The science of sexiness: why some people are just more attractive

Aiden Turner starring in a BBC drama
With his dashing good looks and symmetrical features, Aiden Turner has set hearts afflutter in Poldark 

A new study suggests that long-distance runners are more attractive because they have greater levels of testosterone which makes them more manly and fertile.

But there are other biological and evolutionary triggers which are constantly drawing us to certain individuals, even if we don’t realise it is happening. Scientists in Geneva discovered that determining whether we are attracted to someone is one of the most complex tasks that the brain undertakes. Here are the scientific secrets of attraction:


Charles Darwin once wrote: “It is certainly not true that there is in the mind of man any universal standards of beauty with respect to the human body.”

However recent research suggests that there are universal agreements about beauty which hold true across all cultures and even throughout the animal kingdom.

Probably the most important is facial symmetry. Having a face which is equal on both sides is a biological advert which tells prospective partners that good genes will be found in this body.

Lopsidedness is thought to reflect how development in the womb has been derailed by general poor health, bad DNA, alcohol or tobacco use.

Facial symmetry is also linked to agreeableness, extraversion and conscientiousness, so good looking people generally find it easier to make friends and hold down jobs.

It is why so many people are choosing plastic surgery to straighten noses, and even-up lopsided grins. However, biologically, they are cheating their partners, as they will still pass on their wonky genes no matter what they look like from the outside.

And the importance of symmetry does not stop at facial features.

Studies have also shown that women partnered to men with symmetrical bodies have the most orgasms, and those with symmetrical breasts are more fertile than those less evenly endowed.

Even female swallows prefer males with symmetrical tail feathers as they hunt for superior genetic quality and developmental stability.

David Beckham
Symmetrical faces like David Beckham are more attractive 
Finger length

While many women might be looking for the tell-tale signs of a wedding ring, research suggests men’s hands can reveal a whole lot more.

In recent years scientists have discovered that there is an intriguing link between finger length and the levels of testosterone that a man was exposed to while still in the womb.

The longer the ring finger is in comparison with the index finger, the more testosterone was present.

That’s important because high levels of testosterone are linked to high sperm counts, increased fertility, good cardiovascular health and better genes. People with longer ring fingers are also likely to have symmetrical faces.

But before you start looking for men with extraordinarily long ring fingers, bear in mind that Oxford University discovered that they are likely to be more promiscuous. In contrast those whose fingers are a similar length are more likely to seek long-term relationships and stay faithful.

A hand
A longer ring finger indicates increases testosterone 
Blonde hair

This one stumped even Darwin, who tried to discover why gentlemen prefer blondes, and eventually gave up, after finding there was no overall preference for the fairer sex.

The blonde hair and blue eye combination found in Caucasians is thought to have evolved among northern European tribes around 11,000 years ago.

For tribes who were venturing ever further north with the retreating ice sheets, being blonde would have bestowed an evolutionary advantage. The loss of pigmentation in the skin allows deeper penetration of ultraviolet light needed to synthesise vitamins which were essential for good health. So blondes were more likely to be healthier and live longer

Some archaeologists suggest that it was a time of great rivalry when men were often killed and women had to compete fiercely for partners. It is thought that Palaeolithic hunters chose blondes because they stood out from their rivals and were more likely to be healthy.

Many women who are blonde go darker as they age, so blonde hair is also viewed as an indicator of youth, and sexual vitality.

And, intriguingly, Caucasian blondes usually have slightly higher oestrogen levels than brunettes and are likely to exhibit finer infantile facial features such as a smaller nose, smaller jaw, pointed chin, narrow shoulders, smooth skin and less body hair.

However a recent study which attempted to determine the most beautiful woman in the world picked a brunette. And a 2011 study in the Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, found that brunettes are generally considered more attractive.

Computerized images of a woman and a man
A recent study found brown hair was the most attractive for men and women 
Body shape

Just as there is an ideal ratio for finger length, it seems that humans are programmed to quickly sum up the bodily measurements of a future lover.

Again these are based on genetic clues which we are unconsciously gleaning from bone ratios.

Men prefer a waist-to-hips ratio of 7:10. Hip width and breast size are important factors in fertility, child birth, and rearing, so there’s definitely an evolutionary connection there.

A BMI (Body Mass Index) of 20.85 has been determined as the most attractive weight for a woman. Scarlett Johansson has previously been voted as having the most attractive female figure.

Women are unconsciously looking for a man who has a waist-to-hip ratio of 9:10 and are attracted to a partner with a big jaw, a broad chin, an imposing brow. The angle between their eyes and mouth, cheekbone prominence, and facial length all play a role as well as does facial hair. Most women prefer heavy stubble to either a beard of clean shaven. However men with full beards are viewed as better fathers.

The perfect man should also have body fat of around 12 per cent which is an important indicator of how well the immune system works.

And the limbal ring — the area where the iris meets the white of the eye — is thought to signal youth and health. In a 2011 study, men and women with a dark limbal ring were perceived as more attractive.

Scarlett Johansson
Scarlett Johansson has previously been voted as having the most attractive female figure.

Scientists are divided about whether humans actually emit pheromones – the chemical signals secreted by animals to help find a mate – but we certainly use smell to detect how genetically compatible a partner might be.

Studies have found that we can literally sniff out our immune system match, the person whose genes complement ours, which will give us healthier babies.

In fact, the most compatible partner genetically would be the one who is the least like you. In terms of evolutionary biology it is easy to see the benefit of having one partner who is less susceptible to getting colds or flu while another has greater immunity to measles, for example.

When sniffing t-shirts saturated with men’s sweat, women preferred the smells of men with high levels of testosterone, particularly when they were at peak fertility.

However research by Newcastle University has suggested that the Pill could stop women picking up these important genetic clues because it alters hormones which make the body think it is pregnant. While that stops women getting pregnant it also means they would rather be surrounded by close family members, and so are more attracted to people who are genetically similar. And for choosing a partner, that is dreadful.

A man smelling white cloth
Pheremone dating now exists to help people find their genetic match
Fitting in

Although it might seem like a good idea to stand out from the crowd when playing the mating game, new research suggests it actually pays to look average.

People with “mathematically average” features advertise a more diverse set of genes and better reproductive health, evolutionary biologists say.

“Basically what our brain does is we go around in our environment, picking up people’s faces and making the average out of these faces we see on a daily basis,” Dr. Kang Lee, psychologist at the University of Toronto.

“And because of that, then, we actually have in our head… a representation of the average of the face. So there’s something we have genetically that’s driving us to prefer to look at something that’s average.”

Ideally, you want the distance between your eyes and mouth to be about 36 percent of the length of your face.

And, the distance between your eyes should be 46 percent of your face’s width.

Natalie Portman
Natalie Portman has mathematically average features 
The voice and mouth

Men prefer women with high, breathy voices as it signifies youth. Women’s voices tend to get lower as they age. A higher pitched voice is also thought to denote small body size.

Female listeners prefer a male voice that signals a large body size with low pitch.

Men are attracted to women who smile, but it’s not true the other way around.

Research found that smiling females were rated as more attractive, whereas men showing happy emotions were rated as less attractive.

Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt
Women should smile to look more attractive

Here’s What We’d Need to Transform Wormholes Into Intergalactic Shortcuts. 

Everyone likes a shortcut and a quick trip somewhere cool, which means that everyone loves a wormhole – at least in theory. In actuality, these space-time tunnels are probably not the alleged intergalactic shortcuts we’re looking for – and this isn’t a mind trick from Obi-Wan, either.

But first, let’s talk about what wormholes are and how they could theoretically allow for faster-than-light travel; it’s always better to build up all of our hopes before dashing them to pieces, I find.

 When physicists started tinkering with general relativity, they predicted that black holes might exist. The same physics that predicts black holes also predicts white holes, which are just what they sound like: the opposite of black holes.

The event horizon of a black hole is a corner of space that is impossible to escape once you’ve entered it. On the other hand, the event horizon of a white hole is impossible to enter – but you can escape if you’re already there.

The wormhole comes in when we learn that all black holes are naturally connected to white holes; these identically opposite twins are joined at the singularities.

Or so the math says. While we’ve seen black holes a-plenty, there’s no evidence at all for white holes – nor any evidence for any process that could form them, or any means for them to stay in existence if they formed, or even any way they could survive their ‘symbiotic’ connections to black holes.

There is just no way they could ever form, or be stable enough to remain once formed. That instability would directly affect any wormholes: they would never be able to last, and would instead stretch and break almost immediately.

If you happened to see a wormhole and went for a ride, you’d be on a one way trip into an event horizon of a black hole. That sounds cool, but remember: you’d then be stretched endlessly and pummeled to death by gravity (and even Anthony Perkins thinks that’s crazy).

 However, some still believe that we can make wormholes work for us, as sort of a next level tube system going all over the universe rather than just beneath London.

To make it work, you’d need to enter just outside the event horizon so you could get through the wormhole without getting done in by gravity first.

You’d also need a tunnel strong and stable enough to handle both the gravitational pummeling mentioned above, and the force of people flying through it at extreme speeds.

blackhole wormhole

What would make that possible? A tunnel made of negative-mass material. Negative-mass materials have not been found in the universe anywhere, although physicists in Washington recently created a fluid with negative-mass.

So will they someday create negative-mass material that you could, say, build a tunnel with? Maybe.

 Will we ever find workable wormholes?

Still, should this really be a priority? There are plenty of reasons why traveling this quickly would mean a lot to humanity: we could explore far reaches of the galaxy, potentially finding alien life, more habitable planets, and whatever else it has to offer – probably a lot.

However, we don’t need to pin all of our hopes on wormholes just because we wish to traverse the galaxy.

First of all, even breakthroughs in physics such as the creation of negative-mass materials are unlikely to lead to workable wormholes.

These fantastical space travel tunnels would violate numerous laws of physics- many of which are very well-tested. The odds of defeating each and every one of them seem long, indeed.

Furthermore, there are a number of other projects in the works that could help us travel faster in space. NASA and others have been studying the EM Drive, a radio frequency resonant cavity thruster that uses microwaves inside a truncated cone to create a thrust at the narrow end of the cone.

If it works, it would mean the ability to create thrust without a propellant – a huge advancement for long-distance space travel. This tech is a long way from being viable, however.

Ion propulsion is already being used once rockets are already in space. NASA’s Dawn mission uses ion propulsion, as do several other missions from Japan and the ESA.

How long it will be before the technology could be used to help humans travel extremely long distances, however, remains to be seen.

In short, it seems unlikely that a solution that would require breaking every law in the physics book will be the one that gets us there. As fun as wormholes feel from the outside, they’re probably not worth too much of our focus.

How Did Marijuana Become Illegal in the First Place? 

Article Image

1st August 1980: A young couple share a marijuana reefer at Notting Hill Carnival, west London.

For a plant that humans have utilized for millennia—our brain’s endogenous cannabinoid receptors make us easy targets—restrictions are recent. In his bookMarijuana: A Short History, Brookings Institution senior fellow John Hudak points to the 1906 Federal Food and Drug Act as the beginning of what would become a series of legislative acts and fear-mongering campaigns associating marijuana with a variety of cognitive and bodily diseases, most of which are patently false.

The 1906 act did not restrict marijuana, Hudak writes, but did expand the federal government’s power regarding drugs. Three years later Congress passed the Opium Exclusion Act to create skepticism over an influx of Chinese immigrants. This association of drugs with foreigners proved to be a winning algorithm. Two decades later the Food, Drug, and Insecticide Administration was formed; in 1930 the name was shortened to the FDA.

