From this radio show document transcript...
October/November Script 2016
http://media.wix.com/ugd/089a87_87ecbb13b43841209e7bacc8b268062b.doc?dn=Show%20Of%20the%20Month%20Oct-November%202016.doc
This is the original post of it: http://www.integrativeholistichealth.org/information/dangers-of-microcrystalline-cellulose-filler-in-pharmaceuticals/
Tony Pantalleresco's comment to the above article...
independz says:
October 2, 2016 at 7:02 pm
hi
good article but you have to remember that this is not just the microcrystaline all the celluose today being used in nutreceuticals as well as pharmaceuticals are all nano~ the methods are going to a “nanodelivery” and this is also being utilized in vaccines and in alot of health supplements which when consumed aggragate and agglomerate and morph and get activated with almost any form of frequency and it begins it’s assmblying and as a result it densifies even more
augmentinforce.com has several links on the topic and yes you can get this out but with great difficulty
independz
I copied the Microcrystalline Cellulose Part direct from the document.
*********************************************************************
MICROCRYSTALLINE CELLULOSE, FILLER IN PHARMACEUTICALS and there DANGERS
Four
rats were fed 14C-labelled
microcrystalline cellulose at 10
or
20% of their diet. No evidence of degradation or digestion was
noted.
Faecal
recoveries of radioactivity ranged from 96-104%
and were complete for all labelled material. No radioactivity
appeared in the urine (Baker, 1966).
In
the studies summarized in Table 1, there was no evidence of
toxicity
of microcrystalline cellulose preparations administered
either
orally or dermally to rats at doses of 5000 or 2000 mg/kg bw,
respectively.
The observations seen at necropsy in animals treated
intraperitoneally
with Cellan 300 at 3160 mg/kg bw are consistent with an irritant
reaction caused by the presence of foreign material.
An inhalation
toxicity study showed only transient effects at a concentration of
5.35 mg/litre.
An
acute inhalation toxicity study using a preparation of Avicel
AC-815
(composed
of 85% microcrystalline cellulose and 15% calcium
alginate)
with mass median aerodynamic diameter of 8.48-8.61 µm (range
of
measures) was dispersed and delivered at a mean concentration of
5.35
mg/litre in a nose-only inhalation exposure chamber to 5 male and
5
female Crl:CDBR VAF Plus rats for a period of 4 hours. The rats were
observed
over the 14 days after removal from the chamber. The
only
signs
of toxicity were on removal from the chamber and consisted of
chromodacryorrhea,
chromorhinorrhea and, in one male rat, decreased locomotion; these
signs had resolved by the next day. After 14 days no gross lesions
were observed at necropsy (Signorin, 1996).
Microcrystalline Cellulose can cause moderate to severe bowel movement when ingusted in large amount. 2. Microcrystalline Cellulose can cause loss of energy and weight when ingusted in large amount as it can not be absorbed and reduces the absorption of other dietary nutrients. 3. Microcrystalline Cellulose can cause allergic reaction in some individuals, the typical reaction is diarrhoea or gas problems.
DANGERS
OF MICROCRYSTALLINE CELLULOSE
I
have some NEW concerns for us to think about as far as using
MICROCRYSTALLINE CELLULOSE as a filler in Nature Throid, Westhroid
and ArmourThyroid tablets.
I
am a Registered Nurse, with an extensive background in physiology. It
occurred to me that just
as the cells cannot keep out artificial sweeteners,
but absorb them as if they were ordinary glucose, and that this
wreaks havoc in our cells ability to function, leading to many forms
of physical discomfort and illness, that the same thing would apply
if we use MICROCRYSTALLINE CELLULOSE as a filler in our Thyroid
products. I remembered reading on this forum about why Armour stopped
working well for many people, even when they adjusted their dosage
correctly. The
reason stated was that they had started using artificial fillers.
Doing
some research I came upon this article, and want to share it here.
It says exactly that: Our
cells cannot stop the micro-nano particles from entering them, and
once there they are not able to be useful, but float in and out of
the cell membranes, and basically clog up tiny places in our bodies,
bioaccumulating as we take more, and causing background inflammation
to rise.
A couple of excerpts from the article follow:
A couple of excerpts from the article follow:
Nanotechnology:
benefits vs toxic risks,
“”Once
in the body, some
particles have changed the shape or conformation of proteins,
creating a protein similar to that produced in Alzheimer’s disease.
Changing
protein conformation can potentially create new allergenic proteins
in organs to which the body could mount an immune response.
--While easy entry into
the cells of the intestine and target organs can be beneficial, the
other side of the coin is that because these particles are so
‘slippery,’ how can they ever be excreted by the body? Because
much of our excretory system at the cellular level is based on a cell
successfully excreting a substance (as in the kidney) to be flushed
away, how can the particle be made to remain in the waste stream if
it can so easily gain re-entry into other cells downstream?
While
some of the more dramatic examples of actual physical damage are
described above, the damage most often seen in response to
nano-materials is the generation
of reactive oxygen species, resulting in oxidative stress to the
biological system.
---In
oxidative stress, the universal antioxidant chemical in the body,
glutathione or GSH, is converted to the oxidized inactive form, GSSH.
As reserves of GSH are depleted and the GSH:GSSH ratio lowers, the
body
mounts a progressively more assertive reaction.
The first stage of oxidative stress is to produce special enzymes to
detoxify the new invading chemical; if,
however, there is no enzyme for this purpose or the human does not
have the capability to produce the enzyme, the body progresses into
the next stage, inflammation.””
***************************************************************************
Tony Pantalleresco Knowledge BaseAugust 9, 2016 ·
New website with scripts for some of Tony's shows
http://independz.wixsite.com/scripts-of-the-show
Tony's radio show archives...
http://independz.podomatic.com/
Listen to this one regarding buying supplements...
buying Stuff...the legitmacy --BIOFILMmmmMMM
https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/independz/episodes/2017-02-04T19_28_13-08_00
Biofilm buildup from the "Other Ingredients" in supplements, such as the cellulose, microcrystalline cellulose, etc...
If it ends in "lose" (as in you (u) lose, or your cells lose - CELL U LOSE), then it means polymer. As in veggie capsules from cellullose or pullulan means polyermized capsules. THIS is compromising us. Look CLOSELY at the word CELL U LOSE Hello? Loser? Get it?
Regarding the Pullulan veggie cappsule, here's what Tony said...
here is what it is
Pullulan is a polysaccharide polymer consisting of maltotriose units, also known as α-1,4- ;α-1,6-glucan'. Three glucose units in maltotriose are connected by an α-1,4 glycosidic bond, whereas consecutive maltotriose units are connected to each other by an α-1,6 glycosidic bond. Pullulan is produced from starch by the fungus Aureobasidium pullulans. Pullulan is mainly used by the cell to resist desiccation and predation. The presence of this polysaccharide also facilitates diffusion of molecules both into and out of the cell.[1]
As an edible, mostly tasteless polymer, the chief commercial use of pullulan is in the manufacture of edible films that are used in various breath freshener or oral hygiene products such as Listerine Cool Mint of Johnson and Johnson (USA) and Meltz Super Thin Mints of Avery Bio-Tech Private Ltd. (India). As a food additive, it is known by the E number E1204.
Tony
This is just one, but if you see the word, Cellulose, take note that the FDA has approved companies the right to use the word when they are using Wood Pulp as a filler. This and the various gums, including XANTHAN GUM, which has been irritating the lining of the intestines, and causing even more problems with many who are Gluten Intolerant.
ReplyDeleteCompanies that we thought were safe and we no longer check their labels, decide to change their ingredients, or have been sold to companies that change their ingredients and we don’t realize we are no longer using a product that we felt good about using. One example is the recent addition of Sodium Lauryl Sulfate, Sodium Laureth Sulfate to 7th Generation Laundry Soap. This ingredient is listed as toxic on the Environmental Working Group’s website, and has been shown to: damage cell membranes, possibly cause hair loss, is linked to skin and eye irritation, organ toxicities, developmental & reproductive toxicities, neurotoxicity, endocrine disruptions, ecotoxicological, and biochemical or cellular changes, and possible cell mutations and cancer. https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/site/about.php#