This section contains articles which describe some of the dirty, dangerous and downright deadly technologies that we have been saddled with, while there are literally thousands of inventions in terms of free-energy, transport, medicine, food production, sea water desalination and so many other areas - that could help humanity and the environment no end.
But of course the 'ruling elite' want things the way they are now in order to maintain their control - but they cannot maintain the status quo.
“Machine Consciousness” Debunked In New Mini-Documentary + The AI Threat Isn’t Skynet. It’s The End Of The Middle Class February 14 2017 | From: NaturalNews / Wired / Various
To the techno-worshippers, humans will soon become “immortal” because they will be able to “transfer” their consciousness into machines.
Or AI systems will become “self aware,” achieving the same mind consciousness that we experience as living, spirit-imbued beings with free will.
Recently released was a new mini-documentary called The Folly of Machine Consciousness. It reveals why all those who claim machines will attain consciousness are not just wrong, but deeply misguided.
As part of the argument, the documentary also reveals why memory is not physically stored in the brain. Despite their best efforts, the most brilliant doctors, scientists and neurologists of our modern world still cannot find physical “locations” in the brain for memory. The fallacy of biochemical memory is obliterated in this mini-documentary.
Consciousness is not an artifact of complex neurology. It is a self-contained, non-physical layer of existence that interfaces with the physical brain to translate conscious intentions into physical actions in a three dimensional world.
As I explain in the video: You will never find yourself in a machine.
The Folly of Machine Consciousness
The concept of 'Artificial Intelligence' is thought of by many to be something new, having emerged within the last few decades. The reality of the situation is that, as many insiders have attested, that Artificial Intelligence in the form of extraterrestrial-developed creations has been around for millions, even billions of years. This is some thing that David Wilcock has covered in multiple books and online formats. The problem with AI is that in the end it always seeks to destroy it's creators. Some even say that the concept of 'Satan' is actually rooted in an ancient rouge AI that is trying to take over the universe.
The AI Threat Isn’t Skynet. It’s The End of The Middle Class
In February 1975, a group of geneticists gathered in a tiny town on the central coast of California to decide if their work would bring about the end of the world.
These researchers were just beginning to explore the science of genetic engineering, manipulating DNA to create organisms that didn’t exist in nature, and they were unsure how these techniques would affect the health of the planet and its people.
Related: The Great A.I. Awakening
So, they descended on a coastal retreat called Asilomar, a name that became synonymous with the guidelines they laid down at this meeting - a strict ethical framework meant to ensure that biotechnology didn’t unleash the apocalypse.
Forty-two years on, another group of scientists gathered at Asilomar to consider a similar problem. But this time, the threat wasn’t biological. It was digital. In January, the world’s top artificial intelligence researchers walked down the same beachside paths as they discussed their rapidly accelerating field and the role it will play in the fate of humanity.
It was a private conference - the enormity of the subject deserves some privacy - but in recent days, organizers released several videos from the conference talks, and some participants have been willing to discuss their experience, shedding some light on the way AI researchers view the threat of their own field.
The rise of driverless cars and trucks is just a start. It’s not just blue-collar jobs that AI endangers.
Yes, they discussed the possibility of a superintelligence that could somehow escape human control, and at the end of the month, the conference organizers unveiled a set of guidelines, signed by attendees and other AI luminaries, that aim to prevent this possible dystopia. But the researchers at Asilomar were also concerned with more immediate matters: the effect of AI on the economy.
“One of the reasons I don’t like the discussions about superintelligence is that they’re a distraction from what’s real,” says Oren Etzioni, CEO of the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence, who attended the conference. “As the poet said, have fewer imaginary problems and more real ones.”
At a time when the Trump administration is promising to make America great again by restoring old-school manufacturing jobs, AI researchers aren’t taking him too seriously. They know that these jobs are never coming back, thanks in no small part to their own research, which will eliminate so many other kinds of jobs in the years to come, as well.
At Asilomar, they looked at the real US economy, the real reasons for the “hollowing out” of the middle class. The problem isn’t immigration - far from it. The problem isn’t offshoring or taxes or regulation. It’s technology.
Rage Against the Machines
In the US, the number of manufacturing jobs peaked in 1979 and has steadily decreased ever since. At the same time, manufacturing has steadily increased, with the US now producing more goods than any other country but China. Machines aren’t just taking the place of humans on the assembly line.
They’re doing a better job. And all this before the coming wave of AI upends so many other sectors of the economy. “I am less concerned with Terminator scenarios,” MIT economist Andrew McAfee said on the first day at Asilomar. “If current trends continue, people are going to rise up well before the machines do.”
McAfee pointed to newly collected data that shows a sharp decline in middle class job creation since the 1980s. Now, most new jobs are either at the very low end of the pay scale or the very high end.
He also argued that these trends are reversible, that improved education and a greater emphasis on entrepreneurship and research can help feed new engines of growth, that economies have overcome the rise of new technologies before.
But after his talk, in the hallways at Asilomar, so many of the researchers warned him that the coming revolution in AI would eliminate far more jobs far more quickly than he expected.
Indeed, the rise of driverless cars and trucks is just a start. New AI techniques are poised to reinvent everything from manufacturing to healthcare to Wall Street. In other words, it’s not just blue-collar jobs that AI endangers. “Several of the rock stars in this field came up to me and said: ‘I think you’re low-balling this one. I think you are underestimating the rate of change,'” McAfee says.
That threat has many thinkers entertaining the idea of a universal basic income, a guaranteed living wage paid by the government to anyone left out of the workforce. But McAfee believes this would only make the problem worse, because it would eliminate the incentive for entrepreneurship and other activity that could create new jobs as the old ones fade away.
Others question the psychological effects of the idea. “A universal basic income doesn’t give people dignity or protect them from boredom and vice,” Etzioni says.
Also on researchers’ minds was regulation - f AI itself. Some fear that after squeezing immigration - which would put a brake on the kind of entrepreneurship McAfee calls for - the White House will move to bottle up automation and artificial intelligence.
That would be bad news for AI researchers, but also for the economy. If the AI transformation slows in the US, many suspect, it will only accelerate in other parts of the world, putting American jobs at even greater risk due to global competition.
In the end, no one left Asilomar with a sure way of preventing economic upheaval.
“Anyone making confident predictions about anything having to do with the future of artificial intelligence is either kidding you or kidding themselves,” McAfee says.
That said, these researchers say they are intent on finding the answer. “People work through the concerns in different ways. But I haven’t met an AI researcher who doesn’t care,” Etzioni says. “People are mindful.” But they feel certain that preventing the rise of AI is not the answer. It’s also not really possible.
I propose that very sort of scientific mischief and outrageousness is going on within vested-interest microwave technology sciences so as to keep you, the gullible and enthralled technology ‘smart’ device consumer, confused into believing there are no adverse health effects from microwaves EXCEPT what’s acknowledged and called thermal radiation, which can heat skin.
If smart technology gadgets don’t heat your skin, then they are safe, which is the standard “tobacco science” pap disseminated by industrial professional societies such as IEEE, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the National Council of Radiation Protection (NCRP) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), who fund and/or perform the studies the World Health Organization and global government health agencies cite as ‘factual’ science.
Basically, microwave technology industrial professional societies state emphatically there is no such effect as non-thermal radiation adverse health effects, which contribute to and/or cause electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) or what physicians call idiopathic environmental intolerance (IEI) in sensitive people around the world.
However, here’s the unbelievable part: Non-Industry vs. Industry Funded Studies.
NON-Industry studies found 70% HARMFUL effects and 30% found no effects; whereas in INDUSTRY-studies, they found only 32% HARMFUL effects with 68% no effects. Those data were compiled by Dr. Henry Lai, University of Washington, Professor Emeritus - Department of Bioengineering.
Dr. Lai’s work included the “biological effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (from extremely-low frequency to radiofrequency) and their possible medical applications". Furthermore, Dr. Lai’s work included the development of Artemisinins (derived from extracts of sweet wormwood) for cancer treatment.
Here’s the truly ironic ‘scientific’ part about the above: Almost one-third (32%) of Industry studies found harmful health effects! How, then, can the microwave industry summarily deny such effects don’t exist plus cavalierly – and deliberately – mislead gullible but adoring technology-crazed consumers?
Even the U.S. Federal Communications Commission is hoodwinked!
The FCC does not have the expertise or the capabilities to determine the safety of electromagnetic fields. FCC stated “Because the Commission does not claim expertise as a de facto health agency, it necessarily considers the views of federal health and safety agencies and institutes that continue to address RF exposure issues in formulating such judgments” in the Federal Register Vol. 78, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 4, 2013 / Proposed Rules. Basically, the FCC takes no responsibility for the science. There ought to be a law against that type of obfuscation on the part of a federal agency tasked with setting safety standards.
Microwave science is more than skewed; it’s downright misleading!
In the recently (December 2016) Reviews on Environmental Health - De Gruyter published the article “Inaccurate official assessment of radiofrequency safety by the Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation,” authored by Sarah J. Starkey, Independent Neuroscience and Environmental Health Research, London, UK.
Starkey describes “incorrect and misleading statements from within the [AGNIR 2016] report, omissions and conflict of interests, which make it unsuitable for health risk assessment.
The executive summary and overall conclusions did not accurately reflect the scientific evidence available. Independence is needed from the International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation (ICNIRP), the group that set the exposure guidelines being assessed.”
In the Introduction, Starkey states:
“The latest AGNIR review has also been relied upon by health protection agencies around the world, including the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency and Health Canada.
The majority of the global population absorb RF radiation on a daily basis from smartphones, tablet computers, body-worn devices, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth transmitters, cordless phones, base stations, wireless utility meters [aka Smart Meters/AMI Smart Meters] and other transmitters." (Pg. 493)
Under Conflicts of interest, Starkey points out:
“At the time of writing the report, the chairman of AGNIR was also chair of the ICNIRP standing committee on epidemiology. Currently, six members of AGNIR and three members of PHE [Public Health England] or its parent organisation, the Department of Health (DH), are or have been part of ICNIRP.” [….]
“How can AGNIR report that the scientific literature contains evidence of harmful effects below the current guidelines when several of them are responsible for those guidelines?
PHE provide the official advice on the safety of wireless signals within the UK, but having members in ICNIRP introduces a conflict of interest which could prevent them from acknowledging adverse effects below ICNIRP guidelines." (Pp. 493-94)
“(a) Studies were omitted, included in other sections but without any conclusions, or conclusions left out; (b) evidence was dismissed and ignored in conclusions; (c) there were incorrect statements. Terms such as ‘convincing’ or ‘consistent’ were used to imply that there was no evidence." (Pg. 494)
Under “Studies omitted, included in other sections but without any conclusions, or conclusions left out” and referring to ROS [reactive oxygen species]:
“By only including a few of the available studies, not referring to many scattered throughout the report and not mentioning ROS or oxidative stress in any conclusions or the executive summary, this important area of research was misrepresented.
Oxidative stress is a toxic state which can lead to cellular DNA, RNA, protein or lipid damage (7,8) is a major cause of cancer (7), as well as being implicated in many reproductive, central nervous system, cardiovascular, immune and metabolic disorders." (Pg. 495)
However and here’s the BIG however, “ICNIRP only accept thermal effects of RF fields and focus on average energy absorbed,” (Pg. 495) even though 32% of Industry studies found non-thermal effects!
ICNIRP has stated its members are independent of vested and commercial interests. However, several ICNIRP members, e.g., Dr. Alexander Lerchl, have been accused of conflicts of interests, the most famous being Anders Ahlborn, Professor of Epidemiology at the Karolinska Institute and former consultant to the tobacco industry.
Professor Ahlborn was forced to resign as a member of the WHO’s IARC working group on radiofrequencies. Ahlborn was ‘outed’ that he was the director of the consulting firm Gunnar Ahlborn AB, founded by his brother. That consulting firm served telecom businesses and industry.
Starkey goes on to say:
“Many of the longer-term observational studies described significant associations of RF exposures with symptoms, albeit with limitations in study designs: ‘while some, though by no means all, of the studies reviewed above appear to suggest an association between mobile phone use and symptoms…’, [page 245 (2)] followed by ‘almost all of the studies share a fundamental methodological problem which makes it difficult to draw any firm conclusions from them: these studies relied upon the participants’ own descriptions of their mobile phone usage as the exposure variable for their analysis and on self-description of symptoms while knowing exposure status'(2).
Longer-term studies on symptoms were omitted from the executive summary. (Pg. 496)
No mention was made of the World Health Organization (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classification of RF fields as a possible human carcinogen in 2011, which was based on limited evidence supporting carcinogenicity below ICNIRP guideline values.(32) (Pg. 496)
By the end of the report, the conclusions on cellular studies had incorrectly become ‘There are now several hundred studies in the published literature that have looked for effects on isolated cells or their components when exposed to RF fields. None has provided robust evidence for and effect.’ "[page 318 (2) (Pg. 497)
The microwave industry considers “cancer” a four-letter-word and does everything within its financial and political prowess to disassociate anyone from proving or even associating cancer etiologies with microwave EMFs/RFs/ELFs, thermal and non-thermal wave radiation.
“Conclusions for further examples:
The denial of the existence of adverse effects of RF fields below ICNIRP guidelines in the AGNIR report conclusions is not supported by the scientific evidence. [….]
The involvement of ICNIRP scientists in the misleading report calls into question the basis and validity of the international exposure guidelines. To protect public health, we need accurate official assessments of whether there are adverse effects of RF signals below current international ICNIRP guidelines, independent of the group who set the guidelines.
The anticipated WHO Environmental Health Criteria Monograph on Radiofrequency Fields, due in 2017, is being prepared by a core group and additional experts with 50% of those named, being, or having been, members of AGNIR or ICNIRP. (Table2) [….]
Independence from ICNIRP is necessary to remove the conflict of interest when effects below ICNIRP exposure guidelines are being assessed. [….]
Individuals and organisations who/that have made decisions about the often compulsory exposures of others to wireless RF communication signals may be unaware of the physical harm that they may have caused, and may still be causing, because they have not been accurately informed of the risks.” [….]
“To prevent further possible harm, restrictions on exposures are required, particularly for children, pregnant women and individuals with medical conditions. (Pg. 499)
PHE and AGNIR had a responsibility to provide accurate information about the safety of RF fields. Unfortunately, the report suffered from an incorrect and misleading executive summary and overall conclusions, inaccurate statements, omissions and conflict of interest.
Public health and the well-being of other species in the natural world cannot be protected when evidence of harm, no matter how inconvenient, is covered up.” (Pp. 499- 500)
Ironically, the above-cited Starkey paper has 99 References, some of which were included to show corrupted science articles which appear in the published scientific literature. [CJF emphasis added]
The above paper by Sarah J. Starkey is only one intelligently explained example of what’s really going on with microwave ‘science’ to keep consumers enthralled about and with ‘smart’ devices and denied microwave technology health hazards.
There are so many more studies I can cite, but I think readers ought to be getting the picture of what’s not being told to them so that the marketing plans for smart appliances and gadgets can rule consumers’ lives - everything from a ‘smart’ phone, appliances and Wi-Fi to the coveted G5, global Wi-Fi in the sky. Fried brains, anyone?
Electrosensitivity, also known as ems, es, electrical oversensitivity / hypersensitivity is a state where the body becomes so sensitive to electrical fields that simple, moder, every-day tasks such as using the phone, driving a car, or working on a computer can have unbearable physical consequences for the sufferer.
Symptoms can vary from mild to severe headaches, nausea, insomnia, eye irritations, dizziness, skin rashes, facial swelling, fatigue, joint pains, buzzing/ringing in the ears, abdominal pain, breathing difficulties, irregular heart beat, depression, balance problems, paralysis, poor memory/concentration, seizures.
People aren't born with this condition it develops after a prologued period of exposure after which the body seems to reach a point of critical mass and tips over the edge into electrosensitivity. Electrosensitivity can also be triggered by exposure to a new electronic device.
Electrosensitivity sufferers face denial from the medical establishment and find themselves fobbed off with antidepressants or other non-effective drugs and left to suffer without support. It is only Sweden that officially recognizes electrosensitivity as a medical condition even though it is now a worldwide rapidly growing phenomenon.
One such electrosensitivity sufferer is U.K sculptor Margaret Lovell. The BBC did a 10 minute segment on her for a local television show and we found her through the associated web site. Margaret accepted our offer to trial both a Nu-Me pendant and a p.e.bal to see how they could help with her condition. The following video summarizes her experience.
Penny is a horse-trainer whose animals, farm and livelihood were systematically destroyed by the presence of a major radio transmission tower on the edge of her property on the outskirts of Christchurch NZ.
For over a decade she has been researching the effects and technologies of electro-magnetic radiation and has become an expert in this area, not academic but experiential.
She was close friends with the late Dr. Neil Cherry, an outspoken critic of EMR and the telecommunications industry. Her information, her experience, her plight, her message are an urgent warning for almost all of humanity who are currently bathed in a carcinogenic sea of weaponized electro-magnetic radiation.
The Binge Breaker: Silicon Valley Is Addicting Us To Our Phones January 30 2017 | From: TheAtlantic
Tristan Harris believes Silicon Valley is addicting us to our phones. He’s determined to make it stop.
On a recent evening in San Francisco, Tristan Harris, a former product philosopher at Google, took a name tag from a man in pajamas called “Honey Bear” and wrote down his pseudonym for the night: “Presence.”
Harris had just arrived at Unplug SF, a “digital detox experiment” held in honor of the National Day of Unplugging, and the organizers had banned real names.
Also outlawed: clocks, “w-talk” (work talk), and “WMDs” (the planners’ loaded shorthand for wireless mobile devices). Harris, a slight 32-year-old with copper hair and a tidy beard, surrendered his iPhone, a device he considers so addictive that he’s called it “a slot machine in my pocket.”
He keeps the background set to an image of Scrabble tiles spelling out the words face down, a reminder of the device’s optimal position.
I followed him into a spacious venue packed with nearly 400 people painting faces, filling in coloring books, and wrapping yarn around chopsticks. Despite the cheerful summer-camp atmosphere, the event was a reminder of the binary choice facing smartphone owners, who, according to one study, consult their device 150 times a day:
Leave the WMD on and deal with relentless prompts compelling them to check its screen, or else completely disconnect. “It doesn’t have to be the all-or-nothing choice,” Harris told me after taking in the arts-and-crafts scene. “That’s a design failure.”
Harris is the closest thing Silicon Valley has to a conscience. As the co‑founder of Time Well Spent, an advocacy group, he is trying to bring moral integrity to software design: essentially, to persuade the tech world to help us disengage more easily from its devices.
While some blame our collective tech addiction on personal failings, like weak willpower, Harris points a finger at the software itself. That itch to glance at our phone is a natural reaction to apps and websites engineered to get us scrolling as frequently as possible.
The attention economy, which showers profits on companies that seize our focus, has kicked off what Harris calls a “race to the bottom of the brain stem.”
“You could say that it’s my responsibility” to exert self-control when it comes to digital usage, he explains, “but that’s not acknowledging that there’s a thousand people on the other side of the screen whose job is to break down whatever responsibility I can maintain.”
In short, we’ve lost control of our relationship with technology because technology has become better at controlling us.
A “Hippocratic oath” for software designers would stop the exploitation of people’s psychological vulnerabilities.
Under the auspices of Time Well Spent, Harris is leading a movement to change the fundamentals of software design. He is rallying product designers to adopt a “Hippocratic oath” for software that, he explains, would check the practice of:
“Exposing people’s psychological vulnerabilities” and restore “agency” to users. “There needs to be new ratings, new criteria, new design standards, new certification standards,” he says.
“There is a way to design based not on addiction.”
Joe Edelman - who did much of the research informing Time Well Spent’s vision and is the co-director of a think tank advocating for more-respectful software design - likens Harris to a tech-focused Ralph Nader.
Other people, including Adam Alter, a marketing professor at NYU, have championed theses similar to Harris’s; but according to Josh Elman, a Silicon Valley veteran with the venture-capital firm Greylock Partners, Harris is “the first putting it together in this way” - articulating the problem, its societal cost, and ideas for tackling it.
Elman compares the tech industry to Big Tobacco before the link between cigarettes and cancer was established:
Keen to give customers more of what they want, yet simultaneously inflicting collateral damage on their lives.
Harris, Elman says, is offering Silicon Valley a chance to reevaluate before more-immersive technology, like virtual reality, pushes us beyond a point of no return.
All this talk of hacking human psychology could sound paranoid, if Harris had not witnessed the manipulation firsthand. Raised in the Bay Area by a single mother employed as an advocate for injured workers, Harris spent his childhood creating simple software for Macintosh computers and writing fan mail to Steve Wozniak, a co-founder of Apple.
He studied computer science at Stanford while interning at Apple, then embarked on a master’s degree at Stanford, where he joined the Persuasive Technology Lab.
Run by the experimental psychologist B. J. Fogg, the lab has earned a cultlike following among entrepreneurs hoping to master Fogg’s principles of “behavior design” - a euphemism for what sometimes amounts to building software that nudges us toward the habits a company seeks to instill. (One of Instagram’s co-founders is an alumnus.)
In Fogg’s course, Harris studied the psychology of behavior change, such as how clicker training for dogs, among other methods of conditioning, can inspire products for people.
For example, rewarding someone with an instantaneous “like” after they post a photo can reinforce the action, and potentially shift it from an occasional to a daily activity.
Harris learned that the most-successful sites and apps hook us by tapping into deep-seated human needs. When LinkedIn launched, for instance, it created a hub-and-spoke icon to visually represent the size of each user’s network.
That triggered people’s innate craving for social approval and, in turn, got them scrambling to connect.
“Even though at the time there was nothing useful you could do with LinkedIn, that simple icon had a powerful effect in tapping into people’s desire not to look like losers,” Fogg told me.
Harris began to see that technology is not, as so many engineers claim, a neutral tool; rather, it’s capable of coaxing us to act in certain ways. And he was troubled that out of 10 sessions in Fogg’s course, only one addressed the ethics of these persuasive tactics. (Fogg says that topic is “woven throughout” the curriculum.)
Harris dropped out of the master’s program to launch a start-up that installed explanatory pop-ups across thousands of sites, including The New York Times’.
It was his first direct exposure to the war being waged for our time, and Harris felt torn between his company’s social mission, which was to spark curiosity by making facts easily accessible, and pressure from publishers to corral users into spending more and more minutes on their sites.
Though Harris insists he steered clear of persuasive tactics, he grew more familiar with how they were applied.
He came to conceive of them as “hijacking techniques” - the digital version of pumping sugar, salt, and fat into junk food in order to induce bingeing.
McDonald’s hooks us by appealing to our bodies’ craving for certain flavors; Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter hook us by delivering what psychologists call “variable rewards.”
Messages, photos, and “likes” appear on no set schedule, so we check for them compulsively, never sure when we’ll receive that dopamine-activating prize. (Delivering rewards at random has been proved to quickly and strongly reinforce behavior.)
Checking that Facebook friend request will take only a few seconds, we reason, though research shows that when interrupted, people take an average of 25 minutes to return to their original task.
Sites foster a sort of distracted lingering partly by lumping multiple services together. To answer the friend request, we’ll pass by the News Feed, where pictures and auto-play videos seduce us into scrolling through an infinite stream of posts - what Harris calls a “bottomless bowl,” referring to a study that found people eat 73 percent more soup out of self-refilling bowls than out of regular ones, without realizing they’ve consumed extra.
The “friend request” tab will nudge us to add even more contacts by suggesting “people you may know,” and in a split second, our unconscious impulses cause the cycle to continue:
Once we send the friend request, an alert appears on the recipient’s phone in bright red - a “trigger” color, Harris says, more likely than some other hues to make people click - and because seeing our name taps into a hardwired sense of social obligation, she will drop everything to answer.
In the end, he says, companies “stand back watching as a billion people run around like chickens with their heads cut off, responding to each other and feeling indebted to each other.”
A Facebook spokesperson told me the social network focuses on maximizing the quality of the experience - not the time its users spend on the site - and surveys its users daily to gauge success.
In response to this feedback, Facebook recently tweaked its News Feed algorithm to punish clickbait - stories with sensationalist headlines designed to attract readers. (LinkedIn and Instagram declined requests for comment. Twitter did not reply to multiple queries.)
Even so, a niche group of consultants has emerged to teach companies how to make their services irresistible. One such guru is Nir Eyal, the author of Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products, who has lectured or consulted for firms such as LinkedIn and Instagram.
A blog post he wrote touting the value of variable rewards is titled “Want to Hook Your Users? Drive Them Crazy.”
While asserting that companies are morally obligated to help those genuinely addicted to their services, Eyal contends that social media merely satisfies our appetite for entertainment in the same way TV or novels do, and that the latest technology tends to get vilified simply because it’s new, but eventually people find balance.
“Saying ‘Don’t use these techniques’ is essentially saying ‘Don’t make your products fun to use.’ That’s silly,” Eyal told me.
“With every new technology, the older generation says ‘Kids these days are using too much of this and too much of that and it’s melting their brains.’ And it turns out that what we’ve always done is to adapt.”
Google acquired Harris’s company in 2011, and he ended up working on Gmail’s Inbox app. (He’s quick to note that while he was there, it was never an explicit goal to increase time spent on Gmail.)
A year into his tenure, Harris grew concerned about the failure to consider how seemingly minor design choices, such as having phones buzz with each new email, would cascade into billions of interruptions. His team dedicated months to fine-tuning the aesthetics of the Gmail app with the aim of building a more “delightful” email experience.
But to him that missed the bigger picture: Instead of trying to improve email, why not ask how email could improve our lives - or, for that matter, whether each design decision was making our lives worse?
Harris gives off a preppy-hippie vibe that allows him to move comfortably between Palo Alto boardrooms and device-free retreats
Six months after attending Burning Man in the Nevada desert, a trip Harris says helped him with:
“Waking up and questioning my own beliefs,” he quietly released “A Call to Minimize Distraction & Respect Users’ Attention,” a 144-page Google Slides presentation.
In it, he declared, “Never before in history have the decisions of a handful of designers (mostly men, white, living in SF, aged 25–35) working at 3 companies” - Google, Apple, and Facebook - “had so much impact on how millions of people around the world spend their attention … We should feel an enormous responsibility to get this right.”
Although Harris sent the presentation to just 10 of his closest colleagues, it quickly spread to more than 5,000 Google employees, including then-CEO Larry Page, who discussed it with Harris in a meeting a year later.
“It sparked something,” recalls Mamie Rheingold, a former Google staffer who organized an internal Q&A session with Harris at the company’s headquarters. “He did successfully create a dialogue and open conversation about this in the company.”
Harris parlayed his presentation into a position as product philosopher, which involved researching ways Google could adopt ethical design.
But he says he came up against “inertia.” Product road maps had to be followed, and fixing tools that were obviously broken took precedence over systematically rethinking services. Chris Messina, then a designer at Google, says little changed following the release of Harris’s slides:
“It was one of those things where there’s a lot of head nods, and then people go back to work.”
Harris told me some colleagues misinterpreted his message, thinking that he was proposing banning people from social media, or that the solution was simply sending fewer notifications. (Google declined to comment.)
Harris left the company last December to push for change more widely, buoyed by a growing network of supporters that includes the MIT professor Sherry Turkle; Meetup’s CEO, Scott Heiferman; and Justin Rosenstein, a co-inventor of the “like” button; along with fed-up users and concerned employees across the industry.
“Pretty much every big company that’s manipulating users has been very interested in our work,” says Joe Edelman, who has spent the past five years trading ideas and leading workshops with Harris.
Through Time Well Spent, his advocacy group, Harris hopes to mobilize support for what he likens to an organic-food movement, but for software: an alternative built around core values, chief of which is helping us spend our time well, instead of demanding more of it.
Thus far, Time Well Spent is more a label for his crusade - and a vision he hopes others will embrace - than a full-blown organization. (Harris, its sole employee, self-funds it.)
Yet he’s amassed a network of volunteers keen to get involved, thanks in part to his frequent cameos on the thought-leader speaker circuit, including talks at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society; the O’Reilly Design Conference; an internal meeting of Facebook designers; and a TEDx event, whose video has been viewed more than 1 million times online.
Tim O’Reilly, the founder of O’Reilly Media and an early web pioneer, told me Harris’s ideas are:
“Definitely something that people who are influential are listening to and thinking about.” Even Fogg, who stopped wearing his Apple Watch because its incessant notifications annoyed him, is a fan of Harris’s work:
“It’s a brave thing to do and a hard thing to do.”
At Unplug SF, a burly man calling himself “Haus” enveloped Harris in a bear hug. “This is the antidote!,” Haus cheered. “This is the antivenom!” All evening, I watched people pull Harris aside to say hello, or ask to schedule a meeting. Someone cornered Harris to tell him about his internet “sabbatical,” but Harris cut him off. “For me this is w‑talk,” he protested.
Harris admits that researching the ways our time gets hijacked has made him slightly obsessive about evaluating what counts as “time well spent” in his own life.
The hypnosis class Harris went to before meeting me - because he suspects the passive state we enter while scrolling through feeds is similar to being hypnotized - was not time well spent.
The slow-moving course, he told me, was “low bit rate” - a technical term for data-transfer speeds.
Attending the digital detox? Time very well spent. He was delighted to get swept up in a mass game of rock-paper-scissors, where a series of one-on-one elimination contests culminated in an onstage showdown between “Joe” and “Moonlight.”
Harris has a tendency to immerse himself in a single activity at a time. In conversation, he rarely breaks eye contact and will occasionally rest a hand on his interlocutor’s arm, as if to keep both parties present in the moment.
He got so wrapped up in our chat one afternoon that he attempted to get into an idling Uber that was not an Uber at all, but a car that had paused at a stop sign.
An accordion player and tango dancer in his spare time who pairs plaid shirts with a bracelet that has presence stamped into a silver charm, Harris gives off a preppy-hippie vibe that allows him to move comfortably between Palo Alto boardrooms and device-free retreats.
In that sense, he had a great deal in common with the other Unplug SF attendees, many of whom belong to a new class of tech elites “waking up” to their industry’s unwelcome side effects.
For many entrepreneurs, this epiphany has come with age, children, and the peace of mind of having several million in the bank, says Soren Gordhamer, the creator of Wisdom 2.0, a conference series about maintaining “presence and purpose” in the digital age.
“They feel guilty,” Gordhamer says. “They are realizing they built this thing that’s so addictive.”
I asked Harris whether he felt guilty about having joined Google, which has inserted its technology into our pockets, glasses, watches, and cars.
He didn’t. He acknowledged that some divisions, such as YouTube, benefit from coaxing us to stare at our screens. But he justified his decision to work there with the logic that since Google controls three interfaces through which millions engage with technology - Gmail, Android, and Chrome - the company was the “first line of defense.”
Getting Google to rethink those products, as he’d attempted to do, had the potential to transform our online experience.
Snapchat’s tactics for hooking users may make Facebook’s look quaint.
At a restaurant around the corner from Unplug SF, Harris demonstrated an alternative way of interacting with WMDs, based on his own self-defense tactics.
Certain tips were intuitive: He’s “almost militaristic about turning off notifications” on his iPhone, and he set a custom vibration pattern for text messages, so he can feel the difference between an automated alert and a human’s words.
Other tips drew on Harris’s study of psychology. Since merely glimpsing an app’s icon will -
“Trigger this whole set of sensations and thoughts,” he pruned the first screen of his phone to include only apps, such as Uber and Google Maps, that perform a single function and thus run a low risk of “bottomless bowl–ing.”
He tried to make his phone look minimalist: Taking a cue from a Google experiment that cut employees’ M&M snacking by moving the candy from clear to opaque containers, he buried colorful icons - along with time-sucking apps like Gmail and WhatsApp - inside folders on the second page of his iPhone.
As a result, that screen was practically grayscale. Harris launches apps by using what he calls the phone’s “consciousness filter” - typing Instagram, say, into its search bar - which reduces impulsive tapping.
For similar reasons, Harris keeps a Post-it on his laptop with this instruction: “Do not open without intention.”
His approach seems to have worked. I’m usually quick to be annoyed by friends reaching for their phones, but next to Harris, I felt like an addict. Wary of being judged, I made a point not to check my iPhone unless he checked his first, but he went so long without peeking that I started getting antsy. Harris assured me that I was far from an exception.
“Our generation relies on our phones for our moment-to-moment choices about who we’re hanging out with, what we should be thinking about, who we owe a response to, and what’s important in our lives,” he said.
“And if that’s the thing that you’ll outsource your thoughts to, forget the brain implant. That is the brain implant. You refer to it all the time.”
Curious to hear more about Harris’s plan for tackling manipulative software, I tagged along one morning to his meeting with two entrepreneurs eager to incorporate Time Well Spent values into their start-up.
Harris, flushed from a yoga class, met me at a bakery not far from the “intentional community house” where he lives with a dozen or so housemates.
We were joined by Micha Mikailian and Johnny Chan, the co-founders of an ad blocker, Intently, that replaces advertising with “intentions” reminding people to “Follow Your Bliss” or “Be Present.” Previously, they’d run a marketing and advertising agency.
“One day I was in a meditation practice. I just got the vision for Intently,” said Mikailian, who sported a chunky turquoise bracelet and a man bun.
“It fully aligned with my purpose,” said Chan.
They were interested in learning what it would take to integrate ethical design. Coordinating loosely with Joe Edelman, Harris is developing a code of conduct - the Hippocratic oath for software designers - and a playbook of best practices that can guide start-ups and corporations toward products that “treat people with respect.”
Having companies rethink the metrics by which they measure success would be a start. “You have to imagine: What are the concrete benefits landed in space and in time in a person’s life?,” Harris said, coaching Mikailian and Chan.
Harris hopes that companies will offer a healthier alternative to the current diet of tech junk food - perhaps at a premium price.
At his speaking engagements, Harris has presented prototype products that embody other principles of ethical design. He argues that technology should help us set boundaries.
This could be achieved by, for example, an inbox that asks how much time we want to dedicate to email, then gently reminds us when we’ve exceeded our quota. Technology should give us the ability to see where our time goes, so we can make informed decisions - imagine your phone alerting you when you’ve unlocked it for the 14th time in an hour.
And technology should help us meet our goals, give us control over our relationships, and enable us to disengage without anxiety. Harris has demoed a hypothetical “focus mode” for Gmail that would pause incoming messages until someone has finished concentrating on a task, while allowing interruptions in case of an emergency. (Slack has implemented a similar feature.)
Harris hopes to create a Time Well Spent certification - akin to the leed seal or an organic label - that would designate software made with those values in mind.
He already has a shortlist of apps that he endorses as early exemplars of the ethos, such as Pocket, Calendly, and f.lux, which, respectively, saves articles for future reading, lets people book empty slots on an individual’s calendar to streamline the process of scheduling meetings, and aims to improve sleep quality by adding a pinkish cast to the circadian-rhythm-disrupting blue light of screens. Intently could potentially join this coalition, he volunteered.
As a first step toward identifying other services that could qualify, Harris has experimented with creating software that would capture how many hours someone devotes weekly to each app on her phone, then ask her which ones were worthwhile.
The data could be compiled to create a leaderboard that shames apps that addict but fail to satisfy. Edelman has released a related tool for websites, called Hindsight. “We have to change what it means to win,” Harris says.
The biggest obstacle to incorporating ethical design and “agency” is not technical complexity. According to Harris, it’s a “will thing.” And on that front, even his supporters worry that the culture of Silicon Valley may be inherently at odds with anything that undermines engagement or growth.
“This is not the place where people tend to want to slow down and be deliberate about their actions and how their actions impact others,” says Jason Fried, who has spent the past 12 years running Basecamp, a project-management tool.
“They want to make things more sugary and more tasty, and pull you in, and justify billions of dollars of valuation and hundreds of millions of dollars [in] VC funds.”
Rather than dismantling the entire attention economy, Harris hopes that companies will, at the very least, create a healthier alternative to the current diet of tech junk food.
He recognizes that this shift would require reevaluating entrenched business models so success no longer hinges on claiming attention and time.
As with organic vegetables, it’s possible that the first generation of Time Well Spent software might be available at a premium price, to make up for lost advertising dollars.
“Would you pay $7 a month for a version of Facebook that was built entirely to empower you to live your life?,” Harris says. “I think a lot of people would pay for that.”
Like splurging on grass-fed beef, paying for services that are available for free and disconnecting for days (even hours) at a time are luxuries that few but the reasonably well-off can afford.
I asked Harris whether this risked stratifying tech consumption, such that the privileged escape the mental hijacking and everyone else remains subjected to it. “It creates a new inequality. It does.”
Harris admitted. But he countered that if his movement gains steam, broader change could occur, much in the way Walmart now stocks organic produce.
Currently, though, the trend is toward deeper manipulation in ever more sophisticated forms. Harris fears that Snapchat’s tactics for hooking users make Facebook’s look quaint.
Facebook automatically tells a message’s sender when the recipient reads the note - a design choice that, per Fogg’s logic, activates our hardwired sense of social reciprocity and encourages the recipient to respond.
Snapchat ups the ante: Unless the default settings are changed, users are informed the instant a friend begins typing a message to them - which effectively makes it a faux pas not to finish a message you start.
Harris worries that the app’s Snapstreak feature, which displays how many days in a row two friends have snapped each other and rewards their loyalty with an emoji, seems to have been pulled straight from Fogg’s inventory of persuasive tactics.
Research shared with Harris by Emily Weinstein, a Harvard doctoral candidate, shows that Snapstreak is driving some teenagers nuts - to the point that before going on vacation, they give friends their log-in information and beg them to snap in their stead.
“To be honest, it made me sick to my stomach to hear these anecdotes,” Harris told me.
Harris thinks his best shot at improving the status quo is to get users riled up about the ways they’re being manipulated, then create a groundswell of support for technology that respects people’s agency - something akin to the privacy outcry that prodded companies to roll out personal-information protections.
While Harris’s experience at Google convinced him that users must demand change for it to happen, Edelman suggests that the incentive to adapt can originate within the industry, as engineers become reluctant to build products they view as unethical and companies face a brain drain.
The more people recognize the repercussions of tech firms’ persuasive tactics, the more working there “becomes uncool,” he says, a view I heard echoed by others in his field. “You can really burn through engineers hard.”
There is arguably an element of hypocrisy to the enlightened image that Silicon Valley projects, especially with its recent embrace of “mindfulness.”
Companies like Google and Facebook, which have offered mindfulness training and meditation spaces for their employees, position themselves as corporate leaders in this movement.
Yet this emphasis on mindfulness and consciousness, which has extended far beyond the tech world, puts the burden on users to train their focus, without acknowledging that the devices in their hands are engineered to chip away at their concentration.
It’s like telling people to get healthy by exercising more, then offering the choice between a Big Mac and a Quarter Pounder when they sit down for a meal.
And being aware of software’s seductive power does not mean being immune to its influence.
One evening, just as we were about to part ways for the night, Harris stood talking by his car when his phone flashed with a new text message. He glanced down at the screen and interrupted himself mid-sentence.
“Oh!” he announced, more to his phone than to me, and mumbled something about what a coincidence it was that the person texting him knew his friend. He looked back up sheepishly. “That’s a great example,” he said, waving his phone. “I had no control over the process.”
The Top 10 Most Outrageous Science Hoaxes Of 2016 January 2 2017 | From: NaturalNews
Science hoaxes were running rampant throughout 2016, pushed by the fakestream media (CNN, WashPost, NYT, etc.) alongside complicit government organizations working in collusion with dishonest corporations steeped in scientific fraud (Monsanto, Big Pharma, etc.).
2016 saw more science hoaxes than a typical year, with the media placing special emphasis on the Zika virus terror campaign (rooted in total scientific hucksterism) and more climate change propaganda (all based on fraudulently altered data).
In every case, those pushing the science frauds claimed to have a divine monopoly on “science” while declaring all opposing views to be “unscientific.”
In this way, much of the “science” in today’s corrupt society has really become nothing more than a cult of scientism, complete with “faith” in the correctness of socially-reinforced beliefs while exercising instant rejection of evidence that contradicts the fairy tale narratives of the science elite.
Sadly, “science” in 2016 functioned more like a priesthood of dogmatists fervently demanding the obedient worship of their unassailable assumptions. On every issue that matters, data were thrown out the window and replaced with fraud.
To drive home the fraud, the scientifically illiterate lamestream media catapulted the propaganda to new heights, even while remaining completely oblivious to the laughably false “science” they were promoting.
Here, I offer a summary of the most outrageous science hoaxes of 2016, along with a few links where you can explore more. By the way, the video on the “Cicret bracelet” invention that claims to turn your arm into a mobile device touchscreen is also a complete fraudulent hoax that has fooled millions of people, and I cover that in detail at the bottom of this article.
My primary message for 2017 is to stop believing in all the fake science being pushed by media, governments, academia and corporate liars.
Science Hoax #1: “Scientific” Political Polling
Through the entire year, we were all subjected to an endless onslaught of so-called “scientific” political polls that almost universally showed Hillary Clinton would win the election.
All the “scientific” polls were wrong, it turns out. (And yes, I called all this well before the election, on the record.)
What we now know is that the word “scientific” was slapped onto these fraudulent polls to try to give them an aura of credibility when, in reality, they were all fabricated or distorted to give Hillary Clinton the appearance of certain victory.
But guess what? All the experts were wrong. But how is that possible if all these polls were “scientific” as claimed? Are the pollsters now telling us that science is broken?
Or maybe, just maybe, they were making s##t up all along and there wasn’t any real “science” behind the “scientific” claim in the first place.
Science Hoax #2: The Zika Virus Terror Campaign
2016 saw the rolling out of an elaborate media-fronted Zika terror campaign designed to scare the entire country into ridiculously believing that mosquito bites would cause millions of women in America to give birth to babies with shrunken heads.
Yeah, I know, it sounds like something a Batman villain would threaten to unleash in Gotham City. “Pay me one million dollars or all your babies will be born with shrunken heads! Mwuah hah hah!”
But, alas, the American sheeple bought the medical science hoax hook, line and sinker. Belief in the Zika virus microcephaly hoax was so deeply embedded in the psyche of the nation that even when the Washington Post published a storyadmitting there was no link after all, the vast majority of so-called “scientists” and doctors still believe the hoax!
So, for the record, I’ll say it again in the hopes of educating all the scientifically illiterate “scientists” who still don’t understand actual facts: The original wave of shrunken heads in Brazil was caused by a larvacide chemical that was dumped into the water supply, not by the Zika virus alone.
The “Zika apocalypse” predicted by all the doctors, scientists and TV talking heads simply did not materialize. And when evidence contradicts your theory, you have to start questioning your theory. Otherwise, you aren’t a scientist. You’re just a petty fool.
Science Hoax #3: The Flint Michigan Lead Poisoning Cover-Up
In order to poison a million black children with brain-damaging lead, the U.S. EPA masterminded a large-scale science fraud that deliberately altered heavy metals testing results for the Flint, Michigan water supply.
Eventually, a few of the science scapegoats were charged with felony crimes for engaging in a conspiracy to alter water quality test data, but no one from the EPA was ever charged or prosecuted for their role in the scheme. (This also proves, by the way, that conspiracies are quite real and very much alive in our society right now.)
The result of all this was the mass poisoning of mostly African-American children with a toxic heavy metal that’s well known to damage cognitive function and impede learning.What a great way to raise more democrats!
It’s all part of the new “science” of keeping the sheeple dumbed down so they will keep voting for corrupt criminals like Hillary Clinton.
Instead of “let them eat cake,” the new progressive Jon Podesta version is, “Let them drink lead!”
Science Hoax #4: The Banning of GMO Labeling Nationwide by Scientifically Illiterate Republicans
This was all accomplished via an unholy alliance among biotech corporate giants (like Monsanto) and right-leaning lawmakers, most of whom have never met a toxic chemical they didn’t absolutely love.
Notably, while Democrats are passing local laws that criminalize Big Gulp sodas, Republicans are blocking labeling laws as a way to say, “If you don’t SEE the poison on the label, it doesn’t actually count!”
Keeping consumers in the dark is now the official science policy of the federal government.
How’s that for transparency?
Science Hoax #5: Climate Change Data Fraud
Democrats have their own science fraud, of course, and there’s no better example than global warming / climate change.
To the great frustration of celebritards like Matt Damon, the data don’t show any warming at all unless you “cook” the numbers first.
This means “climate change science” is actually more like climate change alchemy, which isn’t science at all. It’s more like Tarot cards mixed with voodoo blended with AlGoratotalitaritopian idiocy.
Note to intelligent people: If the world were really warming, they wouldn’t have to alter the temperature data, would they?
Science Hoax #6: Abortion Organ Harvesting for “Scientific Research”
According to leftists, chopping up living human babies who have just been forcibly “birthed” in order to harvest their organs and brains isn’t unethical at all. Nope, it’s a tremendous advancement for scientific research, you see.
Organ harvesting isn’t just limited to places like Communist China and North Korea: The practice is alive and well in America, too. But in the U.S., it takes on a genocidal milestone because most abortions are carried out on black babies… yep, the very same black babies that were also intentionally poisoned by the EPA in Flint, Michigan (see above).
Hmmm… there seems to be a pattern in all this, but I can’t quite put my finger on it… but it definitely seems to have something to do with killing as many black babies as possible while labeling it all “science.”
It’s noteworthy to remember that Adolf Hitler’s eugenics programs were also conducted under the umbrella of “science.”
It seems not that much has changed in almost 80 years… except that instead of Jews being exterminated by the millions, it’s now black babies being exterminated by the millions while democrats demand an open borders human blitzkrieg to replace them all with socialist-leaning illegal aliens who are uninformed enough to vote for leftists.
Science Hoax #7: The California Vaccine Mandate
Another large-scale science hoax that also happens to place a disproportionate burden on African-American babies is the California “medical police state” vaccine mandate pushed by California’s own “Mercury Joker” Dr. Richard Pan.
After receiving bribes from vaccine makers, the “medical child molesting” California state senator Richard Pan took part in a media-backed medical terrorism campaign against California’s citizens, attempting to scare everyone into falsely believing that the best way to protect the health of children is to inject them with mercury (instead of, I don’t know, maybe feeding them nutritious foods and vitamin D).
The entire vaccine mandate was founded on blatantly fraudulent quack science claims fronted by the child-murdering vaccine industry, which continues to absurdly insist that vaccines pose zero risk to children (i.e. claiming they do not harm a single child…ever). The claim is, of course, rooted in sheer delusion. But that’s also what passes for “legislation” in California.
We can only hope California’s #Calexit effort succeeds soon, so we can build a wall around California and stop the contagious epidemic of lunacy from spreading Eastward.
No summary of science quackery would be complete without bringing in the subject of “economics.” Yes, it qualifies as a science… at least if you ask the economists. (If you ask non-economists, it qualifies mostly as voodoo.)
Nevertheless, according to Janet Yellen and the decrepit “wizards of collapse” who are currently steering the global debt Titanic directly into an array of large shards of icebergs, the best way to keep a global economy in balance is to create endless new money until the whole thing explodes, at which point the system collapses to “equilibrium” where everybody starves roughly the same amount (i.e. Venezuela).
To demonstrate this brilliant hypothesis, Yellen and her crotchety academic cohorts have been busy pumping trillions of fiat currency dollars into the pockets of their bankster pals while raising interest rates to accelerate the debt avalanche apocalypse timetable.
As a cherry on top, Obama also doubled the national debt in just eight years, all while handing Iran a path to nuclear weapons, dissing Israel, subverting American culture, gutting the U.S. military and secretly telling his Russian counterparts he would drastically reduce U.S. nuclear capabilities.
Yes indeed, the “dream team” of Obama, Clinton and Yellen has pulled off what America’s worst enemies could not: The near-complete financial paralysis of the U.S. economy all while claiming “Everything is awesome!”
Thank God all the pensions across the country are fully funded, huh? Or that would be a real disaster.
Science Hoax #9: Transgenderism and the Lunatic Liberal “Theory of Spontaneous Genetic Transmutation”
2016 also saw many gullible people being convinced to believe that a biological man can instantly transform himself into a biological woman by declaring himself to be a woman.
At least one “journalist” even claimed that a transgendered man could become pregnant after declaring himself to be a woman. Yes, science education in America has utterly collapsed at this point, replaced with liberal P.C. insanity and delusional college lesson plans rooted in “feelings” rather than physical reality.
Across most of today’s gender-confused college-educated youth, belief in the laws of genetic expression have been replaced by belief that a person’s sex is a “choice.” It’s no longer permutations, phenotypes and genotypes… it’s now metrosexual, generation snowflake, pu##ified blathering idiocy with a diploma, “safe space” cry rooms and $100K in student debt.
Sorry to burst their bubble of stupid, but sex classification isn’t a personal choice. A simple genetic test shows you either have XY chromosomes, XX chromosomes, or the far more rare extra-X-or-Y chromosome defect which typically leads to serious physical and mental defects (including infertility).
According to today’s college snowflakes, the National Human Genome Research Institute is a “purveyor of HATE” because their fact sheet page says all these mean things about chromosomal defects:
“Inheriting too many or not enough copies of sex chromosomes can lead to serious problems. For example, females who have extra copies of the X chromosome are usually taller than average and some have mental retardation.
Males with more than one X chromosome have Klinefelter syndrome, which is a condition characterized by tall stature and, often, impaired fertility. Another syndrome caused by imbalance in the number of sex chromosomes is Turner syndrome. Women with Turner have one X chromosome only. They are very short, usually do not undergo puberty and some may have kidney or heart problems.”
Thus, there are only two sexes in the biology of all mammals: Male and female. And no, you don’t get to change them up just because you think it’s trendy to be a gender-confused metrosexual snowflake.
This doesn’t mean you can’t be gay, by the way. Gay men still realize they’re men. They just choose male partners instead of female partners. On the spectrum of personal freedom, I say people should be able to partner with whomever they want.
Gay or straight, it’s all a personal choice as far as I’m concerned, because it’s none of my business… and stop shoving your sexual preferences in my face, all you militant gay mafia activists.
Just be gay and be done with it. The “gay rights” war is over, and you already won it. Stop being bullies and thinking you’re still oppressed victims.
Marry whomever you want, but just #STFU about it already. Obama already lit up the White House with rainbows, for God’s sake.
But to say that yesterday you were a male, but today you’re a female… now that’s just technically bonkers. You’re not really a female. You’re a male impersonating a female and that’s it. Bruce Jenner, take note: You are not a woman, no matter how much you want to impersonate one.
And that’s celebrated by the women? Yeah, it’s insane. And all these same “progressive” women also insist that pervs with dongs should be able to invade women’s restrooms, too, because that’s “embracing gender identity and inclusiveness” blabbity blah blah.
Get a grip, people. Check your drawers and briefly fondle your hardware. If it’s junk, you’re a dude, and stop playing with it already. If it isn’t, you’re a woman. If you have both, go ask a doctor to run a genetic test and find out if you have ovaries.
Science Hoax #10: Every Science “Journalist” Working for the Fakestream Media
This is more of a collection of hoaxes rather than a single hoax. It all centers around the hilarious fact that most science “journalists” are scientifically illiterate morons who only think they understand science.
I remember reading a science column in a major U.S. publication that claimed cell phones could run on water. (Yeah, I know. I tried that by dropping my cell phone into a glass of water, but it turned off all the power for some strange reason. Maybe I need “special” water?)
There has also been a wave of hilariously stupid media coverage for this bracelet computing project called “Cicret” that ridiculously claims to “turn your arm into a touchscreen.”
The entire video promoting this “Cicret” bracelet is a complete fraud. Racking up almost 25 million views on Youtube, the video shown here is accomplished purely with special effects overlays. The bracelet does not exist and cannot exist as depicted in the video for the simple reason that light cannot bend around the curvature of your arm.
Incredibly, countless “journalists” across the mainstream media fell for this total hoax, stupidly believing that a hi-res touchscreen rendition can be projected onto your skin from a bracelet that barely sits just a few millimeters above your skin in the first place.
Question for brain dead “science” journalists: Do you really believe light rays from the Cicret can bend around your wrist and then magically bounce off skin that isn’t in a direct line of sight with the bracelet projector?
Seriously, you have to be incredibly stupid (or scientifically illiterate) to think the Cicret bracelet, as depicted in the videos, can actually function. But that sure didn’t stop publications from all across the world pushing the hype and convincing their readers that this “cool tech” was real.
And yes, the younger people are on social media these days, the more gullible they are, too. So special effects “viral videos” can be very successful at raising millions of dollars in “Kickstarter” funds for devices that cannot ever exist because they violate the laws of physics.
It’s a whole new kind of financial scam that’s legal because it only extracts money from people who are too stupid enough to believe the viral videos. In summary, “Kickstarter” viral videos are a tax on stupid progressives the same way that the lotto is a tax on stupid conservatives.
And now that I’ve thoroughly offended everyone, let’s wrap all this up…
2016 Was a Bad Year For the Credibility of Real Science… Let’s Hope 2017 is Better
In summary, 2016 saw the pushing of numerous science hoaxes by the fakestream media, governments, academic institutions and corporate propaganda whores like Forbes.com. (Oh, and we can’t leave out the actual whores running SNOPES, who were exposed as prostitutes and fetish bloggers.)
So how do we rescue science in 2017? It’s simple: We start using science to tell the truth instead of allowing governments and corporations to use science to lie.
A few fundamental scientific truths I’d like to see finally embraced in 2017 would include:
Yes, there is extraterrestrial intelligence in the universe.
Yes, there is (or was) microbial life on Mars.
Yes, human consciousness is non-material and not located in the physical brain.
Yes, vaccines cause autism.
Yes, flu shots still contain mercury.
Yes, there are many anti-cancer foods that can help prevent cancer.
Yes, transgenderism is a mental disorder, not a “choice.”
Yes, glyphosate causes cancer.
Yes, DEET is toxic to human neurology.
Yes, genetically engineered crops seeds are a genuine threat to the environment and the food supply.
Yes, water can retain non-physical properties that subtly alter its interactions with living systems.
No, carbon dioxide is not the enemy of mankind.
No, chemotherapy does not “cure” cancer. It often makes it worse.
No, harvesting organs from living human babies is not “ethical science.”
No, science journals are not unbiased, objective arbiters of truth.
No, “scientific” political polls are not reliable. They are bunk.
No, the “experts” are not as smart as they think they are. Mostly, they’re idiots who have attained high positions of “persistent idiocy” in academia or government, and their job is to protect the idiocy for as long as possible, making sure no one overthrows idiocy with intelligence.
The 'Smart' Meter Itself Is The “Hazardous Condition” + Studies On Radiation From Smart Meters Show That Electromagnetic Frequencies Disrupt And Damage The Nervous System December 5 2016 | From: MichiganStopSmartMeters / NaturalNews
In the following article, originally written by Electrical Engineer William Bathgate, as a public comment to the Michigan Public Service Commission, Mr. Bathgate considers safety issues with the new electric meters as related to our current discussion of a proposed rule change concerning emergency shutoffs for “hazardous conditions.”
Revisions to this article are indicated in blue and consist mainly in the addition of a section dealing with the lack of lightning arrestors in the AMI meters. Case No. U-18120 Proposed Rule 460.137 — 37(1)(a) & 37(1)(i) A utility may shut off or deny service to a customer “without notice, if a condition on the customer’s premises is determined by the utility or a governmental agency to be hazardous.”
I hold an electrical engineering and mechanical engineering degree and previously was employed through late 2015 for 8 years at the Emerson Electric Company.
While at Emerson Electric I was the Senior Program Manager for Power Distribution Systems and in charge of an RF and IP based digitally controlled high power AC power switching system product line in use in over 100 countries and I was also directly responsible for product certifications such as UL, CE and many other countries electrical certification bodies.
I am very familiar with the electrical and electronic design of the AMI meters in use because I was responsible for very similar products with over 1 Million units installed across the world.
I have just reviewed the transcripts of the hearing held in Lansing on this subject and came to realize there were many comments regarding the issues identified from the effects of both the RF emitting AMI meter and the non RF emitting AMI Opt-Out Meter.
I have personally tested the RF emissions from the AMI meter and measured that the meter does not send data just a few times a day as the utilities publish.
It actually sends an RF pulse about every 4-5 seconds constantly and a longer duration RF emission after midnight running about 3-5 minutes.
There is no need for the AMI meter to send a pulse every 4-5 seconds all day just to synchronize and time stamp the clock inside the meter, the meter only needs to send data once a day for 3-5 minutes.
All these pulse transmissions the AMI meter is doing is a complete waste of energy and because it is a short but frequently pulsing signal that is not needed to measure power consumption, it is creating needless health effects and is impacting consumers as evidenced in the testimony.
Some consumers have been affected to the point of near death experiences. The Mesh Network design is saturating the environment with RF transmissions mostly for the purpose of the network synchronization not the consumption measurement of power. I could not think of a worse network design for a power measurement device.
Analog Meters contained no electronic circuit boards and while not 100% immune from the effects of a lightning strike, they are much more tolerant than the AMI meter.
The MPSC has been asked to grant the Utilities the ability to turn off power to people and businesses without notice for “Dangerous or Hazardous” conditions.
Based on my professional examination of the metering technology deployed with AMI meters, the meters themselves are “Dangerous or Hazardous” due to their Lightning vulnerabilities, EMI and RF emissions.
There has been a disregard for the health and safety effects of these AMI meters on the general population by the utilities and their AMI supplier. So by their own lack of definition of “Dangerous or Hazardous” all AMI meters deployed at present need to be subject to shut off of service without notice due to “Dangerous or Hazardous” conditions.
The current AMI meters are not safe, as evidenced of the dramatic testimony of residents that are suffering terribly and the engineering analysis such as I and many others in this field have performed.
Studies On Radiation From Smart Meters Show That Electromagnetic Frequencies Disrupt And Damage The Nervous System
For some years now, health and technology experts have warned that smart meters being installed at homes all over the country may be emitting hazardous electronic waves that can damage the nervous system.
Now, as reported byNatural Blaze, a demonstration in a newly released video is groundbreaking in its portrayal of just how smart meters are harming us.
Many people know that these smart meters communicate with power companies via microwave signals. What has was not known – until now – is that additional frequencies from these meters are also transmitted in the 2 to 50 kilohertz range.
Several studies have shown that those same frequency ranges are disruptive to the human nervous system. Some studies refer to it as "nerve block" in describing what takes place.
Natural Blaze further noted that these are not controversial studies, meaning there are no studies that show a different result. Nerve block that is induced by frequencies in the 2 to 50 kHz range are a well-established fact. What's more, these studies come from reputable sources, as well as the standard for electricity, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
The Evidence is Clear: Smart Meters Emit Harmful Energy Frequencies
As noted in the video, the meters emit radiation via the high frequencies. The video, which was produced by Warren Woodward at his home, compared a standard analog energy meter to smart meters, which showed a major difference in "the waveform."
"It's very disturbing," Woodward said.
Using equipment to measure electrical waveforms, Woodward and an assistant used an oscillator to measure waveforms emitting first from the analog meter, and then from the smart meter. The signal differences were significant - enough to wake someone at night, said Woodward's assistant, Paul.
As we previously reported, smart meters have been increasingly tied to a wave of mysterious conditions and illnesses.
The EMF Safety Network, in particular, has documented complaints including sleep problems, stress, agitation, irritability, headaches, memory and concentration problems, fatigue, disorientation, nausea, leg cramps and even cardiac symptoms. Click the link above to see the full list of documented problems.
We noted that Cancer.org says smart meters "talk" to their central control systems using RF transmissions, based on cell phone, pager, satellite, radio, power line, WiFi or Internet-communications methods. "Internet and cell phone applications have become the preferred options because of their flexibility and ease of deployment," the organization noted.
Power Companies Will Not be Motivated on Their Own to Stop Installing Smart Meters
As Woodward noted, several studies have found that the frequencies being emitted by the smart meters are in fact causing harm. That means "people injured by smart meters are not hypochondriacs," Woodward noted in the video.
He added that because of what his experiment has shown, it could be that people injured by the meters have legitimate court cases against power companies that use them, via personal injury lawsuits.
"This is real. You saw it on the oscilloscope," he continued, adding that he encouraged power companies and other scientists to conduct their own research on this issue.
He also said that state utility regulators and public health agencies should now be spurred on to do their jobs, which used to always include protecting the public by promoting public health and safety when it comes to smart meters. And finally, he noted, the U.S. Department of Energy;
“Will have to bring an immediate halt to the promotion and subsidization of the wireless 'smart' grid," because of the harm it is causing humans.
It's not likely that power companies will move on their own, so it will take legal action on the part of those who are injured to get them motivated enough to do the right thing. Most Americans are in favor of modernizing our power grid and making it more efficient, but not at the expense of our health.
New Zealand’s Reputation Stained By Corruption - Case In Point: The Turitea Wind Farm November 30 2016 | From: TuriteaDocuments
Observers of recent world events have witnessed a pushback against corruption and the poor behaviour of governments. Unfortunately New Zealand is not corruption free. When making such a claim there must be concrete evidence to back it up.
This evidence, which has taken more than six years to assemble, is provided in the link below.
The government, which self reports on its corruption status, secretly colluded with Mighty River Power, a then State Owned Enterprise, and our local government authority, Palmerston North City Council [PNCC], to force a gigantic wind farm on the local community; known as the Turitea wind farm.
This was initiated during the reign of former Prime Minister Helen Clark. The consummation of a hitherto punitive, secret contract, which cancels the government’s social contract with all New Zealanders, took place during the current administration.
The Turitea Wind Farm is comprised of 60 turbines. The 60 3MW Turitea turbines are 10 metres taller than these at Tararua three and will tower over the city
This mafia like contract imposes a 3 million dollar penalty on PNCC if it helps anyone affected by the wind farm and further imposes unlimited liability if it changes its mind about supporting it.
A variation to the contract shows all participants would conspire to overthrow any decision by a court impeding the wind farm.
The wind farm was "approved" and a consent issued by a “judge”, Shonagh Kenderdine. Kenderdine however was not a judge as she had been automatically and compulsorily removed, by virtue of age, from the judicial register more than 13 months prior to issuing the consent at the conclusion of a Call-In process, which has higher legal authority than an actual court of law.
This fraud by Kenderdine is certainly not a Commonwealth first. Kenderdine, without a warrant and just a member of the public, took a very substantial bribe to bring the secret contract to a predetermined conclusion.
No one was supposed to find out. Virtually all the executive from the Prime Minister and Attorney-General down either know about this or are actively in on the fraud.
"Judge" Shonagh Kenderdine being awarded the Insignia if a Companion of the Queen's Service Order for services to the judiciary by then New Zealand Governor-General Sir Jerry Mateparae
They and a range of government agencies have been contacted on numerous occasions. These agencies include the Office of the Governor-General, police, Financial Markets Authority, LCRO, Judicial Conduct Commissioner, Ministry for the Environment, Serious Fraud Office, Environment Court, Law Commission, Ombudsman, Office of the Auditor General, etc.
With the exception of one, which was compelled to give the game away, all have maintained a code of silence.
The factual account linked below has all the hallmarks of a systematic fraud; corruption at the highest levels of government, subversion and alienation of existing law, illegal payments, securities fraud, media collusion, and PNCC ratepayers facing severe financial loss, the whole nine yards, but with two laughably novel twists.
1. The Turitea and Puketoi wind farms have been deliberately located right on top of three of the country's most dangerous active fault lines.
2. A 49% share in Mighty River Power, which owns the consents, was subsequently sold to unwitting investors.
Despite assurances the earthquake risk was not revealed. Taxpayers and individual investors will bear the inevitable losses.
Below is part of the fault line map of New Zealand. The red box shows the area of the location of the Turitea Wind Farm. The yellow box marks the town of Kaukoura, the worst hit area during the recent 7.8 magnitude earthquake.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
The recent 7.8 magnitude earthquake causing very serious damage at the top of the South Island is a stern reminder of the certain vulnerability of the Manawatu and Wairarapa landscape to even greater events.
Conspiratorial corruption is here laid out with all the proof needed. The main participants are identified and their actions laid bare. Be prepared for some surprises:
Scotland Just Banned Fracking Forever + Fracking Hell: The Untold Story November 25 2016 | From: TheAntiMedia / GreenMedInfo
Scotland - In one fell swoop, Scotland banned fracking - permanently - when parliament narrowly voted in favor of cementing the country’s temporary moratorium on the controversial practice.
With the original intention of conducting full health and environmental impact assessments before continuing with all unconventional oil and gas extraction - including fracking - Scotland implemented a temporary halt to all such procedures in January 2015.
Members of the ruling Scottish National Party abstained from the vote, which passed 32 to 29, though SNP Energy Minister Paul Wheelhouse claimed the government remains “deeply sceptical” of fracking and none would be allowed to proceed unless distinct evidence proved the practice ‘causes no harm,’ the Guardianreported.
Scottish Labour Party environment spokesperson, Claudia Beamish, said following the vote;
“The SNP government must now clarify whether or not they will respect the will of parliament and introduce an outright ban on fracking. It would be outrageous for this important vote to be ignored.”
While ignoring the will of lawmakers could potentiate serious divisions - and, as the Guardiannoted, represents a “significant defeat” for the new parliament - SNP has no explicit obligation to follow the non-binding vote.
“There is no doubt about the science,”Beamish continued, “to meet our climate change goals and protect our environment we need to develop low carbon sources of energy, not another fossil fuel. Labour’s position is clear: no ifs, no buts, no fracking.”
Opposition Conservative Party members expressed frustration over the fracking defeat, as the unconventional extraction method could boost jobs and the country’s economy.
In sharp contrast to the vote in Scotland, the U.K.’s North Yorkshire County Council recently gave the go-ahead to ree drill tests for shale gas - after five years of being frack-free - despite significant protest.
One council planning officer claimed 36 letters supported restarting fracking - while 4,375 had opposed the move.
Friends of the Earth and Frack Free Ryedale issued a joint “People’s Declaration” condemning the decision, which stated, in part:
“We, as people united across Yorkshire and across Britain, declare that we remain opposed to fracking in Yorkshire, in Britain, and across the world. We know that fracking carries serious risks to local people, to our health, our water, our wildlife, and contributes to climate change."
“We are extremely disappointed that North Yorkshire County Council has not listened to the overwhelming wishes of the locally elected representatives of Ryedale and local people and has approved Third Energy’s application to frack our county."
“With the notable exception of the Tories, there is clearly an appetite for radical land reform in this session of parliament and tonight’s vote puts the pressure on government to deliver on that expectation” the Guardian reported.
“Activists within the SNP agitating for bolder action on land reform should question their party’s decision in chamber today.”
5,000 gallons of toxic petrochemicals per well, and the industry is projecting between 3,000 - 4,000 wells per year for the next 30 years!
An original investigative report by Earth Focus and UK’s Ecologist Film Unit looks at the risks of natural gas development in the Marcellus Shale.
From toxic chemicals in drinking water to unregulated interstate dumping of potentially radioactive waste that experts fear can contaminate water supplies in major population centers including New York City, are the health consequences worth the economic gains?
Marcellus Shale contains enough natural gas to supply all US gas needs for 14 years. But as gas drilling takes place, using a process called hydraulic fracturing or “fracking,” toxic chemicals and methane gas seep into drinking water. Now experts fear that unacceptable levels of radioactive Radium 226 in gas development waste.
Fracking chemicals are linked to bone, liver and breast cancers, gastrointestinal, circulatory, respiratory, developmental as well as brain and nervous system disorders. Such chemicals are present in frack waste and may find their way into drinking water and air.
Waste from Pennsylvania gas wells - waste that may also contain unacceptable levels of radium - is routinely dumped across state lines into landfills in New York, Ohio and West Virginia. New York does not require testing waste for radioactivity prior to dumping or treatment.
So drill cuttings from Pennsylvania have been dumped in New York’s Chemung and other counties and liquid waste is shipped to treatment plants in Auburn and Watertown New York. How radioactive is this waste? Experts are calling are for testing to find out.
New York State may have been the first state in the nation to put a temporary hold on fracking pending a safety review, but it allows other states to dump toxic frack waste within its boundaries.
With a gas production boom underway in the Marcellus Shale and plans for some 400,000 wells in the coming decades, the cumulative impact of dumping potential lethal waste without adequate oversight is a catastrophe waiting to happen. And now U.S. companies are exporting fracking to Europe.
Fracking Hell: The Untold Story
Seeding Doubt: How Self-Appointed Guardians Of “Sound Science” Tip The Scales Toward Industry November 23 2016 | From: TheIntercept
At a time when public mistrust of science runs high, and non-experts are hard-pressed to separate fact from industry-sponsored spin, Sense About Science, a charity based in London with an affiliate in New York, presents itself as a trustworthy arbiter.
The organization purports to help the misinformed public sift through alarmist claims about public health and the environment by directing journalists, policymakers, and others to vetted sources who can explain the evidence behind debates about controversial products like e-cigarettes and flame retardants.
One reason the public is so confused, suggested Tracey Brown, the group’s director, in a recent Guardian op-ed, is that the media feeds alarmism by focusing on who sponsors scientific studies, rather than asking more important questions about whether the research is sound.
Even when there is no evidence of bias, Brown contended, journalists attack industry-funded research, running exposés on subjects such as fracking, genetically modified plants, and sugar. Brown lamented that what she called “the ‘who funded it?’ question” is too often asked by “people with axes to grind.”
Brown’s downplaying of concerns about such research invites skepticism. Since the mid-1990s, numerous studies have shown that industry-funded research tends to favor its sponsors’ products. This effect has been documented in research financed by chemical, pharmaceutical, surgical, food, tobacco, and, we have learned most recently, sugar companies.
In the 1960s, the sugar industry secretly paid scientists to minimize the role sugar plays in causing heart disease and blame saturated fat instead, according to a study published in the September issue of JAMA Internal Medicine.
Journalists in pursuit of transparency have good reason to ask, “Who funded it?”
Sense About Science claims to champion transparency. The organization has campaigned to see the evidence behind policy decisions and asked for pharmaceutical companies to release all the results of clinical trials, not just the positive ones.
Nearly 700 organizations have signed on to the clinical trials initiative since it began last year. These are salutary efforts, and Brown points out that with the exception of one program funded by publishers, none of the group’s projects are underwritten by companies. But this sidesteps a larger issue.
Sense About Science does not always disclose when its sources on controversial matters are scientists with ties to the industries under examination. And the group is known to take positions that buck scientific consensus or dismiss emerging evidence of harm.
When journalists rightly ask who sponsors research into the risks of, say, asbestos, or synthetic chemicals, they’d be well advised to question the evidence Sense About Science presents in these debates as well.
A man holds a tobacco sample at the Seita-Imperial tobacco research center on May 29, 2012, in Fleury-les-Aubrais, France
In 2002, Dick Teverne, an English politician and business consultant, founded Sense About Science “to expose bogus science,” he explains in his memoir, “Against the Tide.”
Through his consulting work, Taverne had cultivated relationships with energy, communications, food, and pharmaceutical companies. Sense About Science’s early sponsors included some of Taverne’s former clients and companies in which he owned stock.
Taverne must have known the power of media narratives about science firsthand, because he had experience with the tobacco industry, which labored mightily to change the conversation about its product in the face of evidence that cigarettes were lethal.
The idea for a “sound science” group, made up of a network of scientists who would speak out against regulations that industrial spokespeople lacked the credibility to challenge, was a pitch Burson-Marsteller made to Philip Morris in a 1994 memorandum.
It’s not hard to identify traces of this approach in Taverne’s later work. Writing in his 2005 book, “The March of Unreason,” Taverne complained that “eco-fundamentalists” and fearmongers had fomented a backlash against science and technology, which had in turn produced a “multiplication of health and safety regulations.”
That year British Petroleum donated 15,000 pounds to Sense About Science, and Taverne argued in the House of Lords that as much as 80 percent of global warming might be attributable to solar activity, even though that theory had been discredited two years earlier. Taverne, who stepped down as chairman of Sense About Science in 2012, did not respond to The Intercept’s requests for comment.
Sense About Science established an American affiliate in 2014, under the direction of a Brooklyn-based journalist named Trevor Butterworth. In financial documents, Sense About Science claims Sense About Science USA as a sister organization “with close ties and similar aims.”
From 2003 to 2014, Butterworth contributed to the website of an organization called STATS, a nonprofit that promoted statistical literacy. STATS had its own connections to the tobacco industry, in this case through founder Robert Lichter, a conservative political scientist and now a communications professor at George Mason University.
Lichter also co-founded and continues to run the Center for Media and Public Affairs, which Philip Morris hired in 1994 to survey news reports about tobacco as part of its strategy, outlined in a memo from March of that year, to counter “personal and public bias” in stories about cigarettes’ health risks.
Lichter, like Sense About Science’s Tracey Brown, has argued that industry money doesn’t necessarily taint the science it supports.
In 2003, a congressional report charged the George W. Bush administration with stacking a government committee on childhood lead poisoning with industry scientists.
“Studies have found that scientists who have consulted for industry do not differ in their assessment of risks, of health risks, from scientists who have not consulted for industry.”
Lichter did not respond to The Intercept’s requests for comment or citations to these studies.
Before STATS was dissolved in 2014, and its web site adopted by Sense About Science USA, it received regular grants from free-market sources. Between 1998 and 2014, STATS received $4.5 million, 81 percent of its donations, from the Searle Freedom Trust, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, Donors Trust (a fund largely sustained by Charles Koch), and other right-wing foundations.
Searle, which describes its mission as promoting “economic liberties,” gave STATS $959,000 between 2010 and 2014.
Anti-regulatory foundations, including these, spent over half a billion dollars between 2003 and 2010 to;
“Manipulate and mislead the public over the nature of climate science and the threat posed by climate change,” according to a 2013 study by Drexel University sociologist Robert Brulle.
A worker sprays foam before removing asbestos from a ceiling at Jussieu University in Paris, France, on March 25, 1999
With these roots Sense About Science should not surprise anyone when it promotes anti-regulatory voices on issues like asbestos. In a 2006 brochure called “Science for Celebrities” and purporting to correct misperceptions about synthetic chemicals, Sense About Science offers John Hoskins, a toxicologist formerly of the Medical Research Council Toxicology Unit at the University of Leicester.
Under the rubric “Toxic effects depend on dose,” Hoskins reassures us:
“Away from the high doses of occupational exposure a whole host of unwanted chemicals finds their way into our bodies. Most leave quickly but some stay: asbestos and silica in our lungs, dioxins in our blood. Do they matter? No!”
Since then, as countries continue to mine asbestos, industry groups have argued that certain varieties, including chrysotile and crocidolite, are not so toxic.
In response, several groups, including the Collegium Ramazzini, an international body of occupational and environmental health experts, have issued consensus statements warning that no form of asbestos is safe at any dose.
In calling for a universal ban on all forms of asbestos in 2010, the Collegium Ramazzini observed that the asbestos industry’s attacks on evidence that “irrefutably” links its product to cancer “closely resemble those used by the tobacco industry.”
Brown maintains that Sense About Science has not disagreed with the scientific consensus on asbestos, and she notes that dose and type of exposure are the issue. But when I asked Hoskins why his position differed from the scientific consensus, he shrugged over email, “Once upon a time the consensus was that the earth is flat.”
Hoskins further replied;
“Unfortunately, to say that within a population low-level exposure of many chemicals must be dangerous is not borne out by reality, much to the chagrin of those who live in the fantasy world of ‘chemical-free.’ ”
Hoskins’s résumé states that he has represented the Chrysotile Institute in “discussion with the governments of several countries.” But he did not disclose this relationship to the Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health journal when he co-authored two scientific papers disputing claims that chrysotile or crocidolite caused a rare cancer in exposed populations.
When his industry ties came to light, the journal issued errata for bothpapers to disclose this competing interest.
(Hoskins denies any conflict of interest, insisting that his role in authoring the papers was confined to providing information the other authors requested. Yet all but one of the other authors had also failed to disclose their asbestos interests, which now appear in the errata.)
Soon after the first paper appeared, eight public health researchers wrote a letter to the editors of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health expressing outrage that the journal would publish a paper with “gross mistakes” and “no scientific content.”
But the journal’s editors declined to retract the papers, which remain in the technical literature, casting doubt on the scientific consensus that all forms of asbestos are hazardous to human health.
Flames threaten to jump a ridge that firefighting aircraft have painted red with fire retardant above Cajon Boulevard at the Blue Cut Fire on Aug. 18, 2016, near Wrightwood, California
It's hard to make a case for the safety of a substance like asbestos, which most people know causes cancer. Other commercial products are easier to defend, not because they are less hazardous, but because consumers are not as familiar with the evidence questioning their safety and utility.
Scientists have known since 1997 that flame retardants, for example, can cause cancer.
These brominated and chlorinated chemicals are used in a wide range of consumer products, including nursing pads and car seats. For more than three decades, studies in animals and humans have linked them to cancer, developmental delays, and other serious health problems.
By 2010, the evidence was so persuasive that nearly 150 scientists from 22 countries signed a statement warning that flame retardants “are a concern for persistence, bioaccumulation, long-range transport, and toxicity.” Flame retardants’ fire safety benefit not only remains unproven, the scientists asserted, but the chemicals form highly toxic byproducts when burned.
Sense About Science has long relied on dubious numbers to insist on the efficacy of these chemicals.
A European Commission press officer told me she knows of no such report.
“The reference to the 20 percent reduction in fire deaths is repeatedly quoted in papers and publications from flame retardant industries and associations, and they always refer to ‘Flame Retardants, DG Environment Video 2000,’ which we cannot find.”
On the contrary, she told me, it is simply “not possible to correlate fire deaths to non-flammability requirements.”
The same year, Sense About Science again called on John Hoskins, identified as an independent toxicologist, this time to fact-check a study that found potentially carcinogenic flame retardants in sofas. In his response, Hoskins wrote: “The bottom line is that danger of fire is many, many times greater than any imagined danger from chemicals used to prevent it.”
“Everything I wrote about flame retardants was taken from published works,” Hoskins told me.
“Reviewers at the time found nothing to criticize and I have had no comment from the thousands of people who must have read the pieces.”
Sense About Science reprinted its guide on chemicals in 2014. “The trade-off between fire risk and toxicology is changing, and we represented that newer precautionary thinking in our most recent publications,” Brown, the group’s director, told The Intercept in an email.
The new guide acknowledged “allegations of side effects” from flame retardants, including persistence in the environment and toxicity to humans and animals.
But it also retained the unsupported claim that regulations requiring the chemicals saved lives.
The guide even retained the text that countered concerns about traces of flame retardants found in children’s bodies by asserting that because the chemicals protected children from death or injury from fire;
“To fail to expose them to such chemicals could be regarded as negligent.”
Scientists who reviewed human studies had come to a different conclusion the year before. They warned that although such links were impossible to prove conclusively, the evidence suggested that children’s exposure to flame retardants could have serious health consequences, including neurobehavioral and developmental problems. The scientists called for regulatory oversight.
A scientist holds a flask containing bisphenol A, a chemical used to make plastics that numerous scientific studies have linked to developmental and reproductive disorders
Of all the controversial chemicals in the public eye, the one Trevor Butterworth, Sense About Science USA’s director, has most fervently defended is bisphenol A, a compound used to make plastics. BPA is found in hard plastics, the lining of canned drinks and foods, thermal receipts, and other consumer and industrial products, including cigarette filters.
Leading reproductive biologists released a consensus statement in 2007 warning that “the wide range of adverse effects of low doses of BPA in laboratory animals exposed both during development and in adulthood is a great cause for concern with regard to the potential for similar adverse effects in humans.”
Two years later, while working for STATS, Butterworth published a 27,000-word investigation sharply questioning the validity of the scientific studies and news reports about BPA’s health effects.
Butterworth’s central claim was that a handful of scientists, journalists, and environmental activist groups had ignored good science in a crusade to paint BPA as “the biological equivalent of global warming.”
These reporters, he claimed, relied on flawed studies by independent researchers and unfairly dismissed the industry-funded studies that found no harm.
But the independent studies were not, in fact, flawed. Regulators just didn’t consider them useful, because, like many such academic studies, they didn’t measure toxicity but tested hypotheses about how BPA could alter living systems.
BPA trade groups have long insisted that the substance is metabolized too quickly to cause harm.
Butterworth cites a 2009 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study that measured BPA concentrations in newborns to make the same case. The study, he argues, “provides important evidence that infants - even those born prematurely - are able to detoxify BPA in the same way as adults.”
The CDC study he cited was designed to gauge exposure, not metabolism. BPA has been detected in the urine of nearly every American tested. Premature babies’ fragile systems make them particularly vulnerable to environmental contaminants.
The researchers suspected that the use of plastic medical devices in neonatal intensive care units might expose premature infants to higher than average levels of BPA. And that’s exactly what they found: Average BPA concentrations in hospitalized premature babies were about 10 times higher than those measured in adults.
The authors noted that although premature babies appear to have some ability to metabolize BPA, their detoxification pathways “are not expected to be functional at adult rates until months after birth.”
Butterworth ended his critique of what he called “the BPA is dangerous thesis” by suggesting that banning the chemical could result in greater harm:
“What if some parents who turned to glass bottles for fear of … ‘leaching’ BPA drop and break them, causing injury to their babies?”
Reached by email for comment, Butterworth did not account for his questionable characterization of the CDC study. He said that his critique relied on the work of scientists from regulatory agencies involved in risk assessment, and that these scientists had criticized smaller studies that claimed adverse effects.
He maintained that studies assessing the effects of low doses of BPA are inconsistent and unlikely to capture significant results because of methodological and statistical problems.
The year after Butterworth’s 2009 investigation, the anti-regulatory Donors Trust awarded STATS $86,000 for its “research efforts,” and the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which belongs to the BPA Joint Trade Association, gave Lichter’s Center for Media and Public Affairs $10,000 for “research support.”
That year Coca-Cola gave more than $30,000 to Butterworth’s future partner, Sense About Science, which hosted a BPA forum the next year. (Since then, Sense About Science has not received corporate donations, which “represented less than 3 percent of our income,” Brown wrote in an email.)
In the forum, a Q&A on social media, Sense About Science put forward a representative of the British Plastics Federation and a toxicologist whose longstanding ties to the chemical industry the organization did not disclose. Participants were assured that BPA posed no risk to human health.
Sales staff exhale vapor while demonstrating their electronic cigarette products at the Vape China Expo at the China International Exhibition Center in Beijing on July 23, 2015
The tobacco industry pioneered tactics to fight regulations by manufacturing doubt about the scientific consensus that cigarettes kill. So it should be no surprise to encounter a strategy among defenders of the e-cigarette that also centers around doubt. If we don’t know for certain that a product is safe, we might urge caution.
Sense About Science has argued the opposite: so long as we don’t know the product is unsafe, medical professionals have no business urging regulation.
E-cigarettes turn chemical solutions into a nicotine-filled mist, which consumers ingest without the added harm of tobacco tar.
E-cigarettes are too new for scientists to have assessed their long-term health risks. British and American scientific bodies have reacted to this paucity of evidence with different views of the relative dangers.
Last year, Public Health England joined other British public health organizations in encouraging smokers to use e-cigarettes as an aid in quitting tobacco. The Royal College of Physicians effectively endorsed this view in April, when it argued against regulating a product that could help smokers quit.
But American public health officials worry that nicotine, which is as addictive as heroin and cocaine, will hook young smokers and cause lasting harm to their still-developing brains. Nicotine is linked to immunosuppression as well as cardiovascular, respiratory, and gastrointestinal disorders.
There is evidence that it interferes with chemotherapies and may even play a role in cancer. Researchers are just beginning to study whether the more than 7,000 flavoring chemicals, which typically aren’t disclosed on e-cigarettes, are safe when inhaled.
“Ensure their use does not undermine smoking prevention and cessation by reinforcing the normalcy of cigarette use.”
BMA reaffirmed this judgment as recently as this past June, despite the opposing position of the Royal College of Physicians. Sense About Science reacted to BMA’s call for a ban by asking the association to produce evidence that e-cigarettes caused harm.
“This move towards heavy regulation appears to be driven by the fear that e-cigs might be harmful or act as a gateway to conventional tobacco - despite little or no evidence for either claim,” the organization argued on its website in 2013, two years before Public Health England endorsed e-cigarettes as a tool to quit smoking.
Such regulations, Sense About Science stated, could do more harm than good by inhibiting access to products that may help reduce harm from smoking tobacco cigarettes.
Although Sense About Science has demanded evidence that e-cigarettes cause harm, it seems poised to cast doubt on the evidence when it turns up. In August, the organization challenged the relevance of research presented that month at a cardiology conference showing that nicotine in e-cigarettes can stiffen arteries, an early indication of heart disease.
Sense About Science’s expert dismissively compared the effects of nicotine documented in the research to those of “watching a thriller or a football match.”
In the United States, just this past May, the Food and Drug Administration moved to regulate e-cigarettes, including banning sales to those 18 and under. The CDC, too, takes the health risks of nicotine seriously. Last fall, the centers called for strategies to reduce the use of all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes.
“The potential long-term benefits and risks associated with e-cigarette use are not currently known,” the CDC reported. “What is known is that nicotine exposure at a young age may cause lasting harm to brain development, promote nicotine addiction, and lead to sustained tobacco use.”
David Koch, executive vice president of chemical technology for Koch Industries, listens as U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, not pictured, speaks to the Economic Club of New York on Nov. 20, 2012
Having established itself as a credible voice in debates about science and industrial regulation in the United States and Britain, Sense About Science has set out for what may prove to be its most challenging assignment.
In July, following Britain’s vote to leave the European Union, Sense About Science established an EU branch in Brussels, the headquarters of the European Commission, which has placed tighter restrictions on e-cigarettes, chemicals, and other potentially risky consumer goods than the United States has mustered.
Both Sense About Science and Sense About Science USA undertake some initiatives that serve the public interest. But the founder of the British organization worked with the architects of the tobacco industry’s disinformation strategy, and both groups have been known to promote science that favors private interests over public health.
When an organization claims to serve as a neutral arbiter in high-stakes debates about science, it pays to do what Sense About Science does: ask for the evidence.
Do You Really Understand The Health Risks From Microwave Technology? + The Health Effects Of Microwave Radiation Spelled Out November 19 2016 | From: ActivistPost / EnergyFanatics / Various
One of the most definitive, expansive and inclusive peer-reviewed papers I’ve ever read on any subject was published July 25, 2016 online at Electronic Physician as an “open access article” that I sincerely hope everyone in the media and healthcare industries will take extremely seriously.
Especially those who are promoting more and more ‘smart’ appliances and devices that transmit electromagnetic frequencies and radiofrequencies - microwaves, which damage human health more than we are being told by government health agencies at all levels (local, state and national), manufacturers, employers and school districts that even mandate their uses as “new technologies” to learn and to implement.
New technologies are fine IF and WHEN they take into consideration and implement safeguards for human health, which is not the case with microwave technology, but has been the "dream warfare" technology for the United States military and other governments, so anything goes, including our being bombarded with so much microwaves, we now are experiencing more adverse health effects attributed to what's scientifically termed "Non-thermal Adverse Health Effects."
The U.S. military has had a GREAT interest in keeping microwave safety standards higher than they should be and not as applicable as the science demands.
Dr Magda Havas, PhD, Environmental & Resource Studies, 1600 West Bank Drive, Trent University, Peterborough, ON, Canada, K9J 7B8 on her website published the following incriminating unclassified U.S. Army documents information as to why microwaves are not safe, nor made safer, due to U.S. military involvement with its electronic warfare techniques, which harm everything.
There are two disturbing paragraphs in the document "Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation (Radiowaves and Microwaves) - Eurasian Communist Countries (U)". Prepared by U.S. Army Medical Intelligence and Information Agency Office of the Surgeon General and released by the Defense Intelligence Agency.
Adams, R.L. and R.A. Williams. 1976. 34 pp. Unclassified, which clearly indicate the U.S. military's perspective opposing more stringent guidelines for microwave radiation.
No. 1:"If the more advanced nations of the West are strict in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards, there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output and military function.
The Eurasian Communist countries could, on the other hand, give lip service to strict standards, but allow their military to operate without restriction and thereby gain the advantage in electronic warfare techniques and the development of antipersonnel applications." [Page vii]
No. 2:"Should subsequent research result in adoption of the Soviet standard by other countries, industries whose practices are based on less stringent safety regulations, could be required to make costly modifications in order to protect workers.
Recognition of the 0.01 mW/cm2 standard could also limit the application of new technology by making the commercial exploitation of some products unattractive because of increased cost, imposed by the need for additional safeguards." [Page 24]
Below is the copy and paste job of the Introduction from A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and the reproductive system, which I hope my readers will take seriously and also take necessary steps to protect yourselves, your children, your pets and your home environment.
This is SERIOUS stuff no one is taking as seriously as we ALL should. Those ‘smart’ gadgets’ just may be making you more sick than you can imagine. With 61 References, I think the Electronic Physician article needs to be taken seriously with revisions made to EMF/RF standards by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reflect them.
"People in the modern world frequently are exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Human exposure to EMFs comes from many sources, and situations are different in people's everyday lives.
EMFs emanate from power lines, computer devices, televisions, radios, and telephones. There are many factors that influence the degree to which people may be affected by EMFs. For example, body weight, body-mass index, bone density, and the levels of water and electrolytes can alter the conductivity of and biological reactivity to EMFs (1, 2).
Therefore, the effects of this environmental pollution can depend on gender, tissue density of the body, the period of life, and the exposure levels to EMFs.
Beginning in 1960 when the biological hazards caused by EMFs first were studied, human health became an important focus in the workplace and at home (3).
Although, the biological effects of EMFs are still controversial, in general, the negative effects should not be ignored.
Currently, people are exposed to various types of EMFs, which are non-ionic radiation that cannot release electrons.
They are energy in the form of oscillating electric and magnetic fields that are transformed from one point to another. Many forms of physical energy, such as X-rays, UV light, and sunlight produce EMFs (4).
There are several references that classify EMFs, but, in general, they can be considered to consist of four different types. The first type of EMFs refers to extremely low frequency (ELF) EMFs, which are EMFs that are below 300 HZ, and they are produced by military equipment and railroads.
The second type, known as intermediate frequency (IF) EMFs, have frequencies in the range of 300 Hz to 10 MHZ, and they are produced by industrial cables and electrical equipment in homes, such as televisions and computer monitors.
The third type is hyper frequency (HF) EMFs that have frequencies in the range of 10 MHz to 3000 GHz and are produced by mobile phones and radio broadcasting. Radio frequencies (RFs) also are a part of this category, which has frequencies up to 100 MHz (4).
There are also static EMFs that are produced by MRI and geomagnetism and have specified with zero frequency (3).
In 1979, Wertheimer and Looper showed that there is a direct relationship between EMFs and the increased incidence of leukemia in infants (5).
If the body's biological system is exposed to EMFs, which produce electric currents and fields, which, in fact, deal with the current and voltage, the normal physiological balance is upset.
If the density of the electric current increases to the stimulation threshold, membrane depolarization of the nerves and muscles may result. Electric and magnetic fields at environmental levels may extend the lifetime of free radicals and result in damage to people's deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) (6).
Some epidemiological studies have been done in various populations, but most have been done in laboratory animals and cell lines (4).
The biological effects of EMFs generally can be divided into thermal and non-thermal effects (7). Thermal effects are defined as the heat generated by EMFs in a specific area.
The non-thermal effects depend on the absorption of energy and changes in the behavior of tissues without producing heat. EMFs have high penetration power, and they are capable of moving charged particles, such as the electrons and ions of large macromolecules and polymers (7).
So EMFs can have devastating effects on tissue with high concentrations of electrons and ions.
EMFs that cause changes in the behavior of cells (8) and tissues alter the function of the cardiovascular system (9) and bone marrow (7).
Electromagnetic fields can have several different effects on cellular components (10), including disorders of cell proliferation and differentiation (10), damaged DNA in cells, chromosomal abnormalities (11), blood disorders (9), birth defects (12), and various mutations, including those associated with long-term exposure to EMFs.
Under the influence of these fields, the balance of the CNS and the hormonal and respiratory systems become weak, resulting in decreased activity of the mentioned organs (13, 14).
Research on the effects of EMFs on the endocrine system has focused mostly on melatonin and the derived tryptophan produced by the pineal gland (15).
Most of the harmful effects of EMFs act through the protein synthesis process (16, 17). In this regard, enzymes, due to their combination of amino acids, are affected, and their catalytic activity is decreased (4).
Studies concerning the cytotoxicicity and genotoxicity effects of EMFs mostly have focused on fibroblasts, melanocytes, lymphocytes, monocytes, and muscular cells in people and on the granolosa cells of rats (18).
A declassified 1976 Defense Intelligence Agency report showed that military personnel exposed to non-thermal microwave radiation experienced "headaches, fatigue, dizziness, irritability, sleeplessness, depression, anxiety, forgetfulness, and a lack of concentration (19).
A 2015 study showed that 2.4 GHz WiFi may be one of the major risk factors for brain tumors and other neurodegenerative diseases (20). Another 2015 paper showed that polarized EMF (man-made) was much more active biologically than non-polarized EMF (21).
Another paper showed that rabbits experienced heart arrhythmia and increased blood pressure when exposed to 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi (22). A long-term study conducted by Lennart Hardell, a Swedish scientist, on glioma and acoustic neuroma brain tumors showed that RF is carcinogenic.
The scientist called for RF to be labeled an IARC Class 1 Carcinogen and recommended urgent revision to safety guidelines (23). A 2011 study by Nora Volkow showed that radiation from cell phones, in areas next to the antenna, increased the metabolism of glucose in the brain.
Increased metabolism of glucose is associated with cancer. The study showed that biological changes occur at levels lower than the current FCC guidelines (24)."
The Health Effects Of Microwave Radiation Spelled Out
On 14 July 2016 the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) of the USA made space available in the radio spectrum for consumer devices to operate within the 25 GHz to 100 GHz of the electromagnetic spectrum. It went on to say:
"The Commission has struck a balance between new wireless services, current and future fixed satellite service operations, and federal uses. The item adopts effective sharing schemes to ensure that diverse users – including federal and non-federal, satellite and terrestrial, and fixed and mobile – can co-exist and expand.”
Nowhere in its document is mention made of consumer safety or well-being. I guess that is fair of the FCC because historically, it is not interested in matters of microwave radiation and consequent thermal and non-thermal effects on the population. Let’s face it, and most people find this hard to believe, the FCC works purely on behalf of the telecoms industries in granting them access to the airwaves, no more and no less.
Industry was very happy to hear the FCC announcement on granting access of large portions of the radio spectrum for yet more of its toys and other consumer devices.
Qualcomm for example talks much about ‘the massive internet of things’, yet nowhere on its 5G musings is mention made of consumer safety or well-being.
That ‘pink elephant’ in the living room regarding safety brings me to the point of this article. The FCC and the telecomms industry rub their hands with glee because lots of money is going to be made as 5G devices rollout yet no recent safety studies have been carried out on consumer safety.
No doubt both the FCC and industry will point regulators to the old, out-dated and one-dimensional so-called ‘safety studies’ (thermal effects) produced by the ICNIRP.
This private organisation is comprised of people and individuals who work in the telecommunications industries with no background in epidemiology, toxicology, radio frequency safety or medical practice.
The implications of 5G on consumer well-being and safety do not look good for one reason: devices that will operate within the 5G electromagnetic spectrum will use antennas that are physically small i.e. from a few millimetres to a centimetre in length.
This means that industry will produce a variety of different antenna systems to do different things.
The weird fact of operating within this very high frequency range is that signals are mostly line of sight or they are easily reflected, refracted or ‘lost’ within the differing build composition of urban environment structures.
In other words, without careful antenna design and recognition of many of the pitfalls trying to propagate microwave signals within urban environments, the signal can be easily degraded or completely lost.
In response to these challenges, the advantages in using very small physical size antennas in the millimetre wavelength is you can feed many antennas in various configuration arrays e.g. vertical or horizontal arays, waveguide, coned or highly directional beam type designs.
These types of antenna designs focus most of the transmitted power into specified directions.
This is bad news for consumers because these very small physical size antennas will pack a mighty punch to our biological systems if we step into them.
Getting back to consumer safety and well-being and all things microwave, it is clear that the latency period for adverse biological effects from devices using microwave frequencies from say 1 GHz to 5 Ghz is approximately 10 – 20 years.
In 2016 there are now many thousands of peer-reviewed medical and epidemiological studies that show, illustrate or correlate, adverse biological effects with use of mobile phone technology or WIFI.
Using frequencies even higher than 5 GHz (and up to 100 GHz) will compress the timeframe in which cancers and other biological effects show themselves within society.
It is anyone’s guess on what might happen in terms of biological safety yet it is clear to see that the pulsed nature of these high frequency, high signal intensity signals do not harbour good news for humanity, particularly in relation to the functioning of our DNA.
Nowadays, exposure to microwave radiation or frequencies used by WIFI, mobile phones, smart phones, smart meters, WIFI-enabled audio devices, WIFI-enabled fridges, most baby monitors and a whole host of other ‘esoteric’ electrical devices were recently classed as Class 2B carcinogens.
Point of sale literature excludes this fact on any advertising blurb and it is also fascinating that the small print embedded deep within mobile phone product literature say that you should not put these devices directly to your skin, body or face. If you do, you exceed the so-called ‘safe’ exposure thresholds put in place for these devices.
Getting back to the very small physical length of the antennas that will be used for 5G devices, it is very clear to surmise that if these devices talk to each other using highly efficient, directional antennas, the ERP (effective radiated power) will be huge.
If you happen to walk into this intensely focused beam of microwave radiation, what will this level of signal intensity do to your biology?
Yet again, time will tell unless we get our arses into gear and demand proper safety studies from industry and independent academia that focus on thermal and non-thermal effects on our biology.
Just like the advent of modern mobile phone technology, it is us, the consumers, who provide the guinea pig role in terms of safety.
Sufferers of EHS (electro-hyper-sensitivity) will need to be aware of any 5G device simply because the electron volt assault on their compromised bodies will be easily and instantly felt.
It is they who will suffer first and in time, everyone will be affected because one other fact the telecoms industries have not mentioned is that in order to develop an efficient network of signals within an urban environment, many thousands of new transmitter sites will need to be installed.
The physical small size of these antennas means they can be covertly installed into all sorts of urban structures which suggest that for urban dwellers at least, there will be no escape from exposure to these highly damaging microwave frequencies.
I also feel that when these antennas are in place, it will be relatively easy to alter and manipulate brain wave function of its users and others close by.
The amount of ancillary information that can be piped or attached to the main carrier frequency of such a telecommunications network system is potentially, huge. Police forces the world over use ‘Tetra’ as a systems of communication.
This system also includes a sub-carrier frequency of about 16 Hz which is very close to our natural brainwave patterns.
Could this 16 Hz ancillary pulsed ELF (extremely low-frequency) be responsible for instilling aggressive behaviours in our police force personnel?
The ‘zombie apocalypse’ might just be around the corner unless of course, we refuse to comply. That is our choice.
Are Microwave Transmission Weapons Of Mass Destruction Being Used To Trigger Catastrophic Earthquakes? + New Zealand Earthquake: The World’s Biggest Offshore Seismic Blasting Ship The Amazon Warrior November 17 2016 | From: GeoEngineeringWatch / TheContrail
Are unimaginably powerful microwave transmissions actively and aggressively being used as weapons of mass destruction? If all available evidence is examined, the logical conclusions are chilling.
When immensely powerful microwave transmissions are bounced off the atmosphere (facilitated by the atmospheric aerosol saturation) and directed back into the Earth's strata (in a seismically sensitive location), the triggering of seismic activity becomes scientifically possible.
“Spacecraft Saw ULF Radio Emissions over Haiti before January Quake
A French satellite observed a dramatic increase in ultra low frequency radio waves over Haiti in the month before the M7.0 earthquake earlier this year.
DEMETER’s is an unusual mission. Its job is to monitor low frequency radio waves generated by earthquakes.
Today, a group of geoscientists release the data associated with the M 7.0 earthquake that struck Haiti in January. They say that DEMETER saw a clear increase in ultralow frequency radio waves being emitted from the Earth’s the crust in that region in the build up to the quake.
The anecdotal evidence of electromagnetic effects associated with earthquakes is legion. Various accounts link earthquakes with mysterious light and heating effects."
The following year a deadly earthquake struck Christchurch, New Zealand. Many circumstances surrounding this disaster were also troubling. Did US officials know the earthquake was coming? Some excerpts from a report on the disaster are below.
"Was the Christchurch earthquake a terrible natural disaster, or was it a terrible MAN MADE disaster?
9 members of US Congress were in Christchurch for a summit meeting on Feb 21 & 22 but left Christchurch 2.5 hours before the earthquake hit and relocated to Wellington even though the meeting was not due to finish until the evening of Feb 22nd.
The US Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, was supposed to be visiting Christchurch and speaking at the summit meeting on Feb 22, but on Feb 18 announced she was cancelling her visit 3.
The Deputy Administrator of FEMA (US Federal Emergency Management Agency), Timothy Manning, just happened to be in Christchurch at the time with a US delegation.
All of the rest of the delegation left Christchurch shortly before the quake hit except for Mr Manning who stayed behind, and then after the quake hit he assisted with directing the emergency response.
Exactly the same thing happened with FEMA delegates with the Haiti earthquake. In Haiti , the FEMA delegates just happened to be there at the time conducting training exercises for responding to major earthquakes."
Recent releases from Wikileaks resulted in the headline below:
"Atmosphere Above Japan Heated Rapidly Before M9 Earthquake
Infrared emissions above the epicenter increased dramatically in the days before the devastating earthquake in Japan, say scientists.
They say that before the M9 earthquake, the total electron content of the ionosphere increased dramatically over the epicentre, reaching a maximum three days before the quake struck.
At the same time, satellite observations showed a big increase in infrared emissions from above the epicentre, which peaked in the hours before the quake. In other words, the atmosphere was heating up."
Though the science community is desperately trying to link pre-quake atmospheric heating to some unknown phenomenon of an atmospheric coupling with the pressure buildup in the strata, is this a rational conclusion?
The much more logical and straightforward conclusion is this, the atmospheric heating is being intentionally created by the global network of ionosphere heaters as immense microwave signals are bounced off of the atmosphere and back down into the planet.
Unfortunately, the science community is not allowed to even consider this possibility, let alone talk about it. In the period preceding the decimating Japanese earthquake, US Japanese relations were very strained.
The post-quake scenario of US/Japanese relations seemed to suddenly be unquestionable, was there a connection? Was the catastrophic quake just a natural event? Or an engineered warning to Japan?
"US Secretary of State John Kerry is scheduled to head back to New Zealand after checking out summer in Antarctica.
He's been criticized for heading to such a remote place while the US election riveted the world
He tweeted a photograph of himself boarding C-17 cargo plane in Christchurch saying "headed to Antarctica to see firsthand some of the drastic effects of climate change".
In Antarctica he was scheduled to meet with scientists and researchers at McMurdo Station, the largest research station of the US Antarctic programme, as well as visit surrounding areas on Ross Island, and the US Government's Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station.
He is the first secretary of state and the most senior US government official to ever travel to Antarctica.
He is hosted by the US National Science Foundation, which manages the US Antarctic program me."
Noctilucent clouds in the skies above Antarctica are an ominous harbinger of the atmospheric damage that is occurring there
"Many are under the belief that HAARP, now labeled IRI, no longer exists Operationally due to the Gakona, AK spin. One must understand that these Frequency Generators are Globally Ubiquitous. There are so many that are of dissimilar designs, and go by different acronyms, it is not seen as functionally one and the same.
In the case of McMurdo’s Radome and all of the Radar equipment there; Raytheon has had the contracts beginning to end. The National Science Foundation and Raytheon Polar Services Company are housed in the same building. For years the station has grown. It can house 1258 personnel and an average of 200 winter over."
Raytheon is one of the largest private "defense contractors" on the planet, this corporation is also the holder of numerous climate engineering patents including some that relate directly to ionosphere heaters. The power structure is likely microwaving the skies for a multitude of reasons, none of those reasons are in the interest of the common good.
Shocking atmospheric flashing lights were filmed in the skies above New Zealand as the massive Earthquake was occurring.
Over 2 decades ago I dove alone on the wreck of the Rainbow Warrior, as it laid on the seafloor off the coast of New Zealand. I swam through the area shown above, around the ship, and examined the gapping bomb blast hole in the hull of the once noble vessel. I hovered over the wreck and contemplated the tyranny of those who rule the world.
We are all at a crossroads, and the horizon is darkening rapidly. The power structure wields weapons of unimaginable destruction, they can only do so because of the order-followers that carry out their insanity. As the saying goes, "we have seen the enemy, and they are us".
It is up to us, the people, all of us, to refuse any further participation in the insanity. It is up to us to fully investigate and fully face the whole truth. It is up to us to prioritize the fight for the greater good because we owe that debt to our children, to the planet, and to the whole.
New Zealand Earthquake: The World’s Biggest Offshore Seismic Blasting Ship The Amazon Warrior
Dots: Super-supermoon, Climate change huckster American Politician, Amazon Warrior, Oil Exploration and Mapping for drilling, Earthquake M7.5 and plates shifting generating many aftershocks the entire length of the fault line through NZ.
The 11/13/16 quake, with a magnitude of 7.8, was much stronger than the magnitude-6.3 quake in 2011. But it also was much deeper - striking 23 kilometers (14 miles) below the earth's surface. The 2011 quake had a depth of just 5 kilometers (3 miles). The shallower a quake is, the more destruction it tends to cause.
The evil empire are after New Zealand's unobtainium. First shake up the locals, destroy infrastructure, weaken the economy and then extort deals to rape the resources of the country.
If you were planning to do seismic blasting off the coast of a Country, the best time to do it would be with the super full moon wouldn’t it? So that people only discuss that as the possible reason.
Kaikoura was clearly the target – now destroyed, and that basin is full of the precious oil for the foreign bankers and the only thing stopping them was the people of Kaikoura - now homeless and to be relocated by NZ Navy ship. Kaikoura is also known for its whale populations, the area should be protected from ALL sonic oil exploration and Naval activity!
The World’s Biggest Seismic Testing Ship - The US "Amazon Warrior" - Parked On Top Of New Zealand Fault Line during the November 13, 2016 Earthquake!
The World’s biggest seismic blasting ship the Amazon Warrior was photographed off Rarangi Beach in Cloudy Bay last night. Right on top of a major fault line. The ship was met with protests when it arrived on the 13th! It was seen off the Coast of Kaikoura on Nov. 13th, but its ETA from Panama was 10 am on Nov 14th in Wellington.
The Amazon Warrior came from Panama, was seen off of Kaikoura on the 13th and then went to anchor off of Cloudy Bay at the top of the South Island, across the channel from Wellington. If you are steaming to NZ from Panama, and your destination is Wellington, then there is no need to go an extra 95 miles south before arriving at your charted destination; after a long sea journey of 7,353 miles.
This fact alone shows that there was something very fishy going on in the state of Aotearoa.
If their scheduled arrival was for 10am on the 14th in Wellington, then their trip to Kaikoura was already calculated into their original ETA. The AW's estimated project-to-project transit speed is 17 knots or 19.5633 mph. Thus traveling the 7353 miles to NZ will take around 16 days, and the last report in Vessel Finder was Oct 25, 2016 17:52 UTC which was probably the departure time from Panama.
Roughly Oct 26 to Oct 13 is 19 days, so they left plenty of leeway to ensure they could make it to Kaikoura before heading to Wellington…however rather than 3 days leeway, it is only 2 days because NZ is one day ahead of Panama.
On a ship like the Amazon Warrior... to travel 95 miles distance from Kaikoura to Wellington it takes around 5 hours, so they have 1.75 days to engage in their seismic mayhem. The ship only pulled into Cloudy Bay to avoid the protesters at Wellington. Yea, rather obvious isn't it. By their deeds shall they shall be known.
Further information on the Amazon Warrior is available here and here.
The company, a business segment of Schlumberger, offers 3D and time-lapse seismic surveys, electromagnetic surveys, and multicomponent surveys for delineating prospects and reservoir management.
The giant defense contractor Raytheon, now holds all 12 HAARP patents. HAARP devises can be made mobile on ships, such as the HAARP Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX) platform.
A HAARP phased array antenna system was transmitting the 2.5Hz ULF frequency and it triggered the 9.0 magnitude earthquake off of Japan and ensuing tsunami.
The earthquake inducing 2.5 Hz ULF frequency was being broadcasted for two days prior to March 11, 2011…during which time the sky over Tokyo turned red as the ionosphere was pulled down into the oxygen rich atmosphere. DARPA is also developing an airborne version of HAARP.
Any country that is in the way of an oil pipeline, has valuable and strategic resources, or threatens to drop the $US dollar standard – is in danger of being chemtrailed, HAARP zapped and attacked with earthquakes and extreme weather events.
The earthquake frequency can be focused on an area during a solar flare event or full moon and once the earthquake is triggered, a seismic research vessel like the Amazon Warrior can take readings of the shockwaves moving through the earth’s crust and get an excellent picture of oil deposits even at very deep levels.
“America and NZ tested a system of using bombs to cause seismic activity and make tsunamis as a weapon in 1944 off the coat of NZ (yes, 72 years ago). "Preliminary modelling suggests that the earthquake was caused by a rupture of a northeast-striking fault that projects to the surface offshore"
The Amazon Warrior is due to commence imminent seismic testing for oil on behalf of Norwegian Oil giant Statoil. Seismic testing involves the dragging of a seismic airgun along the seabed, emitting seismic blasts every 10 seconds, 24 hours a day, from now until next May.
Statoil acquired their permit from American multinational oil corporation Chevron, and the permit extends along the eastern seaboard and to depths that are unprecedented for New Zealand.
Seismic blasting has been proven to be disruptive and harmful to sea life, including marine mammals, and is opposed by coastal fishing interests and eco-tourism operators including Ngāi Tahu’s Whale Watch ventures.
Chevron Corporation (NYSE: CVX) is an American multinational energy corporation. One of the successor companies of Standard Oil, it is headquartered in San Ramon, California, and active in more than 180 countries.
Standard Oil Co. Inc. was an American oil producing, transporting, refining, and marketing company. Established in 1870 by John D. Rockefeller as a corporation in Ohio, it was the largest oil refiner in the world of its time.
Tesla quaked Manhattan around Houston St. with a small resonant device attached to a beam in his workshop/lab, and smashed it with a hammer when it started to shake things to a dangerous level, which stopped the quake instantly.
One of his basic working principles was resonance, mechanical and electromagnetic. It's how the Tesla coil drives up huge voltage on a low current.
HAARP is an adaptation of Tesla technology used for nefarious purposes. The microwave array broils the Upper Atmosphere to 100°F with a focused and steerable electromagnetic beam, that lifts areas of the ionosphere by heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto earth and penetrate everything - living and dead.
Along with chemtrails and this heating of the atmosphere with HAARP dries up precipitation thus producing drought. I learnt somewhere they
HAARP uses sunspot cycles, sunspots, solar flares, hurricanes, fault tension build ups etc... for a EMF assisted corporate-political warfare. HAARP is boost assist and director of natural energies. They can even reflect of the moon to generate massive explosions.
On the HAARP web site in 2001 discussed successful moon bounce experiments (done since the 1960's by HAM radio operators) see: HAARP array may use Moon as a reflector to reach distant targets on Earth to create Nuclear-Sized Explosions Without Radiation!. In order to target the moon you need a steerable array and three arrays minimum are required.
HAARP is capable of creating weather like hurricanes and tornadoes and tsunamis and earthquakes. It is also capable of altering people’s moods.
NASA tomographic image of the subducted Farallon Plate in the mantle beneath eastern North America
Earth tomography is used by the oil and gas industry to find deposits. Tomography refers to imaging by sections or sectioning, through the use of any kind of penetrating wave or mechanical method. ELF waves or extremely low frequency waves can trigger an earthquake on faults that have built up tension.
Thus a ship like Amazon Warrior with even weak exploratory ELF waves can trigger fault lines into concussive domino effect earthquakes of “any” magnitude depending on how much tension is held in the tectonic ridges.
HAARP Weapon How to Make an Earthquake
It appears that the earthquake was accidentally triggered by the Amazon Warrior's exploratory ELF waves...then they quickly pulled out of the area to avoid being held responsible, but didn't go to Wellington due to the protest, and possible fear of reprisal from the New Zealand Navy.
However it is illegal to travel through New Zealand waters and conduct personal "business" PRIOR to checking in officially at one's port of entry first.
I conclude that the 11/13 quakes were accidentally triggered by an oil exploratory vessel working for Chevron. So Chevron should be made responsible for picking up the tab for repairing the damage to the country’s infrastructure and the lives of the people by this little chiropractic adjustment to the backbone of New Zealand.
The ship went about their business conducting their "research" in New Zealand territorial waters PRIOR to officially checking in with customs.
Plus this sortie was premeditated due to the original ETA, and so their actions were criminal and secretive... by going for the gold (oil) first before being invited into the country.
However reading the shenanigans of US officials in Christchurch before and after the 2011 quake....it appears that the 11/13/16 quake swarm was likely deliberate, and appears to be an act of economic war.
Goldman Sachs appears to be undertaking economic warfare on areas to drive up the prices of its commodities and stocks, and to lay claim to resources.
Canadian wildfires, pipeline attacks in Nigeria and the Gulf Oil Spill are likely sabotage undertaken by Goldman Sachs to drive up prices for its own benefit.
In New Zealand now, the Christchurch and Kaikoura quakes and the Rena shipwreck toxic spill event are acts of war against a sovereign nation for economic gain and to intimidate and demoralize Kiwis into submission to the poisoning and sacking of their country.
On 5 October 2011 the Rena ran aground near Tauranga, New Zealand, resulting in an oil spill. The spill has been described as New Zealand's worst maritime environmental disaster.
The ship was carrying 1,368 containers, eight of which contained hazardous materials, as well as 1,700 tonnes of heavy fuel oil and 200 tonnes of marine diesel oil.
Goldman Sachs Now Sees Chevron Better Off Than Exxon Mobil. Goldman Sachs is now buying and selling enough natural gas to make it one of the key players on the market - even reportedly overtaking oil major Exxon Mobil and Chevron.
Goldman Sachs, Chevron, the owners of the Amazon Warrior and the American Military Industrial Machine should be charged with war crimes, deliberate environmental sabotage and held accountable to damages.
John Kerry is in Bed with Goldman Sachs as is Evidenced by their Joint white Washing Projects
Secretary of State John Kerry and Lloyd C. Blankfein, chairman and CEO of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (NYSE: GS), in partnership with Harvard Kennedy School have announced the first-ever cross-border exchange and leadership program to support emerging women leaders across the private and non-profit sectors in the Middle East and Northern Africa.
Senator John Kerry appears to be Goldman Sachs running man, or rather flying man…but appears to be innocent of their crimes of international disaster capitalism.
John Kerry is the most Carbon Intensive Politician on the Planet - I guess we now know why John Kerry was making a short notice / unexplained trip to NZ right in the middle of a fierce US ‘elitecon’.
He went to Antarctica, which has a HAARP at the US base. Kerry is said to be on a climate saving mission. Speaking Sunday in Wellington, New Zealand before flying to Oman via Singapore…after NZ he flew to Oman, and another Arab Gulf states and then Morocco before winging to Peru and then back home.
John Kerry’s current trip could be said to be responsible for 853.4 metric tons of CO2 – as many as 52 average Americans produce in a year. The average CO2 emission for aircraft at 53.3 pounds per air mile. [ CarbonFootprint.com ]
Why Children Hate School + Digital Media And Kids: How Much Is Too Much?
October 25 2016 | From: TheUnboundedSpirit / TheConversation Children come out of the womb with an inborn desire to better understand themselves and the world they live in - they desire to explore new perspectives, to discover different realities and make sense of existence.
But why is it that later on, once they become school students, most children begin to lose interest in learning? Why do children feel bored in classroom, are uninterested in reading books, and in general hate school? These are some questions that I am going to answer here, with the aim to shed some light on the negative aspects of our current education system and provide suggestions on how it can be improved for the benefit of the new generations and hence the future of humanity.
Suppressing Children Through Schooling
When I was a school student, I was feeling very unhappy. I wanted to spend my time outside in nature and play with other children, but I was forced to stay for hours upon hours every day in a small classroom where play was out of question.
I wanted to express myself through art and sports, but I was made to sit down learning maths, history, and other things that I couldn’t care less about learning at that age. I wanted to communicate my thoughts and emotions with my peers, but I was told not to talk or move unless I was given permission first.
What I loved doing, I was not allowed to do, and what I hated doing, I was forced to do. No wonder I was so unhappy.
In most places around the world, school is a very traumatic experience for the majority of children. Children from a very young age are sent to school, whether they like it or not.
There they usually have to be confined in a room for 6 to 8 hours every weekday (except on holidays) for about 12 years of their life, to obey to rules, to follow orders and to learn things they are not interested in.
What children truly want is to have fun, to play, to communicate and form social connections, to explore the great outdoors, to ponder and create - and barely any of those things they are allowed to do in school.
School, as you can understand, is suppressing children in all sorts of ways, which is turning their life into an ongoing hellish experience. So how can children not hate school? It’s only natural that they do.
Education as Indoctrination
Although school is supposed to be the place where children learn to think and become wiser individuals, in reality school is preventing them from developing their critical thinking.
At school, an authority figure (i.e. teacher) is hired to have students unquestionably accept and repeat in a parrot-like fashion what they are being taught by him/her. Those students who do so are rewarded with good grades, while those who choose to think for themselves are being punished with bad grades or by being expelled from school.
I remember once, when I was a high school student, I took the courage to openly disagree with the opinions of my religion teacher. She was teaching a class on world’s religions, but being Christian herself, she provided us students with biased information.
She would do her best to talk in a negative way about all other religions in order to prove the superiority of Christianity.
When I presented her with some solid arguments against the Christian dogma, she soon afterwards started to treat me as a bad student, by giving me lower grades and talking to me in a disrespectful manner.
All I tried to do was to raise questions and use critical thinking, but to her that meant questioning God, which she thought is an inappropriate thing to do.
At school, students are not taught how to think, but what to think, and the difference between the two is tremendous.
Instead of learning how to utilize logic and come to their own conclusions through critical thinking, school is stunting their intelligence by filling their minds with information that they have to accept on belief alone.
Not surprisingly, once students graduate from school, they are so indoctrinated that they cannot make intelligent choices in life and deal with the challenges they encounter along their life’s journey.
Rethinking Our Education System
If we don’t want our children to be mindless automatons, we need to start thinking differently about our education system.
We need to start searching for ways to help children grow into conscious, healthy beings, instead of repressing their emotions and killing their intelligence - which is what schooling is currently doing. In order for this to happen, however, we first need to realize what the true meaning of education is.
Education is not passing exams in order to get a certificate and find a well-paying job - it is cultivating the mind and spirit in order to find health, happiness and peace.
Education is not the imposition of opinions and ideologies of the elder on the youth - it is mastering the art of thinking critically and acquiring the ability to process emerging information.
Education is not memorizing knowledge - it is developing understanding and learning how to put knowledge into practice.
Up until now, the role of school has been to force students to fit into the mould of what we consider normal living.
To be normal in our sick society means to do work that we hate doing, to doubt ourselves and be afraid to think for ourselves, to blindly believe in dogmas, to bend down in submission to authority and follow orders - in short, to live a life of ignorance and pain.
It’s about time we realize that school’s function should not be to adjust children into an unhealthy society, but to help create a healthy society instead, starting from the children themselves, who will form the future of our civilization.
The purpose of schooling should be to provide children with the tools that will enable them to develop to their full potential on multiple levels- emotional, intellectual and spiritual. School should give children the freedom to express themselves, evolve their talents and assist them in the creative process of acquiring essential practical knowledge and skills.
Most importantly, school should be the place where the needs of children are being understood, accepted, and taken care of, so that children can grow their wings of consciousness that will allow them to chase their dreams.
Then, children will no longer hate school, but, on the contrary, love it and embrace the learning experience it offers.
Digital Media And Kids: How Much Is Too Much?
Any time a new technology is introduced, it disrupts values, routines and behaviors. This goes back well before the printing press replaced oral histories or the telephone replaced face-to-face conversations, but is evident today in our regular habits of checking our smartphones for notifications.
With the rapid pace at which new digital products and services are being developed, parents report feeling particularly overwhelmed. They fear missing out on what benefits tech might hold for their families, yet don’t fully trust that electronic devices and apps are designed or marketed with their child’s best interests in mind.
We doctors used to urge parents to discourage media use under age two, and to limit kids’ use to two hours a day, at most. But we have now arrived at a more nuanced understanding of the various ways in which children use digital tools.
Through review of the updated science, interviews and focus groups with parents from diverse backgrounds, and our own clinical experience, we are now recommending that parents use media as a teaching tool – a way to connect and create – instead of just to consume.
This new policy statement represents the best medical research and academic scholarship about electronic media and health and development of children from birth through age five. Along with the associated family media-use planning website, it focuses on how parents can use electronic media together with their young children to encourage family connection, learning and digital literacy skills, in several ways:
We emphasize teaching children that media use means more than just entertainment. It can also involve connecting with others: Videochatting, for example, is fine at any age, although infants need their parents’ help to understand it. Another great use is for creating and learning together – letting the child take photos and record videos or songs, as well as looking up craft ideas. We hope parents will feel comfortable seeing digital media as a tool to meet their parenting needs, and not the thing-in-itself that controls us or our children through the attention economy or gamification.
As far as entertainment, we recommend trusted content producers such as Sesame Workshop and PBS Kids, who design apps with the child’s and parent’s needs in mind. There is also Common Sense Media, a great site for finding information on digital products and answering any tech-related parenting question you can imagine.
We recommend having unplugged spaces and times of day so that both parent and child can play, be bored, or talk without distraction or feeling a need to to multitask.
We ask parents to test apps and watch videos with their children to determine if they are good fits for their child’s temperament, rather than letting the child make all of these choices. Parents are the best people to decide whether a particular app or video is appropriate for the child’s current stage of development and knowledge.
Parents should not feel pressure to introduce their children to technology early in life for the sake of seeking a competitive advantage. Kids will catch up when they are older or in school. But, if parents want to introduce media early, the youngest age we recommend is 18 months. At that age, it’s important to note, parents must play or view along with the child for there to be any educational benefit, such as learning new words. Otherwise, that expensive tablet may just be a portable TV or cause-and-effect toy.
Time Limits and Rules Remain Important
We still recommend time limits (one hour of entertainment media per day – which does not include videochatting, taking pictures, using with parents as a learning tool and the like) and rules, for several reasons.
First, pediatricians are trained to be child advocates, making us naturally protective. In our day-to-day experiences with families in clinics, we see children having difficulties with sleep, obesity, school, relationships or behavior that appear to be intertwined with problematic media habits.
We hear parents asking for concrete guidance from us about the role digital devices might play in their families’ lives. They want to know what to let their child watch and how much of it.
They ask about how to make sure their child can be tech-savvy without ending up in a position where the child prefers and will choose digital play to the exclusion of other important activities.
Overall, the research still shows that excessive media use is associated with poorer sleep, higher obesity risk and developmental outcomes such as poor executive function (the “boss” of our brain that helps us focus, control impulses and plan), so we want parents to prioritize unplugged, social and unstructured play as much as possible.
Parents have always been interpreters of the world for young children. If kids are to grow up with a healthy concept of what digital tools are and how to use them effectively, creatively and kindly, we need to teach them.
This means both guiding them directly and modeling with our own behavior from the very start. The longer-term goal is to raise kids who see us, their parents, as guides when they encounter weird stuff online or have negative interactions on social media.
We want to raise kids who don’t react to negative emotions by spewing out their feelings - sometimes at others’ expense - online, nor binge on videos or games.
We want to raise kids with good sleep habits, healthy bodies, a variety of interests and curiosity about the world, who feel good about their learning and their relationships, both on and offline.
We hope our new guidance can help us all - parents, medical professionals and children alike - achieve that.
Out Of Hand: More People Are Using More Devices More Often Than Ever Before - Increasingly, That’s A Pain Point October 10 2016 | From: Buzzfeed For Cassandra Smolcic, the trouble began at her dream internship. Handpicked to spend a summer working on movies at Pixar, the 26-year-old logged marathon hours, and more than a few all-nighters, at her computer and tablet.
At first, she managed to ignore the mysterious pinching sensations in her hands and forearms. But by the time her internship ended and a full-time job offer rolled in, she could barely move her fingers.
For Skylar, a 12-year-old in South Florida who loves her laptop, phone, and tablet, the breaking point came at the start of sixth grade last fall. Suddenly her neck, shoulders, and back felt strained whenever she rolled her head, as if invisible hands were yanking muscles apart from the inside. All her neck-rolling, she worried, made her look like she was trying to cheat off someone’s test.
To be a perpetually plugged-in, emailing, texting, sexting, swiping, Snapchatting, selfie-taking human being in 2016, a little thumb twinge is the price of admission. There are the media-anointed outliers: the Candy Crusher with a ruptured thumb tendon, the woman who over-texted her way to “WhatsAppitis.”
And then there are people like the 18-year-old woman who said;
“If I’m scrolling down Tumblr for more than half an hour, my fingers will get sore.”
“When I hold my phone,” a 22-year-old complained, cradling her iPhone in her palm, “my bottom finger really hurts.”
A 30-year-old software engineer said his fingers “naturally curl inwards,” claw-like: “I remember my hand did not quite use to be like that.”
Amy Luo, 27, suspects her iPhone 6s is partly to blame for the numbness in her right thumb and wrist.
Compared with her old iPhone, she said, “you have to stretch a lot more, and it’s heavier.”
Dr. Patrick Lang, a San Francisco hand surgeon, sees more and more twenty- and thirtysomething tech employees with inexplicable debilitating pain in their upper limbs. “I consider it like an epidemic,” he said, “particularly in this city.”
To be clear, no one knows just how bad this “epidemic” is. At best, we learn to endure our stiff necks and throbbing thumbs. At worst, a generation of people damage their bodies without realizing it.
In all likelihood, we are somewhere in the middle, between perturbance and public health crisis, but for the time being we simply don’t - can’t - know what all these machines will do to our bodies in the long term, especially in the absence of definitive research.
What we do know is that now more people are using multiple electronics - cell phones, smartphones, tablets, laptops, desktops - for more hours a day, starting at ever earlier ages.
But we weren’t built for them.
Growing up in the Rust Belt city of Greensburg, Pennsylvania, Smolcic was the kid who was always sketching characters from movies and cartoons. And in her adolescent years in the ’90s, computers became an important tool for honing her artistic talents: She made clip-art greeting cards and banners, and high school newspaper layouts, on desktop computers.
At Susquehanna University, she went all in on graphic design as a career after she took a computer arts course on a whim.
That meant long hours on various iMacs, and even more screen time when she went on to earn a master’s in graphic design at the Savannah College of Art and Design. Over the years, she’s also carried a flip phone, a Motorola Razr, a Dell laptop, and, at the moment, a MacBook Pro and an iPhone 6s.
Machines were crucial to Smolcic’s burgeoning artistic career, as they are to so many of our lives. But it’d be hard to call them human-friendly.
Our heads sit atop our necks and line up with our shoulders and arms, just as a two-footed species’ should. But a forward-leaning head shakes up this graceful arrangement: The upper body drifts back, the hips tilt forward, and pretty much everything else - the spine, the nerves below the neck, the upper limb muscles - tightens up.
Slouching is all too easy when we hold a phone in our outstretched hand or reach for a mouse. When we type on our laptops cross-legged or sprawled on our stomachs, our necks and shoulders strain from leaning into the low screens. (Yes, as counterintuitive as it sounds, you probably shouldn’t put a laptop on your lap.)
Our hands are uniquely capable of grasping objects, a useful trait for our branch–swinging primate ancestors. Especially remarkable are our opposable thumbs, free to flex, extend, curl, and press in all sorts of directions. But their inherently unstable joints didn’t evolve to be constantly pushed beyond their range of motion. Yet they are when we flick through our phones or, worse, tablets.
To Dr. Robert Markison, it’s clear: Virtually none of Silicon Valley’s inventions, from the clunky Macintosh 128K of 1984 to the sleek iPhone 7, have been designed with respect for the human form. Markison is a San Francisco surgeon who depends on his hands to operate on other people’s hands.
He so believes in technology’s potential to harm - and treats so many young startup workers who confirm that suspicion - that he almost exclusively uses voice recognition software. He also has his own line of smartphone styluses that double as pens, with colorful barrels made of manually mixed pigments, pressure-cast resin, and hand-dyed silk.
On a recent afternoon in his office, Markison asked me to make a fist around a grip strength measurement tool, with my thumb facing the ceiling. It felt powerful, easy.
Then he had me turn my palm to the floor, the keyboarding stance of a white-collar worker, and do the same thing; my grip immediately lost a noticeable amount of strength.
“There’s no reason to think a mouse is a good idea,” Markison said.
Of course, many people with office jobs probably suspect that already. During the ’80s and ’90s, when computers - then also known as “video display terminals” - invaded workplaces around the world, employees felt their arms and fingers go numb, and headlines warned of the harm these newfangled devices appeared to be inflicting.
In the early ’90s, telephone operators, journalists, clerical workers, and employees from other fields filed hundreds of lawsuits against the manufacturers of equipment such as computer keyboards, which they blamed for severe arm, wrist, and hand injuries.
All that worry woke a generation up to the physical (and psychological) toll of automated, ultra-efficient work. Then came furniture and appliances to align technology with our bodies.
Ergonomic mice are gripped vertically, and foot mice save clicks.
Slanted and split keyboards let hands relax. Desks convert to a standing position or have adjustable split levels for monitors and keyboards. Some software transcribes speech, other software alerts your boss when you type too fast.
But these inventions have been largely for desktops. The dizzying rise of cell phones, tablets, and laptops, fueled by the rush to make screens ever more portable and ubiquitous, have all but left human-centered design principles in the dust.
Chances are good you’re reading this on your phone. In fact, chances are good your phone was the first thing you looked at this morning and the last thing you looked at last night.
Wake up to a phone alarm. Scroll, bleary-eyed, through email, texts, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram. Field more news and email on your phone on public transit (or, er, in the car).
Sit behind a computer of some kind at work or school. All day your buzzing phone demands to be held, whether you’re out to lunch or, admit it, on the toilet.
Come reverse commute, you’re once again head down on your phone, or an e-reader, until you finally take a break at home - by watching Game of Thrones on your laptop or tablet. Bonus points if you play Words With Friends while you do it.
Scientists don’t definitively know how all this activity affects our bodies. While some studies link hand ailments to heavy computer and video game use, far fewer have examined new devices like smartphones.
“The phones have only been out 10 to 15 years at best,” said Jack Dennerlein, who directs the Occupational Biomechanics and Ergonomics Laboratory at Harvard University.
“We haven’t had the long-term exposures to start seeing some of the more chronic issues that come up later in life.”
No reliable measurement of technology-related ailments exists. The closest thing is an annual survey of workplace injuries by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, whose data suggests that cases of musculoskeletal disorders, including carpal tunnel syndrome, have dropped over the last two decades.
But these figures are at best “a very crude measure” of problems, said Dr. Kurt Hegmann, who directs the University of Utah’s Rocky Mountain Center for Occupational and Environmental Health. As Dennerlein put it: “They’re better than nothing.”
Hegmann offers some theories for why the numbers are shrinking: High-risk jobs like manufacturing are decreasing. Panicked workers in the ’90s likely reported nonexistent ailments before the hysteria subsided. Some offices may have became more ergonomic.
And there are other reasons the numbers are probably off: Non-work-related factors like obesity can contribute to carpal tunnel, and if you’re constantly sending work emails but also Instagramming for fun, it’s hard to blame your sore hand on work alone.
However widespread phone-linked injuries may or may not be, a small cluster of studies suggests that they are real. A 2011 study of nearly 140 mobile device users linked internet time to right thumb pain, as well as overall screen time to right shoulder and neck discomfort.
Another found that smartphone overuse enlarges the nerve involved in carpal tunnel, causes thumb pain, and hinders the hand’s ability to do things like pinch.
Upright, an adult’s head puts about a dozen pounds of force on the spine, according to a 2014 paper. But tilted 15 degrees, as if over a phone, the force surges to 27 pounds, and to 60 pounds at 60 degrees. (That’s the weight of four Thanksgiving turkeys.)
“It’s harmful when you’re younger, because the bones are still malleable and pliable and they may be disformed permanently,” said New York spinal surgeon Dr. Kenneth Hansraj, who wrote the paper after treating a patient “head down in his iPad, playing Angry Birds four hours a day.”
Older people can suffer too, he said, because their spines are prone to narrowing, making them susceptible to injury.
But the doctor insists he’s no “cell phone basher.”
“I love the ability to have a cup of coffee and contact 10 of my friends in 10 countries with one text and say, ‘I love this coffee,’” he said.
“I’m just saying, my message is to keep your head up and be cognizant of where your head is in space.”
Skylar started using an iPad a couple years ago to watch movies in the car.
Then, at age 10, she got a MacBook Air and a rose-gold iPhone 6s, says her mother, who requested to withhold her last name to protect her identity.
Game-playing, filming lip-sync sessions, Snapchatting “weird faces,” checking Instagram, FaceTiming, and texting, not to mention doing homework on the computer, keep Skylar busy three hours or so a day.
Recently, she discovered Friends, a show about “a group of friends that do a lot of weird things and they always meet up at every single day at Central Perk. It’s a coffee shop.”
When the Pew Research Center surveyed teens in 2011, one-quarter had smartphones. In 2015, three-quarters did. According to Common Sense Media, a San Francisco nonprofit that surveyed more than 2,600 young people across the US last year, 8- to 12-year-olds log nearly two hours a day on tablets, smartphones, and other mobile devices.
And the habit starts even younger: 38% of children under 2 have played games or watched videos on a mobile device.
Even lower-income teens, who are less likely to own the latest gadgets, may be catching up to their wealthier peers: In a 2015 study of 350 children under age 5 in a low-income community in Philadelphia, most already had their own mobile device, and in fact had started using one before their first birthday.
“It’s not like an hour that goes by I don’t check my phone, unless I’m asleep, you know,” said Kendall Holle, 15.
“It’s bad. It’s bad. As soon as I wake up, open my eyes, brush my teeth, wash my face, I’m on my phone, making snaps.”
“I wake up and I start snapping,” said Jeff Ren, 19.
“When my phone got taken away,” confessed Sara, 15, “I cracked.”
“I just don’t feel normal without my phone on me now,” said Howard Lin, 18. “It would just feel like something’s missing.”
But researchers aren’t studying how so much gadget exposure, so young, affects children’s physiology - at least not to the degree they’re studying how it affects their learning, playing, and thinking.
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children under age 2 avoid screen time completely, and that older children have no more than two hours a day. After more than 15 years, it’s now rethinking these guidelines.
“In a world where ‘screen time’ is becoming simply ‘time,’ our policies must evolve or become obsolete,” it has explained.
When I asked if physical risks were being weighed along with social and psychological ones, Dr. Ari Brown, who’s leading the overhaul of the recommendations, told me by email that “the particular question you are asking … is not being addressed by our group.”
Meanwhile, people like Diane Cho didn’t see the pain coming and don’t know what will happen next.
At the news site she recently left, Cho spent her days typing 10 hours at a time, mostly on a laptop, and reading her phone - until her right arm went periodically numb, immune to icing.
“A huge reason why I wanted a career change was literally my arm was falling apart,” she said. “My body was just aching.” She’s 26.
George McIntire, 27, occasionally sees his right thumb act up: “It starts twitching back and forth, it’s shivering, and it’s going really fast too.”
Tanner Bell, a 17-year-old who makes DIY craft videos on YouTube and helps companies digitally market to teens, feels his thumbs cramp twice a week.
“It doesn’t even happen when I’m holding it, it could happen later on in the day or night,” he said. “There’s an extra tension … sort of like a tingling.”
After trading volleys of texts with a long-distance girlfriend, Vincent Hennerty, 26, ended up with early-stage carpal tunnel. Cutting back on video games was annoying, as was doing push-ups on his knuckles.
Still, nothing could prepare him for what one might call the ultimate sacrifice.
“When I was with girls,” he recalled, “I would either have to finger them less during sexual intercourse or messing around, or I’d have to be in a position where my wrists were completely straight.”
This, he said, “weighed on me the most: ‘I need to stop texting.’”
When neck rubs and ice packs didn’t soothe Skylar’s stiff neck, her mother took her to Dean Fishman, a local chiropractor and physical therapist. He sees so many people like her that in 2009 he started the Text Neck Institute outside Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
The clinic now handles 700 visits a month, he says.
“I started to notice very early on, when texting started to become popular as far as communicating goes, that I was seeing more and more younger people coming in with complaints we hadn’t seen before - headaches, neck pain, arm pain,” said Fishman, whose youngest patient so far has been a 3-year-old iPad-loving girl. So-called text neck “is not a blunt force trauma,” he said.
“You’re not going to see a lot of bulging or herniated discs overnight. Over time, it’s going to be microtraumas that end up being a bigger symptom for our patients.”
Patients are utterly, unnervingly unaware of their own bodies.
“When these younger people are in the middle of studying on their digital device, or if they’re in the middle of gaming or the excitement of texting with their friends, they don’t perceive pain,” Fishman said.
“It’s not until they put it down, lay down at night, and feel pain, and don’t attribute it to what they’ve been doing during the day.”
Cyrene Quiamco is not a patient, but has all the markings of a future one.
“I don’t even know when I don’t check Snapchat,” said the 27-year-old, who Snapchats for brands like MTV, Jolly Ranchers, Pixar, and Disneyland - and charges $10,000 to $30,000 per Story.
“It’s like, I’m in a restaurant, and then I don’t spend all of the time I’m there (on Snapchat), but then I spend five minutes checking what’s in my Snapchat feed. It’s not one sitting, it’s various sittings throughout the day.”
How many texts does she send a day? “Oh gosh, more than a thousand.” She added, “I never actually thought about how many that would be.”
Two to three hours a day, Quiamco draws colorful, detailed cartoons for Snapchat on her phone.
“You’re so focused on creating it because you don’t want to stop,” even when a pang runs up her forearm, she said. “I tell my mom, ‘Hey, I’m getting hand cramps by using the phone.’ She says, ‘You’re going to develop something. If you lose your hand, that’s everything.’”
As a 6-year-old, Smolcic fell in love with The Little Mermaid. As a grown-up graphic designer at Pixar, across the bay from San Francisco, she got to make her own mark on films like Monsters University, Cars 2, and Finding Dory. For Toy Story 3, she crafted the logo of pink teddy bear and chief antagonist Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear; for the Scotland-set Brave, she whipped up Celtic patterns for furniture and costumes.
Meetings with famous directors and other “pinch me” moments overflowed during her five years there.
“There’s just all those amazing little life lessons buried into the entertainment aspect of it that do make an impact on people,” she said of Pixar’s movies. “It felt special to be part of that.”
Despite the grueling hours, Smolcic didn’t seriously believe that hand injuries could be a hazard of the trade. But once the aches arrived, they stayed.
Even when she felt normal after a monthlong break, the stabbing sensations would flare up when she jumped back into work. Pixar was supportive, she said, and gave her an elaborate work station with a motorized standing and sitting desk, a sideways mouse, programmable foot pedals, ergonomic chairs, extra monitors, and a tablet sensitive to touch.
Doctors and specialists put her through one treatment after another, some less conventional than others: acupuncture, acupressure, breathwork, massages, physical therapy, personal training, biofeedback, myofascial release, NeuroKinetic Therapy, reflexology, naturopathy.
According to some of her many medical professionals, her diagnosis was fibromyalgia, a musculoskeletal pain disorder. Others called it a “repetitive strain injury.”
That’s probably the first term that comes to mind for these types of impairments. But occupational health experts shy away from it because it lumps together a lot of different ailments. Take carpal tunnel syndrome: A compressed nerve in your forearm numbs and weakens your hand.
But painful thumb tendons, the cord-like structures that link muscle to bone, might mean de Quervain syndrome. Tendinitis (inflamed tendons) shouldn’t be confused with trigger finger (inflammation around a tendon). And for anything too vague or early-stage to neatly fit a diagnosis, there’s the handy label of “nonspecific pain.”
To make things more confusing, none of these injuries can be easily blamed on technology. You can fiddle with gadgets your whole life without a sore thumb. Or your ailment can build over years, making it hard to know whether gadgets are the sole cause.
Recovery, too, varies. All you may need to do is vigilantly sit up straight and take breaks, whereas others would need anything from a steroid shot to surgery.
These nuances can confound primary care physicians, who don’t necessarily know when to refer patients to specialists - who in turn don’t always have all the answers either.
“People go to the hand surgeons, who are frustrated because they’re not surgical patients, so they send them to therapy,” said Melanie Johnke, who runs Golden Gate Hand Therapy in San Francisco. “And I’m not a doctor, either,” meaning she can’t make official diagnoses or prescribe medications.
As Savir put it: “If I go to the doctor, what is he going to say? ‘Don’t hold your phone that way.’ What’s the point?”
Despite knowing everything we should do, from sitting straight and stretching to taking breaks and using a phone stylus, we probably don’t and won’t follow suit. And maybe that’s just how things are now. Maybe only technology can save us from ourselves.
Tech giants like Apple, Google, and Microsoft are racing to turn their machines into mind readers. Every swipe saved, every “frictionless” convenience engineered, keeps us coming back for more: It’s a business strategy that also happens to be ergonomically friendly.
Speech recognition software - Siri, “OK Google,” Alexa, Dragon - promises to take the manual labor out of internet browsing and looking up directions.
But it doesn’t work perfectly, which isn’t news to anyone who’s yelled at Siri, and it’s still kind of weird, frankly, to talk to your phone in public.
“I’m in a shared office space, and I don’t know how that would work out,” said Saima Jamshed, 42, who has chronic pain in her right arm.
Then there are the machine learning–powered apps that, seemingly magically, cue up the next word in your message, person to call, or video to watch, based on your past activity and keystrokes.
See (as of last week) Google’s new messaging app Allo, which comes with prepackaged responses and predictive texts. But accepting their help does require sacrificing privacy to an unsettling degree.
Of course, we could also use technology less. We certainly seem to want to. Virtually all 30 or so people who spoke to me wished they could leave their phones at home, stop refreshing their notifications, watch less YouTube. Asked to guess how much time this all amounted to, they answered: too much.
Cutting back would almost definitely be healthier. But we may not be willing to do that.
Skylar has almost fully recovered, thanks to physical therapy at the Text Neck Institute and exercises at home. Her mother says she’s diligent about setting her devices at eye level (and telling everyone else to as well), just like the doctor told her to. But she isn’t actually cutting back on screen time.
The peer pressure is intense: All her friends have phones, and some have iPads and computers.
“Sometimes it gets annoying when I go to a friend’s house and all we do is play on our phone or watch something on our iPad,” Skylar said. “I went to their house to play with them or hang out with them, not just go on our electronics and be silent the whole time.”
“When I was growing up,” her mother, Kerri, recalled, “the phone was in the house, so if you left the house, the phone rang and somebody would call you later.” It was a non-negotiable break when the world had to accept that you were physically untethered from your device. “Now,” Kerri said, “it’s just everywhere.”
Smolcic has largely disconnected from technology, just not by choice.
When she was 28, a pain management specialist gave her the devastating news: She would never fully recover. She hung on for a few more years, but finally left in October 2014 for a San Francisco design agency where, she hoped, her role would be less hands-on. “I really felt like I’d tried everything I could,” she said.
But the work and pain remained more or less the same, so this March, she left the agency, and design, for the foreseeable future. Her life’s work hurt.
Since then, she’s been using money saved up to travel through Hong Kong, Greece, and Iceland, with stops to see shamans and alternative healers in Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico. She’s also writing, which she now believes to be her true calling.
Composing an 1,800-word essay this spring - through a combination of typing and recording voice memos - took a month and a half because she could only work for an hour a day. Now she says she can write for several hours at a time with almost no pain, and she’s working on a memoir partly about her injuries.
At 33, Smolcic believes that she’s 90% recovered. She can’t be sure it’s permanent - but even if so, she no longer wants a trade design job.
“I think I’d be okay with not having a lot of the luxuries I had in my San Francisco life,” she said, “as a trade for having more time to be actively living and out in the world, as opposed to being behind a desk.”
But despite all that she believes technology has cost her, physically and emotionally, Smolcic hasn’t been able to resist turning to her iPhone and MacBook on the road this year.
They are a source of directions and travel tips, an outlet for writing and music, a camera to record memories, a line of communication to friends and family. “These machines,” she wrote to me this summer, “put so much power at my fingertips.” And now that she’s feeling better, she uses them all the time.
Electronic Torture + 21st-Century Bio-Hacking And Bio-Robotizing
October 10 2016 | From: ElectronicTorture / Various
Electromagnetic torture, Microwave torture, Electronic murder, Electromagnetic murder, Microwave murder, Organized murder, Cooked alive, Electronic mind control, Electronic mind reading, Brain zapping, People zapper.
What is electronic harassment / electronic torture / electronic murder? In short - "soft kill" techniques to interfere with and kill, by the Cabal and their minions - those who get in their way.
Electronic harassment / electronic torture / electronic murder is about harrasment, torture and murder using electronic weapons based on radio waves.These weapons have been very refined and can cause effects comparable to many illnesses and/or injuries.
These weapons are not science-fiction but used today illegally by your national secret services on mostly random innocent victims not knowing what is being done to them.
What is Electronic Mind Control / Electronic Mind Reading / Brain Zapping / Synthetic Telepathy / Remote Neural Monitoring?
Electronic mind control is about forcing thoughts into your brain using invisible radio waves (this can be done long range). Your attackers can make you think about a certain person at a certain moment, force a song into your brain (so you will start humming / singing it).
Your attackers can also make you stand up and walk to your kitchen. If you do not know about this then you will be just following the thoughts that were planted into your brain. In other words: you are robotized.
Electronic mind reading is about reading your thoughts using invisible radio waves (this can be done from long ranges). Already it has become 'easy' to decode received brain signals into words spoken to oneself without talking.
At the moment they also make progress with decoding images from what you look at (as seen by you through your eyes).
This is not science-fiction but done today illegally by your national secret services on mostly random innocent victims not knowing what is being done to them.
Microwave weaponry systems like the Active Denial System are used in tandem to deliver physical attacks designed to stress targets, torture them physically, and turn their homes into places of extreme distress. Hoping to drive the target from their home or workplaces.
The pain is unbelievable. It involves tones, harmonics, hissing, stabs, blows, voice to skull transmissions, induced dreams (nightmares), burning sensations in the body and head, internal burning sensations inside of the body and head, crawling sensations on the body (phantom touch), electronic rape, induced and unwanted urination or orgasms, holographic inserts, and many other horrible tortures. My thoughts seem to be scanned every second. -
(Carolyn Palit) I thought I was dying. I thought that I would spontaneously combust into flames. Either it came from a base in the hills, or Commander Solo*, or it came from the heavens. It attacked me for two years. -
Some of his attacks are coming from the direction of the houses of the defendants that he has named in a law suit against these kinds of attacks. But . . . mostly . . . the attacks come from . . . "straight up."
More Information about Electronic Weapons Attacks, Including Mind Control and Mind Reading
On the STOPEG.com website www.stopeg.com there is an CBS News video of the Active Denial System (ADS), a microwave laser weapon. Although the DoD wants us to believe this is a safe weapon (that is why they showed it to us), experts agree it is not!
This video shows a big installation, but there are many kinds of laser weapons. Some are very big and mounted in trucks, ships, aircraft, or even in satellites. But there are also much smaller, portable versions, that can be very effective.
Of course military and secret services have equipment based on the most advanced technology available. Their equipment is not available to the public. But now advanced commercial devices are being shown on the internet giving an idea of how easy it must be for the attackers to cook, burn (torture) a person.
One is a portable (hand-held) laser, the S3 Spyder III Arctic laser. Although it may appear not very sophisticated, imagine someone pointing this at your back when you are in a restaurant or at the movies. To look at people through wall take a look at the XAVER 400 Compact, Tactical Through-Wall Imaging System.
Bio-Hacking and Bio-Robotizing
Rohinie Bisesar, the strikingly beautiful and accomplished financial services analyst and York University MBA with no previous criminal record was charged with first-degree murder in the sudden stabbing death of a young woman.
Many targets wonder how they can be attacked so easily when they move to a different location, e.g. a family member, friend, or go to a hotel. The attackers stuff their portable laser weapons and through-wall imaging devices into their suitcases, book rooms close to yours, and often will attack you from two different angles to confuse you.
In case you prevent them to attack the body area the want to attack, e.g. by putting your back against an outside wall of the hotel, they call in military aircraft that will blast you with very high power microwave (HPM) bursts, cooking your inside. (this happened several times to me, last time on July 6, 2011, while staying in a hotel in Westkapelle, Netherlands, the aircraft arriving around 1 am about 15 minutes after they concluded they could not perform the attacks on my back).
Many people have a problem thinking that others can read their mind, their thoughts. Again, the advanced technology used by military and secret services is not available to the public, but today more and more commercial devices are becoming available.
One company delivering a mind reading headset is Emotive, for USD 299,-. With this device you can control your games, your tv set, etc. with you mind! They also have an API (programming interface) to create your own mind reading application.
Even rudimentary electro-pulse mind reading technologies are publicly reported in the media
I cannot emphasize enough that not all but many attacks are from the sky. When driving your car they may burn your back (from the sky or from some equipment in your own car) when another car is driving behind you and make it go away when the car goes away.
If they do this every time then you probably will think it has to do with the car behind you. When driving your car, walking outside, riding your bike, they may burn your head and make many people you look at scratch their head.
Sometimes people are part of the sick network but many others may just have been beamed the same way you are, having no clue about what is going on (your attackers want you to attack other people, they don't care about anything because they are psychopaths, murderers. child abusers).
Another warning is for a much more confusing type of attack: electronic mind control.
In this case your attackers will plant thoughts into the brain of people surrounding you. Of course these thoughts relate to your life in one way or the other.
They may even plant your (!) thoughts into the heads of people surrounding you. If you do not know about this then you may start to think that these people can read your mind, which can be very depressing. I wrote several article about electronic mind control, if you are a target and do not know about this capabilities you may want to read this.
Youtube video on AudioSpotlight, Subvocal Speech and Microwave hearing:
Electronic Harassment and Electronic Torture List
[Published: February 26, 2009. Updated: February 28, 2009, April 11, 2009, June 10, 2009, June 13, 2009, June 25, 2009, September 6, 2009, December 24, 2009]
Almost anybody can become a (temporary) target of these horrible electronic weapons. Please read what can be done so you are prepared. This is not science fiction but happening right now in our 'democratic' society.
Below is a list of all possible attacks by electronic weapons that I know of by experience. I know more attacks exists. Female targets write about sexual attacks, others mention continuous ringing in the ears, etc. I may add these later. I decided to keep this list personal, i.e. in this blog I write down only what has/is being done to me, not what is being done to others.
These attacks are done by the following kind of electronic weapons:
Directed Energy Weapons (laser weapons), like ELF (very low frequency), ultrasonic, lasers, (high power) microwave weapons
Microwave hearing/Silent Sound (letting you hear sounds/things in other ways then hearing by the ear)
On the internet already a lot of symptoms and attacks by these weapons can be found. Most of these lists do not detail these attacks and that is exactly what I am trying to do here. In my opinion it is not enough to read that such a weapon gives you a burning feeling, instead the horrible details must be exposed!
Description of a (continuous) high intensity microwave weapon attack:
This weapon makes your skin really burn like a very heavy sunburn and cooks your inside, you really feel being cooked alive, you are heated like meat in a microwave oven, with intensities that exceed those of a microwave oven.
Gal is coming out of your throat and fluids inside your body evaporate making you instantly burp. In case of high intensity there is also a burning sensation on the other side of the body, where the beam, of approximately 10-30 cm diameter leaves the body.
If they cook you long enough cooked body cells explode inside you, when aimed at your upper body, lung cells explode / are destroyed and reducing lung capacity immediately noticed when walking stairs or running.
The burning sensation and the cooked-inside feeling will go away after 5-30 minutes or 1-2 days depending on the duration and intensity, it may take a day or more to recover from high power microwave bursts with durations of 5-60 seconds (but can you recover from these amounts of irradiation?).
A cup of milk is heated and starts evaporating after 5-10 seconds. The electronic weapons aimed at you can make you burp or fart within 1-3 seconds, hence the intensity of electromagnetic irradiation is not only used to torture a person but murder as well.
Covert and Intended-to-Notice (or Noticed) Electronic Harassment / Torture
Electronic harassment is called covert if the target does not know about these weapons and methods. If you do not know about these weapons you may think you have all the bad luck in the world, you will wonder what strange things are happening to you, to your body, and accept you do not control your life anymore.
If intended-to-notice (or noticed), electronic harassment is torture in its most horrible form. What would you do if your body is made to react every time to events occurring in your life, e.g. by making you burp or fart, your legs are cooked every night, your ankle is cooked during daytime when working behind your computer, your knee is beamed to cause maximum pain, etc.
To delay you:
They make you go the toilet to urinate when you want to leave your house
They cook your legs before running
They burn and cook your body high power to prevent you doing you work
Note that this delaying is often done together with gang stalking methods like cars blocking your road, phone calls when you are to leave your home, etc.
To make things worse:
They make you sneeze extra times when you have a cold
They cook your throat become sore when you have a cold
They attack your eyes until red with blood
The cook your legs after running
They cook or burn where you have pain already
To torture you:
They cook and burn your body everywhere
They cook your family, your children, friends, …
Note that this torture is often done together with gang stalking methods like synchronizing saw machines, honking horns of cars, screaming birds (pigeons, crows), etc.
The Maximum Pain Business, Beyond Imagination Horror and Cruelty Without Evidence
Special methods have been developed to make you think you have a heart problem, erection problem, toothache, etc.
For the ones exposing these horrendous crimes they developed methods to inflict maximum pain, e.g. by cooking such a person alive with a high power microwave weapon, or burning the skin of the target or making the target burp or fart every few minutes to events occurring in the life of the target (including e.g. opening a website on a computer, saving a file, cars passing by the window, etc. ).
Some authors refer to the development and use of these weapons as the pain business. I would like to make a correction, please call it the maximum pain business.
After accepting that there are really such sick and disgusting creatures actually developing and applying these methods and torture, you also have to accept that it is not about just pressing a button, but also about the way how this torture is applied.
Zapping your eyes red to make you look bad, cooking biceps to prevent you from swimming, cooking your throat to prevent you from singing, inducing heart problems and toothaches to prevent you working or sports. More horror, these methods and procedures could not have been highly developed without being tested on humans, on real persons.
And again more horror, these methods are often used with gang stalking (organized stalking) methods.
Like they cook your ankle with insane intensities making your foot very painful, and when you go outside all kinds of people with leg problems are crossing your path, people limping, in a wheelchair, sometimes even someone without a leg.
Or, they start sawing wood somewhere and when the saw enters the wood cook your body with high intensity microwave.
This torture is applied 24/7, not once every hour but more like once every minute/every 5 minutes. Horrible torture that can be called torturing a person to death.
Special Case: The Heart Attack
Damaging your body can be done in several ways. One vital organ is the heart. They can attack the heart very effective with:
Microwave weapons, cooking the heart area slowly
High Power Microwave (HPM) weapons, cooking the heart area in a second
Ultrasonic weapons, pressurizing the heart area
Heart frequency manipulation weapons
These weapons can damage your heart in a split second, you may not survive such a attack, but can also be used to slowly damage your heart. Slowly cook your heart area so will get a strange feeling and in fact your heart is really damaged.
This makes the Heart Attack Gun that the CIA was forced to admit having
look positively archaic: During Senate testimony in 1975 into illegal activities by the CIA, it was revealed that the agency had developed a dart gun capable of causing a heart attack
Then there is also the frequency manipulation attack, your heart may feel pulsing, blobbing like crazy.
Cook heart area from the front, often together with a cook beam from left behind. Slow damage, horrible feeling
Flash your heart with very high power microwave. Instant damage.
Pressurize your chest, even takes your breath away if applied with enough power
Pulsate your body/heart area with low frequencies
These effects will give you a very realistic heart attack or heart problem feeling feeling. Your heart may start pounding very loud, may feel very painful, the heart area may feel strange, cooked.
If applied with enough power, this really damages your heart and heart area. Your heart is cooked like meat in a microwave oven.
Can you recover from these attacks? In general they will not murder you or leave evidence, your heart may feel very painful for several days after they stop their attacks.
It can take weeks until all pain in the area has disappeared. I am not sure about permanent damage caused by these attacks.
Can you die from such an attack? Yes, if the intensity of the beam is high enough your heart can be damaged or temporarily disturbed in such a way that you will die.
How can you recognize a ‘normal’ heart problem from a ‘induced’ heart problem? You yourself are the best judge of what you feel. If you believe something really is wrong with your heart then visit a doctor. If you are certain your heart is attacked then avoid visiting a doctor as this will confirm a heart problem in case you collapse or die, case closed.
Impossible to Protect Yourself
The human body appears to be extremely vulnerable to electromagnetic irradiation of all kind of frequencies. The human body also is a electromagnetic transmitter and sensitive (radio) equipment can pick up and decode the signals that are generated e.g. when speaking, thinking.
In contrast to a knife or a bullet, electromagnetic signals are not blocked by walls, compare your cell phone.
Limited protection is possible using sheet metal, metal plates, water, vacuum, but if you really are a target the attackers increase intensities (if necessary to insane levels), change frequency, attack from different angles etc.
Also remember that these weapons can hit a person without hitting the person sitting next to this person. They can be aimed and the diameter of the beam can be made small enough to hit only the target.
Anybody Can be a Target
Electronic weapons make it very easy to eliminate persons, to get persons (temporarily) out of the way, to murder persons, etc. all without evidence, and most of the time even the target does not know he is zapped, cooked, burned with electronic weapons. The ones owning and controlling this technology now can get everything they want in a very easy way.
They can get their football player into the national team by temporarily cut out the competitor for the same position in the team.
This could be done with other means as well but it is very easy with electronic weapons. Just cook a person’s ankle and foot during the night and the damage is done. To influence a tennis match you could cook a player by heating the body with microwaves (compare microwave oven).
He will just feel overheated and sick and loose the game.
These are just two examples to demonstrate what can be done. You can imagine almost anybody can become a target. Some people because they are more visible then others, because they have something the sick network wants, because they know something the sick network does not want to be exposed, because they are too intelligent for the sick network, ust for personal reasons because may be they made a remark about someone, etc.
The Phoenix Program Continues Today
The Phoenix Program was a program designed, coordinated, and executed by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), United States special operations forces, US Army intelligence collection units from MACV, special forces operatives from the Australian Army Training Team Vietnam (AATTV), and the Republic of Vietnam's (South Vietnam) security apparatus during the Vietnam War.
The Program was designed to identify and "neutralize" (via infiltration, capture, counter-terrorism, interrogation, and assassination) the infrastructure of the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam (NLF or Viet Cong).
The CIA described it as "a set of programs that sought to attack and destroy the political infrastructure of the Viet Cong". The major two components of the program were Provincial Reconnaissance Units (PRUs) and regional interrogation centers. PRUs would kill or capture suspected NLF members, as well as civilians who were thought to have information on NLF activities.
Many of these people were then taken to interrogation centers where many were allegedly tortured in an attempt to gain intelligence on VC activities in the area. The information extracted at the centers was then given to military commanders, who would use it to task the PRU with further capture and assassination missions.
The program was in operation between 1965 and 1972, and similar efforts existed both before and after that period. By 1972, Phoenix operatives had neutralized 81,740 suspected NLF operatives, informants and supporters, of whom between 26,000 and 41,000 were killed.
Electronic Weapons Can Kill a Person
Besides using electronic weapons to monitor, drive into suicide, cause temporary injuries, they can also be used to kill a person.
Killing is possible by sending wrong signals to the heart making it pulse in abnormal ways, or by increasing intensity and cooking the heart area, damaging the heart slowly. Very high power laser weapons or HPM (= High Power Microwave) weapons can damage your heart in a second.
Although little is known at this time about the effects of long term irradiation, it is not difficult to imagine that this will cause all kinds of diseases as electromagnetic irradiation destroys your DNA (cell with damaged DNA are called cancer). Again all these horrible things can be done, and are done today, without evidence.
How do You Know You are a Target of Electronic Harassment?
It is often very difficult to distinghuish between normal body behaviour and induced body behaviour if there no signs of burning or cooking. For example, would you know the difference between normal diareah and induced diareah?
Yes, you are able to decide what is not normal by comparing your diareah with previous experiences.
It may start and disappear very sudden, may cause other effects like water bubbles leaving your anus, etc. Also, the diareah may be linked to a certain event, like picking up your child, appearance in court, etc.
Always ask yourself what it is you are feeling, did you feel this before? Does it go away when you turn your body 180 degrees? Does it go away when you walk in the streets or drive your car? You are the best judge of what you are feeling.
Your Car May be Tagged
When you are a target you will experience harassment everywhere every time. If you have a car they will tag your car (these are words I learned from a ’so-called target’).
This means they will equip your car with electronic weapons not only to monitor you but also to cook and/or burn your body while driving.
They may also harass the target covert and use the following beams:
Sleep beam, to make the driver very sleepy
Eye beam, slowly cooking they eyes, so tears come out and visibility reduces
Just to confirm, all this is done to cause the (mental or physical) death of the target.
Harassment from (Neighbour) Houses, Cars, Handbags, Airplanes, Satellites
Most of the electronic harassment comes from close neighbor houses. When you walk in the the streets you are probably attacked by electronic weapons (directed energy weapons) from houses (they may be remote controlled or controlled by operator at these locations.
If there are no locations for their equipment, they use these weapons from their cars. You may also be hit from airplanes. This is not difficult to believe if you accept a reach several hundreds of meters. Some targets write about satellites being the source of their electronic harassment. In general I do not believe this is true.
Example of Current State-of-Technology:
You can be hit by very accurate equipment. For example, when you are running on the streets or in the woods you may be ’shot’ with a very high power microwave weapon in your calf from an airplane. The intensity can be such that this causes instant injury.
Your calf is cooked within a split second and your muscles almost instantly tear apart. Making running / walking almost impossible.
Electronic harassment can also be done from small devices carried in e.g. shopping bags in shops or on the street.
You need only a small battery to give the target a single burst that makes him burp or fart. This is enough to depress the target: nowhere safe from this horrible harassment.
Satellites probably play a big role in exchanging information about a target, e.g. you can have a subvocal speech decoding PC in the house next to target, but it is more easy (and safe) to transfer the undecoded information to a central computer system, and return the decoded words. But it may be done on site, PC’s have enough power today to do this decoding themselves.
You May be Attacked by Persons (Family, Friends, co-Workers) Who are Covertly Attacked by Electronic Harassment
The aim of the attackers is to drive the target insane. To speed up things they aim their electronic weapons covertly at family, friends, co-workers, etc. to make them react in several ways to what the target is doing or saying.
Some (easy) methods used to covertly attack other persons:
Scratch beam, to make a person scratch his head
Sneeze beam, to make a person sneeze
Cough beam, to make a person cough
Urge to urinate beam, to make a person go to the toilet
They beam persons around the target on the head so everywhere around the target people are scratching their heads
They beam the target’s head very hard and then beam the head of a friend so that this friend will start scratching his head immediately very visible for the target to see
When the target and partner are in the same, then every time the target opens a website on his PC (not visible for the partner), they beam the throat of the partner causing the partner to cough almost immediately
When the target is beamed in the stomach during work, they make a co-worker sneeze at the same time
When the target is beamed in the stomach, they beam her child in the stomach as well, making the child cry and saying it has stomach pain (this is confirmed by multiple victims)
Once again illegal and (beyond imagination) horrible crimes by our national secret services.
Elite and Secret Services Control our Politicians
It is not amazing that these weapons exist, I studied computer science myself, if you have enough money it is not that special. It is also not amazing that there are actually sick and disgusting creatures walking around free applying this kind of electronic harassment to cause the physical or mental death of a person.
What is amazing is that a lot of high ranked politicians and other influential persons are fully aware of the existence and use of these weapons but do not speak out. What does this say about these persons? I believe you can say that the idea we live in a democracy has disappeared completely.
Elite and Secret Services are Trapped by Their Crimes in Vicious Circles of More Violence Against the People of the World
The ones facilitating, outsourcing and performing this cruel electronic harassment and torture is not just a group of people, these attacks are very well designed and applied by people trained to cause maximum pain but leave no evidence.
The ones I am referring to are our secret services, including military. They are tightening their grip on society, not because they have to protect us against the terrorists in the world, but because they are getting more and more afraid what will happen when the truth about them is exposed.
They are trapped in some sort of vicious circle. To maintain themselves they must commit more and more horrible crimes. And to avoid their crimes are exposed they have to perform new horrible crimes, etc. etc.
So here we have the elite, creating wars to maintain themselves, and their armies, the secret services both trapped in their own lies and deceit. And the horror for us, the people of the world is that we will be taken from (created) threat to (created) war because that is the only way out for the (criminal) elite and (criminal) secret services.
People Cookers and Secret Services
I introduced the word people cookers in 2007 for the creatures facilitating, outsourcing, performing electronic harassment and electronic torture. Main reason is of course that people cooking comes closest to what they are doing.
Most of the harassment and torture is done by microwave irration which causes heating of the skin and your inside just like a microwave oven cooks meat.
There are no words to justify these illegal and horrendous crimes. The ones involved are disgusting creatures, an author called them ‘the failed human beings’ and that is just what they are. They were born human, choose the wrong path in life and degenerated into pieces of shit.
I believe people cooking and gang stalking (organized stalking) are the perfect example of how sick our national secret services have become. They now commit the perfect murder, in their language meaning murder without evidence. And they now steal, torture and murder just because it has become so easy to steal, torture and murder.
Electronic Harassment and Electronic Torture List - December 24, 2009
Below is the list of all (most) effects I experienced from these horrible electronic weapons. Few times I may not correctly describe the source of the effects. It is sometimes difficult to point to microwave or ultrasound.
Both can be very damaging. High Power Microwave cooks your body cells while high power ultrasound simply destroys your body cells. But in the end the result is the same, a damaged body.
Special equipment is used to detect muscle contractions like the ones a person uses when speaking out loud. When spoken to itself these muscle movements can be detected by advanced equipment and translated into words and sentences. As most people talk to themselves when ‘thinking’ this resembles mind reading.
How it is applied
They read your subvocal speech and react to it
Unbelievable at first, then you get depressed because the last thing you thought was private appears not to be private anymore. Then you accept that you probably are even more popular and watched then the big stars in the world and sometimes use it to deceive the bastards. Horrible torture
Why it is applied
To drive you insane
Seeing through your eyes
Although some targets claim that they can see what you see. I have not (yet) experienced this. But they do everything to suggest that they can do this. E.g. on the highway you are bursted with the burp beam every time a favorite model car passes in the opposite direction. They are looking at you from some camera build inside your car or from another car. They are looking at your eyes to see what you are looking at. I experienced a few times I was bursted BEFORE I saw the favorite car. A lot of research in this area is going on, I will keep you updated.
Special advanced equipment is used to beam voices, or in fact any sound, into your head.
How it is applied
They make you hear voices that you should not hear. For example, they let you hear voices from people far away very clear as if they are standing next to you. This an amazing experience. There are a lot of reports of people who claim they are attacked by voices
Why it is applied
To drive you insane
Top of your head beam
The top of your head is very sensitive. They will burn the top with some laser or microwave weapon
How it is applied
They put the beam on your head and wait for you to move
Can be very painfull if applied with enough intensity. You cannot do much with this beam on your head. Horrible torture
If applied with high intensity it may take several days for the painful feeling to disappear
Why it is applied
Prevent you from working, doing your thing
Should you worry
Yes, long term irradition may cause brain damage, tumors
They just beam your head somewhere. The normal reaction is your will start scratching your head.
How it is applied
Mostly applied when other people can see you. If they do this everytime with the same people they may wonder whats wrong with you. They also apply this and have random people scratch their heads and then burn you
Not very painfull, mostly a short pulse, although they may keep the beam on your head and remove it after you start scratchin your head
Why it is applied
Drive you out of your mind, drive you into attacking other people
This beam gives you a headache. It is some kind of high intensity low frequency beam. The headache appears suddenly and also disapears suddenly
Can be very painful
The feeling is that you feel a little bit dizzy, see thing a little foggy.
How it is applied
They may apply this when you drink your first glass of beer, wine, etc. or when you have a cold, or are sensitive to hay fever
They put the microwave beamer on your head and your head is heated. They may do this after you drink a glas of wine, but also after you turn on the central heating of your appartment. You will feel hot, sick, slow.
Ear short burst
Your ear is bursted, the idea is to hit your eardrum. With your eardrum cooked/damaged you have a strange feeling.
Ear continous beam
Your ear is beamed for very long time just to present you pain, they want you to move.
It appears your eardrum and surrounding area is very sensitive. This is very painful.
Your eye is bursted and you have instant blurred vision. Often your eye will start tearing
How it is applied
Some kind of miocrowave burst, see also Phasr and other similar military weapons used to blind the enemy
Not really painfull but you cannot do much as you are used to two eyes.
Why it is applied
Prevent you from working
Should you worry
Yes, this is very damaging for your eyes
Your eye is bursted with some kind of laser beam
Like they drive a needle into your eye. Very painful
Why it is applied
Just below eye, tremble
They beam at they area below your eye and the flesh below it starts trembling. They can do this in shops and through wall
Burn (beard) hair
They burn away hair at certain locations, e.g. your moustache hair just below your nose holes to create the illusion of a leaking nose
How it is applied
This is just a laser hair removal procedure, like performed in many beauty parlors
You are bursted and must sneeze. This is a tinglin sensation that can make you sneeze in an instant
How it is applied
You can turn your head in the other direction or hold your hand before your nose to make sure the attack is caused by electronic weapons
Why it is applied
To make your body react to something
You have a runny nose but do not have a cold. You may start thinking you have some kind of strange cold but you have not. Once you are out of the beam, the runny nose disappears.
How it is applied
I am not sure if this is done only by electronic weapon or by a combination of some drug and electronic weapon
Your throat is bursted with a high intensity burst and you start coughing instantly. This coughing does not look like normal coughing. You will have a sore throat immediately afterwards.
Like something fluid/moisture sticks in your lungs, or sometimes your throat. When you breath you hear/feel a rasping sound. You must cough very hard to throw it out.
Using a low frequency beam they induce a toothache, this really is a horrrible feeling. It is like a true toothache but now when you move out of the beam it disappears.
Why it is applied
Prevent you from doing anything, just plain torture
Your throat is sowly cooked and you will almost immediately notice less volume and after some time pain while speaking
How it is applied
They can do this in just one or two hours by aiming a high power beam at your throat.
Why it is applied
Prevent you from speaking loud, prevent you to sing
This is very high intensity burst on your head. There is no pain but it feels like the result having been hit on the head very hard. You feel a bit dizzy and your ears are ringing
On top of shoulder
A very painfull beam on the top of your shoulder
Why it is applied
I call this beam: through-body-beam. You are really cooked by this beam. If applied with enough intensity you will feel a burning sensation on the back (where it enters), then feel the beam cook your insde, then you start burping, then you feel a burning sensation on the other part of your body where the beam leaves your body
How it is applied
This beam can be applied everywhere, form the house next to yours, from cars. When they beam you outside the intensity often is higher as they want to make sure are hit properly
You feel like being microwaved. Very painfull, horrible torture
They put the microwave beamer on your body for a long time and you have the feeling you are cooked alive which in effect is a very accurate description of what is being done
You feel like being cooked alive, horrible torture
This is a low power sophisticated version of the chest/lungs cook beam. It is difficult to locate the source direction.
How it is applied
It takes approx. 2-3 seconds to make you burp, make your body react to events. They also may apply low intensity, so you get an irresistable urge to burp but cannot
Why it is applied
To make you suffer. This applied sometimes once every five minutes, but sometimes also several times a minute to let your body react to events like cars passing your window, etc. Horrible torture.
Heart attack incl. extra beam from left behind
This is a low frequency high power beam aimed at your heart, mostly from a position somewhere in front of you. To maximze the effect they simultaneously beam you from the left behind position with a microwave cook beam.
How it is applied
As they may apply the from behaind beam for a long period your flesh around the heart area may get cooked and the whole area may feel painfiul and stiff
This really gives you the feeling of having a heart problem, and in fact you have! The difference is that this one is applied by murderers. Horrible torture
It may take several days before you recover (if they stop the beam)
Should you worry
Yes, your heart is vital
Heart attack high power burst
This is a very high power burst of very short duration, 1 second or less, that will give you immediately an extremely painful heart (area). This beam is really amazing: I believe it can kill you in an instant
How it is applied
They can do this through wall anytime
It may take several days before your body recovers and it all feels normal again
This may be done seperate from other heart attacks. Your heart may start feel pulsing funny, the feeling is very massive, it also feels like bubling, like the heart lost control of normal operation and just pulses somewhat
How it is applied
Not only frightening but also very painful
They put a pressure beam on your chest this will take your breath away and you may think your are having a heart problem. This can have various intensities
They burn the skin of your back. This can be low intensity or high intensity. The feeling is you have a sun burn, in case of high intensities it will also color your back a little red.
How it is applied
This almost instant skin cooking. Refer to ADS (Active Denial System) for details
Why it is applied
Present pain. To move you out of the way, to make you leave the swimming pool, etc.
This is an overwhelming effect. This is like a shower but not with water but with electronic pulses.
The temperature of your body is increased giving you the feeling you have a flu or some kind of illness.
Beaming in your side gives you the idea you have spleen pain
How it is applied
They often do this during high intensity sport activities. The idea is to make you belive you have real spleen pain and will stop your exercise
They cook your biceps to reduce their power , make them feel painful when you load them during e.g. swimming. This may be done to prevent you from doing your sports.
muscle weakening in hand
They beam your hands. The result is that you can not hold a pen between thumb and finger like you used to, also you can not put you fingers against each other (like making a cup with your hand). They may do this to prevent you from working or doing your sports e.g. swimming.
They put a beam on your stomach and the stomach begins to bubble like something is cooking inside.
How it is applied
They often do this at night.
Should you worry
Yes, long term irradition may cause stomach cancer, tumors
With some kind of ultrasound beam they attack your kidneys. The feeling is like you have been kicked over and over in your sides. This is like the feeling that is described by patients that have their kidney stones crushed by ultrasound.
Intestines cooking, urge to defecate
They cook your intestines and you feel you have to fart but cannot.
They cook your intestines and it will start bubbling. After some time you will have to fart
blind gut attack
they cook the area around your tail bone. After a short period, depending on the intensity this may take 60 seconds or more, you will feel horrible cramps.
This pain makes you crawl on the floor. Horrible torture
It takes at least one hour before the horrible cramps get a litle less painful.
How to detect
With normal cramps you will have other parts of your body react as well, like heavy sweating. In this case there is just intense pain.
They cook your intestines and you have a very strong feeling to go to the toilet. By continously beaming you have very heavy diarreah
Why it is applied
Keep you out of important events, e.g. A lawsuit where you havve to defend yourself
This beam makes your erection go away, if you are a man of course. This can be done in 20-30 seconds. Depending on the direction of the beam your intestines may start bubbling though not very loud
Urge to urinate
They beam your lower body so you will feel the urge to urinate. It is difficult to ignore and there will come a moment you will have to do this when the beam continues.
The feeling is that your movement is blocked. You must take care not to fall or make a strange move
This will cause pain to your knee
High intensity beaming
The put the beamer on your knee and make sure it stays there for hours. The location may vary ut just above the knee cap can cause a lot of pain. This will result in very much pain and a very sensitive knee.
How it is applied
After a few days your knee hurts a lot when walking. They may apply this also when biking to make you think something is wrong with your knee
Very painful, horrible torture
They apply low intensity, low power beam to your legs, e.g. When you are in bed. Your muscles, legs feel stif the next morning. They may start cooking the calfs after you finished running, and after some time before you want to go running to prevent you from running
How it is applied
What happens when you increase load on cooked muscles? They tear apart
Very painful, horrible torture
Why it is applied
Prevent you from running, other sports
This beam is in fact a very high power burst and can cook your calf from hundreds of meters in a split second. If you are running your cooked muscles will tear apart and you have instant injury. See also Heart attack high power burst. You may notice the following feeling: a needle going in and out of your calf within a second
Very painful, horrible torture
Why it is applied
Prevent you from runningm, other sports
They cook the skin of your shin with very high intensities. When you are running, the shin injury is a well-known. They may start cooking the skin of of your shin after you finished running, and after some time (days) before you want to go running to prevent you from running
Very painful, horrible torture
Why it is applied
Prevent you from running, other sports
The cook your heel muscle. This muscle does not contain much nerves so it is difficult to detect before the damage has been done. Then you will think back and remember there was something wrong the previous day or days.
Walking can be painful.
Why it is applied
Prevent you from running, other sports
They cook your ankles, just to cause you pain. You feel the beam and it is difficult to keep your leg in the same position because of the pain. This is often a applied for a long period of time, several hours.
May take several days to disappear when applied with high intensities
They beam very hard in the center of your foot
Very painful, horrible torture
They burst the center of your foot with max power very short burst beam, only once while walking even in a crowded place. This causes insane pain and you may fall immediately, because the foot is not functioning anymore.
Extremely painful, horrible torture
They pick a single toe and beam it for several days in a row
They burst your toes with with max power very short burst beam, and do this several times. This causes insane pain.
How it is applied
They may do this while riding your bike, horrible torture
Ultrasonic beam to block the movement of a foot. If you are not prepared for this block you may fall.
Your whole body starts shaking like being in a aircraft in bad weather. The frequency is around 5 Hz. The intensity may amaze you.
They apply a scratch beam to any part of your body. This beam is very hard to resist. Before you know it you may start scratching yourself like crazy
Some high power acoustic beamer is aimed at your leg and after some time your leg feels non-cooperative, not part of your body anymore
They beam you with a frequency that makes you really feel sleepy. You will start yawning and cannot keep your eyes open. This efect starts very suddenly and often ends very abrupt.
How it is applied
They may also do this by devices built into your car
Not a very pleasant feeling but not veru disturbing or damaging
See the world turning
You feel dizzy and see the world turing like when you are very very tired. This effect is not really very real. The moment you are out-of-the-beam you are not turning anymore. Still it is amazing that this can be done.
With this well-known beam they will keep you awake, prevent you from sleeping. This way they wear you out, may be the next day you have an important meeting or must finish important work.
Sweating, nauseous, vomit feeling
You start sweating suddenly, you feel dizzy, you think you may have to vomit. When applied with enough intensity you will start to vomit, you will need at least 30 minutes to recover a little bit from this attack, but it will take hours before your body is acting a bit like before the attack.
How it is applied
They may do this when you are with a friend. Google: navy vomit beam
You have strange dreams about things but the dreams are not like dreams you had before. The dreams may refer to very recent events in your life, like a person you met, a movie yu saw, it is another form of reacting to events in your life
How it is applied
Some people in your environment might tell you they have wild dreams that night trying to get you talking about your experience
The only way to save the world is to stop your national secret services. Breaking laws and violating human rights in horrible ways has become a way of life. They are responsible for most problems in your neighborhood, in your city, in your country, in the world. Make them responsible for what they are doing.
Let them account for in detail, force them to open up their organizations for thorough investigations. Stop their funding if they do not co-operate. Replace directors and staff immediately by normal people for starters.
Not So Smart Technology: Safety Inspector Blows The Whistle On Fire Hazards Of 'Smart' Electronics
September 20 2016 | From: Sott / If you think your "smart" appliances are the "cat's whiskers," then please think again! Actually, in my opinion, they are the dumbest things ever invented that have been able to buffalo consumers into spending their hard-earned money to purchase, but have the greatest potential for causing consumers harm and grief.
Recently, I received an email from one of my readers who had to attend a fire safety training session for 'their' job. That instructional course was given by none other than a Delaware County, Pennsylvania Fire Investigator, who was quite explicit in his presentation about certain fire causes.
Here's what the email said for which this sender gave permission to share:
“He [the trainer] mentioned in the beginning of his presentation how fire deaths were down, but house fires were up dramatically across the nation. [CJF emphasis added]
Later during the Q&A, I asked him in front of the whole group [what were] the causes of these fires. He mentioned all the electronics - WiFi/Bluetooth gadgets, cheap phone chargers, iPads, wide screen TVs, etc.
I interrupted to say "how about smart meters" to which he replied: Anything "smart" is a fire hazard.
This [smart] technology is so new, and they haven't tested or developed it adequately enough yet.
He went on to poke fun at "smart" wired houses having everything linked and what a hazard that can cause.
Then after the presentation, I commented how I heard that as this technology ages, it becomes even more potentially hazardous, which he affirmed, and also mentioned that
More car fires occur because of all the electronic gadgetry now.”
All the above information is yet another confirmation with implications for Consumer Protection Law(s) at local and state levels regarding "smart" consumer appliances and fires, which insurance companies - especially AMI Smart Meter fires - are declining coverage for!
But there is even more serious damage happening every minute of the day from microwave technology, which smart appliances operate on. It's called electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs/RFs) that emit non-ionizing radiation which cause adverse health effects known as "non-thermal" effects.
Comment: Dr. Barrie Trower, a British physicist has acquired a great deal of expertise in the microwave field, extending his research to common electronic systems, including cell phones, iPods, computer games and microwave ovens. His research has shown that microwave radiation is extremely hazardous, especially to pregnant women and young children.
The risks are so great that the use of WiFi can lead to permanent genetic damage to our children and subsequent generations.
Consumers, when they really learn the downside of "smart technology," obviously will have to beef up their activism to get the protection they need for their health and properties, as the industries involved - and more sadly - states public utility commissions - really don't give a hoot about the harms caused, otherwise they would be enacting legislation to deal with them.
And then there's this information that I received from readers whose privacy I respect and honor, but will share their information. In sharing information like the following from a reader in Canada, it is that consumers become aware, physically safer plus empowered:
“People need to be getting documentation about all of these fires. Media articles are often the starting point, but they are anecdotal. Once there is what sounds like a smart meter fire, request and obtain the official fire report from the state or provincial fire commissioner.
Find out what the legal reporting and investigating requirements are. If the fire is believed to be electrical, who does the investigation and how is he informed about the fire? Are the laws being followed?
Are meters being removed? It takes time and digging but I can't find anyone else who is getting this sort of info for fires in their areas. It is only when this documentation is obtained for many fires and patterns are found that things will be taken seriously.
In the US the Consumer Affairs Dept.  has agreed to gather reports on smeter fires. I have sent her a few because the ITRON meters we use are the same used in many places in the US. But in Canada our meters are not considered "consumer" goods since the utilities own them.
This agency should be informed but it requires full documentation - not just media reports."
Note that here's what I think our kind and thoughtful Canadian neighbor is referring to:
“The US Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) is a federal agency that will take complaints on utility smart meters from all US states. If you have or had smart meter electrical or fire problems CALL: (800) 638-2772 Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. ET or submit your complaint by email. "
However, I must caution a consumer that, if or when you experience an AMI Smart Meter ('smeter') fire, immediately after the fire has been extinguished and it is safe to do so, take photographs with your cell phone and a regular camera, so you can have "secured" documentation because things can get 'lost' in cyberspace! Remember to attach copies of those photos with the smeter fire report you file with the US Consumer Products Safety Commission.
Additionally, I must share that I've heard stories that the power company immediately removes the fire-damaged meter and does not allow consumers access to it or to keep a fire-damaged meter as 'proof' for insurance purposes. It seems that 'games' are being played, and insurance companies 'buy' into them too!
Fire safety regarding all 'smart' technology should be enforced by consumer products safety commissions, municipalities and code enforcement departments at local and state levels. Obviously they are not doing that when it comes to AMI Smart Meters made with heat-sensitive plastic parts. Analog meters were made of glass and steel parts.
Learn how to protect yourself from smart technology EMFs/RFs and fire hazards.
5G Telecomm Radiation The Perfect Tool To Mass Modify Human Brain Waves + More Studies Reveal Dangers
September 16 2016 | From: WakingTimes / Mobilize On 14 July 2016 the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) of the USA made space available in the radio spectrum for consumer devices to operate within the 25 GHz to 100 GHz of the electromagnetic spectrum.
It went on to say: “The Commission has struck a balance between new wireless services, current and future fixed satellite service operations, and federal uses. The item adopts effective sharing schemes to ensure that diverse users – including federal and non-federal, satellite and terrestrial, and fixed and mobile – can co-exist and expand.”
Nowhere in its document is mention made of consumer safety or well-being. I guess that is fair of the FCC because historically, it is not interested in matters of microwave radiation and consequent thermal and non-thermal effects on the population.
Let’s face it, and most people find this hard to believe, the FCC works purely on behalf of the telecoms industries in granting them access to the airwaves, no more and no less.
Industry was very happy to hear the FCC announcement on granting access of large portions of the radio spectrum for yet more of its toys and other consumer devices. Qualcomm for example talks much about ‘the massive internet of things’, yet nowhere on its 5G musings is mention made of consumer safety or well-being.
That ‘pink elephant’ in the living room regarding safety brings me to the point of this article. The FCC and the telecomms industry rub their hands with glee because lots of money is going to be made as 5G devices rollout yet no recent safety studies have been carried out on consumer safety.
No doubt both the FCC and industry will point regulators to the old, out-dated and one-dimensional so-called ‘safety studies’ (thermal effects) produced by the ICNIRP. This private organisation is comprised of people and individuals who work in the telecommunications industries with no background in epidemiology, toxicology, radio frequency safety or medical practice.
The implications of 5G on consumer well-being and safety do not look good for one reason: devices that will operate within the 5G electromagnetic spectrum will use antennas that are physically small i.e. from a few millimetres to a centimetre in length.
This means that industry will produce a variety of different antenna systems to do different things.
Qualcomm’s 5G Vision
“5G is much more than higher peak rates - it needs to enable new classes of services, connect new devices and industries, and empower new user experiences while fully leveraging 4G investments. The envisioned unified platform needs to support all spectrum, below 6 GHz as well as above 6 GHz and mmWave."
Everything is awesome!
The weird fact of operating within this very high frequency range is that signals are mostly line of sight or they are easily reflected, refracted or ‘lost’ within the differing build composition of urban environment structures.
In other words, without careful antenna design and recognition of many of the pitfalls trying to propagate microwave signals within urban environments, the signal can be easily degraded or completely lost. In response to these challenges, the advantages in using very small physical size antennas in the millimetre wavelength is you can feed many antennas in various configuration arrays e.g. vertical or horizontal arays, waveguide, coned or highly directional beam type designs.
These types of antenna designs focus most of the transmitted power into specified directions. This is bad news for consumers because these very small physical size antennas will pack a mighty punch to our biological systems if we step into them.
Getting back to consumer safety and well-being and all things microwave, it is clear that the latency period for adverse biological effects from devices using microwave frequencies from say 1 GHz to 5 Ghz is approximately 10 - 20 years.
In 2016 there are now many thousands of peer-reviewed medical and epidemiological studies that show, illustrate or correlate, adverse biological effects with use of mobile phone technology or WIFI.
Using frequencies even higher than 5 GHz (and up to 100 GHz) will compress the timeframe in which cancers and other biological effects show themselves within society.
It is anyone’s guess on what might happen in terms of biological safety yet it is clear to see that the pulsed nature of these high frequency, high signal intensity signals do not harbour good news for humanity, particularly in relation to the functioning of our DNA.
Nowadays, exposure to microwave radiation or frequencies used by WIFI, mobile phones, smart phones, smart meters, WIFI-enabled audio devices, WIFI-enabled fridges, most baby monitors and a whole host of other ‘esoteric’ electrical devices were recently classed as Class 2B carcinogens.
Point of sale literature excludes this fact on any advertising blurb and it is also fascinating that the small print embedded deep within mobile phone product literature say that you should not put these devices directly to your skin, body or face.
If you do, you exceed the so-called ‘safe’ exposure thresholds put in place for these devices.
Getting back to the very small physical length of the antennas that will be used for 5G devices, it is very clear to surmise that if these devices talk to each other using highly efficient, directional antennas, the ERP (effective radiated power) will be huge.
If you happen to walk into this intensely focused beam of microwave radiation, what will this level of signal intensity do to your biology?
Yet again, time will tell unless we get our arses into gear and demand proper safety studies from industry and independent academia that focus on thermal and non-thermal effects on our biology.
Just like the advent of modern mobile phone technology, it is us, the consumers, who provide the guinea pig role in terms of safety.
Sufferers of EHS (electro-hyper-sensitivity) will need to be aware of any 5G device simply because the electron volt assault on their compromised bodies will be easily and instantly felt.
It is they who will suffer first and in time, everyone will be affected because one other fact the telecoms industries have not mentioned is that in order to develop an efficient network of signals within an urban environment, many thousands of new transmitter sites will need to be installed.
The physical small size of these antennas means they can be covertly installed into all sorts of urban structures which suggest that for urban dwellers at least, there will be no escape from exposure to these highly damaging microwave frequencies. I also feel that when these antennas are in place, it will be relatively easy to alter and manipulate brain wave function of its users and others close by.
The amount of ancillary information that can be piped or attached to the main carrier frequency of such a telecommunications network system is potentially, huge.
Police forces the world over use ‘Tetra’ as a systems of communication. This system also includes a sub-carrier frequency of about 16 Hz which is very close to our natural brainwave patterns.
Could this 16 Hz ancillary pulsed ELF (extremely low-frequency) be responsible for instilling aggressive behaviours in our police force personnel?
The ‘zombie apocalypse’ might just be around the corner unless of course, we refuse to comply. That is our choice.
Mobilize is an investigative documentary that explores the long-term health effects of cell phone radiation, including cancer and infertility.
Clear Light Ventures is sponsoring free viewing of Mobilize from September 15 to October 16, 2016 - enter promo code "ClearLight".
In 2011 the World Health Organization stated, “The electromagnetic fields produced by mobile phones are classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as possibly carcinogenic to humans.” The cell phone industry has vigorously disputed these findings.
Mobilize is an explosive investigative documentary that explores the potential long-term health effects from cell phone radiation, including brain cancer and infertility.
The politically charged film examines the most recent scientific research and the harsh challenges politicians face trying to pass precautionary legislation. Featuring interviews with expert researchers, mobile phone industry representatives, and prominent politicians, MOBILIZE illuminates how industry’s economic and political influence can corrupt public health.
Featuring Gavin Newsom Lt. Governor of California, Lawrence Lessig, Esq., Steve Wozniak, Richard Branson, Devra Davis, PhD, MPH and many more.
Wi-Fried? Australian Broadcasting Company: Catalyst August 13 2016 | From: ForbiddenKnowledge
This documentary by Australia's ABC TV may change the way you look at your cell phone.
A scientific paper bravely published by a leading radiation biologist, Prof. Dariusz Leszczynski now allows top neurologists, like Keith Black, MD of Los Angeles' Cedars-Sinai Hospital to issue warnings to their patients about the dangers of cell phone use, which he describes as "Cooking the brain".
The cell phone industry retaliated against Leszczynski by lobbying to have his funding stopped and in the meantime, insurance companies in the US stopped coverage for health damages related to cell phone use.
Brain tumors associated with cell phone use has replaced leukemia as the number one child-killer. Men who store cell phones in their pockets are assured lower sperm counts and there is a rash of young women contracting breast cancer, in the very spot where they tuck their cellphones in their bras.
You can expect to receive the following measurable doses of radiation, using a standard radiation measuring device: 1) Microwave oven: 800 microvolts, 2) WiFi Router: 800 microvolts, 3) Tablet PC: 2,000 microvolts (watching a movie), 4) Smartphone: 40,000 microvolts (Samsung S3). This last device emits over a thousand times the normal background radiation level of 30 microvolts.
The use of cell phones and other wireless technologies is being called the next 'casualty catastrophe,' after tobacco and asbestos.
iPhones now all contain a legal disclaimer page with fine print, which cannot be enlarged and which is relatively difficult to locate within the phone's navigation. It discloses the dangers of radiation exposure from cell phones and advises users to keep the device at least 10mm from the body - but it's next to impossible to find on the device.
After conducting studies, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France has officially classified the radio wave radiation emitted by cellphones and other household devices (to say nothing of SmartMeters - which is a whole other video!) as a Class 2B Carcinogen (a possible cause of cancer).
At the same time, a US wireless lobbying group called the CTIA assures us that "Radio waves from cell phones are safe" and studies paid for by the cell phone industry claim that, "Cell phone use causes no biological damage."
However, independent studies consistently report serious health effects, ranging from DNA damage, a 300% reduction in sperm counts, 290% more brain tumors, autism and birth defects.
Former senior White House adviser, Epidemiologist, Dr. Devra Davis, who appears in this film testified to the US Senate and has given a hair-raising reports about the back-stories behind these contradictory scientific reports:
The independent scientists who reported on the ill effects of cell phones found themselves under attack by the cellphone industry, who would attempt to get them fired and to get their funding taken away or else accuse them of fraud.
When that didn't work, they hired inexperienced scientists who didn't know anything about the subject to *look* like they were replicating the incriminating experiments - and when all of the above didn't work, they wrote an internal memo, in which they stated, "We war-gamed the science."
To prove a point, one scientist wrote a paper on the subject, laden with obvious errors, which was published in numerous science journals and translated in over 15 countries.
Journalist, Anthony Gucciardi had previously proven how easy it is for industry to plant fake science in such publications in the very similar case involving the drug Prozac, which was long ago proven to increase the incidence of suicide among users and to cause violent behavior in the 1980s - but hidden from the public until 2005 until there was a BBC exposé.
In response, the manufacturers hired their own scientists to prove how "great" Prozac was. However, producers of anti-depressants today are forced to disclose these side effects, which one reads in their accompanying manuals or overhear, in the blindingly-fast and unintelligible disclosure statements that run during television advertisements for these products.
People who know the details believe that once the public becomes aware of these dangerous side effects, the public outcry will be worse than it was for cigarettes.
Dr. Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News since 1981 says:
“The system is broken, nobody has been told the truth. It's crazy."
He says that it's one thing for the tobacco industry to finally admit to the dangers of smoking tar and nicotine, after centuries of being on the market because the science, which would eventually prove that cigarettes and secondhand smoke damaged human health did not yet exist when tobacco was initially marketed - but cell phones were launched after preliminary science was already available as to its inherent dangers and these products were released into the public without any safety studies, whatsoever!
The point is to take action. Action is already being taken in Europe: In Italy, a landmark supreme court ruling found a "causal link" between cell phone use and brain tumors.
In France, WiFi is being taken down and replaced with cabled Internet in schools and countries from Germany to Israel and Finland are moving to stop cell phone sales to kids. In the UK, children under the age of 18, have been barred from cell phone use for several years, already.
But of course, in the Good Ol' USA, the former chief lobbyist for the wireless industry, Thomas Wheeler was appointed by President Barack Obama to head up the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which regulates the safety of wireless devices, in yet another astonishing conflict-of-interest in the choice of appointed US Federal Regulators, who better resemble wolves guarding the sheep than advocates for the health of the public at-large.
Wifi, Microwaves and the Consequences to our Health
Mr. Barrie Trower, a British physicist who was a microwave weapons expert and who worked for the Royal Navy and the British Secret Service, talks about the health effects of WiFi and other forms of microwave radiation.
Mr. Trower came out of retirement because he was concerned that the microwave frequencies and intensities to which children are exposed in schools are similar to those used for microwave weapons.
Something Very Strange Is Going On And Alternative News Readers Are Being Targeted - Have You Noticed Any Of These Symptoms? August 4 2016 | From: AllNewsPipeline
Three days ago a very interesting and disturbing series of comments were noted here at ANP, unrelated to the actual article itself, but that in and of itself is not abnormal as debates progress and lead into other areas of discussion.
But the originating question that started the side-topic and the responses, as well as how many of the comments automatically went into moderation, pending approval before they could be seen when ANP does not moderate comments before they post, all led me to the conclusion that there is something very strange going on.
Note: Each comment shown will be linked to the comment itself because clicking over to the original comment only shows a small fraction of the discussion that stemmed from it unless one goes to the article and scrolls to the end of the comments and continues to reload until they hit that segment of the thread.
The original question was "Have a question for you all. Anybody else having trouble thinking? I have been speaking English for many years, but just the last few days my vocabulary is having 'holes'. I am almost 45, we try eating healthy, no fluoride or meds."
Another commentator, Dar, noted "Almost everyone I talk with as in friends, customers, etc have memory problems. Not just elderly but all ages."
In response to the first question, Tyler stated "Actually, yes I have. Like a lot lately. I've had a really hard time formulating thoughts over the last about 2 weeks, including things I know a lot about. And came out of nowhere too. Even right now, my mind feels very like clouded."
Driving home after work down the freeway, it appeared that all vehicles I all lanes in front of me were...drunk. In the same area, they all drifted across the right marker into other lanes. When I got to that area, it felt as if my mind was zapped, strongly I might add, by what felt as microwaves.
My brain instantly felt numb, swollen, back of my neck hurt...and I felt very strong vertigo and dizziness. Then I felt like I was going to pass out while driving. I had to physically change my position, straighten up in my seat and practically slap myself to maintain.
The rest of the trip home felt a little better, but I had something like hot flashes just wave through me (I'm not a woman, so can't speak to exactly how those feel). Also strong ringing and "plugged" feeling in my right ear only. When I got home, I explained what happened and was told that she didn't feel right all day as well...... Read the rest here.
Another point of interest - In that same portion of the thread, the original poster noted that when trying to post her comments she was being given the message that they were pending moderation.
When we noted that, we checked the moderation dashboard and sure enough, only comments related to that topic we being listed as "pending" and not showing until we manually approved them.
Again, we do not moderate comments before they post and have a very limited "filter" set up to try to catch spammers and nothing in those "pending" comments contained anything in our filters, nor any type of spam.
US Government Mind Control Experiements
Mockers and scoffers often see the words "mind control" and instantly tune out, thinking it is science fiction, so lets address the documented fact that the U.S. Goverment, has experimented with mind control throughout the decades, dating back to the 1950's with the CIA project MK ULTRA, supposedly halted in 1973, congressionals hearings were had in 1977 after an FOIA request uncovered a cache of 20,000 documents relating to the U.S. Government project. In July 2001, more information was declassified. - Source
Does anyone truly believe any government would spend two decades and untold amounts of money experimenting with mind control and would simply stop, even though many tests were deemed successful?
The U.S. governments mind control experiments are a fact and it took over 20 years from the date they started for congress to investigate and for the public to be told... makes one wonder what we learn 20 years from now as to what kind of experiments the government is conducting on us right this very second.
GWEN (Ground Wave Emeregency Network)
Since one of the comments above did bring up the GWEN towers, we'll address that here. GWEN stands for Ground Wave Emergency Network, which was a command and control communication system intended for use by the United States government to facilitate military communications before, during and after a nuclear war.
Specifically, GWEN was constructed to survive the effects of a high-altitude nuclear explosion-generated electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) to ensure that the United States President or his survivors could issue a launch order to strategic nuclear bombers.
The network was conceived as an array of approximately 300 radio transceivers distributed across the continental USA which operated in the Low frequency (LF) radio band. Later revised for 126 towers, plans again changed to include 56 radio towers linking 38 terminals; it was later expanded to 96 towers linking 49 terminals. Final network towers numbered 58. - Source
It is notable that "conspiracy theorists," often claimed the GWEN towers had "different functions, including controlling the weather, mind, behavior and mood control of the populace."
I will remind readers that for decades those that believed the government was conducting mind control experiements on citizens of the U.S. were also called "conspiracy theorists" as well, until MK ULTRA was revealed to the public, and some deny still to this day what the project was and what the U.S. government did, despite the Senate hearings into the project and the documentation released.
We also note that after so much funding being pumped into GWEN, that when it was "terminated," the US Coast Guard began outfitting some GWEN sites to house their National Differential GPS system because "Existing equipment fit the needs of the NDGPS".... in other words, the towers are still up all across the United States. There are currently 85 NDGPS sites in the US network, administered by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Navigation Center, according to Wiki.
Electronic Harassment, aka psychotronic torture, or electromagnetic torture, is also waved away as "conspiracy," of people that believe the government uses electromagnetic radiation (such as the microwave auditory effect), radar, and surveillance techniques to transmit sounds and thoughts into people's heads, affect people's bodies, and harass people.
It is widely know that the government does indeed use technology called "directed energy weapons," which emits highly focused energy, transferring that energy to a target to damage it. The energy used includes: Electromagnetic radiation, including radio frequency, microwave, lasers and masers; Particles with mass, in particle-beam weapons, and; Sound, in sonic weapons.
In researching this article, I ran across an article which led me to a Washington Post article, dated January 2007, buried on page W22, which reported on electronic harassment and voices in the head, and in the article we see that the Pentagon has continued to pursue a weapon that can do just that.
But there are hints of ongoing research: An academic paper written for the Air Force in the mid-1990s mentions the idea of a weapon that would use sound waves to send words into a person's head:
The signal can be a 'message from God' that can warn the enemy of impending doom, or encourage the enemy to surrender,"the author concluded.
In 2002, the Air Force Research Laboratory patented precisely such a technology: using microwaves to send words into someone's head.
That work is frequently cited on mind-control Web sites. Rich Garcia, a spokesman for the research laboratory's directed energy directorate, declined to discuss that patent or current or related research in the field, citing the lab's policy not to comment on its microwave work.
In response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed for this article, the Air Force released unclassified documents surrounding that 2002 patent – records that note that the patent was based on human experimentation in October 1994 at the Air Force lab, where scientists were able to transmit phrases into the heads of human subjects, albeit with marginal intelligibility.
Research appeared to continue at least through 2002. Where this work has gone since is unclear – the research laboratory, citing classification, refused to discuss it or release other materials.
The official U.S. Air Force position is that there are no non-thermal effects of microwaves. Yet Dennis Bushnell, chief scientist at NASA's Langley Research Center, tagged microwave attacks against the human brain as part of future warfare in a 2001 presentation to the National Defense Industrial Association about "Future Strategic Issues."
That work is exceedingly sensitive" and unlikely to be reported in any unclassified documents, he says.
Quoted portions above can be found on page 4 and page 5 of the online version of that WAPO 2007 article.
Knowing the type of technology the U.S. government is pursuing, what they have done in the past with mind control experiments, the fact that they are continuing to research and create energy weapons, what stops them from turning those weapons on the American people?
Is it a coincidence that the very people that read alternative news sites such as ANP, such as Christians, veterans, constitutionalists, preppers, survivalists, etc... are the very same people that the Obama administration has labeled as "extremists," and as "dangerous," and coincidentally are the very same people experiencing the symptoms described at the top of this article?
If readers are experiencing strange symptoms, noting weird behaviors in those around you.... leave a comment describing them, because there is definitely something strange going on.
Gestapo In The USA: FCC Intimidates Press And Kills Free Speech At 5G Rollout August 1 2016 | From: TakeBackYourPower
In a public meeting at FCC headquarters on July 14, the agency which once served the people instead acted like tyrannical thugs, in an escalating series of remarkable events.
First, they prevented wireless science advocates from displaying a simple sign, violating their First Amendment rights in a public venue. Then, a security guard forcefully prevented a t-shirt from being taken out of a bag, by a former Congressional candidate with opposing views [See the full video at the end of this article, or links to the relevant clips from the images below].
Next, a Bloomberg reporter had his credentials confiscated - almost unbelievably - for merely talking with the former Congressional candidate.
Following these incidents, the reporter, Todd Shields, was visibly irate with FCC Commissioner Tom Wheeler - who also happens to be the former president of CTIA, the wireless industry’s lobbying organization.
“Moments ago I was attempting to talk to to some people who came to attend the meeting and have concerns about radiation and 5G. And your security force intervened - told the guy he couldn’t show me the t-shirt he wished to display at the meeting, forced him to put it away, and confiscated my FCC-issued ID. Is this consonant with the discussion that ought to be taking place here, and what’s your reaction to this action by your staff?”
-Todd Shields, Bloomberg reporter, to FCC Chair Wheeler [on video above]
Bloomberg reporter Todd Shields had his credentials confiscated - for talking with a former Congressional candidate about 5G and health concerns
And in the Q&A that followed, the former Congressional candidate Kevin Mottus successfully added another dose of truth the narrative.
“Hey Tom, with the NTP study showing wireless causes cancer sub-thermally, how can you proceed with more wireless expansion, with FCC standards only recognizing thermal effects - ignoring thousands of studies showing cancerous effects, neurological effects, reproductive harm, immune system disorders… people are being electrosensitive…”
-Kevin Mottus, former Congressional candidate, to Wheeler [on video above]
After about 20 seconds of yielding the floor to Mottus, Wheeler interrupted, dodged this very appropriate question, and diverted to an FCC-compliant journalist:
“Lydia, do you have a question?]
(Which, on the video, almost sounds like a Wheeler Freudian slip: “Litigate. Do you have a question?”)
There have been thousands of published peer-reviewed studies that indicate the proliferation of microwave (wireless) technologies is not safe to biological life. (See meta-study links here, here, here and here.)
Why is the FCC resorting to Gestapo-like tactics of suppression and outright intimidation?
The issue here, is that the Federal Communications Commission just rubber-stamped their rollout of “5G” cellular technology, which while increasing throughput, would blanket all planetary life with ultra-high microwave frequencies - 24Ghz and up. The fact that these frequencies have never been tested as safe is not stopping corporate-government plans for an unleashing of “massive infrastructure”.
But there have been thousands of published peer-reviewed studies that indicate the proliferation of microwave (wireless) technologies is not safe to biological life. (See meta-study links here, here, here and here.)
So, because there’s a lot of money in a wireless economy and the data-harvesting that comes with it - trillions, in fact - Big Industry has bought the science, bought lawmakers, ruled the proliferation of microwaves as “safe”, and infiltrated the FCC along with most international health agencies.
And in the face of this willful, for-profit negligence, instead of employing conscience and responsibility, they’re actively silencing all opposition. You know, those of the human species that pay attention to passé concepts like science and reason.
Here’s some snippets from FCC Chair Wheeler, at his June 20 press conference:
“5G will use much higher frequency bands [24 to 100+ GHz]… antennas that can aim and amplify signals… massive deployment of small cells… tens of billions of dollars in economic activity… hundreds of billions of microchips… if something can be connected, it will be connected… unlike other countries… we won’t wait for the standards…”
– Tom Wheeler, FCC Chair [on video above]
Paraphrased:“We can’t let life get in the way of profit. We want to make billions from all of you, and control everything. And in doing so, we’re not only going to willfully ignore science, we’re going to remove the idea of standards and initiate a free-for-all.”
FCC Chair and former industry lobbyist Tom Wheeler announces proliferation of 5G microwave technology, privatizes rollout and removes oversight and standards. “Nobody quits the CTIA. Once you’re CTIA, you’re family – for life.”
If unchecked, what could this lead to?
The implications of all of this are very far-reaching. How far? Well, to find out, let’s start with what we know.
It’s pretty clear at this point that we have a government that has been taken over by corporate interests. In order to increase their power and control even more, they plan to exponentially ramp-up the deployment of technology everywhere, which a vast body of science clearly says is harmful.
If unchecked, this will almost certainly lead to an increase in cancer and other ailments associated with exposure to electromagnetic radiation. Haven’t we had enough of for-profit agendas putting profits before health?
From a surveillance standpoint, we already know there is a sinister spying agenda operating behind the scenes. The rollout of “5G” technology - especially in the standardless, profit-centered way Wheeler describes — would indeed open up a considerable new threat to basic rights.
If everything is connected, you can bet that as many details as possible about our actions will be tracked and stored somewhere - like the $2B NSA facility in Blufdale, Utah. And there is extraordinary market value in this. A director at NARUC stated that the value of data harvested just by “smart” utility meters will likely be worth a lot more than electricity itself, which is a $2.2 trillion market globally.
But besides being creepy and making the 1% even richer, there are clear warning signs that a control-oriented governing system could easily take an indexed catalog of all of your actions and use it against you in a multitude of ways.
For example, increasingly-instrusive “pre-crime” operations are already planned in Miami. And insurance providers are checking their customers’ facebook data to influence premiums and even coverage availability. So it’s really not unreasonable to see how a governing body concerned primarily with staying in power, could restrict rights or remove “privileges” for behavior that is deemed to be not aligned with national interests.
So, tracking is not ok unless we are absolutely convinced that the governing body of that system truly respects individual rights and has the best interests of the people in mind. And right now, we are not even close to having such leadership in our governments.
Wheeler’s vision of 5G would significantly enable those who are motivated by power and money to use technology to rule over everyone else. In order to protect our lives and future, we must not allow that to happen.
While we would all like to have fast internet, we must now look closely at the downside of this technology, and take constructive action. This can understandably be difficult, due to the considerable attachment that we have to both our devices and the sense of immediate gratification that we obtain from using them.
While solutions to out planet’s problems are being actively prevented, steering human culture into a virtual/augmented reality seems to be the insane game of the technocrats. Perhaps “The Matrix” was not far off, after all
How we will save our world: Individual responsibility, accountability and liability
In addition to an interview with Kevin Mottus, last Sunday I skyped with Dafna Tachover, an Israel-based attorney who was present at “G-Day”, last Thursday.
Tachover, who is among millions now who have directly experienced microwave radiation harm after becoming sensitized to it, says that the only way forward is individual accountability and liability. In my view, she is obviously right.
Dafna Tachover is the CEO of We Are The Evidence, an organization which advocates for the rights of those who has been injured by wireless technology:
“Until there’s personal accountability and liability, this systematic problem that repeats itself will happen again, and again, and again, and it has been. So, we learned that the tobacco industry was lying to the public, bluntly - to the public, to the government, to health organizations - without any hesitation…. Was anyone sued? No. Was anyone found personally accountable? No. So that’s actually what enables this kind of behavior to happen again and again.”
“This is the action we should take: we should make it clear to those government people - or you know, if we talk about wi-fi in schools, the school principals, who do have personal responsibility and liability to protect children’s health - to make sure they know they will be found personally liable for the harms they cause. They have a position of trust, and they betrayed that trust. And they should be found liable. It should be civil liability and criminal liability.”
Former Congressional candidate Kevin Mottus spoke about the urgency of the situation.
Kevin Mottus is meeting with reps on the ground in Washington DC, Sept 6 – Oct 6. To meet up with him there, reach him at email@example.com.
“My background is as a medical social worker. And when I was in the hospitals I saw young salesman and lawyers coming in with brain tumors, and healthy otherwise, other than the tumor - and doctors asking them about their cell phone use. So I was clued in very early with these heavy users and the tumors it was causing.”
“Schools are now our most dangerous places to be. You have 20-40 wireless transmitters in their iPads and wireless laptops, and then you have 2-3 commercial-grade wireless routers…. So you have, really, the setting of the most significant exposure in our country, and the most vulnerable population being exposed are small children - which we know are 3 to 4 times as sensitive to all environmental hazards.”
“We are microwaving our population and wondering why our cancer is going through the roof and chronic disease is going through the roof. It’s really very sad.”
“I spoke to Congressman Grayson from Florida, and while I was talking with him, one of his staffers, Joe, came up to me. And he said, ‘What are you talking about?’ I said, ‘I’m talking about wireless cell phones causing brain tumors.’ He said, ‘That’s interesting, because I had a brain aneurysm and I’m lucky to be alive. It’s also interesting because my buddy just died from a brain tumor.’”
“So, people are definitely getting sick. And you need to ask them, ‘Does your face tingle when you use your cell phone?…. Do you have difficulty sleeping? Have you ever gotten nauseous using the phone? Do you feel funny when you’re around wi-fi, or getting close to it?’ And you’ll be surprised - people are getting sick.”
“For instance, I spoke to Congressman Rush. Congressman Rush has a salivary gland tumor, which Israel has associated with cell phone use….”
“We need to stop this before they [FCC] auction the [ultra-high frequency] spectrum.”
If you are reading this from the United States you can find links about actions you can take within your country at the end of the original article at TakeBackYourPower.
The new 5G system they plan on introducing following trials in 2017, described in your info and in the video, are planned to operate between 28GHz – 100GHz is interestingly the SAME FREQUENCY in the Extremely High Frequency (EHF) (30GHz – 300GHz or, wavelengths 10mm – 1mm) spectrum that are already being used in the ACTIVE DENIAL SYSTEM (ADS) non-lethal, directed energy weapon developed by the US military produced by Raytheon – designed for perimeter security and crowd control.
It was also used in Afghanistan War. The US Police use it already, and in 2010 the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department announced that they were going to use reduced versions of it in detention centers to break up prisoner fights etc.
From Prof Olle Johansson interview on the Alzheimer's and Dementia Summit
"If you go back to [EMF] impact on brain function, you have all the pieces that you would look for, in for instance Alzheimer’s and dementia. There are studies regarding loss of concentration capacity, loss of short term memory, impacts on cellular function, including cell death in various rodent models… leakage of the so-called blood-brain barrier, connected also to damage and cell death of nerve cells…. behavioral impacts… impact on sleep quality… various forms of learning tasks…."
"The [blood-brain barrier] effect was seen after a short exposure, namely a 1-minute mobile phone call – and also at an exposure level that was five thousand times below the official guideline...."
"This is the largest full-scale experiment with mankind, ever, on this planet."
Dangerous Molecules Detected In E-Cigarettes Which May Make Them More Harmful Than The Real Thing July 29 2016 | From: PreventDisease
Penn State College of Medicine researchers have found that electronic cigarettes produce highly-reactive free radicals - molecules associated with cell damage and cancer - and may pose a health risk comparable or worse than conventional cigarettes.
The use of e-cigarettes is on the rise but research into the effects of e-cigarettes lags behind their popularity.
The number of teens and tweens using these products doubled between 2011 and 2012. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 20 percent of young adults have tried e-cigarettes, and current smokers and recent former smokers are most likely to have used them.
E-cigarettes deliver nicotine in water vapor instead of by burning tobacco. The battery-operated devices have been marketed as an alternative to traditional cigarettes. They look like the real thing. The end glows as you inhale. As you exhale, you puff out a cloud of what looks like smoke.
But we know very little about the toxic substances produced by e-cigarettes and their health effects. More evidence coming forward may ultimately validate that e-cigarettes may be more dangerous than regular cigarettes, potentially causing cancer at comparable and possible faster rates depending on the chemicals used.
E-cigarettes have triggered a fierce debate among health experts who share the same goal -- reducing the disease and death caused by tobacco. However, many now claim they are not so safe after all.
“There’s a perception that e-cigarettes are healthier than regular cigarettes, or at least not as harmful as regular cigarettes,” said John P. Richie Jr., professor of public health sciences and pharmacology.
“While e-cigarette vapor does not contain many of the toxic substances that are known to be present in cigarette smoke, Â it’s still important for us to figure out and to minimize the potential dangers that are associated with e-cigarettes.”
Previous studies have found low levels of aldehydes, chemical compounds that can cause oxidative stress and cell damage, in e-cigarette “smoke.” But until now, no one has looked for free radicals, the main source of oxidative stress from cigarette smoke. Highly reactive free radicals are a leading culprit in smoking-related cancer, cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Instead of smoke, e-cigarettes produce aerosols, tiny liquid particles suspended in a puff of air. The researchers measured free radicals in e-cigarette aerosols.
They found that e-cigarettes produce high levels of highly reactive free radicals that fall in the range of 1,000- to 100-times less than levels in regular cigarettes. Nanotechnology is also being implemeted to produced some of the chemicals involved in their manufacturing.
“This is the first study that demonstrates the fact that we have these highly reactive agents in e-cigarette aerosols,” Richie said. Results were published in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology.
“The levels of radicals that we’re seeing are more than what you might get from a heavily air-polluted area but less than what you might find in cigarette smoke,” Richie said.
The radicals are produced when the device’s heating coil heats the nicotine solution to very high temperatures.
Further research is needed to determine the health effects of highly reactive free radicals from e-cigarettes.
“This is the first step,” Richie said. “The identification of these radicals in the aerosols means that we can’t just say e-cigarettes are safe because they don’t contain tobacco. They are potentially harmful. Now we have to find out what the harmful effects are.”
Richie is currently conducting studies to carefully measure total numbers of free radicals in e-cigarette aerosols and to identify their chemical structures.
“That will help us interpret the data better to know how dangerous they are,” he said.
Some experts are comparing replacing tobacco with e-cigarettes to heroin users switching to the painkiller methadone. The replacement may have its own risks, but is it safer, probably not.
The Gloves Come Off On EMF / Mobile / WiFi Radiation + Understanding The Dangers Of The “5G” Rollout July 20 2016 | From: TakeBackYourPower
If you care about your health, your children, your pets, your environment it is imperative that you understand the implications of this freight train that is headed down the tracks.
I hope you get the same chills down your spine I get when you read this and are compelled to take swift action!
After reading this post, get informed about the electronic soup we are all frying in. Watch what 18 world class experts are sharing on the EMF summit.
Untested 28GHz radiation blasting from millions of new hidden antennas and tuned-up "smart" meters. A corporate free-for-all, with oversight eliminated. Total, for-profit surveillance. An "internet of everything" with "hundreds of billions of microchippable products". Everywhere and everything... and eventually, everyone.
This is not sci-fi. This is FCC Commissioner Tom Wheeler's insane new plan, slickly badged as "5G".The US government's own NTP cancer study inconveniently concluded that yes - cellular radiation DOES increase cancer. Now, the industy-lobbyist-turned-government-czar gave an uber-creepy speech invoking technocracy's endgame with a stomach-churning sense of urgency.
Check out Wheeler's creepy speech for yourself, here. He stammers through it like a man mostly-possessed. This is desperation on their part. They know full well that the next phase of the megalomanic rollout needs to happen before the SHTF for them, and the tipping point is reached in terms of a convergent awareness of wireless health / surveillance / technocratic insanity- and their liability.
So let's engage and make some noise. Your voice is needed today. This plan is being fast-tracked & voted on tomorrow, Thursday July 14. Let the FCC and this government know that if they do not listen to science and reason, they will be held accountable and liable for their actions. Money is not only their god - it's their language.
This is so important and you need to understand it and protect yourself, your family, and your pets. Create a safe environment and use technology wisely!
Update: July 14, 2016
There’s no stopping this freight train.
In a unanimous vote this morning, the Federal Communications Commission approved a plan to begin readying the United States for 5G wireless networks.
It’s the biggest expansion yet and will make many more people ill!
Now more than ever you need to know how to best protect yourself and your family using technology wisely. Get informed!
The Truth About Mobile Phone And Wireless Radiation: What We Know, What We Need To Find Out, And What You Can Do Now July 5 2016 | From: UniversityOfMelbourne
Deans Lecture: Presented by Dr Devra Davis, Visiting Professor of Medicine at the Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, and Visiting Professor of Medicine at Ondokuz Mayis University, Turkey.
What are the health effects of mobile phones and wireless radiation? While Australia has led the world in safety standards, including compulsory seat-belt legislation, plain packaging on cigarettes, and product and food disclosure legislation, it falls behind in addressing the significant issues associated with mobile phone use.
In this Dean’s Lecture, epidemiologist and electromagnetic radiation expert, Dr Devra Davis, will outline the evolution of the mobile phone and smartphone, and provide a background to the current 19 year old radiation safety standards (SAR), policy developments and international legislation. New global studies on the health consequences of mobile/wireless radiation will be presented, including children’s exposure and risks.
Dr Devra Davis is an internationally recognised expert on electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones and other wireless transmitting devices.
She is currently the Visiting Professor of Medicine at the Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, and Visiting Professor of Medicine at Ondokuz Mayis University, Turkey. Dr Davis was Founding Director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at The University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute - the first institute of its kind in the world, to examine the environmental factors that contribute to the majority of cases of cancer.
In 2007, Dr Devra Davis founded nonprofit Environmental Health Trust to provide basic research and education about environmental health hazards. Dr Davis served as the President Clinton appointee to the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board in the U.S.A. from 1994 -1999, an independent executive branch agency that investigates, prevents and mitigates chemical accidents.
As the former Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Health in the Department of Health and Human Services, she has counseled leading officials in the United States, United Nations, European Environment Agency, Pan American Health Organization, World Health Organization, and World Bank.Dr Davis holds a B.S. in physiological psychology and an M.A. in sociology from the University of Pittsburgh, 1967. She completed a PhD in science studies at the University of Chicago as a
Danforth Foundation Graduate Fellow, 1972 and a M.P.H. in epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins University as a Senior National Cancer Institute Post-Doctoral Fellow, 1982. She has authored more than 200 publications and has been published in Lancet and Journal of the American Medical Association as well as the Scientific American and the New York Times.
Junk Science Week: Science Is On The Verge Af A Nervous Breakdown July 4 2016 | From: TheFinancialPost
Welcome to FP Comment’s 18th annual Junk Science Week, dedicated to exposing the scientists, NGOs, activists, politicians, journalists, media outlets, cranks and quacks who manipulate science data to achieve their objectives.
Our standard definition over the years has been this: junk science occurs when scientific facts are distorted, risk is exaggerated and the science adapted and warped by politics and ideology to serve another agenda.
Much of our content over the past 18 years has focused less on science itself and more on the NGOs, politicians and others who have found it convenient to use and abuse science as a springboard to political action.
It is easy, perhaps too easy, to follow the empty-headed foibles of a media culture that mindlessly recycles reports that bacon may cause heart disease or that cell phones cause cancer. Less easy is dealing with the much bigger problem: the break down of science itself.
In The Guardian last week, Jerome Ravetz, considered one of the world’s leading philosophers of science, reviewed what he and many others describe as “the crisis in science.” Ravetz, who has been warning of the emerging internal conflicts in science for decades, sees the crisis is spreading to the general public.
"Given the public awareness that science can be low-quality or corrupted, that whole fields can be misdirected for decades (see nutrition, on cholesterol and sugar), and that some basic fields must progress in the absence of any prospect of empirical testing (string theory), the naïve realism of previous generations becomes quite Medieval in its irrelevance to present realities.”
Present reality is that science is on the verge of a nervous breakdown. That’s the not-so-tongue-in-cheek message in Science on the Verge, a new book by European scientist Andrea Saltelli and seven other contributors. Science on the Verge is a 200-page indictment of what to the lay reader appears to be a monumental deterioration across all fields, from climate science to health research to economics.
The mere idea that “most published research results are false” should be cause for alarm.
But it is worse than that. The crisis runs through just about everything we take for granted in modern science, from the use of big data to computer models of major parts of our social, economic and natural environment and on to the often absurd uses of statistical methods to fish for predetermined conclusions.
Examples from the book help prove the point. In a chapter titled “Numbers Running Wild,” one of the book’s authors, Jeroen P. van der Sluijs of the University of Bergen, asks how is it possible for a paper in Science magazine to claim that precisely 7.9 per cent (not eight per cent or seven per cent) of the world’s species would become extinct as a result of climate change - when the total number of species is unknown?
Even odder, the species study concluded that the 7.9 per cent demonstrates:
"“The importance of rapid implementation of technologies to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and strategies for carbon sequestration.”
How, asks van de Sluijs, do the researchers jump from species extinction to carbon sequestration?
"This sounds like an opinion for which the underlying arguments are not even given.”
Others examples come from economics, a science filled with unwarranted claims to certainty and predictability. Science on the Verge recalls Nobel economist Robert Lucas’s 2003 declaration that the -
"Central problem of depression-prevention has been solved.”
Also noted is the 2004 claim by former Fed chairman Ben Bernanke that the volatility of business cycles had been tamed.
These and other economic blunders lead critics to suspect the discipline of economics:
"Had reverted to (or never developed beyond) a state of immaturity.”
Few fields and practices are exempt from scrutiny in Science on the Verge. In a chapter on evidence-based science, Andrea Saltelli - also at the University of Bergen - spreads the net wide:
"It is futile to expect, for example, that modelling approaches which have failed to predict a purely financial and economic crisis will be able to inform us accurately about the behaviour of a system involving institutions, societies, economies and ecologies.
Yet this is what we do when we apply the technique of cost – benefit analysis (CBA) to dimensions of climate change”
This kind of quantitative approach to complex systems, says Saltelli, “can only foster abuse and corruption.”
It would be wrong to suspect that Science on the Verge is the work of right-wing activists, climate skeptics and hide-bound traditionalists.
It is the work, rather, of scientists with a range of ideological views despairing over what appears to be a fundamental breakdown as science has become more and more enmeshed in the business of providing evidence for policy-making.
Science, in short, has already been corrupted. We explore just some of the examples in this year’s Junk Science Week, including the GDP factory myth, sugar scares, the social cost of carbon, the last pesticide Roundup, killer lipstick, and our annual Rubber Duckies awards.
These Light Bulbs Cause Anxiety, Migraines, And Even Cancer June 28 2016 | From: TMZ In order to save money and energy, a lot of people replaced their old standard light bulbs with eco -friendly new generation energy- saving light bulbs. Nevertheless, these energy- efficient bulbs are extremely toxic.
According to a study conducted by researchers from the Fraunhofer Wilhelm Klauditz Institute for German’s Federal Environment Agency, if broken indoors, these light bulbs release 20 times the maximum acceptable mercury concentration in the air. It was very astounding how the majority of the British people were able to figure out the fact that it’s too absurd to kill someone from the other side when your position is winning in all the surveys, independent or otherwise.
Consequently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency created an emergency protocol you need to follow in the event of a bulb breakage, due to the poison gas that is released.
Moreover, these light bulbs have a number of negative effects for our health, including:
Inability to concentrate
Here are some more reasons to avoid these light bulbs and go back to incandescent bulbs.
Energy Saving Bulbs Contain Mercury
As previously stated, these energy- saving light bulbs contain mercury, which is a potent neurotoxin that is especially dangerous to children and pregnant women. It is especially toxic to the brain, the nervous system, the liver and the kidneys, and it can also damage the reproductive, cardiovascular and immune system. Furthermore, mercury can cause anxiety, insomnia, memory loss, headaches, tremors, cancer and Alzheimer’s.
Energy Saving Light Bulbs Emit a Lot of UV Rays
It is generally recognized that UV-radiation is harmful for the eyes and the skin, as it can lead to skin cancer. These energy saving lamps emit UV-B and traces of UV-C radiation.
This radiation directly attacks the immune system, and furthermore damages the skin tissues enough to prevent the proper formation of vitamin D-3.
Energy Saving Bulbs Can Cause Cancer
The study by Peter Braun at Berlin Germany’s Alab Laboratory discovered that these light bulbs contain poisonous carcinogens that could cause cancer, such as:
Naphthalene, a volatile white crystalline compound, produced by the distillation of coal tar, used in mothballs and as a raw material for chemical manufacture.
Styrene, an unsaturated liquid hydrocarbon, obtained as a petroleum byproduct.
Phenol, a mildly acidic toxic white crystalline solid, obtained from coal tar and used in chemical manufacture.
Hence, apart from the saving in energy and finances, these light bulbs pose serious health risks. Therefore, it would be wise to change back to regular incandescent bulbs, but be careful in doing so as well- since if one happens to break, the dangers are so severe.
The Environmental Protection Agency has laid out a very detailed protocol to deal with the mercury and cancer-causing chemicals in these cases, which suggests as follows:
In the event of a bulb breakage, due to the poison gas that is released, you should follow this emergency procedure.
People and pets should leave the room.
Open a window or door to the outdoor environment to air out the room for 5-10 minutes
If you have a central forced air heating or air conditioning system, shut it off
Collect materials needed to clean up the broken bulb
Damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes (for hard surfaces)
A glass jar with a metal lid or a sealable plastic bag
Stiff paper or cardboard
Do not vacuum as it could spread mercury-containing powder or mercury vapor, unless broken glass remains after all other cleanup steps have been taken.
Be thorough in collecting broken glass and visible powder, scoop up glass fragments and powder using stiff paper or cardboard.
Pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder with a sticky tape, such as duct tape. Place the used tape in the glass jar or plastic bag.
Place cleanup materials in a sealable container.
After cleanup, avoid leaving any bulb fragments or cleanup materials indoors, and promptly place all of them, including vacuum cleaner bags, outdoors in a trash container or protected area until materials can be disposed of.
Moreover, check with your local government about disposal requirements in your area, and if there is no such requirement in your area, you can dispose of the materials with your household trash. However, some localities require fluorescent bulbs (broken or unbroken) be taken to a local recycling center.
Furthermore, you should continue to air out the room where the bulb was broken and leave the heating/air conditioning system shut off for several hours afterwards.
A New Map Of New Zealand's Wireless Networks June 23 2016 | From: MarkHansen This map draws lines showing the links between antennae like the one shown in the image further below. You might have seen these towers on top of hills while driving. I always wondered what they were used for, and where they connected to. Now you can see where the links go, and who they're for.
It's not just huge antenna mast towers like the one shown below. Hospitals, big businesses, cell towers, weather stations, and offshore oil rigs are connected with these radio links.
Here's just a few interesting things I found exploring the data:
Lakes are awesome to transmit across! They stay flat, and usually have good hills on either side. Lake Rotorua demonstates this really well - here you can see how densely it's criscrossed with links.
The busiest place I could find, with the most links converging on one location, was the Skytower in Auckland. Here dozens, if not hundreds of wireless links converge from all over the Auckland region.
Hamilton's a very flat city, and there's not much in the way of mountain ranges nearby. I imagine this would make it difficult to transmit signals to the roofs of buildings in town. On the map, you can see how transmitting companies have dealt with this flatness - the few high buildings that do exist are used extensively:
The Hamilton Lake Water Tower (shown)
Signals spread all over town from these vantage points.
Taranaki Oil/Gas fields
You don't usually notice New Zealand's offshore gasfields on maps, but they really stick out on a map of wireless links. You can see the Maui A and Maui B platforms communicating through a host of links on the Taranaki shore, and the Kupe Gas field south of the mountain.
We even have a wireless link set up to an active volcano. Awesome!
Exploring the map, I realised that it inadvertently highlights the best views in the country. Antenna masts are specifically placed for great views in all directions. Lots of research must go into finding the places with these great views before spending vast amounts of money erecting a tower.
Why not take advantage of all this research into great views next time you're deciding where to go hiking?
Have a look, go exploring, and let me know in the blog comments if you find something interesting. Feedback is much appreciated.
Smart Meters ‘Not Needed’ After All For European Power Grid + How To Opt Out From ‘Smart’ Meters June 22 2016 | From: FinalWakeUpCall / Various
A smart meter is installed, but industry players have questioned their use. A transition to an intelligent electricity grid in Europe can take place without smart meters, industry players have said, in comments that will embarrass the European Commission, which pushed a Europe-wide plan to roll out smart meters years ago.
There are other more efficient ways than smart meters to help develop intelligent power grids, said industry delegates at the annual convention of Europe’s electricity association Eurelectric, held in Vilnius last week.
These include quicker integration of renewables, the development of energy storage and energy demand response solutions, said the industry representatives.
The actual benefits of smart meters were also questioned at the conference, as several member states have done previously. Germany, for instance, has decided not to have a national roll-out plan at all, running counter to requirements laid out in EU legislation.
80% Roll-Out Target
EU member states are required to implement smart meters under the 2009 Third Energy Package wherever it is cost-effective to do so, with the goal to replace 80% of electricity meters with smart meters by 2020.
The 80% target applies to both households and commercial buildings, a Commission spokesperson confirmed. The EU executive will publish in the next one to two years a report on smart meters “in the context of our regular monitoring exercise of the progress of members states,” the spokesperson said.
But progress has been sluggish, with few countries having completed their roll-outs and a number of nations – most notably Germany – having so far decided against a nation-wide deployment of smart meters.
And the countries that do have a commitment to smart meters, such as the UK, have run into hurdles in completing its roll-out because some meters would cease to work if a consumer decided to change energy supplier.
Markus Merkel, a senior advisor to the management board of German distribution system operator (DSO) EWE, told the Eurelectric conference that “there isn’t a positive business case” for smart meters in Germany.
Real Data Vital
EWE’s move towards an intelligent grid has focused to a large extent on upgrading the system to integrate the vast amount of new renewable energy at a quicker pace.
He said smart meters would be more useful for DSOs in their work to upgrade the grid if they provided real time data on energy consumption rather than the circa 15-minute intervals that current products provide.
"We need something different, and maybe smart metering 2.0 – the next generation of smart meters – will deliver something more that we as DSOs can also use,” he said.
Laurence Carpanini, director smarter energy solutions at IBM, echoed the real time data point, adding: “I don’t look at smart meters now as being the drivers of change – you don’t need smart meters really.”
Instead, industry players should “think about flexibility solutions as a whole” and focus on a mix of demand response technologies, frequency response and energy storage, she said.
Storage was also highlighted by Ari Koponen, CEO of Finnish DSO and utility Caruna. He said that while smart meters have been “essential” for collecting energy consumption data, the aspiration should be to access this data in real time and bring in more storage solutions.
“This would [bring] the smartness of the grid to a whole different level,” Koponen said.
The industry’s comments are an embarrassment for the European Commission’s own plan to deploy smart meters across Europe by 2020.
The Commission spokesperson declined to comment on the views about whether or not smart meters are necessary for the transition to an intelligent grid.
Member states are expected to conduct their own cost-benefit analyses for their national smart meters roll-out plans, the official said.
A spokesperson for Eurelectric sent a statement to EurActiv after publication of this article, clarifying their position on smart meters.
"Even though there are voices in the industry saying that we don’t necessarily need smart meters, this does not represent the view of all Eurelectric members," said Anamaria Olaru, communication and PA coordinator for Eurelectric.
"The debate on 'Enhancing the value of the intelligent grid' showed a complexity of views from our speakers" while the EurActiv article "was written from a pure grid perspective, missing out on the consumer perspective," she said.
The foundations for rolling out smart meters in Europe were laid down in a 2006 EU directive on energy end-use efficiency and energy services. The directive required member states to ensure that consumers of energy and water are provided with individual meters and accurate billing, including time-of-use information.
The gas and electricity directives of the third energy package, adopted in 2009, require member states to prepare a timetable for the introduction of intelligent metering systems.
In the case of electricity, at least 80% of customers should be equipped with smart meters by 2020, pending a cost-assessment study.
EU legislation on buildings has also sought to pave the way for the introduction of smart meters. The Energy Performance of Buildings Directive for instance required member states to "encourage the introduction of intelligent metering systems" when a building is constructed or undergoes major renovation.
Take Back Your Power Trailer:
UPDATE (19 June): A point of clarification: What’s happening here is an increasing number of industry players are recognizing ‘smart’ meters as a false solution.
But rollouts are still happening or planned. We must continue to demand our right to a safe analog meter, and spread the awareness to everyone in our lives until the tipping point is reached and this harmful agenda is stopped and reversed.
Our take: It’s great to increasingly see industry officials realizing that ‘smart’ meters are simply useless toward their stated purposes.
The simple fact of the matter, as we’ve known since making Take Back Your Power (watch it here), is that ‘smart’ meters are an unlawful radiating surveillance device being pawned off in the name of climate action.
Despite obvious harm to rights, safety, security and health, utilities are still pushing them because of the market value of this unlawful, in-home surveillance data - which in the words of a Director at NARUC is estimated to be worth “a lot more than the commodity that’s consumed [electricity] to generate that data.”
That commodity is a $2.2 trillion dollar market. But in their greed, they are forgetting about liability. -Josh del Sol
3. Put cell phone in airplane mode when not in use, and don’t use right next to head. (Good idea: airtube headset)
4. Use a corded landline
We’re Bio-Electric Beings, Affected by Electromagnetics
Quite simply, we are bio-electric beings. As we’ve seen in Take Back Your Power (watch it here), once a utility installs a ‘smart’ meter, thousands (if not millions) are suffering functional impairments, illness or returning bouts of cancer and other diseases.
There are literally thousands of studies that show a biological effect from electromagnetic frequencies (EMF). And just this month, a $25M study by the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) concluded that cellphone radiation is linked with an increase presence of cancerous tumors.
But of course, industry and most government agencies are in full denial. It’s time the world knows what’s going on with ‘smart’ meters - better termed radiating surveillance meters.
Opting-out is not the solution, but it’s a start. It’s time we kick these ‘smart’/advanced/AMI meters out of our homes and neighborhoods once and for all. Contact your utility today and demand a safe analog meter.
Crisis In Science Research: Over 70% Of Researchers Fail To Reproduce Another Scientist's Experiments June 16 2016 | From: Sott
More than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments.
Those are some of the telling figures that emerged from Nature's survey of 1,576 researchers who took a brief online questionnaire on reproducibility in research.
The data reveal sometimes-contradictory attitudes towards reproducibility. Although 52% of those surveyed agree that there is a significant 'crisis' of reproducibility, less than 31% think that failure to reproduce published results means that the result is probably wrong, and most say that they still trust the published literature.
Data on how much of the scientific literature is reproducible are rare and generally bleak. The best-known analyses, from psychology 1and cancer biology 2, found rates of around 40%and 10%, respectively.
Our survey respondents were more optimistic: 73% said that they think that at least half of the papers in their field can be trusted, with physicists and chemists generally showing the most confidence.
The results capture a confusing snapshot of attitudes around these issues, says Arturo Casadevall, a microbiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland.
“At the current time there is no consensus on what reproducibility is or should be." But just recognizing that is a step forward, he says. "The next step may be identifying what is the problem and to get a consensus."
Failing to reproduce results is a rite of passage, says Marcus Munafo, a biological psychologist at the University of Bristol, UK, who has a long-standing interest in scientific reproducibility. When he was a student, he says;
"I tried to replicate what looked simple from the literature, and wasn't able to. Then I had a crisis of confidence, and then I learned that my experience wasn't uncommon."
The challenge is not to eliminate problems with reproducibility in published work. Being at the cutting edge of science means that sometimes results will not be robust, says Munafo. "We want to be discovering new things but not generating too many false leads."
The Scale of Reproducibility
But sorting discoveries from false leads can be discomfiting. Although the vast majority of researchers in our survey had failed to reproduce an experiment, less than 20% of respondents said that they had ever been contacted by another researcher unable to reproduce their work.
Our results are strikingly similar to another online survey of nearly 900 members of the American Society for Cell Biology (see go.nature.com). That may be because such conversations are difficult.
If experimenters reach out to the original researchers for help, they risk appearing incompetent or accusatory, or revealing too much about their own projects.
A minority of respondents reported ever having tried to publish a replication study. When work does not reproduce, researchers often assume there is a perfectly valid (and probably boring) reason.
What's more, incentives to publish positive replications are low and journals can be reluctant to publish negative findings. In fact, several respondents who had published a failed replication said that editors and reviewers demanded that they play down comparisons with the original study.
Nevertheless, 24% said that they had been able to publish a successful replication and 13% had published a failed replication. Acceptance was more common than persistent rejection: only 12% reported being unable to publish successful attempts to reproduce others' work; 10% reported being unable to publish unsuccessful attempts.
Survey respondent Abraham Al-Ahmad at the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center in Amarillo expected a "cold and dry rejection" when he submitted a manuscript explaining why a stem-cell technique had stopped working in his hands. He was pleasantly surprised when the paper was accepted 3. The reason, he thinks, is because it offered a workaround for the problem.
Others place the ability to publish replication attempts down to a combination of luck, persistence and editors' inclinations. Survey respondent Michael Adams, a drug-development consultant, says that work showing severe flaws in an animal model of diabetes has been rejected six times, in part because it does not reveal a new drug target.
By contrast, he says, work refuting the efficacy of a compound to treat Chagas disease was quickly accepted 4.
The Corrective Measures
One-third of respondents said that their labs had taken concrete steps to improve reproducibility within the past five years. Rates ranged from a high of 41% in medicine to a low of 24% in physics and engineering.
Free-text responses suggested that redoing the work or asking someone else within a lab to repeat the work is the most common practice. Also common are efforts to beef up the documentation and standardization of experimental methods.
Any of these can be a major undertaking. A biochemistry graduate student in the United Kingdom, who asked not to be named, says that efforts to reproduce work for her lab's projects doubles the time and materials used - in addition to the time taken to troubleshoot when some things invariably don't work.
Although replication does boost confidence in results, she says, the costs mean that she performs checks only for innovative projects or unexpected results.
Consolidating methods is a project unto itself, says Laura Shankman, a postdoc studying smooth muscle cells at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville. After several postdocs and graduate students left her lab within a short time, remaining members had trouble getting consistent results in their experiments.
The lab decided to take some time off from new questions to repeat published work, and this revealed that lab protocols had gradually diverged. She thinks that the lab saved money overall by getting synchronized instead of troubleshooting failed experiments piecemeal, but that it was a long-term investment.
Irakli Loladze, a mathematical biologist at Bryan College of Health Sciences in Lincoln, Nebraska, estimates that efforts to ensure reproducibility can increase the time spent on a project by 30%, even for his theoretical work.
He checks that all steps from raw data to the final figure can be retraced. But those tasks quickly become just part of the job.
"Reproducibility is like brushing your teeth," he says. "It is good for you, but it takes time and effort. Once you learn it, it becomes a habit."
One of the best-publicized approaches to boosting reproducibility is pre-registration, where scientists submit hypotheses and plans for data analysis to a third party before performing experiments, to prevent cherry-picking statistically significant results later.
Fewer than a dozen people mentioned this strategy. One who did was Hanne Watkins, a graduate student studying moral decision-making at the University of Melbourne in Australia. Going back to her original questions after collecting data, she says, kept her from going down a rabbit hole.
And the process, although time consuming, was no more arduous than getting ethical approval or formatting survey questions.
"If it's built in right from the start," she says, "it's just part of the routine of doing a study."
The survey asked scientists what led to problems in reproducibility. More than 60% of respondents said that each of two factors - pressure to publish and selective reporting - always or often contributed.
More than half pointed to insufficient replication in the lab, poor oversight or low statistical power. A smaller proportion pointed to obstacles such as variability in reagents or the use of specialized techniques that are difficult to repeat.
But all these factors are exacerbated by common forces, says Judith Kimble, a developmental biologist at the University of Wisconsin - Madison: competition for grants and positions, and a growing burden of bureaucracy that takes away from time spent doing and designing research.
“Everyone is stretched thinner these days," she says. "And the cost extends beyond any particular research project.
If graduate students train in labs where senior members have little time for their juniors, they may go on to establish their own labs without having a model of how training and mentoring should work".
"They will go off and make it worse," Kimble says.
What can be done? Respondents were asked to rate 11 different approaches to improving reproducibility in science, and all got ringing endorsements. Nearly 90% - more than 1,000 people - ticked "More robust experimental design" "better statistics" and "better mentorship".
Those ranked higher than the option of providing incentives (such as funding or credit towards tenure) for reproducibility-enhancing practices. But even the lowest-ranked item - journal checklists - won a whopping 69% endorsement.
The survey - which was e-mailed to Nature readers and advertised on affiliated websites and social-media outlets as being 'about reproducibility' - probably selected for respondents who are more receptive to and aware of concerns about reproducibility.
Nevertheless, the results suggest that journals, funders and research institutions that advance policies to address the issue would probably find cooperation, says John Ioannidis, who studies scientific robustness at Stanford University in California.
"People would probably welcome such initiatives."
About 80% of respondents thought that funders and publishers should do more to improve reproducibility.
“It's healthy that people are aware of the issues and open to a range of straightforward ways to improve them," says Munafo.
And given that these ideas are being widely discussed, even in mainstream media, tackling the initiative now may be crucial.
"If we don't act on this, then the moment will pass, and people will get tired of being told that they need to do something."
Downlaod the full questionnaire used in the survey and the raw data in a spreadsheet (the data are also available as a tab-delimited file at Figshare).
Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of The Lancet, has written bleakly:
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.
Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness."
Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor in Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), which is considered one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world, makes her view of the subject quite plain:
"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines."
Utility Smart Meters - A Probable Terrorist Connection Unveiled? June 11 2016 | From: ActivistPost
All throughout the USA - plus globally - informed and concerned citizens are refusing AMI smart meters for electric, natural gas, and municipal water utility services, which are provided using a Marxist-draconian-like edict and rollout by utility companies that want to cash in on the funding they can receive from the feds to institute what amounts to an apparent ‘first leg’ push for the global smart grid and Internet of Things (IoT)
The IoT is designed to track everyone’s every interaction at all times - in your car (transponders and E-Z Pass); on your computers - specifically Windows 10 backdoors that apparently allow the feds access to your computer; through your ‘smart’ home appliances - especially TVs; plus a human RFID microchip surgically imbedded somewhere inside your body to enforce a cashless society, tracking, and an obvious ultimate control mechanism over every human!
That IoT sure beats what Karl Marx, Adolph Hitler, and Joseph Stalin visualized and enforced! Why aren’t consumers waking up to what’s being done to us?
Furthermore, does the Draco-like (7th-century Athenian statesman and lawmaker, or his code of laws, which prescribed death for almost every offence) push for vaccines starting as soon as a fetus exits the womb until one reaches advanced old age play a part in any of this, especially vaccine nanoparticles?
However, one specific aspect of the dumb ‘smart’ technology came into daylight recently because of what’s been going on in Seattle, Washington - terrorism associated with hacking smart systems. Hopefully, that aspect finally will register enough concern in the hearts, minds, and souls of humans to enable us to recognize, and seriously ponder, that we are being downsized into zombies or human robots!
The issue that’s raised security concerns, plus hackles, at corporate levels is the fact that utility companies’ smart meter technology is being equated with terroristic capabilities! Read that again and let it sink into the very depths of your being.
All those dumb ‘smart’ gadgets we can’t live without, and everyone has bought into, pose severe capabilities for terrorists’ hacking, plus a total takeover of the grid! How do you like ‘them’ apples?
The quintessential Pandora’s Box is nothing compared with smart technology and its capabilities of being hacked at every level of communication. How do we know that?
Well, it’s been revealed that when Seattle City Light, a public power utility in Washington State, was asked by an activist for their smart meter and grid details, etc., in order to find out what kind of safety and security safeguards were built in by smart meter suppliers Landis+Gyr and Sensus USA, that request wound up in a rather bizarre legal battle!
Here’s the story of activist Phil Mocek’s request for smart meter information that ran into legal troubles. However, I’d like to cut to what may be the real deal about not releasing those plans, etc:
“The smart meter suppliers objected to the release of the information on the grounds that the unredacted documents would disclose their trade secrets and open the public to terrorist attacks on their infrastructure."
As a result of smart meter suppliers/manufacturers legal actions, this is where the issue currently stands:
“Mocek was given a mix of unredacted and redacted documents by the city, the meter makers complained, whereas he should only have received and published files they had censored.
Seattle officials said they were not skilled enough to know for sure which parts to redact, so left it to the suppliers to edit the files – yet, unredacted information managed to make its way into Mocek’s hands and onto the internet.
Landis+Gyr and Sensus promptly sued the city, Mocek and Muckrock, and filed for an injunction: ultimately, the suppliers wanted the documents taken down, and the unredacted copies banned from public view.
On Thursday, a temporary restraining order was granted by the King County Superior Court in Washington – and Muckrock founder Michael Morisy confirmed the unredacted documents have been taken down pending the outcome of the case."
However, there seems to be some element of naivety involved regarding all this, I offer, and the following leads me to that conclusion:
“In the meantime, however, Mocek also has some additional problems to deal with, thanks to the legal wrangling. Though he has filed similar information requests in the past, he says he has never had to face a lawsuit simply because he wanted to look at public records and keep a local utility honest.
“I don’t think [Seattle City Light] are going to put a device on my house to spy on me,” he quipped. “I think they are being bamboozled by vendors who want to make a lot of money by replacing thousands of meters.”
To which I offer: I think Mr. Mocek and everyone else needs to reconsider the “spy on me” aspect. How naïve are we, if we don’t put two and two together and come up with the correct answer? Utility companies are providing customers’ smart meter information to others, as a California utility admits:
“This data is very valuable because it can reveal patterns about what you do and when. California utility companies admitted they are providing smart meter data to the government and third parties."
There’s a 4.3 minute video explaining what smart meters really can and do, regarding surveillance of customers’ homes in this website. It’s found under “Privacy invasion.”
However, I need to tell readers that my computer surveillance package won’t allow me to copy and paste that video URL into this article! Interesting? No - my computer is compromised as, apparently, all computers are of those who do the type of work I do.
CIA Director Calls Smart Grid “Stupid” Due to Security Problems
If the Smart Grid is that “stupid”, then there must be some ulterior Faustian reason for it to be mandated and installed, wouldn’t you say? No one can be that damn dumb to mandate a system that can cause more harm, especially in the area of personal privacy and national security. Haven’t we learned anything from nine-eleven?
You no doubt have heard about people who live in glass houses and their vulnerabilities.
Well, your house, no matter what it’s made of, will become a crystal clear, see-through structure to all who want to know about your every moment, movement, occupancy times, and use of smart gadgets and, in turn, broadcast that information via hackable cell phone technology in smart meters and, ultimately, sell that personal information without your knowledge and permission to third parties; plus open your privacy, life, and home to burglars, thieves, and government or foreign hackers.
Is that the price we are willing to pay for buying into all the dumb smart technology being forced upon us?
I think every homeowner should file a formal complaint with their utility company and public utility commission informing them that they must obtain an official court order in order to be able to access your personal information via a smart meter.
Basically, it’s a surveillance device! Enforce your lawful rights!
Duke Study Finds A "Legacy Of Radioactivity," Contamination From Thousands Of Fracking Wastewater Spills June 3 2016 | From: Desmog
Years of lax policy making and too many wells being inspected by too few officials means that a massive amount of pollution is being pumped into the wilderness of North Dakota.
Thousands of oil and gas industry wastewater spills in North Dakota have caused “widespread” contamination from radioactive materials, heavy metals and corrosive salts, putting the health of people and wildlife at risk, researchers from Duke University concluded in a newly released peer-reviewed study.
Many cities and towns draw their drinking water from rivers and streams, though federal law generally requires drinking water to be treated before it reaches peoples' homes, and the scientists did not test tap water as part of their research.
High levels of lead - the same heavy metal that infamously contaminated water in Flint, Michigan - as well as the radioactive element radium, were discovered near spill sites. One substance, selenium, was found in the state's waters at levels as high as 35 times the federal thresholds set to protect fish, mussels, and other wildlife, including those that people eat.
The pollution was found on land as well as in water. The soils in locations where wastewater spilled were laced with significant levels of radium, and even higher levels of radium were discovered in the ground downstream from the spills' origin points, showing that radioactive materials were soaking into the ground and building up as spills flowed over the ground, the researchers said.
The sheer number of spills in the past several years is striking. All told, the Duke University researchers mapped out a total of over 3,900 accidental spills of oil and gas wastewater in North Dakota alone.
Contamination remained at the oldest spill site tested, where roughly 300 barrels of wastewater were released in a spill four years before the team of researchers arrived to take samples, demonstrating that any cleanup efforts at the site had been insufficient.
"Unlike spilled oil, which starts to break down in soil, these spilled brines consist of inorganic chemicals, metals and salts that are resistant to biodegradation,” said Nancy Lauer, a Duke University Ph.D. student who was lead author of the study, which was published in Environmental Science & Technology.
“They don't go away; they stay. This has created a legacy of radioactivity at spill sites,” she said.
The highest level of radium the scientists found in soil measured over 4,600 Bequerels per kilogram [bq/kg] — which translates to roughly two and half times the levels of fracking-related radioactive contamination discovered in Pennsylvania in a 2013 report that drew national attention.
To put those numbers in context, under North Dakota law, waste over 185 bq/kg is considered too radioactive to dispose in regular landfills without a special permit or to haul on roads without a specific license from the state.
And that radioactive contamination - in some places over 100 times the levels of radioactivity as found upstream from the spill - will be here to stay for millennia, the researchers concluded, unless unprecedented spill clean-up efforts are made.
"The results of this study indicate that the water contamination from brine spills is remarkably persistent in the environment, resulting in elevated levels of salts and trace elements that can be preserved in spill sites for at least months to years,” the study concluded.
“The relatively long half-life of [Radium 226] (∼1600 years) suggests that [Radium] contamination in spill sites will remain for thousands of years.”
Cleanup efforts remain underway at three of the four sites that the Duke University research team sampled, a North Dakota State Health Department official asked to comment on the research told the Bismarck Tribune, while the fourth site had not yet been addressed. He criticized the researchers for failing to include any in-depth testing of sites where the most extensive types of cleanup efforts had been completed.
The four sites the researchers sampled instead included the locations of two of the biggest spills in the state's history, including a spill of 2.9 million gallons in January 2015, and two areas where smaller spills occurred in 2011. The samples from the sites were collected in June 2015, with funding from the National Science Foundation and the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group.
Over the past decade, roughly 9,700 wells have been drilled in North Dakota's Bakken shale and Bottineu oilfield region - meaning that there has been over one spill reported to regulators for every three wells drilled.
"Until now, research in many regions of the nation has shown that contamination from fracking has been fairly sporadic and inconsistent,” Avner Vengosh, professor of geochemistry and water quality at Duke's Nicholas School of the Environment, said when the study was released.
“In North Dakota, however, we find it is widespread and persistent, with clear evidence of direct water contamination from fracking.”
Dealing with wastewater generated by drilling and fracking has proved to be one of the shale industry's most intractable problems. The industry often pumps its toxic waste underground in a process known as wastewater injection.
Every day, roughly 2 billion gallons of oil and gas wastewater are injected into the ground nationwide, the EPA estimates. Wastewater injection has been linked to swarms of earthquakes that have prompted a series of legal challenges.
The sheer volume of waste generated by the industry - particularly from the type of high volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing used to tap shale oil and gas - has often overwhelmed state regulators, especially because federal laws leave the waste exempt from hazardous waste handling laws, no matter how toxic or dangerous it might be, under an exception for the industry carved out in the 1980's.
This leaves policing fracking waste up to state inspectors, and not only do the rules vary widely from state to state, but enforcing those rules brings its own difficulties.
State inspectors have faced escalating workloads as budgets have often failed to keep pace with the industry's rapid expansion. In North Dakota, the number of wells per inspector climbed from roughly 359 each in 2012 to 500 per inspector last year. In other states, the ratios are even more challenging, with Wyoming oil and gas well inspectors being responsible for more than 2,900 wells in 2015.
And now, with the collapse of oil and gas prices, funds earmarked for oil and gas inspection have also nosedived in many states.
Lax enforcement may help explain why wastewater spills are so common across the U.S. More than 180 million gallons of wastewater was spilled between 2009 and 2014, according to an investigation by the Associated Press, which tallied the amount of wastewater spilled in the 21,651 accidents that were reported to state or federal regulators nationwide during that time.
The naturally occurring radioactive materials in that wastewater have drawn particular concern, partly because of their longevity in the environment and partly because the drilling industry enjoys looser federal standards for their radioactive waste than many other industries.
In January, North Dakota regulators further relaxed their standards for the dumping of radioactive materials, allowing many landfills in the state to accept drilling waste at levels higher than previously permitted, citing tough economic times for drillers.
But environmentalists argue that relaxing the rules for radioactive waste disposal could mean that radioactive materials receive less careful handling.
"If people think this study points to a building tragedy, just wait,” Darrell Dorgan, who chairs the North Dakota Energy Industry Waste Coalition, told the Bismarck Tribune, when the Duke University research was released. "'The new rules allow radioactive waste that is 10 times more dangerous.”
The spills the Duke University researchers identified often resulted from a failure to maintain infrastructure including pipelines and storage tanks. Roughly half of the wastewater spilled came from failed pipelines, followed by leaks from valves and other pipe connectors, and then tank leaks or overflows.
But recent floods in Texas's Eagle Ford shale region also highlight the risks that natural disasters in drilling regions might pose. Texas regulators photographed plumes of contamination around submerged drilling sites, a repeat of similar incidentsin Colorado.
Risks associated with fracking in flood zones have drawn the attention of some federal agencies in the past, but perhaps not in a way that locals in affected areas might find helpful.
In 2012, the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program - a program designed to help people move away from areas subject to recurring floods - ran into a series of conflicts over oil and gas leases on properties that would otherwise be offered buy-outs. Some homeowners in Pennsylvania were denied the chance to participate in the program because of oil and gas leases or pipelines on their properties, as DeSmog previously reported.
In other words, it may be harder for those who have signed oil and gas or pipeline leases to abandon flood-prone areas, meaning that homeowners whose properties frequently flood could potentially face battles over cleanup costs without aid from FEMA.
And the newly published research from North Dakota suggests that the less visible brines may ultimately be more of a long-lasting environmental hazard than the spilled oil.
Even though their study included only leaks that were reported to state regulators, the researchers warned that little is currently being done to clean up sites where spills have occurred - or even to track smaller spills, especially on reservation lands, where roughly a quarter of the state's oil is produced.
This means that the real amount of wastewater spilled is likely even higher than currently reported.
"Many smaller spills have also occurred on tribal lands,” Prof. Vengosh said, “and as far as we know, no one is monitoring them.”
Massive Government Study Concludes Cell Phone Radiation Causes Brain Cancer + The Effects Of Smartphone Light On Your Brain And Body May 31 2016 | From: NaturalNews / StopSmartMeters / Sott / Various
After decades of denials and attacks by the media which called people concerned about cell phone radiation "tin foil hat-wearing conspiracy theorists," a massive, multi-year study funded by the federal government now concludes that yes, cell phone radiation causes brain cancer.
TThe study is published here and it's entitled, "Report of Partial Findings from the National Toxicology Program Carcinogenesis Studies of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation in Hsd: Sprague Dawley SD rats (Whole Body Exposures)."
"The findings, which chronicle an unprecedented number of rodents subjected to a lifetime of electromagnetic radiation, present some of the strongest evidence to date that such exposure is associated with the formation of rare cancers in at least two cell types in the brains and hearts of rats," reports Scientific American:
"The researchers found that as the thousands of rats in the new study were exposed to greater intensities of RF radiation, more of them developed rare forms of brain and heart cancer that could not be easily explained away, exhibiting a direct dose-response relationship. Some of the rats had glioma -- a tumor of the glial cells in the brain -- or schwannoma of the heart.
Furthering concern about the findings: In prior epidemiological studies of humans and cell phone exposure, both types of tumors have also cropped up as associations. In contrast, none of the control rats -- those not exposed to the radiation -- developed such tumors.
Consumer Reports also authored this story published on Yahoo Finance, which states, "The tumors found were gliomas (in the brain), and schwannomas (of the heart)." That same story goes on to report:
[T]he current study, which found the same types of tumors in rats that the earlier epidemiological research found in humans, was a controlled clinical trial; it was specifically designed to simulate the exposures of cell phone users, and all of the important parameters were tightly controlled and carefully monitored.
Rats and mice were exposed to the same kinds of radiation used in cell phones, for roughly nine hours each day, spread over the course of the day."
Another Government Cover-Up Shattered
In other words, the cell phone industry can no longer claim it's "bad science." This is rigorous science, and it shows a clear, dose-related causative link between exposure to cell phone radiation and the development of brain and heart tumors.
For decades, the government has actively conspired with industry to downplay any evidence linking cell phones to cancer. We see this across the federal government, of course, with the EPA downplaying the risks of pesticides, the FDA downplaying the risks of pharmaceuticals, the CDC downplaying the risks of vaccines and the USDA downplaying the risks of genetically engineered crops.
The entire federal government as it operates today is little more than the science propaganda and marketing arm of private industry. (Corporate-government collusion, by the way, is better known as economic Fascism.)
In all this, the role of the government-controlled media has long been to ridicule anyone who questions the official science propaganda on all these topics.
Think cell phones cause cancer? You're a kook. Worried about fluoride in the tap water? You're a nut case. Concerned about mercury in vaccines? You're an anti-science quack, we're told.
Except that now the truth is being exposed on all these fronts.
Now, even the government's own study shows that cell phone radiation causes cancerous tumors of the brain and heart. At the same time, independent science is increasingly exposing the harm of mercury in vaccines, GM crop chemicals like glyphosate, toxic pharmaceuticals and the mass fluoride poisoning of the water supply.
On all these issues, Natural News has always been right! (... and the establishment has always been in denial of reality.)
The CDC, for its conspiratorial part, yanked warnings about cell phone radiation from its website. (It's the Ministry of Truth, you see, and preventing the public from learning the truth is always the CDC's No. 1 priority...)
As Consumer Reports says in its story:
"The results of this large, long-term study could dramatically shift the national debate over cell phone safety. The NTP's website says that the results may be used by the Food and Drug Administration and the FTC in determining how best to protect consumers from the potential harms of radiation that comes from cell phones.
The CDC might also consider reinstating the cautions it pulled from its web site. (We've reached out to the agency for comment, and will update our story once we hear back from them).
Likewise, the cell phone industry may have to alter its stance. The wireless association trade group CTIA has maintained that cell phones are completely safe, and has fought to block San Francisco from passing laws that would require electronics retailers to notify consumers about the proper handling of cell phones."
Related: Live Blood Analysis - Observable Effects of RF/MW Radiation via Smart Meters
The Effects Of Smartphone Light On Your Brain And Body
You might not know this, but your smartphone emits a bright blue light which allows you to read what's on the screen even during the brightest points of the day.
But the light doesn't turn off or adjust according to the hour of the day; it's continually emitted, not only by our smartphones, but by our laptops, televisions, and other devices as well. The problem is that this light, which mimics the brightness of the sun, confuses your brain into thinking it's daytime, even during the dead of night.
This in turn stops your brain from releasing melatonin, the hormone which induces sleep, and prevents you from falling asleep. This is why experts recommend to turn off all screens at least two hours before bed.
Melatonin is released by a tiny organ in your brain called the pineal gland a couple of hours prior to sleep. The science of why the blue light emitted by mobile devices keeps people awake has led to the discovery of a photoreceptor called Melanopsin.
Though we've long been familiar with the various cones and rods that construct our vision, Melanopsin was discovered recently in retinal ganglion cells, which are sensitive to blue light. Since then, experimental research has found that the average person using mobile devices before bed may have difficulty falling and/or staying asleep.
The impact of blue light is even more significant for teenagers, who are more vulnerable to the effects of light than adults. This is because circadian rhythm naturally shifts during adolescence, causing teenagers to feel more awake late into the night. Starting up a video game or television show just before bedtime could be enough to push sleepiness away for another hour or two, making early mornings particularly difficult.
Blue Light Isn't The Only Concern
Dr. Martin Blank from the Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics at Colombia University has joined a group of scientists from around the world who are making an international appeal to the United Nations regarding the dangers associated with various electromagnetic emitting devices, like cellphones and WiFi.
There are multiple concerns with these devices, including their link to cancer. More concerning still is the fact that a child's brain absorbs up to four times as much radiation as that of an adult, and children today are growing up with these devices in hand. You can read more details about this here.
Our love for our screens is in itself a problem. In China, screen addiction is actually considered a clinical disorder, and as a result a number of rehabilitation centres have been established where young people addicted to screens are completely isolated from all media. Although the success of these treatment centres has yet to be established, their necessity paints a dark picture of the technological age in which we live. (source)
What You Can Do
The first thing you can do is limit your screen time before bed, turning all screens off at least two hours before you plan to fall asleep. This is the perfect time to catch up on your reading.
You can also download an app called f.lux, which adjusts the colour of your computer's display to the time of day - warm at night and brighter during the day - and cuts the blue light being emitted. There are similar apps for phones as well. All of us here at CE use these apps and have really noticed an improvement in our sleep quality.
Here is a page from their website that provides more research into what staring at screens can do to your sleep, as well as the science behind the f.lux app.
Regardless of whether you are worried about your sleep, we can all benefit from a daily break from our smartphones and other screens.
The Cult Of 'Scientism' Explained: How Scientific Claims Behind Cancer, Vaccines, Psychiatric Drugs And GMOs Are Nothing More Than Corporate-Funded Science Fraud April 27 2016 | From: NaturalNews
Sadly, what often passes for "science" today in the world of health is little more than "Scientism" - a dangerous cult founded on irrational dogma and faith-based beliefs in faulty, fraudulent ideas being paraded as science.
A common trait that weaves its way through every topic of "Scientism" is corporate profits. Any time something is being pushed with aggressive demands of "SCIENCE!" that also happens to enrich wealthy corporations, it's probably based on fraud, not real science. Perpetrators of fraudulent scientism include Paul Offit, Dr. David Gorski, Monsanto pal Bill Nye, discredited biotech shill and former Forbes.com writer Jon Entine and too many others to even name.
In this HealthRangerReport.com podcast, I explain the truth about the Cult of Scientism, sometimes called the "Church of Scientific Mysticism." This cult currently dominates the "official" dogma concerning vaccines, GMOs, fluoride, cancer, diabetes, pharmaceuticals, biosludge and more.
Half Of All Published 'Scientific' Literature Is Completely Fabricated Or False April 18 2016 | From: NaturalNews For years, alternative news sources such as Natural News have been warning the public about industry-generated scientific research which incorporates falsified data to produce desired results.
These charges have now been corroborated by Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the world's best known medical journal, The Lancet. Dr. Horton has publicly stated that as much as half of the scientific literature being published is unreliable and often completely false.
From a commentary by Dr. Horton published in The Lancet:
"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness."
Those are very strong words, particularly since they came directly from the horse's mouth. For someone in Dr. Horton's position to make such statements is indeed compelling evidence that (in his words): "Something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations."
"Peer-Reviewed" Studies no Longer Reliable
According to Dr. Horton, scientists often "sculpt data" to fit a theory or "retrofit hypotheses" to fit the data – even "peer-reviewed" studies published in journals such as The Lancet are no longer reliable.
"It's common for many to dismiss a lot of great work by experts and researchers at various institutions around the globe which isn't "peer-reviewed" and doesn't appear in a "credible" medical journal, but as we can see, "peer-reviewed" doesn't really mean much anymore. "Credible" medical journals continue to lose their tenability in the eyes of experts and employees of the journals themselves, like Dr. Horton."
Biased Industry-Sponsored Research
Dr. Horton is not the only one among his peers who has been compelled to speak out. Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine, has written extensively about corrupt methodology and the influence of industry on scientific research:
"Clinical trials are also biased through designs for research that are chosen to yield favorable results for sponsors. ... In short, it is often possible to make clinical trials come out pretty much any way you want, which is why it's so important that investigators be truly disinterested in the outcome of their work."
There are a number of dirty tricks that are routinely used by industry-sponsored researchers. For instance, by not publishing the results of unfavorable studies, the makers of useless or dangerous drugs often manage to market their products to an unsuspecting public.
In the case of one antidepressant drug – paroxetine – which resulted in a record $3 billion lawsuit against GlaxoSmithKline, a dangerous and ineffective medication was prescribed to millions of children before it was revealed to cause an elevated suicide risk.
When legal proceedings uncovered the truth, it was found that GlaxoSmithKline had hidden not only the fact that their product was only slightly more effective than a placebo, but also that it caused suicidal behavior.
Is There a Solution?
It is now clear that publication of spurious or falsified research has become endemic within the research publication community.
Dr. Horton offers some suggestions for restoring integrity to scientific research methodology:
"Part of the problem is that no-one is incentivised to be right. ... Instead of changing incentives, perhaps one could remove incentives altogether. Or insist on replicability statements in grant applications and research papers. Or emphasise collaboration, not competition. Or insist on preregistration of protocols. Or reward better pre and post publication peer review. Or improve research training and mentorship."
The bad news, according to Dr. Horton, is that even though "science is beginning to take some of its worst failings very seriously... nobody is ready to take the first step to clean up the system."
The Science Is Conclusive: Mobile Phones Cause Cancer April 12 2016 | From: TheEpochTimes They say there’s only two things constant in this life: death and taxes. But a third viable contender might be cancer, which an extensive cohort of scientific research has found is caused by prolonged exposure to radiation from cell phones and their associated communication towers.
Contrary to what you may have heard in the mainstream news, mobile phones and the antennas that allow them to communicate emit powerful, microwave radio frequencies capable of penetrating our bodies and cells. And constant exposure to these frequencies, according to the science, appears to be one of the leading causes of cancer in the modern age.
Watch: Do Phones Cause Cancer?
Wireless Phone Radiation Can Lead to Brain Cancer
Extensive research into the connection between cell phone radiation and cancer has linked this ubiquitous modern technology to two main types of brain tumors: gliomas and acoustic neuromas. Information compiled by the ElectricSense.com has confirmed the following findings with regard to cell phones and brain cancer.
1) An independent study commissioned by U.S. wireless carrier T-Mobile found that cell phone radiation directly initiates and promotes the formation of cancer: HESE-Project.org.[PDF]
2) The renowned Interphone study also found that regular cell phone use at just 30 minutes per day over 10 years increases the risk of gliomas by 40 percent. It also found that tumors were more likely to form on the side of the head where a cell phone is most prominently held: BioInitiative.org.[PDF]
3) A review of 23 epidemiological studies conducted by seven scientists concluded that cell phones cause a “harmful association” between cell phones and cancer. The only included studies that didn’t suggest this were “lower quality” ones that researchers say “failed to meet scientific best practices” - these studies were all funded by the mobile phone industry:
4) Researchers from the Hardell Research Group, which is noted for conducting what many consider to be the highest-quality studies on the subject, found a “consistent pattern” of increased risks for both glioma and acoustic neuroma in conjunction with mobile phone use: PathophysiologyJournal.com.
5) A study out of France observed similar outcomes associated with prolonged exposure to electromagnetic frequencies from mobile phones. Scientists noted higher rates of gliomas and temporal tumors from “occupational and urban mobile phone use.”
In response, the EMF watchdog group Powerwatch noted that this study supports the categorization of mobile phone radiation as a “probable human carcinogen.”
6) A study of nearly 800,000 middle-aged UK women found that those who used cell phones for 10 years or more had a 250 percent increased risk of developing an acoustic neuroma. The longer the women used the phones, the higher their risk: SaferEMR.com.
7) Similarly, a study conducted by the group Lonn found that acoustic neuromas are increasingly more likely to develop the longer a person uses a mobile phone: NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov.
8) In Sweden, researchers studying adult brain tumor cases found that individuals with the highest cumulative use of mobile phones also had the highest risk of developing brain cancer: NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov.
9) The Hardell group conducted a study in 2009 which found that RF-EMFs from mobile and cordless phones are directly associated with malignant brain tumors. This study specifically states that wireless radiation initiates and promotes carcinogenesis: NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov.’
Wireless Phone Radiation Also Triggers Pituitary, Thyroid, Stem Cell, Oral, Parotid, Lymph Node, Breast, Blood, Prostate and Eye Cancers
1) The body’s “master” gland, also known as the pituitary gland, is responsible for producing hormones and regulating other key bodily systems. But a study out of France found that cell phone use greatly increases the risk that this important gland will become cancerous: MieuxPrevenir.Blogspot.fr.
2) The thyroid gland, which similarly produces hormones in addition to regulating body temperature, is also affected by mobile phone radiation. An Israeli study found that rates of cell phone use are directly proportional to the risk of developing thyroid gland cancer: SaferEMR.com.
3) Many health experts would contend that solar radiation poses the greatest threat to healthy skin. But a study out of Sweden found that melanoma risk is greatly accelerated by mobile phone use: HIR.nu.
4) A controversial Powerwatch study found that cell phone use nearly triples the risk of neuroepithelial tumors, which are a result of stem cell cancer: Powerwatch.org.uk.
5) Another study out of Israel confirmed a direct association between cell phone use and cancers of the mouth.
Based on 460 cases of parotid gland tumors, researchers observed a direct association between mobile phone radiation and cancers of the parotid, the salivary gland located right next to where users typically hold their phones: AJE.OxfordJournals.org.
6) A separate study, also out of Israel, found that parotid gland cancers have increased in prevalence by 400 percent in the country between 1970 and 2006, which scientists link to increased mobile phone use: Journals.LWW.com.
7) An extensive review of more than 12 separate studies looking at health outcomes from exposure to radiation from mobile phone, television and radio broadcast towers found that cancers in general, and specifically cancers of the brain and blood (leukemia), are greatly increased: Journals.LWW.com.
8) Lymph nodes, a key component of the immune system, don’t like cell phone radiation much, either. An Australian study found that typical exposure to cell phone radiation greatly increases lymphoma risk: MicrowaveNews.com.[PDF]
9) Back in the U.S., a study looking at young women with breast cancer found that regular use of smartphones can trigger the formation of breast cancer. This is especially true when women carry their phones in their blouses or bras, where phones are pressed directly against the breasts. Hindawi.com.
10) Researchers in Germany have also linked mobile phone radiation to uveal melanoma and other cancers of the eye: NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov.
11) Practically every other type of cancer not covered by one of the aforementioned studies was identified in a large-scale Brazilian study, which linked mobile phone radiation to cancers of the prostate, breasts, lungs, kidneys and liver. Shockingly, more than 80 percent of identified deaths in Brazil’s third largest city, Belo Horizonte, occurred less than 500 meters away from one of the city’s 300 cell phone antennas: WhyFry.org.
The Disturbingly Aggressive Roll Out Of Smart AKA Advanced Meters - While Children Starve And The Elderly Freeze In Rural Aotearoa (NZ) April 8 2016 | From: EnvironmentWatchRangitikei Here is a sign posted by a Taumaranui resident who had their locked meter box broken intoto install a Smart Meter (aka Advanced Meter). As you can see the response they said they got from the lines people when following this up was equally as telling… “we own you people”!
While it appears little known that there are options for having these meters removed and replaced, it also seems that Taumaranui has only one supplier. This makes things more difficult in terms of no bargaining power.
The use of the term ‘jack boot’ is therefore not that extreme given the whole scenario and the way these folks have been treated. It is all symptomatic of the direction our country is headed with an ex-banker for a Prime Minister who clearly places profits and corporate interests above the interests of his constituents.
What is especially disturbing about this event (and it’s not an isolated incident, I’ve heard myself of installations happening while folk were not home) is that in the comments and discussion around this, many others have been similarly treated.
The repeated tale of outrageous hikes in charges, one for instance from $100 to $150 approx. plus the Nelson woman last year who received a bill for $800 for her two bedroom house!
And this is something I’ve both read about & heard, time and time again. We are fed the line that the meters are more accurate and customers have been undercharged prior to Smart Meter installation.
Not to the tune of a $1000 hike? Surely? … yet this is what I’ve heard more than once. A difference of $20 is feasible but not $600 or more. See here a proposed explanation for these hikes by a retired electrical engineer.
Disturbing also is the detail about the elderly turning off their hot water in order to buy food or not turning on any heating because they can’t pay.
Again I know of this happening in my district (the Rangitikei) where an elderly person is being charged $150 and upwards in a tiny flat with few if any appliances operating.
She has switched off the hot water, has no heater and goes to bed early to keep warm.
And finally, this sign and the comments corroborate that folk are being pressured to leave the district because of the costs. ‘The town is dying’ says the sign.
Now,on that topic, we have been led to believe for years that towns are dying because people somehow mysteriously allowed it. They all moved away. We even had a prominent economist telling us recently that they were zombie towns and pretty much had to go.
Well, people left because of decisions made by our respective governments to close down amenities and resources like the hospitals, pharmacies and banking.
I know … I remember it happening! It was about the time those governments had borrowed large sums of money and gotten a once prosperous and fully employed nation into un-repayable debt, followed by Rogernomics and belt tightening for the poorer folks, not the wealthy mind.
And the former being blamed for the debt while corporations enjoy huge tax breaks. And now this from the power companies and we were told privatizing them would lower prices. Competition, the market and all that. We’re still waiting nearly three decades on.
"…over 250 people have commented with some saying they had similar experiences with unexpectedly large power bills and problems after the installation of smart meters.” - Stuff.co.nz
As this sign very perceptively outlines folk, we are being ripped off and our southern clean, green paradise is fast morphing into a fascist regime. Think, TPPA and all that has entailed in terms of keeping us out of the loop then claiming to seek our feedback / opinion / input.
Their tactics provide the illusion of having sought our opinion … it is nothing more folks, in case you hadn’t already noticed. See how they provide you with forms containing multi choice options none of which you wanted to choose anyway? Like the recently proposed flag debacle that has cost the country $28 million. Shame.
Returning now to the Smart Meters themselves, be aware, they are NOT compulsory. If you already have one, there are options about its removal and replacement. (If you don’t have one yet, inform your powerco you do not consent to one… in writing… in advance).
For further information on that Kiwis, visit stopsmartmeters.org.nz and note they have a page there explaining how to get rid of a Smart Meter. The meters are also known here as Advanced Meters. (Folks from other countries, there are similar sites in your countries, just google.)
You should also be aware that health professionals have warned about the health risks these meters carry. Predictably the authorities deny this, however the stopsmartmeters website has already logged before and after testimonies from Kiwis who had their Smart Meters removed. See also the links here for further information on that, with a video trailer featuring a health professional explaining the effects from long term exposure to a Smart Meter.
See also in this video what the meters when in proximity do to your blood. Above all, educate yourself further by watching the award winning doco Take Back Your Power by Josh Del Sol at his website. It is accessible for a very small charge. Or consider holding a viewing in your town (contact stopsmartmeters for details). Further info on Smart Meters is also available on our Smart Meter pages. Spread the word and resist this move.
The Complete History Of Monsanto, The World’s Most Evil Corporation March 9 2016 | From: WakingTimes
Of all the mega-corps running amok, Monsanto has consistently outperformed its rivals, earning the crown as “most evil corporation on Earth!”
Not content to simply rest upon its throne of death, atop a mountain of rotting corpses, it remains focused on newer, more scientifically innovative ways to harm the planet and its people.
As true champions of evil, they won’t stop until… well, until they’re stopped! But what is Monsanto and how did they get to be so obscenely evil in the first place? I think that’s the best place to start this journey, so grab a few non-GMO snacks or beverages and let’s go for a ride into the deep, murky sewers of their dark past.
1901: The company is founded by John Francis Queeny, a member of the Knights of Malta, ((SMOM), which historically has been the military arm of the Vatican) a thirty year pharmaceutical veteran married to Olga Mendez Monsanto, for which Monsanto Chemical Works is named.
The company’s first product is chemical saccharin, sold to Coca-Cola as an artificial sweetener.
Even then, the government knew saccharin was poisonous and sued to stop its manufacture but lost in court, thus opening the Monsanto Pandora’s Box to begin poisoning the world through the soft drink.
1920's: Monsanto expands into industrial chemicals and drugs, becoming the world’s largest maker of aspirin, acetylsalicyclic acid, (toxic of course). This is also the time when things began to go horribly wrong for the planet in a hurry with the introduction of their polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
“PCBs were considered an industrial wonder chemical, an oil that wouldn’t burn, impervious to degradation and had almost limitless applications. Today PCBs are considered one of the gravest chemical threats on the planet.
Widely used as lubricants, hydraulic fluids, cutting oils, waterproof coatings and liquid sealants, are potent carcinogens and have been implicated in reproductive, developmental and immune system disorders. The world’s center of PCB manufacturing was Monsanto’s plant on the outskirts of East St. Louis, Illinois, which has the highest rate of fetal death and immature births in the state.”
Even though PCBs were eventually banned after fifty years for causing such devastation, it is still present in just about all animal and human blood and tissue cells across the globe.
Documents introduced in court later showed Monsanto was fully aware of the deadly effects, but criminally hid them from the public to keep the PCB gravy-train going full speed!
1930's: Created its first hybrid seed corn and expands into detergents, soaps, industrial cleaning products, synthetic rubbers and plastics. Oh yes, all toxic of course!
1940's: They begin research on uranium to be used for the Manhattan Project’s first atomic bomb, which would later be dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing hundreds of thousands of Japanese, Korean and US Military servicemen and poisoning millions more.
The company continues its unabated killing spree by creating pesticides for agriculture containing deadly dioxin, which poisons the food and water supplies.
It was later discovered Monsanto failed to disclose that dioxin was used in a wide range of their products because doing so would force them to acknowledge that it had created an environmental Hell on Earth.
1950's: Closely aligned with The Walt Disney Company, Monsanto creates several attractions at Disney’s Tomorrowland, espousing the glories of chemicals and plastics. Their “House of the Future” is constructed entirely of toxic plastic that is not biodegradable as they had asserted. What, Monsanto lied? I’m shocked!
“After attracting a total of 20 million visitors from 1957 to 1967, Disney finally tore the house down, but discovered it would not go down without a fight.
According to Monsanto Magazine, wrecking balls literally bounced off the glass-fiber, reinforced polyester material. Torches, jackhammers, chain saws and shovels did not work. Finally, choker cables were used to squeeze off parts of the house bit by bit to be trucked away.”
Monsanto’s Disneyfied vision of the future:
1960's: Monsanto, along with chemical partner-in-crime DOW Chemical, produces dioxin-laced Agent Orange for use in the U.S.’s Vietnam invasion.
The results? Over 3 million people contaminated, a half-million Vietnamese civilians dead, a half-million Vietnamese babies born with birth defects and thousands of U.S. military veterans suffering or dying from its effects to this day!
Monsanto is hauled into court again and internal memos show they knew the deadly effects of dioxin in Agent Orange when they sold it to the government.
Outrageously though, Monsanto is allowed to present their own “research” that concluded dioxin was safe and posed no negative health concerns whatsoever.
Satisfied, the bought and paid for courts side with Monsanto and throw the case out. Afterwards, it comes to light that Monsanto lied about the findings and their real research concluded that dioxin kills very effectively.
A later internal memo released in a 2002 trial admitted:
“That the evidence proving the persistence of these compounds and their universal presence as residues in the environment is beyond question…
the public and legal pressures to eliminate them to prevent global contamination are inevitable. The subject is snowballing. Where do we go from here?
The alternatives: go out of business; sell the hell out of them as long as we can and do nothing else; try to stay in business; have alternative products.”
Monsanto partners with I.G. Farben, makers of toxic Bayer aspirin and Hitler’s go-to chemical manufacturer that exterminated millions with it Zyklon-B gas during World War II.
Together, the companies use their collective expertise in genocide to introduce aspartame, another extremely deadly neurotoxin, into the food supply. When questions surface regarding the toxicity of saccharin, Monsanto exploits this opportunity to introduce yet another of its deadly poisons onto an unsuspecting public.
1970's:Monsanto partner, G.D. Searle, produces over a hundred faked internal studies which claim aspartame to be safe, while the FDA’s own scientific research clearly reveals that aspartame causes tumors and massive holes in the brains of rats, before killing them.
The FDA initiates a grand jury investigation into G.D. Searle for “knowingly misrepresenting findings and concealing material facts and making false statements” in regard to aspartame safety.
During this time, Searle strategically taps prominent Washington insider Donald Rumsfeld, who served as Secretary of Defense during the Gerald Ford and George W. Bush presidencies, to become CEO.
The corporation’s primary goal is to have Rumsfeld utilize his political influence and vast experience in the killing business to grease the FDA to play ball with them.
A few months later, Samuel Skinner receives “an offer he can’t refuse,”withdraws from the investigation and resigns his post at the U.S. Attorney’s Office to go work for Searle’s law firm. This mob tactic stalls the case just long enough for the statute of limitation to run out and the grand jury investigation is abruptly and conveniently dropped.
1980's: Amid indisputable research that reveals the toxic effects of aspartame and as then FDA commissioner Dr. Jere Goyan was about to sign a petition into law keeping it off the market, Donald Rumsfeld calls Ronald Reagan for a favour the day after he takes office.
Reagan fires the uncooperative Goyan and appoints Dr. Arthur Hayes Hull to head the FDA, who then quickly tips the scales in Searle’s favor and NutraSweet is approved for human consumption in dried products.
This becomes sadly ironic since Reagan, a known jelly bean and candy enthusiast, later suffers from Alzheimers during his second term, one of the many horrific effects of aspartame consumption.
Searle’s real goal though was to have aspartame approved as a soft drink sweetener since exhaustive studies revealed that at temperatures exceeding 85 degrees Fahrenheit, it “breaks down into known toxins Diketopiperazines (DKP), methyl (wood) alcohol, and formaldehyde.”,becoming many times deadlier than its powdered form!
The National Soft Drink Association (NSDA) is initially in an uproar, fearing future lawsuits from consumers permanently injured or killed by drinking the poison.
When Searle is able to show that liquid aspartame, though incredibly deadly, is much more addictive than crack cocaine, the NSDA is convinced that skyrocketing profits from the sale of soft drinks laced with aspartame would easily offset any future liability.
With that, corporate greed wins and the unsuspecting soft drink consumers pay for it with damaged health.
Coke leads the way once again (remember saccharin?) and begins poisoning Diet Coke drinkers with aspartame in 1983.
As expected, sales skyrocket as millions become hopelessly addicted and sickened by the sweet poison served in a can. The rest of the soft drink industry likes what it sees and quickly follows suit, conveniently forgetting all about their initial reservations that aspartame is a deadly chemical. There’s money to be made, lots of it and that’s all that really matters to them anyway!
In 1985, undaunted by the swirl of corruption and multiple accusations of fraudulent research undertaken by Searle, Monsanto purchases the company and forms a new aspartame subsidiary called NutraSweet Company.
When multitudes of independent scientists and researchers continue to warn about aspartame’s toxic effects, Monsanto goes on the offensive, bribing the National Cancer Institute and providing their own fraudulent papers to get the NCI to claim that formaldehyde does not cause cancer so that aspartame can stay on the market.
Further, 80% of complaints made to the FDA regarding food additives are about aspartame, which is now in over 5,000 products including diet and non-diet sodas and sports drinks, mints, chewing gum, frozen desserts, cookies, cakes, vitamins, pharmaceuticals, milk drinks, instant teas, coffees, yogurt, baby food and many, many more!
Read labels closely and do not buy anything that contains this horrific killer!
Amidst all the death and disease, FDA stooge Arthur Hull resigns under a cloud of corruption and is immediately hired by Searle’s public relations firm as a senior scientific consultant. No, that’s not a joke!
Monsanto, the FDA and many government health regulatory agencies have become one and the same! It seems the only prerequisite for becoming an FDA commissioner is that they spend time at either Monsanto or one of the pharmaceutical cartel’s organized crime corps.
Related: New Study Could Spell The End For Diet Soda And Aspartame
1990's: Monsanto spends millions defeating state and federal legislation that disallows the corporation of evil from continuing to dump dioxins, pesticides and other cancer-causing poisons into drinking water systems. Regardless, they are sued countless times for causing disease in their plant workers, the people in surrounding areas and birth defects in babies.
With their coffins full from the massive billions profits, the $100 million dollar settlements are considered the low cost of doing business and thanks to the FDA, Congress and White House, business remains very good. So good that Monsanto is sued for giving radioactive iron to 829 pregnant women for a study to see what would happen to them.
In 1994, the FDA once again criminally approves Monsanto’s latest monstrosity, the Synthetic Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), produced from a genetically modified E. coli bacteria, despite obvious outrage from the scientific community of its dangers.
Of course, Monsanto claims that diseased pus milk, full of antibiotics and hormones is not only safe, but actually good for you!
Worse yet, dairy companies who refuse to use this toxic cow pus and label their products as“rBGH-free" are sued by Monsanto, claiming it gives them an unfair advantage over competitors that did. In essence, what Monsanto was saying is “yeah, we know rBGH makes people sick, but it’s not alright that you advertise it’s not in your products.”
The following year, the diabolical company begins producing GMO crops that are tolerant to their toxic herbicide Roundup.
Roundup-ready canola oil (rapeseed), soybeans, corn and BT cotton begin hitting the market, advertised as being safer, healthier alternatives to their organic non-GMO rivals. Apparently, the propaganda worked as today over 80% of canola on the market is their GMO variety.
A few things you definitely want to avoid in your diet are GMO soy, corn, wheat and canola oil, despite the fact that many “natural” health experts claim the latter to be a healthy oil. It’s not, but you’ll find it polluting many products on grocery store shelves.
Because these GM crops have been engineered to ‘self-pollinate,’ they do not need nature or bees to do that for them.
It’s like having sex with yourself to make a baby. Yes, Monsanto wants to take the fun out of that too.
But all kidding aside, there is a very dark side agenda to this and that is to wipe out the world’s bee population.
Monsanto knows that birds and especially bees, throw a wrench into their monopoly due to their ability to pollinate plants, thus naturally creating foods outside of the company’s “full domination control agenda.” When bees attempt to pollinate a GM plant or flower, it gets poisoned and dies.
In fact, the bee colony collapse was recognized and has been going on since GM crops were first introduced.
To counter the accusations that they deliberately caused this ongoing genocide of bees, Monsanto devilishly buys out Beeologics, the largest bee research firm that was dedicated to studying the colony collapse phenomenon and whose extensive research named the monster as the primary culprit! After that, it’s “bees, what bees? Everything’s just dandy!” Again, I did not make this up, but wish I had!
During the mid-90s, they decide to reinvent their evil company as one focused on controlling the world’s food supply through artificial, biotechnology means to preserve the Roundup cash-cow from losing market-share in the face of competing, less-toxic herbicides.
You see, Roundup is so toxic that it wipes out non-GMO crops, insects, animals, human health and the environment at the same time. How very efficient!
Because Roundup-ready crops are engineered to be toxic pesticides masquerading as food, they have been banned in the EU, but not in America! Is there any connection between that and the fact that Americans, despite the high cost and availability of healthcare, are collectively the sickest people in the world? Of course not!
As was Monsanto’s plan from the beginning, all non-Monsanto crops would be destroyed, forcing farmers the world over to use only its toxic terminator seeds.
And Monsanto made sure farmers who refused to come into the fold were driven out of business or sued when windblown terminator seeds poisoned organic farms.
This gave the company a virtual monopoly as terminator seed crops and Roundup worked hand in glove with each other as GMO crops could not survive in a non-chemical environment so farmers were forced to buy both.
Their next step was to spend billions globally buying up as many seed companies as possible and transitioning them into terminator seed companies in an effort to wipe out any rivals and eliminate organic foods off the face of the earth.
In Monsanto’s view, all foods must be under their full control and genetically modified or they are not safe to eat!
They pretend to be shocked that their critics in the scientific community question whether crops genetically modified with the genes of diseased pigs, cows, spiders, monkeys, fish, vaccines and viruses are healthy to eat. The answer to that question is obviously a very big “no way!”
You’d think the company would be so proud of their GMO foods that they’d serve them to their employees, but they don’t.
Monsanto lamely responded “we believe in choice.” What they really means is “we don’t want to kill the help.”
It’s quite okay though to force-feed poor nations and Americans these modified monstrosities as a means to end starvation since dead people don’t need to eat! I’ll bet the thought on most peoples’ minds these days is that Monsanto is clearly focused on eugenics and genocide, as opposed to providing foods that will sustain the world.
As in Monsanto partner Disney’s Sleeping Beauty, the wicked witch gives the people the poisoned GMO apple that puts them to sleep forever.
2000's: By this time Monsanto controls the largest share of the global GMO market. In turn, the US government spends hundreds of millions to fund aerial spraying of Roundup, causing massive environmental devastation.
Fish and animals by the thousands die within days of spraying as respiratory ailments and cancer deaths in humans spike tremendously. But this is all considered an unusual coincidence so the spraying continues. If you thought Monsanto and the FDA were one and the same, well you can add the gov’t to that sorry list now.
The monster grows bigger: Monsanto merges with Pharmacia & Upjohn, then separates from its chemical business and rebrands itself as an agricultural company.
Yes, that’s right, a chemical company whose products have devastated the environment, killed millions of people and wildlife over the years now wants us to believe they produce safe and nutritious foods that won’t kill people any longer.
That’s an extremely hard-sell, which is why they continue to grow bigger through mergers and secret partnerships.
Because rival DuPont is too large a corporation to be allowed to merge with, they instead form a stealth partnership where each agrees to drop existing patent lawsuits against one another and begin sharing GMO technologies for mutual benefit.
In layman’s terms, together they would be far too powerful and politically connected for anything to stop them from owning a virtual monopoly on agriculture; “control the food supply & you control the people!”
Not all is rosy as the monster is repeatedly sued for $100s of millions for causing illness, infant deformities and death by illegally dumping all manner of PCBs into ground water, and continually lying about products safety – you know, business as usual.
Not only do these horrendous seeds destroy the organic farmers’ crops, the lawsuits drive them into bankruptcy, while the Supreme Court overturns lower court rulings and sides with Monsanto each time.
At the same time, the monster begins filing patents on breeding techniques for pigs, claiming animals bred any way remotely similar to their patent would grant them ownership. So loose was this patent filing that it became obvious they wanted to claim all pigs bred throughout the world would infringe upon their patent.
The global terrorism spreads to India as over 100,000 farmers who are bankrupted by GMO crop failure, commit suicide by drinking Roundup so their families will be eligible for death insurance payments.
In response, the monster takes advantage of the situation by alerting the media to a new project to assist small Indian farmers by donating the very things that caused crop failures in the country in the first place! Forbes then names Monsanto "company of the year." Sickening, but true.
More troubling is that Whole Foods, the corporation that brands itself as organic, natural and eco-friendly is proven to be anything but. They refuse to support Proposition 37, California’s GMO-labeling measure that Monsanto and its GMO-brethren eventually helped to defeat.
Why? Because Whole Foods has been in bed with Monsanto for a long time, secretly stuffing its shelves with overpriced, fraudulently advertized “natural & organic” crap loaded with GMOs, pesticides, rBGH, hormones and antibiotics.
So, of course they don’t want mandatory labelling as that would expose them as the Whole Frauds and Whore Foods that they really are!
However, when over twenty biotech-friendly companies including WalMart, Pepsico and ConAgra recently met with FDA in favor of mandatory labelling laws, this after fighting tooth and nail to defeat Prop 37, Whole Foods sees an opportunity to save face and becomes the first grocery chain to announce mandatory labelling of their GMO products…in 2018! Uh, thanks for nothing, Whore.
And if you think its peers have suddenly grown a conscience, think again. They are simply reacting to the public’s outcry over the defeat of Prop 37 by crafting deceptive GMO-labelling laws to circumvent any real change, thus keeping the status quo intact.
This criminal “act” gives the corporate factory farms a virtual monopoly to police and control all foods grown anywhere, including one’s own backyard, and provides harsh penalties and jail sentences for those who do not use chemicals and fertilizers.
President Obama decided this sounded reasonable and gave his approval.
With this Act, Monsanto claims that only GM foods are safe and organic or homegrown foods potentially spread disease, therefore must be regulated out of existence for the safety of the world. If eating GM pesticide balls is their idea of safe food, I would like to think the rest of the world is smart enough to pass.
This law states that no matter how harmful Monsanto’s GMO crops are and no matter how much devastation they wreak upon the country, U.S. federal courts cannot stop them from continuing to plant them anywhere they choose.
Yes, Obama signed a provision that makes Monsanto above any laws and makes them more powerful than the government itself. We have to wonder who’s really in charge of the country because it’s certainly not him!
There comes a tipping point though when a corporation becomes too evil and the world pushes back… hard! Many countries continue to convict Monsanto of crimes against humanity and have banned them altogether, telling them to “get the f#<k out and stay out!”
The world has begun to awaken to the fact that the monster does not want control over the global production of food simply for profit’s sake. No, it’s become clear by over a century of death & destruction that the primary goal is to destroy human health and the environment, turning the world into a Mon-Satanic Hell on Earth!
Research into the name itself reveals it to be latin, meaning “my saint,” which may explain why critics often refer to it as “Mon-Satan.”
Know that all is not lost. Evil always loses in the end once it is widely exposed to the light of truth as is occurring now. The fact that the Monsanto-led government finds it necessary to enact desperate legislation to protect its true leader proves this point. Being evicted elsewhere, the United States is Monsanto’s last stand so to speak.
Yet, even here many have begun striking back by protesting against and rejecting GMO monstrosities, choosing to grow their own foods and shop at local farmers markets instead of the Monsanto-supported corporate grocery chains.
The awakening people are also beginning to see they have been misled by corporate tricksters and federal government criminals poisoned by too much power, control and greed, which has resulted in the creation of the monstrous, out-of-control beast.
And as the people vote against that by choosing not to buy GMO poisons, Monsatan’s limbs continue to get hacked away slowly but surely, driving it to its knees for the final organic sword thrust into its blackened heart.
GMO's - A Planned Human Sterility Program March 5 2016 | From: GlobalResearch
Severe health risks of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) are not new. Studies by scientists among others in France, Germany, Austria, since at least the 1990s, pointing to several levels of health dangers to mankind abound.
A recent study released by Egyptian researchers found that rats fed a GMO diet suffer from infertility, among other health issues. In the US similar studies were muzzled by Monsanto and the Monsanto staffed FDA.
In a 2011 paper the Institute for Responsible Technology - IRT refers to 19 animal studies linking GMOs to mostly liver and kidney organ disruption.
In the early 2000 the first Russian studies revealed reduction in fertility and birth defects in hamsters and rats. In a 2013 Russian study, scientist have discovered that mammals that eat GMO foodstuffs have difficulties to reproduce.
The study concluded that “Campbell hamsters that have a fast reproduction rate were fed for two years with ordinary soya beans which are widely used in agriculture and those contain different percentages of GMOs.
Another group of hamsters, the control group, was fed with pure soya [found in Serbia, as 95% of soya in the world is transgenic].”
According to Dr. Alexei Surov, who led the study on behalf of the National Association for Gene Security;
“We selected several groups of hamsters, kept them in pairs in cells and gave them ordinary food as always. We did not add anything for one group, but the other was fed with soya that contained no GMO components, while the third group [was fed] with some content of GMOs and the fourth one with increased amounts of GMOs…..
Originally everything went smoothly. However, we noticed quite a serious effect when we selected new pairs from their cubs and continued to feed them as before. These pairs’ growth rate was slower, and [they] reached their sexual maturity slowly. When we got some of their cubs, we formed the new pairs of the third generation.
We failed to get cubs from these pairs which were fed with GMO foodstuffs. It was proven that these pairs lost their ability to give birth to their cubs."
Sterilization from GMOs is not an accident. Henry Kissinger, the protégé of the Rockefeller Foundation and one of the driving forces – still today – of the Bilderberg Society, not only is the author of the infamous proclamation in the early seventies:
“Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; and who controls money can control the world;"
He also said;
“Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the Third World."
This is still a (mostly unspoken) key objective of the elite, associated through different semi-secret organizations like the Bilderbergers, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Trilateral Commission, the British Chatham House, the Economic Forum (Davos), and others.
GMOs are based on two strands; one involves insect resistance, the other is herbicide resistant and more dangerous, because it is glyphosate-tolerant. Glyphosate, known under its trade name ‘Roundup’, is however absorbed in the food fibers and has devastating health effects.
The herbicide is an endocrine-disruptor, a chemical that at certain doses can interfere with the hormone system of mammals. These disruptions may cause cancer, infertility, miscarriage, birth defects and full sterility by the third generation, as the Russian study clearly demonstrated.
A less populated Third World will give the US and world elite easier and cheaper access to needed raw materials, allowing the ‘chosen few’ to maintain a lifestyle of exuberant luxury and resources abuse.
“We are leading the world into the sixth mass extinction of life on this planet... Human behavior is undermining the web of life.”
Worse is to come, if and when the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement is ratified by the US and its eleven Pacific partners. The TPP – much like the TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, linking the US with the 28 EU countries) – is negotiated behind closed doors.
The chief agricultural negotiator for the US is the former Monsanto lobbyist, Islam Siddique. The two monster trade agreements would deprive governments from regulating transnational corporations’ activities, to the point where the rights of corporations would supersede sovereign nations laws.
Corporations would be able to set up private courts that may rule a country liable for lost profit due to legislation that may interfere with their activities.
This would particularly apply to biotech agriculture. GMOs could no longer be forbidden by individual countries.
They are integral parts of the two giant trade agreements which the US is attempting to ram down the throats of their ‘partners’ – and may do so in the general realm of vassalage which has been cultivated by Washington’s threat and sledgehammer politics – “You are either with us or you are against us” – and the latter is usually punished with devastating sanctions, if not with death of errant, non-compliant leaders.
The objective of depopulation is alive and well – and being implemented under our eyes; and We, The People, are blinded by the steady drop-by-drop of propaganda that makes us believe that these trade agreements will resolve the world’s food problems, will eliminate famine.
What they will eliminate after a few generations is peoples’ fertility.
This, coupled with the constant and continuous wars on terror and financial assassinations of entire countries (see Greece) by the so-called Bretton Woods Organizations, IMF and World Bank, working hand-in-hand with the FED and Wall Street, may eventually succeed in drastically reducing world population – if We, The People, do not wake up.
Waking up to a new form of agriculture is crucial. Back to nature and earth-friendly farming, as well as away from globalization to the notion of ‘local production for local consumption’. Russia has a strict ban on GMOs. Russia is producing about 40% of its food by permaculture methods on simple garden plots.
According to Natural Living, 80% of the country’s fruit and berries, and 66% of vegetables and about 50% of the nation’s milk are produced on dacha-type plots.
It is not too late to get away from GMOs, from planned sterility and from depopulating the globe for the benefit of a tyrant elite.
But, We the People, have to wake up, take back the sovereign control of our nations from the vassal leadership which Washington has discretely, almost imperceptibly placed at the helm of the 11 TPP and the 28 TTIP nations by stolen or manipulated elections or outright ‘regime change’.
The breaking up of the Eurozone and the European Union – both of which are in dire straits – might be the beginning of a new era of self-determination.
GMO: Seeds of Death
The Top 10 Tricks Used By Corporate Junk Science March 2 2016 | From: ToolsForFreedom
Corporate junk science is an all-pervading presence in our society. It’s everywhere.
The scientific journals of the entire world, offline and online, have been flooded with so much fake science that it has, sad to say, become practically impossible for the average person to wade through all of it and sort out the wheat from the chaff.
However, the fake science I am referring to here is not unintentional or sloppy work, which is more of a minor problem in the scheme of things (since it will eventually be corrected with due diligence), but rather the deliberately fraudulent “scientific studies” which are put out by major corporations with a definite agenda in mind – usually establishing a fake scientific basis of “safety” for their products, whether they be vaccines, mobile phones, GMOs, tobacco, fluoride, soda or soft drinks, etc.
It’s nothing more than corporate junk science, and many people, including doctors, scientists and academics, have been taken in hook, line and sinker by it.
It’s time to shine the light on this ugly phenomenon. Science is meant to be about the pursuit of truth and understanding how our world works. It is truly sickening to see the extent to which it has been hijacked to serve corporate interests – to make a tiny, tiny 0.0001% rich at the expense of harming and killing the rest of mankind.
A recent study published on JAMA entitled “Research Misconduct Identified by the US Food and Drug Administration” found some very disturbing things in its sample of 57 studies that it analyzed:
“Fifty-seven published clinical trials were identified for which an FDA inspection of a trial site had found significant evidence of 1 or more of the following problems: falsification or submission of false information, 22 trials (39%); problems with adverse events reporting, 14 trials (25%); protocol violations, 42 trials (74%); inadequate or inaccurate recordkeeping, 35 trials (61%); failure to protect the safety of patients and/or issues with oversight or informed consent, 30 trials (53%); and violations not otherwise categorized, 20 trials (35%).”
Take a look at this first finding.
It states that 39% which is around 2/5 of studies committed data falsification!
How can we possibly trust medical science when the fraud is so blatant and widespread? And it’s not as though the authors of these studies come out and admit it. The study also found that:
“Only 3 of the 78 publications (4%) that resulted from trials in which the FDA found significant violations mentioned the objectionable conditions or practices found during the inspection. No corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other comments acknowledging the key issues identified by the inspection were subsequently published.”
Another study at PLOS ONE entitled “How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data” concluded that:
“It is likely that, if on average 2% of scientists admit to have falsified research at least once and up to 34% admit other questionable research practices, the actual frequencies of misconduct could be higher than this.”
In light of all of this, if we want the truth, we need to look at the whole structure of how “science” works in the real world. We need to get wise to the methods that are used by unscrupulous groups to further their agenda.
With that in mind, here is a list of the top 10 tricks used by the corporatocracy to pull the wool over your eyes by manipulating science and substituting their fake corporate junk science instead (thanks to Webster Kehr of CancerTutor.com for compiling his instructive list, from which the below points are derived).
1. Substituting Synthetic for Natural Versions of a Nutrient
Those who know a little about nutrition probably realize by now that there is a vast difference between a nutrient found in a food or plant, and its synthetic counterpart artificially made in a lab. All vitamin C is not created equal; some versions are more equal than others. The same goes for other vitamins.
It also applies to minerals, since some are derived from plant or animal matter (“organic”) whereas others are derived from rock (“inorganic”). The body can’t assimilate inorganic minerals, so all those so-called “natural” supplements full of rock and fossil-derived calcium are useless, and are actually harming your body by causing calcification.
When the corporatocracy wants a result skewed against an unpatentable natural solution and in favor of one of their patentable products, they simply use the synthetic (and less potent) version of that nutrient in the study and “find” that it is ineffective. Corporate junk science at its best!
2. Isolating Nutrients to Remove Their Power of Synergy
Here’s another trick used by corporate junk science.
If it’s trying to “scientifically prove” that a natural substance is ineffective, rather than testing the whole substance, it will isolate certain nutrients from it, declare them the only ones with any health benefit, then find them ineffective.
This is like taking a clove of garlic, declaring that allicin is the only thing in it that could possibly do any good for human health, and then disregarding the whole plant when allicin doesn’t do everything you expected. The same goes for when corporate junk science, intentionally or not, tests the wrong nutrient and declares itself finished with testing.
Nature doesn’t work like this. Plants are complex organisms. Some are composed of hundreds of different phytonutrients which work together synergistically to produce wellness in the human body. Real science would test the whole plant open-mindedly in a variety of ways to try to discover and unlock the secret to its healing potential.
3. Contaminating the Tests
Webster Kehr mentions a case involving laetrile or amygdalin (colloquially called vitamin B17). He writes that the “NIH contaminated an already bogus pill being used in a study. Natural laetrile cannot and has never given a patient the symptoms of cyanide poisoning. It simply is impossible.
The NIH refused to allow an alternative laetrile vendor to supply natural laetrile for the study – so they could create a custom pill for the study. In creating their custom bogus laetrile pill, it was not enough for them to not have any natural laetrile in the pill. A worthless pill would not have given any patient the symptoms of cyanide poisoning.
They also had to lace the pill with inorganic cyanide so that the patients would have the symptoms of cyanide poisoning.
If corporate junk science can’t prove a natural substance itself is ineffective, then it uses the trick of altering the treatment plan, so that people are getting the correct amount of that substance.
This could be as simple as making the dosage too low or too high, or combining the substance with other foods or drink which disable its healing effects, or heating it, etc. Just like Big Pharma drugs, natural cures require a patient to follow a correct dosage and treatment plan for them to be successful in healing disease.
5. Getting Tricky with Statistics
Mark Twain once said that there are “lies, damn lies and statistics”. Corporate junk science often plays around with the numbers to emphasize one thing and hide another thing.
Big Biotech often does this with their GMO studies, for instance, never allowing a study to exceed 90 days (after which the deleterious effects of GMOs begin to emerge).
6. The False Worship of Double Blind Studies
Are double blind studies always the gold standard? As Kehr points out, “in many cases, a double blind study makes no sense in the world. For example, how could you do a double blind study comparing a person who refuses all orthodox cancer treatments with someone who goes through chemotherapy?
It is a stupid concept, because after one day a person would know which group they were in… How can you compare chemotherapy to Vitamin C in a double blind study? The chemotherapy group would have intense pain, sickness, their hair will fall out, and so on. The Vitamin C group would have no added pain, no sickness (except perhaps diarrhea), and their hair will not fall out, etc.”
7. Selecting Patients Favorable to the Agenda
The selection protocol in determining which patients to choose for a study is important, because by carefully selecting the patients in a study, you can to a large extent control the outcome of the study. Kehr gives examples of how the Mayo Clinic choose a narrow range of cancers as opposed to Pauling and Cameron when testing the efficacy of vitamin C as a natural cancer treatment.
“In June , the New England Journal of Medicine, one of the most respected medical journals, made a startling announcement. The editors declared that they were dropping their policy stipulating that authors of review articles of medical studies could not have financial ties to drug companies whose medicines were being analyzed.
The reason? The journal could no longer find enough independent experts. Drug company gifts and “consulting fees” are so pervasive that in any given field, you cannot find an expert who has not been paid off in some way by the industry. So the journal settled for a new standard: Their reviewers can have received no more than $10,000 [per year] from companies whose work they judge. Isn’t that comforting?"
9. Controlling the Publicisation of the Results
Most scientists are given contracts by the corporatocracy which contain a clause forbidding them to publicize results that the funders don’t like. This means that Big Pharma, Bir Agra, Big Biotech or whoever it is has the legal right to suppress the results of any study they don’t like – including being able to stop scientists from submitting such studies to a journal.
10. Controlling the Funding and Hiding the Funders
Science is, to some extent, by the admissions of one of its branches quantum physics, based on the state of the observer. So, it is unsurprising that it can be manipulated by placing the people who have your point of view in control.
An outcome is more likely to be generated when you have people expecting (or subconsciously intending) that result. On top of this, results can be bought and the true finance behind that bribery can be hidden through front groups, think tanks, shell corporations, fake grassroots (astroturf) organizations and many other means.
The 10 tricks do, of course, exist in addition to the massive category of data falsification, where corporations omit and distort results at will through all sorts of chicanery (e.g. not reporting patients who suffer side effects and instead labeling them as “non-compliant”).
Corporate junk science is like a cancer parasiting off the host and destroying humanity’s attempt for knowledge and objectivity. The time has come to expose it fully and restore truth.
10 Ways To Protect Yourself From NLP Mind Control March 1 2016 | From: UltraCulture
NLP or Neuro-Linguistic Programming is one of the world’s most prevalent methods of mind control, used by everyone from sales callers to politicians to media pundits, and it’s nasty to the core. Here’s ten ways to make sure nobody uses it on you… ever.
Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a method for controlling people’s minds that was invented by Richard Bandler and John Grinder in the 1970s, became popular in the psychoanalytic, occult and New Age worlds in the 1980s, and advertising, marketing and politics in the 1990s and 2000s.
It’s become so interwoven with how people are communicated to and marketed at that its use is largely invisible. It’s also somewhat of a pernicious, devilish force in the world - nearly everybody in the business of influencing people has studied at least some of its techniques. Masters of it are notorious for having a Rasputin-like ability to trick people in incredible ways - most of all themselves.
After explaining a bit about what NLP is and where it came from, I’m going to break down 10 ways to inoculate yourself against its use. You’ll likely be spotting it left, right and center in the media with a few tips on what to look for. Full disclosure: During my 20s, I spent years studying New Age, magical and religious systems for changing consciousness.
One of them was NLP. I’ve been on both ends of the spectrum: I’ve had people ruthlessly use NLP to attempt to control me, and I’ve also trained in it and even used it in the advertising world.
Despite early fascination, by 2008 or so I had largely come to the conclusion that it’s next to useless - a way of manipulating language that greatly overestimates its own effectiveness as a discipline, really doesn’t achieve much in the way of any kind of lasting change, and contains no real core of respect for people or even true understanding of how people work.
After throwing it to the wayside, however, I became convinced that understanding NLP is crucial simply so that people can resist its use. It’s kind of like the whole PUA thing that was popular in the mid-00s - a group of a few techniques that worked for a few unscrupulous people until the public figured out what was going on and rejected it, like the body identifying and rejecting foreign material.
What is NLP, and Where Did it Come From?
“Neuro-linguistic programming” is a marketing term for a “science” that two Californians - Richard Bandler and John Grinder - came up with in the 1970s. Bandler was a stoner student at UC Santa Cruz (just like I later was in the 00s), then a mecca for psychedelics, hippies and radical thinking (now a mecca for Silicon Valley hopefuls).
Grinder was at the time an associate professor in linguistics at the university (he had previously served as a Captain in the US Special Forces and in the intelligence community, ahem not that this, you know, is important… aheh…). Together, they worked at modeling the techniques of Fritz Perls (founder of Gestalt therapy), family therapist Virginia Satir and, most importantly, the preternaturally gifted hypnotherapist Milton Erickson.
Bandler and Grinder sought to reject much of what they saw as the ineffectiveness of talk therapy and cut straight to the heart of what techniques actually worked to produce behavioral change. Inspired by the computer revolution - Bandler was a computer science major - they also sought to develop a psychological programming language for human beings.
What they came up with was a kind of evolution of hypnotherapy - while classical hypnosis depends on techniques for putting patients into suggestive trances (even to the point of losing consciousness on command), NLP is much less heavy-handed: It’s a technique of layering subtle meaning into spoken or written language so that you can implant suggestions into a person’s unconscious mind without them knowing what you’re doing.
Though mainstream therapists rejected NLP as pseudoscientific nonsense (it has been officially peer reviewed and discredited as an intervention technique - lots more on that here), it nonetheless caught on.
It was still the 1970s, and the Human Potential Movement was in full swing - and NLP was the new darling. Immediately building a publishing, speaking and training empire, by 1980 Bandler had made over $800,000 from his creation - he was even being called on to train corporate leaders, the army and the CIA.
Self-help gurus like Tony Robbins used NLP techniques to become millionaires in the 1980s (Robbins now has an estimated net worth of $480 million). By the middle of the decade, NLP was such big business that lawsuits and wars had erupted over who had the rights to teach it, or even to use the term “NLP.”
But by that time, Bandler had bigger problems than copyright disputes: He was on trial for the alleged murder of prostitute Corine Christensen in November 1986.
The prosecution claimed that Bandler had shot Christensen, 34, point-blank in the face with a .357 Magnum in a drug deal gone bad. According to the press at the time, Bandler had discovered an even better way to get people to like him than NLP - cocaine - and become embroiled in a far darker game, even, than mind control.
A much-recommended investigation into the case published by Mother Jones in 1989 opens with these chilling lines:
“In the morning Corine Christensen last snorted cocaine, she found herself, straw in hand, looking down the barrel of a .357 Magnum revolver. When the gun exploded, momentarily piercing the autumn stillness, it sent a single bullet on a diagonal path through her left nostril and into her brain.
Christensen slumped over her round oak dining table, bleeding onto its glass top, a loose-leaf notebook, and a slip of yellow memo paper on which she had scrawled, in red ink, DON’T KILL US ALL. Choking, she spit blood onto a wine goblet, a tequila bottle, and the shirt of the man who would be accused of her murder, then slid sideways off the chair and fell on her back. Within minutes she lay still.
As Christensen lay dying, two men left her rented town house in a working-class section of Santa Cruz, California. One was her former boyfriend, James Marino, an admitted cocaine dealer and convicted burglar.
The other, Richard Bandler, was known internationally as the cofounder of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), a controversial approach to psychology and communication. About 12 hours later, on the evening of November 3, 1986, Richard Bandler was arrested and charged with the murder.
Bandler’s defense was, simply, that Marino had killed Christensen, not him. Many at the time alleged he used NLP techniques on the stand to escape conviction.
Yet Bandler was also alleged to actually use a gun in NLP sessions in order to produce dramatic psychological changes in clients - a technique that was later mirrored by Hollywood in the movie Fight Club, in which Brad Pitt’s character pulls a gun on a gas station attendant and threatens to kill him if he doesn’t pursue his dreams in life.
That was, many said, Bandler’s MO.
Whatever the truth of the matter, Bandler was indeed let off, and the story was quickly buried - I’ve never spoken to a student of NLP who’s ever heard of the murder case, I’ll note, and I’ve spoken to a lot.
The case hardly impeded the growing popularity of NLP, however, which was now big business, working its way not only into the toolkit of psychotherapists but also into nearly every corner of the political and advertising worlds, having grown far beyond the single personage of Richard Bandler, though he continued (and continues) to command outrageous prices for NLP trainings throughout the world.
Today, the techniques of NLP and Ericksonian-style hypnotic writing can be readily seen in the world of Internet marketing, online get-rich-quick schemes and scams.
Their most prominent public usage has likely been by Barack Obama, whose 2008 “Change” campaign was a masterpiece of Ericksonian permissive hypnosis. The celebrity hypnotist and illusionist Derren Brown also demonstrates NLP techniques in his routine.
How Exactly Does this Thing Work?
NLP is taught in a pyramid structure, with the more advanced techniques reserved for multi-thousand-dollar seminars. To oversimplify an overcomplicated subject, it more or less works like this: First, the user (or “NLPer,” as NLP people often refer to themselves - and I should note here that the large majority of NLP people, especially those who are primarily therapists, are likely well-meaning) of NLP pays very, very close attention to the person they’re working with.
By watching subtle cues like eye movement, skin flush, pupil dilation and nervous tics, a skilled NLP person can quickly determine:
a) What side of the brain a person is predominantly using;
b) What sense (sight, smell, etc.) is most predominant in their brain;
c) How their brain stores and utilizes information (ALL of this can be gleaned from eye movements);
d) When they’re lying or making information up.
After this initial round of information gathering, the “NLPer” begins to slowly and subtly mimic the client, taking on not only their body language but also their speech mannerisms, and will begin speaking with language patterns designed to target the client’s primary sense.
An NLP person essentially carefully fakes the social cues that cause a person to drop their guard and enter a state of openness and suggestibility.
For instance, a person predominantly focused on sight will be spoken to in language using visual metaphors - ”Do you see what I’m saying?” “Look at it this way” - while a person for which hearing is the dominant sense will be spoken to in auditory language - ”Hear me out,” “I’m listening to you closely.”
By mirroring body language and linguistic patterns, the NLPer is attempting to achieve one very specific response: rapport.
Rapport is the mental and physiological state that a human enters when they let their social guard down, and it is generally achieved when a person comes to the conclusion that the person they’re talking to is just like them. See how that works, broadly?
An NLP person essentially carefully fakes the social cues that cause a person to drop their guard and enter a state of openness and suggestibility.
Once rapport is achieved, the NLPer will then begin subtly leading the interaction. Having mirrored the other person, they can now make subtle changes to actually influence the other person’s behavior.
Combined with subtle language patterns, leading questions and a whole slew of other techniques, a skilled NLPer can at this point steer the other person wherever they like, as long as the other person isn’t aware of what’s happening and thinks everything is arising organically, or has given consent.
That means it’s actually fairly hard to use NLP to get people to act out-of-character, but it can be used for engineering responses within a person’s normal range of behavior - like donating to a cause, making a decision they were putting off, or going home with you for the night if they might have considered it anyway.
From this point, the NLPer will seek to do two things - elicit and anchor. Eliciting happens when an NLPer uses leading and language to engineer an emotional state - for instance, hunger. Once a state has been elicited, the NLPer can then anchor it with a physical cue - for instance, touching your shoulder. In theory, if done right, the NLPer can then call up the hungry state any time they touch your shoulder in the same way. It’s conditioning, plain and simple.
How Can I Make Sure Nobody Pulls this Horseshit on Me?
I’ve had all kinds of people attempt to “NLP” me into submission, including multiple people I’ve worked for over extended periods of time, and even people I’ve been in relationships with. Consequently, I’ve developed a pretty keen immune response to it. I’ve also studied its mechanics very closely, largely to resist the nonsense of said people. Here’s a few key methods I’ve picked up.
1. Be Extremely Wary of People Copying Your Body Language
If you’re talking to somebody who may be into NLP, and you notice that they’re sitting in exactly the same way as you, or mirroring the way you have your hands, test them by making a few movements and seeing if they do the same thing. Skilled NLPers will be better at masking this than newer ones, but newer ones will always immediately copy the same movement. This is a good time to call people on their shit.
2. Move Your Eyes in Random and Unpredictable Patterns
This is freaking hilarious to do to troll NLPers. Especially in the initial stages of rapport induction, an NLP user will be paying incredibly close attention to your eyes. You may think it’s because they’re intensely interested in what you’re saying. They are, but not because they actually care about your thoughts:
This could quite possibly be going too far, however
They’re watching your eye movements to see how you store and access information. In a few minutes, they’ll not only be able to tell when you’re lying or making something up, they’ll also be able to figure out what parts of your brain you’re using when you’re speaking, which can then lead them to be so clued in to what you’re thinking that they almost come across as having some kind of psychic insight into your innermost thoughts.
A clever hack for this is just to randomly dart your eyes around - look up to the right, to the left, side to side, down… make it seem natural, but do it randomly and with no pattern. This will drive an NLP person utterly nuts because you’ll be throwing off their calibration.
3. Do Not Let Anybody Touch You
This is pretty obvious and kind of goes without saying in general. But let’s say you’re having a conversation with somebody you know is into NLP, and you find yourself in a heightened emotional state - maybe you start laughing really hard, or get really angry, or something similar - and the person you’re talking to touches you while you’re in that state.
They might, for instance, tap you on the shoulder. What just happened? They anchored you so that later, if they want to put you back into the state you were just in, they can (or so the wayward logic of NLP dictates) touch you in the same place. Just be like, oh hell no you did not.
4. Be Wary of Vague Language
One of the primary techniques that NLP took from Milton Erickson is the use of vague language to induce hypnotic trance. Erickson found that the more vague language is, the more it leads people into trance, because there is less that a person is liable to disagree with or react to. Alternately, more specific language will take a person out of trance. (Note Obama’s use of this specific technique in the “Change” campaign, a word so vague that anybody could read anything into it.)
5. Be Wary of Permissive Language
“Feel free to relax.” “You’re welcome to test drive this car if you like.” “You can enjoy this as much as you like.” Watch the f*k out for this. This was a major insight of pre-NLP hypnotists like Erickson: The best way to get somebody to do something, including going into a trance, is by allowing them to give you permission to do so. Because of this, skilled hypnotists will NEVER command you outright to do something - i.e. “Go into a trance.” They WILL say things like “Feel free to become as relaxed as you like.”
6. Be Wary of Gibberish
Nonsense phrases like “As you release this feeling more and more you will find yourself moving into present alignment with the sound of your success more and more.” This kind of gibberish is the bread and butter of the pacing-and-leading phase of NLP; the hypnotist isn’t actually saying anything, they’re just trying to program your internal emotional states and move you towards where they want you to go.
ALWAYS say “Can you be more specific about that” or “Can you explain exactly what you mean?” This does two things: It interrupts this whole technique, and it also forces the conversation into specific language, breaking the trance-inducing use of vague language we discussed in #4.
7. Read Between the Lines
NLP people will consistently use language with hidden or layered meanings. For instance “Diet, nutrition and sleep with me are the most important things, don’t you think?” On the surface, if you heard this sentence quickly, it would seem like an obvious statement that you would probably agree with without much thought.
Yes, of course diet, nutrition and sleep are important things, sure, and this person’s really into being healthy, that’s great. But what’s the layered-in message? “Diet, nutrition and sleep with me are the most important things, don’t you think?” Yep, and you just unconsciously agreed to it. Skilled NLPers can be incredibly subtle with this.
8. Watch Your Attention
Be very careful about zoning out around NLP people - it’s an invitation to leap in with an unconscious cue. Here’s an example: An NLP user who was attempting to get me to write for his blog for free noticed I appeared not to be paying attention and was looking into the distance, and then started using the technique listed in #7 by talking about how he never has to pay for anything because media outlets send him review copies of books and albums for free. “Everything for free,” he began hissing at me. “I get everything. For. Free.” Obvious, no?
9. Don’t Agree to Anything
If you find yourself being led to make a quick decision on something, and feel you’re being steered, leave the situation. Wait 24 hours before making any decisions, especially financial ones.
Do NOT let yourself get swept up into making an emotional decision in the spur of the moment. Sales people are armed with NLP techniques specifically for engineering impulse buys. Don’t do it. Leave, and use your rational mind.
10. Trust Your Intuition
And the foremost and primary rule: If your gut tells you somebody is fucking with you, or you feel uneasy around them, trust it. NLP people almost always seem “off,” dodgy, or like used car salesmen. Flee, or request they show you the respect of not applying NLP techniques when interacting with you.
Hopefully this short guide will be of assistance to you in resisting this annoying and pernicious modern form of black magic. Take it with you on your phone or a printout next time you’re at a used car sales lot, getting signed up for a gym membership, or watching a politician speak on TV. You’ll easily find yourself surprised how you allow yourself to notice more and more NLP techniques… more and more… don’t you think?
(For more on NLP, check out the book Introducing NLP by Joseph O’Connor or the immensely useful Neuro-Linguistic Programming for Dummies. As a bonus, here’s a great video breaking down the use of NLP techniques by media outlets on both sides of the political spectrum, from FOX News to Stephen Colbert. It gets a bit into Christian conspiracy thinking, but is VERY good information.)
New York Times Reporter Found Murdered After Exposing MKUltra? February 29 2016 | From: TheDailySheeple
A former New York Times reporter has been found murdered in the Dominican Republic following her exposure of MKUltra.
Sarah Kershaw was found asphyxiated due to strangulation on Monday at her apartment in Sosua.
Project MKUltra, often referred to as the CIA’s mind control program, was the code name given to an illegal program of experiments on human subjects, designed and undertaken by the the CIA. Ms Kershaw published an article with the New York Times exploring this subject in 2008 with her article Sharing their Demons on the Web, writing:
“For people who regularly visit and write on message boards on the mind-control sites, the idea that others would describe the sites as promoting delusional and psychotic thinking is simply evidence of a cover-up of the truth.”
“In her article, Ms. Kershaw wrote that people who felt they were being targeted had found the support of Missouri Representative Jim Guest, who told the Times: “I’ve had enough calls, some from credible people - professors - being targeted by nonlethal weapons. They become psychologically affected by it. They have trouble sleeping at night.”"
When Ms. Kershaw wrote her article, psychotronic warfare was not legal against US citizens, but that all changed with the National Defense Authorization Act 2013. In response to the legalization of psychotronic warfare, Abreu Report published an article, writing:
“Psychotronic weapons are those that act to take away a part of the information which is stored in a man’s brain. It is sent to a computer, which reworks it to the level needed for those who need to control the man, and the modified information is then reinserted into the brain.
These weapons are used against the mind to induce hallucinations, sickness, mutations in human cells, ‘zombification,’ or even death. Included in the arsenal are VHF generators, X-rays, ultrasound, and radio waves.”
Is it possible that Ms. Kershaw stumbled upon some new information that made her dangerous? Considering the speed at which the capabilities of psychotronic weapons has improved, the possibility is extremely high.
TEDx: The Wireless Wake Up Call February 28 2016 | From: EMFAnalysis
Jeromy Johnson just gave the first-ever TED Talk on wireless / EMF / smart meter health effects. And it's a real eye-opener.
Jeromy has a Master's degree in Environmental Engineering. As a Silicon Valley tech-enthusiast, he was the last person to expect the debilitating health effects he experienced when 'smart' meters were installed where he lived. There are now thousands upon thousands of others just like him.
One thing is fore sure... the conversation is going mainstream.
Protect Your Family from EMF Pollution: TEDx Talk: Wireless Wake-Up Call
On February 6th, I had the opportunity to speak at TEDxBerkeley. The title of my talk was “Wireless Wake-Up Call.” I discussed the health effects related to the explosion in wireless technology the past few years, along with solutions that can help everyone. Within the presentation, I also talked about how we can develop technology that is much safer for humanity. Here is the video:
The following are a few pictures and experiences from that day:
Zellerbach Hall on the UC Berkeley campus is an incredible venue. It seats 2,000 people and this event was sold-out. I was the second speaker of the day and the first couple minutes on stage were a bit nerve-racking. As you will see in my opening questions, there was an uncomfortable moment for everyone (it felt like the entire room needed to pause).
It happened when I asked who knew that the fine print in every smart phone owner’s manual says to never put the phone within about 1 inch of the body. This is a truth that is currently taboo to discuss in our society, so few people know about it. However, once we got through this moment, the talk soon became fun and was well-received by many in the audience.
TEDxBerkeley hired artists to put each talk into images. It is such an incredible skill to do this in a short amount of time. Every speaker that day gave an amazing talk (it was so much fun to watch the other talks) and each presenter was given the painting of their talk as a gift that evening.
In my talk, I wanted to convey that people are indeed being harmed by this technology and that there is adequate science to show how and why this is happening. Most importantly though, I provided solutions that every family can utilize today to reduce their exposure and encouraged us all to help society wake-up.
Once this happens, our technology industries will create safe products that will move our entire society toward a healthier future.
Russia Bans All U.S. Corn And Soy Imports Due To GMO Contamination February 18 2016 | From: NaturalSociety
Russia’s food safety regulator Rosselkhoznadzor just announced a complete ban starting February 15 on all US corn and soy imports.
This is a huge blow to organic and GM farmers alike, though the ban will be instated due to genetically modified crop and microbial contamination.
Assistant Director of the Rosselkhoznadzor, Alexey Alekseenko said:
“Restrictions will be imposed on imports starting from February 15. They (the US) have to establish a system to ensure safety of products imported to Russia.”
China has issued similar bans in the past due to GM contamination, and only recently did an “about face” on the issue. US corn exports to the country recently dropped by 85% after a report detailing GM contamination was released.
Putin recently said that Russians need to be protected from GM crops. The food latest ban follows that credo. According to the regulator, the corn imported from the US is often infected with dry rot of maize.
In addition, according to the Russian watchdog, corn can be used for transgenic crops in Russia. The potential damage from import and spread of quarantinable objects on the territory of Russia is estimated at 10-15 bln rubles ($126 mln-189 mln) annually.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
So, a combination of microbial disease and genetically mutated genes are both a concern for Russia, China, and multiple other countries who are refusing GM imports from the US.
Just months ago, President Putin’s meeting with US Secretary of State John Kerry revealed the Russian leaders “extreme outrage” over the Obama regimes continued protection of global seed and plant bio-genetic giants Syngenta and Monsanto.
US Intelligence Chief: We Might Use The Internet Of Things To Spy On You February 13 2016 | From: TheGuardian
James Clapper did not name specific agency as being involved in surveillance via smart-home devices but said in congressional testimony it is a distinct possibility
The US intelligence chief has acknowledged for the first time that agencies might use a new generation of smart household devices to increase their surveillance capabilities.
As increasing numbers of devices connect to the internet and to one another, the so-called internet of things promises consumers increased convenience – the remotely operated thermostat from Google-owned Nest is a leading example. But as home computing migrates away from the laptop, the tablet and the smartphone, experts warn that the security features on the coming wave of automobiles, dishwashers and alarm systems lag far behind.
In an appearance at a Washington thinktank last month, the director of the National Security Agency, Adm Michael Rogers, said that it was time to consider making the home devices “more defensible”, but did not address the opportunities that increased numbers and even categories of connected devices provide to his surveillance agency.
However, James Clapper, the US director of national intelligence, was more direct in testimony submitted to the Senate on Tuesday as part of an assessment of threats facing the United States.
"In the future, intelligence services might use the [internet of things] for identification, surveillance, monitoring, location tracking, and targeting for recruitment, or to gain access to networks or user credentials,” Clapper said.
Clapper did not specifically name any intelligence agency as involved in household-device surveillance. But security experts examining the internet of things take as a given that the US and other surveillance services will intercept the signals the newly networked devices emit, much as they do with those from cellphones.
Amateurs are already interested in easily compromised hardware; computer programmer John Matherly’s search engine Shodan indexes thousands of completely unsecured web-connected devices.
Online threats again topped the intelligence chief’s list of “worldwide threats” the US faces, with the mutating threat of low-intensity terrorism quickly following. While Clapper has for years used the equivocal term “evolving” when asked about the scope of the threat, he said Tuesday that Sunni violent extremism “has more groups, members, and safe havens than at any other point in history”.
The Islamic State topped the threat index, but Clapper also warned that the US-backed Saudi war in Yemen was redounding to the benefit of al-Qaida’s local affiliate.
"Homegrown extremists” are the greatest terrorist threat, rather than Islamic State or al-Qaida attacks planned from overseas. Clapper cited the San Bernardino and Chattanooga shootings as examples of lethal operations emanating from self-starting extremists “without direct guidance from [Isis] leadership”.
US intelligence officials did not foresee Isis suffering significant setbacks in 2016 despite a war in Syria and Iraq that the Pentagon has pledged to escalate. The chief of defense intelligence, Marine Lt Gen Vincent Stewart, said the jihadist army would “probably retain Sunni Arab urban centers” in 2016, even as military leaders pledged to wrest the key cities of Raqqa and Mosul from it.
Contradicting the US defense secretary, Ashton Carter, Stewart said he was “less optimistic in the near term about Mosul”, saying the US and Iraqi government would “certainly not” retake it in 2016.
The negative outlook comes as Carter traveled on Tuesday to meet with his fellow defense chiefs in Brussels for a discussion on increasing their contributions against Isis.
On the Iran nuclear deal, Clapper said intelligence agencies were in a “distrust and verify mode”, but added: “We have no evidence thus far that they’re moving toward violation.”
Clapper’s admission about the surveillance potential for networked home devices is rare for a US official. But in an overlooked 2012 speech, the then CIA director David Petraeus called the surveillance implications of the internet of things “transformational … particularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft”.
During testimony to both the Senate armed services committee and the intelligence panel, Clapper cited Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and the Islamic State as bolstering their online espionage, disinformation, theft, propaganda and data-destruction capabilities. He warned that the US’s ability to correctly attribute the culprits of those actions would probably diminish with “improving offensive tradecraft, the use of proxies, and the creation of cover organizations”.
Clapper suggested that US adversaries had overtaken its online capabilities: “Russia and China continue to have the most sophisticated cyber programs.”
The White House’s new cybersecurity initiative, unveiled on Tuesday, pledged increased security for nontraditional networked home devices. It tasked the Department of Homeland Security to “test and certify networked devices within the ‘Internet of Things’.” It did not discuss any tension between the US’s twin cybersecurity and surveillance priorities.
Connected household devices are a potential treasure trove to intelligence agencies seeking unobtrusive ways to listen and watch a target, according to a study that Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society released last week. The study found that the signals explosion represented by the internet of things would overwhelm any privacy benefits by users of commercial encryption – even as Clapper in his testimony again alleged that the growth of encryption was having a “negative effect on intelligence gathering”.
The report’s authors cited a 2001 case in which the FBI had sought to compel a company that makes emergency communications hardware for automobiles – similar by description to OnStar, though the company was not named – to assist agents in Nevada in listening in on conversations in a client’s car.
In February 2015, news reports revealed that microphones on Samsung “smart” televisions were “always on” so as to receive any audio that it could interpret as an instruction.
"Law enforcement or intelligence agencies may start to seek orders compelling Samsung, Google, Mattel, Nest or vendors of other networked devices to push an update or flip a digital switch to intercept the ambient communications of a target,” the authors wrote.
Some Of The Biggest Lies Of Science February 11 2016 | From: ActivistTeacher
The maintenance of the hierarchical structures that control our lives depends on Pinter’s “vast tapestry of lies upon which we feed.”
The maintenance of the hierarchical structures that control our lives depends on Pinter’s “vast tapestry of lies upon which we feed.” Therefore the main institutions that embed us into the hierarchy, such as schools, universities, and mass media and entertainment corporations, have a primary function to create and maintain this tapestry. This includes establishment scientists and all service intellectuals in charge of “interpreting” reality.
In fact, the scientists and “experts” define reality in order to bring it into conformation with the always-adapting dominant mental tapestry of the moment.
“[T]he majority of politicians, on the evidence available to us, are interested not in truth but in power and in the maintenance of that power.
To maintain that power it is essential that people remain in ignorance, that they live in ignorance of the truth, even the truth of their own lives. What surrounds us therefore is a vast tapestry of lies, upon which we feed.”
– Harold Pinter, Nobel Lecture (Literature), 2005
They also invent and build new branches of the tapestry that serve specific power groups by providing new avenues of exploitation. These high priests are rewarded with high class status.
The Money Lie
The economists are a most significant example. It is probably not an accident that in the United States at the end of the nineteenth century the economists were the first professional analysts to be “broken in,” in a battle that defined the limits of academic freedom in universities. The academic system would from that point on impose a strict operational separation between inquiry and theorizing as acceptable and social reform as unacceptable.
Any academic wishing to preserve her position understood what this meant.
As a side product, academics became virtuosos at nurturing a self-image of importance despite this fatal limitation on their societal relevance, with verbiage such as: The truth is our most powerful weapon, the pen is mightier than the sword, a good idea can change the world, reason will take us out of darkness, etc.
So the enterprise of economics became devoted to masking the lie about money. Bad lending practice, price fixing and monopolistic controls were the main threats to the natural justice of a free market, and occurred only as errors in a mostly self-regulating system that could be moderated via adjustments of interest rates and other “safeguards.”
Meanwhile no mainstream economic theory makes any mention of the fact that money itself is created wholesale in a fractional reserve banking system owned by secret private interests given a licence to fabricate and deliver debt that must be paid back (with interest) from the real economy, thereby continuously concentrating ownership and power over all local and regional economies.
The rest of us have to earn money rather than simply fabricate it and we never own more when we die. The middle class either pays rent or a mortgage. Wage slavery is perpetuated and degraded in stable areas and installed in its most vicious varieties in all newly conquered territories.
It is quite remarkable that the largest exploitation scam (private money creation as debt) ever enacted and applied to the entire planet does not figure in economic theories.
Economists are so busy modeling the ups and downs of profits, returns, employment figures, stock values, and the benefits of mergers for mid-level exploiters that they don’t notice their avoidance of the foundational elements. They model the construction schedule while refusing to acknowledge that the terrain is an earthquake zone with vultures circling overhead.
Meanwhile the financiers write and re-write the rules themselves and again this process does not figure in macroeconomic theories. The only human element that economists consider in their “predictive” mathematical models is low-level consumer behaviour, not high-level system manipulation.
Corruption is the norm yet it does not figure. The economies, cultures and infrastructures of nations are wilfully destroyed in order to enslave via new and larger national debts for generations into the future while economists forecast alleged catastrophic consequences of defaulting on these debts…
Management tools for the bosses and smoke and mirrors for the rest of us – thank you expert economists.
The Medicine is Health Lie
We’ve all heard some MD (medical doctor) interviewed on the radio gratuitously make the bold proposal that life expectancy has increased thanks to modern medicine. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Life expectancy has increased in First World countries thanks to a historical absence of civil and territorial wars, better and more accessible food, less work and non-work accidents, and better overall living and working conditions. The single strongest indicator of personal health within and between countries is economy status, irrespective of access to medical technology and pharmaceuticals.
It’s worse than that because medicine actually has a negative impact on health. Medical errors (not counting misattributed deaths from correctly administered “treatments”) are the third leading cause of death in the US, after heart disease and cancer, and there is a large gap between this conservative underestimate in the number of medical error deaths and the fourth leading cause of death.
Since medicine can do little for heart disease and cancer and since medicine has only a small statistical positive impact in the area of trauma interventions, we conclude that public health would increase if all MDs simply disappeared. And think of all the time loss and stress that sick people would save…
One of the most dangerous places in society is the hospital. Medical errors include misdiagnoses, bad prescriptions, prescriptions of medications that should not be combined, unnecessary surgery, unnecessary or badly administered treatments including chemotherapy, radiation treatment, and corrective surgeries.
The lie extends to the myth that MDs anywhere near understand the human body. And this well guarded lie encourages us to put our faith in doctors, thereby opening the door to a well orchestrated profit bonanza for big pharma.
The first thing that Doctors Without Borders (MSF) volunteers need to do in order to contribute significantly in disaster zones is to “forget their medical training” and get to work on the priority tasks at hand: water, food, shelter, and disease propagation prevention; not vaccinating, or operating, or prescribing medication… Public health comes from safety, stability, social justice, and economic buying power, not MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) units and prescription drugs.
These bone heads routinely apply unproven “recommended treatments” and prescribe dangerous drugs for everything from high blood pressure from a sedentary lifestyle and bad nutrition, to apathy at school, to anxiety in public places, to post-adolescence erectile function, to non-conventional sleep patterns, and to all the side effects from the latter drugs.
In professional yet nonetheless remarkable reversals of logic, doctors prescribe drugs to remove symptoms that are risk indicators rather than address the causes of the risks, thereby only adding to the assault on the body.
It’s unbelievable the number that medicine has done on us: Just one more way to keep us stupid (ignorant about our own bodies) and artificially dependent on the control hierarchy. Economically disadvantaged people don’t die from not having access to medical “care” – They die from the life constraints and liabilities directly resulting from poverty. How many MDs have stated this obvious truth on the radio?
Environmental Science Lies
Exploitation via resource extraction, land use expropriation, and wage slavery creation and maintenance are devastating to indigenous populations and to the environment on continental scales. It is therefore vital to cover up the crimes under a veil of expert analysis and policy development diversion. A valued class of service intellectuals here is composed of the environmental scientists and consultants.
Environmental scientists naively and knowingly work hand in hand with finance-corporate shysters, mainstream media, politicians, and state and international bureaucrats to mask real problems and to create profit opportunities for select power elites. Here are notable examples of specific cases.
Freon and Ozone
Do you know of anyone who has been killed by the ozone hole?
The 1987 Montreal Protocol banning chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) is considered a textbook case where science and responsible governance lead to a landmark treaty for the benefit of the Earth and all its inhabitants. How often does that happen?
At about the time that the DuPont patent on Freon(TM), the most widely used CFC refrigerant in the world, was expiring the mainstream media picked up on otherwise arcane scientific observations and hypotheses about ozone concentration in the upper atmosphere near the poles.
There resulted an international mobilization to criminalize CFCs and DuPont developed and patented a replacement refrigerant that was promptly certified for use.
A Nobel Prize in chemistry was awarded in 1995 for a laboratory demonstration that CFCs could deplete ozone in simulated atmospheric conditions. In 2007 it was shown that the latter work may have been seriously flawed by overestimating the depletion rate by an order of magnitude, thereby invalidating the proposed mechanism for CFC-driven ozone depletion.
Not to mention that any laboratory experiment is somewhat different from the actual upper atmosphere... Is the Nobel tainted by media and special interest lobbying?
It gets better. It turns out that the Dupont replacement refrigerant is, not surprisingly, not as inert as was Freon. As a result it corrodes refrigerator cycle components at a much faster rate. Where home refrigerators and freezers lasted forever, they now burn out in eight years or so.
This has caused catastrophic increases in major appliance contributions to land fill sites across North America; spurred on by the green propaganda for obscenely efficient electrical consumptions of the new appliances under closed door (zero use) conditions.
In addition, we have been frenzied into avoiding the sun, the UV index keeps our fear of cancer and our dependence on the medical establishment alive, and a new sun block industry a la vampire protection league has been spawned.
And of course star university chemists are looking for that perfect sun block molecule that can be patented by big pharma.
And as soon as it is, I predict a surge in media interviews with skin cancer experts…
Acid Rain on the Boreal Forest
In the seventies it was acid rain. Thousands of scientists from around the world (Northern Hemisphere) studied this “most pressing environmental problem on the planet.” The boreal forest is the largest ecosystem on Earth and its millions of lakes were reportedly being killed by acid from the sky.
Coal burning plants spewed out sulphides into the atmosphere causing the rain to be acidic. The acid rain was postulated to acidify the soils and lakes in the boreal forest but the acidification was virtually impossible to detect. Pristine lakes in the hearts of national parks had to be studied for decades in attempts to detect a statistically significant acidification.
Meanwhile the lakes and their watersheds were being destroyed by the cottage industry, agriculture, forestry, mining, over fishing and tourism. None of the local and regional destruction was studied or exposed. Instead, scientists turned their gaze to distant coal burning plants, atmospheric distribution, and postulated chemical reactions occurring in rain droplets.
One study found that the spawning in aquarium of one fish species was extremely sensitive to acidity (pH). Long treatises about cation charge balance and transport were written and attention was diverted away from the destruction on the ground towards a sanitized problem of atmospheric chemistry that was the result of industrialization and progress rather than being caused by identifiable exploiters.
As a physicist and Earth scientist turned environmental scientist, I personally read virtually every single scientific paper written about acid rain and could not find an example of a demonstrated negative impact on lakes or forests from acid rain.
In my opinion, contrary to the repeated claims of the scientist authors, the research on acid rain demonstrates that acid rain could not possibly have been the problem.
This model of elite-forces-coordinated exploiter whitewashing was to play itself out on an even grander scale only decades later with global warming.
Global Warming as a Threat to Humankind
n 2005 and 2006, several years before the November 2009 Climategate scandal burst the media bubble that buoyed public opinion towards acceptance of carbon credits, cap and trade, and the associated trillion dollar finance bonanza that may still come to pass, I exposed the global warming cooptation scam in an essay that Alexander Cockburn writing in The Nation called "one of the best essays on greenhouse myth-making from a left perspective".
My essay prompted David F. Noble to research the question and write The Corporate Climate Coup to expose how the media embrace followed the finance sector’s realization of the unprecedented potential for revenues that going green could represent.
“I also advance that there are strong societal, institutional, and psychological motivations for having constructed and for continuing to maintain the myth of a global warming dominant threat (global warming myth, for short). I describe these motivations in terms of the workings of the scientific profession and of the global corporate and finance network and its government shadows.”
“I argue that by far the most destructive force on the planet is power-driven financiers and profit-driven corporations and their cartels backed by military might; and that the global warming myth is a red herring that contributes to hiding this truth. In my opinion, activists who, using any justification, feed the global warming myth have effectively been co-opted, or at best neutralized.”
Other passages read this way:
“Environmental scientists and government agencies get funding to study and monitor problems that do not threaten corporate and financial interests. It is therefore no surprise that they would attack continental-scale devastation from resource extraction via the CO2 back door. The main drawback with this strategy is that you cannot control a hungry monster by asking it not to shit as much.”
“Global warming is strictly an imaginary problem of the First World middleclass. Nobody else cares about global warming. Exploited factory workers in the Third World don’t care about global warming. Depleted uranium genetically mutilated children in Iraq don’t care about global warming. Devastated aboriginal populations the world over also can’t relate to global warming, except maybe as representing the only solidarity that we might volunteer.”
“It’s not about limited resources. [“The amount of money spent on pet food in the US and Europe each year equals the additional amount needed to provide basic food and health care for all the people in poor countries, with a sizeable amount left over.”
(UN Human Development Report, 1999)] It’s about exploitation, oppression, racism, power, and greed. Economic, human, and animal justice brings economic sustainability which in turn is always based on renewable practices.
Recognizing the basic rights of native people automatically moderates resource extraction and preserves natural habitats. Not permitting imperialist wars and interventions automatically quenches nation-scale exploitation. True democratic control over monetary policy goes a long way in removing debt-based extortion. Etc.”
And there is a thorough critique of the science as band wagon trumpeting and interested self-deception. Climategate only confirms what should be obvious to any practicing scientist: That science is a mafia when it’s not simply a sleeping pill.
[Recent development (March 2011): Incisive deconstruction of the dominant climate science narrative - here.]
It just goes on and on. What is not a lie?
Look at the recent H1N1 scam – another textbook example. It’s farcical how far these circuses go:
Antiseptic gels in every doorway at the blink of an eye; high school students getting high from drinking the alcohol in the gels; out datedness of the viral strain before the pre-paid vaccine can be mass produced; unproven effectiveness; no requirement to prove effectiveness; government guarantees to corporate manufacturers against client lawsuits; university safety officers teaching students how to cough; etc.
Pure madness. Has something triggered our genetically ingrained First World stupidity reflex? Is this part of our march towards fascism?
Here is another one. Educators promote the lie that we learn because we are taught. This lie of education is squarely denounced by radical educators.
University professors design curricula as though the students actually learn every element that is delivered whereas the truth is that students don’t learn the delivered material and everyone only learns what they learn. One could dramatically change the order in which courses are delivered and it would make no measurable difference in how much students learn.
Students deliver nonsense and professors don’t care. Obedience and indoctrination are all that matter so the only required skill is bluffing. Students know this and those that don’t don’t know what they know, don’t know themselves.
Pick any expert opinion or dominant paradigm: It’s part of a racket.
We can’t know the truth because the truth is brutal.
There Are 'Fracking' Chemicals In Your Toothpaste, Detergents And Ice Cream February 2 2016 | From: NaturalNews
Most people take measures to ensure that the items they use in their homes on a daily basis are not on par with things that are considered unsafe for their bodies or the environment.
However, researchers from the University of Colorado Boulder have discovered that the toxic substances in fracking fluid, which are going down wells, are essentially the same as what's going down the drain in people's households.
Their findings, which are published in the journal Analytical Chemistry, show that the same toxic substances exist in fracking fluid samples that are also in many of the everyday items that individuals use, from toothpaste and detergent to ice cream and laxatives.
The findings reinforce what many people have thought all along: that contamination of ground and surface water supplies may be traceable to the chemicals used in the fracking (hydraulic fracturing) process.
Expert: fracking fluid samples have same chemicals that are going down drains at home
"This is the first published paper that identifies some of the organic fracking chemicals going down the well that companies use," says the paper's lead author and a co-founder of the Laboratory for Environmental Mass Spectrometry in CU-Boulder's College of Engineering and Applied Science, Michael Thurman.
"We found chemicals in the samples we were running that most of us are putting down our drains at home."
The paper, titled "Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing Flowback and Produced Waters Using Accurate Mass: Identification of Ethoxylated Surfactants," notes the specific surfactants found. It states;
"Two series of ethylene oxide (EO) surfactants, polyethylene glycols (PEGs from EO3 to EO33) and linear alkyl ethoxylates (LAEs C-9 to C-15 with EO3-EO28), were identified in hydraulic fracturing flowback and produced water . . . "
According to the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA), ethylene oxide is present in a range of commonly-used household products ranging from detergents and antifreeze to cosmetics and spices. They also note that it's linked to a host of problems including dizziness, spontaneous abortion, nerve damage and impaired memory.
To conduct the study, researchers obtained fracking fluid samples from five states -- Colorado, Louisiana, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Texas -- then analyzed the surfactants in these fluids at a mass spectrometry laboratory sponsored by Agilent Technologies, Inc., where state-of-the art instrumentation was provided.
Additional studies needed to consider variables in fracking process and address other concerns
Because the chemicals in fracking fluid are considered to be proprietary mixtures designed to extract as much oil and gas as possible, hesitancy to reveal chemicals remain due to fracking industry competition. While state and federal regulations do require disclosure regarding the chemicals used, only broad chemical categories are typically provided.
Furthermore, variations in the fluid mixtures also exist due to the differing geology surrounding different well sites, and as such, researchers involved with this study note that their findings are not necessarily applicable to all existing wells. Researchers in this study, however, say that they are moving forward with plans to conduct a larger study that will look into samples from other wells in an effort to address these matters further.
Additionally, Thurman expressed concern about other fracking-related issues that he says warrant investigation such as air pollution, the quantity of water used and earthquakes occurring from wastewater disposal.
Air pollution as it pertains to fracking is a very real concern.
In fact, recent findings in a study led by Dr. David Carpenter, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany-State University of New York, show that air samples near fracking wells contain hydrogen sulfide levels that exceed federal standards by 90 to 60,000 times.
Researchers also found there to be very high levels of benzene and formaldehyde around these areas. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen linked to leukemia and nasopharyngeal cancer, while hydrogen sulfide has been associated with health hazards such as eye irritation and asthma.
Why Heating Food With Microwave Radiation Is Harmful To Your Health January 31 2016 | From:EnergyFanatics
A few decades from now, will it be common knowledge that using microwave radiation to heat food is harmful to human health?
It’s certainly a possibility, and information is already emerging which shows cause for concern.
Microwaves work by causing water molecules to resonate at very high frequencies, converting them into steam and thereby heating your food. While this might be a convenient way to prepare your food, using microwave radiation in this way actually changes the chemical structure of that food.
The fact that they are approved as safe doesn’t mean much these days, as we’ve seen with several other examples from Tobacco, PCBs and Asbestos and Glyphosate. Just because a government agency, like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or a government health agency approves something as safe, doesn’t necessarily mean it’s safe.
You might be wondering how this is any different from heating your food on the stove or steaming it, and that’s a fair question. The difference is that microwaves deform and distort the molecules in food, while conventional heating methods do not.
This is problematic in the medical field as well. We know, for example, that during blood transfusions, microwaves are often used to heat the blood before it is transferred to the patient. But using microwave radiation to this actually damages components found in blood. In fact, one woman even died after receiving a blood transfusion of microwaved blood. (source)
It is starting to look like microwaving can completely rid your food of most essential nutrients, but more research on this phenomenon needs to be done. That being said, there are some publications we can refer to if you’d like to find out more information regarding the harmful effects of microwaves on nutrients.
One example comes from 2003. A study published in The Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture examined what microwaves do to broccoli, finding that broccoli, after being microwaved, lost up to 97 percent of its beneficial antioxidants. By comparison, when researchers steamed broccoli, they discovered that it only lost 11 percent or fewer of its antioxidants. (source)
A study out of Australia showed that microwaves cause a greater level of “protein unfolding” than conventional heating. It found that;
"Microwaves cause a significantly higher degree of unfolding than conventional thermal stress for protein solutions heating to the same maximum temperature.” (source)
A study using garlic found that just 60 seconds in a microwave can render its principle active ingredient (alliinase) as useless. Microwaves have also been found to destroy immune-boosting agents that are found in breast milk. These are disease fighting nutrients which are essential to the health and development of the child.
For example, one study found that microwaving breast milk caused a decrease in lysozyme activity and antibodies, and aided the growth of more pathogenic bacteria. (source) The interesting thing about this study is that the researchers found that more damage was done to the milk from microwaving compared to any other method of heating.
"Microwaving appears to be contraindicated at high-temperatures, and questions regarding its safety even exist at low temperatures.” (source)
A Japanese study found that only 6 minutes of microwave heating turned approximately 40 percent of the B12 found in milk dead and completely void of any nutritional value. (source)
Three recent studies of historical food composition have shown up to 40 percent declines in some of the minerals commonly found in fresh produce, and another one found the same thing for their protein source. (source)
A Scandinavian study conducted in 1999 also found that cooking asparagus in the microwave results in a reduction in vitamins. (Kidmose U and Kaack K. Acta. Agriculturae Scandinavica B1999:49(2).110-117.)
What Type of Container Are You Using To Microwave Your Food?
Not heating your food in plastic containers should be a no brainer at this point. This is precisely why the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends that any plastic containers should be labelled for microwave use, but even if they are labeled as safe, it’s still probably not a good idea. For more more information on what happens when you microwave your food in plastic containers, you can check out this article.
Many studies have shown that multiple plastic products contain various hormone disrupting chemicals, and heat is the worst culprit when it comes to increasing the rate of chemical transfer from the container to your food.
As written in the journal Toxicology Letters:
Using a sensitive and quantitative competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, BPA was found to migrate from polycarbonate water bottle at rates ranging from 0.20 ng/h to 0.79/h. . . . At room temperature the migration of BPA was independent of whether or not the bottle had been perviously used. Exposure to boiling water increased the rate of BPA migration by up to 55-fold.
Again, heat increases chemical leaching, so be cautious of what you use to heat your food. Even plastic containers which are labelled as microwave safe (or even BPA free, which does not account for other worrisome chemicals) are still dangerous.
According to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC):
"What the term ‘microwave-safe’ basically means is that any chemicals leaching from the container into food do so at levels far below those shown to have any health effects.
There is cause to be wary of this claim, however. In particular, #7 polycarbonate plastic should not be used in a microwave, even if it is labeled ‘microwave-safe,’ because it leaches hormone-disrupting bisphenol A (BPA), especially when heated.” (source)
This may be frightening to consider, but examining the products we choose to use on a daily basis is important. We have seen many examples in recent human history of information coming to light about a product or drug which completely changes our understanding and attitude towards it. We only have to look at cigarettes to see the proof of that.
Electromagnetic Fields From Mobile Phones Accelerate Mercury Release From Dental Fillings January 23 2016 | From: NaturalNews
A fascinating scientific study has found that using mobile phones can accelerate the release of toxic mercury from dental fillings.
This is especially noteworthy given that many people hold their mobile phones right next to their jaws when talking on them.
The authors of the mobile phone study concluded that "MRI and microwave radiation emitted from mobile phones significantly release mercury from dental amalgam restoration."
This means when you hold a mobile phone next to your jaw, you are driving electromagnetic energy into the mercury fillings in your mouth, heating them up just enough to accelerate their release of mercury. You then inhale the mercury which enters the bloodstream, poisoning your brain and kidneys.
It is well known that metallic dental fillings respond to electromagnetic radiation. This is due to the laws of physics that describe how metals are influenced by the kind of electromagnetic fields emitted by mobile phones.
The accelerated release of mercury from dental fillings may even help explain the increased insanity now being witnessed across society. Mercury, which makes up about 50% of "silver" fillings used in dentistry, is a toxic heavy metal associated with mental insanity. The term "mad as a hatter" originates from observations that hat makers who used mercury in the processing of hat components often went insane.
The modern derivative term "quack" even comes from "quick" which is derived from "quicksilver," the common name for mercury. Doctors used mercury for hundreds of years as a treatment for a wide assortment of medical conditions, claiming patients were getting better even as they were being systematically poisoned (much the same still goes on today with chemotherapy).
In effect, mercury dental fillings and mobile phones have created a "binary weapon" of mass metals poisoning and cognitive insanity. While mercury fillings (called "silver fillings" by the dishonest dentistry industry) have been toxic since the very first day they were used, they are now far more toxic because of the ubiquitous use of mobile phones by nearly everyone.
You may have even noticed that the people of the modern world seem to have gone more insane as mobile phone use has risen over the years. While this observation is anecdotal, it seems to be backed by legitimate science.
While there are many chemicals and heavy metals that might contribute to mental insanity in our modern world, few of those chemicals are inhaled directly into the lungs the way mercury vapor is inhaled from dental fillings.
Even eating mercury or lead is not nearly as toxic (at the same concentrations) as inhaling those toxic elements. The lungs deliver toxic vapors directly to the bloodstream, practically guaranteeing toxic elements will be deposited in tissues of the brain, heart, kidneys or other internal organs.
The American Dental Association, which owns patents on mercury fillings, ridiculously insists that dental amalgams made of mercury pose no risk whatsoever to human health. While this view was ignorantly accepted in, say, the 1950's, it is hopelessly obsolete in 2016.
WARNING: Do not get Mercury Removed from your Mouth by a Conventional Dentist
If you're seeking to have mercury removed from your mouth, you must work with a holistic dentist who provides you with supplemental oxygen during the removal procedure.
Drilling on mercury fillings releases toxic mercury vapor that you may inhale. You'll also likely swallow tiny mercury particles during the procedure. The solution to the particles is to consume peanut butter, strawberries or chlorella both before and after the procedure.
Her kettle is switched on, but Marama Waddell says she's been experiencing bad health since the installation of this new smart meter at her residence.
“It's been affecting my body and mind and I've been very sick. I can't even sleep. Every day and every night, it's not good and it's not just me as I've spoken to other families experiencing similar problems to me" says resident, Ms Waddell.
Due to the increased concern, her smart meter is being tested for the rate of radio frequency radiation emitting from it.
Close friend to Ms Waddell, Clare Swinney says “I think people should be aware that they do not have to accept a smart meter they're not compulsory. The NZ safety standards unfortunately don't protect people from the effects of these microwave radiation omitting devices.”
Te Kāea are yet to receive a reply from power companies we contacted today about the concerns over the smart meter. Even though it’s the middle of summer customers are also feeling the bite of a sharp rise in their power bills.
Former smart meter user Nellie Rata says “I'm no longer using my electric blanket because winter has long passed and yet I've received a hefty power bill. And I don't want it cut off because I want to live with dignity and not have to worry about that.”
It's a warning to do your research before agreeing to have smart meter installed at home.
Electromagnetic Radiation And Other Weapons Of Mass Mutation December 4 2015 | From: WakingTimes
Have the elite already become mutated versions of human beings?
Physicist and former military expert on microwave radiation, Barrie Trower has stated, “There are no safe levels of radiation.” Upon watching Barry Trower’s startling video interview (seen below,) it appears evident that the elite and their techno-nerd minions may already be mutants.
Among other things, Trower’s report includes consideration of the effects of cell phone and electromagnetic radiation (EMR) on the brainwaves and development of children. Can we conclude that people who are constantly being bombarded by these pernicious EMRs no longer think as ‘normal’ human beings?
The brain of anyone who is surrounded by microwaves, RF radio frequencies, etc., confined in ‘control’ rooms, military, IT, financial, or whatever environment bombards them 24/7 with EMR electromagnetic radiation - is not going to function the same way as a brain in harmony with nature and the planet.
Imagine living in one of those ‘smart’ houses where you are submerged in an ocean of WiFi high-tech remote-control of pretty much everything, from lighting and heating to the security gate, baby monitors, CCTV cameras and audiovisual equipment.
This powerful video explains the truth regarding microwave weaponry and other exotic weapons (psychotronic, electromagnetic, Radio Frequency, HAARP, GWEN towers, ELF waves) used by The United States & other nations worldwide. Furthermore, it explains why the Police State mentality is seemingly worldwide now. Dr Barrie Trower in a sit down interview tells all to ICAACT.