2 Days and Counting and We Need Your Help!

We are excited to announce that the Revised and Updated pH Miracle book will be released on July 2, 2010.

You can preorder now and as our gift to you, you are invited to attend a FREE webinar with Dr. Robert O. Young, the foremost nutritional microbiologist in the world today!

All you need to do is purchase the newly Revised and Updated pH Miracle book at Amazon.com, selling for $11.55—a substantial savings over bookstore prices—then visit www.phmiracleliving.com/t-booklaunch2010.aspx to submit your information. That's it. Then we'll send you the link to the upcoming video webinar.

The new book is already one of the Top 20 Best Sellers at Amazon.com and moving up quickly. . .and you can help Dr. Young and Shelley drive this book straight to the top of the Best Seller list.

This is the fastest way to help the whole world begin to investigate and understand the health benefits of pH alkaline health and nutrition, as well as the life-work of Dr. Robert O. Young and Shelley Redford Young.

So, never count calories, fat grams, or food portions again! Say good-bye to low energy, poor digestion, extra pounds, aches and pains, and disease. Say hello to renewed vigor, mental clarity, better overall health, and a lean, trim body. The key? Your health depends on the pH balance of its blood; striking the right 80/20 balance between alkaline and acidic foods creates the optimum environment. Now this innovative, proven diet program works more effectively than ever with your body chemistry to help revitalize and maintain your health. This new edition includes the latest information on living the pH lifestyle:

* New ways to cleanse and detox the system to improve your body's digestion and metabolism;
* The latest advice on ridding your body of harmful bacteria, yeast, and molds;
* New details on alkaline foods—tomatoes, avocados, and green vegetables-and how to mix them with mildly acidic foods like fish, grains, and certain fruits to create tempting and delicious meals;
* Adding the right types of water and salt to your diet—and the major difference they can make in your health;
* More than 35 delicious new recipes.

pH Miracle Living Center
16390 Dia Del Sol
Valley Center, California 92082 US

© Copyright 2010 - Dr. Robert O. Young
All rights are reserved. Content may be reproduced, downloaded, disseminated, or transferred, for single use, or by nonprofit organizations for educational purposes, if correct attribution is made to
Dr. Robert O. Young. and Shelley Redford Young
If you can't veiw this email, copy and paste this address in your browser's address bar: http://www.phmiracleliving.com/htmlmail/2010/pHe6_25Launch.html
Robert O. Young, Ph.D., D.Sc.
pH Miracle Living Center
16390 Dia Del Sol
Valley Center, California 92082 US

"Medical Truth"

How many more medical lies have to be perpetuated before we stand up for the truth? How many more people need to be poisoned with antibiotics, vaccinations and other cancer causing pharmaceuticals until we stand up and say "Enough!"? How many more children’s lives need to be destroyed before we take a stand? Please help save a life by passing this information on…

• Harvard University and National Cancer Research Journals now confirm that ONE Aspirin or Tylenol each day will cause up to an 80% increased risk of Cancer and Heart Disease. A Prospective Study of Aspirin Use and the Risk of Pancreatic Cancer in Women, Eva S. Schernhammer, Jae-Hee Kang, Andrew T. Chan, Dominique S. Michaud, Halcyon G. Skinner, Edward Giovannucci, Graham A. Colditz, Charles S. Fuchs, Affiliations of authors: Channing Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (ESS, JHK, ATC, HGS, EG, GAC CSF); Ludwig Boltzmann-Institute for Applied Cancer Research, KFJ-Spital, Vienna, Austria (ESS); Gastrointestinal Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (ATC); Nutritional Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (DSM); Departments of Nutrition (EG) and Epidemiology (HGS, GAC), Harvard School of Public Health, Boston; Harvard Center for Cancer Prevention, Boston (GAC); Epidemiology Program (GAC) and Department of Adult Oncology (CSF), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston. Correspondence to: Eva S. Schernhammer, MD, DrPH, Channing Laboratory, 181 Longwood Ave., Boston, MA 02115 (e-mail: eva.schernhammer@channing.harvard.edu


• Take ONE 50 mg. pill of Vioxx for 5 days? A study undertaken two years ago showed that this increases the chances of getting coronary artery disease by 70%. Lancet Oct 5, 2002


• A University of Washington study found that if you filled 25 or more prescriptions for antibiotics over 17 years, you double your risk of cancer (TIME, Dec. 6, 2004) This equates into taking less than ONE antibiotic each year, an activity in which almost every American participates.


• Infants exposed to ONE single round of antibiotics during their first years of life are twice as likely to develop asthma as those who don’t. The more courses of antibiotics, the worse the immunity and the greater the risk of asthma. (Newsday, March 6, 2006)


• Take ONE Benadryl for your allergies, and here are your possible side-effects: Difficulty breathing, closing of your throat, swelling of your lips, tongue, or face, hives, sleepiness, fatigue, dizziness, headache, dry mouth, difficulty urinating, enlarged prostate and a dramatic reduction in energy.


• Take ONE aspirin per day? Daily aspirin intake shows a significantly increased risk of pancreatic cancer among women. This cancer is fatal 90% of the time. Source: American Association for Cancer Research, October 27, 2003


• Take just ONE Crestor pill/day to lower your cholesterol? This drug has been shown to cause 75 times the level of kidney damage than other statin drugs. Public Citizen Oct 29, 2004


• ONE vaccination can leave your child with brain damage or worse a form of Autism: Children are 27 times more likely to develop autism when exposed to vaccines containing mercury: Lori McIlwain, National Autism Association, (919) 272-8192/ Studies suggest that there is a link between neuro-developmental disorders, such as autism, and mercury exposure from thimerosal-containing childhood vaccines. Centers for Disease Control, Jan. 16, 2004.


• Taking just ONE pain killer can cause death. There are over 16,500 deaths from NSAIDs (Pain Killers) each year in the hospitals alone. JAMA July 26, 2000 Vol. 284. Just as many die from AIDS each year!


• Thinking of taking a cough suppressant or giving to your child just ONE time: cough suppressant is linked to Birth Defects: Dextromethorphan, the major ingredient in most OTC cough medicines, has been shown to cause birth defects. Source: Pediatric Research January 1998:43:1-7


• Taking cold medications like Robitussin, Triaminic, PediaCare, Comtrex, etc. just ONE time can cause stroke, brain bleeding, and seizures. This year the F.D.A. completely banned these cold medications for adults and children, especially under the age of 6.


• L. A. Times states: Antibiotics aren’t the answer to treating sinus infections: “The widespread use of standard antibiotics to treat sinus infections does not help cure patients and taking just ONE round may harm them by increasing their resistance to the drugs.


Below is more truth is it applies to some of the most commonly ingested pharmaceuticals in the world


1. Acetaminophen (Tylenol) use is the number-one reason for acute liver failure in the United States. It is also responsible for 8 percent to 10 percent of the end-stage renal disease in the U.S. The New England Journal of Medicine December 20, 2001; 345:1801-1808. Hepatology Volume 40, Issue 1, Pages 6 – 9. Published Online: 30 Jun 2004, American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.


2. In 2004, the American Academy of Pediatricians reversed its guidelines, pointing out that in more than 80 percent of the children with ear infections, symptoms would subside on their own, without the need for antibiotics.


3. DO NOT take antibiotics or any of the above drugs without the facts!


4. The flu shot and childhood vaccines can be deadly. We have been told to get flu shots that contain mercury, formaldehyde, aluminum and many other dangerous chemicals! Now according to the Vaccine Journal, they said, “flu vaccines offer no protection and have never saved any lives.”


*Mercury!!! 2nd most dangerous substance on earth. Destroys the nervous system and immune system. Associated with Multiple Sclerosis, Central Nervous System Disorders, Autism and Alzheimer's Disease!


*Ethylene glycol (antifreeze) Exposure to ethylene glycol can damage the kidneys, heart, and nervous system.


*Phenol (disinfectant) Exposure to phenol can produce skin burns, liver damage, dark urine, irregular heartbeat, and even death.*Formaldehyde (known cancer causing agent)


*Neomycin and Streptomycin (antibiotics)


*Aluminum associated with Alzheimer's disease and seizures and also cancer producing in laboratory mice. Is this something you want to inject directly into your blood or your children’s?


5. The flu vaccine is manufactured to fight the flu from 2 years previous, so it is IMPOSSIBLE for this year’s flu vaccine to protect you against this year’s exact strain of circulating flu virus!


6. According to Hugh Fudenburg, MD, one of the world’s premier immunogeneticists, the chance of getting Alzheimer’s is ten times higher if an individual has had 5 consecutive flu shots(this is due to the Mercury). Dr. Fudenburg is the 13th most quoted biologist in the world today.


7. A British Medical Journal shows the medical profession to only be about 4% scientific. http://www.vet-task-force.com/CtiM.htm


“Our drugs don’t work.” Dr. Allen Roses, worldwide vice-president of Genetics at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Britain’s giant pharmaceutical company, acknowledged at a scientific meeting in London that fewer than half of the patients prescribed some of the most expensive drugs actually derived any benefit from them.

Perpetuating the Myth

I've just returned from the Theatre Communications Group Annual Conference. The theme for the conference was "Ideas into Action," and it built upon the previous year's conference where the field took a look at some of the major issues facing all of us. The idea was to take what we discussed last year and to explore "bold new solutions."

The first session I attended was entitled "Theatres Becoming Centers in the 21st Century." I attended partially because my Artistic Director, Molly Smith, was speaking, but also because I wanted to hear some ideas from other centers from around the nation as we move toward the opening of the Mead Center for American Theater. The one thing that stayed with me through the entire conference from that session was the quote Molly used to open her remarks--she referenced a quote by R. Buckminster Fuller in which he said: "You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete." It made me think that as a field, if we generally agree that our business models have significant issues, then why do we spend so much energy devising band-aids for them instead of building new models that make the existing ones obsolete?

Later that evening, I had the pleasure of listening to a wonderful speech given by Jonah Lehrer, the author of the book "How We Decide: the New Science of Decision Making." He kept me captivated throughout his entire manifesto, but a single story stood out among the rest (well, at least to me). The story goes that Procter & Gamble decided they wanted to invent a new soap to make mopping more efficient. After several months of failed attempts to create this novel soap in house, they hired a creativity firm to work with them. The firm spent nine months studying homemakers as they mopped their floors, and in the end, they concluded that a new soap wouldn't revolutionize mopping because mopping as a means of cleaning was essentially flawed in itself. After observing one woman cleaning up coffee grounds on the floor with a damp paper towel, an idea emerged--what about getting rid of the mop entirely, and fastening a damp paper towel to the end of a stick? And the Swiffer was born.

After more than 50 years of success, where should the resident theater movement look to throw away a mop, and replace it with a Swiffer? In looking back on my scribbled notes, it looks like I came up with four different ideas:

1. Arts Education/Community Engagement. The idea of having an education department at a resident theater is relatively new. Maybe 15 years or so ago, funders started to route resources to student and community programs. Theater companies took note, and started developing more education programming, however the programming was almost always intended to compliment the more "formal" arts education that students were getting in the schools. Fast forward to present day where the focus of our schools have become glued to developing the highest standardized test scores. In this environment, arts education has been highly marginalized, if not all together eliminated. Who is teaching creativity, at a time where we frequently hear from top corporations that creativity is a key component to success in today's ever changing world? Do we need to look at our education departments to figure out how to serve this essential need by ourselves instead of being a complimentary service to our school systems.

2. Subscriptions. Where is our generation's Danny Newman? When he invented the subscription, it revolutionized how performing arts organizations did business, and it mirrored how a certain generation wanted to "consume" artistic product. Baby Boomers joined Kiwanis clubs, went to church, participated in bowling leagues, and purchased tickets to a large number of shows well in advance at discounted prices. But times have changed--Generation X doesn't act like its predecessor, but we are still using the same sales techniques on them that have worked for decades with Mom and Dad. How do we continue to serve Baby Boomers as they still have the largest disposable income, and work to meet the needs and buying habits of Generation X and the Millenials? We can keep slapping band-aids on the subscription model, by doing things like introducing smaller and smaller "pick your own" packages, or acknowledge that we may need a new mop to clean up this particular problem.

3. Development vs. Marketing. If you read my previous post entitled "The Problem of Silos," you know this is an issue that I have been stuck on for awhile. In my career, I have worked at some amazing organizations both incredibly large and very small, and I can honestly say I have never seen an operation that integrates the needs and priorities of marketing and development well. Almost always, one wins out over the other, the cause of which usually can be tracked back to funding and/or leadership. To solve this, a few organizations have developed external affairs divisions that house both marketing and development activities, however those departments are just as segregated under a Director of External Affairs as they would be under an Executive Director. I proposed a new system in my prior post, but this type of change is daunting considering it would mean dismantling and rebuilding the entire revenue generating departments of an organization.

4. Funding vs. Accessibility. There are a multitude of reports out that show that funding has dropped during the global economic crisis, which has put more and more pressure on earned revenue sources to make up the difference. On the 2amt blog, there has been a heated debate on dynamic pricing, particularly as it is used by non-profit theaters. For those unaware of dynamic pricing, the basic premise is that ticket prices for popular productions are increased as demand increases. Is it a coincidence that dynamic pricing has really gained ground and become almost standard practice during the two years following the start of the global economic crisis? If there is less funding, then we need to make more money in ticket sales. Seems logical to me. The problem is that many times, we are doing excellent work in education and outreach programs that reach populations that will never be able to afford a ticket at our institutions. This used to be addressed by funders who supported lower priced tickets, but as that money has dried up, to keep afloat, institutions have cut discounting programs. So where does that leave us? For me, I have become more and more interested in finding new revenue streams--and hopefully new streams that aren't dependant upon the fickleness of reviews either.

As I wrap up this post, I am more cognizant than ever that as a professor of arts management, the techniques that I am teaching my graduate students are antiquated. I call them "best practices" when a more appropriate title might be "yesterday's best practices." If I continue to teach how I was taught, aren't I just perpetuating the myth that our arts organizations are healthy and ready to take on the challenges of the 21st century? Maybe I should begin my classes by challenging them to throw out the mop.

Outsourcing: Make sure to consider the CONs as well as the PROs

A couple of weeks ago, NPR ran a story entitled "Everyone Else Outsources, So Why Can't the Arts?" Since that time, the story has stuck with me. One positive result of the global economic crisis is that it has forced mature organizations to rigorously examine business practices, many of which haven't changed since the publication of Danny Newman's Subscribe Now! I am consistently amazed at the number of organizations that choose to remain stagnant because change is scarier than doing nothing and watching failure creep up to the doorstep. I applaud organizations that are taking steps to inform the field, as successes and failures will provide beneficial data we can use to plan our next steps. And while I have been accused on many occasions of being too aggressive with implementing change, in this case, I am reminded of a saying that a wise professor in graduate school would always say to me--"just because it is new, doesn't mean it is better."

Let me begin by saying that I support the outsourcing of activities that involve highly specialized tasks. Even in large organizations, most of us are generalists with maybe an area or two of specialized training. In unusual circumstances, many times we need to draw upon an expert with a lot of experience in a certain area. As we approach the opening of the Mead Center for American Theater, I am working with several outside companies that we are outsourcing very specific tasks to including Boneau/Bryan-Brown, SpotCo, Target Resource Group, SD&A, Mires+Ball, Shugoll Research and Allied Live.

Although we outsource work to some of the best companies in the business, we wouldn't be successful unless we supervised their work closely. The best outcomes are usually a result of forming very tight partnerships between on site institutional managers and specialists at the outsourcing firms. One without the other usually ends with mediocre work. In fact, I can't remember a single instance in my career where I hired an outside firm and it removed as much work from my desk as I had hoped for.

In addition, as Russell Willis Taylor asks in the article, one must consider the opportunity cost of outsourcing, particularly in areas of customer service and development. For those of us lucky enough to have been TicketMaster clients in our careers, we know how hard it is to get outsourced sales agents on message and equipped to provide excellent service to our customers (I even tried delivering baked goods weekly to call centers). How can an outsourced entity be as passionate as you are about your institution, and isn't that passion crucial in developing fundraising activities? And we don't like to admit it, but in some cases, we are in competition with one another. In purchasing ads, setting up promotions, pitching stories to the press, calling in favors, taking advantage of remnant space--when you are working with 10-20 arts organizations in the same town, who gets priority when undoubtedly there will be times when the interests of these organizations conflict with each other?

I am eager to see how this experiment in Columbus pans out. To me, this model creates many more questions than it provides solutions, however I think they should be commended for taking an innovative step that I am sure will inform the field in the future.

Just a sidenote--I wonder what BP thinks of outsourcing its drilling rigs at the moment?