This usually happens in basements with poor ventilation. Radon is odorless and tasteless. It is impossible to detect without testing. Radon levels are relatively easy to reduce by installing ventilation systems or exhaust fans. The modern practice of creating energy-efficient homes and buildings with practically airtight walls and windows may increase the potential for radon gas accumulation. Heating and ventilation systems can spread radon gas throughout the house once it has accumulated. Radon has been proven to cause lung cancer. Individuals who smoke and spend considerable time indoors are particularly at risk. The EPA has a pamphlet ” A Citizen’s guide to Radon” It is available online or at your local EPA office.

Another colorless and odorless gas that poses health risks is carbon monoxide. Carbon monoxide is a by-product of a fossil fuel burning appliance or heating system. It also can come from a car exhaust. A few years ago in Charlotte, four people were killed when someone left their car running in a townhouse garage. The garages were under the units. Apparently someone pulled in their garage and forget to turn their car off. It killed four people. After that Charlotte made it a law to have a carbon monoxide detector if you have any gas-burning appliance. When these appliances are ventilated properly there is not a problem. When improper ventilation or equipment malfunctions and permits large quantities of CO to be released into the structure, it poses a significant health hazard. Its effect is compounded by the fact that CO is so hard to detect. CO is quickly absorbed by the body inhibiting the blood’s ability to transport oxygen. This causes dizziness and nausea. More than 200 deaths occur from CO poisoning each year. Carbon monoxide detectors are available and their use is mandatory in some areas.

Comments Off »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Checking Your Home for Radon

July 26th, 2011

Before checking your home for radon levels, you have to learn about radon first and its effect on human beings. What is radon in the first place? Radon is a radioactive gas that can cause cancer. In fact, it has been identified as the second major cause of lung cancer in the US. This is invisible to the naked eye and it is odorless too, making it difficult to detect.

What are the sources of radon?

Our planet is filled of radioactive elements. Most of them are buried under the Earth’s surface. Once these elements decay, they produce Radon. One of the richest radioactive elements in the planet is Uranium, which can last as long as the life of our planet. As this decay, it produces Radon, thus it will always be present. Although it is normally found underneath the Earth’s surface, it can find its way to your home and expose you to dangerous risks.

How to check your home for Radon?

This makes it essential that you check your home. But how are you going to do that? To check your home properly, you need to gather as much information you can. The US Environmental Protection Agency can present you with the essential information about this. You can also check out the web site of the Radon Information Center.

You can check the level of radon in your house using a kit available in the market. The kit comes with instructions on how to use it. Make sure that you use a kit that passes the guidelines set by the EPA to ensure that it will deliver reliable results. After using the kit, you will be asked to seal it. Follow the directions carefully as instructed in the kit. You will need to send it to the designated laboratory to be analyzed. Kits normally comes with pre-address envelops for the lab. There are kits that are intended for long-term use. You can invest in them if you live in an area known for high levels of radon.

You can also high a professional to check your home. These professionals are trained to make sure that your home is properly examined. Before you hire one, check their portfolio first. How long have they been testing homes and what do their clients say about them.

Reducing Radon levels:

Discovering radon in your home puts you at risk. This is why you always have to exert efforts to reduce that. No particular level of radon has been identified as safe. However, reducing its level will surely reduce the risks as well.

There are various known ways to reduce radon. You can use a vent pipe system and fan or a soil suction system. However, you have to keep in mind that the method you will use will depend on the kind of house you have as well as other relevant factors. You can test your home using short-term radon kits. If it reports a high radon level, then run the test again or use a long-term kit. However, the best thing you can do is to look for a Certified Radon mitigation contractor.

Comments Off »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Playing Your Online Casino Games on Your Laptop

July 25th, 2011

Are you one of the big fans of casino games? If you are, you must have done it a lot of times by going to some casino places. It is the most common way that they do to play casino games. For some casino addicts, they would like to go to a bigger casino place, like in Las Vegas. Or, the smaller one, they can go to Atlantic City. However, not everybody can reach these places, including you probably. If this is the problem, you should try to get on online casino games. This game will be another story for you, as you will have fun on virtual casino games. And you can do that wherever you are.

 

If you think this is a great idea to play with, you can just get on onlinecasinospotlight.com. This site has been providing their customers with a lot of choices of online casino games, such as Roulette, Blackjack, Poker, Slot, and the like. You can pick up whichever you would like to play. Before you play the games, you should download their software once you choose one of the casino providers on their list. The software will be the medium of your online casino games, so you can play it on your laptop or computer.

Comments Off »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Pulse Oximeters in the USA, from VitalOximeters.com

July 10th, 2011

Vital Oximeters are a US based finger pulse oximeter specialist. Originally launched in the UK, they offer high quality oximeters from SPO Medical, one of the first manufacturers, and all oximeters are backed with a unique 2 year warranty. SPO Medical oximeters are always on the forefront of technology, bringing new features and advances to the market – quite often being “the first” to bring something in their products. VitalOximeters work hand in hand with SPO Medical, to offer you these high quality pulse oximeters for the same price or less, than cheap chinese imitations. They offer both medical oximeters; perfect for people in the professional field and using them regularly, and personal oximeters for people who want to check their blood oxygen levels at home, for cyclists, climbers, joggers and others where oxygen in the blood is important.

Comments Off »

Posted in Technology

The Air in Your House Is Polluted!

July 9th, 2011

Most people now have some level of concern for the environment and air pollution. As a result, there is much focus and information on the outdoor air quality for various cities and it can be big news when a particular municipality violates the various air pollution regulations. Of course, this is cause for concern as a citizen you don’t want to be breathing dirty, polluted air when you go outside. The little secret though is that the air in your home is, in all likelihood, worse than the polluted outdoor air on the news.

It is not commonly known but the air quality inside a standard home is very poor. In fact, the EPA has reported levels of indoor air pollutants may be up to five times higher and occasionally up to 100 times higher than outdoor pollutant levels. This is rather profound given that people spend most of their time indoors. There are many things that contribute to poor indoor air quality such as new paint or other cleaning products, pet dander, radon or dust. Also, new carpet – that “new carpet” smell is chemicals used in making the carpet and should be ventilated as best as practicable. Additionally, firewood stored in the house can release mold or spores. Obviously, indoor smoking is powerful air pollutant as cigarette smoke contains hundreds of toxins.

The build up of these pollutants can lead to respiratory problems and lowers overall health. Those with asthma suffer more frequent attacks with poor indoor air quality.

The best way to prevent your air quality from degrading is to eliminate the source. Have smokers smoke outdoors, use non-toxic “green” cleaning products, vacuum and dust regularly, etc. However, it is not possible to eliminate all contaminants and this is where an air purifier can help.

An air purification system is designed to eliminate or greatly reduce mold, bacteria, particulates and other microorganisms so as to improve or “purify” the air inside your home. Whole house systems are designed to do just that and improve the air in the entire house. These are excellent systems and wonderful to install if you or a loved one suffer from allergies or asthma. The drawback can be cost. If you are not quite ready to install a whole house system, small units designed for a single room or small space can be purchased at major retailers. Be sure to check the square foot rating for a given device so that you have the proper size machine for the room it will be located in. Typically this would be the bedroom since many hours are spent there and the space is generally small enough for a tabletop unit to be effective.

If you would like to improve your health an air purification system is a great way to go. Contact a qualified installer in your area and have them visit your home. In this way, you may find out exactly what your home needs and learn the cost. Plus, the installer will be able to advise you on specific pollutants common in your area of the country and state. They can be a valuable resource and consultant.

Comments Off »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

What Exactly Does A Berkey Water Filter Eliminate

July 7th, 2011

The most powerful purification system in the world is a Berkey water filter. Even missionaries and the Red Cross trust it in harsh environments. But people want to know what makes Berkey better than other filters. What does it eliminate that other filters don’t?

We all know that filters are supposed to remove toxins and make water clean and safe to drink. Believe it or not, tap water is filled with harmful contaminants like chlorine and fluoride and that is why it’s so important to have a filter.

A Berkey water filter eliminates bad substances through a process called micro-porous filtration. They are self-sterilizing and re-cleanable and the pores are so small that these toxins can’t pass through them. The black Berkey filters were tested to remove 100% of pathogens.

This information isn’t enough, though. People want to know exactly what Berkey’s filter out and how much. The list includes pathogenic bacteria, cysts and parasites including E. coli, trihalomethanes including Bromoform and Chloroform. It also filters radiologicals such as Radon 222, inorganic minerals, volatile organic compounds such as chlorine, Atrazine, Benzene, Ethylene Dibromide (EDB), o-Xylene, m-Xylene and p-Xylene.

But that’s not all. Heavy metals such as Mercury, Aluminum, Cadmium, Chromium and Copper are reduced up to 95%. Berkey’s also remove Nitrates, Nitrites, Rust, Silt and Sediment.

For simpler terms, these filters remove or reduce parasites, pathogenic cysts, herbicides and pesticides, detergents, organic solvents, VOCs, trihalomethanes, cloudiness, silt, sediment, nitrates, nitrites, heavy metals, and foul tastes and odors. They do this all while leaving in the healthful and beneficial minerals the body needs.

This isn’t the full list of toxins removed by a Berkey water filter, but it’s the bulk of it. Having a Berkey gives you peace of mind knowing your family isn’t putting all of those harmful things into their bodies. Instead, you are drinking clean water free of impurities.

Comments Off »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Alternative and Non Toxic Cancer Treatments That No One Wants You to Know!

July 6th, 2011

A study completed in 1993 by a German biostatistician named Ulrich Abel found that the overall success rate for most cancers treated with standard allopathic treatment (chemo, radiation, & surgery) was just 4%. That is a ridiculous number compared to the amount of money it costs for a average person to cure their cancer. If the cancer does not kill you it will certainly kill your bank account. More people die because of the treatments of cancer than because of cancer itself. Chemotherapy, radiation and surgery are the main killers. So why don´t the governments use other methods for treating cancer? Maybe they do not want to use other methods.

The fact is that organized medicine is a business and the goal is to make profits to the big boys who run the business not to cure cancer. If there was a easy and fast way to cure cancer a lot of people would not be very happy about it, because they would lose money. Cancer treatment can cost thousands and thousands of dollars for an average person or even more and there are millions of cancer victims all over the world. If you put the numbers together you can imagine the profits the people who run the business make. That is the way it is.

Doctors are told from day one that the only ways to treat cancer is with chemotherapy. radiation and surgery. Your likelihood of success is lowest if you depend on conventional treatment and highest if you employ Nature-based, non-allopathic therapies.

What Causes Cancer?

Many people have a strong fear of getting cancer because they do not know how they can get it. The orthodox medicine does not give enough information. Smoking, drinking, radiation exposure, asbestos exposure, radon gas, etc can cause cancer but then why do not everybody who smokes or drinks get cancer? The internal biological environment and the spiritual/emotional state of mind is not discussed by the cancer industry, because again they simple do not want you to know. It’s much easier to cure yourself of cancer once you understand what causes cancer malignancy and how to stop it.

The truth is that most medical research is organised, paid for, commissioned or subsidised by the drug industry. Celia Farber said:“Modern medicine, the entire industry and social machinery of it is, at its root, a totalitarian system. By that, I mean that there is a central ideology that seeks to enforce its domination by methodically obstructing any ideas that run counter to it.”
Despite all the super technology the greatest danger to your health is the doctor who practices Modern Medicine. When a doctor’s primary job is to blindly hand out drugs that often do more harm than good, or inject their patients with poisons for the sake of doing good, than something is very wrong indeed. Holistic methods focus on working with the body and boosting whatever immune system the patient still has. Chemotherapy and radiation by contrast, usually devastate the immune system at the one time in you life that you need it the most. Dr. Martin Henry Fischer:“Half of the modern drugs could well be thrown out of the window, except that the birds might eat them.”

The natural purpose and driving force of the pharmaceutical industry is to increase sales of pharmaceutical drugs for ongoing diseases and to find new diseases to market existing drugs. By this very nature, the pharmaceutical industry has no interest in curing diseases.

Comments Off »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags: