Chiropractic: The Story The Medical Establishment Does Not Want You To Hear February 25 2016 | From: UndoctoredMovie
And knowing the truth could change your life.
When people hear the word – Chiropractor – it evokes a wide range of responses. And there is a surprising reason for these mixed emotions!
The American Medical Association (and other high-profile medical organizations) were found guilty in United States Federal Court of a conspiracy to contain and eliminate the chiropractic profession. While millions would attest to the 'miracles of chiropractic', a malevolent agenda sought to eliminate it.
To experienced "Undoctored" is to experience a real life Rocky story where the underdog wins. You will hear from real patients, world-class profession athletes and many experts about the best-kept healthcare secret that could change and maybe even save, your life.
"Between 2005 and 2010, the proportion of French people in favour or very in favour of vaccination dropped from 90% to 60% (2013 INPES Peretti-Watel health barometer). The percentage of French people between the ages of 18 and 75 who are anti-vaccination increased from 8.5% in 2005 to 38.2% in 2010.
In 2005, 58% of doctors questioned the usefulness of vaccines administered to children while 31% of doctors were expressing doubts about vaccine safety. These figures must surely have increased since then.”
France has punched a gaping hole in the fake consensus about vaccines. In the US and other countries, people are taught there is an overwhelming positive attitude about vaccines. Allowing this story about France to leak and bleed into major media would refute that lie in a second.
Not only is consensus built through relentless propaganda, but when the consensus doesn’t exist because the propaganda fails, that fact is blacked out.
To put it another way, major media exist to invent consensus, and when they can’t, they hide the fact.
American medical reporters for mainstream outlets are among the worst journalists in the world. Over the years, I’ve spoken to some of them. They try to radiate scientific authority, but behind that front they’re a) brainwashed morons or b) sold-out pharmaceutical shills.
The shills hype medical drugs, vaccines, and just-over-the horizon research breakthroughs with the phony conviction of late-night infomercial spokespeople.
One reason a high percentage of the French oppose vaccines is: out in the countryside, they still know what good clean food is. Based on several conversations I’ve had with people who live there, the fresh local produce makes American food, by comparison, taste like cardboard. The French understand that real nutrition is a key to preserving health.
That’s why pharmaceutical giants are rooting hard for GMOs and pesticides, and are, in some cases, producing them. The more GMOs and chemical poisons on the land, the lower the level of general health, and the easier it is to peddle vaccines and drugs as a necessary answer.
This, however, is far from the truth, as shown repeatedly by scientific studies on drug addiction. The brilliant short animated video below will explain to you why drugs don’t actually cause addiction, changing your view on drugs forever.
This video is adapted from Johann Hari's New York Times best-selling book 'Chasing The Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs.' For more information, and to take a quiz to see what you know about addiction, go to www.chasingthescream.com
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.
How Big Pharma Gets Away With Selling 'P' / Methamphetamine To Children:
By Renaming It 'Adderall' February 16 2016 | From: NaturalNews
In a recent appearance on All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC, drug abuse and addiction expert Carl Hart of Columbia University made a shocking claim:
There isn't much difference between the demonized street drug methamphetamine (also known as meth or crystal meth) and the prescription drug Adderall.
In a recent appearance on All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC, drug abuse and addiction expert Carl Hart of Columbia University made a shocking claim: There isn't much difference between the demonized street drug methamphetamine (also known as meth or crystal meth) and the prescription drug Adderall.
It's not the first time Hart has raised this idea. In a 2014 report, Hart and co-authors Joanne Csete and Don Habibi, also from Columbia, examined in depth the effects of meth on the brain, concluding that there is no discernible difference in the effects of any amphetamine, whether prescription or illicit.
FDA Says Meth Okay for ADHD, Weight Loss
First, some definitions: Amphetamines are a class of chemicals that are used both medically and recreationally. The street drug known as "meth" may refer to either methamphetamine or dextroamphetamine. "Crystal meth" is a more specific form, methamphetamine hydrochloride.
The authors of the report note that both popular and scientific literature regularly make meth out to be much stronger and more addictive than other amphetamines.
"Such statements, however, are inconsistent with the empirical evidence," they wrote. " In carefully controlled laboratory studies of human research participants, [dextroamphetamine] and methamphetamine produce nearly identical physiological and behavioral effects....
They both increase blood pressure, pulse, euphoria, and desire to take the drug in a dose-dependent manner. Essentially, they are the same drug."
That means amphetamine drugs such as Adderall - prescribed to treat narcolepsy and "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder" (ADHD) in children as young as two - are in fact no different in action from meth.
In fact, the active ingredients of Adderall are actually 75 percent dextroamphetamine salts; the other 25 percent are other amphetamines. That's why the drug is also used to enhance mental and athletic performance, and recreationally to produce a euphoric "high."
There's another FDA-approved drug that's even closer to crystal meth: the active ingredient of Desoxyn is methamphetamine hydrochloride - which is, literally, crystal meth. Desoxyn is approved for treatment of ADHD (even in the absence of any nervous system dysfunction) and as a weight-loss drug.
The Absurdities of Drug War Politics
That means that Adderall, Desoxyn and other prescription amphetamines likely carry the same risks as meth. According to Hart and colleagues, one of the main risks of long-term amphetamine use is toxicity to the brain cells that produce dopamine and other monoamine neurotransmitters.
This appears to occur because large doses of amphetamine abnormally boost dopamine levels in the brain, leading to the production of cell- and DNA-destroying free radicals.
"This, in turn, could lead to persistent deficits in the functioning of dopamine-containing cells," the researchers wrote.
They note that recreational drug users may be somewhat insulated from this effect, because they tend to start with small doses and increase their usage over time. The worst effects in animal studies were seen in drug-naive animals given a large dose repeatedly.
Other known risks of long-term amphetamine use include stroke and "paranoia mimicking full-blown psychosis."
Hart and colleagues note that the artificial division between meth and drugs such as Adderall is typical of the politics-driven "War on Drugs." In 1986, for example, Congress passed a law making the penalties for crack possession 50 times more severe than the penalties for cocaine.
But these are chemically the same drug and produce identical effects. The only major difference is that crack is typically smoked rather than snorted, leading to higher blood concentrations of the active ingredient.
"To punish crack users more harshly than powder users is analogous to punishing those who are caught smoking marijuana more harshly than those caught eating marijuana-laced brownies," the researchers wrote.
The Human Aura And DNA: How You Choose Your Genes February 15 2016 | From: EnergyFanatics
Every human being has an energy field around their body. Some people call it the aura, or the luminous energy field, or simply the human energy field.
The purpose of this article is not only to prove the existence of the human energy field, but also to explore the function of our DNA, the interaction between DNA and the unified field, and the influence of the human energy field on that relationship.
Ultimately, if the science is indeed correct, this is a first step to health, healing, and possibly human evolution.
“If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.”
- Nikola Tesla
Human Energy Field and DNA – The Origin of Health
In the Western world our doctors go through almost a decade of schooling, and in that time they become masters of human biology, anatomy, and physiology. They become adept at understanding disease, and diagnosing all forms of illness, yet in a large majority of cases, what is their prescription? Drugs or Surgery.
All illness has a spiritual/energetic origin. When you do not cleanse your human energy field your energetic field becomes distorted, stagnant, and impure. It becomes extremely imbalanced and charged with low-energy vibrations which cause disease in mind, and spirit, and eventually in our bodies. But why?
The reason why this occurs is because one of the major functions of our DNA is that it receives and transmits energy. This has been shown to be one of the major functions of ‘junk DNA’ (which make up about 95% of the human genome) which is what it was called before they understood what it was all about, but now it is beginning to be shown as an essential component of our biology and DNA.
One of the new discoveries in DNA as Bruce Lipton talks about is epigenetic control, which means literally “above-genetic” control. Thus the new understanding of DNA is that the genes which our DNA codes is dictated as a response to the environment. In essence we are in a perpetual process of adaptation, which means that we have the potential for continuous evolution in our environment, moreover, spontaneous evolution.
More specifically, what is it that our DNA responds to in order to determine the nature of our environment?
Our DNA does not have eyes, or ears, so it cannot see or hear what is going on. Instead it determines the environment by ‘reading’ the energy. It receives energetic signals from the environment and interacts directly with the information and codes encoded within the unified field, reads them, and then our DNA codes and/or activates the appropriate genes suitable for the environment we are in.
What do you think happens to DNA when the human energy field is all polluted by negative energies? To answer this question, we have to look to water.
Consciousness and Water
Dr. Masaru Emoto from Japan for the last number of years has been doing some truly revolutionary work with water. What he is doing is researching the effects of human thought, emotion, andintention (directed attention) on the structure of water. (The source for this section is The Hidden Messages in Water by Dr. Masaru Emoto, and it is a truly enlightening book.)
His tests involve him sending specific thoughts to water (or getting others to do so), and then he flash freezes that water so that he can take a look at the crystal formed, and examine the relationship between the energy / thought / emotion sent to the water, and the crystals that are formed as a result.
Amazingly he found that when positive thoughts, energies, and words were directed to the water, they formed beautiful, highly coherent crystals.
Whereas when negative, angry, or hateful thoughts and emotions were directed towards the water, or in some cases with words directly, he found that there was no more coherent structure, and that the crystals froze with no sacred geometrical pattern. In other words, there was no coherence.
This work proves two things: (1) That our thoughts and emotions influence reality directly; and (2) That the type of energy matters.
What is going on with these water crystals is that when an individual thinks a certain thought, speaks a certain word, or feels in a certain way, their energy is oscillating the human energy field which restructures the geometric patterns within space according to that energy.
Then the frequency of our energy radiates throughout space (or it is transmitted non-locally – I truly have no idea) and it restructures the field in accordance with our energy, and this restructures the field – the space – around the water molecules because atoms are 99.9999% empty space.
Then when the water is flash frozen, it freezes along the geometric pattern created in the space around its molecules by human thought, emotion, and intention.
As we have seen from the images, the highest emotions of love, kindness, joy, and gratitude create highly coherent geometrical patterns in the field which creates crystals that are truly perfect, beautiful, and harmonic which resonate those emotions within us as we observe them.
Negative energies on the other hand seem to distort the natural structure of the field, vibrating the field in a discordant fashion, which create crystals that radiate a sense of ugliness, imperfection, dis-coherence, and in essence, disease. If it is possible for water crystals to look sick, ill, and literally diseased, it is these ones.
So if our bodies are 75% water, and if our genes are bio-oscillating crystalline structures which read and interpret energy, and if we are 99.999% space, then how do you think the energies within the human energy field are impacting our DNA, and most relevant of all, our health?
As I said before, the latest, and possibly the cutting edge of genetic sciences is working with epi-genetic control, meaning that our DNA and the genes which are coded are determined by the energy of our environment. Well, what determines our environment?
It is not what is out there which has the greatest impact, it is our perception of what is out there. In other words, what we believe, think, and feel to be true about our environment determines how we perceive our environment.
So if we think the world is negative, it becomes negative to us. But the opposite is also true. If we live in a state of love, happiness, and inner peace, then we perceive our environment to be the same and thus what we attract is much different.
The human energy field directly informs our DNA and is directly responsible for the genes coded, our health, any illness or disease which may appear in our body, and even our intelligence, memory, and ability to heal is directly affected. All aspects of our lives are determined by the quality of our consciousness.
The Phantom DNA Effect
"Another important piece of evidence that helps us to understand really what is going on when our DNA interacts with the unified field and with consciousness is known as the Phantom DNA Effect. It was discovered by Dr. Peter Gariaev who put DNA in a tiny quartz container and zapped it with a mild laser.
He then observed the DNA with equipment so sensitive it could detect a single photon. He found the DNA acted like a sponge, and absorbed the photons storing them in a cork-screw shaped spiral.
After he finished his experiments he removed the quartz vial with the DNA in it and left. Yet to his utter amazement when he returned to his lab he discovered that the machines were still detecting the photons of light spiraling in the same cork-screw spiral as if the DNA was still present, even though he had removed it from the machine! The spiral was visibly for a further 30 days."
I believe that we can safely make these deductions based off of the evidence at hand:
1. The structure of the vacuum, the unified field, actually stores information, energy, and light, which in reality are all the same thing.
2. This strongly suggests that the DNA molecule and structure is resonant with the structure of space-time. In other words its structure is somehow coherent as to cause the field to interact with it in this way once it is charged with energy, in this case a mild laser. Could it be the field responding with the codes necessary for the DNA molecule to adapt to its new environment?
3. This process infers that to some degree the DNA molecule is like a biological computer chip, an interface between our biology and the unified field. It means that an interesting function of DNA is to store light (which is information), and that this structure leaves a particularly strong energetic imprint onto the fabric of space-time. Maybe even that the process of the DNA storing energy activated an energetic construct already present in the unified field.
4. The evidence also suggests that there is communication going on between our DNA which stores energy/information/light, but it also seems that our DNA is not just informing the field and leaving an energetic imprint on the human energy field, but that the field is informing our DNA right back.
As a continually growing body of information related to energetically driven evolution is suggesting, all the codes, imprints, and information may very well be stored directly in the energetic field which creation emanates from; in essence, within light itself.
And when we are young or when our energetic fields are pure and unpolluted, our energy resonates most clearly with the universe in this state causing an unobstructed communication between our consciousness and universal consciousness, and between our DNA and the field.
When this communication is undistributed, we become the epitome of mental, spiritual, and physical health.
If our emotions were negative or incoherent, that would be disrupting the communication between the field and our DNA, and it is this above all which evidence is suggesting is the source of all disease.
The field of intention, conscious awareness, energy, the universal mind, whatever you choose to call the infinite energy density of the vacuum, the fact remains that the energy of space all around us, is infinite.
In other words, it is love, for that is the highest energy that we have a name for.
As Masaru Emoto’s work shows, the more positive, loving, and compassionate the person’s energy, the higher the degree of coherence in the water crystals.
Imagine what these positive energies do to our bodies which are 75% water, and imagine the effect of that highly coherent energy on our DNA. When we align with this energy, with our source, and thus with our higher self, we are embodying this energy which clears all the negativity and energetic disturbance within us manifesting health in mind, body, and spirit.
"Everything is energy and that’s all there is to it. Match the frequency of the reality that you want and you cannot help but get that reality. It can be no other way. This is not philosophy, this is physics.”
Cancer Industry Now Admits That Chemo And Radiation Treatments Generate Huge Repeat Business & Repeat Profits February 14 2016 | From: RealFarmacy
Second cancers are on the rise in the United States, according to a new study, which found that one in five new cases involve someone who has had the disease before.
The study also found that second cancers, which don’t include reoccurring cancers, but are a completely new type of cancer, have increased 300 percent since the 1970s.
First-time cancers have also spiked, increasing 70 percent in the same time frame.
The Western world of medicine is going with their usual explanation, or rather lack thereof, claiming that they are unaware of the reason for the surge but pointing to the fact that people are living longer and are therefore more at risk for the disease. But living into your 80s and 90s shouldn’t guarantee that you’ll get cancer.
While genetics are a factor, other influences such as your environment, the food you eat, the water you drink, the air you breathe, the vaccines you inject and even the kind of medical treatment you receive may contribute much more than your age when it comes to determining your risk for cancer.
Emerging research continues to show that pesticides, heavy metals and hormone mimickers such as BPA and BPS, as well as other environmental contaminants, greatly influence the risk of developing cancer.
A document [PDF] by the American Cancer Society titled “Second Cancers in Adults” admits that second cancers may be caused by cancer treatment.
“Radiation therapy was recognized as a potential cause of cancer many years ago,” according to the ACS, which also admits that most types of leukemia, including acute myelogenous leukemia (AML), chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), can all be caused by radiation.
Most cancers caused by radiation therapy develop within just a few years of being irradiated, with the disease peaking at five to nine years following exposure.
Similarly, chemotherapy drugs have also been linked to different kinds of second cancers, with the most common being myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and AML; ALL has also been linked to these cancer drugs.
Cancer Drugs Cause at Least 40,000 Cases of New Cancer each Year in the U.S.
Aside from radiation and chemotherapy, other causes include toxins present in tobacco smoke, and high levels of industrial-type chemicals such as benzene, a carcinogenic petrochemical that is widely used in plastics, synthetic fibers, rubber lubricants, resins, dyes, detergents, drugs and pesticides.
This means that at least 40,000 cancer occurrences may be directly attributed to cancer drugs.
Determining how many people perish from cancer drugs is extremely difficult, as most of the deaths are recorded as being from cancer, and not the treatment.
Remember, the cancer industry is one of the world’s most lucrative businesses, generating $100 billion last year. Those profits are expected to increase at about 8 percent each year over the next three years as more and more Americans will be diagnosed and treated for cancer.
A “Quantum Leap” To A Worldwide Paradigm Shift In Healing And Health Is Happening February 13 2016 | From: QuantumLeap / JimHumble
After ONLY one week the “Quantum Leap” film has had over 32,000 views. Our goal is to have 100,000 people in February learn how they can “take control” of their own health!
Please get this above link to as many people as possible! We don’t want this to go viral, we want it to go “antiviral” just like MMS!
With personal experience of the amazing power of MMS this is something that I can thoroughly recommend to anyone for an enormous range of diseases and ailments. The reason why the MMS Protocols are so powerful is because while it is not a cure in and of itself, it provides the immune system with what it needs to be able to fight off virtually any disease caused by pathogens, bacteria and viruses.
In a world where our bodies are constantly under attack from toxic chemicals and additives in our water and food, the benefits of MMS effecetively super-charging your immune system are quite simply incredible.
Registration: VH-OJU Type code: B744 Type: Boeing 747-438 S/N: 25566 Airline: Qantas
Australia is actively trying to approve a new way of vaccinating It’s people: by air! The Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) is looking at a licence application from PaxVax Australia (PaxVax) for the intentional release of a GMO vaccine consisting of live bacteria into the Australian environment
According to the regulator, it qualifies as a limited and controlled release under section 50A of the Gene Technology Act 2000 (the Act).
PaxVax is looking to get approval to conduct the clinical trial of a genetically modified live bacterial vaccine against cholera. Once underway the trial is expected to be completed within one year, with sites selected from local government areas (LGAs) in Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia.
PaxVax has proposed a number of control measures they say will restrict the spread and persistence of the GM vaccine and its introduced genetic material, however there is always a possiblity of these restrictions failing and infecting wildlife and ecosystems. How can we know what’s really going on here, what’s being sprayed on us & how it will affect the natural environment?
The Australian government along with their big Pharma buddies are looking to vaccinate every person living in Australia, no exceptions. There are large pockets throughout the country where people simply will not vaccinate & the numbers are growing so this represents a great way to silently vaccinate these communities right down to an individual level, no needles & no fuss but most importantly, no choice.
Aerial vaccines have been used in the United States directed towards animals by the use of plastic packets dropped by planes or helicopters. Sanofi (who is one of the largest vaccine manufacturers in the world) has subsidiary companies such as Merial Limited who manufacture Raboral, an oral live-virus poisonous to humans yet distributed wildlife in the masses.
Forcibly Release Intentional and Controlled Release of Aerosolized GMO Vaccine
File this under “we’re f*cked” – According to a few different sources, Australia is actively trying to approve a new way of vaccinating you: by air! An article in Prevent Disease: The Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) is on its way to approve a licence application from PaxVax Australia (PaxVax) for the intentional release of a GMO vaccine consisting of live bacteria into the environment in Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Victoria.
Likely one of the preferred delivery agents
According to the regulator, it qualifies as a limited and controlled release under section 50A of the Gene Technology Act 2000 (the Act).
PaxVax is seeking approval to conduct the clinical trial of a genetically modified live bacterial vaccine against cholera. Once underway the trial is expected to be completed within one year, with trial sites selected from local government areas (LGAs) in Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia.
PaxVax has proposed a number of control measures they say will restrict the spread and persistence of the GM vaccine and its introduced genetic material, however there is always a possiblity of these restrictions failing and infecting wildlife and ecosystems.
Aerial vaccines have used in the United States directed towards animals by the use of plastic packets dropped by planes or helicopters. Sanofi (who is one of the largest vaccine manufacturers in the world) has subsidiary companies such as Merial Limited who manufacture Raboral, an oral live-virus poisonous to humans yet distributed wildlife in the masses.
West Nile Virus Spraying
In 2006 Michael Greenwood wrote an article for the Yale School of Public Health entitled, “Aerial Spraying Effectively Reduces Incidence of West Nile Virus (WNV) in Humans.” The article stated that the incidence of human West Nile virus cases can be significantly reduced through large scale aerial spraying that targets adult mosquitoes, according to research by the Yale School of Public Health and the California Department of Public Health.
Under the mandate for aerial spraying for specific vectors that pose a threat to human health, aerial vaccines known as DNA Vaccine Enhancements and Recombinant Vaccine against WNV may be tested or used to “protect” the people from vector infection exposures. DNA vaccine enhancements specifically use Epstein-Barr viral capside’s with multi human complement class II activators to neutralize antibodies.
The recombinant vaccines against WNV use Rabbit Beta-globulin or the poly (A) signal of the SV40 virus. In early studies of DNA vaccines it was found that the negative result studies would go into the category of future developmental research projects in gene therapy.
During the studies of poly (A) signaling of the SV40 for WNV vaccines, it was observed that WNV will lie dormant in individuals who were exposed to chicken pox, thus upon exposure to WNV aerial vaccines the potential for the release of chicken pox virus would cause a greater risk to having adult onset Shingles.
California Aerial Spraying for WNV and SV40
In February 2009 to present date, aerial spraying for the WNV occurred in major cities within the State of California. During spraying of Anaheim, CA a Caucasian female (age 50) was exposed to heavy spraying, while doing her daily exercise of walking several miles. Heavy helicopter activity occurred for several days in this area. After spraying, she experienced light headedness, nausea, muscle aches and increased low back pain.
She was evaluated for toxicological mechanisms that were associated with pesticide exposure due to aerial spraying utilizing advanced biological monitoring testing. The test results which included protein band testing utilizing Protein Coupled Response (PCR) methods were positive for KD-45. KD-45 is the protein band for SV-40 Simian Green Monkey virus.
Additional tests were performed for Epstein-Barr virus capside and Cytomeglia virus which are used in bioengineering for gene delivery systems through viral protein envelope and adenoviral protein envelope technology. The individual was positive for both; indicating a highly probable exposure to a DNA vaccination delivery system through nasal inhalation.
In the Quarterly FunVax Review in June, 2007, the report lists the objective of a project listed as ID: 149AZ2 as a preparation of a viral vector that will inhibit/decrease the expression of a specific disruption gene (VMAT2) within a human population.
It further indicates in the abstract that six method of virus dispersal were tested including high altitude release, water supply release, insect transmission, and various methods of diffusion.
Conspiracy: This Is Why Brazil Is Ground Zero For The Latest Bio-Engineered Pandemic February 11 2016 | From: TheMilleniumReport
Every Major Disease Outbreak Has Been Manufactured in the Biological Weapons Laboratories of the Western Powers.
The U.S. and U.K. possess the most advanced scientific knowledge and applied technology for producing bio-weaponry, which they routinely utilize to create bio-weapons of mass destruction.
Decades ago the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) of the United States of America (in collaboration with their British counterparts) committed itself to the deliberate path of exerting full-spectrum dominance over the entire planetary realm.
The essentially Anglo-American Military-Industrial Complex undertook various and sundry endeavors simultaneously in order to fulfill this ‘critical’ mission to attain and maintain world domination.
Not only did the MIC achieve nuclear superiority within the world community of nations, the U.S. Armed Services also created a global network of military bases unrivaled in world history.
One of the key pillars of attaining full spectrum dominance is the capacity to execute bio-weaponry programs surreptitiously, quickly and efficiently… anywhere on Planet Earth.
Toward that end the many bio-weapons laboratories which now dot the landscape of the USA have worked assiduously to fabricate the perfect biological weapons for the ‘right’ applications and ‘perfect’ situations.
It’s important to understand that the USA and UK form the very backbone of a supranational entity known as the Anglo-American Axis. This large group of countries, which is dedicated to maintaining the Anglo-American Empire - by every means possible - has been locked in a century-long war against the BRICS nations.
As a matter of fact, the First and Second World Wars were both waged in an effort to establish the USA as the military arm of the New World Order.
NATO is merely an extension of the Anglo-American military juggernaut.
Although it has not been declared, a full-blown World War III has been and is being waged under the radar between the AAA and the BRICS.
The entire Middle East is obviously just one major military theater of this ongoing global conflict. So are Africa and South America. Only on those two continents the preferred weapons of mass destruction are of a biological nature.
History of Genocide via Bio-Weapons
You see, the white man learned long ago that the people of the African continent are deathly afraid of contagious diseases and infectious epidemics. The populations of many of the South American countries suffer from the very same phobia.
They don’t understand illness and disease the way that the educated and industrialized nations of the Northern Hemisphere do. There is much superstition which still surrounds any kind of disease outbreak, especially throughout the rural areas. The resulting taboos run very deep throughout society.
With this hidden knowledge it is now quite easy to understand why so many disease outbreaks first occur in either Africa or South America. Whether it is Ebola in West Africa or the West Nile Virus in East Africa, HIV/AIDS in West Central Africa or Malaria anywhere in Africa, Chagas disease in South America or Dengue fever throughout the whole Southern Hemisphere, so many ‘pandemics’ find their origins “south of the border”.
No one denies that the southern climes and predominant biota cultivate an extremely conducive environment for mosquito-borne diseases and the like. This scientific fact is quite well established.
The point here is that because these ‘scary’ diseases are well known among the local populations, they can be furtively spread by those who wish to do them harm by their silent enemies to the north.
The deliberate vector of disseminations are many to include stealth vaccinations, GMO mosquitoes, tainted prescriptions, contaminated water supplies, infected farm animals, toxic produce, corrupted restaurant food, chemtrail aerosols, etc.
This is a subtle but very important point. These diseases are known to be common in these regions of the world; therefore, no one suspects that they have been meticulously weaponized to make them much more deadly.
They have also been precisely bio-engineered to target specific gene pools and bloodlines.
In this fashion the Indigenous Peoples can be gradually killed off so that they no longer pose an obstacle to giving up their lands to the covetous Anglo-American corporate interests.
This very same tactic was of course used against the Native American Indians by the U.S. Federal Government that was determined to wipe out the tribes across America in order to steal their lands. That strategy really worked like a charm for them. And they have never forgotten it.
After all, how could the Indian warriors, who contracted smallpox from the blankets provided to them by the ‘friendly’ white brothers, ever fight on the harsh battlefields?
As for the Indigenous Peoples of Brazil, how are they expected to respond to a terrible disease that shrinks the human head and arrests brain development. Yes, that is what the Zika virus does, unless the public is being misled about the true source of this medical crisis.
Fast Forward to the 2016 Olympics in Brazil
Whenever bio-weapons of mass destruction are used with such great effect there are always several goals on the agenda of the perpetrators. The Zika virus outbreak is no exception.
Because of where the exact ground zero of this explosive epidemic is located in Brazil, it is certain that this public health disaster was quite purposefully manufactured there to disrupt the 2016 Summer Olympics.
Brazil has already been under continuous assault by the AAA, as it represents the South American cornerstone of the BRICS economic union. The Brazilian economy is also the largest in South and Central America, therefore, it provides a much-needed financial engine to keep the BRICS momentum going throughout the world.
The AAA knew that if they took down Brazil economically, as they have been doing relentlessly on the political front, the BRICS union would be weakened considerably. The new world reserve currency would then likely stay with the still dominant petrodollar during this crucial period where it is also under serious assault.
Both Russia and China have already undermined the petrodollar in profound and irreparable ways. So have Iran and India and other quieter BRICS-aligned nations
The important point about Brazil is that a substantial amount of public money and resources have been allocated to this formidable and demanding enterprise known as the Summer Olympics. The private sector, as always, has also dedicated much investment to making the Olympics a commercial success.
With the Zika virus and ensuing epidemic raging in the back yard of Rio de Janeiro, what else could be expected but the second prong of the AAA strategy to sabotage the 2016 Summer Olympiad.
What better way to further destroy the fragile Brazilian economy and sap the spirit of the nation?!
The Anglo-American corporatocracy has enjoyed the status of global hegemon since the advent of the Industrial Revolution. Because of the rapacious nature of the predatory capitalism that it systematically employs, it only knows how to take from those who have what they want. This is the way it has always been since the incorporation of the East India Company in London in 1600.
The Huge difference between now and when India was pillaged, China was plundered and Africa was raped is that the BRICS are now well aware of the true enemy and its unrelenting tactics.
Russia and China, India and Brazil, Iran and South Africa are under constant attack by the AAA. However, they now have a very secret weapon that is being trained on the City of London and Washington, D.C.
More accurately, the BRICS have a number of secret weapons which will be employed with great consequence and awesome effect on the primary nations of the AAA. Part II of this series will further discuss those secret weapons. In the meantime, the reader is encouraged to contemplate the overwhelming repercussions of just one of those weapons known as: Free Enegy
It has been rightly pointed out by many that the looming Zika virus ‘pandemic’ may be to a great extent based on fraudulent data and false information. Inasmuch as it is being reported by those agencies like WHO which are completely controlled by the AAA, why should the MSM ever be believed?
Because of all the fake false flags and fictitious disease outbreaks occurring over many decades such as the recent Ebola scare, it’s clear that these trumpeted pandemics have a huge component of purposefully deceptive reporting.
However, it is virtually impossible to ferret out the truth about a manufactured and bogus pandemic. To what degree is there a real mosquito-borne Zika virus causing the profiled symptoms is extremely difficult to say. Especially given the typical demographics of these types of mosquito-borne public health disasters, it’s even more challenging to arrive at the truth. After all, they ALL occur in virtually the same geographic areas.
With that said, we leave it up to the reader to decide how much of this fastidiously ZIKA health scare is real disease and how much is phony baloney.
We almost forgot to mention what the original source of the Zika virus was, as well as who originally deposited it in 1947 - the Rockefeller Foundation.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
The Anglo-American Axis is represented, first and foremost, by the major English-speaking countries of the world: USA, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel. The European member nations of NATO, such as Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands are also closely aligned with the AAA as are all the Scandinavian countries. So are the Asian Pacific Rim nations of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines.
Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, and Qatar also owe their allegiance to the AAA but some of these may be changing. The World Shadow Government is an ultra-secret, supranational organization which completely controls the Anglo-American Axis, as well as the European Union, NATO, among many other institutional entities which constitute the Global Control Matrix.
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.
5 Cancer Myths Busted February 10 2016 | From: WakingTimes
Cancer statistics are on the rise, and the growing numbers have moved the disease to a priority issue for the global community.
As The Lancetreports, cancer deaths have increased 46% between 1990 and 2013. On Jan 1, 2016, new international development priorities called Sustainable Development Goals, will focus on decreasing premature deaths from non-communicable diseases by 2025.
1.The rise in all types of cancer is due to modern diet, lifestyle, and environment. Records of lifespan prior to the 18th century are scarce, but in all records of studied prehistoric skeletons, only 200 cases of possible cancer have been found. However, from 1900-2011, cancer deaths have increased 3 fold. One researcher found that in 80% of processed food, 4 main ingredients are found which harm immunity: corn, wheat, soy, and meat.
2.Superfoods and herbs can prevent cancer. This is true in many cases.
In fact, there are 17 herbs and spices which in their own right are considered super-foods, and have been scientifically proven to prevent and treat cancer.
3. Acidic diets cause cancer. Blood pH should be within a range of 7.3 to 7.41. If the pH is lower than that range, acidosis occurs, which leads to central nervous system depression. Severe acidosis (below 7.0) can cause coma and death. If the pH rises above 7.45, the result is alkalosis. Keeping the body closer to an alkaline state (up to .05) can make a significant difference in cancer growth or suppression. Cancer cells can’t live in an alkaline environment.
4. Sugar feeds cancer. A four-year study at the National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection in the Netherlands compared 111 biliary tract cancer patients with 480 controls.
Cancer risk associated with the intake of sugars, independent of other energy sources, more than doubled for the cancer patients. Another epidemiological study covering 21 modern countries (Europe, North America, Japan and others) found that sugar intake is a strong risk factor for higher breast cancer rates, especially in older women.
5.Conventional cancer treatment kills more than it cures. Five year relative survival rates for cancer are standard because after 5 years, many patients’ conditions worsen. More accurate long-term statistics would reflect ten years or more, as well as data on cost-effectiveness, immune system impact, quality of life, morbidity, and mortality. When these factors are considered, chemotherapy makes little to no contribution to cancer survival.
The stats don’t lie. A problem is rising and we are releasing this information as a means of prevention and how we in our own way can make life changing choices as a means of lessening the risk of becoming a statistic.
Things that are well known to help are: an organic diet, lessening the time spend in WI-FI environments, avoidance of refined and hidden sugars, and if possible lessening stress.
For males, regular sexual intercourse is a proven benefactor for lessening prostate cancer and lowering anxiety; Fiery Male can help in this area.
A strong immunity is important. T-cells should be kept at optimum levels, which can be helped with our Thymus gland, and DMF Melatonin, which has been used in cancer studies.
Gut health is also important, as all disease begins in the gut. Our Full Spectrum Digestive Enzyme and Laktokhan can benefit gut health tremendously. For endocrine support, try our Adrenal gland and Thyroid Support Homeopathic.
As you see, we have a lot we can do in order avoid sickness and disease, and the best defense is awareness and prevention.
McDonald’s Franchisees Say That The Business Is In Its “Final Days” February 9 2016 | From: Ewao
It’s no secret that McDonald’s menu is not the healthiest food out there.
It seems that after Morgan Spurlock’s independent film called Super Size Me was released back in 2004, which documented his mental and physical health after eating only Mcdonald’s food after a 30-day period, McDonald’s started to see a decline in the amount of people interested in eating at their establishment.
In more recent months, McDonalds have been losing favor from their customer base, as more of us are becoming aware of what types of food we allow into our bodies. There has been an abundance of hype now about GMO food in general and more people are quickly losing interest in consuming food that contains GMO’s.
When interviewed about the condition and potential future of McDonald’s, one of their employees made mention that the company is in a “deep depression” and could be seeing its “final days.” Yet another employee stated that:
“We are in the throes of a deep depression, and nothing is changing,” and when on to say that “probably 30% of operators are insolvent.”
We have come such a long way in seeking out healthier food alternatives. As more of us are becoming aware of how unhealthy our food options are, we have insisted that we have healthier food, and in doing so businesses like McDonald’s are seeing a large decline in revenue. Why is that you might ask?
It’s because they have chosen to stick with unhealthy food options while the rest of us strive for healthier options.
When asked why they thought the company was in the state that it was currently in, another employee had this to say on the matter;
“The CEO is sowing the seeds of our demise. We are a quick-serve fast-food restaurant, not a fast casual like Five Guys or Chipotle. The system may be facing its final days.”
A couple of McDonald’s executives also chose to come to the table about the condition of their company and share with us their concerns and views of their company, and said:
“The lack of consistent leadership from Oak Brook is frightening, we continue to jump from one failed initiative to another.”
Another executive also made a comment about McDonald’s;
“I have been in this business since the early 1970s but have not seen us this leaderless in all my time. The system is very lost at the moment. Our menu boards are still bloated, and we are still trying to be too many things to too many people. Things are broken from the franchisee perspective.”
It’s not too hard to see that McDonald’s is in a decline with no signs of getting better. I remember at one point, no matter where I went, McDonald’s establishments were always packed. From long lines at the drive-thru to packed eating areas on the insides. Also, the play areas always had birthday parties going on. Yet now, as I go through town Mcdonald’s is lucky to have the few sparse customers that they have, even when they are positioned in high traffic areas, there is hardly anyone there, even during busy hours.
To start off the year 2015, McDonald’s would have to start by closing a whopping 700 of its locations, due to all of us simply requesting that instead of super fancy building and sleekly designed menu boards, we just want healthier food. Due to the leadership of McDonald’s and its failed attempts to keep us consumers coming back, not only their local sales were seeing a decline but their global ones as well.
In the beginning months of 2015, McDonald’s had already seen a 28% drop in their overall operating revenue, and additionally they saw a 2.3% decrease in their sales. For years, McDonald’s has been experiencing a trending loss of their overall revenue, and the way future looks for McDonald’s, they may never recover.
At this rate McDonald’s will be added to the list of entities that chose to continue to poison everyone with cheaply made or synthesized food, and are now nonexistent, because instead of pushing to stay with the consciousness of its consumers, as they seek for better food quality, chose the latter path and would rather become extinct instead of grow to something amazing.
Effects And Implications For Consumers Of The Natural Health & Supplementary Products Bill February 6 2016 | From: Uncensored
A brief summary and extended discussion of the consequences of the pending Natural Health & Supplementary Products Bill (formerly the Natural Health Products Bill) currently in Parliament.
This is a very complex Bill with many unacceptable aspects. Due to the need for brevity and clarity we have restricted our comments mainly to aspects that will affect consumers.
The third reading of the Natural Health and Supplementary Products Bill is imminent. This Bill will ban most Natural Health Product (NHP) ingredients without just cause.
NHPs in NZ are presently regulated under a ‘Black-list’ (a short list of banned substances that have shown evidence of harm). We currently have the right to consume any Natural Health ingredients not on the ‘Black-list’, which gives us access to an unquantifiably high number of ingredients with no history of harm.
Under the new Bill this present ‘Black-list’ approach will be replaced by a new ‘White-list’ approach, with a very limited ‘White-list’ of ‘permitted ingredients’. Any ingredient that is not on this permitted ‘White-list will not be allowed to be sold in NZ
Many Natural Health Products will disappear if they contain even one ingredient that is not on their ‘Permitted White-list’. Many suppliers will also disappear as a result.
Any NHP ingredient that is recognised as having therapeutic (health improving) effect can be re-classified as a medicine by the MoH. Once it is classed as a medicine, it will be black-listed for use in Natural Health products. (This is already happening)
There is no accountability for harm or death as a result of consumers losing healthcare products that they depend on. There are no provisions in the Bill to make allowances for this if it does happen.
The passing of the Natural Health and Supplementary Products Bill will result in many Natural Health Products becoming either severely restricted (via new proposed low dosage limits), or being made outright illegal in NZ.
All of the following contain one or more ingredients that do not appear on the list provided by the Ministry of Health, meaning consumers will no longer be able to purchase these products.
These are just a few examples that have been sent to us by consumers:
Natural Health Practitioners will be unable to properly practice as they will no longer be able to prescribe to their patients’ needs.
The Ministry has stated in the consultation document that products made by a practitioner for an individual patient will be exempt from the Bill – including Rongoā Māori and Traditional Chinese Medicine – but that these same products will not be allowed to be sold over the counter.
However New Zealand Health Trust’s interpretation of the Supplementary Order Paper (the most up-to-date version of the Bill) differs from this entirely in that Māori health practitioners and others using traditional herbal and other remedies to administer to an individual will be unable to use non-permitted ingredients.
We feel this is a classic example of how unreliable and misleading the Ministry’s information is in relation to this Bill. To make matters even more uncertain the Bill is crafted to allow most of the detail to be added AFTER the Bill has been passed!
Products presently classified as ‘Practitioner Only Range’ will not be exempt from the ingredient restrictions.
The proposed financing model of the new system presents significant risk to the majority of NZ small business supplement manufacturers, an outcome likely to result in only a small handful of large manufacturers remaining viable. This will result in a significant loss of variety of product in the natural supplements market in NZ.
The new regulatory system will be funded by industry on a Full Cost Recovery Basis by annual registration charges on all products. Note that there have never been any registration charges before.
These charges will rise as the range of products decreases due to the ‘White-list’ restrictions. Short run products will become economically unviable and thus will be discontinued, forcing smaller operators to close.
Every time a manufacturer reduces its product range or closes its doors, the remaining products and remaining manufacturers will have to shoulder more of the financial burden of funding the agency. The biggest players will benefit from this approach, as they can afford the fees – and this approach will increase their market share. This is one reason why large manufacturers support this bill.
Presently in Australia under the TGA it costs manufacturers $40,000 – $150,000 just to apply for one ingredient to be accepted on their White-list, with no guarantee of success.
There is little incentive to make an application because, if successful, a manufacturers’ competitors are able to benefit at no cost to them. And as only one or two ingredients per year have ever been passed by the TGA, manufacturers are discouraged from even trying. There is no reason to believe that this will not also apply here in NZ should the Bill be passed.
The Pharma based ‘single ingredient approach’, which is the framework of the Bill, is inappropriate and misleading for two reasons:
1. It does not reflect the fact that when NHP ingredients are consumed together, higher doses can be safely tolerated above the consumption of a single ingredient.
2. If any one ingredient in a product exceeds a specified dose, then the entire product will be outlawed in NZ. Most supplements have multiple ingredients, affecting a huge number of supplements that New Zealanders are already relying on for their health and well-being.
The Bill will allow Medsafe (the business unit of the Ministry of Health) to increase its control over NHPs by the following means:
It will reverse the basic historic principle confirming our rights to consume any natural health ingredient that is absent from a short defined ‘Black-list’ of substances where there is robust evidence of harm.
The number of ingredients we can currently access is too high to quantify, yet no deaths have been attributed to these ingredients or products (see “No Deaths from Supplements. No Deaths from Minerals. No Deaths from Amino Acids. No Deaths from Herbs” http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v12n02.shtml)
Our present system will be replaced by a ‘White-list’ of permitted ingredients and only ingredients on this list will be sold in NZ. Furthermore, many permitted ingredients have severe dosage and application restrictions placed upon them. There is no scientific reasoning or justification for such limitations, and no history of risk to human health.
The proposed ‘White-list’ currently contains 5,545 ingredients. This may sound like a lot, but to indicate what this means in terms of what we stand to lose, we only need to add up a small handful of the numerous categories of currently permitted ingredients to appreciate the magnitude of loss. There are so far over 8,000 identified Polyphenols, over 3,000 Enzymes and over 12,000 Medicinal Plants. These few examples alone make it easy to see that only a small fraction of our current range of natural ingredients will remain, should this legislation be enacted.
Permitted Ingredients ‘White-list’ File
It is vitally important for you to check if any ingredients that you presently use in your supplements are not on the permitted list.
You can search the file by entering the ingredient name, or searching alphabetically in the Excel Spreadsheet. If the ingredient is not on the list at all, then it will not be permitted in over-the-counter products. Also check the maximum permitted daily dose, and whether it will be permitted for internal or external application only.
What the Columns Mean
In the ‘Outcome’ column
- ‘Y’ means ‘Permitted’ (but make sure you check the maximum permitted amount, and the application, e.g. Glutathione (an important antioxidant) is permitted, but only for applying to the skin),
- ‘N’ means ‘Unaccepted’,
- ‘U’ means ‘Under Review’.
If the ‘Reason’ column states ‘rejected by IJEACCM on safety grounds’ – IJEACCM stands for ‘The Interim Joint Expert Advisory Committee on Complementary Medicines’, a NZ/Australian initiative.
What is the Background to this Bill?
There has been a de facto pharmaceutical monopoly on medicines for almost 100 years.
When we become ill we need medicines. But pharmaceutical medicines are dangerous and can cause substantial harm.
The monopoly has endured and grown stronger due to laws that have been passed. There have been many discoveries made over those 100 years that offered safer, cheaper and more effective treatments than the pharmaceutical options, but the regulators have always stepped in to prosecute, confiscate product and even imprison the people who made or used the discovery.
Very occasionally the regulators’ attempts to destroy a new discovery are not completely successful, and a natural alternative flourishes for a few years. But the Big Pharma lobbyists respond and it doesn’t take long for new laws to be drafted that strengthen the monopoly and the status quo remains.
We can’t prevent Big Pharma and their lobbyists from trying to maintain and strengthen their position. They are very much aware of the impact that an appropriately regulated Natural Health Product industry would have on their market share. They have a duty to their shareholders to prevent natural medicines from entering the market.
But our elected MPs need to wake up and stop passing such laws. The Natural Health and Supplementary Products Bill is Pharma-based and hostile to the interests of the consumer and the Natural Health industry.
Consumers stand to be the biggest losers if this Bill is passed. There are many importers, manufacturers and re-sellers who do not oppose the bill for fear of retribution, as a lot of the fine print will be decided after it has been passed. They hope to be able to stay in business with reduced ranges and less effective products.
Consumers on the other hand, stand to lose access to life saving Natural Health Products.
NHPs can save lives in several ways, from helping people to stay well so the need for pharmaceutical intervention doesn’t arise (the death toll from adverse reactions to properly prescribed pharmaceutical medicines is over 100,000 a year in the USA alone) to products that are capable of returning seriously ill people back to good health.
Natural Health Products
Ministry of Health
PO Box 5013
Sign and Share the Petition Started by Professor Julia Rucklidge
This is on www.Change.org. Simply add your first name, last name, email, city (and reason if you like) to the text box on the right of the page, then click Sign. https://www.change.org/p/naturalhealthproducts-moh-govt-nz-keep-access-to-nutrients-in-nz-that-have-a-proven-safety-record-and-therapeutic-benefit
We Are Eating Ourselves Insane: Causes Of Mental Insanity Identified In Factory Foods February 5 2016 | From: NaturalNews
I've spent the last two years running a heavy metals analysis science lab (labs.naturalnews.com) and writing a detailed, heavily researched book on forensic food analysis.
To my horror, I've come to the conclusion from all this that humanity is driving itself insane with relentless chemical contamination and heavy metals pollution that's driving human minds to clinical madness.
The real reason society is so incredibly insane at every level is rooted in the consumption of toxic heavy metals through food, water and other environmental sources. It's exacerbated by the poisonous heavy metals being fed to factory farmed chickens (and other animals) whose poop is harvested and spread on soils that are used to grow foods for humans.
Once humans eat the contaminated food that's laced with lead, cadmium, mercury and arsenic, their own feces is "recycled" and turned into "bio solids" that are placed back onto commercial farm lands as "fertilizer."
This cycle of metals accumulation results in a steady rise in the concentration of toxic substances in our environment and foods. As people consume these foods (and other toxic substances such as mercury in dental fillings and fluoride in municipal water supplies), they are driven to the brink of madness.
It is these people who are now the voters, the politicians, the media personalities and the decision makers. The modern world of western civilization has literally gone insane, much like the Roman Empire which fed its own people water that was, unbeknownst to them, poisoned with lead.
The lead in the water of Flint, Michigan only worsens the problem... and it's not just Flint, either. I've found that nearly every state government in America routinely covers up the toxicity of public water, and the EPA is also heavily engaged in suppressing the scientific truth about lead in municipal water supplies.
As a result, people are drinking toxic lead at alarming concentrations, and they're eating arsenic, inhaling mercury and consuming significant concentrations of cadmium from other food sources that I'll be detailing this year in my new, expanded lab facility.
Who’s Behind The Zika Virus Outbreak & Fearmongering? February 1 2016 | From:Geopolitics / Various
They’ve been through A with AIDS, C with cancer, D with diabetes, E with Ebola, H1N1, superbugs, etc. Now, they are down to Z with Zika virus.
Here’s the fear mongering channeled through Reuters;
"There is no treatment for Zika infection.
Efforts to combat Zika are focused on protecting people from being bitten and on eradicating mosquitoes, a tough task in many parts of Latin America, where people live in poverty and there are plentiful breeding grounds for the insect.
“We do not have a vaccine for Zika yet. The only thing we can do is fight the mosquito,” Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff said on Friday, reiterating her call for a national eradication effort.
Rousseff said tests for the development of a vaccine would begin next week at the Butantan Institute, one of Brazil’s leading biomedical research centers in Sao Paulo.
U.S. President Barack Obama spoke on Friday with Rousseff about the spread of the virus, the White House said.
“The leaders agreed on the importance of collaborative efforts to deepen our knowledge, advance research and accelerate work to develop better vaccines and other technologies to control the virus,” the White House said in a statement.
Zika has hit Brazil just as it prepares to host the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro on Aug. 5-21, an event that draws hundreds of thousands of athletes, team officials and spectators. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) assured teams on Friday the Olympics would be safe from Zika, but urged visitors to carefully protect themselves.
U.S. lawmakers have begun to press the Obama administration for details of its response to Zika. At least 31 people in the country have been infected, all of them after travel to affected countries.”
We should not just be looking at the issue from the standpoint of healthcare only but also from its geopolitical implications. Because, as always, the enemies of humanity do have the skills, capability and appetite for inflicting pain and suffering into many aspects of our existence.
With bioweapon Zika virus, they can:
Shake up one of the pillars of the BRICS Collective, i.e. Brazil’s economy, to hasten its fall from grace [here, here, and here];
Continue thinning the herd through mass sterilizations via birth control virus-tainted vaccines in pursuant to their upgraded United Nations’ Sustainable Agenda 2030, and;
Continue profiting from sales of more vaccines.
The development and spread of the Zika virus in Brazil is never an act of nature.
Zika Outbreak Epicenter in Same Area Where GM Mosquitoes Were Released in 2015
The World Health Organization announced it will convene an Emergency Committee under International Health Regulations on Monday, February 1, concerning the Zika virus ‘explosive’ spread throughout the Americas. The virus reportedly has the potential to reach pandemic proportions - possibly around the globe. But understanding why this outbreak happened is vital to curbing it. As the WHO statement said:
A causal relationship between Zika virus infection and birth malformations and neurological syndromes … is strongly suspected. [These links] have rapidly changed the risk profile of Zika, from a mild threat to one of alarming proportions.
WHO is deeply concerned about this rapidly evolving situation for 4 main reasons: the possible association of infection with birth malformations and neurological syndromes; the potential for further international spread given the wide geographical distribution of the mosquito vector; the lack of population immunity in newly affected areas; and the absence of vaccines, specific treatments, and rapid diagnostic tests […]
The level of concern is high, as is the level of uncertainty.
Zika seemingly exploded out of nowhere. Though it was first discovered in 1947, cases only sporadically occurred throughout Africa and southern Asia. In 2007, the first case was reported in the Pacific. In 2013, a smattering of small outbreaks and individual cases were officially documented in Africa and the western Pacific. They also began showing up in the Americas. In May 2015, Brazil reported its first case of Zika virus - and the situation changed dramatically.
Brazil is now considered the epicenter of the Zika outbreak, which coincides with at least 4,000 reports of babies born with microcephaly just since October.
When examining a rapidly expanding potential pandemic, it’s necessary to leave no stone unturned so possible solutions, as well as future prevention, will be as effective as possible. In that vein, there was another significant development in 2015.
Oxitec first unveiled its large-scale, genetically-modified mosquito farm in Brazil in July 2012, with the goal of reducing “the incidence of dengue fever,” as The Disease Dailyreported. Dengue fever is spread by the same Aedes mosquitoes which spread the Zika virus - and though they “cannot fly more than 400 meters,” WHO stated, “it may inadvertently be transported by humans from one place to another.”
By July 2015, shortly after the GM mosquitoes were first released into the wild in Juazeiro, Brazil, Oxitec proudly announced they had “successfully controlled the Aedes aegypti mosquito that spreads dengue fever, chikungunya and zika virus, by reducing the target population by more than 90%.”
Though that might sound like an astounding success - and, arguably, it was - there is an alarming possibility to consider.
Nature, as one Redditor keenly pointed out, finds a way - and the effort to control dengue, zika, and other viruses, appears to have backfired dramatically.
Juazeiro, Brazil was the location where genetically-modified mosquitoes were first released into the wild.
The particular strain of Oxitec GM mosquitoes, OX513A, are genetically altered so the vast majority of their offspring will die before they mature - though Dr. Ricarda Steinbrecher published concerns in a report in September 2010 that a known survival rate of 3-4 percent warranted further study before the release of the GM insects. Her concerns, which were echoed by several other scientists both at the time and since, appear to have been ignored - though they should not have been.
Those genetically-modified mosquitoes work to control wild, potentially disease-carrying populations in a very specific manner. Only the male modified Aedes mosquitoes are supposed to be released into the wild - as they will mate with their unaltered female counterparts. Once offspring are produced, the modified, scientific facet is supposed to ‘kick in’ and kill that larvae before it reaches breeding age - if tetracycline is not present during its development. But there is a problem.
According to an unclassified document from the Trade and Agriculture Directorate Committee for Agriculture dated February 2015, Brazil is the third largest in “global antimicrobial consumption in food animal production” - meaning, Brazil is third in the world for its use of tetracycline in its food animals.
As a study by the American Society of Agronomy, et. al., explained;
“It is estimated that approximately 75% of antibiotics are not absorbed by animals and are excreted in waste.”
One of the antibiotics (or antimicrobials) specifically named in that report for its environmental persistence is tetracycline.
In fact, as a confidential internal Oxitec document divulged in 2012, that survival rate could be as high as 15% - even with low levels of tetracycline present. “Even small amounts of tetracycline can repress” the engineered lethality. Indeed, that 15% survival rate was described by Oxitec:
After a lot of testing and comparing experimental design, it was found that [researchers] had used a cat food to feed the [OX513A] larvae and this cat food contained chicken. It is known that tetracycline is routinely used to prevent infections in chickens, especially in the cheap, mass produced, chicken used for animal food.
Is that you Liz?
The chicken is heat-treated before being used, but this does not remove all the tetracycline. This meant that a small amount of tetracycline was being added from the food to the larvae and repressing the [designed] lethal system.
Even absent this tetracycline, as Steinbrecher explained, a “sub-population” of genetically-modified Aedes mosquitoes could theoretically develop and thrive, in theory;
"Capable of surviving and flourishing despite any further” releases of ‘pure’ GM mosquitoes which still have that gene intact. She added, “the effectiveness of the system also depends on the [genetically-designed] late onset of the lethality. If the time of onset is altered due to environmental conditions… then a 3-4% [survival rate] represents a much bigger problem…”
As the WHO stated in its press release, “Conditions associated with this year’s El Nino weather pattern are expected to increase mosquito populations greatly in many areas.”
Incidentally, President Obama called for a massive research effort to develop a vaccine for the Zika virus, as one does not currently exist. Brazil has now called in 200,000 soldiers to somehow help combat the virus’ spread. Aedes mosquitoes have reportedly been spotted in the U.K. But perhaps the most ironic - or not - proposition was proffered on January 19, by the MIT Technology Review:
An outbreak in the Western Hemisphere could give countries including the United States new reasons to try wiping out mosquitoes with genetic engineering. Yesterday, the Brazilian city of Piracicaba said it would expand the use of genetically modified mosquitoes…
The GM mosquitoes were created by Oxitec, a British company recently purchased by Intrexon, a synthetic biology company based in Maryland. The company said it has released bugs in parts of Brazil and the Cayman Islands to battle dengue fever.
Here’s more to the Zika story…
Zika Freakout: The Hoax and the Covert Op Continue
If you want to hide anything on this planet, twist it into a (fake) story about a virus. You’re home free.
This is my second article on the Zika-virus scam (article archive here). I’ve been to these rodeos before: HIV, West Nile, Swine Flu, SARS, Ebola. In each case, a virus is blamed for illness and death that actually arises from other causes.
The Zika virus, now being blamed for the birth of babies with very small heads and impaired brains, has been around for a long time - late 1940s, early 1950s - and suddenly, without warning or reason, after inducing, at best, mild illness, it’s producing horrendous damage? This is called a clue. A clue that scientific liars are lying. Furthermore, many of the women who are giving birth to deformed babies test negative for the presence of the Zika Virus.
So, what is causing babies to be born with very small heads and brain damage? While researching my first book in 1987-8, AIDS INC., I concluded: don’t assume there is only one cause for illness. That can be very misleading. Various factors can combine to produce disease and death.
For example, in the case of this “Zika” phenomenon:
One: Pesticide use in Brazil:
Brazil, the center of the “Zika” crisis, uses more pesticides than any nation in the world. Some of these are banned in 22 other countries. And as for babies born with smaller heads, here is a study from Environmental Health Perspectives (July 1, 2011), “Urinary Biomarkers of Prenatal Atrazine Exposure…”:
"The presence versus absence of quantifiable levels of [the pesticide] atrazine or a specific atrazine metabolite was associated with fetal growth restriction… and small head circumference… Head circumference was also inversely associated with the presence of the herbicide metolachlor.” (emphasis added)
"Drug companies did not test the safety and effectiveness of giving influenza or Tdap vaccine to pregnant women before the vaccines were licensed in the U.S and there is almost no data on inflammatory or other biological responses to these vaccines that could affect pregnancy and birth outcomes…
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lists influenza and Tdap vaccines as either Pregnancy Category B or C biologicals which means that adequate testing has not been done in humans to demonstrate safety for pregnant women and it is not known whether the vaccines can cause fetal harm or affect reproduction capacity.
The manufacturers of influenza and Tdap vaccines state that human toxicity and fertility studies are inadequate and warn that the influenza and Tdap vaccines should ‘be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.’” (emphasis added)
Three: Genetically engineered mosquitoes that have already been released in Brazil to “combat” dengue fever - a project implemented by Oxitec, a company supplied with grant money from Bill Gates:
A town in Brazil has reported continuing elevated levels of dengue fever since the GE (genetically engineered) mosquitoes have been introduced to combat that disease.
The scientific hypothesis is: the trickster GE bugs (males) will impregnate natural females, but no actual next generation will occur beyond the larval stage. However, this plummeting birth rate in mosquitoes is the only “proof” that the grand experiment is safe. No long-term health studies have been done - this is a mirror of what happened when GMO crops were introduced:
No science, just bland assurances.
Needless to say, without extensive lab testing, there is no way to tell what toxic elements these GE mosquitoes may actually be harboring, in addition to what researchers claim. That’s a major red flag.
Wherever these GE mosquitoes have been introduced, or are about to be introduced, the human populations have not been consulted for their permission. It’s all being done by government and corporate edict. It’s human experimentation on a grand scale.
"Brazilian prosecutors said on Monday they would seek at least 50 million reais ($16.6 million) from multinational pesticide manufacturers for alleged safety violations at a collection facility for used pesticide containers…
Those manufacturers, prosecutors said, include the Brazilian units of BASF, DuPont, Monsanto, Nufarm, Syngenta, Adama, FMC and Nortox…
The charges come as scientists, regulators, public health officials and consumers increasingly complain that Brazil’s ascent as an agricultural powerhouse has led to unsafe and excessive use of pesticides. Reuters reported in April that at least four foreign manufacturers sell pesticides in Brazil that they are not allowed to sell in their home markets.” (emphasis added)
How convenient for these corporate giants to evade blame for horrific birth effects—out of nowhere a virus is touted as the cause.
Five: Severe and endemic malnutrition, lack of basic sanitation, and grinding poverty:
These are major factors in all illness and death, in the areas where they are prevalent (e.g., major parts of Brazil). Suppression of the immune system is the result, and anything that then comes down the pipeline, germs or manmade toxic substances, become catastrophic to the body.
Sprays are now being given out to 400,000 pregnant women in Brazil. Naturally, the sprays are toxic. What better way to multiply the attack on mothers and their unborn children? For example, widely used organophosphates in sprays can be highly disruptive to the nervous system.
And don’t forget the Rio Olympic Games, coming up in August. There are multiple scenarios which could play out in front of a global television audience. Will Zika be pushed as some sort of worldwide pandemic? Will a Zika vaccine be magically “discovered” and rushed into production, in time to show (as an advertisement) lines of people dutifully trudging up to receive shots?
Every fake epidemic is, in part, designed to create fear and induce blind compliance to medical and government dictates. The germ is positioned as the “tiny terrorist” in this stage play.
In my first book, AIDS INC. (1988), I indicated that covert medical ops are the most dangerous, because they appear to be politically neutral, they fly under no flag, and they claim to forward only humanitarian aims. But in fact, modern “Rockefeller Medicine” is built as a vast partner in the Globalization of the planet.
Its vision is a universal in-utero-to-cradle-to-grave system for the human race: every human walks a bleak lifelong path of disease-diagnosis after diagnosis, receiving toxic drugs and vaccines at every turn, which weaken his body and mind, and make him unable to consider what is happening outside his perimeter of suffering or resist political totalitarianism.
Medical freedom means: the freedom to refuse medical care, and it’s based on knowledge of destructive effects. This freedom must win, against any odds.
“Official science” is a contradiction in terms, and a grand illusion. (To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)
Like all other outbreaks before, we are calling this one just another fear mongering to divert our attention from more pressing global issues and for what they are about to do.
We already have the effective means to defeat any known and unknown viral infections.
We can mitigate the effects of any chemicals and neutralized all types of parasites without using highly toxic drugs and expensive procedures, but only with a very simple and complete protocol that defeats all known and unknown diseases for good, without any long-term side-effects. Find more about it here.
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.
A Porirua family took in a baby so neglected he showed no emotion. Now he's full of life. They also took in a baby born at 25 weeks and turned her into a happy, healthy wee girl who's off to school soon.
And because they've taken on the children permanently - giving both them and the children the security of knowing they have a family for life - they lose all Child Youth and Family Service (CYFS) support and allowances and receive just $19 a day per child from Work and Income.
They can't change the children's surnames, they can't take them out of the country without permission and, if their birth parents want contact, they have to make it happen.
"So why would anyone sane do that?" carer Jude Pointon says.
"The only people who would do that are people who have had a background like mine [Jude was fostered and adopted as a child], who have gained through having a background in fostering or adoption."
Jude and her husband have first-hand experience of that culture.
Before they became permanency carers, they fostered children and Jude tells of having siblings aged one and three in their care for two months, who then had to go back to their parents for a few days because CYF didn't have its court documents in order.
"I said 'what do I tell them? They need to know what's happening,' and they said 'tell them they're going for a ride in the car'.
"So I had an absolute hissy fit ... and said 'that's not okay, the system is making me into a long line of adults who have failed these children and we're creating this country's future criminals and they have been let down over and over and over again'."
Jude told the social worker they would have the kids back when the situation was sorted, but, she says, because she had spoken her mind the children were sent to another home.
So it was a three-year-old's fourth foster home and it was a one-year-old's second foster home.
And that happens over and over again," she says.
Jude's sister - a social worker and CYF emergency care foster parent - recently had two children arrive in the middle of the night. They were with her for a few days but then weren't returned after school one day.
"She was told 'they've gone to another placement' and she said 'well that's really not okay because they were told they were coming here, they've had an unsettling time and suddenly they're not coming here, they're going somewhere else they don't know, again and all their precious belongings that they've managed to take from their home are here'."
Those belongings might just be a teddy bear or a book but to a child with nothing they are everything.
We have a serious
national problem here in New Zealand with child abuse and satanic paedophile organisations. It is hideous to comprehend, but the reality has to be faced - and those responsible, and even those that have been commiting these crimes for over 50 years - should know that they will be held to account for their heinous actions.
Social workers shocked. Jude's sister arranged a meeting with about 20 Porirua social workers and she, Jude and another foster parent told them what was wrong with the system.
"Some of them were actually shocked to hear from a carer's perspective how it feels to the carer and the children," she says.
"It makes me annoyed because the foster carers and the permanency carers are the experts. Sure, the children who have been who've been through the system are the experts but often they're too young to put across coherently their point of view.
We know what's wrong with the system. We're happy to tell you. We're happy to tell the policymakers. I'm happy to talk to the minister. Listen to us."
And that, simply, is Jude's message to the powers that be who want to fix the care system.
"Listen to the foster carers and ... the permanency carers, because we are here every day dealing with it every day, and we know what can be done to try and fix the situation and make it work for these vulnerable children.
It really infuriates me when I hear on all media people talking about CYFs looking after these children. CYFs don't have some big warehouse somewhere with all these children slotted in it, it's actually families who are looking after these children who are often damaged, going out of their way to try and help these children have as normal a life as they can given the neglect they've had to start with.
It's like we're these invisible people."
The "Minister" Must Step Up
Former ward of the state Tracey said the State care system was broken beyond repair.
Tracey was removed from her family in the late 1970s when she was 11 because of abuse and said she lost track of how many foster homes she lived in.
She told Checkpoint nothing has changed.
"They've lost track of over 1000 children - they don't know where they are, what's happened to them.
"How can you lose 1000 kids? The Minister of Social Welfare is their guardian, is their parent, so that person has better step up and look after these kids."
Tracey said society would have to live with the consequences if children in care were not properly looked after.
Another former ward of the State, Tupua Urlich, said more support was needed for people when they left care.
Mr Urlich said although he felt like a prisoner when he was in care, he had no support when he left and developed alcohol and drug problems. He also tried to take his own life.
People needed a home environment to fall back on well into their 20s.
"The average age of leaving home in New Zealand is 23. You have the luxury of being at home, parents helping you out," he said.
"I know some people will hear this and think 'I didn't do that for my children' - sure but at least they knew they had the option of going home, getting their washing done, getting given a meal or support, real important things."
Mr Urlich now works with child support group the Dingwall Trust.
Immunity: The Emerging Truth January 26 2016 | From: KellyBroganMD
In Humble Awe of Human Complexity;
Eastern wisdom tells us that when we think we know, we don’t. But when we admit ignorance, we achieve enlightenment.
The most profound part of my departure from conventional medicine has been the depths of my surrender to all that we do not, cannot, and must not understand about the body and its experience. Humble awe and wonder are truly the only appropriate states for approaching the complexity of the human condition.
I have sought to validate my intuition around the hubris of our efforts to outsmart nature, through the available scientific literature. We are suffering from our dualistic perspectives: human vs germs, body vs. disease, I vs me.
Disconnected Medicine: A Departure from Intuition
Vicki Noble, in Shakti Woman, a manifesto on our past 4,000 years of patriarchal society, which has served to suppress our deep power of feminine intuition and connection to the natural world, states:
“Western medicine tends to separate the parts of the human body into isolated units, as if they did not belong to something whole. Some malfunction of the heart or the elbow is treated as if it were a discrete segment, unaffected by the rest, with which something has gone wrong that needs to be fixed.
The doctor is the professional expert who is called in to do the fixing, and he learns how to do this not through his own experience of his own body but by reading books and cutting up corpses. Then to further complicate things, Western psychology separated the mind from the body and treats them as if they also had almost no relation to each other, holding that their ideal relationship is mind over matter.
Western thinking in general, supported by Western religion, describes human beings as separate and distinct from Nature and the rest of the animals on earth, with permission to dominate.”
Vaccinations: An Ego Driven Effort
So, if we can acknowledge that domination is an ego-driven exercise in generating a sense of safety and security that will only result in further peril and instability, we must examine some of the most egregious examples of this effort. We must look at the only pharmaceutical product that is recommended (to the point of mandate) to every human on earth, with near comically narrow exceptions.
We must look at the beliefs – the fantasies – underpinning the creation of the vaccine, the simple play on the vulnerable human psyche, and those who stand to accrue power and wealth at the expense of the pawns in the game.
The belief, at its core, is that germs are bad, they kill us if they get near, in, or on us, and we have the know-how to not only defeat them, but to annihilate them forever.
We are acculturated to this belief through corporations and enmeshed government agencies. They tell us that we cannot trust ourselves, the wisdom of our bodies, or our collective experience, to tell us how to be safe and well. The companies that stand to profit from this distrust, are the very ones who have convinced you that you are in danger. The fox is feasting in the hen house.
Rediscovery of the Microbiome
Our dawning awareness of the microbiome has changed everything. It has been a discovery process that is almost like a poetic remembering of our past wisdom. Given our knowledge that microbes comprise more of what we perceive to be us, than human cells do, the only reasonable course of action is abandon all current efforts toward the prevention of infectious disease that were based on a war against germs.
We must acknowledge that we misapprehended germs as other, when they are in fact necessary. We must see that we have plainly missed the mark, and that our best intentions to protect men, women, and children, have made them sicker, and all the more vulnerable to chronic illness.
Game Changers in the Prevention of Infectious Disease
Here are some of the (should-be) game changers that bring the modern application of infectious disease prevention and treatment to a screeching halt:
Virome: Thought to dwarf the bacterial contribution to our microbiome by a factor of 10, only an estimated 1% of the virome has been sequenced. These viruses play immunomodulatory roles and interact with microbes in complex regulatory ways. (Cadwell, 2015)
Bacteriophages: Redefining the locus of immunity in the gut, these viruses adhere to mucus and selectively kill (lyse) bacteria such as E coli. When they don’t kill bacteria, they may confer valuable “information,” not only for humans, but for the greater kingdom of living organisms: For example, aphids are protected against the injection of a parasitic wasp larva by bacteria that produce a toxin that kills the implanted larvae. The toxin is supplied by a bacteriophage that infects the bacterial endosymbiont. (Roossinck, 2011)
Brain lymphatics and immune function: It wasn’t more than 10 years ago that we assumed the brain to be an immunity-free zone.
Since our growing awareness of brain-based immunity, and even discovery of basic anatomical features such as a lymphatic system, we can now understand how and why systemic inflammatory responses such as those generated by vaccines, stimulate cascades of microglia-stimulated inflammation and cytotoxic damage. (Brogan, 2015)
Mucosal immunity: In an exploration of the individual variation in infection susceptibility, researchers from Aarhus University published in Nature Immunology, the discovery of a mucosal mechanism instrumental in our coexistence with potentially opportunistic bacteria and viruses. The mucosal surface, as the first line of defense for the body, is where all of the most sophisticated mechanisms of host protection have evolved to exist. Of course, bypassing these mechanisms through the intramuscular injection of inflammatory vaccine material serves an antiquated model of antibody-driven immunity, not to mention the havoc it wreaks on an immune system which never evolved to respond to this route of entry.
Innate Immune Response to Viruses
Exploring herpes virus, researchers identified an arm of the immune system that acts in advance of the innate immune system, and independent of the adaptive immune response. They state:
“The pathway is activated independently of known innate sensors of viral infections through a mechanism dependent on viral O-linked glycans, which induce CXCR3 chemokines and stimulate antiviral activity in a manner dependent on neutrophils.”
Wow. Back to the drawing board it is. We just don’t have the information yet, to engage in the microbe war we believe is vital to our very survival on this sick planet.
Cultivating the Microbiome Through Natural Pregnancy
Amazingly, great thinkers from decades ago anticipated the fallout of our misguided approach to human health. Alan Watts wrote five decades ago, about antibiotics:
“Furthermore, every act of interference with the course of nature changes it in unpredictable ways. A human organism which has absorbed antibiotics is not quite the same kind of organism that it was before, because the behavior of its micro-organisms has been significantly altered.
The more one interferes, the more one must analyze an ever-growing volume of detailed information about the results of interference on a world whose infinite details are inextricably interwoven. Already this information, even in the most highly specialized sciences, is so vast that no individual has the time to read it – let alone absorb it."
Reset and Remember
It’s high time we pause for a recalibration. It’s time to understand that our fearful frenzy fueling our defensive health strategies is creating the realities we were most afraid of. The only way out of fear is to stop fighting it. Relax into it and release it. Then you can see clearly how to proceed from a place of inner knowing and trust in the wisdom of a body supported by millions of years of co-evolution with its environment.
Corporate Philanthropism: Who Exactly Benefits Most From The “Global Giving” By Billionaires? January 23 2016 | From: GlobalResearch
As the world’s political and economic elite gather to discuss their top concerns at the annual Davos summit in the Swiss Alps and with attention this week focused on the scourge of economic inequality, a new report begs questions about the potentially disastrous role the super-wealthy are playing when it comes to addressing key problems of global inequity, endemic poverty, and international development.
Released on Wednesday, the study by the UK-based social justice group Global Justice Now takes a specific look at the impact of the world’s largest philanthropic charity, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), to assess how large-scale private giving may be “skewing” how international aid works.
In its conclusion, the report argues that what may look like altruism on a grand scale may actually mask a sinister reality about how the billionaires of the world insulate their personal fortunes while using their out-sized influence to project their private ideologies and further financial interests. The result, the report suggests, is that many of the people and communities who such charities purport to be helping, may actually be worse off in the long run.
With more than $43 billion in assets, the Gates Foundation is often lauded as a global force for social good that uses its vast financial resources to launch initiatives and support existing projects in order to, according to its mission, “help all people lead healthy, productive lives.”
The new report, however - entitled Gated Development: Is the Gates Foundation Always a Force for Good? - argues that regardless of good intentions or motivations, the foundation’s “concentration of power is undemocratically and unaccountably skewing the direction of international development” which in turn is “exacerbating global inequality and entrenching corporate power internationally.”
As Mark Jones, lead researcher and author of the report, explains in the introduction:
"Analysis of the BMGF’s programmes shows that the foundation, whose senior staff is overwhelmingly drawn from corporate America, is promoting multinational corporate interests at the expense of social and economic justice. Its strategy is deepening – and is intended to deepen – the role of multinational companies in global health and agriculture especially, even though these corporations are responsible for much of the poverty and injustice that already plagues the global south.
Indeed, much of the money the BMGF has to spend derives from investments in some of the world’s biggest and most controversial companies; thus the BMGF’s ongoing work significantly depends on the ongoing profitability of corporate America, something which is not easy to square with genuinely realising social and economic justice in the global south."
Polly Jones, head of campaigns and policy at Global Justice Now, highlights why the foundation’s unique role as a private organization is so troubling when it comes to putting a check on its enormous influence on the world stage.
“The Gates Foundation has rapidly become the most influential actor in the world of global health and agricultural policies, but there’s no oversight or accountability in how that influence is managed,” argues Polly Jones.
"This concentration of power and influence is even more problematic when you consider that the philanthropic vision of the Gates Foundation seems to be largely based on the values of corporate America.
The foundation is relentlessly promoting big business-based initiatives such as industrial agriculture, private health care and education. But these are all potentially exacerbating the problems of poverty and lack of access to basic resources that the foundation is supposed to be alleviating.”
Based on a careful review of the charity’s behavior, the report offers these specific criticisms of the Gates Foundation:
The relationship between the money that the foundation has to give away and Microsoft’s tax practices. A 2012 report from the US Senate found that Microsoft’s use of offshore subsidiaries enabled it to avoid taxes of $4.5 billion – a sum greater than the BMGF’s annual grant making ($3.6 billion in 2014).
The close relationship that BMGF has with many corporations whose role and policies contribute to ongoing poverty. Not only is BMGF profiting from numerous investments in a series of controversial companies which contribute to economic and social injustice, it is also actively supporting a series of those companies, including Monsanto, Dupont and Bayer through a variety of pro-corporate initiatives around the world.
The foundation’s promotion of industrial agriculture across Africa, pushing for the adoption of GM, patented seed systems and chemical fertilisers, all of which undermine existing sustainable, small-scale farming that is providing the vast majority of food security across the continent.
The foundation’s promotion of projects around the world pushing private healthcare and education. Numerous agencies have raised concerns that such projects exacerbate inequality and undermine the universal provision of such basic human necessities.
BMGF’s funding of a series of vaccine programmes that have reportedly lead to illnesses or even deaths with little official or media scrutiny.
In Polly Jones’ forward to the report, she explains why the ideological underpinnings of the foundation—often overlooked or ignored in mainstream assessments - are essential to understanding the downside of BMFG’s powerful influence:
"[This report] demonstrates that the trend to involve business in addressing poverty and inequality is central to the priorities and funding of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
We argue that this is far from a neutral charitable strategy but instead an ideological commitment to promote neoliberal economic policies and corporate globalisation. Big business is directly benefitting, in particular in the fields of agriculture and health, as a result of the foundation’s activities, despite evidence to show that business solutions are not the most effective.
For the foundation in particular, there is an overt focus on technological solutions to poverty. While technology should have a role in addressing poverty and inequality, long term solutions require social and economic justice. This cannot be given by donors in the form of a climate resilient crop or cheaper smartphone, but must be about systemic social, economic and political change – issues not represented in the foundation’s funding priorities."
Earlier this week, Oxfam International released a report showing that economic inequality across the globe has soared to such heights that now a mere 16 individual billionaires, including Bill Gates, own more wealth than the 3.6 billion people who represent the poorest half of the world’s population. In total, the report confirmed, the richest 1% of people now own more than the bottom 99% combined.
These shocking levels of unequal distribution of wealth are the cause, say experts, of increasingly intractable poverty levels in places like sub-Saharan Africa and across the Global South.
“The richest,” said Oxfam’s executive director Winnie Byanyima, “can no longer pretend their wealth benefits everyone – their extreme wealth in fact shows an ailing global economy. The recent explosion in the wealth of the super-rich has come at the expense of the majority and particularly the poorest people.”
Last week, as Common Dreamsreported, international watchdog group The Global Policy Forum put out its own critical report critical regarding the impacts of large philanthropic foundations and charities. Employing the term “philanthrocapitalism” to described the phenonomen, the report argues that the “influence of large foundations in shaping the global development agenda, including health, food, nutrition, and agriculture” raises “a number of concerns in terms of how it is affecting governments and the UN development system.”
And the intersection between outrageous levels of inequality on the one hand and the rise of powerful private foundations on the other shows how interlocked these phenomenons have become. As Gary Olson, professor of political science at Moravian College in Pennsylvania, wrote recently at Common Dreams, “The one thing that Big Philanthropy must overlook is the green elephant astride the boardroom’s conference table, the economic system that causes and extends [economic and social] injustices in perpetuity.”
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.
How The Oil Industry Conquered Medicine, Finance And Agriculture January 22 2016 | From: Mercola
"How Big Oil Conquered the World" is a brilliant piece of investigative journalism presented by James Corbett, revealing the immense extent to which the oil industry has shaped and is ruling the world as we know it.
"From farm to pharmaceutical, diesel truck to dinner plate, pipeline to plastic product, it is impossible to think of an area of our modern-day lives that is not affected by the petrochemical industry."
"The story of oil is the story of the modern world. And this is the story of those who helped shape that world, and how the oil-igarchy they created is on the verge of monopolizing life itself."
Corbett carefully details the sordid back story of today's "oiligarchy." While most people are well-acquainted with the Rockefeller name, few probably know the true history of the Rockefellers' rise to power.
Big Oil - An Industry Founded on Treachery and Deceit
As noted by Corbett, certain details of the Big Oil story are well known. Others are more obscure. The story begins in rural New York state in the early 19th century, with William Avery Rockefeller, an authentic "snake oil salesman" going by the fictional name of "Dr. Bill Livingston.
While neither a doctor nor a cancer specialist, Rockefeller, aka "Dr. Livingston," aka "Devil Bill," traveled the country's back roads conning people into buying his "Rock Oil" tonic for cancer - "a useless mixture of laxative and petroleum that had no effect whatsoever," according to Corbett
William Avery Rockefeller fathered numerous children with three women, and took the name Livingston after being indicted for rape in 1849. One of those children was John D. Rockefeller, who became the world's first billionaire after founding Standard Oil.
As noted by Corbett:
“When he wasn't running away from them or disappearing for years at a time, [William Avery Rockefeller] would teach his children the tricks of his treacherous trade. He once bragged of his parenting technique: 'I cheat my boys every chance I get. I want to make 'em sharp' ..
The world we live in today is the world created in 'Devil' Bill's image. It's a world founded on treachery, deceit, and the naïveté of a public that has never wised up to the parlor tricks that the Rockefellers and their ilk have been using to shape the world for the past century and a half."
The Birth of the Oil Industry
Another character with a similarly dubious background is "Colonel" Edwin Drake, an unemployed railroad conductor who managed to secure himself a job with the Pennsylvania Rock Oil Company after running into the founders, George Bissell and James Townsend, at a hotel.
The title "Colonel" was bestowed on him by Bissell and Townsend, who thought it might help him "win the respect of the locals" as he went about the company's business, collecting Seneca oil, which the company distilled into kerosene (lamp oil).
His mission was to collect enough Seneca oil to make the business profitable - a task that turned out to be more difficult than expected, as mere gallons could be collected using the standard collection methods.
Eventually, he tried drilling through the shale bedrock to reach greater reservoirs of oil, and on August 28, 1859 - literally the day he'd used up the last of his funds - the oil began to flow from the ground. And with that, a new industry was born.
It didn't take long before homes and factories around the world were using lamp oil refined from crude, and prospectors from around the country flocked to Pennsylvania in search of the "black gold.
Among them was John D. Rockefeller, a Cleveland bookkeeper who, according to Corbett, had two ambitions in life: "To make $100,000 and to live to 100 years old." With a $1,000 loan from his father, "Devil Bill," John D. Rockefeller set off to make his fortune.
The Standard Oil Monopoly
After a series of partnerships and mergers over a seven-year period, John D. Rockefeller eventually incorporated Standard Oil of Ohio in 1870. According to the report.
“The next year, he quietly put what he called 'our plan' - his campaign to dominate the volatile oil industry - into devastating effect. Rockefeller knew that the refiner with the lowest transportation cost could bring rivals to their knees.
He entered into a secret alliance with the railroads, called the South Improvement Company. In exchange for large, regular shipments, Rockefeller and his allies secured transport rates far lower than those of their bewildered competitors.
Ida Tarbell, the daughter of an oil man, later remembered how men like her father struggled to make sense of events: 'An uneasy rumor began running up and down the Oil Regions,' she wrote.
'Freight rates were going up. … Moreover … all members of the South Improvement Company - a company unheard of until now - were exempt. … On every lip there was but one word and that was 'conspiracy.'
By the time he was 40, John D. Rockefeller controlled 90 percent of the global oil refineries. Within another few years (early 1880s), he also controlled 90 percent of the marketing of oil, and one-third of all oil wells. His power and influence cannot be overstated at this point.
He had an international monopoly on what was to become the most important commodity in the world economy.
Following in Rockefeller's footsteps were a handful of other wealthy families, including the Nobels, the Rothschilds, the Dutch Royal family, and millionaire William Knox D'arcy, who was the first to strike oil in Persia.
These early "oil barons" became enormously wealthy. And as billions of people became increasingly dependent on oil for virtually every aspect of life, they gained tremendous power and influence.
However, oil could have been replaced by other resources, were it not for the shrewd manipulation by these early "oiligarchs."
The Death of the Electric Car, and Other Lucky Breaks
.The advent of the electric light bulb took a good chunk out of the lamp oil market and temporarily threatened the oil monopoly. But lamp oil was quickly replaced by the need for gasoline to run the two-stroke internal combustion engine, invented by German engineer Karl Benz.
In 1888, Benz Motorwagen became the first commercially available automobile, and with that, the petroleum industry's profits were again secured. But even then their ongoing monopoly was not guaranteed. The first electric car had been built in 1884, and by 1897, electric cars were gaining popularity in London. In the early 20th century, 28 percent of cars sold in the U.S. were also electric. As noted by Corbett:
“The electrics had advantages over the internal combustion engine: they required no gear shifting or hand cranking, and had none of the vibration, smell or noise associated with gasoline-powered cars. Lady Luck intervened again on January 10, 1901, when prospectors struck oil at Spindletop in East Texas.
The gusher blew 100,000 barrels a day and set off the next great oil boom, providing cheap, plentiful oil to the American market and driving down gas prices. It wasn't long before the expensive, low range electric engines were abandoned altogether and big, loud, gas-guzzling engines came to dominate the road ..."
Interestingly, the event that made John D. Rockefeller into the world's first billionaire was supposed to rein in his unbridled power. He'd come under intense scrutiny as his wealth increased and, on May 15, 1911, the U.S. Supreme Court declared Standard Oil a monopoly "in restraint of trade" and ordered its dissolution.
But by dissolving the company into multiple entities, shares of Standard Oil tripled in value, and in a few short years, Rockefeller's worth equaled nearly 2 percent of the total U.S. economy.
“For the oiligarchy, the lesson of the rise and rise of Rockefeller was obvious: the more ruthlessly that monopoly was pursued, the tighter that control was grasped, the greater the lust for power and money, the greater the reward would be in the end. From now on, no invention would derail the oil majors from their quest for total control. No competition would be tolerated. No threat to the oiligarchs would be allowed to rise."
The Continued Squashing of Competition
While the electric car had been successfully eliminated, thereby securing Big Oil profits, another competing resource was on the horizon: alcohol.
Henry Ford designed his Model T automobile to run on either gasoline or alcohol, stating that just about anything that could be fermented could be used for fuel, predicting the future of fuel was wide open to a number of alternatives. However, the oil industry succeeded in eliminating the competition yet again, this time by supporting the anti-alcohol movements and the formation of the Prohibition Party in 1869.
While Rockefeller avoided alcohol, his chief concern was not to uphold morality in the U.S. The prohibition served his agenda by creating burdensome restrictions on ethanol producers, and as ethanol became more costly, its attraction as an alternate fuel ceased.
Also, as detailed in my previous article about Clair Patterson's fight to eliminate leaded gasoline, once the high compression engine was invented, car manufacturers started running into performance problems. General Motors diagnosed the problem, realizing that the problem originated with the fuel. General Motors tried about 15,000 different combinations of elements to find a solution to the engine knocking.
Adding benzene from coal to gasoline was found to work. Ditto for adding grain alcohol. Adding 10 percent alcohol to gasoline raised the quality of the fuel, causing less knocking in the engine. It also had other benefits, including clean combustion, which eliminated soot emissions, and increased horsepower without engine knocking.
But as research continued, General Motors determined that adding lead to the gasoline produced "an ideal anti-knock fuel" - ideal mostly because manufacturing the lead additive, tetraethyl lead, would allow them to make the greatest profits. Were they to add alcohol to the gasoline, the oil industry stood to lose a large amount of petroleum sales, anywhere from 10 to 20 percent, depending on how much alcohol was added.
By adding lead, the oil industry had a product it could again control in its entirety. So Standard Oil partnered with General Motors, creating a joint corporation known as Ethyl Corporation. Leaded gasoline became the norm, and over the next 80 years, countless people were sickened and harmed by this neurotoxic fuel additive, thrust upon the people for no other reason than it created the greatest profits.
Big Oil Secretly Buys Up and Dismantles Public Transportation System
In 1936, Standard Oil and General Motors also took part in the reformation of public transportation. Only 10 percent of Americans owned a car, and most city dwellers relied on electric trolley networks. By replacing the electric streetcars with gasoline-guzzling buses, the oil industry secured an even greater foothold within the U.S. economy. As detailed in Corbett's report:
“The cartel had been careful to hide their involvement in National City Lines, but it was revealed to the public in 1946 by ... Edwin J. Quinby ... He uncovered the oiligarchs' stock ownership of National City Lines and its subsidiaries and detailed how they had step by step bought up and destroyed the public transportation lines in Baltimore, Los Angeles, St. Louis and other major urban centres...
[I]n 1947 National City Lines was indicted for conspiring to form a transportation monopoly and conspiring to monopolize sales of buses and supplies. In 1949, GM, Firestone, Standard Oil of California and their officers and corporate associates were convicted on the second count of conspiracy.
The punishment for buying up and dismantling America's public transportation infrastructure? A $5,000 fine. H. C. Grossman, who had been the director of Pacific City Lines when it oversaw the scrapping of LA's $100 million Pacific Electric system, was fined exactly $1."
Next came the undermining of the railway system. In 1953, General Motor President Charles Wilson was appointed Secretary of Defense, and Wilson, along with Francis DuPont, Chief Administrator of Federal Highways, set into motion the largest public works project in U.S. history with the creation of the interstate highway system.
As a result, railway travel declined by 84 percent between 1945 and 1964, while private car ownership soared, and along with it, gasoline sales, which rose 300 percent in that same time frame. Similar social engineering feats took place in Europe, further securing the future of the oil business as a primary force to be reckoned with.
The report also goes into the details behind the gas shortages that sent the U.S. into a financial tailspin in the early 1970s, revealing how the secretive Bilderberg Group, created by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands in 1954, successfully created a new financial system based on the petrodollar - a system that granted the oiligarchs unprecedented control over the economy.
The Rockefeller Transformation
In his day, John D. Rockefeller was a despised man. This all changed when he hired Ivy Ledbetter Lee, who essentially invented the public relations industry as we now know it. John D. was filmed handing out dimes to the poor, and was publicly portrayed as a kind and warm-hearted man. While hokey by today's standards, such simple stunts worked. Yet, Rockefeller needed to go even further to truly gain the public's trust.
As Corbett notes:
“In order to win the public over, he was going to have to give them what they wanted. And what they wanted wasn't difficult to understand: money. But just as his father, Devil Bill, had taught him to do in all his business dealings, Rockefeller made sure to get the better end of the bargain. He would 'donate' his great wealth to the creation of public institutions, but those institutions would be used to bend society to his will.
As every would-be ruler throughout history has realized, society has to be transformed from the ground up. Americans in the 19th century still prized education and intellectual pursuits ... with a remarkable 93 to 100 percent literacy rate.
Before the first compulsory schooling laws in Massachusetts in 1852, education was private and decentralized, and as a result ... a solid grounding in history and science was widespread. But a nation of individuals who could think for themselves was an anathema to the monopolists. The oiligarchs needed a mass of obedient workers..."
The Takeover of Education
John D. Rockefeller's first great act of charity was the establishment of the University of Chicago, followed later by a $180 million donation to the establishment of the General Education Board.
But contrary to what you might think, these acts of generosity were not to further education, but to control and impoverish it.
Frederick Taylor Gates became a trusted ally, and in "The Country School of Tomorrow," Gates lays out Rockefeller's plan for the education of future Americans:
“In our dream, we have limitless resources, and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hand. The present educational conventions fade from our minds; and, unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or science.
We are not to raise up from among them authors, orators, poets, or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians. Nor will we cherish even the humbler ambition to raise up from among them lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we now have ample supply."
The Effective Strategy That Eliminated Natural Medicine
Other oil-backed schemes to mold and reshape the American education system followed, including a scheme to alter the teaching of American history to promote a view of collectivism, as well as a program culminating in the transformation of the practice of medicine.
Naturopathic-based herbal medicine was the norm, and Rockefeller set out to shift the medical industry toward using oil-derived pharmaceuticals. To this end, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research was established in 1901, headed up by Simon Flexner.
“His brother, Abraham, was an educator who was contracted by the Carnegie Foundation to write a report on the state of the American medical education system. His study, 'The Flexner Report,' along with the hundreds of millions of dollars that the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations were to shower on medical research in the coming years, resulted in a sweeping overhaul of the American medical system.
Naturopathic and homeopathic medicine, medical care focused on unpatentable, uncontrollable natural remedies and cures was now dismissed as quackery; only drug-based allopathic medicine requiring expensive medical procedures and lengthy hospital stays was to be taken seriously ...
The fortunes of Carnegie, Morgan and Rockefeller financed surgery, radiation and synthetic drugs. They were to become the economic foundations of the new medical economy ... The oiligarchy birthed entire medical industries from their own research centers and then sold their own products from their own petrochemical companies as the 'cure.'"
The Takeover of America's Financial System and the Creation of a Food Monopoly
The financial power of these oil industry giants is by now near-unfathomable, but the aim was to control the entire financial system. This was effectively accomplished with the creation of the Federal Reserve, established in 1913 following a secret meeting on Jekyll Island, during which the details were ironed out. Attendants at this meeting included John D. Rockefeller Jr.'s father-in-law, Senator Nelson Aldrich, and various banking representatives.
Later, in the 1950s, James Stillman Rockefeller, the grandson of John D.'s brother, became the head of National City Bank, while David Rockefeller, John D.'s grandson, took over Chase Manhattan Bank. Still, they were not satisfied.
“Springboarding from success to success as they consolidated monopolies across every field of human activity, the oiligarchs' ambitions became even larger.
This time, their goal was to consolidate control over the very food supply of the world itself, and once again they would use philanthropy as the cover for their business takeover,"Corbett explains.
The Rockefeller Foundation funded the Green Revolution that led to the introduction of petroleum-based agricultural chemicals, which quickly transformed agriculture, both in the U.S. and abroad.
President Lyndon Johnson's "Food for Peace" program actually mandated the use of petroleum-dependent technologies and chemicals by aid recipients, and countries that could not afford it were granted loans from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
The "Gene Revolution" was next, and as noted by Corbett:
“The players involved in this 'Gene Revolution' are almost identical to the players in the Green Revolution, with I.G. Farben offshoots Bayer CropScience and BASF Plant Science mingling with traditional oiligarch associate companies like Dow AgroScience, DuPont Biotechnology and, of course, Monsanto, all funded by the Rockefeller Foundation ..."
The Final End Game: Monopolising Life
In his usual style, Corbett manages to squeeze in an incredible amount of information in as compact a timeframe as is humanly possible, and I highly recommend taking the time to watch the video in full. What I've included here is but a summary overview of the many details he brings forth in this fascinating report.
Those who are ignorant of history are bound to repeat it, and if this story tells us anything, it is that unless we realize what has been done, we'll be deceived again and again, because the oil oligarchy's end game is yet to be realized - if we let them. As Corbett notes in closing:
“The takeover of education, of medicine, of the monetary system, of the food supply itself, showed that the aim was much greater than a mere oil monopoly: it was the quest to monopolize all aspects of life, to erect the perfect system of control over every aspect of society, every sector from which any threat of competition to their power could emerge ... But the oiligarchs are not done yet.
Their next project, launched in the late 20th century, is almost too ambitious to be comprehended ... It is about the monopolization of life itself. They have spent decades preparing the path for this takeover and marshaled their mind-boggling resources in service of the task. And the vast majority of the world's population, still playing the shell game that the oiligarchs perfected and abandoned long ago, are about to fall right into their hands yet again."
4 Facts About ADHD That Teachers & Doctors Never Tell Parents January 21 2016 | From: CollectiveEvolution
Putting a child in a classroom for 8 hours a day, for more than a decade, and expecting them to listen while remaining ‘obedient’ is very unrealistic.
From day one we are taught that this is the only path to success and we are shown the consequences of not paying attention.
It’s important to recognize that it’s perfectly normal for children to struggle with paying attention to something that they are not even remotely interested in; this doesn’t necessarily mean they have a disorder and it doesn’t mean they require (potentially quite harmful) prescription medications.
It’s Okay If Your Child Struggles With Attention - This Does’t Mean They Have A Disorder
Many doctors and teachers are already aware of this, but I would like to reiterate the point - just because your child struggles with paying attention in school or sitting still in the classroom does not mean there is an underlying disorder to blame. It’s perfectly natural for your child to want to be active and to want to focus on things which actually interest them.
Sure, low grades might come as a result of not paying attention, but it is possible for a 2.0 student to know more than a 4.0 student; grades don’t necessarily equate with intelligence. In many cases, they reflect an ability to follow rules and memorize information - both important skills, but perhaps less important than critical thinking and creativity.
Some students may have a better ability to buckle down, pay attention, and do their work, while other, equally as intelligent students, may struggle with this model. This, again, is perfectly normal, and could actually be a marker of something really positive.
If your child is being held back and being denied even the possibility of entering a gifted program based on the fact that they have attention issues, then there is problem.
New data from the National Center for Learning Disabilities shows that only 1 percent of students who receive services for their apparent learning disabilities (some of which are completely and unquestionably valid) are enrolled in gifted or talented programs. The report concluded that “students with learning and attention issues are shut out of gifted and AP programs, held back in grade level and suspended from school at higher rates than other students.” (source)
Disorder Or Creativity?
The last point in the above paragraph is pretty disturbing, particularly given the fact that recent work in cognitive neuroscience shows us that both those with an ADHD diagnosis, and creative thinkers, have difficulty in suppressing brain activity that comes from the “Imagination Network.”
There are no school assessments to evaluate creativity and imagination; these are admittedly difficult to measure and, accordingly, receive very little attention in the education system. Yet a lot of research is pointing to the fact that people who show characteristics of ADHD are more likely to reach higher levels of creative thought and achievement compared to those who don’t show these characteristics.
“By automatically treating ADHD characteristics as a disability– as we so often do in an educational context– we are unnecessarily letting too many competent and creative kids fall through the cracks.”
- Scott Barry Kaufman, Scientific Director of The Imagination Institute in the Positive Psychology Center at the University of Pennsylvania (source)
While brain scans of people diagnosed with ADHD do show structural differences, it is a scary reality that a large portion of ADHD diagnoses are derived from the observations teachers make in school. Too often, children are diagnosed based on perceived behaviour alone, and then encouraged to take medication right away. These children are not actually tested or scanned; they and their parents are simply told that they have ADHD.
“I think the big mistake in schools is trying to teach children anything, and by using fear as the basic motivation. Fear of getting failing grades, fear of not staying with your class, etc. Interest can produce learning on a scale compared to fear as a nuclear explosion to a firecracker.”
- Stanley Kubrick
Did They Tell You This About The Pharmaceutical Industry?
“Over the past two decades the pharmaceutical industry has moved very far from its original high purpose of discovering and producing useful new drugs.
Now primarily a marketing machine to sell drugs of dubious benefit, this industry uses its wealth and power to co-opt every institution that might stand in its way, including the US Congress, the FDA, academic medical centers, and the medical profession itself.
(Most of its marketing efforts are focused on influencing doctors, since they must write the prescriptions.)"
- Marcia Agnell, former editor of The New England Jopurnal of Medicine
The quote to your left comes from Harvard Medical professor and the former Editor-in-Chief of The New England Journal of Medicine, Dr. Marcia Angell. She joins a long and growing list of some very ‘credible’ people within the medical profession who are trying to tell the world something important.
She has said on several occasions that it is no longer possible to believe much of the published research, or even to rely on the judgement of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. (source)
Another great example is Dr. Richard Horton, who is currently the Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet, which is considered to be one of the top ranked medical journals in the world. He said that:
“The case against science is straightforward, much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. . . . Science has taken a turn towards darkness.”
The reason why these professionals are saying such things is because, as Dr. Angell puts it, “the pharmaceutical industry likes to depict itself as a research-based industry, as the source of innovative drugs. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is their incredible PR and their nerve.”
“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”
- Arnold Seymour Relman, Harvard Professor of Medicine
The percentage of children with an ADHD diagnosis continues to increase; it went from 7.8 percent in 2003 all the way up to 11.0 percent in 2011. According to a recent analysis, ADHD in children has surged by 43 percent since 2003. (source)
The quotes above aren’t just opinions, clearly these few (out of many) examples are from people who know a thing or two about the industry, and it is troublesome to think that people still believe pharmaceutical corruption and manipulation of scientific literature are conspiracy theories.
The most recent real world example of this comes from a few months ago, when an independent review found that the commonly prescribed antidepressant drug Paxil is not safe for teenagers - all after the fact that a large amount of literature had previously suggested this.
The 2001 drug trial that took place, funded by GlaxoSmithKline (also maker of the Gardasil Vaccine), found that these drugs were completely safe, and used that ‘science’ to market Paxil as safe for teenagers. The study came from John Ioannidis, an epidemiologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine.
Ioannidis is also the author of the most widely accessed article in the history of the Public Library of Science (PLoS), titled “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.” In the report, he stated that most current published research findings are false. And this was more than 10 years ago.
ADHD is classified as a mental disorder, which is interesting because the definition of these types of disorders in particular have been shown to be heavily influenced by the pharmaceutical industry. American psychologist Lisa Cosgrove and others investigated financial ties between the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) panel members and the pharmaceutical industry.
They found that, of the 170 DSM panel members, 95 (56%) had one or more financial associations with companies in the pharmaceutical industry. One hundred percent of the members of the panels on ‘mood disorders’ and ‘schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders’ had financial ties to drug companies.
The connections are especially strong in those diagnostic areas where drugs are the first line of treatment for mental disorders. In the next edition of the manual, it’s the same thing.
“The DSM appears to be more a political document than a scientific one. Each diagnostic criteria in the DSM is not based on medical science. No blood tests exist for the disorders in the DSMN. It relies on judgements from practitioners who rely on the manual.”
- Lisa Cosgrove, PhD, Professor of Counselling and School Psychology at the University of Massachusetts, Boston
“The very vocabulary of psychiatry is now defined at all levels by the pharmaceutical industry.”
- Dr. Irwin Savodnik, an Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California at Los Angeles (source)
These are definitely some facts to take into consideration when it comes to dealing with your child’s ADHD diagnosis. It’s a ‘disease’ - one which I was also diagnosed with - that I personally don’t even think is real.
I think it was made up strictly for the purpose of making money.
There Are Other Methods To Help Your Child Focus & Improve Your Child’s Ability To Pay Attention
It’s becoming clear that we need a new approach to ADHD. Apart from examining the truth behind that label, as I hope I have done in the above paragraphs, it’s important to note that there does not appear to be much room in our school system for children who do not fit the ‘normal’ mould of the majority.
The fact that we basically point a finger at them and label them does not really help anything. As much as we’ve been marketed to believe that medication can help solve the problem, I really believe they only worsen it. Many of these medications seem to dull the emotions and energy of the children taking them, ultimately making for a less positive and rich life experience.
One great way to improve your child’s ability to focus is to change their diet. It’s a shame that hardly any research has been published examining the relationship between mental ‘disabilities’ and diet, since many medical professionals strongly believe there is a direct link between them.
Some studies have, indeed, emerged which show a link between a gluten/casein free diet and improvement in autistic symptoms, and some parents have already seen the benefits of implementing this research. (source)
The Mayo Clinic claims that certain food preservatives and colourings could increase hyperactive behaviour in some children. It would be best to avoid these, regardless of whether they are linked to ADHD or not.
It has also been suggested that EEG biofeedback (electroencephalographic) could help. It’s a type of neurotherapy that measures brainwaves. You can read more about that here.
In 2003, a study published in the journal Adolescence looked at how regular massages for 20 minutes twice a week could improve behaviour in the classroom. This is interesting because studies have also suggested that tai chi and yoga may also help improve ADHD symptoms. According to the studies, children with ADHD that practiced tai chi became less anxious or hyperactive. (source)
So, one thing you could try is observing what your child is eating. You can limit their intake of harmful, hormone disrupting, disease causing foods like sugar, limit their exposure to pesticides, and encourage their consumption of fruits, vegetables, and whole foods (rather than processed foods).
When it comes down to it, developing methods for your child to pay attention to something they find boring and/or useless is a difficult task, and for parents who struggle with this, it’s important to remember that most likely your child is perfectly normal. It will help to choose to look at it in a positive light.
The fact that children are forced into these institutions, told how the world works, made to follow certain rules, and pressured to complete education out of fear of not having a job, is a truly unfortunate reality of today’s world. It is not the best environment for a child. Perhaps things will change in the future, but right now it seems children are encouraged to complete education out of fear, out of necessity, and out of the mentality that “this is just the way the world is.”
“When we can’t say ‘No,’ we become a sponge for the feelings of everyone around us and we eventually become saturated by the needs of everyone else while our own hearts wilt and die. We begin to live our lives according to the forceful should of others, rather than the whispered, passionate want of our own hearts.
We let everyone else tell us what story to live and we cease to be the author of our own lives. We lose our voice - we lose the desire planted in our souls and the very unique way in which we might live out that desire in the world. We get used by the world instead of being useful in the world.”
- Dr. Kelly M. Flanagan, a licensed clinical psychologist, Ph.D. in clinical psychology (source)
Perhaps sitting down and talking to your child, letting them know that there is nothing wrong with them and that they don’t have a ‘disorder’ is a good start, at least for those who have already been labeled. Again, just because one person struggles with paying attention does not mean they have a disorder. If the information above is any indication, it could actually mean the opposite.
Having your child even believe in that type of label could be harmful. Given the recent developments in neuroplasticity and parapsychology, it has become clear that how a person thinks alone can change their biology.
Speaking with educators and finding a differentiated type of instruction more tailored to your child’s needs and interests could also be a solution. One of the biggest solutions, in my opinion, is not accepting labels for your children in the first place.
This is a big problem in modern day education, and solutions are limited. The issue here really seems to be the environment the children are surrounded by, not the children themselves.
Another thing parents could address are the feelings of the child. Part of growing up is learning to handle our emotions and tackle whatever challenges life throws at us, but in school we are only taught content, and that is all we seem to focus on. Humans are made up of more than just bits of learned information; we all perceive a certain way and if emotions and thoughts are not openly discussed and dealt with, it can create problems in other areas.
“I don’t know about you, but in my adult life, I have never had to use geometry once… yet I experience emotions and challenges every day. If school is designed to prepare you for life… why not teach actual life skills?”
- Elina St. Onge
Russian Scientists Build And Study Pyramids:
What They Found Could Change The World January 20 2016 | From: SitsShow
The following is a compilation of articles discussing the research on pyramids by Russian Scientists and related works of other researchers there after.
Ever since I heard David Wilcock mention the Russian pyramid studies I was fascinated by this shape and how it seemed to affect reality. It is probably one of the most well recognized elements of megalithic structures, yet how these sites were constructed and what they were originally used for remains a mystery.
Dr. Volodymyr Krasnoholovets is a renowned scientist from the Institute of Physics in the Ukraine, that spent over a decade building and researching many pyramids of varying heights and proportions. The Russian government even endorsed his work, producing a 144ft tall pyramid outside of Moscow. What he discovered is truly remarkable and has implications that could completely transform society as we know it.
Here is a brief summary of results from one of the articles below:
Immune system of organisms improved (blood leukocyte composition increased).
Improved regeneration of tissue
Seeds stored in the pyramid for 1-5 days showed a 30-100% increase in yield
Soon after construction of the Lake Seliger pyramid a marked improvement of the ozone was noted above the area
Seismic activity near the pyramid research areas are reduced in severity and size
Violent weather also appears to decrease in the vicinity of the pyramids
Pyramids constructed in Southern Russia (Bashkiria) appeared to have a positive effect on oil production with oil becoming less viscous by 30% and the yield of the oil wells increased according to tests carried out by the Moscow Academy of Oil and Gas.
study was done on 5000 prisoners who ingested salt and pepper that had been exposed to the pyramid energy field. The test subjects exhibited a greatly reduced violence rate and overall behavior was much improved.
Standard tissue culture tests showed an increase in survival of cellular tissue after infection by viruses and bacteria
Radioactive substances show a decreased level of radiation inside the pyramid
There are reports of spontaneous charging of capacitors
Physicists observed significant changes in superconductivity temperature thresholds and in the properties of semi-conducting and carbon nano materials.
Water inside the pyramid will remain liquid to minus 40 degrees Celsius but freeze instantly if jostled or bumped in any way
With the use of pyramids we could heal the planet from centuries of environmental pollution, vitalize once extinct plant species, heal the body and so on. These are just some of the things we've been able to verify, there are no doubt countless other uses that will be discovered once more extensive research has been done.
Here is a video with David Wilcock (who has collated a remarkable body of work on the subject of pyramid energy in his qorks) discussing the Russian pyramid research:
Tour of the Russian Pyramids
In January of 2001, a Dr. Volodymyr Krasnoholovets from the Institute of Physics in the Ukraine contacted me. (The Institute of Physics was considered the top military research institute of the former Soviet Union.) This institute helped develop the Russian cruise missiles, remote sensing devices, satellites, space station technology, and other military technology.
Dr. K (as we now call him) identified himself as a senior scientist at that Institute. He told me that in the last 10 years, he and his colleagues were carrying out research in 17 large fiberglass pyramids, built in 8 different locations in Russia and Ukraine. These pyramids varied in size, the largest being 144 feet high and weighing over 55 tons.
I had not been aware of these pyramids but it seemed that people from Russia knew about them. I was told that they are popular tourist attractions and many people visit them.
Dr. K sent me photos of these pyramids along with a comprehensive research article about experiments conducted in them, which he and his colleagues wrote. They asked me to post it on our web site and invited me to collaborate with them in their pyramid research.
Dr. K explained that the Russians and Ukrainians conducted many kinds of experiments using these pyramids that included such fields as medicine, ecology, agriculture, chemistry and physics. What is significant about this research is that it scientifically documents the changes in both biological and non-biological materials that occur as a result of being placed in these pyramids. So I posted their research article on our web site and subsequently appeared on several major radio programs.
Then in February of 2001, the individual who actually financed and built the pyramids in Russia and the Ukraine contacted me directly. He was Alexander Golod, a scientist and now Director of a State Defense Enterprise in Moscow. He found my web site and saw that I was releasing the research carried out in his pyramids.
Alexander does not speak English so most of our communications were carried out through his son, Anatoli. He told me that his father, Alexander, started constructing these pyramids in 1989. The Golod’s wanted to work with me also and to help publicize and continue their research.
Alexander Golod in his office in Moscow
In two month’s time, I was working with both the builders and some of the major researchers of these pyramids.
Alexander had decided to build these pyramids because he believed that they would produce an energy field that could affect biological and non-biological objects.
He even got support from the Russian government for this massive building project and convinced them in 1998 to take a kilo of rocks that had been placed in one of his pyramids on board the MIR space station.
He felt the energy fields they produced would help the space station and possibly the entire world. Let us look at these pyramids.
The largest and most recently built of the pyramids is located about 200 miles northwest of Moscow on Novorizhskoe Highway. It is 144 feet high and was completed in 1999. It weighs about 55 tons and cost over 1 million dollars to build. It is made of fiberglass.
The 144 Foot Tall Pyramid
Notice that the 144 foot tall pyramid has a sharper slope (greater acute angle) than the Great Pyramid of Giza. The Great Pyramid has a slope of about 52 degrees and these pyramids rise at about a 73-degree angle.
The reason Alexander Golod chose this angle was based on experimental designs that also included the mathematical relationship called the Golden Section.
In his prototype experiments, it was determined that no metal should be included in the structure of these pyramids, so fiberglass was chosen since it would be strong enough to also withstand the strong winds that occur in and near Moscow.
When Alexander Golod was asked why he built these pyramids, he replied:
“I have children, I have a grandson, I do it for them. These pyramids are an instrument to make the world a better place to live and benefit mankind”.
Everyone wants a photo in front of the pyramid.
People from all over Russia, including government officials, cosmonauts, and even famous Russian actresses visit this largest pyramid and spend time inside it.
Millions of people have visited this pyramid and on crowded days, you have to wait in line to enter it. Over the New Year’s weekend, they counted 20,000 people in one day.
The next largest pyramid is the 72-foot pyramid, which is located 15 km from lake Seliger (Ostashkov area of Tver region, Russia). It was completed in June of 1997. Itt is exactly one half the size of the largest pyramid (144 ft). As mentioned, the design of these pyramids was based on the Golden Section, used by ancient architects to design many structures. This would dictate that the pyramid sizes must be built in ratios.
The next (third) largest pyramid is 36 feet high abd it is located in Romenskoey, which is a suburb of Moscow. This is one of the first pyramids built and where the first experiments began.
36 foot Pyramid
A design factor common to all the pyramids that Golod built is that they must be hollow inside. This design element was determined in experiments using prototype models before the building of the large pyramids. Thus, two important conditions of construction were that the pyramids must have no metal in them and they must be hollow.
Inside the 144 foot pyramid gazing upwards
In October of 1998, crystals that were placed in one of the Russian Pyramids were brought aboard the Russian MIR space station and remained on board for over a year.
Crystals were also brought on the International Space Station for 10 days by cosmonaut Afanasiev. Alexander Golod believed that these crystals would benefit both the space stations and the world.
The Russian MIR space station being visited by a US space shuttle
Future building plans include the construction of a 288-foot pyramid (twice the size of the 144 foot pyramid). They believe that the larger the pyramid, the great the effect it produces.
Alexander Golod with Cosmonaut Georgiy Grechko and G. Lozino-Lozinskiy during construction of the largest pyramid
Soon after the construction of this pyramid near Moscow, botanists noticed extinct flowers starting to grow near it.
It is unknown why this has happened and has mystified botanists.
One of the most interesting observations regarding these pyramids comes from Russian Air Force “Radar” (or “Locator” as they call it).
The first indication that the pyramids were producing strange atmospheric effects was when the 144 foot or largest pyramid was in the process of being built.
The planned pyramid would be composed of 30 main layers or sections of fiberglass.
At the completion of the 11th section, Air Force radar picked up an ion column coming right off the pyramid.
This ion column was very large and in fact was over 1 mile high.
As the pyramid construction continued, the ion column still remained.
At the completion of the pyramid, a special weather balloon was launched to measure this ion column.
The results will be discussed in the next chapter. Construction phases of the 144-foot pyramid.
The image to the left shows the first 11 layers of the 30 completed of the 144-foot pyramid.
I read with great interest the report by Bovis describing his discovery of the mummifying power of the shape of the Great Pyramid.
Having been experimenting and measuring bio-energy with the Neurophone and various other instruments described earlier, I began a series of intensive experiments on the shape of the Great Pyramid to see if I could discover its great secrets.
I began by duplicating Bovis’ experiments with pyramids of various dimensions. Using Kirlian photography, GSR, voltage differential, and electrostatic fields, I was able to measure the differences of various pyramids and their effects on living organisms such as plants and people.
The very first experiments were in the area of preserving hamburger meat, liver, eggs, and milk. The first experiments were very encouraging.
It was strange to realize I had taken small pieces of cardboard and made a simple shape that could concentrate some sort of energy that would mummify food without any external power source. My controls all got so bad I had to throw them away.
Bovis and Drbal had indicated in their reports that the energy was focused in the King’s Chamber level bout one third up from the base in the middle of the pyramid.
My own research indicates that the energy is present throughout the pyramid. I was able to mummify food anywhere in the pyramid.
By careful measurement, I was able to determine that the maximum concentration of effect was in the King’s Chamber, but there were effects in the other areas of the whole pyramid.
Further research with various materials of construction revealed further clues as to the nature of the phenomenon we were investigating.
A series of energy measuring machines will be described. Some of these machines measure the effects of the energy on other things, others are esoteric machines which are extremely sophisticated dowsing devices that rely on the human computer as a readout detector.
I have tried various other geometric shapes other than the pyramid and have not had the results obtained with the exact shape of the Pyramid of Gizeh.
Other geometric structures such as cones, icosahedrons, dodecahedrons, tetrahedrons, octahedrons, greater stellated dodecahedrons, etc. all have shape characteristics, but these other shapes do not have any effects demonstrated by the exact pyramid shape to be described.
Pyramid Research Projects
As a result of preliminary research, I began a series of serious research projects on the pyramid itself.
The following is a list of pyramids in tabular form:
The dimensions are based on the exact dimensions of the Pyramid of Gizeh. These are some of the dimensions of pyramids used in my experimental work.
Based on the fact that the Pyramid of Gizeh is the only pyramid in the world that is ventilated, I have also experimented with pyramids with windows in the sides. The windows are holes up to 1/3 of the base length in diameter. The holes do not detract from the function and seem to actually aid the processes going on inside the structure.
The pyramids were made of various materials including cardboard, wood, plaster, Plexiglas, steel, copper, aluminum, cement and combinations of the above materials.
The materials used did not affect the results very much, however the size and orientation was of primary importance. I at first believed the pyramid to work best when it was aligned to true north, however, after very careful research, I discovered the best alignment to be magnetic north, contrary to the alignment of the Great Pyramid.
This leads me to believe the Great Pyramid was built at a time when the earth’s field was aligned to the polar axis. It is not unusual for the poles to shift.
At the time of the writing of this paper, the earth’s magnetic poles are shifting at a rate of 17 feet per month.
In the duplication of Bovis’ experiments, many perishable food items were tried in the pyramids of various shapes and sizes, of different materials, and different orientations, and in different locations in the pyramid itself. The results of these experiments indicate that the best alignment is according to the magnetic axis.
An experiment to determine the validity of this theory was performed by the use of an external permanent magnetic field. This is illustrated in Figure XVI below.
Testing the effects of external magnetic fields on the pyramid
The pyramid was a six inch base cardboard one. The magnets are 5 inch alnico, the fields are on the order of 300 Gauss. With the system described, I was able to get mummification of the foodstuffs with ANY alignment of the set, as long as the pyramid itself was aligned to the magnetic fields as shown. The tables regarding the various food experiments are given in my earlier paper, The Pyramid and Its Relationship to Biocosmic Energy.
My contribution to the field in food mummification is in the discovery that the pyramid will preserve food in any part of the structure as well as in the King’s Chamber as reported by Bovis.
In the duplication of Drbal’s razor blade sharpener, the following discoveries were made:
Whereas Drbal theorized the crystal structure of the blade reformed, I believe the pyramid prevents a dulling effect due to contamination of the surface by skin oils and acids as well as the chemicals in shaving creams and soaps. I shaved over 200 times with the blade treated in the pyramid.
I also shaved an equal number of times with another blade by rinsing my razor out in pure deionized distilled water after every shave. My razors normally go bad in three or four shaves. There may also be a sharpening effect of a sort by the action of energy discharge from the sharp edges of the blade.
It is well known that any sharp object charged with any energy, whether magnetic, electromagnetic, or electric tends to concentrate and discharge from sharp surfaces and points when placed in a charged system.
From this point on, the experiments to be described are entirely the results of my own discoveries in the field.
Effects of Pyramid Energy on Living Organisms
The effects on the pyramid were tested on plants and human subjects. Measurement of changes in the organism were made by means of Kirlian photography, GSR measurements of acupuncture points, Alpha wave detectors, and subjective responses.
Kirlian photography ia a technique for recording photographic images of corona discharges and hence, the auras of living creatures.The Kitlian photography images below are representative but not part of the actual studies described in this article.
Several hundred photographs were made of fingerprints and leaves before and after treatment with the pyramid.
Photographs were taken in both color and black and white. The color photographs are particularly striking as they show changes in color as well as changes in brilliance and bioplasmic structure.
The aura or band of energy around the finger is rounder and larger than the aura in the first photo. The fact that the energy content of the picture is larger and the shape is more rounded indicated an increase in aura without any loss of energy.
A more dramatic effect was obtained with a geranium leaf. The leaf had been off the plant for half an hour when the first photo was taken.
The energy field was almost completely gone as the leaf was dying. The best results were obtained when the pyramids were set up outside the building. The reason for this will be described in the next section on theory.
The Kirlian technique can be used to obtain an instant measure of the result of various energy techniques such as Yoga breathing, meditation, and the effects of foods such as natural vs. chemically grown, alcohol vs. Ginseng, ozone vs. oxygen, etc.
Several hundred people have sat in the 6 foot base plastic pyramids. The tests were first run on friends who were asked to sit in the pyramid for half an hour and then asked to describe their feelings when they were in the structure. The subjects were given no indication of what to expect. In all cases, the subjects reported intense heat in the body and a tingling sensation in the hands.
A number of people decided they wanted pyramids of their own. My own body energy has increased since I began sleeping in the pyramid tent. An effect reported by many is a sense of time distortion.
One subject sat in the pyramid for 4 hours and had the subjective impression that 1/2 hour had passed. It had been stated by alpha researchers that a person in the alpha state loses all sense of time and space. This correlates with observed alpha activity in the pyramid.
Many of the subjects were interested in psychic phenomena and practice various forms of meditation. ALL subjects who practice meditation have reported a significant increase in the effects of meditation in the pyramid.
This correlates with the theory that the Great Pyramid was built as a meditation chamber to develop psychic powers [although it seems now that there are multiple uses for pyramids].
No extensive tests have been conducted on animals at this time. There are however, three cases of interest.
A friend of mine placed his pet cat in a pyramid once a day for 1/2 hour. The cat liked the pyramid and began to sleep in it. When the test was begun, the cat had been a voracious meat eater.
After 6 weeks, the cat stopped eating meat and starved rather than eat meat. Subsequent tests indicated that the cat had changed his diet and would only eat fruit and vegetables, cheese and nuts. The animal became a vegetarian! He ate raw vegetables and fruits of all descriptions; canteloupe, avocado, oranges, and watermelon. The same thing happened to another cat as well as my own poodle.
Growth of Plants
A series of tests were run on the effects of pyramid treatments on the growth rate of plants. The test plants were alfalfa sprouts. I had some familiarity with sprouts as I had grown over 2500 pounds of them in the confines of my office!
The sprouts were treated three different ways:
1. treatment of feed water;
2. direct treatment of the plant in the pyramid;
3. treatment of the seed in the pyramid.
In all cases, identical tests were made in an identical volume cubic box as a control structure.
In all cases, the pyramid treated plants grew 2 to 3 times as fast as the controls, were more healthy and lasted longer after harvest.
One California grape farmer used my system on his irrigation system and his grape yield was 2-1/2 times the average yield of his neighbors and the California average.
The water may be treated in several ways.
It may be placed in the pyramid in a container for a period of time depending on the size of the pyramid and the amount of water treated. I used a 2 foot base pyramid and treated a quart bottle for 1/2 hour.
Another technique is to run water into a spiral coil placed in the pyramid and fashioned into a form of fountain.
Direct Treatment of Sprouts
The pyramid used was a one foot base unit made of clear plexiglass. Four inch holes were cut in the sides for full ventilation. The sprouts were grown entirely in the pyramid.
The controls were grown entirely in a well ventilated equal volume cube.
Treatment of Seeds
The seeds were placed in pyramid for 8 hours.
The water and plant treatments were best, the seed treatment was last. The pyramid grown sprouts lasted over a week without spoilage after harvesting.
The controls on the other hand lasted 24 to 36 hours before spoilage.
Because of the dehydration or mummification of foods in the pyramid, I tried a number of experiments to see if the dehydration rate is accelerated in the pyramid. It is not.
Normal dehydration occurs, the difference being that items placed in the pyramid do not decay while dehydrating. Sprouts grown in the pyramid and left without water 24 hours do not die and decay as the controls do. The controls developed odor and died.
The sprouts in the pyramid dehydrated slightly but did not decay and resumed normal growth when watering was resumed.
Short Term Effects On Foods, Change of Taste
During my original tests on mummification of foods, I used to taste the foods being treated to make sure they were really good. Although there was no sign of decay, I wanted to see how the food tasted as it was undergoing the process of mummification.
I was in for a great surprise! Not only did the foods taste good, they tasted better than they did before they were placed in the structure!
I began experimenting in earnest, and discovered that the pyramid could have an effect on the taste of food even when the food was treated for a surprisingly short duration. I was so impressed by this new discovery that I began a series of double blind tests on the change of taste in foods.
I used several dozen people, and the test was conducted as follows: The foods were all taken from the same source, that is the foods tested were the same food divided in half so the control would be the same as the treated sample except for the treatment.
The samples were then placed in paper cups with numbers on the bottoms. The cups were then divided and recorded in a master file. The ones chosen for the pyramid were then treated for five minutes in the pyramid. The pyramid used for the tests was the 6 inch base ventilated.
The cups of food were then all mixed at random so no one knew which food was which. Taste tests were conducted and 40 out of 48 people chose the foods treated in the pyramid as being more to their liking.
I like hundred percent results, so I interviewed the ones who missed on some of the foods and learned they were either heavy smokers or drinkers. Subsequent interviews with a licensed wine taster confirmed my suspicions that people with certain eating and drinking habits cannot distinguish taste very well.
The foods tested were of all types; sweet, sour, various alcohols, fruits, and tobaccos:
Bitter and sour foods lose their bite, they become milder.
Sweet foods become sweeter.
Coffee loses its bitterness and tastes as if it were acid free.
Fruits increase in their qualities.
Acid tasting pineapple loses its acid taste and becomes as sweet as fresh ripe pineapple picked right out of the field.
Tobacco loses its harshness: Mexican black tobacco loses its harshness and tastes like mild choice Virginia. The most dramatic effects occurred on pipe tobacco, unfiltered cigarettes, and cigars.
One of my associates smokes a very harsh unfiltered brand and uses a crystal type filter cigarette holder. When his cigarettes were treated in the pyramid, he noticed he did not have to change his filter crystal so often. Instead of changing it between every pack, he now has to change it after every three or four packs.
People who had whole cartons of their brands treated with the pyramid came back wanting their new cigarettes treated because they could not stand the harsh taste of their normal brand after smoking pyramid treated cigarettes.
Bananas and other perishables keep longer if they are treated in the pyramid for half an hour after they are purchased.
Controls all turned bad in a short time, and the fruits treated in the pyramids kept fresh up to twice as long as the controls.
Cut flowers take longer to die if they are placed in pyramid treated water. Speaking of water, tests were run on the taste of regular city water treated in the pyramid. The water used to water the plants.
All people who made the tests noticed the pyramid water tasted fresher and had less of a chemical or chlorine taste than the water which was untreated.
To recap; Dr. Alexander Golod, PhD. has been doing Russian pyramid research in the former Soviet Union since 1990. This research involved the construction of over twenty large pyramids in 8 different locations in Russia and the Ukraine.
The pyramids were built in many places including Moscow, Astrakhan, Sochi, Zoporozhye, Voronezh, Belgorod, the Tver Region, Krasnodar, Tolyatti, Uzbekistan, and France.
All the Russian pyramids are made of fiberglass with the largest standing an incredible 144 feet high (44 meters) tall, and weighing in at over 55 tons. Built at cost over 1 million dollars this Russian pyramid is a modern wonder.
Many different experiments are being done using these pyramids. They include studies in medicine, ecology, agriculture, physics, and health sciences. What is significant about this work is that it is being carried out by top scientists in Russia and Ukraine and not fringe elements or unknown inventors.
Some of the amazing pyramid power research being done is showing great promise for all mankind.
A Brief Summary of Pyramid Research Results:
Immune system of organisms improved (blood leukocyte composition increased).
Improved regeneration of tissue
Seeds stored in the pyramid for 1-5 days showed a 30-100% increase in yield
Soon after construction of the Lake Seliger pyramid a marked improvement of the ozone was noted above the area
Seismic activity near the pyramid research areas are reduced in severity and size
Violent weather also appears to decrease in the vicinity of the pyramids
Pyramids constructed in Southern Russia (Bashkiria) appeared to have a positive effect on oil production with oil becoming less viscous by 30% and the yield of the oil wells increased according to tests carried out by the Moscow Academy of Oil and Gas.
A study was done on 5000 prisoners who ingested salt and pepper that had been exposed to the pyramid energy field. The test subjects exhibited a greatly reduced violence rate and overall behavior was much improved.
Standard tissue culture tests showed an increase in survival of cellular tissue after infection by viruses and bacteria
Radioactive substances show a decreased level of radiation inside the pyramid
There are reports of spontaneous charging of capacitors
Physicists observed significant changes in superconductivity temperature thresholds and in the properties of semi-conducting and carbon nano materials.
Water inside the pyramid will remain liquid to minus 40 degrees Celsius but freeze instantly if jostled or bumped in any way
It is interesting to note that results seem to show that increasing the height of the pyramid improves the quality of the results.
Small Russian pyramid complex
So, as you can see from this brief introduction, there is much we have to learn about the natural forces around us.
The Egyptians [et al] knew some of this when they designed the great pyramids at Giza.
However, with modern scientific research techniques it is now becoming possible to gain even more insight and benefit from “Russian Pyramid Power!”
I will, along with others, be conducting personal experiments using scaled down models of these amazing pyramids.
Putin: Human Evolution Under Threat By Big Pharma, GMO, Vaccines January 17 2016 | From: YourNewsWire
A report prepared by the Security Council (SCRF) circulating in the Kremlin today states that President Putin has issued orders that his people must be protected from GMO “food” and Western pharmaceuticals “at all costs.”
The Western government-controlled people are an "intensively vaccinated borderline autistic fat man slumped in front of a screen battling a high-fructose corn syrup comedown", claims Putin who says that Russians "must be protected ... at all costs".
The report says that President Putin believes the next stage of human evolution is currently in “grave risk” and that Western and global powers are “intentionally decelerating the process for their personal gain.”
“We as a species have the choice to continue to develop our bodies and brains in a healthy upward trajectory, or we can follow the Western example of recent decades and intentionally poison our population with genetically altered food, pharmaceuticals, vaccinations, and fast food that should be classified as a dangerous, addictive drug.”
“We must fight this. A physically and intellectually disabled population is not in our interests,” the report states.
Describing the average government-controlled Westerner as an;
“Intensively vaccinated borderline autistic fat man slumped in front of a screen battling a high-fructose corn syrup comedown,” the report states that such tactics used by governments to subjugate their citizens are not only “dark/evil” but “counter-productive in the medium to long term.”
Russia under President Putin has been giving away land for free in the past few years to people willing to farm organically and sustainably. The goal is to become the world’s “leading exporter” of non-GMO foods that are based on “ecologically clean” production.
The Security Council report comes just months after the Kremlin announced a stop to the production of all GMO-containing foods, which was seen by the international community as a major step in the fight against multinationals like Monsanto. Russia continues to lead the way in the realm of natural, organic farming.
9 Lies About Fat That Destroyed The World's Health January 16 2016 | From: Sott
The areas of nutrition and disease prevention are full of incompetence.
We have been wrongly advised to avoid saturated fat and cholesterol, despite no evidence of harm.
Here are the top 9 biggest lies, myths and misconceptions about dietary fat and cholesterol.
1. A Low-Fat, High-Carb Diet is The Optimal Human Diet
Back in 60s and 70s, many prominent scientists believed that saturated fat was the main cause of heart disease, by raising the "bad" cholesterol in the blood.
This idea was the cornerstone of the low-fat diet. Because of a few bad studies and misguided political decisions, this diet was recommended to all Americans in the year 1977 (1).
However, there wasn't a single study on this diet at the time. The American public became participants in the largest uncontrolled experiment in history.
This experiment didn't turn out very well and we are still suffering the consequences. This graph shows how the obesity epidemic started at almost the exact same time the low-fat guidelines came out:
The diabetes epidemic followed soon after. Of course, a graph like this doesn't prove anything. Correlation does not equal causation.
But it seems plausible that the low-fat recommendations made things worse because people started eating less of healthy foods like meat, butter and eggs, while eating more processed foods high in sugar and refined carbohydrates.
Even though there was little evidence at the time, the low-fat diet has actually been thoroughly studied in the past few years and decades.
It was put to the test in the biggest controlled trial in nutrition history, the Women's Health Initiative. In this study, 48,835 postmenopausal women were split into two groups. One group ate a low-fat diet (with the whole grains and all that) while the other group continued to eat "normally."
After a period of 7.5-8 years, the low-fat group weighed only 0.4 kg (1 lb) less than the control group and there was no difference in the rate of heart disease or cancer between groups (3, 4, 5, 6). Other huge studies also found no advantages for the low-fat diet (7, 8, 9).
But it doesn't end there, unfortunately... the low-fat diet recommended by most nutrition organizations is not only ineffective, it may even be downright harmful.
In multiple human studies, the low-fat diet has actually made some important risk factors worse, raising triglycerides, lowering HDL (the good) cholesterol and making the LDL particles smaller (10, 11, 12, 13). Despite miserable results in the studies, many nutritionists all over the world continue to recommend the low-fat diet that is hurting more people than it helps.
Bottom Line: There is no evidence that low-fat diets have any benefits. They do not cause weight loss in the long-term or reduce the risk of chronic diseases. Some studies show that they may even cause harm.
2. Cholesterol Rich Foods (Like Eggs) Are Bad For You
Nutrition professionals have had remarkable success with demonizing perfectly healthy foods. Probably the worst example of that is eggs, which are among the healthiest foods on the planet. Just think about it... the nutrients in an egg are enough to turn a single fertilized cell into an entire baby chicken.
Even so... because eggs contain large amounts of cholesterol, they were believed to cause heart disease. However, studies actually show that the cholesterol in the diet does NOT raise the bad cholesterol in the blood. Eggs raise HDL (the good) cholesterol and are not associated with an increased risk of heart disease (14, 15,16, 17, 18).
What we're left with is an incredibly healthy food... loaded with vitamins, minerals and powerful nutrients that are important for the eyes and brain (19, 20,21).
Keep in mind that almost all the nutrients are found in the yolk... the white is nothing but protein. Telling people to ditch the yolks may be just be the most ridiculous nutrition advice in history.
Bottom Line: Eggs were demonized because of the high amount of cholesterol, but new studies show that they don't raise cholesterol in the blood or contribute to heart disease. Eggs are among the most nutritious foods on the planet.
3. Your Total and LDL Cholesterol Levels Are Good Indicators of Heart Attack Risk
Probably the biggest mistake in modern medicine is focusing too much on Total and LDL cholesterol levels as indicators of heart attack risk. Well... it is true that elevated levels of both are associated with increased risk (22).
But the whole picture is much more complicated than that. Total cholesterol actually includes lots of things... including HDL, also known as the "good" cholesterol.
Having high HDL actually raises your Total cholesterol number. LDL cholesterol isn't just LDL either... there are subtypes. We have the small, dense LDL particles (very bad) and then we have the large, fluffy LDL (good). The small particles are associated with heart disease, while the large ones are mostly benign (23, 24, 25, 26, 27).
Studies actually show that Total and LDL cholesterol are poor indicators of risk compared to other markers, like the Triglyceride:HDL ratio (28, 29). One study found that out of 231,986 patients hospitalized for heart disease, half of them actually had normal LDL levels (30)!
There are also studies showing that high cholesterol can be protective. In old individuals, the higher the cholesterol, the lower your risk of heart disease (31,32).
Not to mention that cholesterol levels that are too low are actually associated with increased risk of death... from other causes, like cancer and suicide (33, 34).
Despite the weak predictive value of Total and LDL cholesterol, people with elevated numbers are often instructed to lower cholesterol by any means necessary... including a low-fat diet (which doesn't work) and statin drugs.
Right now, millions of people all around the world are taking cholesterol lowering drugs without needing them, unnecessarily suffering the risk of serious side effects.
Bottom Line: Total and LDL cholesterol levels are actually quite poor markers of heart disease risk. Many people are being unnecessarily medicated because doctors tend to focus on these numbers.
4. Processed Seed- and Vegetable Oils Are Healthy
For some very strange reason, processed seed and vegetable oils became recognized as health foods. Humans only started consuming them about a 100 years ago, because we didn't have the technology to process them until then.
Yet, somehow the nutrition geniuses figured that these would somehow be very healthy for humans and certainly better than the "dangerous" saturated fats.
These oils, which include soybean, corn and cottonseed oils, are very high in polyunsaturated Omega-6 fatty acids, which are harmful in excess and can contribute to inflammation (35, 36, 37).
Despite these oils being recommended to reduce heart disease, there are actually multiple studies showing that they increase the risk (38, 39, 40, 41). In a study that looked at common cooking oils on the U.S. market, they found that 0.56% to 4.2% of the fatty acids in them were highly toxic trans fats (42)!
However... these oils are actually recommended by the beloved organizations that are supposed to be in charge of protecting our health. This is one example of where blindly following the conventional nutritional wisdom can put you in an early grave.
Bottom Line: Processed seed- and vegetable oils are very unhealthy, loaded with Omega-6 fatty acids and trans fats that can contribute to disease.
5. Saturated Fat Raises Your Bad Cholesterol and Causes Heart Disease
The "war on saturated fat" has been a miserable failure.
It was initially based on flawed studies, but somehow became public policy (with disastrous consequences). The worst part is... the governments and health organizations have yet to change their position despite overwhelming evidencethat they've been wrong all along.
Actually, saturated fat doesn't really raise LDL that much. The effect is weak and inconsistent and appears to depend on the individual (43, 44, 45).
When saturated fat does affect LDL, it changes the particles from small, dense (very, very bad) to Large LDL, which is mostly benign (46, 47, 48). Saturated fat also raises HDL cholesterol, which is associated with a reduced risk of heart disease (49, 50).
If anything, saturated fats actually improve the lipid profile, NOT the other way around. In the past few years, many massive studies have examined the link between saturated fat and heart disease risk.
One of these studies included 347,747 participants and looked at data from 21 studies. The conclusion: there is no evidence that saturated fat increases the risk of heart disease (51).
Many other studies confirm these findings. Saturated fat is harmless (52, 53). The truth is... saturated fat never has been and never will be proven to cause heart disease, because it simply isn't true.
Bottom Line: Despite decades of anti-fat propaganda, saturated fat has never been proven to cause heart disease. In fact, saturated fat improves some of the most important risk factors for heart disease.
6. Saturated Fats and Trans Fats Are Similar
Trans fats are unsaturated fats that have been chemically modified to be more solid and have a longer shelf life. They are also known as partially hydrogenated fats.
The manufacturing process is very disgusting... involving high pressure, high heat, a metal catalyst and hydrogen gas. The fact that anyone thought these nasty fats would be suitable for human consumption is baffling.
Some of the major health organizations have started to confuse people by grouping trans fats together with saturated fats, calling them the "bad fats" (54).
However... like I outlined above, saturated fat is completely harmless, but the same can NOT be said for trans fats. Trans fats are highly toxic and can cause insulin resistance, inflammation and significantly raise the risk of serious diseases like heart disease (55, 56, 57, 58).
Even though consumption has gone down, trans fats are still found in processed foods and the FDA still categorizes them as "Generally Regarded as Safe" (GRAS).
If you want to avoid chronic disease... then eat your butter, meat and coconut oil, but avoid trans fats as if your life depended on it (it does).
Bottom Line: Trans fats resemble saturated fat in consistency and shelf life, but the chemical composition is still very different. While saturated fats are harmless, trans fats are highly toxic and should be avoided.
7. Eating Fat Makes You Fat and High-Fat Diets Are Dangerous
Fat is the stuff that lodges under our skin and makes us look soft and puffy. Therefore, eating more fat should make us store more of it. You are what you eat, right? Well, it actually isn't that simple.
Even though fat has more calories per gram compared to protein and carbs, foods that are naturally high in fat are very fulfilling and hard to overeat. In fact, studies on diets that are high in fat (and low in carbs) show that these diets cause more weight loss than diets that are low in fat (59, 60, 61).
Low-carb, high-fat diets also lead to all sorts of other benefits... increased HDL cholesterol, lower triglycerides, lower blood sugar and insulin levels, more abdominal fat loss and improved size of LDL particles (62, 63, 63, 65).
Despite this, many nutrition professionals still have the audacity to call low-carb diets harmful, then continue to peddle the failed low-fat diet that has been proven, time and time again, to be completely ineffective.
Bottom Line: Despite fat having more calories per gram than carbs or protein, studies show that high-fat (and low-carb) diets actually lead to more weight loss than low-fat diets.
8. Processed Margarine is Better Than Natural Butter
Because of the war on saturated fat, butter became recognized as an unhealthy food. Food manufacturers jumped on the bandwagon and started producing butter replicates like margarine.
Most margarines contain large amounts of processed vegetable oils, often with trans fats added to the mix. It is hard to imagine how people could think that processed, factory made margarine would be healthier than butter, which is completely natural and humans have been eating for a long time.
The studies also do NOT support the idea that margarine is healthier than butter. In the Framingham Heart Study, margarine was associated with an increased heart disease risk compared to butter (66):
Many other studies have looked at high-fat dairy products and found no evidence that they contribute to any disease... in fact, high fat dairy is associated with a lower risk of obesity (67, 68).
Despite all the fear mongering, high fat dairy products like butter are extremely healthy, especially if they are derived from grass-fed cows.
Bottom Line: Margarine is an unhealthy fake food produced in factories, usually containing trans fats and processed vegetable oils. Butter is a much healthier choice, especially if it comes from grass-fed cows.
9. Processed Low-Fat Foods Are Healthy Options
Because of the ridiculous low-fat advice, food manufacturers removed the fat from some of their foods. But there was a major problem... natural foods taste terrible without the fat.
The food manufacturers realized this and added a whole bunch of sugar to compensate for the missing fat. For this reason, most "low fat" foods are actually loaded with sugar, which is seriously harmful (69, 70, 71).
If a food has "low fat"or "diet" on the label, then you will probably find sugar, corn syrup and various artificial chemicals on the ingredients list.
However, sales of these foods have skyrocketed because many nutrition professionals still advise people to eat them... even though the "normal fat" alternatives are much healthier!
Comment: When we allow industry lobbyists to intimidate politicians by threatening to withhold campaign funds unless they do as they're told, and when we allow so-called "scientists" to do alleged "scientific studies" designed to fit the facts around predetermined outcomes, the result is that people are fed what amounts to poisonous substances mistakenly referred to as "food," and people are lied to about what is and isn't truly healthy.
And, in the process of people being slowly sickened and killed by such evil behavior big agriculture and big pharma rake in billions making their leaders rich - at the expense of everyone's health. This entire scenario is probably one of the biggest human atrocities ever perpetrated in all of the recorded history of man.
Medical Deaths And The Corruption Of Healthcare January 15 2016 | From: Sott
Can the above figure be used to expose the corruption in medicine?
The reason why it has taken so long to realise that something is not right and why so many still don't see that anything is going on can be explained like this:
On the whole, people: healthcare workers or patients or the public at large, can regard many circumstances in medicine as isolated cause and effect relationships. In other words, people generally fail to make the connections between the different cause and effect relationships.
The Connections Linking Medical Deaths and Corruption
It is necessary to make the connections so that we can step back and see the 'big picture' of what's really going on and why certain things occur: If not, then indeed, this can be likened to the analogy of looking at separated pieces of jigsaw puzzle and not having the realisation that they are somehow all connected and therefore not carrying out the task of joining up the pieces to see how it works overall.
Such has happened in the circumstances surrounding deaths from medical mistakes. This is why the corruption still continues and how the villains are allowed to get away with it.The big picture and the corruption comprise the connections between: The World Health Organisation, approval bodies such as the FDA, pharmaceutical companies, equipment manufacturers, academia, research institutions, media, the legal profession, healthcare staff and patients. All these can be tied in with 'favours for favours...'
Comment: The healthcare system has become a travesty because corporate profiteers have captured the entire profession:
Nothing stays the same. If everyone was concerned enough to get a deep enough level of realisation of what's really going on in medicine by connecting up the circumstances or pieces of information to find that they are interrelated (the big picture), then consequently, there would be a mass transformation of the healthcare system. This would eventually be brought about by the reactions that would follow from realising the corruption.
This mass transformation is my vision: To see a major turnaround of the healthcare system, where treatment will be based on a genuine want to cure people. Where people are put before profits, instead of the reverse; the way it is at the moment.
It is also the visions of other activists and dissident Doctors, growing in numbers by the day. I would say that one of the biggest reasons why more and more people are realising that they are caught up in a scandal in medicine is through the availability of the internet and its access to information that would otherwise be very difficult to get.
I also find that, in some of my discussions with people, I can see that their intuition has been already telling them that something is not right in the world of medicine...
I predict that, in time, whether it will take a few years or many decades I don't really know, but we will have a revolution on our hands. The healthcare system will change. I have no doubt that it will be a radical change.
Western world medicine should be truly outstanding considering the money spent, but it is not, as exemplified in the above must see video featuring an impassioned talk by Doctor Joe Mercola with jaw-dropping facts and figures:
Are Deaths from Medical Mistakes THE Biggest Cause of Death and Suffering?
Every time deaths from medical mistakes (or deaths from medicine) are re-estimated, taking other factors into consideration the figure increases. Will we ever get a true figure?
Over the last few decades, the more technology that has been introduced into orthodox medicine be it, drugs, state-of-the-art equipment, apparatus, technical expertise...the more unnecessary procedures there are. I'm not for one minute saying that all technology is bad, but a lot of it can do a great deal of harm.
This Time It’s Serious: Monsanto Is Sued For Crimes Against Humanity January 15 2016 | From: TheDawn
Several dozens of non-commercial organizations and human rights activists have sued biotech transnational Monsanto for crimes against humanity and ecocide, and they will have to stand trial in the international court in The Hague, in October next year.
The announcement of the trial was carried out in a press conference in the context of the COP21 Climate Summit being held in Paris, as was informed by the environmental and health advocate OCA (Organic Consumers Association).
According to the plaintiffs, Monsanto has been developing, since the early twentieth century, toxic products that are causing irreparable damage to both the environment and human health.
Among the substances is Roundup, a highly toxic herbicide which is the most used in the world; Polychlorinated biphenyls - persistent organic pollutants that affect human and animal fertility - , Lasso - a herbicide that is now banned in Europe -, and 2,4,5-T - a component of Agent Orange that was used by the US military during the Vietnam War that causes cancer and congenital malformations.
The trial is scheduled to be held between October 12 and 16 2016, after The Hague’s court has studied the facts alleged against Monsanto.
The trial will be based on the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, adopted by the UN in 2011. The plaintiffs are the OCA, International Foundation for Organic Agriculture (IFOAM), Navdanya and Regeneration International (RI) and Millions Against Monsanto, among other groups.
Global Food, Farming and Environmental Justice Groups to Put Monsanto on Trial for Crimes Against Human Health and the Environment in the International People’s Court in The Hague
Organic Consumers Association, IFOAM, Navdanya, Regeneration International and others form Monsanto Tribunal Foundation in advance of World Food Day 2016
PARIS – The Organic Consumers Association (OCA), IFOAM International Organics, Navdanya, Regeneration International (RI), and Millions Against Monsanto, joined by dozens of global food, farming and environmental justice groups announced today that they will put Monsanto MON (NYSE), a US-based transnational corporation, on trial for crimes against nature and humanity, and ecocide, in The Hague, Netherlands, next year on World Food Day, October 16, 2016.
Speaking at the press conference, Ronnie Cummins, international director of the OCA (US) and Via Organica (Mexico), and member of the RI Steering Committee, said: “The time is long overdue for a global citizens’ tribunal to put Monsanto on trial for crimes against humanity and the environment.
We are in Paris this month to address the most serious threat that humans have ever faced in our 100-200,000 year evolution - global warming and climate disruption.
Why is there so much carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere and not enough carbon organic matter in the soil?
Corporate agribusiness, industrial forestry, the garbage and sewage industry and agricultural biotechnology have literally killed the climate-stabilizing, carbon-sink capacity of the Earth’s living soil.”
Vandana Shiva, physicist, author, activist and founder of Navdanya, and member of the RI Steering Committee said:
“Monsanto has pushed GMOs in order to collect royalties from poor farmers, trapping them in unpayable debt, and pushing them to suicide.
Monsanto promotes an agro-industrial model that contributes at least 50 percent of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Monsanto is also largely responsible for the depletion of soil and water resources, species extinction and declining biodiversity, and the displacement of millions of small farmers worldwide.”
Andre Leu, president of IFOAM and a member of the RI Steering Committee, said: “Monsanto is able to ignore the human and environmental damage caused by its products, and maintain its devastating activities through a strategy of systemic concealment: by lobbying regulatory agencies and governments, by resorting to lying and corruption, by financing fraudulent scientific studies, by pressuring independent scientists, and by manipulating the press and media.
Monsanto’s history reads like a text-book case of impunity, benefiting transnational corporations and their executives, whose activities contribute to climate and biosphere crises and threaten the safety of the planet.”
Marie-Monique Robin, journalist and author of the best-selling documentary (and book by the same name), “The World According Monsanto,” said:
“This International Citizens’ Tribunal is necessary because the defense of the safety of the planet and the conditions of life on Earth is everyone’s concern. Only through a collective resurgence of all living forces will we stop the engine of destruction. That’s why today I am calling on all citizens of the world to participate in this exemplary tribunal.”
Also speaking at the conference were Valerie Cabanes, lawyer and spokesperson for End Ecocide on Earth; Hans Rudolf Herren, president and CEO of the Millennium Institute, president and founder of Biovision, and member of the RI Steering Committee; Arnaud Apoteker, creator of the anti-GMO campaign in France, which became one of the priority campaigns of Greenpeace France, and author of “Fish in Our Strawberries: Our Manipulated Food;” and Olivier De Schutter, co-chair of the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPESFood) and former UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food.
Since the beginning of the twentieth century, Monsanto has developed a steady stream of highly toxic products which have permanently damaged the environment and caused illness or death for thousands of people. These products include:
PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyl), one of the 12 Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP) that affect human and animal fertility;
2,4,5 T (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid), a dioxin-containing component of the defoliant, Agent Orange, which was used by the US Army during the Vietnam War and continues to cause birth defects and cancer;
Lasso, an herbicide that is now banned in Europe;
And RoundUp, the most widely used herbicide in the world, and the source of the greatest health and environmental scandal in modern history. This toxic herbicide, designated a probable human carcinogen by the World Health Organization, is used in combination with genetically modified (GM) RoundUp Ready seeds in large-scale monocultures, primarily to produce soybeans, maize and rapeseed for animal feed and biofuels.
Relying on the “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights” adopted by the UN in 2011, an international court of lawyers and judges will assess the potential criminal liability of Monsanto for damages inflicted on human health and the environment.
The court will also rely on the Rome Statute that created the International Criminal Court in The Hague in 2002, and it will consider whether to reform international criminal law to include crimes against the environment, or ecocide, as a prosecutable criminal offense.
The International Criminal Court, established in 2002 in The Hague, has determined that prosecuting ecocide as a criminal offense is the only way to guarantee the rights of humans to a healthy environment and the right of nature to be protected.
Full list of founding organizations (so far) here.
Full list of Monsanto Tribunal Foundation organizing members here.
More information will be available at monsanto-tribunal.org, after 2:30 p.m. EU time on December 3, 2015.
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots non-profit 501(c)3 public interest organization campaigning for health, justice, and sustainability. The Organic Consumers Fund is a 501(c)4 allied organization of the Organic Consumers Association, focused on grassroots lobbying and legislative action.
Regeneration International is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to building a global network of farmers, scientists, businesses, activists, educators, journalists, governments and consumers who will promote and put into practice regenerative agriculture and land-use practices that: provide abundant, nutritious food; revive local economies; rebuild soil fertility and biodiversity; and restore climate stability by returning carbon to the soil, through the natural process of photosynthesis.
'Cancer Screening Has Never Saved Lives' - BMJ Study Concludes January 14 2016 | From: GreenMedInfo
Millions have marched for "cancer causes." Millions more have been diagnosed "early" and now believe screening saved their lives.
But a new study confirms something we have been reporting on since our inception: In most cases, screening not only has not "saved lives," but actually increases your risk of dying.
In the new study, Vinay Prasad and colleagues, argue that the real benchmark for the success of any cancer screening program is if the "early stage" cancers being diagnosed and treated actually result in a reduction in the overall mortality.
Ironically, many of these women ardently believe that their lives were "saved" by the screening and treatment, succumbing to the biomedical equivalent of Stockholm syndrome where identifying with the 'aggressor' becomes palliative.
In reality, most suffered irreparable harm not from the "cancer," but from both the psychological and physical effects of being wrongly diagnosed and treated. If the end point were not breast cancer specific mortality ('invasive' breast cancer has not declined but increased with screening, indicating overdiagnosis), but overall mortality, it is likely that these DCIS diagnosed women's lives were significantly truncated because of screening programs; at the very least, the quality of their lives would have been significantly negatively impacted.
An extremely important new study published in the British Medical Journal titled, "Why cancer screening has never been shown to "save lives"—and what we can do about it," confirms something we have been reporting upon at GreenMedInfo.com since our inception, namely, cancer screening has not lived up to its long held promise of "saving lives" because disease-specific reductions in mortality do not equate to reductions in overall mortality. Worse, in some cases overall mortality actually increased because of screening.
In the new study, Vinay Prasad and colleagues, argue that the real benchmark for the success of any cancer screening program is if the "early stage" cancers being diagnosed and treated actually result in a reduction in the overall mortality.
The New England Journal of Medicine published a study in 2012 shows that approximately 1.3 million women were diagnosed with DCIS in the past 30 years, with most receiving either mastectomy, lumpectomy, radiation, chemotherapy, or some combination thereof. Ironically, many of these women ardently believe that their lives were "saved" by the screening and treatment, succumbing to the biomedical equivalent of Stockholm syndrome where identifying with the 'aggressor' becomes palliative.
In reality, most suffered irreparable harm not from the "cancer," but from both the psychological and physical effects of being wrongly diagnosed and treated. If the end point were not breast cancer specific mortality ('invasive' breast cancer has not declined but increased with screening, indicating overdiagnosis), but overall mortality, it is likely that these DCIS diagnosed women's lives were significantly truncated because of screening programs; at the very least, the quality of their lives would have been significantly negatively impacted.
“Despite growing appreciation of the harms of cancer screening,1 2 3 advocates still claim that it "saves lives.
"This assertion rests, however, on reductions in disease specific mortality rather than overall mortality.
Using disease specific mortality as a proxy for overall mortality deprives people of information about their chief concern: reducing their risk of dying.5 6 Although some people may have personal reasons for wanting to avoid a specific diagnosis, the burden falls on providers to provide clear information about both disease specific and overall mortality and to ensure that the overall goal of healthcare - to improve quantity and quality of life - is not undermined.7
In this article we argue that overall mortality should be the benchmark against which screening is judged and discuss how to improve the evidence upon which screening rests."
And so, without the proper benchmark or end point, all the educational and fund-raising efforts going towards "reducing deaths" or "saving lives" from breast, prostate, lung, skin, brain, [insert body part], become misleading, if not overtly propagandist in nature.
Indeed, the extant scientific evidence itself reveals that at best the present disease specific agenda for "cancer prevention" is pseudo-scientific. In the section of the study subtitled, "Why cancer screening might not reduce overall mortality," the authors summarize what the literature reveals on the topic:
“Discrepancies between disease specific and overall mortality were found in direction or magnitude in seven of 12 randomised trials of cancer screening.8 Despite reductions in disease specific mortality in the majority of studies, overall mortality was unchanged or increased.
In cases where both mortality rates were reduced the improvement was larger in overall mortality than in disease specific mortality. This suggests an imbalance in non-disease specific deaths, which warrants examination and explanation.
A systematic review of meta-analyses of cancer screening trials found that three of 10 (33%) showed reductions in disease specific mortality and that none showed reductions in overall mortality."
And yet, the "Jolie effect" is a well established phenomena. Her decision was lauded the world over as courageous and an "evidence-based" precautionary step, with tens of thousands of women (and some men) following suit. We hope the new BMJ study raises a flag of true caution for those who may habitually and uncritically follow the celebrity-centric herd mentality.
The significant harms of screening overdiagnosis and overtreatment extend to men as well. For instance, aggressive prostate screening programs over the past few decades have resulted in the removal and/or irradiation of millions of men's prostates. A 2004 study found that an astounding 200,000 men are being diagnosed annually with prostate cancer.
Tragically, the 2013 National Cancer Institute report referenced above also found that so-called "early stage prostate cancer," high grade intraepithelial prostatic neoplasia (HGPIN), is also essentially a benign lesion within prostatic epithelial tissue, not unlike DCIS in women's breasts. In other words, millions of men were diagnosed with a potentially lethal "pre-cancer" or "early stage cancer" they never had.
As an aside, it should be noted that even in the case of lesions of true concern for malignancy, there is always hope. Cancer is not an inexorably lethal, genetic mutation-driven process that happens in an environmental, nutritional, and psycho-spiritual/emotional vacuum.
Instead of viewing it as the biological equivalent of a terrorist, and cutting, burning, and poisoning the target tissue (and, collaterally, the entire body of the host), we need to abandon the warfare model of allopathic medicine and adopt one that focuses on targeting cancer stem cells in non-toxic ways, looking at carcinogenesis through the lens of the informational dysregulation of genetic and epigenetic pathways in the cell; informational "disease" in contradistinction to physiochemically-based disease is, of course, more prone to being reversed.
Cancer, in this view, can be halted in its tracks, and even regressed, assuming that, along with informational corrections (e.g. "nanopharmacological" approaches like homeopathy, "energy healing," high quality food (which is also information-containing)), the tumor microenvironment can be adjusted back to healthier conditions through detoxification, lifestyle modifications, mind-body interventions, and targeted, "high dose" nutritional support.
The new study explained how prostate screening programs have created "off target" deaths, primarily through the high rate of false positives, overdiagnosis of non-harmful cancers (e.g. HGPIN), and detection of incidental findings (i.e. unintentionally discovered conditions):
“For example, prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing yields numerous false positive results, which contribute to over one million prostate biopsies a year. Prostate biopsies are associated with serious harms, including admission to hospital and death.
Moreover, men diagnosed with prostate cancer are more likely to have a heart attack or commit suicide in the year after diagnosis or to die of complications of treatment for cancers that may never have caused symptoms."
Shockingly, PSA-based prostate screening has been found to have a false positive rate of about 75%.2 Obviously, given this finding, there is nothing specific at all about the prostate "specific" antigen test, which is why the United States Preventive Services Task Force now strongly recommends against it.
How the Public Is Misled Into Believing "Screening Saves Lives"
The new study reveals just how truly inflated the public's expectations have become:
“A systematic review has shown that the public has an inflated sense of the benefits and discounted sense of the harms of mammography screening, the cervical smear test, and PSA screening.
In one study 68% of women thought that mammography would lower their risk of getting breast cancer, 62% thought that screening at least halved the rate of breast cancer, and 75% thought that 10 years of screening would prevent 10 breast cancer deaths per 1000 women.
Even the most optimistic estimates of screening do not approach these numbers. The most recent Cochrane review of randomised controlled trials of PSA screening failed to show a reduction in disease specific death. The Cochrane review of mammography did not show reduced breast cancer deaths when adequately randomised trials were analysed.
Advocates of screening have emphasised its benefits, sometimes verging on fear mongering. Others, including us, think that shared decision making should be the focus. But as long as we are unsure of the mortality benefits of screening we cannot provide people with the information they need to make an informed choice. We must be honest about this uncertainty.
A summary of the Swiss medical board's decision not to recommend mammography shows that for every 1000 women who undergo screening one breast cancer death is averted (from five to four), while non-breast cancer deaths either remain at 39 or may increase to 40.
If non-breast cancer deaths remain the same, a woman must weigh net benefit against harms. If screening increases non-breast cancer deaths to 40, women would simply be trading one type of death for another, at the cost of serious morbidity, anxiety, and expense.
Women should be told that to date, with over 600 000 women studied, there is no clear evidence of a reduction in overall mortality with mammography screening."
The public's uncritical trust in screening programs help keep hidden the significant harm they produce; harms that are further obfuscated by industry-sponsored research.
The study cites the fact that, "of 57 studies [reviewed] only 7% quantified overdiagnosis and just 4% reported the rate of false positive results." They also found that, "When researchers do examine the harms of screening the results are typically sobering":
“False positive results on breast cancer screening have been associated with psychosocial distress as great as a breast cancer diagnosis 6 months after the event.
False positive results affect over 60% of women undergoing screening mammography for a decade or more, and 12-13% of all men who have undergone three or four screening rounds with PSA.
In the NLST [National Lung Screening Trial] 39.1% of people had at least one positive test result, of which 96.4% were false positives.
Overdiagnosis affected 18% of people diagnosed with lung cancer on low dose CT in the NLST, and researchers have found that as many as one in three diagnoses of invasive breast cancer (or one in two for invasive cancer and carcinoma in situ) by mammography constitute overdiagnosis.
These numbers are broadly equivalent to those found with most major screening tests."
“We encourage healthcare providers to be frank about the limitations of screening—the harms of screening are certain, but the benefits in overall mortality are not. Declining screening may be a reasonable and prudent choice for many people. Providers should also encourage participation in open studies.
We call for higher standards of evidence, not to satisfy an esoteric standard, but to enable rational, shared decision making between doctors and patients. As Otis Brawley, chief scientific and medical officer of the American Cancer Society, often states: "We must be honest about what we know, what we don't know, and what we simply believe."
For additional learning listen to the lead author Vinay Prasad's interview from the British Medical Journal's website below:
FDA Has Known Processed Meat Causes Cancer Since The 1970s, But Continues To Cover Up Truth To Protect Meat industry January 11 2016 | From: NaturalNews
They're added to nearly every processed meat product sold in the today – nitrites and other synthetic curing chemicals that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says are safe to use for keeping meat products from spoiling too quickly.
But an investigation by researchers from the University of Wisconsin has uncovered that, despite years of denial, the FDA has known since at least the 1970s that nitrites cause cancer, and yet continues to pander to the meat industry in allowing their use.
Meat curing has been around forever, with the historical record showing that this process allowed ancient cultures to preserve meats for extended periods of time, especially during periods of food scarcity. People didn't have refrigerators back then, remember, so they had to come up with novel ways of food preservation that would get them through harsh weather conditions and other volatile environmental factors.
The fact that people have been curing meats since time immemorial isn't necessarily a problem. Salt, after all, is a natural curing agent that, in and of itself, isn't harmful. It's when salt is transformed through synthetic chemical alterations – in this case, as nitrites – that it becomes harmful. And these same nitrites, according to independent scientists, have been the subject of intense debate over the years concerning their safety.
Sodium Nitrite Linked to Leukemia, Cancer
Sodium nitrite, one of the most popular curing chemicals found in processed meat products today, contains certain nitroso compounds that, under the right conditions, can transform into cancer-causing nitrosamines. Even at the time when sodium nitrite was first offered up for commercial approval in the 1970s, it was recognized that nitrosamines come with serious health risks, including the threat of leukemia and other forms of cancer.
The debate over whether or not to approve sodium nitrite in the 1970s was centered around the chemical's known carcinogenicity, and the fact that other, safer curing compounds were already readily available. Nitrite opponents did what they could to present sound science that highlighted all this, which they believed would win the FDA over in rejecting sodium nitrite in favor of safer alternatives.
But the FDA ultimately capitulated to the meat lobby, which saw dollar signs rather than people's health as being the priority. Synthetic nitrites, after all, are cheap to produce, they preserve the inherent color and flavor of meats, and most people don't even know they're there – unless, of course, they develop a serious health condition as a result of consuming them.
Naturally-Occurring Nitrites aren't Harmful
Not to be confused with naturally-occurring nitrites, which aid in the body's normal regulation of blood pressure, immune response and more, synthetic nitrites have an almost opposite effect on the body, damaging the normal function of hemoglobin and possibly even causing brain damage, particularly in young people.
"Nitrite changes the normal function of hemoglobin, which carries oxygen in the blood to the rest of the body, into a form called methemoglobin that cannot carry oxygen," explains the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Sciences.
"In severe, untreated cases, brain damage and eventually death can result from suffocation due to lack of oxygen.
Dietary nitrites, on the other hand, offer many protective benefits, including their ability to spur production of nitric oxide in the body. Nitric oxide helps regulate blood pressure, boost immunity, aid in wound repair, and improve neurological function, among other benefits.
The normal production of nitric oxide and nitrite may prevent various types of cardiovascular disease including hypertension, atherosclerosis, and stroke," explains the University of Wisconsin report.
This is why purchasing only nitrite-free meats, or meats that contain only naturally-occurring nitrites from vegetables like celery, is critical for your long-term health. Reading food labels and making smart purchasing decisions will go a long way in protecting you and your family against cancer and other forms of chronic illness.
Kuia Worried Smart Meter Is Affecting Her Health January 10 2016 | From: MaoriTelevision
In the Northland region there are growing concern over the introduction of smart meters by power companies into homes.
The smart meters measure power usage with some consumers experiencing a hefty rise in their power bills as well as certain illnesses believed to be caused by these machines.
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.
The Remedy For True Health & The True Origin Of Vaccines December 27 2015 | From: Sott
As America [and not JUST America... sigh] struggles with a 'legal' drug addiction like no other nation, are we missing something fundamental about how the body realizes true health?
1802 painting of smallpox vaccine inventor Dr. Edward Jenner vaccinating a room full of people who then sprout cows from their bodies. The painting illustrates popular 17th century fears about vaccination. The caption reads “The Cow Pock – or – the Wonderful Effects of the New Inoculation.”
If we look at ancient teachings - those which have been around since well before the fairly new invention of 'modern,' allopathic medicine, which has only been in existence really since the 19th century, and the dawn of 'germ theory, ' instead of relying on the advice of an industry which has grown swollen with greed, might we not discover simple, profound measures to heal the body, once and for all?
We remove limbs and organs with multiple surgeries, blast cells with radiation and chemotherapy, and treat our natural immune system like a four letter word. We give more vaccines than ever, yet somehow various 'germs' and 'super bugs' have taken over. We now have the first generation in history that will likely not outlive its parents.
You might say that modern doctors, with few exceptions, practice medical warfare, instead of true healing. All medical ethics have been abandoned for a Rockefeller-Rothschild-Jesuit influenced poisoned needle. In fact, the origins of vaccination, just one modern medical modus operandi, might shock you.
All Through the Help of a 'Lady'
The history of dumbing down a nation(s) with inoculation is much like the famous tale of the defeat of Troy using a wooden horse. Inoculation was introduced in India using Lady Montague as a smokescreen. Lady Montague wasn't even a doctor. Women doctors did not appear until over 100 years later.
Lady Mary Wortley Montagu
In the year 1717, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu was the smokescreen that the Jesuits used to introduce this religious rite into England. Inoculation or variolation was given the sanction of the Royal Family when two daughters of the Prince of Wales were vaccinated. Barbaric as this religious rite was; it was the human disease of smallpox that was injected into the bloodstream. Inoculation was the foot-in-the-door to prepare the people for something far worse.
Inoculation against smallpox is what led to the 'vaccination generation,' but this disease festered in the unsanitary conditions of poverty - as many illnesses do. Vaccines did not eradicate smallpox, quarantine and the improved and more hygienic living conditions of people is what stopped it from spreading. Since that time vaccines have been developed to include a host of carcinogens and other ingredients that could only rightly be called toxic waste.
Just some of the many toxic substances added to vaccines include:
Mercury, which constitutes 49.7% of thimerosal (or thimerosal), realized to be a highly toxic agent. Mercury has strangely been beloved by allopathy ever since its inception; in fact, the 3 main treatments of the early allopaths of the 19th century were bloodletting, surgery and the injection of toxic heavy metals like lead and mercury to purportedly displace disease.
Aluminum, a known neurotoxin. One peer reviewed study suggests, "aluminum in adjuvant form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications and may thus have profound and widespread adverse health consequences."
Aborted Fetal Cells/Human DNA. This is not a rare occurrence. Former drug company scientist Helen Ratajczak says that over 23 vaccines contain aborted human tissue with an uncanny link to autism. Another study by Dr. Deisher found a connection between the injection of human diploid cells and autism as well.
MSG (monosodium Glutamate) - If just one meal containing MSG can cause serious headaches, what do you think it can do to the body when injected into the bloodstream via a vaccine? Processed glutamic acid can cause brain lesions and neurotoxicity. This adjuvant is added to MMR vaccines and others.
Animal cells. All sorts of animals are used for this, including chickens, pigs, dogs, monkeys, horses, rabbits, cows and more. All these animal cells remain in trace amounts in the vaccine, as admitted by the FDA. Marti Oakley in an article on Activist Post entitled "Vaccines: Human and Animal DNA" points out that:
Cell lines, which can be derived from aborted human babies, can last for decades and are developed from a single type of cell. Yet it is known that after continuous culturing these lines begin to mutate into cancer-causing agents.
If these cell lines do this spontaneously in the lab, what are the chances they are doing the same thing once inside the human body where the culturing never ends? ...
We are being injected via vaccine with bits and pieces of other human beings; with the bits and pieces of other mammals.
Whatever the intended purpose of vaccines was initially, it is apparent that too little is either known or acknowledged regarding the potential adverse side affects from co-mingling the DNA of humans and animals and the potential for viral and bacterial cross-contaminations that can and do occur.
The IARC's 'definite carcinogen' Formaldehyde. This chemical is used as a preservative and biocide, commonly to embalm the dead. Even the US Department of Health says that this substance is highly carcinogenic. It can also cause brain damage and seizures.
Also included are antibiotics, squalene, peanuts (which many people are highly allergic too) and GMOs.
History of Vaccination in the Medical Mafia
Ironically, Allopathy Inc was created before the first world war when IG Farben of Germany merged with Rockefeller. As Guylaine Lanctot explains in The Medical Mafia:
"Vaccination stimulates the immune system, the body's defense mechanism. Repeated vaccination exhausts the immune system. It gives a false sense of security and, in doing so, it opens the door wide to all kinds of illnesses.
Notably, to those related to AIDS, which can only develop on ripe ground, where the immune system has been disturbed. It causes AIDS to explode. It ensures that the illness flourishes perpetually.
Vaccination leads to social violence and crime. What better way to destabilize a country than to disarm its inhabitants, and reinforce police and military control?
The authorities subtly create situations of panic and fear among the population which, in turn, necessitate the reinforcement of 'protection measures', including forbidding citizens from owning weapons. The authorities then come across as saviours and strengthen their control.
It is certain that, in order to impose a single world army, one must first disarm the citizens of every country. One must therefore create violence, if they are to achieve this disarmament, particularly in the United States where the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution."
So how exactly do eradicate disease instead of vaccinating ourselves into delirium and oblivion?
True Secret to Health
The answer is known to Ayurvedic and Chinese medicine practitioners, and to the true healers of ancient times. When the body is cleared of obstructions and toxins, the immune system can flourish, and fights all manner of microbes, superbugs, and viruses, all on its own.
Translated, this Sanskrit text says we should "eliminate that which is not wholeness, that which is disrupting, by that which is suitable for the self, using procedures and preparations to restore the self, to re-establish prakriti (wholeness — our essential nature) and pacify by that which is conducive to health."
In the West, we concentrate on manifest illness, and try to cure the body after it is well past its most prime ability to cure itself. In other cultures, dis-ease is handled while it is in its infancy, so that it can never take over the body in various forms of cancer, heart-disease, diabetes and more.
We have between 50-75 trillion cells, and they cannot respirate properly - that is obtain nutrients and expel waste, if they are not given a pure environment. Ayurvedic texts refer to the bioaccumulated environmental toxins, poor dietary habits, and the eventual mixing of toxins with our bodies' cells, three stages of Ama, which does not translate directly into English, but most closely can be thought of as waste or toxicity.
Ama starts in the mind in the Ayurvedic culture, such as the erroneous thinking that leads us to make poor food and lifestyle choices. It later causes us to take up habits that allow toxic substances, both metabolic and environmental to clog up our digestive system, which eventually leads to horrible immunity.
The Root of All Disease
The very basic function of the immune system is to keep 'bad' things out, 'good' things in. If you think of it - this is exactly what the digestive system does when it is working correctly.
Dysbiosis is what happens when the 'bad' bacteria are running the show in your gut, instead of the 'good' bacteria that forms roughly 90% of your immunity. The standard American Diet (SAD) promotes bad bacteria in the gut instead of good bacteria, and once vaccinations are introduced into this environment, the immune system is often taxed beyond its capacity, leading to chronic disease, neurological failure, and in many cases, complete morbidity.
Simply put, ridding the digestive system of toxins, will restore the proper gut balance, and the body can heal itself from almost anything. This is why the concept of 'saucha' or cleanliness is a cornerstone of all yogic practices, and cleanses, such as Shankha Prakshalana , are carried out with almost religious fervor to protect against disease.
As Jay Pasricha, M.D., director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Neurogastroenterology, reiterates, the gut-brain is hidden within the tissues of your digestive organs:
"The enteric nervous system doesn't seem capable of thought as we know it, but it communicates back and forth with our big brain - with profound results. "
That communication is so profound, it can even cause changes in your mood. Interactions between nerve signals, gut hormones and microbiota—the bacteria that live in the digestive system also signal the immune system to attack foreign invaders, instead of 'go to sleep' or attack the body itself.
Vaccinations were meant to 'dirty' the body and mind. Ancient healing practices were meant to clean them.
You can choose your own path to health, but hopefully this information makes the decision to abstain from allopathic medicine a more interesting one.
Indian Doctors Sue Bill Gates For Harming Children With Deadly 'Humanitarian' Vaccines + Dr. Robert Rowen Reveals The Raw Truth About Vaccines At The Vaccine World Summit December 16 2015 | From: NaturalNews / GlobalResearch
If Monsanto, the most evil corporation in the world, were a person, his name would be Bill Gates.
Yes, the Microsoft founder-turned-icon of Third World humanitarianism is an absolute crook, and an utterly vile one at that.
Reports indicate that Gates' many crimes against humanity in the form of illegal vaccine testing on innocent children are finally being addressed in a new lawsuit filed by the Indian government, which seeks to stop this demon of death from killing any more babies.
The Supreme Courts of India are currently conducting an extensive investigation into the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's devious actions abroad, which mainly involve testing deadly vaccines on poor, and oftentimes illiterate, children in developing nations without informed consent.
According to Health Impact News, the case focuses specifically on illicit human experimentation that occurred with the two available vaccines for HPV, Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline) and Gardasil (Merck & Co.).
Back in 2009, the Gates Foundation quietly funded trials of Gardasil on some 16,000 tribal school children living in Andhra Pradesh, India. According to a report published in Economic Times India back in August, many of the children fell violently ill not long after receiving the vaccine, and at least five of them died.
In a separate trial of Cervarix that took place around this same time, also funded by the Gates Foundation, an estimated 14,000 tribal children in Vadodara, Gujarat, were vaccinated for HPV. The result of this trial was two children dead and possibly hundreds of others severely injured. In both trials, many of the consent forms used were obviously forged, and many of the children's illiterate parents were coerced into signing consent forms with their thumbprints, not really know what they were doing.
A petition condemning these atrocious crimes against humanity notes that the Gates Foundation, as well as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), both of which supported the trials, were "criminally negligent" for testing deadly vaccines on:
“a vulnerable, uneducated and under-informed population [of] school administrators, students and their parents who were not provided informed consent or advised of potential adverse effects."
It wasn't until a non-governmental organization known as SAMA began investigating the two trials that these Nazi-like experiments on human beings were finally brought to light. But none of the controlled media in the U.S., or anywhere else in the West for that matter, agreed to cover it. The only country that took notice was India, which is now seeking justice against Gates and his band of vaccine terrorists.
Gates Foundation also responsible for killing kids with untested meningitis, polio and 5-in-1 pentavalent vaccines
Sadly, this isn't the only time that Gates and his crew were found to have committed evil acts against the world's most vulnerable.
In December 2012, five children in the small town of Gouro, Chad, were forcibly vaccinated with a meningitis A vaccine that was still in trials and not even approved for commercial use.
The children were told that if they didn't agree to the vaccine, which was administered without parental consent, they would not be allowed to receive any further education.
And again in 2013, both the Gates Foundation and GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, were exposed for forcing untested polio vaccines and 5-in-1 pentavalent vaccines on innocent children in Pakistan. Many of the children developed so-called "non-polio acute flaccid paralysis," or NPAFP, which reports indicate is twice as deadly as polio itself.
More on the Gates Foundation's extensive legacy of killing children with vaccines is available here: VacTruth.com.
Dr. Robert Rowen Reveals the Raw Truth About Vaccines at the Vaccine World Summit
Vaccine “science” as it’s most typically presented to the public is a hollow house of cards propped up only by deception and lies. Ask any doctor out there to show you even just one all-cause morbidity and mortality study proving the safety and effectiveness of vaccines and you’ll never get to see it, because such a study is nonexistent.
Johns Hopkins University graduate Dr. Robert Rowen has been investigating the claims surrounding the “safety and effectiveness” of vaccines for many years, and his undeniable conclusion is that vaccines don’t work and they aren’t safe. The measures by which the modern medical profession claims that vaccines are safe and effective don’t hold water, he maintains, and are easily disproven.
“In China, well over 90 percent of large populations are getting vaccinated, and allegedly they have immunity, and they measure immunity by immunoglobulins,” explained Dr. Rowen during a recent interview with NaturalHealth365.com host Jonathan Landsman, which is available online for free through the Vaccine World Summit.
“It turns out that that’s not a good way to measure immunity because people with immunoglobulins are getting measles. It just doesn’t seem to work.”
Vaccines provide only temporary immunity at best, and come with a high risk of permanent health damage.
A widespread misconception holds that vaccines are the only way to attain immunity and avoid infectious disease. But quite the contrary is actually true, as vaccines only provide temporary immunity, at best, while simultaneously and significantly increasing the risk of immune dysfunction, behavioral disorders and other major health problems.
“There’s a graph of how these communicable diseases have fallen since the introduction of vaccines, and a corresponding, parallel, identical rise in chronic immune dysfunction, like asthma, arthritis, multiple sclerosis, and others,” warns Dr. Rowen, who used to advocate for vaccines before he understood their true risks.
“No one has ever done an all-cause morbidity and mortality study on the effectiveness and safety of vaccines, and that’s what I’ve called for since 1990 when I first got alerted to the situation.”
Chronic disease has skyrocketed among children alongside massive additions to vaccine schedule.
Dr. Rowen cites a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) back in 2010 that highlights a doubling in the rate of chronic health conditions among children between the years of 1994 and 2006 — from 12.8 percent to 26.6 percent. This directly corresponds with substantial increases in the number of vaccines added to the government’s vaccine schedule.
Another study he references demonstrated that infant mortality rates are higher among vaccinated children.
“Do we want to be trading a few less problems with measles, or these other illnesses which are far more benign - mumps is benign, chicken pox is benign, German measles, rubella is totally benign [unless it's caught by a pregnant woman] - do we want to be trading a few less complications from that for a doubling in chronic [immune] diseases that we can’t treat?” asks Dr. Rowen.
“I’d rather have lifelong immunity than deal with getting a shot when I’m 18 months old and then get temporary immunity, at best, and then have it wear off when I’m 30 or 40 and be far more susceptible to a problem because these are disease that you don’t want to get when you’re an adult.”
“If the vaccine is safe and effective, then you go get your vaccine. I have no problem with that. You take the 26 percent risk of chronic, intractable, untreatable diseases, or autism, for your child… But don’t blame me, because your child is immune based on your choice, if what you say is true. And if what you say is a lie, then you have a problem.”
Be sure to listen to the full, eye-opening interview with Dr. Rowen by signing up for the Vaccine World Summit: VaccineWorldSummit.com.
Molecular Biologist Explains How THC Completely Kills Cancer Cells December 13 2015 | From: WhatsTrending
Below is a video of Dr. Christina Sanchez, a molecular biologist at Compultense University in Madrid, Spain, clearly explaining how THC (the main psychoactive constitute of the cannabis plant) completely kills cancer cells.
Not long ago, we published an article examining a case study recently published where doctors used cannabis to treat Leukemia, you can read more about that here. To read more articles and view studies about how cannabis is an effective treatment and cure for cancer, click here.
Cannabinoids refer to any group of related compounds that include cannabinol and the active constituents of cannabis. They activate cannabinoid receptors in the body. The body itself produces compounds called endocannabinoids and they play a role in many processes within the body that help to create a healthy environment.
I think it’s also important to note that cannabis has been shown to treat cancer without any psychoactive effects.
Cannabinoids have been proven to reduce cancer cells as they have a great impact on the rebuilding of the immune system. Although not every strain of cannabis has the same effect, more and more patients are seeing success in cancer reduction in a short period of time by using cannabis.
Contrary to popular belief, smoking cannabis does not assist a great deal in treating disease within the body as therapeutic levels cannot be reached through smoking. Creating oil from the plant or eating the plant is the best way to go about getting the necessary ingredients, the cannabinoids.
The world has come a long way with regards to accepting this plant as a medicine rather than a harmful substance. It’s a plant that could benefit the planet in more ways than one. Cannabis is not something offered in the same regard as chemotherapy, but more people are becoming aware if it, which is why it’s so important to continue to spread information like this. Nobody can really deny the tremendous healing power of this plant.
Putin’s New Plan To Become #1 Scares Monsanto Big Time December 11 2015 | From: Infowars
Russia’s Vladimir Putin is taking a bold step against biotech giant Monsanto and genetically modified seeds at large.
In a new address to the Russian Parliament Thursday, Putin proudly outlined his plan to make Russia the world’s ‘leading exporter’ of non-GMO foods that are based on ‘ecologically clean’ production.
Perhaps even more importantly, Putin also went on to harshly criticize food production in the United States, declaring that Western food producers are no longer offering high quality, healthy, and ecologically clean food.
"We are not only able to feed ourselves taking into account our lands, water resources – Russia is able to become the largest world supplier of healthy, ecologically clean and high-quality food which the Western producers have long lost, especially given the fact that demand for such products in the world market is steadily growing,” Putin said in his address to the Russian Parliament.
This is far from over. The dealmakers haven’t disclosed the details – they should immediately – but when they do, expect outrage. The US congress may be our greatest ally.
And this announcement comes just months after the Kremlin decided to put a stop to the production of GMO-containing foods, which was seen as a huge step forward in the international fight to fight back against companies like Monsanto. Using the decision as a launch platform, it’s clear that Russia is now positioning itself as a dominant force in the realm of organic farming.
It even seems that Putin may use the country’s affinity for organic and sustainable farming as a centerpiece in his economic strategy.
"Ten years ago, we imported almost half of the food from abroad, and were dependent on imports. Now Russia is among the exporters. Last year, Russian exports of agricultural products amounted to almost $20 billion – a quarter more than the revenue from the sale of arms, or one-third the revenue coming from gas exports,” he added.
Regardless of what you think about Putin’s politics, the fact that non-GMO farming and organic food production is now such a key part of the international discussion is beyond exciting (and long overdue).
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.
“The Net’s cacophony of stimuli short circuits both conscious and unconscious thought, preventing our mind from thinking deeply or creatively. …Heavy use has neurological consequences.
…as the time we spend hopping across links, crowds out the time we devote to quiet reflection and contemplation, the [brain] circuits that support those old intellectual functions and pursuits weaken and begin to break apart. The brain recycles the disused neurons and synapses…”
Impede Comprehension & Retention
One wonders how this kind of entrainment by the machine will damage our capacity for any deep thinking. This ‘redirection of our mental resources,’ and ‘making judgements that are imperceptible to us,’ as Nicholas Carr says, have been shown to ‘impede comprehension and retention’. Carr quotes the German philosopher, Martin Heidegger, who back in the 1950s said:
“…the looming tide of [the] technological could so captivate, bewitch, dazzle and beguile man that calculative [quantitative] thinking may someday come to be accepted and practiced as the only way of thinking.”
The frenzy of quantity over quality, jumping from one focus to the next, using only a small part of the brain may destroy our capacity for quiet contemplation and meditation. The state of a calm and attentive mind cultivated in silence is the only source of all genuine creativity and innovation. Are these new masters of the universe – who we are in fact allowing the transformation of the very way our brains operate – are they true masters of their own consciousness, or are they some kind of mutants already?
Geoengineering & Chemtrails
Most human beings cannot believe that anyone could be so evil as to poison their own populations, permanently destroying the land & water, killing animals, birds & insects.
Perhaps understanding that EMR electromagnetic radiation mutates brain waves is the answer. Is the elite is so immersed in destructive radiation, so cut off from nature’s healing frequencies, and so obsessed with their own power games and greed that they no longer are ‘human’ in the sense we have always understood? Has the pervasive canopy of EMR destroyed the capacity for compassion and respect for life in the elite?
The ‘Signal’ to OBEY!
Consider the H.G. Wells story & film, The Time Machine that depicts a future where young humans are breed for food for the mutants in control. These young clueless innocents are allowed to live in a fool’s paradise until they are summoned by a ‘signal’ - perhaps emitted from a microwave tower - a ‘signal’ they have been entrained to obey.
Obedience to the call of the frequency emitter draws them into an inescapable cavern where they are slaughtered for food or used as breeders for the reproduction of the mutant’s food supply. Is this where we are headed?
28 Doctors, 11 Scientists, 9 Survivors and 1 "FDA Dragon Slaying" Attorney Break Their 'Code Of Silence' and Expose The TRUTH About Cancer And Exactly How To Prevent, Treat And Beat It 100% Naturally.
The Documentary Series The Mainstream Media Refused To Air Is Now Playing Online.
This documentary series regarding cancer could be the most comprehensive ever made, and the information provided has the potential to wipe out cancer from this world once and for all.
Learn why only about 2% of cancer sufferers live more than 5 years beyond their chemotherapy or radiation treatments.
Think this doesn't affect you? In this current generation, 1 out of every 2 males, and 1 out of every 3 females will die as a result of cancer. If nothing else, watch the first episode; this is life changing.
If any of the links below become inactive, search 'The Truth about Cancer - A Global Quest' on youtube.
Episode 1: The True History of Chemo & The Pharmaceutical Monopoly
Episode 2: Your First Line of Defense.
Let’s end the cancer pandemic once and for all! Every single day, tens of thousands of people, just like you, are curing cancer (and/or preventing it) from destroying their bodies.
It’s time to take matters into our own hands and educate ourselves on real prevention and treatments. It could save your life or someone you love. Doctors, researchers, experts and survivors show you exactly “how-to” prevent and treat cancer in “The Quest for The Cures.”
Pharma CEO: We’re In The Business Of Shareholder Profit, Not Helping The Sick December 2 2015 | From: USuncut
Another Pharmaceutical CEO is stepping up to challenge Martin Shkreli as world’s most hated man.
Last month, Martin Shkreli became a household name. The CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals is now infamous for raising the price of a newly-acquired drug to $750 a pill.
He also explained in an interview that his company was not alone in acquiring drugs currently on the market to raise their price and, in turn, rapidly drive up their stock price.
Enter J. Michael Pearson, The current CEO of Valeant Pharmaceuticals who recently said that his company’s responsibility is to it’s shareholders, while making no mention of his customers who rely on his drugs to live.
“If products are sort of mispriced and there’s an opportunity, we will act appropriately in terms of doing what I assume our shareholders would like us to do.”
Already this year, Valeant has increased the price of 56 of the drugs in its portfolio an average of 66 percent, highlighted by their recent acquisition, Zegerid, which they promptly raised 550 percent. Not only does this have the unfortunate side effect of placing the price of life-saving drugs out of reach for even moderately-insured people, but it has now begun to call into question the sustainability of this rapidly-spreading business model.
In an interview with CNBC, Pearson defended his business practice of acquiring drugs instead of investing in research and development.
“My primary responsibility is to Valeant shareholders. We can do anything we want to do. We will continue to make acquisitions, we will continue to move forward.”
Since being named CEO in 2008, Valeant has acquired more than 100 drugs and seen their stock price rise more than 1,000 percent with Pearson at the helm. But it appears that all of the public backlash over price gouging of prescription drugs, which has included both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders taking a stance against the practice as a platform in their respective presidential campaigns, has placed the practice under tremendous scruitiny.
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is planning to issue a subpoena for information on recent price increases from both Pearson and Shkreli.
And that pending investigation has sent Valeant’s stock price tumbling more than 27 percent in the last month, which may have shareholders concerned enough to wonder if Pearson pushed too hard for too long.
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity From Microwave Technology Finally Medically Proven November 24 2015 | From: ActivistPost
Finally, there’s documented medical proof that electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a real-time health issue that actually can be verified using standard medical procedures and testing capabilities.
An international group of researchers aced it when they published their findings from the clinical study “Metabolic and Genetic Screening of Electromagnetic Hypersensitive Subjects as a Feasible Tool for Diagnostics and Intervention” in the November 2014 issue of Mediators of Inflammation.
“When will utility companies get up to speed on the latest in microwave technology damage to the human body?”
Also, “When will public utility commissions nationwide institute proper procedures to protect consumers from such damage?”
Pennsylvanians currently are being bombarded by non-thermal health problems from public utility companies’ electric, natural gas and water Smart Meters, which operate using microwave technology.
Furthermore, the PA House Consumer Affairs Committee Chair Robert Godshall sits on Opt-Out Bills that will permit electrosensitive consumers and others to keep safe analog meters, which have been in use for decades.
Below is the Press Release Pennsylvania Smart Meter Awareness (PASMA) released November 19, 2015, which discusses pertinent issues to EHS and Smart Meters.
Medical Studies Conform Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity: Are Utility Smart Meters Causing Health Problems?
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity, or electrosensitivity (EHS), is a condition affecting more and more individuals who are exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and radiofrequencies (RFs) from radios, televisions, Wi-Fi, “dirty electricity” coming over household wires from utility companies smart meters (SMs), microwaves, photocopiers, plus cell phones and towers.
Worldwide, the numbers of people affected by EMFs and RFs increase exponentially, and add to other environmentally sensitivity-related illnesses such as multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), sick building syndrome, Persian Gulf War veteran syndrome, and amalgam disease.
In Pennsylvania, children’s and adults’ health is being harmed by electric, natural gas, and water utility companies’ smart meters!
The World Health Organization (WHO), in a December 2005 Background paper, stated:
“EHS is characterized by a variety of non-specific symptoms that differ from individual to individual. The symptoms are certainly real and can vary widely in their severity. Whatever its cause, EHS can be a disabling problem for the affected individual. [….]
For EHS individuals with long lasting symptoms and severe handicaps, therapy should be directed principally at reducing symptoms and functional handicaps. This should be done in close co-operation with a qualified medical specialist (to address the medical and psychological aspects of the symptoms) and a hygienist (to identify and, if necessary, control factors in the environment that are known to have adverse health effects of relevance to the patient).
Treatment should aim to establish an effective physician-patient relationship, help develop strategies for coping with the situation and encourage patients to return to work and lead a normal social life."
WHO published online information about that workshop on electromagnetic hypersensitivity in 2004 here
PASMA wants to remind the Pennsylvania state legislature and the PA Public Utility Commission (PUC) that EHS is a harmful health - and even-life-threatening - issue for those affected, which utility companies are remiss about, in understanding that harm, by denying that such effects are medically proven and that SM-caused EHS cannot - and will not - be mediated by replacing AMI SMs with EMF-free analog meters, which were used safely for decades, and which other states’ utility companies are allowing. The control factor in the environment relevant to many EHS problems is traceable to the installation of smart meters on home properties.
PASMA further wants to point out what the WHO stated at the EMF workshop, which utilities, the PA legislature and PA PUC need to implement: help develop strategies for coping with the situation and encourage patients to return to work and lead a normal social life.
For those EHS individuals impacted by SMs, legal opt-outs from SMs are a necessary ethical and medical exception to PA 129, and must be granted. SM-induced health issues are serious matters, which need to be addressed intelligently by state officials, and very soon, as too many Pennsylvanians cannot lead normal lives due to Smart Meters.
PASMA respectfully directs PA legislators and the PA PUC to clinical studies in the journal Mediators of Inflammation Volume 2014, Article ID 924184, where researchers published their results regarding EHS.
In their clinical study “Metabolic and Genetic Screening of Electromagnetic Hypersensitive Subjects as a Feasible Tool for Diagnostics and Intervention” published as an open access article, they say,
“Till now, no causal relationship between electromagnetic fields exposure and onset of clinical symptoms has been clearly proven. [….]
The profiles of metabolic parameters’ alteration observed in EHS subjects were comparable to those of the “pure MCS” group, though generally less pronounced (Figures 5–8). Similarly to those MCS patients self-reportedly nonelectrosensitive, the EHS cohort showed a highly significant-versus-control decrease in the erythrocyte GST activity and an increase in GPX activity levels (Figure 5), coupled with a marked decrease of GSH levels (Figure 6). [….]
A second parameter proved to be significantly different () between EHS and MCS groups that is the ratio omega-6/omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in the erythrocyte membrane phospholipid fraction (Figure 7(c)). [….]
Further developments must necessarily include a more objective and standardized classification of individual electromagnetic sensitivity scores, to conclusively assess the proposed parameters as a distinctive and specific panel of disease biomarkers for EHS.
Our findings will hopefully contribute, in combination with the so-far putative genetic-risk factors, a better molecular definition of environmental-borne sensitivity-related illnesses and a tool to discriminate single SRI comorbidities, based on sufficiently proven molecular evidences able to gain clinical consensus."
Smart Meter technology is based on microwaves, which is damaging the health of Pennsylvanians; has to be corrected by the PA legislature and PA PUC, since it’s counter to and, undoubtedly, violates the Nuremberg Code, including the Third Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons…shall not be violated.”
Certainly, Pennsylvania’s children’s and adults’ health status is being compromised and violated 24/7/365 from EMFs, RFs, and the dirty electricity produced by Smart Meters.
Auckland Council Rejects Fluoridation For Onehunga
November 8 2015 | From: Scoop / FluorideFreeNZ
Auckland Council Rejects Fluoridation for Onehunga in Landslide: Auckland Councillors yesterday overwhelmingly voted to reject a proposal to add hazardous fluoride chemicals to the drinking water of Onehunga residents, voting 18 to 3 against the motion.
The vote is in keeping with councils around the country not wanting to take responsibility for the fluoridation debate. Currently 23 out of 67 councils allow fluoridation and all are faced with increasing evidence and international concern that water fluoridation is linked to thyroid problems, lowered IQ and fluorosis.
These health risks are difficult to square when the recorded and actual dental benefits of fluroride come from applying flouride to the outside of teeth, not by swallowing.
The vote on whether to fluoridate the water supply in Onehunga was revisited because fluoridationists argue that 2001 was ‘a long time ago and we need to review the feeling in the community’. This argument flies in the face of the gold standard, international Cochrane Review that found no modern reliable evidence that fluoridation actually reduces dental decay.
Speaking at the council meeting yesterday ahead of the vote, Fluoride Free NZ Auckland Representative, Kane Titchener, raised concerns the US Public Health Service this year recommended to lower the allowable maximum target for fluoridation to 0.7ppm, down from a range of 0.7 - 1.2ppm.
The Ministry of Health’s recommendation is a range 0.7 – 1.0ppm with most councils (including Auckland) opting for a target of 0.85ppm. The NZ Ministry of Health’s recommendation is now significantly higher than what is allowed in the United States.
To put yesterday’s vote into context, a referendum was held in what was the Onehunga Borough in 2001 which resulted in 66% of voters opposing fluoridation. The residents of Onehunga understand the fluoridation issue better than most.
When Metro Water was in charge of supplying drinking water to many households in Onehunga, 2000 households requested notification of any planned maintenance shutdowns to ensure that they could make alternative arrangements to access non-fluoridated drinking water.
RT: Abby Martin takes with a look at the long practice of water fluoridation
This notification is possibly the greatest example of informed consent regarding fluoridation in New Zealand. Watercare Services Ltd no longer provides this service citing cost as the reason.
In another vote on fluoridation yesterday, the results of a referendum in the currently fluoridated township of Thames found that most of the 3000 people who voted wanted to continue fluoridation. Thames is a conservative community with a high percentage of retired people.
Fluoride Free NZ believes the case put forward by those wishing to force fluoridation on the whole Thames community amounted to very little more than “believe us, we’re the experts”. It is doubtful that any of those who voted to continue fluoridation realise that fluoride has no health benefits to teeth when swallowed in drinking water.
Fortunately for the residents of Onehunga, Auckland Councillors yesterday considered all the facts presented on water fluoridation and voted No.
Are You Ready To Give Up Water? November 7 2015 | From: NZCPR
Yes, it’s really come to this. While you’ve been debating whether or not to give up your flag, your government’s been preparing to give up control of your drinking water.
On Waitangi Day, iwi leaders issued an ultimatum to the government to surrender control of the nation’s fresh water to Maori tribes within a year.
And believe it or not, your government is complying!
Co-governance. No comeback.
In April, the government met with iwi leaders to work out how to manage the surrender. Together, they decided to hand over control of fresh water to iwi at regional council level. Catchment by catchment. Council by council.
Those regional councils and unitary authorities will then appoint unelected iwi representatives, and give them voting rights to control water. Iwi want priority rights to water in perpetuity.
Memorandum says Iwi trumps Kiwi.
It gets worse. While iwi leaders have been busy consulting their people about the plan, your government’s been hiding it from you. Their trick: to let councils sneak iwi water control clauses into complex fresh water management plans.
In August, Local Government New Zealand agreed in a Memorandum of Understanding with the Iwi Chairs Forum that they “acknowledge the mana and kaitiakitanga status of iwi over the nation’s land and natural resources”.
Is that fine with you?
How can this be happening?
Since 2008, the Maori Party, supported by 1% of New Zealanders, has effectively held the balance of power in Parliament. And with it, the power to demand 50% co-governance of our natural resources.
And what has been your government’s response to this outrageous assault on the democratic rights of all New Zealanders? Appeasement.
Five ways to fight back.
1. Get the full details (yes, there’s more) by visiting www.nzcpr.com
2. Phone or write to your local MP, government MPs, opposition MPs and the Prime Minister. Tell them: “You don’t have my permission to give away my water!” Ask them: “If it’s OK to have a binding referendum on which flag we fly, why can’t we vote on who controls the water we drink?” Then ask: “Where do youstand?”
3. Do the same with your regional councillors. They’re the ones who are voting to give unelected iwi the power to control your water. Demand a local referendum to get ratepayers’ approval before doing such deals.
4. Tell your family and friends to do the same – in person, by email and on Facebook and Twitter. Show them this ad.
5. Ads like this cost big money – donate so we can run more.
Comment: This is the same thing playing out worldwide, the privatisation of water. Except in the case of New Zealand it is the crown operatiing in collusion with corrupt iwi corporations (run by the 'Maori elite') who are willing to screw over not only their own tribes but the whole country. This is absolutely despickable and needs to
The Real Reason Holistic Doctors Are Being Murdered And Are Vanishing November 4 2015 | From:ASheepNoMore
In non-technical language, videographer Professor Doom1 explains that PIG PHARMA is introducing a type of protein (Nagalase) into vaccines that is inhibiting the body’s natural immune function which is then leading to disease states such as autism to cancer.
In addition, the videographer connects the dots between Dr. Bradstreet, GcMAF, cancer cures and the suppression of medical science by the U.S. government.
This information needs to be shared everywhere to expose the truth about the cancer industry and to save the lives of holisitc Doctors. If the information about this spreads the genie can not be put back in the bottle.
Mainstream Medicine Accidentally Handed Us Hard Core Backhanded Proof That Vaccines Cause Autism November 3 2015 | From:CureZone
I did not know this up until yesterday, but mainstream medicine handed us hardcore proof that vaccines cause autism, in a way that can never be put away. Up until the year 2000, Asian countries had their own vaccine manufacturing, and provided their own for themselves.
But after this, they mostly began purchasing vaccines from American and European firms, and when they did, autism rates exploded by hundreds of times over. I am talking increases of over 20,000 percent.
And one would be a fool to believe it is not intentional, the people who make the shots are not stupid. Who is at the hub of the new world order, which needs a stupid and complacent populace? American and European Jewry. And I am not going into how British royalty is part of it all, and most likely Jewish as well because that is irrelevant in this case.
POINT PROVEN: After Asian nations started accepting Western vaccines, their autism rates went up to 1 in 35 children. That would be an apocalypse, and obviously, those not destroyed down to full blown autism after vaccination are mostly destroyed anyway. "Still functioning" does not mean you got away unscathed.
The biggest war against the world's people is happening via the needle. Vaccine trolls will point to cold hard facts - that in the past vaccines were usually beneficial, while ignoring the other now obvious cold hard fact - that evil people got control of the supply and are using childhood vaccines as a tool of world domination.
That is all there is to it, and any time you post to a forum or blog that has vaccine trolls running amok, calling people who are against vaccines "scientific illiterates", make sure you tell the troll they are right - that in the past vaccines worked, and then back slam saying that now they have been weaponized, and the autism stats are proof.
Say things like "you can put anything in a needle and call it anything you want, and the autism stats clearly prove that what is in that shot is NOT a vaccine at all". That will get them scrambling.
"Dear troll, I am not going to allow a "vaccine" to "jew" my child's intelligence down".
Dear troll: Can you prove what is in that shot? Scammers are everywhere, have you ever heard of corruption, or are you that stupid?
Dear troll: Science has indeed proven that vaccines work. But what if the children are now being vaccinated against their own intelligence? Ever think of that possibility?
Dear troll: GET ALL YOUR SHOTS, that way you won't have to worry about me skipping mine, you will by default be protected from my ignorance if the shots really work!
We have to win this vaccine war and get the people responsible shut down and called to account. If we do not, we are finished as a species.
[Sellout Globalist] Minister Open To More GMO's November 3 2015 | From:3News
Environment Minister Nick Smith says more genetically modified organisms may get approval for use in New Zealand and he has dismissed as impractical local councils' opposition to them.
The Environmental Protection Agency this week approved the importation of the Pexa-Vec virus, which is used to combat liver cancer. It is the first GMO to get New Zealand approval as a human medicine.
[Bought-and-paid for piece of shit] Dr Smith told The Nation today the scientific advice was that there was little chance the virus would spread or survive outside a tumorous liver.
About 180 New Zealanders died from liver cancer each year, he said.
"We do not want to deny people access to life-saving treatments on the basis of knee-jerk political reactions, slogans like 'GM-free'."
Dr Smith admitted he was leaving the door open for the threshold for approval of GM changing.
There was an international argument about what was a GMO and what was not.
"When you're bringing in foreign DNA into an organism there's no question in my view that that's a genetically modified organism."Where it gets more tricky is when there are alterations to the genes of an organism within it."
Humans had been selectively breeding, using techniques to enhance mutations for decades, he said.
"When you use those older techniques of enhancements of the mutations that occur naturally within an organism, at what point, where is that line?"
There was a wide range of definitions of the line but New Zealand needed to be cautious, he said.
"New Zealand does have an important brain for natural products, we earn a lot of our living from food products, but also we are a country that has got a pretty proud heritage of leading in science."
Earlier this year, Hastings District Council declared itself a GMO-free food-producing region, but Dr Smith said it was"impractical and wrong for councils to try and regulate this separately".
"It is impractical to have 86 different councils rules around GM. If you get in a car and you drive from Hastings to Gisborne or to Wairarapa, if you had trees that are GM, there is no biological barrier for those to spread."
Councils were welcome to submit to the EPA, and he had confidence in its robust and thorough processes.
Owning an EMF meter enables parents to monitor EMF levels at their child’s or children’s school, as Wi-Fi-equipped computer instruction rooms tend to have high levels of EMF. A mother in a school here in New Zealand was campaigning for the Wi-Fi internet connection at her son’s school to be replaced with wired internet, but I don’t know if she succeeded. In some places, parents have also been campaigning against cell phone masts being installed at or near their children’s schools.
Neil offers some valuable education about the dangers of radio frequency radiation on his YouTube Channel ‘EMF Safety Zone‘. Neil says:
“It is important to eliminate cordless phones from your home and office. In addition, always hardwire computers with an Ethernet cord, disabling the wireless option on the modem or router. Be sure never to sleep with your cell phone on standby near your bed. Do not carry the phone on your person ready to receive calls.
The phone shoots out powerful spikes of RF radiation searching for a cell tower every few minutes, even when you are not using it. This penetrates your entire body and punctures holes in the blood/brain barrier! Never hold a cell phone to your head, always use speaker phone or a headset (not a Bluetooth!).
These wireless devices cause a major percentage of the health issues that humans beings presently suffer with.”
There are now also concerns that EMFs are contributing to the huge, largely vaccine-induced increase in the incidence of autism among children: Autism and EMF? Plausibility of a pathophysiological link. Discovering and eliminating sources of EMFs is therefore important, especially as continued exposure to EMFs will also make a child’s recovery from autism difficult if not impossible.
When purchasing a meter, one’s choice depends on what one wants to measure and how much one is willing to pay. Neil highly recommends the excellent radio frequency/microwave meter Acousticom 2 RF Meter which measures from 200MHz all the way up to 8 GHz.
Here are some helpful guidelines for exposure levels as shown on the Acousticom 2 Radio Frequency Meter:
Below 0.05 V/m – Few people report ill-effects
Between 0.05 and 0.5 V/m – Some people report ill-effects.
Above 0.5 V/m – Many sensitive people report adverse effects.
2.5 V/m is 50 times greater than what some scientists regard as safe.
Negative health effects are found at levels of only 0.06 V/m. Anyone with a cordless phone or wireless internet in the home is exposed to higher levels than this.
Beware Of These 6 Common Household Items That Cause Cancer October 25 2015 | From: NaturalNews
Most people probably live under the assumption that their place of dwelling is a safe haven from all the dangers that lurk "out there".
But little do they know that many common household products contain deadly chemicals that are known to cause cancer, reproductive harm, birth defects and other health damage.
Here's six of the most popular categories to avoid for the safety of you and your family:
1. Air fresheners. They're a staple in many households, but conventional air fresheners are a hotbed of poisonous substances that could leave you and your loved ones infertile, brain-damaged or chronically ill. Tests conducted by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) found that most air fresheners contain phthalates, which among other things interfere with male hormone production.
Most air fresheners are also loaded with other cancer-causing volatile organic compounds as well, which interfere with reproduction, respiration and cellular regeneration. A 2008 study conducted by Anne Steinemann at the University of Washington found that all air fresheners tested emitted chemicals known to be carcinogenic, meaning they cause cancer.
Instead of toxic commercial air fresheners, stick with all-natural essential oils, which can be applied to the skin or released into the air from a diffuser.
2. Candles. Similar to commercial air fresheners, many scented candles are also toxic. A study pioneered by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) found that nearly half of all scented candles on the market contain lead wiring in their wicks, which is released into the air upon burning. This lead might make the wicks more stable, but it also leads to hormone disruption, behavioral disorders and various other health problems.
Many candles are also made of paraffin wax which, when burned, generates two highly toxic compounds, benzene and toluene, both of which are carcinogenic. Artificial fragrances and dyes are also present in many scented candles, which when burned end up in your lungs.
3. Art supplies. Cultural enrichment and creativity are both positive aspirations in life, but not when they involve many conventional art supplies. Many of the epoxy materials, glues, acrylic paints and solvents, drawing utensils and other supplies used to create art contain chemicals linked to allergies, organ damage and cancer.
The federal Labeling Hazardous Art Materials Act (LHAMA) requires that all art supplies sold in the U.S. bear warnings if they cause any acute hazards. But manufacturers are not required to provide an ingredients list, which is why it is recommended that users of such supplies purchase only products that are certified by the Art and Creative Materials Institute (ACMI).
ACMI-certified products undergo rigorous evaluations by independent toxicologists to make sure that they are safe for everyone, including small children.
4). Shampoos and conditioners. Toxins in cosmetics is a huge issue today, with many conventional consumer products -- including some labeled as "natural" or "organic" -- containing ingredients like sodium lauryl sulfate that generate cancer-causing byproducts when used. Other carcinogenic additives commonly used in hair care products include polyethylene glycol (PEG) and cocamide DEA.
Safe Cosmetics has put together a list of the safest and most eco-friendly shampoos on the market, which are free of most or all of the chemicals listed in its "Skin Deep" database, which you can access here: SafeCosmetics.org
5. Antiperspirant deodorants. Millions of people use them daily to cover up foul body odor and reduce armpit perspiration. But antiperspirant deodorants are a no-go if you want to avoid chemicals like aluminum chlorohydrate, which can absorb directly into the skin and promote the formation of breast cancer. Aluminum from antiperspirants is also believed to contribute to brain diseases like Alzheimer's.
Other toxic additives in antiperspirant deodorants include parabens, a class of artificial preservatives that mimics estrogen in the body and promotes the growth of cancer cells. Parabens are also linked to gastrointestinal damage, nausea and central nervous system depression.
6. Shower curtains. They might help prevent water from spraying all over the floor, but your average plastic shower curtain acts something like a radiator for toxic chemical release. Many shower curtains, it turns out, off-gas harmful chemicals known as volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, that are known to damage the respiratory tract, central nervous system, liver and kidneys.
If your shower curtain has that unique "new shower curtain smell," it is likely releasing deadly chemicals -- potentially upwards of 108 different VOCs, in fact -- that are harming you and your children. For this reason, it is important to stick with only non-toxic, PVC-free shower curtains made without these harmful chemicals.
Some of the best options include shower curtains made from hemp, linen, birch, organic cotton or PEVA, which you can learn more about here: RonAndLisa.com
In Defense Of Homeopathy October 23 2015 | From: GreenMedInfo
Homeopathy is here to stay. Despite relentless criticism from skeptics and fundamentalists, homeopathy has withstood the test of time.
Since its inception over 200 years ago, homeopathy has been the target of almost constant antipathy from the prevailing school of orthodox medicine. Given so much organized resistance from the mainstream, one would think that if homeopathy were much ado about nothing it would not have endured.
It would have withered on the vine a long time ago. And yet it has persisted. No, it thrives - all across the globe - for a number of very good reasons.
When a German physician named Samuel Hahnemann discovered that a miniscule dose of a medicinal substance designed to mimic the symptom pattern of a sick person could paradoxically provoke a healing response in that same person, a medical revolution was set in motion.
Dr. Hahnemann referred to this surprising phenomenon as the law of similars. As opposed to the conventional medical approach, which uses opposites to combat symptoms (antidepressants, anti-inflammatories, antihistamines, anticonvulsants, etc.), homeopathy represents a different approach to healing, one that uses "likes to cure likes."
The standard treatment for a bee sting or a case of poison ivy might involve the use of an antihistamine to suppress the inflammatory swelling, redness, and itching.
A homeopathic practitioner, on the other hand, might recommend a highly diluted dose of a medicine made from the honeybee in the former case, and a similar dose of a medicine made from the poison ivy plant in the latter. It's a little bit like the use of anti-venoms to treat snakebites, only the doses used in homeopathy are much smaller.
The homeopathic principle of similars can be used to treat not just physical illness, but also mental and emotional issues. For example, in my own practice I have used homeopathic doses of a plant called Stramonium to successfully help hundreds of children who had suffered from nightmares, were afraid of the dark, and were unwilling to be alone at night.
Ingesting Stramonium in its crude form can induce a type of delirium characterized by severe agitation and a tremendous state of fear. In its homeopathically diluted form, it is the antidote to similar states of fear and agitation. It can be a lifesaver for these kids and their families.
In its heyday in the latter half of the nineteenth century, there were more than 100 homeopathic hospitals in the United States, 22 homeopathic medical schools, 700 homeopathic physicians in New York State, and thousands more across the country.
Homeopathy in the U.S. experienced a decline in the early 1900s, largely due to increased regulatory pressure from orthodox medicine.
Is it possible that so many doctors and patients could be wrong about a medical therapy that they rely upon for their own personal health and well-being? I think not.
Criticism of Homeopathy
In spite of the remarkable growth of homeopathy and the testimony of millions of satisfied patients who swear by its effectiveness, critics insist upon spreading a number of unsubstantiated falsehoods regarding this unique healing modality.
The worst offenders are the ones who call themselves scientific "skeptics." Although they claim to speak for science, their willful refusal to consider the facts exposes them as anti-scientific defenders of scientistic dogma. Their pathological disbelief in all things holistic and unconventional is a violation of the open-minded spirit of genuine scientific inquiry.
Let me be clear; for those who seek to discredit homeopathy purely out of bias there should be no obligation on the part of homeopathy to defend itself. It is a waste of energy to quarrel with a relatively small band of medical fundamentalists who wish to argue their case using disingenuous tactics. The truth of homeopathy stands on its own merit for any open-minded individual to examine for him or herself.
Nevertheless, I will venture to answer skeptic's criticisms for the benefit of innocent bystanders, many of whom are puzzled by the Salem Witch Trial-like atmosphere that surrounds homeopathy. Let's examine these objections to homeopathy one by one and see how they stand up to scrutiny.
Objection 1: The principle of similars is not logical. It does not make scientific sense
Some object to homeopathy on the grounds that treating an illness with a substance that can cause symptoms similar to that illness just doesn't make sense.
They fail to grasp that this is essentially the same idea behind many allopathic therapies including allergy shots andvaccines.
The same principle applies to stimulant drugs used to treat hyperactive children. Amphetamine analogs like Ritalin and Adderall are known to have a paradoxical calming effect on the nervous systems of children with ADHD.
The difference is that while these conventional treatments involve crude and potentially toxic doses that are administered uniformly to all individuals, homeopathy tailors its treatment to each individual with doses that are far smaller and, therefore, far safer.
Skeptics tend to dismiss homeopathy due to its so-called "implausibility." This is a fancy way of saying that, given our current understanding of biology, it is not plausible to assign a cause-and-effect relationship between homeopathic doses and their observed effects.
This is really just a tautological argument - a bogus use of logic - employed by skeptics to deny the validity of a phenomenon that medical science cannot explain in conventional medical terms. In essence, the claim is that, since homeopathy cannot be explained, it therefore cannot be possible.
If we were to adopt this attitude toward all new unexplained medical phenomena, then medicine would remain forever static and impervious to change. The implausibility argument amounts to nothing more than a ridiculous self-fulfilling defense of conventional medical dogma.
Objection 2: Homeopathic doses are too small to have any effect. They are nothing more than placebos.
Homeopathy-hating skeptics love to mockingly claim that homeopathic medicines are nothing but water. After all, they surmise, if these medicines are diluted to the extent that homeopaths claim, then they must be devoid of all medicinal properties. Any observed effects are assumed, therefore, to be placebo effects.
Now, this might be true if homeopathic medicines were just another class of conventional drugs. Drugs are pharmaceutical grade chemicals that act on a biochemical level to alter or arrest physiologic processes. Although homeopathic remedies are regulated by the FDA as if they are drugs, no homeopath believes that they act in the same manner as conventional drugs.
Unlike drugs, which must often be taken on a regular basis to maintain their suppressive effects, homeopathic remedies act as bioenergetic catalysts designed to provoke a healing response from the life force. Dr. Hahnemann, himself, attributed all genuine healing to the innate wisdom of the "vital force."
Homeopathy is based upon a stimulus-response model of treatment. An effective prescription acts as a stimulus that initiates a self-healing reaction from the bioenergetic field of the human organism. Once a healing response has begun, there is no need to repeat the stimulus unless its effect begins to wear off.
It is an energetic property that is gauged by the intensity, depth, and duration of effect that it has upon the living organism. As an energetic phenomenon, the mechanism of action of homeopathy is best studied by medical professionals with backgrounds in physics.
Those who insist that homeopathic medicines are placebos because there is "nothing there" make the mistake of applying a biochemical model to a bioenergetic therapy. They simply do not know what they are taking about.
Objection 3. Homeopathy is not scientific.
It's not hard to see how someone who thinks that all medicinal agents must act on a biochemical basis, according to the tenets of mechanistic medicine, would automatically assume that homeopathy is unscientific.
But this would be a naïve conclusion based on lack of information. When critics who have already made up their minds hear that homeopathy is really a form of energy medicine, their eyes start to glaze over and they begin to chant that familiar mantra, "woo woo, woo woo."
The great irony is that most diagnostic imaging is energy-based. MRIs, CT scans, ultrasound testing, and thermography all involve energetics. They are made possible thanks to physics. I don't hear critics crying, woo woo, over MRIs and CT scans. Even a treatment like radioactive iodine therapy, used to destroy the thyroid gland in cases of hyperthyroidism, is an energetic intervention.
While radioactive iodine is an example of the destructive use of energy, homeopathy represents the cutting edge of the constructive use of bioenergetics designed to improve health and promote healing. Those who claim that homeopathy is unscientific because it is based upon bioenergetic principles demonstrate their lack of scientific understanding.
Homeopathic methodology itself is the very definition of scientific method. Medicinal substances are gathered and their capacity to cause symptoms in the human organism is studied. These substances are administered in diluted form to volunteers who are not told what they are receiving.
The symptoms reported by these study subjects are then recorded in great detail. The symptomatic profile of each medicine is developed and documented in reference texts called materia medicas.
Highly diluted doses of these medicines are then given to sick persons who exhibit similar symptom profiles. The responses are noted and used to confirm the symptom profiles of these substances and to expand the database of information regarding their uses.
In this sense, homeopathy is the most empirically reliable medical methodology ever devised. It is based upon direct experience and real time, real life clinical outcomes and patient feedback. Just because the mechanism of action of homeopathy is as of yet undetermined does not mean that it does not qualify as a science.
No scientist in his or her right mind dismisses an unusual phenomenon simply because it cannot be explained. Homeopathy utilizes a sound scientific methodology that can yield remarkable results.
Objection 4. There is no scientific evidence to support homeopathy.
This particular objection to homeopathy is perhaps the most egregious of all. It is simply untrue. By any objective standard, it is a flat out falsehood. There is a growing mountain of research that demonstrates the positive benefits of homeopathy.
Nevertheless, diehard skeptics who show no interest in factual evidence continue to spread lies to the contrary. When you hear the statement that there is no scientific evidence in support of homeopathy, you know you are dealing with someone who is either uninformed, willfully ignorant, a scientific zealot, or a mercenary for PhRMA.
Many who insist that there is no evidence are usually just parroting propaganda that they've heard elsewhere. At best, a skeptic will acknowledge the existence of a particular homeopathic study, only to then nitpick over the supposed flaws in that study.
This is a common tactic employed by fundamentalist devotees of scientism. In any event, the studies are there to examine for all who are genuinely interested. A small sampling of homeopathic research references is provided at the end of this article.
When it comes to medical research, there are some real issues worth discussing. One such issue is the increasing unreliability of scientific studies, which are often funded and conducted by vested interests. When drugs approved by the FDA are taken off the market with such regularity, then the research that justified their approval in the first place must be called into question.
Another problem is the way in which we define scientific evidence itself. Modern scientists have convinced themselves that experiential evidence is not real evidence. Patient's reports of their own experiences and physician's firsthand observations of the patients that they treat have somehow become second-class forms of evidence.
Skeptics tell us that this type of evidence is merely "anecdotal." We are supposed to believe that direct firsthand experience is inferior to the abstract statistical data produced by modern research trials. A belief like this can only come from armchair quarterbacks who are out of touch with patient reality.
As far as I am concerned, I glean far more practical information from individual patient case studies than from artificially homogenized trials involving large groups of patients.
It appears that the Emperor of Research is wearing no clothes. Society as a whole is dazzled by quantitative data - and seems to have lost its capacity for common sense and sound judgment.We have been bamboozled into believing that our own experiences cannot be trusted.
This, to me, is the true crisis engendered by modern medicine. Its misguided beliefs regarding experiential evidence have had a dehumanizing and disempowering effect on doctors and patients alike.
This issue is particularly important to homeopathy because it is an empirical science. In other words, it places a great deal of emphasis on patient experience. Homeopathic evaluations are heavily influenced by the subjective information provided by patients regarding their own perceptions of their illnesses.
The standards of evidence used by homeopathy are much broader than those of conventional medicine. Homeopathy is more inclusive because, in addition to research findings and objective diagnostic information, it respects the value of subjective patient input.
Conventional medicine places much higher value on objective factors like lab results and imaging tests. It shows little interest in the subjective evidence that is so important to homeopathy. However, none of this mitigates the fact that there are numerous conventionally designed clinical trials that point to the benefits of homeopathy.
Objection 5. Homeopathic treatment is dangerous because it prevents patients from obtaining the "real" medical care that they need.
This objection is just another red herring. Homeopathic treatment is known for its lack of side effects and unparalleled safety record.
When compared side-by-side, allopathic medicine is far more prone to iatrogenic dangers including allergic reactions, side effects, adverse events, and complications.
Furthermore, the course of illness is not always predictable. Even a well-chosen antibiotic, for example, may not work, during which time the patient's condition can worsen. A doctor may diagnose indigestion in a patient who later turns out to have appendicitis.
These types of events occur all the time. And they can happen to practitioners of all stripes; allopathic, homeopathic, and otherwise. All practitioners have patients who take turns for the worse, and who get sick in spite of their best efforts. To argue that this is unique to homeopaths is ludicrous.
The reverse is also true. I have seen my share of patients who, in my medical opinion, could have avoided the side effects and complications from various drugs or surgical interventions had they chosen to consult me for homeopathic care in the first place.
In fact, homeopathic physicians have an advantage in the sense that they have training in both conventional and homeopathic approaches. As it turns out, "real" medical care is not the exclusive province of orthodox medicine.
Homeopathy is here to stay
In spite of relentless opposition, homeopathy has withstood the test of time. It continues to endure deliberate misinformation campaigns designed to undermine its good reputation. Hard core skeptical ideologues hurl epithets like "junk science" and "pseudoscience."
Much of the rhetoric coming from these anti-homeopathy mercenaries amounts to defamation of character. They need to be identified for who they are and held accountable for their libel and slander. These self-proclaimed defenders of science are the most unscientific hucksters of all.
Homeopathic remedies are manufactured by legitimate pharmacies, regulated by the FDA, and in popular demand among consumers. But few U.S. physicians show any interest in learning about how homeopathy can help their patients.
Furthermore, the corporate medical establishment views homeopathy as competition. PhRMA can't own homeopathic medicines exclusively because they cannot be patented.
Homeopathic medicines are exceptionally safe precisely because the material quantities involved are so minute. As such, the likelihood of an allergic reaction or adverse event is virtually nil. One can quibble over whether homeopathic medicines act as bioenergetic catalysts or whether the life force is a real thing or not.
It doesn't really matter, because the final results are what count. Millions of doctors and patients around the globe can attest to the positive benefits of homeopathic treatment.
As bioenergetic catalysts, homeopathic remedies have broad and all-encompassing effects on human health. Homeopathy is truly holistic because it acts on the whole person. Because homeopathic remedies have such deep effects, they are capable of getting to the root of chronic health problems.
When a homeopathic remedy gets to the root of a problem, the life force ceases to generate symptoms because there is no further need to call attention to the problem.
Homeopathy is safe, inexpensive, and effective. It represents the cutting-edge of Space Age futuristic medicine precisely because it transcends the pitfalls of material medicine. In the immortal words of Bones McCoy, "I'm a doctor, Jim, not a car mechanic!"
3. Database. Initiative to Promote Research in Homeopathy.
5 Valid Reasons To Stop Using Aluminium - Aluminium Is Toxic To All Life Forms October 20 2015 | From: NaturalNews / GreenMedInfo
Most people probably think they don’t use aluminum all that often. A little bit of aluminum foil here and there to cover a dish and that’s about it, right? Unfortunately, no.
Our bodies have a hard time knowing what to do with this aluminum and it usually ends up accumulating over time in the kidney, lungs, liver, brain, and thyroid.
Five Reasons to Stop Using Aluminum Now
1. Damage to your Central Nervous System: This consists of the brain and spinal cord. Studies suggest that aluminum exposure may be linked to autism, brain disease, and bone disease in children. In adults, aluminum exposure has been linked to neurological defects similar to Alzheimer’s.
2. Brain Damage:Studies have shown that aluminum has the ability to create toxic, oxidative stress in the brain. Unfortunately, your brain can accumulate a lot of aluminum and not be able to rid itself of it. This aluminum store can result in MS, Attention Deficit Disorder, epilepsy, chronic fatigue syndromes, and Alzheimer’s, as previously mentioned.
3. Robs the Body of Vitamins: Among the vitamins that aluminum steals from the body are magnesium, calcium, and iron. Reduced calcium absorption can result in brittle bones and is especially dangerous for elderly people. Iron deficiency can lead to constant tiredness, weakness, paleness, and lightheadedness. Magnesium is a vitamin that many adults already do not get enough of, and the amount of aluminum found in so many products only exacerbates this issue. Magnesium is needed by every organ in your body to work properly. Side effects of low magnesium include constant tiredness, heart problems, and muscle spasms.
4. It Accumulates: As already mentioned, aluminum accumulates in the body because our system don’t know how to get rid of it. Perhaps even worse, aluminum accumulates in large amounts in the bones. In combination with robbing the body of calcium, this effect drastically puts you at risk for bone breaks and fractures. It can also lead to osteoporosis.
5. Stresses the Body: Because the body is not meant to consume aluminum and it does not know how to process it, the consumption of aluminum severely stresses the body out. Aluminum in the system results in oxidative stress on the cells, which can damage the DNA in those cells and even speeding up the body’s natural aging process.
Needless to say, aluminum is not something that your body likes and it should be avoided as much as possible. Use a cautious eye when shopping for your deodorant and other beauty products, and even your groceries. Almost any food additive with the letter “E” followed by a series of numbers contain aluminum, so stay away!
Juice fasts (full of veggies) may help our bodies get rid of some of the aluminum that has been stored, but it is not a guarantee. It must be emphasized that our bodies simply are not made to process aluminum, and therefore it should be avoided as much as possible.
Many of today’s pro-vaccine elite insist that aluminum in infant and child vaccines is totally harmless. Find out the real truth, with scientific back up. Dr Suzanne Humphries, Internist and Nephrologist, has studied out the issue and shows that Paul Offit’s absurd claim that aluminum ‘plays an important role in the development of a healthy fetus’ is completely made up. Such statements from a leading vaccine educator are flat out dangerous.
The Science Of The Heart October 18 2015 | From: UpliftConnect
It does more than pump blood, it started beating before your brain was formed, and it has an electromagnetic field that can be detected across the room. It’s time that we explore the heart of the matter.
Science is hard at work de-mystifying the role of the heart in our lives and seeing beyond it’s function of pumping blood is perhaps the first step in unlocking the potential of living in the frequency of love.
Understanding the secret frequency of Love
This is not romantic love, it is a state of resonance (instead of discord) with your own mind, with the people around you, and with nature. The key to living in flow involves tuning in to your own center and letting your heart lead.
In my previous article, Beyond the Confines of Intellectwe took an honest look at the limitations of only engaging with the world through our thoughts, thus opening the door to understanding the wisdom inherent in feelings. The heart is actually part of our cognitive system, sending more messages to the brain than the brain sends to the heart. Electrically, the heart is 40 – 60 times stronger than the brain and is many more times stronger than any other electrical impulse in the body.
"The sciences of psychology and medicine are in midst of a major paradigm shift as research findings have uncovered that the heart is a sensory organ that can learn, hold memory and make independent functional decisions.
Even more surprising is the fact that the heart displays qualities of neuroplasticity, and that it can reorganize itself by growing new neural connections, just as the brain can do."
Any Google search regarding heart and science will show a long list of links from the leader in this field of research, Heartmath. They have pioneered in scientific study, but more importantly they have created practical applications to this research that are helping individuals thrive. Increasing one’s Heart intelligence can have a profound effect on personal relationships, productivity in the workplace, reduce stress, while increasing optimism and problem-solving abilities.
"By using your heart as your compass, you can see more clearly which direction to go to stop self-defeating behavior."
– Doc Childre and Howard Martin, HeartMath
I think we all know what it feels like to do something we really don’t want to do, whether it’s taxes, a job we aren’t satisfied with, or acting out of integrity with our own beliefs. Naturally this creates discordance and stress. Many times we are experiencing these feelings beneath the surface of our consciousness, yet our body is still responding to the dissonance.
Finding coherence within ourselves
When our thoughts/brain are not in harmony with our feelings/heart this creates strain and resistance within our own system on a physiological level. Bringing awareness to this process helps us to make choices that have our system working in harmony with itself, thus increasing energy and producing heightened states of wellbeing. This efficient, optimal, and harmonious functioning of the various systems within the body is known as coherence.
Want to experience flow? Increase coherence within yourself. Take this same principle and now apply it to your family, community, and ultimately the planet. The curse of competition has all of humanity, states, nations, religions, working against each other and against natural systems. The best way to increase global coherence is to increase it on an individual level.
Thankfully HeartMath has a very simple and effective exercise called Freeze-Frame to help us develop greater coherence. It is a one-minute technique that allows a major shift in perception. More than positive thinking, it creates a definitive, heartfelt shift in how we view a situation, an individual or ourselves. When under stress:
Shift out of the head, and focus on the area around your heart.
Keep your attention there for at least ten seconds.
Continue to breathe normally.
Recall a positive time or feeling you had in your life, and attempt to re-experience it.
Remember, try not simply to visualize it, but rather to feel it fully.
Ask a question from the heart: “What can I do in this situation to make it different?” or “What can I do to minimize stress?”
Hopefully this short blog will help send you on your way to increasing coherence within your system. Take some time to learn more about Heartmath and if you’d like to read more research on the topic, you will enjoy this online PDF. The first step in healing the discord in the world is to heal it within ourselves. The science of the heart has the capacity to undo our stress and overwhelm as we transition to a more coherent, peaceful world.
Doctor Robert Scott Bell Explains The History Of Modern Medicine+ Why Medical Researcher Calls Doctors 'The Most Brainwashed People On The Planet' October 14 2015 | From: TheTruthAboutCancer /iHealthTube
I asked a question about the monopoly of modern medicine and how we got to where we are today? Dr. Bell explained the journey he took to find the answers to his own health struggles and found he had been lied to about his body and health.
So he researched the history to discover modern medicine wasn’t always around; it was rather new and rooted in patented petro-based molecules manipulated to produce many different medicines that are not healthy, similar to alopathic medicine, whereby physicians used mercury on their patients, which is a poison.
However, in the late 18th century one doctor realized the problem and created homeopathic medicine from minerals and plant-based materials in small quantities. Surprisingly soldiers medical kits in the civil war museum from the south contained homeopathic medicine which shows that America used quality health supplies at one time.
Why Medical Researcher Calls Doctors 'The Most Brainwashed People On The Planet'
If current cancer therapies like chemotherapy and radiation continue to show limited success, why are doctors still using them as a first option for treatment?
Medical researcher Ty Bollinger talks about why this is still the case but why many won't use those same treatments on their own family members!
It’s hard to believe that the once almighty Monsanto is on its knees. But their dirty deeds seem to have finally caught up with them.
Monsanto shares have already dropped 27 percent this year and they just posted fourth quarter losses wider than estimates. They also announced cost-saving measures to counter their plunge; deep cuts to their workforce and exiting the sugarcane business.
“Monsanto Co. said it will eliminate 2,600 jobs as part of a cost-savings plan, joining a growing list of major corporations struggling to contain the damage from the decline in world commodities prices.
The St. Louis-based agricultural giant announced the reductions - the equivalent of 12 percent of its workforce - as it reported a loss of 19 cents a share in the fiscal fourth quarter and warned profit would remain weak through 2016."
Monsanto enjoys a near monopoly on corn and soybean in North America. They appear to have it all; they own the farmers, the industry, the politicians, and the regulators. And, yet, they’re crashing and burning.
Bloomberg cites slumping commodity prices for Monsanto’s decline. “Like DuPont Co. and Glencore Plc, Monsanto, the world’s largest seed maker, is taking steps to combat the effects of a commodity slump…”
However, Here are 5 Real Reasons Monsanto is Tanking:
1. Consumer activism: The market doesn’t want herbicide-soaked genetically modified food anymore. As people are becoming more health conscious, they prefer to eat organic food. It’s really that simple.
2. Lawsuits with farmers: Monsanto spends untold resources suing family farms for patent infringement. Farmers are forbidden from saving patented seeds year to year. Additionally when Monsanto’s GMO crops pollute neighboring farms, Monsanto sues those farms too. Not a great business model when your primary customers are farmers. An organic farmer in Australia is hoping to reverse this revolting practice.
To summarize, when people no longer want a product, market share and regulatory control mean nothing. This a long-term problem for Monsanto that can’t be fixed with cost-savings measures. That is why they’re doomed.
The battle against genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) continues on, with a growing number of countries saying goodbye to these crops for good. There are many countries who are making moves to rid their markets of GM crops.
As of this week, these countries have initiated moves to ban GMO crop cultivation:
Regardless if these GMO crops are already authorized to be grown within the EU, this clause will allow these nations to refuse if they wish to. Although, it's unclear how new trade deals like the TPP would put their refusal option at risk. Currently, the only GM crop that is allowed to be grown in Europe is Monsanto's MON810 maize.
Overall, roughly 65 percent of the EU's population is saying that they want to ban the cultivation of GMO crops. Clearly, a growing number of people are wanting to opt-out of being a part of the experiment, and when given the opportunity to choose; many will prefer to eat food that isn't genetically-modified. “At least half of the EU’s governments are rejecting the commission’s drive for GMO crop approvals. They don’t trust EU safety assessments and are rightly taking action to protect their agriculture and food,” says Greenpeace EU food policy director Franziska Achterberg.
Many of these countries already have anti-GMO legislation established, but more are joining the cause and they are increasing the strict regulation and bans against these crops. All 28 nations currently within the EU require GMO labeling, unlike the U.S. which is still battling over whether companies should be forced to label GMOs. But companies don't need to be forced to label GMOs in order for people to be able to find out what is and isn't genetically-modified, the voluntary non-gmo label verification project is evident to the success of alternative, voluntary methods.
Monsanto and other bio-tech corporations continue to face pressure from the public, over concerns for potential risks that GM crops might pose to health or the environment. From lawsuits to large-scale, world-wide public demonstrations against GM crops, and more, it's clear that people aren't going to let their concerns for these crops subside anytime soon.
It’s important to realize that your diet and general lifestyle are foundational factors that must be optimized if you want to resolve your mental health issues, because your body and mind are so closely interrelated. Depression is indeed a very serious condition; however it is not a “disease.” Rather, it’s a sign that your body and your life are out of balance.
Mounting and compelling research demonstrates just how interconnected your mental health is with your gastrointestinal health for example. While many think of their brain as the organ in charge of their mental health, your gut may actually play a far more significant role. Research tells us that the composition of your gut flora not only affects your physical health, but also has a significant impact on your brain function and mental state. Previous research has also shown that certain probiotics can even help alleviate anxiety.
So the place to start is to return balance — to your body and your life. Fortunately, research confirms that there are safe and effective ways to address depression that do not involve unsafe (and ineffective) drugs. This includes but is not limited to the following. For additional suggestions, please review the links listed under Related Articles:
Eat real food
Dramatically decrease your consumption of processed foods, sugar (particularly fructose), and grains. There's a great book on this subject, The Sugar Blues, written by William Dufty more than 30 years ago, that delves into the topic of sugar and mental health in great detail. In addition to being high in sugar and grains, processed foods also contain a variety of additives that can affect your brain function and mental state, especially MSG, and artificial sweeteners such as aspartame.
Optimize your gut flora
Increase consumption of probiotic foods, such as fermented vegetables and kefir, to promote healthy gut flora. Mounting evidence tells us that having a healthy gut is profoundly important for both physical and mental health, and the latter can be severely impacted by an imbalance of intestinal bacteria. Remember your gut is your second brain and produces more neurotransmitters than your brain.
Vitamin D is very important for your mood. In one study, people with the lowest levels of vitamin D were found to be 11 times more prone to be depressed than those who had normal levels.
The best way to get vitamin D is through sensible sun exposure. SAD (Seasonal Affective Disorder) is a type of depression that we know is related to sunshine deficiency, so it would make sense that the perfect way to optimize your vitamin D is through sun exposure.
Optimize your omega-3 to omega-6 ratio
To normalize your omega-3 to omega-6 ratio, take high quality omega 3 oils such as krill oil and radically reduce if not completely eliminate industrial processed omega 6 oils.
DHA, an animal based omega-3 fat, is crucial for good brain function and mental health
Dr. Stoll, a Harvard psychiatrist, was one of the early leaders in compiling the evidence supporting the use of animal based omega-3 fats for the treatment of depression. He wrote an excellent book that details his experience in this area called The Omega-3 Connection.
Evaluate your salt intake
Sodium deficiency creates symptoms closely resembling those of depression. Make sure you do NOT use processed salt (regular table salt), however. You'll want to use an all natural, unprocessed salt like Himalayan salt, which contains more than 80 different micronutrients.
Exercise is one of the most effective strategies for preventing and overcoming depression. Studies have shown there is a strong correlation between improved mood and aerobic capacity. There’s a growing acceptance that the mind-body connection is very real, and that maintaining good physical health can significantly lower your risk of developing depression in the first place.
Get adequate amounts of sleep
You can have the best diet and exercise program possible but if you aren't sleeping well you can easily become depressed. Sleep and depression are so intimately linked that a sleep disorder is actually part of the definition of the symptom complex that gives the label depression.
Important Message Regarding NZ Natural Health And Supplementary Products Bill October 11 2015 | From: NaturalMedicine
An important message from Health Freedom NZ: The Natural Health and Supplementary Products Bill is about to undergo its third and final reading with broad support. We doubt that there is an MP in the house that realises the harmful consequences of this Bill.
In its current form the Bill delivers the opposite of that which was outlined and agreed to by the Minister of Health in 2009 in the Joint Industry Proposal.
The Bill is drafted with a pharmaceutical mindset, implementing a list of permitted ingredients, despite all but a tiny minority of ingredients used in natural health products posing dangers. Current supplement regulations have proven perfectly capable of restricting this minority, a method known as the ‘black list’ approach – everything not on the black list is permitted.
The current bill proposes the opposite – a ‘white list’ of permitted ingredients, which renders every ingredient not on that list forbidden. The list size is woefully inadequate by comparison to the range we currently access, and given there is no history of harm from the current system, there is no reason to change.
This will wipe multitudes of natural health products off the shelves in NZ, unbelievably products which include essential nutrients which the body must get through food or supplements, and which many choose as a safer and more effective option than pharmaceutical drugs.
We will no longer be able to purchase a wide range of health products that we rely on in NZ for our health conditions.
The continued actions of behind-the-scenes bureaucrats in pushing this agenda to both injure the natural health industry and restrict New Zealanders from making their own healthcare choices is winding back the clock to 2007, when their last attempt was defeated at the 11th hour.
The human body is the last bastion of sovereignty. We must make our elected leaders ensure these bureaucrats do not infringe on our health freedom by again making it clear that this corporate agenda is not made law.
Please help us by:
Sharing this message, and our subsequent communications, to everyone you can via Email, Facebook, Twitter and any other forms of social media you use.
Write, fax, call and visit your local MP’s and opposition MPs and ask them the question WHY is the government attempting to ban the sale of nutrients which are ESSENTIAL TO HUMAN HEALTH?
Talk to your friends, family, work colleagues and associates, tell them this information, forward them more info if you can.
This attempted infringement may affect you or your family one day. We need to again send the message that health freedom shall prevail in New Zealand now and forevermore.
13 Chemical Threats To Remove From Your Home October 4 2015 | From: GreenMedInfo
While people are aware of the health risk caused by outdoor air pollution, few may consider that indoor air quality can also have a negative impact on their health. While many of these products are commonly used in the home there are healthier options available.
The average westerner spends 90 percent of their time indoors. While people are aware of the health risk caused by outdoor air pollution, few may consider that indoor air quality can also have a negative impact on their health.
According to the EPA levels of indoor air pollutants can be 2 to 5 times higher than outdoor pollution levels. In fact indoor air pollutants are ranked among the top five environmental risks to public health. Since we spend so much time indoors it is important to create a healthy, toxin free environment that is safe for everyone.
1. Non Stick Cookware - It's been 40 years since nonstick pans were introduced. Although the concept is appealing to most cooks, the hazards just aren't worth it. Nonstick coating is made of polytetrafluoroethylene which release toxic gasses that are linked to cancer, organ failure, reproductive damage and other health risks.
Healthier Options: Consider using stainless steel, cast iron, or porcelain coated pans.
2. Conventional Cleaning Supplies - All purpose cleaners frequently contain toxic chemicals such as ammonia which is a very strong irritant that can cause liver and kidney damage, or bleach which can burn your skin and eyes, and irritate your lungs. Oven cleaners and drain cleaners can cause chemical burns and emit toxic fumes that harm your lungs. Even products labeled "green," such as Simply Green, are not entirely natural.
Healthier Options: Consider nontoxic cleaning products, or make your own from ingredients around the house, such as baking soda and vinegar. Click here for recipes for homemade cleaners.
3. Air Fresheners - As time passes more negative effects are associated with these incredibly toxic products. Whether they are solids, aerosols, automatic sprayers, diffusers, or plug ins, it doesn't matter. Petrochemically-based air fresheners aggravate and can trigger respiratory problems, reproductive problems, birth defects, and are now being linked to breast cancer, heart disease and diabetes.
Healthier Options: Consider open windows, air cleaners, search for the origin of the offending odor and remove it. Click here to learn more about air fresheners.
4. CFL Light Bulbs - People may appreciate the efficiency of these bulbs, as they use less electricity. However these bulbs contain mercury. If you are using these bulbs, the EPA recommends these bulbs be taken to special facilities when broken or recycled. They also offer detailed clean up instructions of broken bulbs. Learn more.
Healthier Options: Consider sticking with the "old fashion" light bulb or LEDs till something better comes along.
5. Chemical Insecticides and Herbicides - Pests and weeds may be problematic, however the health risk of using these products may cause you to reconsider their use. RoundUp is known to create a host of physical illness. Bug sprays commonly contain cypermethrin, a known eye, skin and respiratory irritant; it is also known to have negative effects on the central nervous system. Click here to learn more about glyphosates.
Healthier Options: Consider Diatomaceous Earth, or a peppermint castile soap for insects and straight vinegar as a weed killer.
Healthier Options: Consider an organic fertilizer and compost, or to be more eco friendly consider a xeriscape yard or replacing your grass with a vegetable garden.
7. Flame Retardants - Flame retardants are used in cushions, mattresses, foam pillows, hair dryers, tvs, computers, carpets, appliances, fabrics, even your telephone. The flame retardant used in mattresses, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) accumulates in blood, breast milk, fatty tissue and is linked to liver, thyroid and neuro development issues. Since most people sleep on average 6-8 hours in their bed, you may consider purchasing an organic mattress.
Healthier Options: Consider replacing items when your finances allow. Click here to read more about toxins in the home.
8. Fabric Softener and Dryer Sheets - According to the EPA and MSDS there are numerous chemicals in fabric softeners and dryer sheets, including benzyl acetate, benzyl alcohol, ethanol, limonene, A-terpineol, ethyl acetate, camphor, chloroform, linalool and pentane. Many of these chemicals are linked to central nervous system disorders, upper respiratory tract infections, and various cancers, they also trigger asthmatic responses.
Healthier Options: Consider using wool dryer balls or spiked dryer balls which fluff your clothes. Another option is to add a ½ cup of vinegar to the fabric softener compartment in your washer. The acidity level of vinegar neutralizes the laundry soap, allowing more residue to wash out in the rinse cycle, clothes come out softer, and vinegar also removes any odor on clothes. Click here to learn more about the ingredients in Fabric Softeners and Dryer Sheets.
9. Antibacterial Products - Since their widespread use we are seeing new "super-bugs" that are resistant to antibiotics. The Center for Disease Control states concern that these anti-bacterial products may be interfering with the immune systems of young children. There is also concern about the buildup of triclosan in our bodies and our water supplies.
Healthier Options: Consider washing your hands more often in plain soap and water.
10. Plastic Shopping Bags - Plastic is forever. In the U.S. only 2% of plastic bags are recycled, the other 98% end up in landfills or the ocean.
Healthier Options: Consider reusable cloth or fabric bags. Storage crates that are easily packed up in the store and carried to your car are a great option as they are more stable than bags while driving, and have multiple uses.
11. Plastic Bottles - Most plastic bottles are made with BPA, a chemical that mimics hormones that are harmful to the endocrine system. When exposed to heat, bottles will leach these chemicals at a faster rate into your water.
Healthier Options: Consider stainless steel or glass bottles.
12. Scented Detergents - Almost all detergents contain fragrance, even those that are listed as unscented, usually have a masking ingredient to cover the scent. 95% of the chemicals used in fragrances are made from petroleum products. Many are known to cause cancer, birth defects, and damage to lungs, brain, and nerves. Fragrances are not regulated by any government or health agency. There is no law that requires fragrance ingredients to be put on product labels.
Healthier Options: Consider washing clothes in baking soda, or look for unscented laundry detergents without a masking fragrance.
13. Perfumes and Scented Soaps - As with scented detergents, 95% of the chemicals used in fragrances are made from petroleum products. Many are known to cause cancer, birth defects, and damage to lungs, brain, and nerves. Some chemicals commonly used in fragrances, such as toluene, are listed as hazardous waste worldwide. Fragrances are not regulated by any government or health agency. There is no law that requires fragrance ingredients to be put on product labels. To read more about perfumes click here.
Healthier Options: There are many organic, unscented soaps available in the marketplace.
Most Scientific Research Of Western Medicine Untrustable & Fraudulent, Say Insiders And Experts October 3 2015 | From: ActivistPost
Fraudulent scientific research is rife throughout the world due to the power of monetary influence wielded by Big Pharma, the giant cartel of multinational pharmaceutical corporations started over 100 years ago by the Rockefellers.
This fraudulent scientific research is now so widespread and pervasive it is become an open secret. There is a long list of medical journal editors, doctors and professors on the “outside”, former Big Pharma employees and executives on the “inside”, as well as government officials somewhere in between, who have stepped forward as whistleblowers and acknowledged the fraud.
Related: Ex Pharmaceutical Sales Representative Comes Clean, Reveals Horrors Of Western Medicine
Money buys favorable research. Period. This is not really surprising, given the history of Rockefeller Western medicine and the fact that Big Pharma’s business model is based on “managing” disease, “treating” symptoms and keeping patients on the hamster wheel, rather than actually healing them completely.
Everyone Knows How the “Game” Works
Whistleblower Dr. Peter Rost, former vice president of Pfizer, a giant Big Pharma company, spelled it out. In the video clip embedded below, taken from the documentary One More Girl, he reveals that everyone knows how the “game” works:
"Universities, health organizations, everybody that I have encountered … are out there …. begging for money. (Big Pharma corporations) use that money to basically buy influence … (Big Pharma provides) grants for various kinds of research … make sure they (scientific researchers) became beholden … Everyone obviously knows this is how things work.
They (scientific researchers) are not going to continue to get money unless they’re saying what you (i.e. Big Pharma) want them to say. They know it, you know it, and it’s only maybe the public that doesn’t know it."
In this way, the almost the entire medical scientific community has been compromised and has become thoroughly untrustworthy.
Fraudulent Scientific Research Exposed by Medical Journal Editors and Professors
Look at what numerous key experts are saying about this epidemic of fraudulent scientific research. Dr. Richard Horton is the current editor-in-chief of the British Lancet journal, which is respected as one of the best peer-reviewed medical journals in the world.
"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."
Then look at what Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of the esteemed New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), had to say about the pervasive fraudulent scientific research:
"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 … I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine."
Dr. John P.A. Ioannidis, a professor of disease prevention at Stanford University, published a study in a PLoS One paper entitled “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.”
He found that research conclusions are less likely to be true when study samples sizes are too small, when effect sizes are even smaller, and when there are major variances in study designs, definitions, outcomes and analytical modes. He highlighted the corrupting influence of Big Pharma and concluded that:
"There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false … it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true."
Fraudulent Scientific Research Exposed by other Big Pharma Whistleblowers
Fraudulent scientific research has also been exposed by former executives and employees of the Big Pharma machine. In addition to Dr. Peter Rost, another Big Pharma whistleblower include Dr. John Virapen, author of Side Effects: Death. Confessions of a Pharma-Insider, who admits in this book that he “bribed a Swedish professor to enhance the registration of Prozac in Sweden.”
Virapen worked for 35 years in the pharmaceutical industry internationally (most notably as general manager of Eli Lilly and Company in Sweden) where he was responsible for the marketing of several Big Pharma drugs (all of them with side effects).
He exposes how Big Pharma invests more than $50,000 per physician per year to entice them to prescribe their products, how more than 75% of leading scientists in the field of medicine are “paid for”, and how illnesses are invented by the pharmaceutical industry to increase profit.
Another Big Pharma whistleblower is Gwen Olsen, a former Big Pharma sales rep who really knew how to push for a hard sell. She reveals the underhanded tactics she was taught by Big Pharma executives to ensure doctors were prescribing their drugs.
After her niece killed herself while taking antidepressants, she changed her tune and exposed the tactics. Olsen admits that she used bribery and personal connections to sell Big Pharma meds, because she found it very difficult to sell drugs on their own merit, that the true purpose of pharmaceutical drugs is social control, that Big Pharma buys up real cures to disease, or sues companies not to release genuine cures.
She also reveals how drug effects or side effects were often separated to avoid full disclosure, e.g. if the effect was on the CNS (Central Nervous System) then Big Pharma would break it down to say dizziness, fatigue, etc. so effects would look smaller.
Sadly, patients were harmed or killed due to Olsen’s (and other drugs reps like her) intentional sidestepping / misinforming physicians about a drug’s effects. Olsen refers to the “Revolving Door Syndrome”, meaning patients who are hospitalized continue to come back repeatedly, and each time lose more of their bodily functions.
The drugs were brain damaging, could induce violence and were slowly killing them. Meanwhile, many drugs are found to be not more efficacious than a sugar pill (placebo).
Fraudulent Scientific Research Exposed by Governmental Whistleblower Too
Lastly, it is also useful to note that fraudulent scientific research has been acknowledged by governmental officials too. Dr. William Thompson of the CDC (the US Center for Disease Control) made headlines last year when he bravely came forth to publicly admit that he had cooked the books and fudged the data regarding vaccines.
Here is an excerpt of his public statement from August 27th, 2014:
"My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where I have worked since 1998.
I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics.
The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed."
Many people were harmed (or killed) by this instance of fraudulent scientific research, especially young black baby boys under the age of 3. Consequences for Thompson or the CDC for this fraudulent scientific research? Basically none.
Obama gave him legal immunity – but that’s not surprising since he also singed the NDAA (claiming the right to imprison any American indefinitely without charge or trial) and initiated his weekly Kill Lists.
Don’t Fall for Appeals to “Scientific” or “Clinical” Research when Fraudulent Scientific Research is So Rife
The lesson in all this is clear: don’t believe it when you are told by anyone involved with the Western Medical Establishment that their products are based on sound, valid, scientific, clinical evidence.
Fraudulent scientific research is so widespread you can’t know anything for sure. Maybe you have to use Western Medicine, or maybe you don’t, but don’t go in blindly believing everything you’re told.
Chemical Exposure Linked To Rising Diabetes, Obesity Risk October 2 2015 | From: ScienceDaily
Emerging evidence ties endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure to two of the biggest public health threats facing society - diabetes and obesity, according to the executive summary of an upcoming Scientific Statement issued today by the Endocrine Society.
Known EDCs include bisphenol A (BPA) found in food can linings and cash register receipts, phthalates found in plastics and cosmetics, flame retardants and pesticides. The chemicals are so common that nearly every person on Earth has been exposed to one or more.
Related: Why Touching Receipts Can Harm Your Health
The statement's release comes as Society experts are addressing a global meeting, the International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM4), in Geneva, Switzerland, on the importance of using scientific approaches to limit health risks of EDC exposure.
The statement builds upon the Society's groundbreaking 2009 report, which examined the state of scientific evidence on endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and the risks posed to human health. In the ensuing years, additional research has found that exposure is associated with increased risk of developing diabetes and obesity.
Mounting evidence also indicates EDC exposure is connected to infertility, hormone-related cancers, neurological issues and other disorders.
EDCs contribute to health problems by mimicking, blocking or otherwise interfering with the body's natural hormones. By hijacking the body's chemical messengers, EDCs can alter the way cells develop and grow.
Known EDCs include bisphenol A (BPA) found in food can linings and cash register receipts, phthalates found in plastics and cosmetics, flame retardants and pesticides. The chemicals are so common that nearly every person on Earth has been exposed to one or more.
An economic analysis published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism in March estimated that EDC exposure likely costs the European Union €157 billion ($209 billion) a year in actual health care expenses and lost earning potential.
"The evidence is more definitive than ever before - EDCs disrupt hormones in a manner that harms human health," said Andrea C. Gore, Professor and Vacek Chair of Pharmacology at the University of Texas at Austin and chair of the task force that developed the statement.
"Hundreds of studies are pointing to the same conclusion, whether they are long-term epidemiological studies in human, basic research in animals and cells, or research into groups of people with known occupational exposure to specific chemicals."
The threat is particularly great when unborn children are exposed to EDCs. Animal studies found that exposure to even tiny amounts of EDCs during the prenatal period can trigger obesity later in life.
Similarly, animal studies found that some EDCs directly target beta and alpha cells in the pancreas, fat cells, and liver cells. This can lead to insulin resistance and an overabundance of the hormone insulin in the body -- risk factors for Type 2 diabetes.
Epidemiological studies of EDC exposure in humans also point to an association with obesity and diabetes, although the research design did not allow scientists to determine causality.
The research offers insights into factors driving the rising rates of obesity and diabetes. About 35 percent of American adults are obese, and more than 29 million Americans have diabetes, according to the Society's Endocrine Facts and Figures report.
The Scientific Statement also examines evidence linking EDCs to reproductive health problems, hormone-related cancers such as breast and ovarian cancer, prostate conditions, thyroid disorders and neurodevelopmental issues. Although many of these conditions were linked to EDCs by earlier research, the number of corroborating studies continues to mount.
"It is clear we need to take action to minimize further exposure," Gore said.
"With more chemicals being introduced into the marketplace all the time, better safety testing is needed to identify new EDCs and ensure they are kept out of household goods."
In the statement, the Society calls for:
Additional research to more directly infer cause-and-effect relationships between EDC exposure and health conditions.
Regulation to ensure chemicals are tested for endocrine activity, including at low doses, prior to being permitted for use.
Calling upon "green chemists" and other industrial partners to create products that test for and eliminate potential EDCs.
Education for the public and policymakers on ways to keep EDCs out of food, water and the air, as well as ways to protect unborn children from exposure.
Click on the image above for further detail
The statement also addresses the need to recognize EDCs as an international problem. Society members are currently meeting in Geneva for the fourth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM4).
Attending members, including Jean-Pierre Bourguignon, MD, PhD, Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Liège in Belgium, emphasize key principles of endocrinology that are confirmed by recent research need to be taken into account when developing policies for identifying and regulating endocrine-disrupting chemicals.
"Exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals during early development can have long-lasting, even permanent consequences," said Bourguignon.
"The science is clear and it's time for policymakers to take this wealth of evidence into account as they develop legislation."
Doctors List 50 Reasons Why You Must Stop Drinking Fluoridated Water Now September 30 2015 | From: WakingTimes
Public water fluoridation continues to be one of the most controversial health topics in the United States and in other parts of the world.
More scientific studies pointout that fluoride is actually very dangerous, yet this practice continues in many countries.
"In Europe, only Ireland (73%), Poland (1%), Serbia (3%), Spain (11%), and the U.K. (11%) fluoridate any of their water. Most developed countries, including Japan and 97% of the western European population, do not consume fluoridated water.
In the U.S., about 70% of public water supplies are fluoridated. This equates to approximately 185 million people, which is over half the number of people drinking artificially fluoridated water worldwide. (Source)
The case against water fluoridation continues to grow and continues to be supported by an increasing body of solid scientific research.
The information in the following list was originally compiled and presented by Paul Connett, PhD, at the Irish Fluoridation Forum in October 2000. Since then, these arguments have been updated with the assistance of James Beck, MD, PhD, Michael Connett, JD, Hardy Limeback, DDS, PhD, David McRae and Spedding Micklem, and D.Phil.
Here are their 50 top reasons why you must stop drinking fluoridated water immediately:
1. Fluoride is the only chemical added to water for the purpose of medical treatment. All other chemicals are added to improve the water’s safety or quality.
2. Fluoridation is unethical because it is forced onto the public without their consent. Informed consent is standard practice for all other medication.
3. The dose of the amount of fluoride consumed is impossible to control if administered through the public water system.
4. Fluoridated water is administered equally to everyone, without regard to age, health or vulnerability.
5. Fluoride is provided in many other sources beside water, including food, salt, dental products, pesticide residues on food, etc.
6. Fluoride is not an essential nutrient that is required by any of the body’s biological processes.
7. Fluoride levels in a nursing mother’s milk are naturally very low, thus bottle-fed babies consuming formula mixed with fluoridated water may be consuming harmful levels.
8. The kidneys of an adult are only able to excrete 50-60% of fluoride ingested each day, resulting in accumulation in the body and bones.
9. No health agency in countries that fluoridate water is monitoring the side effects or results of fluoride exposure.
10. There have been no randomized controlled trials to demonstrate the safety or effectiveness to water fluoridation.
11. Acknowledged by the U.S. Center for Disease Control, the benefit of fluoride is mainly topical, not systemic.
12. Industrialized countries that have rejected water fluoridation have experienced the same decline in childhood dental decay. See graph.
13. The difference between tooth decay among children in fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities in the US is miniscule. See survey.
14. A study funded by the U.S. National Institute of Health found no significant relationship between tooth decay and fluoride intake in children. See study.
16. There is no noticeable rise in tooth decay in communities where fluoridation is stopped.
17. The decline in tooth decay started before water fluoridation was introduced.See graph.
18. The studies used to justify water fluoridation have been criticized as “especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain muddleheadedness and hebetude.” ~ Dr. Hubert Arnold, Statistician from the University of California at Davis
19. Water fluoridation programs have massively failed to achieve their key objective of lowering dental fluorosis to 10% in children. As of 2014, 41% of American adolescents had dental fluorosis. See graph.
20. Infants consuming baby formula made with fluoridated water have the highest exposure to fluoride, which has been found to be a major risk factor in developing dental fluorosis later in life.
21. Dental fluorosis may be an indicator of wider systemic damage.
22. Evidence exists that fluoride may damage the brain, interfere with brain functions, or lead to neurotoxicity.
23. Multiple studies have reported an association between fluoride exposure and reduced IQ.
24. Other studies have reported an association between fluoride exposure and non-IQ neurotoxic effects.
27. Fluoride causes arthritic symptoms due to a fluoride-induced bone and joint disease called skeletal fluorosis.
28. Fluoride damages bones.
29. Fluoride may result in an increase in bone fractures, particularly in the hips, in the elderly. Some studies suggest that even low-level exposure may have a detrimental effect on cortical bone density.
30. People with kidney disease are prone to higher accumulation of fluoride in their bones and blood, making them more vulnerable to bone damage.
31. Fluoride may be one of the causes of osteosarcoma (bone cancer).
32. Proponents of fluoridation have been unable to refute the Bassin-Oteosarcoma study (2006) that showed an increased risk of getting osteosarcoma in men that drank fluoridated water during mid-childhood.
33. Numerous studies have shown that fluoride administered to animals damages the male reproductive system, and other epidemiological studies have shown increased rates of infertility among men living in high-fluoride areas.
34. Individuals that are highly sensitive to low levels of fluoride can experience symptoms such as fatigue, headaches, rashes and gastro-intestinal problems.
35. Some subsets of the population, including infants, the elderly, those with impaired kidney function (see #30), those with diabetes, and those suffering from malnutrition, are more vulnerable to fluoride’s toxicity.
36. There is no margin of safety for the health effects of fluoridation.
37. Low-income families have no financial support to get alternative water supplies or to treat dental fluorosis, even though they are the ones being targeted by new fluoridation programs.
38. Black and Hispanic children are more vulnerable to fluoride’s toxicity resulting in significantly higher rates of dental fluorosis, while, once again, their families are less able to avoid drinking fluoridated water.
39. Minorities and low-income families are not being warned about their vulnerabilities to fluoride.
40. Highest rates of tooth decay today can be found in low-income areas that have fluoridated water.
41. The chemicals used to fluoridate water are often sourced from wet scrubbing systems of the phosphate fertilizer industry. They are classified as hazardous waste and are not pharmaceutical grade.
42. There is a lack of comprehensive testing on the silicon fluorides.
43. Studies have found an association between the use of fluorosilicic acid to fluoridate water and an increased lead uptake into children’s blood.
44. Using fluoridating agents, in combination with chlorinating agents, may lead to an increase in leaching of lead from pipes and brass fittings used in water systems.
45. The status quo regarding fluoride has been followed for too long, without conducting key health studies. Many questions raised about fluoride are unsettled, and the scientific community has much less information than it should.
Side effects of fluoridation:
46. Many endorsements by organizations such as the US Public Health Service were made before any significant health studies were conducted; they were not based on any type of scientific evidence.
47. Reports used to provide necessary re-endorsements of the fluoridation practice are delivered by hand-picked panels of “well-known medical and dental researchers who actively campaigned on behalf of fluoridation.” (Fluoride Wars, Freeze and Lehr)
48. Many scientists oppose fluoridation. As of January 2012, over 4,000 professionals have signed a statement calling for an end to water fluoridation worldwide.
49. “The political pro-fluoridation stance has evolved into a dogmatic, authoritarian, essentially antiscientific posture, one that discourages open debate of scientific issues.” ~ Dr. Edward Groth, Senior Scientist at Consumers Union
50. Medical professionals opposed to fluoridation are apprehensive about speaking out in public in fear of recriminations, censorship and intimidation. Proponents use these tactics because fluoridation practice is not based on secure scientific and ethical grounds.
For a full listing of research and sources cited by Dr. Paul Connett in his presentation, and further explanation of these 50 argents against water fluoridation, can be found here.
Further arguments against water fluoridation can be viewed here.
WiFi Backlash Trend Accelerating + Founder Of PayPal And Tesla Motors Wants To Wirelessly-Irradiate You From Space September 28 2015 | From: EMFanalysis / ExtremeTech
Cafe owners in Sydney are realizing that “Free WiFi” comes at a cost. As The Syndey Morning Herald reports, cafes are starting to limit or ban WiFi so that people will actually have real interactions. It’s economic too – allowing one customer to purchase a $3 coffee and take up a table for five for hours on end is simply not good business practice.
As the health effects of microwave radiation come into the mainstream, this trend will only accelerate. WiFi will become just like smoking – once a ubiquitous presence in all cafes/restaurants and now something that is socially unacceptable.
"The love affair between coffee shops and laptop-wielding customers may be dying out as coffee shop owners revolt against Sydneysiders’ demand to be wired up.
Wi-Fi backlash is a trend accelerating among coffee shops, bars and restaurants, where a failure to see the benefits of Wi-Fi-induced turnover is encouraging many owners to restrict Wi-Fi or ban it.”
The cafe of the future won’t have WiFi. Hemingway’s Manly manager Theo Gibson is a trendsetter.
SpaceX asks FCC to approve its Satellite Internet Plans
Satellite Internet service is usually seen as a last resort - something you get when there is literally no other option. SpaceX might be on track to change that. Elon Musk’s space firm has filed with the Federal Communications Commission seeking permission to deploy a network of satellites in orbit that would beam wireless Internet access to Earth from space. This is the first step in making the plan - first revealed in January - a reality.
Even today there are large swaths of the US and other developed nations that have little or no connectivity. It’s a matter of return on investment for the Internet service providers. If there are only a few potential customers in an area, it’s not worth the investment to run high-speed Internet infrastructure all the way out there. That leaves those people with limited options like dial-up and traditional satellite Internet.
SpaceX’s plan is to deploy a network of 4,000 small and cheap geosynchronous satellites to beam signals down to Earth. This approach would be easier to maintain than satellite Internet managed by Dish and DirecTV, which rely on just a few larger (and more expensive) satellites.
If one of SpaceX’s satellites fails, there’s a huge amount of redundancy and it’s cheap to replace. It certainly helps that SpaceX has its own rockets that can be used to launch new satellites too.
These SpaceX satellites would be set up in a low-Earth orbit, allowing them to reach more areas and hand off connections to improve reliability and speed. One of the most significant issues with satellite Internet is latency - more than half a second for most services.
Having satellites in a lower orbit with more interconnectedness will certainly help with that, but it’s not clear SpaceX’s system would be good enough for real-time applications.
Thanks Elon, for asking the world if they are fine with being irradiated by your dirty tech from space
This isn’t going to happen overnight, and it’s definitely not going to be cheap. The FCC filing seeks permission to begin a test deployment of a few satellites, which can be used to assess the antenna technology and see if the plan is even feasible.
Google and Fidelity have invested $1 billion in SpaceX, part of which is earmarked for the satellite Internet project. SpaceX estimates the project could cost as much as $10 billion when all is said and done.
Despite the high cost, Musk sees this as a good long-term source of revenue to support future spaceflight. Google is also toying with the idea of delivering Internet access to rural areas with its Project Loon balloons. For Google it’s all a matter of getting more people on the Internet to look at ads, but for SpaceX, it’s a stepping stone to Mars.
Hospital Fires Leading Cancer Surgeon For Telling The Truth About Medical Establishment September 24 2015 | From: NaturalNews
A vicious hate campaign has been waged against an internationally renowned cancer surgeon named Joseph Meirion Thomas. At first, his superiors in the medical system tried to silence him, but now they've resorted to firing him.
The courageous 69-year-old surgeon has been fired from the Royal Marsden Hospital in London because he started speaking the truth about the faults of the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK while questioning the quality of care that general practitioners provide.
The more he told the truth, the more backlash he received from the medical establishment. Hospital chiefs have not only called Thomas's criticisms a "misrepresentation of facts," but they have resorted to name calling. One attack came from Daniel Sommer, a doctor at London's Charing Cross. He said that Dr. Thomas should "shut the f*** up!" and added that he is nothing more than a "clueless xenophobe who is completely out of touch with reality."
Prideful, ego-driven medical establishment not willing to admit its faults
The medical establishment, like any other organized power structure, does not willingly admit its faults. Driven by ego, people in allegiance to the medical establishment refuse to look weak or wrong in how they systematically go about their jobs. This ego keeps the establishment from improving its practice and care. This pride stops the medical field from progressing into a fully integrative, diverse, open-minded, solution-based system. The status quo remains, bound by stubbornness.
This limits the power of healing in the profession. This unwillingness to admit shortcomings propels the establishment to come out against anyone who speaks the truth about the faults in the system.
The concerted attacks against Joseph Meirion Thomas are a perfect example of this. Whistleblowers are often hunted down and discredited like witches, but these are the people who could inspire great improvements in society if only the power structures were humble and listened to whistleblowers' concerns, skepticism and insights.
Whistleblower explains how general practitioners lack time to care for patients
Dr. Thomas wrote four comment pieces for the Daily Mail. Two of the pieces focused on the impact of health tourism in the UK. His calm expose pointed out how foreigners were abusing the NHS, making the system more prone to economic collapse. In the third piece, he discussed the burden female doctors were putting on the NHS after going through extensive training and then leaving the field to have families.
The more he addressed problems in the NHS, the more he ran into opposition. His fourth piece drew the most ire. In that piece, Thomas questioned Britain's modern general practitioner system and how doctors have become increasingly unavailable to patients. Thomas said that general practitioners hardly provide "remotely personal" service. He told the truth: doctors aren't willing to work out of hours or see patients more than once.
His employer, the Royal Marsden Hospital in London, said his opinion pieces have put the institution into "disrepute." A number of practitioners lashed back at Thomas, calling him "ignorant, unprofessional and misinformed". Bosses harassed and bullied him and said that general practitioners would stop referring their patients to him if he didn't stop.
The hospital's chief executive went to great lengths to silence Thomas. He tried to force the 69-year-old surgeon into signing a document pledging obedience to the hospital and promising that he would not write any more opinion articles unless he had permission. Thomas refused and was forced out of the hospital.
Instead of listening to people like Dr. Thomas and working on ways to improve the medical system, the stubborn medical establishment banishes people like him, forsaking positive change. In the meantime, the general practitioner system will continue to be economically unsustainable with doctor-per-patient time dwindling.
The "Institutional Corruption" Of Psychiatry: A Conversation With Authors Of ''Psychiatry Under The Influence'' September 21 2015 | From: TruthOut
What does psychiatry have in common with the US Congress? "Institutional corruption," concludes Psychiatry Under the Influence (Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), which investigates how drug company money and psychiatry's own guild interests have corrupted psychiatry during the past 35 years.
Co-authored by investigative reporter Robert Whitaker and psychologist Lisa Cosgrove, the foreword for Psychiatry Under the Influence is written by Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig, who helped create Harvard's Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics' lab on institutional corruption (where both Whitaker and Cosgrove served as fellows).
Whitaker and Cosgrove - as does Lessig - distinguish between "individual" versus "institutional" corruption, between a "bad apple" versus a "bad barrel." In individual corruption, a politician takes an illegal bribe. But in institutional corruption, nothing illegal may be occurring when, for example, politicians raise campaign money via special interest political action committees (PACS).
And just as elected officials develop dependency on special interests and become beholden to these funders instead of the citizenry, Whitaker and Cosgrove conclude, the same thing has occurred in psychiatry, which has had its social mission subverted by drug companies as well as by the psychiatry guild's self-preservation and expansionism needs.
Both authors responded to questions that I had about their recently published book.
Bruce Levine: The corruption of psychiatry by pharmaceutical companies has been widely known since the 2008 Congressional investigation of psychiatry, reported by the mainstream media including The New York Times; and this corruption has been bemoaned by major figures in medicine such as Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine.
But what you are saying is that there is a second corrupting "economy of influence" that is not as well recognized by the public but which is even more problematic. Can you speak about that?
Robert Whitaker: There has indeed been much public attention on the corrupting influence of pharmaceutical money on American psychiatry. But the public's focus on pharmaceutical companies as the main problem distracts attention from the larger corrupting influence, and that is psychiatry's own guild interests.
In 1980, when the APA [American Psychiatric Association] published the third edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual [DSM III], it adopted a "medical model" for diagnosing and treating mental disorders.
The APA then launched a public relations effort to sell this new model to the public, which meant informing the public that psychiatric disorders are real "diseases" of the brain; that they are under-recognized and undertreated; and that psychiatric drugs are very effective - and disease-specific-treatments - for these disorders. The APA has relentlessly promoted that message to the public for 35 years.
This is a narrative that has served the psychiatry guild's interests well. Pharma money flowed to the APA and to academic psychiatrists and their medical schools; psychiatry's influence in society dramatically increased; and psychiatry was able to present itself, to the public and to itself, as a medical specialty that treated diseases of the brain. Money, power, a boost in psychiatry's public image - that is a powerful mix of rewards from a narrative.
The problem is that mainstream psychiatric research was not showing it to be true. Research failed to validate the disorders in psychiatry's DSM; the chemical imbalance hypothesis fell apart long ago; and clinical studies of the drugs, including studies funded by the NIMH [National Institute of Mental Health], have shown that their short-term efficacy is of a very modest sort and that they may do more harm than good over the long-term.
But the APA and academic psychiatry haven't told the public that story of science, and that is because it runs counter to their guild interests. And, of course, the public relies on the medical specialty - as opposed to pharmaceutical companies - to be a reliable provider of information, which is why this corruption due to guild interests is so problematic.
Lisa Cosgrove: I would add to what Bob said that there was a clear scientific impulse to the APA's creation of DSM III. As we wrote in our book, the APA set out to redo its diagnostic manual in order to address issues of reliability. Spitzer, the chair of the DSM III task force, did have the public's interest at heart. He wanted to have a more scientific, empirically based taxonomy.It also should be noted, as part of this discussion, that no medical specialty or professional organization is immune to guild interests.
Psychiatry Under the Influence attempts to understand psychiatry's denial and refusal to accept blame for its failures. So, for example, Ronald Pies, editor-in-chief of Psychiatric Times, refuses to blame psychiatry for the dissemination of the disproven chemical imbalance theory of mental illness (which fueled the dramatic rise of antidepressant use).
Pies claims that the chemical imbalance theory "was always a kind of urban legend - never seriously propounded by well-informed psychiatrists," and he blames Americans' widespread belief in it on drug companies. You attribute much of psychiatry's denial and evasion of responsibility to "cognitive dissonance theory" - can you speak about this?
Robert Whitaker: Again, this is part of the "institutional corruption" lens we were using to study the institution of psychiatry and its behavior. The assumption is that individuals within the institution can't see that their behavior has been corrupted by "economies of influence."
And so, when those outside the institution begin pointing out the corruption in it, those within it may construct a narrative that protects their self-image. In this case, psychiatrists need to protect their image as honest researchers and as physicians who put the interests of their patients first. Cognitive dissonance theory reveals that there are a myriad of ways that people protect themselves in this manner.
We can see that cognitive dissonance quite clearly in Ronald Pies' claim that the "chemical imbalance" theory was always a kind of urban legend. The fact that psychiatrists, for a long period of time, regularly told patients that the drugs fix chemical imbalances in the brain represented a fundamental betrayal of those patients.
So once the chemical imbalance story fell apart publicly, what does Pies do? Does he admit, even in his own mind, that psychiatrists told this false story to patients for decades? No, he says well-informed psychiatrists never said it and places the blame on the pharmaceutical companies for telling that false story.
Pies makes this argument even though it is easy to document that the leaders of the APA often told this chemical imbalance story to the public, and that, even today, many prominent psychiatrists serve on advisory boards of patient advocacy groups that continue to tell it to the public.
Lisa Cosgrove: One of my favorite quotes is by Carol Tavris: "Mistakes were made, but not by me." None of us are immune to cognitive dissonance. It is part of the human condition to have implicit biases and remain blissfully ignorant of them.
You talk about the "social injury" caused by psychiatry's institutional corruption, and I sense that you both are especially troubled by the injury incurred by young people, especially foster kids. Can you elaborate?
Robert Whitaker: This is one of the reasons that the institutional corruption framework can prove so useful. It requires an examination of the social injury resulting from the corruption, and when you do that in this case, you see how vast it is. We, as a society, have organized ourselves - both individually and as a society - around a false narrative of science. And what has been the resulting social injury?
It has led to the pathologizing of millions of children, which is doing extraordinary harm; it has given us an impoverished philosophy of being, with its ever-narrowing boundaries of what is deemed normal; and it prevents us, as a society, from trying to create a more just society, since problems are located within the brain of the individual, rather than in poverty, poor schools and so forth. Society gets a free ride with this model.
The injury done to children in foster care illuminates, with great clarity, this larger societal injury. ... The children may be neglected, abused and so forth - they in essence drew a short straw in the lottery of life. But what do we do in the post DSM III era? We don't ask what happened to these children and try to create nurturing environments for them. Instead, we regularly diagnose them with a psychiatric disorder and medicate them.
Of course the drugs - and this is particularly true of the antipsychotics - make it more difficult for the child to think and to experience emotion.
And thus the social injury from this corruption: We as a society think we are providing medication to fix a disease the child has, while the child is now burdened with the stigma of a diagnosis and the burden of the medications.
Lisa Cosgrove: In order to fully address this social injury in marginalized populations, such as foster care children, we also need to understand that the way our health-care system is structured deincentivizes prescribing providers from taking a more contextual approach. If you talk to clinicians on the ground, that is what they want to do, but they are incentivized to prescribe.
You describe institutional corruption as a problem of "good people" doing "bad things" because of a corrupted environment. I personally know a young politician who genuinely sought to do public good but quickly grasped the reality that candidates with the most money win elections, and he was compelled to either focus on raising money or not run at all.
Is psychiatry really in that same situation? Psychiatry is not facing a big-spending opponent, and it has had every opportunity as the "incumbent" to gain public confidence by simply being honest and effective. And individual psychiatrists can reject drug company incentives and still make a good living, at least compared to most Americans - and some dissident psychiatrists do reject those incentives. Are you being too easy on psychiatry?
Robert Whitaker: Perhaps, but that too is part of the of the institutional corruption framework: Any path to reform must start with a generosity of spirit, which avoids condemnation of individuals - regardless of whether some individuals within the institution deserve such condemnation - and instead focuses on how "economies of influence" have created an environment where "corrupt" behavior has become normalized and unrecognized.
The point is that the framework seeks "understanding" rather than "condemnation," with the thought that such understanding will have two effects. First, in the absence of condemnation, leaders in the institution may be better able to see how the economies of influence have corrupted their behavior. Second, it will focus public attention on how to neutralize the economies of influence as a solution to the corruption, as opposed to stirring public anger toward individuals within the institution.
Lisa Cosgrove: I think this question points to a problem with the societal discussion we have been having. To me, this question of whether we were too easy on psychiatry is close to asking, are you "anti-psychiatry" or "pro-psychiatry?" And I think when we pose questions or answers as dichotomies, we undermine the potential for solutions.
I am not anti-psychiatry; I am not pro-psychiatry. I hope that our book provides data that enables people to think critically about these issues. In my work as a researcher, I try to do empirical work that fosters such critical thinking, and helps people make more informed decisions about their mental health issues.
In your subsection on "Psychiatry's Self-Image," you had quotes from the 12 past American Psychiatric Association presidents who address psychiatry's low professional self-esteem, upset that psychiatrists are not seen as real doctors and suffer demeaning jokes in medical school - and exalting APA members to "change the way the world thinks of psychiatry and the way we think of ourselves as psychiatrists" (Jeffrey Lieberman, APA president through 2014). In addition to trying to pump up psychiatrists' self-esteem, a major role of the APA president is apparently to attack psychiatry's critics - as Lieberman recently called you, Bob, "a menace to society." Is there any hope of reforming American psychiatry?
Robert Whitaker: This is the bottom-line question, and unfortunately, when you apply this institutional framework to psychiatry, the answer becomes clear: American psychiatry, as an institution, is not going to reform itself. The guild influence is too strong; so too the cognitive dissonance.
Lieberman is an example of this: He called me a "menace to society," but what had I done? I had written and spoken about research that reported better long-term outcomes for unmedicated psychiatric patients, compared to those taking medication. But Lieberman can't acknowledge that this could be the case, and so he needs to kill the messenger to protect his profession and to protect his own beliefs.
That is precisely why psychiatry can't be expected to reform itself. The field, as a whole, is too invested in a narrative born of guild interests, and it has shown little sign of the introspection, as an institution, that could lead it to seriously reform its ways.
So what is a possible solution? It must come from an informed public that will see the need to strip psychiatry of its authority over this domain of our lives and instead demand that the authority be vested in a multidisciplinary group of professionals, philosophers and "users" of psychiatric care.
Psychiatry could be a part of this multidisciplinary group, but not the ruler of it. But can this really happen? I am rather pessimistic, and yet, at the same time, the public is increasingly becoming aware that our society has organized itself around a false narrative and that this is doing great harm, and so perhaps this will lead to society putting its trust in a more diverse, multidisciplinary group. I hope so, because this is a case of institutional corruption that is doing great harm to our society.
Lisa Cosgrove: What we were trying to highlight in our book is the harm that can be done when norms and incentive structures develop that undermine reflexivity and critical thinking. Although it is easy to vilify a few people, to effect real change, members of that organization will need to be willing to address the ways in which their guild interests took precedence over their public health mission.
In addition, the framework of institutional corruptions gives us tools to identify solutions and to think big. If we want to effect change, we need to change our current health-care system. We have a society that thinks there is a pill for every ill and a system that incentivizes the prescribing of pills. So there needs to be a paradigm shift, as well as public policy initiatives, that will foster an appreciation of the socio-political grounding of emotional distress.
Before His Death, Father Of ADHD Admitted It Was A Fictitious Disease September 13 2015 | From: NatrualNews
If you or someone you know has a child that has been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), chances are the child is actually just fine
At least this is what the "father" of ADHD, Leon Eisenberg, would presumably say if he were still alive. On his death bed, this psychiatrist and autism pioneer admitted that ADHD is essentially a "fictitious disease," which means that millions of young children today are being needlessly prescribed severe mind-altering drugs that will set them up for a life of drug addiction and failure.
As explained by The Sons of Liberty host Bradlee Dean, who also writes for The D.C. Clothesline, ADHD was merely a theory developed by Eisenberg. It was never actually proven to exist as a verifiable disease, despite the fact that Eisenberg and many others profited handsomely from its widespread diagnosis.
And modern psychiatry continues to profit as well, helping also to fill the coffers of the pharmaceutical industry by getting children addicted early to dangerous psychostimulant drugs like Ritalin (methylphenidate) and Adderall (amphetamine, dextroamphetamine mixed salts).
"ADHD is fraud intended to justify starting children on a life of drug addiction,"said Dr. Edward C. Hamlyn, a founding member of the Royal College of General Practitioners, back in 1998 about the phony condition.
Adding to this sentiment, psychiatrists Peter Breggin and Sami Timimi, both of whom oppose pathologizing the symptoms of ADHD, say that ADHD is more of a social construct than it is an objective "disorder."
Psychiatric profession all about generating obscene profits for Big Pharma
The purpose all along for pathologizing ADHD symptoms, of course, was to generate more profits for the drug industry.
According to the citizen watchdog group Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHRI), roughly 20 million American children today are taking dangerous, but expensive, psychiatric drugs for made-up behavioral conditions like ADHD.
And another one million or so children have been blatantly and admittedly misdiagnosed with phony behavioral conditions for which psychiatric medications are being prescribed.
"Remember, there are two ways drug companies can make money:Invent new drugs, and invent new diseases already invented drugs can treat," writes Dr. Jay Parkinson, M.D., M.P.H., about the fake disease-creation industry.
"In the past decade or so, Big Pharma has created no less than 10 new novel drugs per year," he adds, noting that many of the people who have been told they suffer from ADHD actually suffer from "the consequence of bad design," meaning a conventional social and educational system that is unable and unwilling to recognize unique individuality.
This is definitely true for Jacob Barnett, the 14-year-old autistic genius whose mother was told that her son would probably never read or write. Today, Jacob is already working on his Master's Degree in quantum physics while most of his peers are still in junior high. He is also currently developing his own original theory in astrophysics, according to recent reports.
"The psychiatric / pharmaceutical industry spends billions of dollars a year to convince the public, legislators and the press that psychiatric disorders such as Bi-Polar Disorder, Depression, Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD/ADHD), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, etc. are medical diseases on par with verifiable medical conditions such as cancer, diabetes and heart disease," explains CCHRI. "Yet unlike real medical disease, there are no scientific tests to verify the medical existence of any psychiatric disorder."
Why Touching Receipts Can Harm Your Health September 12 2015 | From: GreenMedInfo
Keeping your receipts may make good financial sense, but it can seriously harm your health
If you are like me, you hesitate at the checkout counter whenever the cashier asks you "would you like your receipt"? If your inner accountant is alive and well, you will find yourself wanting to keep it, which means touch it.
But on the other hand, if you are already aware of the information in this article, the idea of handling a bisphenol A saturated thermal printer receipt without gloves makes as much sense as handling gasoline or paint thinner without protection.
And if you are really "neurotic" like me, you may find yourself thinking about the health of the cashier, who undoubtedly has been handling receipts all shift long, and will continue to be exposed -- often unwittingly -- to a significant dose of bisphenol A throughout the course of their employment. This is why I cringe doubly when I refuse a receipt, because I realize that the cashier has no idea why I would do so, nor that they have suffered a harmful chemical exposure in the very act of offering the receipt to me.
is also used in a lot of food packaging and has caused a lot of concern regarind human health
All this might sound overly cautious if it had not already been proven that exposure to thermal printer receipts is one of the primary routes through which our bodies become contaminated with the toxic synthetic chemical known as bisphenol A (BPA), a potent endocrine disruptor, carcinogen, and neurotoxic and cardiotoxic chemical, linked to over 50 adverse health effects. BPA is also found in airline tickets, gas and ATM receipts, and paper currency absorbs the BPA contained within these receipts, making daily exposure even more likely.
There are other important variables that play into how much of this chemical we absorb. For instance, bisphenol absorption is exponentially enhanced with the use of mass market skin care products, which are themselves mainly comprised of petrochemically-derived ingredientswhose toxicities are also a major concern.
There is also the disturbing fact that 93% of healthy infants aged 3-15 months were found to be contaminated with BPA without any known cause of environmental exposure, revealing how truly widespread contamination is, regardless of direct exposure to thermal printer receipts.
The chemical class known as bisphenols actually includes over a dozen different forms, including bisphenols A, B, C, F, P. The new study found that the printer receipts contained between 1-2% BPA, BPS, or BPSIP (a bisphenol S variation), by weight.
The blood and urine samples of cashiers were evaluated for bisphenol levels in post-shift samples compared with pre-shift samples, finding that the receipts contained between 1-2% BPA, PBS, or BPSIP, by weight, and that their levels of BPS were significantly higher than non-cashiers. Based on the cashier's toxicological profile, the study concluded, "Thermal receipt paper is a potential source of occupational exposure to BPA, BPS, and BPSIP."
So, what do you do if you shouldn't touch or keep your receipts?
One easy 'no touch' way to track receipts is to take a photo of it and email it to yourself or a special email account you create to account for them. You could also use one of many phone apps that help you photo and track your receipts. Here is an article on IGeeksBlog.com on the "Best iPhone Receipt Tracking Apps: Never Miss An Expense Again."
Your Body Is Electrical And Runs On Electrons – NOT Sugar, Protein Or Fat! September 9 2015 | From: PhoreverYoung
“Life’s clever. It figures out how to suck electrons out of everything you eat, everything you drink, everything you absorb from the photons of the sun to the electrons attached to minerals and then keep them under control to be used by the body when needed.”
Every breath we take, every move we make… so goes the song. Yet every move we make does depend on every breath we take and every drink (or meal) we take, because our movement is fueled by electrical (electron) energy that we store in the body. We receive our energy from the sources of sun, air, food, water, and rocks.
Electrical energy doesn’t just ‘drop’ out of the air, food or water that we ingest. In its usual form it is not chemically available. It can’t always be called upon to support every move we make because it is not always ready for chemical reaction.
For any chemical reaction to occur there needs to be two molecules involved, and each of these molecules must have something to ‘trade’, in the form of compatible atoms that are either positively or negatively charged.
Positively charged molecules (and the atoms within them) will easily and naturally unite with negatively charged molecules of equivalent and compatible charge.
Put simply, all of your body functions rely on the electrical energy released from the unity of the ‘charge’ of the molecules in it and the opposite ‘charge’ in food water or air that enters it.
So what is an ion?
An ion is any atom that has a positive or a negative charge. A positively charged ion will seek a negatively charged one to unite with, have a glorious ‘coupling’ and then turn into something totally new and available.
So why do we rave on so much about negative ions?
Because the result of every move you make (a net spending of electrical energy) is a positively charged body. The molecules in your body are left holding a positive charge. They are unavailable for future ‘couplings’ unless we get a new batch of attractive and giving negative ions in quickly.
As we hear so often these days, things ain’t what they used to be. The air is different. Putting it very frankly and unscientifically, it’s full of crud or acid. Positively charged ions are crud or acid. Nothing ever ‘goes away’ on our little green planet and every exhaust, every chimney plume, every release of gas, stays within our thin and fragile ionosphere.
It stays in the air we gulp as we run along the beach, it stays in the water we drink, and it stays in the food we eat. And all of this acidic pollution or positive ions are useless for energy production within the body.
The air we breath in our garden, only 500 meters from the beach, contains only around 150 negative ions/cc/sec. but it also contains around 700 positive ions. This means that even as we lay on the beach doing absolutely nothing, our bodies are getting short-shifted by 2000 (required) plus 700 positive charged ions less 150 negative ions = 2550 ions/cc/second.
Johnson & Johnson Admits: Our Baby Products Contain Cancer-Causing Formaldehyde September 8 2015 | From: HealthyFoodHouse
Parents everywhere were shocked to learn that the No More Tears baby shampoo from Johnson & Johnson contained formaldehyde, which has been shown to cause cancer and is most well-known for its use in embalming dead bodies
But to find out just what the danger is in adding a substance like formaldehyde to baby products you have to look at the evidence from research that has been done over the past few decades, and you must start by understanding just what formaldehyde is.
Formaldehyde has a very strong smell, and it is highly flammable. It is a clear liquid that is used in dozens of different products including cleaning solutions, building materials, glue, fabrics, paper products and insulation materials. It is also used commercially for its anti-fungal, anti-bacterial and disinfectant properties.
But what about formaldehyde and cancer? Is it as dangerous as people think? Although the long-term research on formaldehyde hasn’t been completely finished, there are several signs that point to it as a carcinogen, or cancer-causing agent.
In fact, the United States government has officially labeled it as such. The EPA has had it classified as a carcinogen since 1987.
There have been a number of studies that show that it does indeed cause cancer in both rats and humans and studies of people that work around embalming fluid like embalmers have shown that they have a higher rate of cancer than other groups. So the facts are fairly clear on whether or not formaldehyde really does cause cancer.
Johnson & Johnson Scandal
Although the company claims that the amount of formaldehyde isn’t large enough to be detrimental to humans – even infant humans – the fact is that it still has allowed this chemical for as long as they have been making the No More Tears shampoo.
It could be seen as a sign of good intentions that the company is removing it from their products. But the real question is: why hasn’t it been removed before now?
Obviously, the product doesn’t require that particular ingredient to be manufactured because they are now using a different formula that is formaldehyde free.
Also, the timing is suspect because California just passed a law that required cosmetic companies to identify more than 160 chemicals that could be harmful to people that they previously had been keeping secret.
Johnson & Johnson isn’t the only offender of including harmful chemicals in bath and body products. There are advocates that are lobbying for other cosmetic companies to remove harmful ingredients after independent researchers found that their products still contained the offending substances.
Johnson & Johnson claim that it cost them tens of millions of dollars to make the changes, so it isn’t clear if other companies will follow suit, or if they can even afford to.
Big Pharma’s Shameful Secret & Government’s Genocidal Culpability September 7 2015 | From: MyEClinik
How is it that those who have the required education, claimed to have fully embraced the Hippocratic Oath, observed professional code of ethics, are themselves deliberately killing patients by the thousands with the very knowledge and tools they have professionally acquired?
How is it that the entire pharmaceutical industry able to get away with for profit murdering machine to operate in broad daylight and no one from the entire government structure lifting a finger?
The more we dig into this deep and dark rabbit hole, the more we are convinced we are the only ones who can help ourselves.
We are so grateful to all those who have contributed to our awareness so that we can also share with you some of the best researched documentary that even a mainstream medium like Bloomberg could not ignore anymore. So, thank you very much, John.
Below is just a small part of the whole genocidal machinery aimed to thin the herd of “useless eaters” they think we are.
Big Pharma’s Shameful Secret
A six part Special Report by Bloomberg News, Big Pharma’s Shameful Secret, is a massive documented indictment of the pharmaceutical industry and its corrupt practices which would not be possible without the complicity of the stakeholders in government and academia - both having become dependents of Big Pharma.
This report, following a year long investigation, documents this industry’s widespread corrupt practices involving all the major pharmaceutical companies and commercial CROs (contract research organizations) and most importantly, the report documents FDA’s abdication of its public responsibility.
The report documents how those who profit from the business of clinical trials exploit desperate, poor, and disenfranchised people - immigrants, children, homeless people. None of the stakeholders in this seedy business are untainted: they all exploit and abuse human beings as guinea pigs.
The Bloomberg Report corroborates our consistent criticism over the years about increasingly corrupt clinical trial practices, and a dysfunctional system that protects itself while sacrificing both the safey of human subjects - whether they are patients or healthy volunteers–and the integrity of research findings.
This is a $50 billion business enterprise - that has nothing in common with medicine that was once governed by the “do no harm” principle.
The radical shift occurred when Congress enacted a bad law: the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) in 1992.
Until then, 80% of clinical trials were conducted at academic centers. When Big Pharma began to contract commercial CROs all semblance of ethical standards were swept aside. The culture of medical research changed radically as academia competed for the lucrative drug testing business, its standards changed as well. Today, 75% of clinical trials are conducted as described in this ground breaking series.
No one is safe.
You can download the PDF version of this very important and well researched documentary here.
Drug Industry Human Testing Masks Death, Injury, Compliant FDA
Oscar Cabanerio has been waiting in an experimental drug testing center in Miami since 7:30 a.m. The 41- year-old undocumented immigrant says he’s desperate for cash to send his wife and four children in Venezuela.
More than 70 people have crowded into reception rooms furnished with rows of attached blue plastic seats. Cabanerio is one of many regulars who gather at SFBC International Inc.’s test center, which, with 675 beds, is the largest for-profit drug trial site in North America.
Across the U.S., 3.7 million people have enrolled in drug tests sponsored by the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies. The companies have outsourced 75 percent of experimental drug trials to centers like SFBC, a leader in a $14 billion industry.
At the same time, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has farmed out much of the responsibility for overseeing safety in these tests to private companies known as institutional review boards. These boards are also financed by pharmaceutical companies.
So, the drug industry is paying the people who do the tests - and most of the people who regulate those tests. And that combination can be dangerous, and sometimes deadly.
“The fundamental problem is a system in which investor- owned businesses have control over the evaluation of their own products,” says Marcia Angell, editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine from 1999 to 2000. “Oversight of clinical trials is too important to leave in the hands of drug companies and their agents.”
'I’m in a Bind'
Most of the people lining up at SFBC to rent their bodies to medical researchers are poor immigrants from Latin America, drawn to this five-story test center in a converted Holiday Inn motel.
Inside, the brown paint and linoleum are gouged and scuffed. A bathroom with chipped white tiles reeks of urine; its floor is covered with muddy footprints and used paper towels. The volunteers, who are supposed to be healthy, wait for the chance to get paid for ingesting chemicals that may make them sick.
They are testing the compounds Big Pharma, the name for the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, hopes to develop into best-selling medicines.
Cabanerio, who has a mechanical drafting degree from a technical school, says he left Venezuela because he lost his job as a union administrator. For him, the visit to SFBC is a last resort. “I’m in a bind,” Cabanerio says in Spanish. “I need the money.”
Conflicts of Interest
Few doctors dispute that testing drugs on people is necessary. No amount of experimentation on laboratory rats will reliably show how a chemical will affect people. Helped by human testing, drugmakers have developed antibiotics capable of curing life-threatening infections as well as revolutionary treatments for diseases like cancer and AIDS.
These medical success stories mask a clinical drug trial industry that is poorly regulated and riddled with conflicts of interest. Every year, trial participants are injured or killed.
Rules requiring subjects to avoid alcohol and narcotics and to take part in only one study at a time are sometimes ignored by participants, putting them at risk and tainting the test data.
The consent forms that people in tests sign - some of which say participants may die during the trial - are written in complicated and obscure language. Many drug test participants interviewed say they barely read them.
Ken Goodman, director of the Bioethics Program at the University of Miami, says pharmaceutical companies are shirking their responsibility to safely develop medicines by using poor, desperate people to test experimental drugs.
'It’s an Eye-Opener’
“The setting is jarring,” says Goodman, 50, who has a doctorate in philosophy, after spending 90 minutes in the waiting rooms at SFBC’s Miami center, which is also the company’s headquarters.
“It’s an eye-opener. Every one of these people should probably raise a red flag. If these human subject recruitment mills are the norm around the country, then our system is in deep trouble.”
Pharmaceutical companies distance themselves from the experiments on humans by outsourcing most of their trials to private test centers across the U.S. and around the world, says Daniel Federman, a doctor who is a senior dean of Harvard Medical School in Boston.
The chief executive officers of drug companies should be held accountable for any lack of ethics in these tests, he says.
“The CEOs of the companies have to be publicly, explicitly and financially responsible for the ethical approach,” says Federman, 77, who still sees patients. “It’s not possible to insist on ethical standards unless the company providing the money does so.”
Pressure for New Drugs
CEOs of 15 pharmaceutical companies that outsource drug testing to firms including SFBC - among them, Pfizer Inc., the world’s largest drugmaker; Merck & Co.; and Johnson & Johnson - declined to comment for this story.
SFBC Chief Executive Arnold Hantman says his center diligently meets all regulations.
“We take very seriously our responsibilities to regulatory authorities, trial participants, clients, employees and shareholders,” Hantman, 56, says.
“We are committed to conducting research that fully complies with industry and regulatory standards.”
The pressure pharmaceutical companies face to develop new drugs has intensified in the past 15 years.
Faced with the expiration of patents on best-selling drugs like AstraZeneca Plc’s Prilosec, which has helped tens of millions of people with heartburn and ulcers, Big Pharma has been in a frenzied race to find new sources of profit.
When the patent for a company’s blockbuster drug expires, a lucrative monopoly vanishes. Such drugs typically lose 85 percent of their market share within a year of patent expiration, according to CenterWatch, a Boston-based compiler of clinical trial data.
The private independent review board companies that oversee drug trials operate in such secrecy that the names of their members often aren’t disclosed to the public.
The oldest and largest review company is Western IRB, founded in 1977 by Angela Bowen, an endocrinologist. WIRB, an Olympia, Washington-based for-profit company, is responsible for protecting people in 17,000 clinical trials in the U.S.
The company oversaw tests in California and Georgia in the 1990s for which doctors were criminally charged and jailed for lying to the FDA and endangering the lives of trial participants. No action was taken against WIRB. Bowen says she didn’t see human safety issues in those trials.
WIRB aims to visit test sites it monitors once every three years, Bowen says.
You can download the PDF version of this very important and well researched documentary here.
A judgment by the Court of Toulouse has, in fact, attributed to Marine Richard a disability of 85%, with a compensation of around € 800. The women, since years, is forced, because of his health problems, to live in the mountains, in an old barn, with no electricity and using water from a natural spring.
The Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is not officially recognized in France as a disease and it is a controversial subject among experts. It could cause headaches, tingling, sleeping troubles and several transitional problems common to many other disorders.
This last aspect would make it difficult to find clear diagnostic criteria and scientific basis to link the symptoms to exposure to electromagnetic fields. However, it would be 700,000 cases in France, all difficult to identify because these special sufferers tend to isolate themselves.
They are, in fact, people often live in caravans, caves, tents and in the woods.
Watch As Amazing GcMAF Treatment Kills Cancer Cells In Real Time September 2 2015 | From: NaturalNews
Holistic Doctors 'suicided' over this stunning breakthrough
A breakthrough cancer treatment appears to be the reason why a handful of holistic doctors were recently found "suicided" is now gaining worldwide attention as a potential universal cure for cancer. And new microscopic footage released by First Immune shows this amazing remedy in action -- the human protein GcMAF is visually seen activating the body's own macrophages, which are then able to attack and destroy breast cancer cells in vitro.
By delivering an activated version of this substance intravenously, scientists have shown that the immune system can be fully invigorated to destroy cancer cells on its own without the need for chemotherapy or radiation.
"Your GcMAF empowers your body to cure itself," explains the website GcMAF.se, operated by First Immune.
"In a healthy person your own GcMAF has 11 actions discovered so far, including two on cells, three excellent effects on the brain, and 6 on cancer. Amongst these it acts as a 'director' of your immune system."
As you'll notice in the above video, GcMAF serves as the energized mechanism for macrophages to target and eliminate breast cancer cells. The incredible mechanistic action of this substance is shown in amazing clarity, and is further described in an associated paper entitled"Multifaceted immunotherapeutic effects of GcMAF on human breast cancer cells."
"Time lapse photography over 60 hours shows the cancer monolayer ... first changing from corrugated to smooth ... as the cancer is destroyed," reveals First Immune. "[T]hen the cancer 'fingers' are also eaten and destroyed by the macrophages."
Holistic doctors 'suicided' over GcMAF, which threatens to put cancer industry out of business
Dr. Bradstreet's "suicide" was just one of about seven others that occurred all around the same time, and all within the holistic healing community.
Dr. Bradstreet and his other now-dead colleagues had all been involved in research focused on GcMAF's potential as both a treatment and cure for cancer, and one that doesn't produce deadly side effects like conventional cancer treatments do.
GcMAF doesn't actually cure cancer, of course -- it merely provides the ammunition needed by the body's own immune system to eradicate and cure cancer itself, naturally. And this represents a threat to the pharmaceutical industry, which profits to the tune of billions of dollars annually peddling quackery like chemotherapy and radiation, both of which have been shown to cause more cancer.
"GcMAF and/or oral Colostrum MAF macrophage activation therapy is indicated in the treatment of any diseases where there is immune dysfunction or where the immune system is compromised," explains the website of a clinic out of Japan that sells an oral form of GcMAF.
Besides cancer, the conditions listed as appropriate candidates for GcMAF treatment include:
Read about other anti-cancer treatments from the independent media at AntiCancer.news
You can also do your own research on other types of cancer treatments at TruthWiki.org
David Versus Monsanto August 29 2015 | From: Denkmalfilm
Imagine a storm blows across your property – and that now, without your knowledge or consent, genetically manipulated seeds are present in the garden you have tended for years.
A few days later, representatives of a multi-national corporation pay you a visit, demand that you surrender your produce - and simultaneously file a criminal complaint against you, with a fine of € 20,000, for the illegal use of patented, genetically-manipulated seeds.
What's more: The court decides in favor of the corporate group. But you fight back.
Around the world, this story represents the bitter truth. It’s the real-life experience of Canadians Percy und Louise Schmeiser, winners of the Alternative Nobel Prize, who have been fighting chemical and seed manufacturer Monsanto since 1996. Today, nearly three-fourths of genetically manipulated plants harvested worldwide originated in Monsanto labs.
Monsanto is the U.S.-based corporation responsible for the invention of such devastating and discredited products as as DDT, PCB and Agent Orange. Its aim is to gain absolute hegemony over plants - all the way from the field to the consumer's plate. And in its efforts to achieve this goal, Monsanto has no qualms. Like the Schmeisers, farmers Troy Rush, David Runyon and Marc Loisell have learned the hard way what it means to be confronted with Monsanto's methods of doing business – as have thousands of other farmers worldwide.
The Schmeisers and their allies are not only fighting against Monsanto – and for their livelihood as farmers – but for the right to freedom of speech and to their property. And, above all, they are campaigning for the future of their children and grandchildren – so that they, too, will have the chance to grow up in a world free from genetically-manipulated food.
This film is for anyone who fears that, as individuals, we have no power to confront policymakers, large corporations or the business world. David versus Monsanto offers hope: It shows that it can be done.
Fluoride: Poison On Tap Official Trailer August 26 2015 | From: FramingTheWorld
History tells us that overturning myths are rarely easy. The fluoride story is similar to the fables about lead, tobacco, and asbestos, in which medical accomplices helped industry to hide the truth about these substances for generations.
As a new generation arises we must sound the alarm yet again.
For those who have ears to hear this film is meant to be a warning. This film will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that fluoride is a deadly poison being added to our water supply.
The Shocking Story of How Aspartame Became Legal + What Is Aspartame? Five Surprising Facts You Never Know About This Chemical Sweetener August 21 2015 | From: DailyHealthPost / LiveFreeLiveNatural
Did you know that Aspartame was banned by the FDA twice? How is this product legal now? The bittersweet argument over whether Aspartame is safe or not has been going on for a long time.
On one side we have medical evidence that suggests we should avoid using it and on the other side we lean on the FDA’s approval that suggests it is safe.
You would think that something so widely used and so well accepted would have quite the pristine story leading to its acceptance. But that just isn’t the case as you will soon discover after reading this post.
How Aspartame Became Legal
Born out of accident.
In the mid 1960's a chemist working for the company by the name of of G.D. Searle accidentally created aspartame in a quest to produce a cure for stomach ulcers. Searle puts aspartame through some testing procedures and eventually gets approval by the FDA.
Unfortunately, the testing process was among the worst. Not long after approval, the dangers of aspartame brought G.D. Searle under major fire.
In fact: Aspartame triggered the first criminal investigation of a manufacturer put into place by the FDA in 1977.
In 1980 the FDA banned aspartame from use after having 3 independent scientist study the artificial sweetener. Why?
Because they found that aspartame came with a high danger of inducing brain tumors.
Brain tumors: Bad. Aspartame banned by the FDA.
In January of 1981 Donald Rumsfeld, CEO of Searle, stated in a sales meeting that he was going to “call in his markers” and make a push to get aspartame approved. That month Ronald Reagan was sworn in as President of the United States. His transition team included Rumsfeld who hand picked Dr. Arthur Hull Hayes Jr. to be the new FDA Commissioner.
Within a couple of months, Hayes appointed a 5-person Scientific Commission to review the claims on aspartame. In a 3 – 2 decision, the panel upheld the original ban, stating that the artificial sweetener was unsafe.
Aspartame: Banned twice by the FDA.
Despite the panel’s decision, Hayes later installed a sixth member on the commission who voted in favor of the making aspartame legal. The vote was now deadlocked.
So what happened?
Hayes personally broke the tie in aspartame’s favor. (Keep in mind that Dr. Hayes, a pharmacologist had no previous experience with food additives before becoming the FDA Director.)
On July 18, 1981 Hayes officially approved the use of aspartame as an artificial sweetener in dry goods. (How’s this for a kicker: In 1983 Hayes later left his post at the FDA amid accusations that he was accepting corporate gifts for political favors. BUT, just before leaving office in scandal, Hayes approved the use of aspartame in beverages.)
The icing on the cake: In 1985 Searle was absorbed by Monsanto. Donald Rumsfeld reportedly received a $12 million bonus. And the sad tale of fake food and experimentation on the human race continued onward.
December 1965– While working on an ulcer drug, James Schlatter, a chemist at G.D. Searle, accidentally discovers aspartame, a substance that is 180 times sweeter than sugar yet has no calories.
Spring 1967 – Searle begins the safety tests on aspartame that are necessary for applying for FDA approval of food additives.
Fall 1967 –Dr. Harold Waisman, a biochemist at the University of Wisconsin, conducts aspartame safety tests on infant monkeys on behalf of the Searle Company. Of the seven monkeys that were being fed aspartame mixed with milk, one dies and five others have grand mal seizures.
November 1970 – Cyclamate, the reigning low-calorie artificial sweetener - is pulled off the market after some scientists associate it with cancer. Questions are also raised about safety of saccharin, the only other artificial sweetener on the market, leaving the field wide open for aspartame.
December 18, 1970 – Searle Company executives lay out a “Food and Drug Sweetener Strategy’ that they feel will put the FDA into a positive frame of mind about aspartame. An internal policy memo describes psychological tactics the company should use to bring the FDA into a subconscious spirit of participation” with them on aspartame and get FDA regulators into the “habit of saying, “Yes”.”
Spring 1971– Neuroscientist Dr. John Olney (whose pioneering work with monosodium glutamate was responsible for having it removed from baby foods) informs Searle that his studies show that aspartic acid (one of the ingredients of aspartame) caused holes in the brains of infant mice. One of Searle’s own researchers confirmed Dr. Olney’s findings in a similar study.
February 1973– After spending tens of millions of dollars conducting safety tests, the G.D. Searle Company applies for FDA approval and submits over 100 studies they claim support aspartame’s safety.
March 5, 1973– One of the first FDA scientists to review the aspartame safety data states that:
"The information provided (by Searle) is inadequate to permit an evaluation of the potential toxicity of aspartame”.
She says in her report that in order to be certain that aspartame is safe, further clinical tests are needed.
May 1974– Attorney, Jim Turner (consumer advocate who was instrumental in getting cyclamate taken off the market) meets with Searle representatives to discuss Dr. Olney’s 1971 study which showed that aspartic acid caused holes in the brains of infant mice.
July 26, 1974 – The FDA grants aspartame its first approval for restricted use in dry foods.
August 1974– Jim Turner and Dr. John Olney file the first objections against aspartame’s approval.
March 24, 1976– Turner and Olney’s petition triggers an FDA investigation of the laboratory practices of aspartame’s manufacturer, G.D. Searle. The investigation finds Searle’s testing procedures shoddy, full of inaccuracies and “manipulated” test data. The investigators report they “had never seen anything as bad as Searle’s testing.”
January 10, 1977 – The FDA formally requests the U.S. Attorney’s office to begin grand jury proceedings to investigate whether indictments should be filed against Searle for knowingly misrepresenting findings and “concealing material facts and making false statements” in aspartame safety tests. This is the first time in the FDA’s history that they request a criminal investigation of a manufacturer.
January 26, 1977– While the grand jury probe is underway, Sidley & Austin, the law firm representing Searle, begins job negotiations with the U.S. Attorney in charge of the investigation, Samuel Skinner.
March 8, 1977 – G. D. Searle hires prominent Washington insider Donald Rumsfeld as the new CEO to try to turn the beleaguered company around. A former Member of Congress and Secretary of Defense in the Ford Administration, Rumsfeld brings in several of his Washington cronies as top management.
July 1, 1977– Samuel Skinner leaves the U.S. Attorney’s office and takes a job with Searle’s law firm. (see Jan. 26th)
August 1, 1977– The Bressler Report, compiled by FDA investigators and headed by Jerome Bressler, is released. The report finds that 98 of the 196 animals died during one of Searle’s studies and weren’t autopsied until later dates, in some cases over one year after death. Many other errors and inconsistencies are noted. For example, a rat was reported alive, then dead, then alive, then dead again; a mass, a uterine polyp, and ovarian neoplasms were found in animals but not reported or diagnosed in Searle’s reports.
December 8, 1977 – U.S. Attorney Skinner’s withdrawal and resignation stalls the Searle grand jury investigation for so long that the statue of limitations on the aspartame charges runs out. The grand jury investigation is dropped.
June 1, 1979 – The FDA established a Public Board of Inquiry (PBOI) to rule on safety issues surrounding NutraSweet.
September 30, 1980– The Public Board of Inquiry concludes NutraSweet should not be approved pending further investigations of brain tumors in animals. The board states it “has not been presented with proof of reasonable certainty that aspartame is safe for use as a food additive.”
January 1981 – Donald Rumsfeld, CEO of Searle, states in a sales meeting that he is going to make a big push to get aspartame approved within the year. Rumsfeld says he will use his political pull in Washington, rather than scientific means, to make sure it gets approved.
January 21, 1981 – Ronald Reagan is sworn in as President of the United States. Reagan’s transition team, which includes Donald Rumsfeld, CEO of G. D. Searle, hand picks Dr. Arthur Hull Hayes Jr. to be the new FDA Commissioner.
March, 1981 – An FDA commissioner’s panel is established to review issues raised by the Public Board of Inquiry.
May 19, 1981 – Three of six in-house FDA scientists who were responsible for reviewing the brain tumor issues, Dr. Robert Condon, Dr. Satya Dubey, and Dr. Douglas Park, advise against approval of NutraSweet, stating on the record that the Searle tests are unreliable and not adequate to determine the safety of aspartame.
July 15, 1981– In one of his first official acts, Dr. Arthur Hayes Jr., the new FDA commissioner, overrules the Public Board of Inquiry, ignores the recommendations of his own internal FDA team and approves NutraSweet for dry products. Hayes says that aspartame has been shown to be safe for its’ proposed uses and says few compounds have withstood such detailed testing and repeated close scrutiny.
October 15, 1982– The FDA announces that Searle has filed a petition that aspartame be approved as a sweetener in carbonated beverages and other liquids.
July 1, 1983– The National Soft Drink Association (NSDA) urges the FDA to delay approval of aspartame for carbonated beverages pending further testing because aspartame is very unstable in liquid form. When liquid aspartame is stored in temperatures above 85 degrees Fahrenheit, it breaks down into DKP and formaldehyde, both of which are known toxins.
July 8, 1983– The National Soft Drink Association drafts an objection to the final ruling which permits the use of aspartame in carbonated beverages and syrup bases and requests a hearing on the objections. The association says that Searle has not provided responsible certainty that aspartame and its’ degradation products are safe for use in soft drinks.
August 8, 1983– Consumer Attorney, Jim Turner of the Community Nutrition Institute and Dr. Woodrow Monte, Arizona State University’s Director of Food Science and Nutritional Laboratories, file suit with the FDA objecting to aspartame approval based on unresolved safety issues.
September, 1983– FDA Commissioner Hayes resigns under a cloud of controversy about his taking unauthorized rides aboard a General Foods jet. (General foods is a major customer of NutraSweet) Burson-Marsteller, Searle’s public relation firm (which also represented several of NutraSweet’s major users), immediately hires Hayes as senior scientific consultant.
Fall 1983– The first carbonated beverages containing aspartame are sold for public consumption.
November 1984 – Center for Disease Control (CDC) “Evaluation of consumer complaints related to aspartame use.” (summary by B. Mullarkey)
November 3, 1987 – U.S. hearing, “NutraSweet: Health and Safety Concerns,” Committee on Labor and Human Resources, Senator Howard Metzenbaum, chairman.
What Is Aspartame? Five Surprising Facts You Never Know About This Chemical Sweetener
The controversy surrounding one of the world’s most popular artificial sweeteners, aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal), continues some 30 years after the chemical was rammed through the regulatory process by pharmaceutical interests, despite its well-documented dangers. And yet to this very day, many people are still unaware of the chemical sweetener’s sordid history, not to mention what aspartame is actually made from and how it affects the body and brain.
To many, aspartame is just another FDA-approved sugar alternative that has to be safe, otherwise it wouldn’t be on the market. But the truth about aspartame is much more sinister, including how the chemical sweetener gained market approval. And there’s so much more to the aspartame story that you’ve probably never heard before, thanks to government collusion with powerful drug interests.
1) Aspartame is converted by the body into formaldehyde, a cancer-causing chemical.
Composed of three unique compounds, aspartame is a synergistically toxic chemical, meaning the sum of its individual parts is exponentially more toxic than each one by itself. And yet even in isolation, the three main constituents found in aspartame — aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol — are idiosyncratically toxic in their own right.
Free methanol in particular is highly toxic, converting first into formaldehyde and then into formic acid upon consumption. Unlike the methanol found in alcoholic beverages and various fruits and vegetables, the methanol produced by aspartame is not accompanied by ethanol, which acts as a protector against methanol poisoning. By itself, methanol embalms living tissues and damages DNA, and can cause lymphoma, leukemia, and other forms of cancer.
2) Aspartame causes obesity and metabolic syndrome.
Artificial sweeteners are typically viewed as a safe alternative to sugar, which many people now recognize as a cause of weight gain and metabolic disorders like diabetes when consumed in excess. But a number of scientific studies have found that chemicals like aspartame are perhaps even more damaging, as they promote weight gain in ways unrelated to caloric intake.
3) Reagan-appointed FDA commissioner helped get aspartame approved despite evidence showing its toxicity.
Believe it or not, aspartame was an accidental discovery made by scientists working on the development of an ulcer drug for G.D. Searle and Company, a pharmaceutical corporation that was later acquired by Monsanto in 1985. When researchers discovered that the chemical had a sweet taste, G.D. Searle presented it to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for commercial approval.
But the earliest safety studies conducted on the chemical found that it caused grand mal seizures and death in monkeys, findings that were withheld from the FDA. When FDA scientists discovered on their own that aspartame was unsafe, G.D. Searle made a strategic move, waiting for a new FDA commissioner appointed by the late Ronald Reagan to force the chemical through the approval process.
The details of this political transaction are spelled out in the following document posted at the FDA’s own website, but suffice it to say that aspartame was never proven to be safe. It was only through corruption that this artificial sweetener ended up making its way into more than 9,000 consumer products, many of which still contain it today.
4) Aspartame is made from the feces of genetically-modified (GM) E. coli bacteria.
Another disturbing fact about aspartame is that it is produced from the feces of genetically-modified E. coli bacteria. Similar to the fermentation process, E. coli are modified with special genes that cause them to produce unnaturally high levels of a special enzyme that, as a byproduct, produces the phenylalanine needed for aspartame production.
Aspartame is composed of roughly 40 percent aspartic acid, a free-form amino acid that has the ability to cross the blood-brain barrier. When excess amounts of this compound via aspartame enter the body, brain cells are bombarded with an excess of calcium. The result is neural cell damage and even cell death, which can lead to serious brain damage.
In extreme cases, exposure to aspartic acid, also known as aspartate, can cause neurological conditions like epilepsy and Alzheimer’s disease, and is also implicated in causing diseases like multiple sclerosis (MS) and dementia. Endocrine disorders, or imbalanced or inadequate hormone production, are also linked to so-called “excitotoxin” exposure, or exposure to free-form amino acids like aspartate that overstimulate the brain.
Dr. Chris Shaw: Aluminium In The Body August 20 2015 | From:Youtube / And another website that has been taken offline
Dr. Christopher Shaw is a neuroscientist at University of British Columbia and has been focusing his research on neurotoxicity of aluminium and ALS-parkinsonism dementia complex.
And apologies, but on the other hand - no apologies with regards to the point that it is actually spelt aluminium. Further to that - the rest of the world outside of America does not speak and write in "old english", it is in fact actual English, not the bastardised version used in North America which seems to have an aversion to the correct placement of and actual usage of vowels.
No offence intended; let's just get this straight for the record. If you need a lesson, we can find you a link regarding english, as opposed to 'american'.
Aluminum adjuvants are found in many vaccines, including Gardasil.
The University Of Otago, FDA, Medsafe & Other Bodies Admit That Their Claims About MMS Being Dangerous Are Not Supported By Any Scientific Evidence August 17 2015 | From: MMS
The FDA (Food and Drug Administration) was asked by an MMS customer to provide the scientific studies or any other evidence to support the statements made on their website; that using activated MMS (chlorine dioxide) in low concentrations was dangerous. The customer had asked as follows;
“Can you please send me (or direct me to), the scientific studies and any other evidence upon which you have based your warnings against taking chlorine dioxide in the low concentrations being promoted by MMS users."
The FDA responded by directing the customer to the same 'statements made on their website' as being their evidence. That is like going to court accusing someone of stealing from you, and the only evidence that you have, is you saying that they stole from you!
The FDA further stated that they had no "additional information" to offer, that would scientifically support their claims.
See letter here;
The statements made by the FDA are the basis of most other warnings being released regarding MMS, such as those released by Health Canada, Food Standards Authority in the UK, The Victorian Poisons Centre in Australia, Medsafe in NZ; plus all of the related Media articles.
If the source of such claims now admit that they have published statements that are not supported by any scientific evidence; wouldn't that cast the same unreliability upon all other such warnings?
For example, The Victorian Poisons Centre reference the FDA's statements as evidence of MMS being dangerous.
The Victorian Poisons Centre however admit that the only complaints that they have received, are from incorrect use of MMS; see letter here;
As well as quoting the somewhat discredited warnings from the FDA, the Victorian Poisons Centre state in their letter above that "there is no published scientifically sound evidence that MMS has any health benefits".
Other MMS customers have also received from official sources, similar responses to their requests for evidence of MMS being dangerous, or evidence of harm resulting from correctly following the MMS sacraments of The Genesis II Church of Health and Healing.
Here for example, Medsafe in NZ admit that their department has also conducted NO testing of MMS or chlorine dioxide, upon which they could support any of their claims regarding MMS being dangerous;
Another letter confirms that in relation to safety, the National Poisons Centre has received no complaints or reports of adverse reactions in relation to the use of MMS, over a 13 year period of it's use in NZ;
Likewise, the Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring (CARM) has received no reports of adverse reactions in relation to the use of MMS at the time of writing;
So with the somewhat discredited information published by the FDA (and then duplicated by other departments around the world), put aside; here is what we are left with in relation to activated MMS (chlorine dioxide):
Scientific University study confirming low dose chlorine dioxide is safe for human consumption.
Supposedly no published scientific evidence that chlorine dioxide has any health benefits.
No scientific evidence that low dose chlorine dioxide causes harm.
Confirmation from many official sources, that no reports of harm have been received from using chlorine dioxide correctly.
Tens of thousands of individual cases from around the world confirming that chlorine dioxide has health benefits.
Tens of thousands of individual cases from around the world confirming that chlorine dioxide is being safely ingested.
It seems that the supposed absence of scientific evidence that chlorine dioxide has any health benefits, has had no influence on actual results showing that it does!
The official sources agree with the results, that using activated MMS (chlorine dioxide) correctly has not caused serious harm.
The Teflon Toxin - DuPont And The Chemistry Of Deception August 16 2015 | From: TheIntercept
Ken Wamsley Sometimes Dreams that he’s playing softball again. He’ll be at center field, just like when he played slow pitch back in his teens, or pounding the ball over the fence as the crowd goes wild. Other times, he’s somehow inexplicably back at work in the lab. Wamsley calls them nightmares, these stories that play out in his sleep, but really the only scary part is the end, when “I wake up and I have no rectum anymore.”
Wamsley is 73. After developing rectal cancer and having surgery to treat it in 2002, he walks slowly and gets up from the bench in his small backyard slowly. His voice, which has a gentle Appalachian lilt, is still animated, though, especially when he talks about his happier days. There were many.
While Wamsley knew plenty of people in Parkersburg, West Virginia, who struggled to stay employed, he made an enviable wage for almost four decades at the DuPont plant here. The company was generous, helping him pay for college courses and training him to become a lab analyst in the Teflon division.
He enjoyed the work, particularly the precision and care it required. For years, he measured levels of a chemical called C8 in various products. The chemical “was everywhere,” as Wamsley remembers it, bubbling out of the glass flasks he used to transport it, wafting into a smelly vapor that formed when he heated it. A fine powder, possibly C8, dusted the laboratory drawers and floated in the hazy lab air.
At the time, Wamsley and his coworkers weren’t particularly concerned about the strange stuff.
“We never thought about it, never worried about it,” he said recently. He believed it was harmless;
“Like a soap. Wash your hands [with it], your face, take a bath.”
Today Wamsley suffers from ulcerative colitis, a bowel condition that causes him sudden bouts of diarrhea. The disease also can - and his case, did - lead to rectal cancer. Between the surgery, which left him reliant on plastic pouches that collect his waste outside his body and have to be changed regularly, and his ongoing digestive problems, Wamsley finds it difficult to be away from his home for long.
Sometimes, between napping or watching baseball on TV, Wamsley’s mind drifts back to his DuPont days and he wonders not just about the dust that coated his old workplace but also about his bosses who offered their casual assurances about the chemical years ago.
“Who knew?” he asked.
“When did they know? Did they lie?”
The Washington Works DuPont plant in Parkersburg, West Virginia, on Wednesday, August 5, 2015.
Until recently, few people had heard much about chemicals like C8. One of tens of thousands of unregulated industrial chemicals, perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA - also called C8 because of the eight-carbon chain that makes up its chemical backbone - had gone unnoticed for most of its eight or so decades on earth, even as it helped cement the success of one of the world’s largest corporations.
Several blockbuster discoveries, including nylon, Lycra, and Tyvek, helped transform the E. I. du Pont de Nemours company from a 19th-century gunpowder mill into “one of the most successful and sustained industrial enterprises in the world,” as its corporate website puts it.
Indeed, in 2014, the company reaped more than $95 million in sales each day. Perhaps no product is as responsible for its dominance as Teflon, which was introduced in 1946, and for more than 60 years C8 was an essential ingredient of Teflon.
Called a “surfactant” because it reduces the surface tension of water, the slippery, stable compound was eventually used in hundreds of products, including:
Gore-Tex and other waterproof clothing; coatings for eye glasses and tennis rackets; stain-proof coatings for carpets and furniture; fire-fighting foam; fast food wrappers; microwave popcorn bags; bicycle lubricants; satellite components; ski wax; communications cables; and pizza boxes.
Concerns about the safety of Teflon, C8, and other long-chain perfluorinated chemicals first came to wide public attention more than a decade ago, but the story of DuPont’s long involvement with C8 has never been fully told.
Over the past 15 years, as lawyers have been waging an epic legal battle - culminating as the first of approximately 3,500 personal injury claims comes to trial in September - a long trail of documents has emerged that casts new light on C8, DuPont, and the fitful attempts of the Environmental Protection Agency to deal with a threat to public health.
This story is based on many of those documents, which until they were entered into evidence for these trials had been hidden away in DuPont’s files.
Among them are write-ups of experiments on rats, dogs, and rabbits showing that C8 was associated with a wide range of health problems that sometimes killed the lab animals.
Many thousands of pages of expert testimony and depositions have been prepared by attorneys for the plaintiffs. And through the process of legal discovery they have uncovered hundreds of internal communications revealing that DuPont employees for many years suspected that C8 was harmful and yet continued to use it, putting the company’s workers and the people who lived near its plants at risk.
Ken Wamsley, 73, stands outside of his home in Parkersburg, West Virginia, on Tuesday, August 4, 2015
The best evidence of how C8 affects humans has also come out through the legal battle over the chemical, though in a more public form.
As part of a 2005 settlement over contamination around the West Virginia plant where Wamsley worked, lawyers for both DuPont and the plaintiffs approved a team of three scientists, who were charged with determining if and how the chemical affects people.
In 2011 and 2012, after seven years of research, the science panel found that C8 was “more likely than not” linked to ulcerative colitis - Wamsley’s condition - as well as to high cholesterol; pregnancy-induced hypertension; thyroid disease; testicular cancer; and kidney cancer.
The scientists’ findings, published in more than three dozen peer-reviewed articles, were striking, because the chemical’s effects were so widespread throughout the body and because even very low exposure levels were associated with health effects.
We know, too, from internal DuPont documents that emerged through the lawsuit, that Wamsley’s fears of being lied to are well-founded.
DuPont scientists had closely studied the chemical for decades and through their own research knew about some of the dangers it posed. Yet rather than inform workers, people living near the plant, the general public, or government agencies responsible for regulating chemicals, DuPont repeatedly kept its knowledge secret.
Another revelation about C8 makes all of this more disturbing and gives the upcoming trials, the first of which will be held this fall in Columbus, Ohio, global significance: This deadly chemical that DuPont continued to use well after it knew it was linked to health problems is now practically everywhere.
A man-made compound that didn’t exist a century ago, C8 is in the blood of 99.7 percent of Americans, according to a 2007 analysis of data from the Centers for Disease Control, as well as in newborn human babies, breast milk, and umbilical cord blood.
A growing group of scientists have been tracking the chemical’s spread through the environment, documenting its presence in a wide range of wildlife, including Loggerhead sea turtles, bottlenose dolphins, harbor seals, polar bears, caribou, walruses, bald eagles, lions, tigers, and arctic birds.
Although DuPont no longer uses C8, fully removing the chemical from all the bodies of water and bloodstreams it pollutes is now impossible. And, because it is so chemically stable - in fact, as far as scientists can determine, it never breaks down - C8 is expected to remain on the planet well after humans are gone from it.
'In some ways, C8 already is the tobacco of the chemical industry - a substance whose health effects were the subject of a decades-long corporate cover-up.'
Eight companies are responsible for C8 contamination in the U.S. (In addition to DuPont, the leader by far in terms of both use and emissions, seven others had a role, including 3M, which produced C8 and sold it to DuPont for years.)
If these polluters were ever forced to clean up the chemical, which has been detected by the EPA 716 times across water systems in 29 states, and in some areas may be present at dangerous levels, the costs could be astronomical - and C8 cases could enter the storied realm of tobacco litigation, forever changing how the public thinks about these products and how a powerful industry does business.
In some ways, C8 already is the tobacco of the chemical industry - a substance whose health effects were the subject of a decades-long corporate cover-up. As with tobacco, public health organizations have taken up the cause - and numerous reporters have dived into the mammoth story.
Like the tobacco litigation, the lawsuits around C8 also involve huge amounts of money. And, like tobacco, C8 is a symbol of how difficult it is to hold companies responsible, even when mounting scientific evidence links their products to cancer and other diseases.
There is at least one sense in which the tobacco analogy fails. Exposure to tobacco usually contains an element of volition, and most people who smoked it in the past half century knew about some of the risks involved. But the vast majority of Americans - along with most people on the planet - now have C8 in their bodies. And we’ve had no choice in the matter.
For its furst undred years DuPont mostly made explosives, which, while hazardous, were at least well understood. But by the 1930s, the company had expanded into new products that brought new mysterious health problems. Leaded gasoline, which DuPont made in its New Jersey plant, for instance, wound up causing madness and violent deaths and life-long institutionalization of workers. And certain rubber and industrial chemicals inexplicably turned the skin of exposed workers blue.
Perhaps most troubling, at least to a DuPont doctor named George Gehrmann, was a number of bladder cancers that had recently begun to crop up among many dye workers.
Worried over “the tendency to believe [chemicals] are harmless until proven otherwise,” Gehrmann pushed DuPont to create Haskell Laboratories in 1935. Haskell was one of the first in-house toxicology facilities and its first project was to address the bladder cancers. But the inherent problems of assigning staff scientists to study a company’s own employees and products became clear from the outset.
One of Haskell’s first employees, a pathologist named Wilhelm Hueper, helped crack the bladder cancer case by developing a model of how the dye chemicals led to disease. But the company forbade him from publishing some of his research and, according to epidemiologist and public health scholar David Michaels, fired him in 1937 before going on to use the chemicals in question for decades.
DuPont elected not to disclose its findings to regulators.
C8 would prove to be arguably even more ethically and scientifically challenging for Haskell. From the beginning, DuPont scientists approached the chemical’s potential dangers with rigor. In 1954, the very year a French engineer first applied the slick coating to a frying pan, a DuPont employee named R. A. Dickison noted that he had received an inquiry regarding C8’s “possible toxicity.” In 1961, just seven years later, in-house researchers already had the short answer to Dickison’s question:
C8 was indeed toxic and should be “handled with extreme care,” according to a report filed by plaintiffs. By the next year experiments had honed these broad concerns into clear, bright red flags that pointed to specific organs:
C8 exposure was linked to the enlargement of rats’ testes, adrenal glands, and kidneys. In 1965, 14 employees, including Haskell’s then-director, John Zapp, received a memo describing preliminary studies that showed that even low doses of a related surfactant could increase the size of rats’ livers, a classic response to exposure to a poison.
The company even conducted a human C8 experiment, a deposition revealed. In 1962, DuPont scientists asked volunteers to smoke cigarettes laced with the chemical and observed that:
“Nine out of ten people in the highest-dosed group were noticeably ill for an average of nine hours with flu-like symptoms that included chills, backache, fever, and coughing.”
Because of its toxicity, C8 disposal presented a problem.
In the early 1960s, the company buried about 200 drums of the chemical on the banks of the Ohio River near the plant. An internal DuPont document from 1975 about “Teflon Waste Disposal” detailed how the company began packing the waste in drums, shipping the drums on barges out to sea, and dumping them into the ocean, adding stones to make the drums sink.
Though the practice resulted in a moment of unfavorable publicity when a fisherman caught one of the drums in his net, no one outside the company realized the danger the chemical presented. At some point before 1965, ocean dumping ceased, and DuPont began disposing of its Teflon waste in landfills instead.
A view of Parkersburg, West Virginia, from Fort Boreman Park on Wednesday, August 5, 2015
In 1978, Bruce Karrh, DuPont’s corporate medical director, was outspoken about the company’s duty“to discover and reveal the unvarnished facts about health hazards,” as he wrote in the Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine at the time.
When deposed in 2004, Karrh emphasized that DuPont’s internal health and safety rules often went further than the government’s and that the company’s policy was to comply with either laws or the company’s internal health and safety standards,“whichever was the more strict.” In his 1978 article, Karrh also insisted that a company;
“Should be candid, and lay all the facts on the table. This is the only responsible and ethical way to go.”
Yet DuPont only laid out some of its facts. In 1978, for instance, DuPont alerted workers to the results of a study done by 3M showing that its employees were accumulating C8 in their blood.
Later that year, Karrh and his colleagues began reviewing employee medical records and measuring the level of C8 in the blood of the company’s own workers in Parkersburg, as well as at another DuPont plant in Deepwater, New Jersey, where the company had been using C8 and related chemicals since the 1950s.
They found that exposed workers at the New Jersey plant had increased rates of endocrine disorders. Another notable pattern was that, like dogs and rats, people employed at the DuPont plants more frequently had abnormal liver function tests after C8 exposure.
DuPont elected not to disclose its findings to regulators. The reasoning, according to Karrh, was that the abnormal test results weren’t proven to be adverse health effects related to C8. When asked about the decision in deposition, Karrh said that “at that point in time, we saw no substantial risk, so therefore we saw no obligation to report.”
Not long after the decision was made not to alert the EPA, in 1981, another study of DuPont workers by a staff epidemiologist declared that liver test data collected in Parkersburg lacked “conclusive evidence of an occupationally related health problem among workers exposed to C-8.”
Yet the research might have reasonably led to more testing. An assistant medical director named Vann Brewster suggested that an early draft of the study be edited to state that DuPont should conduct further liver test monitoring. Years later, a proposal for a follow-up study was rejected.
If the health effects on humans could still be debated in 1979, C8’s effects on animals continued to be apparent. A report prepared for plaintiffs stated that by then, DuPont was aware of studies showing that exposed beagles had abnormal enzyme levels “indicative of cellular damage.” Given enough of the stuff, the dogs died.
DuPont employees knew in 1979 about a recent 3M study showing that some rhesus monkeys also died when exposed to C8, according to documents submitted by plaintiffs. Scientists divided the primates into five groups and exposed them to different amounts of C8 over 90 days.
Those given the highest dose all died within five weeks. More notable was that three of the monkeys who received less than half that amount also died, their faces and gums growing pale and their eyes swelling before they wasted away. Some of the monkeys given the lower dose began losing weight in the first week it was administered. C8 also appeared to affect some monkeys’ kidneys.
Of course, enough of anything can be deadly. Even a certain amount of table salt would kill a lab animal, a DuPont employee named C. E. Steiner noted in a confidential 1980 communications meeting. For C8, the lethal oral dose was listed as one ounce per 150 pounds, although the document stated that the chemical was most toxic when inhaled.
The harder question was to determine a maximum safe dosage. How much could an animal - or a person - be exposed to without having any effects at all? The1965 DuPont study of rats suggested that even a single dose of a similar surfactant could have a prolonged effect. Nearly two months after being exposed, the rats’ livers were still three times larger than normal.
Steiner declared that there was no “conclusive evidence” that C8 harmed workers, yet he also stated that “continued exposure is not tolerable.” Because C8 accumulated in bodies, the potential for harm was there, and Steiner predicted the company would continue medical and toxicological monitoring and described plans to supply workers who were directly exposed to the chemical with protective clothing.
Two years after DuPont learned of the monkey study, in 1981, 3M shared the results of another study it had done, this one on pregnant rats, whose unborn pups were more likely to have eye defects after they were exposed to C8. The EPA was also informed of the results. After 3M’s rat study came out, DuPont transferred all women out of work assignments with potential for exposure to C8.
DuPont doctors then began tracking a small group of women who had been exposed to C8 and had recently been pregnant. If even one in five women gave birth to children who had craniofacial deformities, a DuPont epidemiologist named Fayerweather warned, the results should be considered significant enough to suggest that C8 exposure caused the problems.
Photos of Bucky Bailey as a baby, as well as article clippings his mother, Sue, saved over the years
As it turned out, at least one of eight babies born to women who worked in the Teflon division did have birth defects.
A little boy named Bucky Bailey, whose mother, Sue, had worked in Teflon early in her pregnancy, was born with tear duct deformities, only one nostril, an eyelid that started down by his nose, and a condition known as “keyhole pupil,” which looked like a tear in his iris.
Another child, who was two years old when the rat study was published in 1981, had an “unconfirmed eye and tear duct defect,” according to a DuPont document that was marked confidential.
Like Wamsley, Sue Bailey, one of the plaintiffs whose personal injury suits are scheduled to come to trial in the fall, remembers having plenty of contact with C8.
When she started at DuPont in 1978, she worked first in the Nylon division and then in Lucite, she told me in an interview. But in 1980, when she was in the first trimester of her pregnancy with Bucky, she moved to Teflon, where she often sat watch over a large pipe that periodically filled up with liquid, which she had to pump to a pond in back of the plant. Occasionally some of the bubbly stuff would overflow from a nearby holding tank, and her supervisor taught her how to squeegee the excess into a drain.
Soon after Bucky was born, Bailey received a call from a DuPont doctor. “I thought it was just a compassion call, you know: can we do anything or do you need anything?” Bailey recalled. “Shoot. I should have known better.” In fact, the doctor didn’t express his sympathies, Bailey said, and instead asked her whether her child had any birth defects, explaining that it was standard to record such problems in employees’ newborns.
While Bailey was still on maternity leave, she learned that the company was removing its female workers from the Teflon division. She remembers the moment - and that it made her feel deceived. “It sure was a big eye-opener,” said Bailey, who still lives in West Virginia but left DuPont a few years after Bucky’s birth.
Bucky Bailey stands inside his mother’s home in Bluemont, Virginia, on Thursday, August 6, 2015
The Federal Toxic Substances Control Act requires companies that work with chemicals to report to the Environmental Protection Agency any evidence they find that shows or even suggests that they are harmful. In keeping with this requirement, 3M submitted its rat study to the EPA, and later DuPont scientists wound up discussing the study with the federal agency, saying they believed it was flawed. DuPont scientists neglected to inform the EPA about what they had found in tracking their own workers.
When DuPont began transferring women workers out of Teflon, the company did send out a flier alerting them to the results of the 3M study. When Sue Bailey saw the notice on the bench of the locker room and read about the rat study, she immediately thought of Bucky.
Yet when she went in to request a blood test, the results of which the doctor carefully noted to the thousandth decimal point, and asked if there might be a connection between Bucky’s birth defects and the rat study she had read about, Bailey recalls that Dr. Younger Lovelace Power, the plant doctor, said no. According to Karrh’s deposition, he told Karrh the same.
“We went back to him and asked him to follow up on it, and he did, and came back saying that he did not think it was related.”
“I said, ‘I was in Teflon. Is this what happened to my baby?’” Bailey remembered. “And he said, ‘No, no.’”
Power also told Bailey that the company had no record of her having worked in Teflon. Shortly afterward, she considered suing DuPont and even contacted a lawyer in Parkersburg, who she says wasn’t interested in taking her case against the town’s biggest employer. When contacted for his response to Bailey’s recollections, Power declined to comment.
By testing the blood of female Teflon workers who had given birth, DuPont researchers, who then reported their findings to Karrh, documented for the first time that C8 had moved across the human placenta.
In 2005, when the EPA fined the company for withholding this information, attorneys for DuPont argued that because the agency already had evidence of the connection between C8 and birth defects in rats, the evidence it had withheld was “merely confirmatory” and not of great significance, according to the agency’s consent agreement on the matter.
Ken Wamsley also remembers when his supervisor told him they had taken female workers out of Teflon. “I said, ‘Why’d you send all the women home?’ He said, ‘Well, we’re afraid, we think maybe it hurts the pregnancies in some of the women,’” recalled Wamsley. “They said, ‘Ken, it won’t hurt the men.’”
Ibuprofen Kills Thousands Each Year - So What Is The Alternative? August 15 2015 | From: GreenMedInfo
The 2004 Vioxx recall, as you may remember, was spurred by the nearly 30,000 excess cases of heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths caused by the drug between 1999-2003.
Despite the fact that scientific research had accumulated as early as 2000 linking Vioxx to increased heart attacks and strokes, the drug's manufacturer Merck, and the FDA, remained silent as the death toll steadily increased.
The Reuters report focused on new research published in Lancet indicating the risk of heart attack increases as much as a third and the risk of heart failure doubles among heavier users of NSAID drugs.
“Long-term high-dose use of painkillers such as ibuprofen or diclofenac is 'equally hazardous' in terms of heart attack risk as use of the drug Vioxx, which was withdrawn due to its potential dangers, researchers said."
The 2004 Vioxx recall, as you may remember, was spurred by the nearly 30,000 excess cases of heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths caused by the drug between 1999-2003. Despite the fact that scientific research had accumulated as early as 2000 linking Vioxx to increased heart attacks and strokes, the drug's manufacturer Merck, and the FDA, remained silent as the death toll steadily increased.
The Reuters report focused on new research published in Lancet indicating the risk of heart attack increases as much as a third and the risk of heart failure doubles among heavier users of NSAID drugs.
INFLAMED: Our Default Bodily State
Why are so many folks taking NSAID drugs like ibuprofen anyway?
Pain and unhealthy levels of inflammation are fast becoming default bodily states in the industrialized world. While in most cases we can adjust the underlying pro-inflammatory conditions by altering our diet, and reducing stress and environmental chemical exposures, these approaches take time, discipline and energy, and sometimes we just want the pain to stop now.
In those often compulsive moments we find ourselves popping an over-the-counter pill to kill the pain.
The problem with this approach is that, if we do it often enough, we may kill ourselves along with the pain...
Ibuprofen really is a perfect example of this. As mentioned above, this petrochemical-derivative has been linked to significantly increased risk of heart attack and increased cardiac and all-cause mortality (when combined with aspirin), with over two dozen serious adverse health effects, including:
2. DNA Damage
3. Hearing Loss
5. Influenza Mortality
Ibuprofen is, in fact, not unique in elevating cardiovascular disease risk and/or mortality. The entire category of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) appears to have this under-recognized dark side; cardiovascular disease and cardiac mortality score highest on the list of over 100 unintended adverse health effects associated with their use.
Ginger – A 2009 study found that ginger capsules (250 mg, four times daily) were as effective as the drugs mefenamic acid and ibuprofen for relieving pain in women associated with their menstrual cycle (primary dysmenorrhea).
Topical Arnica – A 2007 human study found that topical treatment with arnica was as effective as ibuprofen for hand osteoarthritis, but with lower incidence of side effects.
Combination: Astaxanthin, Ginkgo biloba and Vitamin C - A 2011 animal study found this combination to be equal to or better than ibuprofen for reducing asthma-associated respiratory inflammation.
Chinese Skullcap (baicalin) – A 2003 animal study found that a compound in Chinese skullcap known as baicalin was equipotent to ibuprofen in reducing pain.
Omega-3 fatty acids: A 2006 human study found that omega-3 fatty acids (between 1200-2400 mg daily) were as effective as ibuprofen in reducing arthritis pain, but with the added benefit of having less side effects.
Panax Ginseng – A 2008 animal study found that panax ginseng had analgesic and anti-inflammatory activity similar to ibuprofen, indicating its possible anti-rheumatoid arthritis properties.
St. John's Wort – A 2004 animal study found that St. John's wort was twice as effective as ibuprofen as a pain-killer.
Anthrocyanins from Sweet Cherries & Raspberries – A 2001 study cell study found that anthrocyanins extracted from raspberries and sweet cherries were as effective as ibuprofen and naproxen at suppressing the inflammation-associated enzyme known as cyclooxygenase-1 and 2.
Holy Basil – A 2000 study found that holy basil contains compounds with anti-inflammatory activity comparable to ibuprofen, naproxen and aspirin.
Olive Oil (oleocanthal) – a compound found within olive oil known as oleocanthal has been shown to have anti-inflammatory properties similar to ibuprofen.
There are, of course, hundreds of additional substances which have been studied for their pain-killing and/or anti-inflammatory effects, and there are also aromatherapeutic approaches that do not require the ingestion of anything at all, but there is also a danger here. When we think of taking an alternative pain-killer to ibuprofen, we are still thinking within the palliative, allopathic medical model: suppress the symptom, and go on about our business.
It would behoove us to look deeper into what is causing our pain. And when possible, remove the cause(s). And that often requires a dramatic dietary shift away from pro-inflammatory foods, many of which most Westerners still consider absolutely delightful, e.g. wheat, dairy, nighshade vegetables and even wheat-free grains, etc.
There Is Deadly Formaldehyde In Clothing, Food, Cigarettes And Vaccines - What Will You Be Wearing, Eating, Smoking And Injecting Today? August 9 2015 | From: NaturalNews
As you may know, formaldehyde, a highly carcinogenic fluid, is used to embalm the dead and preserve the cadaver for viewing purposes, such as at open casket ceremonies or for anatomy, dissection and surgery classes.
Ranked one of the most hazardous compounds to human health, formaldehyde can cause liver damage, gastrointestinal issues, reproductive deformation, respiratory distress and cancer.
When a person dies, the first stage of decomposition is autolysis or self-digestion, because the active process of digestion of nutrients by live cells has ceased. Digestive enzymes therefore enter the cells and start breaking them down. Methods of preserving cadavers have changed over the past two centuries, but formaldehyde is the main embalming chemical used today.
It's a colorless solution that maintains that life-like texture of the body for an extended period of time, and this "fixation" of the cadaver terminates all ongoing biochemical reactions. Many people recall their first experience with formaldehyde in high school biology class, where specimens float in glass jars in an awfully stinky liquid called formalin, which is simply formaldehyde gas mixed with water.
The smell alone is enough to send two out of every three people running out of the room. And now onward to the