Enter Harry J. Anslinger, already busy getting his rocks off busting alcohol producers during Prohibition. For the next three decades Anslinger made it a personal goal to publicly discredit marijuana (and the ethnic groups associated with it), touring the country speaking to police and local civic organizations. It was not a far stretch from previous crusade. Hudak writes,

Like alcohol, marijuana was painted as a scourge on society, ruining the moral fabric of America, breaking up families, and decreasing Americans’ capacity for gainful employment.

Anslinger manipulated data to his own ends. In one essay he wrote that while a marijuana cigarette can make you a philosopher or musician it can just as easily turn you into a murderer. Anslinger showed special disdain for Mexicans; the term ‘marihuana’ comes from our southern neighbor, an easy target for his ethnic targeting—a trend still being perpetuated with one presidential candidate’s call for a wall. The Marihauna Tax Act of 1937 was the government’s first attempt at criminalizing the plant.

Coming out of the Great Depression and enduring World War II, Americans were fed up with interventionism even if race baiting made for a good time. By the time the sixties rolled around Anslinger remained vehement toward substances as ever, but the fringes ignored potential prosecution in a combined power of civil rights and personal experimentation.

In the previous decade Eisenhower had released a scathing report treating marijuana users like felons with harsh prison sentences, but by 1963 Kennedy signed Executive Order 11706, which questioned the purported dangers of marijuana. His successor, Lyndon Johnson, did not change the penalties but did question whether or not our society treated addicts properly. He hoped to rehabilitate low-level offenders instead of sentencing them. Then Nixon came into power and that quickly ended. Hudak continues,

While Lyndon Johnson at times acknowledged treating drug use and addiction as a public health problem, Richard Nixon believed drugs to be a criminal element and a scourge on society—their use to be punished, their existence to be stamped out.

Nixon has previously employed a ‘Southern Strategy’ to vilify minority groups and hippies. Once in power, any substance entering their bodies made for banishment. Just as religious leaders need to invent a devil to sustain power, politicians require the other if their aim is to build a fanatical following. Today we associate the ‘War on Drugs’ to Reagan and his wife’s ‘Just Say No’ campaign, but it was in 1971 that Nixon signed Executive Order No. 11599 to declare drugs America’s existential enemy. That war continues to rage today, however diluted and ridiculous it’s become.

And yet, to the thousands of young, mostly black and Latino men escorted to jail for marijuana, this war is anything but over. It has only recently come to light that Nixon specifically targeted minority populations when announcing his war, though for decades American society has witnessed its devastating consequences. This is counter to how legislation is supposed to operate. Hudak concludes,

Public policy at its finest involves trial and error where jurisdictions function as laboratories until best practices gradually emerge and the system’s functioning continues to improve. Improvement and refinement over time is an absolute necessity for marijuana policy, especially since it is very likely that state systems will only expand.

There are many growing pains ahead for marijuana in America. Businesses are being taxed at extraordinary rates yet, since their product is not federally sanctioned, cannot enjoy deductions available to other ventures; misinformation persists as scientific research is impossible due to its Schedule 1 status; ludicrous consumer tax rates (up to 100 percent) keeps the black market alive; corporate intervention is already closing down mom and pop grows that have kept marijuana available to the public for decades.

There are no easy answers, but as Hudak suggests in his fine book, we have to seriously question marijuana policy. In state after state citizens are exercising their democratic right to decide how to treat their bodies. So long as the government keeps longstanding racist, fear-mongering barriers in place we’re never going to reach amiable conclusions that work in the best interest of our nation.

97% of Terminal Cancer Patients Previously Had This Dental Procedure.


Do you have a chronic degenerative disease? If so, have you been told, “It’s all in your head?” Well, that might not be that far from the truth…

The root cause of your illness may be in your mouth.

There is a common dental procedure that nearly every dentist will tell you is completely safe, despite the fact that scientists have been warning of its dangers for more than 100 years.

Every day in the United States alone, 41,000 of these dental procedures are performed on patients who believe they are safely and permanently fixing their problem.

What is this dental procedure?


The root canal.

More than 25 million root canals are performed every year in this country.


Root-canaled teeth are essentially “dead” teeth that can become silent incubators for highly toxic anaerobic bacteria that can, under certain conditions, make their way into your bloodstream to cause a number of serious medical conditions—many not appearing until decades later.


Most of these toxic teeth feel and look fine for many years, which make their role in systemic disease even harder to trace back.


Sadly, the vast majority of dentists are oblivious to the serious potential health risks they are exposing their patients to, risks that persist for the rest of their patients’ lives. The American Dental Association claims root canals have been proven safe, but they have NO published data or actual research to substantiate this claim.


Fortunately, I had some early mentors like Dr. Tom Stone and Dr. Douglas Cook, who educated me on this issue nearly 20 years ago. Were it not for a brilliant pioneering dentist who, more than a century ago, made the connection between root-canaled teeth and disease, this underlying cause of disease may have remained hidden to this day. The dentist’s name was Weston Price—regarded by many as the greatest dentist of all time.


Weston A. Price: World’s Greatest Dentist

Most dentists would be doing an enormous service to public health if they familiarized themselves with the work of Dr. Weston Pricei. Unfortunately, his work continues to be discounted and suppressed by medical and dental professionals alike.


Dr. Price was a dentist and researcher who traveled the world to study the teeth, bones, and diets of native populations living without the “benefit” of modern food. Around the year 1900, Price had been treating persistent root canal infections and became suspicious that root-canaled teeth always remained infected, in spite of treatments. Then one day, he recommended to a woman, wheelchair bound for six years, to have her root canal tooth extracted, even though it appeared to be fine.


She agreed, so he extracted her tooth and then implanted it under the skin of a rabbit. The rabbit amazingly developed the same crippling arthritis as the woman and died from the infection 10 days later. But the woman, now free of the toxic tooth, immediately recovered from her arthritis and could now walk without even the assistance of a cane.


Price discovered that it’s mechanically impossible to sterilize a root-canaled (e.g. root-filled) tooth.

He then went on to show that many chronic degenerative diseases originate from root-filled teeth—the most frequent being heart and circulatory diseases. He actually found 16 different causative bacterial agents for these conditions. But there were also strong correlations between root-filled teeth and diseases of the joints, brain and nervous system. Dr. Price went on to write two groundbreaking books in 1922 detailing his research into the link between dental pathology and chronic illness. Unfortunately, his work was deliberately buried for 70 years, until finally one endodontist named George Meinig recognized the importance of Price’s work and sought to expose the truth.


Dr. Meinig Advances the Work of Dr. Price

Dr. Meinig, a native of Chicago, was a captain in the U.S. Army during World War II before moving to Hollywood to become a dentist for the stars. He eventually became one of the founding members of the American Association of Endodontists (root canal specialists).


In the 1990s, he spent 18 months immersed in Dr. Price’s research. In June of 1993, Dr. Meinig published the book Root Canal Cover-Up, which continues to be the most comprehensive reference on this topic today. You can order your copy directly from the Price-Pottenger Foundationii.

What Dentists Don’t Know About the Anatomy of Your Teeth

Your teeth are made of the hardest substances in your body.


In the middle of each tooth is the pulp chamber, a soft living inner structure that houses blood vessels and nerves. Surrounding the pulp chamber is the dentin, which is made of living cells that secrete a hard mineral substance. The outermost and hardest layer of your tooth is the white enamel, which encases the dentin.

The roots of each tooth descend into your jawbone and are held in place by the periodontal ligament. In dental school, dentists are taught that each tooth has one to four major canals. However, there are accessory canals that are never mentioned. Literally miles of them!

Just as your body has large blood vessels that branch down into very small capillaries, each of your teeth has a maze of very tiny tubules that, if stretched out, would extend for three miles. Weston Price identified as many as 75 separate accessory canals in a single central incisor (front tooth). For a more detailed explanation, refer to an article by Hal Huggins, DDS, MS, on the Weston A. Price Foundation website.iii (These images are borrowed from the Huggins article.)


Microscopic organisms regularly move in and around these tubules, like gophers in underground tunnels.


When a dentist performs a root canal, he or she hollows out the tooth, then fills the hollow chamber with a substance (called guttapercha), which cuts off the tooth from its blood supply, so fluid can no longer circulate through the tooth. But the maze of tiny tubules remains. And bacteria, cut off from their food supply, hide out in these tunnels where they are remarkably safe from antibiotics and your own body’s immune defenses.


The Root Cause of Much Disease

Under the stresses of oxygen and nutrient deprivation, these formerly friendly organisms morph into stronger, more virulent anaerobes that produce a variety of potent toxins. What were once ordinary, friendly oral bacteria mutate into highly toxic pathogens lurking in the tubules of the dead tooth, just awaiting an opportunity to spread.


No amount of sterilization has been found effective in reaching these tubules—and just about every single root-canaled tooth has been found colonized by these bacteria, especially around the apex and in the periodontal ligament. Oftentimes, the infection extends down into the jawbone where it creates cavitations—areas of necrotic tissue in the jawbone itself.


Cavitations are areas of unhealed bone, often accompanied by pockets of infected tissue and gangrene. Sometimes they form after a tooth extraction (such as a wisdom tooth extraction), but they can also follow a root canal. According to Weston Price Foundation, in the records of 5,000 surgical cavitation cleanings, only two were found healed.

And all of this occurs with few, if any, accompanying symptoms. So you may have an abscessed dead tooth and not know it. This focal infection in the immediate area of the root-canaled tooth is bad enough, but the damage doesn’t stop there.


Root Canals Can Lead to Heart, Kidney, Bone, and Brain Disease

As long as your immune system remains strong, any bacteria that stray away from the infected tooth are captured and destroyed. But once your immune system is weakened by something like an accident or illness or other trauma, your immune system may be unable to keep the infection in check.


These bacteria can migrate out into surrounding tissues by hitching a ride into your blood stream, where they are transported to new locations to set up camp. The new location can be any organ or gland or tissue.


Dr. Price was able to transfer diseases harbored by humans to rabbits, by implanting fragments of root-canaled teeth, as mentioned above. He found that root canal fragments from a person who had suffered a heart attack, when implanted into a rabbit, would cause a heart attack in the rabbit within a few weeks.


He discovered he could transfer heart disease to the rabbit 100 percent of the time! Other diseases were more than 80 percent transferable by this method. Nearly every chronic degenerative disease has been linked with root canals, including:

-Heart disease
-Kidney disease
-Arthritis, joint, and rheumatic diseases
-Neurological diseases (including ALS and MS)
-Autoimmune diseases (Lupus and more)

There may also be a cancer connection. Dr. Robert Jones, a researcher of therelationship between root canals and breast cancer, found an extremely high correlation between root canals and breast cancer.iv He claims to have found the following correlations in a five-year study of 300 breast cancer cases:


-93 percent of women with breast cancer had root canals
-7 percent had other oral pathology
-Tumors, in the majority of cases, occurred on the same side of the body as the root canal(s) or other oral pathology

Dr. Jones claims that toxins from the bacteria in an infected tooth or jawbone are able to inhibit the proteins that suppress tumor development. A German physician reported similar findings. Dr. Josef Issels reported that, in his 40 years of treating “terminal” cancer patients, 97 percent of his cancer patients had root canals. If these physicians are correct, the cure for cancer may be as simple as having a tooth pulled, then rebuilding your immune system.

Good Bugs Gone Bad

How are these mutant oral bacteria connected with heart disease or arthritis? The ADA and the AAE claim it’s a “myth” that the bacteria found in and around root-canaled teeth can cause diseasev. But they base that on the misguided assumption that the bacteria in these diseased teeth are the SAME as normal bacteria in your mouth—and that’s clearly not the case.


Today, bacteria can be identified using DNA analysis, whether they’re dead or alive, from their telltale DNA signatures.


In a continuation of Dr. Price’s work, the Toxic Element Research Foundation (TERF) used DNA analysis to examine root-canaled teeth, and they found bacterial contamination in 100 percent of the samples tested. They identified 42 different species of anaerobic bacteria in 43 root canal samples. In cavitations, 67 different bacteria were identified among the 85 samples tested, with individual samples housing between 19 to 53 types of bacteria each. The bacteria they found included the following types:



Are these just benign, ordinary mouth bugs? Absolutely not. Four can affect your heart, three can affect your nerves, two can affect your kidneys, two can affect your brain, and one can infect your sinus cavities… so they are anything BUT friendly! (If you want see just how unfriendly they can be, I invite you to investigate the footnotes.)


Approximately 400 percent more bacteria were found in the blood surrounding the root canal tooth than were found in the tooth itself, suggesting the tooth is the incubatorand the periodontal ligament is the food supply. The bone surrounding root-canaled teeth was found even HIGHER in bacterial count… not surprising, since bone is virtual buffet of bacterial nutrients.


Since When is Leaving A Dead Body Part IN Your Body a Good Idea?

There is no other medical procedure that involves allowing a dead body part to remain in your body. When your appendix dies, it’s removed. If you get frostbite or gangrene on a finger or toe, it is amputated. If a baby dies in utero, the body typically initiates a miscarriage.


Your immune system doesn’t care for dead substances, and just the presence of dead tissue can cause your system to launch an attack, which is another reason to avoid root canals—they leave behind a dead tooth.


Infection, plus the autoimmune rejection reaction, causes more bacteria to collect around the dead tissue. In the case of a root canal, bacteria are given the opportunity to flush into your blood stream every time you bite down.


Why Dentists Cling to the Belief Root Canals are Safe

The ADA rejects Dr. Price’s evidence, claiming root canals are safe, yet they offer no published data or actual research to substantiate their claim. American Heart Association recommends a dose of antibiotics before many routine dental procedures to prevent infective endocarditis (IE) if you have certain heart conditions that predispose you to this type of infection.


So, on the one hand, the ADA acknowledges oral bacteria can make their way from your mouth to your heart and cause a life-threatening infection.


But at the same time, the industry vehemently denies any possibility that these same bacteria—toxic strains KNOWN to be pathogenic to humans—can hide out in your dead root-canaled tooth to be released into your blood stream every time you chew, where they can damage your health in a multitude of ways.


Is this really that large of a leap? Could there be another reason so many dentists, as well as the ADA and the AAE, refuse to admit root canals are dangerous? Well, yes, as a matter of fact, there is. Root canals are the most profitable procedure in dentistry.


What You Need to Know to AVOID a Root Canal

I strongly recommend never getting a root canal. Risking your health to preserve a tooth simply doesn’t make sense. Unfortunately, there are many people who’ve already have one. If you have, you should seriously consider having the tooth removed, even if it looks and feels fine. Remember, as soon as your immune system is compromised, your risk of of developing a serious medical problem increases—and assaults on your immune system are far too frequent in today’s world.


If you have a tooth removed, there are a few options available to you.

1)Partial denture: This is a removable denture, often just called a “partial.” It’s the simplest and least expensive option.
2)Bridge: This is a more permanent fixture resembling a real tooth but is a bit more involved and expensive to build.
3)Implant: This is a permanent artificial tooth, typically titanium, implanted in your gums and jaw. There are some problems with these due to reactions to the metals used. Zirconium is a newer implant material that shows promise for fewer complications.

But just pulling the tooth and inserting some sort of artificial replacement isn’t enough.


Dentists are taught to remove the tooth but leave your periodontal ligament. But as you now know, this ligament can serve as a breeding ground for deadly bacteria. Most experts who’ve studied this recommend removing the ligament, along with one millimeter of the bony socket, in order to drastically reduce your risk of developing an infection from the bacterially infected tissues left behind.


I strongly recommend consulting a biological dentist because they are uniquely trained to do these extractions properly and safely, as well as being adept at removing mercury fillings, if necessary. Their approach to dental care is far more holistic and considers the impact on your entire body—not JUST your mouth.


If you need to find a biological dentist in your area, I recommend visiting, a resource sponsored by Consumers for Dental Choice. This organization, championed by Charlie Brown, is a highly reputable organization that has fought to protect and educate consumers so that they can make better-informed decisions about their dental care. The organization also heads up the Campaign for Mercury-Free Dentistry.

Sources and References:

Glass of red wine a day can keep diabetes under control

Red wine lowers bad cholesterol and keeps diabetes under control, Israeli scientists have found

Red wine is poured into a glass

Red wine appears to help lower cholesterol and help fight diabetes
A glass of red wine a day can keep diabetes under control, say scientists.

A study of patients who did not normally drink found those having the regular tipple with their evening meal had healthier hearts and cholesterol levels than those who drank mineral water or white wine instead. And they slept better than those drinking water.

Researchers followed 224 participants with type 2 diabetes – the form linked to obesity – for two years and put their findings down to the healthy antioxidants in dark grapes called phenols – the most well-known of which is resveratrol.

 “Red wine was found to be superior in improving overall metabolic profiles.”
Prof Iris Shai, Ben-Gurion University

Prof Iris Shai, of the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel, said: “The differences found between red and white wine were opposed to our original hypothesis that the beneficial effects of wine are mediated predominantly by the alcohol.”

However both red and white wine improve sugar control among those carrying genes that helped them to metabolise alcohol slowly.

It is though that diabetes affects nearly four million people in Britainalthough around 850,000 are currently undiagnosed.

Those with diabetes are at high risk of developing the disease, which can lead to complications such as heart disease, stroke and amputations

Diabetics could help keep their condition under control with a glass of wine  

The first long-term alcohol study of its kind – published in Annals of Internal Medicine – aimed to assess the effects and safety of initiating moderate alcohol consumption in diabetics and sought to determine whether the type of wine matters.

People with diabetes are more susceptible to developing cardiovascular diseases than the general population and have lower levels of “good” cholesterol.

Despite the enormous contribution of observational studies, clinical recommendations for moderate alcohol consumption remain controversial – particularly for people with diabetes due to lack of long-term studies.

Prof Shai added: “Red wine was found to be superior in improving overall metabolic profiles.

“Initiating moderate wine intake, especially red wine, among well-controlled diabetics, as part of a healthy diet, is apparently safe, and modestly decreases cardio-metabolic risk.

“The differential genetic effects that were found may assist in identifying diabetic patients in whom moderate wine consumption may induce greater clinical benefit.”

Woman drinking wine at a dinner party

A single glass of wine with dinner could make all the difference  

The researchers found only the slow alcohol-metabolisers who drank wine achieved an improvement in blood sugar control while fast alcohol-metabolisers did not.

One in five participants was found to be a fast alcohol-metaboliser – identified through genetic tests.

In the study neither red or white wine had any effect on blood pressure, liver function, adiposity or adverse events or symptoms.

But sleep quality was significantly improved in both wine groups – compared with the mineral water group.

The participants in the CArdiovaSCulAr Diabetes and Ethanol (CASCADE) trial all generally abstained from alcohol and gradually initiated moderate wine consumption.

Prof Shai said: “The genetic interactions suggest that ethanol plays an important role in glucose metabolism, while red wine’s effects additionally involve non-alcoholic constituents.

“Yet, any clinical implication of the CASCADE findings should be taken with caution with careful medical follow-up.”

The patients were randomised into three equal groups according to whether they consumed a five-ounce serving (150ml) of mineral water, white wine or red wine with dinner every night for two years.

Wine and mineral water were provided free of charge for the purposes of the study.

Compliance with alcohol intake was tightly monitored with patients returning their empty wine bottles and receiving their new supplies.

All groups followed a non-calorie-restricted Mediterranean diet with adherence monitored using several validated assessment tools.

During the study subjects underwent an array of comprehensive medical tests including continuous monitoring of changes in blood pressure, heart rate and blood glucose levels and follow-up for hardening of the arteries and fat by ultrasound and MRI scans.

Scientists Found That The Soul Doesn’t Die – It Goes Back To The Universe

There IS life after DEATH: Scientists reveal shock findings from groundbreaking study.

The mystery of death is not to be told. It is something to be experienced. We all know one thing for sure: we are all going to die one day. And when we do die, we may not get the opportunity to come back and explain our experience.

Many religions believe in life after death. It is said the soul goes out of the body to live a new life in the spiritual realm. A wicked person is sent to hell to be tormented by a blazing fire, while a righteous person is sent to heaven to live an eternal and joyful life.

However, scientists believe that this religious interpretation of death is just a mythology. Some researchers have therefore devoted themselves to unraveling this mystery. The starting point: establish that there is some sort of life after death.

At the University of Southampton in the United Kingdom, researchers have confirmed in a new study that there is indeed life after death. The study has been published in the online journal Resuscitation.

The study is said to be the largest ever medical study into near-death and out-of-body experiences. The study revealed that some awareness may continue even after the brain has shut down completely. A human being is pronounced clinically dead if the heart stops beating and the brain shuts down. The condition can also be called cardiac arrest.

According to the researchers, they spent four years examining more than 2,000 people who suffered cardiac arrests at 15 hospitals in the United Kingdom, the United States and Austria. They found that nearly 40 percent of people who survived their resuscitation, described some kind of awareness during the time when they were clinically dead.

Of the 2,060 cardiac arrest patients studied, 330 survived and of 140 surveyed, 39 percent said they had experienced some kind of awareness while being resuscitated. Although many of them could not recall specific details, some themes emerged. One in five said they had felt an unusual sense of peacefulness, while nearly one third said time had slowed down or speeded up.


Are Oncologists Jumping the Gun with the 21-Gene Assay?

The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay, Oncotype DX™ (ODx), determines a score that estimates the likelihood of distant recurrence of disease in women with early-stage estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer; this score is used to assess the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. RS testing is not recommended for women with intermediate- or high-risk, node-positive breast cancer because significant evidence exists that patients in that population benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. That said, a recent study out of the University of Colorado Cancer Center finds that oncologists are indeed using the RS assay in patients with high-risk disease and, in some cases, foregoing adjuvant chemotherapy as a result.

The study, “The 21-Gene Recurrence Score (RS) Assay for Node-Positive Early Breast Cancer and Impact of RxPONDER Trial on Chemotherapy Decision-Making,” led by Jagar Jasem, MD, MPH, and Peter Kabos, MD, was published in the April issue of JNCCN – Journal of the National Comprehensive Center Network.

Dr. Jagar Jasem

“To our knowledge, this is the largest study that deals with the current trends of the RS assay use in the node-positive breast cancer population in the United States,” said Dr. Jasem.

For this study, Jasem et al used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to evaluate more than 80,000 node-positive early breast cancer cases diagnosed between 2010 and 2012.

Ongoing study and current recommendations

The study indicates that, prior to trial results being published, oncologists are already adopting the inclusion criteria of the ongoing RxPONDER (Rx for Positive Node, Endocrine Responsive Breast Cancer) trial, which looks at low to intermediate RS scores and compares patients treated with hormone therapy alone to those treated with hormone therapy in combination with chemotherapy.

Dr. Peter Kabos

“The adoption of new modalities while prospective studies are ongoing is not new for the oncology field, with mixed results. For many years, use of high-dose chemotherapy intensification followed by autologous bone marrow or stem cell rescue was used and adopted as a standard of care before the completion of prospective randomized trials that were ultimately negative,” said Dr. Kabos.

The University of Colorado researchers found that RS assay is an independent predictor of less chemotherapy recommendation in node-positive early breast cancer. This suggests that oncologists are using the RxPONDER cut-off when making recommendations for patients, despite a lack of evidence. It also suggests that doctors are treating patients according to tumor biology, rather than tumor size or stage.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for Breast Cancer—the recognized standard of cancer care in the United States—recommend adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer.

Who, where, and why?

In breaking down the data, researchers noticed trends showing that race, treatment setting, and insurance coverage influenced whether or not patients received ODx testing, and whether they were treated with chemotherapy.

Black women with breast cancer have higher mortality rates and higher-risk cancers, including triple-negative breast cancer, compared with other patient populations. Despite that, Dr. Jasem’s study revealed that black women were significantly less likely to receive RS testing compared with women of other races. [Gross, et al, reported similar results in the March issue of JNCCN:]

“Black women may be less likely to get tested because oncologists tend to treat them with chemotherapy regardless of the test result,” the authors noted. “Our study, similar to others, documented a higher-risk disease in this patient population, which together with patient preference may play a role in final decision making. However, there are no data currently available that suggest differential use of the test or chemotherapy based on racial factors alone.”

When observing site of care, the researchers found that, compared with patients treated at community centers, patients at academic or comprehensive cancer centers were more likely to receive RS assay testing, but no discrepancies were noted regarding chemotherapy recommendations among all patients tested.

As a key indicator of socioeconomic status, insurance coverage played a major role in RS assay testing recommendations. The study showed that insured patients were more likely to have the RS test compared to uninsured patients, and the privately insured more than the governmentally insured. Furthermore, in the absence of testing, insured patients were significantly more likely to be recommended chemotherapy than uninsured.

“The results of well-designed clinical trials often inform clinical practice. As pointed out by Jasem and colleagues, clinicians not infrequently follow their instincts, rather than wait for the data from a trial. This practice may have unintended consequences including recommending adjuvant chemotherapy, or not, inappropriately—denying benefit to some and exposing unnecessary toxicity to others,” said William J. Gradishar, MD, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University; Chair of the NCCN Guidelines® panel for Breast Cancer,

In Oncology Nursing, One Small Change Can Potentially Prevent Deadly Medical Error in Thousands of Patients


 Vinca alkaloids such as vincristine, are important chemotherapeutic agents that are highly effective at blocking the growth of cancer. Many patients who receive vincristine have a treatment regimen that includes other chemotherapy drugs that are administered intrathecally, or injected into the spinal fluid with a syringe. If vincristine is mistakenly administered into the spinal fluid, it is uniformly fatal, causing ascending paralysis, neurological defects, and eventually death. This mistake, however, is almost completely avoidable with one small administration change—instead of “pushing” intravenous (IV) vinca alkaloids via syringe, experts now call for these agents to be diluted into mini-IV drip bags.

This week, during the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) 42nd Annual Congress, MiKaela Olsen, MS, APRN-CNS, AOCNS, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, will present results of a center-wide effort to administer vincristine via mini-IV drip bags in a poster titled, Putting an Old Oncology Nursing Practice to Bed: A Hospital-Wide Initiative Using Evidence-Based Practice to Standardize the Administration of Vinca Alkaloids Using a Minibag, Side-Arm Technique.

This presentation comes on the heels of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®)’s 2016 Just Bag It! Campaign for the safe administration of vincristine.

According to Ms. Olsen and her colleagues, there are a number of barriers to standardizing vincristine administration in mini-IV drip bags. For instance, they note that nurses may believe the risk of extravasation to be higher than when pushing the agent. However, when analyzing 12 months of data at Johns Hopkins Hospital, Olsen, et al, found zero cases of extravasation among the more than 1,300 mini-bag administrations of vincristine after the practice change.

“This was a big change in practice for bedside nurses at Johns Hopkins Hospital who had, to this point, always administered vesicants—other than continuous infusion vesicants—as an intravenous push through the side port of a free-flowing line. Using an evidence-based practice approach to tackle this clinical practice issue was key to our success,” said Ms. Olsen. “Just because it was always done a certain way does not mean it is the safest way.”

According to Ms. Olsen, the program facilitators provided background education to provider, pharmacy, and nursing staff that included a review of cases of patient harm with recommended guidelines for prevention and used the same technique that nurses were used to; however, instead of pushing the medication through a syringe, the nurse holds the mini-bag as it runs through the side port of a free flowing line.

“Nurses performed the procedure in a skills lab environment to ensure understanding of proper technique for safe mini-bag administration to prevent extravasation. This approach was key to our success,” said Ms. Olsen.

Other barriers noted by the researchers include a lack of understanding of the risk of death associated with central nervous system administration of vincristine, as well as a lack of understanding of how to properly administer vinca alkaloids via drip bag.

To thwart these concerns at the time of the administration switch over, a short video was produced for the nursing staff, demonstrating the proper side-arm drip administration of vincristine, and all RN staff attended a hands-on skill lab. RN staff are instructed to remain with the patient during the entire five-minute administration, checking blood returns every two minutes and at the completion of the infusion. Additionally, labeling of vincristine must be clear and stated as such: “For intravenous use only – fatal if given other routes.”

“At Johns Hopkins Hospital, our pediatric colleagues made this successful practice change first.  After thoughtful design of the step-by-step procedure, policy revisions, and collaboration between nursing and pharmacy, the change was implemented in adult oncology,” said Ms. Olsen. “Our staff feel confident that this new procedure is safe and that it is absolutely the right thing to do to prevent patient harm. Once we made the change, we did not look back.  Eliminating the risk of harm was our number one priority.”

Ms. Olsen will present her findings from 5:30 – 6:30 PM on Friday, May 5, 2017.

“The oncology nursing community plays an imperative role in the day-to-day, hands-on care and protection of patients with cancer. NCCN applauds Johns Hopkins, as well as the staff and faculty of our other Member Institutions, for their dedication to patient safety,” said Robert W. Carlson, MD, Chief Executive Officer, NCCN. “We are pleased that Ms. Olsen has the opportunity to share her findings with the esteemed ONS audience and hope her work is the impetus for others to change their practices.”

In 2005, Dr. Carlson, a medical oncologist, witnessed sequelae of such a tragedy with a 21 year-old patient with Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma named Christopher Wibeto. Wibeto was transferred to Dr. Carlson’s care after receiving incorrectly administered vincristine at another hospital. Dr. Carlson watched the young man go from having a likely curable condition to deteriorating and dying within four days. Motivated by this tragic experience, Dr. Carlson spearheaded a national effort to address this deadly error when he arrived at NCCN, enlisting the help of its Best Practices Committee, which is dedicated to improving cancer treatment protocols.

To ensure that vincristine is always administered properly, NCCN has issued guidelines advising health care providers to always dilute and administer vincristine in a mini-IV drip bag and never use a syringe to administer the medication. This precaution renders it impossible to accidentally administer the medication into the spinal fluid and greatly decreases the chances of improper dosage.

All 27 NCCN Member Institutions, including The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, have adopted policies in line with these guidelines, which are also recommended by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices, the Joint Commission, the World Health Organization, and the ONS.

In March 2017, NCCN issued a challenge to raise the number of reported adopters of these policies to 100 centers or practices. To report adoption of these practices, visit

In 2008, the NCCN Best Practices Committee led the charge for NCCN to begin publishing Chemotherapy Order Templates (NCCN Templates®), which detail the most common regimens for many cancers and highlight safety parameters. These resources enable practitioners to standardize patient care, reduce medication errors, and anticipate and manage adverse events. There are more than 1,500 NCCN Templates® for 86 cancer types, and they are used by more than 10,000 subscribers.


Dinosaurs became extinct because they could not hatch quickly enough

A dinosaur hatches in Jurassic Park 
Richard Attenborough watches as a dinosaur hatches in Jurassic Park 

Paleontologists have discovered that dinosaur young took so long to hatch and grow into adulthood that populations failed to recover quickly enough after the devastating impact 65 million years ago.

Gregory Erickson is a professor of biological science at Florida State University
Gregory Erickson is a professor of biological science at Florida State University 

In contrast, birds and small mammals only took a few weeks for their offspring to emerge giving them a distinct advantage.

The discovery was made by scientists at Florida State University and the University of Calgary, who realised it was possible to calculate how long it took for dinosaurs to hatch based on marks on the teeth of embryos and babies.

Just like tree rings growing a new layer each year, teeth grow a new layer each day, which can be seen in microscopic lines in the dentine.

By simply counting the lines, scientists found that it took dinosaurs between three and six months to hatch.

A fossilized embryo of the dinosaur Hypacrosaurus
Researchers examined a fossilized embryo of the dinosaur Hypacrosaurus 

The lengthy incubation period – in comparison to small mammals – made the hatchlings, and their parents, vulnerable to predators and left them struggling to re-establish their species.

“Some of the greatest riddles about dinosaurs pertain to their embryology, virtually nothing is known,” Gregory Erickson, professor of biological science at Florida said.

“We suspect our findings have implications for understanding why dinosaurs went extinct at the end of the Cretaceous period, whereas amphibians, birds, mammals and other reptiles made it through and prospered.”

Because birds are living dinosaurs, scientists have long assumed that the duration of dinosaur incubation was similar to birds, whose eggs hatch within 11 to 85 days.

A hatchling Protoceratops andrewsi fossil from the Gobi Desert Ukhaa Tolgod, Mongolia
A hatchling Protoceratops andrewsi fossil from the Gobi Desert Ukhaa Tolgod, Mongolia 

However, similar sized reptilian eggs typically take twice as long, ranging from several weeks to many months. To find out where dinosaurs fitted in, the team studied the fossils of dinosaur embryos.

Time within the egg is a crucial part of developmentt, but this earliest growth stage is poorly known because dinosaur embryos are rare,” said Darla Zelenitsky, assistant professor of geoscience at the University of Calgary.

“Embryos can potentially tell us how dinosaurs developed and grew very early on in life and if they are more similar to birds or reptiles in these respects.”

The two types of dinosaur embryos researchers examined were those from  a protoceratops, a sheep-sized dinosaur found in the Gobi desert whose eggs were quite small, and hypacrosaurus, an enormous duck-billed dinosaur found in Alberta, Canada with eggs weighing nine pounds.

The team ran the embryonic jaws through a CT scanner to visualise the forming dentition. Then, they extracted several of the teeth to examine them under sophisticated microscopes.

This image shows the daily growth lines in the dentine of an embryonic tooth of Hypacrosaurus. 
This image shows the daily growth lines in the dentine of an embryonic tooth of Hypacrosaurus  

Growth lines on the teeth showed researchers precisely how long the dinosaurs had been growing in the eggs. Prof Erickson said the teeth are “kind of like tree rings, but they’re put down daily. So we could literally count them to see how long each dinosaur had been developing”.

Their results showed nearly three months for the tiny protoceratops embryos and six months for those from the giant hypacrosaurus.

%d bloggers like this: